Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) offers tremendous potential to accelerate inclusive development—but only if it is intentionally designed to serve all. Around the world, gender gaps in digital access and usage continue to mirror and reinforce broader social inequalities. Without explicit equity and rights-based safeguards, DPI risks excluding the very populations it aims to empower. To ensure that DPI promotes dignity, justice, and equity, its governance, architecture, and implementation must center human rights—particularly those of women, marginalized communities, and vulnerable populations.
The Digital Divide Is a Gender Divide
Globally, women are 18% less likely to own a smartphone and 25% less likely to use mobile internet compared to men. In some low-income countries, this digital gender gap exceeds 50%. These disparities are not just about devices or connectivity; they reflect deep-rooted social norms, discriminatory policies, and systemic barriers to participation.
As DPI becomes foundational to accessing social protection, education, finance, and healthcare, exclusion from digital systems means exclusion from opportunity. Without intervention, DPI could exacerbate inequalities rather than resolve them.
DPI Must Be Built for Inclusion—By Design
The inclusion of women and marginalized groups in DPI systems must go beyond representation. It must be baked into every stage of the design and deployment process—from user research and interface design to data governance and institutional accountability.
Key principles for inclusive DPI include:
- Gender-responsive design: Interfaces and workflows should account for literacy, language, and safety needs, especially in patriarchal or low-resource contexts.
- Consent and privacy by default: Users must have control over how their data is collected, stored, and shared, with safeguards against misuse or surveillance.
- Interoperability with inclusion: DPI must support cross-platform service delivery that accounts for diverse identities and lived experiences.
- Accountability mechanisms: DPI systems must include channels for grievance redress, policy feedback, and ethical oversight.
Inclusive design is not just a moral imperative—it is a practical necessity for system effectiveness and adoption.
Case Studies: CRVS in Bangladesh and UPI in India
In Bangladesh, the modernization of the Civil Registration and Vital Statistics (CRVS) system led to significant gains in gender equity. By digitizing birth and marriage records and linking them to national ID systems, authorities improved the enforcement of child marriage laws and enabled girls to access health and education services more easily.
In India, the Unified Payments Interface (UPI)—a core component of the DPI ecosystem—helped onboard over 70 million women to the formal financial system. Through mobile-based interfaces and assisted access models, even women without smartphones could receive direct benefit transfers, opening up new pathways to autonomy and economic inclusion.
These examples show how DPI, when aligned with social justice objectives, can disrupt traditional power imbalances.
Rights-Based Governance for Digital Systems
A human rights-based approach to DPI is essential. This means ensuring that the systems respect, protect, and fulfill rights across several dimensions:
- Privacy: Systems must be designed to minimize data collection and offer robust security protections.
- Agency: Users must have the ability to opt-in, opt-out, and challenge decisions made using their data.
- Representation: Diverse voices, including women, youth, and persons with disabilities, must be included in DPI governance boards, advisory councils, and technical working groups.
- Non-discrimination: Legal frameworks must explicitly prohibit exclusion, profiling, or algorithmic bias in DPI-enabled services.
Countries that embed these rights in their digital governance architecture are more likely to build resilient, trusted, and inclusive digital ecosystems.
What This Means for Policymakers
- Embed gender equity and rights into DPI laws and policies - Avoid treating inclusion as an afterthought. Establish legal mandates and budgets for inclusive digital design and oversight.
- Support digital literacy and capacity-building for women - Ensure that training programs reach rural, disabled, and elderly populations through accessible formats and community-based approaches.
- Create DPI interfaces for assisted access - Design hybrid models where community agents, kiosks, or helplines help users navigate DPI systems safely and effectively.
- Conduct equity audits and publish inclusion metrics - Regularly review DPI systems for bias or exclusion and commit to transparent reporting on who is being served—and who is being left behind.
- Fund civic tech and community-led innovation - Invest in grassroots digital tools and solutions that reflect local needs, especially from underrepresented communities.
Conclusion
DPI can be an equalizer—but only if it is designed to be. Systems that do not actively address power imbalances and historical injustices risk reproducing them in digital form. Inclusion, privacy, and participation are not optional features—they are foundational components of a just digital society.
Designing for dignity means asking hard questions about who builds, controls, and benefits from our digital infrastructure. If done right, DPI can be a tool not only for efficiency—but for empowerment, equity, and systemic transformation.
