https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6871-0960
ABSTRACT
Comparative policy analyses can be enriched by systematically examining temporal sequences over long periods of time. Yet the literature provides little guidance on operationalizing a systematic approach to trace how “history matters”. In this article, we introduce a model of path dependent, punctuated equilibrium to demonstrate how technological and institutional legacies restrict the policy options available for deploying new communications technologies in Canada and Australia. The research adopts a long-term view of the respective communications industries beginning with the policy choices made from the time of the telegraph and the resulting policy paradigms that continue to influence policy choices made in the present. We find that the consistency of these approaches can be explained by the concepts of technological momentum and policy regimes that reinforce the original policy rationale adopted to deploy the telegraph. Many other types of networked infrastructure exhibit similar characteristics of path dependent, punctuated equilibrium in that it is difficult to undo the legacies, including the sunk-costs, interests, and habits that form around the use of the respective networks and their related institutions. We posit that the model presented here will prove useful in tracing networked infrastructure policies over time, particularly in comparing cross-national policy approaches.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Professor David Marsh, Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra, for feedback provided on an early draft of this paper.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Dr Michael de Percy is Senior Lecturer in Political Science at the University of Canberra, Academic Fellow of the Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, a chartered member of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, and a graduate of the Australian National University (PhD) and the Royal Military College, Duntroon.
Dr Heba Batainah is Assistant Professor in Politics and International Relations in the School of Government and Policy at the University of Canberra. She is a graduate of the Australian National University (PhD) and the University of Canberra (BPhil Hons – First Class).
Notes
1 However, Coghlan (Citation1900, 711) claims that the first telegraph messages sent in Australia occurred in NSW in 1851.
2 For example, in Prince Edward Island alone (the smallest of the provinces), there were over 50 telephone companies by the 1930s. Further, many businesses (such as mining companies) established telephone connections between different locations of their business operations (Higgins Citation2008).
3 Bell Canada was regulated federally, except for its requirement to abide by the rules for deploying infrastructure established by municipal councils. To retain the Bell patent in Canada, Bell Canada was required to maintain an office and to manufacture its equipment in Canada, but nationalist sentiment resulted in the Bell Canada patent later being voided by the federal government anyway.
4 There were also numerous provincially-regulated monopoly providers which restricted Bell Canada’s national monopoly provision. Nonetheless, many of the local and provincial services would later become interconnected under Bell Canada’s leadership.
5 There is some disagreement over which telephone line was first: On 2 January 1878, McLean Bros and Rigg in Elizabeth St in Melbourne connecting with their Spencer Street Depot, or the system established by Robison Brothers, connecting their Flinders Street Office to their South Melbourne works in 1879 (Moyal Citation1984, 73).
6 See, for example, the cross-national statistical rankings available from the OECD’s Broadband Portal: http://www.oecd.org/sti/broadband/oecdbroadbandportal.htm.