[kictanet] Day 7-10:-Available eCommunication Strategies for Regulators

[John Walubengo]

Hi Chanuka,

In our local Ksiwahili dialect 'Chanuka' means the
'bright-one'! So am sure you will have some answers based
on your Asian Study which is quite welcome and timely.

1. What Kind/Category of Information were the Asian
Regulators sharing?
2. Was there provision for two-way electronic information
exchange i.e. b/w the Stakeholders (the Customers) and the
Regulators?
3. In areas where Internet penetration was low, was there
an attempt to provide same information through other means?

walu.



--- Chanuka Wattegama <wattegama at lirne.net> wrote:

> Dear All,
> 
>  
> 
> Extremely sorry to barge in this later stage, but I had
> no other option
> because the past few days were exceptionally busy.
> 
>  
> 
> Let me share some of the useful findings from the study
> Benchmarking
> National Telecom Regulatory Authority websites of
> Asia-Pacific Region  For
> those who are not familiar, This study systematically
> benchmarked National
> Telecom Regulator websites in the Asia-Pacific region,
> evaluating their
> usefulness to telecom operators, investors, consumers,
> researchers and even
> the general public. Each website is awarded marks for the
> availability of
> information and features that are useful to the
> regulator's stakeholders. A
> total of 27 websites are evaluated from a region that
> includes 62 economies.
> (More details:
>
http://www.lirneasia.net/projects/completed-projects/regulatory-web-survey)
> 
>  
> 
> 1.       For the study I have considered 62 independent
> Asia Pacific
> economies (Hong Kong could have been the only exception,
> but that needs to
> be taken into account because of its independent
> regulatory environment,
> which cannot be put in the same category as China.) The
> definition used for
> 'Asia' was the broadest that can be thought of because it
> included Middle
> East and Central Asia as well. Out of that 62, only 33
> NRAs had web sites.
> (This was in 2004, the situation is a bit better now)
> Anyway the bottom line
> is only 60-70% of the NRAs have some sort of websites.
> This raises the
> question how far the NRAs have thought about
> communications.
> 
>  
> 
> 2.       If my memory serves me right I could not
> benchmark  NRA sites
> (Japan, China, Korea, Thailand, Indonesia and Yemen)
> because then they did
> not have English versions. So the number has to be
> limited to 27. (I do not
> say ever NRA should have an English version, but this was
> a practical
> difficulty that we could not avoid) Even out of that 27,
> there were many
> NRAs that had not given any information relevant to end
> consumers. The
> limited information gives perhaps the mandate and the top
> officers at NRA.
> One NRA website even had a page for foreign tourists.
> 
>  
> 
> 3.       Then there were sites that provided consumer
> information to levels
> varying from basic minimum to very good. There was one
> site that reproduced
> every customer complaint and monitored the progress. I am
> not sure whether
> we expect NRAs to do to that level. There were also some
> sites (eg.
> Singapore, Malaysia) that provided a gamut of information
> including
> technical details many consumers might not even follow.
> Anyway, I do not
> think this is a bad practice. We do not need everybody's
> grandmother to
> understand this information, but the fact that they are
> in public domain
> implies that all consumers (including grandmothers!)
> receive a better
> service.
> 
>  
> 
> 4.       Not many NRAs were worried about presenting the
> information in a
> language understandable to the end consumers. (The six
> countries I have
> mentioned in No. 2 were exceptions) So even if the
> information is available
> it is not sure whether the consumers can take any use of
> it. We also have to
> take into account that some of these countries have
> extremely low Internet
> penetration levels. So we come to the same problems
> again. The content is
> there, but can the consumers realistically access that?
> 
>  
> 
> These observations raise the important question how far
> NRAs can use
> websites as a tool to interact with the end consumers. I
> do not try to
> provide an answer right now. May be I can give a better
> answer at GK3.
> 
>  
> 
> Then the question how NRAs can improve their
> communications using e-tools. I
> have some good new here. After publishing the survey
> results some NRAs have
> taken serious efforts to improve their websites. India
> and Bangladesh are
> two examples. I know both these countries have benefitted
> from the survey
> results at best. I do not see any reason why others could
> not.
> 
>  
> 
> Think this is adequate for the moment. I hope I have
> brought in the Asian
> dimension to the discussion. 
> 
>  
> 
> Best Rgds,
> 
> Chanuka Wattegama
> 
> LIRNEasia
> 
> www.lirneasia.net 
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> kictanet mailing list
> kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
> http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet
> 
> This message was sent to: jwalu at yahoo.com
> Unsubscribe or change your options at
>
http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/jwalu%40yahoo.com
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com