Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development 2015
DOI: 10.1145/2737856.2738022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The mobile divide revisited

Abstract: A survey of 191 randomly selected rural farm households in central Malawi was completed to provide a better estimate of mobile phone access in a country that falls at the lower end of published mobile subscription rates. We further ask whether there remains evidence of a mobile divide, across both socio-economic status and gender, in such a context. Detailed analyses of mobile phone ownership, usage practices, and the sources that phone and non-phone owners use for farming-relevant information highlight proble… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
6
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
1
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Despite the increasing number of platforms that offer agricultural information, the use of these services and access to subsequent extension services are mixed due to socio-technical challenges [3,34,43,54,56,57,72,83]. In SSA, mobile phone use is hampered in some sub-populations by the cost of acquiring phones, charging the devices, maintaining airtime, repairing phones, and network coverage issues [1,92,97], as noted in Kenya [63,93], Uganda [45], and Malawi [87]. Another limitation is the farmers' lack of technology knowledge, skills or literacy [44,62,94], and trust in technology [4] .…”
Section: Technologies For Agricultural Informationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the increasing number of platforms that offer agricultural information, the use of these services and access to subsequent extension services are mixed due to socio-technical challenges [3,34,43,54,56,57,72,83]. In SSA, mobile phone use is hampered in some sub-populations by the cost of acquiring phones, charging the devices, maintaining airtime, repairing phones, and network coverage issues [1,92,97], as noted in Kenya [63,93], Uganda [45], and Malawi [87]. Another limitation is the farmers' lack of technology knowledge, skills or literacy [44,62,94], and trust in technology [4] .…”
Section: Technologies For Agricultural Informationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite a push to increase the amount of information communicated via mobile phones (Steinfield et al, 2015), only 3% of farmers accessed weather information through mobile phone services. For example in 2016, mobile phone subscriptions were ∼41.72 per 100 inhabitants, which has stagnated in recent years-estimations for 2018 were 39.01 subscriptions per 100 people, meaning that ∼51.7% households had access to a mobile phone (ITU, 2020).…”
Section: Access Trust and Response To Weather Predictionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This varies from as high as 90% in Zimbabwe (Moyo-Nyede and Ndoma, 2020), 40% in Burkina Faso, and to as low as 15% in Niger, Chad, and Mauritania (Tsan et al, 2019). This vicious gap also characterises mobile phone ownership between men and women (Henze and Ulrichs, 2016; Messenger, 2018; Steinfield and Wyche, 2013). Sub-Saharan Africa's women are 15% less likely to own a mobile phone than men.…”
Section: Mobile Phone Subscriptions and Network Accessibility In Ssamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is worsened by weak awareness and training on the new mobile and internet-based technologies and their potential towards agrarian change (Adebo, 2014; AGRA, 2015; Misaki et al, 2018). Therefore, fostering literacy and appropriate digital skills, especially among the youths, women and the elderly will be essential in keeping pace with the process of digital transformation and the building of digital societies (Misaki et al, 2018; Steinfield and Wyche, 2013; Trendov et al, 2019).…”
Section: Factors Constraining the Use Of Mobile Phone And Web-based T...mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation