The Universal Service Fund (USF) is instrumental in extending telecom services to underserved regions across Pakistan. By allocating contracts to telecom operators through a competitive bidding process, USF aims to bridge the digital divide. However, concerns have surfaced regarding the transparency and fairness of this process, with allegations suggesting that certain operators consistently benefit, potentially indicating favoritism.
Read More: Stuck in Limbo: Telenor-Ufone Merger Drags, 5G Rollout at Risk
The Bidding Process: USF employs a Single Stage Two Envelope System for awarding projects, ensuring that only licensed telecom operators contributing to the USF are eligible to participate. This process comprises two main stages:
-
Technical Evaluation: Operators submit proposals adhering to USF guidelines. Only those meeting the technical criteria advance to the next stage.
-
Financial Bidding: Among the technically qualified bidders, the operator proposing the lowest financial bid secures the contract.
Historically, both mobile and fixed-line operators have been recipients of USF contracts. Notably, major players such as Jazz, Ufone, Telenor, Zong, PTCL, Nayatel, Dancom, and Wateen frequently secure these projects. While their capacity to manage large-scale initiatives is acknowledged, industry experts question whether this pattern limits opportunities for smaller operators, potentially stifling competition and innovation.
Project Execution Oversight: Post-contract award, the responsibility for project execution rests solely with the winning operator. Their duties encompass network design, site selection, infrastructure installation, obtaining necessary approvals, and delivering telecom services in the designated areas. This autonomy facilitates swift implementation but also raises concerns about quality control and accountability, given the limited direct oversight by USF.
Fairness and Transparency Concerns: Despite USF’s adherence to Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA) rules, skepticism persists regarding the fairness of the bidding process. The recurrent success of major telecom operators has led to questions about potential biases favoring larger companies with established infrastructures and financial resources. The absence of independent audits further complicates assessments of these projects’ true impact and cost-effectiveness. Moreover, the apparent exclusion of smaller operators from meaningful participation may reduce competition and hinder sector innovation. The lack of public disclosure concerning bid evaluations exacerbates these transparency concerns.
Recommendations for Improvement: To enhance the integrity of the USF’s project awarding process, experts advocate for several measures:
-
Independent Oversight: Implementing robust third-party supervision during the bidding process to ensure impartiality.
-
Public Disclosure: Making bid evaluation reports accessible to the public to promote transparency and allow for external scrutiny.
-
Encouraging Competition: Facilitating the entry of smaller operators, possibly through strategic partnerships, to diversify participation and stimulate innovation.
-
Regular Audits: Conducting periodic third-party audits to evaluate project outcomes, ensuring they deliver value for money and effectively enhance telecom services in underserved regions.
Without implementing these reforms, concerns regarding favoritism and limited competition are likely to persist, potentially undermining the USF’s mission to equitably expand telecom services across Pakistan.
