{"id":22384,"date":"2025-10-29T12:20:53","date_gmt":"2025-10-29T12:20:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.gsma.com\/solutions-and-impact\/connectivity-for-good\/public-policy\/mobile-policy-handbook\/?p=22384"},"modified":"2025-10-29T12:20:54","modified_gmt":"2025-10-29T12:20:54","slug":"spectrum-pricing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.gsma.com\/solutions-and-impact\/connectivity-for-good\/public-policy\/mobile-policy-handbook\/spectrum-management-and-licensing\/spectrum-pricing\/","title":{"rendered":"Spectrum Pricing"},"content":{"rendered":"

Background<\/h3>\n

The primary goal of charging a fee for spectrum is to award it to those who will use it most efficiently to deliver maximum benefits for society. A well- designed auction will assign spectrum to those who value it most, providing an incentive for them to use it efficiently through investment in widespread, high-quality\u00a0 mobile networks. However, since charging for spectrum also provides state revenues, governments sometimes artificially inflate spectrum prices at the expense of efficient spectrum use and the wider economy.<\/p>\n

Extremely high-priced auctions are typically the result of national policy decisions, such as setting excessive reserve prices, making an insufficient amount of spectrum available for auction, a lack of clarity on future releases or unknown renewal processes for expiring licences. Such factors can create uncertainty or artificial scarcity and encourage mobile operators to bid above their true valuation of the spectrum licences on offer.<\/p>\n

On average, global cumulative spectrum costs now account for 7% of mobile operator revenues \u2013 a 63% increase over the past 10 years. In the worst-case scenario, spectrum prices can account for 25% of operator revenues.<\/p>\n

Increased spectrum cost therefore has an impact on consumers. A 10-percentage point lower spectrum cost-to-revenue ratio leads to coverage of up to six percentage points higher. This effect has been observed for both 4G and 5G coverage. There is a similar negative effect on network speeds whereby a 10-percentage point lower spectrum cost has a positive impact on download speeds of 8%.<\/p>\n

Debate<\/h3>\n

Telecoms regulators increasingly recognise the positive impact of lower spectrum prices, but governments are not always easy to convince. How can regulators and mobile operators work together to highlight the benefits of affordable spectrum to relevant levels of government?<\/em><\/p>\n

Spectrum is a valuable asset, but a long-term vision is needed to maximise its value. The primary goal of all awards should be to encourage the most efficient use of spectrum through investment in widespread high-quality networks.<\/p>\n

Many countries around the world have struck the right balance between increasing revenues and awarding efficient spectrum.<\/p>\n

Recommendations for spectrum pricing and fees:<\/p>\n