Fostering Research on the
Economic and Social Impacts
of Information Technology
Report Of A Workshop
Steering Committee on Research Opportunities Relating to
Economic and
Social Impacts of Computing and Communications
Computer Science and Telecommunications Board
Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and
Applications
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C. 1998
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS · 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. · Washington, DC 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the workshop steering committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Grant No. SRS-95285584 between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for this project.
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 98-86542
International Standard Book Number 0-309-06032-X
Additional copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Ave., NW
Box 285
Washington, DC 20055
800-624-6242
202-334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area)
http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 1998 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Page iii
STEERING COMMITTEE ON RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES
RELATING TO ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPACTS OF
COMPUTING AND COMMUNICATIONS
HAL VARIAN, University of California at Berkeley, Chair
FRANCES ALLEN, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
ERIK BRYNJOLFSSON, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JORGE SCHEMENT, Pennsylvania State University
SCOTT SHENKER, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
LEE SPROULL, Boston University
RICHARD SUTCH, University of California at Berkeley
Staff
MARJORY S. BLUMENTHAL, Director
JANE BORTNICK GRIFFITH, Interim Director
PAUL SEMENZA, Program Officer (through July 1997)
JON EISENBERG, Program Officer
JULIE C. LEE, Administrative Assistant (through August 1997)
MICKELLE RODGERS, Project Assistant
RITA GASKINS, Project Assistant
Page iv
COMPUTER SCIENCE AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS BOARD
DAVID D. CLARK, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Chair
FRANCES E. ALLEN, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
JAMES CHIDDIX, Time Warner Cable
JEFF DOZIER, University of California at Santa Barbara
A.G. FRASER, AT&T Corporation
SUSAN L. GRAHAM, University of California at Berkeley
JAMES GRAY, Microsoft Corporation
BARBARA J. GROSZ, Harvard University
PATRICK M. HANRAHAN, Stanford University
JUDITH HEMPEL, University of California at San Francisco
DEBORAH A. JOSEPH, University of Wisconsin
BUTLER W. LAMPSON, Microsoft Corporation
EDWARD D. LAZOWSKA, University of Washington
DAVID LIDDLE, Interval Research
BARBARA H. LISKOV, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JOHN MAJOR, QUALCOMM, Inc.
DAVID G. MESSERSCHMITT, University of California at Berkeley
DONALD NORMAN, Hewlett-Packard Company
RAYMOND OZZIE, Iris Associates, Inc.
DONALD SIMBORG, KnowMed Systems
LESLIE L. VADASZ, Intel Corporation
MARJORY S. BLUMENTHAL, Director
JANE BORTNICK GRIFFITH, Interim Director (1998)
HERBERT S. LIN, Senior Staff Officer
JERRY R. SHEEHAN, Program Officer
ALAN S. INOUYE, Program Officer
JON EISENBERG, Program Officer
JANET BRISCOE, Administrative Associate
LISA L. SHUM, Project Assistant
MICKELLE RODGERS, Project Assistant
NICCI DOWD, Project Assistant
RITA GASKINS, Project Assistant
Page v
COMMISSION ON PHYSICAL SCIENCES, MATHEMATICS,
AND APPLICATIONS
ROBERT J. HERMANN, United Technologies Corporation, Co-chair
W. CARL LINEBERGER, University of Colorado, Co-chair
PETER M. BANKS, Environmental Research Institute of Michigan
WILLIAM BROWDER, Princeton University
LAWRENCE D. BROWN, University of Pennsylvania
RONALD G. DOUGLAS, Texas A&M University
JOHN E. ESTES, University of California at Santa Barbara
MARTHA P. HAYNES, Cornell University
L. LOUIS HEGEDUS, Elf Atochem North America, Inc.
JOHN E. HOPCROFT, Cornell University
CAROL M. JANTZEN, Westinghouse Savannah River Company
PAUL G. KAMINSKI, Technovation, Inc.
KENNETH H. KELLER, University of Minnesota
KENNETH I. KELLERMANN, National Radio Astronomy Observatory
MARGARET G. KIVELSON, University of California at Los Angeles
DANIEL KLEPPNER, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JOHN KREICK, Sanders, a Lockheed Martin Company
MARSHA I. LESTER, University of Pennsylvania
NICHOLAS P. SAMIOS, Brookhaven National Laboratory
CHANG-LIN TIEN, University of California at Berkeley
NORMAN METZGER, Executive Director
Page vi
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
Page vii
Preface
To aid in identifying fruitful approaches to assessment of both the positive and negative impacts of using information technologies, the National Science Foundation asked the Computer Science and Telecommunications Board (CSTB) of the National Research Council (NRC) to gather perspectives on the problem from experts in several relevant disciplinesin particular, economics, sociology, psychology, and anthropology, as well as computer science and engineering. It was thought that a sharing of ideas among individuals with pertinent experience as well as openness to the benefits of interdisciplinary analysis might suggest new ways of addressing what has proved so far to be a complex and difficult undertakingassessing the diverse outcomes in a variety of contexts of the growing use of computing and communications technology. The results of this exploration are intended to be useful to the National Science Foundation in its efforts to assess the impacts of computing and communications technology, to provide examples of successful research and pose interesting questions to the research community, and to inform policy makers about the nature and utility of such research.
The context for this project included recent legislation and administration efforts (e.g., enactment of the Government Performance and Results Act, establishment of the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board) as well as ongoing oversight activities aimed at assessing the outcomes and impacts of federal programs, including research and development programs. It also included the National Science Board's interest in expanding the body of science and technology indicators to include those relating to impacts on the economy and society of information technology's use.
In addition, as a result of reductions in federal regulation or elimination of federal programs, a number of conventional federal sources of data have disappeared
Page viii
(e.g., data on telecommunications from the Federal Communications Commission, data on early Internet use from the National Science Foundation in connection with its operation of the former NSFNET). One result has been to focus more attention on what can and cannot be measured and on how different disciplines can contribute to better public understanding of the linkages among research and development, computing and communications science and technology, and the larger economy and society.
CSTB formed the multidisciplinary Steering Committee on Research Opportunities Relating to Economic and Social Impacts of Computing and Communications, which met in February 1997 to organize a workshop held on June 30 and July 1, 1997 (Appendix A gives the agenda and lists participants). The steering committee sought to identify topics amenable to research, especially interdisciplinary efforts calling for collaboration involving computer scientists, economists, and others. The workshop featured discussion of specific kinds of impacts along with examination of methodological issues, availability of valid data for research, and approaches relevant to assessing the outcomes of information technology's use.
An objective of the workshop was to identify and stimulate thinking about potential research topics, as well as to obtain perspectives on how to develop a more systematic understanding of outcomes important to public policy making. To this end, workshop participants considered possible gaps in knowledge, open research questions, areas where quantitative and qualitative data as well as new methodology are needed, and areas that appear to experts to be well covered. The workshop was also designed to illuminate how and where new research interest could be stimulated in a range of disciplines. In addition, the steering committee explored how to promote and support such interdisciplinary research.
To broaden the base of common understanding among the multidisciplinary participants in the workshop, the steering committee requested position papers from participants (Appendix B includes a selection of these papers) and also commissioned two background papers (presented in Appendix C). These papers contributed to discussions at the workshop and to the steering committee's efforts to synthesize workshop participants' observations on key impact areas and associated analytical challenges. In addition to meeting physically, the steering committee shared information by electronic mail and through a special World Wide Web site, which it used to develop workshop and report materials.
Given the broad nature of the task addressed by the workshop, and in keeping with the activity's limited budget and time frame, the steering committee adopted the approach of selecting and developing for presentation in its report a set of important and instructive examples compiled from the research topics, issues, and research approaches discussed at the workshop, as well as in submitted position papers. The resulting workshop report thus presents examples of important topics and fruitful approaches within several branches of social science rather than attempting to be comprehensive in considering the full range of possible topics. In the report, the fields of anthropology, demography, education, and
Page ix
political science are underrepresented, and the text has little to say about library science, bibliometrics, or information science. Omission of a number of interesting or significant topics reflects the exploratory nature of the project rather than a value judgment on the part of the steering committee. The topics of the creation and growth of the computer industry itself, among the most obvious of the economic and social impacts of computing and telecommunications, have been excluded here because they merit a report in their own right.
The bibliography suggests further reading that provides broad coverage of many of the issues touched on in this workshop report. Many of the references, including a number of review articles, are themselves replete with pointers to other work. Where possible the report includes references to significant Web sites addressing the impacts of computing and communications.
The workshop steering committee is grateful to Eileen Collins, who originated the idea of an interdisciplinary exploration of the impacts of computing and communications, and Les Gasser, both of the National Science Foundation (NSF), for their support of the project and for ongoing guidance. Their commitment to the importance of interdisciplinary interaction was fundamental to the design of the workshop. Funding for the report came from both the NSF Division of Science Resources Studies and the NSF Division of Information and Intelligent Systems.
The workshop steering committee acknowledges the contributions of the workshop participants, both through papers written as part of workshop activities and during discussions at the workshop itself. The steering committee also wishes to thank the NRC staff for their assistance with the workshop and the preparation of the final report, including Marjory Blumenthal, Paul Semenza, Jon Eisenberg, Julie C. Lee, Mickelle Rodgers, and Rita Gaskins. Finally, the steering committee is grateful to the reviewers for helping to sharpen and improve the report through their comments. Responsibility for the report remains with the workshop steering committee.
There was a problem loading page R10.
Page xi
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council's (NRC's) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The contents of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report:
Robert McC. Adams, University of California at San Diego,
Michael Arbib, University of Southern California,
Anita Borg, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center,
Yale Braunstein, University of California at Berkeley,
John S. Chipman, University of Minnesota,
David Farber, University of Pennsylvania,
Irene Greif, Lotus Development Corporation,
Donna Hoffman, Vanderbilt University,
Heather Hudson, University of San Francisco,
James Morris, Carnegie Mellon University,
Milton Mueller, Rutgers University,
Jean-Michael Rendu, Newmont Mining Corporation,
Henry W. Riecken, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine
(emeritus),
Page xii
Peter Temin, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Timothy Van Zandt, Princeton University, and
Terry Winograd, Stanford University.
Although the individuals listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, responsibility for the final content of this report rests solely with the workshop steering committee and the NRC.
Page xiii
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
||
1 |
INTRODUCTION |
|
1.1 Growth Trends |
||
1.1.1 Computing Power |
||
1.1.2 Demographics of Computer Ownership |
||
1.1.3 Internet Use |
||
1.1.4 Global Connectivity |
||
1.2 Some Major Challenges |
||
1.2.1 Productivity and Organizational Change |
||
1.2.2 Information Technology and Wage Inequality |
||
1.2.3 Design of Technology and Standards Setting |
||
1.3 Role of Social Science |
||
2 |
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES AND UNANSWERED QUESTIONS |
|
2.1 Households and Community |
||
2.1.1 Computer Use in the Home |
||
2.1.2 Differential Impacts of Technology |
||
2.1.3 Community |
||
2.1.4 Education |
||
2.2 Social Infrastructure: Universal Service |
||
2.3 Business, Labor, and Organizational Processes |
||
2.3.1 Location: Internationalization and Telecommuting |
||
2.3.2 Labor and Information Technology |
Page xiv
2.3.3 Organizations and Processes |
||
2.3.4 Social Science and the Workplace |
||
2.4 Information Economy and Society |
||
2.4.1 Protection of Intellectual Property |
||
2.4.2 Free Speech and Content |
||
2.4.3 Privacy |
||
2.4.4 Information Use and Value |
||
2.4.5 Pricing Models and Content |
||
2.4.6 Pricing Information |
||
2.4.7 Network Externalities |
||
2.4.8 Auctions |
||
2.4.9 Electronic Commerce |
||
2.5 Illustrative Broad Topics for Ongoing Research |
||
3 |
DATATHE BASIS FOR NEW KNOWLEDGE |
|
3.1 Types and Uses of Data |
||
3.1.1 Data from Experiments |
||
3.1.2 Panel Data |
||
3.1.3 Data from Time-Use Studies |
||
3.1.4 Metadata |
||
3.2 Availability of and Access to Data |
||
3.2.1 Data Collected by the Private Sector |
||
3.2.2 The Need for Firm-level Data |
||
3.2.3 Data Collected by Government |
||
3.3 New Types of Data |
||
3.3.1 Documenting the Effects of Technology Deployment |
||
3.3.2 Data on Social Interactions from the Internet |
||
3.3.3 The Internet as a Window into How Commercial Transactions Are Conducted |
||
3.4 Time and Tools for Gathering and Interpreting Data |
||
3.4.1 The Time Required to Do Good Social Science |
||
3.4.2 Appropriate Subject Pools and Instrumentation |
||
3.5 Approaches to Meeting Requirements for Data |
||
4 |
OPTIONS FOR FOSTERING INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AND IMPROVING ACCESS TO RESULTS |
|
4.1 Encouraging Interdisciplinary Studies and Collaboration |
||
4.2 Funding to Strengthen Interdisciplinary Research |
||
4.3 Making the Results of Interdisciplinary Research More Accessible |
Page xv
BIBLIOGRAPHY |
||
APPENDIXES |
||
A |
WORKSHOP AGENDA AND PARTICIPANTS |
|
B |
POSITION PAPERS SUBMITTED BY WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS |
|
Research on Information Technology Impacts |
||
What If All Information Were Readily Available to All? |
||
Critical Issues Relating to Impacts of Information Technology: Areas for Future Research and Discussion |
||
Computer-mediated Communications |
||
Impacts of Information Technology: Behaviors and Metrics |
||
Five Critical Issues Relating to Impacts of Information Technology |
||
Cultural Influences on the Process and Impacts of Computerization |
||
Questions for Research |
||
Electronic Interactions |
||
Social Impact of Information Technology |
||
The Uncalming Effects of Digital Technology |