‘Digital Divide’ Reconsidered: A Country- and Individual-Level Typology of digital inequality in 26 European Countries Boris Kragelj, University of Ljubljana.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
European productivity, lagged adjustments and industry competition Mary OMahony, Fei Peng and Nikolai Zubanov University of Birmingham.
Advertisements

Measuring ICT in Europe – EITOs experience Axel Pols German Association for IT, telecom and new media (BITKOM) European Information Technology Observatory.
1 Measuring ICT4D: ITUs Focus on Household and Individual Market, Economics & Finance Unit Telecommunication Development Bureau.
Autocorrelation and Heteroskedasticity
T HE ROLE OF GOVERNMENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS IN THE ICT PROMOTION DEVELOPMENT.
ADePT Automated DECs Poverty Tables Michael Lokshin, Zurab Sajaia and Sergiy Radyakin DECRG-PO The World Bank.
September 2009 Committed to Connecting the World 1 Information Session on Gender Issues 1 September 2009, ITU Headquarters, Geneva ITU work in the area.
1 COMM 301: Empirical Research in Communication Lecture 15 – Hypothesis Testing Kwan M Lee.
Random effects as latent variables: SEM for repeated measures data Dr Patrick Sturgis University of Surrey.
Technology Diffusion and Income Inequality: how augmented Kuznets hypothesis could explain ICT diffusion? 30 May 2005 Miguel Torres Preto.
Correlation and regression Dr. Ghada Abo-Zaid
Regional Trajectories to the Knowledge Economy: A Dynamic Model IKINET-EURODITE Joint Conference Warsaw, May 2006.
0 Productivity Growth and Convergence in Vietnamese Agriculture Wendi Sun Rockland Trust Company March 25 th, 2015.
The role of inflation expectations in the New EU Member States Student: DORINA COBÎSCAN Supervisor: PhD. Professor MOISĂ ALTĂR Bucharest, 2010 THE ACADEMY.
Analysis of farm household incomes in OECD countries Master in Agricultural, Food and Environmental Policy Analysis Université catholique de Louvain University.
Economic Turbulence & Employment Trends Dr. Fragouli Evaggelia (HARVARD, COLUMBIA) Lecturer, University of Athens, Dpt. of Economics & Senior R&D Dpt.
Integrating ICT questions in the work of National Statistical Organizations Harsha de Silva Lead Economist, LIRNEasia WDR Expert Forum.
16 October 2003 Romania, ICT and FP5,6 1 Romanian Experiences Related to ICT and the Fifth Framework Program of the EU and Expectations From the Sixth.
Lecture 12 World Income Inequality: past, present and future.
Lorelei Howard and Nick Wright MfD 2008
Linear Regression/Correlation
E-government and older people in Ireland North and South Online government and offline older people? Professor Irene Hardill Centre for Civil Society and.
Why Has Income Inequality in Thailand Increased? An Analysis Using Surveys.
The new HBS Chisinau, 26 October Outline 1.How the HBS changed 2.Assessment of data quality 3.Data comparability 4.Conclusions.
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2012 Chapter 10: Location effects, economic geography and regional policy... the Community shall aim at reducing disparities.
Paul Dourgnon*, Yasser Moullan** * Institute for Research and Information in Health Economics (IRDES), France **University of Oxford.
Situation of disabled persons living in the EU countries Wojciech Bąba European Economic Integration Chair Cracow University of Economics.
Gender, math and equality of opportunities Marina Murat Giulia Pirani University of Modena and Reggio Emilia Productivity, Investment.
ICEG E uropean Center Factors and Impacts in the Information Society: Analysis of the New Member States and Associated Candidate Countries Pál Gáspár.
The East European Consumer Paul Flatters, CEO, The Future Foundation June 2007.
STATE OF ART IN GREEK FAMILY
ESPON Open Seminar Evidence and Knowledge Needs for the Territorial Agenda 2020 and EU Cohesion Policy Godollo, Hungary June 2011 Federica Busillo.
CJT 765: Structural Equation Modeling Class 7: fitting a model, fit indices, comparingmodels, statistical power.
Venture Capital and the Finance of Innovation [Course number] Professor [Name ] [School Name] Chapter 4 The Cost of Capital for VC.
1 The role of inter-regional benchmarking in the policy-making process Brussels, 20 June 2006 Karsten Gareis, empirica, Bonn.
HOW TO WRITE RESEARCH PROPOSAL BY DR. NIK MAHERAN NIK MUHAMMAD.
SICENTER Ljubljana, Slovenia TRACKING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MDGs WITH TIME DISTANCE MEASURE Professor Pavle Sicherl SICENTER and University of Ljubljana.
Prof. Božidar Tepeš Faculty of Teacher Education, University of Zagreb Mr. Ivan Mijić Diplomatic Academy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration,
Presented by: Edoardo Pizzoli - HANDBOOK ON RURAL HOUSEHOLD, LIVELIHOOD AND WELL-BEING: STATISTICS ON RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND AGRICULTURE HOUSEHOLD INCOME.
Various topics Petter Mostad Overview Epidemiology Study types / data types Econometrics Time series data More about sampling –Estimation.
1 The Labour Market Integration of Immigrants in OECD Countries on-going work for OECD's Working Party 1, EPC presented by Sébastien Jean (OECD) Workshop.
Examining Relationships in Quantitative Research
All Hands Meeting 2005 The Family of Reliability Coefficients Gregory G. Brown VASDHS/UCSD.
Global Event on Measuring the Information Society Geneva, 27 – 29 May 2008 Session 4: Measurement of ICT impact Broadband impacts on Internet use.
Parallel Workshop Session: Workshop 2.1 Accessibility Patterns, Transport Infrastructure ESPON Internal Seminar 2012 “Territorial Development Opportunities.
Household Economic Resources Discussant Comments UN EXPERT GROUP MEETING 9 September 2008 Garth Bode, Australian Bureau of Statistics.
1 Use of aggregated SPPIs as a macro economic indicator of inflationary pressure: country views and possible future STESWP work Richard McKenzie & Seppo.
How free markets create & divide wealth
Discrepancy between Data and Fit. Introduction What is Deviance? Deviance for Binary Responses and Proportions Deviance as measure of the goodness of.
1 ICT s and Gender – evidence from OECD and non OECD countries Seminar Paris, 24 January 2007 Desirée Van Welsum - Pierre Montagnier.
Week 2 INCOME DISTRIBUTION AND POVERTY ERIDICATION Topic 3:
How free markets create & divide wealth
Croatia: Living Standards Assessment Promoting Social Inclusion and Regional Equity Zagreb, February 14, 2007 A World Bank Study.
PHYSICAL INVESTMENT, HEALTH INVESTMENT AND ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS IN AFRICA By Abiodun O. Folawewo and Adeniyi Jimmy Adedokun Department of Economics,
Trends in attitudes toward income equalization across European countries. Do changing economic conditions matter? Renzo Carriero and Marianna Filandri.
PROVIDING INTERNATIONAL COMPARABILITY OF POVERTY ASSESSMENTS
JRC – Territorial Development Unit Petros Gkotsis 08 March 2017
Luciano Gutierrez*, Maria Sassi**
Council Working Group on International Internet-Related Policy Issues Geneva, 3 February 2017 Measuring the Information Society Report 2016 Esperanza.
INCOME DISTRIBUTION AND POVERTY ERADICATION
A new perspective on global carbon emission inequality: insights from global interpersonal carbon Gini-index Presented By: Tianpeng Wang Institute of Energy-Environment-Economic,
A new perspective on global carbon emission inequality: insights from a global interpersonal carbon Gini-index Presented By: Tianpeng Wang Institute of.
CJT 765: Structural Equation Modeling
At 2017 OWSD-BIU International Conference
Maritime and rural development statistics
Economics and Policy of Innovation
Chapter 10: Location effects, economic geography and regional policy
New East Asian Alliances
GDP and beyond Robin Lynch
GDP and beyond Robin Lynch
Presentation transcript:

‘Digital Divide’ Reconsidered: A Country- and Individual-Level Typology of digital inequality in 26 European Countries Boris Kragelj, University of Ljubljana Elmar Schlüter, University of Bielefeld

DIGITAL DIVIDE (definition) First definition: difference between technology „haves“ and technology „have not´s” Inequalities between individuals, households, companies and regions regarding the access and use of new ICT resources (specially internet): Inequalities in access to ICT (first level d. divide) Inequality in skills of using the internet (second level d. divide) Inequalities in ICT penetration between courtiers: Inequalities in access, use and skills to use ICT between more and less developed countries (global digital divide)... is empirical concept that refers to new form of social inequality, regarding the access and/or use of ICT and/or skills of using ICT (specially internet) at various levels of society.

DIGITAL DIVIDE (existing studies) Studies on d. divide varies considering: Definition and level of d. divide under study (first level, second level d. divide) Unit and societal level of study (individual, global) Dependent variables for measuring d. divide (internet access, internet use, skill of internet use...) Independent variables for describing risk groups (gender, age, education, income....) Different methods of analysis applied or different indexes of inequality developed (absolute dif., relative dif., time distance, digital divide index...) Various approaches increased scholarly understanding of the ‘Digital Divide’ in many ways, but they all study only certain view of the whole Digital Divide phenomena even though they might be strongly interrelated.

Aim of the present study Extending previous work on d. divide with integration of different analytical perspectives on digital divide studies within one single (multilevel latent class) model to examine their interrelations linking individual and societal level of analysis on both (first and second) levels of digital divide to simultaneously provide for individual and country level typology of groups regarding the inequality in access, use and skills of internet use Explaining differences between these types of digital inequality according to relevant independent socio-demographic and agregate- level variables (on individual and societal level of analysis respectively) MODELINGIndividual level of analysisSocietal level of analysis First level dig. divide diff. in access and use of internet between individuals diff. in access and use of internet between countries Second level dig. divide diff. in skills of using internet between individuals diff. in skills of using internet between countries

Research questions: Which groups of digital inequality (regarding internet access, use and skills) can be observed on the individual level, and how this groups differ across different (groups) of countries? What are individual and country-level determinants for individual and country affiliations to the (individual and societal) groups of digital inequality?

Research model: Multilevel latent class model C country Country - level Individual - level C ind Access Int. use Int. skills Gender Age Educat. Income Gini coef. % GDP for ICT exp. Tel. Price. Step 1 Step 4 Step 2 Step 3

Data and variables Individual level variablesCountry level variables Source: SIBIS and SIBIS+ Statistical indicators benchamrking the information society (EU/FP5 project) Source: EUROSTAT – structural indicators

Results: individual level (3) latent class solution

individual level (3) latent class solution with covariates

group level (5) latent G-class solution

(5) latent G-class solution with G-level covariates

Summary & Conclusion Using standard digital divide variables (access, use, skills of internet use) within “multilevel latent class framework” we have identified three types of classes regarding digital (in)equality on individual level, whose distribution differ significantly among five group of EU countries:  On ind. level we identified classes of (1) heavy users and (2) out of home moderate users (this group is different than anticipated!!!), and (3) non-users, the last group is presenting dig. divide risk group (52% of population) mainly represented by female, older, low income and low education individuals.  On soc. level we identified five groups of countries: (1) ICT leaders, (2) above ICT average (both mainly north of Europe), (3) ICT average (south of Europe), (4) lagging behind (eastern European block + Greece) and special one country (EE) class, with high share of out of home users and equal distribution between all individual level classes. These groups of countries varies considerably regarding structural characteristics such as ICT expenditure as % of GDP, gini coefficient and telecom prices  Risk group of countries that are lagging behind (presenting 1/3 of European countries) are characterised by high telecom prices and high income inequality, showing that much of digital divide in Europe can be explained with traditional forms of social inequality and poor national telecomm. policies (blocking free market, low investment in ICT...)  Digital divide as a new form social inequality is not new at all. Once again it only reflects already well established traditional forms of social inequality in Europe through a new perspective: risk groups of individual and countries are staying the same.

Methodological Discussion We found ML-LC to be useful when simultaneously searching for typologies and groups on two different levels of analysis, and at the same time explaining and predicting these group membership with other relevant (individual and structural) variables... Still (as the method is not so well documented) we run into several problems:  non convergence: some multilevel models with less DF converge better than one with more DF! How to explain this? Are results valid at all?  Choosing the best model solution: -Why at some point (when you move from individual level to multilevel framework, or when you introduce covariates) the model fit is considerably worse than before, even though you catch more variance and reduce the classification error? -How can you test if one model fits significantly better that the other in multilevel framework where you don’t have chi square statistics to conduct chi square test? -Should one search for best multi level solution before or after introducing covariates on individual level, and with or without covariates on structural level?  Choosing non-parametric vs. parametric multilevel model: In our case we have modelled existence of groups of countries on aggregate level (non parametric ML-LC???), but our solution showed that these groups actually (almost) show an order from leaders to laggards in terms of ICT! Would it be better to model a continuum (factor) of countries on the aggregate level (parametric ML LC, and how to test for this?

Thank you for attention! ‘Digital Divide’ Reconsidered: A Country- and Individual-Level Typology of digital inequality in 26 European Countries Boris Kragelj, University of Ljubljana Elmar Schlüter, University of Bielefeld

group level (5) latent G-class solution with macro level covariates