I argue: Digital inclusion is key to democratic participation

“Digital inclusion is vital for enabling civic engagement and strengthening democracy. When citizens cannot navigate digital platforms, their ability to influence policies or shape communities is diminished,” writes Maja Brynteson of Nordregio in ELM’s “I argue” series.

The Nordic and Baltic countries are among Europe’s digital frontrunners. Yet beneath this success lies a growing concern: the risk of digital exclusion (1). The more digital we become, the greater the danger of deepening inequality. As societies shift essential services, civic engagement and even voting to online platforms, those lacking digital skills or access are left behind. Consequently, despite high digital maturity, significant gaps in digital inclusion remain in the region (2).

A growing concern: the risk of digital exclusion.

Especially digitally vulnerable groups – such as older adults, immigrants, people with disabilities, and those facing social disadvantages – are frequently excluded from both the design of digital solutions and policymaking. Their absence has real consequences: missed access to healthcare, difficulty applying for benefits, diminished civic voice, and barriers to democratic participation. In short, exclusion from the digital sphere can result in exclusion from societal and democratic participation (3).

DIGITAL INCLUSION, by contrast, enables civic agency. It ensures that people can not only consume information but also contribute to it – whether by engaging in debates, participating in local decision-making, or advocating for change. It ensures that all individuals – regardless of age, ability, education level or geographic location – can participate fully in society.

Digital inclusion enables civic agency.

Governments in the Nordic-Baltic region have recognised this. In 2021, they jointly affirmed digital inclusion as a cornerstone of democratic digital transformation (4). This commitment is vital, but must be matched by action.

Our research at Nordregio shows that while national digitalisation strategies acknowledge inclusion, definitions vary widely, and monitoring is inconsistent (2). Too often, the focus is limited to infrastructure or basic access, overlooking deeper needs such as critical digital literacy (5).

WE NEED BROADER understanding f how digital inclusion can be strengthened – including ongoing education in digital skills, source criticism and civic digital literacy.

This is where lifelong learning plays a crucial role. Not limited to formal learning, it includes community-based initiatives, peer learning and public awareness efforts that help people stay digitally competent and critically engaged. Citizens must be equipped to evaluate online information, understand how algorithms filter what they see and participate meaningfully in digital governance.

The Nordic-Baltic region has the infrastructure and political will to lead in this area. But to do so, we must move beyond commending digitalisation and start addressing its blind spots. We must ask: who is being left out, and what does that mean for democracy?

Who is being left out, and what does that mean for democracy?

Our welfare states are built on principles of equality and social responsibility. By prioritising digital inclusion, we can reinforce these values and strengthen democratic participation. While each country faces its own challenges, the shared commitment to inclusive digitalisation can serve as a model for broader European cooperation.

IN CONCLUSION,

• Digital maturity does not guarantee inclusion, especially for vulnerable groups.
• Digital inclusion enables active citizenship and civic engagement, making it essential for democratic participation.
• Lifelong learning empowers citizens with the skills needed to engage critically and confidently in our digital society.

Digital inclusion is not a peripheral concern – it is central to the health of our democracies. As we continue to digitalise, we must ensure that no one is left behind.

The “I argue” series of columns features texts written by researchers, each presenting a well-argued statement on a topic of their research.

References:

• DESI Index. (2025). DESI indicators. https://digital-decade-desi.digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/datasets/desi/charts/desi-indicators?period=desi_2025&indicator=desi_dsk_ab&breakdown=ind_total&unit=pc_ind&country=AT,BE,BG,HR,CY,CZ,DK,EE,EU,FI,FR,DE,EL,HU,IE,IT,LV,LT,LU,MT,NL,PL,PT,RO,SK,SI,ES,SE
• Wendt-Lucas, N., Jessen, S., & Brynteson, M. (2024). National Digital Inclusion Initiatives in the Nordic and Baltic Countries (No. 2024:3). Nordregio. https://pub.nordregio.org/r-2024-3-national-digital-inclusion-initiatives-in-the-nordic-and-baltic-countries/index.html
• Jessen, S., Brynteson, M., & Vasilevskaya, A. (2024, September 5). Bytes and Rights: Civil society’s role in digital inclusion. ArcGIS StoryMaps. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/collections/f249f0dcad2246de88b9cf0e9dad16ef
• Nordic Co-operation. (2021, November 26). Common statement on the importance of promoting digital inclusion as a central part of the digital transformation in the Nordic-Baltic region | Nordic cooperation. https://www.norden.org/en/declaration/common-statement-importance-promoting-digital-inclusion-central-part-digital
• Wulff Andersen, L., & Palludan Kampmann, L. (2024). Monitoring Digital Inclusion in the Nordic and Baltic Region. Nordregio & Digital Europe. https://nordregio.org/publications/monitoring-digital-inclusion-in-the-nordic-and-baltic-region/

Looking for more articles on the role of adult education in supporting democracy?

This article is part of the theme 'Adult Education and Democracy 2025'.

Read related articles here