Berkman Center Defends Open-Access Policy Recommendations
Responding to industry accusations of bias, a Harvard University center said its conclusion that open-access policies spurred broadband in several foreign countries had been based on a review of 57 studies. In a 68-page memo released Monday, the Berkman Center for Internet & Society specified the studies, and it outlined updates planned for the final version of its report, requested by the FCC for developing the National Broadband Plan and coming in mid- January. Berkman’s first draft was criticized as unfair (CD Nov 18 p7) by incumbent broadband providers including USTelecom and NCTA.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The available literature shows “the present unstated consensus in U.S. telecommunications policy circles that open access is a theory in disrepute is without foundation in evidence,” the Berkman Center said. “Quite the contrary, open access should be a continued subject of study, experimentation, and observation as one among the many tools in the toolbox of telecommunications policy.” Berkman said it valued qualitative over quantitative research because its review revealed “that the econometrics analysis of broadband penetration and investment is inconclusive.” Quantitative studies can help raise research questions, but “investing faith in the numerical results rather than in much richer historical and qualitative information is misguided,” it said.
Berkman reviewed 19 quantitative studies, and 10 found that open access policies had “positive effects on broadband deployment and prices,” it said. Two industry-sponsored papers found negative effects or none. One paper found mixed results, and six found no effect or didn’t focus on outcomes, it said.
Berkman said 15 of 38 empirical papers reviewed analyzed the effects of unbundling on broadband penetration. Six found positive effects, three found negative ones and six found mixed results. Berkman said it reviewed 23 papers on how unbundling affects investment, it said. Two showed positive effects on investment by incumbents or entrants, one showed negative effects, one showed positive and negative effects, and two had no findings. The other 17 were “either conceptual or modeling exercises, rather than empirical studies, or have serious methodological flaws,” it said. Twenty of the 38 papers were self-published by their authors, and at least 16 were “directly sponsored by a corporate sponsor with direct interest in the outcomes of the research,” Berkman said. Industry funded most of the papers on investment, it said: Thirteen of 23 were “sponsored by a party with direct commercial interest in the outcome.”
Critics of the Berkman Center’s first draft kept mum on the update memo Tuesday. USTelecom, NCTA and Verizon declined to comment. Other broadband providers we contacted didn’t immediately respond.