Bridging broadband Internet divides: reconfiguring access to enhance

Journal of Information Technology (2004) 19, 28–38

& 2004 JIT Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. All rights reserved 0268-3962/04 $25.00 palgrave-journals.com/jit

Debates and perspectives

Bridging broadband Internet divides: reconfiguring access to enhance communicative power William H Dutton1, Sharon Eisner Gillett2, Lee W McKnight3, Malcolm Peltu4 1

Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; MIT Program on Internet & Telecoms Convergence, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA; 3 Convergence Center, School of Information Studies, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA; 4 Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford, UK 2

Correspondence: WH Dutton, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, 1 St. Giles, Oxford OX1 3JS, UK. Tel: +44 1865 287210; Fax: +44 1865 287211; E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract Government and industry initiatives to stimulate the diffusion of high-performance broadband telecommunications links have given a fresh impetus to debates over the social and economic implications of the growing use of the Internet and other information and communication technologies (ICTs). This paper analyses how outcomes tied to ICT innovation are shaped by choices about whether and how to use, or not use, the technology to reconfigure access to people, services, information and technologies in ways that significantly change the communicative power of individuals, communities, organisations, nations and regions. It explains why these outcomes are not predetermined by the technology, but unfold over time through the complex interplay among many actors, in many arenas. A framework is presented to assist in addressing the issue of digital divides and other areas of research, policy and practice affected by the design and use of broadband Internet and related ICTs. Journal of Information Technology (2004) 19, 28–38. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000007 Keywords: broadband; Internet; social impact; telecommunications; policy

Introduction Broadband Internet: a co-evolving web of people and technology roadband is the latest in a long line of technologies – from ‘Big Brother’ databanks to the micro-chip and information superhighways – that have become symbolic focal points for utopian–dystopian debates about the social and economic significance of information and communication technologies (ICTs).1 This technological emphasis has contributed to the establishment of a widely held view that changes associated with the advances are likely to follow a logic largely predetermined by the technology. For example, broadband is often presented as a ‘pipeline’ delivering ‘faster Internet’: get plugged-in, become ‘always on’ and – at a keystroke – instantaneous downloads will bring hours of fun and mountains of efficiency-driven profits. Indeed, this understanding is a prime motivation for many who have become broadband enabled. Even the social conception of a ‘digital divide’ has its roots in a

B

physical perception of ICTs, as the concept was initially framed in the 1990s primarily in terms of ‘information haves’ and ‘havenots’ who do or do not have access to the technology (e.g. DTI, 2000; Chen and Wellman, 2003). Discussions about bridging the divide have also often been rooted in approaches to extending access to physical equipment and connections to all sections of society. The conventional, overly simplified, view of the ‘social impact’ of ICTs sees access leading to particular patterns of use and impact that can, to some extent, be predicted or predetermined (Figure 1). This paper proposes an alternative analytical perspective. It argues that the social and economic potential of broadband Internet and related ICTs is actually anchored somewhere other than in access to the infrastructure per se: in the technology’s strategic use and non-use in the interwoven web of co-evolving people, institutions and technology that constitutes the Internet in its broadest conception.

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

29

Access to Broadband Internet (Digital Divide)

Figure 1

Uses and Impacts (Reinforcing Social and Economic Disparities)

Conventional perspective on access and the digital divide.

Communicative power and the social nature of ICTs Broadband Internet is already being used around the world to reconfigure access in a multitude of ways that change significantly the relative communicative power of different actors involved in the production, consumption, use and governance of ICT content, services and technology. These include (see also Dutton et al., 2003a):  users becoming so engaged with the technology that they begin to contribute their own online content to also become producers, for example, through Web sites set up by individuals and small groups offering news and views from a myriad of perspectives not seen in mass media, or by students creating their own videos for use in local history courses;  enabling collaboration that creates proximity in ways of interacting, intercreating, interdiscussing and internegotiating that would not be feasible otherwise, which can create novel virtual forums in which new levels of dialogue and interaction can be developed among geographically disparate communities with converging interests;  reforms of public sector institutions and processes, for instance, in forging new educational relationships between teachers, parents and children;  creative collaborations, both at a professional level and among local groups, such as geographically dispersed research teams or young people creating their own radio and TV programmes;  virtual classrooms in multiple locations sharing specialist teaching resources;  democratic processes being reshaped using new forms of interaction to reinvigorate relations between government and its citizens;  villagers and farmers in developing countries gaining access to government services and market information to help enhance their economic and social well-being; and  empowerment of patients through ‘cyber discussions’ with others having the same ailment. Figure 2 highlights examples of such strategic uses of broadband Internet, or decisions not to use it. The range of interactions involved in these reconfiguration processes reveals the intrinsically social nature of broadband, the Internet and other ICTs, as they show that the technologies are inextricably bound up with the making of vital choices by people about what they do, with who they do it, when they do it and how they do it. This indicates that gaining an understanding of the processes shaping the divides and dividends associated with broadband Internet requires a focus on understanding what the technology means in the context of people’s lives and social and cultural structures.

In exploring these issues, this paper first provides an overview of the main ‘reconfiguring access’ concepts in which its approach is grounded. It then emphasises the continuing importance of the role of technology in social change, before exploring key issues of practice, policy and research that flow from an appreciation of broadband Internet as a social phenomenon.

Reconfiguring access The games shaping broadband Internet The processes involved in the co-evolutionary web of people and technology that forms the Internet’s network of networks can reconfigure access to people, services, information and technology in ways that substantially alter social, organisational and economic relationships across geographical and time boundaries (Figure 3). The communicative power of people change as they make ‘digital choices’ about whether and how to use, or not to use, broadband Internet to pursue their goals. Users and nonusers play a role in shaping the nature of, and outcomes from, the diffusion of the technology through their involvement as ‘actors’ making such choices within a broad ‘ecology of games’ that shapes the development of broadband (Dutton, 1999). Physical access to broadband Internet and related ICTs is an important aspect of this. But the central issue is something else: the use (non-use) of broadband Internet, and the design of such uses to open or close off networks by strategically reconfiguring access. Here, the terms ‘game’ and ‘ecology of games’ are not employed in a formal game theoretic sense, but more generally. We see a game as an arena of competition and cooperation structured by a set of rules and assumptions about how to act to achieve a particular set of objectives. From this perspective, an ‘ecology of games’ is a larger system of action composed of two or more separate but interdependent games (Dutton, 1992). Figure 4 summarises some games shaping broadband Internet outcomes that are covered in this paper. Within each, players follow the traditions, rules and disciplines of that game. All players have a role in shaping outcomes, assuming different roles in different games and often acting in many games at the same time. The behaviour and decisions of all actors affect the behaviour and decisions of other actors. For instance, governments committed to a competitive market can help less powerful players in ways that limit the power and freedom of manoeuvre of large players, while global power-broker companies can decide, or threaten, to move operations to other areas as a lever in policy bargaining.

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

30

Figure 2

Broadband Internet provides access to:

Kinds of broadband Internet activities

Examples

People Reconfigures how you interact with people, who you communicate with, who you know, where and when you interact with them.

Inter-creativity between individuals and within groups; other one-toone, one-to-many, many-to-many communication.

Services Influences what you can do online, when you can do it and how much it costs to do it; where and when you buy other products and services; who pays what to whom and how it is paid. Information Affects how and what you read, hear, see and know.

Conducting electronic transactions and obtaining electronic services from distant or nearby sources.

Always-on messaging and emailing; collaborative online working between many people in many locations; online lectures to virtual classrooms; video conferencing and streaming; online game playing; interpersonal interactions, from chat rooms to politician-citizen dialogues. Fast online delivery to any location of multimedia products and services involving large amounts of data, e.g. ‘downloading’ music and video; e-shopping, e-banking, and other e-business interactions; digital art collections; access by doctors to X-rays at remote locations.

Technologies Shapes how and when you access the Internet and other ICTs.

Producing and using broadband knowhow, equipment and techniques to shape access to, and use and consumption of, broadband Internet.

Retrieving, analysing and transmitting images, video, sounds, statistics, etc.

Online news streaming; listening to or watching archived or live radio and TV programmes; exchanging large amounts of multimedia research data; quick Web searches and downloads. Broadband and Internet infrastructures; wireless networks; digital multimedia; Web browsers to find information; network security; anti-virus, anti-spam and child-protection software.

How use (and non-use) of broadband Internet reconfigures access.

Actor’s Strategic or Nonstrategic Uses and Non-uses of Broadband Internet

Reconfiguring

Access (to People, Services, Information, and Technologies)

Relative Communicative Power of Actors

Choices and Responses of Other Actors in a Changing Ecology of Games

Figure 3

Reconfiguring access through broadband Internet.

One value of this perspective is that it captures and anticipates the role of players in games not directly focused on broadband or the Internet, such as in a community development game. The outcomes of such games can influence the rules or outcomes of games more directly within the broadband policy sector, such as competition among rival service providers. The view encapsulated in Figure 4 reveals how the outcomes of a social technology like broadband Internet unfold as the products of countless strategic and everyday decisions made by a myriad of players in many different games in different arenas; within these, underlying

conflicts, divergences and power structures often make it difficult to reach agreement. Broadband Internet could itself change the rules of some games through media convergence and other innovations, which could open new roles for those who have been communicatively empowered by broadband access, for example when media consumers become media producers. The notion of an ecology of games explains why broadband Internet is not on a predetermined path that will produce predictable results. Instead, outcomes are shaped by the negotiations and interplay between actors in each game and how outcomes from one game affects others,

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

31

Game

Main players

Rules

DRM

Content providers v. consumers and ICT industries; regulators

Telecom, media industries and users compete over interpretations of rights in access to information and services.

New-media publishing

Media giants v. Internet entrepreneurs, media novices v. professionals Pro/anti players in business, education, government, etc.

Established and emerging producers of Internet content compete to reach audiences.

E-enablement games

Figure 4

Organisations put their vitality at stake through over/under investment in online infrastructures and applications.

Implementation Users, ICT product and service suppliers, consultants

Users struggle to implement and maintain broadband in order to reap the potential benefits.

Telecom regulation

Telecom firms, regulators, investors, consumers

Regulators umpire moves of competing firms, taking account of conflicting and complementary goals of players.

Broadband pipeline supply

Telco, cable, wireless, Suppliers compete for market share and and other broadband the position as the third main broadband pipeline (with DSL and cable). suppliers

Communitarian Neighbourhoods, community groups, Net enthusiasts

Individuals and groups seek free or lowcost, open-access to the Internet, sometimes competing with commercial users or providers.

Economic development

Governments, public agencies, investors

Players build ICT infrastructures to attract business, investment and jobs to localities, nations and regions.

Developing country

Governments, NGOs, local activists, investors

Players seek to close social and economic divides in developing countries by the use of appropriate ICT infrastructures.

Illustrative games shaping broadband Internet outcomes.

such as new telecommunications regulations that open or close options in other games. Broadband Internet cuts across so many activities and sectors of society that any policy-making process will involve people coming from a wide range of varied backgrounds and perspectives, with different interests and stakes in outcomes, as indicated in this paper. The Digital Rights Management ‘game’ An indication of the nature and complexity of such games is provided by the arena of Digital Rights Management (DRM), which is related to Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and copyright issues. The growing popularity of downloading music and video on the Internet has been met with fierce resistance from the music industry and the Motion Picture Association (MPA), which represents Hollywood and the rest of the film industry. These content providers lobby strongly for regulations that would restrict consumer choices. At the same time, the consumer case is forcefully argued by consumer protection groups and ICT suppliers whose main concern is to sell products and services other than content suited to DRM protection. Fear and uncertainty created by scares generated by content providers and consumers – of

whole industries crashing or masses of people being jailed – could inhibit broadband Internet use, as well as making it difficult to resolve the differences arising from the strongly conflicting interests of some actors in this DRM game. There are also pressures to implement measures, such as user identification, that would permit stronger IPR protection on the grounds of national security. Laws relating to IPR, however, lag behind the fast pace of technological innovation that require new forms of DRM, so regulators are in a continual race to catch up. Meanwhile, consumers who have created the demand for downloaded content have used their communicative power to get some companies to lower costs for their non-Internet products. For example, the Universal Music Group gave the need to counteract free downloads as a key reason for its decision in September 2003 to cut CD prices. Value of technological innovation in social change Although social influences are crucial to the reconfiguringaccess perspective, so are the design and capabilities of the technologies involved. Theories that focus on the social dimensions of technologies, such as the ‘social shaping of technology’ (Williams and Edge, 1996), are often seen as being incompatible with those taking a technologically

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

32

deterministic view, for instance Bell’s (1999 [1973]) concept of the information society. The reconfiguring access concept, on the other hand, acknowledges the important influence of both social forces and technological innovation in opening up or closing off outcomes shaped by the choices people make about how far they bring the technology into their lives. This can be illustrated by two examples directly related to broadband Internet: Wireless Fidelity (WiFi) and the Grid. Their design, development and use indicate how the nature of a technology is intimately bound up in the interactions between the people within specific contexts who seize on and shape particular capabilities because they believe the innovation could help them achieve their own objectives. The outcomes then offer new choices to wider communities. How these choices are made and enacted will determine whether communicative power is reconfigured to bridge, widen or have no effect on social and economic divides. WiFi movement WiFi ‘hotspots’ are local area networks covering a limited range that provide local access to wider broadband infrastructures. WiFi uses unlicensed radio spectrum and relatively low-cost, easily installed, compact and low-power equipment. Its start-up costs are therefore lower, and its installation is more flexible, than other broadband options. This makes it feasible for WiFi to provide broadband Internet for just one household, a cafe´, a cluster of a few houses or an apartment block. Hotspot coverage can be extended using enhanced transmitters and grouping into ‘clouds’. WiFi is relevant to the mainstream ICT industry because it could become an important driver of broadband growth, as indicated by Intel’s investment in developing and promoting its WiFi-enabled Centrino wireless mobile computing technology. This potential boost to broadband availability could disrupt or reinforce existing telecommunications industry structures, depending on whether it is used to compete with or complement the two main current broadband providers: previously telephony-based ‘telcos’ offering broadband direct subscriber line (DSL) on their telephone wires, and suppliers building on a cable-based infrastructure. Numerous WiFi ‘hotspots’ have been established around the world since 2001, in a wide variety of contexts and locations: urban and rural, small local communities and cities, developed and developing countries, homes and offices, cafe´s and gaming clubs, and so on (www.personaltelco.net; Business Week, 2003). That growth has been accompanied by the flourishing of many small ‘Mom and Pop’ Wireless ISPs (WISPs) and WiFi system suppliers. Broader excitement about WiFi’s social implications has been stimulated by the nature of the grassroots culture that nurtured it. This is infused by a libertarian and not-forprofit ethos and fuelled by organic, bottom-up innovation and hands-on experimentation. For instance, a number of organisations are developing ‘community wireless’ capabilities dedicated to remaining open to all, with barriers to access kept as low as possible (see www.freenetworks.org). This is similar to the origins of the Internet, personal

computers and open-source software. The way the WiFi culture has encouraged many individuals and small groups and companies to become producers as well as consumers of WiFi services is another example of the reconfiguring of communicative power. The Grid: a new ‘e-utility’ The Grid had very different origins: large ‘big science’ laboratories with extensive budgets, top scientific talent, strong IT support and substantial backing by governments across the world, such as in the d98 million e-science programme of the UK Research Councils (www.rcuk. ac.uk/ escience). It is a massively powerful form of distributed computing that offers a similar service to an electricity grid, in that it provides a shared utility into which users can ‘plug’ relatively low-cost, stripped-down devices to ‘turn on’ and use whenever and wherever they want to access computing and software capabilities (Foster and Kesselman, 1998; Nelson and Feldman, 2003). To achieve this, the grid had to meet the scientific demand for exacting standards in power, reliability and security. This has given it a built-in potential that could also support multimedia collaborative interactions among a million or more users in a multitude of non-science applications, from improvements to public services to large online games. The Internet was similarly shaped by the values of the academic communities in which the technology was first developed, before reaching out to the wider world. The Grid architecture also opens options for rethinking the design of the Internet itself (e.g. Blumenthal and Clark, 2001). The combination of the Grid with WiFi could open a new form of ‘nomadicity’, which would make broadband Internet not just always on, but also always accessible wherever users are located (McKnight et al., 2002; McKnight, 2003). Can broadband internet deliver social and economic benefits? The credibility gap: a glass half-empty or half-full? Before broadband Internet’s transformative potential can be realised to any significant extent, a conundrum needs to be addressed. Can this technology really matter when suppliers in most countries have struggled to find enough users to make it a profitable proposition? These difficulties have been experienced even in business and industry, where the dividends from broadband are most clearcut (e.g. Crandall and Jackson, 2001; Mayor of London, 2002). One reason for this gap between the expectations of the techno optimists and what is actually happening at the broadband ‘coalface’ concerns the perception of broadband as just a pipeline for ‘faster Internet’. This has made it difficult to find arguments to justify to users who have never experienced broadband why they should spend extra money on getting Internet access, when they seem to be getting an acceptable service through their existing dial-up connections. The credibility gap has also been opened by the hype generally associated with the over-selling of many ICT innovations. For example, the bursting of the ‘dotcom

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

33

bubble’ at the turn of the century cast a long shadow that has seriously undermined ICT investment within user organisations and the telecommunications infrastructure in general. Another significant factor in dampening business enthusiasm for the Internet and broadband is the lack of trust in ICT suppliers resulting from experiences with earlier ICT systems and applications that proved to be far more costly and difficult to implement than had been promised. This is particularly important for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), who often lack the ICT skills needed to develop what to them are complex solutions in terms of the technology, applications software and – significantly – associated management and organisational changes. Confusion over how broadband is defined at its most basic ‘pipeline’ level has also contributed to the promotion of relatively low-performance connections as if they offered full broadband capabilities. Although 1 Mbps is regarded as a baseline for ‘proper’ broadband among many informed observers, speeds as low as 64 kbps have been offered as ‘broadband lite’ and 250 or 500 kbps services are frequently sold as broadband without qualifying their performance limitations. This could attract customers who want to use applications whose demand for bandwidth cause the quality of service to drop – and disillusion to set in with what seems to be yet another ICT mirage. In order to optimise the technology’s effectiveness, any service claiming broadband status should meet two defining characteristics identified by the US National Research Council’s Committee on Broadband Last Mile Technology (CSTB, 2002):  a fast enough local-access link to ensure it is not the limiting factor on a user’s experience in running current applications; and  access with high enough performance, and wide enough penetration of that performance, to encourage the development of new applications. Despite the anxiety at the supplier coal face, there is a debate about whether the broadband glass is half-full or half-empty. For instance, the total number of broadband subscribers across the world grew by more than 30 million to over 62 million in 2002, an increase of more than 70 per cent; about half the 30 OECD countries are likely to have broadband available to at least more than 85 per cent of their population by the end of 2003 (Paltridge, 2003). This shows that reasonably significant progress is being made in broadband take-up and availability. Such figures are subject to fluctuation, but are supported by indications that the diffusion of broadband is taking place at a faster rate than any other household consumer technology in the last 60 years, except for black and white TV and DVDs. A realistic expectation would be that broadband will follow the natural speed of deployment of mass-market innovations: substantial in the long term, but slower than some heightened expectations (Chileshe et al., 2002). Touching people’s lives Broadband is faced by what has become a ‘cliche´d chickenand-egg problem’ for new ICTs, in which more users and consumers would be attracted if there was greater avail-

ability of compelling applications that touch their lives in meaningful ways – but these will be produced only when there is sufficiently widespread penetration of highperformance broadband to encourage the development of those applications. The search for this turning point has led to what has become another cliche´ in the ICT world, the hunt for ‘killer applications’ to stimulate explosive market growth. For broadband Internet, there is more likely to be an emergence of many applications and accumulating content that will appeal to different people in different situations. Basic capabilities that were once killer apps for the Internet, like e-mail or Web browsing, can also still be extremely attractive to users who have not experienced them before, often leading to a migration to more innovative and complex applications. Most people who have had broadband complain bitterly if they have it taken away. This suggests that an effective way of encouraging sustainable take-up would be to make it easier for people to get hands-on experience of broadband Internet, as well as providing education in its potential and effective use. Support for this comes from the way demand for broadband has increased in some areas where young people have been so enthused by the use of the technology at school that they have put pressure on their parents to get access to it at home. Despite such evidence, broadband enthusiasts and marketers should not assume that benefits are self-evident. More research is needed to demonstrate direct causal connections between the use of broadband and any benefits experienced by its users. This is easier to demonstrate with a business issue like productivity than for more complex personal, cultural and other social outcomes. The social relevance of access to ICTs is often compared unfavourably to what is depicted as the more important problems of a lack of adequate medical, education or other facilities. However, this ‘relevancy question’ would more clearly indicate the wider value of ICTs at micro- and macro-levels if it were framed as: ‘How can the technology be used as a tool towards achieving a community’s legitimate objectives in economic development, political empowerment, gender equality, improved public services and other areas?’ Answers to this would point to practical paths for bridging divides and distributing dividends more equitably. Basic access divides The most easily quantifiable broadband divides are measured by statistics on how many people are close enough to gain access to a broadband service (‘availability’) and how many with such access become subscribers (‘take-up’, ‘deployment’ or ‘penetration’). By the end of 2002, there were five subscribers per 100 inhabitants in OECD countries, with 18–25 per cent of all fixed network Internet subscribers having broadband (Paltridge, 2003). This compares with only 0.2 broadband subscribers per 100 people in other, mainly developing, countries (Dutton et al., 2003a: 18). There are also significant divides between ‘rich and rich’. In September 2002, Korea had double the number of subscribers per 100 inhabitants (over 20 per cent) than Canada in second place (over 10 per cent), with 5–7 per

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

34

cent becoming a benchmark range for developed countries. Divides in broadband supply also relate to capacity and price. For instance, in mid-2003 a user in Japan could pay $21 per month for an 8 Mbps access, about half the average for baseline access in Europe (typically only at 256 or 512 kbps). The social and economic implications of these physicalaccess divides are difficult to quantify in a similarly precise way. For example, in general economic terms there is always a ‘cost of delay’ wherever competitive forces are at work because failure to do something now could mean someone else does it first to get an advantage. In social arenas, from education and health to entertainment media, not having access to certain capabilities could also have an ‘opportunity cost’, in terms of lost opportunities for relieving pain, enhancing career options or otherwise improving one’s life if access to the relevant technological capabilities had been available sooner. This could reinforce existing social and economic divides because those who are currently better off are more likely to gain new opportunities more quickly. It could also create some new divides, for instance if older people are deterred from using new media with which the young are more comfortable. Closing divides and reaping dividends Patterns of success Some patterns of success have emerged from different parts of the world where significant progress has been made in closing digital divides (Dutton et al., 2003a: 24–8). Starting with government funding of universities and research institutions, this tends to move to public sponsorship of broadband access to schools, followed by government getting things underway by becoming the first and best customer of the broadband infrastructure. At the same time, a competitive environment is nurtured to provide many investment sources for extending broadband reach and deployment. And local initiatives rooted in grassroots communities generate a valuable source of innovative public and private enterprise that attract mass user demand. These include providing assistance to those who might be wary of the technology, such as SMEs or elderly people, to help them find out more easily what it can do in practice. This kind of investment is often seen as a social rather than regulatory responsibility, to be funded from general tax revenues in a similar fashion to the central role of public investment in developing road and aviation systems. An example is the sponsorship of the SuperNet fibre optic network by the provincial government of Alberta in Canada, which aims to connect all the province’s government offices, schools and hospitals. The private sector has responsibility for delivering the ‘last mile’ link from users to Alberta’s shared SuperNet infrastructure (www.albertasupernet.ca). Maintaining a competitive environment is part of this pattern of success in closing digital divides. Nevertheless, there is growing recognition of both the limits on what the market can do on its own and the positive roles that can be played by public-sector infrastructure investments. This

has led to a general shift in attitudes towards seeing private and public investments as complementary options, not as bitterly competing opposites as they were in the 1980s and 1990s. For example, a public-sector stimulus is now generally seen to be especially important when private funding of telecommunications is seriously depressed, such as by the dotcom crash. The UK government’s approach to boosting broadband has left the infrastructure to market forces, but offers a broad range of policies and investments targeting uses of the technology (see Cabinet Office, 1999; www.broadband. gov.uk). These include: over d1 billion for bringing broadband to all schools; the People’s Network linking all public libraries to the Internet; the wired up communities (WuC) project in deprived areas studying how to close digital divides; and many activities by local government (Socitm, 2002) and regional development agencies. Such investments carry a risk of being caught in the credibility gap if they present the introduction of the technology as an unproblematic path to success, or fail to be sensitive to local and personal needs. For instance, about a quarter of participants in the WuC project did not use the Internet access provided because of technical failures, inadequate skills and lack of interest (Devins et al., 2003). This further indicates how solutions to social problems depend more on the outcome of complex social interactions than on technological innovation alone. The public sector’s advantage in broadband infrastructure investments One reason for the public sector’s vital role in broadband availability and deployment is that it can take a much longer-term view of infrastructure investments than the stock market’s demand for a return on investment within a few quarters. An infrastructure like that for broadband bears most fruit in the longer term, which could be seen as giving public-sector investments an ‘unfair’ advantage over telecommunications companies who borrow on the open market. The best long-term future proofing for broadband is through ‘home-run fibre’, direct from a telecommunications supplier to homes and offices. Profit-driven suppliers find this difficult to achieve, as their decisions about spreading broadband are usually based on the ‘take-rate tyranny’: calculations of how many people are likely to become subscribers following investment in a particular length of fibre or cable. This results typically in step-bystep, stop-and-start decision making that targets areas of highest density. Although some deprived areas in highdensity urban areas can benefit from this by being included in a broadband catchment area, this approach generally fails to provide equitable and timely availability of broadband. In praise of diversity: the need for multi-layered initiatives The success patterns outlined above involve all layers of government, community and business enterprise. Regional, national and international public policies are needed as local governments rarely have the funding resources or scale necessary to execute effective interventions independently (Gillett, 2003).

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

35

Initiatives to assess, encourage or aggregate demand may be appropriate at multiple levels of authority, depending on geographic density. Such ‘demand aggregation’ is one of the most significant emerging strategies for broadband success as it lessens the risk for private sector investors by bringing together a number of people and groups to build sufficient demand to establish a viable new service, for instance for a residential neighbourhood, businesses within a community or schools and libraries across a nation (e.g. Gillett, 2001; International Working Group on Telecommunications Demand Aggregation at www.sis.pitt.edu/~demand/ Overview.htm). The most appropriate levels for policy responsibilities obviously depend on how power is devolved in particular countries and regions, as policy changes can be undertaken only by authorities with appropriate jurisdiction over the rules in question. The disbursement of funds or subsidies is an option at all levels of government, but is often most effective at the higher layers with their larger budgets. In the US, municipalities may take advantage of their ability to issue long-term bonds, ease right-of-way rules or otherwise negotiate with locally franchised communication suppliers for broadband infrastructure. In other countries, there may be less local freedom of manoeuvre. Cities can also play a critical role, as illustrated by the ‘digital city’ plans of Hull City Council in the UK, including the UK’s first publicservice broadband portal combining TV and Internet access (www.hullcc.gov.uk). Adopting different approaches in different contexts is also important because of historically anchored cultural differences in shaping public responses to innovations (Dutton, 2003). Understanding the particular concerns of developing countries Many issues relating to broadband Internet divides and policies for promoting greater equity – for instance, between the wealthy and poor, skilled and unskilled, rural and urban, men and women – are similar in developed and developing countries. However, there are also many striking differences, so each context must be addressed directly and with care to understand its unique characteristics. Governments in developing countries and the nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) taking an interest in these issues generally reflect the view adopted in the OECD that broadband Internet and other ICTs can play an important role in economic and social development. This is reflected in a diverse and growing range of projects using broadband Internet to assist developing countries (e.g. see www.medialabasia.org, www.unicttaskforce.org, and http:// info.worldbank.org/ict). The low level of basic infrastructures in developing countries means many of these projects use wireless media, such as the satellite and WiFi support in the village area network in Bohechio, Dominican Republic that is used mainly to help with agricultural and educational needs (http://edev.media.mit.edu). It also opens opportunities for transformational uses of relatively low-tech capabilities. For example, the Grameen Village Phone programme in Bangladesh builds on Grameen Bank’s experience with village-based ‘micro-enterprises’ to enable women to own and make a living from mobile phones that provided a ‘public call office’ service (www.grameen-info.org).

Stark differences between developed and developing countries are most evident in the extremes of poverty and low levels of economic and infrastructure development found in developing countries. The distribution of dividends from broadband deployment in developing countries are also more likely to depend on issues such as civil liberties, economic openness, corruption, education and health (Osorio, 2003). In addition, developing countries are much more dependent on external sources of funding and expertise, which creates a risk that externally derived agendas for technological change will fail to allow for locally relevant goals and needs. Especially significant for broadband Internet is the low starting point in developing countries for telecommunications infrastructures and generally much less competitive market environment. For instance, there is a ‘tele-density’ – the percentage of population with access to a telephone – of only 3 per cent in a middle-ranking developing country like India, where by mid-2003 speeds of 128 kbps were no more than a promise even in larger metropolitan areas, and dialup connections of more about 9 kbps were not possible outside these areas. Yet, telecommunications prices per capita income in the developing world are generally substantially higher than elsewhere (Dutton et al., 2003a: 38). Attempts by developing countries to use advanced capabilities like broadband Internet to help social and economic development can be severely constrained by their frequently slow pace of establishing a competitive telecommunications market. This is illustrated by the experience in Jamaica, where government moves to open its telecommunications market, particularly since 2000, have been hampered, while the incumbent monopoly supplier, Cable & Wireless, remains the owner of the sole source of cable, fibre and coaxial connection to the global Internet backbone. This bottleneck allowed market distortions that have restricted opportunities in Jamaica for access to a range of broadband-based services at a price that can be afforded by most businesses, or the wider population (Jackson, 2003). Another concern specific to developing countries is that the costs of international Internet connections are being shared in a way that favours developed countries more than in traditional arrangements for international telephone calls, which had brought substantial revenue to developing countries (see www.noie.gov.au). The intervention through various forms of censorship by authoritarian governments is also a significant potential threat in developing countries, where government is often the sole or main provider of local content. Policy priorities for addressing divides The complex intertwining of a multitude of competing and complementary influences that shape emergent outcomes of the use of broadband Internet means it is extremely difficult to identify precise causal connections between the use of ICTs and specific social and economic benefits or disadvantages. However, there is a large amount of common ground among policy makers, practitioners and researchers on key overall principles and general directions that are likely to produce desirable outcomes.

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

36

The following subsections summarise some policy guidelines that should command a broad cross-section of support. They cover three key policy areas: the way content, applications and interactivity shape broader social and economic outcomes; patterns of broadband Internet take-up; and availability of the technology. Seeking equitable outcomes In order to achieve a more equitable sharing of broadband Internet dividends, it is important to have ‘joined up’ policy making across all relevant government activities – from regulation of ICT markets and local government and edemocracy initiatives to what is happening in schools, health and other public services (e.g. Chileshe et al., 2002: 13). The overall regulatory and legal framework should seek to establish a fair balance between conflicting interests, similar to the vehicle registration, insurance, safety and other rules and protocols that have facilitated traffic flows on roads. For broadband Internet, this framework should help to establish and sustain a vigorous telecommunications market that promotes flexibility in the options available for moving towards ubiquitous broadband coverage. For example, new forms of infrastructure pump priming and subsidies to consumers should be tried, rather than concentrating on the traditional approach of seeking a Universal Service Obligation (USO) through subsidies to suppliers. The promotion of widespread and diverse use should be encouraged, especially in applications that exploit broadband Internet’s opportunities for intercreativity. To achieve this, trust in Internet-based transactions and communication must be built, for example through appropriate DRM regulations, safeguards for children, privacy and security controls and the protection of consumers’ and suppliers’ rights in e-commerce transactions. A goal of broadband-based ‘e-democracy’ policies should be to move the focus on broadband uses from just delivering more films, music, documents and data more quickly to asking whether broadband is enabling, for example, more types of films and music to be produced by more sources, new sorts of communities to be heard and new sorts of things to be said from citizens to government and government to citizens. This would stimulate enthusiasm for the technology by demonstrating its ability to touch people’s lives. It could also encourage communitybased e-democracy initiatives that foster interaction between young people, the elderly, poor, unskilled, disabled, rural and other groups who may feel detached from mainstream political processes. To avoid making unfounded presumptions about the nature of broadband Internet demand and supply, more evidence needs to be gathered through social research in a wide range of contexts. In addition to any lessons and guidelines derived at a micro-level for particular situations and applications, research should also develop analytical theoretical frameworks to draw together findings across all sectors. This would assist in developing government policies, business strategies and a better understating among users and consumers of the ‘digital’ choices being opened to them by broadband.

Support should be given in developing countries to projects that seek to build broadband Internet skills to help apply the technology in ways most suited to local needs. An effective form of such support could be to help developing countries create their own intercountry, intraregional and international broadband infrastructures, including the formulation and implementation of a fair international pricing and cost-sharing telecommunications regime. WiFi and other wireless telecommunications projects in developing countries should be encouraged as a relatively quick and low-cost means of overcoming infrastructure gaps. Much value can also be obtained from projects in developing countries that make imaginative uses of relatively low-tech capabilities, sometimes in collaboration with complementary advanced facilities. Encouraging widespread broadband take-up The trust created through a balanced regulatory and policy framework can stimulate and sustain growth in the take-up of broadband Internet by fostering the creation of innovative and compelling applications that attract new users. To achieve this, potential barriers that are not in conflict with the social and economic objectives outlined above should be minimised or avoided, for example by guarding against the introduction of inappropriate standards that would inhibit ICT interoperability and broadband Internet access. Public-sector broadband initiatives should seek to understand and promote proven patterns of success in using the technology to meet social and economic aims. This can be done through policies that seek to:  employ the public sector’s ‘unfair advantage’ in longterm infrastructure investments, with broadband Internet given the same priority as roads and other infrastructure developments;  promote early and effective use of broadband by public agencies;  use demand aggregation to stimulate broadband availability;  inspire and instil widespread broadband Internet skills;  encourage hands-on broadband use through shared facilities in schools, libraries and other community spaces;  gather and widely disseminate best-practice experience in public sector, community, SME and many other contexts (Clark et al., 2002; Gillett, 2003); and  support uses of the Grid beyond e-science. New rules of regulatory engagement to stimulate broadband infrastructure availability A healthy competitive environment needs to be established to encourage wide broadband availability at a realistic pace, through a sustainable and healthy flow of investment into the telecommunications and related Internet sectors. The ‘cost of delay’ and ‘opportunity costs’ should be considered in developing plans for pacing broadband deployment. A generally light and flexible touch that reduces regulatory complexity is likely to encourage wider broadband Internet availability. This will require a re-examination of some basic tenets of regulatory policy to produce new rules of engagement to stimulate innovation and fresh

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

37

investment opportunities (Bruce, 2003). For instance, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) agreed in February 2003 to adopt a ‘new wires, new rules’ approach as a way of deregulating broadband investment on a forwardlooking basis for network investments in fibre, WiFi and other newer technologies (Dutton et al., 2003a: 46). More consensual forms of regulatory dispute resolution should also be investigated (e.g. Bruce and Marriott, 2002). Careful consideration should be given to regulating new digital media that integrate activities previously regulated through separate institutions and processes, such as those covering telecommunications, broadcast media, publishing and databases. Each medium has its own distinctive historical organisational and cultural roots. This should take account of the impacts of different cultures, business models and regulatory regimes on the behaviour of different types of broadband supplier. New multimedia services created by digital convergence should not be constrained by the inappropriate adoption of a particular historical model, such as applying traditional broadcasting regulations to the Internet and Web just because they also delivers TV and radio programmes. Ways of nurturing a wide range of content, service and applications sources should be prioritised, such as investigating the possible effects of ‘logical-layer unbundling’ that offers open access to different layers of broadband applications and services at a higher level than the basic unbundling of copper wires (CSTB, 2002). The emergence of an over-dominant supplier in a particular sector should be countered where necessary, perhaps through general fair-trading and anti-monopoly legislation. However, fear of creating a monopolist should not lead to restrictions that unnecessarily limit consumers’ choices, for example, legitimate concerns about the power that could be wielded by dominant vertically integrated firms should not lead to unnecessary restrictions on the creative packaging of services that integrate telephony, TV or other media that people value highly. Price is a major factor in determining the take-rate, so efforts should be made to develop appropriate conditions covering pricing issues such as access to leased lines, interoperability and billing. A flexible approach to retail price regulation can also assist diversity in broadband Internet services and products. Benchmarking for pricing and other aspects can stimulate the take-up of best practices. Summary: the power of reconfiguring access The reconfiguring access approach outlined above shows that actors can have an impact on outcomes, even though the interaction of social and technical choices within a changing ecology of games means the outcomes are unpredictable. It also demonstrates why conceptions of ‘information’ as the key element in ICTs should give way to an appreciation of the significance of how the use of ICTs can reconfigure access to resources other than information. One possible outcome of the reconfiguring of access and communicative power through an ecology of games could be that broadband Internet will mirror and reinforce existing social and economic divides, and perhaps create some new ones. However, there is another transformative

possibility: that a wide range of people are motivated to gain the knowhow and proficiency to use the technology to make changes to improve their relationships with each other, and with government, business, information and the other resources with which they would not otherwise be able to interact. Those who understand the centrality of broadband Internet and related ICTs in reconfiguring access to local and global resources are therefore in a better position to decide whether, and how, to use this technology to enhance their own situation and help to close social, economic, education, health, age, gender and other divides. This analysis might not represent a revolution: people without broadband Internet have access to other avenues of power and negotiation, and broadband Internet cannot in itself overturn entrenched and deeply rooted power bases and cultural and social influences. However, the powershifts enabled by the technology could be seen as opening up possibilities for a new reformation, in which many traditional doctrines and rituals can be rethought and reinvigorated. Notes 1 This paper draws on Dutton et al. (2003a), a discussion paper based on the Broadband Divides Forum convened in March 2003 by the Oxford Internet Institute, in collaboration with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Syracuse and Tufts Universities. The authors are indebted to the Forum’s participants, whose wide range of knowledge and practical expertise in business, industry, government, public agencies and research form the core of the ideas in the paper. However, they apologise for not having the space here to acknowledge individual contributions (for more detailed reports on the Forum’s discussions and background material see Dutton et al., 2003a, b).

References Bell, D. (1999 [1973]). The Coming of the Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting, New York: Basic Books. Blumenthal, M.S. and Clark, D.D. (2001). Rethinking the Design of the Internet: The end to end arguments vs the brave new world, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology 1(1): 70–109. Bruce, R. (2003). Closing the Digital Divide: Perspectives on initiatives to encourage investment and innovation, In W.H. Dutton, V. Nash and M. Peltu, (eds.) Broadband Divides: Position Papers for OII International Policy Forum, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, pp. 10–14 (www.oii.ox.ac.uk). Bruce, R. and Marriott, A. (2002). The Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Telecommunications Sector, Discussion Paper Prepared for the Office of General Counsel, World Bank, October (www.itu.int/ITU-D/treg/Events/ Seminars/2002/GSR/Documents/12-Bruce_document.pdf). Business Week (2003). WiFi special supplement, 28 April (www:businessweek.com/magazine/toc/03_17/B3830magazine.htm). Cabinet Office (1999). Modernising Government, Cm 4310, London: The Stationery Office. Chen, W. and Wellman, B. (2003). Digital Divides and Digital Dividends: Comparing socioeconomic, gender, life stage, and rural–urban internet access and use in eight countries, Centre for Urban and Community Studies, University of Toronto, Toronto: NetLab. Chileshe, P., Dando, S., Miller, P. and Osman, A. (2002). Investing in Broadband: Perspectives on the political economy of broadband Investment in the UK, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute. Clark, D., Gillett, S., Lehr, W., Sirbu, M. and Fountain, J. (2002). Local Government Stimulation of Broadband: Effectiveness, e-government and economic development, A White Paper Prepared from a Proposal to the US

Bridging broadband Internet divides

WH Dutton et al

38

National Science Foundation Cambridge, MA: MIT Program on Internet & Telecommunications Convergence, (http://itc.mit.edu/itel/pp.html). Crandall, R.W. and Jackson, C.L. (2001). The $500 Billion Opportunity: The potential economic benefit of widespread diffusion of broadband internet access, Washington, DC: Criterion Economics. CSTB (2002). Bringing Home the Bits, Report of Committee on Broadband Last Mile Technology, Computer Science and Telecommunications Board Committee (CSTB), Washington, DC: National Academies Press, (www.cstb.org). Devins, D., Darlow, A., Burden, T. and Petrie, A. (2003). Connecting Communities to the Internet: Evaluation of the wired up communities programme (2000–2002), Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds: Policy Research Institute, (www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR389.pdf). DTI (2000). Closing the Digital Divide: Information and communication technologies in deprived areas, London: Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). Dutton, W.H. (1992). The Ecology of Games Shaping Telecommunications Policy, Communication Theory, 2: 303–328. Dutton, W.H. (1999). Society on the Line: information politics in the digital age, Oxford: University Press. Dutton, W.H. (2003). Historical–Cultural Contexts of Broadband Policy and Practice, in W.H. Dutton, V. Nash and M. Peltu (eds.) Broadband Divides: Position papers for OII international policy forum, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, pp. 20–21 (www.oii.ox.ac.uk). Dutton, W.H., Gillett, S.E., McKnight, L.W. and Peltu, M. (2003a). Broadband Internet: The power to reconfigure access, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, (www.oii.ox.ac.uk). Dutton, W.H., Nash, V. and Peltu, M. (eds.) (2003b). Broadband Divides: Position Papers for OII International Policy Forum, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, (www.oii.ox.ac.uk). Foster, I. and Kesselman, C. (eds.) (1998). The Grid: Blueprint for a new computing infrastructure, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann. Gillett, S.E. (2001). Berkshire Connect: A Case Study of Demand Aggregation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Program on Internet & Telecommunications Convergence, (http://itc.mit.edu/itel/pp.html). Gillett, S. (2003). In Praise of Policy Diversity, In W.H. Dutton, V. Nash and M. Peltu (eds.) Broadband Divides: Position papers for OII International Policy Forum, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, pp. 22–25. [www.oii.ox.ac.uk(andhttp://itc.mit.edu/itel/docs/2003/localgovbrbd.pdf for an updated version)]. Jackson, C.C. (2003). Internet Bandwidth in the Broadband Social Divide, In W.H. Dutton, V. Nash and M. Peltu (eds.) Broadband Divides: Position papers for OII International Policy Forum, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, pp. 26–27 (www.oii.ox.ac.uk). Mayor of London (2002). Broadband: Connecting to London’s future, London: Greater London Authority, (www.london.gov.uk/approot/gla/publications/elondon/broadband_nov02.pdf). McKnight, L. (2003). The Nomadicity Divide: Policy for wireless grids, in W.H. Dutton, V. Nash and M. Peltu (eds.) Broadband Divides: Position papers for OII International Policy Forum, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, pp. 31–34 (www.oii.ox.ac.uk). McKnight, L.W., Anius, D. and Uzuner, O. (2002). Virtual Markets in Wireless Grids: Peering policy prospects, Presented at Conference TPRC 2002, (www.tprc.org). Nelson, M. and Feldman, S. (2003). The Grid and Public Policy, in W.H. Dutton, V. Nash M. Peltu (eds.) Broadband Divides: Position Papers for OII International Policy Forum, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, pp. 39–42 (www.oii.ox.ac.uk). Osorio, C. (2003). A Look at the Broadband Significance Divide, in W.H. Dutton, V. Nash and M. Peltu (eds.) Broadband Divides: Position papers for OII International Policy Forum, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, pp. 42–45 (www.oii.ox.ac.uk). Paltridge, S. (2003). The Social Divide: The deployment and adoption of broadband within nations and across nations and regions? in W.H. Dutton, V. Nash and M. Peltu (eds.) Broadband Divides: Position papers for OII

International Policy Forum, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, pp. 45–50 (www.oii.ox.ac.uk). Socitm (2002). Broadband in Local Government: A snapshot in 2002, Northampton, UK: Society of Information Technology Managers (Socitm) Insight. Williams, R. and Edge, D. (1996). The Social Shaping of Technology, in W.H. Dutton (ed.) Information and Communication Technologies – Visions and Realities, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 53–67.

About the Authors William H Dutton is Director of the Oxford Internet Institute, Professor of Internet Studies, University of Oxford and Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford. He was previously a Professor in the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California, which he joined in 1980, and national director of the UK’s Programme on Information and Communication Technologies (PICT) from 1993 to 1996. Among his recent publications on the social aspects of ICTs are Society on the Line (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999) and Digital Academe, edited with Brian D Loader (Taylor & Francis, Routledge, 2002). He was a Fulbright Scholar in the UK in 1986–1987. Sharon Eisner Gillett is a Research Associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where she serves as Executive Director of the MIT Program on Internet & Telecoms Convergence (ITC). Her research lies at the intersection of Internet infrastructure technology and policy and has resulted in numerous publications. Her current work focuses on broadband first-mile issues and industry structure for wireless Internet. Her experience includes software development and project management in computer networking at Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc., and in supercomputing at Thinking Machines Corporation. Lee W McKnight is an Associate Professor in The School of Information Studies, Syracuse University; a Research Associate Professor of Computer Science at Tufts University; a Research Affiliate of the Program on Internet and Telecoms Convergence at MIT; and President of Marengo Research. His publications (all from MIT Press) include Creative Destruction: Business Survival Strategies in the Global Information Economy (available in 2003 from Toyo Kezai in Japanese, and forthcoming in Chinese); Internet Telephony; The Gordian Knot: Political Gridlock on the Information Highway; and Internet Economics. Malcolm Peltu is editorial consultant to the Oxford Internet Institute. As an editor, writer and journalist, he has specialised in ICT, most recently focusing on editing academic research concerning the social and economic implications of ICTs. He has been editor of Computer Weekly, IT editorial consultant to New Scientist and Editor of the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council’s IT & Computer Science newsletter.