IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/snv/dp2009/2013102.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Conceptual Model and Methodology for Evaluating E-Infrastructure Deployment and Its Application to OECD and MENA Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Baseem Al-Athwari

    () (Technology Management, Economcis, and Policy Program; College of Engineering; Seoul National University)

  • Jorn Altmann

    () (Technology Management, Economcis, and Policy Program; College of Engineering; Seoul National University)

  • Almas Heshmati

    () (Department of Economics, Sogang University)

Abstract

As information and communication technologies have spread throughout the world, countries have realized the importance of investing more and more in building ICT-relevant infrastructure. However, for fostering further information and communication technology (ICT) development, countries are in need of an analysis tool for measuring their advancement in ICT-relevant infrastructure. Motivated by a variety of attempts to generate measures of ICT development, this study aims to develop an index that quantifies the level of ICT-relevant (e-infrastructure) deployment. In particular, this study introduces two e-infrastructure indices that are composed of six components, namely electricity, telecommunication, Internet, processing power, broadcasting, and human capital. Each component is generated from one or more indicators. This composition provides the possibility of tracking each of them separately and to identify strengths and weaknesses of each country with respect to the ICT-relevant area of the component. It will also help pointing out the source of failure in developing the ICT-related infrastructure and to develop policies for enhancing ICT-related infrastructure accordingly. For the index computation, the study uses a parametric and a non-parametric computation method rather than the traditional approaches which are frequently used in literature. In addition to this, this study also aims at analyzing the indices ranking differences among OECD countries and Middle East & North Africa (MENA) countries, using data for the time period between 2000 and 2007. The ranking of the countries shows that MENA and OECD countries differ significantly in their e-infrastructure development. However, a small group of MENA countries are ranked higher than a few OECD countries. Those countries belong to the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).

Suggested Citation

  • Baseem Al-Athwari & Jorn Altmann & Almas Heshmati, 2013. "A Conceptual Model and Methodology for Evaluating E-Infrastructure Deployment and Its Application to OECD and MENA Countries," TEMEP Discussion Papers 2013102, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Apr 2013.
  • Handle: RePEc:snv:dp2009:2013102
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: ftp://147.46.237.98/DP-102.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2013
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Archibugi, Daniele & Coco, Alberto, 2004. "A New Indicator of Technological Capabilities for Developed and Developing Countries (ArCo)," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 629-654, April.
    2. Meghnad Desai & Sakiko Fukuda-Parr & Claes Johansson & Fransisco Sagasti, 2002. "Measuring the Technology Achievement of Nations and the Capacity to Participate in the Network Age," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 95-122.
    3. Almas Heshmati & JongEun Oh, 2006. "Alternative Composite Lisbon Development Strategy Indices: A Comparison of EU, USA, Japan and Korea," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 3(2), pages 131-170, December.
    4. Almas Heshmati & Arno Tausch & Chemen S. J. Bajalan, 2008. "Measurement and Analysis of Child Well-Being in Middle and High Income Countries," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 5(2), pages 187-249, December.
    5. Kang, Sang Mok, 2002. "A sensitivity analysis of the Korean composite environmental index," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 159-174, December.
    6. Farhad Noorbakhsh, 1998. "The human development index: some technical issues and alternative indices," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(5), pages 589-605.
    7. Andersen, Torben M. & Herbertsson, Tryggvi Thor, 2003. "Measuring Globalization," IZA Discussion Papers 817, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    8. M. Desai, S. Fukuda-Parr, C. Johansson, and F. Sagasti, 2002. "Measuring Technology Achievement of Nations and the Capacity to Participate in the Network Age," Human Development Occasional Papers (1992-2007) HDOCPA-2002-22, Human Development Report Office (HDRO), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
    9. Heshmati Almas, 2006. "Measurement of a Multidimensional Index of Globalization," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-30, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ICT Infrastructure; Indices; E-readiness; Composite Index; Principle Component Analysis; MENA; OECD.;

    JEL classification:

    • C01 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Econometrics
    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes
    • C43 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Index Numbers and Aggregation
    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • L96 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Telecommunications
    • R58 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Regional Development Planning and Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:snv:dp2009:2013102. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jorn Altmann). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/tesnukr.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.