Special backbone network initiatives – as opposed to the creation of open access to existing networks – have become a focus for possible universal access and service (UAS) programming over the last few years. Proponents of such initiatives believe that the main operators will not have enough backbone to match the country’s needs and demand for ICT bandwidth. Considering the challenges and complexities involved, special backbone network initiatives require very careful evaluation as to whether or not this is a worthwhile option for an individual country.
A separately owned network operator must be constituted so not to compete with, or discriminate against, its customers. It is controlled by the investors that contributed the funds, possibly with other stakeholders including community interests. Having a specially constituted network operator is most appropriate when the network being managed is being constructed using funds independent of any existing network operator. Section 3.4.4 and
Section 3.4.5 discuss alternative ownership and operating modes, which might be more appropriate in certain situations.
Typically, broadband networks developed with public funds, are required to operate by specially constituted network operators and to offer open access, e.g., different Internet service providers may use the broadband links. The Practice Note
Public intervention to support broadband deployment in the EU gives examples of where this has been done.
The Reference Document The Alberta SuperNet: An Axia Breakthrough Solution to removing the Digital Divide refers to a Canadian initiative where an open access backbone network has been commissioned to reach all communities above a certain size, and which is managed by a private sector company under contract. In such cases, the backbone network may ultimately be transferred to the funders under a build-operate-transfer or build-transfer-operate arrangement.
The challenge for such projects is to determine whether the motivation and economic justification for the backbone projects is:
- To increase basic network reach into new regional or rural areas that are, to date, not reached (but that may be increasingly served by mobile operators);
- To increase bandwidth capacity on main routes, thereby encouraging and enabling advanced ICT applications and independent Internet points of presence to grow (this will gradually take place as demand is proven); or
- To support the growth of existing and future competitive operators who might consider the non-availability of an independently owned, open or shared access backbone to be a constraint.
Building a new national backbone is unlikely to be justified by capacity requirements alone, although it may be justified if the existing networks have extremely limited network coverage, organizational capability, and commercial acumen or management capacity. On balance, these situations are terminating where policy environments are truly liberalized, and encourage competition and investment. Hence other alternatives discussed in previous and following sections might, in the end, prove to be more realistic.