This document provides an overview of telephone and internet coverage around the world based on data from various sources. It finds that: - For the European Union and United States, coverage data comes from robust surveys like Eurobarometer and US government sources, providing reliable estimates of penetration levels. - For some other countries, estimates come from the Google Connected Consumer Survey, but these data have limitations as they relate to indeterminate populations and mobile phones only. - Overall, telephone coverage looks adequate in most countries, while internet coverage is approaching universal levels in many markets but still faces issues that require more work. - The document aims to help researchers design better international studies by understanding coverage levels and the optimal research

1. CONTENTS TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD
1
TELEPHONE AND
INTERNET COVERAGE
AROUND THE WORLD
An ESOMAR Report
By Bill Blyth and Les Taylor

2. TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD
2
COPYRIGHT © ESOMAR 2016.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system of any nature, or transmitted or made
available in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission
of ESOMAR. ESOMAR will pursue copyright infringements.
In spite of careful preparation, this publication may contain errors. ESOMAR does not accept responsibility for the consequences that may
arise as a result thereof.
ISBN 42-831-0285-1
Published by ESOMAR, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
For further information, please contact info@esomar.org.
ESOMAR, the World Association for Social, Opinion and Market Research, gathers
over 4900 individual and 400 corporate members in over 130 countries and is the
essential organisation for encouraging, advancing and elevating market research.
Codes and guidelines are available at www.esomar.org

3. CONTENTS TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD
3
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 4
FOREWORD 5
PREFACE 6
1. DATA SOURCES 7
2. PHONE COVERAGE 8
3. INTERNET COVERAGE 10
4. WHAT THIS MEANS FOR RESEARCHERS 13
5. ADDENDUM 14
Ownership of fixed line telephone in the home across the EU
Ownership of fixed and mobile phone lines across the EU
Ownership of narrowband internet across the EU
CCS Countries with known coverage issues

4. TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD INTRODUCTION
4
This is probably the most long-standing and oft-
debated question in any research project nowadays,
and particularly in multi-country studies.
Within the overall project specification, the choice of
mode of communication is almost entirely dependent
on the reach and representation of that mode. As
globally coherent and up-to-date figures for these
reach and penetration measures have not existed
to-date, these two criteria have become increasingly
subservient to “cost”, and thus was born what is
often referred to as the “race to the bottom” in terms
of price, and the ensuing impact on quality.
Is this a (too) broad statement, which doesn’t take into
account the many important commercial drivers and
methodological nuances that impact on the choice of
mode? Perhaps….but it is also true that the quality
debate has become more pointed than ever before; a
lot of online work has reverted back to telephone in
the US, and the proliferation of “convenience” samples
may well lie at the heart of the current accuracy
debate surrounding polling.
So what does all this have to do with this publication?
Well, to-date, there has never been as comprehensive
a report published on the reach and penetration of
telephone and internet, using consistent and concurrent
measures across different regions. This is what makes
this report unique, and what makes this report THE
definitive reference point for anyone wishing to decide
upon the most appropriate mode of communication
for their research project.
Compiled by Bill Blyth and Les Taylor, ESOMAR is
truly delighted to launch this report, and so please
allow me to put on record our sincere gratitude to
the following entities for granting us access to these
key statistics from their surveys:
TNS for its Eurobarometer; the US Census Bureau
for the National Health Interview Survey and the
American Community Survey; the US government
for the Current Population survey, and last, but by
no means least, Google, for providing us information
from their Connected Consumer Survey.
Without this data, and without the efforts of Bill and
Les, our profession would not have such an important
reference document – as echoed by Corinne Moy in
her foreword. Thank You.
Finn Raben
ESOMAR Director General
INTRODUCTION
FACE-TO-FACE, TELEPHONE OR ONLINE?
Finn Raben
ESOMAR Director General

5. FOREWORD TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD
5
This new ESOMAR report by Bill Blyth and Les
Taylor on the levels of telephone, mobile and internet
coverage across the globe is a welcome addition
to the researcher’s toolkit. It provides an extremely
valuable new resource for designing and conducting
international research.
The choice of methodology always presents a challenge
when doing international research. Researchers need to
assess and balance a number of factors before making
the best choice: the need for accuracy, the impact
on data quality and coverage of different methods,
the degree of population coverage provided, sample
frame availability, the bias that online or telephone
interviews might bring etc.
Within these considerations, coverage of population
is a key criterion. Consistent, accurate information
across a wide range of countries is not easy to access.
Generally such information must be drawn from a
range of sources. Measurement is often not consistent
and therefore not comparable. Recency of information
is also an issue. Disparate sources inevitably provide
information from a range of time periods.
This report overcomes many of these issues. It provides
measurement of penetration levels from reliable and
robust surveys, for 56 countries across Europe, Africa,
North America, South America, Asia and Oceana. The
main sources are the EU’s Eurobarometer and three
well-respected US government sources. For countries
outside these geographies, the report utilises a robust
commercial programme of wide repute, conducted
on behalf of Google. Importantly, the authors also
clearly state the shortcomings of this source, so that
users can make intelligent judgements around the
use of the data.
In addition to current levels, the report provides
coverage levels from prior time periods – allowing the
reader to understand the dynamic nature of access
levels in different markets.
The inclusion of both mobile and fixed line access
further allows an understanding of the feasibility of
both CATI and online research via the mobile platform.
With consumers increasingly in a state of motion, this
intelligence provides a useful guide to how best to
intercept them to maximise response rates.
This report will help researchers to design better
international studies, to make better judgements about
the optimal methodology for different countries. It will
also provide illumination around the possibilities of
implementing mobile and online research.
Corinne Moy
Director of Marketing and Data Sciences at GfK UK
FOREWORD
Corinne Moy
Director of Marketing and
Data Sciences at GfK UK

6. TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD PREFACE
6
Multi-country research is generally used for International
brands and bodies. As it is being conducted increasingly
frequently and by a broader range of companies,
ESOMAR believes it is timely to examine the coverage
of the major methods of data collection.
Currently face-to-face [FTF] interviewing holds few
basic problems other than cost. In contrast, telephone
and internet surveys have issues, even when only
basic questions such as coverage are considered.
We started our work with two aims. Firstly, to find
and document good estimates of the telephone and
internet penetrations in as many countries as possible.
Secondly, to outline our views on the implications of
those levels for researchers.
This paper is divided into four major sections. The
first covers the data sources that we have used for
our analyses. The second and third sections detail
telephone and internet coverage levels. Each of those
has sub-sections for the countries of the European
Union, the USA, and a number of other countries
spread across six continents. The fourth is a discussion
on the implications of the data for researchers. Finally,
we provide a brief summary.
This report includes information on 28 EU countries
from Eurobarometer and the USA. The credentials of
our EU and USA sources are solid, especially those
for the ACS in the USA. Hence, we are confident that
we have met our first aim for those countries.
It also includes less detailed information for 27
additional countries from the Connected Consumer
Survey (CCS). The primary purpose of the CCS is
to provide background data for Google’s Consumer
Barometer Study but not the specific estimates we
need so those data have limitations as far as this
report is concerned. The telephone data relate only to
mobile phones and in addition, both sets of data for
the FTF countries relate to indeterminate populations.
This means that we must treat the values with caution
and recommend that they be regarded as ideas of
magnitude rather than as absolutes.
Thus, we have only been partially successful for the
CCS countries and as we are unaware of any other
source that can provide verifiable estimates, we
would welcome any information on such sources.
Given our caveats above we can say for telephone
we have adequate coverage in most countries,
although work on response rates is needed.
For the internet, coverage looks like a problem that
is close to solution in many markets. However, the
other problems around internet cannot be simply
brushed aside. A lot more work is needed on those
issues.
We thank the following as without their information
our work would not have been possible:
1. Google for giving permission for us to access and
analyse its CCS data.
2. TNS for providing a CCS dataset containing the
characteristics we needed, for copies of the
Methodological Reports for the CCS countries
using face-to-face surveys, and also for answers
to our questions.
3. The European Commission and our USA data
sources for publishing their reports free of any
charge on the Internet.
Finally, we must point out that the opinions given
in this paper are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the views of ESOMAR.
Bill Blyth and Les Taylor
PREFACE
Bill Blyth
Les Taylor

7. DATA SOURCES TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD
7
European Union (EU)
Our EU data are taken from Eurobarometer (EB). This
is a cross-national survey conducted by TNS for the
European Commission. It covers each of the 28 EU
countries, and has been running in its present form
since 1973. It has waves of face-to-face interviews
with samples of adults. Typically, these waves take
place five or six times each year using a multi-stage
random probability design. The waves have 1,000
interviews in most of the EU countries. A few have
larger samples, and Luxembourg only 500 interviews.
The data we are using are taken from supplements
known as E-Communications Surveys. They usually
take place on one wave per year. Here we show
data from 2005 and 2014.
USA
We use three US data sources. These are the National
Health Interview Survey {NHIS], the Current Population
Survey (CPS) and the American Community Survey
(ACS).
The NHIS is an annual survey of some 35,000
interviews. The data are collected by the US Census
Bureau and it has a multi-stage design with CAPI
interviews. The sample is randomly selected in every
US state and the District of Columbia.
The CPS is the source of the US government’s statistics
on employment with a monthly sample size of some
56,000. It also has supplements which collect data on
related topics. We have used data from the Internet Use
supplement, which is conducted one month each year.
The ACS is a continuous survey with data collected
by the US Census Bureau. Its aim is to replace the
long-form, once in a decade, questionnaire of the
census. A multi-stage sample is used to give estimates
for all USA geographical units of 65,000+ people.
Hence, over 2.2 million interviews are conducted each
year. They are obtained by internet, mail, telephone,
and personal interviews.
Other countries
Our final source is the Connected Consumer Survey
(CCS) conducted by TNS for Google in 50+ countries,
25 of which are in the EU. The survey enumerates the
total adult population (both offline and online) in each
country. The definition of an adult is that commonly used
in each country. Most use an 18+ definition. Some use
16+, and 20+ is used in Japan. Data collection is by CATI
in some countries, and face to face using CAPI or PAPI
in others.
The data were collected in early 2014 and 2015. Each
country had a sample of 1,000 each year, except for
India, which had a target sample of 4,000.
CATI: The CATI countries use random digit dialling (RDD)
with dual frames. One frame is of landline numbers, the
other is of mobile numbers. The proportions of the sample
coming from each frame are determined by knowledge of
the population proportions and that knowledge is limited
in some countries.
A dual frame CATI method is perhaps not the most
obvious/appropriate approach to determine the proportion
of respondents that use a mobile phone. However, there
are cost considerations to be made regarding the collection
method in each country.
FTF: The FTF collection uses multi – stage probability
sampling to determine sample points. Then, random
walk methods are used to establish the households to
be contacted in the selected points. The adults to be
interviewed are selected either by a Kish grid or by the
nearest birthday.
Google and TNS let us see some internal reports that
provide details of the sample design for each country using
FTF. Those designs attempt to achieve full geographic
coverage but as they must also be practical, some do
not cover areas/regions that are ‘unsafe’, or would
deviate from the usual standards of a country. Others do
not cover areas of difficult access where costs would be
prohibitive for instance, one country used only urban areas
and another used one ‘representative’ city in each region.
Whilst this report does not provide specific details, a list
of countries with such known issues is included in the
Addendum (see page 15). This has been taken into account
when assessing their data noting that such adjustments
tend to inflate the mobile phone and internet access levels
shown by the data for those countries. ■
DATA SOURCES1.

8. TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD PHONE COVERAGE
8
Mobile is now the most common phone connection
with rates of over 85% (see Figure 2). Fixed line has
declined, sometimes rapidly, everywhere. However,
fixed line only users need to be added in a few EU
countries to achieve over 95% coverage. That level
would probably not be required for many surveys, as
it involves complex sampling methods.
USA
Figure 3 shows data for the USA from 2010 to 2013.
As in the EU, mobile is the most common type of
phone connection, with fixed line ownership falling.
Other countries
Figure 4 gives mobile phone data for the CCS countries
excluding those in the EU. This is for two reasons.
Firstly, the respondents are asked if they currently use
a mobile phone and that might mean that they might
not own a mobile phone. Secondly, all the EU countries
were surveyed using CATI and thus there is some
doubt about the definition of the percentages. They may
be percentages amongst those with phones rather than
for the total population. These may inflate the coverage
levels. As we note that the CCS values tend to be
higher than the Eurobarometer levels, we are only
providing the Eurobarometer data for the EU.
22 of the 31 countries spread across five continents
have reported levels in excess of 90%, with another
four above 85%. Only Canada shows a value below
80%. That is surprising and questionable as it is less
than its reported internet value (see later). We believe
that those are generally above the actual levels.
Some FTF countries have coverage issues. The CATI
samples all have phones. They nevertheless indicate
very high coverage levels.
EU
Figure 1 provides data for all adults in the two years
for telephone coverage of countries in the EU. It shows
values for all phones. Total telephone coverage is now
over 95% in all these countries.
PHONE COVERAGE2.
Figure 1
Ownership of any phone in the home (incl. fixed or mobile) across the EU
Figure 2
Ownership of mobile across the EU
Source: Eurobarometer E-Communications Household Surveys
Source: Eurobarometer E-Communications Household Surveys
100
90
80
70
60 2005
50
40 2014
30
20
10
0
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
CzechRepublic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
UnitedKingdom
100
90
80
70
60 2005
50
40 2014
30
20
10
0
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
CzechRepublic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
UnitedKingdom

9. PHONE COVERAGE TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD
9
Overall
Figures 2, 3, and 4 show mobile phone data for 60
countries. Most have coverage levels of more than 85%.
Thus, in general, sampling mobiles alone for surveys
would be acceptable for most day-to-day purposes.
This is a major change since 2005.There are, however,
other factors to consider that affect response rates.
These include interview length, location, and multiple
lines per individual. Others include legislation and
overseas use. ■
Figure 3
Growth in telephone ownership in the US
Telephone Ownership
2010 2011 2012 2013
Jul - Dec Jan - Jun Jul - Dec Jan - Jun Jul - Dec Jan - Jun Jul - Dec
% % % % % % %
Total Telephone 98 98 98 98 98 98 98
Total Fixed 68 66 64 62 60 58 56
Total Mobile 85 87 87 88 89 89 89
Fixed and Mobile 55 55 53 53 51 49 48
Fixed only 13 11 10 9 9 9 9
Mobile only 30 32 34 36 38 39 41
No Telephone 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Source: National Health Interview Survey
Figure 4
Penetration of mobile phone – Google CCS Countries
Continent/Country Method
2014
%
2015
%
Africa
Egypt FTF 84 82
Kenya FTF 94 NA
Nigeria FTF 93 NA
South Africa FTF 92 92
North America
Canada CATI 76 NA
Mexico FTF 76 82
South America
Argentina FTF 84 86
Brazil FTF 82 91
Asia
China FTF 99 99
Hong Kong CATI 95 96
India FTF 82 84
Indonesia FTF 88 85
Israel CATI 81 93
Japan CATI 86 88
Korea CATI 98 98
Malaysia FTF 84 96
Philippines FTF 97 87
Saudi Arabia CATI 96 91
Singapore CATI 96 96
Taiwan CATI 92 92
Thailand FTF 89 96
United Arab Emirates CATI 97 99
Vietnam FTF 93 93
Europe
Norway CATI 89 97
Russia CATI 86 95
Serbia CATI 84 90
Switzerland CATI 84 93
Turkey FTF 89 86
Ukraine FTF 91 94
Oceania
Australia CATI 82 91
New Zealand CATI 84 88
Source: Google Connected Consumer Survey

10. TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD INTERNET COVERAGE
10
EU
The EU has seen internet access growth in only
four countries with household internet penetration
of more than 60% in 2005. Now 17 have more than
70% and 13 have more than 75%. However, there is
still some way to go. If we set 85% as an acceptable
minimum for total population surveys, only five EU
countries meet that target.
USA
The USA, like the EU, has seen rapid growth from
less than 65% in 2007 to a household penetration
of about 75% in 2012. A continuation of that trend
would suggest a value of around 80% now.
Other countries
The CCS asks how often respondents access the
internet for personal reasons. That is not the same
as having internet access in the home which will be
lower.
We will cover those countries using FTF surveys
separately from those with CATI data collection.
FTF
Most of the CCS countries using FTF show large
increases in internet coverage between 2014 and
2015, although all are still below 80%. It is likely
that the coverage issues inflate some of the values.
Hence, we believe that the internet should not be
used for surveys in those countries at present.
CATI
In contrast, 10 of the 15 CCS countries using CATI have
reported levels of more than 85%. The CCS question
asks “How often do you access the internet for personal
reasons?” that could include access outside the home
or personal access at work. Thus, the coverage levels
could be over-stated so in penetration terms these
countries could be considered for internet research.
Coverage of the Internet has changed completely in
the last few years. PC based growth has continued
combined with the introduction, and rapid growth, of
various forms of smart phones and feature phones.
INTERNET COVERAGE3.
Figure 5
Growth in household internet access across the EU
Internet total
Country
2005
%
2014
%
2014 [2]
%
Austria 40 64 71
Belgium 47 76 81
Bulgaria 8 53 54
Croatia 31 70 77
Cyprus 27 63 66
Czech Republic 26 65 71
Denmark 68 88 91
Estonia 38 70 75
Finland 56 78 80
France 40 78 80
Germany 44 76 79
Greece 19 55 60
Hungary 18 55 61
Ireland 36 67 76
Italy 31 44 61
Latvia 22 70 77
Lithuania 17 60 66
Luxembourg 60 77 87
Malta 43 69 72
Netherlands 80 93 94
Poland 23 57 63
Portugal 18 47 50
Romania 11 54 59
Slovakia 14 59 62
Slovenia 45 73 80
Spain 28 56 68
Sweden 74 91 93
United Kingdom 50 76 85
2014[2] includes mobile internet connections
Source: Eurobarometer E-Communications Household Surveys
Figure 6
Growth in household internet access in the US
Internet access
2007 2009 2010 2011 2012
Internet at Home 62 69 71 72 75
Source: US Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Internet Use Supplement

11. INTERNET COVERAGE TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD
11
Overall
Growth in internet coverage seems likely to continue.
The sources of that growth, and what the current levels
mean for online research requires a short discussion.
Growth in internet use has come from two sources.
Connections via PC/laptop use have continued to
increase. This has been accompanied by rapid growth
in the use of smart/feature phones and tablets which
may, of course all be classified as handheld computers.
These appeal both to new users of computing and to
those who want to fit handheld alongside PC/laptops.
We see growth in these two sectors being driven by
different factors. Use by the classic laptop will continue
to grow, but slower than in the past. We believe use via
handheld devices will grow with a number of drivers.
Firstly, there will be purchases from members of
laptop households because of their wide range of uses.
Secondly, there will be a growth of basic machines
with limited functions. These will provide the core uses
needed to stay part of the everyday functioning society
and will attract new users in the same way that mobile
now does for phone connections worldwide.
Finally, we note that some markets appear to be going
straight to handheld device growth, skipping the PC/
laptop phase.
Demographics
The USA sample sizes permit analysis by sub groups.
The elderly, Afro Americans, those with lower education
levels, and those with lower incomes all have lower
levels of both computer use and internet access. The
USA is not typical in many ways. However, it is likely
that the elderly and those with lower incomes will
have lower levels of internet connections in most, if
not all, countries.
However, we are discussing different modes of contact,
patterns of ownership, and sub-groups. As people
age, but maintain their patterns of spending, the elderly
will become higher penetration users. There will be a
further effect as handheld platforms become cheaper
which will increase penetration in other lower use
groups. This will be of major importance, if there is
an economic slump in the next few years. ■
Figure 7
Internet access – Google CCS Countries
Continent/Country Method 2014% 2015%
Africa
Egypt FTF 39 43
Kenya FTF 51 NA
Nigeria FTF 63 NA
South Africa FTF 52 59
North America
Canada CATI 86 NA
Mexico FTF 71 71
South America
Argentina FTF 60 66
Brazil FTF 51 58
Asia
China FTF 70 73
Hong Kong CATI 73 74
India FTF 35 38
Indonesia FTF 44 44
Israel CATI 86 86
Japan CATI 89 90
Korea CATI 80 83
Malaysia FTF 64 73
Philippines FTF 67 78
Saudi Arabia CATI 88 92
Singapore CATI 84 83
Taiwan CATI 81 79
Thailand FTF 42 59
United Arab Emirates CATI 93 94
Vietnam FTF 57 73
Europe
Norway CATI 95 96
Russia CATI 87 84
Serbia CATI 60 61
Switzerland CATI 91 90
Turkey FTF 57 69
Ukraine FTF 57 58
Oceania
Australia CATI 91 91
New Zealand CATI 91 91
Source: Google Connected Consumer Survey

12. TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD INTERNET COVERAGE
12
Figure 8: USA Computer and Internet Use for Households: 2013
(In thousands. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, non-sampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)
Household characteristics
Total
households
Household with a computer
%
Household with Internet use
%
Total
%
Desktop or laptop
computer
Handheld computer With some Internet
subscription 1
With high-speed
Internet connection 1
Total households 116,291 83.8 78.5 63.6 74.4 73.4
Age of householder
15–34 years 22,331 92.1 82.1 83.3 77.7 77.4
35–44 years 20,745 92.5 86.4 80.7 82.5 81.9
45–64 years 46,015 86.8 82.7 65.2 78.7 77.6
65 years and older 27,201 65.1 62.3 31.8 58.3 56.3
Race and Hispanic origin of householder
White alone, non-Hispanic 80,699 85.4 81.4 63.4 77.4 76.2
Black alone, non-Hispanic 13,816 75.8 66.3 58.9 61.3 60.6
Asian alone, non-Hispanic 4,941 92.5 90.0 78.6 86.6 86.0
Hispanic (of any race) 14,209 79.7 70.0 63.7 66.7 65.9
Limited English-speaking household
No 111,084 84.7 79.6 64.6 75.5 74.4
Yes 5,207 63.9 54.9 43.7 51.4 50.6
Metropolitan status
Metropolitan area 98,607 85.1 79.9 65.9 76.1 75.2
Nonmetropolitan area 17,684 76.5 70.6 51.1 64.8 63.1
Household income
Less than $25,000 27,605 62.4 53.9 39.6 48.4 47.2
$25,000–$49,999 27,805 81.1 74.0 55.2 69.0 67.6
$50,000–$99,999 34,644 92.6 88.4 71.9 84.9 83.8
$100,000–$149,999 14,750 97.1 95.1 84.5 92.7 92.1
$150,000 and more 11,487 98.1 96.8 90.2 94.9 94.5
Region
Northeast 20,937 84 .1 79.9 62.8 76.8 76.0
Midwest 26,161 83 .1 77.9 61.2 73.4 72.1
South 43,399 82.2 76.0 63.2 71.7 70.7
West 25,793 86.8 82.0 67.4 78.1 77.1
Total 25 years and older 111,700 83.5 78.5 62.8 74.5 73.5
Educational attainment of householder
Less than high school graduate 12,855 56.0 47.2 36.5 43.8 42.7
High school graduate (includes equivalency) 28,277 73.9 66.9 48.5 62.9 61.4
Some college or associate’s degree 34,218 89.0 83.9 67.0 79.2 78.0
Bachelor’s degree or higher 36,349 95.5 93.5 79.3 90.1 89.4
1
About 4 .2% of all households reported household Internet use without a paid subscription. These households are not included in this table.
Note: Handheld computers include smart mobile phones and other handheld wireless computers. High-speed Internet indicates a household has Internet service type other than dial-up alone.
For a version of this table with margins of error, please see Appendix Table A at www .census .gov/hhes/computer/.
Source: U .S. Census Bureau, 2013 American Community Survey.

13. WHAT THIS MEANS FOR RESEARCHERS TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD
13
Fourthly, there are differences in the complexity of
software and its load on the hosting software.
These are just broad headings. There are also other
issues of a more detailed kind. It can be argued that
research has always had such issues in the background,
and has got used to overcoming them. However, we
would argue that their size and nature makes the
use of the internet, on its own, dangerous for more
than simplistic research. This is particularly true for
social research. It also has major implications for
research with populations who are current non-users
of computers.
The ACS shows that mixed mode designs can produce
very accurate results. However, they need sound
designs and emphasis on producing a quality product.
In the current economic situation there is a temptation
to focus on a few benefits and to overlook the negatives.
This is a matter of concern to ESOMAR. ■
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR RESEARCHERS4.
Is this picture too simple? A view over the next five
years, or even a shorter period, looking only at the
penetration for both telephone and Internet surveys,
must be positive. Telephone research using only
mobile numbers rather than fixed and mobile is likely to
become the telephone norm. However, response rates
are crucial. Understanding reasons for non-response
and actions to alleviate it requires extensive work.
Looking at using the internet for research shows a
more complex picture.
Our general assessment is as follows:
Firstly, suitable frames, or some form of contact that
enables a direct random approach, do not exist.
Secondly, there are issues with getting software to
work across all varieties of platform; desktop and
handheld and their main divisions. This may not be a
major impediment. However, researchers need to be
aware of its importance to ensure good coverage.
Thirdly, there are differences in the size of screen
and all the effects of this.

14. TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD ADDENDUM
14
Figure 10
Ownership of fixed and mobile phone lines across the EU
Country
2005
%
2014
%
Austria 51 36
Belgium 56 62
Bulgaria 36 36
Croatia 71 73
Cyprus 75 63
Czech Republic 41 15
Denmark 73 40
Estonia 45 37
Finland 46 14
France 64 79
Germany 63 83
Greece 69 77
Hungary 44 39
Ireland 66 52
Italy 60 50
Latvia 41 27
Lithuania 30 29
Luxembourg 78 81
Malta 80 82
Netherlands 87 80
Poland 46 25
Portugal 39 53
Romania 33 37
Slovakia 38 16
Slovenia 73 73
Spain 55 64
Sweden 93 95
United Kingdom 72 77
Source: Eurobarometer E-Communications Household Surveys
ADDENDUM5.
Figure 9
Ownership of fixed line telephone in the home across the EU
Country
2005
%
2014
%
Austria 70 41
Belgium 73 66
Bulgaria 67 43
Croatia 90 83
Cyprus 90 68
Czech Republic 53 15
Denmark 78 44
Estonia 58 39
Finland 57 15
France 85 86
Germany 86 91
Greece 86 82
Hungary 61 44
Ireland 80 57
Italy 67 55
Latvia 54 28
Lithuania 42 32
Luxembourg 91 85
Malta 97 92
Netherlands 96 84
Poland 63 30
Portugal 54 61
Romania 53 44
Slovakia 54 20
Slovenia 85 76
Spain 74 70
Sweden 100 98
United Kingdom 85 82
Source: Eurobarometer E-Communications Household Surveys

15. ADDENDUM TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD
15
CCS Countries with known coverage Issues
The Methodological Reports for the CCS countries
using Face to Face surveys indicate coverage issues
for the following countries:
Brazil
China
Egypt
India
Mexico
Nigeria
Philippines
Thailand
Turkey
Some of the reports are not very detailed and thus
there may also be others with coverage issues. ■
Figure 11
Ownership of narrowband internet across the EU
Country
2005
%
2014
%
Austria 17 4
Belgium 9 2
Bulgaria 2 1
Croatia 25 3
Cyprus 20 3
Czech Republic 13 1
Denmark 15 3
Estonia 4 4
Finland 13 2
France 6 2
Germany 27 7
Greece 16 3
Hungary 6 1
Ireland 29 9
Italy 17 1
Latvia 6 6
Lithuania 5 8
Luxembourg 32 12
Malta 11 0
Netherlands 19 2
Poland 7 3
Portugal 5 2
Romania 4 3
Slovakia 6 1
Slovenia 27 2
Spain 11 1
Sweden 27 2
United Kingdom 15 1
Source: Eurobarometer E-Communications Household Surveys

16. TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD CONTENTS
16
ESOMAR is the essential organisation for encouraging,
advancing and elevating market research worldwide.
www.esomar.org
ESOMAR is the essential organisation for encouraging,
advancing and elevating market research worldwide.