The term digital divide refers to the gap between those people with effective access to digital

and information technology and those without access to it. It includes the imbalances in physical
access to technology as well as the imbalances in resources and skills needed to effectively
participate as a digital citizen. In other words, it’s the unequal access by some members of the
society to information and communications technology, and the unequal acquisition of related
skills. Groups often discussed in the context of a digital divide include socioeconomic (rich/poor),
racial (majority/minority), generational (young/old) or geographical (urban/rural)[1]. The term global
digital divide refers to differences in technology access between countries.
Origins of the term
The term initially referred to gaps in ownership of computers between groups. [2][3] The term came
into regular usage in the mid-1990s. President of the United States Bill Clinton and his Vice
President Al Gore used the term in a 1996 speech in Knoxville, Tennessee,[4] though the term had
appeared in several news articles and political speeches as early as 1995.[5] Larry Irving, a former
United States head of the National Telecommunications Infrastructure Administration (NTIA) at the
Department of Commerce, Assistant Secretary of Commerce and technology adviser to the Clinton
Administration, noted that a series of NTIA surveys; [6], [7][8] were “catalysts for the popularity,
ubiquity, and redefinition” of the term, and he used the term in a series of later reports.[5] Since the
start of the George W. Bush Administration, the NTIA reports [9] [10] have tended to focus less on
gaps and divides and more on the steady growth of broadband access, especially amongst groups
formerly believed to be on the wrong side of the digital divide.
Current usage
There are various definitions of the term "digital divide". Bharat Mehra defines it simply as “the
troubling gap between those who use computers and the internet and those who do not”.[11]
The term initially referred to gaps in the ownership of, or regular access to, a computer. As Internet
access came to be seen as a central aspect of computing, the term's usage shifted to encompass
gaps in not just computers but also access to the Internet. Recently, some have used the term to
refer to gaps in broadband network access.[3] The term can mean not only unequal access to
computer hardware, but also inequalities between groups of people in the ability to use information
technology fully.[12]
Due to the range of criteria which can be used to assess the imbalance, and the lack of detailed
data on some aspects of technology usage, the exact nature of the digital divide is both contextual
and debatable. Criteria often used to distinguish between the 'haves' and the 'have nots' of the
digital divide tend to focus on access to hardware, access to the internet, and details relating to
both categories. Some scholars fear that these discussions might be discouraging the creation of
Internet content that addresses the needs of minority groups that make up the "have nots," as they
are portrayed to be technophobic charity cases that lack the desire to adopt new technologies on
their own.[13]
The discussion on digital divide often are tied with other concepts. Lisa Servon argued in 2002 that
the digital divide "is a symptom of a larger and more complex problem -- the problem of persistent
poverty and inequality".[14] As described by Mehra (2004), the four major components that
contribute to digital divide are “socioeconomic status, with income, educational level, and race
among other factors associated with technological attainment”.[11]
Recognition of digital divide as an immense problem has led scholars, policy makers, and the public
to understand the “potential of the internet to improve everyday life for those on the margins of
society and to achieve greater social equity and empowerment”.[11]
Digital divide evolution
Typical measurements of inequality distribution used to describe the Digital Divide are the Lorenz
Curve and Gini coefficient,[15] however, the question of whether or not the digital divide is growing
or closing is difficult to answer.[16]
A 2008 study released by The Center For The Digital Divide and AARP suggest that users (50+) are
now using the web more frequently for news than those under 20,[17] however, broadband adoption
declined by three percent for households whose annual incomes are less than $20,000 according to
a survey conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project.[18]
Digital divide and education
One area of significant focus was school computer access; in the 1990s, rich schools were much
more likely to provide their students with regular computer access. In the late 1990s, rich schools
were much more likely to have internet access[19]. In the context of schools, which have
consistently been involved in the discussion of the divide, current formulations of the divide focus
more on how (and whether) computers are used by students, and less on whether there are
computers or internet connections[20].
The E-Rate program (officially the Schools and Libraries Program of the Universal Service Fund),
authorized in 1996 and implemented in 1997, directly addressed the technology gap between rich
and poor schools by allocating money from telecommunications taxes to poor schools without
technology resources. Though the program faced criticism and controversy in its methods of
disbursement, E-Rate has been credited with increasing the overall number of public classrooms
with Internet access from 14% in 1996 to 95% in 2005[21].
Recently, discussions of a digital divide in school access have broadened to include technology
related skills and training in addition to basic access to computers and internet access.[citation needed]
Technology offers a unique opportunity to extend learning support beyond the classroom,
something that has been difficult to do until now. “The variety of functions that the internet can
serve for the individual user makes it “unprecedentedly malleable” to the user’s current needs and
purposes”.[22]
Global digital divide
Another key dimension of the digital divide is the global digital divide, reflecting existing economic
divisions in the world. This global digital divide widens the gap in economic divisions around the
world. Countries with a wide availability of internet access can advance the economics of that
country on a local and global scale. In today's society, jobs and education are directly related to the
internet[citation needed]. In countries where the internet and other technologies are not accessible,
education is suffering, and uneducated people cannot compete in the global economy[citation needed].
This leads to poor countries suffering greater economic downfall and richer countries advancing
their education and economy[citation needed]. However, when dealing with the global aspect of digital
divide there are several factors that lead to digital divide. For example, country of residence,
ethnicity, gender, age, educational attainment, and income levels are all factors of the global
aspects of digital divide.[23][page # needed] In addition, a survey shows that in 15 Western European
countries females, manual workers, elderly, and the less educated have less internet access than
males, professional, the young, and the well educated”.[24] The digital divide is a term used to refer
to the gap between people who have access to the internet and those that do not. It can also refer
to the skills people have – the divide between peoples who are at ease using technology to access
and analyse information and those who are not.
Digital divide worldwide
Canada: According to a Fall 2007 Canadian Internet Use Survey, 73% of Canadians aged 16
and older went online in the 12 months prior to the survey, compared to 68% in 2005. In
small towns and rural areas, only 65% of residences accessed the internet, compared to 76%
in urban areas. The digital divide still exists between the rich and the poor; 91% of people
making more then $91,000/year regularly used the internet, compared to 47% of people
making less then $24,000. This gap has lowered slightly since 2005.[25]
China: see Digital divide in the People's Republic of China
Europe: European Union study from 2005 conduced in 14 European countries and focused
on the issue of digital divide found that within the EU,[26] the digital divide is primarily a
 matter of age and education. Among the young or educated the proportion of computer or
Internet users is much higher than with the old or uneducated. Digital divide is also higher in
rural areas. The study found that the presence of children in a household increases the
chance of having a computer or Internet access, and that small businesses are catching up
with larger enterprises when it comes to Internet access. The study also notes that "Despite
increasing levels of ICT usage in all sections of society, the divide is not being bridged."
United States: According to a July 2007 Pew Internet & American Life report, "47% of
Americans have a broadband connection at home," an increase of 5% in one year.[27] Digital
divide is a common subject in US politics and various government policies
Digital divide, e-democracy and e-governance
The theoretical concepts of e-democracy are still in early development, but many scholars agree
that blogs (web logs), wikis and mailing lists may have significant effects in broadening the way
democracy operates.[28] There is, as yet, no consensus among scholars about the possible
outcomes of this revolution;[28] it has so far shown promise in improving electoral administration
and reducing fraud and disenfranchisement; particularly positive has been the reception of e-
government services related to online delivery of government services, with portals (such as United
States USA.gov in English and GobiernoUSA.gov in Spanish) used as intermediaries between the
government and the citizen, replacing the need for people to queue in traditional offices.[29]
One of the main problems associated with the digital divide as applied to a liberal democracy is the
capacity to participate in the new public space, the cyberspace - as in the extreme case,
exclusively computer-based democratic participation (deliberation forums, online voting, etc) could
mean that no access meant no vote. Therefore, there is a risk that some social groups - those
without adequate access to or knowledge of IT - will be under-represented (or others over-
represented) in the policy formation processes and this would be incompatible with the equality
principles of democracy.[29]
Proponents of the open content, free software, and open access social movements believe that
these movements help equalize access to digital tools and information.[30]
Overcoming the digital divide
Projects like One Laptop per Child and 50x15 offer a partial solution to the global digital divide;
these projects tend to rely heavily upon open standards and free open source software. The OLPC
XO-1 is an inexpensive laptop computer intended to be distributed to children in developing
countries around the world,[31] to provide them with access to knowledge. Programmer and free
software advocate Richard Stallman has highlighted the importance of free software among groups
concerned with the digital divide such as the World Summit on the Information Society.[32]
Organizations such as Geekcorps, EduVision [33] and Inveneo [34] also help to overcome the digital
divide. They often do so through the use of education systems that draw on information
technology. The technology they employ often includes low-cost laptops/subnotebooks, handhelds
(eg Simputer, E-slate, ...), tablet PCs, Mini-ITX PCs [35] and low-cost WiFi-extending technology as
cantennas and WokFis [36]. In addition, other information technology material usable in the
classroom can also be made diy to lower expenses. This includes projectors, ... [37][38]
In Digital Nation, Anthony G. Wilhelm calls on politicians to develop a national ICT agenda.[12]
Yet another solution is to try to better understand the lifestyle of a minority or marginalized
community.[39] In doing this, researchers can figure out “what is meaningful to them [minorities and
marginalized users] and how they use (or do not use) different forms of the internet for meeting
their objectives”.[40] Furthermore, “a need for a re-examination of questions based on traditional
ways of looking at people, their social dynamics, and their interactions with technology”.[40]
Additionally, “One strategy is to transfer goal-setting, decision making, and choice-determining
processes into the hands of the disadvantaged users in order that they ‘fit’ internet into their daily
lives in ways that they themselves consider to be meaningful”.[41]
International cooperation between governments have begun, aiming at dealing with the global
digital divide. For example, in an attempt to bridge this digital divide, an agreement between the
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Egyptian government
emerged. The USAID funded state-of-the-art equipment for Egyptian education, their brilliance of
knowledge in using such equipment caused such equipment to increase in use throughout the
years. Now, Egyptian society is more computer literate and knowledgeable about computers than
they used to be. Nonetheless it's a sign of progress that such attempts at bridging the digital divide
are seriously being made. [42] Additional participants in such endeavors include the United Nations
Global Alliance for ICT and Development and the Digital alliance Foundation.[43][44]
The United Nations is aiming to raise awareness of the divide by way of the World Information
Society Day which takes place yearly on May 17.[45]
Criticism
The existence of a digital divide is not universally recognized. Compaine (2001) argues it is a
perceived gap. Technology gaps are relatively transient; hence the digital divide should soon
disappear in any case. The knowledge of computers will become less important as they get smarter
and easier to use. In the future people will not need high-tech skills to access the Internet and
participate in e-commerce or e-democracy. Thus Compaine argues that a digital divide "is not the
issue to expend substantial amounts or funds nor political capital"