1. The Australian Digital Inclusion Index 2016

2. Unequal outcomes for digital inclusion across Australia…
Digital inclusion is, unsurprisingly, geographically variable. At state/territory level, Tasmania has lowest level of inclusion, while ACT has the highest, followed by Victoria(note exclusion of some remote communities from NT data).
The data also demonstrated a ‘country-capital divide’, with capital cities/large metropolitan centres typically having more digitally included residents than rural areas and smaller regional centres.
The overall ‘Capital–Country gap’ has widened marginally over time, but this trend is not consistent across the three sub-indices. Nationally, the Access gap for Capital–Country has actually narrowed marginally, while the Affordability and Digital Ability gaps are widening.
There are, however, some surprises when comparing ‘like’ regions (eg Wollongong and Geelong)
2016 scores
Australia = 54.5

3. Social and economic differences
Lowest 65+ highest Q1 – a series of steep “ social staircases”
Not surprisingly, there appears to be patterns in the data that mirror socio-economic factors more broadly (NB: No associations or correlations specifically tested at this time). In particular, low income and educational attainment look on the surface to be associated with lower inclusion (eg areas of Tasmania and South Australia, where ‘old’ census data show concentrations of low income people).
Other socio-demographic groups also proved more likely to be excluded, including seniors, people living with disabilities, indigenous groups, that consistently received lower index scores.
We need to do more here to understand what’s going on – everyone, fill out your census!

4. Changes over time…
Index scores,

5. … and across the three dimensions of the Index
Nationally, our measure of Access has improved steadily. Internet access was already high in 2014, and has increased. This reflects several simultaneous developments over the past three years: improvements to network infrastructure, the proliferation of connected consumer devices, especially smart phones, and growing demand for data as Australians spend more time, and do more things, online.
Digital ability stands out as a predictor of inclusion. That is, in regions where access was relatively strong, relative levels of digital ability affected overall inclusion measures (eg Tasmania).
We see from the graph that digital ability appears to be improving marginally over time, but off a lower base than collective access and affordability. These results reflect the rapid pace of change in digital technologies, the emergence of new applications, and the proliferation of new devices and online services. While Australians report high interest in using the internet, they also find it hard to keep up with new technologies, and relatively few users engage in more advanced activities.
Note that affordability seems to be decreasing but we need to treat this figure with care as we need to better understand relationship between consumption of online resources relative to other resources (possible trade-offs?). Internet services are becoming comparatively less expensive – but at the same time, Australians are spending more on them.

6. Changes in the Index for selected groups, 2014-2016
65+ down 6.8
Arguments around income adequacy and stagnating incomes in Australia
Should welfare payments make provision for internet costs?

7. The Australian Digital Inclusion Index 2016