Global digital divide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

The global digital divide describes global disparities, primarily between developed and developing
countries, in regards to access to computing and information resources such as the Internet and the
opportunities derived from such access.[1] As with a smaller unit of analysis, this gap describes an
inequality that exists, referencing a global scale.

The Internet is expanding very quickly, and not all countries—especially developing countries—can keep
up with the constant changes. The term "digital divide" does not necessarily mean that someone does
not have technology; it could mean that there is simply a difference in technology. These differences can
refer to, for example, high-quality computers, fast Internet, technical assistance, or telephone services.
The difference between all of these is also considered a gap.

There is a large inequality worldwide in terms of the distribution of installed telecommunication

bandwidth. In 2014 only three countries (China, US, Japan) host 50% of the globally installed bandwidth
potential (see pie-chart Figure on the right).[2] This concentration is not new, as historically only ten
countries have hosted 70–75% of the global telecommunication capacity (see Figure). The U.S. lost its
global leadership in terms of installed bandwidth in 2011, being replaced by China, which hosts more
than twice as much national bandwidth potential in 2014 (29% versus 13% of the global total).[2]

Internet users in 2015 as a percentage of a country's population

Source: International Telecommunications Union.[3]

Internet users per 100 inhabitants

Source: International Telecommunications Union.[4][5]

Global bandwidth concentration: 3 countries have almost 50 %; 10 countries almost 75 %[2]

Worldwide Internet users

 2005 2010 2017 2019a

World population[6] 6.5 billion 6.9 billion 7.4 billion 7.75 billion

Users worldwide 16% 30% 48% 53.6%

Users in the developing world 8% 21% 41.3% 47%

Users in the developed world 51% 67% 81% 86.6%

a Estimate.

Source: International Telecommunications Union.[7]

Internet users by region

2005 2010 2017 2019a

Africa 2% 10% 21.8% 28.2%

Americas 36% 49% 65.9% 77.2%

Arab States 8% 26% 43.7% 51.6%

Asia and Pacific 9% 23% 43.9% 48.4%

Commonwealth of

Independent States

10%

34%

67.7%

72.2%

Europe 46% 67% 79.6% 82.5%

a Estimate.

Source: International Telecommunication Union.[8]

Mobile broadband Internet subscriptions in 2012

as a percentage of a country's population

Source: International Telecommunications Union.[9]

Worldwide broadband subscriptions

2007 2010 2016 2019a

World population[10] 6.6 billion 6.9 billion 7.3 billion 7.75 billion

Fixed broadband 5% 8% 11.9% 14.5%

Developing world 2% 4% 8.2% 11.2%

Developed world 18% 24% 30.1% 33.6%

Mobile broadband 4% 11% 49.4% 83%

Developing world 1% 4% 40.9% 75.2%

Developed world 19% 43% 90.3% 121.7%

a Estimate.

Source: International Telecommunication Union.[11]

Broadband subscriptions by region

Fixed subscriptions: 2007 2010 2014 2019a

Africa 0.1% 0.2% 0.4% 0.4%

Americas 11% 14% 17% 22%

Arab States 1% 2% 3% 8.1%

Asia and Pacific 3% 6% 8% 14.4%

Commonwealth of

Independent States

2%

8%

14%

19.8%

Europe 18% 24% 28% 31.9%

 Mobile subscriptions: 2007 2010 2014 2019a

Africa 0.2% 2% 19% 34%

Americas 6% 23% 59% 104.4%

Arab States 0.8% 5% 25% 67.3%

Asia and Pacific 3% 7% 23% 89%

Commonwealth of

Independent States

0.2%

22%

49%

85.4%

Europe 15% 29% 64% 97.4%

a Estimate.

Source: International Telecommunications Union.[8]

Contents

1 Versus the digital divide

2 Obstacles to a solution

2.1 Physical access

2.2 Financial access

2.3 Socio-demographic access

2.4 Cognitive access

2.5 Design access

2.6 Institutional access

2.7 Political access

2.8 Cultural access

3 Examples

4 Global solutions

4.1 Free Basics

4.2 Satellite constellations

4.3 One Laptop per Child

5 World Summit on the Information Society

6 References

7 Bibliography

8 External links

Versus the digital divide

The global digital divide is a special case of the digital divide; the focus is set on the fact that "Internet
has developed unevenly throughout the world"[12]:681 causing some countries to fall behind in
technology, education, labor, democracy, and tourism. The concept of the digital divide was originally
popularized regarding the disparity in Internet access between rural and urban areas of the United
States of America; the global digital divide mirrors this disparity on an international scale.

The global digital divide also contributes to the inequality of access to goods and services available
through technology. Computers and the Internet provide users with improved education, which can lead
to higher wages; the people living in nations with limited access are therefore disadvantaged.[13] This
global divide is often characterized as falling along what is sometimes called the North–South divide of
"northern" wealthier nations and "southern" poorer ones.

Obstacles to a solution

Some people argue that necessities need to be considered before achieving digital inclusion, such as an
ample food supply and quality health care. Minimizing the global digital divide requires considering and
addressing the following types of access:

Physical access
Involves "the distribution of ICT devices per capita…and land lines per thousands".[14]:306 Individuals
need to obtain access to computers, landlines, and networks in order to access the Internet. This access
barrier is also addressed in Article 21 of the convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities by the
United Nations.

Financial access

The cost of ICT devices, traffic, applications, technician and educator training, software, maintenance,
and infrastructures require ongoing financial means.[15] Financial access and "the levels of household
income play a significant role in widening the gap" [16]

Socio-demographic access

Empirical tests have identified that several socio-demographic characteristics foster or limit ICT access
and usage. Among different countries, educational levels and income are the most powerful explanatory
variables, with age being a third one.[17][15]

While a Global Gender Gap in access and usage of ICT's exist, empirical evidence shows that this is due
to unfavorable conditions concerning employment, education and income and not to technophobia or
lower ability. In the contexts understudy, women with the prerequisites for access and usage turned out
to be more active users of digital tools than men.[18] In the US, for example, the figures for 2018 show
89% of men and 88% of women use the Internet.[19]

Cognitive access

In order to use computer technology, a certain level of information literacy is needed. Further challenges
include information overload and the ability to find and use reliable information.

Design access

Computers need to be accessible to individuals with different learning and physical abilities including
complying with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act as amended by the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 in the United States.[20]

Institutional access
In illustrating institutional access, Wilson states "the numbers of users are greatly affected by whether
access is offered only through individual homes or whether it is offered through schools, community
centers, religious institutions, cybercafés, or post offices, especially in poor countries where computer
access at work or home is highly limited".[14]:303

Political access

Guillen & Suarez argue that "democratic political regimes enable faster growth of the Internet than
authoritarian or totalitarian regimes." [12]:687 The Internet is considered a form of e-democracy, and
attempting to control what citizens can or cannot view is in contradiction to this. Recently situations in
Iran and China have denied people the ability to access certain websites and disseminate information.
Iran has prohibited the use of high-speed Internet in the country and has removed many satellite dishes
in order to prevent the influence of Western culture, such as music and television.[21]

Cultural access

Many experts claim that bridging the digital divide is not sufficient and that the images and language
needed to be conveyed in a language and images that can be read across different cultural lines.[22] A
2013 study conducted by Pew Research Center noted how participants taking the survey in Spanish were
nearly twice as likely not to use the internet.[23]

Examples

In the early 21st century, residents of developed countries enjoy many Internet services which are not
yet widely available in developing countries, including:

In tandem with the above point, mobile phones, and small electronic communication devices;

E-communities and social-networking;

Fast broadband Internet connections, enabling advanced Internet applications;[24]

Affordable and widespread Internet access, either through personal computers at home or work,
through public terminals in public libraries and Internet cafes, and through wireless access points;

E-commerce enabled by efficient electronic payment networks like credit cards and reliable shipping
services;

Virtual globes featuring street maps searchable down to individual street addresses and detailed satellite
and aerial photography;

Online research systems like LexisNexis and ProQuest which enable users to peruse newspaper and
magazine articles that may be centuries old, without having to leave home;

Electronic readers such as Kindle, Sony Reader, Samsung Papyrus and Iliad by iRex Technologies;

Price engines like Google Shopping which help consumers find the best possible online prices and similar
services like ShopLocal which find the best possible prices at local retailers;

Electronic services delivery of government services, such as the ability to pay taxes, fees, and fines
online.

Further civic engagement through e-government and other sources such as finding information about
candidates regarding political situations.

Global solutions

There are four specific arguments why it is important to "bridge the gap":[25]

Economic equality – For example, the telephone is often seen as one of the most important components,
because having access to a working telephone can lead to higher safety. If there were to be an
emergency, one could easily call for help if one could use a nearby phone. In another example, many
work-related tasks are online, and people without access to the Internet may not be able to complete
work up to company standards. The Internet is regarded by some as a basic component of civic life that
developed countries ought to guarantee for their citizens. Additionally, welfare services, for example, are
sometimes offered via the Internet.[25]

Social mobility – Computer and Internet use is regarded as being very important to development and
success. However, some children are not getting as much technical education as others, because lower
socioeconomic areas cannot afford to provide schools with computer facilities. For this reason, some kids
are being separated and not receiving the same chance as others to be successful.[25]

Democracy – Some people believe that eliminating the digital divide would help countries become
healthier democracies. They argue that communities would become much more involved in events such
as elections or decision making.[26][25]

Economic growth – It is believed that less-developed nations could gain quick access to economic growth
if the information infrastructure were to be developed and well used. By improving the latest
technologies, certain countries and industries can gain a competitive advantage.[25]

While these four arguments are meant to lead to a solution to the digital divide, there are a couple of
other components that need to be considered. The first one is rural living versus suburban living. Rural
areas used to have very minimal access to the Internet, for example. However, nowadays, power lines
and satellites are used to increase the availability in these areas. Another component to keep in mind is
disabilities. Some people may have the highest quality technologies, but a disability they have may keep
them from using these technologies to their fullest extent.[25]

Using previous studies (Gamos, 2003; Nsengiyuma & Stork, 2005; Harwit, 2004 as cited in James), James
asserts that in developing countries, "internet use has taken place overwhelmingly among the upper-
income, educated, and urban segments" largely due to the high literacy rates of this sector of the
population.[27]:58 As such, James suggests that part of the solution requires that developing countries
first build up the literacy/language skills, computer literacy, and technical competence that low-income
and rural populations need in order to make use of ICT.

It has also been suggested that there is a correlation between democrat regimes and the growth of the
Internet. One hypothesis by Gullen is, "The more democratic the polity, the greater the Internet use...The
government can try to control the Internet by monopolizing control" and Norris et al. also contends, "If
there is less government control of it, the Internet flourishes, and it is associated with greater democracy
and civil liberties.[28]

From an economic perspective, Pick and Azari state that "in developing nations…foreign direct
investment (FDI), primary education, educational investment, access to education, and government
prioritization of ICT as all-important".[28]:112 Specific solutions proposed by the study include: "invest in
stimulating, attracting, and growing creative technical and scientific workforce; increase the access to
education and digital literacy; reduce the gender divide and empower women to participate in the ICT
workforce; emphasize investing in intensive Research and Development for selected metropolitan areas
and regions within nations".[28]:111

There are projects worldwide that have implemented, to various degrees, the solutions outlined above.
Many such projects have taken the form of Information Communications Technology Centers (ICT
centers). Rahnman explains that "the main role of ICT intermediaries is defined as an organization
providing effective support to local communities in the use and adaptation of technology. Most
commonly, an ICT intermediary will be a specialized organization from outside the community, such as a
non-governmental organization, local government, or international donor. On the other hand, a social
intermediary is defined as a local institution from within the community, such as a community-based
organization.[29]:128

Other proposed solutions that the Internet promises for developing countries are the provision of
efficient communications within and among developing countries so that citizens worldwide can
effectively help each other to solve their problems. Grameen Banks and Kiva loans are two microcredit
systems designed to help citizens worldwide to contribute online towards entrepreneurship in
developing communities. Economic opportunities range from entrepreneurs who can afford the
hardware and broadband access required to maintain Internet cafés to agribusinesses having control
over the seeds they plant.

At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the IMARA organization (from Swahili word for "power")
sponsors a variety of outreach programs which bridge the Global Digital Divide. Its aim is to find and
implement long-term, sustainable solutions which will increase the availability of educational technology
and resources to domestic and international communities. These projects are run under the aegis of the
MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) and staffed by MIT volunteers who
give training, install and donate computer setups in greater Boston, Massachusetts, Kenya, Indian
reservations the American Southwest such as the Navajo Nation, the Middle East, and Fiji Islands. The
CommuniTech project strives to empower underserved communities through sustainable technology and
education.[30][31][32] According to Dominik Hartmann of the MIT's Media Lab, interdisciplinary
approaches are needed to bridge the global digital divide.[33]

Building on the premise that any effective solution must be decentralized, allowing the local
communities in developing nations to generate their content, one scholar has posited that social media
—like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter—may be useful tools in closing the divide.[34] As Amir Hatem Ali
suggests, "the popularity and generative nature of social media empower individuals to combat some of
the main obstacles to bridging the digital divide".[34]:188 Facebook's statistics reinforce this claim.
According to Facebook, more than seventy-five percent of its users reside outside of the US.[35]
Moreover, more than seventy languages are presented on its website.[35] The reasons for the high
number of international users are due to many the qualities of Facebook and other social media.
Amongst them, are its ability to offer a means of interacting with others, user-friendly features, and the
fact that most sites are available at no cost.[34] The problem with social media, however, is that it can be
accessible, provided that there is physical access.[34] Nevertheless, with its ability to encourage digital
inclusion, social media can be used as a tool to bridge the global digital divide.[34]

Some cities in the world have started programs to bridge the digital divide for their residents, school
children, students, parents and the elderly. One such program, founded in 1996, was sponsored by the
city of Boston and called the Boston Digital Bridge Foundation.[36] It especially concentrates on school
children and their parents, helping to make both equally and similarly knowledgeable about computers,
using application programs, and navigating the Internet.[37][38]
Free Basics

Main article: Free Basics

Free Basics is a partnership between social networking services company Facebook and six companies
(Samsung, Ericsson, MediaTek, Opera Software, Nokia and Qualcomm) that plans to bring affordable
access to selected Internet services to less developed countries by increasing efficiency, and facilitating
the development of new business models around the provision of Internet access. In the whitepaper[39]
realised by Facebook's founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, connectivity is asserted as a "human right",
and Internet.org is created to improve Internet access for people around the world.

"Free Basics provides people with access to useful services on their mobile phones in markets where
internet access may be less affordable. The websites are available for free without data charges, and
include content about news, employment, health, education and local information etc. By introducing
people to the benefits of the internet through these websites, we hope to bring more people online and
help improve their lives."[40]

However, Free Basics is also accused of violating net neutrality for limiting access to handpicked services.
Despite a wide deployment in numerous countries, it has been met with heavy resistance notably in
India where the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India eventually banned it in 2016.

Satellite constellations

Several projects to bring internet to the entire world with a satellite constellation have been devised in
the last decade, one of these being Starlink by Elon Musk's company SpaceX. Unlike Free Basics, it would
provide people with a full internet access and would not be limited to a few selected services. In the
same week Starlink was announced, serial-entrepreneur Richard Branson announced his own project
OneWeb, a similar constellation with approximately 700 satellites that was already procured
communication frequency licenses for their broadcast spectrum and could possibly be operational on
2020.[41]

The biggest hurdle to these projects is the astronomical, financial, and logistical cost of launching so
many satellites. After the failure of previous satellite-to-consumer space ventures, satellite industry
consultant Roger Rusch said "It's highly unlikely that you can make a successful business out of this."
Musk has publicly acknowledged this business reality, and indicated in mid-2015 that while endeavoring
to develop this technically-complicated space-based communication system he wants to avoid
overextending the company and stated that they are being measured in the pace of development.
One Laptop per Child

One Laptop per Child (OLPC) is another attempt to narrow the digital divide.[42] This organization,
founded in 2005, provides inexpensively produced "XO" laptops (dubbed the "$100 laptop", though
actual production costs vary) to children residing in poor and isolated regions within developing
countries. Each laptop belongs to an individual child and provides a gateway to digital learning and
Internet access. The XO laptops are designed to withstand more abuse than higher-end machines, and
they contain features in context to the unique conditions that remote villages present. Each laptop is
constructed to use as little power as possible, have a sunlight-readable screen, and is capable of
automatically networking with other XO laptops in order to access the Internet—as many as 500
machines can share a single point of access.[42]

World Summit on the Information Society

Main article: World Summit on the Information Society

Several of the 67 principles adopted at the World Summit on the Information Society convened by the
United Nations in Geneva in 2003 directly address the digital divide:[43]

10. We are also fully aware that the benefits of the information technology revolution are today
unevenly distributed between the developed and developing countries and within societies. We are fully
committed to turning this digital divide into a digital opportunity for all, particularly for those who risk
being left behind and being further marginalized.

11. We are committed to realizing our common vision of the Information Society for ourselves and for
future generations. We recognize that young people are the future workforce and leading creators and
earliest adopters of ICTs. They must therefore be empowered as learners, developers, contributors,
entrepreneurs and decision-makers. We must focus especially on young people who have not yet been
able to benefit fully from the opportunities provided by ICTs. We are also committed to ensuring that the
development of ICT applications and operation of services respects the rights of children as well as their
protection and well-being.

12. We affirm that development of ICTs provides enormous opportunities for women, who should be an
integral part of, and key actors, in the Information Society. We are committed to ensuring that the
Information Society enables women's empowerment and their full participation on the basis on equality
in all spheres of society and in all decision-making processes. To this end, we should mainstream a
gender equality perspective and use ICTs as a tool to that end.
13. In building the Information Society, we shall pay particular attention to the special needs of
marginalized and vulnerable groups of society, including migrants, internally displaced persons and
refugees, unemployed and underprivileged people, minorities and nomadic people. We shall also
recognize the special needs of older persons and persons with disabilities.

14. We are resolute to empower the poor, particularly those living in remote, rural and marginalized
urban areas, to access information and to use ICTs as a tool to support their efforts to lift themselves out
of poverty.

15. In the evolution of the Information Society, particular attention must be given to the special situation
of indigenous peoples, as well as to the preservation of their heritage and their cultural legacy.

16. We continue to pay special attention to the particular needs of people of developing countries,
countries with economies in transition, Least Developed Countries, Small Island Developing States,
Landlocked Developing Countries, Highly Indebted Poor Countries, countries and territories under
occupation, countries recovering from conflict and countries and regions with special needs as well as to
conditions that pose severe threats to development, such as natural disasters.

21. Connectivity is a central enabling agent in building the Information Society. Universal, ubiquitous,
equitable and affordable access to ICT infrastructure and services, constitutes one of the challenges of
the Information Society and should be an objective of all stakeholders involved in building it.
Connectivity also involves access to energy and postal services, which should be assured in conformity
with the domestic legislation of each country.

28. We strive to promote universal access with equal opportunities for all to scientific knowledge and the
creation and dissemination of scientific and technical information, including open access initiatives for
scientific publishing.

46. In building the Information Society, States are strongly urged to take steps with a view to the
avoidance of, and refrain from, any unilateral measure not in accordance with international law and the
Charter of the United Nations that impedes the full achievement of economic and social development by
the population of the affected countries, and that hinders the well-being of their population.

References

Lu, Ming-te (2001). "Digital divide in developing countries" (PDF). Journal of Global Information
Technology Management. 4 (3): 1–4. doi:10.1080/1097198x.2001.10856304. S2CID 153534228. Archived
from the original (PDF) on August 26, 2014.

Hilbert, Martin (2016). "The bad news is that the digital access divide is here to stay: Domestically
installed bandwidths among 172 countries for 1986–2014". Telecommunications Policy. 40 (6): 567–581.
doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2016.01.006.

"Percentage of Individuals using the Internet 2000–2012", International Telecommunications Union

(Geneva), June 2013, retrieved June 22, 2013
"Individuals using the Internet 2005 to 2014", Key ICT indicators for developed and developing countries
and the world (totals and penetration rates), International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Retrieved
May 25, 2015.

"Internet users per 100 inhabitants 1997 to 2007", ICT Data and Statistics (IDS), International
Telecommunication Union (ITU). Retrieved May 25, 2015.

"Total Midyear Population for the World: 1950-2050"". International Programs Center for Demographic
and Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau. Archived from the original on 2017-04-17. Retrieved 2020-
02-28.

"Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2019". Telecommunication Development Bureau,
International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Retrieved 2020-02-28.

"Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2019". Telecommunication Development Bureau,
International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Retrieved 2020-02-28.

"Active mobile-broadband subscriptions per 100 inhabitants 2012", Dynamic Report, ITU ITC EYE,
International Telecommunication Union. Retrieved on June 29, 2013.

"Total Midyear Population for the World: 1950-2050"". International Programs Center for Demographic
and Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau. Archived from the original on 2017-04-17. Retrieved 2020-
02-28.

"Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2019". Telecommunication Development Bureau,
International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Retrieved 2020-02-28.

Guillen, M. F.; Suárez, S. L. (2005). "Explaining the global digital divide: Economic, political and
sociological drivers of cross-national internet use". Social Forces. 84 (2): 681–708. CiteSeerX
10.1.1.649.2813. doi:10.1353/sof.2006.0015. S2CID 3124360.

Krueger 1993; Attewell and Battle 1999.

Wilson, III. E.J. (2004). The Information Revolution and Developing Countries. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Hilbert, Martin (2010). "When is Cheap, Cheap Enough to Bridge the Digital Divide? Modeling Income
Related Structural Challenges of Technology Diffusion in Latin America" (PDF). World Development. 38
(5): 756–770. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.11.019.

"Digital Divide." The Digital Divide, Stanford University,

cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/digital-divide/start.html. Retrieved September 19,
2017.

Hilbert, Martin (2011). "The end justifies the definition: The manifold outlooks on the digital divide and
their practical usefulness for policy-making". Telecommunications Policy. 35 (8): 715–736.
doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2011.06.012.

Hilbert, Martin (2011). "Digital gender divide or technologically empowered women in developing
countries? A typical case of lies, damned lies, and statistics" (PDF). Women's Studies International
Forum. 34 (6): 479–489. doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2011.07.001.

"U.S. Internet penetration by gender 2000–2018".

Section 508 Archived August 6, 2013, at the Wayback Machine (1998). United States Government.

Tait, Robert (July 23, 2006). "Iran bans fast internet to cut west's influence". The Guardian. London.
Retrieved March 11, 2017.

Carr, Deborah (2007). "The Global Digital Divide". Contexts. 6 (3): 58. doi:10.1525/ctx.2007.6.3.58. S2CID
62654684. ProQuest 219574259.

"Who's Not Online and Why". Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. September 25, 2013.
Retrieved February 4, 2018.

This graphic illustrates the difference in fixed broadband penetration (History and Forecast) between the
European Union and Sub-Saharan Africa from International Futures

Digital Divide – ICT Information Communications Technology – 50x15 Initiative. (March 21, 2014).
Retrieved April 13, 2014, from http://www.internetworldstats.com/links10.htm

"Inclusion of excluded groups in decision-making in the development of technologies". Social Impact

Open Repository (SIOR). 2011. Archived from the original on September 5, 2017. Retrieved September 5,
2017.

James, J (2008). "Digital Divide Complacency: Misconceptions and Dangers". The Information Society.
24: 54–61. doi:10.1080/01972240701774790. S2CID 205507951.

Pick, J.; Azari, R. (2008). "Global Digital Divide: Influence of Socioeconomic, Governmental, and
Accessibility Factors on Information Technology". Information Technology for Development. 14 (2): 91–
115. doi:10.1002/itdj.20095. S2CID 214654004.

Rahman, H. (2006). Empowering Marginal Communities and Information Networking. Hershey,

Pennsylvania: Idea Group Publishing.

Fizz, Robyn; Mansur, Karla (June 4, 2008), "Helping MIT neighbors cross the 'digital divide'" (PDF), MIT
Tech Talk, Cambridge: MIT, p. 3

IMARA Project at MIT

Fizz, Robyn, "CommuniTech Works Locally to Bridge the Digital Divide" Archived August 18, 2011, at the
Wayback Machine, IST News, MIT, April 8, 2011
Hartmann, Dominik (March 25, 2016), "Building bridges", D+C, development&cooperation

Ali, Amir (2011). "The Power of Social Media in Developing Nations: New Tools for Closing the Global
Digital Divide and Beyond" (PDF). Harvard Human Rights Journal. 24: 1. Archived from the original (PDF)
on November 14, 2012. Retrieved March 30, 2014.

"Facebook Statistics", 2011. Archived October 18, 2007, at the Wayback Machine

(Boston) Digital Bridge Foundation

"Mayor Menino, Boston Digital Bridge Foundation Host Evening on the Bridge 2.0 Celebration", Mayor's
Office, Boston, Press Release, September 26, 2002

"City of Boston Receives $4.3 Million Grant That Will Give Training, Computers and Opportunity to
Underserved Communities", City of Boston press office, September 14, 2010

"Is connectivity a human right?" (PDF).[permanent dead link]

"Internet.org:About".

"Elon Musk and Richard Branson invest in satellite-Internet ventures". January 17, 2015.

One Laptop Per Child. (2009).

"Declaration of Principles", WSIS-03/GENEVA/DOC/4-E, World Summit on the Information Society,

Geneva, December 12, 2003

Bibliography

Azam, M. (2007). "Working together toward the inclusive digital world". Digital Opportunity Forum.
Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved July 17, 2009, from http://www.dof.or.kr/pdf/Bangladesh%5BPPT
%5D.pdf[dead link]

Borland, J. (April 13, 1998). "Move Over Megamalls, Cyberspace Is the Great Retailing Equalizer". Knight
Ridder/Tribune Business News.

Brynjolfsson, Erik and Michael D. Smith (2000). "The great equalizer? Consumer choice behavior at
Internet shopbots". Sloan Working Paper 4208–01. eBusiness@MIT Working Paper 137. July 2000. Sloan
School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

James, J. (2004). Information Technology and Development: A new paradigm for delivering the Internet
to rural areas in developing countries. New York, NY: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-32632-X (print). ISBN 0-203-
32550-8 (e-book).

Southwell, B. G. (2013). Social networks and popular understanding of science and health: sharing
disparities. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-1-4214-1324-2 (book).

World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), 2005. "What's the state of ICT access around the
world?" Retrieved July 17, 2009.

World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), 2008. "ICTs in Africa: Digital Divide to Digital
Opportunity". Retrieved July 17, 2009.

External links

Wikibooks has a book on the topic of: The Information Age

Wikibooks has a book on the topic of: Information and Communication Technologies for Poverty
Alleviation

Wikibooks has a book on the topic of: Internet Governance

E-inclusion, an initiative of the European Commission to ensure that "no one is left behind" in enjoying
the benefits of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT).

eEurope – An information society for all, a political initiative of the European Union.

Digital Inclusion Network, an online exchange on topics related to the digital divide and digital inclusion,
E-Democracy.org.

Profiles of Innovators and Leaders Who Make a Difference (PDF). Expanding Digital Opportunity in New
York City Public Schools. Committee on Technology in Government, New York City Council. June 2004.

"The Digital Divide Within Education Caused by the Internet", Benjamin Todd, Acadia University, Nova
Scotia, Canada, Undergraduate Research Journal for the Human Sciences, Volume 11 (2012).

Statistics from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU)

Mobile Phones and Access is an animated video produced by TechChange and USAID which explores
issues of access related to global mobile phone usage.

vte

Science and technology studies

vte

Cultural generations

vte

South–South cooperation and Third Worldism

vte
Economic classification of countries

vte

Globalization

Categories: Digital divideDigital mediaTechnology developmentEconomic geographyCultural

globalizationGlobal inequalityRural economicsSocial inequality

Navigation menu

Not logged in

Talk

Contributions

Create account

Log in

ArticleTalk

ReadView sourceView historySearch

Search Wikipedia

Main page

Contents

Current events

Random article

About Wikipedia

Contact us

Donate

Contribute

Help

Learn to edit

Community portal

Recent changes
Upload file

Tools

What links here

Related changes

Special pages

Permanent link

Page information

Cite this page

Wikidata item

Print/export

Download as PDF

Printable version

Languages

Add links

This page was last edited on 21 February 2021, at 22:54 (UTC).