Autonomy as a Condition for Development of National Digital Platforms: Experience of Russia and China

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

The article provides a retrospective analysis of legislation and regulatory practices in Russia and China concerning digital platforms, along with a structured explanation of the interconnection between the actions of foreign technology companies and state countermeasures to establish digital sovereignty. Particular attention is paid to the specifics of state protectionism in China and Russia’s forced digital autarky after 2022. Key regulatory tools are identified, including antitrust measures, cybersecurity laws, data localization policies, and the domestication of foreign companies. The study concludes that autonomy in the digital sphere strengthens the resilience of the information space and fosters the development of national platforms capable of replacing departing Western services. The analysis underscores the need for a strategic approach to shaping digital regulation policies in the context of geopolitical instability.

About the authors

A. A Zapyantsev

HSE University; Kutafin Moscow State Law University

Email: azapyantsev@hse.ru
Post-graduate student Moscow, Russia

M. G Shcherbakova

Kutafin Moscow State Law University

Email: shcherbakova.m@tn.ru
Master’s Graduate, Depart- ment of Competition Law Moscow, Russia

References

  1. Srnicek N. 2019. Platform capitalism. Moscow. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17323/978-5-7598-1786-4
  2. Zapyantsev A.A. 2024. Creation and Regulation of Digital Platforms in China. Asia and Africa today. № 4. Pp. 54–60. (In Russ.). doi: 10.31857/S032150750027789-9
  3. Larionova M.V., Doronin P.A. 2024. Problems of regulating digital platforms: challenges and opportunities for international cooperation. International Organisations Research Journal. Vol. 19. № 2. Pp. 70–92. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17323/1996-7845-2024-02-04 (accessed 22.12.2024)
  4. Efremov A.A. 2019. State sovereignty in the context of digital transformation. Pravovedenie. Vol. 63. № 1. Pp. 47–61. (In Russ.). doi: 10.21638/spbu25.2019.103
  5. Efremov A.A. 2017. Formation of the concept of state informational sovereignty. Law Journal of the HSE. № 1. Pp. 201–215. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17323/2072-8166.2017.1.201.215
  6. Shelepov A.V., Kolmar O.I. 2024. Regulation of digital platforms in Russia. International Organizations Research Journal. Vol. 19. № 2. Pp. 110–126. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17323/1996-7845-2024-02-06
  7. Yankova A.D. 2023. The architecture of China’s cybersovereignty concept (based on materials of the World Internet Conference). Far Eastern Studies. № 4. Pp. 1–14. (In Russ.). doi: 10.31857/S013128120026886-5
  8. Ramich M.S., Piskunov D.A., Kozlova O.A., Lesnikova P.S., Efremenkova A.E. 2024. Spread of 5G technologies in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Moscow. 118 p. ISBN 978-5-16-112278-5. (In Russ.)
  9. Yu H. Networking China: The digital transformation of the Chinese Economy. 2017. University of Illinois Press. doi: 10.5406/illinois/9780252040917.001.0001
  10. Roberts M.E. 2019. Censored: Distraction and diversion inside China’s Great Firewall. Princeton University Press. doi: 10.1111/gove.12420
  11. McKnight S., Kenney M., Breznitz D. 2023. Regulating the platform giants: Building and governing China’s online economy. Policy & Internet, 15, 243–265. doi: 10.1002/poi3.336
  12. Jiang M. 2016. Chinese Internet business and human rights. Business & Human Rights Journal. Pp. 139–144. doi: 10.1017/bhj.2015.4
  13. Lee J.-A., Liu Ch.-Y., Li W. 2013. Searching for Internet Freedom in China: A Case Study on Google’s China Experience. Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal. Vol. 31. № 2.
  14. Bamman D., O’Connor B., Smith N. 2018. Censorship and deletion practices in Chinese social media. Carnegie Mellon University. Journal contribution. doi: 10.1184/R1/6473102.v1
  15. Cai C., Wang T. 2022. Moving toward a “middle ground”? The governance of platforms in the United States and China. Policy & Internet. doi: 10.1002/poi3.303
  16. Thumfart J. 2025. Digital Sovereignty in China, Russia, and India: From NWICO to SCO and BRICS. In: Jiang M., Belli L. (Eds.) Digital Sovereignty in the BRICS Countries. Cambridge University Press. Pp. 41–62. doi: 10.1017/9781009531085
  17. Gillespie T. 2018. Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions that Shape Social Media. Yale University Press. 296 p. doi: 10.12987/9780300235029
  18. Creemers R. 2017. Cyber China: Upgrading Propaganda, Public Opinion Work and Social Management for the Twenty-First Century. Journal of Contemporary China. Vol. 26. № 103. Pp. 85–100. doi: 10.1080/10670564.2016.1206281
  19. Kshetri N. 2016. The Quest to Cyber Superiority: Cybersecurity Regulations, Frameworks, and Strategies of Major Economies. Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-40554-4
  20. Cheng J., Zeng J. 2023. “Digital Silk Road” as a Slogan Instead of a Grand Strategy. Journal of Contemporary China. Vol. 32. № 142. Pp. 1–16. doi: 10.1080/10670564.2023.2222269

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2025 Russian Academy of Sciences