Abstract
This study introduces methodology to quantify the effects that regulation has on the innovation and the introduction of new products, and compares state-regulated services in Indiana under rate of return regulation (RoRR) and under alternative regulation. The econometric model comprises a count process (for innovation) followed by a duration process with selection (for regulatory delay). When the firm is released from RoRR, the rate of service creation triples and expected approval delays nearly disappear. The firm may have introduced up to 12 times as many services to consumers if the alternative regulation had been in place the entire time.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Acton, J. P., and I. Vogelsang. 1989. “Price-Cap Regulation: Introduction.” RAND Journal of Economics 20(3), 369–372.
Ai, C., and D. E. M. Sappington. 1998. The Impact of State Incentive Regulation on the U.S. Telecommunications Industry. Mimeo.
Amemiya, T. 1985. Advanced Econometrics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Anscombe, F. J. 1950. “Sampling Theory of the Negative Binomial and Logarithmic Series Distributions.” Biometrika 37(3/4), 358–382.
Averch, H., and L. L. Johnson. 1962. “Behavior of the Firm Under Regulatory Constraint.” American Economic Review 52(5), 1053–1069.
Bonanno, G., and B. Haworth. 1998. “Intensity of Competition and the Choice Between Product and Process Innovation.” International Journal of Industrial Organization 16(4), 495–510.
Cabral, L. M. B., and M. H. Riordan. 1989. “Incentives for Cost Reduction Under Price Cap Regulation.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 1(2), 93–102.
Cameron, A. C., and P. K. Trivedi. 1998. Regression Analysis of Count Data. Econometric Society Monographs, 30, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Greene, W. H. 1993. Econometric Analysis. 2nd edn, New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.
Greenstein, S., S. McMaster, and P. T. Spiller. 1995. “The Effect of Incentive Regulation on Infrastructure Modernization: Local Exchange Companies' Deployment of Digital Technology.” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 4(2), 187–236.
Harris, R. G. 1997. “Testimony in Support of Opportunity Indiana II Submitted by Ameritech Indiana to the IURC, Cause No. 39705.”
Hausman, J. 1997. “Valuing the Effect of Regulation on New Services in Telecommunications.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Microeconomics, 1–38.
Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. 1990. Final Report, Cause No. 37905. September 19.
Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. 1997a. Annual Report, 1996–1997.
Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. 1997b. Telephone Report to the Regulatory Flexibility Committee of the Indiana General Assembly. July 1.
Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. 1998. Telephone Report to the Regulatory Flexibility Committee of the Indiana General Assembly. July 1.
Kraushaar, J. M. 1991–1997. “Fiber Deployment Update.” Industry Analysis Division, Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission.
Littlechild, S. C. 1983. “Regulation of British Telecom's Profitability.” Report to the Secretary of State, Department of Industry, London, February.
Mayo, J. W. and Joseph E. Flynn. 1988. “The Effects of Regulation on Research and Development: Theory and Evidence.” Journal of Business 61(3), 321–336.
Mueller, M. L. 1993. Telephone Companies in Paradise: a Case Study in Telecommunications Deregulation. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Prieger, J. E. 1999. Regulation, Innovation, and the Introduction of New Telecommunications Services. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
Prieger, J. E. 2000. Telecommunications Regulation and New Services: A Case Study at the State Level. Working Paper 00–11, Department of Economics, University of California, Davis.
Quandt, R. E. 1983. “Computational Problems and Methods.” In Z. Griliches and M. Intriligator, eds. Handbook of Econometrics. Volume I. Amsterdam/New York: Elsevier, pp. 699–764.
Ross, S. M. 1983. Stochastic Processes. (Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics. Probability and Mathematical Statistics.) New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Sappington, D. E. M., and Dennis L. Weisman. 1996. “Potential Pitfalls in Empirical Investigations of the Effects of Incentive Regulation Plans in the Telecommunications Industry.” Information Economics and Policy 8, 125–140.
Taylor, W. E., C. J. Zarkadas, and J. D. Zona. 1992. Incentive Regulation and the Diffusion of New Technology in Telecommunications. NERA mimeo.
United States. Federal Communications Commission. Common Carrier Bureau. 1987–1997. Statistics of Communications Common Carriers. Washington, D.C.: U.S. GPO.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Prieger, J.E. Telecommunications Regulation and New Services: A Case Study at the State Level. Journal of Regulatory Economics 20, 285–305 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011119126828
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011119126828