icegov2012 proceedings

The Digital Divide’s Devaluing of Local E-Government
Richard Huff
Virginia Commonwealth University
923 W. Franklin Street
P.O. Box 842028
00-1-804-827-1430
rrhuff@vcu.edu
ABSTRACT
Despite an abundance of literature on the potential of egovernment
to improve service delivery and alter the relationship
between citizens and government, few scholars have addressed
perhaps the most obvious barrier: the digital divide. This proposed
research highlights the importance of understanding the
complexity of technology and the digital divide as well as users
themselves before implementing solutions.
Keywords
Digital divide, e-government demand, evaluation, user-centered
1. INTRODUCTION
Government today faces the challenge of using 21st
century technologies and strategies to address last century’s
problems. The allure of new tools coupled with extant social and
economic problems has sometimes resulted in the elevated
expectation of information technology. As a result, many have
positioned e-government and its transformative potential as a
solution for more transparent government. Despite the worthiness
of that goal, its long-term agenda should not obfuscate the reality
of today which is that transactional forms of e-government remain
difficult to achieve.
At the local level, e-government efforts have stagnated
in their evolutionary tracks [3], and public officials face the
challenge of assessing e-government demand, not just supply.
Questions aimed at whether governments are ready to supply
citizens with new tools miss the second half of the equation,
which is, do citizens even want e-government and can they use it?
[1]. Much of the academic literature to date has focused on
supply-side factors and few scholars have emphasized the
limitations posed by the digital divide [8][20]. A lack of
alignment between supply and demand may result in wasted
investments, ineffective services and the unintended consequence
of lower levels of trust between citizens and government--just the
opposite e-government’s intent [8].
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for
personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies
bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for
components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored.
Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, to republish, to
post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission
and/or a fee.
ICEGOV '12, October 22 - 25 2012, Albany, NY, USA
Copyright 2012 ACM 978-1-4503-1200-4/12/10...$15.00
513
Liana Kleeman
Virginia Commonwealth University
921 W. Franklin Street
P.O. Box 842028
00-1-804-827-2168
lmkleeman@vcu.edu
2. DEMAND-SIDE CONSIDERATIONS
Before designing or implementing e-government tools,
administrators must first understand the macro context (including
social, political and economic influences on individuals’
relationships with technology) as well as users. Without
recognizing the complexity and multi-dimensionality of
technology, the digital divide and users themselves, e-government
will miss the mark.
3.1 Understanding technology & the digital
divide
Technology is a vague term with seemingly limitless
meanings. It almost seems that as technology becomes more
pervasive in the digital age, the less it is understood. Specifically,
those who use technology multiple times a day on multiple
devices and for multiple purposes often assume that everyone else
is accessing and using technology in similar ways, or, at least, can
do so if they choose.
Orlikowski [16][17] advocates for a reconstruction of
the concept of technology, one that is multi-dimensional,
emergent and accounts for the reality that technology is
“continually socially and physically constructed” [16][17].
Orlikowski’s [16][17] structurational theory of technology reveals
the shortcomings of a techno-centric approach to e-government
and instead, emphasizes the intersectionality of technology with
human agents and organizational structures. A narrow focus on
just one element will result in an overly simplistic rendering of
new technologies and their potential impact.
Just as the notion of technology is complex, so, too, is
the digital divide. Importantly, the digital divide is not a
technology problem; rather, it is a social and economic problem
with a technological component. Similar to Orlikowski’s claim
that technology is dependent on human interaction and
organizational structures, the digital divide stems from a
compounding of systemic social and economic issues.
Despite national statistics that suggest all demographic
groups are increasingly going online today, they are not doing so
at equal rates [15]. The digital divide extends beyond simplistic
notions of technology haves and have not’s to include whether
people can participate and prosper in the digital age [6]. At a
micro level, individuals must have access to new technologies and
the skills to use them in meaningful ways, yet at a macro level,
they must be able to participate in society, socially, economically
and politically [14]. The divide may best be viewed as a