The Federal Communications Commission's competition policy can affect the speed, scale, and scope of marketing's information technology revolution. This article reviews key policy issues before the commission and describes related research projects. The key issues pertain to wireline competition policy, broadband policy, and spectrum policy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BilottiRichard, SwinburneBenjamin, and LynchMegan (2001), Industry Overview: The Marquis de Broadbandbury—Parte Deux.New York: Morgan Stanley Dean Witter.
2.
BraeutigamRonald, and PanzarJohn (1989), “Diversification Incentives Under ‘Price-Based’ and ‘Cost-Based’ Regulation,”Rand Journal of Economics, 20(3), 373–91.
3.
DeGrabaPatrick (1987), “The Effects of Price Restrictions on Competition Between National and Local Firms,”Rand Journal of Economics, 18(3), 333–47.
4.
HausmanJerry (1999), “The Effects of Sunk Costs in Telecommunications Regulation,” in The New Investment Theory of Real Options and Its Implications for Telecommunications, AllenJames, and NoamEli, eds. Boston: Kluwer Publishers, 191–204.
5.
HorriganJohn, and RainieLee (2002), “The Broadband Difference: How Online Americans’ Behavior Changes with High-Speed Internet Connections at Home,”Pew Internet & American Life Project, Washington, DC, (accessed July 15), [available at http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=63].
6.
KahnAlfred, TardiffTimothy, and WeismanDennis (1999), “The Telecommunications Act at Three Years: An Economic Evaluation of Its Implementation by the Federal Communications Commission,”Information Economics and Policy, 11(4), 319–65.
7.
KennetD. Mark, and Perez-ReyesRaul (2002), “Beyond the Rhetoric: An Introduction to Implementing TELRIC,”Review of Network Economics, 1(2), 155–67.
8.
KwerelEvan, and WilliamsJohn (2002), “A Proposal for a Rapid Transition to Market Allocation of Spectrum,” Working Paper No. 38, Office of Plans and Policy, Federal Communications Commission.
9.
MandyDavid (2002), “TELRIC Pricing with Vintage Capital,”Journal of Regulatory Economics, 22(3), 215–50.
10.
McAfeeR. Preston, and McMillanJohn (1996), “Analyzing the Airwaves Auction,”Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10(1), 159–75.
11.
McKinsey & Company and J.P. Morgan H&Q (2001), Broadband 2001: A Comprehensive Analysis of Demand, Supply, Economics, and Industry Dynamics in the U.S. Broadband Market.New York: J.P. Morgan Chase.
PowellMichael K. (2001), “Digital Broadband Migration: Part II,” Federal Communications Commission Press Conference, October 23, 2001 (accessed May 25, 2002), [available at http://www.fcc.gov/Speeches/Powell/2001/spmkp109.html].
RosstonGregory, and NollRoger (2002), “The Economics of the Supreme Court's Decision on Forward Looking Costs,”Review of Network Economics, 1(2), 81–89.
16.
SharkeyWilliam (1982), The Theory of Natural Monopoly.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
SharkeyWilliam (1999), “The Design of Forward-Looking Cost Models for Exchange Telecommunications Networks,” in The New Investment Theory of Real Options and Its Implications for Telecommunications Economics, AllemanJames, and NoamEli, eds. Boston: Kluwer Publishers, 95–117.
18.
Telecommunications Act (1996), Pub. Law No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (codified at 47 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq.).
19.
WeismanDennis (2002), “Did the High Court Reach an Economic Low in Verizon v. FCC?”Review of Network Economics, 1(2), 90–105.
