If market power regulation is necessary from a network economic point of view due to the absence of active or potential competition, the principle of minimal regulation should be applied. Thus, parameters of investment decisions should be left to market participants. Unfortunately, so far no lessons for the regulation of the telecommunications sector were drawn from the disincentive effects of the “ladder of investment approach”. On the contrary, regulators now not only intend to create investment incentives for new entrants; at the same time they also attempt to create incentives for incumbents to make specific investments in broadband networks. The purpose of this paper is to show how regulatory failures in the context of broadband network evolution can be overcome. Path dependency is revealed to be a creative process driven by entrepreneurial decision making. Market power regulation designed to foster technology policy issues (e.g. increasing investment incentives) would disturb this process and, from a network economic point of view, reflect a misinterpretation of the regulatory mandate.
ArnoldR. and TenbrockS. (2014) Bestimmungsgründe der FTTP-Nachfrage. Bad Honnef: WIK Diskussionsbeitrag, No. 387.
2.
BaumolW.J.PanzarJ.C. and WilligR.D. (1982) Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
3.
BellP.W. and PeasnellK. (1997) “Another Look at the Deprival Value Approach to Depreciation”, In CookeT.E. and NobesC.W. (eds), The Development of Accounting in an International Context. London; New York: Routledge.
4.
BlankartCh. B.KniepsG. and ZenhäusernP. (2007) “Regulation of New Markets in Telecommunications: Market Dynamics and Shrinking Monopolistic Bottlenecks”, European Business Organization Law Review, 8: 413–428.
5.
BriglauerW.GuglerK. and BohlinE. (2013) “Regulating and investment in new communications infrastructure”, Telecommunications Policy, 37(10): 815–818.
6.
BüllingenF. and StammP. in VaryKooperation Mit P. (2006) Potenziale alternativer Techniken zur bedarfsgerechten Versorgung mit Breitbandzugängen. Bad Honnef: Studie für das Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie, Projekt Nr. 22/05.
7.
BüllingenF. and StammP. (2008) Breitband für jedermann–Infrastruktur für einen innovativen Standort. Bad Honnef: Studie für das Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr, Landwirtschaft und Weinbau Rheinland-Pfalz.
8.
CaveM. (2006) “Encouraging infrastructure competition via the ladder of investment”, Telecommunications Policy, 30(3–4): 223–237.
9.
CaveM.FournierA. and ShutovaN. (2012) “The Price of Copper and the Transition to Fibre”, Communications & Strategies, 85: 147–168.
10.
CaveM. and VogelsangI. (2003) “How access pricing and entry interact”, Telecommunications Policy, 27(10–11): 717–727.
11.
CambiniC. and JiangY. (2009) “Broadband Investment and Regulation. A Literature Review”, Telecommunications Policy, 33(10/11): 559–574.
12.
DavidP.A. (1985) “Clio and the Economics of QUERTY”, American Economic Review, 75(2), Papers and Proceedings: 332–337.
13.
HausmanJ.A.SidakJ.G. and TardifT.J. (2008) “Are Regulators Forward-Looking? The Market Price of Copper Versus the Regulated Price of Mandatory Access to Unbundled Local Loops in Telecommunications Networks”, Federal Communications Law Journal, 61: 199–227.
14.
ITU. (2014) The State of Broadband 2014, Broadband for all. Geneva: A Report by the Broadband Commission.
15.
IlicD.JayS.PlückebaumT. and StammP. (2013) Migrationsoptionen für Breitbandkabelnetze und ihr Investitionsbedarf. Bad Honnef: WIK Diskussionsbeitrag, Nr. 380.
16.
JayS. and PlückebaumT. (2014) Kostensenkungs potenziale für Glasfaseranschlussnetze durch Mitverlegung mit Stromnetzen. Bad Honnef: WIK Diskussionsbeitrag, Nr. 390.
17.
KniepsG. (1997) “Phasing out sector-specific regulation in competitive telecommunications”, Kyklos, 50(3): 325–399.
18.
KniepsG. (2006) Sector-specific market power regulation versus general competition law: Criteria for judging competitive versus regulated markets, In SioshansiF.P. and PfaffenbergerW. (eds), Electricity Market Reform: An International Perspective. Elsevier, Amsterdam et al., 49–74.
19.
KniepsG. (2012) “Wettbewerb und Pfadabhängigkeit in Netzen”, In EnkeH. and WagnerA. (eds), Zur Zukunft des Wettbewerbs, In memoriam Karl Brandt (1923–2010) und Alfred E. Ott (1929–1994). Marburg: Metropolis.
KniepsG.KüpperH.-U. and LangenR. (2001) “Abschreibungen bei fallenden Wiederbeschaffungspreisen in stationären und nicht stationären Märkten”, Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung (zfbf), 53: 759–776.
22.
KniepsG. and StockerV. (2015) “Network Neutrality Regulation: The Fallacies of Regulatory Market Splits”, Intereconomics, 50(1): 46–51.
23.
KniepsG. and ZenhäusernP. (2007) “‘Stepping Stones’ and ‘Access Holidays’: The Fallacies of Regulatory Micromanagement”, In BaakeP. and BorckR. (eds.), Public Economics and Public Choice. Berlin et al.: Springer.
24.
KniepsG. and ZenhäusernP. (2010) “Phasing out sector-specific regulation in European telecommunications”, Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 6: 995–1006.
25.
NettL. and JayS. (2014) Entwicklung dynamischer Marktszenarien und Wettbewerbskonstellationen zwischen Glasfasernetzen, Kupfernetzen und Kabelnetzen in Deutschland. Bad Honnef: WIK DiskussionsbeitragNr. 388.
26.
NeumannK.-H. and VogelsangI. (2013) “How to price the unbundled local loop in the transition from copper to fibre access networks?”Telecommunications Policy, 37(10): 893–909.
27.
OECD (2014a) The Development of Fixed Broadband Network. Paris: OECD. Digital Economy Paper 239.
28.
OECD (2014b) Defining the Relevant Market in Telecommunications, Review of Selected OECD Countries and Colombia. Paris: OECD.
29.
PereiraP. and FerreiraP. (2012) “Infrastructure Sharing as an Opportunity to Promote Competition in Local Access Networks”, Journal of Computer Networks and Communications, Article ID 409817, www.hindawi.com/journals/jcnc/2012/409817/.
30.
SolomonsD. (1966) “Economic and Accounting Concepts of Cost and Value”, In BackerM. (ed), Modern Accounting Theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
31.
TripathiN.D. and ReedJ.H. (2014) Cellular Communications, A comprehensive and practical guide. Hoboken; New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
32.
WilliamsonB.BlackD.PuntonT. and HorrocksJ. (2011) Costing methodology and the transition to next generation access. London: Plum Consulting, A report for ETNO.
33.
ZhaoR.FischerW.AkerE. and RigbyP. (2014) Broadband Access Technologies. Brussels, FTTH-Council: White Paper.
