TPRC 2024: The 52nd Research Conference on Communications, Information and Inter

Link to paper

Abstract:
For decades, the policy priority to bridge the  digital divide in the United States was to obtain additional funding to build out and upgrade networks, particularly in rural and disadvantaged areas. However, in the past two years, numerous federal programs, plus some state and other initiatives, have allocated billions of dollars to achieve the goal of “universal broadband.”
While resources are more limited in Canada, funding is available from some federal agencies as well as some provincial and other sources. The emphasis in both countries as been on funding for capital projects such as provision of optical fiber for both transport and local networks or equipment for fixed wireless broadband networks. However, there has been little attention to the sustainability of these networks such as business models, and management and technical skills to continue their operation.

While research on the impact and sustainability of recent federally funded projects will take time, this paper examines the challenges they may face and strategies to overcome or minimize them. The following issues are addressed:
• Engagement: consultation, training and hiring
• Participation: partnerships and ownership
• Sustainability: Financial, technical and resilience
• Competition and disruption.
Engagement with local or Tribal governments can not only explain the proposed project, but also identify issues such as access to existing facilities, rights-of-way, services to be provided and pricing. While the FCC now requires Tribal consultation for projects on Tribal lands, preliminary research indicates that there is little enforcement of this requirement. Federal infrastructure programs now mandate engagement with local or Indigenous governments, but it is unclear how compliance will be formalized and monitored. Engagement can also identify opportunities to train and hire local residents for both network installation and ongoing operations and maintenance. Consultation may also identify needs for digital literacy training so that households and organizations can benefit from the infrastructure investment, contributing to local economies.

The paper reviews various models of participation including partnerships and ownership, and examines the implications of programs that fund some Indigenous organizations with little management experience or technical expertise, and must rely on contractors.

Sustainability can include financial viability as well as technical sustainability. Redundancy can be critical for sustainability to ensure continuity of service, for example, satellite terminals to back up fiber networks, and ring transport architecture to provider alternative pathways. The paper provides evidence of extensive outages where projects did not include funding or consideration for redundancy.

Technical sustainability can also include future-proofing to prevent short-term obsolescence at minimal cost. Requirements for inclusion of dark fiber and upgradeable switching can extend useable project life. The paper provides examples of relatively recently installed rural networks that could not meet increased demand during the pandemic, and unforeseen costs incurred to upgrade switching, such as for 988 access.

Concerning competition, some incumbent providers state that allowing competition would discourage investment in regions with low populations, and conversely, that if competition is viable, it should only be facilities-based. However, the paper provides evidence from Alaska and Canada of open access competition, as well as facilities-based competition, most recently from Starlink.

The paper concludes with questions to be addressed, and the need for independent evaluation to determine the impacts and lessons from investments of billions of dollars in rural broadband in Alaska and northern Canada.