MUNICIPAL WIFI AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

1
MUNICIPAL WIFI AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES Paul M.A. Baker, Ph.D,
AICP Center for Advanced Communication Policy
(CACP) Georgia Institute of technology Jarice
Hanson, Ph.D. Verizon Chair in Telecommunications
Temple University dg.o 2008 "Partnerships for
Public Innovation" 9th Annual International
Conference on Digital Government Hilton
Bonaventure Hotel, Montreal Canada, May 18-21,
2008
2
Networks, Accessibility, and Barriers

• Wireless broadband constitutes a critical
  component of our nations goal of ensuring that
  reliable and ubiquitous broadband becomes
  available for all Americans (US FCC)
• State of municipal wireless network design and
  policies with regards to people with disabilities
  (PWD) in the United States
• 320 municipalities (/-) with wireless networks
  in existence, planned, or being considered
• Existing system websites/documentation surveyed
  for accessibility and usability of system
  information for PWD
• Applied research findings used to develop policy
  briefings, filings, advisories and guidance on
  accessibilities of systems
• Access, application, awareness, actors,
  atmosphere (context)

3
Context

• Providing access to broadband Internet/digital
  divide mitigation rationale for deployment of
  these networks (Bar and Park, 2006)
• Literature on municipal wireless initiatives
  indicates a lack of research on the needs of
  people with disabilities
• Of the 52 million Americans with disabilities,
  about 25 own a computer vs. 66 of the
  non-disabled
• 20 PWD have access to the Internet vs. 40 of
  the non-disabled
• Wireless connectivity potentially expands
  opportunities especially for PWD by providing
  access to services and information which might
  otherwise be non-accessible
• Systems can be designed to offer specialized
  information services in multiple formats for PWD,
  affording them greater opportunities for
  community participation

4
Context II

• People facing barriers to access and use of ICTs
  are educationally, economically, and politically
  disadvantaged (Hargittai 2003)
• PWD are not only concerned about having,
  accessing, or using the technology, but also
  concerned about barriers to the content of the
  Internet and World Wide Web (DOC, 1999 Margolin,
  1998)
• Website access barriers for PWD result from
  design flaws, lack of awareness, and ad hoc
  accessibility implementation (Yu 2002)
• Barriers faced by PWD exacerbated by multimedia,
  graphic-heavy nature of the web that cannot be
  read by screen readers unless remediated for
  content access (Heim, 2000)
• Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
  requires electronic and information technology
  developed for the federal government (including
  websites) be accessible for those with
  disabilities (Hackett, Parmanto and Zeng, 2005),
  but local barriers continue

5
Study Design

• Survey conducted of a sample of 48 municipal
  wireless networks for general accessibility out
  of a population of 320 systems
• Comparative analysis of 24 cities under
  Department of Justice Project Civic Access (PCA)
  agreements with 24 control cities
• PCA initiative ensures that towns, cities, and
  counties are compliant with the Americans with
  Disabilities Act (ADA). A number of
  municipalities have been found to be noncompliant
  with the ADA and have entered into compliance
  agreements with the DOJ
• Study considered whether external policy
  instruments (i.e. Project Civic Access), can
  impact the accessibility of these networks

6
Study Design II

• Survey conducted of a sample of 48 municipal
  wireless networks for general accessibility out
  of a population of 320 systems
• Comparative analysis of 24 cities under
  Department of Justice Project Civic Access (PCA)
  agreements with 24 control cities
• 142 localities entered into 153 agreements with
  the U.S. Department of Justice to make their
  programs, services, and facilities accessible to
  people with disabilities.
• PCA initiative ensures that towns, cities, and
  counties are compliant with the Americans with
  Disabilities Act Title II(ADA) by eliminating
  physical and communication barriers to people
  with disabilities. A number of municipalities
  have been found to be noncompliant with the ADA
  and have entered into agreements with the DOJ
  under this program as a means of amelioration

7
Study Design III

• Typical Models of Municipal WiFi system
  Implementation
• - Private Model
• Public Model
• Public/Private Consortium Model
• Stakeholder Issues/Accountability
• Fiscal accountability (Tax dollars)
• Design parameters (who is the client)
• Sustainability

8
Results

• The study largely composed of projects where the
  wireless network had already been implemented and
  was currently being used. 56.2 of the projects,
  were in the final phase of deployment
• municipal project span a large range of city sizes

Table 1 Municipal project deployment phase
9
Results II
Map Legend City size is represented by these dot
colors Very Large (VL) Large (L) Medium (M)
Small (S) Very Small (VS) Phase of deployment
represented by color of text Status 3 Status 2
Status 1 PCA bold text/ Non-PCA un-bold text
10
Results III

• Accessibility determined by evaluating stated
  objectives/goals of the project to determine
  whether potential benefits for digital inclusion
  were mentioned
• None of the projects explicitly mentioned or
  discussed people with disabilities as a community
  that could benefit from these networks
• 18.8 of PCA projects were found to have
  substantial consideration of disadvantaged
  populations (low-income) compared to only 4.5
  of non-PCA projects
• 64 of PCA wireless projects provide detailed
  website information as compared to the 36 of
  non-PCA providing project details
• Surprisingly, a larger percentage of PCA city
  websites failed to be accessible when compared to
  their non-PCA counterparts (accessibility checker
  -- WebXACT, developed by Watchfire)

11
Results IV

• Formative vs. Summative due to evolving state of
  WiFi Systems sustainability a moving target
  (Sustainability/Scalability) MetroFi
  (Portland), Earthlink Municipal Wireless
  (Philadelphia)
• Wireless Philadelphia Project (Feasibility
  Impact)
• Morehead Minnesota (GoMoerhead) /Foster City
  (MetroFi), California projects, limited and
  non-scalable by design (Economic Impact)
• Inaccessibility of PCA city websites
  (Accessibility Impact)
• Need for new model(s)?

12
Policy Considerations/Ramifications

• Policy Context - encompasses regulation,
  legislation, sustainability, design strategies,
  and actions that impact the public interest
• What is the most appropriate unit of analysis?
• Location vs. stakeholder/coverage vs. node
• Barriers
• Economic Barriers
• Awareness/Proficiency
• Technological Incompatibilities
• Approaches
• Regulatory/Policy Interventions
• Market Mechanisms
• Outreach/Awareness

13
Policy Ramifications II

• Municipal networks should assess
  communities/populations that may experience
  access barriers, and not just focus on income
  level/status as the sole evaluatory criteria
• Unmet demand (market) for communication
  services/devices, can drive product/system/policy
  innovation
• Policy interventions can include collaborative
  activities, training initiatives, universal
  design, and device interoperability
• Collaborations can leverage partner resources,
  increase awareness of system/product
  possibilities, and optimize accessible
  system/product design

14
Conclusions

• Despite 18 years since the implementation of the
  ADA, 10 years after the amendment of Section 508,
  issues of accessibility for people with
  disabilities still remain in a number of areas
• An accessibility policy mechanism (i.e. Project
  Civic Access), is positively associated with
  some awareness of requirements of disadvantaged
  populations
• However, cities under accessibility compliance
  agreements not necessarily going beyond the
  specifics of the agreement
• Community based municipal digital inclusion
  initiatives can ensure specialized accessibility
  for their members (focus on individual)

15
Wrap-up

• Further information
• CACP www.cacp.gatech.edu
• School of Communication and Theatre, Temple
  University www.sct.temple.edu
• The authors wish to acknowledge the research and
  editorial assistance of Nathan W. Moon, and the
  support provided by School of Communications and
  Theatre, Temple University.
• The research was funded in part by support from
  the Center for Advanced Communication Policy,
  Georgia Institute of Technology, and the
  Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center for
  Wireless Technologies, sponsored by the National
  Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation
  Research (NIDRR), U.S. Department of Education
  under grant number H133E060061. The opinions
  contained in this paper are those of the author
  and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S.
  DOE or NIDRR.