Conceptualizing and Researching the Adoption of ICT and the Impact on Socioeconomic Development

1. Introduction

Information and communication technologies (ICT) in developed countries have changed much of everyday life. How we communicate with each other, how we find desired information, how we work and conduct business, how we interact with government agencies, and how we conduct our social lives, are all dependent on ICT. While it is reasonable to assume that ICT has also had significant social and economic effects in less developed regions, the specific outcomes may be different, as culture, the existing infrastructure, and government regulations all influence the type and magnitude of the impact of ICT and ICT-enabled services.

As ICT affects everyday lives, it also impacts the macroeconomic growth, which in turn further affects everyday lives by allowing improvements in infrastructure and a higher standard of living. User acceptance of ICT is essential for sustaining and expanding ICT-enabled services, which further heighten the socioeconomic impact.

The papers in this special edition all deal with the adoption, acceptance, and the socioeconomic impact of ICT in some form. They deal with macroeconomic impact, sustained economic growth, human development, transformational policy-making, as well as with the factors that promote the adoption and user acceptance of ICT in transition and emerging economies. In this editorial, we will look at the factors that likely influence the effects of ICT investments and propose a conceptual framework for further studying these relationships, to stimulate and direct future research in this area (Jabareen, 2009). Frameworks dealing with some of these relationships have been proposed in the literature before (see, e.g. Shih, Kraemer, & Dedrick, 2008), but none encompassing all of the issues that we consider important for investigation of ICT impact on socioeconomic development. The objective of this framework is to clarify several concepts related to socioeconomic development and to identify vital interrelations among these concepts. This framework may serve other researchers in organizing their ideas and encourage further theory development, and most importantly promote viable research to spur genuine socioeconomic development in underdeveloped regions.

2. Socioeconomic development and ICT

Although “socioeconomic development” is referred to in many research papers, the concept is not always clearly defined and there seems to be a lack of a general framework around this concept. The word “development” usually implies a process of growth or changes. From a civilizational point of view, development can be defined as the overall activity in a society, consciously or subconsciously undertaken, aimed at improvements in that society (Stec, Filip, Grzebyk, & Pierscieniak, 2014). The qualifier “socioeconomic” is itself a combination of two words and relates to social factors, like education, and occupation, as well as economic factors, like income and assets. Thus, socioeconomic development can be defined as a process of changes or improvements in social and economic conditions as they relate to an individual, an organization, or a whole country.

On an individual level, socioeconomic development may be reflected in positive changes to socioeconomic status, measured by factors such as personal income, personal wealth, level of education, and occupation. Other important factors in socioeconomic development as it impacts individuals are quality of life, standard of living, and general health. Social liberty, defined here as freedom from excessive social constraints that may keep individuals from achieving their personal aspirations, is also an important indicator.

At the organizational level, socioeconomic development may be manifested in improvements in global competitiveness, organizational income, overall business assets, consumer demands, general business opportunity, business reputation and brands, and the quality of the work force.

At the country level, socioeconomic development is reflected in increased national product and wealth, improved political freedom, improved labor market, and in greater international esteem. A country that enjoys high international esteem is likely to participate in many international organizations and treaties and its citizens are likely to enjoy advantageous visa regulations when traveling abroad. Furthermore, products from countries with high esteem will likely command high consumer demand and create healthy profit margins on the global market, benefitting exports from these countries.

As observed by Roztocki and Weistroffer (2015), most published research related to ICT and socioeconomic development has been conducted at the country and organization levels. In contrast, research directed at the individual level is rather scarce. Although it may appear intuitive that positive changes in the socioeconomic standings at the country and organizational levels automatically lead to positive changes at the individual level, this may not always be the case. For example, a global organization may improve its socioeconomic standing at the organizational level by successfully consolidating its international operations. The impact of this consolidation strategy may be positive for countries where new operations are established, but negative for countries where operations are discontinued. For individuals, the socioeconomic impact of this strategy may be significant for people located near the headquarters of the consolidated operations, where many high-paid executive jobs are created, but may do little for individuals with low-paid jobs at other locations. Thus, a multilevel perspective in research on socioeconomic development is important.

Socioeconomic development requires a commercial base to facilitate income-generating business activities and provide needed services. To achieve positive and sustainable socioeconomic development, individuals and organizations must participate in productive economic activity, where productive economic activity is defined as activity that results in tangible business value. For individuals, this may be in the form of enduring employment or in the form of successful entrepreneurship. For an organization, productive economic activity generally means gainfully serving the needs of its customers. The role at the country level is to provide the regulatory backdrop to enable individuals and organizations to carry out their economic activities effectively and efficiently, though sometimes governments may also assume some of the roles of private organizations directly. Regulatory backdrop is not limited to domestic business operations but also may include promoting exports and supporting operations of domestic firms abroad.

Important business activities and services that enable or impact socioeconomic development include e-commerce, online and mobile social networks, navigation systems, e-government, online and mobile broadcasting, online teaching and training, and communication networks such as email, texting, tweeting, and blogging. The focus is on activities and services that are commercially productive. For example, texting may be used for mere entertainment, but it may also serve as a means for a business to communicate with customers and actively sell products.

ICT, including high-speed computing, Internet, mobile telephony, geographic positioning systems, and Wi-Fi are major enablers of these business activities and services. For example, Madon (2000) shows how the Internet and other ICT activities exert a positive impact on economic activities, including health care and access to education. Overall, ICT sustains the commercial base that facilitates the income-generating business activities.

However, according to the environmental hypothesis, successful application of ICT should align with the existing business and regulatory environment (Roztocki & Weistroffer, 2011b). Business culture and government policies may encourage or hinder the successful execution of business activities. Furthermore, these business activities depend on an existing infrastructure. Unfortunately, many developing regions lack the strong infrastructure and favorable business culture and regulatory environment for successful business activities. Gross National Income in these countries is often only a small fraction of what it is in developed economies (Kowal & Roztocki, 2013).

Business activities and services are very much affected by government policies. Governments may encourage (or discourage) business activities and services via regulations, tax policies, subsidies, and other means. Policies may favor small domestic firms or large multinational corporations. A problem in many transition and emerging economies is that their tax policies often benefit global corporations while hampering the domestic commercial base. Evidently, governments also have a large bearing on infrastructure, both indirectly through regulations and directly, by initiating programs to build new and maintain existing infrastructure. Furthermore, some research has shown that government support and quality legal framework lead to better technology utilization (Pick & Azari, 2011).

In addition to ICT, the infrastructure, and the favorable business and regulatory environment, business activities require human capital and social capital. Human capital is defined as the skill and knowledge base necessary to generate a specific output (Schultz, 1961). High level of competency, skills, and knowledge generally lead to higher personal income and better occupations, resulting in higher job satisfaction and quality of life (Kowal & Roztocki, 2015a). Unfortunately, human capital in many developing and emerging economies is fragile (Kowal & Roztocki, 2015b). For example, Markus, Axline, Petrie, and Tanis (2000) observed that many enterprise resource planning (ERP) implementations fail to deliver expected financial benefits because of fragile human capital, manifested in a lack of participation and in insufficient skills and knowledge of the employees.

Social capital is defined as the value of social relations that can be utilized to facilitate business activities (Adler & Kwon, 2002) and support innovation (Zheng, 2010), including acceptance of new ICT-enabled services. At the individual level, expanded social relations may help secure an attractive job, leading to higher income and better career advancement. At the company level, expanded social relations may help secure a contract or a new business partnership. At the country level, social relations may help in international negotiations and treaties. Like human capital, social capital in many developing and emerging economies is fragile. In fact, deficiencies in human and social capital appear to be one of the major reasons why many transition and emerging economies struggle to create a robust commercial base that will enable sustainable socioeconomic development in these regions.

3. Framework for ICT impact on socioeconomic development

Figure 1 shows our conceptual framework. As discussed above, ICT enables business activities and services, which in turn impact the individual, organizational, and country-level socioeconomic achievements. Business activities and services are at the center of our conceptual model, as these activities provide the means that enable socioeconomic development. Business activities and services are influenced by government policies, business culture, and existing infrastructure and also depend on human and social capital. The individual, organizational, and government-level socioeconomic achievements in turn influence government policies, business culture, and infrastructure, and determine the standing of human and social capital.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework of ICT supported socioeconomic development.

Socioeconomic standing may be measured at individual, organizational and country levels. For individuals, key socioeconomic factors include education, health, personal income, quality of life, standard of living, social liberty, personal wealth, and occupation. These factors are not independent of each other and we do not claim that these are the only important factors, but they do comprise a major part of the socioeconomic impact at the individual level. Moreover, although these factors are not independent of each other, they are not easily transferable. Thus, for example, though it seems evident that personal wealth is supportive in achieving an excellent education, attaining education is a long process, requiring not only wealth, but also certain skills, talents, and persistence.

Education may be measured in number of years of schooling but also encompasses the quality and prestige of the institutions attended, and indeed in the attitude of the learner. Health is defined as freedom from disease and physical or mental disability and is thereby related to life expectancy. Personal income is disposable money an individual generates through work and physical and intellectual property. Quality of life is the level of satisfaction an individual obtains from his or her style of life. Standard of living is defined by possession of items and availability of services that surround an individual’s living space. Social liberty is defined as emancipation from social and cultural confines. Personal wealth is the possession of material and nonmaterial assets, including financial means, real estate, and equipment, as well as patents and intellectual property that may generate royalties. Occupation is defined as a person’s principal means of livelihood. A positive change in any of these factors constitutes socioeconomic development.

For organizations, key socioeconomic factors include global competitiveness, business opportunities, organizational income, consumer demand, business reputation and brands, business assets, and workforce. Global competitiveness is defined as the ability to successfully confront international corporations in the global market place. In this context, it is important to point out that the global market place includes the domestic market. Thus, even if a company does not have ambitions to export its products, it is very likely that it will encounter global competitors in its home market. Business opportunity is defined as the prospect to do business, determined by a ready market and supportive environment. Organizational income refers to the cash flow generated by its business activities. Consumer demand is the desire by the populace to acquire particular products or services. Business reputation refers to how the organization is perceived by various stakeholders, such as business partners, suppliers, current and prospective employees, financial institutions, as well as customers. A brand is what distinguishes a company and its products from its competitors and their products, in the perception of its customers. Business assets are financial funds, real estate, and other tangible as well as intangible possessions. Workforce refers to the human resources available to an organization.

For countries, key socioeconomic factors include national product, political freedom, national resources, international esteem, and labor market. National product is the market value of all the products and services generated. Political freedom is the absence of unreasonable and disabling restraints on societal actions. National resources are the natural and manufactured resources of a country, including land, industry, and other assets. International esteem is similar to organizational brand, in that it distinguishes a country as to how it is perceived in other countries. Finally, the labor market refers to the quality and quantity of the potentially productive population.

Business activities and services make up the centerpiece of our conceptual framework, as their effectiveness and efficiency impacts the socioeconomic standing of individuals, organizations, and countries. Though almost all business activities and services nowadays are supported by ICT in some form, some business activities and services are more directly enabled by ICT, including e-commerce, e-government, online and social networks, geographic navigation systems, online teaching, online and mobile broadcasting, texting, tweeting, and blogging, and many others not listed here. The effectiveness and efficiency of business activities and services are dependent on the pervading business and general culture, government regulations, and policies, as well as human and social capital. Longer term, the business and general culture and the government policies are in turn affected by the individual, organizational, and countrywide socioeconomic standing, which also determines the human and social capital, thus creating a full cycle.

All ICT play a supporting role in business activities and services, but some ICT directly enabling some of the listed business activities and services in our framework include the Internet, mobile telephony, geographic positioning systems, wireless technology, as well as the ever-increasing power and speed of computing resources.

4. Papers in this special issue

This special issue has eight papers that focus on various contributions of ICT to socioeconomic development. These papers all deal with some aspects of the framework shown in Figure 1. Other pieces of the framework have been studied in previous research, and yet other pieces still await investigation.

The first paper, Human Development and Macro-Economic Returns within the Context of Investments in Telecoms: An Exploration of Transition Economies, by Sergey Samoilenko and Kweku-Muata Osei-Bryson, investigates the impact of some socioeconomic factors, measured by the human development index (HDI), on macroeconomic returns, specifically gross domestic product (GDP), revenues obtained from telecom investments, and total factor productivity (TFP) in the context of 18 transition economies. GDP is included as national product in our framework shown in Figure 1 among the country-level socioeconomic standings. HDI, a composite statistic of life expectancy, education, and income per capita, is included at the personal level in our framework as education, personal income, and health, and thus as a determinant for the human capital that provides the foundation for business activities and services.

The investigation is conducted at the country level in the context of transition economies, that is, countries that are in transition, or have recently transitioned, from a planned economic system to a market-driven one (Roztocki & Weistroffer, 2008, 2009, 2011a). Using data on 18 transition economies for the year 2000, obtained from publicly available databases, like the World Bank, the International Telecommunications Union, and the United Nations, the authors divide the investigated countries into two groups, the more efficient leaders and the less efficient followers, based on previous published research (Samoilenko & Osei-Bryson, 2010). Leaders include Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovenia, and Slovakia, and followers include Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Romania, and Ukraine. Investments in telecoms are used as a surrogate for ICT investments. The results of this study indicate that HDI impacts GDP and TFP for the leaders but not for the followers. There seems to be no difference between leaders and followers regarding the effects of HDI on revenues from telecoms.

In the second paper, Technology Diffusion in the Telecommunications Services Industry of Malaysia, Chan-Yuan Wong, VGR Chandran, and Boon-Kwee Ng examine diffusion trends for telecommunications technology development and the contribution of economic rent in the transformation of telecommunications in Malaysia, an emerging economy. Economic rent refers to organizational profits derived from nonmarket factors such as market monopolies, government subsidies, and innovations. This fits with the influences of government policies and existing infrastructure on productive business activities and services shown in the conceptual framework in Figure 1. The data were collected through multiple interviews conducted in 2010–2012 at several organizations, including Telekom Malaysia, Malaysian Institute of Microelectronic Systems, and Multimedia Development Corporation. The authors conclude that government policies and rents play an instrumental role in the diffusion of telecommunication technology.

The third paper, Where do Investments in Telecoms Come From? Developing and Testing a Framework of Sustained Economic Impact of Investments in ICT, by Sergey Samoilenko, examines the cyclical relationship between ICT and economic outcomes, using telecoms as surrogate for ICT. The data from 18 transition economies span the years 2003–2008. The results of the study indicate that investments in telecommunication technology contribute to economic growth via higher personal income as well as increased international trade. The results further indicate that for those transition economies classified as leaders, increased international trade and higher personal income contribute to sustained investments in ICT. This paper thus provides evidence in support of the relationships between several concepts in our framework in Figure 1. ICT, as measured by investments in telecoms, and the resulting increase in business activity, indirectly assessed by employment and labor participation, impacts socioeconomic standing in the form of national product, disposable income, and increased foreign trade (related to international esteem). The paper further supports the feedback loop from these outcomes to sustained investments in ICT and thus business activities.

The fourth paper, Information and Communications Technology Acceptance by Youth Entrepreneurs in Rural Malaysian Communities: The Mediating Effects of Attitude and Entrepreneurial Intention, by Zeinab Zaremohzzabieh, Bahaman Abu Samah, Mahazan Muhammad, Siti Zobidah Omar, Jusang Bolong, Salleh Bin Hj Hassan, and Hayrol Azril Mohamed Shaffril, examines acceptance of ICT in rural Malaysia based on survey data from 400 entrepreneurs aged 17–40. Using modified versions of the technology acceptance model with three exogenous variables (perceived ease of use of the new technology, subjective norms of potential user, and perceived usefulness of new technology) and three endogenous variables (entrepreneurial intention, actual usage of the technology, and attitude), this research confirms the relation of social capital in our framework (represented by social norm) and engagement in business activities and services (measured as entrepreneurial intention and actual usage in this research).

The fifth paper, ICT Adoption and Usage in Africa: Towards an Efficiency Assessment, by David Kayisire and Jiuchang Wei, examines ICT adoption at the country level using data from African Bank of Development, Economic Intelligence Unit, International Telecommunication Union, Internet World Stats, and World Bank. In this data envelopment analysis, investigation of 40 African countries, GDP per capita (corresponding to national product in our framework), secondary school enrollment (represented by individual education level and by human capital in our framework), investments in telecoms (part of business assets and of existing infrastructure in our framework), and democracy index (represented by political freedom in our framework) are used as input variables. Internet usage, computer ownership, and social network participation (business activities and services in our framework) are used as output variables.

The sixth paper, The Relative Importance of Monetary and Non-Monetary Drivers for Information and Communication Technology Acceptance in Rural Agribusiness, by Md. Mahbubul Alam and Christian Wagner, examines the drivers for acceptance of a digital procurement system by Bangladeshi sugarcane growers. The data were collected via semi-structured interviews of eight small sugarcane farmers. The results suggest that procedural fairness and uncertainty reduction can be more important than monetary benefits. With respect to our framework, this study relates to the effects that government policies and business culture have on business activities and services.

The seventh paper, User Acceptance of e-government Services: Examining an e-tax Filing and Payment System in Thailand, by Wannasiri Bhuasiri, Hwansoo Lee, and Andrew Ciganek, seeks to determine factors that influence citizens’ acceptance of e-government systems. The analysis is based on survey data with 372 valid responses collected in March 2011. The results suggest that performance expectancy, facilitating conditions, and social influence are significant factors in user acceptance of the electronic tax filing and paying system. This relates to the influences of business culture, existing infrastructure, and social capital on business activities and services in our framework.

The view-from-practice paper, Technology and Vulnerability in Early Warning: Ethical Use of IT in Dangerous Places, by Joseph G. Bock, deals with a very specific socioeconomic impact of ICT, namely the potentially negative as well as positive implications of emerging technologies and social media usage for individual quality of life and societal well-being. The author discusses the shift of emphasis to early warning and early response at a local level and offers seven ethical principles to guide the use of ICT in conflict early warning and early response initiatives.

Though the papers in this issue only cover a small part of our proposed framework, they illustrate how this framework may guide future research in structuring new ideas and findings. The framework should be viewed as dynamic and a work in progress, and we fully expect future researchers to modify, amend, and validate the framework based on new developments and their own specific research results.

We envision that this framework of ICT impact on socioeconomic development will help direct future research efforts to more practicable outcomes benefitting many segments of the population, primarily in less developed countries. Unfortunately, much of current research is very conceptual, and its relevance is not always apparent. Despite the potential value of these studies, the authors often fail to convey workable advice on how this inherent value can be realized. For research to be truly useful, metrics for the progress of socioeconomic development are essential. Of course, measuring the impact of development is often a complex issue, as positive development, such as an increased industrial base, may often be accompanied by negative side effects, such as pollution and worsened dietary habits. Our framework may help researchers in structuring, explaining, and clarifying their contributions to socioeconomic development, and most importantly, help them in offering convincing and viable advice to politicians, employers, business managers, educators, and other decision-makers in developing regions.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Robert M. Davison, James B. Pick and Doug Vogel for their comments on a preliminary version of this editorial. We would also like to thank Sajda Qureshi for guidance throughout the process and making this special issue possible.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Narcyz Roztocki is a Professor in the School of Business at the State University of New York at New Paltz, USA and a Professor in the Department of Accounting at the Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland. His research interests include IS/IT investment evaluation, IS/IT productivity, IS/IT investments in transition/emerging economies, technology project management, and e-commerce. He has been published in numerous journals including the European Journal of Information Systems, the Journal of Strategic Information System, the Journal of Computer Information Systems, the Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, the Journal of Global Information Technology Management, and in proceedings of AMCIS, DSI, ECIS, ECITE, and HICSS, among many others. He is an associate editor of the journal Information Technology for Development and the journal Electronic Commerce Research and Applications as well as a senior editor for the journal Information Systems Management.

Heinz Roland Weistroffer is a Professor of Information Systems in the School of Business at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia, USA. His research interests include information technology for development, systems analysis and design, and computer assisted decision-making. He has published in Journal of Strategic Information Systems, Information Technology for Development, Information Systems Frontiers, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, and European Journal of Operational Research among many other journals, as well as in numerous conference proceedings such as AMCIS, HICCS, and ECIS. He is an associate editor of the journal Information Technology for Development.

ORCiD

Narcyz Roztocki http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0324-9429

H. Roland Weistroffer http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3745-5143