Perspectives on political influences on changes in telecommunications and internet economy markets

For the past thirty years, international consensus has supported telecommunications policies favoring the pursuit of economic efficiency and the distancing of governments from ownership and day-to-day industry governance. These principles serve to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest and corruption to influence industry outcomes. However, recently, a trend has emerged for governments to expand their sector influence more directly, via network ownership, extension of regulatory interests into all aspects of the digital economy, the politicization of matters such as payment for internet content and content censorship and at the extreme, prohibitions on the use of equipment and software originating from non-favored countries. This begs two questions. Is this populist politicization of telecommunications and internet economy matters a worldwide phenomenon, or is it confined to a handful of developed countries? And even though the rhetoric may flow at election-time, do these potentially-flawed populist policies flow through into problematic laws and actions, or are there other checks and balances that constrain these excesses and ensure that the long-standing economic and social objectives governing the industry for the past thirty years are preserved in national laws and regulations? The international perspective appears to confirm both the persistence of regulation and its ability to expand into all areas of the digital economy, and a disconnection of regulation from the original intentions to promote more competitive markets. We review the current state of sectoral regulation and thinking, including a juxtaposition of the EU and US approaches, concluding with a proposed research agenda. • Shift from economic efficiency to increased government influence in the digital economy. • Comparison of EU and US approaches identifies differences across telecommunications and digital economy policies. • Experts confirm regulation expanding into digital economy, diverging from strictly market goals. • New business models like tower companies and network-sharing agreements reshape industry. • Research agenda: examine AI regulation, focus shift from economics to safeguarding rights.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Telecommunications Policy
Published
2024-12-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102901
Citations
3
Primary Topic
ICT Impact and Policies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.96
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Perspectives on political influences on changes in telecommunications and internet economy markets

Roslyn Layton, Bronwyn Howell, Mark A Jamison, Petrus H. Potgieter et al.
3 citations
Telecommunications Policy
ICT Impact and Policies
0.96
article

Perspectives on political influences on changes in telecommunications and internet economy markets

Roslyn Layton, Bronwyn Howell, Mark A Jamison, Petrus H. Potgieter, Fernando Herrera González, Georg Serentschy, Íñigo Herguera García
article en
3 citations

Abstract

For the past thirty years, international consensus has supported telecommunications policies favoring the pursuit of economic efficiency and the distancing of governments from ownership and day-to-day industry governance. These principles serve to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest and corruption to influence industry outcomes. However, recently, a trend has emerged for governments to expand their sector influence more directly, via network ownership, extension of regulatory interests into all aspects of the digital economy, the politicization of matters such as payment for internet content and content censorship and at the extreme, prohibitions on the use of equipment and software originating from non-favored countries. This begs two questions. Is this populist politicization of telecommunications and internet economy matters a worldwide phenomenon, or is it confined to a handful of developed countries? And even though the rhetoric may flow at election-time, do these potentially-flawed populist policies flow through into problematic laws and actions, or are there other checks and balances that constrain these excesses and ensure that the long-standing economic and social objectives governing the industry for the past thirty years are preserved in national laws and regulations? The international perspective appears to confirm both the persistence of regulation and its ability to expand into all areas of the digital economy, and a disconnection of regulation from the original intentions to promote more competitive markets. We review the current state of sectoral regulation and thinking, including a juxtaposition of the EU and US approaches, concluding with a proposed research agenda. • Shift from economic efficiency to increased government influence in the digital economy. • Comparison of EU and US approaches identifies differences across telecommunications and digital economy policies. • Experts confirm regulation expanding into digital economy, diverging from strictly market goals. • New business models like tower companies and network-sharing agreements reshape industry. • Research agenda: examine AI regulation, focus shift from economics to safeguarding rights.

Telecommunications PolicyVol. 49(2)
California Public Utilities Commission (US), Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES), Public Utilities Board (SG), University of South Africa (ZA), Advisory Board Company (United States) (US), Victoria University of Wellington (NZ), United Utilities (United Kingdom) (GB), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (ES), Aalborg University (DK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 20%
ICT Impact and Policies
0.96
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.