Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact Assessment of CR Policy and Regulation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Cognitive Radio Policy and Regulation

Part of the book series: Signals and Communication Technology ((SCT))

Abstract

This chapter looks at emerging issues related to carrying out Impact assessment (IA) for identified combinations of techno-economic circumstances and conditions of CR deployment. The aim of such analysis would be to aid the policy discussion and development, by recognising the most attractive and beneficial combinations of regulatory provisions to form the basis for the ultimate CR regulatory framework. Section 5.1 provides an overview of IA and offers perspective on existing IA guidelines in the case of CR policy. Section 5.2 discusses the alignment of regulation and technology, applying an actor-centric approach. It highlights that successful introduction of CR will require alignment between the characteristics of CR and the regulatory regime under which CR will operate. Section 5.3 discusses role of spectrum regulation and argues that more relaxed spectrum regulations would trigger generation of well suited and flexible services, as they could reduce market entry barriers and allow more service providers to access the spectrum resources. Then, Sect. 5.4 describes a study on IA of Dynamic Spectrum Access (DSA). The introduction of DSA has been challenged by several technical, economic and regulatory factors. The authors develop a framework that combines system dynamics modelling (top-down approach) and Bayesian network data analysis (bottom-up approach) for analysing current mobile markets and their future evolutions possibilities. This is followed by Sect. 5.5 that looks at the matter of type conformity assessment for future CR/SDR apparatus, which would be an important consideration for placing equipment on the market. Then Sect. 5.6 analyses reasons of rather sluggish pace of CR innovation, with the aim of suggesting a range of suitable policies to boost further and more fertile developments of CR technology. The chapter is concluded by Sect. 5.7 that offers spectrum policy analysis from both positive and normative perspectives. It proposes an “agreement framework”, which could be used as reference template against which future policy analysis could be carried out in similar cases, with regard to emerging CR applications and CR technology in general.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This subsection also reflects on [12, 13].

  2. 2.

    Ostrom made this observation in the investigation of common pool resources. The problems associated to infrastructures are quite similar [16]. The latter source argues that infrastructures (including energy, communication, transport, and postal services) can be perceived as common pool resources providing essential services to society.

  3. 3.

    HHI stands for Herfindahl—Hirschman Index.

  4. 4.

    The utilized Bayesian network was implemented with the help of BayesiaLab 5.1 software, which includes machine learning algorithm functionality.

  5. 5.

    Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States.

  6. 6.

    Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea (South), Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States.

  7. 7.

    The European Telecommunication Conformity Assessment and Market Surveillance Committee (TCAM) has for long recognised that CR/SDR will have an impact on market access and conformance regulation. It launched initiatives analysing this possible impact and contemplates adapting said regulation to the new realities which CR/SDR could bring about.

  8. 8.

    EU Member States, EEA EFTA countries (Island, Norway and Lichtenstein), and Switzerland (the transposition of R&TTE in this country is expressly foreseen in a mutual reconnaissance agreement with the EU).

  9. 9.

    Directive 1999/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity (“R&TTE Directive”).

  10. 10.

    See the rulings of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Joined Cases C-388/00 and C-429/00 Radiosistemi [2002] ECR I-5845, Case C-14/02 ATRAL [2003] ECR I-4431, and Case C-132/08 Lidl Magyarország Kereskedelmi [2009] ECR I-3841.

  11. 11.

    Accordingly, the approach followed in the United States—whose paradigms differ markedly from those of the European approach—will not be addressed here. For an overview, see Annex 2 to [17].

  12. 12.

    Considerings (12) and (32) of the R&TTE Directive.

  13. 13.

    Article 8(1) of the R&TTE Directive.

  14. 14.

    See Sect. 9. “Possibility to place products on the market in the Community, which cannot be used in the Community” of “Interpretation of the Directive 1999/5/EC” under http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/documents/interpretation_en.htm [Accessed 31 October 2013].

  15. 15.

    Article 6(3) of the R&TTE Directive.

  16. 16.

    Formally the proposed directive should repeal the R&TTE directive (see draft Article 50) but in effect it will be a revision of the latter as far as radiocommunication equipments are concerned.

  17. 17.

    For further particulars readers are referred to European Commission, Guide to the R&TTE Directive 1999/5/EC, available under http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/files/guide2009-04-20_en.pdf [Accessed 31 October 2013].

  18. 18.

    Considering (27) of the R&TTE Directive: “whereas compliance with such harmonised standards gives rise to a presumption of conformity to the essential requirements; whereas other means of demonstrating conformity to the essential requirements are permitted”.

  19. 19.

    Respectively Articles 3(1)(a), 3(1)(b), and 3(2) of the R&TTE Directive.

  20. 20.

    Article 3(3) of the R&TTE Directive.

  21. 21.

    See relevant Commission decisions under http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/rtte/documents/legislation/decisions/ [Accessed 31 October 2013].

  22. 22.

    Article 10(1) of the R&TTE Directive.

  23. 23.

    Article 12 of the R&TTE Directive.

  24. 24.

    Article 6(4) of the R&TTE Directive.

  25. 25.

    Article 6(3) of the R&TTE Directive.

  26. 26.

    Article 12 of the R&TTE Directive.

  27. 27.

    Article 5(1) of the R&TTE Directive.

  28. 28.

    Article 2(h) of the R&TTE Directive.

  29. 29.

    In other words, SDR technology is a precursor and an enabler of CR technology.

  30. 30.

    ETSI uses the term Reconfigurable Radio Systems (RRS): Such systems exploit the capabilities of reconfigurable radio and networks and self-adaptation to a dynamically changing environment (ETSI TR 102 802 Reconfigurable Radio Systems (RRS); Cognitive Radio System Concept).

  31. 31.

    First cases were reported by market surveillance authorities where wrong or old firmware installed by the supplier on request of customers or directly by the end user appeared to disable the Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS) mechanism of Wireless Access Systems (WAS) operating in the 5 GHz range. This requirement flows from the necessity to prevent undue interference to meteorological radars by WAS [66].

  32. 32.

    As seen previously, difficulties may also occur when several versions of firmware exist, some of which causing the equipment to contravene with an essential requirement.

  33. 33.

    See [33], drafts of Article 3(3)(g) and considering (17): “The user, the radio equipment or a third party should only be able to load software into the radio equipment where this does not compromise the subsequent compliance of the radio equipment with the applicable essential requirements.”.

  34. 34.

    Although manufacturers always have the choice of involving a notified body, they may self-certify against the relevant harmonised standards that references complete test suites and make an EU Declaration of Conformity: harmonised standards give a presumption of conformity with the R&TTE Directive for the equipment to be placed on the market in the EU.

  35. 35.

    For example harmonised standards dealing with spectrum access of one type of proto-CR/SDR should include specifications for the exchange of information between a devices and a database, ensuring that the devices will be connected with the relevant database, on the geo-location systems, on the need for the devices to obtain the authorisation to emit from the database.

  36. 36.

    Though it is admitted that Harmonized Standards (HS) for Cognitive Radio are being developed by ETSI. For an overview of the ETSI Technical Committees and their responsibilities relevant to CR/SDR.

  37. 37.

    Actually, the master–slave model with geolocation database as described in the mandate is at best a rudimentary type of CR/SDR system with a network-centric “intelligence”: it rather is a network with a basic automated frequency assignment method.

  38. 38.

    Respectively Articles 12 and 6(3) of the R&TTE Directive.

  39. 39.

    See [33], drafts of Article 4 and considering (19).

  40. 40.

    ETSI has produced Guides to the application of harmonized standards to multi-radio and combined radio and non-radio equipment: ETSI TR 102 070-1 Electromagnetic Compatibility and ETSI TR 102 070-2 Effective use of the radio frequency spectrum.

  41. 41.

    The lurking complexity can be visualised by means of a very few examples: (a) A user deliberately downloads reconfiguration software in defiance of the use intended by the software programmers and/or the hardware manufacturers; (b) Several third party software applications run in parallel on a hardware platform, creating thus a multitude of combinations which could cause non-compliant behaviour of the radiocommunication equipment; (c) In case of concomitance of several software versions, which software version (the latest?) is used for compliance assessment; (4) Availability of older firmware abiding by specifications of outdated versions of a harmonised standard but no longer compliant with the essential requirements.

  42. 42.

    According to the R&TTE Directive, manufacturers have the sole and full responsibility (sometimes taken over by the importer) of ensuring through testing that their products are compliant to the applicable directives. The liability of the manufacturer (or the importer) hinges on the CE mark and on the declaration of conformity: the responsibility for an equipment is assigned to the entity affixing the CE mark—who’s also the “declarer”.

  43. 43.

    Open-source software (OSS) is computer software that (i) is available in source code form and where (ii) the provision of the source code occurs under a “public” software license. This means there is a freedom to run the program, for any purpose and a freedom to study how the program works, modify it, and release the improvements to the public.

  44. 44.

    This visionary expression is credited to Mr. Reiner Liebler of German regulatory agency for posts and telecommunications (RegTP, later BNetzA), at the time of his leadership of the CEPT’s Working Group Frequency Management, which he chaired between 1998 and 2003.

  45. 45.

    TFTS was allocated frequency bands 1670–1675 MHz/1800–1805 MHz by CEPT in 1997 (cf. ERC/DEC(97)08) and envisaged to provide voice communication to passengers on planes flying over the European continent. A great effort was put into establishing the system: from allocating necessary frequency bands to carrying out a meticulous planning of terrestrial base stations and their frequency assignments to provide suitable pan-European coverage for air traffic. However after brief period of limited deployment the system was deemed a fiasco and rolled down, the allocation of frequency bands was cancelled in 2003 (cf. ECC/DEC(03)03).

  46. 46.

    The Meteor Scatter Application system was a land mobile system working in the range 30–50 MHz promoted by industry in 1990s with the aim of providing low bit-rate pan-European coverage for truck fleet management and similar applications, by using the phenomenon of (very weak) reflection of radio waves from ionised gas trails of microscopic meteorites that constantly bombard the Earth’s atmosphere. The ultimate regulatory recommendation allowing the use of such systems was taken in CEPT in year 2000 (cf. ERC/REC(00)04), however practical implementation of such systems never took off.

  47. 47.

    That is, Licensed Shared Access, see Sect. 2.6.

  48. 48.

    LTE represents a paradigmatic shift to an “all-IP” solution compared against the circuit-switched paradigm of previous 2G/3G network designs. Therefore it makes sense for operators to combine introduction of LTE with converting the rest of their network core to a new IP-based platform.

References

  1. Torriti, J., Löfstedt, R.: The first five years of the EU impact assessment system: a risk economics perspective on gaps between rationale and practice. J. Risk Res. 15(2), 169–186 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Torriti, J.: Impact assessment in the EU: a tool for better regulation, less regulation or less bad regulation? J. Risk Res. 10(2), 239–276 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jacob, K., Hertin, J., Hjerp, P., et al.: Improving the practice of impact assessment, project no. 028889, Evaluating Integrated Impact Assessments (EVIA), Mimeo (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Renda, A.: Impact Assessment in the EU: The State of the Art and the Art of the State. Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. EC-European Commission: Impact Assessment Guidelines, Sec (2009) 92. EC, Brussels (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  6. ECC–Electronic Communications Committee: Guidelines for the implementation of impact assessment in relation to spectrum matters. Report 125, Liége, ECC (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mitola, J., Maguire, G.Q.: Cognitive radio: making software radios more personal. IEEE Pers. Commun. Mag. 6(4), 13–18 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Haykin, S.: Cognitive radio: brain-empowered wireless communications. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 23(2), 201–220 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. RSPG11-392 Report on Collective Use of Spectrum (CUS) and Other Spectrum Sharing Approaches. EU Radio Spectrum Policy Group, Brussels (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Anker, P.: Does cognitive radio need policy innovation? Compet. Regul. Netw. Ind. 11(1), 2–26 (2010)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Lemstra, W., Anker, P., et al.: Cognitive radio: enabling technology in need of coordination. Compet. Regul. Netw. Ind. 12(3), 210–235 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  12. RSPG10-306 Radio Spectrum Policy Group Report on Cognitive Technologies. EU, Brussels (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lehr, W., Jesuale, N.: Spectrum pooling for next generation public safety radio systems. In: DySPAN 2008, 3rd IEEE Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks 2008, IEEE (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Atia, G., Sahai, A., Saligrama, V.: Spectrum enforcement and liability assignment in cognitive radio systems. In: DySPAN 2008, 3rd IEEE Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks 2008, IEEE (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mishra, S.M., Sahai, A., Brodersen, R.W.: Cooperative sensing among cognitive radios. In: IEEE International Conference on Communications, 2006. ICC’06, vol. 4, pp. 1658–1663. IEEE (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bourse, D., Agusti, R., et al.: The E2R II flexible spectrum management (FSM) framework and cognitive pilot channel (CPC) concept–technical and business analysis and recommendations. E2R II White Paper (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. RSPG10-348 Final RSPG Opinion on Cognitive Technologies. EU Radio Spectrum Policy Group, Brussels (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ankre, P.: Cognitive radio, the market and the regulator. In: IEEE Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks, 2010, IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ostrom, E.: Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press, New York (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Haug, T.: A commentary on standardization practices: lessons from the NMT and GSM mobile telephone standards histories. Telecommun. Policy 26(3–4), 101–107 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Szydełko, M., Byrka, J., Oszmianski, J.: Dynamic valuation function based definition of the primary spectrum user in colocated cellular networks. In: Proceedings of 7th International ICST Conference on Cognitive Radio Oriented Wireless Networks and Communications (CROWNCOM 2012), pp. 297–302, June 2012

    Google Scholar 

  22. Szydełko, M.: Business model analysis for spectrum sharing with the spectrum broker. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (DySPAN 2012), pp. 355–365, 16–19 Oct 2012

    Google Scholar 

  23. OECD Communications Outlook. OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/comms_outlook-2011-en (2011)

  24. Yearbook of Statistics: Telecommunication/ICT Indicators 2002–2011. ITU-D, Geneva (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Global Wireless Matrix 2011. Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, Industry Overview. 28 Sept 2011

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sterman, J.D.: Business Dynamics: System Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. McGraw-Hill, USA (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Pistorius, C., Utterback, J.: A Lotka-Volterra Model for Multi-mode Technological Interaction: Modeling Competition, Symbiosis and Predator Prey Modes. Sloan School of Management, MIT, WP # 3929 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Sridhar, V., Casey, T., Hämmäinen, H.: Flexible spectrum management for mobile broadband services: how does it vary across advanced and emerging markets?. Telecommun. Policy 37(2–3), 178–191 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Davies, J., Howell, B., Mabin, V.: Telecom regulation, regulatory behaviour and its impact–a system view. Commun. Strateg. 70, 145–168 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bauer, J.M.: Regulation, public policy, and investment in communications infrastructure. Telecommun. Policy 34, 65–79 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Funk, J.L.: Standards, critical mass, and the formation of complex industries: a case study of the mobile internet. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 28(4), 232–248 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mansfield, E.: Technical change and the rate of imitation. Econometrica 29(4), 741–766 (1961)

    Google Scholar 

  33. European Commission: Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the making available on the market of radio equipment, COM(2012) 584 final (“Radio Equipment Directive”) (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  34. European Commission: Guide to the Implementation of Directives Based on the New Approach and the Global Approach (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Prasad, R.V., Pawelczak, P., Hoffmeyer, J.A., Berger, H.S.: Cognitive functionality in next generation wireless networks: standardization efforts. IEEE Commun. Mag. 46(4), 72–78 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Electronic Communications Committee (ECC) Report 80. Enhancing Harmonisation and Introducing Flexibility in the Spectrum Regulatory Framework, Oulu (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Merino Artalejo, M. F.: Market Impact of SR: Benefits and Barriers. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), USA (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Technopolis Group: Impact assessment concerning a proposed mandatory registration system in the scope of directive 1999/5/EC–final report (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Telecommunication Conformity Assessment and Market Surveillance Committee (TCAM), Document (31)21. Chairman’s summary of the TCAM Workshop ‘Software Defined Radio in the context of the revision of the R&TTE Directive’ of 1 October 2010. https://circabc.europa.eu/w/browse/3ea3bbdb-2cec-4a30-aa15-c97b3400a456. Accessed 31 October 2013

  40. TCAM, Document 18 (04) 25. Application of the Directive to Software Defined Radio (SDR) (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  41. European Commission, Document M/512 EN. Standardisation Mandate to CEN, CENELEC and ETSI for Reconfigurable Radio Systems. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/standards_policy/mandates/database/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.detail&id=515#. Accessed 31 October 2013

    Google Scholar 

  42. R&TTE Compliance Association (R&TTE CA) Document TGN 09 Rev1. Guidance on Essential Requirements, Essential Radio Test Suites & HS Requirements & Conformance Test specifications Table (HS-RTT) (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  43. European Commission: Second progress report on the operation of the directive 1999/5/EC, COM (2010) 43 final (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG): RSPG Opinion on Streamlining the Regulatory Environment, RSPG 08-246 final (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  45. European Commission: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Standardisation and amending Council Directives 89/686/EEC and 93/15/EEC and Directives 94/9/EC, 94/25/EC, 95/16/EC, 97/23/EC, 98/34/EC, 2004/22/EC, 2007/23/EC, 2009/105/EC and 2009/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, COM (2011) 315 final (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  46. TCAM, Document 28 (09) 06: Working document for problems definitions and objectives regarding the R&TTE Directive 1999/5/EC (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  47. QinetiQ: An Evaluation of Software Defined Radio–Main Document (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Software Freedom Law Center: FCC Rules on FOSS and Software-Defined Radio (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hughes, T.P.: The evolution of large technological systems. In: Bijker, W.E., Hughes, T.P., Pinch, T.J. (eds.) The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. MIT Press, Cambridge (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Medeisis, A., Minervini, L.F.: Stalling innovation of cognitive radio: the case for a dedicated frequency band. Telecommun. Policy 37(2–3), 108–115 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Teece, D.J.: Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Res. Policy 15(6), 285–305 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Suarez, F.F.: Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework. Res. Policy 33(2), 271–286 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Fitch, M., Nekovee, M., Kawade, S., Briggs, K., Mackenzie, R.: Wireless service provision in TV white space with cognitive radio technology: a telecom operator’s perspective and experience. IEEE Commun. Mag. 49(3), 64–73 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Granelli, F., Pawelczak, P., Prasad, R.V., Subbalakshmi, K., Chandramouli, R., Hoffmeyer, J.A., Berger, H.S.: Standardization and research in cognitive and dynamic spectrum access networks: IEEE DySPAN-SC efforts and other activities. IEEE Commun. Mag. 48(1), 71–79 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Casey, T.: Analysis of radio spectrum market evolution possibilities. Commun. Strateg. 75(3), 109–130 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Chapin, J.M., Lehr, W.H.: Cognitive radios for dynamic spectrum access-the path to market success for dynamic spectrum access technology. IEEE Commun. Mag. 45(5), 96–103 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Nguyen, T., Zhou, H., Berry, R.A., Honig, M.L., Vohra, R.: The impact of additional unlicensed spectrum on wireless services competition. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (DySPAN 2011), pp. 146–155 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Fomin, V.V., Medeisis, A., Vitkute-Adzgauskiene, D.: In search of sustainable business models for cognitive radio evolution. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 18(2), 230–247 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Metcalfe, J.S.: Evolutionary economics and technology policy. Econ. J. 104, 931–944 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Dosi, G.: Sources, procedures, and microeconomic effects of innovation. J. Econ. Lit. 26(3), 1120–1171 (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  61. Holland, O. et al.: Pluralistic licensing. In: 6th IEEE Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks, Washington, USA, October 2012

    Google Scholar 

  62. Anker, P.: Cognitive radio-the need for coordination: lessons from the past. In: Pres. 3rd Meeting of COST Action IC0905 (TERRA), Brussels, 20–22 June 2011

    Google Scholar 

  63. Robert, C., Zeckhauser, R.: The methodology of normative policy analysis. J. Policy Anal. Manag. 30(3), 613–643 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Delaere, S., Ballon, P.: Multi-level standardization and business models for CR: the case of the cognitive pilot channel. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (DySPAN 2008) (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Fomin, V.V., Medeišis, A., Vitkutė-Adžgauskienė, D.: In search of sustainable business models for cognitive radio evolution. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 18(2), 230–247 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. ECC Report 192 on the Current Status of DFS (Dynamic Frequency Selection) in the 5 GHz Frequency Range (soon to be published)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Macerata, Macerata, Italy

    Leo Fulvio Minervini

  2. Ministry of Economic Affairs and Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

    Peter Anker

Authors
  1. Leo Fulvio Minervini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Anker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leo Fulvio Minervini .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Telecommunication Engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania

    Arturas Medeisis

  2. Centre for Telecommunications Research, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

    Oliver Holland

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Minervini, L.F., Anker, P. (2014). Impact Assessment of CR Policy and Regulation. In: Medeisis, A., Holland, O. (eds) Cognitive Radio Policy and Regulation. Signals and Communication Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04022-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04022-6_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-04021-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-04022-6

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation