EN    EN EN 
 
EN    EN  EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 20.9.2010 
SEC(2010) 1035 final 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
 
SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
  
Accompanying document to the 
Proposal for a 
 
DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN P ARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 
 
establishing the first radio spectrum policy programme  
    
{COM(2010) 471} 
{SEC(2010) 1034} 
 
EN 2   EN IMPACT ASSESSMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
1. GENERAL BACKGROUND  
Radio spectrum is essential to develop the digita l society and fast wireless services, promote 
economic recovery and growth, and ensure qual ity jobs and long-term  EU competitiveness. 
Spectrum policy orientations and objectives must  notably be seen at European level in the 
context of the Digital Agenda for Europe and of  Europe 2020, a European strategy for smart, 
sustainable and inclusive growth. 
The proposed radio spectrum policy programme (RSPP) sets out policy orientations and 
objectives for strategic planning and harmonisation of spectrum us e in the EU, as called for in 
the regulatory framework for electr onic communications revised in 20091. The first 
programme will span the period 2011-2015 to ensu re convergence and consistency of policies 
in the EU and allow sufficient flexibility to cope with technology and market developments 
during that period. 
Most RSPP elements were identified at the Sp ectrum Summit where the Parliament and the 
Commission gathered most st akeholders in March 2010. It  is also based on a public 
consultation and on the Opinion of the Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG). 
2. PROBLEM DEFINITION  
Spectrum is a scarce resource whose use is  limited by physics and technology. Demand for 
quality and cost-effective spectrum often exceed s availability, in particular when new 
technologies and applications emerge. Scarcity can also result from in efficiency in spectrum 
regulatory management or technical spectrum use.  
Scarcity limits economic and social benefits and causes a mismatch between growing demand 
for new wireless services and spectrum availa bility. This creates a dditional costs, wastes 
business opportunities, s tifles innovative technologies and se rvices and prevents certain public 
and commercial services.  
2.1. Sub-optimal spectrum use 
Spectrum use efficiency is influenced by the: 
– risk of interference between users and the extent of possible harm; 
– level of equipment and networks efficiency; 
– regulatory management of spectrum, which influe nces the ‘intensity of use’; this includes 
frequency allocation models (administrative, market, collective use), use of technologies 
allowing effective spectrum sharing (e.g. cognitive radio), and incentives to invest in more 
efficient infrastructures (e.g. administrative in centive pricing), also in the public sector, 
which is a substantial spectrum user; 
                                                 
1 Article 8a(3) of the new Framework Directive. 
 
EN 3   EN – consistency of spectrum access conditions th roughout the EU and in non-EU neighbouring 
countries. 
2.2. Coping with the increasing reliance on  applications requiring spectrum  
Given the scarcity, acc ess to spectrum depends on priorities and choices. While certain 
choices can be left to market (e.g. auctions), certain priorities e.g. for life safety purposes, 
have to be set by public authorities. 
Spectrum management decisions can influence or distort competition when changing the role 
or power of market player s e.g. by giving incumbent user s undeserved or unwanted 
competitive advantages. Consequently, policy c hoices must ensure that legacy rights are 
respected and do not distort competition. 
2.3. Advantage of EU action  
Radio transmissions do not stop at borders and incoherence be tween national approaches can 
hamper spectrum usage. 
Insufficient coordination may ha ve other negative effects: 
– fragment the internal market, preventing ec onomies of scale, thereby increasing costs; 
– cross-border interference pr eventing most efficient spectrum use by all Member States; 
– less effective international spectrum coordi nation outside EU as there is no ‘common 
voice’; 
– missed opportunities for boosting innovation at European level and possible delay in 
strategic investments. 
Both the new ECS regulatory framework and th e Radio Spectrum Decision reflect the benefit 
of EU coordination in the limits of existing national prerogatives on spectrum (e.g. military, 
culture). 
3. OBJECTIVES  
The first RSPP will outline how spectrum use can contribute to main EU political objectives 
until 2015 and will generally envisage how to enhance social, economic and environmental benefits of spectrum access. 
Considering the problems described above, the following objectives can be identified: 
• Support, through spectrum policy, the wirele ss broadband objectives set in the EU2020 
Strategy and the Digital Agenda for Europe; 
• Promote spectrum use efficiency in EU policie s, in particular by fostering flexibility and 
competition; 
• Promote innovation at European level; 
 
EN 4   EN • Address weaknesses in spectrum mana gement in EU competence areas; 
• Support objectives for combating climate change and promoting energy efficiency as set in 
the EU2020 Strategy and the Digital Agenda for Europe; 
• Protect European policy interests in interna tional arenas and suppor t Member States in 
dealing with third countries; 
• Contribute to promoting the internal market  in equipment, services and networks. 
4. POLICY OPTIONS  
Policy options were selected based on the poten tial added value of further EU harmonisation 
and coordination and based on the type of meas ures that could increase spectrum efficiency 
and bring economic, social and environmental benefits. 
The impact assessment (IA) envisa ges three scenario s for the RSPP: 
– spectrum management continues under the current framework without further policy 
orientations and objectives unde r a strategic policy programme; 
– limit the RSPP to the Framework Directive scop e i.e. electronic comm unication services 
(ECS); 
– address all areas where spectrum us e influences the single market. 
The IA also evaluates, fo r each thematic area, the a ppropriate strategic level: 
– no strategic objective to be a ddressed under the first RSPP; 
– identification of a strategic obj ective to be further analysed with interested parties; 
– identification of a strategic objective to be followed by concrete actions re. content or 
procedure. 
5. ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS  
As the RSPP is a high-level, strategic instrume nt, a fully detailed analysis of each potential 
impact or the proportionality of each option was impossible. This IA th erefore delineates the 
areas corresponding to each option and assesses whether EU intervention would add value 
and be more efficient than action at national or local level. As the IA, like the draft RSPP, are 
at strategic level, it verifies that the propos ed legislative measure is in line with the 
proportionality principle; this reflects the need  expressed in the regu latory framework and by 
stakeholders, to identify the strategic direction to  be given to spectrum policy at EU level, as 
EU policy actions can no longer be decided on an  ad hoc basis given their impact on a number 
of sectors and domains with vary ing degrees of EU competence. 
 
EN 5   EN 5.1. Impact of options at first level  
5.1.1.  No RSPP 
This would foreclose the benef its described in the other tw o options and contradict the 
legislator's desire. 
5.1.2.  RSPP limited to electronic communications services 
This would allow developing EU policy prio rities with greater transparency and 
predictability. Extensive consu ltations would also add opportuniti es to collect information on 
future demand and obstacles facing stakeholders . Explicit endorsement by Member States and 
European Parliament would corr oborate subseque nt initiatives. 
Preparing the programme does not  create significant costs apart from normal administrative 
work by EU. 
5.1.3.  RSPP extending beyond electr onic communication services 
Public consultations and spect rum summit demonstrated that key issues often extend beyond 
electronic communications across several sectoral interests (e .g. ECS broadcasting, transport, 
military, public use, environment, space). A broa der information base w ill better balance the 
RSPP and consider all current and potential spectrum uses. Spectrum sharing opportunities 
can be expanded by considering all users while respecting national compet ences. Stakeholders 
clearly called for the widest possible scope. 
5.2. Impact of options at second level  
Policy objectives may address policy content or  process/methodology and address electronic 
communications or go beyond. Five  themes were identified. 
5.2.1.  Contributing to the European Digital Agenda 
‘Europe 2020’, in its flagship initiative ‘A Digital Agenda for Europe’, intends to deliver 
sustainable economic benefits from a Digital Si ngle Market based on ultr a-fast internet and 
interoperable applications. Contributing to the objectives of broadband access for all by 2013 and access to internet speeds above 30 Mbps by 2020, with 50
 % European households having 
internet connections above 100 Mbps. 
Wireless services can contribute to this obj ective by complementing wired infrastructures 
which cannot cover the entire territory. Wireless  broadband services wo uld also complement 
fixed access and allow mobility of use. 
Policy options considered: – No objective defined in first RSPP
: this would allow Member States to adopt diverging 
wireless broadband deployment strate gies and create confusion in EU. 
– Identification of objective to be followed by further analysis/study : allows better informed 
policy choices thanks to more complete data; the potential role of each delivery platform 
needs in particular to be better understood. 
 
EN 6   EN – Identification of concrete measures from the outset : Possible measures include: 
1. at short term make more spectrum avai lable for broadband by enforcing assignment 
of spectrum already allocated for that purpose and ensuring that all citizens get 
broadband at sufficient speed by 2015; 
2. designating harmonised spectrum fo r satellite broadband services; 
3. ensure coordination of di gital dividend: set common date for 800 MHz Decision 
implementation,ensure that digital divide nd is fully used to improve broadband 
access in sparsely populated areas a nd for socially vulnerable groups. 
Any other specific measure would first requir e more understanding of likely market and 
technology trends. 
5.2.2.  Facilitating easy and equal access 
Easing spectrum access requires removing regulat ory barriers (creating flexibility) which 
stifle innovation and market entry such as service and t echnology restrictions, and allow 
spectrum trading. Equal spectrum access requires an effective competitive environment and 
competitive distortion avoidance when existing usage rights are reassigned (refarmed). 
Policy options considered are: – No objective defined in first RSPP
: this assumes that sufficient flexibility is already 
achieved at EU level. 
– Identify objective to be followed by further analysis/study : some support this option but 
numerous technical and economic studies are already available and it is not clear what 
additional research would be needed. The real  issue is Member States' political will to 
effectively implement market-based mechanisms. 
– Identification of concrete measures from the outset : main measures considered are the 
development of common guidelin es for authorisation cond itions and procedures, to 
improve usage flexibility and avoid comp etitive distortion, and identification and 
allocation of additional spectrum under harmon ised technical conditions for innovative 
applications under general aut horisations. This w ould significantly benefit the economy 
and innovation. 
5.2.3.  Enhancing spectrum use efficiency 
Efficient spectrum use is a principle of th e Framework Directive and the Radio Spectrum 
Decision. Three options range fr om no action to actions targetin g specific applications (e.g. 
more efficient sharing to facilitate coordinate d spectrum use for public protection and disaster 
recovery). The medium option calls for an i nventory of current spectrum use and further 
analysis and studies to prepare regulatory initia tives for more spectrally efficient technologies.  
5.2.4.  Contributing to com bating climate change 
EU 2020 aims at a sustainable growth and sust ainable, resource-efficient and competitive 
economy. Spectrum based applications can contribut e to these objectives mainly in two areas: 
 
EN 7   EN smart grids to cut energy consumption and inte lligent traffic management systems to reduce 
carbon emissions. 
A ‘no action’ option is incompatible with th e high EU political priority of the topic. 
Undertaking further studies and analysis is limit ed to intelligent transport systems. The third 
option would be to move ahead with concrete m easures, but such measures have not yet been 
clearly identified. 
5.2.5.  Improving external relations 
Under the new regulatory framework, the Comm ission can propose to Parliament and Council 
common policy objectives for international spectrum policy coordination. Most immediate 
applications relate to ITU Wo rld Radio Conference 2012 where to pics with direct impact on 
EU spectrum policies will be negotiated. The RSPP would be most appropriate to set 
objectives to defend EU policies at international level.  
First option, or status quo, would create no bene fits or risks. Second option would be to limit 
RSPP external relations aspect s to electronic communications. This would address only part 
of the key elements of the in ternational agenda. The third option which also goes beyond 
electronic communications would best cover all sectoral policies  of EU interest. 
5.2.6.  Assessing administrative burden 
Although RSPP benefits and costs vary significantly depending on initiatives and options, in 
all cases examined benefits would clearly out weigh additional administrative costs. This 
should be further evaluated once concrete measures are proposed. 
6. COMPARISON OF OPTIONS  
6.1. Comparison of options at firs t level (RSPP strategic scope) 
The best option for the first RSPP scope is  to extend under option 3 beyond electronic 
communications, as widely suppor ted by external stakeholders. 
6.2. Impact of options at second level  
6.2.1.  Contributing to European Digital Agenda 
For broadband access by terrestrial wireless se rvices, option 3 best reflects Europe 2020 
priorities and stakeholders' wi sh (measures outlined in 5.2.1). 
For satellite broadband services, option 2 is recommended as, be fore concrete measures are 
taken, additional studies must assess the feasib ility and cost for consumers of ensuring 
widespread access via sate llite at a set speed.  
6.2.2.  Facilitating easy and equal access 
Although the IA identifies binding coordination as best option (w ide coordinated introduction 
of market-based approach ensuring harmonise d flexible usage cond itions), only voluntary 
coordination is supported by Member States. Ho wever, the Commission considers option 3 as 
 
EN 8   EN the only one feasible and will propose steps to wards improved coordination without impeding 
national flexibility. 
6.2.3.  Enhancing efficiency of spectrum use 
Option 2 (further studies) is preferred option as all proposed subjects must be further 
investigated before regulatory action. This wi ll also allow consensus building among actors in 
particular the public sector. 
6.2.4.  Contributing to com bating climate change 
Option 1 for ‘intelligent transport systems’ is retained as the main spectrum allocation 
decisions have been taken recently. However, the Commission would continue its monitoring. 
On energy efficiency, more analysis is needed  before concrete proposals can be developed, 
and option 2 is chosen. 
6.2.5.  Improving external relations 
Option 3 is recommended. As most internationa l agreements apply over a long time-frame, 
European interests must be safeguarded and agendas ‘future-proofed’ to address spectrum 
requirements of important policies. Beyond elec tronic communications, relevant EU policies 
include sustainable development and climat e change. The legislator seeks more EU 
coordination in international spectrum negotiations. 
6.3. Conclusion on follow-up impact assessments  
As follow-up measures of significant impact must  have separate impact  assessments, the IA 
already lists follow-up measures for which an IA is obviously needed. 
A communication is planned on coll ective spectrum use. Once more information is available, 
an IA will be drafted to accompany furthe r measures on authoris ations and collective 
spectrum use.  
Technical harmonisation measures  were not subject to IAs in the past. The RSPP might 
require such measures for specific types of spec trum use, whichwould be subject to an IA if 
their impact is sufficiently significan t and if the decision making process 
(involvingstakeholders, CEPT, RSPG and Radi o Spectrum Committee) does not sufficiently 
justify the measure. 
Where option 2 is chosen, the need for further IA will be examined based on Commission 
guidelines and on preparatory work and iden tification of the form of possible action. 
7. MONITORING AND EVALUATION  
Given the RSPP general strategic nature, evalua tion and monitoring should equally remain at 
general strategic level. Furthe r concrete measures to be adopted following the RSPP will be 
evaluated individually in due course. 
Monitoring specific EU policy indicators will benefit from more de tailed evaluation in 
individual sectoral policy initia tives e.g. in energy efficiency , space policy or Digital Agenda. 
 
EN 9   EN In cooperation with RSPG, the Commission will also monitor whether technological and 
regulatory national and international devel opments influencespectrum demand and use.