Is Mobility Overrated?

It is possible that nothing illustrates the idea of modernity better than the reality of mobility – that is, the state of being digitally connected regardless of where one is. It is a powerful idea, one that promises all sorts of things to humanity. A migrant in a sinking boat in the Mediterranean Sea reaches out to her brother in Scandinavia to ask for help and actually gets saved as a result – just because of mobility. Everyone likes that idea and dreads the day that one will actually be ‘out of reach’: for to be disconnected conjures up horrific images similar to those of being lost in the desert, or venture into the realm of the undead.  

But as much as we like the idea let’s pause and ask ourselves: unless one is a driver, a delivery worker, a hawker or even a field technician, how many times are we truly ‘mobile’? If we go with the results of the general ‘how we use our time’ surveys: not an awful lot. In other words, most of the time we are actually ‘fixed’: stuck in the office for an average of nine hours (including commute time), sleeping for seven, watching TV for a possible four, leaving four hours for household duties, personal maintenance, caring for others and leisure. 

So what is all this infatuation with mobility? Why do operators and our governments behave as if we are digital vagabonds who never settle in any one place? Are there any downsides to this attitude? In other words, we have to ask: is digital mobility overrated?

To start with, lest I get lynched by the technology mobs, let’s clarify some things. One, a device can be portable without requiring mobility. Yes, smartphones are lovable: as portable devices they will continue to be at the centre of technology innovation for years to come. But when you think about it their potential is more defined by their portability than their mobility aspect. Once connected, as portable rather than mobile devices, smartphones are a powerful disruptive technology. That is our second point: connectivity can be wireless without being mobile. Mobility points to the core systems that make it possible to handle calls and data without interruption while subscribers are on the move. But mobility is not everything; it is just one small step in a move towards a successful digital economy. In this post we just want to raise some issues which are being sacrificed at the altar of ‘mobility’.

1.  Development of higher value data products

Very low penetration of fixed-line services led to a mobile revolution in Africa. The technology made it cost effective for operators to invest in rural areas where a single mobile base station could serve a sparsely populated area of a radius of up to 40 km. However, with the change of times, the new challenge now is less of providing increased coverage but more of providing urban dwellers with higher value data products for business and entertainment. Here we are talking of streaming, Video on Demand, IPTV, HDTV, gaming, inter-branch connectivity, video conferencing, unified communications and, since the future is already here: Internet of Things (IoT). Mobile data – regardless of the promises made by new technologies such as LTE – can hardly deliver the demands of such high-volume high-value data services. It has its own limitations. Even in 5G some of those challenges may still exist. Alternatively, a fibre cable based network (FTTX) can deliver anything from 10Mbps to 10Gbps. Given a high rise buildings landscape that now adorns most of Africa’s major urban centres a single GPON fibre line could provide a 100 apartments block, with a population of around 500 individuals, with a minimum of 25Mbps of unlimited connectivity for each apartment. With that kind of access the business possibilities are almost endless.

2.  Productivity

The idea of mobility is highly associated with the notion that smartphones are going to replace PCs and TVs. Yes, it is true that people now spend more media time with their smartphones than with their PCs; and that annually more smartphones are being shipped than PCs. But surveys reveal two crucial things: one, the uptake of PCs has remained stable, and, two, between 8am to 5pm – the working hours – the PC still reigns. What this shows is that work, productivity, is still driven by ‘fixed’ desktops and laptops. In other words, as our networks evolve, planning must take into consideration the ‘productivity’ aspect, and that means, addressing the needs of the office-bound, PC-using, ‘fixed’ workers. The number of communication solutions employees have to deal with in their offices can be overwhelming. Research shows that integration of these solutions into a unified channel leads to increased productivity. We will explore this aspect in greater detail in our future posts.

3.  Increased degree of internetworking and systems integration

By the year 2020 there will be about 50 billion objects connected in what is known as Internet of Things (IoT). Without increased internetworking and systems integration, mobility on its own will amount to little in this era. While things – objects – have always been connected in one way or another for years if not decades past, but the essence of IoT is found in increased integration of systems and networks to facilitate greater exchange of data for control and automation. At the human communication level, there are promises which technology is yet to fulfill. One such promise is the ability to reach an individual, wherever he is, through the most efficient, cost-effective means available at that moment. Greater integration, and not faultless mobility, will deliver that.

One of the projects which leads the way into the future is Google’s Project Fi. Project Fi ‘allows phones to automatically switch among multiple cellular networks and local area Wi-Fi networks, depending on which network offers the strongest signal at any given moment.’ While the capability to connect to multiple carriers seamlessly is considered to be a technology feat, what is important is the fact that the user gets to be charged a smaller fee for a higher quality service which is achieved by selecting between networks, including  a choice to route calls through the ideally cheaper WiFi networks (based fixed broadband). While Google’s Project Fi is by no means a new concept, it shows the potential of the capability to integrate operators’ systems and networks: a service revolution. There are less complex approaches to achieve these high technology ideals.

4.  Coordinated broadband policies, practices and regulation.

If the major assumption is that mobile data connectivity will remain the only solution to providing internet connectivity, many opportunities for further developing ICT infrastructures will be ignored. Given the massive infrastructure needs that exist in Africa, there are many ongoing projects aimed at providing basic infrastructure services to the population. In many of these projects – e.g. improving road and rail networks; improving power and water supply; improving sewerage systems; building oil and gas infrastructure; expanding or building of new or expansion of existing airports – some form of excavation, laying of pipes or poles happen. Thus, given a visionary national broadband policy, all of those activities could be required to lay down conduits or cables which could be used in the immediate future to connect new regions or city neighbourhoods at an infinitesimal low cost. Now compare that to undertaking complete turnkey projects. In other words, better coordination between government ministries and operators could end up accelerating the pace towards earning higher dividends of digital connectivity. Here is one model which shows how those who have a better vision of the future than us approach these problems: Taipei looks to its sewers to ensure new FTTH system.

5.  Unbundling of Local Loops

There is an increasing understanding in Telecoms strategic thinking that networks are ‘non-core and non-differentiating’ (Analysys Mason.) As a result Telcos are turning to network sharing to lower their capital expenditures and maximise their revenue opportunities. While this has been an ongoing trend for a while now, there have been limitations: no sharing of active networks, especially the access networks – called lastmile solutions – which usually make a significant percentage of network CAPEX. As long as operators, old and new, keep focusing on aspects of infrastructure as a competitive advantage, there will be duplication of efforts and subscribers will be ill-served. So, while we can continue to celebrate the successes of mobile communications in Africa but, now that almost the whole population is covered, we need to ask: what next?

We can start by focusing on improved services through service competition. Given the backward looking strategic approaches which have made it impossible for mobile virtual network operators (MVNO) to arise, local loop unbundling (LLU), i.e. the sharing of the access network (last mile), will be the last enemy to be defeated in this war. So, instead of every operator trying to build up their own LTE access networks while the market conditions are still not ideal businesswise, they could have shared the infrastructure so that competition would be in product innovation and differentiation. They may need a nudge from the regulators – e.g. through the allocation of spectrum. That is the point where customers will be served best.

To conclude, research shows that fixed network subscriptions in Africa have peaked at 1% (ITU, 2011.) The truth is there is no good reason why this should be the case apart from poor policy vision and bad operators’ practices. Mobile networks were designed to cater to the communications needs of people when they are actually mobile. However, in Africa they were used as a cheap last mile alternative to fixed networks. But mobile networks were not designed as a substitute for fixed broadband networks nor can they achieve that appropriately. These networks are best viewed not only as converging but also complimentary solutions. So any good policy or business planner will have to address that in his programs.   

NB: There may be around 1.3 billion ‘mobile workers’ in the world today, according to IDC, but the definition used means ‘mobile relative to a central office’ which includes quite stationary home workers, occasional travelers and mobile on-location workers. This is not how technology conceptualises mobility.