Community-based Networks and Innovative Technologies: New ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

New models to serve and empower the pooraddressing the scale of the challenge in terms of the volume of funds needed but also thebusiness models and regulatory approaches available. South Africa’s Underserviced AreaLicenses are also innovative but have not yet delivered on their good intentions. Thesecould constitute a component of a more coherent national policy towards serving thesecommunities, and creating an enabling environment.We believe a central feature of such a policy would be support for community owned networksand services. In this regard the following could be undertaken:a) Identification of Areas of Need, or ‘ICT Development Zones’: Research could relativelyeasily identify areas that are currently underserved due to market failure orother reasons, based on a mixture of qualitative and quantitative indicators. Issuesof income and need, as well as cost, could be included and such areas need not bedelineated solely by geographical boundaries. The goal is not only to ensure thewidespread availability of ICTs, but to use them as a catalyst to stimulate broaderdevelopment actions and investment.A proposal has been made to take this further (APC 2005), and to designate specific‘ICT Development Zones’ for special assistance, a recognition that current trajectories ofnetwork provision are unlikely to reach them in the foreseeable future. A special regulatoryand support environment could be created within these to facilitate experimentation,including with community-driven approaches, and to enable new lines of financing andconcessions.An approach that often followed for licensing as well as in the context of universal accessfunds is “strategic zoning’ or packaging of the selected targets, regions and territories, toachieve maximum competitive interest as well as regional equity”. 22 In various instances,however companies getting the licenses have preferred to pay the fine rather than investin apparently unprofitable regions. In such instances as well, bidding could be made opento regional networks of community-based actors.b) Legal Structure: A suitable legal and institutional structure for community ownership,if such does not exist, is important and creating it should be an immediatepolicy goal. It should recognise both the limited liability of a conventional company,as well as the ethos and requirements of a non-profit development entity.c) Tax Exemptions: Exemption from taxes, such as corporate tax, might be appropriateto enable maximum reinvestment into the community.d) A National Support Unit: The creation of a national support unit of some kind, preferablyalready working with cooperative and community development interests, mightbe a useful instrument to explore and design a policy and its elements, to act as acatalyst for local innovation and enterprise and an intermediary with state institutions,and to deliver support, training, capacity building and other needs.The National Telecommunications Cooperative Association in the USA (www.ntca.org)is a good example of a member-driven support organisation, offering an array of services,including a government affairs programme and advocacy support; legal representationand assistance; educational services; an assortment of publications and public relationstools; and member meetings and events. As seen in the case of the Polish cooperatives (Case48
Community-based Networks and Innovative TechnologiesStudy 1) they also offer assistance overseas, and their experience might be relevant to sucha national support unit. However, the unit proposed here would initially require governmentand/or donor support and a statutory basis since its first task would be to providean impetus to the sector.2. Regulating for Local and Community NetworksThere are signs that the regulatory environment in some developing countries is becomingmore fluid and open to ideas. Some regulatory changes have been announced that couldease the way for local solutions. Kenya has announced decisive moves towards a technologyneutral licensing framework (Kirui 2004) and decided to allow VoIP, although there isas yet nothing specific about local or community-based networks. South Africa began theprocess of issuing local licenses in 2003 to underserved areas, although they ignored lobbyingto encourage the emergence of the cooperative model (Gillwald 2002). Thegovernment recently announced that from February 2005 VANs and private networks willbe free to carry voice and resell their excess capacity, both of which would drive downwholesale costs to local network retailers. VoIP is also to be legalised (Vecchiatto and Weidermann2004).However, much more will be needed if a positive environment is to be created generallyfor local network development and more specifically for community ownership.a) Technology neutral licenses. Local licenses should not specify the technology to beused in delivering particular services, and incentives could even be offered to encourageinnovative solutions. Open source software for network management might alsobe worth encouraging, and is now becoming more available for wireless networks.The network designed and tested for the Laos villages is built entirely upon open sourcetechnologies.b) Special License conditions: Exclusive service licenses could be awarded to unservedor underserved rural communities without the need for a competitive process. In acompetitive situation, preferential treatment could be offered to community ownedenterprises to acknowledge their community input and development impact.c) License-exempt spectrum should be just that. Many countries have not yet fullyexempted the agreed WiFi spectrum, 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz, from licenses and fees,and a range of cost and bureaucratic barriers exist (Neto 2004). A more positive environmentwould support progress in implementing license-exempt wireless networks.The ITU could have a role to play here by taking a firmer position and issuing clearerguidelines for the regulation of license-exempt bands (Neto 2004).d) Favourable Interconnection Pricing: Regulation to support minimal connectionfees for non-profit community owned networks to gain access to national and internationalconnections and bandwidth could significantly reduce outgoing costs.Furthermore, the use of asymmetrical interconnection tariffs to complete calls,favouring rural operators (Dymond & Oestmann 2002 ITU, Chapter 3, 2003d) andin this instance the community owned network would help to facilitate investmentand sustainability of rural networks (Gillwald 2002). The national backbone orincumbent telecom operator would benefit from interconnection fees paid out, representingnew revenue. But payment to the local network for completing external calls49
Page 3: Community-based Networksand Innovat
Page 10 and 11: AcronymsADSLbpsCBOCdoTCOPASDGISDFID
Page 12 and 13: SummaryThe technology-development l
Page 14 and 15: SummaryPutting Innovative Technolog
Page 16 and 17: Summary4. Resource and Capacity Bui
Page 18 and 19: New models to serve and empower the
Page 55 and 56: Community-based Networks and Innova
Page 61: Annexes to the reportCommunity-base
Page 64 and 65: Rural Telephony Cooperatives in Pol
Page 82 and 83: Community Telecom Cooperatives in A
Page 101 and 102:
Case Studies 3 & 4:Rural Telecommun
Page 103 and 104:
Community-based Networks and Innova
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
The Connecting the Andes projectall
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143:
Page 146 and 147:
Pro-Poor Access to ICTs: The Case o
Page 148 and 149:
The lack of enterprise of a manager
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
158
Page 162 and 163:
The Case of TeNeT - n-Logue - Dhan,
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
176
Page 180 and 181:
Community Owned Networks: FAQCommun
Page 182 and 183:
Community Owned Networks: FAQC. Fin
Page 184 and 185:
Community Owned Networks: FAQ■Com
show all

Community-based Networks and Innovative Technologies: New ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?