Digital Divide Institute

Meaningful Broadband FAQ

 
This FAQ provides answers to general, non-technological questions about our model, its evolution, and its key concepts.
 
OK, what’s the overview?
 

Digital Divide Institute promotes an innovative model called Meaningful Broadband. Its purpose is to intervene into the difficult process by which a nation seeks to restructure its telecommunications industry to become “broadband-ready”. Amid this restructuring, we believe that majority populations of poor nations, once ignored by global market forces and investors, can be dramatically transformed, and uplifted through the internet-enabled convergence of television, radio, personal smart devices and software apps, We believe that market forces can be induced to join with governments to achieve this impact. This view is pragmatic, not utopian. It draws upon international best practices and intellectual capital from the world’s finest universities, as well as the top national universities in the countries where we operate. Five domains of research are being combined to produce this model. Not yet in full deployment in any country, it has already affected policies and practices in Thailand and Indonesia. Founded by a former Harvard professor named Craig Warren Smith, it is being overseen by a global network of our partners and advisors from around the world.

 
What is meant by the term “Meaningful Broadband?”
 

Meaningful Broadband refers to an innovative framework of broadband deployment for emerging markets that was conceived from a task force at Harvard and MIT headed by Prof Craig Warren Smith. It was eventually embraced among ICT stakeholders in Thailand and Indonesia. It addresses the need for coordinated deployment of “national meaningful broadband ecosystems” – encompassing backbone, Last Mile options, devices and content – which combine to have meaningful, measurable impacts on users and enterprises.

 
How does this model differ from other approaches to broadband policy being offered to developing nations?
 

Most existing models are based on countries like South Korea and Singapore or Australia whose circumstances do not apply to the realities faced by most low-income countries, large and small. The model is not just a government “policy” but a framework for mobilizing all sectors in a country – governmental, commercial,academic, NGOs, and media. Its focus is not just on rapid broadband deployment but “meaningful” deployment in which benefits to the nation are defined in ethical as well as economic terms. The model not only involves innovative policy-formation but a way of implementing these policies through practices that affect each sector of society.

 
How does this model “close the Digital Divide?”
 

Our model shows how the “bottom four billion” world population – those who have been excluded from global markets till now, could be integrated into the global market economy, in ways that bring “equitable growth” to each participating nation. The model draws upon the lessons-learned and best practices in the 15-year global movement to close the Digital Divide. It replaces piecemeal close-the-Divide strategies with strategies that are holistic, cross-sectoral and technologically up-to-date. It does not rely only on formal rules but reflects the “messy” informal modus operandi in each participating nation. It reflects the new consensus in developing countries that the only way to bring full benefit of ICT to majority populations of developing countries is by massive, rapid and “meaningful” deployment of broadband. In the process of achieving this aim, we believe that each nation can also mobilize the investments it needs to fund Meaningful Broadband from commercial, governmental and intergovernmental sources.

 
What is our definition of “Broadband?”
 

Shorthand for “broadband internet,” broadband is not just fast internet, but it refers to the breadth of internet transmission so that it can accommodate multiple media channels and applications at the same time. In this sense, broadband is not just an upgrade to an older technology but an altogether new technology that introduces new and uncertain impacts on human behavior. In our use of the term, furthermore, broadband does not refer only to wireless or wireline broadband infrastructures but it refers to an ecosystem of inter-related broadband-enabled technologies by which bandwidth arrives in a backbone, and then transmitted to users via a Last Mile solutions, e.g. Wimax,. Then bandwidth arrives at smart devices, which transmit content (e.g. software applications), which directly inform or affect the behavior of consumers and enterprises.

 
What is meant by “meaningful?”
 

Meaningful refers to three key terms, each of which is subject to measurement: 1) usable, 2) affordable, and 3) empowering. Meaningful also means “adjusted to context.” In other words, a technology that fits smoothly and practically into its own environment is meaningful. A DDI’s research team is dedicated to operationalizing the term e.g. producing an index that measures the degree of “meaningfulness” of any technology.

 
What is the purpose of Meaningful Broadband ecosystems?
 

In our view, “broadband” refers not just to the infrastructures that transmit bandwidth but to totality of broadband-enabled products and services that shape behavior in citizens and elicit an optimal, transformational effect on communities, educational systems, enterprises and governments.

 
Why does Digital Divide Institute (DDI) promote Meaningful Broadband?
 

DDI introduces Meaningful Broadband specific nations such as Thailand and Indonesia where we currently conduct programs. At the same time, DDI formulates theories, methodologies, strategic partners, and formulates innovations on five levels (public policy/ regulation, technology design, management, and ethics) which can help any participating nation to optimize the impact of broadband.

 
Does the model have a “target population” of users?
 

While our focus is bringing Meaningful Broadband to entire nations, we emphasize serving the low-income majority of citizens and enterprises in middle-income developing countries. Our core group of users cannot afford smart phones at current prices, but they are wealthy enough to have at least one basic cell phone in operation in their families. (In general we are talking about families with spending power that spreads between $100 per month and $600 per month.)

 
What is the Meaningful Broadband Working Group (MBWG)?
 

This is the name for our advisory board in a country where Meaningful Broadband is in development. For example, in Thailand, Meaningful Broadband Working Groups composed of market leaders, regulators and key academics, oversaw the development of several reports from Digital Divide Institute that is influencing the creation of a national broadband strategy for that nation. The aim of each MBWG is to rise about the conflicts that normally occur as a country seeks to transform its telecommunications industry to benefit from broadband. MBWGs hope to formulate new strategic alliances and public-private partnerships and regulatory innovations that cause costs and risks associated with broadband deployment to be shared between business, government and academic sector. In Thailand, the MBWG was composed of CEOs of the five leading telecommunications operators (AIS, DTAC, True, TOT Telecom and CAT Telecom) along with the chairman of the country’s independent regulatory agency, National Telecommunications Union. In that country, MBWG has functioned as an advisory body, not a policy-making group, since the reports issued by MBWG represent the analysis of academics, backed by extensive research into domestic and international best practices.

 
Can implementing Meaningful Broadband alter national economies?
 

Based on our assessment for Thailand, Meaningful Broadband strategies could affect the overall quality of the economy, as indicated in the following chart.

As indicated in the chart, MB would serve as a necessary condition for the qualitative reforms which many governments espoused, such as emerging as “knowledge-based economies,” but which are unachievable without broadband. MB could also help a national economy move from an export-focus towards a domestic-market focus, by enabling urban-based enterprises to use cloud computing to facilitate their expansions into the countrywide.
Furthermore, the deployment of Meaningful Broadband could produce a more equitable distribution of wealth, e.g. increasing the share of total income of low income in Thailand of those who currently earn from 60 baht to 300 baht per day. By 2014, this low-income group, who represent 60% of the Thai population, could increase their share of total national income by about 5% within four years as a result of full-scale deployment of Meaningful Broadband.

 
Why is this needed?
 

Most broadband polices, imported from advanced nations, do not fit the realities of low-income nations. Yet, the evidence is that next-generation broadband ecosystems could produce a more beneficial effect on national economies in poor countries than in rich ones.
Isn’t broadband, by its very nature, beneficial to society?
No. Broadband does not qualify as a “public good,” in the same way as a utility or transportation systems might serve a nation. By contrast, broadband is a moving force, doubling in communications power every year. This can bring benefit or harm to a society (or more likely a combination of both). Still in its infancy in emerging markets, broadband is not just another medium of communications but a meta-medium which will eventually encompass all other media. Thus, broadband will not merely convey information but increasingly it will shape behavior of citizens. Given the consequences of broadband to society, it is essential that broadband be harnessed by leaders to achieve optimal benefits to society – and to anticipate and mitigate any harmful impacts that would occur if unwise governmental or commercial practices are accelerated through broadband.

 
What kind of negative impacts could occur if broadband is deployed unwisely?
 

If guided by the unsound public and private policies and any ill-conceived regulatory mechanisms, broadband could accelerate gaps between rich and poor, produce massive net job loss through automation, undermine cultural and spiritual values, accelerate urban sprawl, undermining rural economies, cause widespread addictive behaviors, a deepen a country’s carbon footprint.
What meaningful impacts can be achieved through broadband?
Meaningful broadband properly deployed and funded, could bring equity to emerging markets, scale up microcredit and boost SME growth, creating a new non-consumerist middle class that could bring stability to fragile economies. Broadband could shift the locus of economies towards human-resources development via lifelong learning, workforce development, It trigger enable reforms of basic public education as well as introduce informal interactive learning via data apps delivered through mobile devices or a convergence of multiple devices (TV, radio, PCs, phones) linked via broadband. It could cause a reverse emigration from cities back to rural villages. It transforms the agricultural sector and shifts the population away from unprofitable farming or logging and towards eco-tourism. Broadband could enhance the productivity and accountability of government bureaucracies, reducing corruption while strengthening democratic processes from the bottom up. It could enhance the “creative economy” in Thailand, tapping the openness and creativity of Thais to enhance the competitiveness of the Thai economy. It could enhance the quality of Thai higher education and teacher training as well as cause the academic sector to move towards online curriculum, furthering lifelong learning. Broadband is essential for extending banking services to the unbanked and in that way to promote savings and creditworthiness among low income populations. Broadband could also help citizens could also “unlock human resources, “enabling citizens to become more creative and openness and flexible in their behavior.

 
Can markets, left to themselves, produce these benefits?
 

No. Private sector investment and market-development activities are essential but not sufficient to deliver the benefits of broadband. But markets, rather than government bureaucracies, must play the starring role in delivering these benefits. Market forces must be reshaped through public policy, regulation, subsidy and voluntary practice to enhance benefits of broadband as well as to minimize harm. However, none of these positive changes made possible by broadband can emerge without the coordinated and skillful development of complex broadband ecosystems. Perhaps more than any other industry, telecommunications industry is a “compact” between public and private sectors. This compact needs to be re-drawn in the digital age.

 
So is this something that has to be pushed onto the private sector?
 

No. Support for meaningful broadband has come more from business than government. Though mobile supply chains have been able to achieve remarkable cell phone penetration without active assistance from government, they have not had corresponding success with inducing cell phone users to upgrade to internet. To fulfill their own ambitious goals for broadband penetration, commercial forces must get help from government. They cannot get this help without establishing broadband as a public good, e.g. assuring governments that broadband will have meaningful impacts. To successfully leapfrog into broadband, the private sector must establish policies that move into alignment with government reformers. To guide this process, Digital Divide Institute will develop a “meaningful technologies index” that can be used to help regulators, technology designers, and educators distinguish between technologies that help, and those that hinder the welfare of citizens.

 
Don’t governments jealously control the shaping of broadband policies in ways that serve the entrenched interests of politicians and bureaucrats?
 

It is true that governmental interests may seek to prevent reforms needed to bring the full benefits of broadband to a nation. But governmental interests are not monolithic. Reformist policians and bureaucrats can use the resources of Meaningful Broadband to overcome entrenched forces, just as they have done with the wireless revolution that leapfrogged over the wireline industries. The struggle within governments to bring the benefits of broadband to all citizens is one of the great dramas of the 21st century. Digital Divide Institute wants to help provide the leverage needed by reformers. For this reason we work through the most credible universities, academic programs and most influential professors to promote innovations needed for Meaningful Broadband.

 
What outcomes are the expected from Meaningful Broadband?
 

The critical outcome is that Meaningful Broadband defines what mix of government intervention – subsidies, tax incentives, regulatory requirements and inducements – are needed to stimulate and shape market forces that create sustainable broadband ecosystems that are meaningful to the population.

 
Where and how did the Meaningful Broadband framework emerge?
 

After 15 years of deliberations and hundreds of conferences on the topic of “digital divide,” held all over the world, the theme of broadband has emerged as the highest priority among governments, think tanks, business associations, intergovernmental agencies, NGOs, and leading corporations. After years of debate it is now generally accepted by all ICT stakeholders in emerging markets that the key to closing the Digital Divide is to shape the deployment of broadband. The concept follows the 15-year journey of Prof Craig Warren Smith, who is one of the founders of the global movement to close Digital Divide.

 
How did Indonesia set the stage for MBWG in Thailand?
 

The model we are using was originally formulated in Indonesia. Republic of Indonesia’s Department of Information and Informatics (DepKominfo) asked an NGO called Investor Group Against Digital Divide (IGADD), founded by Craig Warren Smith and Ilham A. Habibie, to recommend an innovative broadband policy. This policy, which has resulted from interactions with over three hundred leaders of Indonesia, is being presented in three stages, framework development, through a document called Meaningful Broadband Report 1.0, model construction, in which an economic model will address investor criteria for entering new public private partnerships, and implementation phase which will emphasize public/private partnerships.

 
How is Chulalongkorn University involved?
 

Digital Divide Institute-Asia, located within the Center for Ethics of Science and Technology at Chulalongkorn University, first emerged through the interaction between Prof Smith and Dr. Charas Suwanwela, one of Thailand’s foremost leaders and the current the Chairman of the University Council of Chulalongkorn University. Digital Divide Institute’s MBWG was formally established on February 23, 2009, in an event at the university hosted by Dr. Charas. At this event, various CEOs and regulators responded positively to the invitation to join the Meaningful Broadband Working Group. At the same time, the university’s Center for Ethics of Science and Technology, led by Prof Soraj Hongladarom, accepted the role of Secretariat for MBWG. Craig Warren Smith is in residence as a Visiting Professor at Chulalongkorn, and is responsible for directing a team of researchers who form the MBWG Secretariat.

 
Who funds DDI and Meaningful Broadband?
 

For a full list of DDI’s past supporters go here. So far, direct and in-kind funding for Meaningful Broadband (Thailand) has come from Nokia Siemens Network, from Chulalongkorn University, from the National Telecommunications Commission, Cisco Systems, and True Corporation. Direct and inkind funding for Meaningful Broadband in Indonesia has come from the Republic of Indonesia (Depkominfo), The Habibie Center, Nokia Siemens Network, Cisco Systems, BRI (a state-owned bank emphasizing microcredit) and a coalition of participating universities. Other sponsors and funders of projects that established the framework of Digital Divide Institute can be found in the Partners section of this web site.

 
What is Meaningful Broadband’s international agenda?
 

We are extending the Meaningful Broadband model to Asia Pacific Nations as well as clusters of small nations in Asia which may wish to establish their own model of Meaningful Broadband. A number of intergovernmental agencies with offices in Bangkok – World Bank, UNESCAP ADB, ITU, ASEAN, UNESCO, and EU – have each interacted with DDI to convey best practices. Our affiliate in Indonesia, IGADD, has also opened discussions with the Saudi Arabian-based Islamic Development Bank (and is affiliates in Muslim-oriented countries) to bring Meaningful Broadband beyond Indonesia and into the Islamic world. A concept called Islamic Computing evolved from these discussions.