IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v41y2017i5p486-497.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From spectrum management to spectrum governance

Author

Listed:
  • Anker, Peter

Abstract

Spectrum management is essentially an issue of coordination for which different solutions are possible. Two alternative approaches have been proposed to replace or to be applied next to governmental control: (1) property rights; and (2) a commons, with restrictions in the type of use or users. Although elements of both proposals have been implemented, the resulting mixed regime is still a top down process with many rigidities and a government in control. Proper implementation of these alternative approaches requires a shift in the role of the government from a controller of the spectrum management process to a facilitator of decentralized coordination in the market in a multi-actor spectrum governance process. The role of the government shifts to market design, monitoring and facilitation. This shift in the role of the government is relatively absent in the debate on spectrum management.

Suggested Citation

  • Anker, Peter, 2017. "From spectrum management to spectrum governance," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 486-497.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:41:y:2017:i:5:p:486-497
    DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2017.01.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596117300393
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.telpol.2017.01.010?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. Baumol, William J, 1982. "Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Paul Klemperer, 2002. "What Really Matters in Auction Design," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 169-189, Winter.
    3. repec:reg:rpubli:224 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Baldwin, Robert & Cave, Martin & Lodge, Martin, 2011. "Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy, and Practice," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199576098.
    5. Audretsch, David B. & Baumol, William J. & Burke, Andrew E., 2001. "Competition policy in dynamic markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 613-634, April.
    6. P. Anker, 2010. "Does Cognitive Radio Need Policy Innovation?," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 11(1), pages 2-27, March.
    7. Nathalie Steins & Victoria Edwards, 1999. "Synthesis: Platforms for collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(3), pages 309-315, September.
    8. Freyens, Benoît, 2009. "A policy spectrum for spectrum economics," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 128-144, June.
    9. Anonymous, 1952. "International Telecommunication Union," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 646-647, November.
    10. Bazelon, Coleman, 2009. "Too many goals: Problems with the 700Â MHz auction," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 115-127, June.
    11. W. Lemstra & P. Anker & V. Hayes, 2011. "Cognitive Radio: Enabling Technology in Need of Coordination," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 12(3), pages 210-236, September.
    12. P. Anker & W. Lemstra, 2013. "Achieving Alignment between Institutions and Technology, the Case of Radio Spectrum," Competition and Regulation in Network Industries, Intersentia, vol. 14(2), pages 151-173, June.
    13. repec:sen:journl:v:14:i:2:y:2013:p:22 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Nathalie Steins & Victoria Edwards, 1999. "Platforms for collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(3), pages 241-255, September.
    15. Anonymous, 1952. "International Telecommunication Union," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 448-449, August.
    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. Jain, Rekha, 2019. "Lessons from India on the Role of Institutions in Spectrum Trading," 2nd Europe – Middle East – North African Regional ITS Conference, Aswan 2019: Leveraging Technologies For Growth 201758, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Lemstra, Wolter, 2018. "Leadership with 5G in Europe: Two contrasting images of the future, with policy and regulatory implications," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(8), pages 587-611.
    3. Faycal Bouhafs & Alessandro Raschellà & Michael Mackay & Frank den Hartog, 2022. "A Spectrum Management Platform Architecture to Enable a Sharing Economy in 6G," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-13, October.
    4. Matinmikko-Blue, Marja & Yrjölä, Seppo & Ahokangas, Petri & Seppänen, Veikko & Hämmäinen, Heikki & Jurva, Risto, 2019. "Value of the spectrum for local mobile communication networks: Insights into awarding and pricing the 5G spectrum bands," 30th European Regional ITS Conference, Helsinki 2019 205199, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    5. Matinmikko-Blue, Marja & Yrjölä, Seppo & Ahokangas, Petri & Hämmäinen, Heikki, 2021. "Analysis of 5G spectrum awarding decisions: How do different countries consider emerging local 5G networks?," 23rd ITS Biennial Conference, Online Conference / Gothenburg 2021. Digital societies and industrial transformations: Policies, markets, and technologies in a post-Covid world 238039, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    6. Webb, William & Medeisis, Arturas & Minervini, Leo Fulvio, 2024. "Evolved spectrum usage rights: A catalyst for liberal spectrum management reform," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3).
    7. Gisca, Oxana & Matinmikko-Blue, Marja & Ahokangas, Petri & Yrjölä, Seppo & Gordon, Jillian, 2022. "Legitimacy challenges of local private 5G and beyond networks in Europe," 31st European Regional ITS Conference, Gothenburg 2022: Reining in Digital Platforms? Challenging monopolies, promoting competition and developing regulatory regimes 265631, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    8. Queder, Fabian & Lehr, William & Haucap, Justus, 2020. "5G and Mobile Broadband Disruption," ITS Conference, Online Event 2020 224872, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).

    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. Peter ANKER & Wolter LEMSTRA, 2013. "Cognitive Radio: How to Proceed? An Actor-Centric Approach," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(90), pages 77-95, 2nd quart.
    2. Maciej Czaplewski, 2015. "Oddziaływanie regulacyjne Unii Europejskiej na rynek usług telekomunikacyjnych," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 5, pages 65-87.
    3. Murat Sartas & Piet van Asten & Marc Schut & Mariette McCampbell & Moureen Awori & Perez Muchunguzi & Moses Tenywa & Sylvia Namazzi & Ana Sole Amat & Graham Thiele & Claudio Proietti & Andre Devaux & , 2019. "Factors influencing participation dynamics in research for development interventions with multi-stakeholder platforms: A metric approach to studying stakeholder participation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-20, November.
    4. Amaral, Miguel & Saussier, Stéphane & Yvrande-Billon, Anne, 2009. "Auction procedures and competition in public services: The case of urban public transport in France and London," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 166-175, June.
    5. Johnson, Nancy & Ravnborg, Helle Munk & Westermann, Olaf & Probst, Kirsten, 2001. "User participation in watershed management and research:," CAPRi working papers 19, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Charles Heckscher & John McCarthy, 2014. "Transient Solidarities: Commitment and Collective Action in Post-Industrial Societies," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 627-657, December.
    7. Takako Izumi & Sangita Das & Miwa Abe & Rajib Shaw, 2022. "Managing Compound Hazards: Impact of COVID-19 and Cases of Adaptive Governance during the 2020 Kumamoto Flood in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-16, January.
    8. Karin Andrea Wigger & Dean A. Shepherd, 2020. "We’re All in the Same Boat: A Collective Model of Preserving and Accessing Nature-Based Opportunities," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(3), pages 587-617, May.
    9. José Ribas, 2014. "An Assessment of Conflicting Intentions in the Use of Multipurpose Water Reservoirs," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(12), pages 3989-4000, September.
    10. Anabel Sanchez-Plaza & Annelies Broekman & Pilar Paneque, 2019. "Analytical Framework to Assess the Incorporation of Climate Change Adaptation in Water Management: Application to the Tordera River Basin Adaptation Plan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, February.
    11. Peter Jones, 2013. "Governing protected areas to fulfil biodiversity conservation obligations: from Habermasian ideals to a more instrumental reality," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 39-50, February.
    12. Christian Jaag & Urs Trinkner, 2011. "A General Framework for Regulation and Liberalization in Network Industries," Chapters, in: Matthias Finger & Rolf W. Künneke (ed.), International Handbook of Network Industries, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Mark Lijesen & Victoria Shestalova, 2007. "Public and private roles in road infrastructure: an exploration of market failure, public instruments and government failure," CPB Document 146, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    14. Nicolas Faysse, 2006. "Troubles on the way: An analysis of the challenges faced by multi‐stakeholder platforms," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 219-229, August.
    15. Das, Nimai, 2009. "Understanding of Social Capital in Gender-based Participatory JFM Programme: An Evidence from West Bengal," MPRA Paper 15304, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Shastitko. Andrey (Шаститко, Андрей) & Komkova, Anastasia Andreevna (Комкова, Анастасия Андреевна) & Kurdin, Alexander (Курдин, Александр) & Shastitko, Anastasia (Шаститко, Анастасия), 2016. "Competition Policy and Incentives for Innovation [Конкурентная Политика И Стимулы К Инновационной Деятельности]," Working Papers 1447, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    17. Muñoz Escobar, Marcela & Hollaender, Robert & Pineda Weffer, Camilo, 2013. "Institutional durability of payments for watershed ecosystem services: Lessons from two case studies from Colombia and Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 46-53.
    18. John Selsky & Barbara Parker, 2010. "Platforms for Cross-Sector Social Partnerships: Prospective Sensemaking Devices for Social Benefit," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 21-37, July.
    19. Sartas, Murat & Schut, Marc & Hermans, Frans & Asten, Piet van & Leeuwis, Cees, 2018. "Effects of multi-stakeholder platforms on multi-stakeholder innovation networks: Implications for research for development interventions targeting innovations at scale," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(6), pages 1-20.
    20. Werner Hölzl & Michael Böheim & Michael Klien & Eva Pichler, 2017. "Das öffentliche Beschaffungswesen im Spannungsfeld zwischen Billigst- und Bestbieterprinzip," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 59256.

    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:5:p:486-497. 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.