Subscribe to Newsletter
Tell a Friend
Print this Page
09/18/2007Digital Inclusion and Municipal Wireless: The Perfect Pairing?
One of my favorite ad campaigns was the Campbell's soup campaign that suggested that Soup and Sandwich was the perfect pairing, like salt and pepper, peanut butter and jelly and other all-time perfect pairings. Since Wireless Philadelphia set bridging the digital divide as one of the key objectives of its municipal wireless project, Digital Inclusion and Municipal Wireless have been inextricably linked. For mayors and city councils it did seem to be a perfect pairing. By inviting service providers to leverage vertical assets and rights-of-way, cities and towns created the opportunity for an "ask." These rights-of-way created a funding source to build programs to expand broadband access in their communities. Perhaps the most comprehensive "ask" was shaped by the Digital Inclusion Task Force and Community Benefits Agreement for Wireless Minneapolis, and then expanded in Chicago with the Chicago Digital Access Alliance, which took the "ask" to a demand, before that deal crumbled under a cacophony of confused expectations and ill-considered business models.
But are Digital Inclusion and Municipal Wireless really the perfect pairing? Well, I'd say yes... and no...
The opportunity for municipalities to develop policy around broadband and inclusion was spurred by municipal wireless and the ability of cities to leverage "vertical assets" and telecom spending to develop community benefits agreements and programs. These initiatives have emboldened cities to look at the cost of exclusion and to envision the benefit of a connected citizenry.
But what has bridging the digital divide ever had to do with Wi-Fi technology? Digital Inclusion programs require access, hardware, training, content and a social infrastructure of support and engagement. Broadband access must be fast enough to support the applications we all use in life — surfing the Web, downloading files, e-mail, photo sharing, and uploading our blogs and homework — but inclusion does not require that access be wireless. DSL, cable, fiber, and Wi-Fi access all work just fine when rolled into a sustainable program that includes the necessary social infrastructure to help people connect to information they need.
Let me invoke another old ad campaign from Coca Cola — "Everything goes better with Coke" — and suggest that everything goes better with Digital Inclusion. Digital Inclusion programs go with education by leveling the playing field for lower income students and by opening communication channels between home and school. Inclusion programs support civic engagement and enhance community. Technology empowerment programs pair well with workforce development and economic development. Inclusion programs complement healthcare and streamline access to social services. As access to online resources becomes a mainstream expectation in nearly all areas of life, the civic cost of leaving 30-40% of the community off-line becomes an issue of social justice and good government. So the true pairing is that of Digital Inclusion and public policy. Developing and sustaining programs that aggressively close the digital divide must become more central to public policy at all levels of government and those programs should leverage the full ecosystem of technologies, providers, vendors, and institutions to achieve success. Consider Elevate Miami, a multifaceted Digital Inclusion program that includes a discounted DSL offer from AT&T with future plans for municipal wireless.
As communities take a careful look at the societal benefit of a connected citizenry and at the opportunities posed by municipal wireless, I hope government officials will take a good look at both programs together and on their own merit. Municipal wireless networks can be great assets to communities that want to leverage the flexibility and mobility of wireless broadband and/or create another alternative in the broadband duopoly. And Digital Inclusion is excellent government policy since we need to bride the digital divide to have a fully competitive society and support citizen's contributions to the 21st century world. Everything goes better with solutions that increase broadband access. Karen Archer Perry is founder and principal of Karacomm, based in New Jersey. She chaired the Wireless in Education Roundtable at the W2i Digital Cities Convention in Chicago , May 22–23, 2007.
back
Related Items:
• Gotland (GEAB), Sweden
• W2i Teams Up with IBM, Intel, Microsoft, OneCommunity on U.S. Digital Inclusion Initiative
• Muni Wi-Fi Expands Into Peru
• December Is a Defining Moment for Digital Inclusion in the United States
• Joe Mefford, Statewide Broadband Director, ConnectKentucky
• Digital Inclusion Forum Inaugural Meeting
Comments
Anne-Rivers Forcke
Karen, I appreciate your article and agree with Jim's comments. Digital Inclusion is a "field" a "space" and "initiative" or a “strategy" all its own... it's not technology-dependent and certainly not protocol-dependent. Separating it as a discipline from any specific transport protocol makes complete sense. The challenge now will be to keep DI as a respectable goal/initiative/strategy within the municipal network discussion.
03:32 PM, 09/18/2007
Maria Wynne
Karen, I submit this for your consideration: I believe it is important for government to realize that developing the digital inclusion side of the equation when it comes to affordable access to software, hardware, relevant skill acquisition, sustainable and demographically inclusive programs, is their responsibility and that the burden belongs squarely on the shoulders of government. The burden should not, in my opinion, be expected to fall on the operator as a condition for doing business. Unless government steps up to own the design of an affordable approach to digital inclusion (as defined above) that fits the community, programs will come and go with the expiration of contracts entered into with operators. It is the responsibility of government to figure this out – it is not something government can delegate or make a condition of doing business. Delegating the marriage arrangement or settling for the “pick up” of the moment, will result in short lived encounters.
03:28 PM, 09/18/2007
James Farstad
Karen, thanks for the post. My experience makes me somewhat wary of ‘all or nothing’ statements. I have gained more of a ‘both and’ rather than an ‘either or’ sense of things lately. That goes for the fiber vs. wireless, public vs. private ownership, and the Wi-Fi vs. WiMAX debates. Therefore, I believe the intentional alignment of digital inclusion, and what I will call, Local Government broadband can absolutely be a match made in heaven and that if it’s not done well – it certainly will lead, and had led, nowhere, fast. You are correct that the Minneapolis Community Benefits Agreement was presented as an ‘ask’. A strong ask perhaps, but I think that usually works better than a fist pounding demand. When the Minneapolis Broadband initiative was formulated, we saw the initiative, among other things, as a potential catalyst for framing re-energized and coordinated action around the digital inclusion goals you have noted; affordable access to the Internet, increased availability to affordable hardware and software, the more widespread creation and availability of relevant local content, and increased digital literacy. If U.S government leaders were so enlightened as to begin focusing on the development of a Federal broadband policy, I would like to think that an effective, positive impact on digital inclusion would be considered a key measurement of success in the policy debate. Since we are currently developing this ‘policy’ for the most part, from the bottom up in Local Government initiatives, as opposed to from the top down, we must address this at the community level. To introduce an innovative enhancement to existing broadband, whether using fiber, Wi-Fi, WiMAX or copper for that matter, without including digital inclusion as a touch point would be, in my judgment, unsatisfying. On the other hand, if it is a balanced approach, it will likely be sustainable and good for the community. If that is possible, let digital inclusion and Local Government broadband initiatives be linked. Do not assume it can never work. What I would also say, and this is very much in agreement with a key point you make, is that we shouldn’t wait for these ‘successful’ deals to make progress in digital inclusion. There is every reason to advocate for substantial progress outside of broadband initiatives. Let’s not let the potential for a period of indecision regarding Local Government broadband initiatives hold back independent digital inclusion initiatives. In that you are quite right.
03:22 PM, 09/18/2007
Post new comment:Only registered users can add comments.
Please Log-in
|
