ODELS AND CHALLENGES FOR THE EPLOYMENT OF NEXT-GENERATION TELECOM …ville.montreal.qc.ca/pls/portal/docs/PAGE/PRT_VDM_FR/... · DEPLOYMENT OF NEXT-GENERATION TELECOM SYSTEMS IN CITIES

MODELSANDCHALLENGESFORTHEDEPLOYMENTOFNEXT-GENERATIONTELECOMSYSTEMSINCITIES

June2018

Modèlesetréseauxdetélécommunicationdeprochainegénérationencontextemunicipal|2

Contents

Introduction..................................................................................................................................3

SECTION1:LiteratureReviewandExperiencewith5G...................................................................41.1MunicipalConcernsandFindingsintheLiterature................................................................................41.2PrevailingBusinessModels....................................................................................................................8StudyingDifferentHybridModels..............................................................................................................10

SECTION2:ScopeandLimitsofMunicipalAuthority....................................................................142.1InfrastructureandUrbanProperty......................................................................................................142.2MunicipalandTelcoPowersUnderCurrentLegislation......................................................................152.3PromotingaPredictableRegulatoryFrameworkfor5G......................................................................192.4DataGovernanceFrameworkin5GEnvironments..............................................................................19

SECTION3:FormulatingaMunicipalPublic5GPolicy...................................................................223.15GandPublicPolicy.............................................................................................................................223.2PublicPolicyComponents....................................................................................................................233.3InformationManagementAbilitiesofMunicipalInstitutions..............................................................25

Conclusion...................................................................................................................................27

LiteratureReview—ByTopic........................................................................................................29NORTHAMERICA........................................................................................................................................29EUROPE......................................................................................................................................................32AFRICA........................................................................................................................................................33ASIA 33OCEANIA.....................................................................................................................................................34SOUTHAMERICA........................................................................................................................................345GANDSMALLCELLS.................................................................................................................................35TELEPHONEANDLIGHTPOLESANDURBANPROPERTY............................................................................35BROADBAND(GENERALINFORMATION)...................................................................................................36SMALLCELLSANDHEALTH.........................................................................................................................37SMARTCITIESANDBROADBAND...............................................................................................................37MUNICIPALBROADBAND(VIDEOS)............................................................................................................37

MUNICIPALBROADBAND|DOCUMENTSCONSULTED..................................................................385G,SmallCellsandUrbanproperty...........................................................................................................38

Workshop1.................................................................................................................................43

Workshop2.................................................................................................................................44

TableofCases..............................................................................................................................45

MODELSANDCHALLENGESFORTHEDEPLOYMENTOFNEXT-GENERATIONTELECOMSYSTEMSINCITIES

June2018PROJECTTEAMKarineBlondin,ProjectDirector,CEFRIOJoséeBeaudoin,VicePresident,CEFRIODanielJ.Caron,Professor,Écolenationaled’administrationpubliqueLaurieDavid,ProjectOfficer,CEFRIOCristianoTherrien,DoctorofLaw(LL.D.)candidateUdeMPierreTrudel,Professor,Centrederechercheendroitpublic,FacultyofLaw,UdeMLegaldeposit:2018BibliothèqueetArchivesnationalesduQuébecLibraryandArchivesCanadaISBN(PDF):978-2-923852-84-3Photocredit:metamorworks


Introduction

In the winter of 2018, Montréal asked CEFRIO to lead a research team in conducting a preliminaryassessmentofthestrategicandtheoreticalaspectsofbusinessmodelsformassivedeploymentofnext-generationtelecommunicationssystems.

This report constitutes the conclusion of the iterative decision-making process, which included threeworkshopsinvolvingthemunicipalandprojectteams:

Workshop1: Presentationof preliminary findings from the literature reviewanddiscussionondefiningkeyaspectsandconsiderations.

Workshop 2: Using examples from other cities, examination of considerations and theoriespertainingtohybridmodelsofwiredandwirelessinfrastructure.

Workshop3:Discussionof issues involved inestablishingapublic5Gpolicyand,morebroadly,the“informationhub”concept.

Thereportdoesnotincludealloftheinformationpreparedfortheworkshops,whichdohoweverappearinitsappendices.Itservesprimarilyasaconclusionoftheiterativeprocess,presentedin:

- Section1,offeringanoverviewoftheliteraturereviewand5Gexperiences.- Section2,providinganassessmentoftheregulatoryframework.- Conclusion,withadiscussiononpublicpolicydirections.

Thisreportisdesignedtosupportthecityinitsdeliberationsandproposepossiblequestions.


SECTION1:LiteratureReviewandExperiencewith5GByCristianoTherrienThe imminent arrival of high-broadband systems is creating turmoil in municipalities throughout theworld.Citiesmustpromptlyadoptpositionsontheadventofnewtechnologiesthatrequireinstallationoflargenumbersoftelecomdevicesontheirterritories.Thesenext-generationtechnologiesalsooffergreatpotentialsforcities.Thetimehascometodefinemunicipalpositionsonthenewchallengesof5G,wellbeyondthescopeofissuespertainingtocapacitiesandantennas.

1.1MunicipalConcernsandFindingsintheLiteratureFor thestudy, itwasprovidedacomprehensivereviewof literatureaboutthepresentstateof

municipal broadband in major cities of the world. The consulted literature consisted of academic,mediatic, corporative, and governmental publications which are listed in the annexes. Most of thedocumentsareavailableandopenly linkedtotheirsourcesforfurtherconsultation,exceptsomeofthecopyright-restrictedacademicarticles.

Theacademicarticlessupportedaninitialexplorativelookintothetechnologicalelementsofthesubject, mainly 5G as a new technological trend for the cities. The selectedmedia publications aboutmunicipal broadband exposed the social expectations and concerns in the matter, besides a moreaccessibledescriptionofthetechnologiesinvolved.Corporativematerialsprovidedmoregranulardetailsabout commercial tendencies and institutional implications of the new context for fixed and mobileconnectivityincities.Theofficialdocumentsreflectedthegovernmentalpropositionsandactionsalreadyinprogresswhichtakeintoaccountallthepreviouselementsinamorepragmaticapproach.

Theliteraturereviewinvolvedacomparativereviewofbroadbandpoliciesandmodelsadoptedbymunicipal governments around theworld, with an emphasis on cities with closer characteristics toMontreal.Theelementsofcomparisonwerepresentedinthemeetingswiththecityhallemployeeswhohave contributed with all the necessary information aboutMontreal connectivity for the goals of thestudy. The city staff from various departments have demonstrated a higher level of knowledge abouttechnical, regulatory, and institutional elements about municipal broadband and the singularities ofMontrealthananypreviousin-housedocumentationcouldeverprovide.Thedocumentationreviewthusbecameacomplementtothecumulatedknowledgeandabasisforfurtherevaluations.

Montreal city hall follows one of the major municipal trends identified by the review of theliterature: the city is responsively mobilizing academia, community, and government in planning the“connected city” for a near future through the understanding and solving of the present needs andconditions. Despite some distinctive conditions, the city hall shares other common trends inmunicipalconnectivityandcouldbebeneficedbythesharedexperienceavailableaboutsimilarcities.

Aftergoingthroughthedocumentation,itisclearthatallmajorcitiesarefacingsimilarquestionsand challenges to the fast-changing context of municipal broadband. The adoption of emergingtechnologies and new business models with increasing socioeconomic interest—notably 5G and IoT—dependonamassivedeploymentofconsolidated technologiesandusualurbanpractices—mainly fibre


optic and small cell networks—in a high demanding scale and speed for governments and telecomcompanies.Infact,alltherelatedreportsproducedbyconsultantsand“thinktanks”hiredforthepublicand private sectors come to describe this same diagnostic, however with some different predictions,concernsandsolutionstofaceit.

Themostnotoriousreportsreferredinmediawereproducedfortheuseoftelecommunicationscorporationsandtheydescribesimilarconcernsthatreflectthepointofviewoftheindustry:

• Aboutallconcerns,therearethehighcostsinvolvedtotransitionthetechnologiesandtheelevatedinvestmentsassociatedtothemthatimplyaconsiderablelevelofrisk,inspecialthoserelatedtothe(re)actionsfromgovernments;

• MunicipalgovernmentsareseenaskeyplayersforestablishingconditionsofaccesstoRightofWay (RoW)anduseof street furniture,bothwhichwillbenecessary for thedeployoftheconjugatedtechnologiesof5Gandfibre;

• Telecom corporations are apprehensive that the cities may propose unachievablerequirementsoflandusefortheneedsofmassivedeploymentofsmallcellsandfibre;

• Theindustryhasalsomanifestedconcernsaboutrequirementsrelatedtoaestheticsandsitingofequipment,whichareveryvariatedsofarandwithalowerlevelstandard.

• An increased underground accessibility to conducts for fibre optic and energy arefrequentlymentionedasanecessaryfactorforthesuccessinthetransitiontoward5G,withcitiesandotherurbanutilityownersplayingagreatroleinmanycases;

• Theuse/rentalofavarietyofstreetfurniture,inspecialcity-ownedpolesandlampposts,constitutethemainworry for thecompaniesthatwilldisputethesameurbanspacesfor their equipment, what will require cooperation between the many interestedactors;

• Telecommunication companies tend to see themselves in a horizontal relation withgovernmentsforthedevelopmentoftheirbusiness,thereforetheyexpectarelationofcooperation that should be reflected in regulations related to their needs of 5G andfibre;

• Finally, as governments are described as clients of their services, the reports fromprivate telecom operators avoidmentioning any protagonist role of cities for settingpublicnetworkinfrastructures,despitetheincreasingnumberofmunicipalcasesofit.

In an opposed and complementary sense, other reports produced for city governments shareotherkindsofconcernsthatcomposethepointofviewofcityofficialsandcitydwellers:

• Allquestionsrelatedtocostsandbudgetsaresensitivemattersforanycitydepartment,sothesecometothetopofallconcerns,consideringthat,inonewayoranother,thosearegoingtorisetokeepupwiththegrowingneedsofconnectivityforthemunicipality;

• Municipalgovernments tend to see risingconnectivityneeds inorder tokeepupwithmunicipalservicesandfacilitiesthatareexpandingallovertheworldtocorrespondtothegrowingdemandsofcitizens;

• In the previous periods, the connectivity needs were restricted to internal use in alimited number of facilities, but now the services are developing to reach everymunicipalequipment,includingnewservicesasopenWi-Fiandfreepublicaccess;

• New technological resources are expected to deliver more cost-efficient and citizen-oriented services, ranging from connected traffic sensors to better decision makingbased on a data-driven analysis, all depending on reliable municipal connectivity towork;

• Asaninclusiveandnon-discriminatorypolicy,anynewtelecomtechnologywithpositiveeconomic impact has to aim a full city coverage, not only themore privileged urbanareas;


• Thedeploymentof5Ginthecitiestendtoconcentrateinareaswithahighereconomicreturn for companies, keeping only 4G for areas of lower interest, thus limiting theexpansionoffibrenetworksthataremorebeneficialtocitizensandmunicipalservices;

• Even on the areas where 5G is expected, many local debates from citizen concernsinvolvingtheaestheticsofsmallcellsandfibrenetworks,possiblehealthimplicationsof5Gfrequencies,highercostsofconnectivity,aswellprivacyandsecurityquestionings;

• Governments see themselves in a vertical relationwith telecommunication companiesfor the development of their communities, therefore they propose regulations thatreflectexpectedcooperationrelatedtotheachievementoftheircollectiveneeds;

• Finally, as telecom companies are openly lobbying for national regulations to limitmunicipalrequirements,whilenotattendingthelocalneedsofurbanareas,manycitiesareproposingpublic-ownednetworkstoachievemorepowerofnegotiationwiththem.

Aswell,itisnecessarytohighlighttherecommendationsintheofficialdocumentsproducedbynational ministries and supranational organizations that describe contexts, evaluate conditions, andpropose strategies for national, regional, and municipal broadband. Most of those reports are veryorientedtowardseconomiccompetitivityonaworldscale,andtheyavoidgettingintothelevelofdetailsoflocalimplementationthatareofmajormunicipalconcern.Anyhow,theissuesandchallengesidentifiedbynationalstudiescannotbedecoupledfromthemunicipalrecommendationsbecausethecityofficialshave to meet the national concerns and solutions to achieve common understanding grounds withtelecommunicationcompaniesandimpliednationalinstitutions.

Similar questions and propositions are shared by the countries in the front run of themulti-technology5Gtestbedsandthefibremassivedeploymentsbeematerializedinmajorurbanareas:

• There is a strategic focus on economic development for the “industry 4.0” and therenewaloftheautomotivesector(e.g.connectedandautonomousvehicles)whichwilldemand active support from governments, including the financing of necessaryinfrastructures;

• Themosturgenttopicfornationalandglobalagreementsrelayontheharmonizationofthe5Gspectrum(frequenciesbelow6Ghzandabove25Ghz)forwhichthetestresultsare crucial to choosing the frequencies to be used,with significant consequences forcities;

• Oncethefrequenciesaredefined,theexpectanciesof5Gsignalspeed/rangeandfibredensificationwillbeknown,socombinedeffortsneedtobedone in internationalandregionallevelsforaminimalstandardizationoftechnologiesandbusinessmodels;

• Despiteeventual resistances in the telecom industries linked tocommercial strategies,most reports point toward infrastructure sharing for small cell attachments and fibreconducts(locationsandequipment)asacommongoaltobenegotiatedandachieved;

• Oneofthewaysofpromotingappropriatedstandardsandmodelsforconnectivitywillbethroughtheadequationoftaxationfortheuseofurbanspacesandstreetfurniture,considering the high number of small cells and the massive fibre extension to bedeployed;

• Other topics of public relevance are: safety, for themany health concerns around 5Gfrequencies; security, ranging from national cybersecurity to customer security; andprivacy, for the enhanced capabilities of surveillance when combining 5G and IoTsensors;

• Nationalstudieshighlightconcernsaboutcustomeraccessibilityforalleconomicclassestohigh-speedconnectivity innewmobileand fixed technologies (a subjectnotclearlydetailedincorporativematerials),whichmaycostmorethanbroadbandplansoftoday;

• Finally, some reports emphasize a need of adequation of local policy frameworks forbetter development of broadband in municipalities, with recommendations that thecitiesshouldusethisopportunityforthedevelopmentoftheircommunities.


Afterconsideringthemostpresentelementsofanalysisintheliterature,itissafetoaffirmthat,despiteall thesimilarities, the localconditionsandresponses fromthecitiescanvarya lot,evenwheninsidethesamecountryorregion.Somecitycasescanillustratethisundefinedcontext.

Whengoingbeyond theoverviewof the literature that looks forpatterns inpublicpolicies formunicipalbroadbandinmajorcities,oneofthefirstfindingsisthattheresuchvarietyofmodelsthat isevenpossible tosay that there isnoconsolidatedmodel.Everycitycasehasmanydifferences towardstheothers,manykindsofexperimentationsare inprogressallovertheworld.Anyurbanresearcherorcityauthoritylookingforsolutionstothenewlocalconstraintsrelatedtofibreand5Gwillconcludethattherearemanypossibleanswers,dependingonthelocalcontext.

Theadequatemodelofmunicipalbroadbandpolicytofollowwillbedesignedaccordinglytothepeculiarcharacteristicsofthecityandtheconditioningnecessitiesandforces inaction.Therearemanykeyconsiderationstotakeintoaccount,dependingonpolitical,economic,technical,andlegalfactorsthatareofdifficultassessmentforthosenotintheinternaldynamicsofacityhall.Manyvariantshavetobeput inbalancetoevaluateandproposeamanagementmodel formunicipalbroadband,alsodependingontheviablepartnershipswithsurroundingcitiesinametropolitanarea,partnershipswithotherpublicentities,orevenpublic-privatepartnershipsaccordinglytotheconditionsineachcase.


1.2PrevailingBusinessModelsEvolutionandTrends

Consideringthefast-pacedsocioeconomicchangesinsocietiesduetothedisseminationofdigitaltechnologies inallhumanactivities inthe lastdecades, it isexpectedthatallgovernmentsadapttotheincreasingdemandsofcostefficiencyandserviceperformancefromtheircommunitiesandcitizens.Citiesare considered one of the greatest human inventions of all times, andmany of themhave survive forcenturiesexactlyfortheirinherentcapacityofadaptingtochangingtimes.

Inthepastreasonablyrecent,telecommunicationservicesformunicipalgovernmentsweremorelimitedtocommunicationsbyfixedtelephonesandveryspecificdatalinksforfewdatasystemsoperatedbycities.These limitedservicesof communicationwereprovidedbyprivatecompaniesor state-ownedcompaniesandtheywereconsideredquitesufficientforthedataneedsatthattime.

Withachangeofparadigmtowardsadata-drivensociety,localgovernmentshavebeenpushedto attend tomultiplying demands of data-basedmanagement and planning in urban areas.More andmore data is needed for automation and decision making in municipal systems which are constantlyoutgrowing the operational capabilities and/or cost limits of telecommunication networks provided byprivatecompanies.

Beyond the institutional needs of broadband communications, cities representatives feel thepressure from their communities and citizens to conduct public policies for digital inclusion, publictransparency, civic engagement, personal data protection, information security, algorithmicaccountability, and techno-economic development towards a data-based society. In order to achievemoreresponsivegovernanceofallthesesocialaspectsandthoseinstitutionalneedsinplace,moreandmorecitiesareplayingamoresignificativeroleinthetelecommunicationnetworksintheirurbanareas.

Hundredsofcitieshavebuilttheirfibreopticnetworkinfrastructures,inamobilizingmovementthathavebeentakingtractioninthelasttenyearsinNorthAmerica,Europeandothercontinents.Thistendency is clear in small and many medium-sized cities which are bounded by insufficient privatetelecomnetworksthatnegatively impacttheirurbanlivingconditions.Asthere isnotenougheconomicinterest for telecomoperators to expand high-speed broadband in their urban tissues, these cities arepubliclyengagedinevolvingthepreviousprivate-basedmodeltoacommunity-basedmodeloftelecomnetworks.

In themajormetropolitan cities, the situation isnot so clearanddependsonmany factors, inspecialtheobviousfactthatthedeploymentof5Gdependsontheexpansionoffibrenetworks.Itislikelythat telecomcompaniesprovideenough investments in theurbanareaswithamajoreconomicreturn,but they will not necessarily provide full urban coverage and attend all institutional and communityneeds, depending on the geosocial characteristics of the city. For this reason, many major cities areredefiningtheirbroadbandcontractsandpoliciesbycombiningcity-ownednetworkswithpublic-privatepartnerships.


ReviewofPrevailingModels

Regardingmunicipalbroadband—hereunderstoodasservicesoftelecommunicationsbetweenacity government and its communities and city dwellers—there are three main business models toconsider:

• Allprivatemodel–oneormoretelecommunicationcompaniesprovideall theservicesoffixedandmobileconnectivitytothecitygovernmentandcitizensascustomers.

o Fromcontractsselectedbyprocurementprocess,thecityhallbuildingsandequipmentareconnectedthroughtheprivateinfrastructureofatelecomoperator.

o The city frequently becomes a “special client” with some extra rights (SLA clauses),totallydependentonprivatenetworks,devicesandhumanresourcesbeyondany citycontrol.

o It remains the most common case in major cities, but it already lost the previousconsensusof“naturalchoice”forreasonsrelatedtocosts,efficiency,securityandurbanmanagement.

• Allpublicmodel–thecitygovernmentbuildsandoperatesapublicownedfixednetworkinanurbanareawhichprovidesservicestoitselfanditscitizens.ThecitymayofferwirelessservicesasopenWiFiinpublicareas,buttelecomoperatorsstillhaveexclusivityfor3G/4Gconnectivityforcitizens.

o When facing the totalorpartial lackof investmentbyprivate companies, the cityhallhas tomobilize financial andhuman resources to create a network to attend the cityneeds.

o Hundredsofsmallcitiesaroundtheworldhavebeenbuildingtheirpublicfibrenetworksfor economic development goals and to provide better municipal services to theircitizens.

o The main form of sustaining this model is lending excessive dark fibre to privatecompanies through contracts with a public-owned company or a specific citydepartment.

• Partnershipmodel(PPP/hybrid)–therearemanymodelsofpublic-privatepartnershipsonworkand being created which will combine elements of the previous models, accordingly to eachcontext.

o PPP models for setting up network infrastructures ready for new tech generations,where themainconsiderationsareonwhowillown, finance,deploy,andassumetheriskofit.

o PPPmodels for operating the network in pre-determined terms to achievemunicipalgoals, where the main considerations are on who and how will pay, maintain andupgradeit.

o PPPmodelsforusingthenetworkwherethemainconsiderationsareonwhowill“light”thefibre,provideservicestocitizensandcompanies,andsupportthecityserviceswithit.

Thosearenot fully closedmodelsand the lastone isprone toconstant changebecausemanycities around the world are searching for customized forms of better delivering their services in anetwork-basedsocietyandrepositioningthemselvesinamorecompetitivescenario.


Whenitcomesthemomenttoaffirmwhichbusinessmodelformunicipalbroadbandwouldbe

adequate for a specific city—all private, all public, or hybrid—there are some issues and questions topose,especiallyconsideringthecontext-changingexpectanciesrelatedto5Gdeployment.

Once uncontested, the ‘all private’ business model is the most commonly used by citygovernmentsand,by far, thebest-knownscenario. It carriesall theadvantagesanddisadvantagesofatraditional full outsourcingmodel for internal telecommunications services for amunicipality.With thefuture availability of 5G and feasibility of IoT-based sensors for municipal services, there are manyquestionsrelatedto flexibility, security,privacyandhiddencosts tobetaken inaccount,accordingly tocityplans.

Fromapublicpolicyperspective,theallprivatemodelkeepsthecityina“userposition”withalower power of negotiation with telecom companies for meeting public principles and institutionalobjectives.There is less roomtoengage the telecomoperatorswhichcommitments like fairprices, fullcoverage,andadequateuseofstreetfurniture,forexample.

The transition to ‘allpublic’model in telecommunicationsmaybebetterunderstoodbypublicadministrations when looking in the past in the case of electricity companies (many moved from theprivate to the public control) or looking abroad to telecom companies that remain under partial stateownership. In term of cost/benefit relations, there aremany possible questions about the capacity offinancing, deploying and operating a citywide fibre network for municipal services. Considering theimminent 5G and fibremassive deployment by telecom companies in larger cities, it is expected thatmanyurbanareaswillbe impactedwithoverlappingfibrenetworksandsmallcellsonthestreets–thecityhallmayincreaseorlowerthisimpact.

When a city has a full (or even a partial, if relevant) telecom network, it comes with theadvantages of a “major player” for negotiating terms and conditions with telecom companies. Thisbargainingresourcescanbeaddedtothepoliticalcapabilitiesofcityrepresentativesandtheinstitutionalpowers (even if limited)of thecityhall, andbeveryuseful forensuring theaccomplishmentof certainpublicpolicies.

The ‘hybrid’ model of municipal broadband, better know as public-private partnership, iscomposedofelements,risksandrewardsfromthepreviousmodelsandshallbedemonstratedthroughexistingcases.

StudyingDifferentHybridModels Among the larger cities in the world, the literature review pointed some illustrative cases ofhybrid business models with contrasting differences that can help to delineate options for municipalbroadband.

CALGARYThecityasaproviderofapublicdarkfibrenetworkforpublicandprivateusers

Thecityhasbeeninstallingitsowndarkfibreforcityuseovertheyearsandlicensesoutexcessdarkfibretootherorganizationstoencourageinnovation,economicgrowthandcompetitionwithinthecommunity.

Main features: city-owned network withmore than 400km of fibre reaching all quadrants of the city;networkoperator-neutral(openaccess);thecityprovidessupport24/7foritselfandcustomers.


Thecityexpands thenetwork tomeet customerpremises.Thecustomer is responsible for funding thelastmilebuildcostbutwillbereimbursedthefullvalue.Thecityastheultimateowneroftheassetwillreducetheleasecostuntilthefullvalueofthelastmilebuildcostisrecoveredbythecustomer.

Thecityoffersfibreservicestocivicpartnersandnon-profits,schoolsboards,universities,researchcentres,hospitals,clinics,datacentres,ISPs,carriers,commercialbusinesses,wirelesstowers.ThecityfibrenetworkdoesnotprovideInternetservices,residentialretailservice,networkandelectronicequipment.

BOSTONCombiningtelecomoperatorsnetworksandcityequipmentandmanagement

Thecityoperatesacity-widenetworkcalledBostonOpticalNetwork(“BoNET”),whichhasbeenupandrunningsince2008,nowconnectingmorethan180buildings.

Main features: Comcast and RCNown the network and provide service through franchise agreements.Thecityownsandrunsthenetworkequipment,providingmoresecurityandcontrolofdata.

BoNETprovidesagnosticnetworkservicestousergroupsthatvaryfromtypicalofficeenvironmentsto24x7publicsafetyoperations.Itprovidescritical,cost-effectiveinfrastructuretotheoperationsofthecity,meetingthegrowingdemandsofaconnectedcity.

SANFRANCISCOThecityproposingthreedifferentmodelsofPPPformunicipalbroadband

Thecityleadsanundergoingprocesstodesign,build,finance,operate,andmaintainanetworkproposedinthreedifferentPPPmodels:darkfibrenetwork;darkfibreandlitservices;darkfibreandlitservicesandWiFi.

Mainfeatures:city-owned,openaccess,passiveopticalnetworkwithfullurbancoverage,operatedbyaprivate partner (company, consortium, or joint venture) providing services to the city and telecomoperators.

The three different models1 proposed were based on previous studies, city council debates, publicconsultations,andmeetingsofcitystaffandrepresentativeswithprivatecompanies.Thecitywillmakefunds available to cover a portion of the project costs through milestone and periodic availabilitypayments.

In the first PPPmodel proposed, the citywouldnotprovide lit servicesbutdevelopa singledark fibrenetwork,withapartnerresponsible,underacontractof30years,ofleasingdarkfibretotelecomserviceproviders.

1Moredetails about the threemodels of San Francisco aredescribed in threebroadband studies, PPPdocuments (including theRFP), and twovideosofpublicmeetings listed in theannexesof thepresentreport.


In the second PPPmodel proposed, one partnerwould be responsible for the dark fibre, and anotherpartner would be responsible, under a contract of 7-10 years, for delivering lit services to competingproviders.

In the third and final PPPmodel, which was detailed in a Request for Proposals, a single partner willprovide,underacontractof15years,thedarkfibre,thelitservicesandfreeWiFi insignificantareasofthecity.

STOCKHOLMAcitycompanyleasesamunicipaldarkfibrenetworkfortelecomprovidersandservicesforitself

Municipallyownedpassivedarkfibreinfrastructureprovider,calledStokab,aneutralownerbuildingandoperatingthebasicinfrastructureandleasingitonequaltermstocompetingoperators.

Mainfeatures:Itistheworld’slargestopenfibrenetworkwith1.25millionfibrekm,5,500cablekm,600nodes,morethan15,000accesspointscovering90%ofhouseholdsandnearly100%businesses inthecity.

Thispublicnetworkinterconnectsthe4Gmobilenetworksoffouroperators.ThedeploymentofStokab’sinitial networkwas financedby loansbackedby theCity, over€600millionon investment in20 years.Stokabstartedgeneratingprofitafter13yearsofoperation.Savingsareestimatedtoapproximately€7million/year.

AMSTERDAMAmetropolitandarkfibremanagedbyapublic-privateconsortiumwithasmallerpublicshare

A PPP for a passive fibre network infrastructure lead byGlasvezelnet Amsterdam (GNA), a consortiumbetweenthemunicipality,thehousingassociationsandtheprivatesector.

Mainfeatures:GNAownsandoperatesanopenfibrenetwork,anyserviceprovidercansignuptousethenetwork,eventhoughthetelecomcompanyKPNowns70%ofGNAshares.

Eachpartnerinvested€6minreturnforaone-thirdstakeinthecompany.€12minfundingwasprovidedasdebtfinancing.120,000metersoftrenchingwereneededforthefirst40,000connectionstobuildings.Roughly80percentofthecostswerelabourcosts,while10percentwerefibre.


FORTALEZAPartnershipofcity,stateandfederalgovernmentsforbuildingandmanagingasharedfibrenetwork

Thecitynetworkstartedasapublicpartnershipbetweenthecity,state,andfederalgovernments,eachonewithathirdoffibrepairs,withallpartnerscooperatingforextendingthenetworkaccordinglytotheirneeds.

Main features: the municipality shares parts of its 260 Km fibre network (Fibrafor) with the stategovernment fibre network (Cinturão digital do Ceará) and the federal government research network(Gigafor).

TheFibraforinterconnectcitybuildingsand16WiMaxtowerstowirelesslyconnectover600schoolsandhealthclinicswithWiMaxsmallcells.TelecomcontractshavebeenprogressivelyreplacedbytheFibraFor.Allpartnersusethesameequipmenttominimizetechnical risks.ThenetworkwasusedforFIFAWorldCup.

CAPETOWNThecityasaneutralhostoffibrenetworksandcelltowersprovidingservicesfortelecomoperators

TheCityprovidesanopenaccesstelecommunicationsinfrastructureandbackhaulservicestocommercialoperators to extend their networks across the city’s infrastructure, including masts in high sites forwireless.

Mainfeatures:thecity-owned“CapeTownMetroAreaNetwork”consistsof848kmoffibre-opticcablesand 27 switching facilities. Fibre-optic cables and microwave links are used to connect over 400 citybuildings.

CapeTowndoesnotprovideservicestoend-users,likeordinarybusinesses.ThenetworkinvolvedCAD$180 million of City initial investment in 7 years. It combines partnerships with national and stategovernments(IT,Police,hospitalsetc.)andeducationnetworks.

ADELAIDETwoPPPnetworksinthesamemetropolitanarea-TenGigabitAdelaide&GigCityAdelaide

TheTenGigabitAdelaidewasIncludedintheCity2016−2020StrategicPlanandthecitycouncilstartedaPPPprocesstoconnect1.000buildingsthrough100kmopticfibrenetwork.TheGigCityAdelaidenetworkisa1gigabitnetworkcomposedbytheSouthAustralianBroadbandResearchandEducationNetwork

Mainfeatures:TheprivatepartnerTGPownsthenetwork"10GigabitAdelaide"andthecity is itsmainpromoter.“GigCityAdelaide”ownershipissharedbyStategovernmentandEscapenet,aprivateprovider.

TheCitycouncilreleasedthePPPinDecember2016andannouncedthepartnerTGPatelecomoperator,inDecember2017.ThecitycouncilwillspendAU$10millionovera“fewyears”underthepartnership.

The GigCity Adelaide network was announced in 2016 and launched in August 2017 by the stategovernment,whichwillinvestAU$35millioninexpandingitsfibrebroadbandnetwork.


SECTION2:ScopeandLimitsofMunicipalAuthorityByPierreTrudel

Variousfactorsmustbeconsideredindefiningthecity’spositiononnext-generationnetworks.Thefirstisclearlythelegalframework.

Acityhas,orshouldhave,authorityoverthedeploymentofa5Gnetworkintwoareas:(1)Infrastructure,useofpublicspaceandurbanproperty.(2)Data,andinparticular,howthecityshouldapplyitseffortstoensuremembersofthepublicthatdatageneratedbytheirmovementsandactionswillcomplywiththeirfundamentalrightswithrespecttoitsuse.

2.1InfrastructureandUrbanProperty

Theadventof5Gnetworksshedsnewlightontheoldquestionabouttherespectiveauthoritiesofcitiesandtelecommunicationprovidersinbuildingtelecominfrastructure,especiallyinpublicspaces.

5G assumes the existence of an ambient intelligence environment. Deploying 5G means installingequipment,antennas,sensors,conduitsandotherfacilitiesonpublicproperty.Thechallengeistoensurethatsuchinstallationisconsistentwiththemanyrulespertainingtothedevelopmentofsuchspaces.

It is important to consider how legislation currently distributes authority among city governments andtelecom firms. In view of the conditions imposed by the existing legal framework, we must clearlyconsidermeasures to increase the predictability of 5G infrastructure deployment conditions.Wemustalsoenvisionproceduresforupdatingapplicablelegislationandpreparetoadvocatetheimportanceofalegislativeframeworkcomplyingwiththeneedforanorderlyrolloutof5Genvironments,aswellaswiththesoundplanninganddevelopmentofpublicspaces.

The5Glegalframeworkalsodependsonchangesthataresuretocomeintermsofcorporateauthorityandmethodsforinstallingtheequipmentneededtoprovideservices.

Suchaframeworkmeansthattheareasinwhichcitieshaveauthoritytoactandsetconditionsforusingof public property within their territory must be defined. We must also identify proactive efforts topromote changes in the legal framework for telecommunications that will be consistent with therequirementsofacitythatincreasinglyassumestheformofaninformationplatform.


2.2MunicipalandTelcoPowersUnderCurrentLegislation

AsexplainedinVidéotronc.VilledeGatineau,2theMunicipalPowersActpermitscitiesto“makeby-lawsontheplacingofwires,”“useofapublicroad,”“excavations,”“construction,”and“maintenanceofworksover or under a public road.” In exercising its regulatory powers, amunicipalitymay require obtainingpermitsforwhichitsetsthecost.

Bythesametoken,s.29.19oftheCitiesandTownsAct,permitscitiestoenactby-laws“asregardstheoccupationofthepublicdomain.”Municipalitiesalsohavethepowertosettariffsunders.244.1to244.4oftheActRespectingMunicipalTaxation.

Furthermore,thefederalParliamentholdsexclusiveauthoritytoregulatetelecomfirms,unders.92A.(1)oftheConstitutionAct,1867:

92.Ineachprovince,thelegislaturemayexclusivelymakelawsinrelationto[...]

10.LocalWorksandUndertakingsotherthansuchasareofthefollowingClasses:(a) Lines of Steam or other Ships, Railways, Canals, Telegraphs, and other Works andUndertakings connecting the Provincewith any other or others of the Provinces, or extendingbeyondtheLimitsoftheProvince:[...]

The courts have extended the meaning of “telegraphs” to include the set of activities pertaining totelecommunications.

Itfollowsfromtheseconstitutionalprovisionsthatamunicipalitycannotexerciseitspowersinamannerthatinterfereswiththeoperationsoftelecomfirm.

In Alberta Government Telephones v. (Canada) Canadian Radio-television and TelecommunicationsCommission3theSupremeCourtofCanadastatedthat:“Thecaselawclearlyestablishesthatifaworkorundertaking fallswithin s. 92(10) (a) it is removed from the jurisdiction of the provinces and exclusivejurisdictionlieswiththefederalParliament...”

InPublic Service Board et al. v. Dionne et al.,4 the Supreme Court explained that “there cannot be aseparation” between the carrier system, the physical apparatus and the equipment used to build andmaintainthesesystems:

2 2017 QCCS 3571 (CanLII), http://canlii.ca/t/h570z 3 Alberta Government Telephones v. (Canada) Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, 1989

CanLII 78 (SCC), [1989] 2 SCR 225, p. 257. 4 Public Service Board et al. v. Dionne et al., 1977 CanLII 207 (SCC), [1978] 2 SCR 191, p. 197.


[...]wheretelevisionbroadcastingandreceivingisconcernedtherecannomorebeaseparationforconstitutionalpurposesbetweenthecarriersystem,thephysicalapparatus,andthesignalsthatarereceivedandcarriedoverthesystemthantherecanbebetweenrailwaytracksandthetransportationserviceprovidedoverthemorbetweentheroadsandtransportvehiclesandthetransportationservicethattheyprovide.Inallthesecases,theinquirymustbeastotheservicethat is provided and not simply as to the means through which it is carried on. Dividedconstitutional control of what is functionally and interrelated system of transmitting andreceiving television signals, whether directly through air waves or through intermediate cableline operations, not only invites confusion but is alien to the principle of exclusiveness oflegislativeauthority,aprinciplewhichisasmuchfedbyasenseoftheconstitutionasaworkingandworkableinstrumentasbyaliteralreadingofitswords.[...]

In2017, inRogersCommunications Inc.v.Châteauguay(City),5 theSupremeCourtofCanadareiteratedthat “the siting of radiocommunication antenna systems is at the core of the federal power overradiocommunication.Itistheappropriateandspecificsitingofradiocommunicationantennasystemsthatensurestheorderlydevelopmentandefficientoperationofradiocommunication...”

Acitymayhaveavoicein,butcannotdecideon,suchmatters.

Theactualnatureofregulationsenactedbyacitygovernmentmustbeassessedindetermininghowfaramunicipality can go in regulating the telecom systems of one or more telecom providers withoutinfringingonfederalauthority.

The legislation’s primary purpose or prevailing characteristics must be defined in examining the truenatureoftheruleanditsfocus.Thiseffortmeansevaluatingthelegislation’slegalimplicationsandactualeffects.

Theactualobjectiveofthelegislationmustbedescribed.Courtsdosobyweighingintrinsicandextrinsicevidence. This analysis of effects must include an analysis of the legislation’s legal and practicalimplications.

A lawthatfallswithinthescopeofthe legislaturethatenacts itmay incidentallytouchontopicsfallingoutside its jurisdiction without necessarily affecting its constitutional validity. They key is the law’sprimaryfocus.

ThecourtshaveconsistentlyrecognizedParliament’sauthorityovertele-andradiocommunication.PeterW.Hoggwrotethat:

TheBellTelephoneandWinnercasesestablishedanimportantrule,whichhasbeenconsistentlyreaffirmed in later cases, thata transportationor communicationundertaking is subject to theregulationofonlyonelevelofgovernment.6

Thismeansthatprovincesandcitiescannot,perse,regulateatelecomsystem’splanning,construction,management,siting,operationandmaintenance,oradecisiontomaintainornotmaintainsuchasystem.

5 Rogers Communications Inc. v. Châteauguay (City, 2016 SCC 23 (CanLII), at paras. 65 and 66. 6 P. W. HOGG, Constitutional Law of Canada, vol. 1, 5th edition, Toronto, Thomson Reuters, loose-leaf, p. 22-8.1.


Similarly,telecommunicationscontentfallssquarelyundertheauthorityofthefederalParliament.7Citiescannotregulatethecontentofmessagesthatmaybetransmittedbycommunicationsystemsthroughthespacestheygovern.

Similarly, provincial legislation cannot regulate the construction, maintenance or siting oftelecommunication on public roads, or require rent for using the right-of-way8. A provincial authoritycannotimposerestrictionsorrequirementsontheservice.9Theprovincecannotdeterminethesitingorminimumheightsoftelephonelinesoverhighways.10

Inthesamevein,acitycannotchargerenttotelecomprovidersforusingpublicright-of-ways.11Municipalby-laws requiring the city’s approval for installing telecommunications systems and permitting theimposition of conditions are constitutionally unenforceable.12 A notice of reservation prohibiting theinstallationofradioantennasonmunicipallandisunconstitutional.13

Ultimately, federal law regulates the facilities necessary for or essential to the operations of telecomproviders.

InEdmonton(City)v.360NetworksCanadaLtd.14,theFederalCourtofAppealheldthatss.42to44oftheTelecommunicationsAct“shouldbereadascomprehensive,exclusivecodeforregulatingcarriers’accesstopublicplacesforpurposesofconstructing,maintaining,operatingtransmissionlines.”Theseprovisionsof theAct grant telecommunicationsprovidersaccess topublic roads “for thepurposeof constructing,maintainingoroperatingitstransmissionlinesandmayremainthereforaslongasisnecessaryforthatpurpose,butshallnotundulyinterferewiththepublicuseandenjoymentofthehighwayorotherpublicplace.”Suchaccessissubjecttoapprovalbytheprovincialandmunicipalgovernments.Incaseofdispute,however,theCRTCsetsconditionsforsuchactivities:

42(1) Subject to any contrary provision in any Act other than this Act or any special Act, theCommissionmay,byorder,intheexerciseofitspowersunderthisActoranyspecialAct,requireor permit any telecommunications facilities to be provided, constructed, installed, altered,moved,operated,used,repairedormaintainedoranypropertytobeacquiredoranysystemormethod tobe adopted, by anyperson interested inor affectedby theorder, andatorwithinsuch time, subject to such conditions as to compensation or otherwise and under suchsupervisionastheCommissiondeterminestobejustandexpedient.

(2) TheCommissionmay specifybywhom, inwhatproportionandatorwithinwhat time thecostofdoinganythingrequiredorpermittedtobedoneundersubsection(1)shallbepaid.

7 Re C.F.R.B. and Attorney-General for Canada et al., 1973 CanLII 788 (ON CA), [1973] 3 OR 819 (leave application to

the Supreme Court of Canada denied). 8 Toronto Corporation v. Bell Telephone Company of Canada, cited above, note 117; Bell Telephone Company of

Canada v. Corporation of the County of Middlesex, 1946 CanLII 31 (SCC), [1947] S.C.R. 1. 9 Re Public Utilities Commission and Victoria Cablevision Ltd., (1965) 1965 CanLII 498 (BC CA), 51 D.L.R. (2d) 716

(C.A. B.-C.); Montréal (Ville de) c. Bell Canada, JE 84-1035 (C.A.). 10 Mission Paving Services Co. v. British Columbia Telephone Co., [1982] BCJ No. 1740 (BSCC). 11 Montréal (Ville de) c. Bell Canada, JE 84-1035 (C.A.). 12 Telus Communications Co. v. Toronto (City), (2007) 2007 CanLII 6243 (OONSC), 84 OR (3d) 656 (Ont. S.C.). 13 Rogers Communications Inc. c. Châteauguay (Ville), 2016 SCC 23 (CanLII). 14 Edmonton (City) v. 360 Networks Canada Ltd., 2007 CAF 106 (leave application to the SCC denied).


43(1) In this section and section 44, “distribution undertaking” has the same meaning as insubsection2(1)oftheBroadcastingAct.

(2) Subject to subsections (3) and (4) and section 44, a Canadian carrier or distributionundertakingmayenter on andbreakup anyhighwayor other public place for thepurposeofconstructing,maintainingoroperatingitstransmissionlinesandmayremainthereforaslongasisnecessaryforthatpurpose,butshallnotundulyinterferewiththepublicuseandenjoymentofthehighwayorotherpublicplace.

(3)NoCanadiancarrierordistributionundertakingshall constructa transmission lineon,over,underoralongahighwayorotherpublicplacewithouttheconsentofthemunicipalityorotherpublicauthorityhavingjurisdictionoverthehighwayorotherpublicplace.

(4) Where a Canadian carrier or distribution undertaking cannot, on terms acceptable to it,obtaintheconsentofthemunicipalityorotherpublicauthoritytoconstructatransmissionline,thecarrierordistributionundertakingmayapplytotheCommissionforpermissiontoconstructitandtheCommissionmay,havingdueregardtotheuseandenjoymentofthehighwayorotherpublic place by others, grant the permission subject to any conditions that the Commissiondetermines.

(5)Where a person who provides services to the public cannot, on terms acceptable to thatperson,gainaccesstothesupportingstructureofatransmissionlineconstructedonahighwayor other public place, that person may apply to the Commission for a right of access to thesupportingstructure for thepurposeofprovidingsuchservicesandtheCommissionmaygrantthepermissionsubjecttoanyconditionsthattheCommissiondetermines.

44.Onapplicationbyamunicipalityorotherpublicauthority,theCommissionmay

a) order a Canadian carrier or distribution undertaking, subject to any conditions that theCommissiondetermines,toburyoraltertherouteofanytransmissionlinesituatedorproposedtobesituatedwithinthejurisdictionofthemunicipalityorpublicauthority;or;

b) prohibit the construction, maintenance or operation by a Canadian carrier or distributionundertakingofanysuchtransmissionlineexceptasdirectedbytheCommission.

The CRTC holds the authority to resolve disputes between cities and businesses, including matters ofcost.15TheCRTCtakesinaccountavarietyoflegal,economic,socialandpoliticalfactorsinperformingitsfunctions,meetingtheobjectivesoftheCanadianTelecommunicationsPolicyandensuringthatproviderservicesandratesare“justandreasonable.”16TheCRTCcanruleonmattersof lawandfact,withsuchdecisionsbeing“bindingandconclusive”.17

15 From 1970 to 1976, the Canadian Transport Commission held this power. The National Transportation Act,

R.S.C. 1970, c. N-17, s. 51; National Transportation Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-20, s. 54; from 1906 to 1970, the Board of Railway Commissioners held this power: Railway Act, S.C. 1903, c. 58, amended by the Act amending the Railway Act, 1903, S.C. 1906, c. 42; Railway Act, S.C. 1919, c. 68; Railway Act, R.S.C. 1927, c. 170; Railway Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 234. Also see: Pierre TRUDEL and René PIOTTE, “La réglementation des infrastructures de télécommunications au Québec,” (1978) 13 R.J.T., pp. 139-202.

16 Telecommunications Act, ss. 7 and 47. 17 Telecommunications Act, ss. 52, 60 and 61.


Aby-lawthatisconfinedtomanagementofpublicrights-of-waymaybevalid.Forexample,acitycouldrequireproviderstogive informationonplannedprojects,coordinateworkbydifferentutilities,ensurepublicsafety,etc.

2.3PromotingaPredictableRegulatoryFrameworkfor5G

Thecityhaseveryinterestinpromotingapredictableframeworkforrollingout5Gsystemsonitsterritoryandavoidingacase-by-caseapproachbasedondecisionsoverdisputeswithtelecomprovidersarbitratedbytheCRTC.

The city must acquire mechanisms for participating in the review of radio communication andtelecommunicationslegislationtobeenacted,accordingtoannouncementsinthelatestfederalbudget.

In any event, the city should promote a predictable frameworkwith the CRTC in particular, aswell asotherregulatoryagencies, inconsiderationofthe5Ginfrastructure’s inherentcharacteristics.ThiscouldobviouslybedonemoreeasilythroughclosecoordinationamongmunicipalgovernmentsacrossCanada.

2.4DataGovernanceFrameworkin5GEnvironments

Montréalholdscertainpowerswithrespecttoavastgroupofdevicesdirectlyandindirectlyinvolvedin5G systems,primarilyunder theMunicipalPowersAct. Typical 5G connectedenvironments involve theproduction and dissemination of all kinds of data, including data used by security systems, datagenerated,transmittedandrequiredforautomated(ornot)connecteddevicesanddatausedtoprovidepublicservices.

Furthermore, data is becoming increasingly central to controlling municipal and quasi-municipalactivities.Thatiswhythecityshouldadoptapolicyondataflowingwithinitsterritory,usingfacilitieslocated on its territory and on public property. In typical 5G ambient intelligence environments, thecity, in its role of local government, is responsible for ensuring public information security. It mustdevelopanapproachguaranteeingthatthedeploymentof5Gserviceswillcomplywithpersonalrightsandfreedoms.

Itisnotonlyimportanttoensurecompliancewithrulesoncollectingandusingpersonaldatathatmightbe generated by the various 5G services the citymight authorize or install, but to establishmeasuresensuring that the data generated are protected like other personal information and as a communalresourceavailableforeveryone’sbenefit.

The formulation of a data policy means identifying requirements (legislation and other municipalobligationsassociatedwithdifferentdatacategories).Theserequirementscanbedefinedintermsoftherightsandobligationsofthoseconcerned.Suchrequirementscandedescribedwithrespecttothedatalifecycle(collection,transmission,accessrights,use,changeofplatformanddestruction).

Inpractice,suchapolicyshouldtransfertherightsandobligationsofthevariousstakeholderspertainingtotopicsincluding:

• Datacapture,asbysensors.• Dataaccessrights.• Information-sharingconditions.


• Guidelinesonwho canusedata suchas that generatedby self-driving vehicles in the city andhowsuchinformationcanbeused.

• Rulesontransmittinginformationpertainingtoareasfallingundermunicipalauthority.• Accesstoinformation/datarules.• Dataretentionrules.

Ultimately,a5GpolicyforMontréalwillinvolvetheestablishmentofguidelinesonwhatcanbedonewiththedataprocessedinareasfallingundermunicipalauthority.


ProposedPrinciplesforMontréal

ThefollowingprinciplescouldguideMontréalinselectingitsoptionsfordeployingnext-generationtelecomsystems.

Privacyandotherbasicrights

Ensuringthepublic’sabilitytousetheInternetwhilebeingprotected(autonomousdecision-making)

Security Ensuringthephysicalsecurityofinfrastructureandcybersecurity

Ongoingassessment

Conductingimpactassessmentstomonitorresults,ensurecompliancewithprinciplesandanticipatepossibleadverseimplications.

Equityandinclusion

Supportinguniversalequalityinobtainingservices(financial,numeracyandotherfactors).

Coverage Ensuringcoveragethroughoutterritory(physicalfactor).Publicinterestoverride

Publicinterestsprevailwherepublicandprivateneedsconflict.

Economicdevelopment

Promotingeconomicgrowth,innovationandemployment.

Publichealth Ensuringthatpublichealthrisksaretakenintoaccount.

UrbandesignEncouragingaharmoniousappearancetobrandthecity’sdesign.

These principles are based on those proposed by CIRAIG’s research team (2017) in its study oncreatinganInternetofThingsinMontréal.


SECTION3:FormulatingaMunicipalPublic5GPolicyByDanielJ.Caron

Oncealegalframeworkhasbeenclearlydefined,theprocessofestablishingapublic5Gpolicyshouldbeimplemented,onestepatatime.Thissectionoutlinesthesesteps,aswellasquestionstobeanswered.

Deploying5Gposesavarietyofchallengestotowns.Someofthesechallengesareoperational,butothersmore strategic, including the development of broad guidelines that become public policies. The city’schoiceswill notonlyhavean impacton itsoperations,butpotentiallyon the creationofnewcivil andpenalresponsibilities,aswell,sincethesesuchoptionsmayextendbeyonditstraditionalrolesofplanningoradministeringdatapertainingtoitsmanagementresponsibilities.Suchfunctionsarethecentralissue,since theadventof 5G raisesnewquestions about themunicipal role indatamanagement. This is thepointofdepartureforplanning,beyondmereissuesofurbanpropertyandwirelessdeployment.Citiesinwhich 5G rolls out will become de facto information hubs. The basic question beyond legislation andregulationsthatwilldeterminewhatthecitycanorcannotdoarebasedontheextentofitsinvolvementin the data production chain. Various steps, some more tangible and others, less, make up the dataproduction chain. In this new environment, the citymustmake choices at each step of theway, alignthesechoiceswithgeneralpublicpolicyguidelinesandensurethatitcanputthesechoicesintoaction.

3.15GandPublicPolicyStudieson5Ghave,todate,produced little informationonpublicpolicy.Thismakessense,consideringhownewtheissueis.Atmost,suchinformationconcernsexploratoryattemptstoproposeapproachesinformulatingaregulatoryframework.However,asdiscussedinSection1ofthisreport,manydeploymentsarenowunderway indifferent countries, eachwith its owndistinctive characteristics.Anyoverviewoftheseeffortswouldbeonlypartial.First,thisisbecausealloftheprojectsarequiterecentandhavenotreceivedrigorousscrutinytodate.Second,thisisbecauseoperatingparameters,includingthetraditionalpractices of stakeholders in these areas and legal/regulatory frameworksmay differ substantially fromonejurisdictiontothenext.Third,wehavelittleinformationontheseframeworks.Four,wedonotknowtheoriginsofsuchdeployment—orinotherwords,therolesofvariousinstitutionsinsupplyingandusingthesetechnologies,priortotheadventof5G. Additional studies have shown that most of theserollouts have been built around local frameworks based on customary practiceswith respect to theseissues,inthesesettings.Inotherwords,itwouldberiskytoplacetoomuchemphasisonlessonslearnedorbestpracticesbasedonthisincompleteandshakyfoundation.Ontheotherhand,thedescriptionswefoundthroughourstudyprovideanexcellentpictureofwhatdifferentcommunitiesaretryingtoachieveandhowtheyplantodoso.Thisgivesrisetoseveralquestions,includingthefollowingthree,asstartingpoints:

• Towhatextentaregovernmentofficialsinvolvedinthedataproductionchain?• Towhatextentarepublicagenciesinvolvedinthedifferentstagesofdataproduction?


• Whatformsdosuchactivitiestake?

Such information should clarify issues and help explain certain cause-effect relationships between the5Gsystem’scomponents(fromdown - to upstream), in designing a production model, proposingalternativesforcreatingpotentialbusinessmodelsandformulatingrecommendations.

3.2PublicPolicyComponentsSincemostoftheliteratureon5Gdeploymentisinvestigative,itprimarilyfocuseson5G’sconceptsandfunctions,suchasbigdataandultra-high-speedbroadband,aswellasquestionsonhowcollecteddatawillbemanaged.Whenthepublicissueisdiscussed,however,itisoftenpoorlydefined,inafragmentarymanner. Such a discussion is rarely accompanied by an overview, focusing, for example, on urbanpropertyortheprotectionofpersonal information.Whilethe issueofdatamanagement,arisingoutofopengovernmentandthereleaseofdatasetsorthecreationofanInternetofThings,precedes5G,theadventofGplacesbroaderquestionsonthepolicyagenda,whichtranscendit.

Thisisbecause5Gopensthedoortoinfiniteoptions,inareasthatneverpreviouslyfellwithinthescopeofmunicipalgovernmentorpublicorganizations.5G’snaturecouldchangethings—andthisisthechoicethatcitiesmustmake.Thatisbecause,inadditiontothehigh-speedInternetthatcharacterizes5G,suchasystem permits massive collection of all kinds of information that will result in unprecedented dataapplications,withcommercial,personalandpublicuses.Managementofsuchdata isacore issue—andnot justmattersofwireless serviceandurbanproperty. This is because themunicipal governmentwillpermit such data collection on its territory and, to some extent, according to the terms that themunicipality decides to offer, to encourage through incentives or to impose with by-laws, within thescope of its existing or future powers, as Section 2 of this report describes. This is what governmentofficialsmustdecide.This iswhere theywilldetermine theextentof their involvement inmaking5Gareality. This approachmust proceedby assessing theexisting legislative and regulatory framework andevaluating thework tobedoneor limits to respect inmaking thepublicdesire to takeactiona reality.Whenandonlywhenthisanalysishasconcluded,cityofficialscandrawuponeormorescenariosofrolesandresponsibilitiesofthestakeholdersconcerned,inimplementingpolicygoals.

Intermsofthechainofresultstoconsider,twoelementsstandoutclearly.First,thereisadisconnectbetweenthedifferenttangibleandintangibleportionsoftheissue.Thetangiblecomponentconsistsoftwoelements—wireless service andurbanproperty. The intangible aspect consists of four elements:data capture and transmission, management of cloud storage, cloud navigation management(algorithmsandapps)and,finally,publicparticipationincommunitylife.


Urbanwiringandpropertyareissuesthatarealreadyontheagendasofmunicipalities,which,alongwithprivate telecom providers, play an independent role in this arena. 5G is paving the way to newpossibilities intermsofthe intangible.Captureandtransmissionofpublicdata isafresh issuethatalsofallswithinthescopeofasmartcitysupportedbyanInternetofThings.Someoptionshavealreadybeendiscussed in this area, but remain to be validated. Management of and navigation in the cloud areadditional issues highlighting the need for clear public policy directions, particularly as to whethermunicipalitiesshouldaddresstypicallymunicipalneedsortotakebroaderactionwithrespecttoalldataacquired.

The answer to this questionwill shed some light onwhatmaybe considered the “smart city” and the“informationhub.”Themorethecityiscommittedtoglobaldatamanagement,themoreappropriatethe“informationhub”label,whileatighterfocusonthecity’soperationalneedswillsupportaconceptcloserto thatof the“smartcity,” in thestrict sense.Thesparse literatureon the topicdoeshoweversuggestthatdata isapublicgoodthatshouldbeusedaccordingly. Insuchacontext, thisstatementmightalsoimplythatthecitycoulddevelopitsownInternetwithitsownsearchenginesandalgorithms.

Intermsofpublicparticipation,theissueraised—andtheoneweshouldbearinmind—isthatdataandalgorithms produce information that should also permit public participation in different communityissues.Thecentralquestion isensuringaplaceforparticipation,collaborationanddeliberation,beyondtheanalyticalandpredictiveabilitiesofalgorithms.

For each of the elements listed, various problems are outlined: data/information governance andmanagement,aswellassecurity, robustnessof infrastructure,dataprotection,datause,etc.Suchcivicconcernsboost the intensityof thepublicproblemsand theauthoritiesmustbeable toaddress them.Theliteraturecontainsanever-growingnumberofquestionsaboutharnessingbigdata.Generally,suchquestionsareassociatedwithissuesofdatagovernanceandmanagement,aswellaspublicinvolvementincommunitylife.Therearefearsofalgorithmsthatarenotcontrolledbygovernmentorpublicauthority(inthesenseof“commons”).

Finally, somequestions for thisportionof thepublicprogram requireharddecisions. The scopeof theactivitymustfirstbedefined.Willitincludeallwiringoronlythatportionpertainingtomunicipalneeds?Will urban property be covered by a universally applicable by-law? Second,what kind of ownership isdesired for each component?Will the city own all thewiring? The storage space? Third, howwill thesystembegoverned(settingitsbroadorientations)?Shouldthepublicbeinvolved?Justthecity?Orthecitywiththeprivatesector?Finally,howwilltheworkbedoneonanoperationallevel?Bywhom?Thesequestionswillleadtothecreationofstructure,determinationofthedesireddegreeofcentralization,etc.

Table1providesanoverviewof thekindsof choices tobeconsideredanddiscussed foreachprogramcomponent adopted by the city in its policy. This constitutes the first issue for the city—formulating astrongpolicy.


Table1 ScopeofActivity

FormofOwnership

GovernanceModel

ManagementMethod

Wiring Urbanproperty Captureandtransmission

Cloud(storage)

Navigation(apps,algorithms,etc.)

Uses Choices:Private,public(inthesenseof“commons”)andgovernmental

3.3InformationManagementAbilitiesofMunicipalInstitutionsTheadventof5G,thesmartcityconceptandtheInternetofThingsalldependonthegrowingabilitytoharness all information formats (both the traditional document and data). In today’s informationenvironment,paradigmsarealwayschanging,themostimportantbeingtheshiftfrompapertoelectronicdocuments.Ourreviewofthepreparednessofpublicorganizationfor informationmanagement isnotveryrosy.Asweknow,publicorganizationsarerarelymodelsfordata/informationgovernanceormanagement.Theirmainshortcomingsinclude:

• Lackofstrategiccontentgovernance.• Focus on technology (information resources are often defined as primarily being

technologymanagement).• Fragmentedcontentmanagement,asrequiredbyservices.• Fragmentedmanagementofinformationquestion,accordingtoexpertise.

These factors cannot ensure the integrated information management needed by a smart city orinformationhub.

Finally, the “information hub” accompanying the advent of 5G ismore than the smart city, or at leastthose defined like the King Abdullah Economic City (Saudi Arabia), Songdo (South Korea), and Tianjin(China).First,incontrastwith“pure”smartcityexperiences,informationhubswillnotstartfromscratch.They are built on existing foundations. Next and most importantly, they not only address operatingefficiencyandeffectiveness,buttheycreatearoleforthepublicincommunitylifeandpolicies,aswellasin datamanagement and governance. Questions about and deliberations on amunicipal public policyshouldbeanchoredindatagovernanceandmanagement.Thisistheissue.5Gisaresourceoratool.


Thesearethemainpitfallstoavoidandchallengestomeet:- Clearstrategicguidelines.- Establishmentofsuitablestandards.- Regulatoryandfinancialresourcesandabilities.- Mechanismsenablingthepublictoplayrolesontwolevels:

o Participation, cowork and coproduction should be promoted to prevent municipal affairs fromseeming“robotic.”

o Thereshouldbeapublicconsensusonissuesofdatagovernanceandmanagement.


Conclusion

Thisreportrepresentstheconclusionoftheiterativedecision-makingprocessonnext-generationsystemsconductedbyCEFRIO’steamandtheVilledeMontréal.

In short, the report demonstrates that many deployments are now underway. Each is different,respondingtoavarietyofregulatory,legal,politicalandculturalsettings.Notallofthecasescitedintheliteraturehavebeenevaluated.Theyareexperimentalandshouldaccordinglybeseenasfallowland.

The report thenposes legaland regulatory issues specific toCanada.Thisoverviewshows thatexistingregulations may be fairly limiting and restrictive, depending on intended municipal roles andresponsibilities.Theframeworkcurrentlygoverningthetelecomindustryimposesavarietyofrestrictionsonmunicipalitieswithrespecttofinaldecision,whateverthekindofissueposedby5G.Itis,accordingly,necessaryforthecitytobeginconsideringnowhowitwantstodealwithregulatoryagencies(suchastheCRTC)inseekingtodefineacomprehensive,predictableapproach,ratherthananemerging,case-by-casestrategy.

Thethirdpartofthereportdescribedtheimportanceof5Gnotonlywithrespecttotraditionalissuesofurban property and rights of passage, but as a matter of data management and governance. Themunicipal policy to be developed must accordingly address the entire data production chain madepossibleby5G.Variousquestions,suchasthescopeofmunicipal involvement, typeofownership,etc.,shouldbetheobjectofseriousconsiderationforeachstageoftheproductionchain.Theseanswerscanbeusedtocreatepublicpolicyscenariosintendedfor5G.Thissectionalsohighlightstheimportanceforcityagenciestodealwithinformationmanagement.Thisroleiscrucialinperfectinganddevelopinggreatcapacitytodealwithnewchallengesthatwillaccompanytheadventof5G.

Theappendicesprovideahostofinformationtosupportthedeliberativeprocess.

First, a list consulted structures is presented, grouped by topics, with hyperlinks to the documentsconcerned.Over430referencesareavailable,organizedasfollows:

- Resources/itemsprovidedbyWebsiteso Byorigin:

§ North America: Canada (General and cities: Calgary, Ottawa, Toronto,Vancouver)andtheUnitedStates(Generalandcities:Boston,Chicago,Denver,LosAngeles,NewYork,SanFrancisco,SanDiego,Seattle).

§ Europe:GeneralandFrance,Germany,Netherlands,Spain,SwedenandtheUK.§ Africa:SouthAfrica(CapeTownandJohannesburg)andKenya.§ Asia:China,India,Japan,SouthKorea.§ Oceania:Australia,NewZealand.§ SouthAmerica.

o Bytopics:§ 5Gand“smallcells.”§ Streetlamps,telephonepolesandurbanproperty.§ “Municipalbroadband.”§ “Smallcells”andhealth.§ Smartcitiesandconnectivity.

- Documents


o Bytopic:§ 5G,“smallcells”andurbanproperty.§ Academictexts.§ Cities.§ CRTC.§ Fiberand“municipalbroadband.”§ “NeutralHosts.”§ SmartcitiesandIoT.

ThedeliberativedocumentsusedinWorkshops1and2supplementtheappendices.

Theprojectteamthanksallthosewhoparticipatedintheworkshopsandcontributedtoenrichingthedeliberations.Thediscussionswerebroadandengaged,whichaddedtothepleasureofcarryingoutthisstimulatingproject.


LiteratureReview—ByTopicMUNICIPALBROADBAND|SITESINTERNET(CLICKONTITLESTOVIEWDOCUMENTS)

NORTHAMERICACanada

1. “Envyoftheworld”:Bell'sCopesaysfibreinvestmentwillpaybigdividendsin5Gera2. 5GInCanadaDependsonFedsSettingADate,TelecomsSay3. Bellapplaudsgovernmentcommitmenttonextgeneration5Gwireless4. BellCan'tDenyFibreOpticAccesstoSmallerCompetitors:CRTC5. CanadaandNewZealandannouncemajor5Gtests,butnationalserviceremainsyearsoff6. Canadiangovernmentspartnerwithglobaltechcompaniestopreparefor5Gfuture7. Citieschoosesidesinhigh-speedInternetbattle8. CityCouncilsStrikeBackinBellBroadbandBattle9. ConsultationonReleasingMillimetreWaveSpectrumtoSupport5G10. CouncilofCochraneupdatedonstateofdarkfibrenetwork11. CRTCsaysbigtelecomsmustsharehigh-speednetworkswithcompetitors12. Everythingyouneedtoknowabout5GinCanada13. ExpertspeerintothefutureofCanada'swireless'spectrum'andpredictseismicshifts14. Fastfibre-opticinternetarrivesinmanysmalltownsbeforebigcities15. Fibreopticcablebattle:SmallerplayerswantinonBig3networks16. FibreOpticNetwork|CityofPenticton17. HerearethethreemostimportantfilesawaitingnewCRTCheadIanScott18. NewCanadianpartnershipinnext-generationwirelesstechnology|Canada.ca19. OntarioandQuebecgainaccessto5Gwirelesscorridor20. Relationshipwoes:Canadiancitiesdon’twanttosplitcostswithtelecomsfordata21. U.S.companiesannounce5Glaunchdates,butCanadiantelecomsstaymum22. We’reatthebrinkofatechnologicalrevolution:JoeNataleonthefutureofRogers23. WhatCanadiansShouldKnowAbouttheCRTC'sInternetDecision24. WhyOttawaMustContinuetoInvestinWirelessTechnologies25. ReportFindsCanadianWirelessBroadbandPricingOffersLeastBangfortheBuckinDeveloped

World

Calgary

26. CityofCalgaryCIO:"It'simportanttoinvestinourinfrastructures."27. TelecomCommissionLetterAddressedtoMattLonsdale(LawDepartment,CityofCalgary)|

CRTC28. TheCityofCalgary-AccesstheCityofCalgary'sdarkfibre29. TheCityofCalgary-Darkfibre:Whatisitandhowcanitbenefitme?30. TheCityofCalgary-TheCity’sDigitalStrategy


Ottawa

31. Rogers,Ericssontotest5GtechnologyinToronto,Ottawa|FinancialPost32. TheBattleOvertheFutureofBroadbandinCanada:MayorsTory&Watsonv.Nenshi33. 'Thisisnotaboutthemayor':Leiperaskscounciltosupportcompetitionforfibre-opticInternet

access

Toronto

34. Rogers,Ericssontotest5GtechnologyinToronto,Ottawa|FinancialPost35. TheBattleOvertheFutureofBroadbandinCanada:MayorsTory&Watsonv.Nenshi36. 'Thisisnotaboutthemayor':Leiperaskscounciltosupportcompetitionforfibre-opticInternet

access

Vancouver

37. Rogers,Ericssontotest5GtechnologyinToronto,Ottawa38. Toronto|AdvancingBroadbandInfrastructureandInternetConnectivity|CityCouncil39. TorontoCityCouncildefiesmayor,demandsopen,neutralmunicipalbroadband40. Toronto'scelltowerradiationguidelinestostay41. WhyMayorJohnToryisagainstcompetitionforaccesstoaffordablefastbroadband

UnitedStates42. 5GwirelesspitscitiesagainsttelecomsandtheirfriendsintheFCC43. 10KeyIssuesforCaliforniaCities&CountiesontheChallengesofSmallCells&“NotSoSmall

Cells”44. AT&T'sandVerizon's5Gnetworksarecomingthisyear,yourinternetspeedswillbeinsanelyfast45. AT&Ttoprovide5Gto12marketsbyendof2018,fibreto82metrosbymid-201946. AT&TannouncesDallas,Atlanta,andWacoasfirstthree5Gcitiesfor201847. CitiesAreFightingStatesOverMunicipalBroadband48. CitiesTakeaStandAgainsttheFCC'sProposedNetNeutralityRollback49. ColoradoCitiesKeepVotingtoBuildTheirOwnBroadbandNetworks50. FCCRulingon5GInfrastructureMayHurtCities51. Fiber-OpticInternetintheUnitedStatesataGlance52. GovernmentShouldInvestinFiberOptics53. IllinoisBillHampersLocalGovernmentFeesforSmallCells,Boosts5GProspects54. IllinoisCities,CountiesUniteAgainstSmallCellWirelessBill55. KillingNetNeutralityHasBroughtonaNewCallforPublicBroadband56. Sprintispreparingsixcitiesfor5GwithMassiveMIMOantennas-TheVerge57. Sprint'sInitial5GCitiesWillGet4GMassiveMIMOFirst58. T-Mobiletolaunch5Gin30citiesthisyear,includingNewYorkandLA59. ThirteenmayorsblastVerizonforslowFiOSrollouts60. VerizontoAggressivelyDeployDarkFiberfor5GBackhaul61. VerizontoFCC:Streamlinedpoleaccesswillfacilitatesmallcell,fiberdeployments


Boston

62. Bostonspends$10milliontoexpandfibertoschools,housing,citybuildings63. VerizonbeginsfiberopticrolloutinBoston64. ExpandingbroadbandinBoston|Boston.gov

Chicago

65. Chicagodebutsfirstof500streetsensorstocollectenvironmentaldata66. ChicagoSmartLightingProject-ChicagoInfrastructureTrust67. VerizonCompletesAcquisitionofWOW’sChicago-areaFiberInfrastructure

Denver

68. Denver’s5Gcell-signalfuturewillrelyonhundredsof30-footpolesspreadacrossmanyblocks–andthathasrankledsomeresidents

69. Denver’s5GPlansMeanAntennas,LotsofThem70. These30-footpolesarethefutureofcellular,andyoucan'tkeepthemoutofDenver

LosAngeles

71. LosAngelesWantstoBuildItsOwnCitywideBroadbandNetwork72. T-Mobiletolaunch5Gin30citiesthisyear,includingNewYorkandLA73. VerizonnamesLosAngelesasthesecondoffourcitiestoreceive5Grolloutbefore2019

NewYork

74. NewYorkCitiesObjecttoProposedStateRuleson5GTowers75. NewYorkCityFiberOpticSmackdown:Verizon&theUSTAvstheCityofN.Y.76. NewYorkCitySuesVerizon,ClaimingBrokenPromisesofCoverage77. NewYorkCityWantsNewIdeasonProvidingInternetAccess78. NYEDC–ConnectNYCFiberChallenge79. T-Mobiletolaunch5Gin30citiesthisyear,includingNewYorkandLA

SanFrancisco

80. Fiber|SanFranciscoGOV81. SanFranciscogetsblueprintforamunicipalgigabitnetwork82. SanFranciscoJustTookaHugeStepTowardInternetUtopia83. SanFranciscoseeksuniversalfiberbroadbandwithnetneutralityandprivacy84. TheTimeIsNowforSanFranciscoMunicipalFiber,SaysReport85. Verizoneyes5GlaunchinSanFrancisco86. WillSanFrancisco'sCity-WideFiberOpticNetworkSucceed?10TechProsWeighIn

SanDiego

87. InSanDiego,alamppostcantellyouwheretopark88. PhilipsandCityofSanJosepartnertodeployPhilipsSmartPolespilotprojectcombiningenergy

efficientLEDstreetlightingwithwirelessbroadbandtechnologyfromEricsson89. SanDiegoInstalling'SmartCity'NetworkwithSensorson3,200Streetlights90. SanDiegotoCoverHalftheCitywithIntelligentStreetlights91. Smartstreetlightstotracktraffic,parking,airquality

Seattle


92. Broadband|SeattleInformationTechnology93. Gigabitavailability|SeattleInformationTechnology94. WhatHappenedtoSeattle'sGigabitNetwork?

EUROPE95. 5GandtheEUGeneralDataProtectionRegulation96. 5G-PublicPrivatePartnershipEurope97. Europeancitieswant10million‘smart’streetlamps98. Europeansmallcellmarketstillfacingregulatory,tech,commercialbarriers99. FibretoenableEurope’s5Gambition100. TheriseofgigabitbroadbandinEurope101. WinnersoftheEuropeanBroadbandAwards2016102. WinnersoftheEuropeanBroadbandAwards2017

France103. DijonMétropole,lepremiervraiterritoireintelligentfrançais?104. LafibreoptiqueàParis105. Paris,villemodèledutrèshautdébitInternetselonObama106. PlanTrèsHautDébit:Macronveutmoinsdefibreoptiqueetplusde4G107. Qu'estcequelePlanFranceTrèsHautDébit?

Germany108. Germanregulatorflagseasierregulationforbroadbandbuild-out109. Germanytoinvest100billionintonationalgigabitinternetnetwork110. GermanyUrgesTelcostoUpFiberGamefor5G

Netherlands111. HowAmsterdamwaswiredforopenaccessfiber112. T-MobileNetherlandsactivatesfirstantennawith5GtechnologyinAmsterdam

Spain113. Barcelona|InstitutoMunicipaldeInformática-Barcelona-¿Quéhacemos?114. BarcelonagearsuptobecometheEuropean5Glab115. Cómohacerplanesdedesplieguedefibraóptica116. El'milagroespañol'delareddefibra117. LafibraenEspañatienetresprincipalesdueños,perolapuedescontratarconmásoperadores118. Orangetendrácoberturadefibraenel85%deloshogaresyempresasdelaComunidadde

Madrid119. Telefónicaleadsthewaytowards5GwithdeploymentsintwoSpanishcities

Sweden120. TeliaandEricssonpowerAugmentedRealitythrough5GinStockholmtrial121. StockholmStokab-InEnglish122. StokabonTheDarkFiberBusinessCase


UnitedKingdom123. £1bninvestmentinsuperfastinternetcouldbring'full-fibre'and5Gbroadband124. 15,000LamppoststoHelpBoost4Gand5GMobileCoverageinLambeth125. 400,000extraphonemastsneededtobring5gnetworktoruralBritain126. ArqivatomakeLondonlamppostsinto5G-readycells127. InvestinginNetworksfortheFuture-RegulatoryDevelopmentsinUK128. SadiqKhanpromiseshalfamillion“mini-masts”toboostLondon’smobilecoverage129. UK5Ginfrastructurewillovertakefibrebroadband130. VodafoneandEricssonConductUK5GMobileFieldTrialat3.5GHz131. Whatis5GandwhenisitcomingtotheUK?WIREDexplains

AFRICA132. FibreopticswillbethebackboneofAfrica’ssmartcitiesofthefuture133. MTNandEricssonfirstinAfricatotrial5Gtechnology

SouthAfrica

CapeTown

134. BroadbandnetworksavesR117mincosts135. CapeTown-Citydigsinsmartlytoinstallfibre-opticcabling136. CapeTown-Commercialtelecommunicationsservices137. CapeTownaimstoleadthewayasfirsttrulydigitalcityinAfrica138. CapeTowngetssewer-basedfibre139. CapeTown’sfibre-opticnetworkpassesthe800kmmark140. Councilgoeshigh-techforcabletrenching

Johannesburg

141. CityofJohannesburgemployeesuspendedoverR1.3bnbroadbandinvestigation142. Joburg‘takesbackcontrol’ofbroadbandproject143. Joburg’sR1,3bnbroadbandnetworkpurchasetobeinvestigated

Kenya144. FiberOpticSubscriptionsinKenyaUp65%,51.1MillionInternetUsers145. GoogleinjectsbillionsinNairobi-basedfibreopticinternetfirm146. Google'sNairobiBasedCarrier-NeutralFiberProjectCsquaredClosesUSD100mInvestment147. Kenyaamong4AfricanCountriesexpectedtohave5Gnetworkby2022148. WhyKenya’s5Groll-outplansby2019maybetooearly

ASIA

China149. 5GerasettoliftChinesefiberopticindustry150. ChinaMobileplans5-city5Grolloutasgovernmentdemandslowerdataprices151. Chinatopromote5G&smartcitystandardsincountriesalongBeltandRoadroutes


152. China'sHuaweiTests5GNetworkinCanadaDespiteCallsforBaninUS153. ChineseGovernmentannouncesplansfor5Gnetworksandsecurequantumcommunication

network154. WhyChinaandtheUSarefightingover5G

India155. FiberCabletoFulfiltheDreamofDigitalIndia156. Fibre-opticcable:Indianstategovlayscablefornewandsmartservices157. Fibre-opticconnectionsonlymakeup0.5%ofIndia'sbroadbandnetwork,saysFTTHcouncilVP158. TheIndianStateofTelanganaPlanstoGet23MillionPeopleOnlineUsingFiberOpticCable159. IndiaisontheCuspof5GAdoption:Here'sWhyItCouldChangetheCountry'sFuture

Japan160. IntelandNTTDoCoMoprepare5GplansforTokyo2020Olympics161. Japanlaysmoregroundworkfora5GTokyoOlympics162. Japantoupgradefiberopticnetworksforfuture5Gdeployments

SouthKorea163. HowSouthKoreaisBuildingaTechno-UtopiainSeoul164. KTshowcases5GinnovationattheOlympicsinPyeongChang165. WhyisKorea’sinternetsofast?

OCEANIAAustralia

166. Australiaannounces5Gstrategy167. HowAustralia'sA$49bninternetnetworkcametoberidiculed168. Telstraispromising5GservicesinAustraliaby2019

Adelaide

169. 10gigabitbroadbandbeingrolledoutinAdelaide170. AdelaidetoconstructtransformationalTenGigabitCityNetwork171. GigCityAdelaide172. TenGigabitAdelaide-CityofAdelaide

NewZealand173. Crowncompanytoinvest$600minhousinginfrastructureforultra-fastbroadband174. CrownFibreHoldingslimited|CrownInfrastructurePartners|NewZealandGov175. NewZealandintroducingBilltoupdatetelecommunicationsregulatoryframework176. Sparkconducts'firstNZlivetrial'of5G

SOUTHAMERICA177. CearáannouncesexpansionofopticalnetworkintheStateupto2017178. ClaroChile,Nokiacarryoutfirst5GlabtrialsinLatinAmerica179. Conunainversiónde$230millones,BuenosAiresestrenasupropiareddefibraóptica


180. NuevareddefibraópticadeBuenosAires:prometentrámites25vecesmásrápidos181. RededefibraóticadeFortalezaseráampliada182. SouthAmericatofocusonmaximising4GROIbeforeswitchingfocusto5G183. Testescomerciaiscom5GnoBrasildevemcomeçarem2019184. DadosPROCEMPA-PortoAlegre

5GANDSMALLCELLS185. 3G/4GSmallCellsBlog:UndergroundSmallCells186. 5GCellServiceIsComing.WhoDecidesWhereItGoes?187. 5GCity-Adistributedcloud&radioplatformfor5GNeutralHosts188. 5GIsComingSoon.DoYouCare?YouShould.Here’sWhy.189. 5Gwillcostyouabundle190. 5G:SixTopConcernsforNetworkOperators191. Areyoureadyfor5G?192. ClearingtheWayfora5GWirelessWorld193. Deploying5GWillCostatLeast$130BillioninFiber,StudySays194. Don’tbelievethehype:We’realongwayfrom5G195. Networksharingand5G:Aturningpointforloneriders196. Smallcellsarecoming:Howtoprepare197. Smallcells,bigchanges198. SwisscomandEricssonplantLTEsmallcellsunderground199. TheBattleOverHowtoRegulatetheLatestWirelessTechnology200. TheBattleOverSmallCellDeployment201. Thefirstreal5Gspecificationhasofficiallybeencompleted202. TheNextGenerationofWireless—“5G”—IsAllHype203. Theraceto5G:Insidethefightforthefutureofmobileasweknowit204. Theroadto5G:Theinevitablegrowthofinfrastructurecost205. Thisisthefastestcellphonenetworkever206. Whatis5Gandwhyshouldlawmakerscare?207. WhyCompaniesandCountriesAreBattlingforAscendancyin5G

TELEPHONEANDLIGHTPOLESANDURBANPROPERTY

208. 5GandSmartLightPolesareaPerfectMatch209. 5GreadysmallcellscomingtoLambeth’slampposts210. 5GCity-DevelopingCCAMandneutralhostsolutionswithSmartlamp-post211. Anaudacious5Gpower(pole)grab212. BurrRidgeseekstoregulatesmallcellantennas,beforestatedoes213. Citymightholdoffonsmallcellularsignalsonlightpoles214. DASandSmallCellInstallations215. Examplephotosofthegood,thebadandthedownrightuglypoles216. Howmuchdocitieschargeforsmallcellpoleattachment?217. HumbleLamppost|EIP-SCCMarketplace218. Huntingtonsignsupfor5Gsmartpoles219. Lamppostshinesalightonsmartcities220. Lamppostsareonequickfixforsmartsuccess221. LocalControlatHeartof‘SmallCell’Debate


222. Localleadersopposestatelawthatcouldturnutilitypolesintocellphonetowers223. Mallinson:Ductandpoleaccessessentialfor1000-timesgrowthwith5G224. NextGenSONEnabledSmartPole225. Ofcom:Openreachmustdomoreonductandpoleaccess226. Part3|TipsonCraftingOrdinances,PublicOutreach,&Design227. Part4|DesignTipsforSmallCellsBasedonPoleorLocationType228. SmallCellProliferationComing-ButnotonUtilityPoles!229. Smartlamppost–Ascalablelamppostapproach230. Tensionsriseasofficialsstruggletoaddresssmallcelldeploymentchallenges231. Therisingcostofspaceonhydropolesmayresultinahikeinthecostofinternetandcable232. Thesci-fifutureoflamp-posts233. TheseSmartLampPostsCanMonitorTraffic,AirPollutionandEvenGunShots234. Tomorrow'scities-thelamp-postswatchingeverymove235. WirelessIndustryLobbiesStatehousesforAccessTo'StreetFurniture'236. Whyyoushouldbeworriedaboutconnectedstreetlights237. Whyaccessingurbanassetsmattersfor5Gandsmartcitiesbusinessmodels238. WhyUtilityPolesAreSoImportanttotheFutureoftheInternet239. TheDebateOverNeighborhoodZoningCouldHoldUpFast5GWirelessFor240. WirelessCarriersLobbyforAccessTo'StreetFurniture'InWashington241. WillPropertyRightsControltheFutureofTelecommunicationsInfrastructure?

BROADBAND(GENERALINFORMATION)242. BroadbandCommunitiesMagazine243. Broadband:PublicOfficialsWantMoreGovernmentParticipation244. BerkmanCenterReportNeitherUsefulforPolicynorGeneralizableforConsumers245. BuildingaConnectedCityfromtheGroundUp246. Canmunicipalbroadbandsavetheopeninternet?247. City-ownedhigh-speedinternetnetworksgettingsecondlookwithnetneutralityrepeal248. CitywidefiberpartnershipbetweencityandAxiadissolves249. CommunityNetworkMap|CommunityBroadbandNetworks250. Connectedcitieskeytoanautonomousfuture251. Connectedcities:Fromsciencefictiontosciencefact252. Couldmunicipalbroadbandprovideanotherwayonlineifnetneutralityrulesgoaway?253. EntryPointNetworks|MunicipalFiber|OpenAccess|SmartCity254. HandcuffingCitiestoHelpTelecomGiants255. HarvardStudyShowsWhyBigTelecomIsTerrifiedofCommunity-RunBroadband256. HowCanCitiesImproveBroadband?Hint:Don'tTreatItLikeAPothole257. Howsomecitiesareattracting5Ginvestmentsaheadofothers258. Lesréseauxmunicipauxdefibreoptiqueseraientlefutur,ditunexpertendomotique259. MunicipalFiberInitiative|BerkmanKleinCenter260. Newreportswingsandmissesoncommunitiesandnextgenerationbroadband261. PricingReportfromBerkmanKleinCenter:MunicipalBroadbandSubscribersGetBetterRates262. ReportShowsMunicipallyOwnedFiberNetworksareaLosingPropositionforTaxpayers263. TakeControlofyourBroadbandFuture264. ThePublicInternetOption|AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion265. WhyAreThereNoBigCitieswithMunicipalBroadbandNetworks?266. Will5Gallowcitiestokillbroadbandmonopolies?


SMALLCELLSANDHEALTH267. Canadaasleep,whileUSAbeginstodebateSmallCells|EMRHealthAllianceofBC268. eNodeB–Quebec|EMRHealthAllianceofBC269. gNodeB–Whatarethey?|EMRHealthAllianceofBC270. Is5Gtechnologydangerous?Earlydatashowsaslightincreaseoftumorsinmaleratsexposedto

cellphoneradiation271. SmallCells:NewVerizonantennasgenerateunwelcomebuzzinSantaRosa|EMRHealthAlliance

ofBC272. ScientistsandDoctorsWarnofPotentialSeriousHealthImpactsofFifthGeneration5GWireless

Technology|GlobalResearch-CentreforResearchonGlobalization273. WorldHealthOrganization|Electromagneticfieldsandpublichealth274. WorldHealthOrganization,radiofrequencyradiationandhealth-ahardnuttocrack(Review)

SMARTCITIESANDBROADBAND275. ASmartCityisaConnectedCity,AConnectedCityisanInclusiveCity276. Citiesmustbecomemoretelco-friendlyfor5Gtomakethem“Smart”277. Driverlesscarsareforcingcitiestobecomesmart278. FromConnectedStreetLightstoSmartCities279. GotWhatItTakes?SmartCitiesAreBuiltonFiber280. How5Gwillacceleratethegrowthofsmartcities281. Is5Gthemissinglinkforautonomousvehicles,smartcities,andabravenewworld?282. ToGetSmartCities,WeFirstNeed5GNetworks283. SmartCitiesCouncil|WhyyouMUSTfightforfiber-optic(orfallbehind)284. SmartCityNetwork:LPWA,5G,orMesh?285. Stockholm'sFibreNetwork:enablingSmartCityinitiatives286. StudyFindsthatFiberCitiesHaveMoreSmartCityActivity287. Will5GTriggerSmartCityPPPCollaboration?

MUNICIPALBROADBAND(VIDEOS)288. 5GWebinar-NextCenturyCities289. AligningPolicyandTechnology-AHitchhiker's(Policy)GuideThrougha5GUniverse290. BroadbandInfrastructureNeeds-NextCenturyCities291. Cancerrisk?5Gwirelessspeedscouldbedangerous292. BroadbandFinancing-NextCenturyCities293. EuropeanBroadbandAwards-Stockholm’sStokab294. Fiberbuildsstrongcities|JoeReardon|TEDx295. FiberforSanFrancisco:Pre-SubmittalConference296. MakingtheBusinessCasefor5GandSmartCities297. SanFranciscoIndustryDayfortheCityFiberProject298. SmallCellsandPoleAttachments-NextCenturyCities299. SusanCrawford:"ThePromiseofDarkFiber"300. SusanCrawfordinterview:howmayorscansolvethebroadbandproblem


MUNICIPALBROADBAND|DOCUMENTSCONSULTED

5G,SmallCellsandUrbanproperty1. 5Gdeploymentconsiderations-Ericsson.pdf2. Accenture-How5GCanHelpMunicipalitiesBecomeVibrantSmartCities.pdf3. ACICCR-Economic&ConsumerBenefitsfrom5G.pdf4. BellMobilitytoFortErie-SmallCellDeckPresentation.pdf5. CellTowerandSmallCellLaw-ARegulatoryandTransactionalPrimer-BBKMunicipal Law.pdf6. CLIC&Benton-TheEmergingWorldofBroadbandPublic-PrivatePartnerships.pdf7. CTIA-RulesoftheRoadforPoleAttachmentsinStatesAcrossAmerica.pdf8. CTIAtoFCC-Buildinga5GInfrastructure-KeyReforms.pdf9. ElectricCitiesofGeorgia-SmallCellandPoleAttachments.pdf10. EnvironmentalHealthTrust-WhatYouNeedtoKnowAbout5GWirelessandSmall Cells.pdf11. IET-5GNetworksforPolicyMakers.pdf12. JointCenter-5G,SmartCitiesandCommunitiesofColor.pdf13. OMWAttorneys-SmallCellTechnology,BuildOutandtheCurrentStateoftheLaw.pdf14. PreparatorySummaryonSmallCellsREGULATORYIssues-Global5G.pdf15. PWC-Therevivaloffixedinfrastructure-Fibertechnologyandthefutureofmobile networks.pdf16. Smallcellsiting-regulatoryanddeploymentconsiderations-5GAmericas&SmallCell Forum.pdf17. SmallCellsonPoleUtilities-UtilitiesPoles,StreetLightsandTrafficSignals-Wireless InfrastructureAssociation.pdf18. SmallWirelessFacilities-SitingandDeployment-MSA.pdf19. StateLegislationonWirelessSmallCells-UtilitiesTechnologyCouncil.pdf20. StatusofU.S.SmallCell5G&SmartCityApplicationsfromTheCommunity Perspective.pdf21. TechUK-5G-NewServices,NewCustomers,NewChallenges.pdf22. TheRoleofStreetFurnitureinExpandingMobileBroadband-WirelessInfrastructure Association.pdf23. TheSmallCellPoleWars-MunicipalitiesBattleforaLawfulProcess-MurthaCullina Attorneys.pdf24. Thestateof4Gpricing-DigitalFuelMonitor-Rewheel-9threlease.pdf25. Thevalueof5Gforcitiesandcommunities-O2.pdf26. WirelessInfrastructureAssociation-SmallCellsonPoleFacilities.pdf


Academicarticles(Thecrossed-outarticlesarenotfreelyavailablebecauseofcopyright)

27. 5GConvergedCell-LessCommunicationsinSmartCities.pdf28. Asurveyof5Gtechnologies-Regulatory,standardizationandindustrialperspectives.pdf29. ASurveyon5GNetworkTechnologiesfromSocialPerspective.pdf30. Asurveyonenablingwirelesslocalareanetworktechnologiesforsmartcities.pdf31. BroadbandInfrastructuretoEnableSmartCities-EmergingStrategiesandPartnershipModels.pdf32. ConclusionandFutureOutlook-5G.pdf33. ConstructingPremiumNetworkSpaces-StephenGraham.pdf34. CostAnalysisof5thGenerationTechnology.pdf35. Deploying5G-TechnologiesinSmartCityandSmartHomeWirelessSensorNetworkswithInterferences.pdf36. DeploymentstrategiesforFTTHnetworksandtheirimpactinbusinessmodel.pdf37. Driversfor5G-ThePervasiveConnectedWorld.pdf38. EverythingYouWantedtoKnowAboutSmartCities-TheIoTisthebackbone.pdf39. IntroductiontoMobileWirelessSystems.pdf40. Private-PublicPartnershipsforExpandingBroadbandAccess-Lessonsfromthe 'CinturãoDigitaldoCeará'NetworkinBrazil.pdf41. RegulatoryImpacton5GSecurityandPrivacy.pdf42. Securityfor5GCommunications.pdf43. SmallCellsfor5GMobileNetworks.pdf44. SmartCitieswithMassiveDataCentricLivingareHardtoBuildWithout5GNetworks.pdf45. SpectrumAnalysisandRegulationsfor5G.pdf46. SpectrumSharing-5G.pdf

Cities47. CapeTown-CitycompletesPhaseOneofBroadbandNetwork.pdf48. CapeTown-CorporateServices-InformationSystemsandTechnology Telecommunications.pdf49. CityofAdelaide-2016-2020StrategicPlan.pdf50. CityofAdelaide-GigCity-Stage2ExpressionofInterest.pdf51. CityofAdelaide-TenGigabit-InvitationforExpressionsofInterest.pdf52. CityofBoston&VanderWeil-BostonOpticalNetworkAssessment.pdf53. CityofCalgary-FibreLicenseAgreement.pdf54. CityofCalgary-FibreOpticServicesPriceList.pdf55. CityofCalgary-SubmissionCRTC-Bell.pdf56. CityofCapeTown-TheCity'sstrategyforthenextfiveyears.pdf57. CityofCapeTownDigitalCityStrategy.pdf58. CityofChicagoTechnologyPlan-ChicagoTechPlan.pdf59. CityofDenver-PublicWorks-SmallCellInfrastructureinDenver.pdf60. CityofFortaleza-2011sharednetwork-Govsdividedincolors.pdf


61. CityofFortaleza-GigaforeRedessemFio.odp62. CityofHayward-RFP-HighSpeedFiberDesign.pdf63. CityofSanFrancisco&CTC-ThePotentialforUbiquitous,OpenFiber-to-the-Premises inSF.pdf64. CityofSanFrancisco-FiberOpticsforGovernmentandPublicBroadband-AFeasibility Study.pdf65. CityofSanFrancisco-PlanningDepartment-DesignPreferencesforPersonalWireless ServiceFacilities.pdf66. CityofSanFrancisco-RFP-CitywideFibertothePremisesNetwork,LitFiberandWi-Fi Services.pdf67. CityofSanFrancisco-TheMunicipalFiberinSanFranciscoReport.pdf68. CityofToronto&FonturMDB-TorontoBroadbandstudy.pdf69. CityofToronto-AdvancingBroadbandInfrastructureandInternetConnectivity.pdf70. CityofToronto-Map-BroadbandStudy.pdf71. CityofToronto-PublicHealth-PrudentAvoidancePolicyforRadiofrequencyEmissions fromCellTowers.pdf72. CityofToronto-UPDATE2013-PrudentAvoidancePolicyforRadiofrequencyEmissions fromCellTowers.pdf73. FTTHCouncilEurope-AmsterdamCitynet.pdf74. GoogleFiberandKansasCity-Agreement.pdf75. GuidepratiqueFibreParis.pdf76. LondonAssembly-DigitalConnectivityReport.pdf77. OECD-FibretothehomeCaseStudy-AmsterdamCitynet.pdf78. SantaMonicaCityNetFiber2014-seeOptions.pdf79. SantanderSmartCitizen.pdf80. SokabFTTHCaseStudy-EuropeCouncil.pdf81. Stockholm-TheConnectedCity-StokabNetwork.pdf82. Stockholm'sStokab-ABlueprintforUbiquitousFiberConnectivity-Diffraction Analysis.pdf83. Stokab,asocio-economicstudy-Acreoreport.pdf84. StrategyforStockholmasasmartandconnectedcity.pdf

Countries85. Australia-5Gandmobilenetworkdevelopments-Emergingissues-Government.pdf86. AustralianGovernment-Demandforfixed-linebroadbandinAustralia.pdf87. CIGI-ANationalDataStrategyforCanadaKeyElementsandPolicyConsiderations.pdf88. CounciloftheEuropeanUnion-Ministerialdeclaration-Making5Gasuccessfor Europe.pdf89. Deloitte-BroadbandInfrastructurefortransformingIndia.pdf90. EuropeanCommission-ESPC-ConnectedContinentforaFuture-ProofEurope.pdf91. France-Report5G-Issues&Challenges-ARCEP.pdf92. Germany-5GStrategy-TheFederalGovernment.pdf93. HongKong-TelecommunicationsRegulatoryAffairsAdvisoryCommittee-5G TechnologyDevelopmentandTechnicalTrial.pdf94. L’étatdelaconcurrencedansl’industriedestélécommunicationsauCanada-2015- IEDM.pdf95. McKinsey-Japanatacrossroads-The4Gto5Grevolution.pdf96. NextGenerationMobileTechnologies-A5GStrategyfortheUK.pdf97. TheDevelopmentoftheUltra-broadbandNetworkinItaly.pdf98. UKGovernment-NextGenerationMobileTechnologies-A5GStrategyfortheUK.pdf


99. UnitedKingdom-5GNetworkDeploymentPilots-CallforViews.pdfCRTC

100.CityofOttawa-LetteroftheMayortoCRTC.pdf101.CityofToronto-LettertoCRTC.pdf102.ISEDCanada-ConsultationonReleasingMillimetreWaveSpectrumtoSupport5G.pdf103.TheEconomicImpactoftheCRTC'sDecisiontoUnbundleFibre-to-the-PremisesNetworks-

Copia.pdf

FiberandMunicipalBroadband104.10ReasonsWhyBroadbandShouldbeaMunicipalUtility-Entrypoint.pdf105.AReviewoftheBerkmanCenter'sPriceSurveyofMunicipalBroadbandMarkets.pdf106.ACLP-CloserLookBerkmanFiberPricingStudy.pdf107.BerkmanCenter-WiredWest-CooperativeofMunicipalitiesFiberOpticNetwork.pdf108.BerkmanKleinCenter-Community-OwnedFiberNetworks-ValueLeadersin America.pdf109.BerkmanKleinCenter-EnablingCompetition&InnovationonaCityFiberNetwork.pdf110.BlandinFoundation-MunicipalOptionsforFiberDeployment.pdf111.BroadbandcoverageinEurope-Jun2016.pdf112.BroadbandMagazine–Nov.-Dec.2017-seepag88.pdf113.Connecting21stCenturyCommunities-PolicyAgendaforBroadband-NextCentury Cities.pdf114.Cybera-Alberta-2016DigitalInfrastructureReport.pdf115.Deloitte-5GReady-theneedfordeepfiber.pdf116.ESMTBerlin-RegulationandinvestmentinEuropeanfiberopticinfrastructure.pdf117.GigU&Benton-AGuideforCommunityLeadersSeekingAffordable,Abundant Bandwidth.pdf118.ILSR-SuccessfulStrategiesforBroadbandPublic-PrivatePartnerships.pdf119.NationalInstituteforScience,Law&PublicPolicy-Re-InventingWires.pdf120.OECD-DevelopmentofHighSpeedNetworksandtheRoleofMunicipalNetworks.pdf121.OECD-PublicRightsofWayforFibreDeploymenttotheHome.pdf122.PennLaw-MunicipalFiberintheUnitedStates-AnEmpiricalAssessmentofFinancial

Performance.pdf123.PWC-Therevivaloffixedinfrastructure-Fibertechnologyandthefutureofmobile networks.pdf124.Re-InventingWires-MediaVersion-SeeRecomendations.pdf125.SGLF-TheImpactofGovernment-OwnedBroadbandNetworksonPrivateInvestment andConsumerWelfare.pdf126.StrategicNetworksGroup-ALocalOwnershipApproachtoBroadband.pdf127.WIK-Consult-Bestpracticeforpassiveinfrastructureaccess.pdf

NeutralHosts128.5GAmericas-Multioperatorneutralhostsmallcells.pdf129.5GCity-NeutralHost-SmartCity.pdf130.5GCity-UseCasesforSmartCities.pdf131.Atis-NeutralHostSolutionsforMulti-OperatorWirelessCoverageinManaged Spaces.pdf132.CTC-HowLocalitiesCanImproveWirelessServiceforthePublicWhileAddressing CitizenConcerns.pdf


133.Wireless20'20-NeutralHostWhitePaper-TheBusinessCaseforNeutralHost Networks.pdf

SmartcitiesandInternetofThings134.BerkmanKleinCenter-TheFutureofIoTinCities.pdf135.DeutscheTelekom-Whitepaper'ConnectedCities'.pdf136.IoTandGovernment'sRoleintheDevelopmentofCities-IoTAllianceAustralia.pdf137.Nokia-Smartcities-seeCitysharednetworkandCalgary.pdf138.TheEconomist-EmpoweringCities.pdf139.U.S.DepartmentofTransportation-TheSmart-ConnectedCityandItsImplicationsfor ConnectedTransportation.pdf140.UKIoT-TheFutureofStreetLighting.pdf


Workshop1


Workshop2


TableofCases

Titredelanouvellesection


CEFRIOisaresearchandinnovationestablishmentthatsupportspublicandprivateorganizationsintheiradoption and use of digital systems to update business processes and practices. A member ofQuébecInnove,CEFRIOhasbeencommissionedbytheQuébecgovernmenttocontributetotheprogressof Québec society through digital systems. CEFRIO studies, tests, investigates and publicizes digitalapplications in all aspectsof society. CEFRIObenefits fromanexperienced team, anetworkof over 90associate/guest researchers and some 285 dedicated members. Its principal financial partner is theMinistèredel’Économie,delaScienceetdel’Innovation(MESI).

[email protected]:@CEFRIO

QuébecCity888,rueSaint-JeanBureau575Québec(Québec)G1R5H6

Tel.:418-523-3746

Montréal550,rueSherbrookeOuestBureau1770,TourOuestMontréal(Québec)H3A1B9

Tel.:514-840-1245

PrincipalFinancialPartner