Access and the Digital Divide

The digital divide would be much less if it was measured based on terms of population instead of nation-state.

After having read “Measuring the global digital divide at the level of individuals” by Jeffrey James, I’ve found new insight into how the digital divide was measured before and that why, when measured at an individual level, the digital divide appears to be closing despite the facts that lead many to believe otherwise.

The current digital divide has been defined and measured by assigning the same weight for each country no matter what their population size is. This form of measurement clearly has it’s pitfalls in that it allows various countries that could in way compare because of their sheer population size, compare, and in doing so the digital gap appears vast and ever growing.

It’s sensible to  measure the divide based off of the weight of the individuals within countries because, as James argues, much of the policy is directed at individuals instead of countries and that the bulk of welfare economics places the individual, the consumer as the unit of analysis.

The major challenge is finding ways in order to weigh the population but if estimates are made, than the evidence supports that in reality, global equality maybe shrinking from where it was ten years ago. How on earth could this be possible? Many ask that after reading that line but what has failed to be considered by many who analyze this difficult situation is the rise of China. James notes,

The reason for the decline in global economic inequality after 1978 is that the most populated country in the world, China, experienced substantial growth rates. Hence, the incomes of a big fraction of the world’s population (approximately 20%) started converging towards the rich economies after 1978.

What also reinforced the advancements of the developing world and the closing of the digital divide has been the progress of India, who makes up twenty percent of the world’s population. The current method of measurement simply doesn’t provide these facts in statistics that favor my argument. When comparing in terms of nations we find that China and India are simply viewed as two data points that only give them the same importance with countries such as Luxembourg, who has a population of five hundred thousand, and Lesotho, a Southern African country of only two million.

Other statics are affected drastically if the current methods of measurement are switched to a per-person measurement system. For instance if we used the current method to measure the digital divide in terms of mobile phone use when comparing the developed and developing world, we find the ration of usage to non to be 8 to 1. And here is where measuring by terms of population becomes important, because when we weigh the total populations, we find the ration to be 1.8 to 1.

Greater equality will never be fully achieved we fail to measure it correctly from the start. The evidence is clear that if we changed the way in which we measured the divide, a much different image would be drawn, allowing us to address the digital divide problem more pragmatically.

Jeffrey, J. (2009). Measuring the global digital divide at the level of individuals. Current Science, 96(2), 194-197. Retrieved March 4, 2009, from http://offcampus.lib.washington.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=36315249&site=ehost-live