Current approaches for Public Spectrum sharing - Andy Hudson, Director of Spectrum Policy, Ofcom at UK Spectrum Policy Forum Cluster 2 meeting on 9th Sep. on 'Public-Private sharing'

1. Public Private Sharing: can it be
made to work?
Andy Hudson, Director of Spectrum Policy
9 September 2015

2. 1
• Why spectrum sharing?
• Our framework for spectrum sharing
• Current approaches for Public Sector sharing
• My answer to the question……

3. Why spectrum sharing?
2
• Growing demand for spectrum from all sectors
• Becoming more and more difficult to find clear spectrum
• As demand grows we will need to find ways of using spectrum more intensively,
facilitating innovation and market entry
• Emerging technologies (or existing technologies applied in new bands) present
opportunities
• Ofcom has a duty to secure optimal use of spectrum
• Spectrum Management Strategy (April 2014) identified spectrum sharing as an area of
increased emphasis for Ofcom

4. Spectrum use and sharing in the Public Sector
3
- Derived from the UK FAT
- Public sector: bands managed by Government Departments (mostly Defence)
- Market: bands managed by Ofcom through licensing or licence exemption
- Space science: bands used for research and science
Market uses with
exclusive access
Mobile 6%
Fixed links 6%
Satellite 4%
Not assigned 2.8%
Licence exempt 0.7%
Market
exclusive
19.5%
Shared
54%
Public sector
exclusive
19.5%
Space science
exclusive 2.6%

5. We are consulting on a framework for spectrum sharing
4
• Embeds the consideration of spectrum sharing in authorisation decisions
– Whenever we are defining new spectrum authorisations
– When we are seeking to identify spectrum to meet new demands
• Relevant to all types of users
• Does not presuppose that a sharing solution will be appropriate in every circumstance,
but that it should always be considered
• The framework:
– Identifies barriers to sharing
– Describes tools and enablers with potential to facilitate and enable further sharing
– Takes into account the characteristics of use of both incumbent and potential new
use, to identify which – if any – tools to apply
• We are seeking views from stakeholders on all elements of the framework, including the
relative priority of barriers, and of the tools and enablers CLOSES 2 OCTOBER 2015

6. Public Sector Spectrum Release Programme (PSSR)
5
• Government committed to make 500 MHz of sub-5 GHz spectrum available for civil
use by 2020
• Some success, such as the upcoming 2.3 GHz and 3.4 GHz auction
• The establishment of a Central Management Unit (CMU) within ShEx to manage public
sector spectrum offers an opportunity to release/share more spectrum for civil use
• Better incentives to encourage Public Sector users to release/sharing (including funding for
feasibility studies) will help
• The CMU has asked Ofcom to review the current PSSR target and programme
• Evidence from the market of future civil demand is an essential input into this process
– please let us know (for example, through the current sharing consultation)
• Open to many forms of sharing (e.g. geographic, dynamic (databases), PMSE licensing…)

7. Q. Public Private Sharing: can it be made to work?
A. Yes, it has to
6
Q. Public Private Sharing: how can it be made to work?
A. We can make it work by:
• talking to each other
• recognising common objectives
• accepting that different attitudes to risk are legitimate
• surfacing differences
• building evidence (usage, coexistence studies etc.)
• demonstrating the value created
• being prepared to innovate

8. Background slides
7

9. Barriers
8
• Stakeholders requiring spectrum access are likely to face a range of challenges:
– Availability of information – information on what actual use licensees make of a
band is not publically available. This means that it can be difficult to choose which
bands to focus on, leaving many licensees to engage with to establish if there is a
sharing opportunity. We also have limited information on demand.
– Market barriers - transaction costs can be seen as prohibitive, particularly where the
value to an individual potential user is small. Incentives on incumbents to engage
with potential sharers are limited. And incumbents may not wish to share if it could
limit future flexibility, or allow market entry of a disruptive rival technology
– Technological constraints – coexistence is seen as a risk. There is complexity and
cost involved in analysing interference risks and defining technical parameters
– Authorisation constraints – our own approach and processes may constrain
flexible use, if it is onerous for a licence holder to vary the terms of a licence

10. Tools
9
• We have identified tools and enablers that have potential to increase benefits from
sharing. We have categorised these into:
– Increased information – could include information on actual use (rather than
authorisations), in real-time or forward-looking. Also increased information on public
sector use, interference, or demand
– Technology enablers – technology can enable more intelligent and efficient sharing,
e.g. enhancements to geolocation databases, potentially to manage access amongst
sharers; sensing; or more frequency agile equipment
– Market enablers – new intermediaries or trading platforms could create market
liquidity. Our pricing approach to date does not take account of demand from potential
sharers. And we could look for opportunities for auctions to reflect shared use
– Authorisation conditions – intervention to create new ‘tiers’ of users (e.g. TWVS).
Requirements in licences to respond to sharing requests, or to provide information

11. Characteristics of use
• Each service that uses spectrum has different characteristics and different needs. We
will always need to consider sharing on a case by case basis
• We outline high-level characteristics of use (of incumbent and potential sharers) that
should be considered to begin to identify which – if any – tools might be relevant
• In addition to these high level dimensions, there are of course more detailed technical
factors that would need to be studied before implementing sharing in a particular band
• The challenge is to find economically viable opportunities for compatible uses.
10
Geography / coverage Where is the spectrum needed? Is location fixed or dynamic?
Time When is the spectrum needed?
Capacity How much capacity is needed? Over what time frame does
the user need to be able to plan future capacity needs?
Quality of service What level of quality of service is required?
Economies of scale What level of international harmonisation is essential?
Power and directionality