The US Department of Commerce Updates the Digital Divide: Its Hemispheric Significance!

The Washington Post, June 29, 2002 reported on a recent study on the “Digital Divide” with claims that “As Internet Use Spreads, the Policy is Debated Anew”. Some support a view that there is no longer a ‘digital divide’, while others contend the government is “interpreting the numbers wrong”. A UCLA study for the US Department of Commerce makes claim that in the U.S. the gap between the high-tech “haves” and “ have nots” is closing in three areas; education, geography and race.

Education: Education includes elements of knowledge, teaching, practice/experience, analytical learning and organization for learning. There is nothing in this study, as we read it that demonstrates that “education” is taking place. Rather it measures the percentage of respondents who answered that they have “access” to Internet. It has been understood for a long time that in education “access” is half the equation. Access is a measure of progress for consumers and commerce. Without the other half, i.e, “use”, it is difficult to measure education and/or progress. Access to a computer, a network, software, or otherwise, in and of itself provides little or no data to measure if education has taken place. At best, it may be a predictor that information is accessible to the consumer, provided they have the where with all to pay for the cost of access and operations.

Geography –This is completely irrelevant to the issue of closing a gap between the haves and have nots. Geography includes, land, sea, air and water, etc. Technology has most certainly been improved for better reception under certain geographic and environmental conditions.
A more appropriate measure, rather than geography is “habitat”, which is where and how people live. The research also might have looked at “communities”, a term frequently used to measure demographics--physical, social and economic--conditions, the way people live and work.
The first DOC study of the so-called “digital divide”, described the habitats or communities where the gap was greatest, i.e., rural, agricultural, hard to reach and urban areas with large numbers of senior citizens and students, and above all poor, low-income and indigenous groups. Since geography is an inappropriate measure and since the socio-economic conditions applied access and use of Internet and telephones in the first DOC study, we suggest that geography must be set aside, as a measure for closing the digital divide and/or education progress.

Race – The numbers just don’t seem to add up. Despite massive spending in the 90’s, some say $107 billion by 2003, blacks went from 23% with Internet access in 1998, to 36% in 2000. Whites went from 42% to 50% access in the same period. If we knew where the growth occurred how, where people live, the size of the community, and the per capita income, the 8% and 13% growth may even demonstrate a slow down in growth from previous years. This slower growth is why the computer industries in the last few years reported a level of consumer “saturation”, and moved on to more lucrative mergers to deliver “services”.

Of equal importance, what about the 64% of blacks and 50% of whites who still don’t have access and use? Do we know where they live and their per capita income? With the economic down turn and leveling off within the telecommunication industries, many analysts are predicting the days of low cost services are near an end. It is more likely that telecommunication service costs will rise and stabilize with more realistic pricing over the next few years.

Most US citizens have experienced this rise in pricing for their cable systems, as well as telephone use. By June, 2001 US Internet Service Providers (ISPs) increased their monthly service fees anywhere from 9% to 25% or as the Washington Post, 6/3/01 saw it, “as competition dwindles and broadband services grow, users pay more.” In reality, the increases had as much to do with the loss of advertisers in the economic down turn, as it did with competition dwindling. Industry does what it must do for stockholders when revenues decline and fail to materialize, it turns to the consumers to fill a revenue gap!

The first Department of Commerce study showed that “in spite of more Americans than ever with access to telephone, computers and the Internet…there is still a significant digital divide separating American haves” from those with “lower incomes and education levels, minorities, rural areas and central cities…that not only did it widen [in 1999] it was expected to continue widening”.

The US/DOC current study confirms the 1999 projections with “computer use at home and at work, fewer than half of those with annual incomes of $15,000 to $25,000 can get on Internet, compared with about 90% of those with annual incomes more than $75,000… If you count Internet access only at home, less than a quarter under (25%) of those with $15,000 to $25,000 income have access, compared with more than 80% of those with incomes of more than $75,000 a year, and only 32% Hispanics and 40% Blacks have access at home, compare to 60% Whites.”

After all is said and done, when the covers are lifted, it appears that when education, health care and information demands are factored in, the 2nd US/DOC study has a tough time at best of making a case that the digital divide has been put to rest, and at worst it is premature to ring the death knell for inequality!

But what of the digital divide in the Americas? Has demand for education, declined with increasing telecommunication costs? At a time when more than 170 million of this hemisphere’s population live in poverty, rich nations and regional development agencies have made eradicating poverty and hunger by 2015 a priority ; and announced that half of the new $13 billion in foreign aid will be dedicated to education grants, it gives further evidence that education demand has increased, and will continue to grow. At the same time Latin American and the Caribbean countries are showing the greatest growth in demand for Internet and other telecommunication services around the globe.

There is no question of the need for new, bold, public/private strategies to meet the education and health care demands with multilateral efforts to share resources, cultures and languages. It is an economic and social necessity that democratic institutions find cost-effective ways in the delivery of services and programs to meet the demands and needs for all people. An interconnected open, affordable and equitable electronic highway will level the playing field for small and large, poor and developing nations in the global information economy.

It was best stated by the Development Committee of the Board of Governors of the World Bank in the April, 2002 report “Education for Dynamic Economies: ...With Education for All”. With increasing recognition and acknowledgment that “good education reduces poverty and inequality and is essential for sustained economic growth…reducing existing inequality in the distribution of education, the ‘people’s asset’, is an important step towards creating a global tide that lifts all boats which would in turn reduce the likelihood of global instability. ..All countries [must] reach this minimum threshold to build a foundation for a holistic education and training system to empower individuals and transform societies through economic growth, poverty reduction, sound governance and effective institutions.”

But what of the Digital Divide in the Americas? Has education demand declined? We use the US/DOC report as a “case study” to suggest that the problem is worsening as well for the Latin American and the Caribbean countries. Whether in rural America, rural Argentina or Chile, Guyana or Honduras, as an earlier NETO/EDSAT paper on demand pointed out, “costs, equity, governance, and local empowerment” remain the challenges for telecommunication infrastructure systems to be able to deliver equitable, affordable and timely public services to all people

In spite of the best intentions of the World Bank, other regional development agencies, the US Department of Commerce, and rich nations, the following update of statistics for the year 2000, finds that overall the barriers remain pretty much the same , the divide between the haves and have nots is expanding; telecommunications costs are going up, education need and demand is growing, and poverty is unabated, if not worsening!

NETO/EDSAT-Americas, is an education initiative with 16 Latin American and Caribbean countries joined in a multilateral effort as a country-owned initiative, in a new development strategy to include economies of scale, governance and local empowerment, with “strong political commitment and leadership”, “sound sector policy framework”, “attention to the disadvantaged”, and “balancing of quality/access reforms”. These elements excerpted from the World Bank “Education for All” report, are cited as critical necessities in projects which are designed to achieve the leaders’ goals for basic quality education for all Americas children by 2010. The EDSAT-Americas Technical Planning Team project reflects the importance of each of these elements.

The NETO/EDSAT report, “Rationale for an EDSAT-Americas Project: Is there a Demand?”, stated, “We as a global community have the responsibility to ensure that all people benefit from these changes…The concept of an integrated, hemispheric telecommunication system dedicated to instruction [and other public services] is not necessarily a new one…The longer we wait to act, the greater the risk of more people falling behind and the greater the divide between technology haves and have-nots…The challenge we face is turning ideas into reality.” This was a statement made by the late Congressman George E. Brown, Jr., a year prior to the US/DOC documentation of a widening digital divide. It appears both predicted the future with clarity and great insight. The EDSAT-Americas’ founding countries, in partners with NETO/EDSAT, the OAS, the private sector, and civil society organizations have picked up the challenge to do something about Education for All, and are turning the idea into reality!

The following charts update some of the data which appeared in the 1999 NETO/EDSAT report, “Rationale for an EDSAT-Americas project: Is there a Demand?” It confirms that at best, there has been little change for those who have and for the have nots as poor and developing countries and communities, struggle to strengthen economic development, trade and democratic institutions to meet the education, health care and other public service challenges for all Americas’ children. At worst, in many cases, the gap has grown greater, and remains ever more challenging. It also confirms, that there is much work to be done, but its doable, to assure all Americas’ children access to basic quality educational opportunities by 2010.

For further information about the EDSAT-Americas initiative Email, netoedsat@oas.org, or fax 202-458-3538, Washington, DC.