As operators work to limit their environmental impact, some regulators are actively supporting sustainability efforts, while others seem relatively less engaged. We outline tangible steps they could be taking to help reduce the industry’s carbon footprint
Data is the starting point for all evidence-based policymaking, and so should be no different in helping regulators understand the environmental impact of the sector. Across Europe, the regulator’s lack of mandate and/or ability to collect data has proven to be a challenge, with just four regulators (Arcep, BIPT, CNMC, Traficom) actively doing so.
Collaboration between regulators and those they regulate can lead to knowledge sharing without imposing undue burdens on operators. BEREC’s engagement with both the European Green Digital Coalition and the Radio Spectrum Policy Group offers an example of good practice, and one from which other regions can draw.
Arcep is rightly considered a leader on embedding sustainability issues in policymaking, which is supported by a commitment to regular monitoring and reporting of industry performance. Its consideration of the role of spectrum assignments in helping to reduce mobile networks’ carbon footprint has been replicated elsewhere, for example in Canada’s recent five-year spectrum strategy.
Eliminating barriers to legacy network switch-offs (2G, 3G, copper) would benefit operators from both a cost and an environmental standpoint. However, requirements for long notice periods for the closure of exchanges (such as in Spain) can cause a stuttering start to the copper retirement process.
Governments can drive awareness of, and engagement with, the circular economy through legislation. Right to repair and common charger rules both have positive impacts on carbon emissions and e-waste, complementing smartphone trade-in and rating schemes.
How engaged are policymakers currently?
Telecoms operators are setting targets to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, use more renewable energy and support the circular economy. Many are seeing Scope 1 and 2 emissions fall considerably, while smartphone trade-in schemes are helping to limit e-waste. Device manufacturers have set similar objectives, with Apple aiming to reach net zero across its global corporate operations by 2030. The firm also dedicated a significant proportion of its latest product announcement to discussing sustainability.
The issue is on the radar of a growing set of regulators, although that has so far resulted in differing levels of engagement. France is often referred to as a leader, with Arcep having published the second iteration of its annual Digital Sustainability inquiry. Elsewhere (such as Ofcom in the UK), regulators point to having no formal duties in relation to the environment. At the EU level, BEREC has established a sustainability working group to lead its activity. Promisingly, this is being run by Arcep in collaboration with its Czech counterpart, the CTU.
We have identified several actions authorities could take to support the journey to net zero (see Table 1).
Data is the starting point for evidence-based policymaking
Collecting and analysing data from industry is perhaps the easiest way for regulators to engage with sustainability, helping them build a picture of the sector’s carbon footprint and gauge the environmental impacts of different players, technologies and services. In turn, this can provide incentives for firms to assess their emissions and to report on their performance. For example, Traficom, the Finnish regulator, has published its inaugural report on energy consumption of telecoms networks. Using data gathered from the country’s largest operators, the study found that mobile networks use three times more energy than fixed infrastructure.
Arcep’s Digital Sustainability inquiry was also envisaged as a tool to help inform public debate and investigations into a low-carbon strategy for the industry. It has collected data on three indicators (Scope 1 and 2 emissions, energy consumption and mobile handset recycling), initially from France’s four operators. However, this initiative would arguably not have been as effective without legislative intervention. The adoption of a new law in late 2021 strengthened Arcep’s responsibility for the “environmental regulation of the digital sector”, while broadening its data collection powers. These now extend to network vendors, device manufacturers and data centre operators, enabling Arcep to examine the wider connectivity value chain.
In other countries, the regulator’s lack of mandate and/or ability to collect data (beyond standard information requests) has proven to be a major obstacle. BEREC’s draft sustainability indicators report noted that just four regulators (Arcep, Traficom, Belgium’s BIPT and Spain’s CNMC) are currently collecting environmental data. There are also no harmonised data collection requirements or procedures at the EU level despite shared interests, which has made BEREC’s work on sustainability indicators less successful and efficient than it otherwise could have been.
Collaboration between regulators and those they regulate is an effective mechanism to share knowledge
As operators look to engage with their suppliers to tackle Scope 3 emissions, collaboration between regulators and their peers and with industry creates value through shared data and learnings. Encouragingly, policymakers are increasingly seeking to learn from each other – for example, Arcep is collaborating with domestic regulators such as ADEME (the French Environment and Energy Management Agency) and Arcom (the Regulatory Authority for Audiovisual and Digital Communication). Meanwhile, BEREC’s sustainability working group is engaging with the European Green Digital Coalition, an industry initiative backed by the EU, and the Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG), an advisory body to the EC. In such cases, it is important regulators leverage progress industry has made to avoid reinventing the wheel or imposing unnecessary burdens on operators.
With sustainability now commonplace in operators’ quarterly results and used more often as a competitive differentiator among device manufacturers (e.g. Fairphone and Apple), regulators may be well-placed to assess the validity of environmental claims. The ‘greenwashing’ review launched by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is just one example of efforts to ensure businesses are not falsely promoting their green credentials. Nevertheless, a more prudent approach to keeping industry honest and transparent may be for regulators to work with firms to encourage measurement and reporting according to recognised methodologies and via independent channels or platforms. This may be particularly useful for smaller players with lesser resources to invest in understanding their carbon footprint, while it also helps operators assess Scope 3 emissions and select the most environmentally-friendly suppliers.
Embedding environmental considerations into regulatory decisions
Having understood the environmental impacts of the sector, from enhanced data collection and engagement with relevant stakeholders, regulators can incorporate sustainability issues into their thinking and the policy development process, helping to guide decarbonisation of the sector and other industries. Arcep again provides a case in point, making societal imperatives – including the environmental impact of digital communications networks, devices and services – a key part of its future approach to mobile market regulation. With the sector’s GHG emissions a growing concern, Arcep sought input on any positive or negative environmental effects of the use of certain spectrum bands, and the potential of frequency assignments to help reduce networks’ carbon footprint and support digital sustainability.
In its ‘Spectrum Outlook 2023 to 2027’, Innovation, Science & Economic Development Canada (ISED) made climate change a key theme for the next five years. The government agency will continue to closely monitor operators’ progress towards meeting their climate goals and to address the issue of sustainability, as appropriate, when setting spectrum policies, engaging a broader subset of private sector stakeholders in the consultation process.
Eliminate barriers to accelerate legacy network switch-offs
Legacy network retirement benefits operators from both a cost and an environmental standpoint; however, some regulators are seen to have stood in the way. Replacing older or outdated equipment with more future-proof, energy efficient technology can support operators’ journey to net zero. A report from Arcep’s Technical Experts Committee has found that the 2G/3G shutdown process becomes carbon positive after six months (even after factoring in the replacement of all non-4G/5G-compatible devices). Telefónica has estimated that its closure of 1,000 copper exchanges saved 1,000GWh (or 355,000 tonnes of CO2), and that the environmental impact of its Spanish fibre network is 18 times lower than that of copper.
A stuttering start to Telefónica’s copper retirement in Spain was put down to the regulatory environment, which mandated a closure notice period of five years in order to reduce the risk that some customers could be left without service. In its latest wholesale broadband access market review, the CNMC cut this to two years, which should provide a (much-needed) boost to Telefónica’s switch-off plan. Where a firm copper shutdown date has not been announced (such as Germany), the experience of other countries indicates that regulators will need to balance the pace of the transition to fibre with preserving competition (e.g. through suitable migration products) and protecting vulnerable consumers. While the sunsetting of legacy mobile networks has tended to be industry-led, regulators can ensure operators communicate and cooperate with stakeholders and consumers in a timely way in order helping to reduce the need of greater intervention later on in the process.
Further regulatory interventions that would be conducive to operators’ climate goals relate to network sharing and physical infrastructure access (PIA). So long as competition is preserved, greater sharing of mobile infrastructure would have a positive environmental impact as operators would not build out excess sites and would limit the proliferation of new hardware. Also, a PIA remedy that is workable at scale can be key for fibre deployments, particularly for operators that do not also own a copper network (e.g. altnets in the UK). Where PIA rules have not been imposed, such as in Belgium and the Netherlands, enabling reuse of the incumbent’s ducts and poles may help regulators drive faster, cost-efficient and more environmentally-friendly fibre rollouts.
A role in promoting the circular economy
Governments too can play an important role in the race to net zero, especially with respect to driving circularity through legislation. While roughly 80% of the climate impact of a mobile phone has happened before it’s taken out of the box, the circular economy is too often viewed as a challenge and undervalued as an opportunity. The challenge does not stop at handsets, with other electrical equipment, including chargers, a mounting problem around the world. The EU’s common charger rules (which the EC expects to have a positive impact on e-waste, GHG emissions and consumer frustration) have already had an extraterritorial effect, providing a trigger for Apple’s switch to USB-C from its proprietary Lightning port.
Legislation focused on recycling, refurbishing and extending the life of a device, and on maximising the number of lifecycles is another key means of lowering the industry’s carbon footprint – while supporting a growing market for second-hand smartphones. Subsidy programmes created in Austria and France provide leading examples of how governments can incentivise device repairs and reduce e-waste. Developing awareness of such schemes is the first step to drive consumer engagement with them and the circular economy, supporting progress towards a more sustainable future and complementing operators’ own smartphone trade-in and rating initiatives.
