Literature Review

Attached is an annotated bibliography of the research we conducted on the digital divide.  In order to perform a comprehensive literature review on the topic, we sourced information from newspapers, scholarly journals, magazines, trade publications, government agencies, think tanks, independent organizations, and a variety of useful web sites.  With the objective of providing a thorough and clear background on this topic, we found it helpful to categorize our findings into four sections:

I.                    Defining the Digital Divide and the Need For A Solution

II.                 Proposed Ideas For Solution

III.               Commentary Against Intervention

IV.              Additional Sources of Information

At the end of each of the first three sections, we have listed other sources.  These are articles that we did not summarize but are included in our archive, as additional research should further and more detailed information be needed.

Section four also lists additional sources of information that is not particular to any one section.  These sources are an excellent supplementary tool for understanding the digital divide in general.

I.  DEFINING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE AND THE NEED FOR A SOLUTION

Baldassare, Mark and Cheryl Katz. “Bridging the Digital Divide Crucial to Orange County's High-Tech Hopes: Failing to Train Latinos--An Increasingly Large Segment of the Work Force--Will Threaten County's Chances for Success.” The Los Angeles Times 30 July 2000.

According to the 2000 Orange County Annual Survey conducted at UC Irvine, people in Orange County are even more likely than other Californians to use computers and the Internet. Three in four local residents say they use computers, two in three use the Internet, and two in three Orange County homes have a personal computer.  With regard to race, Latinos account for nearly a third of the county's population today and are expected to reach over one million by 2010.  Thus, in an industry where it’s difficult to find skilled workers, Orange County is hurting its chances of high-tech success by failing to train and utilize a large proportion of its work force.  By helping its residents acquire the necessary skills, Orange County will have a solid source of workers who clearly do want to live here.

Short and concise, this article gives excellent Internet user statistics, and the change in those statistics, from 1995-1998.  The authors state that user statistics in the areas of gender and race are representative of the larger population.  Specifically in the area of race, the Web population now reflects a racial breakdown statistically indistinguishable from Census data for the general population.  The article goes on to try distinguishing where the gaps remain, and cites urban city as a major culprit.  Users living in central cities and metro areas constitute a relatively larger proportion of Web users than their rural counterparts. 

This report, a survey by the Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) in 1994, provides us a fresh insight into the make-up of those who are not connected to the National Information Infrastructure (“NII”). More particularly, it explores the characteristics of the “have-nots” in rural versus urban setting. In additional, it gives the new insights about the “information disadvantage” in America’s central cities, enabling policymakers for the first time to array these characteristics against rural and urban profiles. It begins with the introduction to the nation’s universal service database, and then states the “have-nots” groups, using the data from the database. Finally, it points out the work to be done to better assess the characteristics of these “have-nots”.

Important findings:

·         The poorest households in central cities have the lowest telephone penetration. However, the rural poor are lowest in terms of computer and modem penetration.

·         Rural and central city minorities have lower Internet and telecommunication penetration.

·         The youngest and old householders in rural areas are the most disadvantaged groups in terms of access to Internet and/or telecommunication.

·         The fewer the number of years of education, the lower the telephone, computer, and computer-household modem penetration.

·         The lowest telephone and computer penetration is in Northeast central cities, plus central city and rural areas in the South.

This web site is a good source of commentary analysis on the digital divide problem, as it relates to racial and ethnic communities.  Information is presented as a series of four interviews of scholars and leaders of the technology community.  The topic areas discussed include the following;

·         Technological Equity

·         Universal Access

·         Challenges of Providing Access: How to Make It Work

·         Disconnect Between Schools and the Corporate World

·         Wiring Schools

This report, an extensive research product of the Benton Foundation, begins with a general summary of low-income communities in the information age and goes on to compare the contemporary lack of access to information to slavery in the past.  It also gives a substantial demographic layout of the digital divide, citing low-income communities as the most at-risk.  The report’s five main sections include: 1) Defining the Technology Gap; 2) Barriers to Closing the Gap; 3) What’s Needed: The Policy Arena; 4) What’s Working; and 5) Resources. 

For our purposes, sections three and four (What’s Needed: The Policy Arena and What’s Working) have the potential to be extremely helpful in shaping this legislation.  Section three details the need for universal service, existing federal programs, state regulator commissions, and anti-poverty efforts (including school equity and job training).  Section four includes a descriptive overview of a community-based initiative in Appalachia, the Libraries Online! Initiative, which works in conjunction with public schools, and various other community/neighborhood efforts.

This commentary provides an analysis of the digital divide problem, citing important statistics taken from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s (NTIA) study titled, “Falling Through the Net”.  Additionally, the commentary iterates that the digital divide problem has less to do with access and more to do with education of what the Internet can offer.  This includes marketing the relevance the Internet has to the communities that do not have access and/or the skills to navigate the Internet, even if given access. 

This paper, written by two professors from the Graduate School of Mangement at Vanderbilt University, is a research report that explores the relationship of race to Internet access and usage over time.  The study finds statistically significant differences in these areas first between whites and African-Americans and then between whites and additional minority groups (Hispanics, Asian-Americans, and Native Americans).  Major findings of the study include: 1) the digital divide is increasing over time; 2) the difference in computer ownership between whites and minorities, particularly African-Americans, is significant; 3) there are major inequities among schools in their access to different kinds of educational technology; and 4) furthermore, students attending poor and high-minority schools have less access to most types of technology than students attending other schools. The main finding of the report is that in terms of predicting Internet access, income matters, but only to a certain extent.  Education is a stronger predictor of access.

This release provides comprehensive data on the level of access by Americans to telephones, computers, and the Internet. According to the release, there is unequal access to technology and high-tech skills by income, education level, race, and geography in American society. And this has led to a widening digital divide.

Particularly, this release gives out the following facts:

·         There is a slow deployment of advanced services in rural areas.

·         The digital divide between high-and low-income Americans is increasing.

·         Better-educated Americans are more likely to be connected.

·         White people have more home Internet access.

·         Wealthier schools are more likely to be connected to the Internet than poorer schools.

·         There is less access to technology for people with disabilities.

This is the third report of NTIA regarding the “Digital Divide”. It examines which American households have access to telephones, computers, and the Internet, and which do not. It helps to clarify which Americans are falling further behind, so that concrete steps to redress this gap can be taken.

This report consists of three parts:  The main message of the report is that the number of Americans connected to the nation’s information infrastructure is soaring, yet, digital divide still exists, and in many cases, is actually widening over time.

Part 1 updates the earlier household penetration surveys released in NTIA’s previous two reports. It reveals that the digital divide in American society still exists and has actually widened significantly. The gap for computers and Internet access has generally grown larger by categories of education, income, and race.

Part 2 provides an in-depth examination of Internet access and usage with a focus on trends among individuals. The data provides concrete evidence that the Internet is being used by an increasing number of Americans. While higher income people/Whites have more access at home or at work, lower income/minority people have less access and more often use the access at a public place.

Part 3 discusses the challenges ahead in solving the digital divide and highlights the significance of several key policies in promoting access.

Supporting Data/Fact Sheets:

Fact Sheet 1:     Americans Increasingly Use Internet Outside the Home

Fact Sheet 2:     Americans Using Internet for Many Tasks

Fact Sheet 3:     Education: Boosting the Odds for Internet Use

Fact Sheet 4:     “Digital Divide” Widening at Lower Income

Fact Sheet 5:     Government Programs Designed to Close the Divide

Fact Sheet 6:     Hispanics Falling Back in Information Age

Fact Sheet 7:     In Information Expansion, Blacks Lag Behind

Fact Sheet 8:     Native Americans Lacking Information

Fact Sheet 9:     Racial Divide Continues to Grow

Fact Sheet 10:   Rural Areas Magnify “Digital Divide”

Fact Sheet 11:   Single-Parent Households At Information Disadvantage

This paper looks at the relationship between the city and telecommunications.  Specifically, it provides an overview of how telecommunications has been integrated in city planning strategy and how it can be a necessary force in revitalizing an urban center.  With that directive, this paper presents useful statistics on the growth of the internet economy, community concerns over universal internet access, and government strategies on minimizing the digital divide. 

This report, the second profile of telephone and consumer penetration released by NTIA, analyzes telephone and computer penetration rates across the United States to determine who is, and who is not yet, connected. It gives us intuitive demonstration on expanded information access, the persisting “digital divide” and a profile of the “least connected” with the 1997 data from U.S Census Bureau. At the end of the report, it points out the policy implications of the data.

Important findings:

·         Americans have increasingly embraced the information Age through electronics access in their homes.

·         The “digital divides” between certain groups of Americans has increased between 1994 and 1997.

·         Income greatly affects penetration level.

·         There is still a significant divide among racial groups in telephone penetration.

·         As in 1994, those furthest behind the national average for telephone penetration are the youngest.

·         The level of education affects the penetration rates much as income does.

·         Family structure can also make it a significant difference.

This article cites the problem of rural internet access.   Rural access, although increasingly necessary to bridge the digital divide, is primarily a geographical issue at the moment.  The technology that permits high-speed internet access in urban centers is not easily transferable to rural areas.  The distances between homes and phone service connections can be great.  Additionally, the type of connections that currently exist for just phone lines are, in some instances, unable to support internet access.  As a result, access to all in remote areas is not as easy as simply connecting a service.  Additions to infrastructure are needed.  For those remote areas where access is already possible, the speed of the access can be problematic (and perhaps archaic in comparison to the speed of access available in most urban areas).   

This is a speech to European American Business Council made by Gregory L. Rohde, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information on August 3, 2000. In his remarks, Mr. Rohde first outlines the digital problem as defined in the U.S., and then takes a look at some of the solutions the government is trying to implement as the U.S. moves from Digital Divide to Digital Inclusion. At last, he broadens the discussion of digital divide and defines it as an international issue.

Speech highlights:

·         The speech is in support of the Democrat’s effort to close the digital divide, and argues against some Washington pundits who claim there is no divide at all – There is a gap in access to the Internet and telecommunication between higher income/well-educated/urban/white people and lower income/poor-educated/rural and underserved area/minority people.

·         Digital divide is actually an international issue. Internet penetration is happening unevenly around the world. All the governments should coordinate their efforts to close the divide.

·         Regulation on Internet is not an issue; rather, development is more of an issue to be considered.

In this article, Wilhelm, as director of the Communications Policy Program at the Benton Foundation in Washington, DC, provides his commentary on social welfare concerns resulting from the digital divide.  His states that unequal access to computers and the Internet break along “familiar socioeconomic fault lines, such as income, education, race, and age.”  He points out that the technology have-nots include a disproportionate share of people living below poverty, functional illiterates, American Indians, blacks living in the South, people in small rural towns, and people older than 60.  In identifying these specific communities as those in greatest need of computer and Internet access assistance, Wilhelm states that intervention is needed in order to fairly assist these groups who would otherwise be left out of the future economy. 

 “Access: National Initiatives/Information Resources.” 16 Sept. 2000 <http://www.pbs.org/digitaldivide/links.html>.

“Access: Surveys and Statistics on Computer Access.” 16 Sept. 2000 <http://www.pbs.org/digitaldivide/links.html>.

“Access: National Community Training Resources.” 16 Sept. 2000 <http://www.pbs.org/digitaldivide/links.html>.

Bridis, Ted. “Minorities Fall Through the Net.” ABC News 8 July 1999. 16 Sept. 2000 <http://www.abscnews.go.com/sections/tech/DailyNews/digitaldivide990708.html>.

“Crossing the Digital Divide.” American Demographics June 2000: 9.

“The Digital Divide and You: The New Invisible Man.” 16 Sept. 2000  <http://www.digitaldividenetwork.org/ioure.adp>.

 “Digital Divide Driven More By Income Than Race.” Boardwatch Magazine August 2000: vol.  14-8, 20.

Macavinta, Courtney.  “Study: Digital Divide Persists.”  CNETnews 8 July 1999. 16 Sept. 2000 <http://www.CNETnews.com>.

“Politics and the Digital Divide: Part 1 Vice President Gore and the Democrats.” 16 Sept. 2000 <http://www.digitaldividenetwork.org/gore.adp>.

“President Clinton Releases Report Saying Rural Americans Lag Behind Those In Urban Areas In Access To New Technologies.” Department of Commerce Press Release 26 April 2000.

“Redefining the Digital Divide.” 16 Sept. 2000 <http://www.tele.com>.

II.  PROPOSED IDEAS FOR SOLUTION

Akst, Daniel. “My Old Computer Can Bridge the Digital Divide.” Wall Street Journal 9 Aug. 2000.

An editorial, the main assertion of this article is that the real divide here isn't digital, it's educational. If some segment of society has been left behind, it's partly because we compel its children to attend inferior schools that the rest of us would never countenance for our own kids. Proclaiming a digital divide instead of demanding that poor parents be allowed to choose their children's schools (the way the rest of us can by moving or writing tuition checks) has the paradoxical effect of maintaining the poor as helpless victims rather than giving them a serious means of improving their lives.  No one complains that the poor can't afford books, after all, even though learning is a more important social and economic advantage than knowing how to click a mouse. Technology matters but some technology matters more than others. To the extent that job growth has happened in transit-inaccessible suburbs, for instance, it makes more sense to work on helping poor people buy cars than computers.

This article discusses several existing programs that have had success at helping to bridge the digital divide problem.  Each of the examples discussed were pubic-private partnerships.  Armstrong suggests that in order for any partnership initiative to be successful, each party involved must stand to gain something so both the public and private organization will be personally incited to make the initiative a success.   

A product of The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute (TRPI), this brief gives an overview of the Institute’s earlier research which found that most technology “have nots” live in low-income communities.  From there the brief goes on to identify issues that must be addressed in order to develop and sustain information technology programs.  TRPI held a series of forums in which participants outlined the followed challenges for programs in low-income and disadvantaged communities: 1) equal access; 2) recognizing IT as a tool; 3) the need for user literacy; 4) infrastructure barriers; 5) program sustainability; and 6) staff capacity.  These forums also produced the following findings:

·         Parents and community leaders must buy into IT programs.

·         The impact of IT access must be evaluated.

·         Schools, libraries and community centers represent three primary public access points.

Based on the results of study of 1,689 Latinos in California State, the article argues that providing people Internet access and computer hardware is the “easy part in bridging the digital divide," says Mr. Ruben Barrales, whose organization brings together high tech companies, local government and San Jose State University. The article states that "the next frontier is the focus on education and work-force training. That's the new emerging chasm for Latinos and opportunities in high technology."

This article describes a city program that offers free Internet service through the cable system. The goals are to improve the computer literacy of LaGrange citizens, increase communication among residents and city leaders via e-mail, and make the city attractive to industries seeking a technologically proficient community.

This report describes results from a survey conducted in May of 1997.  The survey was administered at 44 community-based technology centers affiliated with the Community Technology Centers’ Network (CTCNet), which include libraries, youth organizations, multi-service agencies, stand-alone computing centers, cable access centers, housing development centers, settlement houses, and various other non-profit organizations.  The goal of the research was to better understand the effect of community technology centers in bridging the digital divide. 

Major findings from the study showed the following:

·         Community technology centers are an important resource for women and girls, people of all ages, and members of racial or ethnic minorities.

·         Community technology centers offer a range of opportunities to use computers and other technologies in classes as well as in self-directed activities.

·         Community technology centers are a valuable resource for obtaining job skills and learning about employment opportunities.

·         Community technology centers had a positive effect on participants’ educational goals and experience.

·         Community technology centers fostered a sense of community and personal effectiveness, and allowed real community building to occur.

(See Section I For Abstract)

·         Universal Access to the Internet

·         Teacher Training

·         Public and Private Funding Partnerships

To date, the Waitt Family Foundation, run by Gateway Inc. Chairman Ted Waitt, has committed 50,000 personal computers to the community-based project, PowerUp, described in this article. Moreover, Dulles-based AOL has pledged at least 100,000 Internet access accounts. PowerUp, which is moving its headquarters from California to McLean, is also working with Colin Powell’s group, America's Promise: Alliance for Youth to run after school computer literacy programs for youth ages 5 to 15. 

(See Section I For Abstract)

This article describes a youth camp designed for kids ages 12 to 18 years as a way of bridging the digital divide for disadvantaged youth.  San Francisco startup, PeoplePC, hooked up with the non-profit Future Partners to organize the camp.

This article outlines efforts that are being made to close the global digital divide and specifically, details the Global Business Dialogue on Electronic Commerce (GBDe) initiative.  The GBDe, a group of more than 60 CEOs and board members of companies located in more than 24 countries throughout the world, is currently working with the leaders of the G-8 nations that are taking steps to bridge the so-called "digital divide" to ensure that the world's poorest countries share in the blessings of free and unfettered global electronic commerce.  GBDe's Digital Bridges initiative promises to help governments address the critical challenges presented by the global digital divide.  The plan envisions working closely with both individual nations and regional associations such as ASEAN.

This article is a synopsis of the steps the Federal Communications Commission had taken to promote the development of information technology among Native American communities.  On June 8, 2000, the FCC took its most radical steps yet to alleviate the growing digital divide in these areas of the country.  Specifically, the FCC adopted measures that will:

·         Establish government-to-government relationships with Indian Nations;

·         Amend its universal service rules to increase the Lifeline discount of monthly local phone service and increase the Link Up discount for initiating service; and

·         Establish a framework for the resolution of eligible telecommunication carrier (ETC) destinations.

At the end of the article, there are also relevant web links to other articles outlining the FCC’s dealings with Indian Country.

Educators, business leaders and public officials worry that the have-nots are missing out on the rewards of the booming digital economy.  In response, Mark R. Warner, cellular phone pioneer and technology venture capitalist, launched an internship program three years ago involving high-tech companies and historically black colleges. More recently, Warner thought that houses of worship might be the best places to take his internship program further and thus, established the TechRiders 2000 program.  This article provides an overview of the program those communities it serves.  Many of the houses of worship being visited by the TechRiders 2000 program are those with low-income minorities or white residents who have little access or knowledge of computers.

What role should small businesses play in bridging the digital divide? This article suggests that this barrier could easily become a bridge.  Today's digital divide serves as yet another barrier not just to jobs but also to racial equality and harmony. For their part, small businesses could shift its criterion for affirmative action scholarships to young African-Americans interested in IT.

“A National Call to Action to Close the Digital Divide.” White House Press Release 4 April 2000.

Crockett, Roger O.. “How to Bridge America’s Digital Divide.” Business Week Analysis and Commentary, 8 May 2000: 56.

“Highlighting Technology’s Economic Opportunity At COMDEX.” White House Press Release 18 April 2000.

Perine, Keith. “Cinton Visits the Land That Tech Forgot.” The Industry Standard 24 April 2000.

Peterson, Molly M. “Net Dreams.” The National Journal 11 March 2000: 32-11, 766.

“U.S. Secretary of Commerce William M. Daley Kicks Off ‘Closing the Digital Divide’ Tour In New York City.” Department of Commerce Press Release  2 Feb. 2000.

III.  COMMENTARY AGAINST INTERVENTION

Murdock, Deroy. “Digital Divide? What Digital Divide? ”CATO Institute. 16 Sept. 2000 <http://www.cato.org/dailys/06/16-00.html>.

This is commentary article by Deroy Murdock, a senior fellow with the Atlas Economic Research Foundation and a policy advisor to the Cato Institute.  He contends that the cost of internet access and the price of PCs are affordable enough for all persons, regardless of class and race.  Any economic inefficiency will correct itself through market forces. He suggests that any funds directed at the digital divide problem would be better utilized in improving education. 

Thierer states that the discussion surrounding the digital divide is simply “high-tech hype and hysteria” for the following reasons:

·         PCs are becoming more and more affordable.

·         PCs are being given away for free.

·         Some PCs are cheaper to buy than TVs.

·         Internet access is cheap and often free.

·         Many companies offer free computing services.

·         Emerging hybrid computing systems may soon make PCs irrelevant.

·         Companies are rushing to deploy state-of-the-art broadband networks to the home.

·         Employers increasingly are offering free or subsidized PCs to employees.

·         Free markets are spreading new technologies more quickly than subsidies.

IV.  ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF INFORMATION

A.  Included in the Archive:

Somerville, Mary R. “Gateways to Cyberspace: Discounts for Libraries and Schools are an Investment in the Future.” Washington Post 23 Oct. 1996.

B.  Suggested Web Site Sources:

<http://www.digitaldivide.gov/>

s

<http://www.digitaldividenetwork.org/>

<http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/Teachers/digitaldividearticles.html>