Conclusion

In this chapter, we discuss the relationship between regulation and socially desirable development of m-commerce. By socially desirable we mean the widespread access from anywhere to mobile services at an affordable price. We confine ourselves to the regulation of m-commerce for efficient markets, and trust in light of recent trends in regulation of EU. In other words, we sum up the e-commerce directive and telecommunications legislative package that are the cornerstones of m-commerce regulation. We use scenarios from the MobiCom study to depict the future states of m-commerce market to evaluate the eventual measures taken by the regulators to maintain socially desirable m-commerce within the next few years.

When looking back to the above-mentioned scenarios, it seems that the Internet scenario kind of liberal market would require such drastic measures of the operators right now that in the present and for the foreseeable future, it would be political suicide to take up these measures, as it would mean letting companies fall, laying off thousands of qualified white-collar workers, etc. Despite the fact that the measures are at hand in the forthcoming legislation, they will not be put into use. It is also against the interests of the market actors possessing the network infrastructure.

Hence, it is most likely that we will see the present stagnation (i.e., Depression scenario) continue for some time. It is immobilizing the whole industry, and it is evident that once the operators burnt their fingers, they are overcautious with their future investments. The problem is that this is neither in line with the socially desirable m-commerce, nor with the efficient and profitable market idea. Actually, this may end up with an outcome where the proprietary mobile networks gradually diminish in importance and lose ground to other technological platforms that can provide the users more affordable service.

However, there might be a way out of this stagnation in the third scenario, the Consensus scenario. It is not the optimal situation (it is an oligopoly), but a somewhat bearable solution in the post-UMTS investment era.

First, in this context, the competition at the European scale is to be decided. By this we mean whether we are talking about competition between proprietary networks or competition between services on a common infrastructure. The consequences are totally different. If the creation of a European mobile infrastructure for m-commerce is a high priority, the market should be made attractive for the investors, e.g., by allowing horizontal integration (i.e., pan-European fusions of networks).

In the common infrastructure view, we would like to utilize the present networks to maximum capacity, to discourage additional investing in growingly complex infrastructure, and to switch focus towards competition at the level of content and services to the customer. This means keeping the switching costs for consumers as low as possible, and consequently emphasizes the importance of the timing and quality of market analyses and benchmarking in market areas in cooperation with NRAs, market players, and the Commission. Together with benchmarking and market analyses, regulators should be sensitive to more than operators' difficulties and problems as well. At present, and during the structural changes within the electronic communications industry, it seems that the focus should be placed on improving content and service providers' positions. The low switching cost is expected to result in lower market entry for new mobile operators, wireless application service providers, and content packagers/providers, which would improve competition.

This would mean clearer horizontal separation of roles, i.e., operators are providing access and transfer over the network, and the content and service providers can be in direct customer contact (like on the Internet). Additional measures—such as opening SIM cards for service providers—may be considered, but it is worth noting that the initiatives to do this have strongly been resisted by the operators.

In the end, we would like to stress that the scenarios are used here as a starting point to evaluate the application of the newly introduced regulatory framework for m-commerce. The scenarios are not predictions, but rather a means to understand the feasible outcomes and fundamental change taking place in the proprietary networks for mobile services in EU.