This paper makes the structural case for dedicated indoor mobile infrastructure. It explains why outdoor mobile networks can no longer reliably serve modern buildings, why the operator-led model is unable to close the gap at scale, and why neutral host infrastructure is the practical, competition-neutral response. Grounded in third-party research and real estate market analysis, it’s written for regulators and operators and relevant for property owners who want to understand the economics and arguments behind the model.
What you’ll find inside: the physics of signal penetration in modern buildings, the incentive misalignment between operators and property owners, why fewer than 5% of commercial buildings in Europe have dedicated indoor mobile infrastructure today, and a set of policy recommendations for regulators.
Executive Summary
This paper is addressed primarily to national regulators and mobile network operators, and secondarily to technically informed stakeholders in the real estate and property sectors. Its purpose is to set out why indoor mobile connectivity has become a distinct infrastructure challenge, why the traditional delivery model is structurally insufficient to meet growing demand, and why neutral host infrastructure should be understood as a necessary and complementary part of the solution.
Indoor mobile connectivity has become a critical component of modern digital infrastructure. While mobile networks were historically designed to provide outdoor population coverage, the majority of digital activity now takes place inside buildings. Offices, retail environments, healthcare facilities and public spaces have become the primary locations where connectivity is required. Industry data consistently indicate that approximately 80% of mobile data traffic is generated indoors.
This shift has created a structural gap between demand and delivery. Mobile network operators continue to optimise their investments around outdoor coverage and their own subscriber base. Property owners, by contrast, must ensure that buildings function for all users, regardless of operator, across shared and tenant spaces. As a result, the party with the strongest incentive to ensure high-quality indoor connectivity rarely controls the means to deliver it.
At the same time, several structural developments are increasing the difficulty of delivering indoor connectivity from outdoor networks:
- Modern energy-efficient buildings significantly reduce signal penetration
- 5G deployment increasingly relies on higher-frequency spectrum with weaker indoor propagation
- Performance requirements have shifted from basic coverage to high-capacity, low-latency connectivity across the entire indoor environment
These factors mean that indoor connectivity can no longer be treated as an extension of outdoor coverage. It requires dedicated indoor infrastructure. Despite this, dedicated indoor deployments remain limited. According to third-party analyst research, fewer than 5% of commercial buildings across European markets currently have dedicated shared indoor mobile infrastructure in place.
The core issue is not lack of demand or willingness to invest. Property owners increasingly recognise connectivity as a fundamental building requirement and are willing to fund solutions. The challenge lies in procurement, coordination and delivery. The operator-led model is constrained by limited economic incentives, operational complexity and fragmented execution processes.
Neutral host infrastructure has emerged as a response to these structural constraints. By introducing a single entity responsible for deploying and operating shared indoor infrastructure, the model simplifies delivery, centralises complexity and better aligns incentives across stakeholders. Property owners gain a clear path to securing building-wide connectivity. Operators gain efficient access to indoor environments without full capital commitment. Users receive consistent service regardless of provider.
The model also enables a transition from project-based deployment to scalable infrastructure delivery. Instead of treating each building as a unique coordination challenge, indoor connectivity can be standardised, repeated and expanded across portfolios.
From a regulatory perspective, this has important implications. Indoor connectivity should be recognised as a distinct infrastructure layer with different economics and deployment characteristics from outdoor networks. Policy frameworks should ensure fair and non-discriminatory access, prevent coordination bottlenecks and enable scalable multi-operator solutions.
Central conclusion
Indoor mobile connectivity is now essential infrastructure. The traditional delivery model is not sufficient to meet growing demand at scale. Neutral host infrastructure provides a practical, efficient and competition-neutral approach to closing this gap and enabling reliable indoor connectivity across modern buildings.
For full report, please use download link below.