Community e-gateways: locating networks and learning for social inclusion

Abstract

A b s t r a c tThe provision of community e-gateways (community-based facilities providing public access to computers and the Internet) has been seen as a way to address the 'digital divide', particularly for people from deprived neighbourhoods. In the UK, policy and practitioner literature has stressed that for these centres to be successful they need to have strong social connections and be able to provide opportunities for interactive learning and content creation. Through a detailed analysis of one community e-gateway, which formed part of a wider study of public access provision, this article analyses the strengths and weaknesses of this advice drawing on broader sociological literature relating to social networks, network mapping and communities of practice. It concludes that greater attention needs to be paid to the signi cance of weak ties, two-way boundary spanning and the resource requirements of social networks for the policy objectives to be fully achieved. K e y w o r d se-gateway, community, networks, learning, public accessThe concept of the 'digital divide' -a gap between those sections of the population with access to computers and the Internet and those without -has been reported and articulated most clearly by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) of the US Department of Commerce. A series of reports, collectively entitled Falling Through the Net, have documented the changing pattern of Internet use. Notwithstanding increased use by all sections of the population, use still varies signi cantly by income, education, occupation, age and ethnicity. The division between the Internet use by men and women is the only one that seems likely to close in the short term. While the reports themselves do not articulate explicit policy measures to address the divide, they do make a clear case for policy intervention. For example, the summary of the most recent report

Using the Internet? The experiences of parents of disabled children

“…While a persuasive case can undoubtedly be made for being open to the potential benefits of the Internet for families with disabled children, there are also grounds for being cautious. There is currently concern about a range of people who may fall on the wrong side of the ‘digital divide’ because they do not have Internet access and experience (Policy Action Team 15 2000; Hellawell 2001; Liff & Steward 2001). These tend to be people from the most socially excluded, financially deprived sectors of the population.…”

The digital divide and the theory of optimal slack

“…The first two conditions are also present in the housing cooperative. Most importantly, according to Mehra et al (2004), Myles (2004) and Selwyn (2006), both groups have found ways of using and colonizing the web that make sense to them as individuals (Liff and Steward, 2001) and communities. Interests such as local politics and campaign contacts were clear motivators towards the use of the internet in these communities (see also music, books, baseball in Newholm et al, 2004).The third and fourth conditions provide the basis for efficient teamwork and are likely to be present in communities, but it is the fifth that gives the slack that allows them to respond in a discretionary manner to the needs of the tenants.To the extent that this successfully engages the tenants in ICT, we might refer to this loosely as optimal slack.This would not be remarkable, but for being able to imagine it to be relatively rare.…”

“…The context in which training and support is delivered is also of relevance here. As Liff and Steward (2001) argue, there must be a low access threshold and it should be provided within 'a context in which people feel comfortable about using it' (Liff et al, 1999: 2). Research conducted into barriers to learning for marginalized groups (Pierce, 2004), including transient people (Doherty et al, 2002) supports this notion.The former narrative illustrates how formal training can reflect the underlying causes of exclusion (e.g.…”

Following the “community” thread from sociology to information behavior and informatics: Uncovering theoretical continuities and research opportunities

“…Community informatics scholars draw upon symbolic interactionist concepts when they focus on the interactions between people and technology. Liff and Steward (2001) analyzed the relationships between stakeholders in a CTC, concluding that interactions were not sufficient to sustain the center. Qiu (2009) focused on interactions between people and technologies to create a subgroup of working class Chinese people.…”