5 Pages Posted: 1 Mar 2006
Date Written: February 2005
Among the countries that have fully liberalized their telecommunications sector, some have chosen to rely mainly on sector-specific rules often (but not always) applied by sector-specific institutions, while others have focused mainly on economy-wide antitrust rules and institutions to control market power in that sector. This note describes the choices made in that respect by Australia, Chile, New Zealand, the UK and the US. It then attempts to draw lessons from the experiences of those countries on whether antitrust or sector-specific processes appear to deal with key regulatory issues most quickly and effectively. A second note will discuss the same question in more details focusing specifically on the regulation of interconnection. Finally, a third note will discuss whether choosing the "right" balance between antitrust and sector-specific regulation appears to translate into a higher degree of competitiveness in the various segments of the telecommunications market.
Keywords: telecommunications, antitrust, competition law, regulation, interconnection, Australia, United Kingdon, United States, New Zealand, Chile, dominance
JEL Classification: L12, L22, L41, L43, L50, L96, D42, K21
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Kerf, Michel and Neto, Isabel and Geradin, Damien, Antitrust vs. Sector-specific Regulation in Telecom: What Works Best? (February 2005). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=886292 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.886292