Specifically, this paper aims to: (a) examine the extent of the digital divide in India at the national, state and district levels and (b) identify the demand- and supply-side factors driving the digital divide at the district level. The study contributes to addressing key theoretical and empirical gaps in existing research on the digital divide in India. Theoretically, none of the existing studies on the digital divide use an explicit supply and demand framework to determine the causes of the digital divide in India.
Specific studies on the digital divide in India (see Appendix A1) have sought to understand the extent of the digital divide (Pick. & Sarkar, 2015), the spread of various forms of mobile technologies (Gupta & Jain, 2012), factors for ICT use and impact of ICT on economic growth (Ghosh, 2016; Narayana, 2011), access to healthcare (Haenssgen, 2018) and financial inclusion (Saibal Ghosh, 2016). In terms of theoretical framework, none of the existing studies have considered both demand-side and supply-side factors while examining the digital divide in India. The empirical contribution of this study is to investigate the demand and supply side factors that characterize the digital divide at the district level in India.
The determinants of the digital divide at the district level are then estimated using a multivariate econometric model. To understand the reasons for the digital divide at the district level, it is imperative to understand the demand for ICT tools.
Econometric Model
4 Results and Discussion
Nature and Extent of Digital Divide
In 2011, only 1 and 7.2 percent of rural and urban households had an Internet connection, respectively (Table 3). According to this report, 4.4 and 23.4 percent of rural and urban families have computers, respectively. Further, 14.9 and 42.0 percent of rural and urban households, respectively, have an Internet connection (Table 3).
The rural-urban ratio tells us that there is a continuation of a huge rural-urban gap in computer and internet access; although the magnitude of the rural-urban gap has reduced in 2017-18 compared to 2011-12. The NSSO survey further indicates that richer households have greater access to ICT instruments (computers and internet connection) compared to poorer households (Figures 3a and 3b). However, the gap in possession of these two ICT instruments between different economic classes has narrowed during this period.
The gap in computer ownership between the different economic classes is greater than that of internet connectivity. The gap between the rural and urban classes is higher in possession of computers than that of internet. In terms of mobile phone ownership, the rural-urban divide exists and the wealthier economic classes in both rural and urban areas own more.
However, the difference between the proportion of households owning a mobile phone in rural and urban areas is much smaller compared to other ICT instruments such as computers and internet connection. So even among the wealthiest urban households there is a considerable gap in the possession of ICT instruments. Households in rural India and those belonging to the urban poor have very few ICT tools.
In the following two subsections, we examine in detail the factors that create this disparity in household ownership of two ICT tools – computers with internet and mobile phones using econometric models derived from supply-demand framework.
Factors behind Digital Divide
- Estimation of Reduced Form Demand Equation of Households for Computers with Internet
- Estimation of Reduced Form Demand Equation of Households with Mobile Phones
The regression result (Table 4) shows that five independent variables – Share_of_urban_population, Share_of_pop_age_between_15to35, Share_of_workers_in_service_sector, Share_of_women_educated_secondary_and_above, Index_average_service.-quality-significant relationship with the positive statistical_broadband relationship The variable Share_of_SCST_ population has a negative statistically significant relationship with the dependent variable. However, the variables Share_of_villages_with_broadband_coverage, Ratio_of_poor_and_middle_to_affluent_households and Share_of_households_with_electricity have no statistically significant impact.
Among all these, higher education, especially of women and the share of the young population, are the two most important factors. The other three significant factors are degree of urbanization, broadband network service quality15 and proportion of SC/ST population. Instead of the variables Proportion_of_villages_with_broadband_coverage and Index_average_service_quality_broadband, we use the independent variables corresponding to the coverage of the mobile network and the quality of its services.
Therefore, instead of considering the level of education as high school and above, we take Proportion_of_persons_with_high_school_and_higher education. The results (Table 4) show that the independent variables: share_of_pop_age_between_15 to 35, share_of_people_educated_with_secondary_school_and_over, share_of_households_with_electricity and index_of_average_quality_of_the_mobile_network have a positive statistically significant relationship with the dependent variable share_of_households_with_mobile_phones. Independent variables: Share_of_SCST_population and Ratio_of_poor_and_middle_to_welloff_households have a negative statistically significant relationship with the dependent variable.
Share_of_villages_with_mobile_network_coverage and Share_of_urban_population have no statistically significant impact. The largest value of the coefficient is that of Share_of_pop_age_between_15to35, followed by Share_of_SCST_population and Index_average_service_quality_mobile_network. Share_of_persons_educated_below_middle_school and Share_of_pop_age_between_15to35 with Share_of population_with_age_not_between_15to35 (Appendix A5, Equation 2).
Both of the new variables show a statistically significant inverse relationship with the dependent variable Share_of_households_with_mobile phones.
5 Policy Implications
Other important factors influencing mobile phone ownership are level of education, electricity connection and economic status of the household. The analysis shows that the gap between rural and urban areas is not statistically significant regarding the ownership of mobile phones in households. However, household mobile phone ownership had a negative impact on poorer economic conditions and SC-STs.
However, household ownership of mobile phones does not appear to differ significantly between those working in the service sector and others. However, the availability of electricity and the quality of mobile network services are important factors driving household demand for mobile phones in both rural and urban areas. Overall, the findings indicate that India's digital divide in 2011 was largely a reflection of existing socio-economic divisions.
The results also show that while the possession of both ICT instruments was not sensitive to network availability, it was sensitive to broadband and mobile service quality. In general, the prevalence of mobile phones is wider than computers with Internet. We did not find a statistically significant rural-urban gap or a significant importance of higher education or a specific service-oriented occupational requirement for mobile phones.
Unlike computers with Internet access, there are no large differences in households owning a mobile phone among different occupational categories. However, being a SC-ST household or a relatively poor household appears to have a negative effect on household possession of both ICT instruments. The results show that districts with higher proportion of SC-ST population have significantly lower mobile phone access.
Therefore, a targeted policy to increase accessibility and use of mobile phones for SC-ST will reduce the digital divide even faster.
6 Concluding Remarks
Thus, a key policy implication is that efforts and interventions to close the digital divide should not only look at supply-side interventions, but also focus on policies that reduce existing socio-economic divides and thus contribute to wider diffusion. of ICT. This may be because customers in 2011 did not differentiate between network unavailability and poor quality of network services. Therefore, the digital divide is likely to be reduced if the price of ICT tools and access to data is reduced, together with the improvement of the quality of network services.
Firms that focus on better network services at lower rates will not only capture greater market share, but also expand the market size for the industry. Furthermore, to increase the spread of computers with internet, the spread of education, especially of women, at secondary and higher level is very important. Thus, policy intervention and schemes aimed at encouraging schooling of girl children by linking it with a conditional cash transfer scheme will lead to reduction in gender-based digital divide.
NSSO's 75th round survey report on household expenditure on education shows us that there is a reduction in the digital divide compared to 2011. However, this report does not provide information on household ownership of mobile phones which seems to be playing a key role in increasing the spread of the Internet and related services. As more data become available, future research could examine whether any changes in socio-economic divides bridge the digital divide or whether it is mainly because better and cheaper ICT infrastructure has reduced the digital divide.
The findings of this study will serve as a starting point for such studies examining the digital divide in India.
Electronic commerce research and applications The impact of ICT development on the global digital divide. Retrieved from http://www.mssrf-nva.org/Speeches/Enabling ICT for Rural India by Asia-Pacific Research Center, Stanford University, National Informatics Center By Rafiq Dossani, D.C. Different Paths to Universal Access: The Impact of Policy and Regulation on Broadband Diffusion in the Developed and Developing Countries.
ICT use in households and businesses in the EU: associations and determinants from a multivariate perspective. The digital divide in the world and its regions: a spatial and multivariate analysis of technology use. The United States Digital Divide: An Analysis of Spatial Clustering and Multivariate Determinants of ICT Use at the State Level.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Australia license, which permits non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original author and AJIS are credited.
Appendix A1: Select studies on digital divide in India
Appendix A2: Variables used and their Data-Source
Appendix A3
Appendix A4: Demand Estimation of Computer with Internet
Appendix A5: Demand Estimation of Mobile
