new frontiers in the digital divide: revisiting policy for ......new frontiers in the digital divide...
TRANSCRIPT
1
New Frontiers in the Digital Divide:
Revisiting Policy for Digital Inclusion
July 4, 2012
Professor Birgit Jæger
Roskilde University, Department of Society and Globalisation
Universitetsvej 1, building 25.2, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
2
Introduction When laying out a new strategy for e-government, the Danish government set the goal
that by 2015 all contacts between citizens and public authorities must be conducted
electronically (Government et al., 2011). For some years the public discussion
concerning the digital divide was almost absent in Denmark but the introduction of
this new strategy placed it back on the political agenda. According to the EU’s strategy
for e-government, every citizen ought to have equal access to public services, this
raises the question of how a policy for digital inclusion where nobody is left behind can
be formed.
The new strategy for e-government marks a profound shift in the interaction between
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and society. Until now it has been
voluntary as to whether or not citizens want to use ICT and a lot of citizens, especially
senior citizens, have chosen not to use the technology. But the new e-government
strategy rules out this choice. It is now a duty for all Danish citizens to know how to
handle a computer in order to get access to public e-services. This situation has upset
the biggest association for older people in Denmark: the DanAge Association who, in
January 2012, arranged a meeting to discuss the consequences of the new strategy for
e-government. The interest was overwhelming and at the meeting several speakers
expressed the desire for the right to reject ICT and protested against being forced `to
go digital’.
However, senior citizens are not the only group affected of the e-government strategy.
New frontiers in the digital divide are opening and a new group is emerging as being
excluded – the youngsters. Just after the presentation of the e-government strategy
one of the leading Danish newspapers ran the headline: “The Municipalities’ Websites
are Nonsense for Young People”1. The article reported that young people were
queuing up in town halls to get help to fill out forms which are already available on the
internet. And a survey, sponsored by the newspaper, showed that more adult people
found it easy to use public e-services that young people.
The e-government strategy does not only affect citizens it also puts a responsibility on
the public authorities. Until now it has mostly been regarded as the responsibility of
the individual citizens to gain the necessary computer skills but the EU policy of giving
equal access to public e-services suggests that the public authorities now have an
obligation to up skill the citizens to serve themselves through the public e-services.
Hence, policies and actions for digital inclusion become a central theme for the
implementation of the e-government strategy. In this article I will investigate how the
Danish policies and actions for digital inclusion are formed and, based on the
knowledge we have about the digital divide, analyze if these policies and actions are
sufficient to solve the problem.
3
Denmark is regarded as being in front of ICT developments due to its high scores on
international ranking lists concerning digital readiness in the form of access to
computers, broadband connections to the internet, use of mobile phones, and the
development of e-government (e.g. OECD, 2005 & 2010; UN, 2010). In this way, the
digital gap in Denmark “is much smaller than in nearly every other country” (OECD,
2005: 57). Hence, we must assume that other countries have similar or even bigger
problems in overcoming the digital divide and in this way it seems feasible to use
Denmark as a case for studying how to solve the problem.
The analysis presented here is based on a multidisciplinary theoretical approach
drawing on theories of the digital divide, theories of domestication of technology, and
theories about the interplay between users and technology developed in the field of
STS (Science and Technology Studies). In continuation of this theoretical framework,
the analysis is conducted based on mixed methods research. In accordance with a
pragmatic approach to social science research methodology (Morgan, 2007), the
analysis draws on quantitative research as well as qualitative research. Hence, I draw
on statistics developed by Statistics Denmark – the national agency for statistic – as
well as a comprehensive study of senior citizens’ usage of ICT conducted some years
ago2. For the analysis of the policy I draw on a literature study of policy papers (Jæger
and Löfgren, 2010) as well as six qualitative interviews with key politicians – including
the Minister of Science and Technology – and key civil servants3.
The article is structured as follows: Firstly, I will present a theoretical discussion of the
concept of the digital divide. This discussion ends up with a definition of the concept as
well as an identification of six barriers to overcoming the digital divide. This will serve
as a framework for the analysis of the actual policies and actions. Secondly, I will
present an empirical description of the Danish digital divide. Thirdly, I will present an
analysis of the Danish policies and actions needed to overcome the digital divide. This
analysis takes its point of departure in a discussion of the digital divide as a political
problem followed by a short description of the government’s policies and actions and
finally an analysis which is structured by the identified barriers. Fourthly, I will
conclude and make some recommendations for a policy for digital inclusion based on
the analysis.
Defining and Understanding the Digital Divide In 2001 the digital divide was defined as “the gap between individuals, households,
businesses and geographic areas at different socio-economic levels with regard both to
their opportunities to access information and communication technologies (ICTs) and
to their use of the Internet for a wide variety of activities.” (OECD, 2001: 5). This
definition is often referred to as a divide between those who do and those who do not
4
have access to the technology. In accordance with this definition, the usual way to
describe the digital divide is based on quantitative surveys which measure the number
of individuals with or without computers and access to the internet (the so-called
‘readiness indicators’). These are related to socio-economic parameters such as
gender, age, race, disability, income, level of education, family structure, and
geography. In this way the digital divide is studied at the level of aggregated individual
behavior. This definition, and way to measure the digital divide, is widespread and
applied in a huge body of literature (e.g. Ferro et al., 2010).
However, this early definition has been criticized for being too simplistic. The
argument is that the digital divide is not just a question of having or not having access
to the technology. Norris (2001) argues that we are not dealing with one but three
different digital divides: A global divide (between developed and developing
countries), a social divide (between individuals within a nation), and a political divide
(between those who use the technology to be a part of the political processes and
those who do not). In the following I will solely focus on the social divide between
individuals.
Other authors (e.g. Brants and Frissen, 2005) argue that the concept of the digital
divide calls for an approach that takes into account its multi-dimensionality.
Furthermore, they argue that the policy debate on digital exclusion often only reflects
the economic dimension. They argue that other dimensions of everyday life, such as
the political, the cultural, and the social ones, also should be taken into account and
that these different dimensions relate to each other in very complex ways.
Furthermore Warschauer (2003) argues that even though access to computers and the
internet is necessary for digital inclusion, it is not enough. Instead he identifies four
different kinds of resources which are required to overcome the digital divide: Physical
resources (access to computers and telecommunication connections), digital resources
(including websites and different kinds of digital material), human resources (including
digital literacy and education), and social resources (including the community,
institutional, and societal structures that support use of ICTs).
In line with this understanding of the digital divide, van Dijk and Hacker (2003) shows
that the digital divide is a complex phenomenon consisting of many layers, hence they
talk about several divides. At the same time the digital divide is dynamic in the way
that it changes over time in accordance with technological development. For example
in the 1990s people with access to the internet were defined as included in the
information society, whereas in the 2000s they needed a broadband connection to be
considered fully included.
5
Van Dijk (2005) developed his ideas and redefined the concept of digital divide by
forming a Model of Digital Technology Access (Figure 2.3: 24). The model includes four
different kinds of access: motivational access, material (or physical) access, skills
access, and usage access. In accordance with Warschauer, van Dijk describes how
different kinds of resources are required to get access on each of these levels. He
understands it as a cumulative process where the end goal is the actually usage of ICT
and the other levels are necessities to get to that point. Given a comprehensive
analysis of each of these kinds of access, van Dijk concludes that some dimensions of
the digital divide (physical access) are declining at the same time as other dimensions
(usage access) are increasing.
As a consequence of the redefinition of the digital divide as a dynamic and multi-
layered concept, several authors have started to avoid the dichotomy by describing
people as either digitally included or excluded and describe the digital divide as a
spectrum (Warschauer, 2003; van Dijk, 2005). Similarly, a study of children and young
people’s usage of ICT (Livingstone and Helsper, 2007) finds a usage which is more or
less developed. This finding makes the authors purpose a continuum of digital
inclusion instead of the idea of a binary divide.
In the redefinition of the concept of the digital divide, van Dijk (2005: 25-26) offered a
critique of the existing research in the field. First of all he criticized the research for
being too descriptive and suffering from a lack of theory. Most of the research consists
of quantitative studies describing the large picture in the form of aggregated behavior
of individuals without any theoretical hypothesis about the causes of individual
behavior. A second problem is a lack of interdisciplinary research which would make it
possible to include e.g. psychological explanations. A third problem with the existing
research is the lack of qualitative research which would make it possible to explain
some of the mechanisms behind the appropriation of ICT. A fourth problem is the lack
of a dynamic approach which is able to catch up with the rapid technological
developments. Finally, he finds the existing research lacking conceptual elaboration
and definition.
A part of this critique is taken up in a study of the psycho-social barriers to computer
literacy (Stanley, 2003). Based on an empirical study, Stanley finds three barriers: The
first is the lack of relevance or need. The second psycho-social barrier is the challenge
to peoples’ comfort zone. To overcome the obstacles of “difficulty of use, presumed
lack of technical competence, and computer-related anxiety” (Stanley, 2003: 411), the
coming users will have to challenge their existing physical or psychological comfort
zones. The third psycho-social barrier she suggests is that of the self-concept. The non-
users in her study did not regard themselves as potential computer-users as “their self-
6
concept or subcultural identity did not include ‘computer user’ as being among their
‘possible selves’.” (Stanley, 2003: 412).
The, above mentioned, Danish study of senior citizens’ usage of ICT (Jæger, 2005a)
deals with several aspects of van Dijk’s critique. At least this study is theory driven,
based on an interdisciplinary approach, and carried out with qualitative methods.
Obviously both van Dijk (2005) and Jæger (2005a) are inspired by Warschauer (2003)
when they describe the process of overcoming the obstacles for becoming digitally
included as a process that requires extra resources. They use, however, different
theories to explain the process of becoming digitally included. While van Dijk draws on
sociological theories to explain the process by a relational analysis of the individual
societal position determined by personal and positional categories, Jæger draws on
theories of domestication and situated learning.
The theory of domestication is developed within cultural studies of media and
communication and focuses on the emergence of users (e.g. Silverstone et al., 1992;
Silverstone and Haddon, 1996; Berg and Aune, 1994; Lie and Sørensen, 1996).
According to Silverstone et al. (1992), users are constructed through a process in which
the technology transcends the distinction between being a product available for
purchase on the market to being an object that is incorporated in everyday life in
private households.
Silverstone et al. (1992) describe how the household is engaged in an exchange with
the surrounding society. Outside the household, technology is a product – a
commodity to be purchased in a market. When the technology transcends the
boundary of the home, it becomes transformed into a cultural product and the family
attributes their values and norms to it. By doing so, it simultaneously becomes a
symbol of the family. That the family even got the idea to acquire such technology,
that they can afford it, how they use it, and the meaning they attribute to it, are all
cultural symbols that can be employed in the family’s interaction with the surrounding
society.
However, before the family can begin to use the technology as a symbol in relation to
neighbors, family, and friends, they must first undergo a process in which the
technology is integrated into the everyday life of the family. Silverstone et al. (1992:
15-31) have developed the concept of domestication to describe the processes in
which a specific meaning is attributed to the new technology, and how relations are
constituted between the technology and the members of the household, through
various forms of negotiations. In this way, the domestication of technology has
practical, symbolic, and cognitive dimensions. The practical dimension of the process
refers to the acquisition and application of the technology. The symbolic dimension
7
concerns the creation of meaning with the technology and the relation between this
meaning and the identity of the users and the presentation of oneself in relation to the
outside world. Finally, the cognitive dimension relates to the learning processes
surrounding the technology and its intellectual application and the construction of new
knowledge about it (Williams et al., 2005).
The cognitive dimension of the domestication process was further elaborated in the
Danish study of seniors’ usage of ICT (Jæger, 2005a: 133-171). Based on situated
learning theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991), the cognitive dimension of becoming a user of
a given technology is described as a role in which one becomes socialized through a
learning process. In the course of the learning process, wherein a person acquires the
role of ICT-user, there is a shift in the person’s identity. From perceiving him/herself as
someone who does not use ICT, the identity shifts in the direction of a person who
comes to regard him/herself as someone who does use ICT.
Given a qualitative analysis of senior citizens appropriation of ICT, the Danish study
concludes that becoming a user of ICT is a complex process in which the user has to go
through a learning process in order to be digitally included. At the same time, the user
depends on the surrounding society both in the way that the technology has to be
customized to the needs of the user, and in the way that the surrounding society has
to make resources available to go through the learning process, and in the end accepts
the change of the person into an ICT-user. In this way many different mechanisms are
in play when a senior becomes digitally included and starts to use the technology in
the everyday life (Jæger, 2005a).
The study also shows that there is a great difference in how the seniors use ICT. Some
of them are satisfied with a simple use of e-mail and Skype to get in contact with
children and grandchildren while others use the computer in very advanced ways e.g.
to make virtual art or to gain political influence on parliamentary decisions (Jæger,
2004). In this way the study shows that it is difficult to make a sharp distinction
between digitally included and excluded. This finding is very much in line with the
above mentioned suggestion of understanding the digital divide as a continuum of
digital inclusion instead of a binary divide.
Another important finding in the Danish study (which is in line with van Dijk, 2005) is
that digitally inclusion is not a static condition. The individual is not included onetime
and for all. If some of the conditions, necessary for the process of domestication, are
changing, the status as (more or less) included can change (Jæger, 2005a). For instance
due to the rapid changes in the technology, the skills for usage are also changing which
can make a person change from less included to excluded. This also points to the fact
that just because a person has used computers in his or her working life it does not
8
mean that this person will be digitally included for the rest of his or her life. As the
technology changes (and so far this has been the rule), the person has to develop new
skills to master the new version of the technology.
Given this theoretical framework I will define the digital divide as: different usage of
ICT in the everyday life among individuals and groups of individuals. In continuation of
this definition, an analysis of the digital divide has to include that it is:
a multidimensional phenomenon including economic, social, and cultural
factors
a dynamic phenomenon which is changing over time
a continuum in which individuals are more or less digitally included/excluded
a complex process in which the individual becomes digitally included/excluded
Hence, a policy aimed at overcoming the digital divide has to take into account that
resources are at disposal to overcome the barriers in the complex process of becoming
digitally included. Based on Warschauer (2003), Stanley (2003), van Dijk (2005), and
Jæger (2005a) the following barriers are identified:
Lack of motivation often experienced as a lack of need
Lack of relevance or meaning often leading to rejection of the technology
Lack of physical/material resources (including economic)
Lack of skills
Lack of relevant content
Lack of social resources (including institutional and societal structures)
Guided by this theoretical framework I will now turn to the Danish case. However,
before I turn to the analysis of how policies and actions for digital inclusion are carried
out in practice, I will describe the size and form of the Danish digital divide.
The Danish Digital Divide As already mentioned, Denmark is ranked in the absolute top of the world with
regards to the ‘readiness indicators’ in the ranking lists from United Nations and OECD.
This is also the picture one finds when looking at the annual statistics from Statistics
Denmark (S.D.) which also includes a comparison between Denmark and the other
European countries.
According to the newest published statistics from S.D. (the 2010 survey), the
penetration of computers in Danish families is very high, 88 % of Danish households
have access to a computer. This number is only exceeded by The Netherlands (92 %),
9
Norway (91 %), and Sweden (90 %). By comparison 74 % of EU’s households have
access to a computer (S.D., 2011: fig. 1: 7). Most of the household computers also have
access to the internet. In this way 86 % of the Danish households have access to the
internet compared with an average of 70 % of the European households (fig. 6: 10).
These numbers are high, but looking at the other way 30 % of the European
households and 13 % of the Danish households are without access to the internet (S.D.,
2011: 10).
When it comes to individuals’ use of computers, Denmark is also in front. 78 % of the
Danish population between 16 and 74 years uses a computer every day. This is only
exceeded by Norway where 83 % of the population uses computers every day. In
comparison, the number is 57 % for the entire European population (S.D., 2011, fig. 15:
15). On the contrary 7 % of the Danish population has never used a computer. 5 % of
the Swedes and 4 % of the Norwegian have never used a computer. In EU the number
is 22 % (S.D., 2011, fig. 16: 16).
In terms of daily use of the internet, Denmark is in front with 76 % only exceeded by
Norway where 81 % use the internet on a daily basis. In Europe as a whole the figure is
53 % (S.D., 2011, fig. 18: 17). In Denmark 9 % of the population has never used the
internet. The same is the case for 8 % in The Netherlands, 7 % in Sweden, 5 % in
Norway, and 26 % in EU (S.D., 2011, fig. 19: 17). All these numbers show that Denmark
is in the front in Europe when it comes to both access and use of computers as well as
internet. However, the numbers also show that there is a digital divide in the Danish
population – not as big as in many other European countries, but it exists.
Numbers of households with access to computers and the internet is, however, not the
only way to measure the digital divide. In 2007 the Danish National ICT and Telecom
Agency conducted a survey aiming at giving a more nuanced picture of the digital
divide by measuring ICT-skills. Based on the answers the population was divided into
four levels of ICT-skills: Level 1: Has never used a computer, level 2: Weak ICT-skills,
level 3: Average ICT-skills, and level 4: Strong ICT-skills.
Table 1: ICT-skills and Age
Age Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Total
16-29 2 % 6 % 44 % 48 % 100 %
30-39 4 % 15 % 38 % 44 % 100 %
40-49 8 % 20 % 41 % 31 % 100 %
50-59 16 % 25 % 34 % 25 % 100 %
60-69 40 % 24 % 21 % 15 % 100 %
70 up 74 % 14 % 11 % 1 % 100 %
10
Source: Teknologisk Institut 2007: 31
The results of this survey clearly show that measured on ICT-skills the digital gap is
much bigger than measured only on access to computers and the internet. The survey
also shows very clearly that the oldest members of the population are the least skilled.
In this way the numbers show that age has a tremendous influence and that especially
the two oldest groups lag significantly behind the rest of the population. This is in
accordance with Statistics Denmark which concludes that the group of digitally
excluded people in Denmark consists of mainly older people living alone outside the
capital Copenhagen (S.D., 2011: 14).
Investigating the digital divide in accordance with the usage of public e-services, the
Danes are also in front when we consider European trends. The 2011 survey of Statistic
Denmark (not yet published) shows that 78 % of the population has searched for
information on public websites, 52 % has downloaded forms, and 64 % has submitted
information to a public authority electronically. In table 2 the findings of the 2011
survey are divided into age groups. The table shows how the people, who have
answered that they are users of the internet, used public e-services.
Table 2: Use of Public E-Services and Age
Age 16-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74
Searched for
information
76 % 92 % 92 % 88 % 86 % 77 %
Downloaded
forms
38 % 62 % 64 % 62 % 59 % 53 %
Submitted
information
58 % 77 % 79 % 74 % 69 % 56 %
Source: Statistics Denmark, unpublished. Per cent of internet users 2011.
Table 2 shows a clearly different picture than table 1. Table 2 shows that when it
comes to the usage of public e-services the youngest age group lags behind the rest of
the internet users. Only 38 % of the youngest group has downloaded forms from a
public website which is in sharp contrast to the 53 % of the oldest group. In this way, it
is possible to verify the statement from the newspaper mentioned above. The group of
young people who are raised with computers, internet, and mobile phones within
reach, and deeply digitally included measured with the common indicators, is the
group least included when it comes to using public e-services.
To sum up, these statistics reveal two important facts: First, that there is a digital gap
in Denmark even though it is smaller than in most other European countries.
Especially, when we look at ICT skills it is clear that older people are lagging behind the
11
rest of the Danish population. Second, when it comes to the usage of public e-services
the group of young internet users are lagging behind. In this way it makes sense to
describe this group as changing its position from fully included to less included when it
comes to usage of public e-services.
Policies and Actions for Digital Inclusion I will now turn to the analysis of the policies and actions for digital inclusion. First, I will
discuss the digital divide as a political problem. Second, I will give a short introduction
to the historical development of the policy field. Third, I will present the analysis which
is structured by the barriers identified above and I will investigate the resources which
are at the disposal for overcoming the digital divide.
The Digital Divide as a Political Problem
As we saw in the theoretical discussion, the digital divide is a complex,
multidimensional and dynamic phenomenon. When a phenomenon like this is
regarded as a political problem, and an attempt is made to solve it by a policy, it is
often defined as a wicked problem (Rittel and Webber, 1973). Wicked problems are
characterized by being very difficult to define and hence very difficult to solve.
Politicians often have the feeling that when they try to solve the problem by taking
action in one place they realize that this action opens up new dimensions of the
problem. In this way the definition of a wicked problem is a part of the solution.
The digital divide has already been declared solved as a political problem several times.
In accordance with the early understanding as a question of having or not having
access to ICT the solution of the problem was thought to be achieved by lowering the
economic barriers. This is achieved by a policy for liberalizing the telecommunications
market, thereby making broadband connections to the internet less expensive, and by
decreasing the price of computers (Jordana, 2002). According to this understanding,
the digital divide will disappear in a few years since this strategy has already been
implemented in most of the Western world, and therefore no further political action is
required (Compaine, 2001). However, the appearance of a new frontier in the digital
gap due to young people’s difficulties in using public e-services indicate that the digital
divide does not disappear by it selves. Instead it continues to be a political problem
that needs actions (see also van Dijk, 2005: 163-180).
Given the understanding of the digital divide as a matter of skills, it is a wide spread
impression that the digital divide will disappear by itself within a decade or two4. If
children learn to use ICT in schools and their parents learn it at their job it is just a
matter of time before the now retired people without digital skills will die out.
However, these expectations have proved not to be realistic. The Danish study of
12
senior’s usage of ICT documents that ICT skills are not static but need continued
updating.
From the public authorities’ perspective, the digital divide becomes a problem with the
introduction of the new strategy for e-government. Over the last 10-15 years the
public authorities in Denmark have spent a huge amount of money to develop digital
solutions for a wide range of public services. According to the government, these e-
services are much more effective than face to face services, which are up to 30 times
as expensive (Government et al., 2011: 5). Thus it is a matter of harvesting the
investments by forcing the citizens and enterprises to use these e-services in their
interaction with the public authorities. If the objectives of the e-government strategy
are fulfilled, the government calculates with savings on public services delivery on DKK
3 bn. every year from 2020 (Government et al., 2011: 4). In this way it is obviously that
seen from the perspective of the public authorities it is a big economic problem if the
citizens do not use public e-services.
From the individual user’s perspective, the Danish study of senior citizen’s usage of ICT
shows that they experienced digitally exclusion to be a big problem before they were
introduced to ICT. After having learned how to use ICT they described the learning
process as having transformed them from being digitally excluded to being included in
contemporary society (Jæger, 2005a).
In interviews, several seniors described how they earlier were mystified by the speaker
on the TV-news, who after a story said: ‘If you want to know more about this issue,
click into our website on www...’ They did not know what it was and they did not know
what kind of information they were excluded from. The interviews also contain several
stories about how the seniors felt excluded in social settings. When younger
generations were talking about websites, YouTube, World of Warcraft, Wikipedia and
the like they did not have a clue about what they were talking about. After having
learned how to use the technology, they felt included in these discussions (Jæger,
2005a). Statements like the following were repeated in many interviews with the
seniors:
It was a jungle for me before I started. I thought I could never find out
before we started. Now I have gained an insight into a whole new world…
I can talk with the grandchildren about it. I am not completely an idiot; I
am more equal to other people now when I’ve got a little sniff at it.
It is obvious that the seniors experienced the exclusion as a problem but not as an
economic problem. Instead they experienced it as a democratic problem of not being a
full member of the contemporary society. Hence, the digital divide is a serious problem
13
– however a wicked problem that looks very different according to the perspective
from which it is regarded.
Development of policies and actions
The policies and actions for digital inclusion is a part of the broader ICT-policy. This
broad ICT-policy consists of many different areas like, for instance, a policy of
telecommunication and broadband delivery, a strategy for the information society
(Jæger, 2005a), and a strategy for e-government (Jæger and Löfgreen, 2010). Broadly
speaking, the ICT-policy is not a part of the usual political fight among the different
political parties in the Parliament. Probably most members of the Danish parliament
agree on a set of key values around the ICT-policy. These values consist of a will to use
the technology for growth in the private sector, efficiency in the public sector,
inclusion of all citizens, and underpinning democracy (Jæger, 2003). However, looking
more closely at the rhetoric and the actually actions taken, it turns out that there are
differences in the way the different values are emphasized among the political parties.
This is in line with the finding of Epstein et al. (2011) who, based on an American study,
describe how political beliefs determine how people understand the problem of the
digital divide and who they consider as responsible for solving the problem.
The awareness of a digital divide was already present in the very first Danish policy
document on the information society (Ministry of Research, 1994), launched by the
center-left government that was in power in 1994. In this strategy the excitement
about the new technology and the expectations to the coming information society are
very clear but it also contains a critical reflection of the danger of a polarization of the
population into an A-part who do have access to the technology and a B-part who do
not have access (Ministry of Research, 1994). Despite this reflection, the report did not
describe any actions to prevent a digital divide from emerging.
In 1997 a new Minister of Research is concerned about the implications of the
information society on democracy. She declares that every citizen has some ICT-rights
such as: easy access to the technology, affordable prices, universal design, and
protection of the private life, among others (Ministry of Research, 1997: 10-11).
Regarding the digital divide, a survey was carried out which clearly shows that the
older part of the population was lagging behind in the usage of ICT. The survey shows
that only 4 % of citizens of the age of 60 years and up have tried to use the internet
(Nielsen and Holst, 1998: 42). Given these findings, the Minister set up a combined
development and research program, running from 1999 to 2004, aimed at producing
both knowledge about senior citizens’ use of ICT and methods to include them in the
information society (see note 1).
14
Simultaneously, the Minister invited the two main associations for senior citizens to
take part in the process. This inspired the associations so that one of them (The Danish
Association of Senior Citizens) started to establish telecentres for seniors and the other
(the DanAge Association) set up a call centre for their members and started to
cooperate with local adult training centers about courses for older ICT users. They
have continued and further elaborated this work ever since and in 2011 the two
associations received a prize as “Best European Telecentre Initiative” by the European
Telecentre Association5.
In 2001 the center-left government lost power and a right wing government came to
power. In contrast to what happened in the U.S. when the Bush administration took
over from the Clinton administration (Epstein et al., 2011), the new Minister of Science
and Technology did not close down ongoing activities. However, the rhetoric changed.
Now the emphasis was on using ICT to create growth in the private sector and a
further stress on efficiency in the public sector. The digital divide was described as a
problem which was almost solved or at least would be solved within the nearest
future. It was also implicit that the responsibility for being included was placed on the
individual and as such not a task for public authorities. In this way the digital divide did
not require further political attention, and no new initiatives were taken.
Meanwhile, the development of e-government has come to a point where it has
become clear that if the economic benefit of all the investment is to be harvested
more citizens have to use the public e-services. This acknowledgment makes it
necessary to get every citizen digitally included and in this way the problem of the
digital divide becomes relevant again.
Due to the development of standardized electronically forms and one-stop-shops in
citizen service centers it is now possible to move the citizen service from the town halls
to the libraries and, at the same time, provide help for using the public e-services.
Concurrently, the National IT and Telecom Agency has established a national network,
called ‘Learn more about ICT’, aiming at improving the ICT skills in the Danish
population6. This network comprises the entire library sector, unions, all
municipalities, adult educational centers, the two above mentioned association for
senior citizens, and associations for non-ethnic Danes. The network provides teaching
material for free use and offers training and supervision of the teachers.
Summing up, the policies and actions concerning digital inclusion started as a general
reflection with a wish to avoid a digital divide. A few years later the issue was taken up
as a democratic problem and especially the group of seniors was pointed to as being
excluded. With the change of governmental power, the digital divide was regarded as a
problem which was almost solved and no special policy for inclusion was necessary7.
15
However, the development of e-government put the issue back on the political agenda
and within the last couples of years new initiatives have been taken. In the following
section I will analyze these policies and actions by means of the six barriers that were
identified in the theoretical section.
Analysis of Policies and Actions
The first barrier that was identified is the lack of motivation often experienced as a lack
of need. Looking into the Danish case we find a group of people who do not experience
any motivation for becoming digitally included. In the recent S.D. survey, people
without internet access are asked why they do not have internet access in their home
(S.D., 2011, fig. 13: 14). The majority (61 %) answered that they do not need it. In the
Danish study of senior citizens’ usage of ICT we often heard the argument that if you
have lived a long life without access to the internet why should you need it in your old
age? The data from the S.D. survey shows that this way of thinking is widespread
among people without internet access.
By contrast, as we saw above the seniors in the Danish study, who actually became
digitally included, defined the digital divide as a democratic problem. In a survey
conducted among the 1,000 participating seniors, they answered that their motivation
for joining the activities was partly a general curiosity (50 %) and partly because it is a
necessity to be a part of contemporary society (10 %) (Jæger, 2005a: 101). Hence, the
stimulation of older people’s curiosity for the opportunities in the usage of ICT and
pointing at the possible democratic benefits of the technology could be a way to
motivate them to be digitally included. However, the new e-government strategy does
not include such initiatives. The democratic aspect of being digitally included is not
mentioned with one word and the main argument is the economic reason for e-
services. In this way, the strategy could improve by applying the knowledge from the
former study.
The second barrier is a lack of relevance or meaning with the usage of ICT which often
result in a rejection of the technology. We also found examples of rejection in the
Danish study. In an interview a woman defined herself as a non-user. When asked
whether or not she had participated in an ICT-course, she responded:
Yes – just to get a feel for it, right? And I have one at home, but it just
doesn’t interest me … Yes, I have tried it, and I was also easily able to
figure it out. But I must admit that I prefer human contact. I just don’t
feel like sitting there and staring into a screen… I don’t really have any
use for e-mails – we don’t know anyone… in Timbuktu. And so I would
rather talk with the people I am communicating with than sit there and
16
write on a computer… So I write on the computer, but that is just like
writing on a type-writer. I mean – it isn’t really very computer-like.
This quote reveals several things: first and foremost that the question of becoming an
ICT-user is a matter of identity. Elsewhere in the interview, she mentions that she
actually uses the internet as well. Most people would probably identify themselves as
ICT-users if they used a computer in the manner described by this interviewee. But she
does not. She reduces her use of the computer to a typewriter, and is therefore able to
maintain her identity as someone who does not use ICT.
Moreover, the quote demonstrates that she perceives the use of ICT as a contrast to
human contact. Later in the interview she explained that the use of ICT demolishes the
sense of togetherness that she can remember from ‘the old days’ and she therefore
regards ICT as a factor contributing to isolation and solitude. In this way, she interprets
the technology as representing a development of a society she does not want and thus
it makes no sense for her to identify as an ICT-user.
The qualitative data includes other examples on rejection of the technology. To the
question of what the usage of ICT has meant for his everyday life an old man
responded as follows:
Yes, in the past I could read a good book; go to the cinema, the theatre
etc. I haven’t been able to do this since I got the computer in the house,
because I had to learn how to use it. It has taken up a lot of time! Time,
which could have been spent together with the family.
The answer shows how the use of ICT has led to other activities becoming less
prioritized. The usage of ICT has therefore had negative consequences for this person
despite, or perhaps because of, the fact that computer-use has been interesting and
enriching. These negative effects led this man to choose to reject further use of ICT. In
another interview an old women explained how she solved this problem. When she
starts her computer she sets her egg-timer for one hour and when the clock rings she
knows it is time to turn of the computer. Personal experiences like this are important
to diffuse through the training courses like ‘Learn more about ICT’ but this kind of
barrier is not reflected in the strategy.
With the new strategy for e-government, a total rejection of the technology is
becoming a very difficult position to hold but not completely impossible. To avoid that
digitally excluded people also will be excluded from an interaction with public
authorities, the strategy includes a ’cat flab’ saying that: “Citizens, who really are
prohibited in using the digital solutions, will continuously be able to register and apply
the public authorities in other ways.” (Government et al., 2011: 14). This way out has
17
immediately started a discussion about who is going to determine whether or not a
person is ‘really prohibited’ in using the technology.
The third barrier is a lack of physical or material resources. This is in accordance with
the early definition of the digital divide where lack of money was a reason for being
digitally excluded. In the 2010 survey, S.D. asked the households without connection to
the internet about this economic barrier. 7 % of the respondent answered that
computers are too expensive and 5 % answered that internet access is too expensive.
These numbers show that there still is a small group who are digitally excluded for
economic reasons. In general the market has ‘done its work’ and lowered the prizes on
the computers just as the deregulation of the telecommunication market has lowered
the price of internet access. However, the existence of this group of seniors shows that
it is still important that the strategy includes a policy aiming at a further lowering of
prices.
The fourth barrier identified is a lack of skills. In the recent S.D. survey, 15 % answered
that the reason why they do not have internet access is that they are not able to use it.
This reason for not having access also came up in several interviews in the Danish
study. In one interview it became clear that an old man could not use ICT due to a lack
of technical and language skills. He explains:
But… technical stuff – it just doesn’t interest me. It never has. I need to have
someone to do it for me – a technician to do it… I just can’t figure out any of it,
and I can’t understand any of those technical terms… I just don’t have the
background to do it. I don’t have any kind of education, so I have never
touched that kind of thing… that’s just the way it is.
This quote reflects that this person saw himself as someone who cannot solve
technical problems. In his own view, he does not have the basic skills to learn how to
use ICT. Thus he chooses not to have access. To explain this reaction we can draw on
Stanlye’s (2003) study of psycho-social barriers. This old man will have to confront his
comfort zone to overcome the lack of technical skills. At the same time he will have to
change his self-concept as someone who is not able to handle new technologies. This
will probably be difficult to change since he has had this self-concept for a long life. To
overcome this barrier significant training resources will be necessary.
The new strategy for e-government offers two solutions to the lack of skills. One is that
the staff in the local citizens service centers help the digitally excluded to use the
public e-services. The other solution is to authorize somebody, e.g. a family member,
to read the digital mail from the authorities and answer on behalf of the excluded
(Government et al., 2011: 14).
18
The fifth barrier is a lack of relevant content. Also in the Danish study, lack of
appropriate digital content was revealed as a reason for seniors to stay digitally
excluded. At the time the program was running, ICT was mostly regarded as a symbol
of modernity connected to youth, speed, and competition. There were no
advertisements for computers using seniors as models, no adverts for internet services
aiming at the seniors as a target group, and no public e-services for older people. This
picture is still dominant although some public e-services have been developed in the
meantime.
Lack of appropriate content is also a matter of design of websites. In the Danish study
one of the local projects wanted to develop a website for members of Elderly Councils
(Jæger, 2004). In the design process a younger technician drew in the users directly by
making a prototype of the website which she presented to the members of the
councils. It turned out that they had a slightly different understanding of the words she
used in menu. Thus they preferred other words to describe the content under the
different points. This is probably because different generations have different points of
reference. The oldest generation has for instance the WWII as a common point of
reference while the baby boomers have the Vietnam War and rock music as common
points of reference. Hence, websites have to be designed in accordance with the point
of references of the target group.
Even though we do not know much about the exclusion of young people from the
usage of public e-services, the findings about the importance of the digital content and
design of website may serve as an explanation. In a small qualitative study, nine young
people’s use of the Danish tax e-service was observed8. It turned out that the
youngsters were not able to use the e-service because they did not understand the
concepts and were unfamiliar with the logic of the tax system. In this way, young
people are not able to use the tax website, not because they are not able to handle the
technology, but because it does not include points of reference the youngsters are
familiar with in the design of the e-service.
The new strategy does approach the question of the quality of the design of e-services.
Hence, a tight cooperation among public authorities at different levels is aimed at a
higher level of functionality of the public e-services. The aim is to have the same
quality as net banks. However, the strategy does not take into consideration that a
high quality maybe involves differentiated design targeted different groups.
The sixth barrier is a lack of social resources. A main conclusion in the Danish study was
that the program for senior citizen’s usage of ICT was a social resource in itself.
Through this program, the digital divide was put on the political agenda and by means
of the training in the local project a large group of seniors was introduced to ICT. The
19
program also resulted in the mobilizing of other social resources in the form of the
work of the two main associations for seniors. Also training at libraries, now turned
into the network ‘Learn more about ICT’, is to be regarded as social resources helping
to overcome the digital divide. In the end, the existence of policies and actions for
social inclusion is a resource and especially if the policy acknowledges that the public
authorities have a responsibility for solving the problem. In this way, the worst thing to
do is to lean back and expect the problem to solve itself.
Conclusion and Recommendations Given this analysis of the Danish case we can conclude that a lot of efforts to narrow
the digital gap have already been undertaken. Even though this analysis does not aim
at evaluating the effects of these actions it is reasonable to believe that they have
played an important role in bridging the digital gap. However, the digital divide still
exists in Denmark and will not disappear by itself. On the contrary we see it changing
and new frontiers are rising. The strategy for e-government does acknowledge the
existence of the problem but the actions to solve the problem do not reflect the
knowledge we actually have. In this way the proposed actions are not sufficient to
solve the problem of the digital divide, which is necessary to implement the e-
government strategy with success.
Instead of having the issue included in an e-government strategy, I suggest that it is
time to formulate a particular Policy for Digital Inclusion. Such a policy will in itself
serve as an acknowledgement of the problem as a real political problem that needs to
be solved. A policy trying to solve a wicked problem is by definition a difficult task.
Hence, the current policies and actions in the field have to be revisited and renewed as
a coherent Policy for Digital Inclusion based on the current knowledge about the
multilayered, dynamic, and complex phenomenon of the digital divide. Given the
above analysis I will offer the following recommendation for a new Policy for Digital
Inclusion.
In the above discussion concerning theory, lack of motivation was identified as an
important barrier to becoming digitally included. As we saw in the analysis, a strong
motivation for seniors who actually did overcome the gap was a general curiosity and a
wish to find out what possibilities usage of ICT can bring. This knowledge is not
included in the e-government strategy since there are no actions in this field. However,
in a renewed Policy for Digital Inclusion it will be profitable to introduce information
campaigns about the benefits of being digitally included in general, and of using public
e-services in particular, and in this way make it visible how ICT usage can make
everyday life easier.
20
A new Policy for Digital Inclusion could also motivate non-users by using arguments in
which the understanding of the policy problem is a matter of digital citizenship and
democracy, instead of using the argument that the public authorities need to save
money. If non-users are to be motivated to use ICTs and public e-services, the
argument is that by being digitally included they become a full member of
contemporary society. The argument is not that they have to be included as a favor for
the public authorities. In other words, instead of threatening with a stick the policy
should tempt with a carrot.
Lack of skills is a major barrier for people who, for a long life, have identified
themselves as someone who does not have technical skills. A range of actions has
already been carried out in this field: From the program for senior’s usage of ICT, over
the activities arranged by the senior associations, to the courses at libraries, and
further on to the network ‘Learn more about ICT’. All these actions are important but a
new Policy for Digital Inclusion has to ask the question of whether or not these actions
are sufficient to fulfill needs or if further actions are needed. The new initiative of the
‘Learn more about ICT’ network looks promising in the way that the responsibility for
training of the seniors is lifted out of the two senior associations into a network
including more actors – not least public authorities. This action also reflects the
knowledge that skills are dynamic and training is an ongoing activity just as it signals an
acknowledgement of the public sectors’ responsibility in ensuring the necessary skills
to use ICTs and not least the public e-services.
A new Policy for Digital Inclusion also needs to include knowledge about the
importance of relevant content for different user groups. In this way, the policy has to
reflect on how the design of e-services is connected to the usage and the public
authorities must draw on knowledge of the different user groups when they design
public e-services. The example of the young people’s problems in using the tax e-
service demonstrates that designers of public e-services still have a job to do if the
usage of the e-services is to be increased.
Looking at the physical and economic barrier we saw that this barrier is decreasing due
to a range of actions that have already been taken in this area. However, it is still
necessary to have a Policy for Digital Inclusion that pushes the industry to deliver
cheap technology and telecommunication lines just like public access to the
technology is necessary for the most marginalized groups of the population.
Altogether the conclusion is that even though a lot of effort has already been made the
digital divide still exists and it is changing. Hence, the knowledge gathered from the
development of a theoretical framework for understanding the digital divide reveals
21
that the Policy of Digital Inclusion has to be revisited not only as a part of an e-
government strategy but as an independent policy issue.
References Berg, A.-J. and M. Aune, eds. 1994. Domestic Technology and Everyday Life – Mutual
Shaping Processes (Vol. 1). Brussels: EC Directorate General Science, Research and
Development.
Brants, K. and V. Frissen. 2005. Inclusion and Exclusion in the Information Society. In
Media, Technology and Everyday Life in Europe. From Information to Communication,
eds. R. Silverstone. Ashgate.
Compaine, B. M. ed. 2001. The Digital Divide. Facing a Crisis or Creating a Myth?
Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Eriksen,B. A. 2011. How to Bridge the Digital Divide? Master Thesis, Global Studies,
Roskilde University.
Epstein, D., E.C. Nisbet, and T. Gillespie. 2011. Who’s Responsible for the Digital
Diuvide? Public Perceptions and Policy Implications. The Information Society 27: 92-
104.
Ferro, E., Y.K. Dwivedi, J.R. Gil-Garcia, and M.D. Williams, eds. 2010. Handbook of
Research on Overcoming Digital Divides: Construction an Equitable and Competitive
Information Society. Hershey: IGI Global, 2010. Volume I and II.
Fuglsang, L. 2005. IT and Senior Citizens: Using the Internet for Empowering Active
Citizenship. Science, Technology, & Human Values 30 (4): 468-495.
Government, Local authorities, and Regions. 2011. Den digitale vej til fremtiden
velfærd. Den fællesoffentlige digitaliseringsstrategi 2011-2015.
Johansson, S. 2005. Non-users, Users and Ex-users. The Senior Net Project, a Social
Experiment with ICT. In Young Technologies in Old Hands. An International View on
Senior Citizen’s Utilization of ICT, ed. B. Jæger, Copenhagen: DJØF Publishing.
Jordana, J. ed. 2002. Governing Telecommunications and the New Information Society
in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Jæger, B. 2003. Kommuner på nettet. Roller i den digitale forvaltning. Copenhagen:
DJØF Publishing.
Jæger, B. 2004. Trapped in the Digital Divide? Old People in the Information Society.
Science Studies 17 (2): 5-22.
Jæger, B. 2005a. Ældre tæmmer teknologien - og bliver borgere i
Informationssamfundet. Frederiksberg: Forlaget Samfundslitteratur.
Jæger, B. 2005b. The Inclusion of Senior Citizens in the Information Society - What
have we learned? In Young Technologies in Old Hands. An International View on Senior
Citizen's Utilization of ICT, ed. B. Jæger, Copenhagen: DJØF Publishing.
22
Jæger, B. and K. Löfgren. 2010. The History of the Future: Changes in Danish E-
Government Strategies 1994-2010. Information Polity Vol. 15, No. 4: 253-269.
Lave, J. and E. Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning. Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lie, M. and K.H. Sørensen, eds. 1996. Making Technology Our Own? Domestication
Technology into Everyday Life. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.
Livingstone, S. and E. Helpser. 2007. Gradations in digital inclusion: children, young
people and the digital divide. New Media & Society Vol. 9, No. 4: 671-696.
Ministry of Research. 1994. Info-Society 2000.
Ministry of Research. 1997. Actions Make Changes.
Morgan, D.L. 2007. Paradigms Lost and Pragmatism Regained: Methodological
Implications of Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods. Journal of Mixed
Methods Research 1: 48.
Norris, P. 2001. Digital Divide? Civic Engagement, Information Poverty & the Internet in
Democratic Societies. Harvard University.
Nielsen, E.B. and C. Holst. 1998. Ældre og IT. Del 1. Copenhagen: Dansk Institut for
Ældrepædagogik.
OECD, 2001. Understanding the Digital Divide.
OECD, 2005. Towards Better Digital Service, Increased Efficiency and Stronger
Collaboration. Country review Denmark.
OECD, 2010. Efficient e-Government for Smarter Public Service Delivery. Denmark 2010.
Rittel, H.W.J. and M.M. Webber. 1973. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.
Policy Sciences Vol. 4, No. 2: 155-169.
Silverstone, R., E. Hirsch, and D. Morley. 1992. Information and Communication
Technologies and the Moral Economy of the Household. In Consuming Technologies.
Media and information in domestic spaces, eds. R. Silverstone and E. Hirsch. London:
Routledge.
Silverstone R. and L. Haddon. 1996. Design and the Domestication of Information and
Communication Technologies: Technical Change and Everyday Life. In Communication
by Design, eds. R. Mansell and R. Silverstone.
Stanley, L. D. 2003. Beyond Access: Psycosocial Barriers to Computer Literacy. The
Information Society 19: 407-416.
Statistic Denmark. 2011. Befolkningens brug af internet – 2010.
Teknologisk Institut. 2007. Borgernes IKT-færdigheder i Danmark.
United Nations. 2010. E-Government Survey 2010. New York: UN.
Van Dijk, J. and K. Hacker. 2003. The Digital Divide as a Complex and Dynamic
Phenomenon. The Information Society 19: 315-326.
Van Dijk, J. 2005. The Deepening the Divide. Inequality in the Information Society.
London: SAGE Publications.
23
Warschauer, M. 2003. Technology and Social Inclusion. Rethinking the Digital Divide.
Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Williams, R., J.Stewart, and R. Slack. 2005. Social Learning in Technological Innovation.
Experimenting with Information and Communication Technologies. Cheltenham Glos:
Edward Elgar.
1 Published in Berlinske October 21, 2011
2 The study is based on a combined research- and development program, running from 1999 to 2004,
that aimed to overcome the digital divide based on age. The developmental part of the program
consisted of six local projects which had in common that they had to teach the participants how to use
ICT. Hence, around 1,000 seniors were introduced to personal computers and the usage of the internet.
ICT was, in this program, defined as personal computers with software programs, browsers, and internet
connections. In this article I draw on empirical data from a research project that followed the six local
projects and studied how the participants learned to utilize the technology. Qualitative methods in the
form of interviews were extensively employed. Accordingly, interviews were carried out with the project
managers, participants, and local decision-makers. Altogether, 57 interviews were conducted. In
addition, written sources relating to the projects were also included in the case studies. Finally, the
research study included a survey among all the participants in the six projects. The results of the study
are published in Danish in Jæger (2005a). A presentation in English of the overall results can be found in
Jæger (2005b). Other publications in English from the study include: Fuglsang (2005); Johansson (2005)
and Jæger (2004)
3 These interviews are conducted by Amalie Eriksen in 2010 while working on her master thesis (Eriksen,
2011).
4 This impression was for example expressed by the former Minister of Finance at the above mentioned
meeting arranged by the DanAge Association in January 2012.
5 See the description at: www.aeldremobiliseringen.dk.
6 See the description at: www.lærmereomit.dk/servicemenu/english.
7 In September 2011 a new center-left government came to power but it is not yet possible to show if
this will lead to changes in the policy for inclusion.
24
8 The study was conducted by a cross ministry organization called MindLab. The results are published at:
http://www.mind-lab.dk/cases/vaek-med-boevlet-et-bedre-moede-med-den-offentlige-forvaltning