Abstract

The quantitative and qualitative data reported complement each other nicely. They indicate that quantitative information of the relationships between social and digital exclusion can be understood more completely when contextualized by qualitative data. Statistics showed differences between continents and countries, with Chile leading in Latin America but lagging behind the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom, while leading in Europe, lagged behind other Northern European countries. The quantitative data also showed that digital divides cannot be explained by general levels of diffusion in different countries. Looking more in-depth at Chile and the United Kingdom for reasons for disengagement from ICT and social support networks, it appeared that while reasons differed significantly between the two countries, the patterns of social exclusion in relation to proxy use were very similar. Proxy use was more prevalent in Chile than in the United Kingdom, which corresponds to the finding that major reasons for disengagement were access and skill issues, as well as Chile’s lower level of socioeconomic development. On the other hand, in the United Kingdom lack of interest and motivation were more important, which corresponds to lower levels of proxy use. Based on the general statistical information, we can conclude that many digital divides in the traditional sense continue to exist. Most, if not all, countries show strong gaps in ICT use between generations and educational levels. Countries with stronger gender differences in their culture see this reflected in the gaps in access and engagement with the Internet by gender. The data further showed that higher diffusion of Internet access points does not imply lower levels of digital exclusion. However, in viewing digital exclusion in terms of levels of disengagement and not just access, it seems that a higher level of ICT integration in society in general, not just technically, relates to greater digital inequalities among the gender, generation, and educational groups mentioned. This indicates that there is something about the general social environment that is important to digital inclusion and to the ways in which ICT is experienced by people from different groups. A model such as the one proposed by Livingstone and Helsper might help researchers and policy makers think about the different areas in peoples’ everyday lives that exert pressures on people to engage or disengage from ICT, going beyond simple economic models of digital exclusion.