Refinements of a Layered Model for Telecommunications Policy

Inconsistencies within the various areas of telecommunications policy make for rich debate. For example, cable Internet service providers are not obligated to provide competing service providers with wholesale pricing for access to customers, while incumbent local exchange providers (specifically regional Bell operating companies) must provide such Internet access. Several authors have proposed models to resolve these inconsistencies; however, efforts to build a better policy mouse-trap continue to elude interested parties. While some claim that the existing title-based approach is not broken (and therefore should not be changed), others argue that the inconsistencies will lead to market distortions and slower deployment of broadband services. One proposed telecommunications policy model is based on a layered design similar to that used in the development of technical communications protocols. The consistency and modularity of such a policy approach may be a workable alternative to the current title-based policy; however, a layered model in and of itself is insufficient. A layered model solution must reflect the reality of network design, market power, and business arrangements, and, to be viable, it requires a transition policy to get there from the existing policy regime. Policy makers must understand the diversity of existing access technology (e.g., cable networks versus common carrier wireline networks), the disparity within industry segments (e.g., ILEC vs. CLEC use of last mile) and the strong influence of present policy on these various segments before implementing a transition to new policy. In this paper, we propose a framework to serve as the basis for a unified * Ph.D., Assistant Professor in the Department of Interdisciplinary Telecommunications, University of Colorado at Boulder. Mr. Sicker can be contacted at [email protected]. ** Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University. Mr. Mindel can be contacted at [email protected]. † Both authors previously worked at the Federal Communications Commission. Unless explicitly noted otherwise, all views expressed in this paper are those of the authors, not of their respective institutions.