IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diwwpp/dp568.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

New Networks, Competition and Regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Pio Baake
  • Ulrich Kamecke

Abstract

We consider a model with two firms operating their individual networks. Each firm can choose its price as well as its investment to build up its network. Assuming a skewed distribution of consumers, our model leads to an asymmetric market structure with one firm choosing higher investments. While access regulation imposed on the dominant firm leads to lower prices, positive welfare effects are diminished by strategic investment decisions of the firms. Within a dynamic game with indirect network effects leading to potentially increased demand, regulation can substantially lower aggregate social welfare. Conditional access holidays can alleviate regulatory failure.

Suggested Citation

  • Pio Baake & Ulrich Kamecke, 2006. "New Networks, Competition and Regulation," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 568, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp568
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.44140.de/dp568.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bourreau, Marc & Dogan, Pinar, 2005. "Unbundling the local loop," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 173-199, January.
    2. Keiichi Hori & Keizo Mizuno, 2004. "Network Investment and Competition with Access-to-Bypass," Econometric Society 2004 Australasian Meetings 138, Econometric Society.
    3. Pindyck Robert S., 2007. "Mandatory Unbundling and Irreversible Investment in Telecom Networks," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(3), pages 1-25, September.
    4. Joshua Gans & Stephen King, 2003. "Access Holidays for Network Infrastructure Investment," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 10(2), pages 163-178.
    5. Gans, Joshua S, 2001. "Regulating Private Infrastructure Investment: Optimal Pricing for Access to Essential Facilities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 167-189, September.
    6. Hazlett Thomas W. & Havenner Arthur M., 2003. "The Arbitrage Mirage: Regulated Access Prices with Free Entry in Local Telecommunications Markets," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(4), pages 1-11, December.
    7. Bourreau, Marc & Dogan, Pinar, 2004. "Service-based vs. facility-based competition in local access networks," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 287-306, June.
    8. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1990. "Optimal Bypass and Cream Skimming," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1042-1061, December.
    9. Cave, Martin & Vogelsang, Ingo, 0. "How access pricing and entry interact," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(10-11), pages 717-727, November.
    10. de Bijl, P.W.J. & Peitz, M., 2004. "Unbundling the Local Loop : One-Way Access and Imperfect Competition," Discussion Paper 2004-025, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
    11. de Bijl, P.W.J. & Peitz, M., 2004. "Unbundling the Local Loop : One-Way Access and Imperfect Competition," Discussion Paper 2004-025, Tilburg University, Tilburg Law and Economic Center.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Joao Vareda & Steffen Hoernig, 2007. "The race for telecoms infrastructure investment with bypass: can access regulation achieve the first best?," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp524, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.
    2. Ingo Vogelsang, 2012. "Incentive Regulation, Investments and Technological Change," Chapters, in: Gerald R. Faulhaber & Gary Madden & Jeffrey Petchey (ed.), Regulation and the Performance of Communication and Information Networks, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Christian Wey & Pio Baake & Ulrich Kamecke, 2005. "Neue Märkte unter dem neuen Rechtsrahmen: Endbericht ; Forschungsprojekt im Auftrag der Deutsche Telekom AG," DIW Berlin: Politikberatung kompakt, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, volume 6, number pbk6.
    4. Flacher, David & Jennequin, Hugues, 2014. "Access regulation and geographic deployment of a new generation infrastructure," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 741-759.
    5. João Vareda, 2011. "Quality upgrades and bypass under mandatory access," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 177-197, October.
    6. Avenali, Alessandro & Matteucci, Giorgio & Reverberi, Pierfrancesco, 2010. "Dynamic access pricing and investment in alternative infrastructures," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 167-175, March.
    7. Michał Grajek & Lars-Hendrik Röller, 2012. "Regulation and Investment in Network Industries: Evidence from European Telecoms," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(1), pages 189-216.
    8. Hrovatin, Nevenka & Švigelj, Matej, 2013. "The interplay of regulation and other drivers of NGN deployment: A real-world perspective," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 836-848.
    9. Pachis, Athanasios & Yannelis, Demetrius, 2013. "The relation between local loop unbundling and investment in fixed telephony," 24th European Regional ITS Conference, Florence 2013 88470, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    10. Flacher, David & Jennequin, Hugues, 2012. "Access regulation and geographic deployment of a new generation infrastructure," 19th ITS Biennial Conference, Bangkok 2012: Moving Forward with Future Technologies - Opening a Platform for All 72537, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    11. Briglauer, Wolfgang & Gugler, Klaus & Haxhimusa, Adhurim, 2016. "Facility- and service-based competition and investment in fixed broadband networks: Lessons from a decade of access regulations in the European Union member states," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 729-742.
    12. Inderst, Roman & Peitz, Martin, 2012. "Network investment, access and competition," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 407-418.
    13. Vogelsang Ingo, 2013. "The Endgame of Telecommunications Policy? A Survey," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 64(3), pages 193-270, December.
    14. Marc Bourreau & Pinar Dogan, 2006. ""Build-or-Buy" Strategies in the Local Loop," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 72-76, May.
    15. Baake, Pio & Kamecke, Ulrich & Wey, Christian, 2005. "A Regulatory Framework for New and Emerging Markets," MPRA Paper 2518, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Pio Baake & Brigitte Preißl (Eds.). Johannes M. Bauer & Per Björstedt & Elena Gallo & Anders Henten & Sven Lindmark & Martijn Poel & Enzo Pontarollo & Knud Erik Skouby & Jason Whalley, 2006. "Local Loop Unbundling and Bitstream Access: Regulatory Practice in Europe and the U.S," DIW Berlin: Politikberatung kompakt, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, volume 20, number pbk20.
    17. Joao Vareda, 2007. "Unbundling and incumbent investment in quality upgrades and cost reduction," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp526, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.
    18. Tselekounis, Markos & Varoutas, Dimitris & Martakos, Drakoulis, 2014. "A CDS approach to induce facilities-based competition over NGA networks," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 311-331.
    19. Vareda, João, 2010. "Access regulation under asymmetric information about the entrant's efficiency," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 192-199, May.
    20. Cambini, Carlo & Silvestri, Virginia, 2012. "Technology investment and alternative regulatory regimes with demand uncertainty," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 212-230.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Regulation; network effects; natural monopoly;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:diw:diwwpp:dp568. 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: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.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.