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

Link to paper

Abstract:
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA, 2021) and the Digital Equity Act (DEA, 2021) outline key pillars for achieving digital equity, including affordable broadband, device availability, digital literacy training, and privacy measures. The Digital Opportunities Compass framework (Rhinesmith et al., 2023) was introduced to create comprehensive digital equity plans that go beyond basic access, emphasizing long-term social and economic development. The framework aids stakeholders in assessing conditions, developing strategies, and evaluating digital equity impacts. It was shared with policymakers and stakeholders to guide program development.

This study in three Michigan communities explored how local contexts influence digital equity strategies. It utilized the Compass framework and an asset-based community development informed approach to assist communities in creating tailored digital equity strategies. Findings indicated that many participants were new to digital equity concepts, affecting task force recommendations and efficacy metrics. The study suggests that local digital equity coalitions can support national and state efforts and emphasizes building community capacity. It also highlights the need for more research on how local factors influence digital equity outcomes.

Local context, including infrastructure, socioeconomic factors, and community assets, significantly affects policy and program development. Community-driven efforts are often more sustainable, but challenges such as limited knowledge and capacity can hinder progress. A guided decision-making process can help stakeholders develop effective digital equity solutions.

These task force participant experiences and practitioner reflections suggest several important directions for future policy implementations using the Digital Opportunities Compass as a guide. in addition to understanding traditional broadband and digital inclusion metrics, such as the five measurable objectives in the IIJA, future digital equity planning initiatives should make sure to gather data on individual indicators found in the Compass, such as “business digital readiness,” “community health and wellbeing,” “community assets,” and “everyday experiences” pertaining to those most impacted by a lack of broadband, devices, digital skills, and technical support. Second, local initiatives that foster existing community strengths, resources, and values can support effective policy interventions. Third, the Compass pilot revealed several key considerations in developing and deploying future policy interventions. Among these include ensuring clear leadership, community cohesion, and task force composition in the development of local digital equity initiatives. Finally, this study revealed that a lack of capacity, limited understanding of systemic and broader issues impacting digital equity, and time constraints faced by government officials can impede the creation of sustainable solutions and policies.

Link to paper

Abstract:
In 2021, Congress allocated billions of dollars to the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), extending the Emergency Broadband Benefit past its classification as a COVID-19 response policy. Since ACP’s inception, over 23 million, or one in six, American families enrolled in the program to offset the price of broadband service and devices. This represents just over half of urban and a third of rural households who were eligible for the program. Earlier this year, the FCC announced that April 2024 would be the last fully-funded month of ACP. Despite considerable bipartisan support, the ACP was fully depleted in May 2024.

Community advocates and local leaders persistently cite affordability as the main reason that residents do not have home broadband subscriptions and adequate devices. This connection inspired our research examining the relationship between broadband access and poverty levels across all fifty states, D.C., Puerto Rico, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Guam.

In anticipation of billions of dollars in broadband funding across the US, we collected statewide statistics from states and territories eligible for the BEAD Program as community-level data from five selected municipalities and counties, where available. Selected communities include a range of population sizes, from 82 to 1.5 million residents, and include a sample of communities investing in different types of broadband and digital inclusion initiatives to compare the local programs’ impact on local adoption rates. Out of a survey of data points from all fifty states, six territories, and 278 communities, we noticed considerable support for our thesis that poverty and Internet access are highly correlated, a finding supported by literature.

Along with American Community Survey (ACS) data, we compiled publications describing state programs and community initiatives. We plan to cross-reference this information with the data collected to better understand outliers in our findings. Additionally, we offer suggestions for policymakers to improve the Internet and device adoption data collection process.

Link to paper

Abstract:
In the FCC’s recent Future of the Universal Service Fund (USF) proceeding, one of the most extensively debated subjects in the record was the possibility of modernizing the USF contributions system. Among others, there were two broad proposals that were advanced – (1) expanding the contribution base to include revenues from broadband internet access service, and (2) broadening the USF contribution base to include entities including edge providers such as streaming video providers, digital advertising firms, and cloud services companies. We find that the most economically efficient option for reform is to expand the contribution base to include broadband internet access service revenues.
The USF is currently funded through fees collected from telecommunications providers. Funds are then used to subsidize the various programs under the USF, promoting universal connectivity. Even though the USF supports broadband through its disbursements, the contribution base for the USF is funded based on interstate and international telecommunications revenue. As the industry shifts towards internet-based communication, the contribution base for universal service has dramatically shrunk. Since 2012 the contribution base has declined more than 42%. Given this, in the past two decades the contribution factor (i.e., Projected USF Expenditures/Contribution Base) has more than tripled – from around 7% to over 29%. Without funding reform we predict it will be 44.0% in 2025 and 49.7% in 2027.
There are economic consequences from such large fees (currently at 29.2%) on such a narrow base (mostly voice revenues) as fees become more distortionary and burdensome on an inequitable subset of Americans who primarily rely on voice services. Expanding the contribution base to include broadband internet access service revenues will simultaneously lower the effective USF fee (to 3.7%) and broaden the base from which the funding comes (all uses of broadband), reducing market distortions in line with economic principles and the institutional history of USF. We also find, under plausible assumptions for service plan prices, that consumers will not face a significant price increase and many will likely achieve savings due to the decrease in contribution factor on voice service. In addition, to the extent any additional fees levied are passed onto downstream consumers, the burden will likely be borne relatively more by high-income consumers.
We also find that various other proposals to include certain edge providers would arbitrarily increase market distortions and are not in line with economic principles. In addition, these proposals also assert, without reliable evidence, that fees levied on edge providers will not be passed down to consumers. We find that economic principles and empirical trends in the industry suggest otherwise.