Cost Efficiency and Technology of Rural Telephone Companies

  • Kent A. Currie
Part of the Topics in Regulatory Economics and Policy Series book series (TREP, volume 37)


After passing by overwhelming margins in Congress, the President signed on February 8, 1996 the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–104). The Act established several sweeping national telecommunications policies. In particular, the Act formally created a national economic policy to promote the introduction of competition into the local telecommunications marketplace. In addition, the Act codified a popular notion of universal service along with several significant extensions. These policies, however, were viewed with some apprehension inside and outside of Congress at the time of the Act’s enactment, because policies that promote competition may be in conflict with policies that maintain or extend universal service. In fact, these concerns resulted in exemptions, suspensions and modifications from parts of the law’s competitive requirements for rural telephone companies.


Cost Efficiency Federal Communication Commission Telecommunication Company Rural Company Cost Frontier 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aigner, Dennis, C. A. Knox Lovell and Peter Schmidt. 1977. “Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Function Models.” Journal of Econometrics 6: 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Coelli, Tim. 1996. “A Guide to FRONTIER Version 4.1: A Computer Program for Frontier Production Function Estimation.” CEPA Working Paper 96/07. Annidale: University of New England, Department of Econometrics.Google Scholar
  3. Coelli, Tim, D.S. Prasada Rao and George E.Battese. 1998. An Introduction to Efficiency and Productivity Analysis. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Currie, Kent A. 1996. “Regulation, Competition and Rural Telephone Companies.” In Pricing and Regulatory Innovations under Increasing Competition, edited by Michael A. Crew. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. Dinc, Mustafa, Kingsley E. Haynes, Roger R. Stough and Serdar Yilmaz. 1998. “Regional Telecommunications Universal Service Provisions in the US: Efficiency versus Penetration.” Telecommunications Policy 22 (6): 541–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Egan, Bruce L. 1992. “Bringing Advanced Technology to Rural America: The Cost of Technology Adoption.” Telecommunications Policy 16 (1): 27–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Federal Communications Commission. 1997. Self-Certification as a Rural Telephone Company. Public Notice. CC Docket 96–45. DA 97–1748 Corrected. Released September 22, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. Federal Communications Commission. 1998. Common Carrier Bureau Sends List of Rural Telephone Companies to the Universal Service Administrative Company for Purposes of Determining Federal Universal Service High Cost Support Beginning July 1, 1999. Public Notice. CC Docket 96–45. DA 98–2642 Corrected. Released December 31, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. Federal Communications Commission. 1999. Common Carrier Bureau Sends Updated Lists of Rural and Non-Rural Telephone Companies to the Universal Service Administrative Company and Changes 1999 Self-Certification Filing Deadline. Public Notice. CC Docket 96–45. DA 99–459. Released March 16, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. Federal-State Joint Board Staff. 1999. “Monitoring Report, CC Docket No. 98–202, June 1999.” CC Docket No. 96–45.Google Scholar
  11. Guldmann, Jean-Michel. 1991. “Economies of Scale and Density in Local Telephone Networks.” Regional Science and Urban Economics 20 (4): 521–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hasenkamp, Georg. 1976. Specification and Estimation of Multiple-Output Production Functions. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  13. Kahn, Alfred E., Timothy J. Tardif and Dennis L. Weisman. 1999. “The Telecommunications Act at Three Years: An Economic Evaluation of Its Implementation by the Federal Communications Commission.” Information Economics and Policy 11 (4): 319–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kodde, David A. and Franz C. Palm. 1986. “Wald Criteria for Jointly Testing Equality and Inequality Restrictions.” Econometrica 54 (5): 1243–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kumbhakar, Subal C. and C. A. Knox Lovell. 2000. Stochastic Frontier Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Resende, Marcelo. 1999. “Productivity Growth and Regulation in U.S. Local Telephone.” Information Economics and Policy 11 (1): 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Levin, Stanford L. and John B. Meisel. 1993. “Telephone Company Ownership of Rural Cable Television Companies.” Review of Industrial Organization 8 (4): 465–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meeusen, Wim and Julien Broeck. 1977. “Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error.” International Economic Review 18 (2), 435–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moody’s Public Utilities Manual. 1999. Mergent FIS, Inc.Google Scholar
  20. Shin, Richard T. and John S. Ying. 1992. “Unnatural Monopolies in Local Telephone.” Rand Journal of Economics 23 (2): 171–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1998. 1997 Statistical Report, Rural Telephone Borrowers. Washington, D.C.: Rural Utilities Service, Informational Publication 300–4.Google Scholar
  22. U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1997. “Financial and Statistical Report for Telephone Borrowers, Form 479.” Rural Utilities Service.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kent A. Currie
    • 1
  1. 1.Cost Analysis and RegulatorySBC Communications, Inc.USA

Personalised recommendations