IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infosf/v14y2012i3d10.1007_s10796-011-9297-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Study of the digital divide evaluation model for government agencies–a Taiwanese local government’s perspective

Author

Listed:
  • She-I Chang

    (National Chung Cheng University)

  • David C. Yen

    (Miami University)

  • I-Cheng Chang

    (National Chung Cheng University)

  • Jung-Chu Chou

    (National Chung Cheng University)

Abstract

Many countries have devoted increasing attention to information infrastructures. However, a gap in digitalization exists among different government agencies, causing unequal opportunities for accessing infrastructures, information, and communication technologies. This paper, based on Gowin’s Vee structure, is an empirical study of the digital divide in the context of local governments in Taiwan. A model for identifying and measuring aforementioned digital divide is constructed in this paper. We first refer to the grounded theory to draft a framework for measuring the digital divide in local governments. Then, through the use of a questionnaire distributed to experts implemented alongside the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), we generate five dimensions (including ICT infrastructure, human resources, external environment, internals of organization, and information) and 42 measures. Finally, we measure the actual levels of the digital divide in local governments with the resulting digital divide evaluation model. This paper aims to generate results that can serve as a reference for government agencies (at all levels) in the formulation of their digitalization strategies. Moreover, the digital divide evaluation model constructed in this study goes beyond existing measures and may serve as a reference for academics in the examination of methods to narrow the digital divide in various levels of governmental bodies. Taken together, the features of integration, comprehensiveness, and wide applicability of this proposed model can be considered the theoretical contributions to digital divide and local government hierarchy research.

Suggested Citation

  • She-I Chang & David C. Yen & I-Cheng Chang & Jung-Chu Chou, 2012. "Study of the digital divide evaluation model for government agencies–a Taiwanese local government’s perspective," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 693-709, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:14:y:2012:i:3:d:10.1007_s10796-011-9297-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10796-011-9297-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10796-011-9297-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10796-011-9297-x?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. Billon, Margarita & Marco, Rocio & Lera-Lopez, Fernando, 0. "Disparities in ICT adoption: A multidimensional approach to study the cross-country digital divide," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10-11), pages 596-610, November.
    2. Oecd, 2001. "Understanding the Digital Divide," OECD Digital Economy Papers 49, OECD Publishing.
    3. Parker, Edwin B., 2000. "Closing the digital divide in rural America," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 281-290, May.
    4. repec:pri:cpanda:wp17%20-%20dimaggio,%20hargittai,%20neuman,%20robinson is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Kiiski, Sampsa & Pohjola, Matti, 2002. "Cross-country diffusion of the Internet," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 297-310, June.
    6. Paul DiMaggio & Eszter Hargittai & W. Russell Neuman & John P. Robinson, 2001. "Social Implications of the Internet," Working Papers 159, Princeton University, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies..
    7. Oecd, 2008. "The Seoul Declaration for the Future of the Internet Economy," OECD Digital Economy Papers 147, OECD Publishing.
    8. Brugha, Cathal M., 2004. "Phased multicriteria preference finding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(2), pages 308-316, October.
    9. Saaty, Thomas L., 1986. "Absolute and relative measurement with the AHP. The most livable cities in the United States," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 327-331.
    10. Andonova, Veneta, 2006. "Mobile phones, the Internet and the institutional environment," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 29-45, February.
    11. Vargas, Luis G., 1990. "An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 2-8, September.
    12. Ronald Leenes, 2004. "Local e-Government in the Netherlands: from ambitious policy goals to harsh reality," ITA manu:scripts 04_04, Institute of Technology Assessment (ITA).
    13. Lentz, R. G. & Oden, Michael D., 2001. "Digital divide or digital opportunity in the Mississippi Delta region of the US," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 291-313, June.
    14. Ernest H. Forman & Saul I. Gass, 2001. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process---An Exposition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 469-486, August.
    15. Meng‐chun Liu & Gee San, 2006. "Social Learning and Digital Divides: A Case Study of Internet Technology Diffusion," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 307-321, May.
    16. Edward M. Crenshaw & Kristopher K. Robison, 2006. "Globalization and the Digital Divide: The Roles of Structural Conduciveness and Global Connection in Internet Diffusion," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 87(1), pages 190-207, March.
    17. James, M.J., 2007. "From origins to implications : Key aspects in the debate over the digital divide," Other publications TiSEM 268eb10c-e0af-4818-8ef9-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chulhwan Chris Bang, 2015. "Information systems frontiers: Keyword analysis and classification," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 217-237, February.
    2. Silvana Rossy Brito & Aleksandra Socorro da Silva & Eulália Carvalho Mata & Nandamudi Lankalapalli Vijaykumar & Cláudio Alex Jorge Rocha & Maurílio Abreu Monteiro & João Crisóstomo Weyl Albuquerque Co, 2018. "An approach to evaluate large-scale ICT training interventions," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 883-899, August.
    3. Frederico Cruz-Jesus & Tiago Oliveira & Fernando Bacao & Zahir Irani, 2017. "Assessing the pattern between economic and digital development of countries," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 835-854, August.
    4. Polyxeni Vassilakopoulou & Eli Hustad, 2023. "Bridging Digital Divides: a Literature Review and Research Agenda for Information Systems Research," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 955-969, June.
    5. Silva, Diego S. & Yamashita, Gabrielli Harumi & Cortimiglia, Marcelo Nogueira & Brust-Renck, Priscila G. & ten Caten, Carla Schwengber, 2022. "Are we ready to assess digital readiness? Exploring digital implications for social progress from the Network Readiness Index," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    6. Jyoti Choudrie & Sutee Pheeraphuttranghkoon & Soheil Davari, 2020. "The Digital Divide and Older Adult Population Adoption, Use and Diffusion of Mobile Phones: a Quantitative Study," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 673-695, June.

    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. Richard Perkins & Eric Neumayer, 2011. "Is the internet really new after all?: the determinants of telecommunications diffusion in historical perspective," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 30800, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Frederico Cruz-Jesus & Tiago Oliveira & Fernando Bacao & Zahir Irani, 2017. "Assessing the pattern between economic and digital development of countries," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 835-854, August.
    3. Frederico Cruz-Jesus & Tiago Oliveira & Fernando Bacao & Zahir Irani, 0. "Assessing the pattern between economic and digital development of countries," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    4. Margarita Billon & Fernando Lera-Lopez & Rocío Marco, 2010. "Differences in digitalization levels: a multivariate analysis studying the global digital divide," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(1), pages 39-73, April.
    5. Dohse, Dirk & Lim, Cheng Yee, 2016. "Macro-geographic location and internet adoption in poor countries: What is behind the persistent digital gap?," Kiel Working Papers 2067, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    6. Bera, Subhasis, 2019. "Club convergence and drivers of digitalization across Indian states," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1-1.
    7. Mona Badran, 2014. "Young people and the digital divide in Egypt: an empirical study," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 4(2), pages 223-250, December.
    8. Szeles, Monica Răileanu, 2018. "New insights from a multilevel approach to the regional digital divide in the European Union," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 452-463.
    9. Zhang, Xiaoqun, 2013. "Income disparity and digital divide: The Internet Consumption Model and cross-country empirical research," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 515-529.
    10. Srinuan, Chalita & Bohlin, Erik, 2011. "Understanding the digital divide: A literature survey and ways forward," 22nd European Regional ITS Conference, Budapest 2011: Innovative ICT Applications - Emerging Regulatory, Economic and Policy Issues 52191, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    11. Menzie D. Chinn & Robert W. Fairlie, 2010. "ICT Use in the Developing World: An Analysis of Differences in Computer and Internet Penetration," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 153-167, February.
    12. Pick, James B. & Nishida, Tetsushi, 2015. "Digital divides in the world and its regions: A spatial and multivariate analysis of technological utilization," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 1-17.
    13. A Ishizaka & D Balkenborg & T Kaplan, 2011. "Does AHP help us make a choice? An experimental evaluation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(10), pages 1801-1812, October.
    14. Neokosmidis, Ioannis & Avaritsiotis, Nikolaos & Ventoura, Zoe & Varoutas, Dimitris, 2015. "Assessment of the gap and (non-)Internet users evolution based on population biology dynamics," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 14-37.
    15. Li, Raymond & Shiu, Alice, 2012. "Internet diffusion in China: A dynamic panel data analysis," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 872-887.
    16. Akos Jakobi, 2013. "Space and virtuality: new characteristics of inequalities in the information society and economy," Review of Applied Socio-Economic Research, Pro Global Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 4-14, June.
    17. Ventura, Eva & Satorra, Albert, 2015. "A multiple indicator model for panel data: an application to ICT area-level variation," 26th European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2015 127191, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    18. Madden, Gary & Coble-Neal, Grant, 0. "Internet use in rural and remote Western Australia," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(3-4), pages 253-266, April.
    19. Menzie D. Chinn & Robert W. Fairlie, 2007. "The determinants of the global digital divide: a cross-country analysis of computer and internet penetration," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(1), pages 16-44, January.
    20. Charles Shaaba Saba & Oladipo Olalekan David, 2023. "Identifying Convergence in Telecommunication Infrastructures and the Dynamics of Their Influencing Factors Across Countries," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 1413-1466, June.

    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:spr:infosf:v:14:y:2012:i:3:d:10.1007_s10796-011-9297-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.