Access to digital technology is a key aspect of everyday life. Calls, emails, texting, online learning, doctors' appointments, representation in digital spheres. The list goes on and on. It would be hard to live in a world without access to these sorts of things.
But what about the people who do?
People who live in rural areas. People who live in underserved areas. People who aren't represented by their government. People who are all of the above?
[[The First Nations People of Australia.]]
//Note: Words highlighted in blue can be clicked for more context.//
[[>]]
//Note: Arrows highlighted in blue will move you to the next page.//The [[Australian Digital Inclusion Index]] is a metric used in Australia to [[measure]] the population's access to digital communication technologies.
In 2017, things were looking pretty good. The most recent ADII survey showed that, while First Nations people were still lagging behind in equal access to internet connections, that gap was narrowing significantly. First Nations people were about 7.0 points seperated from the rest of the population, a [[25% reduction]] in the gap from 2015.
However, this report found there was one area where First Nations people score higher than the general population: [[Attitudes]] towards digital technology.
"This suggests that digital inclusion programs specifically for Indigenous Australians may be beneficial as their digital choices are different from other groups. Moreover, the fact that Indigenous Australians have a positive attitude to technology suggests these programs may have a high rate of success." One article says about these findings.
[[> |access]]The ADII is a metric used to measure the amount of "digital inclusion" across Australia. Every metric within it is measured on a scale from 1-100, with 100 being the most digitally included.
It was established in 2015 with the goal of gathering data to be able to materially help those in Australia who are digitally unincluded. In 2015, the gap between First Nations people and the general population was one of 9.2 points.
Between these two years, the best progress came from Access and Ability, with Affordability providing some, but not as much, progress.The Attitudes metric was measured with a survey of 5 questions:
* Computers and technology give me more control over my life
* I am interested in being able to access the internet wherever I am
* I go out of my way to learn everything I can about new technology
* I find technology is changing so fast, it’s difficult to keep up with it (negative)
* I keep my computer up to date with security software
Notably, despite both the ADII report itself and the report on the report stating the First Nations People's score on the Attitudes metric was "relatively high," they only scored about 1 point (out of a possible 100, and an average 50) higher than the general population.There were [[three]] metrics used to measure digital inclusion in Australia. The first was [[Access]].
In this metric, First Nations people were about 7.9 points behind the [[general population]]. In 2017, they scored 61.7 points to the overall average of 69.6. Access was up from 58.9 points in 2016, up 2.8 points.
Of the three metrics (the other two being Affordability and Ability,) this was the one with the biggest disparity. Of course, living in a remote area would impact that. The good news is, though, there were many [[government programs]] working to reduce this gap.
[[> |affordability]]Prior to 2021, the ADII data was collected by Ray Morgan Research's Single Source Survey.
This was conducted via selecting ~550 sample areas of equal population, then sending interviewers over the weekend to conduct in-person surveys. A large amount of data was collected, which the ADII used a subsample of.
In 2021, this process was replaced by the Australian Internet Usage Survey, a dedicated survey to collect information on internet usage. This survey collected its data from randomly selecting addresses, then offering them the option of filling out an online survey or submitting a form by mail, with a prepaid and preaddressed envelope.Affordability was the next metric. In this one, First Nations people had a disparity of about 7.0 points.
However, this metric was split into two categories: [[Relative Expenditure]], and [[Value of Expenditure]]. While the Relative Expenditure of First Nations people was was only 1.3 points [[lower]] than the general population, the Value of Expenditure was 12.7 points lower.
First Nations people are [[more frequently]] mobile-only users than the rest of the population. While they spent approximately the same amount on internet services as the rest of the population, mobile data also costs more for less data. Therefore, First Nations people were spending more money to recieve less.
[[> |ability]]These three were Access, Affordability, and Ability, as has been mentioned previously. Access is designed to measure, of course, physical access to internet technology. Meanwhiile, Affordability is financial access to internet technology. Ability is ability to navigate and utilize the internet, and prior to 2021, openness to learning more about the internet.Access is gauged via the three metrics below, each of them measured through a handful of metrics.
Internet Access
* Frequency of internet access
* Places of internet access
* Number of internet products
Internet Technology
* Computer technology
* Mobile internet technology
* Fixed internet technology
Internet Data Allowance
* Mobile internet data
* Fixed internet dataThese programs consisted largely of establishing internet connections in remote areas, as well as distributing devices to those who are in need. One program also involved establishing 229 community payphones in First Nations areas. A large number of these programs provided their internet connection for free for those who needed it. The "general population" does not include people with disabilities in Australia when it comes to digital inclusion. Unfortunately, the most recent data on this I could find is in the 2021 ADII Report, which cites data from 2017. In 2017, people with disabilities were seperated from the general population by 9.5 points, with Access a full 10 points behind the general population.Relative Expenditure is considered the proportion of monthly income spent on internet services, then compared to national benchmarks to determine what an acceptable amount to be spent on internet services was. Value of Expenditure is calculated similarly to Relative Expenditure, with data being collected then compared to national benchmarks to find what could be considered "included." However, Value of Expenditure was instead calculated based on what services people were recieving. Despite a lower Relative Expenditure being a good thing, a higher score in this metric is still better. The final score in this metric didn't exactly represent what percent of monthly income was spent on internet services, but rather that proportions relation to the rest of the population, and the calculated ideal benchmarks.While 21.3% of Australians were mobile-only users in 2017, 49% of First Nations people were mobile-only users. Thaat number has fallen to 21.3% for First Nations people and 10.5% of Australians in 2023.Finally, [[Ability]] was the last of these three metrics. This was the one in which First Nations people were closest to the general population, at a difference of only 6.1 points.
Here's where the "Attitudes" factoid comes back in. Three metrics were used to measure Ability; Attitudes, [[Basic Skills]], and [[Activities]]. First Nations people trailed almost 12 points behind the general population on Basic Skills. Meanwhile, that "relatively high" score on attitudes? [[Only]] 1.1 points higher than the rest of the population.
[[>|conclusions]]Ability, similarly to Access, was calculated using 3 metrics. Attitudes was the first, measuring opinions towards the internet and digital communication technologies. Then, there were Basic Skills and Activities, both of which were calculated via a list of 6 internet tasks. However, the Activities tasks were more advanced or complex versions of the Basic Skills tasks.
Notably, the way Ability is calculated was overhauled in 2021, with Attitudes being scrapped entirely, and Basic Skills and Abilities being reworked. The Basic Skills were the following six:
* General internet skills
* Mobile phone skills
* Internet banking skills
* Internet shopping skills
* Internet community skills
* Internet information skillsThe Activities were the following six:
* Streamed, played, or downloaded content online
* AV communication via the internet
* Internet transaction or payment
* Purchased or sold a product online
* Created or managed a site or blog
* Searched for advanced information
Note that they match the Basic Skills activites, but with additional layers of complexity.The difference between Attitudes in Sydney, and Gosford, cities an hour's drive apart, was 1.0 points. While Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People often prefer these more specific terms for themselves and their communities, many of the sources used in this project refer to the wider group of First People that includes both groups.
//Note: The arrow in the upper-left corner can be used to return to the previous page.//While the numbers from this report weren't promising, the trends were. The Index score for First Nations people was increasing, with [[almost]] every metric being an improvement on the previous year. Accompanying this report were lists of [[plans]], both future and current to increase digital inclusion.
Overall, the report was promising.
There was one little thing, though.
[[>|rural]]
Every metric had improved, save for Internet Access, which had fallen 0.4 points between 2016 and 2017.This list of plans included ongoing plans, near future plans, and distant future plans. They were varied in their concept, including plans for distributing internet communication devices, establishing free public wifi in community spaces, increasing education on digital skills, and offering price reduction programs. The Ray Morgan Research's Single Source Survey did not survey [[remote areas]]. It wasn't replaced with the Australian Internet Usage Index until 2021, and as such, remote communities were largely disregarded in previous reports.
"Since the ADII does not survey [[remote]] Indigenous communities, it is likely that the ADII numbers are skewed upwards." says the report.
Not only did this skew the results, though, it also [[disproportionately]] affected First Nations people. They are far more likely to live in remote areas than the general population of Australia, and as such, while a large portion of the report focused on First Nations people, many communities of even higher concern were disregarded.
[[>|changes]]In Australia, land is sorted into five different remoteness categories. There's Major Cities, Inner Regional, Outer Regional, Remote, and Very Remote.
Notably, localities of less than a thousand people are merged into the surrounding remoteness category, meaning even small towns in Very Remote areas are considered Very Remote. The Ray Morgan Survey doesn't survey remote areas. As it's primarily a survey for marketing purposes, it focuses on urban centers and centers of population, as the resources used to survey these sorts of areas would almost certainly be more than they could profit off said data.About 15% of First Nations people live in Remote or Very Remote areas, 9.4% of which were in Very Remote areas.
Also, as you move away from urban centers, the proportion of First Nations people increases. In large cities, the First Nations population is about 2.2%, which increases to 47.1% in Very Remote areas. In 2021, some large changes were made to the ADII. Of course, there was the switch to the Australian Internet Usage Survey, owned and controlled by the ADII themselves. Of course, this greatly helped with data collection, allowing them to collect exactly the data they wished, rather than sourcing it from a third party.
There were also several updates to all three metrics used, focusing on keeping them [[current and relevant]], as well as a total [[rework]] of the Digital Ability metric.
Also added were questions not directly relating to the ADII, that could be used in further [[case studies]], another benefit of the ADII managing their own data collection.
[[>|data]]Several changes were made in 2021 to update the metrics that had been used since 2015.
In Access, the metrics used were updated from Internet Access, Internet Technology, and Internet Data Allowance, to Speed and data allowance, Intensity and frequency of access, Connection type, and Device. Additionally, technologies like smartwatches, smart home devices, and other nontraditional devices were considered when measuring access.
Affordability was also revamped, given that with the rise of unlimited mobile data, the Relative Value of Expenditure was increasingly hard to calculate. It was reevaluated to calculate the amount of revenue that would be spent to get an adequate internet bundle, as well as accounting for size of household.The new Digital Ability scale uses the Internet Skills Scale, a scale developed by many groups at the forefront of digital inclusion. Rather than measuring Digital Ability based on a single scale, each participant was given a score based on their ability in certain areas, which were then averaged to create the overall Digital Ability score.
This was changed to assess how varied knowledge levels can be between different skills, and how to better assess what needs improvement. Case studies are included in all ADII annual reports, each one focusing on a particular area of need or interest in the realm of digital inclusion.
Examples have been First Nations people, people with disabilities, digitial inclusion after COVID, and senior citizens.Unfortunately, it seems that in 2021, data was not collected specifically for First Nations people. The [[interactive data tool]] promoted by the [[summary report]] doesn't seem to include any data on First Nations people until 2022.
Even then, the interactive data tool with data for 2022 contains the disclaimer that "No special First Nations collection was undertaken outside selected remote communities for this year and results obtained based on national sampling methods of First Nations people should be treated with caution due to very small sample sizes."
Additionally, while the 2022 summary report [[doesn't seem to be available]] anywhere online, the 2021 report lacks any substantial mention for First Nations people.
[[>|mapping]]The interactive data tool is now the main way that ADII research is shown to the public. It allows to sort data by age, gender, region, First Nations status, whether or not English is a first language, and several other factors. In 2021, rather than publishing a full report of all data found, the summary report included case studies, overall takeaways, and a list of changes to the ADII this year. Most, if not all, of the hard data was instead in the interactive data tool.However, there was a silver lining in 2023. The [[Mapping the Digital Gap]] project, dedicated to recording data about digital inclusion in remote First Nations areas. It focusesd specifically on remote and very remote areas, being the very first survey to collect data for these regions specifically.
This data was collected for the [[National Agreement on Closing the Gap]], specifically for [[Outcome 17]].
This data found that, predictably, while First Nations people were an average 7.5 points behind the general population, this greatly increased with remoteness, all the way up to 25.4.
This was the first time data like this had been collected, and with luck, it would lead to great developments in reducing that gap.
[[>|closing]]Mapping the Digital Gap is a project developed alongside the National Agreement on Closing the Gap. It's a project dedicated to investigating remote First Nations communities, and the ways they can and cannot access the internet.
It's the first largescale research project dedicated to the topic, and as such, has provided large amounts of valuable data. It also takes particular care to involve First Nations people in the decisionmaking process, including an advisory board, and reporting back all conclusions to the nations from which they were gathered.The National Agreement on Closing the Gap is a project by the Australian government dedicated to increasing equality for First Nations people. There are 17 Outcomes in the agreement, all of which are dedicated to a specific metric in which First Nations people are disadvantaged.
Outcomes include such things as longer life expectancies, children thriving in their early years, strong economic participation, and both adults and teens not being overrepresented in the penal system.Out of 17 Outcomes, Digital Inclusion is number 17. The text of the outcome is as follows:
"Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have access to information and services enabling participation in informed decision‑making regarding their own lives"
A large part of this is increasing digital inclusion, and as such, outcome 17 is the one most heavily considered when it comes to increasing digital inclusion for First Nations groups.Unfortunately, it didn't turn out that way. When the Closing the Gap Annual Report for 2024 was released just this August, it didn't have good news.
While 3 of the 17 targets were on track for their goals, 4 more were actually worsening. Five were improving, but not fast enough, while the remaining 5 had no collected data to measure their progress.
Unfortunately, Outcome 17, the one regarding digital inclusion, was one of those for which no data was collected. In the 2022 report, the need to collect further data was acknowledged, but has yet to be followed up on.
It's clear the Closing the Gap project has yet to make substantial progress.
[[>|fix]]The question now is how to fix it. It's widely acknowledged the Closing the Gap program isn't working, but why?
The 2022 report was almost the same as the 2023 report. Four targets on track, four worsening, and the remainder either had no data, or had incomplete data. In February of 2024, several months after the release of the 2023 Closing the Gap report, the Australian [[Productivity Commission]] published an article on why the Closing the Gap program wasn't working.
While the Australian Government made a strong committment towards sharing power with First Nations people, in practice, the Commission found that wasn't the [[truth]].
The Productivity Commission had four recommendations towards repairing the situation and truly honoring First Nations voices in the process.
[[>|recs]]The Productivity Commission is an advisory body to the Australian government, one which monitors progress on various initiatives, performs research on various initiatives, and provides advice to the Australian government on matters regarding economic or social policy.Upon consulting many First Nations people across the nation, and performing a deep dive into the actual programs established under the Closing the Gap agreement, it was found up to 70% of government actions related to Closing the Gap were pre-existing programs, rebranded or tweaked to seem like improvements.1. The government must share power with First Nations people.
2. The government must fundamentally rethink their systems and culture.
3. The government must recognize Indiginous Data Governance and Soverignty
4. An independent process must be created to ensure the government is holding true to its word.
Should the government truly honor their commitment to the First Nations people, they need to take a step back and genuinely consider how power can be shared. Rather than consider the First Nations people an impoverished group requiring charity, they need to be considered their own people, have their own say in the process, and always have a seat at the table when plans are made to benefit them.
It's hard making this sort of progress. It's hard for governments to give up power to another body to benefit them. But to truly help the First Nations People of Australia, it must be done.
[[Bibliography]]Works Cited
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. “2. Demographic and Social Context.” AIHW Indigenous HPF, 24 July 2024, www.indigenoushpf.gov.au/Report-overview/Overview/Summary-Report/2-Demographic-and-social-context.
Australia Digital Inclusion Index. Measuring Australia’s Digital Divide Australian Digital Inclusion Index: 2021 Acknowledgements. 2021, h3e6r2c4.rocketcdn.me/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/ADII2021-Summary-report-V1.pdf, https://doi.org/10.25916/phgw-b725.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. “Main Features - Defining Remoteness Areas.” Abs.gov.au, c=AU; o=Commonwealth of Australia; ou=Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2016, www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/1270.0.55.005Main%20Features15July%202016?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=1270.0.55.005&issue=July%202016&num=&view=.
Australian Digital Inclusion Index. “Case Study: Digital Inclusion of Indigenous Australians.” Australian Digital Inclusion Index, 6 Dec. 2017, www.digitalinclusionindex.org.au/case-study-digital-inclusion-of-indigenous-australians/.---.
“Case Study: Mapping the Digital Gap - Digital Inclusion in Remote First Nations Communities.” AUSTRALIAN DIGITAL INCLUSION INDEX, 4 July 2023, www.digitalinclusionindex.org.au/case-study-mapping-the-digital-gap-digital-inclusion-in-remote-first-nations-communities/.---.
“Collecting the Data - Australian Digital Inclusion Index.” Australian Digital Inclusion Index, 8 Nov. 2023, www.digitalinclusionindex.org.au/collecting-the-data/. Accessed 22 Sept. 2024.
Thomas, J, Barraket, J, Wilson, C, Ewing, S,
MacDonald, T, Tucker, J & Rennie, E, 2017, Measuring Australia’s
Digital Divide: The Australian Digital Inclusion Index 2017, RMIT
University, Melbourne, for Telstra. ---.
“Reading the Data.” Australian Digital Inclusion Index, www.digitalinclusionindex.org.au/reading-the-data/.
Australian Government. Closing the Gap Commonwealth 2023 Annual Report Commonwealth 2024 Implementation Plan. 2023.
---. Commonwealth Closing the Gap Annual Report 2022. 2022.
Commonwealth of Australia. Closing the Gap Annual Data Compilation Report. 2024.
---. First Nations Digital Inclusion Plan (2023-26). July 2023.
“Indigenous Australians: Torres Strait Islanders: Working with Indigenous Australians.” Workingwithindigenousaustralians.info, 2022, www.workingwithindigenousaustralians.info/content/Indigenous-Australians-3-Approrpiate-Terms.html.
//To view link, replace dashes (-) with underscores (_)//
“Measuring Digital Inclusion to Increase Equitable Access for All.” Www.rmit.edu.au, www.rmit.edu.au/research/impact/digital-inclusion-equitable-access.
Productivity Commission. “Productivity Commission.” Pc.gov.au, 2019, www.pc.gov.au/.
---. “Why Isn’t the Gap Closed?” Www.pc.gov.au, 20 Feb. 2024, www.pc.gov.au/media-speeches/articles/why-isnt-the-gap-closed.
The Social Research Centre Pty. Ltd. “The Australian Internet Usage Survey - Social Research Centre.” Social Research Centre, 12 Aug. 2024, srcentre.com.au/project/the-australian-internet-usage-survey/. Accessed 22 Sept. 2024.
Zheng, Shu Shu. “Remote First Nations Communities Are among the Most Digitally Excluded People in Australia: Report.” Www.rmit.edu.au, 27 Sept. 2023, www.rmit.edu.au/news/all-news/2023/sep/mapping-digital-gap.The ADII webpage that hosts prior years' reports skips straight from 2021 to 2023. No easily available information is online regarding why the 2022 report isn't hosted on their website, nor any indication that a publically available report existed at all.
However, there was also no indication that there wasn't one produced this year, nor public commentary on the lack of a report.