Essay Example on Lehr Kiessling 1999 examined the demand for strong centralized Authority

Subcategory:

Category:

Words:

410

Pages:

2

Views:

21

Lehr Kiessling 1999 examined the demand for strong centralized authority to strengthen the competition in the telecom industry The authors believed that to achieve deregulation and increased local competition U S and liberalization EU policy both U S and Europe must develop one centralized authority which helps to minimize the varied rules and diverse regulation fostering competition The problem identified by the authors in EU is authority depends only on National Regulatory Authority NRA s and European Commission EC while in the U S between State Public Utility Commission PUCs and Federal Communication Commission FCC They believe that there exists the status quo and large monopoly regulation especially in U S Bell Atlantic and in Europe Telecommunication Organization TOs such as France Telecom and Deutsche telecom which discourage or postpone competition The writers also discussed Dual regulation such as National regulatory and centralized authority which makes difficult to regulate policy For instance in U S FCC was case delivering intrastate facilities by 8th circuit because according to Telecommunication act 1996 they must deploy only on an interstate and long distance communication They also argued that Europe has more problem regarding centralized authority than the U S because of heterogeneity culture languages and different political conditions and situations 



The writers concluded that US Telecom sector being privately owned is far ahead because of the consistency language and culture and one centralized authority amended in 1996 FCC whereas Europe being publicly owned there need a centralized authority which can manage the whole European Union telecommunication such as European Regulatory Authority ERA because of different member state with different cultures and nations They also consider more need of power centralized authority in Europe rather than the U S They also believe that status quo must be revised and dual regulation must be amended because of high growth of the internet To increase global competition innovation investment liberalization and deregulation policies and decreasing the asymmetric power poses by local authorities Central Regulatory Authority must be amended which is a great need for European countries 3 3 Interlinkage of Regulatory Frameworks with Competition Lazer Mayer Schonberger 2001 state that telecommunication industry in Europe and U S was governed by the state but during the last decade the scenario has changed due to the liberalization in the telecommunication policies and regulations A tough and fair competition can be seen in the telecom industry in both U S and European countries for the newcomers in the markets using the regulatory frameworks Telecommunications 



Act of 1996 in US and Telecommunication directives in the European Union As these policies had been recently formulated it was hard to find the relevant effective economic and corresponding data which could differentiate the proper functioning of the regulatory framework as mentioned For this purpose authors tried to build a research model which would explain the regulatory framework of both areas which would be based on the political economic theories of policy interdependence The regulatory framework will be interconnected with each other on three different grounds as competition coordination and information Liberalization in Europe in telecommunication sector got its establishment in the year 1985 when European Court of Justice ECJ allowed competition in the sector In the year 1987 liberalization got more advanced when European Commission issued blueprint for pan European liberalization and named as Open Network Provision ONP concept The process of liberalization was furthermore enhanced and redesigned where Competition Law which was guided by the principles of Article 82 of Treaty which established European Community the basis for the Commission directives and ONP concept which was guided by the regulatory frameworks of the nation which became the basis for the Council for the European Union directives Voice telephony was introduced on 1st January 1998 which was formerly agreed in the year 1983 as a part of the telecommunication liberalization in Europe The concept of ONP was also revised during the same time as framework directive But the scenario is totally different in the U S as all the facilities related to telecommunication and the devices were provided by the American Telephone and Telegraph Company AT T AT T was authorized by the Congress which was only telecommunication service provider till the year 1970 after which the international services were provided by the microwave transformation which gave room to competition in the sector But in the year 1974 AT T was penalized with the infringement of the Sherman AntiTrust Act of section 2 and 4 which resulted in restriction of the distribution of the international services and products of the telecommunication devices 



Authors have tried to establish a relationship between the regulatory models which will further clarify the correlation in terms of competition coordination and information Firstly competition in the sense that both states try to gain competitive advantage through the unique regulatory differences and prohibit competition in the home ground with the use of the non tariff regulation Secondly coordination means both states have at least something in common The Innovation of something of course has benefit for the pioneers but also has benefit for the followers because the same invention should not be started from the beginning Both may have the competitive advantages but the second will also benefit as the technology is shared in the world today through the use of the internet Lastly information plays an important role in the decision making and selection of choices One party may have different conception about the alternatives than the other and may take the choice based on the conception But the next party may have false assumption that choice done by the first is best and try to modify the option to gain a competitive advantage


Write and Proofread Your Essay
With Noplag Writing Assistance App

Plagiarism Checker

Spell Checker

Virtual Writing Assistant

Grammar Checker

Citation Assistance

Smart Online Editor

Start Writing Now

Start Writing like a PRO

Start