The FCC is currently engaged in a proceeding that is intended to prevent certain barriers to broadband engagement. Pursuant to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), the commission is examining the “digital discrimination of access.” Of course, since we are in Washington, D.C., part of that investigation includes defining “digital discrimination of access.” But the bottom line is that the FCC seeks to ensure that no one is denied access to broadband for discriminatory reasons. To be sure, the law that directs the FCC to undertake this investigation (the IIJA) recognizes that economic or technical infeasibility may stand in the way of access to broadband, and that disparities arising out of such infeasibility are not discriminatory. And of course (since we are in Washington), the definition of “technical or economic feasibility” is also up to debate. Less uncertain is the widespread agreement across the board, from broadband providers to public interest groups to trade associations, that access to broadband is a critical aspect of modern existence. The challenge is how to ensure that the service is available for those who want and need it.
Data have long indicated that the prevailing barrier to broadband adoption is affordability. A 2010 FCC report cited 36 percent of survey respondents identifying monthly cost as the reason for non-adoption. A study conducted several years later revealed a corollary conclusion, reporting that approximately two-thirds of non-adopters cited non-price barriers to adoption. More recently, the FCC identified affordability, generally, as a concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. These surveys are confirmed by broadband adoption rates, which demonstrate overall that households with higher incomes reflect higher rates of broadband adoption. Age also factors into broadband adoption rates, though the gaps between various age groups (18-29, 30-49, 50-64, and 65+) are narrowing over time. Pew Research data reveals that twenty years ago, adoption rates for users 18-29 were 56 percent higher than for users 65+; by 2020, that gap had narrowed to 14 percent.
Another factor in broadband adoption is educational attainment. And this is where things get interesting. Data (again from Pew Research) reveal that in 2019, the adoption rate for people with less than a high school education was 46 percent; high school graduates, 59 percent; some college, 77 percent; and college graduates, 93 percent. On the one hand, these results should not be surprising: Numerous sources (apart from broadband-oriented discussions) indicate that a higher level of educational attainment generally leads to higher income (though the trend seems to be plateau at Ph.D). Accordingly, affordability should seem to resolve as household income increases alongside educational attainment. Other reports, however, ask whether educational attainment factors into broadband adoption for reasons other than household income.
Stated differently, are broadband adoption rates for college graduates earning $50,000-$74,000 annually higher than non-college graduates earning similar wages, and if so, why? One report argues that prior studies incorrectly “conflat[ed] wealth and educational attainment.” In contrast, alternative perspectives suggest that educational attainment may correlate to more favorable tendencies to adopt new technology, generally; people who pursue higher education are more likely to be the same personality as early adopters of technology. Within that view, even while higher education attainment is found to lead to higher household income, higher broadband adoption rates among more highly educated groups may relate to factors other than higher income. Notable as well is that these trends emerge without discernible regard to race or other demographic characteristics. Household income and educational attainment have been found to found to exert positive impacts on broadband adoption rates across all race groups. This is also important, because gaps among racial groups (Black, Hispanic, and White) are also narrowing over time. In 2000, Black and White broadband adoption rates were separated by a gap of 15 percent. By 2020, that difference had narrowed to 2 percent.
The FCC’s “digital discrimination” docket is just one part of a comprehensive approach established by the IIJA to expand broadband availability and engagement. The IIJA included historic levels of funding to support broadband deployment through the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program and resources to ensure the Affordable Connectivity Program, which offers discounted service rates for low-income users. Not surprisingly, the IIJA recognizes that, for the most part, broadband engagement comes down to resources – money to build broadband and money to buy broadband. But that does not mean the job is done once programs to address buildout (BEAD) and affordability (like the Affordability Connectivity Program, also part of the Infrastructure Act) are implemented.
The FCC’s Communications Equity and Diversity Council (CEDC) issued a report last year that identified more than a dozen recommendations aimed at increasing broadband engagement. They included, for example, low-cost broadband availability programs; strengthening marketing and communications about available federal and state connectivity programs and other programs that target low-income and other unconnected members of a community; streamlining the application process for government benefit programs; increasing support and funding for organizations such as schools, nonprofits, and faith-based organizations to provide digital navigation assistance in communities they serve; increasing device access and participation; strengthening digital skilling efforts in underserved communities; and encouraging the creation of workforce development and training opportunities, focusing on historically unrepresented communities.
This work might not be complicated, per se, but that does not mean it will be easy. The CEDC recommendations seem to contemplate substantial public-private engagements to assess individual community needs and the right partners. In fact, the recommendations line up with components of NTCA’s Digital Inclusion Toolkit, a multi-part series that offers tips on community assessments and case studies of rural broadband providers who have undertaken successful outreach in their communities.
The good news is that gaps in broadband adoption rates are narrowing. The other good news is that significant resources are dedicated to increasing deployment and engagement. And the news can only be expected to improve as rural providers leverage these programs with community partners to ensure the delivery of broadband’s benefits to more users.