1
Mobile OpportunitiesPreliminary results from Peru
Roxana Barrantes
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
2
Table of contents
1. D and E SEC Groups: our sample and ENAHO.
2. Characteristics of selected locations
3. Users and Non - users
4. Users
5. Non users
6. Concluding remarks
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
3
1. D and E SEC Groups: our sample and ENAHO
4
1. D and E SEC: Peru vs SampleNumber of family members
5.4 5.0
1
17
4.2 4
1
13
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
Mean Median Min Max
ENAHO
SAMPLE
Literacy (1=Literate)
0.620.49
0
10.96 1
0
1
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
Mean Median Min MaxIEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Age
46.8 45
14
98
42.0 40
18
70
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
Mean Median Min Max
Sex (1=Male)
0.78
1
0
1
0.83
1.0
0
1
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
Mean Median Min Max
5
Sample• D and S socioeconomic groups, according to
SISFOH.• Urban poor• Three cities:
– Trujillo– Puno-Juliaca– Metropolitan Lima
• 1200 surveys• Randomly selected households• Randomly selected individuals within the
household.
6
1. D and E SEC: Peru vs Sample
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Education: ENAHO and sample
7
22
20
19
22
2
4
2
2
5
13
12
20
31
4
7
4
4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
sin nivel
primaria incompleta
primaria completa
secundaria incompleta
secundaria completa
superior no universitaria incompleta
superior no universitaria completa
superior universitaria incompleta
superior universitaria completa
Le
ve
l
% of total
7
1. D and E SEC: Peru vs Sample
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Walls material
42
10
3739
14
44
01020304050
Brick, block, stone,gravel, cement or
concrete
Wood Adobe
Sewage
50
15 16
36 40
16
0102030405060
Conected to publicnetwork
Cesspit Doesn’t have sewage
%
8
2. Characteristics of selected locations
9
Population in selected locations
Trujillo – La Libertad Pop. 765 171
Puno – Juliaca Pop. 441 382
Lima 6 954 583
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
10
Peru and selected locations
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
11
Urban poor in Peru
% of Urban Poor
2% 3% 1%5% 4%
2% 3% 3% 3% 4% 5% 4% 4%
20%
4%1%
3% 4%8%
4% 4% 3% 2% 4%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Am
azo
na
s
An
cash
Ap
urí
ma
c
Are
qu
ipa
Aya
cuch
o
Ca
jam
arc
a
Cu
sco
Hu
an
cave
lica
Hu
an
uco Ica
Jun
in
La
lib
ert
ad
La
mb
aye
qu
e
Lim
a
Lo
reto
Ma
dre
de
Mo
qu
eg
ua
Pa
sco
Piu
ra
Pu
no
Sa
n m
art
in
Ta
cna
Tu
mb
es
Uca
yali
100% = total of urban poor households of Peru
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
12
Description of telecom indicators
Source: OSIPTEL
Fixed and mobile density 2006
26
2
10
2 2 41 2
8 58 7
17
4 37
25
2 38
5 59
5
18
7
42
11 11
18
29
35
19
27 27
57
9
22
44
11
1916
9
49
33
17
32
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
%
13
3. Users and Non - users
14
During the past three months have you usedused a mobile phone to make or receive calls?
N % N % N %Lima D 102 49,0% 106 51,0% 208 100%
E 90 43,7% 116 56,3% 206 100%Total 192 46,4% 222 53,6% 414 100%
Trujillo D 99 47,6% 109 52,4% 208 100%E 109 54,5% 91 45,5% 200 100%Total 208 51,0% 200 49,0% 408 100%
Puno-Juliaca D 177 83,1% 36 16,9% 213 100%E 178 83,2% 36 16,8% 214 100%Total 355 83,1% 72 16,9% 427 100%
Yes No TotalCities Sectors
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
15
Gender
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Men Women Total
Users 370 385 755No users 200 294 494Total 489 760 1249
User's Gender
49%51%
Men
Women
16
Age
Non-users
Users
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
0.0
2.0
4.0
6D
ensity
0 20 40 60 80edad_us
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4D
ensity
0 20 40 60 80edad_nous
AGET test
Group Obs Mean
Non users 494 36.36Users 755 31.28combined 1249 33.29diff 5.07Ho: diff = 0Ha: diff != 0 Pr(| T| > | t| ) = 0.0000
17
Education
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Users, non-users and education
1%
1%
6%
37%
6%
9%
6%
6%
7%
1%
3%
5%
3%
3%
15%
3%
6%
27%
3%
1%
1%
3%
2%
2%
7%
3%
8%
4%
2%
9%
1%
9%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
ningún nivel/ alfabet
1er grado/ transición
2do grado
3er grado
4to grado
5to grado
6to grado
1ero de media
2do de media
3ro de media
4to de media
5to de media
sup. no universitaria
sup. no universitaria
sup. universitaria in
sup. universitaria co
Le
ve
l
%
EDUCATIONT test
Group Obs Mean
Non users 494 8.73Users 755 11.1combined 1249 10.36diff -2.36Ho: diff = 0Ha: diff != 0 Pr(| T| > | t| ) = 0.0000
18
Family members
FAMILY MEMBERST test
Group Obs Mean
Non users 494 3.923077Users 755 4.32053combined 1249 4.163331diff -0.3974529Ho: diff = 0Ha: diff != 0 Pr(| T| > | t| ) = 0.0001
Users, non-users and family members
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1 3 5 7 9 11
Number of members
%
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
19
Literacy
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Users and Literacy
99%
1%
Literate
Illiterate
Non users and Literacy
93%
7%
LITERACYT test
Group Obs Mean
Non users 494 0.925Users 755 0.988combined 1249 0.96diff -0.06Ho: diff = 0Ha: diff != 0 Pr(| T| > | t| ) = 0.0001
20
4. Users
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
21
Reasons for callingMobile telephone use (for calling) during the last week 563From the total (1249), the % is: 45.08%From the total of users (755), the % is: 74.57%
Calls N °
% of the ones that use the mobile phone to
call% of the total of
users% of the total of
interviewees
To workplace or for business 214 38.0% 28.3% 17.1%Friends 318 56.5% 42.1% 25.5%In-country Relatives 466 82.8% 61.7% 37.3%Relatives living outside of the country 12 2.1% 1.6% 1.0%Emergencies 30 5.3% 4.0% 2.4%
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
22
Higher impact perceived by Independent workers
Found better job or business opportunitiesOccupation N °
Employee 38Laborer 33Independent worker 106Comission worker 3House worker 6Unpaid worker in family business 9Employer 2Farmer 2Other 1Total 200
Saved time at workOccupation N °
Employee 50Laborer 32Independent worker 107Comission worker 5House worker 6Unpaid worker in family business 9Employer 2Farmer 1Other 1Total 213
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
23
Higher impact perceived by Independent workers
Communication with more suppliers Occupation N °
Employee 9Laborer 10Independent worker 55Comission worker 1House worker 1Unpaid worker in family business 2Employer 3Farmer 0Other 0Total 81
Communication with more clients Occupation N °
Employee 21Laborer 14Independent worker 98Comission worker 3House worker 3Unpaid worker in family business 4Employer 4Farmer 0Other 0Total 147
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
24
Higher impact perceived by Independent workers
Communication with work colleagues Occupation N °
Employee 50Laborer 29Independent worker 82Comission worker 2House worker 5Unpaid worker in family business 6Employer 1Farmer 0Other 0Total 175
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
25
Pre paid dominates among mobile subscribers
Type of plan
96%
2%
1%
1%
P repaid P ostpaid P ostpaid (control) Do not know
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
26
Reasons to choose Pre paid
Why do you have a pre-paid mobile plan instead of a Postpaid plan? Freq. %
It is cheaper 149 32.96I can control my mobile phone expenditure better 153 33.85It is simpler to get it this way 96 21.24I didn’t choose it 51 11.28Other 3 0.66Total 452 100
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
27
Recharge card valueCard amount N° %
10 103 23.8420 251 58.130 58 13.4340 4 0.9350 2 0.46120 1 0.23Do not know 7 1.62Did not answer 6 1.39Total 432 10020 said they had not recharged yet
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Card recharge amount
24%
58%
13%
1% 0% 0%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
10 20 30 40 50 120
Amount (S/.)
%
28
Low affordability
How cheap or expensive do you think your mobile phone service is? Freq. %
Very cheap 2 0.44Cheap 41 9.07Neither cheap nor expensive (affordable) 249 55.09Expensive 136 30.09Very expensive 21 4.65Does not apply/ Free of charge 3 0.66Total 452 100
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
29
Strategies to minimize costUse of "call notifications"
26%
67%
7%
Only make calls when the rates are lower (during non-peak hours)
41%
55%
4%
Rent a mobile phone from the street
28%69%
3%
Only use the mobile phone for SMS
13%
82%
5%
Use of the mobile phone just to receive calls
50%
48%
2%
Use of missed calls / beeping
47%
50%
3%
Yes
No
Does not know
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
30
Gross elasticities: Price
Suppose the monthly cost of using your mobile phone was cut in half. Which of the following statements best describes how you would change your
phone usage? N ° %
I would not change my phone usage (it would stay the same) 170 36.6I would increase my phone usage by some amount, but not double it 212 45.6I would double my usage 73 15.7I would more than double my usage 10 2.2Total 465 100
Suppose the monthly cost of using your phone doubled. Which of the following statements best describes how you would change your phone
usage? N ° %
I would not change my phone usage 96 20.6I would reduce my phone usage by some amount, but not by half 145 31.2I would reduce my phone usage by half 107 23.0I would reduce my phone usage by more than half 74 15.9I would not use my mobile phone 43 9.2Total 465 100
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
31
Gross elasticities: Income
Suppose that your monthly income doubled. Which of the following statements best describes how you would change your mobile phone usage? N ° %
I would not change my phone usage (it would stay the same) 147 31.6%I would increase my phone usage by some amount, but not double it 225 48.4%I would double my usage 73 15.7%I would more than double my usage 20 4.3%Total 465 100.0%
Suppose your monthly income was cut in half, which if the following statements best describes how you would change your phone usage? N ° %
I would not change my phone usage 89 19.1%I would reduce my phone usage by some amount, but not by half 124 26.7%I would reduce my phone usage by half 92 19.8%I would reduce my phone usage by more than half 90 19.4%I would stop using my phone 70 15.1%Total 465 100.0%
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
32
Do you have a fixed phone line at home?
TF1. Do you have a fixed phone line (landline) at home?
N % N % N %Lima D 48 23.1% 160 76.9% 208 100%
E 33 16.0% 173 84.0% 206 100%Total 81 19.6% 333 80.4% 414 100%
Trujillo D 60 28.8% 148 71.2% 208 100%E 12 6.0% 188 94.0% 200 100%Total 72 17.6% 336 82.4% 408 100%
Puno-Juliaca D 24 11.3% 189 88.7% 213 100%E 4 1.9% 210 98.1% 214 100%Total 28 6.6% 399 93.4% 427 100%
TotalCities Sectors
Yes No
33
5. Non users
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
34
Reasons
What is the main reason why you haven’t used a mobile phone service? N ° %
It is too expensive 276 55,9I don’t think having a mobile of my own is necessary 139 28,1There is no coverage where I live 8 1,6None of my contacts has a phone 8 1,6I don’t need to use a telephone because my contacts live nearby 13 2,6I can’t because there is no electricity in my home to charge the phone battery 3 0,6Because I have a land line at home 41 8,3Other 6 1,2Total 494 100
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
35
Plans to adquire
• 151 out of 494 non users
91.4% of them plans to buy a prepaid mobile phone
Non users planning to adquire a mobile phone
30,6%
47,4%
Yes
No
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
36
Affordability• In Peru, the monthly
payment to subscribe to a post paid mobile phone currently costs about 38 soles (USD 12). Can you afford to pay this amount?
What is the maximum amount you could pay for this service per month? N ° %
Less than 19 soles 371 75,1%Between 20 and 25 soles 93 18,8%Between 25 and 30 soles 16 3,2%Between 30 and 35 soles 10 2,0%Between 35 and 60 soles 4 0,8%Total 494 100,0%
86%14% Yes
No
IEP Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
37
6. Concluding remarks
38
Final comments
• Mobile phone use is higher than mobile phone subscription.– Important potential market!– Sharing is not widespread.
• Mobile users are, on average, more educated, younger and share household with more members than non users.
39
Final comments
• Affordability is an issue.– 20 soles seems to be “the magic number”.
• Pre paid dominates– Even perceived as less expensive!
More homework to be done in order to present further analysis and policy recommendations!