Stepping stones and access holidays: The fallacies of regulatory micro-management
Good intentions are no substitute for sound economic regulation. Using the 'investment ladder' as the stick and access holidays as the carrot is hardly an effective way to generate competition. On the contrary, this approach creates a regulatory spiral. What regulators plead for today is in effect an obligatory sharing regime for nearly all network elements. However, this splitting up of networks into their elements by ad hoc regulatory interventions is destroying consumer welfare. Instead, rule-based regulation of network-specific market power should be implemented by means of a disaggregated regulatory mandate, limiting incentive regulation to essential facilities as a whole.
|Date of creation:||2009|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +49 +761 / 203 2301
Fax: +49 +761 / 203 2303
Web page: http://portal.uni-freiburg.de/vw/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Valletti, Tommaso M., 0. "The theory of access pricing and its linkage with investment incentives," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(10-11), pages 659-675, November.
- Schankerman, Mark, 1996. "Symmetric regulation for competitive telecommunications," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 3-23, March.
- Cave, Martin & Vogelsang, Ingo, 0. "How access pricing and entry interact," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(10-11), pages 717-727, November.
- Knieps, Günter, 2005. "Telecommunications markets in the stranglehold of EU regulation: on the need for a disaggregated regulatory contract," Discussion Papers 109 [rev.], University of Freiburg, Institute for Transport Economics and Regional Policy.
- Joshua S. Gans & Stephen P. King, 2004. "Access Holidays and the Timing of Infrastructure Investment," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(248), pages 89-100, 03.
- G. Knieps, 2005. "Telecommunications Markets in the Stranglehold of EU Regulation: On the need for a disaggregated regulatory contract," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 6(2), pages 75-94, June.
- Knieps, Gunter, 1997. "Phasing Out Sector-Specific Regulation in Competitive Telecommunications," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(3), pages 325-39.
- Blankart, Charles B & Knieps, Gunter, 1989. "What Can We Learn from Comparative Institutional Analysis? The Case of Telecommunications," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 579-98.
- Gasmi, F. & Laffont, J. J. & Sharkey, W. W., 2000.
"Competition, universal service and telecommunications policy in developing countries,"
Information Economics and Policy,
Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 221-248, September.
- Gasmi, Farid & Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Sharkey, William, 1999. "Competition, Universal Service and Telecommunications Policy in Developing Countries," IDEI Working Papers 92, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
- M.E. Beesley & S.C. Littlechild, 1989. "The Regulation of Privatized Monopolies in the United Kingdom," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(3), pages 454-472, Autumn.
- Bauer, Johannes M., 2005. "Unbundling Policy in the United States Players, Outcomes and Effects," MPRA Paper 2455, University Library of Munich, Germany.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:aluivr:123. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.