Beyond the Access Gap: Gendered Realities of Digital Inclusion in Africa with Evidence from Four Countries

Liz Orembo explains that the research goes beyond whether people are merely connected and examines what happens after access. She argues that this reveals patterns of use, differences between groups and the specific gaps and barriers people face in practice.

She says the session shares 'after access' research based on household surveys that examine how people use the internet once connected, and that this provides insights into whether there are differences in use and what kinds of gaps people face . She also notes that the team conducted gender analysis across four countries to understand these inequalities more closely .

Liz Orembo argues that comparative work across regions is necessary to ensure that digital policy is not shaped by a single context. She suggests that comparing methods and challenges across Africa, Latin America and Asia helps produce global solutions that better reflect the lived realities of the Global South.

She explains that the research works with partner organisations in Latin America and Asia to compare methodologies and identify cultural and connectivity design issues across contexts . She adds that this is done so that processes such as WSIS can produce global solutions that respond to differentiated contexts in Africa and the wider Global South .

Liz Orembo stresses that understanding how people, especially women, actually experience internet use after getting coverage is essential for effective intervention design. Her framing suggests that only by identifying the varieties of inequality and usage patterns can policy and programmes respond appropriately to African realities.

She introduces the session as research that studies how people use the internet after connection and says it reveals differentiations and gaps they face . In closing, she reiterates that the research helps show different varieties of inequality and interventions that people can use, and that comparative work is needed so solutions match differentiated contexts in Africa and the Global South .

Kola Ijasan presents After Access as a long-term research programme with broad geographic coverage and practical policy value. He argues that the findings are not merely academic, but actively shape policy and regulatory processes across Africa.

He states that the After Access surveys have been conducted for over two decades, with the first round in 2002, and that the work has evolved over time in focus and importance . He also says the research has been used in broadband and internet affordability policies, national broadband plans, digital inclusion strategies and education and skills policies, and that governments and regulatory bodies regularly consult the organisation .

Kola Ijasan argues that women’s digital exclusion is not caused by one simple factor but by overlapping structural barriers. These include affordability, poor infrastructure, surveillance and control by others, and social norms that constrain women’s use of devices and time online.

In summarising cross-country barriers, he identifies financial constraints, safety and harassment, over-policing of women, restrictions on girls’ screen time compared with boys, sponsor gatekeeping and lack of privacy on phones, as well as infrastructure gaps in areas with weak connectivity . He also points to device limitations in Ghana, where some connected users still have devices that cannot fully support digital services .

Kola Ijasan argues that in both Nigeria and Ghana women’s digital participation is constrained by social expectations and economic inequality. Women are scrutinised more heavily for online behaviour, have less time because of unpaid domestic work, and often cannot afford devices or services that would enable fuller participation.

For Nigeria, he reports that women face greater scrutiny online, with people questioning why a woman is always on her phone, and he links this to broader social pressure and power access problems . For Ghana, he highlights geographic and income disparities, notes that some devices cannot perform much of what internet technologies can do, and says women reported domestic burdens as a key source of time poverty that leaves them using fewer apps and spending less time online than men .

Kola Ijasan presents Ethiopia as a case where affordability, fragility and household control combine to limit women’s digital autonomy. He argues that high costs and privacy constraints force women into fragmented and dependent forms of internet use.

He says Ethiopia reflected a post-conflict environment with fragile access, and that data scarcity and high data costs relative to GNI were significant issues . He explains that women cope by switching data on and off, which creates intermittent use and risks missing communications, and he shares an example of an entrepreneur whose husband controlled the phone and taught her how to use applications, illustrating limited privacy and autonomy .

Kola Ijasan argues that women’s digital inclusion can be strengthened through collaborative and practical learning models rather than only formal systems. He sees collective resource pooling, informal skills acquisition and digital finance integration as important pathways towards greater participation and autonomy.

He identifies collective models as an opportunity in which people come together to pool resources, and he also highlights informal skilling in tasks such as baking, tailoring and using financial technology through platforms like YouTube or WhatsApp . He further notes that integrating digital and traditional financial systems, including examples such as Ajoo in Uganda and stokvels in South Africa, can boost women’s financial autonomy .

Kola Ijasan argues that affordability and infrastructure are foundational constraints affecting women across all four countries. Without reducing these costs and gaps, broader inclusion efforts will remain limited.

He explicitly says financial constraints cut across women in Africa in all the country cases reviewed . In his recommendations, he states that infrastructure and cost should come down, emphasising that these are core barriers that no single actor can solve alone .

Kola Ijasan argues that digital tools must be designed around the actual constraints women face, rather than idealised always-online conditions. Responsive design, accessibility and offline functionality are necessary to make services usable for more women, including those with disabilities or weak connectivity.

He recommends responsive design, specifically mentioning disability-friendly applications, and says support for offline use should be encouraged so services are not only available when people are online . Earlier, he also notes that the research used an intersectional lens that included people with disabilities and those in remote areas, reinforcing why such design choices matter .

Kola Ijasan argues that digitising public services has direct practical benefits for women. By moving services online, women can avoid long travel, save time and gain easier access to essential administrative functions.

He identifies public service digitalisation as an opportunity because it can spare women from travelling long distances, such as 30 kilometres, to complete tasks that could instead be done online . He adds that women may save more than men in terms of time and effort through such digitalisation .

Kola Ijasan’s central interpretation is that technology is not the original source of gender inequality. Instead, digital systems reproduce and often intensify the same structural disadvantages women and girls already face offline.

He states directly that digital technologies did not create gender inequality . He then explains that they reflected and in many cases amplified offline inequalities, including the existing disadvantages faced by girls and women entrepreneurs, which became more severe through digital technologies .

Thobekile Matimbe argues that exclusion persists even where connectivity is technically available because women may not feel safe enough to use it. Fear, insecurity and social pressures lead some women to withdraw from online spaces or avoid them entirely.

She says women in places such as Ethiopia are afraid to be online and may choose not to access digital spaces because they do not feel safe there . She adds that once online dignity is not achieved, women self-expel or self-censor, and she references reports and testimonies in which women describe online participation as a security risk .

Thobekile Matimbe argues that digital rights cannot be reduced to merely having a connection or device. A genuine rights-based approach must ensure women can participate meaningfully, access services directly rather than by proxy, and experience dignity online.

She draws on the WSIS outcome document adopted the previous year, saying it speaks not just about connectivity or access to devices but about women’s meaningful participation in the digital age . She also asks how women can have full access if they still use digital technologies by proxy and links the issue to broader goals of equality, inclusion and human dignity .

Thobekile Matimbe argues that online violence is a major deterrent to participation, not a peripheral issue. Even where women have technical access, experiences or expectations of gender-based violence make online spaces feel unsafe and lead to avoidance.

She explains that lower reported cases of technology-facilitated gender-based violence may reflect the fact that women are staying offline for safety reasons rather than an absence of abuse . She also cites Paradigm Initiative’s 'Clicks That Hurt' report and says women recount gruesome stories and describe being online as a security risk, which leads them to conclude they are better off not participating .

Thobekile Matimbe argues that improving women’s participation requires a whole-of-society safety response. She sees safety as the prerequisite for inclusion and believes governments alone cannot create trusted digital environments without support from community and faith actors.

She identifies safety as one of the three core priorities governments should address and links this to the UN Secretary-General’s priorities mentioned at the opening of the UN AI Dialogue . She then argues for a 360-degree approach in which government, cultural leaders and faith-based leaders all work to create safe spaces, which would make women more able to participate meaningfully online .

Esther Nyapendi argues that in many Ugandan communities, informal peer learning is not a secondary mechanism but the main structure through which women acquire digital skills. She emphasises that this is especially true in rural and peri-urban areas where formal support may be limited or slower than technology adoption.

She says she fully agrees that informal peer networks are the intervention that works most across communities and draws on WOGNET’s experience in urban, rural and peri-urban areas . She adds that these networks are not merely gap-filling measures but the 'primary architecture' through which many women in rural Uganda gain and sustain digital skills .

Esther Nyapendi explains that peer networks are effective because they are embedded in women’s daily lives and relationships. They rely on shared language, mutual trust and practical help with ordinary digital tasks that matter immediately.

She gives examples of a neighbour teaching mobile money, a market trader showing how to save a contact, and women learning to use basic communication tools such as WhatsApp and audio messages . She says these exchanges are grounded in trust and shared language, which helps women navigate technology and access information and government services .

Esther Nyapendi argues that outside programmes should build on existing community-based learning rather than assume learning starts with formal intervention. She sees women champions and local facilitators as effective bridges because they extend trusted systems already in place.

She refers to WOGNET’s BOLTS programme in northern Uganda and says external facilitators are used to expedite skills women already have rather than replace local knowledge . She also explains that women champions are continuously trained and then return to their communities to train others in the local language, and she recommends strengthening what communities have already built instead of arriving with a new curriculum as if learning starts only with the programme .

Esther Nyapendi argues that digital inclusion support must evolve with technological change. It should not only expand women’s skills, but also respond to safety concerns and new exclusions associated with emerging technologies such as AI.

She warns that as technology advances, including artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies, women continue to face exclusion . She also says formal programmes should amplify available skills while protecting women, referencing the rise of technology-facilitated gender-based violence as women use technology more .