A multiple indicator model for panel data: An application to ICT area-level variation

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may AbstractConsider the case in which we have data from repeated surveys covering several geographic areas, and our goal is to characterize these areas on a latent trait that underlies multiple indicators. This characterization occurs, for example, in surveys of information and communication technologies (ICT) conducted by statistical agencies, the objective of which is to assess the level of ICT in each area and its variation over time. It is often of interest to evaluate the impact of area-specific covariates on the ICT level of the area. This paper develops a methodology based on structural equations models (SEMs) that allows not only the ability to estimate the level of the latent trait in each of the areas (building an ICT index) but also to assess the variation of this index in time, as well as its association with the areaspecific covariates. The methodology is illustrated using the ICT annual survey data collected in the Spanish region of Catalonia for the years 2008 to 2011.

Adaptation, compensation and disengagement: how ICT competences influence nascent entrepreneurs' strategies in a global crisis environment

“…The items composing this variable assess the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on nascent entrepreneurs' business models, demand for products and services and performance. Following Ventura and Satorra (2015), we adapted the evaluations provided to a Likert scale.…”

A theoretical framework to evaluate ICT disparities and digital divides: Challenges and implications for e-government development

“…There are various studies that examine the relationship between ICT disparities and several socioeconomic characteristics at the cross-country, regional, and the individual level, such as Al-Mutawkkil et al (2009), Chang et al (2015); Cruz-Jesus et al (2012), Cruz-Jesus et al (2017Cruz-Jesus et al (2018);Elena-Bucea et al (2020); Helbig et al, 2009b;Vicente and Lopez (2011), Ventura and Satorra (2015) or Zhao et al (2014). There are two types of the digital divide.…”

“…Chang et al (2015) conducted a study to test the effect of the country development index on three levels of the digital divide. Also, a number of related studies rely on Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), or other multivariate models, to select the weights applied to a number of indicators to produce a single composite index or a single measure of e-government development (Al-Mutawkkil et al, 2009;Billon et al, 2009;Cruz-Jesus et al, 2012;Cruz-Jesus et al, 2017;Dodel and Aguirre, 2018;Vicente and Lopez, 2011;Ventura and Satorra, 2015). This technique is especially suitable for the analysis of the digital divide, considering the pervasiveness of ICT (Cruz-Jesus et al, 2012), and its wide set of applications, which require considering multiple dimensions.…”

“…Therefore, since new technologies are continuously emerging, they should be considered in the assessment of ICT disparities and digital divides (Máchová and Lněnička, 2015;Ventura andSatorra, 2015, Wimmer et al, 2020). To ensure that the framework will be relevant to these trends and their composition, it is critical to include all indicators that have an effect on the diffusion of ICT into society.…”

“…(Billon et al, 2009;Chang et al, 2015;Cruz-Jesus et al, 2018;Helbig et al, 2009a;Stoltzfus, 2005;Vicente and Lopez, 2011;Yera et al, 2020;Zhao et al, 2014). However, they did not always consider the current trends in ICT, although the need to continuously update the traditional concept and forms of benchmarking to address contemporary issues and technologies is emphasized in Cruz-Jesus et al (2017), Cruz-Jesus et al (2018), Elena-Bucea et al (2020, Máchová and Lněnička (2015), Máchová et al (2018), Ojo et al (2011), or Ventura and Satorra (2015). Therefore, a new theoretical framework is needed to update the mix of indicators used to monitor ICT disparities and digital divides.…”