Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorOviedo, Juan 
dc.creatorHidalgo Rodríguez, Julián Felipe 
dc.date.accessioned2016-07-18T18:32:26Z
dc.date.available2016-07-18T18:32:26Z
dc.date.created2016-03-16
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.urihttp://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/12233
dc.descriptionA partir de la dinámica evolutiva de la economía de las Tecnologías de la Información y las Comunicaciones y el establecimiento de estándares mínimos de velocidad en distintos contextos regulatorios a nivel mundial, en particular en Colombia, en el presente artículo se presentan diversas aproximaciones empíricas para evaluar los efectos reales que conlleva el establecimiento de definiciones de servicios de banda ancha en el mercado de Internet fijo. Con base en los datos disponibles para Colombia sobre los planes de servicios de Internet fijo ofrecidos durante el periodo 2006-2012, se estima para los segmentos residencial y corporativo el proceso de difusión logístico modificado y el modelo de interacción estratégica para identificar los impactos generados sobre la masificación del servicio a nivel municipal y sobre las decisiones estratégicas que adoptan los operadores, respectivamente. Respecto a los resultados, se encuentra, por una parte, que las dos medidas regulatorias establecidas en Colombia en 2008 y 2010 presentan efectos significativos y positivos sobre el desplazamiento y el crecimiento de los procesos de difusión a nivel municipal. Por otra parte, se observa sustituibilidad estratégica en las decisiones de oferta de velocidad de descarga por parte de los operadores corporativos mientras que, a partir del análisis de distanciamiento de la velocidad ofrecida respecto al estándar mínimo de banda ancha, se demuestra que los proveedores de servicios residenciales tienden a agrupar sus decisiones de velocidad alrededor de los niveles establecidos por regulación.
dc.description.abstractThis paper develops various empirical approaches to evaluate the effects of the setting of download-speed standards on the always-on Internet services market in Colombia. Using information about all the offers available to be chosen by potential Internet subscribers in every municipality of Colombia for the period 2006-2012, this study estimates, discriminating by segment of demand, the modified logistic diffusion model and the strategic interaction model so as to identify the impact of the setting of minimum quality standards on the Internet services market expansion and on providers’ strategic decisions. The findings show, on one hand, that the regulatory decision implemented in Colombia both in 2008 and 2010 shifts the diffusion function forwards and accelerates the growth of the diffusion process at the municipality-level. On the other hand, as to the quality offer decision the effects of the standards depend on the segment under analysis. While there is strategic substitution on quality offer decisions for business service providers, residential providers tend to cluster their quality decisions around the minimum quality standards.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isospa
dc.sourceinstname:Universidad del Rosario
dc.sourcereponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR
dc.subjectDiferenciación de producto
dc.subjectRegulación económica
dc.subjectServicios de la información e Internet
dc.subject.ddcEconomía 
dc.subject.lembEconomía
dc.subject.lembServicios públicos
dc.subject.lembInternet::Aspectos Económicos
dc.subject.lembSistemas de comunicación de banda ancha::Aspectos Económicos
dc.titleEl efecto de la definición regulatoria de banda ancha sobre la difusión y la competencia del mercado de servicios de Internet fijo en Colombia
dc.typemasterThesis
dc.publisherUniversidad del Rosario
dc.creator.degreeMagíster en Economía
dc.publisher.programMaestría en Economía
dc.publisher.departmentFacultad de Economía
dc.subject.keywordProduct differentiation
dc.subject.keywordRegulation economics
dc.subject.keywordInternet services.
dc.rights.accesRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.type.spaTesis de maestría
dc.rights.accesoAbierto (Texto completo)
dc.type.hasVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
dc.source.bibliographicCitationAni, W; Ugwunta, D; Eneje B y Okwo M. 2014. How telecommunication development aids economic growth: evidence from ITU ICT development index (IDI) top ve countries for African region. International Journal of Business, Economics and Management, 1(2), 16-28.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBaltzer, K. 2012. Standards vs. labels with imperfect competition and asymmetric information. Economic Letters, 114(1), 61-63.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBass, F. 1969. A new product growth model for consumer durables. Management Science, 15(5), 215-227.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBernal, R y Peña, X. 2011. Guí a pr áctica para la evaluaci ón de impacto. Ediciones Uniandes.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBockstael, N. 1984. The Welfare Implications of Minimum Quality Standards. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66(4), 466-471.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBoom, A. 1995. Asymmetric International Minimum Quality Standards and Vertical Di erentiation. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 43(1), 101-119.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBouckaert, J; Dijk, T y Verboven F. 2010. Access regulation, competition and broadband penetration: An international study. Telecommunications Policy, 34(11), 661-671.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBranca, A y Catalao-Lopes, M. 2011. Strategic interaction and quality choice. Total Quality Management, 22(3), 265-273.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBresnahan, T y Trajtenberg, M. 1995. General purpose technologies engines of growth? Journal of Econometrics, 65(1), 83-108.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBrueckner, J & Luo, D. 2014. Measuring strategic rm interaction in product-quality choices: The case of airline ight frequency. Economics of Transportation, 3(1), 102-115.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBrueckner, J. 1998. Testing for strategic interaction among local governments: The case of growth controls. Journal of urban economics, 44(3), 438-467.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationBrueckner, J. 2003. Strategic interaction among governments: An overview of empirical studies. International Regional Science Review, 26, 175-188.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCardona, M; Kretschemer, T y Strobel T. 2013. ICT and productivity; conclusions from the empirical literature. Information Economics and Policy, 25(3), 109-125.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCase, A; Rosen, H y Hines J. 1993. Budget spillovers and scal policy interdependence: Evidence from the states. Journal of Public Economics, 52(3), 285-307.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCava-Ferreruela, I y Alabau-Mu~noz, A. 2006. Broadband policy assessment: A cross-national empirical analysis. Telecommunications Policy, 30(8-9), 445-463.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCellini, R y Lamantia, F. 2015. Quality competition in markets with regulated prices and minimum quality standards. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 25(2), 345-370.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationChambers, R y Weiss, M. 1992. Revisiting minimum-quality standards. Economic Letters, 40(2), 197-201.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationChu, W; Feng-Shang, W; Kao K y Yen D. 2009. Di usion of mobile telephony: an empirical study in Taiwan. Telecommunications Policy, 33(9), 506-520.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCockburn, I y Henderson, R. 1994. Racing to invest? The dynamics of competition in ethical drug discovery. Journal of Economic Management Strategies, 3(3), 481-519.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCorry, D; Valero, A y Reenen J. 2011. UK Economic Performance since 1997: Growth, Productivity and Jobs. Centre for Economic Performance special papers, CEPSP24.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCotterill, R y Putsis, W. 2000. Market share and price setting behavior for private labels and national brands. Review of Industrial Organization, 17(1), 17-39.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCrampes, C y Hollander, A. 1995. Duopoly and Quality Standards. European Economic Review, 39(1), 71-82.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCRC. 2010. Resoluci ón 2352 de 2010. Tech. rept. Comisi ón de Regulacióon de Comunicaciones.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCRC. 2013 (Diciembre). Agenda Regulatoria 2014 - Respuesta a Comentarios. Tech. rept. Comisi ón de Regulación de Comunicaciones.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCRT. 2007. Resoluci on CRT 1740 de 2007. Tech. rept. Comisión de Regulación de Telecomunicaciones.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationCRTC. 2011. Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2011-291. Tech. rept. Canadian Radiotelevision and telecommunications Commission.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDauvin, M y Grzybowski, L. 2014. Estimating broadband di usion in the EU using NUTS 1 regional data. Telecommunications Policy, 38(1), 96-104.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDavid, P y Wright, G. 1999. General Purpose Technologies and Surges in Productivity: Histo- rical Re ections on the Future of the ICT Revolution. Discussion Papers in Economic and Social History. University of Oxford. Number 31.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDavid, P. 1990. The dynamics and the computer: an historical perspective on the modern productivity paradox. American Economic Review, 80(2), 355-361.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDavidson, R y Mackinnon, J. 1981. Several tests for model speci cation in the presence of alternative hypotheses. Econometrica, 49(3), 781-793.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDekimpe, M; Parker, P y Sarvary M. 1998. Staged estimation of international di usion models: an application to global cellular telephone adoption. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 57(1-2), 105-132.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDietz, R. 2002. The estimation of neighborhood e ects in the social sciences: An interdisciplinary approach. Journal of Social Science Research, 31(4), 539-575.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDistaso, W; Lupi, P y Maneti F. 2006. Distaso, W; Lupi, P y Maneti, F. Informaction Economics and Policy, 18(1), 87-106.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationDujardin, C; Peeters, D y Thomas I. 2009. Neighborhood e ects and endogeneity issues. Discussion paper no. 56, CORE.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationEcchia, G y Lambertini, L. 1997. Minimum Quakity Standards and Collusion. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 45(1), 101-113.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationFCC. 2014. Tenth broadband progress notice of inquiry. Tech. rept. Federal Communications Commission.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationFranses, P. 1994. A method to select between Gompertz and logistic trend curves. Technolo- gical forecasting and social change, 46(1), 45-49.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationFTTHCouncil. 2013. White Paper: Broadband Access Technologies. Tech. rept. European Commission.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGamboa, L y Otero, J. 2009. An estimation of the pattern of di usion of mobile phones: The case of Colombia. Telecommunications Policy, 33(10-11), 611-620.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGarcia-Murillo, M. 2005. International broadband deployment: The impact of unbundling. Communications and Strategies, 57, 83-108.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGarella, P y Petrakis, E. 2008. Minimum quality standards and consumers information. Economic Theory, 36(2), 283-302.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGarella, P. 2006. \Innocuous" minimum quality standards. Economic Letters, 92(3), 368-374.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGompertz, B. 1825. On the nature of the function expressive of the law of human mortality, and on a new mode of determining the value of life contingencies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 115(1825), 513-583.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGrabowski, H y Baxter, N. 1973. Rivalry in industrial research and development. Journal of Industrial Economics, 21(3), 209-235.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGruber, H y Koutrompis, P. 2013. Competition enhancing regulation and di usion of innovation: the case of broadband networks. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 43(2), 168-195.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationGulati, G y Yates, D. 2012. Di erent paths to universal Access: The impact of policy and regulation on broadband di usion in the developed and developing worlds. Telecommunications Policy, 36(9), 749-761.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHakfoort, J y Weigand, J. 2003. Strategic interaction in the dutch market for consumer magazines. De economist, 151(2), 205-224.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHargittai, E. 1999. Weaving the Western web: explaining di erences in Internet connectivity among OECD countries. Telecommunications Policy, 23(10-11), 701-718.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHaucap, J; Heimesho , U y Lange M. 2015. The impact of tari diversity on broadband di usion - An empirical analysis. Telecommunications Policy. In Press.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHenrickson, K. 2012. Spatial competition and strategic rm relocation. Economic Inquiry, 50(2), 364-379.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationHidalgo, J y Oviedo, J. 2014. The impact of broadband quality standards on Internet services market structure in Colombia. Documentos de trabajo. Universidad del Rosario, 169, 36.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationInternational, Cullen. 2014 (November). Universal service obligation - Scope.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationIrawan, T. 2014. ICT and economic development; comparing ASEAN member states. Inter- national Economics and Economic Policy, 11(1), 97-114.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationITU. 2014. The state of broadband 2014: Broadband for all. Tech. rept. International Telecommunication Union.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKalnins, A. 2003. Hamburguer pprice and spatial econometrics. Journal of Economics Ma- nagment Strategies, 12(4), 591-616.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKiiski, S y Pohjola, M. 2002. Cross-country di usion of the Internet. Informaction Economics and Policy, 14(2), 297-310.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKim, J; Bauer, J y Wildman S. 2003. Broadband uptake in OECD countries: Policy lessons from comparative statistical analysis. In: Art culo presentado en la Conferencia 31 de investigaci ón en pol í tica de comunicaciones, informaci ón e Internet.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationKuhn, M. 2007. Minimum quality standards and market dominance in vertically di erentiated duopoly. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25(2), 275-290.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLazzarini, S; Artes, R; Caetano M; Moura M; Goldberg M y Silva C. 2007. Does it pay to anticipate competitor reactions? Ibmec Working Paper 01/2007.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLee, S y Brown, J. 2008. Examining broadband adoption factors: An empirical analysis between countries. The Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunication, Information and Media, 10(1), 25-39.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLee, S y Lee, S. 2010. An empirical study of broadband di usion and bandwidth capacity in OECD countries. Communications y Convergence Review, 2(1), 36-49.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLeland, H. 1979. Quacks, Lemons, and Licensing: A Theory of Minimum Quality Standards. Journal of Political Economy, 87(6), 1328-1346.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationLin, M y Wu, F. 2013. Identifying the determinants of broadband adoption by di usion stage in OECD countries. Telecommunications Policy, 37(4-5), 241-251.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationManski, C. 1993. Identi cation of endogenous social e ects: The re ection problem. Review of Economics Studies, 60(3), 531-542.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMaxwell, J. 1998. Minimum quality standards as a barrier to innovation. Economic Letters, 58(3), 355-360.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMundial, Banco. 2012. Broadband Strategies Handbook. Banco Mundial
dc.source.bibliographicCitationMussa, M y Rosen, S. 1978. Monopoly and Product Quality. Journal of Economic Theory, 18(2), 301-317.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationNguimkeu, P. 2014. A simple selection test between the Gompertz and Logistic growth models. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 88, 98-105.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationNorris, P. 2000. The Global Divide: Information poverty and Internet access worldwide. In: of Economics, School, & Science, Political (eds), Paper for the Annual Meeting of the Political Studies Association.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationOCDE. 2011 (June). The Future of the Internet Economy. A statistical pro le. Tech. rept. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationOCDE. 2012. Universal Service Policies in the Context of National Broadband Plans. DS- TI/ICCP/CISP(2011)10/FINAL.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationOCDE. 2014. OECD Review of Telecommunication Policy and Regulation in Colombia. Tech. rept. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationOCDE. 2015. Driving Performance at Colombia's Communications Regulator. Tech. rept. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationParker, D y Kirkpatrick, C. 2012. Measuring Regulatory Performance. The economic impact of regulatory policy: A literature review of quantitative evidence. Tech. rept. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationPearl, R y Reed, L. 1920. On the rate of growth of the population of the United States since 1790 and its mathematical representation. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 6(6), 275-288.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationPinkse, J; Slade, M y Brett C. 2002. Spatial price competition: a semiparametric approach. Econometrica, 70(3), 1111-1153.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationQiang, C. 2009. Telecommunications and Economic Growth. Unpublished paper. World Bank, Washington, D.C.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationReimer, J. 2004. Market conduct in the U.S ready to eat cereal industry. Journal of Agricul- tural and Food Industrial Organization, 2(1), 1-27.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationRevelli, F. 2005. On spatial public nance empirics. International Tax and Public Finance, 12(4), 475-492.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationRobertson, A; Soopramanien, D y Fildes R. 2007. Segmental new-product di usion of residential broadband services. Telecommunications Policy, 31(5), 265-275.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationRonnen, U. 1991. Minimum Quality Standards, Fixed Costs, and Competition. The RAND Journal of Economics, 22(4), 490-504.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationScarpa, C. 1998. Minimum quality standards with more than two rms. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 16(5), 665-676.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationShapiro, C. 1983. Premiums for High Quality Products as Returns to Reputations. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 98(4), 659-680.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationSheshinski, E. 1976. Price Quality and Quantity Regulation in Monopoly Situation. Econo- mica, 43(170), 127-137.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationShrapnel, BIS. 2001. Telecommunication Infrastructures in Australia 2001. Tech. rept. Australian Competition and Consumer Commision.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationSpence, M. 1975. Monopoly, Quality and Regulation. Bell Journal of Economics, 6(2), 417-429.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationStaiger, D y Stock, J. 1997. Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. Econo- metrica, 65(3), 557-586.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationTurk, T y Trkman, P. 2012. Bass model estimates for broadband di usion in European countries. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 79(1), 85-96.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationVerboven, F y Gruber, H. 2001a. The di usion of Mobile Telecommunications Services in the European Union. European Economic Review, 45, 577-588.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationVerboven, F y Gruber, H. 2001b. The evolution of markets under entry and standards regulation: the case of global mobile telecommunications. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19(7), 1189-1212.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationVickner, S y Davies, S. 1999. Estimating market power and princing conduct in a product Di erentiated oligopoly: The case of the domestic spaghetti sauce industry. Journal of Agricultural & Applied Economics, 31, 1-13.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationWooldridge, J. 2013. Introductory Econometrics: A modern Approach. 5th edition edn. South- Western. CenGAGE Learning.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationYamakawa, P; Rees, G; Salas J y Alva N. 2013. The di usion of mobile telephones: an empirical analysis for Peru. Telecommunications Policy, 37(6-7), 594-606.
dc.source.bibliographicCitationYu, Y; Zhang, L; Li F y Zheng X. 2013. Strategic interaction and the determinants of public health expenditures in China: A spatial panel perspective. The Annals of Regional Science, 50(1), 203-221.
dc.rights.ccAtribución 2.5 Colombia
dc.rights.licenciaEL AUTOR, manifiesta que la obra objeto de la presente autorización es original y la realizó sin violar o usurpar derechos de autor de terceros, por lo tanto la obra es de exclusiva autoría y tiene la titularidad sobre la misma. PARGRAFO: En caso de presentarse cualquier reclamación o acción por parte de un tercero en cuanto a los derechos de autor sobre la obra en cuestión, EL AUTOR, asumirá toda la responsabilidad, y saldrá en defensa de los derechos aquí autorizados; para todos los efectos la universidad actúa como un tercero de buena fe. EL AUTOR, autoriza a LA UNIVERSIDAD DEL ROSARIO, para que en los términos establecidos en la Ley 23 de 1982, Ley 44 de 1993, Decisión andina 351 de 1993, Decreto 460 de 1995 y demás normas generales sobre la materia, utilice y use la obra objeto de la presente autorización. -------------------------------------- POLITICA DE TRATAMIENTO DE DATOS PERSONALES. Declaro que autorizo previa y de forma informada el tratamiento de mis datos personales por parte de LA UNIVERSIDAD DEL ROSARIO para fines académicos y en aplicación de convenios con terceros o servicios conexos con actividades propias de la academia, con estricto cumplimiento de los principios de ley. Para el correcto ejercicio de mi derecho de habeas data cuento con la cuenta de correo habeasdata@urosario.edu.co, donde previa identificación podré solicitar la consulta, corrección y supresión de mis datos.


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record