Advertisement

Defining the Geographic and Policy Dynamics of the Digital Divide

  • Melissa R. Gilbert
  • Michele Masucci
Living reference work entry

Abstract

This chapter reviews the interrelationships between the digital divide and social inequality by examining the geographic dimensions associated with access to ICTs. We call attention to the National Broadband Map as a framework for examining the geographic depiction of ICT access and reflect on both what is included and excluded within this framework. While a geographical analysis is implicit in both the definition of the digital divide as well as the policy responses to overcome the problems associated with the divide, the nature of the analysis is impoverished and has resulted in failed, or at least insufficient, policies. Finally, we suggest the social justice ramifications of failing to track the continued growth of ICT inequality as technological advances continue to emerge and policies reflect overly simplified notions of digital access. We argue that a policy agenda that reflects the aim to redistribute and restructure the system by which social and cyber inequalities are intertwined might focus on the more revolutionary and visionary aspects of cyber technology itself and would require new institutional arrangements and the participation of marginalized people.

Keywords

Digital divide Internet of things National broadband map Social inequality and ICTs ICT geographies 

References

  1. Alawadhi, S., Aldama-Nalda, A., Chourabi, H., Gil-Garcia, J. R., Leung, S., Mellouli, S., Nam, T., Pardo, T. A., Scholl, H. J., & Walker, S. (2011). Building understanding of smart city initiatives. In Electronic government (pp. 40–53). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, K. J. (2016). NWSA initiative tackles Wikipedia gender gap. Women in Higher Education, 25(5), 8–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ballano, S., Uribe, A. C., & Munté-Ramos, R. À. (2014). Young users and the digital divide: Readers, participants or creators on Internet? Comunicación y Sociedad, 27(4), 147.Google Scholar
  4. BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce). (2016). News release dated July 27, 2016 entitled: “Gross domestic product by State: First quarter 2016”. Available at: http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/gdp_state/qgsp_newsrelease.htm. Accessed 27 Aug 2016.
  5. Bonomi, F., Milito, R., Zhu, J., & Addepalli, S. (2012). Fog computing and its role in the Internet of things. In Proceedings of the first edition of the MCC workshop on mobile cloud computing. (pp. 13–16). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  6. Brinkman, D. L. (2016). Benefiting from the Internet. Do type of device and demographic background matter?: A comparison of achieved Internet effects between devices and user groups. University of Twente. Available at: http://purl.utwente.nl/essays/69711
  7. Bucher, T. (2012). Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media & Society, 14(7), 1164–1180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bunyan, S., & Collins, A. (2013). Digital exclusion despite digital accessibility: Empirical evidence from an English city. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 104(5), 588–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carayannis, E. G. (2010). Innovation, technology, and knowledge management. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. CEA (Council of Economic Advisers). (2015). Mapping the digital divide. Available online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/wh_digital_divide_issue_brief.pdf
  11. CEA (Council of Economic Advisers). (2016). The digital divide and economic benefits of broadband access. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/page/files/20160308_broadband_cea_issue_brief.pdf
  12. Choi, N. G., & DiNitto, D. M. (2013). The digital divide among low-income homebound older adults: Internet use patterns, eHealth literacy, and attitudes toward computer/Internet use. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(5), e93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crampton, J. W. (2003). The political mapping of cyberspace. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Damant, J., & Knapp, M. (2015). What are the likely changes in society and technology which will impact upon the ability of older adults to maintain social (extra-familial) networks of support now, in 2025 and in 2040? London: Government Office for Science Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/463263/gs-15-6-technology-and-support-networks.pdf. Accessed 28 Aug 2016.Google Scholar
  15. Davidson, C. M., Santorelli, M. J., & Kamber, T. (2012). Toward an inclusive measure of broadband adoption. International Journal of Communication, 6, 2555–2575.Google Scholar
  16. DiMaggio, P., & Garip, F. (2012). Network effects and social inequality. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 93–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C., & Shafer, S. (2004). From unequal access to differentiated use: A literature review and agenda for research on digital inequality. In Social inequality (pp. 355–400). Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  18. Dodge, M., & Kitchin, R. (2000). Mapping cyberspace. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Eggleston, K., Jensen, R., & Zeckhauser, R. (2002). Information and communication technologies, markets, and economic development. In The global information technology report 2001–2002: Readiness for the networked world (pp. 62–74). New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Elder, L., Emdon, H., Fuchs, R., & Petrazzini, B. (Eds.). (2013). Connecting ICTs to development: The IDRC experience. Ottawa: Anthem Press. Available at: http://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/bitstream/10625/52228/1/IDL-52228.pdfGoogle Scholar
  21. ESA and NTIA. (Economics and Statistics Administration and National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (2010). Exploring the digital nation: Home broadband and Internet adoption in the United States. Washington, DC: United States Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
  22. ESA and NTIA. (Economics and Statistics Administration and National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (2011). Exploring the digital nation: Computer and Internet use at home. Washington, DC: United States Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
  23. FCC (Federal Communications Commission). (2014). National broadband map. Accessed 18 July 2016, updated last in June 2014. http://www.broadbandmap.gov/about
  24. Ferrari, A. (2012). Digital competence in practice: An analysis of frameworks. Sevilla: JRC IPTS.Google Scholar
  25. Ferrari, A., Cachia, R., & Punie, Y. (2009). Innovation and creativity in education and training in the EU member states: Fostering creative learning and supporting innovative teaching. European Communities. Available at: http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC52374_TN.pdf
  26. Firth, L., & Mellor, D. (2005). Broadband: Benefits and problems. Telecommunications Policy, 29(2), 223–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Friemel, T. N. (2016). The digital divide has grown old: Determinants of a digital divide among seniors. New Media & Society, 18(2), 313–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gilbert, M. (2010). Theorizing digital and urban inequalities: Critical geographies of ‘race,’ gender and technological capital. Information, Communication & Society, 13(7), 1000–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gilbert, M. R., & Masucci, M. (2006). The implications of including women’s daily lives in a feminist GIScience. Transactions in GIS, 10(5), 751–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gilbert, M. R., & Masucci, M. (2011). Information and communication technology geographies. Kelowna: Praxis (e) Press. http://www.praxis-epress.org/ICT/ictgeographies.pdf
  31. Gilbert, M. R., Masucci, M., Homko, C., & Bove, A. A. (2008). Theorizing the digital divide: Information and communication technology use frameworks among poor women using a telemedicine system. Geoforum, 39(2), 912–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Graham, M. (2011). Time machines and virtual portals: The spatialities of the digital divide. Progress in Development Studies, 11(3), 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Graham, M., & Haarstad, H. (2013). Transparency and development: Ethical consumption through Web 2.0 and the Internet of things. In Benkler Y. (Author) & Smith M. & Reilly K. (Eds.), Open development: Networked innovations in international development (pp. 79–112). MIT Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qf6pq.8.
  34. Gurstein, M. (2013). Community innovation and community informatics. The Journal of Community Informatics, 9(3).Google Scholar
  35. Haight, M., Quan-Haase, A., & Corbett, B. A. (2014). Revisiting the digital divide in Canada: The impact of demographic factors on access to the internet, level of online activity, and social networking site usage. Information, Communication & Society, 17(4), 503–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Halford, S., & Savage, M. (2010). Reconceptualizing digital social inequality. Information, Communication & Society, 13(7), 937–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hargittai, E. (2001). Second-level digital divide: Mapping differences in people’s online skills. arXiv preprint cs/0109068.Google Scholar
  38. Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 276–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation”. Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hargittai, E., & Hinnant, A. (2008). Digital inequality differences in young adults’ use of the Internet. Communication Research, 35(5), 602–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hargittai, E., & Shaw, A. (2015). Mind the skills gap: The role of Internet know-how and gender in differentiated contributions to Wikipedia. Information, Communication & Society, 18(4), 424–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Heart, T., & Kalderon, E. (2013). Older adults: Are they ready to adopt health-related ICT? International Journal of Medical Informatics, 82(11), e209–e231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2013). Distinct skill pathways to digital engagement. European Journal of Communication.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323113499113.
  44. Hill, B. M., & Shaw, A. (2013). The Wikipedia gender gap revisited: Characterizing survey response bias with propensity score estimation. PLoS One, 8(6), e65782. Available at: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0065782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Intel. (2016). A guide to the Internet of things. Website accessed 28 Aug 2016 at http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/internet-of-things/infographics/guide-to-iot.html
  46. ITU (International Telecommunications Union) and Cisco. (2016). Harnessing the Internet of things for global development. A contribution to the UN Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development. Available at: https://www.itu.int/en/action/broadband/Documents/Harnessing-IoT-Global-Development.pdf
  47. Jaeger, P. T., Bertot, J. C., Thompson, K. M., Katz, S. M., & DeCoster, E. J. (2012). The intersection of public policy and public access: Digital divides, digital literacy, digital inclusion, and public libraries. Public Library Quarterly, 31(1), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kiser, A. I., & Washington, R. (2015). The information gap amongst the generations and the implications for organizations. International Journal of Digital Literacy and Digital Competence, 6(2), 36–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kitchin, R. (2014). The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal, 79(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kitchin, R., & Dodge, M. (2011). Code/space: Software and everyday life. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Klein, M., & Konieczny, P. (2015). Gender gap through time and space: A journey through Wikipedia biographies and the “wigi” index. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.03086. Available at: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.03086v1.pdf
  52. Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. (2007). Gradations in digital inclusion: Children, young people and the digital divide. New Media & Society, 9(4), 671–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lupton, D. (2014). Critical perspectives on digital health technologies. Sociology Compass, 8(12), 1344–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. MacAulay, M., & Visser, R. (2016). Editing diversity in: Reading diversity discourses on Wikipedia. Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology, (9).  https://doi.org/10.7264/N36M3541
  55. Masucci, M. (2008). Digital divide and E-health implications for E-collaboration research. In N. Kock (Ed.), Encyclopedia of E-collaboration (pp. 153–158). Hershey: Information Science Reference.  https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-000-4.ch024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Masucci, M. M., Homko, C., Santamore, W. P., Berger, P., Mcconnell, T. R., Shirk, G., Menapace, F., & Bove, A. A. (2006). Cardiovascular disease prevention for underserved patients using the Internet: Bridging the digital divide. Telemedicine Journal & E-Health, 12(1), 58–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Menking, A., & Erickson, I. (2015). The heart work of Wikipedia: Gendered, emotional labor in the world’s largest online encyclopedia. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 207–210). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  58. Mertens, A., Rasche, P., Theis, S., Wille, M., Schlick, C., & Becker, S. (2015). Influence of mobile ICT on the adherence of elderly people with chronic diseases. In Human aspects of IT for the aged population. Design for everyday life (pp. 123–133). Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Morris, J. B. Jr. (2016). First look: Internet use in 2015. Retrieved from http://www2.ntia.doc.gov/first-look-internet-use-2015
  60. Nam, T., & Pardo, T. A. (2011). Smart city as urban innovation: Focusing on management, policy, and context. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on theory and practice of electronic governance (pp. 185–194). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  61. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (1995). Falling through the net: A survey of the “have nots” in rural and urban America. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.Google Scholar
  62. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (1998). Falling through the net II: New data on the digital divide. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.Google Scholar
  63. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (1999). Falling through the net: Defining the digital divide. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.Google Scholar
  64. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (2000). Falling through the net: Toward digital inclusion. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.Google Scholar
  65. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (2002). A nation online: How Americans are expanding their use of the Internet. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.Google Scholar
  66. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (2004). A nation online: Entering the broadband age. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.Google Scholar
  67. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (2007). Networked nation: Broadband in America 2007. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.Google Scholar
  68. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (2009). Current population survey (CPS) Internet use 2009. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.Google Scholar
  69. NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). (2011). Expanding Internet usage. Washington, DC: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.Google Scholar
  70. NTIA and ESA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration and Economics and Statistics Administration). (2013). Exploring the digital nation: America’s emerging online experience. Washington, DC: United States Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
  71. Ohemeng, F. L. K., & Ofosu-Adarkwa, K. (2014). Overcoming the digital divide in developing countries: An examination of Ghana’s strategies to promote universal access to information communication technologies (ICTs). Journal of Developing Societies, 30(3), 297–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Olphert, W., & Damodaran, L. (2013). Older people and digital disengagement: A fourth digital divide? Gerontology, 59(6), 564–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Park, E. A., & Lee, S. (2015). Multidimensionality: Redefining the digital divide in the smartphone era. Info, 17(2), 80–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Pearce, K. E., & Rice, R. E. (2013). Digital divides from access to activities: Comparing mobile and personal computer Internet users. Journal of Communication, 63(4), 721–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Pew Research Center. (2015). The smartphone difference. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-2015/
  76. Prieger, J. E. (2015). The broadband digital divide and the benefits of mobile broadband for minorities. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 13(3), 373–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Reagle, J., & Rhue, L. (2011). Gender bias in Wikipedia and Britannica. International Journal of Communication, 5(21), 1138.Google Scholar
  78. Rosenberger, S. (2014). ICTs and development, what is missing? (No. 203). Bochum: Institut fuer Entwicklungsforschung und Entwicklungspolitik, Ruhr-Universitaet Bochum.Google Scholar
  79. Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media & Society, 6(3), 341–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Servon, L. J. (2008). Bridging the digital divide: Technology, community and public policy. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  81. Sparks, C. (2013). What is the “digital divide” and why is it important? Javnost-The Public, 20(2), 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Srinuan, C., Srinuan, P., & Bohlin, E. (2012). An analysis of mobile Internet access in Thailand: Implications for bridging the digital divide. Telematics and Informatics, 29(3), 254–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Stephens, M. (2012). Featured graphic: Digital divide: The geography of Internet access. Environment and Planning A, 44, 1009–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Stephens, M., & Poorthuis, A. (2015). Follow thy neighbor: Connecting the social and the spatial networks on Twitter. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 53, 87–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Sujarwoto, S., & Tampubolon, G. (2016). Spatial inequality and the Internet divide in Indonesia 2010–2012. Telecommunications Policy, 40(7), 602–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Thornham, H., & Cruz, E. G. (2016). [Im]mobility in the age of [im]mobile phones: Young NEETs and digital practices. New Media & Society.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816643430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tran, M. C., Labrique, A. B., Mehra, S., Ali, H., Shaikh, S., Mitra, M., Christian, P., & West, K., Jr. (2015). Analyzing the mobile “digital divide”: Changing determinants of household phone ownership over time in rural Bangladesh. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth, 3(1), e24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. van Deursen, A., & Van Dijk, J. (2011). Internet skills and the digital divide. New Media & Society, 13(6), 893–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. van Deursen, A. J., & Van Dijk, J. A. (2014). The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society, 16(3), 507–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2012). The evolution of the digital divide – The digital divide turns to inequality of skills and usage. In J. Bus, M. Crompton, M. Hildebrandt, & G. Metakides (Eds.), Digital enlightenment yearbook 2012 (pp. 57–78). Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  91. Van Dijk, J. A., & van Deursen, A. J. (2014). Digital skills: Unlocking the information society. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  92. Vroman, K. G., Arthanat, S., & Lysack, C. (2015). “Who over 65 is online?” Older adults’ dispositions toward information communication technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 156–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Wagner, C., Garcia, D., Jadidi, M., & Strohmaier, M. (2015). It’s a man’s Wikipedia? Assessing gender inequality in an online encyclopedia. arXiv preprint arXiv:1501.06307.Google Scholar
  94. Warf, B. (2001). Segueways into cyberspace: Multiple geographies of the digital divide. Environment and Planning. B, Planning & Design, 28(1), 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Warf, B. (2013). Contemporary digital divides in the United States. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 104(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Warschauer, M., & Matuchniak, T. (2010). New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in access, use, and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 179–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. WEF (World Economic Forum). (2016). The global information technology report 2016. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GITR2016/WEF_GITR_Full_Report.pdf
  98. Wells, R. B. (2009). Fog of cloud computing: Fourth amendment issues raised by the blurring of online and offline content. The University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law, 12, 223.Google Scholar
  99. White, P., & Selwyn, N. (2013). Moving on-line? An analysis of patterns of adult Internet use in the UK, 2002–2010. Information, Communication & Society, 16(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Yu, R. P., Ellison, N. B., McCammon, R. J., & Langa, K. M. (2015). Mapping the two levels of digital divide: Internet access and social network site adoption among older adults in the USA. Information, Communication & Society, 19, 1–20.Google Scholar
  101. Zook, M. A., & Graham, M. (2007). Mapping DigiPlace: Geocoded Internet data and the representation of place. Environment and Planning. B, Planning & Design, 34(3), 466–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geography and Urban StudiesTemple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations