Digital Divide and Social Inequality

Kelly Baraka
{"title":"Digital Divide and Social Inequality","authors":"Kelly Baraka","doi":"10.47941/ijhss.2083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The general objective of this study was to examine digital divide and social inequality. \nMethodology: The study adopted a desktop research methodology. Desk research refers to secondary data or that which can be collected without fieldwork. Desk research is basically involved in collecting data from existing resources hence it is often considered a low cost technique as compared to field research, as the main cost is involved in executive’s time, telephone charges and directories. Thus, the study relied on already published studies, reports and statistics. This secondary data was easily accessed through the online journals and library. \nFindings: The findings reveal that there exists a contextual and methodological gap relating to digital divide and social inequality. Preliminary empirical review revealed that the digital divide exacerbated social inequalities in education, employment, and healthcare, primarily due to disparities in digital access and literacy. Despite technological advancements, marginalized groups continued to face significant barriers in using digital technologies effectively. The COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted these issues, underscoring the necessity for comprehensive strategies that included both digital literacy programs and improved access. The study emphasized the importance of targeted interventions and collaborative efforts to bridge the digital divide and promote social equity. \nUnique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: The study made significant contributions to theory, practice, and policy. It advanced theoretical frameworks by integrating Knowledge Gap Theory, Social Capital Theory, and Structuration Theory to better understand digital disparities. Practically, it highlighted the need for targeted digital literacy programs and community-based digital hubs. Policy recommendations included prioritizing investments in digital infrastructure, subsidizing digital access for low-income households, and integrating digital literacy into education curricula. The study also emphasized bridging the urban-rural digital divide, enhancing digital equity in education, and developing inclusive digital policies with stakeholder engagement and continuous monitoring.","PeriodicalId":513171,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Humanity and Social Sciences","volume":"7 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Humanity and Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47941/ijhss.2083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The general objective of this study was to examine digital divide and social inequality. Methodology: The study adopted a desktop research methodology. Desk research refers to secondary data or that which can be collected without fieldwork. Desk research is basically involved in collecting data from existing resources hence it is often considered a low cost technique as compared to field research, as the main cost is involved in executive’s time, telephone charges and directories. Thus, the study relied on already published studies, reports and statistics. This secondary data was easily accessed through the online journals and library. Findings: The findings reveal that there exists a contextual and methodological gap relating to digital divide and social inequality. Preliminary empirical review revealed that the digital divide exacerbated social inequalities in education, employment, and healthcare, primarily due to disparities in digital access and literacy. Despite technological advancements, marginalized groups continued to face significant barriers in using digital technologies effectively. The COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted these issues, underscoring the necessity for comprehensive strategies that included both digital literacy programs and improved access. The study emphasized the importance of targeted interventions and collaborative efforts to bridge the digital divide and promote social equity. Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: The study made significant contributions to theory, practice, and policy. It advanced theoretical frameworks by integrating Knowledge Gap Theory, Social Capital Theory, and Structuration Theory to better understand digital disparities. Practically, it highlighted the need for targeted digital literacy programs and community-based digital hubs. Policy recommendations included prioritizing investments in digital infrastructure, subsidizing digital access for low-income households, and integrating digital literacy into education curricula. The study also emphasized bridging the urban-rural digital divide, enhancing digital equity in education, and developing inclusive digital policies with stakeholder engagement and continuous monitoring.
数字鸿沟与社会不平等
目的:本研究的总体目标是探讨数字鸿沟和社会不平等问题。研究方法:本研究采用了案头研究方法。案头研究指的是二手数据或无需实地考察即可收集到的数据。案头研究基本上是从现有资源中收集数据,因此,与实地调查相比,案头研究通常被认为是一种低成本技术,因为主要成本涉及执行人员的时间、电话费和目录。因此,本研究依赖于已出版的研究、报告和统计数据。这些二手数据可通过在线期刊和图书馆轻松获取。研究结果:研究结果表明,在数字鸿沟和社会不平等方面存在着背景和方法上的差距。初步实证审查显示,数字鸿沟加剧了教育、就业和医疗保健领域的社会不平等,这主要是由于数字接入和扫盲方面的差距。尽管技术不断进步,但边缘化群体在有效使用数字技术方面仍然面临巨大障碍。COVID-19 大流行进一步凸显了这些问题,强调了综合战略的必要性,包括数字扫盲计划和改善访问。该研究强调了有针对性的干预措施和合作努力对于弥合数字鸿沟和促进社会公平的重要性。对理论、实践和政策的独特贡献:该研究对理论、实践和政策做出了重大贡献。它整合了知识差距理论、社会资本理论和结构化理论,以更好地理解数字鸿沟,从而推进了理论框架。在实践中,它强调了有针对性的数字扫盲计划和社区数字中心的必要性。政策建议包括优先投资数字基础设施,为低收入家庭提供数字接入补贴,以及将数字扫盲纳入教育课程。该研究还强调要缩小城乡数字鸿沟,加强教育中的数字公平,并在利益相关者的参与和持续监测下制定包容性的数字政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信