Page 69 - Proceedings of the 2017 ITU Kaleidoscope

Challenges for a data-driven society

SDOs’ operational frameworks, appeals mechanisms and 6. REFERENCES
composition of their bodies play a significant role in its
standardization activities. Designing operational rules that [1] Werle, R. ‘Standards in the International Telecommunications
would satisfy all affected by a standard is a utopian task: for Regime’, HWWA Discussion Paper 157, SSN 1616-4814
this reason, standardization processes are based on (2001) available at
consensus, concessions and compromises. Yet, governance https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/19394/1/157.pdf.
models that open avenues for conspiracy and abuse of [2] Gandal, N., Salant D., and Waverman, L. 'Standards in
processes, and do not guarantee consideration of all Wireless Telephone Networks' (2003) available at
objections, are likely to tilt the balance towards a single http://www.tau.ac.il/~gandal/telecomstandards.pdf.
group of stakeholders and abandon consensus-based nature
of standardization. Such situation may not only result in [3] Delcamp, H. and Leiponen, A. ‘Innovating Standards through
costly and lengthy litigation, as it was the case for the ETSI Informal Consortia: The Case of Wireless
and TruePosition, but may also incentivize members’ Telecommunications’ International Journal of Industrial
withdrawal from organization or even lead to delays in Organization (2014) 36.
standards development, and hence jeopardize the efficiency
and market acceptance of standards. Transparent, open and [4] Brunsson, N. and Jacobsson, B. ‘The Contemporary Expansion
consensus-based governance processes, which give due of Standardization’, in Brunsson, N., Jacobsson, B. and
Associates, A World of Standards (OUP 2000) 1.
considerations to the views of all stakeholders, are the key to
successful standards. [5] Lessig, L. Code: And Other Laws of Cyberspace. (New York:
Basic Books, 2006).
5. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
[6] Mattli, W. ‘The Politics and Economics of International
Despite out tendency to believe the opposite, standardization Institutional Standard-Setting: An Introduction’ (2001) Journal
of European Public Policy, Special Issue 8 (3).
remains a political process, fraught with conflicting interests
and tensions between its stakeholders [12]. Even if [7] Biddle B., e.a., ‘The Expanding Role and Importance of
governance processes of an SDO in theory seem to Standards in the Information and Communications
accommodate a broad range of interests, the practice is not Technology Industry’ (2012) Jurimetrics, 52.
always straight-forward and may demonstrate different
outcomes. The unwritten rule of every SDO is that standards [8] Chaio, B., Lerner, J. and Tirole, J., ‘The Rules of Standard
are not established in the Working Groups, but “during the Setting Organizations: An Empirical Analysis”, Rand Journal
17
coffee breaks or hallway conversations”. Does the same of Economics 38 (2007) 905.
logic apply to governance processes? The answer, if there is
any, lies within an array of extensive empirical studies, [9] Ahrne G., Brunsson N. and Garsten C., ‘Standardizing through
which this paper aims to encourage. Organization’ in Brunsson, N., Jacobsson, B. and Associates,
The overall contribution of this paper to the existing body of A World of Standards (OUP 2000) 50.
research is its exposure of SDOs’ orchestration and [10] Smith, H.E., ‘Property as Platform: Coordinating Standards as
governance processes and the consecutive observation of a Technological Innovation’ (2013) 9 Journal of Competition
disconnect between stakeholders involved in standards Law and Economics 4 (2013) 1057.
development and those defining the rules and procedures of
SDOs. Considering the effect of SDOs’ operational [11] Willingmyre, G. ‘Giving Process its Due When a Standard
frameworks on the outcome of standardization processes, Development Organization Changes the Rules of the Game’
and the expectations of SDOs to act on behalf of their (2017) available at
members, this paper claims that procedural guarantees https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2903602
should be respected in SDO’ procedures-drafting and dispute
resolution. It further suggests that inclusive governance [12] Botzem, S. and Quack, S. ‘Contested rules and shifting
processes that take into account the views of all stakeholders boundaries: International standard-setting in accounting’ in
M.L. Djelic, K. Sahlin - Andersson (eds.) Transnational
contribute to consensus-building in standards development Governance, Institutional Dynamics of Regulation (CUP
groups and as such, improve the quality and general 2006) 266.
acceptance of standards.
[13] Brunsson, N., ‘Organizations, Markets and Standardization’ in
Brunsson, N., Jacobsson, B. and Associates, A World of
Standards (OUP 2000) 21.

[14] Sidak, G.J., ‘Testing for Bias to Suppress Royalties for
Standard-Essential Patents’ (2016) 1 The Criterion Journal on
Innovation 301.

17 Remarks made at the conference ‘Decision-making in Standard University of Exeter, University of Salford, University of Warwick
Developing Organisations for the Internet’ organized by the and Economic & Social Research Council on 25 April 2017.

– 53 –