Introduction

Background

The telecommunications sector has evolved in recent decades, driven by technological advances and disruptive changes in the legal and regulatory landscape. As such, adaptability represents a constant challenge in this industry [1–4].

Telecommunication is defined as the transmission of information by electronic means. This activity includes a wide range of technologies and services that enable remote communication. It is characterized by its ongoing evolution and expansion into the digital sphere, which is made possible by the integration of fixed and mobile networks. The legal regulation of this sector continually encounters challenges due to ever-changing real-world circumstances [1,3,5,6]. Authorities have implemented a range of policies focused on data protection, privacy, promoting competition, and ensuring universal access to services in this area [5–7]. In this context, communication rights are recognized as fundamental, enabling citizens to address the challenges of new realities. For example, this recognition shapes the approaches used in the governance of the internet [5,7–9]. It is imperative to ensure inclusive access to information and communication technologies.

Significant advances in telecommunications have taken place, accompanied by a willingness to make mass use of these technologies. Nevertheless, there remain gaps and challenges that warrant further investigation, particularly concerning the protection of marginalized groups and vulnerable communities. Any action to the contrary can be considered discriminatory and should not be permitted in a democratic country [10–12].

Therefore, a bibliometric analysis of the scientific production of telecommunications is necessary. This quantitative methodology enables the examination of a vast amount of scientific data, which will be beneficial for identifying research trends within the scientific community.

Objectives

The analysis focused on identifying trends in telecommunications research by analyzing the annual scientific production, the most representative journals, the keywords, the most productive authors, and the main articles on the selected topic.

Methods

Ethics statement

The present study did not involve human subjects and was based on the analysis of a database; therefore, neither the approval of the institutional ethics committee nor informed consent was requested.

Study design

The study was based on a bibliometric analysis of scientific publications indexed in the Scopus database, constituting a retrospective descriptive study.

Data sources and measurement

The initial search was conducted on February 26, 2024, utilizing the Scopus database. This database was chosen for its collection of high impact, interdisciplinary journals. The search parameters included the article title, abstract, and keywords, using the following formula: “telecommunication* regulation*” OR “communication* law*” OR “communication* right*.” This search yielded 718 documents. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) 1981–2023 period; (2) document types of articles, books, book chapters, conference papers, editorials, letters, and reviews; (3) final publication stage; and (4) English language. The exclusion criteria encompassed documents that did not meet the specified inclusion criteria and those irrelevant to the study’s focus. After applying these criteria, the final dataset comprised 237 documents (Dataset 1).

Tools for analysis

The Biblioshiny interface (K-Synth SRL) was used for data analysis, and Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corp) was used for the presentation of results.

Results

The main document types included articles (46%), book chapters (21%), reviews (10%), and conference papers (7%).

Annual scientific production

Fig. 1 shows that the maximum number of publications was reached in 2021, and that at least 10 documents were published each year since 2019. The annual growth rate was 2.91%. The figure also highlights that over the past 15 years, the field of telecommunications has remained a active subject, particularly during the pandemic period. Notably, 2021 marked the highest scientific output with 21 documents. Fig. 2 indicates that the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia predominated in terms of the frequency of papers contributing to the scientific output on telecommunications.

Most representative journals

Table 1 lists the 10 most representative journals in the field of telecommunications research. It shows that the journal Telecommunications Policy published the largest number of documents. Additionally, IEEE Communications Magazine held the highest h-index, despite not having the highest publication volume. Another noteworthy observation is that the documents in the journal International Communication Gazette received more citations than those in the other ranked journals.

Keywords

Fig. 3 illustrates five consolidated clusters and two clusters in the process of consolidation. The green cluster is distinguished by the keywords “communication rights,” “public service media,” and “media policy.” In contrast, the red cluster prominently features the terms “regulation” and “telecommunications,” which are not interconnected. The green cluster—especially, the node for “communication rights”—serves as a connection among the blue, gray, and purple clusters. The blue and gray clusters share the term “human rights.” In the purple cluster, the term “freedom of expression” is particularly significant. The orange and brown clusters are in the process of consolidation.

Most productive authors

As shown in Table 2, Amy Sanders and Pradip Thomas are the most representative authors, each with five papers leading the ranking. However, the scientific output of the latter author is particularly notable for the total number of citations received. Additionally, it is important to highlight that Bart Cammaerts had a higher h-index than his peers. Fig. 4 suggests that the telecommunications theme holds potential, and underscores the necessity for internationalizing the network of collaboration among authors.

Main documents

Table 3 [8,10,13–20] shows that the most cited article was “The institutional foundations of regulatory commitment: a comparative analysis of telecommunications regulation.” This paper focused on the role of telecommunications in the social and political context, underscoring the need to strengthen the process of public service regulation. The second-ranked article emphasized the development of the right to communication as a fundamental aspect of the law concerning freedom of opinion and expression. This concept is intrinsic to all individuals, making it universally applicable.

Fig. 3 illustrates the interactions among authors who have published in the field of telecommunications. It reveals that there are still areas requiring further work, presenting an opportunity for researchers. A significant ongoing challenge is to achieve effective interconnection and integration among these researchers.

Discussion

Articles represented 46% of the annual scientific output in the field of telecommunications, with a growth rate of 2.91%. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia are prominent in terms of their scientific contributions. The journals Telecommunications Policy, IEEE Communications Magazine, and International Communication Gazette were found to be among the most significant in this field. The topics identified from the keywords included communication rights, public service media, media policy, regulation, and telecommunications. Amy Sanders and Pradip Thomas were noted as the most productive authors. The most highly cited paper was “The institutional foundations of regulatory commitment: a comparative analysis of telecommunications regulation.” The network of collaboration among authors was found to be in need of internationalization.

Interpretation

The results of this bibliometric study highlight significant trends in scientific production within the field of telecommunications. Notably, the annual growth in scientific output reached its peak in 2021, coinciding with the COVID-19 pandemic and an increased reliance on technology in daily life [13,21].

The journal Telecommunications Policy is particularly noteworthy for its emphasis on Telecommunications Policy and regulation. This focus is complemented by journals such as IEEE Communications Magazine and International Communication Gazette, which have high h-index and numerous citations, underscoring the interdisciplinary nature of the field [11].

Keyword analysis demonstrated the integration of topics such as communication rights, public service media, and media policy, supporting the growing relevance of legal and ethical issues in telecommunications [5–8,22].

The most productive authors in the field of telecommunications were found to include Amy Sanders, Pradip Thomas, and Bart Cammaerts. Their contributions are particularly notable in areas such as communication rights, regulation, and internet governance, as evidenced by the literature review. However, the existing network of authors indicates a need for increased integration and collaborative efforts to tackle the complex challenges within the sector. Promoting networking through research networks remains an important yet under-implemented activity [13,14,23].

The most cited paper was from 1994 and focused on the need for effective regulation of telecommunications. This issue remains relevant to this day. Other highly cited papers addressed issues such as communication rights, the role of the media, and communication in crisis, reflecting the diversity of areas related to telecommunications [11,21,22,24].

Comparison with previous studies

Telecommunications research topics have evolved. Some researchers have identified the need for media regulation, internet policy, and freedom of expression issues as the most frequent areas of research. This was instrumental in solidifying the demand for communication rights and internet governance [2,11,24].

Correspondingly, researchers have emphasized the growing importance of private information intermediaries in governance implementation through their technical design choices and user policies. Additionally, the complex yet beneficial relationship between telecommunications and human rights is noteworthy [13,14,25].

Limitations

The main limitation is that only one database was considered for this study.

Conclusions

The present study demonstrated research trends in telecommunications, highlighting the annual growth in scientific production. Additionally, it was observed that journals accepting submissions on this topic have adopted an interdisciplinary approach. The topics identified in this study are related to communication rights, human rights, and freedom of expression. The absence of a linked research network presents both an opportunity and a challenge in addressing complex issues.

Notes

Conflict of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for this work.

Data Availability

Dataset file is available from Zenodo at https://zenodo.org/records/12611295.

Dataset 1. Scientific production in telecommunications.

Supplementary Materials

Fig. 1.

Annual scientific production according to Biblioshiny (K-Synth SRL).

Fig. 2.

Scientific production of various countries according to Biblioshiny (K-Synth SRL).

Fig. 3.

Keyword network and consolidation according to Biblioshiny (K-Synth SRL).

Fig. 4.

Network of authors’ collaborations according to Biblioshiny (K-Synth SRL).

References

• 1. Gjika J. Harmonizing Albanian electronic communications law: a comprehensive analysis of European electronic communications code impact. Balk Soc Sci Rev 2023;22:189-211.https://doi.org/10.46763/BSSR232222189g. Article
• 2. Pei J. Discursive profile of international telecommunication regulations as institutional dialogue: a sociosemiotic perspective. Soc Semiot 2022;32:17-34.https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2019.1681075. Article
• 3. Burri-Nenova M. The law of the World Trade Organization and the communications law of the European Community: on a path of harmony or discord? J World Trade 2007;41:833-78.https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2007033. Article
• 4. Gürkaynak G, Yilmaz I, Taskiran NP. Protecting the communication: data protection and security measures under telecommunications regulations in the digital age. Comput Law Secur Rev 2014;30:179-89.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2014.01.010. Article
• 5. DeNardis L, Hackl AM. Internet governance by social media platforms. Telecommun Policy 2015;39:761-70.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2015.04.003. Article
• 6. Cave ME, Mariscal EV. The impact of telecommunications regulation on less well-off Mexican households. Telecommun Policy 2020;44:101907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2019.101907. Article
• 7. Eskens S. The personal information sphere: an integral approach to privacy and related information and communication rights. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol 2020;71:1116-28.https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24354. ArticlePubMedPMC
• 8. McLeod S. Communication rights: fundamental human rights for all. Int J Speech-Lang Pathol 2018;20:3-11.https://doi.org/10.1080/17549507.2018.1428687. ArticlePubMed
• 9. Goggin G. Communication rights and disability online: policy and technology after the World Summit on the Information Society. Inf Commun Soc 2015;18:327-41.https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.989879. Article
• 10. Leurs K. Communication rights from the margins: politicising young refugees’ smartphone pocket archives. Int Commun Gaz 2017;79:674-98.https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048517727182. ArticlePubMedPMC
• 11. Flacher D, Jennequin H. Is telecommunications regulation efficient? An international perspective. Telecommun Policy 2008;32:364-77.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2008.02.005. Article
• 12. Lee P. Communication rights in a divided world. Ecum Rev 2020;72:197-208.https://doi.org/10.1111/erev.12500. Article
• 13. Xavier P, Ypsilanti D. Switching costs and consumer behaviour: implications for telecommunications regulation. info 2008;10:13-29.https://doi.org/10.1108/14636690810887517. Article
• 14. Mathieu E, Rangoni B. Balancing experimentalist and hierarchical governance in European Union electricity and telecommunications regulation: a matter of degrees. Regul Gov 2019;13:577-92.https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12254. Article
• 15. Levy B, Spiller PT. The institutional foundations of regulatory commitment: a comparative analysis of telecommunications regulation. J Law Econ Organ 1994;10:201-46.https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jleo.a036849. Article
• 16. Cowper A. Covid-19: are we getting the communications right? BMJ 2020;368:201-m919.https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m919. Article
• 17. Thomas PN. Negotiating communication rights: case studies from India. Sage Publications;; 2011:https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446270325.
• 18. Cammaerts B, Carpentier N. Reclaiming the media: communication rights and democratic media roles. Intellect;; 2007.
• 19. Thomas P. The Communication Rights in the Information Society (CRIS) campaign: applying social movement theories to an analysis of global media reform. Int Commun Gaz 2006;68:291-312.https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048506065763. Article
• 20. Sellnow TL, Vidoloff KG. Getting crisis communication right. Food Technol 2009;63:40-5.https://www.ift.org/news-and-publications/food-technology-magazine/issues/2009/september/features/getting-crisis-communication-right.
• 21. Calabrese A. Human need as a justification for communication rights. Commun Rev 2017;20:98-121.https://doi.org/10.1080/10714421.2017.1304140. Article
• 22. Colomo PI. Future-proof regulation against the test of time: the evolution of European telecommunications regulation. Oxford J Leg Stud 2022;42:1170-94.https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqac016. Article
• 23. Grout PA. Promoting the superhighway: telecommunications regulation in Europe. Econ Policy 1996;22:109-54.https://doi.org/10.2307/1344523. Article
• 24. Drucker SJ, Gumpert G. The regulation of public social life: communication law revisited. Commun Q 1996;44:280-96.https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379609370018. Article
• 25. Li G. Moving towards unsustainability: a study of the Chinese telecommunications regulation. Int J Priv Law 2008;1:47-68.https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPL.2008.019432. Article

Figure & Data

References

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by