UNICEF - Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice

Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice From the voices of children, youth and experts around the world2 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Contents Introduction 4 Project scope and target audience 6 Report structure 7 Children’s interpretations of their best interests in relation to the digital environment 9 Aligning the digital environment with children’s best interests 14 Wish 1. Improve safety, trust and protection in the digital world 14 1.1 Platform regulation and accountability 16 1.2 Children’s participation and digital citizenship 19 Wish 2. Strengthen privacy protection and enable better data control 21 2.1 Privacy and data use in children’s digital lives 21 2.2 Factors shaping children’s privacy online 23 Wish 3. Foster empathy, respect and inclusion in digital communities 26 3.1 Online behaviour and interactions 26 3.2 Inclusion and belonging in digital communities 27 Wish 4. Invest in learning and digital literacy for the future 29 4.1 Access to learning and knowledge 29 4.2 Information integrity, misinformation and overreliance on AI 31 4.3 Barriers and inequalities in digital learning 33 4.4 Digital literacy and education for safe use 34 Wish 5. Ensure equity, accessibility and affordability of digital technologies 36 5.1 Financial barriers and paywalls 36 5.2 Infrastructure and connectivity barriers 38 5.3 Inclusion and accessibility in digital technologies 393 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Wish 6. Enhance play, creativity and self-expression opportunities 42 6.1 Digital play, joy and learning 42 6.2 Online–offline balance in children’s lives 43 6.3 Expression, identity and self-representation 44 6.4 Pressures on authentic identity 45

Wish 7. Support physical and mental health and well-being in the digital world 46 7.1 Mental and emotional health 46 7.2 Digital technology use and its effects on physical health 47 7.3 Digital technologies as sources of health information and safety guidance 47 Digital design features that support children’s best interests 49 Wish 8. Create features that are smarter, not stricter 49 8.1 Children’s experiences with common digital design features 50 8.2 Trust and flexibility in safety features 55 8.3 Children’s priorities for smarter safety features 58 Children’s ideas on how to create digital environments in their best interests 63 Recommendations for creating digital environments in children’s best interests 66 Annexes 72

Annex A: Methodological note on child consultations 72

Annex B: Youth engagement with children’s best interests in the digital environment 76

Annex C: Expert Consultation Participants 77

Endnotes 78 Acknowledgements 794 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Introduction The principle of the best interests of the child (‘the Principle’) is increasingly invoked in digital policies, regulations and corporate commitments worldwide. Yet, despite its growing prominence, there is still limited guidance on how the Principle should be understood and implemented in relation to the digital environment.1 Children’s perspectives remain largely absent from these critical debates, even though they are uniquely placed to articulate how digital technologies shape their lives and what they require for digital spaces to truly serve their interests. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) identifies the best interests of the child as one of its four foundational principles. UNCRC Article 3 states that: “In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.” The Principle underpins every right set out in the UNCRC and applies to actions taken within digital contexts. As children’s lives are increasingly shaped by digital technologies, platforms and online services, understanding and operationalizing the Principle in the digital environment has become essential

of the child shall be a primary consideration.” The Principle underpins every right set out in the UNCRC and applies to actions taken within digital contexts. As children’s lives are increasingly shaped by digital technologies, platforms and online services, understanding and operationalizing the Principle in the digital environment has become essential to the effective protection and realization of their rights. Children’s perspectives on what constitutes their best interests in the digital age are central to this work. In recognition of the urgent need for formalized, rights-respecting consultation with children to ensure that policies, regulations and digital products reflect their lived experiences and voices, UNICEF Office of Strategy and Evidence – Innocenti launched the Best Interests of the Child in Relation to the Digital Environment project. The project is aimed at capturing the views of a diverse group of children on how they understand the Principle in relation to the digital environment, what they 1 The digital environment changes all the time, and includes online services and products (like platforms, apps and websites), artificial intelligence (AI) that drives recommendation systems, and the business models and company approaches that shape how technologies function and affect user experiences. This report uses the term online ‘platform’ as shorthand to capture a broad range of digital environments where children interact with technology, other users and content.5 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice believe is or is not in their best interests online, and how they envision a digital future that better supports their rights and well-being. These insights are intended to inform policymaking, regulation and the design of digital environments. They will hopefully also shape the business models and operational practices of technology companies providing digital products and services to children. A total of 17 participatory in-person consultations were held in seven countries – Brazil, India, Malaysia, Sierra Leone, Spain, Uganda and the United States of America (USA) – with 209 children of various ages from diverse socioeconomic, cultural and connectivity contexts. The sample was gender balanced, with similar numbers of girls and boys participating in each consultation. Creative, child-centred methods, such as drawing, modelling and role-playing were used in the consultations to create

diverse socioeconomic, cultural and connectivity contexts. The sample was gender balanced, with similar numbers of girls and boys participating in each consultation. Creative, child-centred methods, such as drawing, modelling and role-playing were used in the consultations to create space for the children to articulate their experiences, concerns and hopes for digital environments. Detailed information on the data collection methodology, sample and study limitations is presented in Annex A. To complement these perspectives, UNICEF pioneered a novel approach by convening a global network of adolescent and youth experts on the digital environment, who were able to interpret children’s data and shape actionable policy recommendations through a process of participatory foresight. The project also engaged multi-sectoral practitioners, policymakers and technology developers through three global consultations with 23 experts to gather their insights on preliminary findings from child consultations. Collectively, the youth and expert contributions helped UNICEF to identify key challenges, tensions and opportunities for applying the Principle in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.6 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Project scope and target audience The consultations with children, youth and experts were broadly guided by three questions: • How does the best interests of the child principle relate to the other UNCRC principles and rights in the digital environment? • What main points of tension arise when applying the best interests of the child in relation to the digital environment? • How can policy and practice be used to uphold the best interests of the child in relation to the digital environment? The project outputs are directed primarily at two audiences: government actors and technology companies providing digital services and products. A broad range of government actors are covered (acknowledging that their interpretation of the recommendations will differ by mandate), including those at the regional, national or local level who create digital strategies, policies and laws, such as policymakers and legislators, and regulators that oversee compliance. The aim is to inform policy, programming or advocacy to support government actors in ensuring that the digital environment is operated in children’s best interests. In addition to the primary audiences, the project outputs will hopefully add value to the efforts of other stakeholders working at the intersection of

compliance. The aim is to inform policy, programming or advocacy to support government actors in ensuring that the digital environment is operated in children’s best interests. In addition to the primary audiences, the project outputs will hopefully add value to the efforts of other stakeholders working at the intersection of children and the digital environment. These include civil society organizations that monitor how governments and businesses fare in supporting children’s best interests online and publicly hold them accountable, and academic institutions that conduct research into the impacts of ‘best interests’ platform features on children’s rights. Notes on the report scope and content: Throughout the project, an appetite for detailed guidance on how to uphold children’s best interests in the digital environment has been expressed by government actors and technology companies. This report is a contribution towards that goal by giving a much-needed platform to children’s voices on their best interests. With that focus, the report includes only high-level recommendations. Further research and work will be needed to develop comprehensive guidance on upholding children’s best interests in the digital environment.7 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice While the consultations were specifically designed to explore children’s perspectives on their best interests in digital environments, the breadth and complexity of this concept meant that discussions often also addressed the challenges children encounter online, as well as the opportunities digital technologies provide. These perspectives are closely interconnected. Children’s views on risks, opportunities and overall digital experiences should therefore be considered together in order to understand what constitutes a digital environment that is in children’s best interests. Report structure As the core of the project focused on consultations with children, the report is structured around children’s key wishes for a digital environment in their best interests and the findings that support them. All findings are based solely on inputs shared by children who participated in consultations across seven countries. As this is qualitative research, the results are not intended to be statistically generalizable or representative.2 The analysis is organized into three main chapters comprising eight sections, each corresponding to a specific wish articulated by the child participants. To set the context for these findings, the report opens with a brief overview of

seven countries. As this is qualitative research, the results are not intended to be statistically generalizable or representative.2 The analysis is organized into three main chapters comprising eight sections, each corresponding to a specific wish articulated by the child participants. To set the context for these findings, the report opens with a brief overview of how children interpret and understand their best interests in relation to the digital environment. The second chapter examines how the digital environment can be better aligned with children’s best interests. It brings together seven wishes voiced by children, which explore children’s rights and the challenges they encounter in the digital environment. Each section outlines what children identified as not currently working in relation to the respective wish and, where proposed by the children themselves, highlights actionable solutions. The third section focuses specifically on digital design features that support children’s best interests. During the consultations, the children were prompted to reflect on specific platform features. The eighth and final wish focuses on four common features often used by platforms to protect children online. It addresses a final question of how digital features can be designed and implemented to better serve children’s best interests. 2 References to ‘the children’ in this report refer exclusively to children who participated in the consultations, the findings should not be interpreted as generalizable to all children.8 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Consultations with 23 experts (see full list of participants in Annex C) from academia, government and industry to ideate actionable policy recommendations based on children’s perspectives.iv Engagement with UNICEF’s Youth Foresight Network to interpret findings through a futurefocused lens, resulting in a youth consultation report with recommendationsiii (see Annex B). Child consultations conducted in seven countries using creative, play-based data collection methods to capture children’s views on their rights and best interests online. The methodology was piloted, refined and implemented with trained facilitators; data were transcribed and translated by local partners, and analysed by UNICEF Innocenti. Review of academic literature, non-governmental organizations’ reports, frameworks and case studies on the Principle in the digital environment. UNICEF Innocenti published a 2025 working

was piloted, refined and implemented with trained facilitators; data were transcribed and translated by local partners, and analysed by UNICEF Innocenti. Review of academic literature, non-governmental organizations’ reports, frameworks and case studies on the Principle in the digital environment. UNICEF Innocenti published a 2025 working paperi on this literature, which was followed in 2026 by an update on policy, technology and practice developments.ii The report concludes with a set of high-level recommendations for governments and technology companies, drawing on insights gathered from children and those from youth and experts consulted throughout the project. Figure 1: Phases of research

PHASE 1. LITERATURE REVIEW

PHASE 2. PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH WITH CHILDREN

PHASE 3. YOUTH CONSULTATIONS

PHASE 4. EXPERT CONSULTATIONS9

Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Children’s interpretations of their best interests in relation to the digital environment Before presenting the specific preferences and recommendations of the participating children, it is important to understand how they define their own best interests in relation to the digital environment. This section summarizes several key themes that emerged during consultations when children described the conditions that either support or undermine their well-being online. Taken together, these insights illustrate how children conceptualize, understand and apply the notion of their best interests in digital spaces. Translating a complex and abstract concept such as ‘best interests’ across different languages posed challenges that may have inevitably shaped how children understood and discussed these issues. When children talk about their best interests in the digital environment, they do so mainly in practical, experiential and relational terms. The children’s understanding of the digital environment was informed by day-to-day interactions with technology and framed by how digital spaces make them feel, what those spaces enable them to do and how they influence relationships, learning, safety and well-being. They described their best interests as balancing between benefits and risks, autonomy and protection, and performance and safety. They noted that digital environments are not

day-to-day interactions with technology and framed by how digital spaces make them feel, what those spaces enable them to do and how they influence relationships, learning, safety and well-being. They described their best interests as balancing between benefits and risks, autonomy and protection, and performance and safety. They noted that digital environments are not inherently good or bad: “Technologies are neither good nor bad in themselves” (Spain, Madrid,3 14–17 age group). Rather, their impact depends on how they are used, moderated and contextualized. As one participant explained: “If we are using technology, then it must have advantages. If there were only 3 In countries where consultations were conducted in more than one city or region (India, USA, Malaysia and Spain), the region is specified in the quotes, otherwise only the country name is indicated.10 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice disadvantages, we would never have used it in the first place” (India, Assam, 14–17 age group). The children’s accounts reveal a semantic gap in their interpretation of ‘best interests’ as what they enjoy in digital environments rather than as a rights-based concept. When asked about their ‘best interests,’ children often instinctively interpreted the term in the literal sense, as what interests them and what they enjoy doing when online, rather than as a rights-based protective concept. When describing their best interests in this way, they most often referred to play, entertainment, social connection and learning . For example, younger children described gaming and video platforms as being in their best interests because they are enjoyable and help them to manage stress: “I like playing Roblox because it’s fun” (Malaysia, Sabah, 10–13 age group). Across contexts, the children reported valuing the ability to build new connections and keep in touch with friends and family: “The good thing is having friends on the apps, which allows us to be connected” (Spain, Madrid, 14– 17 age group). While more nuanced discussions about balancing protection and entertainment online also emerged during the consultations, in many

connections and keep in touch with friends and family: “The good thing is having friends on the apps, which allows us to be connected” (Spain, Madrid, 14– 17 age group). While more nuanced discussions about balancing protection and entertainment online also emerged during the consultations, in many initial accounts, best interests were associated with immediate benefits and a sense of enjoyment rather than with broader considerations of protections, rights or digital service providers’ responsibilities. The children sometimes frame certain practices that may expose them to new risks and harm as being in their best interests. When discussing access to technology, digital platforms, learning tools and privacy in digital environments, the participating children predominantly framed these as being in their best interests. They often associated (early) access to phones and digital platforms with independence, competence and participation in the 'modern world.' Some expressed regret about not having developed digital skills earlier: “I wish [mum] gave me [a] chance to learn about digital technology earlier” (Sierra Leone, 14–17 age group). From their perspective, access to technology supports autonomy, learning and social inclusion. Learning in digital environments was described in pragmatic terms, with some children viewing AI tools or video platforms as being in their best interests because they help them to understand schoolwork and acquire new skills. As a participant noted, “if you don’t understand something in class, you can access it later and understand it” (Spain, Madrid, 14–17 age group).11 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Nonetheless, some of the children recognized that these same practices can also expose them to harmful content, misinformation and unsafe interactions that they may not be prepared to navigate. For instance, some noted that relying on AI tools or other online platforms (such as Facebook or TikTok) for learning without adequate safeguards, supervision or critical literacy can undermine educational quality and increase exposure to misinformation: “there are times when we are exposed to this fake news, and we do not know how to distinguish it” (Spain, Madrid, 14–17 age group). The older children

for learning without adequate safeguards, supervision or critical literacy can undermine educational quality and increase exposure to misinformation: “there are times when we are exposed to this fake news, and we do not know how to distinguish it” (Spain, Madrid, 14–17 age group). The older children recognized that privacy and anonymity can also enable harm, including abusive behaviour and cyberbullying. One participant noted that “people think that just because they are behind a phone, they can say what they think” (Brazil, 14–17 age group). Their reflections revealed a degree of ambivalence: They value privacy, autonomy and the freedom to access and use content and platforms without restrictions, but not when these expose them to harm or allow others to act without accountability. The children’s accounts reveal tensions between short-term practical gains and long-term implications for their rights and development. The children’s accounts point to a tension between enjoyment and harm in digital environments and reveal contradictions about their perceptions of platform design in shaping these experiences. On the one hand, children described digital entertainment, such as gaming, social media, or streaming, as serving their best interests by providing opportunities for relaxation, enjoyment and social connection. On the other hand, their narratives also revealed experiences of loss of control, exposure to harm and diminished well-being. Not all of the children connected the harms they encounter online and the systems that enable them. Such systems include profitand data-driven business models, and gaps in governance and regulation, which together shape how platforms are designed and made available to end-users, including children. While some, particularly older adolescents, demonstrated awareness that certain platforms are intentional about maximizing engagement and time spent online, they still too often framed their best interests in terms of immediate experiences rather than in relation to more abstract considerations of rights or long-term development.12 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Across age groups, the children described losing track of time – “I don’t realize it’s been two hours” (USA, California, 10–13 age group) – and recalled

of rights or long-term development.12 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Across age groups, the children described losing track of time – “I don’t realize it’s been two hours” (USA, California, 10–13 age group) – and recalled instances of feeling disoriented: “TikTok is like a shopping mall. You enter, you don’t see the time” (Brazil, 14–17 age group). Many, especially adolescents, attributed these experiences to deliberate design choices. But, despite recognizing these manipulative characteristics of some online platforms, they often continued to view the experiences of gaming, play, or viewing content as beneficial. Moreover, even when they acknowledged systemic drivers of risk or even harm, in some cases children internalized responsibility for excessive or inappropriate use, noting that it is how one uses digital platforms that makes them ‘bad.’ As one adolescent reflected: “I don’t think there is anything bad in itself, but it is the excess that makes it bad” (Spain, Madrid, 14–17 age group). The children’s experiences nonetheless highlight an opportunity to balance adult supervision with child-centred approaches to ensuring their best interests in digital environments. The children’s perspectives revealed that how they understand their best interests in digital environments is dynamic, context dependent and relational. Alongside the tensions and challenges noted during consultations, the children also articulated what they think is in their best interests with notable maturity and insight. For example, they linked certain digital use to adverse mental and physical health impacts, including anxiety, stress, low self-esteem, body image concerns, eye strain and back pain, and some described how exposure to idealized online lives can erode self-worth, particularly during adolescence. They also identified the roles that parents, caregivers, other family members, teachers, governments and digital companies could and should play in supporting their best interests online, and they offered tangible recommendations for how these responsibilities could be fulfilled. The solutions proposed by the children underline that ensuring their best interests in digital environments should be centred on their lived experiences

caregivers, other family members, teachers, governments and digital companies could and should play in supporting their best interests online, and they offered tangible recommendations for how these responsibilities could be fulfilled. The solutions proposed by the children underline that ensuring their best interests in digital environments should be centred on their lived experiences of navigating these spaces. They highlighted the importance of striking a balance between protection and their autonomy to participate online, while also strengthening their digital literacy to help minimize potential risks and harms. Meaningfully upholding children’s best interest, therefore, requires their active involvement – while working alongside adults – in developing13 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice policies, tools and practices intended to protect and empower them online, so that decisions about solutions are made with them, not merely for them. As such, it is crucial for societies to complement normative interpretations of best interests with a child-centred approach grounded in children’s own experiences and expertise. Such an approach would foster digital spaces that balance safety with autonomy, privacy with guidance and protection with respect for children’s agency and evolving capacities. The suggestions and ideas provided by children in the following sections reveal how this approach could be put into practice in a way that respects children’s needs, rights and opinions about their own digital well-being.14 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice Aligning the digital environment with children’s best interests Wish 1. Improve safety, trust and protection in the digital world “It’s become a lawless land … many things need regulation.” – Brazil, 10–13 age group Across all contexts in the consultations, the participating children consistently called for online protection that actually works, emphasizing that digital spaces currently expose them to bullying, discrimination, scams, privacy violations and harmful or inappropriate content. Many described feeling unsafe, overwhelmed or discouraged from participating online, and they stressed that safeguarding children requires action from all actors: technology companies, policymakers, educators, parents, caregivers and communities. Younger children (10–13 age group) tended to focus more on personal risks such as

overwhelmed or discouraged from participating online, and they stressed that safeguarding children requires action from all actors: technology companies, policymakers, educators, parents, caregivers and communities. Younger children (10–13 age group) tended to focus more on personal risks such as cyberbullying and privacy breaches, while adolescents (14–17 age group)15 Children’s Best Interests in Digital Policy and Practice highlighted broader systemic harms, including misuse of AI, misinformation and racial discrimination. An adolescent in California reported: “Sometimes I’m playing video games with random strangers online ... I’m just exposed to racial slurs and derogatory terms ... it just makes me feel bad about myself” (USA, California, 14–17 age group). Children also described how harmful online experiences, combined with excessive screen time, affect both physical and mental health. Younger children often mentioned physical strain, particularly eye discomfort from prolonged screen use, while adolescents spoke more about distraction, anxiety and deteriorating mental well-being. A child in Malaysia explained, “Playing too many games can negatively affect studies” (Malaysia, Sabah, 10–13 age group). Across countries, children reported encountering violent, hateful, misleading or adult content online that often left them feeling unsafe or distressed. They also described experiencing or witnessing cyberbullying, peer-to-peer harm and toxic online communities that made digital spaces feel hostile: “Hate speech … It is too easy to bully” (USA, California, 14–17 age group). These and other concerns are explored in greater detail in the following sections. The children expressed a clear and unified message: Online environments must become safer, and this requires coordinated, collective action. They do not view safety as the responsibility of a single actor. Instead, they see a need for collective effort by governments, platforms, schools, families and communities to ensure better enforcement of existing regulations, stronger safeguards and more effective protection from online harm