João Vareda

Racing for Investment under Mandatory Access

Abstract We analyze the impact of mandatory access on a race for investments and show that for a low (high) access price, firms wait (preempt each other). An access price increase tends to accelerate investment in general but may delay the first investment. While the first best cannot be achieved with a time-invariant access tariff, simple instruments such as ending access at a preset date or granting access holidays can improve efficiency. The former forces earlier investment when it would happen too late otherwise, while the latter allows for lower access prices later in order to delay a business-stealing second investment.

Incentives to invest and to give access to non-regulated new technologies

We analyze the incentives of a vertically integrated firm, which is a regulated monopolist in the wholesale market and competes with an entrant in the retail market, to invest and to give access to a new wholesale technology. The new technology represents a non-drastic innovation that produces retail services of a higher quality than the old technology, and is left unregulated. We show that for intermediate values of the access price for the old technology, the vertically integrated firm may decide not to invest. When investment occurs, the vertically integrated firm may be induced to give access to the entrant for a low access price for the old technology. Furthermore, when both firms can invest, investment occurs under a larger set of circumstances, and it is the entrant the firm that invests in more cases. We also discuss the implications for the regulation of the old technology.

Access regulation under asymmetric information about the entrant's efficiency

We study the impact of access regulation on an entrants decision whether to invest in a telecommunications network or to ask for access when the regulator cannot observe its efficiency level. We show that an efficient entrant may have incentives to target low demand after entry in order to convince the regulator that it needs cheap access in the future. Therefore, the regulator must set access prices, contingent on demand, which penalize the inefficient entrant. We further show that, although linear prices are not always sufficient to promote the investment of an efficient entrant without introducing distortions, two-part tariffs already allow the regulator to achieve this objective.

Does Vertical Separation Necessarily Reduce Quality Discrimination and Increase Welfare

Abstract We investigate whether vertical separation reduces quality discrimination and increases welfare. Consider an industry consisting of a vertically integrated firm, the incumbent, and an independent retailer, the entrant, which requires access to the services of the incumbents wholesaler. The wholesaler can discriminate against either of the retailers by supplying it an input of lower quality than its rival. We show that, in our setting, vertical separation of the incumbent reduces discrimination against the entrants retailer, although it does not guarantee non-discrimination. Furthermore, with vertical separation, the wholesaler may discriminate against the incumbents retailer. Vertical separation impacts social welfare through two effects. First, through the double-marginalization effect, which is negative. Second, through the quality degradation effect, which can be positive or negative. Hence, the net welfare impact of vertical separation is negative or potentially ambiguous.

Investment, Dynamic Consistency and the Sectoral Regulator’s Objective

Abstract This article explores the possibility of distorting the regulator’s objective function as a way of overcoming the dynamic consistency problem of regulatory policy toward investment. We derive general conditions under which having the legislator distort the regulator’s objective function away from social welfare allows increasing the range of parameter values for which it is possible to induce socially desirable investment. In particular, we show that when the regulator cannot commit to a regulatory policy, the legislator should give a relatively higher weight to the incumbent’s profit in the regulator’s objective function, if the incumbent invests, and a relatively higher weight to consumer surplus, if the incumbent does not invest.