1 / 31

Geographic Issues Study

Geographic Issues Study . Jorge-A. Sanchez-P.& Nikos Vogiatzis for the EARNEST/GEANT2 Foresight Study http://www.terena.org/activities/earnest/geog.html Amsterdam, 8 May 2007. Presentation Topics. The DD in the REN context A Framework for measuring the DD in REN The RENDDI structure

pekelo
Télécharger la présentation

Geographic Issues Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Geographic Issues Study Jorge-A. Sanchez-P.& Nikos Vogiatzis for the EARNEST/GEANT2 Foresight Study http://www.terena.org/activities/earnest/geog.html Amsterdam, 8 May 2007 The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  2. Presentation Topics • The DD in the REN context • A Framework for measuring the DD in REN • The RENDDI structure • Key Findings and Future Work The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  3. GIS main Goal …to come up with an enhanced, concrete and structured measuring approach that will lead to a deeper understanding and addressing of the Digital Divide (DD) challenges in the Research & Education Networking context. Quantify the Digital Divide / Opportunity Quantify the need for improved network performance The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  4. Definition of the RENDD “The uneven distribution, difference or gap in regular and effective access to and usage of digital resources and technologies” …between scientists, researchers, students, etc*attached to research and education networks … due to infrastructural, social, economic, educational, regulatory and other causes, including but not limited to, unavailability of, difficulty in accessing, unawareness of the availability and/or capabilities of, lack of understanding of how to access and/or use such digital resources and technologies. * Conclusions should be able to be deducted for organizations, campuses, and geographic areas attached to research and education networks. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  5. Why a solid and robust Framework? Stakeholders need information, benchmarks and analysis to evaluate what has been achieved, as well as what is achievable in the future in each member state and neighboring countries for appropriate policy interventions to take place. “it is part of the vision of the European Research Area that researchers throughout Europe, irrespective of location, will be able to contribute fully to its high-quality research activities. This represents equality of opportunity for researchers, and increasingly, advanced research networks such as GÉANT and the NRENs are playing a key role in achieving this.” The SERENATE study The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  6. The International ExperienceA composite index Assess progress in creating digital opportunity and bridging the DD Clustered in 3-6 sub-indexes Ability to participate in and benefit from ICT developments 8-48 Indicators convoluted The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  7. (Source: ITU/UNCTDA/KADO) Digital Opportunity Index (2005) The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  8. (Source: ITU) Digital Access Index (2003) The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  9. (Source: WEF/Insead) Networked Readiness Index (2007) The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  10. The RENDDI Quantification Framework • Covers a large number of countries • Modular structure • can be grouped in logical classifications/clusters/categories/areas with special interest (e.g. enabling factors/opportunity, infrastructure, usage, etc) • Straightforward methodology • Raw ingredients are separate indicators that can be measured relatively easily. • Can be convoluted into a single Index (RENDDI) • Objective criteria and measurable indicators • Data collected via high-quality sources, e.g. the Compendium or other databases from the ITU, WorldBank, EuroStat, etc, and processed via robust statistical methods. • Standardized indicators • Allows for consistent and periodical measurements and assessments • Permits comparisons of the Digital Divide evolution (whether it is diminishing and at what speed)—both changes in absolute scores, as well as changes in rankings. • Captures the causes as well as the effects of the Digital Divide • exposing both the readiness as well as the intensity of use of digital resources and technologies The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  11. RENDDI Structure Sub-Index Cluster How to answer? Answers what? Network capacity Infrastructure How capable is my network? Resources utilization Usage How much my network is used? General infrastructure landscape Affordability Can I build a good network? Financial capacity Policy environment Human capacity Human output Knowledge Can people build and use my network? Network performance Quality How robust is my network? The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  12. RENDDI StructureInfrastructure Sub-Index Category Sub-Index Sub-category How to construct the Sub-Index? External connectivity capacity N e t w o r k c a p a c i t y Core network capacity Infrastructure Access network capacity The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  13. RENDDI StructureSub-Indexes Category Sub-Index Sub-category How to construct the Sub-Indexes? Core network capacity Infrastructure External connectivity capacity Access network capacity Usage IP outgoing traffic IP incoming traffic GDP Expenditure on education Expenditure on R&D NREN budget Affordability Internet tariff International Internet bandw. Internet users Broadband users Regulatory situation Literacy School enrolment Patents Researchers in R&D Knowledge Unreachability Availability Quality Losses Jitter Throughput The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  14. (Source: TERENA compendium) RENDDI InputInfrastructure Index The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  15. RENDDI StructureInfrastructure Index Category Sub-Index Sub-category Sub-Sub-Index External connectivity with peerings per user The NREN potential users are 7.5% of the population External connectivity without peerings per user Core network size per user User centric measurements Core network size per sq km Infrastructure N e t w o r k c a p a c i t y Core network capacity per user Access network capacity per user The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  16. RENDDI StructureInfrastructure Index (cont’d) Category Sub-Index Sub-category Sub-Sub-Index NREN External Connectivity Index 33% External connectivity with peerings Index External connectivity without peerings Index 67% 33% NREN Core Network Connectivity Index 60% Core network size Index1 33% Infrastructure Index 10% Core network size Index2 30% Core network capacity Index 33% NREN Access Network Connectivity Index 100% Access network capacity Index The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  17. REN Infrastructure Index (2006) Average kbps per NREN user Netherlands: (internat. connections) 84,18kbps (access network): 71,03kbps Iceland: (internat. connections) 59,18kbps (access network): 1.152,28kbps Slovakia: (internat. connections) 78,45kbps (access network): 186,61kbps Russia: (internat. connections) 0,27kbps (access network): 1,55kbps The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  18. RENDDI StructureUser-centric Sub-Indexes Category Sub-Index Sub-category Sub-Sub-Index External connectivity with peerings per user Core network size per sq km Infrastructure Index External connectivity without peerings per user Core network size per user 50% Core network capacity per user Access network capacity per user Usage Index IP outgoing traffic per user IP incoming traffic per user 20% GDP per capita Expenditure on education % of GDP Expenditure on R&D % Affordability Index Internet tariff % Broadband users pc International Internet bandw.per capita 10% NREN budget % Internet users per capita Regulatory situation Knowledge Index Adult Literacy School enrolment Patents per capita Researchers per capita 10% Quality Index Unreachability Availability Losses Jitter Throughput 10% The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  19. RENDDI (2006) - top 30 Iceland Netherlands Sweden Slovenia Finland Denmark Sweden Germany France Israel Sweden The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  20. RENDDI (2006) - next 30 The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  21. RENDDI (2006) The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  22. RENDDI vs other related Indices Iceland Netherlands Sweden Norway Slovakia Czech Denmark Hungary Latvia The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  23. RENDDI vs … Iceland Netherlands Luxembourg Latvia Armenia The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  24. Other results… The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  25. The RENDDI as a policy tool • Ranking and comparing countrieson the 5 main sub-indices, is probably more useful than on the main RENDDI • The sub-indices can allow for specific policyrecommendations and concrete action plans in order to address low-ranked attributes. • A country’s overall RENDDI score can be used to benchmark the performance on the main sub-indices in order to produce a specific diagnosis on intra-indicators correlations and deviations. • Time evolution (trend) of RENDDI and its sub-indices is significantly more meaningful than a static snapshot • This requires dedicated resources, commitment, and consistency, in order to implement a data collection, validation, and analysis (both offline and online) process that caries over a long period of time (e.g. min 3-5 years) • TERENA Compendium is widely accepted by the NREN community as a reference point of data gathering, however, a data validation mechanism is required in order to ensure data correctness as much as possible • A data validation mechanism will also encourage cooperation and coordination among the NREN, Academia, Ministries, and other stakeholders in order to produce a cohesive national policy and consensus. • The RENDDI offers up to a point that validation mechanism The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  26. The RENDDI as a policy tool The RENDDI provide R&E policymakers a policy tool • A comprehensive statistical framework to monitor the RENDD • A frame of reference for comparisons over time and between regions • A benchmark for monitoring internal disparities in REN Infrastructure, Usage, Affordability, Knowledge and Quality based on classificatory variables of interest to the R&E community • A Tool to evaluate the impact of REN policies The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  27. Future Work • Further confirm the data in the databases and evaluate further the convolution methods (sensitivity analysis, etc) -> Compare “Apples with Apples” • Identify data for the Quality Index (pinger) • “Run” the Index again for 2007 • Present the findings to the Stakeholders: • The National Research and Education Networks • The management of research institutes, universities and other organisations that could benefit from research and education networks • Governments and research funding bodies for the development of future strategies • The European Commission, which is sponsoring the study and values the Digital Divide issue high in its policy agenda • The members of the European Parliament The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  28. Final outcome • REN-DD Policy Workshop & White Paper • A declaration of solidarity for closing the REN-DD • To be endorsed and co-signed by • EC • EP • NREN directors • National and EU Policy Makers • et al. • Commit to a “REN-DD Action Plan: 2007-2013” based on GIS findings and recommendations. The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  29. Acknowledgements • TERENA • EARNEST panel • Geographic Issues Study Advisory Board • Institute of Computer and Communications Systems • Pinger • ITU, WorldBank, WEF, OECD Please send your comments to j.sanchez@htci.gr The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  30. GIS Target Areas GN2 • Austria (ACOnet) • Belgium (BELNET) • Bulgaria (BREN) • Croatia (CARNet) • Cyprus (CYNET) • Czech Republic (CESNET) • Denmark (UNI-C) • Estonia (EENet) • Finland (FUNET) • France (RENATER) • Germany (DFN) • Greece (GRNET) • Hungary (HUNGARNET) • Iceland (RHnet) • Ireland (HEAnet) • Israel (IUCC) • Italy (GARR) GN2 Observers & SEEREN • Serbia (AMRES) • FYR of Macedonia (MARNet) SEEREN • Albania (ANA) • Montenegro (MREN) • Bosnia & Herzegovina (BIHARNET) PORTA OPTICA • Belarus (BASNET) • Moldova (RENAM) • Ukraine (URAN) • Azerbaijan (AzRENA) • Georgia (GRENA) • Armenia (ASNET) EUMEDCONNECT • Algeria (ARN) • Egypt (EUN) • Jordan (JUNET) • Lebanon (CNRS) • Libya • Morocco (CNCPSRT) • Palestine (PADI2) • Syria (HIAST) • Tunisia (MRST) OCASSION • Kazakhstan (KazRENA) • Kyrgyzstan (KRENA-AKNET) • Tajikistan • Turkmenistan • Uzbekistan (UzSciNet) • Latvia (LATNET) • Lithuania (LITNET) • Luxembourg (RESTENA) • Malta (CSC) • Netherlands (SURFnet) • Norway (UNINETT) • Poland (PIONIER) • Portugal (FCCN) • Romania (RoEduNet) • Russia (RBNET/RUNNET) • Slovakia (SANET) • Slovenia (ARNES) • Spain (RedIRIS) • Sweden (SUNET) • Switzerland (SWITCH) • Turkey (ULAKBIM) • United Kingdom (UKERNA) The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

  31. Defining the Digital Divide “The origins of the Digital Divide can be dated quite precisely to May 24, 1844, when the first electronic telegraph route was opened between Washington D.C. and Baltimore, and when Samuel Morse sent the historic first message “What hath God wrought?” That first link privileged the two end-points of the circuit, but every other point on the globe suddenly found itself on the wrong side of a newly-opened Digital Divide. However, by the time the original telegraph circuit was extended to reach Philadelphia and New York, the Digital Divide was already starting to be reduced.” The EARNEST Foresight Study 2006 - 2007

More Related