Impact of digital sovereignty on vulnerable populations: The role of free software in education to bridge the digital divide
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71068/bzae9v37Keywords:
digital sovereignty, digital divide, free software, technological autonomy, social inclusionAbstract
This article addressed the concept of digital sovereignty and its impact on vulnerable populations, in a context where equitable access to technology posed a key challenge to reducing the digital divide. The objective was to analyze how education based on free software, particularly the use of Linux-based operating systems, along with university extension programs, contributed to strengthening technological autonomy in disadvantaged communities. The methodology consisted of a review of specialized literature and the study of successful cases of free software implementation in educational and community settings, with emphasis on experiences where these resources facilitated access to technology and promoted digital inclusion. The results showed that the adoption of free software not only enabled affordable and sustainable access to digital tools, but also granted greater control over technological infrastructures by the communities, thus fostering their technological self-determination. Additionally, it was observed that the inclusion of university extension programs was fundamental in supporting training and capacity-building processes in the use of free software. Together, these factors reinforced digital sovereignty in vulnerable populations, enabling concrete progress in terms of social inclusion and reducing technological dependency.
References
Acebey Marinaro, J. C. (2023). El programa Conectar Igualdad. Contextualización y análisis teórico de una política social de inclusión digital. Ciudadanías. Revista De Políticas Sociales Urbanas, (11). Recuperado a partir de https://revistas.untref.edu.ar/index.php/ciudadanias/article/view/1703
Alzahrani, A., Al Moaiad, Y., & El-Ebiary, Y. (2022). The impact of using open source software on the progress and quality of the educational process. International Journal of Novel Research in Education and Learning, 9(6), 35–39. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7409044
Asociación para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones. (s.f.). El software libre se adueña de las aulas en Argentina. Recuperado de https://www.apc.org/es/news/el-software-libre-se-aduena-de-las-aulas-en-argentina
Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. Yale University Press. Recuperado de https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227620958_Yochai_Benkler_The_Wealth_of_Networks_How_Social_Production_Transforms_Markets_and_Freedom
Cobo, C., & Moravec, J. W. (2011). Aprendizaje invisible: Hacia una nueva ecología de la educación. Laboratori de Mitjans Interactius / Publicacions i Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona. Recuperado de https://conservancy.umn.edu/items/42ab1ca8-89be-480c-982b-2a5f8ba26317
Couture, S., & Toupin, S. (2019). What does the notion of ‘sovereignty’ mean when referring to the digital? New Media & Society, 21(10), 2305–2322. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819865984
Floridi, L. (2020). The fight for digital sovereignty: what it is, and why it matters, especially for the EU. Philosophy & Technology, 33(3), 369–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00423-6
Free Software Foundation. (2022). What is free software? https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
García Fuentes, R. (2015). Software libre: coste, valor y estrategia (Trabajo de fin de máster, Universidad de Oviedo). Recuperado de https://digibuo.uniovi.es/dspace/bitstream/10651/34626/3/TFM_RebecaGarciaFuentes
Hernández Sampieri, R. (2018). Metodología de la investigación: Las rutas cuantitativa, cualitativa y mixta. McGraw-Hill Interamericana. https://doi.org/10.22201/fesc.20072236e.2019.10.18.6
Kwet, M. (2019). Digital colonialism: US empire and the new imperialism in the Global South. Race & Class, 60(4), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306396818823172
Mansell, R., & Steinmueller, W. E. (2020). Advanced introduction to platform economics. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2021v46n1a3983
Nordhaug, L. M., & Harris, L. (2021). Digital public goods: Enablers of digital sovereignty. En Development Co-operation Report 2021: Shaping a Just Digital Transformation. OECD iLibrary. https://doi.org/10.1787/20747721
Pohle, J., & Thiel, T. (2020). Digital sovereignty. Internet Policy Review, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2020.4.1532
Robles-Carrillo, M. (2023). Sovereignty vs. digital sovereignty. Journal of Digital Technology Law, 1(3), 673–690. https://doi.org/10.21202/jdtl.2023.29
Stallman, R. (2015). Free software, free society: Selected essays of Richard M. Stallman (3rd ed.). Free Software Foundation. https://www.gnu.org/doc/fsfs3-hardcover.pdf
Universidad Nacional de La Plata. (s.f.). La extensión universitaria desde la informática. Recuperado de https://www.extension.info.unlp.edu.ar/la-extension-universitaria-desde-la-informatica/
Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto. (s.f.). Desarrollo de software libre como aporte a la educación y la virtualidad. Recuperado de https://www.evelia.unrc.edu.ar/ensenaryAprenderEnLaVirtualidad/software-libre/
Van Dijk, J. (2020). The digital divide. Polity Press. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24355
Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. MIT Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6699.001.0001
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Sapiens Discoveries International Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Los artículos publicados en la revista se distribuyen bajo la licencia Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0). Esta licencia permite a terceros descargar, copiar, distribuir, adaptar y reutilizar una obra, incluso con fines comerciales, siempre que se otorgue el crédito adecuado al autor original.
