Transcript ppt - Terena

Geographic Issues Study
Jorge-A. Sanchez-P.& Nikos Vogiatzis
for the EARNEST/GEANT2 Foresight Study
http://www.terena.org/activities/earnest/geog.html
Amsterdam, 8 May 2007
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Presentation Topics
•
•
•
•
The DD in the REN context
A Framework for measuring the DD in REN
The RENDDI structure
Key Findings and Future Work
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
GIS main Goal
…to come up with an enhanced, concrete and structured
measuring approach that will lead to a
deeper understanding and addressing of the Digital Divide (DD)
challenges in the Research & Education Networking context.
Quantify the Digital Divide / Opportunity
Quantify the need for improved network performance
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Definition of the RENDD
“The uneven distribution, difference or gap in
regular and effective access to and usage of
digital resources and technologies”
… between scientists, researchers, students, etc* attached to research and education networks
… due to infrastructural, social, economic, educational, regulatory and other causes,
including but not limited to, unavailability of, difficulty in accessing, unawareness of the
availability and/or capabilities of, lack of understanding of how to access and/or use
such digital resources and technologies.
* Conclusions should be able to be deducted for organizations, campuses, and geographic areas attached to research and education networks.
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Why a solid and robust
Framework?
“it is part of the vision of the European Research Area that researchers
throughout Europe, irrespective of location, will be able to contribute fully to
its high-quality research activities. This represents equality of opportunity for
researchers, and increasingly, advanced research networks such as GÉANT
and the NRENs are playing a key role in achieving this.”
The SERENATE study
Stakeholders need information, benchmarks and analysis to
evaluate what has been achieved,
as well as what is achievable in the future
in each member state and neighboring countries
for appropriate policy interventions to take place.
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
The International Experience
A composite index
Assess progress in
creating digital
opportunity and
bridging the DD
Clustered in 36 sub-indexes
Ability to participate in
and benefit from ICT
developments
8-48 Indicators
convoluted
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
(Source: ITU/UNCTDA/KADO)
Digital Opportunity Index (2005)
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
(Source: ITU)
Digital Access Index (2003)
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
(Source: WEF/Insead)
Networked Readiness Index (2007)
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
The RENDDI
Quantification Framework
–
–
–
–
–
–
Covers a large number of countries
Modular structure
• can be grouped in logical classifications/clusters/categories/areas with special interest
(e.g. enabling factors/opportunity, infrastructure, usage, etc)
Straightforward methodology
• Raw ingredients are separate indicators that can be measured relatively easily.
• Can be convoluted into a single Index (RENDDI)
Objective criteria and measurable indicators
• Data collected via high-quality sources, e.g. the Compendium or other databases
from the ITU, WorldBank, EuroStat, etc, and processed via robust statistical methods.
Standardized indicators
• Allows for consistent and periodical measurements and assessments
• Permits comparisons of the Digital Divide evolution (whether it is diminishing and at
what speed)—both changes in absolute scores, as well as changes in rankings.
Captures the causes as well as the effects of the Digital Divide
• exposing both the readiness as well as the intensity of use of digital resources and
technologies
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
RENDDI Structure
Sub-Index
Cluster
How to answer?
Answers what?
Infrastructure How capable is my network?
Usage
Affordability
Knowledge
Quality
Network capacity
How much my network is used?
Can I build a good network?
Resources utilization
General infrastructure landscape
Financial capacity
Can people build and use my network?
How robust is my network?
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Policy environment
Human capacity
Human output
Network performance
RENDDI Structure
Infrastructure Sub-Index
Category
Sub-Index
Sub-category
How
to construct the Sub-Index?
Infrastructure
Network capacity
External connectivity capacity
Core network capacity
Access network capacity
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
RENDDI Structure
Sub-Indexes
Category
Sub-Index
Sub-category
How
to construct the Sub-Indexes?
Core network capacity
Infrastructure
External connectivity capacity
Usage
IP outgoing traffic
GDP
Affordability
IP incoming traffic
Expenditure on education
Internet tariff
Access network capacity
Expenditure on R&D
International Internet bandw.
NREN budget
Internet users Broadband users
Regulatory situation
Knowledge
Literacy
School enrolment
Quality
Unreachability
Availability
Patents
Losses
Jitter
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Researchers in R&D
Throughput
(Source: TERENA compendium)
RENDDI Input
Infrastructure Index
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
RENDDI Structure
Infrastructure Index
Category
Sub-Index
Sub-category
Sub-Sub-Index
External connectivity with peerings per user
Infrastructure
Network capacity
External connectivity without peerings per user
Core network size per user
Core network size per sq km
Core network capacity per user
Access network capacity per user
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
The NREN
potential users
are 7.5% of the
population
RENDDI Structure
Infrastructure Index (cont’d)
Category
Sub-Index
Sub-category
Sub-Sub-Index
33%
33%
Infrastructure
Index
33%
NREN
External
Connectivity
Index
NREN Core
Network
Connectivity
Index
NREN Access
Network
Connectivity
Index
33% External connectivity with peerings Index
67% External connectivity without peerings Index
60%
Core network size Index1
10%
Core network size Index2
30%
Core network capacity Index
100%
Access network capacity Index
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
REN Infrastructure Index
(2006)
Average kbps per NREN user
Netherlands: (internat. connections) 84,18kbps (access network):
71,03kbps
Iceland:
(internat. connections) 59,18kbps (access network): 1.152,28kbps
Slovakia: Study
(internat.
connections) 78,45kbps (access network): 186,61kbps
The EARNEST Foresight
2006 - 2007
Russia:
(internat. connections) 0,27kbps (access network):
1,55kbps
RENDDI Structure
User-centric Sub-Indexes
Category
Sub-Index
Sub-category
Sub-Sub-Index
External connectivity with peerings per user
Infrastructure
Index
50%
Usage
20% Index
External connectivity without peerings per user
Core network size per user
Core network capacity per user
Access network capacity per user
IP outgoing traffic per user
Core network size per sq km
IP incoming traffic per user
GDP per capita
Expenditure on education % of GDP
Affordability
Index
10%
Internet tariff %
International Internet bandw.per capita
Knowledge
10% Index
Adult Literacy
Quality
10% Index
NREN budget %
Unreachability
Expenditure on R&D %
Broadband users pc
Internet users per capita Regulatory situation
School enrolment
Availability
Patents per capita
Losses
Jitter
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Researchers per capita
Throughput
RENDDI (2006) - top 30
Iceland
Netherlands
Sweden
Slovenia
Finland
Denmark
Sweden
Germany
France
Israel
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
RENDDI (2006) - next 30
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
RENDDI (2006)
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
RENDDI vs other related Indices
RENDDI vs DOI
100,00
Iceland
Netherlands
90,00
80,00
Sweden
70,00
Norway
Slovakia
60,00
Czech
50,00
Denmark
Hungary
40,00
Latvia
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,60
0,80
1,00
RENDDI vs DAI
100,00
90,00
80,00
70,00
60,00
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
0,00
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
0,20
0,40
RENDDI vs …
RENDDI vs DOI and DAI
1,00
RENDDI vs GDP per capita
Iceland
100,00
0,90
Netherlands
90,00
0,80
80,00
0,70
70,00
0,60
60,00
0,50
Luxembourg
0,40
50,00
Digital Access Index
0,30
40,00
Digital Opportunity Index
0,20
30,00
Log. (Digital Opportunity Index)
Log. (Digital Access Index)
0,10
20,00
0,00
10,00
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,00
0
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
70.000
RENDDI vs Population in Countries
80.000
100,00
RENDDI vs Internet tariff
90,00
100,00
80,00
90,00
70,00
80,00
60,00
70,00
50,00
60,00
40,00
50,00
30,00
Latvia
40,00
20,00
30,00
Armenia
20,00
0,00
10,00
0,00
0,00
10,00
0
10,00
20,00
30,00
40,00
50,00
60,00
70,00
80,00
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
20.000.000
40.000.000
60.000.000
80.000.000
100.000.000
Croa
t ia
Slo v
en ia
Ire la
nd
Port
Lu xe ugal
mbo
urg
Esto
ni a
Swe
de n
Cyp
rus
Norw
ay
Neth
erla n
ds
Gree
ce
La tv
ia
Icela
nd
Hun
g ary
Swit
zerla
Unit
nd
ed K
i ngd
om
Fi nla
nd
Mold
o va
Tu
Cze
ch R rkey
e pub
lic
Serb
ia
Geo
rg ia
Pol a
nd
Jord
an
Den
mar
Mac
k
e don
ia, F
YR
Slo v
akia
Bel g
iu m
Alg e
ria
Li thu
an
Germ ia
any
Ita ly
Aus
tria
Fra n
ce
Spa
in
Rom
ani a
Israe
Bul g l
ari a
Az e
rbai ja
n
Bel a
rus
Alb a
ni a
Kaz
akhs
Kyrg t an
yzst
an
Mor
occo
Syria
Rus
sia
Uzb
eki s
ta n
Ukra
ine
Other results…
0,2
0,18
0,16
0,14
0,12
0,1
0,08
0,06
0,04
0,02
0
NREN Budget (as % of GDP)
80.000
RENDDI vs GDP pc (NREN budget)
70.000
60.000
50.000
40.000
30.000
20.000
10.000
0
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
0,80
1,00
The RENDDI as a policy tool
• Ranking and comparing countries on the 5 main sub-indices, is
probably more useful than on the main RENDDI
–
–
The sub-indices can allow for specific policy recommendations and concrete action
plans in order to address low-ranked attributes.
A country’s overall RENDDI score can be used to benchmark the performance on
the main sub-indices in order to produce a specific diagnosis on intra-indicators
correlations and deviations.
• Time evolution (trend) of RENDDI and its sub-indices is significantly
more meaningful than a static snapshot
–
This requires dedicated resources, commitment, and consistency, in order to
implement a data collection, validation, and analysis (both offline and online)
process that caries over a long period of time (e.g. min 3-5 years)
• TERENA Compendium is widely accepted by the NREN community as
a reference point of data gathering, however, a data validation
mechanism is required in order to ensure data correctness as much
as possible
–
–
A data validation mechanism will also encourage cooperation and coordination
among the NREN, Academia, Ministries, and other stakeholders in order to produce
a cohesive national policy and consensus.
The RENDDI offers up to a point that validation mechanism
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
The RENDDI as a policy tool
The RENDDI provide R&E policymakers
a policy tool
– A comprehensive statistical framework to monitor the
RENDD
– A frame of reference for comparisons over time and
between regions
– A benchmark for monitoring internal disparities in REN
Infrastructure, Usage, Affordability, Knowledge and Quality
based on classificatory variables of interest to the R&E
community
– A Tool to evaluate the impact of REN policies
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Future Work
• Further confirm the data in the databases and evaluate
further the convolution methods (sensitivity analysis, etc) ->
Compare “Apples with Apples”
• Identify data for the Quality Index (pinger)
• “Run” the Index again for 2007
• Present the findings to the Stakeholders:
– The National Research and Education Networks
– The management of research institutes, universities and other
organisations that could benefit from research and education networks
– Governments and research funding bodies for the development of future
strategies
– The European Commission, which is sponsoring the study and values the
Digital Divide issue high in its policy agenda
– The members of the European Parliament
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Final outcome
• REN-DD Policy Workshop & White Paper
– A declaration of solidarity for closing the REN-DD
– To be endorsed and co-signed by
• EC
• EP
• NREN directors
• National and EU Policy Makers
• et al.
– Commit to a “REN-DD Action Plan: 2007-2013”
based on GIS findings and recommendations.
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Acknowledgements
• TERENA
• EARNEST panel
• Geographic Issues Study Advisory Board
• Institute of Computer and Communications Systems
• Pinger
• ITU, WorldBank, WEF, OECD
Please send your comments to
[email protected]
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
GIS Target Areas
GN2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Austria (ACOnet)
Belgium (BELNET)
Bulgaria (BREN)
Croatia (CARNet)
Cyprus (CYNET)
Czech Republic (CESNET)
Denmark (UNI-C)
Estonia (EENet)
Finland (FUNET)
France (RENATER)
Germany (DFN)
Greece (GRNET)
Hungary (HUNGARNET)
Iceland (RHnet)
Ireland (HEAnet)
Israel (IUCC)
Italy (GARR)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Latvia (LATNET)
Lithuania (LITNET)
Luxembourg (RESTENA)
Malta (CSC)
Netherlands (SURFnet)
Norway (UNINETT)
Poland (PIONIER)
Portugal (FCCN)
Romania (RoEduNet)
Russia (RBNET/RUNNET)
Slovakia (SANET)
Slovenia (ARNES)
Spain (RedIRIS)
Sweden (SUNET)
Switzerland (SWITCH)
Turkey (ULAKBIM)
United Kingdom
(UKERNA)
GN2 Observers & SEEREN
EUMEDCONNECT
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Serbia (AMRES)
FYR of Macedonia
(MARNet)
SEEREN
•
•
•
Albania (ANA)
Montenegro (MREN)
Bosnia & Herzegovina
(BIHARNET)
PORTA OPTICA
•
•
•
•
•
•
Belarus (BASNET)
Moldova (RENAM)
Ukraine (URAN)
Azerbaijan (AzRENA)
Georgia (GRENA)
Armenia (ASNET)
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007
Algeria (ARN)
Egypt (EUN)
Jordan (JUNET)
Lebanon (CNRS)
Libya
Morocco (CNCPSRT)
Palestine (PADI2)
Syria (HIAST)
Tunisia (MRST)
OCASSION
•
Kazakhstan (KazRENA)
•
Kyrgyzstan (KRENAAKNET)
•
Tajikistan
•
Turkmenistan
•
Uzbekistan (UzSciNet)
Defining the Digital Divide
“The origins of the Digital Divide can be dated quite precisely
to May 24, 1844, when the first electronic telegraph route was
opened between Washington D.C. and Baltimore, and when
Samuel Morse sent the historic first message “What hath God
wrought?”
That first link privileged the two end-points of the circuit, but
every other point on the globe suddenly found itself on the
wrong side of a newly-opened Digital Divide.
However, by the time the original telegraph circuit was
extended to reach Philadelphia and New York, the Digital
Divide was already starting to be reduced.”
The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007