Centre for Internet and Society

Response to TRAI Consultation paper No. 6/2009

radha — 2011-08-24T08:06:46Z

CIS Distinguished Fellow, Shyam Ponappa, provides a detailed response to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India's Consultation paper No. 6/2009 "Overall Spectrum Management and review of license terms and conditions". Shyam Ponappa is suggesting that, the TRAI approach the telecom policy in a manner which will facilitate greater user access and, more generally, be designed to serve the public interest in the long-term.

Shyam Ponappa November 12, 2009
Distinguished Fellow
Centre for Internet & Society
Bangalore/New Delhi
cis-india.org

shyamponappa@gmail.com

Telecom Regulatory Authority of India
Attn: Sh. Sudhir Gupta, Advisor (MN)
Mahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, New Delhi-110 002
Tel. No.011-23220018 , Fax No.011-23212014

E-mail : advmn@trai.gov.in

TRAI Consultation paper No. 6/2009- October 16, 2009

"Overall Spectrum Management and review of license terms and conditions"

Sir,

It would help to have a logical framework that defines overall objectives, prioritizes issues, and structures and organizes issues and questions. This would facilitate analysis and response, as we have attempted below.

We begin by responding to Question 57 as a preamble to all the questions:

57. What in your opinion is the desired structure for efficient management of spectrum?
[This question addresses only one of two essential criteria, efficiency. The other criterion is effectiveness; both need equal emphasis.]

Please see separate attachment for answers to Questions 1-56.

Status

Currently, communications services in India comprising Internet, voice and SMS have the following attributes:

Low broadband usage, with relatively high prices: eg, direct satellite TV subscriptions at Rs. 200/month, compared with 512 kbps Internet at Rs. 1,000/month.
Fragmented spectrum allocation for exclusive use by each operator in a service area.
Very high intensity of spectrum use by operators compared with international norms because of constrained availability.
Too many operators per service area (11-14 or more [15-16 with all potential operators with GSM and CDMA counted separately], versus the global average of 4-5).

[For details on (2), (3) and (4), please see: 'An assessment of spectrum management policy in India', David Lewin, Val Jervis, Chris Davis, Ken Pearson, Plum Consulting, December 2008
http://www.plumconsulting.co.uk/pdfs/GSMA%20spectrum%20management%20policy%20in%20India.pdf]

Needs

Our needs are:

good services for Internet, voice and SMS,
at reasonable prices, eg, comparable pricing for TV and broadband,
accessible from/to most households across the country.

The need is especially great in rural areas, as broadband can be the medium for delivery of essential services like education (from basic to advanced to vocational training and Continuing Education at all levels, including high-level professional CE), health (again, from basic diagnostics and monitoring at home, to advanced care at adequately equipped centres), and security and law-and-order services at significantly higher levels than is possible without excellent communications infrastructure.

In view of the above, we suggest that the Government of India consider adopting the following policy goals in the public interest ( and therefore, that where appropriate, the TRAI set these objectives/make appropriate recommendations to the GOI).

Suggested Policy Goals/Objectives [based on needs]

Adopt the criteria of long-term net benefits in the public interest for decisions, eschewing short-term cash collections from auctions and fees.
An approach to policies for telecommunications services (not for broadcasting) that limits the number of operators per service area in line with international experience, because of the economics of networks.
[This implies an explicit reversal of prior policies to maximize competition, and requires allowing for consolidation through mergers and acquisitions.]
Access to broadband (to be defined as at least 512 kbps in keeping with international norms) at all feasible locations in the country for all users.
Develop incentives and penalties favouring good rural service provision, with the emphasis on broadband: an Administered Incentive Pricing mechanism.
Explore ways to structure policies to reduce costs/maximize utility through facilities and resource sharing, so that prices can be reduced while maintaining good scope for investment from growth and profits.

This implies two areas of exploration:
a) Shared use of facilities and equipment/networks;
b) Shared use of spectrum.

(i) This is best done by collaborative consultations between experts (from the GOI, private sector and academia), operators, equipment providers, and government. Without the requisite interdisciplinary skills combined with operating expertise and investment capability, the effort is too complex for an iterative, serial consultation process.
(ii) Even within the GOI, this requires interdisciplinary and cross-jurisdictional convergence, both to develop solutions as well as to implement them.
(iii) This also needs GOI initiatives to invite companies like Ericsson, Nokia, Motorola and Qualcomm as well as Google and Intel, possibly cable companies like Liberty Global, and electricity companies that deliver Internet through their networks.
(iv) The GOI also needs to depute experienced representatives from various ministries and departments including the WPC, the Defence Services, and specialist agencies such as the DRDO/NTRO.
[Please see ‘Managing Spectrum’ in the Business Standard November 5, 2009, and related references: http://organizing-india.blogspot.com/2009/11/managing-spectrum.html]
Monitor operations online and intervene actively where revenues (the totality of rates/tariffs) are far above total costs, i.e., profits are unreasonable. This is a necessary adjunct to accepting a monopolistic/oligopolistic market structures.

Suggested Approach

The use of a decision tree as in the ‘Issue Map for Spectrum & Broadband’ below (please see Exhibit) facilitates a logical sequence and prioritization in exploring alternatives. (Please note that this is for broadband, voice and SMS, and not for broadcasting.) A similar exploration process for networks and facilities (sharing versus exclusive use for delivery) could follow. However, stakeholders should be free to use any analytical process to improve on this in the common interest.

Once decisions are taken on these two issues (spectrum and network/ facilities sharing), other issues like pricing and consolidation can be logically addressed based on these decisions, probably within the scope of existing laws and regulations.

New regulations or laws should be considered only after comprehensive analysis on the lines of Project LARGE (Legal Adjustments and Reforms for Globalising the Economy by Sh. Bibek Debroy).

Exhibit: Issue Map on Spectrum & Broadband

Shyam Ponappa
Centre for Internet & Society
cis-india.org

Attachment – Question 1-57

TRAI Consultation paper No. 6/2009 – October 16, 2009

Overall Spectrum Management and review of license terms and conditions

Chapter 1
Spectrum requirement and availability

Do you agree with the subscriber base projections? If not, please provide the reasons for disagreement and your projection estimates along with their basis?
Do not disagree.
Do you agree with the spectrum requirement projected in ¶ 1.7 to ¶1.12? Please give your assessment (service-area wise).
Agree if exclusive bands of spectrum are used by different operators, and the spectrum requirement is linked to subscribers. Disagree if common use of spectrum is adopted. Please see preamble (reply to Question 57) for details of shared/pooled spectrum approach.
How can the spectrum required for Telecommunication purposes and currently available with the Government agencies be re-farmed?
(a) By rationalizing usage, as advocated in the preamble for commercial operators, by pooling spectrum for common use where possible.
(b) By inducting equipment that allows more efficient usage and usage of other bands.
In view of the policy of technology and service neutrality licences, should any restriction be placed on these bands (800,900 and 1800 MHz) for providing a specific service and secondly, after the expiry of present licences, how will the spectrum in the 800/900 MHz band be assigned to the operators?
(a) Please see suggestions on shared/pooled spectrum as above.
(b) In the event that common use of spectrum is infeasible/not accepted by the Government of India, and exclusive bands of spectrum are assigned to operators as is the practice now, work out ways to consolidate fragmented bands (other than through M&A) for operators, to enable operators to hold contiguous bands for greater efficiency, and explore shared use of pooled spectrum.
How and when should spectrum in 700 MHz band be allocated between competitive services?
Preferred method: for common use (can be pooled or shared even if assigned for exclusive use, immediately).
What is the impact of digital dividend on 3G and BWA?
Should extend its reach and access because of lower costs.

Chapter 2
Licensing Issues
Should the spectrum be delinked from the UAS Licence? Please provide the reasons for your response.
If spectrum is treated as a common resource, the logical requirement is for a linkage that is not dependent on ownership, but to access for service delivery, i.e., common access.
In case it is decided not to delink spectrum from UAS license, then should there be a limit on minimum and maximum number of access service providers in a service area? If yes, what should be the number of operators?
Follow global practice: do not exceed five operators in any service area unless there are compelling reasons to do so.
What should be the considerations to determine maximum spectrum per entity?
Minimum contiguous band for effective rollout and efficient delivery, i.e., inexpensive capital outlay for equipment and towers/network while maintaining Quality of Service.
Is there a need to put a limit on the maximum spectrum one licensee can hold? If yes, then what should be the limit? Should operators having more than the maximum limit, if determined, be assigned any more spectrum?
This depends on the overall approach to spectrum management, i.e., common use, or exclusive use. The logic for a limit is effective delivery capability at ‘normal’ cost. There is no logic for assigning more than this. However, if spectrum is for common/shared use, the only criterion is throughput/capacity.
If an existing licensee has more spectrum than the specified limit, then how should this spectrum be treated? Should such spectrum be taken back or should it be subjected to higher charging regime?
As in No. 10. If common/shared spectrum use is adopted, there needs to be a transition worked out, as in the transition to revenue sharing.
In the event fresh licences are to be granted, what should be the Entry fee for the license?
The principles followed should be:
(a) Low license fees to minimize access costs.
(b) Provided licenses are delinked from spectrum and few in number, there need to be strict rollout requirements.
(c) Incentives for broadband and rural coverage in the form of a structured Administrative Incentive Pricing mechanism.
(d) Penalties for failure.
In case it is decided that the spectrum is to be delinked from the license then what should be the entry fee for such a Licence and should there be any roll out condition?
As in No. 12.
Is there a need to do spectrum audit? If it is found in the audit that an operator is not using the spectrum efficiently what is the suggested course of action? Can penalties be imposed?
(a) Operating attributes should be monitored online on a continuous basis.
(b) Spectrum use probably needs to be monitored as an operating attribute.
(c) Penalties and incentives are needed, including forfeiture for continued transgression.
Can spectrum be assigned based on metro, urban and rural areas separately? If yes, what issues do you foresee in this method?
This needs to be considered only if common/pooled usage is decided against. With common use or sufficiently large blocks/bands of spectrum, no problems are likely to arise.
Since the amount of spectrum and the investment required for its utilisation in metro and large cities is higher than in rural areas, can asymmetric pricing of telecom services be a feasible proposition?
Yes.

M&A issues
If the common/shared use approach is adopted, M&A can be under existing laws and regulations.
Whether the existing licence conditions and guidelines related to M&A restrict consolidation in the telecom sector? If yes, what should be the alternative framework for M&A in the telecom sector?
Whether lock-in clause in UASL agreement is a barrier to consolidation in telecom sector? If yes, what modifications may be considered in the clause to facilitate consolidation?
Whether market share in terms of subscriber base/AGR should continue to regulate M&A activity in addition to the restriction on spectrum holding?
Whether there should be a transfer charge on spectrum upon merger and acquisition? If yes, whether such charges should be same in case of M&A/transfer/sharing of spectrum?
Whether the transfer charges should be one-time only for first such M&A or should they be levied each time an M&A takes place?
Whether transfer charges should be levied on the lesser or higher of the 2G spectrum holdings of the merging entities?
Whether the spectrum held consequent upon M&A be subjected to a maximum limit?

Spectrum Trading
Is spectrum trading required to encourage spectrum consolidation and improve spectrum utilization efficiency?

At present, trading is required to allow consolidation. However, if a comprehensive approach is taken to spectrum use, and especially if common use through common access is established, this set of problems will no longer exist after a transition period. Nor will there be any shortage of spectrum.
Who all should be permitted to trade the spectrum ?
As in No. 24.
Should the original allottee who has failed to fulfill “Roll out obligations” be allowed to do spectrum trading?
There should be penalties and forfeiture for failure to meet rollout obligations, and clawbacks as an interim measure during the transition.
Should transfer charges be levied in case of spectrum trading?
What should be the parameters and methodology to determine first time spectrum transfer charges payable to Government for trading of the spectrum? How should these charges be determined year after year?
Should such capping be limited to 2G spectrum only or consider other bands of spectrum also? Give your suggestions with justification.

This question assumes there is a difference in “2G spectrum” and other spectrum, which is incorrect. The difference is in equipment that has evolved in different phases along different bands. Spectrum should be treated as technology-neutral for the purposes of service delivery. Any service should be deliverable on any band, subject to interference limitations.
Should size of minimum tradable block of spectrum be defined or left to the market forces?
Should the cost of spectrum trading be more than the spectrum assignment cost?

Spectrum sharing

These questions are addressed in the preamble in the cover note.
Should Spectrum sharing be allowed? If yes, what should be the regulatory framework for allowing spectrum sharing among the service providers?
What should be criteria to permit spectrum sharing?
Should spectrum sharing charges be regulated? If yes then what parameters should be considered to derive spectrum sharing charges? Should such charges be prescribed per MHz or for total allocated spectrum to the entity in LSA?
Should there be any preconditions that rollout obligation be fulfilled by one or both service provider before allowing the sharing of spectrum?
In case of spectrum sharing, who will have the rollout obligations? Giver or receiver?

Perpetuity of licences
Should there be a time limit on licence or should it be perpetual?
What should be the validity period of assigned spectrum in case it is delinked from the licence? 20 years, as it exists, or any other period
What should be the validity period of spectrum if spectrum is allocated for a different technology under the same license midway during the life of the license?
If the spectrum assignment is for a defined period, then for what period and at what price should the extension of assigned spectrum be done?
If the spectrum assignment is for a defined period, then after the expiry of the period should the same holder/licensee be given the first priority?

Uniform License Fee
What are the advantages and disadvantages of a uniform license fee?
Whether there should be a uniform License Fee across all telecom licenses and service areas including services covered under registrations?
If introduced, what should be the rate of uniform License Fee?

License fees should be treated as part of the overall scheme of Administered Incentive Pricing.

Chapter 3
Spectrum assignment
If the initial spectrum is de-linked from the licence, then what should be the method for subsequent assignment?
Please see comments on common/shared use in the preamble in the cover note.
If the initial spectrum continues to be linked with licence then is there any need to change from SLC based assignment?
The SLC basis for spectrum assignment gives rise to many distortions and is not in line with international practices.
In case a two-tier mechanism is adopted, then what should be the alternate method and the threshold beyond which it will be implemented?
Should the spectrum be assigned in tranches of 1 MHz for GSM technology? What is the optimum tranche for assignment?
In case a market based mechanism (i.e. auction) is decided to be adopted, would there be the issue of level playing field amongst licensees who have different amount of spectrum holding? How should this be addressed?
In case continuation of SLC criteria is considered appropriate then, what should be the subscriber numbers for assignment of additional spectrum?
In your opinion, what should be the method of assigning spectrum in bands other than 800, 900 and 1800 MHz for use other than commercial?

Spectrum pricing
Should the service providers having spectrum above the committed threshold be charged a one time charge for the additional spectrum?
In case it is decided to levy one time charge beyond a certain amount then what in your opinion should be the date from which the charge should be calculated and why?
On what basis, this upfront charge be decided? Should it be benchmarked to the auction price of 3G spectrum or some other benchmark?
Should the annual spectrum charges be uniform irrespective of quantum of spectrum and technology?
Should there be regular review of spectrum charges? If so, at what interval and what should be the methodology?

Structure for spectrum management
What in your opinion is the desired structure for efficient management of spectrum?

Please see the preamble in the cover note.

Shyam Ponappa
Centre for Internet & Society
cis-india.org

November 12, 2009

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/blog/response-to-trai-consultation-paper

IPv6: The promises and challenges

radha — 2011-04-02T14:45:40Z

An article by Pranesh Prakash, Programme Manager at the Centre for Internet and Society, in the DNA Mumbai edition (4th Nov '09)

What is IPv6?

Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) is a standard defined in 1981, which is central to the Internet, allowing vastly different computers on vastly different kinds of networks to communicate with each other. (Think of how diplomatic protocols enables diplomats from vastly different cultures to communicate effectively by agreement on certain common minimums (such as a handshake, etc.).) IPv4 was defined when there were relatively few computers, and even fewer connected to networks. Many things have changed since then, with one of the most important change being the burgeoning of the Internet and the World Wide Web. Each computer on the Internet has something known as an IP address. Each 'packet' of data transmitted over the Internet must have associated from and to IP addresses (which can sometimes be ranges of addresses). IPv4 can accommodate 4,294,967,296 (2^32) unique IP addresses, whereas IPv6 can handle 340 undecillion (2^128) unique addresses. When you consider that every device with Internet connectivity has an IP address (from laptops to Blackberries to even alarm clocks), a lot of IP addresses are required. Since the early 1990s, people have been talking about some of the limitations of IPv4, the primary one being the lack of expandability of IPv4.

Benefits of IPv6

Greater number of computers on the Internet, as it uses more
Better reliability and security, as IPSec, a protocol for authenticating and securing all IP data, is built into IPv6 as a default.
More efficient and thus faster than IPv4. Despite carrying much more data, IPv6 packets are simpler to route (just as addresses with pincodes are easier for post offices to handle).
More features can be added more easily. If at a later point of time more features are required, those can be added without a whole new protocol being designed.

What all does the shift to IPv6 require?

IPv6-capable Internet Service Providers providing consumers IPv6 addresses
IPv6-capable networking hardware (modems, routers)
IPv6-capable operating systems on consumer devices (smartphones, computers, etc.)
IPv6-capable websites, which depends on (1)

Apart from IPv6 capability, at some point the shift to IPv6 must happen, since IPv4 and IPv6 are not compatible. Translators, which allow an IPv6 address to be understood by a computer using IPv4, do exist, but they are quite expensive to deploy. Currently, it is estimated that around 1% of the world's Internet traffic is conducted using IPv6. The most successful example of IPv6 being used on a large scale was the 2008 Olympics where all network operations (from security camera transmissions to a special IPv6 website). So why haven't more ISPs shifted to IPv6? Because of network externalities. While telephones make sense, being the only person in the world with a telephone doesn't. Similarly, while IPv6 is the way for the future, it only makes economic sense for ISPs to shift (or even prepare for the shift, by using translators) when there are plenty of others using IPv6. While some ISPs (like Sify) are already prepared for the shift, others need to gear up. Importantly, the government step in to encourage (and, perhaps, at some point, mandate) this transition. Following the governments of the US, EU, and China, the Indian government too sees the immensity of this shift, and has tasked the Telecommunication Engineering Centre (TEC) of the Department of Telecommunications to take the lead in this. The TEC has convened meetings with experts, and thus India seems to be on the right track.

What does all this mean for you?

Perhaps a lot or not very much, depending on how you look at things. Most modern modems and routers (which are usually provided by your ISP) support IPv6, but are, by default, configured for IPv4. Many smartphones don't work on IPv6, but generally phones have a shorter shelf life and chances are that market forces will goad manufacturers to support IPv6 by the time the IPv6 Internet becomes more popular. Thus, while IPv4 addresses might be find themselves near the end of their natural life within one to three years, they will live on thanks to various mechanisms that translate IPv4 to IPv6 (which won't work well with certain applications such as peer-to-peer file-sharing). Eventually, even those translators will have to be abandoned if we are to embrace a brave new Internet.

Link to the original article

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/ipv6-the-promises-and-challenges

The South African Telecommunications Sector: Poised for Change

radha — 2011-10-21T09:59:51Z

CIS in collaboration with the LINK Centre, Graduate School of Public and Development Management, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa and in association with different institutions across India is organizing a Lecture Tour on:
“The South African Telecommunications Sector: Poised for Change” By Sagie Chetty, Senior Manager, Eskom, South Africa.
It will be our pleasure to have you join us for the talks.

The Co-hosts, Dates and the Venues for the Talk are given below –

Co-Host: Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
Date: 19th October, 2009 at 3.30pm
Venue – IIT-M, Chennai

Co-Host: Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay
Date: 20th October, 2009 at 4.00pm
Venue – IIT-B, Mumbai

Co-Host: International Institute of Information Technology, Bangalore
Date: 23rd October, 2009 at 4.00pm
Venue – IIIT-B, Bangalore

Co-Host: Indira Gandhi National Open University, Delhi
Date: 26th October, 2009 at 3.00pm
Venue – IGNOU, Delhi

Co-Host: National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies, Delhi
Date: 27th October, 2009 at 3.00pm
Venue – NISTADS, Delhi

Co-Host: CCMG - Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi
Date: 29th October, 2009 at 2.00pm
Venue – CCMG - Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi

About the Speaker:

Sagie Chetty is a Senior Manager in Eskom, South Africa’s largest electricity utility. Sagie spent the first part of his career at Eskom as Information Manager in the Generation Division. In that time he was responsible for information systems strategy development and implementation. Some of the key projects he has been involved in are the implementation of SAP Plant Maintenance, Business Intelligence systems and other bespoke Information Systems for Generation Power Stations.

Abstract of the Lecture: The South African Telecommunications Sector: Poised for Change

With a gross domestic product of over $506 billion (PPP, 2008) South Africa is one of the leading economies on the African continent. Only Nigeria with a GDP of $328 billion and Egypt with a GDP of $453 billion currently rival the South African economy. The economy is strong in manufacturing and agriculture, but is still based significantly on mining of gold, diamonds, platinum, coal and iron ore. Its main trading partner is the European Union. Bilateral trade with India amounts to $6, 2 billion (2008) with the balance of trade in South Africa’s favour to the value of about $1 billion.
Although one of the leading economies in Africa, South Africa’s Information and Communications (ICT) sector has not shown the concomitant level of development that reflects its economic position in Africa. ICT usage – telephony and Internet – has historically been low, and electronic transactions are utilised largely by business. There are a number of reasons for this; however the high cost of telecommunications is certainly a contributing factor. The high cost is attributed largely to policy and regulatory failure in the telecommunications sector. The sector is characterized by powerful incumbent telecoms operators that thwart competition and further entrench their dominant market positions. The consequence is that the high telecommunications costs impact access, affordability and the cost of doing business for the region.
Recent developments in the telecommunications sector, however could spell the end to high costs if policy and regulatory actions do not hinder competition. South African consumers can in the very near future look forward to lower telecommunications prices with the laying of new undersea cables, a new national backbone to compete with the existing one, new satellite ventures to provide the backhaul between cellular and broadband towers, a landmark court decision allowing value added network service providers (VANS) to build their own networks and the imminent entry of the incumbent telecommunications fixed line operator into the mobile arena. It is an opportune time for policy makers and regulators to take bold steps to free up the sector and open it up for true competition.
Lines that historically demarcated fixed, mobile, voice, data are blurring, causing shifts in market structures. However, currently the market is structured around the incumbent Telkom for fixed lines services and Vodacom and MTN for mobile services. A second PSTN, Neotel has been licensed but is only offering limited services. A third mobile operator, Cell C is operating but has yet to gain any significant market share.

The talk is open to all and there are no registration or entry fees.
Please let us know if you require any further details.

VIDEOS

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/events/lecture-tour-by-sagie-chetty

Handy Origins of the winds of change

radha — 2011-04-02T14:59:01Z

A seminar in Bangalore revealed how mobile technology is being harnessed across India to bring about development and social change, reports Shrabonti Bagchi - DNA (6th Sept, 2009)

The Internet, for all the celebrated changes it has made in our lives, still had limited penetration in our country with about 80 million, largely urban and prosperous users. This severely limits its viability as a vehicle of development and social change. The mobile phone, on the other hand, has 400 million users in the country, and has undoubtedly become the first mode of communication in India to gain almost universal reach, cutting across barriers of location, region, community and social classes.
“The mobile phone has unprecedented penetration into classes of society that were largely unconnected with the outside world till now,” said Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society, which along with Mobile Monday Bangalore, the Bangalore chapter of a global community of wireless industry professionals, organised a seminar, “Mobile Technology 4 Social Change”, in the city recently.
The idea for the event came from one of the co-organizers, Mobileactive.org, which is a network of NGOs interested in taking advantage of the mobile telephony revolution to bring about changes, informed Abraham.
Attended by NGOs, non-profit organisations, researchers, donors, and of course, mobile application developers, the seminar intended to throw open doors of communication between these varied groups of people.
Take the case of IFFCO Kisan Sanchar Limited (IKSL), for instance. This farmers’ co-operative formed under the aegis of fertiliser manufacturer IFFCO has tied up with cellular service provider Airtel to develop a special SIM card which enables users to receive voice and text messages everyday containing nuggets of information about various farming practices. It has around 2,75,000 subscribers in Karnataka alone, informs IKSL state manager G Raghunatha, and has made a huge difference to the lives of farmers.
A similar case is related by Subbaih Arunachalam who is involved with the MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, which has tied up with Tata Tele-services and Qualcomm and telecom developer Astute to create special GPS-enabled mobile phones (costing less than Rs.3, 000) that helps fishermen track weather reports, send out emergency messages in case they are lost at sea, etc., and also engage in price-point discussions with local wholesalers.
Several NGOs have also been quick to utilise the advantage of the versatility and ease-of-use of the mobile phone to disseminate vital information. Sreekanth Rameshaiah, director of Bangalore-based NGO Mahiti, spoke of an endeavour started by his group in Calcutta called My SME News which targets small and micro enterprises, sending out customised information for 11 micro-industries through text messages in the local language. They also plan to launch a voice platform soon.
Mobile payments brand mChek started an initiative on similar lines in Bangalore. The company uses its SMS-based mobile payment technology, which is embedded on all new Airtel and Docomo SIM cards, to enable slum dwellers to access banking and explore micro-finance options through micro-finance institution Grameen Koota.
Valerie Rozycki, head of strategic initiatives at mChek, said, “Access to low-cost banking over the mobile and being enabled with safe ways to save and convenient ways to make payments is life-changing for these customers. This is a sustainable business model to serve the un-banked and under-banked. So, these services will continue to thrive."

Let’s raise our mobile phones to that.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/handy-origins-of-the-winds-of-change

Pushing the buttons for social change

radha — 2011-04-02T15:09:10Z

IMMENSE POTENTIAL: With its myriad applications, a mobile phone can be used as an instrument of social change. Meet on how mobile technology can be a power tool to this end - An article in The Hindu on 01st September 2009

BANGALORE: We have all seen the popular television advertisement that claims that mobile phone technology can be much more than a communication device and be used as a powerful tool for social change.

Here is a platform that brings together technology enthusiasts and non-governmental organisations, working in various social sectors, to drive this change.

The one-day camp, Mobile Tech 4 Social Change, to be held on September 4, aims at exploring the power of mobile technology to advance social change goals.

Organised by the Centre for Internet and Studies, in collaboration with Women’s Learning Partnership, Mobile Monday and Mobile Active, it will include informative and interactive sessions on the subject.

It will be held from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. at the Mother Tekla Auditorium on Brunton Road.

Participating NGOs will discuss problems and different ways to use, deploy, develop and promote mobile technology in health, advocacy, economic development, environment, human rights, and citizen media to name a few areas.

According to the Cellular Operators’ Association of India, there has been a growth in the number of subscribers by 1.86 per cent in July 2009 in the metros alone.

“A report on the impact of mobile phones in India reveals that Indian States with high mobile penetration can be expected to grow faster than those with lower mobile penetration rates, namely, 1.2 percentage points for every 10 per cent increase in the penetration rate.

This conference is a step in understanding how this can be taken forward,” says Sunil Abraham of the Centre for Internet and Studies. Participants for Mobile Tech 4 Social Change bar camps will include nonprofits, mobile applications developers, researchers, donors, intermediary organisations, and mobile operators.

While NGOs can gain information on various mobile applications and collaborate with those working in the core field of mobile technologies, enterprises can align their social responsibilities and use this potentially powerful medium.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/pushing-the-buttons-for-social-change

Change is coming, thanks to the mobile

radha — 2011-04-02T15:09:50Z

An article by NT Balanarayan in the DNA on August 27th,'09

Bangalore: A simple mobile can do much more than all your friends or send you cricket alerts, this is not me saying it, this is what a bunch of mobile enthusiasts organised under the banner of different societies are trying to say with the upcoming unconference Mobile tech for Social Change.

The event which will be held in unconference style - read: casual atmosphere - will try to focus on mobile technology and applications which can help not just connect human beings, but also improve their lives. The event is being organised by Centre for Internet Society (CIS) in collaboration with Women's Learning Partnership, Mobile Monday Bangalore and MobileActive.org and will be held on September 1.

Sunil Abraham, executive director of CIS says that the event will bring together two groups of people and provide them a platform to interact and work on ideas.

"On one side, there are the NGOs and social entrepreneurs and on the other side there are the people who develop technology for mobile phones, the geeks and the hackers etc. So if this event works out like expected, there may be a mailing list in the future so that these people can keep in touch and help develop mobile technology that will help uplift the lives of people," he says.

So how important are mobile phones as a technology? According to Abraham, it might be the easiest way for an Indian to access the internet. "There are around 400 million mobile users in India against 80 million people who have occasional access to the internet. The mobile users end up using internet technology a lot in India through GRPS, EDGE and at times indirectly through SMS gateway. This platform however, needs more work so that much more can be provided to mobile users," he says.

The Mobile Monday initiative headed by Kesav Reddy, will be helping CIS to organise the event. "We are expecting not just NGOs and developers, but also, researchers, donors, intermediary organisations and mobile operators; all in all we are expecting 100-200 participants," he says.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/change-is-coming-thanks-to-the-mobile

Payal Malik

praskrishna — 2012-10-12T05:50:30Z

Payal Malik is currently, Advisor to the Competition Commission of India. She has years of research experience in issues of competition and regulation in network industries like power, telecommunication and water. Her research collaborations have involved TRAI, Competition Commission of India, OECD, World Bank, and many others.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/knowledge-repository-on-internet-access/payal-malik

Sagie Chetty- Report

radha — 2011-08-23T03:30:41Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/publications/SC%20Study%20Tour%20Report%202009-11-08%20_2_.pdf

TRAI response

radha — 2011-08-23T03:32:08Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/publications/TRAI%20CP%20Response-Nov%2012%202009.pdf

TRAI - consultation Q 1- 57

radha — 2009-11-23T08:53:00Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/publications/TRAI%20CP-Q%201-57-Nov%2012%202009.pdf

TRAI

radha — 2009-11-23T08:51:35Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/telecom/publications/TRAI%20consultation.jpg