Addressing territorial digital divides through ICT strategies: Are investment decisions consistent with local needs?

Reggi, Luigi and Gil-Garcia, J. Ramon (2021): Addressing territorial digital divides through ICT strategies: Are investment decisions consistent with local needs? Forthcoming in: Government Information Quarterly (2021)

Abstract

Governments around the world are investing a great amount of resources in the development of an information society. These investments are particularly important as an attempt to close digital divides among countries and regions within countries. However, there is no clear evidence that suggests that current Information and Communication Technology (ICT) policies are helping align investments with the actual needs of the local contexts. Based on data about the allocation of 2014-2020 EU Funds, this paper analyzes the relationship between local needs and investment decisions aiming at bridging territorial digital divides. The results identify four different regional strategies developed around four policy goals: broadband, digital inclusion, digital government services, and the use of ICTs in enterprises. The results also show that unlike the past 2007-13 period, the allocations to these goals appear to be consistent with the ICT local context, i.e. funding for a given goal is higher in the regions that need it the most. Therefore, our main recommendation for the European Commission and Member States is to keep existing requirements for developing evidence-informed “Digital Growth” strategies for the next 2021-27 period. We also suggest to strengthen existing support tools for regional governments.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Digital divide, Broadband, Technology Policy, Smart City, European Policy, Regional Planning, European Funds
• Subjects: O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O2 - Development Planning and Policy; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O38 - Government Policy; R - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics > R5 - Regional Government Analysis > R58 - Regional Development Planning and Policy

References

Andreasson, K. J. (2015). Digital divides : the new challenges and opportunities of e-inclusion. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Arduini, D., Denni, M., Lucchese, M., Nurra, A., & Zanfei, A. (2013). The role of technology, organization and contextual factors in the development of e-Government services: An empirical analysis on Italian Local Public Administrations. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 27, 177-189.

Arendt, L. (2008). Barriers to ICT adoption in SMEs: how to bridge the digital divide? Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 10(2), 93-108. doi:doi:10.1108/13287260810897738

Belloc, F., Nicita, A., & Rossi, M. A. (2012). Whither policy design for broadband penetration? Evidence from 30 OECD countries. Telecommunications Policy, 36(5), 382-398.

Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture (Vol. 1): John Wiley & Sons.

Castelnovo, W., & Sorrentino, M. (2018). The digital government imperative: a context-aware perspective. Public management review, 20(5), 709-725. doi:10.1080/14719037.2017.1305693

Charrad, M., Ghazzali, N., Boiteau, V., & Niknafs, A. (2012). NbClust Package: finding the relevant number of clusters in a dataset. Journal of Statistical Software, 61(6), 1-36.

Codagnone, C., Misuraca, G., Savoldelli, A., & Lupiañez-Villanueva, F. (2015). Institutional isomorphism, policy networks, and the analytical depreciation of measurement indicators: The case of the EU e-government benchmarking. Telecommunications Policy, 39(3–4), 305-319.

Cucciniello, M., Porumbescu, G. A., & Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2017). 25 Years of Transparency Research: Evidence and Future Directions. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 32-44.

Dąbrowski, M. (2014). EU cohesion policy, horizontal partnership and the patterns of sub-national governance: Insights from Central and Eastern Europe. European Urban and Regional Studies, 21(4), 364-383.

De Vries, H., Bekkers, V., & Tummers, L. (2016). Innovation in the public sector: A systematic review and future research agenda. Public Administration, 94(1), 146-166.

Edmiston, K. D. (2003). State and local e-government: Prospects and challenges. The American Review of Public Administration, 33(1), 20-45.

European Commission. (2010). A digital agenda for Europe, COM(2010)245 final Publications Office of the European Union.

European Commission. (2020). Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) 2020. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/desi.

European Investment Bank. (2018). 2017 EFSI Report. Retrieved from https://www.eib.org/attachments/strategies/efsi_2017_report_ep_council_en.pdf.

Ferguson, C. H. (2004). The broadband problem: Anatomy of a market failure and a policy dilemma. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

Fernández‐i‐Marín, X. (2011). The Impact of e‐Government Promotion in Europe: Internet Dependence and Critical Mass. Policy & Internet, 3(4), 1-29.

Ferro, E., Gil-Garcia, J. R., & Helbig, N. (2008). Digital Divide and Broadband Access in an Italian Region. In Y. K. Dwivedi, A. Papazafeiropoulou, & J. Choudrie (Eds.), Handbook of research on global diffusion of broadband data transmission (pp. 160-176): IGI Global.

Ferro, E., Helbig, N. C., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2011). The role of IT literacy in defining digital divide policy needs. Government Information Quarterly, 28(1), 3-10.

Ferro, E., & Sorrentino, M. (2010). Can intermunicipal collaboration help the diffusion of E-Government in peripheral areas? Evidence from Italy. Government Information Quarterly, 27(1), 17-25.

Foray, D. (2009). The new economics of technology policy. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Fountain, J. E. (2001). Building the virtual state : information technology and institutional change. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

Freeman, C. (1987). Technology, policy, and economic performance: lessons from Japan. London: Printer Publishers.

Ganapati, S., & Reddick, C. G. (2014). The Use of ICT for Open Government in U. S. Municipalities. Public Performance & Management Review, 37(3), 365-387.

Gascó, M. (2005). Exploring the e-government gap in South America. International Journal of Public Administration, 28(7-8), 683-701.

Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2012). Enacting electronic government success: An integrative study of government-wide websites, organizational capabilities, and institutions (Vol. 31): Springer Science & Business Media.

Gil-Garcia, J. R., Helbig, N. C., & Ferro, E. (2013). Understanding the multi-dimensionality of the digital divide: Empirical evidence from Italy. In P. M. A. Baker, J. Hanson, & J. Hunsinger (Eds.), The Unconnected. Social Justice, Participatoin, and Engagement in the Information Society (pp. 21-43). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Gil-García, J. R., & Pardo, T. A. (2005). E-government success factors: Mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations. Government Information Quarterly, 22(2), 187-216.

Gil-Garcia, J. R., Pardo, T. A., & De Tuya, M. (2019). Information Sharing as a Dimension of Smartness: Understanding Benefits and Challenges in Two Megacities. Urban Affairs Review.

Guy Peters, B. (2008). The napoleonic tradition. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21(2), 118-132.

Heeks, R. (2002). Information systems and developing countries: Failure, success, and local improvisations. The information society, 18(2), 101-112.

Heeks, R. (2005). e-Government as a Carrier of Context. Journal of Public Policy, 25(1), 51-74. doi:10.1017/s0143814x05000206

Helbig, N., Ramón Gil-García, J., & Ferro, E. (2009). Understanding the complexity of electronic government: Implications from the digital divide literature. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 89-97.

Hennessy, T., Läpple, D., & Moran, B. (2016). The digital divide in farming: a problem of access or engagement? Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 38(3), 474-491.

Huggins, R. (2010). Regional competitive intelligence: benchmarking and policy-making. Regional Studies, 44(5), 639-658.

International Telecommunication Union. (2019). Report on the WSIS Stocktaking 2019. Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/net4/wsis/forum/2019/Files/Outcomes/DRAFT-WSISStocktakingReport2019-en.pdf.

Janowski, T. (2016). Implementing Sustainable Development Goals with Digital Government – Aspiration-capacity gap. Government Information Quarterly, 33(4), 603-613.

Kaufman, L., & Rousseeuw, P. J. (2009). Finding groups in data: an introduction to cluster analysis (Vol. 344). Danvers, MA: John Wiley & Sons.

Khalil, O. E. M. (2011). e-Government readiness: Does national culture matter? Government Information Quarterly, 28(3), 388-399.

Kleibrink, A., Niehaves, B., Palop, P., Sörvik, J., & Thapa, B. E. (2015). Regional ICT innovation in the European Union: prioritization and performance (2008–2012). Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6(2), 320-333.

Lebart, L., Morineau, A., & Piron, M. (1995). Statistique exploratoire multidimensionnelle (Vol. 3). Paris: Dunod.

Loughlin, J. P., B.G. (1997). State traditions, administrative reform, and regionalization. In M. L. Keating, J (Ed.), The Political Economy of Regionalism (pp. 41-62). London: Frank Cass.

Maheshwari, D., & Janssen, M. (2013). Measurement and benchmarking foundations: Providing support to organizations in their development and growth using dashboards. Government Information Quarterly, 30, S83-S93.

Mansell, R., & Steinmueller, W. E. (2000). Mobilizing the information society: Strategies for growth and opportunity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Matteucci, N. (2020). Digital agendas, regional policy and institutional quality: assessing the Italian broadband plan. Regional Studies, 54(9), 1304-1316.

Mazzucato, M. (2015). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths (Vol. 1). London: Anthem Press.

McCann, P., & Ortega-Argilés, R. (2015). Smart specialization, regional growth and applications to European Union cohesion policy. Regional Studies, 49(8), 1291-1302.

Mele, V., Compagni, A., & Cavazza, M. (2014). Governing through Evidence: A Study of Technological Innovation in Health Care. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(4), 843-877.

Melody, W. H. (1996). Toward a framework for designing information society policies. Telecommunications Policy, 20(4), 243-259.

Menou, M. J., & Taylor, R. D. (2006). A “grand challenge”: Measuring information societies. The information society, 22(5), 261-267.

Misuraca, G., Broster, D., & Centeno, C. (2012). Digital Europe 2030: Designing scenarios for ICT in future governance and policy making. Government Information Quarterly, 29, S121-S131.

Misuraca, G., Codagnone, C., & Rossel, P. (2013). From Practice to Theory and back to Practice: Reflexivity in Measurement and Evaluation for Evidence-based Policy Making in the Information Society. Government Information Quarterly, 30, S68-S82.

Moon, M. J. (2020). Fighting Against COVID‐19 with Agility, Transparency, and Participation: Wicked Policy Problems and New Governance Challenges. Public Administration Review.

Nam, T. (2014). Determining the type of e-government use. Government Information Quarterly, 31(2), 211-220.

Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide. New York: Cambridge University Press.

OECD. (2011). OECD Guide to Measuring the Information Society: OECD Publishing.

Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization science, 3(3), 398-427.

Orlikowski, W. J. (2010). The sociomateriality of organisational life: considering technology in management research. Cambridge journal of economics, 34(1), 125-141.

Orlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V. (2008). Sociomateriality: challenging the separation of technology, work and organization. The academy of management annals, 2(1), 433-474.

Pellegrin, J., Colnot, L., Arendt, L., Bisaschi, L., Catalano, G., Martinaitis, Ž., & Micheletti, G. (2018). Research for REGI Committee – Digital Agenda and Cohesion Policy. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/617485/IPOL_STU(2018)617485_EN.pdf.

Petrović, M., Bojković, N., Anić, I., Stamenković, M., & Tarle, S. P. (2014). An ELECTRE-based decision aid tool for stepwise benchmarking: An application over EU Digital Agenda targets. Decision Support Systems, 59, 230-241.

Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. The American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251-267. doi:10.2307/2586011

Reggi, L., Arduini, D., Biagetti, M., & Zanfei, A. (2014). How advanced are Italian regions in terms of public e-services? The construction of a composite indicator to analyze patterns of innovation diffusion in the public sector. Telecommunications Policy, 38(5-6), 514-529.

Reggi, L., & Scicchitano, S. (2012). Financing Public e-Services in Europe: A Regional Perspective. In M. De Marco, D. Te'eni, V. Albano, & S. Za (Eds.), Information Systems: Crossroads for Organization, Management, Accounting and Engineering (pp. 19-26). Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag HD.

Reggi, L., & Scicchitano, S. (2014). Are EU regional digital strategies evidence-based ? An analysis of the allocation of 2007-13 Structural Funds. Telecommunications Policy, 38(5-6), 530-538.

Rodríguez Bolívar, M. P., Caba Perez, M. d. C., & Lopez-Hernandez, A. M. (2015). Online Budget Transparency in OECD Member Countries and Administrative Culture. Administration & society, 47(8), 943-982.

Rorissa, A., Demissie, D., & Pardo, T. (2011). Benchmarking e-government: A comparison of frameworks for computing e-government index and ranking. Government Information Quarterly, 28(3), 354-362.

Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2012). Defining and measuring quality of government. In S. Holmberg & B. Rothstein (Eds.), Good government: The relevance of political science (pp. 13-39): Edward Elgar Publishing.

Rothstein, B. O., & Teorell, J. A. (2008). What is quality of government? A theory of impartial government institutions. Governance, 21(2), 165-190.

Ruiz-Rodríguez, F., Lucendo-Monedero, A. L., & González-Relaño, R. (2018). Measurement and characterisation of the Digital Divide of Spanish regions at enterprise level. A comparative analysis with the European context. Telecommunications Policy, 42(3), 187-211. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2017.11.007

Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2012). Are government internet portals evolving towards more interaction, participation, and collaboration? Revisiting the rhetoric of e-government among municipalities. Government Information Quarterly, 29, S72-S81.

Schuppan, T. (2009). E-Government in developing countries: Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 118-127.

Seri, P., Bianchi, A., & Matteucci, N. (2014). Diffusion and usage of public e-services in Europe: An assessment of country level indicators and drivers. Telecommunications Policy, 38(5-6), 496-513.

Stancova, K. C., & Sörvik, J. (2015). Assessment of strategies for ICT investments using European Structural and Investment Funds: reflections from experts and practical examples. Seville, Spain.

Tjoa, A. M., & Tjoa, S. (2016). The role of ICT to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). Paper presented at the IFIP World Information Technology Forum.

Van Deursen, A., Van Dijk, J., & Ebbers, W. (2006). Why e-government usage lags behind: explaining the gap between potential and actual usage of electronic public services in the netherlands. In A. M. Wimmer, H. J. Scholl, A. Grönlund, & K. V. Andersen (Eds.), Electronic Government. EGOV 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 4084, pp. 269-280). Berlin, Heildelberg: Springer.

Van Dijk, J. A. (2005). The deepening divide: Inequality in the information society: Sage Publications.

Vicente, M. R., & López, A. J. (2011). Assessing the regional digital divide across the European Union-27. Telecommunications Policy, 35(3), 220-237.

Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.