Globalisation may not lead to international competitiveness without consideration of the key reason for participation in the global economy and adoption of an approach that provides consistency. How can consumers determine the suitability of what is offered to them and be certain they’re getting what they paid for? And how can suppliers be sure their offering is appropriate for their potential offshore markets? From BICSI’s perspective, the answer is “standards”.
For a number of reasons over the last five to ten years we have seen a shift in politics, moving away from the centre towards the extreme edges. What is often still missing is a holistic approach towards the development of smart cities; this needs to be led from the top and to be supported by a ‘smart council’. A major stumbling block towards the development of a smart city is the many silos within a city, resisting the sharing of infrastructure and other relevant assets, resisting open data and open government. There are however, good examples both nationally and internationally of councils that are moving in the right direction.
In March 2015 Australia became the 50th country in which US video streaming company Netflix had set up a local operation to supplement its planned global expansion in 200 countries. Newcomers Presto and Stan also joined in to further add to the extraordinary rate of growth of all forms of video traffic in Australia, now over half of Telstra’s Internet business. So who is Netflix, and how well might it expand its business in addition to those customers in Australia who are already using virtual private networks (VPNs) to access and pay for their programmes?
One of the central goals of ACCAN’s 2013 Affordability Roundtable was to kick-start a broader discussion around affordability of telecommunications products and services, encouraging new and innovative social programs and industry-wide models which can be employed to alleviate the affordability divide. This paper is intended as a continuation of that broader discussion and builds upon the ideas first developed in the article Improving Affordability of Communications: Research and Policy Directions published in the ATJDE in 2013.
This article compares the telecommunications consumer dispute resolution scheme in Australia, Japan and Korea based on the telecommunications consumer policy principles developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 2011 and the guidelines and recommendations developed by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) in 2013. This article concludes that the Australian consumer dispute resolution scheme (the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman scheme) appears to be the best practice among these three jurisdictions studied, followed by the consumer scheme in Korea.