Caslon Analytics elephant logo title for Digital Divides profile
home | about | site use | resources | publications | timeline   spacer graphic   blaw

overview

concepts

N America

L America

W Europe

E Europe

Australia

N Zealand

Asia

Middle East

Africa

Oceania

missions

initiatives

claims















related pages icon
related
Guides
& Notes:


Metrics &
Statistics


Networks
& the GII
 

Volkscomputer

Telecentres

section heading icon     claims

This page considers some claims about digital divides, illustrating problems regarding basic data and its interpretation.
It covers -

section marker icon     Tokyo Syndrome

In late 2001 the International Telecommunications Union announced that there are now more than twice as many telephone lines in Africa as in Tokyo, questioning the claim that "Tokyo has more telephones than the whole of the African continent".

That was reinforced by a 2005 World Bank report claiming that there were 59 million fixed-line or mobile phones in Africa in 2002, contradicting the claim by Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade at a 2004 UN news conference that there were more telephones in Manhattan than in all of Africa.

The report sniffed that

Unless New Yorkers and their commuter friends have 12 phones each, Africa now has many more telephones than Manhattan.

We have questioned what is a very crude measure of teledensity: the ITU counts lines but does not identify whether they are working, who is using them and how much the traffic costs. Ten lines to urban villas of the kleptocrats, for example, have a different value to ten lines in regular use by poor farmers in a remote village.

The distribution of those lines is even more problematical, since independent research suggests that Capetown and Johannesburg for example account for a large proportion of the continent's lines.

Tim Kelly of the ITU (PDF) noted that although there were more telephones in Tokyo than in Africa at the time of the 1985 Maitland Missing Link report (PDF) - the acknowledged or unacknowledged source of what critics have labelled 'the Tokyo Syndrome' - that had changed by the late 1990s. As of December 2003 the ITU considered that there were around 25 million fixed lines and over 50 million mobile phones in Africa, several times more than Tokyo's population. Some figures are here.

section marker icon     a phone-free life?

A corollary is the claim that "half of the world's population has never made a telephone call".

There has been no comprehensive survey of who has made a call - whether from their own device, from a phone lent by a family member or friend, or from a 'community' phone. (Figures for the number of people who have received a letter or, in the past, were recipients of a telegram, are also uncertain).

The claim does not appear in the Maitland report. The ITU has suggested that although large parts of the world's population still lack physical access to a landline or mobile phone (and more significantly cannot afford to make a call if infrastructure is available) those people now comprise less than half the global population. Some ITU estimates, as of 2006, indicate that under 20% of the world's population have no telephone access in their home or village.

section marker icon     Iceland Syndrome

The Tokyo model has been adapted for the 'Iceland Syndrome', with claims that "there are more internet users in Iceland than in Africa". Variants include more users in London, Sydney or Manhattan.

The claim was publicised in the 1999 ITU Internet for Development report. By 2004 there were an estimated 12.4 million internet users in Africa (unevenly distributed, with most being located in South Africa), well over 40 times the total population of Iceland.

Critics have responded to dismissals by noting that on a per capita basis internet access is much more likely to be a luxury in Africa than in Reyjkavik or Melbourne and that people in the First World are more likely to go online at home.

A perhaps more searching criticism, consistent with disagreements about the meaningfulness of teledensity counts, is that recent ITU figures merely identify whether someone has been online. They do not, for example, differentiate between some who is online every day (often for much of each day) and someone who is online for a few minutes each week or each month. They also do not identify the shape of access: is 'use' restricted to email or encompasses electronic commerce and YouTube?





icon for link to next page   back to Metrics guide




this site
the web

Google

version of June 2007
© Bruce Arnold
caslon.com.au | caslon analytics