When Sociotechnical Imaginations Come True: The Pandemic's Digital Transition of Public Services and Inequalities

Seretyu Lerwe^*
*Correspondence: Seretyu Lerwe, Department of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON P3E 2C6, Canada, Email:

Keywords

Public services • Sociotechnical • Digital transition

Introduction

Telehealth and digital health solutions emerged as essential tools in responding to the pandemic. Healthcare providers adopted telemedicine to provide remote consultations, monitor patients, and facilitate diagnostics. This transition prioritized accessibility and safety; however, it also exposed disparities in access to healthcare technology and the internet, particularly affecting marginalized communities. The closure of schools and universities necessitated a swift shift to online learning. While the move to virtual education aimed to ensure continuity of learning, it revealed the digital divide. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds often lacked access to necessary devices and reliable internet connections, exacerbating educational inequalities. Government agencies turned to digital platforms for the distribution of financial aid, unemployment benefits, and other social support services. This transition expedited the process, but it highlighted challenges related to digital literacy and access [1,2]. Many individuals struggled to navigate online application processes, and those without internet access faced significant barriers in accessing essential aid.

Literature Review

The concept of sociotechnical imaginations refers to the collective visions and values that guide the development and deployment of technology in society. These imaginaries influence how technology is designed, implemented, and used. In the context of the pandemic's digital transition, we can identify several key sociotechnical imaginaries at play. In the realm of healthcare services, the pandemic drove the development of telehealth and digital health technologies. The sociotechnical imaginaries guiding this transition prioritized accessibility, efficiency, and safety. However, these imaginaries did not fully account for the digital divide, data privacy concerns, or the potential to exacerbate health inequalities. Consequently, while telehealth expanded access for some, it inadvertently left others behind [3,4].

Discussion

The move to online education was primarily guided by the imaginaries of flexibility and personalized learning. These visions emphasized the potential benefits of adaptive learning technologies and the ability to tailor education to individual needs. However, the digital transition in education often overlooked the reality of unequal access to devices and internet connectivity, perpetuating disparities in educational outcomes. In the realm of social support services, the imaginaries focused on streamlining and simplifying the distribution of aid. While this made the process more efficient, it failed to account for the digital literacy of aid recipients. Many individuals, particularly older or less technologically savvy individuals, struggled to navigate the online systems, leading to delays in receiving critical support. The digital transition of public services during the pandemic has starkly revealed and exacerbated existing inequalities, with the digital divide being a central issue [5,6].

Conclusion

The pandemic's digital transition of public services has brought sociotechnical imaginaries into reality. While these imaginaries aimed to improve accessibility, efficiency, and safety, they often overlooked the existing digital divide and inequalities, exacerbating disparities in access to essential services. As we move forward, it is imperative to address these inequalities, invest in infrastructure, promote digital literacy, and develop technologies with inclusivity in mind. Only then can the digital transition of public services truly benefit all members of society, regardless of their socioeconomic status or digital proficiency. Efficiency should not come at the expense of equity. Policymakers should carefully consider the trade-offs when implementing digital solutions and seek ways to ensure that no one is left behind. Sociotechnical imaginaries should prioritize inclusivity and consider the needs of all users, including those who may be digitally disadvantaged. This involves consulting with marginalized communities during the design and development of digital solutions.

Acknowledgement

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1. Schiølin, Kasper. "Revolutionary dreams: Future essentialism and the sociotechnical imaginary of the fourth industrial revolution in Denmark." Soc Stud Sci 50 (2020): 542-566.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

2. Gostin, Lawrence O., Eric A. Friedman, Sara Hossain and Joia Mukherjee, et al. "Human rights and the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective and prospective analysis." The Lancet 401 (2023): 154-168.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

3. LI, Juan Juan, Rong Hua Zhang, Yan Zou and Fang Gu, et al. "Influencing factors of depressive symptoms in zhejiang adolescents." Am J Prev Med (2021): 139-142.

   Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Lozano, Rafael, Nancy Fullman, John Everett Mumford and Megan Knight, et al. "Measuring universal health coverage based on an index of effective coverage of health services in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2019." The Lancet 396 (2020): 1250-1284.

   Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

5. Zancajo, Adrián, Antoni Verger and Pedro Bolea. "Digitalization and beyond: The effects of Covid-19 on post-pandemic educational policy and delivery in Europe." Policy Soc 41 (2022): 111-128.

   Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Watts, Geoff. "COVID-19 and the digital divide in the UK." The Lancet Digital Health 2 (2020): e395-e396.

   Google Scholar, Crossref