This book is a penetrating examination of the rapidly changing approach of states to telecommunications regulation and planning since the divestiture of AT&T in January 1984.
Preface
Introduction
California
Florida
Illinois
Nebraska
New York
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
Conclusion: Perspectives on the New State Role
Telecommunications Glossary
Index
JURGEN SCHMANDT is Professor of Public Affairs at the University
of Texas at Austin. His numerous previous works on public policy
include State Water Policies (Praeger, 1988).
FREDERICK WILLIAMS is Director of the Center for Research on
Communication Technology and Society. He is the author of 36 books
including Computer-Assisted Writing Instruction in Journalism and
Professional Education (Praeger, 1989).
ROBERT H. WILSON is Professor of Public Affairs at the University
of Texas at Austin. His recent work includes Growth Policy in an
Age of High Technology: The Role of Regions and States.
?This study of state regulation of the telecommunications industry
was conducted by a research team composed of 17 graduate students
from the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Policy and from the
Center for Research on Communication, Technology, and Society, both
at the University of Texas. The book's thesis is that there exists
an important link between telecommunications and economic
development that remains to be fully recognized and exploited by
various policy-making groups at the individual state level. An
advanced communications network is a critical competitive advantage
when flexible production processes and segmented markets become
paramount strategic concerns. Policy initiatives in nine states
(California, Florida, Illinois, Nebraska, New York, Texas, Vermont,
Virginia, and Washington) are considered in some depth. On the
basis of their analysis, the authors include a series of policy
recommendations for state governments. They also identify a
critical need for empirical evaluation regarding the consequences
of procompetitive laws that have been put into effect, particularly
those fostering open competition in Nebraska and Virginia. Finally
they express concern that the bold procompetitive initiatives made
by some states are not based on well-grounded analysis but rather
on competitive fashion.' To what extent will procompetitive
initiatives enhance allocative efficiency and how will the benefits
therefrom be distributed? Very useful telecommunications glossary.
Upper-division and graduate collections.?-Choice
"This study of state regulation of the telecommunications industry
was conducted by a research team composed of 17 graduate students
from the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Policy and from the
Center for Research on Communication, Technology, and Society, both
at the University of Texas. The book's thesis is that there exists
an important link between telecommunications and economic
development that remains to be fully recognized and exploited by
various policy-making groups at the individual state level. An
advanced communications network is a critical competitive advantage
when flexible production processes and segmented markets become
paramount strategic concerns. Policy initiatives in nine states
(California, Florida, Illinois, Nebraska, New York, Texas, Vermont,
Virginia, and Washington) are considered in some depth. On the
basis of their analysis, the authors include a series of policy
recommendations for state governments. They also identify a
critical need for empirical evaluation regarding the consequences
of procompetitive laws that have been put into effect, particularly
those fostering open competition in Nebraska and Virginia. Finally
they express concern that the bold procompetitive initiatives made
by some states are not based on well-grounded analysis but rather
on competitive fashion.' To what extent will procompetitive
initiatives enhance allocative efficiency and how will the benefits
therefrom be distributed? Very useful telecommunications glossary.
Upper-division and graduate collections."-Choice
![]() |
Ask a Question About this Product More... |
![]() |