Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Encyclop DigitalDivideHilbert
Encyclop DigitalDivideHilbert
Encyclop DigitalDivideHilbert
net/publication/319588474
Digital Divide(s)
CITATIONS READS
2 3,179
1 author:
Martin Hilbert
University of California, Davis
80 PUBLICATIONS 4,069 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
entropy: Special Issue "Information Theory for Human and Social Processes" View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Martin Hilbert on 10 April 2018.
the determinants of the divide such as income, devices and fixed line telephones (with only 20%
education, age, geographic location, etc. These of the latter digitized globally). Over the next
are the conceptual attributes that describe the decade, the introduction of a myriad of digital
subjects that constitute the social network (the ICTs changed this scenario, such that, by 2007,
“nodes” of the network) (Hilbert, 2011a). Most 99.9% of global network traffic was digitized
investigations use some kind of statistical anal- (Hilbert, 2013). This leads to the question of
ysis that links independent demographic and which technology to measure in order to track
socioeconomic variable(s) with ICT-related vari- the divide: fixed lines, mobile phones, narrow
able(s) (e.g., Katz & Rice, 2002). The urban–rural or broadband internet, or, for instance, digital
distinction traditionally has been used as one television. Some studies evaluate a mix of tech-
of the main attributes of analysis (NTIA, 1995). nologies using ICT indices. The widely cited ICT
Income and education, but also age, have also Development Index (IDI) of the United Nations
been shown to have quite strong independent International Telecommunication Union (ITU)
correlations with ICT access and use. The correla- includes a weighted mix of (1) fixed-telephone
tion with education and income can be read both subscriptions, (2) mobile cellular telephone sub-
ways since these variables, as well as others, foster scriptions, (3) international internet bandwidth
ICT adoption and vice versa. Correlations with per internet user, (4) percentage of households
other variables such as sex and gender have been with a computer, (5) percentage of households
questioned as explanatory variables, since studies with internet access, (6) fixed (wired) broadband
have identified them as confounding variables subscriptions, and (7) active mobile broadband
leading to spurious correlations. The fact that (ITU, 2012). The subjectivity of this approach
fewer women use ICT than men stems from the stems from the fact that each of these technolo-
fact that women are discriminated against in gies has to be assigned a specific weight that
terms of income, education, and employment, prescribes its importance in the final mix/index.
which may be the sources of diminished ICT ITU’s IDI, for example, assigns a larger weight
usage (independent of the sex or gender of the to the last two variables of the above list (broad-
user) (Hilbert, 2011b). band) than to the first five variables. This is not
The characterization of the connected subjects without criticism. An evaluation of different
also suggests its negative complement, which ICT indices reconfirmed the observation that
sheds light on the question of why some people the weight of each ingredient predetermines the
do not connect. In this case, the attribute that is resulting average score and the final result to a
analyzed does not have to be socioeconomic or large extent. Some studies employ expert opin-
demographic, but might be an attitude or opin- ion or statistical methods to tackle the widely
ion. While cost and access prices are often cited acknowledged problem of subjectivity in the cre-
hindrances in developing countries (which are ation of such indices. These approaches attempt to
supply-side variables), these considerations have be more objective, but pass the responsibility for
less importance in more developed countries achieving this to the methodological level (based
where users frequently state that they simply have on expert sampling and the chosen clustering
no interest in, see no usefulness for, or are con- technique).
fused by the technology (WIP, 2012). A certain In the light of this challenge, other studies
level of self-reinforcing digital self-efficacy has suggest the unification of the tracking of a diverse
been detected, whereas the belief in one’s capa- set of ICT by focusing on the underlying variable
bilities and the usefulness of digital interaction that describes the informational performance
has been found to grow with prior experience, of these technologies, measured in bits (or one
outcome expectancies, and the increased use of of its equivalent on the kilo-, mega-, or giga-
digital tools. scale) (Hilbert, 2013). As such, the “bit becomes
a unifying variable enabling comparisons and
aggregations across different kinds of commu-
What kind of technology is considered?
nication technologies” (ITU, 2012, p. 182). The
Until the late 1980s, much of the ICT landscape analysis of telecommunication capacity in terms
consisted of analog storage and computational of kilobits per second also leads to rather different
D I G I TA L D I V I D E ( S ) 3
results than the tracking of devices, since different complementary factors which include skills and
devices can have vastly different informational capabilities, cultural attitudes, strategic choices,
performances. It turns out that the digital divide the institutional environment, and social reor-
measured in terms of telecommunication devices ganization, among others (Hargittai, 2002; Van
is rapidly closing, especially considering that Dijk, 2005). Thus, “this focus on social inclusion
9 out of 10 people worldwide have access to a shifts the discussion of the ‘digital divide’ from
mobile phone (ITU, 2012). While this led to the gaps to be overcome by providing equipment to
indisputable fact that everybody is better off in social development challenges to be addressed
absolute terms, some are much better off than through the effective integration of technology
others and, since inequality is a relative, not an into communities, institutions, and societies”
absolute, measure, inequality in terms of digital (Warschauer, 2004, p. 268). The analysis of
communication capacity (in data speed and impact has led to the demolition of some persis-
traffic) actually increased during the mid-2000s: tent myths. For example, it has been shown that,
while the average inhabitant of the developed on average, active ICT usage leads to intensified
world experienced some 40 kbps greater data social relations with family and friends, and not
speed than the average inhabitant in developing to general social alienation through some sort of
countries in 2001, this gap grew to over 3 mbps virtual isolation (WIP, 2012).
per capita in 2010 (Hilbert, 2013).
Strategies to drive down costs and prices may contends that existing disparities in ICT access
include more efficient regulation of the relevant and usage are the normal and unavoidable result
markets (e.g., through increased competition), of the diffusion of innovations and are main-
the provision of low-cost ICTs such as low- tained by market forces. This group of scholars
cost computers and laptops in schools, as well (e.g., Compaine, 2001) argues that the divide
as the provision of public ICT access centers. will naturally decline since ICT producers will
With regard to software, the discussion of cost, undoubtedly seek to expand their markets and
user-friendliness, adaptability, and inclusion cen- eventually find solutions to bring ICT products
ters on far-reaching issues such as open source and services to everyone. This group sees neither
software, content regulation, and open content. urgency nor a necessity for public or government
The policy-relevant discussion on the digital intervention in this process. Another school of
divide has historical roots in the expansion of thought (e.g., OECD, 2001) contends that the dig-
the fixed-line telephone network. The installation ital divide is real and persistent and that it is one
of public telephone booths at the beginning of of the most acute developmental problems among
the 1900s aimed at bridging the emerging divide and within societies. This group agrees with the
between those who were increasingly connected first group about the importance of market forces
to the incipient global communication infrastruc- in eliminating the digital divide, but proposes
ture and those who were excluded. A conceptual active public policy intervention such as promo-
distinction emerged between so-called “universal tion of competition, copyright management, tax
access” (where everyone has access to some kind and tariff incentives, the development of tech-
of communication network facility, which might nology parks, and international aid. A further
be through a public payphone or telecentres) and group of scholars is mainly informed by ethical,
“universal service” (where everyone maintains sociocultural, and political economy considera-
individualized communications services, e.g. in tions. They are critical of the notion of a discourse
households). This discussion promoted some of on digital opportunity without addressing the
the most powerful policy instruments still in place larger challenges of social, political, and cultural
to fight the digital divide: universal service funds. issues associated with inequality. In their more
These were financed initially by sector-specific moderate version, these authors argue that the
taxes collected from telecommunications opera- divide is social, not technological, in nature
tors that were then used to invest in infrastructure (e.g., Warschauer, 2004; Van Dijk, 2005). A more
and to foster the installation of public payphone extreme version of this school of thought is
booths. Many countries continue to maintain against activities or policies that create “hype”
public access funds through the collection of a about the digital divide, contending that it dis-
certain percentage of telecommunications service tracts government attention from more pressing
revenues, and some are using these funds for matters, leads to the misuse of public resources,
fixed-line expansion and to subsidize the financ- and simply increases technological dependence.
ing of the modern ICT landscape including fiber This group sees a threat in the ongoing expansion
optic backbones, mobile broadband expansion, of ICTs and argues, among other things, that the
and community telecentres. uneven global playing field will lead to a digital
heritage characterized by an ongoing trend that
promotes the commercial imperative and disre-
Digital Divide(s) – Trends over Time gards cultural heritage and traditional knowledge
and Outlook (Yu, 2006).
Over the years both utopian claims and dystopic
The digital age initially was characterized by a warnings have given way to more nuanced and
dichotomy between those who assumed it to be circumscribed understandings of the ambiguous
inherently decentralizing, globalizing, harmo- mix of effects of ICTs on social inequality. The
nizing, and empowering and those who coined emerging consensus among scholars is a mix of
the term “digital divide.” Interpreting the nature these stylized schools of thought. The impressive
and severity of the divide, several stylized schools success of mobile telephony is just one example
of thought can be distinguished (Yu, 2006). One that has shown that private markets have an
D I G I TA L D I V I D E ( S ) 5
unpredictable potential to diffuse technology. of the motorized transport revolution for nearly
The mobile phone can be considered to be the everyone, including the introduction of motor-
fastest diffusing technology in human history, cycles and scooters, and heavily subsidized sys-
having reached 9 out of 10 people worldwide in tems of public transportation (which are key
less than two decades. This has provided impor- means of transportation for large segments of
tant leapfrogging benefits for many, especially in today’s population in developing countries). It is
the least developed countries. expected that the digital revolution will follow
The continuous evolution of ICT has shown, at a route similar to the revolution in motorized
the same time, that the digital divide is a moving transport, with the difference being that the
target. Despite remarkable progress in absolute solutions provided by private sector innovation
terms, different segments move at different speeds and public intervention to access inequalities are
on the collective wave of technological change. still in the process of social creation. At the end,
The result is the epitome of what economists call constant technological progress also requires
the notorious “red queen effect” (which refers constant adjustment with regard to current tech-
to the Red Queen in Alice’s Wonderland, who nological frontiers. This distance is relative, not
explains that one has to constantly run simply absolute. Similar to the constant updating of
to stay in the same place). If one wants to catch public transport systems, the minimally accept-
up with incessant technological progress, it is able level of connectivity will constantly evolve.
necessary to run even faster, or to leapfrog certain The “bridge” over the digital divide represents
stages. This implies that everyone’s advancement the current socially acceptable distance to the
in absolute terms is not automatically accompa- ever-moving technological frontier.
nied by equality in relative terms. The empirical It is commonly accepted, furthermore, that the
evidence suggests that inequality in terms of digital divide is not only socially embedded but
technological devices has been monotonically goes beyond the assessment of the technological
decreasing over recent decades (everyone has aspects. On the one hand, this makes it part of
more technological devices), but that inequal- a larger socioeconomic, political, and cultural
ity in terms of communication capacity is not framework that may be more or less egalitarian,
(compared to an historical rather egalitarian more or less public, more or less collective, more
landscape, today some have much more telecom- or less capitalistic, and more or less commercial.
munication capacity than others) (Hilbert, 2013). These aspects frame and give rise to specific
Rapid and continuing technological change digital dynamics. On the other hand, ICTs are
in ICTs replicates the digital divide in ongo- often considered merely to be tools to selected
ing structural characteristics of societies which ends. The issue of ICT inequality inevitably raises
open up with each innovation. Once everyone an underlying question of “for what?” Any dis-
is equipped with top-notch smartphones and cussion of inequality in access and use of the tool
fiber-optic connections – the technological fron- can be meaningful only when considered in the
tier in 2014 – others will have holograms and context of a specific end (Hilbert, 2011a). ICT
brain–computer interfaces, or some other kind of can be put to a myriad of ends. Establishing a
as yet unpredictable product of the ceaseless cre- policy for fighting the digital divide and creating
ative destruction that accompanies technological digital opportunities for children will be different
innovation. than doing the same for women, for democratic
This implies that the digital divide will never participation, for health benefits, or for small and
be “closed” but that, in some cases, it may be medium-sized enterprises. In each instance, a
“bridged,” which implies a relative, not an abso- different combination of issues is raised around
lute conceptualization of the divide. For example, the question of who, with which attributes, con-
almost 150 years after the invention of the mod- nects how to what kind of ICT. There is, therefore,
ern automobile, not everyone in the world has a no single outlook on or solution to the digital
state-of-the-art car. However, over time, a mix of divide.
private sector innovation and public intervention In summary, the emerging consensus among
has yielded numerous solutions to provide a scholars is, first, that the digital divide is here
certain level of minimum access to the benefits to stay since it reopens with each new digital
6 D I G I TA L D I V I D E ( S )
innovation, and has joined the list of perma- Hilbert, M. (2013). Technological information inequal-
nent structural social characteristics of today’s ity as an incessantly moving target: The redistribution
societies. If it cannot be “closed,” it will constantly of information and communication capacities
have to be “bridged.” This calls for the establish- between 1986 and 2010. Journal of the Association for
Information Science and Technology, 65(4), 821–835.
ment of enduring and sustainable institutional
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.
mechanisms that can constantly react to the 23020/abstract
ever-changing nature of the digital divide. Sec- ITU (2012). Measuring the information society 2012.
ond, the divide is social and the complementary Geneva, Switzerland: International Telecommuni-
nature of ICTs requires a policy framework that cation Union, ITU-D. Retrieved from http://www.
goes beyond the installation of technological itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/material/2012/
infrastructure. Finally, the key question of how to MIS2012_without_Annex_4.pdf
address the digital divide is closely related with Katz, J. E., & Rice, R. E. (2002). Social consequences
the question of what specific benefit is expected of internet use: Access, involvement, and interaction.
with ICTs. Only with the answer to this question Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
in mind can the digital divide meaningfully be Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, infor-
mation poverty, and the internet worldwide. Cam-
bridged in a way that leads to real-world positive
bridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
impact. This requires a decentralized approach NTIA (1995). Falling through the net: A survey of
that works with tailor-made solutions for specific the “have nots” in rural and urban America. Wash-
challenges, but also to create cross-thematic ington: National Telecommunications and Informa-
synergies in the manifold challenges posed by the tion Administration, US Department of Commerce.
digital divide(s). Retrieved from http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/
fallingthru.html
SEE ALSO: Geographical Information Sys- OECD (2001). Understanding the digital divide
tems in the Global South; ICT4D; ICT4D and (OECD Digital Economy Papers). Paris, France:
e-Business; ICT4D and Mobile Communication; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
ICT4D, Monitoring and Evaluation of; ICT4D Development, Directorate for Science, Technology
and Participatory Design; ICT4D and Sustain- and Industry. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/
dataoecd/38/57/1888451.pdf
ability; ICT, the Environment, and Climate
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.).
Change; ICT and Gender; Mobile Money; Online New York, NY: Free Press.
Labor and Business Outsourcing; Open Content Van Dijk, J. (2005). The deepening divide: Inequality in
the information society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and social inclusion:
References Rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
WIP (2012). World internet international report 2012.
Compaine, B. M. (2001). The digital divide: Facing a cri- USC Annenberg School Center for the Digital
sis or creating a myth? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Future. Retrieved from www.worldinternetproject.
Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: net
Differences in people’s online skills. First Mon- Yu, L. (2006). Understanding information inequal-
day, 7(4). Retrieved from http://firstmonday. ity: Making sense of the literature of the infor-
org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/ mation and digital divides. Journal of Librari-
viewArticle/942/864 anship and Information Science, 38(4), 229–252.
Hilbert, M. (2011a). The end justifies the defi- doi:10.1177/0961000606070600
nition: The manifold outlooks on the digital
divide and their practical usefulness for policy-
making. Telecommunications Policy, 35(8), 715–736.
doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2011.06.012 Martin Hilbert pursues a multidisciplinary
Hilbert, M. (2011b). Digital gender divide or techno- approach to understanding the role of infor-
logically empowered women in developing coun- mation, communication, and knowledge in the
tries? A typical case of lies, damned lies, and statis- development of complex social systems. He holds
tics. Women’s Studies International Forum, 34(6), doctorates in communication, and in economics
479–489. doi:16/j.wsif.2011.07.001 and social sciences, and has been an Economic
D I G I TA L D I V I D E ( S ) 7
Affairs Officer of the UN Secretariat for 15 years. Wired, Washington Post, and BBC, among others.
His has published in the academic journals He has provided technical assistance to heads
Science, Psychological Bulletin, and World Devel- of state, legislators, diplomats, companies, and
opment, and has featured in popular magazines NGOs in more than 20 countries.
such as Scientific American, The Economist, WSJ,