{"title":"Regulation and Net Neutrality","authors":"Michael Kotrous","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2575436","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper seeks to inform the network neutrality debate by looking at the role existing government regulation has played in shaping the market for broadband access. Prior research has concluded that network externalities that exist in the market for broadband services justify government intervention (Economides and Tag, 2012). This literature takes limited competition among broadband providers as given rather than questioning why competition is limited in the first place. I argue here that limited competition among broadband providers is not the result of a market failure but rather stems from barriers to entry erected by government regulation, notably municipal “rights-of-way.” The key to improving consumer welfare is therefore not to impose additional regulations on broadband providers, but to clear the way for capital investments in the expansion of new infrastructure and the improvement of existing infrastructure by removing existing regulatory barriers to entry. I conclude that deregulation rather than more regulation would improve Internet access and result in a more level playing field for all content providers.","PeriodicalId":231496,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"181 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2575436","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
This paper seeks to inform the network neutrality debate by looking at the role existing government regulation has played in shaping the market for broadband access. Prior research has concluded that network externalities that exist in the market for broadband services justify government intervention (Economides and Tag, 2012). This literature takes limited competition among broadband providers as given rather than questioning why competition is limited in the first place. I argue here that limited competition among broadband providers is not the result of a market failure but rather stems from barriers to entry erected by government regulation, notably municipal “rights-of-way.” The key to improving consumer welfare is therefore not to impose additional regulations on broadband providers, but to clear the way for capital investments in the expansion of new infrastructure and the improvement of existing infrastructure by removing existing regulatory barriers to entry. I conclude that deregulation rather than more regulation would improve Internet access and result in a more level playing field for all content providers.
本文试图通过观察现有政府监管在塑造宽带接入市场中所起的作用,为网络中立性辩论提供信息。先前的研究得出结论,宽带服务市场中存在的网络外部性证明政府干预是合理的(Economides and Tag, 2012)。这篇文献认为宽带供应商之间的有限竞争是既定的,而不是首先质疑为什么竞争是有限的。我认为,宽带提供商之间的有限竞争不是市场失灵的结果,而是源于政府监管设置的进入壁垒,特别是市政“通行权”。因此,改善消费者福利的关键不是对宽带提供商施加额外的监管,而是通过消除现有的进入监管壁垒,为扩大新基础设施和改善现有基础设施的资本投资扫清道路。我的结论是,放松管制而不是加强监管将改善互联网接入,并为所有内容提供商创造一个更公平的竞争环境。