A new book launched at the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) 2025, ‘Self-sustaining financing solutions for Community Connectivity‘, explores practical pathways to fund and scale community-centred connectivity initiatives (CCCIs). The publication, developed through the IGF’s Dynamic Coalition on Community Connectivity (DC3), captures global experiences and offers a framework for sustainable, locally driven network development.
The book is both a product of and a companion to the IGF 2025 session titled ‘Financing Self-Sustaining Community Connectivity Solutions‘, which brought together a diverse spectrum of voices: Policymakers, community network operators, researchers, and private-sector innovators.
In other words, ‘Self-sustaining financing solutions for Community Connectivity’ reflects some of the collected insight and experience of our communities. Indeed, it features several case studies of community-centred connectivity initiatives (CCCIs) drawn from the Asia Pacific region.
The book is particularly relevant to people who are interested in novel networks, networking as a platform to empower communities, and those looking for opportunities to support community networks with technical skills.
This post will cover highlights from the book, including common features of CCCIs, ways their impact can be objectively measured, and the technical and financial support they require to be sustainable.
Two terms, similar idea
Community Networks (CNs) are connectivity initiatives usually developed in a bottom-up fashion by groups of individuals — that is, communities — that may contribute to the design, development and management of network infrastructure as a common resource.
CCCIs are social enterprises (SEs) within the digital economy. They are not merely Internet Service Providers — they are mission-driven enterprises that prioritize purpose over profit, delivering meaningful connectivity to underserved populations.
The two terms are used more or less interchangeably in the book; however, CCCI highlights a mission focus, with impact that requires and builds on the network but is not limited to it.
Case studies from the Asia Pacific region
CCCIs from the Asia Pacific region made important contributions to the development of the knowledge captured in the book. Let’s start by highlighting them:
- Common Room (Indonesia): A multidisciplinary Indonesian initiative combining community centres, Internet of Things (IoT) deployment, and Wi-Fi networks across island villages, with deep roots in capacity building and digital literacy. The initiative is supported Kasepuhan Ciptagelar as a key partner.
- Kasepuhan Ciptagelar (Indonesia): An indigenous-led initiative in rural West Java integrating local cultural values with affordable Internet services, fostering digital literacy, and enabling self-sustaining network management.
- Pathardi (India): A community-managed network connecting seven tribal villages in rural West India. The initiative supports e-DOST — a program empowering tribal women entrepreneurs — alongside cultural preservation efforts and an e-commerce platform with integrated banking services for local artisans and farmers. The network is operated by a local association in partnership with the Panchayat, the village self-governing institution.
- MyKCat (Philippines): A profitable, 100% Filipino-owned fibre ISP operating in Negros Occidental, delivering high-speed broadband to underserved towns with strong subscriber growth and operational discipline.
Takeaway: Strength in diversity
Community-centred connectivity initiatives are diverse and often arise in response to community need. Chapter one develops a typology for analysing CCCIs that takes into account attributes like geographic focus, purpose, legal structure, planning and management, sustainability (or business) model, and many more.
The typology is flexible enough to recognize many different types of CCCIs, while being specific enough to allow for learning between types of CCCIs. This makes it potentially useful for people who are working on a CCCI to identify applicable lessons from other initiatives, and for policymakers who are seeking to create a regulatory environment that supports CCCIs and their social impact.
Takeaway: Social impact is measurable
The ambiguity of ‘making life better’ can put off people who prefer the more predictable ‘true or false’ and ’cause and effect’ measurement common in technology. However, the impact achieved by CCCIs can be objectively measured.
Chapter two employs two key analytical tools: Development Indexing (DI), which assists in articulating multiple aspects of social impact, and Social Return on Investment (SROI), which evaluates cost effectiveness by comparing investment to financial and monetized social benefits.
It turns out that, despite the diversity in the CCCIs being analysed, six common themes emerged in the key results they were pursuing. And from those themes, performance indicators could be derived that allow an objective evaluation as to whether CCCIs are having their intended effect.
For instance, to measure the ‘inclusive human development’ key results area, you can measure for greater achievement in formal education and more enhanced social relations within households or among community members. To measure the ‘improved economic conditions’ key results area, you can look for an increase in household assets like motorcycles, or improved capability to use adaptive farming techniques integrating traditional and new technologies.
These common key results areas and performance indicators allow for a development index that could be used to support any CCCI in articulating the value they are creating to attract technical and financial contributions.
Takeaway: Technical capacity can lead to capital access
Chapters three and four are concerned with how CCCIs can be financed. What stands out is how important technical capacity and execution are to securing finance.
Many CCCIs use hybrid networking models, including fibre, Wi-Fi, mobile, and solar-powered mesh. These are technically credible designs, but they are often operating environments prone to infrastructure challenges.
In fact, chapter four highlights Network Technical Risk, including less redundancy, limited network automation, and greater vulnerability to environmental disruptions as a major impediment to receiving finance.
This suggests a need for investment not just in last-mile connectivity, but in resilience and monitoring capacity at the network core. It is here that technical contributors can help close the maturity gap that prevents many networks from absorbing investment at scale.
A solvable problem
‘Self-sustaining financing solutions for Community Connectivity’ makes the case that the digital divide is a solvable problem. The technology exists. What is primarily missing are the right financial structures to get investment to where it is needed most.
Part of getting those financial structures in place is making sure the CCCIs have the technical capacity to absorb additional capital, which represents an opportunity for the Internet community.
This book is a call to identify the CCCIs in your local community and ask the people involved whether they need the type of help you can provide.
Download ‘Self-sustaining financing solutions for Community Connectivity‘ for free.
The views expressed by the authors of this blog are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of APNIC. Please note a Code of Conduct applies to this blog.