Maak breedbandmarkt innovatiever

In Dutch an opinion piece I wrote was published in "Het Financieele Dagblad". It is based on my Ecomm presentation, where I explain Free.fr's business model and philosophy. The point in the article is that Dutch broadband providers haven't innovated in the last 10 years and need to look at France to see how having only 1 product can lead to simplicity and alot of innovation. (Google Translate)


Maak breedbandmarkt innovatiever


De consument heeft genoeg van al die tientallen combinaties op het thema internet, tv en telefoon

Rudolf van der Berg



De triple play-strategie is aan een nieuwe impuls toe. Nederlandse aanbieders blijven steken in een verouderd model dat weinig zicht op vooruitgang biedt. De Franse markt toont dat het anders en goedkoper kan. Daar krijgt de klant een Mercedes voor de prijs van een Golf. Volgende week maandag 30 november is het tien jaar geleden dat KPN ADSL aankondigde in Nederland. Kabelaanbieders leverden al sinds 1995  internet zonder telefoontikken. Snel internet werd zo voor iedereen bereikbaar.
Qua internetpenetratie staat Nederland in de wereldtop. Maar het is verbazingwekkend te constateren dat in de afgelopen tien tot vijftien jaar de klant eigenlijk niets nieuws gekregen heeft. Iedere aanbieder komt met hetzelfde: internet, telefoon en televisie voor €20 tot €70. UPC heeft er 80 combinaties voor. Concurrentie tussen de twee infrastructuren leverde vooral meer bandbreedte en lagere prijzen op. Maar van echte innovatie is geen sprake.

Daar zijn twee oorzaken voor. Ten eerste ligt de nadruk op de verkeerde innovatie. Vol afgunst kijkt iedereen naar de marges van Google, Apple en Skype. Maar ondertussen vergeten ze dat die ene andere marktgigant Microsoft $4 mrd verloor op haar online diensten en de wereldwijde infrastructuur die daarvoor benodigd is.

Het succes van Google kopiëren zal niemand lukken. Een tweede fout is dat ze hun eigen bedrijfsvoering te complex maken door honderden combinaties van internet, telefonie en televisie aan te bieden. Vernieuwing is alleen al onbetaalbaar omdat het wijzigen van de systemen voor factureren en het onderhouden van klantenrelaties te complex is geworden.

Dat het ook anders kan bewijst de Franse breedbandmarkt. Deze is veel innovatiever. Alle aanbieders proberen er iedere paar maanden met iets nieuws te komen. Geen wereldschokkende diensten als Youtube,
maar wel innovaties waar de klant blij van wordt.

De aanstichter hiervoor is de nummer twee in de Franse markt: Free.fr . Dit bedrijf reduceerde alle complexiteit tot maar één aanbod en dat kost €30. De klant krijgt standaard de hoogste internetsnelheid, gratis bellen naar 100 landen en een uitgebreid pakket hd-tv.

De concurrentie vindt plaats op de gratis opties, zoals back-up, beveiligde toegang tot de wifi-verbinding van de 3 miljoen andere klanten van Free.Fr, spelletjes op de tv en zelfs voor iedere klant een eigen live tv-kanaal om wat dan ook uit te zenden. Concurrent SFR biedt vergelijkbare diensten en kwam met een gratis jukebox van 250.000 muzieknummers.

Vanuit het oogpunt van marketing kun je zeggen dat men in Frankrijk de T-Ford herontdekt heeft: Hij komt in alle kleuren als ie maar zwart is. Maar je zou ook kunnen zeggen dat ze je in Frankrijk een Mercedes met alle opties leveren voor de prijs van een Volkswagen Golf. Als de klant dan niet de stoelverwarming wil gebruiken, dan is dat zijn keuze, maar het zit er wel op en het kost niets meer.

Deze manier van concurrentie heeft als bijkomend voordeel dat de interne organisatie kan worden vereenvoudigd en gestroomlijnd. Zowel de IT-als de Sales-en Marketingafdelingen hoeven veel minder
complexiteit te managen. De gerealiseerde besparingen vinden hun weg terug in diensteninnovatie en ook in aandeelhouderswaarde. Wie is de eerste in Nederland die durft?

Rudolf van der Berg is Management Consultant van Logica Management Consulting.

Nederland staat met zijn internetpenetratie in de wereldtop, maar de klant heeft verder niets nieuws gekregen

In Frankrijk vindt concurrentie plaats op gratis opties zoals back-up en beveiligde toegang tot wifi

Pissing off the Peering Guru's.

This is one of the most hilarious threads on Gigaom for a long while. Richard Bennett (a guy who writes anything you pay him for) tried to bring paid peering into the net neutrality debate. It seems everybody is weighing in: Vijay Gill (Google), Patrick Gilmore (Akamai), Richard Steenbergen (nLayer) etc.

http://gigaom.com/2009/11/22/how-video-is-changing-the-internet/

Andrew Odlyzko should also have a look as his MINTS institute is given a snide remark as well.

All of it seems to have been the result of Bill Norton writing as Dr. Peering
http://drpeering.net/a/Ask_DrPeering/Entries/2009/11/5_Paid_Peering_and_Net_Neutrality.html

I respected Bill alot, but this piece is just off the mark. There seems no basis for it whatsoever.

and of course the obligatory link to my Peering and Transit introduction.

Update: CircleID also weighs in with: Dr. Peering commits malpractice on Net Neutrality.
http://www.circleid.com/posts/dr_peering_commits_malpractice_on_net_neutrality/

The Future of VoIP interconnection (or buy an ENUM-based number portability system now)

Last week I attended the ITU GSR09 in Lebanon as you might have guessed from previous posts. I presented a discussion paper there on the future of VoIP interconnection. I didn't like my paper too much as I thought I could have written down the point a lot more poignantly and used less deductive reasoning, however other people disagree. The presentation is now embedded below and the paper is available here.

The main point I think you should take away is that interconnection isn't that hard. It is made difficult by lawyers and weird business models, but it is quite simple. The second point is that regulators should have a look at ENUM for a national number database, with number portability attached to it. They shouldn't care about Public ENUM that much as it mixes technology and policy in standard. The policy who can change and add what in the national number database is the domain of the national regulators and not of the IETF or the ITU. BTW it turns out Bahrain is going to build a national number portability solution based on ENUM.

(And yes, Logica makes number portability systems, but that wasn't the reason why I came to my conclusion) 

The Future Of VoIP Interconnection

View more presentations from Raindeer.

A quick write up of the Dutch meeting on Net Neutrality

Two weeks ago the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs organized a meeting on Net Neutrality. It was the third one already all presentations are now online. The first one was a more closed affair with economic thinktank Encore in 2006 (and a presentaton by moi)  and a more open meeting in 2007 similar to the one of Thursday. This time the occasion was the publication of a report by Dialogic on the topic. It's a very good report on net neutrality and worth the read. (It is in Dutch though)

The speakers at the meeting were:

• Frank Heemskerk, deputy minister of Economic Affairs, (speech in English)
  
• Taylor Reynolds, OECD
• Rudi Bekkers, Dialogic, lead researcher for the report;
• Michel van Eeten, professor TUDelft and Next Generation Infrastructures,
• Alex Blowers, Ofcom, UK
  
• Frode Sorensen, NPT, Norway 
• Martijn van Dam, Member of Parliament for the Dutch Labour Party 

The speakers all had their interesting bits. Heemskerk was very polically vague about the topic, but not vague enough to not make sure everybody knew he wouldn't allow blatant violations of netneutrality, but where the line is is difficult. Rudi Bekkers gave a good overview of how it is very difficult to distinguish from an act that may harm netneutrality to derive the intent. Michel van Eeten was interesting as it showed how net neutrality was just a vague term that gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling. Martijn van Dam was excellent as a politician. He had a great opinion how everything should be open and freedom of speech etc. which is bound to be a press pleaser, but doesn't give you anything else. He also was of the opinion that the iPhone should be open and that companies should be barred from meddling with users rights (at which point Michel van Eeten pointed out that Van Dam is using an iPhone, hypocritical fool). Tad Reynolds showed how the debate was as much about competition as anything else. Frode Sorensen demonstrated the Norwegians ability to talk themselves out of any problem, just like the Dutch Poldermodel

I twittered the entire meeting, thanks to Swisscom who left a port open for free tweeting on their otherwise paid for wifi network.Unfortunately it seems that all is now lost as I didn't save them from Twitter.

In love with the Lebanese people (at least with the TRA)

Sitting at Istanbul Airport, I have to get online to put this in my blog. I'm in love with the Lebanese. What a fantastic people. I can't say anything else than that the Lebanese are now among my favorite people in the world. I don't know enough about the country, the culture, music etc to declare my love, but the people they are amazing.

Truely you will be hard pressed to find people so open and welcoming to weird foreigeners who fly in for 4 days to give a 15 minute speech. We were welcomed by the staff of the Lebanese TRA like we were new friends. The staff of the Lebanese TRA are an extraordinary mix of people. Imagine a regulator with 65% women, most under 35 (30 I would even think and gorgeous). And they are eager, they are knowledgeable, open, they challenge you, but can think for themselves as well. And they are diverse as well. Everything is included from western educated to local educated and even daughters of the Hezbollah clan (who know how to party)

Yes, the Lebanese know how to party too. This night we (ITU staff and this lonely Dutchman) were taken to the Music Hall club by the TRA staff. Here we were treated by live performances of traditional Arabic and modern western music. Amy Winehouse really has a problem if anyone ever discovers Lebanon. It was a full blown party. The whole Music Hall was popping. The booze was (too) richly flowing. I had a blast.

Kind words also should go to the heads of the TRA. Though I didn't see them partying, they do rock. Haven't ever seen such knowledgeable management of telecoms regulators. People who really understand technology, business and regulation. I am almost afraid they are too ambitious for their political situation. I hope it all turns out for the best.

(My love is even extended to such people as a taxi driver who refuses a tip, because we agreed on a fixed price, though there are many stereo typical taxi drivers as well) 

I am still proud to be Dutch, but I like the Lebanese alot. I can only say to the Lebanese: Shukran.

SESSION 8: A VoIP WORLD

Moderator: Mr. P. Masambu, Executive Director, Uganda Communications Commission (UCC), Uganda

GSR Discussion Paper on Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP): Enemy or Ally, [presentation]
Ms. Phillippa Biggs, Economist, ITU/SPM

GSR Discussion Paper on The Future of VoIP Interconnection, [presentation]
Mr. Rudolf Van der Berg, Management Consultant, Logica Management Consulting

Interactive panel discussion:

• VoIP worldwide and regulatory approaches: an update
• Evolution of VoIP interconnection
• What can regulators do to prevent operators from blocking access to VoIP services?

Panelists:

• Mr. W. Dorji, Head, Telecommunications, Bhutan InfoComm and Media Authority (BICMA), Bhutan
• Mr. P. Eid, Board Member and Head of Market and Competition Unit, TRA, Lebanon
• Dr. M. Jankovic, Executive Director, Republic Telecommunication Agency (RATEL), Serbia

Bhutan: We have moved to a converged regulation. We are now responsible for telecoms and content, even print. We have rules that say technological neutrality. Being a mountainous country we didn’t want to exclude any technology. It is about whether it works. VoIP is therefore allowed. For VoIP we did have the discussion on the numbering plan. We went for a non-geographic numbering plan, but we are still consulting. We don’t have a big VoIP operator yet. We are having international VoIP service by the two networks our country has.

Lebanon: Despite the similarity for VOIP to PSTN there are also differences. A customer using the PSTN doesn’t have a backup network. It only works with complicated technology. A VoIP user can use any network that is available. With numbering the PSTN only uses the rigid E.164 numbering plan. VoIP can be more flexible and use all kinds of identifiers. VoIP can offer more codecs with better quality.

Interconnection differs a lot. This is mostly because of the high termination rates. VoIP can rely onder internet exchanges and peering. The incumbent will miss income, but can make that up in different areas. The regulator will have to remove all the barriers and make sure that it all works with simple market entry. The TRA will allow licenses for managed VoIP services. For now we tolerate VoIP, it’s not legal, but we will allow it. It will only be regulated for Lawful Intercept and emergency calls.

Serbia; We have a very competitive market, with lots of ISP’s and Cable companies (around 100). VoIP operators may not circumvent international VoIP termination and will need a transit provider on the public network (PSTN). VoIP will be one of the services on the broadband network. VoIP is not an interesting service anymore, its just data.

Middle East: We believe the customer comes first. So the incumbent may not like this, but it is our position. We believe that we should be technological neutral. VoIP providers do need a license. We don’t have licenses for skype. We have confiscated devices that came with a subscription in high street shops. Even though we allowed skype international revenues grew for the incumbent, so there was no reason to spread fear.

Middle East: The lack of definition for VoIP is a real problem. There are now different approaches for VoIP, like Google Voice and it causes all kinds of regulatory problems how do we deal with it.

Australasia: Congratulations to mrs. Biggs. How are we going to collect data in the future. It will become increasingly hard to tell what VoIP is. So how are we getting the stats. Your challenge was provide data and my answer is what the

Interconnection with VoIP for emergency services. How do you think we can work with location services.

West Africa: If we do not regulate VoIP how do we know it meets certain standards.

Answer Lebanon: Google Voice if we see it as a service that is dependent upon a true broadband connection. The user will be aware that the quality isn’t always perfect.

Answer mrs. Biggs: it’s difficult to collect the stats. Even the commercial organisations have this problem.

Question West Africa: I find it a problem that Africa doesn’t have any statistics. Because you don’t have the stats, you can’t make proper comments. Mrs. Biggs said there were only 20 countries were using VoIP. Is this the incumbents. Or is this done by bypassing the traditional operators. Do these operators have licenses then? We have a problem that the rest of the world isn’t paying for our international connectivity. This is unfair.

Answer we have analyzed the situation in all. I do recognize the problem. We have stats on Africa and we will work with any nations.

Question West Africa: mr. Van der Berg is ENUM necessary for number portability.

Answer: No its not.

Answer Rudolf to West Africa: It is your country who wants to be connected to the internet. It are your people who download stuff from the internet. Not the world dumping it on you. The costs therefore should be born by you.

Serbia: Customers need to know what they get.

Bhutan: ISP’s were using Calling Cards to bypass the incumbent. We now need to deal with that. You cannot ride on someone’s network without investing.

MOBILE TERMINATION: TO REGULATE OR NOT TO REGULATE?

SESSION 6: MOBILE TERMINATION: TO REGULATE OR NOT TO REGULATE?

Moderator: Dr. M. Treschow, Director General, National Post and Telecom Agency, Sweden

GSR Discussion Paper on Mobile termination: to regulate or not? [presentation]
Dr. Vaiva Lazauskaite, Economic Analyst, ITU/RME

Interactive panel discussion:

• Should mobile termination rates be regulated or left to the market? What regulatory approach to choose?
• Symmetric regulation to promote investment and competition: can the EC approach be replicated in other parts of the world?
• How are convergence, NGNs and the transition to all-IP networks changing the situation?

Panelists:

• Mr. A. Alfehaid, Deputy Governor, Communications and Information Technology Commission (CITC), Saudi Arabia
• Mr. A. Haire, Deputy Director General (Telecoms & Post), InfoComm Development Authority of Singapore (IDA)
• Mr. J. Salvat, CEO, Servei de Telecomunicaciones d’Andorra (STA)

Mod: is there a need for regulation of MTR’s. I think we need to look at the consumer to answer this question.

Singapore: I view as regulation any decision made by the regulation. This also is not making a decision. It is necessary to understand when you are not going to make a decision. We do regulate parties with Significant Market Power. We do make decisions on someone who has control over a bottleneck. Communication is about three things: It is about getting on the network, going across and getting off the network (to another network). In Singapore we have noticed that when getting off the network onto a mobile network, we know that the Mobile companies have an incentive to raise prices. And the nice thing is they can tax someone who isn’t their customer. We have set our termination rate at zero therefore. At the retail layer we have a called party pays layer. At the wholesale layer we have a mobile network party pays. We did get a problem with arbitrage so we did get involved here (No explanation on what the problem was and how they did it)

Saudi Arabia: I would like to see more comparisons between nations. We need to know whether we should regulate or not. The question is when we can get rid of MTR. It is only when we have a mature market, with a fair spread of customers and traffic between networks.

Andorra: In our region the market is very mature. We should look at how many users there are and how they are using it. We  have a mature market. We should get rid of regulation of MTR;s and leave it to the market. If we regulate MTR’s we might see operators loosing interest in the pre-paid market.

Singapore: I belief that MTR rates are part of a big Mosaic. What we have done is create a highly competitive market. It is ruthlessly competitive. Maybe HongKong is more competitive. It is not just MTR’s. We have also prevented the use of SIM-Locks. These came on the market with the iPhone. We think that the services and handset market should be separate. We have repeatedly said no. Before the iPhone came on the market we warned the operators we wouldn’t allow SIM-locks. We now have an extremely vibrant market. When the third marketplayer came in the market. This guy was certifiably mad. He started to give away free incoming calls. His marketshare rose to 15%. Than the other two did the same and this madman again did something. He started with free international calls to seven nations.

We now have 6 pure VoIP play. The mobile players didn’t want to interconnect with them. They didn’t even answer a phonecall. In the end we put them in a room and got them discussion going. By 2007 we had worked out something.

Mod: What do you think of next generation networks

Andorra: We only have one operator. In our case we are unsure about NGN. We don’t have a peering point in Andorra. We assume that the costs will be the same because we will pay more on transit.

Saudi Arabia: In my opinion we are all going to review the existing systems and regulations. We think the existing system can’t be maintained.

Singapore: We are almost finished with our national broadband network. We are finished with all the interconnection stuff. It is all an open interconnection framework. We have based open access. We now have to mesh that with the traditional models. We are bringing three models into one, the new NGN, the old internet and the mobile network.

Gentleman from Africa: We didn’t have MTR’s between mobile operators and we did have fixed mobile termination termination at 0.30 US dollar. We are now regulating them and they fell 0.15 US dollar. Most mobile operators are not necessary even though  they are 0.09 USD now.

Lebanon: in Lebanon we have a kind of Bill and Keep regime between fixed and mobile. (than he quotes some of my paper and its statements, which you can find online. Much thanks for that!)

Mod: in the EC we are currently discussing this. We are discussing how we are going to get to Bill and Keep.

Question asked on termination rate to Wimax. Nobody comes up with a good answer it seems.

African nation asked what should be done when operators don’t want to negotiate a termining rate.

Singapore answers that they will revoke the license of the party not willing to interconnect.

African Nation answers that the impact will be much larger than if they let it continue. Singapore answers that they give fair warning. This is also a signal to the customers to leave the  network or other ways they are in trouble. This is enough to push telco’s in the right direction.

Saudi: We give parties 60 days to agree and if they don’t we set the prices for them.

North African nation. We had two mobile networks. When the third one came into the market we noticed that the two started an interconnection regime that favors big parties from small ones. Than we noticed that onnet charges were lower than off-net charges. Than we put the termination charge at 65% of the on-net charge.

Himalayan nation: To Singapore, is it fair to have a termination rate at zero. Isn’t it harsh to those parties. Because to terminate a call some resources are used.  I would like your opinion.

Moderator: Thanks audience and forgets to ask Singapore to answer the question. 
Later Singapore answered that the telco's do get their money, but from their own customers. Not from someone elses customers

IP AND TRADITIONAL TELECOM (VOICE) INTERCONNECTION - A WORLD OF DIVERGENCE

10:45 - 12:15          SESSION 5: IP AND TRADITIONAL TELECOM (VOICE) INTERCONNECTION - A WORLD OF DIVERGENCE

Moderator: Mr. A. Horne, General Director, Telecommunications Regulatory Authority (TRA), Bahrain

GSR Discussion Paper on Coexistence of traditional and IP interconnection, [presentation]
Ms. Natalija Gelvanovska, Head, Network and Access Division, Communications Regulatory Authority, Lithuania

Interactive panel discussion:

• Coexistence of both worlds: how can traditional strongly regulated interconnection coexist with self-regulated IP interconnection?
• Data transport/interconnection: who pays for what?
• Net neutrality: what does it mean? Is it a developed country issue? How will it affect developing countries?

Panelist:

• Mr. C. Lizcano Ortiz, Executive Director, Comisión de Regulación de Comunicaciones (CRC), Colombia
• Mr. Hirohisa Furuichi, Director, Tariff Division, Telecommunication Business Department, Telecommunication Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications(MIC), Japan
• Mr. S. A. M’Poue, Secretary General, Agence des Télécommunications de Côte d'Ivoire (ATCI), Côte d’Ivoire
• Mr. E. Ndukwe, Executive Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), Nigeria

In the internet world they use a completely different model. In the PSTN they now move to a different network. The IP-world has now come to telephony. The dilemma is what the new model will be.

Colombia:  We got a regulatory framework that looks in a converged way at markets. Colombia focuses on QoS, Content, Effectiveness and Efficiency, renumeration for the networks. The role of the regulator is critical.  

Ivory Coast: Our laws don’t look at IP. Nationally we can’t do IP interconnection. Internationally we can. We all know what regulation is for. But IP interconnection is not an issue yet in our country

Japan: We use interconnection mosty for traditional networks. We do unbundling in Japan. We have changed our interconnection rules to fit with the new networks like mobile and broadband. We think that it has had a good effect. NTT is now rolling out an ALL-IP FTTH network. For us the problem is how to separate the pricing for different services. We need a different accounting system for NGN Services. It was very difficult to calculate this well. It was also difficult to convince NTT to open up more Points of Interconnection.

Mediteranean country: we are struggling with the same problems as Japan. We are going to hybrid networks with IP in the core and all other technologies go to the edge. We are very interested to see how QoS is introduced and how it is costed.

Answer Japan: In Japan we have discussed Bill and Keep we have discovered it is too early to move to Bill and Keep. One of the problems is to end up with a transparent system. Secondly we see that it will have great impact on the User Tariff. It would allow the dominant carrier to do something …. (don’t know what)

Middle East country: The main problem with IP interconnection is Quality of Service. In order to solve this we need to monitor QoS

Japan: we have monitored the network congestion. And we look at traffic imbalance. We have promoted Internet Exchange Points. We further try to do practical experiments with QoS.

Moderator: with deep packet inspection we can monitor the Quality of Service statistics. It is more than solveable.

Question: how to deal with a transition phase.

Answer: it is an issue… needs to be solved when time is right. It is necessary to open up forums and to discuss openly.

Moderator: In Bahrain we have a full-IP network. The incumbent hasn’t put forward an Wholesale IP interconnect. We think this is because it is more expensive and we won’t accept it.

Question: I have comment. In the internet networks it wasn’t about termination. It was about peering. From the basic model of the internet it was hard to do regulation and we don’t regulation we think. We don’t need to regulate the interent. We need to move to peering and transit.

Answer: In Lithuania the incumbent doesn’t want to peer anymore. But how do I deal with that. I found that I have no real tools for that.

European nation: how do you do the costing in NGN?

Japan: The basic approach to calculate network costs is similar. We did a basic calculation and then modified it by a QoS factor.

Mod: It would be good to have a forum on this topic.

Middle East: The ITU is already dealing with questions regarding interconnection and the Hybrid networks. I do think the ITU can deal with this very well and we don’t need an extra forum on this subject.

Colombia: complements the ITU on its work on interconnection already.

Middle East: I would like to ask about the question on interconnection on symmetrical and asymmetrical network. The size of the networks is very important. Large operators and smallers have different traffic load.

Japan: we implement both symmetrical and asymmetrical interconnection. We do pay attention to net neutrality as well as not to have anyone block content of others. So there are rules for packet shaping.

Question: How does Japan deal with the numbering in NGN network

Mod: We’re all looking at how to deal with this problem in the future. The thing was that incumbents weren’t present in the IP world. In Bahrain we’re now looking at the costing of IP-services. Fundamentally there shouldn’t be a difference between the IP world and the old-world. But we should move to IP fast as the hybrid model is causing more problems than solving them.

Presentations on Internet Exchanges and the Middle East

In preparation for this week's ITU Global Symposium for Regulators, Beirut I looked at the presentations of MENOG5 which was held in Lebanon 2 weeks ago.There are some excellent presentations there on how internet exchanges were established, what their impact was etc. It ranges from Beirut, Amsterdam, Enschede to Nepal. Also there is a presentation by the head of the Lebanese Regulator,  Kamal Shedadi on IPv6. One important item I hadn't ever seen before was the effects IPv6 may have to facilitate lawful interception. Even though I worked on LI for 3 years in The Netherlands, I had never really considered it in this way, but I do think it's a fair assessment.
http://www.menog.net/meetings/menog5/presentations/index.php

Also have a look at the discussion papers and the presentations which will be given at the ITU GSR (one of them is mine) . http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/treg/Events/Seminars/GSR/GSR09/papers.html

UNIVERSAL ACCESS POLICIES IN THE 21ST CENTURY

Moderator: Ms S. Scholze, Executive Superintendent, Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações (ANATEL), Brazil

Background Paper on Bringing broadband to rural areas: a step-by-step approach, the experience of the Dominican Republic, [presentation]
Mr. Edwin San Roman, Senior Telecom Expert, Peru

Interactive panel discussion:

• Are Universal Access and Service (UAS) policies stuck in the 20th Century?
• Is the time right for innovative approaches?
• Public-private partnerships, what role for the government in funding UAS?

Panelists:

• Prof. I. Kadi, Senior Advisor, Communications and Information Technology Commission (CITC), Saudi Arabia
• Dr. E. Spio-Garbrah, CEO, Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation (CTO)
• Mr. Mohsen Jaziri, Vice-President, Instance Nationale des Télécommunications (INTT), Tunisia

For information:

Background Paper on Trends in Universal Access and Service Policies, Ms. Sofie Maddens, Senior International Expert for the ITU-EC Project to Provide Support for the Establishment of Harmonized Policies for the ICT Market in the ACP (HIPCAR)

Very good presentation on broadband in Rural areas and then inventiveness of people to get broadband.

Panel discussion: One of the panellists mentions that bringing broadband access in his country to rural areas has had very positive effects on social indicators like crime and other elements. He mentions the price of the use of mobile telecommunications as very detrimental. Mr. Pena from Brazil: most countries have now voice access via mobile almost everywhere. Internet is much less prevalent and broadband even more so. We’ve done a survey of the all of South America and this is the case everywhere.

In Tunisia we used fixed numbering to extend telephony to rural areas over mobile telephony. With the privatization we’ve had to revert this because it was anti-competitive. A compromise was made to allow new operators to enter the market and still get universal access. Tunisia is also trying to get the handicapped online, like the blind. This leads to some problems as they are often charged more for specific services.

Gentleman from the Commonwealth: We shouldn’t think of rural as anything other than a geographic designation. These areas are not necessarily poor. There are often companies in those areas that need connectivity and often realize their own connectivity. Sometimes we need to convince them to share that connectivity with local schools and communities. Microfinancing helps bring telecommunications out into rural areas. Even banks are interested as they can expand banking into rural areas by using mobile payments and other forms of telecommunications. Local savings informal savings initiatives are also very good in promoting savings and investments in rural areas. It is important to get the women involved, because educating a woman educates an entire village.

Discussion from the floor:

West African country: Of course we can roll out in rural areas, but how do we deal with maintenance? What if stuff breaks down? Could the panellists explain what they do to stimulate maintenance?

Answer: In the Dominican republic we have the Digital Room project. More than 80% are functioning well. The reason for the success is that we provide the computers and the backup power. But we also establish a local management team that is responsible and we get everyone involved up to the church and local social clubs. The community is made responsible and signs a contract. If the community doesn’t do adequate maintenance we take away the equipment and we give it to someone more deserving.

Answer Saudi Arabia: We set up a fund that is responsible for financing our Universal Access and this includes maintenance. 

Answer Commonwealth: Make sure that the locals are responsible by giving them ownership

Question from Mediterranean: the title of the session implies we need to enrich USF. I would caution to enlarge broadband to USF, because of the cost involved. We need a sustainable environment for investment and market forces should be at the forefront. Broadband services are generally available to those that can pay. Those that aren’t served are not rich enough. What we see is also that people are willing to pay only a fixed amount of their income to telecommunications.

Question from Uruguay: In Uruguay we have provided a laptop for every child (600.000) We also got all schools connected and through the schools we get the kids connected at home as well. We think that this experience can be copied in other countries as well. The logisitical problem was the biggest, but we got it solved through a special fund and it took us only two years to roll out the program. We now want to extend it to secondary schools.

Question from West Africa: In our country we found that if you build it they will come. People in the towns made it possible to bring affordable connections in the rural areas.

Answer Tunisia: In Tunisia we found that in the framework of the Family Computer programme we were able to distribute 50.000 computers, with maintenance included. On the question of universal access there are different ways of financing this.

Question Himalayan nation: We know that Broadband is good for rural areas. But we already are having problems with narrowband. So how are we going to Broadband. Is it worthwhile to leapfrog and go to broadband.

Answer Speaker: In the domincan republic we try to get everyone connected. That is why we establish Computer Rooms, where you can use the internet cheaply or even freely. You should be able to use it regardless of whether you have money. In my country we’re talking about wireless technologies, so we try to get the wifi that uses as much broadband as possible. The macro economic situation is such that we can go to 3G.