IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v63y2020ics0160791x20303249.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Digital inequality in Austria: Empirical evidence from the survey of the OECD “Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies”

Author

Listed:
  • Zilian, Stella Sophie
  • Zilian, Laura Samantha

Abstract

Digitisation and rapidly emerging new technologies are transforming many aspects of life such as education, work, and leisure. These changes lead to a growing demand for new skills related to ICT use, computer literacy, internet use, or technical digital skills. However, the extensive literature on digital inequality provides evidence for significant differences in computer skills along the usual dimensions of social inequality. Due to the omnipresence of digital technologies in everyday life, it is all the more important to know the extent of digital inequality to be able to take appropriate measures to ensure that social participation does not degenerate into a question of social stratification in the Digital Age. In this paper, we provide empirical evidence for socio-economic digital inequality in Austria using survey data from the “Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies” (PIAAC) conducted in 2011/2012.11The data set that supports the findings of this study is available as a scientific use file (SUF) for scientific research made available by Statistics Austria free of charge after conclusion of a data use agreement. We show, for Austria, that higher socio-economic background is positively related to digital problem-solving while being female is negatively correlated. However, when controlling for ICT engagement in everyday life, the positive effect of the socio-economic background only remains significant for groups of people with a very high socio-economic background while the effect of gender becomes statistically insignificant. Furthermore, based on Eurostat data we cannot identify a uniform trend towards a decline of digital inequality since 2012. Our results indicate that disadvantaged population groups in Austria should be encouraged and enabled to integrate ICT usage in their everyday life to reduce digital inequality.

Suggested Citation

  • Zilian, Stella Sophie & Zilian, Laura Samantha, 2020. "Digital inequality in Austria: Empirical evidence from the survey of the OECD “Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies”," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:63:y:2020:i:c:s0160791x20303249
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101397
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X20303249
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101397?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Melanie Arntz & Terry Gregory & Ulrich Zierahn, 2016. "The Risk of Automation for Jobs in OECD Countries: A Comparative Analysis," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 189, OECD Publishing.
    2. Hanushek, Eric A. & Woessmann, Ludger, 2011. "The Economics of International Differences in Educational Achievement," Handbook of the Economics of Education, in: Erik Hanushek & Stephen Machin & Ludger Woessmann (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Education, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 2, pages 89-200, Elsevier.
    3. Oecd, 2001. "Understanding the Digital Divide," OECD Digital Economy Papers 49, OECD Publishing.
    4. Hanushek, Eric A. & Schwerdt, Guido & Wiederhold, Simon & Woessmann, Ludger, 2015. "Returns to skills around the world: Evidence from PIAAC," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 103-130.
    5. Frey, Carl Benedikt & Osborne, Michael A., 2017. "The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 254-280.
    6. David H. Autor, 2015. "Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Automation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 3-30, Summer.
    7. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    8. Chetty, Krish & Qigui, Liu & Gcora, Nozibele & Josie, Jaya & Wenwei, Li & Fang, Chen, 2018. "Bridging the digital divide: Measuring digital literacy," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 12, pages 1-20.
    9. Nicole Zillien & Eszter Hargittai, 2009. "Digital Distinction: Status‐Specific Types of Internet Usage," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 90(2), pages 274-291, June.
    10. Bernadette Szajna, 1996. "Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 85-92, January.
    11. Robert Grundke & Luca Marcolin & The Linh Bao Nguyen & Mariagrazia Squicciarini, 2018. "Which skills for the digital era?: Returns to skills analysis," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2018/09, OECD Publishing.
    12. Riina Vuorikari & Yves Punie & Stephanie Carretero Gomez & Godelieve Van Den Brande, 2016. "DigComp 2.0: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Update Phase 1: the Conceptual Reference Model," JRC Research Reports JRC101254, Joint Research Centre.
    13. Judy Wajcman, 2010. "Feminist theories of technology," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 143-152, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cuesta, Lizeth & Ruiz, Yomara, 2021. "Efecto de la globalización sobre la desigualdad. Un estudio global para 104 países usando regresiones cuantílicas [Effect of globalization on inequality. A global study for 104 countries using quan," MPRA Paper 111022, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Tarasova, Ekaterina & Rohracher, Harald, 2023. "Marginalising household users in smart grids," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Fanlue Li & Ke He & Run Zhu & Junbiao Zhang & Ming Gao, 2023. "Rural low‐carbon energy development in the information age: Can internet access drive the farmer to participate in personal carbon trading schemes related to bioenergy?," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 1417-1432, June.
    4. Venkataramanan, R. & Kumar, Abhishek & Mantena, Sreekar & Subramanian, S.V., 2021. "Geographical variation in mobile phone ownership and SMS literacy among women (age 15–49) in India: A cross-sectional analysis based on National Family Health Survey-4," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zilian, Laura S. & Zilian, Stella S. & Jäger, Georg, 2021. "Labour market polarisation revisited: evidence from Austrian vacancy data," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 55, pages 1-7.
    2. Maria-Chiara Morandini & Anna Thum-Thysen & Anneleen Vandeplas, 2020. "Facing the Digital Transformation: Are Digital Skills Enough?," European Economy - Economic Briefs 054, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    3. Armanda Cetrulo & Dario Guarascio & Maria Enrica Virgillito, 2020. "Anatomy of the Italian occupational structure: concentrated power and distributed knowledge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(6), pages 1345-1379.
    4. Montobbio, Fabio & Staccioli, Jacopo & Virgillito, Maria Enrica & Vivarelli, Marco, 2022. "Robots and the origin of their labour-saving impact," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    5. Thomsen, Stephan L, 2018. "Die Rolle der Computerisierung und Digitalisierung für Beschäftigung und Einkommen," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-645, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    6. John P. Martin, 2018. "Skills for the 21st Century: Findings and Policy Lessons from the OECD Survey of Adult Skills," Working Papers 201803, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    7. Beier, Grischa & Matthess, Marcel & Shuttleworth, Luke & Guan, Ting & de Oliveira Pereira Grudzien, David Iubel & Xue, Bing & Pinheiro de Lima, Edson & Chen, Ling, 2022. "Implications of Industry 4.0 on industrial employment: A comparative survey from Brazilian, Chinese, and German practitioners," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    8. Manav Raj & Robert Seamans, 2018. "Artificial Intelligence, Labor, Productivity, and the Need for Firm-Level Data," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 553-565, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Antonio ALOISI & Valerio DE STEFANO, 2020. "Regulation and the future of work: The employment relationship as an innovation facilitator," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 159(1), pages 47-69, March.
    10. Morikawa, Masayuki, 2017. "Who Are Afraid of Losing Their Jobs to Artificial Intelligence and Robots? Evidence from a Survey," GLO Discussion Paper Series 71, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    11. Su, Chi-Wei & Yuan, Xi & Umar, Muhammad & Lobonţ, Oana-Ramona, 2022. "Does technological innovation bring destruction or creation to the labor market?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    12. Songul Tolan & Annarosa Pesole & Fernando Martinez-Plumed & Enrique Fernandez-Macias & José Hernandez-Orallo & Emilia Gomez, 2020. "Measuring the Occupational Impact of AI: Tasks, Cognitive Abilities and AI Benchmarks," JRC Working Papers on Labour, Education and Technology 2020-02, Joint Research Centre.
    13. Lingmont, Derek N.J. & Alexiou, Andreas, 2020. "The contingent effect of job automating technology awareness on perceived job insecurity: Exploring the moderating role of organizational culture," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    14. Usabiaga, Carlos & Núñez, Fernando & Arendt, Lukasz & Gałecka-Burdziak, Ewa & Pater, Robert, 2022. "Skill requirements and labour polarisation: An association analysis based on Polish online job offers," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    15. Lamberti, Giuseppe & Lopez-Sintas, Jordi & Sukphan, Jakkapong, 2021. "The social process of internet appropriation: Living in a digitally advanced country benefits less well-educated Europeans," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1).
    16. Werner Eichhorst, 2017. "Labor Market Institutions and the Future of Work: Good Jobs for All?," Working Papers id:11689, eSocialSciences.
    17. BARCEVICIUS Egidijus & CIBAITE Guonda & CODAGNONE Cristiano & GINEIKYTE Vaida & KLIMAVICIUTE Luka & LIVA Giovanni & MATULEVIC Loreta & MISURACA Gianluca & VANINI Irene, 2019. "Exploring Digital Government transformation in the EU," JRC Research Reports JRC118857, Joint Research Centre.
    18. Kerstin Hotte & Angelos Theodorakopoulos & Pantelis Koutroumpis, 2021. "Automation and Taxation," Papers 2103.04111, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    19. Eggenberger, Christian & Backes-Gellner, Uschi, 2023. "IT skills, occupation specificity and job separations," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    20. Naude, Wim, 2019. "The race against the robots and the fallacy of the giant cheesecake: Immediate and imagined impacts of artificial intelligence," MERIT Working Papers 2019-005, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:63:y:2020:i:c:s0160791x20303249. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.