Blog

Ten years ago, I was writing about gender inequality in the digital world. Today, I find myself writing the same thing. And I fear that ten years from now, I will still be writing these very same words.

On International Women’s Day, reports, initiatives, conferences, and commitments multiply. But when we look at the data objectively, we realize that the structural transformation we so often proclaim is moving far too slowly — dangerously slowly — in a sector that, paradoxically, thrives on acceleration.

I revisited an opinion piece I wrote for SapoTEK in 2020, in which I argued that digital inclusion and gender balance would be key drivers of social inclusion and economic development. The pandemic had brutally exposed what we already knew: the digital world is not neutral. It amplifies inequalities when they exist. And women were — and continue to be — among those most affected.

While it is true that today we have more women in higher education, more women entrepreneurs, and more female role models in technology, it is also true that the underrepresentation of women in STEM fields persists, that decision-making positions in the technology sector remain predominantly male, and that levels of digital literacy still reflect structural inequalities.

And there is a factor that makes this discussion even more urgent: the widespread deployment of artificial intelligence. AI systems are trained on data that reflect the world as it is — and the world is unequal. If women are underrepresented in technology development, in algorithm design, and in digital governance, that absence turns into bias. And bias turns into automated decisions that perpetuate discrimination in recruitment, access to credit, healthcare and information.

We are not just talking about social justice. We are talking about competitiveness, innovation and democracy. 

Europe has placed the digital transition at the center of its economic strategy. Portugal has done the same. But there will be no true digital transformation if half of the population does not fully participate in it — as users, as creators, and as decision-makers.

Digital gender inequality manifests itself across multiple layers: in access and skills; in educational choices; in career progression; in the gender pay gap; in representation in leadership roles; and in the historical invisibility of women’s contributions to technology.

The problem is not a lack of talent. It is a lack of structural conditions, role models, consistent public policies, and genuine organizational commitment.

And this is where a question I have been studying closely comes into play: what do public policies actually say — and, above all, what do they leave unsaid — about this inequality?

The European Digital Decade and the National Digital Strategy formally recognize gender convergence in the digital sphere and even set targets, such as the ambition of reaching 30% women ICT specialists. In recent months, this framework has been further developed through instruments such as the National Digital Strategy Action Plan, the Digital Skills Pact, the National Artificial Intelligence Agenda, and, notably, the National Girls in STEM Program.

However, when we apply a critical lens, a worrying pattern emerges: the "problem” tends to be framed as a deficit in female participation (a number to be corrected), rather than as a structural inequality embedded in decision-making mechanisms, institutional cultures and in the very governance of the digital sphere. This has consequences. When inequality is treated primarily as a quantitative target, it risks being confined to sector-specific programs, often peripheral ones, instead of being mainstreamed into the core spaces where digital transformation is actually shaped and decided.

This is particularly critical when we talk about AI: it is not enough to train more women for the sector; we must ensure representation among those who make decisions, set priorities, assess risks, establish rules and have a voice in governance models. Otherwise, we will be adjusting who enters the system without changing the system itself.

Over the past few years, we have seen important progress: upskilling programs, diversity targets, funding for female entrepreneurship and national strategies for digital skills. But we are still talking about exceptions, not balance.

And perhaps the question we should be asking this March 8 is a simple one: why, in a sector that prides itself on disruption, is gender equality still treated as an incremental process?

Digital transformation will only be truly transformative if it is inclusive. Otherwise, it will simply become another accelerator of inequality.

We need inclusive digital education starting in early childhood; visible and recognized female role models; retention and career progression policies within technology companies; transparent diversity metrics; funding directed toward women-led projects; and digital governance that incorporates diverse perspectives from the outset.

But we also need something less tangible: cultural change.

Deconstruct stereotypes. Rewrite narratives. Create environments where girls do not feel like visitors in a space that belongs to them just as much as to anyone else.

And that is perhaps the greatest challenge at a time when we are witnessing troubling setbacks, attacks on hard-won rights and a democracy that is showing signs of fragility.

And yet, ten years later, I still believe that digital inclusion and gender balance are drivers of economic development and social cohesion. But today I would add something more: they are also a condition for the legitimacy of technological transformation itself.

We cannot accept that the economy of the future is built on the imbalances of the past.

Writing about this every year should not be necessary.

But if it is, I will continue to do so.

Because equality is not a trend. It is a commitment.

And above all, it is a human right, in a world that needs, more than ever, to ensure that those rights do not move backwards.

Note: This article was originally published in Tek Notícias.