The Influence of Broadband Regulation in EU on the Development of the Regulated Technology
Languages of publication
The aim of the article is to answer the question if the level of intensity of "ex ante" regulation (also "regulation") imposed by NRA (national regulatory Authority or regulators) influence on the development of incumbent DSL technology against other Access technologies. There are several approaches which support the basic idea of regulation, that "ex ante" regulation promotes the competition. The approaches must be also based on the size of the market. In the internet world there are different access technologies. Open Access is crucial for the development of competition. Regulators have to ensure, that also new entrants can reach end users through the facilities of the incumbent operator. Based on the approach of three criteria, European Commission defines two wholesale relevant access markets both based on DSL technology ("bitstream" access and unbundled local loop) susceptible to sector specific "ex ante" regulation. In the last stage also optical access is included on the relevant markets. Other technologies are still not equivalent to incumbent DSL technology according to the opinion of the commission. The intensity of regulation influences on the competition conditions. It influences on the level where and at which point of the investment ladder entrants will enter the market through wholesale inputs or through building its own infrastructure.
- Bae S., Hoeel J. & Youngbae K. (2008). Innovation patterns and policy implications of ADSL penetration in Korea: A case study. Telecommunications Policy, 32: 307-325. DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2007.08.003[Crossref][WoS]
- Bouckaert J. & van Dijk T. (2010). Access regulation, competition, and broadband penetration: An international study. Telecommunications Policy 34: 661-671. DOI:10.1016/j.telpol.2010.09.001.[WoS][Crossref]
- Brandão A. & Sarmento P. (2007). Access pricing: A comparison between full deregulation and two alternative instruments of access price regulation, cost based and retail minus. Telecommunications Policy, 31: 236-250. DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2007.03.003.[WoS][Crossref]
- Cave M. & Prosperetti L. (2001). European telecommunications infrastructure. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 17: 416-431. DOI: 10.1093/oxrep/17.3.416.[Crossref]
- Commission of the European Communities (2007). Explanatory note to the Commission recommendation On Relevant Product and Service Markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex ante regulation in accordance with Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on a common regulatory framework for electronic communication networks and services: Commission of the European Communities. Available from:
- Commission of the European Communities (2010). Progress report on the single European Electronic Communications Market 2009 (15TH Report) SEC(2010) 630. Available from:
- Dippon C. H. & Ware H. (2010). Wholesale unbundling and intermodal competition: Telecommunications Policy, 34: 54-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2009.11.002.[Crossref][WoS]
- European Parliament and of the Council (2002). Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive), Official Journal L108. Available from:
- European Parliament and of the Council (2009). Directive 2009/140/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 amending Directives 2002/21/EC on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services, 2002/19/EC on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities, and 2002/20/EC on the authorization of electronic communications networks and services (Text with EEA relevance), Official Journal L337. Available from:
- ERG (2009). ERG Report: Regulatory Accounting in Practice 2009, ERG (09) 41, 1-41. Available from:
- ERG (2009). Report on Next Generation Access - Economic Analysis and Regulatory Principles, ERG (09)17, 2009. Available from:
- Höffler F. (2005). Cost and Benefits from infrastructure competition. Estimating Welfare Effects from Broadband Access Competition, Max Planck Institute, 1-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2007.05.004[Crossref]
- Laffont J. J. & Tirole J. (2000). Competition in Telecommunications. London, The MIT Press, 2000.
- Mason R. & Valetti T. M. (2001). Competition in communications networks: Pricing and regulation. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 17: 389-415. DOI: 10.1093/oxrep/17.3.389.[Crossref]
- Nicewander W. A. & Rodgers J. L. (1988). Thirteen ways to look at the correlation coefficient, The American Statistician, 42(1): 59-66.
- Pavlos C. S. (2009). Does smallness affect the liberalisation of telecommunications? Case of Cyprus, Telecommunications Policy, 33: 215-229. DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2008.12.006[Crossref][WoS]
- Picot A. & Wernick C. (2007). The role of government in broadband access, Telecommunications Policy, 31: 660-674. DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2007.08.002.[Crossref][WoS]
- Siciliani P. (2010). Access regulation on NGA-A financial, market lead solution to bridge the gap between US and European diverging regulatory approaches, Telecommunications Policy, 34: 287-298. DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2009.12.004.[Crossref][WoS]
Publication order reference