Another day. Another report. An extra brick in the wall for those who can see the sense of investment in the transformation of local access networks.

Publication of the UN Broadband Commission’s report ‘A Platform for Progress’ may seem to many to be long overdue and yet only states the blindingly obvious.

Broadband enthusiasts rarely allow for the complex mechanics of achieving international consensus and are often too quick to criticize the inevitable compromises that occur in an undertaking of this scale. But before dismissing this report they’d do well to step back and look at the context.

First there’s the timing. It arrives just after McKinsey’s ‘Internet Matters’ – an authoritative attempt to assert a rational linkage between Internet adoption and economic growth. Such is the dull drag of last generation policy progress that it needed several celebrity enterprise leaders to ram home these self-evident truths to G8 political leaders.

Then there’s the focus on the developing world. The UN Broadband Commission arose from the challenge of delivering the internationally agreed Millennium Development Goals. It’s taken a decade of digital progress for the global penny to drop – realization that the goals cannot be realized any other way but through better use of better broadband.

Then there’s the cross-sector approach. The underlying message is that broadband has little to do with the telecoms industry but everything to do with pretty much everything else.

Whilst the incumbent ‘experts’ might argue about how much broadband capacity the citizen really needs (a convenient debate for those who wish to delay progress in the interests of self-preservation) the position taken by enlightened leaders does not assume an ability to predict the future.

Last week in Brussels the Australian Ambassador to Europe made the ‘future enablement’ point succinctly. ‘We are not investing in advanced broadband because we know what the future needs might be. We are investing in broadband precisely because we do not know what will be needed.’

And hidden diplomatically in the undergrowth of this report are thoughts that rarely get aired in polite western society. Ostensibly aimed at the developing economies, these are opportunities to avoid mimicking the mistakes and legacies of those who might now prefer to be starting over from a different point.

To get the very best from these new technologies, fixed or mobile, fibre or wireless, there is no point denying that they contradict (or totally trash) the under-pinnings of much last-generation regulation and market models.

Who would, starting now, voluntarily allow the locked-in vertical integration of things that are fundamentally different – the essential utility of connectivity with the competitive complexity of services?

It’s not even a debate about how to be fair to Telco’s. The higher and more-urgent national priorities are in effective delivery of Health and Education and Energy Management and community development and the growth of enterprise, innovation and employment.  It would surely be just like allowing the regulation of ‘retail banking’ to be mixed up with the regulation of ‘casino banking’ and then, whilst watching those games being played, overlook the failure of anything other than banking to be adequately resourced.

The UN Broadband Commission has gifted us all this report. We can choose to imagine that it is for the benefit of some distant countries of which we know very little.   Or we can take the time to read, mark, learn a little and question the way we do things around here.

_________________

Additional Notes (Tuesday 7th June 2011)

In conversation today with Dr Touré, Secretary General of the ITU, he reflected on the outcomes of the 3^rd formal meeting of the UN Broadband Commission in Paris. In this first extract from our discussion he considers the balance between public and private sector initiatives and highlights the role of governments not just in telecoms regulation but in wider taxation policy to incentivize investment and in stimulating demand for better broadband.

Discussion extract 1 (MP3 3:28)

The UN report is ‘technology neutral’ and Dr Touré reaffirmed the ITU’s market-led approach where ultimately the customers decide on value for money but first need a raised awareness of what should be possible.

 Discussion extract 2-1 (MP3 1:31)

In discussion of various approaches to investment a question on the effective take-up rates for broadband led on to a discussion of three very different broadband models – in Korea, Australia and Finland, the latter demonstrating the value of regulatory and taxation policy in contrast to heavy public sector investment.

Discussion extract 3-1 (MP3 1:51)

In terms of applications Dr Touré emphasized the opportunities for ‘local solutions for local problems’ and the need for political leaders to adopt a clear vision for broadband deployment.

Discussion extract 4-1 (MP3 2:08)

Despite the widely-reported political battles over broadband investment in Australia, Dr Touré identifies the clarity of vision and transparency of information sharing as key to success.

Discussion extract 5-2 (MP3 2:33)

Dr Touré identifies broadband as the central enabler of economic growth and job creation in this millennium’s 2^nd decade

Discussion extract 6-1 (MP3 2:13)

And finally he commented on the role of the ITU and the need to encourage countries to continue to build capacity and the importance of education – illustrated by his view of the renaissance of Eastern European states.

Discussion extract 7-1 (MP3 2:35)

___________

General Notes:

This editorial was written for the UK's Communications Management Association (CMA) whose members in aggregate spend over £13bn per annum on networked products and services.

Readers of this editorial also viewed 'Getting the Message'.

The UN Broadband Commission for Digital Development - shared resource site. 

UNESCO Commentary added 6th July 2011