Geographically segmented regulation for telecommunications: lessons from experience

Purpose – The aim of this paper is to make policy makers and regulators more fully aware of the practical problems and costs involved in implementing geographically segmented regulation. This awareness will be valuable in deciding whether to adopt the approach and, if so, in designing its implementa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Xavier, Patrick, Ypsilanti, D.
Format: Journal Article
Published: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd 2011
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/6499
_version_ 1848745092670554112
author Xavier, Patrick
Ypsilanti, D.
author_facet Xavier, Patrick
Ypsilanti, D.
author_sort Xavier, Patrick
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Purpose – The aim of this paper is to make policy makers and regulators more fully aware of the practical problems and costs involved in implementing geographically segmented regulation. This awareness will be valuable in deciding whether to adopt the approach and, if so, in designing its implementation, i.e. how the scheme's problems will be addressed and costs minimized. Design/methodology/approach – Increasingly, incumbent operators and some regulators have argued that regulatory forbearance should be adopted in geographic areas (usually the more densely populated cities) where facility-based competition is developing. Certainly geographically segmented regulation accords with widespread agreement that regulation should be the minimum necessary. Indeed, a number of countries have implemented the scheme, including Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, Portugal, Spain, the UK and USA. This paper examines the experience these countries have had in applying geographically segmented regulation. Findings – The lessons from experience in applying geographically segmented regulation suggest that the processes used to determine specific relevant markets are, at present, contentious and problematic in principle, and complex and subjective in practice. The problems/costs relating to the implementation of geographic regulation could erode the stability, certainty and predictability so important in a regulatory regime. Moreover, outcomes are uncertain, especially when looking ahead into an NGN environment. Originality/value – This is the first paper that examines the actual experience of countries that have implemented geographically segmented regulation.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T06:11:52Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-6499
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T06:11:52Z
publishDate 2011
publisher Emerald Group Publishing Ltd
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-64992017-09-13T15:54:29Z Geographically segmented regulation for telecommunications: lessons from experience Xavier, Patrick Ypsilanti, D. telecommunications geographic regions Purpose – The aim of this paper is to make policy makers and regulators more fully aware of the practical problems and costs involved in implementing geographically segmented regulation. This awareness will be valuable in deciding whether to adopt the approach and, if so, in designing its implementation, i.e. how the scheme's problems will be addressed and costs minimized. Design/methodology/approach – Increasingly, incumbent operators and some regulators have argued that regulatory forbearance should be adopted in geographic areas (usually the more densely populated cities) where facility-based competition is developing. Certainly geographically segmented regulation accords with widespread agreement that regulation should be the minimum necessary. Indeed, a number of countries have implemented the scheme, including Australia, Austria, Canada, Finland, Portugal, Spain, the UK and USA. This paper examines the experience these countries have had in applying geographically segmented regulation. Findings – The lessons from experience in applying geographically segmented regulation suggest that the processes used to determine specific relevant markets are, at present, contentious and problematic in principle, and complex and subjective in practice. The problems/costs relating to the implementation of geographic regulation could erode the stability, certainty and predictability so important in a regulatory regime. Moreover, outcomes are uncertain, especially when looking ahead into an NGN environment. Originality/value – This is the first paper that examines the actual experience of countries that have implemented geographically segmented regulation. 2011 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/6499 10.1108/14636691111121601 Emerald Group Publishing Ltd restricted
spellingShingle telecommunications
geographic regions
Xavier, Patrick
Ypsilanti, D.
Geographically segmented regulation for telecommunications: lessons from experience
title Geographically segmented regulation for telecommunications: lessons from experience
title_full Geographically segmented regulation for telecommunications: lessons from experience
title_fullStr Geographically segmented regulation for telecommunications: lessons from experience
title_full_unstemmed Geographically segmented regulation for telecommunications: lessons from experience
title_short Geographically segmented regulation for telecommunications: lessons from experience
title_sort geographically segmented regulation for telecommunications: lessons from experience
topic telecommunications
geographic regions
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/6499