The 1992 World Administrative Radio Conference: Technology and Policy Implications Page: 46
195 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this report.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
46 I The 1992 World Administrative Radio Conference: Technology and Policy Implications
tee, composed of representatives of both the FCC
and NTIA, that would meet on a regular basis, and
produce a report to Congress every year or two
years. This legislation would force the United
States to specifically develop goals and plans for
developing the radio spectrum resource and
radiocommunication systems, and could provide
a vehicle for Congress to participate in the
goal-setting for radiocommunications and to closely
monitor progress toward those goals.
OPTION 3. Formally establish a separate agency
for developing and coordinating international
radiocommunication policy.
Essentially, the international radiocommunication
functions and staff of the FCC, NTIA and Bureau
of International Communications and Informa-
tion Policy (CIP) would be merged in one
agency.63Domestic functions could be left intact.
Such an agency would combine technical and
policy expertise and, proponents believe, would
effectively unify U.S. international radiocommunica-
tions policymaking and streamline both the de-
velopment of policy and the WARC preparation
process. Such a singular focal point for intern-
ational radio policy could also improve the con-
duct of radiocommunications negotiations inter-
nationally. For example, foreign spectrum man-
agers would no longer be confused by the
three-part division of responsibility in this coun-
try and could no longer take advantage of this
split to further their own positions. However, such
a centralized approach faces opposition by manyanalysts and would be difficult to institute both
institutionally and politically.64
The most difficult question regarding the
establishment of such an agency is whereto locate
it in the structure of the U.S. Government. Care
would have to be taken to establish it at a high
enough level to give it the authority to set
priorities and policies, while at the same time
avoiding the ability of one group or groups to
dominate the agency's work. Clear lines of
responsibility and coordination between this agency
and the FCC, NTIA, and State Department would
have to be established.
Along these lines, some have suggested the
creation of an office similar to the U.S. Trade
Representative (USTR) for international telecom-
munications (or just radiocommunications) pol-
icy. In 1962, Congress created a position in the
White House for a special representative for trade
negotiations, changed as the chief representative
of the United States in all trade agreements
negotiations, and chair of an interagency organi-
zation, established by the President, to assist with
the implementation of trade and tariff agree-
ments.65 Paralleling the language describing the
mission of NTIA, the USTR is designated as the
President's "principal advisor" on international
trade policy. The USTR also coordinates inter-
agency preparation for and participation in multi-
lateral trade talks, and supervises a network of
private sector advisory groups.
The advantage of this option is that it would
raise the level of international telecommunica-63 For example, the agency would combine the FCC'S Office of International Communications, NTIA'sOffice of International Affairs, and
the State Department's cw.
64 The idea of centralizing telecommunications and radiocommunications policy in the United States has been discussed extensively
elsewhere. For a brief review of the arguments for and against such an approach, see OTA, WARC-92.
65 The office supporting the USTRwascreatedbyexecutive order in 1%3. For a fuller discussion of the USTR, see Stephen D. Cohen, The
Making of United States International Economic Policy, 3rd Ed. (New York: Praeger, 1988). Cohen reports that the creation of the office was
precipitated by Congressional doubts about 'the State Department's ability to drive a hard bargain and bring home the most advantageous trade
agreement..." (p. 66). Similar concerns have been raised about the ability and will of the State Department to negotiate international
telecommunication agreements-some believe that they are more concerned with keeping foreign governments happy than anything else. The
1974 Trade Act elevated the position to cabinet-level status. In 1980, under Reorganization Plan No. 3, the office was renamed the Office of
the USTR and received a broader mandate that effectively made the office "the lead agency in all aspects of policy formulation in the trade
and investment sectors. Reorganization Plan No. 3 (as submitted to Congress by the President) says that the USTR 'shall have primary
responsibility' for 'developing and for coordinating the implementation of U.S. international trade policy.'" Ibid, p. 67.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
United States. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. The 1992 World Administrative Radio Conference: Technology and Policy Implications, report, May 1993; [Washington D.C.]. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc39719/m1/54/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.