Search results

Based on literature and an empirical case, the purpose of this paper is to present a framework for decision‐making in utilities where unbundling considerations are taking place. The paper analyses the implications of splitting long‐term network planning activity from the organization responsible for short‐term network operation activities.

The proposed framework includes an analysis of impacts of external forces, set‐up of common targets and performance models, and alignment of responsibilities in the new organization. The empirical results and validation of the proposed framework is performed by an electric utility, where legal unbundling of activities has taken place; the study includes expert interviews and theoretical analysis.

Colliding interests in the new business model can be avoided if economic and technical targets are mainly set by the regulator for both network development and operation activities.

The results are based on internal re‐organization; a complementary study on re‐organizing network business activities to an external service provider could give information about the generalizability of the findings.

Application of the proposed framework for decision‐making and lessons learned can support electric utilities when planning for unbundling and strategic target‐setting in the unbundled business model.

The study presents experiences of re‐organized network business activities in a pioneering market area with a long experience of outsourcing. The detailed analysis of internal re‐organization within one electric utility can facilitate further restructuring phases.

Shows that some national governments’ policy to promote specific market structures have either proved ineffective (France) or increased entry barriers, likely to raise industry cost (Spain). Argues high‐speed cable modems are the way forward for the future. Concludes, in order to achieve long‐term efficiency, the regulator should promote a mix of infrastructure and service competition to enable viability in the long term.

The US government is considering removing regulations on ILECs (incumbent local exchange carriers) with respect to local access services, through the implementation of legislation. These regulations imposed through the US 1996 Telecommunication Act, include local network unbundling and TELRIC pricing, and, in our view, set the correct economic incentives for efficient investment in the telecommunications industry, and industries using telecommunication services. Critics argue that unbundling requirements and TELRIC pricing are negatively affecting investment incentives of the ILECs. This paper uses empirical data to study the causes of varying degrees of DSL take‐up in Western Europe and the US. The analysis shows that, rather than disincentivising incumbent investment, local network unbundling actually provides a competitive stimulus for incumbents to achieve higher rates of take‐up for their own DSL services. Any departure from unbundling and TELRIC prices would protect ILECs against competition in downstream services, and dampen incentives for efficient service provision.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the costs and benefits of local loop unbundling with an eye toward determining whether developing countries should pursue this strategy despite the significant controversy it has generated in the USA.

The paper examines arguments for and against local loop unbundling and determines which claims make economic, legal and practical sense and which claims support stakeholders' other public policy objectives.

The paper identifies legitimate reasons for favoring and opposing local loop unbundling. However, the paper also finds false justifications, unsupported by economic and legal principles, that serve incumbents' quest for further deregulation and securing greater incentives for investment in next generation infrastructure, and market entrants' interest in exploiting margins without having to invest in infrastructure. The paper provides recommendations on how developing countries can implement local loop unbundling that balances public benefits against specific downside risks and costs borne by incumbents or market entrants.

This paper supports conditional implementation of local loop unbundling by developing countries that concludes at a future date and incorporates desirable incumbent deregulation and liberalization.

The author has received no financial sponsorship from one or more of the stakeholders to prepare this paper. This paper offers an unbiased assessment of the benefits and burdens imposed by local loop unbundling.

Unbundling has been the widely adopted regulatory solution to introducing competition in the local loop. But what is the aim of unbundling? Is it an end in itself, or a means to an end? Experience from around the world suggests there is as yet no clear cut evidence one way or the other that unbundling encourages facilities competition, or that it encourages investment in broadband networks in particular. This article considers the case for unbundling the local loop in Hong Kong and examines the experience in countries such as the EU, the UK, USA, Canada, South Korea and Japan.

Bundled mode of public–private partnership (PPP) procurement has been a widely advocated governance structure of infrastructure delivery. The purpose of this paper is to identify the various aspects of how this bundling phenomenon has to be played out in practice and examines the implications of such decisions.

A longitudinal case study with an Indian municipal solid waste (MSW) PPP project provides the necessary evidence on the identification of constructs which are deemed important in the decision making of bundling in PPP MSW projects. Transaction cost economics theory, agency theory and auction theory informed the development of theoretical constructs. The longitudinal case study used interviews, observations and documents analysis.

This study has highlighted the complexity inherent in bundling decision, arising out of the relatively scanty rationale by which stakeholders first developed. Not only they are very different from the practice, but also many assumptions are proved otherwise. Poor sectoral developments, hindrances arguably caused to innovation, increase in transaction cost and a decrease in the competition along with ex post characteristics such as unfavourable transaction attributes made bundling a too early proposition to Guwahati MSW project. This study suggests that strong liability of the bundling phenomenon was the above the rationale of typical PPP bundling benefits envisaged in the extant literature. It also shows that poor practice and decision making by immature clients would lead to project failure.

A cognitive map emerged from the study on the failure of Guwahati project. An empirical generalisation can be attempted using multiple contrasting case studies to make the theory more acceptable.

The case illustrated why naïve clients should not try PPPs in a bundled model. Accordingly, the developed framework would help the governments to create the right projects catalysing the bundling benefits and harness the full potential of private sector participation in future PPP projects.

The current study would be novel in advancing the theory of bundling in PPP projects. This would be of interest to academia and to industrial practice and policy.

This paper aims to explain how airlines in India and customers can both benefit by the unbundling of services.

The paper explores how a recent regulatory change allowing unbundled services will affect the airline industry in India. Using illustrations, it highlights the benefits to the airlines and to the customers. It recommends the strategies that airlines can follow.

Airlines in India can now offer unbundled services. However, regulatory authorities need to allow greater flexibility to airlines. Given more flexibility, airlines can design offerings that will improve their profitability while simultaneously benefiting customers.

The government needs to go beyond the current regulatory changes. Providing increased flexibility will benefit both airlines and customers. Airlines would need to understand customers more intimately, experiment in the market, lobby for flexibility and develop strategic agility to benefit from the changed regulations on unbundled services.

It concedes that airlines can now design unbundled services such that only those customers who value a service get charged for the service. Those customers who do not need a service can get away by paying a lower fare. The government has taken the first steps in the right direction. Once it provides greater flexibility, the airlines in India can benefit significantly.

The paper considers the unique context of the airline industry in India where recent regulatory changes are likely to make the industry more dynamic and improve profitability of airlines. It provides insights in to the challenges faced under the current system and recommends strategies for the government and companies to follow.

Asks whether the FCC is using the wrong cost model to try to balance incumbents of the US Telecommunications Act with new operators, to make things equal for all. Concludes that regulators around the world learn from the US’s experience in trying to avoid the use of cost proxy models and the consequences of their actions.

The purpose of this article is to introduce a theoretical framework and approach for studying the evaluation and decision-making practices through which academic librarians attempt to reduce the cost of electronic journal subscriptions – an organizational practice known as the unbundling of big deal journal packages.

The article presents a literature-based conceptual analysis of several fields to delineate the elements of the practice of unbundling of big deal journal packages. Beyond analysing the prior literature, the discussion is supported by empirical findings from a pilot study on the topic conducted by two of the article's authors.

The main finding of the article is that the unbundling of big deal packages is a case of what sociologist refers to as decision-making in a social context. By reviewing previous studies, the article identifies the social and material elements constitutive of this practice. This, in turn, allows to develop questions and concepts for future research on the topic and to position it as an area of inquiry within the field of information behaviour/practices.

The article is the first attempt to conceptualize the unbundling of big deal journal packages by highlighting its phenomenological status as a type of information practice. In addition, the article proposes a research approach for studying this type of information practice by drawing on insights from the information behaviour/practice literature and enriching them through practice theory contributions in organizational studies and sociology.

In recent years, a growing number of libraries have canceled or unbundled their “Big Deal” journal subscriptions – those subscriptions that include a full package of digital journal titles for one discounted cost. This started as an affordability problem but has slowly morphed into a challenge from libraries demanding a new pricing structure that accommodates and spurs the growing open access movement.

The change has caused a variety of challenges for technical services units including the increased need for user data, increasingly complicated workflows as they manage partial subscriptions, new interactions with consortia, and ongoing campus conversations. Whether the library is seeking to simply unbundle due to budget constraints, or push for new models such as “read and publish”, there is a tremendous impact on the work of technical services units.

This chapter will explore the rationale and growth of the Big Deal, how it is breaking, four case studies on breaking Big Deals, a brief discussion of new transformative agreements, new challenges for consortia, and implications for technical services units moving forward.