[kictanet] CHAKULA Issue #20: Pushing for broadband policy in Africa

Chakula alan at openresearch.co.za
Sun Sep 26 12:17:15 EAT 2010


CHAKULA Issue No. 20, September 2010:

Pushing for broadband policy in Africa



CONTENTS

1. Broadband for Africa: Launching the cables, launching the  
campaigns… – e-interview with Willie Currie

2. NIGERIA: Striking when the time is right… – e-interviews with John  
Dada, Titi Omo-Ettu and Abi Jagun

3. GHANA: Moving the hand of God – e-interviews with Eric Osiakwan and  
Eva Lokko

4. SOUTH AFRICA: Autopsy of a missed opportunity – Ten things analysts  
say are absent in the South African broadband policy; and an e- 
interview with Steve Song



//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\

Broadband for Africa: Launching the cables, launching the campaigns…

The rapid roll-out of fibre optic cables in Africa over the past years  
brought a wave of optimism to the continent – finally, the sentiment  
went, all those ambitious online business plans and project proposals  
that couldn’t be realised ten years go – simply because the internet  
was too slow – could be dusted off and see the light of day. The  
implications for fast connectivity for the continent – in education,  
in realising citizen and social rights, in entrepreneurial  
development, or just for plain gaming fun – suggested the realisation  
of something of a renaissance for Africa; a quantum leap into the 21st  
Century, as far as the internet was concerned.
But the boom in broadband – the landing and roll-out of cables such as  
the East African Submarine Cable System (known as EASSy), The East  
African Marine Systems (TEAMS), and SEACOM – was in many countries met  
with something of a vague and non-committal response from governments.  
Some were, it seemed, trapped in a strategic uncertainty, much like  
the 1990s, when the implications of information and communications  
technology (ICT) policy on the continent were only just beginning to  
be grappled with. Few countries had developed coherent broadband  
policies – if any policy at all – to manage the implications and  
potential of the new connectivity being dug into the ground before  
their eyes.

It was with this in mind that the Association for Progressive  
Communications (APC), together with its partners, set about mobilising  
stakeholders in South Africa, Nigeria and Ghana, to advocate for  
progressive broadband policies to be developed in those countries. The  
overall objectives of the project, which was funded by the Partnership  
for Higher Education in Africa, was to achieve affordable universal  
broadband.

The advocacy initiative kicked off in South Africa in October 2008,  
with the launch of the South African Broadband Forum, a partnership  
between APC, South Africa Connect, SANGONeT (Southern African NGO  
Network), and the Shuttleworth Foundation.

The Forum’s interventions included a multi-stakeholder workshop, the  
drafting of a forward-looking framework for a broadband policy, and an  
online petition. A face-to-face meeting with the South African  
government was also held. In Nigeria, a similar multi-stakeholder  
approach was adopted, with an outside consultant team employed to  
draft a broadband policy document. This in turn was put open to  
vigorous public review, a process which included a strong media  
campaign. In Ghana a stakeholder’s forum held in August 2009 was  
attended by some 60 participants from across the public, private and  
civil society sector. This processes resulted in the formation of a  
broadband policy sub-committee, which was part of the newly formed  
ministerial advisory committee in that country.

The impact of the campaigns has been different in each country. In  
South Africa, a broadband policy gazetted earlier this year has been  
met with disbelief from some stakeholders. As the interviews in this  
Chakula show, campaigners in Nigeria are optimistic about a positive  
outcome to their efforts. In Ghana, the response is less optimistic,  
even though the advocacy resulted in the formation of the policy sub- 
committee – a move which seemed to guarantee government buy-in.

With the project now having reached its conclusion, Chakula caught up  
with Willie Currie, APC’s Communications and Information Policy  
Programme Manager, to get his take on the success of the initiative…



*********************************************************************

"Policy processes are not linear. They have peaks and troughs and can  
go round in circles…”

*********************************************************************

CHAKULA: The broadband initiative in South Africa was the first to get  
off the ground with the launch of the South African National Broadband  
Forum. Then Ghana and Nigeria followed. Why broadband and why these  
countries in particular?

Willie Currie [WC]: The context for broadband revolved mainly around  
the question of what would happen when increased submarine cable  
capacity reached the east and west coasts of Africa. Were African  
counties ready for taking advantage of the reduction in costs of  
international bandwidth to reduce the broadband gap inside their  
countries? Research at the OECD [Organisation for Economic Co- 
operation and Development] indicated that countries that adopted  
broadband strategies increased their levels of broadband penetration  
while countries like the US and Britain who did not adopt broadband  
strategies did not. Research from the World Bank indicated that  
increasing broadband penetration by 10% increased GDP in both  
developed and developing countries. One of Obama’s tech policies was  
to have the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] develop a national  
broadband plan as well as to include broadband as part of his stimulus  
package. And Britain was going through its Digital Britain process. In  
South Africa and Ghana there were elections and new ministries and the  
hope was that they would be willing to support national broadband  
strategies. Nigeria had a very effective coms regulator and was about  
to receive additional submarine cables, so it also seemed to be a good  
opportunity to promote a national broadband strategy. In addition, the  
project was funded by the Partnership for Higher Education in Africa  
who was also keen to see progress towards affordable broadband in  
these countries.

CHAKULA: The policy vacuum around broadband in Africa is striking. I  
suppose there are many sectors where a policy lag exists – energy  
springs to mind. But why do you think African countries tend to be  
‘late adopters’ when it comes to ICT policy? The growth in the ICT  
sector has hardly been a surprise – and it’s no longer the early 1990s  
when many were still trying to get to grips with new technologies from  
a policy perspective.

WC: Good question. African countries work closely with the ITU  
[International Telecommunication Union] and its regulators do attend  
the ITU's Global Regulators Symposium. ITU has put broadband on the  
agenda in its events and publications and has organised a Broadband  
Commission which is to make a policy recommendation on broadband to  
the UN this month. Governments have certainly been active on policy on  
the east coast - Kenya, Rwanda, but not so much elsewhere. But one  
still hopes for more  dynamic  policy initiatives.

CHAKULA: The three campaigns are at different points right now –  
Nigeria has developed a draft strategy; the process in Ghana seems to  
have stalled; and in South Africa, there is a sense of the  
ineffectiveness of the campaign, despite the good work of the people  
involved. How successful do you think these campaigns have been?

WC: Policy processes are not linear. They have peaks and troughs and  
can go round in circles. What has happened has been some degree of  
engagement between civil society and governments in the three  
countries, some awareness raising of the issues and attempts to  
persuade governments to take action.  Perhaps as the cables continue  
to land we may start to see a more coherent approach emerging from  
governments.

CHAKULA: What have been your key learning experiences across the three  
countries when it comes to these sorts of advocacy drives? If  
anything, what has been missing?

WC: What is difficult is to sustain advocacy processes over long  
periods of time, especially when immediate results are not  
forthcoming. The funding cycles that civil society organisations draw  
on run over two years at the most and if results are not achieved  
quickly campaigns can stall. On the other side, governments have their  
own ways of undertaking policy and these do not always align with  
those of business or civil society. It is important for the civil  
society policy entrepreneurs involved to be able to sustain their  
activities during peaks and troughs so that they are ready when  
conditions change and policy windows open up to engage with policy- 
makers.

CHAKULA: What are the next steps from your perspective? Do you  
anticipate another advocacy push in, say, Ghana and Nigeria to bring  
those processes to fruition?

WC: The next steps are really up to the policy entrepreneurs in Ghana  
and Nigeria to keep the broadband initiatives going if they can.


//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\

NIGERIA: Striking when the time is right…
The broadband campaign in Nigeria kicked off in early 2010 with the  
formation of a multi-stakeholder team to drive the initiative. The  
strategy in that country had several components, including  
commissioning the drafting of a broadband policy, hosting a Nigeria  
National Broadband Forum, and implementing a media strategy.  
Fittingly, the media strategy included a strong online presence to  
stimulate awareness and discussion of the broadband strategy and to  
monitor the progress of the campaign.

Chakula spoke to the campaign’s leader, John Dada, Titi Omo-Ettu, who  
is president of the Association of Telecommunications Companies of  
Nigeria and also a co-ordinator of the campaign, and Abi Jagun, who  
represented SMarT Research in the policy development process.



*********************************************************************

“[M]edia-savvy individuals and members who know the history of the  
Nigeria telecom inside out were on the team…”

*********************************************************************

CHAKULA: You were tasked to set up a broadband forum in Nigeria, with  
the view of developing a national broadband strategy for the country.  
With such rapid take up of ICTs in Nigeria, how is it possible that  
the country didn’t have a framework for broadband development?

JOHN DADA [JD]: Nigeria is awash with brilliant attempts at ensuring  
ICTs are available for national development. However the uncertain  
political climes have been a major deterrent to continuity and focus.  
The nation already had a draft ICT4D policy, which was developed after  
the original IT Policy, but it is still waiting legislative approval.  
This draft policy is a precursor of the work done on the broadband  
framework.

CHAKULA: Tell me a bit about the process of setting up the forum – how  
did you go about it, who was involved, and what did you hope to achieve?

JD: A core group of volunteer individuals and organisations from civil  
society, the private sector and academia was identified to initiate  
discussions on issues related to a broadband strategy, including  
infrastructure, content, e-governance/e-citizenship and education.

CHAKULA: You then contracted Society Markets & Technology (SMarT)  
Research to develop a draft broadband strategy. How was this strategy  
received by stakeholders?

JD: SMarT Research were commissioned to conduct policy research and  
produce the draft broadband framework and background documents. After  
a consultation process, the final version of both documents were  
prepared and submitted on 18 May, 2010. These were published and  
widely circulated for inputs in both print and electronic formats in- 
advance of, and during a stakeholders forum. Drafts of the documents  
were made available to the public through mailing lists, presentations  
and interactions at various stakeholder meetings, workshops and  
conferences. A BB4NG [Broadband for Nigeria] Stakeholders’ Forum was  
held on 28 July at the National Commission for Colleges of Education  
(NCCE) in Abuja. Chaired by a private sector delegate, over one  
hundred delegates participated in the event and each had a copy of the  
printed documents. Delegates were from government ministries and  
institutions; private sector and telecoms industry; civil society  
groups; the media; the political sector; the military and intelligence  
community; young adults from the National Youths Service Corps; the  
academia and the general public. The framework document was considered  
acceptable, as the issues brought up and discussed by delegates had to  
do with implementation of the framework. Accordingly, all but three of  
the delegates in the attendance register also signed their endorsement  
of the framework during the Stakeholders’ Forum, and both the senior  
special assistant to the minister of information and communications as  
well as the chairman of National Information Technology Development  
(NITDA) regarded the framework as presented to government.

CHAKULA: There were a number of strands to your strategy, which  
attracted a good deal of media coverage. What do you think were the  
most successful learning experiences, and why do you think they were  
successful?

JD: Composition of the core team of volunteers for developing the  
strategy was critical; media-savvy individuals and members who know  
the history of the Nigeria telecom inside out were on the team. They  
were able to mobilise their formidable network for effective coverage  
and follow up activities. For example a key member of the BB4NG  
campaign, Titi Omo-Ettu, is also the president of the high profile  
Association of Telecommunications Companies of Nigeria (ATCON). ATCON,  
is already part of a team that includes the Nigeria telcom regulator  
that will attend the October ITWeb Broadband 2010 summit in South Africa

CHAKULA: Where is the process now, and what are the next steps?

JD: Sustained post-forum campaigns are on-going and being monitored.  
It is delightful that a framework already has a solid “leg in” with  
the present government, as the objectives are already featuring in  
speeches delivered by the minister of information and communications.  
However, the impending commencement of political campaigns and changes  
of government and functionaries at all levels of governance suggest a  
strategic delay or toning down of the formal presentation of the  
framework to government. The Nigeria campaign therefore has to be  
sustained for a period that will span the inauguration of the next  
government in May 2011. This is an advantage as the new government is  
more likely to own a policy presented to it than inherited, especially  
from the tail-end of a previous one, and will also have the time to  
commence implementation of the framework.



*********************************************************************


"[T]he campaign is coming at this time, which is its time."

*********************************************************************

CHAKULA: You are the president of ATCON, and also a member of the  
broadband forum. First of all, can you tell me more about the  
Association – what is its role, and does it have a strong membership?

TITI OMO-ETTU [TO]: ATCON is the umbrella Association of all  
Telecommunication Companies in Nigeria. It recognises  seven subgroups  
as well as autonomous subgroup associations such as Association of  
Licensed Telecom Operators (ALTON), the Internet Service Providers  
Association (ISPAN) and others. It interfaces with the industry  
regulator and also with government to protect the interest of its  
members and also of the entire industry. It is a powerful input  
provider into policies of the federal government of Nigeria on  
communication matters. The government hired the association’s  
president in 2000 to serve as the chief executive of the Nigerian  
Communication Commission for two terms, which ended a few months ago.  
Another active member of the Association was recently hired to succeed  
him. The Association is taking a team of its members and other  
industry players and entrepreneurs to explore trade relationships with  
world class players in Johannesburg in a fortnight, there about. It  
asked for and got the approval of the regulator to lead the trade team  
for strategic reasons.

CHAKULA: What got you interested in the broadband campaign?

TO: I am an engineer and I built a career in the telcom industry  
working for Nigeria's expired monopoly incumbent in the days of  
monopoly. I have followed the growth and development of Nigeria’s  
telecommunications since 1987 while I was in the public service and  
when we first mooted  the liberalisation agenda. I opted out of  
service in 1991 into retirement to pursue a career in  
telecommunication consultancy and also to play in the political  
development of the industry. I have done so continuously from then and  
it is only natural that the broadband campaign is coming at this time,  
which is its time.

CHAKULA: Why do you think Nigeria lacked a broadband strategy?

TO: To the extent that something has to start one day, ubiquitous  
broadband presence is not an old subject anywhere and I would rather  
see it as current need and not one of previous lack.

CHAKULA: What does the Association’s membership make of the campaign?  
Are they generally supportive?

TO: Yes, they are.

CHAKULA: There have been suggestions that in Nigeria, perhaps more  
than in other countries, in order to bring about policy change you  
have to prove the business model – appeal to the economics of it –  
rather than appeal, to say, bridging the digital divide, or providing  
services to the poor. Is this perception correct?

TO: This is true. I am an apostle of that philosophy which actually  
derived from our experiences that we have to situate the fortune of  
our development in the private-sector focused economy. This needs to  
be done to amass the kind of seriousness that enables us to meet our  
social needs using business models for productivity. The other models  
are unsuitable for our circumstances and ditto for a few other  
strategies.

CHAKULA: Where to now with the campaign, in your view?

TO: One way. Up! We are influencing government to open up the industry  
further. We did just that in the past decade, but now by stimulating  
SME initiatives to transport traffic and to enhance universal reach in  
such manners that promise ubiquity of broadband and strategic lowering  
of the cost of access and services. Government has been responding  
better and our efforts are counting. For our association and its  
members, the first is advocacy, then education, then constructive  
requests for government intervention to reduce stress as we march on.  
The march is unstoppable.



*********************************************************************

“[T]he dominant paradigm regarding [ICT development] dictates that  
[the government’s] involvement be minimal.”

*********************************************************************

CHAKULA: You were asked by Nigerian National Broadband Forum to  
develop a draft broadband strategy for Nigeria. I have posed this  
question to the forum – but it intrigues me that many African  
countries with burgeoning ICT environments, have not yet taken the  
initiative to develop policy frameworks to guide the development of  
the ICT sector – which they nevertheless concede is critical to the  
country’s development. How do you account for the policy lag in Africa  
around ICTs?

ABI JAGUN [AJ]: I wish I had concrete evidence for what I am about to  
say rather than gut feel or unsubstantiated opinion, but I really do  
think that whilst some countries do more to integrate developments in  
ICTs into their national development strategies, and indeed practical/ 
concrete examples exist of this, other countries merely "talk the  
talk". I think there are various reasons for this, but a key one links  
to the perception that technology is a "black box" (for want of a  
better phrase). It boils down to the way technological innovation is  
packaged to developing countries and is linked to an out-dated(?)  
perspective of the way in which developing countries are expected to  
acquire technology. Technology is not something that developing  
countries "develop"; rather it is "transferred" to them, and as such  
there is little expectation that governments/the recipient nation  
should be too involved in the "technicalities" nor in innovation.  
Given an acceptance of this, it is not surprising that not much by way  
of developing the ICT sector features in meaningful/practical ways in  
the national priorities. Reinforcing this is the success with which  
the theory of liberalisation has influenced development interventions.  
A competitive private sector can deliver the promises of technology  
and governments need only *react* to their needs - articulated either  
by the sector itself or agencies that directly of indirectly represent  
their needs. Also influential are the very expansive and effective  
'advertising' that has been done by private sector communications  
operators looking for new markets and who, on the one hand, are  
looking for favourable investment/trade conditions in developing and  
emerging countries and on the other see the opportunity to score  
corporate social responsibility points/quick-wins with their customers/ 
public in more industrialised countries. In summary, we do not see  
more government involvement in the way/manner in which ICT development  
occurs in (most) African countries because the dominant paradigm  
regarding such developments dictates that their involvement be minimal.

CHAKULA: The draft framework suggests that the broadband strategy  
should aim to bring “broadband, with speed of at least 4Mbps, that is  
accessible, affordable and dependable to citizens and consumers in  
Nigeria.” How do you define issues of accessibility and affordability?

AJ: Accessibility and affordability are defined in practical terms and  
much the same way as would be defined with respect to other  
(tele)communications products/services. A large proportion of the  
population (if not all members of the public that wish to access the  
product/service) should be able to access the product/service  
conveniently and at a price that is commensurate with the income of  
the majority of the population.

CHAKULA: Amongst the objectives, you talk about the use of broadband  
for economic activities, because of the entrepreneurial nature of the  
population. In your experience, is broadband more about making money  
in Nigeria than elsewhere on the continent? In other countries, such  
as South Africa, an advocacy campaign might make more of bridging the  
digital divide, and serving underserved communities. In Nigeria, how  
do you see the balance between business and development, as the spark  
for an advocacy campaign – what gets you more leverage if you want to  
bring about change?

AJ: There was intense discussion with respect to this in developing  
the broadband strategy. Whilst I cannot speak for other African  
countries, the truth is that the main driver of broadband deployment/ 
diffusion in Nigeria will be businesses. When businesses believe that  
they will be able to make money in rolling out broadband and when  
businesses believe that they will make money by adopting it we will  
see infrastructure being built and applications and/or content being  
developed. Personal use of broadband and its spread to underserved  
areas and/or mariginalised groups will come about/increase as a result  
of this. There is therefore a need to acknowledge and create the space  
for the business aspect of broadband in order to attain more public- 
interest oriented objectives.

Key links:

Draft policy documents: www.forum.org.ng/BB4NG

Essentials of the media strategy is summarized at http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AUg1mzUdzt_SZGZ6anRqaDJfMjY5ZnNwcTJnZ20&hl=en

Stakeholder mapping is summarized at http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AS4Cn2nENwLzZGZkMmtrMmJfMmZ0OG05d2Zi&hl=en
Results of the media campaign:

“Nigerians demand broadband access from FG,” Available at   http://compassnewspaper.com/NG/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=64925:nigerians-demand-broadband-access-from-fg-&catid=37:info-tech&Itemid=709

“Nigeria: New Broadband Capacity Underway, Says FG,” Available at http://allafrica.com/stories/201008100128.html

“Stakeholders to dialogue on broadband for Nigerians,” Available at    http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6361408-stakeholders-to-dialogue-on-broadband-for-nigerians

“Broadband for Nigeria holds in Abuja,” Available at http://www.vanguardngr.com/2010/07/20/broadband-for-nigeria-holds-in-abuja/


//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\

GHANA: Moving the hand of God

The campaign in Ghana was launched in August 2009 with a stakeholder  
workshop in Dodowa. One of the key purposes of the campaign was to  
push for “immediate steps” to lower the cost of bandwidth in Ghana –  
the vehicle to do this would be the development of a national  
broadband strategy in consultation with stakeholders.
Chakula spoke to Eric Osiakwan from Internet Research, who was tasked  
to lead the campaign, and Eva Lokko from Ghana Information Network for  
Knowledge Sharing.


*********************************************************************
“Unfortunately the political elite has higher priorities…”
*********************************************************************

CHAKULA: The goal of your broadband campaign was to push for lower  
bandwidth cost. Why are broadband prices so high in Ghana?

Eric Osiakwan [EO]: The business model of operators nurtured by the  
environment is a "high margin, low volume" one, but our effort is to  
move them towards a "low margin, high volume" approach which is  
fundamentally responsible for the mobile revolution we have  
experienced on the continent.

CHAKULA: It seems strange to me that governments in this day and age  
don't recognise the need for policy and strategy frameworks when it  
comes to ICTs. Why does this broadband strategy vacuum exist in Ghana?

EO: There is an existing ICT for Accelerated Development Policy which  
calls for a Broadband Strategy, hence our effort. But unfortunately  
the political elite has higher priorities even when the sub-committee  
was set-up to advance the cause.

CHAKULA: You intervention began in 2009 with a multi-stakeholder  
workshop in August of that year. It looks like government and business  
were very responsive to your aims?

EO: Very. Our process was to gather the relevant stakeholders, and at  
the level of the vice president we had buy-in. But when the button was  
handed over to government to take leadership on the development of the  
strategy, which is within their remit, other competing priorities took  
over.

CHAKULA: You have now been asked to serve on a newly-formed Broadband  
Policy Sub-committee of the Ministerial Advisory Committee. The task  
of the sub-committee has been to develop the broadband strategy. But I  
understand this has also been a frustrating process – where does  
everything stand right now? And what are your next steps?

EO: Various members of the committee were tasked to write various  
elements of the policy input paper, but it is yet to be integrated,  
polished and tabled for a multi-stakeholder submission and input.

CHAKULA: What are your learning experiences from this intervention, in  
terms of making policy interventions of this sort work?

EO: We have learned that you can only move the "hand of God" that  
much.......maybe it would move at its own time and pace.



*********************************************************************
“Stakeholders from all sides get to the practical acceptance of the  
fact that they need each other to survive…”
*********************************************************************

CHAKULA: You were one of the conveners of the broadband strategy in  
Ghana, representing the Ghana Information Network and Knowledge  
Sharing (GINKS).  First of all, tell me a bit about GINKS?

EVA LOKKO [EL]: GINKS provides the platform for individuals and  
institutions to share experiences, best practices, lessons learnt as  
well as common ground for networking and dialogue with each other in  
order to harness all aspects of ICT for the development of Ghana.  
GINKS brings together institutions including government, CSOs, ICT  
infrastructure/service providers and users.

CHAKULA: Why did the broadband initiative interest you?

EL: I believe that the internet has become a “human right” in this era  
of knowledge economy. Consequently broadband is the blood that carries  
all the knowledge and information through the physical and virtual  
pipes to us. It will therefore be a disaster if Ghana does not put in  
place the necessary strategy to ensure standards, availability,  
affordability, reliability and sustainability of broadband services  
and support to facilitate ICT4D for all Ghanaians. I could therefore  
not stay out of such an important ICT initiative.  A broadband  
strategy will:

* Promote competition between and within communication service providers

* Promote the provision of reliable and high-quality electronic  
services and content at affordable prices

* Stimulate individual and business demand for broadband services to  
ensure viability of ICT businesses

* Expand infrastructure, services and support to areas that do not yet  
have access.

CHAKULA: Why do you think Ghana lacked a broadband strategy up until  
this point?

EL: Unfortunately, strategies and policies seem to always lag behind  
implementation where ICT is concerned. I think the lack of a broadband  
strategy for Ghana was primarily due to the difficulty of accepting  
that ICTs cut across all sectors (education, health, agriculture,  
business, etc.) and that implementing ICT solutions across board would  
solve faster (and in some cases solve better) some of the same  
problems that we are aiming to solve with “brick-and-mortar”. The  
perception was that after we have solved the difficult problems in  
health, education etc. then we can look at ICTs. There was also the  
perception that ICTs are solely for ICT professionals and enthusiasts  
and therefore issues pertaining to ICTs were always reserved for last.  
The impact of broadband as a key economic indicator had also not been  
appreciated fully until now.

CHAKULA: In your view, has the strategy been successful?

EL: I think it has, even though not to the extent and at the speed  
that one would have wished. It was successful because stakeholders  
found it challenging and important enough to send high-powered  
delegates and decision-makers to the forum (government, users,  
providers, public, CSOs, etc.). The strategy forum sparked off a lot  
of interest from all quarters via the internet when it was going on  
and was taken up by parliament, the National Communications Authority  
and the ministry of communications (all of them participants) after it  
concluded. A committee has also been set up to review it for adoption.  
It will however be fully successful if implemented in good time after  
the review.

CHAKULA: What has been your learning experience in engaging in this  
kind of strategy initiative?

EL: Such initiatives are always very challenging experiences fraught  
with the usual tug-of-war on almost all suggestions made on the floor.  
The most important thing, though, is that there is always consensus at  
the end of such initiatives, since stakeholders from all sides get to  
the practical acceptance of the fact that they need each other to  
survive. You also learn new things and get a better picture of what is  
actually on the ground, what has been planned and where the gaps are.  
It always brings you back to the reality that there is always the need  
for a champion to ensure the move from a strategy to review and  
adoption, and finally to implementation.


Key links:

ICT for Accelerated Development Policy in Ghana: http://www.ict.gov.gh/

//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\

SOUTH AFRICA: Autopsy of a missed opportunity

What got left out…

Ten things analysts say the South African broadband policy, gazetted  
earlier this year, does not do:
1.  State the problem/challenge/opportunity which requires a policy  
intervention, and relate this to wider national policy objectives.

2. Establish the present position in relation to that problem (through  
e.g. statistical summary, technological and market analysis, research  
into user behaviour).

3. Consider international and national trends relevant to the policy  
area concerned.

4. Establish objectives for national broadband policy.

5. Set out alternative approaches which could be taken by government  
(and other actors), and consider the pros and cons of these different  
alternatives in light of objectives and resources.

6. In a consultation process, identify choices and questions which  
need to be addressed and on which opinion is consulted (but may  
indicate an initial policy preference)

7. In a final policy document, choose a particular policy approach and  
give reasons why this particular approach has been chosen.

8. Address  questions of resourcing, including both finance and human  
resources.

9. Identify and consider other policy areas, outside the policy area  
in question, in which action or interventions are required (e.g. In  
supply-side areas such as capacity-building, in demand-side areas such  
as enabling legislation for e-commerce).

10. Establish a plan of action with clear goals, allocation of  
responsibilities and timetable.


**********************************************************************

Criticism of South Africa’s broadband policy has been hard-hitting.  
Stakeholders – including activists, policy advisors and academics –  
have called it a “lost opportunity”, an “aspirational document with no  
clear plan of action”, unambitious, and the result of a government  
consultative process that was not sincere. Analysts have pointed out  
that there are few differences between the draft document published in  
2009 – which was roundly criticised -  and the final policy document  
which was gazetted.

In a response to the draft policy document released by the department,  
Alison Gillwald, executive director of Research ICT Africa, pointed to  
the lack of clarity in the “roles of the state, state- owned entities,  
authorities and private sector in broadband infrastructure  
development”. These included the roles of the state broadband company  
Infraco, the Department of Public Enterprises, which is the sole  
shareholder of Infraco, and the Department of Communications, which  
has been “responsible for the to-date weak ‘managed liberalisation’  
policy of the last decade”.
“Critical issues of the co-ordination of rights of way and of  
complementary spectrum usage, which have plagued the roll-out of new  
entrants, are not raised,” she wrote, adding that the strategy lacked  
the vision seen in Britain, Australia, Mauritius and the US. In  
particular, the draft policy lacked insight into the crucial role of  
broadband in economic growth and job creation.

Many have now warned that South Africa is likely to fall even further  
behind other African countries in its economic development because of  
a lack of strategic insight into the transformative power of  
communications technologies.

Chakula spoke to the Shuttleworth Foundation’s Steve Song to get his  
sense of what can be salvaged from the aftermath…


*********************************************************************
“[N]o one within government gets it or is prepared to stand up and  
fight for it.”
*********************************************************************

CHAKULA: When we last spoke there was a sense of a policy window  
opening – an opportunity for policy influence given the change in  
government. It was in this moment that the South African National  
Broadband Forum (SANBF) launched its campaign for a progressive  
broadband strategy in this country. But the final policy as it emerged  
appears to lack substance, despite the efforts of many. What do you  
think are the key failings of the policy?

STEVE SONG [SS]: I think the key failings of the policy are:

a) To have set broadband penetration goals that are so weak as to be  
comparatively meaningless (15% broadband penetration - 256kbps – by  
2019 for example).

b) To have no resources linked to the policy.  Without strong backing  
from economic planning, this policy is unlikely to attract the  
investment it needs to be meaningful.

CHAKULA: The campaign was proactive, and, probably with limited  
resources, had a number of components – a workshop, a media drive (you  
yourself were interviewed on radio), a meeting with the Department of  
Communications, and a written response to the first draft of the  
broadband policy. Would you do anything differently if you had to  
launch a campaign like this again?

SS: From a public perspective, I would simplify the message.  We asked  
people to support a framework which was a set of recommendations for  
government policy.  As a public campaign, we should have just focused  
on the targets, namely:

By 2014, South Africa will:

    *  Have broadband access in every town and village;

    *  Have the cheapest broadband access on the continent; and,

    *  Be number one in terms of broadband penetration on the continent.

We should have just hammered those targets into the public  
consciousness so that even politicians would have those targets on  
their mind. Secondly, I would have focused on finding a point of  
leverage within the economic planning centres of power.  As mentioned  
above, a broadband policy without some strong budget commitment is  
unlikely to have much impact.

CHAKULA: What is your sense of the South African policy environment –  
do you think there is real willingness to engage with stakeholders on  
the government’s side; or do you think that much is made of this  
engagement, yet when it comes to the crunch, government goes its own  
way? Sometimes there is a feeling that when stakeholders are ready,  
government isn’t really on the same page, so efforts at advocacy can  
come to very little. Has this process left you disempowered, as  
stakeholders working outside of government?

SS: There is no real champion within the South African government for  
broadband as an accelerator of social and economic development. My  
learning from this process is that no one within government gets it or  
is prepared to stand up and fight for it.  We took a calculated risk  
that the South African election was a point of malleability in terms  
of policy and that politicians might seize on affordable broadband as  
policy issue. Strategically this was the right thing to do but  
tactically we failed to find the right points of engagement within the  
government.  I don't feel disempowered by the process. It was a  
learning experience.

CHAKULA: An assessment of the gazetted broadband policy document and  
the process is now underway. Are there still avenues open for policy  
advocacy around broadband? Where to now?

SS: The problem of affordable access to broadband is not going to go  
away. Other countries are expanding their broadband infrastructure at  
an accelerated rate and the impact of this is showing itself in  
economic growth, in education, in nearly every aspect of life. Sooner  
or later it will dawn on someone in the South African government that  
we have been shooting ourselves in the telecommunications foot for  
nearly 10 years and it is damaging South Africa's prospects of being a  
competitive player in the global knowledge economy.  Our job is to see  
bring that dawn about as quickly as possible.



Key campaign links:

Website for the online campaign: http://www.broadband4africa.org.za/
Participants' comments on the strategy framework:  http://www.apc.org/en/system/files/Broadband+strategy+framework_compiled_input_06042009.pdf

Willie Currie’s blog on the campaign: http://www.southafricaconnect.org.za/

Broadband Forum’s workshop on video: http://www.southafricaconnect.org.za/?p=265



//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//\\//

CHAKULA is a newsletter produced by the Association for Progressive  
Communications (APC). It aims to mobilise African civil society around  
ICT policy for sustainable development and social justice issues.
We welcome your opinions about this newsletter. Send your comments,  
feedback or contributions to chakula at apc.org. To subscribe or  
unsubscribe e-mail chakula at apc.org or go to: http://lists.apc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chakula
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/pipermail/kictanet/attachments/20100926/011c719a/attachment.htm>


More information about the KICTANet mailing list