RTC: Rural Home | Rural Institute Home | The University of Montana Home | Our Publications
Ruralfacts
Rates of Computer and
Internet Use:
A Comparison of Urban and Rural Access
by People with Disabilities
Updated August 2006
Information tools, such as the personal computer and the Internet, are increasingly critical to economic success and personal advancement (NTIA, 1999). These new technologies have tremendous potential to broaden the lives and increase the independence of people with disabilities (Kaye, 2000).
How the Internet is Improving the Lives of Americans with Disabilities: Harris Poll #30 (June, 2000), concluded that adults with disabilities who use the Internet feel better informed and more connected to the world around them, and interact with others who have similar interests and experiences. Commissioned by the National Organization on Disabilities, the survey reported that respondents derived significantly greater positive impact from the Internet than adult Internet-users without disabilities. Despite these benefits, only about 25% of Americans with disabilities own a computer and about 10% are online, compared with 50% computer ownership, and 40% online use in households with no disability.
While the number of individuals with access to information tools is increasing, some Americans are being left behind. Minorities, low-income persons, the less-educated, and children of single-parent households, particularly those who live in rural areas and central cities, are among the groups that lack access to information resources. (NTIA, 1995, 1998, 1999). The "digital divide" -- the divide between those with access to new technologies and those without -- based on disability status is just as large as that based on race and ethnicity (Kaye, 2000).
Table 1. Computer Use and Internet
Usage by Location
The U.S. Census Bureau's Current Population Survey categories include
"metropolitan" (i.e. urban) and "non-metropolitan" (i.e.
rural). The metropolitan
category is further differentiated into "city" (central city) and
"suburb" categories.
Across these settings, there is a large and statistically significant difference
between
people (aged 15 and over), with and without work disabilities, in individual
computer
ownership and Internet usage.
Percent of Households with a Computer Percent
of Individuals Who Use the Internet Anywhere
With no
disability With a
disability
With no disability With a disability
Metropolitan
53.5
25.0
Metropolitan 39.3
10.9
Suburban
57.5
28.7
Suburban 41.9 11.6
Central
City 47.4 19.9 Central City 36.4 8.8
Rural
44.5 19.8
Rural
33.1 6.8
Combined 51.7 23.9
Combined 38.1
9.9
Source: H.S. Kaye. Unpublished data, derived from Computer and Internet use
among
people with disabilities. Disabilities Statistics Report (13), March
2000.
If computers and the Internet have such utility for people with disabilities,
why don't more people with disabilities (particularly in rural and central city areas)
purchase
computers and use Internet services? It may be because computer ownership and
Internet usage in the general population are linked to two important attributes:
educational attainment and household income.
Twenty-two percent of adults with disabilities have not completed high school,
compared with 9% of adults without disabilities. Only 32% of working-age
individuals
with disabilities are employed full or part-time, compared to 81% of those
without
disabilities (N.O.D./Harris Survey, 2000).
Slightly more than half of people with work disabilities (50.3%) have an annual
household income of $20,000 or less. Only 22.2% of U.S. households with an
annual
income of less than $20,000 own a computer and 19% use the Internet. In that
income
category, even fewer people with disabilities own computers (11%) and are online
(4.9%). (Kaye, 2000). As income rises in the general population, so
does computer
ownership and Internet usage. Of households with incomes of more than $75,000,
the
percentage of computer ownership increases to 80.8% (urban) and 76.5%
(rural).
Internet usage rises to 62% for urban households and 53.7% for rural households
(NTIA, 2000). Little is known about people with disabilities in this income
category, due
to current categorical definitions of disability. By observation and anecdote,
this
group of highly-paid individuals with disabilities has many of the
characteristics of
their economic peers and is likely to have equally high Internet use.
Table 2. Computer ownership and Internet use,
by disability status,
gender, employment status, educational attainment, and family income,
ages 15 and over:
| With Work Disability Without Work Disability | ||||||||||
|
Total Population
|
Computer in Household # (1000s) |
% |
Uses Internet #(1000s) | % |
Total Population # (1000s) | Computer in Household # (1000s) | % |
Uses
Internet #(1000s) |
% |
|
| Gender | ||||||||||
| Male | 9,587 | 2,383 | 24.9+ | 1,056 | 11.0+ | 92,105 | 49,040 | 53.2 | 36,942 | 40.1 |
| Female | 11,289 | 2,600 | 23.0+ | 1,020 | 9.0+ | 97,849 | 49,227 | 50.3 | 35,358 | 36.1 |
| Employment Status (ages 18-64 only) | ||||||||||
| Employed | 3,351 | 1,427 | 42.6+ | 885 | 26.4+ | 124,001 | 70,547 | 56.9 | 54.621 | 44.0 |
| Not Employed | 9,024 | 2,608 | 28.9+ | 970 | 10.8+ | 29,445 | 13,786 | 46.8 | 8,914 | 30.3 |
| Educational Attainment | ||||||||||
| Not H.S. grad | 7,461 | 949 | 12.7+ | 179 * | 2.4*+ | 37,520 | 12,949 | 34.5 | 8,457 | 22.5 |
| H.S. grad | 11,418 | 3,105 | 27.2+ | 1,294 | 11.3+ | 108,779 | 53,267 | 49.0 | 35,957 | 33.1 |
| College grad | 1,998 | 929 | 46.5+ | 604 | 30.2+ | 43,655 | 32,051 | 73.4 | 27,885 | 63.9 |
| Family Income | ||||||||||
| <$20,000 | 8,614 | 950 | 11.0+ | 424 | 4.9+ | 28,557 | 6,326 | 22.2 | 5,419 | 19.0 |
| $20,000+ | 8,512 | 3,403 | 40.0+ | 1,417 | 16.6+ | 132,451 | 81,042 | 61.2 | 59,916 | 45.2 |
Table adapted from Disability Statistics Report 13: Computer and Internet Use among People with Disabilities, 3/2000.
Ensuring Access and Usability
Although prices continue to fall,
computers and Internet services are still unattainable
luxuries for many Americans -- especially those with disabilities. A greater
proportion (23%) of the population in non-metropolitan counties reports having a disability
than in metropolitan counties (18.44%) (McNeil, 1993). For many of them, rural
America's
lack of basic access to technology and services compounds issues of education
and
income.
There will be no quick and easy solutions to the problems all rural Americans
face in securing an education, finding employment and earning enough income to
provide themselves and their families with a quality of life most others take
for granted. Adding disability to the mix enhances the magnitude of those
problems. Even educated,
employed rural residents with adequate income encounter
difficulties with purchasing computer equipment, finding technical support and
training, connecting with an Internet
service provider, and paying for services
which may be more expensive than those in more populated areas.
Access to information is increasingly critical
to finding a job, taking online courses,
contacting colleagues, and finding
resources. One approach to bridging the digital divide between the information
"haves" and "have nots" is to increase the number of community computer/Internet access centers in schools, libraries and other
public
areas. For people with disabilities, however, these community technology
access centers, databases at one-stop employment centers, shopping mall
information kiosks and government offices, must be both accessible and usable if
we are to avoid creating additional personal digital divides.
Like other rural community members, rural
residents with disabilities must be able to
travel to access centers, enter and
navigate the buildings, use the restrooms, receive
appropriate training, and
manipulate the equipment and software (e.g. an individual with low vision may
need larger print on the monitor screen or a screen reader with voice output to
read a display monitor; an individual without hands can use speech
input
software as a keyboarding alternative).
People with disabilities may be inadvertently
excluded from rural community life unless telecommunications access -- economic,
social, and physical -- is addressed and ensured locally. New telecommunications
policies are committed to the inclusion of people with disabilities. However,
policy alone cannot ensure equitable access. Grassroots understanding is needed
to define access in telecommunications, and determine how access can inform
development activities.
In the end, some of the
problems that prevent rural Americans with disabilities from
sharing in the
benefits of the Information Age -- isolation, unemployment, lack of education,
and low incomes -- may be the very problems that are solved when they begin to
share in the Information Age.
Resources:
Disability Statistics Center, University of
California-San Francisco, Box 0646, Laurel Heights, 3333 California St., San
Francisco, CA 94143-0646; distats@itsa.ucsf.edu
(415) 502-5210
Digital Divide Web Site: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/index.html , National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20230 (202) 482-7002; digitaldivide@ntia.doc.gov
References:
Enders, A. & Seekins, T. (10/99).
Telecommunications access for rural Americans with
disabilities. Rural
Development Perspectives, 2, 1, 61-70.
Kaye, H. S. (3/2000). Computer and Internet use
among people with disabilities. Disabilities Statistics Report (13). Washington,
DC: Department of Education, National
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation
Research.
McNeil, J. M. (1993). Americans with
disabilities: 1991-92. (U.S. Bureau of the Census,
Current Population Reports,
P70-73). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/disability.html
National Organization on Disability & L.
Harris & Associates (2000). Survey of Americans with Disabilities.
Washington, DC: National Organization on Disability. http://www.nod.org
National Telecommunications & Information
Administration. (7/95). Falling through the
net: A survey of the "have nots"
in rural and urban America. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Commerce. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fallingthru.html
National Telecommunications & Information
Administration. (7/98). Falling through the
net: New data on the digital divide.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/net2/
National Telecommunications & Information
Administration. (7/99). Falling through the net: Defining the digital divide (a
report on the telecommunications and information technology gap in America).
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/digitaldivide
Stoddard, S., Jans, L., Ripple, J. &
Kraus, L. (1998). Chartbook on work and disability in
the United States. An
InfoUse Report. Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research. http://www.infouse.com/disabilitydata/workdisability/
Taylor, H. (6/2000). The Harris Poll #30: How
the Internet is improving the lives of Americans with disabilities.. National
Organization on Disability: Washington, DC. http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp
U.S. Census Bureau (1999). Comparison of
summary measures of income by selected
characteristics: 1989, 1997 & 1998
(Households & people as of March of the following year). http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/income99/99tablea.html
U.S. Census Bureau (3/99). Disability selected
characteristics of persons 16 to 74: 1999. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/disable/cps/cps399.html
U.S. Census Bureau (1999). Educational
attainment of persons 18 years old and over, by metropolitan and nonmetropolitan
residence, age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin: March 1998. http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/education/p20-476.html
For more information, contact:
Alexandra Enders, Research & Training Center on Rural
Rehabilitation Services,
The University of Montana Rural Institute, 52 Corbin
Hall,
Missoula, MT 59812-7056
rural@ruralinstitute.umt.edu
406/243-2655 (office) |
406/243-5467 (V) or
888/268-2743 (Toll-free) |
406/243-2349 (fax)
406-243-4200 TTY |
http://rtc.ruralinstitute.umt.edu
This work was supported by
grant #H13370017-01 from the National
Institute on Disability &
Rehabilitation Research, U.S. Department of Education. The opinions expressed do
not necessarily represent the
policy of the Department of Education. Do not
assume endorsement by the Federal government.
Factsheet prepared by Alexandra Enders & Diana Spas © RTC: Rural 2000. This publication is available in Braille, large print, and text formats.
Return to Telecommunications Home Page
Questions? Would you like to receive periodic updates about our research and training activities? Do you have comments or suggestions about this site? E-mail your requests, comments and suggestions to dspas@ruralinstitute.umt.edu or call 888-268-2743 and ask for the Information Coordinator.
RTC: Rural Home | Rural Institute Home | The University of Montana Home | Our Publications