Hot Topics Subscribe to Newsletter Tell a Friend Print this Page 01/10/2008 What Are the New (Old) Primary Drivers of Citywide Wireless? The theme of the 15th Digital Cities Convention in Washington, DC, (December 11–12, 2007) was "The End of Peace, Love and Wi-Fi," a turn of phrase that conference co-chair and W2i executive director Daniel Aghion credited during the conference opening session to Phil Belanger, principal of the broadband-wireless consultancy Novarum. As local communities and the industry revisit the tangible drivers of sustainable network implementation, W2i sees the end of a speculative period — the era of "peace, love and Wi-Fi" — and an increased focus on the value proposition and purpose of deploying broadband wireless in local communities as well as on likely sources of funding. What does this mean? While there has been broad agreement that the deployment of broadband-wireless networks are necessary for economic development, digital inclusion and even lifestyle improvement, the pursuit of these primary drivers has proven elusive, replete with speculative business models and funding roadblocks. Moreover, even in cities like Corpus Christi (TX), Minneapolis (MN), Riverside (CA) and Brookline (MA), which have identified strong value propositions for deploying such networks for their own operational purposes, actual return on investment still remains to be proven, and communities have been reluctant to embark on such capital-intensive projects until such proof points materialize. Primary Drivers and Secondary Benefits Going forward in 2008, what should we consider as the primary drivers of deploying these networks? Can a look back at the deployment of two major infrastructure systems in the United States provides a basis of comparison while highlighting the role of federal policy and funding? Example #1: What was the primary driver behind building the Federal Highway System? President Eisenhower argued for the highways for the purpose of national defense. In the event of an invasion by a foreign power, the military would need good roads to move quickly and transport troops around the country. This resulted in passage of the National Interstate and Defense Highway Act of 1956. What was the secondary benefit of this act was the direct subsidization of the surburban road infrastructure making commutes between urban center and suburb much quicker and furthering the flight of citizens and businesses and divestment from inner cities, deeply affecting our lifestyle. Example #2: What was the primary driver behind the building of ARPANET, the early incarnation of the Internet? In 1969, the Department of Defense commissioned BB&N in Cambridge, Mass., to develop the first packet-switching network to facilitate collaboration between research labs throughout the United States, linking UCLA, Stanford, UC Santa Barbara, and the University of Utah. By 1981, the number of nodes on the network had grown dramatically to 213, and in 1983, 50 were spun off as military nodes and split into a separate network called MILNET. The secondary benefit didn't arrive until 1991 when innovation out of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne produced the first browswer, MOSAIC, introducing a user-friendly experience and setting the stage for the Internet as we know it today. Today, several federally driven policies are finally beginning to make their way into the marketplace from federal agencies, carrying the promise of the marked acceleration of network deployment. The Department of Agriculture's Rural Broadband Brogram, which began in 2000 with $180 million in loans over the first two years, is accelerating, granting in excess of $1.3 billion in loans in 2006, a 260% increase from 2005, with much of this going to multi-jurisdictional broadband wireless projects. The Department of Transportation granted in excess of $850 million toward the first congestion-charging systems in New York City, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Seattle, San Francisco, and Miami, requiring deployments of wireless camera systems. The Department of Homeland Security's SAFECOM program is ramping up its statewide public-safety interoperability initiative with more than $10 billion in funding to be distributed in 2008, and more to come over several years forward. These developments raise several questions: Are we at a juncture similar to the metaphors alluded to above? Are these federal policy driven initiatives the primary drivers behind wireless community networks? Do innovative business models have the potential to build on these policy initiatives to deliver secondary benefits down the line by broadening the scope of applications? What role will each of the stakeholders — federal, state, and local — play and evolve into making this happen? What innovative public-private partnerships will emerge from those efforts? What innovative applications will technology vendors respond with to leverage this infrastructure for the well being of our communities? How will we ensure the broadest segments of the population benefit? Your comments are welcomed. back Related Items: • Groningen • W2i Finalizes Program Agenda for Digital Cities Convention in Washington, DC • City Services Drive Network in St. Louis • New-Technology Rollouts: Avoid Putting Lipstick on the Pig! • Doug Townsend, IT Director, Medford (OR) - Part 2 • Tallahassee `08 Comments No records were found. Post new comment: Only registered users can add comments. Please Log-in

• MORE BLOGS