Apparently Airtel, scheduled to start operations in Sri Lanka this year, have run into some trouble. I like Airtel, it's my operator of choice whenever I'm in India, I've got good memories with it. It worked well for me, and i did do some traveling across states in remote moutanes areas. The Advert above with the two boys playing football is probably my favorite ad on TV.

I was looking forward to the increased competition, I think Air-tel could have given dialog run for their money. I think they have already woken up dialog from a monopoly lethargy and if Airtel do some of the things they do in India, they can lure in customers. Airtel as a brand will have instant recognition from anyone has table, so they have a good start. I don't think I will switch, changing numbers is a bitch unless Air-tel can give me a remarkably better deal.

As for the troubles, a few weeks back in a flight back from Delhi I met a guy from Chandigarh, who's flying to Colombo. He turned out to be a senior telecoms engineer at Airtel, flown down to SL to help with the operations here. I asked him what's taking Airtel so long to set up here, he told me they faced two main problems. one, was permissions issues - Setting up towers and that sort of thing needed all sorts of clearances from the ministry of defense, TRC, and the bureaucracy is taking time. The other, he told me is lack of telecoms engineers, He said latter is going to be a bigger problem in the long-term.

This is probably why dialog have invested in heavily University of Moratuwa, they desperately need the people. All of this is a problem of too much government. in 2006, Lirneasia, a Colombo-based policy research agency concluded the Telecom regulatory environment in Sri Lanka one of the worse in the region and heading in the wrong direction (PDF link). The impact of national security concerns since would only have worsen the situation.

It's heartening however, that the sector has grown tremendously despite having too much regulation. Often times, technology itself is a liberator, government bureaucracies cannot keep up with the dynamism of changing technologies and that's why telecoms 'work' for most people, when fixed-lines become a limiting factor, the industry comes up with CDMA, so on, before the bureaucrats can get their head around that, there'll be another technology.

It just beats me why when simple logic would tell you (and the data backs up the claim) that having barriers to entry, too much of regulation is just bad for business and bad for consumers, yet we are still stuck in this old paradigm of "license-permit" economic (mis)management. sigh.

Former Sri Lankan Minister, and the national organizer of the main opposition UNP, S.B. Dissanayake seems to 'get it' when it comes to Higher Education reform. Here's S.B. from an Interview with the Colombo Post :

During 1960 to 70, our main five universities were included in the world’s best 500 universities. There were only two universities from India among the 500. Today ours are not even in the first 1000 universities. But even today we have a huge demand in this sector. When our students lose the opportunity of getting admission to our Medical College by a few marks, they go to medical colleges in Nepal which is a donation to the army, or to the Bangladesh Medical College for higher studies.

Last year 150,000 students were eligible for university admission, 17,000 were selected. About 25,000 leave this country every year. If they are permitted to pay and study here, then our universities need not depend on government funds to build libraries, to purchase books or for research, they can earn by themselves. In the world today there aren’t any universities that depend on their governments. Those universities earn by themselves. If we improve and market these universities to Asian countries we may get down students from China and India and make this a good service country. [link]

I've so far met no reasonable person who's against higher education reform. Yes, there are few insecure undergraduates in local universities who are against it, but they don't quite make
cut as 'reasonable' in my book.

I've chatted about this with various folks, including government ministers and MPs about the need for reform. All of them get it. They know Higher ed. in this country, sucks, that's why most of the ministerial offspring (including His Excellency's sons) are studying abroad.

The great tragedy is the incentives are arranged such that it doesn't make sense for any politician to invest political capital in higher ed. reform and disturb the apple cart. The ruling party don't want to give any more reasons for the JVP to mobilize its left-wing student unions, there are no other pressure groups at work - including the Colombo civil society, who's primarily obsessed with peace.

It's a tragedy because higher ed. reform is essentially a middle-class project. Most people in the affluent class, if I'm to use that word, don't usually have their children studying in Sri Lanka at the undergraduate level. It's the middle to lower income earners who will benefit the most from reform with increased access with lower costs to undergraduate degrees.

How do you reform? I'm no higher ed. expert, but I can offer some clues. One option as I've said before, is to grant the university autonomy as to it's administration and make them accredition bodies for potential private colleges, so you go to College Xyz, but get your degree from University of Colombo, the university sets the papers, the curriculum maybe even offer access to expensive labs and that sort of thing. This is what kind of happens in India, and Sri Lankan colleges like APIIT or ANC except they are affiliated to foreign universities. It would bring in competition in the sector, bring down costs, increase access to higher education, diversify options beyond just IT and business in the private sector and can potential bring in more revenue for the University which they can invest in paying their lectures, scholarships or improving their facilities. You can keep some (or all) of the universities in government hands privatize the rest and authorize setting up universities (not just colleges) by the private sector.

Another possibility is to privatize all universities, except for maybe one and offer educational vouchers on merit-basis , the students can reimburse the voucher at any college of his/her choosing and can add-value to it if he/she is able to afford it.

I think all these, especially a variation of the first option is entirely possible and even politically feasible, if more people start advocating it.

Previously, What's free in free education?

Adam Smith Institute has it's latest report Unfair Trade, Out today. From the ASI Blog:

Fairtrade is a nice idea, and it is great that so many consumers want to help the poor in the developing world. But it is important that we ask whether Fairtrade really helps. After all, 'Fairtrade' does not mean anyone who gives better terms to third-world farmers. It is a particular brand, which competes with other ethical schemes and charities for people's money.

There are a number of inconvenient truths about Fairtrade. Indeed, on closer inspection it may not be that fair at all. It only offers a very small number of farmers a higher fixed price for their goods. Given the way markets work, these higher prices come at the expense of many other farmers, who – unable to qualify for Fairtrade certification – are left even worse off.

More importantly, the Fairtrade scheme does not aid economic development. It sustains uncompetitive farmers on their land, holding back diversification, mechanization and moves up the value chain. In doing so it denies future generations the chance of a better life. [link]

Download the Report here

Greg Mankiw's 10 principles of economics, The Rap Version :

What can I say, just Awesome. I don't know about #7, but WTF. For anyone feeling really bored, here's the original version:

1. People face tradeoffs
2. The cost of something is what you give up to get it
3. Rational people think at the margin
4. People respond to incentives
5. Trade can make everyone better off
6. Markets are usually a good way to organize economic activity
7. Governments can sometimes improve market outcomes
8. A country’s standard of living depends on its ability to produce goods and services
9. Prices rise when the government prints too much money
10. Society faces a short-run tradeoff between inflation and unemployment.

WTF story of the day comes from the the Daily Mirror (Fight terror, build monuments of art) :

Sri Lankan Premier Ratnasiri Wickramanayaka has asserted that they would fight the war on terrorism in the country while noting the architectural feats of the decades gone by. [link]

Meanwhile in other news,

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) said in a letter dated Feb. 15 to rebel leader Velupillai Prabhakaran that "the explosive device that was set off near the zoo's bird enclosures terrified many animals at the zoo."

In the letter, PETA president Ingrid E. Newkirk pleaded with Prabhakaran "to leave animals out of this conflict."

People saddened by the attack had inundated PETA with messages, Newkirk said.
[from AP]

Pass the Rotti on the Left hand side has more on the response of the LTTE and the Government.