Electronic government (e-gov), a means of providing online public services, has the potential to greatly benefit all members of society. However, its advantages are often out of the reach of citizens who are digitally excluded. Drawing on socioeconomic and demographic ICT survey data, researchers have explored the digital divide and have concluded that gender is an important determinant of inequality. If we are to provide e-gov services that are more accessible to women and geared towards their needs, we must consider the digital gender gap. This paper explores gendered differences in e-gov service usage in Brazil. Findings on the disproportionate numbers of women and men seeking and using e-gov services, as well as the reasons for not using them, justify the relevance of gendering the e-gov debate.
Al-RababahB.A., & Abu-ShanabE. (2010). E-government and gender digital divide: the case of jordan. International Journal of Electronic Business Management, 8(1), 1-8.
2.
BélangerF., & CarterL. (2009). The impact of the digital divide on e-government use. Communications of the ACM, 52(4), 132-135.
3.
BimberB. (2000). Measuring the gender gap on the Internet. Social Science Quarterly, 81(3), 868-876.
4.
Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). (2020). Síntese de Indicadores sociais 2019. Retrieved from https://agenciadenoticias.ibge.gov.br/agencia-sala-de-imprensa/2013-agencia-de-noticias/releases/29431-sintese-de-indicadores-sociais-em-2019-proporcao-de-pobres-cai-para-24-7-e-extrema-pobreza-se-mantem-em-6-5-da-populacao.
5.
Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). (2019). Continuous National Household Sample Survey – Continuous PNAD. Retrieved from https://www.ibge.gov.br/en/statistics/social/labor/16833-monthly-dissemination-pnadc1.html?=&t=o-que-e.
6.
Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br). (2020). Survey on the Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Brazilian Households – ICT Households survey 2019. São Paulo, SP: CGI.br. Retrieved from https://cetic.br/en/publicacao/pesquisa-sobre-o-uso-das-tecnologias-de-informacao-e-comunicacao-nos-domicilios-brasileiros-tic-domicilios-2019/.
7.
Brazilian Network Information Center (NIC.br). (2020). Survey on the Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Brazilian Households – ICT Households survey 2019: Microdata base. Retrieved from http://cetic.br/arquivos/domicilios/2019/individuos/#bases.
8.
BüchiM.JustN., & LatzerM. (2015). Modeling the second-level digital divide: a five country study of social differences in Internet use. New Median & Society, 18(11), 2703-2722.
9.
BrännströmI. (2012). Gender and digital divide 2000–2008 in two low-income economies in Sub-Saharan Africa: Kenya and Somalia in official statistics. Government Information Quarterly, 29(1), 60-67.
10.
ChoiY.T., & ParkS. (2013). Understanding gender inequality in central e-government: a Korean case study. Government Information Quarterly, 30(3), 300-309.
11.
ChunS.A.ShulmanS.SandovalR., & HovyE. (2010). E-government 2.0: making connections between citizens, data and government. Information Polity, 15, 1-9.
12.
CooperJ. (2006). The digital divide: the special case of gender. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(5), 320-334.
13.
Criado PerezC. (2019). Invisible Women: Exposing data bias in a world designed for men. New York: Abrams Press.
14.
DiMaggioP., & HargittaiE. (2001). From the ‘Digital Divide’ to ‘Digital Inequality’: Studying Internet Use as Penetration Increases. Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University: Center for the Arts and Cultural Policy Studies.
15.
DinizE.H.BarbosaA.F.JunqueiraA.R.B., & PradoO. (2009). O governo eletrônico no Brasil: perspectiva histórica a partir de um modelo estruturado de análise. Revista de Administração Pública, 43(1), 23-48.
16.
European Parliament. (2018). The underlying causes of the digital gender gap and possible solutions for enhanced digital inclusion of women and girls. European Union: European Parliament. Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/604940/IPOL_STU(2018)604940_EN.pdf.
17.
GerpottT.J., & AhmadiN. (2016). Use levels of electronic government services among German citizens. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy.
18.
Gil-GarciaJ.R.HelbigN.C., & FerroE. (2006). Is It Only About Internet Access? An Empirical Test of a Multi-dimensional Digital Divide. In: WimmerM.A.SchollH.J.GrönlundÅ., & AndersenK.V. (Eds.). Electronic Government. EGOV 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4084.
19.
GillwaldA.GalpayaH., & AgüeroA. (2019). Towards understanding the digital gender gap in the Global South. In SeyA., & HafkinN. (Eds.). Taking Stock: Data and Evidence on Gender Digital Equality. Macau, CN: United Nations.
20.
GrayT.J.GainousJ., & WagnerK.M. (2017). Gender and the digital divide in latin america. Social Science Quarterly, 98(1), 326-340.
21.
HafkinN. (2003). Some thoughts on gender and telecommunications/ICT statistics and indicators. In International Telecommunication Union (ITU). 3rd World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators Meeting. Retrieved from http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/wict02/doc/pdf/Doc46_Erev1.pdf.
22.
HelbigN.Gil-GarcíaJ.R., & FerroE. (2009). Understanding the complexity of electronic government: implications from the digital divide literature. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), 89-97.
23.
HelsperE.J. (2010). Gendered internet use across generations and life stages. Communication Research, 37(3), 352-374.
24.
HinesA.H.NelsonA., & TuT.L.N. (2001). Introduction – Hidden circuits. In: NelsonA.T., T. L. N., & HinesA.H. (Eds.). Technicolor.
25.
International Telecommunication Union (ITU). (2020). Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2020. Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/FactsFigures2020.pdf.
26.
International Telecommunication Union (ITU). (2014). Manual for measuring ICT access and use by households and individuals. Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-d/opb/ind/D-IND-ITCMEAS-2014-PDF-E.pdf.
27.
KennedyT.WellmanB., & KlementK. (2003). Gendering the digital divide. IT & Society, 1(5), 72-96.
28.
KöseT. (2019). Gender and Use of E-Government Services in Turkey. In: Gender Gaps and the Social Inclusion Movement in ICT, IGI Global, pp. 130-146.
29.
MariscalJ.MayneG.AnejaU., & SorgnerA. (2019). Bridging the gender digital gap. Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, 13(2019-9), 1-12.
30.
MartinF., & GogginG. (2016). Digital transformations: gendering the end user in digital government policy. Journal of Information Policy, 6(1), 436-459.
31.
MoonM.J. (2002). The evolution of e-government among municipalities: rhetoric or reality? Public Administration Review, 62(4), 424-433.
32.
MorenoR.MolinaC.M.FigueroaJ.C., & MorenoM. (2013). Gender and e-government adoption in Spain. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 9(3), 23-42.
33.
NestiG. (2019). Mainstreaming gender equality in smart cities: theoretical, methodological and empirical challenges. Information Polity, 24(3), 289-304.
34.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). Country note: Education at a glance 2019. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/education-at-a-glance/EAG2019_CN_BRA.pdf.
35.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2018). Bridging the digital gender: divide include, upskill, innovate.
36.
OudshoornN.RommesE., & StienstraM. (2004). Configuring the user as everybody: gender and design cultures in information and communication technologies. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 29(1), 30-63.
37.
PaixãoM., & CarvanoL.M. (2008). Censo e demografia: a variável cor ou raça nos interior dos sistemas censitários brasileiros. In: PinhoA.O., & SansoneL. (Orgs.). Raça: novas perspectivas antropológicas. 2nd ed. rev. Salvador, BA: EDUFBA, pp. 25-61.
38.
RaoJ.N.K., & ScottA.J. (1981). The analysis of categorical data from complex sample surveys: chi-squared tests for goodness of fit and independence in two-way tables, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 76(374), 221-230.
39.
SarabdeenJ., & RodriguesG. (2010). Gender differences in e-government adoption in Dubai. The Business Review, 16(2), 120-126.
40.
ScheerderA.van DeursenA., & van DijkJ. (2017). Determinants of Internet skills, uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second-and third-level digital divide. Telematics and Informatics, 34(8), 1607-1624.
41.
ServonL.J. (2002). Bridging the Digital Divide: Technology, Community, and Public Policy. John Wiley & Sons.
42.
SilvaG.M. (2016). After racial democracy: contemporary puzzles in race relations in Brazil, Latin America and beyond from a boundaries perspective. Current Sociology, 64(5), 794-812.
43.
United Nations (UN). (2020). E-government survey 2020: Digital government in the decade of action for sustainable development. Retrieved from https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2020-Survey/2020%20UN%20E-Government%20Survey%20(Full%20Report).pdf.
44.
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (UN DESA). (2019). World Population Prospects 2019: Online Edition.
45.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2019). Human Development Report 2019. Beyond income, beyond averages, beyond today: Inequalities in human development in the 21st century. New York. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-2019.
46.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2008). Gender responsive e-governance: exploring the transformative potential. Retrieved from: https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/womens-empowerment/primers-in-gender-and-democratic-governance-4.html.
47.
United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (UN-ECLAC). (2018). Monitoreo de la Agenda Digital para América Latina y el Caribe eLAC2018.
48.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2020). Niñas, niños y el uso de Internet en São Paulo y Buenos Aires: estudios a partir de una perspectiva de igualdad de género.
49.
van DeursenA., & HelsperE.J. (2015). The third-level digital divide: Who benefits most from being online? Communication and information technologies annual. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
50.
VenkateshV.SykesT.A., & VenkatramanS. (2014). Understanding e-government portal use in rural India: role of demographic and personality characteristics. Information Systems Journal, 24, 249-269.
51.
World Wide Web Foundation. (2020). Women’s Rights Online: Closing the digital gender gap for a more equal world.
52.
YeraA.ArbelaitzO.JaureguiO., & MuguerzaJ. (2020). Characterization of e-government adoption in Europe. PLoS ONE, 15(4), 1-22.
53.
ZaidiZ.H.AbroA.A.MessoM.S., & MahesarG.A. (2017). Demographic variables’ affect on male and female awareness to use of e-government service in Pakistan. The Woman, Research Journal, 9(9), 22-47.
