As national and regional ICT strategies are put in place there is a need for appropriate policy instruments and institutions to oversee their implementation, including the growing number of national regulatory authorities for telecommunications. They have become important actors in creating and sustaining an enabling environment for ICT development, supplemented by regional associations to address common problems. Yet no two NRAs are identical, indeed there is an immense variety of arrangements, with great differences in size and in form. Some are a single regulator, others a collegiate body. The scope ranges from single and double to multi-sectoral responsibility, covering posts, broadcasting, electricity and utilities. In a few countries there is more than one regulator for telecommunications. The scope can extend from purely economic and technical regulation to the social, cultural and moral, with a few having been given cyber-security. The level of development of horizontal policies and agencies will help to determine the powers required for the NRA. Where the institutions for competition law, consumer protection and privacy are weak or missing, then the NRA can be expected to play a stronger role. Now that having an NRA is the orthodoxy, it is useful to examine the problems for which they are the best available solution and those where other options would produce better results. Given technological and market changes, it is also important to revise the arrangements for and within NRAs. Audits, benchmarking and peer reviews play invaluable roles in identifying the characteristics, competences and processes best suited to the tasks with which an NRA has been charged. However, experience is mostly in developed countries. A few countries do without NRAs. One country has tried both with and without a regulator, neither proving especially successful. Thus a case can be made for alternatives, especially where the goal is development. While NRAs might be described as independent they must still sit within a framework of good governance and must be responsive to national policies. It is important that structures and practices keep up with changes in the markets and technologies. Even a good regulator needs to create its own future, it cannot expect to remain unchanged, especially with the promises and threats of “convergence”. In parliamentary systems, the NRA should also be subject to scrutiny and review, aided by independent expert advice. It should be possible for a government to ensure and to assure itself that its NRA is close to global best practice. Even with a strong measure of self-regulation and self-criticism, ultimately, someone must regulate the regulators
