National Broadband Plan Workshop on Broadband Benchmarks (see summary)

National Broadband Plan Workshop (Benchmarks)

See a summary of the workshop

Federal Communications Commission
Sept 2, 2009
1:30pm-5:00pm

Contact:
Nick Maynard
Nicholas.Maynard@fcc.gov
(202) 418-2047
http://broadband.gov/ws_benchmarks.html

The goal of this workshop will be to explore various metrics or benchmarks for evaluating the various dimensions of broadband across geographic areas and across time. The workshop will consider various metrics to measure such important variables as broadband deployment and adoption, the price and quality of broadband services, and the level of competition. Where appropriate, the workshop will also discuss formulas that compare these metrics for different broadband technologies or services offered under varying terms and conditions.

The workshop will also examine sector-specific metrics, such as how best to measure the deployment and adoption of health IT or smart grid technologies. These sector-specific benchmarks will build on prior workshops that focused on more specific issues, with the goal of identifying those metrics that will be most important and useful for tracking the implementation and impact of the National Broadband Plan.

The workshop's goal is to identify those metrics that are most likely to be useful in assessing the broadband sector, tracking changes in the US broadband sector over time, and comparing US broadband performance against the performance of other countries.

FCC Participants:

  • Donald K. Stockdale, Jr., Deputy Chief and Bureau Chief Economist, WCB
  • Nick Maynard, Economic Research Manager
  • Jon Peha, Chief Technologist
  • Ken Lynch, Industry Economist, Industry Analysis and Technology Division, WCB, FCC

Panel:

  • Scott Berendt, Director, Research, Evaluation and Documentation, One Economy
  • Richard N. Clarke, Assistant Vice President, Public Policy, AT&T
  • Jon Eisenberg, Director, Computer Science and Telecommunication Board, The National Academies
  • Harold Feld, Legal Director, Public Knowledge
  • Gregory L. Rosston, Deputy Director, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research
  • Catherine Sandoval, Assistant Professor of Law, Santa Clara University

The following are some of the preliminary topics that will be covered at this workshop. The FCC is inviting suggestions.

  • Review of key metrics for US broadband deployment, adoption, price, usage, and competition
  • Metrics for sector-specific broadband adoption, such as health IT, smart grid, or transportation
  • Methodologies for measuring US broadband progress over time, as well as international comparisons
  • Limits of benchmarking for policy decisions and program evaluation
  • Data collection
  • Data dissemination
  • Tying data to course corrections

Here's what some are already telling the FCC about broadband benchmarks...

Mercatus Center At George Mason University
The following steps would enable the Commission to craft a plan that promotes consumer welfare and identifies the most efficient and effective ways to accomplish broadband policy goals:

  • Define "broadband" as the minimal high-speed service that has garnered substantial subscribership.
  • Measure broadband access by evaluating whether broadband service is available from wireline, fixed wireless, mobile wireless, or satellite providers in each census tract.
  • Measure "affordable" broadband prices by reference to prices paid by middle-class consumers in competitive urban and suburban markets.
  • Measure broadband subscribership using the census-tract data that broadband providers are now required to provide.
  • Establish baselines grounded in reality.
  • Evaluate benefits and costs of alternative policies.
  • Consider alternatives to infrastructure or subscribership subsidies.
  • Encourage facilities-based competition.
  • Conduct retrospective analysis of outcomes and costs

Costquest Associates (economic network cost modeling and analysis, broadband mapping and assessment and design of USF funding systems)

Defining Broadband: should be defined by what it is intended to be used for. A speed definition is IRRELEVANT - benchmarks should be tied to local needs which could evolve over time. Benchmarks must be tied to the delivery of certain applications.

  • A situational, "experiential" tiered metric would be clearer to the typical consumer. The tiered metric should adapt over time which recognizes consumer's improved understanding of the internet's capability and the technical expansion of the internet so that an achievable target is provided to push for continued expansion of the internet capabilities.
  • The tiered metric should be technology agnostic and focus on content that should be available to Americans

Affordability: Price of service should be considered, since affordability appears as important to a consumer's ability to access broadband as is network availability. In collecting information on broadband it is important to factor retail prices in so that a differentiation can be drawn between a lack of broadband service providers and a lack of broadband services at a price that can be afforded. These two problems will likely be addressed differently, so analysis should not confuse the two.

Measuring Progress

  • Include broadband date that would be consistent with other forms of publicly available data. Combine customer data for their purchases across government reporting programs like the USAC data and the 477 FCC info.
  • Explore moving to a lower level of census geography - also it would be helpful to build a record of carriers success with accurately locating reported customers
  • Develop a periodic survey that ties in to the tiered metric above
  • Capture key infrastructure elements including: fiber nodes, electronic locations, towers, backhaul locations, points of interconnection, wired schools and libraries, etc
  • Include a national annual survey, that captures info on broadband, and speed and barriers to adoption.

Effective and Efficient Mechanisms for Ensuring Access

  • Market Mechanisms: when assessing the High Cost law reward areas it is necessary to:
    • Collect and disseminate info on demand, existing supply and cost of expansion
    • Identify and eliminate regulatory hurdles such as rights of way policies and tower permit issues
    • Promote demand side programs to improve adoption
    • Supply side subsidies should be made to the marginal investments that would not have otherwise been made - this will include an detailed analysis of demand and costs

The FCC, NTIA, RUS and States should consider using a Broadband Assessment Model (BAM) to evaluate a market and the utilization of grants/loans/funding programs. The BAM is simply an analytical approach and discipline that links broadband coverage information to other data sources. The assessment model should:

  • Assist and enable the effective identification and communication of priorities (and expected benefits) to the emerging NTIA and RUS funding processes.
  • Align and coordinate with corresponding mapping and demand analysis work - that is, the BAM is approached as an area specific analysis
  • Develop comparable / relatable scores to understand the market, to prioritize the projects for funding so that the ARRA funds provide optimal benefit, and to assess sustainability. BAM's key measures should include at least: Supply and demand assessment, consumer surveys, demographic and cost assessments, revenue and funding assessments, and net present value assessments