REVISTA CHILENA VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26 • DOI 10.5354/0719-2584.2021.

60730
DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA RECIBIDO: 7/1/2021 • APROBADO: 25/11/2022 • PUBLICADO: 31/12/2022

DOCTRINA

The digital divide in Brazil and the accessibility

as a fundamental right
La brecha digital en Brasil y la accesibilidad como derecho fundamental

Emerson Gabardo
Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná and Federal University of Paraná, Brazil

Ana Cristina Aguilar Viana and Olga Lúcia Castreghini de Freitas

Federal University of Paraná, Brazil

ABSTRACT The research analyses digital inequality in Brazil. We are based on official
indicators, in addition to the literature on the subject. We argue that tackling the digital
divide by general data alone can result in generic conclusions and, consequently, inef-
fective proposals. We propose that the particularities of individuals, together with their
place of residence, have a significant impact on the identification of inequality. We col-
lect research on digital accessibility and social exclusion. The results demonstrate the
increase in access to information technologies in Brazil until 2018. However, we have
identified unequal digital access. The article concludes that digital accessibility must
be understood as a fundamental right in Brazil to demand specific public policies to
reverse the situation.

KEYWORDS Brazilian digital divide, development, digital exclusion, digital accessibil-

ity, fundamental right to digital accessibility.

RESUMEN Esta investigación analiza el problema de la desigualdad digital en Brasil. Nos

basamos en indicadores oficiales y literatura sobre el tema. Sostenemos que abordar la
brecha digital solo con datos generales puede dar lugar a conclusiones genéricas y, en con-
secuencia, propuestas ineficaces. Proponemos que las particularidades de los individuos,
junto con su lugar de residencia, tienen un impacto significativo en la identificación de la
desigualdad. Recopilamos investigaciones sobre accesibilidad digital y exclusión social.
Los resultados demuestran el aumento del acceso a las tecnologías de la información en
Brasil hasta 2018. Sin embargo, hemos identificado un acceso digital desigual. El artículo
concluye que la accesibilidad digital debe entenderse como un derecho fundamental en
Brasil para exigir políticas públicas específicas para revertir la situación.

1
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

PALABRAS CLAVE Brecha digital brasileña, desarrollo, exclusión digital, accesibilidad

digital, derecho fundamental a la accesibilidad digital.

Introduction

In 2014, in an interview for the British network British Broadcasting Corporation-

BBC, Stephen Hawking presented the following statement: “The development of to-
tal artificial intelligence could mean the end of the human race”.1 Nevertheless, the
consequences of new technologies are, for now, immeasurable. In other words, the
finitude’s prediction of the humans in the face of its substitution by artificial intelli-
gence – AI, as pointed out by Hawking, is in the field of probabilities. Nobody knows
how the convergence of the offline world to the online world will result.
The debate about the future of the world due to the digital transition is fascina-
ting. However, the fourth industrial revolution’s fleet emergence already reveals posi-
tive and negative aspects with tangible consequences. Mentions of more transparent
governments (Future of Life Institute, 2015), real-time connections, provision, and
purchase of online services embody the positive side. On the other flank, privations
and violent extremism represent some of the subtraction situations that emerge (Ki-
yindou, 2019).
Thus, the digital divide emerges as one of the biggest concerns. For no other rea-
son, the number of studies on the subject increase, seeking to observe, identify, and
analyse the development of a gap in the digital world, its equivalence, and correlation
with offline exclusion.
The digital transformation and its inequality concern more in developing coun-
tries, given their substantial inequality in the offline world. Plus, although there is
no doubt about inequality in the digital universe, most studies compare countries or
macro-regions in a panoramic way.
Hence, we argue that looking solely at the gap for general data can result in pri-
mary conclusions and, consequently, ineffective proposals. Therefore, the paper aims
to examine the digital divide in Brazil, identifying the scenario in which it unfolds in
the country. We analyse data and indexes carried out by research institutes, as well
as conclusions from the literature on the subject. From the results identified on the
status of digital divide in Brazil, we propose legal tools and policies that can reduce
inequality and offer directives that assist in promoting digital equality in the country.

1. Rory Cellan-Jones, “Stephen Hawking: Inteligência artificial pode destruir a humanidade”, BBC
News, 2 December 2014, available at https://bbc.in/3hTgUCu.

2
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

The digital transformation: Strengths and weaknesses

During the 18th Century, the Modern State hosted the first industrial revolution,
which profoundly impacted the economy and society. For a century, the model or-
ganization has modified from manufacturing to the machine. It required constant
adaptation, as employment eradication, urbanization, among others. Similarly, the
second and third industrial revolutions also brought structural changes in economic,
political, and social systems.
History, therefore, has demonstrated the correlation between technology’s emer-
gence with other structures (Fukuyama, 2014: 155). Joseph Schumpeter (1988) had
already explained that a technological innovation inaugurates a rupture in the eco-
nomic system, breaking with the State of equilibrium and promoting the alteration
of production patterns. Subsequently, Christensen and Raynor (2003: 32-40), dealing
with digital technological issues, agreed that a disruptive innovation occurs through
a process in which it rises quickly, with the possibility of surpassing other established
competing technologies.
The digital technologies are revolutionizing the economy, politics, and the pro-
duction of knowledge. Entitled as Revolution 4.0, it constitutes the progressive trans-
mutation of the analogue to the virtual world. Its main characteristics are speed,
amplitude, and depth, in addition to the systemic impact. Indeed, information te-
chnology (IT) has transformed the domains of individual and community life: eco-
nomic structures, politics, and administration, communication, socialization, work,
and leisure. They are search engines, social networks, robotic factories, intelligent di-
gital assistants, autonomous cars and airplanes, systems that speak, understand, and
translate the language. IT provides excellent opportunities for individuals and com-
munities. They bring economic development, promote education, build knowledge,
improve public administration, and support cooperation (Sartor, 2017: 1).
However, IT carries risks among those, unemployment, and social alienation.
They amplify productivity and the demand for jobs that require creativity and pro-
blem-solving skills that cannot yet be done by machines. On the other hand, other
activities can be excluded or performed by the machine. Still, the rapid formation
of this expansion is marked by inequality since the digital universe’s opportunities
are not equally accessible to all (Arretche, 2019). Today, internet giants like Google
control large amounts of data, which are not accessible to individuals and public ad-
ministrations and small economic operators, who are always at a disadvantage (Sar-
tor, 2017: 1).
Surveillance is another risk pointed out by the literature (Timan, Galic & Koops,
2017; Zuboff, 2015; Mhalla, 2019). Technologies make it possible to monitor public
authorities and private actors. Hardware and software record human behaviour tra-
ces, allowing various data relating to the same person to be extracted from different

3
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

places and added to their profiles. The nudging in turn (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008),
fosters individuals with certain types of interests. IT use information from people
and assess their behaviour, according to criteria possibly unknown to them, and
make decisions that affect them. As human action takes place in IT-based environ-
ments, it is influenced and can be governed by IT (Sartor, 2017).
It is also possible to use information recorded in computer systems to distinguish
and discriminate individuals, classifying them in stereotypes without considering
their real identity. One can also consider a person’s characteristics in a derogatory
way, which may imply different treatment concerning individuals, employment, ac-
cess to business, and social opportunities. In other words, it also contributes to so-
cial problems, as it reinforces inequalities and structural prejudices by perpetuating
gender inequalities by threatening jobs (Dormoy & El Khatib, 2019). Thus, there are
positive and negative consequences of digital transformation.
In the context of academic discussions, there is a conceptual transition from the
vision of digital divide to that of digital inequality, to which the present text is affilia-
ted. According to the OECD, the term digital divides “refers to the gap between in-
dividuals, households, businesses, and geographic areas at different socio-economic
levels with regard both to their opportunities to access information and communica-
tion technologies (ICTs) and to their use of the Internet for a wide variety of activities.
The digital divide reflects differences among and within countries” (OECD, 2001: 5).
Thus, the digital divide allows to segment society in a binary way, that is, who has
(haves) or who does not (haves-not) access to the new ICTs. It is, therefore, a techno-
logical gap whose manifestation can occur on the scale of the individual, the home or
the company and the territory (neighbourhoods, cities, regions, or countries).
Dupuy, when dealing with the digital divide, states that “It is the dynamic develo-
pment of NICTs (and not just the Internet) that creates the divide between those who
appropriate the latest technologies and those who do not” (Dupuy, 2007: 19). It is the
set of technologies that produce exclusion and not just the Internet.
Discussions have recently moved on to another perspective, which decouples ac-
cess inequality from digital inequality. Stiakakis, Kariotellis and Vlachopoulou, point
out that the digital divide manifests itself internally to the population that has access
to the Internet, either in relation to the material conditions that result in differences
in terms of quality of access and cost of the connection, or in relation to the skills that
each must use this new form of communication (Stiakakis, Kariotellis & Vlachopou-
lou, 2009: 48)
Such transformations are one of the pillars of global society and, despite reaching
all countries indistinctly, they do not spread internally through the same conditions.
There is a profound difference in access and use of IT when looking at developed and
developing countries. In these, access to information and communication techno-
logies are exclusive, insofar as they reproduce the previous economic patterns, that

4
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

is, IT is established on a social basis with profound differences, whether in relation

to access to networks that favour the expansion of system, which are not evenly dis-
tributed across space, especially in cities, either through access to objects capable of
promoting connectivity.
It is evident that new technologies and digital inclusion are important as mecha-
nisms to foster development (Friedrich & Philippi, 2020). So, it is necessary to reflect
on the new dimension of inequality in developing countries, more specifically, on
how this new dimension of exclusion occurs, that is, the digital divide.

Digital divide data and indicators in Brazil

We examine official information and studies carried out on Brazilian IT’s usance and
social inequality to this goal. This data assembling offered a description, which pre-
sents the results collected by the research instituted. According to a survey carried
out by The Network Readiness Index (NRI), a important global indices proceeding
impact of information and communication technology (ICT) throughout the world,
Brazil ranks 59th in a ranking of 121 countries in terms of internet access conditions
– including among the ten countries in the world with a most significant number of
disconnected populations (Portulands Institute, 2020).
According to a United Nations index, Brazil ranks 54th in terms of countries pro-
viding electronic government. The Survey assesses the development status of the di-
gital government of United Nations Member States, ranking countries to each other.
It measures the digital government’s effectiveness in providing public services and
identifies digital development patterns and performance patterns (UNCTAD, 2021).
The overview pointed by United Nations shows Brazil at the group “Very high” in
e-government. Nevertheless, regarding global analysis, Brazil lost degrees in compa-
rison of last report, hold in 2018, when it was ranked 44th in terms of e-government.
The same happened relating e-participation, that was before at 12th country, and in
2020 appeared only at 18th.
The digital divide proposes to denominate disparities access of individuals in
information technologies. Report of the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development – UNCTAD details that half of the world population does not have
access to the internet. According to the report’s data, the USA and China concentra-
ted digital’s economy, while the rest of the world consume the products produced by
big companies. Though digital revolution has fetched countless benefits, these only
remained for a small number of individuals (UNCTAD, 2021).
According UNCTAD report, in developing countries, significant differences bet-
ween rural and urban areas and men and women remain. The reports conclude that
the digital revolution will positively transform developing nations if digital resour-
ces personify accessible manner to all masses (UNCTAD, 2021). UNCTAD’s report

5
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

shows also that the digital divide amid developed and developing remains elevated
and constitutes a constant challenge for development (UNCTAD, 20211).
The 2021 Report focused in digital data flows and disclosure data core as evolving
new digital technologies, as artificial intelligence (AI), blockchain, Internet of Things
(IoT), cloud computing and other Internet-based services (UNCTAD). The report
shows the relevance of a well development of these technologies, which affects digital
divide. Nevertheless, specifies studies are missing in Brazil about it. Besides, the pur-
pose of the present research leads analysing geodemographic and intersectional data
of digital technology.

Intersectional and geodemographic data to digital inequality

The panoramic prospect of inequality is relevant, but insufficient. It is impossible to

include all developing countries in the same category and hence conclude the need
for minorities’ attention. Inequality is due to economic, social, and political issues,
and the particularities of individuals such as their race, ethnicity, gender, social class,
together with their place of residence and work, accept a significant impact on the
identification of the inequality. That is, intersectional and geodemographic conside-
rations are necessary to assess the exclusion framework.
For intersectionality, we adopt Helena Hirata’s definition. She considers intersec-
tionality as the interdependence of power, race, gender, and class relations (Hirata,
2014). Thus, we argue that examining digital divide must be done by paying attention
to the connective relationship between gender, class and besides, the issue of terri-
torial space where exclusion occurs is relevant, whether in rural or urban areas and
in which region of the country and its relationship with economic and social cha-
racteristics. Hence for an adequate assessment of the status of digital divide in Brazil
and possible indications of instruments to be used, it is necessary to examine more
specific digital accessibility elements and social inequality.

General data of access and use of internet in Brazil

As Brazilian specific research, Household Information Technology Research, carried

out by the Regional Centre for Studies for the Development of the Information So-
ciety (CETIC), brings data on Brazilians’ consumption and digital accessibility. To
enable comparison of its results, CETIC follows methodological specifics standards
and indicators. The study adopts the guidelines of the multisectoral initiative Part-
nership on Measuring ICT for Development, headed by the International Telecom-
munications Union (ITU). The main reference for the indicators is the manual for
Measuring ICT Access and Use by Households and Individuals of the International
Telecommunication Union (ITU).

6
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

The survey’s units of analysis are households and individuals 10 years of age or
older. The sampling plan uses information from the Demographic Census and the
National Household Sample Survey (PNAD) or the most recent Continuous National
Household Sample Survey (PNADC) available, conducted by the Brazilian Institute
of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). Interviews were conducted in person, in house-
holds located in urban and rural areas. The survey results are stratified and conglo-
merated at various stages depending on the fields of interest for the dissemination
of results.
The 2019 report –hold before Covid pandemic– reveals that 126.9 million people
used the internet in 2018, with an increasing number from 67% to 70% Brazilians
accessing the network from the last report. The urban sphere points out that 74% of
people are connected to the internet, while 49% in the rural area. Concerning social
class,2 48% of classes D and E connect, which corresponds to 46.5 million households
with access. The cellphone represents a significant way of connection: 97% of the
people who connect to the internet in the country use this device, while the number
who consume by computer is 43%.
In rural areas, 77% of Internet consumers use the internet via cellphones, while
only 20% by computer. Due to a lack of structure, 43% of rural schools do not have
access to the internet. Still, 44% of the interviews in rural areas reveal that the reason
to not access is due to the lack of possibility.
In the rural area, the percentage of women using the internet (41.95%) is higher
than men. There are also differences between the rural and urban areas regarding the
unavailability of services due to not using the internet (12.9% in the rural area, and
1.7% in the urban area) (IBGE, 2018).
Concerning socio-economic aspects, the research reveals that almost all people in
classes A (92%) and B (91%) consume the internet, a number detached from those in
classes D and E, whose number was less than half (48%). There was growth in access in
recent years, from 30% in 2015 to 48% in 2018, representing an increase of 24.6 million
internet users in the period. However, individuals in the DE classes use the internet
less and mostly through cell phones, which shows disparities with B and C (CGI.br/
NIC, 2019). In 2018, regarding the educational aspect, 95% of people with higher edu-
cation access the internet. In turn, only 57% of those who completed only elementary
education utilise the service. The data also shows issues related to the network access
infrastructure, notably concerning inequalities between the country’s most remote
regions, which affects an individual’s consumption (CGI.br/NIC.br, 2019).

2. In Brazil, there are two criteria for assessing social class. The Social Class by the New Brazil Crite-
rion (ABEP) is more used, as it uses household characteristics to differentiate the population (comfort,
education level of people). IBGE uses the criterion by minimum wage bands, which is more straight-
forward and is divided from class A (highest) to class E (lowest) (Rodrigo, 2020).

7
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

The Annual Continuous Household Sample Survey of the Brazilian Institute of

Geography and Statistics – IBGE Points out that while 80.1% of the urban population
use the internet, the number in the rural area is 41%.3 Although it is said that there
was an increase from one year to another (from 33% to 41%), it is a timid growth con-
sidering, as it represents half the value of people connected in the urban environment
(IBGE, 2018).
The indicators of the study shows the reasons given by people for not using the in-
ternet. The numbers indicate the internet price in 60 out of 100% of the interviewees
in the urban area and 65 in the rural area.
The use of broadband also varies when examining the states of the federation.
Less people reported using broadband in the North region (only 44%). Other regions
ranked 57% at Northeast, 69% South, 66% southeast, and 57% centre-west.
The Center changed the methodology in the year 2020. Due to the onset of the
Covid pandemic, face-to-face collection was restricted. An internationally recom-
mended best practice was to replace face-to-face collection with telephone collection
(CATI). The effective sample was conducted with 3,979 respondent households and
a 7% response rate on telephone interview data collection. Face-to-face interviews
were conducted, with an effective sample of 1,611 respondent households, that had a
72% rate response. Summary, the sample was smaller, which brought larger margins
of error.
The report shows a very unstable collection scenario due to the socioeconomic
impacts of the pandemic. However, according to CETIC, the difference in the so-
cial class profile of the sample remains, even after the corrections and weighting
strategies adopted.
Nevertheless, the Center’s main results shows an increase of household’s access,
reaching 83% of Brazil’s population. Another positive result lie on fixed broadband,
that had become the main type of internet connection (69%.) There is also more
households with a computer (45%) in the country. Regarding internet use, it was
observed an increase in the proportion of users (81%). The total number of internet
users in Brazil reached 152 million. Summary, the new report shows a growing aspect
of internet use by Brazilian population, including rural area.
Comparison between years displays other differences. The research observed im-
portant access increase in terms of classes. If in the last report, hold in 2018, people on
class C that used internet reached 76%, in 2020 the number increased to 91%. Clas-
ses D/E went from 40% to 64%, a very significant increase. There was also a greater

3. According to the report, the methodology uses “information from the Demographic Census and
the National Household Sample Survey; both carried out by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and
Statistics (IBGE). The interviews are conducted in person, in households in urban and rural areas (from
2009)”. More information at CETIC, 2019a.

8
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

increase in fixed broadband in DE class homes, from 62% to 69%. In addition, nine
out of ten providers made fiber optic available. The graphic bellow shows the results’
difference between 2019 and 2021 report.
The number of homes with computers also increased, particularly in urban areas
(50%). The percentage for rural area has remained low, with only 17% of the rural
population using the Internet via computer. Nevertheless, there was a significant in-
crease of internet use in rural areas, that was 49% of households in 2018 and in 2020
the number scored 67%.
Summarizing, the 81% total of internet use - raw - in 2020 are distributed as fo-
llows. Regarding area, 83% of urban population and 70% of rural; regarding gen-
der, 77% male and 85% female; regarding color/race white (81%), black (80%), brown
(83%); regarding education level, higher 96%, middle 92% and elementary 73%; regar-
ding age group 50% of the population over 60 years old uses internet. Finally, social
classes, class A (99%); B (97%); C (85%); D/E (67%). Devices used, the majority with
99% cellphone.

Correlation between access, use, gender, region, and education

Aside from comparing data on Internet use and access over the years, which pre-
viously disclose important changes, correlations can also be established among the
variables indicated for the examination. Specifically, the relationship between class,
with region, gender, type of use and access. The purpose here, indeed, is to verify
whether by extracting specific data from the combination of these variables it is pos-
sible to identify less apparent results.
The overall raw numbers shows an improvement, but disparities in access remain.
The higher proportion of access can be defined in the higher classes, with more edu-
cation and younger people.
There is a relationship between the type of means used and the amount of income
regarding family income. For families whose income is one to two minimum wages,4
the majority use exclusively cell phones and only 17% of the computer. In families ear-
ning more than ten minimum wages, computer use rises to 31%, with the percentage
of cell phones and computers being 80%. Concerning social classes, in a population
whose family income is up to a minimum wage, 78% use only their cell phones, and
19% use computers and cell phones to access the internet (IBGE, 2018).
According to a study carried out by the Institute for Applied Economic Research –
IPEA, published in June 2019, the lack of access to the internet repeats adversities that
already exist in the socio-economic sphere. IPEA highlights the relationship between

4. Brazil’s minimum wage in January 2020 is R$ 1,039, an amount of approximately U$ 250.00 (depen-
ding on the exchange rate).

9
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

the cognitive aspects of individuals and access. The highly educated have the largest
access to the internet and, at the same time, possess the most significant aggregate
index of practices, in other words, those with greater understanding availability for
the digital world (IPEA, 2019).
Therefore, in addition to the data relating to digital accessibility itself, it is ne-
cessaire to examine reports that deal with inequality in the offline world. Thus, the
following data showed dealing with illiteracy and social inequalities in the offline
world. The purpose is to examine the correlation and similarity between the specific
results of digital divide with Brazilian social inequality.
IBGE data on education, study and sex, schooling rate, and illiteracy rate reveal
11.3 million illiterates in Brazil. Regarding illiteracy in Brazil, the rate in 2015 was 8.3%
for men and 7.7% for women. The distribution of people aged 25 and over, by age, gen-
der according to groups of years of study in Brazil, also reveals a similarity in gender.
Regarding the illiteracy rate by region, the numbers reveal much higher illiterates in
the North and Northeast states of the federation. While in several north-eastern sta-
tes, the index was between 12.9 to 17.2% of the illiterate population, in the south, the
average was between 2.5% and 5.0% (Gazeta do Povo, 2019).5
Annual Continuous Household Sample Survey (IBGE, 2018) reveals the persis-
tence of inequalities previously mentioned regarding regional, gender, colour, and
race issues. While women are more educated than men, whites have higher edu-
cation levels than blacks or browns, just as the North and Northeast regions have
a significantly higher illiteracy rate than the Central and South regions. Access to
education in the south is 53.6% of the population, while the number is 38.9% in the
Northeast. The number of whites who have access to education is 55.8%, while blacks
and browns 40.3% (IBGE, 2019a). Illiteracy still reaches 10.3% of older white people,
while the number is 27.5% of blacks and browns. Besides, although there has been
an improvement in illiteracy in Brazil, more than half of the population aged 25 and
over has not completed primary and compulsory education and has not completed
high school. In the Northeast, this percentage of people who have not completed high
school reaches 61.1% (IBGE, 2019a).
Therefore, the data indicates a similarity between the data collected on statistics
from the digital universe with the analogue universe.

Analysis of the results: What the data reveal

about the profile of the digital divide in Brazil

It is possible point out two approaches to studies on digital inequalities. The first,
behavioural and individual (Dimaggio & Garip, 2012), and the second, which un-

5. “Taxa de analfabetismo no Brasil”, Gazeta de Povo, 8 Marh 2019, available at https://bit.ly/3jsKCyK.

10
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

derstands that the root of inequalities is structural and systemic (Sampson, 2017).
The first is based on the first level inequalities, seeking to emphasise improving ac-
cess and, the second focuses on social structures such as gender, ethnicity, and social
condition. Such a perspective, therefore, shows that there is a distinction between a
black woman who lives in an economically homogeneous neighbourhood and with
adequate infrastructure from one who lives in a neighbourhood, although similar,
where there is widespread use of technologies by women (Helsper, 2019).
Behavioural and individual studies would be insufficient for this reason. Thus, the
author argues for a multi-level approach. Otherwise, only inequalities are reached at
the first level, proposing access mechanisms that will not bring substantial accessi-
bility. Therefore, it is necessary to go beyond individual aspects and observe social
and structural issues together with them, that is, intersectional and geodemographic
(Helsper, 2019).
The present work is in line with that indicated by the author, emphasizing the
data’s intersectional and geodemographic aspects. The examination of the studied
data provides essential information about the digital divide. It identifies a specific
picture of inequality: indicators geographic region, urban and rural region, race, eth-
nicity, gender, age, social, class, and form of use of IT. Regarding digital divide in
Brazil, the IPEA notes that, as a rule, socio-economic categorizations are associated
with digital content consumption or practices (IPEA, 2019).
As can be seen, Brazil has grown on the internet, from 70% to 81% of Brazilian
households connected between 2018 and 2020. However, access to IT does not occur
in a uniform and homogeneous manner in Brazil. The average number of accesses
hides relevant inequality. Though almost all people with higher education consume
the internet, the percentage of those who have primary education is lower. In this
regard, the data on social inequality revealed that although the number of illite-
racies in Brazil has decreased, more than half of the population has not primary
basic education.
Thus, it is possible to state a digital elite in Brazil, which corresponds to classes
A, B, and C. They use cell phones for access, but they also have broadband at home,
which places them in the first digital access level. Additionally, they have more educa-
tion, allowing more substantial access to the amenities offered over the internet. The
majority are white. Gender distinction is noticed by internet access but only when
comparing type of access (cell phone or computer). Thus, gender distinction can be
identified at this point.
The incidence of using cell phones in these areas is not irrelevant. Studies on di-
gital inequalities examine distinction concerning the benefits underuse of IT. Those
who traditionally have fewer social benefits are also less likely to have high quality
connected, which show distinction in the quality of consumption of these services,
even where there is access. Therefore, it is necessary to divide the potential access,

11
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

where infrastructure is available to access the devices, from the adequate access that
deals with the possession and personal use of the devices (Helsper, 2019).
As explained by Marta Arretche, the online mode’s more frequent use is related to
broadband, allowing greater exploitation of the network, promoting more possibili-
ties for jobs, economic activities, and civic engagement. On the other hand, when it
comes to mobile access such as smartphones, dial-up access, or even internet access
in public places, engagement is more limited. The quality of the use changes because
of that and implies consequences for consumption, thus modifying an initial view
that only the increased use of the internet corresponds, in fact, to greater accessibility.
In 2021 report, the comparison between cell phone usage and other variables is
interesting. 90% of the D/E class use the internet exclusively over the cell phone;
people with elementary school level this average is 81%; population from the Nor-
theast (72%); North (65%) and Midwest (53%); 62% of women, while 52% of men;
color: 48% white; 65% black and 60% mixed race.
It is not difficult to deduce that the use of internet exclusively through cell phones
reveals economic inequalities. Therefore, the result of the use of cell phones indicates
the digital inequality precisely demarcated in the country. The population at nor-
thern and northeastern regions, and people of classes D and E, have major incidence
in only using cell phones to access internet. In addition, specific use also reinforces
class and gender inequality. A relevant point, given that the raw data show a higher
percentage of women accessing the internet than men. In summary, there is a higher
incidence of internet use by women, but not in same conditions.
The data above also allows a profile of the Brazilian digital exclusion to be drawn.
It is a less favoured class “D and E,” rural area, or more remote regions, mainly in the
north and in the country’s northeast region. Besides, in rural areas and northeast re-
gions, a significant portion does not use the internet due to the high price or the lack
of infrastructure. Regarding the economic and social aspects, they are less educated,
have a fundamental level, but not a higher level. There is a higher incidence of brown
or black people, and a more significant number when paying attention to gender.
Moreover, as it turned out, broadband availability is distributed unevenly in the
Brazilian territory, which led Marta Arretche to consider that “patterns of access
close to Germany and India” coexist in the country. That is why the author points
out that digital technologies have not eliminated barriers in access and development
(Arretche, 2019).
Indeed, studies have already pointed out the relationship between digital and
social inequality (Schiefler, Cristóvam & Sousa, 2020). Likewise, historically econo-
mically, socially, and culturally disadvantaged people have less access to the digital
universe. The reasons for such disparities are to be found in matters relating to hou-
seholds, the individuals themselves, or in resources and status associated with them
in society (Helsper, 2019).

12
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

Examining the indices presented on digital accessibility, it is correct to conclude

the existence of two forms of territorial inequality, which separates the urban from
the rural and divides the country’s regions. The economic barrier has its highest in-
dex in the north-eastern and northern and rates. However, in these areas, the leading
cause is the lack of service provision or the service’s value to be provided. On the
other hand, in more affluent regions, it is possible to observe that the lack of digital
networks results from the individual’s own choice (Arretche, 2019).
Thus, this shows that internet users can be divided into first-class users, who have
an offer and use broadband and use it domestically, and second-class users who use
the internet through more limited means. According to the literature, the primary
condition of being in the first class is to use broadband at home. In other words,
internet access does not depend solely on the individual condition and potential. Its
location, the territory, has relevance and matters in internet access (Arretche, 2019).
It is not by chance that Tomás Wissenbach points out that the examination of the
differences between the federative units shows the existence of a digit which found
totter extent in the states with the highest income, such as São Paulo. The author also
explains that “the decision to offer services, such as broadband, for example, seems to
be more influenced by the average income of each jurisdiction (Wissenbach, 2019).
The digital elite incidence is higher in states like São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, and lower
in northern states, such as Pará.
However, as IPEA (2019) reasonably considers the relationship between digital
elites has deeper aspects, as it shows that they are structured by symbolic capitals,
which have their very rationality and a specific field, reflecting on a social distinc-
tion. On symbolic systems, Pierre Bourdieu listed them as instruments to legitimise
domination. The ruling classes are favoured. They disseminate social practices, which
enable them to realise the power. Such symbols are tools of social integration, and
they allow a consensus to be established on the social world, thus contributing to the
reproduction of the social order. The power is invisible and exercised when indivi-
duals do not want or are unaware of it (Bourdieu, 2000).
Instead of collaborating in development in the country, it can be inferred that
the digital transformation is corroborating the maintenance of inequalities, not only
of class but also of ethnicities, regions, and education. The reality of revolution 4.0
is creating a digital elite with access, almost globally depending on the region, and
social exclusion of half of the rural population, in the northern primary’s, of basic
education. In short, symbolic power is exercised through digital systems.

Legal propositions and public policies

The examination of the inequality indexes revealed a digital elite’s existence, with
most second-class Brazilian users at the access level, as they utilise tools with limited

13
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

capacities to enjoy the amenities and services that the online universe provides. For
this reason, digital geography in Brazil is marked by stratification, coinciding geo-
graphically, and in income. Therefore, the author argues that such results should be
engaged into account when distributing Internet use access in the country.
That highlights the need to promote policies focused on these inequalities. It is
necessary to integrate different legal measures (data protection, security, electronic
commerce, electronic documents) and public policies (addressing economic, poli-
tical, social issues, educational issues), as well as the involvement of different actors
(legislators, administrative authorities, technical experts, civil society) to guarantee
the opportunities (Wissenbach, 2019).
Due to the fast evolution of technologies, predicting details by the law is impossi-
ble. However, this does not exclude the possibility of regulation (Sartor, 2017). As Mar-
cus Duwell (2017) explains, jurists must examine the normative work to be developed
in the environment of new technologies, including, for this purpose, the content, and
institutions of human rights, which requires that effects be drawn up in this sense.
Therefore, given the existing picture of a digital elite and the exclusion of a ma-
jority from digital accessibility, the State’s role in digital world is to guarantee access
to the digital world for all. In this context, as Juan Corvalán warns, this is not a mere
adaptation to the digital experience, but the promotion of the fundamental right to
relate in the digital world and create an environment of technological preparation,
which is decisive in the development of inclusive technology (Corvalán, 2017).
Hence, universal, and integral accessibility to the digital world must be conside-
red a fundamental right. The defence of digital inclusion as a fundamental right in
the Brazilian legal system is not new. In 2011, an Amendment to the Constitution
(06/2011) proposal was presented, aiming to insert internet access among sole appro-
ved, but shelved due to the legislature’s end.
In 2013, a survey conducted at the Faculty of Law of the University of São Pau-
lo proposed that digital inclusion should be considered a fundamental right. At the
time, the reasons outlined were that citizens would be able to access through access
to the digital universe, pointing out that more than 80% of Brazilians did not have
access to the internet. The study emphasised promoting specific public policies, min-
dful of economic exclusion, that is, people who cannot afford to buy a computer
would suffer digital inclusion (USP, 2013).
When the study was conducted, the historical exclusion was mentioned, which
would correspond to the group formed by black women like those who would suffer
the most. It is currently clear that, although there has been a significant change in
the number of people who access the internet, digital inequalities remain and are not
related only to individual issues, but also geographic ones. Even though there was a
university defence for considering digital inclusion as a fundamental right, its stan-
dardization is not yet a reality.

14
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

In 2014, with the Marco Civil da Internet, Law no. 12,965/2014, which establishes
principles, guarantees, rights, and duties for the use of the Internet in Brazil, expressly
highlighted in article 7 that: “Access to the internet is essential to the exercise of citi-
zenship”. Among the rights guaranteed to users are, in item IV, the non-suspension of
the internet connection, except for a direct debit resulting from its use; and in item
V, maintaining the contracted quality of the internet connection. They are standards.
Therefore, that reinforces the right to digital accessibility and seeks to protect IT use
quality by users.
Following this intelligence, Bill n. 3883/2019, pending in the Federal Senate, aims
to amend Law 12,965/2014 and Law 9,472, of 16 July 1997, which provides for tele-
communications services, the creation, and operation of a regulatory body, and
others institutional aspects. With the text, which alters art. 7 of Law 12.965/2014, it is
proposed to ensure “users with continuous and free access to digital public services
considered essential, including service plans with deductibles. It allows the Fund’s
resources for the Universalization of Telecommunications Services (Fust) to be used
to finance public policies for digital inclusion, for the massification of access to servi-
ces of collective interest provided in a private regime, and for access to digital public
services considered essential.
However, they do not indicate what digital public services goods would be consi-
dered essential, which should be defined by a specific regulation. The bill also alters
art. 3 of Law 9.998/1997 to establish a Fund for the Universalization of Telecommu-
nication Services (FUST) with the purpose of “covering a portion of the cost attribu-
table to the fulfilment of the obligations for the universalization of telecommunica-
tion services provided in a single regime that cannot be recovered with exploration
efficiency of services, as well as financing public policies aimed at promoting digital
inclusion, in addition to mass access to services of collective interest provided in a
private regime and subsidizing access to public services considered essential.
The bill’s initial basis is based on access to information, considered as a funda-
mental right, in Article 5, XXXIII, of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees all
citizens the right to receive information of public interest from public bodies. The
project itself clarifies that the fundamental right to access information was regulated
by Law 12.527/2011,6 which made collective information of interest on the internet
mandatory. Digital divide is pointed out in the project, with the information that 90%
of the connected people are from classes A and B.
Otherwise, there was no examination of the indexes brought by IBGE, which,

6. According to Eneida Desiree Salgado and Tarso Cabral Violin, “The objectives of the Law are three-
fold: 1. the right to truth and memory and the documents of the dictatorship; 2. the fight against patri-
monialism and personalism in Public Administration; and 3. the social control of legal entities under
private law that receives public funds” (Salgado & Violin, 2015).

15
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

together with those of IPEA, also shed light on Brazil’s digital divide. The project in-
tents to ensure continuous and free access to public services considered essential and
extend to service plans with franchises, which will not be able to discount the volume
of data contracted by users. At this point, it aims not to discount data deductibles,
such a service is provided for the use of mobile internet, by cell phone. However, as
seen in the research results, the most relevant policy measure in the Brazilian case
does not lie in mobiles, but the insertion of instruments so that excluded geographic
and social layers can enjoy the domestic broadband internet.
Report from the ICT Households still reveals the absence of full internet online
use by cell phones, as there are still relevant limitations concerning the implementa-
tion of activities that require a greater traffic capacity, which highlights the need to
offer mobile networks with an accessible price to certain layers, or even free internet
in certain situations. Also, the government needs to adapt to electronic sites so that
the mobile device views them. The ICT Electronic Government Survey was clear in
showing that less than half of city halls provided mobile versions of their pages. The-
refore, initiatives focused on cell phones must be adopted.
As noted, the bill focuses on the spread of services considered essential and gua-
rantees the universality of public digital services. It is a measure that brings progress
and a political measure that, if implemented, can reduce the digital divide. However,
it is insufficient, as the country’s focus should be digital accessibility as universal for
all services provided, whether public or private. To allow or guarantee only a portion
of services and still only by cellular data more significantly more significant distinc-
tion between those who are considered first-class and those who are second class.
That may imply an increase in the digital elite, which already exists in Brazil and
results, as seen, not only from access to the internet but mainly from the way it uses
the internet.
Some say, like Vinton Cerf, that internet access is not a human right. He argues,
therefore, that the best way to characterise human rights is to identify the results of
what one tries to guarantee. According to him, internet access would serve to guaran-
tee freedom of expression and access to information, but that such rights would not
necessarily depend on this medium.7 Although the article was written in 2012, it is not
difficult to contradict that, since then, it is clear that access to the internet does not
only bring these to guarantees but is the essential means for exercising an individual’s
citizenship in a digital society. Consider the paradigmatic case of the conversion
from face-to-face education to distance education, due to the Covid-19 pandemic - a
clear demonstration that access to the internet is, in itself, a right. Moreover, the fact
of being a right that allows access to other rights does not remove its substantive

7. Vinton Cerf, “Internet access is not a human right”, 4 January 2012, available a https://nyti.
ms/3FWWArK.

16
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

autonomy. After all, there are no rights that are more common than the connection
between rights. Education is hardly accomplished without health or mobility, but
health and mobility are still fundamental due to their instrumental character.
Nevertheless, internet access is already considered a human right. In 2016, the
United Nations published regulations on the inclusion of digital accessibility in the
list of human rights (CETIC, 2019a). The 2030 agenda for sustainable development
contemplates universal access to information as one of the pillars. In 2015 the Dyna-
mic Coalition for Internet Rights and Principles published the Internet Charter of
Rights and Principles (Sartor, 2017). The values set out in the Charter are freedom,
dignity, and equality. This understanding reinforced academics to consider digital
accessibility as a universal right.
Scholars also defend accessibility as a human right. For Giovani Sartor, the right
to access the internet is an essential aspect of freedom; and the right to access the
internet is an essential aspect of freedom. According to him, blocking a person’s ac-
cess to the internet represents a serious interference with freedom, which also affects
private life and communication, as well as participation in politics and culture. The
author explains that the Charter of Human Rights and Principles for the Internet
requires governments to respect the right to access the internet and to protect and
fulfil that right, supporting it through measures aimed at guaranteeing the quality
of service and freedom of choice of software and hardware systems to overcome the
digital divide (Sartor, 2017).
Alain Kiyindou (2019) ponders about human accessibility, which corresponds
to the freedom for all to access digital resources. The law must be universal, which
means adapt the tool and infrastructure to each category of a person without distinc-
tion. Tim Berners-Lee and Harry Halpin (2012) start from the perception that each
growth in technology and the advent of a new one increases the disparity between
those who have access and those who do not. Still, they clarify that defining what
comes to be a natural right is a human decision, which demonstrates the possibility
of including digital accessibility as a fundamental right.
Thus, given that full digital access is already considered a human right, it must
be accepted in the Brazilian legal system as a fundamental right. The Constitution
states that Brazil must choose human rights as a preference in art. 4, III. In addition
to universalism, the Constitution accepted the indivisibility and interdependence of
human rights, ratifying treaties on civil, political, cultural, and economic issues. Also,
there is a filtering of the law, which provides that the other norms of the order must
be compatible with the system of protection of human rights.
This filtering aims, among others, to choose the interpretation according to the
human rights of a specific norm, and to demand that public policies put as effective
human rights that were established in the Constitution. The second paragraph of art.
5 of the Constitution establishes that fundamental rights are not exhaustive. New

17
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

rights may be incorporated into the legal system, with support for its consideration
as a human right. Therefore, as a universal human rights category, digital accessibility
can be accepted as a fundamental right with immediate applicability.
The legal nature of the fundamental right to complete and universal digital ac-
cessibility must be considered globally. As Daniel Wunder Hachem (2019) states, all
fundamental rights have entirely the features that would, in theory, be allocated in a
specific dimension. The fundamental right to digital accessibility must be considered
a right that directs a duty of abstention to the Public Power, that imposes on the State
the promotion of factual and normative services and that has transindividual and
individual ownership.
With the consideration of digital accessibility as a fundamental right, the State
has the duty to provide adequate material conditions to that people enjoy the right
(Hachem, 2013). According to Daniel Wunder Hachem’s doctrine, the Brazilian legal
system recognizes the fundamental right to an effective administrative protection.
Arguably, the right can be inferred from a systematic interpretation of the Brazilian
constitutional framework (art. 5, §§1 and 2, and art. 37, caput) and can be interpreted
as the citizen’s right to receive from the Public Administration, an effective protection
of his rights. This right should be understood as the right to receive from the Public
Administration an effective protection of his rights, which authorizes the adoption
of all the appropriate administrative techniques and procedures to do so. Besides the
conventionalization of administrative law, establishes that the human rights agree-
ments and guarantees could be incorporated into Brazilian internal legislation (Ha-
chem, 2021).
Hence, the right to effective administrative protection imposes on the Public Ad-
ministration the priority duty to create material and legal conditions to satisfy social
fundamental rights in their entirety. Consequently, through a systematic analysis of
the Brazilian Constitution, it is possible to affirm that in order to guarantee access to
this right, the government must propose ways to provide access to all citizens, whose
right can be administratively requested in order to see it realized.
Thus, following Brazilian singularities and deficiencies policies should be promo-
ted. Barbosa da Silva, Ziviani & Ghezzi (2019) argue that it is necessary to consider
the variety of internal configurations and the differences between groups by their fre-
quency of utilization. Hence, access policies should consider differences, in addition
to inequalities.
Digital accessibility is transversal, as the challenges posed are technological, le-
gislative, social, and political (Kiyindou, 2019). Therefore, policies focused on im-
plementing tools that provide substantial access to the digital universe are extremely
important, which must be attentive to all the singularities of what access represents,
together with the Brazilian social reality.
First, it must be considered that accessibility is not limited to making internet

18
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

networks available. It includes digital literacy, digital education, and the development
and maintenance of access regarding digital education is essential to consider the
situation of digital divide in Brazil. The study identified a deficit in access to a specific
layer of the population (northern region, rural areas). Nevertheless, digital education
first passes through literacy. In Brazil, as seen, the number of illiterates is extensive,
with more than half of the population over 25 years having only primary school,
which addresses the necessary attention with digital accessibility. Furthermore, in
Brazil, there is a higher incidence of illiterate blacks and browns.
Tim Berners-Lee and Harry Halpin (2012) pointed out the proposal for uniting
education rights with digital accessibility to boost the development of those in a si-
tuation of social exclusion. In the same sense, Tomás Wissenbach, in a study on the
use of the internet in the city of São Paulo, considers that the imposition of promoting
policies that consider territorial diversity and that are efficient in a given community
has the purpose of equalizing the opportunities between different social groups and
avoid reproducing a dimension of exclusion (Wissenbach, 2019).
Besides, digital accessibility is not limited to the issue of Internet penetration rate
or ICT, but is expanding for use and exploitation, which makes the digital divide a
more significant threat (Randrianasolo-Rakotobe & Ledjou, 2019). Therefore, finally,
educational measures must also be taken to promote specialised education in the
digital universe, focusing on specifics training in this field. The Francophone Report
states that efforts must be made to achieve gender equality, recognizing initiatives to
develop, train, and network in this field, developing as innovation and coding con-
tests explicitly aimed at a public (Kiyindou, 2019).
In the Brazilian case, given the results identified in the present research, it is un-
derstood that special attention should be paid to the less favoured classes, in the nor-
thern region, in the rural area, blacks, people who have little education. Also, con-
sidering the world immersion in the algorithmic system, it is essential to establish
educational policies for its management. That is, preparatory courses in this sense,
specialised in computer science, and oriented to the country’s general culture, as a
way to preserve the national culture (Villani, 2019). In this sense, it is also necessary
to note that most people working in the area of information technology are men and
whites must also be observed when including specific policies that aim to strengthen
access to learning in these areas for blacks and women (Villani, 2019).
Accessibility also implies ensuring adequate infrastructure. This can only be done
through state intervention, especially in developing countries. This perspective im-
plies a view contrary to the idea of merely subsidiary action by the State (Gabardo,
2014). To invest in fixed and mobile high-speed networks and can form the basis of
the digital economy and has repercussions on the development of new uses of IT for
development. In this sense, Kiyindou (2019) considers that it is necessary to enrich
the digital development approach to include more complex dimensions, which deal

19
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

with equipment and other variables such as costs and energy capacity. In short, digi-
tal infrastructure is an essential ingredient that drives technological innovation and
improved productivity.
The maintenance of exclusion situations ends up restricting the opportunity for
action by individuals, even though there is a greater number of people who access
the internet and have virtual environments at their disposal. The quality of use, ex-
perience, speed, place of use, and how it is used are all factors that impact how to use
information technologies, limiting the use and opportunities that internet offers, no-
tably for those most vulnerable (Wissenbach, 2019). These are all elements that must
be considered in the search for reducing the digital divide in Brazil.
Thus, the results demonstrate that the availability of Internet access depends on an
adequate infrastructure, yet the cost of access is the major problem identified. Hence,
it is fundamental to prioritize proper investments in order to address the problem in
accordance with the realities and peculiarities of the country. Creating applications
for a portion of the population that doesn’t use the Internet is useless. Public policies
cannot be detached from reality. Policy choices must be promoted with attention to
the Brazilian singularities, seeking to tackle the access issues of the social strata and
classes that effectively necessitate it.
Regarding internet access as an autonomous fundamental right of immediate
applicability brings relevant consequences, since, as of its establishment, it becomes
an obligation of the State to ensure the access to this commodity.
Concerning the obstacles involved internet access, policy choices must be con-
sidered a very relevant factor. The lack of concern with public policies aimed at the
Brazilian reality is a great potential in the backlash against the problem of digital
inequality. An example can be seen regarding the application created by the govern-
ment during the Covid pandemic which was installed to obtain emergency aid.
To ensure the desired agility of the process, the government clarified that the
application would have a simplified format and would be free, and that those who
meet the requirements would receive the amounts directly into their accounts within
48 hours after the effective registration. The main problem was the lack of attention to
the reality of Brazil’s digital inequality. The solution given by the government did not
reach a large part of the population group that needed the aid, who either don’t have
access to the internet or have difficulties to access the application.
Thus, the problem in Brazil regarding digital inequality, which is well-demarca-
ted, does not depend only on infrastructure solutions (Viana, 2021). Although it is
an important issue, political choices are more determinant. It is imperative that pu-
blic policies be taken to address the Brazilian reality, in order to not only guarantee
access to those who cannot afford it, but also to promote actions that guarantee this
access. The conception as a fundamental right already has sufficient normative sup-
port, whether for a guarantee of access by judicial or administrative means. There-

20
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

fore, politicians and administration can and should use the governmental structure
to reduce inequality, focusing on the Brazilian reality and not only in government
digital transformation.

Final considerations

Benefits and harms accompany revolution 4.0. Among the negative points is digital
divide. The study of reports and research on the reality of digital accessibility in Brazil
revealed a digital elite in the country, with almost integral internet access. These are
classes that use the cell phone but have broadband at home, corresponding to the
first digital access level. They are better educated and access the facilities offered by
the internet more substantially. On the other hand, the digitally excluded picture co-
rresponds to the D and E classes, from rural areas, and/or more distant regions, from
the northern and northeast regions of the country. They access IT through mobile
networks, with an equivalence regarding the economic and social aspects.
In summary, this is the Brazilian panorama of digital reality. In the legal field,
digital accessibility is already considered a human right and cand be consider a fun-
damental right in Brazil. The study concludes that the insertion of universal and in-
tegral digital accessibility as a fundamental right that has immediate applicability
implies the promotion of specific policies for the insertion of the law in the com-
munity and brings guarantees to the least favoured citizens. Accessibility must be
considered a good of collective interest, which requires adequate infrastructure and
specific training. The development of access infrastructure emerges as a matter of
social justice, constituting economic development. Specific training in digital educa-
tion is an imperative, focuses on minorities. These instruments, however, depend on
political positions.

References

Arretche, Marta (2019). “Geografia Digital no Brasil: Um panorama das desigual-

dades regionais”. In Desigualdades digitais no espaço urbano: um estudo sobre o
acesso e o uso da Internet na cidade de São Paulo, edited by Núcleo de Informação
e Coordenação do Ponto BR. São Paulo: Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil.
Barbosa da Silva, Frederico Augusto, Paula Ziviani & Daniela Ribas Ghezzi (2019).
“As tecnologias digitais e seus usos”. Texto para Discussão (IPEA), 2470: 3-49.
Berners-Lee, Tim & Harry Halpin (2012). Internet access is a human right. Available
at https://bit.ly/3C0SiOU.
Bourdieu, Pierre (2000). O poder simbólico. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil.
CETIC (2019a). TIC Domicílios. Available at https://cetic.br/pesquisa/domicilios/.

21
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

CGI.br/NIC.br, Regional de Estudos para o Desenvolvimento da Sociedade da In-

formação (2019). Pesquisa sobre o Uso das Tecnologias de Informação e Comuni-
cação nos domicílios brasileiros. TIC Domicílios 2018. Available at http://data.cetic.
br/cetic/explore.
Christensen, Clayton M. & Michael E. Raynor (2003). The innovator’s solution:
Creating and sustaining successful growth. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Corvalán, Juan G. (2017). “Administración pública digital e inteligente: transfor-
maciones en la era de la inteligencia artificial”. Revista de Direito Econômico e
Socioambiental, 2 (8): 26-66.
Dimaggio, Paul & Filiz Garip (2012). “Network effects and social inequality”. Annual
Review of Sociology, 38 (1): 93-118.
Dormoy, Daniel & Kamil El Khatib (2019). “Soutenir le partagedes ressources et
la contribution des acteurs francophones aux questions émergentes”. In IDEST,
Rapport 2018 sur l’état de la francophonie numérique. Available at https://bit.
ly/3PQKcy0.
Dupuy, Gabriel (2007). La fracture numérique. Paris: Ellipses Édition Marketing.
Duwell, Marcus (2017). “Human dignity and the ethics and regulation of technolo-
gy”. In B. Roger, S. Eloise, & Y. Karen (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Law, Regula-
tion and Technology. Oxford University Press.
Friedrich, Denise B. & Juliana H. M. Philippi (2020). “Inclusão digital e blockchain
como instrumentos para o desenvolvimento econômico”. International Journal of
Digital Law, 1 (1): 96-115.
Fukuyama, Francis (2014). Political order and political decay: from the industrial re-
volution to the globalization of democracy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Future of Life Institute (2015). Autonomous weapons: an open letter from ai &
robotics researchers. Available at https://bit.ly/3WqqP1h.
Gabardo, Emerson (2014). “Mecanismos de intervención del Estado en Brasil,
postmodernidad y la cuestión de la subsidiariedad”. Revista Eurolatinoamericana
de Derecho Administrativo, 1 (2): 59-71.
Hachem, Daniel Wunder (2013). “A dupla titularidade (individual e transindividual)
dos direitos fundamentais econômicos, sociais, culturais e ambientais”. Revista de
Direitos Fundamentais e Democracia, 14 (14): 618-688.
—. (2019). “São os direitos sociais ‘direitos públicos subjetivos’? Mitos e confusões na
teoria dos direitos fundamentais”. Revista de Estudos Constitucionais, Hermenêu-
tica e Teoria do Direito, 11 (3): 404-436.
—. (2021). “A convencionalização do Direito Administrativo na América Latina”. Re-
vista de Direito Administrative, 280: 207-257.
Helsper, Ellen J. (2019). “Por que estudos baseados em localização oferecem novas
oportunidades para uma melhor compreensão das desigualdades sociodigitais?”.
In Desigualdades digitais no espaço urbano: um estudo sobre o acesso e o uso da

22
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

Internet na cidade de São Paulo, edited by Núcleo de Informação e Coordenação

do Ponto BR. São Paulo: Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil. Available at https://
bit.ly/3FSrOQL.
Hirata, Helena (2014). “Gênero, classe e raça Interseccionalidade e consubstanciali-
dade das relações sociais”. Tempo Soc., 26 (1): 61-73.
IBGE (2018). PNAD Contínua TIC 2017: Internet chega a três em cada quatro domicí-
lios do país. Available at https://bit.ly/3jk9WGS.
IBGE (2019a). PNAD Contínua 2018: educação avança no país, mas desigualdades ra-
ciais e por região persistem. Available at https://bit.ly/3Gjg4Zd.
IPEA (2019). As tecnologias digitais e seus usos. Available at https://bit.ly/3VYFzU7.
Kiyindou, Alain (2019). “Développer et maintenir les infrastructures donnant accès
au numérique”. In IDEST, Rapport 2018 sur l’état de la francophonie numérique.
Available at https://bit.ly/3PQKcy0.
Mhalla, Asma (2019). De l’État de droit à l’État de surveillance. Available at https://
bit.ly/3vf6Gzh.
OECD (2001). Understanding the Digital Divide. Available at https://bit.ly/3GjXyQv.
Portulans Institute (2020). “Network Readiness Index 2019 Brazil”. Available at
https://bit.ly/3ZiwVTg.
Randrianasolo-Rakotobe, Hanitra & Jean-Michel Ledjou (2019). “Appuyer le
développement de l’économie numérique.” In IDEST, Rapport 2018 sur l’état de la
francophonie numérique. Available at https://bit.ly/3PQKcy0.
Rodrigo, Thiago (2020). Faixas salariais x classe social: qual sua classe social? Availa-
ble at https://bit.ly/3CFfUJc.
Salgado, Eneida D. & Tarso C. Violin (2015). “Transparência e acesso à informação:
o caminho para a garantia da ética na Administração Pública”. In Luiz Alberto
Blanchet, Daniel Wunder Hachem and Ana Cláudia Santano (eds.), Eficiência e
ética na Administração Pública. Editora Íthala.
Sampson, Robert J. (2017). “Urban sustainability in an age of enduring inequalities:
Advancing theory and no ecometrics for the 21st Century city”. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 114 (34): 8957.8962.
Sartor, Giovani (2017). “Human Rights and Information Technologies”. In R.
Brownsword, E. Scotford, & K. Yeung (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Law, Regu-
lation and Technology. Oxford University Press.
Schiefler, Eduardo A. C., José da Silva Cristóvam, & Thanderson P. Sousa (2020).
“Administração pública digital e a problemática da desigualdade no acesso à tec-
nologia”. International Journal of Digital Law, 2 (1): 97-116.
Schumpeter, Joseph A. (1988). A teoria do desenvolvimento econômico. São Paulo:
Nova Cultural.

23
GABARDO, AGUILAR VIANA Y CASTREGHINI DE FREITAS
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE IN BRAzIL AND THE ACCESSIBILITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

Stiakakis, Emmanouil, Pavlos Kariotelis & Maria Vlachopoulou (2009). “From

the Digital Divide to Digital Inequality: A Secondary Research in the European
Union”. E-Democracy 2009, 26: 43-54.
Timan, Tjerk, Masa Galic & Bert-Jaap Koops (2017). “Surveillance Theory and its Im-
plications for Law”. In Roger Brownsword, Eloise Scotford & Karen Yeung (eds.),
The Oxford Handbook of Law, Regulation and Technology. Oxford University Press.
Thaler, Richard H., & Sunstein, Cass. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about
health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press.
UNCTAD (2021). Digital Economy Report 2019. Available at https://bit.ly/3W1JOOX.
USP (2013). Inclusão digital deve ser um direito fundamental, afirma estudo da Facul-
dade de Direito. Available at https://bit.ly/3WJQwK8.
Viana, Ana Cristina Aguilar (2021). “Digital transformation in Public Administra-
tion: from E-Government to Digital Government”. International Journal of Digital
Law, 2. DOI https://doi.org/10.47975/IJDL/1viana.
Villani, Cédric (2019). “Les enjeux politiques de l’intelligence artificielle”. Le Seuil
Pouvoirs, 3 (170): 5-18.
Wissenbach, Tomás (2019). “Dinâmicas intraurbanas e desigualdades territoriais:
elementos para o debate sobre inclusão digital na cidade de São Paulo”. In Des-
igualdades digitais no espaço urbano: um estudo sobre o acesso e o uso da Internet
na cidade de São Paulo, edited by Núcleo de Informação e Coordenação do Pon-
to BR. São Paulo: Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil. Available at https://bit.
ly/3FSrOQL.
Zuboff, Shoshana (2015). Big other: surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an
information. Available at https://bit.ly/3X2mrWy.

Funding

This work was carried out under the auspices of CAPES/PRINT - Project SENSED
(Space, Society and Development) and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento
Científico e Tecnológico do Brasil.

About the authors

Olga Lúcia Castreghini de Freitas has a Bachelor’s degree in Geography from

UNESP - Presidente Prudente with a Master’s degree in Geography from UNESP
- Rio Claro, a PhD in Human Geography from the University of São Paulo and a
Postdoctoral Fellow at the Université Paris I Phantéon-Sorbonne (France). She is a
Full Professor of the Department of Geography of the Federal University of Para-
ná and of the Graduate Programs in Geography and Urbanism, both of the Federal
University of Paraná. She is a Research Productivity Fellow at CNPq – Brazil. Email:

24
 REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA
VOL. 11 NÚM. 2 (2022) • PÁGS. 1-26

[email protected]. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5840-2377.
Emerson Gabardo is a Lawyer with a Law Degree from the Federal University of
Paraná, a Master’s Degree in Law and a Doctorate in State Law from the same study
house. He is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Fordham University School of Law – 2013
(United States of America) and a Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of California
– UCI – 2020 (United States of America). He is a Full Professor of Administrative
Law at the Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná and an Associate Professor of
Administrative Law at the Federal University of Paraná. Email: emerson.gabardo.br@
gmail.com. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1798-526X.
Ana Cristina Aguilar Viana is a Lawyer with a Master’s Degree in Public Po-
licy from the Federal University of Paraná and she is a PhD candidate in Law from
the Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne University, France and Federal University of Paraná.
Email: [email protected]. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3837-8589.

25
REVISTA CHILENA DE DERECHO Y TECNOLOGÍA

La Revista de Chilena de Derecho y Tecnología es una publicación académica semestral del

Centro de Estudios en Derecho Informático de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de
Chile, que tiene por objeto difundir en la comunidad jurídica los elementos necesarios para
analizar y comprender los alcances y efectos que el desarrollo tecnológico y cultural han pro-
ducido en la sociedad, especialmente su impacto en la ciencia jurídica.

director
Daniel Álvarez Valenzuela
([email protected])
sitio web
rchdt.uchile.cl
correo electrónico
[email protected]
licencia de este artículo
Creative Commons Atribución Compartir Igual 4.0 Internacional

La edición de textos, el diseño editorial

y la conversión a formatos electrónicos de este artículo
estuvieron a cargo de Tipográfica
(www.tipografica.io).