Researching Online Risks and

Opportunities Across Europe: Emerging Patterns from a European Project

Joke BAUWENS, Bojana LOBE, Katia SEGERS and Liza TSALIKI

Introduction Collecting and comparing empirical findings on use of the Internet across Europe (conducted

within EU Kids Online) show that:

– Children gain access to the internet very rapidly all over Europe, although not at the same speed across and within countries (EC 2006, EC 2007)

– Strong variations between European countries exist in: • Use of the Internet• The experienced opportunities and risks, identified by Hasebrink, Livingstone and Haddon (2008)

– Opportunities: » education and learning» (Cultural) participation and civic engagement» Creativity and Identity» Social connection

– Threats: » Commercial» Aggressive» Sexual» Value related

Research question:

• Which factors are contributing towards a high degree of online risk experienced by children in the different European countries?

• 7 factors were identified as shaping conditions:

– Child’s use of the internet

– Legal framework

– Networked Readiness Index

– Educational Policy

– Role of Internet service providers

– Online content provision

– Raise awareness

Introduction

Introduction

Research based on data collected by national teams from 20 participating countries in EU Kids Online Network– 20 national reports– Comparative report (Hasebrink, Livingstone & Haddon 2008)

Cross-country comparisons difficult due to the absence of national statistics, lack of research evidence and opacity of stakeholders in specific countries

Media (Internet) literacy of children: Protection from risk or education, empowerment and trust?

Today’s childhood between – Pedagogization: the innocent child that has to be protected– Commercialization : the child as sovereign, autonomous

consumer and participant in the market and society

Children and the Internet

This double-sided view on today’s childhood

innocence versus empowerment

frames debate and policy on children and the Internet

‘should we protect or educate?’

– Explosion of social scientific interest in risk and risk society hand in hand with

“putative decline in trust and trustworthiness” (Collins 2008)

– Ambivalence evidenced in the rhetoric of children as “the digital generation”,

facing rather risks than opportunities

Children and the Internet

Contrast between – vast research and debate in social sciences on children, their use of

the internet, risks and opportunities– few research on factors contributing towards the degree of online risk

experienced

Protecting children on the Internet is matter of concern of three centres of action (Oswell 1999): – Government– Industry – Parents

Children and the Internet

Research Methodology:

Qualitative Comparative Research (QCA)- analysis strategy aiming at comparing multiple cases- capture the complexity of cases and pursuing some level of generalisation (Rihoux, Lobe 2008)

Mainly three steps:

1. Pool of conditions are identified and inserted into a table (‘truth table’)2. A second table (optimal truth formula) is produced by excluding

redundant conditions3. Interpretations are made by returning to the cases, regarding each

case as a whole

Research design

7 conditions considered:

– Child’s use of the internet– Legal framework – Networked Readiness Index– Educational Policy– Role of Internet service providers– Online content provision– Raise awareness

To operationalise the conditions qualitative data (country reports) and quantitative data (Eurostat, Eurobarometer surveys)

Research design

Table 1: Truth table

country child's_use legal_fr nri_i edu_pol ISPs provision awareness online_risk Austria 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 Belgium 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 Bulgaria 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Cyprus 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Chech Republic 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 Denmark 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 Estonia 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 France 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Germany 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 Greece 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 Ireland 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 Italy 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Netherlands 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 Norway 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 Poland 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Portugal 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Slovenia 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 Spain 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Sweden 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 UK 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Research results

Research results

Different steps of analysis show different casual paths leading to a high degree of online risk

Research resultsEmerging patterns

BULGARIA and POLAND: – low use– Low on all conditions

NETHERLANDS and UK: – Heavy internet use– Successful government in promoting use of ICT– Important role of ISP’s – Large initiatives for raising awareness for safety

ESTONIA and SLOVENIA: – High use– Well developed legal framework and educational policy– ISP’s active role in safeguarding– Lack of provision of online media content for children

Research results

CZECH REPUBLIC– High use– High efforts in education – High efforts in awareness – Low on all other conditions

NORWAY– High use– High efforts in education and awareness – Strong legal framework and ICT promotion– Medium provision of online media content for children– ISP’s passive about safeguarding Internet safety

Research results

Conclusions

- Risks experienced in different countries show very different patterns

- Each country possesses its own specific configuration of conditions

- No expected clusters (not linked to economic situation and/or political history)

- QCA analysis does not uncover one explaining condition

- Yet, some patterns can be disclosed

- ‘High use’ seems to be the constant condition

- Provision of online media content for children seems to be significant

- When high use is accompanied by low provision of online content for children, risk arises surely.

- Responsibility in securing safety of children is a shared one. - Importance of a strong legal framework - Strong importance of ISP and media industry (governance)- strong importance of education (media literacy: empowerment)

- Final remark: amount of conditions taken into account is limited (e.g. cultural values)

Conclusions