Mooketsi Mocumi, strategic communications and corporate affairs adviser.
South Africa’s telecoms policy cycle is entering another decisive phase. Spectrum discussions are resurfacing, consultations are underway and familiar arguments are beginning to take shape: who should get what, when the next allocation will happen and whether the market is sufficiently competitive.
These are important questions, but they are no longer the most important ones.
Spectrum as inclusion policy
The real issue is whether spectrum policy is being designed to expand meaningful connectivity, or whether it continues to reinforce existing market structures.
If the debate remains anchored in incumbency versus competition, South Africa risks repeating a familiar outcome: regulatory progress without meaningful inclusion gains.
Spectrum is not simply a technical resource. It is economic infrastructure. It determines where networks expand, how efficiently capital is deployed, and whether digital participation broadens or remains concentrated. In that sense, spectrum policy is, fundamentally, inclusion policy.
From coverage to usage
For years, South Africa’s connectivity narrative has focused on coverage. We have largely won that battle. Mobile broadband networks now reach more than 95% of the population.
However, usage presents a contrasting narrative. Active mobile internet adoption sits at approximately 70%–75%, leaving a usage gap of close to a quarter of the population, millions of people who live within network reach but remain digitally excluded.
South Africa does not have a coverage problem. It has a usability problem.
Across Sub-Saharan Africa, the disparity is even more pronounced, with a coverage gap of roughly 15% compared to a usage gap exceeding 55%. The implication is clear: the next phase of connectivity policy must shift from access to usability.
South Africa does not have a coverage problem. It has a usability problem.
Rethinking deployment economics
This distinction has major implications for how spectrum policy should evolve. It is no longer sufficient to focus on extending network reach. The more pressing question is whether the cost structures, technologies and regulatory frameworks enable sustainable usage, particularly in low-income and rural contexts.
Traditional deployment models face clear limitations. Building and maintaining network infrastructure in low-density areas remains capital-intensive, particularly when factoring in fibre backhaul, site resilience and energy constraints.
In these environments, commercial returns are often marginal, forcing operators to make difficult trade-offs between expansion and financial sustainability.
Policy innovation and flexible spectrum
This is where policy innovation becomes critical. Globally, regulators are moving toward more flexible spectrum frameworks, including dynamic spectrum access, shared licensing models and innovation bands.
These approaches allow for more efficient use of spectrum while enabling alternative deployment models such as fixed wireless access, community networks and hybrid satellite-terrestrial solutions.
South Africa is already engaging with elements of this shift. The opportunity is now to move decisively from a model based on spectrum scarcity to one focused on spectrum productivity, maximising the societal and economic value derived from available spectrum resources.
Redefining competition
This reframing also requires a more nuanced view of competition. The question is no longer simply which operators hold which spectrum bands. Rather, it is whether the regulatory environment enables a diverse ecosystem of connectivity providers, technologies and business models to coexist and scale.
A competitive market, in this context, is one that expands participation, not just one that redistributes market share.
Global momentum
Global industry developments reinforce this direction. At Mobile World Congress Barcelona 2026, operators and policymakers highlighted the growing importance of hybrid connectivity models, particularly for underserved areas.
Satellite-to-mobile integration, infrastructure sharing and more flexible spectrum regimes are moving from experimental pilots to commercially-viable solutions, which are essential for enhancing connectivity in underserved areas and ensuring equitable access to mobile services.
These trends highlight a fundamental shift: the economics of connectivity are changing, and regulatory frameworks must adapt accordingly.
High stakes for South Africa
The country’s broader digital ambitions − including e-government, digital services and AI-driven innovation − depend on widespread, affordable and reliable connectivity.
Without this foundation, digital transformation risks reinforcing existing inequalities rather than addressing them, particularly in terms of access to essential services such as education, healthcare and job opportunities for marginalised communities.
Investment certainty matters
Policy clarity will also play a critical role in shaping investment decisions. As operators continue to invest in 5G, fibre expansion and edge infrastructure, uncertainties around spectrum allocation and usage can delay or disrupt capital deployment.
Clear, forward-looking policy creates the conditions for more balanced investment, including in underserved regions.
Inclusion and commercial viability
Importantly, an inclusion-focused approach does not require compromising commercial viability. On the contrary, more flexible spectrum models and hybrid technologies can improve the economics of rural connectivity while preserving incentives for private investment.
The objective is not to weaken operators but to enable more efficient and sustainable expansion, which can be achieved by fostering collaboration between the public and private sectors to enhance infrastructure and service delivery in rural areas.
From process to outcomes
South Africa has demonstrated its ability to navigate complex telecoms policy challenges in the past. The next phase requires building on that experience, but with a sharper focus on outcomes rather than process.
If the upcoming spectrum debate focuses on incumbency, the outcome may be technically sound but strategically limited. If it shifts toward inclusion, it has the potential to unlock broader economic participation and long-term digital growth.
Inclusion as the measure of success
Spectrum policy should not be treated as a periodic regulatory exercise. It is a strategic lever for national development.
South Africa does not need another spectrum debate that looks like the last one. It needs one that recognises that inclusion, not allocation, is the true measure of success.
