DIGITALIZATION OF SPHERES OF URBAN LIFE: INEQUALITY IN DISTRICTS OF SAINT-PETERSBURG
|
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION 7
CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL AND LEGISLATIVE FOUNDATION OF DIGITALIZATION AND DIGITAL INEQUALITY 10
1.1 Analysis of the literature sources in the field of digitalization, digital divide, and digital
inequality 10
1.2 Analysis of the federal and regional legislation of digital transformation 22
CHAPTER 2. ANALYSIS OF THE EMPIRICAL DATA OF DIGITALIZATION OF
SPHERES OF URBAN LIFE IN DISTRICTS OF SAINT-PETERSBURG 29
2.1 Descriptive statistics of socio-economic characteristics of districts of St. Petersburg 29
2.2 Analysis of the secondary open data of distribution of digital goods and usage of online services
in districts of Saint-Petersburg 32
2.3 Analysis of the survey results of digital inequality between St. Petersburg citizens 42
2.4 Regression analysis of survey results of digital inequality among St. Petersburg citizens... .52
CHAPTER 3. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND DEVELOPING RECOMMENDATIONS
TO OVERCOME DIGITAL INEQUALITY 57
3.1 Discussion the results of digital inequality in St. Petersburg 57
3.2 Recommendations of overcoming digital inequality in St. Petersburg 58
CONCLUSION 62
References 64
Appendix 1.
The composition of indicators characterizing the implementation of the target indicator “achieving digital maturity of key sectors of the economy and social sphere, including healthcare and education, as well as public administration for the subject of the Russian Federation” 70
Appendix 2. Questionnaire 75
INTRODUCTION 7
CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL AND LEGISLATIVE FOUNDATION OF DIGITALIZATION AND DIGITAL INEQUALITY 10
1.1 Analysis of the literature sources in the field of digitalization, digital divide, and digital
inequality 10
1.2 Analysis of the federal and regional legislation of digital transformation 22
CHAPTER 2. ANALYSIS OF THE EMPIRICAL DATA OF DIGITALIZATION OF
SPHERES OF URBAN LIFE IN DISTRICTS OF SAINT-PETERSBURG 29
2.1 Descriptive statistics of socio-economic characteristics of districts of St. Petersburg 29
2.2 Analysis of the secondary open data of distribution of digital goods and usage of online services
in districts of Saint-Petersburg 32
2.3 Analysis of the survey results of digital inequality between St. Petersburg citizens 42
2.4 Regression analysis of survey results of digital inequality among St. Petersburg citizens... .52
CHAPTER 3. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS AND DEVELOPING RECOMMENDATIONS
TO OVERCOME DIGITAL INEQUALITY 57
3.1 Discussion the results of digital inequality in St. Petersburg 57
3.2 Recommendations of overcoming digital inequality in St. Petersburg 58
CONCLUSION 62
References 64
Appendix 1.
The composition of indicators characterizing the implementation of the target indicator “achieving digital maturity of key sectors of the economy and social sphere, including healthcare and education, as well as public administration for the subject of the Russian Federation” 70
Appendix 2. Questionnaire 75
In the conditions of active introduction of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in Russia digital transformation is being implemented. It is represented in converting of public services into digital platforms in different spheres of urban life: healthcare, education, urban environment, transport, public administration. But technologies not only make daily life easier saving spent time and money, but also form obstacles.
So, in St. Petersburg the mandatory receipt of QR-codes of vaccine in digital form has led to impossibility for adult people, who didn’t have accounts in “Gosuslugi”, to get digital QR-code. As the result, citizens older 60 years had the possibility to get QR-codes in traditional way (in paper form). Another example is transport reform 2022. One of the goals of reform is transition to cashless payment. But citizens also faced problems due to system failures of the validators, which are not able to apply online payment by cards or sometimes citizens do not have the cards, only cash, thus they cannot pay. Also, citizens note the impossibility to make online doctor’s appointments due to system failures in digital platform of healthcare.
The problem of digitalization is represented by both sides: supply side is not able to adopt digital infrastructure and information systems, and demand side (users) is not able to be adopted to digital environment due to different factors.
The studies show that the level of broadband penetration in St. Petersburg - 87,4% (EMISS, 2020) and 89,5% active users of Internet (EMISS, 2020). There are some differences in Internet use. The part of residents isn’t ready to use technologies. 63% didn’t trust the communication with government via official accounts on social networks. And 42% preferred to contact the authorities in person and 22% preferred contact online (Vidiasova L., Tensina I. 2020).
In literature it was proved that digitalization generates and increases socio-economic inequality. In the context of digitalization, the terms “digital divide” and “digital inequality” were arisen. Digital divide is about differences in access to Internet, digital inequality - the differences in Internet use due to socio-economic features of population (education, gender, age, digital skills, average wage, geographical location) and represents socio-economic inequality of society.
As for socio-economic inequality in St. Petersburg, it is represented in gender and age composition, allocation of income, housing development, investments in districts of St. Petersburg.
Thus, because of digitalization increases inequality, and at the same time the inequality is observed in St. Petersburg between administrative unites (18 districts). The problem of implementation the digitalization policy in the context of St. Petersburg districts under the influence of inequality factors becomes actual.
Research questions:
1) Whether there is digital inequality between population of districts of St. Petersburg? 2) What are the reasons of digital inequality?
Goal: develop recommendations of digital inequality overcoming for regional authorities of St. Petersburg.
Objectives:
1. Analysis of the literature sources in the field of digitalization, digital divide, and digital inequality.
2. Analysis of the federal and regional legislation in the field of digital transformation.
3. Analysis of the secondary data of digital equipment distribution and digital services usage by citizens in St. Petersburg districts.
4. Analysis of survey results.
5. Construct appropriate regression model and run tests hypotheses.
Object - digitalization of spheres of urban life in districts of Saint-Petersburg.
Subject - digital inequality in districts of Saint-Petersburg.
Methodology
This dissertation follows both qualitative and quantitative methods. The following methods were used: legislation analysis, secondary data analysis, survey, regression analysis.
As for the methodology, this study originates from the previous research of author (since 2018) devoted to inequality in districts of St. Petersburg, unequal urban development and unequal distribution of social benefits in districts of St. Petersburg.
Thus, theoretical and methodological base of dissertation is based on scientific papers of such scholars as P. Bourdieu, M. Castells, Jan Van Dijk, DiMaggio and Hargittai, etc.
P. Bourdieu showed the existence of the effects of “club” and “ghetto”. The dominant class, having the access to social benefits restricts the possibilities of benefits possession for members of another class. Thus, those who have not gained access to this club are in the ghetto, where they cannot get out, because the norms in society, existing for reasons of established economic relations on the distribution of benefits, set the boundaries of their social practices (Bourdieu, 2007).
Since the society is actively developing, technologies are being introduced, it is appropriate to consider the processes of access to benefits in society from the point of view of the formation of information society. Technologies have become new social benefits. M. Castells was mainly concerned with the access of these benefits and provided the following explanation.....
So, in St. Petersburg the mandatory receipt of QR-codes of vaccine in digital form has led to impossibility for adult people, who didn’t have accounts in “Gosuslugi”, to get digital QR-code. As the result, citizens older 60 years had the possibility to get QR-codes in traditional way (in paper form). Another example is transport reform 2022. One of the goals of reform is transition to cashless payment. But citizens also faced problems due to system failures of the validators, which are not able to apply online payment by cards or sometimes citizens do not have the cards, only cash, thus they cannot pay. Also, citizens note the impossibility to make online doctor’s appointments due to system failures in digital platform of healthcare.
The problem of digitalization is represented by both sides: supply side is not able to adopt digital infrastructure and information systems, and demand side (users) is not able to be adopted to digital environment due to different factors.
The studies show that the level of broadband penetration in St. Petersburg - 87,4% (EMISS, 2020) and 89,5% active users of Internet (EMISS, 2020). There are some differences in Internet use. The part of residents isn’t ready to use technologies. 63% didn’t trust the communication with government via official accounts on social networks. And 42% preferred to contact the authorities in person and 22% preferred contact online (Vidiasova L., Tensina I. 2020).
In literature it was proved that digitalization generates and increases socio-economic inequality. In the context of digitalization, the terms “digital divide” and “digital inequality” were arisen. Digital divide is about differences in access to Internet, digital inequality - the differences in Internet use due to socio-economic features of population (education, gender, age, digital skills, average wage, geographical location) and represents socio-economic inequality of society.
As for socio-economic inequality in St. Petersburg, it is represented in gender and age composition, allocation of income, housing development, investments in districts of St. Petersburg.
Thus, because of digitalization increases inequality, and at the same time the inequality is observed in St. Petersburg between administrative unites (18 districts). The problem of implementation the digitalization policy in the context of St. Petersburg districts under the influence of inequality factors becomes actual.
Research questions:
1) Whether there is digital inequality between population of districts of St. Petersburg? 2) What are the reasons of digital inequality?
Goal: develop recommendations of digital inequality overcoming for regional authorities of St. Petersburg.
Objectives:
1. Analysis of the literature sources in the field of digitalization, digital divide, and digital inequality.
2. Analysis of the federal and regional legislation in the field of digital transformation.
3. Analysis of the secondary data of digital equipment distribution and digital services usage by citizens in St. Petersburg districts.
4. Analysis of survey results.
5. Construct appropriate regression model and run tests hypotheses.
Object - digitalization of spheres of urban life in districts of Saint-Petersburg.
Subject - digital inequality in districts of Saint-Petersburg.
Methodology
This dissertation follows both qualitative and quantitative methods. The following methods were used: legislation analysis, secondary data analysis, survey, regression analysis.
As for the methodology, this study originates from the previous research of author (since 2018) devoted to inequality in districts of St. Petersburg, unequal urban development and unequal distribution of social benefits in districts of St. Petersburg.
Thus, theoretical and methodological base of dissertation is based on scientific papers of such scholars as P. Bourdieu, M. Castells, Jan Van Dijk, DiMaggio and Hargittai, etc.
P. Bourdieu showed the existence of the effects of “club” and “ghetto”. The dominant class, having the access to social benefits restricts the possibilities of benefits possession for members of another class. Thus, those who have not gained access to this club are in the ghetto, where they cannot get out, because the norms in society, existing for reasons of established economic relations on the distribution of benefits, set the boundaries of their social practices (Bourdieu, 2007).
Since the society is actively developing, technologies are being introduced, it is appropriate to consider the processes of access to benefits in society from the point of view of the formation of information society. Technologies have become new social benefits. M. Castells was mainly concerned with the access of these benefits and provided the following explanation.....
Based on the study, it is possible to answer the research questions: 1) there is digital inequality among population of districts of St. Petersburg; 2) the main factors are age (adult population) and geographic location (districts of St. Petersburg with low level of income, where live population) and income.
Thus, the main conclusions and proposals were formulated.
Digitalization of urban environment is represented in the smart city concept, which supposes availability of digital infrastructure and online services in all spheres of urban life. But with the technologies introduction not all people have the possibility to use it due to unequal distribution of digital benefits, that depend on relations in society. It is proved that there is digital inequality, that is represented by socio-economic inequality in society. Such features as gender, age, occupation, education, geographic location influence on levels of digital divide: access, skills, trust, and benefits - digital inequality.
In St. Petersburg in the context of digital transformation, introduction technologies, online services the problems of digital inequality and policies of overcoming digital inequality are represented in legislation. In general, the studied spheres of urban life (healthcare, education, public administration, urban environment) have high level of digitalization and citizens use these online services. But it is observed unequal distribution physical digital infrastructure among districts and in several districts citizens less use online services. The digitalization policy is realized in regional projects and implemented at the regional and local level.
As for the local level, according to the data, districts can be divided into 2 parts: 1) districts with average wage lower than average wage in St. Petersburg (<124 thousands ₽): Kronshtadtskiy (85 thousand ₽), Krasnoselskiy (85 thousand ₽), Kolpinskiy (91 thousand ₽), Nevskiy (96 thousand ₽), Pushkinskiy (98 thousands₽), Petrodvorsoviy (98 thousands₽), Kirovskiy (99 thousands₽), Frunzenskiy (100 thousands₽), Krasnogvardeiskiy (102 thousands₽), Kalininskiy (105 thousands₽), Kirovskiy (100 thousands₽), Viborgskiy (107 thousands₽); 2) districts with higher average wage than average wage in St. Petersburg: Petrogradskiy (170 thousands₽), Admiralteiskiy (147 thousands₽), Centralniy (146 thousands₽), Vasileostrovskiy (137 thousands₽), Moskovskiy (135 thousands₽), Kurortniy (134 thousands₽), Primorskiy (133 thousands₽).
Thus, the districts (Admiralteiskiy, Petrogradskiy, Vasileostrovskity) where there is less labour force (and total population) are more welfare due to high average wage. As a result, segregation zones are formed, where wealthy population has access to social benefits, including technologies.
The survey has shown, that in St. Petersburg people older 55 years who live in districts with low average wage have obstacles:
1) 100% of those who do not have Internet access are respondents older 55 years and live in district with socio-economic disadvantage (Nevskiy, Vyborgskiy, Kurortniy, Kirovskiy, Krasnoselskiy).
2) 100% of those who have never heard about “gosuslugi” are older 72 years and live Petrgradskiy and Nevskiy districts.
3) 52% of respondents who do not have registration are older 55 years. 77% of them live in districts with low average wage (Kolpinskiy, Kirovskiy, Kurortniy, Nevskiy).
4) 74% of respondents with low level of digital skills live in districts with low average wage and 78% of them are older 55.
5) 76% of respondents who do not trust, live in districts with low average wage. 54% of those who do not trust are older 55 years.
6) 78% of those who do not recognize the benefit live in districts with socio-economic disadvantage. 57% of them are older 55 years.
Thus, the most vulnerable group to technologies is older 55 years old and live in districts with low average wage.
As a result, there were identified such weaknesses:
Weakness 1. Inconsistency of public authorities and state programs.
Weakness 2. Unavailable reliable official information.
Weakness 3. The differences in distribution of digital infrastructure and usage digital services in districts of St. Petersburg.
Weakness 4. Citizens older 55 years old who live in districts with low average wage have problems with access to Internet, awareness, usage of online public services and skills.
And according to these problems, it was proposed the following decisions:
1. Creation of unified information statistical system (cloud storage), which will include an assessment of the digitalization of the urban environment at the district level, containing indicators of the supply side, they exist in regional projects, as well as demand sides.
2. Creation of information system with database in Home department of St. Petersburg.
3. Providing socio-economic analysis in districts of St. Petersburg.
4. Ensuring policy of adaptation of the older generation to the digital environment.
But practice has shown that the forced transition to digital interaction with residents is not effective, since part of the population is not ready. It is necessary to adapt the population to new technologies.
Moreover, in conditions when the Russian information technology market depends on foreign production, and supplies are limited, which led to failures on the websites of state authorities and the inability to make online transactions by the population, and as a result, the growth of distrust, it is necessary to leave alternative (traditional forms) interactions. In addition, there are people among the older generation who do not want to use the Internet and technologies, moreover, experienced users may be exposed to fraud regarding electronic devices and personal data, as a result, they will temporarily be unable to use electronic devices. As a result, a person is cut off from city life. However, digitalization should create comfort for a person both in everyday life and in unforeseen situations, and not create additional barriere.
Thus, the main conclusions and proposals were formulated.
Digitalization of urban environment is represented in the smart city concept, which supposes availability of digital infrastructure and online services in all spheres of urban life. But with the technologies introduction not all people have the possibility to use it due to unequal distribution of digital benefits, that depend on relations in society. It is proved that there is digital inequality, that is represented by socio-economic inequality in society. Such features as gender, age, occupation, education, geographic location influence on levels of digital divide: access, skills, trust, and benefits - digital inequality.
In St. Petersburg in the context of digital transformation, introduction technologies, online services the problems of digital inequality and policies of overcoming digital inequality are represented in legislation. In general, the studied spheres of urban life (healthcare, education, public administration, urban environment) have high level of digitalization and citizens use these online services. But it is observed unequal distribution physical digital infrastructure among districts and in several districts citizens less use online services. The digitalization policy is realized in regional projects and implemented at the regional and local level.
As for the local level, according to the data, districts can be divided into 2 parts: 1) districts with average wage lower than average wage in St. Petersburg (<124 thousands ₽): Kronshtadtskiy (85 thousand ₽), Krasnoselskiy (85 thousand ₽), Kolpinskiy (91 thousand ₽), Nevskiy (96 thousand ₽), Pushkinskiy (98 thousands₽), Petrodvorsoviy (98 thousands₽), Kirovskiy (99 thousands₽), Frunzenskiy (100 thousands₽), Krasnogvardeiskiy (102 thousands₽), Kalininskiy (105 thousands₽), Kirovskiy (100 thousands₽), Viborgskiy (107 thousands₽); 2) districts with higher average wage than average wage in St. Petersburg: Petrogradskiy (170 thousands₽), Admiralteiskiy (147 thousands₽), Centralniy (146 thousands₽), Vasileostrovskiy (137 thousands₽), Moskovskiy (135 thousands₽), Kurortniy (134 thousands₽), Primorskiy (133 thousands₽).
Thus, the districts (Admiralteiskiy, Petrogradskiy, Vasileostrovskity) where there is less labour force (and total population) are more welfare due to high average wage. As a result, segregation zones are formed, where wealthy population has access to social benefits, including technologies.
The survey has shown, that in St. Petersburg people older 55 years who live in districts with low average wage have obstacles:
1) 100% of those who do not have Internet access are respondents older 55 years and live in district with socio-economic disadvantage (Nevskiy, Vyborgskiy, Kurortniy, Kirovskiy, Krasnoselskiy).
2) 100% of those who have never heard about “gosuslugi” are older 72 years and live Petrgradskiy and Nevskiy districts.
3) 52% of respondents who do not have registration are older 55 years. 77% of them live in districts with low average wage (Kolpinskiy, Kirovskiy, Kurortniy, Nevskiy).
4) 74% of respondents with low level of digital skills live in districts with low average wage and 78% of them are older 55.
5) 76% of respondents who do not trust, live in districts with low average wage. 54% of those who do not trust are older 55 years.
6) 78% of those who do not recognize the benefit live in districts with socio-economic disadvantage. 57% of them are older 55 years.
Thus, the most vulnerable group to technologies is older 55 years old and live in districts with low average wage.
As a result, there were identified such weaknesses:
Weakness 1. Inconsistency of public authorities and state programs.
Weakness 2. Unavailable reliable official information.
Weakness 3. The differences in distribution of digital infrastructure and usage digital services in districts of St. Petersburg.
Weakness 4. Citizens older 55 years old who live in districts with low average wage have problems with access to Internet, awareness, usage of online public services and skills.
And according to these problems, it was proposed the following decisions:
1. Creation of unified information statistical system (cloud storage), which will include an assessment of the digitalization of the urban environment at the district level, containing indicators of the supply side, they exist in regional projects, as well as demand sides.
2. Creation of information system with database in Home department of St. Petersburg.
3. Providing socio-economic analysis in districts of St. Petersburg.
4. Ensuring policy of adaptation of the older generation to the digital environment.
But practice has shown that the forced transition to digital interaction with residents is not effective, since part of the population is not ready. It is necessary to adapt the population to new technologies.
Moreover, in conditions when the Russian information technology market depends on foreign production, and supplies are limited, which led to failures on the websites of state authorities and the inability to make online transactions by the population, and as a result, the growth of distrust, it is necessary to leave alternative (traditional forms) interactions. In addition, there are people among the older generation who do not want to use the Internet and technologies, moreover, experienced users may be exposed to fraud regarding electronic devices and personal data, as a result, they will temporarily be unable to use electronic devices. As a result, a person is cut off from city life. However, digitalization should create comfort for a person both in everyday life and in unforeseen situations, and not create additional barriere.
