Cited by 210ICT Impact and PoliciesInformation Society and Technology TrendsEconomic Growth and Development

The bad news is that the digital access divide is here to stay: domestically installed bandwidths among 172 countries for 1986–2014

Hilbert, Martin·2016·Telecommunications Policy

Abstract

In contrary to the common argument that the digital access divide is quickly closing and that the focus should shift to skills and usage, this article shows that access to digital communication is a moving target unlikely to ever be solved. While the number of subscriptions reaches population saturation levels, the bandwidth divide continuous to be dynamic. The article measures the nationally installed bandwidth potential of 172 countries from 1986 to 2014. The overarching finding is that the divide in terms of bandwidth does not show any clear monotonic pattern. It fluctuates up and down over the decades as the result of an intricate interplay between incessant technological progress and diffusion of technology. The bandwidth divide between high- and low income countries has first increased and only decreased below historic levels very recently during 2012-2014. In general it shows that the bandwidth divide is linked to the income divide, which is notoriously persistent. The bandwidth distribution among all countries is undergoing a new process of global concentration, during which North America and Europe is being replaced by Asia as the new global leader. In 2014 only 3 countries host 50% of the globally installed bandwidth potential (10 countries almost 75%). The U.S. lost its global leadership in 2011, being replaced by China, which contributes more than twice as much national bandwidth potential in 2014 (29% versus 13%). Despite this bad news about the continuous persistence of the digital access divide among countries, exploratory analysis from a global perspective brings the good news that many more individual people seem to enjoy more equal access to global bandwidth. All of this showcases the urgency to systematically develop indicators to track the digital divide in terms of bandwidth.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.telpol.2016.01.006

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hilbert, M.
Affiliations
University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Hilbert, Martin
Venue
Telecommunications Policy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-06
Volume
40
Issue
6
Pages
567-581
ISSN
0308-5961 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2276382071
Cited by
210
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3
FWCI
17.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Telecommunications Policy (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › ICT Impact and Policies
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Information Society and Technology Trends
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Economic Growth and Development
Keywords
digital divide, broadband access, income inequality, technology diffusion

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review