The Inclusive Internet Index 2020 Methodology report - A report by The Economist Intelligence Unit

Page created by Kathy Schroeder
 
CONTINUE READING
The Inclusive Internet Index 2020
Methodology report
A report by The Economist Intelligence Unit

                                              Sponsored by
The world leader in global business intelligence
The Economist Intelligence Unit (The EIU) is the research and analysis division of The Economist Group, the sister company
to The Economist newspaper. Created in 1946, we have over 70 years’ experience in helping businesses, financial firms and
governments to understand how the world is changing and how that creates opportunities to be seized and risks to be managed.

Given that many of the issues facing the world have an international (if not global) dimension, The EIU is ideally positioned to be
commentator, interpreter and forecaster on the phenomenon of globalisation as it gathers pace and impact.

EIU subscription services
The world’s leading organisations rely on our subscription services for data, analysis and forecasts to keep them informed about
what is happening around the world. We specialise in:
   •C  ountry Analysis: Access to regular, detailed country-specific economic and political forecasts, as well as assessments of
      the business and regulatory environments in different markets.
   • Risk Analysis: Our risk services identify actual and potential threats around the world and help our clients understand the
      implications for their organisations.
   • Industry Analysis: Five year forecasts, analysis of key themes and news analysis for six key industries in 60 major
      economies. These forecasts are based on the latest data and in-depth analysis of industry trends.

EIU Consulting
EIU Consulting is a bespoke service designed to provide solutions specific to our customers’ needs. We specialise in these key
sectors:
   • EIU Consumer: We help consumer-facing companies to enter new markets as well as deliver greater success in current
      markets. We work globally, supporting senior management with strategic initiatives, M&A due diligence, demand forecasting
      and other issues of fundamental importance to their corporations. Find out more at eiu.com/consumer
   • Healthcare: Together with our two specialised consultancies, Bazian and Clearstate, The EIU helps healthcare organisations
      build and maintain successful and sustainable businesses across the healthcare ecosystem. Find out more at: eiu.com/
      healthcare
   • Public Policy: Trusted by the sector’s most influential stakeholders, our global public policy practice provides evidence-
      based research for policy-makers and stakeholders seeking clear and measurable outcomes. Find out more at: eiu.com/
      publicpolicy

The Economist Corporate Network
The Economist Corporate Network (ECN) is The Economist Group’s advisory service for organisational leaders seeking to better
understand the economic and business environments of global markets. Delivering independent, thought-provoking content,
ECN provides clients with the knowledge, insight, and interaction that support better-informed strategies and decisions.

The Network is part of The Economist Intelligence Unit and is led by experts with in-depth understanding of the geographies and
markets they oversee. The Network’s membership-based operations cover Asia-Pacific, the Middle East, and Africa. Through a
distinctive blend of interactive conferences, specially designed events, C-suite discussions, member briefings, and high-calibre
research, The Economist Corporate Network delivers a range of macro (global, regional, national, and territorial) as well as
industry-focused analysis on prevailing conditions and forecast trends.
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                Contents

                The Inclusive Internet Index 2020: Methodology                                               2

                   Acknowledgements                                                                          2

                   Scoring criteria and categories                                                           3

                   Country selection                                                                         3

                   Updates to the 2020 index                                                                 4

                   Sources and definitions                                                                   8

                   Data modeling                                                                             9

                   Estimating missing data points                                                           11

                   Aggregation and weights                                                                  11

                Appendix 1: Detailed indicator list                                                         13

                Appendix 2: Background indicator list                                                       19

                Appendix 3: List of indicators and weights                                                  21

1                                                                 © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                            The Inclusive Internet Index 2020:
                            Methodology

                            C     ommissioned by Facebook, the fourth iteration of the Inclusive Internet Index assesses and
                                  compares countries according to their enabling environment for adoption and productive use of
                            the Internet. The index outlines the current state of Internet inclusion across 100 countries, and aims to
                            help policymakers and influencers gain a clearer understanding of the factors that contribute to wide
                            and sustainable inclusion.
                               This document contains The Economist Intelligence Unit’s (EIU) methodology for the index. The
                            research results are available at this website.1
                               This year’s index includes a total of 100 countries (80 core countries and 20 rotating countries).
                            This year’s 20 rotating countries replace 20 countries included in last year’s index; these two groups
                            are switched out on an annual basis while the core group of 80 countries remains unchanged. The
                            composition of countries in this year’s Index is provided in the Country selection section below.
                               The EIU made minor changes to the methodology this year. First, this iteration of the index
                            incorporates three new indicators and modifies five previously-included indicators. As the dynamics
                            of Internet inclusion change over time, the indicators in the index must adapt to measure new
                            phenomena, and to ensure that the index remains a leading benchmark. This is particularly true as new
                            technologies such as 5G networks are deployed. The details of these modifications are discussed in the
                            sections below.
                               Some features previously introduced into the second and third iterations of the index were
                            maintained in the latest version. This includes outreach to governments for data confirmation and the
                            “Value of the Internet” survey—which this year focuses on the relationship between the Internet and
                            financial inclusion.

                            Acknowledgements
                            The EIU drew on the expertise of highly respected experts in the field of connectivity and inclusion
                            to provide input on the methodology, data sources and modeling options for the index. This panel of
                            experts was convened initially in 2016 and has interacted annually as necessary.

                            Project director           Sabu Mathai                 sabumathai@eiu.com

                            Project manager            Robert Smith                robertsmith@eiu.com

                            Project analyst            Richard Pedersen            richardpedersen@eiu.com

1
 https://
theinclusiveinternet.eiu.
com

2                                                                                             © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                Scoring criteria and categories
                Categories, indicators and weights used in the index were selected on the basis of EIU analysis, a
                literature review, and consultation with industry experts and specialists from academia and NGOs.
                The EIU gathered data and conducted the research and analysis for all qualitative and quantitative
                indicators.
                    The index contains 56 indicators organized across four categories:
                    1) Availability: This category captures the quality and breadth of available infrastructure
                        required for access. At a basic level, connectivity is limited where the infrastructure needed
                        for connection is insufficient or unavailable. The category looks at Internet use, the quality of
                        the Internet connection, and the type and quality of infrastructure available for Internet and
                        electricity access in both urban and rural areas of the country.
                    2) Affordability: This category examines the cost of accessing the Internet and considers
                        initiatives, whether private or public, to lower costs or other ways to promote access. Cost of
                        access relative to income is a critical factor in Internet adoption. The category includes factors
                        that focus on price, such as the cost of a handset or fixed-line broadband, and the competitive
                        environment for wireless and broadband operators.
                    3) Relevance: This category considers the value of being connected, in terms of useful services
                        and content and the availability of local content. If people do not find value in being connected,
                        then Internet adoption is less likely. The category measures the availability of local content, such
                        as whether basic information or government services are available online in the local language.
                        It also measures whether content and services that stimulate economic activity, such as those
                        relating to health, finance, commerce or entertainment, are available online. The category
                        includes measures which determine the value of the Internet to consumers.
                    4) Readiness: This category measures the capacity among Internet users to take advantage
                        of being online. The category looks at measures such as the level of literacy and educational
                        attainment, the level of web accessibility, privacy regulations, the level of trust in different
                        sources of information found online, national female e-inclusion policies and spectrum policy.
                    Each category receives a score, calculated from a weighted average of the underlying indicator
                scores (see “Weights”). Scores are then scaled from 0 to 100, where 100 represents the strongest
                environment for the adoption and productive use of the Internet. The overall country score (adjusted)
                is a weighted average of the category scores.

3                                                                                  © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                               Country selection
                               The Inclusive Internet Index 2020 evaluates the state of Internet inclusion in 100 countries. The
                               countries selected reflect a mix of high-income, middle-income and low-income countries, with a
                               wide range of geographic and demographic representation. The 100 economies selected for the index
                               represent approximately 91% of the world population and 96% of global GDP.
                                  The fourth year of the index continues the pattern of maintaining a core group of 80 countries and
                               including subsets of 40 non-core countries. In other words, the index swaps out 20 non-core countries
                               on an annual basis. This year, 20 new non-core countries were added to the study, replacing 20 non-
                               core countries that were included in 2019.2 The 100 countries included this year are:

                                                        Americas                    Asia                      Europe              Middle East and Africa
                               Core                 Argentina, Brazil,      Australia, Bangladesh,        Austria, Belgium,          Algeria, Botswana,
                                                      Canada, Chile,       Cambodia, China, India,      Bulgaria, Denmark,              Burkina Faso,
                                                  Colombia, El Salvador,    Indonesia, Iran, Japan,       Estonia, France,            Cameroon, Cote
                                                   Guatemala, Jamaica,      Kazakhstan, Malaysia,        Germany, Greece,         d’Ivoire, Egypt, Ethiopia,
                                                  Mexico, Peru, United       Mongolia, Myanmar,        Hungary, Ireland, Italy,   Ghana, Kenya, Kuwait,
                                                    States, Venezuela        Pakistan, Philippines,     Netherlands, Poland,        Liberia, Madagascar,
                                                                           Singapore, South Korea,       Portugal, Romania,           Malawi, Morocco,
                                                                              Sri Lanka, Taiwan,       Russia, Spain, Sweden,     Mozambique, Namibia,
                                                                              Thailand, Vietnam       Turkey, United Kingdom       Nigeria, Oman, Qatar,
                                                                                                                                   Rwanda, Saudi Arabia,
                                                                                                                                   Senegal, South Africa,
                                                                                                                                      Sudan, Tanzania,
                                                                                                                                   Uganda, United Arab
                                                                                                                                      Emirates, Zambia
                               Rotating              Cuba, Honduras,       Azerbaijan, Hong Kong,         Croatia, Latvia,           Bahrain, Burundi,
                                                   Nicaragua, Paraguay,     Laos, New Zealand,          Lithuania, Slovakia          Gabon, Lebanon,
                                                    Trinidad & Tobago       Papua New Guinea,                                          Zimbabwe
                                                                                Uzbekistan

                               Updates to the 2020 Index
                               The EIU team made several improvements to the index as a result of feedback collected after the
                               launch of the 2019 index. These updates are discussed below.
2
  The non-core countries
that appeared in the third     Changes and additions to the index framework
edition of this index and      A series of updates were made to the index framework to capture developments in the enabling
that were rotated out of
                               environment for Internet inclusivity. The table below summarizes the indicators that were modified or
this edition are: Angola,
Benin, Congo (DRC), Costa      added to the framework.
Rica, Czech Republic,
Dominican Republic,
Ecuador, Finland, Guinea,
Israel, Jordan, Mali, Nepal,
Niger, Panama, Sierra
Leone, Switzerland,
Tunisia, Ukraine and
Uruguay.

4                                                                                                        © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                 Category        Indicator   Indicator name   Modifications/ Additions            Rationale for change
                                 number
                 Availability    1.3.3       Network          Adjusted the weighting              With 3G networks being upgraded to
                                             coverage (min.   scheme for the Infrastructure       4G, 4G has increased in importance.
                                             4G)              sub-category. This involved         Countries have increasingly made 4G
                                                              increasing the relative             coverage their goal due to advancements
                                                              weighting of the 4G                 in network technology. While the
                                                              indicator to reflect the            worldwide availability of 4G continues
                                                              increased importance of             to expand, the speed of 4G around the
                                                              4G connectivity, and in             world varies more greatly from country
                                                              turn reducing the relative          to country.
                                                              weighting of the 3G indicator.
                 Availability    1.3.4       5G deployment    NEW INDICATOR: This                 5G deployment is a forward-looking
                                                              indicator measures                  indicator. Roll-out of 5G has begun in
                                                              whether 5G New Radio                limited cities in advanced economies
                                                              (NR) technology has been            in 2019. It is expected to have wide
                                                              deployed in any area of the         implications for economies and societies
                                                              country, either as a trial or for   at large. This indicator specifically
                                                              commercial or public use.           measures deployment of 5G New
                                                                                                  Radio (NR) technology, and acts as a
                                                                                                  proxy for overall development of 5G
                                                                                                  infrastructure.
                 Affordability   2.1.2       Mobile phone     Adjusted the indicator to           Available data regarding the cost of
                                             cost (prepaid    capture developments in data        500 MB mobile data plans are updated
                                             tariff)          plans. This entailed replacing      less frequently and no longer the
                                                              the 500 GB data plan                international standard for measuring
                                                              measure with a 1 GB data            data plan pricing. With expanded
                                                              plan measure.                       4G coverage and growing adoption,
                                                                                                  statistics regarding data affordability
                                                                                                  most commonly measure 1 GB
                                                                                                  data plans. Also, Internet inclusivity
                                                                                                  organizations such as the Alliance
                                                                                                  for Affordable Internet (A4AI) have
                                                                                                  increased their targets for Internet
                                                                                                  affordability and now define affordable
                                                                                                  access in terms of the price of a 1 GB
                                                                                                  plan.
                 Affordability   2.1.3       Mobile phone     Adjusted the indicator to           Available data regarding the cost of
                                             cost (postpaid   capture developments in data        500 MB mobile data plans is updated
                                             tariff)          plans. This entailed replacing      less frequently and no longer the
                                                              the 500 GB data plan                international standard for measuring
                                                              measure with a 1 GB data            data plan pricing. With expanded
                                                              plan measure.                       4G coverage and growing adoption,
                                                                                                  statistics regarding data affordability
                                                                                                  most commonly measure 1 GB
                                                                                                  data plans. Also, Internet inclusivity
                                                                                                  organizations such as the Alliance
                                                                                                  for Affordable Internet (A4AI) have
                                                                                                  increased their targets for Internet
                                                                                                  affordability and now define affordable
                                                                                                  access in terms of the price of a 1 GB
                                                                                                  plan.
                 Relevance       3.1.1       Availability     This indicator measures             All but one country received a perfect
                                             of basic         whether the country has             score on the existing indicator, so the
                                             information      domestic news websites that         indicator has been revised to include
                                             in the local     provide information online in       a higher bar that assesses whether or
                                             language         both official and non-official      not local news sites are available in local
                                                              language(s). Previously, it         languages. If domestic news websites
                                                              had measured whether                are available in local languages, adoption
                                                              domestic news websites              becomes more likely.
                                                              provide information in official
                                                              languages only.

5                                                                                          © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                 Category        Indicator   Indicator name     Modifications/ Additions         Rationale for change
                                 number
                 Relevance       3.2.3       e-Health content   Added a higher scoring           Score distribution has narrowed
                                                                option for countries that        in each iteration of the index. The
                                                                provide e-Health services        proposed modification aims to capture
                                                                via the Ministry of Health (or   differentiation by tracking the provision
                                                                equivalent) website.             of government e-Health services.
                 Relevance       3.2.8       Open data          NEW INDICATOR: This              Added because open data policies
                                             policies           measures the existence of        promote transparency that can increase
                                                                government “open data”           availability, affordability, efficiency,
                                                                policies that promote the        competition, and innovation in the
                                                                dissemination of public-         provision of essential services, and
                                                                sector (public and publicly      enable oversight that makes government
                                                                funded) data.                    more accountable.
                 Readiness       4.3.3       Existence          Added a higher scoring           The existing indicator provided only
                                             of national        option for countries that        limited differentiation in scores. The
                                             broadband          have developed or revised        proposed modification also accounts
                                             strategy           a national broadband             for technology neutrality with regard to
                                                                strategy within the past         fixed and mobile broadband.
                                                                two years. Also, the
                                                                question has been revised
                                                                to capture technologically
                                                                neutral strategies (i.e., they
                                                                emphasize either fixed or
                                                                mobile broadband, or both).
                 Readiness       4.3.7       Government         NEW INDICATOR:                   Roll-out of 5G has already begun in
                                             efforts to         This indicator assesses          limited cities in advanced economies
                                             promote 5G         government efforts to            in 2019. It is expected to have wide
                                                                promote 5G roll-out across       implications for economies and societies
                                                                the use case applications        writ large, and governments should be
                                                                (e.g., FWA, eMBB, mMTC, IoT,     working to help accelerate the adoption
                                                                URLLC).                          of such a significant technological leap.

                Backscoring for selected indicators
                The EIU has backscored a number of indicators in this year’s index to account for revisions to previously
                reported data.
                   Data publishing institutions may revise previously published data in light of new information.
                Backscoring index data incorporates these revisions, making the most accurate data available in
                the index. Having identified datasets that include revisions to prior year data, the EIU team has
                incorporated those historical data revisions into the data collection and analysis process for this index
                edition. Indicators in the index which have been backscored are based on ITU data, Gallup World Poll
                gender gap data, UNESCO literacy data, and UNDP education data.
                   Users of the index conducting historical data analysis should utilize only the data published in this
                edition of the index as reference data for year-on-year analysis.

                 Note: Due to the introduction of new metrics, revisions to existing indicators, and backscoring for
                 selected indicators, as well as the use of new sources and updates to the weighting system, the scores and
                 rankings for the 80 core countries may not be directly comparable between the 2020 and 2019 editions of
                 the Inclusive Internet Index. For additional information on comparability issues, please refer to the YOY
                 CHANGE tab in the accompanying Excel workbook.

6                                                                                          © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                              Value of the Internet survey
                              The 2018 index introduced a novel survey, evaluating the value of the Internet to people in all index
                              countries.3 Repeated for the 2019 and 2020 editions of the index, the “Value of the Internet” survey
                              explores the ways in which the Internet brings value to people’s lives, from employment and shopping
                              to entertainment and self-expression. The survey was conducted among 4,953 people across 99
                              countries, who were interviewed using local languages. Both CATI (computer-assisted telephone
                              interviewing) and online methodologies were employed, depending on the market. Quotas were set at
                              the country level using standard census criteria to ensure consistent sampling and representation, and
                              to allow for reliable cross-country comparisons.
                                 The following quotas were required within each country:

                              l Minimum sample size: 51 complete respondents

                              l Age: Minimum of 20% for each category: Millennials4 (born 1981–2001), Gen X (born 1965–1980),
                                Baby Boomers (born 1946–1964)

                              l Gender: Minimum of 30% male and 30% female respondents

                              l Household income: 50/50 split above and below the country median

                              l Community type: Mix of urban (major cities) and non-urban (suburban and rural) in each country;
                                Minimum of 10% rural respondents in each macro region (Asia, North America, Latin America,
                                Europe, Middle East & North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa)

                                 The main findings of the survey are captured in the Executive Summary paper, available here:
                              https://theinclusiveinternet.eiu.com/summary

                              Survey data in the index
                              The research team used survey data to build several indicators related to Relevance and Readiness,
                              focusing on user perceptions of factors such as trust and privacy. Such data were not easily available
                              through desk research and an existing survey with comparable data could not be found for all countries
                              included in the index. Below is a list of indicators that used survey data:

                              Category        Indicator   Indicator name              Survey question
3
  Azerbaijan, Cuba, Iran,                     number
Papua New Guinea and          Relevance       3.2.2       Value of e-finance          Which of the following forms of useful information have
Venezuela were excluded                                                               you accessed via the Internet at least once in the past year?
                                                                                      The indicator is ranked by responses indicating ‘Information
from the survey sample                                                                about personal finance’.
this year. At the time of     Relevance       3.2.4       Value of e-health           Which of the following forms of useful information have
fieldwork, no reliable                                                                you accessed via the Internet at least once in the past year?
online sample source was                                                              The indicator is ranked by responses indicating ‘Information
                                                                                      about health and fitness’.
available that could be
confidently verified. Given   Relevance       3.2.5       e-Entertainment usage       How often do you use the Internet for entertainment
                                                                                      purposes? The indicator is ranked by responses indicating
the target audience, phone                                                            ‘Several times a day’, ‘Every day’ and ‘Several times a week’.
access would also have
                              Relevance       3.2.7       Value of the Internet for   How often do you purchase goods via the Internet? The
been extremely limited.                                   e-commerce                  indicator is ranked by responses indicating ‘About once a
                                                                                      month’, ‘About once a week’ and ‘More than once a week’.
4
 Adult Gen Z (1996–2000)
are included in this group.

7                                                                                                  © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                 Category        Indicator    Indicator name                 Survey question
                                 number
                 Readiness       4.2.2        Trust in online privacy        How confident are you that your activity online is private?
                                                                             The indicator is ranked by responses indicating ‘Somewhat
                                                                             confident’ and ‘Very confident’.
                 Readiness       4.2.3        Trust in government websites   To what extent do you trust the information you receive
                                              and apps                       from the following sources online?—‘Government websites/
                                                                             apps.’ The indicator is ranked by responses indicating ‘Mostly’
                                                                             and ‘Completely’.
                 Readiness       4.2.4        Trust in non-government        To what extent do you trust the information you receive
                                              website and apps               from the following sources online?—‘Non-government
                                                                             websites/apps that are based in my country.’ The indicator is
                                                                             ranked by responses indicating ‘Mostly’ and ‘Completely’.
                 Readiness       4.2.5        Trust in information from      To what extent do you trust the information you receive
                                              social media                   from the following sources online?—‘Other people using
                                                                             social media.’ The indicator is ranked by responses indicating
                                                                             ‘Mostly’ and ‘Completely’.
                 Readiness       4.2.6        e-Commerce safety              To what extent do you agree with the following
                                                                             statements?—‘Making purchases online is safe and secure.’
                                                                             The indicator is ranked by responses indicating ‘Somewhat
                                                                             agree’ and ‘Strongly agree’.

                Sources and definitions
                The EIU project team collected and analyzed all of the quantitative and qualitative data in the Inclusive
                Internet Index 2020. We gathered the data from reputable international, national and industry sources,
                including the EIU’s own internal databases. The data collection process lasted from September 2019 to
                December 2019. Any changes to source data after December 2019 are not accounted for in this version
                of the index.
                   In creating the Inclusive Internet Index, the EIU relied heavily on publicly available sources. This
                research approach has the benefit of creating a fully transparent and repeatable methodology.
                   The main sources used in the Inclusive Internet Index are the EIU’s internal databases, Alexa
                Internet, Cisco, Gallup, Google, GSMA, International Energy Association (IEA), International
                Telecommunications Union (ITU), Ookla, OpenSignal, TeleGeography, United Nations Conference on
                Trade and Development (UNCTAD), United Nations Development Program (UNDP), United Nations
                Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), World Bank, country ministries, national
                statistics offices, city administrative offices, national telecommunications authorities, domestic news
                websites and industry associations.
                   Data availability is a critical issue in this index and in this field of study. The latest publicly available
                data are not always up to date or recent, leading to pronounced effects in assessing performance in
                such a fast-changing field. In addition, several international sources rely on data reported by countries.
                Country governments may each adopt different methodologies to gather or analyze data, or lack the
                means to report on the most recent data, which causes variations in data quality and timeliness.
                   To mitigate these risks, the EIU validated 10 selected indicators through a data confirmation process
                in collaboration with the telecommunications ministry (or its equivalent) in each of the 100 countries in
                this edition of the index. The following indicators were vetted with ministries:

8                                                                                        © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                 Indicator name                            Unit                                  Main source(s)
                 Internet users                            % of households                       ITU
                 Fixed-line broadband subscribers          Per 100 inhabitants                   ITU
                 Mobile subscribers                        Per 100 inhabitants                   ITU
                 Network coverage (min. 2G)                % of population                       ITU
                 Network coverage (min. 3G)                % of population                       ITU
                 Network coverage (min. 4G)                % of population                       ITU
                 Mobile phone cost (prepaid tariff)        % of monthly GNI per capita           A4AI, ITU, World Bank
                 Mobile phone cost (postpaid tariff)       % of monthly GNI per capita           ITU, World Bank
                 Level of literacy                         % of population                       UNESCO
                 Schools with Internet access              % of schools                          UNESCO

                   In cases where the ministries provided data that were comparable (in terms of definitions and
                methodologies used in calculation) to other data in the series, they were included in the study.
                   The research team hopes to improve the accuracy and type of data provided by both public agencies
                and private companies to aid the understanding of Internet inclusion and welcomes comments and
                suggestions to this end.
                   As discussed above, the index also uses data from a survey conducted by the EIU called “Value of the
                Internet”. In total, nine indicators were based on survey results.
                   The index uses the latest year of available data as the reference year for all data series. Where data
                existed for 2019, that value was used. If not, we used the following sequence:
                   1. Where available, we used data from the most recent year prior to 2019.
                   2. If the data were older than five years, we used other reliable data sources if the definitions and
                      technical notes in the series that were used to fill the data gaps aligned with those of the same
                      series.
                   3. If neither historical same-source data nor alternative source data were available, we used a data
                      imputation approach (see “Estimating missing data points”).

                Data modeling
                Indicator scores are transformed and then aggregated across categories to enable a comparison of
                broader concepts across countries. The process of transforming involves rebasing the raw indicator
                data to a common unit so that it can be aggregated. All indicators in this model are transformed into
                a 0 to 100 scale, where 100 refers to the strongest enabling environment for Internet inclusion and 0
                indicates the weakest environment for Internet inclusion.
                   Most indicators are transformed on the basis of a min/max normalization, where the minimum
                and maximum raw data values across the 100 countries are used to bookend the indicator scores. The
                indicators for which a higher value indicates a more favorable environment for Internet inclusion, such
                as access to mobile phones, have been transformed on the basis of:

                   x = (x - Min(x)) / (Max(x) - Min(x))

                  where Min(x) and Max(x) are, respectively, the lowest and highest values in the 100 countries for
                any given indicator. The value is then changed from a 0–1 value to a 0–100 score to make it directly
9                                                                                   © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                comparable with other indicators. This in effect means that the country with the highest raw data value
                will score 100, while the lowest will score 0 for all indicators in the index.
                   It must be noted that the study focuses on comparing data across countries and between the 2020
                and 2019 versions of the study. To that end, year-on-year comparisons of data took into account the
                core 80 countries that were included in both the 2019 and 2020 iterations. These comparisons also took
                into account updated data for previous years as part of our backscoring process, discussed above.
                Several adjustments were made to quantitative indicators to manage the data structure or to account
                for outliers. These adjustments are summarized in the table below:

                 Indicator                     Adjustment
                 Mobile subscribers            Mobile cellular telephone subscriptions are subscriptions to a public mobile telephone
                                               service that provide access to the PSTN (public switched telephone network) using cellular
                                               technology. This includes, and is split into, the number of postpaid subscriptions and the
                                               number of active prepaid accounts (i.e., that have been used during the past three months)
                                               and applies to all mobile cellular subscriptions that offer voice communications. It excludes
                                               subscriptions via data cards or USB modems, subscriptions to public mobile data services,
                                               trunked private mobile radio, telepoint, radio paging and telemetry services. There is a cap
                                               on mobile subscriptions at 130. All countries that exceed this value will receive 130 as the
                                               maximum possible value. This cap accounts for differences in SIM user behavior, including
                                               influxes in tourism, migrant workers, and other factors that can lead to the over-estimation of
                                               the number of subscribers.
                 Wireless operators’ market    The wireless operators’ market share was calculated using a commonly accepted method
                 share                         called the “Hirschman-Herfindahl Index”. Market concentration, however, does not follow a
                                               strictly linear pattern. To account for that, the EIU used three scoring bands as follows: HHI
                                               < 3,000, “unconcentrated”; HHI 3,000–4,000, “moderately concentrated”; and HHI > 4,000,
                                               “highly concentrated”. This reflects the nature of the telecom industry, which tends to have
                                               fewer players than most other industries. It is important to note these thresholds when using
                                               the “Simulator” function in the Excel workbook. Changes to scores and ranks in the “Simulator”
                                               function will be recorded only if a value is changed so that it moves to a different scoring band.
                 Broadband operators’ market   The broadband operators’ market share was calculated using a commonly accepted method
                 share                         called the “Hirschman-Herfindahl Index”. Market concentration, however, does not follow a
                                               strictly linear pattern. To account for that, the EIU used three scoring bands as follows: HHI
                                               < 3,000, “unconcentrated”; HHI 3,000–4,000, “moderately concentrated”; and HHI > 4,000,
                                               “highly concentrated”. This reflects the nature of the telecom industry, which tends to have
                                               fewer players than most other industries. It is important to note these thresholds when using
                                               the “Simulator” function in the Excel workbook. Changes to scores and ranks in the “Simulator”
                                               function will be recorded only if a value is changed so that it moves to a different scoring band.

10                                                                                            © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                               Estimating missing data points
5
  For i) ad hoc weighting
schemes, the analyst
                               In cases where data were incomplete or missing, EIU analysts developed customized estimation
simply chooses the             models to estimate data points, where appropriate. The concern at this stage of the data treatment
contribution of each
variable to the final          process was assigning missing data using statistical methods. This was done for 7 indicators, which
composite indicator. While     presented missing values that could not be obtained through comparable series, historical data or
an attempt to base the
weights is possible using      regional estimates. Missing data were therefore populated using a modeling approach for the following
a theoretical framework        indicators:
that assigns different
priorities to different
sub-dimensions, the             Indicator                                                                       Number of missing data points
final weight is—to some         e-Commerce content                                                                                          3
extent—always ad hoc.
A variant of the ad hoc         Average mobile download speed                                                                               8
approach is to use a            Average mobile latency                                                                                      8
structured methodology
to determine the weights,       Average mobile upload speed                                                                                 8
although not one that           Mobile phone cost (prepaid tariff)                                                                          5
is based upon statistical
optimization. For example,      Mobile phone cost (postpaid tariff)                                                                         2
it may be possible to use       Smartphone cost (handset)                                                                                   2
survey data to weight
indicators by importance,
or a “traffic-light” system,      For those indicators where data availability presented incomplete datasets, missing data were
where indicators can be
put into one of a number       assigned using a regression-based approach. In order to calculate index values for countries with
of categories of high,         missing data, we assigned missing values by predicting data using the Ordinary Least Squares (OLS)
medium or low weight.
                               method.
For ii) statistical
(optimization) methods,
the most common                Aggregation and weights
approach is to use
principal component            Methods to aggregate the transformed variables into a final composite indicator can be broadly
analysis (PCA). Intuitively,   separated into two types: i) ad hoc weighting schemes; and ii) statistical (optimization) methods.5
the idea of PCA is to
reduce high-dimensional            Given the difficulties in assigning weights, many composite indices resort to an equal weighting
data (several variables
                               scheme, allowing all variables to enter uniformly. The advantage of an equal weighting approach is
and sub-components
of an index) into lower-       transparency, while the clear disadvantage is the lack of an underlying theoretical justification for equal
dimensional data by
grouping highly correlated     treatment of all variables and sub-dimensions. Other approaches that allow users to adjust weights or
sub-components and             that present a number of weighting scenarios pose the risk of obfuscating the index outcome.
variables into a linear
combination. In most               The weighting process for any index is a qualitative determination that may reflect the biases or
cases, the factor loadings     suppositions of the researchers. One method for gauging the soundness of a weighting scheme is to
for the first component
are used as the weights        think of the weights as implicit trade-offs among the sub-dimensions of an indicator. As such, a short
for the final index. The
advantage of this approach
                               survey and consultation with individual experts was used to reflect on-the-ground priorities and the
is that the weights are        practical shortcomings of existing data around Internet inclusion.
statistically determined
and, as a result, free from        The four indicator categories used in the index are weighted according to a “lifecycle” approach,
value judgements. The          under which the most important category is Availability, followed by Affordability, then Relevance, and,
disadvantage lies in the
lack of transparency:          finally, Readiness. At the foundation of this approach is the conceptual sequencing of these categories
multivariate statistical       in the lifecycle of activities that underlie an inclusive Internet: (1) if access to the Internet were not
methods are relatively
complex and the                available due to limited infrastructure in a country, then affordability would matter less; (2) once access
methodology of such
indices is difficult to
                               becomes available and affordable, then relevant content will likely be a major driver of adoption; and
convey to a wider public.      (3) once there is relevant adoption, the ability to take advantage of Internet access, as measured by
11                                                                                               © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
METHODOLOGY REPORT

                readiness, will in all probability become a factor. Although not always the case, the research team found
                that this sequence applied to the vast majority of countries.
                   As the nature of connectivity and inclusion changes, it will be necessary to revisit the weighting
                system applied to this index to see whether the logic still holds.
                   The weights assigned to each category are as follows:

                 Category                                                                                                             Weight
                 Availability                                                                                                            40%
                 Affordability                                                                                                           30%
                 Relevance                                                                                                               20%
                 Readiness                                                                                                               10%
                 Total                                                                                                                 100%

                   As part of the lifecycle approach, further adjustments were made to the weights of individual
                indicators. These are intended to lessen any bias in factors relating to income and geography, and to
                balance the influence of indicators across a sub-category or category. A summary of these adjustments
                can be found below:

                 Indicator                                Sub-category weight   Rationale
                 INFRASTRUCTURE
                 Network coverage (min. 3G) /             9.1% / 18.2%          4G coverage is now considered the standard to which
                 Network coverage (min. 4G)                                     countries should strive when developing network
                                                                                infrastructure. Therefore, the weightings for the 3G and
                                                                                4G network coverage indicators were adjusted, with
                                                                                greater weight given to the latter. As 5G developments
                                                                                progress, the weightings for both of these indicators may
                                                                                be adjusted again in the future.
                 POLICY
                 National digital identification system   15.4%                 Digital identification systems were traditionally more
                                                                                relevant on account of how they were applied to
                                                                                e-government services, and were generally not of broader
                                                                                relevance to the entire Internet. However, their use is
                                                                                becoming more prevalent around the globe, and they are
                                                                                a potentially useful tool for promoting trust in the Internet.
                                                                                Therefore, the weighting for this indicator was increased.

                   Examining the weighting scheme by comparing the relative importance of different dimensions is an
                important tool for conducting robustness checks. To this end, the EIU has provided a way to compare
                the effects of different weighting schemes on country rankings in the dashboard tool.
                   Despite the care that has been taken in selecting the indicators, categories and weights, no index
                of this kind can ever be perfect. The EIU recognizes there are many different methods for weighting
                an index. The weighting assigned to each category and indicator can be changed by users on the
                ‘Custom Weights’ tab of the dashboard tool to reflect different assumptions about their relative levels
                of importance. This functionality enables users to create customized weightings that allow them to test
                their own assumptions about the relative importance of each category and indicator. Users can also set
                a weighting to zero to completely remove the influence of any category, indicator or sub-indicator on
                the index results and country rankings. In addition to the pre-set weighting offered in the dashboard
                tool, users can save one other bespoke weight setting and compare the effect of different settings on
                country rankings and scores.

12                                                                                          © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
APPENDIX                       THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
                               METHODOLOGY REPORT

Appendix 1: Detailed indicator list
The categories, sub-categories and indicators are:

No.       Indicator                 Unit                  Description                                                                           Source
          OVERALL                   0-100                 The overall score is the weighted sum of the following category scores: 1 to 4.
1         AVAILABILITY              0–100                 This category captures the quality and breadth of available infrastructure
                                                          required for access. Connectivity is limited if the infrastructure to connect
                                                          is insufficient or unavailable. The score for the availability category is the
                                                          weighted sum of the following indicator scores: 1.1 to 1.4.
1.1       USAGE                     0–100                 Increased usage usually indicates greater connectivity, even if this may be
                                                          concentrated among certain groups. The usage score is the weighted sum of
                                                          the following indicators: 1.1.1 to 1.1.5.
1.1.1     Internet users            % of households       This measures the number of people who have used the Internet in the past             ITU
                                                          12 months. A higher number of people using the Internet indicates greater
                                                          connectivity.
1.1.2     Fixed-line broadband      Per 100 inhabitants   This measures fixed-line broadband subscriptions per 100 inhabitants.                 ITU
          subscribers                                     The higher the number of subscriptions, the greater the level of Internet
                                                          connectivity.
1.1.3     Mobile subscribers        Per 100 inhabitants   This measures mobile-cellular telephone subscriptions per 100 inhabitants.            ITU
                                                          A higher number of smartphones increases the propensity to use the
                                                          Internet and related services, especially advanced mobile services, though
                                                          this may be concentrated among certain groups.
1.1.4     Gender gap in Internet    % difference, male    This measures the gap between male and female access to the Internet (%               EIU, Gallup, ITU
          access                    to female access      male access - % female access / % male access). Positive values indicate
                                                          that male access exceeds female access. A smaller or negative gap indicates
                                                          greater female connectivity.
1.1.5     Gender gap in mobile      % difference, male    This measures the gap between male and female access to mobile phones                 EIU, Gallup
          phone access              to female access      (% male access - % female access / % male access). Positive values indicate
                                                          that male access exceeds female access. A smaller or negative gap indicates
                                                          greater female connectivity.
1.2       QUALITY                   0–100                 The higher the quality of the available infrastructure for access, the easier it is
                                                          to use a broader range of Internet sites and related services. The quality score
                                                          is the weighted sum of the following indicators: 1.2.1 to 1.2.7.
1.2.1     Average fixed broadband   Kbps                  This measures average fixed broadband upload speed. Averages are based                Ookla
          upload speed                                    on Ookla’s analysis of Speedtest data. A faster speed is a positive indicator for
                                                          better performance.
1.2.2     Average fixed broadband   Kbps                  This measures average fixed broadband download speed. Averages are                    Ookla
          download speed                                  based on Ookla’s analysis of Speedtest data. A faster speed is a positive
                                                          indicator for better performance.
1.2.3     Average fixed broadband   ms                    This measures average fixed broadband latency (or how long it takes for data          Ookla
          latency                                         to travel between its source and destination). Averages are based on Ookla’s
                                                          analysis of Speedtest data. A faster speed is a positive indicator for better
                                                          performance.
1.2.4     Average mobile upload     Kbps                  This measures average mobile upload speed. Averages are based on Ookla’s              Ookla
          speed                                           analysis of Speedtest data. A faster speed is a positive indicator for better
                                                          performance.
1.2.5     Average mobile            Kbps                  This measures average mobile download speed. Averages are based on                    Ookla
          download speed                                  Ookla’s analysis of Speedtest data. A faster speed is a positive indicator for
                                                          better performance.
1.2.6     Average mobile latency    ms                    This measures average mobile latency (or how long it takes for data to                Ookla
                                                          travel between its source and destination). Averages are based on Ookla’s
                                                          analysis of Speedtest data. A faster speed is a positive indicator for better
                                                          performance.

13                                                                                                              © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
APPENDIX                      THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
                              METHODOLOGY REPORT

No.     Indicator                    Unit                  Description                                                                        Source
1.2.7   Bandwidth capacity           Bit/s per Internet    This measures the total used capacity of international Internet bandwidth,         ITU
                                     user                  in bits per second per Internet user. Used international Internet bandwidth
                                                           refers to the average traffic load (expressed in bits per second) of
                                                           international fiber optic cables and radio links carrying Internet traffic. More
                                                           Bits/s indicates better quality.
1.3     INFRASTRUCTURE               0–100                 The wider the coverage of infrastructure for Internet access, the easier it is
                                                           for people to be connected. The infrastructure score is the weighted sum of
                                                           the following indicators: 1.3.1 to 1.3.7.
1.3.1   Network coverage (min.       % of population       This measures the percentage of people covered by 2G networks (number of           ITU
        2G)                                                people as a percentage of the total population). The higher the percentage,
                                                           the greater the number of people connected.
1.3.2   Network coverage (min.       % of population       This measures the percentage of people covered by 3G networks (number of           ITU
        3G)                                                people as a percentage of the total population). The higher the percentage,
                                                           the greater the number of people connected.
1.3.3   Network coverage (min.       % of population       This measures the percentage of people covered by 4G networks (number of           ITU
        4G)                                                people as a percentage of the total population). The higher the percentage,
                                                           the greater the number of people connected.
1.3.4   5G Deployment                Qualitative rating    This indicator measures whether 5G New Radio (NR) technology has been              EIU, Ookla
                                     0–2; 2 = best         deployed in any area of the country, either as a trial or for commercial or
                                                           public use.
1.3.5   Government initiatives to    Qualitative rating    This indicator looks at whether the government provides public Wi-Fi access        EIU country
        make Wi-Fi available         0–2; 2 = best         in the largest city in the country and whether the Wi-Fi is free to connect to.    research
                                                           Initiatives that come at no cost to the consumer are likely to promote usage.
1.3.6   Private-sector initiatives   Qualitative rating    This indicator looks at whether the largest privately owned ISP provides           EIU country
        to make Wi-Fi available      0–2; 2 = best         public Wi-Fi access to its customers in the largest city in the country and        research
                                                           whether the Wi-Fi is free to connect to. Initiatives that come at no cost to the
                                                           consumer are likely to promote usage.
1.3.7   Internet exchange points     Number of IXPs        This indicator measures the number of Internet exchange points (IXPs) in           EIU, PCH,
                                     per 10 million        each country. The higher the number of IXPs, the wider the infrastructure          PeeringDB,
                                     inhabitants           coverage.                                                                          TeleGeography
1.4     ELECTRICITY                  0–100                 Electricity is needed to power the infrastructure and hardware required for
                                                           Internet access. More extensive electricity access increases the number of
                                                           people who are connected. The electricity score is the weighted sum of the
                                                           following indicators: 1.4.1 to 1.4.2.
1.4.1   Urban electricity access     % of population       This indicator measures the urban electrification rate (%). The higher the         IEA, World Bank
                                                           percentage of population with access to electricity, the easier it is for people
                                                           to gain access to the Internet.
1.4.2   Rural electricity access     % of population       This indicator measures the rural electrification rate (%). The higher the         IEA, World Bank
                                                           percentage of population with access to electricity, the easier it is for people
                                                           to gain access to the Internet.
2       AFFORDABILITY                0–100                 This category looks at the cost of access to the Internet. Cost of access
                                                           relative to income is a critical factor in Internet adoption. The score for the
                                                           affordability category is the weighted sum of the following indicator scores:
                                                           2.1 to 2.2.
2.1     PRICE                        0–100                 The cost of access relative to income is an important factor for Internet
                                                           adoption. Generally, the lower the cost of access, the higher the adoption
                                                           rates. The price score is the weighted sum of the following indicators: 2.1.1
                                                           to 2.1.4.
2.1.1   Smartphone cost              Score of 0–100; 100   This measures the indexed scores of the price of an entry-level handset to         GSMA
        (handset)                    = most affordable     the consumer, as a percentage of GNI per capita. Generally, the lower the
                                                           cost of a smartphone handset, the higher the adoption rates.
2.1.2   Mobile phone cost            % of monthly GNI      This measures the price of a prepaid 1 GB mobile data plan, as a percentage        A4AI, ITU, World
        (prepaid tariff)             per capita            of monthly income. Generally, the lower the mobile phone data cost, the            Bank
                                                           higher the adoption rates.

14                                                                                                              © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
APPENDIX                      THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
                              METHODOLOGY REPORT

No.     Indicator                  Unit                 Description                                                                       Source
2.1.3   Mobile phone cost          % of monthly GNI     This measures the price of a postpaid 1 GB mobile data plan, as a percentage      ITU, World Bank
        (postpaid tariff)          per capita           of monthly income. Generally, the lower the mobile phone data cost, the
                                                        higher the adoption rates.
2.1.4   Fixed-line monthly         % of monthly GNI     This measures the price of fixed-line monthly broadband to the consumer as        ITU, World Bank
        broadband cost             per capita           a percentage of monthly income. Generally, the lower the broadband cost,
                                                        the higher the adoption rates.
2.2     COMPETITIVE                0–100                A healthy, competitive environment usually leads to lower prices for
        ENVIRONMENT                                     consumers. The competitive environment score is the weighted sum of the
                                                        following indicators: 2.2.1 to 2.2.4.
2.2.1   Average revenue per user   USD                  This measures the average revenue per user (ARPU) for wireless operators.         Axiata,
        (ARPU, annualized)                              Generally, the higher the ARPU, the higher the adoption rates.                    GSMA, ITU,
                                                                                                                                          TeleGeography
2.2.2   Wireless operators'        HHI score            This measures the market concentration among all wireless operators. The          EIU,
        market share               (0–10,000)           Hirschman-Herfindahl Index measures the concentration of markets as               TeleGeography
                                                        follows: HHI < 3,000, “unconcentrated”; 3,000 ≤ HHI < 4,000, “moderately
                                                        concentrated”; and HHI ≥ 4,000, “highly concentrated”. A lower HHI score
                                                        indicates a more competitive environment.
2.2.3   Broadband operators'       HHI score            This measures the market concentration among all broadband operators.             EIU,
        market share               (0-10,000)           The Hirschman-Herfindahl Index measures the concentration of markets as           TeleGeography
                                                        follows: HHI < 3,000, “unconcentrated”; 3,000 ≤ HHI < 4,000, “moderately
                                                        concentrated”; and HHI ≥ 4,000, “highly concentrated”. A lower HHI score
                                                        indicates a more competitive environment.
3       RELEVANCE                  0–100                This category describes the value of being connected, in terms of useful
                                                        services and content and the availability of local content. If people do not
                                                        find value in being connected, then Internet adoption is less likely. The score
                                                        for the relevance category is the weighted sum of the following indicator
                                                        scores: 3.1 to 3.2.
3.1     LOCAL CONTENT              0–100                A key barrier for adoption is when local content does not meet local needs.
                                                        The higher the amount of local content, the higher likelihood of Internet
                                                        adoption. The local content score is the weighted sum of the following
                                                        indicators: 3.1.1 to 3.1.3.
3.1.1   Availability of basic      Qualitative rating   This indicator measures whether the country has domestic news websites            EIU country
        information in the local   0–3; 3 = best        that provide information online in local language(s). It gives additional         research
        language                                        credit for countries with news websites in local languages other than the
                                                        official language. If domestic news websites are available in local languages,
                                                        adoption becomes more likely.
3.1.2   Concentration of           Qualitative rating   This measures the proportion of websites in the top 25 most-visited websites Alexa Internet
        websites using country-    0–3; 3 = best        that use a country code top-level domain (ccTLD). The higher the proportion,
        level domains                                   the more likely there are popular websites catering to local content needs.
3.1.3   Availability of            Qualitative rating   This measures whether the government of the largest city in the country has       EIU country
        e-government services in   0–2; 2 = best        a website that offers transactional services, including applying for a business   research
        the local language                              license or permit. The availability of government services online is likely to
                                                        increase adoption.
3.2     RELEVANT CONTENT           0–100                This measures whether there are content and services online that stimulate
                                                        economic or social activity. The relevant content score is the weighted sum of
                                                        the following indicators: 3.2.1 to 3.2.8.
3.2.1   e-Finance content          Qualitative rating   This measures whether the largest retail banking institution offers online        EIU country
                                   0–2; 2 = best        banking services. Online banking services are likely to stimulate economic        research
                                                        activity.
3.2.2   Value of e-finance         %                    This is an indicator taken from the EIU “Value of the Internet” survey. The       EIU survey
                                                        indicator looks at country-level responses to questions about personal
                                                        finance. A higher proportion of respondents that value e-finance in their
                                                        country suggests that more relevant content is available.

15                                                                                                          © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
APPENDIX                      THE INCLUSIVE INTERNET INDEX 2020
                              METHODOLOGY REPORT

No.     Indicator                    Unit                  Description                                                                         Source
3.2.3   e-Health content             Qualitative rating    This measures whether the Ministry of Health in the country has a website           EIU country
                                     0–3; 3 = best         that provides information regarding healthcare, and also provides e-Health          research
                                                           services functionalities. Easily available health information is likely to inform
                                                           both social and economic activity, and increase adoption.
3.2.4   Value of e-health            %                     This is an indicator taken from the EIU “Value of the Internet” survey. The         EIU survey
                                                           indicator looks at country-level responses to questions about health and
                                                           fitness. A higher proportion of respondents that value e-health in their
                                                           country suggests that more relevant content is available.
3.2.5   e-Entertainment usage        %                     This is an indicator taken from the EIU “Value of the Internet” survey.             EIU survey
                                                           The indicator looks at country-level responses to questions about how
                                                           often respondents use the Internet for entertainment purposes. A higher
                                                           proportion of respondents that use the Internet for entertainment in their
                                                           country suggests that more relevant content is available.
3.2.6   e-Commerce content           Score of 0–100; 100   This indicator seeks to measure the availability—and extent—of electronic           UNCTAD
                                     = best                commerce (e-commerce) in the country, which can serve both as a way to
                                                           buy products and to sell them. E-content refers to both electronic (online)
                                                           and mobile commerce. Greater availability of online services/e-commerce is
                                                           generally thought to increase Internet adoption.
3.2.7   Value of e-Commerce          %                     This is an indicator taken from the EIU “Value of the Internet” survey. The         EIU survey
                                                           indicator looks at country-level responses to questions about how often
                                                           respondents purchase goods via the Internet. A higher proportion of
                                                           respondents that use the Internet for purchasing goods in their country
                                                           suggests that more relevant content is available.
3.2.8   Open data policies           Qualitative rating    This indicator measures the existence of government “open data” policies            EIU country
                                     0–2; 2 = best         that promote the dissemination of public-sector (public and publicly funded)        research
                                                           data, as well as the existence of government open data platforms.
4       READINESS                    0–100                 Readiness is a measure of the capacity among Internet users to take
                                                           advantage of being online. The score for the readiness category is the
                                                           weighted sum of the following indicator scores: 4.1 to 4.3.
4.1     LITERACY                     0–100                 In order to find and use Internet content, users must have basic and digital
                                                           literacy. The literacy score is the weighted sum of the following indicators:
                                                           4.1.1 to 4.1.4.
4.1.1   Level of literacy            % of population       This indicator assesses the extent of literacy within countries. In order to use    UNESCO
                                                           the Internet for useful purposes, such as to read news and access health or
                                                           educational information, people must be able to read. The higher the level of
                                                           literacy, the higher the capacity to take advantage of being online.
4.1.2   Educational attainment       Years of schooling    This indicator measures educational attainment through average years of             Pew Research
                                                           schooling (ISCED 1 or higher). Internet adoption tends to be higher among           Center, UNDP
                                                           highly educated groups. The greater the number of years of schooling, the
                                                           higher the capacity to take advantage of being online.
4.1.3   Support for digital          Qualitative rating    This measures whether the government has a plan or strategy that addresses          EIU country
        literacy                     0–3; 3 = best         digital literacy for students and training for teachers. Higher digital literacy    research
                                                           increases the capacity of users to take advantage of being online.
4.1.4   Level of web accessibility   Qualitative rating    This measures whether the national government website passes W3C                    EIU country
                                     0–4; 4 = best         guidelines on web accessibility. If websites are not accessible to people with      research
                                                           disabilities, there are fewer opportunities to use them.
4.2     TRUST & SAFETY               0–100                 A secure and safe connection and higher cultural acceptance generally
                                                           increase the capacity to take advantage of being online. The trust and safety
                                                           score is the weighted sum of the following indicators: 4.2.1 to 4.2.6.
4.2.1   Privacy regulations          Qualitative rating    This measures whether the country has data protection law(s) and whether            EIU country
                                     0–2; 2 = best         there are legal or financial penalties in place for firms that do not follow the    research
                                                           law. Clear and transparent laws and financial penalties mean users can tell
                                                           what is legally acceptable within the country, which increases their capacity
                                                           to take advantage of being online.

16                                                                                                               © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2020
You can also read