• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>The Emerging Digital Economy: Entrepreneurship, Clusters, and Policy; Advances in Spatial Science >Investment and Household Adoption of Communication and Information Services
【24h】

Investment and Household Adoption of Communication and Information Services

机译：投资和家庭采用通信和信息服务

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The diffusion of telecommunication service innovations has never been uniform or continuous. Innovations have gone to rich households that were more likely to adopt them sooner than less wealthy households or otherwise less likely to adopt. The rollout of Internet service has been no different. Urban areas were the first to receive new services, while rural areas lagged. High-income households adopted the new services before low-income households. The Washington, DC area led most other regions of the country. Rural areas are higher cost areas than urban areas. They also have fewer households and businesses to share in the cost of the service. Nevertheless, many rural communities are receiving these new communication and information services.rnDoes this mean that the Digital Divide is either an illusionary or only transitory? The answer is both yes and no. In a sense they are illusionary and transitory because, as in most technological and service diffusions, the divide is much greater at first than it is later. In another sense the Digital Divide is not. First, the availability, and affordability, of new services will be determined by four main mechanisms: governmental policy, economic feasibility, technical limits, and market incentives. While the fallout from the bust of the dot-com boom has led to excessive decline for investment in telecommunications and can only slow down the diffusion of new services, government policy will still be a critical factor in determining what degree of divide there will be. Second, technology has not changed and will not change enough to make the delivery of telecommunications to make the cost structure the same across space. Third, technology will not change enough to lower service delivery costs so that income will not be a factor in their adoption.rnThe federal government has played a major role in reducing the divide. The federal government operates a number of relatively small grant and loan programs that encourage private investment for rural Internet service provision, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's rural telecommunication service providers. The major policy mechanism, the universal program has not been tapped so far to increase Internet access for the household. The program, however, was used to bring Internet service to schools, public libraries, and medical clinics. These programs are under review by the Federal Communications Commission and Congress. The Federal Communications Commission review itself is mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
机译：电信服务创新的传播从未统一或连续。富裕家庭比富裕家庭或其他可能性较小的家庭更容易采用创新。 Internet服务的推出没有什么不同。城市地区是第一个获得新服务的地区，而农村地区则落后。高收入家庭在低收入家庭之前采用了新服务。华盛顿特区地区领先该国其他大部分地区。农村地区是比城市地区成本更高的地区。他们也减少了家庭和企业分担服务成本。但是，许多农村社区正在接受这些新的通信和信息服务。这是否意味着数字鸿沟只是虚幻的还是暂时的？答案是是和不是。从某种意义上说，它们是虚幻的和短暂的，因为像大多数技术和服务的普及一样，这种鸿沟在开始时比在后来时要大得多。换句话说，数字鸿沟不是。首先，新服务的可用性和可负担性将由四个主要机制决定：政府政策，经济可行性，技术限制和市场激励措施。虽然互联网泡沫破灭带来的后果导致电信投资过度下降，只会减缓新服务的普及，但政府政策仍将是决定分歧程度的关键因素。其次，技术并没有发生变化，也不会发生足够的变化以至于无法交付电信来使整个空间的成本结构保持不变。第三，技术变化不足以降低服务交付成本，因此收入不会成为采用服务成本的因素。联邦政府在缩小鸿沟方面发挥了重要作用。联邦政府实施了一些规模较小的赠款和贷款计划，以鼓励私人投资以提供农村互联网服务，例如美国农业部的农村电信服务提供商。到目前为止，尚未开发出主要的政策机制即通用计划来增加家庭的互联网访问量。但是，该程序用于将Internet服务引入学校，公共图书馆和医疗诊所。这些程序正在由联邦通讯委员会和国会审查。联邦通讯委员会（Federal Communications Commission）的审查本身是根据1996年《电信法》（Telecoming Act of 1996）授权的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号