Traditional regulatory methods for spectrum licensing have been recently identified as one of the causes for the under-utilization of the valuable radio spectrum. Governmental agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) are seeking ways to remove stringent regulatory barriers and facilitate broader access to the spectrum resources. The goal is to allow for an improved and ubiquitous sharing of the precious radio spectrum between commercial service providers. In this paper, we propose a novel noncooperative game theoretic approach, to show how to foster more sharing of the radio spectrum via the use of regulatory power. We define a two stage game in which the government regulators move first, followed by the providers. The providers are incentivized by lower spectrum allocation fees from the regulators in return for proof-of-sharing. The providers are offered discounted spectrum bands, potentially at different locations, but will be asked to provide coverage to users that are not subscribed to them so as to maintain their subsidy incentives from the government. In a simplification of the model, analytical expressions for the providers' perfect equilibrium strategies are derived, and we argue for the existence of the government's part of a perfect equilibrium. Our analysis shows that through subsidization, the government can provide small service providers a fair chance to compete with the large providers, thereby avoiding monopolization in the market.
Regulatory practice has been part of the wireless market since its inception as the resource being shared was soon recognized to be very valuable. Governmental agencies establish regulatory policies to increase the efficiency of the spectrum market while preserving an acceptable level of fairness in sharing the precious spectrum. The concept of subsidization is one way to involve the government so as to incentivize various long-term goals in the market being regulated. Typically, subsidy regulations are used for markets serving the larger good'' (i.e., the benefit of the whole society) and involving a significant amount of cost producers cannot bare individually. Transportation @cite_25 , agriculture @cite_18 and telecommunications @cite_24 are examples of such markets where new initiatives require significant infrastructure investments, and hence the government's involvement is justified. However, subsidization is known to have negative effects on the efficiency of the market. Thus, subsidization is preferred if at all possible.
@cite_24 @cite_18 @cite_25
2091927099 1561702655
Unlike telephone operators, which pay termination fees to reach the users of another network, Internet Content Providers (CPs) do not pay the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) of users they reach. While the consequent cross subsidization to CPs has nurtured content innovations at the edge of the Internet, it reduces the investment incentives for the access ISPs to expand capacity. As potential charges for terminating CPs' traffic are criticized under the net neutrality debate, we propose to allow CPs to voluntarily subsidize the usagebased fees induced by their content traffic for end-users. We model the regulated subsidization competition among CPs under a neutral network and show how deregulation of subsidization could increase an access ISP's utilization and revenue, strengthening its investment incentives. Although the competition might harm certain CPs, we find that the main cause comes from high access prices rather than the existence of subsidization. Our results suggest that subsidization competition will increase the competitiveness and welfare of the Internet content market; however, regulators might need to regulate access prices if the access ISP market is not competitive enough. We envision that subsidization competition could become a viable model for the future Internet. Dynamic spectrum access is a new paradigm of secondary spectrum utilization and sharing. It allows unlicensed secondary users (SUs) to exploit the opportunistically underutilized licensed spectrum. Market mechanism is a widely used promising means to regulate the consuming behaviours of users and, hence, achieve the efficient allocation and consumption of limited resources. In this paper, we propose and study a hybrid secondary spectrum market consisting of both the futures market and the spot market, in which SUs (buyers) purchase underutilized licensed spectrum from a spectrum regulator (SR), either through predefined contracts via the futures market, or through spot transactions via the spot market. We focus on the optimal spectrum allocation among SUs in an exogenous hybrid market that maximizes the secondary spectrum utilization efficiency. The problem is challenging because of the stochasticity and asymmetry of network information. To solve this problem, we first derive an off-line optimal allocatio... Unlike markets for storable commodities, electricity markets depend on the real-time balance of supply and demand. Although much of the present-day grid operates effectively without storage, cost-effective ways of storing electrical energy can help make the grid more efficient and reliable. We investigate the economics of two emerging electric energy storage (EES) technologies: sodium sulfur batteries and flywheel energy storage systems in New York state's electricity market. The analysis indicates that there is a strong economic case for EES installations in the New York City region for applications such as energy arbitrage, and that significant opportunities exist throughout New York state for regulation services. Benefits from deferral of system upgrades may be important in the decision to deploy EES. Market barriers currently make it difficult for energy-limited EES such as flywheels to receive revenue for voltage regulation. Charging efficiency is more important to the economics of EES in a competitive electricity market than has generally been recognized. Cybercrime activities are supported by infrastructures and services originating from an underground economy. The current understanding of this phenomenon is that the cybercrime economy ought to be fraught with information asymmetry and adverse selection problems. They should make the effects that we observe every day impossible to sustain. In this paper, we show that the market structure and design used by cyber criminals have evolved toward a market design that is similar to legitimate, thriving, online forum markets such as eBay. We illustrate this evolution by comparing the market regulatory mechanisms of two underground forum markets: 1) a failed market for credit cards and other illegal goods and 2) another, extremely active marketplace for vulnerabilities, exploits, and cyber attacks in general. The comparison shows that cybercrime markets evolved from unruly, scam for scammers market mechanisms to mature, regulated mechanisms that greatly favors trade efficiency.