Abstract
The telecommunications industry has evolved rapidly in the last two decades, when the maturing wireless technology sharply eroded the dominance of fixed-lines providers. The decline in market share of fixed lines has been especially strong in countries where the traditional cable infrastructure was not well developed. Three interacting forces drive the transformation of the industry: (1) Market structure and deregulation, (2) innovation, and (3) capital expenditures by the firms. Stimulating competition can increase market efficiency as a more competitive market stimulates the degree of innovation undertaken both by incumbents and by entrant operators. Vast arrays of telecommunications policies throughout the world affect the dynamics of entry through the control of network availability and connection charges. Regulating agencies can affect market prices, and consequently influence both profits and the incentive to invest in R&D and equipment. The sharp interest in the interaction between these forces has generated a voluminous literature. In particular, Laffont and Tirole (2000) provide a comprehensive overview of the main issues in the economics of the telecommunications sector.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Amable, B., Demmou, L. and Ledezma, I. (2008) “Competition, Innovation and Distance to Frontier.” Documents de Travail du Centre d’Economie de la Sorbonne 2008.64.
Aghion P., Bloom, N., Blundell, R., Griffith, R. and Howitt, P. (2005) “Competition and Innovation: An Inverted U Relationship.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 120, No. 2, pp. 701–28.
Aghion, P., Blundell, R., Griffith, R., Horwitz, P. and Prantl, S. (2006) “The Effects of Entry on Incumbent Innovation and Productivity.” Working Paper 2006.
Andersson, M., Lööf, H. and Johansson, S. (2008) “Productivity and International Trade — Firm-level Evidence from a Small Open Economy.” Review of World Economics, Vol. 144.
Badunenko, O., Fritsch, M. and Stephan, A. (2008) “What Drives the Productive Efficiency of a Firm? The Importance of Industry, Location, R&D and Size.” Berlin, March 2008.
Battese, G.E. and Triplett, J. (1988) “Prediction of Firm-Level Technical Efficiencies with a Generalized Production Function and Panel Data.” Journal of Econometrics, 38(3), pp. 387–99.
Bond, S., Elston, J.A., Mairesse, J. and Mulkay, B. (1999) “Financial Factors and Investment in Belgium, France, Germany and the UK: A Comparison Using Company Panel Data,” Working Papers 9964, Centre de Recherche en Economie et Statistique.
Bosma, N., Stam, E. and Schutjens, V. (2008) “Creative Destruction and Regional Productivity Growth: Evidence from the Dutch Manufacturing and Services Industries.” http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:egu:wpaper:0813&r=eff.
Cellini, R. and Lambertini, L. (2009) “Dynamic R&D with Spillover: Competition vs Cooperation,” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 33(3), 568–82.
Crépon, B., Duguet, E. and Mairesse, J. (1998) “Research, Innovation, and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level.” Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 7(3), 115–56.
Ericson, R.E., and Pakes, A. (1995) “Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work.” Review of Economic Studies, 62, 53–82.
Fang, L. (2009) “Entry Barriers, Competition, and Technology Adoption”, Federal Reserve of Atlanta, Working Paper 2009–8.
Griliches, Z. (1988) “Productivity Puzzles and R&D: Another Nonexplanation.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 2(4), 9–21.
Hall, B.H. (2002) “The Financing of Research and Development.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, Vol. 18(1), 35–51.
Heckman, J. (1979) “Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error.” Econometrica, Vol. 47, 153–61.
Kamien, M. and Swartz, N. (1982) Market Structure and Innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laffont, J.J. and Tirole, J. (2000) Competition in Telecommunications. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Lehto, E., Böckerman, P. and Huovari, J. (2008) “The Return to the Technological Frontier: The Conditional Effect of Plants’ R&D on their Productivity in Finnish Manufacturing”, Palkansaajien Tutkimuslaitos (Labour Institute for Economic Research) Discussion Paper 243, Helsinki, Finland.
Li, W. and Xu, L. (2004) “The Impact of Privatization and Competition in the Telecommunications Sector Around the World.” Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 47, No. 2.
Lööf, H. and Heshmati, A. (2002) “Knowledge Capital and Performance Heterogeneity: A firm-level Innovation Study.” International Journal of Production Economics, 76(1), 61–85.
Megginson, W. and Netter, J. (2001) “From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization.” Journal of Economic Literature, 39: 321–89.
Nickell S. (1996) “Competition and Corporate Performance.” The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 104, No. 4, pp. 724–46.
Repkine, A. (2009), “Telecommunications Capital Intensity and Aggregate Production Efficiency: A Meta-Frontier Analysis.” MPRA Paper 13059, January 2009.
Vickers, J., and Yarrow, G. (1995) Privatization: An Economic Analysis. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Copyright information
© 2009 Jati K. Sengupta and Phillip Fanchon
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sengupta, J., Fanchon, P. (2009). Efficiency and Growth of the Telecom Industry. In: Efficiency, Market Dynamics and Industry Growth. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230248663_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230248663_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-36913-3
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-24866-3
eBook Packages: Palgrave Economics & Finance CollectionEconomics and Finance (R0)