The Economic Benefits of Fiber Deployment

On 6 June 2025, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) issued a Policy Notice restructuring the $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program. The new directive removes the previous preference for fiber projects.

Now, any technology capable of delivering speeds of at least 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload, with latency at or below 100 milliseconds, is eligible to compete for BEAD funding. This opens the door for providers using technologies such as Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite and unlicensed fixed wireless to participate in the program.

While the BEAD program emphasizes technology neutrality by allowing any solution that meets specified performance benchmarks, choosing these metrics inherently shapes the competitive landscape and is not inherently neutral.

Drawing from the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund experience, we’ve seen that setting minimum thresholds without incorporating forward-looking metrics—such as scalability, resilience, and the ability to accommodate future growth in data demand—can unintentionally favor certain technologies, like fixed wireless or LEO satellite, that meet short-term benchmarks but may face limitations over time. By focusing only on immediate speed and latency requirements, regulators effectively place a “thumb on the scale,” steering outcomes toward solutions optimized for today’s needs, rather than those best equipped to support sustainable, long-term connectivity.

An effective policy instrument should incorporate externalities into the development of evaluation metrics. This would require evaluating a broader set of performance dimensions, including future capacity, upgrade paths, and network robustness.

Read: Modernizing the Universal Service Fund: The Appropriate Path Forward

The Brattle Group report clarifies this issue. Our analysis shows that even when other high-speed technologies—such as hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) cable—offer speed and latency characteristics comparable to fiber, fiber still delivers greater overall value.

Despite a decade of progress, fiber still reaches only about half of the broadband serviceable locations (BSLs) in the U.S. Of the 132 million BSLs nationwide, approximately 63 million remain unserved by fiber, representing 56 million households without access to what is widely considered the most future-proof broadband infrastructure.

The Economic Case for Fiber

Fiber’s advantages over legacy technologies are well-established: higher speed and symmetrical bandwidth, ultra-low latency, reliability, energy efficiency, and resilience to extreme weather. But what’s less appreciated is fiber’s enormous economic return, even in areas already served by other high-speed technologies.

Brattle’s analysis reveals that fiber deployment to the remaining 56 million unserved households could generate at least $3.24 trillion in net present value (NPV) through increases in housing value, income, employment, and other societal benefits.

Other highlights from our analysis show

• Deploying fiber to unserved areas would raise median home values by 14–17%,  translating to a $1.64 trillion increase in NPV.
• Non-urban households would see a $1,450 annual income boost, amounting to $81 billion annually, or $1.6 trillion in total NPV.
• Fiber buildout is expected to generate at least 380,000 new jobs through direct construction and indirect spillovers.
• Access to fiber correlates with a 27% higher increase in work-from-home rates during the COVID period, pointing to its value in a hybrid economy.

Impact on	Sample Average Without Fiber	Impact of Fiber Presence	Implied Change (%)
Household Income
Non-Urban	USD 192,827	USD 27,061	14.0
Urban	USD 241,736	USD 41,201	17.0
Houshold Income
Non-Urban	USD 56,260	USD 1,613	2.9
Urban	USD 52,354	–	–
Employment Rate	67.90%	+0.5%	0.74
Work from Home Rate	5.34%	+1.2%	22.5

Why the Market Isn’t Doing It Alone

Even with these benefits, the private market has underinvested in fiber, primarily because many of the returns—property values, improved health, educational benefits—are social benefits, not monetizable by the deploying provider. This is a textbook case of market failure due to positive externalities.

Brattle’s report calls attention to this externality gap, where private returns fall short of public returns, especially in rural and underserved regions. As a result, public policy intervention is not just justified but essential.

Fiber vs. HFC and Fixed Wireless: A Future-Proof Argument

While alternatives like HFC and fixed wireless (FWA) may be cheaper to deploy initially, fiber outperforms them in long-term cost, reliability, and upgradeability. It has a smaller carbon footprint (up to 96% less than HFC), is less expensive to maintain, and requires fewer energy-intensive components.

Moreover, fiber is essential for supporting next-gen technologies like 5G, IoT, and AI-driven services. Its ultra-low latency and scalability make it the backbone of everything from autonomous vehicles to telemedicine and smart agriculture.

Public Funding: Right Direction, More Needed

Many federal programs, including the BEAD, RDOF, ReConnect, and the Capital Projects Fund, allow funding for various broadband technologies. Brattle’s findings suggest that directing more funds toward fiber deployment will yield the highest return.

With BEAD entering a new phase where the fiber preference is removed and states may choose to prioritize fiber over other technologies, the Brattle report makes a compelling case for why they should, such as:

• Shifting funding explicitly toward fiber, even in areas already served by non-fiber broadband.
• Defining “underserved” using fiber access, not just speed metrics.
• Replicating and scaling successful programs like Louisiana’s GUMBO or Maine’s ConnectMaine that prioritize fiber in rural areas.

Ultimately, this is not just about faster Netflix streams. Fiber enables higher home equity, better health access, lower educational gaps, and more resilient communities. It’s the infrastructure investment that pays dividends across sectors and generations.

Paroma Sanyal is a Principal at The Brattle Group’s Washington DC office and co-leads Brattle Telecom, Media, and Entertainment practice. She is a telecommunications industry expert specializing in spectrum policy, auctions, broadband, competition, regulation, consumer protection, and intellectual property matters.

The views expressed by the authors of this blog are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Internet Society.

---

Photo by Dan York.