164 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
10.15240/ ul/001/2022-4-011
DIGITAL INEQUALITY AND USAGE GAP
IN THE V4 REGION
Anna Vallušo á1, I ana Ku áko á2, Žane a Laco á3
1 Ma ej Bel Uni e si y in Banská Bys ica, Facul y o Economics, Depa men o Economics, Slo akia,
ORCID: 0000-0001-8861-1102, [email p o ec ed];
2 Ma ej Bel Uni e si y in Banská Bys ica, Facul y o Economics, Depa men o Economics, Slo akia,
ORCID: 0000-0001-9307-5367, [email p o ec ed];
3 Ma ej Bel Uni e si y in Banská Bys ica, Facul y o Economics, Depa men o Economics, Slo akia,
ORCID: 0000-0002-4580-1421, [email p o ec ed].
Abs ac : The V4 coun ies ha e achie ed di e en le els o digi al ans o ma ion due o dis inc ions
in hei indi idual echnical in as uc u e and human capi al cha ac e is ics. The success o digi al
ans o ma ion canno be measu ed solely by he achie ed le el o digi aliza ion; he dis ibu ion o
a o able ou comes o in e ne use wi hin a coun y should also be conside ed. The le el o digi al
skills and usage pa e ns di e among social g oups, he e o e capabili y o ansla e in e ne access
and use o angible (o line) bene i s a ies. The aim o ou pape is wo old. Fi s ly, we quan i y he
ex en o he digi al inequali y in e ms o usage gap in he V4 coun ies. We indica e he dynamics
o inequali y by compa ing he de elopmen o such inequali y be ween he yea s 2015 and 2019.
Secondly, we iden i y socioeconomic and sociodemog aphic ac o s, which a e connec ed o
di e ences in in e ne usage pa e ns and he e o e a ec he capabili y o an indi idual o bene i
om in e ne use. In common wi h o he s udies ca ied ou in he Wes e n wo ld, we show ha
in e ne access and possession o o mal digi al skills a e no he mos impo an de e minan o
p obabili y o being a digi al bene icia y; indi idual cha ac e is ics, especially educa ion and age,
p edic he p obabili y o being a digi al bene icia y o a highe deg ee o accu acy. As o he ex en
o digi al inequali y in he indi idual coun ies, we come o conclusion ha al hough he V4 coun ies
a e ela i ely homogeneous conce ning socioeconomic inequali ies, he le el o digi al inequali y
among hem di e s – Hunga y being somewha unequal as compa ed o he mos equal Czechia.
In all ou coun ies, equali y inc eased wi hin an obse ed pe iod.
Keywo ds: Digi al ans o ma ion, digi al di ide, digi al inequali y, digi ally ulne able social g oups,
digi al inclusion, V4 coun ies.
JEL Classi ica ion: J24, F36, O57.
APA S yle Ci a ion: Vallušo á, A., Ku áko á, I., & Laco á, Ž. (2022). Digi al Inequali y and
Usage Gap in he V4 Region. E&M Economics and Managemen , 25(4), 164–179. h ps://doi.
o g/10.15240/ ul/001/2022-4-011
In oduc ion
The digi aliza ion o economies and socie ies
has been one o he key elemen s in he
de elopmen o coun ies wo ldwide o
mo e han 30 yea s. Howe e , coun ies
di e in hei achie ed le el o digi aliza ion
due o dis inc ions in echnical in as uc u e
de elopmen and human capi al cha ac e is ics.
The ou coun ies o he Viseg ád egion,
Czechia, Hunga y, Poland, and Slo akia, we e
acing he beginning o he digi aliza ion o hei
economies (in he 1990s) in he pe iod o hei
ongoing ansi ion p ocesses om cen ally
planned o ma ke economies. Thus, he
esou ces o he digi aliza ion o hese coun ies
we e limi ed in he las decade o he wen ie h
cen u y. Howe e , he beginning o he new
cen u y was ma ked by a ca ching-up p ocess
o he V4 coun ies o he o he Eu opean
Union Membe S a es in all a eas o social and
EM_4_2022.indd 164 7.12.2022 10:56:09
165
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
economic li e, including digi aliza ion aspec s.
This ca ching-up p ocess was cha ac e ized by
he ac ha he whole V4 egion has consis ed
o a he he e ogeneous a eas a he le el o
NUTS3 egions (Szakálné Kanó & Lengyel,
2021) and he cu en s a e o digi aliza ion can
di e ac oss coun ies, as well as wi hin he
coun ies.
Today, he EU op ics ep esen ed by he
EU digi al s a egy (e.g., Digi al Compass
o he EU’s digi al decade) is aimed a he
EU Membe S a es’ de elopmen , deploymen ,
and up ake o new echnologies in he daily
li es o ci izens. The V4 coun ies a e also
in ol ed in his s a egic ocus, al hough he
alues o he sco es comp ising he Digi al
Economy and Socie y Index (DESI index)
pe sis below he Eu opean a e age in
all V4 coun ies. Consequen ly, na ional
and egional ini ia i es (such as he Digi al
V4 ini ia i e) a e implemen ed o os e policies
ha suppo digi aliza ion in he V4 egion.
In gene al, a e he pe iod when policies
we e p ima ily o ien ed o he de elopmen o
b oadband in as uc u e leading o a high le el
o connec i i y o ci izens o ICT, cu en policies
ace new challenges conce ning he le el o
he popula ion skills needed o ake ad an age
o he possibili ies o e ed by a digi al socie y.
In his con ex , human capi al aspec s a e
analyzed om he pe spec i e o he le el
achie ed, bu he dis ibu ional aspec s become
ex emely ele an as well. The dispe sion
o digi al skills in he popula ion is one o he
impo an ac o s in luencing posi i e ou comes
(bene i s) ha a popula ion can gain om
in e ne se ices use. The unp eceden ed
COVID-19 pandemic expe ience has been he
ca alys ha has unde lined he impo ance and
ele ance o hese issues. Due o hese e ec s,
he mic oeconomic pe spec i e app oach o
analysis becomes mo e app op ia e, elying
on indi idual da a p esen ing e en ual unequal
dis ibu ion o digi al skills and bene i s. In his
con ex , ou pape a emp s o p o ide an inside
iew o he p oblems o digi al inequali y and
i s ex eme case – he digi al di ide – in he
V4 coun ies egion.
The discussion abou he digi al di ide
and digi al inequali ies alls unde he scope o
widely discussed inequali y opics. T adi ionally
in economics, inequali y esea ch ocuses
on income o weal h dis ibu ion ac oss
he popula ion. O he o ms o economic
Czechia Hunga y Poland Slo akia EU-27
a e age
GDP pe capi a (in PPS, 2020) 93 74 76 70 100
Gini coe icien (2019) 24.0 28.0 28.5 22.8 30.2
Ra io o income o op 80% o bo om
20% (2019) 3.34 4.23 4.37 3.34 4.99
Sha e o he popula ion aged 65 and
o e (2020) 19.9 19.9 18.2 16.6 20.6
Sha e o he popula ion achie ed
low educa ion le el (ISCED le els
0–2), 2020 (%, 25–54 yea s)
5.6 13.3 5.9 6.7 18.6
Sha e o he popula ion achie ed
high educa ion le el (ISCED le els
5–8), 2020 (%, 25–54 yea s)
26.9 29.2 38.0 29.6 35.9
Sha e o he popula ion achie ed
low educa ion le el (ISCED le els
0–2), 2020 (%, 55–74 yea s)
10.2 20.6 14.2 12.0 32.8
Sha e o he popula ion achie ed
high educa ion le el (ISCED le els
5–8), 2020 (%, 55–74 yea s)
15.2 20.5 15.9 16.1 21.8
Sou ce: EUROSTAT online da a
Tab. 1: Chosen measu es connec ed o adi ional o ms o economic and social
inequali y
EM_4_2022.indd 165 7.12.2022 10:56:10
166 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
(e.g., employmen ) and social (e.g., educa ion
le el) inequali ies a e ei he a he o igin, o
po en ially a e he consequence, o hese
adi ional economic inequali ies. Thus, an
unequal dis ibu ion o ICT usage in he
popula ion can also play bo h he ole o a ca alys
o an a enua o o adi ional economic o ms o
inequali y.
Tab. 1 p esen s some indica o s connec ed
o economic and social inequali y aspec s in
he V4 coun ies. Compa ed o he Eu opean
a e age, he po ions o he popula ion aged 65
and o e a e cu en ly lowe in he ou Viseg ád
coun ies; howe e , due o a low bi h a e he
p oblem o an ageing popula ion will soon be
e en mo e ac ual in his egion han in o he
Eu opean coun ies. Conce ning he educa ion
le el, Tab. 1 desc ibes i s mo e equal dis ibu ion
in V4 egion han in he EU gene ally, wi h
he domina ion o medium educa ion le el o
bo h age g oups unde ques ion. Czechia
and Slo akia a e he coun ies wi h he mos
egali a ian educa ion sys em esul s compa ed
o he o he V4 coun ies and o he EU a e age.
The indica o s o income dis ibu ion
(Gini coe icien , pe cen iles sha es) con i m
a ela i ely lowe occu ence o income inequali y
p oblems in pos -communis coun ies. Czechia
and Slo akia a e again examples o coun ies
wi h low le els o income inequali y measu es.
I should be no ed ha he eal GDP pe capi a
alues in bo h coun ies a e highe han in
Hunga y and Poland, al hough hey emained
qui e dis an om he a e age alue in 2020.
Digi al echnologies a e o en discussed
om he pe spec i e o he economic and
social inequali ies hey can b ing. Van Deu sen
e al. (2017) poin ou ha au ho s wo k wi h
wo hypo heses; he no ma i e hypo hesis
sugges s ha in e es in digi al echnologies in
highe income g oups leads o a dec ease o he
p ice and makes i a o dable o lowe income
g oups. This p ocess can lead o mi iga ion
o digi al inequali ies and consequen ly he
o -line inequali ies. On he o he hand, he
s a i ica ion hypo hesis s a es ha in e ne
s uc u es eplica e o line social s uc u es
and o line human capi al ca ies o e o he
online wo ld, he e o e digi al inequali y has he
po en ial o eplica e and e en ampli y exis ing
social inequali ies.
Ou esea ch in en ion is o inc ease he
awa eness o socioeconomic pa e ns o digi al
inequali y in he V4 coun ies. The aim o ou
pape is wo old. Fi s ly, we quan i y he ex en
o he digi al inequali y in e ms o he usage gap
in he V4 coun ies. We indica e he dynamics
o inequali y by compa ing he de elopmen o
such inequali y be ween he yea s 2015 and
2019. Secondly, we iden i y socioeconomic and
sociodemog aphic ac o s, which a e connec ed
o di e ences in in e ne usage pa e ns and
he e o e a ec he capabili y o an indi idual
o bene i om in e ne use. Thus, we y o
con ibu e o he discussion abou necessa y
policy measu es o mi iga e he mode n o ms
o he digi al di ide and o os e digi al inclusion
in con empo a y economies.
1. Theo e ical Backg ound
Policymake s and social scien is s ha e deal
wi h he dis ibu ion o in e ne access since he
eme gence o he in e ne as a mass medium
in he mid-1990s (DiMaggio & Ha gi ai,
2001). The massi e a i al o in o ma ion and
communica ion echnologies (ICT) was no
sp ead equally in e ms o geog aphy and i s
use did no a ec e e yone compa ably. This
inequi able access o ICT has had implica ions
o he p oduc i i y and economic g ow h o
ich and poo coun ies (Quib ia e al., 2003).
Simila ly, i was e iden ha he in oduc ion
o new ICT in he global economy pa allels
widening asymme ies among coun ies and
e en egions wi hin coun ies (An onelli,
2003). The i s o icial epo documen ing
hese inequali ies was published in 1995 by
he Na ional Telecommunica ions In o ma ion
Adminis a ion and was called “Falling
Th ough he Ne : A Su ey o he Ha e No s
in Ru al and U ban Ame ica”. The epo
documen ed sys ema ic gaps in he use o
compu e ne wo ks by socioeconomic s a us,
educa ional backg ound, ace, gende , and
geog aphic loca ion (Eps ein e al., 2011).
These inequali ies ha e been labeled as
a digi al di ide. Commonly, i is de ined as he
gap be ween hose who ha e and do no ha e
access o compu e s and he in e ne (Ha gi ai,
2002; Quib ia e al., 2003; an Dijk, 2006).
An onelli (2003) de ines i as he gap be ween
he digi al ich and he digi al poo . Acco ding
o OECD (2001), he e m ‘digi al di ide’ e e s
o he gap be ween indi iduals, households,
businesses, and geog aphic a eas a di e en
socioeconomic le els ega ding bo h hei
oppo uni ies o access ICTs and o hei use
o he in e ne o a wide a ie y o ac i i ies.
EM_4_2022.indd 166 7.12.2022 10:56:10
167
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
Howe e , he e a e o he pe spec i es ha look
a he digi al di ide as a pa o social sys ems
and p ocesses; and om a policy s andpoin ,
he goal o using ICT wi h ma ginalized
g oups is no o o e come a digi al di ide, bu
a he o u he a p ocess o social inclusion
(Wa schaue , 2002).
In he las 25 yea s, digi al di ide esea ch
and policy has expanded o h ee le els
(Schee de e al., 2017). The dicho omous iew
o he digi al di ide as a dis inc ion be ween
people who do and do no ha e in e ne access
was na u al and app op ia e a he beginning
o he di usion p ocess (DiMaggio & Ha gi ai,
2001). Ha ing some ype o compu e and
in e ne connec ion o e e ybody was he
main objec i e ( an Dijk, 2020). A ha ime,
he mo i a ion o ge access was g owing
apidly ( an Dijk, 2017). Today, in e ne
pene a ion is inc easing in many coun ies,
bu he gap in access pe sis s and inequali ies
in accessing he in e ne may be obse ed
bo h be ween coun ies (global digi al di ide)
and wi hin coun ies (Ragnedda & K ei em,
2018). Public in es men in human capi al,
elecommunica ions in as uc u e, and he
egula o y in as uc u e could help o mi iga e
he gap in digi al echnology and in e ne use
(Chinn & Fai lie, 2007). The i s -le el digi al
di ide s ill equi es a en ion because, besides
ha ing o no ha ing an in e ne connec ion,
di e ences in ma e ial in as uc u e mus be
conside ed ( an Deu sen & an Dijk, 2019).
I includes he means equi ed o main ain he
use o he in e ne o e ime, such as compu e
de ices (e.g., desk ops, able s, sma TVs),
so wa e (subsc ip ions), and pe iphe al
equipmen (e.g., p in e s, addi ional ha d d i es).
As in es iga ions has con inued o e he
yea s, esea che s and policy make s ha e
become con inced ha digi al li e acy o skills
and usage a e in ac mo e impo an ega ding
digi al inequali y ( an Dijk, 2020). While he
adi ional access-o ien ed hinking in he i s
le el ocused on measu es such as owne ship,
a ailabili y, and a o dabili y o in as uc u e,
he ocus la e mo ed beyond echnology o he
use s (Ba zilai-Nahon, 2006). Equal access o
he in e ne does no ensu e equal usage o he
in e ne (B and zæg e al., 2011). This is called
he second le el o he digi al di ide. Wi hin his
le el, inequali ies in e ms o mo i a ion, skills,
and pu pose o use a e examined (Ragnedda
& Ruiu, 2017). Skill is de ined as he abili y o
ind he in o ma ion e icien ly and e ec i ely
on he web (Ha gi ai, 2002). The esul s o
many esea che s who examine his le el o
he digi al di ide sugges ha indi iduals ha e
a ious ways o accessing and using ICTs, and
ha mul iple laye s o access and use a e o en
de e mined by a a ie y o ac o s ha include
no only socioeconomic and demog aphic
elemen s bu also physical, psychological,
cul u al and ecological ac o s (Min, 2010).
Ha gi ai (2002) also con i ms ha he e is g ea
a ia ion in people’s abili y o loca e con en
online.
Since abou 2015, he ou comes o
compu e and in e ne use came o wa d in
a hi d le el o esea ch and policy on he
digi al di ide ( an Dijk, 2020). By analyzing he
hi d le el o he digi al di ide, schola s s a ed
o pu emphasis on social implica ions and
inequali ies in he ou comes gained om he
di e en o ms o access and use o he in e ne
(Luce o O iz e al., 2020; Ragnedda & K ei em,
2018). The hi d-le el digi al di ide conce ns
dispa i ies in he e u ns om in e ne use wi hin
popula ions o use s who exhibi b oadly simila
usage p o iles and enjoy ela i ely au onomous
and un e e ed access o ICTs and he in e ne
in as uc u e ( an Deu sen & Helspe , 2015;
Zhao e al., 2022). Speci ically, whe he
conce ning educa ion, wo k, heal h o o he
a eas, wha ma e s is ha indi iduals ha e he
esou ces o deploy skills in ways ha b ing
abou angible ou comes ha bene i hem
( an Deu sen & Helspe , 2018). These o line
ou comes ha could be achie ed h ough he
u iliza ion o digi al esou ces include inding
a job, quicke access o in o ma ion, ha ing
mo e con ac wi h people, and buying p oduc s
a a discoun online compa ed o buying in
a physical s o e (Ogbo e al., 2021). Wi hin
he las decade, no only posi i e ou comes
we e obse ed bu also nega i e ones.
Examples include cybe c ime, illegal hacking,
ha e and disin o ma ion on social media and
sma phones, and in e ne o game addic ion
( an Dijk, 2020).
In e ne access has become a s anda d
o mos wes e n popula ions. As a esul ,
digi al di ide esea ch shi ed o ocus on
de e minan s o in e ne skills, uses and
ou comes (Schee de e al., 2017). Zillien
and Ha gi ai (2009) sugges ha di e en ial
payo s om in e ne use depend on he use ’s
socioeconomic backg ound. Acco ding o
EM_4_2022.indd 167 7.12.2022 10:56:10
168 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
an Dijk (2012), when examining he digi al
di ide and digi al skills he mos impo an
dis inc ion a e he ca ego ies o employmen ,
manage s and execu i es, indi iduals wi h high
and low le els o educa ion, women and men,
young and old, pa en s and child en, e hnici y,
and na i es and mig an s.
This b oade pe spec i e co esponds o
Bou dieu’s (1986) capi al heo y. Acco ding o
his heo y, people’s ac ions a e shaped by he
social space hey li e in, as de ined by ield,
capi al, and habi us. This idea has become
cen al in many app oaches o inequali y and
s a i ica ion ac oss he social sciences; capi al
especially, in he sense o digi al capi al, is
a key concep in s udies o digi al inequali y
(Igna ow & Robinson, 2017). Such s udies ha e
shown how he same kinds o in o ma ional
engagemen s yield di e en payo s o mo e
and less disad an aged g oups (Igna ow
& Robinson, 2017). Fo ins ance, Wi e and
Mannon (2010) use ep esen a i e su ey
da a o show ha inequali ies in IT access
and in e ne usage bo h augmen and mi o
inequali ies in o line esou ces such as
economic and cul u al capi al. The same was
shown by Calde ón Gómez (2018), whose
esea ch ocused on unde s anding how
adi ional o ms o capi al (economic, cul u al,
and social) a e con e ed in o digi al capi al, as
well as he e e se p ocesses o econ e sion
o digi al capi al back in o economic, cul u al
and social capi al. Following Bou dieu, o he
schola s also s ess ha i is impo an o no
jus conside economic capi al, bu also include
social and cul u al capi als o de e mine one’s
s a us and posi ion (Schee de e al., 2017).
Helspe (2012) explains ha by cul u al capi al
he esea che s unde s and sha ed no ms o
beha io . They a e ep esen ed by belie s, ways
o in e p e ing he in o ma ion and ac i i ies
lea ned by socializa ion, which can ei he
enable o limi he capaci y o an indi idual o
ake up oppo uni ies. Social capi al ela es o
in ol emen in ne wo ks o o he people, which
o e s he indi idual ins umen al o emo ional
suppo . In addi ion o economic capi al, cul u al
and social capi al a e ela ed o access, skills,
a i udes and mo i a ion o use digi al esou ces
and can ei he mi iga e o deepen he digi al gap.
B and zæg e al. (2011), E l e al. (2020)
s a e ha he mos impo an ac o in luencing
he le el o digi al skills is age. Olde people
on a e age ha e a lowe equency o ICT and
in e ne use han younge indi iduals (Blank
& G oselj, 2014; Helspe & Reisdo , 2017). A
he same ime, olde indi iduals a e less likely
o use he in e ne , sma phones, and social
media (Ande son & Pe in, 2017). On he o he
hand, skills a y bo h wi hin and ac oss age
g oups, e en among he oldes in socie y, and
i is necessa y o ake in o conside a ion he
socioeconomic ci cums ances and educa ional
a ainmen o he olde people (Ha gi ai e al.,
2019). Conside ing he bene i s om in e ne
use, Blank and Lu z (2018) s a e ha elde ly
indi iduals bene i mo e han younge ones.
This con as s wi h p e ious esea ch.
The second equen ly examined ac o is
income, which is an impo an de e minan o
digi al skills in bo h de eloping and de eloped
coun ies; i a ec s in e ne access, usage,
and he di e si y o ICTs ha indi iduals own
(Robinson e al., 2020). The esul s o esea ch
led by Fuchs (2009) show ha income inequali y
measu ed by he Gini coe icien is an impo an
ac o in luencing he o e all le el o skills in
addi ion o pe capi a income, he deg ee o
u baniza ion, and he le el o democ a iza ion.
When looking a he expansion o in e ne use,
low-income indi iduals a e less likely o use he
in e ne han highe -income indi iduals, o hey
s a using i la e (Ma in & Robinson, 2007).
A he ad en o ICT, gende was a signi ican
ac o in luencing he le el o digi al skills (Zillien
& Ha gi ai, 2009), bu a p esen i s in luence
has signi ican ly weakened (Ono & Za odny,
2002). Some s udies (Campos-Cas illo, 2015)
e en s a e ha in some coun ies, age- ela ed
esul s ha e e e sed, and women a e hose
wi h be e in e ne access and associa ed wi h
be e digi al skills. Coope (2006) sugges s ha
he digi al di ide is undamen ally a p oblem o
compu e anxie y whose oo s a e deep in he
socializa ion pa e ns o boys and gi ls, and ha
in e ac wi h he s e eo ype o compu e s as
oys o boys.
In e ms o educa ion, i can be obse ed
ha use s o compu e s equi e a ce ain le el
o educa ion o use he compu e e ec i ely,
whe eas elephones and he in e ne do no
equi e any speci ic educa ion (Dasgup a e al.,
2001). Two sec ions o Du ch people – one
educa ed o a lowe le el and he o he wi h
disabili ies – spend mo e o hei spa e ime
using he in e ne han highe educa ed people
and employed people ( an Deu sen & an Dijk,
2014). Highly educa ed use s bene i mos
EM_4_2022.indd 168 7.12.2022 10:56:10

169
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
om using he web (Blank & Lu z, 2018).
Educa ion is also an impo an p edic o o he
ypes o ac i i ies ha people engage in online
(Robinson e al., 2003).
In addi ion o he a iables p esen ed in
Tab. 2, some au ho s (e.g., Robinson e al.,
2020) epo o he ac o s a ec he le el o
digi al skills, such as sexual o ien a ion, ace
and na ionali y, p esence o disabili y, le el o
heal h ca e, and loca ion o esidence (whe he
u al o u ban). Howe e , hei oles seem o be
a he limi ed.
Tab. 2 summa izes he main de e minan s
o he digi al di ide iden i ied by schola s in
hei empi ical s udies. Acco ding o hem, we
can iden i y he isk g oups in he popula ion,
which a e p edominan ly elde ly people, people
wi h a lowe educa ion, and low-income g oups.
These g oups a e mos a isk o ge ing
s uck in he digi al di ide. To ou knowledge,
none o he exis ing s udies ocus on Eas e n
Eu opean coun ies o a wide ex en , so ou
pape a emp s o pa ially ill his gap. The
only s udy ha deals wi h he digi al di ide in
Eas e n Eu opean coun ies is he s udy om
Ragnedda and K ei em (2018). The au ho s
analyze h ee angible ou comes (eGo e nmen
se ice compe i ion and use, eHeal h, and
eComme ce) on a mac oeconomic le el. They
do no pay special a en ion o he indi idual-
le el de e minan s o he digi al di ide
connec ed o in e ne use ou comes.
2. Resea ch Me hodology
The aim o ou analysis is wo old. Fi s ly, we
wan o quan i y he ex en o digi al inequali y
in e ms o usage gap in he V4 coun ies.
To do so, we ha e modi ied he p ocedu e o
calcula ing he digi al di ide index p oposed
by Hüsing and Selho e (2002, 2004). This
index exp esses he a io o pe cen age o
digi al bene icia ies in indi idual isk g oups o
he pe cen age o digi al bene icia ies in he
whole popula ion. In he o iginal e sion, he
digi al bene icia ies we e people who ha e
access o a compu e and o he in e ne . As
De e minan Schola s Time co e age Region co e age
Age
B and zæg e al. (2011) 2004–2006 No way, Sweden, Aus ia,
Uni ed Kingdom, Spain
Blank and G oselj (2014) 2003–2014 Uni ed Kingdom
Blank and Lu z (2018) 2013 Uni ed Kingdom
Ande son and Pe in (2017) 2016 USA
Helspe and Reisdo (2017) 2005–2013 Sweden, B i ain
Ha gi ai e al. (2019) 2013 USA
E l e al. (2020) 2013 Ge many
Income
Ma in and Robinson (2007) 1997–2003 USA
Fuchs (2009) 2005 126 coun ies
Robinson e al. (2020) 2018 Ne he lands
Educa ion
Robinson e al. (2003) 2000–2002 USA
Dasgup a e al. (2001) 1999 Wo ld Bank da a o many coun ies
an Deu sen and an Dijk (2014) 2011 Ne he lands
Blank and Lu z (2018) 2013 Uni ed Kingdom
Gende
Ono and Za odny (2002) 1997–2001 USA
Coope (2006) 1987–2006 S udies o many coun ies
Zillien and Ha gi ai (2009) 2004 Ge many
Campos-Cas illo (2015) 2007–2012 USA
Sou ce: own
Tab. 2: Li e a u e e iew o digi al di ide de e minan s
EM_4_2022.indd 169 7.12.2022 10:56:10
170 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
ou ocus is usage gap, we iden i ied digi al
bene icia ies based on hei usage o digi al
echnologies in a pa icula domain. To desc ibe
popula ion g oups who bene i he mos om
in e ne use in V4 coun ies, we adap ed he
app oach o an Deu sen and Helspe (2015),
who iden i ied i e domains o online ac i i ies
(economic – including bo h e-comme ce and
p o essional li e ac i i ies; social; ins i u ional
– including bo h e-go e nance and e-heal h
ac i i ies; poli ical; and educa ional), e lec ing
ac i a ion o economic and non-economic o ms
o digi al capi al. An indi idual is conside ed as
a bene icia y o a speci ic domain i he/she uses
a leas one o he possibili ies s a ed in he
desc ip ion o he domain p esen ed in Tab. 3.
In ou analysis, we calcula e he summa y
digi al di ide index (DDI) as an a i hme ic mean
o pa ial digi al di ide indices (Di) by usage
domains. The pa ial digi al di ide index o
indi idual isk g oups is calcula ed as ollows:
(1)
whe e:
pij – pe cen age o digi al bene icia ies in gi en
isk g oup o each usage domain;
pj – pe cen age o digi al bene icia ies in he
whole popula ion o each usage domain;
m – numbe o usage domains.
Based on ou li e a u e e iew esul s, we
wo k wi h h ee isk g oups om he gene al
popula ion in ou calcula ions: indi iduals olde
han 55 yea s, indi iduals wi h low le el o
educa ion (a lowe seconda y educa ion le el)
and indi iduals belonging o he i s income
qua ile.
Secondly, we use logi eg essions o
es ima e he de e minan s o he p obabili y o
being a digi al bene icia y in an indi idual usage
domain. To dis inguish be ween he di e ences
in in e ne usage ou comes due o a ious digi al
skills and he ac i a ion o economic and non-
economic capi al, we use a dummy a iable.
This a iable indica es a pe son wi h – a he e y
leas – basic digi al skills. The dummy a iable
is calcula ed based on so wa e digi al skills
measu ed by Eu os a . The esponden s wi h,
as a minimum, basic digi al skills a e conside ed
digi ally skilled o he pu poses o ou esea ch.
To indica e ac i a ion o economic and non-
economic capi al (Bou dieu, 1986) we include
he ollowing demog aphic cha ac e is ics:
age ca ego y, gende , educa ional ca ego y,
Domain Desc ip ion
Economic:
e-comme ce
Buying o o de ing goods;
Selling o goods o se ices;
In e ne banking;
A anging accommoda ion h ough he in e ne .
Economic:
p o essional li e Looking o a job o sending a job applica ion.
Social
Sending/ ecei ing e-mails;
Telephoning o e he in e ne / ideo calls;
Pa icipa ing in social ne wo ks.
Ins i u ional:
e-go e nance
Ob aining in o ma ion om web si es o apps;
Downloading/p in ing o icial o ms;
Submi ing comple ed o ms online.
Ins i u ional:
e-heal h Seeking heal h- ela ed in o ma ion.
Poli ical Pos ing opinions on ci ic o poli ical issues ia websi es in he las h ee mon hs;
Pa icipa ing in online consul a ions o o ing o de ine ci ic o poli ical issues.
Educa ional
Doing an online cou se;
Using online lea ning ma e ial o he han a comple e online cou se;
Communica ing wi h ins uc o s o s uden s using educa ional websi es/po als.
Sou ce: own based on an Deu sen and Helspe (2015)
Tab. 3: De ini ion o usage domains
EM_4_2022.indd 170 7.12.2022 10:56:10
171
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
income qua ile, and he coun y in which he
esponden li es. We also include con ol
a iables indica ing deg ee o u baniza ion and
indi iduals li ing alone and wo king. Fo ease
o in e p e a ion, we epo a e age ma ginal
e ec s o m he logi model.
The s udy examines da a om Eu os a
Communi y Su ey on ICT use in households
and by indi iduals collec ed in 2015 and 2019,
as hey o e he ea lies and la es a ailable
da a co e ing bo h ou comes o in e ne usage
and in o ma ion abou digi al skills. The da a
sample is weigh ed and ep esen a i e o he
coun ies. The age o he esponden s anges
om 16 o 74. Tab. 4 shows he composi ion o
he esea ch sample in yea s 2015 and 2019.
Tab. 5 depic s he a io o digi al bene icia ies
in indi idual domains o each coun y. No
su p isingly, he a io o in e ne bene icia ies
di e s among he domains. Social use
domina es in all coun ies ollowed by economic
use in he ield o e-comme ce. On he o he
hand, he in e ne is used he leas equen ly
wi hin he poli ical domain and connec ion o
p o essional li e.
3. Resea ch Resul s
Using Eu os a Su ey mic oda a, we
quan i y he le el o he digi al di ide index in
V4 coun ies in he yea s 2015 ( he ea lies yea
o which necessa y da a a e a ailable) and
2019 (Tab. 6). The alues close o 100 indica e
a pe ec digi al equali y in a socie y, i.e., isk
g oups bene i om using he in e ne as
much as he a e age popula ion do, whe eas
alues close o 0 signal he opposi e si ua ion.
Al hough V4 coun ies seem o be ela i ely
homogeneous conce ning o he socioeconomic
o ms o inequali ies when compa ing hem o
he a e age o EU Membe S a es (Tab. 1), he
2015 2019
Numbe o
esponden s
In e ne
use s
% o in e ne
use s
(weigh ed)
Numbe o
esponden s
In e ne
use s
% o in e ne
use s
(weigh ed)
Czechia 7,256 5,506 81.32 6,287 5,232 87.03
Hunga y 6,421 4,742 72.83 5,904 4,807 80.37
Poland 8,153 5,334 68.00 9,860 7,367 80.44
Slo akia 4,500 3,459 73.96 3,273 2,547 82.85
Sou ce: own
Tab. 4: Resea ch sample composi ion
CZ HU PL SK To al
Economic use
E-comme ce 87.30 77.62 79.63 85.89 81.22
P o essional li e 6.99 18.47 10.91 17.63 11.93
Social use 96.37 97.53 91.01 95.65 93.32
Poli ical use 14.72 15.04 18.38 14.14 16.87
Ins i u ional use
E-go e nance 61.70 65.06 50.15 69.46 56.07
E-heal h 64.87 75.23 58.93 63.54 62.78
Educa ional use 17.85 12.92 16.11 17.91 16.10
Sou ce: own
Tab. 5: Po ion o digi al bene icia ies (in % o in e ne use s)
EM_4_2022.indd 171 7.12.2022 10:56:10
172 2022, XXV, 4
In o ma ion Managemen
le el o digi al inequali y di e s, wi h Hunga y
being somewha unequal as compa ed o he
mos equal Czechia (Tab. 6). The a iabili y is
e en mo e ob ious when i comes o he pa ial
digi al di ide indices and hei change o e an
obse ed pe iod. In Czechia, people olde han
55 yea s lagged behind he a e age popula ion
usage; he same g oup expe ienced he lowes
change in inequali y be ween he yea s 2015
and 2019. The mo emen owa d equali y was
led mainly by people wi h a low educa ion,
whose usage o digi al echnologies was simila
o he a e age o he popula ion in 2019.
Hunga y p esen ed he highes digi al
inequali y among V4 coun ies. In con as
wi h he o he h ee coun ies, in 2015 he
ex en o inequali y was nea ly he same o all
he isk g oups. In 2019, he inequali y index
e en dec eased o he i s income qua ile.
Summa y DDI emains low and does no each
he le el o he second wo s pe o ming coun y
in 2015.
Poland has he consis en ly lowes alues
o digi al inequali y indices o people olde
han 55. The esul s o he o he isk g oups
a e be e . The dec ease in inequali y in 2019
was mainly imp o ed by people wi h a low
educa ion, al hough he i s income qua ile
showed a sligh wo sening o he si ua ion.
In Slo akia, he dec ease in inequali y was
he esul o a signi ican inc ease in he digi al
di ide indices o i s income qua ile. On he
o he hand, he inequali y has wo sened o
people wi h a low educa ion; hose people olde
han 55 expe ienced only mino changes.
To iden i y ulne able g oups speci ic o he
V4 egion, we model he p obabili y o being
a digi al bene icia y in i e domains o digi al
usage gi en indi idual socioeconomic a ibu es
– age, gende , educa ion, income qua ile, and
coun y o esidence. We also include con ol
a iables indica ing he deg ee o u baniza ion
and indi iduals li ing alone and wo king.
The models a e es ima ed using mic oda a
om V4 coun ies. Tab. 7 shows he a e age
ma ginal e ec s o indi idual socioeconomic
a ibu es.
3.1 Economic Domain
The ac o ha dec eases he p obabili y
o using he in e ne o buying and selling
goods is lowe educa ion. The p obabili y also
dec eases wi h age (and is especially low o
he age ca ego y o 55 yea s and o e ). As o
he coun y o esidence, people end o use
he in e ne less o his pu pose in Hunga y.
Conce ning p o essional li e, he di e ences
among social g oups a e lowe . The mos
impo an ac o o looking o a job online is he
s a us o being unemployed, which inc ease he
p obabili y o using he in e ne o his pu pose
by nea ly 30%. The p obabili y dec eases wi h
age. The e ec o possessing digi al skills is
posi i e and signi ican , al hough i is small in
compa ison o he a o e-men ioned ac o s.
Pa adoxically, he coun y wi h mos de eloped
CZ HU PL SK
2015
Olde han 55 50.97 43.40 38.23 45.61
Low le el o educa ion 75.80 49.56 56.18 76.09
Fi s income qua ile 64.36 41.14 71.78 60.46
Summa y DDI 63.71 44.70 55.40 60.72
2019
Olde han 55 56.92 52.69 44.62 47.66
Low le el o educa ion 89.66 56.54 68.27 66.12
Fi s income qua ile 70.22 35.89 69.06 78.92
Summa y DDI 72.27 48.37 60.65 64.24
Sou ce: own
Tab. 6: Pa ial and o e all digi al di ide indices o V4 coun ies in 2015 and 2019
EM_4_2022.indd 172 7.12.2022 10:56:10
179
4, XXV, 2022
In o ma ion Managemen
Dodel, M., S e n, M. J., Ball, C., Huang, K.-T.,
& Khilnani, A. (2020). Digi al inequali ies 2.0:
Legacy inequali ies in he in o ma ion age.
Fi s Monday, 25(7). h ps://doi.o g/10.5210/ m.
25i7.10842
Schee de , A., an Deu sen, A.,
& an Dijk, J. (2017). De e minan s o In e ne
skills, uses and ou comes. A sys ema ic e iew
o he second- and hi d-le el digi al di ide.
Telema ics and In o ma ics, 34(8), 1607–1624.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j. ele.2017.07.007
Szakálné Kanó, I., & Lengyel, I. (2021).
Con e gence Clubs o NUTS3 Regions o he
V4 G oup. E&M Economics and Managemen ,
24(4), 22–38. h ps://doi.o g/10.15240/ ul/001/
2021-4-002
an Deu sen, A. J., & an Dijk, J. A. (2014).
The digi al di ide shi s o di e ences in usage.
New Media & Socie y, 16(3), 507–526. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1177/1461444813487959
an Deu sen, A. J. A. M., & Helspe , E. J.
(2015). The Thi d-Le el Digi al Di ide:
Who Bene i s Mos om Being Online?
In L. Robinson, S. R. Co en, J. Schulz,
T. M. Hale, & A. Williams (Eds.), S udies in Media
and Communica ions (Vol. 10, pp. 29–52).
Eme ald G oup Publishing Limi ed. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1108/S2050-206020150000010002
an Deu sen, A. J. A. M., Helspe , E.,
Eynon, R., & an Dijk, J. (2017). The
Compoundness and Sequen iali y o
Digi al Inequali y. In e na ional Jou nal o
Communica ion, 11(7), 452–473.
an Deu sen, A. J. A. M., & Helspe , E. J.
(2018). Colla e al bene i s o In e ne
use: Explaining he di e se ou comes o
engaging wi h he In e ne . New Media
& Socie y, 20(7), 2333–2351. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1177/1461444817715282
an Deu sen, A. J. A. M., & an Dijk,
J. A. G. M. (2019). The i s -le el digi al di ide
shi s om inequali ies in physical access
o inequali ies in ma e ial access. New
Media & Socie y, 21(2), 354–375. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1177/1461444818797082
an Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). Digi al di ide
esea ch, achie emen s and sho comings.
Poe ics, 34(4–5), 221–235. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1016/j.poe ic.2006.05.004
an Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2012). The E olu ion
o he Digi al Di ide: The Digi al Di ide u ns
o Inequali y o Skills and Usage. In J. Bus,
M. C omp on, M. Hildeb and , & G. Me akides
(Eds.), Digi al Enligh enmen Yea book
2012 (pp. 57–75). IOS P ess. h ps://doi.
o g/10.3233/978-1-61499-057-4-57
an Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2017). The S a e
o Digi al Di ide Theo y. In M. Ragnedda
& G. W. Musche (Eds.), Theo izing Digi al
Di ides (pp. 199–206). Rou ledge. h ps://doi.
o g/10.4324/9781315455334
an Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2020). Closing he
Digi al Di ide: The Role o Digi al Technologies
on Social De elopmen , Well-Being o All and
he App oach o he COVID-19 Pandemic.
In P oceedings o he Con e ence: Vi ual Expe
G oup UN Mee ing on “Socially jus ansi ion
owa ds sus ainable de elopmen : The ole o
digi al echnologies on social de elopmen and
well-being o all”. Uni ed Na ions.
Wa schaue , M. (2002). Reconcep ualizing
he Digi al Di ide. Fi s Monday, 7(7). h ps://
doi.o g/10.5210/ m. 7i7.967
Wi e, J. C., & Mannon, S. E. (2010). The
In e ne and Social Inequali ies. Rou ledge.
h ps://doi.o g/10.4324/9780203861639
Zhao, L., Cao, C., & Li, Y. (2022).
De e minan s o he digi al ou comes di ide in
E-lea ning be ween u al and u ban s uden s:
Empi ical e idence om he COVID-19
pandemic based on capi al heo y. Compu e s
in Human Beha io , 130, 107177. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107177
Zillien, N., & Ha gi ai, E. (2009). Digi al
Dis inc ion: S a us-Speci ic Types o In e ne
Usage. Social Science Qua e ly, 90(2), 274–291.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2009.00617.x
EM_4_2022.indd 179 7.12.2022 10:56:11