[governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective?

[Riaz K Tayob]

One way out of the impasse is to look at the treatment of these issues 
differently than the traditional neoclassical economics sense...

Oligopoly has its privileges and costs - but are tolerated particularly 
in enterprises with high fixed costs and the need to maintain/enhance 
capabilities/innovation.

Lower prices to consumers is the classical spread of benefits... there 
is also the German Historical School economics that focusses on the 
ability of entrepreneurial firms pushing up both wages and profits - the 
collusive spread - that has other synergistic effects.

In other instances, would access be facilitated even more by sharing of 
infrastructure for network coverage (forms of cooperation not evident in 
many countries where there is capital shortage (or high cost) as UNCTAD 
previously indicated? I.e. is the liberalisation competitive model the 
most efficient in its own terms, or can it be improved by policy (i.e. 
no policy policy vs a policy)? I mean haracter for character SMS seems 
to be the highest cost telecoms (even in some cases when compared to 
satelite comms)...

On 2012/10/12 09:46 AM, michael gurstein wrote:
>
> */[Milton L Mueller] The problem with your perspective, Michael, is 
> that it does indeed represent the classic telecom monopoly perspective 
> which is often held by the governmental Ministries and national 
> telecom monopolies in LDCs. Basically they see international traffic 
> not as an industry that supplies goods and services that benefit the 
> consumers who pay for them, but as a source of monopoly rents that can 
> be soaked to “distribute” wealth to their favored businesses and 
> political causes. This concern with “equitable distribution” 
> inevitably ends up both being massively inefficient and thus stifling 
> growth, while not even achieving equity either, because it will always 
> be a few privileged, well-connected businesses and politicians who 
> benefit from setting up the national toll booths. /*
>
> *//*
>
> */[MG>] I know that is your position Milton, which at that level of 
> ideological pandering/name calling is no different from Kende's 
> argument and we hear it often enough.  What I would very much like to 
> see though, is some evidence to back it up. What I'm curious to see, 
> and that was the point of my original note, is some research/analysis 
> which starts not from a definition of "benefits" as dictated by 
> Google, Microsoft, and Uncle Tom digerati and all but rather one which 
> starts from the quite specific policy contexts and dilemmas of the 
> folks in LDC's who seem to be bearing a rather large amount of short 
> term cost in the service of purported long term benefit (and not 
> incidentally alongside rather significant short term benefits adhering 
> to already extremely well provided for DC beneficiaries). And if they 
> don't publicly object I will,  not all of those folks or dare I say 
> even most (countering again some ideological and even should  I say 
> xenophobic posturing rather than systematic analysis and research on 
> your part) are as you imply, corrupt and despotic. /*
>
> *//*
>
> *//*
>
> I myself am of two minds on this issue.  I well recognize the 
> value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the 
> poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access 
> provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage 
> of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and 
> information (including through undermining various repressive 
> political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated 
> policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others 
> of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a 
> further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a 
> signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to 
> those with the most.
>
> */[Milton L Mueller] I am glad you are honest about this 
> two-mindedness. Factually, there is just no way around it. The 
> liberalization and deregulation of telecommunications has massively 
> increased access, decreased costs, increased diversity and innovation./*
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121013/ebf309f4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t