Dimensions and barriers for digital (in)equity and digital divide: a systematic integrative review

Author:

Raihan Mohammad M.H.,Subroto Sujoy,Chowdhury Nashit,Koch Katharina,Ruttan Erin,Turin Tanvir C.ORCID

Abstract

PurposeThis integrative review was conducted to provide an overview of existing research on digital (in)equity and the digital divide in developed countries.Design/methodology/approachWe searched academic and grey literature to identify relevant papers. From 8464 academic articles and 183 grey literature, after two levels of screening, 31 articles and 54 documents were selected, respectively. A thematic analysis was conducted following the steps suggested by Braun and Clarke and results were reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.FindingsThe results showed that most articles and papers were either from Europe or North America. Studies used a range of research methods, including quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. The results demonstrated four major dimensions of the digital divide among various vulnerable groups, including digital literacy, affordability, equity-deserving group-sensitive content and availability or access to infrastructure. Among vulnerable groups, low-income people were reported in the majority of the studies followed by older adults, racial and ethnic minorities, newcomers/new immigrants and refugees, Indigenous groups, people with disabilities and women. Most reported barriers included lack of access to the internet, digital skills, language barriers and internet costs.Originality/valueTo the best of our knowledge, there have been limited attempts to thoroughly review the literature to better understand the emerging dimensions of digital equity and the digital divide, identifying major vulnerable populations and their unique barriers and challenges. This review demonstrated that understanding intersectional characteristics (age, gender, disability, race, ethnicity, Indigenous identity and immigration status) and their interconnections is crucial for analyzing the dynamics of digital (in)equity and divide.

Publisher

Emerald

Reference51 articles.

1. The ‘digital divide’ is about equity, not infrastructure;First Policy Response, Toronto Metropolitan University,2020

2. Albert, S., Flournoy, D., & LeBrasseur, R. (2009). The network society. In K. Klinger, J. Snavely, & C. Coulson (Eds.), Networked Communities: Strategies for Digital Collaboration, Information Science reference (pp. 1–34). Hershey, New York. doi: 10.4018/978-1-59904-771-3.ch001.

3. Andrey, S., Masoodi, M. J., Malli, N. and Dorkenoo, S. (2021), Mapping Toronto’s digital divide. Available from: https://www.ryersonleadlab.com/digital-divide”title=“https://www.ryersonleadlab.com/digital-divide”>https://www.ryersonleadlab.com/digital-divide (accessed 7 January 2022).

4. Gaps and bits: Conceptualizing measurements for digital divide/s;The Information Society,2006

5. Vicious cycles: Digital technologies and determinants of health in Australia;Health Promotion International,2014

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3