Spectrum and economic policy
During yesterday's Ofcom-immersion, it was clear to me that Ed Richards wasn't interested in having some form of government-internet access-involvement story unfold in his country.
Ken Zita of Network Dynamics (who was just terrific) then got up and pointed out that in Asia they are unafraid to talk about telecommunications as part of “industrial policy.” (For me, that phrase connotes smokestacks and Margaret Bourke White photos, so I'd probably say “economic policy.”) For example, Zita continued, in S. Korea the government said where they wanted to go, invested in research and development, [and invested money and made micro loans], and they're now seeing 70% of adults (not just kids) involved in online social networks. Very high speeds, very low cost. Hong Kong is also not embarrassed to talk about economic policy and telecom. Zita noted that opening up spectrum, as Ofcom plans to do, is a traditional telecom regulatory move.
In response, Richards said that, yes, it's true that some countries in Asia have this policy approach to telecommunications, and a couple of countries are doing this in Europe. [Paraphrasing]: “It's an overarching political choice. It's not something we feel is a good idea in the UK.”
[Update — see snarky article here about Ofcom's failures. Thanks to Dirk van der Woude.]
Today, we're reading that the Indian government “proposes to offer all citizens of India free, high-speed broadband connectivity by 2009.”
Well, so far in the US we also haven't linked economic policy explicitly to universal highspeed internet access (although we should), so the best we can do is hope for more enlightened spectrum policy and assume that someone will show up to help. The Commission is making noises about possibly being interested in “open access” requirements for part of the 700 MHz auction. (Commr. Copps: “I .. am pleased that we ask general questions about how the 'open-access' proposals made by some might encourage the development of a sorely-needed wireless 'third pipe' in the broadband market.”)
According to Harold Feld, “this condition would prohibit the licensee from engaging in retail wireless service sales (on this spectrum), and require the licensee to lease wholesale spectrum on a non-discriminatory basis. If adopted, it would make 30 MHz of 'beachfront' spectrum available for lease in every market in the U.S. This proposal is in addition to the 'Frontline' proposal, which would create a public-private partnership with public safety to make up to 22 MHz of spectrum available under an 'open access' condition, but such commercial use would be 'preemptable' by public safety.”
So it's not economic policy, it's tinkering with spectrum policy, but it's better to be asking questions that might make wireless highspeed access a realistic alternative here in the US.
Comments
One Response to “Spectrum and economic policy”
Got something to say?
Not only is opening spectrum a traditional move, Ofcom are going about it based on a commissioned study (the Cave report) that incorporates some spectacularly naive (i.e. “traditional”) assumptions about how spectrum can and will be used; which in turn lead to claims like this chestnut from Mr. Cave himself, “Spectrum demand is forecast to exceed supply in the medium term.”