According the LIRNEasia’s 2011 Telecom Regulatory Environment (TRE) survey, stakeholders in India, Pakistan and Indonesia have identified the telecom regulatory environments in their countries as improved since 2008, the last time the survey was carried out.   In contrast, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, the Philippines have seen the regulatory environments decline in effectiveness, while Thailandremains more-or-less the same.

The TRE Survey asks senior level stakeholders to evaluate the effectiveness of the telecom regulatory environment in the fixed, mobile and broadband subsectors along a Lickert scale of 1 to 5 (1 being highly ineffective and 5 being highly effective, with the mid-point of 3 being considered average performance).  Seven different dimensions of regulation (market entry, tariff regulation, interconnection, universal service, anti-competitive-practices, quality of service) are evaluated by the stakeholders.    This year, 349 responded participated in the 7 countries.

Within a country, scores for each of the dimensions reflect specific issues: for example, in India, the lowest score (of 2.3 out of 5) was received by the Access to Scarce Resources dimension in the mobile-sub-sector.  This is perhaps not surprising given the 2G scandals in India.  However, India did finally get around to allocating 3G spectrum in 2010, and did so by having its first ever spectrum auctions. Perhaps because of this, or because stakeholders believe that that the 2G scandal has finally paved way for transparency in allocation, the score of 2.3 this year is still an improvement, though marginal,  over the 2008 score of 2.2.   India’s USD 4 billion+ undisbursed Universal Service Fund and related policies are responsible for its biggest TRE score decline: the TRE for USO drops from 3.1 in 2008 to 2.4 this year.  In contrast, tariff regulation in the mobile sub-sector continues to be the top performer with a score of 3.9 out of 5.0, indicating stakeholder satisfaction at TRAI’s policy of forbearance which has enabled Indian consumers to enjoy extremely low prices thanks to competitive forces.

Pakistan saw an increased in almost all dimensions, with the exception of 3 (fixed market entry, mobile access to scarce resources and mobile interconnection) which showed minor declines.   In contrast, Bangladesh saw scores in all seven fixed-subsector dimensions decline, in some cases by as much as 1 point.  The scores are perhaps reflective of the issues related to the cancellation of several fixed licenses.  Overall only seven dimensions showed improvements in Bangladesh, and even these were marginal.   Thailand, whose overall performance is unchanged, has however seen significant declines in its Market Entry scores due the uncertainties caused by the concession contracts granted to the mobile operators and what their status would be when they expire starting next year.

Detailed analysis of the scores is available in the draft country reports for Pakistan, India, Thailand, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and Bangladesh.

A comparative country analysis is also available online.

All reports and analysis is in draft form at present. We hope you will comment on the country reports and cross country comparisons so that we may improve our analysis.

We said (a) broadband is above 256 kbps, not 128 kbps; (b) minimum bandwidth requirements should be valid beyond the ISP domain; (c) operators should maintain predetermined contention ratios; (d) bandwidth ultilisation should be above 75% on average; (e) latency < 85 ms for local and <300 ms for international and (f) user surveys are important but should be supplemented by user testing which gives a more objective measure. LIRNEasia also offered assistance if BTRC plans user testing.

Downloads: Consultation Paper and LIRNEasia’s Response.

LIRNEasia saw BTRC’s move to issue three new Broadband Wireless Access (BWA) licenses a positive development, as Bangladesh is certainly not a country that can boast of quality and affordable broadband.

This is what we learnt from our research:

Exceptionally high cost of broadband remains a key barrier that prevents the development of the BPO industry in Bangladesh. This is apparent when the prices are compared with similar packages offered by the operators in neighbouring countries. The annual cost of the basic office broadband package offered by Grameen Cybernet Ltd is USD 8,016. This is more than thirty times when compared with the equivalent in India (and 67 times that of EU average). These prices indicate a serious mismatch between demand and supply. So opening the market for broadband services is commendable, but the true impact will be felt only if this results in significant drop in prices.

We are glad to find our trademark in multiple places in the RFP document, specifically in following imrpovements (from the earlier one):

1. Operators should now guarantee QoS not just in last mile, but at least till the first foreign entry point, by purchasing adequate international bandwidth. (Earlier the focus was only on last mile.)

2. Contention ratios and download/upload speed ratios are defined, ensuring capacity increase parallel to the number of subscribers

3. Connectivity need not be confined to WiMax (except in Dhaka and Chittagong Metropolitan area). Operators have the flexibility in using other media (eg Fiber or Copper wires) in conjunction

4. Operators have to ensure QoS as per BTRC guidelines. There will be regular monitoring. (Glad to learn that BTRC will an eye on broadband QoSE! Not many regulators have!)

5. Operators now have a better understanding on backbone/backhaul design. The system can be point-to-multipoint or mesh radio systems consisting of BWA distribution hub stations and their associated subscriber stations (or BWA access devices).

Our complete response is here.

With this, is it too much to expect the same reaction from Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Sri Lanka too for our response on the ‘Planning and Implementation of a National Backbone Network (NBN)’?

Such wise words were not always heeded.

Four new levies, reported Financial Times today, will come into force this month under the Environmental Conservation Levy Act No. 8 of 2008.

All communication towers will be charged Rs 50,000, according to the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) Chairman Udaya Gammanpila, who explained it was done to ‘induce telecommunication companies to share the towers’.

Sharing telecom towers is good, but if Mr. Chairman thinks that happens just by forcing them to pay for erecting towers, he is wrong. Had cost been the issue, sharing would have already happened, given the high cost of tower erection – from leasing the land to bribing authorities of all levels. Further if the CEA’s concern was reducing the numbers it could have been done more effectively working together with Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of Sri Lanka (TRCSL). That is how it happens in other countries. They could have learnt from the recent attempts by Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory commission.

Perhaps TRCSL is too busy with monitoring porn. So this will levy be eventually paid by the mobile and CDMA subscribers.

If that is not enough, mobile phones will further be levied two percent of their monthly bills. (Even without this mobile users pay 26 cents as tax for every Rs. 1 usage – the ratio among the highest in the world) The funds such generated will supposedly be used to build an e-waste recycling plant. Says CEA Chairman: “Currently we do not have such a facility and users dispose of their old mobile phones improperly, causing damage to the environment.”

We anticipate CEA Chairman to be better informed than we are in environmental matters. All we know is used mobile phones are not an environmental concern in Sri Lanka. Recycling firms confirm it is only rarely they find a mobile phone discarded. When Dialog Telekom initiated an island-wide drive to collect used mobiles (with attractive cash prices) they could not gather even a hundred.

So we can only assume if at all another recycle plant is needed, it is for the other forms of e-waste. Parts of all types of electronic goods including televisions, radios, washing machines, refrigerators, air conditioners, sound systems and computers are being added to the environment in bulk. We fully agree. That is the environmental concern.

However almost all of these are luxury goods while mobile and CDMA phones are increasingly used by the poor. So why should poor pay for clearing the e-waste of the rich? Why not impose an environmental levy on all electronic goods?

May CEA Chairman please explain?

The fixed and mobile operators’ outbound calls will first terminate in one of the six ICX. Then the calls will be processed in the IGW followed by getting routed to the overseas destinations via BTTB’s submarine cable station. Similar path will be followed for the inbound overseas calls.

BTRC will host a pre-bid meeting on November 5, 2007 and the offers will be received on or before 12:00 PM of November 22, 2007.

The industry has been demanding competition in this segment but the political governments have never showed respect to this. Even the BNP-led four party alliance government had ordered to end BTTB’s monopoly in a cabinet meeting in 2003.

But the regulator has not taken any move to materialise it. This delay has rather helped the mushrooming of illegal international call termination outfits. Siblings and offspring of the powerful quarters flexed political muscles and operated such illegal outfits right under the authorities’ nose.

The fixed mobile telephone operators along with numerous BTTB officials also joined the bonanza of enormous windfall. These factors are blamed for the deliberately belated liberalisation of international telecoms gateway.

Once the licenses are awarded, the very last barrier to liberalise the country’s telecoms sector will be removed. State-owned Bangladesh Telegraph and Telephone Board (BTTB) has been enjoying the monopoly over international gateway.

But the success of current liberalisation move is facing questions for various reasons.

No foreign company or foreign joint venture will qualify to apply for IGW or ICX license, BTRC chairman categorically told the media in a press conference on August 17, 2007. Even the non-resident Bangladeshis’ business outfits are not eligible either.

“Only the companies fully owned by resident Bangladeshi citizens are qualified for these international telecoms licenses.” He also said fixed or mobile phone operators also cannot contest in this race. But the state-owned Bangladesh Telegraph and Telephone Board (BTTB) gets the ICX as well as the IGW licenses by default being the country’s incumbent international telecoms monopoly.

All these provisions are the result of the International Long Distance Telecommunication Services (ILDTS) Policy-2007 which has been enacted without public consultation. This policy also remains undisclosed and the authorities are reluctant to reveal the reason behind such secrecy.