Citizens’ experiences of enablers and barriers to obtaining digital citizenship

E-applications for social assistance

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31265/jcsw.v19i1.614

Keywords:

self-service technology, e-applications, digital divide, social assistance, digital citizenship, Sweden

Abstract

This article focuses on citizens’ experiences of enablers of- and barriers to obtaining digital citizenship. E-applications for social assistance are used as an exemplar. In Sweden, as in many countries, there is political pressure on welfare services to become more digitalized, and to offer different kinds of self-service technology such as e-applications. Even if the goals of implementing these technologies are to increase efficiency and transparency and offer faster services to citizens, there is a risk of expanding the ‘digital divide’. and making it more difficult to obtain one’s digital citizenship and gain access to social rights. This article draws on a qualitative interview study. and explores citizens’ experiences using e-applications in two Swedish municipal social assistance agencies. Results show that most citizens had positive experiences applying for social assistance online, but there were some potential barriers. There were also differences in experiences in the two municipal social assistance agencies. We discuss how the increased digitalization of welfare services seems to push towards a blend of digital and social rights. In this process, social workers play an important role in countering new types of inequalities that emerge in evolving social assistance organizations. The article identifies several areas that merit further research.

Author Biographies

Gabriella Scaramuzzino

Associate Professor, PhD
School of Social Work, Lund University
Sweden
E-mail: [email protected]

Kettil Nordesjö

Associate Professor, PhD
Department of Social Work, Malmö University
Sweden
E-mail: [email protected]

Rickard Ulmestig

Professor, PhD
Department of Social Work, Linnæus University
Sweden
E-mail: [email protected]

References

Baker, S., Warburton, J., Hodgkin, S. & Pascal, J. A. N. (2017). The supportive network: Rural disadvantaged older people and ICT. Ageing & Society, 37(6), 1291–1309. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X16000350

Bender, K., Schau, N., Begun, S., Haffejee, B., Barman­Adhikari, A. & Hathaway, J. (2015). Electronic case management with homeless youth. Evaluation and program planning, 50, 36–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.02.002

Bernhard, I. & Wihlborg, E. (2021). Bringing all clients into the system–Professional digital discretion to enhance inclusion when services are automated. Information Polity, 27(3):373–389. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-200268

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-004.

Considine, M., McGann, M., Ball, S. & Nguyen, P. (2022). Can robots understand welfare? Exploring machine bureaucracies in welfare-to-work. Journal of Social Policy., 51(3), 519–534. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279422000174

Gallist, V., Rohner, R., Hengl, L. & Kolland, F. (2021). Doing digital exclusion—technology practices of older internet non-users. Journal of Aging Studies, 59(100973), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2021.100973

Galperin, H., Bar, F. & Nguyen, H. (2021). The power divide: Mobile communication in Los Angeles’ skid row. Mobile Media & Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157920932608

Germundsson, N. (2022). Promoting the digital future: the construction of digital automation in Swedish policy discourse on social assistance. Critical Policy Studies, 16(4), 478–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2021.2022507

Goedhart, N. S., Broerse, J. E. W., Kattouw, R. & Dedding, C. (2019). ‘Just having a computer doesn’t make sense’: The digital divide from the perspective of mothers with a low socio­economic position. New Media & Society, 21(11/12), 2347–2365. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819846059

Hansen, H. T., Lundberg, K. & Syltevik, L. J. (2018). Digitalization, street­level bureaucracy and welfare users’ experiences. Social Policy & Administration, 52(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12283

Helsper, E. & Reisdorf, B. (2017). The emergence of a “digital underclass” in Great Britain and Sweden: Changing reasons for digital exclusion. New Media & Society, 19(8), 1253–1270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816634676

Hintz, A., Dencik, L. & Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2019). Digital Citizenship in a datafied society. Polity Press.

Holmes, H. & Burgess, G. (2022). Digital exclusion and poverty in the UK: How structural inequality shapes experiences of getting online. Digital Geography, 3(100041), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diggeo.2022.100041

Manor, I. & Kampf, R. (2022). Digital nativity and digital diplomacy: Exploring conceptual differences between digital natives and digital immigrants. Global Policy, 13(4), 442–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13095

Marshall, T.H. & Bottomore, T. (1992). Citizenship and social class. Pluto Press.

Méndez-Domínguez, P., Carbonero Muñoz, D., Raya Díez, E. & Castillo De Mesa, J. (2023). Digital inclusion for social inclusion. Case study on digital literacy. Frontiers in Communication, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1191995

Middle, R. & Welch, L. (2022). Experiences of digital exclusion and the impact on health in people living with severe mental illness. Frontiers in Digital Health, 4, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2022.1004547

Moreno, R. M., Borrero, M. F., Ferri Fuentevilla, E., Medina, F. R., Luchena, A. M. & Aguado, O. V. (2023). Technologies and social services. An overview of technology use by users of social services. PLoSONE, 18(5). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284966

Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J. & McNeal, R. S. (2008). Digital Citizenship: The internet, society and participation. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7428.001.0001

National Board of Health and Welfare (2021). Ekonomiskt bistånd: Handbok för socialtjänsten [Social assistance: Handbook for Social Services]. https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/globalassets/sharepoint-dokument/artikelkatalog/handbocker/2021-5-7389.pdf

Nordesjö, K., Ulmestig, R., & Scaramuzzino, G. (2023). Saving time for activation or relationships? The legitimation and performance of automated decision-making for time efficiency in two street-level bureaucracies serving poor and unemployed clients. Nordic Social Work Research, 14(2), 209–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2023.2218385

Panican, A. & Ulmestig, R. (2016). Social rights in the shadow of poor relief–social assistance in the universal Swedish welfare state. Citizenship Studies, 20(3–4), 475–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2016.1139053

Park, S. & Humphry, J. (2019). Exclusion by design: Intersections of social, digital and data exclusion. Information, Communication & Society, 22(7), 934–953. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1606266

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816

Ragnedda, M. (2017). The third digital divide: A Weberian approach to digital inequalities. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315606002

Ramsten, C., Hammar, L. M., Martin, L. & Göransson, K. (2017). ICT and intellectual disability: A survey of organizational support at the municipal level in Sweden. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 30(4), 705–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12265

Raven, M. C., Kaplan, L. M., Rosenberg, M., Tieu, L., Guzman, D. & Kushel, M. (2018). Mobile phone, computer, and Internet use among older homeless adults: Results from the HOPE HOME cohort study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 6(12), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.2196/10049

Salonen, T. (2013). Det nödvändiga uppbrottet: reformera det ekonomiska biståndet [The necessary break: reform social assistance] Stockholm Arena Idé.

Schou, J. & Pors, A. (2019). Digital by default? A qualitative study of exclusion in digitalised welfare. Social Policy & Administration, 53(3), 464­477. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12470

Seong-Jae, M. (2010). From the digital divide to the democratic divide: Internet skills, political interest, and the second-level digital divide in political internet use. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 7(1), 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331680903109402

Silvennoinen, P. & Rantanen, T. (2023). Digital agency of vulnerable people as experienced by rehabilitation professionals. Technology in Society, 72(102173). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102173.

Simonofski, A., Clarinval, A., Vanderose, B., Dumas, B. & Snoeck, M. (2021). What influences citizens’ expectations towards digital government? An exploratory survey. Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, 23(2), 154–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPRG-12-2020-0173

Steyaert, J. & Gould, N. (2009). Social work and the changing face of the digital divide. British Journal of Social Work, 39(4), 740–753. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcp022

Tomasello, F. (2023). From industrial to digital citizenship: rethinking social rights in cyberspace. Theory and Society, 52, 463–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-022-09480-6

Wong, C. Y., Fung, C. Y. J., Law, K. C., Lam, Y. C. J. & Lee, P. W. V. (2009). Tackling the digital divide. British Journal of Social Work, 39(4), 754–767. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcp026

Downloads

Published

2024-10-03

How to Cite

Scaramuzzino, G., Nordesjö, K., & Ulmestig, R. (2024). Citizens’ experiences of enablers and barriers to obtaining digital citizenship: E-applications for social assistance. Journal of Comparative Social Work, 19(1), 41–67. https://doi.org/10.31265/jcsw.v19i1.614