Digital technology increasingly shapes how people learn, work, communicate, manage their finances, access healthcare and engage with public services. For many, these activities have become part of everyday life. Yet the ability to connect to the internet is not the same as having the confidence or capability to navigate everything that happens online.

A person may own a smartphone, use messaging applications every day and regularly access social media, while still finding it difficult to complete an online application, understand a digital financial service, manage a healthcare account or assess whether information generated by artificial intelligence can be trusted.

This distinction matters. If digital inclusion is measured primarily through access, device ownership or attendance at training sessions, important parts of people’s experiences can remain unseen.

1. The limitations of being online

For many years, conversations about the digital divide have understandably focused on whether people have access to the internet and suitable devices. These remain fundamental issues. Without reliable connectivity, an appropriate device and affordable access, many digital opportunities are simply out of reach.

However, access alone does not explain the full extent of digital exclusion. The quality of a person’s connection, the condition and suitability of their device, the cost of staying connected, the accessibility of services and the support available when something goes wrong all influence what people can do.

The distinction is reflected in the UK digital inclusion landscape. Good Things Foundation’s Digital Nation 2026 reports that 34 million adults are online with some form of digital barrier or vulnerability. It also reports that only one in three adults are comfortably online.

These figures challenge the assumption that digital exclusion is principally an issue for people who are completely offline. A substantial number of people are already connected but continue to experience barriers that limit the benefits they can gain from technology.

The policy challenge, therefore, is not simply to bring more people online. It is also to understand what happens after they connect.

2. Digital inclusion is a spectrum, not a binary state

Digital capability is rarely uniform across every part of a person’s life. Someone may be confident communicating with family online but less confident using digital banking. Another person may be comfortable searching for information but struggle to identify misleading content or protect their personal information.

A person may also have the necessary skills but lack a suitable device, affordable data or an accessible service. In other circumstances, the technology itself may create barriers through poor design, complex authentication processes or inaccessible interfaces.

This is why describing people simply as digitally included or digitally excluded can obscure important differences in their circumstances.

The UK Government’s Digital Inclusion Action Plan: One Year On recognises that digital inclusion involves access, skills, support and confidence, alongside the need for inclusive services and continued non-digital routes.

This broader understanding is important because people do not experience digital technology in isolated categories. Their ability to participate is shaped by the relationship between personal circumstances, technology, services and the support available around them.

3. The next digital divide is also about capability and confidence

Digital exclusion is not caused by a single barrier. It is often the result of several challenges interacting with one another.

• Affordability: People may struggle with the ongoing costs of broadband, mobile data, devices and repairs.
• Capability: Access to technology does not automatically provide the skills needed to complete unfamiliar or more complex tasks.
• Confidence: Fear of making mistakes, losing money, compromising personal information or being misled can discourage people from using services.
• Accessibility: Digital services may not adequately accommodate different disabilities, communication needs or ways of interacting with technology.
• Support: People may need trusted assistance when learning something new, resolving a problem or dealing with a change in a digital service.
• Relevance: People are more likely to engage when technology connects with something meaningful in their lives, rather than being presented as an abstract requirement.

These barriers can reinforce one another. A person who cannot afford reliable data may have fewer opportunities to practise. Someone who struggles with an inaccessible service may become less confident about using other services. A person who has learned a skill in one setting may not have the opportunity to apply it independently elsewhere.

Effective digital inclusion must therefore consider the conditions in which people use technology, not simply the skills they have been taught.

4. AI changes the conversation, but does not replace the fundamentals

Artificial intelligence is becoming part of the digital environment in which people study, work, communicate and access information. Its growing presence creates new opportunities, but also introduces new questions about confidence, privacy, reliability, safety and informed decision-making.

AI literacy should not be reduced to knowing which tools exist or how to write an effective prompt. People need opportunities to understand what these systems do, where their limitations lie, how their outputs should be evaluated and when human judgement remains essential.

They should also be able to make informed choices about whether and when to use AI. Digital inclusion should expand people’s agency, not create another expectation that everyone must adopt every new technology.

This is particularly important for people who are still developing foundational digital skills. Introducing AI without addressing connectivity, basic capability, accessibility and online safety risks creating another layer of inequality.

The opportunity is to make AI learning practical, accessible and relevant to everyday life. This includes exploring how AI can support learning, communication, creativity and problem-solving, while developing the critical judgement needed to question its outputs.

5. From measuring activity to understanding progress

If digital inclusion is a journey rather than a single state, our approach to measuring it must reflect that complexity.

Counting devices distributed, sessions delivered or people attending workshops can provide useful information about activity and reach. These measures help organisations understand what they have delivered. However, they do not necessarily show what changed for the people involved.

A more meaningful approach asks what people can now do, whether they can apply their learning in different circumstances, whether they feel more confident making decisions and whether they can access opportunities that were previously difficult to navigate.

It should also recognise that progress is not always linear. People may develop confidence in one area while continuing to need support in another. Their circumstances may change, services may be redesigned and new technologies may introduce unfamiliar challenges.

Measurement should make these realities visible rather than forcing individual experiences into a simple success-or-failure category.

What should meaningful measurement consider?

• Access: Does the person have suitable devices and reliable, affordable connectivity?
• Capability: Can they complete relevant tasks and apply their skills in practical situations?
• Confidence: Do they feel able to make informed decisions and approach unfamiliar digital activities?
• Independence: Can they complete tasks without requiring the same level of assistance?
• Transfer: Can they apply what they have learned in different settings and circumstances?
• Participation: Has their ability to learn, communicate, access services or contribute to their community improved?
• Continuity: What support remains necessary, and how can progress be sustained over time?

This approach does not diminish the importance of delivery data. Instead, it connects delivery to outcomes and helps organisations understand the difference between providing support and enabling lasting change.

6. From Devices to Impact: connecting support with outcomes

At IFB Gaming, we believe digital inclusion needs to be understood through the relationship between access, capability, confidence and participation. The objective is not simply to help people use technology. It is to support their ability to apply it meaningfully in their lives.

Our From Devices to Impact Digital Inclusion Toolkit reflects this principle. It encourages a broader view of digital inclusion, connecting foundational access and skills with practical application, emerging technologies and the opportunities people can pursue.

The IFB Stage Index extends this thinking by focusing on people’s changing needs, their progress through different stages of digital inclusion and the support or referrals that may be appropriate along the way.

These approaches are intended to support a more rounded understanding of digital inclusion. They are not a replacement for established national frameworks or sector-wide measurement initiatives. They contribute to the wider conversation about how organisations can better understand individual experiences and improve the support they provide.

These dimensions are connected rather than strictly sequential. A person may have access but need support with capability. Another may have developed strong skills but face affordability or accessibility barriers. The purpose is to understand the whole experience and respond to what is actually needed.

7. Building communities where participation is possible

Digital inclusion cannot be delivered by one organisation or sector alone. Individuals, community organisations, educators, employers, local authorities, public services, technology providers and policymakers all influence the conditions in which people participate.

Community-based support remains particularly important. Trusted local organisations can help people explore technology, build confidence, understand unfamiliar services and identify further support. They can also communicate the experiences of residents to organisations responsible for designing and delivering services.

However, the responsibility for inclusion should not rest entirely on individuals or frontline support providers. Organisations must also consider whether their systems are accessible, understandable and designed around the people expected to use them.

This requires a wider understanding of the relationship between people, technology and the systems around them.

IFB Gaming’s Seven Pillars of Future-Proofed Communities provides one way of exploring that relationship. It considers digital inclusion across interconnected areas of everyday life:

• Digital Citizenship: Participation, responsibility and informed engagement in digital society.
• Education: Lifelong learning, digital capability and access to knowledge.
• Living: The role of technology in everyday life, independence and community connection.
• Commerce: Access to financial services, economic activity and digital opportunities.
• Healthcare: The ability to navigate digital health information and services.
• Governance: Access to public services, information and opportunities to participate in civic life.
• Safety and Security: The knowledge and support needed to navigate digital environments safely.

The value of this perspective is that it moves digital inclusion beyond a narrow discussion about technology. It recognises that digital capability affects how people experience services, exercise choices and participate in their communities.

8. A different question for the next chapter of digital inclusion

The next chapter of digital inclusion should not be defined solely by how many people have access to devices, how many connections are available or how many training sessions have been delivered.

These measures remain important, but they need to sit alongside a deeper understanding of people’s experiences and the opportunities available to them.

We need to understand whether people can use technology in ways that are relevant to their lives, whether they can make informed decisions, whether services work for them and whether they have the support needed to continue developing their capabilities.

We must also recognise that meaningful participation is not the same as constant technology use. People should have the knowledge and opportunity to engage with digital services where appropriate, while retaining access to human support and non-digital alternatives.

For IFB Gaming, this is the direction of travel: from access towards capability, from capability towards confidence, and from confidence towards meaningful participation.

Digital inclusion is not a one-off intervention or a destination that people reach and leave behind. It is an ongoing process shaped by changing technologies, personal circumstances and the systems in which people live. Our approaches to learning, support, service design and measurement must evolve with it.

The IFB Gaming perspective

From access to systems. From systems to participation.

IFB Gaming is a London-based research and learning organisation working at the intersection of play, lifelong learning and social exclusion. We explore how inclusive approaches to technology and learning can help people develop capability, confidence and meaningful opportunities to participate.

Explore our work and join the conversation about the future of digital inclusion.

Explore the Toolkit Discover the Stage Index Visit IFB Gaming

Evidence and further reading

This article draws on published research and policy evidence to inform the discussion about digital inclusion, capability and participation.

1. Good Things Foundation. Digital Nation 2026 . National evidence on digital exclusion, barriers, vulnerabilities and the benefits of digital inclusion.
2. UK Government. Digital Inclusion Action Plan: One Year On . Government progress and priorities concerning access, skills, support and inclusive digital services.
3. Good Things Foundation. Only 1 in 3 UK adults are comfortably online as new data exposes hidden barriers facing 34 million people .
4. UK Government. A Safe, Informed Digital Nation . Policy considerations concerning media literacy and informed participation in digital society.