« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Digital Communities Final Report
B BASELINE
Previous Computer Ownership
B.1 Twenty-six per cent of households in Bellsmyre and 50% in North Argyll already had a home computer when they were offered one from the project ( Figure B-1) 14. The majority of these had internet access from their existing computer (70% of those with a computer in Bellsmyre and 80% in North Argyll - Figure B-2). Further, 35% of respondents in Bellsmyre and 37% in North Argyll who did not already own a computer had plans to buy one when they were offered one from the project ( Figure B-3). Therefore in North Argyll, 69% of all respondent households either owned a computer or had planned to buy one before they were offered one from the initiative, while in Bellsmyre, 52% either owned a computer already or had plans to buy one.
B.2 It is also worth noting that among respondents who did already own a computer, 30% in Bellsmyre and 32% in North Argyll had been planning to buy a new one or upgrade their existing machine before being offered a new computer through the project ( Figure B-4). There was, therefore, provision of computers to households who either already had a suitable machine or did not need help to obtain one.
Points to note The initiative chose a geographical focus rather than an attempt to segment the population according to need. As a result the project incurred a significant amount of deadweight. Using the most narrow definition, those already owning a computer and having access to the internet constituted 18% of households in Bellsmyre and 40% in North Argyll. Using the broadest definition, over half of households in Bellsmyre already had or planned to buy a computer, and in North Argyll this group constituted almost 70% of the population. In view of the relatively high penetration of ICT, deadweight in this initiative was significant, especially in the rural area. By providing a technology that is relatively common, the initiative duplicated provision for many of the households involved. If similar schemes are pursued in future, they need to be targeted carefully by ensuring that specific groups are selected who have currently not got access to the technology in question. |
Reasons for Becoming Involved
B.3 There were some interesting differences in the stated motivations for becoming involved in the Digital Communities projects between participants in Bellsmyre and North Argyll ( Table B-1). Participants in Bellsmyre most commonly cite factors connected with learning (14% said they took part to learn how to use a computer/the internet;), or with providing opportunities for children to use computers (14% said they got involved "for children" generally and 10% to help children with school work, education or learning). Participants in North Argyll, on the other hand, were more likely to mention the advantages of being able to e-mail family and friends (13%) as well as being able to access information (12%). These findings are perhaps not particularly surprising given the demographic and geographical differences between the two areas. However, they do emphasise differences in the potential benefits of this kind of scheme to different kinds of communities.
Points to note It is clear that the households involved had clear ideas about what they expected to achieve with computer and internet access. These objectives do not necessarily match the explicit objectives of the initiative set out initially. It is particularly striking that much of the involvement seems to have been driven by consideration of what their children might require from ICT. This is not to say that these outcomes are not worthwhile in their own right - rather future policy initiatives should make much more explicit reference to the expressed requirements of the target group. It is also worth appraising explicitly at the outset why particular target groups might get involved in an initiative such as digital communities. There are a number of drivers that are not objectives of the intervention which might be important to households, such as direct material gain. These might alter behaviour and are likely to reduce the effectiveness of the intervention if not taken into account from the start. |
« Previous | Contents | Next »