IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/diceop/29.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Der angemessene Kostenmaßstab für Terminierungsentgelte - "Pure LRIC" vs. "KeL"

Author

Listed:
  • Barth, Anne-Kathrin
  • Heimeshoff, Ulrich

Abstract

Im Jahr 2009 veröffentlichte die EU Kommission eine neue weitreichende Empfehlung (2009/396/EG) bezüglich der Regulierung der Festnetz- und Mobilfunk- Terminierungsentgelte in der Europäischen Union. Wesentliche Unterschiede zur bisherigen Praxis in Deutschland, die auf dem sog. KeL-Verfahren beruht, bestehen vor allem darin, dass es zum einen zu einer Harmonisierung der Zustellungsentgelte über alle EU27-Länder hinweg kommen soll. Zum anderen werden bei Anwendung des neuen Kostenstandards, dem sog. pure LRIC-Ansatz, Terminierungsentgelte lediglich auf Basis der variablen Kosten festgelegt. Somit bliebe die Berücksichtigung von Gemeinkosten außen vor. Ziel dieses Arbeitspapiers ist es daher, die Vor- und Nachteile der europaweiten Angleichung der Terminierungsentgelte und der unterschiedlichen Kostenansätze pure LRIC und KeL ökonomisch aufzuzeigen, um anschließend Regulierungsempfehlungen abzuleiten.

Suggested Citation

  • Barth, Anne-Kathrin & Heimeshoff, Ulrich, 2012. "Der angemessene Kostenmaßstab für Terminierungsentgelte - "Pure LRIC" vs. "KeL"," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 29, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:diceop:29
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/64635/1/727064371.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:eee:ecolet:v:71:y:2001:i:3:p:413-42 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Sjaak Hurkens & Ángel Luis López, 2011. "The Welfare Effects of Mobile Termination Rate Regulation in Asymmetric Oligopolies: the Case of Spain," Working Papers 11-09, NET Institute.
    3. Dewenter, Ralf & Kruse, Jörn, 2011. "Calling party pays or receiving party pays? The diffusion of mobile telephony with endogenous regulation," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 107-117, March.
    4. Barth, Anne-Kathrin & Heimeshoff, Ulrich, 2011. "Does the growth of mobile markets cause the demise of fixed networks? Evidence from the European Union," 22nd European Regional ITS Conference, Budapest 2011: Innovative ICT Applications - Emerging Regulatory, Economic and Policy Issues 52144, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    5. de Bijl,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2008. "Regulation and Entry into Telecommunications Markets," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521066631.
    6. Barth, Anne-Kathrin & Heimeshoff, Ulrich, 2012. "How large is the magnitude of fixed-mobile call substitution? Empirical evidence from 16 European countries," DICE Discussion Papers 49, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    7. Haucap, Justus & Lange, Mirjam R. J. & Wey, Christian, 2012. "Nemo Omnibus Placet: Exzessive Regulierung und staatliche Willkür," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 27, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    8. Haucap, Justus & Coenen, Michael, 2010. "Regulierung und Deregulierung in Telekommunikationsmärkten: Theorie und Praxis," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 01, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    9. Christos Genakos & Tommaso Valletti, 2011. "Testing The “Waterbed” Effect In Mobile Telephony," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(6), pages 1114-1142, December.
    10. Dewenter, Ralf & Haucap, Justus & Heimeshoff, Ulrich, 2007. "Regulatorische Risiken in Telekommunikationsmaerkten aus institutionenoekonomischer Perspektive," Working Paper 64/2007, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
    11. Kruse, Jörn, 2003. "Regulierung der Terminierungsentgelte der deutschen Mobilfunknetze?," Wirtschaftsdienst – Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik (1949 - 2007), ZBW – German National Library of Economics / Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 83(3), pages 203-208.
    12. Gans, Joshua S. & King, Stephen P., 2001. "Using 'bill and keep' interconnect arrangements to soften network competition," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 413-420, June.
    13. Hans-Werner Sinn, 2004. "The New Systems Competition," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 5(1), pages 23-38, February.
    14. Pindyck Robert S., 2007. "Mandatory Unbundling and Irreversible Investment in Telecom Networks," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(3), pages 1-25, September.
    15. Kenneth E. Train, 1991. "Optimal Regulation: The Economic Theory of Natural Monopoly," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200848, January.
    16. Kruse, Joern, 2003. "Regulierung der Terminierungsentgelte der deutschen Mobilfunknetze?," Working Paper 1/2003, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg.
    17. Haucap, Justus & Kühling, Jürgen, 2007. "Telekommunikationsregulierung: Brauchen wir noch mehr Zentralisierung?," Wirtschaftsdienst – Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik (1949 - 2007), ZBW – German National Library of Economics / Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 87(10), pages 664-671.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Coenen, Michael & Haucap, Justus, 2013. "Kommunal- statt Missbrauchsaufsicht: Zur Aufsicht über Trinkwasserentgelte nach der 8. GWB-Novelle," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 53, University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:diceop:29. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/diduede.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.