Information and Knowledge Management using ArcGIS ModelBuilder

Maria Concetta De Vivo, Alberto Polzonetti and Pietro Tapanelli
rather vague aura, given that the same point continues by stating that “in specific cases where the
connection to the public telephony network at a fixed location is clearly insufficient to support
satisfactory internet access, Member States should be able to require the connection to be brought up
to the level enjoyed by the majority of subscribers so that it supports data rates sufficient for access to
the internet”. In fact, in addition to the frequently repeated use of the conditional in the point, the
phrasing “sufficient” for access to the internet is open to a range of anything but clear interpretations.
Even though broadband is not mentioned, the point refers to sufficient access which, given the current
state of affairs, cannot be any less than connections meeting certain quality levels (which are no
longer in line with the speed of data transfer in 2002).
The recent communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament, Council,
Economic and Social Committee and Committee of the Regions regarding the second periodic review
of the contents of universal service in e-communications networks and services in compliance with
article 15 of Directive 2002/22/EC, examines the concept of the obligation of universal service (USO)
in the electronic communications sector, in addition to the scope of universal service itself.
Point 2.1, “Introduction”, specifically states that “universal service in electronic communications (ecommunications),
as currently defined, means ensuring that all who so request are provided with
those services essential for participation in society and already available to the great majority of
citizens, either by the market or in the case of market failure by public intervention”. In their analysis of
the status quo of broadband, the Commission itself concludes that “coverage of broadband networks
is now very high in most Member States, being available, on average, to 90% of the EU population.
Use of the internet is now approaching the level of a service used by the majority, with 49% of EU
households using the internet, 36% of which are on broadband. Although broadband is not yet used
by the majority of consumers (the first of two considerations identified in Annex 5 of the Directive) and
is therefore not encompassed by the USO as laid down and described by the present wording, takeup
is approaching the threshold of use by a majority of consumers. Furthermore, it is reasonable to
anticipate that, in a relatively short horizon of time, narrowband will no longer answer the requirement
of being “sufficient to permit functional internet access”. Thus the situation does need to be kept under
review”. If the situation already needed to be monitored at the end of 2008, doubts are almost
inevitably raised about the functionality of narrow band connections today.
Access to the internet is in any case held to be of vital importance. For example, we refer to Directive
2009/140/EC, in modification of Directives 2002/21/EC, 2002/19/EC and 2002/20/EC, which at
introductory point no.4 confirms the essential nature of internet “for education and for the practical
exercise of freedom of expression and access to information”, to the point that “any restriction
imposed on the exercise of these fundamental rights should be in accordance with the European
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms”. Incidentally, the failure
of the free market to operate efficiently is revealed in the fact that the investment to guarantee a
public service is no longer profitable. Hence point no.9 of the 2009 Directive, regarding the principle of
non-discrimination, recognises that “despite the general increase in broadband connectivity, access in
various regions is limited on account of high costs resulting from low population densities and
remoteness. In order to ensure investment in new technologies in underdeveloped regions, electronic
communications regulation should be consistent with other policies, such as State aid policy,
cohesion policy or the aims of wider industrial policy”.
5. Conclusion
Independently from the quality of broadband, which is not considered here, the essential problems are
revealed in particular when considering three factors. Firstly: the scarce penetration of broadband
within the territory, especially rural areas, materially preventing users from accessing online services
provided by public authorities, even where a wide range of services are available. It is no longer
conceivable today to talk about narrow band internet access, relying on the traditional fixed telephone
line. Secondly: the absence of a digital culture. The majority of citizens, whether from the older or
younger generation, do not understand the importance and potential offered by the window on the
world provided by internet. The fault lies not so much in a lack of interest from citizens, but rather a
scarce level of sensitisation by the political class which should use specific initiatives to promote and
facilitate digital access to social life. We will not attempt to make a distinct classification between
those who are or are not open to the digital approach, such as a division between older and younger
generations, because the difficulty in access is rooted in certain procedures, regardless of the final
user. This is because, very often, traditional procedures are simply replicated on a computer level
124