Global Digital Divide - at the HICSS 2010

2,189 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, News & Politics
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,189
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
284
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Financial investment -- additive index with seven (7) components from World Bank: 1) Telecommunications revenue (as a percentage of GDP); 2) Telecommunications investment (as a percentage of revenue); 3) Research & development spending (as a percentage of GDP); 4) ICT expenditures (as a percentage of GDP); 5) Computer, communications and other services (as a percentage of service exports); 6) High-technology exports (as a percentage of manufacturing exports); and 7) Natural log of international Internet bandwidth (bits per second per person).Political freedom -- additive index with two (2) components from Freedom House: 1) Press freedom index; and 2) Civil liberties index.
  • Global Digital Divide - at the HICSS 2010

    1. 1. Explaining the Global Digital Divide: The Impact of Public Policy Initiatives on DIGITAL OPPORUNITY and ict development<br />David J. Yates & Girish J. “Jeff” Gulati<br />Bentley University<br />Anas Tawileh<br />Cardiff University<br />
    2. 2. Motivation<br />Bridging the digital divide is an important concern for policymakers.<br />No previous large-N studies of the digital divide have assessed the impact of public policy initiatives that should enable and expand access to information and communication technologies (ICTs).<br />We explore the impact of national policy initiatives on digital opportunity and ICT access and use.<br />
    3. 3. Research Questions<br />Do national policy initiatives to promote information and communication technologies (ICTs) increase a nation’s digital opportunity?<br />Do public policy initiatives to advance information and communication technologies increase a nation’s ICT access and use?<br />
    4. 4. Research Hypothesis 1<br /><ul><li>National policy initiatives to promote information and communication technologies (ICTs) increase a nation’s digital opportunity.
    5. 5. Nations that (1) have a national telecommunications regulatory authority and (2) have competition to provide basic telecommunication services and (3) have competition to provide mobile services and (4) encourage financial investment in ICTs are the most likely to have increased digital opportunity.</li></li></ul><li>Research Hypothesis 2<br />National policy initiatives to advance information and communication technologies (ICTs) improve a nation’s ICT access and use.<br /><ul><li>Nations that (1) have a national telecommunications regulatory authority and (2) have competition to provide basic telecommunication services and (3) have competition to provide mobile services and (4) encourage financial investment in ICTs are the most likely to have more inclusive ICT access and use.</li></li></ul><li>Dependent Variables and Models<br /><ul><li>Model 1:
    6. 6. Digital Opportunity Index (DOI) — ITU 2007
    7. 7. Multiple regression analysis using four (4) national policy variables
    8. 8. Model 2:
    9. 9. ICT Development Index ICT Access and Use indicators (IDI ICT Access & Use) — ITU 2009
    10. 10. Multiple regression analysis using same four policy variables</li></li></ul><li>Independent Variables for Both Models<br /><ul><li>Policy Variables (1) – (4)
    11. 11. National regulatory authority (NRA) from ITU ICT Eye = { 0, 1 for Yes }
    12. 12. Competition for providing basic telecommunication services = { 0, 0.5, 1 for full competition }
    13. 13. Competition for providing mobile telecommunication services = { 0, 0.5, 1 for full competition }
    14. 14. Financial investment additive index with seven (7) components from World Bank
    15. 15. Control Variables
    16. 16. Affluence, Education
    17. 17. Urbanization
    18. 18. Democracy, Political freedom</li></li></ul><li>Impact of a National Regulatory Authority <br />Have no NRA:<br /> Average DOI = 0.36<br /> Top 3 = Japan, Taiwan & Israel<br />Have an NRA:<br /> Average DOI = 0.41<br /> Top 3 = S. Korea, Denmark & Iceland<br />Digital Opportunity Index<br />Have an NRA<br />Have no NRA<br />
    19. 19. Impact of Competition (Basic Svcs) <br />Monopoly:<br /> Average DOI = 0.29<br /> Top 3 = Israel, Antigua & Jamaica<br />Partial Competition :<br /> Average DOI = 0.34<br /> Top 3 = Barbados, Bahamas & UAE<br />Full Competition:<br /> Average DOI = 0.48<br /> Top 3 = S. Korea, Japan & Denmark<br />Digital Opportunity Index<br />Monopoly<br />Partial Competition<br />Full Competition<br />
    20. 20. Impact of Competition (Mobile Svcs) <br />Monopoly:<br /> Average DOI = 0.33<br /> Top 3 = Bahamas, Brunei & Dominica<br />Partial Competition :<br /> Average DOI = 0.38<br /> Top 3 = Denmark, Austria & Belgium<br />Full Competition:<br /> Average DOI = 0.43<br /> Top 3 = S. Korea, Japan & Iceland<br />Digital Opportunity Index<br />Monopoly<br />Partial Competition<br />Full Competition<br />
    21. 21. Impact of Financial Investment <br />Bottom 1/3 :<br /> Average DOI = 0.26<br /> Top 3 = Taiwan, Bahamas & St. Kitts<br />Middle 1/3 :<br /> Average DOI = 0.39<br /> Top 3 = Spain, Slovenia & Portugal<br />Top 1/3 :<br /> Average DOI = 0.53<br /> Top 3 = S. Korea, Japan & Denmark<br />Digital Opportunity Index<br />Financial Investment Index<br />
    22. 22. Policy Initiatives and Digital Opportunity<br />Partially supports Research Hypothesis 1<br />Competition and financial investment have a positive impact on digital opportunity<br />Has greatest significance for <br />digital opportunity<br />Unstandardized coefficients. Significance: *** = 0.01, ** = 0.05, * = 0.1<br />
    23. 23. Impact of a National Regulatory Authority <br />Have no NRA:<br /> Average ICT A & U = 1.98<br /> Top 3 = Japan, Taiwan & Israel<br />Have an NRA:<br /> Average ICT A & U = 2.75<br /> Top 3 = Luxembourg, Sweden & Netherlands<br />IDI ICT Access & Use<br />Have an NRA<br />Have no NRA<br />
    24. 24. Impact of Competition (Basic Svcs) <br />Monopoly:<br /> Average ICT A & U = 1.44<br /> Top 3 = Israel, Kuwait & Uruguay<br />Partial Competition :<br /> Average ICT A & U = 1.71<br /> Top 3 = UAE, Brunei & Qatar<br />Full Competition:<br /> Average ICT A & U = 3.50<br /> Top 3 = Luxembourg, Sweden & Netherlands<br />IDI ICT Access & Use<br />Monopoly<br />Partial Competition<br />Full Competition<br />
    25. 25. Impact of Competition (Mobile Svcs) <br />Monopoly:<br /> Average ICT A & U = 1.65<br /> Top 3 = Brunei, Kuwait & Costa Rica<br />Partial Competition :<br /> Average ICT A & U = 2.34<br /> Top 3 = Denmark, Austria & Belgium<br />Full Competition:<br /> Average ICT A & U = 2.94<br /> Top 3 = Luxembourg, Sweden & Netherlands<br />IDI ICT Access & Use<br />Monopoly<br />Partial Competition<br />Full Competition<br />
    26. 26. Impact of Financial Investment <br />Bottom 1/3 :<br /> Average ICT A & U = 1.26<br /> Top 3 = Taiwan, Kuwait & Venezuela<br />Middle 1/3 :<br /> Average ICT A & U = 2.30<br /> Top 3 = Spain, Slovenia & UAE<br />Top 1/3 :<br /> Average ICT A & U = 4.16<br /> Top 3 = Luxembourg, Sweden & Netherlands<br />IDI ICT Access & Use<br />Financial Investment Index<br />
    27. 27. Policy Initiatives and IDI ICT Access and Use<br />Partially Supports Research Hypothesis 2<br />Competition in basic services and financial investment have a positive impact on ICT access and use<br />Has greatest significance for <br />ICT access and use<br />Unstandardized coefficients. Significance: *** = 0.01, * = 0.1<br />
    28. 28. Impact of Policy Initiatives for both Models<br />Unstandardized coefficients. Significance: *** = 0.01, ** = 0.05, * = 0.1<br />
    29. 29. Implications and Conclusions<br />Nations that (2,3) have competition to provide telecommunication services and (4) encourage financial investment in ICTs are the most likely to have increased digital opportunity.<br />Nations that (2) have competition to provide telecommunication services (i.e., basic services) and (4) encourage financial investment in ICTs are the most likely to have more inclusive ICT access and use.<br />Having a national regulatory authority does not appear to impact digital opportunity and diffusion of ICTs for a nation’s citizens.<br />
    30. 30. Future Work<br />Expand and refine policy variables<br />For example, understand and analyze impact of national regulatory authority policies and regulations<br />Improve model for telecommunications competition<br />Consider additional outcome variables<br />Alternative digital divide metrics<br />Diffusion of emerging information and communication technologies<br />Adoption of e-government<br />

    ×