Summary assessment report:
The Digital Landscape, Threats, and Opportunities.
Across
9 countries.
Bolivia, Cambodia, El Salvador, Kenya, Occupied Palestinian Territory, Somalia, Tunisia, Uganda and Vietnam.
Asking
87 questions.
To
1030 respondents.
77%
of respondents who work or involved in the digital rights sector are members of an NGO.
76%
do not have professional experience related to digital rights.
29%
are members of a human rights organisation or involved in human rights work.
12%
are members of a feminist collective.
Respondents by age (%)
Respondents by gender (%)
◉ Women (48.2%)
◉ Men (45.8%)
◉ Preferred not to answer (5.4%)
◉ Non-binary (0.6%)
RESULTS & KEY FINDINGS:
01.
INTERNET ACCESS
94% of respondents have regular access to the internet.
But even when the internet is accessible, those on lower incomes or who live in rural or remote areas face challenges.
68% of respondents consider the quality of connectivity in their country to be fair or poor.
More than 60% of respondents considered the cost of connecting to the internet to be expensive or very expensive.
The amount of people without internet access increases with age:
28% of those aged 51 and up do not have access to the internet.
25% of women aged 40 and up do not have access to the internet, compared to 15% of men in this age group.
There is therefore a significant digital divide based on age and gender.
02.
DIGITAL SECURITY
“Understanding of the internet is limited, and most people only use it for entertainment - unaware of the risks.”
- Respondent in Cambodia.
68%
of respondents take measures to protect themselves from external attacks.
38%
do not take any measures to protect themselves.
50%
of respondents claim to have experienced various types of digital security problems—rising to 64% of those aged over 40.
29%
reported digital security problems to an official authority.
28%
of respondents have sought support or help from CSOs while facing digital security problems.
02.
DIGITAL SECURITY
“Understanding of the internet is limited, and most people only use it for entertainment -unaware of the risks.”
- Respondent in Cambodia.
68%
of respondents take measures to protect themselves from external attacks.
38%
do not take any measures to protect themselves.
50%
of respondents claim to have experienced various types of digital security problems—rising to 64% of those aged over 40.
29%
reported digital security problems to an official authority.
28%
of respondents have sought support or help from CSOs while facing digital security problems.
03.
KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL VIOLENCE AND SAFETY
Digital violence:
Using digital technologies (like mobile devices, the internet, etc.) to threaten, cause, or facilitate violence against someone that may result in physical, sexual, psychological or economic harm or suffering.
Digital violence can include exploiting a victim's individual circumstances, characteristics, or vulnerabilities.
Findings from the survey suggest that public awareness of the concept of digital violence may be limited.
Many respondents were unsure whether they have been victims of digital violence; when asked what they understand digital violence to mean, 20% said they were not sure, and 19% preferred not to answer.
35% of respondents were victims of digital violence in the last year.
This is a relevant number given the percentage of people with internet access.
44% of people also report having experienced digital violence as a result of lending their voice to campaigns on social media. Depending on the country, this figure increases significantly.
03.
KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL VIOLENCE AND SAFETY
Digital violence:
using digital technologies (like mobile devices, the internet, etc.) to threaten, cause, or facilitate violence against someone that may result in physical, sexual, psychological or economic harm or suffering.
Digital violence can include exploiting a victim's individual circumstances, characteristics, or vulnerabilities.
Findings from the survey suggest that public awareness of the concept of digital violence may be limited.
Many respondents were unsure whether they have been victims of digital violence; when asked what they understand digital violence to mean, 20% said they were not sure, and 19% preferred not to answer.
35% of respondents were victims of digital violence in the last year.
This is a relevant number given the percentage of people with internet access.
44% of people also report having experienced digital violence as a result of lending their voice to campaigns on social media. Depending on the country, this figure increases significantly.
The most common forms of digital violence experienced by respondents included:
Experiences of digital violence
This graph shows the demographics of respondents who have experienced digital violence, based on interviews conducted throughout mapping research.
From the interviews, the most common victims of digital violence are: members of CSOs andNGOs, women and girls, and young people.
Around 50% of women and non-binary people surveyed said they have been victims of digital violence in the last year, and around 20% were unsure.
Around 50% of women said they have experienced technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TF-GBV). An additional ~15% of women were not sure.
Tech-facilitated gender-based violence (TF-GBV)
is a form of violence facilitated by the use of digital technologies like smartphones, social media, and the internet against a person on the basis of gender. TF-GBV includes harassment and digital hate, cyberstalking, and the sharing of intimate images without consent.
This means that half of women and non-binary people have been victims of digital violence due to their gender, which is a significant figure.
Among men, around 35% considered themselves to be victims of digital violence, and 27% have experienced some form of TF-GBV.
Women are more likely to be victims of digital violence in general, and technology-facilitated gender-based violence in particular.
In addition, as people get older, the risks associated with using the internet may increase.
CURRENT CONTEXT AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
“The speed at which digital platforms and technologies evolve often outpaces the development and implementation of regulations.”
- Respondent in Tunisia.
04.
CURRENT MEASURES TO PREVENT DIGITAL VIOLENCE
66% of respondents believe that governments are not doing enough to prevent and combat digital violence and protect people. In some countries, this is much higher.
48% of respondents believe that the current implementation of policies and regulations in their country is not effective.
35% are not sure.
Respondents believe that governments are not doing enough to prevent and combat digital violence and protect people. The main reasons are:
05.
CAPACITIES AND RESOURCES OF CSOs
"Many organisations lack the necessary expertise to fully understand and address digital rights complexities."
- Respondent in Tunisia.
Around 28% of respondents report having received training on digital rights and/or digital security.
Responses to the survey indicated that there is a need for CSOs to deepen their knowledge of data protection and digital rights issues, protection and prevention of technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TF-GBV) and external threats.
Some suggested areas for improvement in training are:
- Improving the contextual factors of such training to make them more relevant.
- Allocating sufficient time for practice, with a clear learning plan and objectives, not just a technical focus.
- Broadening knowledge to include protection and human rights and targeting minority groups.
- Staying updated on emerging trends, such as AI.
05.
CAPACITIES AND RESOURCES OF CSOs
"Many organisations lack the necessary expertise to fully understand and address digital rights complexities."
- Respondent in Tunisia.
Around 28% of respondents report having received training on digital rights and/or digital security.
Responses to the survey indicated that there is a need for CSOs to deepen their knowledge of data protection and digital rights issues, protection and prevention of technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TF-GBV) and external threats.
Some suggested areas for improvement in training are:
- Improving the contextual factors of such training to make them more relevant.
- Allocating sufficient time for practice, with a clear learning plan and objectives, not just a technical focus.
- Broadening knowledge to include protection and human rights and targeting minority groups.
- Staying updated on emerging trends, such as AI.
06.
PROPOSALS TO PREVENT THREATS TO DIGITAL RIGHTS:
"Through close collaboration, we can develop comprehensive policies and guidelines, provide timely support for vulnerable groups, and raise awareness to create a safe and equitable digital space for everyone."
- Respondent in Vietnam.
By civil society actors:
Identify the most vulnerable populations.
Bring together organisations in a network to share information on digital rights and violence and to strengthen organisations.
Focus on prevention though awareness strategies for citizens.
Develop advocacy strategies and identify existing public policies.
By activists:
Advocate for laws that criminalise all forms of digital violence and influence digital rights policy.
Support victims through to the end of a trial and resolution of the case.
Amplify voices to raise awareness and disseminate evidence of abuse or digital violence.
Educate the community and run workshops to build citizens' capacity on the issue.
By social and/or educational actors:
Set up victim support programmes and focus on psychological support.
Systematise support, complaints procedures, reporting channels and communication formats.
Enhance and disseminate digital educational content.
Make digital literacy compulsory in schools.
By the media and social networks:
Identify the most vulnerable populations and carry out social media campaigns to identify, detect and report digital violence.
Make information on social media more accessible, reliable and factual.
Share general data on digital threats and violence to generate a public and media agenda.
By governments or local authorities:
Carry out a diagnosis of the state of the country in terms of digital violence.
Develop digital violence legal frameworks and specific protocols.
Increase sanctions and penal reform, and increase resources for protection and justice.
Strengthen data protection legislation.
By technology companies:
Improve internet governance policies.
Take responsibility for investing in prevention and support and train staff, including outsourced staff.
Establish agile response mechanisms for cases of digital violence.
Tackle the digital and security divide and educate technology users on how to protect themselves.
By all actors to be people-centred:
Prevent revictimisation and address the root causes of digital violence.
06.
PROPOSALS TO PREVENT THREATS TO DIGITAL RIGHTS:
By civil society actors:
Identify the most vulnerable populations.
Bring together organisations in a network to share information on digital rights and violence and to strengthen organisations.
Focus on prevention though awareness strategies for citizens.
Develop advocacy strategies and identify existing public policies.
By activists:
Advocate for laws that criminalise all forms of digital violence and influence digital rights policy.
Support victims through to the end of a trial and resolution of the case.
Amplify voices to raise awareness and disseminate evidence of abuse or digital violence.
Educate the community and run workshops to build citizens' capacity on the issue.
By social and/or educational actors:
Set up victim support programmes and focus on psychological support.
Systematise support, complaints procedures, reporting channels and communication formats.
Enhance and disseminate digital educational content.
Make digital literacy compulsory in schools.
By the media and social networks:
Identify the most vulnerable populations and carry out social media campaigns to identify, detect and report digital violence.
Make information on social media more accessible, reliable and factual.
Share general data on digital threats and violence to generate a public and media agenda.
By governments or local authorities:
Carry out a diagnosis of the state of the country in terms of digital violence.
Develop digital violence legal frameworks and specific protocols.
Increase sanctions and penal reform, and increase resources for protection and justice.
Strengthen data protection legislation.
By technology companies:
Improve internet governance policies.
Take responsibility for investing in prevention and support and train staff, including outsourced staff.
Establish agile response mechanisms for cases of digital violence.
Tackle the digital and security divide and educate technology users on how to protect themselves.
By all actors to be people-centred:
Prevent revictimisation and address the root causes of digital violence.
Specific proposals to protect vulnerable people against threats of digital violence, particularly for women, girls, non-binary people or other minorities:
Facilitate access to information, prevention and support for vulnerable populations, paying particular attention to rural areas, indigenous peoples, women and non-binary groups, who very often feel neglected and underrepresented.
Ensure that online content does not reproduce violence, misogyny, machismo or other forms of discrimination.
Develop specific legislation on digital violence with an intersectional feminist and human rights approach, and establish clear criteria for content policing.
Strengthen the justice system by working with prosecutors, judges and police.
CSOs and feminist collectives should have a better understanding of what digital violence is and should organise themselves collectively to respond to it.
Work on gender bias in companies.
Specific proposals to protect vulnerable people against threats of digital violence, particularly for women, girls, non-binary people or other minorities:
"Recognising digital violence in the criminal justice system would be a giant step forward."
- Respondent in Bolivia.
Facilitate access to information, prevention and support for vulnerable populations, paying particular attention to rural areas, indigenous peoples, women and non-binary groups, who very often feel neglected and underrepresented.
Ensure that online content does not reproduce violence, misogyny, machismo or other forms of discrimination.
Develop specific legislation on digital violence with an intersectional feminist and human rights approach, and establish clear criteria for content policing.
Strengthen the justice system by working with prosecutors, judges and police.
CSOs and feminist collectives should have a better understanding of what digital violence is and should organise themselves collectively to respond to it.
Work on gender bias in companies.
RECOMMENDATIONS SUMMARY
This section provides a summary of the main suggestions made by respondents. The following recommendations do not necessarily reflect the views of Oxfam but will be considered by the ReCIPE project team in the next phase of the project.
Conduct awareness-raising and training with information about digital risks and how to deal with them.
Create a network of digital rights defenders with a collaborative and cross-sectoral approach.
Put the issue of digital rights and safety on the international agenda.
Enhance the ability to anticipate risks associated with emerging technologies.
Call on governments to develop or strengthen policies and laws that regulate the digital environment and protect people.
Call for greater engagement and social responsibility by technology companies in the prevention of risks online.
Improve coordination between government ministries, the media and civil society.
Identify the most vulnerable groups and develop specific instruments to protect them.
Strengthen support and assistance mechanisms for victims of digital violence, abuse or any kind of threat on social networks.
Support CSOs and/or activists with more information and resources.
Promote policies that protect freedom of expression online and ensure that technology policies and practices are consistent with the principles of justice, equity and respect for human rights.
Bridge the digital divide by advocating for policies that promote affordable and accessible internet, and improving infrastructure to expand access.
Built with Shorthand