License-Exempt Wireless Policy:
Results of an African Survey
Isabel Neto
Sharon E. Gillett &
Michael L. Best
ITS conference, Berlin
7th September 2004
Wireless technology can be used to
achieve connectivity at different levels





Source: ‘The Wireless revolution and Universal Access’, Michael Best, Trends in
Telecommunications Reform 2003, ITU, Chapter 7
|
2.4 & 5GHz Bands
Low cost, especially
for localized coverage
Standards available
for different levels
(802.11b, 802.16, etc)
Combinations with
other technology
possible (e.g. VSAT,
etc)
Different solutions for
end-user equipment:
laptops, WiFi phones,
asynchronous
reception models, etc
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Motivation
Changing nature of technology (e.g. spread spectrum) and
spectrum management

Growing use of unlicensed bands: 2.4 and 5GHz Band
–
Institutions and the developing world context

Corruption, inefficiencies, obstacles
–
Entrepreneurship

Value of bottom-up approaches
Unlicensed bands as friendly environment for entrepreneurs
–
–
Hypothesis: Unlicensed bands can spur entrepreneurship
solutions and enhance connectivity

Very little information available on regulation, use and best
practice notes
–
ITU (limited info), US State Depart. (confidential), W2i conf. ‘03
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Methodology: the survey

Survey covering:
1.
2.
3.

Sent to all African countries (54 countries):
–
–

Regulators
Other people who work in ICT sector (e.g. ISPs)
Distribution via e-mail (total of ~260 e-mails sent)
–

Spectrum licensing / enforcement on 2.4 & 5GHz Bands
Background to regulations
Implementation and experiences of use
reminders, contact by phone
All contacts in French, Portuguese and English
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Level of response
70%
Share of Surveys
60%
50%
40%
Sent
30%
Received
20%
10%
0%
Regulators &
ministries, from
ITU
Carriers &
industry
associations,
from ITU
Users & ISPs,
from personal
contacts
Responses obtained mainly
from regulators
Results by population: 96% response rate
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Difficulties & delays
Countries
Response Lag
From ~260 contacts

20%
unreachable

35% response
to e-mail

20% response
to survey
46
43
40
37
34
31
28
25
22
19
16
13
10
7
4
1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Days


Need to account for connectivity and other problems
People very cooperative
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Key findings

Uncertain and heterogeneous environment
–
–
–

Significant variation in rules (‘unlicensed’ has several
meanings, technical restrictions, other business restrictions)
Creates confusion and discourages small players
Deters bigger players because no economies of scale
Still, bands being used everywhere, both for
localized and surprisingly high for wider area
coverage
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Licensing regimes
2.4GHz Band
5GHz Band
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Licensing regimes (cont.)
Detailed Licensing Regimes by country, 2.4GHz Band



Around 50% licensed
(mostly automatic)
Most unlicensed
requires a registration:
unlicensed, as known in
e.g. US, almost nonexistent
Generally 5GHz band
more restrictive (newer
technology)
No regulation or
regulator, 4, 7%
Unlicensed, no
registration, 3, 6%
Not avalable, 7, 13%
Use barred, 1, 2%
Licensed, not
automatic, 7, 13%
Unlicensed,
registration, 10, 19%
Licensed, automatic,
22, 40%
2.4GHz Band
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Differences surprising, given sources
Background to regulations by licensing type
16
Number of countries
14
12
ITU
CEPT/ERC
10
ETSI
8
FCC
other countries
6
others (e.g. SADC)
4
own only
2
0
Unlicensed, no
registration
Unlicensed,
registration
Licensed,
automatic
Licensed, not
automatic
Highlights ITU’s harmonization role:
regulation somewhat vague in these bands
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Heterogeneity and uncertainty








Mali: no regulation in place
Eritrea: free use for incumbents, ISPs pay a fee
Botswana: automatic, but ISPs need to be registered in country
and present business plan
Namibia: unlicensed, but only allowed within property
boundaries
South Africa, Mauritius: unlicensed within single premises,
licensed between premises
Mozambique: Only for non commercial purposes
Regulation undergoing changes, and sometimes uncertain
Additional parameters: Power/range/services restrictions,
certification, etc
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Other dimensions: technical
restrictions


More restrictions
imposed on
‘laxer’ licensing
regimes
Correlation w/
indicators: lower
competition in
local & long
distance markets
=> more
restrictions on
power & range
Power
restrictions EIRP [W]
Averages of allowable Power and Range levels for 2.4GHz
Not
4.0
limited
Range
restrictions
>=
3.0
4
Not
limited
Outdoors,
long range
(>1km)
[ 1,2.0
4[
Outdoors,
short range
(<1km)
[ 0.1,1.0
1[
< 0.1
0.0
Indoors only
Unlicensed, no
registration
Unlicensed,
registration
Licensed,
automatic
Licensed, not
automatic
Restrictions in bands may be used to control market power and raise
barriers to entry
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Power
Range
Certification requirements also differs
across countries
Two opposite and
combined effects?
2.
Laxer licensing
regimes as
consequence of
regulators ‘washing
their hands’ =>
leading to less
certification
Regulators may
choose to certify
equipment to have
some control over
interference (since
bands often regulated
on a ‘best-effort’ or ‘no
QoS guarantee’ basis).
Percentage of countries in different categories
1.
Certification vs. 2.4GHz licensing regime
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Not Certified
50%
Certified
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
No regulation Unlicensed, no Unlicensed,
registration
registration
|
Licensed,
automatic
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Licensed, not
automatic
Services restrictions:
e.g., voice (VoIP) may not be allowed
Are there
restrictions in the
services to be
used in this band?
(2.4 GHz)
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Low enforcement & capacity to enforce
• Enforcement likely to be even lower, since most responses from regulators
• Reports of significant illegal use
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Despite this….
Ubiquity of use



Significant use,
given context
More use in
2.4GHz
(5GHz newer)
Main users ISPs
(56%), followed by
Telecom operators
(28%)
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Bands used mainly for localized but
also wider area coverage
Percentage of countries in licensed/unlicensed
bands
Use of spectrum for 2.4 Licensed and unlicensed bands


90%
80%
70%
Localized coverage, urban hotspots
60%
Rural connectivity, wider area
coverage (infrastructure, point to
point, point-to-multipoint)
50%
40%
Other (e.g., private networks,
interconnection betw sites, grey
market)
30%
20%
10%
0%
unlicensed 2.4 spectrum
licensed 2.4 spectrum
Relatively more countries deploying wider area networks in licensed
environments
Technical restrictions imposed may explain this difference
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Recommendations

Seek to harmonize policies across the continent

Establish better business environment
(e.g. UService policies)

Aim for more balanced regulatory models
–
–
Now, regulatory regimes tending to over regulate –
protecting incumbents?
Err on the side of laxity
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
A key role for regional bodies?
Objective: Rapid harmonization of spectrum policies that are:
• good for the continent
• integrate well into international context:

Several bodies active in ICT policy:
–
–

Economic Commission of West African States (ECOWAS)
created the West African Telecommunications Regulatory
Association (WATRA).
South African Development Community (SADC) made good
progress through their Telecommunications Regulators
Association of Southern Africa (TRASA).
NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa's Development) could
play key role by liasing with those regional bodies, the ITU,
and other regulators (e.g. FCC, ECC, etc).
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Seek to establish better business
environment



Are there Universal Service Policies
for use in these bands?
Certainty and stability
Lower barriers to entry
Access to capital Universal Service
Policies?
Universal Service Policies are still and untapped opportunity
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Right balance needed
Type of
restriction
Advantages
Disadvantages
Unlicensed bands
- Lower barriers to entry, promoting
competition in the market
- Avoid regulatory capture, in
particular in concentrated markets
- Lower guarantees
- More difficult to manage interference
- More revenue for the government
Low restrictions on power &
range
- Enables wider area coverage,
increasing population covered
- Higher competition in the long
distance market
- Encourage innovation and
experimentation
- Levels of interference can rise
- Bands may become congested and
unusable
Certification required
- Ensures quality and reduces
interference
- Discourages innovation and
experimentation
Services restricted
(e.g. no voice allowed)
- Good for incumbent and traditional
telecom companies (can have
monopoly over voice)
- Bad for users, there will be less
competition in the market for those
services
Strict Enforcement
- If regulations are set at an
appropriate level, enforcement is
good, since it will control interference
and punish offenders, ensuring the
well functioning of the bands
- Can be a form of capture if
restrictions are set too high
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Err on the side of laxity?...

The objective should be to maximize output
–
i.e., connectivity may come at the cost of some interference

Spectrum is renewable resource (unlike fish, or
forests)

Africa has very weak teledensity – going from ‘no
service’ to ‘SOME service’?...
Need to lower barriers to entry
Since little use, lower probability for congestion


|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Suggestions for further research

More info on use
–
–




Look at amount of use (e.g. talk to suppliers, operators)
Cross users with type of use (e.g. who is doing rural
coverage?)
Develop country categories and select case studies
Look further for reasons why spectrum policies
differ in different countries
Work on specific recommendations to improve
regulatory balance
Further look into enabling business environment
|
Isabel Neto, ITS, 7th Sept 2004
Thank you!
Any questions?
[email protected]