1. ICT measurement and beyond (emphasis on the Internet) A bit of background Recent UNCTAD report Moving beyond the digital divide

2. Internet diffusion, 9/1991

3. Internet diffusion, 6/1997

4. Latin American survey Toward an Internet Census for Developing Nations Larry Press, USA Luis Rodríguez, Venezuelalpress@isi.edulgrodrig@conicit.ve

5. Mosaic dimensions

6. E-readiness assessments 23 tools and methodologies 188 nations have been assessed at least once 68 nations have been assessed between 5 and 10 times 69 nations have been assessed over 10 times None: N. Korea, Tuvalu, Monaco and Nauru Bridges.org, February/March, 2005

7. THE DIGITAL DIVIDE REPORT: ICT DIFFUSION INDEX 2005 UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT United Nations New York and Geneva, 2006

8. ICTDI is a function of Connectivity, as measured by Internet hosts per capita, number of PCs per capita, the number of telephone mainlines per capita and the number of mobile subscribers per capita. As such, it gives a measure of the infrastructure development. Access, as measured by the number of estimated Internet users, the adult literacy rate, the cost of a local call and GDP per capita (PPP US$). This component aims at describing the opportunity to take advantage of being connected.

9. The ICTDI rank versus average rank of five ICT indices (DOI, NRI, ISI, DAI, Orbicam ranks from 39 nations, Minges 2005) (r =.96)

10. ICTDI rank 1997 versus 2004 (r =.98)

11. Rank change between 1997 and 2004 versus GDP per capita Discontinuity: GDP/capita < US$14,000 (126 nations)

12. ICTDI versus GDP/capita, 2004. Discontinuity: GDP < US$2,373 (42 nations)

13. ICTDI versus HDI, 2003. Discontinuity: HDI <.300 (91 nations)

14. Interregional IP bandwidth, 2005 IP bandwidth 6x > voice and private line Source: Telegeography, mid 2005

15. Intraregional Internet bandwidth as a percent of total international bandwidth Region19992005 Africa0%1% Asia6%35% Europe70%72% Latin America5%12% US and Canada28%21% Source: Global Internet Geography (2006)

16. Lorenz curve for Internet users

17. Internet subscribers/100 inabitants IncomePopulation20032005 Low2,338.221.6 Lower-mid2,4302.926.2 Upper-mid5763.6820.9 High1,00122.4836.6 World6,3454.9815 Unfortunately, “apples to oranges” comparison

18. The digital divide is pretty much persistent, regardless of how we measure it.

19. Digital access index 0 -.29 About the same yellow nations as on Landweber’s maps

20. Digital access index.7- 1

21. Digital access index.3 -.49

22. Digital access index.5 -.69

23. ITU Digital Access Index, 2003

24. What has been our policy?

25. PCR policy Privatization Competition Fair, independent regulation PCR has been effective, but have we reached a point of diminishing returns?

26. ICTDI rank changes 1997-2004, all nations AverageSt. Dev.n WTO signatories-2.19.892 Non signatories2.011.088 Signatories as of 1998

27. ICTDI rank changes 1997-2004, low-income nations AverageSt. Dev.n WTO signatories0.19.317 Non signatories4.310.837

28. ICTDI rank changes 1997-2004, sub-Saharan Africa AverageSt. Dev.n WTO signatories-0.88.411 Non-signatories-0.76.830

29. ICTDI rank changes 1997-2004, high-income AverageSt. Dev.n WTO signatories0.97.229 Non-signatories5.18.47

30. PCR has been effective, but it has limits

31. Poverty limits the ability to attract private capital Low income nations258.3 Lower middle income32.2 Upper middle income13.3 High income1.7 Cost of 20 hours of (heterogeneous) access as percent of average monthly GNI per capita (2003)

32. Limits to competition illustrated in the United States Failure of the 1996 Telecommunication Act Duopoly at best Low speed broadband Rapidly dropping household penetration rank

33. Limits to competition, e.g., U. S. “All too often companies work to change the regulations, instead of working to change the market.” “Companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists and politicians, instead of plant, people and customer service.” “Too often [regulation is] used as a shield, to protect the status quo from new competition - often in the form of smaller, hungrier competitors -- and too infrequently as a sword -- to cut a pathway for new competitors to compete by creating new networks and services.” William Kennard, FCC Chairman, 1967-2001

34. Beyond PCR policy – publicly funded IP backbone networks

35. A grand challenge Build national IP backbones providing high-speed connectivity to and a point of presence in every rural village Innovation and most investment to be market-driven at the edges of the network – in the villages.

36. A grand challenge Build national IP backbones providing high-speed connectivity to and a point of presence in every rural village Innovation and of the investment to be market-driven at the edges of the network – in the villages.

37. Rural emphasis because Urban areas are more able to attract capital. “What makes Bombay overpopulated is the impoverishment of the countryside, so that a young man with dreams in his head will take the first train to Bombay to live on the footpath. If you fix the problems of the villages, you fix, as a happy side effect, the problems of the cities.” Suketu Mehta, Maximum City, page 17

38. This challenge is daunting, but feasible

39. We have demonstrated applications Using old technology and slow connections

40. We have business models Remote medicine Remote veterinary Remote agricultural advice E-government E-mail Digital photography Desktop publishing Telephony Break even at $75/mo. N-Logue rural Kiosk (using old technology)

41. Pixelcorps Training, leading to offshore media production

42. We have technology Fiber backbone, wireless mesh, and POPs

43. We have precedent United States Congressional Record of funding for the initial Morse Telegraph

44. A more relevant precedent NSFNet backbone – $130 million connected all universities

45. It is affordable 70,000 Km fiber core 30,000 Km fiber spurs Wireless to fiber Reach 400 million Walking/bicycling distance 1 billion dollars FiberAfrica, Rahul Tongia, CMU

46. Larry Press lpress@csudh.edu bpastudio.csudh.edu/fac/lpress/