Delivering Digital Inclusion

Summary of consultation responses

April 2009

Communities and Local Government

Eland House

Bressenden Place

London

SW1E 5DU

Telephone: 020 7944 4400

Website:

© Crown Copyright, 2009

Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.

This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research,
private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately
and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title
of the publication specified.

Any other use of the contents of this publication would require a copyright licence. Please apply for a Click-Use Licence for core material at or by writing to the Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU

e-mail:

If you require this publication in an alternative format please email

Tel: 0300 123 1124

Fax: 0300 123 1125

Email:

Online via the Communities and Local Government website:

April 2009

Reference: 09NRAD05890

ISBN: 978-1-4098-1384-2

Contents

Page

Chapter 1: Introduction4

Background4

The consultation4

Research objectives and approach5

Chapter 2: Summary6

Introduction6

Perceptions of the consultation6

Perceptions of digital inclusion analysis6

Criticisms and suggested improvements7

Evaluating recommended actions for delivering digital inclusion7

Digital inclusion strategy9

Chapter 3: Understanding Digital Inclusion11

Introduction11

Positive response to the consultation11

The barriers that need to be challenged14

Criticisms16

Chapter 4: Evaluating Digital Inclusion Actions18

Introduction18

Charter for Digital Inclusion19

Digital Inclusion Champion21

Chapter 5: Delivering Digital Inclusion24

Introduction24

Digital inclusion strategy24

Strong leadership25

Case study examples27

Annex31

Chapter One

Introduction

Background

In October 2008, Delivering Digital Inclusion: An Action Plan for Consultation was published. Commissioned by the Rt Hon Paul Murphy, Secretary of State for Wales and Minister for Digital Inclusion, the document provides a framework for achieving greater digital inclusion and for championing the best use of technology to tackle ongoing social inequalities. It sets out both immediate actions and a number of proposals for consultation.

The Action Plan outlines the key issues relating to the use of digital technology and argues why digital exclusion is an increasingly urgent social problem. In summary:

  • Digital technologies pervade every aspect of modern society. However these opportunities are not enjoyed by the whole of the UK population – for example, 17million people in the UK still do not use computers and the Internet and there is a strong correlation between digital exclusion and social exclusion.
  • There are significant and untapped opportunities to use technology better on behalf of citizens and communities. These include improved service planning, design and delivery, particularly to address the needs of disadvantaged groups and individuals.
  • The purpose of the Digital Inclusion Action Plan is to ensure that all citizens, particularly those who are disadvantaged, realise both the direct and indirect benefits of digital technologies

The consultation

The consultation document formed the basis for a consultation with public, private and third sector stakeholders. The consultation period extended from the launch of the document on the 24 October 2008 and closed on 19 January 2009.

Stakeholder events

The consultation process included two stakeholder events with public, private and third sectororganisations to gather their views and perceptions of the analysis outlined in Delivering Digital Inclusion.

Each stakeholder event included more than a hundred delegates and took place in London on 4 December 2008 and Birmingham on 12 December 2008. The delegates represented a diversity of audiences and perspectives, including the Information and Computer Technology Industry, Regional Development Agencies, Local Authorities, Charities working with disadvantaged groups, education specialists and researchers, and organisations whose remit is to deliver digital inclusion initiatives.

Open feedback and responses

[1]An important part of the consultation and feedback process was the written and email responses to the Digital Inclusion Action Plan provided by a diversity of stakeholders from across the public, private and third sectors. In total, 99 consultation responses of varying degrees of detail were received.

Research objectives and approach

In January 2009, Communities and Local Government (CLG) commissioned the Ipsos MORI Social Research Institute to undertake systematic secondary analysis of all stakeholder feedback and responses to the Delivering Digital Inclusion consultation. This report documents the key findings emerging from this analysis.

The core objectives of the research were to:

  • Identify the key findings emerging from the stakeholder responses
  • Understand the general perceptions and responses of the stakeholders to the document
  • Articulate what the stakeholders perceive to be the core barriers to delivering digital inclusion and possible ways of overcoming these
  • Evaluate stakeholders’ responses to the proposals of a Digital Inclusion Charter and concept of a Digital Inclusion Champion
  • Explore possible elements of a future strategy for tackling digital exclusion.

Chapter 2

Summary

Introduction

This chapter summarises some of the key findings from the analysis. The findings are broken down into key points taken from each chapter. The structure of this chapter is as follows:

Chapter structure
Section one: What are the stakeholder perceptions of the consultation?
Section two: To what extent do stakeholders share the same understanding of digital inclusion?
Section three: What are the problems with the consultation and its analysis?
Section four: How do stakeholders evaluate and perceive core digital inclusion actions?
Section five: What overall strategy and principles do stakeholders consider necessary for delivering digital inclusion?

Perceptions of the consultation

  • All the stakeholders support the Delivering Digital Inclusion consultation. Most stakeholders agree with the definition of digital inclusion and the nature of the problem.
  • All consider it important to tackle the digital exclusion of large sections of society, particularly because of the advantages new technology offers people in the 21st century.
  • The consultation is perceived to be an important starting point for debate and policy delivery focused on reducing digital exclusion and its negative social consequences.

Perceptions of digital inclusion analysis

  • The majority of stakeholders concur with the analysis provided on digital inclusion, including the benefits and barriers connected to it. Stakeholders are particularly supportive of the powerful links established between digital exclusion and social exclusion.
  • Emphasis on the broader social impact of digital inclusion is widely embraced by all stakeholders. All stakeholders reject a more narrow emphasis on technological aspects of the agenda.

  • As public services increasingly provide and deliver their services online, the importance of digital inclusion will continue to increase in the future. As a result, there is a concern that those digitally excluded will become further excluded as traditional means of communicating with public services are phased out.
  • Given the importance of the issue, many stakeholders argue that digital inclusion needs to be supported and pushed across government.
  • The key barriers to digital inclusion are differentiated into two types: internal and external barriers.

Internal barriers are barriers connected to individuals and include cost and affordability; poverty of aspiration; fear and anxiety connected to using digital and new technology, and lack of skills and confidence

External barriers are structural barriers connected to lack of access, accessibility and usability.

Criticisms and suggested improvements

  • Stakeholders do raise questions and criticisms regarding the analysis that might need to be developed in the future as demonstrated below:
  • Some think the consultation document offers a superficial and limited account of new technology and its benefits. This is a gap that needs to be filled.
  • Some stakeholders consider the analysis of the benefits of digital inclusion to be quite “pedestrian”, not fully exploring the positive impact of technological innovation on the digital inclusion agenda.
  • Furthermore, some stakeholders do not feel that the consultation goes far enough in its understanding, definition or approach to digital inclusion. Improvements are suggested. It is argued that:

More detailed analysis of the digital exclusion of specific audiences including low income, black and minority ethnic and disabled groups is needed

The consultation has to go beyond analysis. There needs to be greater emphasis on policy and how this will translate into actions to address digital exclusion

More needs to be made of the economic justification and argument in support of digital inclusion. This is mentioned but does not go far enough and needs to if the digital inclusion agenda is to be successful.

Evaluating recommended actions for delivering digital inclusion

Perceptions of a Digital Inclusion Charter

  • The vast majority of stakeholders are supportive of the concept of developing a Charter for Digital Inclusion.
  • Developing a Charter would signify the importance government places on tackling digital exclusion and could be an important first step in raising levels of digital inclusion.
  • The positive reception of the Charter is based on widespread support for the principles themselves.

  • The three principles of the Charter directly address what most consider the key issue: ensuring that the digital and social exclusion of the most disadvantaged groups in society is combated.
  • Furthermore, the Charter could also provide public, private and third sector service providers with a benchmark for success for evaluating digital inclusion in the future.
  • But many stakeholders are concerned that talk of principles of digital inclusion and its proposed benefits will not materialise into concrete actions and policy interventions. This reflects a concern, among many third sector organisations, that interest in delivering digital inclusion is limited to the ‘usual suspects’.
  • The Digital Inclusion Charter needs to clearly lay out the benefits, obligations, and responsibilities associated with digital inclusion. People do not want too much prescription. However, light regulation might be necessary.
  • Some criticise the Charter principles for being too broad to be useful. A more effective Digital Inclusion Charter would be based on specific strategic priorities for improving the digital inclusion outcomes of socially and digitally excluded groups.
  • Attached to this is the criticism that the Charter needs to be communicated in a citizen-focused and clear language that is understandable by those groups of people specifically targeted.
  • The related point made is that the Charter needs to be more “people focused” not “government focused”. It needs to be driven by people and not by government. This means engagement with those who are digitally excluded, and cross-sector engagement with the public, private and third sectors.

Perceptions of the Digital Inclusion Champion

  • The majority of stakeholders support the proposal for introducing a Digital Inclusion Champion to establish and drive cross-sector strategy for delivering digital inclusion.
  • The Digital Inclusion Champion is needed as a central driving force ensuring that digital inclusion becomes embedded across government.
  • The analysis identified different characteristics of what the role of the Digital Inclusion Champion should be. But most think the key role for any Champion would be to represent and advocate the interests of those who are digitally excluded and to promote digital inclusion.
  • Many like the concept but think a new name is required. Emphasis on the Digital Inclusion Champion being the “voice of the excluded” led some stakeholders to suggest an alternative name for a Digital Inclusion Champion. One prominent suggestion was “Champion for the Digitally Excluded”.
  • The Digital Inclusion Champion would need to be a prominent public figure. It is essential that the individual brings gravitas to the role.
  • The figure must have the power and authority to enforce any changes that are necessary to ensure digital inclusion of the most vulnerable groups is delivered. To do this, the individual must be someone who has direct access to ministers and other key policy decision-makers.

  • The Digital Inclusion Champion would need to have strong lobbying and media skills to ensure digital inclusion receives widespread attention, and should be effective at working with ministers and civil servants across Whitehall.
  • Any Digital Inclusion Champion (be it regional or national) needs to have some experience and expertise in the areas of (new) technology and social policy surrounding social exclusion. This is necessary in order to provide an authoritative voice on the issue of digital inclusion.
  • Many stakeholders think finding a Digital Inclusion Champion with all these attributes would be difficult.
  • If the role of a Digital Inclusion Champion is to be successful it must be independent of government. The Digital Inclusion Champion needs to be in a position to challenge the government and openly criticise public and private institutions where they feel it appropriate.
  • Stakeholders want more detail on how the role of the Digital Inclusion Champion can bring about change. At present, it is felt that there is a lack of detail or that the proposals are too generic in nature.
  • A popular suggestion was to have a network of Regional Digital Inclusion Champions spread across England who would be working under a unifying figure of National Digital Inclusion Champion. They would be responsible for the ‘groundwork’ and ensuring effective delivery of digital inclusion at a local level.
  • Regional Digital Inclusion Champions would report to a UK Digital Inclusion Champion responsible for organising a strategic approach, working across government departments, and ensuring cooperation from the public, private and third sectors.
  • Another suggestion is to split the role of the Digital Inclusion Champion. This would mean having a well-known, popular and media-savvy Champion responsible for raising awareness of digital inclusion while a second Champion would have more of an executive role, deciding what changes are needed and working towards implementing them.
  • There was a distinct shortage of names suggested. This reflects the difficulty in finding someone who possesses the ideal blend of experience and attributes stakeholders argue a Digital Inclusion Champion should have.

Digital inclusion strategy

  • The analysis has highlighted a number of key principles central to any successful digital inclusion strategy.
  • It is vital that government places the voices of local people at the heart of its digital inclusion strategy. This agenda needs to remain social in character, not technological. This requires that the strategy is explicitly established to meet the needs of citizens and communities.
  • The successful delivery of the digital inclusion agenda will depend on strong leadership from the Minister for Digital Inclusion, the Digital Inclusion Champion and others (e.g. Digital Mentors) with the task of directing and implementing policy and interventions.

  • Effective strategy requires a national approach. A national strategy must be structured, well organised, ensuring nationwide coverage. But the strategy should not be a ‘one size fits all’ approach.
  • The strategy needs to be flexible and closely tailored to the different needs of communities and individuals. This national approach should thus seek to build on existing local arrangements and expand on the most successful ones, indeed applying these to other areas where appropriate.
  • The digital inclusion strategy needs benchmarking and measurable outcomes with aclear time frame for delivery. These should be established through sustained engagement and dialogue with not only industry and service providers, but consumers and service users themselves.
  • The digital inclusion strategy needs to have long term and secure funding. Without this it will be impossible for the digital inclusion agenda to be successful.
  • The digital inclusion strategy will require strategic planning and targeted allocation of funds to the “right areas” to ensure that the most digitally and socially excluded groups and individuals are empowered. This is related to having Regional Digital Inclusion Champions and the emphasis on local delivery.

Chapter 3

Understanding Digital Inclusion

Introduction

This section of the report focuses on three key objectives.

Objective one
First, an outline overview of stakeholder responses to the Delivering Digital Inclusion Action Plan and the analysis is provided. This includes commentary on the key themes of consensus identified.
Objective two
Second, the stakeholder response and evaluation of the understanding of the digital inclusion agenda is given. The chapter looks at whether there is a general consensus regarding the linking of digital inclusion specifically as a driver for social justice and inclusion and looks at stakeholder perception of the key barriers connected to digital inclusion more broadly.
Objective three
Third, we look at the criticisms made of the consultation document’s understanding of digital inclusion and suggestions for improving its understanding and focus.

Positive response to the consultation

All the stakeholders support the Delivering DigitalInclusion consultation. Many expressed their gratitude at being consulted on such an important and far reaching issue and considered the consultation itself to be important.

“Clearly a very good idea. The digital inclusion of older people is a key issue and hopefully this will address that”

“17 million people not even using the Internet. That is awful. Something needs to bedone”

One of the key findings from the analysis is that the vast majority of stakeholders concur with the analysis provided of digital inclusion, including the benefits and barriers connected to it.

“The analysis of the benefits and barriers looks spot on to me. They are on the right trackhere”

“We agree with the comment in the paper that to be most successful “engagement programmes and applications need to focus on their benefits rather than the ICT itself. Focus must lie on specific targeted benefits”

Stakeholders are particularly supportive of the powerful links established between digital and social exclusion. The argument that 75 per cent of those who are digitally excluded are also socially excluded is perceived to be a compelling argument for focusing on the digital inclusion of those currently not taking advantage of the benefits of new technology and digital progress.