COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT    Accompanying document to the Proposal for a  DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL  establishing the first radio spectrum policy programme      {COM(2010) 471} {SEC(2010) 1034}
Date: 2010-09-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European audiovisual area, harmonisation of standards, radiation protection, technical regulations, telecommunications, waveband

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 PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

establishing the first radio spectrum policy programme  

{COM(2010) 471} 
{SEC(2010) 1034} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
IMPACT ASSESSMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

1. 

GENERAL BACKGROUND 

Radio spectrum is essential to develop the digital society and fast wireless services, promote 
economic  recovery  and  growth,  and  ensure  quality  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 use in the EU, as called for in 
the  regulatory  framework  for  electronic  communications  revised  in  20091.  The  first 
programme will span the period 2011-2015 to ensure 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 Spectrum Summit where the Parliament and the 
Commission  gathered  most  stakeholders  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  exceeds  availability,  in  particular  when  new 
technologies and applications emerge. Scarcity can also result from inefficiency 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  availability.  This  creates  additional  costs,  wastes 
business opportunities, stifles innovative technologies and services 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 influences 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  incentive  pricing),  also  in  the  public  sector, 
which is a substantial spectrum user; 

1 

Article 8a(3) of the new Framework Directive. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  consistency of spectrum access conditions throughout the EU and in non-EU neighbouring 

countries. 

2.2. 

Coping with the increasing reliance on applications requiring spectrum  

Given  the  scarcity,  access  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  players  e.g.  by  giving  incumbent  users  undeserved  or  unwanted 
competitive  advantages.  Consequently,  policy  choices  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 between national approaches can 
hamper spectrum usage. 

Insufficient coordination may have other negative effects: 

–  fragment the internal market, preventing economies of scale, thereby increasing costs; 

–  cross-border interference preventing most efficient spectrum use by all Member States; 

–  less  effective  international  spectrum  coordination  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 the 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  wireless  broadband  objectives  set  in  the  EU2020 

Strategy and the Digital Agenda for Europe; 

•  Promote spectrum use efficiency in EU  policies,  in particular by fostering  flexibility and 

competition; 

•  Promote innovation at European level; 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
•  Address weaknesses in spectrum management 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  international  arenas  and  support  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 potential added value of further EU harmonisation 
and coordination and based on the type of measures that could increase spectrum efficiency 
and bring economic, social and environmental benefits. 

The impact assessment (IA) envisages three scenarios for the RSPP: 

–  spectrum  management  continues  under  the  current  framework  without  further  policy 

orientations and objectives under a strategic policy programme; 

–  limit  the  RSPP  to  the  Framework  Directive  scope  i.e.  electronic  communication  services 

(ECS); 

–  address all areas where spectrum use influences the single market. 

The IA also evaluates, for each thematic area, the appropriate strategic level: 

–  no strategic objective to be addressed under the first RSPP; 

–  identification of a strategic objective 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  instrument, a fully detailed analysis of each potential 
impact or the proportionality of each option was impossible. This IA therefore 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  proposed  legislative  measure  is  in  line  with  the 
proportionality principle; this reflects the need expressed in the regulatory 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 varying degrees of EU competence. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
5.1. 

Impact of options at first level  

5.1.1.  No RSPP 

This  would  foreclose  the  benefits  described  in  the  other  two  options  and  contradict  the 
legislator's desire. 

5.1.2.  RSPP limited to electronic communications services 

transparency  and 
This  would  allow  developing  EU  policy  priorities  with  greater 
predictability. Extensive consultations would also add opportunities to collect information on 
future demand and obstacles facing stakeholders. Explicit endorsement by Member States and 
European Parliament would corroborate subsequent initiatives. 

Preparing the programme does not create  significant costs apart  from  normal administrative 
work by EU. 

5.1.3.  RSPP extending beyond electronic communication services 

Public consultations and spectrum 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 broader information base will 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 competences. 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  Single  Market  based  on  ultra-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  objective  by  complementing  wired  infrastructures 
which cannot cover the entire territory. Wireless broadband services would 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 strategies 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 

5 

   EN 

 
–  Identification of concrete measures from the outset: Possible measures include: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

at short term make more spectrum available for broadband by enforcing assignment 
of  spectrum  already  allocated  for  that  purpose  and  ensuring  that  all  citizens  get 
broadband at sufficient speed by 2015; 

designating harmonised spectrum for satellite broadband services; 

ensure  coordination  of  digital  dividend:  set  common  date  for  800  MHz  Decision 
implementation,ensure  that  digital  dividend  is  fully  used  to  improve  broadband 
access in sparsely populated areas and for socially vulnerable groups. 

Any  other  specific  measure  would  first  require  more  understanding  of  likely  market  and 
technology trends. 

5.2.2.  Facilitating easy and equal access 

Easing  spectrum  access  requires  removing  regulatory  barriers  (creating  flexibility)  which 
stifle  innovation  and  market  entry  such  as  service  and  technology  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  guidelines  for  authorisation  conditions  and  procedures,  to 
improve  usage  flexibility  and  avoid  competitive  distortion,  and  identification  and 
allocation  of  additional  spectrum  under  harmonised  technical  conditions  for  innovative 
applications  under  general  authorisations.  This  would  significantly  benefit  the  economy 
and innovation. 

5.2.3.  Enhancing spectrum use efficiency 

Efficient  spectrum  use  is  a  principle  of  the  Framework  Directive  and  the  Radio  Spectrum 
Decision.  Three  options  range  from  no  action  to  actions  targeting  specific  applications  (e.g. 
more efficient sharing to facilitate coordinated spectrum use for public protection and disaster 
recovery).  The  medium  option  calls  for  an  inventory  of  current  spectrum  use  and  further 
analysis and studies to prepare regulatory initiatives for more spectrally efficient technologies.  

5.2.4.  Contributing to combating climate change 

EU  2020  aims  at  a  sustainable  growth  and  sustainable,  resource-efficient  and  competitive 
economy. Spectrum based applications can contribute to these objectives mainly in two areas: 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
smart grids to cut energy consumption and intelligent traffic management systems to reduce 
carbon emissions. 

A  ‘no  action’  option  is  incompatible  with  the  high  EU  political  priority  of  the  topic. 
Undertaking further studies and analysis is limited to intelligent transport systems. The third 
option would be to move ahead with concrete measures, but such measures have not yet been 
clearly identified. 

5.2.5. 

Improving external relations 

Under the new regulatory framework, the Commission can propose to Parliament and Council 
common  policy  objectives  for  international  spectrum  policy  coordination.  Most  immediate 
applications relate to ITU World Radio Conference 2012 where topics 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 benefits or risks. Second option would be to limit 
RSPP external relations aspects to electronic communications. This would address only part 
of  the  key  elements  of  the  international  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  outweigh  additional  administrative  costs.  This 
should be further evaluated once concrete measures are proposed. 

6. 

COMPARISON OF OPTIONS 

6.1. 

Comparison of options at first level (RSPP strategic scope) 

The  best  option  for  the  first  RSPP  scope  is  to  extend  under  option  3  beyond  electronic 
communications, as widely supported 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  services,  option  3  best  reflects  Europe  2020 
priorities and stakeholders' wish (measures outlined in 5.2.1). 

For  satellite  broadband  services,  option  2  is  recommended  as,  before  concrete  measures  are 
taken,  additional  studies  must  assess  the  feasibility  and  cost  for  consumers  of  ensuring 
widespread access via satellite at a set speed.  

6.2.2.  Facilitating easy and equal access 

Although the IA identifies binding coordination as best option (wide coordinated introduction 
of  market-based  approach  ensuring  harmonised  flexible  usage  conditions),  only  voluntary 
coordination is supported by Member States. However, the Commission considers option 3 as 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
the only one feasible and will propose steps towards 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 will also allow consensus building among actors in 
particular the public sector. 

6.2.4.  Contributing to combating 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  international  agreements  apply  over  a  long  time-frame, 
European  interests  must  be  safeguarded  and  agendas  ‘future-proofed’  to  address  spectrum 
requirements of important policies. Beyond electronic communications, relevant EU policies 
include  sustainable  development  and  climate  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 collective spectrum use. Once more information is available, 
an  IA  will  be  drafted  to  accompany  further  measures  on  authorisations  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 spectrum use, whichwould be subject to an IA if 
their 
the  decision  making  process 
(involvingstakeholders, CEPT, RSPG and Radio Spectrum Committee) does not sufficiently 
justify the measure. 

significant  and 

sufficiently 

impact 

is 

if 

Where  option  2  is  chosen,  the  need  for  further  IA  will  be  examined  based  on  Commission 
guidelines and on preparatory work and identification of the form of possible action. 

7. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

Given the RSPP general strategic nature, evaluation and monitoring should equally remain at 
general strategic level. Further concrete measures to be adopted following the RSPP will be 
evaluated individually in due course. 

Monitoring  specific  EU  policy  indicators  will  benefit  from  more  detailed  evaluation  in 
individual sectoral policy initiatives e.g. in energy efficiency, space policy or Digital Agenda. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
In  cooperation  with  RSPG,  the  Commission  will  also  monitor  whether  technological  and 
regulatory national and international developments influencespectrum demand and use. 

EN 

9 

   EN