As we go through the early stages of preparation for ITU World Radio Conference WRC-27, it is worth reflecting on the growing importance and necessity of spectrum sharing, and how it should be advanced in ways favorable to the U.S. and its allies.
The last ITU World Radio Congress, WRC-23, took place in Dubai in November and December 2023. It addressed numerous spectrum issues across many different areas — although few more contentious than bands for mobile uses such as 6 GHz.
The U.S. has been a leader in developing and delivering innovative spectrum models, like those underpinning Wi-Fi and the Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS), plus their technological enablers such as advanced sensing and databases. These shared‑spectrum wireless systems produce tremendous economic value, democratize investment into new wireless solutions, and expand consumer and business access to high-speed and high-capacity connectivity. They also help mitigate the risks of state control and oligopolistic domination of wireless services.
A key domain for future spectrum sharing will be 6G (and upcoming versions of 5G). Today, there are few realistic candidates for bands that can be easily cleared and repurposed for cellular wireless systems — almost all have important incumbents that will be difficult, expensive and time-consuming to move.
A geopolitical time bomb
Indeed, the proposed 6G bands covered under WRC-27 Agenda Item 1.7 involve a geopolitical time bomb. Whether by coincidence or design, the new bands overlap with some core frequencies used by NATO armed forces. The US and its allies use 4.4-4.8GHz for fixed, mobile and aviation applications, 7.25-8.40GHz for satellite connectivity and 14.8-15.3GHz for wireless systems including those for drones / UAVs.
With the recent accession of Finland and Sweden (the homes of Nokia and Ericsson) as NATO member states, the “coincidence” hypothesis seems to have low probability, given the potential commercial and military benefits for China, its vendors such a Huawei and ZTE, and its allies such as Russia.
It is essential that these bands are either not designated for high-powered exclusive usage at all at WRC-27, or that it is considered secondary and disallowed from interfering with strategically important incumbent usage. The U.S. position at WRC-27 needs to reflect the new reality of a sharing-native world by ensuring that mobile services in IMT bands are fully capable of integrating and deploying sharing technologies. The US mobile industry should get onboard and support this future as well – ideally by using sharing as a platform for innovation and leadership.
In its repeated demands for more exclusively licensed spectrum, it is worth noting that CTIA (representing AT&T, T-Mobile USA, Verizon and others) makes various false and misleading claims about midband frequencies and the need for exclusive high-powered spectrum.
These exaggerated claims of crisis are intended to unduly influence the U.S. position at WRC-27 and elsewhere. This campaign also misrepresents how other countries use shared and low-power spectrum in an attempt to portray the U.S. as lagging and to justify more exclusive spectrum allocation.
For example, despite CTIA's suggestions to the contrary, China’s 3.3-3.4GHz band is indoor-only and shared between mobile network operators, while the EU and UK are developing sharing or localized-license approaches for the Upper 6GHz and 3.8-4.2GHz.
In any case, it is rapidly becoming clear that future cellular data use will not follow an exponential growth trajectory, especially over wide areas or whole nations. Growth is instead already flattening and becoming more localized, both for consumer and especially business/IoT usage. Sharing allows such patterns to be accommodated efficiently — but to date, ITU and previous WRCs have had little to say on this trend, while CTIA and others have pushed back against it with questionable claims and arguments.
As a result, many of the demand forecasts are deeply flawed, contributing to political rather than objective analysis of spectrum requirements. While global organizations such as GSMA can be expected to take positions that reflect China’s preferences, it is disappointing to see the same lack of rigor and strategic awareness from U.S.-oriented groups such as CTIA.
Areas for improvement
To get back on track, U.S. authorities need to focus on three distinct areas to improve the dialogue and outcomes of WRC-27 on spectrum sharing:
US consensus
U.S. authorities need to develop a true national consensus on the growing role for dynamic models of sharing, and the importance of DSS technical enablers and testbeds, in order to present a cohesive message and negotiation strategy for WRC-27. All stakeholders — including CTIA — need to align their understanding and messaging in this regard. While there are clear differences of opinion, it should be possible to resolve these through appropriate multi-stakeholder forums and collaboration.
One possible starting point is around spectrum sharing between terrestrial and satellite users, which already has some support among MNOs, and which could form an initial basis for agreement.
Broad ITU participation
U.S. authorities also need to directly and rapidly engage with the ITU both for the main WRC process and its associated working parties and regional groups, at multiple levels, to advance awareness and expertise around DSS.
The U.S. should work with other members of ITU regional group CITEL (the Inter-American Telecommunication Commission) to reach a common view on candidates for bands that can be shared, use-cases and technology roadmaps. Where appropriate, it should encourage broader development of national spectrum strategies and assist in capacity building around spectrum sandboxes and databases. It should also engage with ITU study groups such as WP5D, which is developing 6G frameworks and requirements, as well as SG1 for spectrum management.
Bodies such as National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the State Department should reach out to provide advice, case-studies or technical assistance where needed. The U.S.’s leadership here is essential.
International alignment
Finally, the U.S. should work collaboratively with other international regulatory agencies and other groups that can advance DSS frameworks. This includes other regulators already working on spectrum sharing approaches such as CEPT, Ofcom, BNetzA, CST, MIC, ACMA and others. This work should center on advancing at WRC and within ITU the broader goal of sharing, rather than specific technical mechanisms or bands. It should also work closely with other relevant organizations such as OECD and NATO, and perhaps industry groups less influenced by China, such as DSA, WBA or TIP. It may also be useful for NTIA and the U.S. Department of Defense to reach out to allied militaries, many of which are also analyzing spectrum sharing options.
Given the geopolitical issues around bands such as 3.1GHz and 7-8GHz, it is clear that spectrum sharing is important for both global security and future U.S./Western success in wireless technology and thought-leadership. The National Spectrum Strategy's focus on AI-enhanced sharing “moonshots” provides a further basis for possible advantage over commercial and strategic rival powers such as China.
Sophisticated spectrum sharing approaches represent a win-win-win for U.S. leadership and innovation in wireless, national security and for American consumers and businesses.
In short, the major cellular operators, vendors and their industry associations will need to get more realistic about spectrum sharing. 6G will have to be sharing-native if it is to benefit from proposed new bands without harmful consequences.
Dean Bubley is the Founder of Disruptive Analysis. He is an independent technology industry analyst, futurist, speaker and advisor, with over 25 years' experience. He specialises in wireless, telecoms and policy fields.
Industry Voices are op-eds from industry experts or analysts invited to contribute by Fierce staff. They do not represent the opinions of Fierce.