Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Figures
Introduction
Literature Review
Data and Methods
Results
References
All Topics
Sociology
Science and Technology Studies

Digital divide and sustainable development of Ukrainian regions

Profile image of Liubov ZharovaLiubov Zharova

2022, Problems and Perspectives in Management

https://doi.org/10.21511/PPM.20(1).2022.29
visibility

…

description

15 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Digital inequality of the regions is considered one of the topical issues of sustainable development provision in less developed countries. It can be defined as a gap between the geographical areas regarding the access opportunities to ICT and the Internet use for different activities. The goal of the study is to identify the link between the regional digital divide and the level of economic development in Ukraine and generalize international practices of digitalization promotion in lagging regions. Methodologically, various statistical methods (analytical grouping, variation, and correlation analysis) were used. The most appropriate and available data for assessing the digital divide referred to the State Statistical Service of Ukraine’s survey on Internet users in Ukrainian regions. The study revealed an overall shrink in the variation coefficient of the share of Internet users (from 36.4% in 2010 to 10.2% in 2019). However, the variation coefficients for the share of interacting ...

Figures (9)
Source: State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). Table 1. Socio-economic and digital development of Ukrainian regions, 2019
Source: State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). Table 1. Socio-economic and digital development of Ukrainian regions, 2019
Source: Statista (2021b), State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). he accountability of institutions, reliability of da- a, cybersecurity policies, etc. Statista (2021a) offers Digital Competitiveness ranking by country evalu- ted on the basis of a country’s readiness to sustain ligital technologies and their implementation at nanufacturing companies and public institutions. The statistical analysis allowed identifying trends in digital differentiation between regions and the factors that determine it. Moreover, recommen- dations for national and regional digital develop- ment policy were developed.
Source: Statista (2021b), State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). he accountability of institutions, reliability of da- a, cybersecurity policies, etc. Statista (2021a) offers Digital Competitiveness ranking by country evalu- ted on the basis of a country’s readiness to sustain ligital technologies and their implementation at nanufacturing companies and public institutions. The statistical analysis allowed identifying trends in digital differentiation between regions and the factors that determine it. Moreover, recommen- dations for national and regional digital develop- ment policy were developed.
Source: Cisco (2020), Chakravorti et al. (2020), Statista (20214). Note: * State represents the current state of digitalization; Momentum represents the pace of digitalization over time. Table 2. Ukraine in various world digital indices compared to other countries
Source: Cisco (2020), Chakravorti et al. (2020), Statista (20214). Note: * State represents the current state of digitalization; Momentum represents the pace of digitalization over time. Table 2. Ukraine in various world digital indices compared to other countries
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). Note: “—” no data.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). Note: “—” no data.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). Note: * A — Share of Internet users in regional population; B — Share of Internet users with the purpose of interaction with public authorities; C— Share of Internet users with the purpose of study and education.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). Note: * A — Share of Internet users in regional population; B — Share of Internet users with the purpose of interaction with public authorities; C— Share of Internet users with the purpose of study and education.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). Table 6. Analytical grouping by industrial sector value added per capita
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). Table 6. Analytical grouping by industrial sector value added per capita
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). sector for digital technologies implementation. It makes it possible to assess the impact on regional digitalization (Table 7). Correlation of relations with analytical grouping by GDP per capita demonstrates a weak link be- tween the level of income in the regions and the evel of digital penetration. This indicates the generally low level of digital technology develop- ment and multidimensional spatial inequality in Ukraine.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). sector for digital technologies implementation. It makes it possible to assess the impact on regional digitalization (Table 7). Correlation of relations with analytical grouping by GDP per capita demonstrates a weak link be- tween the level of income in the regions and the evel of digital penetration. This indicates the generally low level of digital technology develop- ment and multidimensional spatial inequality in Ukraine.
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). In that case, one will observe that, with the deep- ening of industrial processing and the expansion of the industrial sector in the structure of regional gross added value, the average share of those who use the Internet increases. The maximum level of users (81.4%) is typical for Kyiv city, and in the third and fourth groups, the average level of users is 76.4% and 77.3%. In addition, the industrial sec- or value added per capita also explains nearly 50% of the intergroup variation of Internet users with the purpose of study and education. At the same time, the variation in the number of pupils of sec- ondary schools per 100,000 population is low. The influence of industrial sector development on the capabilities of e-governance and digital means of interaction with the government in the regions is weak (only by 32.6%). The generally low-income level and property stratification within the regions (coefficient of variation is 37.3%) is also the reason for unequal access to digital technologies. AS all CAdHIple, slsptliicant GUlerences i the country’s mobile Internet coverage can be con- sidered. Even though the 4G technology has long been launched in Ukraine, the country lags many years behind the high-income countries by mo- bile Internet coverage. Comparing the density of coverage with France, it is evident that Ukraine does not reach 20% of the level of this European country (Nekrasov, 2018). The smallest coverage is observed in the northern, central, southwestern, and southeastern regions. The western regions are most covered by the mobile Internet - Lviv, Ivano- Frankivsk, Zakarpattia, and Chernivtsi. The low population density in rural areas, as well as the complexity of frequency distribution procedures, are the barriers to the slow promotion of mobile Internet communications. Table 7. Analytical grouping by manufacturing value added per capitz
Source: Authors’ calculations based on the State Statistical Service of Ukraine (n.d.). In that case, one will observe that, with the deep- ening of industrial processing and the expansion of the industrial sector in the structure of regional gross added value, the average share of those who use the Internet increases. The maximum level of users (81.4%) is typical for Kyiv city, and in the third and fourth groups, the average level of users is 76.4% and 77.3%. In addition, the industrial sec- or value added per capita also explains nearly 50% of the intergroup variation of Internet users with the purpose of study and education. At the same time, the variation in the number of pupils of sec- ondary schools per 100,000 population is low. The influence of industrial sector development on the capabilities of e-governance and digital means of interaction with the government in the regions is weak (only by 32.6%). The generally low-income level and property stratification within the regions (coefficient of variation is 37.3%) is also the reason for unequal access to digital technologies. AS all CAdHIple, slsptliicant GUlerences i the country’s mobile Internet coverage can be con- sidered. Even though the 4G technology has long been launched in Ukraine, the country lags many years behind the high-income countries by mo- bile Internet coverage. Comparing the density of coverage with France, it is evident that Ukraine does not reach 20% of the level of this European country (Nekrasov, 2018). The smallest coverage is observed in the northern, central, southwestern, and southeastern regions. The western regions are most covered by the mobile Internet - Lviv, Ivano- Frankivsk, Zakarpattia, and Chernivtsi. The low population density in rural areas, as well as the complexity of frequency distribution procedures, are the barriers to the slow promotion of mobile Internet communications. Table 7. Analytical grouping by manufacturing value added per capitz

Related papers

Regional Patterns Of Third-Level Digital Inequality In Russia: An Analysis Of Google Trends Data
Marina Gribok

Geography, Environment, Sustainability, 2023

Digital inequality extends beyond mere access to technology. This study explores the concept of third-level digital inequality, which describes the situation where individuals or communities have access to technology and the Internet, have required skills, but still struggle to use it effectively. However, there is currently a lack of data and methods for assessing thirdlevel digital inequality. To address this gap, this study aimed to evaluate it on a regional scale by analyzing the popularity of Google search queries. In proposed method, the data are categorized into three groups: everyday services, education, science, and technology, and entertainment. On this basis authors calculated the index of Internet usage efficiency. The study's findings revealed the territorial patterns of digital inequality in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Regions in North Caucasus and Siberia showed low Internet usage efficiency, while regions in the Urals and Central Russia had high Internet usage efficiency. The study's methodology is quick, cost-effective, and easy to implement, but it also has limitations. The method only considers the popularity of certain search queries and does not consider the frequency or duration of internet usage, or the specific websites or services accessed, and does not consider individual-level factors that may influence internet usage patterns. The authors emphasize the importance of addressing not only differences in Internet access but also the lack of technology skills, digital literacy, and motivation among certain groups. They conclude that public policies aimed at enhancing internet skills can reduce digital inequality and improve the quality of life of the population.

View PDFchevron_right
Digital Inequality as a Prerequisite of Socio-Economic Differentiation of Society
Галина Січкаренко

Fìnansovo-kreditna dìâlʹnìstʹ: problemi teorìï ta praktiki, 2021

The aim of the article is to study the current state of digital inequality, factors of influence and trends in its transformation as a component of socioeconomic differentiation of the population in the world and in Ukraine in order to to make optimal management decisions. The theoretical significance of the article is that it was generalized and systematized a prerequisite of socioeconomic inequality-digitalization. Socioeconomic factors of digital inequality are highlighted. The contradictory nature of digital wealth is shown. The interrelation between economic growth and key indicators of digital inequality is revealed. Based on statistical indicators, the problems of digital inequality and the degree of its relevance for Ukraine are highlighted. In the article digital inequality is seen as a dynamic threat that simultaneously extends to all spheres of society, broad sections of the population and has quantitative and qualitative characteristics. It is proved that the processes of digitalization, on which serious hopes were placed, do not lead to the equalization of economic potential and social structure, but are able to intensify the level of digital inequality. There are various direct and inverse interactions between digital inequality and the level of the socioeconomic development in society. Not only the spread of information and communication technologies and socioeconomic restrictions on access to them affect the economy and the labor market. In turn, the level of information and digital inequality affects all spheres of society and economic development of the country. The results of the study reveal the relationship between economic growth, key indicators and factors of digital inequality, allow for constant monitoring of the level of digital differentiation of Ukrainian society in order to identify and eliminate bottlenecks at different levels of governance.

View PDFchevron_right
Exploring Digital Inequalities in Russia: an interregional comparative analysis
Anna Gladkova, Massimo Ragnedda

Online Information Review, 2020

This paper contributes to the literature by proposing an analysis of digital inequalities in Russia that focuses on two aspects hitherto under explored: the inter-regionality (by comparing and contrasting eight federal districts) and the multidimensionality of digital inequalities (by taking into account the three levels of digital divide). Therefore, the aim is to address the phenomenon of digital divide in Russia by discussing the three levels of the digital divide (access / skills / benefits) in a comparative and interregional perspective. This paper uses secondary data for its analysis, including both national (e.g. the total number of daily Internet users in Russia) and more regionalized data (related to particular federal districts of Russia). The choice of data sources was determined by an attempt to provide a detailed and multifaceted coverage of all three levels of the digital divide in Russia, which is not limited to the access problem only. For this purpose, we are using and re-elaborating various reports about the development of the Internet and ICTs in Russia prepared by national and international organizations to cover the first level of the digital divide. To shed light upon the second and third levels of the digital divide, we discuss digital literacy report (2018), the report on Internet openness index of Russian regions (2017), and the report on the digital life index of the Russian regions (2016). Finally, in the attempt to map out the key directions of the state policy aimed at decreasing digital inequality in Russia, on both federal and regional levels, we analyze the most important regional and national policy measures to foster digitalization such as the Digital Russia program, the Digital Government program, the Program of Eliminating Digital Inequality in Russia. We consider this study to be both a first exploration and a baseline of the three level digital divides in Russia. The paper shows how the level of socioeconomic development of the federal districts, as well as a number of objective factors (distance/isolation, urbanization level, availability of infrastructure and costs for building new infrastructure, etc.) have impact upon digitalization of the regions. As a result, several federal districts of Russia (Central, Northwestern, and, in a number of cases, Ural and Volga federal districts) more often than others take leading positions in rankings, in terms of degree of Internet penetration, audience numbers, use of e-services, etc. This correlation however is not universal as we will show, and some regions lacking behind in terms of access can be booming in terms of digital literacy or other factors, like it happened with Far Eastern federal district for example. All in all, our research showed that digital inequality in Russia is still on place and will require more time for complete elimination, even though current state and public initiatives are being actively developed. This paper will bring to light meaningful insights into the three levels of digital divides in Russia. Based on a multilevel (three levels of digital divide) and multi-sectional approach (the interplay of different types of inequalities), this paper contributed to overall better understanding of the digital inequalities phenomenon in Russia. It also allowed for a comparative interregional perspective, which has been missing in most papers on digital inequalities in Russia so far.

View PDFchevron_right
The Three Levels of Digital Divide in East EU Countries
Hanna Kreitem

World of Media, 2018

This article brings to light significant insights into the three levels of digital divide in the particular setting of East EU. It discusses and analyses indicators related to the spread of and use of Internet (first level of digital divide), the level of digital skills (second level of digital divide) and digital services used by citizens in East EU countries to improve their quality of life (third level of digital divide). The article specifically focuses on the third level of digital divide, by analysing, on a macro level, three tangible outcomes, namely eGovernment service completion and use, eHealth in terms of seeking health related information and interacting with practitioners online, and e-commerce. Data from Eurostat, including digital scorecard and other reports, showed clear discrepancies among countries of East Europe, as well as distinct difference between some countries and overall European Union averages, suggesting the existence of two groups of countries, one as high performance in terms of services offered and high growth in terms of use, and the second is at medium performance in terms of services offered, and low in terms of growth and use.

View PDFchevron_right
Assessing the pattern between economic and digital development of countries
TIAGO OLIVEIRA

Information Systems Frontiers, 2016

Although Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) are today deeply embedded with almost every aspect of our lives, they are still far from achieving the tremendous potential in terms of innovation and development opportunities that they are recognised to have (European Commission, 2013; United Nations, 2014). This achievement is limited by the existence of disparities in the rates of adoption and use of these technologies the so-called digital divide. Digital divides exist both between and within countries, among the different socioeconomic groups of the population, and are known as international and domestic digital divides, respectively. With this Dissertation we intend to contribute to a better awareness and understanding of ICT asymmetries across countries, i.e., the global digital divide. In order to do so, we develop five studies. The first of these (chapter two) is a literature review of

View PDFchevron_right
Urban Versus Regional Divide: Comparing and Classifying Digital Divide
Enrico Ferro

2005

This paper presents a comparative study on digital divide between a region and its main metropolitan area. The exercise shows how barriers to technology access and usage may vary in terms of both nature and intensity. The paper also proposes a taxonomy of the different types of digital divides that may be present inside a region.

View PDFchevron_right
Use Of The Internet By The Romanian Citizens. An Empirical Study Of Digital Gaps Between Regions
ANIELA BALACESCU

Annals - Economy Series, 2018

New IT technologies have generated changes in the economic and social system, and the rapidity with which countries adopt these technologies is essential for increasing economic and social competitiveness in the future. Thus, the measuring of ITC technologies integration in the economy and society is essential, and at the level of the EU-28 countries there is a Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) that shows how a country evolves digitally compared to others. The 2017 report shows significant disparities within the EU28 regarding digitization. Although Romania ranks 2nd in the EU28 for high-speed broadband subscriptions, it is ranked the last in the EU28 from the point of view of Internet usage. In this paper, we will limit to identifying the regions in Romania with the highest percentages of Internet usage and commenting on the main causes underpinning the regional gaps. The research method used was cluster analysis that identified 3 clusters in terms of Internet usage. The dat...

View PDFchevron_right
Socio-Spatial Dimensions of Digital Divide
Mariusz Palak

Humanities and Social Sciences quarterly

The development of the network has irreversibly changed people's lives and non-users from the network is considered to be digitally excluded. The term digital divide is defined as: inequalities in an access to the Internet, the intensity of its use, knowledge of how to search for information, the quality of connection and social support to help in using the Internet, as well as inequalities in the ability to assess the quality of information and the diversity of the use of the network. The authors of this article will present the results of a sociological survey, the issues of which concerned the availability of Internet in homes. The analysis focuses on two dimensions of the lack of access to the network: social and spatial. The study was conducted in 2009 on a random sample of 727 adult residents of Rzeszów and municipalities bordering the city. The sample was successfully selected thanks to the help of employees of the Podkarpackie Voivodship Office in Rzeszów. In order to obtain the most reliable results during the sampling, the respondents were subjected to the place of residence, so that the research would cover the residents of all Rzeszów settlements and towns bordering the city administratively to neighboring municipalities.

View PDFchevron_right
ICT Development Index and the Digital Divide
Anteneh Ayanso

한국경영정보학회 학술 …, 2011

The disparity in access to information and communications technologies (ICTs), often referred to as "digital divide", has received significant attention among policy makers and academics around the world. In particular, the need for continuous monitoring of the ICT adoption rates by communities in different economies has been one of the top priorities in various forums. In order to address this need, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a United Nation agency, proposed a single, comprehensive ICT Development Index (IDI) in 2009. IDI is designed to consolidate useful information from previous measurement indices. One of its main uses, as illustrated by ITU, is to measure the magnitude of the digital divide and how it is evolving over time. The objective of this paper is to supplement the methodologies applied in ITU's project as well as in previous research in measuring and analyzing the digital divide. Using the data set and the statistical processes applied in the construction of IDI, we employ a cluster-based methodology to analyze the global and regional digital divide and provide additional insights.

View PDFchevron_right
Digital Divide and the Opportunity Dimension of Economic Inequality: The Case of the Republic of Moldova
Rodica Pisica

International Journal of Management, Knowledge and Learning

Purpose: to analyse how the Republic of Moldova has been coping with digital inequality during the pandemic and the extent to which the digital divide has impacted the economic inequality in the country, as well as to understand what leads to digital disparities. Study design/methodology/approach: In this research, the level of preparedness of the Moldovan households for the digitalization needs that occurred as a result of the pandemic and the both ways impact of the opportunity dimension of economic inequality and digital divide have been analysed, as well as how the lack of ICT utilities deprived certain social layers of economic opportunities during the pandemic. Concurrently, the causes of digital divide in the Republic of Moldova have been analysed to get a deeper understanding of the digital discrepancies that resulted in lack of economic opportunities. For this purpose, the data on the access to mobile phones and computers, notebooks, tablets of Moldovan households and the ...

View PDFchevron_right

References (45)

  1. Beynon-Davies, P., & Hill, R. (2007). Evaluating a digi- tal divide index in a regional context. Journal of Systems and Information Technol- ogy, 9(1), 46-59. http://dx.doi. org/10.1108/13287260710817683
  2. Chakravorti, B., Chaturvedi, R. S., Filipovic, C., & Brewer, G. (2020). Digital in the time of Covid. Trust in the Digital Economy and Its Evo- lution Across 90 Economies as the Planet Paused for a Pandemic. The Fletcher School at Tufts University. Retrieved from https://sites.tufts. edu/digitalplanet/files/2021/03/ digital-intelligence-index.pdf
  3. Chmeruk, G., & Kralich, V. (2018). Tsyfrova nerivnist v Ukraini: anal- iz ta shliakhy podolannia [Digital inequality in Ukraine: analysis and ways to overcome]. Molodyi vchenyi -Young Scientist, 7(59), 289-293. (In Ukrainian). Re- trieved from http://dspace.ubs.edu. ua/jspui/handle/123456789/1460
  4. Cisco. (2020). Cisco Global Digital Readiness Index 2019 (White Pa- per). Retrieved from https://www. cisco.com/c/dam/en_us/about/csr/
  5. Deineko, L., & Tsyplitska, O. (2020). Rozvytok promyslovosti v konteksti vyrivniuvannia mizhrehionalnykh ekonomichnykh dysproportsii [Industrial development in the context of the alignment of inter- regional economic disparities]. Proceedings of International scientific and practical conference, 318-324. Kyiv: KNEU. (In Ukrainian).
  6. Deineko, L., Sychevskiy, M., Kovalenko, O., Tsyplitska, O., & Deineko, O. (2020). The estima- tion of sectoral contribution to regional divergence in Poland and Ukraine. Problems and Perspec- tives in Management, 18(4), 107- 120. http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ ppm.18(4).2020.10
  7. Deloitte. (2018). Managing Risk in Digital Transformation. Retrieved from https://www2.deloitte.com/ content/dam/Deloitte/in/Docu- ments/risk/in-ra-managing-risk- in-digital-transformation-1-noexp. pdf
  8. Ding, Ch., Liu, Ch., Zheng, Ch., & Li, F. (2022). Digital Economy, Technological Innovation and High-Quality Economic Develop- ment: Based on Spatial Effect and Mediation Effect. Sustainability, 14(1), 216. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su14010216
  9. European Commission. (2015). Country profile. Key indicators. Eesti. Retrieved from https:// ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/ sources/docgener/informat/coun- try2020/country_ee_en.pdf
  10. FAO. (2021). The digital divide risks becoming the 'New Face of Inequality'. Retrieved from https:// www.fao.org/new-york/news/de- tail/en/c/1397201/
  11. Gillwald, A. (2018, October 31). Data deficit means we're in the dark about digital divide. The Con- versation. Retrieved from https:// theconversation.com/data-deficit- means-were-in-the-dark-about- the-digital-divide-103363
  12. Hidalgo, A., Gabaly, S., Morales- Alonso, G., & Urueña, A. (2020). The digital divide in light of sustainable development: An approach through advanced machine learning techniques. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 150, 119754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tech- fore.2019.119754
  13. i8 Ventures. (2019). The Top 10 Risks of Digital Transformation. Retrieved from https://i8.ventures/ mation/
  14. Kerras, H., Sánchez-Navarro, J. L., López-Becerra, E. I., & de-Miguel Gómez, M. D. (2020). The Impact of the Gender Digital Divide on Sustainable Development: Com- parative Analysis between the European Union and the Maghreb. Sustainability, 12(8), 3347. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su12083347
  15. Kolodiziev, O., Tyschenko, V., Ostapenko, V., & Kolodizieva, T. (2018). Assessment of the develop- ment level of information and communication infrastructure in the regions of Ukraine. Problems and Perspectives in Manage- ment, 16(2), 134-144. https://doi. org/10.21511/ppm.16(2).2018.12
  16. KPMG. (2019). Digital risk: A new security frontier. Retrieved from https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/ kpmg/in/pdf/2019/03/digital- transformation-cyber-security.pdf
  17. Kuroda, R., Lopez, M., Sasaki, J., & Settecase, M. (2019). The Digital Gender Gap. Policy Brief. Retrieved from https://www.gsma. com/mobilefordevelopment/wp- content/uploads/2019/02/Digital- Equity-Policy-Brief-W20-Japan. pdf
  18. Lim, K., Kim, Y., Kim, M., Jang, Y., Joo, M.-H. (2019). The Digital Divide? Analyzing Regional Differences of Tablet PC Use in Korean Middle Schools for Sustainable Development. Sustain- ability, 11(18), 5054. https://doi. org/10.3390/su11185054
  19. Mwin, E., & Kritzinger, E. (2016). Views of Digital Divide: A Litera- ture Review. 2 nd African conference on information systems & technol- ogy (ACIST) 2016, Information Systems & Technology Innovation for a Digital Africa. Accra, Ghana: Ghana Institute of Manage- ment and Public Administration. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle. net/10500/21076
  20. Myeong, S., Kwon, Y., & Seo, H. (2014). Sustainable E-Governance: The Relationship among Trust, Digital Divide, and E-Govern- ment. Sustainability, 6(9), 6049- 6069. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su6096049
  21. Neagu, G., Berigel, M., & Lend- zhova, V. (2021). How Digital Inclusion Increase Opportuni- ties for Young People: Case of NEETs from Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey. Sustainability, 13(14), 7894. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su13147894
  22. Nekrasov, V. (2018, March 15). 4G ne dopomozhe: chomu v Ukraini nemaie povnoho 3G-pokryttia i yak tse vypravyty [4G won't help: why there is no 3G coverage in Ukraine and how to deal with it].
  23. Ekonomichna Pravda. (In Ukrai- nian). Retrieved from https:// www.epravda.com.ua/publica- tions/2018/03/15/634981/
  24. OECD. (2001). Understanding the digital divide. OECD Publications. Retrieved from https://www.oecd. org/digital/ieconomy/1888451.pdf
  25. Pagán, F. J. B., Martinez, J. L., & Máiquez, M. C. C. (2018). Internet Use by Secondary School Students: A Digital Divide in Sustainable Societies? Sustainability, 10(10), 3703. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su10103703
  26. Rajnai, Z., & Kocsis, I. (2017). Labor market risks of industry 4.0, digitization, robots and AI. 2017 IEEE 15 th International Symposium on Intelligent Systems and Informatics (SISY), 000343- 000346. https://doi.org/10.1109/ SISY.2017.8080580
  27. Shen, F. (2020, July 27). Bridging the Digital Divide: How Digital In- clusion Breeds Sustainable Develop- ment. Irish Tech News. Retrieved from https://irishtechnews.ie/ bridging-the-digital-divide/
  28. Shirazi, F., & Hajli, N. (2021). IT-Enabled Sustainable Inno- vation and the Global Digital Divides. Sustainability, 13(17), 9711. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su13179711
  29. Song, Zh., Song, T., Yang, Y., & Wang, Zh. (2019). Spatial-Tempo- ral Characteristics and Determi- nants of Digital Divide in China: A Multivariate Spatial Analysis. Sus- tainability, 11(17), 4529. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su11174529
  30. Srinuan, C., & Bohlin, E. (2011). Understanding the digital divide: A literature survey and ways forward. 22nd European Regional Conference of the In- ternational Telecommunications Society (ITS2011). Retrieved from https://www.econstor.eu/bit- stream/10419/52191/1/672623358. pdf
  31. State Statistical Service of Ukraine. (n.d.). Ofitsiinyi vebsait [Official website]. (In Ukrainian). Retrieved from http://www.ukrstat.gov.ua/
  32. Statista. (2021a). Country-level digital competitiveness rankings worldwide as of 2021. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/ statistics/1042743/worldwide- digital-competitiveness-rankings- by-country/
  33. Statista. (2021b). Index of regional disparity in gross domestic product per capita in small regions of selected European countries in 2018. Retrieved from https://www. statista.com/statistics/1225815/ regional-gdp-disparity-europe/
  34. Stoiciu, A. (2011). The role of e-governance in bridging the digital divide. UN Chronicle, 48(3), 37-39. https://doi.org/10.18356/ d51f530b-en
  35. The World Summit on the Infor- mation Society (WSIS). (2005). Tunis Agenda for the Information Society (WSIS-05/TUNIS/DOC/6 (Rev. 1)-E). Retrieved from https:// www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs2/tunis/ off/6rev1.html
  36. Thonipara, A., Sternberg, R., Proeger, T., & Haefner, L. (2020). Assessing the Digital Divide and its Regional Determinants: Evidence form a Web-Scraping Analysis (IFH Working Paper No.25/2020). Göttingen: Volkswirtschaftliches Institut für Mittelstand und Handwerk. Retrieved from https:// www.ifh.wiwi.uni-goettingen.de/ upload/veroeffentlichungen/WP/ ifh_wp-25_2020.pdf
  37. UN. (2016). Sustainable Devel- opment Goals. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/sustainablede- velopment/
  38. UN. (2019). Closing Digital Gap Vital to Attaining Sustainable Development, Speakers Stress, as Economic and Social Council Opens Forum on Science, Technol- ogy, Innovation (ECOSOC/6980). Retrieved from https://www. un.org/press/en/2019/ecosoc6980. doc.htm
  39. UN. (2021). Summary of the President of the General Assembly "High-level thematic debate Digital cooperation and connectivity". Re- trieved from https://www.un.org/ pga/75/wp-content/uploads/ sites/100/2021/07/PGA-Letter- Summary-of-HLD-on-Digital- Cooperation-Connectivity.pdf
  40. UNCTAD. (2006). The Digital Divide Report: ICT Diffusion Index 2005. New York and Geneva: Unit- ed Nations. Retrieved from https:// unctad.org/system/files/official- document/iteipc20065_en.pdf
  41. UNCTAD. (2019). Digital econo- my report 2019. Value creation and capture: implications for develop- ing countries. United Nations. Retrieved from https://unctad.org/ system/files/official-document/ der2019_en.pdf
  42. UNCTAD. (2021). Least developed countries suffer digital divide in mobile connectivity. Retrieved from https://unctad.org/topic/ least-developed-countries/chart- april-2021
  43. World Bank Group. (2016). Digital Dividends (World Development Report). Retrieved from https:// documents1.worldbank.org/cu- rated/en/896971468194972881/ pdf/102725-PUB-Replacement- PUBLIC.pdf
  44. Zhang, B., Jin, Zh., & Peng, Zh. (2018). Bridging the Digital Di- vide: Making the Digital Economy Benefit to the Entire Society. 22 nd Biennial Conference of the Interna- tional Telecommunications Society (ITS): "Beyond the Boundaries: Challenges for Business, Policy and Society". Seoul, Korea. Retrieved from https://www.econstor.eu/ bitstream/10419/190412/1/F5_2_ Zhang-et-al.pdf
  45. Zharova, L. (2019). Sustainable development of territories in the framework of smart initiatives. ASEJ, 23(4), 61-65. Retrieved from https://asej.eu/resources/html/ article/details?id=196440

Related papers

Digital life of russian regions. What defines the digital divide?
Vladimir Korovkin

SKOLKOVO Institute for Emerging Market Studies (IEMS), 2020

Now that digital technologies have become a key driver of social and economic development of companies, regions, and countries, the problem of the so-called digital divide, or the gap between the levels of technological capabilities, is growing increasingly acute. This divide can be observed within each country and between regions or social and demographic groups. Some degree of digital divide objectively exists at all times, but beyond a certain level, it becomes socially and politically unacceptable — when people from information-deprived regions or social groups find themselves in “another universe” in terms of their economic and social opportunities. It is critical to answer two questions: does the degree of digital divide increase or decrease over time in “natural” conditions, and are there scenarios for an independent bridging of the digital divide by under-performed? The majority of the world has moved beyond the “primary” digitization — creating the necessary Internet access infrastructure — to the “secondary” stage, i.e. creating as many individual digital solutions as possible that unite into comprehensive multidimensional systems. Such systems generate a network effect where the value to users grows faster than the number of system participants. To evaluate the processes of secondary digitization, the Moscow School of Management SKOLKOVO developed a seven-dimensional model of “digital life” back in 2014, and then proceeded to test it on Russian million-plus cities. In the new wave of the study, the sample included all the capitals of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as a number of major non-capital regional centres — 91 cities in total. The expanded analysis scope made it possible to compare cities that differ greatly in terms of their size, income level, economic structure, and history. The second-tier digital divide between Russian regions is considerable: the final Digital Life Index score of the leading cities (Krasnodar and Ekaterinburg) is almost 5 times higher than that of the trailing city (Magas-Nazran). At the same time, supply is distributed much more evenly, with only a three times difference between the leading and the trailing city; the resulting digital divide has more to do with gaps in digital demand determined by the population’s digital skills. The correlation between the city’s size and the vibrancy of its digital life is not linear: small cities (with less than 100,000 people) have higher scores than cities with a population of 100–200,000. In terms of demand, they even surpass cities in the 500,000 to 1 million people range, being second only to the million-plus cities. At the federal district level, the Ural Federal District and the Central Federal District take the lead. Despite Krasnodar’s leadership among cities, the Southern District is in the middle of the list, while the North Caucasian District is at the bottom. Statistical analysis of the contributory factors revealed a picture similar to the well-researched digital divide between countries: human capital and expansionary policies play the key role, while the resource capability factor is not so significant. The results inspire a certain amount of optimism, since the digital divide can be bridged through purposeful strategic actions rather than by pouring resources into the regions. Each region can and should aim to develop its digital life to the fullest to experience significant results, such as: • Acceleration of social and economic development and improvement of the quality of economic growth (fixing the existing structural imbalances in the well-resourced primary producing regions); • Fair access to social and economic resources, reduction of inequality, and provision of inclusive opportunities; • Decent quality of life with opportunities for self-fulfillment; • Development of the region’s soft power and competitiveness both on the national and the global scale.

View PDFchevron_right
Analysis of Approaches for the Measurement of the Spatial Digital Divide in Russia and Abroad
Peter Likholob

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference Spatial Development of Territories (SDT 2020), 2021

Despite the increasing role and importance of digitalization at the present stage of development of the world economy, the problem of digital inequality is also worsening. From the point of view of sustainable spatial development of the economy, it is important to measure the digital inequality between cities and regions, urbanized and rural areas. This article is devoted to the study of approaches to the measurement of digital inequality at the national and regional level. The authors conducted a comparative analysis of the most wellknown national indexes of development of the digital economy, rating approaches to the assessment of the development of "smart cities", research methods of digitalization of the regions. The analysis of the Russian market of data processing centers in the context of regions and main players is carried out, the factors of its development are revealed. It is established that economic problems are concentrated in the absence of a business model f...

View PDFchevron_right
Digital divides in the world and its regions: A spatial and multivariate analysis of technological utilization
James Pick

Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2014

The research purpose is to identify the correlates of technology utilization for the world and major world regions, while screening for spatial bias. Conceptual theory is induced which posits that levels of technological utilization are based on social, economic, government, and societal openness factors, while recognizing that geographic proximity can be influential for this utilization; the model's endogenous factors are posited to account for proximity. Regression findings worldwide for broadband internet subscribers indicate that the important correlates are tertiary education and innovation capacity. The disaggregated findings provide a more refined view. For Europe, significant determinants are judicial independence and innovation capacity, while for Asia they are tertiary education, foreign direct investment, and innovation capacity. For combined Africa-Latin America, higher education, press freedom, and foreign direct investment are most significant. The empirical findings lead to a more complex theoretical model that distinguishes determinants for developed and developing nations. The study suggests that a nation's governmental policies be tailored to the distinctive factors that apply for that nation's developed or developing region and/or its continental region. For planners and policy makers, the study suggests that use of spatial analysis can contribute to greater understanding and more accurate investigation of digital divides.

View PDFchevron_right
Spatiotemporal investigation of the digital divide, the case study of Iranian Provinces
Mohsen Roohani

Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2022

Many communities and territories in developing countries experience significant gaps in access to and use of information and communication technology (ICT), which is viewed as a major impediment to socioeconomic and health-related vulnerabilities. Geographic considerations, on the other hand, as well as variations in motivation for ICT usage and technology adoption within and across nations, as well as between cultures, have exacerbated the digital divide. This paper investigates disparities in access to and utilization of ICT in 31 Iranian provinces from 2011 to 2020. The research discovers evidence that family income and the number of R&D centers affected the formation of the digital divide, albeit the degree of the split has fluctuated through time and space. This study discovered that digital inequality is associated with social exclusion throughout Iranian regions, and it went on to try to better understand the underlying issues and potential solutions. In this regard, some policy avenues are suggested for government action, particularly for marginalized socioeconomic groups, such as the provision of infrastructure, training and skill augmentation, and the easing of digital services supplied by the government or private sector.

View PDFchevron_right
Assessing the regional digital divide across the European Union-27
Ana Jesús López-Menéndez

Telecommunications Policy, 2011

Over the last years great efforts have been devoted to the analysis of the digital divide at the international level. In contrast, the evidence about the regional digital divide is still scarce, especially in the case of the European Union. Within this context, the aim of this paper is to remedy this deficiency, trying to throw some light on the state of ICT adoption across European regions. On the basis of a set of ICT-related indicators, we perform a factor analysis that leads us to the development of a ranking, identifying best-and-worst performing regions. The Top-10 mainly corresponds to Dutch regions, while Greece and Bulgaria occupy the Bottom-10. Hence, results show that the regional digital divide reflects to some extent the income gap. However, regional policy towards ICT seems to be having some positive implications for technology adoption. Finally, we assess the regional divides within each Member State.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Digital Divide
  • Business and Management

    • Cited by

    Marketing research in the context of trust in the public sector: A case of the digital environment
    Veronika Litovtseva

    Innovative Marketing

    Trust in public services is a driving force of socio-economic development. It ensures effective dialogue between citizens and government and becomes especially relevant in the digitalization. The lack of trust in the public sector can make reforms ineffective and the achievement of the goals of the Ministry of Digital Transformation within the framework of the State Strategy for Regional Development of Ukraine until 2027 in question. For this reason, marketing tools in public services should be directed toward achieving greater trust in those services and the government. This paper analyzes the current research on public sector marketing and its role in building trust as a foundation for the country’s digital development. Implementing multi-level bibliometric (Scopus tools), network (VOSviewer), and comparative (Google Trends) analysis, this study traces the development of marketing research on the process of public services delivery transformation from traditional to digital. 922 s...

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved