Daggett, Becca Vargo (2007). Localizing the Internet: Five Ways Public
Ownership Solves the U.S. Broadband Problem. Institute for Local
Self-Reliance, January 2007.
www.newrules.org/info/5ways.pdf
Executive Summary:
http://www.muniwireless.com/article/articleview/5519/1/23/
This resource makes a strong case for the public ownership of broadband
networks, and gives a clear, comprehensive overview of US broadband
policy and broadband technology as they relate to public ownership. The
report is a good introduction for communities thinking about initiating
a broadband network (whether public or private) to because it
summarizes, clarifies, and puts into context a large number of issues
related to publicly-initiated broadband projects. It is also a useful
introduction to the difference between investing in wireless and fiber
technology in terms of up-front costs and building a future-proof
network. This report, and the idea of public ownership of broadband
networks, has received much criticism from the private sector, and
advocates of the dominant privately-owned “public” models for municipal
broadband. It is worth quoting, up front, a brief reply to this
criticism:
“Public ownership does not mean the city will be acting as an ISP. The
city will look for private companies to build, maintain and run the
networks. These networks are open to all service providers (including
EarthLink, Verizon, AT&T, whoever). So I don't want to see any more
comments about how cities should not be delivering Internet service.
The public infrastructure is a platform for private companies to
compete (on a transparent and non-discriminatory basis) in the delivery
of broadband services to residents and businesses. I love competition.”
The report argues that municipal broadband projects often give too
little attention to a very important question: who will own the
broadband network? And, argues that public ownership of information and
communications networks is in the public interest because:
1. High-speed information and communication networks are essential
public infrastructure.
2. Public ownership ensures competition. 3. Publicly owned networks can
generate significant revenue. 4. Public ownership ensures universal
access.
5. Public ownership can ensure non-discriminatory networks. (e.g.
network neutrality)
To give context to this argument, the report gives a brief history of
US telecommunications regulation, and explains what recent regulatory
decisions have meant in practical terms for US broadband availability,
quality and consumer choice. It also evaluates the dominant
public-private partnership municipal broadband model and other private
models in terms of the risks and benefits these give to communities;
gives an overview of the financial considerations and risks a
municipality must consider regarding a municipal broadband network;
gives a brief, clear definition of broadband including the differences
between Wi-Fi and fiber technology in terms of up front cost and long
term use; shows how municipal broadband projects often categorized as
“failures” by the private sector funded think tanks are, in reality,
often quite beneficial to their communities; and profiles a number of
publicly owned broadband network projects, ranging from small town
projects to city and region-wide projects. Selected quotes:
“Broadband subscribers in the U.S. pay twice as much as customers in
Asia and Europe for one-twentieth the speed.”
“Cities may be able to negotiate such requirements [free or low cost
access for low-income residents, universal access] in initial
contracts. But as pointed out above, federal and state intervention in
cable franchises over the years demonstrates that local governments
cannot count on retaining the authority to enforce these contracts.
Cities that choose private networks get one chance to set rules
governing the network, in contract negotiations. After that, they rely
on corporate good will.” “For over 100 years, cities have successfully
built and managed public infrastructure like roads and water and sewer
systems.
Information networks are new kinds of infrastructure, but they are not
outside the competencies of local government.”
“The fundamentals of high-speed information networks are actually quite
established. Optical fiber cables are to this century what copper wires
were to the last, and their capacity is essentially unlimited. When the
electronics that “light up” the fiber can no longer support the level
of traffic on the network, they can be replaced without replacing the
fiber. Wireless has a shorter life-span, but also a shorter payback
period. Rapid upgrades are part of both private and public wireless
business plans.”
“Cities own roads, but they do not operate freight companies or deliver
pizzas. Modern information infrastructure easily allows the transport
layer (the road, or in this case the network hardware) to be separated
from the service layer (the pizza delivery, or in this case Internet
access or video services).”
“As Franklin D. Roosevelt said, “the very fact that a community can, by
vote of the electorate, create a yardstick of its own, will, in most
cases, guarantee good service and low rates to its population. I might
call the right of the people to own and operate their own utility
something like this: a ‘birch rod’ in the cupboard to be taken out and
used only when the ‘child’ gets beyond the point where a mere scolding
does no good.”
