Ethical and Social Issues of Digitalization: Global Perspective


The Interdisciplinary Journal of Human and Social Studies, Vol.3, issue 3, p.15-33, 2025
2 Downloads, 6 views
  • Research paper

Abstract

This research explores critical aspects of the ethical and sociocultural implications of digitalization worldwide. The rapidly evolving digital transformation in societies around the world presents public policy challenges that cross borders and cultures. Based on systematic scoping of the existing literature along with empirical evidence, this paper identifies the following growing ethical tensions in the digital environment: erosion of privacy, algorithmic bias, digital divides and reconfiguration of social relationships. The authors highlight major inequalities in the way that digitalization affects different populations, including that marginalized groups often bear disproportionate digital risks and have limited access to digital benefits. This study ends up with a framework for ethical governance of digital technologies that translates innovation into a human rights entity and as a tool for social cohesion. By situating ethical concerns within broader socioeconomic, cultural and political landscape, this study adds to the existing debate around responsible digitalization.

Keywords

Digital ethics, social impacts, global digitalization, technological governance, digital justice

References

Angwin, J., Larson, J., Mattu, S., & Kirchner, L. (2016). Machine bias. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing

Barocas, S., & Selbst, A. D. (2016). Big data’s disparate impact. California Law Review, 104(3), 671–732. https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38BG31

Bartl, G. (2024). Social and ethical implications of digital crisis technologies: Case study of pandemic simulation models during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 26, e45723. https://doi.org/10.2196/45723

Beaunoyer, E., Dupéré, S., & Guitton, M. J. (2020). COVID-19 and digital inequalities: Reciprocal impacts and mitigation strategies. Computers in Human Behavior, 111, 106424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106424

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new Jim Code. Polity Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soz162

Bhaskar, R. (2016). Enlightened common sense: The philosophy of critical realism. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315542942

Celeste, E. (2019). Digital constitutionalism: A new systematic theorisation. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 33(1), 76–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2019.1562604

Cohen, J. E. (2019). Between truth and power: The legal constructions of informational capitalism. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190246693.001.0001

Costanza-Chock, S. (2020). Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12255.001.0001

Dastin, J. (2018, October 10). Amazon scraps secret AI recruiting tool that showed bias against women. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-amazon-com-jobs-automation-insight/amazon-scraps-secret-ai-recruiting-tool-that-showed-bias-against-women-idUSKCN1MK08G

Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., & Steinfield, C. (2020). Social network sites and society: Current trends and future possibilities. Interactions, 27(1), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1145/3347662

Ess, C. (2020). Digital media ethics (3rd ed.). Polity Press.

Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin’s Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2018.1498442

Feenberg, A. (2017). Technosystem: The social life of reason. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674982109

Feldstein, S. (2019, September 17). The global expansion of AI surveillance. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/09/17/global-expansion-of-ai-surveillance-pub-79847

Floridi, L. (2013). The ethics of information. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199641321.001.0001

Floridi, L. (2018). Soft ethics, the governance of the digital and the General Data Protection Regulation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 376(2133), 20180081. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0081

Fülöp, M. T., Ionescu, C. A., & Topor, D. I. (2024). Digital business world and ethical dilemmas: A systematic literature review. Digital Finance, 7, 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42521-024-00119-y

Graham, M., & Dutton, W. H. (Eds.). (2019). Society and the internet: How networks of information and communication are changing our lives (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198843498.001.0001

Green, B. (2020). The flaws of policies requiring human oversight of government algorithms. Computer Law & Security Review, 38, 105481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105481

Guenduez, A. A., Walker, N., & Demircioglu, M. A. (2025). Digital ethics: Global trends and divergent paths. Government Information Quarterly, 42, 102050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102050

Hargittai, E., & Hsieh, Y. P. (2018). Digital inequality. In W. H. Dutton (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of internet studies (pp. 129–150). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199589074.013.0007

Hoffmann, A. L. (2019). Where fairness fails: Data, algorithms, and the limits of antidiscrimination discourse. Information, Communication & Society, 22(7), 900–915. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1573912

Huang, C. (2017). Time spent on social network sites and psychological well-being: A meta-analysis. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(6), 346–354. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0758

International Telecommunication Union. (2023). Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2023. ITU Publications. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/facts/default.aspx

Kantha, T., Sahoo, D., Rout, D., & Mishra, S. J. (2024). Ethics in the digital era: Technology’s role in shaping society. Shanlax International Journal of Arts, Science and Humanities, 11(S1), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.34293/sijash.v11iS1-June.7794

Kleine, D. (2013). Technologies of choice? ICTs, development, and the capabilities approach. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9061.001.0001

Miller, D., Costa, E., Haynes, N., McDonald, T., Nicolescu, R., Sinanan, J., Spyer, J., Venkatraman, S., & Wang, X. (2021). How the world changed social media. UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1g69z35

Nissenbaum, H. (2010). Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780804772891

Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt

Obermeyer, Z., Powers, B., Vogeli, C., & Mullainathan, S. (2019). Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science, 366(6464), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax2342

Ostrom, E. (2010). Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 20(4), 550–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Paul, J., Ueno, A., Dennis, C., et al. (2024). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary perspective and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 48, e13015. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.13015

Pew Research Center. (2023, April 18). Americans and privacy: Concerned, confused and feeling lack of control over their personal information. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/04/18/americans-and-privacy-2023/

Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1970). The logic of comparative social inquiry. Wiley-Interscience.

Robinson, L., Schulz, J., Khilnani, A., Ono, H., Cotten, S. R., McClain, N., Levine, L., Chen, W., Huang, G., Casilli, A. A., Tubaro, P., Dodel, M., Quan-Haase, A., Ruiu, M. L., Ragnedda, M., Aikat, D., & Tolentino, N. (2020). Digital inequalities in time of pandemic: COVID-19 exposure risk profiles and new forms of vulnerability. First Monday, 25(7). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i7.10845

Scheerder, A., van Deursen, A., & van Dijk, J. (2017). Determinants of Internet skills, uses and outcomes: A systematic review of the second- and third-level digital divide. Telematics and Informatics, 34(8), 1607–1624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.07.007

Sen, A. (2017). Collective choice and social welfare (Expanded ed.). Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674974616

Taylor, L. (2017). What is data justice? The case for connecting digital rights and freedoms globally. Big Data & Society, 4(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951717736335

Twenge, J. M. (2019). More time on technology, less happiness? Associations between digital-media use and psychological well-being. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(4), 372–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419838244

Van Dijk, J. (2020). The digital divide. Polity Press.

Vallor, S. (2016). Technology and the virtues: A philosophical guide to a future worth wanting. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190498511.001.0001

Verduyn, P., Ybarra, O., Résibois, M., Jonides, J., & Kross, E. (2017). Do social network sites enhance or undermine subjective well-being? A critical review. Social Issues and Policy Review, 11(1), 274–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12033

World Bank. (2023). World development report 2023: Digital technology and development. World Bank Publications. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr2023

Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Public Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2019.1640327

 


Publication date:

13 April 2025

Subscribe for latest updates

Indie folks start out by making something they want to read, that tell stories they want told..