Imperfect Legal Unbundling of Monopolistic Bottlenecks

We study an industry with a monopolistic bottleneck (e.g. a transmission network) supplying an essential input to several downstream firms. Under legal unbundling the bottleneck must be operated by a legally independent upstream firm, which may be partly or fully owned by an incumbent active in downstream markets. Access prices are regulated but the upstream firm can perform non-tariff discrimination. Under perfect legal unbundling the upstream firm maximizes only own profits; with imperfections it considers to some extend also the profits of its downstream mother. We find that reducing imperfections in legal unbundling (keeping ownership fixed) generally increases total output. Increasing the incumbent's ownership share increases total output if imperfections are sufficiently small, otherwise the effects are ambiguous. Surprisingly, higher ownership shares of the downstream incumbent may sometimes lead to lower degrees of imperfections. Our analysis suggests that consumers may benefit most from legal unbundling with strong regulation and parts of ownership given to a minority outside shareholder.Network industries, regulation, vertical relations, ownership, corruption, sabotage

Regulatory Approaches to NGNs: An International Comparison

The emergence of Next Generation Networks (NGNs) raises profound challenges for regulators everywhere. Different regulatory authorities have approached these problems in strikingly different ways, depending in part on the overall regulatory milieu in which they operate, and in part on the nature of the NGN migration envisioned by major market players. Also, the NGN core network raises significantly different issues from those of the NGN access network. The migration to NGN raises many of the same issues that were already on the table as a result of the broader migration to IP-based services, notably in regard to the de-coupling of the service from the underlying network. To these concerns are added profound questions related to the nature of market power. Will NGNs enable new forms of competition? Will competitive bottlenecks remain, especially in the last mile? Will NGN enable new forms of bottlenecks to emerge, especially in the upper layers of the network, perhaps as a result of new IMS capabilities? Regulators in the UK, Netherlands, Germany, Japan and the United States have been forced to deal with these issues due to relatively rapid migration to NGNs proposed by their respective incumbent telecoms operators. Many of the same issues are also visible in the recommendations that the European Commission finalised on 13 November 2007 as part of the ongoing review of the European regulatory framework for electronic communications. In this paper, we compare and contrast the many regulatory proceedings that have been produced by these regulatory authorities.Regulation; Next Generation Networks; access network; core network; all-IP; competition; market power; international comparison

Regulatory Approaches to NGNs: An International Comparison

The emergence of Next Generation Networks (NGNs) raises profound challenges for regulators everywhere. Different regulatory authorities have approached these problems in strikingly different ways, depending in part on the overall regulatory milieu in which they operate, and in part on the nature of the NGN migration envisioned by major market players. Also, the NGN core network raises significantly different issues from those of the NGN access network. The migration to NGN raises many of the same issues that were already on the table as a result of the broader migration to IP-based services,notably in regard to the de-coupling of the service from the underlying network. To these concerns are added profound questions related to the nature of market power. Will NGNs enable new forms of competition? Will competitive bottlenecks remain, especially in the last mile? Will NGN enable new forms of bottlenecks to emerge, especially in the upper layers of the network, perhaps as a result of new IMS capabilities? Regulators in the UK, Netherlands, Germany, Japan and the United States have been forced to deal with these issues due to relatively rapid migration to NGNs proposed by their respective incumbent telecoms operators. Many of the same issues are also visible in the recommendations that the European Commission finalised on 13 November 2007 as part of the ongoing review of the European regulatory framework for electronic communications. In this paper, we compare and contrast the many regulatory proceedings that have been produced by these regulatory authorities.Regulation; Next Generation Networks; access network; core network; all-IP; competition; market power; international comparison.

Re-Politicising Regulation: Politics: Regulatory Variation and Fuzzy Liberalisation in the Single European Energy Market

[From the introduction] The idea that we are living in the age of the regulatory state has dominated the study of public policy in the European Union and its member states in general, and the study of the utilities sectors in particular.1 The European Commission’s continuous drive to expand the Single Market has therefore been a free-market and rule-oriented project, driven by regulatory politics rather than policies that involve direct public expenditure. The dynamics of European integration are rooted in three central concepts: free trade, multilateral rules, and supranational cooperation. During the 1990s EU competition policy took a ‘public turn’ and set its sights on the public sector.2 EU legislation broke up national monopolies in telecommunications, electricity and gas, and set the scene for further extension of the single market into hitherto protected sectors. Both the integration theory literature (intergovernmentalist and institutionalist alike) and literature on the emergence of the EU as a ‘regulatory state’ assumed that this was primarily a matter of policy making: once agreement had been reached to liberalise the utilities markets a relatively homogeneous process would follow. The regulatory state model fit the original common market blueprint better the old industrial policy approaches. On the other hand, sector-specific studies continue to reveal a less than fully homogeneous internal market. The EU has undergone momentous changes in the last two decades, which have rendered the notion of a homogeneous single market somewhat unrealistic

Information Society Strategies in the European Context: The Case of Greece

This article sets out to analyze the policies adopted by the Greek government in its effort to accelerate the pace of reform towards a knowledge-based economy. These policies have to take into account the position that the country occupies within the emerging information society and, of course, the opportunities created by EU initiatives that aim to promote economic competitiveness and reduce regional disparities. Within this framework Greek policy makers have recognized the need for a coordinated, coherent and integrated approach, which attempts to diminish inequalities both within the country and with respect to other European Union economies. What emerges as a distinctive feature of the Greek information society strategy is the emphasis placed on the pivotal role of the state and the adoption of active interventionist policies

Innovation, investment and regulation : What are the options for regulation in the near future ?.

This paper addresses the question of what options are available to regulate the sector in the near future. In order to answer this question, the paper focuses on the problem of investment and innovation in an ex ante regulated sector. Relying on existing literature, we argue that ex ante regulation could represent a danger for the long-term development of the sector by delaying or cancelling investment projects, especially (but not only) concerning the construction of new infrastructures. We also argue that ex ante regulation is distorting investment itself: incremental investment is privileged as opposed to radical investment. In this context, we identify three possible options for regulation in the near future: 1) continuing ex ante regulation, 2) substituting ex post regulation for ex ante regulation and 3) implementing an industrial policy for macro-strategic reasons. After describing a few major mutations in the sector that must be taken into account by regulators and presenting the major dilemmas that the latter are facing, we propose two possible solutions inspired by foreign policy. The first solution consists of offering investors regulation holidays, with regular reviews to deem whether these holidays should be prolonged or not. The second solution consists of implementing an industrial policy that could take the form of a contract negotiated between the regulator and operators. This would guarantee the absence of ex ante regulation if the conditions of the contract (in terms of regional planning, price, quality of service, types of investment…) are met.Industrial Policy; Investment; Innovation; Regulation;

Innovation, convergence and the role of regulation in the Netherlands and beyond

In the light of converging services for voice, data, and video, this paper discusses the challenges for telecommunications regulation from a European perspective. The Netherlands, a country with excellent conditions for facilities-based competition, is discussed as a case in point. With dynamic issues at the heart of the debate, the role of regulation and government intervention more generally is to create and possibly to sustain conditions among operators to upgrade their networks and to provide innovative services. A fresh look at current regulation suggests that an overhaul may be needed.

Innovation, Investment and Regulation: What are the Options for Regulation in the Near Future?

This paper addresses the question of what options are available to regulate the sector in the near future. In order to answer this question, the paper focuses on the problem of investment and innovation in an ex ante regulated sector. Relying on existing literature, we argue that ex ante regulation could represent a danger for the long-term development of the sector by delaying or cancelling investment projects, especially (but not only) concerning the construction of new infrastructures. We also argue that ex ante regulation is distorting investment itself: incremental investment is privileged as opposed to radical investment. In this context, we identify three possible options for regulation in the near future: 1) continuing ex ante regulation, 2) substituting ex post regulation for ex ante regulation and 3) implementing an industrial policy for macro-strategic reasons. After describing a few major mutations in the sector that must be taken into account by regulators and presenting the major dilemmas that the latter are facing, we propose two possible solutions inspired by foreign policy. The first solution consists of offering investors regulation holidays, with regular reviews to deem whether these holidays should be prolonged or not. The second solution consists of implementing an industrial policy that could take the form of a contract negotiated between the regulator and operators. This would guarantee the absence of ex ante regulation if the conditions of the contract (in terms of regional planning, price, quality of service, types of investment…) are met.regulation; innovation; investment and industrial policy