Here in the UK the ‘new’ devices of smartphones, tablet pcs and ipads are very evident. Just take a train, and you will see at least half the people on it are staring at a screen. While we may think they are working on their emails, some of them are just playing games or watching films – nevertheless digital information on the move is becoming even easier.
So is this change in device use becoming common in the countries where we work?
Our recent study (yet to be officially launched and published), suggests that for the policy environment these devices are changing access to information. When asking 368 policy actors in six countries (Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Kenya, Nepal) what devices they have access to we get the responses as shown in the figure below.
 |
| Emerging findings from Impact and Learning Team (IDS) research, full report will be available on www.ids.ac.uk |
The figure illustrates that 90% of respondents have a computer desktop either at home or the office, 88% have a laptop for use in either the office or home. However what becomes interesting is their growing use of Tablet computers. Tablet use among policy makers in the South is at 12%.
So how does this compare with the UK scene? While we don’t have the UK figures (and if anyone has please add as a comment), the Pew internet survey for the USA (June 2011) suggests that use of Tablets across the USA has risen to 8% over the last 12 months. This means average use among policy actors in the South is slightly higher at 12%. Perhaps interestingly but unsurprisingly, desktop and laptop use among policy actors is considerably higher than the USA general public average which stands at 58% and 52% respectively.
Indeed in September 2011, India's Economic Times carried a story announcing that the computer allowance for MPs had been raised from Rs 150,000 to Rs 200,000. The extra Rs50,000 was specifically to obtain a tablet device such as an ipad or Samsung Galaxy powered by Android. “Owning a tablet is mandatory for all MPs, officials said.” The article states that “over 125 members from the total 245 have already bought the tablets”.
And how about Smartphones? The graph shows that 40% of respondents had smartphones. Of these 8% had iphones, 12% Blackberries and 31% were ‘other’ smartphones – where smartphone meant they got their email over the phone and could surf the internet.
What does this increased use of mobile technology mean for Knowledge Intermediaries?
The information ecosystem is changing. Policy actors do indeed have access to the latest technology, and the proportion of early adopters among the policy actor subset is approximately the same as the averages of the general public in the USA. While much intermediary work is digital, the debate continues as to whether it is the best pathway for getting research in front of the key people.
Our forthcoming report explores the behaviour of policy actors, but in terms of potential digital access, the data confirms that, increasingly, policy actors have access to this medium, and we should not miss the opportunity to develop "apps" which engages with these early adopters. A real-time example of the potential in this is the IDS Knowledge Services Open API. It allows developers to create apps for Android-driven Tablets and smartphones which could tap into the BRIDGE and Eldis research databases containing over 32, 000 summaries and documents.
Thanks for this Simon. This is a question I have had for quite some time.
ReplyDeleteI have certainly noticed more and more ipad, bbs and iphones on my visits to Peru (also the south). But I am not too surprised since we had access to the internet in Lima from the early-mid 90s and mobile phones were became quite popular also around the same time.
Of course Latin America is not the subject of this research but my point is that it is mistaken to think that the south is always catching up. Yes, some (the majority sometimes) of the population is often left behind but politicians and poicymakers (and the political and economic elites in general) are usually early adopters of technologies.
By the same token I would not really compare India with Nepal. Having an iphone in either country would not be the same. The former is likely to be able to enjoy more information and services that the latter.
I am therefore not surprised that you find more users of tablets or smartphones in Africa or Asia. But a few questions arise:
1) Is this a trend? how fast is it growing? How far back can you track this?
2) How are these devises used? One thing is to buy the latest phone or tablet but another is to use it to access 'work related' information. What are these devises used for?
3) How many UK or US politician use apps developed for them? What is the evidence that this is working differently in the UK, for instance? (is twitter not enough?)
A point of method: Do the 368 respondents comprise a sufficiently large sample? Are they members of parliament (politicians), bureaucrats (policymakers), local authorities, opinion makers, etc? How many responded per country? Do you have a representative sample of each in each country?
These 368 cannot be representative of 'the south' as you seem to suggest. It would, however, be interesting (and possible) to know more about their profile. Who are the, for instance, 12% who use tablets? Do they share common socio-economic characteristics?
I assume the full study provides comparisons between countries? But would the samples be large enough to be representative of 'policy actors'?
In reply to Enrique
DeleteThanks for your comments. Yes indeed “the political and economic elites in general are usually early adopters of technologies.”
To your questions
1) Is this a trend? how fast is it growing? How far back can you track this?
Short answer is, we don’t know. The study was a one off relatively rapid data collection, and I have found no other equivalent studies – of the policy actors. There is data from RIA, LirneAsia, DIRSI, Gamos, among others on ICT use by the general population in these countries and particularly the use of phones and the cost of standardised baskets. However, almost by definition they avoid the elites not wishing to skew their data. I would love to see our study repeated in the same countries in a couple of years time – you may say that 2 years is a long time in the life of ICT, but actually I am thinking about the utility of the data – would we be changing our knowledge strategies if we knew that takeup of tablets was a few percentage higher than we thought? I think it has been important to gather the data this time round to evidence that elites are early adopters, but i wonder about the value of a repeat too soon. Of course that doesn’t preclude Latin America – we were not able to include it so if you want to try it in Peru....
One thought though about long term trends – IF as this data suggests, the elite follow the global trends, then we (as knowledge intermediaries and seeking to maximise our impact) can consider the change in USA or Europe and take it as a benchmark of what is most likely happening among that elite.
2) How are these devices used? One thing is to buy the latest phone or tablet but another is to use it to access 'work related' information. What are these devices used for?
This was (for me) one of the most interesting aspects of the study. We asked specific questions about use, the frequency, the type of information accessed, etc. Of the people who have smartphones, the majority know how to use them and how to do the fancier stuff (upload video, download a podcast, operate different types of instant messaging). Their ability to use surprised me. From experience we hypothesised that the role of children might be important, and sure enough – those who let their children play with their phone have a significantly greater understanding of the fancier functions (than those of similar age who don’t let their children play – caveat – those who are younger (and therefore often do not have children) have a greater understanding of functions.
Work related information – yes we asked about this – although not solely to smartphone users. We have a wide set of data that talks about what people are looking for and the channels they use (including the traditional media).
More to come - replies are limited in size!
Second half of reply to Enrique
Delete3) How many UK or US politician use apps developed for them? What is the evidence that this is working differently in the UK, for instance? (is twitter not enough?)
Good question – and I have no idea. I believe Louise Shaxon (ODI) has strong experience in the UK setting and maybe she might jump in on this public discussion? I think it would be worth investigating.
A point on method: Do the 368 respondents comprise a sufficiently large sample? Are they members of parliament (politicians), bureaucrats (policymakers), local authorities, opinion makers, etc? How many responded per country? Do you have a representative sample of each in each country?
Hmmm, Sampling. A sticky subject. What is the universe of ‘policy actors’? Where would you draw the boundary? What I can say is that I think the power of the sample is compelling, and by the time we have analysed the data for the full 700 respondents then we could be assured it is ‘good enough’ evidence for decision makng. Certainly I was with an organisation recently and they were arguing about what access Nepalese policy actors had, and one member was making the case that radio was the best option for communicating with the elite, basing their argument on anecdote and their visits. In the room others were speculating that ‘even in Nepal’ the elite had access to technology. To be shown data from 100 Nepalese policy actors swung the argument convincingly.
Yes it included politicians, bureaucrats, local authorities. It also included CEOs of NGOs, Researchers in Universities, CEO of traditional media and Knowledge Intermediaries – so I think we can throw in some ‘opinion makers’. They were all very senior people and thats why the collection of the data took so long – its not easy to get a face to face with senior people and all credit to our partners for achieving it. We included questions on whether they would classify themselves as ‘policy makers’, researcher and knowledge broker –they did with many claiming to be more than one ‘type’. We also asked an open question about an example of how they influenced policy, or what they researched. That has allowed us to generate a strength of policy influence – and the next iteration of the data will see if that effects technology use.
Without boring people with tables, its approximately equal numbers across the countries – we did the study in stages, 20 first, then assess the answers to make sure its worthwhile, then another 60, then a final 20 after analysis. There are actually 6 countries involved, Kenya, Bangladesh, Nepal, India, Ethiopia and Ghana, with a sample of 100 in each with 200 in India. The 368 was for four countries only Nepal, India, Ethiopia and Ghana.
Hope that answers. More on this study to come, but ask again if this answer it raises more questions.
Simon
The rise of tablet PCs has brought equal advantages and disadvantages in our stream of information. For one, it has contributed largely to the digital information world, but the downside is that, these gadgets are also somewhat becoming obstacles in receiving information. Another one is that, it offers better access to the online world, but with that unlimited access, comes the abusive use of online authority.
ReplyDelete