Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-g78kv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-27T16:26:24.092Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Key Aspects of PCAST Recommendations

from Part II - Three-Tier Dynamic Spectrum Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2017

Get access

Summary

Movement Towards Flexible, Dynamic Spectrum Policies

The United States (US) President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is a US policy advisory board that directly advises the President and his Executive Office, with recommendations in science, technology and innovation. It comprises leading scientists and engineers, and performs a number of studies each year in a variety of topics selected by the committee. In 2011–2012, PCAST performed a study on Federal spectrum policy and innovation, which was released in July, 2012 [1]. This report provided a broad framework for managing shared spectrum, as well as specific recommendations for immediate policy initiatives to implement its recommendations in Federal-controlled spectrum. The broad framework was a fundamental departure from many of the approaches that had dominated spectrum policy.

The PCAST report did not spring up arbitrarily, or suddenly. It was the product of several prior evolutions of spectrum policy thinking in the United States of America (USA), and worldwide. Some of the prior efforts that set the stage for the development and acceptance of the PCAST recommendations include those shown in Table 3.1. There will likely be further extensions and enhancements to the PCAST three-tier model that will emerge, but it is an important starting point, and worth close examination.

This book utilizes much of the PCAST report as a baseline for the three-tier concept. However, the PCAST report is far from perfect. In part, the report is a political document, formed through compromise and consensus-building; reflecting not only technical realities, but political, and economic ones as well. Therefore, this concept of three-tier in this book is heavily influenced by PCAST, but is not identical. It reflects a further four years of industrial development, regulatory litigation, and the participation of innumerably more insights, perspectives, and points of view, than were reflected in the initial report.

PCAST Findings and Recommendations

A summary of significant findings of the PCAST report [1] are included in a single table in the report. This table outlines seven finding areas, and their associated recommendations. Some are specific to the US spectrum management and policies, but most are inherently technical, and not nationally specific. These findings of the PCAST report are summarized (abridged) in Table 3.2. Although these findings were focused on US economic considerations, they are likely similar to many developed economies.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Report to the President: Realizing the Full Potential of Government-Held Spectrum to Spur Economic Growth (Executive Office of the President (EOP), Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), 2012). http://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stem-ed-final.pdf.
2 M., McHenry, K., Steadman, A., Leu, and E., Melick, XG DSA radio system. 3rd IEEE International Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks 3/1 (2008), 497–507.Google Scholar
3 M., McHenry, E., Livsics, N., Thao, and N., Majumdar, XG dynamic spectrum access field test results. IEEE Communications Magazine, 45/6 (2007), 51–57.Google Scholar
4 P. F., Marshall, Extending the reach of cognitive radio. Proceedings of the IEEE, 97/4 (2009), 612–625.Google Scholar
5 Federal Communications Commission, Spectrum Policy Task Force Report, ET Docket No. 02-135 (2002). http://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-228542A1.pdf.
6 Office of Communications (Ofcom) (UK), Spectrum Usage Rights; Technology and Usage Neutral Access to the Radio Spectrum. Consultation (2006).
7 L., Luna, NEXTEL interference debate rages on. Mobile Radio Technology, 21/8 (2003), 26.Google Scholar
8 National Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Systems Engineering Forum (NPEF), Assessment of LightSquared Terrestrial Broadband System Effects on GPS Receivers and GPS-dependent Applications (2011). www.gps.gov/spectrum/lightsquared/docs/2011-06-NPEF-lightsquared-report.pdf.
9 R. H., Coase, The Federal Communications Commission. The Journal of Law & Economics, 2 (1959), 1–40. www.jstor.org/stable/724927.Google Scholar
10 Federal Communications Commission, Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan (2010). http://download.broadband.gov/plan/national-broadband-plan.pdf.
11 Federal Communications Commission, Consumers May Experience Interference to Their Garage Door Opener Controls Near Military Bases. Public Notice, 20 F.C.C.R. 3614 (2005).
12 House Energy and Commerce Committee, Communications and Technology Subcommittee Hearing: Creating Opportunities Through Improved Government Spectrum Efficiency. Video (2012). www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvuOy_LtnUU.
13 P. F., Marshall, Scaling, Density, and Decision-Making in Cognitive Wireless Networks (Cambridge University Press, 2012).
14 Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, ITIF's Bennett Says PCAST Spectrum Report Impractical. Technical report (2012). https://itif.org/publications/2012/07/23/ itifs-bennett-says-pcast-spectrum-report-impractical.
15 L., Doyle, The Only Ones Who Will Drop Dead Are Those Who Stand Still. Blog post (2012). ledoyle.wordpress.com/2012/07/31/the-only-ones-who-will-drop-dead-are-those-who-standstill/.
16 C-SPAN, Communicators with Craig Mundie and Mark Gorenberg. Video (2012). www.c-span.org/video/?307379-1/communicators-craig-mundie-mark-gorenberg.
17 J., Furman, Remarks on Public Sector Spectrum Policy. Prepared remarks for presentation at Brookings Institution (2014).
18 T. W., Hazlett, D., Porter, and V., Smith, Radio spectrum and the disruptive clarity of Ronald Coase. Markets, Firms, and Property Rights: A Celebration of the Research of Ronald Coase (University of Chicago School of Law, 2009).

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×