Welcome to the United Nations | Department of Economic and Social Affairs

Contributions: Mr

Created On Tuesday, 08 September 2015 18:29

Contribution

  • Title
    Mr
  • First Name
    Shreedeep
  • Last Name
    Rayamajhi
  • Professional Affiliation
    Rayznews
  • Stakeholder Group
    Civil Society

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

  • How would you define the issue “Connecting the Next Billion”?
    Internet of today has expanded to the basic needs of people. It has evolved to the next achievement of human evolution.

    It’s a crucial aspect of not just fighting for the control but understanding the vulnerabilities in resolving the difference of digital divide and net neutrality.
    I believe it’s the process of reaching out with every possible means to lessen the gaps in between the developed and developing world creating a common point of growth and development
    Internet has been dynamic in its approach and has out-lashed the barriers in terms of its limitation. Time and again it has proved the norms and limitation where the developed countries should know that they cannot rule the internet alone and the developing countries should feel that they have contributed equally in making internet so popular.
    Internet is for everyone but we need to overcome the differences in between by creating a favorable environment securing the rights of every individual.
    Connecting the next billion is the initiation of lessening the gaps in creating feasibility opportunity, environment by every means possible for growth and development.
  • Have you observed any regional or national specificities regarding connectivity (e.g. Internet industry development)?
    Especially in the developing countries in Asia there is a huge problem of connectivity in terms of technology and infrastructure. On one hand the high cost of spectrum leasing limits the reach whereas on the other the expensive infrastructure makes it impossible to make internet cheap. In Nepal the local telecom have to pay NRS 2.5 billion yearly for renewal of spectrum leasing whereas due to the high amount there is no competition. There are only two telecom ruling and monopolizing the industry thus resulting in high cost and limited service. This has limited the industry where 3g services are fast but due to the monopoly the cost are very high.
    The regulating body is happy with the revenue generation so it is silent about the further evolution of the industry.
  • Do you know of existing policy measures, and private sector or civil society initiatives addressing connectivity? If yes, was the policy a government policy, industry policy (either collective best practice or corporate policy), technical policy, or did i
    In Nepal due to the expensive spectrum leasing the local ISPs have diverted towards third party leasing. Most of the ISPs in Nepal render the bandwidth from Indian Telecom giants like TATA, Airtel etc. they have no option as they cannot render the 2.5 billion leasing cost.

    Though for infrastructure the shadow lines (electrical grid) have been used for reaching out but still due to lack of proper bandwidth there is no quality of service in Nepal
  • In your opinion, what worked well in the development of the policy, and what impediments were encountered?

    I think policies should be made for development, and development should not be subjected to policies. It’s a way around, especially in the lower economies the regulating bodies control the policies and infrastructure where they limit the growth and development in terms of their aspirations.

    The whole industry and the nation suffers the condition due to lack of proper understandability and promptness.

    The government or regulating bodies plays a relevant role in conducting research and adopting the international policies as per the need of the region. It’s highly questionable whether the system should be efficient or the policies in both cases the lack of efficiency is suffered by the public which results in lack of development and growth.
  • What was the experience with implementation?
    Implementation is yet another important phase which demands standardization in terms of policy and practice. If the systems fails to reconciliate then it result in lack of effectiveness and efficiency.
    On one hand the regulatory body fails to absorb the importance of polices in terms of its control and management mechanism whereas on the other if it accepts the policies then it tries to put the voices of the industry at bay due to its issues of control. The point come as whether the regulatory body wants to give its power up to adapt the role of a facilitator or not which is highly questionable.
  • Did you experience any unintended consequences of policy developments/interventions, good and bad?
    Yes I have in Nepal the broadband policy is in its evolution phase. There were few consolidation meeting done by the regulatory body with the nearest and dearest association. It was done in a one way model where limited consolidation was done with limited stakeholders.
    Lack of research and information is surpassing the question of its adaptation. A policy that is related with the national strategy needs to be focused with more intricate research model of integration and development. Multistakeholder concept of internet ecosystem cannot be ignored. A national level strategy should entail the aspirations of all stakeholder as further determines the path of tomorrow.
  • Can you think of unresolved issues where further multistakeholder cooperation is needed?
    Not just at government regulatory level but even at times of decision and research it needs to be integrated for greater efficiency and effectiveness. A system needs to be flexible in-terms of its use where it should be optimized for its own benefit.
  • Did you gain any insight as a result of the experience?
    Internet is a Dynamic innovation, it cannot be controlled by a limited country or entity. It belongs to the world where we need to harness it by multistakeholder concept establishing the ownership and securing the right of every individual. The ownership and control cannot be limited to one nation as globally it has its own definition. As per region and sector the internet ecosystem needs to channelize with proper policies, protocol and then an approach of system established for the growth and development of humanity. Only then it can result in optimization of service and achievement of goals or else if there is a problem in the system it would create further problem in various aspect of degradation of the system of its use, access, security, quality etc
  • List proposed steps for further multistakeholder dialogue/actions.
    I think it’s the best means possible for adaptation and further getting the best possible results

    -Research of Problem
    -Consolidation with stakeholders
    -Testing the results
    - Finalization and Adaptation