2.5 Convergence and Regulators

Platforms fulfilling different functions have traditionally been regulated differently for many reasons. For example, as illustrated in Module 6, telecommunications has been regulated in a different manner than broadcasting. In the context of convergence, where a single platform is capable of delivering all forms of electronic communications, should separate regulatory bodies merge or remain distinct institutions? Or should there be one regulator for platforms and another for content?

There remain many multi-utility regulators, which include telecommunications, although the number of “converged” regulators has grown over recent years,. In Malaysia, the issue of a converged regulator was addressed at an early date when the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 established the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) as the sole regulator of telecommunications, broadcasting, and computing industries. In 2008, the Korean government created the Korea Communications Commission (KCC) by consolidating the separate telecommunications regulator and broadcasting regulator, which were the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) and Korean Broadcasting Commission (KBC), respectively.  The KCC merged telecommunications, spectrum allocation and broadcasting, including content, under a single regulatory authority in order to adapt to the rise of converged technologies, particularly Internet Protocol Television (IPTV).  The introduction of IPTV in Korea had been delayed for several years due to disputes between the MIC and KBC over jurisdiction.  Within a few months of the KCC’s creation, however, the converged regulator finalized the rules enabling operators to provide IPTV.  By the end of 2009, Korea had over one million IPTV subscribers.[1]

Establishing converged regulators in the EU has been more challenging.  Although EU Member States are implementing a “future-proof” single regulatory framework for electronic communications, only four out of 27 Member States (as of 31 December 2009) have what could be regarded as “converged” regulatory bodies.[2]  These are Finland, Italy, Slovenia, and the United Kingdom.

It is not just the EU that lacks converged regulators since most OECD Members have not yet implemented laws to consolidate regulators. Only seven of the 30 OECD Members have single bodies dealing with all four regulatory forms of telecommunications; broadcasting carriage; broadcasting spectrum allocation; and content.  These countries are Australia, Finland, Iceland, Japan, Korea (Rep.), the United Kingdom and the United States.[3] For each of the EU Member States listed above, at least one of the four regulatory functions lies outside the “converged” regulator.   

Converged regulators – with responsibilities for media and content as well as ICT services – face a daunting challenge by taking on extensive, and often complicated, workloads.  However, in a converged environment, traditional telecommunications regulators may struggle to resolve certain issues, such as consolidation between media content and telecommunications service providers.[4] Further, the absence of a converged regulator allows for the possibility of unequal regulatory treatment of different platforms delivering overlapping content or unequal regulatory treatment of different content delivered over any platform. Here there is the issue of technology-neutral regulation, meaning that the regulatory treatment of a particular service, regarding authorization, spectrum, interconnection, universal service, and numbering, is the same irrespective of the technology used to deliver it. Convergence poses challenges to both the structure of regulatory bodies and the instruments they use.

ENDNOTES

[1] Telecoms Korea, IPTV Subscribers Top 1 Million in Korea (2009) at http://www.telecomskorea.com/market-7674.html.

[2] European Commission, European Broadcasting Regulators Strengthen Their Cross-Border Cooperation under the Television Without Frontiers Directive at http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/06/374&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en.

[3] OECD, Telecommunication Regulatory Institutional Structures and Responsibilities (2006) at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/56/11/35954786.pdf.

Related content

Module 6, Section 4, "Impact of Convergence"