A Framework for Evaluating the Impact of High-Bandwidth Internet Provision and Use on Digital Literacy and Social Life Outcomes in Australia

  • S. Dane
  • M. Fahey
  • C. Mason
  • R. van der Zwan
  • J. Tucker
  • D. Bradford
  • C. Griffith
Conference paper


In this paper we present a framework for evaluating the social impact of high-bandwidth Internet provision and use in Australia. High-bandwidth Internet will be provided through a national broadband network to be rolled out gradually and which began in 2011. The framework is based around four key aspects: (1) identifying provision of the national broadband network as an intervention, (2) specification of important outcomes, (3) understanding the behavioural link between intervention and outcomes and (4) conduct of high-quality population-based empirical research. The framework is sufficiently flexible that it can be adapted and applied to various regions of Australia and, depending on the appropriate focus, to the conduct of different types of studies. It is hoped that, by focusing attention on the human behavioural link between high-bandwidth Internet provision and individual outcomes in the general community, we will be able to identify ways of promoting social inclusion and other benefits through appropriate use of the national broadband network .





Australian Centre for Broadband Innovation


Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation


Geographic information system


Geocoded National Address File


High-bandwidth Internet


National broadband network


Regional Initiative for Social Innovation and Research


Theory of Planned Behaviour


  1. 1.
    Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behaviour. Organ Behav Hum Dec 50:179–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ajzen I (2006) Constructing a TPB questionnaire: conceptual and methodological considerations. http://people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.measurement.pdf. Accessed 12 Jul 2012
  3. 3.
    Armitage CJ, Conner M (2001) Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. Br J Soc Psychol 40:471–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bagozzi RP (2007) The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. J Assoc Inf Syst 8:244–254Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen HY (2003) A note on the prospective analysis of outcome-dependent samples. J Roy Statist Soc Ser B 65:575–584CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Choudrie J, Dwivedi YK (2004) Towards a conceptual model of broadband diffusion. J Comput Inform Tech 12:323–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Choudrie J, Dwivedi YK (2006) Investigating factors influencing adoption of broadband in the household. J Comput Inform Syst 46:25–34Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dane SD, Stenner K, Hobman EV (2012) Predicting subjective well-being: material versus psycho-social needs. Report EP 124179. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci 35:982–1002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Diener E, Emmons R, Larsen J, Griffin S (1985) The satisfaction with life scale. J Pers Assess 49:71–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dwivedi YK, Choudrie J, Brinkman WP (2006) Developing a survey instrument to examine consumer adoption of broadband. Ind Manag Data Syst 106:700–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dwivedi YK, Williams MD, Lal B, Mustafee N (2010) An analysis of literature on consumer adoption and diffusion of information system/information technology/information and communication technology. Int J Electron Gov Res 6:58–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fishbein M, Cappella JN (2006) The role of theory in developing effective health communications. J Commun. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00280 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hayes R (2011) Valuing broadband benefits. Institute for a broadband-enabled society. University of Melbourne, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jeyaraj A, Rottman JW, Lacity MC (2006) A review of the predictors, linkages, and biases in IT innovation adoption research. J Inf Technol. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jit.2000056 MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leeuw F, Vaessen J (2009) Impact evaluations and development: NONIE guidance on impact evaluation. World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McLachlan GJ, Peel D (2000) Finite mixture models. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Montano DE, Kasprzyk D (2008) Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behaviour, and the integrated behavioural model. In: Glanz K, Rimmer BK, Viswanath K (eds) Health behavior and health education. Theory, research, and practice, 4th edn. Jossey-Bass, San Franciso, CAGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mundfrom DJ, Shaw DG, Lu Ke T (2005) Minimum sample size recommendations for conducting factor analyses. Int J Test 5:159–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rogers EM (1995) Diffusions of innovations. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ryff CD (1989) Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol 57:1069–1081CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Silva L (2007) Post-positivist review of technology acceptance model. J Assoc Inf Syst 8:255–266Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Skrondal A, Rabe-Hesketh S (2004) Generalized latent variable modeling. Chapman and Hall, Boca Raton, FLCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified approach. Mis Quart 27:425–477Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Venkatesh V, Davis FD, Morris MG (2007) Dead or alive? The development, trajectory and future of technology adoption research. J Assoc Inf Syst 8:267–286Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A (1988) Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol 54:1063–1070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Williams T (2011) Connecting communities: the impact of broadband on communities in the UK and its implications for Australia. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd, SydneyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Dane
    • 1
  • M. Fahey
    • 1
  • C. Mason
    • 1
  • R. van der Zwan
    • 2
  • J. Tucker
    • 2
  • D. Bradford
    • 1
  • C. Griffith
    • 1
  1. 1.Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)KenmoreAustralia
  2. 2.Southern Cross UniversityCoffs HarbourAustralia

Personalised recommendations