teleuse@bop owner-users, non-owner users and how they use phones at the sri lanka bop rohan...
TRANSCRIPT
Teleuse@BOP
Owner-users, non-owner users and how they use phones at the Sri Lanka BOP
Rohan SamarajivaRohan SamarajivaSri Lanka Telecom Limited Media EventHabarana, 15 September 2007
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Bottom of the Pyramid
Emerging markets are ‘where the action is’ The next billion...
Untapped potential at the ‘bottom of the pyramid’
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Reality check . . .
1. What percentage of households had some kind of phone in 2004?
2. How many BOP households had some kind of phone in 2006?
3. Which Province was second highest in phones/households in 2004? Third?
4. Which province was second highest in computers/households in 2004?
5. Did fixed phones outnumber mobile phones or vice versa at the BOP in 2006?
6. What percentage of the BOP made or received international calls in 2006?
7. What percentage of people making international calls were women?
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Reality check . . .
8. What percentage of people had made/received a call in past three months, when approached by survey personnel in mid 2006?
9. Do women talk longer than men on the phone at the BOP in Sri Lanka?
10. Do women use the phone for different purposes than men in Sri Lanka? What is the dominant purpose for men? What is the dominant purpose for women?
11. Who makes the decision on whether a woman gets a mobile In Sri Lanka? In Thailand?
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Answers?
Not all the right answers in this presentation; some are from the 2004 Consumer Finance Survey of the Central Bank
The importance of challenging common knowledge/popular wisdom Recent fiasco over mobile taxes probably driven by ignorance
Industry needs to use representative surveys more and communicate the results more broadly
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Plan of presentation
Methodology and background Everyone has access but not ownership Who owns phones? Why? Getting connected Not getting connected Gender and telecom Beyond basic services at the BOP?
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Methodology
6 Focus Group Discussions per country
(30)
Random sample 8,689 F-to-F interviews; in 5 countries
50% diary
Final output
QualitativeQuantitative
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
*excluding FANA/FATA – Tribal Areas; **excluding N&E Provinces
Bottom of the Pyramid (BOP) defined
Many definitions of poverty, but this study uses SEC D and E; between ages 18-60
SEC does not take into account income, but it is closely related to income levels
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
Population (million) 165 1,095 20 89 64
Target population of study (million)
77* 260 4** 41 15
SEC D & E
SEC A, B & C
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Teleuse@BOP
~9,000 sample survey in five countries India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Philippines & Thailand
Understand telecom use at the BOP (= SEC Groups D &E) in Developing Asia
Representative of target population SEC D&E, ages 18-60
Bottom of the Pyramid
Everyone has access, but not ownership
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Overall access is very high
South Asia South East Asia
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
Used phone in last 3 months
98% 94% 92% 93% 95%
Most have used a phone in the last 3 months
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Time it takes to reach nearest phone
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
% o
f n
on
-ow
ne
rs a
t th
e B
OP
>60 minutes
45-60 minutes
30-45 minutes
15-30 minutes
10-15 minutes
5-10 minutes
3-5 minutes
< 3 minutes
Phones are close at the BOP
Most can get to a phone in less than 30 mins
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Even in rural areas
A small number (6%) in rural areas incur up to US 50 cents to get to a phone
Time to nearest phone: urban vs. rural: Sri Lanka
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Urban Rural
Sri Lanka
% o
f n
on
ow
ner
s at
BO
P Betw een 45 - 60 minutes
Betw een 30 - 45 minutes
Betw een 15 - 30 minutes
Betw een 10 - 15 minutes
Betw een 5 - 10 minutes
Betw een 3 - 5 minutes
Less than 2 - 3 minutes
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Ownership and GDP per capita (USD, PPP)
23%
9%
22%
60%
11%
23%
7%
14%
64%
81%
59%
38%
23%
76%
18%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
% a
t b
ott
om
of
pyr
amid
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
GD
P p
er c
apit
a, U
SD
(P
PP
)
Own a mobile Own a fixed phone (household)
Own nothing (but use something) Per Capita GDP PPP (USD)
But phone ownership is low
Just 41% of BOP own their own phone in Sri Lanka 22% own mobiles; 23% own fixed; few have both
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Most frequently used mode
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%%
at
BO
P
Public phone 35% 71% 30% 8% 7%
Relative / friend's phone 10% 1% 12% 14% 6%
Neighbours phone 8% 7% 14% 7% 1%
Mobile of another householdmember
12% 4% 6% 11% 5%
Household fixed phone 14% 9% 21% 4% 8%
Own mobile 21% 9% 17% 56% 73%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
BOP in South Asia mainly used public phones
30% of BOP in Sri Lanka used public phones most frequently
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Reason for selecting most frequent mode: Sri Lanka
Lower cost18%
Lack of other options30%
Accessibility at any time
35%
Accessibility in any location
2%Other6%
Privacy7%
Quality of connection
2%
Why did they use their most-frequent mode?
Convenience and lack of other options override cost
Users of public phones
Not users of public phones
Bottom of the Pyramid
Who owns phones? Why?
41%of BOP in Sri Lanka own a phone
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Why own a mobile phone?
Convenience is key; privacy is more of a concern for Sri Lanka (highest) and Philippines
Primary reason for choosing to own a mobile
64%71% 66% 68%
92%
11%6%
9% 5%
7% 4%
20%17%
18% 16%
4%10%
3%7%
1%1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
% o
f mob
ile o
wne
rs a
t the
BO
P Other
It is cheaper
For privacy
So I don’t depend onothers
Convenience: accessibileat any time
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Primary reason for choosing to own a fixed phone
55%65%
60% 63%
80%
24%
18%
14% 8%
11%10%
7%6%
7%6%
17% 22%
1%
0%
16%
3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
% o
f fix
ed o
wne
rs a
t th
e B
OP Other
For privacy
So I don’t depend on others
It is cheaper
Convenience: accessibile at anytime
Why own a fixed phone?
Same reasons on fixed
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Growth in mobile phone ownership at BOP since 2001
23%
9%22%
60%
76%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
before2001
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006(Q1&2)
Year during which connection was obtained
%(c
um
ula
tive
) at
BO
P
Pakistan India Sri LankaPhilippines Thailand
92% of mobiles at Sri Lankan BOP are prepaid
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Older fixed connections; LK picked up after 2005
18%
11%
23%
7%
14%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
before2001
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006(Q1&2)
Year during which connection was obtained
%(c
um
ula
tive
) a
t B
OP
Pakistan India Sri LankaPhilippines Thailand
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Mobiles used more often as the primary phone by males at BOP in South Asia
30%
12%
22%
56%
76%
11%5%
12%
55%
70%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
Male Female
% o
f m
ob
ile o
wn
ers
at
BO
P
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Who decides female ownership of phone at BOP? (Patriarchy lives in South Asia!)
74%
9%
26%
91%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
South Asia South East Asia
Male Female
% o
f fe
male
mob
ile o
wn
ers
at
BO
P
Who makes the decision to obtain a mobile
(among female mobile owners)?
Bottom of the Pyramid
Getting connected
1.3 millionfrom BOP in Sri Lanka will get connected between mid-2006- mid-2008
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
31% of the BOP in Sri Lanka plan to get connected between mid-2006- mid-2008
This means that by mid-2008, 72% of BOP will own their own phone, unless actively hindered
Prospective owners
1.3 million (31% of BOP)
1.8 million (41% of BOP)
1.2 million (28% of BOP)
Don't own and don't
plan to buy a phone
Plan to buy a phone between mid-2006 & mid-
2008
Already own a phone
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Hitting the poor (Hutch ARPU = LKR 311; Dialog prepaid ARPU = LKR 414; Dialog postpaid ARPU = LKR 1,709)
Monthly spend (LKR)
Current take (VAT+2.5%)
Orig. proposal (VAT+50+7.5%)
Am. proposal (VAT+10%)
200 35 95 (48%) 50 (25%)
400 70 140 (35%) 100
600 105 185 (31%) 150
800 140 230 (29%) 200
1000 175 275 (28%) 250
1200 210 320 (27%) 300
1400 245 365 (26%) 350
1600 280 410 (26%) 400
1800 315 455 (25%) 450
2000 350 500 (25%) 500 (25%)
Understated because tax on tax not calculated
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
The cost of getting connected…Expectation vs. affordability gap
Expected cost of a new phone by non-owners
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines
% o
f no
n-ow
ners
at
BO
P >USD 176
USD 146-175
USD 116-145
USD 86-115
USD 56-85
USD 26-55
<USD 25
Initial cost that prospective owner can afford
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines
% o
f pr
ospe
ctiv
e ow
ners
at
the
BO
P
More than USD 71
USD 51 - 70
USD 31 - 50
USD 10 - 30
Less than USD 10
70% of non-owners at BOP in Sri Lanka believe that the cost to get connected will be greater than USD56
Only 11% can afford more than USD50 Can get new mobile and connection for USD 33; lower with
second-hand phone
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Use cost: most can afford USD5 per month on communication
Monthly charges: expected vs. affordable
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
affo
rdab
le
expe
cted
affo
rdab
le
expe
cted
affo
rdab
le
expe
cted
affo
rdab
le
expe
cted
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines
% o
f us
ers More than USD 20
USD 11 - 15USD 5 - 10Less than USD 5
Expectations and affordability are in line Most expect the monthly cost to be less than USD5, which most can afford to
pay Also in line with ARPUs of mobiles (USD 3-4)
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Most would use phone for emergency communication & keeping in touch
What respondent would use the phone for if given one at an affordable rate
84%
69%
44%
58%
50% 52%57%
17%13%
26%
11%
21%
10%
18%
5% 3%2% 1% 2% 1%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines
% o
f re
spo
nd
ents
To keep in touch with family andfriends
Only in an emergency
For networking
To enhance my income
Other
s
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Type of phone prospective owners would buy
23% 29%
52%
8%
68%67%
40%
91%
9% 4% 7% 1%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines
Not decided yet
Mobile
Fixed phone
Most new connections in Sri Lanka will be fixed phones
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Affection for fixed higher in rural Sri Lanka…
Type of phone prospective owner would buy: Urban vs. rural
34%56%
62%36%
4% 8%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Urban Rural
Sri Lanka
% o
f pro
spe
ctiv
e o
wn
ers
at B
OP
Not decided
Mobile
Fixed
Bottom of the Pyramid
Not getting connected
1.2 millionfrom BOP in Sri Lanka will not get connected between mid-2006 & mid-2008
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
The biggest barrier to ownership at the BOP is affordability
31% plan to get connected between mid-2006 and mid-2008
BUT, 28% will not
1.3 million (31% of BOP)
1.8 million (41% of BOP)
1.2 million (28% of BOP)
Don't own and don't
plan to buy a phone
Plan to buy a phone between mid-2006 & mid-
2008
Already own a phone
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
What do we know about this group?
The majority in Sri Lanka will be females
36%48%
39%47% 44%
64%52%
61%53% 56%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand% o
f non-o
wners
at
BO
P w
ho d
o n
ot
pla
n t
o b
uy
a
phone
FemaleMale
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Among those not planning to buy phones, males are more dependent on public phones, while women are more dependent on other peoples’ phones
78%
32%
88%79%
51%
36%
13%17% 14% 17%
22%
68%
12%21%
49%
64%
87%83% 86% 83%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
% o
f th
ose
not
pla
nnin
g t
o b
uy
a p
hone
Other peoples' phones
Public phones
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
What do we know about this group?
The large majority in Sri Lanka will be rural
42%53%
14%
46%
8%
58%47%
86%
54%
92%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand% o
f non-o
wners
at
BO
P w
ho d
o n
ot
pla
n t
o b
uy
a
phone
Rural
Urban
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
50%
67%
45%57%
16%
13%
19%
39% 22%
79%
25%
12%15%
13% 14%4% 7% 6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand% o
f non-o
wners
at
BO
P w
ho d
o n
ot
pla
n t
o b
uy
a
phone Above 3rd quartile
Median-3rd quartile
1st Quartile-median
Below 1st Quartile
What do we know about this group?
Poorer. The large majority will have monthly household incomes below USD75.81 (median)
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
What do we know about this group?
Older The mean age of this group will be 40 years of age
Compared to mean age of mobile owners at BOP of 33 years
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
What do we know about this group?
Make fewer calls They make and receive a total of 8.65 calls per month
Compared to the average for the Sri Lankan BOP of 23.2 (compared to those who plan to buy a phone who make and receive a total of 15.05 calls per month)
Non-owners
Do not plan on buying phone by mid-2008
Plan on buyingphone by mid-2008
Mean monthly number of calls
(incoming + outgoing)8.65 15.05
Source: diary
Gender and telecom at the BOP
Findings from T@BOP2
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Most frequently used phone: males vs. females
22%12%
19%23%
4% 9%
23% 30%
31% 26%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Male Female
Sri Lanka
% o
f B
OP
Public phone
Neighbor/friend/relative's phone
Mobile of anotherhousehold member
Household f ixed phone
Ow n mobile
Access: Primary phone used in Sri Lanka
Small gender divide in access exists at BOP in Sri Lanka Individually owned mobiles and public phones appear to be more
male-dominated access modes Use of household fixed phones, and other people’s phones (within as
well as outside of the house) is more often among females
Ratios: f : m
Public phone 1 : 1.2
Neighbor/friend/relative's phone
1 : 0.8
Mobile of another household member
1 : 0.5
Household fixed phone
1 : 0.8
Own mobile 1 : 1.8
Ratio of 1 indicates equal access between males and females. Ratio > 1 indicates males use access mode more often as primary phone (e.g. mobiles). Ratio < 1 indicates females use access mode more often as primary phone (e.g. neighbor/friend/relative’s phone).
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Most frequently used phone: males vs. females
30%
11%
11%
16%
3%22%
11%
26%
45%
24%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Male Female
Pakistan
% o
f b
ott
om
of
the
pyr
amid Public phone
Neighbor/relative/friend'sphoneMobile of anotherhousehold memberHousehold f ixed phone
Ow n mobile
However, far larger divide exists in India and Pakistan, esp. on mobile, and public phones in Pakistan
Ratios: f : m
India
Public phone 1 : 1.0
Neighbor/friend/relative's phone 1 : 0.6
Mobile of another household member 1 : 0.5
Household fixed phone 1 : 0.9
Own mobile 1 : 2.7
Pakistan
Public phone 1 : 1.9
Neighbor/friend/relative's phone 1 : 0.4
Mobile of another household member 1 : 0.1
Household fixed phone 1 : 0.7
Own mobile 1 : 2.7
Most frequently used phone: males vs. females
12% 5%
9%10%
3%6%
6% 10%
71% 70%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Male Female
India
% o
f b
ott
om
of
the p
yra
mid
Public phone
Neighbor/friend/relative's phone
Mobile of anotherhousehold member
Household f ixedphone
Ow n mobile
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
netMost frequently used phone: males vs. females
76% 70%
4% 12%7% 4%6% 8%7% 6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Male Female
Thailand
% o
f B
OP
Public phone
Neighbor/friend/relative's phone
Mobile of anotherhousehold member
Household f ixed phone
Ow n mobile
Access almost equitable in Philippines and Thailand
Most frequently used phone: males vs. females
56% 55%
3% 4%9% 13%
25% 21%
7% 7%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Male Female
Philippines
% o
f B
OP
Public phone
Neighbor/friend/relative'sphone
Mobile of anotherhousehold member
Household f ixed phone
Ow n mobile
Ratios: f:m
Philippines
Public phone 1 : 0.9
Neighbor/friend/relative's phone 1 : 1.2
Mobile of another household member 1 : 0.7
Household fixed phone 1 : 0.7
Own mobile 1 : 1.0
Thailand
Public phone 1 : 1.1
Neighbor/friend/relative's phone 1 : 0.7
Mobile of another household member 1 : 1.9
Household fixed phone 1 : 0.3
Own mobile 1 : 1.1
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Little urban-rural differences in Sri Lanka except on individually owned mobiles
Gender divide on mobile is most severe in rural Pakistan (ratio of 1 : 4.8) and rural India (ratio of 1 : 3.9)
Highest reliance on other peoples’ phones among women in rural Pakistan
Public phones hold strong among women even in rural India
Ratios: f:m
Urban Rural
Public 1 : 1.2 1 : 1.2
Other peoples’ phones 1 : 0.7 1 : 0.7
Fixed 1 : 1.0 1 : 0.8
Own mobile 1 : 1.4 1 : 1.9
19% 14%23%
12%
30%29% 17%
22%
22% 34%28% 40%
28% 23%32% 26%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Male Female Male Female
Urban Rural% o
f urb
an o
r ru
ral m
ale
s or
fem
ale
s at
BO
P
public
other peoples
fixed
own mobile
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Access: Urban vs. Rural (India and Pakistan only)
14%6% 10%
3%
38%
18% 22%
5%
8%10%
10%
9%
14%
23% 9%
10%
5%10%
12%22%
12% 36%
15%60%
73% 73% 68% 66%
36%23%
54%
25%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Urban Rural Urban Rural
India Pakistan
% o
f urb
an o
r ru
ral m
ale
s or
fem
ale
s at
BO
P
publicother peoplesfixedown mobile
Ratios: f:m
India Pakistan
Urban Rural Urban Rural
Public 1 : 1.0 1 : 1.0 1 : 1.6 1 : 2.2
Other peoples’ phones 1 : 0.5 1 : 0.5 1 : 0.3 1 : 0.2
fixed 1 : 0.8 1 : 1.1 1 : 0.6 1 : 0.8
own mobile 1 : 2.3 1 : 3.9 1 : 2.1 1 : 4.8
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Use: average number of calls per month
2515
27 2614 15 11 10
48 48
18
10
19 20
9 12
5 5
3732
43
25
46 46
2427
16 15
85
79
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
ave
rage c
alls
per
month
Outgoing
Incoming
•Only country where differences were significant (95% confidence interval) was Pakistan
Total (in+out)
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Use: Average call duration (mins)
3.5 3.4
2.8
3.84.1
4.4
3.4
3.0
3.94.0
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
Ave
rage c
all
dura
tion
Male
Female
•NB, minutes recorded were an approximation (e.g., ‘1 min or less’, ‘2-3 minutes’, ‘about 5 mins,’ ‘about 10 mins’…)
•Only country where differences between men & women were significant (95% confidence interval) was Pakistan
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Use: Purpose of calls
Significant differences: Pakistan: male vs. female use of the phone to keep in touch and for business
purposes (95% confidence interval) India: male vs. female use of the phone for business purposes (90% confidence
interval)
8.70.6
7.0 5.7 3.0 1.6 3.1 2.1
20.0 21.5
32.2
22.8
32.3 33.8
16.6 20.19.2 10.2
63.8 55.81.3
1.9
6.7 6.5
6.08.5
3.9 2.8
1.31.8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90M
ale
Fem
ale
Mal
e
Fem
ale
Mal
e
Fem
ale
Mal
e
Fem
ale
Mal
e
Fem
ale
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
aver
age
calls
per
mon
th
Check somethingor delivermessage
Keeping in touch
Business
Bottom of the Pyramid
What about “beyond-basic” services, including IDD, at the BOP?
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Currently few at the BOP use the Internet; even fewer know what it is
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
Use the Internet 1.9% 0.3% 1.5% 8.8% 10.4%
36.0%
71.9%
28.6%
14.3%
35.7%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
% o
f bott
om
of th
e p
yra
mid
Not heard of Internet
Internet ‘un-awareness’
Next to the Philippines, highest level of knowledge. . .
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Even less so in rural Sri Lanka
23.8%
67.0%
23.5%
9.3% 9.6%
48.7%
77.9%
29.6%
19.8%
42.8%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
% a
t B
OP
Urban
Rural
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
Use the Internet Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural
3.0% 0.7% 0.2% 0.1% 2.1% 1.4% 12.8% 4.3% 22.0% 2.3%
Internet ‘un-awareness’
Not a massive urban-rural gap in knowledge
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Use of SMS
50%
35%
60%
100%
30%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines Thailand
% o
f m
ob
ile o
wn
ers
wh
o u
se S
MS
SMS is popular even at BOP
Among non-users, 39% in Sri Lanka state the reason as not knowing how to use it
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Relative cost of an SMS plays a more significant role (than actual cost) on SMS use at BOP
50%
35%
60%
100%
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
Jazz Budget Airtel Regular Dialog KITStandard
Smart TnT
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philippines
Ra
tio
of
ou
tgo
ing
ca
ll t
o S
MS
ch
arg
e
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
% o
f m
ob
ile
ow
ne
rs a
t B
OP
Call to mobile on-net Call to mobile off-net Use SMS
* This relationship is examined only for the prepaid case, because mobile use at the BOP is predominantly prepaid; charges as at June 2007
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Mostly local at BOP, but some international in LK & PH
Type of call (local, long distance, international)
71%78%
62%
88% 84%
28%22%
34%
6% 16%
1% 0% 4% 6% 1%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Pakistan India Sri Lanka Philipines Thailand
% o
f c
alls International call
Long distance call
Local call
Source: Diary
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
1.5 million expatriate workers, 90% in West Asia
44% male; 56% female, according to SLBFE 840,000 women separated from families 660,000 men separated from families
Don’t they need to talk?
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
International calls: Who is calling/being called?
Primarily rural females, with primary or secondary education, aged 25-54 Different from the Philippines: more males, mostly living in urban
areas, with higher levels of education, mostly below 34. The bulk of the calls are made by trained & untrained laborers
(25 %); Farmers / agricultural workers (16%); Housewives (13%) Again, different from the Philippines: mostly housewives (32%), those
employed in services (18%) or unemployed (17%)2006 data; excluding N&E provinces
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
28.8%
46.1%
71.2%
53.9%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Sri Lanka Philippines
% o
f int
erna
tiona
l cal
ls
FemaleMale
Gender of the caller/callee (as a percentage of international calls made)
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
11.7%
70.9%
88.3%
29.1%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Sri Lanka Philippines
% o
f int
erna
tiona
l cal
ls
RuralUrban
Location of the caller/callee (as a percentage of international calls made)
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net97%
67%
3%
19%
0%
14%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Sri Lanka Philippines
% o
f int
erna
tiona
l cal
ls
Graduate
Diploma level
Primary or secondaryeducation
Educational attainment of callers/callees
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
5.4%
29.7%
36.9%
25.2%
2.7%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+
Age of the respondent
% o
f in
tern
atio
na
l ca
lls
Sri Lanka
Age of the caller (as a percentage of international calls made)
30.1%
32.0%
16.5%
9.2%
12.1%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+
Age of the respondent
% o
f in
tern
atio
na
l ca
lls
Philippines
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Fragmented families in a maldeveloped country . . .
In North as well as South, but more pronounced in Jaffna . . .
Results from a unique snapshot from “between the wars” cleared areas of Jaffna district (2005 end of Q1)
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Use for keeping in touch with family and friends abroad
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Urban Rural
Jaffna Sri Lanka
% o
f use
rs FixedMobilePublic access
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
People in Jaffna were heavier users, especially on mobiles
Received and made more international calls than any other location in SL
Mobile Fixed
Reflects highly dispersed families: need to keep in touch, arrange for remittances 80% of households in Jaffna district have family/friends outside
district
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Higher % spend longer time talking on their mobiles
Approximate duration of outgoing mobile calls
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Urban Rural Urban Rural
Jaffna Sri Lanka Jaffna Sri Lanka
National International
% o
f mob
ile u
sers
> 3 minutes< 3 minutes
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Jaffna urbanites used the Internet more than others in same socio-economic groups
•Mostly for keeping in touch
Internet Use
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Urban Rural
Jaffna Badulla Colombo Hambantota
% w
ho
use
Inte
rnet
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Reality checked
1. What percentage of households had some kind of phone in 2004? 24.5%
2. How many BOP households had some kind of phone in 2006? 41%
3. Which Province was second highest in phones/households in 2004? NWP. Third? Northern (excl. Mannar, Kili, Mulativu districts).
4. Which province was second highest in computers/households in 2004? Northern (as above).
5. Did fixed phones outnumber mobile phones or vice versa at the BOP in 2006? F=23%; M=22%
6. What percentage of the BOP made or received international calls in 2006? 4%
7. What percentage of people making international calls were women? 71%
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net
Reality checked
8. What percentage of people had made/received a call in past three months, when approached by survey personnel in mid 2006? 92%
9. Do women talk longer than men on the phone at the BOP in Sri Lanka? No
10. Do women use the phone for different purposes than men in Sri Lanka? No What is the dominant purpose for men? Keeping in touch What is the dominant purpose for women? Same
11. Who makes the decision on whether a woman gets a mobile In Sri Lanka? Male In Thailand? Female
ww
w.li
rnea
sia.
net