Table 1
Exclusive wavelengths to countries in Europe adapted by the UIR in 1926, the so called Geneva Plan. The Soviet Union is called Russia in the original document.17
| Albania | 1 |
| Austria | 2 |
| Belgium | 2 |
| Bulgaria | 1 |
| Czechoslovakia | 3 |
| Denmark | 1 |
| Estonia | 1 |
| Finland | 2 |
| France | 9 |
| Germany | 12 |
| Great Britain | 9 |
| Greece | 1 |
| Holland | 2 |
| Hungary | 1 |
| Ireland | 1 |
| Italy | 5 |
| Latvia | 1 |
| Lithuania | 1 |
| Luxemburg | 1 |
| Norway | 3 |
| Poland | 4 |
| Portugal | 1 |
| Rumania | 2 |
| Russia (west) | 5 |
| Spain | 5 |
| Sweden | 5 |
| Switzerland | 1 |
| Turkey (European) | 1 |
| Yugoslavia | 1 |
| Design principles from Ostrom (1990, 90) | Examples from the management of the medium frequencies band of the radio spectrum in the 1920s | |
| 1 | Clearly defined boundaries | The boundaries of the spectrum, medium wave, were clear and distinct, even if they changed over time. The boundaries of Europe that were agreed upon also changed over time, but were declared in the frequency plan. |
| 2 | Congruence between appropriation rules and local conditions. | The introduction of common, i.e., shared wavelengths allowed for adaptation of the frequency plan to local conditions. |
| 3 | Collective-choice arrangements (appropriators’ right to participate in rule-making) | Implementation of shared wavelengths, which was proposed by an appropriator negatively affected by the original plan for exclusive (non-shared) wavelengths, illustrates the use of collective choice arrangements. |
| 4 | Monitoring | The Technical Centre, a part of the UIR, was charged with continuous monitoring of the radio transmitters in Europe. |
| 5 | Graduated sanctions | The publication of monitoring reports served as sanction by shaming. |
| 6 | Conflict resolution mechanism | The head of the Office or of the Technical Centre corresponded with stations that deviated from the plan and disturbed others, which was a cheap mechanism for conflict resolution. |
| 7 | Minimal recognition of rights to organise | The Washington Convention, which changed the boundaries of the resource, allowed for regional frequency plans adapted to regional conditions. |
| 8 | Nested enterprises | National telegraph administrations were responsible for frequency issues on the national level. The Washington Convention, an agreement based on the plenipotentiary Washington Conference and signed by national representatives, was an international agreement among states – but not all states. The UIR, with broadcasting companies as members (but which sometimes included representatives from national telegraph administrations) worked out a regional European plan even though its status changed over time. The Technical Centre handled technical development issues, monitoring and sanctions. The Office, finally, was administrative but was also involved in conflict resolution. Together they illustrate the “nested enterprises” paradigm of multi-level governance. |