Reception-oriented radio rights: Increasing the value of wireless by explicitly defining and delegating radio operating rights

Vries, Jean Pierre De; Sieh, Kaleb August

doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2011.12.009

Cited by 15 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such flexibility could be provided through two elements, namely, radiocommunication service allocation flexibility and technology neutrality (Chaduc and Pogorel, 2008). Although there have been several theoretical attempts to define spectrum property rights, none of them has been adopted in practice (Vany et al, 1969;Cave andWebb, 2003, 2012;Vries and Sieh, 2012).…”

Section: Spectrum Marketmentioning

confidence: 99%

International spectrum management regime: is gridlock blocking flexible spectrum property rights?

El-Moghazi

Whalley

Irvine

2017

DPRG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to examine the influence of the international spectrum management regime on the introduction of flexibility in the national allocation of radiocommunication services. This is achieved through focusing on the main elements of the international regime. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative inductive methodology is adopted that examines the different elements of the international radiocommunication service allocation framework. Data are drawn from 66 semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders who are actively involved in International Telecommunication Union Radiocommunication Sector discussions. Findings The international radio regulations (RR) are perceived to be more of a framework for harmonisation that does not constrain the flexibility of countries. Countries are only restricted on their borders with their neighbours, and flexibility is already facilitated through a range of different measures. Moreover, several elements of the RR can be used to achieve both, i.e. to promote flexibility and to restrict the decisions of others. Practical implications The international spectrum management regime is not one of the reasons for the unsuccessful practical application of the flexible spectrum property rights concept. This suggests the need for reviewing whether there still is a need for such a concept given the increasing importance of global harmonisation and economies of scales. Originality/value This paper sheds light on spectrum property rights from the perspective of the international spectrum management regime. Such a perspective is largely overlooked in the on-going current debate.

show abstract

Section: Spectrum Marketmentioning

confidence: 99%

International spectrum management regime: is gridlock blocking flexible spectrum property rights?

El-Moghazi

Whalley

Irvine

2017

DPRG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The full consideration of what an appropriate definition of harmful interference is beyond the scope of this work. For further discussion about harmful interference, please refer to [10], [11].…”

Section: Enforcement and Spectrum Sharingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enforcement and Network Capacity in Spectrum Sharing: Quantifying the Benefits of Different Enforcement Scenarios

Altamaimi

Weiss

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies have forecasted major growth in mobile broadband traffic. Due to the predicted high growth rate of mobile broadband traffic over the coming years (demand), there is a need for more wireless network capacity (supply). One of the major approaches to expand mobile wireless capacity is to add more spectrum to the market by enabling "spectrum sharing". The FCC has issued many reports indicating that the US is dangerously close to running out of capacity for mobile data, which is why the FCC and the NTIA have been working continually to enable spectrum sharing. Spectrum sharing has moved from being a radical notion to a principal policy focus in the past decade. Enabling spectrum sharing regimes means that sharing agreements must be implemented.To have meaning, those agreements must be enforceable. The focus of this paper is to determine the relationship between enforcement methodologies and benefits of spectrum sharing through sharing between government and commercial users. Sharing between the government incumbents (i.e. Federal or non-Federal agencies) and commercial wireless broadband operators/users is one of the key forms of spectrum sharing that is recommended by the NTIA, the FCC, and the PCAST report. To address this problem, we build a model to quantitatively examine the relationships between different enforcement scenarios and sharing benefits. We model two case studies, 1695-1710 MHz band and 3550-3650 MHz band.

show abstract

“…licenses) should expire, but also that the allocations on which they are based should do so. The time of renewal can then be used to also change the rules if necessary, but not between renewal dates [26]. Indeed spectrum licenses have fixed terms, and we propose that the same time limit should be applied to unlicensed assignments.…”

Section: B Fail-safe Engineering and Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Illuminating the Road from Engineering and Policy to Radio Regulation

Mähönen

Petrova

Vries³

2012

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between engineering practice and technology policy is a perennial question. In this paper, we examine it in the context of the spectrum regulation debate. There is a widely held belief that regulatory and policy decisions can be justified, and indeed quantified, based on hard engineering and science facts. Similarly it is often felt that regulatory and policy domain issues should not stifle innovation by dictating the course of technology development for broadband radio systems. In this paper we strongly argue against such views and contend that key policy decisions in communications must be connected to engineering in a more explicit and nuanced way. We hold that policy makers' belief in "technology neutral" regulation is an illusion; engineering results are often used by businesses and politicians to justify their actions and promote their interests, yet the engineering means to achieve social ends are usually far upstream from political outcomes, and their connection is tenuous. Conversely, wireless communications engineers typically focus on the network protocol stack, ignoring the broader socio-economical context of their work. We show that is useful to consider a more holistic framework for radio system design that includes not just the network protocol layers but also the regulatory and commercial aspects of the technology. Given the inevitable complexity of the decision space in spectrum regulation, we believe that transparency and taking a systems view are essential for supporting evidence-based decision making around wireless technology policy and spectrum regulation. We ground our work in a technical case study, considering the extent to which engineering results can (or cannot) be used to argue the benefits of unlicensed spectrum allocation in the TV white spaces. We critique the unsophisticated use of spectrum efficiency metrics by providing a framework that demonstrates the many ways in which metrics can be constructed and interpreted. We emphasize the importance of N-dimensional engineering analysis to properly reason about the complex technical design space of modern wireless systems, and of the disclosure of financial interests by expert interlocutors. We frame our analysis of the relationship between engineering and policy using a technology circle which generalizes the seven-layer OSI network protocol stack by adding Layer Zero, the regulatory rules that constrain what may be implemented at the networking layers, and Layer Eight, the business and social practices that are built on the network, and that inform regulatory decisions at Layer Zero. Finally, we advocate the use of a fail-safe design philosophy to inform engineering work and regulatory decisions. We believe that our recommendations would make the interaction between wireless engineering and radio regulation more effective, thus strengthening the spectrum regulation and policymaking process.

show abstract

Reception-oriented radio rights: Increasing the value of wireless by explicitly defining and delegating radio operating rights

Cited by 15 publications

References 17 publications

International spectrum management regime: is gridlock blocking flexible spectrum property rights?

International spectrum management regime: is gridlock blocking flexible spectrum property rights?

Enforcement and Network Capacity in Spectrum Sharing: Quantifying the Benefits of Different Enforcement Scenarios

Illuminating the Road from Engineering and Policy to Radio Regulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About