esomar telephone and internet coverage around the world 2016

CONTENTS TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD

1

TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD An ESOMAR ReportBy Bill Blyth and Les Taylor

TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD

2

COPYRIGHT © ESOMAR 2016.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system of any nature, or transmitted or made available in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of ESOMAR. ESOMAR will pursue copyright infringements.

In spite of careful preparation, this publication may contain errors. ESOMAR does not accept responsibility for the consequences that may arise as a result thereof.

ISBN 42-831-0285-1

Published by ESOMAR, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsFor further information, please contact [email protected].

ESOMAR, the World Association for Social, Opinion and Market Research, gathers over 4900 individual and 400 corporate members in over 130 countries and is the essential organisation for encouraging, advancing and elevating market research.

Codes and guidelines are available at www.esomar.org

CONTENTS TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD

3

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 4

FOREWORD 5

PREFACE 6

1. DATASOURCES 7

2.PHONECOVERAGE 8

3. INTERNETCOVERAGE 10

4.WHATTHISMEANSFORRESEARCHERS 13

5.ADDENDUM 14

OwnershipoffixedlinetelephoneinthehomeacrosstheEU

OwnershipoffixedandmobilephonelinesacrosstheEU

OwnershipofnarrowbandinternetacrosstheEU

CCSCountrieswithknowncoverageissues

TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD INTRODUCTION

4

This is probably the most long-standing and oft-debated question in any research project nowadays, and particularly in multi-country studies.

Within the overall project specification, the choice of mode of communication is almost entirely dependent on the reach and representation of that mode. As globally coherent and up-to-date figures for these reach and penetration measures have not existed to-date, these two criteria have become increasingly subservient to “cost”, and thus was born what is often referred to as the “race to the bottom” in terms of price, and the ensuing impact on quality.

Is this a (too) broad statement, which doesn’t take into account the many important commercial drivers and methodological nuances that impact on the choice of mode? Perhaps….but it is also true that the quality debate has become more pointed than ever before; a lot of online work has reverted back to telephone in the US, and the proliferation of “convenience” samples may well lie at the heart of the current accuracy debate surrounding polling.

So what does all this have to do with this publication?

Well, to-date, there has never been as comprehensive a report published on the reach and penetration of

telephone and internet, using consistent and concurrent measures across different regions. This is what makes this report unique, and what makes this report THE definitive reference point for anyone wishing to decide upon the most appropriate mode of communication for their research project.

Compiled by Bill Blyth and Les Taylor, ESOMAR is truly delighted to launch this report, and so please allow me to put on record our sincere gratitude to the following entities for granting us access to these key statistics from their surveys:

TNS for its Eurobarometer; the US Census Bureau for the National Health Interview Survey and the American Community Survey; the US government for the Current Population survey, and last, but by no means least, Google, for providing us information from their Connected Consumer Survey.

Without this data, and without the efforts of Bill and Les, our profession would not have such an important reference document – as echoed by Corinne Moy in her foreword. Thank You.

FinnRabenESOMAR Director General

INTRODUCTION

FACE-TO-FACE, TELEPHONE OR ONLINE?

FinnRabenESOMAR Director General

FOREWORD TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD

5

This new ESOMAR report by Bill Blyth and Les Taylor on the levels of telephone, mobile and internet coverage across the globe is a welcome addition to the researcher’s toolkit. It provides an extremely valuable new resource for designing and conducting international research.

The choice of methodology always presents a challenge when doing international research. Researchers need to assess and balance a number of factors before making the best choice: the need for accuracy, the impact on data quality and coverage of different methods, the degree of population coverage provided, sample frame availability, the bias that online or telephone interviews might bring etc.

Within these considerations, coverage of population is a key criterion. Consistent, accurate information across a wide range of countries is not easy to access. Generally such information must be drawn from a range of sources. Measurement is often not consistent and therefore not comparable. Recency of information is also an issue. Disparate sources inevitably provide information from a range of time periods.

This report overcomes many of these issues. It provides measurement of penetration levels from reliable and robust surveys, for 56 countries across Europe, Africa, North America, South America, Asia and Oceana. The

main sources are the EU’s Eurobarometer and three well-respected US government sources. For countries outside these geographies, the report utilises a robust commercial programme of wide repute, conducted on behalf of Google. Importantly, the authors also clearly state the shortcomings of this source, so that users can make intelligent judgements around the use of the data.

In addition to current levels, the report provides coverage levels from prior time periods – allowing the reader to understand the dynamic nature of access levels in different markets.

The inclusion of both mobile and fixed line access further allows an understanding of the feasibility of both CATI and online research via the mobile platform. With consumers increasingly in a state of motion, this intelligence provides a useful guide to how best to intercept them to maximise response rates.

This report will help researchers to design better international studies, to make better judgements about the optimal methodology for different countries. It will also provide illumination around the possibilities of implementing mobile and online research.

CorinneMoyDirector of Marketing and Data Sciences at GfK UK

FOREWORD

CorinneMoyDirector of Marketing and

Data Sciences at GfK UK

TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD PREFACE

6

Multi-country research is generally used for International brands and bodies. As it is being conducted increasingly frequently and by a broader range of companies, ESOMAR believes it is timely to examine the coverage of the major methods of data collection.

Currently face-to-face [FTF] interviewing holds few basic problems other than cost. In contrast, telephone and internet surveys have issues, even when only basic questions such as coverage are considered.

We started our work with two aims. Firstly, to find and document good estimates of the telephone and internet penetrations in as many countries as possible. Secondly, to outline our views on the implications of those levels for researchers.

This paper is divided into four major sections. The first covers the data sources that we have used for our analyses. The second and third sections detail telephone and internet coverage levels. Each of those has sub-sections for the countries of the European Union, the USA, and a number of other countries spread across six continents. The fourth is a discussion on the implications of the data for researchers. Finally, we provide a brief summary.

This report includes information on 28 EU countries from Eurobarometer and the USA. The credentials of our EU and USA sources are solid, especially those for the ACS in the USA. Hence, we are confident that we have met our first aim for those countries.

It also includes less detailed information for 27 additional countries from the Connected Consumer Survey (CCS). The primary purpose of the CCS is to provide background data for Google’s Consumer Barometer Study but not the specific estimates we need so those data have limitations as far as this report is concerned. The telephone data relate only to mobile phones and in addition, both sets of data for

the FTF countries relate to indeterminate populations. This means that we must treat the values with caution and recommend that they be regarded as ideas of magnitude rather than as absolutes.

Thus, we have only been partially successful for the CCS countries and as we are unaware of any other source that can provide verifiable estimates, we would welcome any information on such sources.

Given our caveats above we can say for telephone we have adequate coverage in most countries, although work on response rates is needed.

For the internet, coverage looks like a problem that is close to solution in many markets. However, the other problems around internet cannot be simply brushed aside. A lot more work is needed on those issues.

We thank the following as without their information our work would not have been possible:

1. Google for giving permission for us to access and analyse its CCS data.

2. TNS for providing a CCS dataset containing the characteristics we needed, for copies of the Methodological Reports for the CCS countries using face-to-face surveys, and also for answers to our questions.

3. The European Commission and our USA data sources for publishing their reports free of any charge on the Internet.

Finally, we must point out that the opinions given in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of ESOMAR.

BillBlythandLesTaylor

PREFACE

Bill Blyth

Les Taylor

DATA SOURCES TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD

7

EuropeanUnion(EU)Our EU data are taken from Eurobarometer (EB). This is a cross-national survey conducted by TNS for the European Commission. It covers each of the 28 EU countries, and has been running in its present form since 1973. It has waves of face-to-face interviews with samples of adults. Typically, these waves take place five or six times each year using a multi-stage random probability design. The waves have 1,000 interviews in most of the EU countries. A few have larger samples, and Luxembourg only 500 interviews.

The data we are using are taken from supplements known as E-Communications Surveys. They usually take place on one wave per year. Here we show data from 2005 and 2014.

USAWe use three US data sources. These are the National Health Interview Survey {NHIS], the Current Population Survey (CPS) and the American Community Survey (ACS).

The NHIS is an annual survey of some 35,000 interviews. The data are collected by the US Census Bureau and it has a multi-stage design with CAPI interviews. The sample is randomly selected in every US state and the District of Columbia.

The CPS is the source of the US government’s statistics on employment with a monthly sample size of some 56,000. It also has supplements which collect data on related topics. We have used data from the Internet Use supplement, which is conducted one month each year.

The ACS is a continuous survey with data collected by the US Census Bureau. Its aim is to replace the long-form, once in a decade, questionnaire of the census. A multi-stage sample is used to give estimates for all USA geographical units of 65,000+ people. Hence, over 2.2 million interviews are conducted each year. They are obtained by internet, mail, telephone, and personal interviews.

OthercountriesOur final source is the Connected Consumer Survey (CCS) conducted by TNS for Google in 50+ countries,

25 of which are in the EU. The survey enumerates the total adult population (both offline and online) in each country. The definition of an adult is that commonly used in each country. Most use an 18+ definition. Some use 16+, and 20+ is used in Japan. Data collection is by CATI in some countries, and face to face using CAPI or PAPI in others.

The data were collected in early 2014 and 2015. Each country had a sample of 1,000 each year, except for India, which had a target sample of 4,000.

CATI: The CATI countries use random digit dialling (RDD) with dual frames. One frame is of landline numbers, the other is of mobile numbers. The proportions of the sample coming from each frame are determined by knowledge of the population proportions and that knowledge is limited in some countries.

A dual frame CATI method is perhaps not the most obvious/appropriate approach to determine the proportion of respondents that use a mobile phone. However, there are cost considerations to be made regarding the collection method in each country.

FTF: The FTF collection uses multi – stage probability sampling to determine sample points. Then, random walk methods are used to establish the households to be contacted in the selected points. The adults to be interviewed are selected either by a Kish grid or by the nearest birthday.

Google and TNS let us see some internal reports that provide details of the sample design for each country using FTF. Those designs attempt to achieve full geographic coverage but as they must also be practical, some do not cover areas/regions that are ‘unsafe’, or would deviate from the usual standards of a country. Others do not cover areas of difficult access where costs would be prohibitive for instance, one country used only urban areas and another used one ‘representative’ city in each region. Whilst this report does not provide specific details, a list of countries with such known issues is included in the Addendum (see page 15). This has been taken into account when assessing their data noting that such adjustments tend to inflate the mobile phone and internet access levels shown by the data for those countries. ■

DATASOURCES1.

TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD PHONE COVERAGE

8

Mobile is now the most common phone connection with rates of over 85% (see Figure 2). Fixed line has declined, sometimes rapidly, everywhere. However, fixed line only users need to be added in a few EU countries to achieve over 95% coverage. That level would probably not be required for many surveys, as it involves complex sampling methods.

USAFigure 3 shows data for the USA from 2010 to 2013. As in the EU, mobile is the most common type of phone connection, with fixed line ownership falling.

OthercountriesFigure 4 gives mobile phone data for the CCS countries excluding those in the EU. This is for two reasons. Firstly, the respondents are asked if they currently use a mobile phone and that might mean that they might not own a mobile phone. Secondly, all the EU countries were surveyed using CATI and thus there is some doubt about the definition of the percentages. They may be percentages amongst those with phones rather than for the total population. These may inflate the coverage levels. As we note that the CCS values tend to be higher than the Eurobarometer levels, we are only providing the Eurobarometer data for the EU.

22 of the 31 countries spread across five continents have reported levels in excess of 90%, with another four above 85%. Only Canada shows a value below 80%. That is surprising and questionable as it is less than its reported internet value (see later). We believe that those are generally above the actual levels. Some FTF countries have coverage issues. The CATI samples all have phones. They nevertheless indicate very high coverage levels.

EUFigure 1 provides data for all adults in the two years for telephone coverage of countries in the EU. It shows values for all phones. Total telephone coverage is now over 95% in all these countries.

PHONECOVERAGE2.

Figure1Ownershipofanyphoneinthehome(incl.fixedormobile)acrosstheEU

Figure2OwnershipofmobileacrosstheEU

Source: Eurobarometer E-Communications Household Surveys


100

90

80

70

60 2005

50

40 2014

30

20

10

0

Aus

tria

Bel

gium

Bul

garia

Croa

tia

Cypr

us

Czec

h Re

publ

ic

Den

mar

k

Esto

nia

Finl

and

Fran

ce

Ger

man

y

Gre

ece

Hun

gary

Irela

nd Italy

Latv

ia

Lith

uani

a

Luxe

mbo

urg

Mal

ta

Net

herla

nds

Pola

nd

Port

ugal

Rom

ania

Slov

akia

Slov

enia

Spai

n

Swed

en

Uni

ted

King

dom

100

90

80

70

60 2005

50

40 2014

30

20

10

0

Aus

tria

Bel

gium

Bul

garia

Croa

tia

Cypr

us

Czec

h Re

publ

ic

Den

mar

k

Esto

nia

Finl

and

Fran

ce

Ger

man

y

Gre

ece

Hun

gary

Irela

nd Italy

Latv

ia

Lith

uani

a

Luxe

mbo

urg

Mal

ta

Net

herla

nds

Pola

nd

Port

ugal

Rom

ania

Slov

akia

Slov

enia

Spai

n

Swed

en

Uni

ted

King

dom

PHONE COVERAGE TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD

9

OverallFigures 2, 3, and 4 show mobile phone data for 60 countries. Most have coverage levels of more than 85%. Thus, in general, sampling mobiles alone for surveys would be acceptable for most day-to-day purposes.

This is a major change since 2005.There are, however, other factors to consider that affect response rates. These include interview length, location, and multiple lines per individual. Others include legislation and overseas use. ■

Figure3GrowthintelephoneownershipintheUS

TelephoneOwnership

2010 2011 2012 2013

Jul - Dec Jan - Jun Jul - Dec Jan - Jun Jul - Dec Jan - Jun Jul - Dec

% % % % % % %

TotalTelephone 98 98 98 98 98 98 98

TotalFixed 68 66 64 62 60 58 56

TotalMobile 85 87 87 88 89 89 89

FixedandMobile 55 55 53 53 51 49 48

Fixedonly 13 11 10 9 9 9 9

Mobileonly 30 32 34 36 38 39 41

NoTelephone 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Source: National Health Interview Survey

Figure4Penetrationofmobilephone–GoogleCCSCountries

Continent/Country Method2014%

2015%

Africa

Egypt FTF 84 82

Kenya FTF 94 NA

Nigeria FTF 93 NA

SouthAfrica FTF 92 92

NorthAmerica

Canada CATI 76 NA

Mexico FTF 76 82

SouthAmerica

Argentina FTF 84 86

Brazil FTF 82 91

Asia

China FTF 99 99

HongKong CATI 95 96

India FTF 82 84

Indonesia FTF 88 85

Israel CATI 81 93

Japan CATI 86 88

Korea CATI 98 98

Malaysia FTF 84 96

Philippines FTF 97 87

SaudiArabia CATI 96 91

Singapore CATI 96 96

Taiwan CATI 92 92

Thailand FTF 89 96

UnitedArabEmirates CATI 97 99

Vietnam FTF 93 93

Europe

Norway CATI 89 97

Russia CATI 86 95

Serbia CATI 84 90

Switzerland CATI 84 93

Turkey FTF 89 86

Ukraine FTF 91 94

Oceania

Australia CATI 82 91

NewZealand CATI 84 88

Source: Google Connected Consumer Survey

TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD INTERNET COVERAGE

10

EUThe EU has seen internet access growth in only four countries with household internet penetration of more than 60% in 2005. Now 17 have more than 70% and 13 have more than 75%. However, there is still some way to go. If we set 85% as an acceptable minimum for total population surveys, only five EU countries meet that target.

USAThe USA, like the EU, has seen rapid growth from less than 65% in 2007 to a household penetration of about 75% in 2012. A continuation of that trend would suggest a value of around 80% now.

OthercountriesThe CCS asks how often respondents access the internet for personal reasons. That is not the same as having internet access in the home which will be lower.

We will cover those countries using FTF surveys separately from those with CATI data collection.

FTFMost of the CCS countries using FTF show large increases in internet coverage between 2014 and 2015, although all are still below 80%. It is likely that the coverage issues inflate some of the values. Hence, we believe that the internet should not be used for surveys in those countries at present.

CATIIn contrast, 10 of the 15 CCS countries using CATI have reported levels of more than 85%. The CCS question asks “How often do you access the internet for personal reasons?” that could include access outside the home or personal access at work. Thus, the coverage levels could be over-stated so in penetration terms these countries could be considered for internet research.

Coverage of the Internet has changed completely in the last few years. PC based growth has continued combined with the introduction, and rapid growth, of various forms of smart phones and feature phones.

INTERNETCOVERAGE3.

Figure5GrowthinhouseholdinternetaccessacrosstheEU

Internettotal

Country2005

%

2014%

2014[2]%

Austria 40 64 71

Belgium 47 76 81

Bulgaria 8 53 54

Croatia 31 70 77

Cyprus 27 63 66

CzechRepublic 26 65 71

Denmark 68 88 91

Estonia 38 70 75

Finland 56 78 80

France 40 78 80

Germany 44 76 79

Greece 19 55 60

Hungary 18 55 61

Ireland 36 67 76

Italy 31 44 61

Latvia 22 70 77

Lithuania 17 60 66

Luxembourg 60 77 87

Malta 43 69 72

Netherlands 80 93 94

Poland 23 57 63

Portugal 18 47 50

Romania 11 54 59

Slovakia 14 59 62

Slovenia 45 73 80

Spain 28 56 68

Sweden 74 91 93

UnitedKingdom 50 76 85

2014[2] includes mobile internet connections


Figure6GrowthinhouseholdinternetaccessintheUS

Internetaccess

2007 2009 2010 2011 2012

InternetatHome 62 69 71 72 75

Source: US Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Internet Use Supplement

INTERNET COVERAGE TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD

11

OverallGrowth in internet coverage seems likely to continue. The sources of that growth, and what the current levels mean for online research requires a short discussion.

Growth in internet use has come from two sources. Connections via PC/laptop use have continued to increase. This has been accompanied by rapid growth in the use of smart/feature phones and tablets which may, of course all be classified as handheld computers. These appeal both to new users of computing and to those who want to fit handheld alongside PC/laptops.

We see growth in these two sectors being driven by different factors. Use by the classic laptop will continue to grow, but slower than in the past. We believe use via handheld devices will grow with a number of drivers. Firstly, there will be purchases from members of laptop households because of their wide range of uses. Secondly, there will be a growth of basic machines with limited functions. These will provide the core uses needed to stay part of the everyday functioning society and will attract new users in the same way that mobile now does for phone connections worldwide.

Finally, we note that some markets appear to be going straight to handheld device growth, skipping the PC/laptop phase.

DemographicsThe USA sample sizes permit analysis by sub groups. The elderly, Afro Americans, those with lower education levels, and those with lower incomes all have lower levels of both computer use and internet access. The USA is not typical in many ways. However, it is likely that the elderly and those with lower incomes will have lower levels of internet connections in most, if not all, countries.

However, we are discussing different modes of contact, patterns of ownership, and sub-groups. As people age, but maintain their patterns of spending, the elderly will become higher penetration users. There will be a further effect as handheld platforms become cheaper which will increase penetration in other lower use groups. This will be of major importance, if there is an economic slump in the next few years. ■

Figure7Internetaccess–GoogleCCSCountries

Continent/Country Method 2014% 2015%

Africa

Egypt FTF 39 43

Kenya FTF 51 NA

Nigeria FTF 63 NA

SouthAfrica FTF 52 59

NorthAmerica

Canada CATI 86 NA

Mexico FTF 71 71

SouthAmerica

Argentina FTF 60 66

Brazil FTF 51 58

Asia

China FTF 70 73

HongKong CATI 73 74

India FTF 35 38

Indonesia FTF 44 44

Israel CATI 86 86

Japan CATI 89 90

Korea CATI 80 83

Malaysia FTF 64 73

Philippines FTF 67 78

SaudiArabia CATI 88 92

Singapore CATI 84 83

Taiwan CATI 81 79

Thailand FTF 42 59

UnitedArabEmirates CATI 93 94

Vietnam FTF 57 73

Europe

Norway CATI 95 96

Russia CATI 87 84

Serbia CATI 60 61

Switzerland CATI 91 90

Turkey FTF 57 69

Ukraine FTF 57 58

Oceania

Australia CATI 91 91

NewZealand CATI 91 91

Source: Google Connected Consumer Survey

TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD INTERNET COVERAGE

12

Figure8:USAComputerandInternetUseforHouseholds:2013(Inthousands.Forinformationonconfidentialityprotection,samplingerror,non-samplingerror,anddefinitions,seewww.census.gov/acs/www)

Householdcharacteristics

Totalhouseholds

Householdwithacomputer%

HouseholdwithInternetuse%

Total%

Desktoporlaptopcomputer

Handheldcomputer WithsomeInternetsubscription1

Withhigh-speedInternetconnection1

Totalhouseholds 116,291 83.8 78.5 63.6 74.4 73.4

Ageofhouseholder

15–34years 22,331 92.1 82.1 83.3 77.7 77.4

35–44years 20,745 92.5 86.4 80.7 82.5 81.9

45–64years 46,015 86.8 82.7 65.2 78.7 77.6

65yearsandolder 27,201 65.1 62.3 31.8 58.3 56.3

RaceandHispanicoriginofhouseholder

Whitealone,non-Hispanic 80,699 85.4 81.4 63.4 77.4 76.2

Blackalone,non-Hispanic 13,816 75.8 66.3 58.9 61.3 60.6

Asianalone,non-Hispanic 4,941 92.5 90.0 78.6 86.6 86.0

Hispanic(ofanyrace) 14,209 79.7 70.0 63.7 66.7 65.9

LimitedEnglish-speakinghousehold

No 111,084 84.7 79.6 64.6 75.5 74.4

Yes 5,207 63.9 54.9 43.7 51.4 50.6

Metropolitanstatus

Metropolitanarea 98,607 85.1 79.9 65.9 76.1 75.2

Nonmetropolitanarea 17,684 76.5 70.6 51.1 64.8 63.1

Householdincome

Lessthan$25,000 27,605 62.4 53.9 39.6 48.4 47.2

$25,000–$49,999 27,805 81.1 74.0 55.2 69.0 67.6

$50,000–$99,999 34,644 92.6 88.4 71.9 84.9 83.8

$100,000–$149,999 14,750 97.1 95.1 84.5 92.7 92.1

$150,000andmore 11,487 98.1 96.8 90.2 94.9 94.5

Region

Northeast 20,937 84 .1 79.9 62.8 76.8 76.0

Midwest 26,161 83 .1 77.9 61.2 73.4 72.1

South 43,399 82.2 76.0 63.2 71.7 70.7

West 25,793 86.8 82.0 67.4 78.1 77.1

Total25yearsandolder 111,700 83.5 78.5 62.8 74.5 73.5

Educationalattainmentofhouseholder

Lessthanhighschoolgraduate 12,855 56.0 47.2 36.5 43.8 42.7

Highschoolgraduate(includesequivalency) 28,277 73.9 66.9 48.5 62.9 61.4

Somecollegeorassociate’sdegree 34,218 89.0 83.9 67.0 79.2 78.0

Bachelor’sdegreeorhigher 36,349 95.5 93.5 79.3 90.1 89.4

1 About 4 .2% of all households reported household Internet use without a paid subscription. These households are not included in this table.

Note: Handheld computers include smart mobile phones and other handheld wireless computers. High-speed Internet indicates a household has Internet service type other than dial-up alone.

For a version of this table with margins of error, please see Appendix Table A at www .census .gov/hhes/computer/.

Source: U .S. Census Bureau, 2013 American Community Survey.

WHAT THIS MEANS FOR RESEARCHERS TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD

13

Fourthly, there are differences in the complexity of software and its load on the hosting software.

These are just broad headings. There are also other issues of a more detailed kind. It can be argued that research has always had such issues in the background, and has got used to overcoming them. However, we would argue that their size and nature makes the use of the internet, on its own, dangerous for more than simplistic research. This is particularly true for social research. It also has major implications for research with populations who are current non-users of computers.

The ACS shows that mixed mode designs can produce very accurate results. However, they need sound designs and emphasis on producing a quality product. In the current economic situation there is a temptation to focus on a few benefits and to overlook the negatives. This is a matter of concern to ESOMAR. ■

WHATTHISMEANSFORRESEARCHERS4.

Is this picture too simple? A view over the next five years, or even a shorter period, looking only at the penetration for both telephone and Internet surveys, must be positive. Telephone research using only mobile numbers rather than fixed and mobile is likely to become the telephone norm. However, response rates are crucial. Understanding reasons for non-response and actions to alleviate it requires extensive work. Looking at using the internet for research shows a more complex picture.

Our general assessment is as follows:

Firstly, suitable frames, or some form of contact that enables a direct random approach, do not exist.

Secondly, there are issues with getting software to work across all varieties of platform; desktop and handheld and their main divisions. This may not be a major impediment. However, researchers need to be aware of its importance to ensure good coverage.

Thirdly, there are differences in the size of screen and all the effects of this.

TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD ADDENDUM

14

Figure10OwnershipoffixedandmobilephonelinesacrosstheEU

Country 2005%

2014%

Austria 51 36Belgium 56 62Bulgaria 36 36Croatia 71 73Cyprus 75 63CzechRepublic 41 15Denmark 73 40Estonia 45 37Finland 46 14France 64 79Germany 63 83Greece 69 77Hungary 44 39Ireland 66 52Italy 60 50Latvia 41 27Lithuania 30 29Luxembourg 78 81Malta 80 82Netherlands 87 80Poland 46 25Portugal 39 53Romania 33 37Slovakia 38 16Slovenia 73 73Spain 55 64Sweden 93 95UnitedKingdom 72 77


ADDENDUM5.

Figure9OwnershipoffixedlinetelephoneinthehomeacrosstheEU

Country2005

%2014

%Austria 70 41Belgium 73 66Bulgaria 67 43Croatia 90 83Cyprus 90 68CzechRepublic 53 15Denmark 78 44Estonia 58 39Finland 57 15France 85 86Germany 86 91Greece 86 82Hungary 61 44Ireland 80 57Italy 67 55Latvia 54 28Lithuania 42 32Luxembourg 91 85Malta 97 92Netherlands 96 84Poland 63 30Portugal 54 61Romania 53 44Slovakia 54 20Slovenia 85 76Spain 74 70Sweden 100 98UnitedKingdom 85 82


ADDENDUM TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD

15

CCSCountrieswithknowncoverageIssuesThe Methodological Reports for the CCS countries using Face to Face surveys indicate coverage issues for the following countries:

BrazilChinaEgyptIndiaMexicoNigeriaPhilippinesThailandTurkey

Some of the reports are not very detailed and thus there may also be others with coverage issues. ■

Figure11OwnershipofnarrowbandinternetacrosstheEU

Country2005

%2014

%Austria 17 4Belgium 9 2Bulgaria 2 1Croatia 25 3Cyprus 20 3CzechRepublic 13 1Denmark 15 3Estonia 4 4Finland 13 2France 6 2Germany 27 7Greece 16 3Hungary 6 1Ireland 29 9Italy 17 1Latvia 6 6Lithuania 5 8Luxembourg 32 12Malta 11 0Netherlands 19 2Poland 7 3Portugal 5 2Romania 4 3Slovakia 6 1Slovenia 27 2Spain 11 1Sweden 27 2UnitedKingdom 15 1


TELEPHONE AND INTERNET COVERAGE AROUND THE WORLD CONTENTS

16

ESOMAR is the essential organisation for encouraging, advancing and elevating market research worldwide.

www.esomar.org

ESOMAR is the essential organisation for encouraging, advancing and elevating market research worldwide.