Review of Co-Investment in Telecommunications
In the near future broadband infrastructure services broadband and broadband and ultra-wide bandwidth will offer so-called next generation network (NGN) – it is also thought to contribute to economic development and is supported by research empirical. Previously, indicating that fiber optic cable doubles the rate reached more than 10% of the high-tech level in the economic sectors Greenstein, Spiller and McMaster (1995) were related. Then, based on data obtained from the 21 OECD countries over a 20-year period, roller bearing Uever (2001) found evidence of a significant positive causal relationship between economic growth and Investment in broadband. There is a critical mass of telecommunications infrastructure. Analysis, broadband penetration rate of a 10% increase was demonstrated as the average increase of 2.8% of GDP.
More recently, other studies have brought the impact on GDP growth of high-speed investments using the shadow of econometric techniques. Koutroumpis, (2008), 0.63% of the impact of the average GDP of broadband infrastructure (EU-15 for 2002-2007) shows that. In other words, the% of 16.92 of the total increase in the period. US Greenstein and McDevitt (2009), the share of broadband in 2006, shows that 28 billion. Dollars of GDP is estimated at 20-20 billion dollars. Rec. The United States is associated with domestic use. This broadband infrastructure is estimated at about 8.3 to 106 billion. Rec. GDP for the same period, accounts for about 40% to 50% of total GDP. Telecommunications – plays an important role in the network and infrastructure of the sector that plays a key role in the market. The developments in this area depend to a large extent on the performance of infrastructures and hence on investments in infrastructure. This becomes even more important in the broadband area, for example an innovative technological development, quality improvement, capacity expansion and so on. Investments are closely linked. D. Broadband access today is a significant proliferation, requires large amounts of capital expenditure. Therefore, the growing problem of regulatory issues to attract investment in the broadband market. Regulation, as it has a profound and lasting effect on the selection of financial firms by offering incentives or barriers to investment in the telecommunications sector is a key factor. One of the basic regulation aims to encourage competition and improve social welfare. Thus, for example, when it weakens the incentive to invest in normative competitive measures that limit the monopolistic behavior of the current president, it may have a social and private conflict of interest.
The competition between investment promotion and the presentation of trends, widely seen in the economic aspects of the telecommunications literature. Laffont and Tirole (2000, p.7) “Overall, after the creation of infrastructure to encourage competition to improve social welfare and investors, there is a trade-off between encouraging investment in Infrastructure and protection: Many theoretical and empirical subject studies, most telecommunications and broadband regulation of the promotion of access to services and arrangements that try to light on interested in policy making.
Given the importance of the link between broadband investment and regulations, such as the complexity and diversity of this study was to consider for future research and recommendations for literature and House practitioners in the topic. classifying documents in a critical, present and Pro Poses – theoretical and empirical parts – possible areas for further research.
The document is organized as follows:
Chapter 2 regulation of the World State in the field of broadband investments and is communication networks.
Chapter 3, regulations and investments in telecommunications theoretical work provides a critical review.
Chapter 4 summarizes the empirical data on retail and wholesale regulation.
Finally, Chapter 5 summarizes the main issues and research and discuss the results with future regulations. Broadband world. In this section, how to address the issue in broadband and investment trends changes in the regulatory framework are discussed. Member States discussed East Asia and the European Union on the case. In the global broadband market, there are essentially three different approaches to the regulatory approach and deregulation of the US intervention in East Asia and has determined that the middle path between full liberalization with the intervention of EU.
United States is the largest broadband market in the deregulation of the OECD has been a change in the direction of recent years. First, the 1996 Telecommunications Act, existing local carriers (ILECs) for many constraints in creating networks reveal and began to long-term contracts in the rival wholesale price regulation based on open network elements (UNES) specifies additional procurement costs. Communications and public services 21 OECD countries to liberalize product and investment product reform, increasing liberalization and privatization reforms suggest a positive relationship. Role Type important in promoting investment oynuyor.4oecd: “Five major OECD markets a broad (December 2008). “‘
The Commission Communication (FCC) a copy of the author, when candidates have no alternative infrastructure request, especially the local multiplex mode to encourage competition in the early stages (ULL) found the section. ULL, especially large-scale US in the world to start a discussion.
As a result, there was intense academic debate and recurring problems. Promote the network of ILEC broadband expansion and improved incentive services to provide as expected, and had weakened to build their networks with a sufficient incentive to move from leased lines, a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC) ensuring Than the critics. Therefore, in response to multiple injuries, the US Supreme Court rules earlier, to the FCC had to be revised total bankruptcy and separation scheme line and the FCC finally approved the liquidation of obligations for the separation of broadband in 2005. market. An important feature of the strong competition between cable television systems and telephone systems in the US broadband market.
Since 1996, the reform of the United States, cable service providers to provide Internet services provided impose certain regulatory requirements, on the other hand created by strict rules according to the telephone companies. This is also the overtaking conditions for the elimination of former Bell companies, creating an asymmetric arrangement for determining two types of business. As a result, the process of liberalization of telecommunications services has led the United States to become very different. East Asia, not because it was a little more than a third of the broadband and international users, but also two member states is a difficult position in the global broadband zone is well located in South Korea And Japan, plays an important role in global broadband development. In both countries, an important factor in the development of policy intervention activities and regulation will seriously affect broadband services. The rapid development of broadband services in South Korea, large-scale investment, subsidies and other public support stems from. D. After the economic crisis of 1997, the Korean government sent a high-speed Internet connection and new opportunities for economic growth.
The most famous example, launched by the government provides loans to operators who invest in the KIA high-speed infrastructure initiative. In 2002, only the country, separated strict rules of entry to local loops. As a result, some studies as an example of indiscriminate success until 2002 are related to the South Korean case (Crandall, 2006). On the other hand, Japan, NTT East and NTT existing telecom operator for Nippon West Telegraph and Telephone (NTT) shortly after the breakup, then in 2000 to the rising long-term costs (LRIC) The separation of the local network. This Public Management, Business, Post and Telecommunications Department (MPHPT) is a response to the resistance of the old ntt’n and access to open struggle against their own business.
In 2003, the government’s broadband programs to promote the “e-Japan” strategy of expanding subsidies for a wide range of operators, tax incentives and implied that a combination of low or no credit. Then, in 2004 and 2006, the strategy “Japan special” and government policy “IT strategy of the new strategy” and expansion of broadband in 2004 and 2006 “expand broadband” continued. In the European Union, the mid-term is necessary between the full deregulation of state intervention in the early 1990s, the EU-15 in the early days after telecommunications liberalization, the European Commission Decision on the arrangements for access to the network for the Member States. Germany, 1996, then Denmark in 1998, Italy started in the Netherlands in 1999 and 2000. 2000, ULL law came into force in Europe: This is necessary that the separation of the network Local regulators designated by their National Regulatory Authority (NRA) said they have market power, and then the “new regulatory framework” has updated the regulatory framework with the ratification of the 2002 and expanded.
