1 / 28

Broadband Universal Services and Access: O pportunities for “Broadband for all”

Broadband Universal Services and Access: O pportunities for “Broadband for all”. Nataša Gospić 1,2 , Dragan Bogojević 3 , Goran M uri ć 1 1 Univesity of Belgrade, Traffic and Transport Faculty, Belgrade, 2 FMSK, Berane, 3 ICT-INFO, Belgrade. Agenda.

parker
Download Presentation

Broadband Universal Services and Access: O pportunities for “Broadband for all”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Broadband Universal Services and Access: Opportunitiesfor “Broadband for all” Nataša Gospić1,2, Dragan Bogojević3, Goran Murić1 1Univesity of Belgrade, Traffic and Transport Faculty, Belgrade, 2FMSK, Berane, 3ICT-INFO, Belgrade

  2. Agenda Introduction: USO in European Regulatory Frame 2009: to change or not to change? Overview of European USO regulation development US in SEE: no BB US, no BB UA BB USA in developing countries: why Conclusions Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  3. EU US Obligation “To change or not to change?” Review of BB US public consultations in Europe still gives answer NOT YET. Is it “NO from all stakeholders” (society vs industry)? Is objective “BB for all” possible without BB USO for undeveloped and un-served areas? A key question: Whether USO should become a pro-active tool in the broadband development and have a role in meeting the objective of ‘broadband for all’, or whether this should be left to other EU and national policy measures, while retaining USO as a safety net (traditional approach)? Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  4. Review of Broadband Universal Service in Europe2005-2011

  5. EU USO 1. Review 2005/2006 The EU reviewed the scope in 2005/2006, specifically whether mobile telephony and broadband Internet were to be added. However, neither mobile telephony nor broadband Internet was added for the following reasons: • Mobile telephony passed the first requirement – ability to use a mobile phone is now seen as essential for social inclusion in Europe – however, normal commercial forces had led to widespread availability and use of mobile phones, so the balance of opinion was that there was no need for regulatory intervention to achieve universal mobile service; • Broadband Internet: • failed the first test – well under half of European households subscribed to broadband Internet and so was not seen as essential for social inclusion. • the second test was not applied. Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  6. EU USO 2. Review 2008 A second periodic review was carried out in 2008 which reaffirmed that, in the case of mobile telephony, overall the market provides access. In the case of broadband it was thought that it was unlikely that the market would provide access within a reasonable period of time to the most isolated regions of the EU. Broadband was proving more and more of a necessity for accessing a whole range of services and therefore its impact on competitiveness and economic growth was gradually turning this infrastructure into an essential commodity. There was therefore an argument for strengthening EU and national strategies to provide access. Nevertheless, the review stopped short of recommending extending the coverage of US to include broadband. Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  7. EU USO 3. Review 2010/11 • Public consultation and workshop on broadening the scope of the USD to include broadband has been opened March – May 2010/ They provided wide-ranging views on the topic, including an assessment of the cost of broadband availability and also the rapid change of broadband penetration rate throughout Europe. • A question, therefore, arises whether it is necessary to update the current universal service regime, 2002 Universal Service Directive (USD), designed ten years ago to include broadband. • Two major views have been raised: • views opposing BB US and • view supporting BB US . Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  8. Views opposing/supporting broadband universal service (1) Many arguments raised in the submissions disagree with including broadband within the scope of universal service. In the 2010 the interesting views include: Competition distortion: Operator abandonment and innovation harm Policy shift Availability of other tools or initiatives Most national governments and consumer associations support the inclusion of broadband into the scope of universal service. The rationale supporting their views is based much on social issue. Some arguments raised in the submissions to support broadband universal service include: Existing of the divide Stimulate full potential from Internet-enabled society: Constraint of some technology Necessity to some services Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  9. Views opposing/supporting broadband universal service (2) Source: O. Teppayayon & E. Bohlin, Broadband Universal Service in Europe: A Review of Policy Consultations 2005-2010 , COMMUNICATIONS & STRATEGIES, 80, 4th Q. 2010 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  10. Recent development of broadband USO (November 2011) The 3rd periodic review of USO concluded that there is no need to change the basic concept and principles of universal service as an instrument for preventing social exclusion. The 2009 Telecom Package gives Member States the flexibility to define the appropriate data rate for network connections delivering ‘functional internet access’ in the light of national conditions. Basic broadband access can therefore be part of USO at national level in justified cases To minimize market distortions, Member States should use other public intervention tools other than USO to ensure broadband availability It considers that further guidance (following revision of Dir. 2002/22/EC) on the implementation of the USO will be necessary, for example on the flexibility that Member States have to define functional internet access beyond a narrowband connection. Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  11. Fixed broadband network coverage in the EU as % of the population, 2010 Fixed (DSL) broadband networks were, on average, available to around 95% of the EU populationat the end of 2010 Source: IDATE, 2010 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  12. Is EU ready to pay € 13.6 bn? While fixed BB networks are, on average, available to 95.1% of the EU population, this figure is only 82.8 % in rural areas across the EU and 60 % or less in rural areas of Bulgaria, Slovakia, Poland, Romania and Cyprus. The total EU net cost of rolling out or upgrading BB infrastructure in underserved areas and ensuring the availability (coverage) and affordability (subsidized social tariffs) of a 2 Mbps broadband connection through USO to be approximately €13.6 bn over a five-year period. Total sum translates into some € 2.7 bn annually, which represents approximately 0.69 % of the turnover of the EU telecoms sector as a whole. This percentage is higher in countries with a sparse population, difficult terrain or less developed infrastructure. The highest cost ratio would be in Romania (4.6 %) and the lowest in Luxembourg (0.08 %). In absolute terms, the EU average cost per household would be approximately €14.40 per year, ranging up to €30 in Romania. This compares with current annual costs per household of between €0.05 and € 4.19 in the seven Member States that have established USO funds. Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  13. Desired approach by the EU Commission Source: Bellavite Michele “The Evolution of the US in the Telecommunications Sector”, ETNO, Feb. 2012 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  14. US in SEE: Cullen reports What Cullen Int. has provided in reports (last in July 2012, chapter I): Scope of US Minimum data rates within US scope US funding mechanisms Subscriber directories 112 emergency number Contract regulation & resolution of disputes Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  15. US scope in SEE National legislation in all monitored countries defines the scope of universal service as broadly corresponding to the elements listed in the Universal Service Directive. Only Croatia, Iceland, FYROM and Montenegro have so far carried out universal service provider designation procedures in line with the requirements set out in the EU regulatory framework. Source: Cullen Report 2, July 2012 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  16. Minimum data rates within universal service scope SEE * *This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSC 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. Source: Cullen Report 2, July 2012 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  17. Universal service funding in SEE * * *This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSC 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. Source: Cullen Report 2, July 2012 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  18. BB Universal Service Access challenges in developing countries Should BB USA policies migrate to Broadband policy(rural)

  19. US concepts (1) • Safety net: traditional approach to intervention of narrow service range. The safety net for PSTN is dominant in the EU. USOs encompass common pricing geographically, ready access to public services, directory enquiry, and public pay phones. The concept applies to disenfranchised population groups. Typically broadband is not included. • E-society: government supports citizen's rights to knowledge-based society participation. Electronic communications is a citizen's right. The state provides citizens with contemporary service levels of basic needs. Universal service revolves around the obligation Member State to ensure that citizens can access the full range of e-communications. The principle implicitly includes broadband in the scope of USOs. What extent should the scope of universal service be covered? Should it cover a narrow and specific set of services or a wide range of services? Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  20. US concepts (2) Limited promotion:government only encourages the wide eployment of services. The provision of an array of electronic communications is deemed critical for social inclusion, but not necessarily part of citizen rights. Although ICT is necessary for an efficient functioning of economy, there is no extensive government intervention. Rather, government promotes esociety. Promotional efforts attempt to create a demand-led deployment. Minimalist concept: the market mechanism is assumed to function adequately and there is no need for government intervention. Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  21. Gap model, theoretical framework for USA* • Over last few years operators have bridged the market efficiency gap for voice • The smart subsidy zone has narrowed • The true access gap is typically last 5% of total population, but 20% in rural areas *Source: Telecom Regulation Handbook, Universal Service: Distinctions Within the Access Gap, WB 2011 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  22. ITU: similar definitions, market and access gaps* • Market gap (Zone 1) • Sustainable Coverage Gap (Zone 2) the portion of the market that could be operated on a commercially viable basis, once the necessary investments have been funded by public subsidy • Universal Coverage Gap (Zone 3) the portion of the market that could never be operated on a commercially viable basis, but would require public subsidy both for investment and operation *Source: S. Maddens-Toscano, HIPSSA Project, ITU Workshop Gabon, June 2012 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  23. Authors proposal for national model of the NGN and BB deployment* *Sources: Gospic & Bogojevic, NGN Deployment in Developing Countries, ITU-D Forum for Arab Region, Dec. 2010 Bogojevic & Gospic, Modeling of NGN deployment, African Journal of Business Management, July, 2011 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  24. Model decomposition* *Source: N. Gospic & D. Bogojevic, ITU Cross Regional Seminar, Chisinau Moldova, Sep. 2011 Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  25. PROPOSAL Scope: US + UA => BB_USA BB_USA as a solution for Broadcasting : BB_USA + BroadCast => BB_USAB New services to be included: eGov + eEDU + eHelth + eSecurity_Critical_Infrastructure National model for BB deployment Financing: PPP Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  26. Lessons Learned • Definition of Universal Service/Access must be changed within time according to the country’s realities • Need for innovation and creativity in identification of services to be under USA (Broadband/Digital Broadcasting) • Monitoring mechanism is critical factor • National model for BB deployment • Multi stakeholder approach is only financial solution (PPP) Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  27. Conclusions BB UAS policies should to migrate to Broadband policies (rural) to ensure “BB for All” Methods of government’s state intervention should be defined Pilot projects with the proposed analytical model for investigating the limits of market efficiency, availability and sustainability should be initiated. Pilot projects to test positive effects of public-private partnerships (PPP) should be implemented Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

  28. Thank you for your attention! n.gospic@sf.bg.ac.rs drbogy@gmail.com goran.muric@gmail.com Even the longest journey begins with the first step Gospic, Bogojevic & Muric, INFOFEST 2012, Budva, MNE

More Related