It is fair to see that the topic of barriers to entry in conventional (non-network) industries has received little attention in recent years. This is partly because of competing arguments such as contestability (see works by Baumol and Spence), and models of innovative entrants (even with initially inferior technology) overcoming incumbents (see in particular Christensen's model of disruptive innovation). A brief overview of the arguments is in the following:

Martin, Xavier, “Preemption and entry timing.” In Palgrave Encyclopedia of Strategic Management (David Teece and Mie Augier, editors). New York, NY and Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave, 2013.

You are right, though, that the question takes on a new life given developments in technology, and specifically the growth of businesses that act as platforms and leverage network externalities that can render later entry extremely costly. Here are two papers on the topic:

An excellent review: McIntyre DP, Srinivasan A. 2017. Networks, platforms, and strategy: Emerging views and next steps. Strategic Management Journal 38(1): 141-160.

And a paper on a rare exception:

Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., & Van Alstyne, M. (2011). Platform envelopment. Strategic Management Journal, 32(12), 1270-1285.

I think the question is quite interesting, especially if to connect barriers to entry with different types of the industy

My personal opinion is that research on barriers to entry (BTE) has moved on, primarily due to the focus on more quantitative strategic management research trends.

I would presume that investigation on BTE tends to be more qualitative in the form of ethnography and observations. It would be hard to quantify BTE factors, other than using dummy variables. However, I also do think it would be interesting to study barriers to entry in the light of innovation and digitalisation of work activities.

New technologies break down barriers. Altavista was the Internet search engine, then Yahoo came, Google surpassed them all. Likewise, despite being tiny among giants, Tesla today is worth five times the Ford + GM, something unthinkable years ago. Barriers exist, but they can be smashed.

Georges, I think the barriers to entry debate and discussion has made some progress not only in the context of MNEs but increasingly in the context of SMEs. This is partly because the lack of research attention on smaller organisations operating in less-developed and emerging economies and the nature of the variety of challenges faced by such firms have raised many-a-researcher's interest in this area of work. For a sample of such emerging topics in this aspect, please see:

Mendy, J., Rahman, M. & Bal, P. M. (2019) ‘Using the ‘Best-fit’ Approach to Investigate the Effects of Politico-economic and Social Barriers on SMEs’ Internationalisation in an Emerging Country Context: Implications and future directions’, Thunderbird International Business Review, 62(2), 199-211.

Mendy, J. & Rahman, M. (2019) ‘Supporting SMEs’ internationalisation through a deeper understanding of human and technology barriers: applying effective HRM processes from a developing-country’, Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance.

Mendy, J. (2019) ‘Demystifying Misted Mirrors to Investigate Emerging People Issues in SMEs: Implications for Strategic Change’ Strategic Change Journal Special Issue on ‘Supporting Creating Shared Value’, 29(2).

Mendy, J. (2019) ‘Supporting Creating Shared Value: Including Local and Global Clusters of Staff Resistance to Strategic SME Restructuring’, Strategic Change Journal Special Issue on ‘Supporting Creating Shared Value’, 28(2), 157 – 161.

Rahman, M. & Mendy, J. (2018) ‘Evaluating People-related Resilience and Non-Resilience Barriers of SMEs’ Internationalisation: A developing country perspective’, International Journal of Organisational Analysis, 27(2), 225 – 240.

Mendy, J. & Rahman, M. (2018) ‘Application of HRM’s Universal Model: an examination of People vs Institutions as Barriers of Internationalization for SMEs in a Small Developing Country’, Thunderbird International Business Review, 61(2), 363 – 374.

Interesting stuff...

Yes, I agree .. but have in mind that barriers to entry in new normal would change. Maybe it is interesting to you to refer to our book on this subject Book YOU AND THE NEW NORMAL

Barriers to entry is more suited for a mature market. Where the business model is product-centric and the industry structure prevails over decision such as prices. Where one follows the rules of the game or is at least governed by it. It is less of a concern when the rules themselves becomes amendable to the strategic player. An industry and market is therefore created and the notion of "entry" is a misnomer.

Georges, I think that you could consider the barriers to exit and the barriers to move as dimensions of the barriers to entry. These two dimensions could be more or less relevant, depending on industry dynamics and maturity.

Best regards

Dear Georges, I personally think it would be interesting to study the barriers to entry (also to move) in light of the dimension of upgrading in value chains, which is one of the pillars of the Global Value Chain approach's.

Dear Mr. German:

I fully agree with you that barriers to entry was a very important subject from 1980 on. Afterwards, the revolution in TICs changed not only many of the barriers but also some business in itselves, that is to say the core of the idea.

So, I would say that a good thing to ask yourself and to study is how the concept has evolved in the XXI century, having in mind TIC and all the change associated. Probably you´ll find that the concept is no way as strong for companies as it was, but perhaps it is still usefull in some industries.

In short, I would study the evolution of the concept.

Regards

Gustavo Concari