Source: The Conversation – USA
Drawing on 14 years of data, we examined whether access to broadband internet could improve Americans’ use of time and found that a 10% increase in broadband adoption across a community corresponds to a 1.19% reduction in waiting time.
Losing time waiting for goods and services is a reality millions of Americans face. Whether standing at a store checkout or sitting on hold over the phone, delays contribute to a chronic sense of not having enough time – a condition known as time poverty. This phenomenon affects most Americans and is linked to poorer health, lower community engagement and greater social inequality. It hits lower-income women hardest.
As scholars of public administration and public policy, we study how government use of technology can address social challenges while supporting vulnerable populations.
Our results suggest that living in counties with greater broadband adoption rates reduces waiting time. That’s usually because businesses, healthcare providers and government agencies offer greater online services, allowing residents to complete tasks from home. And as more people handle their errands online, physical lines at stores, clinics and government offices shrink, creating shorter queues for people who still need to visit in person.
That 10% increase in broadband adoption saves each person 1.5 hours each year. With 24 million Americans lacking broadband access, a 10% nationwide increase in adoption could reclaim about 36.5 million hours annually. That time is worth about US$1.2 billion at the mean hourly wage of $33.54 determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in May 2025.
Why it matters
Research indicates that women and low-income people are disproportionately affected by time poverty. Because women still shoulder most caregiving and household responsibilities, they end up waiting not only for themselves but on behalf of others. Hence, they have 20% less leisure time than their male counterparts. Low-income people, instead, frequently face great challenges because of multiple jobs, unpredictable shift work and poor services. As a result, low-income women are the most affected group because they often work for pay in addition to all the daily duties at home.
Sean Gallup via Getty Images
In this context, technology can represent a game changer. Our results suggest that overall, a 10% increase in broadband adoption is associated with an 11% decline in waiting time for women, amounting to about 14.4 million hours saved annually.
What still isn’t known
Better infrastructure alone though may not guarantee benefits. Our data shows that increased broadband is most beneficial for middle-income people. Wait times for low-income individuals are consistently long regardless of how well connected their county was. We do not study why, but we suspect that barriers such as high monthly subscription fees or limited digital skills may reduce any potential gains.
What’s next
One key question is what policymakers can do to address the disparity between low-income and middle-income women. Our findings suggest that broadband expansion may not benefit all groups equally, pointing to persistent differences in the extent to which people are able to translate access to technology into actual time savings.
These results are indicative of the second digital divide: not just differences in access to technology, but differences in people’s ability to use it effectively.
If that is the case, then expanding broadband infrastructure alone is not enough to reduce time poverty across America. Policymakers could pair broadband investment with digital literacy programs and affordability initiatives. Community-based training, assistance at libraries and targeted outreach could help ensure that women at all economic levels can enjoy the time-saving benefits of digitalization, leaving fewer people waiting in line.
The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.
This work was supported by funding from the New Jersey State Policy Lab
Andrea Hetling and Gregory Porumbescu do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.