More than ten years after the liberalization of the telecommunications industry, Turkey still has the least penetrated and most concentrated broadband market in Europe. This paper investigates the poor performance of the Turkish broadband market, emphasizing institutional limitations of promoting service-based competition through the ladder of investment approach. In particular, the paper argues that the aforementioned type of broadband policy has failed and delayed facility-based competition. The paper first illustrates failures in serviced-based competition. Then it examines the potential and limits of the newly emerging facility-based competition through next generation access networks.
AokiM. (2001) Towards a Comparative Institutional Analysis. MA: MIT Press.
3.
ArdiyokŞ., and Aslanİ.Y. (2006) “Telekokomünikasyondaki Bor Madeni: Kablo TV Şebekesi”, Legal Fikri ve Sinai Haklar Dergisi, (6): 329–349.
4.
Atiyasİ., and DoğranP. (2010) “Glass Half Empty? Politics and Institutions in The Liberalization of the Fixed LineTelecommunications Industry in Turkey”, In ÇetinT. and YilmazF. (eds), Understanding the Process of Economic Change in Turkey (261–283). Nova Science Publishers.
5.
Atiyasİ., and RendaA. (2007) “Telecommunications”, In ÜlgenS. (ed), Second Generation Structural Reforms: De-Regulation and Competition in Infrastructure Industries: The Evolution of the Turkish Telecommunications, Energy and Transport Sectors in Light of EU (25–75). Istanbul: Centre for Economics and Foreign Policy Studies (EDAM) and Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS).
6.
AvenaliA.MatteucciG., and ReverberiP. (2010) “Dynamic access pricing and investment in alternative infrastructures”, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 28(2): 167–175.
7.
BourreauM., and DoğranP. (2006) “‘Build-or-buy’ strategies in the local loop”, American Economic Review, 96(2): 72–76.
8.
BourreauM.DoğranP., and ManantM. (2010) “A critical review of the ‘ladder of investment’ approach”, Telecommunications Policy, 34(11): 683–696.
9.
BritoD.PareiraP., and VaredaJ. (2010, September 30) Incentives to invest and to give access to new technologies. Retrieved June 1, 2012, from http://idei.fr/doc/conf/sic/vareda.pdf.
10.
CaveM. (2006) “Encouraging infrastructure competition via the ladder of investment”, Telecommunications Policy, 30(3): 223–237.
11.
CaveM. (2010) “Snakes and ladders: Unbundling in a next generation world”, Telecommunications Policy, 34(1): 80–85.
12.
ChoiS. (2011) “Facilities to service based competition, not service to facilities based, or broadband penetration: A comparative study between the United States and South Korea”, Telecommunications Policy, 35(9): 804–817.
CrandallR.W., and SidakJ.G. (2007) Is mandatory unbundling the key to increasing broadband penetration in Mexico? A survey of international evidence. Retrieved April 16, 2012, from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=996065.
16.
DistasoW.LupiP., and ManentiF.M. (2009) “Static and Dynamic Efficiency in the European Telecommunications Market: The Role of Regulation on the Incentives to Invest and the Ladder of Investment”, In LeeI. (ed), Handbook of Research on Telecommunications Planning and Management for Business (1–14). IGI Global.
EdwardsG., and WavermanL. (2006) “The Effects of Public Ownership and Regulatory Independence on Regulatory Outcomes: A Study of Interconnect Rates in EU Telecommunications”, Journal of Regulatory Economics, 29(1): 23–67.
19.
FinkC.MattooA., and RathindranR. (2003) “An assessment of telecommunications reform in developing countries”, Information Economics and Policy, 15(4): 443–466.
20.
GlachantJ.M., and PerezY. (2008) “Regulation and Deregulation in Network Industry”, In BrousseauE. and GlachantJ.M. (eds), New Institutional Economics: A Guide Book. Cambridge University Press, 328–262.
21.
GutierrezL.H., and BergS. (2000) “Telecommunications liberalization and regulatory governance: Lessons from Latin America”, Telecommunications Policy, 24(10): 865–884.
LevyB., and SpillerP. (1994) “The Institutional Foundations of Regulatory Commitment: A Comparative Analysis of Telecommunications Regulation”, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 10(2): 201–246.
26.
MelodyW.H. (1997) “On the meaning and importance of ‘independence’ in telecom reform”, Telecommunications Policy, 21(3): 195–199.
NorthD.C. (1991) “Institutions”, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1): 97–112.
29.
OECD. (2011) OECD Communications Outlook 2011.
30.
OldaleA., and PadillaJ. (2004) “From state monopoly to the ‘investment ladder’: Competition policy and the NRF”, In The Pros and Cons of Antitrust in Deregulated Markets. Stockholm: Swedish Competition Authority, 51–79.
RagoobarT.WhalleyJ., and HarleD. (2011) “Public and private intervention for next-generation access deployment: Possibilities for three European countries”, Telecommunications Policy, 35(9): 827–841.
WallstenS. (2007, December) Whence competition in network industries? Broadband and unbundling regulations in OECD countries. Technology Policy Institute. Retrieved April 20, 2012 from https://www.techpolicyinstitute.org/files/s8.pdf.
