Advocacy Coalitions in the Spectrum Policy Process in India Rishabh Dara IIM Ahmedabad
Existing Theoretical Lenses of the Policy Process Lasswell s(1956) Stages Heuristic Kingdon s(1995) Multiple Streams Theory Baumgartner & Jones s (1993) Punctuated Equilibrium Model Ostrom s(1984) Institutional Analysis and Development Framework Thelen s(2003) Institutional Layering Sabatier s (1988) Advocacy Coalition Framework Adam & Kriesi s(2007) Network Approach Hofferbert s(1974) Open Systems Framework Berry & Berry s (1990) Policy Diffusion Framework
Lasswell s (1956) Stages Heuristic Kingdon s (1995) Multiple Streams Theory
Objective and Questions To review the telecommunications policy subsystem from the lens of the Advocacy Coalition Framework Do beliefs of actors remainresistant to change over time? Are there any advocacy coalitions operating in the subsystem? How have the advocacy coalitions evolved over time? Has any advocacy coalition dominated over other coalitions? What kind of resources have been used by advocacy coalitions to translate their beliefs into policy outputs?
Data Source: Methodology 144 Testimonies: Comments & Counter-Comments (TRAI Consultations) 14 Telecom Service Providers Two Time Periods: 2008 to 2011 2012 to 2015 Coding Frame 40 variables: Contentious policy issues 5 point scale for each variable: 1 and 5 as extreme policy positions Condensed to 4 composite scales Hierarchical Agglomerative Cluster Analysis (SPSS)
Composite Scales Level Playing Field Refarming, Excess Spectrum, Extension of Licenses, Valuation Market Based Practices Auctions, Trading, Sharing, Liberalisation, Delinking, Subscriber Linked Role of Government Operators UnderutilisedSpectrum, Priority in Allocation, Access Deficit Charges Future of CDMA Ecosystem E-GSM, Refarming, Valuation of 800 MHz, Dual Licenses, Mobility
Beliefs Remain Resistant to Change Over Time Level Playing Field 2008-2011 2012-2015 Vodafone Bharti Airtel AUSPI / ABTO COAI Idea Cellular BSNL MTNL Tata Tele Reliance Comm Jio / Infotel Aircel Videocon Uninor / Telenor 4.6 (5) 5 (4) 1.4 (5) 5 (3) 4.33 (3) 5 (2) 4 (1) 1.16 (6) 1.12 (8) 5 (2) 1.5 (2) 1 (3) 4.84 (13) 4.72 (11) MTS SSTL 1.23 (13) 4.83 (6) 4.5 (6) 4 (6) 1.8 (10) 1.25 (12) 1.62 (8) 3.5 (4) 1.42 (7) 1.85 (7) 1.69 (13) Anova NS NS NS NS NS - NS NS NS - NS - NS # Market Based Practices 2008-2011 2012-2015 Vodafone Bharti Airtel AUSPI / ABTO COAI Idea Cellular BSNL MTNL Tata Tele Reliance Comm Jio / Infotel 1.18 (11) 1.33 (15) 2.77 (9) 1.11 (9) 1.28 (7) 1.42 (7) 4 (5) 4 (13) 3.72 (11) 2 (1) Aircel Videocon Uninor / Telenor 2.12 (8) MTS SSTL 1.55 (9) 2.77 (9) 1.53 (15) 1.2 (10) 4.5 (8) 1 (3) 2.12 (8) 1 (2) 2.5 (4) 3.44 (9) 4.55 (9) 3.33 (6) 1.5 (2) 1 (4) 2.25 (4) 1.66 (6) Anova NS NS * NS NS NS NS NS NS - NS - NS NS NS = Not Significant (>0.1); # = Significant at 0.1; * = Significant at 0.05; ** = Significant at 0.01; *** = Significant at 0.001
Homogeneous Subsets (2012-2015) Level Playing Field Actor N Subset 1 Subset 2 Subset 3 AUSPI 13 1.2308 Reliance 12 1.2500 Videocon 7 1.4286 Jio 8 1.6250 MTS 13 1.6923 Tata Tele 10 1.8000 Uninor 7 1.8571 Aircel 4 3.5000 MTNL 6 4.0000 4.0000 Idea 6 4.5000 4.5000 Bharti 11 4.7273 COAI 6 4.8333 Vodafone 13 4.8462 Sig..749.097.288 Market Based Practices Actor N Subset 1 Subset 2 COAI 3 1.0000 Videocon 4 1.0000 Bharti 10 1.2000 Aircel 2 1.5000 Vodafone 15 1.5333 MTS 6 1.6667 1.6667 Idea 8 2.1250 2.1250 Uninor 4 2.2500 2.2500 MTNL 4 2.5000 2.5000 Jio 6 3.3333 3.3333 Tata Tele 9 3.4444 3.4444 AUSPI 8 4.5000 Reliance 9 4.5556 Sig.210 0.59
2008-2011 Coalition of Incumbent GSM Operators Coalition of Unified Service Operators
2012-2015 Coalition of Unified Service Operators Coalition of Incumbent GSM Operators Coalition of New Entrants
Coalition of Unified Service Operators \ 2012-2015 Coalition of New Entrants Coalition of Incumbent GSM Operators
Mapping Advocacy Coalitions to Industry Associations Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI)comprises of Coalition of Incumbent Operatorsand Coalition of New Entrants Both coalitions have common positions on Market Based Practices and CDMA Ecosystem The coalitions differ on issue of Level Playing Field Association of Service Providers (AUSPI)comprises of Coalition of Unified Service Operators Disagreement between MTS and remaining members on issue of Market Based Practices
Domination of Advocacy Coalitions No single coalition has dominated the entire subsystem Coalition of Incumbent Operators has dominated on issue of Market Based Practices Coalition of New Entrants and Coalition of Unified Service Operators have dominated on issues of Level Playing Field No coalition dominating for issues related to CDMA Ecosystem.
Coalition Resources & Instruments Different in each venue (TRAI and TC) Resources at TRAI Influence over Policy Broker Consultant Reports (PwC, Analysys Mason) Substantiate TRAI submissions Create statistics for media consumption (increase in tariffs) Lawsuits (TDSAT, Supreme Court judgments) Skillful leadership Public opinion (corruption, transparency, access) Ability of coalitions to internalise events (scam, failed auctions)
Strengths of Framework Groups multiple actors into a few coalitions thus bringing structure and focus to the analysis Recognisesthat the policy development is a continuous process with a feedback loop Defines constructs allowing comparison across nested policy subsystems Recognises multiple venues
Issues with Framework Technical and legal narrative is lost when beliefs are treated as a dichotomy Non-coalition actors (who are indifferent or neutral) are ignored Stability of Advocacy Coalitions is questionable in an environment where beliefs change fast as a result of change in underlying technology