1. 1 Project acronym: SIVA Project name: South East Europe
improved virtual accessibility through joint initiatives
facilitating the rollout of broadband networks Program: South East
Europe Transnational Cooperation Program Document Information:
Document title: Report on common policy approaches and suggested
measures to integrate infrastructure mapping and availability
prerequisites in network deployment and civil engineering
construction works Date of Delivery: 18/06/2014 Work Package: WP5
Work Package Title: Exchange of experience, administrative and
policy measures to improve the virtual accessibility of SEE areas
Work Package Leader: ERDF PP1 - Molise Task: A531 Common policy
processes and suggested measures to integrate infrastructure
mapping and availability prerequisites in network deployment and
civil engineering construction works Task Leader: PEDDM
Distribution (R/P): Public Nature: Report History Chart Date
Changes Cause of change Implemented by 18/06/2014 Initial Document
N/A PEDDM Authorisation Disclaimer The information in this document
is subject to change without notice. All rights reserved The
document is proprietary of the SIVA Consortium. No copying or
distributing, in any form or by any means, is allowed without the
prior written agreement of the owner of the property rights. This
document reflects only the authors view. The SEE Program is not
liable for any use that may be made of the information contained
herein. No. Action Partner Date 1 Prepared PEDDM 18/06/2014
2. 2 Table of Contents 1 Introduction
..........................................................................................................................................3
1.1 General
context.............................................................................................................................3
1.2 Siva
project....................................................................................................................................4
1.3 Scope and aim of
deliverable........................................................................................................5
2 Infrastructure
mapping.........................................................................................................................6
2.1 Position Analysis
...........................................................................................................................6
2.2 Problem
description......................................................................................................................6
2.2.1 Bridging the digital divide
.....................................................................................................6
2.2.2 Cutting the rollout costs of broadband infrastructure
.........................................................8 2.3
Political
Background....................................................................................................................11
2.3.1 Digital
Agenda.....................................................................................................................11
2.3.2 EU regulatory framework for electronic communications
.................................................11 2.3.3 NGA
recommendation
........................................................................................................12
2.3.4 Regulatory measures to promote competition and enhance the
broadband investment
environment........................................................................................................................................15
2.3.5 National broadband
plans...................................................................................................16
2.4 Rationale for
recommendations.................................................................................................18
3 Common policy processes and suggested
measures..........................................................................25
3.1 Governance and strategic planning
............................................................................................25
3.2 Legal and regulatory
framework.................................................................................................26
3.3 Approaches to
finance................................................................................................................27
3.4 Human
resources........................................................................................................................28
3. 3 1 Introduction 1.1 General context A large growth in the
use and diversity of information and communications technologies
(ICTs) has been witnessed worldwide the latest decade, with the
rise of broadband being of particular note. Broadband has been a
critical factor in fostering sustainable economic growth and is
strategic to the goals of enhancing social cohesion and welfare.
According to the Single Market Act II Communication1 , a 10%
increase in broadband penetration results in a 1%-1.5% increase in
the GDP annually and 1.5% labour productivity gains while
broadband-induced innovation in companies creates employment and
has the potential to generate 2 million extra jobs by 2020.
However, the extent to which broadband infrastructure covers entire
populations and regions is still not clear. While there is a clear
increasing trend towards the adoption of broadband globally, a
significant heterogeneous diffusion of broadband connections is
quite evident among countries and within the same territories. This
fact has led many national and transnational political
institutions, regulatory bodies and independent agencies to place
emphasis on facilitating access to broadband networks, especially
in non-competitive areas in order to address the existing digital
divide. In that context, the European Commission (EC) introduced
the Digital Agenda for Europe (DAE)2 as one of the flagship
initiatives for Europe 2020 aiming at providing full broadband
coverage and sustainable economic and social benefits from a
digital single market based on high-speed broadband services. In
order to facilitate the implementation of these objectives, the
Digital Agenda for Europe highlighted the importance for additional
efforts to be made in the direction of overcoming the funding
difficulties arisen in the context of broadband network deployment.
One useful strategy for diminishing high-investment costs in
broadband network deployment is to integrate infrastructure mapping
and availability prerequisites in broadband network deployment and
civil engineering construction works. Mapping provides a means by
which to integrate, classify and present information about existing
infrastructures in a territory where relevant data was not
available or easily accessible from multiple heterogeneous sources
and databases. Well designed maps of existing 1 COM (2012) 573 2
http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/
4. 4 infrastructures are easy-to-interpret and constitute
concentrated databases of information about the location, size,
type, current use, technology used and ownership of the available
infrastructures and facilities. This report illustrates the power
and utility of a mapping strategy by focusing on its potential to
bring down the set up cost through enhancing sharing and puts
forward a series of common policy approaches and suggested measures
to accelerate the establishment of a cadastre or inventory of
existing infrastructures in South East Europe (SEE) areas. 1.2 Siva
project Broadband is the fourth strategic pillar3 of the Digital
Agenda for Europe (DAE). The connectivity and internet access it
provides is a key enabler for a number of important services for
citizens, businesses and the public sector. The ambitious and
aggressive targets set in the Digital Agenda indicate the
importance of broadband for the economy of the EU and citizen
welfare. The SIVA project supports the goals of EU's strategy on
digital technologies (namely the Digital Agenda for Europe) and
aims to contribute to the improvement of virtual accessibility in
South East Europe through the promotion of broadband access,
supplementing physical accessibility and thus narrowing the digital
gap in the SEE area. The ultimate objectives of the SIVA project
can be summarized as follows: The closing of the digital gap
through broadband service rollout in South East Europe areas, where
market mechanisms fail to provide adequate level of services or
competitive pricing in the short to mid-term. The promotion of
public and private investments and partnership schemes, the
collaboration of public authorities and scientific institutions in
the faster development of broadband networks, the development of
public e-services. 3 Pillar IV: Fast and ultra-fast Internet access
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/our-goals/pillar-iv-fast-and-
ultra-fast-internet-access
5. 5 The maximisation of the social & economic potential of
the internet and the spread of innovation, economic growth and
improvements in daily life of citizens and businesses through the
provision of fast internet capabilities. Exploring the potential of
infrastructure mapping in the context of SIVA is of particular
added value as progress in this aspect will have a direct impact on
bringing down the set up cost through sharing and hence contribute
to the improvement of virtual accessibility in South East Europe.
1.3 Scope and aim of deliverable This document is the deliverable
of Activity 5.3.1 of the SIVA project, which constitutes the first
part of activity 5.3 entitled Promotion of cost reduction
strategies by facilitating the sharing of physical infrastructures
for network deployment in South East Europe. In the context of the
WP5, which works towards promoting the exchange of experiences,
consultation processes and coordination of strategies and plans
related to the development of broadband infrastructures, this
report aims to put forward common policy approaches and suggested
measures to integrate infrastructure mapping and availability
prerequisites in network deployment and civil engineering
construction works in SEE areas. Complementing the technical
corresponding work carried out under activity 4.3, this deliverable
provides specific policy recommendations and consensus-building
approaches in order to set the basis for a comprehensive framework
that will promote the development of an inventory or cadastre of
telecommunication infrastructures which in turn will be integrated
in broadband network rollout so as to facilitate infrastructure
sharing and accelerate broadband investments. The report is
outlined as follows: section 2 provides a policy analysis of the
measure of infrastructure mapping describing the political
background as well as identifying sources of values and challenges
and section 3 concludes with the provision of policy
recommendations and suggested measures that national authorities
should embrace in order to integrate infrastructure mapping in
broadband network deployment and enhance sharing.
6. 6 2 Infrastructure mapping 2.1 Position Analysis The
ultimate objective of policy recommendations and suggested measures
is to provide essential guidelines towards the promotion of cost
reduction strategies through common policy approaches on
facilitating the sharing of physical infrastructures for broadband
network deployment in South East Europe. This section puts forward
common policy approaches and suggested measures to integrate
infrastructure mapping and availability prerequisites in network
deployment and civil engineering construction works from a
perspective of establishing an appropriate regulatory and policy
framework that will promote the creation of a cadastre of telecom
infrastructures which in turn will bring a direct impact on
diminishing the set up cost through sharing and accelerate
broadband deployment investments. 2.2 Problem description 2.2.1
Bridging the digital divide Despite the acceleration of broadband
penetration worldwide, some areas (rural and remote area in most)
have remained underserved for broadband. This can be attributed to
the socioeconomic inequalities, in terms of income, literacy, age,
and/or gender and/or to the existence of geographically remote
and/or isolated territories, where the investments in broadband
networks do not seem affordable and commercial business plans
remain unfavourable. As a consequence, the population of such areas
cannot enjoy the benefits associated with broadband in terms of
economic growth and social welfare while a crucial divide among
population and social groups within the same territory is created.
The digital divide is a phenomenon defined as the gap between
individuals, businesses, households and geographic territories at
different social-economic levels as regards their opportunities to
have access to broadband services (OECD, 2001)4 . The accessibility
of individuals and businesses to broadband solutions and services
has been a topic of particular interest. Evidence shows that the
ability of 4 OECD (2001), Understanding the digital divide.
7. 7 individuals and businesses to take advantage of the
broadband services varies substantially across the EU as well as
between the EU as a whole and South East Europe as an independent
area of particular interest. According to the SEE Transnational
Cooperation Programme, a serious digital gap is quite evident in
terms of telecommunication services and infrastructures between the
EU and SEE. SEE demonstrates on average a number of 154 internet
users per 1000 people while the EU figure is more than double. In
the context of SEE area, a heterogeneous diffusion of broadband
connections is also evident among countries of South East Europe as
well as between urban and rural areas within the same territories.
As regards the SIVA countries the problem of low broadband coverage
and great disparities becomes significantly intense for the
under-accession SIVA countries. While for EU countries the rates of
broadband coverage is quite high and the disparities appear to be
limited, for under-accession countries the rates are significantly
lower while the diffusion within country appears extremely
heterogeneous. As far as the Next Generation Access services are
concerned, the deployment of fiber networks for NGA is still in
progress in the SIVA countries. While some countries have already
created significant portions of the necessary infrastructures,
others are now beginning the deployment. A critical aspect of
promoting wider broadband use and closing the digital divide is
ensuring that the infrastructure is affordable. Lower cost of
broadband infrastructure leads to affordable pricing and subsequent
take-up of services. Affordable pricing in turn encourages the
critical mass of users, as well as the services and applications
that they might use. Due to the nature of broadband though, the
deployment of infrastructure is both encouraged and at the same
time prohibited by the existing network externalities; without the
creation of broadband networks there will be no critical mass of
users and without the users, the economic and social benefits of
broadband will not be delivered. The development of broadband
networks requires sufficient investments that in many cases cannot
be justified by the existing or even the potential demand. Hence,
market by itself often fails to ensure the affordability of
broadband infrastructure deployment in certain territories. These
territories run the risk of enlarging the digital divide and become
second class markets in the global broadband and competitiveness
order.
8. 8 2.2.2 Cutting the rollout costs of broadband
infrastructure Broadband network rollout processes comprise four
main stages: a) commercial and technical planning; b) applying for
rights of way and other permits; c) civil engineering works; and d)
connecting end users. According to estimations of cost distribution
per different broadband infrastructure layer, the dominant part in
overall network deployment costs constitute the civil engineering
costs or else passive infrastructure elements which are estimated
as high as 80% of the total cost having inter alias a payback
period of 15 years. That makes operators to increasingly
investigate opportunities to diminish broadband network deployment
costs in order to invest in the rollout of broadband networks.
Recognising the need and importance of policies and action plans to
provide better broadband coverage and high-speed broadband
services, the EU highlights the importance of policies and measures
to be adopted in order to achieve quickly the objectives set in the
Digital Agenda for Europe by inter alias addressing the investment
challenge of high-speed broadband infrastructure which is one of
the most critical preventing factors tackling and delaying the
implementation of the declared objectives. The deployment of
broadband networks is by default an extremely capital intensive
initiative with a high sunk cost that in most business cases are
not justified by the expected revenues, representing thus a high
risk investment. These costs can be attributed to several barriers
identified in both the supply and demand side of the rollout
process. - On the demand-side, the main barriers are the limited
demand for broadband services as compared to conventional internet
connections and the relatively high cost of terminals required for
internet access. That becomes more apparent in countries with low
household computer ownership and lack of established digital
services to take full advantage of broadband (e-health,
e-government). Hence, the incentive for citizens to pay for high
speed internet connections is very low. - On the supply side, the
development of infrastructure in areas currently underserved (i.e.
rural and scarcely populated areas) is considered very expensive
due to the size of the area that must be covered. The
return-on-investment expectations remain low due to the small
population and the number of customers to be served. Furthermore,
high deployment costs can be attributed to inefficiencies related
to the utilisation of existing physical infrastructures such as
conduits,
9. 9 manholes, ducts, antenna installations etc.; barriers
regarding to the co-ordination of civil engineering works as well
as bureaucratic administrative procedures and bottlenecks related
to in-building networks deployment. Table 2 summarizes the results
of a survey conducted in the context of the SIVA project regarding
the barriers for further deployment of broadband infrastructure as
reported by the project partners. These barriers verify the
aforementioned assumptions and argumentation for the countries of
the SIVA consortium. More particularly, the survey results verify
that the high network deployment cost and the lack of existing
infrastructure are considerable barriers for the development of
broadband services in most of the SIVA countries. Table 1: Major
barriers for the deployment of broadband services in the SIVA
countries, Source: SIVA survey on broadband penetration in SEE
(2013) Barriers5 AT BG FYROM GR IT ME SI Supply-side Regulatory
issues in general X Lack of cooperation with local governments,
municipalities X X X Lack of exact and concrete National Strategy X
Access to spectrum Lack of existing infrastructure X X X X X
Network deployment capital cost issues X X X X Complex procedure
(bureaucracy, etc.) Lack of permits on local level Lack of suitably
skilled people for network construction, maintenance, operation and
training X Demand-side High cost for the subscriber either in terms
of up front or monthly charges for access X X Not enough demand to
justify infrastructure cost X X X High cost of user terminals X X X
X 5 This table depicts the positive answers of respondents, the
barriers that were positively identified as barriers to broadband
access deployment
10. 10 Actions and measures targeting at diminishing the costs
and barriers in carrying out new civil engineering works should
contribute to ensure a fast and extensive deployment of high speed
broadband networks while maintaining effective competition. A great
number of studies suggest that substantial cost savings in the
deployment of high-speed broadband networks could be achieved by a
more intensive use of existing infrastructures. Such savings and
efficiency gains can be delivered both for fixed and wireless
networks by increasing the use of existing passive infrastructures
such as ducts, conduits, masts etc and infrastructures of utility
companies (e.g. water, transport, energy, sewerage) as well as
raising transparency on the availability of existing
infrastructures (which infrastructures exist, the location, owner
details etc). That is why infrastructure sharing requires
transparent, easily accessible and up-to-date information on
existing infrastructures and details about their availability,
their exact location, their ownership and the way they can be
accessed. Such a mapping will be beneficial not only for
facilitating infrastructure sharing but also for other construction
works and for environmental purposes. Despite the potential
benefits of such a measure, its adoption seems to lag behind for
the countries of South East Europe. In that context, the SIVA
project sets forward common policy approaches and suggested
measures to promote the establishment of an inventory of telecom
infrastructures as well as the integration of infrastructure
mapping and availability prerequisites in network deployment and
civil engineering construction works.
11. 11 2.3 Political Background 2.3.1 Digital Agenda
Recognising the importance of public interventions in the
development of the electronic communications market, the European
Union has undertaken the promotion of a series of measures in order
to frame the European broadband policy. To this end, the European
Commission has introduced the Digital Agenda for Europe as one of
its flagship initiatives for Europe 2020 explicitly aiming to
provide all citizens with the capability to access fast internet
services by 2013 and ultra-fast internet by 2020. In that context,
European authorities have been attempting to advance broadband
diffusion and eliminate the digital gap (especially through
specific actions of the fourth pillar of DAE) by: a) Enhancing
market competition, b) Establishing a consensus on national
broadband policies, c) Improving access to networks and radio
spectrum, d) Providing a number of funding opportunities and
financial aid to (public and private) investors, and e) Reinforcing
the knowledge about the benefits of broadband services. National
authorities of the Member States have the fundamental role to
contextualize the actions in their specific reality, adjust their
national legislation and policy frameworks to this central EU
strategy, take action and comply with the directives and
recommendations of the European Commission. 2.3.2 EU regulatory
framework for electronic communications The adoption of the EU
electronic communications reform package6 in November 2009 paved
the way towards strengthening the European electronic
communications market by revising rules to ensure more effective
competition and better rights for consumers. 6 Regulatory framework
for electronic communications in the European Union
https://ec.europa.eu/digital- agenda/sites/digital-
agenda/files/Copy%20of%20Regulatory%20Framework%20for%20Electonic%20Communications%202013%20NO
%20CROPS.pdf
12. 12 Much has been accomplished already: the market has
become more competitive, generating investment, innovation and
growth in all 27 EU Member States. New communication services have
emerged and EU citizens now benefit from lower prices, better
quality and increased transparency. However, the common rules for
the regulation of electronic communications networks and services
are being implemented in the Member States with different degrees
of effectiveness. As a result, many operators and citizens still
perceive Europe as being a patchwork of different regulatory
regimes. More efforts are therefore still needed to move towards a
single market for electronic communications. The revised EU
framework constitutes the basis for a supportive and consistent
regulatory environment targeting remaining challenges. They
reinforce competition while enhancing incentives to invest. New
provisions on freeing radio spectrum will improve the availability
of new wireless services, including wireless broadband, at
reasonable costs. The new body of European regulators (BEREC) will
improve cooperation between national regulators and the European
Commission. This will lead to the creation of a common "regulatory
culture", to more consistency, and to a real single market for
electronic communications networks and services. 2.3.3 NGA
recommendation The regulation of access to Next Generation Access
Networks (NGA) constitutes a crucial step towards achieving the
goal of the Digital Agenda. This Recommendation therefore defines a
common regulatory approach as regards access to the new very fast
broadband networks using optical fibre, to offer a balance between
encouraging investment and maintaining competition. 7 2.3.3.1 Cost
reduction for deploying broadband networks Deployment of high-speed
broadband networks is subject to various inefficiencies and
bottlenecks which lead to high costs for undertakings wishing to
deploy networks, especially in rural areas. The 7 Next Generation
Access Networks (NGA),
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_society/strategies/si0018_en.htm
13. 13 dominant cost (up to 80%) in deploying new networks is
linked to civil engineering works. Therefore it is necessary to
adopt measures tackling these inefficiencies and to bring down the
civil engineering costs in order to incentivise infrastructure
rollout. The Commission intends to work on the adoption of the
regulation8 aimed at tackling: 1. Inefficiencies or bottlenecks
concerning the use of existing physical infrastructure (such as,
for example, ducts, conduits, manholes, cabinets, poles, masts,
antennae, towers and other supporting constructions); 2.
Bottlenecks related to co-deployment; 3. Inefficiencies regarding
administrative permit granting; and 4. Bottlenecks concerning
in-building deployment. In practical terms, thanks to the
regulation the owners of all infrastructures, e.g. electricity,
gas, water, sewage, suitable to host electronic communications
network elements will need to coordinate their works. Local
authorities will need to issue fewer permits. The implementation of
proposed measures is expected to incentivise rollout and facilitate
investments by decreasing the associated costs by up to 30 %. It is
estimated that the total amount to be saved on deployment could
reach over 60 billion. Towards this direction, the measure of
infrastructure mapping aims at increasing efficiency in the use of
existing infrastructures and at reducing costs and obstacles in
carrying out new civil engineering works. Even if the regulation
does neither require Member States to undertake such a mapping
exercise nor require the data to be aggregated or stored at a point
of single contact, it imposes Member States to 'make available' the
information collected by public sector bodies at a single
information point, via hyperlinks to other locations. Moreover, the
proposal does not impose any general obligation of pre-
notification of planned civil works. In that case, it rather
enables electronic communications providers to require this
information from network providers, in view of deploying high-speed
electronic communications networks. 8 Digital Agenda for Europe,
Action 117: Reduction of the cost of deploying high speed
electronic communication networks
http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/pillar-iv-fast-and-ultra-fast-internet-access/action-117-reduction-
cost-deploying-high-speed
14. 14 2.3.3.2 Universal Service Directive The European Union
intends to ensure the availability of a minimum set of high-quality
services that are available to all users at an affordable price,
without distortion of competition. It therefore lays down
obligations with regard to the provision of certain mandatory
services, such as the retail provision of leased lines. It also
establishes end-users' rights and the corresponding obligations of
undertakings that provide publicly available electronic
communications networks and services. Directive 2002/22/EC9 10
defines universal service as the minimum set of services of
specified quality to which all end-users have access, at an
affordable price in the light of specific national conditions,
without distorting competition. Representative provisions of the
Directive follow. Availability of the universal service Member
States must ensure that the electronic communications services
detailed in the Directive are made available to all users in their
territory, regardless of their geographical location, at a
specified quality level and an affordable price. Provision of
access at a fixed location and telephone services A fundamental
requirement of universal service is to provide users on request
with a connection to the public telephone network at a fixed
location and at an affordable price. The connection provided shall
enable end-users to take charge of voice communications, facsimile
communications and data communications, at data rates that are
sufficient to permit functional Internet access, the provision of
which may be restricted by Member States to the end-user's primary
residence. There should be no constraints on the technical means by
which the connection is provided. Affordability of tariffs The
Member States shall ensure that consumers with low incomes have
access to special tariff arrangements or are given special
assistance to enable them to have access to the network and to use
it. The special tariffs must either be provided by the designated
undertaking, or already be available on the 9
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2002:108:0051:0051:EN:PDF
10
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_society/legislative_framework/l24108h_en.htm
15. 15 market. Furthermore, the Member States may require
undertakings which have universal service obligations to comply
with price caps or to apply common tariffs, including geographical
averaging, throughout the national territory. Quality of service
The national regulatory authorities must set performance targets
for undertakings with universal service obligations and monitor
compliance with these targets by designated undertakings. Financing
of universal service obligations In order to compensate for the net
costs to which the provision of universal service might give rise,
compensation mechanisms for operators with universal service
obligations may be provided for. This may involve the introduction
of a mechanism to compensate from public funds and/or a mechanism
to share costs between providers of electronic communications
networks and services. 2.3.4 Regulatory measures to promote
competition and enhance the broadband investment environment On 12
July 2012 Neelie Kroes, the European Commission Vice-President and
European Commissioner for Digital Agenda, announced a new policy
package11 to create the legal predictability that investors are
asking for against the current overall economic situation in Europe
and the substantial roll-out costs of high speed internet. The
Commission is preparing a Recommendation on consistent
non-discrimination obligations and costing methodologies to promote
competition and enhance the broadband investment environment. The
EU Recommendation on consistent non-discrimination obligations and
costing methodologies which implements this policy has been
published at the end of 2012. There is no evidence that it has been
already incorporated in national legislations. It does have the
approval of BEREC though, the Body of European Regulators for
Electronic Communications which represent the national regulatory
authorities. 11 Digital Agenda for Europe, Actions 113 and 114:
Regulatory measures to promote competition and enhance the
broadband investment environment,
http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/pillar-iv-fast-and-ultra-fast-internet-
access/actions-113-and-114-regulatory-measures-promote
16. 16 2.3.5 National broadband plans The Commission
highlighted the importance of all Member States deploying an
operational broadband plan with defined national targets aligned on
European broadband targets, as well as a balanced set of policy
measures to incentivise investment in fast and ultra-fast internet.
The Digital Agenda for Europe (DAE) called on all Member States to
devise and make operational by 2012 national broadband plans which
meet the level of ambition of the broadband targets set out in
Europe 2020. Today, almost all Member States have developed a
national broadband strategy setting explicit broadband targets and
timelines. However, there are significant variations in the targets
set by each Member State as a result of the different starting
points. Most of them focus on achieving full coverage for basic
levels of broadband (i.e. adequate for email, routine surfing and
administrative services) setting a corresponding quantitative
target. Very few of them set clear operational measures to achieve:
Real competition among broadband providers that would lead to
affordable prices for consumers; and The roll-out of high-speed
internet, both in terms of timing and funding. As regards the next
generation access, approaches to ultra-fast networks vary more
widely than basic broadband targets. Member States can be clustered
into different groups of countries: countries, whose primary
objective is the basic broadband coverage, those countries with
full coverage of basic broadband which seek a gradual upgrade to
speeds between 30 and 100 Mbps and those countries with
highly-developed networks which target at the full transition to
NGA. Developing comprehensive national broadband strategies will
stimulate investment in fast internet access beyond current market
levels. Ultra-fast internet will enable new services based on
higher bandwidth needs to become available on a daily basis.
17. 17 In March 2012, the Commission presented a Staff Working
Document12 on national broadband plans. This summarised that state
of play and provides a reference point to assist and co-ordinate
national planning. 12
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=7948
18. 18 2.4 Rationale for recommendations Measures to accelerate
investment is a key to bridging the gap between the amount that
telecom operators, or other interested parties, plan to invest in
network infrastructure deployment and the investments required for
achieving the DAE broadband targets and closing the digital divide.
The economic rationale behind actions to facilitate investment is
to diminish investment costs. From the perspective of private
investors, this will bring about an increased number of sustainable
broadband projects, while simultaneously optimising the use of
existing economic resources. In that context, the reuse of existing
physical infrastructures can diminish the capital investments costs
for broadband network deployment. It is estimated that the
construction of passive infrastructure accounts for around 80% of
total fixed investment costs and reduction efforts should focus on
this major cost driver. Civil engineering costs (i.e. trenching or
digging) can be significantly reduced through a proper coordination
by national, regional and local authorities, using town planning
rules and remedies mandating access to passive infrastructures.
Wireless infrastructure costs can similarly be reduced by such
measures. Diminishing this cost removes an important barrier and
brings a significant and positive impact on the economic viability
of the broadband network deployments. As regards sharing, the
mandate access to physical infrastructures refers to the obligation
of the holders of the rights to install facilities on, over, or
under public or private property and to open up such
infrastructures for access to interested operators under reasonable
and non-discriminatory conditions. Infrastructure sharing means
exploiting infrastructure built for other purposes, such as laying
fibre in sewers, ducts for electric cabling or for road traffic
surveillance, attaching fibre to the rails of railway lines or
using rooftops of public buildings or masts and poles of
electricity distribution networks for the installation of aerials.
Such a measure will result in avoiding the costly and lengthy
broadband infrastructure construction process as it will promote
the use of already or simultaneously deployed infrastructure in
order to roll out their networks cheaper and faster. However,
infrastructure sharing faces significant bottlenecks and barriers
that tackle the efficient use of existing infrastructure and
prevent the broadband rollout in SEE areas. Table 2 summarises the
main barriers associated with the sharing of infrastructures and
sets forward relevant remedies.
19. 19 Table 2: Bottlenecks and barriers to more efficient use
of existing infrastructure Bottleneck / Barrier Remedy 1. Limited
transparency concerning the available existing physical
infrastructure suitable for broadband network deployment Obligation
to provide information and details about existing physical
infrastructures suitable for broadband network deployment.
Mechanisms and tools to ensure availability of such infrastructure
and facilitate access to relevant information 2. Lack of legal and
regulatory basis / institutional framework Establishment of a
institutional framework that will regulate the process of
infrastructure sharing by determining the scope of entities to be
obliged to share infrastructure and the scope of infrastructure to
be mandated for sharing 3. Commercial issues Introduction of a
pricing scheme that will provide the right incentives for
incumbents to allow access to their infrastructures and stimulate
business interest for investments in broadband rollout 4. Technical
infeasibility List of reasons for refusal of sharing as well as
definition of technical infeasibility 5. Administrative issues
Limit the complexity of the planning-to-implementation process and
configure the planning process A critical first step in supporting
infrastructure sharing is to set up a civil infrastructure mapping,
that is, a register of existing civil infrastructure which can be
used in broadband network roll-out. Development of cadastres or
inventories containing information about the existing
infrastructures as well as details about the location, the size,
the infrastructure type, the current use and the ownership seems a
critical measure to address the issue of limited transparency as
regards the suitability and availability of infrastructures for
broadband deployment. Mapping of existing telecom infrastructures
refers to the detailed, geo-referenced and structures gathering,
processing and visualisation of telecommunication infrastructure
(points and lines of TC- infrastructure as well as of relevant
physical infrastructures such as ducts, buildings, inspection
chambers masts, manholes and cabinets) for the purposes of the
accommodation, setting up and removal, and maintenance of
electronic communications transmission systems, equipment and
resources.
20. 20 Mapping telecom infrastructures in an inventory or
cadastre will enable to: a) Create insights into the current state
of broadband availability by conducting spatial analysis on amount,
length and nature of infrastructures in an area or region. Relevant
data can be used to determine the broadband service availability;
b) Coordinate broadband deployment measures and projects resulting
in the allocation of funds to areas without sufficient
infrastructure; and c) Reduce investment costs of broadband
deployment by publishing existing infrastructure that can be
utilised for further broadband deployment. A centralised mapping of
both active and passive physical infrastructures is also associated
with a series of financial implications which could result in a
great reduction of the broadband deployment costs in SEE countries.
The benefits of the creation of a cadastre of telecommunications
can be summarized as follows: 1. A detailed mapping of
infrastructures can be used as an instrument for strategic planning
and policy. More particularly, a cadastre of infrastructures can be
a strategic device for planning and implementing urban and regional
development, plotting military strategy as regards telecom
self-efficiency and legally contesting land ownership and use. Maps
can be employed in the national broadband plans in monitoring and
addressing inequalities, the so-called digital divide between areas
and regions within the same territory, providing clear directions
where broadband deployment investments should be accelerated. In
other words, an accurate mapping of areas served by next generation
networks (NGN) will enable authorities to identify the
disadvantaged areas and take measures to reduce the Digital Divide.
2. The major benefit of implementing a centralized mapping of
existing physical infrastructures is that such a measure can act as
an enabler of passive infrastructure sharing. That would definitely
lead to substantially lower deployment costs as well as to
increased broadband and NGA coverage. The knowledge of the current
and future network configuration will enable potential operators as
well as public authorities to design their broadband deployment
investments in such a way so as to optimize the use of
resources.
21. 21 3. Engineers will reduce the risk of redesigns and
claims by knowing the location of all infrastructures before the
beginning of design. Alike, investors will minimise the risk of
costly damages and change orders when they have been given all of
the infrastructure information they need to complete the evaluation
of the broadband network deployment project while contractors will
stay on schedule and under budget on projects where infrastructure
mapping is provided. 4. The cadastre of telecommunications appears
to have the potential of diminishing the bureaucratic and
administrative barriers related to the planning process. The
creation of a single information point containing all relevant
network information (such as the location, the size, the type of
infrastructure, the current use as well as the owner and legal
details) will have a positive impact on the administrative burdens
faced by operators and infrastructure providers when planning civil
engineering works. It will enable new public sector networks and
new network operators to reduce the amount of time spent collecting
and analyzing data before deciding on an installation path. 5.
Experience suggests that such a cadastre will result in less damage
caused to existing infrastructures, such as cables and pipelines,
when civil works are in progress. Operators will know where the
infrastructure is located and the likelihood of damages during
digging or trenching will be limited. The benefits of adopting a
central mapping of existing infrastructures for SEE countries are
also illustrated in various similar projects implemented in other
European countries. In the Flanders region of Belgium, AGIV13 has
developed a database called KLIP that provides information about
all passive infrastructure in the region as well as details about
the owners and the availability of their infrastructures. The
system has managed to significantly enhance infrastructure sharing,
diminish deployment costs and increase broadband coverage. AGIV
estimates that the system saves the authorities and the operators
EUR29.5 million14 per year in administrative and planning expenses
while the incidents of existing infrastructure being damaged
declined annually by 5%. Similarly, Portugals CIS portal is a
centralized infrastructure cadastre which uses red, amber and green
lights to indicate spare capacity in the incumbents ducts. All
organizations (local authorities, utility companies and telecom 13
Agentscahp voor Geografische Informatie Vlaanderen (www.agiv.be) 14
http://www.agiv.be/gis/organisatie/?artid=587
22. 22 companies) that may own relevant infrastructures are
obliged to provide and regularly update information concerning
their infrastructures. The system has boosted the sharing of the
existing facilities, yielding a cost reduction in infrastructure
deployment of 20%-30%. Table 3 summarises best practices in passive
infrastructure mapping in selected European countries. Table 3:
Examples of Passive Infrastructure Mapping (Source: European
Commission, 201215 and World Bank, 201416) Country Description
Germany In 2009, the German Federal Network Agency introduced the
Infrastrukturatlas programme to map the existing infrastructure
that can be utilised for NGA network deployment. The atlas covered
wired and wireless telecom infrastructure, transport networks and
other infrastructures such as utilities, antenna sites, windmills
etc while the data was collected from the infrastructure owners
themselves. Belgium In 2009, the Geographic Information System
(GIS) framework, which was a geographical database of environmental
and human factors covering the Flanders region of Belgium, was
updated with the spatial infrastructure data programme. This
consisted of three decrees one of which was a portal of cables and
conduits (KLIP). United Kingdom The National Joint Utilities Group
(NJUG) is a UK organisation that aims to promote best practice for
public street civil works. One initiative of the NJUG is to map
existing underground assets to create an infrastructure atlas for
the UK. In addition to the estimated 1 million kilometres of gas
and water mains and sewers, and 500 000 kilometres of electricity
cables, NJUG believes there are 2 million kilometres of telecoms
cabling, all of which it wishes to map. 15 European Commission
(2012), Support for the preparation of an impact assessment to
accompany an EU initiative on reducing the costs of highspeed
broadband infrastructure deployment. 16 Gelvanovska et al., (2014),
Broadband Networks in the Middle East and North Africa -
Accelerating High-Speed Internet Access, World Bank.
23. 23 Country Description Netherlands The Kadaster (Land
Registry) is responsible for maintaining the register of cables and
infrastructure in the Netherlands, using the KLIC portal. Although
not a map as such, this database contains the locations of active
infrastructure. Any organisation that wishes to undertake
excavation work is mandated by law to check the system to see which
operators are active in the area in question. Poland The
Information Broadband Infrastructure System (SIIS) was launched by
the office of electronic telecommunications to promote the
development of broadband networks. Polish operators are mandated to
provide detailed information about the entire deployed telecom
infrastructure in the system. The inventory maps the location of
telecom hubs, transmission systems, collocation buildings, points
of contact between public telecom networks as well as the route of
backbone and distribution telecom networks. Portugal ANACOM, the
Portuguese NRA, decided in 2009 to implement the Centralized
Information System (CIS), a central infrastructure atlas aimed at
reducing the cost of deploying new electronic communications
equipment. Providing and regularly updating information is
mandatory for all organizations that own or operate infrastructure
suitable for accommodating electronic communication infrastructure
(including roads, railways, water, and gas infrastructure).
Challenges Infrastructure mapping is a complex undertaking with
several difficulties and challenges that need to be overcome. The
issues and challenges associated with the creation of a cadastre of
existing infrastructures can be summarised as follows: - A detailed
mapping of infrastructure requires synergies and compatibility with
other existing cadastres such as the cadastre of land and buildings
and the cadastre of roads. In that context, administrative burdens
must be overcome allowing the provision of the data and enabling
rapid cooperation with relevant authorities.
24. 24 - Data acquisition is of critical importance. Possible
solutions are to collect data via ground surveys that would be
prohibitively expensive or to be acquired by authorities,
telecommunications companies, infrastructure owners, operators and
utility companies. However the high resolution infrastructure data
related to sensitive company details will require high
confidentiality requirements while the low willingness of companies
to supply data will require legal provisions and obligations. In
that context, it seems crucial to determine how much information is
already known and whether there are other overlapping mapping
projects in place - Issues related to accessibility and user rights
to data are considered of high importance. The question arisen is
who is allowed to request information from the cadastre. In that
context, high resolution infrastructure data will require control
mechanisms such as restricted access to data, contractual
agreements with data users, restriction of access to a dedicated
area etc. - Legal issues related to the regulatory framework
surrounding the procedure of gathering the information of existing
infrastructures including the conduct of ground surveys and the
obligation of telecommunication companies and owners of
infrastructures to provide details about the location, the size,
the infrastructure type, the current use and the ownership of their
facilities. - Given the general economic climate in SEE that does
not encourage the implementation of public investments, a critical
financial challenge arises prompting national authorities to
investigate alternative funding schemes for setting forward the
creation of the cadastre.
25. 25 3 Common policy processes and suggested measures The
SIVA Consortium wishes to integrate infrastructure mapping and
availability prerequisites in network deployment and civil
engineering construction works so as to bring down the set up cost
through sharing and requests further actions for the accomplishment
of this effort. Thus, this section provides some general principles
that policy makers and national authorities of the SEE area should
embrace in their efforts to support and promote the mapping of
existing infrastructures. The common policy processes and suggested
measures have been grouped under four categories that emphasize the
approach that should be embraced towards the integration of
infrastructure mapping in broadband deployment: a) governance and
strategic planning; b) legal and regulatory framework; c)
approaches to finance; and d) human resources. 3.1 Governance and
strategic planning - Commence due diligence and develop a
comprehensive feasibility study so as to lay the ground for a
roadmap towards the establishment of the cadastre of existing
infrastructures. The feasibility study should evaluate and analyse
the potential of the construction of the cadastre and be based on
extensive investigation and research to support the process of
decision making. - Step up efforts to limit the length and the
complexity of the planning-to-implementation process. Determine
procedures, obtain approvals and secure rights of way at an initial
stage. - Configure the planning process in order to confront the
delays that may arise because of the complexity of the
administrative processes, the bureaucracy as well as the great
number of various levels of government and public bodies involved
in the implementation of the measure. Possible policy solutions
would be to a) simplify such arrangements by redistributing
decision- making powers among different players of public
administration and b) accelerate the procedures by creating a
cross-functional team to identify relevant stakeholders and ensure
the involvement and to develop synergies with other existing
cadastres. - Ensure the involvement of a broader range of
stakeholders in the process of needs assessment, prioritisation,
design, planning and delivery of the cadastre. Broadband
infrastructures embody both public and private implications, with
the latter moving increasingly to the fore as the role of the
private sector in infrastructure provision expands. What is more,
in the wake of shifting
26. 26 patterns of urban and rural settlement, infrastructure
projects are affecting many more assets, especially in already
densely inhabited residential areas. - Use a two-phase approach to
create the cadastre of telecom infrastructures. The first stage
should contain the gathering of information related to existing
passive infrastructures and broadband facilities by requesting the
information from the owners while in the second phase details about
the shareability of each duct will be collected by conducting a
ground survey. The advantage of the first approach is that
infrastructure mapping can be implemented fairly quickly and at
reasonable cost while the second one requires to survey areas which
is very costly. In such a case, national authorities should conduct
a cost-benefit analysis to determine the financial implications of
these approaches as well as their feasibility. - Set forward a
common management system for infrastructure data. Develop synergies
with other cadastres so as to create a harmonised centralised data
management platform addressing inter alia the unnecessary procuring
and processing of data from multiple heterogeneous sources. -
Commit resources to spread knowledge among elected representatives
about the potential and the benefits associated with the mapping of
infrastructures in terms of economic growth and social welfare with
the aim to mobilise them and accelerate the decision making
process. - Communicate the opportunities arisen with the
development of the cadastre of existing infrastructures in terms of
infrastructure sharing to stakeholders and interested parties. - -
Strengthen international co-operation to improve the efficiency and
reliability of the measure and encourage the exchange of best
practices at the national/regional/local level. 3.2 Legal and
regulatory framework - Examine and determine the legal and
regulatory framework conditions with a view to encouraging the
provision and access to the sensitive infrastructure data. High
resolution infrastructure data and sensitive company information
pose high confidentiality requirements. As a result, special care
should be given to defining what type of data will be provisioned,
how information will be acquired and maintained, when and under
what circumstances confidentiality will be maintained and any
reasonably anticipated risk associated with the inappropriate
disclosure of data.
27. 27 - Develop specific control mechanisms dealing with
issues of access to high resolution data. Such control mechanisms
could be contractual agreements with data users; involvement of
data suppliers and contractual agreements for data use; restricted
access to data; restriction of access to a dedicated area and
generalisation of information. - Adopt provisions that oblige
owners of physical infrastructures, who may be unwilling to
participate, to supply the necessary infrastructure details
(location, size, infrastructure type, current use, technology used
and ownership) in the cadastre for the telecom infrastructures.
Create and establish necessary enforcement tools to ensure
compliance and define penalties for non-compliance. 3.3 Approaches
to finance - Explore the funding possibilities offered by the EU.
As the allocation of public resources may be hampered by strict
national budgets and austerity policies, national authorities
should investigate additional financing in the funding
opportunities provided by the EU and more especially in the context
of financial instruments for broadband support (e.g. EU Structural
Funds, Connecting Europe Facility etc.). Co-financing through state
aid and grant from the EU could possibly aid to overcome the
resistances caused by the limited financial resources and hence,
accelerate the procedures towards the establishment of the
cadastre. The acceleration of the mechanism of funding as well as
the speeding up of the relevant bureaucratic procedures is
considered critical in order to avoid unnecessary delays. -
Encourage public-private partnerships as a mean for raising
additional financing or as an alternative funding scheme. This is
why the private sector is involved in the provision and operation
of physical infrastructure and broadband facilities. Apart from
providing information in cases where private companies own existing
passive infrastructures, the private sector could contribute to the
financing of such a measure aiming at utilising the investment
opportunities that the mapping and sharing of infrastructures will
bring to the forefront.
28. 28 3.4 Human resources - Commit resources to build up
technical knowledge among public officers on issues related to the
procedures of the cadastre of existing infrastructures. The
creation of the cadastre will require staff with significant
expertise in the field to ensure that the final outcome will meet
the needs and requirements of national authorities. Hence, apart
from the engagement of external experts, staff of all government
levels and public bodies involved in the procedure of mapping need
to be trained on the necessary concepts and details in order to
facilitate the process of collecting the necessary details from the
owners, conducting the ground survey and incorporating evidence
into the system.