1. 1 Project acronym: SIVA Project name: South East Europe improved virtual accessibility through joint initiatives facilitating the rollout of broadband networks Program: South East Europe Transnational Cooperation Program Document Information: Document title: Report on common policy approaches and suggested measures to integrate infrastructure mapping and availability prerequisites in network deployment and civil engineering construction works Date of Delivery: 18/06/2014 Work Package: WP5 Work Package Title: Exchange of experience, administrative and policy measures to improve the virtual accessibility of SEE areas Work Package Leader: ERDF PP1 - Molise Task: A531 Common policy processes and suggested measures to integrate infrastructure mapping and availability prerequisites in network deployment and civil engineering construction works Task Leader: PEDDM Distribution (R/P): Public Nature: Report History Chart Date Changes Cause of change Implemented by 18/06/2014 Initial Document N/A PEDDM Authorisation Disclaimer The information in this document is subject to change without notice. All rights reserved The document is proprietary of the SIVA Consortium. No copying or distributing, in any form or by any means, is allowed without the prior written agreement of the owner of the property rights. This document reflects only the authors view. The SEE Program is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained herein. No. Action Partner Date 1 Prepared PEDDM 18/06/2014

2. 2 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................3 1.1 General context.............................................................................................................................3 1.2 Siva project....................................................................................................................................4 1.3 Scope and aim of deliverable........................................................................................................5 2 Infrastructure mapping.........................................................................................................................6 2.1 Position Analysis ...........................................................................................................................6 2.2 Problem description......................................................................................................................6 2.2.1 Bridging the digital divide .....................................................................................................6 2.2.2 Cutting the rollout costs of broadband infrastructure .........................................................8 2.3 Political Background....................................................................................................................11 2.3.1 Digital Agenda.....................................................................................................................11 2.3.2 EU regulatory framework for electronic communications .................................................11 2.3.3 NGA recommendation ........................................................................................................12 2.3.4 Regulatory measures to promote competition and enhance the broadband investment environment........................................................................................................................................15 2.3.5 National broadband plans...................................................................................................16 2.4 Rationale for recommendations.................................................................................................18 3 Common policy processes and suggested measures..........................................................................25 3.1 Governance and strategic planning ............................................................................................25 3.2 Legal and regulatory framework.................................................................................................26 3.3 Approaches to finance................................................................................................................27 3.4 Human resources........................................................................................................................28

3. 3 1 Introduction 1.1 General context A large growth in the use and diversity of information and communications technologies (ICTs) has been witnessed worldwide the latest decade, with the rise of broadband being of particular note. Broadband has been a critical factor in fostering sustainable economic growth and is strategic to the goals of enhancing social cohesion and welfare. According to the Single Market Act II Communication1 , a 10% increase in broadband penetration results in a 1%-1.5% increase in the GDP annually and 1.5% labour productivity gains while broadband-induced innovation in companies creates employment and has the potential to generate 2 million extra jobs by 2020. However, the extent to which broadband infrastructure covers entire populations and regions is still not clear. While there is a clear increasing trend towards the adoption of broadband globally, a significant heterogeneous diffusion of broadband connections is quite evident among countries and within the same territories. This fact has led many national and transnational political institutions, regulatory bodies and independent agencies to place emphasis on facilitating access to broadband networks, especially in non-competitive areas in order to address the existing digital divide. In that context, the European Commission (EC) introduced the Digital Agenda for Europe (DAE)2 as one of the flagship initiatives for Europe 2020 aiming at providing full broadband coverage and sustainable economic and social benefits from a digital single market based on high-speed broadband services. In order to facilitate the implementation of these objectives, the Digital Agenda for Europe highlighted the importance for additional efforts to be made in the direction of overcoming the funding difficulties arisen in the context of broadband network deployment. One useful strategy for diminishing high-investment costs in broadband network deployment is to integrate infrastructure mapping and availability prerequisites in broadband network deployment and civil engineering construction works. Mapping provides a means by which to integrate, classify and present information about existing infrastructures in a territory where relevant data was not available or easily accessible from multiple heterogeneous sources and databases. Well designed maps of existing 1 COM (2012) 573 2 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/

4. 4 infrastructures are easy-to-interpret and constitute concentrated databases of information about the location, size, type, current use, technology used and ownership of the available infrastructures and facilities. This report illustrates the power and utility of a mapping strategy by focusing on its potential to bring down the set up cost through enhancing sharing and puts forward a series of common policy approaches and suggested measures to accelerate the establishment of a cadastre or inventory of existing infrastructures in South East Europe (SEE) areas. 1.2 Siva project Broadband is the fourth strategic pillar3 of the Digital Agenda for Europe (DAE). The connectivity and internet access it provides is a key enabler for a number of important services for citizens, businesses and the public sector. The ambitious and aggressive targets set in the Digital Agenda indicate the importance of broadband for the economy of the EU and citizen welfare. The SIVA project supports the goals of EU's strategy on digital technologies (namely the Digital Agenda for Europe) and aims to contribute to the improvement of virtual accessibility in South East Europe through the promotion of broadband access, supplementing physical accessibility and thus narrowing the digital gap in the SEE area. The ultimate objectives of the SIVA project can be summarized as follows: The closing of the digital gap through broadband service rollout in South East Europe areas, where market mechanisms fail to provide adequate level of services or competitive pricing in the short to mid-term. The promotion of public and private investments and partnership schemes, the collaboration of public authorities and scientific institutions in the faster development of broadband networks, the development of public e-services. 3 Pillar IV: Fast and ultra-fast Internet access https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/our-goals/pillar-iv-fast-and- ultra-fast-internet-access

5. 5 The maximisation of the social & economic potential of the internet and the spread of innovation, economic growth and improvements in daily life of citizens and businesses through the provision of fast internet capabilities. Exploring the potential of infrastructure mapping in the context of SIVA is of particular added value as progress in this aspect will have a direct impact on bringing down the set up cost through sharing and hence contribute to the improvement of virtual accessibility in South East Europe. 1.3 Scope and aim of deliverable This document is the deliverable of Activity 5.3.1 of the SIVA project, which constitutes the first part of activity 5.3 entitled Promotion of cost reduction strategies by facilitating the sharing of physical infrastructures for network deployment in South East Europe. In the context of the WP5, which works towards promoting the exchange of experiences, consultation processes and coordination of strategies and plans related to the development of broadband infrastructures, this report aims to put forward common policy approaches and suggested measures to integrate infrastructure mapping and availability prerequisites in network deployment and civil engineering construction works in SEE areas. Complementing the technical corresponding work carried out under activity 4.3, this deliverable provides specific policy recommendations and consensus-building approaches in order to set the basis for a comprehensive framework that will promote the development of an inventory or cadastre of telecommunication infrastructures which in turn will be integrated in broadband network rollout so as to facilitate infrastructure sharing and accelerate broadband investments. The report is outlined as follows: section 2 provides a policy analysis of the measure of infrastructure mapping describing the political background as well as identifying sources of values and challenges and section 3 concludes with the provision of policy recommendations and suggested measures that national authorities should embrace in order to integrate infrastructure mapping in broadband network deployment and enhance sharing.

6. 6 2 Infrastructure mapping 2.1 Position Analysis The ultimate objective of policy recommendations and suggested measures is to provide essential guidelines towards the promotion of cost reduction strategies through common policy approaches on facilitating the sharing of physical infrastructures for broadband network deployment in South East Europe. This section puts forward common policy approaches and suggested measures to integrate infrastructure mapping and availability prerequisites in network deployment and civil engineering construction works from a perspective of establishing an appropriate regulatory and policy framework that will promote the creation of a cadastre of telecom infrastructures which in turn will bring a direct impact on diminishing the set up cost through sharing and accelerate broadband deployment investments. 2.2 Problem description 2.2.1 Bridging the digital divide Despite the acceleration of broadband penetration worldwide, some areas (rural and remote area in most) have remained underserved for broadband. This can be attributed to the socioeconomic inequalities, in terms of income, literacy, age, and/or gender and/or to the existence of geographically remote and/or isolated territories, where the investments in broadband networks do not seem affordable and commercial business plans remain unfavourable. As a consequence, the population of such areas cannot enjoy the benefits associated with broadband in terms of economic growth and social welfare while a crucial divide among population and social groups within the same territory is created. The digital divide is a phenomenon defined as the gap between individuals, businesses, households and geographic territories at different social-economic levels as regards their opportunities to have access to broadband services (OECD, 2001)4 . The accessibility of individuals and businesses to broadband solutions and services has been a topic of particular interest. Evidence shows that the ability of 4 OECD (2001), Understanding the digital divide.

7. 7 individuals and businesses to take advantage of the broadband services varies substantially across the EU as well as between the EU as a whole and South East Europe as an independent area of particular interest. According to the SEE Transnational Cooperation Programme, a serious digital gap is quite evident in terms of telecommunication services and infrastructures between the EU and SEE. SEE demonstrates on average a number of 154 internet users per 1000 people while the EU figure is more than double. In the context of SEE area, a heterogeneous diffusion of broadband connections is also evident among countries of South East Europe as well as between urban and rural areas within the same territories. As regards the SIVA countries the problem of low broadband coverage and great disparities becomes significantly intense for the under-accession SIVA countries. While for EU countries the rates of broadband coverage is quite high and the disparities appear to be limited, for under-accession countries the rates are significantly lower while the diffusion within country appears extremely heterogeneous. As far as the Next Generation Access services are concerned, the deployment of fiber networks for NGA is still in progress in the SIVA countries. While some countries have already created significant portions of the necessary infrastructures, others are now beginning the deployment. A critical aspect of promoting wider broadband use and closing the digital divide is ensuring that the infrastructure is affordable. Lower cost of broadband infrastructure leads to affordable pricing and subsequent take-up of services. Affordable pricing in turn encourages the critical mass of users, as well as the services and applications that they might use. Due to the nature of broadband though, the deployment of infrastructure is both encouraged and at the same time prohibited by the existing network externalities; without the creation of broadband networks there will be no critical mass of users and without the users, the economic and social benefits of broadband will not be delivered. The development of broadband networks requires sufficient investments that in many cases cannot be justified by the existing or even the potential demand. Hence, market by itself often fails to ensure the affordability of broadband infrastructure deployment in certain territories. These territories run the risk of enlarging the digital divide and become second class markets in the global broadband and competitiveness order.

8. 8 2.2.2 Cutting the rollout costs of broadband infrastructure Broadband network rollout processes comprise four main stages: a) commercial and technical planning; b) applying for rights of way and other permits; c) civil engineering works; and d) connecting end users. According to estimations of cost distribution per different broadband infrastructure layer, the dominant part in overall network deployment costs constitute the civil engineering costs or else passive infrastructure elements which are estimated as high as 80% of the total cost having inter alias a payback period of 15 years. That makes operators to increasingly investigate opportunities to diminish broadband network deployment costs in order to invest in the rollout of broadband networks. Recognising the need and importance of policies and action plans to provide better broadband coverage and high-speed broadband services, the EU highlights the importance of policies and measures to be adopted in order to achieve quickly the objectives set in the Digital Agenda for Europe by inter alias addressing the investment challenge of high-speed broadband infrastructure which is one of the most critical preventing factors tackling and delaying the implementation of the declared objectives. The deployment of broadband networks is by default an extremely capital intensive initiative with a high sunk cost that in most business cases are not justified by the expected revenues, representing thus a high risk investment. These costs can be attributed to several barriers identified in both the supply and demand side of the rollout process. - On the demand-side, the main barriers are the limited demand for broadband services as compared to conventional internet connections and the relatively high cost of terminals required for internet access. That becomes more apparent in countries with low household computer ownership and lack of established digital services to take full advantage of broadband (e-health, e-government). Hence, the incentive for citizens to pay for high speed internet connections is very low. - On the supply side, the development of infrastructure in areas currently underserved (i.e. rural and scarcely populated areas) is considered very expensive due to the size of the area that must be covered. The return-on-investment expectations remain low due to the small population and the number of customers to be served. Furthermore, high deployment costs can be attributed to inefficiencies related to the utilisation of existing physical infrastructures such as conduits,

9. 9 manholes, ducts, antenna installations etc.; barriers regarding to the co-ordination of civil engineering works as well as bureaucratic administrative procedures and bottlenecks related to in-building networks deployment. Table 2 summarizes the results of a survey conducted in the context of the SIVA project regarding the barriers for further deployment of broadband infrastructure as reported by the project partners. These barriers verify the aforementioned assumptions and argumentation for the countries of the SIVA consortium. More particularly, the survey results verify that the high network deployment cost and the lack of existing infrastructure are considerable barriers for the development of broadband services in most of the SIVA countries. Table 1: Major barriers for the deployment of broadband services in the SIVA countries, Source: SIVA survey on broadband penetration in SEE (2013) Barriers5 AT BG FYROM GR IT ME SI Supply-side Regulatory issues in general X Lack of cooperation with local governments, municipalities X X X Lack of exact and concrete National Strategy X Access to spectrum Lack of existing infrastructure X X X X X Network deployment capital cost issues X X X X Complex procedure (bureaucracy, etc.) Lack of permits on local level Lack of suitably skilled people for network construction, maintenance, operation and training X Demand-side High cost for the subscriber either in terms of up front or monthly charges for access X X Not enough demand to justify infrastructure cost X X X High cost of user terminals X X X X 5 This table depicts the positive answers of respondents, the barriers that were positively identified as barriers to broadband access deployment

10. 10 Actions and measures targeting at diminishing the costs and barriers in carrying out new civil engineering works should contribute to ensure a fast and extensive deployment of high speed broadband networks while maintaining effective competition. A great number of studies suggest that substantial cost savings in the deployment of high-speed broadband networks could be achieved by a more intensive use of existing infrastructures. Such savings and efficiency gains can be delivered both for fixed and wireless networks by increasing the use of existing passive infrastructures such as ducts, conduits, masts etc and infrastructures of utility companies (e.g. water, transport, energy, sewerage) as well as raising transparency on the availability of existing infrastructures (which infrastructures exist, the location, owner details etc). That is why infrastructure sharing requires transparent, easily accessible and up-to-date information on existing infrastructures and details about their availability, their exact location, their ownership and the way they can be accessed. Such a mapping will be beneficial not only for facilitating infrastructure sharing but also for other construction works and for environmental purposes. Despite the potential benefits of such a measure, its adoption seems to lag behind for the countries of South East Europe. In that context, the SIVA project sets forward common policy approaches and suggested measures to promote the establishment of an inventory of telecom infrastructures as well as the integration of infrastructure mapping and availability prerequisites in network deployment and civil engineering construction works.

11. 11 2.3 Political Background 2.3.1 Digital Agenda Recognising the importance of public interventions in the development of the electronic communications market, the European Union has undertaken the promotion of a series of measures in order to frame the European broadband policy. To this end, the European Commission has introduced the Digital Agenda for Europe as one of its flagship initiatives for Europe 2020 explicitly aiming to provide all citizens with the capability to access fast internet services by 2013 and ultra-fast internet by 2020. In that context, European authorities have been attempting to advance broadband diffusion and eliminate the digital gap (especially through specific actions of the fourth pillar of DAE) by: a) Enhancing market competition, b) Establishing a consensus on national broadband policies, c) Improving access to networks and radio spectrum, d) Providing a number of funding opportunities and financial aid to (public and private) investors, and e) Reinforcing the knowledge about the benefits of broadband services. National authorities of the Member States have the fundamental role to contextualize the actions in their specific reality, adjust their national legislation and policy frameworks to this central EU strategy, take action and comply with the directives and recommendations of the European Commission. 2.3.2 EU regulatory framework for electronic communications The adoption of the EU electronic communications reform package6 in November 2009 paved the way towards strengthening the European electronic communications market by revising rules to ensure more effective competition and better rights for consumers. 6 Regulatory framework for electronic communications in the European Union https://ec.europa.eu/digital- agenda/sites/digital- agenda/files/Copy%20of%20Regulatory%20Framework%20for%20Electonic%20Communications%202013%20NO %20CROPS.pdf

12. 12 Much has been accomplished already: the market has become more competitive, generating investment, innovation and growth in all 27 EU Member States. New communication services have emerged and EU citizens now benefit from lower prices, better quality and increased transparency. However, the common rules for the regulation of electronic communications networks and services are being implemented in the Member States with different degrees of effectiveness. As a result, many operators and citizens still perceive Europe as being a patchwork of different regulatory regimes. More efforts are therefore still needed to move towards a single market for electronic communications. The revised EU framework constitutes the basis for a supportive and consistent regulatory environment targeting remaining challenges. They reinforce competition while enhancing incentives to invest. New provisions on freeing radio spectrum will improve the availability of new wireless services, including wireless broadband, at reasonable costs. The new body of European regulators (BEREC) will improve cooperation between national regulators and the European Commission. This will lead to the creation of a common "regulatory culture", to more consistency, and to a real single market for electronic communications networks and services. 2.3.3 NGA recommendation The regulation of access to Next Generation Access Networks (NGA) constitutes a crucial step towards achieving the goal of the Digital Agenda. This Recommendation therefore defines a common regulatory approach as regards access to the new very fast broadband networks using optical fibre, to offer a balance between encouraging investment and maintaining competition. 7 2.3.3.1 Cost reduction for deploying broadband networks Deployment of high-speed broadband networks is subject to various inefficiencies and bottlenecks which lead to high costs for undertakings wishing to deploy networks, especially in rural areas. The 7 Next Generation Access Networks (NGA), http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_society/strategies/si0018_en.htm

13. 13 dominant cost (up to 80%) in deploying new networks is linked to civil engineering works. Therefore it is necessary to adopt measures tackling these inefficiencies and to bring down the civil engineering costs in order to incentivise infrastructure rollout. The Commission intends to work on the adoption of the regulation8 aimed at tackling: 1. Inefficiencies or bottlenecks concerning the use of existing physical infrastructure (such as, for example, ducts, conduits, manholes, cabinets, poles, masts, antennae, towers and other supporting constructions); 2. Bottlenecks related to co-deployment; 3. Inefficiencies regarding administrative permit granting; and 4. Bottlenecks concerning in-building deployment. In practical terms, thanks to the regulation the owners of all infrastructures, e.g. electricity, gas, water, sewage, suitable to host electronic communications network elements will need to coordinate their works. Local authorities will need to issue fewer permits. The implementation of proposed measures is expected to incentivise rollout and facilitate investments by decreasing the associated costs by up to 30 %. It is estimated that the total amount to be saved on deployment could reach over 60 billion. Towards this direction, the measure of infrastructure mapping aims at increasing efficiency in the use of existing infrastructures and at reducing costs and obstacles in carrying out new civil engineering works. Even if the regulation does neither require Member States to undertake such a mapping exercise nor require the data to be aggregated or stored at a point of single contact, it imposes Member States to 'make available' the information collected by public sector bodies at a single information point, via hyperlinks to other locations. Moreover, the proposal does not impose any general obligation of pre- notification of planned civil works. In that case, it rather enables electronic communications providers to require this information from network providers, in view of deploying high-speed electronic communications networks. 8 Digital Agenda for Europe, Action 117: Reduction of the cost of deploying high speed electronic communication networks http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/pillar-iv-fast-and-ultra-fast-internet-access/action-117-reduction- cost-deploying-high-speed

14. 14 2.3.3.2 Universal Service Directive The European Union intends to ensure the availability of a minimum set of high-quality services that are available to all users at an affordable price, without distortion of competition. It therefore lays down obligations with regard to the provision of certain mandatory services, such as the retail provision of leased lines. It also establishes end-users' rights and the corresponding obligations of undertakings that provide publicly available electronic communications networks and services. Directive 2002/22/EC9 10 defines universal service as the minimum set of services of specified quality to which all end-users have access, at an affordable price in the light of specific national conditions, without distorting competition. Representative provisions of the Directive follow. Availability of the universal service Member States must ensure that the electronic communications services detailed in the Directive are made available to all users in their territory, regardless of their geographical location, at a specified quality level and an affordable price. Provision of access at a fixed location and telephone services A fundamental requirement of universal service is to provide users on request with a connection to the public telephone network at a fixed location and at an affordable price. The connection provided shall enable end-users to take charge of voice communications, facsimile communications and data communications, at data rates that are sufficient to permit functional Internet access, the provision of which may be restricted by Member States to the end-user's primary residence. There should be no constraints on the technical means by which the connection is provided. Affordability of tariffs The Member States shall ensure that consumers with low incomes have access to special tariff arrangements or are given special assistance to enable them to have access to the network and to use it. The special tariffs must either be provided by the designated undertaking, or already be available on the 9 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2002:108:0051:0051:EN:PDF 10 http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_society/legislative_framework/l24108h_en.htm

15. 15 market. Furthermore, the Member States may require undertakings which have universal service obligations to comply with price caps or to apply common tariffs, including geographical averaging, throughout the national territory. Quality of service The national regulatory authorities must set performance targets for undertakings with universal service obligations and monitor compliance with these targets by designated undertakings. Financing of universal service obligations In order to compensate for the net costs to which the provision of universal service might give rise, compensation mechanisms for operators with universal service obligations may be provided for. This may involve the introduction of a mechanism to compensate from public funds and/or a mechanism to share costs between providers of electronic communications networks and services. 2.3.4 Regulatory measures to promote competition and enhance the broadband investment environment On 12 July 2012 Neelie Kroes, the European Commission Vice-President and European Commissioner for Digital Agenda, announced a new policy package11 to create the legal predictability that investors are asking for against the current overall economic situation in Europe and the substantial roll-out costs of high speed internet. The Commission is preparing a Recommendation on consistent non-discrimination obligations and costing methodologies to promote competition and enhance the broadband investment environment. The EU Recommendation on consistent non-discrimination obligations and costing methodologies which implements this policy has been published at the end of 2012. There is no evidence that it has been already incorporated in national legislations. It does have the approval of BEREC though, the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications which represent the national regulatory authorities. 11 Digital Agenda for Europe, Actions 113 and 114: Regulatory measures to promote competition and enhance the broadband investment environment, http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/pillar-iv-fast-and-ultra-fast-internet- access/actions-113-and-114-regulatory-measures-promote

16. 16 2.3.5 National broadband plans The Commission highlighted the importance of all Member States deploying an operational broadband plan with defined national targets aligned on European broadband targets, as well as a balanced set of policy measures to incentivise investment in fast and ultra-fast internet. The Digital Agenda for Europe (DAE) called on all Member States to devise and make operational by 2012 national broadband plans which meet the level of ambition of the broadband targets set out in Europe 2020. Today, almost all Member States have developed a national broadband strategy setting explicit broadband targets and timelines. However, there are significant variations in the targets set by each Member State as a result of the different starting points. Most of them focus on achieving full coverage for basic levels of broadband (i.e. adequate for email, routine surfing and administrative services) setting a corresponding quantitative target. Very few of them set clear operational measures to achieve: Real competition among broadband providers that would lead to affordable prices for consumers; and The roll-out of high-speed internet, both in terms of timing and funding. As regards the next generation access, approaches to ultra-fast networks vary more widely than basic broadband targets. Member States can be clustered into different groups of countries: countries, whose primary objective is the basic broadband coverage, those countries with full coverage of basic broadband which seek a gradual upgrade to speeds between 30 and 100 Mbps and those countries with highly-developed networks which target at the full transition to NGA. Developing comprehensive national broadband strategies will stimulate investment in fast internet access beyond current market levels. Ultra-fast internet will enable new services based on higher bandwidth needs to become available on a daily basis.

17. 17 In March 2012, the Commission presented a Staff Working Document12 on national broadband plans. This summarised that state of play and provides a reference point to assist and co-ordinate national planning. 12 http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=7948

18. 18 2.4 Rationale for recommendations Measures to accelerate investment is a key to bridging the gap between the amount that telecom operators, or other interested parties, plan to invest in network infrastructure deployment and the investments required for achieving the DAE broadband targets and closing the digital divide. The economic rationale behind actions to facilitate investment is to diminish investment costs. From the perspective of private investors, this will bring about an increased number of sustainable broadband projects, while simultaneously optimising the use of existing economic resources. In that context, the reuse of existing physical infrastructures can diminish the capital investments costs for broadband network deployment. It is estimated that the construction of passive infrastructure accounts for around 80% of total fixed investment costs and reduction efforts should focus on this major cost driver. Civil engineering costs (i.e. trenching or digging) can be significantly reduced through a proper coordination by national, regional and local authorities, using town planning rules and remedies mandating access to passive infrastructures. Wireless infrastructure costs can similarly be reduced by such measures. Diminishing this cost removes an important barrier and brings a significant and positive impact on the economic viability of the broadband network deployments. As regards sharing, the mandate access to physical infrastructures refers to the obligation of the holders of the rights to install facilities on, over, or under public or private property and to open up such infrastructures for access to interested operators under reasonable and non-discriminatory conditions. Infrastructure sharing means exploiting infrastructure built for other purposes, such as laying fibre in sewers, ducts for electric cabling or for road traffic surveillance, attaching fibre to the rails of railway lines or using rooftops of public buildings or masts and poles of electricity distribution networks for the installation of aerials. Such a measure will result in avoiding the costly and lengthy broadband infrastructure construction process as it will promote the use of already or simultaneously deployed infrastructure in order to roll out their networks cheaper and faster. However, infrastructure sharing faces significant bottlenecks and barriers that tackle the efficient use of existing infrastructure and prevent the broadband rollout in SEE areas. Table 2 summarises the main barriers associated with the sharing of infrastructures and sets forward relevant remedies.

19. 19 Table 2: Bottlenecks and barriers to more efficient use of existing infrastructure Bottleneck / Barrier Remedy 1. Limited transparency concerning the available existing physical infrastructure suitable for broadband network deployment Obligation to provide information and details about existing physical infrastructures suitable for broadband network deployment. Mechanisms and tools to ensure availability of such infrastructure and facilitate access to relevant information 2. Lack of legal and regulatory basis / institutional framework Establishment of a institutional framework that will regulate the process of infrastructure sharing by determining the scope of entities to be obliged to share infrastructure and the scope of infrastructure to be mandated for sharing 3. Commercial issues Introduction of a pricing scheme that will provide the right incentives for incumbents to allow access to their infrastructures and stimulate business interest for investments in broadband rollout 4. Technical infeasibility List of reasons for refusal of sharing as well as definition of technical infeasibility 5. Administrative issues Limit the complexity of the planning-to-implementation process and configure the planning process A critical first step in supporting infrastructure sharing is to set up a civil infrastructure mapping, that is, a register of existing civil infrastructure which can be used in broadband network roll-out. Development of cadastres or inventories containing information about the existing infrastructures as well as details about the location, the size, the infrastructure type, the current use and the ownership seems a critical measure to address the issue of limited transparency as regards the suitability and availability of infrastructures for broadband deployment. Mapping of existing telecom infrastructures refers to the detailed, geo-referenced and structures gathering, processing and visualisation of telecommunication infrastructure (points and lines of TC- infrastructure as well as of relevant physical infrastructures such as ducts, buildings, inspection chambers masts, manholes and cabinets) for the purposes of the accommodation, setting up and removal, and maintenance of electronic communications transmission systems, equipment and resources.

20. 20 Mapping telecom infrastructures in an inventory or cadastre will enable to: a) Create insights into the current state of broadband availability by conducting spatial analysis on amount, length and nature of infrastructures in an area or region. Relevant data can be used to determine the broadband service availability; b) Coordinate broadband deployment measures and projects resulting in the allocation of funds to areas without sufficient infrastructure; and c) Reduce investment costs of broadband deployment by publishing existing infrastructure that can be utilised for further broadband deployment. A centralised mapping of both active and passive physical infrastructures is also associated with a series of financial implications which could result in a great reduction of the broadband deployment costs in SEE countries. The benefits of the creation of a cadastre of telecommunications can be summarized as follows: 1. A detailed mapping of infrastructures can be used as an instrument for strategic planning and policy. More particularly, a cadastre of infrastructures can be a strategic device for planning and implementing urban and regional development, plotting military strategy as regards telecom self-efficiency and legally contesting land ownership and use. Maps can be employed in the national broadband plans in monitoring and addressing inequalities, the so-called digital divide between areas and regions within the same territory, providing clear directions where broadband deployment investments should be accelerated. In other words, an accurate mapping of areas served by next generation networks (NGN) will enable authorities to identify the disadvantaged areas and take measures to reduce the Digital Divide. 2. The major benefit of implementing a centralized mapping of existing physical infrastructures is that such a measure can act as an enabler of passive infrastructure sharing. That would definitely lead to substantially lower deployment costs as well as to increased broadband and NGA coverage. The knowledge of the current and future network configuration will enable potential operators as well as public authorities to design their broadband deployment investments in such a way so as to optimize the use of resources.

21. 21 3. Engineers will reduce the risk of redesigns and claims by knowing the location of all infrastructures before the beginning of design. Alike, investors will minimise the risk of costly damages and change orders when they have been given all of the infrastructure information they need to complete the evaluation of the broadband network deployment project while contractors will stay on schedule and under budget on projects where infrastructure mapping is provided. 4. The cadastre of telecommunications appears to have the potential of diminishing the bureaucratic and administrative barriers related to the planning process. The creation of a single information point containing all relevant network information (such as the location, the size, the type of infrastructure, the current use as well as the owner and legal details) will have a positive impact on the administrative burdens faced by operators and infrastructure providers when planning civil engineering works. It will enable new public sector networks and new network operators to reduce the amount of time spent collecting and analyzing data before deciding on an installation path. 5. Experience suggests that such a cadastre will result in less damage caused to existing infrastructures, such as cables and pipelines, when civil works are in progress. Operators will know where the infrastructure is located and the likelihood of damages during digging or trenching will be limited. The benefits of adopting a central mapping of existing infrastructures for SEE countries are also illustrated in various similar projects implemented in other European countries. In the Flanders region of Belgium, AGIV13 has developed a database called KLIP that provides information about all passive infrastructure in the region as well as details about the owners and the availability of their infrastructures. The system has managed to significantly enhance infrastructure sharing, diminish deployment costs and increase broadband coverage. AGIV estimates that the system saves the authorities and the operators EUR29.5 million14 per year in administrative and planning expenses while the incidents of existing infrastructure being damaged declined annually by 5%. Similarly, Portugals CIS portal is a centralized infrastructure cadastre which uses red, amber and green lights to indicate spare capacity in the incumbents ducts. All organizations (local authorities, utility companies and telecom 13 Agentscahp voor Geografische Informatie Vlaanderen (www.agiv.be) 14 http://www.agiv.be/gis/organisatie/?artid=587

22. 22 companies) that may own relevant infrastructures are obliged to provide and regularly update information concerning their infrastructures. The system has boosted the sharing of the existing facilities, yielding a cost reduction in infrastructure deployment of 20%-30%. Table 3 summarises best practices in passive infrastructure mapping in selected European countries. Table 3: Examples of Passive Infrastructure Mapping (Source: European Commission, 201215 and World Bank, 201416) Country Description Germany In 2009, the German Federal Network Agency introduced the Infrastrukturatlas programme to map the existing infrastructure that can be utilised for NGA network deployment. The atlas covered wired and wireless telecom infrastructure, transport networks and other infrastructures such as utilities, antenna sites, windmills etc while the data was collected from the infrastructure owners themselves. Belgium In 2009, the Geographic Information System (GIS) framework, which was a geographical database of environmental and human factors covering the Flanders region of Belgium, was updated with the spatial infrastructure data programme. This consisted of three decrees one of which was a portal of cables and conduits (KLIP). United Kingdom The National Joint Utilities Group (NJUG) is a UK organisation that aims to promote best practice for public street civil works. One initiative of the NJUG is to map existing underground assets to create an infrastructure atlas for the UK. In addition to the estimated 1 million kilometres of gas and water mains and sewers, and 500 000 kilometres of electricity cables, NJUG believes there are 2 million kilometres of telecoms cabling, all of which it wishes to map. 15 European Commission (2012), Support for the preparation of an impact assessment to accompany an EU initiative on reducing the costs of highspeed broadband infrastructure deployment. 16 Gelvanovska et al., (2014), Broadband Networks in the Middle East and North Africa - Accelerating High-Speed Internet Access, World Bank.

23. 23 Country Description Netherlands The Kadaster (Land Registry) is responsible for maintaining the register of cables and infrastructure in the Netherlands, using the KLIC portal. Although not a map as such, this database contains the locations of active infrastructure. Any organisation that wishes to undertake excavation work is mandated by law to check the system to see which operators are active in the area in question. Poland The Information Broadband Infrastructure System (SIIS) was launched by the office of electronic telecommunications to promote the development of broadband networks. Polish operators are mandated to provide detailed information about the entire deployed telecom infrastructure in the system. The inventory maps the location of telecom hubs, transmission systems, collocation buildings, points of contact between public telecom networks as well as the route of backbone and distribution telecom networks. Portugal ANACOM, the Portuguese NRA, decided in 2009 to implement the Centralized Information System (CIS), a central infrastructure atlas aimed at reducing the cost of deploying new electronic communications equipment. Providing and regularly updating information is mandatory for all organizations that own or operate infrastructure suitable for accommodating electronic communication infrastructure (including roads, railways, water, and gas infrastructure). Challenges Infrastructure mapping is a complex undertaking with several difficulties and challenges that need to be overcome. The issues and challenges associated with the creation of a cadastre of existing infrastructures can be summarised as follows: - A detailed mapping of infrastructure requires synergies and compatibility with other existing cadastres such as the cadastre of land and buildings and the cadastre of roads. In that context, administrative burdens must be overcome allowing the provision of the data and enabling rapid cooperation with relevant authorities.

24. 24 - Data acquisition is of critical importance. Possible solutions are to collect data via ground surveys that would be prohibitively expensive or to be acquired by authorities, telecommunications companies, infrastructure owners, operators and utility companies. However the high resolution infrastructure data related to sensitive company details will require high confidentiality requirements while the low willingness of companies to supply data will require legal provisions and obligations. In that context, it seems crucial to determine how much information is already known and whether there are other overlapping mapping projects in place - Issues related to accessibility and user rights to data are considered of high importance. The question arisen is who is allowed to request information from the cadastre. In that context, high resolution infrastructure data will require control mechanisms such as restricted access to data, contractual agreements with data users, restriction of access to a dedicated area etc. - Legal issues related to the regulatory framework surrounding the procedure of gathering the information of existing infrastructures including the conduct of ground surveys and the obligation of telecommunication companies and owners of infrastructures to provide details about the location, the size, the infrastructure type, the current use and the ownership of their facilities. - Given the general economic climate in SEE that does not encourage the implementation of public investments, a critical financial challenge arises prompting national authorities to investigate alternative funding schemes for setting forward the creation of the cadastre.

25. 25 3 Common policy processes and suggested measures The SIVA Consortium wishes to integrate infrastructure mapping and availability prerequisites in network deployment and civil engineering construction works so as to bring down the set up cost through sharing and requests further actions for the accomplishment of this effort. Thus, this section provides some general principles that policy makers and national authorities of the SEE area should embrace in their efforts to support and promote the mapping of existing infrastructures. The common policy processes and suggested measures have been grouped under four categories that emphasize the approach that should be embraced towards the integration of infrastructure mapping in broadband deployment: a) governance and strategic planning; b) legal and regulatory framework; c) approaches to finance; and d) human resources. 3.1 Governance and strategic planning - Commence due diligence and develop a comprehensive feasibility study so as to lay the ground for a roadmap towards the establishment of the cadastre of existing infrastructures. The feasibility study should evaluate and analyse the potential of the construction of the cadastre and be based on extensive investigation and research to support the process of decision making. - Step up efforts to limit the length and the complexity of the planning-to-implementation process. Determine procedures, obtain approvals and secure rights of way at an initial stage. - Configure the planning process in order to confront the delays that may arise because of the complexity of the administrative processes, the bureaucracy as well as the great number of various levels of government and public bodies involved in the implementation of the measure. Possible policy solutions would be to a) simplify such arrangements by redistributing decision- making powers among different players of public administration and b) accelerate the procedures by creating a cross-functional team to identify relevant stakeholders and ensure the involvement and to develop synergies with other existing cadastres. - Ensure the involvement of a broader range of stakeholders in the process of needs assessment, prioritisation, design, planning and delivery of the cadastre. Broadband infrastructures embody both public and private implications, with the latter moving increasingly to the fore as the role of the private sector in infrastructure provision expands. What is more, in the wake of shifting

26. 26 patterns of urban and rural settlement, infrastructure projects are affecting many more assets, especially in already densely inhabited residential areas. - Use a two-phase approach to create the cadastre of telecom infrastructures. The first stage should contain the gathering of information related to existing passive infrastructures and broadband facilities by requesting the information from the owners while in the second phase details about the shareability of each duct will be collected by conducting a ground survey. The advantage of the first approach is that infrastructure mapping can be implemented fairly quickly and at reasonable cost while the second one requires to survey areas which is very costly. In such a case, national authorities should conduct a cost-benefit analysis to determine the financial implications of these approaches as well as their feasibility. - Set forward a common management system for infrastructure data. Develop synergies with other cadastres so as to create a harmonised centralised data management platform addressing inter alia the unnecessary procuring and processing of data from multiple heterogeneous sources. - Commit resources to spread knowledge among elected representatives about the potential and the benefits associated with the mapping of infrastructures in terms of economic growth and social welfare with the aim to mobilise them and accelerate the decision making process. - Communicate the opportunities arisen with the development of the cadastre of existing infrastructures in terms of infrastructure sharing to stakeholders and interested parties. - - Strengthen international co-operation to improve the efficiency and reliability of the measure and encourage the exchange of best practices at the national/regional/local level. 3.2 Legal and regulatory framework - Examine and determine the legal and regulatory framework conditions with a view to encouraging the provision and access to the sensitive infrastructure data. High resolution infrastructure data and sensitive company information pose high confidentiality requirements. As a result, special care should be given to defining what type of data will be provisioned, how information will be acquired and maintained, when and under what circumstances confidentiality will be maintained and any reasonably anticipated risk associated with the inappropriate disclosure of data.

27. 27 - Develop specific control mechanisms dealing with issues of access to high resolution data. Such control mechanisms could be contractual agreements with data users; involvement of data suppliers and contractual agreements for data use; restricted access to data; restriction of access to a dedicated area and generalisation of information. - Adopt provisions that oblige owners of physical infrastructures, who may be unwilling to participate, to supply the necessary infrastructure details (location, size, infrastructure type, current use, technology used and ownership) in the cadastre for the telecom infrastructures. Create and establish necessary enforcement tools to ensure compliance and define penalties for non-compliance. 3.3 Approaches to finance - Explore the funding possibilities offered by the EU. As the allocation of public resources may be hampered by strict national budgets and austerity policies, national authorities should investigate additional financing in the funding opportunities provided by the EU and more especially in the context of financial instruments for broadband support (e.g. EU Structural Funds, Connecting Europe Facility etc.). Co-financing through state aid and grant from the EU could possibly aid to overcome the resistances caused by the limited financial resources and hence, accelerate the procedures towards the establishment of the cadastre. The acceleration of the mechanism of funding as well as the speeding up of the relevant bureaucratic procedures is considered critical in order to avoid unnecessary delays. - Encourage public-private partnerships as a mean for raising additional financing or as an alternative funding scheme. This is why the private sector is involved in the provision and operation of physical infrastructure and broadband facilities. Apart from providing information in cases where private companies own existing passive infrastructures, the private sector could contribute to the financing of such a measure aiming at utilising the investment opportunities that the mapping and sharing of infrastructures will bring to the forefront.

28. 28 3.4 Human resources - Commit resources to build up technical knowledge among public officers on issues related to the procedures of the cadastre of existing infrastructures. The creation of the cadastre will require staff with significant expertise in the field to ensure that the final outcome will meet the needs and requirements of national authorities. Hence, apart from the engagement of external experts, staff of all government levels and public bodies involved in the procedure of mapping need to be trained on the necessary concepts and details in order to facilitate the process of collecting the necessary details from the owners, conducting the ground survey and incorporating evidence into the system.