Infrastructure and the rural-urban divide in high-speed residential internet access

International Regional Science Review

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 249-273

  Whitacre, Brian E ^a   Mills, Bradford F ^b  

^a OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Digital divide; High speed; Internet; Logit decomposition; Rural

Indexed keywords

BOOTSTRAPPING; INFRASTRUCTURE; INTERNET; LOGIT ANALYSIS;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34250622880     PISSN: 01600176     EISSN: 15526925     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0160017607301606     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Bauer, J. 2005. Regulation and state ownership: Conflicts and complementarities in EU telecommunications. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics 76: 151-77.
2. Bimber, B. 2000. Measuring the gender gap on the Internet. Social Science Quarterly 81: 868-76.
3. Blinder, A. 1973. Wage discrimination: Reduced form and structural variables. Journal of Human Resources 8: 436-55.
4. Chakraborty, J., and M. Bosman. 2005. Measuring the digital divide in the United States: Race, income, and personal computer ownership. The Professional Geographer 57: 395-410.
5. Consumer Electronics Association. 2006. Broadband and the home of tomorrow - March 2006. Used with Permission.
6. Cooper, M., and G. Kimmelman. 1999. The digital divide confronts the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Washington DC: Consumer Federation of America.
7. Downes, T., and S. Greenstein. 2002. Universal access and local Internet markets in the US. Research Policy 31: 1035-52.
8. Fairlie, R. 2003. An extension of the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition technique to logit and probit models. Economic Growth Center: Yale University. Paper Number 873.
9. Federal Communications Commission (FCC)-Industry Analysis and Technology Division. 2004. High speed services for Internet access: Status as of June 30, 2004. Available at http://www.fcc.gov/wcb/iatd/comp.html
10. Fellows, D. 2005. How women and men use the Internet. Pew Internet & American Life Project. http://pewinternet.org/
11. Gillett, S., W. Lehr, and C. Osorio. 2004. Local Government Broadband Initiatives. Telecommunications Policy 28: 537-58.
12. Gillett, S., W. Lehr, and C. Osorio. 2006. Municipal electric utilities' role in telecommunication services. Telecommunications Policy 30: 464-80.
13. Gooding, H. 2005. Identifying critical factors for developing effective rural community technology centers. Unpublished Dissertation. West Virginia University, College of Human Resources and Education.
14. Graham, S., and A. Aurigi. 1997. Virtual cities, social polarization, and the crisis in urban public space. Journal of Urban Technology 4: 19-52.
15. Greenstein, S., and M. Lizardo. 1999. Determinants of the regional distribution of information technology infrastructure in U.S. In The electronic village: Public policy issues of the information economy, edited by Dale Orr and Tom Wilson. Toronto: C. D. Howe Institute.
16. Griliches, Z. 1957. Hybrid corn: An exploration in the economics of technological change. Econometrica 25: 501-22.
17. Grubesic, T., and M. O'Kelly. 2002. Using points of presence to measure accessibility to the commercial Internet. The Professional Geographer 54: 259-78.
18. Horrigan, J.B. 2001. Online communities: Networks that nurture long-distance relationships and local ties. Pew Internet & American Life Project. http://pewinternet.org/
19. Horrigan, J.B.2004. PEW Internet data project memo: Home broadband adoption has increased 60% in the past year and use of DSL lines is surging. Pew Internet and American Life Project. http://pewinternet.org/
20. Horrigan, J.B. 2006. Home broadband adoption 2006: Home broadband adoption is going mainstream and that means user generated content is coming from all kinds of Internet users. Pew Internet and American Life Project. http://pewinternet.org/
21. Knowledge Networks, 2006. Spring 2006 ownership and trend report. The Home Technology Monitor. November.
22. Kruger, L. 2005. Broadband Internet access and the digital divide: Federal assistance programs. Congressional Research Service - The Library of Congress.
23. Leighton, W.A. 2001. Broadband deployment and the digital divide. Cato Policy Analysis No. 410. August 7.
24. Malecki, E.J. 2003. Digital development in rural areas: Potentials and pitfalls. Journal of Rural Studies 19: 201-14.
25. McConnaughey, J., and W. Lader. 1998. Falling through the Net II: New data on the digital divide. National Telecommunications and Information Administration, http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/net2/falling.html
26. Mills, B.F. and B. Whitacre. 2003. Understanding the non-metropolitan-metropolitan digital divide. Growth and Change 34: 219-43.
27. Miniaci, R., and M. Parisi. 2006. Social interactions and the digital divide: Identification and policy implications. Contributions to Economic Analysis and Policy 5: Article 29.
28. National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). 1995. Falling through the Net: A survey of the "have nots" in rural and urban America. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
29. National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). 1998. Falling through the Net II: New data on the digital divide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
30. National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). 1999. Falling through the Net: Defining the digital divide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
31. National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). 2002. A nation online: How Americans are expanding their use of the Internet. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
32. Neumark, D. 1988. Employers discriminatory behavior and the estimation of wage discrimination. Journal of Human Resources 23: 279-95.
33. Oaxaca, R. 1973. Male-female differentials in urban labor markets. International Economic Review 14: 693-709.
34. Oaxaca, R., and M. Ransom. 1994. On discrimination and decomposition of wage differentials. Journal of Econometrics. 61: 5-21.
35. Pinkham Group. 2002. DSL deployment analysis of RBOCs and independent LECs in metropolitan and rural areas-Q4 2001. Available at http://www.dslprime.com/a/pinkham_deployment.htm
36. Prieger, J. 2003. The supply side of the digital divide: Is there equal availability in the broadband Internet access market? Economic Inquiry 41: 346-63.
37. Rose, R. 2003. Oxford internet survey results. Oxford, UK: The Oxford Internet Institute.
38. Servon, L., and M. Nelson. 2001. Community technology centers: Narrowing the digital divide in low-income, urban communities. Journal of Urban Affairs 23: 279-90.
39. Sinai, T., and J. Waldfogel. 2004. Geography and the Internet: Is the Internet a substitute or a complement for cities? Journal of Urban Economics 56: 1-24.
40. Strover, S. 2001. Rural Internet connectivity. Telecommunications Policy 25: 331-47.
41. Television and Cable Factbook, Cable and Services. 2000. Number 68: Cable Volumes 1-2. Washington, DC: Warren Publishing Inc.
42. Television and Cable Factbook, Cable and Services. 2001. Number 69: Cable Volumes 1-2. Washington, DC: Warren Publishing Inc.
43. Television and Cable Factbook, Cable and Services. 2003. Number 71: Cable Volumes 1-2. Washington, DC: Warren Publishing Inc.
44. Townsend, A. 2001. The Internet and the rise of the new network cities, 1969-1999. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 28: 39-58.