ICTs should be available, affordable and accessible for all. Today, universal service, competition and associated issues of consumer protection and privacy have become all the more relevant given that digital technologies increasingly underlie the economic, social and political aspects of our lives. There is a need for international collaboration, cooperation and cross-cutting regulation.The author would like to discuss all these issues and invites comments. Disclaimer: Views are personal.
What is common in different countries is the complexity on finding an appropriate solution; if there is any. I praise first Archana’s job, because I see that she covers different angles and her experience gives her a good perspective of an Indian case solution. My experience as Latin-American native tells me the following: Subsidies: The bigger the subsidy the shorter the life of the project. Even if it comes as a simple obligation, the provider will look the first opportunity to jump off the burden. This is because subsidies come from policies, and those can change but investments are still there. Besides, technology fast pace will reduce the low return income that is inherent on rural areas. I like the idea about smart subsidies, because it keeps the attachment at a low level. Relations should be win – win or they will not last. Government Role: That should be a promoter role, facilitating the provider – village relation trough expert advice or mediating trough negotiation. The smaller the role; the longer the life’s project. Promoting could be gathering different requirements and planning a single integrated solution. No matter what, initiative and decision must come from the village, the opposite will take them as counterparts on “government project”. Technology: Every solution should be tackled case by case, that includes QoS, services, even tariffs if regulations can allow them, because every project has different demands, every village can have different requirements, and every village can afford different costs. Policy: Every single line on policy will demand a cost on implementation, but also reduce a higher cost on interpretation. Policy makers should know all factors in the game, and this is why this blog is so important.
The efforts by Archana at USOF needs to be encouraged.It is unfortunate that in India we live in dichotomy. On one side we speak of rural empowerment, women empowerment, equal treatment to man/women...on other side we are always faced with rules, regulations, bidding etc. etc.Even the USOF, the Sanchar Sakti became a one time affair. Nothign after Archana left USOF. How does we continue such things.Wish Archana is empowered with all authorities, so that Sanchar Sakti can become a regular affair.
Jaime I appreciate and agree with your comments. If we are to bring the benefits of ICTs to rural populations, we must be ready to support community and demand driven projects with the government playing the role of facilitator and promoter. I also agree that technology choices should to the extent possible be left to the operators. USFs should monitor outcomes. My experience and research so far has convinced me that the overall policy and regulatory environment of a nation and those pertaining to USFs and public funding in the communications sector have a major role to play in the success of a nation in its efforts to leverage communications for equity and growth. I will write more about the latter in the days to come. This blog would be much enriched if readers like you continue to give valuable comments and share their experience.
Role of Government is a must in a country like India with huge disparities in incomes, level of education and lack of access to basic amenities to all sections of society especially in rural/tribal areas. Even in cities, the standard of living in a posh locality and in a slum is too glaring. Left to market forces, the focus will only be on revenue generation and maximisation of share value to the shareholders. Committed set up involving the end users in designing the schemes and implementation and delivery is necessary. Another thing that I feel necessary is the development of services to be delivered in the local languages. The availability of web-delivered services mostly in English is perhaps hindering the growth and penetration of ICT into wider areas and larger population. This is one area where USOF can be put to use. One can start by converting the existing English based content to the local languages and make them user friendly. The programs should be sharply focussed with an effective monitoring system until they take off and are sustained by the users themselves.
I agree with you Niranajana. It is now being widely recognized that USFs must cater to digital inclusion as a whole. this includes appropriate content and capacity building.
What is common in different countries is the complexity on finding an appropriate solution; if there is any. I praise first Archana’s job, because I see that she covers different angles and her experience gives her a good perspective of an Indian case solution.
ReplyDeleteMy experience as Latin-American native tells me the following:
Subsidies: The bigger the subsidy the shorter the life of the project. Even if it comes as a simple obligation, the provider will look the first opportunity to jump off the burden. This is because subsidies come from policies, and those can change but investments are still there. Besides, technology fast pace will reduce the low return income that is inherent on rural areas. I like the idea about smart subsidies, because it keeps the attachment at a low level. Relations should be win – win or they will not last.
Government Role: That should be a promoter role, facilitating the provider – village relation trough expert advice or mediating trough negotiation. The smaller the role; the longer the life’s project. Promoting could be gathering different requirements and planning a single integrated solution. No matter what, initiative and decision must come from the village, the opposite will take them as counterparts on “government project”.
Technology: Every solution should be tackled case by case, that includes QoS, services, even tariffs if regulations can allow them, because every project has different demands, every village can have different requirements, and every village can afford different costs.
Policy: Every single line on policy will demand a cost on implementation, but also reduce a higher cost on interpretation. Policy makers should know all factors in the game, and this is why this blog is so important.
The efforts by Archana at USOF needs to be encouraged.It is unfortunate that in India we live in dichotomy. On one side we speak of rural empowerment, women empowerment, equal treatment to man/women...on other side we are always faced with rules, regulations, bidding etc. etc.Even the USOF, the Sanchar Sakti became a one time affair. Nothign after Archana left USOF. How does we continue such things.Wish Archana is empowered with all authorities, so that Sanchar Sakti can become a regular affair.
ReplyDeleteJaime I appreciate and agree with your comments. If we are to bring the benefits of ICTs to rural populations, we must be ready to support community and demand driven projects with the government playing the role of facilitator and promoter. I also agree that technology choices should to the extent possible be left to the operators. USFs should monitor outcomes.
ReplyDeleteMy experience and research so far has convinced me that the overall policy and regulatory environment of a nation and those pertaining to USFs and public funding in the communications sector have a major role to play in the success of a nation in its efforts to leverage communications for equity and growth. I will write more about the latter in the days to come.
This blog would be much enriched if readers like you continue to give valuable comments and share their experience.
Role of Government is a must in a country like India with huge disparities in incomes, level of education and lack of access to basic amenities to all sections of society especially in rural/tribal areas. Even in cities, the standard of living in a posh locality and in a slum is too glaring. Left to market forces, the focus will only be on revenue generation and maximisation of share value to the shareholders.
ReplyDeleteCommitted set up involving the end users in designing the schemes and implementation and delivery is necessary.
Another thing that I feel necessary is the development of services to be delivered in the local languages. The availability of web-delivered services mostly in English is perhaps hindering the growth and penetration of ICT into wider areas and larger population. This is one area where USOF can be put to use. One can start by converting the existing English based content to the local languages and make them user friendly.
The programs should be sharply focussed with an effective monitoring system until they take off and are sustained by the users themselves.
I agree with you Niranajana. It is now being widely recognized that USFs must cater to digital inclusion as a whole. this includes appropriate content and capacity building.
ReplyDelete