Study on national broadband plans in the EU-28 : final report.
Date: 2014-02-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology
Subjects: EU Member State, digital technology, information technology, telecommunications equipment, telecommunications policy, transmission network

Study on National 
Broadband Plans  
in the EU-28 

Final report 
A study prepared for the European Commission 
DG  Communications  Networks,  Content  &  Technology 
by: 

Digital 
Single 
Digital 
Market 
Single 
Market 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This study was carried out for the European Commission by 

atene KOM GmbH |  

Agency for Communication, Organization and Management 

Invalidenstraße 91     

10115 Berlin / Germany   

Tel. +49 (0)30 / 60 98 990-0  

Fax +49 (0)30 / 60 98 990-99             

info@atenekom.eu  

AUTHORS 

Feldmann, Johannes (M.A., M.A., MBA) 

Khodabakhsh, Peyman (M.Sc.); Valiucko, Darijus (M.A.) 

Weber, Christina (M.A.); Beck, Christian (M.A.) 

Internal identification 

Contract number: 30-CE-0735856/00-93 
SMART number 2014/077 

DISCLAIMER 

By the European Commission, Directorate-General of Communications Networks, Content & Technology.  

The information and views set out in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the 
official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this 
study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf may be held responsible for 
the use which may be made of the information contained therein. 

ISBN 978-92-79-66284-3 
doi: 10.2759/340045 

© European Union, 2014. All rights reserved. Certain parts are licensed under conditions to the EU.  

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledg 

Digital 
Single 
Market 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table of Contents 

Disclaimer ................................................................................................................................................ 5 

1 

2 

3 

Executive Summary (English) ........................................................................................................ 6 

Executive Summary (French) ...................................................................................................... 15 

Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 24 

3.1  Objective of the study ....................................................................................................... 26 

3.2  Methodology and Procedure ............................................................................................ 27 

4 

Digital Agenda 2020: Towards High-Speed Internet Access in the EU ....................................... 29 

4.1  Definitions and Objectives ................................................................................................ 29 

4.2  Gauging Progress: Key Indicators ..................................................................................... 30 

4.2.1  Broadband Indicators: DAE targets on European and National Level ........................... 31 

4.2.2  Socio-Economic Indicators ............................................................................................ 39 

4.2.3  Mobile network indicators ............................................................................................ 42 

5 

Implementing the Digital Agenda 2020 ...................................................................................... 45 

5.1  Broadband Targets: Overview of national broadband plans ............................................ 45 

5.1.1  NBPs: Differing Approaches .......................................................................................... 50 

5.1.2  Probabilities of Achievement ........................................................................................ 50 

5.2  Broadband Development in Practice: Member State Reports ......................................... 52 

5.2.1  Austria ........................................................................................................................... 55 

5.2.2  Belgium .......................................................................................................................... 60 

5.2.3  Bulgaria .......................................................................................................................... 64 

5.2.4  Croatia ........................................................................................................................... 70 

5.2.5  Cyprus ............................................................................................................................ 75 

5.2.6  Czech Republic ............................................................................................................... 80 

5.2.7  Denmark ........................................................................................................................ 85 

5.2.8  Estonia ........................................................................................................................... 90 

5.2.9  Finland ........................................................................................................................... 95 

5.2.10 France .......................................................................................................................... 100 

5.2.11 Germany ...................................................................................................................... 104 

5.2.12 Greece ......................................................................................................................... 109 

5.2.13 Hungary ....................................................................................................................... 114 

5.2.14 Ireland.......................................................................................................................... 119 

5.2.15 Italy .............................................................................................................................. 124 

5.2.16 Latvia ........................................................................................................................... 130 

5.2.17 Lithuania ...................................................................................................................... 135 

 
 
 
 
5.2.18 Luxembourg ................................................................................................................. 139 

5.2.19 Malta ........................................................................................................................... 144 

5.2.20 The Netherlands .......................................................................................................... 149 

5.2.21 Poland .......................................................................................................................... 155 

5.2.22 Portugal ....................................................................................................................... 160 

5.2.23 Romania ....................................................................................................................... 165 

5.2.24 Slovakia ........................................................................................................................ 171 

5.2.25 Slovenia ....................................................................................................................... 177 

5.2.26 Spain ............................................................................................................................ 182 

5.2.27 Sweden ........................................................................................................................ 189 

5.2.28 United Kingdom ........................................................................................................... 194 

6 

Main Trends .............................................................................................................................. 201 

6.1 

Favourable conditions for NGA roll-out .......................................................................... 201 

6.1.1  Market pressure on the incumbent ............................................................................ 201 

6.1.2  Demand side activities and digitization of society as a whole .................................... 204 

6.1.3  State aid and financial instruments ............................................................................. 205 

6.1.4  Regulation (AOs to access different infrastructures) .................................................. 207 

6.1.5  Population density and urbanization rate ................................................................... 207 

6.1.6  Availability of ducts and upgradable networks ........................................................... 209 

6.1.7  Willingness to pay and affordability ............................................................................ 210 

7 

Good Practices for defining NBP measures .............................................................................. 212 

7.1 

7.2 

7.3 

7.4 

Example I: Demand Side measure – Broadband Delivery UK’s voucher scheme ........... 214 

Example II: Supply Side measure – National Funding Program Germany ...................... 215 

Example III: Regulatory, Organizational measure – Symmetric regulation .................... 216 

Example IV: Transparency measure – Polish NBP .......................................................... 216 

Conclusion and Outlook (revised EU targets) ........................................................................... 218 

List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................. 221 

List of References ...................................................................................................................... 229 

Annex ........................................................................................................................................ 233 

8 

9 

10 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Disclaimer  

By the European Commission, Directorate-General of  

Communications Networks, Content & 

Technology. 

The information and views set out in this publication are those of the 

author(s) and do not necessarily 

reflect the official opinion of the Commission.  

The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the 

data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person 

acting on the Commission’s behalf 

may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the infor-

mation contained there

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1  Abstract – Key Findings (English) 

Despite ambitious national broadband plans, only few Member States are close to reaching the DAE 

targets or their national targets respectively. The Member states’ NBPs highly differ regarding their 

content. Few countries do currently not have a single document that can be regarded as an NBP, but 

all Member States however have an overall strategic approach for the deployment of NGA networks 

that is implemented in practice. There are a variety of conditions that influence the success of NGA 

roll-out in a given country. Successful NBPs consider their respective starting positions and describe 

concrete measures that take advantage of the individual strengths and define measures to mitigate 

the effect of disadvantages. The NBPs of the Member States usually set one or two foci out of the 

following  spheres:  Demand  Side  measures,  Supply  Side  measures,  Regulatory  and  Organizational 

measures,  Transparency  measures.  There  is  no  one-size-fits-all  solution  for  broadband  strategies 

across Europe. The NBPs seem not to be transferrable, while some measures, however, can be applied 

under the same conditions. 

| Page 6 from 320 

  6 

 
 
 
 
2  Abstract – Key Findings (French) 

Malgré les plans nationaux haut débit ambitieux, peu d’États membres sont près d'atteindre les ob-

jectifs de l'agenda numérique (DAE) ou leurs objectifs nationaux. Les NBPs des États membres diffè-

rent fortement concernant leur contenu. Peu de pays ne disposent pas actuellement d'un document 

unique qui peut être considéré comme un NBP, mais tous les États membres ont une approche straté-

gique générale pour le déploiement des réseaux d’accès de nouvelle génération (NGA) et leur mise en 

œuvre pratique. Il existe de nombreuses conditions qui ont une influence sur le succès du déploie-

ment des réseaux NGA. Des NBPs efficaces considèrent leurs propres positions de départ et propo-

sent des mesures concrètes exploitant les forces individuelles et définissant des mesures pour atté-

nuer l'effet des inégalités. Les NBPs des États membres établissent généralement un ou deux points 

prioritaires dans les domaines suivants : les mesures afférentes à l’offre, les mesures afférentes à la 

demande, les mesures réglementaires et organisationnelles, les mesures de transparence. Il n'y a 

pas d’approche universelle pour les stratégies haut débit à travers l'Europe. Il semble que les NBPs ne 

soient  pas transférables, tandis que  certaines mesures  peuvent  cependant  être  appliquées partout 

dans les mêmes conditions. 

| Page 7 from 320 

  7 

 
 
 
 
 
3  Executive Summary (English) 

The following study on National Broadband Plans (NBPs) in the EU-28 (SMART 2014/0077) was con-

ducted between November 2015 and September 2016. For our analysis, we mainly relied on infor-

mation obtained from the European Commission and National authorities. Furthermore, we reached 

out to key stakeholders and practitioners from the 28 Member States to gain insights concerning the 

actual implementation of the national broadband plans in each respective country. Overall, the study 

presented shall give an overview on the current state of the Member States regarding their connectiv-

ity, the targets and measures defined within the NBPs and the actual practical implementation pro-

cesses. The main results of the study are as follows: 

1)  Despite ambitious national broadband plans, only few Member States are close to reaching 

the DAE targets or their national targets respectively. 

2)  The Member states’ NBPs highly differ regarding their content. Few countries do currently 

not have a single document that can be regarded as an NBP, but all Member States however 

have an overall strategic approach for the deployment of NGA networks that is implemented 

in practice. 

3)  There are a variety of conditions that influence the success of NGA roll-out in a given country. 

Successful NBPs consider their respective starting positions and describe concrete measures 

that take advantage of the individual strengths and define measures to mitigate the effect of 

disadvantages. 

4)  The NBPs of the Member States usually set one or two foci out of the following spheres: De-

mand  Side  measures,  Supply  Side  measures,  Regulatory  and  Organizational  measures, 

Transparency measures. 

5)  There is no one-size-fits-all solution for broadband strategies across Europe. The NBPs seem 

not to be transferrable, while some measures, however, can be applied under the same con-

ditions.  

I. Concerning the probabilities of reaching the DAE targets, we have analysed that currently only 14 

out of the 28 Member States defined their own national targets. The other countries follow the Digital 

Agenda  for  Europe.  However,  only  few  countries  have  high  probabilities  to  reach  their  targets.  As 

shown by the following table, we are not convinced that any EU Member State will reach its own tar-

get. Nonetheless, there are several countries that have decent chances to meet the DAE targets by 

2020. Generally, the results of the study reinforce the need to increase and incentivise investment. If 

| Page 8 from 320 

  8 

 
 
Europe does not want to lag behind at global level, broadband development needs to speed up. In this 

regard, the provision and exploitation of fast and ultrafast internet services is crucial for Europe’s fu-

ture economic development and competitiveness as well as for the progress and cohesion of society 

as a whole. With the Digital Agenda 2020 and the recently published new European broadband targets 

for 2025, the European Commission has set up a substantial framework for the future digital advance-

ment of Europe. For Europe to fully take advantage of this framework and thus to realise the full po-

tential of digital development, all relevant stakeholders need to maximise their efforts. Member States 

have to provide appropriate incentives and means for increasing investment whilst local actors and 

the ICT industry need to make use of these instruments. In that sense, Member States should build on 

existing successful measures, but be more ambitious, not only in terms of incentives and means, but 

also, especially with regard to the new European ambitions for 2025, in terms of objectives, thereby 

ensuring Europe’s future economic and social progress. 

Table 1 summarizes all NBP’s targets, the current state of connectivity and our estimations concerning 

the probability of meeting the national targets and the DAE targets respectively. 

| Page 9 from 320 

  9 

 
 
State of connectivity DESI (July 

                                                                                   NBP Targets 

Member State 

Coverage 
(NGA) 
30 Mbps 

Austria 

88.8 %  

2015) 

Take up (calculated 
as of households) 
100 Mbps and 
more 
2.24% 

Coverage 

Take-up 

Probability of achievement (DAEII / 
DAE III / National target) 

99 % coverage with 100 Mbps by 2020 / 70 % until 

N/A 

Medium / low / low 

Belgium 

98.9 %  

22.77% 

2018 

N/A 

50 % HH penetration with 1 

Gbps service by 2020 

High / high / medium 

Bulgaria 

71.8 % 

2.88% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50  %  of  households  and  80  %  of  businesses  subscribing  to 

Low  /  low  /  medium  (80  %  of 

>100 Mbps by 2020 

businesses with 100 Mbps) 

Croatia 

Cyprus 

52.0 % 

0.12% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Low / low / N.A. 

84.0 % 

0.06% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Medium / low / N.A. 

Czech Republic 

72.9 % 

5.55% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Low / low / N.A. 

Denmark 

91.7 % 

9.39% 

100 % coverage with 100 Mbps download and 30 

N/A 

Medium / medium / low 

Estonia 

Finland 

86.4 % 

4.48% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

60 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

High / low / low 

75.1 % 

15.11% 

99  %  of  all  permanent  residences  and  offices 

N/A 

Low / medium / medium 

Mbps upload by 2020 

should  be  located  within  2  km  of  an  optic  fibre 

network  or  cable  network  that  enables  connec-

tions of 100 Mbps by 2019 

France 

44.8 % 

7.66% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2022 

Germany 

81.4 % 

4.82% 

100 % coverage with 50 Mbps by 2018 

N/A 

N/A 

Low / low / medium 

Medium / low / medium 

Greece 

Hungary 

36.3 % 

0.01% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Low / low / N.A. 

78.2 % 

12.68% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2018 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Medium / medium / medium 

  10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
State of connectivity DESI (July 

                                                                                   NBP Targets 

Member State 

Coverage 
(NGA) 
30 Mbps 

Ireland 

79.7 % 

2015) 

Take up (calculated 
as of households) 
100 Mbps and 
more 
13.24% 

Coverage 

Take-up 

Probability of achievement (DAEII / 
DAE III / National target) 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020, expect-

Low / low / N.A. 

ing upstream bandwidths around 17 to 21 Mbps 

Italy 

Latvia 

43.9 % 

0.54% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Low / low / N.A. 

90.7 % 

25.30% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Medium / medium / N.A. 

Lithuania 

97.5 % 

10.42% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

High / medium / N.A. 

Luxembourg 

94.4 % 

7.33% 

100 % coverage with 1 Gbps downstream and 500 

N/A 

High / low / medium 

Mbps upstream by 2020 

Malta 

100.00 

0.99% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Target met / low / N.A. 

% 

Netherlands 

98.3 % 

16.53% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

High / low / N.A. 

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

60.7 % 

4.23% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Low / low / N.A. 

90.9 % 

18.88% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Medium / medium / N.A. 

71.6 %  

26.72% 

80 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

45 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Medium / medium / medium 

67.1 % 

6.70% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

N/A 

78.8 % 

4.91% 

96  %  coverage  with  100  Mbps,  4%  coverage  30 

N/A 

Mbps by 2020 

Low / low / N.A. 

Low / low / low 

76.6 % 

9.76% 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020 

50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service by 2020 

Low / medium / N.A. 

76.4 % 

27.06% 

90 % coverage with 100 Mbps by 2020 

N/A 

Low / medium / medium 

  11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
State of connectivity DESI (July 

                                                                                   NBP Targets 

Member State 

Coverage 
(NGA) 
30 Mbps 

United Kingdom  90.5 % 

2015) 

Take up (calculated 
as of households) 
100 Mbps and 
more 
6.15% 

Coverage 

Take-up 

Probability of achievement (DAEII / 
DAE III / National target) 

95 % coverage with 24 Mbps by 2017. At least 100 

N/A 

Medium / low / medium 

Mbps for nearly all UK premises (no date) 

Table 1 DAE and NBP targets – Probability of achievement (Executive Summary ENG) 

  12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
II. Concerning the content of the NBPs, we have seen very different approaches. It is however striking 

that those countries with favourable conditions for market-driven roll-out (e.g. high population den-

sity, high demand, high degree of urbanization, extensive cable networks) are often less concrete re-

garding the measures described in their respective NBPs. They usually rely on strategic approaches 

that define the overall framework under which competition shall take place.  These countries often 

consequently trust in market forces for further NGA coverage. In these cases, an NBP is mainly de-

signed to provide for a level playing field, meaning that fair competition can take place. Contrarily, 

those countries with more difficult starting positions are often advanced concerning the definiteness 

of the measures described. According to their respective economic capabilities, they try to increase 

supply,  demand or transparency  regarding existing infrastructures. The different  NBPs then usually 

subsequently incorporate measures accordingly in a single strategy document, guidelines, legislation 

etc. 

However, what we learned from practitioners across Europe is that the overall national strategy does 

not have to be part of a single document to be effective. As long as there is political determination to 

reach certain targets with certain measures, also a loose collection of statements and documents can 

still lead to positive results. Most important concerning the actual implementation, however, seems 

to be that responsible actors (usually at local level) are attached to the strategic targets and feel in-

volved. Generally speaking, the involvement of local actors is especially important when countries of 

usually larger size have significantly lower rural coverage and need demand aggregation and bottom-

up initiatives. 

III. There are several conditions that influence the success of NGA roll-out. Some of these are compe-

tition,  demand side  activities  and  digitization of a  society, the  availability  of  state  aid  and  financial 

instruments, a decent regulatory framework, population density and urbanization rate, availability of 

ducts and upgradable networks as well as willingness to pay and affordability. This list is not compre-

hensive. Thus it is difficult to evaluate the “success” of NBPs. They can only be relatively successful 

given their circumstances. If the conditions described above are negative, defining an NBP to counter 

these conditions is a lot more challenging than writing an NBP within an environment that favours NGA 

roll-out anyway. However, what is often missing within NBPs, is the consideration of what the actual 

situation in a country is. There is a vast unused potential where countries could improve their NBPs by 

analysing the respective environments in a better way. The decency of an NBP can therefore not be 

evaluated by analysing a singular aspect such as achieving the connectivity targets, but rather if the 

NBP is well adjusted to local needs and conditions. 

| Page 13 from 320 

  13 

 
IV.  The  adjustments  described  above  are  at  least 

partly reflected by the thematic focus of the NBP. 

We  recognize  four  different  spheres  of  influence 

where NBPs can define measures in (regarding de-

mand,  supply,  organizational  and  regulatory  ap-

proach as well as transparency). Although it is of-

ten difficult to determine the focus of an NBP, we 

decided  to  cluster  them  by  evaluating  where  the 

most  concrete  and  measurable  provisions  are 

taken to support NGA roll-out in a given country. 

As  shown  in  Figure  1,  we  see  that  the  Member 

States are somewhat evenly distributed regarding 

their approaches and foci within the spheres of in-

fluence. However, one has to bear in mind that this 

focus only represents how well-defined measures 

are, meaning if they are underpinned by clear re-

sponsibilities  and  plans  of  their  implementation. 

The foci, however, do not tell anything about the 

 Figure 1 Focus of NBPs (Executive Summary ENG) 

actual feasibility of the plans. 

V.  This also leads to the  final conclusion: There is no one-size-fits-all approach concerning a “best” 

broadband strategy. All Member States have unique starting positions that make results hardly trans-

ferrable. The member states differ regarding their governmental structures as well as regarding the 

degree of involvement of local and regional actors. The size of a country as well as autonomous regions 

and federal structures often directly influence the steering modalities and capabilities. Furthermore, 

macroeconomic aspects matter as much as socio-economic aspects. Economic hardships decrease in-

vestments and demand alike, worsening the situation in crisis-struck countries. Other aspects include 

the role of the incumbent and the quality of existing infrastructures. In some countries, mobile tech-

nologies are an important aspect of connectivity and partly substitute fixed networks. All of these fac-

tors and several others can and will influence the state of connectivity within given countries, making 

it difficult to transfer approaches. Measures that lead to excellent results in one country might bring 

negative results in other countries. It is therefore most important to regard NBPs in the same way as 

the countries they belong to: unique

| Page 14 from 320 

  14 

 
4  Executive Summary (French) 

L'étude suivante sur les plans nationaux haut débit (NBPs) dans l'UE à 28 (SMART 2014/0077) a été 

menée  entre  novembre 2015 et septembre 2016. Pour notre  analyse,  nous nous  sommes appuyés 

principalement sur des informations obtenues auprès de la Commission européenne et des autorités 

nationales. Par ailleurs, nous avons contacté des parties prenantes clés et des praticiens des 28 États 

membres pour nous faire une idée concernant la mise en œuvre concrète des plans nationaux haut 

débit dans chaque pays respectif. Plus généralement, l’objet de cette étude est de donner un aperçu 

sur la situation actuelle des États membres en ce qui concerne leur connectivité, les objectifs et les 

mesures définis dans les NBPs, et les actions pratiques réellement réalisées. Les principaux résultats 

de l'étude sont les suivants : 

1)  Malgré les plans nationaux haut débit ambitieux, seuls un petit nombre d’États membres sont 

près d'atteindre les objectifs de l'agenda numérique (DAE) ou leurs objectifs nationaux res-

pectifs. 

2)  Les NBPs des États membres diffèrent fortement concernant leur contenu. Peu de pays ne 

disposent pas actuellement d'un document unique qui peut être considéré comme un NBP, 

mais tous les États membres ont cependant une approche stratégique  générale pour le dé-

ploiement des réseaux d’accès de nouvelle génération (NGA) et leur mise en œuvre pratique. 

3)  Il existe de nombreuses conditions qui ont une influence sur le succès du déploiement des 

réseaux NGA dans un pays donné. Des NBPs efficaces considèrent leurs propres positions de 

départ et proposent des mesures concrètes exploitant les forces individuelles et définissant 

des mesures pour atténuer l'effet des inégalités. 

4)  Les NBPs des États membres établissent généralement un ou deux points prioritaires dans les 

domaines suivants : les mesures afférentes à l’offre, les mesures afférentes à la demande, 

les mesures réglementaires et organisationnelles, les mesures de transparence. 

5)  Il n'y a pas d’approche universelle pour les stratégies haut débit à travers l'Europe. Il semble 

que les NBPs ne soient pas transférables, tandis que certaines mesures peuvent cependant 

être appliquées partout dans les mêmes conditions. 

I. En ce qui concerne les probabilités d'atteindre les objectifs du DAE, nous avons analysé qu'actuelle-

ment seulement 14 des 28 États membres ont défini leurs propres objectifs nationaux. Les  autres pays 

suivent l'agenda numérique européen. Cependant, seuls quelques pays ont des probabilités élevées 

| Page 15 from 320 

  15 

 
d’atteindre leurs objectifs propres. Comme le montre le tableau suivant, nous ne sommes pas convain-

cus que tous les États membres de l'UE puissent y arriver. Cependant, il y a plusieurs pays qui ont des 

chances raisonnables d’atteindre les objectifs du DAE d’ici 2020. En général, les résultats de l'étude 

renforcent la nécessité d'accroître et de stimuler les investissements. Si l'Europe ne veut pas être à la 

traîne  au  niveau mondial, le  développement  haut  débit  doit accélérer.  À  cet  effet,  la fourniture  et 

l'exploitation des services Internet rapides et ultrarapides est cruciale pour le futur développement 

économique et la compétitivité de l'Europe ainsi que pour le progrès et la cohésion de la société dans 

son ensemble. Avec l'agenda numérique européen 2020 et les nouveaux objectifs haut débit euro-

péens pour 2025 récemment publiés, la Commission européenne a mis en place un cadre substantiel 

pour le futur avancement numérique de l'Europe. Pour que l'Europe puisse tirer pleinement profit de 

ce cadre et donc réaliser le plein potentiel du développement numérique, tous les parties prenantes 

doivent maximiser leurs efforts. Les États membres doivent fournir des incitations appropriées et des 

moyens pour accroître les investissements, alors que les acteurs locaux et l'industrie des télécommu-

nications doivent faire usage de ces instruments. En ce sens, les États membres doivent consolider les 

mesures efficaces existantes, mais être plus ambitieux, non seulement en termes d'incitations et de 

moyens, mais aussi, en particulier prenant en considération les nouvelles ambitions européennes pour 

l’année 2025, en termes d'objectifs, assurant ainsi le progrès social et économique de l’Europe.  

Le Table 2 résume les objectifs de tous les NBPs, l'état actuel de la connectivité et nos estimations 

concernant la probabilité d'atteindre respectivement les objectifs nationaux et les objectifs du DAE. 

| Page 16 from 320 

  16 

 
État de la connectivité DESI 

(Juillet 2015) 

États membres 

Couverture 
(NGA) 
30 Mbps 

Allemagne 

81,4 % 

Pénétration 
(en taux de 
ménages) 
100 Mbps et 
plus 
4,82 % 

                                                                                   NBP Objectifs 

Couverture 

Pénétration 

100 % de couverture avec 50 Mbps d‘ici 2018 

Non disponible 

Autriche 

88,8 %  

2,24 % 

99 % de couverture avec 100 Mbps d’ici 2020, 70 

Non disponible 

% d’ici 2018 

Probabilité de la réalisation (DAEII 
/ DAE III / Objectif national) 

Moyenne / faible / moyenne 

Moyenne / faible / faible 

Belgique 

98,9 %  

22,77 % 

Non disponible 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Haute / haute / moyenne 

vice de 1 Gbps d’ici 2020 

Bulgarie 

71,8 % 

2,88 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux d’abonnement > 100 Mbps de 50 % dans les ménages 

Faible / faible / moyenne ( 80 

et de 80 % dans les entreprises d’ici 2020 

% 100 Mbps dans les entre-

prises 

Chypre 

84,0 % 

0,06 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Moyenne / faible / non dispo-

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

nible 

Croatie 

52,0 % 

0,12 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Faible / faible / non disponible 

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

Danemark 

91,7 % 

9,39 % 

100  %  de  couverture  avec  100  Mbps  en  débit 

Non disponible 

Moyenne / moyenne / faible 

descendant  et  30  Mbps  en  débit  montant  d’ici 

2020 

Espagne 

76,6 % 

9,76 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Faible / moyenne / non dispo-

Estonie 

86,4 % 

4,48 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 60 % avec un ser-

Haute / faible / faible 

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

nible 

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

  17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
État de la connectivité DESI 

(Juillet 2015) 

États membres 

Couverture 
(NGA) 
30 Mbps 

Finlande 

75,1 % 

Pénétration 
(en taux de 
ménages) 
100 Mbps et 
plus 
15,11 % 

                                                                                   NBP Objectifs 

Couverture 

Pénétration 

Probabilité de la réalisation (DAEII 
/ DAE III / Objectif national) 

99  %  de  toutes  les  résidences  permanentes  et 

Non disponible 

Faible / moyenne / moyenne 

bureaux doivent être situés à 2 km d’un réseau 

de  fibre  optique  ou  d’un  réseau  câblé  qui  per-

mette des connections de 100 Mbps d’ici 2019 

France 

Grèce 

44,8 % 

36,3 % 

7,66 % 

0,01 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2022 

Non disponible 

Faible / faible / moyenne 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Faible / faible / non disponible 

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

Hongrie 

78,2 % 

12,68 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2018 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Moyenne  /  moyenne  /  mo-

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

yenne 

Irlande 

79,7 % 

13,24 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Faible / faible / non disponible 

vice  de  100  Mbps  d’ici  2020,  avec,  en  attendant,  un  débit 

montant d’environ 17 à 21 Mbps 

Italie 

43,9 % 

0,54 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Faible / faible / non disponible 

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

Lettonie 

90,7 % 

25,30 % 

100 % couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Moyenne / moyenne / non dis-

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

ponible 

Lituanie 

97,5 % 

10,42 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Haute / moyenne / non dispo-

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

nible 

  18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
État de la connectivité DESI 

(Juillet 2015) 

États membres 

Couverture 
(NGA) 
30 Mbps 

Luxembourg 

94,4 % 

Pénétration 
(en taux de 
ménages) 
100 Mbps et 
plus 
7,33 % 

                                                                                   NBP Objectifs 

Couverture 

Pénétration 

Probabilité de la réalisation (DAEII 
/ DAE III / Objectif national) 

100 % de couverture avec 1 Gbps en débit des-

Non disponible 

Haute / faible / moyenne 

cendant  et  500  Mbps  en  débit  montant  d’ici 

2020 

Malte 

100,00 % 

0,99 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Objectif  réalisé  /  faible  /  non 

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

disponible 

Pays-Bas 

98,3 % 

16,53 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Haute / faible / non disponible 

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

Pologne 

60,7 % 

4,23 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Faible / faible / non disponible 

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

Portugal 

90,9 % 

18,88 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Moyenne / moyenne / non dis-

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

ponible 

République tchèque  72,9 % 

5,55 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 50 % avec un ser-

Faible / faible / non disponible 

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

Roumanie 

71,6 %  

26,72 % 

80 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Taux de pénétration dans les ménages de 45 % avec un ser-

Moyenne  /  moyenne  /  mo-

vice de 100 Mbps d’ici 2020 

yenne 

Royaume-Uni 

90,5 % 

6,15 % 

95 % de couverture avec 24 Mbps d’ici 2017 et 

Non disponible 

Moyenne / faible / moyenne 

au  moins  100 Mbps  pour  presque  tous  les  édi-

fices du Royaume-Uni (sans date) 

Slovaquie 

67,1 % 

6,70 % 

100 % de couverture avec 30 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Non disponible 

Faible / faible / non disponible 

  19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
État de la connectivité DESI 

(Juillet 2015) 

États membres 

Couverture 
(NGA) 
30 Mbps 

Slovénie 

78,8 % 

Pénétration 
(en taux de 
ménages) 
100 Mbps et 
plus 
4,91 % 

                                                                                   NBP Objectifs 

Couverture 

Pénétration 

Probabilité de la réalisation (DAEII 
/ DAE III / Objectif national) 

96 % de couverture avec 100 Mbps et 4 % avec 

Non disponible 

Faible / faible / faible 

30 Mbps d’ici 2020 

Suède 

76,4 % 

27,06 % 

90 % de couverture avec 100 Mbps d‘ici 2020 

Non disponible 

Faible / moyenne / moyenne 

Table 2 DAE and NBP targets – Probability of achievement (Executive Summary FR) 

  20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
II. En ce qui concerne le contenu des NBPs, nous avons remarqué des approches très différentes. Il est 

cependant frappant de constater que les pays ayant des conditions favorables pour un déploiement 

fondé  sur  la  dynamique  du  marché  (par  exemple  une  densité  de  population  élevée,  une  forte  de-

mande, un degré élevé d'urbanisation, de vastes réseaux câblés) sont souvent moins concrets concer-

nant les mesures décrites dans leurs NBPs respectifs. Par conséquent, ils comptent généralement sur 

des approches stratégiques qui définissent le cadre général dans lequel la concurrence doit avoir lieu. 

Ces pays souvent se fient exclusivement aux forces du marché pour une couverture NGA supplémen-

taire. Dans ces cas, un NBP est principalement élaboré pour fournir des conditions de concurrence 

égales, ce qui signifie qu’une compétition équitable peut avoir lieu. Au contraire, les pays ayant des 

positions de départ plus difficiles sont souvent plus avancées concernant le réalisme des mesures dé-

crites. Selon leurs capacités économiques, ils essaient d'accroître l'offre, la demande ou la transpa-

rence relative aux infrastructures existantes. Ensuite, les différents NBPs intègrent généralement ces 

mesures dans un document unique de stratégie, des directives, une législation, etc. 

Néanmoins, ce que nous avons appris des professionnels à travers l'Europe est que la stratégie natio-

nale générale ne doit pas faire partie d'un seul document pour être efficace. Tant qu'il existe une vo-

lonté politique d'atteindre certains objectifs avec certaines mesures, un recueil approximatif de décla-

rations et de documents peut effectivement fonctionner. Cependant, il apparaît que l’aspect le plus 

important concernant la mise en œuvre effective est que les acteurs responsables (généralement au 

niveau local) soient attachés aux objectifs stratégiques et s’y sentent associés. D'une manière générale, 

la participation des acteurs locaux est particulièrement importante lorsque les pays de grande super-

ficie, qui ont généralement une couverture rurale significativement faible, ont besoin d'associer la de-

mande et les initiatives prises par la base (bottom-up). 

III. ll y a plusieurs conditions qui influent sur le succès du déploiement des réseaux NGA. Les principales 

sont la concurrence, les activités afférentes à la demande et à la numérisation de la société, la dispo-

nibilité des aides de l'État et des instruments financiers, un cadre réglementaire décent, la densité de 

population et le taux d'urbanisation, la disponibilité des réseaux, et que ceux-ci soient modernisables, 

ainsi que la volonté de mettre la main à la poche et l'accessibilité financière. Cette liste n'est pas com-

plète. Il est donc difficile d'évaluer le « succès » des NBPs. Ils ne peuvent réussir que relativement à 

des circonstances particulières. Si les conditions décrites ci-dessus sont négatives, la définition d'un 

NBP pour les contrer sera beaucoup plus difficile que d'écrire un NBP pour un environnement qui fa-

vorise de toute façon le déploiement NGA. Cependant, ce qui manque souvent dans un NBP est la prise 

en considération de la situation réelle dans le pays. Il y a un vaste potentiel inexploité où les  États 

pourraient  améliorer leurs NBPs en analysant  mieux les  environnements respectifs.  La qualité  d'un 

  21 

| Page 21 from 320 

 
NBP ne peut donc pas être évalué en analysant un aspect singulier, comme la réalisation des objectifs 

de connectivité, mais plutôt si le NBP est bien adapté aux besoins et aux conditions locales. 

IV. Les ajustements décrits ci-dessus sont au moins 

partiellement  reflétés  par l'accent  thématique  du 

NBP.  Nous 

reconnaissons  quatre 

sphères 

d'influence différentes où les NBPs peuvent définir 

des  mesures  (en  ce  qui  concerne  la  demande, 

l'offre,  l'approche  organisationnelle  et  réglemen-

taire ainsi que la transparence). Bien qu'il soit sou-

vent difficile de déterminer le domaine prioritaire 

d'un NBP, nous avons décidé de les regrouper en 

évaluant  les  dispositions  les  plus  concrètes  et  les 

plus mesurables qui sont prises pour soutenir le dé-

ploiement NGA dans un pays donné.  

Comme le montre la Figure 2, nous voyons que les 

États membres sont quelque  peu répartis  de ma-

nière  égale  en  ce  qui  concerne  leur  approche  et 

leur 

importance  en 

fonction  des 

sphères 

d'influence.  Cependant,  il  faut  se  rappeler  que 

cette  répartition  ne  représente  que  les  mesures 

 Figure 2 Focus of NBPs (Executive Summary FR) 

envisagées,  ce  qui  signifie  qu’elles  doivent  être 

étayées par les responsabilités claires et les plans de mise en œuvre. La répartition cependant ne dit 

rien au sujet de la faisabilité réelle des plans. 

V. Cela conduit aussi à la conclusion finale : il n'y a pas d’approche universelle concernant une stratégie 

haut débit optimale. Tous les États membres ont des positions de départ individuelles qui rendent les 

résultats difficilement transférables. Les États membres sont différents en ce qui concerne leurs struc-

tures gouvernementales ainsi que le degré d'implication des acteurs locaux et régionaux. La taille d'un 

pays ainsi que les régions autonomes et les structures fédérales influent souvent directement sur les 

modalités et les capacités de direction. En outre, les aspects macro-économiques comptent autant que 

les aspects socio-économiques. Les difficultés économiques diminuent les investissements comme la 

demande, aggravant la situation dans les pays en crise. D'autres aspects comprennent le rôle de l'opé-

  22 

| Page 22 from 320 

 
rateur historique et la qualité des infrastructures existantes. Dans certains pays, les technologies mo-

biles sont un aspect important de la connectivité et remplace partiellement les réseaux fixes. Tous ces 

facteurs et plusieurs autres peuvent et vont influer sur l'état de la connectivité dans les pays donnés, 

ce qui rend difficile le transfert des approches. Les mesures qui conduisent à d'excellents résultats dans 

un pays pourraient mener à des résultats négatifs dans d’autres pays. Il est donc plus important de 

considérer les NBPs de la même manière que les pays auxquels ils appartiennent : comme étant unique 

  23 

| Page 23 from 320 

 
 
 
 
5 

Introduction 

Broadband connectivity is of strategic importance for technological innovation and economic growth 

across sectors and, as such, forms a key ingredient of social and regional cohesion within the European 

Union (EU). The Digital Agenda for Europe (hereinafter DAE or Digital Agenda) provides a central policy 

framework in this regard. It represents one of the flagship initiatives of the EU in the context of the 

Europe 2020 strategy, devised to deliver smart, sustainable and inclusive growth and render the EU 

globally more competitive in the long-run.1 The DAE’s overall aim is thereby “to deliver sustainable 

economic and social benefits  from a digital single market based on fast and ultra-fast internet and 

interoperable applications”.2 This is of utmost importance as the future economy will be knowledge-

based with the internet at its centre. Against this background, the EU set two overarching broadband 

targets to be met by its member states by 2020:3 

  all Europeans should have access to internet speeds higher than 30 Mbps, 

  and 50% or more of European households should be able to obtain subscriptions above 100 

Mbps 

In this light, the DAE envisages a number of measures to foster the deployment of networks required 

to meet its central objectives as well as to support substantial investments required in the upcoming 

years. At EU level, investments in high-speed broadband are supported through a variety of policy, 

regulatory and financing as well as funding measures. These include: 

Funding/Financing initiatives: 

  The European plan for Investment supported by the European Fund for Strategic Investment 

(EFSI)4;  

  The European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs) for the 2014-2020 periods;  

  The Connecting Europe Facility (CEF)5;  

Regulatory measures: 

1 http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-2020-in-a-nutshell/flagship-initiatives/index_en.htm  

2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0245&from=EN 

3 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0472&from=EN, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-con-
tent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0245&from=EN 

4 http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/jobs-growth-investment/plan/index_en.htm      

5 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/connecting-europe-facility   

  24 

| Page 24 from 320 

 
                                                           
  The Cost Reduction Directive6;   

  The new Broadband State Aid Guidelines7 and the new General Block Exemption Regulation 

(GBER)8; 

  The Telecoms Single Market (TSM) and upcoming review9;  

  The Digital Single Market Strategy10; 

Policy guidance and support:  

  The EC Guide to high speed broadband investment11;  

  The Broadband Europe website12;  

  The Connected Communities Initiative13; 

At national level, most Member States (MS) have gradually adopted National Broadband Plans (NBPs), 

devised to integrate all relevant aspects to develop an effective broadband policy and resources ena-

bling policy makers and public authorities to properly plan public interventions in the telecommunica-

tions sector. The implementation of the NBPs plans thereby usually falls within the competence area 

of the MS’ responsible ministries. 

Besides financing from the private sector, national projects for network roll-out are also funded from 

national public funds and from the EU, via the European Regional Development Fund and the European 

Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. For the period 2014-2020, 22 Member States have allocated 

ERDF and/or EAFRD funding to broadband deployment, totalling approximately EUR 6 billion. Note-

worthy is that there are considerable differences between Member States in terms of net amounts 

and percentages of ERDF and/or EAFRD funds earmarked for broadband deployment. The CEF (Con-

necting Europe Facility) and the EFSI (European Fund for Strategic Investment) provide additional fi-

6 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/measures-reduce-cost-high-speed-broadband-roll-out-0    

7 http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/legislation/specific_rules.html    

8 http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/legislation/block.html#gber    

9 https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/connected-continent-legislative-package    

10 http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/digital-single-market/ 

11 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/broadband-investment-guide   

12 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/broadband-europe   

13 https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/node/70418   

  25 

| Page 25 from 320 

 
                                                           
nancial instruments (e.g. guarantees, loans, equity) to support innovative business models. The Euro-

pean Structural and Investment Funds also encourage the use of financial instruments for broadband 

deployment. 14 

A staff working document by the European Commission on the Implementation of National Broadband 

Plans posits that broadband dynamics are necessarily shaped by idiosyncratic factors such as local ge-

ography and roll-out costs, the competitive situation in the national broadband market, the general 

legal framework, various socio-economic factors and differing attitudes towards the scope and design 

of state intervention.15 Taking it from there, the paper argues that forms of national implementation 

will continue to vary, despite the uniformity imposed by EU legislation and coordination measures such 

as the common regulatory and state aid frameworks. These observations underline, at the very mini-

mum, that a “one-size-fits-all” solution is unlikely to evolve. 

Overall, Member States need to devise appropriate strategies and instruments in order to reach set 

targets. Notably, progress with respect to reaching the high-speed broadband targets of the DAE is 

variable, with some Member States lagging behind and others being in an advanced stage of imple-

menting their national strategies. Providing a succinct picture of recent developments across countries 

will thus be vital as a means to identify deficiencies and point out ameliorative measures where nec-

essary. 

5.1  Objective of the study  

The  absence  of  a  universally  applicable  “recipe”  in  the  area of  broadband  development  inherently 

raises the question about what kind of specific strategies Member States pursue (i.e. National Broad-

band Plans) and through what means and within what period they aim at meeting the DAE2020 tar-

gets, or their own respectively. In this light, the task is to examine the current state of affairs concern-

ing broadband development in the EU-28 Member States. Thus, the focus of the study is rather on the 

actual implementation processes than on political statements or the content of official documents.16 

Correspondingly, the main objective is to review the national broadband plans of the Member States, 

the assessment of their feasibility and evaluation of the likelihood of achieving the EU’s DAE2020 tar-

gets as well as the identification of main trends and best practices across Member States. 

14 http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=9990 

15 http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=914 

16 Minutes from the project-related inception meeting that took place on 3rd of November 2015 in Brussels. 

  26 

| Page 26 from 320 

 
                                                           
5.2  Methodology and Procedure 

The overall methodological approach for this study is an inductive one, meaning that we gather several 

single observations and derive generally applicable patterns from these observations.  

In order to be able to provide a cohesive picture of the process of broadband development in all Mem-

ber States, we defined a mixed methodology, combining quantitative and qualitative elements to be 

the most appropriate approach. While the quantitative approach is being applied to provide a sound 

understanding of the status quo across Europe, the qualitative approach will deliver insights for cur-

rent and future developments. A key characteristic of qualitative methodology is its ability to deliver a 

“thick analysis” which allows for an in-depth examination of processes and (expected) outcomes by 

relying on rich and dense information concerning specific cases.17 In addition, statistical figures are 

included in the analysis where available to provide for context and support the validity of the qualita-

tive findings. Likewise, different visualization tools are utilized to facilitate understanding. The form of 

gathered data will to a certain degree determine the way of presentation. 

In collecting the necessary data, we adopted multiple tools including desk-research, surveys and inter-

views with leading experts from each (or groups of) Member States in the area of broadband develop-

ment. The surveys and interviews thereby followed a semi-structured design which allowed to identify 

salient issues and challenges in the deployment of broadband infrastructure in each Member State. 

Given its topicality and reliance on first-hand information, a potential challenge is information scarcity 

and data validity. While validity issues can never be completely ruled out in a research context where 

information is gathered through unofficial channels as well, the authors of the present study have tried 

to  minimize  error  potential  and  strengthen  accuracy  by  triangulating  information  from  different 

sources.  

The information gathered accordingly is subsequently used to write up comprehensive reports on each 

Member State. To allow for comparability, each Member State section thereby follows a predefined 

structure. It begins with a short country profile containing information on general economic, demo-

graphic and geographic conditions. Next follows an outline of the Member States’ National Broadband 

Plans. In order to provide for background, each country’s NBP is contextualised – where applicable – 

in terms of preceding efforts, targets and/or strategies devised to promote the deployment of NGA 

infrastructure. After all, a country with a proven track record in promoting high speed networks in the 

17 Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier, Henry E. Brady, and David Collier (Ed.) (2008): The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology: Oxford Uni-
versity Press. 

  27 

| Page 27 from 320 

 
                                                           
past might on average fare better in meeting the future DAE 2020 targets than others. Not only infra-

structural endowments matter in this respect, but also policy-related and administrative preparations 

and experiences. Accordingly, we seek to provide a holistic picture. Then an assessment of the practical 

implementation and broadband roll-out process is undertaken. This includes an analysis of the steering 

modalities (e.g. centralized vs. decentralized), the convergence of networks, sources of funding and 

financing, cost-reduction measures, mapping tools, and major/outstanding projects. Each country re-

port closes with a feasibility assessment of the country’s NBP, focusing on the likelihood of reaching 

set national targets and DAE targets as well as recommendations. In a final step, the country-based 

reports are examined in a cross-case analysis to identify (a) main trends and (b) best-practices across 

countries. 

Before  proceeding  with  the  Member  State  reports,  we  shall  briefly  discuss  definitions  relevant  to 

broadband and bandwidth and, successively, present the objectives of the EU’s Digital Agenda. 

  28 

| Page 28 from 320 

 
 
 
6  Digital Agenda 2020: Towards High-Speed Internet Access in the EU 

6.1  Definitions and Objectives 

There is no standard definition for broadband. However, broadband is a term generally considered 

synonymous  with  fast  connections  to  the  internet.  The  EU  more  specifically  defines  broadband  in 

terms of “high speed telecommunications systems, i.e. those capable of simultaneously supporting 

multiple information formats such as voice, high-speed data services and video services on demand.”18  

The European Union therewith follows conventional practice of defining broadband in terms of data 

transmission rates (i.e. the amount of data that can be transmitted across a network connection in a 

given period of time). It should be noted, however, that such definitions need to take into account that 

bandwidth demand is dynamic. Requirements for internet applications are continuously increasing and 

infrastructure standards steadily  improving to face growing demand.19  A bandwidth-based (or data 

transmission speed-based) definition of broadband can therefore only be relative to a particular mo-

ment in time in a particular place.20 

The Digital Agenda for Europe forms one of the seven pillars of the Europe 2020 strategy, set out to 

outline a path to maximise the social and economic potential of information and communication tech-

nology  (ICT).  The  initiative  underlines  the  importance  of  broadband  deployment  to  promote  social 

inclusion and competitiveness in the EU. It is based on the premise that services and applications are 

increasingly made available in an interoperable and borderless internet environment. In response, de-

mand for higher speeds and capacity is spurred creating the business case for investments in faster 

networks. The deployment and take-up of faster networks in turn open the way for innovative services 

exploiting higher broadband speeds.21  

With regard to broadband targets, the DAE in principle distinguishes three broadband categories, 2, 

30, and 100 Mbps, referring to basic broadband, fast and ultra-fast broadband, respectively. Towards 

18 Cf. URL: http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/broadband-glossary#B 

19 Cf. URL: http://broadbandtoolkit.org/1.2 

20 In addition, it should be kept in mind that internet speed is primarily an indicator measuring transfer rates of a broadband connection. 
Equally important, depending on the application used, may be “latency” as yet another important aspect. For instance, if a cloud service is 
running on a remote server, not only a high bandwidth but also the latency is of great importance (especially if access to the cloud occurs 
often). If each time you click it takes two or three seconds before an action is executed, user satisfaction decreases. Latency also plays a big 
role in telephony. If it takes too long for voice data packages to be transferred, it may become difficult to make a simple conversation work. 

21 See URL: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0245&from=EN 

  29 

| Page 29 from 320 

 
                                                           
achieving the roll-out of high-capacity networks across the EU, the Digital Agenda stipulates that Mem-

ber States have to meet two major broadband targets by 202022: on the one hand, to provide all Euro-

peans with internet speeds higher than 30 Mbps (For further analysis, we define achievement of this 

target with virtually 100 % coverage, meaning 99 % and more); and on the other hand, to have 50 % 

or more of European households take up internet subscriptions higher than 100 Mbps. 

6.2  Gauging Progress: Key Indicators 

Broadband development can be gauged by resorting to different indicators. Indicators likely to be of 

most  interest  to  policy  makers  are  usually  availability,  demand,  quality  and  pricing.23  Importantly, 

these parameters relate to local retail access rather than to wholesale and backbone markets.24 Other 

than that, broadband development also bears important socio-economic implications. Social effects 

include  better  access  to  public  services  and  health,  whereas  economic  effects  for  instance  revolve 

around improved innovation capacity and productivity of businesses. 

In particular, indicators such as  fixed and mobile  broadband coverage and take-up rates  as well as 

socio-economic facets thereof (e.g. digital inclusion and provision of digital public services) deliver val-

uable information regarding broadband development and overall digital progress. A highly informa-

tive, in-depth analysis of such indicators in Europe is provided by the Digital Scoreboard of the Euro-

pean Commission25, measuring the progress of the European digital economy via the Digital Economy 

&  Society  Index  (DESI)26  and  the  European  Digital  Progress  Report  of  the  European  Commission 

(EDPR)27. Hence, the aim of this section is to give a brief overview of some of the key findings of the 

DESI/EDPR regarding broadband development in Europe and to partially elaborate on them, in order 

to provide some context regarding the current status of attainment of the DAE targets, thereby creat-

ing a solid basis for the subsequent analysis of NBPs in the EU. 

22 The DAE’s initial interim target for achieving basic broadband (>2mbps) by 2013 will not be part of the discussion as it has been analysed 
at length by the Commission Staff Working Document on the Implementation of National Broadband Plans, Brussels, 23.3.2012, 
SWD(2012) 68 final/2 

23 Additional indicators which may also be useful for monitoring and analysis include monetary-based statistics such as broadband reve-
nues 

24 Cf. The World Bank (Ed.) (2012): Broadband Strategies Handbook. Tim Kelly, Rossotto Carlo Maria. Coordinated by Telecommunications 
Management Group, Inc., P. 77 

25 https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/digital-scoreboard 

26 https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/desi 

27 http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=15806 

  30 

| Page 30 from 320 

 
 
                                                           
6.2.1  Broadband Indicators: DAE targets on European and National Level 

6.2.1.1  BASIC COVERAGE ACROSS EUROPE (DAE TARGET I) 

In addition to the “grand targets” discussed further above and below, the Digital Agenda for Europe 

also sets to ensure full basic broadband (2 Mbps) coverage by 2013 (DAE target I). Fixed basic broad-

band networks are the cornerstone of this kind of connectivity in Europe and widely available, covering 

most of the households in the EU (97 % according to the EDPR). Moreover, mobile broadband via 3G 

networks has achieved a comparably high rate of coverage, with very limited differences across Mem-

ber States. Additionally, satellite networks also offer ubiquitous coverage for the entire territory of the 

European Union. Hence, for the remainder of remote areas, where still no fixed basic broadband is 

available, mobile and satellite connections can constitute a pragmatic alternative.  As a result, basic 

connectivity  across  Europe  is  given  and  the  European  Commission  considers  the  first  DAE  to  be 

achieved.  

6.2.1.2  NGA COVERAGE (DAE TARGET II) 

However, if we have a closer look at advanced Next Generation Access (NGA) technologies, which are 

able to fulfil the second DAE target of 30 Mbps downlink, the picture changes. DAE target II (100 % 

coverage with 30 Mbps or more until 2020) has not been achieved yet. Based on DESI data, Figure 3 

shows that despite the average NGA coverage of 70.9 %, a significant number of households across 

Europe cannot subscribe to these higher bandwidths. The figure depicts NGA broadband coverage as 

a supply-side indicator calculated in terms of the percentage of population living in areas served by 

NGA networks. Here, NGA is understood to include FTTH and FTTB, Cable Docsis 3.0, VDSL and other 

superfast broadband technologies with a data download rate of at least 30 Mbps. 

  31 

| Page 31 from 320 

 
 
Figure 3 NGA Coverage across Europe - DAE status quo (own illustration based on DESI) 

It is evident, that the only Member State with 100 % coverage for such NGA networks is Malta, fol-

lowed by Belgium and the Netherlands. The other Member States differ in their degree of coverage, 

with France, Italy and Greece at the bottom. This current level of NGA coverage leads to the question, 

if and when the second DAE target will be met on a European Level. To answer this question, we have 

analysed the NGA coverage progress across Europe over a couple of years. Figure 4 (DESI data) depicts 

this evolution of digital infrastructure. From this perspective, we can see that the sequence of coun-

tries remained similar over the last five years. However, progress was generally quicker in countries 

with low baselines (e.g. FR, PL) compared to those with higher ones (e.g. NL, BE, MT). The question 

when a market saturation effect appears is especially interesting to estimate the fulfilment of targets. 

Analysing the existing data, we see that growth steadily declines after 90 % coverage, which means 

that the effort to fully cover the last few percentage points of population (mostly to be found in rural 

  32 

| Page 32 from 320 

 
 
remote areas) increases drastically while the potential turnover is relatively small, making these areas 

less attractive for commercial roll-out.  

NGA coverage, Member States 2011-2015

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

EL IT FR HR PL SK RO BG CZ FI SE ES HU SI

IE DE CY EE AT UK LV PT DK LU LT NL BE MT

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

EU average 2011

EU average 2012

EU average 2013

EU average 2014

EU average 2015

Figure 4 NGA coverage MS 2011-2015 (own illustration based on DESI) 

To estimate the actual rate of progress across Europe, we have concluded several trend analyses based 

on current official data to determine the actual and the potential future achievement. Please note that 

there is a differing date of time (Mid 2015 vs End of nx) which distorts the trend line and leads to results 

that are worse than if we solely calculated with End of n. However, if we calculate a linear trend (where 

this distortion has the least effect; R² = 0,9841), we estimate an achievement of the targets by End 

2019 (see Figure 5). This is at least true on a European level. Within the country sections the achieve-

ment on national levels will be more thoroughly examined.  

  33 

| Page 33 from 320 

 
 
 
Figure 5 NGA coverage, linear growth trend (own calculation & illustration based on DESI) 

To verify our first estimation, we also added exponential (R² = 0,9687) and logarithmic (R² = 0,927) 

trend lines. The exponential trend line hereby depicts a positive scenario and shows the achievement 

of the targets by End 2018. However, considering the market saturation effect, a further exponential 

growth is unlikely (see Figure 6). 

Figure 6 NGA coverage, exponential growth trend (own calculation & illustration based on DESI) 

Contrarily, the logarithmic trend line representing this saturation, leads to differing results. As depicted 

in Figure 7, an achievement of the second target is not foreseeable. Again, it is worth noticing that the 

last 10  % of  coverage  will in  any case  be  the  costliest  ones  to  achieve,  which will  lead  to a  severe 

reduction of deployment speed. We therefore conclude that an achievement of the second DAE target 

is rather questionable (on a European level). 

  34 

| Page 34 from 320 

 
 
 
Figure 7 NGA coverage, logarithmic growth trend (own calculation & illustration based on DESI) 

6.2.1.3  ULTRAFAST SUBSCRIPTIONS (DAE TARGET III) 

Regarding the third DAE target (50 % take up for bandwidths of 100 Mbps and higher), the EDPR 2016 

states that currently 8 % of European households subscribe to ultrafast connections. Looking at Figure 

8 summarizing HH-penetration figures from EDPR, this still relatively low value is no surprise. In the 

vast majority of Member States, still less than 10 % of households subscribe to connections offering 

100 Mbps or more. However, there are also several Member States with higher penetration rates, 4 

of them even achieving penetration rates well above 20 %.  

Percentage of households subscribing to 100 Mbps 
or more  - 2015 (number of MS)

BE 
LV 
RO 
SE

FI
HU
IE
NL
PT

4

5

19

0-10 %

11-20 %

21-30 %

AT 
BG 
CY 
CZ 
DE 
DK 
EE 
EL 
ES 
FR 
HR
IT 
LT 
LU 
MT 
PL 
SI 
SK 
UK

Figure 8 Subscriptions with 100 Mbps or more (percentage of HH/number of MS)  
(own illustration based on EDPR 2016) 

  35 

| Page 35 from 320 

 
 
 
Comparing take-up rates for connections >100 Mbps with the previously analysed NGA coverage rates 

reveals another interesting fact: on average, countries that tend to have a higher NGA coverage rate 

also tend to have higher take-up rates, suggesting that demand follows supply to some extent (based 

on EDPR data we calculated a correlation coefficient of 0.33). However, we can also observe that some 

countries deviate from this pattern (e.g. Malta having achieved full NGA coverage, but showing very 

low >100 Mbps take-up rates, whereas Romania has only an average coverage rate, but significantly 

outperforms most other countries regarding take-up). There are several reasons for such discrepan-

cies: obviously technological reasons are a factor, i.e. networks capable of delivering 30 Mbps are not 

necessarily capable of delivering 100 Mbps, which is also confirmed by EDPR data showing that speeds 

of 100 Mbps or more are only available for approximately 50 % of EU households, compared to the   

significantly higher NGA coverage of 70.9 %. Moreover, the difference, can also be explained by de-

mand  side  factors  (i.e.  socio-economic  factors  and  affordability)  and  regional  disparities,  often  be-

tween rural and urban areas. 

In summary, one can conclude that there is currently no country that has achieved the target yet or 

that  is  close  to  achieving  it.  Hence,  the  current  figures  suggest  that  achieving the  third DAE target 

remains doubtful, especially considering that, as said before, demand seems to follow supply and as 

there is a shortage of high-end coverage across Europe, chances are low that the take-up target can 

be achieved. 

Although the figures and numbers indicate a clear result at first glance, there are still some dynamics 

that could change the current trends and make both the coverage and take-up target achievable: the 

increasing demand for ultrafast speeds. Based on DESI data, we calculated the recent growth rates for 

ultrafast subscriptions in Europe (Table 3). 

MS 

AT 

BE 

BG 

CY 

CZ 

DE 

DK 

EE 

EL 

Growth 

rate 

100 Mbps 

100 Mbps 

and above 

and above 

15 

14 

100 Mbps 

100 Mbps 

Growth 

and above 

and above 

MS 

rate 

15 

14 

71% 

98% 

48% 

19% 

85% 

74% 

422% 

50% 

N.A. 

4% 

26% 

6% 

0% 

8% 

6% 

9% 

7% 

2% 

13% 

4% 

0% 

5% 

4% 

2% 

4% 

0,01% 

0,00% 

  IE 

  IT 

  LT 

  LU 

  LV 

  MT 

  NL 

  PL 

  PT 

| Page 36 from 320 

19% 

0% 

11% 

5% 

38% 

1% 

13% 

3% 

23% 

-9% 

119% 

60% 

63% 

11% 

14% 

33% 

164% 

12% 

17% 

1% 

17% 

9% 

42% 

1% 

18% 

8% 

25% 

  36 

 
 
ES 

FI 

FR 

HR 

HU 

70% 

27% 

36% 

5277% 

305% 

14% 

23% 

8% 

0% 

20% 

8% 

18% 

6% 

0% 

5% 

  RO 

  SE 

  SI 

  SK 

  UK 

77% 

24% 

69% 

12% 

152% 

49% 

42% 

8% 

10% 

7% 

28% 

34% 

4% 

9% 

3% 

Table 3 Growth rates of ultra-fast subscriptions in MS 2014-2015 (own  calculation & illustration based on DESI) 

Nearly all of the Member States show extremely high growth rates (for EL 2014 there is no reliable 

data available and HR is exceptionally high, but the baseline is very low, so results are distorted). From 

11 % (LV) to 422 % (DK), we can observe that the demand for ultra-high speed subscriptions across 

Europe is growing. This dynamic growth might make take-up targets more achievable than they cur-

rently look like. If growth stays comparably high, supply will be short of demand for these bandwidths. 

There might even be an overspill effect: While demand for ultrafast connections increases significantly, 

operators might  reconsider  their  internal  risk  calculations  and  start  deploying  in  areas  which  were 

deemed to be economically not viable. 

If we have a closer look at the technologies deployed, we can obtain a more valid view, that supports 

this thesis. Figure 9, gathered from the EDPR, shows the decline of xDSL technologies while technolo-

gies that usually offer ceteris paribus higher bandwidths, gain market shares.  

Figure 9 Development of fixed broadband subscriptions by technology (own illustration based on EDPR 2016) 

Although  general  fixed  broadband  is  still  overwhelmingly  dominated  by  xDSL,  the  picture  changes 

when we examine only NGA subscriptions by technology. As of today, the NGA subscriptions are al-

ready dominated by non-xDSL technologies (especially cable), while FTTP is only slightly behind xDSL, 

  37 

| Page 37 from 320 

 
 
 
suggesting that xDSL is not fit to meet the highest standards of end-customers (see Figure 10, extracted 

from EDPR) 

NGA Subscriptions by technology at EU 
Level Mid 2015

45% 1%

25%

29%

11%

14%

vDSL

Cable

Other NGA

FTTH

FTTB

Figure 10 NGA subscriptions by technology 2015 (own illustration based on EDPR 2016) 

This current displacement of xDSL technologies incentivizes the further exchange of legacy networks 

and deployment of future-proof technologies, which in turn makes the achievement of the DAE targets 

again slightly more probable. 

6.2.1.4  MAIN CHALLENGE: RURAL AREAS 

As it has been mentioned already, other factors such as demand and socio-economic factors notwith-

standing, one of the key challenges regarding the achievement of both DAE targets will be the coverage 

of rural areas, which are still lagging significantly behind (28 % coverage according to DESI). Assuming 

an ongoing linear growth trend, based on DESI data, we calculated a trend line for the development of 

rural NGA coverage in the next years. Looking at Figure 11, it becomes clear that, based on the current 

trend, an overall availability of NGA networks and thus also ultrafast NGA networks (networks capable 

of >100 Mbps) is currently not foreseeable. Without these networks, the coverage and penetration 

rates  cannot  rise  to  the  levels  targeted.  Hence,  further  effort  with  a  special  focus  on  said  areas  is 

needed to achieve the DAE targets. 

  38 

| Page 38 from 320 

 
 
Figure 11 Rural NGA coverage, linear growth trend (own calculation & illustration based on DESI) 

6.2.2  Socio-Economic Indicators 

Besides the connectivity targets of the DAE, there are also socio-economic indicators that are valuable 

for assessing the status quo and possibly even the future chances of meeting the connectivity targets. 

Especially considering the demand side, it is useful to examine several aspects, considering the previ-

ously described impact of demand on take-up and coverage alike. These indicators express the overall 

digitization of a society, however, observing solely these factors do not define the whole scope of the 

demand side sufficiently. Especially factors such as affordability are at least equally important. 

  digital inclusion 

Digital inclusion means especially the regular internet use across the Member States, but also regular 

use by disadvantaged people and a low number of persons that have never used the Internet. These 

indicators are well suited to estimate how and if the use of internet has become a tool of everyday life. 

The common use of digital services directly influences the demand for broadband subscriptions, while 

the use by disadvantaged people and persons that have never used the internet correlates with af-

fordability, publicly available WLAN, etc. The DAE targets here include a 70 % regular use of internet 

by the population, a 60 % regular use of Internet by disadvantaged people and a lower than 15 % share 

of people who have never used the Internet before. 

  digital public services 

The use of digital public services is another suitable set of indicators for evaluating the demand side 

activities of national broadband strategies. The number of people using eGovernment and the amount 

of returned filled forms directly show  if digital services  are designed well enough to substitute the 

  39 

| Page 39 from 320 

 
 
 
 
traditional administrative procedures. As traditional administrative processes are often linked to bur-

densome procedures (especially time and commuting), there can be a strong incentive to use digital 

services instead. The DAE sets its targets as 50 % of people using eGovernment services and of these, 

50 percent (25 % overall) shall return filled files. 

Table 4 summarizes the status quo of these indicators based on DESI data. While countries such as 

Denmark, Estonia, Finland and the Netherlands succeed in all indicators, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, It-

aly, Poland and Romania fail in all of them. This failure can be a strong indicator that the measures set 

for the demand side are not properly functioning and should be revised. 

There are also a number of countries that succeed in some of the indicators while failing in others. 

Countries such as Sweden, UK, Ireland and Germany have significant success in most indicators while 

failing one of them. Here it is obvious, that the demand side measures are overall successful and only 

need minor adjustment, if at all. In these cases, evidence is not strong enough to support the call for 

major changes. 

  40 

| Page 40 from 320 

 
Summary of MS-DAE - socio-economic indicators (Annex 2 DAE) 

digital inclusion 

public services 

persons that 

have never 

increase regular 

...for disadvan-

used the inter-

People using 

returning filled 

EU-28 MS 

internet use 

taged people 

net 

eGovernment 

in forms 

65% -> 70% / 

41% -> 60% / 

DAE  

2015 

2015 

max. 15% 

50% 

50% of a) 

AT 

BE 

BG 

CY 

CZ 

DE 

DK 

EE 

ES 

FI 

FR 

EL 

HR 

HU 

IE 

IT 

LT 

LU 

LV 

MT 

NL 

PL 

PT 

RO 

80,6 

83,5 

54,6 

69,6 

77,2 

84,5 

93,2 

85,8 

74,7 

90,5 

81 

63 

65,8 

71,6 

77,6 

63,4 

69 

96,8 

74,9 

74,4 

91,5 

64,8 

65 

51,8 

64 

72 

33 

53 

66 

73 

89 

73 

45 

62 

84 

70 

48 

52 

63 

52 

50 

94 

58 

59 

87 

47 

51 

33 

13,42 

12,64 

34,71 

26,00 

13,36 

9,67 

2,79 

9,05 

19,02 

5,29 

10,77 

29,97 

26,24 

21,16 

16,47 

27,89 

24,56 

2,18 

18,17 

21,63 

4,44 

27,08 

27,86 

31,79 

| Page 41 from 320 

36,7 

39,2 

15,1 

23,7 

12 

19,1 

71,1 

80 

37,7 

63,2 

48,4 

37,1 

21,3 

31,6 

56,5 

17,9 

42,3 

35,7 

36,4 

28,5 

56,1 

22,5 

40,8 

7,96 

67,1 

60,6 

29,6 

46,6 

39,1 

60 

91,2 

91,2 

62 

85,5 

72 

68,3 

49,3 

55,6 

61,1 

35,3 

60,4 

72,1 

65,2 

54,2 

79,4 

38,1 

61,8 

17,5 

  41 

 
  
SE 

SI 

SK 

UK 

88,6 

70,5 

74,2 

89,6 

80 

50 

54 

81 

4,52 

22,12 

16,25 

6,14 

79,4 

60 

62,8 

52,9 

48,9 

24,2 

16,3 

34,4 

Table 4 Socio-economic indicators DAE indicators in MS 2015 (own illustration based on DESI  

6.2.3  Mobile network indicators 

There are also other indicators that are meaningful to observe, especially mobile network indicators. 

Mobile networks are often a complementary and sometimes even substitute fixed networks in areas 

where fixed networks are extraordinary costly to deploy. Although there is a variety of non-fixed tech-

nologies (e.g. WLAN, WiMAX, Satellite,  radio relay), most  reliable data exists concerning the major 

technologies (LTE and HSPA). The following section will thus briefly show the current state of mobile 

broadband connectivity. The country reports will then deliver more in-depth information, if available 

and/or relevant. 

MOBILE BROADBAND COVERAGE 

Few mobile technologies can be considered a substitute for fixed technologies as most mobile tech-

nologies work as a shared medium and therefore divide their capabilities by the number of active users 

at the same time. However, some mobile technologies (e.g. LTE) have at least currently technical ca-

pabilities that let them compete with some fixed technologies in some markets. For example, in Fin-

land, Austria, Italy and some other countries, there is a significant number of persons that uses mobile 

broadband only, meaning that these persons do not see an added value in fixed technologies and/or 

that they live in areas with no access to fixed broadband or NGA respectively. However, the techno-

logical issues mentioned above notwithstanding, even LTE coverage is by far not sufficient to substitute 

fixed technologies throughout Europe. According to recent DESI data, currently only 36 % of rural EU 

territory is covered by LTE. 

There are vast differences between the Member States. As Figure 12, based on DESI dataFigure 12 

shows, the Member states vary between a total coverage of 100 % and roughly 45 %. The figure also 

shows the disparity of LTE coverage within the Member States: While some countries such as NL, SE 

or DK show nearly no difference between rural and total coverage, in countries such as BG and CY, 

there is virtually no LTE coverage in rural areas. 

  42 

| Page 42 from 320 

 
 
 
 
LTE coverage mid 2015

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

BG CY SK RO HR MT PL FR ES EL EE BE LV UK AT IT

IE LT FI CZ DE PT HU LU SI DK SE NL

Total

Rural

EU average total

EU average  rural

Figure 12 LTE coverage in Europe 2015 (own illustration based on DESI) 

Mobile  take-up,  however,  according  to  DESI  data,  has  been  constantly  rising  across  Europe,  from 

merely 13 % in 2008 to over 75 % in 2015. The rising number of mobile devices is the main driver of 

this swift development. While there are more and more devices that use SIM-cards, it is not surprising 

that the overall take-up rate will further increase. However, it is difficult to estimate the actual number 

of mobile users, as the number of SIM cards does not necessarily mean the number of persons owning 

a SIM-card. We often see that people have several SIM-cards (e.g. for private mobile phone, a business 

mobile phone, a tablet). This will be increased by future IoT tendencies. This phenomenon can be ob-

served if we analyse mobile penetration rate on national level. 

As shown in Figure 13, based on DESI data, there are several Member States with penetration rates 

well above 100 %, indicating the enormous importance of mobile devices. 

  43 

| Page 43 from 320 

 
 
Mobile Broadband Penetration – all active Users

160%

140%

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

HU EL PT SI RO BE SK MT LT LV CY DE AT HR BG CZ LU FR IT NL ES UK IE PL EE DK SE FI

Jul 14

Jul 15

EU average Jul 14

EU average Jul 15

Figure 13 Mobile broadband penetration in MS - all active users (own illustration based on DESI) 

  44 

| Page 44 from 320 

 
 
 
 
 
7 

Implementing the Digital Agenda 2020  

7.1  Broadband Targets: Overview of national broadband plans 

Since  the adoption of the Digital Agenda  for Europe (DAE) 2020  targets –  i.e. coverage of 30 Mbps 

download for all Europeans and take-up of 100 Mbps for at least 50 % of European households -  most 

Member States have gradually adopted National Broadband Plans (NBPs). They are devised to inte-

grate all relevant aspects of an effective broadband policy and resources enabling policy makers and 

public authorities to properly plan public interventions in the telecommunications sector.  

At the time of writing, a large majority of MS had already started implementing their NBPs, albeit with 

various time horizons ranging from 2015 to 2022. Some NBPs are integrated within broader strategic 

approaches, others are documents specifically dedicated to broadband deployment. In some coun-

tries, multiple official documents drafted by different national authorities exist that specify aspects 

related to such broadband developments. Other countries have no extensive set of written strategies 

or implementation plans at all.  

Content-wise, nearly all Member States' NBPs focus on reaching minimum download speeds – in most 

cases in terms of coverage (availability of commercial offer on a given territory) and sometimes also 

penetration (actual take-up in the form of internet access subscriptions); in contrast, emphasis on up-

load data rates is rather exceptional (e.g. Denmark, Luxembourg or Ireland). Also operational measures 

that foster demand for digital applications and high-speed internet access are relatively infrequent. 

Notably, some countries have held consultations on their draft national broadband plans. These in-

clude for instance the Czech Republic (“Digital Czech Republic”), France (“national programme for very 

high speed broadband”) and the Slovak Republic (“National Strategy for Broadband Access in the Slo-

vak Republic).28  

Table  5 (below) lists  the national broadband targets of the Member States  in comparison with the 

Digital Agenda targets. The following general observations can be made: 

  11 Member States surpass the DAE-2020 targets (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, 

Finland, Hungary, Germany, Luxembourg, Slovenia and Sweden), 

28 OECD countries with public consultation procedures prior to drafting their national broadband plans are: Canada (“Improving Canada’s 
Digital Advantage”), Ireland (“Next Generation Broadband”), Japan (“Path of light”), and the United States (“Connecting America: The Na-
tional Broadband Plan“) 

  45 

| Page 45 from 320 

 
                                                           
  14 Member States are convergent with the DAE-2020 targets (Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, 

Greece,  Ireland,  Italy,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Malta,  Netherlands,  Poland,  Portugal,  Slovakia  and 

Spain), 

  3 Member States fall short of meeting the DAE-2020 targets (Romania, France and the United 

Kingdom). 

  46 

| Page 46 from 320 

 
MS 

NBP-Targets 

National  vs. 

National 

MS 

NBP-Targets 

National 

National 

Austria 

99 % coverage with 100 Mbps until 2020 

Belgium 

50% connections with 1 Gbps by 2020 

Bulgaria 

100  %  coverage  with  30  Mbps  until  2020.  50  %  of  households  and  80  %  of  businesses 

subscribing >100 Mbps by 2020 

Croatia 

100  % coverage  with  30 Mbps  until  2020. 50 % HH penetration with  100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

Cyprus 

100  % coverage  with  30 Mbps  until  2020. 50 % HH penetration with  100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

Czech Republic 

100  % coverage with  30 Mbps until 2020. 50 % HH  penetration  with 100 MBps service 

until 2020 

Denmark 

100 % coverage with 100 Mbps download and 30 Mbps upload until 2020 

Estonia 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 60 % coverage with 100 Mbps until 2020 

Finland 

99 % of all permanent residences and offices should be located within 2 km of an optic 

fibre network or cable network that enables connections of 100 Mbps 

France 

Greece 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2022 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 50 % coverage with 100 Mbps until 2020 

Germany 

100 % coverage with 50 Mbps until 2018 

Hungary 

100  % coverage  with  30 Mbps  until  2018. 50 % HH penetration with  100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

Ireland 

100  % coverage  with  30 Mbps  until  2020. 50 % HH penetration with  100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

DAE  Target 

II 
++ 
N.A. 
= 
= 
= 
= 
++ 

+ 

++ 

- 
= 

+ 

+ 

= 

vs 

DAE 

Target III 

N.A. 

++ 

+ 

= 

= 

= 

N.A. 

+ 

N.A. 

N.A. 

= 

N.A. 

= 

= 

Italy 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 
Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

United  King-

dom 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 85 % HH coverage to reach 50 % penetration 

of 100Mbps services by 2020 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

100 % coverage with 1 Gbps until 2020 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service 

until 2020; 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

80 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 45 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 

96 % coverage with 100 Mbps, 4% coverage 30 Mbps until 2020. 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020. 50 % HH penetration with 100 Mbps service 

until 2020 

90 % coverage with 100 Mbps until 2020 

95 % coverage with superfast broadband (currently 24 Mbps) until 2017 

vs.  DAE 

Target II 
= 
= 
= 
++ 
= 
= 
= 

= 

- 

= 
++ 

= 

++ 

- 

vs.  DAE 

Target III 

= 

= 

= 

N.A. 

= 

= 

= 

= 

- 

N.A. 

N.A. 

= 

N.A. 

N.A. 

Table 5: Comparison of National Broadband Plans' targets vs. DAE 2020 targets 

Legend: “(+)+”(clearly surpasses) DAE targets; “=” convergent with DAE targets, “-“ does not meet DAE targets, “N.A.” not defined. Some Member States do not have targets on penetration/uptake (50 % of households having 100 Mbps subscriptions or higher) in their National Broadband 

Plans. Source: own compilation 

 
 
 
The following figure shows a visualization of the broadband targets of the Member States in compari-

son to the DAE connectivity targets. 

Figure 14 National vs DAE target II 

In contrast, if the DAE take-up target is being visualized, it is obvious, that a lot  of Member States 

refrain from defining take-up targets in their own broadband strategies. This however is to a certain 

| Page 48 from 320 

 
 
 
 
 
 
degree expectable as take-up is usually more difficult to incentivize than coverage. With usual means 

of intervention (e.g. grants for areas with market failure), take-up can only partially be influenced. 

Figure 15 National vs DAE target III 

| Page 49 from 320 

 
 
 
 
 
 
7.1.1  NBPs: Differing Approaches 

However, declared broadband targets in NBPs are, first and foremost, guideposts whose practical fea-

sibility and actual success will depend on the utilisation of appropriate means, including legal measures 

and financial resources. Therefore, it is of pivotal importance that Member States have the necessary 

resources and tools in place, rather than merely policy targets, to facilitate the effective roll-out of 

broadband infrastructure on their territories.  

For the actual implementation of the National Broadband Plans, the national (or regional governments 

in some cases) define a variety of measures. Often, the NBPs differ within two dimensions: operational 

and strategic NBPs. While strategic NBPs often describe intentions and targets at an abstract level, 

operational NBPs add indicators, responsibilities and timeframes to clarify their measures.  

Mainly Strategic Elements 

Mainly operational Elements 

AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK, EE, 

FR, EL, HU, IE, IT, LV, LT, PL, RO, 

FR, DE, LU, MT, NL, PT, SE, UK 

SK, SI, ES  

Table 6 Strategic vs operational elements in NBP 

Of course, a clear distinction between strategic and operational is usually not possible, as strategic 

NBPs include operational aspects and vice versa. From an evaluator’s perspective, NBPs with a strong 

focus on operational implementation are favourable. Especially the description of responsibilities and 

means of measurement are useful to find causalities and correlations. However, a majority of NBPs is 

characterized by strategic elements. They usually elaborate overall plans and measures without defin-

ing how they actually want to implement these measures. A full compilation of all NBP measures can 

be found in the annex of this study. 

7.1.2  Probabilities of Achievement 

Based on the current connectivity and take-up rates as well as the theoretical and practical implemen-

tation of the National Broadband Plans (to be examined within the following country sections), we 

expect the following probabilities for the EU-28 to achieve the DAE targets individually. We differenti-

ate  between  low  probability,  medium  probability,  high  probability  and  target  met  to  classify  each 

country. Please note that we included the most relevant mobile and fixed technologies. It is, however, 

well possible that, as an alternative technology, satellite connections could be available that can relia-

bly  offer 30 Mbps  and more  by 2020. This could at  least generally validate  the second DAE target. 

| Page 50 from 320 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
However, satellite based technologies are currently not well accepted and represent only a niche prod-

uct. 

30 Mbps coverage / 100% HHs 

by 2020 

100 Mbps take-up 50% by 2020 

National target 

(if applicable) 

Probability as-

EU-28 MS 

Probability assessment 

Probability assessment 

sesssment 

AT 

BE 

BG 

CY 

CZ 

DE 

DK 

EE 

ES 

FI 

FR 

EL 

HR 

HU 

IE 

IT 

LT 

LU 

LV 

medium probability 

high probability 

low probability 

medium probability 

low probability 

medium probability 

medium probability 

high probability 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

high probability 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

medium probability 

low probability 

low probability 

medium probability29 

medium probability 

N/A 

N/A 

medium probability 

low probability 

low probability 

medium probability 

N/A 

medium probability 

medium probability 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

medium probability 

N/A 

N/A 

medium probability 

medium probability 

medium probability 

low probability 

low probability 

high probability 

high probability 

medium probability 

low probability 

medium probability 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

low probability 

medium probability 

medium probability 

medium probability 

MT 

target met 

NL 

PL 

PT 

RO 

SE 

SI 

SK 

high probability 

low probability 

medium probability 

medium probability 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

29 80 % of businesses subscribing to 100 Mbps or more 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

medium probability 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

medium probability 

medium probability 

medium probability 

medium probability 

low probability 

low probability 

low probability 

N/A 

| Page 51 from 320 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
30 Mbps coverage / 100% HHs 

by 2020 

100 Mbps take-up 50% by 2020 

National target 

(if applicable) 

Probability as-

EU-28 MS 

Probability assessment 

Probability assessment 

sesssment 

UK 

medium probability 

low probability 

medium probability 

Table 7 Probability of achievement of DAE targets in MS 

As shown above, regarding the DAE targets, the achievement of full NGA coverage is less problematic 

than 50 % household ultrafast take-up. Several countries are already close to 100 % NGA coverage and 

some have a high probability to eventually meet the targets (NL, LU, EE, BE). However, the majority 

will struggle to come close to the target. In some cases (e.g. DE, FR, PL, IT), it will be decisive, how well 

the national and/or European funds will be used for market initialization in areas of market failure. 

Concerning the take-up targets, we expect only few countries to come close to the 50 % household 

market penetration. We expect BG, LV, PT, RO and SE at the forefront of achieving the target  or at 

least coming close to it. 

7.2  Broadband Development in Practice: Member State Reports 

In what follows, Member States’ national broadband strategies shall be analysed on a case-by-case 

basis. As there are only very few countries among the EU-28 that maintain a single strategy document 

as point of reference, there are a variety of documents throughout Europe that were included within 

the  upcoming  chapter.  Hence,  the  synopses  presented  below  draw  upon  multiple  sources.  These 

sources, which are predominantly pertinent official documents, vary rather remarkably in content and 

scope. Some NBPs are very comprehensive and specific, others merely state ambitions or targets. Ta-

ble 8 lists these main guiding documents we took into consideration for analysis of each and every 

country.  

After having reviewed key features of the NBPs, the practical implementation process is examined for 

each Member State, taking into consideration issues such as steering modalities, convergence of net-

works and the role of mobile and satellite technologies, funding and financing instruments, cost-re-

duction  measures,  GIS/mapping  tools,  and  notable  roll-out  projects.  Often,  these  practical  assess-

ments are based on unofficial discussions with key stakeholders in each country and own expertise. 

Each Member State report closes with an evaluation, a comparison between targets and actual per-

formance, and an assessment of the feasibility of meeting the DAE requirements.  

| Page 52 from 320 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Country 

Year NBP 

was adopted 

Austria (p. 52-56) 

Belgium (p. 57-60) 

Bulgaria (p. 61-65) 

Croatia (p. 66-69) 

Cyprus (p. 70-74) 

Czech Republic (p. 75-79) 

Denmark (p. 80-84) 

Estonia (p. 85-88) 

2014 

2015 

2014 

2011 

2016 

2013 

2013 

2014 

Title 

Broadband Strategy 2020 (Breitbandstrategie 2020) 

Digital Belgium – Plan for Ultrafast Internet in Belgium (2015-2020) (Digital Belgium, Plan Voor Ultrasnel Internet in Belgie) 

National Broadband Infrastructure Plan Next Generation Access Plan (2014-2020) and corresponding Roadmap 

Strategy for Broadband Development in the Republic of Croatia for 2012-2015 / Updated Version:  Broadband development strategy 2016-2020 

Cyprus Broadband Plan 2016 – 2020 

Digital Czech Republic V.2.0 the way to the digital economy (Digitální Česko v. 2.0 Cesta k digitální ekonomice Note) 

e.g. Digital Growth Policy Statement / the action plan “Better broadband and mobile coverage in Denmark” Note: no single reference NBP available 

Digital Agenda 2020 for Estonia 

Finland (p.89-93) 

2008/2011  National broadband strategy/ Digital Agenda for 2011-2020 

France (p. 94-98) 

Germany (p. 99-103) 

Greece (p. 104-108) 

Hungary (p. 109-112) 

2015 

2014 

2015 

2014 

France Very High Speed (France Très Haut Débit) 

Digital Agenda 2014-2017 (Digitale Agenda 2014-2017)  

National Plan Next Generation Broadband Access 2014-2020 

National Infocommunication Strategy 2014-2020 

Ireland (p. 113-117) 

2012/2015  National Broadband Plan 2012 / the updated Intervention Strategy 2015 

Italy (p. 118-123) 

2015 

Strategia italiana per la banda ultralarga (“Piano nazionale banda ultra larga”) 

Latvia (p. 124-128) 

Lithuania (p. 129-132) 

Luxembourg (p. 133-137) 

Malta (p. 138-142) 

2012 

2014 

2010 

2014 

The conception of next generation broadband electronic communication network development 2013-2020 (Nākamās paaudzes platjoslas elektronisko 

sakaru tīklu attīstības koncepcija 2013-2020 gadam) 

Plan for the Next Generation of Internet Development for 2014- 2020 in Republic of Lithuania 

National strategy for very highspeed networks – Very highspeed broadband for all 

Digital Malta 2014 – 2020 

Netherlands (p. 143-148) 

2011/2016  Digital Agenda Netherlands (ICT voor innovatie en economische groei)  /  Digitale Agenda - Vernieuwen, Vertrouwen, Versnellen 

Poland (p. 149-153) 

2014 

Polish National Broadband Plan (2014) 

 
 
Portugal (p. 154-158) 

2015 

Agenda Portugal Digital (Diário da República, 1.ª série —N.º 74 — 16 de abril de 2015) 

Romania (p. 159-164) 

2015 

Slovakia (p. 165-170) 

Slovenia (p. 171-175) 

Spain (p. 176-182) 

2014 

2016 

2013 

Sweden (p. 183-187) 

2009/2011 

Government Decision HG 414/2015 (Romanian Program for the implementation of the National Plan for NGN infrastructure development) and 245/2015  

(National Strategy on Digital Agenda for Romania) 

Strategic document for Digital Growth and Next Generation Access Infrastructure 2014-2020 (including the new government notes) 

Plan for the development of next generation broadband networks until 2020 (updated in March 2016) 

The Digital Agenda for Spain - Telecommunications and Ultra-fast Networks Plan 

Broadband Strategy for Sweden / Swedish Digital Agenda (IT i Människans Tjänst - en digital agenda för Sverige)  Updated version: Sweden fully connec-

ted 2025 - A broadband strategy (Sverige helt uppkopplat 2025 - en bredbandsstrategi) 

United Kingdom (p. 188-194)  2015 

UK Next Generation Network Infrastructure Deployment Plan (March 2015), digital communications infrastructure strategy 

Table 8 NBPs in MS - main documents 

 
 
7.2.1  Austria 

Austria facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Federation (federal parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

8,576,261 (1.69 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

103.6 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

83,879 km2 (2.07 % of EU)III  

Largely mountainous country (Alps, only 32 % below 500 

meters) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

A1 Telekom Austria: 58 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

89 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

24.59 EUR30 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 9 Austria facts & figures 

30 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons   

  55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.1.1  Key Features 

Austria’s National Broadband Plan (NBP) 

“Breitbandstrategie  2020”31  is  generally 

National Broadband Plan of Austria: key facts 

in  line  with  the  DAE  targets  and  super-

Main strategic 

Breitbandstrategie 2020 

sedes them in several aspects. The  Aus-

document(s): 

trian government’s aim is to achieve 70 % 

coverage of ultrafast-broadband (defined 

as  100  Mbps  downstream)  until  2018, 

coupled  with  a  99  %  coverage  of  ultra-

Targets: 

  99  %  coverage  with  100 

Mbps  by  2020  /  70  %  until 

2018 

fast-broadband for all households in Aus-

Identical to DAE-

No (more ambitious coverage 

tria until 2020. In addition, Austrian offi-

Targets: 

target) 

cials  have  devised  supplementary  docu-

Table 10 NBP Austria key facts 

ments.  

These include a planning guide (“Planungsleitfaden Breitbandausbau”32), clarifying technical issues in-

volved in infrastructure roll-out and a generic implementation plan (“Masterplan zur Breitbandförder-

ung”33), specifying the funding and financing time frame and instruments (e.g. laying empty ducts in 

areas with market failure). 

Parts of the national broadband plan are several state aid programmes (“Broadband Austria 2020 Ac-

cess”, “Broadband Austria 2020 Backhaul”, “Broadband Austria 2020 empty ducts funding”, “Broad-

band  Austria 2020  AT:net”)  that  shall  bridge  the  digital  divide  between  urban and  rural  areas. The 

funding programmes also allow for mobile technologies (e.g. LTE/5G). Austria is planning partial rein-

vestments of the proceeds from the digital dividend. In addition, Austria has set up a broadband com-

petence centre in early 2013. It functions as a coordination and service centre for municipalities, cities, 

states and operators. Furthermore, the Austrian NBP identifies the need for an infrastructure database 

31 Available online (German version): https://www.bmvit.gv.at/service/publikationen/telekommunikation/downloads/breitbandstrate-
gie2020.pdf 

32 Available online (German version): https://www.bmvit.gv.at/service/publikationen/telekommunikation/downloads/planungsleit-
faden2015.pdf 

33 Available online (German version): https://www.bmvit.gv.at/service/publikationen/telekommunikation/downloads/breitbandoffen-
sive.pdf 

  56 

 
 
                                                           
(“Baumaßnahmendatenbank”) for planned works, ideally connected with the broadband atlas and the 

fibre optic cadastre (“Glasfaserkataster”). 

There  are  regional  broadband  plans  that  differ  from  the  NBP.  Upper  Austria  for  example  aims  for  

100 % ultrafast-broadband until 2022. Upper Austria’s own state aid programmes include special fund-

Main Challenges for NGA-rollout in Austria: 

ing for small-scale projects and FTTH-projects.  

  Number of available ducts 

In  sum,  Austria  opts  for  a  market-driven  network 

  Coordination regarding In-house cabling 
(within spheres of influence of two min-
istries) might need improvement 

  Emphasis  on  mobile  networks  to  be  a 
complement rather than a substitute 

roll-out  and  intends  to  confine  the  use  of  public 

funds  to  where  they  are  absolutely  necessary,  in 

particular, for the rural areas with the least chance 

of  benefiting  from  private  sector-based  invest-

  Harmonization  as  regional  targets  and 

ments. While the Austrian Broadband Plan is quite 

aspects differ 

comprehensive,  it  does  not  specify  investment 

  Possibly  extension  of  the  funding  pro-
gramme needed to achieve the target in 
rural Austria 

needs.  

  Enhancement  of  Infrastructure  based 

competition in rural areas 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  BMVIT 

bottom-up 

 

Federal Broadband Bureau 

  Austrian Regulatory Authority for Broad-

casting and Telecommunications  

  Regional/state authorities 

Figure 16 Organizational Steering & Main Players Austria 

7.2.1.3  Feasibility Assessment 

Austria’s National Broadband Plan target can considered to be very ambitious, especially in European 

comparison. As a consequence, there is a low probability that the target of 99 % coverage with 100 

Mbps downlink will be met by 2020. Concerning the DAE targets, a medium probability to achieve the 

  57 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
coverage target is seen as well as a low probability to achieve the take-up target. There are several 

reasons for this assessment. 

Generally, Austria is performing really well concerning total NGA coverage (88.8 %). Coverage in rural 

areas, however, is slightly lagging behind EU average (20.8 % vs. 27.8 %). Given Austria’s difficult moun-

tainous topography and rather low population density, which considerably increases the cost of de-

ployment, gaps regarding rural coverage are obviously to be expected. The current funding program 

provides important financial means for broadband roll-out, but NGA deployment in the remaining rural 

areas will be extremely burdensome. In this regard, further increasing the number of ducts and possi-

bly  distribution network infrastructures  to promote  infrastructure-based competition in rural areas 

will be crucial for reaching countrywide NGA coverage.  Moreover, the Austrian telecommunication 

market is characterized by fierce price competition. Prices for NGA connections are relatively low (Aus-

trians  spend  roughly  1.3  %  of  the  median  income  for  the  subscription of  the  cheapest  NGA  tariff), 

which is generally positive for consumers and not necessarily a major hindrance for NGA roll-out, but 

also entails the risk of hampering incentives for investment. While Austria has good chances to over-

come these problems regarding the DAE coverage target, reaching the much more ambitious national 

target will be more difficult.  

Concerning take-up, we calculated that currently 2.24 % of Austrian households subscribe to connec-

tions with 100 Mbps or more. However, Austria has extremely high growth rates for ultrafast subscrip-

tions (71 %), showing that it is still possible to reach the DAE take-up target. Nevertheless, it is currently 

uncertain whether this trend will persist as the current trend towards “mobile broadband only” could 

dampen demand for ultrafast fixed connections at some point. Moreover, if the strong demand for 

ultrafast connections persists, incentives for investment in ultrafast technologies such as FTTP will be 

crucial to ensure that this strong demand can be satisfied accordingly. 

With its NBP, a funding programme worth roughly EUR 1 Billion enabling investments in access and 

backhaul networks as well as ducts, and a relatively high overall NGA coverage, Austria is already in a 

very good position regarding future broadband expansion. The public funds will play an important role 

in getting closer to the targets. Furthermore, there are publicly managed special purpose vehicles that 

deploy passive infrastructure, especially in rural areas. Some regions within Austria (e.g. Lower Austria) 

are bound to deploy FTTH-architectures, which is in favour of the national strategy (although at a dif-

fering timeframe, in this case 2030). In order to further increase coverage and take-up alike, especially, 

additional demand stimulation/aggregation and funding will be important to incentivize investments 

in areas where market failure can be expected. Although mobile networks are an important aspect of 

  58 

 
 
connectivity in Austria and elsewhere, it should be stressed that mobile networks are more of a com-

plement to fixed networks rather than a substitute.   

The current NBP already gives a well-defined strategic focus. Hence, incorporating a somewhat more 

operational dimension into its NBP, thereby providing more concrete measures on how to tackle the 

aforementioned issues, could be beneficial to master future challenges.  

  59 

 
 
 
 
7.2.2  Belgium 

Belgium facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Federation (constitutional popular monarchy and federal 

Population:  

11,258,434 (2.22 % of EU)I 

parliamentary democracy) 

Population density:  

370.3 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

30,528 km2 (0.75 % of EU)III  

Coastal plain in the north-west, central plateau and uplands 

in the south (Ardennes) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Proximus (including Scarlet): 46 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

99 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

23.39 EUR34 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 11 Belgium facts & figures 

34 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons  

  60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.2.1  Key Features 
Belgium’s  National  Broadband  Plan  is 

part of a broader policy strategy called 

National Broadband Plan of Belgium: key facts 

“Digital Belgium – Plan for Ultrafast In-

Main strategic 

Digital Belgium – Plan for Ultrafast 

ternet  in  Belgium  2015  –  2020”.35  The 

document(s): 

Internet in Belgium (2015 – 2020) 

goal is to achieve a take-up rate of 50 % 

(Digital Belgium, Plan Voor Ultras-

of households with 1 Gbps until 2020. In 

nel Internet in Belgie) 

this  sense,  the  Belgian  broadband  tar-

gets exceed the DAE objectives. 

Belgium delineated four areas of action 

in the plan:  

1)  common strategic vision of the 

roll-out of ultrafast internet,  

2)  broadband for everyone,  

Targets: 

  50 % HH penetration with 1 

Gbps by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

No (more ambitious take up tar-

Targets: 

get) 

Table 12 NBP Belgium key facts 

3)  lower costs of building networks and  

4)  creating a dynamic ecosystem.  

In  the  first  action  area  (common  strategic vision of 

the  roll-out  of  ultrafast  internet),  measures  include 

the  mapping  of  existing  network  coverage,  stake-

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out in Belgium: 

  More  diversification  of  technologies 
(FTTB/FTTH in addition to HFC) needed 

holder meetings, a stable framework for network in-

  Facilitation  of  permit  gathering  proce-

vestments,  and  lowering  the  thresholds  for  rolling 

dures 

out  mobile  broadband.  The  second  action  area 

(broadband for everyone) involves the development 

  Establishing of a centrally administrated 
infrastructure mapping tool could prove 
useful 

of  policy  guidelines  for  network  roll-out,  mobile 

  Taxation on network deployment might 

broadband as an alternative to fixed lines, stimulat-

ing  WLAN  roll-out,  informing  about  broadband  via 

satellite and giving priority to providing public insti-

need revision 

 

Improvement  of  coordination  between 
national, regional and local level needed 

tutions with ultrafast internet. In the third action area (lower costs of building networks) Belgium aims 

at lowering costs in infrastructure roll-out projects inter alia by establishing a central counter for li-

censes, carrying out roadworks jointly, using existing infrastructure and introducing guides to in-house 

35 Available online (English version): http://www.decroo.belgium.be/en/plan-ultrafast-internet-belgium 

  61 

 
 
                                                           
cabling (e.g. preparing for fibre optic) for new buildings or renovation plans. Action area four (dynamic 

ecosystem) emphasizes innovation and competition. 

Belgium intends to establish a 5G framework as a complementary technology to fixed lines and as a 

means to foster future IoT36 connectivity. There seem to be no state aid programmes for roll-out avail-

able. Neither does the Broadband Plan state needed or planned investments. Yet, the Belgian govern-

ment  commits  to  reducing  administrative  burdens  and  costs  of  deployment  of  ICT  infrastructures. 

There are no regional broadband plans in Belgium. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered top-

  Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of 

down 

Development Cooperation, Digital 

Agenda, Telecom and Postal Service 

 

FPS Economy, S.M.E.s, Self-employ-

ment and Energy 

  Belgian Institute for Postal Services and 

Telecommunications  

  Regional & local authorities 

Figure 17 Organizational Steering & Main Players Belgium 

7.2.2.2  Feasibility Assessment 

Overall, despite having one of the most ambitious targets in Europe, it is certainly realistic for Belgium 

to reach its NBP target. Hence, it is presumed that there is a medium probability that Belgium will 

achieve its penetration target of 50 % households subscribing to 1 Gbps or more by 2020. In case of 

Belgium, NGA coverage is not an issue. There are widespread cable networks available that (accompa-

nied by FTTC in urban areas) offer NGA coverage of already nearly 100 %. After an expected upgrade 

to the new standard DOCSIS 3.1 in the upcoming years, marketed bandwidths will be sufficient to po-

tentially reach the target. Moreover, at the end of 2016, the incumbent telecom operator Proximus 

has announced an investment project to accelerate the roll-out of FTTH in the coming 10 years. How-

ever, it is at least questionable whether take-up will be high enough. Whilst Belgium already has a 

36 Internet of things 

  62 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
comparably household penetration rate of 22.7 % with 100 Mbps or more, overall fixed broadband 

growth rates are rather low (1.1 %), which could hamper achieving the target. Therefore, only sub-

scribers upgrading their connections can be a potential source for achieving the target. A substantial 

growth for higher bandwidths is currently seen (within NGA subscriptions), but still a stronger focus 

on the demand side is recommended. At the same time, Belgium has to make sure that the existing 

networks will be upgraded.  

Concerning the DAE targets, Belgium is well on the track. 100 % NGA coverage is nearly achieved (99 

%), therefore a high probability to meet the target by 2020 is presumed. Concerning the take-up tar-

get, we conclude that Belgium also has a high probability to meet the target, given the current growth 

for ultrafast connections (nearly 100 % from 2014 to 2015). 

Belgium ranks in the top group regarding broadband connectivity in Europe. The overall circumstances 

within the Belgian broadband market are highly in favor of a market driven NGA deployment. There 

are few aspects the NBP could actually improve. In its current version, the Belgian NBP follows a rather 

strategic approach with few concrete measures. However, it addresses the most pressing problems 

that  should  be  solved.  There  is  some  room  for  improvement  especially  in  the  coordination  of  civil 

works, which is a competence of the regions and the municipalities. Particularly, a better developed 

centrally  administered  infrastructure  mapping  tool  and  a  one-stop  shop  for  permit  granting  might 

prove to be helpful, especially considering the fact that future competition will be between newly de-

ployed FTTB/FTTH technologies and cable networks with a diminishing role of FTTC in the long run. 

However, costs of deployment will be a main factor for FTTP to be able to replace current FTTC tech-

nologies and thus to compete with the NGA-first mover cable. Therefore, any concrete measures to 

increase coordination, transparency concerning infrastructures or decrease costs of transaction will be 

crucial to facilitate the roll-out of ultra-fast networks even further. 

  63 

 
 
 
 
7.2.3  Bulgaria 

Bulgaria facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary democracy) 

Population:  

7,202,198 (1.42 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

66.3 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

110,370 km2 (0.27 % of EU)III  

Northern lowlands (Danube plain), highlands in the south 

(Balkan and Rhodope Mountains) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Vivacom: 24 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

72 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

13.23 EUR37 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 13 Bulgaria facts & figures 

37 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  64 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.3.1  Key Features 

The 

Bulgarian 

government 

had 

launched its initial broadband strategy 

National Broadband Plan of Bulgaria: key facts 

in  November  2009.  In  2014,  a  new 

Main strategic 

National Broadband Infrastruc-

broadband  strategy  “National  Broad-

document(s): 

ture for Next Generation Access 

band  Infrastructure  for  Next  Genera-

tion Access Plan” came into force with 

the Decision No. 435 of  the  Council of 

Ministers  (COM)  from  26  June  2014.38 

The  strategy  sets  broadband  targets, 

which  are  in  line  with  the DAE:  100  % 

coverage with 30 Mbps until 2020, and 

50 % take-up rate for 100 Mbps. 

Furthermore,  Bulgaria targets an 80 % 

take-up rate (100 Mbps) for businesses 

until  2020,  which  supersedes  the  DAE 

2020  requirements.  Bulgaria’s  broad-

band plan defines six investment prior-

Plan (2014 – 2020); 

Roadmap for the implementation 

of the National Broadband Infra-

structure for Next Generation Ac-

cess Plan 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020  

  50 % of households and 80 % 

of businesses subscribing 

>100 Mbps by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

Yes (a more ambitious take up tar-

Targets: 

get for  businesses) 

ity areas that reflect its broadband tar-

Table 14 NBP Bulgaria key facts 

get  structure  and  envisage  different 

measures for “white”, “grey“ and “black 

areas”. 

These are:  

1)  development of existing cable access networks,  

2)  building FTTx optical cable access networks,  

3)  introduction and development of wireless NGA technologies,  

4)  development of optical and wireless broadband access connectivity with speeds exceeding 30 

Mbps (“last mile”),  

38 Available online (English Version): http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=7487 

  65 

 
 
 
                                                           
5)  development of optical and wireless connectivity for ultrafast broadband access with speeds 

exceeding 100 Mbps to business organisations (“last mile“),  

6)  development of optical ultrafast  broadband access  connectivity with speeds exceeding 100 

Mbps to public institutions in the country (“last mile“).  

Furthermore, the  Bulgarian NBP states that mobile, wireless  or  satellite technology may be  used  if 

these networks are able to provide next generation access services. In addition, the NBP commits to 

providing free access in public spaces and to co-use electronic communication infrastructures, with 

the objective of facilitating network-related works. In order to stimulate demand, Bulgaria inter alia 

opts for increasing the availability of digital public services. 

In terms of investments, the Bulgarian NBP states that approximately BGN 234 million (ca. EUR 120 

million) will be necessary to invest in “white” areas, and about BGN 54 million (ca. EUR 27.7 million)   

in “grey” areas. These calculations are based on a certain set of assumptions. In particular, the NBP 

states  that  settlement  areas  will  be  treated  differently  with  respect  to  network  deployment  tech-

nique(s):  

 

 

 

for settlements with a population up to 100 inhabitants, connectivity will be provided through 

radio-relay systems that ensure speeds of up to 300 Mbps,  

for settlements with a population from 100 to 3000 people, optical infrastructures of mixed 

type topology (linear, star) will be established and  

for settlements with a population of over 3000 people, optical star topology infrastructures 

will be developed. 

Main Challenges for NGA-rollout in Bulgaria: 

  Ongoing market consolidation may bring 

macroeconomic advantages 

 

 

Improvement  of  digital  literacy,  skills 
and inclusion needed 

LTE  coverage  in  rural  areas  needs  im-
provement 

  Stronger  involvement  of  local  authori-

ties advisable 

  Strong digital divide 

 

Increase in NGA take-up needed 

The NBP quantifies the investment needs in differ-

ent types of settlements; however, it does not spec-

ify the available budgetary sources. After achieving 

the necessary clarity regarding the available finan-

cial resources, a roadmap39 stipulating the relevant 

national  and  European  sources  of  funding  for  the 

plan to be implemented was added. 

39 https://www.mtitc.government.bg/upload/docs/2016-04/roadmap_Bulgarian_final_stages_10.032015.pdf 

  66 

 
 
 
                                                           
European funding, especially from ERDF and EARDF, which in the past has been already used to estab-

lish a national backhaul network and to connect rural areas, constitutes one of the main sources of 

funding in Bulgaria. For the current funding period (2014-2020), EUR 30 million from EARDF alone were 

allocated exclusively to the development of ultra-fast networks. Moreover, small scale national state 

aid is available in cooperation with local authorities. Public-private partnerships form an integral part 

of the national strategy (with differing roles of the public entities).   

Overall, Bulgaria’s NBP highlights the importance of private investments for achieving a countrywide 

roll-out of high-end ICT infrastructures. There are no regional broadband plans and municipal devel-

opment plans usually do not address broadband either. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Transport, Information Tech-

top-down 

nology and Communications and E-Gov-

ernment State Agency40 

 

Communications Regulation Commission 

(CRC) 

Figure 18 Organizational Steering & Main Players Bulgaria 

7.2.3.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Bulgaria’s NBP targets will be challenging. A medium probability to achieve the 

national target of 80 % of businesses subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020 is presumed.  More 

than 72 % of enterprises already have a fixed broadband connection of which 13. 8 % are currently 

subscribing to 100 Mbps or more.41 Considering the high growth rate of such connections (see below), 

reaching the national target is cumbersome, but not impossible. The other national targets are in line 

with the DAE targets.  

40 This agency was set up only very recently and will be responsible for eGovernment and broadband infrastructure-related issues. It replaces 
the former Executive Agency “Electronic Communication Networks and Information Society” 
41 http://www.nsi.bg/sites/default/files/files/pressreleases/ICT_ent2016_en_RHVBRZ8.pdf 

  67 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Concerning the DAE coverage target, the probability of achievement is low. NGA coverage is currently 

roughly 71.8 % (EU average 70.9 %). The main source of this coverage is existing cable network infra-

structure. Within urban areas, there is a widespread availability of such networks provided by alterna-

tive operators. The market share of alternative operators in Bulgaria even ranks among the highest in 

the EU, illustrating the vibrant nature of the Bulgarian market. The incumbent competes with these 

networks via the deployment of FTTP technologies. As a result, there is potent infrastructure based 

competition within urban areas and Bulgaria reaches an overall NGA coverage above EU-average. How-

ever, in rural areas, there is considerably less competition. Here, copper-based infrastructures are still 

dominant. Even though Bulgaria made considerable efforts, creating incentives for the deployment of 

new infrastructures as well as providing public funding, fully covering these areas is an extremely dif-

ficult task. Therefore, coverage is the main challenge Bulgaria will face in the next few years. The situ-

ation is further complicated by a low demand from a substantial part of the population (34 % have 

never used the internet). As a result, also LTE coverage is relatively low in these areas. Thus, we see a 

severe digital divide between urban areas, where high-end infrastructures compete and rural areas, 

where establishing overall fixed and mobile NGA connectivity still remains a challenge.  

Concerning the DAE take-up target, the expected probability of achievement is rather low. Relatively 

high-end customer prices (roughly 5 % of the monthly median income is spend for the lowest NGA 

tariff, despite the fact that the absolute numbers are low in European comparison) are seen, which 

might be a hindrance for further take-up and subsequently roll-out. However, although take-up rates 

will probably not rise fast enough to reach the target, there are several factors providing for a generally 

more positive outlook. FTTP and cable dominates NGA in Bulgaria, which leads to a solid basis for high-

level connectivity. Although calculated household penetration (100 Mbps) is relatively low (2.88 %), 

there is substantial growth concerning these ultrafast speeds (+ 48.45 % between 2014 and 2015). 

These arguments are even more relevant regarding the national target. Generally, businesses are more 

likely  to  take-up  higher  bandwidths  and  are  usually  more  concentrated  within  urban  areas,  which 

should increase the probability of achievement, leading to a medium probability for the national tar-

get as mentioned above. 

The current NBP acknowledges the problem of a digital divide, but prioritises the development of cable 

networks (which are mainly available in urban areas). However, the second priority focuses on FTTx 

networks in white and grey areas to address the digital divide. The NBP tries to establish PPP-models 

to mitigate the risk for deployment within rural areas, which were already successful in some cases. 

Despite the fact that Bulgaria’s NBP stresses the importance of local actors, there seems to be room 

for improvement. Demand aggregation through inter-communal cooperation could happen on a larger 

  68 

 
 
scale. Furthermore, costs of deployment should come down further, if the digital divide ought to be 

decreased. As a demand side measure, tax deductions exist for the use of ICT. Considering the compa-

rably high prices for NGA access, tax deductions to incentivize a larger portion of households to take 

up higher bandwidths is a crucial aspect, but should be accompanied by additional measures. Gener-

ally, Bulgaria established a substantial and sound plan for broadband development, which will make a 

significant contribution to the country’s broadband development and overall economic and social sit-

uation, especially considering  the  focus  on  a  business-related  target,  thereby  creating  a  solid  basis 

upon which future measures and initiatives can be built.  

  69 

 
 
 
 
7.2.4  Croatia 

Croatia facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

4,225,316 (0.83 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

74.9 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

56,694 km2 (1.4 % of EU)III  

Adriatic Basin with 1,246 islands, mountain chain along the 

coast (Dinaric Alps), Pannonian Basin in the east 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

T-Hrvatski Telekom: 51 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

52 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

37.08 EUR42 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 15 Croatia facts & figures  

42 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  70 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.4.1  Key Features 

Croatia  has  formulated  a  “Strategy 

for  Broadband  Development  in  the 

National Broadband Plan of Croatia: key facts 

Republic of Croatia for 2012 – 2015” 

Main strategic 

Strategy for Broadband Development 

published by the government in Oc-

document(s): 

in the Republic of Croatia for 2012 – 

tober  2011.44  Croatia’s  overall 

broadband  objectives  are  conver-

gent with the DAE (100 % coverage 

with 30 Mbps until 2020; 50 % take-

up rate for 100 Mbps).  

The  “National  Framework  Pro-

gramme  for  the  Development  of 

Broadband  Infrastructure  in  Areas 

Lacking Sufficient Commercial Inter-

2015 / Updated Version:  Broadband 

development strategy 2016-2020)43 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 

2020 

  50 % HH penetration with 100 

Mbps service by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

Targets: 

est  for  Investments”  accompanies  

Table 16 NBP Croatia key facts  

the National Broadband Plan (NBP).45 The framework document establishes the procedures for state 

aid and public deployment of ICT infrastructures in access networks. In addition, the document outlines 

several possible investment models: 

  Model A: private design, build, operate with public grants,  

  Model B: public design, build, operate,  

  Model C: public-private partnership.  

In underserved areas, the Croatian NBP suggests ensuring broadband access by applying mobile com-

munication  technologies,  such  as  UMTS,  LTE  and  WiMAX.  Concerning  lowering  costs,  the  Croatian 

strategy inter alia envisions infrastructure sharing and access to infrastructure mapping systems in the 

context of network  roll-out  projects. Besides measures  for facilitating the  availability of broadband 

access,  Croatia  commits  to  implement  measures  for encouraging  the  demand  for  fast  networks  by 

citizens and businesses. 

43 In 2016, the Croatian government published an updated version of the NBP this study is based on. See (Croatian version) 
http://www.mppi.hr/UserDocsImages/Strategija-sirokopojasni-pristup2016-2020-usvojeno%20na%20VRH.pdf 

44 Available online (English Version): http://www.mppi.hr/UserDocsImages/w%20StrategyBB%205_12.pdf 

45 http://www.mppi.hr/UserDocsImages/MPPI_Okvirni_program_NGA_BB_prenotification-EN_v4_17072014.pdf 

  71 

 
 
 
                                                           
In terms of funding, the Croatian NBP states that HRK 652.5 million (ca. EUR 83.5 million) were neces-

sary to achieve 1,000,000 fixed broadband connec-

tions  by  2013.  Another  HRK  900  million  (EUR  120 

Main Challenges for NGA-rollout in Croatia: 

Mio) were allocated to achieve 500,000 fibre-based 

broadband  connections  by  2015.  More  generally, 

 

Increase of NGA coverage and percent-
age of ultrafast connections needed 

  Possibly extension of national funding to 

Croatia envisages the use of EU and national funds 

achieve the targets 

in  regions,  which  operators  deem  to  be  economi-

  Further FTTP deployment  

cally  non-viable.  100  %  aid  intensity  is  possible. 

  Establishing  an  infrastructure-mapping 

State aid intensity is the highest in rural areas if ex-

tool  

isting infrastructures can be upgraded. State aid for 

mobile  technologies  is  possible  as  well.  Currently 

  Comparably  high  prices  for  NGA  sub-

scriptions 

there is a state aid programme for backhaul networks under development. In Croatia, there are no 

regional broadband plans available. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered top-

  Ministry of the Sea, Transport and In-

down 

frastructure (Directorate for Air Traffic, 

Electronic Communications and Postal 

services) 

 

The Croatian Regulatory Authority for 

Network Industries (HAKOM) 

Figure 19 Organizational Steering & Main Players Croatia 

7.2.4.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Croatia’s NBP targets is challenging. Concerning the coverage target (100 % cov-

erage with 30 Mbps by 2020), we estimate that despite the efforts and progress made in Croatia, there 

is only a low probability that this target can actually be met as there are several factors, some of which 

beyond the government’s or other actors’ sphere of influence, which make broadband roll-out in Cro-

atia particularly difficult. The current NGA coverage in Croatia is 52 % and there is a serious digital 

divide. Topographic (mountainous areas) and demographic challenges alike lead to economically not 

feasible areas. Furthermore, several indicators (26.24 % of “non-liners”, only 65.8 % of the population 

  72 

 
 
 
 
 
 
uses the internet on a regular basis) show that demand is not strong enough and hereby creates un-

certainty concerning new investments in NGA networks. Hence, also wireless solutions are not able to 

constitute an appropriate alternative to fixed NGA networks in many areas.  

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), we also 

conclude that there is a low probability that Croatia will meet the target. We calculated that currently 

0.12 % of households fulfil this criterion. On the plus side, there is a massive growth of subscriptions 

with 100 Mbps or more (5,277 % from 2014 to 2015), but one has to observe the low baseline (in 2014 

100 Mbps and more had a market share of slightly more than 0.00 %, while in 2015 the market share 

was 0.19 %). Therefore, it is difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from the current growth rate and 

even if this trend continues, it will probably be difficult for supply to keep up with demand in short 

future. However, as said before, demand in general is an issue that inhibits higher take-up rates. One 

obvious factor that negatively impacts the demand side is affordability. In Croatia, NGA subscriptions 

consume roughly 9 % of the median income -  the highest value in the EU (EU average 3 %).  

Until 2010, Croatia’s incumbent deployed FTTH GPON networks but then switched to VDSL deploy-

ment. As a result, only few FTTP connections exist and xDSL technologies are still dominant in Croatia. 

However, cable operators became the main source of NGA connectivity during the last couple of years, 

forcing the incumbent to invest in FTTP and fibre based VDSL again in order to compete with DOCSIS 

providers. 

Croatia’s NBP has been updated in 2016. The previous NBP (2012 – 2015) was rather strategic than 

operational, outlining general statements on the importance of broadband. Measures, responsibilities 

and monitoring tools were rather vague regarding some fields of intervention. However, the NBP had 

a rather extensive section on the demand side, describing the advantages of broadband for end cus-

tomers and activities to foster them (e.g. e-Government, involvement of stakeholders). In this regard, 

the lack of demand for NGA services had been identified as one of the issues in Croatia.  

Whilst the 2012 – 2015 version of the NBP laid the foundation by providing clear strategic guidance, 

the recently adopted updated version can considered to be much more operational and therefore has 

great potential to tackle the biggest challenges of affordability and availability. The current version has 

a stronger focus on the supply side and also contains an action plan. Hence, it is much more specific 

regarding the definition of concrete measures, responsibilities and monitoring mechanisms. Actions 

include the establishment of a central infrastructure cadastre and measures to decrease the cost of 

deployment. In this regard, the transposition of the cost reduction directive, which has been realized 

at the end of 2016, plays a crucial role. Moreover, stronger support for regional/local self-government 

  73 

 
 
units in the launching and preparation of broadband projects is foreseen, which could foster necessary 

demand aggregation. The total budget for the implementation of measures included in the strategy 

amounts up to EUR 765 million. Hence, despite probably missing the DAE targets, Croatia has identified 

its main challenges and thus seems to be prepared for the future developments.   

  74 

 
 
 
 
7.2.5  Cyprus 

Cyprus facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (presidential republic) 

Population:  

847,008 (0.17 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

92.5 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

9,251 km2 (0.23 % of EU)III  

Mountain ranges in the south-west (Troodos Mountains) 

and north (Kyrenia Mountains), central plain (Mesaoria) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

CYTA (Cyprus Telecommunications Authority): 63 %  

NGA coverage: 

84 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

(EU average: 41 %) 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

69.37 EUR46 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 17 Cyprus facts & figures 

46 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  75 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.5.1  Key Features 

The National Broadband Plan (NBP) of Cyprus 

“Digital Strategy for Cyprus” was initiated by 

the  Ministry  of  Communications  and  Works, 

Department of Electronic Communications in 

2012.47 Cyprus’ broadband targets are in line 

with the DAE (100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

until  2020  and  50  %  take-up  rate  for  100 

Mbps).  Cyprus’  NBP  is  divided  into  6  objec-

tives. The first objective, “Connect  

Cyprus”, includes five measures:  

1)  to promote a stable regulatory frame-

work,  

National Broadband Plan of Cyprus:  

key facts 

Main strategic 

Digital  Strategy  for  Cyprus  by 

document(s): 

2012   

Cyprus  Broadband  Plan  2016  – 

2020 

Targets: 

  100  %  coverage  with  30 

Mbps by 2020 

  50  %  households  penetra-

tion  with  100  Mbps  service 

by 2020 

2)  licensing of wireless networks (e.g. avoid-

Identical to 

Yes 

ance of spectrum hoarding),  

DAE-Targets: 

3)  promote competition and decrease of          

Table 18 NBP Cyprus key facts 

broadband prices,  

4)  establish fibre to the home networks  

(FTTH) and  

5)  strengthen network and information  

security.  

Besides the development of future-proof network infrastructure, the Cyprus strategy envisages to fos-

ter the digitisation of public services. Furthermore, an increase of digital literacy is planned as well as 

to promote the digital economy and to make use of ICT for the overall livelihood. The Cypriot strategy 

also aims at installing public computers as well as free WLAN access with fast internet connections in 

public places. 

Overall, these measures are centred on the development of a regulatory framework that is in favour 

of FTTH infrastructures. Generally speaking, Cyprus follows a market-based approach to achieve its 

47 Available online (English Version): http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4831 

  76 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
targets. Funding for underserved areas is available from EU funds and public sources solely if market-

driven deployment fails.   

Cyprus has prepared a new Broadband Plan for the 

period of 2016 – 2020.48 In preparation of the plan, 

a  public  consultation  started  on  29  January  2016, 

lasting  until  26  February  2016.49  The  new 

broadband  plan  follows  the  activities  of  the 

previous NBP with a focus on further development 

of supply and demand side. Similar to the previous 

version, the new NBP considers the combination of 

public  and  private 

investment  as  essential 

Main Challenges for NGA-rollout in Cyprus: 

  High incumbent market share 

  Comparably high price level 

  Enhanced regulatory measures might be 

needed 

  More transparency regarding infrastruc-
ture advisable  (no mapping tool availa-
ble yet) 

 

Increase of digital awareness and digital 
skills needed 

components  and  addresses  that  EUR  22  Milion  is  secured  from  the  European  Structural  and 

Investment Funds (ESIF) for broadband development. This will be accompanied by a plan to secure 

other financial support in the form of guarantees, project bonds, loans and grants.  

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered top-

  Ministry of Transport, Communications 

down 

and Works (Department of Electronic 

Communications) 

  Office of the Commissioner of Elec-

tronic Communications and Postal Reg-

ulation 

Figure 20 Organizational Steering & Main Players Cyprus 

7.2.5.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Cyprus’ National Broadband Plan targets can be regarded as major challenge for 

the country. While the current NGA coverage is relatively high (86 %) and well above EU average (70.9 

48 http://www.mcw.gov.cy/mcw/dec/dec.nsf/All/AA8BA9C426E54929C2257FBE0023CF39/$file/Cyprus_Broadband_Plan.pdf?Open 
Element 

49 http://www.mcw.gov.cy/mcw/dec/dec.nsf/DMLhearings_gr/DMLhearings_gr?Opendocument 

  77 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
%), we  expect  a  slowdown  for  the  remaining  14 %  of  the  population  due  to  topographical  circum-

stances, non-widely available cable networks and few incentives for operators to invest in currently 

uneconomical areas. Nonetheless, despite probably missing the target of full NGA coverage, we also 

assume that only a minority of the population will not be able to subscribe to a marketed speed of 

more than 30 Mbps in 2020, meaning that substantial progress is expected. Hence, despite the fact 

that a continuation of the overall positive development can be expected, there is a low-medium prob-

ability of fully achieving DAE target II. 

Concerning penetration rates, to achieve actual connection speeds of >30Mbps via ADSL2+ (providers 

currently  market  speeds  of  40  Mbps  to  51  Mbps),  technologies  such  as  vectoring,  pair  bonding  or 

phantom mode must be applied, which need substantial investments in legacy networks. Thus, this 

fact is exacerbating the main existing challenge for higher take-up rates by end-customers: affordabil-

ity. Contrarily, mobile broadband prices are getting more affordable and 4G/H+ coverage is expanding. 

With Mobile networks (4G), fixed VDSL connections and few DOCSIS 3.0 cable networks (the technol-

ogies existing in Cyprus that can theoretically achieve ≥ 100 Mbps), there is a low probability for Cyprus 

to meet the target of 50 % take-up of 100 Mbps broadband connections by 2020. We have calculated 

that currently 0.06 % of households fulfil this criterion, making an achievement of the target difficult, 

even if growth rates were high.  

As price levels are already comparably high, the willingness to pay a premium for higher bandwidths 

on the part of end customers is rather limited. However, current measures such as tax deductions are 

already a step in the right direction to substantially increase take-up rates. In combination with further 

public investment to incentivize upgrades of existing networks or even the deployment of technologies 

with higher capabilities than the existing xDSL solutions, take-up rates might gain momentum in the 

future.  

At any rate, increasing digital awareness and interest in broadband remains a major challenge for Cy-

prus as socio-economic indicators show that a substantial part of the population cannot or does not 

want to use digital services yet. Free WLAN in public institutions is a step in the right direction in order 

to narrow the digital divide. In addition, transparency concerning existing infrastructures and regula-

tory measures to increase competition between operators would help to decrease prices. Therefore, 

the planned development of an infrastructure-mapping tool is an approach deemed adequate. 

The current NBP addresses these issues, providing overall strategic guidance and thus contributing to 

the  generally  positive  development  in  recent  years.  Cyprus’  upcoming  NBP  could,  however,  define 

more  concrete  measures  including  defined  responsibilities,  indicators  and  time  frames  on  how  to 

  78 

 
 
tackle these issues in detail, potentially via the use of financial instruments, funding and better use of 

existing and upcoming infrastructures.  

  79 

 
 
 
 
7.2.6  Czech Republic 

Czech Republic facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary representative Republic) 

Population:  

10,538,275 (2.07 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

136.3 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

78,868 km2 (1.94 % of EU)III  

Two mountainous regions, Bohemia in the west, Moravia in 

the east, river basin in Bohemia (Elbe and Vltava rivers) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Telefonica O2 Czech Republic: 28 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

73 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

15.18 EUR50 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 19 Czech Republic facts & figures 

50 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  80 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.6.1  Key Features 

The  Czech  Republic  has  put  up  a 

broadband  strategy  entitled  “Dig-

itální Česko v. 2.0 Cesta k digitální 

ekonomice” aiming at implement-

ing the EU’s  Digital Agenda.51  The 

national 

strategy  commits 

to 

providing  broadband  access  with 

at least 30 Mbps for all households 

and 100 Mbps for 50 % of  house-

holds  and  enterprises  by  2020. 

These  targets  are  in  line  with  the 

DAE. Besides supply-side interven-

tions,  the  Czech  NBP  also  pro-

National Broadband Plan of Czech Republic:  

key facts 

Main strategic 

Digitální Česko v. 2.0 Cesta k digitální 

document(s): 

ekonomice 

Note: A new NBP (NPRSNG)  has been 

adopted shortly before this study was 

completed 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 

2020  

  50 % household penetration with 

100 Mbps service by 2020 

motes  measures  to  support  de-

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

mand  for  high-speed  internet  ac-

Targets: 

cess.  

Table 20 NBP Czech Republic key facts 

Other action areas include the establishment of a register of passive infrastructures (mapping), the 

allocation of radio frequencies for mobile networks (especially with regards to expanding coverage in 

rural  areas),  transition  to  the 

IPv6  protocol  and  the 

launch  of  an 

information  portal 

(www.digitalnicesko.cz).  In  terms  of  funding,  the  Czech  NBP  stresses  the  effective  utilisation  of EU 

funds. Stimulating the development of market-based competition in network roll-out is also a stated 

aim of the Czech Government.  

51 Available online (Czech Version): http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4833 

  81 

 
 
 
                                                           
A new strategy entitled “Národní plan rozvoje sítí nové 

generace” (NPRSNG - English: National Plan for the De-

velopment  of  Next  Generation  Networks)  has  been 

adopted shortly before this study was completed.52 The 

Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Ministry of Inte-

Main  Challenges  for  NGA  roll-out  in  Czech 
Republic: 

 

Infrastructure and service mapping need 
improvement 

  Very  high  percentage  of  fixed  wireless 

rior53  have  prepared  separate  draft  documents.  How-

access-only users 

ever, the latter was reportedly held to withdraw from 

  Very fragmented WLAN market 

the process for different reasons. The new NBP also in-

cludes up-to-date information from an ongoing collec-

tion of geographic data (white spots mapping). Further-

more, the new strategy contains an action plan, a time-

table and specific tasks for government authorities. 

A funding programme with total subsidies of about CZK 

  Harmonization of outside plant building 
standards might bear cost advantages 

  Smooth shift of responsibilities needed 

  Some  delays 

in  the  start  of  ESIF 
measures  because  of  differing  ap-
proaches (national broadband company 
vs. competitive selection process) 

14 billion (approx. EUR 517 million) to support NGA roll-out is in preparation. This initiative represents 

the operational programme for gaining financial resources from the European Structural Investment 

Funds (ESIF). The main beneficiaries of the programme are telecommunications providers. The financ-

ing instrument allocates subsidies for about 50 % of the costs involved in deploying the passive part of 

the NGA and backhaul networks (typically optical cabling, splitters, cabinets and their installations). 

Support from EU and public funds can only be directed to white areas.  

52 Available online (English Version): http://www.mpo.cz/assets/cz/e-komunikace-a-posta/elektronicke-komunikace/koncepce-a-strate-
gie/narodni-plan-rozvoje-siti-nga/2016/11/NPRSNG_EN_final-copy_1.pdf  

53 Available online (Czech version): http://www.mvcr.cz/clanek/ruzne-poskytnuti-informace-dokumentu-narodni-plan-rozvoje-siti-nove-
generace-strategie-skokove-zmeny-2030.aspx 

  82 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Industry and Trade (Depart-

top-down 

ment of Electronic Communications) 

 

Czech Telecommunication Office 

Figure 21 Organizational Steering & Main Players Czech Republic 

7.2.6.2  Feasibility Assessment 

Large efforts will be necessary for the Czech Republic to reach its coverage and take-up targets. Hence, 

a low probability for the achievement of both targets is assumed. NGA coverage is currently at 72.9 

%, which is relatively high and above EU average. However, there is still a substantial portion of the 

population without access to NGA technologies, making it rather difficult to achieve full coverage until 

2020. Take-up is also relatively low, we calculated a 5.55 % household penetration rate (with subscrip-

tions of 100 Mbps or more). On the plus side, demand for ultra-fast bandwidths grows considerably, 

but overall growth rates for broadband connections are relatively low (1.1 %). The purchasing power 

in the Czech Republic is below EU average and customers are very price-sensitive, which is one of the 

reasons for the considerable expansion of low-priced internet access via the WLAN networks in unli-

censed bands. Therefore, consumer prices for internet access are lower. 

Currently, an option to achieve the targets is a quick upgrade of existing cable networks. This would 

increase chances to meet the take-up target considerably and might even have a minor effect on get-

ting closer to the coverage target. 

This approach is also in line with the current NBP. The Czech Republic has prioritized the upgrade of 

their existing cable and VDSL networks in urban areas. WLAN-solutions are to be used for connectivity 

in less densely populated areas. WLAN providers compete in these areas with ADSL und deliver com-

parably  good quality of services. However, the upgrade  of existing infrastructures and competition 

between less capable technologies leads to very few projects to deploy FTTB/FTTH. 

  83 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The Czech Republic’s NBP is relatively operational (17 measures are defined and to be monitored an-

nually) and addresses a lot of topics that are relevant for the Czech context (e.g. digital inclusion, fund-

ing, transparency, digital divide, co-investments, spectrum auctions). A future challenge lies in foster-

ing  consolidation  within  the  WLAN  market,  allowing  for  economies  of  scale  and  quicker  upgrades. 

However, WLAN should in the long run be regarded as a complementary and not as a substitute for 

fixed networks. Demand aggregation should be fostered and further funding should be used to initial-

ize markets in areas of market failure, which is particularly the case in many rural areas. In this regard, 

close  cooperation  with  local  and  regional  actors  will  be  needed.  Promoting  high-end  technologies 

could pressure the market to quickly upgrade existing infrastructures, leading to high-end infrastruc-

ture based competition at some point. The only very recently adopted new NBP already largely takes 

these issues into account. Especially the new funding programme aiming at the development of back-

haul and access networks is expected to have a positive effect of broadband development in the Czech 

Republic.  

  84 

 
 
 
 
7.2.7  Denmark 

Denmark facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (constitutional monarchy with a representa-

Population:  

5,659,715 (1.11 % of EU)I 

tive parliamentary system) 

Population density:  

131.5 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

42,924 km2 (1.06 % of EU)III  

Peninsula of Jutland with rolling plains and dunes in the 

north as well as 442 named islands (74 inhabited) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

TDC: 57 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

92 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

25.81 EUR54 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 21 Denmark facts & figures 

54 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  85 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.7.1  Key Features 

In  2010,  the  Danish  government  has 

announced  the  ambition  that  every 

National Broadband Plan of Denmark: key facts 

household  and  business  should  have 

Main strategic 

Digital Growth Policy Statement (no 

access to at least 100 Mbps download. 

document(s): 

single reference NBP available, mul-

Furthermore, in 2013, Denmark intro-

tiple documents e.g. the action plan 

duced the action plan “better broad-

“Better broadband and mobile cov-

band  and  mobile  coverage  in  Den-

erage in Denmark”) 

mark”55 with 22 initiatives to promote 

broadband and mobile coverage in all 

parts of the country, especially in rural 

areas.  Therein,  an  upload  goal  was 

added  stating  that  everyone  should 

also have access to at least  30 Mbps 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 100 Mbps 

download and 30 Mbps upload 

by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

No (more ambitious coverage tar-

Targets: 

get) 

upload speeds.  

Table 22 Denmark key facts 

Both targets should be met by 2020. Thereby the Danish objectives do not only exceed the DAE tar-

gets, Denmark adds yet another important target to its goals, namely upstream bandwidth targets. 

With regard to the practical implementation of the targets, the Government may set coverage re-

quirements at spectrum auctions, municipalities may impose coverage requirements in tenders, 

framework conditions for infrastructure investments are set, low rent can be applied for mast/an-

tenna positions in sparsely populated areas, and a relaxing regulation applies to antennas on existing 

structures in the open country.56  

Besides, the Denmark’s Growth Plan 2013 announced a specific infrastructure development initiative 

for the island of Bornholm.57  The  initiative  allocated “DKK 30 million annually in 2014 and 2015 to 

promote high speed broadband on the island of Bornholm.“ 

55 Better Broadband and mobile phone coverage throughout Denmark, an outline of policy goals. Available online (Danish version): 
https://ens.dk/sites/ens.dk/files/Tele/bedre_bredbaand_og_mobildaekning_2013.pdf 

56 Broadband Mapping 2013, The Danish Business Authority. Available online: http://w2l.dk/file/475201/broadband-mapping.pdf 

57 See Denmark’s Digital Growth 2013, Policy Statement to the Danish Parliament by the Danish Government. Available online: 
http://evm.dk/english/publications/2013/13-05-29-denmarks-digital-growth 

  86 

 
 
 
                                                           
The Digital Growth Plan agreed upon by the government and all political parties in February 2015 fur-

ther details growth strategies in different action areas, one of which concerns mobile and broadband 

coverage throughout the country. Therein, planned initiatives inter alia include the release of addi-

tional frequency bands (700 MHz) for mobile broadband services, future spectrum auctions, legislation 

to reduce excavation and improve coordination of civil works and the provision of various measures 

to facilitate coordination and agreements between telco providers and municipalities. The three re-

maining action areas are the  ICT industry, increased digitization  and digital growth in collaboration 

with the public sector.  

More recently, in the context of the “Agreement on 

growth  and  development throughout  Denmark”58 

(a general strategy for economic growth),  a broad-

band  fund  -  “Bredbåndspuljen”59  has  been  estab-

lished, which provides grants for local associations 

and municipalities to improve broadband coverage 

Main  Challenges  for  NGA  roll-out  in  Den-
mark: 

  Coordination  among  different  authori-
ties  related  to  broadband  could  be  im-
proved 

 

Identification  of  a  take-up  target  to  in-
crease measurability of success 

in underserved areas (generally  defined as cover-

  Enhancement of infrastructure mapping 

age of less than 10 Mbps download and 2 Mbps up-

might be useful 

load, whereby a special emphasis lies on areas with 

less than 5 Mbps download and 1 Mbps upload). As 

  Development of a more integrated strat-
egy (currently no single NBP) is advisable 

usual within European state aid framework, regions are eligible when commercial roll-out is deemed 

unprofitable  in  the  near  future.  The  funding  scheme  works  technology-neutral  but  requires  partial 

monetary  contributions  by  the  local  actors  and must  be  established  as  open-access  networks.  The 

budget amounts to DKK 200 million for the period 2016 to 2019.  

Overall, Denmark’s primary focus is on the roll-out of high-speed network infrastructure based on pri-

vate investments with a key role reserved for regional and local actors in coordinating and promoting 

the process with telecommunication operators. In particular, the now former Ministry of Business and 

Growth drafted a guide for municipalities and government institutions establishing a legal framework 

and specifying lease conditions for mobile phone masts. More recently, this competence was trans-

ferred to the Ministry of Energy, Utilities and Climate. 

58 http://em.dk/~/media/files/2016/16-02-09-aftaletekst-vuhd.ashx?la=da 

59 https://bredbaandspulje.ens.dk/ and https://ens.dk/ansvarsomraader/bredbaand/bredbaandspuljen 

  87 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

bottom-up 

  Danish Energy Agency - within the Minis-
try of Energy, Utilities and Climate (legis-
lation,  competition,  physical  infrastruc-
ture and frequencies) 

  Danish Business Authority - within the 

Ministry of Industry, Business and Finan-
cial Affairs (market decisions and e-pri-
vacy) 

 

Local & regional authorities 

Figure 22 Organizational Steering & Main Players Denmark 

7.2.7.2  Feasibility Assessment 

In Denmark, currently there is no single document regarded as an NBP; therefore, a variety of docu-

ments give overall guidance concerning the market approach. However, in the Danish case, there is a 

strong bottom-up movement driven by the deployment of infrastructures by utility providers. This de-

centralized approach reduces the demand for a single national strategy. Nonetheless, deployment by 

AOs via access obligations is fostered.  

Denmark has very ambitious national target (100 % coverage with 100 Mbps download and 30 Mbps 

upload). Consequently, a low-medium probability to achieve the target is presumed. According to the 

Danish Energy Agency, coverage with 100 Mbps download and 30 Mbps upload is currently at 86 %.60 

Whilst this is already a very impressive figure, putting Denmark ahead of most other European coun-

tries, fully covering the remaining few percent of the country will still be a difficult and costly process.  

Concerning the DAE coverage target, Denmark is heavily advanced. Currently there is an NGA coverage 

of 91.7 %. We presume  there  is a  medium  probability  that  Denmark might  be able to achieve the 

target, mainly supported by extensive cable networks and local initiatives in underserved areas.  

With regards to the DAE take-up target, we presume that there is a medium probability the target will 

actually be met in Denmark. We already see a relatively high penetration rate (calculated as 9.39 % of 

all households) and a very strong growth for ultrafast bandwidths (+ 422 % from 2014 to 2015), but it 

remains unsure whether this trend will continue. To support this claim, we see that overall broadband 

60 https://ens.dk/sites/ens.dk/files/Tele/bredbaandskortlaekning_2015.pdf 

  88 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
growth rates are relatively low (0.7 %), which is an indicator for market saturation, leaving upgraded 

networks as the main source of ultrafast connectivity. 

Currently, the main sources of NGA connectivity in Denmark are upgraded cable networks and FTTP 

(combined 50 % broadband market share, presumably well higher in NGA alone) while xDSL slowly 

declines. There are plans to upgrade the cable networks to DOCSIS 3.1 until the end of 2017 and also 

xDSL networks are still being upgraded for the use of vectoring and pair bonding, resulting in higher 

speeds. However, it is doubtful that these upgrades directly transfer to getting closer to the national 

target, especially considering the fact that the currently available DOCSIS 3.0 network already allows 

for the targeted bandwidths. Therefore, the main issue is how to convince end customers to take-up 

higher bandwidths, thus increasing the chances for further roll-out. Either the operators need to be 

convinced  to  further  invest  in  currently  underdeveloped  areas  or  there  are  demand  stimulating 

measures that aggregate demand and incentivize end customers to get connected.  

Both aspects are currently part of the national strategy: For example, there are tax deductions for end 

customers getting newly connected or upgrading their connection and soon there will be special mort-

gage loans for operators, decreasing the cost for deployment. In this regard, these measures will be 

extremely important for the achievement of Denmark’s national target and the DAE targets. 

Whilst Denmark achieved its current status by relying on a strong bottom-up movement and variety 

of different initiatives and projects, developing a more integrated strategy (thus a single NBP), thereby 

channelling the country’s potential, involving all relevant stakeholders as well as creating and illustrat-

ing synergies, could nonetheless prove to be beneficial. Moreover, while theoretically there is a clear 

division of competences between the Danish Energy Agency and the Danish Business Authority regard-

ing regulation (the  former can be  regarded as the overall  telecom  regulator while  the  latter manly 

deals with specific market decisions), in practice, closer coordination between the two in order to avoid 

ambiguities or confusion will be necessary. Denmark also established a comprehensive mapping tool 

(tjekditnet.dk), but in the past, the tool has been subject to criticism regarding its usability and the 

quality of data provided. Currently, also steps are taken to establish a digital mapping for passive in-

frastructure.  

Overall, possessing an already impressive NGA infrastructure, a well above average coverage rate as 

well as a decent take-up rate, Denmark is definitely among the leading nations  in Europe regarding 

broadband development and therefore seems to be well-prepared for future challenges. 

  89 

 
 
 
7.2.8  Estonia 

Estonia facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

1,313,271 (0.26 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

30.3 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

45,227 km2 (1.11 % of EU)III  

Shallow coastline with 1,520 islands and moraine landscape 

in the south 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Elion: 58 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

86 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

19.16 EUR61 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 23 Estonia facts & figures 

61 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  90 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.8.1  Key Features 

In  April  2009,  Estonia  published  a 

national  broadband  strategy  enti-

National Broadband Plan of Estonia: key facts 

tled  “development  vision  of  next 

Main strategic 

Digital Agenda 2020 for Estonia 

generation  broadband  network  in 

document(s): 

Estonia.”62 The document envisages 

connecting  all  houses,  apartments 

and offices with new fibre-optic con-

nections  and  providing  a  minimum 

download speed of 100 Mbps. Esti-

mated investment requirements ac-

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 

2020  

  60 % HH penetration with 100 

Mbps by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

No (higher take up target) 

crue  to  EEK  5  –  6  billion    (ca.  EUR 

Targets: 

320-389  million).  Operators  would 

Table 24 NBP Estonia key facts 

finance the roll-out to a large extent from their own funds, except for a share of EEK 1.5 billion (ca. 

EUR 95 million) to be obtained from EU funds. 

In early 2014, Estonia updated its targets and measures for broadband development as part of its new 

Digital Agenda 2020 for Estonia.63 The country aims at providing all residents with internet access of 

more than 30 Mbps and achieving at least 60 % household subscription rates for speed of more than 

100 Mbps. More generally, Estonia’s Digital Agenda is meant to provide general guidance for creating 

a well-operating national information and communication technology environment. The development 

of country-wide NGA networks is deemed an essential component thereof.   

A distinguishing feature of the Estonian strategy is that it also sets objectives with regard to mobile 

networks as well as the level of “internet freedom”. On the one hand, the target is to achieve mobile 

internet access levels greater than 80 % throughout the country. Relatedly, by making more frequen-

cies available on the spectrum, Estonia also intends to help to increase broadband coverage in under-

served areas. On the other hand, the country desires to rank among the top five countries in the world 

with respect to internet freedom (as measured by the Freedom House Survey’s indicator “Freedom on 

the Net”).  

These goals are coupled with concrete initiatives, which include the measures for broadband roll-out 

in areas with market failure:  

62 Available online (English Version), URL: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4977 

63 Available online (English Version), URL: https://www.mkm.ee/sites/default/files/digital_agenda_2020_estonia_engf.pdf 

  91 

 
 
                                                           
 

support for broadband roll-out by reducing administrative burdens (simplifying legal frame-

works) 

  obligation to install last-mile connections into any new public funded objects 

  promoting community initiatives and  

 

supporting the development of last-mile connections.  

In  addition,  the  government  strategy  emphasises 

spectrum will be made available if required and the 

transition to IPv6 will be promoted.  

Overall, with this diverse set of output targets and 

action areas, Estonia exceeds the EU’s DAE targets. 

The  implementation  of  the  strategy  in  Estonia  is 

steered centrally, namely by the Information Soci-

ety  Council  led  by the  Prime Minister.  Funding  is 

expected to come from private and public sources, 

state budget as well as EU structural funds. Finally, 

Estonia plans to undertake a mid-term evaluation 

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out in Estonia: 

  Accelerate the realization of the EstWin 
project and allow for a stronger involve-
ment of local actors in it 

  Evaluate and enhance the capabilities 

of ELASA (non-profit organization steer-
ing the EstWin project) 

  Stagnant  fixed  broadband  take  up  rate 

despite high availability 

  Mapping  system’s  level  of  detail  needs 
improvement  for  EstWin  to  develop  its 
full potential  

of the implementation of its strategy in 2017. This may result in updating existing targets or instru-

ments taking into account the state of the art. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered top-

  Ministry of Economic Affairs and Com-

down 

munications 

Figure 23 Organizational Steering & Main Players Estonia 

 

The Estonian Broadband Development 

Foundation  

 

Estonian Association of Information 

Technology and Telecommunications  

  Republic of Estonia Information System 

Authority 

  92 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.2.8.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Estonia’s NBP targets is still possible, if the growth of ultrafast-subscriptions will 

increase further. Estonia slightly exceeds the DAE take-up target (60 % instead of 50 % of households 

to subscribe to 100 Mbps or more by 2020). However, we currently conclude that there is a low prob-

ability that this target as well as the DAE take-up target will be met. Take-up is currently one challenge 

that exists within the  Estonian context. Despite  a very  high NGA coverage (86.4 %), there  is only a 

minority of households (we calculated 4.82 %) that subscribes to ultrafast-speeds (100 Mbps or more). 

General fixed broadband penetration (currently 29.9 % as of population) growth is nearly stagnating 

(0.1 %) and coverage is already very high, which leads to the conclusion that new broadband connec-

tions alone will not be sufficient to achieve the take-up target. Therefore, upgrades of existing connec-

tions are the main source to achieve the take-up target. We see substantial growth (50 %) within ul-

trafast-subscriptions, but even if the trend continues, in 2020 there would be only roughly 34 % take-

up. Hence, fostering the growth of ultrafast subscriptions and thus reaching the national target or the 

DAE take-up target respectively still remains a challenge for Estonia.   

However, concerning the DAE coverage target, Estonia is well on track and there is a medium-high 

probability that 100 % coverage will be achieved by 2020. The current NGA coverage (86.4 %) is already 

relatively high despite the delay in the EstWin project. Concerning FTTP coverage, with a coverage rate 

of more  than  70  %  and  still  50  %  in  rural  areas,  Estonia  ranks  among the top countries  in  Europe, 

illustrating Estonia’s impressive and future-proof broadband infrastructure.  

The EstWin project is crucial for the success of the NBP as there is great potential to close the gap to 

100 % coverage. In this regard, closely monitoring and evaluating the process of implementation as 

well as ELASA’s capabilities to successfully implement the project will be important. In order to use 

EstWin to its fullest potential, transparency is the key. Hence, also setting up a comprehensive map-

ping of infrastructures so that privately owned operators can establish their access networks in the 

most efficient manner will be essential for the success of the project. One aspect that needs to be 

further assessed is the regulatory environment and costs of NGA subscriptions. Estonians pay roughly 

3 % of the median income for the lowest NGA subscription, which is EU average but leaves room for 

further price reductions, especially considering that the incumbent market share is relatively high (58 

%). An increased competition and other measures to further incentivize take-up might be useful to 

tackle the relatively low take-up and thereby improve the chances of Estonia to fully achieve its targets. 

  93 

 
 
Moreover, also the demand side should be fostered further. In this regard, the Estonian NBP already 

includes several well-defined demand side activities (e.g. improvement of e-Government solutions and 

ICT skills through a dedicated institute) with the potential to increase take-up.  

Hence, possessing already one the most advanced broadband infrastructures in Europe, realizing the 

full potential of this infrastructure will be the main challenge for Estonia to face in the next years. 

  94 

 
 
 
 
7.2.9  Finland 

Finland facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

5,471,753 (1.08 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

18.0 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

338,440 km2 (0.83 % of EU)III  

Dominated by lowlands (Coastal Finland and Finnish lake 

district with extensive forests), uplands in the north (Lap-

land) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

N/A64 (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

75 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

20.84 EUR65 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 25 Finland facts & figures 

64 Unlike most European countries, Finland has always been a multi-operator country. Hence, a single incumbent operator which could be 
subject to comparison with incumbent operators in other countries does not exist in Finland. 
65 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  95 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.9.1  Key Features 

Finland is among the few EU countries 

having adopted a proactive stance on 

National Broadband Plan of Finland: key facts 

broadband  development  at  an  early 

Main strategic 

Updated broadband action plan by 

stage.  This  is  reflected  in  a  series  of 

document(s): 

2012 

policy and strategy statements and in-

itiatives,  not  counting  concomitant 

working papers, reports or alike. Fin-

land’s  first  cohesive  national  broad-

band  strategy  dates  back  to  January 

2004,  presented  by  the  Ministry  of 

Transport and Communications, with 

a mid-way update in February 2005.66 

Targets: 

  99 % of all permanent resi-

dences and offices should be 

located within 2 km of an optic 

fibre network or cable network 

that enables connections of 

100 Mbps by 2019 

Identical to DAE-

No 

Back then, the primary goal was to in-

Targets: 

crease the number of broadband con-

Table 26 NBP Finland key facts 

nections. 

In December 2008, Finland adopted a new national broadband plan valid for the period 2009 to 2015. 

This document stipulated two distinct targets, namely to provide all public and private end users with 

a minimum download rate of 1 Mbps by 2010 and to make NGA networks available to everybody by 

the end of 2015.67 In particular, the strategy envisaged the construction of fibre middle-mile networks, 

therewith locating fibre access points no further than 2 km from virtually all permanent residences or 

offices. Additionally, Finland introduced a universal service obligation of 1 Mbps for all citizens in 2010. 

Finland also discusses the auctioning of further frequency spectra for increasing mobile coverage. 

66 Available online (English Version): http://www.lvm.fi/documents/20181/752245/Government_resolution.pdf/e0765a6c-ee90-49d0-
89c9-aae0a0343af6?version=1.0 

67 Cf. URL: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=3264; cf. also: http://www.lvm.fi/-/hundred-mega-broadband-to-
be-made-available-throughout-finland-in-2015-772351 

  96 

 
 
                                                           
In May 2012, the Finnish government released an updated action plan, albeit without introducing ma-

jor changes. Finland commits to achieving that 99 % of all permanent residences and offices should be 

located within 2 km of an optical fibre network or 

cable  network  that  enables  connections  of  100 

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out in Finland: 

  Development of an integrated NBP is ad-

Mbps. 

Overall, the Finnish Government opts for a compe-

tition-driven,  fibre-based  network  roll-out,  with  a 

special focus on assistance for underserved areas 

visable 

  Further decrease of the digital divide 

  Very low population density 

 

Increasing number of mobile broadband 
only users 

(via public funds). Especially with regards to the lat-

  Establishing  of  an  infrastructure-map-

ter, Finnish authorities are advising local municipal-

ping tool might foster roll-out 

ities on how to set up entities dedicated to deploy a NGA network where market failure occurred; for 

 

Increase take up  

example, by way of a joint venture of multiple municipalities or in partnership with private operators. 

In terms of investments, funding from the state, municipal and EU level is expected. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Transport and Communica-

bottom-up 

tions 

 

 

The Finnish regulatory authority (FICORA) 

Local & regional authorities 

Figure 24 Organizational Steering & Main Players Finland 

7.2.9.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The chances for the achievement of Finland’s NBP´s target (99 % of all permanent residences and of-

fices should be located within 2 km of an optic fiber network or cable network that enables connec-

tions of 100 Mbps by 2019) are rather good. According to the Finnish NRA Ficora, currently 74 % of 

Finnish households are within 2 km of the next fiber optical connection point enabling 100 Mbps or 

more.  We therefore  expect  a  medium-high  probability  that  the  NBP’s target  can  be  fulfilled.  Fiber 

optical networks in Finland are still expanding substantially and the distance of 2 km is long enough 

for relatively simple fulfillment of the criterion. Especially local initiatives currently establishing net-

works in rural areas will have a significant impact on achieving the criterion. Although Finland has a 

good chance to fulfill its own national target, increasing actual connectivity throughout Finland will be 

  97 

 
 
 
 
 
more difficult as the distance of 2 km is still a significant hurdle to develop access networks. Especially 

in  sparsely  populated  areas  in  North  and West  Finland,  the  costs  of connection  per  household  are 

relatively high. In these areas, wireless solutions (often via mobile broadband) have a significant im-

portance and are often regarded a substitute for fixed networks. 

Considering the DAE targets, we see that despite the already high rate of fulfillment of the NBP´s ob-

jectives, there is no automatism between the two sets of targets. Concerning the coverage target (100 

% coverage with 30 Mbps), we see that Finland is lagging behind in rural areas. 7.6 % of rural (and 75.1 

% of total) Finland currently enjoy NGA coverage. This digital divide is not easy to close. The current 

investments (especially state aid) contribute to the development of high-end networks within these 

areas and lead to a further increase of NGA coverage, but reaching full coverage, especially considering 

Finland’s difficult geographic circumstances, still constitutes a major challenge. We therefore conclude 

that there is a low probability that the coverage target will be met. Concerning the take-up target (50 

% of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more), Finland is currently in a good position. We calcu-

lated that 15.11 % of households are subscribing to 100 Mbps or more. Furthermore, growth rates of 

ultrafast broadband are currently at 27.47 %. If this strong growth continues, Finland would achieve 

50.86 % take-up by 2020. However, upgrading as an option to achieve the take-up target only exists 

for some Finns as NGA networks are mainly available in urban and not in remote areas. Moreover, 

generally fixed broadband penetration rates grow at merely 0.2 %. Thus, it is rather unlikely that the 

current  growth  trend  of  ultrafast  subscriptions  will  continue,  leading  to  an  overall  rather  medium 

probability to achieve the take-up target.  

In contrast to other countries, take-up cannot realistically be enhanced by lowered prices. In Finland 

we see a relatively high willingness to pay for NGA services (especially initial costs), while NGA sub-

scription prices are relatively low (1 % of median income for the lowest NGA subscription). Hence, we 

conclude that affordability is no concern in Finland, but rather the lack of coverage that inhibits higher 

take-up rates. In this case, demand is probably higher than supply. 

To achieve higher coverage within Finland, supply side measures and transparency measures are the 

key. In this regard, it would be useful to establish a single document that  can serve as an NBP and 

deliver measures to support higher coverage. Although there is state aid available for the development 

of broadband infrastructures, reaching countrywide NGA coverage will still be a burdensome process. 

Despite the lack of an all-embracing national strategy (decent strategic guidance is provided, but with-

out incorporating many detailed measures accordingly that an NBP would usually provide), Finland has 

  98 

 
 
been making progress in recent years, especially as there are many regional and local activities dis-

cernible. There are local and regional operators under public management, governed by state aid rules 

who provide connectivity in rural areas. These activities, including further demand aggregation, should 

be fostered. Together with measures to bring down costs of NGA deployment (e.g. enhanced coordi-

nation, transparency concerning existing infrastructures, alternative methods of deployment) and the 

use of non-fixed technologies for remote areas, Finland will be able to achieve an even higher degree 

of coverage and take-up.   

  99 

 
 
 
 
7.2.10  France 

France facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (semi-presidential republic) 

Population:  

66,415,161 (13.07 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

104.5 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

633,187 km2 (15.60 % of EU)III  

Mountain ranges in the north-east (Vosges) south-east 

(Alps) and south (Pyrénées), four river basins and a plateau, 

island Corsica and oversea territories 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Orange: 39 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

45 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

17.67 EUR68 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 27 France facts & figures 

68 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  100 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.10.1  Key Features 

In  February  2013,  the  French  govern-

ment published its National Broadband 

National Broadband Plan of France: key facts 

Plan  (NBP)  entitled  “France  Très  Haut 

Main strategic 

France Très Haut Débit 

Débit”. The plan was updated in 2015.69 

document(s): 

In devising the strategy, wide consulta-

tions  with  stakeholders,  investigations 

and analyses were conducted between 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2022 

2012  and  2013.  With  its  broadband 

Identical to DAE-

No (longer time frame coverage 

plan,  France  commits  to  covering  the 

Targets: 

target) 

entire territory with high-speed broad-

Table 28 NBP France key facts 

band by 2022. In particular, the French broadband target is to achieve 100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

until 2022. France’s broadband targets can be said to be in line with the DAE, albeit with a time horizon 

for realisation that is two years longer than the DAE. 

Successively, the French Government published a convention agreement on the modalities of FTTH 

deployment (Modèle de « Convention de programmation et de suivi des déploiements FttH, 2013) as 

well as specifications for network development project applications (Le cahier des charges de l'appel 

à projets " France Très Haut Débit - Réseaux d'initia-

tive  publique  [2013]  2015).  The  government  also 

published a list, which is continuously upgraded, in-

cluding the network-roll-out projects in the country 

initiated under the French Broadband Plan. 

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out in France: 

 

xDSL technologies bear a very dominant 
position 

  Decrease of the digital divide is needed 

  Further increase of NGA coverage neces-

French officials expect that the national strategy will 

sary  

require the mobilisation of private and public invest-

ments of up to EUR 20 billion. In terms of outreach, 

French officials run a web-based portal (www.fran-

  Stronger 

focus  on  demand 

side 

measures advisable 

  Simplifying pole access in rural areas 

cethd.fr) which provides a wide array of information, ranging from national documents to information 

on running projects.  

Overall, France predominantly opts for establishing and widening its broadband network infrastruc-

ture by FTTH technology. Public initiative networks play a central role in this context. According to the 

NBP, private operators, local authorities and the state are expected to share the required investments. 

69 Available online (French version): http://francethd.fr/documents_reference/Cahier-des-charges-PFTHD-2015.pdf 

  101 

 
 
                                                           
 
 
In more isolated areas, satellite, mobile and wireless networks (LTE, WiMAX) are viewed as a viable 

solution to expand broadband coverage. Public aid is only eligible for areas where private companies 

do not plan any infrastructure investments in the mid-term. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of the Economy, Industry & Digi-

bottom-up 

tal Affairs  

  Agence du numérique (attached to the 

Ministry of the Economy) with the Super-

fast Broadband Taskforce in charge of 

the NBP 

  Regional and County governments 

 

The national regulatory authority 

Figure 25 Organizational Steering & Main Players France 

7.2.10.2  Feasibility Assessment 

Given France’s difficult starting situation with a current NGA coverage of 44.8 % in total and 23 % in 

rural areas including the country’s difficult topographic conditions in some parts of the country, achiev-

ing France’s NBP target (100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2022) can considered to be a very challenging 

task. We estimate that there is a low-medium probability that France will actually achieve this target. 

France has made significant progress in recent years, but with still more than half of the territory un-

covered, reaching full NGA coverage will be a tedious process. However, as there is substantial state 

aid available (roughly EUR 7 billion until 2022) and overall investment is expected to be roughly EUR 

20 billion, there is no doubt that France will further increase its NGA coverage rate dramatically, albeit 

perhaps not to the extent that the entire territory will be covered, even if the investment will be used 

in total. Moreover, besides its large focus on the roll-out of new FTTH-infrastructure as well as wireless 

broadband technologies acting as substitute technologies in remote areas, France’s NBP also envisions 

to upgrade current PSTN networks. Whilst continuing support for increasing bandwidth of PSTN net-

works may bring France closer to achieving its national target, such measures also at least potentially 

entail the risk of downgrading the sustainability of business plans of the Public Initiative FTTH Network 

and thus endanger meeting the demand for higher bandwidths in the future.  

  102 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Concerning the DAE coverage target (100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020), we expect a low proba-

bility of success as the target will be even more cumbersome to reach due to the shorter time frame. 

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more), there is also a 

low probability that the target can actually be met. We calculated that currently 7.66 % of households 

subscribe to 100 Mbps bandwidths. Hereby, the very high market shares of xDSL technologies (88 % 

of all fixed broadband subscriptions) could become an obstacle to that target. Although we see sub-

stantial growth for ultrafast speeds (+35.55 %), it remains unsure whether supply can fully keep up 

with that speed of development. The possibility of success will highly depend on the success of several 

large-scale FTTH projects. As described above, maintaining the balance between the upgrade of cur-

rent PSTN networks and setting the framework for the envisaged copper to fibre switch in the long run 

will be challenging.  

France’s  NBP  is  comparably  operational:  It  defines  a  lot  of  concrete  measures,  underpinned  by 

timeframes, responsibilities and monitoring procedures. There are several managerial and organiza-

tional measures (e.g. project controlling, highlighting the relevance of local authorities, central task 

forces) as well as supply side measures (including a EUR 3.3 Billion national state aid scheme, financial 

instruments, PPP models, concession models). However, although supply is gaining momentum and 

more and more FTTB/H projects are implemented, pushing operators to switch to future-proof tech-

nologies continues to be a challenge. We also foresee major challenges concerning the digital divide: 

Wireless solutions (currently mostly 4G and satellite with 5G probably gaining importance in the fu-

ture) are considered to be crucial for the supply of rural areas in order to bridge the digital divide, but 

at the current state, it remains unsure to what extent they will be able to substitute fixed networks.  

Besides the NBP, France has several regional broadband strategies and large-scale broadband projects 

that deploy future-proof technologies accordingly, but in the end, the most decisive question for the 

achievement of France’s national targets will be whether and when efficient supply will be available. 

Overall, France has identified its deficiencies and envisioned necessary and suitable measures which 

will have a considerably positive effect on broadband roll-out. While they might not develop enough 

impact to steer the market forces and thus achieve the national target and the DAE targets on time, 

they constitute a valuable effort that will lead to a significant enhancement of France’s broadband 

infrastructure, thereby paving the way for France’s digital future.  

  103 

 
 
 
 
7.2.11  Germany 

Germany facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Federation (federal parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

81,197,537 (15.98 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

226.6 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

357,376 km2 (8.80 % of EU)III  

Northern European Plain in the northern third of the coun-

try, hill ranges in middle Germany, mountain ranges in the 

south (Alps) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Deutsche Telekom AG: 42 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

81 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

23.46 EUR70 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 29 Germany facts and figures 

70 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  104 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.11.1  Key Features 

In  2014,  the  German  government 

has 

adopted 

the 

“Digitale 

Agenda”71,  valid  for  the  period 

from 2014 to 2017. The document 

represents  a  further  refinement 

and extension of an existing broad-

band  strategy  published  in  2009 

(Breitbandstrategie72). The Federal 

National Broadband Plan of Germany: key facts 

Main strategic 

Digitale Agenda (2014 – 2017) & Digi-

document(s): 

tale Strategie 2025 (not to be consid-

ered an NBP) 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 50 Mbps by 

2018 

Government’s goal is to provide at 

Identical to DAE-

No (more ambitious coverage target) 

least  50  Mbps  download  speed 

Targets: 

countrywide until 2018 in both ur-

ban 

and 

rural 

areas.  

Table 30 NBP Germany key facts 

With these ambitions, Germany exceeds the DAE targets. Additional pursued objectives of the “Digi-

tale Agenda” are the promotion of mobility and the support of new services in this context, the digi-

talisation of the economy as well as the economic utilisation of new digital potentials for health care 

and medical services. The Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure and the Ministry of Economic 

Affais and Energy were leading the process of developing the Digital Agenda, supported by several 

other ministries that are responsible for impacts of digitization in their respective areas of influence. 

In terms of technology, the German strategy aims to achieve an efficient mix of different technological 

solutions. Generally, the “Digitale Agenda” works as a government stimulus to optimise the conditions 

for  a  market-driven  network  expansion.  This  also  contains  radio  frequency  regulation  measures  to 

provide additional spectrum for mobile internet coverage.  

Furthermore,  the  German  government  aims  to  implement  the  EU’s  Cost  Reduction  Directive 

2014/61/CE through different measures to ensure coordination and cooperation between different 

aspects of infrastructure development. It is planned to transpose the respective provisions to national 

law in a timely manner. For this purpose, the German government has already contrived a draft law 

entitled “DigiNetzG.” 

71 Available online (German version): https://www.digitale-agenda.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/2014/08/2014-08-20-digitale-
agenda.pdf;jsessionid=45ADB12CE6E02B57E51889B1B82839E2.s4t1?__blob=publicationFile&v=6 

72 Available online (German version): http://www.bmwi.de/Dateien/BBA/PDF/breitbandstrategie-der-
bundesregierung,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdf 

  105 

 
 
 
                                                           
As  an  informal  governance  structure,  the  Federal  Ministry  of  Transport  and  Digital  Infrastructure 

(BMVI) has established the “Netzallianz Digitales Deutschland.” This network of governmental Institu-

tions and private sector organisations and enterprises in the field of telecommunications industry dis-

cusses and coordinates different aspects involved in broadband development. Recently, the “Netzalli-

anz” devised a joint strategy paper setting out targets, principles and measures in the field of digital 

infrastructure  development,  called “Kursbuch  Netzausbau”  (2014),  which  complements  the  federal 

government’s “Digitale Agenda”. 

In 2015, the federal government initiated a national state aid programme worth EUR 4 billion (Bundes-

förderprogramm) to close the remaining white spots. The programme’s beneficiaries are regional and 

local actors such as counties, municipalities or special purpose associations of municipalities. Regions 

where market-driven infrastructure roll-put does not take place are eligible. The budget partially stems 

from auctioning radio frequencies in the 700 MHz range for achieving rural LTE coverage (second dig-

ital dividend).  

In addition to the “Digitale Agenda”, there is also a plethora of regional broadband strategies on state-

level (“Länderstrategien”), similar to Austria. These differ both with regards to broadband targets and 

preferred technologies. For example, the city-state Berlin aims at achieving 1 Gbps for the entire met-

ropolitan area. While Baden-Württemberg is eager to develop FTTB in their territory, Bavaria generally 

opts for FTTC solutions. Regional differences also exist 

in regard to funding programmes for digital infrastruc-

ture projects, funded partially through the second dig-

ital  dividend  funds  and  supplemented  by  public 

sources.  

Overall, Germany opts for a technology-mix in realis-

ing  its  national  broadband  targets.  Mobile  networks 

are explicitly stated as a viable technology to facilitate 

Main  Challenges  for  NGA  roll-out  in  Ger-
many: 

  Ensure future investments and competi-
tion  in  combination  with  simultaneous 
expansion of nearshore vectoring 

 

 

Increasing  number  of  FTTB/FTTH  con-
nections needed 

Inter-ministerial coordination and coor-
dination  between  federal  and  regional 
level needs to be ensured 

country-wide broadband coverage. In particular, Ger-

  Decrease of the digital divide needed 

many expects increased accessibility and higher data-

  High price sensitivity 

transfer speeds from 5G technologies starting in 2018. 

Fibre-based network projects (FTTB/FTTH) are primarily initiated by local and regional actors. Many 

efforts  from  the  private  sector  focus  on  upgrading  existing  PSTN  (via  VDSL,  vectoring)  and  CATV 

(DOCSIS 3.0) networks.  

  106 

 
 
Very recently, the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi) issued its own 

perspective on digital infrastructure entitled “Digitale Strategie 2025”. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered bot-

 

Federal Ministry of Transport and Digi-

tom-up 

tal Infrastructure  

Federal Broadband Bureau  

State level competence centres & au-

 

 

thorities 

 

Federal Network Agency for Electricity, 

Gas, Telecommunications, Post and 

Railway 

Figure 26 Organizational Steering & Main Players Germany 

7.2.11.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Germany’s NBP’s target of 100 % coverage with 50 Mbps by 2018 has a medium 

probability to succeed. Despite several introduced measures which should increase coverage signifi-

cantly, there is still a substantial gap to bridge (currently, 70.1 % are covered with 50 Mbps). However, 

the remaining 29.9 percentage points can be achieved if the private sector contributes as declared 

within the multi-stakeholder process “Netzallianz”. The main driver for the potential achievement is 

the  controversially  discussed  nearshore  vectoring  decision  and  the  current  national  funding  pro-

gramme. Nearshore vectoring will increase the connection possibilities for more than 1 million house-

holds across Germany. However, nearshore vectoring could lead to decreased investments and less 

deployment of FTTB/FTTH and thereby backfire if national targets are increased in the future. Thus, 

allowing for vectoring whilst simultaneously promoting and ensuring investments in future-proof tech-

nologies will be one of Germany’s main challenges in the next years.   

The national funding programme  supports  both gap funding for operators as well as regional/local 

authorities that wish to invest in passive infrastructures, promoting FTTC and FTTP deployment alike. 

Both measures combined will lead to a significantly increased NGA coverage, which lets us presume 

that there is a medium probability to achieve the DAE target II as well, especially considering the fact 

that overall  NGA  coverage  is  already  at  81.4 %  and steadily  climbing.  Concerning  take-up  rates  for 

  107 

 
 
 
 
 
ultrafast connections (DAE target III), 4.82 % of German households subscribe to 100 Mbps or more. 

Considering  price  sensitivity  within  the  German  ICT  market,  we  presume  that  despite  substantial 

growth in this segment, there is a low probability to meet this DAE target.  

Generally speaking, the NBP of Germany is a strategic document with several ministries involved. All 

ministries define general provisions on how to achieve the best results concerning digitalization in their 

respective areas. Concerning digital infrastructures, there are some defined concrete measures as part 

of necessary standardization and investment processes (e.g. different high-level stakeholder forums 

and  initiatives,  spectrum  auctions,  transparency  of  infrastructures  etc.).  Hereby,  the  NBP  acknowl-

edges the structural challenges Germany has (e.g. federal structures, cable networks mainly available 

in western urban areas, large proportion of underserved rural areas). State aid is part of the NBP and 

a significant contributor for investments in NGA networks.  In this regard, a comprehensive national 

funding programme worth more than EUR 4 billion has been established. There are also several fund-

ing mechanisms at state level, the largest of which is worth EUR 1.5 Billion (in case of Bavaria) and 

several co-financing programmes concerning the national state aid programme. As a positive aspect, 

bottom-up special purpose  associations are well accepted, often  being the  beneficiaries of funding 

schemes and responsible for a major part of FTTB/FTTH deployment – especially in rural areas. 

Germany has been lagging behind concerning the provision of free WLAN in European comparison. A 

major obstacle was that the operator of a WLAN was liable for all misconduct by third parties. After 

new legislation in early 2016, this problem has been removed which will increase the WLAN coverage 

significantly. 

In  terms of  responsibilities,  given  the  involvement of  different  actors  at  federal  and  regional  level, 

coordination  between  these  actors  will  continue  to  be  an  important  task.  While  the  Ministry  of 

Transport and Digital Infrastructure is in charge of the broadband strategy, other ministries are re-

sponsible for other parts of the Digital Agenda and sometimes publish their own perspectives on over-

lapping topics with differing approaches whilst the regions in turn might have their own point of view. 

However, provided that the necessary coordination takes place, the involvement of different actor can 

be seen as a strength rather than a weakness as by means of joining forces, valuable synergies can be 

created, thereby helping Germany to realize its full potential.  

  108 

 
 
 
 
 
7.2.12  Greece 

Greece facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

10,812,500 (2.13 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

83.3 per km2 (EU average: 174.25 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

131,957 km2 (3.25 % of EU)III  

Mountainous, peninsular mainland, 227 inhabited islands 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

 OTE: 43% (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

36 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

31.43 EUR73 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 31 Greece facts & figures 

73 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  109 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.12.1  Key Features 

In June 2015, Greece has devised a na-

tional broadband strategy entitled “Na-

National Broadband Plan of Greece: key facts 

tional Plan Next Generation Broadband 

Main strategic 

National Plan Next Generation 

Access 2014 – 2020” (also referred to as 

document(s): 

Broadband Access 2014 – 2020  

NGA  plan)  under  the  auspices  of  the 

Ministry  of  Economy,  Infrastructure, 

Tourism  and  Shipping.  Therein,  Greek 

officials  essentially  reiterate  the  DAE 

2020 targets, aiming to achieve online 

access with speeds over 30 Mbps for all 

Greeks by 2020, and 50 % house- 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020  

  50 % HH penetration with 

100 Mbps by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

Targets: 

hold  penetration  of  internet  speeds  

Table 32 NBP Greece key facts 

exceeding 100 Mbps.74 The Greek approach is reportedly based on a combination of political, regula-

tory and financial interventions and progress monitoring. There are basically two pillars, also known 

as action lines, where government efforts will be concentrated:  

  Pillar A revolves around setting up a business environment favourable for private investments,  

  Pillar B focuses on increasing next-generation broadband access in areas with little perspective 

for infrastructure and service development.  

In particular, the  Greek NBP outlines  two action areas: “Rural Extension”, designed to intervene  in 

"white areas”, and “Super-Fast Broadband”, aiming to achieve connectivity of 50 % of households with 

speeds of at least 100 Mbps. 

In order to reduce overall infrastructure roll-out costs, Greece intends to transpose and benefit from 

measures related to the EU’s Cost Reduction Directive 2014/61/EU. This includes access to the existing 

physical infrastructure, the establishment of mapping tools, the coordination of civil works and trans-

parency  of  planned  projects  among  public  and  private  actors.  More  generally,  the  Greek  national 

74 Available online (Greek version): http://www.yme.gr/getfile.php?id=5836 

  110 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
broadband plan states explicitly that it views the NGA network infrastructure development as a key 

strategic policy in helping to overcome the economic crisis and achieve sustainable economic growth. 

In terms of investments, the broadband strategy expects the private sector to take on the vast majority 

of the weight of these investments, with public intervention focusing mostly on areas characterised by 

market failure. Required funding will range expectedly between EUR 1.36 billion and EUR 4.53 billion. 

Greece has no regional broadband plans. However, 

regional/transregional  projects  were  put  in  place, 

according to the Greek NGA plan. In European com-

parison, Greece ranks among the countries with the 

lowest  NGA broadband coverage. In 2014, Greece 

was outperformed in terms of NGA broadband cov-

erage  regarding download rates >  30 Mbps (Euro-

Main challenges for NGA roll-out in Greece: 

 

Low affordability of telecommunications 
services and investments 

  Geographical conditions and low  popu-
lation density of the remaining 5 – 10 % 
uncovered areas 

  No  central  infrastructure  mapping  tool 

in place yet 

pean Commission, Digital Agenda Scoreboard), with 

  Fostering  of  FTTB/FTTH  deployment 

an availability rate lower than 40 % of households. 

needed 

Importantly, Greece’s existing broadband networks 

predominantly depend on DSL (99 %), VDSL (34 %) 

  Decrease of digital divide and improve-

ment of digital literacy advisable 

and mobile (HSPA, LTE) or satellite solutions. There is virtually no FTTP or CATV available in Greece.75 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and 

top-down 

Networks (Secretariat General for Tele-

communications and Posts) 

 

The National Telecommunications and 

Posts Commission 

Figure 27 Organizational Steering & Main Players Greece 

75 Cf. Broadband coverage in Europe in 2014 by IHS and VVA 

  111 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.12.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The  achievement  of  Greece’s  NBP  targets  constitutes  a major  challenge,  especially  considering the 

country’s difficult overall economic situation. Concerning the coverage target (100 % coverage with 30 

Mbps by 2020), we see that Greece has currently a rather low coverage (36.3 %) and there is only a 

low probability that this coverage will improve so drastically for the target to be met.  

In Greece, OTE is the only provider that has substantially invested in infrastructure for the provision of 

NGA services via VDSL technologies, both on retail and wholesale basis.76 However, the vast majority 

of existing PSTN networks are not NGA networks. As a result, xDSL is still the dominant access technol-

ogy since cable or FTTX  infrastructure do virtually  not exist in Greece. Alternative providers’ public 

statements and comments during the public consultation of the Greek NGA plan indicate that they are 

rather cautious with regard to both investing in FTTC and making use of bit stream wholesale services 

(by the dominant provider OTE) for providing high speed internet access.  

Despite a certain level of competition in the market, consumer prices for NGA connections are above 

European average (roughly 5 % of the median monthly income is spent for the lowest price compared 

to an EU average of 3%). In addition, economic hardships and relatively high taxes decrease the afford-

ability for end customers and investments by operators alike.  With the exception of investments by 

the OTE Group (in VDSL and 4G), by Vodafone (in 4G) and Wind (in 3/4G), the remaining providers 

have practically frozen their investment activities (limiting themselves to low cost investment.) 

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), we 

estimate that there is also a low probability to actually meet this target. Currently, a calculated num-

ber of 0.01 % of households fulfil this criterion. Again, this is mainly a result of outdated infrastructure 

in Greece and therefore a lack of supply (copper-based networks as the dominant source of connec-

tivity). Furthermore, despite the wide availability of basic broadband services at competitive prices, 

the overall penetration rate for both fixed and mobile broadband remains rather low, partly due to 

affordability, partly due to the digital divide and levels of digital illiteracy in Greek society. Increasing 

the problem of low investments in fixed networks, there is a rising number of mobile broadband only 

users.  

The Greek NBP identifies several of these issues and clearly defines strategies and measures to tackle 

them. It is very operational and defines tasks, schedules, responsibilities and monitoring procedures. 

76 OTE was the only telecommunication’s provider in Greece back in 1998. OTE was partially privatized with the following shareholder dis-
tribution: Deutsche Telekom: 40%, International Institutional Investors: 29.5%, Greek Institutional Investors: 10, 7%, Greek state: 10%, 
Other shareholders: 9.8%. 

  112 

 
 
                                                           
However, notwithstanding the large efforts made, Greece’ s resources are currently limited. Although 

there is state aid and substantial EU funding available, achieving 100 % NGA coverage and thus replac-

ing outdated infrastructure will be a burdensome process. Due to the absence of cable and FTTP net-

works, there  is only  a  low pressure on the  incumbent  to upgrade  its  copper-based network. Other 

measures to incentivize private investments (e.g. simplification of administrative procedures, digital 

registry of infrastructures) can, however, contribute to improve the situation. Greece has realized that 

due to limited resources, the main viable approach is to increase transparency and coordination to 

reduce the costs for private investments. Hence substantial progress (e.g. transposition of EU cost re-

duction directive, mapping tools etc.) within this field of intervention should be one of the key priori-

ties for Greece. Thus, despite the country’s difficult overall situation, further progress can still be ex-

pected.  

  113 

 
 
 
 
7.2.13  Hungary 

Hungary facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance 

Unitary state (parliamentary representative republic) 

Population:  

9,849,000 (1.94 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

106.1 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

93,011 km2 (2.29 % of EU)III  

Great Hungarian Plain, North Hungarian Mountains, Aus-

trian foothills in the west 

Fixed BB Incumbent market share: 

Magyar Telekom: 42 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA-Coverage: 

78 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

15.77 EUR77 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 33 Hungary facts & figures 

77 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  114 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.13.1  Key Features 

In  2004,  Hungary  developed  a 

broadband  plan  “National  Broad-

National Broadband Plan of Hungary: key facts 

band Strategy” laying the fiscal and 

Main strategic 

National Infocommunication Strategy 

policy  foundation  for  network  roll-

document(s): 

2014-2020 

out and strategy implementation. In 

2007,  the  document  was  followed 

by  the  so-called  Broadband  Action 

Plan  (BAP).  The  latest  broadband 

strategy paper was devised in 2014 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 

2018.  

  50 % HH penetration with 100 

Mbps service by 2020 

under  the  title  “National  Infocom-

Identical to DAE-

No (more ambitious coverage target) 

munication Strategy” for the  

Targets: 

period  2014-2020.78  The  current 

Table 34 NBP Hungary key facts 
strategy is in line with the DAE and envisions that all households have access to at least 30 Mbps in-

ternet and at least 50 % of the households should have 100 Mbps or faster internet access.  

With regard to funding, the National Broadband Plan states that about 180 – 210 billion HUF (EUR 600 

- 700 million) of investments are needed in order to assure at least 30 Mbps internet speed for all 

households in Hungary.  

Concerning potential problems and risks in terms of 

the realisation of the broadband targets, Hungary’s 

Main Challenges for NGA-rollout in Hungary: 

  Stronger  involvement  of  local  and  re-

NBP notes the possibility of a shortage of financial 

gional actors 

resources and EU funds. White spots in rural areas, 

  Possibly  more  national  and  EU  funds 

similar to other territorially bigger countries, repre-

sent a problem in Hungary, as well. Hungary’s NBP 

also  includes  demand-stimulating  measures.  In 

terms of reducing roll-out costs, Hungary commits 

to establish a detailed infrastructure map, access to 

public  infrastructure  and  facilities  of  public  utility 

entities as well as to simplify and shorten construc-

needed 

  Stagnant  FTTB/H  market  share  at  rela-

tively low level  

 

 

Increase of mobile  broadband penetra-
tion needed 

Lack of a central infrastructure mapping 
tool 

  Considerable  levy  on  broadband  lines 

(public utility tax) 

tion permission procedures. Overall, the Hungarian 

  Relatively  high  prices  for  NGA  connec-

broadband strategy centres on promoting market-

tions 

78 Available online (English version): URL: http://www.kormany.hu/download/5/ff/70000/NIS_EN_clear.pdf 

  115 

 
 
                                                           
based broadband roll-out by enacting adequate public policy and regulatory measures. Where deploy-

ment incentives for market players are lacking, credit or tender schemes (e.g. tax relief for broadband 

developments, allocation  funds to support investments, etc.) shall be provided  to support  network 

upgrades.  

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of National Development of the 

top-down 

Republic of Hungary, Deputy Secretary of 

State for Infocommunication 

 

The Ministry of Interior of the Republic of 

Hungary 

 

The National Media and Infocommunica-

tions Authority 

 

Cabinet Office of the Prime Minister 

Figure 28 Organizational Steering & Main Players Hungary 

7.2.13.2  Feasibility Assessment 

Hungary has set a considerably ambitious coverage target (100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2018). 

Given this rather short timeframe and the current NGA coverage being at 78.2 %, meaning that 21.8 

% are still to be covered in the upcoming years, enormous efforts will be necessary in order to achieve 

this target. Nonetheless, based on the current situation and plans envisaged, reaching the target is 

certainly  not  impossible.  Hence,  we  assume  a  medium  probability  for  Hungary  to  reach  its  target. 

Especially in the context of the “Economic Development and Innovation Operational Programme 2014-

2020 (GINOP)”, largely financed by EU-funds, Hungary has set up a substantial funding mechanism, the 

so-called “Superfast Internet Programme”, thereby making around EUR 250 million of state aid avail-

able for broadband roll-out.  In total, (public and private investments combined) investments of nearly 

EUR 500 million are envisaged to be made until 2018. Hence, the achievement of Hungary’s coverage 

target will largely depend on the success of these investments. Considering the two years longer time 

frame of DAE target II, a medium probability with more positive outlook to reach the target can be 

assumed. 

  116 

 
 
 
 
 
 
In any case, Hungary needs to narrow the strong digital divide between urban and rural areas. In urban 

areas, upgraded cable networks are available and competing with FTTP/VDSL, whereas in rural areas, 

this kind of infrastructure based competition is missing, resulting in only 20.3 % rural NGA coverage. 

While in other countries the digital divide is decreased by the use of mobile broadband services, in 

Hungary this development is currently less important. A low mobile broadband penetration rate of 

34.5 % is an indicator of this situation. However, in the Hungarian case it is not a lack of LTE coverage 

(supply) that leads to low penetration rates. Even in rural Areas there is 84 % LTE coverage. There is 

still substantial rate of “non-liners” (21.16 %, mainly in rural areas) that hinders a higher demand for 

(mobile) broadband services.  

Take-up is relatively high in Hungary. Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing 

to 100 Mbps or more), Hungary is relatively advanced. We calculated a HH penetration rate of 12.86 

%. Due to the strong growth for ultrafast subscriptions (+305 %), we expect a medium-high probability 

for Hungary to meet the take-up target. As a result of the strong market share of cable operators (48 

% of all broadband connections), the technical requirements for meeting the target are met, given that 

all of these networks are to be upgraded to DOCSIS 3.0 or DOCSIS 3.1 by 2020. However, affordability 

might be hindering further take-up at one point in near future, as NGA prices are currently relatively 

high (4 % of the monthly median income). In this regard, the considerable levy on broadband lines 

(public utility tax) must also be regarded as a potential hindrance for NGA roll-out and take-up alike. 

However, the recently introduced VAT reduction on internet services as well as the introduction of a 

low-cost basic internet package (both part of Hungary’s “Digital Welfare Programme”) can be regarded 

as an important effort to decrease prices for end-costumers. Hence, if these measures prove to be 

successful, they could have a significantly positive effect on take-up rates, thus making the achieve-

ment of the target even more likely.    

The Hungarian NBP shows a mixture of strategic and operational aspects. Besides general statements 

and a vision for the use of broadband services in Hungary, there are also specific measures, under-

pinned with responsibilities, schedules and monitoring procedures. For example, an annual evaluation 

of the strategy is foreseen to be undertaken by the Ministry of National Development. There are sev-

eral supply side measures (e.g. public networks, support of local cooperatives, state aid, tax deduc-

tions, loans, spectrum management). Also, there are several measures to decrease the costs of de-

ployment (e.g. via an infrastructure mapping tool, increased coordination of civil works, simpler permit 

granting procedures). Furthermore, also the demand side is a significant part of the national broad-

band strategy. Especially e-Government and ICT skills are expected to increase the overall competi-

tiveness and welfare. The NBP  also  includes  demand side measures such as venture capital for ICT 

  117 

 
 
start-ups, research collaborations, the development of community internet service spaces and the in-

creased use of e-Government services. 

Overall, the outlook for Hungary’s future broadband development is very positive. The Hungarian NBP 

is very comprehensive and the most pressing issues are addressed, even though some measures could 

still be more operational. In this regard, strong incentives for large-scale deployment of FTTP technol-

ogies to compete with cable operators are a crucial aspect. In any case, the government also should 

continue to further increase the acceptance and impact of the NBP’s measures . 

  118 

 
 
 
7.2.14  Ireland 

Ireland facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

4,628,949 (0.91 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

67.5 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

69,797 km2 (1.72 % of EU)III  

Coastal mountain ring, low plains at the center 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Eircom: 35 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

80 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

31.76 EUR79 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 35 Ireland facts & figures 

79 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  119 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.14.1  Key Features 

The 

Irish  Government’s  National 

Broadband  Plan  (NBP)  from  August 

National Broadband Plan of Ireland: key facts 

2012  is  entitled  “Delivering  a  Con-

Main strategic 

National Broadband Plan 2012 & 

nected Society: A National Broadband 

document(s): 

the updated Intervention Strategy 

Plan  for  Ireland.”80  It  focuses  on  a 

(December 2015) 

threefold set of broadband targets:  

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

  70 Mbps – 100 Mbps available to 

by 2020 

at  least  50  %  of  the  population 

with  a  majority  having  access  to 

100 Mbps,  

  at  least  40  Mbps  and  in  many 

cases  much  faster  speeds,  to  at 

least a further 20 % of the popula-

tion and potentially as much as 35 

  50 % HH penetration with 100 

Mbps service by 2020, expect-

ing upstream bandwidth 

around 17 to 21 Mbps 

Identical to DAE-

Yes (except considering the up-

Targets: 

stream band width) 

%  around  smaller  towns  and  vil-

Table 36 NBP Ireland key facts 

lages and  

  a  minimum  of 30  Mbps  available 

to all.  

Upload speeds are also emphasised in the plan, expecting upstream bandwidth “in the region of 25 % 

to 30 % of the headline download speeds [70 Mbps]”, in other words, around 17 to 21 Mbps.  

In terms of financing, the Irish strategy centres on a combination of commercial and state-led invest-

ments,  the  latter  predominantly  in  areas  of market failure.  These  areas  are  particularly  difficult  to 

cover given that Ireland has one of the lowest population densities in Europe (67 people per km²). The 

total cost of state investment is around EUR 175 million over the period of the plan. Together with 

private investments, total costs are  roughly about EUR 350 million.  Additional resources will come 

from the release of frequencies of the mobile spectrum. Importantly, the Irish NBP stipulates that any 

state intervention will involve co-funding with the private sector. 

80 Available online (English version): http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/communications/SiteCollectionDocuments/Broadband/National%20Broad-
band%20Plan.pdf 

  120 

 
 
                                                           
In December 2015, the Irish government published an updated version of the National Broadband Plan 

Intervention Strategy. It targets at 100 % coverage of minimum 30 Mbps throughout the country and 

50 % take-up of minimum 100 Mbps. It aims at detailing how to ensure high-speed broadband, partic-

ularly in areas with market failure. For instance, the report refers to the legislation enacted in 2014, 

enabling the use of Electricity Supply Board’s (ESB) national distribution system to deliver fibre ser-

vices. As a result, the NBP states, a new wholesale operator has entered the Irish market. The upshot 

of  the  legislative  change  is  said  to  be  the  increased 

competition and growing investments in fibre to the 

home (FTTH) services by two operators – with the per-

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out in Ireland: 

 

Increase of infrastructure based compe-
tition in rural areas could prove useful 

spective of more players entering the market. In Oc-

  Further  decrease  of  the  digital  divide 

tober  2015,  the  Irish  government  published  yet  an-

needed 

other note entitled “Guidance on Potential Locations 

of  Telecommunications  Infrastructure”81  addressing 

  Ongoing 

increase  of  overall  market 

share of FTTP needed 

  No  central  passive  infrastructure  map-

the engineering appropriateness of siting telecommu-

ping tool in place 

nications infrastructure equipment on the roads net-

  Decreasing  demand  for  ultrafast  band-

work.  

widths 

The Irish broadband strategy also commits to reducing roll-out costs, for instance, by establishing a 

mapping system for existing infrastructure and emphasizes demand-stimulating measures as well. Fur-

thermore, fixed wireless and mobile broadband services are deemed important technologies in reach-

ing underserved areas. 

81 Available online: http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/communications/en-ie/Pages/Publication/Guidance-on-the-Potential-Location-of-Over-
ground-Telecommunications-Infrastructure-on-Public-Roads.aspx 

  121 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Department of Communications, Energy 

top-down 

and Natural Resources (Communications 

Section) 

 

Commission for Communications Regula-

tion  

Figure 29 Organizational Steering & Main Players Ireland 

7.2.14.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Ireland’s NBP targets is a challenging endeavour. Concerning the coverage target 

(100 % coverage with 30 Mbps or more by 2020), we expect a low-medium probability to achieve this 

target. The current NGA coverage in Ireland is currently 80 %, which is a decent coverage rate in EU 

comparison. However, there is a strong digital divide: in rural Ireland, only 24.9 % can subscribe to 30 

Mbps or more. Although there are substantial joint-venture initiatives (e.g. between the state owned 

ESB and Vodafone to establish 500.000 FTTP wholesale connections by 2018), the timely deployment 

within areas with a low population density will be difficult. Thus, fully covering the remaining 20 % will 

probably take more time.  

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), we 

conclude that Ireland’s position is better as the current deployment of fiber already bears fruits. As of 

today, we calculated that 13.24 % of households already subscribe to 100 Mbps or more. However, 

surprisingly (and in contrast to all other EU Member States), the demand for ultrafast bandwidths is 

currently declining (- 9 % from 2014 to 2015). This is an indicator that the demand side is currently not 

strong enough to achieve the target. Moreover, even though substantial NGA coverage already exists, 

the  availability  of  ultrafast  broadband  technologies  guaranteeing  100  Mbps  is  still  rather  limited. 

Whilst Ireland’s cable network is fairly well developed (resulting in a current market share of 29%), 

FTTP does not play yet a significant role within in the market. However, as substantial investments in 

further supply (especially FTTP) are expected and already ongoing, there is still a low-medium proba-

bility to meet the target. In this regard, the successful and quick implementation of the above men-

tioned joint-venture initiatives providing ultrafast connections will be crucial for meeting the take-up 

  122 

 
 
 
 
 
 
target. Why the demand decreased during the last year is inexplicable. NGA prices are affordable in 

Ireland (roughly 2 % of the median monthly income) and the economic situation is stable in comparison 

to the economic hardships of the recent past. In addition, the socio-economic indicators show that 

internet services are an important aspect of everyday lives of Irish citizens. Therefore, we assume that 

Ireland is one of the few examples where customers feel the cost/gain ration for higher connections is 

not worth a premium. 

The Irish NBP (and its 2015 intervention strategy) are operational documents. Measures, responsibili-

ties, schedules and monitoring procedures are described in a comprehensive manner. One of the most 

striking features is the planned wholesale open access FTTP network built via a utility provider/ISP joint 

venture (mentioned above). Besides  this joint venture,  the Irish NBP allocates substantial state  aid 

measures to foster the supply side. There are several other measures to incentivize supply and to bring 

down the cost of deployment (e.g. a mapping tool and the use of existing infrastructures). Moreover, 

especially the intervention strategy puts a particular emphasis on measures to reach the rural areas of 

Ireland. There are also several demand side measures, including the connection of public service facil-

ities (especially schools, local authorities). 

Overall, Ireland set up several convincing measures and initiatives, although the demand side needs 

even more focus than it has today to counter the decreasing demand for ultrafast connections. While 

the targets might not be met entirely by 2020, the Irish strategy paves the way to a high-speed broad-

band infrastructure in the nearer future. 

  123 

 
 
 
 
 
7.2.15  Italy 

Italy facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

60,795,612 (11.96 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

201.2 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

302,073 km2 (7.44 % of EU)III  

Mountain ranges in the north (Alps) and central peninsular 

(Apennine Mountains), Po Valley and two large islands (Sar-

dinia and Sicily) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Telecom Italia: 47 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

44 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

35.33 EUR82 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 37 Italy facts & figures 

82 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  124 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.15.1  Key Features 

Italy’s first broadband strategy was pre-

sented  as  “Piano  Nazionale  Banda 

National Broadband Plan of Italy: key facts 

Larga”  (PNBL),  adopted  into  national 

Main strategic 

“Strategia italiana per la banda ul-

law n. 69/2009. State aid was approved 

document(s): 

tralarga”, known as “Piano na-

by the European Commission with deci-

sion State aid n° SA.33807 (2011/N). In 

addition, a separate plan for rural areas 

was  released  and  approved  (National 

broadband plan for rural areas in Italy) 

under State aid n. N 646/2009.83  PNBL 

envisioned the provision of a download 

speed ranging from a minimum of 2 to 

zionale banda ultra larga” (PNBUL) 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020  

  50 % HH penetration of 100 

Mbps services by 2020 (to be 

achieved through 85 % cover-

age with 100 Mbps) 

a maximum of 20 Mbps.  

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

PNBL  envisioned  the  provision  of  a 

Targets: 

download  speed  ranging  from  a  mini-

Table 38 NBP Italy key facts 

mum of 2 to a maximum of 20 Mbps. The most remote and less populated areas should only have 

access to the minimum service threshold (2 Mbps) via sustainable wireless technologies. However, the 

implementation of the plan was delayed for various reasons.  

Just  after the 2010 approval of the Digital Agenda for Europe  (DAE), Italy contrived a new  plan for 

super-fast broadband “Piano Nazionale Banda Ultra Larga” (PNBUL). PNBUL envisages a minimum of 

30 Mbps across the country and ensures a potential take-up rate of 50 % of the population for internet 

connections above 100 Mbps based on FTTH technology. These targets comply with the DAE require-

ments. The plan provided the structure for the implementation of remaining EU funds programmes on 

broadband  under  the  2007-2013  framework  and  was  approved  via  SA.34199  (2012/N).84  In  March 

2015,  an  updated  version  of  the  plan  has  been  published,  approved  through  State  aid  SA.41647 

(2016/N), constituting the framework for the current EU funding period (2014-2020).85   

83 See the corresponding assessments of the European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/competi-
tion/state_aid/cases/242381/242381_1352102_93_2.pdf and http://ec.europa.eu/competi-
tion/state_aid/cases/233970/233970_1114455_30_1.pdf 
84 Information derived from the European Commission’s assessment of Italy’s Digital Plan: European Commission, SA.34199 (2012/N) – Italy 
Digital Plan – Super-fast broadband, http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4853.  
85 For the updated plan see: www.governo.it/sites/governo.it/files/strategia_banda_ultralarga.pdf; for the European Commission’s State aid 
assessment see: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/cases/264095/264095_1764969_101_2.pdf 

  125 

 
 
                                                           
The two plans envisage different technical interventions on the broadband network, to be carried out 

with partly different instruments and financing tools. While the first plan, PNBL, had a major emphasis 

on providing fibre optic links to central switches (backhaul-link through passive infrastructure), PNBUL 

targets also the distribution network, planning the construction of passive infrastructure (fibre optic 

link connecting the central switch to the cabinet (FTTC) or the premises in the case of public buildings 

(FTTB, FTTH)). 

PNBUL defines moreover three main types of intervention (Type A, B and C) in the overhaul of the 

broadband infrastructure.  

  Type A focuses on the development of Next-Generation Access (NGA) networks in public own-

ership.  

  Type B addresses telecom operators in upgrading the “last mile” understood in a broad sense 

as the set of active devices and carriers.  

  Type C provides support to users in isolated areas (such as mountainous areas) where geo-

morphological conditions render market-based broadband development less viable.  

PNBUL, Italy’s current broadband strategy, plans demand side interventions as well (i.e. towards rais-

ing the level of civic digitalisation).   

The strategy introduces three different scenarios for broadband funding, taking into account the avail-

Main Challenges for NGA-rollout in Italy: 

  Complexity of the administrative and co-

ordination processes 

  Further  increase  of  NGA  coverage  and 

take-up needed 

  Relatively low FTTP market share 

 

 

Incentivisation  of  more  private  invest-
ments needed 

Increase of ICT skills level of the popula-
tion advisable 

ability of public resources. The “best case scenario” 

states that about EUR 12 billion investments will be 

necessary to fully implement the plan of which half 

is expect to be covered by national and ESIF funds.  

Overall,  Italy  opts  for  FTTB  or  FTTH  solutions  in 

providing countrywide NGA networks. Mobile, sat-

ellite  and  wireless  technologies  represent 

im-

portant  alternatives  to  provide  internet  access  in 

underserved  areas.  For  these  areas,  the  Italian 

broadband strategy explicitly emphasises the use of 

public funds. Towards reducing costs in network roll-out, the Italian strategy also refers to the EU’s 

Cost-Reduction Directive with its measures. While there are no stand-alone regional plans, given Italy’s 

federal political structure, regional and local authorities are responsible for defining the operational 

programmes and setting intervention priorities consistent with the national strategy. 

  126 

 
 
Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Economic Development  

top-down 

 

COBUL – a new ministerial-level coordi-

nation committee also acting as an inter-

disciplinary competence centre 

  National regulatory authority 

Figure 30 Organizational Steering & Main Players Italy 

7.2.15.2  Feasibility Assessment 

Achieving the targets of its NBP will be a cumbersome process for Italy. Beginning with the coverage 

target (100 % coverage with 30 Mbps or more by 2020): the current NGA coverage is 43.9 % and we 

expect a low probability to meet the target. There is a strong digital divide observable: in rural areas, 

there is basically 0 % NGA coverage. Furthermore, Italy suffers from a lack of CATV and an outdated 

legacy copper network, which leads to a lack of infrastructure based competition. Therefore, it will be 

very  difficult  for  Italy  to  bridge  that  gap,  despite  the  current  deployment  process  and  use  of  vast 

amounts of public funds. Especially in rural areas, where demographic and topographic challenges ex-

ist, it is cumbersome to achieve a 100 % NGA coverage within the next years, despite the progress 

made by very advanced regions such as Emilia Romagna. 

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), there 

is a similar picture. We estimate that there is a low probability to meet the target. We calculated that 

0.54 % of households currently fulfil the criterion. However, the chances to achieve the take-up target 

are significantly higher than in the case of the coverage target due to substantial progress in urban 

areas. 

There is, however, a chance left that Italy will outperform our prognosis: Before changing its ownership 

status (it was taken over by a French group), Telecom Italia had committed in early 2016 to a very 

courageous industrial plan of NGA roll-out, concentrating on covering 40 main Italian towns with FTTH, 

thereby raising the ambitions of previous planning. In fact, the 2016 – 2018 version of the industrial 

plan stated as its objective the explicit coverage of 84 % of the population with NGA by the end of 2018 

  127 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
and 98 % with mobile LTE (4G). It calculated a total investment of EUR 12 billion. However, it is ques-

tionable whether Telecom Italia will continue to make the same investments in its current situation. 

Concerning the supply side, one noticeable wholesale dark fibre provider is the private-public group 

Metroweb Italia, partly owned by the CDP Spa with a minority stake, which is a private holding fully 

controlled by the Italian Government. The group Metroweb Italia in the last years has started to im-

plement a sizable industrial plan of NGA networks construction (mostly FTTH), starting from the most 

profitable urban areas of the country, and willing to partner with telecom operators such as Vodafone 

and Wind to offer the resulting capacity at wholesale level.86 

In the last few years, under a new countrywide investment scheme, momentum spurred, supported 

by the first NBP and then again from 2013, with the first implementation of the new 2011 National 

Plan  for  Superfast  broadband,  other  operators  have  started  to  invest  in  broadband  infrastructures 

(mostly LTE antennas and selected segments of the FTTC architecture). In Italy, the public intervention 

has already created a very unique and counterintuitive situation, in which the more socio-economically 

disadvantaged southern areas are now the best performers for digital connectivity, both in first gen-

eration broadband and prospectively also in second generation broadband.  

Notwithstanding the supply side, fostering the demand side remains a mayor challenge. This includes 

a declining number of fixed lines, penetration of fixed broadband that is stalled at current levels, lim-

ited consumption of audio-visual content, and a still high ratio of “non-liners” (27.89 %). Given the 

current state of digitisation, the low relevance of the ICT economy and e-public services in Italy, de-

mand side measures will continue to be crucial for reaching the DAE targets and to ameliorate Italy’s 

overall digital development.  

The Italian NBP comprehensively addresses supply and demand at the same time: It includes several 

concrete measures to strengthen supply (e.g. state aid, more than EUR 1 billion EU-funds available) 

and measures to bring down the costs of deployment (e.g. infrastructure cadastre). Furthermore, the 

new NBP further focuses on demand stimuli, including vouchers providing ICT services and training, 

specifically  designed  for  the  part  of  the  population  (or  even  SMEs)  currently  excluded  or  not  ade-

quately incentivized to adopt and use broadband and digital services. 

The focus on demand side activities is well chosen, but the potential of strengthening administrative 

simplification and the operative capacity of the public administration should not be underestimated 

86 Other utility and network operators have some long distance segments of fiber optics or rings, but their operative dimensions or preva-
lent activity so far do not compare with the previous telecom operators. The main ones are: the national railway (F.S.) and motorway in-
cumbent companies (Autostrade per l’Italia), the national electricity incumbent (ENEL) and other local utility companies. 

  128 

 
 
                                                           
and persists to be a challenge. If private investment takes place as planned, administrative procedures 

and fund management are running efficiently and private demand takes up significantly, it is still pos-

sible for Italy to reach its targets. However, irrespective of whether the targets will be met or not, Italy 

has made substantial efforts in recent years, leading to further improvement in the nearer future.  

  129 

 
 
 
 
7.2.16  Latvia 

Latvia facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

1,986,096 (0.39 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

32.0 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

64,573 km2 (1.59 % of EU)III  

Largely undulating plains, uplands in the western (Kurzeme) 

and central part (Vidzeme) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Lattelecom: 59 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

91 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

14.70 EUR87 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 39 Latvia facts & figures 

87 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  130 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.16.1  Key Features 

In 2012, the government approved 

Latvia’s  National  Broadband  Plan 

National Broadband Plan of Latvia: key facts 

“The  conception  of  next  genera-

Main strategic docu-

The conception of next generation 

tion broadband electronic commu-

ment(s): 

broadband electronic communica-

nication  network  development 

2013  –  2020”.88  Latvia  has  set  its 

national  broadband  objectives  to 

reach  100  %  coverage  with  30 

Mbps until 2020 and 50 % house-

hold  penetration  with  100  Mbps 

service until 2020. 

The  overall  goal  is  to  ensure  the 

availability  of  high-speed  broad-

band network access (NGA), espe-

tion network development 2013 -

2020 (Nākamās paaudzes platjoslas 

elektronisko sakaru tīklu attīstības 

koncepcija 2013 – 2020 gadam) 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020  

  50 % HH penetration of 100 

Mbps services by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

cially in scarcely populated and/or 

Targets: 

remote territories where telecom-

Table 40 NBP Latvia key facts 

munications providers do not see any commercial interest.  

The Latvian NBP has a number of action areas which include:  

  developing backbone networks,  

 

the implementation of the so-called second round of the optical network state aid programme 

which intends to provide an infrastructure upgrade in areas where there are no optical access 

points, 

  promoting the installation of mobile communications base stations,  

 

 

 

informing citizens about the possibilities of NGA networks, 

setting up a state aid programme for regions characterized by market failure, 

selling lots from the frequency spectrum,  

  establishing a database of existing infrastructures where state and telecommunication com-

panies have access and 

88 Summary available online (English version): URL: http://www.vvc.gov.lv/export/sites/de-
fault/docs/LRTA/Citi/Summary_of_the_Concept_for_the_Development_of_Next_Generation.doc 

  131 

 
 
                                                           
  minimising the administrative burden and costs in infrastructure roll-out (including simplified 

permission procedures). 

An interim comparison of planned and actual outcomes of the Latvian NBP with regards to broadband 

deployment yields the following picture: planned set up of NGA points in rural areas: 165 (actual out-

come: 177);  planned  siting  of optical  cable  connections 

between main grid and access  points: 1,900 km (actual 

outcome: 1,800 km).  

Main Challenges for NGA-rollout in Latvia: 

  Digital Literacy should be improved 

  Relatively strong digital divide 

In  terms  of  funding,  Latvia’s  NBP  estimates  investment 

  Mainly GPON architecture, few p2p 

need of about LVL 500 million (EUR 711 million), of which 

 

Increase of LTE coverage needed 

LVL 144.2 million stem from EU funds and LVL 75 million 

  Transparency  concerning  existing  infra-

from the private sector. The largest part of financial aid 

provided by the government went to the previous project 

structures could be improved 

“Next Generation Electronic Communications Network Deployment in Rural Areas” from 2012 – 2015.  

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered top-

  Ministry of Transport of the Republic of 

down 

Latvia (in cooperation with the Ministry 

of Environment Protection and Re-

gional Development of the Republic of 

Latvia) 

Public Utility Commission  

Council of Electronic Communications 

Latvia State Radio and Television Cen-

 

 

 

tre 

Figure 31 Organizational Steering & Main Players Latvia 

7.2.16.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Latvia’s NBP targets is possible. Concerning the coverage target (100 % coverage 

with 30 Mbps or more by 2020) Latvia has made significant progress in recent years. Currently, the 

total NGA coverage is 90.7 %. We estimate that there is a medium probability that Latvia will be able 

to bridge that gap. However, there is a strong digital divide: in rural areas, 47.2 % of the population 

  132 

 
 
 
 
 
 
can subscribe to 30 Mbps or more. Overall rural broadband coverage also remains a critical issue in 

Latvia. In 2015, 54.9 % of all households in rural areas had access to basic broadband – for the EU-28, 

rural coverage for basic broadband was as high as 90.6 % in 2015.89  

FTTP is widely available throughout Latvia (FTTP coverage is approximately 85 %, one of the highest 

values in Europe), leading to future-proof connectivity. One slightly negative aspect is the usual de-

ployment of GPON architecture as the main technology, while p2p architectures are rare. Concerning 

the digital divide, VDSL and mobile technologies will probably be able to bridge the gap until country-

wide FTTP is available. Hence, if Latvia manages to concentrate its efforts and effectively deploy these 

bridging technologies, rural areas could be fully covered by 2020 and the coverage target be reached.  

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), we 

estimate  that  there  is  also  a  medium  probability  of  achievement.  We  calculated  that  the  current 

household penetration rate is 25.3 %. Although this is already an impressive number, it remains yet 

uncertain whether another 25 % will take up ultrafast bandwidths by 2020. There are several reasons: 

First, despite the low NGA prices in Latvia in absolute numbers, prices for connectivity are at EU aver-

age (roughly 3 % of the monthly median income). Furthermore, overall broadband growth rates are 

nearly stagnant (+ 0.4 %).  Although there is discernible growth for ultrafast bandwidths (+ 11.44 % 

growth), higher growth rates will be necessary to achieve 50 % take up by 2020. 

Despite the tendency for decreased investments in the last few years, market players appear to show 

sufficient commitment to network roll-out. The incumbent, Lattelecom, dominates fibre roll-outs with 

bandwidths up to 500 Mbps. In urban areas, several smaller operators offer such services as well. 90 

Looking at the Latvian broadband market, it becomes apparent that the incumbent’s share has been 

steadily high since the market liberalisation, although with significant fluctuations ranging from 44 % 

(2007) to 69 % (2004). Currently, the incumbent’s market share amounts to 59 %.  

The Latvian NBP tries to tackle most of the issues mentioned above with several measures. It is a very 

comprehensive and operational NBP with well-defined measures, responsibilities, schedules, indica-

tors and monitoring procedures. It also envisions a regular evaluation regarding its own progress. The 

parts supporting the supply side are however relatively short. Latvia highlights the importance of pri-

vate investments, although some state aid funds are available (especially for funding the “middle mile” 

89 European Commission, Digital Agenda Scoreboard, Indicator: Rural standard fixed broadband coverage (as a % of households). Defini-
tion: Coverage is a supply indicator defined as the percentage of Households living in areas served by xDSL, cable (basic and NGA), FTTP or 
WiMax networks. Rural areas are defined as those with less than 100 people per km2. 

90 Investment and Development Agency of Latvia (2014). Information and Communications Technology Industry In Latvia, p. 6. 

  133 

 
 
                                                           
and thus connecting previously white spot rural areas). Furthermore, it describes mobile technologies 

as an option for connectivity in rural areas. Concerning transparency, the main measure to bring down 

costs of deployment is the development of an infrastructure registry and mapping tool. Regarding the 

demand side, Latvia focuses on e-Skills, e-Government  and raising awareness for ICT topics.  In this 

regard, reaching the elderly rural population will remain a mayor challenge in the upcoming years.  

Overall, Latvia has made strong progress during the last few years and has established a remarkable 

broadband infrastructure. FTTP coverage is already very high, several hundreds of Mbps bandwidths 

are available for subscription and take-up steadily grows. If Latvia manages to narrow the digital divide 

(mainly by the use of state aid), it is well possible that Latvia will reach its targets. 

  134 

 
 
 
 
7.2.17  Lithuania 

Lithuania facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

2,921,262 (0.57 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

47.2 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

65,286 km2 (1.61 % of EU)III  

Lowlands along the coast and in the central part, south-

eastern plain, highlands in the north (Žemaičia Highlands) 

and the east (Baltic Highlands) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Teo LT: 46 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

97 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

11.42 EUR91 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 41 Lithuania facts & figures 

91 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  135 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.17.1  Key Features 

Lithuania’s  key  document  relating  to 

broadband  development  is  the  “Plan 

National Broadband Plan of Lithuania: key facts 

for  the  Next  Generation  of  Internet 

Main strategic 

Plan for the Next Generation of In-

Development  for  2014  –  2020  in  the 

document(s): 

ternet Development for 2014 – 

Republic  of  Lithuania”  adopted  in 

2020 in the Republic of Lithuania 

2014.92  The  Lithuanian  broadband 

goals are congruent with the DAE and 

aim at providing 100 % coverage with 

30 Mbps and 50 % coverage with 100 

Mbps  until  2020.  The  declared  over-

arching purpose of the programme is 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020  

  50 % HH penetration of 

100Mbps services by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

the  establishment  of  an  information 

Targets: 

society by increasing the use of ICT  

Table 42 NBP Lithuania key facts 

technologies and the access to broadband internet as a key economic, political and social tool. This 

includes initiatives to increase the level of digitisation and demand for broadband access. Lithuania 

also commits to establishing a mapping system of existing networks. 

In the implementation of the programme, funding 

will  come  from  municipal  budgets,  EU  structural 

funds and other public sources. Hitherto, Lithuania 

has  reportedly set  up  public  access  points  in  rural 

areas and public libraries. In particular, in the con-

text of two projects – “Public Internet Access Points 

in rural areas” and “libraries for innovation” – 700 

public internet access points have been established, 

83 such points have been updated and broadband 

internet was installed in 1276 public libraries until 

2013, respectively. 

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out in Lithua-
nia: 

  Establishing of official discussion boards 
for discussing the NBP to increase stake-
holder involvement 

 

Increase of mobile  broadband penetra-
tion needed 

  Few infrastructure based competition 

 

Increase of digital literacy and ICT skills 
is advisable  

Overall, Lithuania opts for a market-driven roll-out, mainly supporting infrastructure development in 

areas that suffer from market failure. Investments in next generation access technologies by private 

92 Available online (Lithuanian version): https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/en/legalAct/7e1fdab0600411e4bad5c03f56793630 

  136 

 
 
                                                           
operators are planned be diverse, including mobile technologies (3G, 4G), WiMAX and public WLAN 

solutions.  

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Transport and Communica-

top-down 

tions of the Republic of Lithuania (Infor-

mation Society Policy Department) 

 

Information Society Development Com-

mittee 

Plačiajuostis internetas 

Communications Regulatory Authority 

 

 

Figure 32 Organizational Steering & Main Players Lithuania 

7.2.17.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Lithuania’s NBP targets is relatively likely. Concerning the coverage target (100 % 

coverage with 30 Mbps), Lithuania is very close to meeting it. There is already a NGA coverage of 97 

%. Even within rural areas, Lithuania achieved an impressing NGA coverage rate of 84.4 %. We are 

therefore confident that there  is a  high  probability for Lithuania to achieve the  coverage target or 

come at least very close to the fulfilment by 2020. 

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), we 

estimate that there is a medium-high probability to meet the target. We calculated the current house-

hold penetration rate as 10.42 %. Considering the very high coverage and market share of FTTP con-

nections (60 % market share of all broadband connections), the take-up for ultrafast bandwidths is 

actually  lower  than  one  would  expect.  While  affordability  is  an  issue  in  Lithuania  (the  lowest  NGA 

prices are at EU average with 3 % of the median monthly income), there seem to be other important 

factors decreasing demand. As one example, it is obvious that the number of “non-liners” is still rela-

tively high (24.56 %) despite the wide availability of online services. However, despite this small nega-

tive aspect, the growth rate for ultrafast connections (+ 59.9 %) lets us assume that Lithuania is well 

on track and has decent chances to meet both targets by 2020. 

The reasons for Lithuania’s success are manifold. The NBP of Lithuania, however, definitely played a 

role in it. The NBP is operational, describing measures in all possible fields of intervention together 

  137 

 
 
 
 
 
 
with responsibilities, schedules and monitoring procedures. One example in the sphere of managerial 

and supply side measures was the introduction of the non-profit organization “Plačiajuostis internetas” 

as the main body for implementing the NBP. This organization also acts as a wholesale provider for 

FTTP solutions. As there is no relevant cable network available, the publicly financed deployment of 

FTTP networks and competition on service level is rather efficient from a macroeconomic perspective, 

as this approach avoids overbuilding and duplication of infrastructures. Furthermore, Lithuania also 

made substantial progress concerning transparency of infrastructures and coordination of civil works. 

What it currently needs is a stronger focus on the demand side; however, the Lithuanian NBP already 

includes several very strong measures (e.g. free internet service for households with economic hard-

ships, e-Government or capacity building). Overall, we conclude that Lithuania made the right steps 

with its current  NBP. The country is well on  track  and will either meet the targets by 2020 or  only 

slightly miss them. One remaining task is to further foster the demand side and provide more infor-

mation on the use of internet services to incentivize the still discernible number of “non-liners” to take 

up internet services. Moreover,” Plačiajuostis internetas” needs to be monitored and evaluated regu-

larly as it is one of the key actors of Lithuania’s NBP and crucial for its success. 

  138 

 
 
 
 
7.2.18  Luxembourg 

Luxembourg facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (constitutional monarchy) 

Population:  

562,958 (0.11 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

215.1 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

2,586 km2 (0.06 % of EU)III  

Hill ranges in the northern part (Ardennes), Luxembourg 

Plateau in the South 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

P&T Luxembourg (POST Technologies): 67 %  

(EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

94 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

44.60 EUR93 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 43 Luxembourg facts & figures 

93 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  139 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.18.1  Key Features 

In  2010,  Luxembourg  has  devised 

its “National strategy for very high-

National Broadband Plan of Luxembourg: key facts 

speed networks – Very high-speed 

Main strategic 

National strategy for very high-speed 

broadband  for  all.”94  The  strategy 

document(s): 

networks – Very high-speed broadband 

has  certain  unique  characteristics 

in an EU-wide comparison as it em-

phasises both down- and upstream 

rates  and  sets  a  series  of  interim 

targets.95  

for all 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 1 Gbps 

downstream and 500 Mbps up-

stream by 2020 

In  particular,  specific  bandwidth 

Identical to DAE-

No (more ambitious coverage target) 

goals are coupled with interim cov-

Targets: 

erage level objectives. The country 

Table 44 NBP Luxembourg key facts 

exceeds the DAE targets by far. Luxembourg commits to reach: 

  100 % coverage with min. 100 Mbps downstream and min. 50 Mbps upstream by 2015 (interim 

target), and  

  50 % coverage with min. 1 Gbps and min. 500 Mbps upstream by 2020.  

Luxembourg centres its strategy on market-driven broadband roll-out based on competition among 

the operators. Accordingly, the government notes that it “does not intend to support this plan [the 

broadband strategy] with public financing but will see to favourably influence the costs of network 

deployment”. This strategy is implemented by the following six measures:  

  ensuring access to the local loop,  

  putting in place a national construction works register,  

  putting in place a national infrastructure register,  

 

introducing an obligation to roll out associated facilities for optical fibre,  

  providing in-house wiring in new buildings,  

94 Available online (English version): http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4854 

95 Yet another objective was to achieve 2 Mbps downstream and 512 mbps upstream for all users by 2010. This target has already been 
met. 

  140 

 
 
                                                           
  broadening the mandate of Luxconnect (private company created by the Luxembourg Govern-

ment to improve the national dark fibre network).  

Luxembourg’s government supports the development of high-speed satellite access as well as it deems 

it helpful in reaching even those areas that are remote or sparsely populated with no business case for 

optical fibre network roll-out. In addition, Luxembourg 

also specifies a set of cost-reduction measures such as 

Main  Challenges  for  NGA-rollout  in Luxem-
bourg: 

the sharing of existing infrastructure and in-house wir-

 

Interim target missed (for 2015) 

ing. In terms of mapping, Luxembourg’s NBP commits 

  No national or European funds available 

to putting in place a national construction works regis-

ter  and  an  infrastructure  database.  Overall,  Luxem-

bourg emphasises the role of competition and the mar-

ket in facilitating infrastructure roll-out. The NBP does 

not  state a concrete  amount  of investments needed. 

Neither are there  any demand-stimulating measures. 

Nevertheless,  in  European  comparison  Luxembourg 

for broadband deployment 

  The  incumbent  is  the  sole  operator  to 

roll out FTTH 

 

xDSL is still dominant, despite high avail-
ability of HFC networks 

  Demand  side  efforts  will  be  needed  to 
encourage  the  switch  from  dominant 
xDSL connections towards FTTB/FTTH 

fares quite well already with regards to broadband take-up. The number of broadband subscriptions 

per 100 people is over 30, ranking Luxembourg in the upper quartile of Member States.96 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Economy, Department of 

top-down 

Communications and Media  

 

Luxembourg Regulation Institute 

Figure 33 Organizational Steering & Main Players Luxembourg 

96 Cf. Digital Agenda Scoreboard 

  141 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.18.2  Feasibility Assessment 

Luxembourg’s NBP’s target (100 % coverage with 1 Gbps coverage by 2020) supersedes the DAE cov-

erage target (100 % coverage with 1 Gbps by 2020) by far. Concerning the DAE coverage target, we 

estimate that there is a high probability that Luxembourg can meet the target. Concerning its own 

coverage target however, there is “only” a medium probability that the target can be met. Current 

NGA coverage in Luxembourg is already at 94.4 %. DOCSIS 3.0 cable networks are widely available and 

there is already a significant number of homes passed (roughly 50 % usually FTTH GPON). The incum-

bent is planning to deploy countrywide FTTP networks  despite  the high availability of VDSL.  Often, 

sufficient ducts are available in Luxembourg which simplifies the exchange of outdated infrastructures. 

Concerning the take-up target of the DAE (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 

2020), there is a low probability that Luxembourg will meet the target. Despite the overall high avail-

ability of NGA technologies in Luxembourg, we calculated that currently 7.33 % of households sub-

scribe to 100 Mbps or more. A negative aspect is a declining rate of broadband penetration (-0.9 %) 

which indicates a market saturation at 33.6 %.  The relatively slow take-up of additional broadband 

connections  is  surprising,  as  the  prices  for  connectivity  are  affordable  (roughly  2  %  of  the  median 

monthly income). However, if we assume that the existing subscribers all upgrade their existent con-

nections, which is doubtful, but not unlikely (given the current growth rate of ultrafast connections of 

63 %), Luxembourg can still come close to meeting the target.  

As there is sufficient supply in urban (infrastructure based competition between cable and FTTP) and 

rural (competition between cable, VDSL and partly FTTP) areas, demand seems not be strong enough. 

Luxembourg’s  NBP  includes  strategic  and  operational  aspects.  There  are  partly general  statements 

concerning the importance of broadband in general and specifically the importance of private invest-

ments as Luxembourg does not intend to spend state aid on infrastructure deployment. There is a clear 

focus  towards  FTTP,  but  a  quick  increase  of  network  performance  (and  hereby  the  use  of  bridging 

technologies) is intended. There are some measures underpinned with responsibilities, schedules, in-

dicators and monitoring procedures. However, transparency and demand are identified as the primary 

fields of intervention, characterized by the most concrete measures. In the case of transparency there 

are measures such as the establishment of a national construction work register, a national infrastruc-

ture register  and obligations  for in-house  wiring. Concerning the demand side, there  are measures 

such as an upgrade of the connections of public administration and academic institutions as well the 

connection of  business  parks  with  gigabit  connections.  However,  Luxembourg refrains  from  supply 

side stimuli in terms of state aid. 

  142 

 
 
Overall, Luxembourg is already in a strongly advanced position. The Grand Duchy already has a heavily 

developed broadband infrastructure and there is high level infrastructure based competition which 

will exchange VDSL networks with FTTP and upgraded DOCSIS networks. As ducts are available and 

steps are taken to increase transparency of existing infrastructures, the upgrade of Luxembourg’s in-

frastructure can be done at affordable prices. However, the demand side remains a challenge for Lux-

embourg: Despite high availability of next-generation access networks at affordable prices and the fact 

that internet services  are very well accepted in Luxembourg, take-up is still lagging behind.  Hence, 

xDSL technologies are still dominant, accounting for more than 75 % of fixed broadband subscriptions, 

with the rest being equally divided between Cable and FTTP. This is a result that definitely needs more 

research and calls for a strong focus regarding demand side measures in the future.  

  143 

 
 
 
 
7.2.19  Malta 

Malta facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

429,344 (0.08 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

1,352.4 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

315 km2 (0.01 % of EU)III  

Three larger inhabited islands 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Vodafone Malta: 48 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

100 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

42.30 EUR97 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 45 Malta facts & figures 

97 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  144 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.19.1  Key Features 

The  first  NBP  of  Malta  (“The  National 

Broadband Strategy”) covered the time 

National Broadband Plan of Malta: key facts 

period  between  2004  –  2006.  Its  suc-

Main strategic 

Digital Malta 2014 – 2020 

cessor “Digital Malta 2014 – 2020” was 

document(s): 

issued in March 2014.98 The strategy is 

also communicated via an online portal 

providing information, amongst others, 

on  Malta’s  policy  goals,  initiatives  and 

performance indicators.  

Malta’s infrastructure and other perfor-

mance targets are in line with the DAE 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020.  

  50 % HH penetration with 

100 Mbps service by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

Targets: 

targets: 100 % coverage with 30 Mbps  

Table 46 NBP Malta key facts 

until 2020 and 50 % take-up rate for 100 Mbps. Content-wise, the Maltese Digital Agenda defines dif-

ferent strategic themes, including digital business, digital citizen, digital government, human capital, 

regulation and legislation, and infrastructure. With regard to infrastructure in particular, the Digital 

Malta strategy envisions the following measures:  

 

 

to introduce cost effective and timely technologies to keep Malta competitive and vibrant as 

a digital nation, 

implement infrastructure that is resilient and capable of supporting future demands,  

  provide safe, accessible and trustworthy services, while protecting fundamental rights, free-

dom of expression, personal data and privacy.  

98 Available online (English version): https://digitalmalta.gov.mt/ 

  145 

 
 
                                                           
Moreover, Malta’s Digital Agenda emphasises both 

supply-  and  demand-side  related  aspects  and  co-

vers  measures  concerning  network-roll-out,  the 

sharing of existing infrastructure, as well as the pro-

motion of IPv6 as a preparation for the IoT.  

In terms of investments, the NBP states the possi-

bility  to  “explore  the  feasibility  of  private  funding 

and  public-private  partnerships”  for  the  deploy-

Main Challenges for NGA-rollout in Malta: 

  Digital literacy needs improvement 

 

Incentivisation  of  investments  in  wire-
less solutions  advisable to complement 
fixed networks 

  Further expansion of FTTB/FTTH, incum-
bent only recently started FTTH deploy-
ment 

  No central tool for service or infrastruc-

ture mapping available 

ment of infrastructures. However, this only applies 

  Relatively high prices decrease demand 

within  areas  where  market  failure  exists.  With 

for higher bandwidths 

Malta standing at a leading position within Europe 

with respect to NGA coverage, it is highly doubtful, that state aid will be needed in foreseeable future.  

Overall, Malta opts for infrastructure-based competition in meeting the DAE targets which, at the time 

of writing, the Maltese government was already close  to fulfilling. Due to the relative  small size of 

Malta, there are no regional broadband plans.  

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Economy, Investment and 

top-down 

Small Businesses 

  Malta Information Technology Agency 

  Malta Communications Authority 

Figure 34 Organizational Steering & Main Players Malta 

7.2.19.2  Feasibility Assessment 

Malta is one outstanding example, as it is the only member state that already met the coverage target 

of 30 Mbps available for 100 % of the population. The main source of connectivity within Malta is xDSL 

and cable networks. Both are widely available. Malta’s very high population density favours NGA in-

frastructure deployment. Densely populated areas often have cable networks available and distances 

  146 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
to the next street  cabinet are short  enough so that VDSL becomes a viable solution for initial NGA 

connectivity.  

However, despite the widely available NGA networks, take-up is lagging behind. Concerning the take-

up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more), Malta still needs improvement. We 

calculated that the current household penetration rate with 100 Mbps or more is as low as 0.99 % 

(with a growth rate of 14 %). We therefore conclude that there is only a low probability that the take-

up target can be met. This relatively low penetration rates might be a result of different developments: 

first of all, VDSL and cable currently deliver bandwidths that are sufficient for applications as of today 

and both technologies are able to deliver reliable NGA (30 Mbps and more) connections within areas 

of high population density. As demand for ultrafast bandwidths is relatively low, there are few incen-

tives to further invest in technologies that are capable of higher (upstream-) bandwidths. Nonetheless, 

the incumbent recently started to deploy FTTH, which will probably force the cable operators to keep 

up and upgrade to DOCSIS 3.1 in the near future. The demand side is lacking dynamism, among other 

reasons, due to relatively high prices (average 4 % of the Median monthly income for the lowest priced 

NGA subscription) and a relatively high number of “non-liners” (>20 %). Operators state that the main 

reason for higher bandwidths throughout Malta are a result of upgraded networks (without premium 

for end customers) and not the demand asking for better connections. 

Malta’s NBP is rather strategic than operational. There are some measures that are described in detail 

with a plan of implementation and monitoring procedures, while mainly general statements and pro-

visions are included. Especially concerning transparency measures the NBP remains vague. Concerning 

the supply side, Malta relies on a market driven approach which seems feasible considering the high 

population density. Mobile technologies are mentioned and regarded as a complimentary. The NBP is 

very comprehensive concerning the governing structures, stakeholder participation and evaluation of 

its own implementation. Measures on the demand side, however, Malta’s most pressing issue, are also 

quite detailed. Malta describes four demand side areas that it wishes to foster (Digital Citizen, Digital 

Business, Digital Government, Human Capital). Within these areas, there are four example education 

programs (including curriculae in schools), free WLAN in public spaces, connection of public admin-

istration, e-Government initiatives, IPv6 promotion and several others, underpinned by indicators and 

schedules. 

Malta’s NBP tackles the demand side problem with a variety of measures, which will surely have a 

positive effect  and lead to higher take-up rates in the  future.  While this strong direct focus on the 

demand side is comprehensible, more detailed measures decreasing the cost of deployment (e.g. via 

  147 

 
 
an infrastructure registry and mapping) or initiatives for the use of existing infrastructures and joint 

construction, tackling the problem from a different angle, could also be extremely beneficial for the 

country. All of these are important to increase supply and thus decrease prices which may be an im-

portant reason why take-up still needs discernible improvement.  

Summing up, altogether Malta has a demographic and topographic structure which is supporting the 

roll-out  of  infrastructures with  even  higher  capabilities  than those  of  today.  Therefore, there  is  no 

doubt that Malta is fit for its digital future.   

  148 

 
 
 
 
7.2.20  The Netherlands 

Netherlands facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (Constitutional monarchy) 

Population:  

16,900,726 (3.32 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

500.7 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

41,542 km2 (1.02 % of EU)III  

Low coastal area (16 % below sea level protected by dikes, 

hill ranges in the south) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

KPN: 42 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

98 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

22.02 EUR99 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 26.12 

EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 47 Netherlands facts & figures 

99 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  149 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.20.1  Key Features 

The  most  recent  strategic  docu-

ment concerning broadband policy 

National Broadband Plan of Netherlands: key facts 

is  the  “Digitale  Agenda  -  Vernieu-

Main strategic 

Digital Agenda.nl – ICT voor innovatie 

wen,  vertrouwen,  versnellen”100 

document(s): 

en economische groei (2011-2015) / 

(Digital Agenda - Renew, trust, ac-

celerate),  published  by  the  Minis-

try of Economic Affairs in July 2016 

and defining ICT strategies and ac-

tion lines for 2016/2017. The doc-

ument  does  not  contain  any  spe-

cific  coverage  or  penetration  tar-

Digitale Agenda - Vernieuwen, vertrou-

wen, versnellen (2016) 

Targets: 

 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 

2020.  

 

50 % HH penetration with 100 

Mbps service by 2020 

gets and also only very little infor-

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

mation regarding strategies or ac-

Targets: 

tion  lines  for  NGA  rollout  as  it  is 

Table 48 NBP Netherlands key facts 
strongly focused on demand side measures, i.e. promoting digitization (e.g. in education, health care, 

businesses, etc.) and cyber security/privacy. However, it can be regarded as a direct follow-up of its 

predecessor, “Digitale Agenda.nl - ICT voor innovatie en economische groei”101 (Digital Agenda.nl - ICT 

for innovation and economic growth) from 2011, which reiterated the EU’s DAE targets (100 % cover-

age  with  30  Mbps  by 2020  and 50  %  HH  penetration  with 100  Mbps  by 2020)  and  has  introduced 

strategies and measures which are still defining the Dutch broadband policy today. In 2011’s agenda, 

the Dutch government already mentioned that, despite its general acknowledgment, it does not regard 

the DAE coverage and take-up targets as its ultimate objective, but rather “that by 2020, networks will 

match the demand from users and suppliers of services.” This is further underlined by the complete 

absence of quantitative targets and the announcement of a study evaluating future demand and sup-

ply in the current agenda. 

Generally, the Dutch broadband strategy opts for a market-based infrastructure rollout. It thereby puts 

key emphasis on the role of local and regional actors in coordinating and simplifying the process. Im-

portantly, it is emphasized that the local government’s principal task is to create the right conditions, 

100 Available online (Dutch version): https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/binaries/rijksoverheid/documenten/rapporten/2016/07/05/digitale-
agenda-vernieuwen-vertrouwen-versnellen/digitale-agenda-vernieuwen-vertrouwen-versnellen.pdf 

101 Available online (Dutch version): http://digivaardigdigiveilig.nl/images/uploads/img/Digitale_agenda.nl.pdf; English version: 
http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4217 

  150 

 
 
                                                           
such  as  planning  and  coordinating  excavation work, shortening  and  reducing  the  costs  of  licensing 

procedures or promoting the development as well as the use of applications and services. Where mar-

ket-based infrastructure rollout fails, local and regional actors may assist and provide for funding and 

financing instruments. In this regard, also the usage of European public funds is mentioned as an al-

ternative. The central government’s role is mainly to facilitate NGA rollout by informing municipalities 

about the various aspects of a broadband project (e.g.  opportunities for state aid within the European 

state aid rules), ensuring the exchange of knowledge and best practices and providing an overview of 

current developments.  

A distinguishing feature about the Dutch approach is a NGN Task Force that has been appointed to 

specify the role municipalities and provinces could play in infrastructure rollout. In 2010, it has pub-

lished  a  corresponding  document  entitled  “Supersnel  Breedband.  Voor  al  uw  bewoners  en  bed-

rijven.”102 In parallel, the relevant regulatory and statutory framework for local authorities was set out 

in the Ministry of Economic Affairs’ guide entitled “Goed op weg met breedband, handreiking voor  

gemeentes en provincies.”103 Following the NGN Task Force’s advice, the creation of a platform for 

coordination and experience sharing was initiated. Correspondingly, the G32 (an association of middle-

sized municipalities) have established a foundation called City Link (“Stichting Stedenlink”104) for col-

laborative endeavours and best-practice sharing and, more generally, as an intermediary platform for 

discussions  between  municipalities,  provinces  and  central  government.  Municipalities  that  are  not 

members of the G32 can nonetheless join City Link and participate in its activities. With City Link, the 

local and regional actors also aim at establishing a link between the Digital Cities Agenda of the G32 

and the national Digital Agenda. Moreover, the government is currently considering the need for an 

umbrella scheme for public funding of broadband projects by local governments to facilitate the pro-

cedures for the approval of state aid with regard to European regulation. The overall progress of broad-

band rollout is assessed annually in the form of a “Broadband Monitor”. 

Apart from local and regional governments, the Dutch approach also attaches particular emphasis to 

citizens’ initiatives, which can constitute a valuable alternative for rolling out NGA infrastructure, es-

pecially in rural areas. Citizens are encouraged and supported in forming such initiatives and thus get 

102 Superfast broadband. For all residents and businesses. 

103 Available online (Dutch version): https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/binaries/rijksoverheid/documenten/brochures/2011/08/26/handreiking-
breedband/handreiking-breedband-internet.pdf 

104 http://stedenlink.nl/ 

  151 

 
 
                                                           
directly involved in NGA rollout. Information (e.g. regarding technologies, organizational forms and 

best practices) can be obtained via the online platform samensnelinternet.nl.   

A priority area in the Netherlands is to grant special attention to rural areas. According to the current 

digital agenda, in 2015 there were still approximately 330,000 households and businesses with no ac-

cess to fast internet, mainly located in rural, sparsely 

populated  areas  all  over  the  Netherlands.  Hence, 

faster satellite and mobile technologies are supposed 

to play an important role in bringing NGA to such ar-

eas, acting as complementary technologies. 

Main  Challenges  for  NGA-rollout  in  the 
Netherlands: 

 

Increase  of  number  of  available  ducts 
advisable, if possible 

  Decrease  of 
powers 

local  significant  market 

  No centralized (comprehensive) service 

mapping tool 

  Partly overbuilding of existing infrastruc-

tures 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Economic Affairs 

bottom-up 

 

The Authority for Consumers and Mar-

kets 

 

 

The Radio Communication Agency  

Local & regional authorities 

Figure 35 Organizational Steering & Main Players Netherlands 

7.2.20.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of the Dutch NBP’s target is well possible. Concerning the coverage target (30 Mbps 

with 30 Mbps by 2020), the Netherlands are very close to meeting the target. Currently there is a 98.3 

% coverage throughout the country. There is no significant digital divide discernible as rural areas have 

a similar high value of 97.8 %. Due to the relatively high population density and small size of the Neth-

erlands, xDSL and cable networks are currently feasible technologies to deliver NGA connections to 

the Dutch citizens. The incumbent now invests in FTTP (after the acquisition of an FTTP-only provider 

  152 

 
 
 
 
 
REGGEFIBER) and there are also local initiatives (e.g. cooperatives) deploying future-proof technolo-

gies on their own. Therefore, we estimate that there is a high probability that the Netherlands can 

achieve the coverage target by 2020. 

Regarding the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), there 

are mixed results. Overall, we conclude that there is a medium probability the Netherlands can actu-

ally meet the target. We base this conclusion on several premises. First, the calculated household pen-

etration rate with said bandwidths is currently 16.53 %. Given a growth rate for ultrafast connections 

of +33 % per year, the Netherlands would be able to meet the target. However, the growth rate is very 

strong and it is not without doubt that this trend will continue. Furthermore, the most probable source 

of higher connectivity are upgrades as growth for overall new fixed broadband connections is relatively 

low (+1 %) and the Netherlands already have the highest fixed broadband penetration rate across Eu-

rope (42.6 % of the population), which will lead to a market saturation at some point. However, digital 

services are well accepted within the Netherlands and there is no doubt that take-up and coverage will 

further increase. 

The main challenge for the Netherlands will be how to guarantee the upgrade of currently dominant 

xDSL technologies to FTTP and currently available DOCSIS 3.0 to DOCSIS 3.1 to make the most capable 

technologies available throughout the country. However, as the availability of ducts is limited and di-

rectly buried deployment took partially place, the upgrade to FTTP will require significant investments. 

Furthermore, the prices for NGA connections in the Netherlands are relatively low (1 % of the monthly 

median income), which decreases the incentive for operators to further invest in their networks as 

there is a low chance for an increase in revenue. 

The Dutch NBP is rather strategic. Most aspects of infrastructure development are described in a broad 

sense.  Especially  concerning  the  supply  side,  the  Dutch  NBP  leaves  most  questions  to  the  market 

forces. Consequently, the Dutch government describes the providing of a fitting regulatory framework 

as a main task, to be supported by a task Force on Next Generation Networks. Furthermore, the Dutch 

authorities recognized that local activities will be decisive for the coverage of the remainder of house-

holds currently not covered. Therefore, the foundation “City Link” is pursued to support local activities, 

share best practices and foster cooperation. The Dutch NBP specifically highlights the role of local ad-

ministrations that ought to simplify permit granting procedures, increase coordination and promote 

broadband services overall. Concerning demand side activities, the Dutch NBP’s approach includes a 

variety of ambitious and innovative measures to promote, inter alia, digitization, digital skills, e-Gov-

ernment, digital economy, which should be very beneficial for making the Dutch society and economy 

  153 

 
 
future-proof, even though some measures could be specified in a more comprehensive way (i.e. re-

garding indicators, time schedules or responsibilities). 

Overall, the Netherlands are in a very good position regarding broadband development. There is nearly 

100 % NGA coverage, take-up is considerably high and a high population density favours the efficient 

upgrade and exchange of networks. Furthermore, demand for ultrafast bandwidths is strong and ICT 

services well accepted.  

  154 

 
 
 
 
7.2.21  Poland 

Poland facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary republic) 

Population:  

38,005,614 (7.48 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

124.1 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

312,679 km2 (7.70 % of EU)III  

Central lowlands (Polish Plain), Silesian lowlands in the 

west, mountain ranges in the south, baltic coastal plains in 

the north 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Telekomunikacja Polska (TK): 30 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

77 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

16.64 EUR105 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 

26.12 EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 49 Poland facts & figures 

105 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  155 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.21.1  Key Features 

Poland  has  no  single  national  broad-

band  plan  but  a  series  of  documents 

National Broadband Plan of Poland: key facts 

that  circumscribe  the  overall  frame-

Main strategic 

Polish National Broadband Plan 

work, strategy and implementation ap-

document(s): 

(2014), Poland regulatory strategy 

proach  regarding  broadband  network 

roll-out.  The  country’s  broadband  tar-

gets are in line with the DAE and envis-

age 100 % coverage with 30 Mbps and 

50  %  access  for  households  to  broad-

band 

internet  with  100  Mbps  by 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020 

  50 % HH penetration with 

100 Mbps service by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

2020.106  Poland’s  broadband  plan  also 

Targets: 

outlines a series of socio-economic ob-

Table 50 NBP Poland key facts 

jectives including:  

 

 

 

 

 

safe and quick access to electronic public services and efficient communication between public 

institutions, citizens and businesses,  

the development of a digital society, 

the development of modern education, 

the development of research and innovation, and  

the creation of a digital single market. 

106 Relevant documents relating to Poland’s national broadband roll-out plans are: Polish National Broadband Plan (Polish version) (URL: 
https://mac.gov.pl/files/narodowy_plan_szerokopasmowy_-_08.01.2014_przyjety_przez_rm.pdf); Regulatory Strategy (Polish version) 
(URL: http://www.en.uke.gov.pl/regulatory-strategy-until-2015-11926) 

  156 

 
 
                                                           
Broadband infrastructure funding thereby comes from both EU and state funds as well as private in-

vestments. Poland’s broadband plan states that monetary resources from the EU are made available 

via the operational programme “Digital Poland” (“Polska Cyfrowa”), valid from 2014 to 2020. No such 

programme existed in the previous funding period.107 

Analyses presented with the NBP estimate the total cost of implementation to in the range of PLN 17 

to 42 billion (EUR 4 to 10 billion) depending on the technologies to be used (from a mix of wired and 

wireless technologies up to full FTTH access). 

The estimated investments in broadband infrastructure are approximately EUR 1.03 billion, to be ac-

companied by possible investments from private investors which are estimated to be around EUR 4 

billion. In the context of Digital Poland, telecommunications companies will receive funds for the con-

struction, extension or restructuring of broadband internet access and support for e-administration 

and  e-services  in  collaboration  with  the  local  and 

central government administration. Broadband ac-

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out in Poland: 

  Need  for  more  dialogue  between  all 

cess below 30 Mbps can be funded only exception-

stakeholders 

ally,  that  is,  in  remote  areas.108  Local  government 

  Relatively high amount of “non-liners” 

units  can  use  this  programme  to  implement  tasks 

aiming at e-integration and e-activation to increase 

intensity and quality of the use of internet. It is en-

  Possibly expansion of state aid and other 

forms of funding needed 

 

Low rural NGA coverage  

  Further  increase  of  fixed  broadband 

visaged  by  Polish  decision-makers  to  shift  the  re-

penetration needed 

sponsibility  for the  distribution  of  EU  funds  in Po-

 

land  to  provinces (“województwa”)  and  therewith 

increasing  the  importance  of  the  regional  opera-

Improvement of digital skills of the pop-
ulation advisable 

tional programmes. While between 2007 and 2013 local governments handled about 25 % of all funds 

for Poland, regional and local actors are now responsible for 40 %, thus further opening up to local and 

regional needs.109  

The Polish government expects additional funding opportunities under the financial instrument “Con-

necting Europe Facility”. In addition, Poland’s broadband strategy envisions funding through a long-

term  funding  mechanism  for  the  development  of  broadband  infrastructure  from  the  programme 

107 A non-official source states, that the EU’s current cohesion fund budget has allocated EUR 82.5 billion for Poland (2014 to 2020), making 
it one of the largest beneficiaries among the member states for the current funding period. These funds are implemented by way of opera-
tional programmes of which 6 are nationwide and 16 with regional focus. One of these programmes is Digital Poland. 

108 https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/country-information-poland#national-and-regional-broadband-financial-instrument 

109 Cf. http://www.roedl.com/pl/en/services/state_aid_advice/eu_funds_in_poland_20142020.html 

  157 

 
 
                                                           
"Polish Investments", open pension funds and other investors interested in long-term infrastructure 

investments. A requirement to make the mechanism work is said to be the cooperation of telecom-

munications companies with entities of the financial market, based on investments on market condi-

tions, guaranteeing maximised and safe return on investment. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered top-

  Ministry of Digital Affairs  

down 

 

 

Council of Digitization 

Committee of the Council of Ministers 

for the Digitization 

  Office of Electronic Communications 

Figure 36 Organizational Steering & Main Players Poland  

7.2.21.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Poland’s NBP targets will require large efforts. Concerning the coverage target 

(100 % coverage with 30 Mbps or more by 2020), we conclude that there is a low probability the target 

can be met. The current NGA coverage rate is 60.7 %. In rural areas, the NGA coverage is significantly 

lower at 33.8 %. This digital divide is even more visible when examining the LTE coverage (76 % total 

and 6 % rural coverage). Hence, state aid measures are an important aspect to increase coverage in 

the near future as there seem to be market failures in some regions and a significant part of the country 

still needs to be covered both by mobile and fixed technologies alike.  

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), the 

situation is similar:  Again we expect a low probability for Poland to meet its target by 2020. We cal-

culated that currently 4.23 % of households subscribe to 100 Mbps or more. There seem to be several 

reasons why  the  take-up is relatively low. Of course, as indicated above, supply  is not very  high in 

Poland  which  automatically  decreases  the  potential  take-up.  Furthermore,  the  demand  side  itself 

seems to be struggling. One of the most essential hurdles to overcome is the lack of knowledge and 

acceptance of its advantages by some social groups, administration and businesses. There are 27 % 

“non-liners” and all other socio-economic indicators are below EU targets. Furthermore, affordability 

  158 

 
 
 
 
 
 
seems to be an issue. The prices for NGA connections (lowest price) are currently  about 4 % of the 

median monthly income and hereby above EU average (3 %).  

To tackle these issues, there is a substantial use of state aid. Vast national and EU-funds (more than 

EUR 1 billion in the current funding period) are available to deploy new (backbone and access) net-

works and upgrade existing ones. According to the government, in 2015 the main broadband network 

has already been established. In frames of 14 projects, 29,345.87 km of network has been built. The 

project was realized through a cooperation of regional authorities and commercial developers. In the 

long-term, the results will be used by companies to provide access for private and commercial clients, 

thus making a significant contribution for increasing coverage and take-up alike.  

The Polish NBP is very comprehensive and describes a number of measures, underpinned by respon-

sibilities, schedules, indicators and monitoring procedures.  A special emphasis is laid on regulatory 

measures to provide for a level playing field and access to existing infrastructures. Regarding the supply 

side, as described before, state aid is considered an important part of broadband development. Mobile 

technologies are considered as an important bridging step. Next to the highlighted importance of pri-

vate investments, PPP models are also part of the NBP.  Poland also planned to bring down the cost of 

infrastructure deployment by means of increased coordination and transparency concerning existing 

infrastructures. A mapping system for planned and existing infrastructures is part of the plan as well 

as an active promotion of joint construction and guidelines for co-deployment.  

Finally, the demand side is also part of the NBP. The Polish government describes measures such as 

connecting schools, hospitals and public administrations. Furthermore, the development of e-skills, e-

services and e-government is prioritized to increase demand and thus make more areas economically 

viable across the country. 

Overall, Poland has already made substantial progress and will continue to do so. For the future, an 

even stronger focus on the already growing number of FTTP investments, incentivising further inten-

sive financing, both from the side of investors as well as financial institutions, would be desirable. To-

gether with well-spent state aid funds, there is a good chance that Poland will significantly improve its 

infrastructure and prepare itself for its digital future. 

  159 

 
 
 
 
 
 
7.2.22  Portugal 

Portugal facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (semi-presidential representative democratic 

Population:  

10,374,822 (2.04 % of EU)I 

republic) 

Population density:  

112.8 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

92,226 km2 (2.27 % of EU)III  

Low coastal area, lowlands in the north, uplands north of 

the Tejo river, hill ranges in the south and two archipelagos 

(Azores and Madeira) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Portugal Telecom: 46 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

91 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

32.36 EUR110 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 

26.12 EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 51 Portugal facts & figures 

110 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  160 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.22.1  Key Features 

Portugal’s  National  Broadband  Plan 

(“Agenda  Portugal  Digital”)  is  in  line 

National Broadband Plan of Portugal: key facts 

with the DAE targets (100 % coverage 

Main strategic 

Agenda Portugal Digital (Diário da 

with 30 Mbps until 2020, 50 % take-up 

document(s): 

República, 1.ª série — N.º 74 — 16 

rate for 100 Mbps).111 Portugal’s NBP 

must be regarded more as a law listing 

several objectives and responsibilities 

rather  than  an  integrated  plan  con-

cerning  specific  actions  by  a  specific 

institution. The NBP of Portugal is a di-

rect  update  of  Portugal’s  previous 

NBP published in 2012112 and also sets 

de abril de 2015) 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020 

  50 % HH penetration with 100 

Mbps service by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

Targets: 

objectives  concerning 

the  digital  

Table 52 NBP Portugal key facts 

economy and e-public services. Amongst others, these include the following additional goals:  

 

 

 

 

 

to create the conditions to increase the number of electronic commerce businesses by 55 % until 

2020 compared to 2011, 

to create the conditions to increase ICT exports by 25 % until 2020 (as compared to 2011),  

to promote the utilisation of ICT for decreasing the number of people that have never used the 

internet to 23 % until 2020,  

to provide internet access with 100 Mbps for 50 % of households by 2020, 

to promote digital public services so that the usage of such services converges with EU average by 

2020  

111 Available online: https://dre.pt/application/file/66991457 

112  See  https://dre.pt/application/dir/pdf1sdip/2012/12/25200/0730707319.pdf  and  http://www.entelis.net/sites/all/files/entelis_fact-
sheet_crisostomo_digitalagendaportugal.pdf  

  161 

 
 
 
                                                           
Other measures  of  Portugal’s NBP are the promo-

tion of appropriate levels of symmetry with regard 

to broadband lines and the improvement of mobile 

Main  Challenges  for  NGA  roll-out  in  Portu-
gal: 

  More  support  for  bottom-up  initiatives 

networks (e.g. LTE) by extending levels of coverage 

might be useful 

across the country. 

In terms of funding, the Portuguese NBP states that 

almost EUR 2.5 billion had been channelled into de-

veloping infrastructure until 2012. Close to EUR 1.1 

billion were invested by fibre infrastructure opera-

tors in the market, EUR 600 million were invested 

by various market agents in the development of ser-

vices and content and EUR 750 million in the devel-

opment and modernisation of networks. In the con-

  Establishing of public discussion boards 
concerning  the  NBP  could  further  in-
crease stakeholder involvement 

  Further  incentivisation  of  operators  to 
connect the last mile possibly needed 

  Digital  divide  between  urban  and  rural 

areas 

  Take-up  rates  are  a  challenge  due  to 
economic  hardship,  high  prices  and  a 
lack of digital skills and knowledge 

text of the rural networks programme, a budget of EUR 200 million was allocated, including EUR 106 

million of public subsidies.  

There are currently no specific regional broadband plans available, but regional development strate-

gies that cover broadband-related topics. Large-scale public funding for broadband deployment ended 

several years ago. Portugal trusts in a market-driven approach ever since. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Economics 

top-down 

  Ministry of Planning and Infrastructure 

(Secretary of State for Infrastructure) 

  National Regulatory Authority  

  Digital Agenda inter-ministerial commis-

sion 

Figure 37 Organizational Steering & Main Players Portugal 

  162 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.2.22.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Portugal’s NBP targets is possible. Concerning the coverage target (100 % coverage 

with 30 Mbps by 2020), there is a medium probability to actually meet that target. Portugal already 

has 91 % NGA coverage and there are still substantial investments by the private sector. However, the 

reason why there is no high probability of achievement is that there is a discernible digital divide (49.5 

% NGA coverage in rural areas). LTE is not a feasible substitute either as rural LTE coverage is 67 % and 

LTE as a shared medium cannot be considered technologically en par. Concerning the deployment of 

new networks, local and regional administrations are more and more important. There are regional 

approaches and regions trying to aggregate demand to make market driven deployment of infrastruc-

tures economically more attractive. 

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), there 

is also a medium probability of attainment. Portugal has already achieved a decent ultra-fast penetra-

tion rate (18.88 %). However, the current growth rate for ultrafast bandwidths (+12.43 %) needs a 

further increase in order to achieve the target by 2020. The market is not yet saturated. In Portugal 

there is a strong growth for new broadband connections (+3.3 percentage points in 2015). Combined 

with an upgrade of existing networks, it is possible to meet the take-up target by 2020, even though 

overall broadband take-up as of population is relatively low, amounting to 29 %, compared to an EU 

average of 31 % (as of total population). 

Portugal has made significant progress concerning its ICT infrastructure. Currently, there is a strong 

infrastructure-based competition between cable and FTTP networks. As usual, this kind of competition 

is considerably weaker in rural areas, where both cable and FTTP networks are less available, even 

though the rural coverage rate for both technologies is generally relatively high (36.9 % for cable and 

23.2 % for FTTP) and well above EU average. FTTP is currently being deployed by both, the incumbent 

and AOs. In this regard, a project that could be particularly important for the further coverage of rural 

areas is the extension of DSTelecom’s fibre network which takes place in the context of the European 

Commission’s “Connected Communities Initiative.” With the help of the European Investment Bank 

and the World Bank, providing financial and technical assistance, EUR 150 million are envisaged to be 

invested in deploying fibre in rural Portugal.  

Besides regulated access to ducts, some operators made agreements to reciprocally use their respec-

tive fiber infrastructures. Given the wide availability of cable and FTTP networks, the market share of 

said technologies is considerably high (cable and FTTP combined account for 58 % of the market). Con-

cerning demand, prices of broadband in Portugal are relatively high in relation to the average income 

  163 

 
 
(5 % of the monthly median income for the lowest priced NGA connection). However, one has to bear 

in mind, that Portugal is a country where bundled services have a high importance and we compared 

single play offers. 

The Portuguese  NBP is very strategic, defining measures, objectives and  indicators, thereby mostly 

leaving  the  detailed  implantation  to  the  responsible  entities.  There  are  also  some  organizational 

measures such as the creation of a monitoring committee for the Digital Agenda. Concerning supply, 

mobile technologies are considered as complimentary technologies and thus are briefly addressed (to 

be fostered via frequency release). 

Regarding transparency, the  NBP foresees the  introduction of a centralized information system for 

passive infrastructure in order to ensure open access to such infrastructures. The demand side is the 

most specific section of the NBP. The Portuguese government intends to connect public authorities 

and describes the promotion of digital skills as a necessary condition for innovation and the further 

development towards a knowledge society. Thus, several demand driving measures are described (e.g. 

smart metering, simplification of e-services, increase of e-government, e-health services and start-up 

creation). The Digital Agenda sets measurable targets and schedules for this part of the NBP.  

Overall, Portugal is one of the countries with very good perspectives concerning broadband coverage 

and services. Market driven deployment and competition worked well to deploy significant amounts 

of fibre lines throughout the country. FTTP coverage is among the highest in Europe (approx. 75 %), 

illustrating Portugal’s remarkable broadband infrastructure. Demand is overall good, but there is still 

a significant number of “non-liners” and generally speaking, digital literacy could be improved. The 

Digital Agenda addresses these issues, but the challenge of incentivizing demand in rural areas and 

thus making them economically more attractive will persist. To tackle this issue without the use of 

substantial amounts of state aid, the regions of Portugal will be highly important. Hence, further de-

mand aggregation, thereby convincing operators to take the risk of deploying high-end infrastructures 

within rural areas, should also be one of the key priorities in the future. 

  164 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.2.23  Romania 

Romania facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (semi-presidential, representative democratic 

Population:  

19,861,400 (3.91 % of EU)I 

republic) 

Population density:  

86.5 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

238,391 km2 (5.87 % of EU)III  

Mountain ranges in the north and central part (Carpathi-

ans), Transylvanian Plateau, lowlands in the west, south and 

east 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Romtelecom: 26 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

72 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

13.04 EUR113 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 

26.12 EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 53 Romania facts & figures 

113 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  165 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.23.1  Key Features 

The Romanian government has initially 

adopted a national strategy for the de-

National Broadband Plan of Romania: key facts 

velopment  of  electronic  broadband 

Main strategic 

Government Decision HG 

communication in Romania for the pe-

riod from 2009 to 2015.114 The strategy, 

which 

ran  under  Resolution  no. 

444/2009,  emphasized  the  role  of  the 

competitive market and the fundamen-

tal principle of technological neutrality 

in  rolling-out  high  speed  broadband 

networks. Back in 2008, when the strat-

egy was developed, Romania adopted a 

dynamic  understanding  of  broadband, 

therewith incorporating the trend that 

internet bandwidth demand will  

increase progressively in the upcoming 

document(s): 

414/2015 (Romanian programme 

for the implementation of the Na-

tional Plan for NGN infrastructure 

development) and 245/2015  (Na-

tional Strategy on Digital Agenda 

for Romania) 

Targets: 

  80 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020  

  45 % HH penetration with 

100 Mbps by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

No (less ambitious coverage and 

Targets: 

take up targets) 

years.  

Table 54 NBP Romania key facts 

On the supply side, the document formulates the following broadband targets, although with no data 

transmission rate specifications:  

  growth of the penetration rate at the level of households of broadband connection services 

up to 80 % by 2015,  

  growth of the rate of access to electronic broadband communication services at the level of 

the population up to at least 100 % until 2015,  

 

connection and increase in the use of broadband services at the level of SMEs,  

  growth of the penetration rate of electronic broadband communication services in disadvan-

taged areas  

Action areas outlined in the old Romanian broadband strategy thereby refer to both demand stimu-

lating measures as well as the provision of high-speed infrastructure networks. Romania’s initial NBP 

identified a total investment sum of EUR 1.25 billion, of which around EUR 145 million were allocated 

to infrastructure-related works. These included co-financing infrastructure projects in market failure 

114 Available online (English version): http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4214 

  166 

 
 
                                                           
areas (EUR 130 million), granting fiscal incentives for infrastructure projects in such areas (EUR 10 mil-

lion) and developing hotspots in public spaces (EUR 5 million). The remaining EUR 1.1 billion was re-

served for initiatives increasing demand such as the introduction of online services at the level of public 

administration, promoting ICT and connectivity of SMEs or consumer education.  

In September 2014, the Romanian Ministry of Communications and Information Society has devised a 

document entitled “National Strategy on Digital Agenda for Romania”.115 This document represents 

Romania’s current digital strategy. Therein four fields of action are defined, one of which is related to 

“broadband and digital services infrastructure”:116  

  100 % of households fixed broadband coverage,  

  80 % of households over 30 Mbps broadband coverage and  

  45 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps.  

In the attainment of the proposed objectives, Romania envisions to implement certain measures until 

2018. In addition to the inventory of national telecommunications/broadband infrastructure by the 

National Authority for Management and Regulation in Communications (ANCOM) (imposed by Law 

154/2012), the Romanian strategy involves the following measures designed to lower network roll-out 

costs:  

  encourage access to the existing passive infrastructure,  

 

 

 

 

improve the transparency and coordination in the relevant civil works,  

simplify the authorisation procedures for the new network developments,  

set up norms regarding the NGN infrastructure for new buildings and  

improve the regulatory framework.  

In the operational phase from 2016 to 2020, Romanian officials also intend to set up monitoring mech-

anisms and increase the involvement in research and development projects. The costs of rolling-out 

NGN infrastructures, according to Romania’s digital strategy, are estimated to range between EUR 3.1 

and 5.5 billion (out of this, 1.1-3.5 billion for NGA infrastructure). Private investments alone will only 

partially cover the costs. Assuming costs to materialise at the upper level of the estimation, broadband 

related expenses in Romania would approximately claim a share of 80 % of the total budget allocated 

in the context of the National Strategy of the Digital Agenda for Romania.  

115 Available online (Rumanian version): https://ec.europa.eu/epale/sites/epale/files/strategia-nationala-agenda-digitala-pentru-romania-
20202c-20-feb.2015.pdf 

116 The remaining fields of action are: 1) e-government, Interoperability, Cyber Security, Cloud-Computing, Open Data, Big Data and Social 
Media; 2) ICT in Education, Health, Culture and e-inclusion, and 3) e-commerce, Research & Development and Innovation in ICT 

  167 

 
 
                                                           
Yet another key feature of Romania’s Digital Agenda is its inclusive drafting process, during which dif-

ferent government institutions such as the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of National Education, the 

Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Transportation were consulted. Aligning interests and finding 

a common denominator amongst stakeholders is crucial as this measure helps with achieving cross-

cutting, stable and long-term support for the national strategy. 

In June 2015, Romania has adopted a follow-up NGA implementation plan by issuing Government De-

cision no. 414/2015.117 The document represents the currently binding programme for the implemen-

tation of the Romanian NGN plan. It is embedded in the context of the Romanian Digital Strategy dis-

cussed above. In particular, Romania opts for putting priority on the development of fibre networks as 

close to the end user as possible. Yet, the document also qualifies high-capacity xDSL and DOCSIS tech-

nologies as adequate  NGA technologies. However,  “adequate levels  of symmetry” and high-perfor-

mance  backhaul  networks  are  emphasized.  Existing  wireless  and  mobile  networks  (e.g.  LTE)  are 

deemed to be important technologies towards extending overall NGN coverage in Romania. The plan 

also  commits  to  transposing  Directive  2014/61/EU on  cost-reduction measures.  In  terms of  invest-

ments, the NGA plan states average costs of EUR 4.6 billion. According to the Romanian NBP, about 

EUR 750 million will be needed to upgrade existing networks in urban areas, and EUR 1.25 billion in 

rural areas. 

All in all, Romania’s broadband development process is steered centrally. Romania commits to pro-

moting the deployment of fibre-optic networks as a technology. Yet, especially in rural areas, the Ro-

manian  NBP  underlines  a  mix  of  fixed  and  mobile 

technological  solutions,  notably  FTTx,  VDSL,  3G, 

HSDPA  and  HSDPA+.  The  document  stresses  the 

Main  Challenges  for  NGA roll-out  in Roma-
nia: 

  Shortening of permit granting process at 

comparatively low purchasing power of the Roma-

local level advisable 

nian  citizens  in  a  European  perspective,  demo-

  Process  of  EU  cost  reduction  directive 

graphic changes, and relatively low levels of digiti-

zation in society as potential obstacles. Correspond-

ingly, the NBP envisages measures to stimulate the 

demand for broadband services (e.g. establishment 

of e-government services, subsidies, cloud compu-

ting,  social  media,  open  and  big  data).  Infrastruc-

transposition is delayed 

 

 

LTE  coverage  is  below  EU  average  and 
needs further improvement 

Low  purchasing  power  and  rather  low 
level of digital skills inhibit higher take-
up 

ture-based competition is yet another aspect Romania highlights. The concurrent development and 

117 Only available in Rumanian language 

  168 

 
 
                                                           
improvement of wireless networks to expand coverage is deemed an integral part of the overall broad-

band strategy. Funding for the NGN programme will come from the EU budget for 2014 – 2020, along-

side Romanian public sector contributions via the national state budget and local budgets as well as 

private investments. Public funding is mostly reserved for “white areas”. 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Communications and Infor-

top-down 

mation Society 

 

The National Authority for Management 

and Regulation in Communications 

 

The National Centre “România Digitală” 

Figure 38 Organizational Steering & Main Players Romania 

7.2.23.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Romania’s NBP targets is likely. Romania defined its national target as 80 % cov-

erage with 30 Mbps by 2020 and 45 % household take-up with 100 Mbps or more by 2020. Romania 

hereby defines less ambitious targets than the DAE. 

Concerning coverage, Romania has currently achieved 71.6 % NGA coverage. There is a high probabil-

ity that Romania will meet its national target and a medium probability it will meet the DAE coverage 

target (100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020). FTTP and cable networks are both well available in 

urban areas. FTTP coverage is even among the highest in Europe (more than 60 %). However, in rural 

areas in Romania, NGA connectivity is less available. In these areas only 33.2 % are covered by NGA 

technologies yet. Currently, this digital divide can also not be bridged by mobile networks as rural LTE 

coverage is at a comparably low level (34 %). 

Concerning take-up, there is a similar picture. We expect that there is a high probability that Romania 

will meet its national target but “only” a medium probability it will meet the DAE target of 50 % of 

households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020. We calculated that currently 26.72 % of house-

  169 

 
 
 
 
 
 
holds subscribe to 100 Mbps or more. Most interesting, already 54 % of the existing broadband con-

nections are FTTP. FTTP is being deployed by two operators and is an overall very well accepted tech-

nology. Combined with a decent DOCSIS cable network, there is a great potential for high-speed con-

nectivity. However, the overall broadband penetration rate is rather low (20.5 %), leaving significant 

room  for  new  connections.  While  future-proof  technologies  are  widely  available  for  connectivity 

throughout Romania, the demand could be stronger. There are different reasons for this: First, ICT 

services are not part of the daily life of many Romanians. The number of “non-liners” is still very high 

and about one quarter of the population has never used the internet before (27.86 %). Furthermore, 

affordability is an issue. Romanians pay 7 % of the monthly median income for the lowest priced NGA 

subscription, which is one of the highest values in Europe.  

The NBP of Romania is very operational and tries to tackle the remaining issues. It includes a variety 

of measures underpinned with responsibilities for implementation, schedules, indicators and monitor-

ing procedures. Despite its overall centralised approach, Romania involves ICT stakeholders for public 

consultations and strategy development. There is a monitoring procedure for the NBP’s implementa-

tion.  Concerning  the  supply  side,  there  is  a major  use  of  state  aid  discernible  (the most  important 

project  (RONET)  connect  more  than  700  localities  via  middle  mile  funding.  PPP  models  are  an  im-

portant mode of investment and local authorities are part of these investments. According to the NBP, 

symmetric fibre-based technologies should be preferred for deployment. To further bring down the 

cost of deployment, the NBP also defines several measures to increase transparency (e.g. a  central 

infrastructure register, service mapping, simplification of permit granting or rules for in-house-wiring). 

Whilst the transposition of the cost reduction directive was delayed initially, a new law was adopted 

in 2016, thereby completing the transposition. Concerning the demand side, the described measures 

include tax deductions, subsidies for end users’ equipment, open data, e-government and several oth-

ers.  

Overall, the Romanian NBP is comprehensive and largely addresses the most pressing topics. However, 

the most prominent problem of affordability still constitutes a major challenge. Despite the state aid 

investments, further incentives for investments in commercially not viable rural areas including poten-

tial simplifications of the complex permit granting procedures at local level will be crucial for Romania’s 

broadband development. Additionally, further demand side measures to compensate for the extraor-

dinary high prices (in relation to the median income) will be necessary. However, the Romanian fibre 

infrastructure is one of the leading ones in Europe. Chances are that with further economic develop-

ment in Romania, NGA coverage and take-up will increase likewise and will bring Romania close to 

fulfilling the DAE targets as well as its own. 

  170 

 
 
 
7.2.24  Slovakia 

Slovakia facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary democratic republic) 

Population:  

5,421,349 (1.07 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

110.5 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

49,035 km2 (1.21 % of EU)III  

Largely mountainous (Tatra Mountains in the north), flat 

terrain in the south 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Slovak Telekom: 35 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

67 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

17.23 EUR118 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 

26.12 EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 55 Slovakia facts & figures 

118 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons. 

  171 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.24.1  Key Features 

Slovakia’s  initial  National  Broadband 

Plan  was  published  under  the  title 

“National Strategy for Broadband Ac-

cess  in  the  Slovak  Republic.”119  The 

Slovakian  broadband  targets  are  in 

line  with  the  DAE  (100  %  coverage 

with 30 Mbps until 2020, 50 % take-up 

rate for 100 Mbps).  

In  2014,  the  initial  NBP  has  been 

amended by the “Strategic document 

for  Digital  Growth  and  Next  Genera-

tion  Access  Infrastructure  2014  – 

2020.”120  

National Broadband Plan of Slovakia: key facts 

Main strategic 

Strategic document for Digital 

document(s): 

Growth and Next Generation Access 

Infrastructure 2014 – 2020 (includ-

ing the new government notes) 

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 

2020 

Identical to DAE-

No, only identical concerning the 

Targets: 

coverage target 

Table 56 NBP Slovakia key facts 

The basic framework to be considered in the deployment and use of broadband is to meet the Digital 

Agenda target of 100 % coverage with 30 Mbps high-speed internet and the preparation for meeting 

the target concerning the subscriptions of high-speed internet above 100 Mbps. The long-term target 

of ensuring that 50 % of households have access to broadband with speed above 100 Mbps by 2020 

was not incorporated in Slovakia’s National Broadband Strategy, largely on grounds that its accom-

plishment cannot be guaranteed.121 

Therein, Slovakia formulates  six strategic objectives towards cultivating e-government services, im-

proving the functioning of an information society and establishing a “Smart Government”. These in-

clude:  

  moving towards electronic services to improve the quality of life,  

  moving towards electronic services to boost competitiveness,  

 

constant improvements in services in using modern technologies,  

119 Available online (English version): http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/open_file.php?file=telekom/Strategia/Broad-
band/NSSP_2011_en.pdf&lang=en and the new version, including the new government notes on January 2016: http://www.roko-
vania.sk/Rokovanie.aspx/BodRokovaniaDetail?idMaterial=23177 

120 Available online (English version): http://www.informatizacia.sk/ext_dok-strategicky_dokument_2014_2020_en/16622c 

121 http://www.rokovania.sk/Rokovanie.aspx/BodRokovaniaDetail?idMaterial=23177 

  172 

 
 
                                                           
 

creating a secure environment for citizens, businesses and public administration,  

  bringing  public  administration  closer  to  the  maximum  use  of  data  in  customer-driven  pro-

cesses,  

  optimum use of information technologies in public administration through a shared services 

platform.  

As a possibility of state intervention, Slovakia’s NBP discusses defining broadband as part of a universal 

service  obligation.  EU  funding  and  private  invest-

ments  are  described  as  the  main  source  of  funds 

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out in Slovakia: 

that can be used for broadband deployment. In par-

  Allow  for stronger involvement of local 

ticular,  Slovakia’s  NBP  estimates  that  about  EUR 

161.5 million should come from the EU’s structural 

funds,  co-financed  by  EUR  28.5  million  from  state 

budget. Furthermore, EUR 1.7 billion of private in-

vestments  are  expected.  Planned  financing  for 

broadband development according to the NBP thus 

and regional actors  

 

Incentivize  the  private  sector  to  cover 
the last mile regarding the current fund-
ing of (middle mile) regional networks  

  Avoid  delays  within  publicly  financed 

projects  

  Decrease of the digital divide 

  Further  increase  of  fixed  and  mobile 

totals EUR 1.89 billion. In its NBP, Slovakia commits 

broadband take-up needed 

to introduce legislative changes which inter alia aim 

at complying with provisions of the EU’s Cost-Reduction Directive. Relatedly, the implementation of a 

central atlas mapping existing passive infrastructure was announced to begin in 2014. Until 2015, there 

was a major state aid measure in place to achieve the construction of a national backhaul network. 

The establishment of a public-sector-only wireless network is part of a discussion as well.  

Slovakia’s NBP is supposed to be reviewed again in mid-2018. Overall, Slovakia emphasises that net-

work  deployment  should  be  funded  by  private  sources.  Mobile  technologies  are  viewed  as  an  im-

portant element in providing nation-wide coverage. There are no regional broadband plans available 

in the Slovak Republic. 

  173 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered top-

  Ministry of Transport, Construction and 

down 

Regional Development 

  Office of the Deputy Prime Minister of 

the Slovak Republic for investment and 

information society  

  Ministry of Finance 

  Regulatory Authority for Electronic 

Communications and Postal Services  

  National Agency for Networking and 

Electronic Services 

  Research Institute of Posts and Tele-

communications 

Figure 39 Organizational Steering & Main Players Slovakia 

7.2.24.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Slovakia’s NBP’s targets will be difficult. Concerning the coverage target (100 % 

coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020), we expect a low probability of achievement. Currently, there is an 

NGA  coverage  rate  of 67.1 %,  which is slightly below EU average  (70.9%). However, the rural NGA 

coverage is significantly lower. Currently, 14.1 % of the rural population are able to subscribe to 30 

Mbps or more. This digital divide is severe and will be difficult to close by 2020. LTE is not a suitable 

substitute for this lack of rural NGA networks, as rural coverage is at 9 %. However, WLAN providers 

are an important substitute for the rural population. Although usually not NGA networks, these tech-

nologies compete with ADSL, while within urban areas, there is an infrastructure-based competition 

between cable operators (present in roughly half of the urban areas) and the incumbent as well as AOs 

mainly deploying FTTH (usually P2P). 

Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), there 

is again a low probability of achieving the targets. We calculated that currently 6.7 % of households 

fulfil this criterion and subscribe to ultrafast connections. Furthermore, fixed broadband penetration 

in Slovakia is currently at 22.7 %, well below EU average (31.6 %). Considering the growth rate of 1.3 

%, the chance that new fixed connections will be sufficient to achieve the target is thus rather low. 

  174 

 
 
 
 
 
 
However, the demand for ultrafast connections is at least substantially growing (currently +11.92 %). 

Nonetheless, the number of new connections and upgrades of existing connections would have to rise 

significantly to achieve the target. The reasons for relatively low take-up seem to be manifold. While 

prices are at European average (3 % of the monthly median income for the lowest priced NGA connec-

tion), broadband take-up clearly stays behind. The relatively high unemployment rate (>12 %) might 

be one aspect which decreases affordability. Overall, the low fixed and mobile broadband penetration 

rate reveal that demand seems to be relatively low. However, in the case of Slovakia, the shortage of 

supply might also negatively impact the demand. 

The Slovakian NBP is a very operational and comprehensive document. It describes several measures 

underpinned by a definition of responsibilities, a schedule for implementation, indicators to measure 

progress and monitoring procedures. For all “priority actions” there are quantitative indicators. Con-

cerning the overall strategic approach, Slovakia defines a level playing field as an important factor in 

favour of digital infrastructure development. In practice, the importance of regulatory action is demon-

strated by strict access obligations for the incumbent’s infrastructures. Concerning the supply side, the 

Slovakian NBP identifies the issue of a substantial digital divide. The NBP outlines different possibilities 

of public intervention (e.g. PPP models, development of regional networks). The use of EU-funds is an 

important aspect of financing such projects, although of course private investment is prioritized. To 

incentivize such private investment, there are several measures to increase transparency and hereby 

costs of deployment. The most striking measure is the establishment of an atlas for passive infrastruc-

ture, planned to be completed in 2018. Otherwise, there are efforts to transpose the cost reduction 

directive to full extent, including in-house wiring. Concerning the struggling demand side, the NBP de-

fines  some  measures  including  the  connectivity  of  centres  of  education  (e.g.  schools/libraries)  and 

programmes designed to increase the affordability of services (especially for disadvantaged groups). 

E-Government services are another field of intervention where the government aims to incentivize 

demand. 

Overall, Slovakia has already undertaken major efforts and identified the most pressing issues. Even 

though  rural  areas  are  lagging  behind  in  terms of  high-end  digital  infrastructures,  ADSL  and WLAN 

providers offer a basic and reliable connectivity that currently still serves an important purpose while 

more sustainable technologies are already being deployed in many areas. Due to the very fragmented 

operators market, the opportunities for economies of scale and large-scale deployment are currently 

limited. However, the competitive environment incentivizes several operators to invest in cable and 

FTTB/FTTH solutions which will cover a large part of Slovakia in the foreseeable future. Generally, the 

  175 

 
 
current measures concerning the demand and supply side will provide for substantial progress in the 

future, despite the circumstance that the DAE targets might not be met entirely.  

  176 

 
 
 
7.2.25  Slovenia 

Slovenia facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (parliamentary representative democratic re-

Population:  

2,062,874 (0.41 % of EU)I 

public) 

Population density:  

102.4 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

20,273 km2 (0.50 % of EU)III  

Largely mountain ranges (Alps), lowlands in the east (Pan-

nonian Basin) 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Telekom Slovenije: 34 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

79 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

30.74 EUR122 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 

26.12 EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 57 Slovenia facts & figures 

122 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  177 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.25.1  Key Features 

Slovenia’s  initial  broadband  strategy 

was  launched  in  2008  under  the  title 

National Broadband Plan of Slovenia: key facts 

“Strategija Razvoja Širokopasovnih Om-

Main strategic 

Plan for the development of next-

režij V Republiki Sloveniji” (“Broadband 

document(s): 

generation broadband networks 

Network  Development  Strategy  in  the 

until 2020 (updated in March 

Republic of Slovenia”).123 Slovenia’s ini-

2016) 

tial NBP is not in line with the DAE tar-

gets,  as 

its  broadband  targets  are 

slightly  below  the  DAE  requirements, 

with a 90 % coverage with 30 Mbps in-

stead  of  a  100  %  coverage  to  be 

reached by 2020. Furthermore, take-up 

rates of higher bandwidths are not ad-

Targets: 

 

96 % coverage with 100 Mbps 

by 2020 

 

100 % coverage with 30 Mbps 

by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

No (more ambitious coverage tar-

Targets: 

get) 

dressed within the national strategy.  

Table 58 NBP Slovenia key facts 

The strategy describes FTTH or technologies “with similar capabilities” as the preferred choice for de-

ployment. There are no regional broadband plans available. In terms of funding, the Slovenian NBP 

allocated about EUR 91 million (excluding EU funds) for the period of 2007 to 2013. There are no spe-

cific budgetary estimations for the present period included in Slovenia’s broadband strategy. 

In 2015, Slovenia issued a new broadband strategy that runs until 2020: the “plan for the development 

of next-generation broadband networks until 2020”. The plan was updated in early March 2016.124 

Slovenia’s currently binding broadband targets envision that 96 % of households should be equipped 

with broadband internet access  speeds of at least 100 Mbps  by 2020, and the remaining 4 % with 

broadband internet access speeds of at least 30 Mbps. The plan follows the EU 2020 strategy and the 

Digital Agenda. In this context, it sets strategic objectives in the field of broadband infrastructure and 

the strategic basis for the use of funds from the European Regional Development Fund and the Euro-

pean Agricultural Fund for Rural Development.  

123 Available online (Slovenian version): http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4863 

124 http://www.mizs.gov.si/fileadmin/mizs.gov.si/pageuploads/Informacijska_druzba/NGN_2020.pdf 

  178 

 
 
                                                           
According to the “plan for the development of next generation broadband networks until 2020”, the 

planned investment for developing broadband net-

works for high-speed access are EUR 365 million.125   

Overall, Slovenia opts for market dynamics in devel-

oping broadband networks, in particular infrastruc-

ture- and service-based competition. Towards an in-

creasing demand, the Slovenian NBP highlights the 

role of e-government, e-health, e-education and e-

business services. Satellite technology is viewed as 

a  viable  approach  towards  increasing  broadband 

coverage,  especially  in  remote  and  less  accessible 

areas. Mobile and wireless solutions are a comple-

Main  Challenges  for  NGA  roll-out  in  Slove-
nia: 

  Relatively  low  take-up  rate  considering 
the high availability of NGA networks 

  Digital literacy needs improvement 

 

Increase of mobile  broadband  penetra-
tion rate needed 

  Dispersed settlement structures in rural 
areas increase the costs of construction 
of broadband infrastructure 

 

Identification of a take-up target can in-
crease measurability of success 

ment for fixed broadband networks as well. Infrastructure deployment in white spots will be financed 

by EU funds and the state budget. Local and regional actors are encouraged to launch roll-out projects, 

assist in financing, establish public-private partnerships or contemplate other business models. The 

NBP also invites local governments to adjust administrative procedures, for instance towards issuing 

permits, administrative processes and the provision of passive public utility infrastructure.  

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Education, Science and 

top-down 

Sport (Information Society Directorate) 

 

ICT Technology Institute 

  Agency for Communication Networks 

and Services 

Figure 40 Organizational Steering & Main Players Slovenia 

125 http://www.mizs.gov.si/fileadmin/mizs.gov.si/pageuploads/Informacijska_druzba/NGN_2020.pdf 

  179 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
                                                           
7.2.25.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The achievement of Slovenia’s NBP’s targets is rather challenging. Slovenia defined its national target 

as 96 % coverage with 100 Mbps by 2020. We expect a low-medium probability that this target will 

be  met. The  reasons for our estimations are the  same concerning the  DAE  coverage target (100 % 

coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020), where we also expect only a low-medium probability of achieve-

ment. Most importantly, the current NGA coverage in Slovenia is 78.8 %, which is by itself a decent 

coverage rate and above EU average. However, there is a significant digital divide: in rural areas, the 

coverage rate is at 62.4 %. Again, in EU comparison, the rural coverage is at  a relatively high level. 

However, as roughly 50 % of Slovenia’s population live in rural areas, bridging this gap quickly will be 

cumbersome. Especially considering the high rural LTE coverage rate of 97 %, there are some doubts 

concerning the further deployment of fixed NGA networks in rural areas as there is already a substitute 

available. However, there are lots of positive signs concerning overall development of (fixed) digital 

infrastructures in Slovenia. Cable and other alternative providers were first movers within the NGA 

market and offer high quality cable and FTTH connections, thus pressuring the incumbent to also invest 

in FTTH technology to keep up with the competition. By now, cable and FTTB/FTTH have an impressive 

combined market share of 54 %, indicating that these technologies are the main source of connectivity 

in Slovenia.  

Concerning the DAE take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), 

there is also a low-medium probability that the target can be met. We calculated that currently 4.91 

% of Slovenian households subscribe to such ultrafast connections. The fixed broadband penetration 

rate across Slovenia is at 28 % and has a rather slow growth rate of 0.7 %. New connections will thus 

be not sufficient to achieve the 50 % take-up rate by 2020. Concerning further upgrades of existing 

connections, Slovenia is in a better position. The growth rate for ultrafast-connections are currently at 

69.24 %, which would (in case this strong growth continues) bring Slovenia close to the target. Aspects 

that inhibit higher take-up seem to be affordability (Slovenians pay roughly 3 % of the median income 

for the lowest priced NGA connection and triple-play bundles are dominant) and digital literacy. Espe-

cially the rate of “non-liners” is relatively high and thus negatively affecting demand.  

The Slovenian NBP is a very comprehensive and operational document. The NBP defines clear respon-

sibilities, indicators, monitoring procedures and schedules. The NBP stresses the importance of a reg-

ulatory and legislative environment that incentivizes broadband development. An annual evaluation 

shall discover if the measures are contributing to the targets. Concerning the supply side, Slovenia uses 

mainly ESIF funds to provide for future-proof technologies in areas of market failure. Public Private 

Partnership models are also part of the NBP and realized at local level, involving municipalities. The 

  180 

 
 
Slovenian authorities describe rural areas as the priorities of intervention, while urban areas are mainly 

developed by market forces. The Slovenian NBP also defines several measures to decrease costs for 

deployment via an increase in joint construction and co-use of existing infrastructures. For example, 

the transposition of the cost reduction directive is a central aspect of transparency related measures 

defined within the NBP. Furthermore, the setting up of a public infrastructure cadastre is one measure 

of the plan. Concerning the demand side, there is still room for improvement as the number and scope 

of measures could still be extended. One positive example, however, is the obligation for PPP projects 

to provide free WLAN with at least time-limited access. 

Overall, Slovenia’s situation is  much better than what the estimations would suggest: although  we 

expect Slovenia to fail both the DAE as well as its own national target, the overall development of 

digital infrastructures is very positive. There is a high market share of cable and FTTB/FTTH connections 

provided by several providers within a competitive  environment.  Future measures should focus on 

publicly funded projects within rural areas and further demand stimulation. 

  181 

 
 
 
 
 
 
7.2.26  Spain 

Spain facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (Constitutional monarchy) 

Population:  

46,439,900 (9.14 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

92.5 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

505,944 km2 (12.46 % of EU)III  

Inner plateau, mountain ranges in the north (Pyrenees), 

lowlands in the southwest, north and coastal plains, Bale-

aric and Canary Islands 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Telefónica (Movistar): 44 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

77 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

40.21 EUR126 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 

26.12 EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 59 Spain facts & figures 

126 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  182 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.26.1  Key Features 

In  2013, 

the  Spanish  Government 

adopted the Agenda Digital para España 

(Digital Agenda for Spain, ADpE),127  set-

ting  out  a  comprehensive  national  ICT 

strategy to meet the DAE objectives.  

One  of  the  goals  of  the  ADpE  is  to  pro-

National Broadband Plan of Spain: key facts 

Main strategic 

Spanish Digital Agenda - Tele-

document(s): 

communications and Ultrafast 

Networks Plan and implementa-

tion reports 

mote the deployment of (ultra-fast) net-

Targets: 

  100 % coverage with 30 

works  and  an  efficient  radio  spectrum 

management  by  setting  up  a  regulatory 

framework that guarantees certainty and 

prevents the introduction of unnecessary 

barriers.  Furthermore,  the  strategy  in-

tends to increase the demand for digital 

Mbps by 2020 

  50 % HH penetration with 

100 Mbps by 2020 

Identical to DAE-

Yes 

Targets: 

services 

and 

to 

promote 

the  

Table 60 NBP Spain key facts 

production and distribution of digital content over the Internet by improving the experience of broad-

band service for users. 

The ADpE is developed by several specific plans (10 so far), including a Telecommunications and Ultra-

fast  Networks  Plan128  (UN  Plan),  which  contains  the  blueprint  of  the  country’s  national  broadband 

strategy. Seven indicators contribute to the monitoring of the implementation of the UN Plan. A first 

report on the implementation of the UN Plan (Informe de seguimiento) was published in November 

2014.129  

The UN Plan contains measures to foster ultrafast fixed access networks (regulatory measures to re-

duce roll out cost, better use of existing infrastructure and coordination with other administrations), 

foster ultrafast mobile access networks (accelerating 4G deployment thanks to new spectrum, simpli-

fying roll out requirements and universal access to ultrafast mobile broadband (30 Mbps) in centres 

with less than 5000 inhabitants) and support take-up. In this regard, the objectives of the DAE are 

reiterated (100 % coverage with 30 Mbps and 50 % take-up with 100 Mbps until 2020). 4G coverage 

127 Available online (English version): http://www.agendadigital.gob.es/digital-agenda/Documents/digital-agenda-for-spain.pdf 

128 http://www.agendadigital.gob.es/planes-actuaciones/Bibliotecatelecomunicaciones/Detalle%20del%20Plan/Plan-ADpE-1_Redes-Ultrar-
rapidas.pdf 

129 http://www.agendadigital.gob.es/planes-actuaciones/Bibliotecatelecomunicaciones/Material%20complementario/ADPE-
Situacion_Plan_1-3Q2014.pdf 

  183 

 
 
 
                                                           
should reach 75% of the population by 2015. In 2015, a first implementation report on the ADpE was 

published.130 

In May 2014, the main legislative measure provided for in the ADpE was completed, with the adoption 

of  the  Telecommunications  Law  (9/2014),  replacing  Law  32/2003.  Furthermore,  the  Plan  contains 

measures to facilitate the access of operators to new spectrum bands, simplify network deployment 

(for instance by introducing deployment standards and lowering administrative burdens), reduce de-

ployment costs (see below) and support demand.  

In regions where market-based deployment fails due to a lack of profitability, the Spanish UN Plan also 

foresees to financially support the deployment of broadband networks (access networks of 100 Mbps 

or  more,  extension  of  backhaul  supporting  at  NGA  networks,  and  access  networks  of  30  Mbps  or 

more).  

In addition to the national Digital Agenda, at regional level, various regions (Comunidades Autónomas 

- CCAA) have developed their own projects, programmes and strategies for overall digital development 

and broadband roll-out, thereby, apart from their own financial resources and private sector invest-

ments, often also relying on European funds. Generally, the different regional strategies share many 

commonalities and also usually refer to the Spanish or European agenda as being a reference frame-

work, but they also show some differences regarding their scope and emphasis. Some regions have 

developed comprehensive and detailed digital agendas (e.g. Galicia131, the Valencian Community132 or 

the Basque Country133), whereas others seem to renounce all-embracing concepts and rely more on 

individual measures and projects and/or embed their approach in overall growth programs and strat-

egies such as Operational Programmes or Smart Specialisation Strategies in the context of EU-funds 

(e.g. Aragón134 or Castilla y León135). While most regional strategies reiterate the Spanish/European 

130 http://www.agendadigital.gob.es/Seguimiento/Informesanuales/Informes/informe-agenda-digital-espana.pdf 

131 http://amtega.xunta.gal/../axenda-dixital-de-galicia-2020.pdf  

132 http://www.agendadigital.gva.es/documents/128745511/128746769/AgendaDigitalCV.pdf/2f6188e7-50de-4cf3-9ebf-9d781b280198  

133 http://www.euskadi.eus/contenidos/plan_departamental/xleg_plandep_46/es_def/adjuntos/Agenda%20Digi-
tal%20de%20Euskadi%202020.pdf  

134 http://www.aragon.es/DepartamentosOrganismosPublicos/Departamentos/InnovacionInvestigacionUniversidad/AreasTematicas/Tele-
comunicaciones/ci.pag_10_conectaragon.detalleDepartamento?channelSelected=0  

135 http://www.jcyl.es/junta/cp/Memoria_RIS3_20140630.pdf 

  184 

 
 
                                                           
coverage  and  penetration  targets,  some  regions 

have also set their own, usually more ambitious tar-

gets. Catalonia136, for example, aims for a penetra-

tion  rate  of  75  %  and  envisions  100  %  coverage 

(both  with  100  Mbps  and  until  2020)  while  the 

Basque  country  introduced  the  specific  target  of 

100  %  coverage  with  100  Mbps  in  all  industrial 

zones  in  the  same  time  frame.  Moreover,  many 

strategies  are  somewhat  similar  in  the  sense  that 

they  clearly  put  their  emphasis  on  demand  side 

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out in Spain: 

  Balancing  investment  and  competition 
in the transition towards FTTP networks 

  Further  enhancement  of  coordination 
between national and regional/local ad-
ministrations is advisable 

  Dominance  of  xDSL  despite  strong 

growth of FTTP-networks  

  Disparities  between  regions  and  be-

tween regional and urban areas 

  Need to foster NGA take-up 

measures (e.g. regarding digital skills, digital administration or the IT-sector in general), thereby also 

addressing regional peculiarities (e.g. the Galician plan attaches specific importance to digitisation in 

the primary sector). Nonetheless, infrastructure roll-out usually constitutes a core element of regional 

strategies and many regions have established programmes and projects in this context, with the em-

phasis usually being to connect public buildings, industrial zones or rural areas, whereby the specific 

focus again depends on the respective region (e.g. Galicia focuses more on rural areas whereas Cata-

lonia or the Basque Country focus more on industrialized zones). In this regard, Andalusia137 and Gali-

cia138 can be regarded as outstanding examples as they developed comprehensive separate plans ded-

icated exclusively  to  broadband  infrastructure  roll-out,  complementing their overall  digital  agenda. 

While  most  other  regional  plans  attach  less  importance  to  infrastructure  roll-out  or  remain  rather 

vague, the Andalusian and Galician governments produced thorough roll-out plans providing a detailed 

analysis of the status quo and a comprehensive strategy regarding specific objectives, legislative and 

regulative measures, funding, monitoring mechanisms and the establishment of specific bodies and 

entities. 

136 http://www.idigital.cat/documents/10501/405750/Agenda_Digital_CAT_maquetada.pdf  

137 http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/export/drupaljda/ESITA_2020.pdf 

138 https://amtega.xunta.gal/sites/default/files/plan-de-banda-larga-de-galicia-2020_0.pdf  

  185 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Energy, Tourism and Digital 

top-down 

Agenda (The Secretary of State for Infor-

mation Society and Digital Agenda) 

 

The National Commission for Markets 

and Competition (CNMC) 

  Regional actors (CCAA) 

Figure 41 Organizational Steering & Main Players Spain 

7.2.26.2  Feasibility Assessment 

Spain has shown tremendous efforts regarding the update of its telecommunications networks during 

the last years and thus has already a decent NGA infrastructure at its disposal. Especially FTTP coverage 

is significantly above European average (52. 8 % in Spain vs. 21 % in the EU), ranking Spain within the 

top group in Europe. Reaching full NGA coverage (100 % with 30 Mbps), however, still remains a major 

challenge, at least within the time frame of 2020. Hence, a low-medium probability for reaching DAE 

target II is presumed. NGA coverage is currently 77 %  (24 % in rural areas). Considering this digital 

divide and the current demographic developments, making rural areas economically even less inter-

esting for internet service providers, reaching countrywide coverage will be difficult139. However, both 

FTTB/H and cable networks are currently strongly expanding, which will lead to a further increase of 

overall NGA coverage in the future. 

For the second target (50 % of the households have subscriptions of 100 Mbps or higher), we conclude 

that there is a medium probability to meet the target. There are several premises that lead to this 

conclusion: the overall availability of NGA networks is good (especially in urban areas) and take-up of 

ultra-fast speeds is already at an above-average level (currently calculated as 9.76 % of households 

subscribing to 100 Mbps or more). Furthermore, there is a strong growth for ultra-fast speeds (2014- 

2015: 69.98 %). If this trend continues, the DAE take-up target can be met. However, concerning higher 

take-up rates, affordability may become an obstacle at some point. In Spain, triple (or quadruple) play 

139 As in all other countries, potential 30 Mbit/s downstream coverage via satellite and mobile connections as 
shared mediums are not considered within the analysis. 

  186 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
bundling is very common, the  lowest price for standalone NGA subscriptions is therefore  relatively 

high (4 % of the median income, above EU average). As a positive aspect, FTTB/H often comes within 

the said bundles at no premium, which leads to a high FTTB/FTTH market share. However, stronger 

competition might help to tackle the overall existing issue of affordability.  

Several landmark decisions by the Spanish NRA have already contributed to an increase in competition 

and thus decrease in prices, leading also to the strongest growth in fibre deployment (17.7 % in 2015) 

in the EU. In 2008, the incumbent Telefónica was obliged to offer access to its ducts and only one year 

later, a symmetrical obligation to provide access to in-house fibre cabling was imposed upon all oper-

ators. Moreover,  several  agreements  on  co-investment  and  co-deployment  of  fibre  were  signed  in 

2012/2013 and cable operators upgraded their networks to DOCSIS 3.0 in recent years, which further 

contributed to the growth of FTTP networks.140 In February 2016, CNMC further completed its review 

of wholesale  broadband markets141  and  imposed on Telefónica (incumbent) the obligation  to offer 

other operators access to its FTTH networks via virtual unbundling:  66 locations across Spain (roughly 

35% of the territory), however, will be exempted from this rule as they were already classified as “com-

petitive regions”. Telefonica reacted to the NRA’s decision by announcing a reduction of its planned 

investments in broadband expansion by 20 % and a future focus on regions exempted from the deci-

sion. Hence, despite the overall positive nature of the decision, possibly leading to further competition 

and fibre deployment, its overall impact on the Spanish telecommunications market remains yet un-

certain.  

Overall, despite the fact that the DAE targets might not be met entirely, Spain is very well on track with 

its current NBP. NGA coverage as well as take-up of ultrafast connections is already relatively high and 

especially futureproof solutions such as FTTP and cable are expanding and growing fast. Spain’s NBP is 

very comprehensive and operational, including various well-defined measures, responsibilities and in-

dicators to monitor progress. Spain defined different supply side measures (e.g. grants and loans) to 

foster supply, which already had a significantly positive effect. Worth noticing is the fact that AOs re-

ceive significantly higher shares of state aid in relation to their market share than the incumbent. The 

demand side of the Spanish NBP is also well-defined. The various measures foreseen (e.g. plans for e-

commerce, e-government action plans, digital ecosystem confidence plan) are expected to have a pos-

itive pact on take-up as well as coverage. 

140 http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=15401 

141 https://www.cnmc.es/CNMC/Prensa/TabId/254/ArtMID/6629/ArticleID/1650/La-CNMC-aprueba-la-regulaci243n-mayorista-de-los-
mercados-de-banda-ancha.aspx 

  187 

 
 
                                                           
Next to the NBP of Spain, there are also several regional broadband strategies and digital agendas with 

differing measures. While the most pressing issues will have to be solved at national level, regional 

and local actors will continue to play an important role. There are several projects driven by regional 

and local actors that currently gain momentum which could contribute to bridging the digital divide in 

Spain and achieving the NBP’s targets. Whilst Spain has already recognized the importance of regional 

and local actors by introducing several important coordination mechanisms (especially regarding state 

aid), there still seems to be some yet unexploited potential at regional and local level. By enhancing 

coordination and cooperation between the federal and regional level even more (e.g. via additional 

cooperation agreements) and increasing support for local actors and operators, which in some cases 

lack the necessary resources, important local small-scale projects could be fostered, thereby creating 

synergies and making a valuable contribution to narrow the digital divide. Here, the Spanish BCO initi-

ative might help, which is well ahead in European comparison. In this regard, also the creation of a 

centrally administrated infrastructure register should at least be considered. While the incumbent cur-

rently provides an infrastructure database in the context of a reference offer for access to its infra-

structure (MARCo), a centrally administrated infrastructure register would offer even more potential, 

especially regarding co-deployment and alternative methods of deployment, which could prove to be 

particularly beneficial in the context of the above mentioned local small-scale projects. 

  188 

 
 
 
 
7.2.27  Sweden 

Sweden facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (Constitutional monarchy) 

Population:  

9,747,355 (1.92 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

23.8 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

438,574 km2 (10.8 % of EU)III  

Coastal lowlands in the east and south, mountain ranges in 

the west 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

Telia Sonera: 36 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

76 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

15.64 EUR142 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 

26.12 EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 61 Sweden facts & figures 

142 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  189 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.27.1  Key Features 

Sweden has a role model status in Eu-

rope  as  it  has  had  a  broadband  policy 

National Broadband Plan of Sweden: key facts 

ever since the late 1990s. The country’s 

Main strategic 

Broadband Strategy for Sweden - 

overall  objective  is  accordingly  ambi-

document(s): 

Swedish Digital Agenda (IT i Män-

tious,  namely  to  obtain  “world-class 

broadband”. The national strategy doc-

ument is entitled “Broadband Strategy 

for Sweden” and was drafted in Novem-

ber  2009.144  The  Swedish  Broadband 

Strategy  is  embedded  into  the  over-

arching  Swedish  Digital  Agenda  (“IT  i 

Människans Tjänst - en digital agenda  

för Sverige”).145  

Sweden’s  long  term  objective  is  to 

achieve 90 % coverage with 100 Mbps 

until 2020. An additional mid-term goal 

to be achieved by 2015 was that 40 % of 

niskans Tjänst - en digital agenda 

för Sverige) /  

Updated version: Sweden fully 

connected 2025 

- A broadband strategy (Sverige 

helt uppkopplat 2025 - en 

bredbandsstrategi)143 

Targets: 

  90 % coverage with 100 Mbps 

by 2020 (95 % in the current 

NBP) 

Identical to DAE-

No (more ambitious coverage tar-

Targets: 

get) 

all  households  and  businesses  should  

Table 62 NBP Sweden key facts 

have access to internet at a minimum speed of 100 Mbps. By the end of 2014, Sweden had already 

met its interim goal with a broadband coverage level (> 100 Mbps) of 57.5 % according to the IHS and 

VVA Broadband Coverage study. 

Sweden’s broadband objectives evidently surpass the DAE broadband targets. In realising network de-

ployment, the country emphasizes the role of private capital and the market in making investments in 

the network infrastructure. The Swedish government’s role is confined to the provision of a conducive 

regulatory and market environment. Furthermore, Sweden has launched a broadband forum to enable 

exchange and collaboration in the area of broadband development.  

143 Very recently (December 2016) Sweden adopted an update of its NBP. Whilst it is already directed towards the year 2025 (the target is to 
achieve 98 % coverage with 1 Gbps, 99.9 % with 100 Mbps and at least 30 Mbps for the remaining 0.1 % by 2025), it also contains a slight 
raise of the coverage target set out in the NBP this study is based on (from 90 % to 95 % with 100 Mbps until 2020). See (Swedish version): 
http://www.regeringen.se/4b00e7/contentassets/a1a50c6a306544e28ebaf4f4aa29a74e/sverige-helt-uppkopplat-2025-slutlig.pdf  

144 Available online (English version): http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4861 

145 Available online (Swedish version): URL: http://www.regeringen.se/rapporter/2011/10/n2011.12 

  190 

 
 
 
                                                           
Overall, the Swedish Post and Telecom Agency assumes the task of monitoring developments in the 

market with regards to the operational targets. 

In Sweden municipalities play a crucial role in the operational implementation of network deployment 

by way of controlling access to municipal land and granting licenses to operators rolling out networks. 

Furthermore, it is also quite common for municipal city networks and housing companies to provide 

broadband services themselves (ranging from wholesale to consumer services). Many municipal city 

networks own and/or operate a fibre-based infrastructure. According to the Swedish Broadband Strat-

egy, city networks owned around 25 – 30 % of the total fibre infrastructure in 2008. 

Overall, Sweden is currently among the countries in the EU with a very advanced NGA coverage base-

line. By 2015, Sweden had a basic broadband cover-

Main Challenges for NGA roll-out Sweden: 

age (> 2 Mbps) of 99 % and NGA availability (> 30 

  Avoidance of delays within funding pro-

Mbps) of 76.4 %. Towards decreasing the remaining 

grammes 

  Possibly  increase  of funding for achiev-

ing full white spot elimination 

 

Identification  of  a  take-up  target  to  in-
crease measurability of success 

gap in coverage, the Swedish strategy views satellite 

as  a  viable  option  for  remote  areas.  Mobile  and 

wireless solutions are also expressly contemplated 

in the context of reaching out to areas lacking ac-

  Relatively low rate of cable subscriptions 

cess or suffering from low capacities, if necessary by 

freeing  additional  frequencies  on  the  spectrum. 

Measures to reduce costs such as the laying empty ducts are also mentioned with the aim of minimis-

ing difficulties faced by operators when deploying networks. For instance, in its budget for 2012, the 

Swedish government allocated SEK 120 million for the laying of ducts for the period 2012 to 2014. A 

monitoring mechanism  assesses  progress  in  the  development of  access  to  broadband  on  a  regular 

basis. In sum, Sweden opts for a collaborative market-driven network roll-out, expecting national au-

thorities to provide a favourable environment for doing so. 

  191 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation 

bottom-

up 

 

Swedish Post and Telecom Authority (Post-

och telestyrelsen, abbreviated PTS) orga-

nized under the Ministry of Enterprise 

 

Swedish Broadband Forum (& regional/lo-

cal broadband coordinators) 

 

Local and regional authorities 

Figure 42 Organizational Steering & Main Players Sweden 

7.2.27.2  Feasibility Assessment 

Concerning  the  achievement  of  the  Swedish  NBP targets,  differing  results  are  expected.  There  is  a 

national coverage target (90 % coverage with 100 Mbps by 2020) which is well higher than the DAE 

coverage target (100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020). Regarding the DAE target, we conclude that 

Sweden has a low probability to meet the target. Current NGA coverage is 76 % and there is a strong 

digital divide: only 13.9 % of the rural Swedish population is currently covered by NGA networks. Due 

to the vast size of Sweden and its low population density, this result is not surprising. However, re-

garding the national coverage target, we conclude that there is a medium probability of achievement. 

Sweden has one of Europe’s most advanced fibre infrastructure with high end access for the majority 

of its population. Within urban areas, FTTP is widely available. Furthermore, there are lots of regional 

initiatives to aggregate demand and deploy FTTP for previously underserved areas. We therefore ex-

pect that it will be possible to meet the national target despite the fact that still a substantial part of 

the rural population will not be able to subscribe to similar bandwidths. 

Concerning the DAE take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), we 

calculated that currently 27.06 % of the Swedish population fulfil this criterion – one of the highest 

values across Europe. As there is still a strong growth for ultra-fast bandwidths (+14 %) and at least 

discernible progress on new fixed broadband connection (+0.8 %), we conclude that there is a  high 

probability that Sweden will achieve the target.  

FTTP is the most dominant technology for new connections and upgrades across Sweden. Cable net-

works (20 % fixed broadband market share) are stable but not expanding. There is a strong bottom-up 

  192 

 
 
 
 
 
movement in Sweden with roughly 180 local operators deploying FTTP, partly supported by state aid. 

ICT services are well accepted in Sweden: rent mark ups for high-end inhouse wiring and FTTP connec-

tions are common and accepted, so are fees for initial connections. The overall perception is that there 

is a high willingness to pay, however, one has to realize that the costs for subscriptions are amongst 

the lowest in the EU (0.7 % of the median monthly income). 

The Swedish NBP includes both strategic and operational aspects. Overall, within organizational, sup-

ply side, and demand side measures, the importance of local actors is being stressed and there is a 

clear division of tasks between national and local authorities. Monitoring procedures concerning the 

implementation of the NBP are described but sometimes lack concrete indicators. However, potential 

investors (municipal networks, utility providers) are addressed in detail. Regarding the demand side, 

there are general statements, outlining the importance of ICT services for Sweden’s future. 

Overall, Sweden is in a very decent  position. FTTP is rapidly  expanding, local authorities and utility 

providers are active in rural areas and deploy high-end infrastructures to close the digital divide. Fur-

thermore, affordability is not an issue which leads to a situation where no market saturation (in the 

ultrafast segment) is foreseeable. Although the NBP does not provide for a lot of concrete measures, 

bottom up initiatives, private and public investment and high demand for ultrafast connectivity make 

sure that Sweden is well on track to achieve its targets. 

  193 

 
 
 
 
7.2.28  United Kingdom 

United Kingdom facts & figures 

Degree of self-governance: 

Unitary state (Constitutional monarchy) 

Population:  

64,875,165 (12.74 % of EU)I 

Population density:  

266.4 per km2 (EU average: 116.7 per km2)II 

Size:  

Topography: 

248,528 km2 (6.12 % of EU)III  

Mountain ranges in Scotland and Wales, rolling hills in 

Northern Ireland, lowlands in England, highlands north-

west of the Tees-Exe line 

Fixed BB incumbent market share: 

BT (British Telecom): 32 % (EU average: 41 %) 

NGA coverage: 

91 % (EU average: 70.9 %)IV 

Lowest price for NGA subscription: 

26.47 EUR146 (EU lowest price: 11.42 EUR; EU average: 

26.12 EUR) 

I  1 January 2015, Eurostat 

II  2014, Eurostat 

III Europa.eu 

IV June 2015, DESI 2016 

Table 63 United Kingdom facts & figures 

146 Please be aware of the dependency of NGA prices on national economic disparities, such as income per capita or GDP. As of this, the 
present numbers serve as a reference point rather than allowing absolute price comparisons.   

  194 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
7.2.28.1  Key Features 

The  UK  has  drafted  a  series  of  strategy 

and policy papers setting the framework 

National Broadband Plan of UK: key facts 

for  broadband  infrastructure  develop-

Main strategic 

UK Next Generation Network Infra-

ment.  Furthermore,  Scotland,  Northern 

document(s): 

structure Deployment Plan (March 

Ireland and Wales  have developed their 

2015), digital communications infra-

own plans, which generally complement 

structure strategy 

but also go beyond the UK’s strategy, es-

pecially regarding broadband bandwidth 

and coverage targets.  

UK’s initial Broadband Plan “Britain’s Su-

perfast  Broadband  Future”  was  devised 

under the auspices of the Department for 

Business Innovation & Skills in December 

2010.147  

Targets: 

  At least 100 Mbps for nearly  all 

UK premises (no date) 

  95% coverage with 24 Mbps 

Identical to 

No 

DAE-Targets: 

Table 64 NBP UK key facts 

The strategy paper is not too concrete on measurable broadband targets such as download-speed or 

coverage rate; it rather stresses a general commitment by the government to ensure “the rapid roll-

out of superfast broadband across the country”.  

In a successive guidance note by the government entitled “Broadband Delivery UK” first published in 

February 2013148, the country further substantiates its approach stating that its objectives are to pro-

vide access to basic broadband (2 Mbps) for all by December 2015 and to provide superfast broadband 

coverage (defined in UK as > 24Mbps) to 90 % of the UK by early 2016, 95 % by December 2017. With 

these targets, the UK would fall short of meeting the DAE objectives. The guidance-note also initiated 

a tool to encourage take-up of superfast broadband by SMEs and support growth called Broadband 

Connection Voucher Schemes. The voucher scheme ran from December 2013 until October 2015 with 

over 50,000 vouchers issued to SMEs and 37,000 vouchers issued since April 2015 across 50 UK cities.  

Since the publication of the Digital Agenda Europe, UK’s government has consecutively contrived a 

number of partially non-binding guidelines related to in-house wiring149, micro trenching and street 

147 Available online (English version): http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4865 

148 Available online (English version): https://www.gov.uk/guidance/broadband-delivery-uk 

149 Available online (English version): https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/78511/10-1339-
pas-2016-next-generation-access-new-build-guide.pdf 

  195 

 
 
                                                           
 
works150 as well as a permit scheme concerning broadband related works in public spaces151. The in-

house wiring note recommends fibre over copper, referring to the benefits and cost-efficiency of the 

former. The guidance-note on micro trenching and street works mostly revolves around cost-reduction 

measures. Altered permit schemes aim at a simplification of network-related works such as the instal-

lation of street cabinets.  

In a recently published policy paper by the Department for Culture, Media & Sport entitled “UK Next 

Generation Network Infrastructure Deployment Plan152” (March 2015), the UK has updated its overall 

broadband speed and coverage targets, now aiming at providing “95 % coverage with 24 Mbps by 2017 

and at least 100 Mbps to nearly all UK premises (no date).”153 However, no time frame is given for the 

implementation of these  ambitious  targets.  In the  future  as  it  has  in  the  past, the  UK  government 

continues to perceive its role mainly as a facilitator of private investment in infrastructure, for instance 

by providing policy stability, and supporting the market. Importantly, in its new strategy, the govern-

ment calls for “local leadership” via assisting and providing local information and expertise in the ap-

plication and planning process of telecommunications companies and commits to implementing the 

EU’s Cost-Reduction Directive in order to lower the costs of deployment (e.g. by coordinating street 

works or duct access). The UK’s NBP discusses the possibility of overhead or aerial deployment of elec-

tronic communications cables as well, where the local community is in agreement, as a method which 

carries lower costs than buried network infrastructure. BDUK is responsible for providing support and 

guidance and providing tools such as central mapping databases. In terms of funding, the English gov-

ernment states an investment commitment over 530 million £ by 2014/2015, which is mostly reserved 

for underserved areas. 

All in all, the UK government aims at achieving its goals via a diverse approach involving different fixed 

broadband technologies. “Freeing up further 4G spectrum, piloting superfast satellite connections and 

looking to increase the Universal Service Obligation (in discussion is a 5 Mbps threshold)” are further 

actions planned. In other words, the UK appears to put comparatively high significance on mobile and 

satellite technology in reaching its country-wide broadband targets.  

150 Available online (English version): http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4866 

151 Available online (English version): http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4868 

152 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attach-
ment_data/file/418567/UK_Next_Generation_Network_Infrastructure_Deployment_Plan_March_15.pdf 

153Available online (English version): https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-digital-communications-infrastructure-strat-
egy/the-digital-communications-infrastructure-strategy 

  196 

 
 
                                                           
While  there  are  no  regional  broadband  plans  in  the  conventional  sense,  the  “Nations  of  the  UK”, 

namely the Scottish and Welsh governments, have made public additional broadband coverage objec-

tives, priorities and action areas.  

Scotland seeks in its national strategy entitled “Scotland's Digital Future: Infrastructure Action Plan” 

from January 2012 “to deliver world-class digital access to all of Scotland by 2020 with an interim mile-

stone of delivering next generation broadband (40 – 80 Mbps) to 85 – 90 % of premises by 2015 and 

putting in place measures to ensure an uplift in service delivered to the remaining 15 %”154. While the 

precise meaning of “world-class” internet is not explicated in the respective strategy paper, elsewhere 

on the official homepage of the government the following definition is put forward: “There is no fixed 

definition of what world-class access will look like in the future. Today world-class would probably be 

speeds of between 100 Mbps and 1 Gbps. In 2020, this may differ.“155 The broadband plan also envi-

sions measures to increase take-up and usage. Overall, it can be said that the Scottish government, 

with its commitment to achieve country-wide download speeds higher than 100 Mbps by 2020, ex-

ceeds the DAE broadband targets.  

The  Welsh  government’s  pendant  to  a  National 

Broadband  Plan  has  been  published  in  December 

2010 under the title “Delivering a Digital Wales.”156 

Therein the government commits to providing next 

generation  broadband  to  all  businesses  by  mid-

2016 and all households by 2020. NGA broadband is 

thereby defined in terms of a minimum of 30 Mbps 

download  speed.  Notably,  the  Broadband  Plan 

stresses that infrastructure projects funded through 

Main  Challenges  for  NGA-rollout  in  the 
United Kingdom: 

  Decrease of the digital divide needed 

 

 

 

 

Low LTE coverage in rural areas 

Lack of a centralized infrastructure map-
ping system 

xDSL technologies as the main source of 
connectivity 

Low market share for FTTP 

public sources will ideally aim at “100 Mbps, to avoid the need for repeated investment at a later date”. 

Wales focuses on a mix of private investments and public interventions, the latter predominantly fo-

cusing on white spots. Importantly, “Superfast Cymru” is the Welsh government’s delivery body for its 

154 Available online (English version): http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0038/00386525.pdf 

155 Available online (English version): http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Economy/digital/action 

156 Available online (English version): http://gov.wales/docs/det/publications/101208digitalwalesen.pdf 

  197 

 
 
                                                           
superfast broadband programme and assumes an operational role in the network development pro-

cess. The Superfast Cymru contract was signed with the dominant incumbent British Telecom (BT) in 

2012 and supported by £ 205 million of public funding.157 

Organizational Steering 

Main Players 

  Broadband development usually steered 

  Broadband Delivery UK as a part of the De-

bottom-up 

partment for Culture, Media and Sport 

 

The Office of Communications, commonly 

known as Ofcom 

 

Local authorities 

Figure 43 Organizational Steering & Main Players UK 

7.2.28.2  Feasibility Assessment 

The feasibility assessment of the UK’s NBP delivers mixed results. The UK has defined its own national 

Broadband target (100 % coverage with ultrafast broadband, currently defined as 24 Mbps by 2020). 

Both the national and the DAE coverage target (100 % coverage with 30 Mbps by 2020) have a low-

medium probability to be met. Currently, NGA coverage in the UK is currently already very high at 90.5 

%, although a digital divide is well discernible. Within rural areas, only 47.4 % are able to subscribe to 

an NGA connection. This digital divide is the reason why there is still doubt if the coverage targets can 

be met entirely. Especially considering the low fixed broadband penetration growth rate of 0.4 % it is 

doubtful if the digital divide can be bridged. This problem is enhanced by the fact that LTE is not a 

viable substitute in rural areas (only 10 % coverage in rural UK). The announced plans of the incumbent 

to begin deployment of FTTP+G.fast in 2017 could be remedy for rural coverage, but it is yet unclear 

whether this investment will reach lowly populated areas. As a positive aspect, cable networks are 

currently covering 45 % and are still expanding. There are substantial state aid funds available and a 

discussion concerning 10 Mbps USO is prevalent, which could further provoke a faster increase of con-

nectivity.  

157 Cf. Hirst, David (2016): Fixed Broadband: Policy and Speeds. Briefing Paper, Number CBP06643, House of Commons Library. Available 
online: http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06643#fullreport 

  198 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Concerning the take-up target (50 % of households subscribing to 100 Mbps or more by 2020), there 

is a low-medium probability that the target can actually be met. We calculated that currently 6.15 % 

of households subscribe to such ultrafast bandwidths. Given the relatively high general fixed broad-

band penetration rate of 37.2 % (as of pop.) and the low growth of new broadband subscriptions (+0.4 

%), it is unlikely that the targeted penetration rate could be a result of new connections. However, 

upgrading of existing connections is a viable option. Last year, there was a growth rate of roughly 152 

% concerning the market share of ultrafast connections. If that trend continues, the targeted penetra-

tion rate could be achieved. However, it will be decisive for the supply to keep up with the demand. 

An increased deployment of FTTP will be necessary if shortages are to be avoided. Thus the main issue 

within the UK will be to increase the coverage in urban and rural areas with high-end infrastructures 

capable of reliably delivering 100 Mbps by 2020. 

The  UK’s  NBP  is  accompanied  by  regional  broadband  strategies  (e.g.  Digital  Scotland  with  differing 

targets, in this case to close the digital divide and develop a “world-class” digital infrastructure). More-

over, it should be noted that also various small scale local broadband projects driven by municipalities 

exist, constituting a valuable contribution to reaching the NBP target. Overall, the NBP is a strategic 

document with several operational elements. Not all measures within the NBP also define concrete 

deadlines or responsibilities. This at least is true for the measures aside the sections about state aid. 

The UK has defined substantial state aid programmes (combined worth 1.7 billion pound, e.g. a satel-

lite voucher scheme for SMEs) and possible business models to bridge its digital divide. Concerning 

transparency measures to bring down the costs of deployment, the UK’s NBP could be more concrete. 

The cost reduction directive has not been transposed yet and the recent BREXIT decision might nega-

tively affect its further transposition to national law. Concerning the demand side, the UK’s NBP de-

fines as a measure a marketing campaign aiming at the promotion of digital services for citizens and 

business alike. 

Generally, the UK is in a solid position, but establishing supply side measures to support the exchange 

of xDSL technologies with FTTP and cable and to bridge the digital divide will continue to be a chal-

lenge. These two issues are the striking hurdles the UK has to overcome. However, there are several 

interesting aspects which might give the UK the momentum needed for tackling these issues: 1. There 

are currently discussions regarding a 10 Mbps USO, which will, if approved, be an important factor for 

rural connectivity as (fixed) technologies to be deployed there will usually be able to provide more 

than 10 Mbps anyway. 2. The incumbent BT established a wholesale provider, further investing in mid-

dle-mile networks. 3. The incumbent announced to begin with large scale FTTP+G.fast deployment by 

2017 (see above), and thus increasing the available supply significantly. 

  199 

 
 
Overall, there are several tendencies that will further increase the UK’s connectivity, leading to a gen-

erally positive outlook for the country’s broadband development, even though the targets might not 

be achieved by 2020.  

  200 

 
 
 
 
8  Main Trends  

Within the analysis of the NBPs on European and on National Level, we found that there are several 

defining conditions that are in favourable for NGA roll-out in each given country. Generally speaking, 

we found conditions that helped countries to achieve higher degrees of connectivity. However, one 

has to bear in mind that not all of these factors can be influenced by governmental strategies. Existing 

infrastructures, population density, degree of urbanization and several other aspects are difficult to 

change and often not within the sphere of influence of democratic governments. The conditions de-

scribed within this section are therefore a mixture of influenceable and non-influenceable conditions 

that affect the current situation in the respective Member States. Often governments try within their 

NBPs to react to these conditions and define appropriate measures (e.g. low population density can 

be addressed by supply side intervention, such as funding schemes). This section shall thus describe 

these factors and possible measures that Member States could adopt. In doing so, we will again rely 

on official data (DESI/EDPR and other sources). 

8.1  Favourable conditions for NGA roll-out 

8.1.1  Market pressure on the incumbent 

It is evident that competition helps to initiate the NGA-market. However, the technologies used seem 

to be rather irrelevant. In some cases, cable based operators pressure the incumbent to deploy FTTP, 

in other cases its WLAN technologies that challenge xDSL technologies and in even other cases there 

are FTTP providers competing with the VDSL Vectoring networks of the incumbent. In any case, alter-

native operators stimulate a general improvement of networks across Europe, triggering vast invest-

ments by incumbents that try to defend their market shares.  

Market pressure especially occurs in countries with substantial cable network (shown in Figure 44). 

These  countries  are  usually  better  concerning  their  overall  NGA-coverage  (correlation  coefficient: 

0.54). This result is of course not very surprising, as cable networks are often the primary source of 

NGA coverage. However, we see that even in cases with the highest cable NGA market share (MT with 

51 % of all NGA subscriptions and a cable coverage close to 100 %), there is still a roughly 50 % non-

cable NGA market share. This, in conclusion lets us assume that other operators invest in their own 

infrastructure to compete with the cable networks. Therefore, it is very likely that the existence of 

cable networks fosters overall infrastructure based competition.  

  201 

 
 
NGA Coverage and NGA-market share of cable subscriptions

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

EL

IT FR HR PL SK RO BG CZ FI SE ES HU SI

IE DE CY EE AT UK LV PT DK LU LT NL BE MT

Cable modem % (DOCSIS 3.0 included)

NGA coverage Mid 15

EU average Cable modem % (DOCSIS 3.0 included)

EU average NGA coverage Mid 15

Figure 44 NGA coverage and market share of cable subscriptions 2015 (own illustration based on DESI 2016) 

However, we found that the actual organizational structure of a competitor does not matter for de-

termining its effect on the incumbent. The sole existence of a competitor that can offer a comparable 

or better quality of service at comparable prices forces the incumbent to upgrade its networks in order 

to compete with these new entrants. 

By now, there are several organizational models for Infrastructure Investors across Europe (Table 65). 

The different models serve the different layers of the digital infrastructure value chain respectively 

(passive infrastructure, active infrastructure, services). Although vertically integrated corporations are 

still the major sources of connections and investments alike, there are also several other types emerg-

ing. For instance, Germany and Austria see several Public Special Purpose Associations which deploy 

passive infrastructure, while private companies operate active components and offer services (Model 

3). Especially in Eastern European countries (e. g. Czech Republic), we see Public Private Partnerships 

(Model 4), while in England and Ireland vertically integrated private companies prevail (Model 6). An 

interesting aspect concerning these models is a rising number of cross-sector cooperations. In Sweden, 

Denmark and several other countries we see an increased activity of utility providers that invest into 

all layers of the value chain.     

  202 

 
 
 
Table 65 Organizational models for Infrastructure Investors across Europe 

If we have a look at the correlation of incumbent market shares (fixed broadband) and the median 

fixed broadband prices for end-customers (Figure 45), we can observe another positive aspect of com-

petition: a correlation coefficient of .38 indicates that there is a link between the position of the in-

cumbent and the end customer prices. Generally speaking, the less dominant the incumbent, the lower 

the median end customer prices. This correlation in turn increases the probability of higher take-up 

rates. Therefore, we can conclude that increased competition positively affects coverage and take-up 

alike. 

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Incumbent market share / Median BB price

80 €

70 €

60 €

50 €

40 €

30 €

20 €

10 €

0 €

BG RO CZ PL UK SI SK IE SE FR HU DE NL EL ES LT PT BE IT MT HR DK EE AT LV CY LU FI

Incumbent market share (Fixed BB)

EU average Incumbent market share (Fixed BB)

Median BB price

EU average Median BB price

Figure 45 Correlation Incumbent market share / Median BB price (own calculation & illustration based on DESI 2016) 

  203 

 
 
 
 
 
  Possible NBP measures: infrastructure mapping tools, open access to state owned infrastruc-

tures, financial incentives for operators to enter the market, public investments (e.g. whole-

sale providers) 

8.1.2  Demand side activities and digitization of society as a whole 

The acceptance of ICT-services within a given country is usually directly linked to take-up and therefore 

indirectly also linked to coverage. There are several indicators for the digitization of a country (e.g. 

digital skills of the population, availability and usage of eGovernment, usage of ICT technology in busi-

ness, education, health care  and other  areas). However, they are often difficult  to quantify. A very 

simple, yet meaningful indicator is the number of “non-liners”, meaning the amount of persons that 

have never used the internet in their life. This is an interesting figure to evaluate since a low share of 

non-liners indicates that a country has become truly “digitized”, with digitization covering society as a 

whole, notwithstanding other  socio-economic factors such as age,  income, education or health. By 

contrast, a high number of non-liners means that a significant percentage of a country’s population is 

completely excluded from digital life, not even being able to enjoy the most basic benefits of the digital 

world, which clearly indicates that a profound digitization of society has not taken place.   

The number of “non-liners” is obviously also linked to the quality of broadband infrastructure. The 

better the infrastructure and thus the better, faster and simpler the access to digital applications and 

services, the easier it is to illustrate the vast benefits of the digital world to non-liners and thereby turn 

them into “digital citizens”. This relation is illustrated by Figure 46. As we can see, the percentage of 

non-liners correlates negatively with NGA coverage (correlation coefficient of -0,37), meaning the bet-

ter the infrastructure, the lower the  number of non-liners. Nevertheless, we can also observe  that 

there are many countries which have a decent NGA coverage, but still a relatively high share of non-

liners. The reasons for such a development are usually to be found in a lack of digital awareness and 

digital skills, but to some extent also in affordability. This underlines the importance of demand side 

activities, which are a powerful tool that is often neglected by the National Broadband Plans.  

  204 

 
 
 
NGA Coverage vs. Percentage of "non-liners" 
(2015)

EU average

"
S
R
E
N
I
L
-
N
O
N
"
F
O
E
G
A
T
N
E
C
R
E
P

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

EL

IT

HR

SK

FR

BG

RO

PT

LV

CY

PL

SI
HU
ES

IE

CZ

AT

EE

DE

FI
SE

LT

MT

BE

UK

DK

LU

NL

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

NGA COVERAGE

Figure 46 NGA coverage vs. “non-liners” (own calculation & illustration based on DESI) 

  Possible NBP measures:  awareness raising campaigns, public  WLAN, use of digital media in 

education, tax deductions for end customers, vouchers, capacity building 

8.1.3  State aid and financial instruments 

Although there is still significant private investment across Europe and the number of white spots de-

creases on a daily basis, some areas will never be commercially viable. Public intervention is therefore 

sometimes inevitable to close the digital divide. To tackle this, in a number of cases Member States 

have decided to extensively use European Investment and Structural Funds (ESIF) – notably ERDF and 

EAFRD – for the extension of broadband networks, amounting to a total of over € 6 Billion by 2020.   

  205 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 47 Planned ICT Investments - European Regions (category of intervention 045, 046, 047 048) under ESIF (million €) 
Source: European Commission, ICT monitoring Tool (http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ict-monitoring).  

Individual countries like Poland and Italy plan to invest more than a € 1 Billion of ERDF each; France, 

the Czech Republic, Spain and Hungary are in a range of € 400 million to € 700 million of ERDF each; 

Croatia, Greece and Slovakia between € 200 million and € 400 million of ERDF each. The administrative 

capacity  to  maximise  the  leverage  on  public  (national  or  regional)  and  private  co-funding  (notably 

through the use of financial instruments) will be crucial to support projects rolling out the next-gener-

ation of broadband networks. These European funds are an important cornerstone of many National 

Broadband Plans and help to develop ICT-infrastructures, especially within rural areas with low com-

mercial interest. 

Member 

ESIF 

Member 

ESIF 

Member 

ESIF 

Member 

ESIF 

State 

Italy 

Funds 

State 

Funds 

State 

Funds 

State 

Funds 

1,165 M 

Croatia 

335 M 

Ireland 

75 M 

Belgium 

21 M 

Poland 

1,025 M 

Greece 

323 M 

Sweden 

71 M 

Cyprus 

France 

628 M 

Slovakia 

278 M 

Slovenia 

68 M 

Malta 

19 M 

18 M 

Czech  Re-

563 M 

United 

164 M 

Lithuania 

64 M 

Portugal 

8 M 

public 

Spain 

Kingdom 

449 M 

Germany 

139 M 

Latvia 

51 M 

Finland 

0.5 M 

  206 

 
 
 
 
Hungary 

400 M 

Romania 

100 M 

Estonia 

43 M 

Table 66 Current planned broadband and digital networks investments under ESIF 
Source: European Commission, ICT monitoring Tool (http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ict-monitoring) 

  Possible NBP measures: national funds and ESIF funds, dedicated financial instruments (e.g. 

loans), guarantees, PPP models 

8.1.4  Regulation (AOs to access different infrastructures) 

Regulation plays a major role in facilitating NGA roll-out. Most National Broadband Plans leave this 

topic  to  the  mostly  independent  National  Regulatory  Authorities.  However,  although  there  are  no 

measures described how the regulatory authorities should support NGA roll-out, they usually describe 

the ideal situation of a “level playing field”. It is evident that national regulatory authorities can play a 

vital role in increasing competition. A recent draft of an upcoming BEREC study stresses the importance 

of network related factors such as “availability of high quality ducts in access networks”. However, 

these capacities are only available in a small number of countries. Therefore, several other regulatory 

measures concerning access can increase NGA roll out, depending on the situation in each country  

(e. g. via LLU, SLU, VULA, duct access, access to civil works, fiber unbundling). The study concludes that 

infrastructure based competition is a main driver of NGA roll-out. Regulatory authorities can therefore 

play a vital role if they succeed in decreasing costs for late entrants that can subsequently put pressure 

on the incumbent and roll out their own NGA networks. Furthermore, access regulations can avoid 

duplication of infrastructure and from a macro-economic perspective, avoid a waste of resources as 

capacity utilization increases. However, a regulatory approach that is too strict may backfire and dis-

courage investments. 

  Possible NBP measures: asymmetric and symmetric access regulation (to civil works, ducts), 

possibly also dark fiber, LLU and VULA 

8.1.5  Population density and urbanization rate 

One of the most defining characteristics for NGA roll out is the population density and urbanization 

rate. As shown on Figure 48, there is a correlation (correlation coefficient .35) between population 

density and NGA coverage. Die explanation is simple: the more people are concentrated in one area, 

the cheaper the costs per connection. Malta is an outlier as it is extremely small with a comparably 

  207 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
high population density. The cases of Greece, France and Italy are particularly interesting. All of these 

countries show a comparably low NGA coverage, despite clear differences concerning population den-

sity. We hereby conclude that population density is not the single defining aspect, but other conditions 

inhibiting higher NGA coverage as well. In these cases, we assume that factors such as topography, 

macro- und microeconomic hardships as well as few investments in network expansion and upgrades 

are leading to distorted results. 

Population Density / NGA Coverage

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

FI SE EE LV LT BG IE HR EL RO CY ES SI AT FR HU SK PT PL DK CZ IT LU DE UK BE NL MT

Population density EU states 2014 (persons per km^2)

EU average Population density 2014 (persons per km^2)

NGA Coverage

EU average NGA Coverage

Figure 48 Population density / NGA coverage (own calculation & illustration based on EUROSTAT and DESI 2016) 

Another important aspect besides the population density is the urbanization rate. Both a high degree 

of urbanization and a dense population indicate a potential business case that is in favour of private 

investments. Large urban areas are therefore an asset that supports swift NGA roll-out. The correlation 

between  urbanization  rate  and  NGA  coverage  (Figure  49)  is  similar to  population  density  and  NGA 

coverage (correlation coefficient .33). 

  208 

 
 
 
 
Degree of Urbanization / NGA Coverage

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

SI SK RO HR PL PT IE AT LT CY LV EE IT HU CZ BG DE EL FR ES UK FI SE DK LU NL MT BE

Degree of Urbanization

NGA Coverage

EU average Degree of Urbanization

EU average NGA Coverage

Figure 49 Urbanization / NGA coverage (own calculation & illustration based on World Bank Data and DESI 2016) 

Both population density and urbanization rate cannot be solved by a National Broadband Plan, there-

fore these two indicators are framework indicators that clearly foster NGA deployment. National gov-

ernments could in cases where low urbanization rate and low population density are given consider 

either the use of public funds, increased use of alternative methods of deployment (e.g. micro- and 

minitrenching, aerial deployment etc.), aggregated demand via special purpose associations or finan-

cial incentives such as vouchers or tax deductions. There are a variety of instruments that might be 

used if national governments want to mitigate the negative impact of these conditions.  

  Possible NBP measures: bottom-up approaches for demand aggregation, changes regarding 

USO, public investments, alternative methods of deployment 

8.1.6  Availability of ducts and upgradable networks 

While available ducts in access networks can increase the speed of NGA roll-out, the inexistence of 

such ducts slows down the deployment of NGA networks significantly. Directly buried cables are espe-

cially problematic as they cannot easily be upgraded or exchanged as the main cost driver – civil works 

-  will apply for any party, either owner of these cables or alternative operators wishing to serve the 

same areas. Although the influence of national governments and their respective National Broadband 

Plans on construction methods is limited, there are several examples where implementation processes 

solved these issues. For example, some countries use construction standards as a prerequisite for the 

receivers of funds  (e.g. DE). In several countries there  are also working groups for standardization, 

often led by the responsible ministry, a broadband competence centre or national regulators. Via these 

  209 

 
 
 
standardization  approaches,  the  national  governments  can  at  least  incentivize  the  use  of  common 

standards that provide for future-proof constructions. 

  Possible NBP measures: development of construction standards, permit granting procedures 

can be altered to only allow for future proof methods of deployment 

8.1.7  Willingness to pay and affordability 

A very important aspect regarding take-up of broadband services is affordability and the willingness to 

pay respectively. This aspect is often an outcome of the economic situation (defined through e.g. rates 

of unemployment, median income, purchasing power) 

When we analysed the situation in each Member State, we realized that the NGA retail prices (lowest 

offer) vary enormously. The absolute costs of an NGA subscription vary from 11,42 € in Lithuania to 

69,37 € in Cyprus (Figure 50). 

Lowest NGA retail price

80 €
70 €
60 €
50 €
40 €
30 €
20 €
10 €
0 €

LT RO BG LV CZ SE HU PL SK FR EE FI NL BE DE AT DK UK SI EL IE PT IT HR ES MT LU CY

Lowest NGA retail price

Average of Member States

Figure 50 Currently lowest NGA retail price in MS (own illustration based on DESI 2016) 

However, as described above, the absolute numbers cannot be compared as they do not reflect certain 

other aspects. For gaining more meaningful results, we put the Median monthly income of each Mem-

ber State into relation to the lowest offer for an NGA subscription. 

This relation changes the picture substantially (Figure 51). 

  210 

 
 
 
Median income/NGA cost-ratio

3 750 €

3 000 €

2 250 €

1 500 €

750 €

0 €

10%

8%

6%

4%

2%

0%

RO BG HU LT LV HR PL SK EE CZ EL PT SI MT ES CY IT IE DE UK NL FR BE AT FI SE DK LU

Median monthly income

EU average Median monthly income

Median monthly income/lowest cost (NGA cost-ratio)

EU average Median monthly income/lowest cost (NGA cost-ratio)

Figure 51 Correlation median income / NGA cost-ratio (own calculation & illustration based on EUROSTAT and DESI 2016) 

By this comparison, we see some interesting developments. While the EU average median monthly 

income is 1314.58 €, the average lowest NGA offer is 26.12 € and the average ratio between median 

income and NGA subscription is roughly 3 %. Romanians pay an astonishing 7 % of the median monthly 

income on an NGA subscription, being the second highest value in the EU with only Croatians paying 

more while the Swedish population pays less than 1 %. This means that willingness to pay is an enor-

mous asset. Sweden is often called as one of the countries with the highest willingness to pay, but in 

reality the subscription prices are low in comparison to the median income. However, it is still true 

that in Sweden initial costs for getting connected or even rent mark-ups are well accepted, which in 

turn is again a true indicator that the Swedish population is willing to pay for high quality of services. 

In any case, lower prices incentivize take-up. However, a fierce price driven competition can slow down 

investments as return on investment takes place in longer periods of time. 

  Possible NBP measures: tax deductions, free public WLAN, free internet access within centers 

of education (e.g. universities, libraries, schools) 

  211 

 
 
 
 
 
9  Good Practices for defining NBP measures 

The national governments of the EU-28 define  different measures within their National Broadband 

Plans to stimulate NGA coverage and take-up in their respective countries. Overall, we defined four 

spheres of influence an NBP could have, namely Demand side measures, Supply side measures, Regu-

latory and Organizational measures as well as Transparency measures. Although one could argue that 

all of them could be subsumed under supply side and demand side, a more detailed analysis seems to 

be more appropriate. Demand and Supply are both enormous factors for NGA roll-out, however, trans-

parency measures recently gained momentum. They are the striking feature of the cost reduction di-

rective and often cover demand side (service mapping) and supply side (infrastructure mapping) alike. 

Regulatory and organizational measures are also in the middle of demand and supply as they often set 

the framework how supply and demand can interact. All measures described within the NBPs can be 

categorized within these four spheres of influence.  

Regulatory & 
Organizational measures 
(access obligations [VULA, 
LLU, Fiber unbundling], 
regulated prices, reference
offers), dedicated 
committees

Demand side measures
(eGovernment, tax
deductions, voucher
schemes, capacity building

NBP 

Supply side measures
(state aid, public
broadband companies, 
special purpose
associations, utility
providers, AOs)

Transparency measures: 
technical standards (in-
house, outside plant); 
infrastructure mapping

Figure 52 Spheres of influence of NBPs 

  212 

 
 
 
 
As 

shown  before,  each  NBP 

is  especially  detailed 

in  one  of 

these 

aspects.  

Table 67 shows this focus. Nonetheless, a clear distinction is often not possible as a strong focus on 

regulations (e.g. access obligations) are often accompanied by strong transparency measures. 

Demand Side Focus 

Supply Side Focus 

HR, DK, EE, FI, HU, NL, SE 

AT, FR, DE, IE, LT, RO, SK, UK 

Regulatory, organizational Focus 

Transparency Focus 

CY, CZ, IT, LV, MT, PT, SI, ES 

BE, BG, EL, LU, PL 

Table 67 Focus of NBPs 

  213 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The following map illustrates these different foci of the National Broadband Plans across Europe. 

Figure 53 Focus of NBPs  

As we can see, the NBPs are relatively even distributed towards each of the four spheres. Within the 

following section we will present one striking example of successful implementation of a measure re-

lated to one of each sphere. 

9.1  Example  I:  Demand  Side  measure  –  Broadband  Delivery  UK’s  voucher 

scheme 

As a part of the British funding scheme Broadband Delivery UK, the British Government introduced a 

voucher system which ran from December 2013 until October 2015. 

  214 

 
 
 
 
The voucher scheme was designed to stimulate demand by SMEs regarding broadband connections. 

The voucher covered the initial costs of connection (connection fees, end user’s equipment), with a 

£100 minimum and a £3,000 maximum, not covering VAT. SMEs taking advantage of the voucher were 

obliged to subscribe to at least 20 Mbps with a possible upgrade to 30 Mbps. SMEs were only eligible, 

if they at least doubled their current business grade connection. The voucher could be used for dedi-

cated lines or point-to-point microwave links. 

The whole scheme was supported by dozens of cities that provided lists of registered suppliers. Fur-

thermore, it was accompanied by extensive public relation measures, e.g. production of videos raising 

awareness  concerning  the  competitive  advantage  that  can  be  gained  by  connecting  businesses  to 

broadband networks. Additionally, a dedicated website providing general broadband knowledge and 

guidelines for SMEs and suppliers alike was set up. The voucher scheme was very successful: hundreds 

of registered suppliers won contracts to connect more than 55,000 British SMEs. The voucher system 

thus enabled these SMEs to invest in their digital capabilities and hereby work as multipliers concern-

ing the need for digital infrastructures. 

9.2  Example II: Supply Side measure – National Funding Program Germany 

The NBP of Germany defined the national broadband targets as 100 % coverage with 50 Mbps down-

stream by 2018. However, it became obvious that private investments alone would not be sufficient 

to cover the extended rural areas within Germany in time. Therefore, the national government notified 

a funding scheme in 2015. It is one of the many national funding schemes to be found throughout the 

European Union, but differs in several aspects. First, currently it is worth roughly EUR 3.4 billion, mak-

ing it one of the largest funding programs in Europe (being in one  league  with the French  and the 

British programs). Municipalities and associations of municipalities are the beneficiaries of the funds. 

Two models can be financed: the gap funding model which applies when a municipality decides to 

tender the provision of broadband services as well as the operator model where municipalities deploy 

their own passive networks and tender the active operations. 

In each call, a scoring model evaluates the most promising projects. The scoring model values those 

areas without commercial interest (defined by e.g. low population density, high costs per connection). 

The connection of business parks (with 1 Gbps symmetrical bandwidths) and institutional consumers 

are other aspects that increase the chances of a positive decision regarding the application. Currently 

  215 

 
 
it is estimated, that the funding program will be responsible for the connection of several million Ger-

man households with bandwidths of 50 Mbps or more. The funding program will hereby be an im-

portant factor to close the digital divide in Germany. 

9.3  Example III: Regulatory, Organizational measure – Symmetric regulation  

There  are  several  countries  across  Europe  whose  regulatory  approach  differs  from  the  traditional 

asymmetric regulatory approach (AOs to demand access to SMP operator’s infrastructure). Countries 

such as France, Spain, Portugal and Lithuania stress the importance of regulations within their national 

strategies and acted accordingly by introducing different kinds of symmetric regulation (where all op-

erators can demand access to passive civil infrastructures). In some parts, this access is expanded to 

ducts. Furthermore, in France there is also a symmetric in house-wiring access obligation in place. All 

of these countries have in common that symmetric regulation increased the overall availability of high-

end infrastructures significantly. Despite initial fears that investments may stop, these approaches led 

to different kinds of cooperation between the operators. Often, operators now engage in joint con-

struction and co-investment schemes to develop their networks to their mutual benefit. In Portugal, 

FTTP providers even entered commercial agreements that went beyond the actual access obligation 

and now grant each other open access to their fiber infrastructure. Symmetric regulation increases the 

utilization of network capacity and hereby reduces the risk of duplication of infrastructures. From a 

macro-economic perspective, this approach is most efficient for a country’s welfare. 

9.4  Example IV: Transparency measure – Polish NBP 

Few NBPs are as detailed concerning transparency measures as the Polish NBP. While several NBPs 

describe the importance of access to existing infrastructures and different tools to achieve it, the Polish 

NBP is rather detailed. It describes the establishment of a service mapping and infrastructure mapping 

tool (by now in existence) that goes beyond other tools as it already capable of visualizing infrastruc-

tures, services, demand and investments. Future improvements will primarily increase the available 

layers and give more detailed information. The establishment of this tool was announced within the 

NBP and underpinned by an implementation plan with schedules and responsibilities. Furthermore, 

the Polish NBP also includes several measures related to cost reduction. For example, it included a 

memorandum of understanding concerning the deployment of passive infrastructures between local 

and national authorities as well as telecommunication operators to increase joint  construction and 

  216 

 
 
sharing of infrastructures. Furthermore, Poland developed guidelines concerning permit granting pro-

cedures, minimizing the time needed until a permit can be issued. Additionally, a code for in-house 

wiring has been established. Within all of these areas, Poland has described clear measures and plans 

for implementation. Through this measures, Poland is already well advanced concerning the transpo-

sition of the cost reduction directive and has supported its recent stride towards better NGA connec-

tivity. 

  217 

 
 
 
 
10 Conclusion and Outlook (revised EU targets) 

This study was designed to give an overview on the National Broadband Plans of the European Union. 

To achieve this endeavour, we have first analysed the state of connectivity on European and on Na-

tional  Level.  We  have  seen  that  the  achievement  of  the  DAE  targets  (full  NGA  coverage  and  50  % 

household penetration by 2020) is questionable on a European level, mainly due to a strong digital 

divide that is discernible throughout Europe. We then proceeded to analyse the National Broadband 

Plans and their respective national targets individually. We have seen that most countries will struggle 

to meet the European and their own targets respectively. However, we have identified several positive 

aspects that might positively change our assessment in the future: especially the strong demand for 

ultrafast bandwidths is a positive sign that can increase coverage and take-up alike. Furthermore, we 

have seen that in many countries there are strong efforts to incentivize and initialize NGA markets in 

rural areas. This is partly achieved through state aid, but sometimes also through cross-sector cooper-

ation and demand aggregation. 

We have seen that the involvement of local actors is gaining more and more importance with respect 

to deploying digital infrastructures in areas deemed economically not interesting for operators. These 

local  actors  act  as  catalysts,  aggregate  demand  and  build  capacities  whenever  needed.  Broadband 

competence  centers  already  play  a vital  role  within  these  activities.  The recently  established  BCOs 

might possibly further support these local activities. 

Another important aspect of the evaluation of the NBPs was the transposition of the cost reduction 

directive. Although few countries have already transposed the directive, some are very advanced and 

had some provisions of the directive already incorporated within their national legal framework, partly 

even before the directive was issued. However, we have seen that access to infrastructures is often 

limited by the lack of infrastructure mappings or cadastres. 

After the country sections, we have shown some general trends that we have discovered during the 

study and illustrated the general possibilities countries have to influence them. Finally, we have shown 

how the measures included in the NBPs can be categorized and have shown some positive examples 

of the practical implementation. 

During the final phase of this study, the EU announced the revision of the objectives announced in the 

DAE. The upcoming objectives include the following 

  All main socio-economic drivers, such as schools, universities, research centres, transport 

hubs, all providers of public services such as hospitals and administrations, and enterprises 

  218 

 
 
relying on digital technologies, should have access to extremely high - gigabit - connectivity 

(allowing users to download/upload 1 gigabit of data per second) [by 2025]. 

  All European households, rural or urban, should have access to connectivity offering a down-

load speed of at least 100 Mbps, which can be upgraded to Gbps [by 2025]. 

  All urban areas as well as major roads and railways should have uninterrupted 5G coverage, 

the fifth generation of wireless communication systems. As an interim target, 5G should be 

commercially available in at least one major city in each EU Member State by 2020.158 

As shown within the previous sections of this study, as of today most of the Member States’ NBPs are 

not prepared yet to achieve these goals. Regarding the connection of socio-economic drivers, there is 

still room for improvement  for most Member States. Although several Member States  realized the 

importance of connecting centres of education, business parks and public administrations, some Mem-

ber States have not yet fully recognized the importance this issue or defined specific measures to in-

crease their connectivity. The demand by business and institutional consumers is, however, of increas-

ing  importance. Often,  these  potent  drivers  have  socio-economic  influence  far beyond their  actual 

reach as they act as multipliers. Whenever students, employees or customers have access to these 

facilities and experience the possibilities of modern digital infrastructures and corresponding web ap-

plications, they are more likely to demand better connections for their private life as well. This in turn, 

reduces the take-up risk of operators which offer high-end solutions especially in areas where deploy-

ment of digital infrastructures is deemed to be economically not viable. Hence, for this objective to be 

attained, a stronger focus on these socio-economic drivers will be necessary in the Member States’ 

future NBPs. 

Regarding the connectivity target, the situation is somewhat similar. Currently, most Member States 

would struggle to meet these objectives, even considering the extended timeframe. However, there 

are several Member States that currently invest in future proof fiber (e.g. Baltic countries, Sweden, 

Portugal) networks or have extensive cable networks available (e.g. Netherlands, Denmark, Malta) that 

are also able to deliver the updated connectivity target. But on the other hand, there are also some 

Member States that are dependent on xDSL technologies where it is at least doubtful, if 100 Mbps can 

be delivered reliably for the majority of users. Thus, in order to improve connectivity and achieve full 

coverage  with  100  Mbps  across  Europe,  future  NBPs  need  to  provide  appropriate  incentives  and 

158 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-3008_en.htm 

  219 

 
 
                                                           
means for increasing investment in broadband infrastructure roll-out. Local actors as well as the pri-

vate sector have to be included and in turn have to make use of such measures.  

Regarding  the  5G  target,  the  perspectives  are  relatively  good.  Commercial  roll-out  of  5G  will  start 

within the next few weeks and commercial availability in one city per Member State will probably be 

possible. On the other hand, uninterrupted service along major roads and railways will again be a chal-

lenge. If this challenge may be mastered is unclear, as there are no commercial experiences with 5G in 

Europe yet. 

In any case, the key for achieving current and future targets will be decided today. Europe’s digital 

future will heavily depend on scalable and future-proof technologies that are able to fulfil all future 

demands alike. If the Member States incentivize the deployment of these technologies, Europe’s digi-

tal infrastructure can become a competitive advantage and support Europe’s societal and economic 

progress alike. 

  220 

 
 
 
11 List of Abbreviations 

2G 

3G 

4G 

5G 

2nd Generation Wireless Mobile Technology 

3rd Generation Wireless Mobile Technology 

4th Generation Wireless Mobile Technology 

5th Generation Wireless Mobile Technology 

ADB 

 Tender Database - Germany 

(Ausschreibungsdatenbank) 

ADF 

Association of French Counties 

(Assemblée des Départements de France) 

ADSL(2)(+) 

Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line(2)(+) 

Agcom 

Authority for Communication Granting - Italy 

(L'Autorità per le garanzie nelle comunicazioni) 

AgID 

Digital Agency of Italy 

(Agenzia per l’Italia Digitale) 

AKOS 

Agency for Communication Networks and Services - Slovenia 

ANACOM 

National Communications Authority - Portugal 

(Autoridade Nacional de Comunicações) 

ANCOM 

Authority for Management and Regulation in Communications - Romania 

AO(s) 

ARCEP 

Alternative Operator(s) 

French Regulation Authority of Electronic Communication and Post 

(L'Autorité de régulation des communications électroniques et des postes) 

ARF 

Association of French Regions 

(Association des Régions de France) 

AT 

Austria 

AVICCA 

Association of local broadband connected communities - France 

(Association  des  Villes  et  Collectivités  pour  les  Communications  Electroniques  et 

l’Audiovisuel) 

BBB 

Federal Broadband Bureau - Germany 

BDUK 

BE 

BEREC 

(Breitbandbüro des Bundes) 

Broadband Delivery UK 

Belgium 

Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications 

  221 

 
 
BG 

BGN 

BIPT 

Bulgaria 

Bulgarian Lev (currency) 

Belgian Institute for Postal Services and Telecommunications - Belgium 

(Institut belge des services postaux et des télécommunications /  Belgisch Instituut 

voor postdiensten en telecommunicatie) 

BMVI 

Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure - Germany 

(Bundesministerium für Verkehr und digitale Infrastruktur) 

BMVIT 

Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology - Austria 

(Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation und Technologie) 

BMWi 

Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy - Germany 

(Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie) 

BNetzA 

Federal  Agency  for  Electricity,  Gas,  Telecommunications,  Post  and  Railway  -  Ger-

many 

(Bundesnetzagentur) 

BT 

British Telecom (private company) 

CAPEX 

Capital expenditures 

CATV 

CEF 

CETIN 

Community Access Television (cable television) 

Connecting Europe Facility  

Czech Telecommunication Infrastructure - private company 

(Česká telekomunikační infrastruktura) 

CIPE 

Interministerial Committee for Economic Programming - Italy  

(Comitato Interministeriale per la Programmazione Economica) 

CIS 

Centralized Information System 

CNMC 

National  Commission  for Markets  and  Competition on  electronic  and  audiovisual 

communications - Spain 

COBUL 

Committee for the dissemination of Ultrafast Broadband - Italy 

(Comitato per la diffusione della Banda Ultralarga) 

ComReg 

Commission for Communications Regulation - Ireland 

CRC 

CTU 

CY 

CYTA 

Communications Regulatory Commission - Bulgaria 

Czech Telecommunication Office 

Cyprus 

Cyprus Telecommunications Authority (operator) 

  222 

 
 
CZ 

CZK 

DAE 

DBO 

Czech Republic 

Czech Koruna (currency) 

Digital Agenda Europe 

Design Build and Operate 

DCENR 

Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources - Ireland 

DCLG 

DCMS 

DE 

DEC 

Defra 

DK 

DKK 

Department for Communities and Local Government - United Kingdom 

Department for Culture, Media and Sport- United Kingdom 

Germany 

Department of Electronic Communications - Cyprus 

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs - United Kingdom 

Denmark 

Danish Krone (currency) 

DOCSIS 

Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification 

(x)DSL 

DSM 

Digital Subscriber Line 

Digital Single Market 

E.A. ECNIS 

Electronic Communication Networks and Information Society - Bulgaria 

EAFRD 

EBRD 

EE 

EEK 

EETT 

EFSI 

EL 

ELASA 

ELFA 

European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development 

European Bank for Reconstruction and Development 

Estonia 

Estonian Kroon (currency) 

National Telecommunications and Posts Commission - Greece 

European Fund for Strategic Investment 

Greece 

Estonian Broadband Development Foundation 

European Local Fiber Alliance 

ENGAGE 

Enhancing Next Generation Access Growth in Europe (Project) 

ERDF 

ES 

ESIF 

EU 

EUR 

FFTP 

European Regional Development Fund 

Spain 

European Structural Investment Funds 

European Union 

Euro (currency) 

Fibre to the Premises 

  223 

 
 
FI 

Finland 

FICORA 

Finnish Regulatory Authority 

(Viestintävirasto) 

FIRIP 

Industrial Federation of Public Initiative Networks - France 

(Fédération des Industriels des Réseaux d’Initiative Publique) 

FNCCR 

National Federation of Public Service Providers - France 

FPS 

FR 

FSN 

FTTB 

FTTC 

FTTH 

FTTx 

FWA 

GAK 

GBER 

Gbps 

GHz 

GIS 

GPON 

GSM 

(Fédération Nationale des Collectivités Concédantes et Régies) 

Federal Public Service Economy, S.M.E.s, Self-employed and Energy - Belgium 

France 

National Fund for the Digital Society - France 

(Fond National pour la Société Numérique) 

Fibre to the Building 

Fibre to the Curb 

Fibre to the Home 

Fibre to the x 

Fixed Wireless Access 

Joint Task on Agricultural Structures and Coastal Protection - Germany 

(Gemeinschaftsaufgabe Verbesserung der Agrarstruktur und des Küstenschutzes) 

General Block Exemption Regulation 

Gigabits per second 

Gigahertz 

Geographic Information System 

Gigabit Passive Optical Networks 

Global System for Mobile Communications 

HAKOM 

Croatian regulatory authority for network industries - Croatia 

HFC 

HH 

HR 

HRK 

Hybrid Fibre-Coaxial 

Household 

Croatia 

Croatian Kuna (currency) 

HSDPA 

High Speed Downlink Packet Access 

HSPA(+)/ 

(Evolved) High Speed Packet Access 

H(+) 

  224 

 
 
HU 

HUF 

ICT 

Hungary 

Hungarian Forint (currency) 

Information and communications technology 

ICT UNIE 

Information Technology and Telecommunication Association - Czech Republic 

IE 

ILR 

IMT 

IoT 

IS 

ISO 

Ireland 

Luxembourgian Regulations Institute 

(Institut Luxembourgeois de Régulation) 

International Mobile Telecommunications 

Internet of Things 

Information System 

International Organization for Standardization 

ISP(s) 

Internet Service Provider(s) 

IST 

IT 

ITL 

IVPK 

KLIC 

Information Systems Technology 

Italy 

Estonian Association of Information Technology and Telecommunications 

Information Society Development Committee - Lithuania 

Cable and Pipeline Information Centre - Netherlands 

KLIM-CICC 

Federal Duct and Cable Contact Point - Belgium, Wallonia and Brussels 

(Federaal Kabels en Leidingen Informatie Meldpunt / Contact federal Informations 

Câbles et Conduites 

KLIP 

Cable and Duct Information Portal - Belgium, Flanders 

LAG 

LDR 

LEC 

LIA 

(Kabel- en Leidinginformatieportaal) 

Local Action Group 

Less Developed Region 

Law for Electronic Communication - Bulgaria 

Latvian Internet Association 

LIKTA 

Latvian Information and Communications Technology Association 

LLU 

LSA 

LSP  

LT 

LTE 

Local Loop Unbundling 

Learning Support Assistant  

Law on Spatial Planning - Bulgaria 

Lithuania  

Long-Term Evolution 

  225 

 
 
LU 

LV 

LVL 

Luxembourg 

Latvia 

Latvian Lats (currency) 

LVRTC 

Latvia State Radio and Television Centre 

(Latvijas valsts radio un televīzijas centrs) 

M2M 

MAN 

Mbps 

MCA 

MCSI 

MDA 

MDR 

MDU 

Machine to Machine 

Metropolitan Area Network 

Megabits per second 

Malta Communications Authority 

Ministry of Communications and Information Society - Romania 

Ministry of Digital Affairs - Poland 

More Developed Region 

Multi-Dwelling Unit 

MDVRR 

Ministry of Transport, Construction and Regional Development of the Slovak Repub-

MHz 

MISE 

MITA 

MND 

MNO 

MS 

MT 

MTITC 

MVNO 

NASES 

NBP 

NGA 

NGN 

NGO 

NL 

lic 

Megahertz 

Ministry of Economic Development - Italy 

(Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico) 

Malta Information Technology Agency 

Ministry of National Development of the Republic of Hungary 

Mobile Network Operator 

Member State 

Malta 

Ministry of Transport and Communications - Bulgaria 

Mobile Virtual Network Operator 

National Agency for Networking and Electronic Services - Slovakia 

National Broadband Plan 

Next Generation Access 

Next Generation Network 

Non-governmental organization 

Netherlands 

NMHH 

National Media and Infocommunications Authority - Hungary 

  226 

 
 
NP-BBI 

National Programme for Broadband Backhaul Infrastructure - Croatia 

NPRSNG 

National NGN Development Plan - Czech Republic 

(Národní plan rozvoje sítí nové generace) 

NRA 

National Regulatory Authority  

Ofcom 

Office of Communications - United Kingdom 

OP 

OPRD 

PL 

PNBL 

Operational Programme 

Operational Programme Regional Development - Bulgaria 

Poland 

National Broadband Plan - Italy 

(Piano Nazionale Banda Larga) 

PNBUL 

National ultrafast-Broadband Plan - Italy 

(Piano Nazionale Banda Ultra Larga) 

PON 

Passive Optical Network 

(M)POP 

(Minimum) Point of Presence 

PPDR 

PPP 

PSTN 

PT 

PTS 

PUC 

R&D 

RCA 

RCBF 

RO 

RRT 

RSPP 

SE 

SEK 

SETSI 

SI 

SIM 

Public Protection and Disaster Relief 

Public–private partnership 

Public Switched Telephone Network 

Portugal 

Swedish Post and Telecom Agency 

(Post- och telestyrelsen) 

Public Utility Commission - Latvia 

Research and Development  

The Radio Communication Agency - Netherlands 

Rural Community Broadband Fund - United Kingdom 

Romania 

Communications Regulatory Authority of the Republic of Lithuania 

Radio Spectrum Policy Programme 

Sweden 

Swedish Krona (currency) 

Secretary of State for Telecommunications and Information Society - Spain 

Slovenia 

Subscriber Identity Module 

  227 

 
 
SJSC 

SK 

SLU 

SMC 

State Joint-Stock Company 

Slovakia 

Sub Loop Unbundling 

Communications and Media Service - Luxembourg 

SME(s) 

Small and medium-sized enterprise(s) 

SMP 

Significant Market Power 

SOP-IEC 

Sectoral Operational Programme-Increase of Economic Competitiveness - Romania 

SSSI(s) 

SUMIN 

TDD 

TEN-T 

TIFF 

TKG 

TLC 

TSM 

UHF 

UK 

UKE 

Site(s) of Special Scientific Interest - United Kingdom 

Ministry of Transport and Communications of the Republic of Lithuania 

Time-division duplexing 

Trans-European Transport Networks 

Tagged Image File Format 

Telecommunications Act - Austria/Germany 

(Telekommunikationsgesetz) 

Telecommunication(s) 

Telecoms Single  Market 

Ultra High Frequency 

United Kingdom 

Office of Electronic Communications - Poland 

UMTS 

Universal Mobile Telecommunications System 

USO 

VAT 

VDSL 

VULA 

Universal Service Obligation 

Value Added Tax 

Very-high-bit-rate Digital Subscriber Line 

Virtual Unbundled. Local Access 

WCDMA 

Wideband Code Division Multiple Access 

WiMAX 

Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access 

WLAN 

Wireless Local Area Network 

  228 

 
 
 
 
 
12 List of References 

Agenda Portugal Digital (Diário da República, 1.ª série —N.º 74 — 16 de abril de 2015). Source: 
https://dre.pt/application/file/66991457 (2015) 

Analysis Mason and Tech4i2: The socio-economic impact of bandwidth. (2013) 

Analysis Mason: Broadband network investment three actions for regulators and policy-makers. 
(2015) 

Analysis Mason: Report for ECTA – European Competitive Telecommunications Association - The digi-
tal single market and telecoms regulation going forward. (2015) 

Analysis Mason: Report for the Broadband Commission - Broadband Policy Briefing Paper. (2015) 

Analysis Mason: Tech companies offer an alternative to PPP investments in broadband networks. 
(2015)  

Bourreau, Marc, Pinar Doan, and Matthieu Manant: A Critical Review of the "Ladder Investment" Ap-
proach. Telecommunications Policy 34(11):683-696. (2010) 

Broadband Commission for Digital Development: The State of Broadband 2015: Broadband as a 
Foundation for Sustainable Development. (2015) 

Broadband Strategy 2020 (Breitbandstrategie 2020) - Austria. Source: https://www.bmvit.gv.at/ser-
vice/publikationen/telekommunikation/downloads/breitbandstrategie2020.pdf (2014) 

Broadband Strategy for Sweden / Swedish Digital Agenda (IT i Människans Tjänst - en digital agenda 
för Sverige). Source: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4861 (2009/2011) 

Cyprus Broadband Plan 2016 – 2020. Source: 
http://www.mcw.gov.cy/mcw/dec/dec.nsf/All/AA8BA9C426E54929C2257FBE0023CF39/$file/Cyprus
_Broadband_Plan.pdf?OpenElement (2016) 

Delft University of Technology: Explaining Telecommunications Performance across the EU. (2014) 

Delft University of Technology: The policy framework for electronic communications: an EU bench-
mark 2012. (2014) 

Digital Agenda 2014-2017 (Digitale Agenda 2014-2017) - Germany. Source: https://www.digitale-
agenda.de/Content/DE/_Anlagen/2014/08/2014-08-20-digitale-
agenda.pdf;jsessionid=45ADB12CE6E02B57E51889B1B82839E2.s4t1?__blob=publicationFile&v=6 
(2014) 

Digital Agenda 2020 for Estonia. Source: https://www.mkm.ee/sites/default/files/digi-
tal_agenda_2020_estonia_engf.pdf (2014) 

Digital Agenda Netherlands (ICT voor innovatie en economische groei). Source: http://ec.eu-
ropa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4217 (2011) 

Digitale Agenda - Vernieuwen, Vertrouwen, Versnellen - Netherlands. Source: https://www.rijksover-
heid.nl/onderwerpen/ict/documenten/rapporten/2016/07/05/digitale-agenda-vernieuwen-ver-
trouwen-versnellen (2016)  

  229 

 
 
Digital Belgium – Plan for Ultrafast Internet in Belgium (2015-2020) (Digital Belgium, Plan Voor Ult-
rasnel Internet in Belgie). Source: http://www.decroo.belgium.be/en/plan-ultrafast-internet-belgium 
(2015) 

Digital Czech Republic V.2.0 the way to the digital economy (Digitální Česko v. 2.0 Cesta k digitální 
ekonomice Note). Source: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4833 (2013) 

Digital Growth Policy Statement / the action plan “Better broadband and mobile coverage in Den-
mark”. Source: http://evm.dk/english/publications/2013/13-05-29-denmarks-digital-growth (2013) 

Digital Malta 2014 – 2020. Source: https://digitalmalta.gov.mt/ (2014) 

Directive 2014/61/CE on broadband cost reduction in a nutshell. (2014) 

European Commission:  Impact Assessment - Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation 
of the European Parliament and of the Council on measures to reduce the cost of deploying high-
speed electronic communications networks - SWD(2013) 73 final. (26.03.2013) 

European Commission: A Digital Agenda for Europe - COM(2010) 245 final. (19.5.2010) 

European Commission: A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe - COM(2015) 192 final. 
(6.05.2015) 

European Commission: Commission Staff Working Document on the Implementation of National 
Broadband Plans - SWD(2012) 68 final/2. (23.03.2012) 

European Commission: Digital Scoreboard / Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI). Source: 
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/digital-scoreboard (2016) 

European Commission: European Broadband: investing in digitally driven growth - COM(2010) 472 
final. (19.5.2010) 

European Commission: European Digital Progress Report. Source: http://ec.europa.eu/news-
room/dae/document.cfm?action=display&doc_id=15806 (2016) 

European Commission: Guidance on Ex ante Conditionalities for the European Structural and Invest-
ment Funds PART II. (2014) 

European Commission: Guide to High-Speed Broadband Investment. (2014) 

European Commission: ICT Monitoring Tool. Source: http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ict-monito-
ring (2016) 

European Commission: Implementation of the EU regulatory framework for electronic communica-
tion - SWD(2015) 126 final. (19.6.2015) 

Eurostat regional yearbook 2015. (2015) 

France Very High Speed (France Très Haut Débit). Source: http://francethd.fr/documents_refer-
ence/Cahier-des-charges-PFTHD-2015.pdf (2015) 

Government Decision HG 414/2015 (Romanian Program for the implementation of the National Plan 
for NGN infrastructure development). Source: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/docu-
ment.cfm?doc_id=4214 (2015) 

  230 

 
 
i2010 High Level Group: Benchmarking Digital Europe 2011-2015 - a conceptual framework. 
(27.10.2009) 

IHS Inc. and Valdani Vicari & Associati: Broadband Coverage in Europe 2014 - Mapping progress to-
wards the coverage objectives of the Digital Agenda. (2015) 

Lemstra, Wolter and Melody, William H.: The Dynamics of Broadband Markets in Europe Realizing 
the 2020 Digital Agenda. (2015) 

National Broadband Infrastructure Plan for Next Generation Access (2014-2020) -Bulgaria. Source: 
http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=7487 (2014) 

National Broadband Plan 2012 / the updated Intervention Strategy 2015 - Ireland. Source: 
http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/communications/SiteCollectionDocuments/Broadband/National%20Broad-
band%20Plan.pdf (2012/2015) 

National broadband strategy/ Digital Agenda for 2011-2020 - Finland. Source: ec.europa.eu/news-
room/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=3264 (2008/2011) 

National Infocommunication Strategy 2014-2020 - Hungary. Source: http://www.kormany.hu/down-
load/5/ff/70000/NIS_EN_clear.pdf (2014) 

National Plan Next Generation Broadband Access 2014-2020 - Greece. Source: 
http://www.yme.gr/getfile.php?id=5836 (2015) 

National strategy for very highspeed networks – Very highspeed broadband for all - Luxembourg. 
Source: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=4854 (2010) 

OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers No. 26: Development of High-speed Networks 
and the Role of Municipal Networks. (2015) 

Ofcom: The Communications Market Report. (2015) 

Official Journal of the European Union - L155/1. (23.05.2014) 

Official Journal of the European Union - L155/11. (23.05.2014) 

Official Journal of the European Union - L155/9. (23.05.2014) 

Plan for the development of next generation broadband networks until 2020 (updated in March 
2016) - Slovenia. Source: http://www.mizs.gov.si/fileadmin/mizs.gov.si/pageuploads/Informa-
cijska_druzba/NGN_2020.pdf (2016) 

Plan for the Next Generation of Internet Development for 2014- 2020 in Republic of Lithuania. 
Source: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/en/legalAct/7e1fdab0600411e4bad5c03f56793630 (2014) 

Polish National Broadband Plan. Source: https://mac.gov.pl/files/narodowy_plan_szerokopas-
mowy_-_08.01.2014_przyjety_przez_rm.pdf (2014) 

SamKnows Limited: Quality of Broadband Services in the EU. (2013) 

South East Europe - Transnational Cooperation Programme: BASIC Private DBO MODEL. (2013) 

  231 

 
 
Strategic document for Digital Growth and Next Generation Access Infrastructure 2014-2020 -Slo-
vakia. Source: http://www.informatizacia.sk/ext_dok-strategicky_dokument_2014_2020_en/16622c 
(2014) 

Strategy for Broadband Development in the Republic of Croatia for 2012-2015. Source: 
http://www.mppi.hr/UserDocsImages/w%20StrategyBB%205_12.pdf (2011) 

Strategia  italiana  per  la  banda  ultralarga  (“Piano  nazionale  banda  ultra  larga”)  -  Italy.  Source: 
http://www.governo.it/sites/governo.it/files/strategia_banda_ultralarga.pdf (2015) 

The conception of next generation broadband electronic communication network development 
2013-2020 (Nākamās paaudzes platjoslas elektronisko sakaru tīklu attīstības koncepcija 2013-2020 
gadam) - Latvia: http://www.vvc.gov.lv/export/sites/de-
fault/docs/LRTA/Citi/Summary_of_the_Concept_for_the_Development_of_Next_Generation.doc 
(2012) 

The Digital Agenda for Spain - Telecommunications and Ultra-fast Networks Plan. Source: 
http://www.agendadigital.gob.es/digital-agenda/Documents/digital-agenda-for-spain.pdf (2013) 

The World Bank: Building Broadband - Strategies and Policies For Developing The World. (2010) 

The World Bank: Urban population (% of total). Source: http://data.worldbank.org/indica-
tor/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS (2015) 

UK Next Generation Network Infrastructure Deployment Plan, digital communications infrastructure 
strategy. Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attach-
ment_data/file/418567/UK_Next_Generation_Network_Infrastructure_Deployment_Plan_March_15
.pdf (2015) 

Van Dijk Management Consultants: Broadband Internet Access Cost (BIAC) 2015 

  232 

 
 
 
 
13 Annex 

Mem-

ber 

State 
Austria 

Belgium 
Bulgaria 

Croatia 

Cyprus 

Czech Re-

public 

Denmark 

Estonia 

Finland 

France 

Greece 

Germany 

Hungary 

NBP Source 

http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/docu-

ment.cfm?doc_id=4828  

http://www.digitalbelgium.be/en#digital-agenda  

http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/docu-

Member 

State 

Italy 

Latvia 
Lithuania 

NBP Source 

http://www.governo.it/sites/governo.it/files/strate-

gia_banda_ultralarga.pdf  

http://mk.gov.lv/lv/mk/tap/?pid=40249838  

http://www3.lrs.lt/pls/inter3/dokpaieska.show-

ment.cfm?doc_id=7487  

doc_l?p_id=467638&p_tr2=2  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redi-

rect/15189  

Luxembourg 

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/15195 

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redi-

Malta 

http://www.digitalmalta.gov.mt/en/Pages/Con-

rect/15178  

tent/DMDownload.aspx  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redi-

rect/15180  

Netherlands 

http://www.evm.dk/aktuelt/pressemedde-

lelser/2013/13-03-13-bedre-bredbaand-og-mo-

bildaekning-i-hele-danmark  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redi-

rect/15183  

http://www.lvm.fi/en/broadband  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redi-

rect/15186  

http://www.yme.gr/getfile.php?id=5836  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redi-

rect/19213  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redi-

rect/15188  

Poland 

Portugal 

Romania 

Slovakia 

Slovenia 

Spain 

Sweden 

http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/docu-

ment.cfm?doc_id=4217 

https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/ict/documen-

ten/rapporten/2016/07/05/digitale-agenda-vernieuwen-

vertrouwen-versnellen 

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/15199  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/15200  

http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/14051  

http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/in-

dex.php?ids=8591&lang=en  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/15204  

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/15185  

http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redirect/15202  

  233 

 
 
 
Ireland 

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/news-redi-

rect/15191  

United  King-

dom 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-digital-

communications-infrastructure-strategy/the-digital-com-

munications-infrastructure-strategy  

Table 68: National Broadband Plans of the Member States: Sources

  234 

 
 
 
  235 

 
 
  236 

 
 
  237 

 
 
  238 

 
 
  239 

 
 
  240 

 
 
  241 

 
 
  242 

 
 
  243 

 
 
  244 

 
 
  245 

 
 
  246 

 
 
  247 

 
 
  248 

 
 
  249 

 
 
  250 

 
 
  251 

 
 
  252 

 
 
  253 

 
 
  254 

 
 
  255 

 
 
  256 

 
 
  257 

 
 
  258 

 
 
  259 

 
 
  260 

 
 
  261 

 
 
  262 

 
 
  263 

 
 
  264 

 
 
  265 

 
 
  266 

 
 
  267 

 
 
  268 

 
 
  269 

 
 
  270 

 
 
  271 

 
 
  272 

 
 
  273 

 
 
  274 

 
 
  275 

 
 
  276 

 
 
  277 

 
 
  278 

 
 
  279 

 
 
  280 

 
 
  281 

 
 
  282 

 
 
  283 

 
 
  284 

 
 
  285 

 
 
  286 

 
 
  287 

 
 
  288 

 
 
  289 

 
 
  290 

 
 
  291 

 
 
  292 

 
 
  293 

 
 
  294 

 
 
  295 

 
 
  296 

 
 
  297 

 
 
  298 

 
 
  299 

 
 
  300 

 
 
  301 

 
 
  302 

 
 
  303 

 
 
  304 

 
 
  305 

 
 
  306 

 
 
  307 

 
 
  308 

 
 
  309 

 
 
  310 

 
 
  311 

 
 
  312 

 
 
  313 

 
 
  314 

 
 
  315 

 
 
  316 

 
 
  317 

 
 
  318 

 
 
 
European Commission 

Study on national broadband plans in the EU-28 – Final Report 
Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union 

2014 – 320 pages  

ISBN 978-92-79-66284-3 
doi: 10.2759/340045 

  319 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
K
K
-
0
2
-
1
7
-
2
5
2
-
E
N
-
N

doi: 10.2759/340045                       ISBN 978-92-79-66284-3 

  320