IMHO we aren't seeing these developing countries as early adopters of mass IPv6 or having local-only services move to IPv6-only due to lack of IPv4 addresses.
Like, I fully understand that they would be feeling much more pressure to migrate, but I don't see that this pressure working; and if even they aren't pushed to IPv6 then why would the western world do so?
https://subnettingpractice.com/ip-address-allocation-by-coun...
The allocation of ipv4 addresses are not fair. These developing Countries deserve the right to host and develop their own tech industries.
Already India is mandating the use of ipv6 by the end of the year.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/...
China too
http://www.cac.gov.cn/2021-07/23/c_1628629122784001.htm
The rest of the world should enable ipv6 if they wish to easily capture this growing market.
Well, that's the way to solve this chicken-and-egg problem - the people who need IPv6 the most will switch to it, perhaps by a mandate from the top, and then it will make practical sense for others to switch as well to ensure interoperability.
The final thing that would actually make IPv6 happen would be for India and China to ban IPv4 internally. Then companies would move, and fast.
Do you have additional data on this? Carrier grade nat equipment or hardware that supports tunneling ipv4 over ipv6 seems like it would be a very small percentage of a consumer network buildout cost.
For developing countries where such equipment can be costly and unscalable it does matter.