Broadband between the lines: Alberta library policies in provincial broadband development

Author: Dana Louise Cramer

Home university: Department of Communication, Media and Film, University of Calgary

Education level: Master of Arts Candidate - Communication and Media Studies

Abstract

This article reviews high quality of service fibre broadband infrastructure in the province of Alberta. This article finds that province-wide strategies for internet delivery infrastructure are beneficial to connecting both rural and urban end users, thereby providing equality for internet access. This research reveals how public services such as libraries and their corresponding policies can aid in the development of provincial internet delivery infrastructure projects as found with the case study of Alberta SuperNet. These policies which lead to large-scale broadband infrastructure projects, however, may not result in large market penetration with numerous households benefitting, however, does find the ways in which large telecommunications infrastructure projects allow other technologies to build on this existing backbone infrastructure.

Keywords: broadband; telecommunications infrastructure studies; Alberta SuperNet; wireless internet infrastructure; Alberta Libraries Act; Alberta Libraries Regulation; last mile connectivity

List of Abbreviations

CRTC

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

DSL

Digital Subscriber Line

FWA

Fixed Wireless Access

GB

Gigabytes

Gbps

Gigabits per second

ISP

Internet Service Provider

ITU

International Telecommunications Union

LTE

Long Term Evolution

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OTT

Over-the-Top

Mbps

Megabits per second

QoS

Quality of Service

RRBS

Rural and Remote Broadband Systems

In 2018, the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), which is the international technology and telecommunications regulator and the information communication technologies (ICTs) division of the United Nations, specified in their Measuring the Information Society Report: Volume 1 that governments around the world must continuously be updating their technological infrastructure and digital literacy strategies and laws in order to ensure that citizens of all ages, abilities, and genders will have the technological opportunities needed to flourish in new and existing job markets which are becoming more digitally advanced (International Telecommunications Union, 2018). This topic of the importance of digital infrastructure policy, however, has not only been highlighted on the international stage. As well in 2018, the Auditor General of Canada published a report on Canada’s internet connectivity for both rural and remote regions of the country and recommended that a national broadband strategy was necessary for a changing digital landscape (Auditor General of Canada, 2018). Faced with recommendations on both the international and national context, this article will identify high quality of service backbone digital infrastructure, being fibre broadband technologies, needed to meet the contemporary data demands of Canadians. In addition, this article will identify provincial policies, specifically through a case study of Alberta, that have the potential to help with developing these large-scale infrastructure projects to connect all Canadians to the internet.

In Canada, two federal policies are directly related to internet infrastructure. These include the Telecommunications Act and the Radiocommunication Act. The Telecommunications Act encompasses all issues related to Canada and telephony, international telecommunications services licences, international undersea cable licences, who must have the ability to receive telecommunications services (all Canadians), who may sell these telecommunications services, and overall, how telecommunications must work towards the common good of all Canadians with being able to connect one another and have cultural sovereignty through this connection (Telecommunications Act, 1993). The Radiocommunication Act, however, does not have the same cultural distinctions as the Telecommunications Act, and is written instead to ensure that the use of valuable radio-spectrum, a key aspect of the current internet delivery infrastructure globally for wireless internet connectivity, is not misused by unlicenced radio operators (Radiocommunication Act, 1985).

As mentioned earlier, this article will focus on reviewing fibre infrastructure as a main backbone infrastructure, however, there are four primary broadband infrastructures. These include fibre cables, copper cables, mobile wireless, and satellite infrastructure. Wireless towers and fibre and copper cables both represent what are termed ‘fixed’ internet delivery infrastructures in that they are physically laid-out towers and cables that must connect to a given residence, public office, or business (Auditor General of Canada, 2018; Nuechterlein, & Weiser, 2013, pp. 178-180). Mobile wireless and satellite infrastructure are considered mobile internet infrastructures in that a physical cable in not laid out which creates an ease for setup as end users connect to the internet via transmissions carried out over electromagnetic airwaves, known as radio-spectrum (Nuechterlein, & Weiser, 2013, p. 86). Both wireless and satellite internet requires purchasing of spectrum licences, that purchase being done in the form of spectrum auctions in Canada (Taylor, 2013), as well for wireless infrastructure, a fixed wireless tower is needed to bring internet services to people within the tower’s given radius (Auditor General of Canada, 2018; Nuechterlein, & Weiser, 2013, pp. 81-125). With all of this internet delivery infrastructure, why does a review of the infrastructure even matter? Yes, there is a very large commercial benefit with internet delivery services being regular users downloading music, movies, liking ‘posts’ they see on social media platforms, sending email, and so forth. As previously mentioned, however, from the ITU’s Measuring the Information Society Report: Volume 1, there is an economic consequence for those who do not have access to internet delivery services as more jobs undergo varying levels of digitization (e.g., sending PDF files to colleagues via email).

As is apparent with the ITU’s report and the previously mentioned Auditor General of Canada’s report, internet access and connectivity are not just a means of connecting to entertainment, these have ripple effects to residents’ economic livelihoods. This is why studying access to the internet, being internet delivery infrastructure, is important to have this first step–access–available to citizens, permanent residents, and visitors. Star (1999) discusses the importance of infrastructure studies, even with its ‘boring nature,’ in the field of technical work, as the importance of this scholarship rests in topics that are not in the mainstream and can instead be found in “semi-private settings” (p. 378). She notes that with infrastructure it is important to review because further political discourse stems from the origins of this infrastructure as per her quote, “Study an information system and neglect its standards, wires, and settings, and you miss equally essential aspects of aesthetic, justice, and change.” (Star, 1999, p. 379). Mattten (2015) discusses similar aspects with an urban historian context in that media infrastructure is important to review as urban spaces throughout history have been designed to make communication between people and parties more efficient. This is why, she explains, work on infrastructure is important as uncovering the past will lead to understanding the present and future with regards to media infrastructure and that, specifically, cyber infrastructure has a tendency to be overlooked (Matten, 2015). This is why this article works to review an aspect of cyber infrastructure, being internet delivery/broadband infrastructure, to determine how this overlooked area of communication and media studies relates to economic, social, and political discourse in Canadian society.

Literature Review

For Canada, like many other countries, the majority of citizens reside in cities. Urban areas have numerous benefits regarding access to resources because there is a large population of people that are available to spend money in close proximity to one another. As the given population is high density, this is specifically desirable to industries such as the telecommunications industry, where their services are most profitable when customers are closely inhabited to one another. Sarnoff’s Law states that, “The value of the network is proportionate to the number of customers it reaches.” (Gunasekaran & Harmantzis, 2007, p. 29). At the time of developing his law, David Sarnoff was discussing television broadcasting (Westland, 2010), however, his law can also be applied to other forms of telecommunications given that economies of scale and density where serving a telecommunications service to high density areas will result in a higher return on investment from up-front costs (Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013, pp. 8-9). This is problematic, however, for rural locales that lack the population density necessary for profitable telecommunications networks as they do not have as many residents in close proximity to one another to be deemed as being profitable to telecommunications companies (Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013, p. 10).

In Canada, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has set goals that every Canadian household and office should be able to access 50 Megabits per second (Mbps) of download speeds and 10 Mbps of upload speeds regardless of geographic locale being either urban or rural (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, 2018). To conceptualize, however, this means that in a household, two people may watch ultra HD quality video streamed from an over-the-top (OTT) service such as Netflix at the same time and no other internet consumption may take place during these streams as this would hit the 50 Mbps allotted amount because each stream of ultra HD quality video requires a download speed of 25 Mbps (Netlix, n.d.). Note that not all streaming must be done in ultra HD quality, however, this example sets context of internet speeds and usage. This shows how the allotted 50 Mbps download speed by the CRTC is not reasonable for a policy decision as Canadians are increasingly using the internet for more services as it relates to entertainment, business, and education (Rajabium & Middleton, 2013). Furthermore, the internet service providers (ISPs) have in their marketing that their networks may reach up to specified upload and download speeds, however this may not actually take place as these speeds will differ depending on how many other people are on the network as, for example, evenings will have more people on a network than the middle of the night (Middleton, 2017; Rajabuin & Middleton, 2013; Rajabuin & Middleton, 2018). The question then arises of what internet access infrastructure technologies are best for reaching higher internet speeds and consumption and are these technologies easily accessible to all Canadians. The CRTC’s policy specifically states that there are required upload and download speeds for each Canadian regardless of if they live in Toronto, a rural small town in Saskatchewan, or remotely on Baffin Island. Therefore, these technologies that hit the required speeds must be able to be used in urban, rural, and remote contexts.

The Different Technologies and Policy Implications

There are four different types of internet delivery technologies, each of which have varying capacities for reaching the 50 Mbps download speeds. Fibre, copper, wireless, and satellite each have benefits and drawbacks for their ability to give Canadians a strong internet connection and are used complementary to one another depending on locale. Currently, copper wires, which were the first telecommunications infrastructure (Fischer, 2011), are being refurbished from its original telephone use to be used for internet delivery (Kateeb, Burton, Peluso, Chopade, & AlOtaibi, 2013). Of the four internet delivery technologies, fibre is the fastest with being able to transmit data at the speed of light (Middleton, 2016).

In their article, Kateeb et al. (2013) argue that although fibre is the fastest form of internet delivery infrastructure, its costs of implementation far outweigh its benefits. They discuss how the economics of the development of internet infrastructure are the most important consideration when new networks are being planned (Kateeb et al., 2013). In essence, the social and political issues do not matter as much as the economic determinants. This point is also supported by other authors who do acknowledge that there are economic benefits with continuing a copper network opposed to upgrading to fibre (Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013, pp. 179-180).

Although Neuchterlin and Weisner (2013) agree that there are economic benefits to the continued use of copper infrastructure with not having to build a new network, they still acknowledge that fibre is the best internet delivery infrastructure and note that refurbishing copper wires continuously to meet contemporary data demands may prove problematic in the future, but is economically feasible in the present (pp. 179-180). The refurbishment of cables being problematic is also briefly noted by Rajabuin and Middleton (2013) and Middleton (2016).

In their article, Rajabuin and Middleton (2013) study how provincial policies may lead to better quality of service (QoS) internet infrastructure technologies because provinces have a stronger incentive in providing higher QoS broadband as provinces also take care of other public services. They note that Canada has extensive broadband coverage, however, has low QoS which is an issue for end users with regards to being withheld from the digital economy. According to Rajabuin and Middleton (2013), provinces and municipalities are able to develop and implement policies to have high QoS backbone infrastructure, the main cables that will connect a geographic locale with internet opposed to only connecting end users, which can then be made of fibre to ensure this backbone infrastructure will not become dated as fibre is the fastest internet delivery infrastructure.

Kateeb et al. (2013), Neuchterlin and Weisner (2013), Rajabuin and Middleton (2013) and Middleton (2016) all identify that fibre infrastructure is the strongest internet delivery technology. Where Kateeb et al. (2013) and  Neuchterlin and Weisner (2013) identify cost as being a limitation of fibre deployment and suggest refurbishing copper wires, Rajabuin and Middleton (2013) and Middleton (2016) are strong proponents that the importance with internet infrastructure is to lay the foundation (the backbone infrastructure) with the best technology which is fibre. As specified earlier, wireless and satellite technologies are also part of the internet delivery infrastructure landscape and will be reviewed next.

Both wireless and satellite technologies utilize electromagnetic airwaves that sit on different radio-spectrum frequencies to then have data packets transmit content to the end user (Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013, pp. 83-125). They use differing radio-spectrum bandwidths as their services are better utilized depending on factors such as mountains and trees (Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013, pp. 90-106; Scheibe, Carstensen, Rakes, and Rees, 2006; Taylor 2018). Current radio-spectrum technologies have lower upload and download speeds than the aforementioned fibre cables, however, are able to cover large areas for a cheaper price due to lower ‘fixed’ costs of implementation (Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013, pp. 83-125).

In their articles, both Kanno, Dat, Kuri, Hosako, Kawanishi, Yoshida, Yasumura, and Kitayama (2012) and Scheibe et al. (2006) use different economics and mathematical theories to determine how there is no one-size-fits-all approach to broadband infrastructure and different technologies will work better for different locales. Scheibe et al. (2006) specify that areas with geographies that include mountains and forestry will need varying radio-spectrum frequencies to permeate complex geographies. Kanno et al. (2012) identify how a strong broadband network could be a coherent radio-over-fibre (RoF) transmission system where fibre specifically provides the backbone infrastructure to a wireless last mile infrastructure system. This would give the best internet speeds at the cheapest up-front costs. Although not policy-specific articles, these two studies do demonstrate how, with regards to wireless broadband infrastructure, there are different approaches that different locales can take which may be determinants of different internet infrastructure policies.

On a similar note to the above, Taylor (2018) determined through his study of remote rural broadband systems (RRBS) that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to bridging discrepancies in broadband access and that multiple policies will be needed to ensure equitable access in rural and remote areas of Canada which tend to be the most underserved with regards to internet access. Reviewing the federal RRBS policy that allows smaller ISPs to access unused radio-spectrum, Taylor (2018) identifies that this policy, which is primarily used by northern Canadians, assists rural and remote Canadians with receiving equitable internet access. This policy has notably been used in abundance by northern Alberta residents as the physical geography of a prairie province with residents separated far apart on farms had this policy making sense for them (Taylor, 2018).

It should be noted that for each of the above listed technologies (copper, fibre, wireless, and satellite), Sarnoff’s Law, which was outlined earlier, still holds and has impacted rural communities in not receiving adequate services being the minimum 50 Mbps download speeds and 10 Mbps upload speeds (Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013, p. 83-125; Philpot, Beaton, & Whiteduck, 2014). With Kanno et al. (2012), Scheibe et al. (2006), and Taylor (2018), these authors identify the need for different policies for different locales as each locale will have different broadband infrastructure needs.

As the three academic studies outlined above indicate, poor internet access in urban areas is not an issue, but in rural and remote areas it proves to be problematic and in need of government intervention. Because of this, the rural and remote demographic is of immediate concern by policymakers in Canada (Auditor General of Canada, 2018). Other countries are also working to bridge their own urban-rural digital access divides as this is not an issue unique to Canada (Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013). It is not that the demand for higher QoS internet access by the residents in rural and remote areas is not there, simply the supply by government and ISPs in developing and maintaining networks has not reached an equilibrium due to the high initial costs of developing a network without the guarantee of it turning a profit (Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013, pp. 8-40).

Urban-Rural Internet Access Digital Divide

As identified earlier, the urban-rural digital divide is an issue of QoS opposed to connectivity. In their article, Rajabiun and Middleton (2015a) review the implications and uncertainties in the QoS end user experience from their broadband network. They argue how speeds are the most important aspect of economic value from the internet and call for more transparency on QoS speeds since competition between ISPs is not always available for given locales to incentivize better service (Rajabiun & Middleton, 2015a). The authors specify that transparency can be achieved by technologies, business models, and public policies that would force ISPs to deliver advertised speeds, opposed to up to speeds which are not regularly hit in some areas, but ISPs advertise customers will be able to reach (Rajabiun & Middleton, 2015a).

In the same year, Rajabiun & Middleton’s (2015b) article studied European Union countries with regards to how different policies resulted in different technological change and development of broadband infrastructure. The authors note that high capital investment does not always lead to high-quality broadband infrastructure. They found, however, that countries that do implement stronger policies that promote entry and competition in telecommunications services reap the benefits of better internet delivery infrastructure as a result. These two articles by Rajabiun and Middleton (2015a; 2015b) demonstrate the importance of policy in providing rural areas with similar QoS internet as their urban counterparts, thereby reducing the urban-rural internet access digital divide. Reaching a higher QoS across Canada means upgrading existing telecommunications networks to the previously mentioned fibre cables which have the highest data capacity. Winseck (2017) outlines that telecommunication infrastructure does have a history of sudden booms in its development followed by lags in changing or updating this infrastructure. This is where policy has the ability to ensure that lags do not occur, which then are able to have innovative technologies, such as fibre, be built when demand is substantially higher for a telecommunications network than when one was first built. Again, policymakers must be ready to step in and either build the infrastructure or develop innovative policies in order to ensure that all areas are networked with a QoS network infrastructure in order for Canadians to enjoy and utilize all aspects of the internet.

As discussed in this section, there are discrepancies in the urban-rural internet access landscape as technologies are not matching demand based on the types of networks in place for rural and remote areas. This imbalance is leading to an internet access digital divide with regards to QoS. With many services being moved to digital platforms, the demand for internet consumption is only increasing and with this a strong network that is able to meet the demand of citizens is needed for the digital economy. The academic literature that this section reviewed addressed how policies can help with implementing high QoS networks to bridge the urban-rural internet access digital divide. These policies may relate to fibre networks or to wireless ones as demonstrated by Rajabuin and Middleton (2013; 2015a; 2015b; 2018) and Taylor (2018). The reviewed literature also determined how price and supply-demand economics affects networks and that price specifically should be taken into consideration when internet delivery infrastructure networks are developed (Kateeb et al., 2012; Neuchterlin & Weisner, 2013, pp. 179-180). It is apparent from this literature review, however, that different geographic locales will require different internet delivery infrastructure policies and developments (Kanno et al., 2012; Scheibe et al. 2006). Therefore, there is no one-size-fits-all approach that can be taken to internet delivery infrastructure.

Methodology

The research question that this article aims to answer is: What kinds of solutions are there to having a high quality of service (QoS) fibre broadband backbone infrastructure to support contemporary data demands? Using a case study of Alberta, the key points this article explores are, firstly, how different geographic locales in the province of Alberta receive different quality of service regarding broadband connectivity. Second, the ways in which different quality of service between the different locales (e.g., rural areas opposed to urban areas), has been built. Lastly, this article aims to determine if the current internet delivery infrastructure is sustainable with the influx of contemporary data demands (i.e., video streaming services).

In order to address this question and explore its key issues being examined, a media history approach has been chosen, being historical analysis and primary document analysis.

Historical Analysis

The first method discussed for this article is historical analysis. With this article focusing on public policy, historical analysis, and more broadly media history, is used in order to situate telecommunications policies with the ways in which Albertans receive different broadband speeds across the province. Historical analysis is the method in which both primary and secondary documents are reviewed in order to either understand a topic by reconstructing the historic time period in which it had occupied, or to understand a topic by determining how it has changed or developed over time (Merrigan, Huston, & Johnston, 2012, p. 144).

Primary Document Analysis

The next method described is primary document analysis. Stemming from historical analysis, primary document analysis is also a method that can be encompassed under ‘media history’ (Gidley, 2018, pp. 285-304). Media history stems from communication and media studies in that a media artefact – which can be print, web, film, or sound – is analyzed in a historical context and thereby the media artefact would be the primary document under analysis (Gidley, 2018, pp. 285-304). The primary sources evaluated in this article include CRTC reports, government Acts that relate to Alberta’s internet delivery infrastructure, reports by the Government of Alberta, and reports by Innovation, Science and Economic Development (ISED) Canada. To gather the primary documents, which will further be referred to as ‘primary data’ in this article, the CRTC’s website (https://crtc.gc.ca), the Government of Alberta website (https://www.alberta.ca/index.aspx), and ISED Canada’s website (http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/icgc.nsf/eng/home) were reviewed. Government reports were chosen specifically after 2010 as this was the year Netflix was introduced to the Canadian market, thereby resulting in higher data consumptive activities by Canadians, and more specifically, Albertans.

The benefits of this method are that in order to have primary data to analyze which is necessary for this article, primary documents would have to be analyzed. Ali and Duemmel (2018) also use this method in their evaluation of a rural broadband regulator in the United States being the Rural Utilities Service (RUS). They used a thematic organization of Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) interventions regarding decisions that related to the RUS. This example shows how primary document analysis for policy articles is a well-chosen method.

Analysis of Data

As described above, the two methods of historical analysis and primary document analysis will provide a qualitative methods methodology for this research. This data works collectively by providing a historical understanding of what policies and initiatives were used to construct Alberta’s fibre broadband infrastructure. Next, an analysis of policy decisions and reports regarding broadband.

Analysis

At its most basic definition and understanding, broadband is a method of connectivity to the internet and has a minimum speed of two Mbps (International Telecommunications Union, 2003 September). It is always on, there is no need to ‘dial up’ or make choices between using your home telephone or your internet access at a given moment (McNally, McMahon, Rathi, Pearce, Evaniew, & Prevatt, 2016). Where the internet is a space of economic, social, and political engagement, broadband is the means of getting to that space. Broadband’s ‘always on’ ability is necessary as the internet is more than just a space for communication between people, it also connects vital aspects of Canadian society such as traffic lights, food transportation orders, water services, and more, as communication between these services/industries must be ‘always on’ in order to increase efficiency of basic services for a more harmonious society (McNally, et al., 2016). The need for broadband, therefore, is not just one of entertainment value where multi-million-dollar broadband infrastructure is built simply for internet users to watch more Netflix, it also assists in the organization of basic services in Canada.

Internet delivery infrastructure in Alberta uses a combination of infrastructure for different regions of the province. These include: fibre wires, copper coaxial wires, copper digital subscriber line (DSL) wires, fixed wireless access (FWA), mobile wireless, and direct-to-home satellite (Cybera, 2016). Not including DSL on its own (i.e., not partnered with a fibre-optic cable) due to its slow speeds on its own, rendering it not being ‘always on,’ the other identified internet delivery technologies can support broadband, however, at differing speeds with fibre having the fastest and most reliable connectivity (Cybera, 2016; McNally et al., 2016). Other internet delivery infrastructure technologies include, satellite community aggregator access which can be found in Canadian provinces and territories excluding maritime provinces and Alberta (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, 2014; Cybera, 2016).

As mentioned, Alberta uses both fixed, fixed wireless, and wireless solutions for internet delivery infrastructure. A ‘fixed’ internet delivery infrastructure describes copper wires, fibre wires, and wireless towers that are connected to a fibre or copper backbone wires for their internet delivery (Auditor General of Canada, 2018; Cybera, 2016; Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, 2018; McNally et al., 2016). Wireless infrastructure includes internet delivery infrastructure that uses microwaves via radio-spectrum to distribute data signals (Auditor General of Canada, 2018; Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, 2014; Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, 2018, McNally et al., 2016). The following image taken from the Auditor General of Canada’s (2018) report titled Report 1 – Connectivity in Remote and Rural Areas visually outlines these different internet delivery infrastructures.

Figure 5.1: Broadband internet providers access to essential services (Auditor General of Canada, 2018)

As the above figure shows, there are two primary aspects to internet delivery infrastructure: the backbone and the ‘last mile.’ The backbone and ‘last mile’ are the infrastructure which allow access to the internet. This consists of different technologies to then allow for the ‘last mile’ being the final connection to the end user to be achieved. The next section will identify fibre infrastructure as a high quality of service backbone infrastructure.

Fibre Infrastructure

As stated earlier, fibre infrastructure is the fastest internet delivery system. Fibre is able to have speeds between 1 Gbps (1000 Mbps) to 10 Gbps (in some areas of the United States this is being tested for speeds, however not in Canada) (McNally et al., 2016). Fibre optic cables are made of fibreglass and are able to transport data at the speed of light when ‘lit up’ (Kateeb et al., 2013). The term ‘lit up’ is used for fibre optic cables because, when the cables are in use, they literally light up, whereas when they are dormant, they do not illuminate, thereby referred to as ‘dark fibre.’ Fibre as an internet delivery infrastructure is not slowed down by multiple devices being connected to it like other broadband infrastructures. Instead, the speed of data being transported along a fibre network is only slowed down at the endpoints being the electronics attached (Lau, 2009, p. 125-134; McNally et al., 2016). It should be noted that these electronics do not just include a personal device, but also include routers, modems, and demodulators (Lau, 2009, p. 125-134). As the internet router in a home or office is where internet may arrive via Wi-Fi, this is where the network slows down for the end user, to sum not the fibre infrastructure itself.

The primary barrier to fibre optic cables’ deployment is the cost of implementation. With fibre infrastructure being a fixed (wired) broadband infrastructure, this means that trenches would have to be dug to bury the wires underground, phone poles would have to either be erected or leased for space, as well the overall maintenance of these wires would have additional long-term recurring costs. In Calgary, for example, deployment of fibre optic cables in ‘brownfield’ areas, areas which were previously developed in urban spaces but are then under new development, costs approximately $200 per metre (McNally et al., 2016). For areas that are sparsely populated and require long distances for the wires to cover, the cost-benefit of fibre may reduce the desire for the speeds that could be achieved.

The next section of this analysis will chronicle how fibre has been deployed in Alberta specifically, and the corresponding policies that led to this deployment.

Historical Account of Alberta’s Fibre Infrastructure

As described earlier, fibre is the fastest form of telecommunications where data is able to travel at the speed of light. In the early 2000s, the Alberta government began talks regarding a province-wide fibre optic telecommunications infrastructure project in order to support the emerging innovation of the day – the Internet. Starting the project in 2000 (The Globe and Mail, 2005 February 20), this telecommunications infrastructure achievement was finally completed in 2004 titled the Alberta SuperNet, thereby providing Canada’s first province-wide fibre system (Government of Alberta, n.d.a; Government of Alberta, 2005). The image below maps the Alberta SuperNet.

Figure 5.4: The Alberta SuperNet (Axia NetMedia Corporation, 2007)

In the above image the base SuperNet infrastructure are the fibre optic cables which are represented in orange solid lines. The red-dotted lines are fixed wireless infrastructure that rely on the SuperNet’s fibre optic cables as its backbone infrastructure. As is apparent in the above map, the province as a whole is not connected, however, in terms of a large government-led broadband initiative, the coverage area of the SuperNet project is noteworthy.

SuperNet was a project that aimed to connect Alberta’s schools, hospitals, government and municipal offices, and libraries in 429 communities with high-speed internet access (Government of Alberta, n.d.a; Government of Alberta, 2005). The Government of Alberta advertised that not only would Albertans benefit economically and socially from internet access, they would also not have to worry about travelling for health, teaching and learning activities, or business because daily tasks would be able to be done electronically (Government of Alberta, 2005). For 2005 where online shopping, teleconferencing, and entire university degrees being offered in an online format was not as widespread/available as it is today, this forecasting of the power of the internet should not go underappreciated. There were delays in when the project was meant to be completed (Ministry of Restructuring and Government Efficiency, 2005), however, the final result was a high-speed backbone infrastructure for ISPs to connect to, thereby connecting Albertans.

The project was not seen as extraordinary by many Albertans, which frustrated the policymakers who worked to make the project a reality (Bakaradjieva & Williams, 2010). The goal of SuperNet, however, was not to connect these individual Albertans, it was to connect institutions being the previously mentioned hospitals, schools, government and municipal offices, and libraries. Interestingly, one institution that was required to be connected in order to share resources were Alberta’s libraries. In Canada, each province is able to have its own Libraries Act. Alberta’s Libraries Act and Libraries Regulation specifically states that libraries are to adhere to and follow a given ‘Plan of Service’ for patrons as developed by a municipal library board of a given Albertan city or town (Libraries Regulation, 2018; Libraries Act, 2007). These Plans of Service may include sharing knowledge resources with other Alberta libraries which is routinely done throughout the province. The current Libraries Act was established in 2000, whereas the current Libraries Regulation was developed in 1998, two years before construction of the Alberta SuperNet began. On the Government of Alberta website, the only available operational policy for SuperNet has to do with its mandate of connecting Alberta’s libraries (Government of Alberta, n.d.b). As apparent, libraries legislation in the province of Alberta has had a clear linkage to broadband development in the province, a first in the Canadian context, with this article being a first in identifying this linkage. The history of Alberta’s fibre internet delivery infrastructure, therefore, has its historic roots in Alberta’s libraries legislation.

It should be noted that Albertans themselves are unable to connect to the SuperNet. Instead, the SuperNet infrastructure only directly connects to the public institutions mentioned earlier (McNally et al., 2016). ISPs have the ability to connect to SuperNet as a backbone infrastructure in order to then provide their services to citizens instead (McNally et al., 2016). This analysis of the history of SuperNet is important in determining internet delivery infrastructure sustainability as fibre is termed as being ‘future-proof,’ meaning it can withhold the demands of the future even when built in the present (Middleton, 2016), in that users and ISPs do not need to worry about upgrading the network again as the best has already been put in place by the government. The provincial government’s decision at the time showed a commitment to ensuring Alberta had the best public infrastructure resources needed for a sustainable digital economy.

Discussion

This article’s primary goal was to review Alberta’s backbone broadband infrastructure and determine the technologies needed for contemporary data demands. As discussed earlier with the CRTC’s requirement of 50 Mbps download speeds and this supporting only two Netflix HD quality video streams, it is apparent that these download speeds do not fit Canadians’ contemporary internet demands. In Canada, Alberta is the only province with a large-coverage fibre backbone infrastructure, which has helped Alberta to have 97.7 percent of households receiving a 25-49.9 Mbps download speeds (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, 2019, p. 278), the highest coverage in Canada in this category. In contrast, British Columbia has reached 93.2 percent of households that have 50 Mbps or above download speeds, thereby closely hitting the CRTC’s mandated 50/10 Mbps goal (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, 2019, p. 278). In this comparison, however, although Alberta has a fibre backbone infrastructure, the province is still lagging behind in the 50+ Mbps download requirements to its British Columbia counterparts. Although Alberta has a broadband infrastructure network like the SuperNet, the speeds that the fibre network provide are not being transferred to the entirety of the population which shows that the use of this network is not being valuable to citizens as it is not proportionate to the number of users it serves, thereby breaking Sarnoff’s Law which states the value of the network is directly proportionate to the number of customers it reaches (Gunasekaran & Harmantzis, 2007).

In mobile penetration rates, however, Alberta has exceeded other provinces with 91.6 percent of long-term-evolution (LTE) coverage in the province (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, 2019, p. 27). As shown with the Auditor General of Canada’s diagram earlier, a fibre backbone infrastructure is still needed for mobile data usage. As such, although Alberta does not have the highest rates of download speeds in Canada, the fibre backbone does provide benefits when reviewing wireless infrastructure which can be built on top of it. With fibre backbone infrastructure, however, as demonstrated earlier it is expensive to build at approximately $200 per metre (McNally et al., 2016). With government initiatives like the Alberta SuperNet, however, this infrastructure becomes more feasible to deploy. Another alternative to higher quality of service broadband infrastructure, namely fibre infrastructure, is instead of provinces looking to solve broadband access issues, the Government of Canada could also provide stronger leadership with a national broadband strategy as recommended by the Auditor General of Canada (2018).

Conclusion

“I thank the Auditor General and his office for their report. We accept the recommendations and will move forward to improve rural and remote connectivity. Ensuring rural and remote communities are connected to the Internet is one of my top priorities. Few aspects of life today are untouched by information and communications technology. No matter their region, all Canadians need access to high-speed Internet to live, study and work in today’s digital world.”

(Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, 2018, November 20).

As the above response by Minister Navdeep Bains suggests to the Auditor General of Canada’s (2018) Report 1 – connectivity in rural and remote regions, shows how the Government of Canada recognizes the need for stronger internet delivery infrastructure policies and initiatives, and they are prepared to make this happen. Time will tell as to how quickly this talk becomes a reality for Canadians, however, as this article has shown, provincial policies may also assist with connecting citizens to high quality of service broadband infrastructure.

Bibliography

Ali, C., & Duemmel, M. (2018). The reluctant regulator: The Rural Utilities Service and American broadband policy. Telecommunications Policy, 19(1), 1-13.    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2018.08.003

Auditor General of Canada. (2018). Report 1 – connectivity in rural and remote areas. Retrieved from
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201811_01_e_43199.html

Axia NetMedia Corporation. (2007). The Alberta SuperNet. Reprinted [or adapted] from The   Alberta SuperNet: An Axia breakthrough solution to removing the digital divide.  Retrieved from  
http://ictregulationtoolkit.org/action/document/download?document_id=3369

Baines, N. (2018, November 20). Statement from Minister Bains on the Auditor General of  Canada’s report on rural and remote connectivity. Retrieved from
https://www.canada.ca/en/innovation-science-economic-development/news/2018/11/statement-from-minister-bains-on-the-auditor-general-of-canadas-report-on-rural-and-remote-connectivity.html

Bakardjieva, M. & Williams, A. (2010). Super network on the prairie the discursive framing of broadband connectivity by policy planners and rural residents in Alberta, Canada. Culture Unbound: Journal of Current Cultural Research, 2, 153-175. Retrieved from
https://doaj.org/article/7f39b98ab3fc425aaa725415722609e0

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. (2014). Satellite Inquiry Report. Retrieved from
https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/rp150409/rp150409.htm

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. (2018).Closing the digital divide in Canada. Retrieved from
https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/internet/internet.htm

Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. (2019). Communications
Monitoring Report. Retrieved from the Canadian Radio-television and  Telecommunications Commission’s website:
https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/index.htm

Crawford, S. (2018). Fiber: The coming tech revolution – and why America might miss it. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Cybera. (2016). State of Alberta digital infrastructure report. Retrieved from
https://www.cybera.ca/news-and-events/publications/

Fischer, C. S. (2011). The Telephone Takes Command. In D. J. Crowley, & P. Heyer. (2011). Communication in history: Technology, culture, society (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson.

Gidley, B. (2015). Doing historical and documentary research. In Seale, C. (Eds.), Researching society and culture. (4th ed.). (285-304). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE   Publications

Government of Alberta. (n.d.a). Alberta SuperNet: Alberta SuperNet is a broadband network that connects to rural and urban communities in the province. Retrieved from
https://www.alberta.ca/supernet.aspx

Government of Alberta (n.d.b). Public library network – SuperNet: This broadband network  connects public institutions cross Alberta. Retrieved from
https://web.archive.org/web/20190309001237/https://www.alberta.ca/public-library-network-supernet.aspx

Government of Alberta. (2005). (Producer), & Department of Restructuring and Government Efficiency. (Producer). (2005). Albert SuperNet: They don’t call it SUPER for nothing! [Motion picture]. Alberta, Canada.

Gunasekaran, V., & Harmantzis, F. C. (2007). Emerging wireless technologies for developing countries. Technology in Society, 29(1), 23-42.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2006.10.001

Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. (2018). Spectrum outlook 2018-2022. (ISED Publication No. SLPB-003-18). Ottawa, ON: Canada. Retrieved from
https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf11403.html

International Telecommunications Union. (2003, September). Birth of broadband: Frequently asked questions. Retrieved from
https://www.itu.int/osg/spu/publications/birthofbroadband/faq.html

International Telecommunications Union. (2018). Measuring the Information Society Report:   Volume 1. Geneva, Switzerland: ITU Publications.

Kanno, A., Dat, P. T., Kuri, T., Hosako, I., Kawanishi, T., Yoshida, Y., Yasumura, Y., & Kitayama, K. (2012). Coherent radio-over-fiber and millimeter-wave radio seamless transmission system for resilient access networks. IEEE Photonics Journal, 4(6), 2196-2204. 10.1109/JPHOT.2012.2228182

Kateeb, I., Burton, L., Peluso, M. S., Chopade, P., & AlOtaibi, K. (2013). Copper cables: Should they be phased out as last mile broadband solutions? Paper presented at the 1-7. 10.1109/SECON.2013.6567470

Lau, K. Y. (2009). Ultra-high frequency linear fiber optic systems. Berlin: Springer.

Libraries Act. (2007). Revised statutes of Alberta 2000. Retrieved from
http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/L11.pdf

Libraries Regulation. (2018). Alberta Regulation 141/1998. Retrieved from
http://www.qp.alberta.ca/1266.cfm?page=1998_141.cfm&leg_type=Regs&isbncln=9780779732661

Matten, S. (2015). Deep time of media infrastructure. In Parks, L. & Starosielski, N. (Eds.),  Signal traffic: Critical studies of media infrastructures. (94-112). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

McNally, M. B., McMahon, R., Rathi, D., Pearce, H., Evaniew, J., & Prevatt, C. (2016). Understanding community broadband: The Alberta broadband toolkit. 1-50. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.7939/R3H708B16

Merrigan, G., Huston, C. L., & Logan, R. (2012). Communication research methods (Canadian ed.). Don Mills, Ont.: Oxford University Press.

Middleton, C. (2016). Moral Fibre. Intermedia 44(1), pp. 31-34

Middleton, C. (2017). Broadband infrastructure for the future: Connecting rural Ontario to the digital economy. Rural Ontario Institute Foresight Paper.

Ministry of Restructuring and Government Efficiency. (2005). Restructuring and government efficiency annual report 2004-2005. Edmonton, AB: Government of Alberta. Retrieved
from https://open.alberta.ca/publications/1715-4987

Netflix, (n.d.). Internet connection speed recommendations. Retrieved from
https://help.netflix.com/en/node/306

Nuechterlein, J., & Weiser, P. (2013). Digital crossroads: Telecommunications law and policy in the internet age (2nd ed.). London; Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Philpot, D., Beaton, B., & Whiteduck, T. (2014). First mile challenges to last mile rhetoric: Exploring the discourse between remote and rural first nations and the telecom
Industry. Journal of Community Informatics, 10(2), 56-65.

Radiocommunication Act. (1985). Consolidation. R.S.C., c. R-2. Retrieved from
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/R-2.pdf

Rajabiun, R., & Middleton, C. (2013). Multilevel governance and broadband infrastructure development: Evidence from Canada. Telecommunications Policy, 37(9), 702-714.

Rajabiun, R., & Middleton, C. (2015a). Lemons on the edge of the internet: The importance of   transparency for broadband network quality. Communications & Strategies, (98), 119-136. Retrieved from
https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/docview/1699262041?OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/sid:primo&accountid=9838

Rajabiun, & Middleton. (2015b). Regulation, investment and efficiency in the transition to next generation broadband networks: Evidence from the European Union. Telematics and Informatics, 32(2), 230-244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.09.001

Rajabiun, R. & Middleton, C. (2018). Strategic choice and broadband divergence in the
transition to next generation networks: Evidence from Canada and the U.S. Telecommunications Policy 42(1), pp. 37-50.

Scheibe, K. P., Carstensen, L. W., Rakes, T. R., & Rees, L. P. (2006). Going the last mile: A
spatial decision support system for wireless broadband communications. Decision Support Systems, 42(2), 557-570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2005.02.010

Star, S. L. (1999). The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behaviour Scientist, 43(3), 377-391. https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/10.1177/00027649921955326

Taylor, G. (2013). Oil in the ether: A critical history of spectrum auctions in Canada. Canadian Journal of Communication, 38(1), 121-137. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2013v38n1a2600

Taylor, G. (2018). Remote rural broadband systems in Canada. Telecommunications Policy. 19(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2018.02.001

Telecommunications Act. (1993). Consolidation. c. 38. Retrieved from
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/T-3.4.pdf

The Globe and Mail. (2005, February 20). Alberta warns Bell to get cracking. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/alberta-warns-bell-to-get-cracking/article22505220/

Westland, J. C. (2010). Critical mass and willingness to pay for social networks. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9(1), 6-19. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2009.05.003

Winseck, D. (2017). The geopolitical economy of the global internet infrastructure. Journal of Information Policy, 7, 228-267. Retrieved from
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/jinfopoli.7.2017.0228#metadata_info_tab_contents

Date modified:

2021-12-08