This section features background information about the World Dialogue on Regulation and its partners, news about their activities, and information on conditions of use of the site.
| WDR e-Brief No. 05 |
|
|
| Friday, 19 April 2002 | |
In this e-Brief
 No. 05, 19 April 2002 Welcome to the fifth issue of the WDR e-Brief, a bi-weekly bulletin from the World Dialogue on Regulation for Network Economies (WDR). We are pleased to announce that the e-Brief now has more than 850 subscribers and the list is still growing. We encourage you to bring WDR’s website to the attention of your colleagues and students. Please feel free to forward the e-Brief to potentially interested readers and let them know they can subscribe for free from the WDR website at http://www.regulateonline.org/. The e-Brief is designed to help you keep informed of new documents and ongoing discussions on our website and of other WDR activities as well as other information of interest to the regulatory community. For more information on any of the items discussed here, go to the web addresses provided. Q&A: What kind of regulatory regime will prioritise development?In each WDR e-Brief we feature a question or comment posted to the Online Dialogue at http://www.regulateonline.org/dialogue/ and ask our research teams to comment. The featured comment in this e-Brief was posted in the forum on WDR’s Framework and Objectives by Bruce Girard of Comunica, in the Netherlands. The answer comes from Professor William Melody, managing director of WDR. Question: According to Girard, telecom reform may support the rollout of information infrastructures, however, if the “information infrastructure is defined as the Internet (or even basic telephony), the vast majority of the world’s population does not have access and will not have access for a very long time.” Furthermore, “access is just the tip of the iceberg,” argues Girard. “Other factors, such as languages, education, poverty and illiteracy, serve to keep the Internet inaccessible to billions, even if they did have a connection.” In his view, “harnessing knowledge for development doesn’t require that everyone have access to the Internet - it requires that they have access to relevant and meaningful content, regardless of the communication channel used.” Girard provides the example of the radio, with its ubiquitous presence in the most remote and poor communities of the world. “Local radio broadcasters speak in local languages and accents, have knowledge of their community and are established and trusted providers of communication, education, commerce, governance and entertainment service.” However, he adds, the current regulatory environment “on the one hand promotes access to knowledge for development via the largely inaccessible Internet, while at the same time being indifferent to the development potential of broadcast radio, the most important medium for the region’s poor and rural communities.” Finally, he poses the following question: “What kind of regulatory regime will be able to regulate telecoms, internet and broadcasting in a consistent, coherent matter that really prioritises development?” Read Girard’s complete comments and a paper he wrote on the subject at: http://www.comunica.org/w-agora/index.php?bn=wdr_framework Comments by Morten Falch, a member of WDR’s ICT Convergence research team, can also also be read in the online dialogue. Answer: Bruce Girard has poured a cold dose of reality on the idealist aspirations of Internet and development enthusiasts. But at the same time he has pointed to an overlooked and relatively straightforward mechanism for multiplying by an order of magnitude the potential benefits of Internet information for the poor. In many developing countries, less than 10% of the population have access to the telecom network and less than 1% have access to the Internet. Telecom reform is allowing greater participation in extending telecom networks and services, but despite significant progress over the last decade, it will be several generations before even a simple majority of people in poor countries have effective access to the telecom network. Moreover, the driving force for network expansion in developing countries is prepaid mobile services that can’t be used to access the Internet. Under this traditional network model of development, only a very small percentage of the poor have any hope of ever benefiting directly from the Internet’s vast information store, even assuming all the ambitious programmes and plans are successful. But right now the poor of the world have almost universal access to local broadcast radio, and the information they receive is actionable for them, i.e., it is presented in a form and language they can understand and use. They can also ask questions through the local post. To make effective use of the information they get, these people (like most of us) benefit tremendously from supportive intermediaries who can interpret the information and the questions to help achieve an effective result. Why hasn’t convergence between telecom, Internet and local broadcast radio been seriously examined as an economical and highly effective way for making at least some of the Internet store of information available to the poor in useable form? Girard’s comment and paper bring to mind the role that broadcast radio has played historically in many countries in providing agricultural information to farmers, education to rural children and health advice to rural families. It improved the knowledge base of rural people, improved productivity dramatically, and provided a sense of community to listeners. It drove the agricultural revolution in most developed countries, and particularly the big ones - US, Canada and Australia - where it provided the folklore for an entire genre of books and films. Broadcast radio continues to play this important role today in virtually all developing, and some developed countries. The potential role of intermediary institutions in communication development has not been totally neglected in modern times. InfoDev, World Bank, ITU and other development agencies are supporting telecenters, web site development for local entrepreneurs in poor areas, and other related experiments in developing countries. The development of e-readiness indicators for countries considers institutional readiness in addition to network capacity measures. But I am aware of no case where local broadcast radio has been an integral part of these initiatives. It has been around for so long its enormous past contributions to communication and development have been forgotten, and its potential for innovative application in the new environment have been overlooked. Yet it could promote the economic and social sustainability that is essential if experiments are to demonstrate models for more general application. Girard’s evidence and analysis points persuasively to the need for a more holistic approach to communication and development policy that includes the full potential of broadcast radio. But what is the role of next generation regulation in facilitating or promoting the implementation of such policies? Industry specific telecom regulators are charged with facilitating the growth of national telecom networks with a capacity to deliver a full range of services. This includes ensuring efficient interconnection of networks, whether telecom, broadcast or Internet, reasonable prices and service conditions, etc. Under convergence regulation, telecom regulators are being assigned an expanded responsibility to facilitate broadband rollout for next generation Internet services, including e-commerce. This activity presumably includes local radio operators in their role as broadcasters, Internet service providers, or providers or consumers of other communication services. However, under this rationale, it is unlikely that the role of regulation would be extended to include a more direct involvement in the implementation of communication and development policies. Under a broader conception of convergence regulation, such as that being proposed for Ofcom in the UK, infrastructure regulation and broadcast content regulation are being brought under a single regulator. Public interest content regulation of broadcast services includes very specific categories of information (local news, children, advertising, etc.), including non-commercial content requirements. Information society policies that have been announced by many national governments in recent years identify electronic access to information as the cornerstone of the policies. If local broadcasters in underserviced areas are mandated to provide at least a minimal form of access to specific types of information that can be found on the Internet, then the convergence regulator likely would be the most appropriate agency for ensuring this policy is implemented. A proactive regulator could seek innovative ways to ensure this policy was implemented as fully as possible. However, Girard’s challenge must be directed primarily to policymakers. Regulators implement policy, they don’t make it; and they are on questionable ground when they step in to fill the gaps of inadequate policies. Communication and development policymakers, and those agencies that support new experimental communication and development programmes need to attend to the lessons of Girard’s analysis and fashion more holistic approaches that recognize the important roles of intermediaries and established communication networks in achieving their objectives. A greater volume of successful experiments involving local broadcast radio would provide a stimulus to more comprehensive policy development. This in turn would determine the precise role of the convergence regulator in implementing the goals of information society policies. This is an issue at the boundaries of convergence regulation that has not yet been exposed to sufficient research, discussion and critical analysis within the context of the very different circumstances that prevail in different countries. Hopefully WDR can help fill that gap by promoting further attention to this issue. William Melody Follow the dialogue post a question or make a comment at http://www.regulateonline.org/dialogue/ . Also from the Dialogue: Bangladesh Railway Brings Broadband to Rural AreasIn a message posted to the WDR Framework and Objectives Forum, Partha wrote that Bangladesh Railway has had a optic fibre network running along its right of way for a decade now. However, the network has been used only for the company’s internal communication, “an example of under utilizing a powerful resource”. Partha reports that “it took such a long time to convince the decision makers that if opened this network can also be used for rural telephony, high speed Internet connection and all sorts of communication linkages”. He did not say which decision makers needed to be convinced, but it may be that closer cooperation between railway and telecom authorities might have resulted in this infrastructure being made available earlier. Network SecurityAlthough network security is not usually within the area of responsibility of regulators, it is increasingly a concern for them. This e-Brief features reports from two regulators’ forums where security emerged as a major issue, one in Denmark and the other in Bulgaria. WDR will be following this issue closely. Information Security on the Network: An Issue for Regulators? European telecom regulators are getting concerned about information security on the network, even though most regulators have no jurisdiction over such matters. Politicians, industry executives and others are coming to national regulatory authorities (NRAs) and expecting them to resolve the problems associated with security. On April 4, the Danish IT and Telecom Authority (formerly the National Telecom Authority of Denmark) convened a seminar for the Independent Regulators Group (IRG) of EU countries in Copenhagen. Regulators heard expert presentations and debated the pros and cons of national regulators being assigned legal responsibility for theses issues. Current EU regulation on cryptography, internet content, liability of ISPs, privacy, data retention and related matters does not directly involve telecom regulators, but there is no uniform implementation at the national level. The views expressed were wide ranging, with the most commonly heard one being that as a result of increasing convergence, national telecom regulators may be reluctantly forced to regulate on these issues. The seminar concluded with observations on the issues and the day by “outsiders”, former FCC Chair William Kennard, INTUG´s Ewan Sutherland and LIRNE.NET’s William Melody. E-Security an Issue at Balkan Regional Information Society Forum The Third Regulators Information Society Forum in Sofia, Bulgaria, 27-28 March 2002 under the auspices of the Bulgarian Applied Research and Communications Fund (ARC). It focussed on the theme of building e-economies in Southeastern Europe. Experts from the region reported on the latest developments across a range of reform issues, including e-readiness and e-security. William Melody discussed the WDR Next Generation Regulation theme as part of his presentations on building the regulatory foundations for network economies, and development of the e-security regulatory framework. Melody reports that although the Balkan countries are at very early stages in the telecom reform process, they are very advanced on network e-security issues. Participants did not see e-security as necessarily related to either convergence or multisector utility regulation, but rather as a very broad and evolving issue requiring the priority attention of telecom regulators, however structured, as well as other government agencies on issues ranging from consumer protection to cybercrime. Bulgarian Applied Research and Communications Fund http://www.arc.online.bg. Implementing the UK’s OfcomThe UK government plans to merge five regulatory agencies into one. The new agency, Ofcom, will replace Oftel (the telecom regulator), the Radio Communications Agency, the Independent Television Commission, the Radio Authority and the Broadcasting Standards Commission. The planning is now underway, initial enabling legislation is expected within the next several months, to be followed by more comprehensive legislation shaping the remit of Ofcom to the needs of the future UK information society. The transition process is expected to be fully implemented by end 2003. On 16 April the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) and the London Business School (LBS) held a conference, Implementing Ofcom, to examine the issues, with presentations by 18 representatives of UK organisations affected by the change and researchers, plus a view from the outside by William Melody. The implication of the presentations and discussions was that, although the direction and broad outlines of the planned changes are clear, most of the important issues relating to implementation have not been resolved. This includes the fundamental issue of the relative priorities or balance between infrastructure and content regulatory responsibilities. Similarly, the apparent contradiction between the desire for a light handed regulator that only responds to evident market failures after they have appeared, and for a regulator that will anticipate and prevent the potential fallout from market failures, and proactively drive broadband rollout and the foundations for an e-society, has not been resolved. Melody gave the only formal presentation, which can be downloaded from: http://www.regulateonline.org/ppt/ofcom.ppt The IPPR will be publishing a report on the conference. IPPR website - http://www.ippr.org.uk/ Ghanian forum considers convergence and multisector utility regulationIn the second part of the 1990s, Ghana witnessed a considerable increase in the number of fixed telephone lines and, lately, mobile communications has seen high growth trends, which indicates that there is a sizeable demand for communication services in Ghana. In the IT and Internet areas, companies are being developed, and telecom centers and Internet cafés have proliferated. In 2001, the Government of Ghana issued a draft ‘Information Technology Policy Framework for Ghana’. The document presents a policy framework for the development of telecom, IT and broadcasting in Ghana, taking convergence trends into consideration. The policy framework was subject to discussion at a conference titled “African Information and Communication in Global Perspective: A Focus on Technology and Regulation” in Accra, Ghana. WDR researchers, Knud Erik Skouby and Anders Henten made presentations on convergence and multi-sector regulation issues. Furthermore, there were presentations on interconnection regulation, on the development of mobile services and on the telecom sector in Ghana. Henten reports, “there is a sense in the community of a lack of definite direction of the ICT policy in the country.” Questions and supportIf you have questions about WDR, send them to This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it For technical matters, contact us at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it or see the Frequently Asked Questions section in the Online Dialogue. http://www.regulateonline.org/dialogue/ Subscribing and unsubscribingThe WDR e-Brief is a bi-weekly bulletin from the World Dialogue on Regulation for Network Economies <http://www.regulateonline.org>. Subscribe from the site or by sending a message to This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it with the subject wdr e-brief list . To unsubscribe, send a message to This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it Bruce Girard < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it >edits the e-Brief with assistance from Divakar Goswami. Archives: http://www.comunica.org/w-agora/index.php?bn=wdr_ebrief The purpose of the World Dialogue on Regulation is to critically examine ideas and evidence. Unless otherwise indicated, the views expressed in content appearing on the WDR website, the Online Dialogue and the WDR e-Brief are the personal views of the individuals submitting them. Content does necessarily reflect the views of LIRNE.NET, infoDev, the World Bank, the International Telecommunication Union or any other organisation associated with the World Dialogue on Regulation. World Dialogue on Regulation c/o LIRNE.NET Technical University of Denmark Center for Tele-Information, Building 371 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, DENMARK Email: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it Phone: +45 4587 1577 - Fax: +45 4596 3171 http://www.regulateonline.org |
