This includes the role of third-party vendors – which vendors will perform which functions (e.g., maintenance, repair, field services), etc. Although it will be difficult to exit a network-sharing agreement, exit provisions also need to be agreed.2.4.4 Incumbent resistance In the fixed sector, which is devoid of the intense infrastructure-based competition that characterizes the mobile market, incumbents can be reluctant to depart from the status quo or to consider novel co-investment options – particularly options involving any loss of control. 2.5 Ways governments can encourage or incentivise network sharing and co-investment To date, governments have generally adopted a light touch in encouraging network sharing and co-investment. Some countries have mandated network sharing, but there have been few examples of governments actively incentivizing network sharing or co-investment. This section addresses what governments can do to actively promote network sharing and co-investment. 2.5.1 Government co-venturing Governments can play a significant role in fostering co-investment by co-venturing with private-sector operators. This is one of the most important steps that a government can take to encourage broadband deployment, particularly in green-field network development. Governments have very valuable assets and infrastructure that, if made available, can speed up and potentially reduce the cost of broadband deployment. Governments can contribute assets, access to utility infrastructure or rights-of-way, among other things. It is not essential for governments to enter into ventures with private sector operators, but it is a key option. An auction could be used to determine private sector participation and the valuation of government contribution could, for example, be set at replacement cost using modern equivalent assets. Alternatively, government assets could be leased to a co-investment entity, rather than the government participating at an equity level.Governments can pursue participation by public utilities in the roll-out of next-generation access networks. Co-investments are already happening between public utilities and private operators in European countries such as France, Germany and Switzerland. In Switzerland, the co-investment arrangements reportedly have increased competition in the market as well as facilitating deployment of next-generation access networks13. Interestingly, in regions of Switzerland where public utilities have not participated, the incumbent operator hasn’t shown the same level of investment activity. Co-investment between a utility and a private-sector operator avoids some of the obstacles referred to in the previous section concerning negotiating agreements between competitors. Loss of independence could still be a concern for private-sector operators, but arrangements with utilities may permit operators a greater level of control over key network decisions than might be the case in a pure sharing arrangement between private operators.Moreover, utilities may not be the only public-sector entities getting involved in such ventures. Road or railway entities can be key partners Trends in Telecommunication Reform 2016 61 Chapter 2 Box 2.4: Utility Participation in a Joint Venture in Ireland In 2014, the Irish electricity utility ESB entered into a 50/50, incorporated joint venture with Vodafone to build and operate a wholesale-only, open-access, fibre-to-the-building (FTTB) network in certain parts of Ireland. The joint venture entity will deploy fibre to homes and businesses using ESB’s existing overhead and underground infrastructure, in return for a fee from the joint venture. In turn, the joint venture will provide a wholesale, virtual unbundled local access (VULA) product to retail operators, as well as a higher quality, point-to-point service suitable for mobile backhaul and business customers14.