Serbia is advancing legislation that could reduce the cost of deploying fibre-optic and very-high-capacity mobile networks by requiring greater coordination between telecommunications operators, utilities and owners of physical infrastructure. The proposed law on the deployment of very-high-capacity electronic communications networks moved forward in parliament on 24 August 2026, after receiving backing from the relevant infrastructure committee during an extraordinary session. The legislation has not yet entered into force.
- Civil works remain a major network investment cost
- Fibre networks could gain from lower construction costs
- 5G expansion also depends on fixed networks
- Coordinated construction could reduce duplicated works
- Infrastructure owners could generate new revenues
- Lower costs could affect telecom competition
- Rural connectivity remains a key test
- Municipal implementation will determine practical results
- Shared networks also require resilience controls
- The reform also supports wider digital infrastructure alignment
- Existing infrastructure projects offer immediate coordination opportunities
Its central provisions concern the shared use of existing physical infrastructure, coordination of civil works and disclosure of planned infrastructure projects. The measures target civil-engineering costs associated with network construction, including road excavation, duct installation, access permits and repeated works on the same streets. The framework could enable telecom operators to make greater use of existing ducts, poles, utility corridors and other infrastructure instead of building separate physical routes. Road companies, railway infrastructure managers, electricity utilities, municipalities and other infrastructure owners could consequently play a larger role in digital-network deployment.
Civil works remain a major network investment cost
The cost of broadband deployment extends well beyond fibre cables, routers, switches, mobile base stations and 5G radio equipment. Operators must often obtain permits, excavate roads, install ducts, restore surfaces and coordinate with several public authorities before connecting customers. These expenses can be particularly difficult to absorb in areas with low customer density. Large cities such as Belgrade, Novi Sad and Niš can distribute construction costs across thousands of potential customers, while the same works in smaller towns and rural communities may serve substantially fewer users.
Existing utility corridors, ducts and poles can reduce the need for new excavation. Coordinated construction can also allow several operators to share the cost of opening a road.
Advance information about planned municipal or utility projects would create another opportunity. Telecom operators could install communications infrastructure while roads or other facilities are already being reconstructed, rather than returning later for separate excavation. The proposed framework would therefore alter relationships between telecom companies and traditional infrastructure owners. Electricity distribution companies may control poles and underground corridors, railway companies may manage long-distance routes, road authorities may control rights of way and municipalities may manage streets and public spaces. The economic question will be how operators gain access to those assets, under which conditions and at what price.
Fibre networks could gain from lower construction costs
Fixed fibre networks are among the clearest potential beneficiaries of infrastructure sharing. Serbia has expanded broadband availability, but high-capacity coverage remains uneven. The cost of civil works can determine whether operators extend networks into locations that are close to, but below, their investment thresholds.
Lower excavation and permitting costs could improve the economics of deployment in smaller towns and rural areas. The impact would extend beyond telecom companies. Manufacturing facilities depend on reliable connectivity, while hotels, tourism businesses, agricultural companies and small enterprises increasingly use cloud services, digital payments, e-commerce, connected equipment and logistics systems.
For municipalities seeking new investment, high-speed connectivity is increasingly part of the infrastructure package alongside roads, electricity and industrial land. The same consideration applies to logistics parks, data-intensive industrial facilities and business-service operations.
5G expansion also depends on fixed networks
The proposed rules could affect mobile infrastructure as well. Although 5G is a wireless technology, its capacity depends heavily on fibre connections between mobile base stations and core networks. Higher-capacity deployments can require additional sites, fibre backhaul, poles, ducts, rooftops and electricity connections. Easier access to existing infrastructure could therefore lower the cost of expanding 5G.
The issue becomes particularly relevant for industrial applications. Factories can use private or dedicated wireless networks, while ports, logistics centres and mines can deploy 5G-supported automation. Utilities may also operate large numbers of connected devices. These applications require high-capacity and reliable networks rather than basic consumer mobile coverage, linking infrastructure-sharing policy with industrial digitalisation.
Coordinated construction could reduce duplicated works
Repeated excavation is one of the most visible inefficiencies that infrastructure coordination can address. A municipality may reconstruct a road only for a telecom operator to reopen it months later to install fibre, followed by another intervention by a utility. Coordinating those projects can reduce construction expenses, traffic disruption and administrative work.
Under the proposed framework, greater visibility of planned infrastructure projects could allow operators to identify opportunities to build communications networks alongside other works.
For example, knowing that a municipality will reconstruct a road in six months could allow a telecom company to install ducts during the project instead of excavating the completed road. Major railway, motorway and utility projects could similarly provide opportunities for lower-cost digital infrastructure deployment. The timing is significant because Serbia is carrying out major investments in roads, railways, energy networks and urban infrastructure. Transport corridors and utility projects could provide routes for communications infrastructure if construction schedules are coordinated.
Infrastructure owners could generate new revenues
Shared-use rules could create commercial opportunities for owners of existing physical infrastructure. Ducts, poles and rights of way can be monetised through access charges, potentially creating additional revenue for utilities and public infrastructure companies from assets originally developed for other purposes. Access pricing would be important to the effectiveness of the system. Excessive charges could undermine the cost savings that infrastructure sharing is intended to generate.
Access fees need to account for infrastructure use, maintenance and risk without creating a bottleneck that makes new network investment uneconomic. The regulatory balance is also relevant to competition. Mandatory sharing that goes too far could weaken incentives to invest in new infrastructure, while insufficient sharing could leave operators duplicating expensive physical networks.
Lower costs could affect telecom competition
Reduced deployment costs could change competitive conditions among Serbian telecom operators. Large incumbent companies can benefit from the scale of their existing infrastructure, while smaller operators may face higher marginal costs when entering new areas and having to construct networks independently.
Access to existing ducts and poles could lower those barriers. Operators could share passive infrastructure while continuing to compete on active equipment, services, pricing and customer experience. Similar models already exist in mobile markets through tower sharing and wholesale access. The proposed framework will therefore need to balance infrastructure competition with incentives for continued private investment.
Rural connectivity remains a key test
The greatest practical test for the reform may be whether it improves the economics of broadband deployment outside Serbia’s largest urban centres. Rural networks face high infrastructure costs relative to the number of potential customers. Existing poles can support aerial fibre deployment, while available utility ducts can reduce underground construction costs. Planned road or electricity works can also provide opportunities to install communications infrastructure simultaneously.
These savings could make projects that previously failed to meet investment thresholds commercially viable. Improved connectivity has implications for smaller communities because remote work, online education, digital public services and modern agricultural technologies increasingly depend on reliable broadband. The effectiveness of the framework will therefore depend partly on whether shared infrastructure can translate into greater network coverage in less densely populated areas.
Municipal implementation will determine practical results
Many network-deployment procedures remain dependent on local authorities, which issue permits, manage roads and coordinate public works. A national legal framework can establish access rights and obligations, but implementation will depend on municipal administrative capacity. Slow permitting could limit the benefits even if the legal framework provides broader access.
Standardised applications, digital permitting, clear administrative deadlines and municipal infrastructure databases could reduce uncertainty for operators. Such systems could also connect infrastructure information held by different institutions. Road authorities, electricity companies, municipalities and telecom operators each possess information about their respective networks and planned projects. Greater interoperability between these datasets could make coordinated infrastructure planning more effective.
Shared networks also require resilience controls
Infrastructure sharing introduces operational and security considerations because telecommunications, electricity, transport and other networks can all represent critical infrastructure.
Damage to a shared duct or corridor could affect several telecom operators simultaneously. Physical protection, redundancy and network-route diversification would therefore remain important as shared infrastructure becomes more common. A lower-cost network must still maintain sufficient resilience, particularly where several operators depend on the same physical route.
The reform also supports wider digital infrastructure alignment
The proposed legislation forms part of Serbia’s broader effort to align its digital-infrastructure framework with European rules and commitments associated with the Western Balkans Growth Plan. The issue has direct economic relevance because Serbian manufacturers operate within European supply chains, financial institutions conduct cross-border transactions, manufacturers exchange production data with foreign partners and technology companies provide services internationally.
High-capacity connectivity is consequently becoming an increasingly important factor in investment decisions. Data centres, advanced manufacturing and technology services depend on network reliability and low latency alongside electricity, transport and other infrastructure. Faster deployment of very-high-capacity networks could therefore address part of Serbia’s digital infrastructure gap while supporting investment requirements in bandwidth-intensive industries.
Existing infrastructure projects offer immediate coordination opportunities
Serbia’s current investment cycle provides a broad base for applying the shared-infrastructure model. New and modernised roads, railways, energy networks and urban projects can incorporate communications infrastructure while construction is already underway.
A fibre duct installed during motorway construction can avoid the much higher cost of excavating the corridor later. Railway routes can provide long-distance fibre corridors, while electricity infrastructure can offer access to poles and rights of way. Urban redevelopment can similarly incorporate ducts before roads and pavements are completed. The proposed law could therefore allow Serbia to derive additional digital infrastructure value from physical infrastructure projects already being developed, provided that institutions exchange project information early enough for construction to be coordinated.
