Degrees of separation: the case of BT. A regular column on the information industries

DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/DPRG-12-2016-0057
Pages332-334
Published date12 June 2017
Date12 June 2017
AuthorJason Whalley,Peter Curwen
Subject MatterInformation & knowledge management,Information management & governance,Information policy
Rearview
Degrees of separation: the case of BT
A regular column on the information industries
Jason Whalley and Peter Curwen
Jason Whalley is based at the
Newcastle Business School,
Northumbria University, Newcastle
upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, UK.
Peter Curwen is Professor at the
Newcastle Business School,
Northumbria University, Newcastle
upon Tyne, UK.
The socio-economic benefits of
broadband are widely
acknowledged. Governments
around the world have adopted a
range of strategies to ensure that
broadband networks are available
across their territories. Some have
thrown large amounts of money at
the issue, subsidising the rollout of
broadband networks or even
building their own when they
became frustrated at the pace of
private sector developments, while
others have encouraged smaller
scale initiatives such as community
based networks. Within the UK, a
different approach was adopted:
functional – that is, operational –
separation and the creation of
Openreach.
Created in 2005 when functional
separation was imposed on BT,
Openreach provides the
infrastructure on which most
customers and businesses within
the UK rely for their broadband
services. Openreach is arguably a
“regulatory experiment” – only a
handful of other countries have
implemented functional separation,
and no other country has exactly
replicated the model adopted by the
UK. However, virtually since the day
it was created, Openreach has been
subject to wide-ranging criticism,
leading some to question whether
functional separation could deliver
the sort of network that the UK
needs in the coming years.
During 2016/2017, this criticism
became increasingly vocal. In
particular, Openreach was criticised
for the poor quality of the services
that it delivered and its cautious
attitude towards infrastructure
investment that perpetuated the role
of copper used within its network –
a strategy that, unsurprisingly, has
been very profitable for BT.
Although the combination of
fibre-to-the-cabinet and copper,
which is currently being improved
further through the deployment of
so-called “g.fast” technologies, has
provided the UK with superficially
attractive broadband speeds, the
average downlink disguises wildly
varying delivery speeds according
to location and even “not-spots”.
Openreach has continued to be
criticised by its rivals like Talk
Talk, Sky and Vodafone as well as
by politicians. There is a concern
that the company is investing too
little in its infrastructure and that
the continued use of copper in the
network will eventually result in the
UK being left behind by other EU
countries which are instead
focusing on a “full fibre” future.
In early 2016, Ofcom, the regulator,
published its initial conclusions from
the Strategic Review of Digital
Communications that it had initiated
PAGE 332 DIGITAL POLICY, REGULATION AND GOVERNANCE VOL. 19 NO. 4, 2017, pp. 332-334, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2398-5038 DOI 10.1108/DPRG-12-2016-0057

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT