IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/telsys/v65y2017i1d10.1007_s11235-016-0214-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mobile telecommunication standardization in Japan, China, the United States, and Europe: a comparison of regulatory and industrial regimes

Author

Listed:
  • G. Kaa

    (Delft University of Technology)

  • M. J. Greeven

    (Zhejiang University, School of Management)

Abstract

The process that leads to standardization in the mobile telecommunication industry has changed considerably over time. Where it was first a national process, it has gradually changed into a more global process, and the role of the government in the standardization process has changed from very influential to less influential. The role of the government now mainly consists of creating boundary conditions such as competition rules and granting licenses to operate. Finally, the number of stakeholders involved in the standardization process had increased considerably from stand-alone development of the standard to a situation in which a multitude of companies work together to develop standards. The purpose of this paper is to create insight in the changes in standardization processes in mobile telecommunication. We analyze existing theory on standardization and dominant designs and construct a framework which includes geographic setting, governmental regimes and industrial regimes. We test this framework by analyzing the standardization processes of four generations of mobile telecommunication standards in four regions (i.e., Japan, China, the US, and Europe).

Suggested Citation

  • G. Kaa & M. J. Greeven, 2017. "Mobile telecommunication standardization in Japan, China, the United States, and Europe: a comparison of regulatory and industrial regimes," Telecommunication Systems: Modelling, Analysis, Design and Management, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 181-192, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:telsys:v:65:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11235-016-0214-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11235-016-0214-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11235-016-0214-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11235-016-0214-y?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. Kano, Sadahiko, 2000. "Technical innovations, standardization and regional comparison -- a case study in mobile communications," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 305-321, May.
    2. Besen, Stanley M., 1990. "The European Telecommunications Standards Institute : A preliminary analysis," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 521-530, December.
    3. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1985. "Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(1), pages 70-83, Spring.
    4. Lyytinen, Kalle & Fomin, Vladislav V., 0. "Achieving high momentum in the evolution of wireless infrastructures: the battle over the 1G solutions," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3-4), pages 149-170, April.
    5. Joseph Farrell & Nancy T. Gallini, 1988. "Second-Sourcing as a Commitment: Monopoly Incentives to Attract Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 103(4), pages 673-694.
    6. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    7. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1988. "Coordination through Committees and Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 235-252, Summer.
    8. Suarez, Fernando F., 2004. "Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 271-286, March.
    9. Bekkers, Rudi & Duysters, Geert & Verspagen, Bart, 2002. "Intellectual property rights, strategic technology agreements and market structure: The case of GSM," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1141-1161, September.
    10. van de Kaa, Geerten & de Vries, Henk J., 2015. "Factors for winning format battles: A comparative case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 222-235.
    11. Funk, Jeffrey L., 2003. "Standards, dominant designs and preferential acquisition of complementary assets through slight information advantages," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1325-1341, September.
    12. Farrell, Joseph & Saloner, Garth, 1986. "Installed Base and Compatibility: Innovation, Product Preannouncements, and Predation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 940-955, December.
    13. David, Paul A. & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 1994. "Economics of compatibility standards and competition in telecommunication networks," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 217-241, December.
    14. Bekkers, Rudi & Bongard, René & Nuvolari, Alessandro, 2011. "An empirical study on the determinants of essential patent claims in compatibility standards," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 1001-1015, September.
    15. Funk, Jeffrey L. & Methe, David T., 2001. "Market- and committee-based mechanisms in the creation and diffusion of global industry standards: the case of mobile communication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 589-610, April.
    16. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    17. Funk, Jefrey L, 1998. "Competition between regional standards and the success and failure of firms in the world-wide mobile communication market," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(4-5), pages 419-441, May.
    18. den Hartigh, Erik & Ortt, J. Roland & van de Kaa, Geerten & Stolwijk, Claire C.M., 2016. "Platform control during battles for market dominance: The case of Apple versus IBM in the early personal computer industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 4-12.
    19. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-841, August.
    20. Jho, Whasun, 2007. "Global political economy of technology standardization: A case of the Korean mobile telecommunications market," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 124-138, March.
    21. Jeffrey L. Funk, 1998. "The Competition between Regional Standards and the Success and Failure of Firms in the World-Wide Mobile Communication Market," Kobe Economic & Business Review, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University, vol. 42, pages 137-161, February.
    22. Sadowski, B M & Dittrich, K & Duysters, G M, 2003. "Collaborative Strategies in the Event of Technological Discontinuities: The Case of Nokia in the Mobile Telecommunication Industry," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 173-186, September.
    23. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    24. van de Kaa, Geerten & Rezaei, Jafar & Kamp, Linda & de Winter, Allard, 2014. "Photovoltaic technology selection: A fuzzy MCDM approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 662-670.
    25. Kim, Moon-Koo & Park, Myeong-Cheol & Jeong, Dong-Heon, 2004. "The effects of customer satisfaction and switching barrier on customer loyalty in Korean mobile telecommunication services," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 145-159, March.
    26. van de Kaa, Geerten & de Bruijn, Hans, 2015. "Platforms and incentives for consensus building on complex ICT systems: The development of WiFi," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 580-589.
    27. David, Paul A & Shurmer, Mark, 1996. "Formal standards-setting for global telecommunications and information services. Towards an institutional regime transformation?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(10), pages 789-815, December.
    28. Stanley M. Besen & Joseph Farrell, 1994. "Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 117-131, Spring.
    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. Chenqian Xu & Cheng Hu, 2024. "Understanding the Rivalry Among Telecommunication Companies in the Cross-Border Patent Infringement: An Evolutionary Social Network Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, April.

    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. Geerten Van de Kaa & Daniel Scholten & Jafar Rezaei & Christine Milchram, 2017. "The Battle between Battery and Fuel Cell Powered Electric Vehicles: A BWM Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, October.
    2. van de Kaa, Geerten & de Vries, Henk J., 2015. "Factors for winning format battles: A comparative case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 222-235.
    3. van de Kaa, Geerten & Greeven, Mark, 2017. "LED standardization in China and South East Asia: Stakeholders, infrastructure and institutional regimes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 863-870.
    4. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.
    5. Kretschmer, Tobias & Muehlfeld, Katrin, 2006. "Co-opetition and prelaunch in standard-setting for developing technologies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 19843, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. van de Kaa, Geerten & Janssen, Marijn & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Standards battles for business-to-government data exchange: Identifying success factors for standard dominance using the Best Worst Method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 182-189.
    7. Hussinger, Katrin & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "The value of disclosing IPR to open standard setting organizations," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-060, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    8. Tobias Kretschmer & Katrin Muehlfeld, 2004. "Co-opetition in Standard-Setting: The Case of the Compact Disc," Working Papers 04-14, NET Institute, revised Oct 2004.
    9. Daniel P. Gross, 2020. "Collusive Investments in Technological Compatibility: Lessons from U.S. Railroads in the Late 19th Century," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(12), pages 5683-5700, December.
    10. Vitor Trindade & Johannes Moenius, 2007. "Networks, Standards and Intellectual Property Rights," Working Papers 0705, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    11. Matutes, Carmen & Regibeau, Pierre, 1996. "A selective review of the economics of standardization. Entry deterrence, technological progress and international competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 183-209, September.
    12. Nicholas Economides, 1997. "The Economics of Networks," Brazilian Electronic Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, vol. 1(0), December.
    13. van de Kaa, G. & Fens, T. & Rezaei, J. & Kaynak, D. & Hatun, Z. & Tsilimeni-Archangelidi, A., 2019. "Realizing smart meter connectivity: Analyzing the competing technologies Power line communication, mobile telephony, and radio frequency using the best worst method," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 320-327.
    14. Oz Shy, 2011. "A Short Survey of Network Economics," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(2), pages 119-149, March.
    15. Papachristos, George, 2017. "Diversity in technology competition: The link between platforms and sociotechnical transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 291-306.
    16. Foucart, Renaud & Li, Qian Cher, 2021. "The role of technology standards in product innovation: Theory and evidence from UK manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    17. Heli Koski & Tobias Kretschmer, 2004. "Survey on Competing in Network Industries: Firm Strategies, Market Outcomes, and Policy Implications," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-31, March.
    18. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    19. Frank Borowicz & Ewald Scherm, 2001. "Standardisierungsstrategien: Eine erweiterte Betrachtung des Wettbewerbs auf Netzeffektmärkten," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 391-416, June.
    20. Ewald Scherm & Christian Maaß, 2006. "Zum Stellenwert der Netzwerkökonomik in der Strategie-/Marketingforschung —Eine Analyse empirischer Untersuchungen," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 27-46, March.

    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:spr:telsys:v:65:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11235-016-0214-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.