Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
This document has been produced by DiploFoundation with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the author and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union or DiploFoundation.
Internet governance and service provision in Zimbabwe
Rumbidzayi Gadhula, Zimbabwe
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to explore the involvement of Internet service providers/Internet access
providers (ISPs/IAPs) in the Internet governance process, the impact on service provision by the ISPs/IAPs, the
response to legislation and/or policy by the ISPs, and the effects on infrastructure development and access.
In this regard, questionnaires were sent out to various ISPs/IAPs. The survey results were analysed according
to policy development inclusiveness, infrastructure development, accessibility, service/customer retention,
and innovativeness. The findings revealed that the governance process has not been inclusive as it has been
dominated by government. Other findings showed that more regulations on the sharing of the available
infrastructure and providing a more even playing field are necessary. The current licensing fees have a
negative impact in terms of costs of access to the consumer and providers’ ability to further upgrade/develop
infrastructure. Innovation by providers has been possible and the restrictions seem not to be prohibitive
in terms of value added services, which was a measure for innovation. Finally, infrastructure development
policy is not an important factor in infrastructure development for providers.
The drafting of a national information and communication technology (ICT) strategy has been welcomed by
most people in the ICT industry as a means to show government commitment to the development of ICT in
Zimbabwe. The national strategy is expected to give rise to action, which will encourage the growth of ICT
and Internet development. This paper aims to encourage genuine commitment towards recognising other
stakeholders’ role in the Internet governance process and ensuring multistakeholder participation.
Keywords: ISPs; IAPs; service provision; infrastructure development; Zimbabwe
Introduction
The government of Zimbabwe has taken mea-
sures and drafted legislation to promote the
expansion of network infrastructure and improve
Internet access in Zimbabwe. One such exam-
ple is the recent digging along the main trans-
port networks by Internet service provid-
ers (ISPs) to lay down fibre network cables in
an effort to increase accessibility for users.
As the government formulates policy on Internet
access, however, it is unclear whether ISPs
are being consulted. The conduct/response
of ISPs has been such that it has been dif-
ficult to determine if there is a policy they
adhere to. This paper will attempt to fol-
low the current governance that Zimbabwean
ISPs operate under and their influence on
the service they provide in the country.
ISPs are the major stakeholders within national
boundaries, as they provide the gateway to
Internet access for education, industry and
all the other sectors. It is therefore impor-
tant to determine the involvement of the same
ISPs in the development of policies that affect
them as stakeholders, (owners of equipment
and providers of internet service) and even-
tually their activity, willingness and commit-
ment to the Internet governance process.
According to the Herald, the Postal and
Telecommunications Regulatory Authority
of Zimbabwe (POTRAZ) was reported to
have been sitting on more than USD$20 mil-
lion under the Universal Services Fund, which
the government – through the Ministry of
Finance – has since developed a plan for (The
Herald, 2010). This indicates disjointed efforts
in the planning of national Internet devel-
2
Internet governance and service provision in Zimbabwe
opment projects among the relevant stake-
holders. There seems to be no common pur-
pose or policy in these processes, and research
into the policy or regulations regarding secu-
rity, access, and ISP governance is required.
Background
There has been an increasing effort for an
all-inclusive Internet governance process in
both developing and developed countries.
However, most developing countries – partic-
ularly in Africa – seem to still use the govern-
ment approach, which involves the govern-
ment as the sole policy authority. Zimbabwe is
one of many African countries that have only
recently come up with a national ICT plan.
This plan includes the development of a cyber
law framework, e-governance laws, connectiv-
ity, and access provision. Various complaints
among stakeholders about the conduct of other
stakeholders requires investigation to determine
points of departure and areas at which to con-
centrate efforts for the successful development
of the Internet (Technology Zimbabwe, 2010).
Broad objectives
This paper seeks to act as an informant to
policymakers on the role and varied inter-
ests in the Internet governance process. It
will attempt to investigate other stakehold-
ers and their interest and perceived value to
the process, as well as analyse public policy
in Internet-governance-related laws to deter-
mine their value and influence on Internet
access as indicated by their contribution to
Internet connectivity, access and security.
Research questions
This paper will seek to answer
the following questions:
● How inclusive is the governance process for
ISPs and regulatory authorities?
● How are the roles of ISPs and regulatory
authorities meshed in the Internet gover-
nance process?
● How has Internet governance impacted the
provision (implementation of services) of
services by ISPs (infrastructure development,
access, security)?
● How have ISPs responded to policy and
regulations on infrastructure development,
access, and security?
Purpose of the study
The general consensus (at the global level
through such organisations as the Internet
Governance Forum (IGF) and the Internet
Society (ISOC)) is that there is a need to iden-
tify all stakeholders in the Internet gover-
nance process, and to consult with them and
ensure their active participation. This is neces-
sary in order to develop proper Internet gov-
ernance policies that will encourage the devel-
opment (through concerted efforts) of the
Internet’s infrastructure, its security, and access
to it by the global community. ISOC has signed
an online petition asking the UN to set up an
open and inclusive process that will allow full
involvement of all stakeholders (ISOC, 2010).
This study of the Internet governance process in
Zimbabwe seeks to analyse how the process has
taken place and how it has impacted the current
infrastructure development, security, and accessi-
bility of the Internet. The results should encour-
age an assessment of the regulatory issues and
policies on ISP governance and encourage stake-
holders to work together and agree on a course
of action for Internet growth and development
Research scope
This paper will seek to determine and anal-
yse the Internet governance process in rela-
tion to Internet development in Zimbabwe.
Literature review
The regulation of ISPs has an impact on Internet
growth in any given country. The influence of
legislation and regulations – which can either
enable or restrict the expansion of Internet devel-
opment and growth, access, and security – is
3
Rumbidzayi Gadhula, Zimbabwe
of great importance in determining the pro-
visioning of services to a country’s citizens.
‘The UNECA (2004), states that contrary to pop-
ular belief, the making and shaping of policy is
less a set of organised, predictable and rational
choices than a complex, often unpredictable and,
above all, political process (UNECA 2004:9). The
point is made by Ikiara et al., (2004) and Soludo
et al., (2004) that there are several theories and
approaches to public policy making. One of the
most popular to-date, especially among econo-
mists, is the Rational Comprehensive Model, also
said to be one of the oldest. This model sees pol-
icy as a smooth, linear, hierarchical and essentially
rational process consisting of two phases: policy
formulation and policy implementation. In the for-
mulation stage of this model, experts, (technical,
subject matter, policy) statisticians and research-
ers identify the problem, analyse the options using
the most sophisticated, up-to-date and appli-
cable knowledge available’ (McGee, 2004).
‘…Poor implementation of policies has been one
of the main weaknesses in the country’s eco-
nomic policy process. This is due to a number
of factors, including too much concentration of
decision – making at the Office of the President,
corruption and mismanagement of national
resources, inadequate supervision of the pub-
lic sector workers, inadequate checks and bal-
ances and weak reward and punishment mecha-
nism in the public service’ (Etta and Elder, 2005).
As the Internet becomes more and more
vital to the development of a country, (cover-
ing political, economic and educational fac-
ets of life), Internet governance becomes even
more important and crucial to development.
The policymaking process becomes a pivotal
point on which developmental issues hinge.
Methodology
Introduction
The objective of this study is to determine the
current role of regulatory authorities and ISPs
in Internet governance, how this has impacted
the governance process and how ISPs have
responded to policy and regulations on infra-
structure development, access and security.
This paper seeks to further analyse the dispar-
ity in the implementation of regulations (or
the lack thereof) in relation to the policies.
Design sampling
Respondents were selected from across the ISP
spectrum and asked to respond on behalf of their
organisation. These included Internet access pro-
viders (IAPs) and ISPs that are currently oper-
ating within the country. Respondents were
expected to be familiar with and have an aware-
ness of both the regulation they operate under
and the technical aspects of their infrastructure.
Seven IAPs and ISPs indicated they would take
part in the survey. Out of the seven question-
naires sent out to participants, five were returned.
● 71.4% participants responded to the ques-
tionnaire
● 60% of respondents were IAPs
● 20% of respondents were ISPs
While responses from all the IAPs and ISPs
would have been more representative of
the true nature of the regulations imple-
mentation and their involvement in the
Internet governance process, some partici-
pants did not manage to answer the question-
naire within the time limit for this research.
Data collection
An online survey1 was designed and sent
out to participants. Responses were ren-
dered online, making them easily accessi-
ble. Reminders were sent out to respondents
and the data were collected online. Secondary
data from the regulations under which ISPs
operate were also collected from the reg-
ulatory authority’s (POTRAZ) website.
1 http://FreeOnlineSurveys.com/rendersurvey.asp?sid=qx6xdgpfwwedd0p878093
4
Internet governance and service provision in Zimbabwe
Results analysis
The survey was analysed under policy develop-
ment inclusiveness, infrastructure development,
accessibility, service/customer retention, and
innovativeness.
Policy development
● 60% of respondents want a multistakeholder
approach to Internet governance with 40%
preferring that the regulatory authority to
control (Figure 1).
● 60% feel the government is dominant in
the Internet governance process, 20% say
the dominance is diminishing, and another
20% think the government’s role is minimal
(Figure 2).
● 60% think the call by the regulatory body for
a consultative meeting with other partners
was good as it encouraged participation by all
stakeholders, while 40% believe it was long
overdue and consultations should be done
more widely (Figure 3).
Future Internet governance process
● 80% of respondents feel it is very important
to have a multistakeholder opinion and 20%
think it is important (Figure 4).
● 20% are very optimistic of achieving con-
sensus among multistakeholder governance
forum, 20% are mildly optimistic, 20% are
optimistic, and 20% are pessimistic. Overall,
there is 80% optimism (Figure 5).
Infrastructure development
● 100% of respondents feel it is important to
have consensus on governance for Internet
development (Figure 6).
● 60% of organisations do not have an IPv6
transition plan (Figure 7).
● The legacy and cost of compatible infrastruc-
Figure 1. Survey response to the question: Who should lead Internet governance issues in Zimbabwe?
Figure 2. Survey response to the question: What is the government’s current role
when it comes to Internet governance in the Zimbabwean context?
5
Rumbidzayi Gadhula, Zimbabwe
Figure 3. Respondents views on the POTRAZ consultative meeting.
Figure 4. Respondents’ views on importance of multistakeholder opinion in Internet governance.
Figure 5. Respondents’ optimism on achieving consensus among multistakeholder forum.
Figure 6. Importance of consensus on governance for Internet development.
6
Internet governance and service provision in Zimbabwe
Figure 9. Respondents’ opinions regarding existence of telecommunications monopoly in Zimbabwe.
Figure 8. Respondents’ view on limitations to Internet development.
KeyA – Increase in the number of
players\competitionB – Regulations on the leas-
ing of infrastructureC – Government intervention on
international carrier tariffsD – Reduction of licensing fees
Figure 7. Response on organisational IPv6 transition plan.
ture, as well as the lack of technical skills are
major limitations (Figure 8).
● There is no monopoly, but the playing field is
uneven (Figure 9).
● All respondents agree with the rationalisation
of duplicated infrastructure as per the cur-
rent government policy (Figure 10).
Accessibility
● Regulations on the sharing and leasing
of infrastructure, as well as reduction of
licensing fees, were cited as the most impor-
tant factors for Internet access costs reduc-
tion (Figure 11).
● 40% had <5% of their customers in remote
areas, another 40% had 5–10%, while 20%
had 11–20% (Figure 12).
7
Rumbidzayi Gadhula, Zimbabwe
Figure 10. Respondents’ view on infrastructure rationalisation by government.
Figure 12. Organisations’ customers from remote areas.
Figure 11. Respondents’ view on Internet access costs reduction.
KeyA – Legacy\cost of compatible infrastructureB – Lack of technical skillsC – Partners with incompatible infrastructureD – Lack of demand
The cost of Internet access is still high
with remote areas still lacking access.
Service/customer turnover
● Customer turnover has been less than 10%
for 80% of respondents (Figure 13).
● 60% have challenges in meeting customer
connection needs (Figure 14) with high
access costs, and bandwidth is the major
reason for customer turnover (Figure 15).
While rationalisation is due, current infra-
structure and service offered by the pro-
viders do not meet customer needs.
Innovation
● A mixture of value added services indicates
provider innovation (Figure 16).
● Customer needs, organisation initiatives and
global trends drive infrastructure develop-
ment (Figure 17).
8
Internet governance and service provision in Zimbabwe
Figure 13. Respondents’ customer turnover rating.
Figure 14. Respondents’ opinion on their current infrastructure’s ability to meet customer needs.
Figure 15. Respondents’ response on reasons for customer turnover.
Conclusion
Key findings
● The governance process has not been inclu-
sive as it has been dominated by government,
yet there is a move towards inclusiveness of
all stakeholders which is very much wel-
comed by respondents.
● The regulatory authority has not been con-
sulting with other stakeholders, that is, ISPs/
IAPs who are very willing to participate in
the governance process.
● Current regulations are good in terms of
rationalising infrastructure, but there should
be more regulations on the sharing of avail-
able infrastructure and providing a more
even playing field.
● The current licensing fees have a negative
impact in terms of costs of access to the con-
sumer and the ability of providers to further
upgrade/develop infrastructure.
9
Rumbidzayi Gadhula, Zimbabwe
Figure 16. Response on value added services offered by the respondents.
Figure 17. Response on drivers for infrastructure upgrade/development.
KeyA – Customer needs/demandsB – Global trendsC – Local trendsD – Policy\regulatory complianceE – Organisation Initiative
● Restrictions have not been prohibitive,
regarding value added services, and provider
innovation has been possible.
● There is some effort towards enabling access
to remote areas. Policy on infrastructure
development is not an important factor in
infrastructure development for providers.
Recommendations
The regulatory authority needs to consult more
widely with and involve all stakeholders in gov-
ernance issues for Internet development. There
should be a drive towards infrastructure devel-
opment for better Internet service and a mul-
tistakeholder body established to drive such
issues would be beneficial to the consumers
and help create a level field among providers.
Countries in a similar situation can gain insight
and perspective on the effects of their policies on
Internet development (infrastructure and access),
and formulate ideas on how to draft policy to
encourage participation by other stakeholders.
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to everyone who has helped me
in writing this paper, in particular Jean Paul
Nkurunziza and Chipo Kanjo for provid-
ing feedback, and to Mufaro, Rufaro, and Jesse
for being so understanding and cooperative.
Abbreviations and acronyms
ICT – Information and
Communication Technology
IG – Internet governance
IPv6 – Internet Protocol version 6
ISOC – Internet Society
ISP/IAP – Internet Service/Access Providers
10
Internet governance and service provision in Zimbabwe
POTRAZ – Postal and Regulatory
Authority of Zimbabwe
UN – United Nations
UNECA – United Nations Economic
Commission for Africa
References
1. Boakye K (2005) CTO Internet Governance Survey.
Available at www.uneca.org/disd/events/accra//
InternetGovernance/CTO%2520Internet%2520
Governance%2520Survey.ppt [accessed 19 April
2011].
2. Etta FE and Elder L (eds) (2005) At the Crossroads:
ICT Policy Making in East Africa. Nairobi, Kenya: East
Africa Educational Publishers Ltd. Available at
http://www.idrc.ca/openebooks/219-8/ [accessed
14 April 2011].
3. ISOC (2010) Internet governance compro-
mise reached. ISOC Monthly Newsletter.
December. Available at http://isoc.org/wp/
newsletter/?m=201012 [accessed 14 April 2011].
4. Technology Zimbabwe (2010) Full text on ZOL
press statement on ‘Potraz accused of inaction’.
Technology Zimbabwe, 13 October 2010. Available
at http://www.techzim.co.zw/2010/10/zol-state-
ment-potraz-inaction/ [accessed 14 April 2011].
5. The Herald (2010) Over US$20m lie idle at Potraz.
Available at http://zimvest.com/over-us20m-lie-
idle-at-potraz [accessed 19 April 2011].
6. Zvikarakadzo (2010) POTRAZ and Broadlands in
row. Technology Zimbabwe, 14 February 2010.
Available at http://www.techzim.co.zw/2010/02/
potraz-and-broadlands-in-row/ [accessed 14 April
2011].