Digital Dividend

How big is the slice of cake?

and other questions on Spectrum Policy and Broadcasting

European Broadcasting Union

October 2007

Q & As on Spectrum Policy

WHAT IS RADIO FREQUENCY SPECTRUM? WHY IS FREQUENCY SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT NEEDED? WHAT IS THE ITU GENEVA 2006 FREQUENCY PLAN (GE06)? WIRELESS BROADBAND SERVICES AND TWO-WAY MOBILE COMMUNICATION: IS IT EFFICIENT TO USE THE BROADCASTING BANDS FOR NON-BROADCASTING SERVICES? WHY DOES INTERFERENCE SERIOUSLY REDUCE THE POTENTIAL OF SERVICE NEUTRALITY? WOULD RE-PLANNING OF THE EUROPEAN PART OF THE GENEVA PLAN AND CREATING THE EU FREQUENCY PLAN BE A FEASIBLE AND EFFICIENT SOLUTION TO THE INTERFERENCE PROBLEM? WHAT IS THE DIGITAL SWITCHOVER AND WHY IS IT BEING DONE? WHAT IS THE DIGITAL DIVIDEND? HOW BIG IS THE DIGITAL DIVIDEND? WHY DO BROADCASTERS NEED SPECTRUM? WHY DO PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTERS WANT TO OFFER HIGH DEFINITION TELEVISION? WHAT IS THE VALUE OF FREE TO AIR (FTA) BROADCASTING? DOES SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT NEED MORE FLEXIBLITY? WILL SPECTRUM TRADING AND AUCTIONING INCREASE SPECTRUM EFFICIENCY? WHAT SHOULD BE THE ROLE OF EU SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT? WHAT IS THE OPINION OF MEMBER STATES EXPERTS? WHAT IS THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTS VIEW? WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE NEXT ITU WRC07? PROCEDURE GLOSSARY

3 3 4 5 5

6 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 10 11 12 13 13 15 17

1.

WHAT IS RADIO FREQUENCY SPECTRUM? 1

The radio frequency spectrum (simply referred to as radio spectrum) is only a comparatively small part of the electromagnetic spectrum, covering the range from 3 Hz to 300 GHz. Due to its excellent ability to carry codied information (signals), the radio spectrum is the home of communication technologies such as mobile phones, radio and television broadcasting, two-way radios, broadband services, radar, xed links, satellite communications, etc. Depending on the frequency range, the radio spectrum is divided into frequency bands and subbands. The more information a signal is to carry, the more bandwidth it needs. In simple terms, bandwidth is the range of frequencies that a signal occupies in the spectrum. For example, an FM radio station might broadcast on a frequency of 92.9 MHz but requires a bandwidth of 0.3 MHz (300 kHz) the spectrum between 92.8 and 93.0 MHz inclusive. Other stations cannot broadcast on these frequencies within the same area without causing or receiving interference. The agreed bandwidth of an analogue TV channel is 8 MHz in UHF Band IV/V.

2.

WHY IS FREQUENCY SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT NEEDED?

In principle spectrum is managed nationally, it is the responsibility of the State. However, radio waves do not respect international borders. Signals can cross boundaries easily. Therefore international coordination to reduce the scope for harmful interference between one country and another is necessary.

Some of the answers are based on the work and publications written for the EBU Technical

Department Review i.e. Lafn, N. and B. Dajka (BBC) A Simple Guide to Radio Spectrum. It can be found at: http://www.ebu.ch/en/technical/trev/trev_309-spectrum.pdf other publications can be found at: http://www.ebu.ch/en/technical/publications/index.php

It takes place at different levels:

world wide: the International Telecommunication Union (ITU); regional: Europe the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administration (CEPT which brings together 48 countries) in Europe and the European Commission; national: i.e. a bilateral country-by-country basis.

3.

WHAT IS THE ITU GENEVA 2006 FREQUENCY PLAN (GE06)?

The use of analogue TV frequencies in Europe was regulated by the ITU 1961 Stockholm Plan. At the latest Regional Radiocommunications Conference (RCC) in 2006, a new frequency agreement was adopted, replacing the analogue broadcasting plan. The ITU Geneva 2006 frequency plan (GE06) denes the use of the broadcasting bands III (VHF 174-230 MHz) and bands IV/V (UHF 470862 MHz) for digital terrestrial broadcasting (T-DAB and DVB-T digital services) for the next decades over a large area including 118 countries. In practice, the Geneva Plan is an all-digital plan for use after the analogue TV services have been closed. Indeed, it makes clear that analogue TV services in UHF Bands IV & V will not be protected against interference after 17 June 2015. Interference is a crucial issue and does not stop at borders. This is why it is the biggest issue at the ITU planning conferences. Therefore the Geneva Agreement must be respected.

4.

WIRELESS BROADBAND SERVICES AND TWO-WAY MOBILE COMMUNICATION: IS IT EFFICIENT TO USE THE BROADCASTING BANDS FOR NON-BROADCASTING SERVICES?

Not every service using a given technology is t for any frequency. Different services have different needs. Broadcasting, for instance, is a one-way (one-tomany) communication: the transmitter sends a signal to the receiver. Mobile communication or WiFi services need a return channel, so they need frequencies to enable the two-way communication to take place. Unlike other candidates for the UHF band, terrestrial TV, uniquely, can only be accommodated in that spectrum. Sharing of the broadcasting bands by other types of service, such as two-way mobile communications services and wireless broadband services, could result in unacceptable interference to broadcasting as well as to these other services. For example, sharing between two-way mobile services and broadcasting would be possible only if the frequencies are well-separated (by so-called guard bands); this would result in the waste of valuable spectrum (frequencies not usable in large areas for broadcasting services or mobile services).

5.

WHY DOES INTERFERENCE SERIOUSLY REDUCE THE POTENTIAL OF SERVICE NEUTRALITY?

The European Commission proposes to base spectrum management in the EU on the principle of technological and service neutrality, i.e. the possibility to provide any service using any technology in any frequency band. However, this approach does not take into account the technical constraints and interference concerns which arise when different services are provided in the same band. Interference is not a trivial problem, it seriously reduces the potential of service neutrality. While interference to analogue TV services typically appears as more or less obtrusive patterns on the picture, interference to digital TV services usually results in a blank screen, i.e. a very rapid transition from near perfect reception to no reception at all. It is difcult or impossible to identify
5

and remedy the problem when this happens. There is a great risk that viewers and listeners who have invested in digital equipment cannot be sure any more to receive their programmes in high quality and uninterrupted.

6.

WOULD RE-PLANNING OF THE EUROPEAN PART OF THE GENEVA PLAN AND CREATING THE EU FREQUENCY PLAN BE A FEASIBLE AND EFFICIENT SOLUTION TO THE INTERFERENCE PROBLEM?

In theory, an EU Frequency plan which would harmonise certain sub-bands for the use of specic services seems a plausible solution to the interference problem, however in reality such an undertaking runs a risk of being unworkable and above all inefcient and too costly. The experience of the work of the CEPT regarding the sub-band harmonisation for mobile services proves that it would be extremely cumbersome if not impossible to conduct such a harmonisation. In fact, as signals carried over radio frequencies cannot be limited by political borders, the decision to harmonise any sub-band would need to be agreed by all neighbouring countries thus not only the EU Member States e.g. The Russian Federation has already stated its reservation regarding such a move! This effectively means coming back to further long-lasting multilateral and bilateral negotiations under the GE06 plan with an uncertain outcome. Technical expertise shows that even if the use of sub-bands limits co-channel interference between different types of service, there will still be problems at the edges of the sub-bands. Even if one sub- band is for example dedicated to DVB-H services for mobile TV, such services require much denser networks of transmitters than normal broadcast transmitters and this means that the many low-power transmitters can punch holes in the coverage of the broadcast services (despite being on different channels - because of adjacent channel interference). Moreover, re-planning of the GVA plan on the EU territory will unduly burden regulators and the industry to invest once again in frequency changes. Following RRC-06, many countries have already embarked on very expensive projects to create digital TV services using the results of RRC-06. In many cases, it is too
6

late to change these plans. Especially, for those countries, which decided before RRC-06 which frequency bands could be made available for additional services and thus negotiated in 2006 its frequencies accordingly, such a move would be unacceptable.

7.

WHAT IS THE DIGITAL SWITCHOVER AND WHY IS IT BEING DONE?

Digital compression technologies and coding systems make it possible to squeeze much more information into a radio signal than in the case of analogue technology. A digital television multiplex a machine which encodes, combines and transmits several television programme channels in a single broadcast signal takes up 8 MHz bandwidth just like an analogue television channel. The difference is that, using digital compression technology, this one signal can carry the picture and sound information of not just one, but several (between 4 and 6) television programme channels. That means that more television services can be provided using the same amount of spectrum as compared to analogue broadcasting. Public Service Broadcasters have been the driving forces of the digital switchover and they have been heavily investing in digital radio and television technology and programming. Digital terrestrial television (DTT) allows broadcasters to offer freeto-air services with an increasing choice of quality programming to all sections of the population while continuing to use spectrum efciently. And the viewers are increasingly accepting this valuable offer. DTT is currently the fastest-growing digital TV platform in Europe already used by more than 70 million individuals in Western Europe. Without the success of DTT, analogue TV switch-off would not be possible. In its Communication of 24 May 2005 on accelerating the transition from analogue to digital broadcasting, the European Commission recommends 2012 as the deadline for the switch-off of analogue terrestrial TV broadcasting and expects that by the end of 2010 the switchover process should be well advanced in the EU as a whole. However, the ITU GE06 plan deadline for the switch from analogue to digital broadcasting has been set at mid 2015.
7

8.

WHAT IS THE DIGITAL DIVIDEND?

Since digital television needs less spectrum than analogue television for roof-top reception some spectrum may be released after the analogue TV services have been closed down. This release of spectrum is usually referred to as the digital dividend (DD). The released spectrum could be used for a range of purposes such as:

increasing the number of digital terrestrial broadcasting services (e.g. designed for reception on roof-top antennas or set-top antennas); improving the coverage of digital TV transmissions (e.g. increasing the population coverage and/or providing higher eld strengths so as to deliver more reliable services to mobile receivers or set-top antennas, improving regional coverage), enhancing indoor, portable and mobile reception; digital TV services designed for reception on hand-held receivers (e.g. DVB-H); enhancing sound and picture quality, in particular High Denition TV; non-broadcasting services, such as WiMAX, UMTS, etc.

9.

HOW BIG IS THE DIGITAL DIVIDEND?

The full potential of the digital dividend will not be available until the switch-off of terrestrial analogue television. The Geneva Plan has set the end of the transition period in 2015. Although a number of countries will switch off earlier, it will be very difcult in the mid-term future to quantify the spectrum which will be available for use of services other than broadcasting. Moreover, due to national circumstances topography, penetration of satellite/cable services, the requirements for regional service, the spectrum usage in adjacent countries, etc the digital dividend will vary in size and in location in the spectrum from one country to another. The digital dividend will not be harmonised in Europe.
8

It is up to the Member States to decide on the use of any digital dividend reecting social, cultural and political considerations in their countries.

10. WHY DO BROADCASTERS NEED SPECTRUM?

Public Service Broadcasters have coverage obligations, most of them have to cover 98% of the territory. Only a mix of platforms, including terrestrial, can deliver this universal access to broadcasting. In the digital environment DTT plays a vital role in the delivery of free-to-air services. But there are more reasons why it cannot easily be replaced by other networks, such as cable, satellite, broadband or the internet. As opposed to cable and satellite, DTT offers unique prospects for the public in terms of mobile, portable and pocket equipment. Cable and IPTV are subscription-based platforms and the internet cannot be a substitute since it is a one-to-one delivery as opposed to the much more efcient one-to-many broadcasting distribution.

11. WHY DO PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTERS WANT TO OFFER HIGH DEFINITION TELEVISION?
In ve to six years time, standard denition television will begin to disappear in the most advanced markets as High Denition becomes a consumer expectation. HD-ready sets are already selling well despite the fact that few consumers can receive HDTV services; it is predicted that by 2011 over forty million Europeans will have opted for HDTV2. New broadcast content is already being produced in HD and broadcasters have started offering HD services. It is anticipated that by 2010 there will be 120 HDTV channels in Europe3. Consumers will expect that free-to-air DTT will be transmitted in HD as well. Since HD requires more bandwidth than standard DTT and consequently requires signicantly more spectrum, the digital dividend will be reduced.

2 3

IMS Research, The Future of HD 2007, June 2007 Screen Digest, February 2007

12. WHAT IS THE VALUE OF FTA BROADCASTING?

Broadcasters are important players of the audiovisual industry. They invest in quality content and this has a price. European Public Service Broadcasters and commercial broadcasters invested well over 20 billion in 2006 in commissioned TV programming. New TV programming is by far the largest audiovisual production sector in the EU, accounting for almost 60 per cent of all such spend4. Public Service Broadcasters alone invest in excess of 12 billion Euros every year in original television and radio programmes. They produce 2,200,000 hours of radio programme output and 1,300,000 hours of television programme output. They have a wealth of 2.2 million TV programmes and 10.5 million radio programmes in their archives from the early days of broadcasting to the present. Their services are accessed by approximately 400 million people every week.

13. DOES SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT NEED MORE FLEXIBLITY ?

Broadcasters have being promoting new procedures to add exibility to frequency management models. As a result, the ITU Geneva Agreement contains a number of elements that offer exibility to cope with future developments of digital technology, but without reducing the interference requirements.

14. WILL SPECTRUM TRADING AND AUCTIONING INCREASE SPECTRUM EFFICIENCY?

With regard to the broadcasting bands well-managed and considered technical planning will lead to the most efcient use of spectrum.

David Graham and Associates Limited, Impact Study of Measures Concerning the Promotion of

Distribution and Production of TV Programmes, 24 May 2005

10

The individual licence system and the granting of exclusive individual rights must continue to be possible in the broadcasting sector which needs a stable environment without interference. Moreover, individual authorisations and the granting of exclusive rights are justied in the TV and radio broadcasting sector as these services are subject to general interest objectives and to strict content regulatory obligations. Since guard bands would have to be introduced, trading and auctioning to other non-broadcasting use would inevitably lead to a loss of efciency in the spectrum use. Furthermore, as shown by the UMTS example, spectrum auctions can yield to unreliable results which do not reveal the true value of spectrum nor do they necessarily lead to efcient use. In the EU 100 million were spent collectively in the UMTS spectrum auctions: in retrospect, the bidders now recognise that they bid far too much for this spectrum.

15. WHAT SHOULD BE THE ROLE OF EU SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT?

Noting each Member States specic situation and the need to respect the subsidiarity principle, spectrum management should remain under the responsibilities of the Member States. Nevertheless, the European Commission still has a role to play in co-ordinating the 27 Member States policies and to make sure that the technical decisions taken at the CEPT and at the ITU levels are properly implemented by the Member States without causing any distortion in terms of competition. In that respect the current system of coordination which is based on the Radio Spectrum Decision of the Telecom Framework works well and should be maintained. The Commission carries out its coordinating role with the help of a number of advisory groups. The following groups are involved in the work on Spectrum: the RSPG, RSC, ERG, COCOM and the CEPT. They consist of technical and regulatory experts from Member States and sometimes, the candidate countries and the EEA (see Glossary).

11

At the international level, the Commission is mandated to ensure the promotion of European Community interests in the ITU World Radiocommunication Conferences (WRC). The Commission participates as a non-voting delegation and coordinates negotiations led by Member States on issues related to Community policies, based on European common positions which are prepared in particular within CEPT. If the principle of service neutrality was to be introduced as a binding principle for spectrum management in the EU, Member States must have the possibility to make exceptions. Such exceptions motivated by the promotion of media pluralism and cultural and linguistic diversity would reect the specicity of each Member State and could not be harmonised on the European level.

16. WHAT IS THE OPINION OF MEMBER STATES EXPERTS?

The RSPG

In its opinion on the digital dividend of February 20075, the Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG) expresses a cautious view regarding the possibility of spectrum auctions. It stressed that European action to enable the development of new services seeking access to the broadcasting bands should not conict with national and European content legislation aiming at promoting cultural diversity and media pluralism. Legislative options should not be determined by economic factors alone but ought also to take account of social, cultural and political factors.

The CEPT

Delivering on a mandate given by the EC in January 2007, the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrators (CEPT) studied the technical considerations regarding the technical feasibility of harmonising a sub-band of

RSPG opinion on EU Spectrum Policy Implications of the Digital Dividend for the full text of the

opinion, go to http://rspg.ec.europa.eu/doc/documents/opinions/rspg07_161_nal_op_digdiv.pdf

12

bands IV and V (470-862 MHz) of the UHF band for xed/mobile applications (including uplinks). The CEPT concluded the following: the harmonisation of a sub-band (798-862 MHz) is feasible provided that it is not made mandatory and any decision about the use of the harmonized sub-band is left to individual administrations. However, some administrations made statements and reservations and indicated that at least parts of this sub-band cannot or will not be made available. Some indicated a preference for a band else-where in the band 470862MHz. The Report also conrmed that further technical studies are required. This shows that there are some difculties between European countries to agree in the sub-band to be harmonised for mobile services.

17. WHAT IS THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTS VIEW?

The European Parliament has already expressed its view on the Commissions European Spectrum policy plans in February 20076. It considered that spectrum management should not be based only on a marketdriven approach but also needs to take into account wider social, cultural and political considerations. Furthermore, the Parliament recommended, that the spectrum should be managed in a manner which is exible and transparent and which facilitates cultural linguistic diversity, freedom of expression, and media pluralism (...).7

18. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE ITU WRC07?

The ITU World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC07), in Geneva from 22 October 16 November 2007, is focusing on issues related to the regulation

European Parliament Resolution Towards a European Policy on Radio Spectrum (2006/2212NI)

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sidesSearch/sipadeMapUrl.do?PROG=TA&L=EN&REF_P=P6_ TA-2007-0041
7

Ibidem, points: 8, 9, 11

13

of new uses in the spectrum. Allocations to mobile services in the UHF band and the identication of a sub-band for these services are being explored by the 191 countries attending the conference. The EUs approach to this question looks for an allocation to the mobile service in Bands IV/V to upgrade the mobile services status in the UHF band in Europe to increase exibility and remove a potential constraint to the future optimal organisation of this band. The Commissions position is not in line with the current CEPT position: Europe currently investigates the use of the upper part of the band 470-862 MHz for mobile applications after digital switchover. Technical studies are still ongoing and no nal decision has been taken yet. This is why Europe would prefer taking decisions concerning International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) in this frequency band at WRC11, after studies have been completed.

14

PROCEDURE
June/October 2006 July 2006 EC preliminary public consultation on review EC mandate to CEPT to develop least restrictive technical conditions for frequency bands addressed in the context of WAPECS EC mandate to CEPT on technical considerations regarding harmonisation options for the digital dividend EC Communication on Rapid access to spectrum for wireless electronic communications services through more exibility (WAPECS) EP Resolution Towards a European policy for radio spectrum EC consultation on selection and authorisation of systems providing mobile satellite services (MSS) EC draft Recommendation on WAPECS EC Decision on harmonised availability of information regarding spectrum use within the Community EC Communication on ITU WRC07 EC Communication on Mobile Broadcasting EC second interference management workshop EC legislative proposals on review

30 January 2007

8 February 2007

14 February 2007

30 March 200730 May 2007

April 2007 16 May 2007

2 July 2007 18 July 2007 27 September 2007 13 November 2007

22 October16 November 2007 ITU WRC07 December 2007 EC Communication Strategy for digital dividend

15

GLOSSARY
I. BODIES ADVISING THE EU COMMISSION ON SPECTRUM POLICY RSC Radio Spectrum Committee created on the basis of the Council Decision (on comitology procedure), in order to help or assist the Commission, with the development and adoption of technical implementing measures and with a view to contributing to the formulation, preparation and implementation of Community radio spectrum policy. The RSC is chaired by the Commission and composed of representatives of the Member States. RSPG The Radio Spectrum Policy Group the group created by the Commissions decision, advises and assists the Commission on radio spectrum policy issues. However its aim is larger that the one of the RSC, the RSPG adopts opinions regarding digital dividend, digital switchover, WAPECS and secondary trading 8. It gathers all bodies relevant for the radio spectrum issues: representatives of the Member States and EEA countries, the European Parliament. The European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT) and the European Telecommunications Standardisation Institute (ETSI) attend as observers. ERG The European Regulators Group is an independent body consisting of the heads of National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs), encouraging cooperation and coordination between national regulatory authorities and the Commission, in order to promote the development of the internal market for electronic communications. COCOM The Communications Committee established under the Telecom Framework Directive with the aim of coordinating and regulating the implementation of the Directive. Its activities cover all aspects of the Telecom Framework.

see: http://rspg.ec.europa.eu/rspg_opinions/index_en.htm

17

CEPT the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrators The CEPT supervises the work of two Committees: ECC (European Communications Committee) and CERP (European Committee for Postal Regulation). The Electronic Communications Committee (ECC) is responsible for harmonising European frequency usage plans and nding ways of accommodating new radio applications in the spectrum. It also develops and adopts common positions for example in the run-up to ITU conferences, decisions (binding for Member States) and recommendations. The CEPT and the European Commission coordinate their activities on the basis of a Memorandum of Understanding. The CEPT also carries out mandates for the European Commission (i.e. the latest mandate concerns the technical considerations regarding harmonisation options for the digital dividend). CEPT is observer to the EU Radio Spectrum Policy Group RSPG (at CEPT level) and to the EU Radio Spectrum Committee RSC (at ECC level).

18

II. INTERNATIONAL BODIES ITU The International Telecommunication Union a UN agency with a membership of 191 countries. One of its pillars, specically responsible for Radiocommunications, ITU-R co-ordinates and organises work at the World Radiocommunication Conferences (WRC), were the decisions are taken collectively on how to avoid interference in Radio Spectrum between countries, by updating, amending and adding to the global agreements. WRC & RRC World Radio Conferences and Regional Radio Conferences WRCs usually take place every 3 or 4 years; the next one will take place this year, where ITU Radio Regulations will be updated and the rules that will dene the spectrum landscape for the years to come will be agreed on a global basis. The RRCs are held less frequently in order to deal with frequency planning issues in particular regions.

19

III. SPECIFIC TECHNICAL TERMINOLOGY WiMAX the Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access, is a telecommunications technology aimed at providing wireless data over long distances in a variety of ways, from point-to-point links to full mobile cellular type access. WiMAX allows a user, for example, to browse the Internet on a laptop computer without physically connecting the laptop to a wall jack. The name WiMAX was created by the WiMAX Forum, which was formed in June 2001 to promote conformance and interoperability of the standard. The forum describes WiMAX as a standards-based technology enabling the delivery of last mile wireless broadband access as an alternative to cable and DSL. WAPECS Wireless Access Policy for Electronic Communications Services, is the term coined by the Commission to dene a framework for the provision of electronic communications services within a set of frequency bands to be identied and agreed between European Union Member States in which a range of electronic communications networks and electronic communications services may be offered on a technology and service neutral basis, provided that certain technical requirements to avoid interference are met, to ensure the effective and efcient use of the spectrum, and the authorisation conditions do not distort competition.

20

EBU Headquarters LAncienne-Route 17A CH-1218 Grand-Saconnex Switzerland ebu@ebu.ch +41 (0)22 717 21 11 fax: +41 (0)22 747 40 00

www.ebu.ch

EBU Brussels Ofce 50, rue Wiertz 1050 Brussels Belgium brussels@ebu.ch +32 (0)2 286 91 15 fax: +32 (0)2 286 91 10