This is a printer-friendly version of this feature essay. Return to this month's introduction.
ABSTRACT
Social exclusion is an issue that focuses mainly on conspicuous urban issues: homelessness, crime, poverty and lack of access to services are visible and 'real'. The 'green and pleasant land' of rural Britain is seldom associated with social exclusion. An important factor within social exclusion is that of a lack of access to the Internet, as e-citizenship is as fundamental a part of rural life as urban living. This paper examines the factors contributing to rural social exclusion, including lack of adequate transport and limited access, highlighted by a snapshot example of a rural and an urban area in West Yorkshire: the result of a small, comparative research project.
Social exclusion is still a priority issue within most government agendas. Generally associated with poverty, social exclusion and inclusion are in fact associated with more than money. [1] Transport, access to services, cultural difference, lack of education and motivation should also be considered when designing policies to enable social inclusion.
'Social exclusion is a multidimensional, dynamic concept, which emphasises the processes of change through which individuals or groups are excluded from the mainstream of society and their life chances reduced' [2]
Viewing social exclusion as an access issue focuses on the processes by which people are excluded rather than only examining the causes of poverty [3]. Within this framework, it can be seen that it is not only the poor who are socially excluded. A lack of access to facilities, whether physical, mental or financial, can be as exclusionary as the experience of poverty [4].
'Today, the concept of social exclusion is taking over from poverty, which is more static than dynamic and seen far more often as, exclusively, monetary poverty... Social exclusion does not only mean insufficient income, and it even goes beyond participation in working life... More generally, in stressing the rupture of the social link, it suggests something more than social inequality and therefore carries within it the risk of a multi-tier society, or the relegation to the status of the welfare dependent.' [5]
However, social inclusion policies for urban areas focus on different factors than those designed for rural areas. While it is accepted that poverty may not be as acute in rural areas and the population density in those areas is smaller, access to full membership of society, including e-citizenship, is just as pertinent an issue to those living in rural areas as those in towns and cities, although often affected by different factors. In a rural setting, access to services and communications are often key causes of social exclusion. Government action to provide all public information on the Internet by 2005 may cause further exclusion, especially to those in rural areas, through lack of access to the Internet. In conjunction with more general rural exclusion this may further impact on the lives of people already isolated.
In order to illustrate the problems of e-citizenship and rural living, a small, comparative research project will be discussed. This was carried out between two areas within the Kirklees Metropolitan Council area in West Yorkshire: Paddock, an urban area, and Holmfirth, a rural area.
In 1999, The UK government's Social Exclusion Unit published a report entitled 'Bringing Britain Together'. The strategy focuses on community involvement, local partnerships and neighbourhood management, using 18 Policy Action Teams. The Single Regeneration Budget and the New Deal for Communities also show government commitment to addressing the problems experienced by the most socially excluded and degenerated neighbourhoods [6]. These three policies all deal with urban deprivation. Rural degeneration is not seen to be as marked, nor are the residents found to be as poor. The persistent myth of the rural idyll, perhaps less readily accepted after the 2001 Foot and Mouth crisis, still leads some to believe that those who live in England's 'green and pleasant land' are mutually supporting and self-sufficient, thus in less need of government support. Policies which aim to tackle social exclusion need to reflect these different circumstances. It should not be assumed that urban solutions will work in a rural context [7].
Cox [8] states that '20% of the rural population of England and 25% of the rural households live in absolute poverty (on an income of less than 140% of supplementary benefit entitlement)'. Remote rural dwellers were found to be more disadvantaged than accessible rural dwellers, with average and top incomes in accessible areas being markedly higher than in remote rural areas [9].
By examining rural social exclusion it can be seen that there are distinct features that distinguish it from urban social exclusion. Access to affordable food, banking and communications are issues that affect both areas, but urban deprivation often includes poorer housing, greater poverty and incidence of homelessness. Rural social exclusion can include lack of access to employment opportunities, communications, adequate public transport and technology [10]. The combination of these issues can compound social exclusion in a different way for people living in remote rural areas.
Communications can present a major problem for rural dwellers, as more people rely on mobile phones, WAP and ADSL lines [11]. Without these technologies, businesses and people in these areas are at a disadvantage to those in urban areas. According to UK Online [12], "Over a third of the UK population is needlessly paying more for everyday goods and services simply because they are not using the internet." Or, it should be added, because they are unable to access the internet.
There are still many remote rural areas that are not within range of mobile network aerials or have the technology within their telephone exchanges for services such as broadband. BT OpenWorld point out that "ADSL [on which the service depends] is distance dependant, which means that service degrades significantly when... premises are beyond 3.5 km (approx.) from the local exchange... Around 85% of the UK population live within this distance from their exchange." However, this means that 15% of the population do not - specifically those living in remote rural areas - and therefore will not have access to this service even when the final "rollout" takes place.
Rural areas are distinguished by their sparse population. This in itself can be a cause of social exclusion: isolation becomes a major problem if there is no access to adequate transport. As the cost of running a car in remote areas is also often prohibitive, public transport networks become as important [13]. 77% of rural households do have a car [14] but this means that 23% - almost a quarter of rural households - do not.
The Department of the Environment studies on rural lifestyles [15] found that 25% of rural households were living in or on the margins of poverty. THe incomes in accessible rural areas were also found to be highly polarised, with the poorest residents of the areas experiencing a high degree of relative poverty, often due to the incidence of polarised wealth and poverty found in commuter belts. This was also found in the study carried out by Harrop et al [16] who state that 'inequality is higher in accessible rural areas than in remote rural or urban areas'. These studies also found that a main element of rural poverty exists because agriculture and tourism are among the main employers in these areas and in both industries, wages are low.
The government has set out its visions for the countryside alongside a specific set of policy aims [17]. They state that their vision is:
'a living countryside, with thriving rural communities and access to high quality public services; a working countryside, with a diverse economy giving high and stable levels of employment; a protected countryside in which the environment is sustained and enhanced and which all can enjoy; and a vibrant countryside which can shape its own future and with its voice heard by Government at all levels.'
The current state of many rural areas, with a lack of services and poor public transport networks, would suggest that there is a major task ahead. It may become necessary to provide services that are not necessarily cost-effective, but are result effective - i.e. they may cost more to run than they accrue in payments, but the end result is that some people would be able to more fully participate in society.
By modernising rural services, mainly by utilising technology, the government aim to enable those living in rural areas to have the same benefits and opportunities as those in urban areas. Primary care 'one-stop' centres with Internet and tele-links to local hospitals are one such aim, as is to provide Internet Learning and Access points in rural areas. Tony Blair stated that he wanted to:
'ensure that everyone in the United Kingdom has the best chance to seize this moment - our information age which offers new opportunities for greater prosperity, and a better quality of life.... The prize of this new age is to engage our country fully in the ambition and opportunity which the digital revolution offers.' [18]
The Prime Minister also stated that all public government information will be online by 2005. The UKOnline Annual Report states that internet access is available for all “as near as your local library” – some considerable distance for dwellers in remote rural areas. Physical access to the Internet in rural areas is therefore frequently difficult for those without access at home, thus these people stand little chance of being able to take part in this digital revolution.
The Office of National Statistics (http://www.statistics.gov.uk), in their latest (2004) statistics on internet access, state:
'In the third quarter of 2003, 48 per cent households in the UK (11.9 million) could access the Internet from home, compared with just nine per cent (2.3 million) in the same quarter of 1998. […] Among those adults who had used the Internet in the three months prior to interview, 84 per cent used it for e-mail, 80 per cent to find information about goods or services and 68 per cent to search for information about travel and accommodation. Over half had used it to buy or order tickets, goods or services (53 per cent). For adults who had used the Internet, for personal or private use in the 12 months prior to interview, the most popular purchases were travel, accommodation or holidays (52 per cent), books, magazines, e-learning or training material (38 per cent), tickets for events (36 per cent), and music or CDs (34 per cent).'
However, while these results appear to answer the question ‘what do people use the Internet for?’ they do not address ‘why don’t people use it?’ Over half of the population cannot access the Internet from home, according to these statistics – this must surely have some impact on future research. The statistics also suggest that the majority of those interviewed had enough disposable income to be able to afford to travel and take holidays. It also appears to focus on those adults who are able to access the Internet from home, and makes no comment about barriers to being able to gain access. The UK Online 2003 Report states that 96% of Britain’s population are aware of a place where they can readily access the internet, yet with considerably lower levels of actual access, this must suggest a problem.
The main barrier to access is a lack of basic skills and computer phobia or fear [19]. This is arguably the first time in history when children have had more knowledge than their parents on a subject. Many parents, whose households possess a computer, do not have the ability to use them, while their children appear to be very comfortable using the technology. The government is attempting to address the skill barrier with its UK Online programme. The network of UK Online centres are targeted at enabling those who may not otherwise have access, through lack of skills and lack of money, to participate in online communication.
Promoting the government initiative to address this issue, at the Drapers City Foyer UK online centre in Bethnal Green, (http://getting.ukonline.gov.uk/news/news75.htm) David Blunkett said:
'The [U.K. Online] centres aim to attract people who may feel technology is not for them, such as people with basic skills needs, lone parents, people over 60, those with disabilities, people from minority ethnic groups and unemployed people.'
The second barrier to access is lack of access to computers and the Internet. Although the government is endeavouring to offer every member of society access to a public computer, this will take time:
'People living on isolated farms who could benefit from access to the Internet will be targeted. Some will receive digital television set-top boxes giving access to the worldwide web. Those who receive computers will also be given training about how to use them and encouraged to visit a specially designed website which will show them how to look for work on the internet' [20]
By using alternative technology, e.g. digital television, the government is hoping that the population, who would not access the Internet by computer, will have the technology to access it in their homes, even if people are unable to afford a computer. Stephen Byers, then Trade Secretary, said in a report in the Guardian Newspaper (16/4/01) 'Already, one in three households, and one in two families with children, have digital TV. We need to ensure that Britain leads the world in the development of digital television, that every community shares in the benefits, and that we don't see the creation of a digital divide.'
Van Dijk [21] states that the take up of the computer will follow the same pattern of the take up of the telephone, which took approximately 70 years to achieve general diffusion, rather than the assumption that the pattern would be nearer that for television and radio, which was much shorter. It should be noted that, comparatively, new technologies are much more expensive than old ones, and although computer technology is now much cheaper than 10 years ago, it is still out of reach for many people. Many people also worry about the extra cost incurred in connection charges to the Internet.
The third issue of access is that the Internet and computers may not be sufficiently user friendly, although with the arrival of Microsoft Windows GUI platforms, users find it easier to use personal computers today, than when DOS was the operating system. An issue often not considered in the issues of access, is the design of computer operating systems [22]. Windows is written for an English speaking, U.S. cultured society, by members of the ethnic majority. Although Windows does include additional language software, available to download freely, it is necessary to understand the procedure for this task - not an undertaking within the capabilities of a computer novice, a person who is computer phobic or who has difficulty with English.
The final barrier to access could be seen to be an issue of ‘state of mind’. Many people, who overcome the fear of computers and can afford to connect to the Internet, use their computers only as a word processor. This may be related to lack of use of computers at their place of work, or lack of knowledge of other applications. It may also be due to a fear of the unknown in the same way that people, who are scared of using a computer at all, fear technology. Continuing training for people competent in word processing packages should address this issue, such as the U.K. Online opportunities offered by the government and the European Computer Driving License - a certificate for all round computer competence offered by increasing numbers of further education establishments.
It can be seen that there are barriers to access of the Internet that may prevent people from using the technology for a variety of reasons. These barriers are not necessarily financial, but could cause or increase social exclusion for those affected. As has previously been mentioned, social exclusion is not merely a financial issue, but can be caused by a variety of factors for different people. It is possible for the government to address the first three barriers to access as these involve factors that can be physically addressed - providing free computer lessons, hardware and user-friendly software, although the fourth is an issue that only the individual can address.
To bring the issues into a focus, if a person lived in an area poorly served by public transport and wished to use the Internet, but had to catch a bus, travel for an hour and then wait several hours for a return trip on the bus to reach home, how motivated would they be to either undertake the bus journey or bother to use the Internet, would they take a trip to their local library just to get online if it such a problem? If the access is free it is likely that it will have to pre-booked, causing more complication. How will this affect the concept of e-citizenship, if only those who have ready access or are very motivated will take part in being an e-citizen? Many people cannot be motivated to vote once every 3 – 5 years, arguably a basic requirement of taking part of the citizenship of a country – will they be more motivated to take part if Internet access is such a difficult process? Those living in rural areas often have problems with adequate public transport, live too far from a public library to walk and cannot have broadband access to enable fast Internet access – what implications does the concept of being an e-citizen have for them?
In order to highlight the issues of rural internet access and the reality for access for rural dwellers, the wards of Holme Valley South and Paddock were examined in some detail. The information used was taken from the Kirklees Council website (http://www.kirklees.gov.uk) and a map of public Internet access points, supplied by Kirklees council.
Holme Valley South Ward is a rural area in the southern part of the Kirklees Metropolitan Council, in West Yorkshire. The population density of Holme Valley South is from 2.4 to less than 10 people per hectare and according to the ONS Mid-Year Estimates 2002, has a total population of 17,247. The area, on the whole, is not poor, unemployment is just over 2% and the claimant count for November 2000 was 175 people. There is no blanket coverage of the area provided by public transport - with the outlying areas of the ward only served with 0.1 - 1 bus per hour. There are no trains within the area.
Paddock Ward is part of the urban area of Huddersfield. The population density of this area is 30 - 39.5 per hectare and, according to the ONS Mid Year Estimates 2002, has a total population of 14,875. This is not a wealthy area of Kirklees as there is over 8% unemployment and the claimant count for November 2000 was 402 - more than twice that of Holme Valley South Ward. This area is well served by buses and also has a train line that runs across its southern border. Most bus routes are served by 4 buses per hour.
Within the Holme Valley South ward, there are 3 public access points for Internet use, with 52 Internet connected computers within these facilities. Free tutorials and assistance are available to people living within this ward, although on a small scale.
The Paddock ward has 126 public Internet access computers at four locations and are used free of charge to some members of the community - mainly benefit claimants, people over 50, single parents, the unemployed and certain Asian groups. There are also a further 30 within a mile of the east boundary of the ward; these are on very well served bus routes. Free Internet courses are available to people living in the Paddock ward who are claiming benefits and to some groups of the Asian communities in the area.
Most rural areas in Kirklees will not have access to ADSL and will, therefore, not be able to access the same quality of Internet access as the more populated areas. Although a proposed cyberbus carrying 7 computers will not address the entire problem of rural Internet access to any great extent, it is attempting to address it.
By using the statistics on population and computer access it can be seen that there are 336 people per computer in Holme Valley South and 124 people per computer in Paddock. It could be argued that there is a greater need for free public access computers in Paddock as this is an area of greater poverty than Holme Valley South, but this may not affect the experience of social exclusion. It is proposed that Holme Valley should either have an increase in bus services and/or free Internet access as without one of these factors being addressed the residents in the area may suffer further social exclusion and lack of access to e-citizenship, due to a lack of adequate access to the Internet.
It cannot be denied that social exclusion is an issue affecting many people in Britain at the present time. Poverty, although a major factor in the experience, is not the only aspect of social exclusion. Lack of access to services are a fundamental factor in the experience of social exclusion and a lack of adequate transport and communications systems may cause those living in remote areas to become more isolated and excluded from enjoying full citizenship and participation in society.
It was seen that rural social exclusion could be due to a combination of factors that, on their own, may not appear to be major reasons for a person to experience exclusion. Lack of adequate communications, poor public transport networks and geographical isolation can combine to exclude people from participating in society.
As the government pledged to provide Internet access for all and to publish all public information online by 2005, it was seen that this could be an additional cause for further rural social exclusion. It is seen that, at present, Internet access is reduced for many rural dwellers, and is concentrated in urban areas. Due to the lack of public transport in rural areas - this lack of access may be compounded.
In order to genuinely address social exclusion in Britain, it is be necessary for the government to implement policies to assist those living in rural areas alongside those in place for those in towns and cities. A lack of adequate public transport was seen to be a major factor in the isolation of some inhabitants of rural areas - an increase in frequency and areas covered is necessary to allow people to participate more fully in society.
Internet access for those in rural areas must be addressed. This could be addressed partly through an increase in public transport and an increase in access in libraries, adult education centres, post offices and schools. Subsidised satellite internet access and ‘Cyber-busses’ may be methods of bringing technology to those in remote rural areas.
Further research must be carried out into rural social exclusion, internet access and its impact on ecitizenship, as this debate will not disappear. People who live in rural areas, though not seen to be in as much poverty as those living in some urban areas, are being excluded, both from society and citizenship, due to factors of access and deprivation. Poor farmers do exist, homelessness does exist in the countryside, poverty is a valid experience for 20% of rural dwellers and services are frequently poor. The factors that impact on those living in rural areas should be taken into account in that, rather than attempting to fit methodologies and measures used for urban research.
There is no doubt that these polices would incur further cost to councils and central government, but social exclusion is still a major issue and must be addressed if the people in rural areas are to be able to participate fully, as citizens, in their communities and in wider society.
1. See also McAleavy, G. Donegan, T. and O'Hagan, C. 2004, 'The Digital Learning Divide - responding to the access needs of citizens', Tangentium 1/2.
2. Philip, L. and Shucksmith, M. 1999. 'Conceptualising social exclusion', European Society for Rural Sociology XVIII Congress, Lund, Sweden, August 1999.
3. Alcock, P. 1997. Understanding Poverty, Macmillan, London.
4. Lavalette, M. and Pratt, A. 1998. Social policy: a conceptual and theoretical introduction, London, Sage, p. 186.
5. Robbins, cited in Alcock, op. cit., p.96.
6. http://www.detr.gov.uk
7. http://www.countryside.gov.uk/EssentialServices/Social_Inclusion/intro.asp
8. Cox, J. 1998. 'Poverty in Rural Areas', British Medical Journal 316, pp. 722-730.
9. Harrop, A., Kenaway, P. and Palmer, G. 2000. Indicators of Poverty and Exclusion in Rural England, New Policy Institute, London.
10. Philip and Shucksmith, op. cit.
11. http://www.rogerfrost.btinternet.co.uk/tv0299.htm
12. http://www.e-envoy.gov.uk/assetRoot/04/00/60/69/04006069.pdf
13. Shucksmith, M., Chapman, P. and Clark, G. M. 1994. Disadvantage in Rural Scotland. http://www.jrf.org.uk/knowledge/findings/socialpolicy/sp62.asp: Joseph Rowntree Foundation Social Policy Research no. 62.
14. Cox, op. cit.
15. cited in Philip and Shucksmith, op. cit., p. 9.
16. Harrop et al, op. cit.
17. Prescott, J. and Brown, G. 2000. Our Countryside: the future - a fair deal for rural England, Dept. of the Environment, Transport and the Regions/Cabinet Office, London.
18. Our information Age: The Governments vision - http://www.number-10.gov.uk/default.asp?Pagetd=1590
19. Van Dijk, J. 1997. Widening Information Gaps and Policies of Prevention. http://www.thechronicle.demon.co.uk/archive/infogap.htm.
20. Sylvester, R. (March 16th 2001) Free computers for poor isolated areas, Daily Telegraph.
21. van Dijk, op. cit.
22. van Dijk, op. cit.