https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9578-077X
![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Smart cities rely on data, wireless technology, and connectivity; therefore, the radio spectrum is essential for their future development. This article provides an overview of the regulatory framework and relevant actors related to spectrum use, thereby promoting foreseeability and thus investment in the smart city ecosystem. The focus is the EU-level, but due to the importance of national and local levels, Finland functions as an example. The article highlights the important role of network slicing, infrastructure and spectrum sharing, other forms of cooperation for smart city development, and various operational models and alternatives. The article concludes that smart city operations are both possible and also supported by current regulation and allocation. Despite international and EU-level frameworks, national approaches remain relatively critical. Future real-life experiences will indicate the direction of spectrum regulation, but clearly smart cities require dynamic, local and flexible (use of) networks.
Acknowledgements
This work was performed as part of the LuxTurrim5G ecosystem that is partially funded by the participating companies and Business Finland. We thank Professor emeritus Heikki Hämmäinen (Aalto University) for his comments.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 T Kempin Reuter, ‘Smart City Visions and Human Rights: Do They Go Together?’ (2020) 006 Carr Center Discussion Paper Series, Understanding the Impact of Technology on Urban Life.
2 Commission (EC), ‘Smart cities’ (European Commission, An Official Website of the European Union) <https://ec.europa.eu/info/eu-regional-and-urban-development/topics/cities-and-urban-development/city-initiatives/smart-cities_en> accessed 1 January 2022.
3 D Washburn and others, ‘Helping CIOs Understand “Smart City” Initiatives: Defining the Smart City, Its Drivers, and the Role of the CIO’ (Forrester Research, Inc., 2010) <http://goo.gl/4XHk0F> accessed 7 November 2022.
4 RE Hall and others, ‘The Vision of a Smart City’ (2nd International Life Extension Technology Workshop, Paris, France, 2000) <https://www.osti.gov/biblio/773961> accessed 7 November 2022.
5 J Salmelin and others, ‘Smart City Design Guideline’ (2021) An unpublished project document edited by J Turunen and others.
6 Regarding personal data protection in the smart city context, see P Korpisaari and others, ‘Legal Aspects in Developing Smart City Services and Data Ecosystems’ in P Korpisaari (ed), Sanan vapauksia ja rajoja: Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2020 (University of Helsinki Faculty of Law, Forum Iuris, 2021) 160–70; A Alén-Savikko and others, ‘Personal Data Protection, Frequency Regulation and Competition Law in the Context of Smart City Infrastructure’ in P Korpisaari (ed), Oikeuksia, vapauksia ja rajoituksia: Viestintäoikeuden vuosikirja 2019 (University of Helsinki Faculty of Law, Forum Iuris, 2020) 161–73.
7 Traficom, ‘Information about 5G’ (2021) <https://www.traficom.fi/en/communications/communications-networks/information-about-5g> accessed 7 November 2022; L Sastrawidjaja and M Suryanegara, ‘Regulation challenges of 5G spectrum deployment at 3.5 GHz: The framework for Indonesia’ (Electrical Power, Electronics, Communications and Informatics Seminar (EECCIS), Batu, Indonesia, 2018) 213–14.
8 F Beltran, ‘Accelerating the Introduction of Spectrum Sharing Using Market-based Mechanisms’ (2017) 1 IEEE Commun Stand Maga 66.
9 With regard to interference in the form of jamming and spoofing, see A Alén-Savikko, ‘Satelliittipaikannuksen häirintä lainsäädännön kohinassa’ (2019) 3–4 Lakimies 240.
10 Korpisaari and others (n 6) 158; Sastrawidjaja and Suryanegara (n 7) 213.
11 F Beltran, S Kumar Ray, and JA Gutiérrez, ‘Understanding the Current Operation and Future Roles of Wireless Networks: Co-Existence, Competition and Co-Operation in the Unlicensed Spectrum Bands’ (2016) 34 IEEE JSAC 2831, 2829.
12 See also the arguments used in M Ala-Fossi and others, ‘Operationalising Communication Rights: The Case of a “Digital Welfare State”’ (2019) 8(1) Internet Policy Review <https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.1.1389>. For more on the so-called ‘Finnish model’, see M Castells and P Himanen, The Information Society and the Welfare State: The Finnish Model (Oxford University Press, 2002).
13 Ala-Fossi and others (n 12).
14 Ala-Fossi and others (n 12). See also more about the “broadband for all strategy” in H Nieminen, ‘European Broadband Regulation: The “Broadband for All 2015” Strategy in Finland’ in M Löblich and S Pfaff-Rüdiger (eds), Communication and Media Policy in the Era of the Internet: Theories and Processes (Nomos, 2013) 119–31.
15 Statista, ‘Internet Usage in Finland - Statistics & Fact’ <https://www.statista.com/topics/7400/internet-usage-in-finland/> accessed 31.3.2023.
16 Other requirements may include or be based on, among others, notification requirements to the competent authority prior to commencing operations, cybersecurity rules, rules on joint use and joint construction of physical infrastructure in certain circumstances as well as competition law (incl. notification requirements to competition authorities in cases of cooperation or creation of joint ventures). When engaging in operational actions, all possible requirements must be considered independently by the operative party in contact with the competent authorities. Regarding competition law in a smart city, see Vesala and Brouwer’s analysis in Korpisaari and others (n 6) 194–99; regarding public procurement law, see Vesala in Alén-Savikko and others (n 6) 189–92.
17 See, e.g. G Ancans and others, ‘Spectrum Considerations for 5G Mobile Communication Systems’ (2017) 104 Procedia Computer Science 509 <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.01.166> accessed 7 November 2022; Alén-Savikko (n 8) 244–45; European conference of postal and telecommunications administrators, ‘The CEPT Portal’ <https://www.cept.org/> accessed 7 November 2022.
18 Electronic Communications Committee (ECC), ‘The European table of frequency allocations and applications in the frequency range 8.3 kHz to 3000 GHz (ECA TABLE)’ (ERC Report 25, European Communications Office, October 2021) <https://docdb.cept.org/download/3543> accessed 7 November 2022.
19 Decision No 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community [2002] OJ L108/1.
20 Decision No 243/2012/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme [2012] OJ L 81/7.
21 Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code [2018] OJ L 321/36.
22 Directive 2014/53/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the making available on the market of radio equipment and repealing Directive 1999/5/EC [2014] OJ L 153/62.
23 See, e.g. S Bu-Pasha, ‘Vulnerabilities in Localization with Regard to GNSS and Harmful Radio Iinterference: International and EU Law Aspects’ (2018) 6 IEEE Access 8332. <https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2018.2805282> accessed 7 November 2022; A Alén-Savikko (n 8) 247–49.
24 See, e.g. Alén-Savikko (n 9) 252–53.
25 ibid 254–56.
26 A public mobile network means ‘a communications network which is used to provide communications services for an unlimited group of users’. A mobile network means ‘a network which is based on 3GPP technology and uses mobile terminal equipment’. About terminology, see: <https://www.traficom.fi/en/communications/communications-networks/applying-frequency-reservation-and-radio-licence> accessed 7 November 2022.
27 To fall under the scope of Section 6(4), the provided service must be a minor network service, meaning ‘operations that are minor in terms of the number of users, financial impact or significance in communications markets. Minor operations also cover operations that are minor based on the number of frequencies, other technical implementation or the service provided’ and local operation meaning ‘operation that is local, based on the number of customers/subscriptions, the geographic area of use or other purpose of use (e.g. factory)’. About terminology see: <https://www.traficom.fi/en/communications/communications-networks/applying-frequency-reservation-and-radio-licence> accessed 7 November 2022.
28 See, e.g. Traficom, ‘Regulation 15 on collective frequencies for licence-exempt radio transmitters and on their use’ (Explanatory notes, 2021) <https://www.traficom.fi/sites/default/files/media/regulation/EN_M%C3%A4%C3%A4r%C3%A4yksen_15AR_perustelumuistio_%28englanti%29.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022.
29 In the case of a joint venture, when leasing out the right to use the spectrum band, approval of the competition authorities might also be required. However, as noted above, competition law is not further discussed in this article. See, e.g. decision Dnro 438/14.00.00/2014 of the Finnish competition and consumer authority (2015), where a joint venture raised concerns about restriction of national network competition. Remedies were imposed by the competition authorities. <https://arkisto.kkv.fi/globalassets/kkv-suomi/ratkaisut-aloitteet-lausunnot/ratkaisut/kilpailuasiat/2015/kielto--sitoumus--ja-toimitusvelvoiteratkaisut/r-2014-00-0438_2018_dna.pdf> accessed 8 January 2022; For more on competition law, see J Vesala and D Brouwer in Korpisaari and others (n 6) 194–99.
30 Similar obligations for the secondary use of MNO’s spectrum bands can be found, for example, in Denmark, see more: <https://www.gsma.com/spectrum/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Spectrum-Leasing-5G-Era.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022.
31 The principle of technological neutrality has been reinforced by the Framework Directive 2002/212, Recital 18 (Directive 2002/21 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) [2002] OJ L108/33) and later by the European Electronic Communications Code, Recital 25: The principle sets a requirement for Member States ‘to ensure that national regulatory authorities take the utmost account of the desirability of making regulation technologically neutral, that is to say that it neither imposes nor discriminates in favour of the use of a particular type of technology, does not preclude the taking of proportionate steps to promote certain specific services where this is justified, for example digital television as a means for increasing spectrum efficiency’.
32 Commission (EC), ‘5G Observatory Quarterly Report 14 up to January 2022’ (Quartely Report January 2022) <https://5gobservatory.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/5G-Obs-PhaseIII_Quarterly-report-14_FINAL-Clean-for-publication_16022022.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022.
33 ibid 80–84.
34 M Matinmikko-Blue and others, ‘Analysis of 5G Spectrum Awarding Decisions: How Do Different Countries Consider Emerging Local 5G Networks?’ (2021) <https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/238039/1/Matinmikko-Blue-et-al.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022. The adoption of the 3.5GHz band is used as an example to indicate the fragmentation of 5G spectrum decisions at the EU and globally, 7–9.
35 Report ITU-R M.2330-0, ‘Cognitive Radio Systems in the Land Mobile Service’ (11/2014), 9. <https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-r/opb/rep/R-REP-M.2330-2014-PDF-E.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022. According to the ITU’s definition, spectrum sharing refers to the situation where two or more radio systems operate in the same frequency band.
36 See more about spectrum management approaches in M Matinmikko-Blue, S Yrjölä and P Ahokangas, ‘Spectrum Management in the 6G Era: The Role of Regulation and Spectrum Sharing’, 1. <http://jultika.oulu.fi/files/nbnfi-fe2020050725614.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022. See also Beltran, Kumar Ray, and Gutiérrez (n 11).
37 The 3.5 GHz frequency band was auctioned so as to award licences to DNA Oyj, Elisa Oyj and Telia Finland Oyj in 2018. The auction for the 26 GHz frequency band in 2020 also resulted in the same three MNOs obtaining licences for developing 5G networks.
38 Traficom, ‘Local 4G/5G Networks’ <https://www.traficom.fi/en/communications/communications-networks/local-4g5g-networks> accessed 7 November 2022.
39 Traficom, ‘5G Momentum -ekosysteemi vie Suomea 5G-edelläkävijäksi’ (5G Momentum Uutiskirje 4/2022) <https://uutiskirjeet.traficom.fi/a/s/185197098-6fca4af219d9140014d51b8d802b411b/5126584> accessed 7 November 2022.
40 See, e.g. M Ala-Fossi, ‘Finland: Surfing the Mobile Wave Against the Tide of EU Spectrum Policy Consensus’ in G Taylor and C Middleton (eds), Frequencies: International Spectrum Policy (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2020) 46–67.
41 Examples of the policy targets for smart city development can be found in the European Commission (EC) 2030 Policy Programme, ‘Path to the Digital Decade programme’ COM(2021) 574 final, 15 September 2021, arts 2 and 4 <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021PC0574> accessed 7 November 2022.
42 Commission (EC), Ref.Ares (2021) 7794710 - 16/12/2021. Mandate to CEPT on technical conditions regarding the shared use of the 3.8–4.2 GHz frequency band for terrestrial wireless broadband systems providing local-area network connectivity in the Union.
43 GSMA, ‘5G Spectrum: GSMA Public Policy Position March 2021’ (June 2022) <https://www.gsma.com/spectrum/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/5G-Spectrum-Positions.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022. See also A Garcia-Rodriguez and others, ‘Massive MIMO Unlicensed: A New Approach to Dynamic Spectrum Access’ (2018) 56(6) IEEE Communications Magazine 186.
44 European 5G Observatory, ‘To Fulfil Its Potential 5G Needs Access to Much Higher Frequencies: 3.5 GHz and Above. This was not the Case with Earlier Mobile Generations’ <https://5gobservatory.eu/5g-spectrum/> accessed 7 November 2022. 5G Spectrum: ‘At the ITU World Radio Conference in 2023 (WRC-23) a further IMT identification could be approved for 3.3–3.4 GHz, 3.6–3.8 GHz, 6425–7125 GHz and 10.1–10.5 GHz, facilitating the use of these bands for 5G.’
45 Millimeter Wave Products Inc., ‘What is 6G?’ <https://www.miwv.com/what-is-6g/> accessed 8 January 2022.
46 ITU-R Preparatory Studies for WRC-23 <https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-R/study-groups/rcpm/Pages/wrc-23-studies.aspx> accessed 7 November 2022; See also ‘White Paper on RF Enabling 6G – Opportunities and Challenges from Technology to Spectrum’ (2021) 13 6G Research Visions 38 <http://jultika.oulu.fi/files/isbn9789526228419.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022.
47 GSMA and Coleago Consulting Ltd., ‘Estimating the Mid-Band Spectrum Needs in the 2025–2030 Time Frame: Global Outlook’ (July 2021) 53 <https://www.gsma.com/spectrum/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Estimating-Mid-Band-Spectrum-Needs.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022.
48 ibid 2–3.
49 GSMA, ‘The WRC Series: Regional Spotlights: Impact of mmWave 5G’ (2019) <https://www.gsma.com/spectrum/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/mmWave-5G-Regional-Spotlights.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022.
50 ibid 21.
51 BEREC, DotEcon Ltd and Axon Partners Group, ‘Study on Implications of 5G Deployment on Future Business Models’ (2018) BoR (18) 23, 100. <https://berec.europa.eu/eng/document_register/subject_matter/berec/reports/8008-study-on-implications-of-5g-deployment-on-future-business-models> accessed 7 November 2022.
52 This refers to the provision of ‘slices’ that enable specific and separate uses of the network. See, e.g. ITU-T Rec, ‘Series Y: Global Information Infrastructure, Internet Protocol Aspects, Next-Generation Networks, Internet of Things and Smart Cities’ (Future networks. Y.3157 (02/2021)) <https://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=s&id=T-REC-Y.3157-202102-I!!PDF-E&type=items> accessed 7 November 2022.
53 See International Telecommunication Union (ITU) (n 46); BEREC, DotEcon Ltd and Axon Partners Group (n 45) 100–01. See also A Alén-Savikko, ‘Network Neutrality in the Era of 5G: A Matter of Faith, Hope, and Design?’ (2019) 28(2) Information & Communications Technology Law 115, 124–25 with references <https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2019.1587830> accessed 7 November 2022.
54 Commission (EC), ‘Radio Spectrum Policy Group, Work Programme for 2022 and Beyond’ (2022) <https://rspg-spectrum.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/RSPG22-006final-work_programme_2022_and_beyond.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022.
55 Traficom, ‘Finland Strongly Involved in European 6G Spectrum Work’ (press release 21.3.2022) <https://www.traficom.fi/en/news/finland-strongly-involved-european-6g-spectrum-work> accessed 7 November 2022; One of the writers of this article, Heidi Himmanen, acts as a co-chair of the RSPG sub-group ‘The Development of 6G and Possible Implications for Spectrum Needs, and Mobile Technology Evolution – Experiences and Strategies’ <https://rspg-spectrum.eu/sub-groups/> accessed 7 November 2022.
56 Ficom, ‘Suomen 3G-verkot suljetaan vuoden 2023 aikana’ (press release 27.9.2022) <https://ficom.fi/ajankohtaista/uutiset/suomen-3g-verkot-suljetaan-vuoden-2023-aikana/> accessed 7 November 2022.
57 Liikenne- ja viestintäministeriö, ‘DNA, Elisa ja Telia saivat uudet verkkotoimiluvat 900, 1800 ja 2100 megahertsin taajuusalueille’ (press release 13.12.2018) <https://www.lvm.fi/-/dna-elisa-ja-telia-saivat-uudet-verkkotoimiluvat-900-1800-ja-2100-megahertsin-taajuusalueille-990437> accessed 7 November 2022.
58 EECC, Recitals 119, 124, 132, 156, arts 45(1–2), 51(1–3).
59 See GSMA and Coleago Consulting Ltd. (n 41) 7–8; see also BEREC, DotEcon Ltd and Axon Partners Group (n 45) 101, where it is also noted that ‘[c]harging models for shared infrastructure should ideally be capacity-based to ensure that there are no retail competitive effects’.
60 OECD, ‘Wireless Market Structures and Network Sharing’ (2015) OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 243, OECD Publishing 2014, 5–7. <https://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=DSTI/ICCP/CISP(2014)2/FINAL&docLanguage=En> accessed 7 November 2022.
61 M Bourreau, S Hoerning, and W Maxwell, ‘Implementing Co-investments and Network Sharing’ (2020) Centre on regulation in Europe (CERRE) Telecom Report, 14–15. <https://cerre.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/cerre_implementing_co-investment_and_network_sharing-26.05.2020.pdf> accessed 7 November 2022. Shared use of passive infrastructure may be mandatory resulting from the telecommunication laws.
62 EECC, Recital 29.
63 See also Ala-Fossi (n 40) 62–63.
64 Decision No 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in the European Community [2002] OJ L108/1. The 2002 Radio Spectrum Decision allows the Commission to adopt implementing decisions to harmonise technical conditions with regard to the availability and efficient use of spectrum for the proper functioning of the single market, arts 1(1–2).
65 EECC.