IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_2537.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Chinese Experience with Global G3 Standard-Setting

Author

Listed:
  • John Whalley
  • Weimin Zhou
  • Xiaopeng An

Abstract

China’s growth strategy as set out in the 11th 5-year plan in 2005 called for upgrading of product quality, the development of an innovation society, and reduced reliance on foreign intellectual property with high license fees. Consistent with this policy, China has been involved in recent years with the development of a Chinese standard in third generation (3G) mobile phone technology, both in negotiating the standard and seeing it through to commercialization. This is the first case of a developing country both originating and successfully negotiating a telecommunications standard and this experience raises issues for China’s future development strategy based on product and process upgrading in manufacturing. We argue that while precedent setting from an international negotiating point of view, the experience has thus far is unproven commercially. But the lessons learned will benefit future related efforts in follow-on technologies if similar Chinese efforts are made. This paper documents Chinese standard-setting efforts from proposal submission to ITU to the current large-scale trial network deployment in China and overseas trial networks deployment. We discuss the underlying objectives for this initiative, evaluate its effectiveness, and assess its broader implications for Chinese development policy.

Suggested Citation

  • John Whalley & Weimin Zhou & Xiaopeng An, 2009. "Chinese Experience with Global G3 Standard-Setting," CESifo Working Paper Series 2537, CESifo.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_2537
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp2537.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    2. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    3. Joseph Farrell & Carl Shapiro, 2008. "How Strong Are Weak Patents?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1347-1369, September.
    4. Shy,Oz, 2001. "The Economics of Network Industries," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521805001, September.
    5. A. Bassanini & G. Dosi, 1998. "Competing Technologies, International Diffusion and the Rate of Convergence to a Stable Market Structure," Working Papers ir98012, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    6. Cowan, Robin, 1991. "Tortoises and Hares: Choice among Technologies of Unknown Merit," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 801-814, July.
    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. Dassanayake, Geekiyanage Disela Malinga & Kumar, Amit, 2012. "Techno-economic assessment of triticale straw for power generation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 236-245.
    2. Vialle, Pierre & Song, Junjie & Zhang, Jian, 2012. "Competing with dominant global standards in a catching-up context. The case of mobile standards in China," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 832-846.
    3. Michel Casteigts, 2010. "Mythes Métropolitains Et Territorialités Urbaines Dans Le Processus De Globalisation : Un Repérage Critique," Post-Print halshs-01528113, HAL.

    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. 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.
    2. Vanberg, Margit A., 2005. "Network Externalities and Interconnection Incentives," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-80, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Slowak, André P., 2009. "Market fields structure & dynamics in industrial automation," FZID Discussion Papers 02-2009, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    4. Robin Cowan & William Cowan & G.M. Peter Swann, 2004. "Waves in consumption with interdependence among consumers," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 149-177, February.
    5. Chang, Sungyong & Park, Sanghyun, 2021. "Borders of Network Effects and Early Internationalization as a Latecomer Strategy," SocArXiv d74he, Center for Open Science.
    6. Andrea Marchini & Chiara Riganelli & Francesco Diotallevi & Bianca Polenzani, 2021. "Label information and consumer behaviour: evidence on drinking milk sector," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, December.
    7. Pekka Sääskilahti, 2016. "Buying Decision Coordination and Monopoly Pricing of Network Goods," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 313-333, April.
    8. Cowan, Robin & Cowan, William & Swann, Peter, 1997. "A model of demand with interactions among consumers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 711-732, October.
    9. Karacuka, Mehmet & Çatık, A. Nazif & Haucap, Justus, 2013. "Consumer choice and local network effects in mobile telecommunications in Turkey," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 334-344.
    10. Cowan, Robin & Cowan, William, 1998. "Technological Standardization with and without Borders in an Interacting Agents Model," Research Memorandum 015, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    11. A. Bassanini & G. Dosi, 1998. "Competing Technologies, International Diffusion and the Rate of Convergence to a Stable Market Structure," Working Papers ir98012, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    12. Michihiro, Kandori & Rob, Rafael, 1998. "Bandwagon Effects and Long Run Technology Choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 30-60, January.
    13. Andreas Pyka & Paul Windrum, 2003. "The self-organisation of strategic alliances," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 245-268.
    14. Paul Windrum, 2003. "Unlocking a Lock-in: Towards a Model of Technological Succession," Chapters, in: Pier Paolo Saviotti (ed.), Applied Evolutionary Economics, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Kiwit Daniel, 1996. "Path-Dependence In Technological And Institutional Change – Some Criticisms And Suggestions," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 69-94, March.
    16. Witt, Ulrich, 1997. ""Lock-in" vs. "critical masses" -- Industrial change under network externalities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 753-773, October.
    17. Choi, Young Back, 2008. "Path dependence and the Korean alphabet," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 185-201, February.
    18. 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.
    19. Sammut-Bonnici, Tanya, 2010. "Network Strategy in the Digital Economy," MPRA Paper 50620, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. John Board & Charles Sutcliffe & Stephen Wells, 2002. "Transparency and Fragmentation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-4039-0707-3, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O57 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Comparative Studies of Countries

    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:ces:ceswps:_2537. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.