Knowledge as a mediator in the relationship between digital and economic development

Автор: Buchinskaia Olga N.

Журнал: Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast @volnc-esc-en

Рубрика: Science, technology and innovation development

Статья в выпуске: 6 т.15, 2022 года.

Бесплатный доступ

Modern development of the digital economy urges society to address not only the global issue of socio-economic inequality, but also the problem of digital inequality, since the level of development of digital technology largely affects labor productivity and, accordingly, national GDP. In this dichotomy of inequality, the sphere of knowledge plays an important role, since it is knowledge that allows us to unlock the full potential of digital technology for the economic system. The aim of the work is to identify the role of knowledge as a mediator in the relationship between the level of development of digital technology and GDP in different countries. The study used data from the Global Knowledge Index, Network Readiness Index and Digital Competitiveness Ranking in their relationship with GDP per capita. We analyzed the results of two models containing data sets for 64 countries for five years and 134 countries for three years; thus, we revealed the influence of the digital competitiveness and network readiness indices, as well as their constituent sub-indices characterizing certain aspects of development of the digital economy, on GDP. Scientific novelty of the study consists in the fact that it reveals the absence of the influence of knowledge on the relationship between GDP per capita and the penetration of digital technology into the national economy. We prove that indicators based on the spread and penetration of technology into the economy cannot objectively reflect the possibilities of economic development in the process of digitalization. It is necessary to focus on indicators reflecting the development and dissemination of national technologies; this requires an increase in the level of knowledge. We find that the level of knowledge development has a significant impact on the possibility of using digital technology to achieve the goals of sustainable development and organize effective management of digitalization. Otherwise, the impact of digital technology on economic development will be much less than the potentially possible level. The results of our study can be used by national governments to develop a strategy to overcome the digital divide and bridge a socio-economic gap between countries.

Еще

Economic inequality, digital divide, knowledge gap, digital economy, digitalization, socioeconomic development, sustainable development, mediation effect

Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/147239128

IDR: 147239128   |   DOI: 10.15838/esc.2022.6.84.8

Список литературы Knowledge as a mediator in the relationship between digital and economic development

  • Adeyemi J.O., Oni S. (2021). Realising Sustainable Development Goal 4 in Nigeria: The challenge of digital divide. Covenant University Journal of Politics & International Affairs (Special Edition), 9(1), 121–132.
  • Baron R.M., Kenny D.A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
  • Brooks S., Donovan P., Rumble C. (2005). Developing nations, the digital divide and research databases. Serials Review, 31(4), 270–278. DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2005.10765002
  • Buchinskaia O.N. (2022). The threefold divergence of socio-economic development in the digital age. Idei i idealy=Ideas and Ideals, 14(2, part 2), 239–260. DOI: 10.17212/2075-0862-2022-14.2.2-239-26 (in Russian).
  • Chan V.W. (2021). Initiative on reducing the “digital divide”. IEEE Communications Magazine, 59(5), 4–5. DOI: /10.1109/MCOM.2021.9446683
  • Chaudhuri R., Chatterjee S., Vrontis D., Vicentini F. (2022). Effects of human capital on entrepreneurial ecosystems in the emerging economy: The mediating role of digital knowledge and innovative capability from India perspective. Journal of Intellectual Capital, (ahead-of-print). DOI: 10.1108/JIC-07-2021-0177
  • Chen L.J., Hung H.C. (2016). The indirect effect in multiple mediators model by structural equation modeling. European Journal of Business, Economics and Accountancy, 4(3), 36–43.
  • Csótó M. (2019). Examining the role of the knowledge gap as a driver towards e-Government service adoption. In: Central and Eastern European eDem and eGov Days. DOI: 10.24989/ocg.v335.3
  • Cullen R. (2001). Addressing the digital divide. Online Information Review, 25(5), 311–320. DOI: /10.1108/14684520110410517
  • Danner D., Hagemann D., Fiedle K. (2015). Mediation analysis with structural equation models: Combining theory, design, and statistics. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(4), 460–481. DOI:10.1002/ejsp.2106
  • Eichhorn T., Jürss S., Hoffmann C.P. (2022). Dimensions of digital inequality in the sharing economy. Information, Communication & Society, 25(3), 395–412. DOI: /10.1080/1369118X.2020.1791218
  • Foster S.P. (2000). The digital divide: Some reflections. The International Information & Library Review, 32(3-4), 437–451. DOI: 10.1080/10572317.2000.10762529
  • Giebel M. (2013). Digital divide, knowledge and innovations. Journal of Information, Information Technology, and Organizations, 8, 1–24.
  • Gunzler D., Chen T., Wu P., Zhang H. (2013). Introduction to mediation analysis with structural equation modeling. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry, 25(6), 390–394. DOI: 10.3969%2Fj.issn.1002-0829.2013.06.009
  • Ibe G. (2018). Effects of GDP per capita on mobile telecommunication penetration in Sub-Saharan Africa. Asia and Africa Today, (4), 68–72. DOI: 10.7868/S0321507518040116
  • James J. (2008). The digital divide across all citizens of the world: A new concept. Social Indicators Research, 89(2), 275–282. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-007-9156-9
  • Jose P.E. (2013). Doing Statistical Mediation and Moderation. Guilford Press.
  • Litvintseva G.P., Karelin I.N. (2020). Effects of digital transformation of the economy and quality of life in Russia. Terra Economicus, 18(3), 53–71. DOI: 10.18522/2073-6606-2020-18-3-53-71 (in Russian).
  • Mehmetoglu M. (2018). Medsem: A Stata package for statistical mediation analysis. International Journal of Computational Economics and Econometrics, 8(1), 63–78.
  • Neogi C. (2020). Effect of ICT on the performance of Indian states in terms of human development indices. In: Maiti D., Castellacci F., Melchior A. (Eds.). Digitalisation and Development. Singapore: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-13-9996-1_11
  • Ogunsola L.A., Okusaga T.O. (2006). Digital divide between developed and less-developed countries: The way forward. Journal of Social Sciences, 13(2), 137–146. DOI: 10.1080/09718923.2006.11892542
  • Ordieres-Meré J., Prieto Remon T., Rubio J. (2020). Digitalization: An opportunity for contributing to sustainability from knowledge creation. Sustainability, 12(4), 1460. DOI: 10.3390/su12041460
  • Parsons C., Hick S.F. (2008). Moving from the digital divide to digital inclusion. Currents: Scholarship in the Human Services, 7(2), 15892.
  • Ragnedda M., Ruiu M.L., Addeo F. (2022). The self-reinforcing effect of digital and social exclusion: The inequality loop. Telematics and Informatics, 101852. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2022.101852
  • Rye S.A. (2008). Exploring the gap of the digital divide. GeoJournal, 71(2), 171–184. DOI: 10.1007/s10708-008-9154-8
  • Shi D., Lee T., Maydeu-Olivares A. (2019). Understanding the model size effect on SEM fit indices. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 79(2), 310–334. DOI: 10.1177/0013164418783530
  • Sidorenko A., Findlay C. (2001). The digital divide in East Asia. Asian‐Pacific Economic Literature, 15(2), 18–30. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8411.00103
  • Sobel M.E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290–312.
  • Solomon E.M., van Klyton A. (2020). The impact of digital technology usage on economic growth in Africa. Utilities Policy, 67, 101104. DOI: 10.1016/j.jup.2020.101104
  • Van Deursen A.J., Mossberger K. (2018). Any thing for anyone? A new digital divide in internet‐of‐things skills. Policy & Internet, 10(2), 122–140. DOI: 10.1002/poi3.171
  • Van Deursen A.J., Van Dijk J.A. (2014). The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society, 16(3), 507–526.
  • Van Dijk J.A.G.M. (2008). The digital divide in Europe. In: The Handbook of Internet Politics. London and New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203962541.ch21
  • Visco I. (2020). Economic growth and productivity: Italy and the role of knowledge. PSL Quarterly Review, 73(294), 205–224.
  • Weston R., Gore Jr P.A. (2006). A brief guide to structural equation modeling. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(5), 719–751. DOI: 10.1177/0011000006286345
  • Wu H., Fai Cheung S., On Leung S. (2020). Simple use of BIC to assess model selection uncertainty: An illustration using mediation and moderation models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 55(1), 1–16. DOI: 10.1080/00273171.2019.1574546
  • Yu B., Ndumu A., Mon L.M., Fan Z. (2018). E-inclusion or digital divide: An integrated model of digital inequality. Journal of Documentation, 74(3), 552–574. DOI: 10.1108/JD-10-2017-0148
  • Zhao X., Lynch Jr J.G., Che Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206. DOI: 10.1086/651257
Еще
Статья научная