DIGITAL INEQUALITY AND USAGE GAP IN THE V4 REGION
Abstract
The V4 countries have achieved different levels of digital transformation due to distinctions in their individual technical infrastructure and human capital characteristics. The success of digital transformation cannot be measured solely by the achieved level of digitalization; the distribution of favorable outcomes of internet use within a country should also be considered. The level of digital skills and usage patterns differ among social groups, therefore capability to translate internet access and use to tangible (offline) benefits varies. The aim of our paper is twofold. Firstly, we quantify the extent of the digital inequality in terms of usage gap in the V4 countries. We indicate the dynamics of inequality by comparing the development of such inequality between the years 2015 and 2019. Secondly, we identify socioeconomic and sociodemographic factors, which are connected to differences in internet usage patterns and therefore affect the capability of an individual to benefit from internet use. In common with other studies carried out in the Western world, we show that internet access and possession of formal digital skills are not the most important determinant of probability of being a digital beneficiary; individual characteristics, especially education and age, predict the probability of being a digital beneficiary to a higher degree of accuracy. As to the extent of digital inequality in the individual countries, we come to conclusion that although the V4 countries are relatively homogeneous concerning socioeconomic inequalities, the level of digital inequality among them differs – Hungary being somewhat unequal as compared to the most equal Czechia. In all four countries, equality increased within an observed period.
Full text
164 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
10.15240/ ul/001/2022-4-011
DIGITAL INEQUALITY AND USAGE GAP
IN THE V4 REGION
Anna Vallušo á1, I ana Ku áko á2, Žane a Laco á3
1 Ma ej Bel Uni e si y in Banská Bys ica, Facul y o Economics, Depa men o Economics, Slo akia,
ORCID: 0000-0001-8861-1102, [email p o ec ed];
2 Ma ej Bel Uni e si y in Banská Bys ica, Facul y o Economics, Depa men o Economics, Slo akia,
ORCID: 0000-0001-9307-5367, [email p o ec ed];
3 Ma ej Bel Uni e si y in Banská Bys ica, Facul y o Economics, Depa men o Economics, Slo akia,
ORCID: 0000-0002-4580-1421, [email p o ec ed].
Abs ac : The V4 coun ies ha e achie ed di e en le els o digi al ans o ma ion due o dis inc ions
in hei indi idual echnical in as uc u e and human capi al cha ac e is ics. The success o digi al
ans o ma ion canno be measu ed solely by he achie ed le el o digi aliza ion; he dis ibu ion o
a o able ou comes o in e ne use wi hin a coun y should also be conside ed. The le el o digi al
skills and usage pa e ns di e among social g oups, he e o e capabili y o ansla e in e ne access
and use o angible (o line) bene i s a ies. The aim o ou pape is wo old. Fi s ly, we quan i y he
ex en o he digi al inequali y in e ms o usage gap in he V4 coun ies. We indica e he dynamics
o inequali y by compa ing he de elopmen o such inequali y be ween he yea s 2015 and 2019.
Secondly, we iden i y socioeconomic and sociodemog aphic ac o s, which a e connec ed o
di e ences in in e ne usage pa e ns and he e o e a ec he capabili y o an indi idual o bene i
om in e ne use. In common wi h o he s udies ca ied ou in he Wes e n wo ld, we show ha
in e ne access and possession o o mal digi al skills a e no he mos impo an de e minan o
p obabili y o being a digi al bene icia y; indi idual cha ac e is ics, especially educa ion and age,
p edic he p obabili y o being a digi al bene icia y o a highe deg ee o accu acy. As o he ex en
o digi al inequali y in he indi idual coun ies, we come o conclusion ha al hough he V4 coun ies
a e ela i ely homogeneous conce ning socioeconomic inequali ies, he le el o digi al inequali y
among hem di e s – Hunga y being somewha unequal as compa ed o he mos equal Czechia.
In all ou coun ies, equali y inc eased wi hin an obse ed pe iod.
Keywo ds: Digi al ans o ma ion, digi al di ide, digi al inequali y, digi ally ulne able social g oups,
digi al inclusion, V4 coun ies.
JEL Classi ica ion: J24, F36, O57.
APA S yle Ci a ion: Vallušo á, A., Ku áko á, I., & Laco á, Ž. (2022). Digi al Inequali y and
Usage Gap in he V4 Region. E&M Economics and Managemen , 25(4), 164–179. h ps://doi.
o g/10.15240/ ul/001/2022-4-011
In oduc ion
The digi aliza ion o economies and socie ies
has been one o he key elemen s in he
de elopmen o coun ies wo ldwide o
mo e han 30 yea s. Howe e , coun ies
di e in hei achie ed le el o digi aliza ion
due o dis inc ions in echnical in as uc u e
de elopmen and human capi al cha ac e is ics.
The ou coun ies o he Viseg ád egion,
Czechia, Hunga y, Poland, and Slo akia, we e
acing he beginning o he digi aliza ion o hei
economies (in he 1990s) in he pe iod o hei
ongoing ansi ion p ocesses om cen ally
planned o ma ke economies. Thus, he
esou ces o he digi aliza ion o hese coun ies
we e limi ed in he las decade o he wen ie h
cen u y. Howe e , he beginning o he new
cen u y was ma ked by a ca ching-up p ocess
o he V4 coun ies o he o he Eu opean
Union Membe S a es in all a eas o social and
EM_4_2022.indd 164 7.12.2022 10:56:09
165
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
economic li e, including digi aliza ion aspec s.
This ca ching-up p ocess was cha ac e ized by
he ac ha he whole V4 egion has consis ed
o a he he e ogeneous a eas a he le el o
NUTS3 egions (Szakálné Kanó & Lengyel,
2021) and he cu en s a e o digi aliza ion can
di e ac oss coun ies, as well as wi hin he
coun ies.
Today, he EU op ics ep esen ed by he
EU digi al s a egy (e.g., Digi al Compass
o he EU’s digi al decade) is aimed a he
EU Membe S a es’ de elopmen , deploymen ,
and up ake o new echnologies in he daily
li es o ci izens. The V4 coun ies a e also
in ol ed in his s a egic ocus, al hough he
alues o he sco es comp ising he Digi al
Economy and Socie y Index (DESI index)
pe sis below he Eu opean a e age in
all V4 coun ies. Consequen ly, na ional
and egional ini ia i es (such as he Digi al
V4 ini ia i e) a e implemen ed o os e policies
ha suppo digi aliza ion in he V4 egion.
In gene al, a e he pe iod when policies
we e p ima ily o ien ed o he de elopmen o
b oadband in as uc u e leading o a high le el
o connec i i y o ci izens o ICT, cu en policies
ace new challenges conce ning he le el o
he popula ion skills needed o ake ad an age
o he possibili ies o e ed by a digi al socie y.
In his con ex , human capi al aspec s a e
analyzed om he pe spec i e o he le el
achie ed, bu he dis ibu ional aspec s become
ex emely ele an as well. The dispe sion
o digi al skills in he popula ion is one o he
impo an ac o s in luencing posi i e ou comes
(bene i s) ha a popula ion can gain om
in e ne se ices use. The unp eceden ed
COVID-19 pandemic expe ience has been he
ca alys ha has unde lined he impo ance and
ele ance o hese issues. Due o hese e ec s,
he mic oeconomic pe spec i e app oach o
analysis becomes mo e app op ia e, elying
on indi idual da a p esen ing e en ual unequal
dis ibu ion o digi al skills and bene i s. In his
con ex , ou pape a emp s o p o ide an inside
iew o he p oblems o digi al inequali y and
i s ex eme case – he digi al di ide – in he
V4 coun ies egion.
The discussion abou he digi al di ide
and digi al inequali ies alls unde he scope o
widely discussed inequali y opics. T adi ionally
in economics, inequali y esea ch ocuses
on income o weal h dis ibu ion ac oss
he popula ion. O he o ms o economic
Czechia Hunga y Poland Slo akia EU-27
a e age
GDP pe capi a (in PPS, 2020) 93 74 76 70 100
Gini coe icien (2019) 24.0 28.0 28.5 22.8 30.2
Ra io o income o op 80% o bo om
20% (2019) 3.34 4.23 4.37 3.34 4.99
Sha e o he popula ion aged 65 and
o e (2020) 19.9 19.9 18.2 16.6 20.6
Sha e o he popula ion achie ed
low educa ion le el (ISCED le els
0–2), 2020 (%, 25–54 yea s)
5.6 13.3 5.9 6.7 18.6
Sha e o he popula ion achie ed
high educa ion le el (ISCED le els
5–8), 2020 (%, 25–54 yea s)
26.9 29.2 38.0 29.6 35.9
Sha e o he popula ion achie ed
low educa ion le el (ISCED le els
0–2), 2020 (%, 55–74 yea s)
10.2 20.6 14.2 12.0 32.8
Sha e o he popula ion achie ed
high educa ion le el (ISCED le els
5–8), 2020 (%, 55–74 yea s)
15.2 20.5 15.9 16.1 21.8
Sou ce: EUROSTAT online da a
Tab. 1: Chosen measu es connec ed o adi ional o ms o economic and social
inequali y
EM_4_2022.indd 165 7.12.2022 10:56:10
166 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
(e.g., employmen ) and social (e.g., educa ion
le el) inequali ies a e ei he a he o igin, o
po en ially a e he consequence, o hese
adi ional economic inequali ies. Thus, an
unequal dis ibu ion o ICT usage in he
popula ion can also play bo h he ole o a ca alys
o an a enua o o adi ional economic o ms o
inequali y.
Tab. 1 p esen s some indica o s connec ed
o economic and social inequali y aspec s in
he V4 coun ies. Compa ed o he Eu opean
a e age, he po ions o he popula ion aged 65
and o e a e cu en ly lowe in he ou Viseg ád
coun ies; howe e , due o a low bi h a e he
p oblem o an ageing popula ion will soon be
e en mo e ac ual in his egion han in o he
Eu opean coun ies. Conce ning he educa ion
le el, Tab. 1 desc ibes i s mo e equal dis ibu ion
in V4 egion han in he EU gene ally, wi h
he domina ion o medium educa ion le el o
bo h age g oups unde ques ion. Czechia
and Slo akia a e he coun ies wi h he mos
egali a ian educa ion sys em esul s compa ed
o he o he V4 coun ies and o he EU a e age.
The indica o s o income dis ibu ion
(Gini coe icien , pe cen iles sha es) con i m
a ela i ely lowe occu ence o income inequali y
p oblems in pos -communis coun ies. Czechia
and Slo akia a e again examples o coun ies
wi h low le els o income inequali y measu es.
I should be no ed ha he eal GDP pe capi a
alues in bo h coun ies a e highe han in
Hunga y and Poland, al hough hey emained
qui e dis an om he a e age alue in 2020.
Digi al echnologies a e o en discussed
om he pe spec i e o he economic and
social inequali ies hey can b ing. Van Deu sen
e al. (2017) poin ou ha au ho s wo k wi h
wo hypo heses; he no ma i e hypo hesis
sugges s ha in e es in digi al echnologies in
highe income g oups leads o a dec ease o he
p ice and makes i a o dable o lowe income
g oups. This p ocess can lead o mi iga ion
o digi al inequali ies and consequen ly he
o -line inequali ies. On he o he hand, he
s a i ica ion hypo hesis s a es ha in e ne
s uc u es eplica e o line social s uc u es
and o line human capi al ca ies o e o he
online wo ld, he e o e digi al inequali y has he
po en ial o eplica e and e en ampli y exis ing
social inequali ies.
Ou esea ch in en ion is o inc ease he
awa eness o socioeconomic pa e ns o digi al
inequali y in he V4 coun ies. The aim o ou
pape is wo old. Fi s ly, we quan i y he ex en
o he digi al inequali y in e ms o he usage gap
in he V4 coun ies. We indica e he dynamics
o inequali y by compa ing he de elopmen o
such inequali y be ween he yea s 2015 and
2019. Secondly, we iden i y socioeconomic and
sociodemog aphic ac o s, which a e connec ed
o di e ences in in e ne usage pa e ns and
he e o e a ec he capabili y o an indi idual
o bene i om in e ne use. Thus, we y o
con ibu e o he discussion abou necessa y
policy measu es o mi iga e he mode n o ms
o he digi al di ide and o os e digi al inclusion
in con empo a y economies.
1. Theo e ical Backg ound
Policymake s and social scien is s ha e deal
wi h he dis ibu ion o in e ne access since he
eme gence o he in e ne as a mass medium
in he mid-1990s (DiMaggio & Ha gi ai,
2001). The massi e a i al o in o ma ion and
communica ion echnologies (ICT) was no
sp ead equally in e ms o geog aphy and i s
use did no a ec e e yone compa ably. This
inequi able access o ICT has had implica ions
o he p oduc i i y and economic g ow h o
ich and poo coun ies (Quib ia e al., 2003).
Simila ly, i was e iden ha he in oduc ion
o new ICT in he global economy pa allels
widening asymme ies among coun ies and
e en egions wi hin coun ies (An onelli,
2003). The i s o icial epo documen ing
hese inequali ies was published in 1995 by
he Na ional Telecommunica ions In o ma ion
Adminis a ion and was called “Falling
Th ough he Ne : A Su ey o he Ha e No s
in Ru al and U ban Ame ica”. The epo
documen ed sys ema ic gaps in he use o
compu e ne wo ks by socioeconomic s a us,
educa ional backg ound, ace, gende , and
geog aphic loca ion (Eps ein e al., 2011).
These inequali ies ha e been labeled as
a digi al di ide. Commonly, i is de ined as he
gap be ween hose who ha e and do no ha e
access o compu e s and he in e ne (Ha gi ai,
2002; Quib ia e al., 2003; an Dijk, 2006).
An onelli (2003) de ines i as he gap be ween
he digi al ich and he digi al poo . Acco ding
o OECD (2001), he e m ‘digi al di ide’ e e s
o he gap be ween indi iduals, households,
businesses, and geog aphic a eas a di e en
socioeconomic le els ega ding bo h hei
oppo uni ies o access ICTs and o hei use
o he in e ne o a wide a ie y o ac i i ies.
EM_4_2022.indd 166 7.12.2022 10:56:10
167
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
Howe e , he e a e o he pe spec i es ha look
a he digi al di ide as a pa o social sys ems
and p ocesses; and om a policy s andpoin ,
he goal o using ICT wi h ma ginalized
g oups is no o o e come a digi al di ide, bu
a he o u he a p ocess o social inclusion
(Wa schaue , 2002).
In he las 25 yea s, digi al di ide esea ch
and policy has expanded o h ee le els
(Schee de e al., 2017). The dicho omous iew
o he digi al di ide as a dis inc ion be ween
people who do and do no ha e in e ne access
was na u al and app op ia e a he beginning
o he di usion p ocess (DiMaggio & Ha gi ai,
2001). Ha ing some ype o compu e and
in e ne connec ion o e e ybody was he
main objec i e ( an Dijk, 2020). A ha ime,
he mo i a ion o ge access was g owing
apidly ( an Dijk, 2017). Today, in e ne
pene a ion is inc easing in many coun ies,
bu he gap in access pe sis s and inequali ies
in accessing he in e ne may be obse ed
bo h be ween coun ies (global digi al di ide)
and wi hin coun ies (Ragnedda & K ei em,
2018). Public in es men in human capi al,
elecommunica ions in as uc u e, and he
egula o y in as uc u e could help o mi iga e
he gap in digi al echnology and in e ne use
(Chinn & Fai lie, 2007). The i s -le el digi al
di ide s ill equi es a en ion because, besides
ha ing o no ha ing an in e ne connec ion,
di e ences in ma e ial in as uc u e mus be
conside ed ( an Deu sen & an Dijk, 2019).
I includes he means equi ed o main ain he
use o he in e ne o e ime, such as compu e
de ices (e.g., desk ops, able s, sma TVs),
so wa e (subsc ip ions), and pe iphe al
equipmen (e.g., p in e s, addi ional ha d d i es).
As in es iga ions has con inued o e he
yea s, esea che s and policy make s ha e
become con inced ha digi al li e acy o skills
and usage a e in ac mo e impo an ega ding
digi al inequali y ( an Dijk, 2020). While he
adi ional access-o ien ed hinking in he i s
le el ocused on measu es such as owne ship,
a ailabili y, and a o dabili y o in as uc u e,
he ocus la e mo ed beyond echnology o he
use s (Ba zilai-Nahon, 2006). Equal access o
he in e ne does no ensu e equal usage o he
in e ne (B and zæg e al., 2011). This is called
he second le el o he digi al di ide. Wi hin his
le el, inequali ies in e ms o mo i a ion, skills,
and pu pose o use a e examined (Ragnedda
& Ruiu, 2017). Skill is de ined as he abili y o
ind he in o ma ion e icien ly and e ec i ely
on he web (Ha gi ai, 2002). The esul s o
many esea che s who examine his le el o
he digi al di ide sugges ha indi iduals ha e
a ious ways o accessing and using ICTs, and
ha mul iple laye s o access and use a e o en
de e mined by a a ie y o ac o s ha include
no only socioeconomic and demog aphic
elemen s bu also physical, psychological,
cul u al and ecological ac o s (Min, 2010).
Ha gi ai (2002) also con i ms ha he e is g ea
a ia ion in people’s abili y o loca e con en
online.
Since abou 2015, he ou comes o
compu e and in e ne use came o wa d in
a hi d le el o esea ch and policy on he
digi al di ide ( an Dijk, 2020). By analyzing he
hi d le el o he digi al di ide, schola s s a ed
o pu emphasis on social implica ions and
inequali ies in he ou comes gained om he
di e en o ms o access and use o he in e ne
(Luce o O iz e al., 2020; Ragnedda & K ei em,
2018). The hi d-le el digi al di ide conce ns
dispa i ies in he e u ns om in e ne use wi hin
popula ions o use s who exhibi b oadly simila
usage p o iles and enjoy ela i ely au onomous
and un e e ed access o ICTs and he in e ne
in as uc u e ( an Deu sen & Helspe , 2015;
Zhao e al., 2022). Speci ically, whe he
conce ning educa ion, wo k, heal h o o he
a eas, wha ma e s is ha indi iduals ha e he
esou ces o deploy skills in ways ha b ing
abou angible ou comes ha bene i hem
( an Deu sen & Helspe , 2018). These o line
ou comes ha could be achie ed h ough he
u iliza ion o digi al esou ces include inding
a job, quicke access o in o ma ion, ha ing
mo e con ac wi h people, and buying p oduc s
a a discoun online compa ed o buying in
a physical s o e (Ogbo e al., 2021). Wi hin
he las decade, no only posi i e ou comes
we e obse ed bu also nega i e ones.
Examples include cybe c ime, illegal hacking,
ha e and disin o ma ion on social media and
sma phones, and in e ne o game addic ion
( an Dijk, 2020).
In e ne access has become a s anda d
o mos wes e n popula ions. As a esul ,
digi al di ide esea ch shi ed o ocus on
de e minan s o in e ne skills, uses and
ou comes (Schee de e al., 2017). Zillien
and Ha gi ai (2009) sugges ha di e en ial
payo s om in e ne use depend on he use ’s
socioeconomic backg ound. Acco ding o
EM_4_2022.indd 167 7.12.2022 10:56:10
168 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
an Dijk (2012), when examining he digi al
di ide and digi al skills he mos impo an
dis inc ion a e he ca ego ies o employmen ,
manage s and execu i es, indi iduals wi h high
and low le els o educa ion, women and men,
young and old, pa en s and child en, e hnici y,
and na i es and mig an s.
This b oade pe spec i e co esponds o
Bou dieu’s (1986) capi al heo y. Acco ding o
his heo y, people’s ac ions a e shaped by he
social space hey li e in, as de ined by ield,
capi al, and habi us. This idea has become
cen al in many app oaches o inequali y and
s a i ica ion ac oss he social sciences; capi al
especially, in he sense o digi al capi al, is
a key concep in s udies o digi al inequali y
(Igna ow & Robinson, 2017). Such s udies ha e
shown how he same kinds o in o ma ional
engagemen s yield di e en payo s o mo e
and less disad an aged g oups (Igna ow
& Robinson, 2017). Fo ins ance, Wi e and
Mannon (2010) use ep esen a i e su ey
da a o show ha inequali ies in IT access
and in e ne usage bo h augmen and mi o
inequali ies in o line esou ces such as
economic and cul u al capi al. The same was
shown by Calde ón Gómez (2018), whose
esea ch ocused on unde s anding how
adi ional o ms o capi al (economic, cul u al,
and social) a e con e ed in o digi al capi al, as
well as he e e se p ocesses o econ e sion
o digi al capi al back in o economic, cul u al
and social capi al. Following Bou dieu, o he
schola s also s ess ha i is impo an o no
jus conside economic capi al, bu also include
social and cul u al capi als o de e mine one’s
s a us and posi ion (Schee de e al., 2017).
Helspe (2012) explains ha by cul u al capi al
he esea che s unde s and sha ed no ms o
beha io . They a e ep esen ed by belie s, ways
o in e p e ing he in o ma ion and ac i i ies
lea ned by socializa ion, which can ei he
enable o limi he capaci y o an indi idual o
ake up oppo uni ies. Social capi al ela es o
in ol emen in ne wo ks o o he people, which
o e s he indi idual ins umen al o emo ional
suppo . In addi ion o economic capi al, cul u al
and social capi al a e ela ed o access, skills,
a i udes and mo i a ion o use digi al esou ces
and can ei he mi iga e o deepen he digi al gap.
B and zæg e al. (2011), E l e al. (2020)
s a e ha he mos impo an ac o in luencing
he le el o digi al skills is age. Olde people
on a e age ha e a lowe equency o ICT and
in e ne use han younge indi iduals (Blank
& G oselj, 2014; Helspe & Reisdo , 2017). A
he same ime, olde indi iduals a e less likely
o use he in e ne , sma phones, and social
media (Ande son & Pe in, 2017). On he o he
hand, skills a y bo h wi hin and ac oss age
g oups, e en among he oldes in socie y, and
i is necessa y o ake in o conside a ion he
socioeconomic ci cums ances and educa ional
a ainmen o he olde people (Ha gi ai e al.,
2019). Conside ing he bene i s om in e ne
use, Blank and Lu z (2018) s a e ha elde ly
indi iduals bene i mo e han younge ones.
This con as s wi h p e ious esea ch.
The second equen ly examined ac o is
income, which is an impo an de e minan o
digi al skills in bo h de eloping and de eloped
coun ies; i a ec s in e ne access, usage,
and he di e si y o ICTs ha indi iduals own
(Robinson e al., 2020). The esul s o esea ch
led by Fuchs (2009) show ha income inequali y
measu ed by he Gini coe icien is an impo an
ac o in luencing he o e all le el o skills in
addi ion o pe capi a income, he deg ee o
u baniza ion, and he le el o democ a iza ion.
When looking a he expansion o in e ne use,
low-income indi iduals a e less likely o use he
in e ne han highe -income indi iduals, o hey
s a using i la e (Ma in & Robinson, 2007).
A he ad en o ICT, gende was a signi ican
ac o in luencing he le el o digi al skills (Zillien
& Ha gi ai, 2009), bu a p esen i s in luence
has signi ican ly weakened (Ono & Za odny,
2002). Some s udies (Campos-Cas illo, 2015)
e en s a e ha in some coun ies, age- ela ed
esul s ha e e e sed, and women a e hose
wi h be e in e ne access and associa ed wi h
be e digi al skills. Coope (2006) sugges s ha
he digi al di ide is undamen ally a p oblem o
compu e anxie y whose oo s a e deep in he
socializa ion pa e ns o boys and gi ls, and ha
in e ac wi h he s e eo ype o compu e s as
oys o boys.
In e ms o educa ion, i can be obse ed
ha use s o compu e s equi e a ce ain le el
o educa ion o use he compu e e ec i ely,
whe eas elephones and he in e ne do no
equi e any speci ic educa ion (Dasgup a e al.,
2001). Two sec ions o Du ch people – one
educa ed o a lowe le el and he o he wi h
disabili ies – spend mo e o hei spa e ime
using he in e ne han highe educa ed people
and employed people ( an Deu sen & an Dijk,
2014). Highly educa ed use s bene i mos
EM_4_2022.indd 168 7.12.2022 10:56:10
169
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
om using he web (Blank & Lu z, 2018).
Educa ion is also an impo an p edic o o he
ypes o ac i i ies ha people engage in online
(Robinson e al., 2003).
In addi ion o he a iables p esen ed in
Tab. 2, some au ho s (e.g., Robinson e al.,
2020) epo o he ac o s a ec he le el o
digi al skills, such as sexual o ien a ion, ace
and na ionali y, p esence o disabili y, le el o
heal h ca e, and loca ion o esidence (whe he
u al o u ban). Howe e , hei oles seem o be
a he limi ed.
Tab. 2 summa izes he main de e minan s
o he digi al di ide iden i ied by schola s in
hei empi ical s udies. Acco ding o hem, we
can iden i y he isk g oups in he popula ion,
which a e p edominan ly elde ly people, people
wi h a lowe educa ion, and low-income g oups.
These g oups a e mos a isk o ge ing
s uck in he digi al di ide. To ou knowledge,
none o he exis ing s udies ocus on Eas e n
Eu opean coun ies o a wide ex en , so ou
pape a emp s o pa ially ill his gap. The
only s udy ha deals wi h he digi al di ide in
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies is he s udy om
Ragnedda and K ei em (2018). The au ho s
analyze h ee angible ou comes (eGo e nmen
se ice compe i ion and use, eHeal h, and
eComme ce) on a mac oeconomic le el. They
do no pay special a en ion o he indi idual-
le el de e minan s o he digi al di ide
connec ed o in e ne use ou comes.
2. Resea ch Me hodology
The aim o ou analysis is wo old. Fi s ly, we
wan o quan i y he ex en o digi al inequali y
in e ms o usage gap in he V4 coun ies.
To do so, we ha e modi ied he p ocedu e o
calcula ing he digi al di ide index p oposed
by Hüsing and Selho e (2002, 2004). This
index exp esses he a io o pe cen age o
digi al bene icia ies in indi idual isk g oups o
he pe cen age o digi al bene icia ies in he
whole popula ion. In he o iginal e sion, he
digi al bene icia ies we e people who ha e
access o a compu e and o he in e ne . As
De e minan Schola s Time co e age Region co e age
Age
B and zæg e al. (2011) 2004–2006 No way, Sweden, Aus ia,
Uni ed Kingdom, Spain
Blank and G oselj (2014) 2003–2014 Uni ed Kingdom
Blank and Lu z (2018) 2013 Uni ed Kingdom
Ande son and Pe in (2017) 2016 USA
Helspe and Reisdo (2017) 2005–2013 Sweden, B i ain
Ha gi ai e al. (2019) 2013 USA
E l e al. (2020) 2013 Ge many
Income
Ma in and Robinson (2007) 1997–2003 USA
Fuchs (2009) 2005 126 coun ies
Robinson e al. (2020) 2018 Ne he lands
Educa ion
Robinson e al. (2003) 2000–2002 USA
Dasgup a e al. (2001) 1999 Wo ld Bank da a o many coun ies
an Deu sen and an Dijk (2014) 2011 Ne he lands
Blank and Lu z (2018) 2013 Uni ed Kingdom
Gende
Ono and Za odny (2002) 1997–2001 USA
Coope (2006) 1987–2006 S udies o many coun ies
Zillien and Ha gi ai (2009) 2004 Ge many
Campos-Cas illo (2015) 2007–2012 USA
Sou ce: own
Tab. 2: Li e a u e e iew o digi al di ide de e minan s
EM_4_2022.indd 169 7.12.2022 10:56:10
170 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
ou ocus is usage gap, we iden i ied digi al
bene icia ies based on hei usage o digi al
echnologies in a pa icula domain. To desc ibe
popula ion g oups who bene i he mos om
in e ne use in V4 coun ies, we adap ed he
app oach o an Deu sen and Helspe (2015),
who iden i ied i e domains o online ac i i ies
(economic – including bo h e-comme ce and
p o essional li e ac i i ies; social; ins i u ional
– including bo h e-go e nance and e-heal h
ac i i ies; poli ical; and educa ional), e lec ing
ac i a ion o economic and non-economic o ms
o digi al capi al. An indi idual is conside ed as
a bene icia y o a speci ic domain i he/she uses
a leas one o he possibili ies s a ed in he
desc ip ion o he domain p esen ed in Tab. 3.
In ou analysis, we calcula e he summa y
digi al di ide index (DDI) as an a i hme ic mean
o pa ial digi al di ide indices (Di) by usage
domains. The pa ial digi al di ide index o
indi idual isk g oups is calcula ed as ollows:
(1)
whe e:
pij – pe cen age o digi al bene icia ies in gi en
isk g oup o each usage domain;
pj – pe cen age o digi al bene icia ies in he
whole popula ion o each usage domain;
m – numbe o usage domains.
Based on ou li e a u e e iew esul s, we
wo k wi h h ee isk g oups om he gene al
popula ion in ou calcula ions: indi iduals olde
han 55 yea s, indi iduals wi h low le el o
educa ion (a lowe seconda y educa ion le el)
and indi iduals belonging o he i s income
qua ile.
Secondly, we use logi eg essions o
es ima e he de e minan s o he p obabili y o
being a digi al bene icia y in an indi idual usage
domain. To dis inguish be ween he di e ences
in in e ne usage ou comes due o a ious digi al
skills and he ac i a ion o economic and non-
economic capi al, we use a dummy a iable.
This a iable indica es a pe son wi h – a he e y
leas – basic digi al skills. The dummy a iable
is calcula ed based on so wa e digi al skills
measu ed by Eu os a . The esponden s wi h,
as a minimum, basic digi al skills a e conside ed
digi ally skilled o he pu poses o ou esea ch.
To indica e ac i a ion o economic and non-
economic capi al (Bou dieu, 1986) we include
he ollowing demog aphic cha ac e is ics:
age ca ego y, gende , educa ional ca ego y,
Domain Desc ip ion
Economic:
e-comme ce
Buying o o de ing goods;
Selling o goods o se ices;
In e ne banking;
A anging accommoda ion h ough he in e ne .
Economic:
p o essional li e Looking o a job o sending a job applica ion.
Social
Sending/ ecei ing e-mails;
Telephoning o e he in e ne / ideo calls;
Pa icipa ing in social ne wo ks.
Ins i u ional:
e-go e nance
Ob aining in o ma ion om web si es o apps;
Downloading/p in ing o icial o ms;
Submi ing comple ed o ms online.
Ins i u ional:
e-heal h Seeking heal h- ela ed in o ma ion.
Poli ical Pos ing opinions on ci ic o poli ical issues ia websi es in he las h ee mon hs;
Pa icipa ing in online consul a ions o o ing o de ine ci ic o poli ical issues.
Educa ional
Doing an online cou se;
Using online lea ning ma e ial o he han a comple e online cou se;
Communica ing wi h ins uc o s o s uden s using educa ional websi es/po als.
Sou ce: own based on an Deu sen and Helspe (2015)
Tab. 3: De ini ion o usage domains
EM_4_2022.indd 170 7.12.2022 10:56:10
171
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
income qua ile, and he coun y in which he
esponden li es. We also include con ol
a iables indica ing deg ee o u baniza ion and
indi iduals li ing alone and wo king. Fo ease
o in e p e a ion, we epo a e age ma ginal
e ec s o m he logi model.
The s udy examines da a om Eu os a
Communi y Su ey on ICT use in households
and by indi iduals collec ed in 2015 and 2019,
as hey o e he ea lies and la es a ailable
da a co e ing bo h ou comes o in e ne usage
and in o ma ion abou digi al skills. The da a
sample is weigh ed and ep esen a i e o he
coun ies. The age o he esponden s anges
om 16 o 74. Tab. 4 shows he composi ion o
he esea ch sample in yea s 2015 and 2019.
Tab. 5 depic s he a io o digi al bene icia ies
in indi idual domains o each coun y. No
su p isingly, he a io o in e ne bene icia ies
di e s among he domains. Social use
domina es in all coun ies ollowed by economic
use in he ield o e-comme ce. On he o he
hand, he in e ne is used he leas equen ly
wi hin he poli ical domain and connec ion o
p o essional li e.
3. Resea ch Resul s
Using Eu os a Su ey mic oda a, we
quan i y he le el o he digi al di ide index in
V4 coun ies in he yea s 2015 ( he ea lies yea
o which necessa y da a a e a ailable) and
2019 (Tab. 6). The alues close o 100 indica e
a pe ec digi al equali y in a socie y, i.e., isk
g oups bene i om using he in e ne as
much as he a e age popula ion do, whe eas
alues close o 0 signal he opposi e si ua ion.
Al hough V4 coun ies seem o be ela i ely
homogeneous conce ning o he socioeconomic
o ms o inequali ies when compa ing hem o
he a e age o EU Membe S a es (Tab. 1), he
2015 2019
Numbe o
esponden s
In e ne
use s
% o in e ne
use s
(weigh ed)
Numbe o
esponden s
In e ne
use s
% o in e ne
use s
(weigh ed)
Czechia 7,256 5,506 81.32 6,287 5,232 87.03
Hunga y 6,421 4,742 72.83 5,904 4,807 80.37
Poland 8,153 5,334 68.00 9,860 7,367 80.44
Slo akia 4,500 3,459 73.96 3,273 2,547 82.85
Sou ce: own
Tab. 4: Resea ch sample composi ion
CZ HU PL SK To al
Economic use
E-comme ce 87.30 77.62 79.63 85.89 81.22
P o essional li e 6.99 18.47 10.91 17.63 11.93
Social use 96.37 97.53 91.01 95.65 93.32
Poli ical use 14.72 15.04 18.38 14.14 16.87
Ins i u ional use
E-go e nance 61.70 65.06 50.15 69.46 56.07
E-heal h 64.87 75.23 58.93 63.54 62.78
Educa ional use 17.85 12.92 16.11 17.91 16.10
Sou ce: own
Tab. 5: Po ion o digi al bene icia ies (in % o in e ne use s)
EM_4_2022.indd 171 7.12.2022 10:56:10
172 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
le el o digi al inequali y di e s, wi h Hunga y
being somewha unequal as compa ed o he
mos equal Czechia (Tab. 6). The a iabili y is
e en mo e ob ious when i comes o he pa ial
digi al di ide indices and hei change o e an
obse ed pe iod. In Czechia, people olde han
55 yea s lagged behind he a e age popula ion
usage; he same g oup expe ienced he lowes
change in inequali y be ween he yea s 2015
and 2019. The mo emen owa d equali y was
led mainly by people wi h a low educa ion,
whose usage o digi al echnologies was simila
o he a e age o he popula ion in 2019.
Hunga y p esen ed he highes digi al
inequali y among V4 coun ies. In con as
wi h he o he h ee coun ies, in 2015 he
ex en o inequali y was nea ly he same o all
he isk g oups. In 2019, he inequali y index
e en dec eased o he i s income qua ile.
Summa y DDI emains low and does no each
he le el o he second wo s pe o ming coun y
in 2015.
Poland has he consis en ly lowes alues
o digi al inequali y indices o people olde
han 55. The esul s o he o he isk g oups
a e be e . The dec ease in inequali y in 2019
was mainly imp o ed by people wi h a low
educa ion, al hough he i s income qua ile
showed a sligh wo sening o he si ua ion.
In Slo akia, he dec ease in inequali y was
he esul o a signi ican inc ease in he digi al
di ide indices o i s income qua ile. On he
o he hand, he inequali y has wo sened o
people wi h a low educa ion; hose people olde
han 55 expe ienced only mino changes.
To iden i y ulne able g oups speci ic o he
V4 egion, we model he p obabili y o being
a digi al bene icia y in i e domains o digi al
usage gi en indi idual socioeconomic a ibu es
– age, gende , educa ion, income qua ile, and
coun y o esidence. We also include con ol
a iables indica ing he deg ee o u baniza ion
and indi iduals li ing alone and wo king.
The models a e es ima ed using mic oda a
om V4 coun ies. Tab. 7 shows he a e age
ma ginal e ec s o indi idual socioeconomic
a ibu es.
3.1 Economic Domain
The ac o ha dec eases he p obabili y
o using he in e ne o buying and selling
goods is lowe educa ion. The p obabili y also
dec eases wi h age (and is especially low o
he age ca ego y o 55 yea s and o e ). As o
he coun y o esidence, people end o use
he in e ne less o his pu pose in Hunga y.
Conce ning p o essional li e, he di e ences
among social g oups a e lowe . The mos
impo an ac o o looking o a job online is he
s a us o being unemployed, which inc ease he
p obabili y o using he in e ne o his pu pose
by nea ly 30%. The p obabili y dec eases wi h
age. The e ec o possessing digi al skills is
posi i e and signi ican , al hough i is small in
compa ison o he a o e-men ioned ac o s.
Pa adoxically, he coun y wi h mos de eloped
CZ HU PL SK
2015
Olde han 55 50.97 43.40 38.23 45.61
Low le el o educa ion 75.80 49.56 56.18 76.09
Fi s income qua ile 64.36 41.14 71.78 60.46
Summa y DDI 63.71 44.70 55.40 60.72
2019
Olde han 55 56.92 52.69 44.62 47.66
Low le el o educa ion 89.66 56.54 68.27 66.12
Fi s income qua ile 70.22 35.89 69.06 78.92
Summa y DDI 72.27 48.37 60.65 64.24
Sou ce: own
Tab. 6: Pa ial and o e all digi al di ide indices o V4 coun ies in 2015 and 2019
EM_4_2022.indd 172 7.12.2022 10:56:10
179
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
Dodel, M., S e n, M. J., Ball, C., Huang, K.-T.,
& Khilnani, A. (2020). Digi al inequali ies 2.0:
Legacy inequali ies in he in o ma ion age.
Fi s Monday, 25(7). h ps://doi.o g/10.5210/ m.
25i7.10842
Schee de , A., an Deu sen, A.,
& an Dijk, J. (2017). De e minan s o In e ne
skills, uses and ou comes. A sys ema ic e iew
o he second- and hi d-le el digi al di ide.
Telema ics and In o ma ics, 34(8), 1607–1624.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j. ele.2017.07.007
Szakálné Kanó, I., & Lengyel, I. (2021).
Con e gence Clubs o NUTS3 Regions o he
V4 G oup. E&M Economics and Managemen ,
24(4), 22–38. h ps://doi.o g/10.15240/ ul/001/
2021-4-002
an Deu sen, A. J., & an Dijk, J. A. (2014).
The digi al di ide shi s o di e ences in usage.
New Media & Socie y, 16(3), 507–526. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1177/1461444813487959
an Deu sen, A. J. A. M., & Helspe , E. J.
(2015). The Thi d-Le el Digi al Di ide:
Who Bene i s Mos om Being Online?
In L. Robinson, S. R. Co en, J. Schulz,
T. M. Hale, & A. Williams (Eds.), S udies in Media
and Communica ions (Vol. 10, pp. 29–52).
Eme ald G oup Publishing Limi ed. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1108/S2050-206020150000010002
an Deu sen, A. J. A. M., Helspe , E.,
Eynon, R., & an Dijk, J. (2017). The
Compoundness and Sequen iali y o
Digi al Inequali y. In e na ional Jou nal o
Communica ion, 11(7), 452–473.
an Deu sen, A. J. A. M., & Helspe , E. J.
(2018). Colla e al bene i s o In e ne
use: Explaining he di e se ou comes o
engaging wi h he In e ne . New Media
& Socie y, 20(7), 2333–2351. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1177/1461444817715282
an Deu sen, A. J. A. M., & an Dijk,
J. A. G. M. (2019). The i s -le el digi al di ide
shi s om inequali ies in physical access
o inequali ies in ma e ial access. New
Media & Socie y, 21(2), 354–375. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1177/1461444818797082
an Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). Digi al di ide
esea ch, achie emen s and sho comings.
Poe ics, 34(4–5), 221–235. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1016/j.poe ic.2006.05.004
an Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2012). The E olu ion
o he Digi al Di ide: The Digi al Di ide u ns
o Inequali y o Skills and Usage. In J. Bus,
M. C omp on, M. Hildeb and , & G. Me akides
(Eds.), Digi al Enligh enmen Yea book
2012 (pp. 57–75). IOS P ess. h ps://doi.
o g/10.3233/978-1-61499-057-4-57
an Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2017). The S a e
o Digi al Di ide Theo y. In M. Ragnedda
& G. W. Musche (Eds.), Theo izing Digi al
Di ides (pp. 199–206). Rou ledge. h ps://doi.
o g/10.4324/9781315455334
an Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2020). Closing he
Digi al Di ide: The Role o Digi al Technologies
on Social De elopmen , Well-Being o All and
he App oach o he COVID-19 Pandemic.
In P oceedings o he Con e ence: Vi ual Expe
G oup UN Mee ing on “Socially jus ansi ion
owa ds sus ainable de elopmen : The ole o
digi al echnologies on social de elopmen and
well-being o all”. Uni ed Na ions.
Wa schaue , M. (2002). Reconcep ualizing
he Digi al Di ide. Fi s Monday, 7(7). h ps://
doi.o g/10.5210/ m. 7i7.967
Wi e, J. C., & Mannon, S. E. (2010). The
In e ne and Social Inequali ies. Rou ledge.
h ps://doi.o g/10.4324/9780203861639
Zhao, L., Cao, C., & Li, Y. (2022).
De e minan s o he digi al ou comes di ide in
E-lea ning be ween u al and u ban s uden s:
Empi ical e idence om he COVID-19
pandemic based on capi al heo y. Compu e s
in Human Beha io , 130, 107177. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107177
Zillien, N., & Ha gi ai, E. (2009). Digi al
Dis inc ion: S a us-Speci ic Types o In e ne
Usage. Social Science Qua e ly, 90(2), 274–291.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2009.00617.x
EM_4_2022.indd 179 7.12.2022 10:56:11