Gender-based violence (GBV) remains one of the most widespread human rights violations in the world. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), nearly one in three women experiences physical or sexual violence in her lifetime.[1] This violence, deeply rooted in power dynamics and patriarchal structures, has a major impact on the physical, mental, and social health of survivors, while weakening the socio-economic fabric of societies. In a context of increasing digitization of human interactions, digital technologies appear to be potential levers for transforming practices related to awareness-raising, prevention, reporting, and response to violence. The development of tools such as mobile applications, anonymous reporting platforms, and social networks has enabled the emergence of new spaces for mobilization, mutual aid, and visibility for victims. With more than 5.4 billion people connected worldwide in 2023,[2] these technologies represent considerable potential for rethinking strategies to combat GBV.

However, this digitization also carries specific risks, particularly from a gender perspective: sexist cyberbullying, online threats, non-consensual sharing of intimate content, and digital tracking of victims. These forms of cyberviolence, which are often underestimated, prolong or exacerbate the gender-based violence that already exists in the physical world.[3] Its intensity is all the greater in contexts of high social vulnerability and low connectivity, where digital inequalities can exacerbate discrimination and limit access to protection mechanisms. The question, then, is to what extent digital tools can improve the prevention, reporting, and handling of gender-based violence, particularly in areas with low connectivity.

Based on the assumption that digital technologies can play a transformative role in combating GBV, but that their effectiveness remains dependent on factors such as accessibility, ownership, and institutional frameworks, this research employs a qualitative and documentary approach. It draws on a critical literature review, a typology of digital tools used in the fight against GBV, and two case studies in Africa and Asia: Tanzania[4] and Cambodia (in 2020), focusing on USAID-funded projects to strengthen women’s capacities in the field of technology. It is important to note that the study exclusively relies on the data and information available in the agency’s reports.

The article is divided into two parts. A presentation of the types of digital tools used (applications, platforms, social networks) and a focus on the cases allows an analysis of the concrete uses of these technologies. Finally, a critical reading of the limitations and challenges enables identification of avenues for action and research.

Theoretical framework and literature review

GBV refers to harmful acts committed against a person because of their actual or perceived sex, gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Such violence can include physical, psychological, and sexual acts, as well as more subtle forms, such as economic and symbolic violence. In the digital context, this violence takes the form of sexist cyberbullying, online threats, and sexual cyberviolence, creating new vulnerabilities for victims.[5]

Theoretical framework

The study of gender-based violence and its relationship with digital technologies benefits from the introduction of structuring concepts, which will be used to enrich the theoretical framework. These include concepts such as digital empowerment, techno-feminism, and digital justice. Each of these concepts is essential to understanding how digital technologies can transform the fight against GBV.

Digital empowerment, as developed by Martha Nussbaum and Amartya Sen, refers to the process by which individuals, particularly women, acquire the skills and resources necessary to use technology independently. According to the authors, this process is central to emancipation and improving human well-being in a context of social and gender inequality. In the context of GBV, digital empowerment enables victims of violence to anonymously report abuse, learn about their rights, and find appropriate support, while circumventing geographical, social, and political barriers.[6]

Furthermore, technofeminism as conceived by Donna Haraway (1991) and Judy Wajcman (2004) explores the relationship between women and technology from a critical perspective, questioning how technologies can reinforce patriarchal power structures while offering potential for resistance for women and gender minorities. They emphasize that technology, far from being neutral, is shaped by power dynamics, but that it can also serve as a lever to challenge these unequal relationships. Digital technologies thus offer women opportunities for self-empowerment, while contributing to a feminist rethinking of the social and political order.[7] Finally, the concept of digital justice[8] refers to how technologies, far from being egalitarian tools, can sometimes exacerbate social and gender inequalities.

Virginia Eubanks and Safiya Noble have demonstrated that automated systems, algorithms, and search engines can reproduce gender and racial biases and reinforce discrimination. In the area of GBV, digital justice involves reexamining the design of technologies to ensure that they serve to protect women’s rights and reduce online violence. Technologies must be designed to provide equal access to security, information, and resources for victims of GBV. However, in addition to a rich theoretical framework, the analysis of GBV and digital technologies incorporates research from a diverse range of authors in order to offer a comprehensive and balanced view of the subject.

In her book “Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men,” Caroline Criado Pérez demonstrates how digital technologies, like the physical world, are often designed without taking women’s needs into account, leading to bias in information systems. She highlights how these technological biases contribute to the perpetuation of gender-based violence.[9] Similarly, in “Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism,” Safiya Noble examines how search engines and algorithms reinforce sexist and racial stereotypes. She highlights the dangers of digital technology for women, especially those from minority groups, in terms of cyberviolence and cyberbullying.[10]

Virginia Eubanks develops the idea of structural violence amplified by the use of digital technologies. In her book “Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor”, she highlights how automated systems used in public services tend to reproduce and exacerbate social inequalities. In particular, she shows that women from working-class backgrounds are particularly vulnerable to these forms of algorithmic discrimination, thereby reinforcing existing patterns of exclusion.[11] Judy Wajcman’s work on technofeminism ultimately explores how women are represented in technology and how they interact with technological systems. She offers a critical look at the place of women in the digital realm and the use of these technologies to combat GBV.[12]

I. Brief overview of digital tools used in the fight against GBV

Several digital technologies play a key role in the fight against GBV: mobile applications and social media. Each of these solutions helps to raise awareness, prevent violence, and support victims, making assistance more accessible and facilitating collective mobilization.

   a. Mobile applications: technological tools in the fight against GBV

In the context of modernizing prevention and protection measures against GBV, mobile applications are proving to be increasingly useful tools. These technologies are particularly relevant in high-risk environments, especially among vulnerable populations living in isolated, unstable, or informal areas. With this in mind, the International Rescue Committee (IRC), in partnership with the U.S. Department of State, the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (BPRM), and the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), has developed guidelines to strengthen the delivery of mobile and remote services to survivors of GBV in extreme humanitarian contexts (Iraq, Burundi, Myanmar, among others).[13] Among the tools developed, the Primero application stands out for its ability to facilitate incident tracking, case management, and psychosocial support, even in the absence of humanitarian personnel in the field. This system has been tested as part of a pilot project in Iraq. According to the IRC, the goal is to guarantee permanent access to personalized and confidential support, despite logistical or security constraints.[14]

Other applications are also emerging in non-humanitarian contexts to meet similar needs. In Côte d’Ivoire, the “Protection for All”[15] app, developed under the auspices of the Ministry of Health, allows users to report acts of violence, particularly against people living with HIV or from key populations. It is available in French and English on Android and ensures confidential handling of reports, in conjunction with legal and health services. These initiatives also follow in the wake of transnational digital movements such as #MeToo, #NiUnaMenos, and #IWillGoOut, which have helped to globalize the issue of GBV and amplify the voices of survivors in the digital public sphere. Finally, in a more institutional context, Morocco, for example, adopted Law 103-13[16] on combating violence against women in 2018, which encourages anonymous reporting. Platforms such as Hollaback are used to report assaults while guaranteeing anonymity and providing psychological support. The following discussion, therefore, focuses on the ambivalent role of social media in the fight against GBV: both tools for collective empowerment and spaces for GBV reproduced online.

   b. Social media: catalysts for online mobilization, reporting, and support

Following the rise of mobile applications dedicated to direct assistance and protection for victims of GBV, social media is another major facet of the fight against gender-based violence in the digital environment. It is no longer limited to a simple role of awareness-raising and prevention, but has become a real space for collective action, transnational mobilization, and community support.

In recent years, online support communities have emerged on digital platforms, creating a space where survivors can speak freely. These dynamics have fostered the emergence of viral campaigns denouncing abuse, which have become emblematic of the mobilizing power of social media. The #MeToo movement, launched in 2017 by activist Tarana Burke and propelled to global prominence after being taken up by actress Alyssa Milano, is the most emblematic example of this. This hashtag exposed GBV in many sectors, including film, sports, politics, and finance, and enabled thousands of women to publicly testify about the sexual and GBV they had suffered.[17] The aim was not only to highlight the scale of the phenomenon but also to create solidarity among women of all backgrounds and social statuses. From a hashtag to political pressure, #MeToo has had a tangible impact on institutions. It has affected more than 85 countries, prompting the European Parliament to hold a special debate on sexual harassment on 25 October 2017, urging EU member states to ratify the Istanbul Convention.[18] In the same vein, movements such as #NousToutes, #NousAussi and #BalanceTonPorc have emerged in France, redefining the balance of power in professional, judicial and media circles. These movements are not limited to denunciation: they are shaping a new culture of consent, helping to rewrite social and legal norms, and influencing court decisions that are contributing to changes in case law on GBV.[19]

In Africa, too, social networks can play a crucial role. In Gabon, according to data from the sixth Gabon/UNFPA cooperation program, women are the majority victims of the most serious forms of GBV: 54.3% of cases of physical violence, 82.3% of economic violence, and 89.8% of sexual violence.[20] Although these figures are from a 2016 survey, they illustrate the persistence of the problem, which is exacerbated by deeply entrenched patriarchal norms. The study also shows that in contexts where men hold economic and symbolic authority, women are more exposed to multiple forms of domination.

However, despite the existence of these social networks, African civil societies struggle to occupy the digital space in a systematic and structured way to make their voices heard. This can be explained by several factors: the weight of cultural norms, the centrality of religion in social organization, lack of access to technology, and self-censorship linked to fear of stigmatization. In some regions, talking about sexual violence is still socially risky, even morally forbidden. Nevertheless, the political uprisings of 2011 demonstrated that citizen mobilization via digital technology can shake established regimes, showing that social media can be powerful catalysts for change. However, as several researchers have pointed out, the question of the sustainability of these movements remains unanswered: while they may succeed in shaking up the established order, they often struggle to bring about profound, long-term institutional change.[21]

Thus, although social media cannot eradicate GBV on its own, it plays a crucial role in building digital counterpowers, raising awareness of feminist struggles, and creating international solidarity. Through social media, victims find not only a platform for expression but also a means of organizing collectively against impunity.

The following sections highlight projects carried out by the U.S. government agency USAID in Africa and Asia. It is important to note that the authors did not conduct fieldwork during this study and therefore relied exclusively on data and information available in the agency’s reports. The added value of this work lies in the analytical commentary and interpretive insights derived from the systematic examination of these cases.

II. Documented and analyzed case studies: Tanzania and Cambodia

   a. Strengthening women’s digital skills: USAID program in Tanzania

The actions taken by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) demonstrate the strategic use of digital technologies in the fight against GBV. Although these examples are only from secondary sources, they provide a relevant basis for a critical analysis of technological initiatives in resource-limited contexts. As part of the WomenConnect Challenge program, USAID supported a project in Tanzania with the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT) platform, aimed at strengthening GBV prevention in rural areas.[22] Launched in 2017, approximately 87 women from 78 villages in the Serengeti were trained in the use of smartphones to collect geolocated data on local infrastructure (schools, clinics, roads, etc.), while also acting as community relays in reporting violence.

Thanks to a system based on Open Data Kit (ODK) and WhatsApp, these women, known as “digital champions,” received testimonies from survivors and interacted with local authorities to follow up on cases and offer advice.[23] The approach is certainly interesting: it combines technological innovation, women’s empowerment, and community involvement. At the end of the program, a positive change in social norms was observed, with increased mobilization against gender-based violence in the communities concerned.

However, several structural limitations must be highlighted. On the one hand, the effectiveness of such a project depends on the availability of smartphones, reliable network coverage, and digital literacy, all factors that are often insufficiently stable in rural areas. On the other hand, the program relies on the voluntary commitment of “digital champions,” whose mobilization could decline without long-term support. Finally, the social transformations observed remain fragile without stronger institutional support, particularly in the areas of health, education, and justice.[24] This is because “government institutions and NGOs have an important role to play in promoting communication for development and social change, as they are the first to adapt and offer citizens the power, agency, and ability to express themselves.”[25]

   b. Cambodia: Promoting women’s participation in digital technology through the Women in Tek Network

At the same time, USAID supported the Women in Tek Network (WTN) initiative in Cambodia, with the aim of promoting the inclusion of women in the technology sector.[26] The project implemented complementary strategies: coworking spaces, mentoring, conferences, digital campaigns, and university programs. The ambition is clear: to transform young women into actors of digital innovation and technological leadership. This program highlights an integrated approach, combining economic empowerment, advocacy for parity, and the creation of an ecosystem conducive to gender equality.

Nevertheless, while inspiring, this initiative also raises the question of its transferability to other cultural contexts, particularly in Africa, where barriers to women’s technological empowerment are often stronger and multifactorial (traditions, social norms, educational disparities).[27] The question of whether this model can be replicated elsewhere is not the only challenge in the fight against GBV. In other words, digital technologies themselves can be a source of limitations and challenges that were previously unknown.

III. Challenges, limitations, and critical perspectives on digital technologies in the fight against GBV

   1. Technological inequality and digital security as obstacle 

   a. Inequalities in access and the digital divide

Access to digital technologies remains deeply unequal, particularly for women and girls in low-income countries. In 2022, only 26% of the population in low-income countries was connected to the Internet, compared to over 90% in high-income countries.[28] In East Africa, Internet access rates are barely 30%. These disparities can be explained by socioeconomic, cultural, and geographic factors, which limit the effectiveness of digital tools in combating GBV.[29] The digital divide is therefore a major obstacle to the empowerment of women and marginalized minorities, requiring public policies that promote equitable access to technology.

These measures are more urgent given that the digital divide is not limited to a simple opposition between geographical areas or countries. It also manifests itself within a territory, through multiple micro-divides linked to gender, age, level of education, and income.[30] In other words, even in connected areas, not everyone has the same access to or use of digital technology. With the advent of broadband, the nature of these divides has changed profoundly: they are no longer just technical or related to connectivity; they have become qualitative, i.e., they concern digital skills, quality of use, and the ability to derive real benefit from technologies.[31]

That said, it is important not to misinterpret the analysis of digital divides, particularly in the African context. In several countries on the continent, there is a segment of the population, generally belonging to the affluent social classes or the economic and intellectual elite, that has easy access to the latest technologies.[32] For these groups, investment in digital infrastructure is part of a desire for social distinction, or even a desire to embrace a model of modernity inspired by Western lifestyles. This situation highlights a more complex reality: the digital divide is not just a question of physical access to ICTs; it also raises questions about structural inequalities within societies.

   b. Platform security and confidentiality

Security and confidentiality are essential for building victims’ trust in digital tools. However, the risks of surveillance, unauthorized disclosure of personal information, and cyberbullying deter many victims from using these platforms.[33] Furthermore, digital technologies can be misused to perpetrate violence, such as doxxing, online harassment, or identity theft. These forms of violence have serious consequences for women’s mental health, safety, and social participation.[34]

The omnipresence of technological tools in everyday life increases individuals’ vulnerability, particularly because of their constant accessibility, regardless of place or time. The digital space, with its possibilities for anonymity, rapid dissemination, and mass sharing of content, is fundamentally different from other spaces for socialization.[35] This digital environment is reshaping the traditional dynamics of communication, socialization, and hierarchy between individuals. The features specific to digital technologies, such as instant messaging, social networks, and forums, not only make it possible to circumvent customary social norms but also to create new forms of power relations, often marked by the invisibility of the aggressors and the persistence of the violence suffered by the victims.[36]

Furthermore, the lack of sufficient digital security guarantees on platforms supporting victims of GBV can pave the way for serious forms of malicious behavior, such as identity theft. In this regard, a study conducted by Lisa Pointurier on cyberbullying in schools highlights particularly pernicious strategies of aggression: the perpetrator can impersonate the victim, publish hateful or sexual content in their name, or manipulate exchanges on messaging platforms to make others believe that the victim is the instigator.[37] This staging then leads to a wave of abusive and threatening messages directed at the targeted person, amplifying their isolation and psychological distress. There are many limitations, some of which are presented below.

   2. Social and human connections put to the test by technological dependence

   a. Excessive dependence on technology

Although digital tools are valuable for reporting violence, they cannot replace the human support needed to care for victims. Excessive dependence on technology can hinder the establishment of trusting relationships with healthcare professionals or psychologists. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this dependence, making it more difficult to access in-person support services at a time when domestic violence has been on the rise. While it is important to recognize the considerable potential of digital technologies in addressing social issues such as gender-based violence, their intensive and recurrent use can nevertheless have adverse effects, foremost among which is the phenomenon of dependence.[38] Indeed, excessive use of digital tools, although initially envisaged as a lever for empowerment and self-care, can paradoxically lead to social isolation or an altered relationship with others, particularly when the tool gradually replaces human interaction in support processes.

The Smart Use survey (2016), conducted in Belgium among 12-18-year-olds, reveals that 21.1% of young people surveyed consider themselves addicted to their smartphones, compared to 33.4% who consider themselves non-addicted, while 45.5% are ambivalent.[39] In France, data collected in 2016 indicate that two-thirds of individuals under the age of 35 recognize some form of dependence, and more than one-third of mobile users, regardless of age, say they are “addicted” and unable to part with their device.[40] These data suggest that the integration of technology into measures to combat GBV must be accompanied by a reflection on how it is used, to avoid the systematic replacement of human connection with digital channels.

   b. Rapid evolution of digital threats

The constant evolution of digital threats illustrates the ingenuity and adaptability of attackers, who exploit technological innovations to refine their methods of surveillance, harassment, or control. These increasingly complex forms of violence include the unauthorized use of images, hacking of personal data, geolocation without individuals’ knowledge, and cyberbullying. This dynamic requires the constant updating of both legal and technical protection measures, as well as ongoing training for those involved in supporting victims. On a larger scale, even states are not immune: cyberattacks can now compromise critical infrastructure, steal strategic data, or undermine democratic sovereignty, particularly by influencing electoral processes. These changes reveal a profound reconfiguration of digital threats, which are now rooted in economic, political, and geopolitical issues.[41] Beyond the challenges and limitations of digital technologies in the fight against GBV, it is equally important to open up new perspectives that can improve the use of these technologies in the fight against GBV.

   3. Digital technologies: between exclusion and social reconnection

For digital technologies to contribute effectively to the fight against GBV, it is crucial to take decisive action to see real change. A first lever for action is to strengthen digital inclusion by developing accessible infrastructure and promoting digital education, particularly for vulnerable populations and those in rural areas. While digital technologies are presented as tools that can be used in the fight against GBV and forms of social exclusion, it should be recognized that proficiency in these tools remains unevenly distributed among individuals, thus generating new forms of inequality.[42] These disparities, which predate the rise in visibility of GBV, have been extensively documented in studies on the digital divide. These studies emphasize that access to equipment and infrastructure is one of the determining factors of this divide, contributing to widening gaps between social groups.[43]

In addition, a second area for action is the security of digital platforms, through the integration of enhanced confidentiality protocols and the guarantee of effective protection of personal data. The digital environment is characterized by greater accessibility to data, which raises many questions about its legal status, the applicable regime, and its links to other fundamental rights.[44] In this context, the boundary between the private and public spheres is becoming increasingly blurred, fueling discussions around the concept of e-reputation or digital identity.[45] In light of these developments, data protection mechanisms must be reconsidered to respond to the social changes brought about by contemporary technological uses.

Thirdly, maintaining human support is just as essential, as the complementary nature of digital tools and face-to-face support mechanisms is an effective approach to ensuring holistic support for victims. The different ways in which individuals use digital technologies reflect varying degrees of exposure: some users adopt a moderate approach, favoring a balance between digital assistance and human support, while others tend to rely excessively on these tools, which can increase their vulnerability to the associated risks.[46] Furthermore, it should be noted that the effectiveness of the digital tools mentioned above depends on prior access to an Internet connection, which reinforces the importance of addressing digital inclusion and disparities in usage from a global perspective.

Conclusion

This study has highlighted the ambivalent role of digital technologies in relation to gender-based violence (GBV). On the one hand, digital tools can reinforce existing inequalities through unequal access, algorithmic biases, data exploitation, and the proliferation of online violence. These dynamics contribute to the reproduction of structural gender asymmetries, particularly affecting women and marginalized groups in contexts marked by social, economic, and digital divides. On the other hand, digital technologies also offer significant opportunities for prevention, protection, and empowerment. Mobile applications, data mapping, online awareness campaigns, and institutional digital strategies demonstrate the potential of technology as a lever for social change when embedded within inclusive and gender-sensitive frameworks.

Ultimately, the impact of digitalization on GBV is not determined by technology itself, but by the political, legal, and social choices that govern its design and use. Addressing gender-based violence in the digital age, therefore, requires a multidimensional approach that combines technological innovation, robust regulatory frameworks, intersectional gender analysis, and strong institutional commitment. Only by aligning digital development with principles of equity, accountability, and human rights can digital technologies effectively contribute to the prevention of GBV and the promotion of social justice.

[1] WHO, “Violence against women,” 2021, https://www.who.int/fr/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women. Accessed July 9, 2024.

[2] “With 2.6 billion people still offline in 2023, the decline in the number of people worldwide without Internet access continues,” International Telecommunication Union (ITU), September 2023, https://www.itu.int/fr/mediacentre/Pages/PR-2023-09-12-universal-and-meaningful-connectivity-by-2030.aspx#:~:text=Cette%20baisse%20par%20rapport%20aux,personnes%2C%20est%20d%C3%A9sormais%20en%20ligne.   Accessed September 7, 2024.

[3] Isabelle Hare and Aurélie Olivesi, “Analyzing cyberviolence through the lens of gender,” Questions de communication, Open Edition Journals, 2022,  http://journals.openedition.org/questionsdecommunication/27108. Accessed April 11, 2025.

[4] “How Maps Are Preventing Female Genital Cutting” Minidocumentary, AJ+, 2017 (YouTube), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_XF436QWMg&t=31s. Accessed November 22, 2025.

[5] Council of Europe, Explanatory Report of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence, 2011, https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016800d38c9. Accessed September 7, 2024.

[6] Martha Nussbaum and Amartya Sen, The Quality of Life (Oxford University Press, 1993), https://academic.oup.com/book/9949. Accessed November 4, 2025.

[7] Judy Wajcman, TechnoFeminism, (Polity Press, 2004),  https://monoskop.org/images/a/ae/Wajcman_Judy_TechnoFeminism_2004.pdf. Accessed April 11, 2025.

[8] Virginia Eubanks, Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor (Saint Martin’s Press, 2018), https://tetrazolelover.at.ua/virginia_eubanks-automating_inequality-how_high-te.pdf. Accessed April 11, 2025.

[9] Caroline Criado Perez, Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men, Librairie des femmes, 2020, https://www.librairie-des-femmes.fr/livre/9781784706289-invisible-women-exposing-data-bias-in-a-world-designed-for-men-caroline-criado-perez/. Accessed April 11, 2025.

[10] Safiya Umoja Noble, Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism (New York University Press, 2019,) https://files.commons.gc.cuny.edu/wp-content/blogs.dir/6105/files/2019/01/SAFIYA-NOBLE.pdf.   Accessed April 11, 2025.

[11] Virginia Eubanks, Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor.

[12] Judy Wajcman, TechnoFeminism.

[13] “Feasibility and Acceptability of Mobile and Remote Service Delivery,” International Rescue Committee, 2018,

https://gbvresponders.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Research-brief-_-Feasibility-and-Acceptability-of-Mobile-and-Remote-Service-Delivery_-French_final.pdf. Accessed September 24, 2024.

[14] Ibid., p.6.

[15] “The “protection for all” mobile app is finally available,” 2024, https://www.protectionpourtous.ci/detail-actualite/263-l-application-mobile-protection-pour-tous-enfin-disponible. Accessed September 24, 2024.

[16] Law 103-13 on violence against women, https://www.chambredesrepresentants.ma/sites/default/files/103-13-fr.pdf. Accessed November 4, 2025.

[17] Council of Europe, “Preventing gender-based violence,” https://www.coe.int/fr/web/gender-matters/prevention-of-gender-based-violence. Accessed September 27, 2024.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Laboratoire Junior visage, “Vivacité des recherches sur les violences fondées sur le genre : la création du laboratoire junior “VisaGe”” Cairn info, 2019, p. 5., https://shs.cairn.info/revue-mouvements-2019-3-page-67?lang=fr. Accessed September 27, 2024.

[20] UNITED NATIONS POPULATION FUND, Report on the sixth Gabon/UNFPA cooperation program, “Gender Equity and Equality” component, 2016, p. 7., https://gabon.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/Version%20finale%20Rapport%20Enquete%20Nationale%20VBG.pdf. Accessed September 27, 2024.

[21] Zeynep Tufekci, Twitter and Tear Gas. The Power and Fragility of Networked Protest (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017), https://d-nb.info/124031910X/34. Accessed April 11, 2025.

[22] “Sector-Specific Program Elements,” Combating Gender-Based Violence Through Technology Programs, Sophie Read-Hamilton and members of CARE-GBV, 2022, p. 9., https://makingcents.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Technology_accessible_FR.pdf. Accessed October 14, 2024.

[23] Ibid., P. 10.

[24] Rodideal Anda, “Thomas TUFTE (2018), Communication and Social Change,” Communication 37, no. 1, 2020,

http://journals.openedition.org/communication/12033. Accessed April 11, 2025.

[25] Ibid.

[26] “Sector-Specific Program Elements,” Combating Gender-Based Violence Through Technology Programs, Sophie Read-Hamilton and members of CARE-GBV, p. 10.

[27] Nancy J. Hafkin and Sophia Huyer, “Women and Gender in ICT Statistics and Indicators for Development,” Information Technologies and International Development 4, no. 2 (2007): pp. 25-41,

 https://itidjournal.org/index.php/itid/article/download/254/254-590-2-PB.pdf   accessed on 04/11/2025.

[28] World Bank: https://www.banquemondiale.org/fr/news/immersive-story/2024/03/05/global-digitalization-in-10-charts. Accessed April 12, 2025.

[29] Ibid.

[30] Adel BEN YOUSSEF, “les quatre dimensions de la fracture numérique,” cairn info, 2004, p. 5.

https://shs.cairn.info/revue-reseaux1-2004-5-page-181?lang=fr. Accessed April 12, 2025.

[31] Ibid., p. 6.

[32] Kouassi Sylvestre Kouakou, “Fracture numérique : essai de définition et regard critique sur quelques stratégies déployées pour sa réduction en Afrique de l’Ouest francophone,” HAL open Science, 2017, p. 6, https://auf.hal.science/hal-01591752/document. Accessed April 12, 2025.

[33] 2023 Roadmap for the Global Partnership for Action on Gender-Based Online Harassment and Abuse, March 28, 2023, https://www.state.gov/2023-roadmap-for-the-global-partnership-for-action-on-gender-based-online-harassment-and-abuse/. Accessed November 24, 2024.

[34] UNITED NATIONS POPULATION FUND, “Technology-facilitated Gender-based Violence,” https://www.unfpa.org/TFGBV. Accessed November 24, 2024.

[35] Julien Berthaud and Catherine Blaya, “Pratiques numériques, perception de la violence en ligne et victimation chez les étudiants,” HAL open science, 2018, p. 3, https://shs.hal.science/halshs-01133828/document. Accessed April 12, 2025.

[36] Ibid.

[37] Lisa Pointurier, “Le (cyber)harcèlement : connaissances et modes d’actions des élèves et des enseignants face au (cyber)harcèlement,” HAL open science, 2024, p. 18, https://dumas.ccsd.cnrs.fr/dumas-04843675v1/file/POINTURIER_Lisa_svt_2024.pdf. Accessed April 4, 2025.

[38] Digital technology’s complex role in facilitating and responding to gender-based violence among (Im)migrants: A scoping review, Faculty of Medicine,” Center for Gender and Sexual Health Equity, University of British Columbia, 2024, https://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/society-societe/community-communite/ifca-iac/evidence_briefs-donnees_probantes/gbv-vfg/bhuyan-fra.aspx?utm. Accessed December 4, 2025.

[39] Marie-Pierre Fourquet-Courbet et Didier Courbet, “Anxiété, dépression et addiction liées à la communication numérique,” Revue française des sciences de l’information et de la communication, 11 | 2017, http://journals.openedition.org/rfsic/2910. Accessed April 12, 2025.

[40] Ibid.

[41] Philippe Wolf, “Les menaces numériques aujourd’hui,” Cairn info, 2015, https://shs.cairn.info/revue-securite-et-strategie-2010-1-page-44?lang=fr. Accessed April 12, 2025.

[42] Léa Cauchard et Gilles N’Goala, “L’inclusion numérique : se rapprocher de l’usager pour des stratégies plus efficaces,” HAL open science, 2022, p.5, https://hal.science/hal-03544579/document. Accessed April 14, 2025.

[43] Ibid.

[44] Gohar Galustian, “La protection des données personnelles à l’épreuve du numérique,” Cairn info, 2018, p. 3,

https://droit.cairn.info/revue-revue-du-droit-public-2018-5-page-1389?lang=fr  accessed on 14/04/2025.

[45] Ibid.

[46] Sandra Juneau et Joane Martel, “La “cyberdépendance” : un phénomène en construction,” Cairn info, 38(3), 2014, p. 18, file:///C:/Users/keny/Downloads/la-cyberdependance-un-phenomene-en-construction.pdf. Accessed April 16, 2025.