This is an open RFI. I'm looking for any research that has been done - preferably in developing or 3rd world economies proving relationships between the introduction of deregulation, or disruptive technologies such as broadband, WiFi or VoIP and the economic growth (or decline!) of the country. If it ties % changes in GDP to % growth of X, or Y, or Z technology in any way, great!
Bit of background here:- I think it was in 2002 that a DoC official challenged me to prove to him why DoC should be legalising VoIP. That is became purely academic on 1 Feburary 2004 when VoIP was legalised in South Africa. I then heard Dr Gillian Marcelle speak at a local conference where she bemoaned the dearth of quantitative research done by any organisation which would help regulators like ICASA to understand the implications of disruptive technologies and make wise decisions.
A week or so back, I came across a piece by William L. Hahn, Principal Research Analyst at Gartner, entitled "The Problem With One Laptop per Child" where he argues that rather than focusing on making cheap laptops ubiquitous, it is also necessary to stimulate the spread of broadband.
I'd like to be able to see something that either supports or refutes my view that disruptive technologies like WiFi and VoIP have positive impacts on GDP. After all, in the words of John Rutledge and Sonia Arrison:
"…when telecom is dragged down, the entire country is affected.
The telecom network is not only a source of jobs, value and innovation in its own right, but it is also the central nervous system of the overall economy. We all use it to exchange information with our customers, our workforce and our suppliers. In today’s service-driven economy, the speed of the telecom network determines the speed of commerce, which we measure as GDP.
It also determines our pay checks. The amount we earn is limited by our productivity – what we can produce in a day of work. Faster information flows mean higher productivity and rising incomes."
That's me. Too much strat planning has my head on the spin cycle.
Comments