Context

Poverty, particularly deep poverty, is one of the key factors that underlies digital exclusion. This can occur through the direct effects of a lack of access to online technology for financial reasons, as well as the corollary impact of this on digital skills development. The result is an ‘offline premium’, in which the digitally excluded pay more for goods and services, are excluded from services and products that would help alleviate the impacts of poverty, and are impacted on their social capital. The relationship between deep poverty and digital exclusion therefore warranted further research and investigation.

The study used the following definitions:

• ‘Deep poverty’: individuals and families living 50% or more below the poverty line.
• ‘Digital exclusion’: taking account of affordability, access (devices, data), internet usage, digital skills and abilities, and motivation.

The study

Trussell Trust and Good Things Foundation commissioned WPI Economics to undertake a review of evidence on the links between digital exclusion and deep poverty in the UK. The review set out to address four overarching questions:

• How does digital exclusion drive people into or trap them in deep poverty?
• What role does digital exclusion have in access to services, support, or life’s opportunities?
• How might this develop in the future?
• What evidence gaps exist and how might they be filled?

The review involved three methodological elements:

• A review of around 30 items of existing literature sourced from think tanks and research centres, including policy-only items which did not provide analytical insights.
• In-depth interviews with three academic experts in the field and one focus group with five community hub providers from across England and Scotland.
• An audit of 15 sources of large-scale national and smaller, bespoke UK surveys to identify the scope to analyse these in relation to the links between deep poverty and digital exclusion.

Key findings

The role of digital exclusion in deep poverty

A small minority of the population (especially food bank users) did not have internet access, and many households on low incomes struggled to afford it or paid more for it. People with very low digital capability were more likely to struggle after a financial shock. Digital exclusion had the same risk factors as poverty.

Access to services, support, and life’s opportunities

The internet was relied on for job and rental adverts and applications. Substantial minorities of benefit recipients were offline. Digitally-excluded children experienced worse educational outcomes.

Future prospects

Digital affordability was worsening and digital services were expected to play an increasing part in people’s financial and wider lives (especially in health). The report provides an initial Theory of Change to help policymakers and practitioners visualise the links between and potential for tackling digital exclusion and deep poverty.

Gaps in the evidence

Existing research had failed to disentangle the causal relationships between poverty and digital exclusion and address deep poverty adequately. Robust survey data were often fragmented or unavailable. Major UK household surveys offer scope for analysis of more narrowly-defined research questions.

Points to consider

Methodological strengths/weaknesses

• The report provides an overview of previous evidence. There is no indication that the review was undertaken systematically or that the quality of the evidence reviewed was assessed.
• The qualitative element of the research was small-scale. It is not stated how the qualitative data were analysed, or how insights from them were used in the report.
• The data audit appears to have been thorough.
• The Theory of Change was an initial mapping only, based only on current evidence (which the authors noted was weak in key areas).

Applicability

• The report should be of interest to those policymakers, providers, and practitioners who advocate for people experiencing (or at risk of) poverty and deep poverty and digital exclusion.

Relevance

• The report is timely given the increasing reliance by providers of goods and service on digital infrastructure.

Generalisability

• The report identifies concerns which are likely to transfer to other countries, with similar economic markets and societal structures.