High-speed Internet (or broadband)1 is integral to the lives of many Canadians who use it for banking, shopping, education and entertainment. Furthermore, governments at all levels are offering more and more services online. Broadband Internet has an increased importance in rural areas. It makes available a variety of essential services, such as education and medical services, that people living in rural and remote areas would often be unable to access otherwise.
In December 2016, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) declared that broadband Internet access is a basic telecommunications service for all Canadians and set the following targets for the basic services that Canadians need to participate in the digital economy:
Because Canada’s population is unevenly distributed over a vast landscape – most Canadians live in cities along the border with the United States – connectivity across the country is unequal. Urban Canadians have access to a wide variety of Internet services, while those living in rural or remote areas have limited or no access to broadband because building broadband networks is extremely expensive. Their cost-effectiveness is highly dependent on the population density of the market. This gulf in connectivity between urban and rural areas, often referred to as the “digital divide,” has become a policy concern for all levels of government.
A digital divide separates those who use broadband from those who do not. There are two main categories of digital divide: the technical digital divide and the socio‑economic digital divide. The technical digital divide refers to accessibility or the technical ability to have a broadband connection. Although there may be areas in cities (or on the urban-suburban fringe) with no access to broadband, the “technical digital divide” generally refers to the gap between urban and rural or remote areas.
The socio-economic digital divide focuses on factors independent of where people live, such as age, income, education, language or gender. Bridging the socio‑economic digital divide is important in establishing an inclusive digital society; however, this paper focuses on the fundamental issue of bridging the technical divide between urban and rural and remote populations.
Figure 1 shows the urban/rural split for broadband availability in Canada, while Table 1 shows broadband availability in each province and territory.
Figure 1 – Broadband Availability: Urban Versus Rural Areas, 2017
In 2017, broadband availability (as a percentage of households) was significantly lower in rural areas than in small, medium and large population centres, across all speeds.
Speed in megabits per second (Mbps) | Rural Areas | Small Population Centres | Medium Population Centres | Large Population Centres |
---|---|---|---|---|
1.5 + Mbps | 94 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
5 + Mbps | 88 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
10 + Mbps | 79 | 99 | 100 | 100 |
16 + Mbps | 69 | 96 | 100 | 100 |
25 + Mbps | 66 | 95 | 100 | 100 |
30 + Mbps | 41 | 89 | 99 | 100 |
50 + Mbps | 39 | 88 | 99 | 100 |
100 + Mbps | 35 | 87 | 99 | 99 |
Source: Figure prepared by the authors using data obtained from Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, Communications Monitoring Report 2018, 2019.
Province/Territory | 5+ Mbps | 10+ Mbps | 16+ Mbps | 25+ Mbps | 50+ Mbps | 50/10 Mbps and unlimited data transfera |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
British Columbia | 97.6 | 96.7 | 94.5 | 94.3 | 92.8 | 91.0 |
Alberta | 99.2 | 98.1 | 95.9 | 94.4 | 82.8 | 80.3 |
Saskatchewan | 94.6 | 87.1 | 77.1 | 75.3 | 53.5 | 45.4 |
Manitoba | 98.0 | 96.1 | 94.9 | 94.6 | 70.9 | 69.8 |
Ontario | 98.3 | 96.4 | 94.5 | 93.5 | 87.4 | 86.9 |
Quebec | 98.1 | 96.2 | 93.3 | 92.5 | 88.9 | 88.5 |
New Brunswick | 94.3 | 91.9 | 91.9 | 91.9 | 81.2 | 81.2 |
Nova Scotia | 87.4 | 83.4 | 79.1 | 79.1 | 78.7 | 77.8 |
Prince Edward Island | 93.4 | 87.7 | 87.7 | 87.7 | 59.8 | 59.8 |
Newfoundland and Labrador | 89.0 | 80.8 | 80.7 | 78.1 | 70.9 | 70.9 |
Yukon | 90.5 | 84.2 | 60.8 | 60.8 | 60.8 | 0 |
Northwest Territories | 97.7 | 93.6 | 53.7 | 53.7 | 53.7 | 0 |
Nunavut | 29.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Canada | 97.5 | 95.4 | 92.8 | 92.0 | 85.4 | 84.1 |
Note: a. This column presents access to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) target by province and territory.
Source: Table prepared by the authors using data obtained from CRTC, Communications Monitoring Report 2018, 2019.
Canada is not alone in facing the urban/rural technical digital divide. In 2017, for example, the European Commission noted the following situation in its report Broadband Coverage in Europe, 2017:
Rural broadband coverage continued to be lower than national coverage across EU Member States. Although 92.4% of rural EU homes were passed by at least one fixed broadband technology in mid-2017, less than 50% (46.9%) had access to high-speed next generation services.3
Almost all developed countries have digital or broadband plans that call for universal broadband access.
Canada’s population distribution and geography are sometimes cited to explain why Canadians receive lower-quality broadband service but pay higher prices for broadband than citizens of other developed countries.4 In its introduction to the Connect to Innovate program, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada ( ISED) explained that, in rural and remote communities, “challenging geography and smaller populations present barriers to private sector investment in building, operating and maintaining infrastructure.” 5
Canada is a vast, sparsely populated country, with a population density of 3.6 persons per square kilometre (persons/km²), which is low compared to other countries. (For comparison, Appendix A provides data on population density and urbanization for selected countries.) However, this overall average can be misleading, as the population density is not constant across Canada, so the average represents neither the high density in urban areas nor the extremely low density in rural and remote areas.
A comparison of the North (Yukon, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut) with Canada’s five largest census metropolitan areas (CMAs) shows how a measure using total population and total land area can be misleading. In 2016, the North had 39% of Canada’s land mass and 0.3% of its population, giving a population density of 0.013 persons/km².6 The five largest CMAs had 2.8% of the country’s land mass and 43% of its population, constituting a population density of 601.7 persons/km².
Table 2 shows the population densities for the top five CMAs in Canada. Given these densities, private-sector firms can cover costs and make a profit serving the population in these cities and along some of the transportation corridors linking them. Focusing on the densely populated areas in the country appears to be the strategy of most wireless and broadband providers in Canada, in order to make a profit acceptable to their shareholders. For other areas of Canada, public–private partnerships, such as those in Alberta, Saskatchewan and elsewhere, or more direct government involvement is needed to bring broadband to the entire population.
Census Metropolitan Area | Area (km²) | Population | Density (persons/km²) |
---|---|---|---|
Toronto | 5,905.8 | 5,928,040 | 1,003.8 |
Montréal | 4,604.2 | 4,098,927 | 890.2 |
Vancouver | 2,882.7 | 2,463,431 | 854.6 |
Calgary | 5,110.2 | 1,392,609 | 272.5 |
Ottawa–Gatineau | 6,767.4 | 1,323,783 | 195.6 |
Total | 25,270.3 | 15,206.790 | 601.8 |
Source: Statistics Canada, “Population and dwelling counts, for census metropolitan areas, 2016 and 2011 censuses,” Population and Dwelling Count Highlight Tables, 2016 Census. Data for Montréal and Calgary exclude one or more incompletely enumerated Indian reserves or Indian settlements.
In recent years, the federal government has introduced various programs to improve broadband connectivity in rural and remote areas. For example, in 2014, the Government of Canada launched the Connecting Canadians program, which aims to expand and improve broadband Internet access to nearly 300,000 Canadian households. Total funding of $225 million has been allocated to this program.7
In 2016, the Government of Canada announced an investment of up to $500 million over five years to bring broadband Internet service to 300 rural and remote communities through the Connect to Innovate program.8 As of 11 July 2019, 147 projects had been announced, for a total of $468.9 million.9
In addition, the CRTC has implemented initiatives to complement ISED programs. For example, in 2016, the CRTC created a $750 million fund, financed through contributions by major telecommunications service providers, to support projects in areas where the established target of 50/10 Mbps had not yet been met.10 However, as part of Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2018-377, issued on 27 September 2018, this target was reduced to require that projects aim to provide a minimum speed of 25/5 Mbps instead.11 Despite some criticism,12 the CRTC says that this new target will likely result in “projects covering underserved areas that would deliver a broadband Internet access service that the majority of Canadians use today.” 13
In June 2018, the federal government launched a review of the telecommunications and broadcasting Acts.14 The public consultations conducted as part of this review identified key themes, including “broadband deployment in rural and remote communities.” 15
Additional initiatives to support broadband Internet were announced in the two most recent federal budgets. In Budget 2018, $100 million over five years was announced under the Strategic Innovation Fund to support projects related to Low Earth Orbit satellites and the next generation of broadband service in rural areas.16
In addition, in Budget 2019, the Government of Canada committed to ensuring that 95% of Canadians have access to Internet speeds corresponding to CRTC targets by 2026 and that 100% of Canadians have access to them by 2030. To achieve its objectives, the government proposed various initiatives, including these:
The cost-effectiveness of various broadband delivery systems is highly influenced by the population densities of the targeted regions. Figure 2 shows how declining population densities lead to higher capital costs for households with wireless or wireline broadband (wire or fibre); satellites, because of their vast coverage, do not show the same rising costs, although their technical characteristics make them a choice for only sparsely populated areas.
Figure 2 – Cost-Effectiveness of Technologies by Population Density
Source: Figure prepared by the Library of Parliament using data obtained from Brightstar Canada, Nova Scotia Department of Business Last Mile Strategy (1.34 MB, 46 pages), May 2018.
The following technologies are examples of cost-effective solutions for providing high-speed Internet access to vast, sparsely populated regions.
Fixed wireless: Fixed wireless systems use digital radio transmitters placed on any elevated location (e.g., rooftop or tower) and achieve point-to-point signal transmission via a microwave platform.18 In 2017, 26% of rural households relied solely on this technology for broadband access.19
Satellite: Although costlier than fixed-line service, satellite delivery of broadband provides access to multiple remote users from one delivery point. Emerging technology in ultra-high-throughput-capacity satellites, such as ViaSat-2 (launched in June 2017), will provide greater economies of scale for broadband providers, which should make satellite service more affordable.20
Small-cell infrastructure: Small-cell infrastructure includes a variety of operator-controlled radio-communications equipment that provides mobile and Internet services within localized areas. The term “small cell” covers femtocells, picocells, microcells and metrocells. These cells typically have a range of from 10 to several hundred metres.21 This type of infrastructure is already used in some rural areas, as in Saskatchewan.22
Rural Remote Broadband Systems (RRBS): This technology, used only in Canada, allows for broadband Internet transmission over unused analog television channels in the 512–698 megahertz (MHz) spectrum (channels 21–51). Use of this technology is declining (52 stations were in operation in 2015 compared with 555 stations in 2011). The receivers required to use this technology are not produced in sufficient quantities to make them affordable for the average consumer, and RRBS operators will have to move their services since the 600 MHz band was auctioned in spring 2019 and can therefore no longer be used for this purpose.23
WiMAX: Using a powerful base station, WiMAX can provide wireless broadband access for up to 50 km for fixed stations and 5 to 15 km for mobile stations. WiMAX may be useful in underserved areas that are just beyond traditional urban limits.24
To offer wireless Internet technologies (including WiMAX and fixed wireless), often used in rural areas in particular, Internet service providers (ISPs) must have access to quality spectra, which can sometimes be difficult. In Canada, ISED manages the use of the various spectrum frequency bands and distributes them through auctions.25 Some stakeholders, particularly in rural areas, have said that various issues – including the size and cost of spectrum licences – hinder the access to the spectrum that would allow them to deliver Internet in their regions. They say that this situation favours ISPs that wish to serve primarily major urban centres.26
In addition, a recent issue in rural spectrum management is the potential reallocation of the 3500 MHz band. Currently, this band is often used for fixed wireless services, particularly in rural areas, but it is now coveted for fifth generation (commonly referred to as “5G”) deployment. ISED is consulting stakeholders on this subject and announced on 5 June 2019 that it will hold public consultations on the auction operations for the 3500 MHz band spectrum.27 At the same time, ISED announced a decision paper outlining changes to the 3500 MHz band leading up to an auction in 2020.
For a truly inclusive digital society, all Canadians must have access to broadband service. As noted above, the CRTC has set broadband targets to be met for all Canadians by 2030. With the aid of private investment, government policies, technological advances and public-private partnerships, the technical digital divide may be bridged. The government may then address the socio-economic digital divide to allow all Canadians – regardless of their circumstances – to take full advantage of the 21st century digital society.
† Papers in the Library of Parliament’s In Brief series are short briefings on current issues. At times, they may serve as overviews, referring readers to more substantive sources published on the same topic. They are prepared by the Parliamentary Information and Research Service, which carries out research for and provides information and analysis to parliamentarians and Senate and House of Commons committees and parliamentary associations in an objective, impartial manner. [ Return to text ]
Country | Area (km²) | Population (millions) | Density (persons/km²) | Urbanization (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Canada | 9,984,670 | 35.8 | 3.6 | 81 |
United States | 9,833,517 | 329.2 | 3,5 | 82 |
Australia | 7,741,220 | 23.4 | 3.0 | 86 |
France | 643,801 | 67.3 | 104.5 | 80 |
Japan | 377,915 | 126.1 | 333.7 | 92 |
Finland | 338,145 | 5.5 | 16.3 | 85 |
United Kingdom | 243,610 | 65.1 | 267.2 | 83 |
South Korea | 99,720 | 51.4 | 515.4 | 82 |
Belgium | 30,528 | 11.5 | 376.7 | 98 |
Hong Kong | 1,108 | 7.2 | 6,498.2 | 100 |
Singapore | 719 | 5.9 | 8,203.6 | 100 |
Source: Table prepared by the authors using data obtained from Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook. Population is a July 2018 estimate; urbanization, which is the percentage of the total population living in urban areas, as defined by the country, is for 2018. Density calculated from The World Factbook data.
© Library of Parliament