Net Neutrality Regulation: Much Ado about Nothing?

IF 0.9 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS Review of Network Economics Pub Date : 2018-09-25 DOI:10.1515/rne-2018-0051
Ingo Vogelsang
{"title":"Net Neutrality Regulation: Much Ado about Nothing?","authors":"Ingo Vogelsang","doi":"10.1515/rne-2018-0051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The economics literature on Net Neutrality (NN) has been largely critical of NN regulation on the basis of theoretical findings that NN violations can be both welfare improving and welfare deteriorating, depending on the circumstances of the case in question. Thus, an ex post competition policy approach would be preferable to a strict ex ante prohibition of NN violations. In contrast, the current paper argues that NN regulation is largely ineffective, in particular, when it comes to the prohibition of fast lanes and other quality of service (QoS) differentiations, and to a lesser extent, when it comes to the zero price rule. NN regulation is only effective in preventing the blocking of specific content and in preventing the favoring of ISP owned content and in preventing some price discriminations. These are also areas where NN regulations are more likely to be welfare-enhancing. Where they are ineffective, NN regulations are likely to create inefficiencies through the cost and allocative inefficiencies caused by NN bypass. The paper ends with a call for theoretical and empirical economic analyses of NN circumvention techniques.","PeriodicalId":45659,"journal":{"name":"Review of Network Economics","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Network Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/rne-2018-0051","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The economics literature on Net Neutrality (NN) has been largely critical of NN regulation on the basis of theoretical findings that NN violations can be both welfare improving and welfare deteriorating, depending on the circumstances of the case in question. Thus, an ex post competition policy approach would be preferable to a strict ex ante prohibition of NN violations. In contrast, the current paper argues that NN regulation is largely ineffective, in particular, when it comes to the prohibition of fast lanes and other quality of service (QoS) differentiations, and to a lesser extent, when it comes to the zero price rule. NN regulation is only effective in preventing the blocking of specific content and in preventing the favoring of ISP owned content and in preventing some price discriminations. These are also areas where NN regulations are more likely to be welfare-enhancing. Where they are ineffective, NN regulations are likely to create inefficiencies through the cost and allocative inefficiencies caused by NN bypass. The paper ends with a call for theoretical and empirical economic analyses of NN circumvention techniques.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
网络中立法规:无事生非?
关于网络中立性(NN)的经济学文献在很大程度上对网络监管持批评态度,其理论发现,违反网络中立性既可以提高福利,也可以使福利恶化,这取决于所讨论的情况。因此,事后竞争政策的做法将优于严格的事前禁止违反神经网络。相比之下,目前的论文认为,神经网络监管在很大程度上是无效的,特别是在禁止快速通道和其他服务质量(QoS)差异方面,以及在较小程度上,在零价格规则方面。神经网络监管仅在防止对特定内容的封锁、防止对ISP拥有的内容的偏袒和防止某些价格歧视方面有效。这些也是神经网络监管更有可能提高福利的领域。在它们无效的地方,神经网络法规可能会通过神经网络绕过造成的成本和分配效率低下而产生低效率。文章最后呼吁对神经网络规避技术进行理论和实证经济分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: The Review of Network Economics seeks to help policy makers, academics, and practitioners keep informed of new research and policy debate in network economics and related subjects that are relevant to the study of network industries. By publishing high quality research on topical issues relevant to network industries, it is hoped readers will be able to gain a deeper understanding of the economic issues involved and that this will improve the quality of decision making by private and public organisations, and debate among researchers. The articles can cover specific network industries, or may deal with general issues that have relevance to a number of different network industries, including topics in the economics of networks, regulation, competition law, or industrial organisation. Papers that provide insights into policy debates are especially welcome, as are up-to-date surveys, book reviews, and comments.
期刊最新文献
Reform, Not Revolution, is What is Needed Now for Yardstick Competition The Quality of Interactions in Competition Between Social Media Platforms Mixed Bundling and Mergers Price-Cap Regulation of Firms That Supply Their Rivals A Signaling Theory of the Online Consumer Review Policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1