Last updated: December 3, 2009 - 11:38pm
Speaking at a Phoenix Center event, Federal Communications Commission member Meredith Attwell Baker offered her take on how US spectrum allocation policy should change. She said, "The United States needs a comprehensive approach that expands upon proven flexible, market-oriented policies that facilitate spectrum access, wireless innovation and competition. Our policy should achieve two overarching objectives: first, make the best use of the spectrum that is available today and, second, get as much additional spectrum into the market as possible to meet the current and future demands of wireless consumers." The first step is a comprehensive inventory of how government and industry use spectrum today. Then the Commission must develop a comprehensive and strategic spectrum management framework. She said her approach is to "first identify the objective, then look to the statute and to Congress, consider the context, and weigh the costs and benefits." Commissioner Baker called for a comprehensive look at our secondary market rules. Initially developed to encourage deployments in unserved and underserved areas, she explained, the secondary market rules have been an evolving tool for providers that may not be attracting the level of investment initially envisioned. The FCC needs to take another look. It needs to ask what the Commission can do to stimulate secondary market transactions that enhance the efficient use of existing spectrum allocations. She asked: Could they be modified to provide incentives that would encourage additional deployments? Within this discussion, what is the potential role of spectrum leasing? Is interference trading a concept that could help improve spectrum policy? Are there policies that would encourage dynamic spectrum access and cognitive radio technologies and other innovative tools yet to be developed? She suggested an update of existing spectrum allocations and service rules. Decades-old service-specific and technology-specific allocations have splintered our spectrum, delayed implementation of tremendous innovation and arguably resulted in inefficiencies. Resolving those inefficiencies could be one of the keys to unlocking additional value in our current spectrum allocations.
Links to Sources
National Broadband Plan
Learn more about:
Related Events
The Phoenix Center's 2009 Annual U.S. Telecoms Symposium
(Thu, 12/03/2009)
Related Legislation
Related Topics
Special Topics
Similar links
- Mobile Broadband: A 21st Century Plan for U.S. Competitiveness, Innovation and Job Creation
- A Pragmatic, Sustainable Federal Spectrum Policy
- Broadband plan stirs praise, then criticism at the FCC
- FCC Wants 120 MHz Back From TV (updated)
- Spectrum: Public trust or cash cow?
- Why the FCC's Plan to Provide Enough Mobile Spectrum Falls Short
- Is there new life for the public safety D block of spectrum?
- Unleashing the Digital Television Band: A Proposal for an Overlay Auction
- Genachowski should balance his spectrum policy team with a broadcaster
- NAB: Broadcasters Must Be Part of Broadband Ecosystem
- The Rabbit-Ear Wars
- FCC Seeks Data on Uses of Spectrum
- NAB Says Broadband Does Not Have To Be At Expense of Broadcasting
- Broadcasters Cool To Cash-For-Spectrum
- Sinclair Counters Cash-For-Spectrum Plan
