{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015139442231075698, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0031872509960159364, 'mean_word_length': 5.645502645502646, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Chapter 1: Innovation in competition law analysis: making sense of on-going academic and policy debates

Although it is widely believed that market economies characterised by undistorted competition contribute directly to innovation,1 the relationship between innovation and competition law remains mysterious. As a result, scholars have grappled with the notion of innovation and its place within the competition law analytical framework. Analyses have varied between claims that no place should be awarded to innovation in competition law analysis2 and proposals to develop or fine-tune new economic tests grounded directly in innovation-related arguments.3 In the same way, competition authorities seem to have either excluded different innovation-related testing frameworks or have – often cautiously – proposed a more innovation-focused analytical framework or theory of competitive harm. Confronted with that variety of approaches in covering the relationship between innovation and competition law analysis, one may be inclined to find it difficult to distinguish the forest from the trees throughout those debates. In an attempt at making sense of the different takes on the relationship between competition law analysis and innovation, this brief