ICT Policies and
Regulations in Africa:
Implications to NRENs
Lishan Adam
Outline
Progress in regulations and ICT policies
 Qualitative view of ICT policies and
regulations
 Regional dimensions of regulation
 Challenges and opportunities
 Emerging policy and regulatory issues
within the context of NREN
 Implications

Progress

Reform in the telecom sector in
all countries and improved private
investment

Tele-density from 1% in 1990 to above
10% in 2005 (including mobile)

Mobile footprint of about 30%
Internet usage, slow but improved
(about 2-3%)

Subscribers in Africa in 2003 (millions)
51
22
Mobile
Mainline
RECs (ECOWAS, SADC, COMESA), NEPAD, ADB have made
in regional networks and broadband top priority
Independent IXPs in about nine countries
Market entry by alternative communication service
providers (Gas, electricity, railway)

Progress in Sector Reform
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
42
37
36
41
30
17
3
s ent ors ors ws tor
e
m
e
a ula e co tra d
ic
b rat ra t
l
v
r
r
m
l
se ncu ope o pe ct o reg d te PE
C
sic he i la r lar e se rate a n
a
u
t
u
t
t
l
b
l
s
a
ll
in n of ce ce o da ep po
n o
S te
o
t
e
it tio zat i n tw ivat Up
ra
a
e
r
i
t
a
p
p
P
m riva e t h
Se
o
C
P
or
M
Source: World Bank
Less than 5% have moved towards full competition in basic services
Over 35 countries have yet to introduce competition in fixed segment
48
Reform agenda incomplete
Public and private sector
investment is required for rapid
diffusion of NRENs
Good regulation is a must for
lowering cost and bring about
rapid investment
Qualitative view – regulatory
situation in Africa

Using a key benchmarks like

legal status – laws creating the regulatory body
 Independence - budget, decision, legitimacy
 Competencies – tariff setting, licensing, resource allocation, dispute
settlement, interconnection, quality of service, consumer protection,
facilitating competition and market entry
 Internal organization –staffing, management and relationship with the
board
 Regulatory governance – participation of CSO, public
 Enforcement – enforcement power, interaction with judiciary,
arbitration bodies
Different pace of reform due to institutional and political factors

Three phases in regulation




Phase I – regulatory bodies are non-existent or ineffective
Phase II – regulatory bodies exist, do assume roles, but weak
Phase III – regulatory bodies assume full roles
State owned
Incumbent operators
Monopoly of
International Segment
Congo DRC
Cote d’ivoire
Others
Angola
Mozambique
Nigeria
Zimbabwe
Botswana
Gabon
Malawi
Burundi
Sierra Leone
Liberia
Cameroon
Burkina Faso
Gambia
Benin
Chad
Kenya
Zambia
Eritrea
Swaziland
Senegal
South Africa
Niger
Mauritania
Tanzania
Morocco
Uganda
Egypt
CAR
Sao Tome
Equatorial Guinea
Somalia
Guinea
Sudan
Mali
Namibia Ethiopia
Rwanda Comoros
Congo
Cape Verde
Guinea Bissau
Tunisia
Algeria
Togo
No regulatory
Authority
Mauritius
Lesotho
Mobile
Monopoly
Phase I







Regulatory agencies are non-established (sector
ministry in charge) or not functional – e.g Sierra
Leone, Liberia, Eritrea,Swaziland
One to five staff members
Watching the behaviour of monopoly operator
Non-existent enforcement and dispute resolution
No public participation
Limited competencies of staff and inefficient
institution
Unable to determine market behaviour
Phase II







Countries have created sector regulators and
licensed sector participants (Uganda, Kenya,
South Africa, etc.)
Laws are in place
Some independence in allocation of resources,
government sets fees and approve allocation
Some power in dispute resolution and
enforcement via fine
A few core competencies
Decisions with approval of minister
Assume certain roles in market development
Phase III

Barely a few regulatory institutions…



Meet the necessary independence and self governance
criteria
Promote open access - (technology neutral, competition
in all layers, opportunities for small players to connect)
All the necessary competencies (e.g tariff setting, licensing,
resource allocation, dispute settlement, interconnection, quality of
service, consumer protection, facilitating competition and market
entry)




assumed an active role in enforcement, promoting
competition, open access in all layers (local, national
regional, service, transmission, physical)and general
market development
Clear from entrenched personal and political interest
(focus on long term benefits than short term benefits)
Flexible and technology neutral regulation
Sophisticated information systems (transparency)
Information Management as a
key indicator on progress
NRA web sites survey by Amy Mahan 2004
NRAs with site
under
construction
11%
NRA with
partially
functioning site
44%
No independent
regulator
34%
NRAs without
site
11%
Organization do not pay attention
to the appeals their content,
content management is not a
core business
http://www.ncc.org.na/
Information management is often
event driven http://www.incm.gov.mz/
•New tools are not incorporatedWeb sites remain static http://www.potraz.gov.zw/,
Some feel that basic information could
be sufficient http://www.virtualseychelles.sc/gov
er/mitc_telecom.htm
•Outsourcing core function as a result
no up to date sites
•Outdated web sites
PHASE III
PHASE II
PHASE I
Mauritius, Morocco, Tanzania, Botswana, South Africa Uganda Kenya
Nigeria Senegal Cote d’Ivoire Ghana Mozambique Mauritania
Zambia Zimbabwe
Lesotho Namibia Seychelles Rwanda Malawi Cameroon
Mali Sudan Congo Togo Burkina Faso
Burundi Cameroon, Niger, Guinea-Bissau DRC Ethiopia Comoros Benin Chad Togo
Cape Verde Gabon
Gambia Swaziland, Sao Tome & Principe Equatorial Guineas
Eritrea, Sierra Leone Liberia
Central African Republic
Consequences of weakness in
regulation
Slowed transaction and investment due to
negative sentiments
 Excessive cost of bandwidth
 Backbone networks over stretched
 Network concentration in urban area
 Limited diffusion of wireless and innovative
technologies

Challenges


Different pace of reform due to these institutional and
political factors
Regulation were not up to date to reflect
technological changes, rapidly changing
circumstances –




outdated “Telecommunication ACT” over 7 years makes it
difficult to regulate
Information asymmetry and low level of competence
to regulate/not regulate the dynamic sector
Competing institutions (IT, regulator, spectrum
management, broadcast, consumer affairs, fair trade,
parent ministry)
New elements of monopoly and resistance (mobile
services)
In imperfect governance situation regulation more
about mediating vested interest and political
networks






Natural tendencies to defend status quo
Governments trying to (open the sector and
protect the incumbent)
Influence of political and individual agendas
Personality of regulators, background,
relationship to the incumbent and senior policy
makers
Role of influential sector participants (Board,
director of operators)
Ignorance and fear of consequences of changes
or introducing competition
National ICT Policies


Many countries developed e-strategies between 1999-2003 at the height
of enthusiasm about ICTs
Were instrumental in raising awareness, mobilization of resource,
conceptual shift to ICT4D and digital divide now to wider information
society issues
Decisive changes to policies and implementation of e-strategies has been difficult
The number of countries with ICT policies and
without
100%
80%
60%
No policy
40%
Underway
20%
Policy
Year
20
04
20
02
20
00
0%
19
99
Detached from core reform agenda
Comprehensive vs focussed
ICT experts vs development experts
Distribution impact on sectors vs ICT investment
Technology push vs reality
Internal vs external
Commitment vs rhetoric
Shopping list vs realistic implement able projects
Consensus and participatory vs decree
Organic vs driven by institutions
New institutions vs competing implementing
agencies
PRSP/MDG focus vs host of lists under the sun
Regional Dimensions







Smaller traffic, large number of
countries
Regional strategies
EARPTO
Policy harmonization
Cross-border connectivity
Rationalization of initiatives
Investment opportunities (PPP) –
mostly studies – DFID, World Bank,
e-Africa commission
Enabling environment –
Interconnection (world Bank)
ARICEA
e-Africa Commission
Opportunities for NREN



Phasing out of exclusivity period (Senegal, Uganda, South
Africa, Kenya, Mali, Ghana)
Introduction of converged licensing regime (postexclusivity) – Kenya, Uganda, Mauritius, South Africa
Senegal, Tanzania, these announced broad competition
IP driven market dynamics


Depriving incumbents of lucrative revenue
low volume/high margin  High volume low margin

Digital divide/ information society initiatives
 WSIS (ITU, ADB)
 Commission for Africa
 NEPAD/AU
 RECs (ECOWAS, ECAAS, COMESA, SADC, EAC, IOC,
 National (e-strategies, ICT4D policies)

Fastest growing communications economy
Implications to NREN





Regulations adapted to NREN take time (patience)
No homogeneous model or logic in regulation –
respond to specific infrastructure, demographic and
organizational capacities (institutional, national
NREN, sub-regional, continental)
Stronger knowledge networks between regulators,
policy makers, members of NREN for joint
innovations ( focus on local innovations)
NREN members could capitalize on their position in
the society (VCs, eminent academics) to negotiate
changes in policies (human relations)
Local policies research and advocacy informed by
global best practices (bring in global best practice)
Implications to NREN


Involvement of middle level managers
(technocrats drafting policies and regulations)
NREN promotion within the contexts of





E-strategies e-governance
Development, MDGs and government e-education,
national S&T policy
Regional agenda (Strategic policy advocacy speak
the language)
Policy and advocacy strategy taking incentives,
vested interests, linguistic, cultural and regional
factors into account (association with local
actors)
Smaller better – EARPTO
Implications to NREN



Bilateral, trilateral or … quadrilateral regional aggregations
could be used as building block for regional regulations –
federated R&E networks useful than regional
Organic development start from where it works (SARUA)
Regional harmonization through regional regulatory associations
(engage NRAs)



Build interface with regulatory associations (participation in AGM, OGM)
Awareness – tutorials
Model NREN and regulatory implications cookbook(small players, e-rates, Dark fiber, public
good)

Use of regional organizations (AAU, East African Universities Association, Association of
Francophone universities.)

Rationalization of regional NREN projects and initiatives (avoid
confusions, policy makers do hate confusion and unnecessary details)
It is about policy…and commitment of governments



AU, NEPAD, RECs (ECOWAS, SADC, COMESA) agenda
Policy advocacy requires same level of commitment – “It is political,
institutional than technical”
Thank you