needs analysis - current state of broadband in …sirepub.halton.ca/councildocs/pm/22/may 23...

2018

Prepared by

Dr. Helen Hambly, Dr. Jamie Lee and Matt Rapke

R2B2 Project Team University of Guelph

01/20/2018

NEEDS ANALYSIS - CURRENT STATE OF

BROADBAND IN RURAL HALTON

CA-04-18 Attachment 3 – Current State of Broadband in Rural Halton

Blauelr

Typewritten Text


1

Questions or inquiries on the report: [email protected]

©R2B2 Project, University of Guelph, January 2018


mailto:[email protected]

2

Executive Summary

This report is prepared by the R2B2 Project Team at the University of Guelph, in partnership with BDO Inc. and The Regional Municipality of Halton. The report documents the preliminary needs analysis and findings of the Rural Halton Broadband Surveys. The purpose of the study is to inform Regional Council on the existing broadband infrastructure and connectivity needs within the rural areas of Halton.

The Halton Rural Broadband Study created four datasets for geospatial and economic analysis. These are the: 1) Municipal, Utilities, School and Health/Hospital (MUSH) User Inventory; 2) Residential and Farm User E-Survey (including Home-Based Businesses); 3) Business Users E-Survey; and 4) Telecommunications Service Providers Inventory. This report concentrates on findings from the first three datasets with selected data overlays from the fourth inventory. The latter is proprietary and data are not included in the maps contained in this report.

The findings of the MUSH user survey indicate that there are diverse public sector sites across Halton Region (n=466) with 79% of sites having access to fibre. MUSH users are mainly located in urban areas of Halton Region. Only 40 of these sites are in non-urban areas. Connectivity across Halton’s MUSH user sites varies substantially by user type and should not be generalized. In the inventory data, several MUSH user sites require a) confirmation of quality of service at site, or b) improved connectivity for current and future applications at site. MUSH sites are relevant to enable scaling out of existing fibre connections to business, farm and residential users. New MUSH digital applications, including Public Alerting Systems (WPAS) requires universal access to LTE service. The lack of rural broadband availability will limit applications available to some MUSH users as well as rural residential and business users of e-government services, particularly with future, cloud based applications. We note that within some urban areas of Halton, findings point to low bandwidth at social housing and care facilities as well as public libraries and schools located near or within rural areas.

The findings indicate that the majority of Halton’s rural communities experience speeds near or lower than the minimally acceptable speed targets established by the federal government. In 2015, the target was 5 megabits per second (Mbps) download and 1 Mbps upload for broadband Internet access service in Canada. At present, rural Halton users report averages of 10.7 Mbps download and 6.2 Mbps upload (home and primary residence users only). Farm users are lower, reporting on average 6.1 Mbps download and 1.7 Mbps upload. This current service is substantially lower than the current 2021 target of 50 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload.

Furthermore, residential/farm users report relatively high monthly recurring costs of service for low speeds at the premise, with some variation by area. There are distinct gaps in broadband availability in rural Halton due to connection types. In comparison to other areas of Southwestern Ontario, monthly recurring costs for service at the residential/farm level, including home-based businesses in rural Halton is $20-25 higher (2017 dollars). To complete the current state of broadband gap analysis, additional data from TSPs are needed in order to confirm the fibre routes and potential availability in rural Halton.


3

Rural Halton has a significant telecommuter surplus with potential returns to the local economy. The business survey did not provide a representative sample. Further analysis of the reliability of service (specifically, quality of service) among micro, small and medium businesses is needed due to the small sample size.

In a final synthesis mapping of the data, not included here due to proprietary data restrictions, we hypothesize on the general areas of highest need based on population density, current speeds (index) and existing connection types/towers connected to fibre. We conclude that some settlement areas of rural Halton are distinctly disadvantaged by limitations of the available connection type and lack of consistent, reliable broadband service.


4

Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................. 2

Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 5

Background and Methodology ........................................................................................... 5

Demographics ...................................................................................................................... 6

Findings ................................................................................................................................... 8

MUSH Inventory .................................................................................................................. 8

Residential/Farm Survey Findings .................................................................................. 17

Business Survey Findings ................................................................................................. 30

Observations ........................................................................................................................ 32

MUSH User Connections ............................................................................................... 32

Residential/Farm User Connections ............................................................................ 33

Business User Connections ........................................................................................... 34

Concluding Remarks .......................................................................................................... 35

Additional References ........................................................................................................ 36


5

Introduction

Background and Methodology

Across Ontario, municipalities seek to understand gaps in broadband connectivity, in order to inform economic development policy and emerging public service requirements such as the Wireless Public Alerting System (WPAS). In 2017, the Regional Municipality of Halton commissioned a Rural Broadband Study to inform the Regional Council about improving telecommunications infrastructure and services in these areas. The study examines the:

availability of broadband connections in rural areas; consistency and reliability of connections; cost of service. The Rural Halton Broadband Study collected data on internet services by user type, namely

the public sector referred to as MUSH (Municipal, Utility, Schools and Hospitals/health care), residences, farms and other businesses.

To collect input from residential/farm and business users, surveys were developed. An online survey was available on the Qualtrics online platform and managed by the R2B2 Project at the University of Guelph. Surveys were also available through the Regional Office in hard copy format. The survey announcement was distributed through a postcard announcement sent by post and social media distribution using the link to the dedicated Rural Halton Broadband Study page on the Halton Region website.1

Data from the surveys were downloaded for preliminary analysis on November 17, 2017. This voluntary survey produced a clean sample size for residential/farm users of 1,035; the sample size is proportionately representative of the target population at the margin of error/confidence level of three percent.2 The sample of business users (not located at residential/farm premises) was insufficient (n=24) with a margin of error greater than 10 percent. The sample is not considered representative. Findings are reported; limitations of the business data are discussed at the end of this report.

Additional data were available to the study. The sample of MUSH sites represents 100 percent of the sites with a user population (n=466). This inventory was provided by Halton Region. Additional data on P25 and amateur radio towers was received from the Regional Office. Data from some telecommunication service providers (TSPs) were received under non-disclosure arrangements. The Rural Halton Broadband Study surveys are still live and final data analysis will be required. At a later date, comparative analysis by the R2B2 Project will benchmark the aggregate findings from rural Halton against other regional and rural broadband studies conducted by the R2B2 Project in Southwestern Ontario.3

1 See: http:/www.halton.ca/cms/one.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=158488

2 Following the standard from Dixon & Leach (1978) for the rural population of Halton, this sample is below

the 5% margin of error for statistical purposes therefore, the results of the dataset are considered representative. 3 From 2013 to 2016, State of Regional and Rural Broadband reports included: Western Ontario, Niagara

Region, Town of Caledon and Town of Collingwood.


6

Demographics

Halton Region is located within the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area (GTHA). Rural Halton is defined in this study as the non-urban areas of Burlington, Halton Hills, Milton and Oakville. The Greenbelt Plan covers 54.5% of the Region’s land area or 52,558 hectares. Population density therefore varies according to geographic features such as the Greenbelt area and aggregate mining (Map 1). 4

Table 1: Rural Halton Population and Farm Attributes

Attribute Rural Halton Source

Total Land Area (Census 2016) 96,405 ha Census

Total no. rural dwellings (2016) 8420 Census

Total no. businesses (2016) 749 Census

Total no. active farms** (2016) 451 Census

Percentage of farms under 10 ha** (2016) 14% Census

Percentage of farms over 400 ha** (2016) 7% Census

Area of Census Farms (2016) 27,792 ha Census

Gross Farm Receipts (2016) $143.8 million Census

Gross Farm Receipts per Hectare of Census Farm (2016)

$5,174.21 Census

*http://www.halton.ca/regional_council_administration/chair_s_corner/advocating_for_a_strong_halton/halton_region_at_a_glance/ ** CANSIM table 004-0201

According to the 2016 Census of Agriculture, the Town of Halton Hills, located in the northern rural area of the region, reports 180 farms (2016). The Town of Milton, the fastest growing municipality in Canada in 2011, has 191 farms (2016). Halton Region’s on-going Employment Survey details the context of business and employment data for the region.5

Rural Halton includes hamlets such as Brookville, Campbellville, Glen Williams, Kilbride, Lowville, Moffat, Mount Nemo and Norval as well as rural clusters of Ballinafad, Bannockburn, Crewson’s Corners, Henderson’s Corners, Limehouse, Silvercreek and Terra Cotta. To understand the needs of these communities, in April 2016, the Halton Rural Agricultural Strategy (RAS) was documented. This report did not, however, include questions on broadband

4 See Map 1E from Halton Region for agricultural areas:

http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=115808 and Ontario Government’s map of the Greenbelt area here: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=17124

5 See: http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=60770


http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=115808

http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=17124

7

connectivity. The RAS does contain contextual information including key trends and issues relevant to the Rural Halton Broadband Study.6

Map 1: Population Density in Rural Halton

6 See: http://www.halton.ca/cms/One.aspx?portalId=8310&pageId=137956


8

Findings

The Halton Rural Broadband Study created three main datasets created for geospatial and economic analysis. These are the: 1) Municipal, Utilities, School and Health/Hospital (MUSH) User Inventory; 2) Residential and Farm User E-Survey (including Home-Based Businesses); 3) Business Users E-Survey; and 4) Internet Service Providers Inventory. This report concentrates on findings from the first three datasets with reference to generalized data analysis from the fourth inventory.

MUSH Inventory

A MUSH inventory was developed. The types of Halton MUSH user sites are as follows:

Social/Cultural Facilities o Arts/Heritage o Community Centres o Care Facilities o Social Housing o Libraries

Infrastructure – operations, water; waste; pumping stations, SCADA

Utilities (Hydro)

Fire and Ambulance

Health Clinics and Hospitals

Conservation Authorities

Others (golf courses, cemetery, animal shelter) Data includes user and site information as well as the type and cost of Internet service

(Table 2).

Table 2: MUSH User Variables

Type of Variable Variable

User and site of service Site Name Site Address User Population @ Site

Type and cost of service Service Provider Contract Term (start/end) One-time Non-Recurring Charge (if

applicable) Monthly Recurring Charge Local Access Type Local Access Port Speed (Mbps) Transport Protocol Service Type Bandwidth (Mbps)


9

The data obtained are from 479 sites listed but usable attributes are available for 466 sites. Some partial data was provided. For example, price information for 160 sites which are elementary or secondary schools was made available by Halton District School Board but not the Halton Catholic District School Board. Among MUSH user sites, 370 can access fibre (79%) and these are predominantly premises located within urban areas. All schools report FTTP (fibre to the premise).

MUSH user sites are served by seven Telecom Service Providers as follows:

Cogeco (n=233) serves 50% of users (primarily urban sites; esp. schools)

Rogers (n=76) fibre service 16% of users

Bell (n=71) serves 15% of users (copper, fibre, wireless)

Customer owned = 9.5% (n=44)

Standard Broadband and Telus serving GRCA sites.


10

Map 2: MUSH User Population at Site


11

Map 3: MUSH User Site Service Providers


12

Map 4: MUSH User Sites Access Type


13

Map 5: MUSH User Sites with Fibre


14

Map 6: P25 Radio and Amateur Radio Sites


15

Map 7: MUSH User Site Bandwidth


16

Map 8: MUSH User Site Monthly Fees


17

Residential/Farm Survey Findings

The total number of surveys received was 1175 with 1,037 records sufficiently complete for the data analysis. The data were time-stamped as of November 17, 2017.

The e-survey has 50 questions including optional questions and a section for final comments. Table 3 summarizes the main questions used in analysis.

Table 3: Residential/Farm Survey Variables

Type of Variable Variable

User and site of service Site Name Site Address Type of User Site (Household/ Farm/Home-Based Business)

Type and cost of service Service Provider Monthly Recurring Charge Type of Internet Connection (Transport Protocol)

Speed test data Average Download and Upload Speeds (Mbps) Differences to Provider Guaranteed Speeds (Down/Up) Latency Symmetry (Index of Down/Up Speeds)

Use Frequency Preferred Applications Importance of Use Use for Teleworking Use for Home-Based Business

Note: each record also includes the source of data and additional notes on some variables

As the above map illustrates, 32.5% of respondents indicate the premise is a home/primary

residence only, 28.7% are both a residence with a (non-farm) home-based business, 19.3% are a residence and farm and 1.3% report as “other” premises (unoccupied farm/ranch; unoccupied residence; seasonal residence). The types of home-based businesses are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4: Type of Business Owned/Operated at Premise

Type of business No. Respondent % of Total

Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 50 19.5

Construction 37 14.5

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 31 12.1

Administrative Support Services 27 10.5

Real State, Rental and Leasing 25 9.8

Information and Communication Technology 22 8.6


18

Type of business No. Respondent % of Total

Finance and Insurance 14 5.5

Health Care and Social Assistance 13 5.1

Retail 11 4.3

Educational Services 6 2.3

Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 6 2.3

Transportation and Warehousing 4 1.6

Food Service and Accommodation 3 1.2

Manufacturing 3 1.2

Tourism and Recreation 2 0.8

Utilities 2 0.8 Note: Sum of the percent column may exceed 100% as the individual percentage figures are rounded to a nearest whole number. Respondents may operate more than one type of business from the premise.

The top five service providers are Xplornet (30.1%), Bell (26.6%), Standard Broadband (17.9%), Cogeco (11.9%) and Rogers Communications Inc. (7.4%). Others include: Telus, TekSavvy and Ananac.

Figure 1: Residential/Farm User Service Providers


19

Map 8: Residential/Farm User Service Providers


20

Residential/farm users connect to the Internet mainly using fixed wireless, satellite or mobile wireless as indicated in Figures 2, 3 and 5.

Figure 2: Home/Residential Only Users Connection Type

Figure 3: Residence and (Non-Farm) Home-Based Business Connection Type


21

Figure 4: Residential and Farm User Connection Type

The monthly cost of Residential/Farm internet service in rural Halton is between $80-110/month. Initial set-up costs are wide ranging with one significant outlier of $5000 to a corrected average of approximately $250 (measured in 2017 dollars). Table 5 presents initial set-up and recurring monthly costs by residential/farm user type. Table 5: Costs and Speeds of Connection at Residential/Farm Premises

Speeds vary widely by hamlet or communities within rural Halton. In Figure 5, the index approximates symmetry as the weighted difference between download/upload speeds.


22

Figure 5: Download, Upload and Index Speed by Community


23

The findings indicate that majority of Halton’s rural communities experience speeds lower than the minimally acceptable speed target of the federal government’s 2015 target of 5 Mbps download.7 This is substantially lower than the current 2021 target of 50 Mbps download.8

Figure 6: Download and Upload Speeds by Provider

As presented in Figure 7 and 8, the percentage of respondents (40%) reporting that their

download speed is not within the range promised by their ISPs varies by provider with Xplornet customers relative less satisfied or certain about their guaranteed speeds. More than two-thirds of respondents (37%) did not know about if the speeds they receive are within their provider’s promised speed. Maps 9, 10, 11 and 12 visualize the speed test data for home-based businesses and farms.

Maps 13 and 14 present the monthly cost data for home-based business and farm users.

Nearly 71% of farms accesses less than 5.1 Mbps download speeds for costs that average $82.30 per month. For half of all home-based businesses access is characterized as less than 5.1 Mbps (download speed) at an average cost of $100 per month. In comparison to other areas of Southwestern Ontario (i.e. Niagara Region), monthly recurring costs for service at the residential/farm level, including home-based businesses in rural Halton is $20-25 higher (2017 dollars).

7 See: Telecom Regulatory Policy 2011-291 https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-291.htm

8 See: https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/internet/internet.htm


https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-291.htm

24

Figure 7: Download Speed by Provider Figure 8: Upload Speed by Provider


25

Map 9: Home-Business Download Speed Map 10: Home-Business Upload Speed


26

Map 11: Farm Download Speed Map 12: Farm Upload Speed


27

Map 13: Farm Monthly Service Fee Map 14: Home-Business Monthly Service Fee


28

According to the Residential/Farm survey respondents, 56% reported that at least one person telecommutes from the premise. The data were there applied to an economic model as follows: according to the Canadian Automobile Association (CAA)9, the cost (per km) of driving a mid-size vehicle with an average consumption of 8.34L/100km is $0.52. We further estimated the average hourly wage rate in Ontario as $22.02.10 The estimate of annual savings of broadband can be estimated by the avoided cost of travel (i.e. working at home via internet) by the following formula.

( )

( )

TELECOMMUTER’S SURPLUS (TS) CALCULATED AS FOLLOWS:

Using the formula noted above and the average monthly cost of internet for four dwelling

types, the following Table 6 and Table 7 summarizes our results by dwelling type and various number of days telecommuted.

Table 6. Annual Rural Halton Telecommuter Surplus for Various Telecommuting Days per Week by Dwelling Types for the First Telecommuter.

2* 3 4 5

Home and Primary Residence (n=816)

8336 13446 18360 23274

Business and Residence (n=126)

10035 15965 21679 27389

Farm and Residence (n=81)

10090 15985 21664 27342

Note: * 2, 3,4, and 5 represent the total number of days telecommuted per week. All numbers are measured in CAD.

9 http://caa.ca/car_costs/. The cost per km includes annual fuel, insurance, license and registration, and

depreciation and maintenance costs. 10

https://www.gov.mb.ca/jec/invest/busfacts/workforce/wages_all.html


http://caa.ca/car_costs/

29

Table 7. Annual Rural Halton Telecommuter Surplus for Various Telecommuting Days per Week by Dwelling Types for the Second Telecommuter.

2* 3 4 5

Home and Primary Residence (n=816)

7023 11496 15760 20024

Business and Residence (n=126)

7955.7 12781 17436 22085

Farm and Residence (n=81)

5852 9558 13094 15450

Note: * 2, 3,4, and 5 represent the total number of days telecommuted per week. All numbers are measured in CAD.

Respondents were definite about the benefits of increased internet capacity at the home-

based business.

Figure 9. Aggregate responses to the question "For the business owned/operated at this premise, do you see better or more business opportunities if you had increased internet capacity?"

3

22

35

56

213

0 50 100 150 200 250

OTHER (INDICATE)

NO, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HELP MY FARM/BUSINESS

I DON'T KNOW

YES, I THINK THERE MIGHT BE MORE OPPORTUNITIES

YES, DEFINITELY

Total Numbers

Re

spo

nse


30

Business Survey Findings

Respondents to the Business User survey indicate that businesses located in rural Halton vary by income group and size of firm.

Figure 10. Total Number of Businesses by Different Income Groups

Figure 11. Total Number of Business by Size

1

1

4

8

10

0 5 10 15

LARGE BUSINESS WITH 500 EMPLOYEES OR MORE

MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESS WITH 100 TO 499 EMPLOYEES

SMALL BUSINESS WITH 11 TO 99 EMPLOYEES

SELF-EMPLOYED/NO EMPLOYEES

MICRO-ENTERPRISE WITH 1 TO 10 EMPLOYEES

Total Numbers

Bu

sin

ess

Siz

e


31

Table 8 summarizes the average cost and speed of service at business user sites. The primary connection type is fixed wireless (Figure 12).

Table 8. Average Fixed Fees, Monthly Fees, Upload, Download and Latency Rates

Avg Initial Set-up Fee ($)*

Avg Monthly Fee ($)

Avg Download Speed (Mbps)

Avg Upload Speed (Mbps)

Avg Latency Rate (ms)

Avg Highest Charge **

Avg Lowest Charge ***

Costs and Quality of Internet

923 137 15.3 7.5 19.4 302 88.4

*Initial set-up fee is same as one-time fixed fee. **Average highest charge paid for exceeding data cap in the last previous 12 months. *** Average lowest charge paid for exceeding data cap in the last previous 12 months.

Figure 12. Aggregate Number of Internet Connection Type

1

3

3

3

8

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

TELEPHONE LINE- DSL (DIGITAL SUBSCRIBER LINE)

CABLE MODEM

MOBILE WIRELESS- USES THE MOBILE DATA NETWORK THROUGH AN ADAPTER, SUCH AS A

TURBO STICK

SATELLITE

FIXED WIRELESS (WIFI/WIMAX)

Total Numbers

Inte

rne

t C

on

ne

ctio

n T

ype


32

Figure 13. Total Number of Responses to The Question “Overall how satisfied are you with your current internet service for your business?”

The level of satisfaction with current service provision is presented in Figure 13, and the

distribution of results indicate that this question would benefit from further cross-tabulation with the income and size of business, as well as a larger dataset.

Observations

Taken together, the findings of the data collected through the MUSH user inventory and two online surveys (Residential/Farm Users and Business Users) are discussed in this section of the report.

MUSH User Connections

The findings of the MUSH user survey indicate that Halton has invested across diverse public sector sites (n=466) with 79% of its sites having access to fibre. The observations made on these data area are:

MUSH user sites in rural Halton are primarily located in urban and peri-urban areas.

With the exception of Brookville Elementary School, all rural sites have a relatively low user population at site with relatively limited connection types and low bandwidths.

1

2

2

2

2

5

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

NEITHER SATISFIED NOR DISSATISFIED

EXTREMELY DISSATISFIED

EXTREMELY SATISFIED

SLIGHTLY DISSATISFIED

SLIGHTLY SATISFIED

MODERATELY SATISFIED

MODERATELY DISSATISFIED

Total Numbers

Re

spo

nse


33

109 of the MUSH sites (23%) are located at waste or water management and pumping station sites. They have high bandwidth.

Monthly recurring costs at MUSH user sites are relatively uniform for the service provided. However, bandwidth varies by user type. Bandwidth is lowest among social and cultural premises including: social housing, care facilities (seniors; children), some community centres/arenas and libraries serving rural areas near Acton, Georgetown, and the outskirts of Oakville. The Museum at Kelso Park has low bandwidth but its location is a considered strategic for fibre requirements in northwest Halton (service to businesses and residential/farm users). Some health centres in Halton have relatively modest bandwidth which may implicate telehealth services. Relative higher bandwidth is observed at all public infrastructure sites (WWT; PS, etc.).

Analysis of some MUSH user sites would benefit from key informant interviews or field visits, including some fire/ambulance sites which may need higher bandwidth and the Brookville Elementary School; while price performance may be standardized, these sites require confirmation of quality of service.11

P25 and amateur radio sites are relevant rural broadband assets; most towers are owned by the Region while others are owned by providers.

Based on available data for the towers owned Standard Broadband and Rogers (n=30), fibre is available at 66% of these towers. Towers owned by Halton Region require confirmation. Information for towers owned by Xplornet, Cogeco and Bell was not made available.

Residential/Farm User Connections

The e-survey indicates that residential/farm users rarely have fibre optic access, Service availability is primarily through fixed wireless. Connectivity is generally characterized as ‘low’ or ‘low to moderate’ across rural Halton, compared, at least in a preliminary manner, to benchmarks provided by regionally available data (SWIFT Surveys 2017; WOWC 2013-14 feasibility study data). Moreover, residential/farm user responses indicate uncertainty in terms of the speeds providers are promising. The following are additional characteristics of the residential users across the region.

From the analysis of the two surveys, farms and home-based businesses have generally low availability of higher-speed, low symmetrical speeds capable of fibre optic connections. The service is “low to moderate” based on limited connection types, high index and download speeds below 5 Mbps to a high of below 10 Mbps.

When grouped and compared by community, rural Halton indicates speeds near or lower than the minimally acceptable speed targets established by the federal government. In 2015, the target was 5 megabits per second (Mbps) download and 1 Mbps upload for broadband Internet access service in Canada. At present, rural

11

Quality of service is defined here as a guaranteed level of performance for a certain data flow.


34

Halton users report averages of 10.7 Mbps download and 6.2 Mbps upload (home and primary residence users only).

Average speeds among farm users are considerably lower; farm users reported on average 6.1 Mbps download and 1.7 Mbps upload.

Taken together, the current service is substantially lower than the current 2021 target of 50 Mbps download and 10 Mbps upload.

Users in communities located in the north, northwest and western boundaries of Halton Region are at or below the 2015 minimally acceptable national download speed target (5 Mbps) and these speeds are insufficient to support existing or emerging applications for businesses and cloud-based online public services.

While most residential/farm users report a $87-100 monthly recurring cost for Internet access, this cost is above the averages for proximities such as Niagara Region; for this reason we report a relatively high cost of monthly service.

Residential/farm surveys and available TSP data indicate limited competitiveness within rural Halton which is likely to affect the quality of service and service scalability (e.g. lack of spectrum).

All rural Halton residential/farm users reported that at least one working adult at the premise has a job that requires) telecommuting. The telecommuter surplus is approximately $6,000 higher (for the first telecommuter) than regional comparisons. Cloud-based applications for telecommuters require fast and reliable broadband connections.

Business User Connections

The Rural Halton Broadband Study generated a small number of business user surveys and results are reported here are not representative. At this point of the study, they can be supplemented by the findings, reported above, for farm and home-based business users.

The following are apparent characteristics of the business user connectivity:

Business users lack access to broadband (fibre specifically) and primary use wireless connections;

Business users are not experiencing faster download or upload speeds in comparison to Residential/Farm (and Home-Based Business) users;

Businesses are reporting minimally higher monthly recurring costs of service;

There is an expectation, according to the survey, that the Internet is important, and increasingly so for their business; and,

Compared to other areas of the Southwestern Ontario, it is not observed that businesses subscribe to more than one provider (a strategy to ensure mobility/improved availability and reliability of their Internet access).


35

Concluding Remarks

The preliminary analysis of the survey data collected for the Rural Halton Broadband Study can be characterized as ‘low’ to ‘low to moderate’ connectivity among residential/farm and business users in the non-urban area. MUSH users are mainly located in urban areas of Halton Region. They access broadband with ‘moderate to high’ connectivity. Variation exists across these diverse public sector sites, and generalizing across the MUSH user sector is not possible. Some rural MUSH user sites require assessment of the current quality of service and consideration for building out fibre into rural Halton. The lack of rural broadband availability will limit applications available to MUSH users as well as users of e-government services, particularly with future, cloud based applications.

Results point to gaps in broadband availability in rural Halton, based on current responses to the residential/farm survey and business survey. The latter did not produce a representative sample and the methodology should be revisited. Further analysis of the reliability of service (specifically, quality of service) among micro, small and medium businesses is needed due to the small sample size.

To complete the current state of broadband needs analysis, additional data from TSPs are needed. Two of the top five residential/farm providers supplied relevant data.

Nevertheless, the current findings point to important implications regarding inclusive digital opportunities and economic development. Rural Halton has a significant telecommuter surplus with potential returns to the local economy. The need for improved broadband services is evident at the residential/farm level, including home-based businesses. Residential/farm users report relatively high monthly recurring costs of service at the premise (compared to Niagara Region, $20-25 higher), with some variation by area. In a final synthesis map, not included here due to proprietary data restrictions, we hypothesize on the areas of highest need based on population density, existing provider data and connection types/fibre connected towers.

In summary, we conclude that despite a need for reliable broadband service at some MUSH and residential/farm premises, some settlement areas of rural Halton are distinctly disadvantaged by limitations from the available connection type and current provider service.


36

Additional References

Dixon, C. & B. Leach. (1978). Sampling Methods for Geographical Research Catmog #17. Norwich: Geo-Abstracts pp 7-8.

SWIFT. (2013). Feasibility Study. Western Ontario Wardens Caucus. Redacted report accessed here: http://swiftnetwork.ca/WOWC02-Regional_Broadband_Feasibility_Study_07-12-13_REDACTED.pdf


http://swiftnetwork.ca/WOWC02-Regional_Broadband_Feasibility_Study_07-12-13_REDACTED.pdf

http://swiftnetwork.ca/WOWC02-Regional_Broadband_Feasibility_Study_07-12-13_REDACTED.pdf

needs analysis - current state of broadband in …sirepub.halton.ca/councildocs/pm/22/may 23...

Documents