1 / 9

Karen Mossberger University of Illinois at Chicago

Karen Mossberger University of Illinois at Chicago. BROADBAND RESEARCH: COMMUNITY-LEVEL CHANGE IN CHICAGO’S SMART COMMUNITIES, CUYAHOGA COUNTY DATA Caroline Tolbert, University of Iowa Karen Mossberger , UIC Chris Anderson, University of Iowa

mattox
Télécharger la présentation

Karen Mossberger University of Illinois at Chicago

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Karen MossbergerUniversity of Illinois at Chicago BROADBAND RESEARCH: COMMUNITY-LEVEL CHANGE IN CHICAGO’S SMART COMMUNITIES, CUYAHOGA COUNTY DATA Caroline Tolbert, University of Iowa Karen Mossberger, UIC Chris Anderson, University of Iowa Chicago research funded by Partnership for A Connected Illinois and The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Ohio research funded by One Community

  2. Chicago’s Smart Communities Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (broadband stimulus funding, National Telecommunications and Information Administration) • $7 million federal BTOP SBA grant to City of Chicago in 9 Chicago community areas (2010-2013) • Coordinated by Local Initiative Support Corp. (LISC) with community-based organizations • FamilyNet Centers • Civic 2.0 training and tech organizers (community groups) • Business Resource Network • Digital Youth Network and YouMedia • Neighborhood Portals • Ad campaign

  3. City-wide Survey: A Unique Neighborhood-Level View • City-wide surveys in early 2011, 2013 (comparison with 2008) • English & Spanish, approx. 10 mins. • n= 3,000, RDD, cell phone sampling included • Geocoding, merger with census data, multilevel modeling • Estimates for 20 aspects of technology use, barriers to use, for 77 community areas Comparing change in Smart Communities with other Chicago neighborhoods from 2008-2011, controlling for demographic change

  4. Broadband vs. Smartphone Only

  5. Regression Results, 2008-2011 • Smart Communities (BTOP SBA) neighborhoods have 15 percentage point higher increase in Internet use, 2008-2011 – compared to other Chicago community areas, controlling for demographic change • No significant increase in broadband adoption, activities online (use for work, use for job search, health info, etc.) • Regression models based on change in estimates in multilevel models, 2008, 2011 • Substantively large effect for Internet use in targeted communities • Can’t say with certainty that Smart Communities caused change, but controlled for many other factors, such as gentrification • Regression allows us to say what the difference is between similarly-situated areas with and without the Smart Communities intervention Report available at broadbandillinois.org. Mossberger, Q.2

  6. Why Broadband Matters for Anchor Institutions • Cuyahoga County Survey, November 2012 • Random sample phone survey, 1200 respondents 68% of parents use school’s website 62% email teachers 50% follow students on school portal

  7. Cuyahoga Social Services 50% of social service recipients have broadband at home vs. 63% for County overall • Ohio Direction Card – 52% • WIC – 50% • Medicaid – 42% • Healthy Start – 63% • Ohio Work First – 69% • Senior/Disabled Bus Passes – 34%

  8. Implications and Further Research • Broadband matters for neighborhoods and community anchor institutions • Chicago’s Smart Communities programmay have been responsible for substantial gains in Internet use outside the home, using public access, smartphones, etc. • What might explain community-level outcomes? • A critical mass of programs, resource sharing? • Broadband adoption at home did not increase, but prior research in Chicago and elsewhere shows that cost is a major barrier (Mossberger, Tolbert, Bowen & Jimenez 2012; Mossberger, Tolbert and Franko 2012) • Early 2013 citywide survey will offer additional measure of change later this year • Does broadband adoption increase after Internet Essentials? • Smart Communities promoted the program, which began right after the 2011 survey

More Related