Global Study Stresses Importance of Public Internet Access

vinces99 writes "Millions of people in low-income countries still depend on public computer and Internet access venues despite the global proliferation of mobile phones and home computers. However, interest in providing such public access has waned in recent years, especially among development agencies, as new technologies become available. But a five-year, eight-country study recently concluded by researchers at the University of Washington Information School has found that community access to computer and Internet technology remains a crucial resource for connecting people to the information and skills they need in an increasingly digital world. The Global Impact Study of Public Access to Information & Communication Technologies surveyed 5,000 computer users at libraries, telecenters and cybercafés and 2,000 nonusers at home to learn about patterns of public access use. The researchers also surveyed 1,250 operators of public access venues and conducted seven in-depth case studies to examine issues that have generated controversy. The study was conducted in eight low- and middle-income countries on three continents: Bangladesh, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, Ghana, Lithuania, Philippines and South Africa."

Comments

Re:Public access has waned?

[Elgonn]

So what they're building in Utah isn't actually a datacenter. It is the worlds largest internet cafe!

America the Poor

[b4upoo]

Since the only computer connection for millions of Americans is the one at school, the one at work or the one at the library that puts the US in third world status as well. Not to mention that we have millions of people with zero net access at all. Net access of reasonable quality is expensive in the US as well. We have not touched the edge of getting America up and running yet.

Re:America the Poor

[kermidge]

"You could say the same about any other country too."

That's rather the point of the study, I thought.

"And it's not that hard to afford an internet connection."

Ahh. Unsupported assertion, methinks, without meaning offense. Relative, and all, to be sure, but in fact from my own observation, yes, for some, it _is_ that hard to afford an Internet connection - along with their own computer, knowledge, skill, wherewithal, electric capacity, etc., and to safely maintain said system to use the connection at all. There are several people in the house whose computers I help fix and maintain for somewhere between free and barter (a sandwich or so; for the guy with a car, a trip to the store, and I let him access my wireless for his school work.) That leaves, in the same house, at least five people I know who would be incapable, could they afford it, to manage a computer of their own no matter how much help I gave them. (As a reference point, I've successfully worked with, trained, coached developmentally disabled people at Goodwill Industries. Success defined as the work was well done and no one lost fingers.) Yes, it's anecdotal, so only has any worth if my perceptions and conclusions are correct and I'm telling truth.

"Interesting how adding a few economically marginal people to the internet is supposed to be such a big deal."

To each individual who can get that access that I've seen, yes, it is a big deal. Some can get info they need to find a clinic, to see a doctor, to access the EPIC system, to get help with taxes, to file unemployment, to seek and apply for jobs, to look things up for whatever reason, to get an email account that helps them do some of the above and gain an avenue for communication with friends and relatives. This and more, just from what I've seen with my own eyes or have been told directly by such people. That access certainly helped me when I was homeless and had no computer and no personal access.

(As an aside, and please forgive me if my memory is totally borked, but I seem to recall you once posted a remarkable story of how you went essentially "from rags to riches" - it was inspiring, I thought, and I applaud and am happy for you. However, I think that to sneer at those less fortunate, or who could not replicate your success, is a bit... unseemly. Just because some may be lazy or drug-addled is to me no reasonable reason to tar all with such a wide brush, nor deny them access.)

For, say, a local library to set up a couple dozen surplus computers for public access at marginal cost to allow such access is a reasonable thing to do. Multiply that planet-wide. That's the whole point. Do we deliberately forbid access to those less fortunate or do we at relatively marginal cost and effort allow entry to what the Internet may offer them?

Here's all you have to know

[Anonymous Coward]

I went directly to the web site of the folks that conducted the study. This was at the very top:

Our Mission

The Technology & Social Change Group (TASCHA) at the University of Washington Information School explores the design, use, and effects of information and communication technologies in communities facing social and economic challenges. With experience in 50 countries, TASCHA brings together a multidisciplinary network of social scientists, engineers, and development practitioners to conduct research, advance knowledge, create public resources, and improve policy and program design.

Our purpose? To spark innovation and opportunities for those who need it most.

Our People

TASCHA brings together a multidisciplinary network of social scientists, engineers, development practitioners, and others to conduct research, advance knowledge, create public resources, and improve policy and program design

In other words, this five year taxpayer funded study by researchers professionally committed to bringing the benefits of Internet-centric innovation to every corner of the globe, finally reached the conclusion that.... people in every corner of the globe desperately the need the benefits of Internet-centric innovation.

Next!