IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sip/dpaper/13-008.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Broadband Stimulus: A Rural Boondoggle and Missed Opportunity

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory Rosston

    (Stanford University)

  • Scott Wallsten

    (Georgetown University)

Abstract

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act included $7 billion for broadband development. We highlight two endemic problems with the rural subsidy programs managed by NTIA: 1) There is little economic rationale for subsidizing rural areas; and 2) NTIA’s mechanism for selecting projects appears to have been largely incoherent. The rationale for rural subsidies has been debunked by scores of economists – the programs turn out to be inefficient income transfer mechanisms and do not tend to increase subscriptions, but Congress forced NTIA to award subsidies. In its awards, NTIA adopted a system that led to awards differing by more than a factor of 100 in terms of expected cost-effectiveness. Had it adopted a more reasonable framework, many more households could have been connected for the same money, or the same number of connections could have been realized for a fraction of the cost.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory Rosston & Scott Wallsten, 2013. "The Broadband Stimulus: A Rural Boondoggle and Missed Opportunity," Discussion Papers 13-008, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:sip:dpaper:13-008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-siepr.stanford.edu/repec/sip/13-008.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Manlove, Jacob & Whitacre, Brian, 2019. "An evaluation of the Connected Nation broadband adoption program," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1-1.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sip:dpaper:13-008. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anne Shor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cestaus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.