Embed Doc
Copy Link
Readcast
Collections

CommentGo Back

Download

Technology in a Cold Climate: Interconnected Society

John Farrington

, Peter Edwards

& Sarah Skerratt

1 - RCUK Rural Digital Economy Research Hub, University of Aberdeen2 - Scottish Agricultural College

Interconnected Society – Benefits and ChallengesAbstract

When considering the interconnectedness of society and the roles that technologies may play,commentators and analysts largely fall into two distinct camps – those who believe firmly inthe enabling powers of technology to increase our civic and civil connectedness and thosewho see the threats of technology leading to a dystopia of computer-driven isolatedindividuals.Underpinning these shifts towards technology-enabled connectedness, there is much writtenabout, and focus upon, providing access, where access to technology (and particularlybroadband) is seen as the essential component which will ensure progress towards ubiquityand thus use, and by inference social inclusion. It is argued here that there is, in addition, aneed to look “beyond access” (Hellawell, 2001) to how people experience the technology, theenvironments in which they do (Skerratt, 2008), and the adaptations they make. Further, thereis a need to differentiate access and adaptation geographically, and this paper focuses on theexample of rural areas, and the potential for their interconnectedness, given the dispersednature of the population over sometimes inhospitable (to ICTs) terrain.While some recent software advances (most notably to support social networking) havehelped create vast on-line communities of connected individuals, the next generation of theWeb will facilitate much greater connectedness between people and machines.Once we bring these dimensions of complexity into the analysis, we can assess moreeffectively the benefits of such technologies for supporting and enhancing interconnectednessin society.

Introduction

What are the benefits of a more interconnected society and how could connectivity help us meet thechallenges we face? It is important at the outset, when addressing this question, to identify the

expectations

of benefits as distinct from benefits. The expectations are set out in the literature as well as inpolicy statements not only in the UK, but underpinned by Information Society visions from across Europe.We are living in what has variously been described as an ‘information age’ and ‘knowledge society’(Castells, 2002; OECD, 2001; Allen & Dillman, 1994). Information provision, and networking (allowing forexchange of information and experience), are seen as critical for survival, socially, economically andenvironmentally (Servon, 2002). Access to information, support, individuals with expertise, and up-to-the-minute news digests, are seen as important elements of ‘social justice’, and as such, should be availableto all, irrespective of geographical location (Scottish Executive, 2000).The largely metropolitan trend towards “24/7 connectivity” at high speed, facilitated through a range ofInformation and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and their associated infrastructures, are increasinglyseen as the norm. There is, according to some commentators, an apparent ubiquity of access to always-on, high-speed, computer-mediated communication (CMC) through broadband-enabled email, websitesand portals. This, in turn, skews channels of information and service provision towards online media. Asstated by the OECD (2001), “The Information Society and the New Economy, based on virtual networkingand knowledge oriented activities, are rapidly becoming a reality…” (p.15). The implications of thisconnected, international ‘society’ are highlighted in many European documents relating to

Europe andnow

2010, for example:

2“As the knowledge-based economy advances, the exclusion from ICT becomes more and more abarrier to economic, employment and social opportunities and to using public services.Disadvantaged areas and groups are at higher risk of lagging for various reasons including lowincome and poverty, lack of ICT infrastructures, awareness and training opportunities, ordifficulties of access because of disabilities. On the other hand, ICT can overcome barriers ofdistance, distribute more equally knowledge resources, and generate new services…Thus, therisks of the digital divide need to be transformed to digital opportunities by actions focused atdisadvantaged groups and areas.” (European Commission, 2001, p.17).At Member State level, for example in the UK, we can see similar expectations of digital technology, notonly in terms of overcoming geographical challenges, but also in terms of establishing a “digital revolution”where the UK and its constituents are centres of excellence and innovation. The following examples areillustrative. In

A Smart Successful Scotland

(Scottish Executive, 2001), the vision for the business sector isthat:“We are living through a revolution in digital telecommunications, affecting how most Scots andmost businesses work, communicate and succeed. If we are not connected we shall not compete.

Embracing the Digital Age is not an option but a necessity for success

. And it has alreadyarrived. Meeting the challenges of raising productivity, encouraging entrepreneurship, raising skilllevels and connecting globally, will create a self-reinforcing upward spiral of growth. We needScottish based businesses to be more creative and better informed about global change. We wantthe workforce to be better skilled and have a capacity to learn and re-learn and to be betterinformed about job opportunities. We want those detached from the labour market to be betterplaced to take up economic opportunities. We want widespread digital connections to speedinformation flow around Scotland and back and forth between Scotland and the world.” (p.7)When considering rural areas, and the need for high-speed, high-quality digital connectivity, the ScottishExecutive states its expectation that:“Information and communications technology can reduce the constraint of peripherality and enablethe development of a less geographically centralised economy … there is real potential for the useof technology to make significant difference to many of the services and employment opportunitiesavailable to our rural communities.” (p.14)There is a widely-held expectation that remote and rural areas are said to benefit disproportionately fromusage of digital technologies, primarily because of the distance-shrinking and social inclusion potential ofsuch media (Cairncross, 1997) – indeed Cairncross (2001) argues that such technologies lead to, havealready led to, the “death of distance”. Further, Grimes & MacLeod (2003) state that:“the Internet, and associated advanced services, have the potential to liberalise spatial barriers byway of e-commerce, and reduce the real costs of public service delivery through e-government. Itcan facilitate access to business networks, and reduce the transactional cost of informationexchange. (pp. 2-3)The above vision is consistent with Executive expectations of ICT from 2000, where the first ScottishStrategic Framework for E-commerce (2000) stated:“The Internet is dissolving conventional boundaries. It is removing the restrictions ofgeography and time…[I]t is reconfiguring the economic map, opening access to a trulyglobal economy. The business playing field is being levelled”. (cited in MacLeod &Grimes, 2003)These visions are seductive. It is the conclusion of a number of authors, however, that such visions are notbeing realised to the extent initially expected. If we look, for example, at the Small and Medium Enterprise(SME) sector, Grimes (2004) observes that “It is clear, however, that despite the conviction of policymakers in relation to the potential which the digital economy may present to rural enterprise, and despitethe obvious considerable efforts made by development agencies to promote and operationalise thesepolicies,

the diffusion of sophisticated uses of the internet in the form of e-commerce in rural Europe is moving quite slowly for a variety of reasons

” (p.1, emphasis added). Further, Cruikshank (2005) statesthat: “it is clear that many SMEs are not taking advantage of this apparent opportunity”, citing Drew 2003,

3who comments “surveys in several European countries show that SMEs have been slower to adopt e-commerce than their larger counterparts” (2005, p.66). Further, Wagner

et al

(2003) comment that:“despite technology facilitating improved business practices in terms of developing electronic markets,electronic data interchange and Internet commerce, a number of SMEs have not taken advantage of thisnew mode of carrying out business” (cited in Cruikshank, 2005, p.66). Further, MacLeod and Grimes(2003) conclude that:“One of the major weaknesses of much of the research in this area to date has been the absenceof solid empirical analysis of the reality of how businesses in rural areas are coming to terms withsuch new opportunities. Policy formulation has been based, perhaps more on theoreticalassumptions which may be difficult to justify, than on a close appreciation of the reality ofchallenges facing businesses in rural areas to exploit whatever opportunities that might beassociated with the new technologies.” (p2.)

Policy Statements & Connectedness

Some of the euphoria has evaporated over time, therefore, due to an increasing evidence base of barriers,divides, hot spots and not spots. Such inequalities were recognised in the ESRC’s E-Society ResearchProgramme which ran from 2003-2007

, and were also highlighted in the 2000 PAT Report on accessingdigital technologies in deprived communities

.Most recently, in the UK policy context, two reports highlight the challenges to ensuring societalinterconnectedness through digital technologies. These reports are:

•

Digital Britain (Final Report, Dept of Culture, Media and Sport and Department of Business,Innovation and Skills, 2009),

and

•

Mind the Gap: Digital England – A Rural Perspective (Commission for Rural Communities, 2009).Digital Britain

(2009) is focused mainly on large-scale issues of the challenges of deployment of NextGeneration Broadband and its role in Britain’s relative competitiveness, and is not specific about the role ofdigital connectedness in society. It does, however, recognise an important aspect of the digital landscape -that digital technology has yet to reach large proportions of the population. For example:“The technology revolution we have seen in the last 10 years has brought enormous benefits. Yet,today, over 15 million adults in the UK still do not use the Internet. If we are going to maximise thebenefits across society, we must also ensure that we address the needs of those 15 million….those not using the Internet [also] risk missing out on the full benefits of digitally delivered publicservices, which can provide greater flexibility and personalisation for the user” (p.32)

Digital Britain

also recognises potential economic disadvantage among those not connected:“It is already increasingly the case that those without access to the Internet suffer economicdisadvantage. Their opportunities and livelihoods can be compromised by exclusion from thedigital world. More fundamentally, they miss out on areas of learning for themselves and theirfamilies and increasingly, they may begin to miss out accessing the full benefits of online publicservices from health to financial services and employment advice. They miss out on the easyaccess to relevant information ….. [and] access to news is part of daily life as well as an essentialingredient for democracy”. (p.32)The particular issues of lower levels of rural broadband connection, the market challenges posed inimproving this situation, and the special needs of rural areas (low population densities, and distance) arerecognised in

Digital Britain

:“This technology is particularly critical for certain sections of society. For example, for families withschool age children where the Internet is essential for educational purposes, for the unemployed

http://www.york.ac.uk/res/e-society/

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/cabinetoffice/social_exclusion_task_force/assets/publications_1997_to_2006/ pat_report_15.pdf