Digital inequality of the Russian regions: strategic opportunities and threats

The article presents evaluation of digital inequality of the Russian regions – the subjects of Russia. Digital inequality has been assessed according to access to the Internet and digital technology which corresponds to the first level digital divide concept. Also, the Russian regions’ inequality in the effectiveness of use of digital technologie has been evaluated by the gross value added under the section “Information and communication activities”. During the first stage of the study the author analyzed 37 indicators characterizing the digital technology development in the regions to select 12 of them and perform the cluster analysis. The cluster analysis engaged indicators which had high variation coefficients and were not related to each other. The indicators with correlation coefficient exceeding 0.75 were excluded. The second stage of the study involvedk-means clustering of 85 regions of Russia with the use of STATA econometric package. As a result of cluster analysis the author identified four groups of homogenious regions varying by the level of access to digital technologies, strategic opportunities and threats of further development. The next stage of the study involved evaluation of digital inequality of the regions by means of the Theil index. The author used the “Information and communication activity” indicator’s value as the resulting indicator to make the Theil index calculation. The calculations were made for all the 85 regions as well as for the four groups of the regions for 2016 and 2020. The decomposition of the Theil index made it possible to assess the intra-group and intergroup inequality. It has been stated that digital inequality in the regional perspective is increaing in spite of the fact that the general penetration of digital technologies is rather high for the country. One of the factors determining the digital inequality is lack of finance for the implementation and use of digital technologies. Each of the group of regions identified has been suggested a scheme of strategic priorities to overcome the digital inequality.

1. Kvint V.L. The global emerging market: Strategic management and economics. NY, USA: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group; 2009. 488 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203882917

2. Kvint V.L. Strategy for the global market: Theory and practical applications. NY, USA: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group; 2015. 548 p. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315709314

3. Квинт В.Л. Концепция стратегирования. В 2 т. СПб.: СЗИУ РАНХиГС; 2019. Т. 1. 132 с.

4. Ganichev N.A., Koshovets O.B. Quantifying the digital economy: Between reality and design. EKO = ECO. 2020;(2(548)):8–36. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30680/ECO0131-7652-2020-2-8-36

5. Kokh L.V., Kokh Yu.V. Analysis of existing approaches to measurement of digital economy. St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University Journal. Economics. 2019;12(4):78–89. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18721/JE.12407

6. Bukht R., Heeks R. Defining, сonceptualising and measuring the digital economy. International Organisations Research Journal. 2018;13(2):143–172. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2018-02-07

7. Bukht R., Heeks R. Defining, conceptualising and measuring the digital economy.Centre for Development Informatics. Global Development Institute, SEED. Working Paper Series. 2017. No. 68. 26 p. URL: https://diodeweb.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/diwkppr68-diode.pdf (24.11.2022).

8. Arkhipova M.Y., Sirotin V.P. Development of digital technologies in Russia: regional aspects. Economy of Regions. 2019;15(3):670–683. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17059/2019-3-4

9. Marichev S.G. Analysis of approaches to assessing changes in welfare and real GDP growth during digitalization of the economy. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2022;(1):126–146. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2022-1-126-146

10. Tatarinov A.A., Ustinova N.E. Measuring the ICT sector in the digital economy. Voprosy statistiki. 2021;28(6):5–17. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.34023/2313-6383-2021-28-6-5-17

11. Negroponte N. Being digital. NY, USA: Alfred A. Knopf; 1995. 243 р.

12. Tapscott D. The digital economy: Promise and peril in the age of networked intelligence. NY, USA: McGrawHill; 1994. 342 p.

13. Коровкин В. Цифровая жизнь российских регионов. Что определяет цифровой разрыв? Институт исследований развивающихся рынков бизнес-школы СКОЛКОВО (IEMS); 2020. 63 с. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.17835.26400

14. Lapidus L.V., Leontieva L.S., Gostilovich A.O. Minimum digital basket of Russian regions for industry transformation. Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie. Elektronnyi vestnik=Public Administration. E-Journal. 2019;(77):212–228. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24411/2070-1381-2019-10025

15. Riggins F.J., Dewan S. The digital divide: Current and future research directions. Journal of Association for Information Systems. 2005;6(12):13. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00074

16. Scheerder A., Van Deursen A., Van Dijk J. Determinants of internet skills uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second-and third-level digital divide. Telematics and Informatics. 2017;34(8):1607–1624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.07.007

17. Van Deursen A.J., Van Dijk J.A., Klooster P.M. Increasing inequalities in what we do online: A longitudinal cross-sectional analysis of Internet activities among the Dutch population (2010 to 2013) over gender, age, education, and income. Telematics and Informatics. 2015;32(2):259–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.09.003

18. Gruzdeva M.A. Inclusion of population in digital space: global trends and inequality of Russian regions. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast. 2020;13(5):90–104. https://doi.org/10.15838/esc.2020.5.71.5

19. Ragnedda M. Conceptualizing digital capital. Telematics and Informatics. 2018;35(8):2366–2375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.10.006

20. Ragnedda M., Kreitem H. The three levels of digital divide in East EU countries. World of Media.Journal of Russian Media and Journalism Studies. 2018;1(4):5–27. https://doi.org/10.30547/worldofmedia.4.2018.1

21. Квинт В.Л. Концепция стратегирования. В 2 т СПб.: СЗИУ РАНХиГС; 2020. Т. 2. 164 с.

22. Квинт В.Л. (ред.). Стратегирование цифрового Кузбасса. Кемерово: КемГУ; 2021. 434 с.

23. Айвазян С.А., Бухштабер В.М., Енюков И.С., Мешалкин Л.Д. Прикладная статистика: Классификация и снижение размерности [под ред С.А. Айвазяна]. М.: Финансы и статистика; 1989. 607 с.

24. Theil H. The measurement of inequality by components of income. Economics Letters. 1979;2(2):197–199.

25. Что такое цифровая экономика? Тренды, компетенции, измерение. Докл. к XX Апрельской междунар. науч. конф. по проблемам развития экономики и общества; под науч. ред. Л.М. Гохберга. Москва, 9–12 апреля 2019 г.; М.: Издательский дом Высшей школы экономики; 2019. 82 с.

26. Индикаторы цифровой экономики: 2021 [стат. сб.] М.: НИУ ВШЭ; 2021. 380 с.

27. Регионы России. Социально-экономические показатели. 2021 г. [стат. сб.] М.: Росстат; 2021. 1112 с.

28. Calinski R., Harabasz J. A dendrite method for cluster analysis. Communications in Statistics. 1974;3(1):1–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03610927408827101

29. Gagarina G.Y., Bolotov R.O. Valuatio of inequality in the Russian Federation and its decomposition using the Theil index. Federalizm. 2021;26(4):20–34. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21686/2073-1051-2021-4-20-34

30. Minakir P.A. Strategies for Russia and Russia. Prostranstvennaya Ekonomika = Spatial Economics. 2021;17(1):7–17. (In Russ.). https://dx.doi.org/10.14530/se.2021.1.007-017