TAO/Handbook/Context Analysis

Context Analysis

The context analysis aims at finding out how different kinds of organizations in different European countries master the challenges that are aligned with organizing and collaborating with older adults online. We basically differ between Wikimedia Chapters and community organizations like SeniorWeb NL or Seniorweb CH. In addition, we differentiate between profit and non-profit / not-for-profit organizations; local, regional, national and international scope of the organization; and key purpose of the organization (e.g. communication platform, collaboration platform, participation platform).

Before the context analysis started, we created a common analysis framework that describes for each type of organization what information we search for and how we interpret this information. Subsequently we identified relevant organizations in twelve countries outside the TAO consortium’s home countries (the number of countries is relevant for the sustainability and internationalization goals of TAO) that suit best as a case study for TAO against the background of the relevant conditions in each country, as is explained in the European and National Policy Context. To carry out the case studies (one per country plus Wikimedia chapters that appear useful to examine, based on their activities or strategies targeting older adults), we collected data and information via phone interviews. The interviews shall were recorded and summarized. The analysis below focuses only on the relevant aspects of the conversation for our context.

European and National Policy Context

In May 2010, the European Commission adopted e-Inclusion as one of the main topics of the ‘Digital Agenda for Europe’ and consequently, the concept entered the debate on aging populations in full force (EC, 2010a). E-inclusion is, according to the EC, a possible strategy to achieve active aging. The concept is strongly related to other European policies on social inclusion, for example, and is conceptualized as a “focus…on participation of all individuals and communities in all aspects of the information society” (EC, 2010a). According to the EC, e-inclusion is the solution to the gaps in Information and Communications Technology (ICT) usage, and moreover, will improve quality of life and social participation and thus will reduce social exclusion (EC, 2010a). The EC furthermore claims that e-inclusion methods are an effective way of reaching vulnerable social groups such as older people (Stegeman et al., 2012). A multitude of programs specifically designed for older people therefore focus on creating opportunities to make them increasingly active online. It is also stated that these programs decrease dependency and increase responsibility, thus leading to living more active lives as people age (Stegeman et al., 2012).

However, most critical e-inclusion and innovation policy studies argue that the concepts 'access' and 'usage' are on the one hand too techno-deterministic and on the other hand insufficient as policy terms to get people involved online and informed about e-inclusion (Maier-Rabler, 2002; Golding and Murdock, 2001; Light, 2001; Burgelman, 2001; Cammaerts and Burgelman, 2000; Warschauer, 2002). Besides our focus on the EC, there are plenty of national initiatives of this – too techno-deterministic – kind, too. In this chapter, we will present an analysis framework for e-inclusion and innovation policy in Europe, applied to several case studies to highlight national policies and explain how similar or different they are from the EC’s e-inclusion policy.

The link between e-inclusion and innovation policy was best described by Maier-Rabler (2002), when she coined the concept of e-policy as “the strategy for the introduction of ICT in a certain social environment.” With her model of new e-policy, she proceeds from infrastructure-oriented measures, linked to bridging the digital divide, to identity-oriented measures to close the knowledge gap between different generations (Martinson and Minkler, 2006). This model should “make people understand how they are affected by the new media and which individual choices they have” and “eventually lead to the acquisition of the desired capabilities in order to develop a self-determined style of utilization of the new information and communication technologies” (Maier-Rabler, 2002 ). Describing the new e-policy model, Maier-Rabler sees a shift between policies on the technological/infrastructural level of (technical) access and (technical) skills, to policies about more individual-based aims focusing on capabilities and understanding of new media and digital technologies (2002).

The predominating information-culture constitutes current e-policy practice. The shift suggested by Maier-Rabler (2002) is from infrastructure-oriented to identity-oriented measures.

These e-inclusion and innovation policies, both focusing on access, literacy, and cognition as capabilities are top-down, since the policy makers decide on which strategies to aimed at and to what extent a country focuses on e-policy on a infrastructural, technological, capacity or ability level. Besides these top-down approaches, e-inclusion and innovation policy can also be emulated by smaller or other national initiatives or organisations that choose to pursue e-policy and to close the knowledge gap bottom-up. To assess the directions and degree of successful e-inclusion and innovation policy in Europe that has been pursued, we apply both the bottom-up initiatives as the top-down approaches to the e-policy model.

To see overlaps between e-inclusion and aging policies in Europe we follow the approach of Sapir (2006), clustering Europe according to socio-economic situation and care model zones:

• The continental welfare state (Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria)
• The Scandinavian welfare state (Sweden, Denmark, Finland)
• The Anglo-Saxon welfare model (UK, Ireland)
• The Mediterranean welfare state (Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece)

And, as added by Ivan (2009), with the accession of the new 12 EU member states (in 2004 and 2007):

• The Eastern European welfare state (Eastern European countries, such as Romania, Bulgaria, former Yugoslavia and the Baltic countries).

However, together with describing the e-policy-model of several European countries, Maier-Rabler also clustered European countries and labelled them, differentiating “between e-strategies and e-actions” and categorising “strategies and actions into access, skills/literacy, cognition/awareness, and capability driven policies” (2010). This led her to create the following clustering with labels “drawn on the main characterizing element of the cluster” (Maier-Rabler, 2010):

• Nordic Openness: Denmark, Finland and Norway
• Anglo-Nordic: United Kingdom, Ireland, the Netherlands and Sweden
• Stuck-in-the-Middle: Austria, Germany, Slovakia, Slovenia, Italy, Spain, and Malta
• Traditional National Individualists: France, Belgium, Portugal, Poland and Hungary
• New Achievers: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Czech Republic
• New Uncertain Conservatives: Greece, Cypress, Bulgaria and Romania
• Little Princesses: Luxembourg and Switzerland

With several overlapping countries, many similarities can be seen between both Sapir and Ivan’s (2006; 2009) and Maier-Rabler’s (2010) approach, but “even when the goals of policies are the same for a number of countries or regions, or sectors, the difference in specific contexts may call for different policy solutions” (Wintjens and Nauwelaers, 2008).

Information cultures and e-policy (Maier-Rabler, 2002)

For our research, we not only elaborate on political, economic, technological and demographic trends in Europe, but also on social and innovative trends, and we attempt to label and cluster the bottom-up initiatives and approaches in Europe. Maier-Rabler created a matrix in which information cultures are assigned to two axes (see Figure). On the one hand the axis of either individual-centered or collective-centered societies and on the other hand the axis of information-friendly (open, transparent) or information-restrictive (gate-keepers) cultures.

Where top-down national policies are considered as information-restrictive and most of the times collective-centered, opening up these policies for more social innovation is considered as information-friendly. These bottom-up initiatives and approaches are an example that e- policy does not “lead automatically to the well-known either or not, connected or not-connected, haves or have-nots, but to a variety of patterns of involvement” (Maier-Rabler, 2002). The varying national e-policies are hence illustrated in the figure, where the European information cultures are mapped, according to the earlier mentioned labels.

Mapping European information cultures (Maier-Rabler, 2010)

To illustrate that bottom-up involvement might give a different character to a country’s e-policy, we will elaborate different case studies, such as several European Wikimedia Chapters and Online Senior Communities in the following chapters.

	Nordic Openness	Anglo-Nordic	Stuck in the Middle	Traditional National Individualists	New Achievers	New Uncertain Conservatives	Little Princesses
WikiMedia Chapters		Sweden	Spain	France		Romania
Senior Communities	Norway, Denmark		Slovenia	Belgium	Latvia	Greece	Luxembourg

Wikimedia

Wikimedia Foundation

• Wikimedia Foundation
• San Francisco, California, USA
• https://wikimediafoundation.org
• charitable, not-for-profit, membership-based association
• 170 employees – 6500 volunteers
• develop and maintain open content, and providing it to the public free of charge
• public donations, fundraisers, sponsorship, brand merchandising

Key activities with adults aged 50+: Wikimedia Foundation is currently not targeting adults aged 50+ specifically. Including 85-year-olds in Wikimedia projects doesn't matter more than including 16-year-olds. What matters to the foundation’s goals is including people who are knowledgeable and want to contribute, for example to topics the collaborative encyclopedia Wikipedia, the foundations' most well-known project with more than 280 multilingual editions. Strategies to encourage people to participate in national editions of Wikipedia include: Engage people in real life activities around free knowledge, offer the opportunity to support chapters’ activities on a local level, and finally, offer affiliation for people living in regions where there are no chapters yet or where chapters might not be feasible. In addition to Wikipedia, there is a family of currently 13 other Wikimedia projects, including the dictionary Wiktionary, the educational resource Wikiversity or the free knowledge base Wikidata.

Key revenue streams: Wikimedia Foundation relies on public contributions and onsite fundraisers to fund its mission. Wikimedia Foundation also increases its revenue by alternative means of funding such as grants, sponsorship, services and brand merchandising. Access for search engines and similar businesses to Wikimedia databases in exchange for fees used to be a revenue stream, but is no longer offered to new customers. In 2012, the Wikimedia Foundation launched the Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC), which disseminates funds to eligible entities, including national Wikimedia chapters.

Challenges: Getting more people to edit Wikipedia is among Wikimedia’s current goals. The number of people who contribute five edits or more each month to Wikipedia has fallen from 8800 authors in 2008 to 6500 authors in 2013. This means between 2008 and 2013, 2000 active members, about 25 percent, have left the community. One of the factors contributing to this development is an increasingly less inclusive community of contributors with complex norms and policies. Another important factor is the competition of Wikipedia with newer high-profile like Facebook. A third factor is the continually improving quality of articles on Wikipedia: It is difficult to add to an article that is already extensively sourced and fact-checked. Researching, sourcing and writing articles has become a very time-consuming activity.

Wikimedia España

• Wikimedia España
• Valladolid, Spain
• http://wikimedia.org.es
• not-for-profit, membership-based association
• organization of activities that promote the creation and release of open content, including projects hosted and supported by the Wikimedia Foundation
• Wikimedia foundation grants, public donations, public grants, membership fees

Key activities with adults aged 50+: Wikimedia España tries to get people of all ages involved with creation of open content in public workshops and courses at schools, universities, museums and other public institutions. Since 2011, the photo contest Wiki Loves Monuments is one of the major and most successful activities. The pocket book “Wikipedia, from A to W” was produced as a guide for librarians, archivists and people in the media seeking to become involved with and support the use of open content on Wikipedia. Wikimedia España advocates for free access to knowledge in the media. The chapter promotes the use and improvement of Wikimedia Foundation projects, as well as other projects that fall within the scope of its statutes.

Key revenue streams: Wikimedia España is mainly funded by grants and donations.

Challenges: Besides constant struggles to generate more sources of revenue, Wikimedia España is focused on increasing creation and release of open content: Find people who can provide scientific and historical contributions, as well as advice in various fields of knowledge. Get more supporters to produce quality images and articles. Get more supporters to work on revisions of existing content. Improve and update information, documentation, and support for supporters. In order to achieve these goals, the chapter is making the most of existing contacts with universities and cultural institutions. Other challenges lie in the field of public relations: The movement for open content and the chapter itself need to become more visible in the public.

Wikimedia Sverige

• Wikimedia Sverige
• Stockholm, Sweden
• http://www.wikimedia.se
• charitable, not-for-profit, membership-based association
• 5 employees – 170 members – 2300 volunteers
• organization of activities that promote the creation and release of open content, especially projects hosted and supported by the Wikimedia Foundation
• Wikimedia foundation grants, public donations, membership fees

Key activities with adults aged 50+: While quite a lot of active contributors in Sweden are above 50, the interviewee in the chapter believes activities shouldn’t expressly target older adults. People wouldn’t want to be seen as old or needing extra help. In autumn 2013, Wikimedia Sverige was invited to a lecture at the senior university in Sweden. To attract new contributors, the chapter focused on knowledge that the audience was already having. Team members sought to find persons among adults aged 50+ who had a passion for certain topics and wanted to contribute to articles that should be on Wikipedia, but are not. Wikipedia Coffee is another activity well suited for adults aged 50+: Community members choose a café in their town and organize a small social event. Writing on Wikipedia can sometimes feel lonely. Wikipedia Coffee is an opportunity to meet up in person, talk about ongoing events and get support from fellow Wikimedians. Beginning in the spring of 2014, Wikimedia Sverige is going to organize workshops every other week.

Key revenue streams: The biggest issue in the chapter right now is money. Wikimedia Sverige has issues funding everything they want to do, basically. The chapter has gone from one to five people in less than a year. It is growing, but as far as a sustainable structure is concerned, they are not at the level they want to be at.

Challenges: Wikipedia needs to be packaged as easy to use when presented to new contributors, even when it is not. The new Visual Editor of Wikipedia will hopefully bring about a big change, especially when trying to get less computer-savvy people to contribute. But bridging the digital device is not only about technical skills, but also about trust. Older adults don’t see computers as necessary or as a natural part of their life. They don't have the same relationship to the Internet as younger generations. They don't trust strangers on the Internet and are, therefore, less likely to contribute. Overcoming the anonymity in online communities is essential in building trust.

Wikimédia France

• Wikimédia France
• Paris, France
• http://www.wikimedia.fr
• charitable, not-for-profit, membership-based association
• 6 employees – 470 members
• supporting the creation, collection and distribution of open content; workshops at libraries, universities and other public institutions
• Wikimedia foundation grants, public grants, membership fees

Key activities with adults aged 50+: Older adults are included in training sessions by Wikimédia France targeted toward several different types of new contributors. Since March 2013, a fellow for communication seeks to increase contacts with public institutions as well. “WikiPermanence” events are held as a physical meeting between Wikipedians and new contributors, or simply those who want to know more about the operation of Wikipedia and other related topics. Community members at WikiPermanence answer questions, show demonstrations, and provide assistance. Adults aged 50+ are included in WikiPermanence events.

Key revenue streams: Founded in 2004, the French Wikimedia chapter is funded mainly by Wikimedia foundation grants, but also by public grants and membership fees.

Challenges: Many projects were continued despite the lack of funds and capacity to hire new staff dedicated to projects of the chapter. In turn, Wikimédia France focused on continuing successful projects and refrained from starting new ones. Some educational projects did not work as well as people had hoped because of the brevity of the allotted time slots. For example, it proved difficult to properly introduce using and editing Wikipedia in short training sessions. People conducting training sessions learned that new contributors need significant support by tutors; otherwise they will face too many difficulties and will not stay. Mass upload projects are also difficult because of a lot of work needed by few volunteers able to prepare quality uploads. One widely publicized incident in 2013 involved the DCRI (Direction Centrale du Renseignement Intérieur) who forced a volunteer to delete an article in the French edition of Wikipedia about a French military compound on the grounds.

Wikipedia Community România

• Wikipedia Community România
• Romania
• http://ro.wikipedia.org
• online community
• supporting the creation, collection and distribution of open content in the Romanian edition of Wikipedia
• no revenue streams

Key activities with adults aged 50+: An official Wikimedia chapter does not exist yet. The efforts of the community currently focus on providing support to authors, correcting errors or vandalism in Wikipedia articles, and moderating conflicts in the community. To get more adults aged 50+ to participate, the interviewee proposes authors should write more about the history of their own country; not as a form of nationalism, but because they are knowledgeable about it and can provide content that cannot be found on the English edition of Wikipedia. In his opinion, the community should talk to schools or municipal administrations and support them in writing about their local history or create photos of the places they live in. Key players in these activities could be people who have written books about local history.

Key revenue streams: The Wikipedia Community in Romania currently does not have established revenue streams.

Challenges: Romania is one of the countries with the lowest proliferation of Internet access and computer literacy scores in Europe. The Romanian Wikipedia Community is small compared to other countries. In the experience of the interviewee from the community, Romanian people aged 50+ are often not very computer-savvy and tend to view content in Wikipedia as superficial. Traditional encyclopedias on the other hand were seen as more trustworthy by them. The lower reputation of Wikipedia served as a barrier for participation. Additionally, Wikipedia would primarily serve the interests of an audience that is interested in topics on pop culture or sports. Topics older adults are interested in received significantly fewer contributions. They might feel excluded when they become aware of this disparity in the content. Another challenge is the sometimes chaotic editing process in Wikipedia. For example, many people make suggestions for improvements in the discussion pages, yet these suggestions seldom encourage active authors to rewrite the articles. The Wikipedia Community in Romania needs to attract more contributors in order to overcome this problem.

Online Senior Communities

Norway

• Seniornett
• Oslo, Norway
• www.seniornett.no
• Not-for-profit foundation
• 800-850 volunteers – 6 employees – 170 learning centers in Norway
• Offering IT support to senior citizens in Norway, founding of new learning centers and offering support to volunteers and members of Seniornett
• Funding: private and governmental, members pay a small amount

Key activities with adults aged 50+: Seniornett Norway is based in Oslo with 6 employees and a majority on 800-850 volunteers. The board is mainly responsible for the financial matters due to their large network. Their main focus lies in teaching senior citizens in small communities and motivating seniors to use the internet in 170 learning centers spread throughout Norway. Seniornett’s business model is characterized by the 50+ year old volunteer community who teach senior citizens in a one-to-one-model about ICT and internet in their own pace. This strong tradition of volunteering is very typical in the Norwegian context because of their long-term commitment and socializing through volunteering. Current projects include the establishment of new learning centers and support volunteers in different locations with workshops and learning material and the participation in EU-projects which have senior citizens as a target.

Key revenue streams: Most funding origins from private and governmental sources and members pay only a small amount.

Challenges: Due to the geographical circumstances (mountains and long distances), one of the main challenges has been to reach seniors and recruiting them and managing volunteers. Besides the geographical circumstances, promoting Seniornett and recruiting new members has been another barrier and lacks of an effective market strategy that might reach senior citizens in small towns.

Belgium

• People communication (agency of www.seniorennet.be)
• Brussels, Belgium
• Marketing Communication and market strategies for senior citizens
• For-profit organization
• 1.400.000 visitors per month
• Offering marketing consultancy and communication campaigns targeting the generation 50+
• Collaboration with private partners/companies

Key activities with adults aged 50+: People Communication is a marketing and communication agency specialized in the 50+ generation. With 15 years of experience in the marketing to seniors, People Communication’s aim is to propose a series of strong communication tools. People Communication also provides marketing consultancy and works proactively with her customers to set up marketing and communication campaigns towards the 50+. They work as the media agency of the successful seniorennet.be, where seniors in the age 50+ help each other and exchange information online.

Key revenue streams: As a marketing and communication agency specialized in the 50+ generation, their customers are companies, associations, media agencies, advertising agencies and events organizations etc. who want to communicate towards the 50+ generation.

Challenges: One of the main problems they are facing is volunteer management and recruiting skilled volunteers who are knowledgeable and might attract senior citizens. Within their organization they have experienced that working together with volunteers and the amount of freedom they are given might cause tension within the community. Subsequently, they face the problem that some communities grow faster than other and are not able to allow more members.

Latvia

• http://www.senioriem.lv
• Riga, Latvia
• Targeting senior citizens (55+) online.
• Free online platform
• Offering an online platform for interactive exchange between members and providing articles on health and lifestyle for seniors
• Collaboration with private partners/companies

Key activities with adults aged 50+: The main goal of Senioriem is to produce information of target group’s interest, as well as offering some services, for example classified ads. So far senioriem.lv is still the first and the sole website for elderly people in Latvia. For the time being only one person Kaspars Odins, has been taking charge of creating original content, acquiring materials from partners, editing and doing some marketing activities. The website was a personal investment by his own company.

Key revenue streams: Senioriem.lv is the product of Kaspars Odins’ private company "Mildas Eiropa. Ltd." and was established almost 2 years ago. The website’s offerings are free and currently only Midas Eiropa is paying for all costs.

Challenges: Kaspars Odins invested in developing the website and all content, while working as a journalist. Currently he is looking for more funds, sponsors or projects, however this is quite hard at the moment in Latvija.

Greece

• 50+ Hellas
• Athens, Greece
• www.50plus.gr
• Non-governmental, not-for-profit organization
• 1 salaried employee in administration; 3 executive board members; ad-hoc volunteers according to project needs
• Training of older adults (50+) in the new technologies. To bring older adults’ perspectives to the forefront, create visibility for their issues, raise awareness of elder abuse. Create and maintain a network of organizations committed to the support of older adults
• Mainly funded through EU programs (research and development)

50+ Hellas is strongly involved in stimulating activities in favor of older adults. However, it is not focused on integrating older adults and volunteers into its own organization (e.g. through membership). By its own estimate, it mainly reaches persons aged 50-70 years. 50+ Hellas has worked successfully with intergenerational learning arrangements from which both older and younger adults benefit.

There are 700 recipients of a newsletter and 500 subscribers of the Facebook page. An estimated 1.000 persons aged 50-70 are reached regularly. Many of these engage in ad hoc volunteer work but they are not in a continuous work-relation with 50+ Hellas.

Bringing up 25% of self-funding, which is a frequent condition in EU research and development calls, is challenging for 50+ Hellas. Moreover, the funding scheme provides very little long-term security.

Denmark

• Aeldre Sagen
• Denmark
• http://www.aeldresagen.dk/
• National membership organisation
• 100 employees (fte), 13.000 volunteers; 650.000 members
• Key activity & target group: Facilitating the access to and use of the internet for older adults 50+
• Members pay an annual fee

In the beginning the initiative was focused on advancing the interests of older adults in general. Nowadays, the focus is on accessing the internet and using it in all possible ways. The organization has become very visible and has a strong impact on the political debate. Aeldre Sagen’s Facebook page is enormously popular and a new community website was launched recently. Among its digital offers is also a website dedicated to the intergenerational communication between family members.

Not all of Aeldre Sagen’s activities are online. There remains much "traditional" journalistic activity for hardcopy magazines. Aeldre Sagen stresses that it wants to reach all older adults, not only those who are online.

The activities and services involving older adults are extremely widespread and driven from the bottom up. The only condition for an activity to take place is that a volunteer’s proposal (e.g. computer class, dance lessons) is met with interest from the community.

Luxembourg

• LuxSenior
• Luxembourg
• www.luxsenior.lu
• Created as the result of a ministerial policy and today integrated in the federal administration (Ministry of families and integration).
• No designated employees (rather mandated persons at the Ministry), volunteers or members
• Provides online information about Active Ageing to persons aged 55+
• Fully financed by the state of Luxembourg, via the ‘Ministry of Families and Integration’

LuxSenior, founded in 1998, is a website which provides information about ‘Active Ageing’ to persons aged 55 and above. Being a static (unidirectional) information platform, LuxSenior does not offer visitors the opportunity to interact with other visitors. The website is a result of a ministerial policy, and therefore also run by the ‘Ministry of Families and Integration’. LuxSenior does not have any designated employees; instead, various persons at the Ministry are mandated to publish information on the platform. The platform and its maintenance are fully funded by the state of Luxembourg. LuxSenior is well-known in Luxembourg, also because the local internet courses for older citizens (organized by the senior clubs ‘Club Sénior’) have raised the awareness of the information platform. In the future, LuxSenior aims to make the website more dynamic, e.g. by offering opportunities for interaction and providing more links to other relevant websites.

Slovenia

• The Third Age University of Slovenia
• Ljubljana, Slovenia
• http://www.univerzazatretjeobd-drustvo.si
• joint program by 45 Slovenian universities
• 300 study groups – 5.000 participants
• provide access to education to older adults, influence the social and economic status of the elderly, education and consulting for national and international organizations
• public grants

Key activities with adults aged 50+: The Third Age University of Slovenia is a voluntary educational movement, meant for 50+, mostly retired people, but also for elderly workers. It has been established to provide access to education to older adults and to contribute to changing the social and economic position of the elderly. At present, it encompasses 35 universities all over the country. Each Slovenian university organizes study circles, lectures, and some of them also summer universities, educational camps, study trips, etc. An introductory course on using and contributing to Wikipedia has been in place in the capital city of Ljubljana for several years.

Key revenue streams: The Wikipedia course is funded by a grant from the city of Ljubljana. People pay for computer literacy courses at the Third Age University, but not for the Wikipedia course. The decision was made because the administrators believe people would not be willing to pay for it. Currently, getting another grant to fund the project is the main goal. Secondary goals are doing more coursework and publishing more articles on Wikipedia.

Challenges: A challenging aspect during the organization of the Wikipedia courses is the interdisciplinary background of the target audience. The courses must allow for a wide range of topics participants can contribute to. Lecturers have to assess what each person is most interested in and help them find topics they can contribute the knowledge to – everyone is bound to be knowledgeable about something. Additionally, Wikipedia can be daunting for newcomers, even if they are already well-versed in using computers and the Internet. In a nutshell, lecturers had to bridge diverging interests as well as differences in computer literacy skills among the participants.

References

• Burgelman, J.C., 2001. How Social Dynamics Influence Information Society Technology. Lessons for innovation policy. In. OECD (Ed.). Social Sciences and Innovation. Workshop proceedings.
• Cammaerts, B., Burgelman, J.C. (Eds.), 2000. Beyond Competition: Broadening the Scope of Telecommunications Policy. Brussels: VUB University Press.
• European Commission, 2009a. 2009 Ageing Report. Economic and budgetary projections for the EU-27 Member States (2008-2060), European Economy 2/2009. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication14992_en.pdf.
• European Commission, 2009b. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Dealing with the impact of an ageing population in the EU (2009 Ageing Report). Brussels: European Commission. Available online at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/¬LexUriServ/¬LexUriServ.do?-uri=COM:2009:0180:FIN:EN:HTML
• European Commission, 2010a. e-Inclusion. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/index_en.htm
• European Commission, DG Information Society and Media, 2010b. Overview of the European Strategy in ICT for Ageing Well. Available online at:
• http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/docs/¬ageing/overview.pdf. Accessed 31 May 2013.
• Golding,P., Murdock, G., 2001. Digital Divides: Comunications policy and its contradictions.In: New Economy,Vol. 8,No. 2, 110-115.
• Ivan, I., 2009. Types of Welfare States in the European Union..
• Light, J., 2001. Rethinking the Digital Divide.In: Harvard Educational Review 71/4 (Winter 2001), 710-734.
• Maier-Rabler, U., 2002. Cultural aspects and digital divide in Europe. Medien Journal, 3(2002), 14-32.
• Maier-Rabler, U., 2010. E-Policies and the Diversity of European Information Cultures, in: INTL: Technological Issues (Topic) 10/2010; 1-15.
• Sapir, A., 2006. Globalization and the Reform of European Social Models. In: JCMS, Vol.c44, No. 2. pp. 369–390.
• Stegeman, I., Otte-Trojel, T., Costongs, C., & Considine, J., 2012. Healthy and Active Ageing. Healthyageing.eu. Available online at http://www.healthyageing.eu/sites/www.healthyageing.eu/files/resources/Healthy%2 0and%20Active%20Ageing.pdf
• Warschauer, M., 2002. Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide. In: First Monday, vol.7, 2002.
• Wintjes, R., Nauwelaers, C. (Eds.), 2008. Innovation Policy in Europe: Measurement and Strategy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.