Upload
enrico-ferro
View
782
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
“Demand and Offer Related Digital “Demand and Offer Related Digital Divides: The Piedmont ExperienceDivides: The Piedmont Experience””
EUROPEAN KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY FORUM
Divides: The Piedmont ExperienceDivides: The Piedmont Experience
EUROPEAN KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY FORUM 23rd – 25th October 2008AMAROUSSION - Hellas
Dr. Enrico FerroDr. Enrico Ferro
Why Caring about Digital Divide?Why Caring about Digital Divide?
• Importance of eInclusion has been widely recognized (pillar• Importance of eInclusion has been widely recognized (pillarof i2010 strategy)
N t j t tt f i l lit b t bl f t t i• Not just a matter of social equality, but a problem of strategicimportance in the global race for competitiveness
Th F i d i h b k “ ld i fl ” h• Thomas Friedman in the book “world is flat” argues theincreased importance of individuals as key the economicagents
• “The world did not expect the second wave of Internetinnovation to be led by consumers rather than companiesy p(myspace, youtube, 2L, facebook, etc..)” interview toCYSCO’s CEO.
1
Types of Digital DividesTypes of Digital Divides
DIGITAL DIVIDE TAXONOMY
OFF
ER
1. Lack of e-Government service provisioning in small municipalities 2. Availability of broadband networks
id li
1. Availability of PCs and Internet connections in schools and public places 2. Diffusion of WAI compliant websites
ND
outside metropolitan areas
1. Gap associated to age, gender, d ti d i
1. Lower penetration of PC and Fast Internet
ti i l t lit
GeographicDivides
DE
MA
N education and income 2. Gap associated to enterprise size, sector of activity and type of management
connections in rural vs. metropolitan areas 2. Less training and lower ICT usage in small Public Administrations
INTRA-MUNICIPAL (Social Classes)
INTER-MUNICIPAL (Geographic Areas)
Th Pi d t CThe Piedmont Case
• Background information:– 1206 Municipalitiesp– 90% of which below 5000
inhabitants– Around 40% of the population
lives in rural areas– As of 2005 30% of
municipalities reached by DSL iservices
The WI-PIE ProgrammeThe WI-PIE Programme
R l i d b h EU C i i b i i• Recently recognized by the EU Commission as a best practice in Europe through a “fast track” INTERREG capitalization project named: B3 Regions.
• ACTION LINES:
– Understand and keep under control the phenomenon through a regular monitoring and study activity (Observatory)monitoring and study activity (Observatory)
– Promote the experimentation of Alternative Technological Solutions:
• Satellite + HyperLAN + WiFi / Satellite + Copper wire / WiMAXSate te ype N W / Sate te Coppe w e / W
– Favor the development of broadband enabled services (break chicken and egg problem - BB better sold in bundles)
– Creation of distributed GigaPops to be used as test beds for the creation of interactive multimedia services
– Provide fast access to schools and universities
4
Guiding CriteriaGuiding Criteria
• Selectivity: technological and economical model efficiency;y;
• No overlapping on market action and interventions t bilitsupportability;
• Coherence with national and international Co e e ce w t at o a a d te at o ainitiative
T h l i l li d O A• Technological neutrality and Open Access
5
DSL Infrastructure EvolutionDSL Infrastructure Evolution
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
0.0%
10.0%
gen-
99ap
r-99
lug-
99ot
t-99
gen-
00ap
r-00
lug-
00ot
t-00
gen-
01ap
r-01
lug-
01ot
t-01
gen-
02ap
r-02
lug-
02ot
t-02
gen-
03ap
r-03
lug-
03ot
t-03
gen-
04ap
r-04
lug-
04ot
t-04
gen-
05ap
r-05
lug-
05ot
t-05
gen-
06ap
r-06
lug-
06ot
t-06
gen-
07ap
r-07
lug-
07ot
t-07
gen-
08ap
r-08
% municipalities reached % population reachedLAUNCH OF WI-PIE
PROGRAMMEAGREEMENT SIGNED WITH
TELECOM ITALIA
6
Agreement with Telecom ItaliaAgreement with Telecom Italia
• Incumbent operator (TI) has agreed to cover 1029 municipalities out of 1206
– Focus infrastructure related actions on a limited number of municipalities 177number of municipalities 177
– Government may hence concentrate on stimulating demand
7
Digital Divide DynamicsDigital Divide Dynamics
B d B d N B d N iN ti
50%80%
100%Broad Band Narrow Band Nessuna connessioneNo connection
13%
55% 59% 54% 53% 53% 50%
60%
26%37%
39% 37% 37%26% 21%
13%
20%
40%
5% 4% 9%21% 26%
0%2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
• Broadband penetration has increased among I/net users
8• No “technology push” effect on excluded people
Digital Divide Dynamics (II)Digital Divide Dynamics (II)
2003 2005 2006 2007
70%
80%
90%2003 2005 2006 2007
HO
UT
ion
40%
50%
60%
olds
WIT
Het
Con
nect
10%
20%
30%
of H
ouse
han
Inte
rne
0%
n. familiare=1 n. familiare=2 e reddito ≤2000
n. familiare=2 e reddito >2000
n. familiare>2% o a
2 peopleIncome >2000€
More than 2 people
1 person 2 peopleIncome <2000€
• Very limited opt-in dynamics within clusters over time
HOUSEHOLD TYPES IDENTIFIED
• Very limited opt-in dynamics within clusters over time • High resistance to change
9
Open issuesOpen issues…
• Are i2010 objectives realistic?• May a multiplatform approach help to find a
solution?• Should we start talking about the concept of digital
h i ?choice?• How should public policies evolve to face changing
i ? F h ld b d d iissues? Focus should be on demand since:– Its reduces market perturbations – It is the only real technology neutral actionIt is the only real technology neutral action– It fosters the creation of complementary services– Life long learning prevents the birth of second order
dividesdivides10