IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v33y2011i1p73-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Internet use? A quantitative examination of the role of everyday life and Internet policy and regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Tsatsou, Panayiota

Abstract

Regardless of the technological advances achieved so far and the often techno-deterministic approaches to the information society, inequalities in the access to, distribution and use of ICTs such as the Internet still highlight the importance of digital divides. The complex nature and continuing importance of the unequal rates of use of ICTs such as the Internet invite research to examine their drivers. Ordinary people’s everyday life and their awareness and evaluation of policy and regulation are influential factors in how Internet use takes shape today. This is the argument made by this article and supported by a survey of 1001 Internet users and non-users in Greece. Particular attention is paid to how aspects of everyday life and culture, such as resistance to ICTs, and people’s awareness and evaluation of Internet policy and regulation in areas such as online security and privacy can explain Internet use.

Suggested Citation

  • Tsatsou, Panayiota, 2011. "Why Internet use? A quantitative examination of the role of everyday life and Internet policy and regulation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 73-83.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:33:y:2011:i:1:p:73-83
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2011.03.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X11000170
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2011.03.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mokyr, Joel, 1992. "Technological Inertia in Economic History," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(2), pages 325-338, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Snir, Avichai & Levy, Daniel, 2010. "Economic Growth in the Potterian Economy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 211-236.
    2. Stefan Mann & Henry Wüstemann, 2010. "Efficiency and utility: an evolutionary perspective," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 37(9), pages 676-685, August.
    3. Peter Linquiti & Nathan Cogswell, 2016. "The Carbon Ask: effects of climate policy on the value of fossil fuel resources and the implications for technological innovation," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(4), pages 662-676, December.
    4. Blain, Bodil Bjerkvik, 2006. "Melting markets: the rise and decline of the Anglo-Norwegian ice trade, 1850-1920," Economic History Working Papers 22471, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Economic History.
    5. repec:dpr:wpaper:0878 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Ricardo J. Caballero & Mohamad L. Hammour, 2000. "Creative Destruction and Development: Institutions, Crises, and Restructuring," NBER Working Papers 7849, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Enflo, Kerstin & Molinder, Jakob & Karlsson, Tobias, 2019. "More Power to the People: Electricity Adoption, Technological Change and Social Conflict," CEPR Discussion Papers 13986, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Hiroshi Kitamura & Noriaki Matsushima & Misato Sato, 2024. "How Does Downstream Firms’ Efficiency Affect Exclusive Supply Agreements?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 64(2), pages 219-242, March.
    9. Schwerin, Joachim & Werker, Claudia, 2003. "Learning innovation policy based on historical experience," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 385-404, December.
    10. Boucekkine, Raouf & Martinez, Blanca, 2003. "Replacement, adoption and economic dynamics: lessons from a canonical creative destruction model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 339-359, September.
    11. Schneider, Benjamin & Vipond, Hillary, 2023. "The past and future of work: how history can inform the age of automation," Economic History Working Papers 119282, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Economic History.
    12. Nazareno, Luísa & Schiff, Daniel S., 2021. "The impact of automation and artificial intelligence on worker well-being," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    13. Dora Gicheva & Albert N. Link, 2022. "Public sector entrepreneurship, politics, and innovation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 565-572, August.
    14. Furukawa, Yuichi & Lai, Tat-kei & Sato, Kenji, 2019. "Love of Novelty: A Source of Innovation-Based Growth... or Underdevelopment Traps?," MPRA Paper 92915, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Berthold Herrendorf & Arilton Teixeira, 2007. "Technology adoption: on the non equivalence of tariffs and quotas," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 4(3), pages 195-217, September.
    16. FURUKAWA Yuichi & Tat-kei LAI & SATO Kenji, 2018. "Novelty-Seeking Traits and Innovation," Discussion papers 18073, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    17. Teixeira, Arilton, 2003. "Effects of Trade Policy on Technology Adoption and Investment," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 23(1), May.
    18. Bridgman, Benjamin R. & Livshits, Igor D. & MacGee, James C., 2007. "Vested interests and technology adoption," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 649-666, April.
    19. Frank W. Geels & Jonatan Pinkse & Dimitri Zenghelis, 2021. "Productivity opportunities and risks in a transformative,low-carbon and digital age," Working Papers 009, The Productivity Institute.
    20. Schuelke-Leech, Beth-Anne, 2018. "A model for understanding the orders of magnitude of disruptive technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 261-274.
    21. Benjamin Schneider & Hillary Vipond, 2023. "The Past and Future of Work: How History Can Inform the Age of Automation," CESifo Working Paper Series 10766, CESifo.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:33:y:2011:i:1:p:73-83. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.