IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v41y2017i3p208-224.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public value mapping of network neutrality: Public values and net neutrality in Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Shin, Dong-Hee
  • Lee, Min-Kyu

Abstract

Network neutrality (NN) is of broad and current interest despite its complex and multifaceted nature. This study examines NN in the Korean context in terms of policy, industry, values, and society. It addresses the policy effectiveness of ongoing NN discussions by analyzing user attitudes and perceptions. The proposed model empirically tests policy effectiveness through user perceptions by incorporating factors representative of NN. Possible NN factors are derived from the previous literature and perceptions of NN concepts. The results find that regulation and competition are two primary factors constituting network neutrality, and these factors differently influence the formation of attitudes toward policy effectiveness. Political and social implications are discussed based on the proposed model. This study provides comprehensive analysis and heuristic data on user drivers, industry dynamics, and policy implications in the NN ecosystem.

Suggested Citation

  • Shin, Dong-Hee & Lee, Min-Kyu, 2017. "Public value mapping of network neutrality: Public values and net neutrality in Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 208-224.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:41:y:2017:i:3:p:208-224
    DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2016.12.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596116302804
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.telpol.2016.12.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dong‐Hee Shin & Hyungseung Choo, 2011. "Demystifying Internet Neutrality in South Korea with Stakeholder Analysis," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 28(6), pages 557-583, November.
    2. Hsing Kenneth Cheng & Subhajyoti Bandyopadhyay & Hong Guo, 2011. "The Debate on Net Neutrality: A Policy Perspective," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 60-82, March.
    3. Wallsten Scott & Hausladen Stephanie, 2009. "Net Neutrality, Unbundling, and their Effects on International Investment in Next-Generation Networks," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Nicholas Economides & Benjamin E. Hermalin, 2012. "The economics of network neutrality," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(4), pages 602-629, December.
    5. Shin, Dong-Hee, 2015. "Effect of the customer experience on satisfaction with smartphones: Assessing smart satisfaction index with partial least squares," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 627-641.
    6. Economides, Nicholas & Tåg, Joacim, 2012. "Network neutrality on the Internet: A two-sided market analysis," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 91-104.
    7. Shrimali, Gireesh, 2008. "Surplus extraction by network providers: Implications for net neutrality and innovation," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 545-558, September.
    8. Jean Tirole, 2012. "Overcoming Adverse Selection: How Public Intervention Can Restore Market Functioning," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 29-59, February.
    9. Krämer, Jan & Wiewiorra, Lukas & Weinhardt, Christof, 2013. "Net neutrality: A progress report," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 794-813.
    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. Md. Morshadul Hasan & Lu Yajuan & Appel Mahmud, 2020. "Regional Development of China’s Inclusive Finance Through Financial Technology," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440199, February.
    2. Siddhartha Menon, 2021. "An Institutional Analysis of TMP Regulation in India," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(3), pages 300-325, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shin, Donghee, 2013. "Governing network neutrality: Public perception and policy capacity," 24th European Regional ITS Conference, Florence 2013 88540, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Liu Xingyi, 2016. "Fear of Discrimination: Net Neutrality and Product Differentiation on the Internet," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 211-247, December.
    3. Gautier, Axel & Somogyi, Robert, 2020. "Prioritization vs zero-rating: Discrimination on the internet," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    4. Vogelsang Ingo, 2013. "The Endgame of Telecommunications Policy? A Survey," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 64(3), pages 193-270, December.
    5. Calzada, Joan & Tselekounis, Markos, 2018. "Net Neutrality in a hyperlinked Internet economy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 190-221.
    6. Nielsen, Martin, 2015. "Strategic Investment Dependence and Net Neutrality," Discussion Papers on Economics 11/2015, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Economics.
    7. Frago Kourandi & Jan Krämer & Tommaso Valletti, 2015. "Net Neutrality, Exclusivity Contracts, and Internet Fragmentation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 320-338, June.
    8. Alexei A. Gaivoronski & Per Jonny Nesse & Olai Bendik Erdal, 2017. "Internet service provision and content services: paid peering and competition between internet providers," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 43-79, May.
    9. Briglauer, Wolfgang & Stocker, Volker & Stockhammer, Paul, 2019. "Ist Netzneutralität tatsächlich gut? Eine Neubewertung vor dem Hintergrund der Regulierung in den USA und in der EU sowie aktueller Forschungsergebnisse," Policy Notes 38, EcoAustria – Institute for Economic Research.
    10. Nicholas Economides, 2015. "Economic Features of the Internet and Network Neutrality," Working Papers 15-01, NET Institute.
    11. Baranes, Edmond, 2014. "The interplay between network investment and content quality: Implications to net neutrality on the Internet," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 57-69.
    12. D'Annunzio, Anna & Russo, Antonio, 2015. "Net Neutrality and internet fragmentation: The role of online advertising," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 30-47.
    13. Peitz, Martin & Schuett, Florian, 2016. "Net neutrality and inflation of traffic," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 16-62.
    14. Marc Bourreau & Frago Kourandi & Tommaso Valletti, 2015. "Net Neutrality with Competing Internet Platforms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 30-73, March.
    15. Dewenter Ralf & Lüth Hendrik, 2015. "Eine alternative Definition von Suchneutralität / An alternative definition of search neutrality," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 66(1), pages 221-242, January.
    16. Baranes, Edmond & Poudou, Jean-Christophe, 2011. "Internet access and investment incentives for broadband service providers," 22nd European Regional ITS Conference, Budapest 2011: Innovative ICT Applications - Emerging Regulatory, Economic and Policy Issues 52196, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    17. Bauer, Johannes M. & Shim, Woohyun, 2012. "Regulation and digital innovation: Theory and evidence," 23rd European Regional ITS Conference, Vienna 2012 60364, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    18. Soohyun Cho & Liangfei Qiu & Subhajyoti Bandyopadhyay, 2016. "Should Online Content Providers Be Allowed To Subsidize Content?—An Economic Analysis," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 580-595.
    19. Nicholas Economides & Benjamin E. Hermalin, 2015. "The strategic use of download limits by a monopoly platform," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(2), pages 297-327, June.
    20. Pio Baake & Slobodan Sudaric, 2016. "Interconnection and Prioritization," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1629, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    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:eee:telpol:v:41:y:2017:i:3:p:208-224. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30471/description#description .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.