reorganization proceedings. Half of this index measure is based on the implemented regulatory framework within which firms operate and therefore seems relevant for TFiS. Moreover, the general issue of “resolving [investment-related] issues” relevant for Mode 3 has also been identified as relevant by experts.

A third relevant database for potential TFiS measures is the World Bank’s **_Governance Indicators_** database. This database does not measure the quality and effectiveness of any regulatory proceedings themselves, but rather measures the quality and effectiveness of the institutions or the institutional framework as such. In that regard, the institutional dimension of this database sets it apart from the Regulatory Governance database as discussed above. To the extent that potential TFiS measures are related to the importance of the institutional strength and soundness of national regulatory bodies, two areas of this database seems of particular importance, which are **(a) Regulatory quality** and **(b) Government effectiveness.** Regulatory quality captures perceptions of the ability of the government to formulate and implement sound policies and regulations that permit and promote private sector development. Government effectiveness captures perceptions of the quality of public services, the quality of the civil service and the degree of its independence from political pressures, the quality of policy formulation and implementation, and the credibility of the government's commitment to such policies. Compared to the previous two databases, all the elements are broad in nature and, admittedly, their definitions seem close to the regulatory governance issues described above. However, one should note that the two indicators really measure the _capacity_ of the government to effectively formulate and implement sound policies (see Kaufmann et al., 2010), not so much the process or implementation of the regulations as measured with the Regulatory Governance database. The two indicators are therefore closer to measuring items such as whether regulators are independent from any external political influence, have a clear mandate, expertise (i.e. skills) and resources to operate.<sup>10</sup> Several other country-wide sources exist which deal with regulatory governance and transparency in some way or another. However, each of them appears to be somewhat remote with regards to the purpose of categorizing regulatory TFiS measures per our previous discussion above. They are (1) the Transparency International index; (2) World Justice Project that covers areas such as regulatory enforcement, open government and civic participation; (3) Polity IV database and index that measures a country’s democratic institutions; and (4) measures of the Freedom House index that covers more political items rather than regulatory proceedings. They are not taken up in our empirical section.

# **_Modal-specific measures_**

The more modal-specific concepts for TFiS measures that emerged as relevant relate mostly to Modes 1, 3 and 4. Empirical indicators for the latter mode are generally harder to find than empirical indicators of TFiS measures related Modes and 1 and 3. Potential TFiS measures relevant for Mode 1 centered around the issue of cross-border flows of data and the various policies that government have recently implemented to restrict the mobility of data between countries. There are two regulatory databases that 10 Various empirical studies have also used measures from the World Bank’s Governance Indicators database to assess the quality of domestic institutions and regulators and their impact on (services) trade and productivity in services. See for instance Beverelli et al. (2017), van der Marel (2016) and Iootty et al. (2016).

11