Follow us:
The Open Internet: International Comparisons
Internet development in Canada has significantly declined over the past decade. Compared to other developed nations, broadband penetration has stagnated, and Canadians continue to pay some of the highest prices for comparatively slow speeds.
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reports on a range of Internet data from thirty-four developed nations worldwide. The most recent of this data from 2010 shows Canada slipping to 12th place in the rankings of broadband subscribers per 100 inhabitants, a considerable decline since 2002 when it ranked second place.166 In terms of pricing, Canada placed 27th with average monthly subscription rates of $64.72.167 Only Turkey and Luxembourg pay more. Despite these telling statistics, “Canada continues to see itself as a high performer in broadband, as it was early in the decade, but current benchmarks suggest that this is no longer a realistic picture of its comparative performance”.168
High pricing and low speed, as well as other problems associated with the broadband market, stem from the way our market is structured. While five companies dominate the telecommunications landscape in Canada, they are comprised of two major groups: incumbent telephony companies (Bell and Telus) and incumbent cable companies (Rogers and Shaw, and Vidéotron in Quebec). This structure is referred to as inter-modal competition, where in order to enter the market, entrants must be able to 1) build their own infrastructure, or 2) have fair (regulated) access to incumbents’ infrastructure. Thus, high barriers to entry exist, which are only exacerbated by the government’s unwillingness to support competition through either of these requisites. Instead of safeguarding against anti-competitive behaviour and ensuring a level playing field through regulatory measures, the government has relied heavily on this market structure for sufficient competition.
It is essential to call attention to how this affects the quality of Internet service and the issue of net neutrality. With inter-modal competition, telecommunications markets are less open, and incumbent carriers are less inclined to provide competitive services. Indeed, “the majority of companies that offer the highest prices for the lowest speeds... operate in countries that rely on inter-modal competition: the United States and Canada ... ”.169 Furthermore, they have the power to carry out unfair traffic management practices, give preferential treatment to certain content, and perform other discordances with net neutrality.
The U.S. is not unlike Canada when it comes to its market structure and regulatory approach to telecommunications. Since we increasingly follow the path of the U.S. on many regulatory issues, we begin here by exploring the trajectory of net neutrality in the U.S. to get a better picture of the potential future of net neutrality in Canada.
Endnotes
166. OECD. (2010, June). Fixed and Wireless Broadband Subscriptions Per 100 Inhabitants June 2010. OECD Broadband Portal. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/35/39574709.xls
167. OECD. (2009, October). Average Monthly Subscription Price for High-Speed Connections October 2009. OECD Broadband Portal. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/33/4/43922216.xls
168. Benkler, Y., Faris, R., Gasse, U., Miyakawa, L., & Schultze, S. (2010). “Next Generation Connectivity: A review of broadband Internet transitions and policy from around the world.” Harvard University: The Berkman Center for Internet & Society.
169. Ibid.
In this Section:
- United States: A Gradual Decline of Regulatory Power
- Net Neutrality Elsewhere
- Usage-based Billing Worldwide
- Japan: A Strong, Engaged Regulator
- United Kingdom: A Model for Functional Separation
- Sweden: Open Access and Public-Private Partnerships
- Australia: Major Public Investment in Network Infrastructure
- Chile: A Leader in Net Neutrality Legislation
- Conclusion
Email this Report to Your MP
Casting an Open Net
- An Action Plan for a Connected Canada
- Canadian Views on the Open Internet
- The Technical Case for Openness
- The Open Internet: International Comparisons
- United States: A Gradual Decline of Regulatory Power
- Net Neutrality Elsewhere
- Usage-based Billing Worldwide
- Japan: A Strong, Engaged Regulator
- United Kingdom: A Model for Functional Separation
- Sweden: Open Access and Public-Private Partnerships
- Australia: Major Public Investment in Network Infrastructure
- Chile: A Leader in Net Neutrality Legislation
- Conclusion
- Canadian Culture in an Open Internet Age
- The Open Internet: Open for Business and Economic Growth
This Report Sponsored By:
And our supporters from the pro-Internet community.



