International Economics and Economic Policy

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 185–208 | Cite as

Broadband Internet: net neutrality versus open access

  • Christiaan HogendornEmail author
Original Paper


“Network neutrality” and “open access” are two policies designed to preserve openness on the Internet. Open access mandates openness of conduits (e.g. television cable and DSL) to intermediaries (e.g. America Online), while network neutrality mandates openness to advanced content (streaming video, interactive e-commerce, etc.). We develop a systems model with free entry and competition in all three industry segments (conduits, intermediaries, and content) and examine the effects of the two types of regulation. We find that open access does not necessarily result in more openness of content and is not a substitute for network neutrality.


Network neutrality Open access Broadband 

JEL Classification

L1 L5 L9 



I thank the editor, an anonymous referee, Gerald Faulhaber, Elizabeth Bailey, Paul Kleindorfer, Richard McLean, Gil Skillman, Yossi Spiegel, Joel Waldfogel, Dennis Yao, and participants of the 2006 INFRADAY conference. Madalina Ursu provided able research assistance.


  1. Anderson K, Fjell K, Foros Ø (2004) Are interactive TV-pioneers and surfers different breeds? Broadband demand and asymmetric cross-price effects. Review of Industrial Organization 25:295–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson S, de Palma A, Thisse J-F (1992) Discrete choice theory of product differentiation. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  3. Caillaud B (2003) Chicken & egg: competition among intermediation service providers. RAND J Econ 34:309–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chipty T (2001) Vertical integration, market foreclosure, and consumer welfare in the cable television industry. Am Econ Rev 91:428–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Church J, Gandal N (1992) Network effects, software provision, and standardization. J Ind Econ 40:85–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Church J, Gandal N (2000) Systems competition, vertical merger and foreclosure. J Econ Manage Strategy 9:25–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coffman K, Odlyzko A (2002) Internet growth: is there a ‘Moore’s law’ for data traffic? In: Abello J, Pardalos P, Resende M (eds) Handbook of massive data sets. Kluwer, Norwell, pp 47–93Google Scholar
  8. Doganoglu T, Wright J (2006) Multihoming and compatibility. Int J Ind Organ 24:45–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Economides N (1998) The incentive for non-price discrimination by an input monopolist. Int J Ind Organ 16:271–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Evans D (2003) The antitrust economics of multi-sided platform markets. Yale J Regul 20:325–381Google Scholar
  11. FCC (1999) Broadband today. Cable services bureau, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  12. FCC (2002) In the matter of inquiry concerning high-speed access to the Internet over cable and other facilities. FCC No. 02-77, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  13. Faulhaber G, Hogendorn C (2000) The market structure of broadband telecommunications. J Ind Econ 48:305–329Google Scholar
  14. Ferreira R, Thisse J-F (1996) Horizontal and vertical differentiation: the Launhardt model. Int J Ind Organ 14:485–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gehrig T (1998) Competing markets. Eur Econ Rev 42:277–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Greenstein S (2000) The evolving structure of commercial Internet markets. In: Brynjolfsson E, Kahin B (eds) Understanding the digital economy: data, tools, and research. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 151–184Google Scholar
  17. Greenstein S (2007) Innovation and the evolution of market structure for Internet access in the United States. In: Aspray W, Ceruzzi P (eds) The commercialization of the Internet and its impact on American business. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (in press)Google Scholar
  18. Hahn R, Wallsten S (2006) The economics of net neutrality. The Economists’ Voice 3Google Scholar
  19. Hausman J (2002) Internet-related services: the results of asymmetric regulation. In: Crandall R, Alleman J (eds) Broadband. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp 129–156Google Scholar
  20. Hazlett T, Bittlingmayer G (2003) The political economy of cable ‘open access’. Stanf Technol Law Rev 4Google Scholar
  21. Hogendorn C (2005) Regulating vertical integration in broadband: open access versus common carriage. Rev Netw Econ 4:19–32Google Scholar
  22. Lemley M, Lessig L (2001) The end of end-to-end: preserving the architecture of the Internet in the broadband era. UCLA Law Rev 48:925–972Google Scholar
  23. Mankiw N, Whinston M (1986) Free entry and social inefficiency. RAND J Econ 17:48–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. National Research Council (NRC) (2002) Broadband: bringing home the bits. National Academy Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  25. Rhee B-D (1996) Consumer heterogeneity and strategic quality decisions. Manage Sci 42:57–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rochet J-C, Tirole J (2006) Two-sided markets: a progress report. RAND J Econ 37:645–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rubinfeld D, Singer H (2001) Vertical foreclosure in broadband access. J Ind Econ 49:299–318Google Scholar
  28. Savage S, Worth M (2005) Price, programming and potential competition in US cable television markets. J Regul Econ 27:25–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shaked A, Sutton J (1982) Relaxing price competition through product differentiation. Rev Econ Stud 49:3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Spence M (1976) Product differentiation and welfare. Am Econ Rev 66:407–414Google Scholar
  31. van Schewick B (2007) Towards an economic framework for network neutrality regulation. J Telecommun High Technol Law 5Google Scholar
  32. Wu T (2003) Network neutrality, broadband discrimination. J Telecommun High Technol Law 2Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Economics DepartmentWesleyan UniversityMiddletownUSA

Personalised recommendations