Demand for number portability in the korean mobile telecommunications market: Contingent valuation approach

Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

Volumn 37, Issue , 2004, Pages 3379-3388

  Lee, Sang Woo ^a   Kim, Dan J ^b   Park, Myeong Cheol ^a  

^a Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)   (South Korea)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

KOREAN MOBILE SUBSCRIBERS; MOBILE SERVICE; PORTABILITY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY (WTP);

COMPETITION; COSTS; MARKETING; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PUBLIC POLICY; REGULATORY COMPLIANCE; SOCIAL ASPECTS; TELECOMMUNICATION INDUSTRY; TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES;

MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS;

EID: 12344303032     PISSN: 10603425     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (25)

1. Aoki, R., Small, J.(1999) The economics of number portability: Switching Cost and Two-part Tarrifs, University of Auckland, Mineo.
2. Bishop R.C., Heberlein T.A., (1979) Measuring values of extra-market goods: are indirect measures biased?, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61, 926-930.
3. Brown T.C., Champ P.A., Bishop R.C., McCollum D.W.,(1996) Which response format reveals the truth about donations to a public good?, Land Economics 72, 152-166.
4. Cameron, T.A., James, M.D., (1987) Efficient estimation methods for use with closed-ended contingent valuation survey data, Review of Economics and Statistics 69, 269-276.
5. Cameron, T.A., Quiggin, J. (1994) Estimating using contingent valuation data from a dichotomous choice with follow-up questionnaire, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 27, 218-234.
6. Carson, R.T., Hanemann, W.M., Mitchell, R.C., (1985) Determining the demand for public goods by simulating referendums at different tax prices, Department of Economics Working Paper, University of California, San Diego.
7. Carson R.T., Flores N.E., Meade N.F., (2001) Contingent valuation: controversies and evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics 19, 173-210.
8. Cummings, R.G., Brookshire, D.S., Schuze, W.D.,eds.,(1986) Valuing environmental goods: A state of the arts assessment of the contingent method, Totowa, NJ:Rowman and Allanheld.
9. Gans, J.S., King, S.P., Woodbridge, G.,(2001) Numbers to the people: regulation, ownership and local number portability, Information Economics and Policy 13, 167-180.
10. Hanemann, W.M.,(1984) Welfare evaluation in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66(3), 332-341.
11. Hanemann, W.M.,(1985) Some issues in continuous and discrete response contingent valuation studies, Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 14, 5-13.
12. Hanemann, W.M., Loomis, J. and Kanninen, B.,(1991)Statistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73, 1255-1263.
13. Herriges, J.A, Shorgen, J.F.,(1996) Starting point bias in dichotomous choice valuation with follow-up questioning, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30, 112-131.
14. Hicks J., (1946) Value and capital, Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
15. Horowitz J.K., McConnell K.E., (2002) A review of WTA/WTA studies, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 44, 426-447.
16. Kealy M.J., Montgomery M., Dovidio J.F., (1990) Reliability and predictive validity of contingent value: does the nature of the good matter?, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 19, 244-263.
17. McFadden, D., Leonard, G.K., (1993) Issues in the contingent valuation of environmental goods: Methodologies for data collection and analysis, in Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment, J.A. [29]Hausman, ed., North Holland, Amsterdam.
18. Mitchell, R.C., Carson R.T., (1989) Using survey to value public goods-The contingent valuation method. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.
19. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1993) Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation, Federal Register, 58(10), 4601-4614.
20. Neil H.R., Cummings R.G., Gandeton P.T., Harrison G.W., MCGuckin T.,(1994) Hypothetical surveys and real economic commitments, Land Economics 70, 145-154.
21. Park M.C., Lee, S.W.,(2002) Double marginalization problems: evidence from the Korean fixed-to-mobile service market, Telecommunications Policy 26(11), 607-621.
22. Peitz., M., (2002) Asymmetric Access Price Regulation in Telecommunications Markets ", mimeo, University of Frankfurt.
23. Reinke T.H.(1998) Local number portability and local loop competition, Telecommunications Policy, vol.22(1), 73-87.
24. Shrogen J.F., Shin S.Y., Hayes D.F., Kleibenstein J.B., (1994) Resolving differences in willingness to pay and willingness to accept, American Economic Review 84, 255-269.
25. Whittington D., Lauria D.T., Mu X., (1991) A study of water vending and willingness to pay for water in Onitsha, Nigeria. World Development 19, 179-198.