CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 56ICT in Developing CommunitiesICT Impact and PoliciesInformation Society and Technology Trends

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Barriers to digital participation in developing countries: Identifying technological, social, and cultural obstacles to community involvement

Open access
Nirmani I.A.P.·2025·GSC Advanced Research and Reviews
DOI 10.30574/gscarr.2025.23.2.0130
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Digital technologies hold significant promise for fostering inclusive development in low- and middle-income countries, yet many communities remain excluded due to persistent barriers to digital participation. This study investigates the technological, social, and cultural obstacles that prevent equitable access and engagement with digital tools. Key technological barriers include inadequate internet infrastructure, high costs of connectivity and devices, and unreliable electricity, which collectively hinder digital inclusion in rural and underserved areas. Social inequalities such as gender disparities, low income, advanced age, and disability further exacerbate exclusion, while cultural factors—including mistrust in digital systems, language barriers, and limited digital literacy—discourage meaningful engagement. Drawing on a review of relevant literature and case studies, the study finds that these barriers are often interlinked, creating a cycle of digital marginalization. Even where access is available, low usage rates are attributed to the lack of locally relevant content and support structures. The findings highlight that addressing digital exclusion requires more than infrastructure investment; it demands inclusive design, culturally appropriate digital education, and active collaboration among governments, civil society, and private actors. Ultimately, this research emphasizes that closing the digital divide is critical not only for individual empowerment but also for the broader goals of sustainable and equitable development.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.30574/gscarr.2025.23.2.0130

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY-NC-SA · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Crawford, J., & Evans, R. (n.d.). Beyond the school gates: The influence of place on educational outcomes. British Educational Research Journal, 1102.
  2. Cruz, S., Silva, E., & Rodríguez, D. (2019). Community networks: Telecommunications from the people for the people. . Journal of Community Informatics.
  3. Donovan, K. P., & Martin, A. (2022). Digital trust and state surveillance in the global South: Challenges and responses. Oxford Internet Institute.
  4. Elmi, A. (2021). Barriers to women's access to digital spaces in conflict-affected countries: The case of Afghanistan. International Gender Studies Journal, 44-60.
  5. Hussain, F., Malik, M. N., & Ahmad, S. (2019). Geographic and infrastructural challenges in internet connectivity for rural communities. Journal of Rural Development and Administration, 112-125.
  6. Jensen, M. (2019). Barriers to digital inclusion in developing countries: A review of the evidence. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
  7. Mohanty, C. T. (2020). Decolonizing knowledge: Reflections on global feminism and the politics of location. Duke University Press.
  8. Rathore, A. (2020). Digital culture and the resistance to change: Case studies from rural India. In R. D. Sharma, echnology and rural development in the Global South (pp. 112-130). Routledge.
  9. Sengupta, D., & Kaur, R. (2020). Digital empowerment of rural women in India: Case studies. Journal of Rural Development, 591-607.

Cited by

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Nirmani, I. A. P.
Venue
GSC Advanced Research and Reviews
Publisher
GSC Online Press
Published
2025-05-30
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
061-071
ISSN
2582-4597 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.30574/gscarr.2025.23.2.0130
OpenAlex
W4410730063
Cited by
37
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 3
FWCI
38.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
GSC Advanced Research and Reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › ICT in Developing Communities
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › ICT Impact and Policies
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Information Society and Technology Trends
Keywords
digital participation, digital divide, digital inclusion, developing countries, internet infrastructure, electricity reliability, social inequality, gender digital divide, disability, digital literacy, language barriers, inclusive design, digital education, rural communities, low- and middle-income countries

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review