|
Convergencia
es un término que significa la creciente tendencia de las firmas
en segmentos tradicionalmente segmentados del
sector de tecnologías de la información, telecomunicaicones y
radiodifusión de ofrecer múltiples servicios. La disposición de
“multiple play” sobre una red de acceso único se
debe en primera instancia a la proliferación de las redes del
Protocolo Internet (IP).
Mientras las tecnologías de redes tradicionales enlazaba
inexorablemente los servicios y las facilidades, IP separa
la facilidad del servicio. Tal como sucede en Internet, es posible
para la televisión por cable o la red telefónica el transportar
voz, video, y datos.
Esto permite que las firmas en sectores
tradicionalmente separados ofrezcan una combinación de servicios, que
los lleva hacia la convergencia.
Nota del
editor: Artículo sólo disponible en inglés.
Convergence is a catchall term
signaling the growing trend of firms in traditionally segmented
sectors of IT, telecom, and broadcasting offering multiple services.
Such provision of “multiple play” over a single access network is
primarily due to the proliferation of Internet Protocol (IP) networks.
While traditional network technologies inexorably linked services and
facilities, IP separates the facility from the service. As with the
Internet, it becomes possible for a cable television or telephony
network to carry voice, video, and data. This allows firms in
traditionally separate sectors to offer a combination of services,
driving them forward towards convergence.
Convergence is important for the
additional investments it is expected to bring, and the increased
competition it allows. Between 1990 and 2005, Latin America and the
Caribbean attracted 41 per cent of worldwide private investment in the
telecoms sector, totaling $194 billion. Much of this was a response
first to privatization, and then mobile communication. It is likely
that convergence will drive the next wave of investments as carriers
upgrade their networks and offer new services. Analysts expect that
investments will cross US$300 billion over the next five years. Apart
from attracting investment, convergence also allows immediate
facilities competition. In the United States and Europe, cableco entry
into telephony through VoIP has significantly altered the voice market.
For example, 80 percent of VoIP subscribers in Switzerland obtain
their service from cablecos, while US cablecos are now the leading
providers of IP-based voice services.
Yet, the benefits of convergence
are not only going to flow from technical or market developments. A
number of regulatory issues will need attention in order that a stable
and predictable regime can attract sustained investments. The
fundamental problem is that convergence blurs the boundaries between
sectors that have had very different regulatory treatments in the past.
Broadcasting regulation heavily focused on content, while telecom
regulation focused on carriage. Further, the computing and IT sectors
often had little regulatory oversight, with the Internet developing in
a regulatory space created by exception. Now, these rules and their
institutions overlap or even conflict, increasing regulatory risk and
the cost of capital. This not only slows down investment; it also
blocks competition in facilities and services from fully expressing
itself. An uncertain regulatory environment can thus minimize the
rewards that may otherwise flow.
A telling example here is the
current debate over rules for IPTV worldwide. In South Korea, a
dispute between the telecom ministry and broadcasting regulator about
who can control IPTV has delayed its introduction. Similarly, it is
uncertain whether India’s cable television or telecom laws apply to
IPTV, and the service may or may not be considered legal depending on
the interpretation. However, some telcos have already begun deployment,
and with private investment tied up, regulatory intervention will now
be costly. Different rules are creating conflict in the US. After a
legal battle, a court in Connecticut classified IPTV as a cable
service, requiring it to go through franchise licensing at city level.
Unsure of embarking on this slow and expensive process, AT&T has had
to delay its rollout plans.
It is possible to identify some
of the trends in regulatory responses to convergence. Countries have
begun to move to open and flexible licensing regimes, permitting
operators to use any technology to offer a wide range of services.
While Malaysia permitted full flexibility, India has implemented
technology neutral licensing and has plans to evolve to service
neutrality. Some countries, especially in the EU, are de-licensing –
preferring automatic authorization for operators who do not require
spectrum or numbers. Interconnection arrangements will also have to
consider PSTN-VoIP or cableco-telco links, and as networks move to IP
technology, interconnect will have to move from switch-based to
Internet-style. Spectrum management will also have to consider the
possibility of multiple services and technologies in bands that
earlier would be specifically licensed. With the digitization of
wireless communications, the flexible uses of spectrum will allow the
“digital dividend,” the increase in potential capacity, and innovative
services like wireless triple play. Apart from increasing access, such
services may succeed where stand-alone offers might fail.
One of the critical issues is to
reconsider universal service policies. The scope of these programs has
begun to go beyond voice telephony, bringing more services into their
funding ambit. India redefined universal service to include mobile and
broadband in 2006, and Australia has a program to subsidize ISDN speed
data connections. The scope of collections has also widened, for
example in the US, where the FCC asked VoIP providers to pay into the
fund.
Even as these global trends form,
it is clear that each country will have to identify the regulatory
issues and determine responses that are most important locally. As new
technical and market possibilities intersect with traditional
regulatory frameworks, the underlying principle in addressing these
challenges should be to remove the regulatory asymmetries of the past.
With sectors merging, rules will need to be sector-neutral. Any
variation will lead to a distortion, hindering innovation and
investment, an outcome that policymakers and regulators should seek to
avoid.
Siddhartha Raja & Juan
Navas-Sabater
Global ICT Policy Division
The World Bank
|
Información adicional: xxxxxxx
|
|
