Assessing early uptake and impacts of 5G mobile services for Australian consumers

Abstract

The introduction of the fifth generation of mobile standards (5G) has promised faster speeds, greater network capacity and lower latency. 5G has only recently rolled out in many countries, so there is little empirical data on what individual consumers are doing with the speed, capacity and lower latency that 5G promises to offer. To examine early consumer take-up of 5G, we conducted a series of small-group discussions with individual users of 5G mobile services in Melbourne and regional Victoria, Australia. We found that coverage, connectivity and reliability of network connection remain live issues for many consumers, especially (but not exclusively) those in regional areas. Despite this, there is some evidence of incremental improvements in performance, even with a weakened 5G signal. Significantly, in cases where there's strong connectivity and reliability, there is also evidence that 5G provides consumers with an additional or alternative connectivity option to home broadband. Investigating this unique moment in the rollout of fifth-generation mobile standards is crucial in grasping the continuing challenges as well as the emerging and evolving economic and cultural possibilities of 5G services and applications in Australia.

Introduction

Mobile network standards are developed according to approximately 10-year cycles. In Australia, as elsewhere around the world, the fifth (and latest) generation of mobile standards (5G) is currently being rolled out. 5G is said to significantly improve network speed and capacity, delivering higher multi-Gbps peak data speeds. In addition, 5G does more than simply upgrade infrastructure and mobile networks as seen with previous generations. It promises to usher in a constellation of new technologies, which may represent a step change in mobile telecommunications (Boccardi et al., 2014). These developments position 5G as not just a consumer technology but also one created, designed and promoted for large-scale enterprise. This vision is commonly seen in technical documentation and promotional materials for 5G, where it is pitched as a transformative (‘revolutionary’) technology that promises enabling infrastructure for smart technologies, automation and the Internet of Things that underpin a range of sectors from health to transport (Osseiran et al., 2014). In contrast, for Australian consumers at least, 5G is marketed in fairly conventional (‘evolutionary’) ways, with promises of faster speeds, improved data carrying capacity and lower latency.

In this exploratory study, we spoke with Australian consumers who had transitioned to 5G mobile services to gain insight into their experiences with 5G. As part of our discussions, we asked participants: How different is 5G from consumer experience of existing or prior generations (3G, 4G)? Does 5G mean ‘business as usual’, or is there emerging evidence of shifts in media and communication practice? And, to what extent does the introduction of 5G mobile services ameliorate digital inclusion? In this article, we report on findings from an Australian baseline study employing small-group interviews that examine 5G consumer use in Melbourne and regional Victoria.

These research questions, and the overarching study, are framed by two broad contextual considerations that arise at each generational transition point in mobile telecommunications, and, as such, continue to warrant ongoing consideration. Firstly, understanding the socio-technical complexities of mobile standards and the adoption rate of emerging mobile technology allows us to identify the emergent possibilities associated with each new mobile generation. Secondly, questions of access and inclusion continue to arise with the provision of any new communications technology, and in view of Australia's existing challenges in addressing digital divides (Thomas et al., 2023), we sought to assess whether the 5G rollout facilitated opportunities for meaningful connectivity, particularly outside of urban centres. Given the promised speed and capabilities of 5G, a central point of focus for us is the extent to which 5G has been made available and offered a quality option for consumers, and whether 5G mobile connectivity could function as a viable substitution for fixed broadband.

The paper proceeds as follows. We begin with a brief introduction of mobile standards and the current state of 5G technology before canvassing the relevant literature around digital access and inclusion, noting the efforts made in this paper to advance extant research on 5G and fixed-to-mobile substitution. We then outline our qualitative methods before setting out our findings across three themes: availability, reliability and substitutability. We end with a discussion that highlights the need for further research on consumer experiences of network reliability, and the growing importance of the mobile network as a connectivity option, even when in domestic environments.

Mobile technology take-up

Each new ‘generation’ of standards promises new features and improved capacities for consumers. For example, 3G heralded the arrival of the mobile internet and video calling, while 4G permitted high-definition mobile streaming, allowing people to do everything from watch television shows on trams to live stream events. Yet the actual deployment of a new mobile standard is often an incremental process, with occasional bursts of more radical shifts (Garcia-Swartz and Campbell-Kelly, 2022). Often, consumers must obtain new mobile devices in order to receive new standards (Financial Review, 2020). Agar's (2013: 190–191) history of the mobile phone illustrates how the vision of 3G, that presented a radical shift in how the internet was used, was held back until several years after its rollout in early 2000:

3G promised a cornucopia of data services, and these weren’t all ready at once… in the early 2000s 3G crept out, with a dash of video messaging here and a smattering of live football and games there. It would be half a decade before we experienced what 3G really could do.

Likewise, Goggin (2006: 204) illustrates how visions of both 3G and (then forthcoming) 4G were propelled by the idea that ‘the technologies and those that design and arm them will be able to discern what users want and consummate their desire’. In the case of 3G, more radical changes in both markets and consumer behaviour were, in fact, only achieved through a confluence of technical specifications, social norms, policy shifts and changing market conditions (Vincent et al., 2005). These included the increasing availability of Wi-Fi hotspots, new devices (particularly the iPhone), changes to licencing arrangements and new market offerings (particularly the offer of a flat rate for data downloads) (Agar, 2013: 190–192). A single standard, then, is in fact a socio-technical phenomenon, or ‘complex assemblage’ (Goggin, 2015: 138), that brings together various technologies into the dynamic realm of everyday reception and use, where social, institutional, economic, cultural and policy contexts shape and reshape their form (Bijker and Law, 1992; MacKenzie and Wacjman, 1999).

Initial global deployment of 5G was driven by a small number of early adopting jurisdictions that led the way, notably South Korea, China, Japan and Singapore (Curwen and Whalley, 2021). Other parts of the world are starting to catch up, such as North America, where 5G is now well established. In Australia, where this study is based, 5G rollout is gathering pace after a slow start (ACMA, 2022). The roll-out of 5G in largely urban areas is doing little to resolve long-standing issues pertaining to telecommunications provision, particularly in regional and rural Australia (Marshall, 2024; Randell-Moon and Hynes, 2024) and among remote First Nations communities (Featherstone et al., 2024). While cognisant of these persistent issues, we seek to examine how different groups of consumers are taking up 5G, and if it is resulting in a different experience and changes in practice.

Whether empirically justified or not, Australia has a reputation, both internally (ACCAN, 2022; ACMA, 2018) and internationally, as a nation of ‘early adopters and avid users of technology’ (techUK, 2021), including 5G mobile handsets (Boyd, 2020). Despite this, there has been little focus on what users are doing with the speed, capacity and lower latency that 5G is promised to offer. Additionally, positioning Australia as a nation of early adopters needs to be tempered by the fact that standards are embedded in handsets, which condition possibilities for adoption and adaptation. Research on the uptake of previous standards illustrate that consumer uptake is driven by expectations on the value of upgrading to a compatible device, with the new standard playing only a partial role in driving adoption (Tseng and Lo, 2011). In examining consumer uptake of 5G and its impacts, this article offers a baseline to explore how 5G evolves from here, and it seeks to illustrate the multiple developments (not just in connectivity) that must come together to result in the emergence of new forms of use. Investigating this unique moment in the rollout of fifth-generation mobile standards is critical if we are to understand the ongoing challenges and emerging and evolving economic and cultural possibilities of 5G services and applications. One such challenge, and a fundamental question posed by any new communications technology that is rolled out in Australia, is the extent and effectiveness with which it can address ongoing access and inclusion challenges.

Access and inclusion

While scholars and policymakers have known for at least two decades that merely having access is not sufficient for people to be able to use digital services effectively (DiMaggio and Hargittai, 2001), it is a necessary precondition. In digital inclusion literature, the gap between those who have internet access and those who do not are known as ‘the first level digital divide’ (van Dijk, 2020). While the ‘access gap’ was initially seen as being surmountable, as network availability increased and use became more ubiquitous, access continues to be an issue, including in advanced economies, such as the Netherlands (Van Deursen and Van Dijk, 2019) and Australia (Thomas et al., 2023). For example, in Australia, recent surveys suggest almost everyone (99%) has accessed the internet in the past 6 months and 93% of Australians have internet access at home (ACMA, 2022). Despite this, divides in coverage, quality and usage have persisted, and for some household groups worsened (Thomas et al., 2023). This ongoing divide illustrates that access is not just about having access to a connection but also involves securing necessary devices and being able to afford ongoing expenses relating to hardware, software and subscriptions (Van Deursen and Van Dijk, 2019).

Searching for a more nuanced understanding of access beyond a binary ‘divide’, Helsper (2021) argues that meaningful access ultimately means quality (speed and functionality), ubiquity (available wherever and whenever needed) and autonomy (independence in technology use). Those who nominally have access, but in a manner that is less than is desired, have been described as ‘under-connected’ (Katz, 2017). These people are often constrained in their use, constantly planning, monitoring and ‘rationing’ use of the internet according to restrictive data allowances and limited opportunities for connection (Dezuanni et al., 2023; Featherstone et al., 2024; Park et al., 2019).

In Australia, opportunities for access continue to be shaped by geographic and socio-economic factors. In particular, the quality and reliability of networks declines with remoteness (Park, 2017; Park et al., 2019). Vast distances and low population density in much of the interior have made the universal rollout of communications infrastructure difficult. Meanwhile, Australia's market-driven approach to telecommunications has seen more densely populated urban areas receive upgrades to mobile networks before they ‘trickle-down’ to regional and remote areas (Marshall et al., 2020: 10). This is in spite of the fact that connectivity has become increasingly necessary in rural areas as services shift online (Park, 2017). Meanwhile, local governments and businesses in rural areas are increasingly seeing improvements in telecommunications as a critical part of the response to population drift, ageing populations and stagnating local economies (Randell-Moon and Hynes, 2022).

Research has started to consider whether mobile broadband or mobile connections offer viable substitutes for fixed broadband, especially in more rural areas that have previously been without adequate cable or wired connections (Quaglione et al., 2020). However, analysis of the cost of the 5G rollout in Britain and the Netherlands has illustrated that rolling out the new network to more sparsely populated parts of these countries will be very expensive (Oughton et al., 2021). In Britain, Oughton and Frias (2018) suggest that 5G reaching the final 10% of the population by 2027 is unlikely in a ‘business-as-usual scenario’ due to exponentially increasing costs. The provision of the National Broadband Network (NBN) in Australia means that the fixed-line market attempts to provide a baseline level of internet access across the country. However, Australia's substantial distances and low population density compared to these countries, and a similarly privatised mobile telecommunications market, leads many to suggest the country is unlikely to see 5G coverage evenly distributed anytime soon, which may exacerbate existing digital inequalities (Featherstone et al., 2024; Marshall, 2024). As Randell-Moon and Hynes (2024: 92) note in their study of regional towns in North-West New South Wales, Australia, ‘accessing 5G broadly replicates socio-spatial inequalities within the towns in terms of infrastructural prioritisation of some areas over others’.

This said, Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites, such as those powered by Starlink, are emerging as a more likely contender to address existing digital inequalities than 5G (see, e.g., Telstra, 2024). The current paper cannot address these developments in detail, but it is worth noting that there are now more Australian households who have signed up to Starlink than NBN Sky Muster (Bonyhady and Baird, 2023). In addition to the provision of satellite internet connectivity, Starlink has also established partnerships with Telstra and Optus, with a view to providing ‘backhaul for small-cell mobile services’ (Featherstone et al., 2024: 34). Also of note, is Starlink's current trials with Telstra and Optus to offer text messaging, and eventually voice and data via LEO satellites. If successful, these efforts may offer something close to full telecommunications coverage across Australia, with scope to significantly disrupt exisiting telecommunications arrangements in turn.

Meanwhile, mobile-only use has tended to be associated with lower levels of digital inclusion (Thomas et al., 2017) as ‘mobile-only use seems to afford fewer opportunities to develop more comprehensive digital skills, which are necessary to take full advantage of the possibilities given by Internet connection’ (Correa et al., 2024: 1009). However, given the ability to substitute fixed broadband with mobile has been part of the narrative of 5G (Mattern, 2019), ‘further investigation is warranted on how mobile Internet usage influences, complements or replaces fixed-line Internet usage among various groups of the population’ (Park, 2017: 405).

Methods

In developing this study (which forms part of a larger project examining 5G in Australia), the research team worked closely with an Australasian qualitative market research firm to refine research questions, co-design small-group composition and develop the ‘topic framework’ (the questions asked, and materials and prompts used during group sessions). This firm also managed recruitment and coordinated and ran the small-group discussions. They were selected for their extensive market research experience and for their prior experience working with telecommunications companies. This domain expertise productively shaped the co-design process as they were telecommunications literate, with firsthand knowledge of and experience in investigating issues pertaining to the telecommunications sector.

In selecting group participants, the two core criteria for recruitment were having a 5G mobile plan and device (prospective participants were asked to provide a screenshot showing proof of 5G connection) and personal experience using mobile 5G services. We conducted online qualitative group interviews (Barbour, 2018) with Victorian consumers of mobile 5G services during February and April of 2023. Six groups were held, consisting of 5–6 participants per group, for a total of 33 participants. Composition of interview groups can impact group dynamics (Morgan, 1997), where similarity can encourage rapport and trust building among participants. With this in mind, we employed segmentation in our sampling (Morgan, 1996), with the composition of the six groups capturing three key variables: intensity of technology use; strength of network coverage; and geographical differences. Of the six online discussion groups, four (Groups 1–4) were conducted with 5G consumers living in inner urban, urban and suburban areas of Melbourne (Groups 1–4); these four groups were selected based on varied levels of usage and network coverage (high/low 5G use; strong/weak network coverage). The final two groups (Groups 5–6) were with 5G consumers living in rural or regional Victoria. All six groups were provided with the same set of small-group discussion prompts and stimulus materials.

Group 1: High 5G use and Strong network coverage (Melbourne).

Group 2: High 5G use and Weak network coverage (Melbourne).

Group 3: Low 5G use and Strong network coverage (Melbourne).

Group 4: Low 5G use and Weak network coverage (Melbourne).

Group 5: Regional consumers (North and North-West of Melbourne).

Group 6: Regional consumers (Gippsland).

This sampling approach was considered advantageous in that it incorporates a comparative dimension into the research, including the data analysis, and ‘facilitates discussions by making participants [of each group] more similar with each other’ (Morgan, 1996: 143).

Participants were asked about current understandings of 5G, processes of obtaining 5G, current uses of 5G, experiences of coverage and functionality, opinions on 5G marketing materials, views regarding 5G infrastructures and perceptions of 5G in the future. The group discussions ran for 1.5 h. Each group discussion was professionally moderated, which ensured that each participant had the opportunity to respond to most questions or prompts (Morgan, 1997). The authors observed and took notes during each group discussion; they were also able to feed suggested prompts and requests for clarification or follow-up to the moderator via a back channel. All group discussions were audio and video recorded and professionally transcribed. Video was not explicitly analysed but was used to ensure the accuracy of the attributions of remarks in the transcripts.

We used an interactive and interpretive framework for data collection and analysis (Lofland et al., 2005), allowing us to engage with and represent the perspectives and experiences of our research participants. Analysis of the transcripts was completed using the initial categories that guided the interviews themselves – that is, perceptions (what they imagined 5G to be like), motivations (why have a 5G connection?), expectations (what would change through acquiring 5G?), interactions (how is 5G used?), challenges (were there any when establishing or while using a 5G connection?) and future conceptualisations (what might 5G enable in the future?). Once all sessions were completed, the market research firm also conducted a debriefing session with the research team that involved collaborative discussion and analysis of high-level findings. Subsequent to this, a more detailed thematic analysis (Lofland et al., 2005; Morgan, 1997) was conducted by the research team to compare responses across interview questions within and across each discussion. Similar responses were grouped and further sub-categorised when necessary.

Findings: Consumer experience of 5G

Prior to presentation of findings, it is valuable to provide some insight into initial consumer perceptions of and motivations for getting 5G. For participants, perceptions of 5G were primarily shaped by telecommunications industry marketing, with most participants reporting some variation of ‘faster’, ‘stronger’ and ‘more reliable’, when asked about their perceptions of 5G. Only one participant mentioned the term ‘fifth generation’ (Gp 3). And while there were strong expressions of 5G representing a clear technological upgrade, there was less certainty around how it differed from 3G or 4G, other than 5G being ‘faster’ and ‘better’.

The majority of participants first accessed 5G as a result of needing or wanting to upgrade their phones. Only a handful of participants actively sought it; in one case, their employer stipulated a 5G handset in order ‘to make sure everyone can be connected at any time’ during team meetings (Gp 1). The price our participants were paying for mobile services also varied widely, ranging from $20 per month to up to $130 per month. The point to note about this here is that there was no clear evidence from the small-group discussions that price was a significant factor shaping views on the merits or otherwise of 5G mobile services.

From coding of the small discussion group data, three core themes were identified. These are: (1) 5G network availability (coverage); (2) 5G network reliability (stability of connection); and (3) substitutability (where a 5G mobile connection comes to stand in for other network alternatives). Each of these themes will be explored in turn.

Availability

As noted earlier, there tends to be an uneven spread of network availability, or coverage, across different regions and groups. Research has generally focused on the quality of infrastructure between urban and rural areas, sometimes referred to as an ‘urban-rural divide’, or ‘rural digital divide’ (Salemink et al., 2017: 363). Across these bodies of literature, a dominant theme is the ongoing tension between universal access and commercial returns. For this reason, wealthier and more densely populated areas tend to receive upgrades to network coverage first (Marshall et al., 2020: 10). However, there are also divides within urban environments, where the quality and availability of broadband is unevenly distributed, including along existing lines of socio-economic inequality (Alizadeh, 2015).

All of our participant groups raised issues associated with network availability. For example, one Melbourne-based participant observed that, in the suburban development where they lived, ‘most people have to go and stand on the street to get even barely a signal at all’ (Gp 2). Urban participants were also cognisant of the larger connectivity challenges facing Australian consumers, with one reflecting, ‘I think what this country needs is a better coverage of our land mass rather than better quality in your high density areas’ (Gp 3).

Network coverage challenges were especially pronounced for our regional participants, who relayed how availability was a concern not just in outlying areas but also within large regional centres (‘5G can be pretty bad in Bendigo’ (Gp 5)), and when travelling between regional centres (‘Even just between Maffra and Sale […] there's still patches where we don’t get reception. So, it's not ideal.’ (Gp 6)). For some of these regional residents, the coverage challenges they face are put into sharp relief when visiting urban centres: ‘You go to Melbourne and it's just such a massive difference in connection to what we have here’ (Gp 6). These connectivity challenges can mean that the performance upgrades promised by the arrival of 5G (such as faster speeds or less lag) have less immediate appeal than strengthened availability, with one participant noting, ‘I more care about the coverage than the speed of 5G, [and] when I’ve got it, because it's not that often’ (Gp 6). As a fellow group member put it, ‘I think a lot of work needs to be done to expand where it is available’ (Gp 6).

Indeed, a sentiment shared across groups was that further infrastructure was necessary in order to achieve wider 5G network availability:

You need to put more towers around. […] You have to, otherwise the coverage is going down. (Gp 1)

I think [more infrastructure] is actually essential, to be honest with you. (Gp 6)

With this shared desire for availability came an acceptance that the amenity (visual) impact of telecommunications infrastructure takes a backseat to improved coverage (on the politics of infrastructural visibility, see Parks, 2009). ‘If that […] big, ugly tower can make things go quicker, then fine’ (Gp 5). In the words of a Gippsland participant, ‘If you asked regional people with low connectivity, […] we don’t care what it looks like’ (Gp 6). This view carried through to metropolitan Melbourne. Reflecting on the recent installation of a new cell tower, an urban participant experiencing low connectivity remarked, ‘I was overjoyed to see another tower go up’ (Gp 2).

The desire for increased coverage went hand-in-hand with calls for greater investment in 5G infrastructure. One Melbourne participant felt that network coverage issues were ‘an infrastructural thing’ because ‘they just haven’t invested enough’ (Gp 2). And, reflecting on the prospect of improved coverage, a regional participant remarked, ‘I would be excited knowing they’re investing in the future’ (Gp 5). Here, we have two calls for greater investment in 5G infrastructure, although who the ‘they’ is in both these statements (telcos? government? infrastructure firms?) remains unclear. And yet, this investment is understood to be important: ‘We’ve got to spend to stay up with things. If we don’t have coverage, people can’t communicate, and communication is the name of what we do now’ (Gp 5) – an observation that neatly encapsulates the value of supporting infrastructural investment. Notably, these opinions stand in stark contrast to those of local councils, some of whom have ongoing concerns about the visual impact of telecommunications infrastructure on urban streetscapes (Meese et al., 2024).

What came through from these small-group discussions was that, while all had 5G-enabled mobile handsets, availability of 5G network coverage is a live issue. Participant examples of this were provided by our regional groups (where availability issues are most pronounced) as well as our metropolitan groups. Across the board, our participants expressed enthusiasm for greater infrastructural investment to improve network availability. In the following section, we move from participant reflections on network availability (extent of coverage), to their thoughts and reflections on network reliability (stability of connection).

Reliability

Network reliability constitutes a long-standing scholarly concern within the telecommunications policy literature (see the ‘Conference: optimizing reliability’, 1983: 181) and continues to be a crucial consideration for telecommunications service providers (Hallahan and Peha, 2010: 200). The issue takes on renewed significance with the arrival of 5G, partly due to claims that 5G will achieve ‘greater reliability in the face of variable spectral environments’ (Oughton et al., 2021: 4). However, amongst our regional group participants, reliability was a genuine issue (both in general and with respect to 5G mobile services), with a stable network connection often experienced only intermittently. For one Gippsland participant, this was an issue when close to home (‘If I turn in my driveway and go 50 metres up the road, it drops out and then comes back in, and then drops out’) and while on the road:

I’ve got a few jobs out in Briagolong, the foothills of the Great Divide, and sometimes you get absolutely no signal whatsoever. It's a little town, you expect it to be fairly stable, but it's flaky at best. And my hometown, Heyfield, it's improving but it's not the best. (Gp 6)

Here, user expectation of basic network reliability was not matched by experience.

Reliability issues were not only experienced among our regional and rural participants. Rather, perceived issues with a lack of network reliability were common across all of the groups, regardless of composition. For our participants, network reliability issues were experienced in a number of different ways. To begin with, even among those with a strong signal, high latency – or lag – was an ongoing issue:

It's pretty patchy. … So, you’ll probably have a good signal, or you’ll have a strong signal, but there’ll just be lag. Like, it will just take forever for pages to load and render and everything else. (Gp 2)

[R]eliability is very important. That's why the company upgraded to a 5G [connection] for all employees. Because we need to do business meetings, the figures, every sentence sometimes is critical. You miss it, you miss information. So, we need a reliable network anywhere we’re travelling to, especially in regional areas. We need reliable coverage. (Gp 1)

While much of the promotion of 5G ultra-low latency mentions high-end applications (remote medicine, autonomous vehicles and tactile media applications), the second passage reveals that this is just as applicable to and important in more mundane corporate settings, where (post pandemic) strong connectivity is now expected, such as Zoom calls or Teams meetings.

For our participants, reliability issues were also expressed through reflections on experiences of mobile network fall-back, where their 5G signal reverted to a 4G connection or lower. One metropolitan-based participant explained that despite signing up to a 5G plan, at home their connection tended to default to 4G:

In Southbank where I am, I do get very intermittent 5G access in my building. I’m not sure if it's to do with the building itself or the area, but it very frequently drops to 4G and then most of the time I actually see 4G rather than 5G on my phone screen. (Gp 2)

Other participants had similar experiences, with one noting that while they had ‘supposedly bought a 5G phone […] it very rarely pops up as 5G.’ (Gp 3). Another described the reversion from 5G ‘back to 4G or 3G’ as a noticeable ‘pain point’ (Gp 1).

Finally, reliability issues were also encountered as ongoing reductions in signal quality, which meant that participants had to ‘handover’ network coverage to their home broadband wireless service:

I basically have to rely on my Wi-Fi, because even though it says 5G I’ve got like two bars […] It's not really the same thing seeing your loved ones in pixels. (Gp 3)

Across all the examples explored above there is, in response to 5G network reliability issues, a mix of bewilderment (why is this happening?), resignation (it's happening again) and frustration (it shouldn’t be happening). One discussant summarises these concerns in their response to being asked whether 5G had lived up to expectations: ‘The quality of the product I think has [lived up to expectations], but the reliability of the product hasn’t’ (Gp 5). Irrespective of what type of reliability issue they may be encountering, there was a collective desire among our participants for a more reliable experience of 5G connectivity.

And yet, a number of participants, most notably those from regional and rural areas, observed that even when 5G was only partially operational there were incremental improvements over what they would have been experiencing had they been on 4G, as we see in the following quotes:

You might have one bar on your phone and the internet might be a little bit slower but you’re still able to eventually access some sort of internet service. It does seem to be a bit more reliable than the 3 and the 4G. (Gp 5)

I suppose it's just the Google Maps, I guess. It's something that I used to find if I’d have directions I’d really struggle if there was no service, but now I can pretty much say, ‘where am I?’, and it can find me straight away with the 5G. (Gp 5)

For those with strong connectivity, the benefits were even more pronounced. As one group participant explains:

Best way to put it: if I was sitting in a café and they had a Wi-Fi connection, I wouldn’t bother asking for the password, I’d just tether off my phone. Because I know it's reliable enough nine times out of ten scenarios in a metro area. (Gp 2)

While challenges with reliability persist, the scenario described by this final participant speaks to some of the possibilities associated with improved 5G connections. Namely, the fact that mobile networks may prove to be a preferred option for consumers, a topic we now go on to discuss.

Substitutability

Regardless of where our participants were located or their level of technical capability, complaints about the performance of the NBN, Australia's wholesale broadband provider, were commonplace. The NBN was treated as a political football throughout its deployment, which meant that the original goal of providing Fibre to the Premises broadband to all Australians was eventually abandoned (Wilken et al. 2015). Given this history, the network and the wholesale company managing it are now the subject of regular complaints from Australian consumers frustrated with the poor quality of their home broadband service. So while these responses were not unexpected, what was particularly interesting was discovering the extent to which consumers chose to turn to 5G when they perceived that their NBN connection was performing poorly. This is notable because even though mobile networks have often complemented Wi-Fi and fixed broadband, 5G raises the spectre of genuine substitution, which could disrupt existing telecommunication markets and associated policy frameworks.

For a number of our participants, an unanticipated benefit of having 5G was being able to turn to their 5G connection because it was a better option in specific circumstances. One participant noted that ‘Zoom calls were a lot smoother on 5G than NBN’ (Gp 5). Another described the challenges associated with their NBN and highlighted the clear benefits of 5G as a complementary technology explaining the process as follows:

So, […] when we’re having trouble with the NBN – big mistake there – we’ll hotspot. And it's super-fast, everything gets done. (Gp1)

Others shared that they had also ‘been using it as a substitute for the NBN’ (Gp 1), that ‘when I want to download anything, I turn my Wi-Fi off completely and I just use my mobile data’ (Gp 4), and that it was ‘more reliable’ (Gp 2). One participant was even more detailed and offered a specific time frame where 5G had better performance. They explained that ‘between four to, say, nine o’clock, the internet – your home internet isn’t the best as it could be’ and that their ‘5G tends to be faster’ (Gp 4).

Another participant went further and changed their internet connection, cancelling their NBN and relying solely on 5G wireless broadband (5G Home Internet), using it alongside their 5G phone. They explained that it ‘was cheaper than NBN, so I did cancel it and I’ve got 5G home broadband’ (Gp2). Other perceived benefits included network speed, stating that it was ‘much faster than NBN’ and more flexible. You could ‘pick up and put down that modem wherever you want’ (Gp 2), rather than being tethered to the NBN box. However, given our participants’ previous discussions about the patchiness of their 5G connections, these examples were not universal, with some participants from our metropolitan small groups observing that NBN performed better than their mobile 5G (Gp 1, Gp 3). For example, one participant noted that, while their 5G mobile connection gets ‘consistently better speed’ than their NBN connection, the mobile connection is ‘just not [as] reliably consistent’ as NBN is (Gp 2).

The above examples imply that 5G is not an imminent threat to fixed broadband. Our findings present a mixed picture, with only one participant actively giving up their NBN connection, and some of our participants even preferring fixed broadband. However, along with practical discussions about how individuals handled their 5G and NBN connections, it is necessary to highlight the general frustration that our participants felt about the NBN. In some cases, this was in respect to how the network performed for them, in the context of broader promises made by politicians and policy makers. For example, one participant stated that ‘[w]e were promised this super-fast NBN and it just – it conks out and it's a pain’ (Gp 1). Another said, ‘We have got one at home, NBN, but I’d pull it out of the wall tomorrow’ (Gp 3). In the same group, a subsequent participant fervently agreed, explaining that while their NBN connection was supposed to handle six devices it could only support two devices ‘watching Netflix’ (Gp 3). For others, 5G mobile was seen as a viable option for people who had worse fixed-line connections than they did, with another stating that, ‘I would seriously probably look at promoting it as an option for people who have really shit NBN’ (Gp 2). Looking beyond people's individual circumstances, our participants’ broad dissatisfaction with the NBN suggests that 5G presents a genuine alternative option and a potential avenue for substitution.

Discussion and conclusion

Three key findings emerge from this research. First, lack of availability – patchy coverage and poor connectivity – remain live issues and pressing concerns for many consumers, especially (but not exclusively) for those in regional areas. Second, issues with network connection reliability, often experienced as a sudden loss of signal, are also a concern for many in our study. Despite this, there is evidence that 5G represents a significant performance boost over 4G, even with a weakened 5G signal. And third, strong connectivity and reliability in certain contexts raise the possibility of a shift away from NBN and Wi-Fi, with the mobile handset emerging as a genuine second option for internet connectivity. In some cases, these developments went so far as to see a consumer wholly discard their NBN connection in favour of 5G wireless broadband.

These findings carry implications for telecommunications policy and adjacent scholarly research. With respect to availability, our participants noted ongoing challenges associated with network coverage. There has been a laudable effort to improve digital inclusion across Australia, with a growing network of scholars, policymakers and politicians addressing the issue. Efforts range from conducting research in remote communities (Thomas et al., 2023) and exploring how low-income families stay connected (Dezuanni et al., 2023), to providing free broadband access to digitally excluded families with schoolchildren (School Student Broadband Initiative, 2024). There is of course a critical need to focus on the most underserved with respect to digital inclusion, and our regional small-groups’ discussions about coverage rehearse well-known challenges associated with regional connectivity (Marshall, 2024). However, our more digitally included participants in metropolitan areas still faced challenges with coverage, which was notable for two reasons. First, it highlighted the nascent state of the 5G network, with all our metropolitan participant groups raising coverage challenges. Second, it signalled that people may welcome increased infrastructure density if it supported better connectivity. This is particularly relevant for 5G technology, as much of the technology's future capability will be supported by a dense network of small cells that will be more visible in the urban environment. Our interviews suggest that some people may not be too worried about any subsequent impact on visual amenity.

In a similar fashion, network reliability emerged as another ongoing problem for our participants. Given their status as early adopters, it is notable that our participants described challenges with securing stable connections. At a minimum, it suggests that even in urban areas connectivity is not being provided to the level that Australians need. In some cases, the perceived poor performance of the 5G network as it stands was mentioned, and in other cases, 5G provided a solution to connectivity challenges with fixed broadband, a point we will soon return to. In addition to offering further context to the digital inclusion literature above, these findings may also be of relevance for other fields. While the field of network engineering features extensive discussion about reliability (e.g., Baltrūnas et al., 2014; Birolini, 2017), ¹ what is noted as largely missing from discussions of 5G roll-out to date, is consideration of consumer experiences of network reliability (Baltrūnas et al., 2014: 45). Our findings stand as one attempt at capturing and assessing ‘user-experienced reliability’ (Baltrūnas et al., 2014: 45) of the 5G network in Victoria.

However, these concerns and complaints about earlier experiences with 5G were balanced by perhaps the most consequential finding: that some people were turning to their 5G connected phone to complement, augment and in some cases, even replace their fixed-line NBN connection. While there have been discussions about whether mobile wireless would replace fixed broadband for some time, network speeds have not been strong enough for this to be seen as a viable threat (see Given, 2010; Whitacre and Rhinesmith, 2016). It would seem that with improvements associated with 5G, mobile networks appear to function as well, or in some cases better, than established forms of fixed connection, at least in the eyes of our participants. To complicate matters further, it is also worth noting that 5G fixed wireless access (5G FWA) – ‘5G Home Internet’ – products are also now being rolled out by telecommunications providers (Hill, 2024). If this trend continues it would present significant challenges for governments and the structure of the telecommunication market more generally. The Australian Government invested billions of dollars into the NBN, presuming that its subsequent financial success as a wholesaler would ensure a return on investment. As we note elsewhere, if ‘Australians decide to sign up for wireless mobile broadband instead of fixed-line broadband, it impacts the long-term funding models associated with broadband access’ (Meese and Wilken, 2024: 248). These practices also reverse existing presumptions about how people interact with mobile networks. Historically, people have used the mobile network while they were out of the home before ‘offloading’ to the fixed network and Wi-Fi when they got home. In contrast, the strategic use of 5G represents a notable ongoing reliance on the mobile network, even while in the domestic environment.

It may seem hard to square our stories of participants complaining about their 5G connection on one hand, with practices revealing that in some cases the technology represents an improvement when compared with their existing NBN connection on the other hand. However, we suggest that these outcomes simply form part of Australia's challenging relationship with telecommunications, which was recently named the least-trusted sector in the country (Roy Morgan Research, 2023). Wider discussions around 5G, which see policymakers, governments and telecommunications marketing present the new standard as a revolutionary technology, also set the stage for consumer disappointment as people have high expectations of a still-developing technology (just as they had of prior generations of mobile services). In closing, though, we argue that the most notable point from this consumer research is that regardless of technology, Australians still face ongoing challenges with connectivity, even in areas that are relatively digitally included. In such a context, a new 5G connection becomes just another tool to help a household secure an ongoing connection to the internet.