• Articles

  • Inclusion

Three Belgian sociologists examine digital inclusion through the lens of the "economies of scale" model

Published on 26 May 2021
Update on 26 September 2022
Download in PDF

Summary

Research on digital inequalities generally focuses on the uses and users of digital technologies. Three Belgian sociologists, Périne Brotcorne, Carole Bonnetier and Patricia Vendramin (Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche Travail, État et Société, CIRTES) have undertaken to understand these inequalities through the prism of service providers by questioning the influence of digitization strategies on the design (the "shaping") of online services. " This shift in analysis from users to service providers allows us to pay more attention to a question that has not yet been studied: the collective responsibility of those who develop digital services of general interest in maintaining an offer that is accessible to all, an essential condition for the real equality of citizens in front of the public service.

To this end, Périne Brotcorne, Carole Bonnetier and Patricia Vendramin conducted three case studies within three Belgian public interest organizations: a regional public transport company, a mutual health insurance company and a regional public interest organization, an IT partner of all regional, local and community public institutions. "Overall, the interviews aimed to capture the registers of justification mobilized by the interviewed actors regarding the purposes, place and role of digital inclusion in the digitization process."

" Digital inclusion, a political slogan and a scientific concept "

The authors of this study trace the genealogy of the notion of digital inclusion: questioning in the 2000s of the scientific value of the very category of "digital divide", then inclusion in the field of the sociology of inequalities, and the recent appearance of the concept of a third-degree digital divide, "in line with those of the so-called first-degree digital divide (inequalities in access) and second-degree digital divide (inequalities in competencies and uses)" . This term refers to "inequalities in the capacity of individuals to convert the opportunities offered by digital technologies into effective benefits in terms of social inclusion".

"If, at the beginning of the 2000s, public policies to fight digital inequalities, both European and national, adopted the reference framework of the "digital divide", they have gradually shifted to that of "digital inclusion"... The reclassification by political programs of the digital divide in terms of digital inclusion is not insignificant. It reflects a political will not to limit itself to measures aimed at removing obstacles, but to focus on the development of individuals' capacities to use these technologies to increase their social, professional or cultural capital.

Digitization, an obligatory passage, a "digital unthinkable

"Most of the actors we met agree that the process of digitizing services is unavoidable," observe the three academics. " The necessity of the digital transition seems to be imposed without ever being discussed or questioned with regard to the principles traditionally applied to services of general interest. However, the digitization of services of general interest is not the subject of a clearly defined and coordinated strategy within the organizations surveyed. "It is as if the certainty of being faced with an inescapable process was accompanied by uncertainty about the collective steps to be taken to respond proactively without being subjected to it.
  • The IT partner of a public authority cannot claim to have its own digital strategy, since its approach is part of that of the region it serves.
  • For mutual health insurance companies, adapting to the digital transition appears to be an absolute priority in view of the overall evolution of the sector.
  • In the transport sector, digitization is bringing about major transformations that traditional players are trying to anticipate so as not to be left behind by the new private players.
"In short, most of the professionals we met have a relatively fragmented vision of the digitization of services (...) This evolution is seen as inevitable and desirable to such an extent that it becomes difficult to envisage it as potentially disruptive to the missions of general interest. Thus, digital technology can only be evaluated according to its own criteria and escapes criticism from other orders of magnitude. When uncertainties due to changes in organizations are mentioned, they are never attributed to technologies as such, but to human or institutional obstacles, such as the lack of human resources, the cumbersome nature of the organization's operations and/or the constraints inherent to the sector of activity or its general interest mission.

If projects to digitize services are not subject to justification with regard to the principles linked to missions of general interest, how does thinking about the inclusive dimension fit in with the changes made within organizations whose singularity is to serve the common good?

 Digital inclusion through the lens of the economies of scale model

In order to grasp the plurality of rationalities underlying the discourses of the actors interviewed in their survey on the role and place of digital inclusion in their practices of digitization of services, the authors of this study rely on the theoretical model of the economies of magnitude, developed by Luc Boltanski, Laurent Thévenot and Ève Chiapello.

This theoretical model " allows us to show the plurality of principles of justice at work in public interest organizations during the process of digitization of their services . It also allows us to "understand the digitization of services as a situation that profoundly disrupts the stable arrangement of the traditional modalities of access to the services under study. This transformation then generates a "test in justification" (...) As soon as the digital conversion of services creates a situation of instability within organizations, controversies emerge between the actors on the ways to pursue the conduct of missions of general interest; compromises are sought in order to stabilize the situation. In other words, it is through this ordeal that principles and tacit choices are established and then translated into digital devices with more or less inclusive formats.

In their analysis, Périne Brotcorne and Patricia Vendramin focus on four of the six "worlds" identified by Luc Boltanski, Laurent Thévenot and Ève Chiapello:

  • the civic world, which can be linked to the principles governing all services of general interest
  • the commercial world and the industrial world, which are important in projects relating to the digitization of services
  • the project-based world where networking between actors and the ability of users to be connected are the foundations.
In the three organizations studied, the justifications for digital inclusion from the commercial world are mainly provided by the marketing department: "to bring more consumers online so that as many people as possible can take part in their own activities.

Industrial justifications are present in the public transport sector, which is strongly linked to technology. They are also widely used in the comments of the actors of the IT departments, in charge of the conception and design of digital services, whatever the organization considered.

The justifications relating to the civic world refer to the general interest missions specific to the three organizations. Some of the actors interviewed subscribe to this more than others because of their professional function.

Provisional compromises, arrangements, arbitrations

Faced with the coexistence of divergent rationales in favor of digital inclusion, the field survey reveals the emergence of compromises aimed at ensuring a balance between these rationales while promoting their convergence. "In this sense, the actions observed in favor of digital inclusion are the result of temporary compromises rather than stable agreements around a common normative horizon where the general interest prevails. In addition to their fragile and revocable nature, these arbitrations also reveal the place given to inclusive concerns during the digitization of services (...) The arrangements resulting from compromises between the stakeholders reveal a narrow conception of inclusion through digital technology (...) These actions, considered by the professionals interviewed to be balanced, nonetheless appear questionable. They are more like temporary tinkering than permanent initiatives aimed at promoting inclusive uses in the long term, the specificity of which lies, as stated in the section above, in the development of individuals' power to act through technology, regardless of their social condition.

To overcome what looks like a "technical logic of digital inclusion", the authors conclude, " it is essential that the digitization practices of public services be deployed according to a civic logic where concerns related to the equal treatment of users and the defense of a general interest that is not the sum of individual interests prevail. The idea here is not to oppose the digitization of services of general interest, but to dare to debate it in order to openly and collectively question its aims.

Référence :

Sources

Three Belgian sociologists examine digital inclusion through the lens of the "economies of scale" model

Research on digital inequalities generally focuses on the uses and users of digital technologies. Three Belgian sociologists, Périne Brotcorne, Carole Bonnetier and Patricia Vendramin (Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche Travail, État et Société, CIRTES) have undertaken to understand these inequalities through the prism of service providers by questioning the influence of digitization strategies on the design (the "shaping") of online services. " This shift in analysis from users to service providers allows us to pay more attention to a question that has not yet been studied: the collective responsibility of those who develop digital services of general interest in maintaining an offer that is accessible to all, an essential condition for the real equality of citizens in front of the public service.

To this end, Périne Brotcorne, Carole Bonnetier and Patricia Vendramin conducted three case studies within three Belgian public interest organizations: a regional public transport company, a mutual health insurance company and a regional public interest organization, an IT partner of all regional, local and community public institutions. "Overall, the interviews aimed to capture the registers of justification mobilized by the interviewed actors regarding the purposes, place and role of digital inclusion in the digitization process."

" Digital inclusion, a political slogan and a scientific concept "

The authors of this study trace the genealogy of the notion of digital inclusion: questioning in the 2000s of the scientific value of the very category of "digital divide", then inclusion in the field of the sociology of inequalities, and the recent appearance of the concept of a third-degree digital divide, "in line with those of the so-called first-degree digital divide (inequalities in access) and second-degree digital divide (inequalities in competencies and uses)" . This term refers to "inequalities in the capacity of individuals to convert the opportunities offered by digital technologies into effective benefits in terms of social inclusion".

"If, at the beginning of the 2000s, public policies to fight digital inequalities, both European and national, adopted the reference framework of the "digital divide", they have gradually shifted to that of "digital inclusion"... The reclassification by political programs of the digital divide in terms of digital inclusion is not insignificant. It reflects a political will not to limit itself to measures aimed at removing obstacles, but to focus on the development of individuals' capacities to use these technologies to increase their social, professional or cultural capital.

Digitization, an obligatory passage, a "digital unthinkable

"Most of the actors we met agree that the process of digitizing services is unavoidable," observe the three academics. " The necessity of the digital transition seems to be imposed without ever being discussed or questioned with regard to the principles traditionally applied to services of general interest. However, the digitization of services of general interest is not the subject of a clearly defined and coordinated strategy within the organizations surveyed. "It is as if the certainty of being faced with an inescapable process was accompanied by uncertainty about the collective steps to be taken to respond proactively without being subjected to it.
  • The IT partner of a public authority cannot claim to have its own digital strategy, since its approach is part of that of the region it serves.
  • For mutual health insurance companies, adapting to the digital transition appears to be an absolute priority in view of the overall evolution of the sector.
  • In the transport sector, digitization is bringing about major transformations that traditional players are trying to anticipate so as not to be left behind by the new private players.
"In short, most of the professionals we met have a relatively fragmented vision of the digitization of services (...) This evolution is seen as inevitable and desirable to such an extent that it becomes difficult to envisage it as potentially disruptive to the missions of general interest. Thus, digital technology can only be evaluated according to its own criteria and escapes criticism from other orders of magnitude. When uncertainties due to changes in organizations are mentioned, they are never attributed to technologies as such, but to human or institutional obstacles, such as the lack of human resources, the cumbersome nature of the organization's operations and/or the constraints inherent to the sector of activity or its general interest mission.

If projects to digitize services are not subject to justification with regard to the principles linked to missions of general interest, how does thinking about the inclusive dimension fit in with the changes made within organizations whose singularity is to serve the common good?

 Digital inclusion through the lens of the economies of scale model

In order to grasp the plurality of rationalities underlying the discourses of the actors interviewed in their survey on the role and place of digital inclusion in their practices of digitization of services, the authors of this study rely on the theoretical model of the economies of magnitude, developed by Luc Boltanski, Laurent Thévenot and Ève Chiapello.

This theoretical model " allows us to show the plurality of principles of justice at work in public interest organizations during the process of digitization of their services . It also allows us to "understand the digitization of services as a situation that profoundly disrupts the stable arrangement of the traditional modalities of access to the services under study. This transformation then generates a "test in justification" (...) As soon as the digital conversion of services creates a situation of instability within organizations, controversies emerge between the actors on the ways to pursue the conduct of missions of general interest; compromises are sought in order to stabilize the situation. In other words, it is through this ordeal that principles and tacit choices are established and then translated into digital devices with more or less inclusive formats.

In their analysis, Périne Brotcorne and Patricia Vendramin focus on four of the six "worlds" identified by Luc Boltanski, Laurent Thévenot and Ève Chiapello:

  • the civic world, which can be linked to the principles governing all services of general interest
  • the commercial world and the industrial world, which are important in projects relating to the digitization of services
  • the project-based world where networking between actors and the ability of users to be connected are the foundations.
In the three organizations studied, the justifications for digital inclusion from the commercial world are mainly provided by the marketing department: "to bring more consumers online so that as many people as possible can take part in their own activities.

Industrial justifications are present in the public transport sector, which is strongly linked to technology. They are also widely used in the comments of the actors of the IT departments, in charge of the conception and design of digital services, whatever the organization considered.

The justifications relating to the civic world refer to the general interest missions specific to the three organizations. Some of the actors interviewed subscribe to this more than others because of their professional function.

Provisional compromises, arrangements, arbitrations

Faced with the coexistence of divergent rationales in favor of digital inclusion, the field survey reveals the emergence of compromises aimed at ensuring a balance between these rationales while promoting their convergence. "In this sense, the actions observed in favor of digital inclusion are the result of temporary compromises rather than stable agreements around a common normative horizon where the general interest prevails. In addition to their fragile and revocable nature, these arbitrations also reveal the place given to inclusive concerns during the digitization of services (...) The arrangements resulting from compromises between the stakeholders reveal a narrow conception of inclusion through digital technology (...) These actions, considered by the professionals interviewed to be balanced, nonetheless appear questionable. They are more like temporary tinkering than permanent initiatives aimed at promoting inclusive uses in the long term, the specificity of which lies, as stated in the section above, in the development of individuals' power to act through technology, regardless of their social condition.

To overcome what looks like a "technical logic of digital inclusion", the authors conclude, " it is essential that the digitization practices of public services be deployed according to a civic logic where concerns related to the equal treatment of users and the defense of a general interest that is not the sum of individual interests prevail. The idea here is not to oppose the digitization of services of general interest, but to dare to debate it in order to openly and collectively question its aims.

Référence :

Sources

Labo Société Numérique

Labo République Française Agence nationale de cohésion des territoires
Three Belgian sociologists examine digital inclusion through the lens of the "economies of scale" model