'The Internet of Elsewhere' works for countries - how about communities?

After I heard an interview with Cyrus Farivar on CBC radio, I read his book "Internet of Elsewhere" to better understand how the Internet has developed in four countries besides Canada. Farivar’s book describes how the Internet has emerged in four different countries and settings: South Korea, Senegal, Estonia and Iran.This book was an interesting and informative read and did a great job of illustrating how geography, culture, economy and politics all impact the development of Internet in a given location. The main points I took away from this book are that the development  and more importantly the application of the Internet is shaped by its locale and context. Different Countries = Different Internet Profiles

Farivar demonstrates that the Internet has developed and been applied in very distinct ways in each of the four countries he examines, and it stands to reason that the same is true for other locations as well. These conclusions provide some interesting and important findings for Internet development in rural Manitoba and rural Canada. Within, the development field, participant input and context is essential for development work and will result in unique projects specific to a community or group. It should be as no surprise that the development of the Internet within a community exhibits similar traits.

Farivar describes more than 15 years of Internet development in South Korea, Senegal, Estonia and Iran; and the levels that have been achieved in each of these countries varies dramatically. While the differences in Internet infrastructure and adoption between the more and less developed countries in Farivar’s writings are eye opening, perhaps most informative is the different paths taken between South Korea and Estonia, two developed countries that have successfully reinvented themselves with the use of Internet and Information and Communication Technology (ICT).

Ranked 2nd and 33rd for ICT in the world respectively by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), South Korea and Estonia are espoused as leaders in ICT infrastructure and adoption. While the ITU identifies strong ICT access, skill and use in both countries, Farivar illustrates that the Internet is being used very differently in each country.

South Korea is a world leader in mobile phone connectivity and has the world’s premiere professional online gaming league. Estonia on the other hand is a pioneer in e-governance and electronic citizenship along with being a leader in offering free wifi to residents and tourists alike.

These countries are amongst the world leaders in ICT and Internet, but they have arrived there via different roads and their citizens have adopted the technology in different ways, creating unique Internet profiles or footprints.

Different Communities = Different Internet Reality
Applying Farivar’s conclusions, to develop effective connectivity and adaptation of the Internet in rural communities, it is necessary to understand the the community and its users. Understanding community characteristics and working with community residents to determine how they might use the Internet helps to increase the effectiveness of Internet infrastructure, skills and applications.   

When I worked at Function Four Ltd., I helped to develop an ICT assessment tool called the E-Index that measured infrastructure, affordability, skills, and utilization which I also describe here. When initially applied in 2004 to rural Manitoba communities, it revealed that levels of ICT varied significantly. Amongst the differences, some were not surprising, as in the case of ICT infrastructure - the number of computers, mobile phones and level of connectivity in southern communities near Winnipeg were higher than their more remote counterparts in northern Manitoba.

However, the E-Index also revealed that many northern communities had higher usage rates than their better connected neighbours to the south. Highlighted in both E-Index reports and in my Master’s thesis,  follow up discussions in the community of Misipawistick Cree Nation (MCN), revealed that households with computers in northern communities often had a lineup of people waiting to use computers. In 2004, this created the surprising reality where a community in which less than a ⅓ of households had computers, more than ⅔ of residents were using computers regularly.

MCN’s E-Index profile in 2004 is one of my favourite examples of how the Internet can be adopted so differently in communities. On one hand the E-Index revealed that this northern community had lower infrastructure and poorer affordability than its southern neighbours but in spite of this challenge, the residents of MCN still had had higher usage rates than many of the southern communities.

The purpose of this example is to demonstrate that differences in ICT exist at a community level as well as at a national level. In some cases, the differences might be as large and as surprising as they were for MCN in 2004. In other cases, it might be a situation where community A offers free wifi throughout the community while community B doesn’t have free wifi but offers free computer training. Each of these unique characteristics of community infrastructure, skills and applications impact the reality of Internet in those communities and differentiate them from their neighbours.

While communities side by side may appear to have similar Internet histories and characteristics, the realities of Internet in each community is different. Communities have different strategic plans and visions, how about digital strategies?

Unfortunately digital planning in many rural communities stops with achieving general connectivity, while communities should be developing specific digital plans that meets their infrastructure, skill and application goals. Do you know of any examples of rural communities having tailored digital strategies or plans?


Sources:
http://internetofelsewhere.com/
http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/index.html
http://functionfour.com/about/
Kelly (2008). Knowledge Planning, Community Development in the Knowledge-Based Economy. Thesis, Brandon University, Brandon.

Want a good return on your money? Try investing in Highspeed Rural Internet

Photo courtesy of mikeleeorg (flikr)

Why invest in rural broadband? What is the benefit of hooking up small rural communities? These are common questions when working in the field of rural Internet. While there are a wide range of important benefits from the Internet for rural communities, its the economic benefits and perceived lack thereof for rural broadband that drives most conversations. 

Recipe for Rural Community Development in the New Economy

The recipe for rural development in the new economy is based on three key ingredients of knowledge, innovation and leadership. Various types of economic and social development in rural communities will require these three elements to be successful. An important starting point is to understand what each of these key ingredients are and how they play a role in the development of rural communities.

Convergence: bring all our ICT together to create new innovation and opportunities; now lets do the same for urban-rural

As part of my research manager duties at Brandon University, I was fortunate enough to attend the TRLabs Convergence conference in Winnipeg. The topic of convergence refers to the coming together of media, merging ICT experience and activities into a seamless experience. The day was spent looking at this convergence in ICT and exploring how it is going to impact our lives in the next 5-10 years. Many ideas and directions were discussed, revealing how the integration of technology in our lives is going to continue to increase. It's an exciting time and all of the speakers agreed that we are moving towards a society with more wireless devices that are used more and more throughout our lives, making existing activities easier and more efficient while letting us do completely new activities and interactions as well.

Wireless devices are already transforming how we work, play and communicate and this will continue with further integration of wireless devices into our lives. Many of the presenters talked about how blended or seamless experiences will continue to improve work, play and communication with networks working effortlessly to transfer content and data between devices and locations whether it be on our computers, smartphones, televisions or tablets. From working on documents to taking phone calls to watching movies or reading the news, our lives are going to increasingly get easier and easier as we are able configure how and where we want to do these activities. Presenters also agreed that many of these innovations are already here and that they will just continue to improve and become more widespread.

In addition to further integration and innovation around our current mobile devices, trends indicate that we are going to see a proliferation of wireless devices in our lives, from smart cars, smart appliances and smart apparel to RFID stickers that can be put on anything such as furnaces, pets and even toothbrushes. One presenter indicated that Ford is showcasing automobiles with monitored driver seats that can help control the car in the event of a driver heart attack. Another example provided home communication solutions that let families talk and video effortlessly with each other no matter where they were or what device they were using.

The unifying factor in all of these innovations and trends was the need for a strong connection to the Internet as the data demand from our devices grow. Not only will these innovations and devices require a strong Internet connection, there are is going to be an explosion of wireless devices putting further demand on our Internet infrastructure. A CISCO study was cited which predicted there will be more than 50 billion Internet connected devices by the year 2020, an average of 6.6 devices per person, far beyond the current average of 1.5 devices per person globally today. To put the speed of wireless device growth in perspective, it was only 5 years ago that there were more people than wireless devices and in 8 years from now there will be more than 6 times the number of devices as people.

As I listened throughout the day and as I thought about what I had learned, one question kept coming back to me: how do rural communities fit into this? I'm fortunate enough to have a solid Internet connection in my rural city of Portage la Prairie and I will be able to participate and enjoy society's increasing innovation and blended experience. Like many people, I already do some of these things; I use my smartphone as my alarm clock and to track exercise, I use a tablet for work and entertainment and we use our TV for watching movies from Netflix as often as watching regular TV.

I look forward to what's next in further integrating technology into our lives, but again I am fortunate enough to have the Internet connection to be able to participate in our changing reality. Just 10 or even 5 kilometers outside of my city though, people do not necessarily have the same ability. Having just recently explored the differences in broadband speeds, I know that just 5 km away, people can have difficulty accessing 5Mbps high speed, speeds that are 5 times slower than what myself and other urban residents in Manitoba are able to access.

As the Convergence conference illustrated, all indications are that we are going to increase our connectedness exponentially, both through our existing devices and by the explosion of new devices that become integrated into our lives. While the merits of being able to watch TV seamlessly on all our devices can be debated, the benefits to areas like health and education are exciting and promise to continue improving society. The unfortunate reality though is that not all rural communities and residents are currently able to realize the benefits of those innovations. As demands on Internet connections increase, those without Internet or with slower connections will be the first to miss out on the potential benefits. Ironically, rural communities are some of those places that would benefit the most from health, education and communication innovations, helping to address both geographic and demographic challenges. It will be important for Manitoba and Canada as a whole to think about and plan for this increasing connectedness and to increase efforts to make sure that all rural communities and residents are able to benefit from the related improvements and opportunities along with their urban neighbours.

Ingredients for e-ready communities

How do you describe the importance of the Internet? How about its potential for communities? That is a question I continue to try and answer after more than 10 years of working in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and rural development. Studies are beginning to calculate its impact with some results indicating that the Internet is responsible for 21% of economic growth in developed nations. Additionally, a study from the World Bank determines that every10% point increase in penetration of ICTs can impact economic growth by up to 1.4% for developing countries.

Unfortunately, in attempts to explain the Internet and its importance, it often comes across as a magic bullet that is going to solve all of the community’s problems (something I'm guilty of on occasion). The natural reaction to this is a “Build it and they will come” approach by community decision makers and governments. Many groups work hard to set up Internet infrastructure and access in a community and then hope for change.

Regrettably, the Internet is not a magic bullet and to fully realize its benefits, communities need to do more than just build ICT infrastructure. While building ICT infrastructure is a critical first step, successful adoption also requires building digital skills, and most importantly, it requires people actively using the Internet.

In 2001, I travelled to a northern community in Canada to help update the software on their community access site only to discover the computer for the access site was still in the original boxes. The local organization that had agreed to host the access site was very appreciative of the computer, but explained matter of fact that they had no idea how to set up the computer, and so it had remained in the box for six months until I arrived.

More than 10 years later, the lesson learned from this experience still holds true, setting communities up with computers and Internet is not the only or final step in unleashing the potential of the Internet for our rural communities. E-Ready communities are those communities that are able to take full advantage of the information society. In my master’s thesis on knowledge planning, I defined an e-ready community as “a community that provides its residents, businesses and organizations with the necessary tools and environment to be successful in the new knowledge-based world” (Kelly, pg 14).

 As the UN’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU) describes, it is the combination of ICT skills and ICT access which enables the use of ICT and the Internet. In turn, it is using technology that results in communities taking full advantage of the information society. Another ICT assessment is built on this model, but Function Four Ltd.’s E-Index focuses on community level rather than national level measurements of infrastructure, skills and use.  

Communities that want to effectively participate in the information society, to become e-communities need to address each of these steps of infrastructure, skills and use to fully realize the benefits of ICT. The ITU and the E-Index provide some examples of how to determine progress towards effective engagement in the information society with the ITU focusing on country measurements while the E-Index concentrates at a community level.

Figure 1 ITU Measuring the Information Society 2011

Infrastructure and access

The ITU describes ICT infrastructure and access as the presence and availability of computers, cell phones, fixed phone lines and Internet within a community. While the ITU measures fixed phone lines, it acknowledges that they are becoming less and less important for accessing the Internet and may be removed from infrastructure measurements in the future. The E-Index, a community ICT Index that builds locally on the ITU’s efforts, factors in the presence of more traditional ICTs such as radios and televisions to create an overall measure of ICT infrastructure and access.

Infrastructure and access are often measured by ratios of ICT per 100 people to provide a comparable benchmark between ICTs and between geographies. This type of measurement also provides helpful context for understanding the importance and role of ICTs; for example the country of Taiwan has the highest rate of mobile phones per capita in the world with more than 100 mobile phones per 100 people meaning that many people have multiple phones.

Communities wanting to participate more in the information society need to determine which ICTs are the most beneficial for them and focus on measuring the level of those ICTs. Access becomes an issue when certain groups or parts of the community have unequal access to those ICTs due to issues of cost, control or availability. Recent data shows that in the US, only 46% of the poorest households have broadband access in the home – that figure jumps to 80% in houses with more than $50,000 in household income and to 96% for the wealthiest households.

Skills

ICT skills are also referred to as digital literacy or capacity, typically referring to the ability to use computers and the Internet. While ideally measured through surveys or even testing, the ITU and other agencies often use education enrollments as proxies for ICT skills, measuring capacity through enrollment rates in secondary and tertiary education. The E-Index uses a tiered skill tree for each ICT grouping skills into level of difficulty and measuring survey participant

Communities are better situated to use surveys and even training requests as indicators of ICT skills. Determining the level of comfort and expertise with ICTs locally is an important step in helping to increase and encourage ICT use.

Use

Using ICTs is the only way for a community to benefit from them and to move towards becoming e-communities. Computers, cell phones and the Internet provide the main opportunities for community use. As a result, the ITU focuses its measurements on these technologies, tallying broadband and cellphone subscriptions as their main indicators of use. The E-Index on the other hand focuses on individual time use of technology to help determine a community’s ICT use profile.

Its important for communities to understand current use patterns in their community before trying to focus efforts on a specific ICT or outcome. Is the community strongly engaged in social media or are the majority of residents focused on productivity uses such as word processors and spreadsheets. Once communities know where they are currently in terms of ICT use, it’s much easier to determine and plan for new goals.

The first step in any recipe is to make sure you have the all the ingredients, and both the ITU and E-Index have identified that the necessary ingredients for engagement in the information society are ICT infrastructure, skills and use. Providing Computers and broadband alone will not create e-ready communities, but it is an important step, and the first step in the recipe for creating communities engaged in the information society. 

Sources:

http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/index.html

http://functionfour.com/about/

http://mashable.com/2012/02/05/digital-divide-infographic/

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTINFORMATIONANDCOMMUNICATIONANDTECHNOLOGIES/Resources/282822-1208273252769/Building_broadband.pdf

Kelly (2008). Knowledge Planning, Community Development in the Knowledge-Based Economy. Thesis, Brandon University, Brandon. 

How fast is fast enough?

Image courtesy of techline info

Rural Canada and rural Manitoba are experiencing an ever increasing Internet speed gap. Over the last ten years, broadband speeds have been increasing around the world with the leading countries increasing from 1.5 Mbps to over 50 Mbps. 

According to netindex.com, the average bandwidth speed globally is 9.9 Mbps. As a previous post indicated, Canada and Manitoba’s average speeds are slightly faster than the global average at 12.3 Mbps and 11.3 Mbps respectively. Most of the communities in Manitoba under 5,000 people are averaging under 5 Mbps and most out-of-town households average less than that. The target Internet speed still being used as standard for rural Manitoba and Canada is 1.5 Mbps. This standard for access was set 10 years ago in Canada and neither Canada nor Manitoba has revised this standard or put forward a new broadband plan.

While 10 years ago, 1.5 Mbps was considered leading edge Internet access, times have changed and now, Internet speeds of 1.5 Mbps are 10x slower than the Canadian average and 20-50x slower than what is available to many in Canada and Manitoba. While residents in cities have access to 25 and even 50 Mbps broadband, many rural residents are lucky to have access to 5 Mbps and for many out-of-town residents, it can be a struggle to even achieve the 1.5 Mbps broadband minimum.

Does speed matter - Is 1.5 Mbps fast enough?

Maybe the difference is not important. If rural Manitoba's de facto standard is 1.5 Mbps, an important question for rural residents and community decision-makers and developers alike is: “Is this fast enough? Or, to phrase it another way, “Is the speed of our rural Internet sufficient?”

A 1.5 Mbps connection speed does meet minimum/recommended standards for many popular Internet activities, including voice and video calling on Skype, streaming audio and streaming video, accessing youtube and other social media sites. However, due to the fact that 1.5 Mbps is the minimum for many of these applications and that users very rarely achieve their advertised speeds, the quality of the experience and the content may be impacted, often requiring minutes to view a 30 second youtube clip or repeatedly experiencing lagging/dropped Internet calls.

As this table from broadband.co.uk illustrates, while 1.5Mbps meets the minimum requirements for many web applications, the quality of that experience and those applications will be substantially improved with faster speeds:

Internet Connection Speed	Time to load a typical web page*	Time to download a typical 5-minute song**	Streaming Video Quality
56K dial-up modem	14 sec	12 min 30 sec
256K broadband	3 sec	3 min	Low Quality
512K broadband	1.6 sec	1 min 30 sec
1Mb broadband	0.8 sec	41 sec
2Mb broadband	0.4 sec	20 sec	Medium Quality
4Mb broadband	0.1 sec	5 sec
6Mb broadband	Instantaneous	3.5 sec
8Mb broadband	Instantaneous	2.5 sec	TV Quality
Note: all figures are approximate and represent best-case download speeds. Actually speeds will generally be lower. * Assumes a typical web page is 100 kilobytes of data. ** Assuming a typical song is a 5 megabyte MP3 file.

Needs to be faster

While 1.5 Mbps does allow for access to the majority of the Internet and Internet activities there are Internet applications and uses that are clearly beyond the capacity of 1.5 Mbps broadband. Streaming HD video for example requires 6-8 Mbps and for group video calling on Skype 2Mbps is the recommended connection. Unfortunately for rural residents, these are the types of applications and Internet use that are increasing in popularity and importance in areas such as online education, health and business activities.

Rural Manitoba clearly needs, and would benefit from, faster Internet access. While rural users with a 1.5 Mbps connection are currently able to use many of the same Internet applications that their faster counter parts are, they do so with a noticeable reduction in quality. In addition, more advanced and bandwidth heavy applications are simply beyond the limits of their access.

While 1.5 Mbps may meet the absolute minimum Internet requirements, this will not be the case for long. Increasingly rich media content on websites means that the Internet connection speed requirements are going to keep increasing and 1.5 Mbps will soon be insufficient for many activities it currently allows. Reflecting ever-expanding Internet and bandwidth requirements, the FCC in the United States has recently raised the definition of minimum broadband from 1.5 to 4 Mbps.

Improvements underway in Manitoba

Luckily for rural residents in this province, Manitoba is working hard to expand its Internet availability and speed in rural areas. The rural-focused initiative Manitoba Netset  is now to offering up to 7 Mbps connections in many parts of the province and is continuing to expand in its efforts to serve more rural Manitobans. Efforts such as this are a very important step in improving rural Internet access, but efforts will need to continue. While Rural Manitobans will definitely benefit from the doubling/tripling of their Internet speed, the Canadian average will still be more than 2x faster and city residents will still have access of speeds up to 10x faster than their rural counterparts. More initiatives like Manitoba Netset will be needed for rural residents to be able to keep pace with the changing Internet and to continue to shrink the access gap for rural Manitobans.

Sources

http://support.google.com/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en-GB&answer=78358

https://support.skype.com/en-us/faq/FA1417/How-much-bandwidth-does-Skype-need

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_media#Streaming_bandwidth_and_storage

http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kg9sr5fmqwd-en

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_access

Social Media is here to stay; time to get on the bandwagon

courtesy of dknyprgirl

Social media is now part of how organizations, companies and society operate. Organizations big and small, urban and rural, tech savvy and tech adverse, can no longer ignore or avoid the importance and impact of social media. As I continue to explore what ICT can mean for rural development, the role of social media is quickly becoming a central part of that exploration. As a result, I am increasingly immersed in social media, expanding beyond the longtime facebook presence and establishing more comprehensive profiles and a more active presence in the other main networks including Google+, LinkedIn, Twitter and most recently Pinterest.

Not surprisingly my network of colleagues, friends and family have also been increasing their engagement in social media and I have quickly found that I many of the same connections online as I have offline. However, one of the main differences with social networking is that it is designed to expand your network beyond those people you know face to face, while also greatly facilitating the exchange of knowledge, ideas and even people.

Now, in addition to my current ‘real-world’ or offline network, I have in my ‘circles’, am ‘following’, ‘friends with’, ‘connected-to’, and ‘re-pin’ leaders and practitioners in development, research, technology and even spirituality. The knowledge that flows through my social network on a daily basis is very informative and inspiring. The network of experts and practitioners at my fingers tips to learn from and share with grows daily and far exceeds what I could’ve achieved a few short years ago before social media. All of this has affirmed that rural communities and organizations need to insure that they are also on the social media bandwagon as the dangers of missing it are now too significant to ignore. 

The Social Media “Push”

One of the key benefits of social media is the ability to easily and effectively share information, knowledge and ideas with others. Rural communities are no longer affected by being isolated from networks, businesses, stakeholders or even prospective residents. Social media allows rural communities and organizations to promote themselves and to share their information in a much more effective manner than ever before. As an example, a rural community that posts an event on their website relies on users to come to the website to be aware of the event. While websites are still a very important tool, social media creates a dynamic network of interested participants who are waiting for information to be sent to them and many of whom are willing and wanting to forward that information to their extended networks. A study by the market research company AYTM study indicates that 57% of users on facebook have more than 100 friends and 25% of users on twitter have more than 100 followers; the community event notice can reach thousands of people through social networking in the time it takes dozens to visit the community website. 

The Social Media “Pull”

For those communities and organizations that are not producing lots of content or not ready to share information regularly, social media provides a window into a cycle of knowledge exchange, idea generation and discussion that is seemingly endless in terms of the topics available and in the constant evolution of this content. Social networks are a fantastic source of knowledge and you can find participants, experts and groups of participants and experts that provide a wealth of information. Through social media, rural communities and organizations can easily follow the latest discussions on relevant topics and be up to date on news, events and announcements related to them or their economies. Rural businesses can know what their customers want and what their competition is doing as it happens.

The Social Media “Access” to Talent

One of the most significant indicators of the importance of social media, is the rapid evolution of employee recruitment and hiring. According to Careerenlightnement.com an amazing 91% of companies are now using social media in some manner for recruiting. Recruiters are using social media, primarily facebook and LinkedIn, to verify qualifications, to get a better understanding of applicants’ interests and expertise and to determine if there are any potential character issues. Many companies are basing decisions on what they find as 68% of companies having hired or rejected applicants based on social media. As a result, job hunters are focusing their job searches, networking efforts and communication activities on social media. If rural companies and communities are not engaged in social media, they are going to find that talent is harder and harder to find as potential employees are no longer searching and applying for jobs in the same manner any more. 

Sources

http://mashable.com/2011/08/16/social-media-marketing-stats-infographic/

http://www.mdgadvertising.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/the_roi_of_social_media_mdg_advertising_infographic.png

http://aytm.com/blog/research-junction/branding-and-how-it-works-in-the-social-media-age/

http://careerenlightenment.com/social-media-job-seeking-tips/how-recruiters-use-social-media-to-screen-candidates-infographic

Playing catch-up: putting rural ICT in perspective

The more I explore and practice rural development, the more I am convinced that Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is a core pillar of development for rural areas, not only creating new opportunities for rural communities but necessary in able to keep pace and participate in the increasingly Internet and knowledge-based economy. As I research ICT in rural Manitoba, I’m always trying to data sources that help put the quality of Internet access in perspective for rural areas. Recently, I came across a fantastic resource for benchmarking and comparing rural Internet access and speeds, Ookla’s Net Index.

The Net Index is a real time, comprehensive assessment of broadband speed and value. Populated by the popular Speedtest.net and Pingtest.net Internet testing sites, Net Index provides results for download speeds, upload speeds, broadband costs and even explores the difference between promised speeds and actual speeds. Understanding the different aspects and speed levels of Internet access creates a much more informed discussion around rural Internet

In addition to its detailed measures for Internet speed, Net Index also creates a comprehensive geographical profile as well with results available and comparable between city and province, and from national to international. While it does not let rural Manitobans identify their specific towns, villages or locations, it does provide detailed results for the province as a whole as well as the urban centres, allowing more specific and localized comparisons than most broadband metrics and repots. While it does not capture use or capacity and does not yet provide results for small, rural areas, Net Index establishes an important benchmarking and comparison tool for Internet speed and value.

Using Net Index then, we are able to create a detailed overview of Internet access in Manitoba and Canada. For a rural context, it is worth remembering that Canada has not established a new target for rural Internet access and that it currently sits at 1.5Mbps, well below global averages and comparable to many developing countries. The results below provide Winnipeg, Manitoba and Canada Internet levels along with comparisons to global averages and leaders, creating clear targets and comparisons for rural communities and residents.

The results illustrate that Canada has average Internet access overall, but is well behind global leaders, especially in upload speeds. Additionally Manitoba is slightly below the Canadian average in every category. Finally, Winnipeg is above the provincial average in every category and above the national average in all but one category. 

Internet Download Speed

• Global average = 9.88 Mbps (Global Leader: Estonia = 55.61 Mbps
• Canada average = 12.29 Mbps (Global ranking = 33^rd)
• Manitoba average = 11.27 Mbps
• Winnipeg average = 13.61 Mbps 

Internet Upload Speed

• Global Average = 3.71 Mbps (Global Leader: South Korea = 27.65 Mbps)
• Canada Average = 1.82 Mbps (Global ranking = 65^th)
• Manitoba Average = 1.60 Mbps
• Winnipeg Average = 1.81 Mbps

Internet Cost/Mbps

• Global average = $9.74 USD/Mbps (Global Leader: Bulgaria = $.64 USD/Mbps)
• Canada average = $5.86 USD per Mbps (Global ranking = 33^rd)
• Manitoba average = $5.66 USD per Mbps
• Winnipeg average = $4.39 USD per Mbps

Internet Promise Index – comparison between the promised Internet speeds and the actual results (100% would meant that actual speeds are equal to promised speeds)

• Global average = 86.28% (Global Leader: Slovakia = 100.76%)
• Canada average = 88.32% (Global ranking = 33^rd)
• Manitoba = 87.71%
• Winnipeg average = 87.85%

All data was provided by www.netindex.com on January 1, 2012 and covered a data range from July 2, 2009 to December 31, 2011.