The Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, is showing its ... more The Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, is showing its age.1 Like an old New England house that added drafty new additions over the years to accommodate a growing extended family, the Act is poorly suited to meet today's challenges. Much of what is included in the Act relates to earlier technologies, market structures, and regulatory constructs that address issues that are either no longer relevant or that cause confusion when one tries to map them to current circumstances. The legacy Act was crafted in a world of circuit-switched POTS2 telephony provided by public utilities, and even when substantially revised in 1996, barely mentions broadband or the Internet.3 Moreover, the FCC has struggled in recent years to establish its authority to regulate broadband services and in its effort to craft a framework to protect an Open Internet (sometimes, referred to as Network Neutrality). While many of the fundamental concerns that the legacy Act addressed remain core concerns for public policy, the technology, market, and policy environment are substantially changed. For example, we believe that universal access to broadband and Internet services is an important policy goal, but do not believe that the current framework enshrined in Title II of the legacy Act does a good job of advancing those goals. Additionally, spectrum policy within the FCC is too closely mired in legacy decisions that blend management of scarce spectrum resources with media content considerations4 and industrial policy. In this paper, we identify the key concerns that a new Act should address and those issues in the legacy Act that may be of diminished importance. We propose a list of the key Titles that a new Communications Act of 2021 might include and identify their critical provisions. Our straw man proposal includes six titles: Title I establishes the basic goals of the Act and sets forth the scope and authority for the FCC; Title II provides the basic framework for regulating potential bottlenecks; Title III establishes a framework for monitoring the performance of communications markets, for addressing market failures, and for promoting industrial policy goals; Title IV focuses on managing radio-frequency spectrum; Title V focuses on public safety and critical infrastructure; and Title VI addresses the transition plan. Our goal is to provoke a discussion about what a new Act might look like in an ideal, clean-slate world; not to address the political, procedural, or legal challenges that necessarily would confront any attempt at major reform. That such challenges are daunting we take as given and as a partial explanation for why the legacy Act has survived so long. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile having a clear picture of what a new Communications Act should include and the benefits that having a new Act might offer so we can better judge what our priorities ought to be and what reforms might best be attempted.
Resource sharing is fundamental to the design of telecommunication networks. The technology, econ... more Resource sharing is fundamental to the design of telecommunication networks. The technology, economic and policy forces shaping the transition to next-generation digital networking infrastructure—characterized here as “5G+” (for 5G and beyond)—make new and evolved forms of edge sharing a necessity. Despite this necessity, most of the economic and policy research on Network Sharing Agreements (NSAs) has focused on sharing among service providers offering retail services via networks owned and operated by legacy fixed and mobile network operators (MNOs). In this essay, we make the case for why increased and more dynamic options for sharing, in particular of end-user owned network infrastructure, should be embraced for the future of NSAs. Furthermore, we explain how such a novel sharing paradigm must be matched by appropriate regulatory policies.
The recognition that spectrum management practices have not kept pace with wireless technology or... more The recognition that spectrum management practices have not kept pace with wireless technology or markets is hardly new. Efforts have been underway for well over a decade to effect a paradigm shift from old-style command & control regulation to more market-based regulation. Much of the urgency for effecting spectrum reform in recent years has been motivated by the need to satisfy commercial demand for mobile broadband spectrum. This has driven efforts to expand access for both exclusively licensed and unlicensed spectrum, as well as the introduction of new shared access models (e.g., at 3.5GHz). A significant thread in the policy debates has been whether exclusive licensed or unlicensed is the preferred model, and much of the academic debate has been framed in the language of property rights, with exclusive licensed spectrum mapped to a private property regime and unlicensed to an open access regime. Neither of these pure rights regimes provide a good match to the reality of spectru...
This panel will debate where and how wireless, cloud computing and Internet of Things technology ... more This panel will debate where and how wireless, cloud computing and Internet of Things technology and policy intersect. What are the economic and regulatory implications as communication network functions are increasingly virtualized and resources shared; given that applications already are. What do these trends suggest for privacy and security policy and identity regulation in t? To motivate and focus the discussion, participants and panelists are invited to participate in demonstrations and hands-on use of wireless grids edgeware as the panel proceeds. McKnight and colleagues claim that wireless grids edgeware is a new category of 'cloud to edge' ad hoc network applications and services have been under refinement for more than a decade following the first presentation on the topic to TPRC in 2002. A variety of proprietary and open/non-proprietary applications - called gridlets and wiglets, respectively - have been developed over the years, and tested in experimental use by a wide variety of users. Applications and use cases in K-12, university, and adult education as well as informal learning; social emergency response; social radio; virtual energy; enterprise cloud operating models for 'workplace as a service' and 'healthcare workplace as a service' as well as infrastructureless and serverless networks. This panel will offer contrasting views on the economics and security and privacy implications of the technologies demonstrated. By providing hands-on use experiences and guest account access to Gridstream Rx gridlets, for Healthcare Workplace as a Service and healthcare as a Service. The security implications of these novel ad hoc network services will be discussed, as will other regulatory implications of the apparent potential growth in machine to machine communication across the Internet of Things, through social machines, social radios, and other ad hoc network applications which extend well beyond the industrial Internet focus of many market participants. The ability of the these novel applications to withstand 'worst case scenario' circumstances for -social- emergency response is a particularly compelling application, which can be provided widely at negligible cost, this tutorial will demonstrate. Panelists: Prof. Lee McKnight is the inventor of wireless grid edgeware, and the author of articles, book chapters, books, and open specifications for wireless grids. McKnight was Principal Investigator of the Wireless Grid Innovation Testbed (WiGiT) National Science Foundation Partnerships for Innovation project, 2009-2014. He is also the founder and former CEO of Wireless Grids Corporation, which spun out of Syracuse University in 2004 and joined WiGiT as a founding partner in 2009, contributing its edgeware – such as GridstreamRx – to WiGiT for research purposes. Since its founding, McKnight has been a member of WGC’s board of directors. Prof. Jean Camp will focus her remarks on the privacy and security policy implications of the technologies demonstrated. Dr. William Lehr has collaborated with McKnight on wireless Internet research and WiGiT previously and has published extensively on the industrial economy of dynamic spectrum trading and sharing. Dr. Dale Meyerrose is a recent (May 2014) doctoral graduate of Syracuse University iSchool Doctor of Professional Studies program. Dr. Meyerrose’s, prize-winning study on ‘Introducing Wireless Grids to the Field of Telemedicine GridstreamRx’ will report on a study of wireless grids edgeware in 2 major military (U.S. Army) medical centers for professional healthcare training and education in the field of PTSD and Traumatic Brain injury, which was undertaken in cooperation with both WGC other partners in the National Science Foundation Partnerships for Innovation Wireless Grid Innovation Testbed (WiGiT), including the Steptoe Group, which developed the ‘Warrior-Centric Healthcare Training Program.’ Dr. Meyerrose will summarize his thesis findings and consider HIPAA and cybersecurity as well as market and policy implications of wireless grids edgeware.
Several factors suggest that meaningful network neutrality rules will not be enshrined in near-te... more Several factors suggest that meaningful network neutrality rules will not be enshrined in near-term U.S. telecommunications policy. These include disagreements over the need for such rules as well as their definition, efficacy and enforceability. However, as van Schewick (2005)1 has demonstrated in the context of the Internet, network providers may have economic incentives to discriminate in welfare-reducing ways; in addition, network operators may continue to possess market power, particularly with respect to a terminating monopoly.2 On the other hand, the literature on two-sided markets,3 the challenge of cost-recovery in the presence of significant fixed and sunk costs, and the changing nature of Internet traffic all provide efficiency-enhancing rationales for discriminatory pricing and traffic management. Thus, policy-makers face a daunting challenge: discriminatory behavior is likely to occur and distinguishing between good and bad discriminatory behavior is difficult.
Does broadband matter to the economy? Numerous studies have focused on whether there is a digital... more Does broadband matter to the economy? Numerous studies have focused on whether there is a digital divide, on regulatory impacts and investment incentives, and on the factors influencing where broadband is available. However, given how recently broadband has been adopted, little empirical research has investigated its economic impact. This paper presents estimates of the effect of broadband on a number of indicators of economic activity, including employment, wages, and industry mix, using a cross-sectional panel data set of communities (by zip code) across the United States. We match data from the FCC (Form 477) on broadband availability with demographic and other economic data from the US Population Censuses and Establishment Surveys. We find support for the conclusion that broadband positively affects economic activity in ways that are consistent with the qualitative stories told by broadband advocates. Even after controlling for community-level factors known to influence broadban...
Spectrum Access Systems (SAS) are emerging as a principal mechanism for managing the sharing of r... more Spectrum Access Systems (SAS) are emerging as a principal mechanism for managing the sharing of radio spectrum. The design of the SAS depends on the specification of spectrum property rights and the governance system by which those rights are enforced. Current perspectives on SAS design have been too limited, focusing narrowly on the technical components without adequate consideration of socio-technical factors that will impact the likely success of any SAS design. In this paper, we apply the social science literature on the management of common pool resources (CPR) to the design challenge for the SAS. Heretofore, too much of the discussion has focused on an overly simplistic characterization of the spectrum rights design space as a dichotomous choice between licensed v. unlicensed, markets v. government, and exclusive v. open. The CPR framework forces consideration of a wider class of design options, positioning the specifications of spectrum property rights more appropriately alon...
On July 24-25, 2018, MIT hosted an invitation-only workshop for network researchers from academia... more On July 24-25, 2018, MIT hosted an invitation-only workshop for network researchers from academia, industry, and the policy community engaged in the design and operation of test schemes to measure broadband access, in order to address the measurement challenges associated with highspeed (gigabit) broadband Internet access services. The focus of the workshop was on assessing the current state-of-the-art in gigabit broadband measurement tools and practices, the technical and policy challenges that arise, and possible strategies for addressing these challenges. A goal of this initial workshop was to provide a level-setting and networking opportunity among representatives of many of the leading research and operational efforts within academia, industry, and the government to collect, analyze, and make use of broadband and Internet performance measurement data and in the design of the measurement methods and tools.
This article compares and contrasts two technologies for delivering broadband wireless Internet a... more This article compares and contrasts two technologies for delivering broadband wireless Internet access services: 3G vs. WiFi. The former, 3G, refers to the collection of third-generation mobile technologies that are designed to allow mobile operators to offer integrated data and ...
Several factors suggest that meaningful network neutrality rules will not be enshrined in near-te... more Several factors suggest that meaningful network neutrality rules will not be enshrined in near-term U.S. telecommunications policy. These include disagreements over the need for such rules as well as their definition, efficacy and enforceability. However, as van Schewick (2005)1 has demonstrated in the context of the Internet, network providers may have economic incentives to discriminate in welfare-reducing ways; in addition, network operators may continue to possess market power, particularly with respect to a terminating monopoly.2 On the other hand, the literature on two-sided markets,3 the challenge of cost-recovery in the presence of significant fixed and sunk costs, and the changing nature of Internet traffic all provide efficiency-enhancing rationales for discriminatory pricing and traffic management. Thus, policy-makers face a daunting challenge: discriminatory behavior is likely to occur and distinguishing between good and bad discriminatory behavior is difficult. Assuming...
This paper examines the nature of congestion in the interior of the Internet: its location and it... more This paper examines the nature of congestion in the interior of the Internet: its location and its intensity. We present results of a new method for probing the In-ternet which allows us to detect the presence of congestion on specific links. We are particularly interested in the links that interconnect ISPs, including what are called peering links. There is little data on the extent of congestion across interconnection links, leaving users to wonder if peering links are properly engineered, or whether they are a major source of problems transferring data across the Internet. Questions about congestion are an important part of the current debates about reasonable network management. Our results suggest that peering connections are properly provisioned in the majority of cases, and the locations of major congestion are associated with specific sources of high-volume flows, specifically from the Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) and dominant content providers such as Netflix and Google...
The Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, is showing its ... more The Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, is showing its age.1 Like an old New England house that added drafty new additions over the years to accommodate a growing extended family, the Act is poorly suited to meet today's challenges. Much of what is included in the Act relates to earlier technologies, market structures, and regulatory constructs that address issues that are either no longer relevant or that cause confusion when one tries to map them to current circumstances. The legacy Act was crafted in a world of circuit-switched POTS2 telephony provided by public utilities, and even when substantially revised in 1996, barely mentions broadband or the Internet.3 Moreover, the FCC has struggled in recent years to establish its authority to regulate broadband services and in its effort to craft a framework to protect an Open Internet (sometimes, referred to as Network Neutrality). While many of the fundamental concerns that the legacy Act addressed remain core concerns for public policy, the technology, market, and policy environment are substantially changed. For example, we believe that universal access to broadband and Internet services is an important policy goal, but do not believe that the current framework enshrined in Title II of the legacy Act does a good job of advancing those goals. Additionally, spectrum policy within the FCC is too closely mired in legacy decisions that blend management of scarce spectrum resources with media content considerations4 and industrial policy. In this paper, we identify the key concerns that a new Act should address and those issues in the legacy Act that may be of diminished importance. We propose a list of the key Titles that a new Communications Act of 2021 might include and identify their critical provisions. Our straw man proposal includes six titles: Title I establishes the basic goals of the Act and sets forth the scope and authority for the FCC; Title II provides the basic framework for regulating potential bottlenecks; Title III establishes a framework for monitoring the performance of communications markets, for addressing market failures, and for promoting industrial policy goals; Title IV focuses on managing radio-frequency spectrum; Title V focuses on public safety and critical infrastructure; and Title VI addresses the transition plan. Our goal is to provoke a discussion about what a new Act might look like in an ideal, clean-slate world; not to address the political, procedural, or legal challenges that necessarily would confront any attempt at major reform. That such challenges are daunting we take as given and as a partial explanation for why the legacy Act has survived so long. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile having a clear picture of what a new Communications Act should include and the benefits that having a new Act might offer so we can better judge what our priorities ought to be and what reforms might best be attempted.
Resource sharing is fundamental to the design of telecommunication networks. The technology, econ... more Resource sharing is fundamental to the design of telecommunication networks. The technology, economic and policy forces shaping the transition to next-generation digital networking infrastructure—characterized here as “5G+” (for 5G and beyond)—make new and evolved forms of edge sharing a necessity. Despite this necessity, most of the economic and policy research on Network Sharing Agreements (NSAs) has focused on sharing among service providers offering retail services via networks owned and operated by legacy fixed and mobile network operators (MNOs). In this essay, we make the case for why increased and more dynamic options for sharing, in particular of end-user owned network infrastructure, should be embraced for the future of NSAs. Furthermore, we explain how such a novel sharing paradigm must be matched by appropriate regulatory policies.
The recognition that spectrum management practices have not kept pace with wireless technology or... more The recognition that spectrum management practices have not kept pace with wireless technology or markets is hardly new. Efforts have been underway for well over a decade to effect a paradigm shift from old-style command & control regulation to more market-based regulation. Much of the urgency for effecting spectrum reform in recent years has been motivated by the need to satisfy commercial demand for mobile broadband spectrum. This has driven efforts to expand access for both exclusively licensed and unlicensed spectrum, as well as the introduction of new shared access models (e.g., at 3.5GHz). A significant thread in the policy debates has been whether exclusive licensed or unlicensed is the preferred model, and much of the academic debate has been framed in the language of property rights, with exclusive licensed spectrum mapped to a private property regime and unlicensed to an open access regime. Neither of these pure rights regimes provide a good match to the reality of spectru...
This panel will debate where and how wireless, cloud computing and Internet of Things technology ... more This panel will debate where and how wireless, cloud computing and Internet of Things technology and policy intersect. What are the economic and regulatory implications as communication network functions are increasingly virtualized and resources shared; given that applications already are. What do these trends suggest for privacy and security policy and identity regulation in t? To motivate and focus the discussion, participants and panelists are invited to participate in demonstrations and hands-on use of wireless grids edgeware as the panel proceeds. McKnight and colleagues claim that wireless grids edgeware is a new category of 'cloud to edge' ad hoc network applications and services have been under refinement for more than a decade following the first presentation on the topic to TPRC in 2002. A variety of proprietary and open/non-proprietary applications - called gridlets and wiglets, respectively - have been developed over the years, and tested in experimental use by a wide variety of users. Applications and use cases in K-12, university, and adult education as well as informal learning; social emergency response; social radio; virtual energy; enterprise cloud operating models for 'workplace as a service' and 'healthcare workplace as a service' as well as infrastructureless and serverless networks. This panel will offer contrasting views on the economics and security and privacy implications of the technologies demonstrated. By providing hands-on use experiences and guest account access to Gridstream Rx gridlets, for Healthcare Workplace as a Service and healthcare as a Service. The security implications of these novel ad hoc network services will be discussed, as will other regulatory implications of the apparent potential growth in machine to machine communication across the Internet of Things, through social machines, social radios, and other ad hoc network applications which extend well beyond the industrial Internet focus of many market participants. The ability of the these novel applications to withstand 'worst case scenario' circumstances for -social- emergency response is a particularly compelling application, which can be provided widely at negligible cost, this tutorial will demonstrate. Panelists: Prof. Lee McKnight is the inventor of wireless grid edgeware, and the author of articles, book chapters, books, and open specifications for wireless grids. McKnight was Principal Investigator of the Wireless Grid Innovation Testbed (WiGiT) National Science Foundation Partnerships for Innovation project, 2009-2014. He is also the founder and former CEO of Wireless Grids Corporation, which spun out of Syracuse University in 2004 and joined WiGiT as a founding partner in 2009, contributing its edgeware – such as GridstreamRx – to WiGiT for research purposes. Since its founding, McKnight has been a member of WGC’s board of directors. Prof. Jean Camp will focus her remarks on the privacy and security policy implications of the technologies demonstrated. Dr. William Lehr has collaborated with McKnight on wireless Internet research and WiGiT previously and has published extensively on the industrial economy of dynamic spectrum trading and sharing. Dr. Dale Meyerrose is a recent (May 2014) doctoral graduate of Syracuse University iSchool Doctor of Professional Studies program. Dr. Meyerrose’s, prize-winning study on ‘Introducing Wireless Grids to the Field of Telemedicine GridstreamRx’ will report on a study of wireless grids edgeware in 2 major military (U.S. Army) medical centers for professional healthcare training and education in the field of PTSD and Traumatic Brain injury, which was undertaken in cooperation with both WGC other partners in the National Science Foundation Partnerships for Innovation Wireless Grid Innovation Testbed (WiGiT), including the Steptoe Group, which developed the ‘Warrior-Centric Healthcare Training Program.’ Dr. Meyerrose will summarize his thesis findings and consider HIPAA and cybersecurity as well as market and policy implications of wireless grids edgeware.
Several factors suggest that meaningful network neutrality rules will not be enshrined in near-te... more Several factors suggest that meaningful network neutrality rules will not be enshrined in near-term U.S. telecommunications policy. These include disagreements over the need for such rules as well as their definition, efficacy and enforceability. However, as van Schewick (2005)1 has demonstrated in the context of the Internet, network providers may have economic incentives to discriminate in welfare-reducing ways; in addition, network operators may continue to possess market power, particularly with respect to a terminating monopoly.2 On the other hand, the literature on two-sided markets,3 the challenge of cost-recovery in the presence of significant fixed and sunk costs, and the changing nature of Internet traffic all provide efficiency-enhancing rationales for discriminatory pricing and traffic management. Thus, policy-makers face a daunting challenge: discriminatory behavior is likely to occur and distinguishing between good and bad discriminatory behavior is difficult.
Does broadband matter to the economy? Numerous studies have focused on whether there is a digital... more Does broadband matter to the economy? Numerous studies have focused on whether there is a digital divide, on regulatory impacts and investment incentives, and on the factors influencing where broadband is available. However, given how recently broadband has been adopted, little empirical research has investigated its economic impact. This paper presents estimates of the effect of broadband on a number of indicators of economic activity, including employment, wages, and industry mix, using a cross-sectional panel data set of communities (by zip code) across the United States. We match data from the FCC (Form 477) on broadband availability with demographic and other economic data from the US Population Censuses and Establishment Surveys. We find support for the conclusion that broadband positively affects economic activity in ways that are consistent with the qualitative stories told by broadband advocates. Even after controlling for community-level factors known to influence broadban...
Spectrum Access Systems (SAS) are emerging as a principal mechanism for managing the sharing of r... more Spectrum Access Systems (SAS) are emerging as a principal mechanism for managing the sharing of radio spectrum. The design of the SAS depends on the specification of spectrum property rights and the governance system by which those rights are enforced. Current perspectives on SAS design have been too limited, focusing narrowly on the technical components without adequate consideration of socio-technical factors that will impact the likely success of any SAS design. In this paper, we apply the social science literature on the management of common pool resources (CPR) to the design challenge for the SAS. Heretofore, too much of the discussion has focused on an overly simplistic characterization of the spectrum rights design space as a dichotomous choice between licensed v. unlicensed, markets v. government, and exclusive v. open. The CPR framework forces consideration of a wider class of design options, positioning the specifications of spectrum property rights more appropriately alon...
On July 24-25, 2018, MIT hosted an invitation-only workshop for network researchers from academia... more On July 24-25, 2018, MIT hosted an invitation-only workshop for network researchers from academia, industry, and the policy community engaged in the design and operation of test schemes to measure broadband access, in order to address the measurement challenges associated with highspeed (gigabit) broadband Internet access services. The focus of the workshop was on assessing the current state-of-the-art in gigabit broadband measurement tools and practices, the technical and policy challenges that arise, and possible strategies for addressing these challenges. A goal of this initial workshop was to provide a level-setting and networking opportunity among representatives of many of the leading research and operational efforts within academia, industry, and the government to collect, analyze, and make use of broadband and Internet performance measurement data and in the design of the measurement methods and tools.
This article compares and contrasts two technologies for delivering broadband wireless Internet a... more This article compares and contrasts two technologies for delivering broadband wireless Internet access services: 3G vs. WiFi. The former, 3G, refers to the collection of third-generation mobile technologies that are designed to allow mobile operators to offer integrated data and ...
Several factors suggest that meaningful network neutrality rules will not be enshrined in near-te... more Several factors suggest that meaningful network neutrality rules will not be enshrined in near-term U.S. telecommunications policy. These include disagreements over the need for such rules as well as their definition, efficacy and enforceability. However, as van Schewick (2005)1 has demonstrated in the context of the Internet, network providers may have economic incentives to discriminate in welfare-reducing ways; in addition, network operators may continue to possess market power, particularly with respect to a terminating monopoly.2 On the other hand, the literature on two-sided markets,3 the challenge of cost-recovery in the presence of significant fixed and sunk costs, and the changing nature of Internet traffic all provide efficiency-enhancing rationales for discriminatory pricing and traffic management. Thus, policy-makers face a daunting challenge: discriminatory behavior is likely to occur and distinguishing between good and bad discriminatory behavior is difficult. Assuming...
This paper examines the nature of congestion in the interior of the Internet: its location and it... more This paper examines the nature of congestion in the interior of the Internet: its location and its intensity. We present results of a new method for probing the In-ternet which allows us to detect the presence of congestion on specific links. We are particularly interested in the links that interconnect ISPs, including what are called peering links. There is little data on the extent of congestion across interconnection links, leaving users to wonder if peering links are properly engineered, or whether they are a major source of problems transferring data across the Internet. Questions about congestion are an important part of the current debates about reasonable network management. Our results suggest that peering connections are properly provisioned in the majority of cases, and the locations of major congestion are associated with specific sources of high-volume flows, specifically from the Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) and dominant content providers such as Netflix and Google...
—Spectrum Access Systems (SAS) are emerging as a principal mechanism for managing the sharing of ... more —Spectrum Access Systems (SAS) are emerging as a principal mechanism for managing the sharing of radio spectrum. The design of the SAS depends on the specification of spectrum property rights and the governance system by which those rights are enforced. Current perspectives on SAS design have been too limited, focusing narrowly on the technical components without adequate consideration of socio-technical factors that will impact the likely success of any SAS design. In this paper, we apply the social science literature on the management of common pool resources (CPR) to the design challenge for the SAS. Heretofore, too much of the discussion has focused on an overly simplistic characterization of the spectrum rights design space as a dichotomous choice between licensed v. unlicensed, markets v. government, and exclusive v. open. The CPR framework forces consideration of a wider class of design options, positioning the specifications of spectrum property rights more appropriately along a multi-dimensional continuum of rights bundles. The CPR framework highlights the importance of considering formal and informal, multi-layered institutional and market-based interactions among SAS stakeholders when designing a resource management system. We will explain how this leads one to view the SAS as a polycentric governance system (using the terminology in the CPR literature). By examining the economic and social context of spectrum sharing, we assert that these emerging systems must be sufficiently flexible to adapt to various forms of resource governance, which refers to the process by which rights are distributed among stakeholders, how those rights are enforced, and how the resource is managed. We illustrate how the insights from the CPR literature might be implemented in a prototype SAS architecture.
Uploads
Papers by William Lehr