Analysing ICT indicators, based on benchmarking provides a far more valid evidence-base for ICT policy and regulation than using the ranking of a country on one of the global ICT indices. Both ap- proaches use the same data but differ in how the data is analysed. The benchmarking approach is a starting point for further analysis, showing clearly the linkages between individual indicators. Global ICT indices, as they are currently formulated, disguise these linkages by providing a composite measure, and often only display normalised indicators that cannot be verified by the user. This encourages the perception that the index is the end result of the analysis, rather than the beginning.

1. ANALYSIS INSTEAD OF
SUMMATION
WHY INDICES ARE NOT ENOUGH FOR
ICT POLICY AND REGULATION
Research ICT Solutions

2. A GOOD INDEX
• Most of us have used indices and many of us
have constructed some
• Good indices include:
• World Bank Ease of Doing Business Index
• Consumer Price Indices
• OECD price baskets
• Stock market indices
• Changes in the value or ranking of ICT sector
indices should help to identify best practice
and potential bottlenecks to improved ICT
sector performance

3. COMMON PROBLEMS
• Summing up indicators that explain the
same factor (muti-colinearity)
• Summing up indicators that are all highly
correlated to GDP per capita
• Measuring affordability as prices expressed
as % of GDP per capita, masking
information included in prices
• Using first world indicators such as fixed-
line penetration and wired broadband

4. INDICES PRODUCE
ARBITRARY RESULTS

5. COMPARING RANKINGS AGAINST
SELECTED ICT INDICATORS
Ranking ICT Indicators
ADI
(A4AI)
3i
(EIU)
IDI
(ITU)
NRI
(WEF)
MCI
(GSMA)
1 GB
prepaid
data in USD
Active
SIM cards
per 100
Fixed-line
per 100
Nigeria 13 45 137 119 98 3.20 83 0.10
Kenya 30 51 129 86 105 5.00 82 0.19
Ghana 26 49 112 102 96 2.46 128 1.01
Namibia 31 NA 120 99 NA 5.89 99 7.42
Brazil 10 18 63 72 56 8.48 124 21.01
Sources
A4AI
2017
EIU
2017
ITU
2016
WEF
2016
GSMA
2016
RIS / RIA
Q4 2016
ITU
2016
ITU
2016
Brazil scores best in this comparison, but has the highest mobile
broadband prices and the only 2nd highest mobile penetration

6. COMPARING RANKINGS AGAINST
SELECTED ICT INDICATORS
Ranking ICT Indicators
ADI
(A4AI)
3i
(EIU)
IDI
(ITU)
NRI
(WEF)
MCI
(GSMA)
1 GB
prepaid
data in USD
Active
SIM cards
per 100
Fixed-
line
per 100
Nigeria 13 45 137 119 98 3.20 83 0.10
Kenya 30 51 129 86 105 5.00 82 0.19
Ghana 26 49 112 102 96 2.46 128 1.01
Namibia 31 NA 120 99 NA 5.89 99 7.42
Brazil 10 18 63 72 56 8.48 124 21.01
Sources
A4AI
2017
EIU
2017
ITU
2016
WEF
2016
GSMA
2016
RIS / RIA
Q4 2016
ITU
2016
ITU
2016
Nigeria scores better the Ghana but Ghana is cheaper and has
higher penetration of SIM cards and fixed-lines

7. INDICES MOSTLY
TRACK GDP PER
CAPITA

8. VARIATION IN THE EIU 3I (2017) EXPLAINED BY
GDP PER CAPITA CURRENT PRICES FOR 2016
GDPperCapitainUSD(currentprices)
0
15,000
30,000
45,000
60,000
0 25 50 75 100
R² = 0.8479

9. VARIATION IN THE GSMA MOBILE CONNECTIVITY
INDEX (2017) EXPLAINED BY GDP PER CAPITA
CURRENT PRICES FOR 2016
0
30,000
60,000
90,000
120,000
0 22.5 45 67.5 90
R² = 0.8673

10. AFFORDABILITY
INDICES CANNOT
EXPLAIN PRICES

11. VARIATION IN INDICES EXPLAINED
BY PRICES (R2) - NETWORK
READINESS INDEX (WEF)
NRI
4th Pillar
Affordability
1GB
USD 3% 8%
% GDP per
Capita
58% 28%
OECD 30
calls 100
SMS basket
USD 1% 17%
% GDP per
Capita
62% 32%

12. IDI 2016 Access Use Skill
1GB Basket USD 0% 0% 0% 0%
1GB Basket
% GDP per Capita
64% 63% 55% 56%
R2 INTERNET DEVELOPMENT INDEX (ITU)
3i Availability Affordability Readiness Relevance
1GB Basket
USD
3% 1% 3% 6% 5%
1GB Basket %
GDP per
Capita:
Exponential
79% 73% 67% 53% 41%
R2 INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX (EIU)

13. R2 AFFORDABILITY DRIVERS INDEX (A4AI)
ADI Infrastructure Access
1GB Basket USD 3% 1% 7%
1GB Basket % GDP
per Capita
44% 38% 43%
R2 MOBILE CONNECTIVITY INDEX (GSMA)
MCI Affordability
1GB Basket USD 0% 1%
1GB Basket % GDP per
Capita: Exponential
64% 68%

14. NO SHORTCUT FOR ICT
POLICY MAKERS AND
REGULATORS

15. BENCHMARKING
Competition
Infrastructure
Affordability
Access
Usage
• When benchmarking
an analysts needs to
select the countries
to benchmark against
• The interlinked
indicators enable the
identification of
regulatory
intervention points
for the ICT sector

18. DOMINANT OPERATORS, (BIGGEST
WITH 39% MARKETSHARE) ARE
NOT FUSSED BY LOW PRICES OF
SMALLER OPERATORS
• Smaller operators only offer services in the Kampala /
Entebbe
• Policy makers and regulators thus need to find ways
on how to increase competition on national level
• National roaming?
• Extend open access fibre network?
• Base -station level spectrum allocation instead of
national?

19. CONCLUSION

20. GDP PER CAPITA
Not in scope of policy makers
and regulators
SUMMATION
Value of indicators is lost in
aggregation
ANYTHING BUT PRICES
Indices are not linked to
prices, not even affordability
sub-indices
BENCHMARKING
Analytical power bears
responsibility
NOTALLANSWERED
M-Access starting point
rather then end result
AWAY FROM THE COFFEE TABLE
Global indices can be
improved to serve ICT policy
makers & regulators