Policy Tracker, a Spectrum Management research and training outfit, has referred to a report of SBR Juconomy Consulting, which has studied 15 benchmark countries and detected some significant variations in the policy approaches for spectrum pricing among them. The countries this study has covered are: Germany, France, UK, Switzerland, USA, Canada, Morocco, Nigeria, South Africa, Australia, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman, United Arab Emirates, and Jordan.
Jörg Kittl, a co-author of the study, told Policy Tracker most countries defined the optimal and efficient usage of spectrum as the primary goal, but some emphasized other aspects such as economic and social benefits, competition or public interest.
Western countries focus on maximising the optimal use of spectrum. Others, for example in Africa, the Middle East or parts of Asia, have different approaches, including maximising the value of spectrum and income for the government. Most administrations do not provide a detailed cost analysis. It is not always clear whether the fees are based just on costs or also include an incentive fee.
The study has detected lack of transparency in the basis for determining spectrum fees. “Most administrations do not provide a detailed cost analysis,” said Kittl. “It is not always clear whether the fees are based just on costs or also include an incentive fee.” He said that Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries typically use a single pricing formula for all frequencies, which takes into account factors such as bandwidth, frequency band, and the technology used.
However, there is no documentary support for the formula used or clarification of the values. “As a result, the price seems to be established more by international benchmark than by policy decision,” he said. Kittl added that this is a very different situation from the USA, UK, and Switzerland, where the authorities clearly document how they determine the prices for frequencies where cost orientation applies.
The white paper published by SBR Juconomy Consulting is available here.
Comments are closed.