Tag Archives: armenia

02 Jul

Internet Tripled, Personal Computer Ownership Doubled last year in Armenia

My primary research interest is technology adoption and use, especially looking at digital divides (ownership and use patterns based on socioeconomic differences).

I’ve been studying these divides and patterns in Armenia for a long time. 2010 was a very exciting year for me (and Armenia!) because after many years of low adoption rates for personal computers and Internet, we saw some big jumps! Internet penetration tripled and personal computer ownership doubled between 2009 and 2010. Analysis and thoughts are below.

INTERNET
After years of single-digit Internet penetration, in 2010, Internet penetration in Armenia tripled from nearly 6% in 2009 to 19% in 2010, based on the Caucasus Barometer.

Home Internet Adoption in Armenia

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
ITU 2.00% 2.90% 4.21% 4.41% 5.86% 5.86% n/a
CB n/a n/a n/a 4.30% 7.00% 5.80% 19.30%

(ITU is the UN International Telecommunications Union, CB is Caucasus Barometer.)

Why did this happen in 2010? Probably because of mobile Internet. According to the Caucasus Barometer, 22% of Armenians have Internet access via their mobile phones (although the ITU says trhat only 5.18% of Armenians in 2010 had mobile Internet), most of them beginning using this service in 2009 or 2010. The mobile phone companies have a variety of options for mobile Internet, some of which are at low prices. 3 common ways that Armenians use mobile Internet are: 1) Accessing the Internet through a phone that has the ability to access the Internet, such as a “smartphone” 2) Tethering, a method to share the Internet connection on a mobile phone with a personal computer through a USB cable or a Bluetooth connection and 3) USB sticks that are plugged into a PC’s USB port and pick up a cellular signal.
And who uses mobile Internet in Armenia? Contrary to expectations that early adopters of technology are young, rich, educated urbanites, Armenians adopting mobile Internet are regionally-diverse: 37% are adopters are Yerevantsis, 29% are regional city dwellers, and 35% are rural villagers. They’re equally men and women. They’re young, but they are not teenagers. The average age of a mobile Internet adopter is 41. They’re better off economically than the average Armenian, but not extremely wealthy, this is all according to analysis of the Caucasus Barometer.

PERSONAL COMPUTERS
Another major event of 2010 is that Armenians owning personal computers has nearly doubled from 15% in 2009 to 27% in 2010.

Home PC Adoption in Armenia

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
ITU 6.77% 8.32% 10.23% 15.40% n/a
CB 10.80% 11.40% 14.70% 14.70% 26.70%

Why did this happen in 2010 after years of slow growth? Possibly because of the ComputerforAll.am program has lowered the cost of computers for some Armenians. This program that allows individuals to rent computers at a subsidized low cost. It was launched in September 2009. According to Armenpress, in early 2011, over 17,000 computers have been rented through the program. Within the program, laptops rent for between 11,400-18,300AMD per month and desktops for 11,200AMD per month.

According to the official website of the program: “The use of computers and the Internet access to each country’s economic development incentives are the most important and also have an important significance for the formation of information society. “Computers for All” program aims to significantly increase the level of use of computers in Armenia, offering software packages equipped with modern computers and buy them for the current credit solutions.”

The stated goals of the program are:
– expand the distribution of computer software packages in Armenia, equipped with accessible, but modern and reliable computers, creating an opportunity to buy in Yerevan, as well as regional residents,
– contribute to Armenia’s ICT sector by promoting the development of computer technology and software development markets development,
– prepare computer literate personnel, promoting the education of Armenian issues.
– to promote the spread of the Internet, increasing the number of users of electronic services and provide a basis for the introduction of government services, business sector, educational institutions within the framework, thereby contributing to the formation of information society in Armenia, and
– encourage the use of licensed software.
– And in a press conference, an involved party said… “The aim of the program is to provide 30 percent of Armenian residents with home computers” (Armenia Now 2009 HP article)

So did the ComputerforAll program meet its goals?

Has the Computer for All program met its goal of providing 30% of Armenian residents with PCs?

YES, but they said in 2009 that only 5% of Armenians had personal computers and that was not true. Also, since there was already an increase in adoption of personal computers, we cannot say that the ComputerforAll program was the only reason for more adoption of personal computers.

Has the Computer for All program met its goal of increasing Internet adoption?

YES – but could have been due to the mobile Internet increase.

Has the Computer for All program met its goal of expanding computers to Yerevan Armenians?
YES, in 2009, 33% of Yerevantsis had personal computers and in 2010 48% did. (But we cannot know if the increase was caused by the program.)

Has the Computer for All program met its goal of expanding computers to rural Armenians? YES – in 2009, 5% of rural Armenians had personal computers and in 2010, 12.5% of rural Armenians had personal computers. (But we cannot know if the increase was caused by the program.)

Has the Computer for All program met its goals of increasing computer literacy? NO – according to the Caucasus Barometer, self-reported computer skill has not increased from 2007 to 2010, with nearly two-thirds of Armenians reporting no skill with computers.

And according to the Caucasus Barometer, 24.8% of PC owners bought their latest computer in 2009 and 24.2% bought their latest computer in 2010, both possibly within the government subsidy program. Thus, although this program obviously does provide some computers to some individuals, it is still prohibitively expensive for most Armenians. Despite the government subsidy program, personal computers are still only available to the wealthier in Armenian society.

02 Jul

Feelings about the Direction Country is Headed in the Caucasus

How do Armenians, Azerbaijanis, and Georgians feel about the direction in which their countries are headed?

The 2010 Caucasus Barometer tells us that opinions on this are mixed.

Few people in any of the three countries think that their country is definitely headed in the right direction (3% Armenia, 11% Azerbaijan, 11% Georgia), although some think that their countries are headed somewhat in the right direction (15% Armenia, 27% Azerbaijan, 33% Georgia).

In Armenia, over a third (37%) feel that their country is headed in the wrong direction. Only 10 percent of Azerbaijanis feel this way though and 18 percent of Georgians.

Interestingly, many people aren’t sure. Nearly 20 percent of Azerbaijanis (19%) and Georgians (18%) say that they don’t know what direction their countries are headed in. Only 15 percent of Armenians aren’t sure.

Direction

View more presentations from Katy Pearce.
02 Jul

Political Institutional Trust in Armenia

This is a study that I did with the 2008 (collected in fall) Caucasus Barometer. As a warning, it is pretty stats-heavy. If you’re going to cite this paper, please use this citation:

Pearce, K.E. (2010). Political trust in the post-coup attempt Republic of Armenia. Demokratizatsiya, 19, 58-83.

Abstract:
This paper presents a model of institutional political trust in Armenia after a coup attempt. The model of political trust was created using exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis. Results indicated strong support for a three-factor model with civil society, elected government and non-elected government as factors.

demokratz2010

02 Jul

Approval of Others in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

This analysis was conducted on the 2007 Caucasus Barometer on questions dealing with approval of being friends with, doing business with, and marrying other nationalities/ethnic groups. (I apologize that this is more “statistics-y” than other posts. I did this analysis for a statistics class assignment a few years ago but thought that people might be interested so I posted it as is.)

approvalAMAZGE

02 Jul

Treatment of Citizens in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

According to the 2010 Caucasus Barometer, people in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia have strong opinions about how their governments treat citizens.

Three-quarters of Armenians (74%) do not believe that the Armenian government treats its citizens fairly (half strongly believe this and half somewhat believe this).

Half of Azerbaijanis and 43 percent of Georgians think that their government doesn’t treat people fairly.

Interestingly, few are completely sure that their governments treat people fairly, 4 percent in Armenia and 9 percent in Azerbaijan and Georgia.

Fairlygovernment

View more presentations from Katy Pearce.
02 Jul

Rule of Law in the Caucasus

People in the Caucasus think that their court systems favor some people over others, according to the 2010 Caucasus Barometer.

Over half of Armenians (54%) and Azerbaijanis (57%) believe that this, and 43 percent of Georgians do.

And while those that say that they don’t know are high in each country (10% of Armenians, 18% of Azerbaijanis, and 27% of Georgians), those that are sure and certain that there is favorship.

Why don’t Armenians, Azerbaijanis, and Georgians think that their court systems are fair?

One reason may be judges. While most people in the Caucasus do not trust judges, there are many that are neutral or unsure.

Moreover, many believe that the court systems are under the influence of the government. Very few people in any of the three countries think that the court systems are independent.

Furthermore, many also believe that high officials are not publish when they break the law.

Ruleoflawjudicial

View more presentations from Katy Pearce.
02 Jul

Elections in the Caucasus

South Caucasians aren’t so sure if their national elections are conducted fairly. Only half of Armenians (50%) and Azerbaijanis (46%) feel that the last election was fair. Nearly two-third of Georgians (63%), however, feel that their last election was fair. Interestingly, over a third of Armenians (46%) are certain that the last election wasn’t fair, while Azerbaijanis and Georgians are mixed between thinking that the election wasn’t fair and not being sure.

As to the reasons why they think that the elections aren’t fair, please look at the slides for responses on a number of items. Of particular interest is the high number of “don’t knows” from Azerbaijani and Georgian respondents. Armenians, whether they believe that different aspects of elections are fair or not, are certainly “more certain” than their neighbors are.

Most Armenians and Georgians believe that they’ll vote in the next national election. Azerbaijanis, however, aren’t so apt to vote, with over half (57%) saying that they don’t think that they’ll vote. Furthermore, only half of Azerbaijanis (48%) are sure that they’d vote in a presidential election (if it were to happen next week – which it won’t!). Nearly two-thirds of Armenians (64%) and Georgians (62%) are sure that they’d vote in a presidential election.

Elections

View more presentations from Katy Pearce.
02 Jul

Migration in the Caucasus

Based on an analysis of the 2010 Caucasus Barometer, I found that there are significant differences in interest in temporary and permanent migration in the three Caucasus Republics. All three countries have a pretty strong interest in migration, especially temporarily. This question is about “interest in” — not ability to migrate, however. And as there are many barriers to migration (visas, economic ability, finding work, etc.), this should not be taken as “intention to migrate,” merely interest.

Temporary Migration
With 59 percent of Armenians interested in temporary migration, of the three republics, Armenia is leading in this category. This may be due to a number of factors: established groups of migrants in Russia and the United States (among other places), relatively high unemployment, and an established remittance system. Who wants to migrate in Armenia? Lots of people! Only those in the lower economic categories are less likely to be interested in temporary migration. Moreoever, Yerevantsis are significantly less likely to be interested in temporary migration than rural Armenians or those living in regional cities. This may be because a lot of Yerevantsis have already left Armenia or because there has been a shift in internal migration where rural people are moving to Yerevan for work and educational opportunities.

Half of Azerbaijanis are interested in temporary migration. There are no patterns or significant differences in interest based on economic wellbeing, capital/rural cities/village, or gender.

Many Georgians (40%) are interested in temporary migration as well. Like Azerbaijan, there are no economic differences in interest, but rural residents are strongly more interested in temporary migration than capital or rural city residents are. Also, unlike Armenia or Azerbaijan, women in Georgia are more interested in temporary migration than men are.

Permanent Migration
A quarter of Armenians (26%) want to permanent migrate. Again, economic conditions likely cause this interest. Only those in the absolutely highest economic category are less interested in permanent migration than the vast majority of lower upper class, middle class, and lower class Armenians (in terms of their economic wellbeing). Interestingly, women are more interested in permanently migrating than men are.

Only 17 percent of Azerbaijanis state an interest in permanent migration. Again, economic differences played no role, but rural Azerbaijanis are significantly more interested in permanent migration than capital or regional urbanites. And like Armenia, women are more interested in permanent migration than men are.

Few Georgians (8%) want to permanently migrate. There are not any economic, regional, or gender differences for permanent migration.