[governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic] programme

[Michael Gurstein]

Milton,

To reinforce and support Parminder's point, in a very large part of the
developing world Universal Service policies are in place (and Universal
Service funds are being collected) as a basis for (wait for it) the
realization of "universal service" i.e. universal service now being
reintepreted from universal telephone service to universal internet
access... (I happen at the moment to be in the airport of one of those
jurisdictions that is in the process of spending a very very considerable
amount of money in support of this mission having collected these funds
under a program explicity designated Universal Services for Under Serviced
areas...

(I should also add that after meeting with senior official involved
intensively over the last few days, I have no doubt whatsoever that their
ultimate goal is "universal service/universal access" and that they are
prepared to back this broader mission with an appropriate enabling
institutional structure and in full recognition of the technical
requirements for the achievement of this (in part that is what we have been
discussing).

BTW, I also think the folks I have been meeting with would consider your
position either derisory (that you have no idea of the reality of their
particular local telecom/Internet circumstances) or personally and
nationally insulting (that they and their national government don't know
what they doing).
 
Thus, I see nothing either in logic or in practice which would not allow us
to turn the syllogism around and indicate that universal access is something
which many countries are looking to achieve by means of the modality of
(wait for it again) policies and practices supportive of Universal
Service...

Whether or not (or the degree to which) they achieve this goal is a matter
of resources and sustained political will (highly variable of course, across
the world) but that this is the stated (and a most desirable) goal is I
would suggest unarguable in virtually any jurisdiction which doesn't have a
President and apparently at least a portion of its intelligentsia who
evidently are (whether by willfulness or disposition) profoundly unaware and
incurious concerning the larger world.

MG
  
-----Original Message-----
From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] 
Sent: June 13, 2008 3:09 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Parminder
Subject: RE: [governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic] programme



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> 
> Ideology cannot be separated from advocacy, so that's fine.

:-) But ideological disagreements will almost certainly prevent you from
filing an advocacy statement in this instance. 

> And status quo needs to change, and any time is as good as another. I 
> suspect close to 90 percent people on this list do not agree with you
[snip]
> So why the will of such a small minority should keep prevailing in and 
> informing our group's positions?

Aha, "suspected" consensus (is this a new version of "declared consensus?
;-)) Hmmm, of the huge masses of 6 or 7 people who have addressed this
issue, 3 or 4, including Ken and Adam, have agreed to abandon the U-word.

>[ MM asserts] that
> universal service obligations, in some way or the other, are not
required for universal
> access.

That's not what I said. What I said was that calling for universal access
without an institutional framework to define it, deliver and enforce USOs,
and without a price tag, is meaningless rhetoric, and that
it risks being confused with retrograde policies.   

> Access to Internet in the developing is not following the same path as
> mobile telephony did, and there are some very good reasons for it. 
> Although even universal access to telephony has almost always needed 
> support of USOs or some other policy instruments, almost everywhere in 
> the world.

Universal access does not exist anywhere in the world, except perhaps for a
few very dense inner cities.  
But that of course depends on how you define it. 
 
> India is a perfectly peaceful country, with a relatively open market. 
> As for spread of rural broadband - nothing is happening even
with 
> such excess of backbone capacity that you cant imagine. A little more
than 1 
> percent of India fiber optic backbone capacity is used today. And
fibre 
> runs within 50-60 KM of most Indian villages. But this has not
translated 
> to access to
> Internet/ broadband for rural Indians. I am enclosing the presentation 
> I made to the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development 
> last month where I trace 4 stages of 'policy understanding' for 
> universal Internet access in India. It has been clearly established 
> that even supply side policies (what to say markets alone) are not 
> sufficient for spread of
> broadband in rural areas, and demand side polices are required. 

But this is based on fallacious economic thinking and illustrates perfectly
why I am resisting your rhetorical incursions into universal access policy.
To say that fiber backbones run within 50 km of most Indian villages implies
that it would be easy and cheap to connect them all (tens of thousands,
right? or is it hundreds of thousands of
villages?) But the vast majority of the costs associated with providing
access are in the electronics and gear and labor associated with the
so-called last mile. And what happens after you have spent this enormous
amount? Where does the money come from? And how many PCs are in those
villages? Will you pay for those, too? How much traffic will those villages
generate? How much of that infrastructure will they be able to sustain
through subscription charges? Or will it all be free? Does India have the
money to do this? What if the investment was wasted, and a it is not used
and a cheaper technology comes along 18 months later? You've just pissed
away someone's health care or education funds. 

Further, You have decided that fixed-line Internet access is all that
counts. But it may be that, in a few years, mobile internet access can reach
all these villages at a tiny fraction of the cost. 

I don't have time to go on. Economic decisions are all about incremental
growth, budget constraints, efficiency and trade offs. I am in favor of
universal access, but that and a $1.69 will get you a cup of coffee. Indeed,
I would willingly donate the entire US Iraq war budget to Indian telecom
development under your administration, I guess if we are going to waste $100
billion a year we may as well give it to someone with good intentions. 

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance