This presentation introduces us to why communities facilitate Broadband networks. It further presents the opportunities in developing PPPs to develop such networks.

1. ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC PRIVATE INTERPLAY
FRAMEWORKS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF
RURAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS
INFRASTRUCTURE
A MULTI-CASE STUDY
I D O N G E S I T W I L L I A M S
C M I , A A U
P H . D D E F E N S E ( 5 T H O C T O B E R , 2 0 1 5 )

2. CONTENT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESEARCH QUESTION
 SCOPE OF STUDY
 METHODOLOGY
 ANALYSIS OF THE FINDINGS
 PPI FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT
 CONCLUSION

3. INTRODUCTION

4. Public sector Private sector
SEARCH FOR OR EXPLORE A PUBLIC-PRIVATE INTERPLAY (PPI)
FRAMEWORK
BROADBAND INTERNET INFRASTRUCTURE
Especially in developing countries
THE CORE ASSIGNMENT
RURAL AREAS

5. THE PROBLEM
 LOW FIXED BROADBAND PENETRATION IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA AND
GLOBALLY
 MODERATE PENETRATION OF MOBILE BROADBAND PENETRATION
GLOBALLY AND IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
 19% USAGE OF THE INTERNET IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
 19% MOBILE BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE PENETRATION IN SUB-
SAHARAN AFRICA
 0.4% PENETRATION OF FIXED-BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE
PENETRATION IN AFRICA
 69% MOBILE TELEPHONY SUBSCRIPTION IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA
Source: ITU statshot 2014

6.  THE EXISTENCE OF BROADBAND ACCESS GAPS
 TRUE ACCESS GAPS OR SMART SUBSIDY ZONES
 THESE GAPS HAMPER THE ATTAINMENT OF UNIVERSAL
ACCESS AND SERVICE OF BROADBAND INTERNET SERVICE
GOALS IN MOST COUNTRIES
 DEVELOPING COUNTRIES AFFECTED MORE
IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROBLEM

7. PPI CAN BE A NECESSARY TOOL TO FILL THE ACCESS
GAPS
Public sector Private sector
THE PROPOSED SOLUTION
Access
Gap
Areas

8. Universal Access and Service
Cities Rural Areas
Market PPI
Public sector
Private sector Universal Access
and Service
Has the potential
EXPECTED IMPLICATION OF THE
SOLUTION

9. PUBLIC PRIVATE INTERPLAY IS THE COMBINATION OR
LEVERAGING OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR RESOURCES TO
DEVELOP BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE
Public Sector
Resources
Private Sector
Resources
Contractual relationships Non-contractual relationships
Partnerships
PPP, PPPP, Joint Ventures etc.
Collaborations Co-orporations
Market reform arrangements
Public sector Private sector
THE PPI CONCEPT

10. RESEARCH QUESTION

11.  WHAT TYPE OF PUBLIC PRIVATE INTERPLAY WILL ENABLE
THE DEVELOPMENT OF BROADBAND INTERNET SERVICE IN
RURAL AREAS OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ?
THE MAIN RESEARCH QUESTION
Public sector Private sector
Narrow the developing
country focus
Sub-Saharan
Africa
Ghana, Nigeria

12. 2014 Statistics
Population: >25 Million citizens
Total Area: 239 460 Square KM
GDP: $US 48.14 Billion
6 mobile GSM Network Operators: MTN, GLO,
TIGO, Expresso, Vodafone, Airtel
Mobile Cellular penetration: >100%?
Mobile broadband penetration: > 39.3%
Fixed broadband penetration:0.3%
2014 Statistics
Population: >150 Million citizens
Total Area: 923 768 Square KM
GDP: $US 521 Billion
4 mobile GSM network operators: MTN, GLO, Etisalat,
Airtel
2 active CDMA operators: Visafone, multilinks
4 Fixed-wired operators: MTN ,GLO, Ipnx, 21st century
2 Fixed-wireless operators: Visafone, multilinks
Mobile Cellular penetration: >91%?
Mobile broadband penetration: > 10.1%
Fixed broadband penetration:0%
(insignificant)
PROBLEM IN GHANA AND NIGERIA

13.  WHAT FORM OF PPI/PPPS EXISTS IN NIGERIA AND
GHANA?
 WHAT EXTERNAL INSPIRATIONAL BOTTOM -UP PPP
INITIATIVES EXISTS?
 HOW ARE THESE BOTTOM-UP INITIATIVES ORGANIZED
AND FINANCED?
 HOW CAN THESE PPI INITIATIVES BE APPLICABLE TO
GHANA AND NIGERIA?
 HOW CAN THESE IDENTIFIED PPI BE ORGANIZED AND
FINANCED
SUB-RESEARCH QUESTIONS

14. SCOPE OF STUDY

15.  2 CASE STUDIES
 PRIMARY CASE STUDIES
 SECONDARY CASE STUDIES
 PRIMARY CASES
o A L M H U L T M U N I C I P A L I T Y B R O A D B A N D I N I T I A T I V E ( S W E D E N )
o H A L L A R Y D B R O A D B A N D C O O P ( S W E D E N )
o D J U R S L A N D S N E T ( S W E D E N )
o M A G N O L I A R O A D I N T E R N E T C O O P ( U S A )
o D H A R A M S A L A W I R E L E S S N E T W O R K ( O W N E D B Y A I R J A L D I I N D I A )
o G H A N A W I R E L E S S P R O J E C T ( G H A N A )
o J O H A N N E S B U R G W I R E L E S S U S E R G R O U P ( S O U T H A F R I C A )
 SECONDARY CASES
o U N I V E R S A L S E R V I C E P R O V I S I O N F U N D ( U S P F )
o G H A N A I N V E S T M E N T F U N D F O R E L E C T R O N I C C O M M U N I C A T I O N S ( G I F E C )
SCOPE OF STUDY

16. METHODOLOGY

17.  INTERPRETIVISM/CONSTRUCTIVISM
 MULTIPLE CASE STUDY
 PRIMARY CASES INVESTIGATED USING ACTOR NETWORK THEORY
AND GROUNDED THEORY
 SECONDARY CASES INVESTIGATED USING THE STAKEHOLDER
THEORY
METHODOLOGY

18. ANALYSIS AND FINDING

19. FINDINGS FROM PRIMARY CASE STUDY
 ACTOR NETWORK THEORY
o T H E A C T O R S R E L E VA N T I N E A C H C A S E
o H O W T H E Y I N T E R A C T E D W I T H E A C H O T H E R
o P P I A R R A N G E M E N T S I D E N T I F I E D I N T H E P R I M A RY C A S E S
o H O W T H E P R I M A RY C A S E G R O U P S W E R E O R G A N I Z E D
o T H E F I N A N C I A L A R R A N G E M E N T S A D O P T E D I N T H E P R I M A RY C A S E S
o I T P R O V I D E D I N S P I R AT I O N F O R T H E F I N A L P P I M O D E L
o P E O P L E O W N E D I N F R A S T R U C T U R E I S P O S S I B L E

20.  GROUNDED THEORY (STRAUSS AND CORBIN (1998)) TRADITION
o O P E N C O D I N G
o A X I A L C O D I N G
o S E L E C T I V E C O D I N G
o O P E N C O D I N G F O R E A C H O F T H E 7 P R I M A RY C A S E S ( 7 5 6 C O D E S )
o A X I A L C O D I N G F O R E A C H O F T H E 7 P R I M A RY C A S E S ( 1 7 7 C AT E G O R I E S )
o S E L E C T I V E C O D I N G D O N E F O R E A C H O F T H E 7 C A S E S
o C A S E S G R O U P E D U N D E R D E V E L O P E D C O U N T RY, D E V E L O P I N G C O U N T RY, A N D
P U B L I C S E C T O R C O N T E X T
o C R O S S C A S E C O D I N G F O R P R O C E S S W A S C A R R I E D O U T
FINDINGS FROM PRIMARY CASE STUDY

21. *
DEVELOPED COUNTRY MODELS
Vital Resources
Perceived Usefulness
of the Technology
Deployment
Possibilities
Trial/Mini-Implementation Mobilization/Union Formation Implementation
Mobilization/Union Formation Implementation
Vital Resources
Perceived Usefulness
of the Technology
Deployment
Possibilities
Trial/Mini-ImplementationMobilization/Union Formation Implementation
Vital Resources
Perceived Usefulness
of the Technology
Deployment
Possibilities

22. T H E R E W E R E M A J O R T E S T S A S W E L L A S L O T O F M I N O R T E S T S
Vital
Resources
Usefulness
of
Technology
Usefulness
of Services
Accepted
User Need
Intention to deploy Trial/mini-implementation
Mobilization of
Critical mass
Implementation
DEVELOPING COUNTRY MODELS
Vital
Resources
Usefulness
of
Technology
Usefulness
of Services
Accepted
User Need
Intention to deploy Trial/mini-implementation
Mobilization of
Critical mass
Organization and
Implementation on
a large scale
Successful
trial
Critical mass
achieved
Failed trial
Abandon idea
Retrial
Retrial failure
Retrial
success
Critical mass
not achieved
Search for more
potential users

23. PUBLIC SECTOR MODEL
Municipality planning
Enrolment of
partners
Municipality decision
Coop decision to
partner municipality
Private sector desire
to invest
Infrastructure
Development
Municipality planning
Enrolment of
partners
Municipality Decision
Identification of
municipality partners
Infrastructure
Development

24. FINDINGS FROM SECONDARY CASE STUDY
STAKEHOLDER THEORY SALIENCE ( MITCHELL, AGLE AND W OOD (1997)
Stakeholder
Attributes
Type of
Stakeholder
Definitive Expectant Latent
High Salience Medium Salience - Pay attention to Low Salience - Ignore
Dormant , Demanding, DiscretionaryDangerous , Dependent, Dominant

25.  USPF( NIGERIA ) AND GIFEC (GHANA) COLLABORATE W ITH COMMUNITIES
(VILLAGE STRUCTURE), IDAS, IGOS AND NGOS
 THE COMMUNITIES ARE DEFINITE STAKEHOLDERS IN BOTH COUNTRIES
 NGOS, IDAS AND IGOS ARE DEPENDENT STAKEHOLDERS IN NIGERIA
 NGOS AND IDAS ARE DOMINANT STAKEHOLDERS IN GHANA

26.  NGOS, IDAS AND IGOS ARE THEREFORE EXPECTANT STAKEHOLDERS TO
THEIR RESPECTIVE UNIVERSALITY FUNDS
 A PPI FRAMEW ORK BETW EEN COMMUNITIES, NGOS, UNIVERSALITY
FUNDS W ILL W ORK
 ACTOR CHARACTERISTICS IN PRIMARY CASE ALSO EX IST IN THE
SECONDARY CASES
 USPF AND GIFEC W ERE NOT AVERSE TO PPI/PPPS

27. PPI FRAMEWORKS
DEVELOPMENT

28.  POSSIBLE PEOPLE GROUPS IDENTIFIED IN GHANA AND NIGERIA
 COMMUNITIES, SOCIAL ENTERPRISE, NGOS, BROADBAND COOP,
 IDENTIFIED ACTORS, SIMILAR TO THAT OF PRIMARY CASES
 POSSIBLE PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS IDENTIFIED IN GHANA AND NIGERIA
(UNIVERSALITY FUNDS)
 PPI FUNDING AND ORGANIZATION INSPIRATION GATHERED FROM
PRIMARY CASE STUDY
 POSSIBILITIES FOR ORGANIZING PEOPLE IDENTIFIED
 STICKING POINT – IT SHOULD BE A PEOPLE - OWNED INFRASTRUCTURE
POSSIBILITIES FOR A BOTTOM-UP PPI/PPP

29. Design Ownership Building Management
/Operations
Maintenance Finance
1 Non-profit
private
(people)
Non-profit
private
(people)
Non-profit
private
(people)
Non-profit
private (people)
Non-profit
private (people)
Non-profit
private (people)
2 Public sector
(Universality
fund,)
Private
sector
Private sector Private sector Public sector
(Universality
fund,)
3 External
funding
ORGANIZATION AND THE FINANCING OF THE
PPI

30.  INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING
o E X P E N D I T U R E : T H E N O N - P R O F I T P R I VAT E S E C T O R , P U B L I C S E C T O R , E X T E R N A L
F U N D I N G
o L O N G T E R M P E O P L E F I N A N C I N G
o R E V E N U E : “ U S E R PAY ” ( T H I S I S W H E R E T H E M O B I L I Z AT I O N M O D E L S C O M E I N T O
P L AY )
 IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT SOME PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS MAY
NOT REQUIRE REPAYMENT AS PART OF THEIR LEGAL OBLIGATION
 PROFIT MAKING PRIVATE SECTOR IS HIRED BY THE PEOPLE
INFRASTRUCTURE AFFORDABILITY

31.  BANKABILITY
o E L I M I N AT E D F R O M T H I S F R A M E W O R K
o P R O F I T M A K I N G P R I VAT E S E C T O R , N O T D I R E C T LY I N V O LV E D I N F I N A N C I N G T H E
P R O J E C T
 REGULATORY RISK
o G H A N A A N D N I G E R I A A R E M A R K E T O R I E N T E D C O U N T R I E S ,
o I N C O U N T R I E S T H AT A R E N O T M A R K E T O R I E N T E D , T H E R E I S T H E N E E D F O R
P R O T E C T I O N F R O M N AT I O N A L I Z AT I O N
 COMMERCIAL RISK
o I N G H A N A A N D N I G E R I A , T H E U N I V E R S A L I T Y F U N D S W I L L B E A R M O R E O F T H E
S U P P LY R I S K S

32.  SUPPLY RISK
o C O S T O F C R E AT I N G AW A R E N E S S
o I N S O M E C A S E S A I D I N F U N D I N G S O M E O F T H E S E B O T T O M - U P I N I T I AT I V E S
 DEMAND RISK
o B O R N E B Y T H E P E O P L E A S T H E U S E R PAY M O D E L I S P R O P O S E D
 HENCE PEOPLE HAVE TO BE MOBILIZED USING THE
MOBILIZATION MODELS IN THE THESIS

33. PPI/PPP FRAMEWORK 1
Private Sector
(Profit making)
Universality
Fund / Public
Institution
Private Sector
(Non-Profit) –
(NGO, Broadband
coop, Village,
Neighbourhood
groups)
o Selection of private
sector participant
o Regulation on terms
of engagement with
civil society
Outsource Infrastructure
management and operations
Provide Finance and
Regulation
Infrastructure Finance, maintenance &
infrastructure financing
Infrastructure owners

34. Municipality
People/non-
profit private
sector
Financing Public entity
(eg. universality funds)
Private sector model
PPI/PPP FRAMEWORK 2-
MUNICIPALITY MEDIATED MODEL

35. POSSIBILITY FOR THE ADOPTION OF PPI
FRAMEWORK
 EXTENSIVE FIBRE OPTIC BACKHAUL DEVELOPMENT
 THE POTENTIAL FOR RURAL CONNECTIVITY
 AFFORDABLE LOW COST BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE
 THE POSSIBILITY FOR RURAL DWELLERS TO MOBILIZE
THEMSELVES
 THERE IS ROOM FOR PUBLIC ASSISTANCE
 THE PROJECT IS ONLY MEANT FOR AREAS WHERE MARKET
FORCES MAY NOT CATER FOR (PATCHES)

36. IMPLICATIONS OF THE
PPI FRAMEWORK
 REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS
o I N T E R C O N N E C T I O N T O E X I S T I N G F I B R E N E T W O R K
o T A X A T I O N ,
o I N C E N T I V E S
 TECHNICAL IMPLICATIONS
o D E P L O Y M E N T P O S S I B I L I T I E S
o T Y P E O F I N F R A S T R U C T U R E
o T R A I N I N G O F P E O P L E
 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
o A B U S I N E S S M O D E L N E E D E D O N A C A S E B Y C A S E B A S I S

37. CONTRIBUTION OF THE
THESIS
 CONTRIBUTION TO LITERATURE
 THE THESIS AGREES WITH
o T H E A D O P T I O N O F T H E H Y B R I D A P P R O A C H T O B R O A D B A N D
I N F R A S T R U C T U R E D E V E L O P M E N T ( S A L E M I N K A N D B O S W O R T H , 2 0 1 4 )
o I T C O N C U R S W I T H T H E N E E D F O R A R E G U L A T O R Y A P P R O A C H
E M P O W E R I N G C O M M U N I T Y O W N E R S H I P ( K A K E K A S P A N , 2 0 1 4 )
 THE THESIS CHALLENGES THE NOTION THAT
o C O O P S H A V E N O E X P E R T I S E T O D E V E L O P B R O A D B A N D
I N F R A S T R U C T U R E ( Y A R D L Y 2 0 1 2 )
o C O O P S L A C K F I N A N C I A L A B I L I T Y T O F A C I L I T A T E B R O A D B A N D N E T W O R K S
( Y A R D L Y 2 0 1 2 )
o C O O P O W N E R S H I P O F B R O A D B A N D I N F R A S T R U C T U R E I S N O T P O S S I B L E
W I T H O U T H Y B R I D O W N E R S H I P ( S A L E M I N K A N D B O S W O R T H , 2 0 1 4 )

38. LIMITATIONS
 FEW CASES
 LANGUAGE BARRIER
 GREATER EMPHASIS ON BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE
DELIVERY THAN SERVICE DELIVERY
 LIMITATIONS POSED BY DISTANCE

39. FUTURE WORKS
 QUANTITATIVE VALIDATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION MODELS
 THE IMPACT OF TELECENTRES TO ICT IN RURAL AREAS
 FIELD TEST OF THE PPI MODEL

40. CONCLUSION
 FACILITATING BOTTOM-UP APPROACHES IS POSSIBLE
 THE PPI DESIGN SHOULD ASSIGN INFRASTRUCTURE
OWNERSHIP TO THE PEOPLE
 THE PUBLIC SECTOR OUGHT TO CARRY OUT PROPER RISK
ASSESSMENT WHEN DESIGNING THE PPI
 UNDERSTANDING USER NEEDS AND THE UNIQUE VITAL
RESOURCES IN THE COMMUNITY IS IMPORTANT
 BOTTOM-UP PPI INITIATIVES ACTUALLY POSE THE
POTENTIAL OF FACILITATING UNIVERSAL SERVICE