The DOI matches its Crossref record.
World Development Report, 2016: digital dividends
Abstract
Digital technologies have spread rapidly in much of the world. Digital dividends—that is, the broader development benefits from using these technologies—have lagged behind. In many instances, digital technologies have boosted growth, expanded opportunities, and improved service delivery. Yet their aggregate impact has fallen short and is unevenly distributed. For digital technologies to benefit everyone everywhere requires closing the remaining digital divide, especially in internet access. But greater digital adoption will not be enough. To get the most out of the digital revolution, countries also need to work on the “analog complements”—by strengthening regulations that ensure competition among businesses, by adapting workers’ skills to the demands of the new economy, and by ensuring that institutions are accountable. Digital technologies—the internet, mobile phones, and all the other tools to collect, store, analyze, and share information digitally—have spread quickly. More households in developing countries own a mobile phone than have access to electricity or clean water, and nearly 70 percent of the bottom fifth of the population in developing countries own a mobile phone. The number of internet users has more than tripled in a decade—from 1 billion in 2005 to an estimated 3.2 billion at the end of 2015. This means that businesses, people, and governments are more connected than ever before. The digital revolution has brought immediate private benefi ts—easier communication and information, greater convenience, free digital products, and new forms of leisure. It has also created a profound sense of social connectedness and global community. But have massive investments in information and communication technologies (ICTs) generated faster growth, more jobs, and better services? Indeed, are countries reaping sizable digital dividends?
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Graham, M., Hjorth, I., & Lehdonvirta, V. (2017) · Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research · doi:10.1177/1024258916687250 · Cited by 1,089
Fu, Z., Burger, H., Arjadi, R., & Bockting, C. L. H. (2020) · The Lancet Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(20)30256-x · Cited by 336
Digital transformation, digital dividends and entrepreneurship: A quantitative analysis
Galindo-Martín, M.-Á., Castaño-Martínez, M.-S., & Méndez-Picazo, M.-T. (2019) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.014 · Cited by 282
Kunkel, S., & Matthess, M. (2020) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2020.06.022 · Cited by 253
Digital Control in Value Chains: Challenges of Connectivity for East African Firms
Foster, C., Graham, M., Mann, L., Waema, T., & Friederici, N. (2018) · Economic Geography · doi:10.1080/00130095.2017.1350104 · Cited by 169
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 2016-06-21
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 53-4889-53-4889
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W2279520549
- Cited by
- 966
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: World Development Report, 2016: digital dividends. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.196952
- The paper
- World Development Report, 2016: digital dividends. (2016). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.196952
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.