Telecom's Road to 2030: “What If We Were to Do Nothing?”

Abstract

Telecom’s Road to 2030: “What if We Were to Do Nothing?” By 2030, current U.S. broadband policy may be unable to fulfill its mission of providing all Americans with equal access to the capabilities of advanced digital products and services, while geopolitical competitors forge ahead. This paper compares the information technology strategies of the U.S., the EU and China, and proposes a distinctively American leadership vision, building from the FCC’s 2010 National Broadband Plan (NBP). According to Blair Levin, NBP Exc. Dir., “We started with the question of what if we were to do nothing; what would be the biggest problem in a decade?” Revisiting that question in 2021 reveals very different problems and calls for a new paradigm for solutions. Digital networks are growing at near-exponential rates, along with networked technologies, platforms and applications which are increasingly critical for full societal participation. According to the NBP, “Broadband networks only create value to consumers and businesses when they are used in conjunction with broadband capable devices to deliver useful applications and content.” By 2030, for U.S. citizens to be fully engaged and productive members of society, broadband access alone will not be enough. Multi-Gb connectivity will be near ubiquitous, with mobile and fixed technologies functionally equivalent. The goal of universal broadband access will shift from connecting geographies and devices to connecting individuals (PANs, wearables, implantables), enabling use of an array of networked services and applications. Leading geopolitical competitors are aggressively pursuing new information technology opportunities. The EU hopes to become a global rule-maker for consumer digital protection. It is calling the current decade, “Europe’s Digital Decade”, embracing “digital citizenship”. In addition to the 2018 GDPR, the Digital Services and Digital Markets Acts, and rules for Commercial Data and AI are pending. China, in its 13th and now 14th Five Year Plans, is focused on international market leadership in critical new technologies (e.g., “Made in China 2025”), integrating strategies for AI, quantum information, Cyberspace, Big Data centers, and 5G, while domestically emphasizing rural development, social stability and regime perpetuation, merging Informatization with Cybersecurity. The paper compares the current goals, laws and structures of each related to emerging digital technologies. It asks if the U.S. is disadvantaged relative to its main competitors and offers a holistic policy alternative. It argues it is time to reforge U.S. broadband policy so policy and technology can develop in tandem. This will require an evolved policy framework that is flexible and responsive, with an integrative view of the digital ecosystem, focused on outcomes, not technologies, with full digital inclusion as the basic condition of the social contract. What if we were to do nothing? Domestically, broadband policy and regulation would become progressively dysfunctional. Globally, the U.S. would fall behind in technology markets and leadership in international fora as a respected source of norm making based on digital inclusion for all. It is time to go beyond “access” and take a vision of universal digital inclusion to the next level. This paper proposes such a path.