DIGITAL INEQUALITY AND USAGE GAP IN THE V4 REGION
dc.contributor.author | Vallušová, Anna | |
dc.contributor.author | Kuráková, Ivana | |
dc.contributor.author | Lacová, Žaneta | |
dc.contributor.other | Ekonomická fakulta | cs |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-12-12T11:20:21Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-12-12T11:20:21Z | |
dc.description.abstract | The V4 countries have achieved different levels of digital transformation due to distinctions in their individual technical infrastructure and human capital characteristics. The success of digital transformation cannot be measured solely by the achieved level of digitalization; the distribution of favorable outcomes of internet use within a country should also be considered. The level of digital skills and usage patterns differ among social groups, therefore capability to translate internet access and use to tangible (offline) benefits varies. The aim of our paper is twofold. Firstly, we quantify the extent of the digital inequality in terms of usage gap in the V4 countries. We indicate the dynamics of inequality by comparing the development of such inequality between the years 2015 and 2019. Secondly, we identify socioeconomic and sociodemographic factors, which are connected to differences in internet usage patterns and therefore affect the capability of an individual to benefit from internet use. In common with other studies carried out in the Western world, we show that internet access and possession of formal digital skills are not the most important determinant of probability of being a digital beneficiary; individual characteristics, especially education and age, predict the probability of being a digital beneficiary to a higher degree of accuracy. As to the extent of digital inequality in the individual countries, we come to conclusion that although the V4 countries are relatively homogeneous concerning socioeconomic inequalities, the level of digital inequality among them differs – Hungary being somewhat unequal as compared to the most equal Czechia. In all four countries, equality increased within an observed period. | en |
dc.format | text | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.15240/tul/001/2022-4-011 | |
dc.identifier.eissn | 2336-5604 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1212-3609 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://dspace.tul.cz/handle/15240/166306 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.publisher | Technická Univerzita v Liberci | cs |
dc.publisher | Technical university of Liberec, Czech Republic | en |
dc.publisher.abbreviation | TUL | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Anderson, M., & Perrin, A. (2017). Tech Adoption Climbs Among Older Adults. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2017/05/17/tech-adoption-climbs-among-older-adults/ | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Antonelli, C. (2003). The digital divide: Understanding the economics of new information and communication technology in the global economy. Information Economics and Policy, 15(2), 173–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6245(02)00093-8 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Barzilai-Nahon, K. (2006). Gaps and Bits: Conceptualizing Measurements for Digital Divide/s. The Information Society, 22(5), 269–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240600903953 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Blank, G., & Groselj, D. (2014). Dimensions of Internet use: Amount, variety, and types. Information, Communication & Society, 17(4), 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.889189 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Blank, G., & Lutz, C. (2018). Benefits and harms from Internet use: A differentiated analysis of Great Britain. New Media & Society, 20(2), 618–640. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816667135 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press. | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Brandtzæg, P. B., Heim, J., & Karahasanović, A. (2011). Understanding the new digital divide – A typology of Internet users in Europe. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 69(3), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.11.004 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Darvas, Z., Domínguez-Jiménez, M., Devins, A., Grzegorczyk, M., Guetta-Jeanrenaud, L., Hendry, S., Hoffmann, M., Lenaerts, K., Tzaras, A., Vorsatz, V., & Weil, P. (2021). European Union countries’ recovery and resilience plans (Dataset). Bruegel. https://www.bruegel.org/dataset/european-union-countries-recovery-and-resilience-plans | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Calderón Gómez, D. (2021). The third digital divide and Bourdieu: Bidirectional conversion of economic, cultural, and social capital to (and from) digital capital among young people in Madrid. New Media & Society, 23(9), 2534–2553. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820933252 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Campos-Castillo, C. (2015). Revisiting the First-Level Digital Divide in the United States: Gender and Race/Ethnicity Patterns, 2007–2012. Social Science Computer Review, 33(4), 423–439. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314547617 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Chinn, M. D., & Fairlie, R. W. (2006). The determinants of the global digital divide: A cross-country analysis of computer and internet penetration. Oxford Economic Papers, 59(1), 16–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpl024 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Cooper, J. (2006). The digital divide: The special case of gender. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(5), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00185.x | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Cotten, S. R., Andreson, W. A., & McCullough, B. M. (2013). Impact of Internet Use on Loneliness and Contact with Others Among Older Adults: Cross-Sectional Analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(2), e39. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2306 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Dasgupta, S., Lall, S., & Wheeler, D. R. (2001). Policy reform, economic growth, and the digital divide – An econometric analysis (Policy Research Working Paper No. WPS2567). World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/935091468741308186/Policy-reform-economic-growth-and-the-digital-divide-an-econometric-analysis | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | DiMaggio, P., & Hargittai, E. (2001). From the ‘Digital Divide’ to ‘Digital Inequality’: Studying Internet Use as Penetration Increases (Working Paper No. 47). Princeton University. | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Epstein, D., Nisbet, E. C., & Gillespie, T. (2011). Who’s Responsible for the Digital Divide? Public Perceptions and Policy Implications. The Information Society, 27(2), 92–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2011.548695 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Ertl, B., Csanadi, A., & Tarnai, C. (2020). Getting closer to the digital divide: An analysis of impacts on digital competencies based on the German PIAAC sample. International Journal of Educational Development, 78, 102259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2020.102259 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Fuchs, C. (2009). The Role of Income Inequality in a Multivariate Cross-National Analysis of the Digital Divide. Social Science Computer Review, 27(1), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439308321628 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-Level Digital Divide: Differences in People’s Online Skills. First Monday, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v7i4.942 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Hargittai, E., Piper, A. M., & Morris, M. R. (2019). From internet access to internet skills: Digital inequality among older adults. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18(4), 881–890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-018-0617-5 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Helsper, E. J. (2012). A Corresponding Fields Model for the Links Between Social and Digital Exclusion: A Corresponding Fields Model for Digital Exclusion. Communication Theory, 22(4), 403–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01416.x | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Helsper, E. J., & Reisdorf, B. C. (2017). The emergence of a “digital underclass” in Great Britain and Sweden: Changing reasons for digital exclusion. New Media & Society, 19(8), 1253–1270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816634676 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Hüsing, T., & Selhofer, H. (2002). The Digital Divide Index – A Measure of Social Inequalities in the Adoption of ICT. In Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Information Systems, Information Systems and the Future of the Digital Economy (pp. 1273–1286). ECIS. Gdansk, Poland. | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Hüsing, T., & Selhofer, H. (2004). DiDix. A Digital Divide Index for Measuring Inequality in IT Diffusion. IT & Society, 1(7), 21–38. | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Ignatow, G., & Robinson, L. (2017). Pierre Bourdieu: Theorizing the digital. Information, Communication & Society, 20(7), 950–966. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1301519 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Kuhn, P., & Mansour, H. (2014). Is Internet Job Search Still Ineffective? The Economic Journal, 124(581), 1213–1233. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12119 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Lucero Ortiz, A., Rodríguez, J. C., & Gómez, M. (2020). E-commerce Development in Europe: A Panel Data Analysis 2003–2017. E&M Economics and Management, 23(4), 89–101. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2020-4-006 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Martin, S. P., & Robinson, J. P. (2007). The Income Digital Divide: Trends and Predictions for Levels of Internet Use. Social Problems, 54(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2007.54.1.1 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Min, S.-J. (2010). From the Digital Divide to the Democratic Divide: Internet Skills, Political Interest, and the Second-Level Digital Divide in Political Internet Use. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 7(1), 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331680903109402 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | OECD. (2001). Understanding the Digital Divide (OECD Digital Economy Paper No. 49). https://doi.org/10.1787/20716826 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Ogbo, E., Brown, T., Gant, J., & Sicker, D. (2021). When Being Connected is not Enough: An Analysis of the Second and Third Levels of the Digital Divide in a Developing Country. Journal of Information Policy, 11(1), 104–146. https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0104 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Ono, H., & Zavodny, M. (2002). Is there a gender gap in internet usage? (Working Paper No. 495) Stockholm School of Economics, The Economic Research Institute (EFI). http://hdl.handle.net/10419/56093 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Quibria, M. G., Ahmed, S. N., Tschang, T., & Reyes-Macasaquit, M.-L. (2003). Digital divide: Determinants and policies with special reference to Asia. Journal of Asian Economics, 13(6), 811–825. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1049-0078(02)00186-0 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Radnedda, M., & Ruiu, M. L. (2017). Social capital and the three levels of digital divide. In M. Ragnedda & G. W. Muschert (Eds.), Theorizing Digital Divides (pp. 21–34). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315455334-3 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Ragnedda, M., & Kreitem, H. (2018). The three levels of digital divide in East EU countries. World of Media. Journal of Russian Media and Journalism Studies, 1(4), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.30547/worldofmedia.4.2018.1 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Robinson, J. P., DiMaggio, P., & Hargittai, E. (2003). New Social Survey Perspectives on the Digital Divide. IT & Society, 1(5), 1–22. | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Robinson, L., Schulz, J., Blank, G., Ragnedda, M., Ono, H., Hogan, B., Mesch, G. S., Cotten, S. R., Kretchmer, S. B., Hale, T. M., Drabowicz, T., Yan, P., Wellman, B., Harper, M.-G., Quan-Haase, A., Dunn, H. S., Casilli, A. A., Tubaro, P., Carvath, R., Chen, W., Wiest, J. B., Dodel, M., Stern, M. J., Ball, C., Huang, K.-T., & Khilnani, A. (2020). Digital inequalities 2.0: Legacy inequalities in the information age. First Monday, 25(7). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i7.10842 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Scheerder, A., van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2017). Determinants of Internet skills, uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second- and third-level digital divide. Telematics and Informatics, 34(8), 1607–1624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.07.007 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Szakálné Kanó, I., & Lengyel, I. (2021). Convergence Clubs of NUTS3 Regions of the V4 Group. E&M Economics and Management, 24(4), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2021-4-002 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | van Deursen, A. J., & van Dijk, J. A. (2014). The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society, 16(3), 507–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487959 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Helsper, E. J. (2015). The Third-Level Digital Divide: Who Benefits Most from Being Online? In L. Robinson, S. R. Cotten, J. Schulz, T. M. Hale, & A. Williams (Eds.), Studies in Media and Communications (Vol. 10, pp. 29–52). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2050-206020150000010002 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | van Deursen, A. J. A. M., Helsper, E., Eynon, R., & van Dijk, J. (2017). The Compoundness and Sequentiality of Digital Inequality. International Journal of Communication, 11(7), 452–473. | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & Helsper, E. J. (2018). Collateral benefits of Internet use: Explaining the diverse outcomes of engaging with the Internet. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2333–2351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817715282 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2019). The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media & Society, 21(2), 354–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818797082 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4–5), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.004 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2012). The Evolution of the Digital Divide: The Digital Divide turns to Inequality of Skills and Usage. In J. Bus, M. Crompton, M. Hildebrandt, & G. Metakides (Eds.), Digital Enlightenment Yearbook 2012 (pp. 57–75). IOS Press. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-057-4-57 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2017). The State of Digital Divide Theory. In M. Ragnedda & G. W. Muschert (Eds.), Theorizing Digital Divides (pp. 199–206). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315455334 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2020). Closing the Digital Divide: The Role of Digital Technologies on Social Development, Well-Being of All and the Approach of the COVID-19 Pandemic. In Proceedings of the Conference: Virtual Expert Group UN Meeting on “Socially just transition towards sustainable development: The role of digital technologies on social development and well-being of all”. United Nations. | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Warschauer, M. (2002). Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide. First Monday, 7(7). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v7i7.967 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Witte, J. C., & Mannon, S. E. (2010). The Internet and Social Inequalities. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203861639 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Zhao, L., Cao, C., & Li, Y. (2022). Determinants of the digital outcomes divide in E-learning between rural and urban students: Empirical evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic based on capital theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 130, 107177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107177 | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | Zillien, N., & Hargittai, E. (2009). Digital Distinction: Status-Specific Types of Internet Usage. Social Science Quarterly, 90(2), 274–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2009.00617.x | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Ekonomie a Management | cs |
dc.relation.ispartof | Economics and Management | en |
dc.relation.isrefereed | true | |
dc.rights | CC BY-NC | |
dc.subject | digital transformation | en |
dc.subject | digital divide | en |
dc.subject | digital inequality | en |
dc.subject | digitally vulnerable social groups | en |
dc.subject | digital inclusion | en |
dc.subject | V4 countries | en |
dc.subject.classification | J24 | |
dc.subject.classification | F36 | |
dc.subject.classification | O57 | |
dc.title | DIGITAL INEQUALITY AND USAGE GAP IN THE V4 REGION | en |
dc.type | Article | en |
local.access | open | |
local.citation.epage | 179 | |
local.citation.spage | 164 | |
local.faculty | Faculty of Economics | |
local.filename | EM_4_2022_11 | |
local.fulltext | yes | |
local.relation.abbreviation | E+M | cs |
local.relation.abbreviation | E&M | en |
local.relation.issue | 4 | |
local.relation.volume | 25 |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
- Name:
- EM_4_2022_11.pdf
- Size:
- 567.49 KB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
- Description:
- článek