衡量数字化发展：ICT发展指数2025

Source: ITU The gap between low- and lower-middle-income economies is substantial across mostindicators. The exceptions are the trafficindicators, where scores are very close. In thecase of fixed broadband traffic, this is due tothe extremely low number of subscriptionsin low-income economies – mostly businessor institutional users with very high usage.Additionally,the values are unweightedaverages based on the available data fromonly a few countries, making the indicator lessrepresentative of the group as a whole. The results by income groups reveal areasthat could be prioritized for each group. Low-income economies should focus on individualsand households accessing and using theInternet,mobile broadband penetration,and affordability. Middle-income and high-income economies are relatively weaker inmobile broadband penetration and mobilebroadband traffic. Internet use, affordability,coverage, and mobile ownership are absolutestrengths of high-income economies. Comparison with previous editions The largest disparity between high- and low-income economies is in fixed broadbandaffordability, where the average score for high-income economies (90) is nearly four times ashigh as that of low-income economies (23).This reflects the continuing cost barrier tofixed broadband access in poorer countries.The second widest gap is in Internet usage,where the score for high-income economies(96) is over three times as high as that for low-income ones (28). Table 2 shows the lowest, highest and averagevalues reported for each indicator in the 2023,2024 and 2025 editions of the IDI. It alsoincludes the thresholds and goalposts, whichrepresent the ideal state and have remainedunchanged since 2023. Theaverage values increased across allindicators and in each edition.5 Averagevaluesfor the mobile network coverageindicatorsand mobile phone ownership For mobile network coverage, gaps acrossincome groups are smaller. While encouraging,this result makes it clear that access does notalways translate into meaningful use. were already high in previous editions, withlimited variation across income groups. Bycontrast, average values for the two trafficindicators and the two affordability indicatorsremain far from their respective goalposts and show substantial disparities across incomegroups. High-income countries have eitherapproached, met, or surpassed the goalpostsfor the two affordability indicators and formobile ownership. Looking at the evolution of the normalizedscores of the world and income groups revealsthat these improved across all indicators inboth the 2024 and 2025 edition. The mobilebroadband traffic indicator saw the mostimprovement, increasing by 8 points, from 65in IDI 2023 to 73 in IDI 2025 (Figure 2, Figure10and Annex 4). The smallest improvementswere recorded for mobile phone ownershipand Internet use, both of which increased by 4points. The remaining indicators saw averagescore increases ranging from 4 to 7 points. of change. For Internet use, the average scoreof the high-income group of economiesimproved by 2 points, while the low-incomegroup improved by 2 points. For mobile dataand voice affordability, the low-income groupincreased by almost 20 points, compared witha modest 0.6-point gain in the high-incomegroup.Nevertheless,this group remainsthe only one to have met the affordabilitythreshold – and is now well below it – leavinglimited room for further improvement. For mobile network coverage, mobile trafficand fixed broadband affordability, the lower-middle-incomegroup–rather than thelow-income group – registered the largestincreases, while the upper-middle incomegroup recorded greatest improvement inInternet use. Generally – and as expected – low-incomeeconomies, starting from a lower baseline,recorded the largest increases, and high-income economies the smallest. However,this pattern did not hold for all indicators, andthere were significant differences in the degree Dependingon the indicator,goalpostshavedifferent meanings.Some reflectUMC targets (e.g., share of Internet users,households with Internet access). Others arepurely technical: they were introduced to capthe data distribution to treat outliers and toenhance comparability and discriminationbetween countries (e.g. mobile broadbandsubscriptions and both traffic indicators). Forthe affordability indicators, a goalpost of 1per cent of GNI per capita was set on bothconceptual and technical grounds. This is morestringent than the 2 per cent target used by theBroadband Commission6, allowing for greatervariation in results and more meaningfulbenchmarking of performance and progress. the goalpost corresponds to a conceptuallydefined target (rather than being a purelytechnical parameter). There are some encouraging results. Forexample, in the 2025 edition, one additionaleconomyreached the goalpost for thehouseholds with Internet access indicator,bringing the total to 29 economies. Thelargest improvement was seen in mobile dataand voice afforda