Date: 15 November 2007 12:17:57 GMT+03:00
Subject: [Fibre-for-africa] Fwd: [APC-IGF] Notes on Access Plenary
--------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: [APC-IGF] Notes on Access Plenary
Date: Wed, November 14, 2007 9:46 pm
To: "Private work space for APC members, staff and partners
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The panel was chaired by Helio Costa [Minister of Communications,
Brazil] and Markus Kummer [Executive Coordinator, IGF]; and was
moderated by Richard Sambrook [Director of the BBC's Global News
division].
Panellists were: Mike Jensen [Independent consultant/APC], Roque
Gagliano [ANTEL/NAPLA/ALAC], Valerie D'Costa [InfoDev], Sylvia Cadena
[WILAC.net], Mouhamet Diop [Next.sn], Anita Gurumurthy [ITforChange],
and Jacquelynn Ruff [Verizon].
Discussants were: Maui Sanford, Rajesh Bansal, Hökmark Gunnar, Sam
Paltridge, and Radhika Lal [UNDP].
The moderator asked that the discussions of the panel be framed in
light of the following two considerations: (i) the characteristics of
the next billion people to be connected to the Internet - "How do they
differ from those who are already connected … Who are they and what is
needed in order to bring them online?; and (ii) issue emanating from
the demand side as well as from the traditional supply side. Issues
arising from the supply perspective include - regulation, law, policy,
competition, capacity building etc. Whilst demand side considerations
include issues of cost, ease of use, relevance of content, access for
the elderly and those with disabilities, questions of language, and
the crucial link between access and development.
Key issues and/or suggestions that emerged from the Access Panel are as
follows:
1. There was recognition that availability of Internet infrastructure
must be considered hand-in-hand with the affordability of the
infrastructure.
2. There was recognition that more concrete efforts at building demand
for the Internet are required and an important aspect of this is the
availability of content and affordability of access. To facilitate
this, it was suggested that local content and traffic should be "kept"
(in terms of hosting and transmission) at the local level. This is
because "Internet transit cost[a] is one of the main problems for
developing countries" (Gagliano) and are usually borne (100%) by
service providers/operators in the developing countries. With this in
mind, it was suggested that greater support (in terms of regulation
and backbone infrastructure) be given to the establishment and
sustainability of Internet Exchange Points (IXPs) at both national and
regional levels.
3. With respect to high transit costs, the need for developing
countries/regions to take advantage of the "savings" that can be made
by adopting a regional policy of interconnected IXPs and thereby
"break through the transit model and … [usher in a] … peering model"
(Diop).
4. It was also recognised that for affordable and universal access to
be achieved, the competitive environment in developing nations needs
to be developed. This requires that regulatory and policy regimes be
improved – in particular the "long-term monopolies, duopolies or cosy
cartels" (Jensen) that exist in the key areas of international
gateways, backhaul/terrestrial networks and mobile sector need to be
addressed. Other regulatory and policy areas that need to be looked
into are interconnection, number portability, and the expansion and/or
increase in diversity of organisations that are able to
deliver/provide telecom services – these include community operators,
municipal authorities, cooperatives etc.
5. There was recognition that improvements in international and
national fibre optic network require new models for deployment. It
was suggested that backhaul networks be viewed as a public good (in
much the same way as roads are) and that in this respect their
deployment be coordinated with other infrastructure projects – such as
new road, rail, electricity, gas pipelines etc. The position can also
be taken that "…development finance for these types of infrastructure
projects should be conditional on including fibre in their
deployment." (Jensen)
6. In considering the suggested need for greater coordination in the
deployment of fibre in new infrastructure projects; it was highlighted
that priority should be given to energy infrastructure and in
particular electrification projects.
7. Reviewing regulatory and policy regimes, and achieving greater
coordination in the deployment of infrastructure (amongst others)
requires that the capacity of regulators be built up significantly ...
8. In order to improve and achieve more informed policy- and
decision-making, the need to rethink indicators used for measuring
progress/performance was highlighted. Those that are currently
collated and used are often characterised by a significant time lag
(sometimes of up to two to three years) which negatively impacts on
the reliability and realism of decisions on which they are based. It
was therefore suggested that more up-to-date Internet metrics - such
as autonomous system numbers, domain names, Internet protocol
addresses etc. – be incorporated into the repertoire of (global)
telecom/Internet metrics.
9. There was recognition of the tremendous strides that have been made
by mobile and wireless technologies in enabling developing country
populations to gain access communication services. It was recognised
that the mobile phone has been instrumental in this success and
suggested that this technology, and the many initiatives that have
adapted its use at the local/"grass root" level be considered for
inclusion in future connectivity/access plans. This would suggest
that such "community-based" initiatives be considered at par with
telco-led roll-out plans – especially with reference to rural areas
and marginalised/under-served communities; and where funding provision
exists for universal service.
10. It was recognised that adopting a more "demand side" perspective
to the access problem/issue calls for a better understanding of the
needs of users – and in particular the needs of "the next billion" to
be connected. It was felt that an understanding and articulation of
"what the critical Internet use issues[b] are in underserved
communities" (D'Costa) will help to better identify the relevance of
telecoms and ICT to development, and in initiating access solutions
that better serve these communities.
11. Recognising the needs of users – especially those in rural
communities, highlights the importance of translating and promoting
local languages and local customs as this facilitates the use of
communications networks by these communities. An appreciation of the
culture and incorporation of local languages also helps to promote and
develop the skills of the members of the community in using the
networks and in adapting them to their needs. This can significantly
improve the sustainability and continuity of the network (Cadena).
12. In developing countries; rural areas can no longer be treated as
the exception: "when in truth [in cited specific instance] more than
70% of the population lives in rural areas" (Cadena). It was
therefore recognised that some reform/modification of regulation and
policy is required to facilitate the implementation of access
solutions in these areas. Specific areas highlighted include the
removal of charges and/or duties applied to new technologies that are
particularly suited to such areas.
13. Also with respect to rural and remote areas, it was suggested that
certain services - such as communication during emergencies and
disasters, should be provided as a public good (and considered more
important than any economic interest).
14. There was the recognition that access is more than connectivity
and that the tools used in connecting to the Internet – in particular
their adaptation and adequacy of use –are also important. The need
for capacity building around technological development and adaptation
that would ensure that connectivity tools are "fit for use".
15. It was highlighted that when it comes to providing access to poor
communities: "the most meaningful ICT models … are not just about
creating demand loops for individual users to pay, but models that
address systemic and institutional change through ICTs" (Gurumurthy).
It was suggested that Telecoms/ICTs can and should therefore be
embedded within social development initiatives and in these
circumstances be delivered as a public good. It was emphasised that a
"public goods approach to ICT" does not negate the need and relevance
of market-orientated approaches to Internet access; rather each
approach has its own area of application.
16. It was noted that access, from the perspective of the deployment
of infrastructure, is capital intensive and that capital available for
investments in infrastructure is international in nature. This
emphasises the capacity developing countries must have in attracting
investment/capital. Areas that facilitate attractiveness for
investment were identified as including transparent and stable
regulatory environment; respect for the rule of law; openness to
foreign investment; a commitment to encouraging competition; good
licensing and spectrum allocation procedures, a flexibility for
innovative services etc.
[a] This relates to the cost of accessing Internet ports that are
generally located outside developing countries and also the cost of
transmission to and from these ports all of which are borne (100%) by
the service provider in the developing country.
[b] Examples of these include how such use substitutes for a two or
three day journey to the nearest town. How it can help a citizen
better engage more effectively with a local or their municipal
authority. How it can help a small business to expand its market
reach, or its distribution network. How it can help new entertainment
and information possibilities open up to those citizens. (D'Costa)
_______________________________________________
Apc-igf mailing list
_______________________________________________
Fibre-for-africa mailing list