中国电信市场重组中的竞争与垄断
|
摘要
经济全球化是世界经济发展的趋势,而且这个趋势正在不断发展,推动世界经济的方方面面都已经和正在融入全球一体化中。具体到电信业,就是电信国际化,以电信业为基础的信息产业是经济全球化的物质力量。电信业国际化和经济全球化相互推动,加快了经济的一体化进程。在全球经济中,电信业及其更广泛的信息产业已经超越汽车产业成为全球第一大产业。在我们国家电信业已经成为国民经济的基础产业、先导产业和战略产业。
回顾世界电信发展史可以发现,20世纪上半叶之前,在电信技术发展初期和成长阶段,尽管各国经济发展水平不尽相同,但在电信体制上都采取了国家垄断或企业垄断模式。由于垄断体制较好地适应了电信产业在发展时期的技术经济特点,电信产业的垄断时期也是各国电信产业获得较快发展的时期。随着电信产业由发展阶段进入发达阶段,在电信技术经济特性内在要求的促进下,电信产业的自然垄断性质日渐弱化,从20世纪80年代初期开始,世界电信产业从垄断进入竞争时代。正是在这样的内在技术经济的背景下,以美国、英国和日本等为代表的国家掀起世界电信改革浪潮。
概括起来,世界电信改革总体方式是引入电信竞争和电信民营化,具体方式不外乎引入民营竞争者、拆分垄断者或者电信企业国有股权的逐渐拍卖直至完全民营化。在这个过程中,美国的电信市场是经历了一个垄断(专利保护)—竞争—垄断(市场机制下产生的垄断者)—竞争(行政力量)这样一个反复的过程,英国的电信市场是垄断(国有行政垄断)-垄断(引入民营竞争者无效)-垄断竞争(拆分垄断者)-竞争-垄断(市场产生的垄断者)这样一个过程。从西方发达国家电信市场的发展历程可以看到,电信市场的发展尽管伴随着行政力量的渗透,但是有其内在的发展轨迹,当外在的行政力量同电信市场内在的发展规律相符合而形成合力时,就促进了电信市场的高速发展,而当外在的行政力量抑制了电信市场内在规律的发挥时,就限制了电信市场的发展,而且最终需要行政力量做出某种较正。那么决定电信市场发展的内在规律性是什么呢?很遗憾,目前我们还没有发现或明确提出这种电信发展的内在演进规律。这也是我们以及第三世界发展中国家盲目跟随发达国家的具体发展路径就必然是一个不断试错过程的原因。
中国的电信市场在过去的10多年中,经历了高度垄断的稳定时期、引入联通的竞争试探期、纵向分离的分项垄断期、横向拆分的恶性竞争期,并最终走向了默契合谋的平稳期。中国电信市场管制机构对于电信发展的目的是清晰的,但手段与结果却是混乱的,虽然依靠行政力量在不断地做出各种修正,但目前业界形成共识的一点就是在我们国家的电信市场中还没有形成有效竞争。我们国家是在借鉴了发达国家电信市场发展的经验教训后对中国电信市场进行的外科手术式改革,其结果是我们依然走过了先行者的已经走过的弯路,这样的事实激发了我强烈的探求欲望。
在这样的思考中,受经济发展原动力的启发,我发现影响电信市场发展历程的依然还是电信技术的变迁。技术是市场发展形式的基础,或者更规范地说,市场受技术因素的制约。从而,技术构造了市场发展的激励和基础,技术变迁决定了市场结构的演化方式,因而是理解市场结构演变的关键。技术对市场绩效的影响是无可争议的,不同时期市场的长期绩效差异从根本上受技术变迁程度的影响,这也是毋庸置疑的(没有信息化的基础就不可能有经济全球化的可能)。然而,由于尚无任何分析框架将技术作为直接因素融入到市场与市场结构的演变中去,无论是主流的新古典均衡理论还是产业组织学(Industry organization)以及制度学派,都未能揭示技术在市场结构演进中的作用。本篇论文就是在这样的思考中,提出了这样一种理论框架。这一分析的意义就在于对大部分产业发展—特别是中国电信产业—中市场结构演变历史进行重行审视,并对市场结构的历史演变做出一种新的诠释。
历史是重要的。其重要性不仅在于我们可以从历史中获取知识,还在于种种市场演变的连续性把现在、未来与过去连接在了一起。现在和未来的选择都是由过去所型塑的,并且只有在市场结构演变历史的事实中,才能理解市场结构演进的内在决定因素,将技术整合到产业组织与市场结构的分析中,是改进二者的重要步骤与手段。将技术分析清楚而直接地融入到产业历史以及市场结构演变的历史之中,会产生些什么不同呢?探求决定市场结构演变的决定因素,就是将随时光流转的产业发展的市场方面构建成一个连贯的逻辑中。我们不是重建产业发展的历史,而是构建一个关于产业中市场发展的逻辑结构,这种构建只能存在于人类的心智之中。然而,一个好的理论框架,就必须能给出一个一致的、合乎逻辑的解释,并且还应紧守已有的证据与理论。对于这个问题的一个回答便是:技术因素与市场结构的结合,比之其他方式,将能使我们更好地理解市场结构的演变。
按照科斯(Coase,1937,1960)的交易费用与制度安排内在关系的理论,在给定技术水平的条件下,人们创生或选择某种制度来降低交易费用,从而导致一些市场制度安排的出现与改变。这一点已经是新制度经济学的常识。然而问题在这里并没有结束,技术并不是给定的,更不是静止的,而是在不断变化发展着。人们需要同时选择技术和制度时,结果又将如何?诺斯和瓦里斯建立了把技术变迁与制度变迁整合在一起的新的理论框架,在整个经济层面揭示了技术与制度的互动关系,从而让我们理解了经济变迁的逻辑,遗憾地是对于我们这些研究产业发展的产业组织经济学者,却在市场与市场结构演变这种市场制度的变迁问题上,彻底地将技术因素遗忘了。技术因素和市场结构之间存在着某种深层的内在关联,且至少在电信、电力、铁路等产业发展的历史演变中有充分的证明。技术在市场结构演变中的主要作用,是通过建立一个企业互动的稳定结构来减少技术发展的不确定性。技术总是处在不断地发展与变迁之中,因而也在不断改变着对市场来说可能的选择。尽管我们生活在一个技术变迁速率呈现加速度的世界中,但变迁在边际上可能宛如冰川融化般缓慢,以致于我们必须以历史学家的眼光观察市场结构的变化,方能察觉其中的逻辑。
在电信业发展初期,在专利保护作用下,电信市场必然是一种垄断的市场结构,随着专利期的结束,在电信市场利润的诱惑下,如果没有行政力量的干预,必然是一种近似于完全竞争的群雄争斗局面,而电信技术在当时的条件下具有全程全网的自然垄断特性,所以争斗的结果如果没有外在力量的干扰,必然会形成一家独大的局面。随着电信技术的发展,电信成本成倍数地不断降低,电信产业的自然垄断性发生变异,电信的内在技术经济特性要求的是垄断竞争的市场结构,此时就需要借助于行政力量的参与来打破市场形成的垄断结构,否则就会制约电信市场的发展。目前世界电信技术的发展降低了电信企业的最佳生产规模,打破了电信网络的不适宜分割性,特别是网络融合技术的出现,未来的电信技术呈现出一种向完全竞争发展的趋势。因而,总体市场结构的演变是由各种因素来决定的,但是技术条件和技术特性是其内在的基础和诱因,有些技术能增加集中度并促进垄断,有些技术则增加了市场的多样性促进了竞争。但无论怎样,将某些技术条件下(直流电、铜质电缆、蒸汽机等等)的市场结构与变迁后的技术条件下(交流电、光纤、内燃机等等)的市场结构作个对比,将能使我们清楚地看到:技术变迁(不论是区域间的对比还是历史阶段上的比较)对于市场结构的演变是一个至关重要的决定因素,制约着市场结构可能演化的程度与方式。这是我们在思索电信业发展历程受到的启发。根据这样的启发,结合产业组织理论中经典的SCP范式,我们提出了分析产业发展的T-S-C-P理论框架,并用这种理论框架反过来对世界电信业及相关产业的发展进行理论上的验证,我们发现这种理论框架是有其解释力和说服力的,不过对于这种理论框架在其他产业中的验证,以及关于决定市场结构演变的特别重要的制度因素,鉴于时间和能力的制约,我们只能形成一种感性上的理解,未能形成理论上的内容,我想这应该是以后会继续进行工作的一部分。
理论服务于实践,提出这种理论框架最终是要用来分析中国电信市场并找出制约中国电信市场发展的根本症结所在。在分析中国电信市场的发展中,我们发现对于我们国家转型期的电信市场而言,有着与西方发达国家根本不同的因素。发达国家是在完善的市场环境和法律基础上来发展电信产业的,而我们国家到目前为止还存在着主体电信运营商产权同质的制度制约。同时在研究的过程中,发现国内学者唐要家已经提出过针对转型期国家的SS-C-P框架,同这种思路不谋而合,肯定并坚定了我们将产权结构加进T-S-C-P框架中的决心,最终形成了进行产业分析的T-S(S)-C-P理论分析框架。
应用这样的理论分析框架,并按照T-S(S)-C-P理论分析框架的逻辑顺序,从电信技术的发展变异(量变到质变)开始,就中国电信市场结构的演变、中国电信市场中主体运营商产权同质对电信竞争的制约、中国电信市场的竞争行为和中国电信市场的竞争有效性(绩效)分别用一个章节来进行分析。同时在这样的分析中,我们发现电信技术的发展要求管制体制做出相应的调整,否则就会制约电信市场的发展。例如网络融合的电信技术就要求统一的管制机构来进行行业的监管,然而我们国家目前实行的还是分业管制,这必然制约电信产业的发展。另外网络融合的技术发展要求电信市场市场有结构上的调整,只有进行这种结构上的调整才可能形成广义电信的有效竞争,否则一定会限制电信竞争,例如在我们国家广电网还没有参与到电信市场竞争中,网间的分割和对立已经严重制约电信技术的发展和电信竞争的形成,IPTV业务就是一个有力的证据。遵循这样的思路用电信技术进步中的网络融合、电信管制与电信竞争这一章节来分析中国电信市场重组中的竞争与垄断效应。
全篇论文根据T-S(S)-C-P理论框架中的5个要素提出了7个问题,通过对这5个要素的系统分析,形成了本篇论文逻辑上有机组合的5个章节,也是全篇论文的关键线索,得出的了一些贴近有关电信政策实践的结论,其中核心关键的结论是中国电信市场的重组没有形成有效竞争,目前的市场结构同电信技术变迁的市场存在不可调和的矛盾,需要我们国家电信管制不论实在结构上还是在管制机制上需要进行根源性的改变。
At continuously development, push world economy of everyone all already with is integrating into global integral whole to turn in. It is the telecommunication industry internationalization to the telecommunication industry and the telecommunication industry-based information industry is the material strength of the economic globalization. Telecommunication industry internationalization and economic globalization push mutually and speed economy of the integral whole turn progress. In the global economy, telecommunication industry and its more extensive information industry have already outstripped car industry to become the biggest industry in the world. The telecommunication industry already become the foundation industry of nation economy and lead industry and strategic industry first in our nation.
Looking back the world telecommunication development history you can discover, in 20th century early before first half hundred years, develop in the telecommunication technique and growth stage, though economy in all countries develop level not to exert a homology, all adopted on the telecommunication system nation monopoly or business enterprise monopoly mode.Because the monopoly system a little bit well adapted to telecommunication industry the technique during the period of development economic characteristics, the monopoly period of telecommunication industry is also the period that telecommunication industry in all countries acquires a little bit quickly a development.BE turned into a flourishing stage by the development stage along with the telecommunication industry, promoted under the telecommunication technique economic characteristic internality, the natural monopoly property of telecommunication industry gradually weakens and since the early part of 80's in 20th century, telecommunication industry in the world gets into competition ages from the monopoly.It is the United States, England and Japan etc.taked as the representative's nation which bring about the world telecommunication reform under the background of the technique economy characteristic change.
Summarize, the total way of the world telecommunication reforms is to lead into the telecommunication competition and the telecommunication run by private capital turns and the concrete way has no exception that lead into a run by private capital competitor, dismantle the monopolizes or sale the telecommunication business enterprise stateowned ownership of a share until the complete run by private capital turns. In this process, the telecommunication market of the United States is to experience a monopoly(patent protection), competition monopoly(monopoly under the market mechanism), competion(administration monopoly) such an iterative process and the telecommunication market of England is a monopoly(state administration monopoly)-monopoly(by private capital)-monopoly competition(dismantle a cent to monopolize)-competition-monopolize(market creation of monopoly) such a process.You can see from the development process of west developed national telecommunication market, though the development of telecommunication market accompanies with permeating of administration strength, but has it the inside development track and promoted while being outside administration strength to agree with the development regulation of telecommunication industry internality, but when the outside administration strength repressed the exertion of the telecommunication industry inside regulation, so limited the development of telecommunication market, and finally needed the administration strength does an a certain more positive.So what is the inside regulation that the telecommunication market develops?Very sorry, we haven't discovered or definitely put forward the inside evolution regulation of this kind of telecommunication development currently.This is also the third world developing country blindly follows behind the concrete development mode of devoped nation and then by all means is reasons of continuously tries mistake.
The telecommunication market of China, at the past of 10 more years, experienced the stable period of high monopoly, lead to go into the competition period of uniting and lengthways dismantle the item monopoly, horizontal dismantle the unfair competition of cent of period, and finally headed for tacit understanding to match to strive for of steady period.The purpose of chinese telecommunication market administrators for the telecommunication development is clear, but means and result is confusion, although depend on administration strength constantly doing a various correction, currently industry formation consensus is that haven't formed an effective competition at our national telecommunication market.Our nation carries on the reform of surgical operation types to the Chinese telecommunication markets again after drawing lessons from experience precept that the devolped national telecommunication market develops, but we still once walk over of curved road, which stirs up my desire of mightiness investigation.
In the thinking like this, inspired by economy development motive force, I discover that telecommunication technique economic characteristic still influence the telecommunication industry development process.The technique is the foundation that the market develops a form, or more norm ground say, the market is subjected to check and supervision of the technique factor.Thus, the technique constructed the encouraging and foundation of market development, the technique change comes to a decision an evolving of market structure method, as a result techniquue is the key to comprehends the market structure turns into.The influence of the technique upon the market results is beyond dispute, not the long-term results difference of the corresponding period market by the root under the influence of technique change degree, this also needs not to doubt.(have no information-based foundation is not likely to have an economic globalization of possibility). However, no any analysis frame is integrated into the direct factors which influnce the market and the market structure, and regardless is an essentially lately classic and balanced theories or an industry histology(Industry organization) and so system school of thought can not announce to public the function of technique to the evolve in the market structure.In the thinking like this, I put forward such a theories frame.The meaning of this analysis lies in that we can do new annotation to the history of market structure by carrying on again examine to the big parts of industry-especially China telecommunication industry-medium the market structure.
The history is important.Its importance not only lieses in we can obtains knowledge from the history, but also various continuous that the markets turn into linke past and now and future at together.Now and future choices all come from past , and we just apprehend the inside decision factors of market structure evolves, and it is important step and means to industry organization and market structure by integrate the technique to them.What dissimilarity will produce if the technical analysis clearly but directly integrated into the history of industry history and the market structure?Investigating the decision factor to decide that the market structure turns into is to set up a coherent logic of industry history. We aren't rebuiling the history of industry development, but to set up the logic structure of the market development in the industry, which can only be existed to mankind of intelligence in.However, a good theories frame, have to give his one consistent of, conform to a logical explanation, and should tightly guard proof and theories.The solution to this problem is: technique factor and market structure combine, which be able to make us better comprehend market structure.
According to the theories of inside relation between bargain expenses and system of Coase(Coase, 1937, 1960), while giving and settling the condition of the technique leveling, people create to or choose a certain system to lower bargain expenses and make of emegence and change some market systems.This is already the common sense of the economics.However the problem didn't end here, the technique didn't give to settle, isn't also static, but at continuously variety develop.When people needed to choose technique and system in the meantime, what result again would ever?Norse and Walis built up a new theories frame which integrate technique change and the system into together and announced to public the interactive relation of technique and system in the whole economic level and made us comprehend the logic of economic change thus, sorrily is for we these research industry development of industry organization economic scholar, but thoroughly forget a technique factor.Exist a certain and deep inside connection between market structure and technique factor, and turn into in the history of industry developments, such as telecommunication, electric power and railroad...etc. at least in there is full proof.The main function of technique in the market structure is reduce the indetermination by building up the stable enterprise interaction structure .The technique is constantly always placed in development and change in, as a result is also continuously changing a possible choice to market.Though we are living in a world in which technique change velocity presents the acceleration,change is possiblly slow like the glacier melts, with the result that we have to observe market structure by the taste of the historian, then can realize logics in it.
At telecommunication industry development initial stage, protected under the patent, the telecommunication market is by all means market structure of monopoly.Along with patent period of be over, at the temptation of telecommunication market profits, if there is no the intervention of administration strength, by all means is the group of heroes that is looked like to a complete competition fights situation, while the telecommunication technique at that time, the result for fighting will form an only big situation.Along with the telecommunication technical development, the telecommunication cost becomes multiple continuously lower, the natural monopoly occurrence variation of telecommunication industry, what the inside technique economic characteristic of telecommunication requests is the market structure that monopolizes a competition and need to ask for help from participation of administration strength to break the monopoly structure of market formation at this time, otherwise the development of telecommunication market will be restricted.The world telecommunication technical development lowered the best production scale of telecommunication business enterprise and broke the unwell proper partition of telecommunication network currently, especially the network blend technical emergence, the future telecommunication technique presents one kind toward the trend of complete competition development.As a result, the total market structure turns into is decided by various factor of, but technique condition and technique characteristic are the foundation and inducements of its internality, some techniques can increase a concentration degree and promote monopoly, some techniques then increased diverse of market to promote a competition.But no matter how it is, making a contrast between some technique conditions(direct current, the copper quality electric cable, and steam engine...etc.) of under the technique condition of market structure and change empress(alternate current, fiber optic, and I.C. engine...etc.) of the market structure, it will be able to make us clearly see:Technique change(in spite of is a contrast between districts or a history the comparison on the stage)'s turning into to the market structure is the most important decision factor, check and supervision the market structure evolve of degree and way.This is the inspire we get form the deliberating the telecommunication industry development process.
According to thus of inspire, combine industry organization classic SCP paradigm, we put forward the T-S-C-P theories frame to analytical industry develops. we discovered this kind of theories frame have its explain, however to this kind of theories frame in the verification in other industries, and concerning decision market the structure turns into specially important system factor, owing to the check and supervision of time and ability, the contents can not form theoretically, I think this should be later a part of carrying on the work.
The theories is served to practice and put forward this kind of theories frame to be used to analyse Chinese telecommunication market and find out the root key sticking point of restricting Chinese telecommunication market development.In the analytical of development of Chinese telecommunication market, we discover there are basically different factors between the developed nation and our nation in transform of telecommunication market.The devoped nation comes up development telecommunication industry in the perfect market environment and the law foundation of, but our nation so far still exist the restrict of property right homogeneity in telecommunication the operator.In the meantime in the process of studying,I discovered that local scholar Tang having gived the SS-C-P frme aimed at a transformation period nation, agrees without previous consultation with this kind of way of thinking and affirms and determine we will produce the property structure adds into T-S-C-P decision within frame, finally form the T-S(S) -C-P analysis frame.
Applied this theories analysis frame, and according to the logic order of T-S(S)-C-P theories frame, begaining as the telecommunication technical development variation(from the quantity change to the quality change), the turning into of Chinese telecommunication market structure, I carry on analysis with a chapter respectively to the restrict of property, the competition behavior and the competition usefulness(results).In the meantime and in the analysis like this, we discover the telecommunication technical development requests to regulation system to do a homologous adjustment, otherwise restrict the development of market.For example the telecommunication technique of network fusion will request united control organization to carry on taking charge of of profession, however in our nation not, it will limit the development of telecommunication industry.Moreover the technique development of network fusion requests the telecommunication th adjustment of market structure, only carry on this kind of the adjustment on the structure just may form the effective competition, otherwise will definitely limit a telecommunication competition, for example the brocast system's net haven't participated in a telecommunication market in our nation, partition and opposition of net will seriously restrict telecommunication technical development and telecommunication competition, the IPTV business is a example.Follow such of the way of thinking the network fusion, telecommunication regulation and telecommunication competion is place in a chapter to analytical Chinese telecommunication market competition and monopolise effect within reorganization.
回顾世界电信发展史可以发现,20世纪上半叶之前,在电信技术发展初期和成长阶段,尽管各国经济发展水平不尽相同,但在电信体制上都采取了国家垄断或企业垄断模式。由于垄断体制较好地适应了电信产业在发展时期的技术经济特点,电信产业的垄断时期也是各国电信产业获得较快发展的时期。随着电信产业由发展阶段进入发达阶段,在电信技术经济特性内在要求的促进下,电信产业的自然垄断性质日渐弱化,从20世纪80年代初期开始,世界电信产业从垄断进入竞争时代。正是在这样的内在技术经济的背景下,以美国、英国和日本等为代表的国家掀起世界电信改革浪潮。
概括起来,世界电信改革总体方式是引入电信竞争和电信民营化,具体方式不外乎引入民营竞争者、拆分垄断者或者电信企业国有股权的逐渐拍卖直至完全民营化。在这个过程中,美国的电信市场是经历了一个垄断(专利保护)—竞争—垄断(市场机制下产生的垄断者)—竞争(行政力量)这样一个反复的过程,英国的电信市场是垄断(国有行政垄断)-垄断(引入民营竞争者无效)-垄断竞争(拆分垄断者)-竞争-垄断(市场产生的垄断者)这样一个过程。从西方发达国家电信市场的发展历程可以看到,电信市场的发展尽管伴随着行政力量的渗透,但是有其内在的发展轨迹,当外在的行政力量同电信市场内在的发展规律相符合而形成合力时,就促进了电信市场的高速发展,而当外在的行政力量抑制了电信市场内在规律的发挥时,就限制了电信市场的发展,而且最终需要行政力量做出某种较正。那么决定电信市场发展的内在规律性是什么呢?很遗憾,目前我们还没有发现或明确提出这种电信发展的内在演进规律。这也是我们以及第三世界发展中国家盲目跟随发达国家的具体发展路径就必然是一个不断试错过程的原因。
中国的电信市场在过去的10多年中,经历了高度垄断的稳定时期、引入联通的竞争试探期、纵向分离的分项垄断期、横向拆分的恶性竞争期,并最终走向了默契合谋的平稳期。中国电信市场管制机构对于电信发展的目的是清晰的,但手段与结果却是混乱的,虽然依靠行政力量在不断地做出各种修正,但目前业界形成共识的一点就是在我们国家的电信市场中还没有形成有效竞争。我们国家是在借鉴了发达国家电信市场发展的经验教训后对中国电信市场进行的外科手术式改革,其结果是我们依然走过了先行者的已经走过的弯路,这样的事实激发了我强烈的探求欲望。
在这样的思考中,受经济发展原动力的启发,我发现影响电信市场发展历程的依然还是电信技术的变迁。技术是市场发展形式的基础,或者更规范地说,市场受技术因素的制约。从而,技术构造了市场发展的激励和基础,技术变迁决定了市场结构的演化方式,因而是理解市场结构演变的关键。技术对市场绩效的影响是无可争议的,不同时期市场的长期绩效差异从根本上受技术变迁程度的影响,这也是毋庸置疑的(没有信息化的基础就不可能有经济全球化的可能)。然而,由于尚无任何分析框架将技术作为直接因素融入到市场与市场结构的演变中去,无论是主流的新古典均衡理论还是产业组织学(Industry organization)以及制度学派,都未能揭示技术在市场结构演进中的作用。本篇论文就是在这样的思考中,提出了这样一种理论框架。这一分析的意义就在于对大部分产业发展—特别是中国电信产业—中市场结构演变历史进行重行审视,并对市场结构的历史演变做出一种新的诠释。
历史是重要的。其重要性不仅在于我们可以从历史中获取知识,还在于种种市场演变的连续性把现在、未来与过去连接在了一起。现在和未来的选择都是由过去所型塑的,并且只有在市场结构演变历史的事实中,才能理解市场结构演进的内在决定因素,将技术整合到产业组织与市场结构的分析中,是改进二者的重要步骤与手段。将技术分析清楚而直接地融入到产业历史以及市场结构演变的历史之中,会产生些什么不同呢?探求决定市场结构演变的决定因素,就是将随时光流转的产业发展的市场方面构建成一个连贯的逻辑中。我们不是重建产业发展的历史,而是构建一个关于产业中市场发展的逻辑结构,这种构建只能存在于人类的心智之中。然而,一个好的理论框架,就必须能给出一个一致的、合乎逻辑的解释,并且还应紧守已有的证据与理论。对于这个问题的一个回答便是:技术因素与市场结构的结合,比之其他方式,将能使我们更好地理解市场结构的演变。
按照科斯(Coase,1937,1960)的交易费用与制度安排内在关系的理论,在给定技术水平的条件下,人们创生或选择某种制度来降低交易费用,从而导致一些市场制度安排的出现与改变。这一点已经是新制度经济学的常识。然而问题在这里并没有结束,技术并不是给定的,更不是静止的,而是在不断变化发展着。人们需要同时选择技术和制度时,结果又将如何?诺斯和瓦里斯建立了把技术变迁与制度变迁整合在一起的新的理论框架,在整个经济层面揭示了技术与制度的互动关系,从而让我们理解了经济变迁的逻辑,遗憾地是对于我们这些研究产业发展的产业组织经济学者,却在市场与市场结构演变这种市场制度的变迁问题上,彻底地将技术因素遗忘了。技术因素和市场结构之间存在着某种深层的内在关联,且至少在电信、电力、铁路等产业发展的历史演变中有充分的证明。技术在市场结构演变中的主要作用,是通过建立一个企业互动的稳定结构来减少技术发展的不确定性。技术总是处在不断地发展与变迁之中,因而也在不断改变着对市场来说可能的选择。尽管我们生活在一个技术变迁速率呈现加速度的世界中,但变迁在边际上可能宛如冰川融化般缓慢,以致于我们必须以历史学家的眼光观察市场结构的变化,方能察觉其中的逻辑。
在电信业发展初期,在专利保护作用下,电信市场必然是一种垄断的市场结构,随着专利期的结束,在电信市场利润的诱惑下,如果没有行政力量的干预,必然是一种近似于完全竞争的群雄争斗局面,而电信技术在当时的条件下具有全程全网的自然垄断特性,所以争斗的结果如果没有外在力量的干扰,必然会形成一家独大的局面。随着电信技术的发展,电信成本成倍数地不断降低,电信产业的自然垄断性发生变异,电信的内在技术经济特性要求的是垄断竞争的市场结构,此时就需要借助于行政力量的参与来打破市场形成的垄断结构,否则就会制约电信市场的发展。目前世界电信技术的发展降低了电信企业的最佳生产规模,打破了电信网络的不适宜分割性,特别是网络融合技术的出现,未来的电信技术呈现出一种向完全竞争发展的趋势。因而,总体市场结构的演变是由各种因素来决定的,但是技术条件和技术特性是其内在的基础和诱因,有些技术能增加集中度并促进垄断,有些技术则增加了市场的多样性促进了竞争。但无论怎样,将某些技术条件下(直流电、铜质电缆、蒸汽机等等)的市场结构与变迁后的技术条件下(交流电、光纤、内燃机等等)的市场结构作个对比,将能使我们清楚地看到:技术变迁(不论是区域间的对比还是历史阶段上的比较)对于市场结构的演变是一个至关重要的决定因素,制约着市场结构可能演化的程度与方式。这是我们在思索电信业发展历程受到的启发。根据这样的启发,结合产业组织理论中经典的SCP范式,我们提出了分析产业发展的T-S-C-P理论框架,并用这种理论框架反过来对世界电信业及相关产业的发展进行理论上的验证,我们发现这种理论框架是有其解释力和说服力的,不过对于这种理论框架在其他产业中的验证,以及关于决定市场结构演变的特别重要的制度因素,鉴于时间和能力的制约,我们只能形成一种感性上的理解,未能形成理论上的内容,我想这应该是以后会继续进行工作的一部分。
理论服务于实践,提出这种理论框架最终是要用来分析中国电信市场并找出制约中国电信市场发展的根本症结所在。在分析中国电信市场的发展中,我们发现对于我们国家转型期的电信市场而言,有着与西方发达国家根本不同的因素。发达国家是在完善的市场环境和法律基础上来发展电信产业的,而我们国家到目前为止还存在着主体电信运营商产权同质的制度制约。同时在研究的过程中,发现国内学者唐要家已经提出过针对转型期国家的SS-C-P框架,同这种思路不谋而合,肯定并坚定了我们将产权结构加进T-S-C-P框架中的决心,最终形成了进行产业分析的T-S(S)-C-P理论分析框架。
应用这样的理论分析框架,并按照T-S(S)-C-P理论分析框架的逻辑顺序,从电信技术的发展变异(量变到质变)开始,就中国电信市场结构的演变、中国电信市场中主体运营商产权同质对电信竞争的制约、中国电信市场的竞争行为和中国电信市场的竞争有效性(绩效)分别用一个章节来进行分析。同时在这样的分析中,我们发现电信技术的发展要求管制体制做出相应的调整,否则就会制约电信市场的发展。例如网络融合的电信技术就要求统一的管制机构来进行行业的监管,然而我们国家目前实行的还是分业管制,这必然制约电信产业的发展。另外网络融合的技术发展要求电信市场市场有结构上的调整,只有进行这种结构上的调整才可能形成广义电信的有效竞争,否则一定会限制电信竞争,例如在我们国家广电网还没有参与到电信市场竞争中,网间的分割和对立已经严重制约电信技术的发展和电信竞争的形成,IPTV业务就是一个有力的证据。遵循这样的思路用电信技术进步中的网络融合、电信管制与电信竞争这一章节来分析中国电信市场重组中的竞争与垄断效应。
全篇论文根据T-S(S)-C-P理论框架中的5个要素提出了7个问题,通过对这5个要素的系统分析,形成了本篇论文逻辑上有机组合的5个章节,也是全篇论文的关键线索,得出的了一些贴近有关电信政策实践的结论,其中核心关键的结论是中国电信市场的重组没有形成有效竞争,目前的市场结构同电信技术变迁的市场存在不可调和的矛盾,需要我们国家电信管制不论实在结构上还是在管制机制上需要进行根源性的改变。
At continuously development, push world economy of everyone all already with is integrating into global integral whole to turn in. It is the telecommunication industry internationalization to the telecommunication industry and the telecommunication industry-based information industry is the material strength of the economic globalization. Telecommunication industry internationalization and economic globalization push mutually and speed economy of the integral whole turn progress. In the global economy, telecommunication industry and its more extensive information industry have already outstripped car industry to become the biggest industry in the world. The telecommunication industry already become the foundation industry of nation economy and lead industry and strategic industry first in our nation.
Looking back the world telecommunication development history you can discover, in 20th century early before first half hundred years, develop in the telecommunication technique and growth stage, though economy in all countries develop level not to exert a homology, all adopted on the telecommunication system nation monopoly or business enterprise monopoly mode.Because the monopoly system a little bit well adapted to telecommunication industry the technique during the period of development economic characteristics, the monopoly period of telecommunication industry is also the period that telecommunication industry in all countries acquires a little bit quickly a development.BE turned into a flourishing stage by the development stage along with the telecommunication industry, promoted under the telecommunication technique economic characteristic internality, the natural monopoly property of telecommunication industry gradually weakens and since the early part of 80's in 20th century, telecommunication industry in the world gets into competition ages from the monopoly.It is the United States, England and Japan etc.taked as the representative's nation which bring about the world telecommunication reform under the background of the technique economy characteristic change.
Summarize, the total way of the world telecommunication reforms is to lead into the telecommunication competition and the telecommunication run by private capital turns and the concrete way has no exception that lead into a run by private capital competitor, dismantle the monopolizes or sale the telecommunication business enterprise stateowned ownership of a share until the complete run by private capital turns. In this process, the telecommunication market of the United States is to experience a monopoly(patent protection), competition monopoly(monopoly under the market mechanism), competion(administration monopoly) such an iterative process and the telecommunication market of England is a monopoly(state administration monopoly)-monopoly(by private capital)-monopoly competition(dismantle a cent to monopolize)-competition-monopolize(market creation of monopoly) such a process.You can see from the development process of west developed national telecommunication market, though the development of telecommunication market accompanies with permeating of administration strength, but has it the inside development track and promoted while being outside administration strength to agree with the development regulation of telecommunication industry internality, but when the outside administration strength repressed the exertion of the telecommunication industry inside regulation, so limited the development of telecommunication market, and finally needed the administration strength does an a certain more positive.So what is the inside regulation that the telecommunication market develops?Very sorry, we haven't discovered or definitely put forward the inside evolution regulation of this kind of telecommunication development currently.This is also the third world developing country blindly follows behind the concrete development mode of devoped nation and then by all means is reasons of continuously tries mistake.
The telecommunication market of China, at the past of 10 more years, experienced the stable period of high monopoly, lead to go into the competition period of uniting and lengthways dismantle the item monopoly, horizontal dismantle the unfair competition of cent of period, and finally headed for tacit understanding to match to strive for of steady period.The purpose of chinese telecommunication market administrators for the telecommunication development is clear, but means and result is confusion, although depend on administration strength constantly doing a various correction, currently industry formation consensus is that haven't formed an effective competition at our national telecommunication market.Our nation carries on the reform of surgical operation types to the Chinese telecommunication markets again after drawing lessons from experience precept that the devolped national telecommunication market develops, but we still once walk over of curved road, which stirs up my desire of mightiness investigation.
In the thinking like this, inspired by economy development motive force, I discover that telecommunication technique economic characteristic still influence the telecommunication industry development process.The technique is the foundation that the market develops a form, or more norm ground say, the market is subjected to check and supervision of the technique factor.Thus, the technique constructed the encouraging and foundation of market development, the technique change comes to a decision an evolving of market structure method, as a result techniquue is the key to comprehends the market structure turns into.The influence of the technique upon the market results is beyond dispute, not the long-term results difference of the corresponding period market by the root under the influence of technique change degree, this also needs not to doubt.(have no information-based foundation is not likely to have an economic globalization of possibility). However, no any analysis frame is integrated into the direct factors which influnce the market and the market structure, and regardless is an essentially lately classic and balanced theories or an industry histology(Industry organization) and so system school of thought can not announce to public the function of technique to the evolve in the market structure.In the thinking like this, I put forward such a theories frame.The meaning of this analysis lies in that we can do new annotation to the history of market structure by carrying on again examine to the big parts of industry-especially China telecommunication industry-medium the market structure.
The history is important.Its importance not only lieses in we can obtains knowledge from the history, but also various continuous that the markets turn into linke past and now and future at together.Now and future choices all come from past , and we just apprehend the inside decision factors of market structure evolves, and it is important step and means to industry organization and market structure by integrate the technique to them.What dissimilarity will produce if the technical analysis clearly but directly integrated into the history of industry history and the market structure?Investigating the decision factor to decide that the market structure turns into is to set up a coherent logic of industry history. We aren't rebuiling the history of industry development, but to set up the logic structure of the market development in the industry, which can only be existed to mankind of intelligence in.However, a good theories frame, have to give his one consistent of, conform to a logical explanation, and should tightly guard proof and theories.The solution to this problem is: technique factor and market structure combine, which be able to make us better comprehend market structure.
According to the theories of inside relation between bargain expenses and system of Coase(Coase, 1937, 1960), while giving and settling the condition of the technique leveling, people create to or choose a certain system to lower bargain expenses and make of emegence and change some market systems.This is already the common sense of the economics.However the problem didn't end here, the technique didn't give to settle, isn't also static, but at continuously variety develop.When people needed to choose technique and system in the meantime, what result again would ever?Norse and Walis built up a new theories frame which integrate technique change and the system into together and announced to public the interactive relation of technique and system in the whole economic level and made us comprehend the logic of economic change thus, sorrily is for we these research industry development of industry organization economic scholar, but thoroughly forget a technique factor.Exist a certain and deep inside connection between market structure and technique factor, and turn into in the history of industry developments, such as telecommunication, electric power and railroad...etc. at least in there is full proof.The main function of technique in the market structure is reduce the indetermination by building up the stable enterprise interaction structure .The technique is constantly always placed in development and change in, as a result is also continuously changing a possible choice to market.Though we are living in a world in which technique change velocity presents the acceleration,change is possiblly slow like the glacier melts, with the result that we have to observe market structure by the taste of the historian, then can realize logics in it.
At telecommunication industry development initial stage, protected under the patent, the telecommunication market is by all means market structure of monopoly.Along with patent period of be over, at the temptation of telecommunication market profits, if there is no the intervention of administration strength, by all means is the group of heroes that is looked like to a complete competition fights situation, while the telecommunication technique at that time, the result for fighting will form an only big situation.Along with the telecommunication technical development, the telecommunication cost becomes multiple continuously lower, the natural monopoly occurrence variation of telecommunication industry, what the inside technique economic characteristic of telecommunication requests is the market structure that monopolizes a competition and need to ask for help from participation of administration strength to break the monopoly structure of market formation at this time, otherwise the development of telecommunication market will be restricted.The world telecommunication technical development lowered the best production scale of telecommunication business enterprise and broke the unwell proper partition of telecommunication network currently, especially the network blend technical emergence, the future telecommunication technique presents one kind toward the trend of complete competition development.As a result, the total market structure turns into is decided by various factor of, but technique condition and technique characteristic are the foundation and inducements of its internality, some techniques can increase a concentration degree and promote monopoly, some techniques then increased diverse of market to promote a competition.But no matter how it is, making a contrast between some technique conditions(direct current, the copper quality electric cable, and steam engine...etc.) of under the technique condition of market structure and change empress(alternate current, fiber optic, and I.C. engine...etc.) of the market structure, it will be able to make us clearly see:Technique change(in spite of is a contrast between districts or a history the comparison on the stage)'s turning into to the market structure is the most important decision factor, check and supervision the market structure evolve of degree and way.This is the inspire we get form the deliberating the telecommunication industry development process.
According to thus of inspire, combine industry organization classic SCP paradigm, we put forward the T-S-C-P theories frame to analytical industry develops. we discovered this kind of theories frame have its explain, however to this kind of theories frame in the verification in other industries, and concerning decision market the structure turns into specially important system factor, owing to the check and supervision of time and ability, the contents can not form theoretically, I think this should be later a part of carrying on the work.
The theories is served to practice and put forward this kind of theories frame to be used to analyse Chinese telecommunication market and find out the root key sticking point of restricting Chinese telecommunication market development.In the analytical of development of Chinese telecommunication market, we discover there are basically different factors between the developed nation and our nation in transform of telecommunication market.The devoped nation comes up development telecommunication industry in the perfect market environment and the law foundation of, but our nation so far still exist the restrict of property right homogeneity in telecommunication the operator.In the meantime in the process of studying,I discovered that local scholar Tang having gived the SS-C-P frme aimed at a transformation period nation, agrees without previous consultation with this kind of way of thinking and affirms and determine we will produce the property structure adds into T-S-C-P decision within frame, finally form the T-S(S) -C-P analysis frame.
Applied this theories analysis frame, and according to the logic order of T-S(S)-C-P theories frame, begaining as the telecommunication technical development variation(from the quantity change to the quality change), the turning into of Chinese telecommunication market structure, I carry on analysis with a chapter respectively to the restrict of property, the competition behavior and the competition usefulness(results).In the meantime and in the analysis like this, we discover the telecommunication technical development requests to regulation system to do a homologous adjustment, otherwise restrict the development of market.For example the telecommunication technique of network fusion will request united control organization to carry on taking charge of of profession, however in our nation not, it will limit the development of telecommunication industry.Moreover the technique development of network fusion requests the telecommunication th adjustment of market structure, only carry on this kind of the adjustment on the structure just may form the effective competition, otherwise will definitely limit a telecommunication competition, for example the brocast system's net haven't participated in a telecommunication market in our nation, partition and opposition of net will seriously restrict telecommunication technical development and telecommunication competition, the IPTV business is a example.Follow such of the way of thinking the network fusion, telecommunication regulation and telecommunication competion is place in a chapter to analytical Chinese telecommunication market competition and monopolise effect within reorganization.
引文
2卡尔?夏皮罗和哈尔·瓦里安著:《信息规则》(张帆译),中国人民出版社2000年版,第16页。
1根据国际电联ITU1998年的一份报告,大西洋光缆每话路分钟的传输成本仅仅是0.01美分,折合人民币约为0.8厘。
2张昕竹等《网络产业:规制与竞争理论》社会科学文献出版社2000年第3页
1陈卫华,《中国电信市场的有效竞争研究》第107页～108页,经济科学出版社,2005年5月
1 [法]梯若尔:《产业组织理论》(张维迎校译,中国人民大学出版社1997年版,第243页)。
1 (日)植草益:《信息通讯业的产业融合》,《中国工业经济》,2001年第2期
1 R·Collins&C·Muroni. New Media, New Policy. London: Polity Press, 1996.
[1] Andrea Goldstein. Institutional Endowment and Regulatory Reform in Telecoms[R]. A Five-country Comparion in the MEDA Region. OECD DevelopCenter
[2] Armstrong M. Competition in Telecommunications[J] Oxford Review pf Economic Policy, 13 1997
[3] Armstrong M, Doyle C, Vickers J. The Access Pricing Problem: A Synthesis [J]. Journal of Industrial Economics,1996,44(2): 131-150
[4] Armstrong M, Doyle C. Network Access Pricing [R]. Report to H M Treasury,1993
[5] Armstrong M, Vickers J. Competitive Price Discrimination[J], RAND Journal of Economics, 2001, 32(4): 579-605
[6] Armstrong M, Vickers J. Price Discrimination, Competition and Regulation [J]. Journal of Industrial Economics, 1993, 41: 335-360
[7] Armstrong M, Vickers J. The Access Pricing Problem with Deregulation:A Note[J], The Journal of Industrial Economics, 1998,46(1):115-121
[8] Armstrong M. Access Pricing, Bypass, and Universal Service[J], The American Economic Review, 2001, 91(2): 297-301
[9] Armstrong M. Competition in Telecommunications [J].Oxford Review of Economic Policy,1997,13:64-82
[10] Armstrong M. Network Interconnection in Telecommunications[J], The Economic Journa1, 1998, 108(448): 545-564
[11] Armstrong M. Optimal Regulation with Unknown Demand and Cost Functions [J]. Journal of Economic Theory, 1999, 84(2): 196-215
[12] Agarwal, Gort. The Evolution of Market and Entry, Exit and Surbival of Firms [J]. Rebiew of Economics and Statistic, 1996:489-498
[13] Bauml, Panzar, Willing. Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure[J], Harcout Brace Jovanovich, Inc. 1982
[14] Baumol W J. Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the theory of Industry Structure[J], American Economic Review, 72 1982
[15] Baumol W J. On the Proper Cost Tests for Natural Monopoly in a Multi-product Industry[J], American Economic Review, 67 1977
[16] Baumol, W J,R. D. Willig. Contestability: Developments since the Book[J]. Oxford Economic Papers(Suppl) 38 1986
[17] Barbara A, Cherry, Steve S. Wildman. Institutional endowment as foundation for regulatory performance and regime transitionas: the role of the US constitiona in telecommunicationas regulation in the United States[J] Telecommunications Policy 23(1999), 607-623
[18] Berg S, Tschirhart J. Contributions of Neoclassical Economics to Public Utility Analysis [J]. Land economics 71 1995
[19] Berg S, TschirhartJ. Natural Monopoly Regulation [J]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1988
[20] Calhoun G. Wireless Access and the Local Telephone Network [J]. Boston, Lodon: Artech House 1992
[21] Cabral,Luis M,Michael H,Riordan. Incentive for Cost Reduction under Price Cap Regulation [J]. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 1(June.) 1989
[22] Chantal Blouin. The WTO Agreeement on Basic Telecommunications: a reevaluation [J]. Telecommunications Policy 24(2000)135-142
[23] Clifford, Winston. Economic Deregulation: Days of Reckoning for Microeconomist [J]. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol.31,Issue3(Sep,1993),1263-1289
[24] Colin Kirkpatrick, David Parker. Infrastructure Regulation: Models for Developing Asia[R]. ADB Institute Reserch Paper Series No.60, November 2004
[25] Comanor·William·S, Wilson·Thomas·A. Adertising market structure and performanced [J]. Review of Economics and statistics, 1967, 49(4):423-440
[26] Delbert·A·Fitchett. Capital-labor Substituional in the Manufacturing Sector of Panama [J]. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 1976, Vol.24, No.3:577-592
[27] European Commission. Green paper on the convergence of the Telecommunications, Media and information Technology Sectors and the Implications for Regulation towards an Information Society Approach [R]. Brussels: European Commission, 1997
[28] Germa Bel, Francesc Trillas. Privatization Corporate control and regulatory reform: the case of Telefonica [J]. Telecomminications Policy 29(2005)25-51
[29] Harold Demsetz. Why regulate utilities. The Journal of Law Economics,Vol.XI,April, 1968
[30] Harver Averch, Leland L, Johnson. Behavior of the firm under regulatory constraint [M]. The American Economic Review, Vol52,Issue(Dec.,1962),1052-1069
[31] Ingo Bogelsang, Glenn Woroch. Local Telephone Service: A Complex Dance of Technology Regulation and Competition. Forthcoming in industry Studies [M], 2nd Edition,edited by Larry Duetsch,M.E.Sharpe, 1998
[32] Jay, Pil, Choi. Network Externality Compatibility [M]. Choice and Plannned Obsolescence. Journal of Industrial Economics,Vol.42, Issue2 (Jun., 1994), 167-182
[33] Gregory Sidak, Daniel F. Spulber. Deregulation and Managed Competiton in Network Industries [M]. Yale Journal on Regulation,Vol.15, No.1, Winter 1998
[34] John Sterm, John Cubbin. Regulatory Effectiveness: The Impact of Regulatory and Regulatory Goberance Arrangerments On Electricity Indutry Outcomes: A Review Paper [R]. Department of Economics Discussion Paper Series(City University, London), No 04/01
[35] John Ure. China telecoms: Regulations and Forces [M]. Paper Delivered to China Telecoms:Finance, Investment and Regulation IIR Conferences, 5-6 May 1997
[36] Joshua S, Gans, Stephen P.King, Graceme Woodbridge. Numbers to the people: regulation ownership and local number portability [M]. Information Economics and Policy 13(2001)167-180
[37] Joseph·P·Kalt. Technological Change and Factor Substitution in the United States: 1929-1967 [J]. International Economic Review, 1978, Vol.19, No.3:761-775
[38] Kao K S. Discussion of 3G Development and Licence Issunace Policy [J]. Telecommunications Magzine, 10, 7-9
[39] Karakaya F, Michael J S. Barries to Entry and Market Entry Decision in Consumer and Indutrial Good Market [M]. Journal of Marketing (1989), 53:80-91
[40] Klepper, Graddy. The Evolution of New Industries and the Determinants of Markets of Market Strucuture [J]. Rand Journal of Economics, 1990:27-44
[41] Lawrence J, White. US telephone deregulation: lessons to be learned and mistakes to be avoided [M]. Japan and the World Economy,12(2000)173-183
[42] Liangchun Yu,Anford Berg,Qing Guo. Market Performance of Chinese Telecommunications: New regulatory Policies. Telecommunications Policy:Chinese Telecommunications Policies (2004)
[43] Luis H,Gutierrez,,Sanford Berg. Telecommunications liberalization and regulatory governace: lessons from Latin America. Telecommunications Plicy24 (2000)865-884
[44] Laffont J J,Rey P,Tirole J. Competition Between Telecommunications Operators [J] ,European Economics, 1997 14: 701-711
[45] Laffont J J, Tirole J. Access Pricing and Competition [J]. European Economics Review, 1994, 38, 1673-1710
[46] Laffont J J, Tirole J. Creating Competition through Interconnection: Theory and Practice [J]. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 1996, 10: 56-227
[47] Laffont J J, Rey P, Tirole J. Network Competition: II .Pricing Discrimination [J]. RAND Journal of Economics, 1998,29(1):38-56
[48] Laffont J J, Rey P, Tirole J. Network Competition: I .Overview and Nondiscriminatory Pricing [J].RAND Journal of Economics, 1998,29(1):1-37
[49] Mark Armstrong, Dvid E.M.Sappington. Regulation Competition and Liberazation 2005 9
[50] Martin Peitz. Asymmatric access price regulation in telecommunications markets. European Economic Review 49(2005)341-358
[51] Martha A, Garcia-Murillo, Ian Macinnes. FCC organizational structure and regulatory conbergence. Telecommunications Policy 25(2001)431-452
[52] Matthias Blonski. Network externalities and two-part tariffs in telecommunication markets. Information Economics and Policy 14(2002)95-109
[53] MichaelL, Katz, Carl Shaprio. Network Externalities Competition and Compatibility. The American Economic Review,Vol.75, Issue 5(June, 1985), 424-440
[54] Michael Ghertman, Bertrand quelin. Regulation and transaction costs in telecommunications. Telecommunication Policy,Vol.19, No.6, pp.487-500, 1997
[55] Nicholas Economides. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and its Impact. New York University Center for Law and Business Working Paper #CLB-99-003
[56] Noel D Uri. Changing Productive efficiency in telecommunications in the United States. Int.J.Production Economics, 72(121-137)
[57] Paeker, David. A decade of privatization: The effect of ownership change and competition on British Telecom. British Review of Economic Issues 16,87-113
[58] Peter, Lovelock, John Ure. Telecommunications Policy in China:A Two-tier Bargaining Model. The Telecomminications Reserch Project ,Center of AsianStudies,The University of Hong Kong,April,1999
[59] Ping Gao, Kalle Lyytinen. Transformation of China’s telecommunications sector:a macro perspective. Telecomminications Plicy 24(2000)719-730
[60] Richard T.Shin, John S.Ying. Unnatural Monopolies in Local Telephone. The Land Journal Economics,Vol.23, Issue 3(Sumer, 1992), 171-183
[61] Rober W, Hahn. Policy Watch-Government Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Regulation. Journal of Economic Perspectives Vol12,Number 4,Fall,1998,Pages 201-210
[62] Roger G, Noll. Telecommunications Reform in Developing Countries. Aei-bookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Working Paper 99-100 December 1999
[63] R.Collins & C, Murroni. New Media New Policy. London: Polity Press, 1996
[64] Sam Peltzman. Toward a More General Theory of Regulation. Nber Working Papper No.133
[65] Sanghoon Ahn. Competition, Innovation and Productivity Growth:A review of Theory and Evidence. ECO/WKP(2002)3
[66] Sangjin Lee. Indicators for the Accessment of Telecommunications Competition. Deirectorate for Science,Technology and Industry Committee Foe Information,Computer ang Communications Policy(OECD),17-jan-2003
[67] Scott J Wallsten. An empirical analysis of competition,privatization,and regulation in telecommunication markets in Africa and Latin Americ. The World Bank Working Papper,Jun.1999
[68] Smith W, Kenneth Lehn. Deregulation, the Evolution of Corporate Governance Structure and Survival. The American Economic Review,Vol.87,Issue 2,Papers and Proceedings of the Hundred and Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association(May 1997),421-425
[69] Stern J(1997). What makes an independent regulator independent. Business Strategy Review, Vol.8, No.2, pp67-84
[70] Stern J, Holder S. Regulatory governance: criteria for assessing the performance of regulatory systems.An application to infrastructure industries in the developing countries of Asia. Utilities Policy, Vol.8, pp.33-50
[71] Schwartz, M, Reynolds R.J. Contestable markets: an uprising in the theory of industry structure: comment. American Economic Review, 73 1983
[72] Schenk, Karl-Ernst. The pattern of evolution, emergence of markets, and institutional change in telecommunications-a very special or a more general phenomenon? Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. 1997
[73] Scherer·F·M. Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance: Second edition [M].Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 1980
[74] Sutton·John. Technology and market structure: theory and history [M].Cambridge: Mass MIT Press, 1988
[75] Taylor, L. Telecommunications Demand: A Survey and Critique. Cambridge, Mass: Ballinger. 1980
[76] T Kiessling Y Blindeel. The EU regulatory framework in telecommunications [M]. Telecommunication Policy,Vol.No.7, pp. 571-592, 1998
[77] Waterson M. Regulation of the Firm and Natural Monopoly. New York: Basil Blackwell 1988
[78] Wallsten, Scott J 2000a. An economic analysis of telecommunications competition, privatization, and regulation in Africa and Latin America [J]. workingpapper, Palo Alto: Stanford University
[79] Yale M.Braunstein. Book review-Cost Proxy models and telecommunications Policy: a new empirical approach to regulation [J]. Information Economics and Policy16(2004)311-313
[1]马骏. 2006年:电信竞争模式的演变[R].国研报告,2006年10月
[2]国家发改委经济体制与管理研究所电信体制研究课题组.中国电信市场结构与有效监管研究[R]。国研报告, 2007年12月
[3]黄继忠.自然垄断与管制:理论和经验[M].经济科学出版社,2004
[4]胡汉辉,沈华.网络的融合及电信管制的动态性[J].产业经济研究(双月刊), 2008年第1期
[5]张维迎,盛洪.从电信业看中国的反垄断问题[J].改革, 1998年第二期
[6]张维迎,马捷.恶性竞争的产权基础[J].经济研究, 1999(b)
[7]朱金周等.中国电信业国际竞争力发展报告(2002,2003,2004)[R].中国信息产业部电信研究院通信政策研究所
[8]朱金周.中国电信业产权的经济学分析[J] .经济社会体制比较(双月刊), 2005年第4期总第120期
[9]朱彤.竞争、可竞争与政府管制[J].世界经济, 2001年第4期
[10]蔡翔.浅析3G许可证的发放方式[J].世界电信, 2001年第7期
[11]曹建海.过度竞争论[M].中国人民大学出版社, 2000年版
[12]曹桢桢,刘险峰.关于我国电信监管政策的分析研究[J].大众科技, 2006年第1期
[13]让·雅克·拉丰,让·泰勒尔.电信竞争[M].人民邮电出版社, 2001
[14] [美]F.M.谢勒著,姚贤涛、王倩译.技术创新:经济增长的原动力[M].北京:新华出版社,2001年2月
[15]张昕竹,让.拉丰,安.易斯塔什.网络产业:管制与竞争力理论[M].北京:社会科学出版社,2000年
[16]张昕竹.中国管制与竞争:理论与政策[M].社会科学文献出版社,2000年
[17]张昕竹.中国基础设施产业的管制改革与发展[M].国家行政学院出版社,2002年
[18]唐晓华.产业组织与信息[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2005
[19]唐晓华.产业集群:辽宁经济增长的路径选择[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2006
[20]唐晓华,张丹宁.典型产业网络的组织结构分析[J].产业经济评论,2008,(1):45-59
[21]唐晓华,杨灵.全球化背景下的电信产业标准竞争.中国工业经济,2009年2月
[22]王伟光.技术创新与市场结构演化:从A-U、PLC到SCP[J].沈阳师范大学学报(社会科学版),2004年第6期
[23]王伟光.自主创新、产业发展与公共政策—基于政府作用的一种视角[M].经济管理出版社,2006年2月第1版
[24]王伟光,董如合.市场结构与技术创新:一种产业组织理论的观点[J].沈阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2001年11月第25卷第6期
[25]张保胜.网络产业技术创新与竞争[M].经济管理出版社,2007年12月第1版
[26]杨灵.竞争、产权结构与中国电信运营商重组.理论探讨,2008年6月
[27]丹尼尔?卡尔顿,杰弗里?佩罗夫(美).管制与市场[M].上海三联书店,上海人民出版社
[28]丹尼斯?卡尔顿,杰弗里?佩罗夫(美).现代产业组织[M].上海三联书店、上海人民出版社
[29]段小强.中国电信业改革路径[J].东北大学学报(社会科学版)第7卷第1期
[30]范瑾.电信管制的经济学分析[J].沿海企业与科技. 2005年第2期
[31]冯霞.从我国电信业的市场结构分析看改革前景[J].科技管理研究, 2004年第6期
[32]付信明,邓玲玉.基于SCP框架对我国电信业的分析[J].重庆工商大学学报,第15期增刊
[33]高迎晖,皇甫婧琪.关于电信业的反垄断立法问题[J].理论探索, 2005年第3期
[34]管仁勤.电信行业的垄断与竞争问题研究[J].经济经纬, 2003年第4期
[35]何霞.国外电信资费管制政策的演进与发展[J].世界电信, 2004年第12期
[36]何霞.韩国电信市场发展与政府管制[J].世界电信, 2005年第9期
[37]胡汉辉.电信竞争与网络融合-国外的动态和中国的改革[J].现代经济探讨, 2005年第4期
[38]胡珊,石军.转型环境下的中国电信业监管[J].电信科学, 2006年第1期
[39]李俭伟.影响3G牌照发放的适度竞争问题分析[J].世界电信, 2004年第3期
[40]连海霞.有效竞争与中国电信业监管体制改革[J].经济评论, 2001年第4期
[41]刘俊杰.技术创新、管制重建与中国电信产业的发展[J].当代财经, 2005年第5期
[42]刘林森编译.美国光通信市场激增,产能过剩面临泡沫(2004年1月8日)[EB]. http://www.enet.com.cn
[43]刘新梅,刘胜强.我国电信管制机构改革研究[J].经济社会体制比较(双月刊), 2004年第6期
[44]卢安文.关于我国电信业有效竞争的研究[J].改革与战略,2004年12月
[45]罗璇. 70年代以来电信体制自由化和中国电信产业快速增长的关系[D].香港理工大学硕士论文,1999年
[46]吕廷杰,张珂.通过管制重构加强对我国电信产业的政府监管[J].北京大学学报(社会科学版),第6卷第1期
[47]马伟华.竞争与管制-中国电信业改革的思考[J].经济与管理研究, 2001年第2期
[48]苗巧刚,李保伟.我国电信业有效竞争研究[J].当代财经, 2004年第1期
[49]彭伟斌.论中国电信产业的有效竞争[J].中国软科学, 2000年第11期
[50]吕薇.产业重组与竞争[M].中国发展出版社,2002
[51] Y·巴泽尔.产权的经济分析[M].上海三联书店、上海人民出版社,1997
[52]迈克尔·迪屈奇.交易成本经济学[M].经济科学出版社,1999
[53]迈克尔·波特.竞争战略[M].华夏出版社, 1997
[54]迈克尔·波特.竞争优势[M].华夏出版社, 1997
[55]张曙光.中国制度变迁的案例研究[M].中国财政经济出版社, 1999
[56]张曙光编.中国制度变迁的案例研究(第一集)[M].上海人民出版社1997年版
[57]张继伟.联通“中中外”解套内幕”[J].财经, 2000年第18期
[58]张立.电信监管改革:问题、成因与未来的任务[J].世界电信, 2005年第8期
[59]张立.改进电信行业公司治理任重道艰[J].通信企业管理, 2005年第11期
[60]张立,王学人.浅议电信监管问责制[J].世界电信, 2005年第1期
[61]王廷惠.竞争与垄断:过程竞争理论视角的分析[J].经济科学出版社,2007年10月
[62]周振华.产业结构优化论[J].上海人民出版社, 1992
[63]江小涓,刘世锦.竞争性行业如何实现生产集中[J].管理世界,1996年第一期
[64]江小涓等.体制转轨中的增长、绩效与产业组织变化—对中国若干行业的实证研究[M].上海三联书店和上海人民出版社, 1999
[65]于立,肖兴志.自然垄断理论演进综述[J].经济学动态, 2006年第6期
[66]汪向东.破除“自然垄断教条”加大电信业总体竞争[EB].载中评网2001年2月11日第10期
[67]刘戒骄.自然垄断产业的放松管制和管制改革[J].中国工业经济, 2000年第11期
[68]刘戒骄.竞争机制与网络产业的管制改革[J].中国工业经济, 2001年第9期
[69]黄海波.中国电信业市场结构的演进及面临的问题—对电信业放松管制与引入竞争的描述[M].载于“中国管制与竞争:理论政策”,张昕竹等编,社会科学文献出版社,2000,第317～334页
[70]卡尔?夏皮罗,哈尔?瓦里安.信息规则—网络经济的策略指导(中译本)[M].中国人民大学出版社, 2000
[71]王俊豪.论自然垄断产业的有效竞争[J].经济研究,1998年第8期
[72]王俊豪,周小梅.中国自然垄断产业民营化改革与政府管制政策[J].经济管理出版社,2004
[73]王骏豪.中国垄断性产业管制机构改革-以中国电信产业管制机构为例[J].中国工业经济, 2005年第1期
[74]王骏豪. A-J效应与自然垄断产业的价格管制模型[J].中国工业经济, 2001年第10期
[75]王骏豪.垄断性产业市场结构重组后的分类管制与协调政策[J].中国工业经济, 2005年第11期
[76]腾颖等.放松管制的路径与电信市场结构的演进[J].经济体制改革, 2004年第5期
[77]王红梅.电信全球竞争[M].人民邮电出版社2000年版
[78]王琦,陈起跃.网络外部性在电信价格管制中的研究[J].北京大学学报(社会科学版),第7卷第1期
[79]王文峰.促进电信业有效竞争的制度逻辑[J].同济大学学报(社会科学版), 2004年2月
[80]杨海涛.论电信市场的有效竞争机制[J].价格与市场, 2004年第1期
[81]杨仲荣.电信市场无序竞争的原因分析和根治之策[J].企业经济, 2005年第5期
[82]余晖.受管制市场里里的政企同盟—以中国电信产业为例[J].中国工业经济,2000年第一期
[83] [日]植草益.微观管制经济学[M].中国发展出版社,1992
[84]余晖.受管制市场里的政企同盟-以中国电信产业为例[J].中国工业经济, 2001年第1期。
[85]于良春.论电信产业的政府管制[J].东岳论丛,第25卷第2期(2004年第3月)
[86]于良春,黄莉.英、美电信产业管制体制之比较研究及其对我国的启示[J].经济评论, 2002年第5期
[87]于良春,胡雅梅.管制、放松管制与中国电信业改革[J].中国工业经济. 1999年第4期
[88]郑建伟.论我国独立的电信管制机构的立法模式[J].学术前沿, 2005年第12期
[89]郑奇宝.电信行业的竞争性垄断和有效竞争[J].上海综合经济, 2004年第9期
1根据国际电联ITU1998年的一份报告,大西洋光缆每话路分钟的传输成本仅仅是0.01美分,折合人民币约为0.8厘。
2张昕竹等《网络产业:规制与竞争理论》社会科学文献出版社2000年第3页
1陈卫华,《中国电信市场的有效竞争研究》第107页～108页,经济科学出版社,2005年5月
1 [法]梯若尔:《产业组织理论》(张维迎校译,中国人民大学出版社1997年版,第243页)。
1 (日)植草益:《信息通讯业的产业融合》,《中国工业经济》,2001年第2期
1 R·Collins&C·Muroni. New Media, New Policy. London: Polity Press, 1996.
[1] Andrea Goldstein. Institutional Endowment and Regulatory Reform in Telecoms[R]. A Five-country Comparion in the MEDA Region. OECD DevelopCenter
[2] Armstrong M. Competition in Telecommunications[J] Oxford Review pf Economic Policy, 13 1997
[3] Armstrong M, Doyle C, Vickers J. The Access Pricing Problem: A Synthesis [J]. Journal of Industrial Economics,1996,44(2): 131-150
[4] Armstrong M, Doyle C. Network Access Pricing [R]. Report to H M Treasury,1993
[5] Armstrong M, Vickers J. Competitive Price Discrimination[J], RAND Journal of Economics, 2001, 32(4): 579-605
[6] Armstrong M, Vickers J. Price Discrimination, Competition and Regulation [J]. Journal of Industrial Economics, 1993, 41: 335-360
[7] Armstrong M, Vickers J. The Access Pricing Problem with Deregulation:A Note[J], The Journal of Industrial Economics, 1998,46(1):115-121
[8] Armstrong M. Access Pricing, Bypass, and Universal Service[J], The American Economic Review, 2001, 91(2): 297-301
[9] Armstrong M. Competition in Telecommunications [J].Oxford Review of Economic Policy,1997,13:64-82
[10] Armstrong M. Network Interconnection in Telecommunications[J], The Economic Journa1, 1998, 108(448): 545-564
[11] Armstrong M. Optimal Regulation with Unknown Demand and Cost Functions [J]. Journal of Economic Theory, 1999, 84(2): 196-215
[12] Agarwal, Gort. The Evolution of Market and Entry, Exit and Surbival of Firms [J]. Rebiew of Economics and Statistic, 1996:489-498
[13] Bauml, Panzar, Willing. Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure[J], Harcout Brace Jovanovich, Inc. 1982
[14] Baumol W J. Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the theory of Industry Structure[J], American Economic Review, 72 1982
[15] Baumol W J. On the Proper Cost Tests for Natural Monopoly in a Multi-product Industry[J], American Economic Review, 67 1977
[16] Baumol, W J,R. D. Willig. Contestability: Developments since the Book[J]. Oxford Economic Papers(Suppl) 38 1986
[17] Barbara A, Cherry, Steve S. Wildman. Institutional endowment as foundation for regulatory performance and regime transitionas: the role of the US constitiona in telecommunicationas regulation in the United States[J] Telecommunications Policy 23(1999), 607-623
[18] Berg S, Tschirhart J. Contributions of Neoclassical Economics to Public Utility Analysis [J]. Land economics 71 1995
[19] Berg S, TschirhartJ. Natural Monopoly Regulation [J]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1988
[20] Calhoun G. Wireless Access and the Local Telephone Network [J]. Boston, Lodon: Artech House 1992
[21] Cabral,Luis M,Michael H,Riordan. Incentive for Cost Reduction under Price Cap Regulation [J]. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 1(June.) 1989
[22] Chantal Blouin. The WTO Agreeement on Basic Telecommunications: a reevaluation [J]. Telecommunications Policy 24(2000)135-142
[23] Clifford, Winston. Economic Deregulation: Days of Reckoning for Microeconomist [J]. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol.31,Issue3(Sep,1993),1263-1289
[24] Colin Kirkpatrick, David Parker. Infrastructure Regulation: Models for Developing Asia[R]. ADB Institute Reserch Paper Series No.60, November 2004
[25] Comanor·William·S, Wilson·Thomas·A. Adertising market structure and performanced [J]. Review of Economics and statistics, 1967, 49(4):423-440
[26] Delbert·A·Fitchett. Capital-labor Substituional in the Manufacturing Sector of Panama [J]. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 1976, Vol.24, No.3:577-592
[27] European Commission. Green paper on the convergence of the Telecommunications, Media and information Technology Sectors and the Implications for Regulation towards an Information Society Approach [R]. Brussels: European Commission, 1997
[28] Germa Bel, Francesc Trillas. Privatization Corporate control and regulatory reform: the case of Telefonica [J]. Telecomminications Policy 29(2005)25-51
[29] Harold Demsetz. Why regulate utilities. The Journal of Law Economics,Vol.XI,April, 1968
[30] Harver Averch, Leland L, Johnson. Behavior of the firm under regulatory constraint [M]. The American Economic Review, Vol52,Issue(Dec.,1962),1052-1069
[31] Ingo Bogelsang, Glenn Woroch. Local Telephone Service: A Complex Dance of Technology Regulation and Competition. Forthcoming in industry Studies [M], 2nd Edition,edited by Larry Duetsch,M.E.Sharpe, 1998
[32] Jay, Pil, Choi. Network Externality Compatibility [M]. Choice and Plannned Obsolescence. Journal of Industrial Economics,Vol.42, Issue2 (Jun., 1994), 167-182
[33] Gregory Sidak, Daniel F. Spulber. Deregulation and Managed Competiton in Network Industries [M]. Yale Journal on Regulation,Vol.15, No.1, Winter 1998
[34] John Sterm, John Cubbin. Regulatory Effectiveness: The Impact of Regulatory and Regulatory Goberance Arrangerments On Electricity Indutry Outcomes: A Review Paper [R]. Department of Economics Discussion Paper Series(City University, London), No 04/01
[35] John Ure. China telecoms: Regulations and Forces [M]. Paper Delivered to China Telecoms:Finance, Investment and Regulation IIR Conferences, 5-6 May 1997
[36] Joshua S, Gans, Stephen P.King, Graceme Woodbridge. Numbers to the people: regulation ownership and local number portability [M]. Information Economics and Policy 13(2001)167-180
[37] Joseph·P·Kalt. Technological Change and Factor Substitution in the United States: 1929-1967 [J]. International Economic Review, 1978, Vol.19, No.3:761-775
[38] Kao K S. Discussion of 3G Development and Licence Issunace Policy [J]. Telecommunications Magzine, 10, 7-9
[39] Karakaya F, Michael J S. Barries to Entry and Market Entry Decision in Consumer and Indutrial Good Market [M]. Journal of Marketing (1989), 53:80-91
[40] Klepper, Graddy. The Evolution of New Industries and the Determinants of Markets of Market Strucuture [J]. Rand Journal of Economics, 1990:27-44
[41] Lawrence J, White. US telephone deregulation: lessons to be learned and mistakes to be avoided [M]. Japan and the World Economy,12(2000)173-183
[42] Liangchun Yu,Anford Berg,Qing Guo. Market Performance of Chinese Telecommunications: New regulatory Policies. Telecommunications Policy:Chinese Telecommunications Policies (2004)
[43] Luis H,Gutierrez,,Sanford Berg. Telecommunications liberalization and regulatory governace: lessons from Latin America. Telecommunications Plicy24 (2000)865-884
[44] Laffont J J,Rey P,Tirole J. Competition Between Telecommunications Operators [J] ,European Economics, 1997 14: 701-711
[45] Laffont J J, Tirole J. Access Pricing and Competition [J]. European Economics Review, 1994, 38, 1673-1710
[46] Laffont J J, Tirole J. Creating Competition through Interconnection: Theory and Practice [J]. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 1996, 10: 56-227
[47] Laffont J J, Rey P, Tirole J. Network Competition: II .Pricing Discrimination [J]. RAND Journal of Economics, 1998,29(1):38-56
[48] Laffont J J, Rey P, Tirole J. Network Competition: I .Overview and Nondiscriminatory Pricing [J].RAND Journal of Economics, 1998,29(1):1-37
[49] Mark Armstrong, Dvid E.M.Sappington. Regulation Competition and Liberazation 2005 9
[50] Martin Peitz. Asymmatric access price regulation in telecommunications markets. European Economic Review 49(2005)341-358
[51] Martha A, Garcia-Murillo, Ian Macinnes. FCC organizational structure and regulatory conbergence. Telecommunications Policy 25(2001)431-452
[52] Matthias Blonski. Network externalities and two-part tariffs in telecommunication markets. Information Economics and Policy 14(2002)95-109
[53] MichaelL, Katz, Carl Shaprio. Network Externalities Competition and Compatibility. The American Economic Review,Vol.75, Issue 5(June, 1985), 424-440
[54] Michael Ghertman, Bertrand quelin. Regulation and transaction costs in telecommunications. Telecommunication Policy,Vol.19, No.6, pp.487-500, 1997
[55] Nicholas Economides. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and its Impact. New York University Center for Law and Business Working Paper #CLB-99-003
[56] Noel D Uri. Changing Productive efficiency in telecommunications in the United States. Int.J.Production Economics, 72(121-137)
[57] Paeker, David. A decade of privatization: The effect of ownership change and competition on British Telecom. British Review of Economic Issues 16,87-113
[58] Peter, Lovelock, John Ure. Telecommunications Policy in China:A Two-tier Bargaining Model. The Telecomminications Reserch Project ,Center of AsianStudies,The University of Hong Kong,April,1999
[59] Ping Gao, Kalle Lyytinen. Transformation of China’s telecommunications sector:a macro perspective. Telecomminications Plicy 24(2000)719-730
[60] Richard T.Shin, John S.Ying. Unnatural Monopolies in Local Telephone. The Land Journal Economics,Vol.23, Issue 3(Sumer, 1992), 171-183
[61] Rober W, Hahn. Policy Watch-Government Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Regulation. Journal of Economic Perspectives Vol12,Number 4,Fall,1998,Pages 201-210
[62] Roger G, Noll. Telecommunications Reform in Developing Countries. Aei-bookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Working Paper 99-100 December 1999
[63] R.Collins & C, Murroni. New Media New Policy. London: Polity Press, 1996
[64] Sam Peltzman. Toward a More General Theory of Regulation. Nber Working Papper No.133
[65] Sanghoon Ahn. Competition, Innovation and Productivity Growth:A review of Theory and Evidence. ECO/WKP(2002)3
[66] Sangjin Lee. Indicators for the Accessment of Telecommunications Competition. Deirectorate for Science,Technology and Industry Committee Foe Information,Computer ang Communications Policy(OECD),17-jan-2003
[67] Scott J Wallsten. An empirical analysis of competition,privatization,and regulation in telecommunication markets in Africa and Latin Americ. The World Bank Working Papper,Jun.1999
[68] Smith W, Kenneth Lehn. Deregulation, the Evolution of Corporate Governance Structure and Survival. The American Economic Review,Vol.87,Issue 2,Papers and Proceedings of the Hundred and Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association(May 1997),421-425
[69] Stern J(1997). What makes an independent regulator independent. Business Strategy Review, Vol.8, No.2, pp67-84
[70] Stern J, Holder S. Regulatory governance: criteria for assessing the performance of regulatory systems.An application to infrastructure industries in the developing countries of Asia. Utilities Policy, Vol.8, pp.33-50
[71] Schwartz, M, Reynolds R.J. Contestable markets: an uprising in the theory of industry structure: comment. American Economic Review, 73 1983
[72] Schenk, Karl-Ernst. The pattern of evolution, emergence of markets, and institutional change in telecommunications-a very special or a more general phenomenon? Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. 1997
[73] Scherer·F·M. Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance: Second edition [M].Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 1980
[74] Sutton·John. Technology and market structure: theory and history [M].Cambridge: Mass MIT Press, 1988
[75] Taylor, L. Telecommunications Demand: A Survey and Critique. Cambridge, Mass: Ballinger. 1980
[76] T Kiessling Y Blindeel. The EU regulatory framework in telecommunications [M]. Telecommunication Policy,Vol.No.7, pp. 571-592, 1998
[77] Waterson M. Regulation of the Firm and Natural Monopoly. New York: Basil Blackwell 1988
[78] Wallsten, Scott J 2000a. An economic analysis of telecommunications competition, privatization, and regulation in Africa and Latin America [J]. workingpapper, Palo Alto: Stanford University
[79] Yale M.Braunstein. Book review-Cost Proxy models and telecommunications Policy: a new empirical approach to regulation [J]. Information Economics and Policy16(2004)311-313
[1]马骏. 2006年:电信竞争模式的演变[R].国研报告,2006年10月
[2]国家发改委经济体制与管理研究所电信体制研究课题组.中国电信市场结构与有效监管研究[R]。国研报告, 2007年12月
[3]黄继忠.自然垄断与管制:理论和经验[M].经济科学出版社,2004
[4]胡汉辉,沈华.网络的融合及电信管制的动态性[J].产业经济研究(双月刊), 2008年第1期
[5]张维迎,盛洪.从电信业看中国的反垄断问题[J].改革, 1998年第二期
[6]张维迎,马捷.恶性竞争的产权基础[J].经济研究, 1999(b)
[7]朱金周等.中国电信业国际竞争力发展报告(2002,2003,2004)[R].中国信息产业部电信研究院通信政策研究所
[8]朱金周.中国电信业产权的经济学分析[J] .经济社会体制比较(双月刊), 2005年第4期总第120期
[9]朱彤.竞争、可竞争与政府管制[J].世界经济, 2001年第4期
[10]蔡翔.浅析3G许可证的发放方式[J].世界电信, 2001年第7期
[11]曹建海.过度竞争论[M].中国人民大学出版社, 2000年版
[12]曹桢桢,刘险峰.关于我国电信监管政策的分析研究[J].大众科技, 2006年第1期
[13]让·雅克·拉丰,让·泰勒尔.电信竞争[M].人民邮电出版社, 2001
[14] [美]F.M.谢勒著,姚贤涛、王倩译.技术创新:经济增长的原动力[M].北京:新华出版社,2001年2月
[15]张昕竹,让.拉丰,安.易斯塔什.网络产业:管制与竞争力理论[M].北京:社会科学出版社,2000年
[16]张昕竹.中国管制与竞争:理论与政策[M].社会科学文献出版社,2000年
[17]张昕竹.中国基础设施产业的管制改革与发展[M].国家行政学院出版社,2002年
[18]唐晓华.产业组织与信息[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2005
[19]唐晓华.产业集群:辽宁经济增长的路径选择[M].北京:经济管理出版社,2006
[20]唐晓华,张丹宁.典型产业网络的组织结构分析[J].产业经济评论,2008,(1):45-59
[21]唐晓华,杨灵.全球化背景下的电信产业标准竞争.中国工业经济,2009年2月
[22]王伟光.技术创新与市场结构演化:从A-U、PLC到SCP[J].沈阳师范大学学报(社会科学版),2004年第6期
[23]王伟光.自主创新、产业发展与公共政策—基于政府作用的一种视角[M].经济管理出版社,2006年2月第1版
[24]王伟光,董如合.市场结构与技术创新:一种产业组织理论的观点[J].沈阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2001年11月第25卷第6期
[25]张保胜.网络产业技术创新与竞争[M].经济管理出版社,2007年12月第1版
[26]杨灵.竞争、产权结构与中国电信运营商重组.理论探讨,2008年6月
[27]丹尼尔?卡尔顿,杰弗里?佩罗夫(美).管制与市场[M].上海三联书店,上海人民出版社
[28]丹尼斯?卡尔顿,杰弗里?佩罗夫(美).现代产业组织[M].上海三联书店、上海人民出版社
[29]段小强.中国电信业改革路径[J].东北大学学报(社会科学版)第7卷第1期
[30]范瑾.电信管制的经济学分析[J].沿海企业与科技. 2005年第2期
[31]冯霞.从我国电信业的市场结构分析看改革前景[J].科技管理研究, 2004年第6期
[32]付信明,邓玲玉.基于SCP框架对我国电信业的分析[J].重庆工商大学学报,第15期增刊
[33]高迎晖,皇甫婧琪.关于电信业的反垄断立法问题[J].理论探索, 2005年第3期
[34]管仁勤.电信行业的垄断与竞争问题研究[J].经济经纬, 2003年第4期
[35]何霞.国外电信资费管制政策的演进与发展[J].世界电信, 2004年第12期
[36]何霞.韩国电信市场发展与政府管制[J].世界电信, 2005年第9期
[37]胡汉辉.电信竞争与网络融合-国外的动态和中国的改革[J].现代经济探讨, 2005年第4期
[38]胡珊,石军.转型环境下的中国电信业监管[J].电信科学, 2006年第1期
[39]李俭伟.影响3G牌照发放的适度竞争问题分析[J].世界电信, 2004年第3期
[40]连海霞.有效竞争与中国电信业监管体制改革[J].经济评论, 2001年第4期
[41]刘俊杰.技术创新、管制重建与中国电信产业的发展[J].当代财经, 2005年第5期
[42]刘林森编译.美国光通信市场激增,产能过剩面临泡沫(2004年1月8日)[EB]. http://www.enet.com.cn
[43]刘新梅,刘胜强.我国电信管制机构改革研究[J].经济社会体制比较(双月刊), 2004年第6期
[44]卢安文.关于我国电信业有效竞争的研究[J].改革与战略,2004年12月
[45]罗璇. 70年代以来电信体制自由化和中国电信产业快速增长的关系[D].香港理工大学硕士论文,1999年
[46]吕廷杰,张珂.通过管制重构加强对我国电信产业的政府监管[J].北京大学学报(社会科学版),第6卷第1期
[47]马伟华.竞争与管制-中国电信业改革的思考[J].经济与管理研究, 2001年第2期
[48]苗巧刚,李保伟.我国电信业有效竞争研究[J].当代财经, 2004年第1期
[49]彭伟斌.论中国电信产业的有效竞争[J].中国软科学, 2000年第11期
[50]吕薇.产业重组与竞争[M].中国发展出版社,2002
[51] Y·巴泽尔.产权的经济分析[M].上海三联书店、上海人民出版社,1997
[52]迈克尔·迪屈奇.交易成本经济学[M].经济科学出版社,1999
[53]迈克尔·波特.竞争战略[M].华夏出版社, 1997
[54]迈克尔·波特.竞争优势[M].华夏出版社, 1997
[55]张曙光.中国制度变迁的案例研究[M].中国财政经济出版社, 1999
[56]张曙光编.中国制度变迁的案例研究(第一集)[M].上海人民出版社1997年版
[57]张继伟.联通“中中外”解套内幕”[J].财经, 2000年第18期
[58]张立.电信监管改革:问题、成因与未来的任务[J].世界电信, 2005年第8期
[59]张立.改进电信行业公司治理任重道艰[J].通信企业管理, 2005年第11期
[60]张立,王学人.浅议电信监管问责制[J].世界电信, 2005年第1期
[61]王廷惠.竞争与垄断:过程竞争理论视角的分析[J].经济科学出版社,2007年10月
[62]周振华.产业结构优化论[J].上海人民出版社, 1992
[63]江小涓,刘世锦.竞争性行业如何实现生产集中[J].管理世界,1996年第一期
[64]江小涓等.体制转轨中的增长、绩效与产业组织变化—对中国若干行业的实证研究[M].上海三联书店和上海人民出版社, 1999
[65]于立,肖兴志.自然垄断理论演进综述[J].经济学动态, 2006年第6期
[66]汪向东.破除“自然垄断教条”加大电信业总体竞争[EB].载中评网2001年2月11日第10期
[67]刘戒骄.自然垄断产业的放松管制和管制改革[J].中国工业经济, 2000年第11期
[68]刘戒骄.竞争机制与网络产业的管制改革[J].中国工业经济, 2001年第9期
[69]黄海波.中国电信业市场结构的演进及面临的问题—对电信业放松管制与引入竞争的描述[M].载于“中国管制与竞争:理论政策”,张昕竹等编,社会科学文献出版社,2000,第317～334页
[70]卡尔?夏皮罗,哈尔?瓦里安.信息规则—网络经济的策略指导(中译本)[M].中国人民大学出版社, 2000
[71]王俊豪.论自然垄断产业的有效竞争[J].经济研究,1998年第8期
[72]王俊豪,周小梅.中国自然垄断产业民营化改革与政府管制政策[J].经济管理出版社,2004
[73]王骏豪.中国垄断性产业管制机构改革-以中国电信产业管制机构为例[J].中国工业经济, 2005年第1期
[74]王骏豪. A-J效应与自然垄断产业的价格管制模型[J].中国工业经济, 2001年第10期
[75]王骏豪.垄断性产业市场结构重组后的分类管制与协调政策[J].中国工业经济, 2005年第11期
[76]腾颖等.放松管制的路径与电信市场结构的演进[J].经济体制改革, 2004年第5期
[77]王红梅.电信全球竞争[M].人民邮电出版社2000年版
[78]王琦,陈起跃.网络外部性在电信价格管制中的研究[J].北京大学学报(社会科学版),第7卷第1期
[79]王文峰.促进电信业有效竞争的制度逻辑[J].同济大学学报(社会科学版), 2004年2月
[80]杨海涛.论电信市场的有效竞争机制[J].价格与市场, 2004年第1期
[81]杨仲荣.电信市场无序竞争的原因分析和根治之策[J].企业经济, 2005年第5期
[82]余晖.受管制市场里里的政企同盟—以中国电信产业为例[J].中国工业经济,2000年第一期
[83] [日]植草益.微观管制经济学[M].中国发展出版社,1992
[84]余晖.受管制市场里的政企同盟-以中国电信产业为例[J].中国工业经济, 2001年第1期。
[85]于良春.论电信产业的政府管制[J].东岳论丛,第25卷第2期(2004年第3月)
[86]于良春,黄莉.英、美电信产业管制体制之比较研究及其对我国的启示[J].经济评论, 2002年第5期
[87]于良春,胡雅梅.管制、放松管制与中国电信业改革[J].中国工业经济. 1999年第4期
[88]郑建伟.论我国独立的电信管制机构的立法模式[J].学术前沿, 2005年第12期
[89]郑奇宝.电信行业的竞争性垄断和有效竞争[J].上海综合经济, 2004年第9期
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |