Surprise: America is No. 1 in Broadband

By Saul Hansell
Nicole Bengiveno/The New York Times

There is a constant refrain that the United States is falling behind in broadband, as if the speed of Internet service in Seoul represents a new Sputnik that is a challenge to national security.

It’s certainly true that in some countries, like South Korea, far more homes have broadband connections than in the United States. And the speeds in some countries are far higher than is typical here.

But there are many ways to measure the bandwidth wealth of nations. At the Columbia/Georgetown seminar on the broadband stimulus yesterday, I heard Leonard Waverman, the dean of the Haskayne School of Business at the University of Calgary, describe a measure he developed called the “Connectivity Scorecard.” It’s meant to compare countries on the extent that consumers, businesses and government put communication technology to economically productive use.

Even after deducting the untold unproductive hours spent on Facebook and YouTube, the United States comes out on top in Mr. Waverman’s ranking of 25 developed countries. The biggest reason is that business in the United States has made extensive use of computers and the Internet and it has a technically skilled work force.

“Korea has great broadband to the house, but businesses in Korea don’t use the best networks and don’t have the skills and computing assets they need to take advantage of them,” Mr. Waverman said.

Also, as dusty as your local motor vehicle office may seem, government use of communications technology is as good in the United States as anywhere in the world, according to Mr. Waverman’s rankings.

After the United States, the ranking found that Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Norway rounded out the five most productive users of connectivity. Japan ranked 10, and Korea, 18.

And while wired and wireless broadband networks used by consumers lagged other countries, the United States ranked No. 1 in the world for technology use and skills by consumers. (This was measured by comparing countries on five measures: The penetration of Internet use, penetration of Internet banking, wired and wireless voice minutes per capita, SMS messages per capita, and consumer software spending.)

To see the full methodology, look at page 38 in this report.

A separate paper based on the survey research of the Pew Internet and American Life project also undercut the idea that Americans are starving for broadband.

First of all, Pew found that 57 percent of people in the country now have access to broadband, compared to only 9 percent who have dial-up Internet access. Another 9 percent of people use the Internet at work or at a library but not at home.

That leaves 25 percent of the population that doesn’t use the Internet at all. When Pew looked at the reasons why people didn’t use broadband (combining dial-up users with those that don’t have Internet access at all), it found that by far the most common reason was that people said that going online was not relevant to their lives. Some 51 percent of people surveyed in these groups said things like they weren’t interested in the Internet or they were too busy.

The second-most common reason was money: 18 percent of the people said that the cost of broadband was too high or that they don’t have a computer. Next came usability, with 17 percent citing reasons like the Internet was too difficult to use or wasted too much time.

Rather significantly, for the debate about broadband in rural areas, only 14 percent of the people who don’t have broadband now say the reason is that they can’t get it. That represents 4.5 percent of the population. Those figures match up with statistics from the cable industry, which says it now offers broadband service to 95 percent of the homes in America.

Cycle all this back to the findings by Mr. Waverman. Since his research found that, on average, Americans have more technology skills and involvement than people in any other country, maybe the biggest reason that 39 percent of the population doesn’t have broadband is that they know what they’d get — and they don’t want it.

Comments are no longer being accepted.

AK February 23, 2009 · 8:06 am

Surprise! A North American researcher sets up a study with a criteria carefully designed to allow his conference hosts to come out on top and “voila!” the US wins!

Never mind the reality, we can feel good about being Americans again. Thank you, Mr. Waverman! It’s good that Canada is still the farm team for their amazing can-do NAFTA trading partners.

hairV February 23, 2009 · 8:10 am

I’m living in France and I really surprised to see that we’re credited with the same consumer infrastructure level while we have faster (by far) infrastructure than USA…

And I don’t speak about 3G which is a reality there !! ;o)

Dave Kliman February 23, 2009 · 8:18 am

When we should be enjoying multiple Gigabit upload and download speeds, a free, unfettered neutral internet where speed upgrades happen every single day, instead of every 5 years under phone and cable monopolies, and where there’s a new IPO every day for yet another exciting new internet technology, I say that if somehow we are #1 at all, then we are still woefully inadequate.

We shouldn’t sit on our laurels. We need to seriously upgrade if we are going to get to a point where any person could make a video and without the help of any youtubes or anything like that, broadcast it to the entire world. It needs to be possible for everybody and anybody to be able to not only see, but share at super high speeds. we aren’t there yet. not even close.

We have some dangers ahead that we must face down. for one thing there are those who believe ISPs should be cops. we can’t be China, here, where thought police flourish. Make sure we have a free, open, fast, constantly improving, uncensored internet. Our freedom depends on it.

btb February 23, 2009 · 8:48 am

The lack of readily available, affordable fiber optic broadband to the home in the US puts us at a competitive disadvantage over the long term. Claiming that what we have is “good enough” is akin to saying we don’t need faster processors and better PCs – what we have now is “good enough” for word processing and web surfing – and totally misses the point. Advances in infrastructure are the basis of economic growth.

Michael Dickerson February 23, 2009 · 8:51 am

Not a single word about the cost in the USA or the downlaod speeds. Those are glaring omissions. Worthless article.

Edward Beshore February 23, 2009 · 8:53 am

A nice piece all around — except for the last sentence. While my own experience must be classified as anecdotal, most of those I know who do not choose to have Internet service are quite ignorant about it and what it might mean for their own lives.

AH2 February 23, 2009 · 9:11 am

What is most interesting of course is that both attitudes about U.S. leadership or lack of leadership in connectivity can be true and in fact are. By some yardsticks we are the leader worldwide by others we are not We shouldn’t ignore either in support of one position or the other.

Here is the REAL question how is that we csn be the leaders in the effective use of broadband but other countries have much faster broadband and better more dynamic Internet services available.

That is NOT logical if we are making such effective use of the Internet imagine how much more effective it could be if we were the leaders by all measures.

The non-sensical reasons we are not is where the focus oif everyone’s attention should be. The goal should be to be the leaders in every category within the next 5 years.

Where is that plan ???

UpstateNYer February 23, 2009 · 9:22 am

Interesting. Do you folks know how few people upstate have broadband? Do you know that the cable and phone companies charge huge fees to areas not covered in order for them to get the lines brought in? That these companies will only actually put in the lines for which they charge the fees after a certain percentage of that area’s residents state they’ll pay the fee? “Only” 4.5 percent includes your fellow NYers, who can’t access anything online because all websites require broadband speeds to open them now. You remember upstate, right? We’re the ones whose houses aren’t worth $1 million and have been suffering from the economic downturn a lot longer than those who live in Westchester.

Chris February 23, 2009 · 9:44 am

A horribly misleading title to an otherwise decent blog post. Yes America might be #1 in utilizing broadband for economic use, but the quality of broadband service available in America lags far behind many other developed nations.

Pierce Randall February 23, 2009 · 9:46 am

That sounds about right, actually. But let’s frame it another way:

How much more on top were we by every single metric in 1999?

And yet another way:

Considering the myriad failures of United States fiscal and economic policy in this first decade of the 21st century, what marketable skills other than our technologically elite workforce are we selling? If all I could do was make chairs, and all of a sudden a lot of other people started making chairs, even if my chairs were a little better, I’d be worried.

We’ve rested on our laurels for too long, and we’re not going to be #1 in this report 10 years from now if we don’t at least try to solidify our lead.

We also need to use the inherency of our advantage to further integrate technology into society in a way that takes advantage, and doesn’t break down, our existing institutions. Today’s elite GIS analyst or flash programmer isn’t unionized, probably isn’t retrained from another career, and may only be a contractor in order for the company he or she works for to skirt basic benefits like unemployment and health insurance. Meanwhile, our techno-love commodified so many workers in the northern Midwest who made cars and other heavy machinery to the point where we thought, well, minus their jobs, plus these elite tech jobs, plus the old manufacturing jobs for china, equals everyone wins. That was arrogant, and we didn’t do it with consideration for our existing institutions of labor. Now we wonder why the contemporary worker, not after some kind of industrial revolution, feels alienated, disaffected, scared, and uncertain. Cringing at every crumb of bad news from the recession that’s been baking for a few years.

But there’s more than pessism here: European countries and Japan, if they lag behind us in broadband connectivity and computer-workplace integration, will face these problems going forward. We’ve already faced them. Many of these societies have less flexible ideas about labor institutions than we do. Or maybe Japan uses some of its labor institutions ot recreate the idyllic factory worker who’s cheaper, similarly productive, and more loyal than the American factory worker apparently was in the 1980’s — for a variety of reasons that, then as now-going-forward, were the fault of America’s sometimes-disregard for its people beyond unemployment numbers and GDP contribution.

spudly0 February 23, 2009 · 9:48 am

Until broadband connectivity is made universal, and I don’t include satellite service in this category due to reliability and cost issues, we are in danger of solidifying a dual class system for internet users. For some time now I have been unable to access important sites and information due to connectivity issues. The REA was implemented to raise all Americans standard of living and promote economic stability in the rural areas, why can’t this happen for what is increasingly becoming a necessity for millions of citizens?

EddieB February 23, 2009 · 9:53 am

Sounds like creative accounting to me.

JW February 23, 2009 · 10:02 am

Another reason people avoid broadband is the required contract–surprised that the Pew study didn’t elicit more on that road block that broadband providers throw in the way of potential high speed internet access users.

The long term contract requirement needs to disappear for broadband.

Patrick February 23, 2009 · 10:13 am

If we look bad on common simple metrics such as speed and price, let’s invent some complicated and mostly meaningless ones to claim that we are #1 again.

Facts: I pay 3x more to get 10x slower internet access compared to France. It’s 4x/100x compared to Japan.

Nothing will change until we realized that Internet access is just another utility, the city/county/collective should build and own the distribution vector (copper, fiber, whatever) and offer it to Internet providers at reasonable price. That’s how you get competition, that’s how you increase speed while decreasing price.

Patrick

Tyler February 23, 2009 · 10:29 am

This report is garbage. It never even defines the term “broadband” am I just to assume that a 100Mb line in Japan is equivelant to a rural US house that gets 512kbps?

I can’t be bothered to write out a full retort to this except to say, hooray for weighting and misleading reports! The US is on top again!

Bill Dollar February 23, 2009 · 10:37 am

Uhm, Saul, did you actually read the methodology. Because if you did, you’ll see that your headline about “broadband” is completely misleading. Not sure how SMS and wireless voice relates to broadband, but that is 2 out of the 3 criteria.

London UK February 23, 2009 · 11:17 am

Come on, what’s the news story here? As a previous poster pointed out, the headline should surely be ‘Surprise: an American study designed on arbitrary and fairly meaningless metrics shows the US is #1′. Penetration rates of broadband in the US are laughable outside the major metropolitan areas – and I say this as a Brit who realises that the UK is way behind developed countries such as Sweden, Switzerland and Germany for high-speed internet.
The marvel is that the US continues to lead the way in terms of digital strategy, when it’s really an also-ran in the broadband marketplace.

bill bishop February 23, 2009 · 11:42 am

When we asked John Horrigan at Pew to break out the number of rural and urban residents using dialup, we found that rural residents were seven times more likely to say they didn’t have access to broadband. //www.dailyyonder.com/broadband-missing-many-rural-dial-users/2009/02/17/1936

We also looked at the Ag Census of 2.2 million farms, which asked questions about both internet use and broadband in 2007. There are significant differences from urban to exurban to rural settings. //www.dailyyonder.com/broadband-connection-highs-and-lows-across-rural-america/2009/02/11/1921

Clyde Smith February 23, 2009 · 12:20 pm

I spend most of my time online working on various websites.

My life would be so much better and I would be so much more productive if I had real broadband instead of this weak ass nonsense that America calls broadband.

That said, Wilson, NC is getting ready to beat most spots in America for broadband access because they went municipal and have backed it all the way.

//www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A259848

The idea that America is no. 1 is wishful thinking in so many ways. Obama was right. We need some change!

Clyde
//www.prohiphop.com

Charbax February 23, 2009 · 12:25 pm

Here in Denmark, we had something like the iphone in 2003 in the brand of the Motorola A920, which has the same screen, same 3G features, same video/audio playback features. In Denmark since 2003 that phone cost $0,20 to buy with a 6-month contract back then at $40 per month for unlimited phone calls to other users on the 3G network, unlimited landline calls (thus landline-to-VOIP), unlimited video conferencing on the phone.

Here in Denmark wireless HSDPA at 2mbit/s costs $20 per month for unlimited bandwidth use.

In France 24mbit/s ADSL2+ has been available for $30 per month for a while.

In Sweden, Denmark, Norway, you can get unlimited 100mbit/s download/upload fiber to the home for around $40 per month.

Though I agree that twitter penetration, and other pretty much useless websites like Digg, 4chan have lower penetration in Europe. There are many more HDTV channels in the USA for example, but they are filled with dumb advertisements. Though Facebook usage in Denmark is about 50% of the population.

In any ways, my study of IT in society makes it out to be that IT use worldwide pretty much sucks, and that we as a worldwide society need to use that Internet and these computer tools much more effeciently. For example, all students should have laptops, all should use the Internet for reorganizing their education, all classes need to be put up as videos on Youtube. All TV should come from the Internet, all wireless broadband should be on 700mhz and should be free, we should all have HD videoconferencing using fiber to the home.

Cordell February 23, 2009 · 12:29 pm

Why pray tell does the average consumer today need gigabit or even 45 Mb/sec Internet access if the bulk of their time is spent surfing the net? We are not all Google guys with server farms in our garages. In my personal experience with a 1.5 Mb/sec DSL link, the longest delay I suffer is ~15 minutes every two months when I download an operating system patch or software update. Even then, the download occurs in the background — so I cannot feel particularly inconvenienced. Moreover, most congestion occurs at the server end. Dramatically expanding network capacity to the home offers little return on investment, both for the consumer and ISP, and simply exacerbates server congestion. The only application that requires more than a fraction of a 45 Mb/sec link to the home is real-time HD video. Even here, more economical alternatives like Netflix or Tivo time shifting exist. Thankfully, at least for now, market forces rather than government edicts and taxpayer subsidies determine the US internet infrastructure build out.

Tessa February 23, 2009 · 1:09 pm

Never cross a stream that is 4 feet deep on average. 10% of people in the US have dial up. 35% have no Internet access at all. The idea that the US can be competitive or reduce health care cost or impove education while this is the case is as silly as your trumpting a telco financed study. The broadband future is here– it’s just highly unevenly distributed. And getting more so not less so.

Carl Howe February 23, 2009 · 1:28 pm

The US may be #1 on this connectivity scorecard, but it isn’t even in the top 10 in the world in broadband connectivity. If that sounds like a contradiction, let me explain.

The challenge of using any metric is knowing what is being measured. Despite the title, the Connectivity Scorecard mentioned in this article is measuring many factors beyond connectivity, including consumer software spending, how many PCs a country has per 100 people and adjusted business computer services spending. In fact, because of the high weightings for business infrastructure used in the scorecard, non-connectivity factors such as PCs per 100 have more effect on a country’s score than, say, having more fiber lines per person than any other. The result: being #1 on this scorecard is more akin to winning a baseball game based on the weighted sum of the number of hits, walks, and home runs; while those metrics may represent interesting aspects of the game, they don’t necessarily tell you the real score.

Like the authors cited here, we here at Yankee Group believes that there are many factors affecting a country’s path to “Anywhere”, which is what we call the state where everyone who can benefit has a broadband connection to the network. But the proper way to measure that state is by measuring how connected the population is, not how they got there. If we measure wired and wireless broadband connectivity per capita, a measure we call the Anywhere Index, the US ranked 20th in the world in 2008. The OECD was kinder — it ranked the US 19th for the same year.

So we shouldn’t be confused between connectivity and this Connectivity Scorecard. Our [Yankee Group’s] forecast says that countries like Sweden and Japan will pass one broadband line per capita in 2009, while the US languishes at just over one broadband line per two people today. At current rates, it will take the US until 2011 to surpass the milestone of one broadband line per person. Claiming that we are ahead of the rest of the world is more likely to demonstrate how disconnected our knowledge is rather than how connected our citizens are.

For more information on worldwide broadband connectivity from Yankee Group (www.yankeegroup.com), please feel free to peruse our reports “Getting the Anywhere Net” (//www.yankeegroup.com/ResearchDocument.do?id=51115), and Many Roads To Anywhere, A Field Guide (//www.yankeegroup.com/ResearchDocument.do?id=51354).
Carl Howe, Director Anywhere Research, Yankee Group, Boston MA

Josh, Cleveland February 23, 2009 · 1:31 pm

Is this news?

We know that America is behind most of the world’s major nations in broadband speed and availability. We know that America is behind because for 8 years American government said “we aren’t going to do anything but let business drive broadband growth”. Now we have a report saying that while the American people are behind in speed and access, American business has the best internet in the world!

So to recap, let the government drive broadband growth and the people get good broadband. Let business drive broadband growth and businesses get good broadband. No surprises here, just American conservative capitalism at its finest!

C February 23, 2009 · 1:37 pm

I didn’t read all the comments, so pardon if I’m redundant… but if we, the US, are making the best use of technology as consumers, but are lagging far behind numerous other countries for consumer broadband… how the hell are we on top?

If anything, that makes the arguement that our broadband needs to be stepped up! But as long as we only have a few key players in broadband market we are screwed on that count. We pretty much need the internet for our daily whatevers and the big players know they can get away with not investing in better equipment. And they bitch about ‘network congestion’ when nobody gets anywhere near the speeds they advertise in the first place.

Not where I live anyway. Sorry, but we are still behind on the broadband. The big ISPs don’t have any incentive to upgrade… because there is hardly any competition. I think that is the main driving force here and eventually its going to really bite us in the ass.