Our digital future relies on ubiquitous, high-quality and affordable connectivity. This chapter assesses progress towards this goal by exploring the status and main developments in broadband connectivity, subscription rates, access technologies and the quality of broadband connections. It looks at the state of digital divides through the lens of communication services affordability and spatial connectivity gaps, and identifies actions to close these gaps. The chapter concludes with trends shaping future connectivity and how communication policy and regulation must adapt to bring broadband connectivity to the next level of connecting people, businesses and things.
OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2024 (Volume 2)
Strengthening Connectivity, Innovation and Trust
Abstract
Developments in connectivity: Where do we stand?
Without connectivity, there is simply no digital transformation. As the latter progresses, the demand for high-quality broadband services continues to increase in the OECD area. For example, the share of gigabit fixed broadband subscriptions more than tripled from 2019 to 2023, reaching 14% of total fixed broadband subscriptions by December 2023.
Fibre-to-the-home connections that help “future-proof” networks have been the fastest growing fixed broadband access technology in OECD countries during the last decade accounting for 42% of all fixed subscriptions at the end of 2023.
The rollout of 5G continues apace. As of June 2024, 5G was available in 37 of 38 OECD countries. The number of 5G connections per 100 inhabitants averaged 38.6 in 2023 up from 25 (per 100) a year earlier, according to GSMA Intelligence data.
Towards bridging connectivity divides
Bridging connectivity divides (i.e. gaps in affordable access to high-quality broadband services) is at the heart of the policy agenda in OECD countries, more than half of which consider access to the Internet as a basic right for citizens.
Affordability is one of the main barriers for broadband adoption and take-up. Mobile broadband prices have significantly decreased over 2013-23 in OECD countries. Prices of bundled communication services across the OECD area, however, remained relatively stable during 2020-23. The exception has been a 19.5% decrease in the price of the common triple-play (i.e. fixed broadband, fixed voice and television) medium-usage profile bundle.
There are persistent and substantial territorial gaps to high-quality broadband access across and within countries. In OECD countries, people living in cities (metropolitan areas) experienced median fixed broadband download speeds that were 50% higher than those available to people living in regions far from metropolitan areas in Q4 2023 (based on OECD analysis of data provided by Ookla).
Main trends shaping the future of connectivity and related policy challenges
Future policy priorities for OECD countries include transitioning to more future-proof networks; bridging connectivity divides; addressing changes to market structures in the connectivity ecosystem; and ensuring secure, resilient and environmentally sustainable communication networks.
Policy makers and regulators have been active in furthering access to high-quality broadband networks and adapting regulatory frameworks. Several OECD countries are beginning to shut down legacy networks.
Communication regulators increasingly play a role in broader digital policy issues. Since 2021, their partial or full responsibilities increased for topics related to over-the-top services; end-user devices; the Internet of Things (IoT); artificial intelligence (AI); environmental sustainability, and cloud computing.
Our digital future relies on ubiquitous high-quality and affordable connectivity. However, despite the remarkable progress in the deployment of fixed and mobile networks, there are still significant disparities between urban and rural areas in the use, quality and coverage of broadband connections. Access to high-quality and resilient networks and services is increasingly urgent to secure an inclusive digital future.
This chapter comprises three sections. First, it provides an overview of developments in connectivity. It then focuses on connectivity divides and key policy challenges in the pursuit of expanding high-quality connectivity for all. Finally, the chapter discusses the main trends shaping future networks and emerging communication policy issues raised by an evolving connectivity ecosystem.
Applications across all sectors of the economy, from smart factories and hospitals to automated vehicles, increase the overall demand on broadband networks. Consequently, to meet growing needs, networks evolve to offer higher speeds, greater reliability and improved network response times (i.e. low latency) (OECD, 2022[1]). Actions today to promote high-quality broadband networks will influence the implementation and diffusion of digital technologies transforming our society (e.g. the IoT, AI, augmented and virtual reality).
The demand for reliable and high-quality broadband connectivity is growing in OECD countries. In recent years, broadband users have been upgrading their connections to gigabit fixed broadband offers (i.e. subscriptions with advertised speeds above 1 gigabit per second [Gbps]), reflecting the rise of remote activities. Between 2019 and 2023, the share of gigabit offers over total fixed broadband subscriptions grew 250% across the OECD, reaching 14% of fixed broadband subscriptions in December 2023, up from 4% at the end of 2019. In December 2023, two thirds (66%) of all fixed broadband subscriptions had advertised speeds higher than 100 megabits per second (Mbps) (Figure 2.1). Following a similar trend, the volume of mobile data usage per subscription in OECD countries almost tripled over a five-year period, from 4.7 gigabytes (GB) per SIM card per month in 2018 to 13 GB in 2023. For some leading countries, such as Latvia, Finland and Austria, this average exceeds by a factor of three or four, with data usages of 48, 45 and 35 GB per month, respectively (OECD, 2024[2]). This trend will continue upwards with the increased adoption of 5G across OECD countries.
Fixed broadband offers by speed tiers as a share of total fixed broadband subscriptions in the OECD area
Note: Data are for available OECD countries.
Source: OECD elaborated from the CSI DEO 2024 Data Questionnaire.
Given the trend towards a “remote economy”, where business processes increasingly move on line, people adopt flexible working and learning approaches and data-intensive applications continue to grow, the demand on networks is only expected to increase (OECD, 2022[1]). This demand must be met with investments to expand and upgrade broadband networks. Over the past decade, investments in the communication sector in OECD countries grew by 39%, which translates to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 3.3%. In five years (2018-23), the sector experienced a 18% investment increase (CAGR of 3.4%), reaching USD PPP (purchasing power parity) 290 billion at the end of 2023 (Figure 2.2).
Several OECD countries – Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Iceland, the Netherlands and Portugal – experienced investment growth higher than 50% (CAGR 9%) over 2018-23 (Figure 2.2). The three-year rolling OECD average investment per capita during 2021-23 in the communication sector amounted to USD PPP 207 (OECD, 2024[2]).
Revenues of communication service providers in OECD countries increased slightly during the 2018-23 period at a CAGR of 1.3% while the share of investment over communication sector revenues rose from 16.5% to 19%. Most OECD countries experienced an increase of this ratio over the last five years (i.e. 26 of 36 countries for which data were available). Investment by communication service providers was mainly driven by the expansion and upgrade of broadband networks, such as fibre and 5G, as well as the decommissioning of legacy networks (e.g. copper DSL and 2G/3G mobile networks). For more details on revenues and investments in the communication sector per country and per year, please refer to the Statistical Annex.
Compound annual growth rate of investment in the communication sector in OECD countries, 2018-23
Notes: Data for 2022 have been used as estimates for the missing 2023 data. For Colombia, investment data are not available. Japan is not included in the graph because a change in the data collection methodology that occurred in 2021.
Source: OECD (2024[2]), Broadband Statistics (database), https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/broadband-statistics.html.
In recent years, the connectivity ecosystem has also diversified with other players besides “traditional” communication operators financing communication networks (e.g. private equity firms, fibre wholesale-only operators, tower companies). For example, tower companies invest in parts of the broadband infrastructure, a direct consequence of divestments by traditional communication operators. In addition, although not their core business, publicly listed technology companies often develop their own communication infrastructure and financial asset providers. Such providers, including private equity firms, hedge funds or pension funds, increasingly deliver capital to invest in the sector, namely in fibre wholesale access networks. The latter is changing both the structure of the connectivity ecosystem and traditional ownership structures of broadband networks, as explored in recent OECD work (OECD, 2024[3]).
Deployment status of future-proof technologies
The sharp rise in usage and demand for high-quality, ubiquitous connectivity is leading to a transition to “future-proof” broadband access technologies that can support digital transformation across all sectors of the economy. Scalable broadband access technologies that can provide symmetrical download and upload broadband speeds, such as fibre-to-the-home (FTTH), exemplify this trend. In addition, countries are at full speed in the deployment of next generation wireless networks, such as 5G.
At a wholesale level, fibre needs to be deployed deeper into networks to increase broadband performance across all access technologies. Mobile networks are quickly becoming the extension of fixed networks as network densification progresses. This process brings mobile cells closer to users for increased performance, which requires access to backhaul connectivity to redirect mobile traffic via fixed networks (OECD, 2019[4]). This includes offloading indoor mobile traffic into wireless local area networks (WLANs, such as Wi-Fi). It also involves redirecting mobile access traffic in radio access networks (RANs) to the operator’s fixed core networks (i.e. backhaul and backbone), mostly comprised of fibre.
The deployment and adoption of broadband has seen strong growth over the last decade (2013-23) in OECD countries. Total fixed and mobile broadband subscriptions increased by 42% and 100%, respectively, during the period. Moreover, in recent years, fixed broadband subscriptions were still growing in most OECD countries, reaching 496.5 million in December 2023 and averaging 36 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants. This compares to 433.4 million at the end of 2019, shortly before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The difference amounts to an increase of 63 million, or 15%, in four years. Fibre accounted for 42% of all fixed subscriptions at the end of 2023, up from 28% in December 2019 (Figure 2.3). During the same period, mobile broadband subscriptions continued to expand, despite high penetration rates, growing by 19% between 2019 and 2023.
Fibre has been the fastest growing fixed broadband technology in the last decade (Figure 2.3). During the 2013-23 period, and starting in 2014, legacy copper DSL has continued to decline. It is being replaced by fibre, which is now the dominant access technology for fixed broadband connections in OECD countries (Figure 2.3).
Evolution of total fixed broadband subscriptions by access technology in the OECD, 2010-23
Notes: Fibre subscriptions data include fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) also known as fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP), and fibre-to-the-building (FTTB); it excludes fibre-to-the-curb (FTTC) and fibre-to-the-node (FTTN). For the graph on the Percentage share of fixed broadband subscriptions, “Other” includes fixed wireless access (FWA), satellite and other technologies.
Source: OECD (2024[2]), Broadband Statistics (database), www.oecd.org/sti/broadband/oecdbroadbandportal.htm.
Belgium, Greece, Israel, Mexico and United Kingdom increased their fibre subscriptions by more than 40% in one year (2022-23). At the end of 2023, the share of fibre in total fixed broadband subscriptions exceeded 80% in Iceland, Korea, Lithuania and Spain. In addition, it was greater than 50% in a further fourteen OECD countries (Chile, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Japan, Latvia, Luxembourg, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia and Sweden) (OECD, 2024[2]). The introduction of policies, incentives and public funding to support fibre rollout contributed to this growth (see Section on Main trends shaping the future of connectivity and related policy challenges).
The take-up of cable remained relatively stable over 2013-23, with a slight rise from 8 to 10.6 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants in 2023. In some OECD countries, cable has high penetration rates (e.g. United States, Belgium, Canada and the Netherlands, with 24, 23, 20 and 19 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants, respectively) (OECD, 2024[2]). In December 2023, cable made up 30% of total fixed broadband subscriptions,1 while fixed wireless access (FWA) and satellite broadband represented only 5% and 0.5% of total fixed broadband subscriptions across the OECD, respectively (Figure 2.3).
Broadband performance indicators are key to gauging the state of connectivity and are often correlated to the type of access technology pervasive in the market. Notwithstanding the increase in data traffic, networks are managing demand effectively. Across the OECD, fixed broadband download and upload speeds experienced by users increased in the 2019-23 period. According to data from Ookla, median download speeds in OECD countries, on average, rose 169% in four years (Q4 2019 – Q4 2023), while median upload speeds more than doubled (i.e. 207% growth). Meanwhile, median latency was reduced by 20% during the same period (Figure 2.4). An increase in upload speeds can have significant effects on people teleworking or using video conferencing applications that require upload throughput. A reduction in latency (i.e. network response time) is important for critical applications.
Total mobile broadband subscriptions more than doubled over the past decade in OECD countries. Between 2013 and 2023, mobile broadband subscriptions rose from 928 million to 1.86 billion, reaching a penetration of 134 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants (OECD, 2024[2]). One of the recent factors driving this demand is the introduction of 5G.
Evolution of fixed broadband median speeds and latency experienced in OECD countries, Q1 2019 to Q4 2023
Notes: Mbps = Megabite per second. ms = milliseconds. OECD calculations are based on Speedtest by Ookla Fixed Network Performance Maps for Q1 2019 – Q4 2023. OECD average is of download median speed and latency tests experienced, weighted by the number of tests across 36 OECD countries (data for Costa Rica and Israel unavailable). Measurements are based on tests performed by users around the globe via the Speedtest platform. For a more comprehensive picture on broadband performance metrics, see OECD (2022[1]).
Source: Speedtest® by Ookla®.
The rollout of 5G continues apace. As of June 2024, 5G was available in some form in 37 of 38 OECD countries.2 According to GSMA Intelligence, the number of 5G connections3 per 100 inhabitants averaged 38.6 in 2023 up from 25 the prior year for the 35 OECD countries where data was available (Figure 2.5). The top-five leading OECD countries were the United States with 68.4 5G connections per 100 inhabitants, followed by Korea (63), Finland (58), Australia (57) and Japan (56) (Figure 2.5). Moreover, according to this same data source, the share of 5G connections in overall mobile connections in OECD countries was 31% in 2023 (GSMA Intelligence, 2024[5]).
5G connections per 100 inhabitants, OECD, EU27 and People’s Republic of China
Notes: GSMA Intelligence’s definition of 5G connections: “5G unique SIM cards (or phone numbers, where SIM cards are not used) that have been registered on the mobile network at the end of the period. Connections differ from subscribers such that a unique subscriber can have multiple connections.” See https://data.gsmaintelligence.com/definitions.
Sources: GSMA (2024[5]), ©GSMA Intelligence 2024, OECD National Accounts Statistics (database), https://doi.org/10.1787/na-data-en (accessed on 26 June 2024).
The number of 5G base stations is an indicator on the level of deployment of commercial services within countries and can influence the availability and quality of these services. The number of 5G base stations is constantly increasing and reached 979 000 in 2023 for the 27 OECD countries where data were available. Korea has the highest number of 5G base stations relative to its population with 593 base stations per 100 000 inhabitants, followed by Lithuania (328) and Finland (251) (Figure 2.6).
Most 5G commercial networks to date are based on non-standalone (NSA)-5G (i.e. relying on 4G core network infrastructure and using NSA-5G standards in the radio interface). However, standalone (SA)-5G deployments are on the rise (OECD, 2022[1]). While NSA-5G is built using current 4G core networks, SA-5G requires deploying an entire new network end-to-end (OECD, 2022[1]).4 SA-5G offers a number of advantages such as faster speeds, lower latency, support for massive numbers of devices, and programmable systems enabling faster and more agile creation of services and network slices. In all, 124 of 588 operators in 58 countries worldwide are investing in 5G-SA for public networks, with at least 49 operators in 29 countries having launched 5G-SA commercial networks by April 2024 (GSA, 2024[6]).
5G base stations, 2022 OECD, EU27 and People’s Republic of China, 2023
Notes: OECD total is for the 27 OECD countries where data were available. Data for Japan are for March 2023 and data for Korea are for August 2023.
Source: OECD elaborated from the CSI DEO 2024 Data Questionnaire. Japan: Data are from MIC (2024[7]), Survey on Actual Radio Spectrum Usage.
Across the OECD, private networks have also been emerging in different sectors, e.g. industrial applications, health care and national defence. Private networks are usually local, non-public communication networks. They are typically dedicated to the owner of the network with unified connectivity and optimised services within a specific area (e.g. a factory or plant). Such networks can be operated by the entities owning the networks or by mobile network operators (MNOs). By June 2024, 78 countries had at least one private mobile network and more than 66 network operators were involved with private mobile network deployments, according to a GSA report (GSA, 2024[10]).
A major hurdle for the development of private networks is providing access to appropriate and affordable spectrum. Local private networks can access spectrum resources either through direct local licences assigned to non-communication service providers (i.e. industrial firms, public entities) or via mobile operators offering such capabilities (OECD, 2022[11]). In Korea, spectrum for private 5G networks is shared in specific zones (e.g. lot, building) to provide services tailored to the demand in the area – from manufacturing, education and ship building to logistics and health. To allow customised private 5G services in diverse areas, Korea has provided 50 branches of 29 companies with private 5G spectrum as of 13 December 2023. In Portugal, ANACOM approved changes to the spectrum access model in the 400 MHz band for providers interested in delivering private mobile services to third parties.
Developments in wireless indoor connectivity are increasingly important and complement other connectivity solutions. WLANs are a particularly important use case that benefit from unlicensed spectrum to support connectivity, primarily indoors, for residential home networks, as well as local area networks for enterprises. They also serve to offload data from mobile networks (OECD, 2022[11]). Several developments can be noted concerning Wi-Fi5 standard, a type of WLAN. Wi-Fi 6 and Wi-Fi 6E, for example, aim to improve performance particularly for large outdoor deployments, increase throughput in dense deployments and reduce device power consumption (Intel, 2024[12]). Wi-Fi 7 was expected to be released in mid-2024 (Koziol, 2023[13]).6
Other broadband access technologies: Fixed wireless access and satellite broadband
The ambition to connect the entire population, and therefore people living in remote areas, has led operators and local players to find innovative connectivity solutions. While FWA and satellite broadband access have existed for a while, recent technological developments promise to allow these technologies to bridge spatial connectivity divides.
In recent years, FWA has grown steadily in OECD countries. Despite the low level of adoption (i.e. 1.7 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants in December 2023), the number of FWA subscriptions reached 23 million in 2023 (OECD, 2024[2]) (Figure 2.7). In December 2023, FWA penetration was higher than the OECD average in certain countries, such as the Czech Republic (15 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants), the Slovak Republic (7.7), New Zealand (7) and Estonia (6.7) (OECD, 2024[2]).
Fixed wireless access (FWA) and satellite subscriptions per 100 inhabitants, OECD
Note: OECD average is for available countries. The FWA definition was revised in 2023.
Source: OECD (2024[2]), Broadband Statistics (database), OECD Telecommunications and Internet Statistics (database), https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/broadband-statistics.html. StatLink contains more data.
Satellite broadband, meanwhile, has remained at a low level, averaging around 0.2 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants over the 2013-23 period in OECD countries (Figure 2.7). In December 2023, New Zealand, the United States and Australia had the highest satellite penetration with 0.9, 0.6 and 0.3 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants, respectively (OECD, 2024[2]). More details on advances in satellite technology, including recent developments in low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellations, can be found in DEO Volume 1, Spotlight “Next generation networks and the evolving connectivity ecosystem” (OECD, 2024[14]).
Operators are expanding FWA solutions in several OECD countries (e.g. Australia, Italy, New Zealand, Switzerland and the United States). For example, in Australia, Nokia will supply FWA services using millimetre wave spectrum for the National Broadband Network (NBN) (Majithia, 2022[15]). In the United States, T-Mobile and Verizon have been leading with FWA offers. T-Mobile expects to serve 7-8 million FWA customers by 2025, and Verizon’s Home Internet” service expects to serve 4-5 million subscribers by the end of 2025 (Alleven, 2022[16]; Fletcher, 2022[17]). In India, Reliance Industries announced an “AirFiber” service in 2022, an FWA offer leveraging on Reliance Jio’s 5G network with a device that acts as a Wi-Fi hotspot at home or in a business (Hardesty, 2022[19]). The company launched the service in eight Indian cities in September 2023 and plans to reach 100 million FWA customers (Wood, 2023[20]).
FWA may provide advantages in terms of reaching remote residential locations with high-speed as a complementary solution for last mile connectivity. At the same time, FWA drawbacks include bandwidth limitations depending on spectrum availability. The specific benefits often depend on the technology used (e.g. 4G-LTE, 5G, WiMax) and how operators manage traffic from FWA connections.
While technologies like FWA and satellite broadband are proposed as possible options to provide communication services in rural and remote areas, they can come with drawbacks. For example, satellite broadband may have restricted bandwidth (e.g. data caps), a lower advertised speed or be of lower quality at a higher price (OECD, 2022[21]). Acknowledging the potential role of satellites in bridging connectivity divides, as well as the associated costs, some countries have previously opted to incorporate subsidies for satellite services in rural areas (OECD, 2018[22]; 2017[23]).
Without connectivity, there is simply no digital transformation. Therefore, closing gaps in affordable access to high-quality broadband services (i.e. bridging connectivity divides7 ) is at the forefront of digital policy agendas. As such, Phase IV of the OECD’s horizontal project “Going Digital” (2023-24) aims to shed light on such divides through the “Digital Divides: Improving connectivity” pillar.
Connectivity divides vary across and within countries. For example, OECD countries had more than twice the level of fixed broadband penetration (35.8 subscribers per 100 inhabitants) than the world average (excluding OECD countries) of 15 per 100 in December 2023 (Figure 2.8).
Evolution of fixed broadband subscriptions per 100 inhabitants, OECD and world
Note: Data for World average based on ITU data.
Source: OECD (2024[2]), Broadband Statistics (database); (ITU, 2024[24]), World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators (database), www.itu.int/pub/D-IND-WTID.OL.
On many dimensions, great progress has been made to increase the number of connected people and start closing connectivity divides. However, persistent and substantial territorial gaps to affordable and high-quality broadband remain. Therefore, assessing the affordability of communication services and spatial connectivity divides are important indicators to guide policy makers in their pursuit of achieving connectivity for all.
Affordable access to communication services
Affordable access to communication services leads to increased adoption and more inclusive participation in digital transformation. Affordability is one of the main barriers to broadband uptake by households and business in many OECD countries. It leads to accentuated digital divides and can disproportionally affect low-income households and/or populations living in rural areas.
Assessing the prices of communication services is a way to gauge their affordability and an important factor in understanding competition dynamics. Several factors influence the price of communication services. Policy and regulatory frameworks directly affect investment incentives, barriers to entry and network deployment costs (including spectrum licensing rights). Competition levels in communication markets also affect price. The OECD’s communication baskets provide detailed information on price trends for fixed, mobile and bundled communication services. The new OECD price methodology for bundled communication services includes different combinations of fixed broadband, fixed voice, mobile voice and data (i.e. mobile broadband), as well as television services and usage profiles.8
Over the last decade, fixed and mobile broadband prices across the OECD have declined. Between 2013 and 2023, the OECD average prices for four different mobile broadband baskets (i.e. mobile voice and data baskets) experienced a sharp decrease. The price for the low-usage basket of 100 calls and 500 Megabytes (MB) of data allowance declined by 54% – from 32 USD PPP to 14.6 USD PPP. Price declines for the medium-usage basket are at a similar level (-63%). The high-usage basket (900 calls and 2 Gigabytes [GB] of data allowance) saw the sharpest drop in prices – from 71 USD PPP to 20 USD PPP, a 72% decline from the original average OECD price. The highest-usage profile (i.e. 900 calls with 10 GB), for which the time series is shorter, dropped 50% in price from 2018 to 2023. The decrease in mobile prices has undoubtedly helped address one source of inequality in access to communication services in OECD countries (Figure 2.9).
Evolution of price baskets for fixed broadband and mobile voice and data in USD PPP
Note: PPP = purchasing power parity; GB = Gigabyte; MB = Megabyte. The basket methodology consists of selecting, for every OECD country, the cheapest offer in the market meeting all criteria for a given user profile (i.e. low, medium, high and highest usage profiles).
Source: OECD calculations based on (Teligen/TechInsights, 2024[25]), “Teligen tariff & benchmarking market data using the OECD methodology”.
For fixed broadband baskets in the OECD area, the declining trend is more pronounced in high-usage profiles (i.e. 900 GB data allowance and speeds higher than 1 Gbps), which decreased by 22.5% between 2015 and 2023. Between 2013 and 2023, the price for the low-usage (20 GB data allowance) fixed broadband basket decreased by 17%. Meanwhile, prices of the medium-usage baskets (120 GB) remained relatively stable (i.e. -7.4%) during 2013-23 (Figure 2.9).
Bundles of communication services are becoming more prevalent across the OECD. In 2023, bundled communication services accounted for 69% of total fixed broadband offers across the OECD (OECD, 2024[2]). More than one-quarter (26%) of these offers were triple-play (i.e. fixed broadband, fixed voice and television), while 15% were quadruple-play (fixed broadband, fixed voice, television and mobile broadband) (OECD, 2024[2]). In about three years (July 2020-January 2023), prices of triple-play bundles have, on average, decreased by around 19.5% for the medium-usage profile in the OECD area. Most prices for triple- and quadruple-play bundles have remained relatively stable (Figure 2.10).
Price evolution of triple- and quadruple-play bundles, OECD average, 2020-23, in USD PPP
Note: Prices calculations are for the average of the three cheapest offers meeting all criteria for a given user profile.
Source: OECD calculations based on (Teligen/TechInsights, 2024[25]), “Teligen tariff & benchmarking market data using the OECD methodology”, www.strategyanalytics.com/access-services/service-providers/tariffs---mobile-and-fixed.
Disparities in broadband bundle prices exist between countries. For example, for the low-usage basket of triple-play bundles, prices in USD PPP terms vary by a factor of eight when comparing the country with the lowest priced bundle to the highest. In January 2023, the OECD average price for the low-usage and medium-high usage profile of triple-play bundles was 64 USD PPP and 100 USD PPP, respectively (Figure 2.11).
Prices across OECD countries of triple-play bundled communication baskets (fixed broadband, fixed voice and pay television), low and medium-high usage profile, January 2023
Note: Price calculations are for the average of the three cheapest offers meeting all criteria for a given user profile. Triple-play bundles=fixed broadband, fixed voice and pay-TV.
Source: OECD calculations based on (Teligen/TechInsights, 2024[25]), “Teligen tariff & benchmarking market data using the OECD methodology”, www.strategyanalytics.com/access-services/service-providers/tariffs---mobile-and-fixed/U.
In countries where the prices of communication services are high, these services can be unaffordable for parts of the population (ITU, 2023[26]). In countries with high income disparities, the average household may be able to afford high-priced communication services, but other households may find them out of reach. Without access to communication services, some disadvantaged groups risk further marginalisation if they cannot access the digital tools needed for essential services (e.g. education, employment, health care, transportation) and running businesses (OECD, 2022[21]). (For more details on the different price baskets, see the Statistical Annex containing all tables of prices of communication services).
Geographical broadband connectivity divides
Communication regulators across the OECD highlight the need to bridge spatial connectivity divides as one of the main policy challenges. The measurement of broadband quality and coverage across regions is essential to track the evolution of urban-rural access divides and inform policy making. These indicators will contribute to the pillar on digital divides of the ongoing horizontal project Going Digital Phase IV.
Within and across OECD countries, there are persistent and substantial spatial divides. This is true both in terms of the availability of high-speed broadband offers in rural areas, as well as disparities in broadband performance across regions. The share of overall households reporting basic Internet access (above 256 Kbps)9 increased considerably over the last decade in OECD countries, rising from 75.7% in 2013 to 91.5% in 2023. However, there are substantial gaps in household adoption of Internet services in rural areas compared to urban areas. In 2023, 89.2% of OECD households in rural areas reported having Internet access, albeit at minimal speeds, compared to 91.5% of households overall (OECD, 2024[27]).
High-speed broadband coverage in rural areas remains a major challenge for many OECD countries. This challenge is often linked to the cost differences to deploy infrastructure in rural areas compared to more populous centres (OECD, 2021[28]). For example, only 45% of European rural households lived in areas with high-speed broadband network coverage (i.e. FTTH or DOCSIS 3.1)10 in 2022 compared to 73% of households in overall areas (European Commission, 2024[29]).
Territorial differences in connectivity also translate into user experiences that vary substantially depending on where people live and work. This is evidenced by the differences in actual download speeds in metropolitan regions compared to other areas (either remote or close to a small/medium city). Over 2019- 23, connectivity data from the self-administered tests by Ookla (Speedtest) shows persistent gaps in speeds experienced between users living in metropolitan areas (cities) compared to regions far from metropolitan areas (i.e. either remote areas or close to a small/medium city) in the OECD area (Figure 2.12).
Evolution of gaps in mean fixed broadband download speeds experienced by users (Ookla) by TL3 (small regions) classification, OECD average, Q1 2019-Q4 2023, percentage deviation from the OECD average
Notes: OECD calculations based on Speedtest by Ookla for Q1 2019 to Q4 2023. Average of mean download speeds experienced, weighted by the number of tests, as the percentage deviation from the OECD average across 34 OECD countries (data for Costa Rica, Iceland and Israel unavailable and Luxembourg only had metropolitan areas). Measurements are based on tests performed by users around the globe via the Speedtest platform. For a more comprehensive picture on broadband performance metrics, see OECD (2022[1]). Within small regions (TL3), the OECD has three main classifications: “Metropolitan regions”, “Regions near a metropolitan area”, and “Regions far from a metropolitan area”. The last category has two further subcategories: “Regions close to small/medium city” and “Remote regions” (see https://doi.org/10.1787/20737009).
Source: Speedtest by Ookla Global, Fixed and Mobile Network Performance Maps.
For OECD countries, mean download speeds over fixed networks in regions located far from metropolitan areas were on average 19.6 percentage points below the national average, while mean download speeds in metropolitan (urban) areas were on average 6 percentage points above the national average in the fourth quarter of 2023 (Figure 2.13). Moreover, for OECD countries for which data were available, people in cities experienced median fixed broadband download speeds 50% higher than people living in regions far from metropolitan areas in Q4 2023 (Figure 2.14). While some countries have a narrower gap between regions, a persistent divide remains between urban and remote regions.
Gaps in mean fixed broadband download speeds experienced by users, by TL3 (small regions) classification in OECD countries, Q4 2023
Notes: OECD calculations based on Speedtest by Ookla for Q4 2023. Average of mean download speeds experienced, weighted by the number of tests, as the percentage deviation from the national average across 34 OECD countries (data for Costa Rica, Iceland and Israel unavailable and Luxembourg only had metropolitan areas). See more notes in Figure 2.12.
Source: Speedtest by Ookla Global, Fixed and Mobile Network Performance Maps.
Median fixed broadband download speeds in OECD countries by TL3 (small regions) classification
Notes: Mbps = Megabits per second. OECD calculations based on Speedtest by Ookla for Q4 2023. Average of median download speeds experienced, weighted by the number of tests across 35 OECD countries (data for Costa Rica, Iceland and Israel unavailable).
Source: Speedtest by Ookla Global, Fixed and Mobile Network Performance Maps.
Download/upload speeds are only one aspect of broadband quality. Other metrics indicating network performance include latency (the time it takes for information to travel between two points e.g. from when a command is sent and a response is received), reliability and quality of experience (OECD, 2022[1]). Improved network response times (i.e. lower latency) supports many applications across different sectors (e.g. fully automated vehicles, remote surgery). Differences in quality dimensions other than speeds also exist between rural and urban areas, which can cause a lower overall quality of experience for rural users. Based on OECD calculations using Ookla data (Ookla, 2024[30]), people in cities across the OECD experienced, on average, 23% lower median latency compared to people living in regions far from metropolitan areas in Q4 2023.
Bridging connectivity divides, a top policy priority for countries
Increasingly, countries view an individual’s right to connectivity as being just as important as the right to electricity or fresh water. For example, more than half of OECD countries consider access to the Internet as a basic right for citizens (i.e. 19 of 36 countries where data were available). Furthermore, most have changed their legal frameworks to include broadband as part of their universal service framework (30 of 36 OECD countries). Political recognition of connectivity as a fundamental right is a step towards bridging digital divides.
In light of the broadband coverage and quality spatial gaps within and across countries, action is needed to ensure ubiquitous, affordable and high-quality connectivity. Affordability and high-quality broadband services usually derive from competition in communication markets and investment in networks.
Overarching policies that foster competition, promote investment and facilitate infrastructure deployment are key tools to spur expansion of high-quality communication networks, including in rural and remote areas that are often underserved or completely unserved. Combining market forces with alternative approaches is key to expand connectivity (OECD, 2021[31]). As such, the regulatory, legal and institutional framework plays a fundamental role to bridge connectivity divides. This is especially the case for the communication sector, which is characterised by high fixed costs and barriers to entry (see Section on Communication policy and regulatory frameworks).
Connectivity targets and public programmes to expand high-quality broadband
Most OECD countries (36 of 38) have established connectivity targets either through a Digital Agenda or a National Broadband Plan. These set specific coverage and quality objectives to be achieved within a certain timeframe. However, many countries increasingly aim for higher speeds (e.g. “gigabit” speeds).
The majority of OECD countries (31 of 38) have allocated public funds to expand deployment of high-quality connectivity (e.g. 5G and fibre) with the aim of bridging divides. These public funds (or state aid) have been either part of economic recovery packages, elements of national digital or broadband strategies, or tailored funds to expand broadband in rural areas.
Given that countries are diverse in territorial features, regulatory frameworks, market dynamics and historical context, the amount of public funds required to complement private sector investment varies. Some countries have invested more than USD 1 billion in public funds to expand broadband since 2018 (e.g. Australia, Austria, Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Poland, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States):
In Canada, the Universal Broadband Fund (CAD 3.225 billion; USD 2.5 billion)11 – part of the government of Canada’s Connectivity Strategy – supports high-speed broadband projects across the country (Government of Canada, 2022[32]).
In New Zealand, a government-funded programme (NZD 1.785 billion; USD 1.115 billion)12 aims to provide fibre to more than 410 cities and towns and key institutions by 2023 (Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment, 2022[33]).
In the United States, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 allocates USD 65 billion to bridge digital divides by expanding broadband infrastructure and funding digital equity and inclusion programmes (The White House, 2021[34]).
The United Kingdom allocated GBP 5 billion (USD 6.25 billion)13 to subsidise the rollout of gigabit-broadband in areas that will not be reached by private investment (20% of the country) (DIST, 2023[35]).
Several public funding programmes include a focus on fibre (e.g. Australia, Austria, Chile, Colombia, New Zealand, Portugal and Türkiye). For example, Chile included the National Fibre Optic Project (FON) as part of the infrastructure subsidy programme of the Telecommunication Development Fund in 2021. Colombia funded the National Optical Fibre Project to expand the infrastructure of fibre networks. In December 2023, Portugal launched an international tender for fibre networks to cover the entire mainland territory by 2026/27 (Government of Portugal, 2023[36]). Türkiye allocated public funds to support the expansion of high-capacity broadband infrastructure, including fibre networks and mobile broadband networks, particularly to underserved regions.
Examples are emerging of innovative forms of public funding to expand broadband in extremely remote areas. In Brazil, the Connected North Programme, partially funded by the proceeds of the 5G spectrum auction held in 2021 (BRL 1.3 billion; USD 250 million),14 will extend 12 000 km of sub-fluvial fibre to connect broadband to 59 municipalities (10 million people) in the Amazon region. The investment includes an open consortium of operators that will ensure the project is environmentally sustainable. To that end, they will preserve around 68 million trees compared to a communication network requiring inland deployment with ducts and posts. As of November 2023, about three of eight segments have been deployed, bringing high-quality connectivity across Brazil’s Amazon region (Ministério das Comunicações, 2023[37]). OECD (2024[3]) includes further detail in its annex about different methods of financing public funds across OECD countries.
Granular indicators on connectivity to foster broadband development
Assessing connectivity divides is a prerequisite to tailor policies and regulatory measures aimed at maximising the benefits of access to and use of broadband services. As such, OECD countries are increasingly collecting and publishing granular indicators on broadband (Figure 2.15).
Most OECD countries (97%) collect subnational indicators on broadband coverage, subscriptions and/or quality. The vast majority (31 of 38) have national broadband maps sponsored by the government to increase transparency of broadband availability (e.g. France’s “Ma connexion internet”, Mexico’s Microsite, Portugal’s Geographical Platform, Sweden’s “bredbandskartan”). Moreover, almost half of OECD countries (18 of 38 countries) use approaches such as “crowdsourcing” and open data to measure broadband quality and coverage. The United Kingdom, for example, publishes the “Ofcom Connected Nations Report” (Ofcom, 2022[38]). Some countries, such as Canada, Mexico and the United States, also publish data on coverage for particular populations or geography such as Indigenous persons or land (FCC, 2021[39]; CRTC, 2024[40]; IFT, 2024[41]).
Granular approaches to broadband measurement in OECD countries
Note: Sample size is 38 OECD countries (i.e. 37/38 have subnational indicators on broadband and 31/38 have broadband maps).
Source: OECD elaboration based on the CSI DEO 2024 Regulatory Questionnaire.
Improving the accuracy of broadband data at a granular level is crucial to providing end-user transparency and increasing the effectiveness of broadband policy measures. Broadband maps, for example, can influence the allocation of funds to close connectivity gaps in unserved and underserved areas. As such, OECD countries are constantly trying to improve these maps. In the United States, for example, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a draft of its new National Broadband Map in 2022, inviting the public to submit challenges to improve its accuracy (FCC, 2022[42]). In addition, releasing the underlying information for the maps as open data can enable third parties to contribute with further analysis. Countries including Canada, France and the United States provide data for their maps in open format (ISED, 2022[43]; Arcep, 2022[44]; FCC, 2024[45]).
Countries also sponsor the provision of tools that facilitate drawing comparisons in terms of both broadband availability and prices, given that affordability is a key concern. Access to this information empowers consumers, provides useful insights about the level of competition in the market and complements other metrics used to assess the sector’s overall efficiency and performance.
Bottom-up approaches: Municipal and community networks
Some OECD countries use municipal networks to promote fibre deployment in cities, smaller towns and surrounding regions. These networks are typically high-speed networks that have been fully or partially facilitated, built, operated or financed by local governments, public bodies, utilities, organisations, or co-operatives with some type of public involvement (OECD, 2015[46]).
In addition to municipal networks, community networks are often bottom-up approaches in rural and remote areas that build on local knowledge and initiatives, and can play a complementary role with respect to national service providers in bridging connectivity divides (Redes, 2020[47]). Institutional framework conditions can help foster bottom-up initiatives to expand connectivity in rural and/or remote areas. In 2013, for example, telecommunication reform in Mexico provided for social use spectrum licences, including community and Indigenous networks with non-profit purposes. These changes helped spark the rise of community networks in rural areas (OECD, 2017[48]). Mexico has granted local spectrum licences to facilitate Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs), mainly in rural areas (OECD, 2022[11]). It reported more than 660 WISP licences in 2022 (IFT, 2022[49]). In Brazil, the communication regulator (Anatel) explicitly recognised community networks as an option for Internet access (Anatel, 2020[50]).
Some measures that help reduce barriers to entry for local operators include: access to spectrum at a local level (see Section below), streamlining licensing requirements for small service providers, enhancing access to backhaul connectivity and updating universal service provisions so that alternative operators can access such funds (Redes, 2020[47]).
Tailored programmes to bridge connectivity divides
Some OECD countries have both overarching and targeted policies to bridge connectivity gaps. Overarching policies in some OECD countries aim to increase competition and investment in broadband markets that directly influence affordability and access of communication services. At the same time, they may also tailor approaches to bridging connectivity divides in rural and remote regions. These include programmes targeted to low-income populations (i.e. demand-side initiatives) to promote uptake of broadband services. For example, residential Internet providers in Portugal must offer social Internet tariffs where infrastructure permits (ANACOM, 2022[51]). For its part, the United States launched the Affordable Connectivity Program, discussed in more detail in OECD (2023[52]).
Demand aggregation models in the market can help increase certainty for investors and operators. In Germany, for example, demand aggregation15 extends connectivity in rural and remote areas; some 30-40% of households are expected to commit before FTTH networks are deployed (Deutsche Glasfaser, 2020[53]; FiberConnect Council MENA, 2022[54]).
As a complement, some countries are also implementing public broadband access solutions (e.g. in the form of public Wi-Fi hotspots). For example, in Colombia, the project “Universal Access to Rural Areas: Digital Centres”, aims to provide public Wi-Fi connectivity solutions in 14 750 “Digital Centres” throughout all Colombian departments until 2031 (OECD, 2022[55]). In Mexico, the state-owned programme named “CFE (Comisión Federal de Electricidad) Telecomunicaciones e Internet Para Todos” (Federal Electricity Commission Telecommunications and Internet for All) provides 91 000 free Wi-Fi hotspots across the country (Government of Mexico, 2024[56]). However, these hotspots are no substitute for household and business broadband subscriptions. For more details on tailored approaches to bridge connectivity divides, refer to OECD (2021[28]).
Accelerating the deployment of ubiquitous high-quality, secure and resilient broadband networks is a strategic challenge for all countries. It supports both their competitiveness across the digital ecosystem and participation in the digital and green transitions. A new wave of digital innovation driven by emerging technologies requires networks to continue evolving.
Broadband networks are responding to the surging demand of digital transformation. With the need for more flexible network design and more cost-effective, high-quality communication services, the communication industry is moving towards disaggregation of network elements, virtualisation, integration of cloud services into networks, more private networks and more use of AI systems in networks, among other measures (OECD, 2022[1]). Operators are using AI and machine learning to improve and optimise network management, do predictive maintenance and reduce energy consumption of broadband networks. Moreover, as virtualisation progresses, networks are also integrating cloud and edge computing solutions. As such, partnerships between communication service providers and major cloud providers (Microsoft Azure, Amazon Web Services and Google Cloud) have increased in recent years (OECD, 2022[1]).
Against this backdrop of technological trends shaping networks, the connectivity landscape is also changing. Both emerging and existing players are gaining more prominent roles in connectivity. Tower companies, cloud providers, satellite companies and over-the-top players, for example, are redefining their engagement in business models.
A broad array of connectivity solutions, many complementary, are needed to face the demands placed on future broadband networks and to ensure seamless connectivity to users (OECD, 2022[1]). Developments touch on satellite broadband solutions (e.g. LEO satellite constellations); the road towards “beyond 5G” technologies; further advances in WLANs (such as Wi-Fi); and the next stage of network convergence with the development of hybrid wireless terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks. All these developments point towards a future where the co-integration of connectivity solutions will become increasingly important. At the same time, such developments will increase the complexity of communication regulatory and policy landscape. (See DEO Volume 1 Spotlight “Next generation networks and the evolving connectivity ecosystem” (OECD, 2024[57]).)
As networks and the connectivity ecosystem evolve, regulation and policies must also adapt. On the one hand, the regulatory environment must continue to foster innovation and investment to ensure optimum conditions for network rollout. On the other, policies must ensure competition and services meet user needs and continue to be affordable.
The main communication policy priorities or challenges reported by OECD communication regulators in 2023 for the upcoming three to five years can be grouped into four broad categories: i) changes to the regulatory framework and the transition to future-proof networks (e.g. boosting fibre deployment, AI for networks, 5G, research for 6G); ii) policies to bridge connectivity divides (as explored in the previous section); iii) the evolving connectivity ecosystem and changes to market structure; and iv) ensuring secure, resilient and environmentally sustainable broadband infrastructure (Figure 2.16).
Note: The diagram was created for illustrative purposes. It is not intended to summarise most common listed priorities and is not exhaustive of all regulatory priorities in the area of connectivity as reported by OECD countries.
Source: OECD elaboration based on the CSI DEO 2024 Regulatory Questionnaire.
This section explores generally how OECD countries are adapting regulatory frameworks to meet the needs of the digital transformation and key policies to ensure that networks are fit for the future. The impact of digital transformation on the environment, including networks, is discussed in Chapter 3. The OECD is preparing reports on the environmental sustainability of communication networks and the resilience of communication networks.
Communication policy and regulatory frameworks are evolving to face the challenges stemming from digital transformation
Policy makers and regulators across the OECD area are actively adapting regulatory frameworks to spur competition, innovation and investment in communication markets. In 2023, 37 OECD countries reported making significant policy changes affecting the provision of communication services since 2021. These changes include reforms to sectoral legislation, national digital strategies, development plans or broadband plans, new regulations, amendments to universal service provisions, internal restructuring of the regulator, and new legislation on broader digital policy issues (e.g. on digital security, online harms) that expanded the mandate of communication regulators.
Several OECD countries have updated and/or amended their sectoral legislation in recent years (e.g. Canada in 2022, Chile in 2021, Colombia in 2021, Costa Rica in 2022, Iceland in 2022, Israel in 2022, Japan in 2023, Korea in 2023, New Zealand in 2018 and Switzerland in 2021).
For OECD countries within the EU area, changes in the regulatory framework mainly include the transposition of the European Electronic Communications Code (EECC) of 2018 (Directive (EU) 2018/1972), the transposition of European Directives such as the Broadband Cost Reduction Directive (2014/61/EU) and the alignment with Gigabit Society targets set by the European Commission. As such, reforms to sectoral legislation in many European countries have been observed (e.g. Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden).
Some OECD countries within the EU area expect further amendments in sectoral legislation. These changes derive from implementation of the Digital Services Act (DSA), the Digital Markets Act (DMA), the Data Governance Act, the “Directive on measures for a high common level of cybersecurity across the Union” (the NIS2 Directive) and the European Artificial Intelligence Act. For example, some European countries highlighted potential changes to regulation on issues of convergence and regulatory treatment of audio-visual content provided over the Internet with the implementation of the DMA and DSA. European countries are also monitoring ongoing EU legislation and recommendations. The “Gigabit Infrastructure Act” entered into force in May 2024, replacing the Broadband Cost Reduction Directive of 2014 (European Commission, 2024[58]). Meanwhile, the “Recommendation on the regulatory promotion of gigabit connectivity” proposed in February 2023, was published in February 2024 (European Commission, 2024[59]).
Since 2021, OECD countries have been adapting regulations in different policy areas. For example, 28 OECD countries reported changes to wholesale access regulation, 14 countries reported changes to network interconnection regulation and 23 countries reported changes on the regulatory treatment of over-the-top providers or on bundling of communication services.16
The mandate of regulators in the communication sector continues to evolve
The mandate or responsibilities of communication regulators continue to evolve since 2021, with half of OECD countries reporting major changes. The changing nature of communication markets has driven modifications in the mandates and responsibilities of communication regulators in OECD countries. These include increased convergence, as well as how the evolution of the connectivity ecosystem blurs the boundaries between “traditional” communication markets and broader digital players (OECD, 2022[60]).
Communication regulators in OECD countries, Brazil and Singapore have increasingly at least partial responsibilities in broader digital policy issues either through their own mandates, regulatory co-operation or as part of a whole-of-government approach (Figure 2.17). Compared to 2021 (OECD, 2022[60]), partial or full responsibilities of communication regulators in 2023 have notably increased in the following domains: OTTs, end-user devices, IoT and AI, environmental sustainability and cloud computing (Table 2.1). In addition, almost half of OECD countries (47%) reported having a converged broadcasting and communication sector regulator in 2023.
Several examples highlight the role of communication regulators in broader digital policy issues. In January 2023, the Australian government announced it would introduce legislation to provide the communication regulator with new powers. The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) would now hold digital platforms to account for and improve efforts to combat false and misleading content on line (Australian Government, 2023[61]). In the United Kingdom, the Online Safety Act introduces rules for sites and apps such as social media, search engines and messaging platforms to protect users from online harms. Ofcom, the UK communication regulator, has been tasked with new responsibilities by providing guidance and establishing codes of practice on how companies can comply with this legislation (United Kingdom, 2023[62]).
Mandate of communication regulators by topic in OECD countries, Brazil and Singapore, 2023
Note: The sample size is 40 (i.e. 38 OECD countries, Brazil and Singapore). Four OECD countries did not reply to this question and are marked at N/A (i.e. 10%). Countries answered the following question (question 8): “Does your national regulatory authority, with responsibility for communication/telecommunication/broadcasting services have the mandate for the following areas?: Digital security, privacy, OTT services, issues related to cloud computing, issues related to end-user devices, issues in the area of the IoT and AI, issues related to the digital aspects of transportation, issues related to health, issues related to the sustainability of networks or digital technologies in general?”
Source: OECD elaboration based on the CSI DEO 2024 Regulatory Questionnaire. StatLink contains more data.
Note: Green highlight=increase of mandate or responsibility since 2021.
Source: OECD elaboration based on the CSI DEO 2024 Regulatory Questionnaire.
With new players gaining prominence in communication markets, some countries are restructuring their national regulatory authority. In the United States, for example, given the increase in applications for new satellites that feature new commercial models, players and technologies, the FCC created the Office of International Affairs and Space Bureau to support the burgeoning satellite industry (FCC, 2023[63]). In the United Kingdom, Ofcom released a “Space spectrum strategy” and new licensing framework for Non-Geostationary Orbit satellites (Ofcom, 2022[64]). See DEO Volume 1, Spotlight “Next generation networks and the evolving connectivity ecosystem” (OECD, 2024[57]).
Communication regulators are also increasingly engaging in inter-agency co-operation to achieve digital policy objectives that require a whole-of-government approach, such as the environmental sustainability of digital technologies. For example, the French government tasked its communication regulator, Arcep, and its agency for ecological transition (Agence de la transition écologique, ADEME), to quantify the current and future environmental footprint of digital technologies. In January 2022, the two agencies delivered the first two volumes of the study that assessed the current impact of ICTs on the environment (Arcep, 2022[65]). In March 2023, they delivered the third volume providing a forward-looking assessment (2030-50) (Arcep, 2023[66]) (See Chapter 3).
The transition towards future-proof networks and shutting down legacy networks
As new generations of broadband networks are rapidly emerging, deploying fibre backhaul further into fixed networks to support increases in speed and capacity across all network technologies becomes critical. In response, OECD countries have worked on how to extend and improve broadband access through policies that reduce deployment costs. Moreover, to promote deployment of broadband networks of the future, OECD countries have been working to streamline rights of way, ensuring efficient spectrum management, and promoting access to backhaul and backbone connectivity.
Adapting the regulatory framework to the shutting down of legacy networks
Several OECD countries have begun the transition from legacy networks and services, adapting regulatory frameworks to accommodate this evolution. In 2023, 33 OECD countries observed plans by operators to shut down legacy networks. In 29 OECD countries, the plans concerned the closing down of mobile networks (e.g. 2G or 3G networks). In 23 countries, they related to the transition from copper fixed networks to future-proof technologies, such as fibre.
The closing down of legacy networks, such as copper, boosts the deployment of high-capacity networks as operators invest in the transition to new access technologies. Many OECD communication regulators face the common challenge of adapting the regulatory framework to provide incentives to boost the deployment of future-proof access technologies, such as fibre. Approaches to the decommissioning of copper networks vary by country. Regulators need to ensure the timeline for copper shutdown is properly co-ordinated with the transition to fibre and other future-proof access technologies. Namely, the remaining affected customers on copper networks to be shut down need ample advance notice to migrate to newer technologies. Legacy customers also need satisfactory service levels on the copper network until it is phased out.
In Slovenia, the incumbent is allowed to switch off parts of the copper network if there is a parallel fibre network deployed or another open access network available. In New Zealand, copper network infrastructure is being withdrawn in specified areas and being gradually replaced by fibre if operators (principally Chorus, the incumbent) have ensured comparable or better levels of service are available to customers. The withdrawal of copper is subject to compliance with the “Copper Withdrawal Code” (Commerce Commission New Zealand, 2023[67]; Chorus, 2024[68]). In Norway, shortly after a broadband market analysis decision by the Norwegian Communications Authority (Nkom), the historical incumbent (Telenor) unliterally decided in 2019 to launch a plan to close down its copper network by 2022. In 2020, Nkom decided that Telenor had to maintain its wholesale access products delivered over its copper until September 2025, unless the incumbent provided a migration plan that wholesale access seekers could accept (Nkom, 2020[69]). In some OECD countries, the copper PSTN shutdown of the incumbent network has been completed with a full transition to fibre (e.g. the Czech Republic).
Wholesale access remedies with the aim of providing incentives to upgrade networks
OECD countries have taken several approaches to promote broadband development and foster competition. Actions include the promotion of both infrastructure competition and common wholesale infrastructures with regulated17 or non-regulated wholesale access to increase competition at the retail level (i.e. last mile or access part of the network). Insufficient infrastructure competition in some instances may require ongoing regulatory intervention or oversight. This explains why integrated incumbents in OECD countries were, and in many cases still are, subject to wholesale regulatory measures.
With the aim of fostering fibre deployment, regulators are both looking to safeguard competition while incentivising investments in networks. Some OECD countries are promoting infrastructure-based competition, including through physical infrastructure access, to boost fibre deployment. Some implement this through asymmetric wholesale access remedies. Others have applied symmetric regulation for fibre wholesale products based on geographical segmentation (OECD, 2022[1]).
Spain has emerged as a connectivity leader in Europe and in the OECD. The share of fibre in total fixed broadband connections in Spain grew from 35% to 86% between 2016 and 2023 (OECD, 2024[2]). The increase resulted from a combination of wholesale access regulation that spurred competition and targeted public funds. In 2016, after seven years of the initial regulatory forbearance for fibre deployments, Spain applied fibre wholesale access regulation based on geographical segmentation of competitive versus non-competitive areas (Godlovitch et al., 2019[70]). In 2021, the Spanish communication regulator relaxed the imposed obligations by deeming more geographical areas of the country “competitive markets”. In addition, backed by funding from the European Regional Development Fund, Spain has delivered major programmes to subsidise connectivity investment in rural areas. In 2021, it expanded the next evolution of broadband networks to the whole country (Government of Spain, 2021[71]).
Easing network deployment and promoting infrastructure sharing
Infrastructure sharing
With the increasing need for high-quality networks, infrastructure-sharing agreements among operators are on the rise to mitigate the costs of deployment of the next evolution of broadband networks. Such agreements can permit the sharing of passive infrastructure (e.g. masts, towers, sites) or active mobile infrastructure (e.g. RAN sharing, roaming, software elements).
Most OECD countries encourage infrastructure sharing, provided the advantages outweigh the drawbacks, i.e. that sharing is not detrimental to competition (OECD, 2022[1]). Almost all OECD countries promote sharing of passive infrastructure. However, active infrastructure sharing is becoming increasingly common and allowed in most OECD countries.18
The nature of infrastructure-agreements is changing. They may sometimes relate to deeper forms of network and spectrum sharing (i.e. in the active layer of networks compared to only passive infrastructure). This approach raises new competition and regulatory challenges.
In many countries, operators themselves develop active infrastructure-sharing agreements and do not require regulatory approval; however, they must notify the authority. In some cases, all such agreements are subject to regulatory approval. Thirty-two OECD countries generally allow sharing agreements of the RAN (e.g. antennas, transceivers, power, base stations, backhaul networks also called “multi-operator radio access network”), with some subject to regulatory approval. In 27 OECD countries, sharing of RAN and spectrum resources is allowed (i.e. “multi-operator core network”), while secondary trading or sharing of spectrum resources may require regulatory approval. Finally, in 24 OECD countries there is core network sharing (i.e. sharing of core network functionalities and servers).
In Japan, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications revised its guidelines on infrastructure sharing in August 2022. The guidelines clarified the application of relevant regulations and established rules between mobile operators and infrastructure-sharing operators (MIC, 2022[72]). In the Netherlands, the Authority for Consumers and Markets announced guidelines on mobile network sharing in April 2021 to answer questions about passive/active infrastructure sharing (ACM, 2021[73]).
Dig-once policies and single information points
Most OECD countries (71%, or 27 of 38) allow and encourage network operators to access available infrastructure at utilities and/or public administrations, including through “dig-once” policies that leverage non-broadband infrastructure projects (e.g. utilities, street light providers and highway/road construction) and reduce the costs of broadband network deployment. Moreover, 21 OECD countries have a single information point (SIP) on either the available infrastructure at utilities and public administrations for broadband network deployment or on planned civil engineering works for co-ordination purposes.
With respect to broadband deployment, several OECD countries have an “infrastructure atlas” for communication service providers. This acts as a SIP for the location of backbone and backhaul connectivity, as well as other types of wholesale infrastructure (OECD, 2022[1]). Such an approach enhances transparency for infrastructure-sharing and joint-deployment initiatives that bring deployment costs down:
Finland has a Geographic Information System (GIS) portal with data of building plans to co-ordinate civil works. This tool also allows network owners to contact relevant authorities to access physical infrastructure in certain geographical areas.
In Mexico, the communication regulator (IFT) has had a public portal for planned civil engineering works since 2020. Interested operators can render public their deployment plans for co-ordination purposes.
In Portugal, the Adequate Infrastructure Information System (SIIA Portal) enables communication operators to access information on infrastructure suitable for hosting their networks and to co-ordinate civil works. Through SIIA, those who need to install communication networks can find out who owns the infrastructure that can host them. This increases transparency for infrastructure-sharing and joint-deployment initiatives that reduce deployment costs.
In Slovenia, the communication regulator (AKOS) has taken steps to facilitate investment in broadband networks by providing maps of underlying wholesale infrastructure. This allows operators to plan their deployments (through the public portal “Geoportal AKOS” and the “Infrastructure Investment Portal”).
In Sweden, PTS collaborates with the Authority of the Land Survey (Lantmäteriet) and the Swedish National Heritage Board to continuously supply the SIP with an updated map (European Commission, 2022[74]).
In Spain, the new General Telecommunication Law established that the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Digital Transformation will create a SIP.
Joint deployments or co-investment
An increasing number of OECD countries have implemented policies on co-investment, or joint deployment of broadband networks. In the European Union, for example, the EECC creates incentives for co-investment in new fibre networks. To that end, it provides for regulatory relief to operators entering into such agreements (see OECD (2022[1])). In Italy, TIM, FiberCop (a fibre joint investment company founded by TIM) and Open Fiber signed an agreement in October 2022 to share fixed services. The agreement will enable Open Fiber to use FibreCop’s network infrastructure in so-called white areas; public funding has helped develop a TLC infrastructure under concession in these areas (Open Fiber, 2022[75]).
In the United Kingdom, MNOs, the government and the regulator (Ofcom) agreed to a programme called “Shared Rural Network” (SRN) in March 2020. Under this programme, EE, O2, Three and Vodafone have built and shared 222 mobile masts to enhance mobile broadband coverage in rural areas. The SRN is an advanced form of network and spectrum sharing to ensure population and geographic coverage. Operators agreed to invest to close connectivity gaps in areas where there is only coverage by one, but not all operators (i.e. “grey areas”). Meanwhile, government funding is complementing such investments to close connectivity gaps in areas where there is no coverage from any operator, also known as “white areas” (Shared Rural Network, 2020[76]).
Streamlining rights of way
Many OECD countries have issues around access to rights of way to deploy communication infrastructure. Ensuring access requires a high degree of collaboration between national, state/regional and local authorities. In Sweden, for example, the Broadband Forum brings together all three levels of government to ease broadband deployment (OECD, 2018[77]). Some OECD countries issue a code of “Good Practices” to streamline access to rights of way, while others monitor how municipalities adhere to the national communication law (e.g. Spain). Colombia publishes an index of municipalities to measure the degree that capital cities “ease infrastructure deployment”. This aims to provide incentives for municipal authorities to reduce barriers for network rollout (CRC, 2022[78]; OECD, 2022[55]).
Streamlining rights of way can help reduce the cost of network deployment. Austria issued a new Telecommunications Act in 2021, which grants rights of way for broadband infrastructure on private and publicly owned properties. As part of the Austrian Broadband Strategy 2030, the ministry installed the “Platform Internet-Infrastructure Austria (PIA 2030)”. This platform enables responsible stakeholders to discuss ways to accelerate and streamline deployment (European Commission, 2022[74]).
Germany announced the Gigabit Strategy in July 2022 that calls for fibre coverage of at least half of households and full mobile coverage by the end of 2025. To achieve these goals, the strategy set out to simplify approval processes for communication infrastructure deployment by the end of 2022 (Bundesministerium für Digitales und Verkehr, 2022[79]).
Promoting efficient spectrum management
Spectrum is a scarce essential input, in the form of invisible airwaves, that is required to provide wireless communication services, including mobile connectivity. Its timely availability is key to foster a vast array of critical applications and to enable connectivity for mass consumer and business communications. Therefore, efficient spectrum management can help expand overall economic and social welfare. As the demands for spectrum increase, many OECD countries are considering how to enable shared access to spectrum to increase its efficient use (OECD, 2022[11]).
Spectrum assignments for mobile services have been prominent in 30 OECD countries and in Brazil since 2021. Between 2021 and 2023, 55 spectrum assignments via auctions in different frequency ranges for mobile communications took place in OECD countries and in Brazil. Many of these auctions targeted licences in multiple bands (i.e. “multi-band auctions”). The most common frequency range was mid-band spectrum (i.e. above 1 GHz and below 6 GHz) (Figure 2.18). Eight countries licensed millimetre wave (mmWave) spectrum through auctions (Australia, Brazil, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Korea, Slovenia and Spain). Other countries such as Chile, Denmark, Germany and Iceland opted for different assignment procedures for mmWave spectrum (e.g. comparative selection, administrative selection or other).
Spectrum licensing plays a key role to close connectivity gaps, imposing build-out requirements in licences or allowing access to unused spectrum to expand connectivity in underserved areas (OECD, 2022[11]). Coverage obligations in spectrum assignment procedures, such as auctions, along with competitive communication markets, have proven to be an effective tool to extend mobile broadband coverage in rural and remote areas (OECD, 2022[11]).
Share of spectrum assignments according to frequency ranges auctioned during 2021-23 in OECD countries and Brazil
Note: A total of 55 spectrum assignments were auctioned, often in a multi-band setting.
Source: OECD elaboration based on the CSI DEO 2024 Regulatory Questionnaire.
Spectrum licensing can also be used as a tool to promote wireless local community broadband networks. In several OECD countries, spectrum licensing frameworks can cater to local networks to address rural connectivity needs, including via low-cost licences to extend coverage in rural and remote areas (Australia, Finland, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States) (OECD, 2022[11]). In Mexico, social purpose spectrum licences can be used to provide not-for-profit communication services, and commercial licences (i.e. for-profit) have been granted to local WISPs (OECD, 2022[11]). In the United States, the FCC established a “Tribe Priority Window” to allow tribes in rural areas to directly access unassigned 2.5 GHz spectrum to expand broadband in their lands (FCC, 2021[80]). (More details can be found in OECD (2022[11]).)
References
[73] ACM (2021), “Guidelines for sharing of mobile networks”, webpage, https://www.acm.nl/en/publications/guidelines-sharing-mobile-networks (accessed on 28 October 2022).
[16] Alleven, M. (2022), “T-Mobile’s 5G Home Internet footprint is getting a lot bigger with a data capped version”, 9 August, Fierce Wireless, https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobiles-5g-home-internet-footprint-getting-lot-bigger-light-version.
[51] ANACOM (2022), “Social Internet tariff now open to subscriptions”, webpage, https://www.anacom.pt/render.jsp?contentId=1717706&languageId=1 (accessed on 22 January 2024).
[50] Anatel (2020), “Redes Comunitárias” [Community Networks], 17 May, News Release, Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações, Brasilia, https://www.gov.br/anatel/pt-br/regulado/universalizacao/redes-comunitarias.
[66] Arcep (2023), “Christophe Bechu, Agnès Pannier-Runacher and Jean-Noël Barrot receive the forward-looking assessment of the digital environmental footprint in 2030 and 2050, from ADEME and Arcep”, 6 March, Press Release, Arcep, Paris, https://en.arcep.fr/news/press-releases/view/n/environment-060323.html.
[44] Arcep (2022), Maps & Data – Open Data (database), https://en.arcep.fr/maps-data/open-data.html (accessed on 18 January 2024).
[65] Arcep (2022), “The digital environmental footprint in France: ADEME and Arcep submit their first report to the government”, 19 January, Press Release, Arcep, Paris, https://en.arcep.fr/news/press-releases/view/n/the-environment-190122.html.
[61] Australian Government (2023), “New ACMA powers to combat misinformation and disinformation”, webpage, https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/have-your-say/new-acma-powers-combat-misinformation-and-disinformation (accessed on 17 February 2024).
[79] Bundesministerium für Digitales und Verkehr (2022), “Gigabitstrategie der Bundesregierung verabschiedet”, [Federal government’s gigabit strategy adopted], webpage, https://www.bmdv.bund.de/SharedDocs/DE/Pressemitteilungen/2022/050-wissing-gigabitstrategie-der-bundesregierung-verabschiedet.html (accessed on 1 December 2022).
[68] Chorus (2024), “Phone and broadband options are changing in some areas”, webpage, https://www.chorus.co.nz/copper-withdrawal (accessed on 22 February 2024).
[67] Commerce Commission New Zealand (2023), “Development of the Copper Withdrawal Code”, webpage, https://comcom.govt.nz/regulated-industries/telecommunications/projects/development-of-the-copper-withdrawal-code (accessed on 19 March 2024).
[78] CRC (2022), Índice de favorabilidad al despliegue de infraestructura de telecomunicaciones en las capitales del país, [Favourability index for the deployment of telecommunications infrastructure in the country’s capital cities], Comisión de Regulación de Comunicaciones, Colombia, https://www.crcom.gov.co/es/micrositios/indice (accessed on 28 July 2022).
[40] CRTC (2024), Current Trends - High-speed Broadband (database), https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/PolicyMonitoring/ban.htm (accessed on 22 January 2024).
[84] De Nil, M. (2023), “The emergence of Wi-Fi HaLow for IoT adoption and innovation”, 17 May, Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2023/05/17/the-emergence-of-wi-fi-halow-for-iot-adoption-and-innovation.
[53] Deutsche Glasfaser (2020), “Deutsche Glasfaser: Netzausbau”, [Deutsche Glasfaser: Network expansion], webpage, https://www.deutsche-glasfaser.de/netzausbau (accessed on 12 August 2020).
[35] DIST (2023), “Project Gigabit progress update, June 2023”, Policy Paper, 30 June, Department of Science, Innovation and Technology, London, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/project-gigabit-progress-update-june-2023/project-gigabit-progress-update-june-2023 (accessed on 28 August 2023).
[9] European Commission (2024), 5G Observatory, Biannual Report, June 2024, European 5G Observatory, https://5gobservatory.eu/report-20-june-2024.
[29] European Commission (2024), “DESI 2023 indicators: Digital Infrastructure”, DESI 2023 Dashboard for the Digital Decade (database), https://digital-decade-desi.digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/datasets/desi/indicators#desi2023-2 (accessed on 22 February 2024).
[59] European Commission (2024), “Recommendation on the regulatory promotion of gigabit connectivity”, 6 February 2024, European Commission, Brussels, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/recommendation-regulatory-promotion-gigabit-connectivity.
[58] European Commission (2024), “Regulation (EU) 2024/1309 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2024 on measures to reduce the cost of deploying gigabit electronic communications networks, amending Regulation (EU) 2015/2120 and repealing Directive 2014/61/EU Gigabit”, 8 May 2024, European Commission, Brussels, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32024R1309.
[74] European Commission (2022), “Connectivity toolbox: Member States’ implementation reports”, Report/Study, 19 May, European Commission, Brussels, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/connectivity-toolbox-member-states-implementation-reports.
[45] FCC (2024), FCC National Broadband Map (database), https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov/data-download (accessed on 18 January 2024).
[63] FCC (2023), “FCC Space Bureau & Office of International Affairs to launch April 11”, 11 April, Press Release, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C., https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-space-bureau-office-international-affairs-launches-april-11.
[42] FCC (2022), “FCC releases new national broadband maps”, 18 November, Press Release, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C., https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-releases-new-national-broadband-maps.
[80] FCC (2021), “Broadband radio service & education broadband service”, webpage, https://www.fcc.gov/broadband-radio-service-education-broadband-service (accessed on 4 May 2022).
[39] FCC (2021), Fourteenth Broadband Deployment Report, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C., https://www.fcc.gov/reports-research/reports/broadband-progress-reports/fourteenth-broadband-deployment-report.
[54] FiberConnect Council MENA (2022), “The business models that are attracting FTTH investment now”, 24 August, Fibre Connect Council, https://fiberconnectmena.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1795:the-business-models-that-are-attracting-ftth-investment-now&catid=100&lang=en&Itemid=259.
[17] Fletcher, B. (2022), “Verizon expects 4-5M fixed wireless customers by the end of 2025”, 4 March, Fierce Wireless, https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/verizon-expects-4-5m-fixed-wireless-customers-end-2025.
[70] Godlovitch, I. et al. (2019), “Prospective competition and deregulation: An analysis of European approaches to regulating full fibre for BT”, report commissioned by Ofcom, WIK-Consult, February.
[32] Government of Canada (2022), “Universal Broadband Fund”, webpage, https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/high-speed-internet-canada/en/universal-broadband-fund (accessed on 28 August 2023).
[56] Government of Mexico (2024), CFE Telecomunicaciones e Internet Para Todos, [CFE Telecommunications and Internet For All], website, https://mapa.internetparatodos.cfe.mx/?entidad=&municipio=&t4g=true&tsatelital=true&tadsl=true (accessed on 16 February 2024).
[36] Government of Portugal (2023), “Tender to take fibreoptics to the entire country is launched”, 12 December, Press Release, Government of Portugal, https://www.portugal.gov.pt/en/gc23/communication/news-item?i=tender-to-take-fibre-optics-to-the-entire-country-is-launched.
[71] Government of Spain (2021), “Recovery plan is most ambitious economic plan in Spain’s recent history“, says Pedro Sánchez”, 13 April, President’s News, La Moncla, Government of Spain, https://www.lamoncloa.gob.es/lang/en/presidente/news/Paginas/2021/20210413recovery-plan.aspx.
[6] GSA (2024), “5G - 5G-Standalone April 2024 Summary”, webpage, https://gsacom.com/paper/5g-standalone-april-2024-summary (accessed on 30 June 2024).
[10] GSA (2024), “Private Mobile Networks June 2024 Summary”, webpage, https://gsacom.com/technology/private-mobile-networks (accessed on 30 June 2024).
[85] GSMA (2019), “Infrastructure sharing: An overview”, webpage, https://www.gsma.com/futurenetworks/wiki/infrastructure-sharing-an-overview (accessed on 28 October 2022).
[5] GSMA Intelligence (2024), GSMA Intelligence (database), https://www.gsmaintelligence.com (accessed on 18 September 2023).
[19] Hardesty, L. (2022), “Reliance Jio to launch a different kind of fixed wireless access”, 6 September, Fierce Wireless, https://www.fiercewireless.com/5g/reliance-jio-launch-different-kind-fixed-wireless-access?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=FT-NL-FierceWireless&oly_enc_id=2115D4525489H3G.
[41] IFT (2024), “Diagnostics of Mobile service coverage among indigenous peoples”, webpage, https://www.ift.org.mx/usuarios-y-audiencias/diagnosticos-de-cobertura-del-servicio-movil-en-los-pueblos-indigenas (accessed on 22 January 2024).
[49] IFT (2022), Análisis de las iniciativas públicas y privadas para proveer servicios de telecomunicaciones y radiodifusión en zonas rurales y/o marinadas, [Analysis of public and private initiatives to provide telecommunications and broadcasting services in rural and/or marginalised areas], Federal Telecommunications Institute, Mexico City, https://centrodeestudios.ift.org.mx/admin/files/estudios/1669919717.pdf.
[12] Intel (2024), “What is Wi-Fi 6?”, webpage, https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/gaming/resources/wifi-6.html (accessed on 22 February 2024).
[43] ISED (2022), “National broadband data information”, webpage, https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/high-speed-internet-canada/en/universal-broadband-fund/national-broadband-data-information (accessed on 18 January 2024).
[24] ITU (2024), World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators (database), http://www.itu.int/pub/D-IND-WTID.OL (accessed on 19 September 2023).
[26] ITU (2023), “The affordability of ICT services 2022”, Policy Brief, International Telecommunication Union, Geneva, https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-d/opb/ind/D-IND-POL_BRIEF.02-2023-PDF-E.pdf.
[13] Koziol, M. (2023), “Wi-Fi 7 signals the industry’s new priority: Stability”, 29 December, IEEE Spectrum, https://spectrum.ieee.org/wi-fi-7 (accessed on 10 March 2024).
[18] Lennighan, M. (2023), “AT&T to maintain 5G spend and push FWA in 2023”, 26 January, Telecoms.com, https://telecoms.com/519601/att-to-maintain-5g-spend-and-push-fwa-in-2023.
[15] Majithia, K. (2022), “Nokia to deploy FWA mmWave on Australian NBN”, 18 October, Mobile World Live, https://www.mobileworldlive.com/featured-content/home-banner/nokia-to-deploy-fwa-mmwave-on-australian-nbn/?ID=a6g1r000000xNauAAE&JobID=1270899&utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MWL_20221018&utm_content=https%3a%2f%2fwww.mobileworldlive.com%2ff.
[7] MIC (2024), Survey on Actual Radio Spectrum Usage, https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000917561.pdf.
[72] MIC (2022), “Results of solicitation of opinions on draft revisions to the guidelines on application relationships of the Telecommunications Business Act and the Radio Act”, 29 March, Press Release, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Toyko, https://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/joho_tsusin/eng/pressrelease/2024/3/29_2.html.
[37] Ministério das Comunicações (2023), “Norte Conectado”, [Connected North], Brazilian Ministry of Communications, Brasilia, https://www.gov.br/mcom/pt-br/acesso-a-informacao/acoes-e-programas/programas-projetos-acoes-obras-e-atividades/norte-conectado.
[33] Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (2022), Lifting Connectivity in Aotearoa New Zealand, Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment, Wellington, https://www.mbie.govt.nz/assets/lifting-connectivity-in-aotearoa-new-zealand-december-22.pdf.
[8] MSIT (2024), “K-Network 2030 Strategy”, Press Release, Ministry of Science and ICT, Seoul, https://www.msit.go.kr/bbs/view.do?mId=113&mPid=238&bbsSeqNo=94&nttSeqNo=3182740.
[69] Nkom (2020), “Decision to amend the decisions in Markets 3a and 3b - obligation to maintain access to copper-based access networks”, Norwegian Communications Authority, Fornebu, https://nkom.no/ekom-markedet/markeder/marked-3a-og-3b-lokal-og-sentral-tilgang-til-faste-aksessnett/_/attachment/download/9ab67684-1bda-4df8-a091-a6256cdd9b9b:56396f4462c29e322205578047504831d4a75c2d/Vedtak%20om%20endring%20av%20vedtakene%20i%20Marked%20.
[2] OECD (2024), Broadband Statistics (database), https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/broadband-statistics.html (accessed on 14 March 2024).
[3] OECD (2024), “Financing broadband networks of the future”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 365, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/eafc728b-en.
[27] OECD (2024), “Internet access”, (indicator), https://doi.org/10.1787/69c2b997-en (accessed on 29 September 2023).
[57] OECD (2024), “Next generation wireless networks and the connectivity ecosystem”, in OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2024 (Volume 1): Embracing the Technology Frontier, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/45ba765d-en.
[14] OECD (2024), OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2024 (Volume 1): Embracing the Technology Frontier, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a1689dc5-en.
[52] OECD (2023), Enhancing Rural Innovation in the United States, OECD Rural Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/22a8261b-en.
[1] OECD (2022), “Broadband networks of the future”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 327, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/755e2d0c-en.
[21] OECD (2022), “Building better societies through digital policy: Background paper for the CDEP Ministerial meeting”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 338, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/07c3eb90-en.
[60] OECD (2022), “Communication regulators of the future”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 333, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f02209e6-en.
[11] OECD (2022), “Developments in spectrum management for communication services”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 332, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/175e7ce5-en.
[55] OECD (2022), Rural Policy Review of Colombia 2022, OECD Rural Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c26abeb4-en.
[28] OECD (2021), “Bridging connectivity divides”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 315, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e38f5db7-en.
[31] OECD (2021), Bridging digital divides in G20 countries, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/35c1d850-en.
[82] OECD (2020), “OECD bundled communication price baskets”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 300, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/64e4c18a-en.
[4] OECD (2019), “The road to 5G networks: Experience to date and future developments”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 284, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2f880843-en.
[22] OECD (2018), “Bridging the rural digital divide”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 265, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/852bd3b9-en.
[77] OECD (2018), OECD Reviews of Digital Transformation: Going Digital in Sweden, OECD Reviews of Digital Transformation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264302259-en.
[48] OECD (2017), OECD Telecommunication and Broadcasting Review of Mexico 2017, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264278011-en.
[81] OECD (2017), Revised Telecommunication Price Baskets, Working Party on Communication Infrastructures and Services Policy, OECD, Paris, https://one.oecd.org/document/DSTI/CDEP/CISP(2017)4/FINAL/En/pdf.
[23] OECD (2017), “The evolving role of satellite networks in rural and remote broadband access”, OECD Digital Economy Papers, No. 264, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7610090d-en.
[46] OECD (2015), “Development of High-speed Networks and the Role of Municipal Networks”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 26, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jrqdl7rvns3-en.
[38] Ofcom (2022), Connected Nations 2022, Ofcom, London, https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-and-data/multi-sector-research/infrastructure-research/connected-nations-2022.
[64] Ofcom (2022), Space Spectrum Strategy, 10 November, Ofcom, London, https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0023/247181/statement-space-spectrum-strategy.pdf.
[30] Ookla (2024), “Global, fixed and mobile network performance maps”, Speedtest® by Ookla®, 4Q 2023, Registry of Open Data on AWS, https://registry.opendata.aws/speedtest-globalperformance.
[75] Open Fiber (2022), “TIM, FiberCop and Open Fiber sign a commercial agreement to speed up digitalisation of the country”, 13 May, Press Release, Open Fiber, https://openfiber.it/en/open-fiber-world/press-releases/partnership-open-fiber-tim-fibercop/#:~:text=Rome%2C%2013%20May%202022,been%20financed%20by%20public%20funding.
[47] Redes, A. (2020), “Expanding the telecommunications operators ecosystem: Policy and regulatory guidelines to enable local operators”, webpage, https://www.apc.org/en/pubs/expanding-telecommunications-operators-ecosystem-policy-and-regulatory-guidelines-enable-local (accessed on 9 March 2022).
[76] Shared Rural Network (2020), “About the shared rural network”, webpage, https://srn.org.uk/about (accessed on 28 October 2022).
[25] Teligen/TechInsights (2024), “Teligen tariff & benchmarking market data using the OECD methodology”, Teligen/TechInsights.
[34] The White House (2021), “President Biden’s bipartisan infrastructure law”, November, Press Release, The White House, Washington, D.C., https://www.whitehouse.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law (accessed on 28 July 2022).
[62] United Kingdom (2023), Online Safety Act, Government of the United Kingdom, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/enacted (accessed on 22 January 2024).
[83] Wi-Fi Alliance (2024), “Discover Wi-Fi CERTIFIED HaLow: Long Range, Low Power Wi-Fi for IoT”, webpage, https://www.wi-fi.org/discover-wi-fi/wi-fi-certified-halow (accessed on 20 May 2024).
[20] Wood, N. (2023), “Jio’s FWA service goes live in eight cities”, 21 September, Telecoms.com, https://telecoms.com/523838/jios-fwa-service-goes-live-in-eight-cities.
← 1. Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS) is a standard that allows delivery of broadband on an existing Hybrid Fibre-Coaxial (HFC) cable technology. The standard has evolved to its current version DOCSIS 3.1. While DOCSIS 3.1 may provide a viable alternative to FTTH in terms of download speeds, it does not achieve symmetrical upload speeds. The scalability of these cable networks depends on the evolution of the DOCSIS standard. DOCSIS 4.0 envisions to achieve 10 Gbps symmetrical speeds.
← 2. In most countries, rollouts concerned mobile services except for Colombia where one provider (DirectTV) is delivering 5G FWA services in the capital.
← 3. The definitions of the GSMA Intelligence database are the following: “5G connections: 5G unique SIM cards (or phone numbers, where SIM cards are not used) that have been registered on the mobile network at the end of the period. Connections differ from subscribers such that a unique subscriber can have multiple connections. Total mobile connections: Total unique SIM cards (or phone numbers, where SIM cards are not used), excluding licensed cellular IoT connections, that have been registered on the mobile network at the end of the period.”
← 4. Namely, SA-5G uses both the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) core network architecture for 5G (i.e. 5G Core, 5GC), as well as the 5G radio interface (i.e. New Radio, NR) (OECD, 2022[1]).
← 5. Wireless networking protocols that are based on the IEEE 802.11 network standard.
← 6. Moreover, WLAN developments are also seeking to improve IoT use cases. For example, the Wi-Fi HaLow standard enables low power and long-range connectivity necessary for applications, including sensor networks and wearables (De Nil, 2023[84]; Wi-Fi Alliance, 2024[83]).
← 7. Connectivity divides are defined as gaps in access and uptake of high-quality broadband services at affordable prices in areas with low population densities and for disadvantaged groups compared to the overall population (OECD, 2021[28]).
← 8. The OECD has been collecting prices of communication services for 30 years and has developed a unique methodology to compare the prices of communication services with different features across countries. The price baskets have been revised over the years to keep pace with service offerings and technological developments. In 2020, the OECD adopted a new basket methodology for bundled communication services. The revised version of price baskets for mobile broadband services (called “mobile voice and data”) and fixed broadband services were adopted in 2017 (OECD, 2017[81]). With increased convergence and the prevalence of communication bundles in most OECD countries, a new methodology for prices baskets was approved in 2020, allowing to compare prices of bundled communication services (dual-play, triple-play and quadruple-play bundles) (OECD, 2020[82]). The features of different offers of communication services are evaluated and compared, including the number of calls, download speed, data allowance, and number of TV channels and premium channels in the case of bundles. The basket methodology consists of selecting, for every OECD country, the cheapest offers in the market meeting all criteria for a given user profile (i.e. low, medium, high usage profiles).
← 9. “Internet access is defined as the percentage of households who reported that they had access to the Internet. In almost all cases this access is via a personal computer either using a dial-up, ADSL or cable broadband access. This indicator is measured in percentage of all households.”
← 10. Percentage of households covered by any fixed very-high-capacity network (VHCN) according to the European Commission definition. The technologies considered are FTTH and FTTB for 2017-18 and FTTH, FTTB and Cable DOCSIS 3.1 for 2019 onwards.
← 11. Using an exchange rate of CAD 1.302/USD in 2022 according to OECD.stat.
← 12. Using an exchange rate of NZD 1.6/USD in 2022 according to OECD.stat.
← 13. Using an exchange rate of GBP 0.8/USD in 2022 according to OECD.stat.
← 14. Using an exchange rate of BRL 5.2/USD in 2022 according to OECD.stat
← 15. Demand aggregation models help investors by essentially signing up customers in advance, co-ordinating and bundling demand to increase the potential profitability, economies of scale and/or the certainty of the business case for network expansion.
← 16. Note: Sample size is 37 of 38 OECD countries. Source: OECD elaboration based on CSI Regulatory Questionnaire responses in 2023.
← 17. “Wholesale access regulation” is defined as the mandatory offering by network operators of specific wholesale elements of their network to other operators, on terms approved by a regulator or sanctioned by a court. It requires the incumbent to allow rivals to lease or grant access to certain individual building blocks that make up a communication network (network segments or layers). This concept is distinct from the concept of “network sharing”, which refers to an agreement between operators for the shared use of network elements, which may be subject to regulatory measures (OECD, 2022[60]).
← 18. Active infrastructure can be categorised into three types from a technical point of view: i) Multi-Operator Radio Access Network (MORAN), in which operators share the RAN but use their own dedicated spectrum and core network; ii) MOCN (Multi-Operator Core Network), in which operators share RAN and spectrum, but do not share their core network; and iii) Core Network Sharing, where operators share RAN, spectrum and their core network (GSMA, 2019[85]).