Digital technologies create great opportunities, but the transformation they offer isn’t equally within reach of everyone. Access is determined by a vast digital divide.
The digital divide refers to the gap between individuals and households who have access to the internet, and those who do not. The digital divide can restrict education attainment, economic opportunity, the ability to adapt to rapidly changing employment environments, healthcare access, social inclusion, and overall quality of life.
While digital technology will bring about many environmental, social and economic gains, the pathway to South Africa’s digital future is not without challenges. The country needs to make the benefits inclusive and equitable.
As a researcher at the Gauteng City-Region Observatory (GCRO), I analyse urban development with the aim of providing evidence for policies. I recently explored Gauteng’s digital divide to understand how it might shape inequalities in the future. I asked whether residents of Gauteng – South Africa’s most populous province and a regional economic power house – have equal access to opportunities in our digital futures.
My findings show that there’s a marked digital divide in Gauteng. It is spatially concentrated and characterised by social inequality in terms of race and household income.
These findings matter because digitalisation and digital transformation are increasingly affecting the shape of the economy and society. Not having access reduces opportunities. Maximising the benefits of digital futures depends on reliable and affordable connections to the internet for everyone.
The measuring
South Africa’s digital divide is a function of extreme social inequality. Many residents still lack the financial means to access the internet, or live in areas with poor internet connectivity. Large parts of our society are unable to participate in digitisation and digital transformation and benefit from it.
I used Quality of Life Survey 7 (2023/24) data to explore how access to home internet varies in Gauteng. This survey series is one of the largest and longest-running social surveys in South Africa. It collects information from adult respondents in Gauteng to measure quality of life and understand the successes and challenges of the province.
The 13,795 survey respondents were asked whether their household had access to a selection of things that were in good working order. The list included things like a microwave oven or air fryer; a smartphone; a television; a personal computer, laptop or tablet; a car; fibre-based home internet; or other home internet connection.
In this analysis, I focused on the last two assets. Does a household have access to a fibre-based home internet connection or access to another home internet connection (Wi-Fi, home-based 5G, LTE connection or any other internet connection that is used in the household)?
Connectivity
Among all the survey respondents, 46% lived in households with home internet connections. The remaining 54% of respondents lived in households without any home internet connection.
The research also showed that 85% of respondents lived in households with a working smartphone. This means that most households had other means to access the internet from home. This can be through mobile networks or access to municipal Wi-Fi networks. However, mobile data is expensive and smartphones are somewhat limited when it comes to remote work or online learning.
A home internet connection is also very important for survey respondents with access to a resource like a laptop. About 39% of survey respondents live in a household with a personal computer, laptop or tablet, but 25% of these respondents do not have access to home internet. This reduces the potential value of having a laptop because the laptop cannot be connected to home internet in order to do remote work, pursue online qualifications, or just get useful information.
Spatial divide
Drilling further into the survey results shows that access to home internet is uneven across wards in Gauteng. In suburban areas like Centurion, Midrand and Randburg, more than 80% of households have home internet. Suburbs in South Africa are low density residential areas where households typically have above average incomes.
In low-income communities like Hammanskraal, Soweto and Katlehong, there are many wards where only 40% of households have home internet. Similarly, in parts of Mamelodi, Sebokeng and Daveyton, less than 20% of households in a ward have access to home internet.
The spatial patterns are substantially influenced by infrastructure and service coverage (5G and LTE coverage), the infrastructure rollout plans of fibre installers, and household income.
For example, fibre infrastructure rollout is driven by the private sector and requires space on the road verge. This means that rollout is focused on areas where there is guaranteed demand and where it is practically feasible to install fibre lines on road verges.
Why it’s important
The digital divide is deeply associated with socio-economic inequality.
Only 39% of black African respondents lived in households with home internet, compared to 87% of Indian/Asian respondents and 86% of white respondents.
Access to fibre-based home internet is further skewed. Only 18% of black African respondents lived in households with fibre-based home internet, compared to 74% of Indian/Asian respondents and 70% of white respondents.
Similar differences were visible between households with lower or higher income. Only 20% of households in the lowest monthly income bracket had home internet, compared to more than 80% of households in the top monthly income brackets. Once again, access to fibre home internet was even further skewed.
Only 5% of households in the lowest monthly income bracket benefit from having fibre, compared to more than 60% of households in the top monthly income brackets.
What should be done?
The digital divide needs to be narrowed if Gauteng is to follow a path of inclusive growth. This analysis can enable policymakers and community leaders to make strategic decisions about inclusive digital futures.
The results also show that closing the digital divide will require partnerships between the private and public sectors.
