$7.2 Billion for Broadband Stimulus:Broadband Stimulus: Opportunities & · PDF...

4/29/2009

1

$$7.2 Billion forBroadband Stimulus:Broadband Stimulus:

Opportunities & ChallengesWest Virginia High Technology Consortium

Roundtable Discussion of"Broadband's Impact on Your West Virginia Business" 

Fairmont, West Virginia

Robert C. AtkinsonDirector of Policy Research

April 15, 2009

Director of Policy ResearchColumbia Institute for Tele‐Information (CITI)

Columbia Business School, New York

4/29/2009

2

Disclaimer

Although I have assisted NTIA and RUS in d ti i f t blimoderating a series of recent public

meetings on the broadband stimulus programs I have no non-public knowledgeprograms, I have no non public knowledge about the programs and my comments do NOT reflect the views of either agency: they are strictly my own.

4/29/2009

3

AGENDA

• Summary of $7.2 Billion “Broadband Sti l ”Stimulus”– RUS an NTIA “BTOP” Programs

Broadband Deployment and Availability in• Broadband Deployment and Availability in West Virginia

• Barriers to Broadband Adoption and Use• Barriers to Broadband Adoption and Use• Creating (or Losing) Jobs With Broadband

4/29/2009

4

NTIA “BTOP” Program• $4.7 Billion

– No more than $350M for BB mappingLeaving at least $4 350M including– Leaving at least $4,350M, including-

• At least $200M to expand community computer centers• At least $250M for innovative programs to encourage

sustainable BB adoptionsustainable BB adoption• About $150M for administration, inc. $10M to Inspector

General for audits and monitoring– Remainder---max $3,750M-- for project grants$ , p j g– Grants for up to 80% of a project’s cost– All grants to be awarded by Sept. 30, 2010

• Three phases being considered• Three phases being considered– Projects must be completed 2 years after award

4/29/2009

5

Who Is Eligible for BTOP Grants?

1. States and political subdivisionsIncl des DC territories Indian tribes nati e– Includes DC, territories, Indian tribes, native Hawaiian organizations

2. Non-profit organizationsp g3. Any other entity, including a broadband

service or infrastructure provider, found “b l t b i th bli i t t ”“by rule to be in the public interest.”

– No rule yet, so “partnering” with government or non-profit results in assured eligibilityp g y

4/29/2009

6

NTIA BTOP Grants For:

1. Equipment, network capability, hardware and software, technology for BB servicesgy

2. Build/deploy BB infrastructure3. BB access for “community anchor institutions”4. Facilitate BB access for “low-income,

unemployed, aged and otherwise vulnerable populations” for education and employmentp p p y

5. BB for public safety communications6. Other projects that are consistent with BTOP

purposes

4/29/2009

7

BTOP Purposes1. More consumer access to BB in “unserved areas”2. More consumer access to BB in “underserved

areas”3. BB education, awareness, training, access,

equipment and support for -(a) schools, libraries, medical, colleges and “other

comm nit s pport organi ations”community support organizations”(b) Organizations that encourage BB use by low-income,

unemployed, aged and otherwise vulnerable people(c) Job-creating strategic facilities in eco development(c) Job creating strategic facilities in eco development

zones4. BB for public safety agencies5. Stimulate demand for BB, economic growth and job5. Stimulate demand for BB, economic growth and job

creation

4/29/2009

8

NTIA Grant Award Criteria1. At least one grant per State2. Infrastructure deployment projects should-

(A) Increase BB affordability and subscribership(A) Increase BB affordability and subscribership(B) Provide greatest BB speed(C) Enhance service for healthcare, education and

childrenchildren(D) Not result in unjust enrichment

3. Consider socially and economically disadvantaged small businessdisadvantaged small business

… and presumably other criteria developed by NTIANTIA

4/29/2009

9

NTIA BTOP Critical Issues• What is “broadband”?

What is an “unserved” area?• What is an “unserved” area?• What is an “underserved” area?• Is it in the “public interest” to allow for-profitIs it in the public interest to allow for profit

entities to receive grants?• How does applicant show:

– Capability to do the project?– That project wouldn’t have been implemented

without grant?• State role?

4/29/2009

10

BTOP Opportunitiespp“We view these grants as a test-bed or proof of concept for sustainable viableproof of concept for sustainable, viable, and scalable projects. For example, we encourage partnerships between small businesses, municipalities, and others that may demonstrate nontraditional but effecti e a s of getting broadband intoeffective ways of getting broadband into communities. These grants will not be just for large companies ”for large companies.

Mark Seifert, Senior Advisor, NTIA, testifying before the House Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet, April 2, 2009

4/29/2009

11

Suggestions for BTOP Projectsgg j

• BB Infrastructure Deployment, such as:– First/last mile (connections to users)– Mid-mile (connecting first/last mile to internet

backbone)backbone)• Stimulating BB Adoption and Usage, such as:

– Training and educationTraining and education– New ways to use BB in education, healthcare,

economic development, etc.

4/29/2009

12

RUS Programg• $2.5 Billion

For loans loan guarantees and grants– For loans, loan guarantees and grants– 75 percent of project’s area must be in “a rural

area without sufficient access to high speed broadband to facilitate rural economicbroadband to facilitate rural economic development”

– Priority to projects that deliver choice of more than one service provider to end usersthan one service provider to end users

– Priority to projects that provide service to highest proportion of unserved rural residentsP i it t t d f RUS b– Priority to current and former RUS borrowers

4/29/2009

13

RUS Community Connect Grants in West VirginiaWest Virginia

Grantee and Location

Year Amount Project DescriptionLocation

Philippi Municipal Building Comm., Philippi

2002 $2,391,115 Upgrade muni cable system to HFC for internet access

Gateway Telecom (aka StratusWave),Pine Grove

2003 $181,000 WISP: connect school, FD, PD, community center, etc; provide computer and internet training

Gateway Telecom,Middleborne

2003 $192,000 WISP: same

Gateway Telecom 2003 $182 000 WISP: sameGateway Telecom, Bethany

2003 $182,000 WISP: same

Source: USDA, http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/commconnect/pdfs/2008West%20Virginia.pdf

4/29/2009

14

RUS Community Connect Grants in yWest Virginia

Grantee and Location

Year Amount Project Description

Mountain Champion 2003 $275,000 WISP: connect school, FD,pCommunity First, Richwood

$ , , ,PD, community center, etc; provide computer and internet training

T f D 2005 $280 360 WISPTown of Davy,Davy

2005 $280,360 WISP: same

WV Wisp,Reedy

2008 $628,200 WISP: sameReedy

Source: USDA, http://www.usda.gov/rus/telecom/commconnect/pdfs/2008West%20Virginia.pdf

4/29/2009

15

RUS Broadband Loans

Source: USDA http://broadbandsearch.sc.egov.usda.gov/

4/29/2009

16

B db d D l tBroadband Deploymentand

Availability

4/29/2009

17

Is the US “Behind” in BB?

Broadband Subscribers per 100 Populationb T h l

30

35

40

Fibre/LAN Cable

USA‐#16

by Technology 

15

20

25 DSL OECDAverage

OECD average

0

5

10

Source: OECD

4/29/2009

18

Broadband Penetration Comparisons-US States and European CountriesUS States and European Countries

(2007 Data Based on Consumer Surveys, Not Service-Provider Reports)

West Va.

SOURCE: Verizon analysis:  EU Member States – European Commission, DG‐Information Society, “E‐communications Household Survey” (June 2008), at 54. U.S. States – U.S. Census Data, as reported in U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NTIA, “Networked Nation: Broadband inAmerica” (January 2008), at Table B‐3.  Other countries – OECD Broadband Statistics, Households with Broadband Access (Nov. 2008)

4/29/2009

19

Wired Broadband Availabilityed oadba d a ab tyfor Residences

xDSL AvailabilityWhere ILECs Can Provide Telephone Service

Cable ModemAvailability Where Cable TV Systems Can Provide Cable TV Service

West Virginia 74% 84%

Nationwide 82% 96%

Source: FCC, “High‐Speed Services for Internet Access: Status as of December 31, 2007,” Table 14, January 2009

4/29/2009

20

Source: West Virginia Public Service Commission, General Investigation Into The Deployment Of Advanced Telecommunications In West Virginia,  Case No. 00‐0028‐T‐GI,  2007 Update,  April 2007

4/29/2009

21

Source: West Virginia Public Service Commission, General Investigation Into The Deployment Of Advanced Telecommunications In West Virginia, Case No. 00‐0028‐T‐GI, 2007 Update,  April 2007

4/29/2009

22

Source: West Virginia Public Service Commission, General Investigation Into The Deployment Of Advanced Telecommunications In West Virginia, Case No. 00‐0028‐T‐GI, 2007 Update,  April 2007

4/29/2009

23

4/29/2009

24

Broadband Availability

Source: Connect West Virginiahttp://connectwestvirginia.org/mapping_and_research/county_maps.php

4/29/2009

25

Source: WISP Directory, http://www.wispdirectory.com/index.php?option=com_mtree&task=viewlink&link_id=5504&Itemid=53

4/29/2009

26

Commercial WISPs in

WestWestVirginia

Source: WISP Directory, http://www.wirelessmapping.com/Google%20Maps3.htm

4/29/2009

27

Observation• There are plenty of opportunities to use RUS and

BTOP funding to build additional broadband infrastructure (last mile mid-mile) in “unserved” andinfrastructure (last mile, mid-mile) in unserved and “underserved” West Virginia

• There is a track-record of success from relatively small grants that pay the capital costs forsmall grants that pay the capital costs for deployment of “last mile”– Modest operating costs can be covered by monthly

subscriber charges– “Mid-mile” is essential to “last mile” and may be favored

BUT…”infrastructure” isn’t the whole story…

4/29/2009

28

Barriers to Broadband Adoption and Usep

4/29/2009

29

Availabilty vs. Adoption(2007 Data excluding satellite)(2007 Data, excluding satellite)

U.S. West VirginiaAvailability 92% 77%Availability 92% 77%

Adoption 51% 34%

4/29/2009

30

BB Adoption Challenge:Moving Dial Up Users to BBMoving Dial-Up Users to BB

What would it take dial-up users (9% of adults) to switch to broadband?to switch to broadband?

• 35% say price would have to fall• 19% say nothing would get them to change• 19% say nothing would get them to change• 16% don’t know• 14% say it would have to become available• 14% say it would have to become available

where they live• 11% cite some other reason

Source:  John Horrigan, Pew Internet & American Life Project

4/29/2009

31

BB Adoption Challenge:Non‐Users of InternetNon Users of Internet

What is the MAIN reason 25% of US adults don’t use the internet?33% of non users say they aren’t interested in• 33% of non-users say they aren’t interested in getting online.

• 13% say they can’t get access9% find it diffic lt and fr strating• 9% find it difficult and frustrating

• 9% cite unspecified “other” reason• 7% say it is too expensive• 7% say the internet is a waste of time• 4% don’t have a computer• 3% say they are too old to learny y• 3% are physically unableSource: John Horrigan, Pew Internet & American Life  Project

4/29/2009

32

Barriers to Broadband Adoption Among Rural ResidentsAmong Rural Residents

(44%)

(National)Rural

( )

(32%)

(23%)

(14%)

(8%)

Source: “Consumer Insights to America’s Broadband Challenge,” ConnectedNation, Oct. 2008 at http://www.connectednation.org/_documents/ConsumerInsightsBroadbandChallenge_20081013.pdf

4/29/2009

33

Barriers to Computer Ownership Among Rural Residents

(62%)

Rural  (National)

(62%)

(24%)(24%)

(10%)

(10%)

Source: “Consumer Insights to America’s Broadband Challenge,” ConnectedNation, Oct. 2008 at http://www.connectednation.org/_documents/ConsumerInsightsBroadbandChallenge_20081013.pdf

4/29/2009

34

BB Adoption Challenge:M t hi P li t P blMatching Policy to Problem

Policy Response

On line literacy

Vouchers, USF

Computer literacy

Infrastructure

Source: John Horrigan, Pew Internet & American Life Project

4/29/2009

35

Observation• Encouraging greater use of existing

broadband may be at least as important asbroadband may be at least as important as building new broadband infrastructure – Creates different kinds of jobsj– New demand justifies more private investment

in infrastructure

4/29/2009

36

Creating (or Losing) Jobs With Broadband

4/29/2009

37

Creating Jobs with BB Stimulus

• Capital investment of $6.4B in the form of BB stimulus grants will generate 128,000 j b f (32 000 )jobs over four years (32,000 per year), nationwide

37 300 directly (mostly construction)– 37,300 directly (mostly construction)– 31,000 indirectly (jobs in other sectors)– 59,500 induced from spending direct and59,500 induced from spending direct and

indirect incomes

Source: “Estimating the Economic Impact of the Broadband Stimulus Plan,” Raul Katz, Director of Business Strategy, CITI , Feb. 19, 2009; available at http://www.elinoam.com/raulkatz/Dr_Raul_Katz_‐_BB_Stimulus_Working_Paper.pdf

4/29/2009

38

Increasing and Retaining JobsWith Improved BroadbandWith Improved Broadband

• Distributed call centers: work at home• Data centers• Telecommuting and satellite work centers• “Back office” services• New home-based businesses• Warehousing and distribution operations• Agricultural productivity improvementsAgricultural productivity improvements

BUTBUT…

4/29/2009

39

Jobs Challengeg

• While BB stimulus spending will create construction and network operations jobsconstruction and network operations jobs,– “How many jobs can be lost as a result of

productivity induced by broadband? – How many jobs can be lost as a result of

outsourcing facilitated by broadband?– Finally a broadband investment programFinally, a broadband investment program

could create new jobs in the targeted region but result in job losses in another one, with limited incremental national impact ”limited incremental national impact…

Source: “Estimating the Economic Impact of the Broadband Stimulus Plan,” Raul Katz, Director of Business Strategy, CITI , Feb. 19, 2009

4/29/2009

40

Network externalities could result in another 136,000 jobs,

Jobs Challengealthough there is a high level of uncertainty of ultimate impact

2009 2010 2011 2012 TotalProductivity Effect

Jobs Lost in professional and i f ti i

(19,000) (17,000) (15,000) (13,000) (64,000)

information services

Jobs lost in other sectors

(61,000) (54,000) (47,000) (40,000) (202,000)

Subtotal (80,000) (71,000) (62,000) (53,000) (266,000)

I ti N b i 55 000 47 000 40 000 33 000 175 000InnovationEffect

New business services

55,000 47,000 40,000 33,000 175,000

New economic activity

64,000 55,000 46,000 38,000 203,000

Subtotal 118,000 101,000 86,000 70,000 375,000, , , , ,

Outsourcing Effect

Pessimistic scenario (33,000) (29,000) (26,000) (22,000) (110,000)

Mid-course scenario 8,000 7,500 6,000 5,500 27,000

Optimistic scenario 49,000 44,000 38,000 33,000 164,000

Total Pessimistic scenario 5 000 1 000 (2 000) (5 000) (1 000)Total Pessimistic scenario 5,000 1,000 (2,000) (5,000) (1,000)

Mid-course scenario 46,000 37,500 30,000 22,500 136,000Optimistic scenario 87,000 74,000 62,000 50,000 273,000

40Source: Raul Katz, Director of Business Strategy, CITI , Feb. 19, 2009

4/29/2009

41

No Easy or Quick Fixes“…targeted efforts to address infrastructure gaps and cost barriers could, within a few years boost broadband adoption by as muchyears, boost broadband adoption by as much as 10 percentage points... However, one-in-five Americans currently don’t have broadband for reasons that won’t be addressed by price cuts or a fiber node in the neighborhood. It will take time to get them upneighborhood. It will take time to get them up and running on broadband -- probably longer than the impacts of the stimulus package are intended to last ”intended to last.”

Source: John Horrrigan, Pew Internet & American Life Project

4/29/2009

42

Thank You

Contact Info:

rca53@columbia.edu

212‐854‐4222