Essay Example on Kiessling Blondeel 1998 analyzed the regulatory Framework

Kiessling Blondeel 1998 analyzed the regulatory framework which was put forward in the year 90s for liberalization along the member states The decision and plans were neglected since all member states do not give provision for widening the interconnection and universal services throughout the EU The problem was mainly detected on pricing access and interrelated connecting services However the authors encouraged the foundation of National Regulatory Authority NRA to overcome such difficulties and enhance telecom services among the European Union motivating competition and enlarging public interest Ungerer 2000 briefly discussed the Access issued related to Local access and Global market access under EU regulation and Antitrust law 

The authors reconsidered three issues that make a road to enhance model and performance to access in telecommunication and internet which are the basic layer of internet sector specific regulation and EU Antitrust law According to European Commissioner Mario Monti applying competition has decreased the European telephone cost by 35 enriching better services and quality minimizing cost The author pointed top level internet connectivity and internal access software issues as main problem in antitrust law in Europe and U S in current scenarios The author also added that union and rise of new internet market in EU has more anti trust consideration significant whereas U S has linked its local access into multilateral framework from World Trade Organization WTO Basic Telecommunication Agreement The author believes such prospects enhances telecom industries to further invest innovate and compete in coming days Alden 2002 summarized the United States telecommunication history along with the antitrust and sector specific regulation The Telecom industries unions and intermodal competition have been put forward by authors pressuring competition policy to approve rapidly The writer analyzed the U S Telecommunications through Natural Monopoly to competition AT T along with 1934 and 1996 

Telecommunication Act The involvement of political party Congress along with other legislation has been pointed for adopting National legislation The author believed the U S has no sector specific regulation which makes many competing firms emerge and collides due to lack of capital He also describes the implementation of intermodal competition i e the rival between bell companies ADSL offering and Cable operators of Cable services before FCC and Congress in 2002 The author absorbed that Ex ante FCC and state regulation and Ex post Telecom s Acts restriction and Agencies approach in US telecom were balanced because of both sector specific and antitrust regulation participation He also believed that both regulations are effective and should be handled carefully one after another in order to enhance competition and satisfy and work on public interest Shelanski 2007 studied the conventional approaches that have been used by monopoly firms before Telecommunication Act of 1996 to regulate telecommunications and investigated whether they have influenced till now or not 

The author founded that there has been no effect and suggested to encouraged ex post involvement in favor of conventional antitrust and competition policy instead of ex ante regulation and exact anti competitive acts Moreover the writer proposed to regulate ex post competition as well as other regulations were needed in order to promote customer satisfaction removing ex ante regulation that varies on monopoly behavior Friederiszick Grajek and Roeller 2008 analyzed the relationship between investment in the telecommunication sector and regulation The authors discovered infrastructure development being discouraged and demotivated where there is difficulty in entry of firms however there seems to be no significant impact in mobile telephony They also identified political variables and adjacent markets as the measure to power the endogeneity of regulatory bodies The authors have used empirical analysis for 25 European countries over 10 years including 180 fixed line and mobile operators to measure the regulatory strength of European countries They used statics and dynamics models which seems to be more appropriate The competitor s measures are analyzed through penetration rate through a fixed line and mobile telephony The author also summarized the infrastructure and service based competition where he seems both are viable if regulation is properly managed Apart they summarized firms can get access to regulation but it only holds for short term neglecting the effect of competition and investment in their own infrastructure that causes an impact on long term facilities based competition Talayero 2014 addressed the policy models of USA and Europe 

The writer considered Europe is behind because of its regulatory choices and telecom solitary market suggestion Europe believed in reviewing and maintaining its existing network and framework fostering competition in services rather than facilities based competition which lacks investment and innovation Unbundling was established in the year 1996 to open competition in the market an open fixed network was initiated in the year 1998 broadband unbundling with copper based in the year 2000 some modification in wholesale and price controls policies with fiber networks in the year 2002 and 2009 to enhanced competition The writer also contemplates Europe being backward than USA because of strict rules and regulation limited competitors however things got changed when European regulators recognized the advantage of investment and competitive market in the year 2012 Later they enhanced competition and takes different steps to foster telecom industry with Next Generation Access NGA and spectrum proposal or digital agendas Similarly the writer has different perspectives in favor of the USA policy models with an open network and competition policy since deregulation in the year 1996 where FCC has utilized the spectrum caps to enhance effective competition in mobile market development Since the year 2003 the regulatory approach has changed fully in the USA reconsidering spectrum caps little control on the spectrum developing markets for competition and limiting unbundling This allows higher investment and fewer rules and regulation fostering competition and innovating high speed broadband