Institutional Co-Evolution and Hybrid Regulation in the Digital Economy: A Case Study of BRICS Nations
Downloads
This study investigates the institutional co-evolution associated with digitalization processes in BRICS countries, emphasizing the development of hybrid regulatory frameworks that integrate state intervention, platform-based self-regulation, and entrepreneurial institutional agency. The primary objective is to analyze how these frameworks operate within heterogeneous governance environments and address the sustainability challenges arising in emerging digital economies. Grounded in the theory of institutional co-evolution, the research applies a mixed-methods design, combining bibliometric mapping, comparative policy analysis, and multiple linear regression on cross-national panel data from Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (2018 - 2022). The findings demonstrate that increasing levels of digitalization and innovation are significantly correlated with reductions in environmental risks, while GDP growth remains positively associated with CO2 emissions; underscoring a structural tension between economic expansion and ecological resilience. To address this contradiction, the study proposes and empirically validates an Optimized Hybrid Model of institutional regulation, which improves sustainability indicators by 18.5%. The novelty of this research lies in the operationalization of institutional co-evolution within digital governance, offering a transferable policy model for flexible, adaptive regulation in complex, data-intensive economies. These results contribute to the advancement of institutional theory and provide actionable insights for the governance of transitional digital systems.
Downloads
[1] Lianos, I. (2022). Value extraction and institutions in digital capitalism: Towards a law and political economy synthesis for competition law. European Law Open, 1(4), 852–890. doi:10.1017/elo.2023.2.
[2] Deutscher, E. (2022). Reshaping Digital Competition: The New Platform Regulations and the Future of Modern Antitrust. Antitrust Bulletin, 67(2), 302–340. doi:10.1177/0003603X221082742.
[3] Radic, L., Manne, G., & Auer, D. (2024). Regulate for What? A Closer Look at the Rationale and Goals of Digital Competition Regulations. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1-79. doi:10.2139/ssrn.4929628.
[4] Davidson, S. (2024). The economic institutions of artificial intelligence. Journal of Institutional Economics, 20. doi:10.1017/S1744137423000395.
[5] Eckardt, M. (2025). EU digital law and the digital platform economy—an inquiry into the co-evolution of law and technology. Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, 6(1), 183–213. doi:10.1007/s43253-024-00135-z.
[6] North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge university press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
[7] Williamson, O. E. (1999). Strategy research: Governance and competence perspectives. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1087–1108. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199912)20:12<1087::AID-SMJ71>3.0.CO;2-Z.
[8] Mazzucato, M. (2013) The Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs Private Sector Myths. Anthem Press, New York, United States.
[9] Frolov, D. (2023). Digital capitalism and new institutionalism. Routledge, London, United Kingdom. doi:10.4324/9781003267430.
[10] Kochetkov, A. P., & Mamychev, A. Y. (2024). Digital Elite: Trends of Formation and Development. Polis. Political Studies, 2024(4), 135–145. doi:10.17976/jpps/2024.04.10.
[11] Lyu, Y., Xie, J., Meng, X., & Wang, X. (2024). Digital economy and institutional dynamics: striving for equitable public service in a digitally transformed era. Frontiers in Public Health, 12. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2024.1330044.
[12] Shkalenko, A. V., & Kozlova, S. A. (2024). A New Concept of Techno-Economic Institutions within Institutional Economics: Integrating Technologies and Institutional Frameworks. Emerging Science Journal, 8(5), 2047–2072. doi:10.28991/ESJ-2024-08-05-022.
[13] Törnberg, P. (2023). How platforms govern: Social regulation in digital capitalism. Big Data and Society, 10(1), 20539517231153808. doi:10.1177/20539517231153808.
[14] Dong, H., & Chen, J. (2024). Meta-Regulation: An ideal alternative to the primary responsibility as the regulatory model of generative AI in China. Computer Law & Security Review, 54, 106016. doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106016.
[15] Li, D. D., Feng, J., & Jiang, H. (2006). Institutional entrepreneurs. American Economic Review, 96(2), 358–362. doi:10.1257/000282806777211775.
[16] Ioannou, S., Wójcik, D., & Urban, M. (2024). FinTech and financial instability. Is this time different? Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 47(3), 542–565. doi:10.1080/01603477.2024.2315055.
[17] Köroğlu, I. (2024). Impact of Digital Marketing Strategies on Entrepreneurial Orientations of Turkish Commercial Banks. Istanbul Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(3), 9–18. doi:10.62185/issn.3023-5448.2.3.2.
[18] DiMaggio, P. J. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment, 3–21.
[19] Kingston, C., & Caballero, G. (2009). Comparing theories of institutional change. Journal of Institutional Economics, 5(2), 151–180. doi:10.1017/s1744137409001283.
[20] Shastitko, A.E. (2002). New Institutional Economic Theory. Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.
[21] Gleiss, A., Degen, K., & Pousttchi, K. (2023). Identifying the patterns: Towards a systematic approach to digital platform regulation. Journal of Information Technology, 38(2), 180–201. doi:10.1177/02683962221146803.
[22] Potts, J. (2019). Innovation Commons. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom. doi:10.1093/oso/9780190937492.001.0001.
[23] Zetzsche, D. A., Buckley, R. P., Arner, D. W., & Barberis, J. N. (2017). Regulating a Revolution: From Regulatory Sandboxes to Smart Regulation. SSRN Electronic Journal, 31. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3018534.
[24] Ghobakhloo, M., Iranmanesh, M., Fathi, M., Rejeb, A., Foroughi, B., & Nikbin, D. (2024). Beyond Industry 4.0: a systematic review of Industry 5.0 technologies and implications for social, environmental and economic sustainability. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 1-26. doi:10.1108/APJBA-08-2023-0384.
[25] Touzard, J.-M., Temple, L., Faure, G., & Triomphe, B. (2015). Innovation systems and knowledge communities in the agriculture and agrifood sector: a literature review. Journal of Innovation Economics & Management, 17(2), 117–142. doi:10.3917/jie.017.0117.
[26] Kokshagina, O., Reinecke, P. C., & Karanasios, S. (2023). To regulate or not to regulate: unravelling institutional tussles around the regulation of algorithmic control of digital platforms. Journal of Information Technology, 38(2), 160–179. doi:10.1177/02683962221114408.
[27] Nanni, R., Bizzaro, P. G., & Napolitano, M. (2024). The false promise of individual digital sovereignty in Europe: Comparing artificial intelligence and data regulations in China and the European Union. Policy & Internet, 16(4), 711–726. doi:10.1002/poi3.424.
[28] Heimburg, V., & Wiesche, M. (2023). Digital platform regulation: opportunities for information systems research. Internet Research, 33(7), 72–85. doi:10.1108/INTR-05-2022-0321.
[29] Jolly, S., & Raven, R. P. J. M. (2015). Collective institutional entrepreneurship and contestations in wind energy in India. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 42, 999–1011. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.039.
[30] Frenken, K., Vaskelainen, T., Fünfschilling, L., & Piscicelli, L. (2020). An Institutional Logics Perspective on the Gig Economy. Theorizing the Sharing Economy: Variety and Trajectories of New Forms of Organizing, 83–105, Leeds, United Kingdom. doi:10.1108/s0733-558x20200000066005.
[31] Obia, V. (2025). Digital policy and Nigeria’s Platform Code of Practice: towards a radical co-regulatory turn. Data and Policy, 7, 7. doi:10.1017/dap.2025.1.
[32] Tapia, S. P. (2018). Requiem for cyberspace: The effect of the European general privacy regulation on the global Internet. Seattle University Law Review, 42, 1163–1173.
[33] Ulbricht, L., & Egbert, S. (2024). In Palantir we trust? Regulation of data analysis platforms in public security. Big Data and Society, 11(3), 20539517241255108. doi:10.1177/20539517241255108.
[34] Carlsson, V., & Rönnblom, M. (2022). From politics to ethics: Transformations in EU policies on digital technology. Technology in Society, 71, 102145. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102145.
[35] Kiselev, I. S. (2025). Principles of mentoring and team development for achieving high results. Innovation and Investment, (2), 147-151. doi:10.24412/2307-180X-2025-2-147-151. (In Russian).
[36] Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71.
[37] Global Carbon Project. (2025). Global Carbon Atlas: Carbon Emissions Data. Global Carbon Project, Canberra, Australia. Available online: https://globalcarbonatlas.org/emissions/carbon-emissions/ (accessed on September 2025).
[38] Our World in Data. (2025). National GDP (Constant USD). Our World in Data, Oxford, United Kingdom. Available online: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/gdp-worldbank-constant-usd?tab=table&time=2011..latest (accessed on September 2025).
[39] Nations Sustainable Development. (2025). Sustainable Development Report: SDG Index & Dashboards. Nations Sustainable Development, New York, United States. Available online: https://dashboards.sdgindex.org/explorer (accessed on July 2025).
[40] WIPO. (2025). Global Innovation Index. World Intellectual Property Organization. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Geneva Switzerland. Available online: https://www.wipo.int/en/web/global-innovation-index (accessed on July 2025).
[41] IMD. (2025). IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking. International Institute for Management Development, Lausanne, Switzerland. Available online: https://www.imd.org/centers/world-digital-ranking/ (accessed on September 2025).
[42] World Population Review. (2025). Human Development Index (HDI) by Country 2025. World Population Review, Walnut, United States. Available online: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/hdi-by-country (accessed on July 2025).
[43] Son, T. H., Weedon, Z., Yigitcanlar, T., Sanchez, T., Corchado, J. M., & Mehmood, R. (2023). Algorithmic urban planning for smart and sustainable development: Systematic review of the literature. Sustainable Cities and Society, 94, 104562. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2023.104562.
[44] Bibri, S. E., Alexandre, A., Sharifi, A., & Krogstie, J. (2023). Environmentally sustainable smart cities and their converging AI, IoT, and big data technologies and solutions: an integrated approach to an extensive literature review. Energy Informatics, 6(1), 9. doi:10.1186/s42162-023-00259-2.
[45] Fang, B., Yu, J., Chen, Z., Osman, A. I., Farghali, M., Ihara, I., Hamza, E. H., Rooney, D. W., & Yap, P. S. (2023). Artificial intelligence for waste management in smart cities: a review. Environmental Chemistry Letters, 21(4), 1959–1989. doi:10.1007/s10311-023-01604-3.
[46] Kumar, N., Poonia, V., Gupta, B. B., & Goyal, M. K. (2021). A novel framework for risk assessment and resilience of critical infrastructure towards climate change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 165, 120532. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120532.
[47] Soni, G., Kumar, S., Mahto, R. V., Mangla, S. K., Mittal, M. L., & Lim, W. M. (2022). A decision-making framework for Industry 4.0 technology implementation: The case of FinTech and sustainable supply chain finance for SMEs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 180, 121686. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121686.
[48] Dahmani, N., Benhida, K., Belhadi, A., Kamble, S., Elfezazi, S., & Jauhar, S. K. (2021). Smart circular product design strategies towards eco-effective production systems: A lean eco-design industry 4.0 framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 320, 128847. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128847.
[49] Leal Filho, W., Wall, T., Rui Mucova, S. A., Nagy, G. J., Balogun, A. L., Luetz, J. M., Ng, A. W., Kovaleva, M., Safiul Azam, F. M., Alves, F., Guevara, Z., Matandirotya, N. R., Skouloudis, A., Tzachor, A., Malakar, K., & Gandhi, O. (2022). Deploying artificial intelligence for climate change adaptation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 180, 121662. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121662.
[50] Robinhood. (2025). Financial Services and Commission-Free Trading Platform. Robinhood, Menlo Park, United States. Available online: https://robinhood.com/us/en/about-us/ (accessed on September 2025).
[51] Klarna. (2025). Flexible Payment Solutions and Financial Services. Klarna, Stockholm, Sweden. Available online: https://www.klarna.com/international/about-us/ (accessed on September 2025).
[52] Aadhaar. (2025). Unique Identification Authority of India. Aadhaar, New Delhi, India. Available online: https://uidai.gov.in (accessed on September 2025).
[53] Gosuslugi. (2025). Unified Portal of State Services of the Russian Federation. Gosuslugi, Moscow, Russia. Available online: https://www.gosuslugi.ru (accessed on September 2025). (In Russian).
[54] Gov.br. (2025). Brazilian Federal Government Digital Platform. Gov.br, Brasilia, Brazil. Available online: https://www.gov.br (accessed on September 2025). (In Portuguese).
[55] eGov Portal South Africa. (2025). Republic of South Africa Digital Government Services. eGov Portal South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa. Available online: https://www.gov.za/services (accessed on September 2025).
[56] Alibaba Group. (2025). Official Website. Alibaba Group, Hangzhou, China. Available online: https://www.alibaba.com (accessed on September 2025).
[57] Tencent. (2025). Official Website. Tencent, Shenzhen, China. Available online: https://www.tencent.com/en-us (accessed on September 2025).
[58] Flipkart. (2025). India’s Leading E-commerce Platform. Flipkart, Bengaluru, India. Available online: https://www.flipkart.com (accessed on September 2025).
[59] Paytm. (2025). Digital Payments and Financial Services. Paytm, Noida, India. Available online: https://paytm.com (accessed on September 2025).
[60] Yandex. (2025). Official Website. Yandex, Moscow, Russia. Available online: https://yandex.com (accessed on August 2025).
[61] Mercado Livre. (2025). E-commerce and Digital Payments Platform. Mercado Livre, Montevideo, Uruguay. Available online: https://www.mercadolivre.com.br (accessed on September 2025). (In Portuguese).
[62] Takealot. (2025). South Africa’s Largest Online Retailer. Takealot, Cape Town, South Africa. Available online: https://www.takealot.com (accessed on September 2025).
[63] Lynn, L. H., Reddy, N. M., & Aram, J. D. (1996). Linking technology and institutions: The innovation community framework. Research Policy, 25(1), 91–106. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(94)00817-5.
[64] Wise. (2025). Global Money Transfer and Financial Services Platform. Wise, London, United Kingdom. Available online: https://wise.com/us/about (accessed on September 2025).
- This work (including HTML and PDF Files) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
