Author Archives: admin

Significant progress has been made in ensuring that a digital connection can be offered to every household. However, bandwidth availability varies considerably and in the majority of cases falls short of what is currently considered internationally to be “high speed”(30MB/sec+).
Convergence in the digital space, e.g., TV sets and games consoles with Internet capability, plays a part in bringing “digital” to an increasing number of households. For those who may not be able to afford a digital connection/service or PC/device to effect a connection, access through libraries, schools, community centres is for the most part within reach. However, if a basic level access is no longer a significant deterrent for the “determined” citizen, then the focus of attention for digital inclusion must now shift to “use” and to addressing the motivational and skills factors that are the obstacles for what is still a sizeable minority of our people, many of whom could, but do not yet use the Internet.
According to the CSO (December 2011) report on the use of computers in households, Internet access “has increased over the period 2007-2011 with an estimated 78% now connected to the Internet compared with 72% in 2010 and 57% in 2007”.  Adding to this the access points in Libraries, community centres and schools, Access appears to be getting to a point where it is not the problem it was. The report however indicates that usage is strongly skewed towards the young. However, apart from OECD PISA data relating to a sample of 15-year olds, we have little or no data on Internet usage – the scope of communications/tasks/transactions being undertaken on the Internet by individuals.
Data regarding usage is urgently needed if we are to target supports effectively to those who remain marginalised. It is important to separately measure and to seek to understand the underlying factors in the case of:
Persons who potentially have access to the Internet, but who do not as yet avail of it (apart from those who may have made a conscious decision not to).
Persons with no access to the Internet.
It is clear to those working in the field of digital inclusion that people who are currently regarded as the most unreachable will continue to be the most difficult to reach, for reasons that are more attributable to wider social exclusion factors than to problems of Internet service connectivity. There is a strong correlation between the wider problems of poverty and social exclusion and the problem of attaining digital inclusion for all. The following groups are under-represented and/or at risk of marginalisation in terms of Internet access and use:

People living in isolated rural areas
Older people
People with a disability
People with little formal education
People with literacy difficulties
People in lower income groups
People who are socially isolated
The homeless

Determined effort must continue to be made to deliver connectivity to all remote locations and to improve broadband speeds to acceptable international “high speed” standards where connections have already been made. Those who already have high-speed broadband have access to a much wider range of online services and to a richer and more motivating and rewarding experience. To that extent, Internet access cannot be said to be equally distributed throughout the population since speed and quality of connection is also closely correlated with cost/affordability, introducing the risk of a new form of inequality – the so-called second digital divide.
Awareness and motivation are critical to mobilising Internet adoption among those who still remain unconnected and who, precisely because they remain unconnected, are at risk of becoming more unreachable. Conversely, digital literacy, and the technologies it affords access to, can play an important role in overcoming other forms of social exclusion and contribute to the acquisition of key skills for lifelong learning. The goal of “every citizen digital” must be accorded the highest national priority and we must also turn our attention to the avoidance of a second digital divide, between those who are regular, confident, sophisticated and critical users of the Internet and those whose access is marginal or unproductive.

In addressing digital exclusion and its consequences, we need to be aware of the key factors that prevent people from engaging satisfactorily with the new technologies. Our experiences working in the area and the available research suggest the following are the most important barriers:

Access
Broadband availability is still poor in parts of the country.
The cost of ICT equipment and broadband connection can act as a deterrent if a person has yet to develop a real interest in using the technology. The internet should be perceived as cheap, reliable and easy to access.

Confidence
The digitally excluded are more likely to have had unsatisfactory experiences with training and education services. They are also more likely to have had problems with basic literacy and low self-esteem. All these contribute to a lack of confidence in the ability to master new skills which prevents people from seeking training and may undermine their learning if not addressed early in a training programme.

Fear
Fear of damaging expensive equipment by, for instance, pressing the wrong button inhibits people from freely exploring the abilities of devices. Concerns about the security of financial transactions prevent newly competent users taking the step of purchasing goods/services online.

Poor Design
Simplicity and ease of use need to be major considerations in designing all local and national government websites. Using web accessibility standards should be compulsory for interface designers of these sites. Many existing interfaces discourage the novice user with poorly presented options. The bulkiness of desktops and slow start up procedures can also inhibit learning and discourage casual use. The physical handiness of tablets and their more flexible interfaces will help address these issues.

Lack of Support
There is evidence that a significant number of people who receive initial training either fail to continue using the internet or fail to take advantage of the opportunities offered by technology. This highlights the need for some form of on-going support and flexible approaches to delivering the support.

Lack of Interest
There is sometimes an assumption that if we show people how to access and browse the internet they will remain “hooked”. However for all those who become frequent users of Skype or Facebook or YouTube or even Solitaire there are many whose interest is not stimulated enough to become or remain engaged.

Lack of Purpose
Related to and often underlying a lack of interest is the lack of a clear purpose motivating people to become engaged with technology and to remain using it. For many the need to access the internet is not, as yet, as compelling as the need to own, for instance, a phone. For many, there are no clear personal benefits to be derived from using the internet or at least not clear enough to outweigh the barriers to use. Part of the problem may be due to lack awareness of what the internet offers. National awareness campaigns and a digital champion would be part of a solution to this issue. Where tuition is offered on a 1-to-1 basis there is more scope for the tutor to explore what “hook” may grab the individual learner. In general, the challenge for the training designers and deliverers is to identify what the personal benefits might be and communicate them. The challenge for the policymakers may be to create a greater awareness of personal benefits. A financial incentive can be a fast track to creating personal benefits. Discounts for online purchasing/payments are common but widely publicised special online offers by semi-states (ESB, An Post for television licence, etc.) might create wider interest.

If we do not within a short timeframe achieve the goal of “every citizen online”, there is a very real risk of exacerbating already intractable problems of social exclusion. As public and private services increasingly “go online” and phase out traditional face-to-face or postal communications, there is a risk that more citizens, particularly the elderly will be unable to go about their day to day business in an independent way. In addressing digital inclusion, we are addressing the first digital divide.

At European level, there is a growing awareness of the emerging second digital divide, something we should now take cognisance of and take steps to mitigate. The second digital divide arises between those who have attained a high level of digital competence and who use a wide range of resources, tools and services in a high-speed fixed and/or mobile Internet environment and those who use the Internet at a very basic functional level Highly connected/networked persons/households are likely to have enhanced opportunities for education, work, leisure and overall quality of life. New forms of inequality may become manifest in a world that is intensely mediated through the Internet.