WHAT DEFINES THE DIGITAL DIVIDE? - skolkovo iems
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
D I G I T A L
THE S S I A N
F E O F R U
LI 2 0
G I O N S 20
E
R ES THE DIGITA L D I V I D E?
H A T D E FIN
W
SKOLKOVO Institute for Emerging Market Studies (IEMS)
2020
Ruben VARDANYAN,
Impact Investor and
Venture Philanthropist
«The world has never been as dynamic as it is today: technological disruptions, demographic
shifts, economic turbulence, and political unrest bring challenges on an unprecedented scale.
Twenty years ago nobody could have imagined that the combined GDP of the top seven emerging
markets could exceed that of the G7 countries. These markets offer both a great opportunity and
a major challenge for any business. By establishing IEMS we wanted to contribute our views and
insights to the dialog of business with policy-makers and NGOs in all emerging markets. We
believe that open multi-stakeholder dialog will eventually help businesses and politicians come up
with better-informed decisions that make a positive impact and drive change for better.»
Karl JOHANSSON,
former Managing Partner,
EY Russia & CIS,
Chairman of the Analytical
Credit Agency of Russia (ACRA)
«Studying emerging markets from within – that is the idea behind bringing together the research
teams in Moscow, Hong Kong, and Hyderabad into the international and interdisciplinary research
network. These are the most effective means to deal with the dynamics and complexity of the
changing nature of emerging markets. Assisting international businesses better understand
emerging markets and operating businesses in emerging markets expand globally – those are the
strategic aims of the research initiatives at IEMS.»
FOUNDING PARTNERS RESEARCH PARTNERS
MOSCOW | HONG KONG | HYDERABAD
RESEARCH AREAS
Contents
Summary 6
The Digital Divide as the Key Challenge of the
Vladimir Digital Age.
KOROVKIN 10
Head of Digital and Innovations
Components of Digital Life digital@skolkovo.ru 22
Leading Cities in Terms of Digital Life 26
DIGITAL
Digital Divide TRANSFORMATION
Determinants 30
How to Bridge the Digital
— Digital Divide?
transformation of the living environment, of business 34
models and of consumer behavior
Appendix 1. Digital Life Index Metrics 38
Appendix 2.—Leading
Innovations for, in, Cities
and Lagging and from the emerging
in Terms economies
of the Supply
and Demand Ratio per Digital Life Dimensions 41
— Management, governance, and policy in the digital age
Notes 54
READ
AGENDA
N HOW TO L
OF RUSSIA AL OFFICERS TA
D IG IT THE DIGI MATION?
F R
TRANSFO
CH IE
2
formation stitu te
ital Trans
ad the Dig OLKOVO In
How to Re m the SK MS)
paper fro (IE
A working g Market Studies
for Emergin
S
LIFE LATFORM
DIGITAL DIGITAL P SYSTEMS
ECO
AN AND THE L
OF RUSSI S OF FIN A N C IA
ISE
MEGAPOL CASES INCLU S IO N . THE
CE
YNAMICS. EXPERIEN
MODEL. D RUSSIAN
SKOLKOVO Institute for Emerging Market Studies (IEMS)
2016
The Moscow School of Management SKOLKOVO
2015
1
2 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0
Dear friends,
Digitalisation of all areas of life is becoming this report is not so much to rank the country’s
an increasingly vital requirement in the mod- regions in terms of their digital maturity as
ern age. It is an imperative for any country to provide scientifically-grounded suggestions
that wishes to solidify its position in our ever- for the direction and nature of actions to be
changing world. It is no coincidence that the undertaken by regional administrations, busi-
Digital Economy has become one of the key nesses and opinion leaders in order to acceler-
national programmes intended to shape the ate digital transformation.
future of Russia. It is safe to say that the digi- The results of this study encourage opti-
tal transformation of the economy is not just mism—they show that the quality of a region’s
a fad or a way to spend more budget money digitalisation is determined not by its resource
but a key tool for improving the quality of life capability but by the quality of the regional
that should focus on the needs of the general policies and human capital. The digital era
public. can open up new opportunities for small and
But is it possible to achieve nation-wide dig- medium-sized cities, provided they set clear
ital transformation without digitalisation at priorities and make efficient use of available
the regional level? The obvious answer is no, resources, no matter how limited. This report
since a country’s economy can only be as digi- does not just acknowledge the current situa-
tal as its constituent parts. It is critical to un- tion but also shows how to design an effec-
derstand the regions’ relative progress with tive digital acceleration programme that could
the digitalisation of economic and social life create new social and economic opportunities
in order to properly assess the current situa- and what relevant competencies should be de-
tion across Russia and make realistic plans for veloped by regional administrations, entrepre-
the future. neurs and opinion leaders..
The Moscow School of Management
SKOLKOVO has been studying regional digi- Andrei Sharonov
tal development for over five years now, noting
both a general positive trend and the areas re- President of the Moscow School
quiring accelerated development. The goal of of Management SKOLKOVO
3
4 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0
Dear colleagues,
The issue of digital inequality grows increas- digitalisation become attractive platforms for
ingly relevant as economic success in the con- developing local management hubs, research
temporary world is becoming more and more and innovation centres, venture projects, etc.
dependent on the use of modern digital tech- This new study by the Moscow School of Man-
nologies. For more than two decades, it has agement SKOLKOVO describing the digital life
been attracting the interest of researchers and of Russian regions provides ample food for
politicians, but we believe that business lead- thought for entrepreneurs looking for ways
ers should devote their full attention to it as to expand their presence in the Russian mar-
well. There are two aspects of digital inequal- ket. Its conclusion is of particular interest as
ity and the digital divide that both global and it debunks a popular belief that state-of-the-
local businesses need to consider—that of the art technological development can only be
market and of resources. achieved in the capital regions of Russia. The
On the one hand, the local market’s satura- numbers presented in the study prove that
tion with digital technologies leads to an in- businesses should start paying closer attention
crease the scale and variety of opportunities to small and medium-sized cities with consid-
for businesses. On the other hand, since the de- erable potential for development.
velopment of digital technologies is closely re-
lated to the quality of human capital and the
business environment, regions with advanced Alexander Ivlev
CIS Managing Partner at EY
5
Summary 6 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0
Now that digital technologies have become a key driver of social and economic development of com-
panies, regions and countries, the problem of the so-called digital divide, or the gap between the lev-
els of technological capabilities, is growing increasingly acute. This divide can be observed within
each country, and between regions or social and demographic groups. Some degree of digital divide
objectively exists at all times, but beyond a certain level it becomes socially and politically unaccept-
able—when people from information-deprived regions or social groups find themselves in “another
universe” in terms of their economic and social opportunities. It is critical to answer two questions:
does the degree of digital divide increase or decrease over time in “natural” conditions, and are there
scenarios for independent bridging of the digital divide by underperformers?
The majority of the world has moved beyond the “primary” digitalisation—creating the necessary
Internet access infrastructure—to the “secondary” stage, i.e. creating as many individual digital solu-
tions as possible that unite into comprehensive multidimensional systems. Such systems generate
a network effect where the value to users grows faster than the number of system participants. To
evaluate the processes of secondary digitalisation, the Moscow School of Management SKOLKOVO
developed a seven-dimensional model of “digital life” back in 2014, and then proceeded to test it on
Russian million-plus cities. In the new wave of the study, the sample included all the capitals of the
constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as a number of major non-capital regional cen-
tres—91 cities in total. The expanded analysis scope made it possible to compare cities that differ
greatly in terms of their size, income level, economic structure, and history.
The second-tier digital divide between Russian regions is considerable: the final Digital Life Index
score of the leading cities (Krasnodar and Ekaterinburg) is almost 5 times higher than that of the
trailing city (Magas-Nazran). At the same time, supply is distributed much more evenly, with only a
three times difference between the leading and the trailing city; the resulting digital divide has more
to do with gaps in digital demand determined by the population’s digital skills.
The correlation between the city’s size and the vibrancy of its digital life is not linear: small cities
(with less than 100,000 people) have a higher scores than cities with a population of 100–200,000.
In terms of demand, they even surpass cities in the 500,000 to 1 million people range, being second
only to the million-plus cities. At the federal district level, the Ural Federal District and the Central
Federal District take the lead. Despite Krasnodar’s leadership among cities, the Southern District is in
the middle of the list, while the North Caucasian District is at the bottom.
S u m m ar y 7
Statistical analysis of the contributory factors revealed a picture similar to the well-researched digi-
tal divide between countries: human capital and expansionary policies play the key role, while the
resource capability factor is not so significant. The results inspire a certain amount of optimism,
since the digital divide can be bridged through purposeful strategic actions rather than by pouring
resources into the regions. Each region can and should aim to develop its digital life to the fullest to
experience significant results, such as:
• Acceleration of social and economic development and improvement of the quality of eco-
nomic growth (fixing the existing structural imbalances in the well-resourced primary pro-
ducing regions);
• Fair access to social and economic resources, reduction of inequality, and provision of in-
clusive opportunities;
•D ecent quality of life with opportunities for self-fulfilment;
• Development of the region’s soft power and competitiveness both on the national and the
global scale.
What are the benefits of a well-developed digital life for a region? What can be gained from secondary
digitalisation? A previous study by the Moscow School of Management SKOLKOVO demonstrated
that digital technologies matter a lot when it comes to the general perceived quality of urban envi-
ronment. They are turning into key competitive tools for cities and regions in the national and global
human capital markets, helping them to attract, develop and retain successful, ambitious and inno-
vative people who can give a fresh impetus to the regional social and economic development. Thus,
bridging digital divide must be an integral part of any answer to the challenges faced by all Russian
regions.
8 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0S u m m ar y 9
Digital Divide
as the Key Challenge
of the Digital Age.
10 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0Penetration by digital technologies into all as- countries, regions and social groups in terms
pects of daily life is becoming an increasing- of “information wealth”. However, a number of
ly important factor in the social and economic recent studies in the U.S. have shown that the
development of countries and regions. While county-level digital divide is still almost hun-
creating new opportunities for growth accel- dredfold.ii
eration, this integration also exposes risks of Some degree of digital divide must exist
the so-called digital divide—countries and re- in all numerate societies, but beyond a cer-
gions without sufficient resources for effec- tain level it becomes socially and politically
tive digitalisation increasingly lagging behind unacceptable. It is difficult to pinpoint where
the leaders. The digital divide between coun- this critical threshold lies, but it is intuitively
tries is becoming a progressively more urgent clear that situations in which people from in-
global problem,1 but it can also be observed formation-deprived regions or social groups
within countries, between regions or social can find themselves in “another universe” in
and demographic groups. terms of their economic and social opportu-
In 1998, the U.S. National Telecommunica- nities should not be tolerated. For regions,
tions and Information Administration pointed this can accelerate human capital outflow and
out that the gap between some social groups make it irreversible. The Moscow School of
in terms of Internet access could be as large Management SKOLKOVO’s 2016 study Digi-
as twentyfold.i The increasing importance of tal Life of Russian Megapolises has shown
the Internet as a means of obtaining informa- that the quality of the digital environment
tion, as an economic tool and as a socialisation in a city correlates closely with the perceived
facility meant that, with the status quo pre- quality of life, i.e. access to digital informa-
served, society faced a real danger of division tion is becoming a key factor in general well-
into the “information rich” and the “informa- being. With a wide digital life development
tion poor”. Subsequent studies on the differ- gap, a city risks losing its most innovative,
ences in Internet access levels between differ- dynamic and mobile residents—those who
ent countries revealed an even more troubling can develop its digital environment effective-
picture: in 2000, the disparity between OECD ly. Such trends can become a vicious circle,
and non-OECD countries was almost a hun- where greater human capital losses mean
dredfold, and within the OECD itself, the gap fewer opportunities to attract, develop and
between the leader, the U.S., and Mexico and retain such capital.
Turkey was almost as great. In this context, it is critical to answer two
For some time, the digital divide seemed questions: (1) does the degree of digital divide
like an inevitable side effect of the early stages increase or decrease over time in “natural”
of the brave new wired world. The explosive conditions (i.e. without significant efforts to
growth of the global Internet, with numer- accelerate the development of underperform-
ous access channels (particularly various mo- ing countries and regions), and (2) are there
bile technologies), provided an illusory solu- scenarios in which independent bridging of
tion to the problem, with the convergence of the digital divide by underperformers can
1 This problem started gaining attention at the turn of the century, prompted by the publication of such influential books as Digital Divide:
Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide (Pippa Norris, 2001) and Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital
Divide (Mark Warschauer, 2004). The more recent important publications on this topic include the chapter The Digital Reproduction of In-
equality in (Eszter Hargittai, 2018)
D igital D i v ide as the K e y C hallenge of the D igital A ge . 11happen, or does that require a considerable healthcare, education, media, and state ad-
amount of external resources? The answers to ministration.iv Supply and demand are evalu-
these questions can define the processes of na- ated for each aspect individually, and analysis
tional digital strategising that is gaining mo- of gaps between them provides concrete ideas
mentum throughout the world.iii for managerial actions (See the insert How to
By definition, such answers require quan- Measure a City’s Digital Life?). This model
titative study, but that presents serious meth- was tested on Russian million-plus cities as
odological challenges. In general, it seems part of the two studies (2014 and 2015), which
evident enough that digital transformation generated interesting comparison data, both
processes should be evaluated on the basis of static and dynamic.
their outputs rather than inputs—otherwise, In the second wave of the study, the sam-
the less well-off countries and regions would ple was greatly expanded to include all the
indeed be destined forever to lag behind to an capitals of the constituent entities of the Rus-
ever-increasing extent. However, even simply sian Federation, as well as a number of ma-
identifying the number of outputs subject to jor non-capital regional centres2—91 cities in
evaluation can, and does, cause heated debate. total. The expanded analysis scope made it
In general, researchers agree that the first- possible to compare cities that differ greatly
tier digital divide (inequality in terms of ac- in terms of their size, income level, econom-
cess to digital networks) decreases while the ic structure, and history. The comparison data
second-tier digital divide (inequality in terms allowed researchers to analyse digitalisation
of digital competencies and ways to use tech- across Russia, the results of which can be used
nologies) increases. This poses the threat of a as a basis for strategic decisions in both busi-
catastrophically increasing third-tier divide in ness and state administration.
terms of the social and economic effects of a
digital transformation, which can lead to a vi-
cious circle where “the rich get richer and the
poor get poorer”.
The majority of the world has already
moved beyond “primary” digitalisation—cre-
ating the necessary Internet access infra-
structure—to the “secondary” stage, i.e. cre-
ating as many individual digital solutions as
possible that unite into comprehensive mul-
tidimensional systems. Such systems gener-
ate a network effect where the value to the
user grows faster than the number of system
participants. To evaluate the processes of sec-
ondary digitalisation, the Moscow School of
Management SKOLKOVO developed a model
of “digital life” in 2014 that included seven
dimensions: transportation, finance, retail,
2 Volzhsky, Naberezhnye Chelny, Nizhny Tagil, Novokuznetsk, Sochi, Surgut, Tolyatti, Cherepovets
12 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0How to Measure the Digital Divide?
The concept of the digital divide was formulated in the late 1990s and at first applied to
the inequality of access to digital information channels between various social groups.v
Early studies focused on the “knowledge divide” and “information poverty” which had
crystallised in the mid-1970s, in large part due to the influence of Thomas Childer’s book
The Information Poor in America.vi At first, researchers considered Internet access as just
another channel for obtaining information, with no fundamental difference from other
channels, which was the approach that the early critique of the digital divide concept was
based on.vii
In the early 2000s, researchers turned their attention to the topic of digital divide between
countries and regions within a given country viii and attempted some of the first quantitative
comparisons based on the Internet availability data. That was when the key questions
that have shaped subsequent research were first raised: “Will the gap in Internet access
gradually decrease over time, as new technologies spread further throughout the world?
Or will this gap remain, or even increase? How can government, corporate and non-profit
investments [into access tools] ... expand access for groups that are limited in that regard?”ix
The search for the answers to those questions is still relevant today, except that studies
on the first-tier digital divide (in digital network access options) have given way to studies
on the second-tier digital divide (in network utilisation skills and subsequent creation of
various applications). The idea for this differentiation was suggested in 2006 by a group of
researchers from the University of Ljubljana, Slovenia, who used the integrated Digital Divide
Index to evaluate the depth of the second-tier digital divide. x A similar index was later used
to study the county-level digital divide in the U.S. xi, but the potential for using integrated
metrics to describe the effects of digitalisation and for studying the second-tier digital
divide has clearly not been exhausted yet.
The modelling of factors that determine the depth of digital divide has become one of
the key areas of digital divide studies, as such models can directly inform both national
and regional strategies and policies. The first model of this sort was suggested in
2001 xii and included the following factors: income level, infrastructure, human capital,
D igital D i v ide as the K e y C hallenge of the D igital A ge . 13and regulation quality. A study of 53 countries showed that regulation quality—national telecommunications market policy and its level of competitiveness in particular—is a key digital divide factor, second only to the level of income. The Income—Infrastructure—Human Capital—Policy model was generally accepted by researchers as fundamental, though sometimes with reservations. xiii However, the importance of regulation quality was repeatedly confirmed. xiv A number of authors studying the impact of cultural factors on the digital divide found out that cultural differences (measured based on, for instance, the Hofstede model) played a certain role at the early development stages of digital networks but had lost their significance by the late 2000s. xv In 2014, the Moscow School of Management SKOLKOVO developed a methodology for describing the second-tier digital divide between citiesxvi and for examining its determinant factors. This addressed a key methodological challenge—finding a proper way to describe secondary digitalisation, i.e. the use of digital systems in daily life. It applied the Digital Life Index3 to comparison of secondary digitalisation in 15 Russian cities with a population of over a million people as of 2014: Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kazan, Volgograd, Novosibirsk, Ekaterinburg, Nizhny Novgorod, Samara, Chelyabinsk, Omsk, Rostov-on-Don, Ufa, Krasnoyarsk, Perm, and Voronezh. Each city was evaluated on seven digital technology criteria: transportation, finance, retail, healthcare, education, media, and state administration. For each, specific metrics were selected that indicated the integration of digital services into the city’s daily life. The evaluation used some existing metrics from other studies and new empirical data collected specifically for this research. All metrics were divided into two types: the first dealt with the demand for digital solutions, and the second with their supply. This approach made it possible to separate two fundamentally different issues of the digital divide: the lack of technological capability and its poor utilisation due to the undeveloped digital skills. In particular, the 2014 and 2015 studies showed little correlation between supply and demand, indicating that market factors played a minor role in the formation of regional digital ecosystems. 3 The Index methodology was developed under the guidance of Prof. Evgeny Kaganer (IESE Business School, Spain) 14 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0
Daily Urban Life Model
SUPPLY
Media Transportation
DEMAN
ND D
A
DEM
AND
DEM
DEM
Retail Finance
ND
ND
A
DEMA
Education
Healthcare
Administration
D igital D i v ide as the K e y C hallenge of the D igital A ge . 15How Large Is the Digital Divide? systemic digitalisation problems in the lag-
ging group.
The second-tier digital divide between Rus- It should also be noted that digital sup-
sian regions is considerable: the final Digi- ply and demand indices show significantly
tal Life Index of the leading cities (Krasnodar different dynamics. The supply is distribut-
and Ekaterinburg) is almost 5 times higher ed more evenly, with the difference between
than that of the trailing city (Magas-Nazran the leading and the trailing cities reduced to
as a single entity). The trajectory of the Index three times. Therefore, it is the divide in digi-
across regions makes it possible to identify tal demand that drives the overall digital di-
three groups: leaders—the first 19 cities (with vide, which is fully consistent with the idea
two “super leaders”, Krasnodar and Ekaterin- of the second-tier divide being determined
burg, far ahead of the others), the average per- by the difference in the population’s digital
formers, and the laggards—a clearly identifi- skills and competencies.
able group of 9 cities with its own “super lag- Despite what intuition might suggest,
gard” (see Chart 1). The Index drops faster near the correlation between a city’s size and
the end of the distribution, which indicates the vibrancy of its digital life is not fully
Fig. 1. Digital Life Index Overall Distribution
Overall Digital Divide
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
y = –0.0032x + 0.5617
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Belgorod
Cherepovets
Maykop
Kostroma
Tula
Perm
Kazan
Ulan-Ude
Stavropol
Barnaul
Kaluga
Kyzyl
Oryol
Kemerovo
Salekhard
Sevastopol
Volgograd
Yoshkar-Ola
Ufa
Ivanovo
Simferopol
Tolyatti
Astrakhan
Nizhny Tagil
Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky
Grozny
Moscow
Novosibirsk
Khanty-Mansiysk
Vladivostok
Chelyabinsk
Izhevsk
Saransk
Smolensk
Lipetsk
Kursk
Tomsk
Bryansk
Blagoveshchensk
Petrozavodsk
Saratov
Magnitogorsk
Nalchik
Krasnodar
Syktyvkar
Anadyr
16 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 00.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
Krasnodar Belgorod
Moscow Vladivostok
Samara Murmansk
Novosibirsk Novosibirsk
Belgorod Kazan
Stavropol Arkhangelsk
Salekhard Penza
Kostroma Elista
Chelyabinsk St. Petersburg
Voronezh Tambov
Yaroslavl Moscow
Kirov Oryol
Sochi Khanty-Mansiysk
Ufa Kaliningrad
Krasnoyarsk Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk
Kursk Cherkessk
Kaliningrad Yaroslavl
Barnaul Orenburg
Oryol Kurgan
Petrozavodsk Kemerovo
Bryansk Blagoveshchensk
Fig 2. Digital Supply Index Distribution
Fig 3. Digital Demand Index Distribution
Kurgan Vologda
Ivanovo
Krasnoyarsk
Ulyanovsk
Saratov
Birobidzhan
Abakan
Tomsk
Anadyr
Maykop
Naryan-Mar
Nalchik
Magadan
Vladikavkaz
Cherepovets
Magnitogorsk
Makhachkala
Grozny
Magas+Nazryn
D igital D i v ide as the K e y C hallenge of the D igital A ge .
y = – 0.0035x + 0.6752
y = – 0.0043x + 0.5101
17linear:4 the-smaller-the-city-the-weaker-the- accelerate digital technology penetration and
digitalisation tendency does not apply to demand. In terms of demand, smaller towns
small cities (with less than 100,000 people) surpass even the cities in the 500,000 to
within the sample. They have a higher index 1 million people range, being second only to
than cities with a population of 100–200,000 the million-plus cities. Having said that, digi-
(see Chart 4). This can be partially explained tal demand does gradually decrease in pro-
by the fact that smaller capital cities are of- portion with city size, though two Russian
ten located in resource-producing regions megapolises (Moscow and St. Petersburg) fail
with high GRP (Khanty-Mansiysk, Sale- to show any difference from other million-
khard, Naryan-Mar, Anadyr, Magadan). How- plus cities in this respect (see Chart 5).
ever, even the relatively poor Gorno-Altaysk At the federal district level, the Ural Fed-
and Birobidzhan show reasonable results. It eral District and the Central Federal District
seems that compactness of the urban envi- take the lead. Despite Krasnodar’s leadership
ronment, including the community, tends to among cities, the Southern District is only in
Fig. 4. Digital Life Index Distribution by City Size
Digital Divide by City Population
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00Fig. 5. Digital Supply and Demand Distribution by City Size
Divide in Digital Supply and Demand by City Population
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00Table 1. Digital Life Index Comparison for Regional Centres and Second Cities
Regional centre General index Second city General index
Volgograd 0.40 Volzhsky 0.31
Vologda 0.45 Cherepovets 0.28
Ekaterinburg 0.64 Nizhny Tagil 0.31
Kazan 0.46 Naberezhnye Chelny 0.26
Kemerovo 0.41 Novokuznetsk 0.40
Krasnodar 0.64 Sochi 0.49
Samara 0.55 Tolyatti 0.33
Khanty-Mansiysk 0.52 Surgut 0.41
Chelyabinsk 0.49 Magnitogorsk 0.37
Table 2. Digital Supply and Demand Comparison for Regional Centres and Second Cities
SUPPLY DEMAND SUPPLY DEMAND
Regional centre Second city
(avg) (avg) (avg) (avg)
Volgograd 0.54 0.25 Volzhsky 0.54 0.09
Vologda 0.48 0.43 Cherepovets 0.37 0.17
Ekaterinburg 0.61 0.67 Nizhny Tagil 0.42 0.20
Kazan 0.61 0.32 Naberezhnye Chelny 0.40 0.12
Kemerovo 0.49 0.33 Novokuznetsk 0.57 0.24
Krasnodar 0.58 0.71 Sochi 0.65 0.34
Samara 0.63 0.46 Tolyatti 0.51 0.13
Khanty-Mansiysk 0.54 0.50 Surgut 0.53 0.29
Chelyabinsk 0.60 0.37 Magnitogorsk 0.61 0.12
20 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0the middle of the list,5 while the North Cau- a given region. In some cases, it is the “sec-
casian District is far behind, at the very bot- ond” cities that function as major industrial
tom (see Fig. 6). Interestingly, the situation centres, sometimes surpassing the “first” cit-
changes when analysing supply and demand ies in terms of population: Cherepovets and
separately: the Southern District—along with Vologda, Surgut and Khanty-Mansiysk, No-
the Siberian and Ural Districts—takes the vokuznetsk and Kemerovo. However, in al-
lead in terms of supply, while the Ural, Cen- most every case the second cities have a sig-
tral and Northwestern Districts lead in terms nificantly lower digital life index. The only
of demand. As in the case of distribution by exception, where the values are almost equal,
city size, the difference in demand is signifi- is the pair Kemerovo-Novokuznetsk (see Ta-
cantly more pronounced than the difference ble 1). The difference is largely determined by
in supply. demand: in terms of supply, some of the sec-
Another important aspect of digital di- ond cities even surpass their regional centres
vide is the difference in digital life maturi- (Novokuznetsk, Sochi, Magnitogorsk), but all
ty between capitals of the Russian Federa- pairs are far from equal in terms of digital
tion’s constituent entities and other cities in demand.
Fig. 7. Digital Supply and Demand per Federal Districts
Divide in Digital Supply and Demand per Federal Districts
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
al
t
lga
ria
l
lga
st
us
sia
ra
as
Ur
we
as
be
nt
us
Vo
Vo
rE
uc
Ce
r th
Si
lR
Fa
Ca
ta
No
To
N.
SUPPLY (avg) DEMAND (avg)
5 A similar pattern was observed in the 2014 and 2015 studies where Volgograd and Rostov-on-Don were among the lagging million-plus cities.
D igital D i v ide as the K e y C hallenge of the D igital A ge . 21Components
of Digital Life
22 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0The analysis of individual dimensions of digi- very small. They are twofold in healthcare
tal life suggests two important observations: (probably as a result of the national project
very large gaps in demand; and a lack of cor- implementation), and fourfold in transporta-
relation between supply and demand for most tion and administration. The largest divide in
dimensions. supply is in the media.
As Table 3 shows, the difference in digital Only three out of seven dimensions show
demand between the leading and the lagging noticeable positive correlation between sup-
city can be 160-fold! There are only two dimen- ply and demand: transportation, retail, and
sions of digital life—education and administra- administration. The area of digital adminis-
tion—where the divide is relatively small. In- tration demonstrates considerable progress
terestingly, both dimensions function primarily compared to the results of the 2014 and 2015
as domains of government agencies. However, studies, when the correlation was almost zero.
in two other dimensions with significant state On the one hand, that can be explained by the
participation—transportation and healthcare— population’s growing competencies in using
the gap in digital demand between regions is electronic platforms of regional administra-
considerably higher. The media sphere, which tions and, on the other hand, by the improved
is under strong administrative influence in quality of these platforms, especially when it
many regions, shows the largest divide. comes to user experience.
That being said, the gaps in digital supply However, such dimensions as education
are significantly smaller, and in some cases and media show almost zero correlation, i.e.
Table 3. Difference Between Leading and Lagging Cities, and Supply and Demand Ratios
for Digital Life Dimensions
Supply, difference Demand, difference
between leader between leader Correlation
and laggard, times and laggard, times
Transportation 4.00 129.59 0.36
Finance 8.04 90.95 -0.36
Retail 10.36 144.95 0.37
Healthcare 2.00 58.98 -0.10
Education 9.50 15.94 -0.01
Media 47.77 159.15 -0.01
Administration 4.00 15.54 0.29
C o m ponents of D igital L ife 23Table 4. Supply Correlations for Digital Life Dimensions. Significant Correlations Singled Out
Transpor- Health- Educa- Adminis-
Finance Retail Media
tation care tion tration
Transportation 0.02 0.05 -0.24 0.08 -0.01 0.23
Finance 0.02 1.00 0.32 -0.01 0.07 0.08 0.12
Retail 0.05 0.32 1.00 -0.28 0.15 0.27 -0.06
Healthcare -0.24 0.07 0.15 0.10 1.00 -0.05 0.01
Education 0.08 -0.01 -0.28 1.00 0.10 -0.29 -0.07
Media -0.01 0.08 0.27 -0.29 -0.05 1.00 0.24
Administration 0.23 0.12 -0.06 -0.07 0.01 0.24 1.00
Table 5. Demand Correlations for Digital Life Dimensions. Significant Correlations Singled Out
Transpor- Health- Educa- Adminis-
Finance Retail Media
tation care tion tration
Transportation 1.00 0.21 0.54 0.62 0.30 0.40 -0.13
Finance 0.21 1.00 0.27 0.22 0.19 0.40 -0.09
Retail 0.54 0.27 1.00 0.65 0.49 0.40 0.04
Healthcare 0.62 0.22 0.65 1.00 0.41 0.56 -0.11
Education 0.30 0.19 0.49 0.41 1.00 0.30 0.27
Media 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.56 0.30 1.00 -0.18
Administration -0.13 -0.09 0.04 -0.11 0.27 -0.18 1.00
24 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0supply and demand are not interlinked in any basically determine supply) follows complete-
way. There is a weak negative correlation in ly independent parallel paths (see Table 4).
healthcare, i.e. demand is significantly high- When it comes to digital demand, we see
er than supply, and a strong negative corre- a reverse situation, with significant positive
lation in finance where there seems to be a correlations between almost all dimensions:
very large reserve of digital technology with transportation and retail (0.54), transporta-
low demand.6 tion and healthcare (0.62), retail and health-
Characteristically, digital demand shows care (0.65), healthcare and media (0.56). It is
little coordination between various dimen- unlikely that the identified pairs are directly
sions. There are only a few cases with signif- related; high correlations probably indicate
icant correlations, including transportation that digital demand is systemic in nature, and
and administration, media and administration, the growth of skills and competencies in using
and finance and retail. In some cases, there one type of system can be easily translated to
are counter-intuitive negative correlations7 other systems. The only exception is the ad-
(e.g., transportation and healthcare, or educa- ministration dimension that has only one sig-
tion and media). However, those could be ran- nificant positive correlation, with education,
dom fluctuations. For most dimensions, cor- with no other correlations between demand
relations are close to zero, which means that for digital regional government and demand
creation of various digital platforms (which for other digital life dimensions (see Table 5).
6 Diagrams showing leading and lagging cities in terms of the supply and demand ratio for each dimension are provided in Appendix 2
7 That is, the more developed one dimension is, the weaker the other is
C o m ponents of D igital L ife 25Leading Cities
in Terms of Digital Life
26 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0The level of digital life maturity varies sig- Population of Over 1 Million People
nificantly even between leading cities not so
much quantitatively as qualitatively. In most This category, as well as the overall ranking,
cases, a city has a clear “profile” both in terms is topped by Krasnodar and Ekaterinburg with
of demand and supply, with only a handful equal index values but noticeable differences
of cities showing strong correlation between when it comes to their digital profiles. Krasno-
them. Below are the digital profiles of cities dar shows high demand in transportation, me-
that lead in four population-based categories: dia, healthcare and retail, and high supply in
over 1 million people, 500,000 to 1 million healthcare, retail and administration. Ekaterin-
people, 100,000 to 500,000 people, and less burg shows high demand in retail, transporta-
than 100,000 people. tion and healthcare, and high supply in trans-
portation, healthcare, retail and administration.
1.00 Transportation
0.90
0.80
0.70
Administration Finance
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
Krasnodar
0.10 Supply
0.00
Demand
Media Retail
Education Healthcare
1.00 Transportation
0.90
0.80
0.70
Administration Finance
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00 Ekaterinburg
Media Retail Supply
Demand
Education Healthcare
L eading Cities in T er m s of D igital L ife 27Population of 500,000 to 1 Million all digital life dimensions, save for a dip in fi-
People nance. The supply is strong in healthcare, ad-
ministration and transportation, and weak in
The leaders in this category are Vladivostok media and finance.
and Tyumen. Both are not so high in the over- Tyumen has a more developed overall
all ranking, sharing the 17th and the 18th posi- demand, especially strong in the areas of fi-
tion (and yielding to many of the smaller cit- nance, media and administration. The supply
ies). This example clearly shows how different is strong in administration, less so in finance
some cities’ digital profiles can be despite sim- and education, and weak in transportation and
ilarities in digital life maturity. media.
Vladivostok has an average demand that
is more or less evenly distributed between
1.00 Transportation
0.90
0.80
0.70
Administration Finance
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
Vladivostok
0.10 Supply
0.00
Demand
Media Retail
Education Healthcare
1.00 Transportation
0.90
0.80
0.70
Administration Finance
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00 Tyumen
Media Retail Supply
Demand
Education Healthcare
28 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0Population of 100,000 to 500,000 Population of Less Than 100,000
People People
Belgorod, in 3rd position in the overall rank- This group is topped by the resource-rich
ing (higher than both capitals), is a rare ex- Khanty-Mansiysk, which is in 9th position in
ample of a balanced supply-and-demand situ- the overall ranking. It is characterised by a very
ation (which is clearly demonstrated in the uneven digital development with high supply
chart). Both supply and demand are well-de- in administration, media, transportation and
veloped in administration, healthcare and re- retail, and very weak supply in healthcare and
tail, with high demand also observed in edu- education. The supply is strong in administra-
cation. The supply takes a rather large dip in tion, education and retail, and weak in finance,
finance. media and healthcare.
1.00 Transportation
0.90
0.80
0.70
Administration Finance
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
Belgorod
0.10 Supply
0.00
Demand
Media Retail
Education Healthcare
1.00 Transportation
0.90
0.80
0.70
Administration Finance
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00 Khanty-Mansiysk
Media Retail Supply
Demand
Education Healthcare
L eading Cities in T er m s of D igital L ife 29Digital Divide
Determinants
30 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0A key question regarding the digital divide is regions is more than tenfold. The analysis of
whether it is possible to bridge it. To answer digitalisation distribution per Russian region
this question, it is necessary to identify the de- according to their level of income shows no
terminant factors. The first models attempting linear correlation. The overall index value is
to explain the first-tier digital divide appeared the highest for cities with average income.
in 2001.8 The researchers tried to establish the When it comes to “rich” cities with average
extent to which it was determined by the level monthly incomes of over RUB 50,000 per per-
of wealth—in the form of GDP per capita. If it son, the index value is the same as for the cit-
had turned out to be the key factor, the only vi- ies with income of RUB 20,000 to RUB 29,000,
able bridging strategy would have been a gen- while their digital demand development is the
eral economic catch-up, which is inevitably a weakest among all groups (see Figs. 8 and 9).
slow process.9 If the level of economic resources is not
This question is just as relevant for Rus- the primary determinant, what is it for the de-
sian regions as it is in the international con- velopment of secondary digitalisation in a re-
text: the gap in the gross regional product per gion? To answer this question, a regression
capita between the richest and the poorest analysis was performed based on the model
Fig. 8. Overall Digital Life Index According to a City’s Average Monthly Income (RUB Thousand)
Digital Divide per Regions with Different Levels of Income
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
50 Total Russia
8 See section Brief History of Digital Divide Studies below
9 Some of the early critics of the digital divide concept like Mark Warschauer thought that it posed the wrong question: according to their
thinking, the digital divide was just an isolated case of a general social and economic divide that could not be bridged separately (Warschau-
er, M. (2002). Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide. First Monday, 7(7)),
D igital D i v ide D eter m inants 31Fig. 9. Digital Supply and Demand According to a City’s Average Monthly Income (RUB Thousand)
Divide in Digital Supply and Demand per Regions with Different Levels of Income
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
50 Total Russia
SUPPLY (avg) DEMAND (avg)
suggested in 2001 by Dasgupta et al. (see sec- key role was played by human capital and ex-
tion How to Measure the Digital Life? for pansionary policies. That being said, the role
more details) with three groups of determi- of human capital for Russia is much more sig-
nants: income, human capital, and expansion- nificant, especially when it comes to demand.
ary policies. That makes sense, since policies applied with-
This analysis showed that, in general, the in the same country are as a rule more homo-
digital divide between Russian regions was geneous in nature. As should be expected, the
determined by the same factors as the well-re- policy factor plays a much bigger role in terms
searched digital divide between countries: the of supply.
32 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0D igital D i v ide D eter m inants 33
How to Bridge
the Digital Divide?
34 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0The results inspire a certain amount of opti- most significant determinants of digital
mism, since it appears that the digital divide life quality in a given region.
can be bridged through purposeful strategic 3. It is also vital not to lose sight of the
actions rather than by pouring in resources. digital supply creation agenda. How-
Each region can and should aim to develop its ever, rather than one-off super projects,
digital life to the fullest to experience signifi- the most effective measure in this re-
cant results. These should include: gard would be a large number of ex-
• Acceleration of social and economic de- periments offering various business
velopment and improvement of the qual- models to consumers. As foreign stud-
ity of economic growth (correcting ex- ies show,xvii one of the most important
isting structural imbalances in the well- determinants of the digitalisation qual-
resourced primary producing regions); ity is the market’s competitiveness, as
• Fair access to social and economic re- well as the competitiveness of products
sources, reduction of inequality, and offered on the market. In this respect,
provision of inclusive opportunities; regional administrations and leading
• Decent quality of life with opportunities regional enterprises from “traditional”
for self-fulfilment; industries must become competent cus-
• Development of the region’s soft power tomers of digital systems and create op-
and competitiveness both on the nation- portunities for the development of prod-
al and a global scale. ucts with the potential to enter national
and global markets, rather than just ad-
This study by the Moscow School of Man- dressing individual local problems.
agement SKOLKOVO and others published in
international research journals make it pos- As clear as this programme architecture
sible to define key areas of a potential action is, it is difficult to implement, since it does
plan for the administration, business leaders not entail direct administrative actions bring-
and opinion leaders in each region. These are: ing immediate results. This is what makes the
1.
Development of digital demand and secondary digitalisation stage different from
creation of skills and competencies for earlier stages that required investment in in-
effective use of digital platforms and frastructure to provide access to the Internet
systems. As noted earlier, it is the dif- and, as such, brought quick and easily mea-
ference in the levels of demand that sured results. The current tasks faced by re-
determines much of the digital divide gional politicians aiming to bridge the digital
between regions. divide are much harder: they have to provide
2. To develop digital competencies, it is fertile ground for numerous individual ac-
necessary to increase a region’s human tors to create successful projects on the side
capital quality and to cultivate a cre- of supply, while stimulating the growth of de-
ative environment that facilitates in- mand for these projects. Areas of action for re-
novation. The statistical analysis shows gional project administrations might include
that human capital components are the creating effective open digital technology
10 Unfortunately, a quantitative assessment of this aspect as related to Russian regions was not possible due to the absence of relevant data
11 In many respects, this is what complicates the implementation of the Digital Economy National Project (it was in last place among all national
projects in 2019 in terms of budget performance) https://www.cnews.ru/news/top/2020-01-13_tsifrovaya_ekonomika_provalila
H o w to B ridge the D igital D i v ide ? 35platforms in the region, switching the region- long-term they will ensure integration of the
al administration into “digital government” regional social and economic ecosystem at
mode, creating a regulatory environment to the national and global levels (see Fig. 9).
support the digital transformation of business To achieve that, regional elites (including
and digital entrepreneurship, or developing administration, businesspeople, public figures
and implementing educational initiatives to and political activists) should build a “digital
facilitate the transition to a digital economy. consensus” of sorts—a shared understanding
It should all lead to an accelerated devel- of goals, approaches and tools for digital life
opment of the region in four areas: quality development based on well-developed compe-
of life, business environment (ease and effi- tencies in the following four areas:
ciency of doing business), quality of manage- 1. Strategic thinking in the age of digital
ment, and infrastructure (including increased transformation. How to develop realistic
benefits from traditional types of infrastruc- and effective long-term plans in an age
ture assets). If these are sustained over the of “constant change”?12 What new value
Fig. 9. Areas for Acceleration as a Result of a Region’s Digital Transformation
N T
P ME
LO
VE
DE
QUALITY BUSINESS
OF LIFE ENVIRONMENT
MANAGEMENT INFRA-
STRUCTURE
N
IO
AT
GR
TE
IN
12 For more details, see Orlovsky, V., Korovkin, V. From a Rhinoceros to a Unicorn. How to Lead a Large Company Through Transformation in the
Digital Age and Avoid Deadly Traps. M., Bombara, 2020 (in print)
36 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0could be created for “digital residents” markets or business models, but also requires
of a city/region? How to set priorities in deep personal change. The great yachtsman
the face of limited resources and a large Bruno Peyron used to say that one cannot go
number of unresolved social and eco- through a storm and come out of it unchanged,
nomic problems? which could also be applied to the “storms” of
2. Understanding of the technological ba- the digital age.
sis of digital transformation. What tech- What are the benefits the accrue to a re-
nologies could be used to effective- gion from a well-developed digital life? What
ly solve already established strategic can be gained from secondary digitalisation?
tasks? How to distinguish truly promis- The previous study by the Moscow School
ing innovations from endless dead-end of Management SKOLKOVO already demon-
ideas hiding behind fancy names? strated that digital technologies matter a lot
3. Digital project management. How to set when it comes to the general perceived qual-
tasks for developers and accept work ity of the urban environment. They are turn-
when creating novel systems that have ing into key competitive tools for cities and
no comparable counterparts in the world? regions in national and global human capi-
4. Leadership and communications. How tal markets, helping them to attract, develop
to manage the public agenda effectively and retain successful, ambitious and innova-
in the age of a fragmented media land- tive people who can give a fresh impetus to
scape, the erosion of credibility, “infor- a region’s social and economic development.
mation bubbles” and “fake news”? How Therefore, the bridging of the digital divide
to achieve leadership in a continuous is not the proverbial “icing on the cake”,
open discussion with no formal hierar- something you could deal with after solving
chies and constant interaction with nu- pressing social and economic issues, but an
merous equal stakeholders? integral part of the comprehensive answer
to the challenges faced by every region in
This list shows that digital transformation Russia.
is not limited to changes in environments,
H o w to B ridge the D igital D i v ide ? 37Appendix 1.
Digital Life Index
Metrics
38 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0To analyse demand, the researchers used data the top five online media outlets for each city,
indicating the degree of activity and interest with the selection based on the regional me-
of Internet users in the existing digital infra- dia citation index (http://www.mlg.ru/ratings/
structure. Firstly, they estimated the number regional_media/3745/0/0/2/).
of search queries in Google and Yandex re- The obtained results were normalised
garding the digital services that city residents based on populations of specific cities. The
were interested in. The average number of city’s final score for 2014 was determined by
queries per month over the year preceding the the average position in the rankings for each
period of data collection was analysed taking dimension (based on the following calcula-
into account the distribution of the audience tions: 1st place = 1 point, last place = 0 points),
for specific cities. Secondly, city residents’ ac- and the score for 2015 was determined against
tivity in social networks was evaluated. To do the 2014 ranks (thus, values of more than 1 and
this, the total audience of social networks (VK, less than 0 were possible).
Facebook, OK.ru and My World@Mail.Ru) was This methodology was adapted to the ob-
analysed, broken down by city. jective of researching secondary digitalisation
To analyse supply, the researchers used in all Russian regions. The list of metrics com-
data indicating the presence and the degree prising the index was somewhat reduced due
of development of digital services in the cit- to unavailability for certain small regional
ies under consideration. In particular, they ex- centres. The sample included not only capital
amined features of Internet resources related cities of federal constituent entities but also
to the areas covered by the research, namely major second cities in some regions, namely:
hospital web-sites and the official portals of lo- Volzhsky (Volgograd Region), Naberezhnye
cal administrations. Portal usability and com- Chelny (Republic of Tatarstan), Nizhny Tagil
pleteness of services provided were taken into (Sverdlovsk Region), Novokuznetsk (Kemero-
consideration. The number of services offered vo Region), Sochi (Krasnodar Krai), Surgut
by the regional portals of state and munici- (Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug), Toly-
pal services, as well as the number of massive atti (Samara Region), and Cherepovets (Volog-
open online courses (MOOC) provided by lo- da Region).
cal universities and other higher educational
institutions located in the cities under analy- Description of Digital Divide
sis, were considered separately. To assess the Determinants.
development of digital infrastructure in fi-
nance and retail, a number of bank branches The assessment of factors influencing the lev-
with the highest quality digital offering (the el of secondary digitalisation and determin-
top ten of the Internet Banking Rank—Mark- ing the digital divide was based on the model
swebb Rank & Report) and the pick-up points by Dasgupta et al.: (1) income level, (2) human
of online stores (the top five of the Forbes list capital, and (3) regional digitalisation policy.
and the top ten stores according to http://www. The first factor is relatively easy to describe, as
ruward.ru/ecommerce-index-2015/) were con- it uses objective metrics like GRP per capita13
sidered for each of the cities. Assessment of and its dynamics. The human capital factor can
supply in media was carried out on a sample of be described from three perspectives: overall
13 Rosstat data used everywhere unless data source indicated specifically
A ppendi x 1 . D igital L ife I nde x Metrics 39Table. Primary Metrics Used in the Digital Life Index
Supply Demand
Search queries “transport timetable, bus timetable, bus/
1. A
vailability of Yandex.Transport or a
trolleybus/tram/fixed-route taxi van/marshrutka route,
similar service
Transportation Yandex transport, Smart transport” and related variations—
2. A
vailability of electronic timetables at
Wordstat Yandex, number of queries for July 28–August 27,
bus stops
2018
Number of bank branches from
Search queries “online/internet/mobile banking/loan/credit”
the 2018 Internet Banking Rank—
and all queries containing these word combinations—
Finance Markswebb Rank & Report (the top ten
Wordstat Yandex, number of queries per 1,000 people for
banks from the ranking) per 1,000,000
August 02–September 01, 2018
people
Number of pick-up points of online Search query “online store” and all queries containing this
stores from the Forbes list (Top 5) + a word combination excluding words “open, create”—Wordstat
Retail
network of parcel terminals* (2018) per Yandex, number of queries per 1,000 people for August 09–
1,000,000 people September 08, 2018
1. Search query “doctor appointment/make an appointment/
polyclinic” and related variations—Wordstat Yandex,
number of queries per 1,000 people for August 10–
September 09, 2018
1. A
bility to make an appointment with
2. Search query “buy medicine, activated charcoal,
a paediatrician on gosuslugi.ru
Healthcare pancreatin, xylometazoline, chlorhexidine, fluconazole,
2. Ability to make an appointment with
ibuprofen, omeprazole, hydrogen peroxide, bisoprolol,
a general physician on gosuslugi.ru
acetylsalicylic, aspirin, band aid, quamatel, paracetamol,
nemozole” and related variations—Wordstat Yandex,
number of queries per 1,000 people for August 10–
September 09, 2018
1. N
umber of universities offering
distance education (DE) listed on
http://vuz.edunetwork.ru/dist/?spec=0
Education per 1,000,000 people
2. N
umber of universities listed
on http://vuz.edunetwork.ru/ per
1,000,000 people
1. Activity on social networks—VK audience (statistics from
Number of online media outlets in VK’s advertising campaign planner) per 1,000 people
Media Yandex.News aggregator per 1,000,000 2. Activity on social networks—Facebook audience
people (statistics from Facebook’s advertising campaign planner)
per 1,000 people
Region’s 14+ population connected to ESIA (Gosuslugi) as
Features of city administrations’ web
Administration of April 1, 2018 (per constituent entities of the Russian
pages (per the check-list)
Federation)
40 T H E D I G I TA L L I F E O F R U S S I A N R E G I O N S 2 0 2 0You can also read
