3.1. Research Design, Data Collection, and Analysis
This research study’s main objective is to conduct a DIANA economy and global RPM analysis of selected countries to explore where they currently stand in terms of digitalization and analogization for adapting, thriving, and addressing the challenges of an increasingly interconnected and technology-driven world while being an appropriate method for situations of strategic planning. Therefore, the DIANA economy and global RPM analysis allow policymakers to obtain a combined view of globalization, rationality, professionalism, and morality of their countries. Since both frameworks analyze the environment based on different factors, the digitalization and analogization processes can provide a holistic view of the drivers of innovation, economic growth, and improvements in various aspects of modern life. Each tool complements the other, allowing for a broader analysis of the environment when used together. When both approaches are applied together, it is possible to understand how the dimensions of the DIANA economy will increase its opportunities globally, rationally, professionally, and morally.
In particular, this study measures the current situations of 60 countries in the digitalization progress, which is based on three sectoral dimensions covering government, industry, and human capital, with each dimension assigned an equal weight. Each dimension plays a distinct yet interdependent role in shaping the overall digital landscape. Recognizing the significance of these dimensions, this research assigns equal weight to each, acknowledging their equal contribution to a country’s digital transformation. Additionally, the objective is not merely to assess digitalization progress, but more importantly, to provide actionable insights and policy recommendations. These insights are designed to empower policymakers, industry leaders, and educators, offering them a comprehensive perspective on their country’s digitalization process. While the policies, regulations, and initiatives set forth by governments can either catalyze or hinder the diffusion of digital technologies, assessing the digital maturity and adoption rates of industries within a country provides profound insights into their competitive edge on the global stage. Most importantly, at the heart of every digital transformation is a country’s human capital. The digital age imposes unique demands on the workforce, necessitating adaptability, technical proficiency, and digital literacy. Therefore, these insights are designed to empower policymakers, industry leaders, and educators, offering them a comprehensive perspective on their country’s digitalization path. These three dimensions, each playing a distinctive yet interconnected role, form the foundation of a country’s digital transformation. The combination of the global RPM analysis and the DIANA economy enables policymakers to horizontally analyze the connections between each indicator of globalization, rationality, professionalism, and morality in relation to government, industry, and human capital.
Moreover, we disaggregated the countries into three subgroups, which are countries with large, mid-sized, and small populations. Accordingly, there were 20 countries in each of the three groups, for a total of 60 countries represented within the analysis. For each group of countries, we chose the top 20 countries based on their GDP as a criterion for analyzing their digitalization levels, providing a structured and informative perspective on the relationship between economic strength and technological advancement. Namely, this criterion can help elucidate how countries with varying economic capacities approach digitalization and provides insights into their readiness, investments, and strategies in embracing the digital age. Furthermore, the choice to examine countries with diverse population sizes—large (more than 50 million), mid-sized (between 15 million and 50 million), and small (less than 15 million)—in the context of their roles in digitalization is rooted in the recognition of the unique dynamics and implications that population size can have on a nation’s digital transformation. In fact, countries with populations exceeding 50 million face the challenge of serving diverse and often geographically dispersed citizenry. They must invest heavily in digital infrastructure, digital literacy, and e-governance to meet the needs of their vast populations. Meanwhile, countries with populations between 15 million and 50 million strike a balance between scale and agility. They have the potential to excel in niche industries, foster innovation, and manage the digital divide more effectively. Additionally, countries with populations of less than 15 million often exhibit nimble governance structures and may prioritize targeted digital initiatives. Smaller nations can achieve higher levels of digital inclusion and innovative solutions. Their small scale allows for efficient resource allocation. By studying countries across the spectrum of population sizes and volume of GDP, we gain valuable insights into the diverse strategies, challenges, and achievements in digitalization. This allows us to appreciate the multifaceted nature of the global digital landscape and fosters a deeper understanding of how nations of varying sizes and economic capabilities play pivotal roles in shaping the digital environment.
We chose the following 60 countries:
- -
Countries with large populations, namely United States, China, Japan, Germany, United Kingdom, India, France, Italy, South Korea, Russia, Brazil, Spain, Mexico, Indonesia, Turkiye, Thailand, Nigeria, Argentina, Egypt, and Bangladesh.
- -
Countries with mid-sized populations, namely Canada, Australia, The Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Poland, Malaysia, Chile, Romania, Peru, Kazakhstan, Morocco, Ecuador, Sri Lanka, Guatemala, Ghana, Cote d’Ivoire, Uzbekistan, Angola, Cameroon, and Nepal.
- -
Countries with small populations, namely Switzerland, Sweden, Belgium, Austria, Ireland, Norway, Denmark, United Arab Emirates, Singapore, Finland, Hong Kong (China), Czechia, Portugal, New Zealand, Greece, Hungary, Qatar, Cuba, Slovakia, and Kuwait.
To assess the level of digitalization of these countries and to determine the similarity between them, it was necessary to choose appropriate indicators. To choose appropriate indicators of global RPM, a purposeful sampling method was used [
40] to deliberately select a sample of participants which had a firm association with a digital economy and digital transformation and adequately understood its functional and operative requirements. Moreover, 31 in-depth interviews were conducted with participants from four groups, i.e., policymakers—7, scientists—9, IT engineers—5, and digital business owners and specialists—10. Then, the DIANA economy and global RPM analyses were performed to identify the key indicators. Consequently, this study identified four dimensions of the global RPM analysis based on experts’ interviews and previous literature. Each dimension consisted of three indicators in the appropriate case of global RPM and 12 indicators. In addition, each of the four indicators from the government, industry, and human capital dimensions of the DIANA economy were adopted to measure the global RPM’s affective evaluation. All of the indicators used in this study can be seen in
Table 1.
In order to determine where the countries were in relation to the digital economy, a number of data points were used as a basis for the analysis. All the data are public and available on internet sources. As previously mentioned, we extracted a set of 12 indicators that measured the influence that digitalization had on the economies, that were divided into four dimensions, including globalization, rationality, professionalism, and the adoption of morality. The selection of the indicators for the global RPM analysis is a critical component of our research methodology. To ensure transparency and a robust justification for these choices, we provide the following rationale for selecting these specific indicators for each dimension: globalization, rationality, professionalism, and morality.
For the globalization dimension, to assess a nation’s degree of globalization in digitalization, the following indicators were selected: global connectivity, high-technology exports, and research and development. These indicators measure the extent to which the countries are connected to the global digital network, as well as the extent to which they participate in the global digital trade and invest in digital innovation.
Regarding the rationality dimension, rationality in the digital era is a fundamental aspect of efficient economic decision-making [
46]. The indicator of e-government development assesses the accessibility and efficiency of government services. The presence of online creativity indicates the implementation of digital tools and creative thinking of a country, while professionals in knowledge-intensive roles, such as data analysts, researchers, and digital strategists, play a crucial role in gathering and interpreting data to support rational policy and business decisions.
For the professionalism dimension, the indicators of open government data, online access to financial accounts, and digital skills are used to assess professionalism. These indicators assess the extent to which countries use digital technologies to promote their transparency and accountability, to facilitate their professional financial transactions and literacy, and to develop their digital competencies.
For the morality dimension, internet freedom, green and sustainable development, and control of corruption were chosen as indicators to measure morality in digitalization. These indicators assess the extent to which countries use digital technologies to protect their online rights and freedoms, support their environmental and social goals, and combat their corruption and fraud in the digital age by promoting transparency, accountability, and anti-corruption technologies.
These indicators collectively provide a holistic view of each dimension, allowing us to evaluate the influence of digitalization on economies comprehensively. Taking into account that different research areas can prioritize unique indicators or methodologies, future studies are encouraged to explore variations and modifications to the approach of this study [
47,
48,
49]. This transparent justification offers a clearer understanding of the indicator selection and its relevance to the research objectives.
Because the digital economy is essentially a fusion of the analog economy and digital technologies, it is influenced by a wide range of elements. At the same time, each dimension summarizes the information of several individual indicators (from 1 to 100). Each indicator has equal weight in the calculation of the final point. The time coverage of the study for the last updates is from 2019 to 2023 based on data availability. Therefore, this was the period that we considered for our analysis, which is presented in
Table 2. The indicators utilized for measuring digitization and competitiveness rely on the data collected in the previous year. For example, the indicators for the year 2022 are based on information from the year 2021 and are identifiable in the sources used in the year 2022. The analysis used data from the most recent year for each indicator due to difficulty in finding data for the same year. In order to facilitate the understanding of our interpretations, we have kept the same notation. The descriptions of the indicators adopted for evaluation that characterize the processes for the digitalization level of the countries are presented in
Table 2.
The DIANA economy framework focuses on categorizing countries into four types: digital, dinalog, anatal, and analog, based on various dimensions of digitalization. However, there are alternative frameworks and opposing views when it comes to assessing digitalization, such as the IMD world digital competitiveness ranking, which specifically evaluates a country’s competitiveness in the digital age [
62]. They consider factors like technology infrastructure, digital skills, and the adaptability of businesses to digital transformation. On the other hand, the ranking primarily focuses on business-related aspects of digital competitiveness. It may not fully capture social or government aspects of digitalization or digital inclusion. Moreover, the United Nations’ EGDI measures the readiness and capacity of national governments to use digital technologies and the internet to deliver public services [
42]. It focuses primarily on the digitalization of government services and does not encompass broader economic or societal aspects.
Another alternative framework is the digital economy and society Index (DESI), which was developed by the European Commission to measure the progress of EU member states towards a digital economy and society [
63]. The DESI uses five main dimensions: connectivity, human capital, use of internet services, integration of digital technology, and digital public services. However, the index does not cover all aspects of the digital economy and society, such as the quality, security, or impact of digital services, or the social and environmental dimensions of digitalization. Therefore, DESI may not reflect the full potential and challenges of digital transformation for a country.
Regarding the theoretical framework of the study, the DIANA economy differs from the other tools due to its focus on adaptation, dynamic and real-time data, holistic assessment, customization, policy recommendations, emphasis on resilience, inclusivity, global relevance, and evolving metrics. It serves as a forward-looking tool to guide countries in their efforts to navigate and thrive in the digital age. Additionally, most of indexes related to digital transformation demonstrate that countries with a higher level of digitalization tend to have more developed economies and digital products, and technologies are vitally essential tools for modernizing and advancing countries. However, there is no doubt that digital products offer many advantages, such as convenience, accessibility, and reusability [
52,
56], yet they generally lack the tangible and emotional qualities that make analog items so valuable to collectors and consumers. In fact, analog products can often be more valuable than digital products, especially when it comes to luxury items or handcrafted goods [
53]. Most developed countries today have embraced digital technologies to a significant extent because of the advantages they offer in terms of efficiency, innovation, and competitiveness. However, the specific mix of factors contributing to a country’s economic development can vary widely, and digitalization is one of many potential drivers [
20]. Therefore, there are some possible scenarios in which analog countries might have more developed economies because of natural resource wealth, competitive specialized industries with a relatively low reliance on digital technologies, strategic geopolitical positioning, or unique economic policies [
54]. The DIANA economy is unique compared to other frameworks due to its concept that digital and analog economies are equal in importance and not superior to each other. It analyzes a country profile based on digital and analog environments that can help to identify weak points, and it offers digitalization and analogization strategies for analog and digital economies to be more competitive in today’s age.
With the improvement in a country’s economy, the question of how to drive the further development of digital and analog economy has aroused the thinking of policy makers. In order to maintain high levels of productivity and achievement, each economy struggles with digitalization and analogization. This paper studies the factors spurring the digital and analog economy in world counties based on a sample of selected countries and their data availability. Using the DIANA economy methodology, multivariate indicators have been developed to measure both the digital and analog economies. Additionally, we provide information about each country’s economy as well as the steps that need to be taken in order to improve and enhance their position within the context of digitalization and analogization by conducting an in-depth comparative analysis.
3.2. Results and Discussion
This study analyzes and ranks the changes that countries around the globe have seen in their digital competitiveness to present the theoretical and practical fundamentals of analog and digital economies, refining their definitions. An analog economy, or a digital economy, is one part of a mixed economy that was first introduced in this study. As defined by the DIANA economy, digital economies are comprised of 90 percent digital and 10 percent analog, while analog economies comprise 90 percent analog and 10 percent digital. Moreover, dinalog economies can have a large share of digital at 70 percent and a smaller share of analog at 30 percent, and anatal economies can have 70 percent analog and 30 percent digital. However, in the previous section, it was stated that the percentage scores of dividing countries into the DIANA economy’s the four concepts (digital, dinalog, anatal, and analog) are not static, and different fields of research may use their own methodologies and weightings based on their specific goals and objectives to adapt their assessments. Therefore, when using or interpreting a digitalization index, it is essential to understand the methodology and factors used and be aware of any changes or updates that may occur over time.
According to this study’s criteria, data availability, quality, and comparability, as well as its methodological consistency, transparency, and interpretation and communication of its results calculating the scores and rankings of the selected countries, the initial percentage scores used to divide the four concepts of the DIANA economy have been modified in order to increase the study’s applicability, relevance, and effectiveness. In the analysis of the countries, 12 indicators of the DIANA economy pertained to every global RPM dimension (globalization, rationality, professionalism, and morality), including scores ranging from a minimum of 1 point to a maximum of 100 points. In our assessment, a country was categorized as a “digital country” when it attained a score of 75 points or higher. A “dinalog country” is identified when a country achieves a score within the range of 60 to 75 points. An “anatal country” classification is assigned to a country which scores between 30 and 60 points. Lastly, an “analog country” classification is solely applicable to countries that score below the threshold of 30 points. The choice of specific percentage thresholds for categorizing countries into “digital”, “dinalog”, “anatal”, and “analog” classifications is based on a combination of factors that aim to provide meaningful distinctions while remaining practical and broadly applicable. Furthermore, the thresholds are designed to facilitate cross-country comparisons and benchmarking by allowing researchers, policymakers, and businesses to understand where countries stand in their digital development journey, making comparisons and assessments more manageable. While the chosen thresholds serve as a starting point, they can be adjusted or refined based on specific research objectives, regional variations, or evolving global standards. This flexibility ensures that the classification system can adapt to changing contexts and criteria.
Table 3 shows the level of digitalization of countries which have populations of 40 million citizens or more based on seven dimensions: government (GOV), industry (IND), human capital (HUM), globalization (G), rationality (R), professionalism (P), and morality (M). As stated above, each dimension is scored from 1 to 100, and the total score is the average of the global RPM dimensions or government, industry, and human capital dimensions. Accordingly, the classifications of the countries into the four categories of the DIANA economy are shown based on their total score: digital, dinalog, anatal, and analog.
According to the table, the results show that among the 20 countries with large populations (40 million citizens or more), only two countries were classified as digital: the United States and the United Kingdom, with 76.0 and 75.2 points, respectively. These countries had high scores in all dimensions, especially in government, industry, people, and globalization. They are considered to have successfully adopted and explored new digital technologies across different sectors of the economy. The U.S. government was rated as the most digitalized government among the large population countries, scoring 85.0 out of 100, while its industry is the least digitized in comparison to the government and human capital dimension of the country. In fact, the U.S. government has actively pursued e-government initiatives and open data policies, aiming to improve the delivery of government information and services to citizens and businesses through digital channels, online portals, applications, and platforms. Although it seems that the U.S. industry lacks a digitalization process because of its highly diverse economy, encompassing industries ranging from traditional manufacturing like steel and textiles to high-tech sectors such as aerospace and electronics, it can embrace a more digitalized approach to remain competitive in the global market by leveraging its potential in globalization and professionalism factors, which are ranked as the highest scoring factors with 78.3 and 78.8 points. Additionally, the UK scored 76.6 out of 100 in the morality dimension, ranking first among the 20 countries. As this dimension measures the ethical and social standards for digitalization, such as internet freedom, green and sustainable development, and control of corruption, the country prioritizes promoting and adhering to ethical principles when developing and using technology, which can include considerations such as the responsible use of artificial intelligence, ethical guidelines for algorithmic decision-making, and avoiding technologies that may have harmful consequences.
The next category is dinalog, which includes three countries: Germany, Korea, and France. These countries have relatively high scores in most dimensions, but they are lagging behind in industry and globalization. The results suggest that Germany, Korea, and France are on a path towards digitalization, with significant strengths but also specific areas that require further attention and development to reach a higher level of digital economy. They are considered to have potential to become digital leaders by improving their industrial competitiveness and global integration to digitalization.
The largest category is anatal, which includes 10 countries: Japan, Spain, Italy, China, Russia, Brazil, Mexico, Turkey, Thailand, and India. These countries had relatively low scores in most dimensions, especially in industry and morality. As a result, they are also seen as having challenges to overcome in terms of digital transformation and innovation. Accordingly, managing digitalization initiatives in countries with large populations can be particularly complicated due to the scale and complexity of their diverse demographics, geography, and socioeconomic conditions [
55]. It is essential for countries to improve their industrial productivity, quality, and morality concepts in order to embrace digitalization in an effective manner.
The last category is analog, which includes five countries: Argentina, Indonesia, Nigeria, Egypt, and Bangladesh. These countries have very low scores in all dimensions. They are considered to have a lack of digital readiness and capability. All of the countries also face shortages in human capital and skills, as well as difficulties in creating an enabling an environment for digitalization through effective government policies and regulations. To overcome these challenges, they may need to invest more in their digital infrastructure for industry and education, government policies, and regulations, as well as fostering a digital culture and mind-set among their human capital [
56,
64].
On the one hand, the data for the countries with large populations shows that the digital economy is rapidly expanding throughout government sectors. On the other hand, the findings reveal that industry and human capital are the most critical factors in accelerating the development of the digital economy. At the same time, they perform different actions in different areas. Therefore, it is crucial for the governments of these countries to enhance their levels of human capital and technology innovation to address the deficit in the digital economy. It is also possible that the anatal countries will benefit from learning from the best practices and experiences of other countries that have achieved higher levels of digitalization in their region or globally. In the analog countries, the governments may boost the digital economy by encouraging globalization and professionalism factors to work in digital transformation.
It is important for policymakers and researchers to tailor policy recommendations according to the unique strengths and challenges of each country based on their digitalization levels. The following are some possible policy recommendations for each category of country:
For digital countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, the policy recommendations are to maintain their digital leadership and competitiveness, to foster digital innovation and entrepreneurship, to address the digital divide and inequality, and to balance the benefits and challenges of digitalization. It is also recommended for these countries to develop analogization strategies to be more competitive in the global market. For example, they could invest more in research and development, integrate digital and analog systems, support start-ups and small businesses, promote digital literacy and inclusion, and protect online rights and privacy.
For dinalog countries, such as Germany, Korea, and France, the policy recommendations are to improve their industrial competitiveness and global integration to digitalization, to enhance their digital skills and creativity, to strengthen their digital governance and transparency, and to incorporate analog elements into their digital business models or strategies [
12,
65]. In particular, the government can develop their manufacturing and service sectors, develop online creative industries, open government data and services, and leverage the strengths of both digital and analog approaches.
For anatal countries, such as Japan, Spain, Italy, China, Russia, Brazil, Mexico, Turkey, Thailand, and India, in order to embrace digitalization in an effective manner, the policy recommendations can include improving industrial productivity, quality, and morality, increasing their investment and innovation in digital infrastructure and technologies, developing their human capital and skills, and creating an environment that facilitates digitalization through effective government policies and regulations. A few examples include adopting best practices and standards for their industries, enhancing their education and training systems, and implementing supportive institutional and legal frameworks.
For analog countries, such as Argentina, Indonesia, Nigeria, Egypt, and Bangladesh, the policy recommendations are to invest more in their digital infrastructure for industry, education, government policies, and regulations, as well as to foster a digital culture and mindset among their human capital. They also need to address their basic development needs and challenges that hinder their digital readiness and capability. Accordingly, they could improve their digital supply and internet connectivity, promote online learning and access to information, reform their bureaucratic and corrupt systems, and raise awareness and interest in digital opportunities.
Table 4 shows an analysis of 20 countries with mid-sized populations (between 15 million and 40 million citizens) based on the DIANA economy and global RPM dimensions. The categories are as follows: digital, dinalog, anatal, and analog. The table shows that only one country out of the 20 was categorized as digital, which is The Netherlands. This country has high scores in all dimensions, especially in government, people, rationality, and professionalism. Two countries are categorized as dinalog: Canada and Australia. They have moderate scores in most dimensions, but lower scores in industry and globalization. Six countries are categorized as anatal: Poland, Malaysia, Romania, Chile, Saudi Arabia, and Kazakhstan. They have low scores in most dimensions, especially in industry and people. Eleven countries are categorized as analog: Ecuador, Uzbekistan, Ghana, Morocco, Peru, Cameroon, Sri Lanka, Guatemala, Nepal, Angola, and Cote d’Ivoire. Based on the results, most of the countries with mid-sized populations were considered as analog countries, which had very low scores across all the dimensions. In fact, as an analog economy typically refers to an economic system that primarily relies on traditional, non-digital methods and processes for conducting business and economic activities, the selected analog countries are likely labor-intensive and often lack automation or computerized systems. These countries may need to adopt more tailored and inclusive strategies that address their specific needs and opportunities in the digital era [
12,
66]. The results suggest that there is a wide variation in the levels of digitalization and analogization among countries with mid-sized populations. Some countries have achieved high levels of digitalization by investing in their infrastructure, human capital, government policies, and social acceptance [
67,
68]. Others have lagged behind due to various challenges such as a lack of resources, skills, or innovation.
As most countries with mid-sized populations are categorized as analog countries, an analog economy can have some advantages, such as preserving traditional values, cultures, and practices, as well as being less vulnerable to cyberattacks or digital espionage. However, an analog economy can also face many challenges in the modern world, such as lower efficiency, productivity, innovation, and competitiveness, as well as higher costs, risks, and environmental impacts [
69]. It is important to note that while some regions or sectors of the global economy can still exhibit the characteristics of an analog economy, the trend in recent years has been toward increasing digitalization and the adoption of digital technologies across various industries and economies worldwide. In accordance with the DIANA economy classification, the following policy recommendations can be tailored to each country category:
For digital countries (The Netherlands), the The Netherlands is leading the digitalization efforts. To maintain and strengthen this position, the government should continue supporting applied research and the fourth industrial revolution, especially in emerging and frontier technologies, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, cloud computing, big data, and the Internet of Things. It is also essential that digital countries can benefit from analogization strategies by incorporating analog elements into a predominantly digital economy to enhance their compatibility, flexibility, and customer experiences.
For dinalog countries (Canada and Australia), Canada and Australia are making good progress, but they face challenges in industry and globalization. These countries should prioritize industry modernization and the adoption of digital technologies. They must enhance global integration, foster trade relationships, and promote international collaborations to facilitate digital globalization.
The anatal countries (e.g., Poland, Malaysia, Romania, etc.) face significant challenges, especially in theindustry and people dimensions. To enhance digital readiness, these countries should promote digital industrial transformation, supporting industries in transitioning to digital processes and automation for improved productivity. Additionally, it is recommended to address issues related to corruption and governance to build trust and attract investments to enhance digital skill development and digital literacy through training and education.
The analog countries (e.g., Ecuador, Uzbekistan, Ghana, etc.) are in the early stages of digital transformation. They need to invest in building essential digital infrastructure, such as high-speed internet access and data centers. It can be essential to focus on human capital investment by streamlining regulatory processes and stimulating a digital mindset among the population to embrace digital opportunities and innovations, close the skills gap, and prepare the workforce for the digital era.
Table 5 presents an analysis of the countries with small populations, defined as 15 million citizens or less, based on the 12 indicators of the DIANA economy. The analysis shows that six countries out of the twenty are categorized as digital: Denmark, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, and Finland, while there are five countries classified as dinalog: New Zealand, Hong Kong (China), Austria, Belgium, and Ireland. In comparison with countries with large or mid-sized populations, countries with small populations appear to be more digitally advanced. It is likely that there are more opportunities and incentives for digitalization for countries with small populations due to their higher degree of openness and integration with the global economy [
70,
71]. Additionally, some countries with small populations are endowed with a higher level of income and education, which can enable them to invest more in their digital infrastructure, human capital, government policies, and social acceptance in comparison to countries with large populations. Therefore, they are likely to have a higher level of digital literacy and demand, as well as to be able to afford and access more digital goods and services. Furthermore, six countries are categorized as anatal: Czechia, Portugal, Hungary, United Arab Emirates, Slovak Republic, and Greece. Only three countries are categorized as analog: Qatar, Kuwait, and Cuba. Considering the results shown in
Table 5, it appears that the countries that rely primarily on natural resources, such as agriculture, mining, or oil production, tend to be less digitalized. Accordingly, natural resource-dependent countries often derive a significant portion of their income from resource exports [
72]. This economic dependence can lead to a focus on traditional industries, with less emphasis on diversification into digital sectors. When natural resources provide substantial revenue, there may be less incentive for governments and businesses to invest in digitalization. There is a possibility that they prioritize resource extraction and export over digital transformation.
In accordance with the results, most of the countries with small populations are classified as digital and dinalog, indicating that their economies are highly digitized. However, digitalization can also pose some risks and barriers for developing countries. Accordingly, it is important to note that digital countries can be highly volatile due to the fast-paced nature of the technology industry [
72]. Investors should conduct thorough research and consider both the opportunities and risks associated with investing in digitalized economies. Additionally, market conditions and industry-specific factors can change rapidly, impacting share prices accordingly. Investors may replace certain sectors or industries with others based on changing economic conditions. Economic factors such as inflation, interest rates, and overall market conditions can influence share prices. If the broader economy is struggling or facing uncertainty, it can lead to a decline in digital industry shares. Furthermore, political tensions, trade disputes, or geopolitical events can affect the digital economies with international operations, including digital industries. In this case, analogization strategies are important for digital countries because they can help them to balance the benefits and challenges of digitalization and to leverage the strengths of both digital and analog systems. Incorporating analog elements into digital business models or strategies allows systems to provide a more personalized and human touch to customers or stakeholders. Analogization is not a rejection or replacement of digitalization, but rather a complement and enhancement of it. By finding the optimal mix of digital and analog systems for different contexts and purposes, digital countries can achieve a more inclusive and sustainable development. The following recommendations are for the digital countries (e.g., Denmark, Singapore, Sweden, etc.), as part of their analogization strategies:
Opening physical stores or showrooms to complement online sales and provide a more tangible experience to customers.
Integrating digital technologies in traditional analog industries such as agriculture or manufacturing to increase efficiency and productivity while maintaining the human touch and experience.
Hosting hybrid events that combine physical attendance with digital streaming or participation options.
Combining digital and analog systems to create hybrid solutions that can overcome the limitations or vulnerabilities of each mode.
In countries with small populations, digitalization can have an enormous impact on growth and development. The following are some strategies for digitalization that the anatal and analog countries (e.g., Czechia, Qatar, Cuba, etc.) can consider:
Developing a comprehensive national digitalization plan that outlines clear goals, strategies, and timelines. This plan should be aligned with the country’s broader economic and social development objectives.
Implementing e-government strategies to simplify administrative processes, reduce government regulations, improve public service delivery, and offer online portals for citizens to access government services conveniently.
Expanding digital learning opportunities, including online education platforms and digital resources for schools and universities. This can help bridge educational gaps and improve access to quality education.
Designing smart city projects that use technology to improve urban planning, transportation, energy efficiency, and overall quality of life in urban areas.
Reducing regulations and promoting e-commerce to make it easier for local businesses to access global markets and expand their reach.
Promoting sustainable and green technologies to reduce the country’s environmental footprint while fostering innovation in renewable energy and eco-friendly practices.
Establishing international partnerships and agreements with other countries, organizations, and corporations to access expertise, resources, and global markets.
In our study, we also conducted a correlation analysis to examine the relationship between the dimensions of global RPM. A correlation analysis is considered as a useful instrument for exploring our data and understanding the characteristics of relationships. Presenting a correlation matrix can significantly enhance the comprehensibility of research results, assisting readers in gaining insight into more detailed analyses. A correlation coefficient, on the other hand, offers a quantitative assessment of both the magnitude and direction of the linear connection between two variables. The correlation coefficient spans from −1 to 1, with −1 denoting a complete negative correlation, 0 signifying no correlation, and 1 indicating a complete positive correlation.
Table 6 shows that this correlation matrix indicates that there are positive relationships between the dimensions of globalization, rationality, professionalism, and morality in the context of digitalization in countries. As evidence, the correlation between globalization and rationality showed the most significant coefficient of 0.7167. This suggests that as a country scores higher in terms of globalization, it also tends to score higher in rationality. In other words, the positive correlation implies that as a country engages more with the global digital economy, it is more likely to make decisions related to digitalization in a more rational and methodical manner. Policymakers and researchers can use these findings for countries aiming to enhance their digital economies to focus on rational decision-making processes and strategies as they engage more with the global digital landscape. The correlation coefficient of 0.5432 between globalization and professionalism in the context of digitalization suggests a positive but moderate association between these two dimensions. This means that as a country’s level of globalization increases, its level of professionalism in digitalization tends to increase as well, though the relationship is not as strong as in the case of globalization and rationality. There is higher positive correlation between the globalization and morality dimensions, with a correlation coefficient of 0.6212. By exploring the connections between globalization and morality in digitalization, it is possible to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the opportunities and challenges that digitalization brings to our society and environment. There is also the possibility of developing more ethical frameworks and strategies to shape the digital future in a way that respects human dignity and promotes sustainable development.
The correlation between rationality and professionalism resulted in the lowest coefficient, standing at 0.4423. While the correlation was positive, it was weaker than the other correlations observed in the analysis. This could lead to discussions on how to strengthen the relationship between rationality and professionalism in the context of digitalization. The correlation of morality with rationality and professionalism showed positive results, with coefficients of 0.5292 and 0.5983, respectively. In both cases, the correlations between the dimensions were close to each other, with a small difference. These insights can be valuable for understanding how these dimensions interact and influence the digitalization efforts of countries.
In conclusion, the analysis shows that most of the countries, 41 out of 60, are analog and anatal, which means that these countries depend on an analog economy. Therefore, there is a need to form digitalization strategies for converting from analog to digital. By exploring the current situation of the main industries using the DIANA economy, this analysis can be useful to form strategies and policy recommendations to develop a country’s economy in the long-term and short-term. Some of the issues discovered here will require urgent attention, and neglecting them could lead to serious problems in economic and social processes of the country in the long-term. These are the analyses of main industries that hold them back from achieving their full potential, restricting growth in the process and giving an edge to their competition. For instance, a lack of a digital economy is often a weakness for most industries.