Gender and digital rights: An empirical study among young entrepreneurs

Received: 28 November 2024 Revised: 23 December 2024 Accepted: 27 December 2024 Published: 30 December 2024 Citation: Fariña-Sánchez, M., & Gutiérrez-Santiuste, E. (2025). Gender and Digital Rights: An Empirical Study Among Young Entrepreneurs. Administrative Sciences,15(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ admsci15010012 Copyright: © 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/). Article Gender and Digital Rights: An Empirical Study Among Young Entrepreneurs Marisa Fariña-Sánchez 1,* and Elba Gutiérrez-Santiuste 2 1Department of Research Methodology and Diagnosis in Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Seville, 41013 Seville, Spain 2Department of Pedagogy, Theory and History of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Granada, 18081 Granada, Spain; [email protected] *Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Digital rights have been little studied from a gender perspective until now. This research analyses, from a gender perspective, the characteristics of young entrepreneurs, the use of social media in their entrepreneurial projects, and their observance of digital rights. It uses a descriptive methodology based on the analysis of 144 successful cases of youth entrepreneurship. Percentage analysis and Chi-Square tests were carried out to determine gender differences. The results reveal that most of the entrepreneurial projects are led by men. The sectors of choice for female entrepreneurs seem to be, among others, the manufacturing industry and health activities. The most used social media are websites and Facebook. Overall, no statistically significant gender differences were found in terms of respect for digital rights. The results of this study point to the need to design and develop training actions aimed at gender equity in youth entrepreneurship and training in the observance and respect of digital rights. The results of this study have social implications insofar as they highlight the differences between genders in the development of entrepreneurial projects and the importance of protecting and respecting digital rights in social media, as established by international standards. Keywords: entrepreneurs; gender; digital rights; information communication technology; social media 1. Introduction In recent decades, a number of changes have been taking place, resulting in major repercussions in areas such as politics, economy and society, among others. The COVID-19 pandemic had serious consequences, mainly in terms of human losses. Moreover, with the conflict in Ukraine, the citizens have witnessed the disruption of the supply chain and an energy crisis with severe repercussions. The interplay of all these events is preventing a return to the relative stability (in terms of economy, employment, growth, etc.) which existed in the pre-pandemic era (Ionescu-Somers & Shay,2022). Another aspect that has been adversely affected by the above-mentioned events has been the labour market. Society has witnessed rising unemployment figures in many social groups, but mainly in vulnerable populations such as women and young people. Unemployment in the euro area, according to Eurostat (2023) data from July 2022 to 2023, has decreased from 6.7% to 6.4%. However, among young people, unemployment has risen from 13.8% to 14.5%, while, among women, although it has fallen from 7.1% to 6.8%, it is still higher than among men—in which it has fallen from 6.3% to 6.2%. In other words, we find, on the one hand, that youth unemployment worsened in 2023, despite the Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15010012 Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 2 of 18 fact that it was already double the general rate, and, on the other hand, we observe that unemployment among women is higher than both the general rate and the rate for men. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development [OECD] & European Union,2020), Spain is, among the analyzed nations, the first country in terms of unemployment rate in all age groups. According to data from the Spanish government (Public Service of State Employment [SEPE], 2023), Andalusia is the autonomous community with the highest unemployment rate (26%). Spanish female unemployment in July 2023 is the second highest in Europe after Greece, at 14.9% and 14.8%, respectively (Eurostat,2023). In the case of Andalusia, the percentage of unemployed women is higher than that of men (454,286 people compared to 293,859) and is higher in all Andalusian provinces ( SEPE,2023 ). Considering the employment sectors where women mainly develop their activities, it can be observed that the service sector is at the head of female unemployment, both at the Spanish national level and at the Andalusian regional level (SEPE,2023). In this context, entrepreneurship is presented as a way for people to create their own professional prospects through the development of an entrepreneurial project. The term entrepreneur has been studied from different theoretical perspectives which have influenced its different conceptions. Zhao et al. (2021) noted that the concept has been influenced by three schools of thought: Austrian, German and neoclassical. These influences have shifted the concept of entrepreneurship from being understood as the ability to resist in uncertain environments to being conceived as the ability to take risks, to identify and seize opportunities and to be able to innovate. These authors also point out that there seems to be some agreement that entrepreneurship is the ability of the individual to discover and use identified opportunities to achieve observable rewards. Social media (SM), in the form of social networks (e.g., Facebook, Instagram or Twitter), blogs and websites, are increasingly occupying an outstanding place in the development of entrepreneurship. People who begin with the use of these technologies have the possibility of widening their range of action to reach different markets, thus making their brand, their values and qualities known (Naudin & Patel,2017). Thus, entrepreneurship becomes a key element to encourage economic development and employment creation (Carvalho et al.,2021). In this sense, the gender perspective cannot be ignored as a crucial factor in entrepreneurial initiative, as it has a greater influence than age (Vodă& Florea,2019). Women’s entrepreneurship makes use of SM and allows their projects to be made visible across borders. However, the emergence of these information and communication technologies (ICTs), the internet and social networks also reflect the so-called digital divide in terms of access and use as well as the reproduction of existing inequalities in society, including gender and age (Herranz et al.,2017). ICT and gender inequalities in entrepreneurship are currently under-researched, as Gawel and Minska-Struzik (2023) state. 2. Theoretical Framework 2.1. Youth Entrepreneurship, Gender and Intersectionality Scientific literature focusing on youth entrepreneurship and gender is scarce. Aljuwaiber (2021) reviewed 271 articles published between 2009 and 2019 and found that gender and entrepreneurship (69 articles) and youth entrepreneurship (41 articles) are relevant topics. However, no studies were found which combine both topics. There is little previous literature focusing on youth entrepreneurship in relation to gender. In terms of the subject matter of these articles, Ilynkh (2015) investigates youth entrepreneurship from economic, social and psychological perspectives. Stough (2016) conducts an analysis of research on entrepreneurship and economic development where he Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 3 of 18 considers aspects such as youth entrepreneurship and gender. Sharma (2018) investigates the role of gender and culture in young people’s intentions and perceptions of barriers to entrepreneurship. Finally, Weiss et al. (2023) analyze intra-group support and embeddedness in the development of women’s youth entrepreneurship. With regard to research on youth entrepreneurship, it should be noted that research on youth entrepreneurship is relevant, as stated by the Organisation for Economic CoOperation and Development [OECD] and European Union (2020) and the European Union (Duell,2018), because of the need to address high levels of youth unemployment through the development of entrepreneurial projects. This situation, and the economic and social conditions, pose new challenges for young people (Wasilczuk & Karyy,2022). They are distinguished by being determined and adaptive, which makes them a subject of study. However, unemployment figures, as described above, not only affect young people and make them a target for the development of entrepreneurial projects, but women also require special attention (Stough,2016). Research by Hamdani et al. (2023) points to the importance of women and female entrepreneurship in both social and economic development in many countries. Women have shown that they are capable of recognising and taking advantage of the different opportunities that the current crisis situation offers and, thus, of further contributing to the economic growth of their area, region or country. Regarding sectors of activity where these women are entrepreneurs, almost half of them work in the wholesale and retail trade. In addition, one in five women develop their projects in the public sector, in health, education and social services (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, GEM,2022). Nevertheless, the proportion of women in technology-related sectors is 2.7% as compared to 4.7% for men. However, there are certain barriers, both internal and external, that women face when it comes to entrepreneurship. Although nowadays the number of women entrepreneurs is still increasing, the support given to them by governments and institutions is not enough (Ionescu-Somers & Shay,2022). According to the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Report 2021/2022 (GEM,2022), women are less active than men on a global level. Out of every five entrepreneurs, two are women, in the case of projects in the early stages of development. In turn, according to this report, at a global level, women account for one in three entrepreneurs in high-growth and innovative projects. The concept of intersectionality (Crenshaw,1989) shows that various motives or factors interact with each other, giving rise to other sources of inequality. In our case, we are talking about gender and age. Bignotti and Le Roux (2018) highlight the importance of entrepreneurship spirit and entrepreneurship as a solution to youth unemployment as related to gender. These authors point out that women secondary school students have a greater need for achievement than their male peers, and that they rely more on their mentors and contact networks to overcome certain difficulties, e.g., access to funding. Sharma (2018) investigates whether gender has a significant influence on young people’s entrepreneurial intentions, finding that female students have less entrepreneurial intentions than males. Meanwhile, Arias et al. (2021) point out the demographic factors which affect rural entrepreneurship in young people, concluding that gender and age are interacting factors that influence project development. According to these authors, women are less entrepreneurial and those under 24 years of age are more likely to report a desire not to be entrepreneurial. Finally, Hamdani et al. (2023) point out in their research that women’s perceptions of gender stereotypes and perceived social support mediate their self-efficacy in terms of entrepreneurial intention. In light of the above, it seems that there is scientific evidence of the role that age and gender play as an intersection in the intention and subsequent development of entrepreneurial projects. This makes them topics of scientific interest. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 4 of 18 2.2. Social Media (SM) and Entrepreneurship Social media, social networks (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter), blogs and websites, among others, have become an essential element for entrepreneurs (Secundo et al.,2020). Thanks to these technologies, people can reach different markets, promote their brands (Naudin & Patel,2017) and influence their innovation (López-Lemus et al.,2024). In the review carried out by Secundo et al. (2020) on the impact of social media on entrepreneurship and its process, these authors highlight, firstly, that there is scarce literature on this impact. Secondly, it focuses on four lines: the use of social media in entrepreneurial learning and self-employment; the use of social media as a tool for project promotion (purpose of this research); social media in itself as a potential entrepreneurial opportunity; and, finally, social media as an enabler when creating entrepreneurial networks. Regarding the relationship between SM, young people and entrepreneurship, Shi et al. (2022) argue that both the use of SM and e-commerce provide key opportunities for young people to become entrepreneurs. Naudin and Patel (2017) note that the public nature of SM allows, in the case of women, for the presentation of entrepreneurial experience, values and qualities. In this line, Manolova et al. (2020) claims that women entrepreneurs have taken advantage of the opportunities offered by the pandemic to digitise their business models, a fact that offsets the assumption that women use technology less (Raman et al.,2022). In addition, Steel (2021) points out that, increasingly, educated women are starting their projects by using digital devices and social networks. Through these online media, women offer their products and are able to cross borders. They offer their products to international markets, obtain international products to further develop their project and can bring variety and originality to their products. Nicolescu et al. (2022) add that the use of these platforms allows global inequalities to be reduced by enabling the most disadvantaged people to be incorporated into global economic flows. Specifically, in their research—contextualised in small businessmen and women in Chile, Italy and India—they highlight the advantages of using these platforms. Women positively value the use of technology in their entrepreneurial projects, as they see it as a complementary job and value the advantages of the flexibility and work–life balance that this type of work offers them, enhancing their contribution to the community. Brydges and Hracs (2019) also point out the advantages that websites and social media have had for the fashion industry and indicate that Instagram is the most widely used channel for promoting brands and interacting with the public. Social networks also have the advantage of their low cost and the possibility of direct sales. In short, there is evidence of the advantages that the use of SM offers women entrepreneurs when selling their brand and products. However, the relationship between the use of social media and female entrepreneurship needs further research. In the review of Raman et al. (2022) on female entrepreneurship between 1991 and 2021, the authors identify the three most outstanding themes: barriers and catalysts to female entrepreneurship; cultural and social practices, such as childcare; economic development and female entrepreneurship. 2.3. Digital Divide and Gender As shown in the previous subsection, ICTs have brought about a great change in many areas and activities, including entrepreneurship, but they also serve to reproduce social and political inequalities (Herranz et al.,2017). Among these inequalities, the intersectionality between gender and age appears again. The differences that occur between individuals, social groups and even countries when it comes to accessing and knowing how to use ICTs are referred to as the digital divide (Acosta-Velázquez & Pedraza-Amador,2020). Bokhari and Awuni (2023) argue Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 5 of 18 that digitisation reflects or exacerbates pre-existing inequalities, and that gender, age, education and socio-economic status significantly influence digital inclusion, indicating persistent inequalities and barriers. Saavedra-García(2023) states that this gap is among the barriers faced by women when it comes to entrepreneurship. A barrier that hinders the digitalisation of women’s entrepreneurial projects and, therefore, access to new markets, the ability to diversify their offer and expand the market and sales channels, weave new networks, access government training and funding programmes or even access and create women’s networks, among others. Therefore, as stated by Dini et al. (2021), reducing this gap is essential for young women’s SMEs to add value and become more productive. The elimination of this barrier requires the intervention of governments to create public policies and programmes that reduce this gap and favour the digitisation processes of women entrepreneurs. In fact, Goal 5.b of the Sustainable Development Goals [SDGs] already seeks to ‘Improve the use of enabling technology, in particular information and communications technology, to promote the empowerment of women’ (United Nations,n.d.-a, para. 6) and, in terms of reducing intersectional discrimination, Goal 10.2, where ‘By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all people, regardless of age, gender, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status’ (United Nations,n.d.-b, para. 7). It is worth considering that, if gender and age are variables that influence this digital divide, hindering the development of entrepreneurial projects, they may also be interfering with the knowledge and application of digital right and principles in their projects on social networks. 2.4. Digital Rights and Principles The European Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles for the Digital Decade (European Commission,2023) says that digital technologies are changing every area of our lives, as well as opening up new and unprecedented opportunities. The COVID19 pandemic has undoubtedly hastened the role and perception of digitalization in our societies and economies. The pace of digital transformation has brought with it innovations and tools that allow us to better address social challenges. At the same time, digital transformation has provided easier access to education, training and information and has opened up new spaces for public discourse. The spread of digital technologies has enhanced freedom by allowing people to connect with each other even in the remotest parts of the world, but it has also opened up new opportunities for citizens, workers and consumers. The spread of digital technologies has enabled the creation and growth of businesses while allowing for the inclusion of disadvantaged groups and the progress of society as a whole (European Commission,2023). However, the availability of and access to these digital technologies and the data they produce has given rise to new risks with serious consequences for citizens, their security and even the foundation of societies. These risks concern privacy, security of personal data, harmful and unsafe content, cybercrime and abuse, among others. Neither citizens nor businesses should have fewer rights because they work in digital environments. To guarantee these fundamental rights and to ensure that people can take advantage of their opportunities in these environments, the European Union has taken preventive measures, although this is not an easy task given the complex nature of the use of these technologies and their solutions. For their part, start-ups and entrepreneurial companies face new challenges internally and externally to social media in order to make their business ideas visible and marketable (Oppong et al.,2020). Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 6 of 18 In the Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles, the European Union also presents its commitment to ensure that this digital transformation protects citizens and is safe and sustainable. A transformation where people are at the center of all actions and measures. All of this is in line with the fundamental values and rights established by the European Union. Among the principles set out in this Declaration (European Commission,2023) are the following: • Digital technologies must protect people’s rights, support democracy and ensure that all those involved in the digital area act responsibly and safely. • Technology should bring people together, not divide them. Everyone should have access to the Internet, digital skills, digital public services and fair working conditions. • People should benefit from a fair online environment, be safe from illegal and harmful content, and be empowered when engaging with new and evolving technologies, such as artificial intelligence. • Citizens should have the opportunity to participate in the democratic process at all levels and to have control over their own data. • The digital environment must be safe and protected. All users, regardless of age and condition, must be empowered and protected. • Digital devices must account for sustainability and the ecological transition. Citizens need to be aware of the environmental impact and energy consumption of their devices. As a response to the above, some European countries have drafted their own Charter of Digital Rights. This is the case of Portugal, with the Portuguese Charter of Human Rights in the Digital Era (Lopes & Nunes,2021), and Italy, a pioneer with its Internet Bill of Rights (Camera of Italy,2015). Specifically, in Spain, the Spanish Digital Agenda 2025 (Government of Spain,2021) sets out, among its 10 strategic goals, the drafting of this charter. This document aims to be the reference framework for ensuring the rights and obligations of citizens and companies in the digital age. This charter is based on the developments in personal data protection and the guarantee of digital rights and addresses the following rights: (a) right to freedom, i.e., right to identity, data protection, pseudo-anonymity, non-traceability, cybersecurity and digital inheritance; (b) right to equality, including nondiscrimination, access to the Internet, protection of minors, universal accessibility and access gaps; (c) the right to participation and shaping of the public space, i.e., neutrality, freedom of expression and information, receiving accurate information, participation, digital education and access to public services through these technologies; (d) the rights of the working and specific environment; and, finally, (e) the guarantees of those rights and the effectiveness of what is stated in this document. However, the majority of young entrepreneurs do not know or do not have sufficient knowledge of these regulations, their applications and the risk of not complying with them when it comes to making their entrepreneurial projects visible on the internet or social networks (Barbosa et al.,2024). 2.5. Entrepreneurship Support Centres According to Colombo et al. (2019) and Spigel and Harrison (2018), within the entrepreneurial ecosystem there are organisations whose aim is to support and develop entrepreneurship. These organisations provide advice, financing, opening up to other markets, infrastructures and mentoring, among others (Labudová& Jánošová,2019;Nowi´nski & Rialp,2016;Sarkar et al.,2019). Among these organisations is the European Commission itself, which has launched a website (European Commission,n.d.) where citizens can find information on how to create an entrepreneurial project. In European countries there are Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 7 of 18 organisations which support entrepreneurship, such as the Local Enterprise Office (n.d.) in Ireland or the Chamber of Commerce (KVK,n.d.) in the Netherlands. For Andalusia (Spain), which is the target community of this research, the leading organisation in terms of entrepreneurial advice is the Andalusian Public Foundation Andalusia Starts Up. This is a public entity belonging to the Regional Government of Andalusia and, more specifically, attached to the Ministry of Knowledge, Research and Universities. It was created with the objective of helping to start up, develop and consolidate business ideas, aware of the value of entrepreneurs as creators of wealth and employment (Siles-Moreno,n.d.). Through its more than 250 Andalusian Entrepreneurship Centres (CADE, by its acronym in Spanish) spread throughout the Andalusian region, this foundation offers free services to entrepreneurs who wish to create a business project or to companies which are already established, grouped into three areas: (a) support for the entrepreneurial project and the creation of the company by means of information, communication and personal attention; project design and business plan; assistance in setting up the company; accompaniment, incubation and tutoring; mentoring by experienced professionals; (b) support in the strengthening of business projects by offering accommodation, training, consultancy, management tools, assistance in strategic decision making; and, finally, (c) promotion of the entrepreneurial culture with actions within education in entrepreneurial skills, the promotion and guidance of entrepreneurial initiative and the development of entrepreneurial activity in the local environment. On the basis of the above, the general objective of this research is to analyze the differences between genders in young entrepreneurial projects, both in the observance of digital rights and in the type of SM used to advertise each project. Specifically, it examines the issue by asking the following questions: • Objective 1. What are the characteristics of young entrepreneurs, their projects and business activity according to gender? • Objective 2. Are there statistically significant differences between men and women in the type of SM used to promote their entrepreneurial projects? • Objective 3. Are there statistically significant differences between men and women in the observance of digital rights in the SM? 3. Materials and Methods A descriptive methodology has been used in a multiple case study. We have reviewed the initiatives contained in the Andalucía Emprende program—developed in the CADEs. A total of 144 entrepreneurial proposals were used to analyze the entrepreneurs, their projects and their SM. This study complies with the ethical requirements of the University of Granada (2019). 3.1. Sample The participants were 144 entrepreneurs. The average age of the participants was 24.58 years, SD = 4.15. A total of 144 SMs of the entrepreneurial projects were analyzed. The number of companies created in 2022 in the Autonomous Community of Andalusia was 12,597 (Junta de Andalucía,2022); 460 projects were hosted on the institutional platform, of which 220 corresponded to young entrepreneurs. Considering sampling and representativeness requirements, a confidence level of 95%, and an error of 5%, this study had a sample that exceeded the minimum size required to be representative (population 220, minimum sample 141). Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 8 of 18 3.2. Data Structuring and Analysis Procedure For this study, two parallel processes were carried out: on the one hand, the selection of people and entrepreneurial projects; on the other hand, the construction of a grid for the analysis of the projects. Process 1. The data were structured on the basis of the information contained in the Andalucía Emprende program and the SMs of each of the entrepreneurial projects. The projects were located on the website of the project bank and considered successful experiences and cases (Andalucia Emprende Fundación Pública Andaluza,n.d.). Afterward, the entrepreneurs who had started up at an age of less than 29 years were selected. Process 2. Six researchers have constructed a grid (Supplementary Materials) for coding information. The grid has been based on the Charter on Digital Rights document (Ministry of Economic Affairs and Digital Transformation,2021), which aims to articulate a reference framework that safeguards citizens’ rights in the new digital reality. Fifty normative documents were also used with the following descriptors: digital rights, digital skills, internet and social responsibilities, digital entrepreneurship, young entrepreneurs and the European Union Legal Framework. Subsequently, documents related to at least one category of digital rights (Government of Spain,2021;European Commission,2023) were selected, and, finally, documents that explicitly refer to one of the indicators were identified and selected. Afterward, an item pool was created, and an interdisciplinary discussion group was set up with two rounds of discussion for proposals to improve the grid. Later, the grid was validated by experts in entrepreneurship and digital rights. The final version of the analysis tool consists of four sections: (a) socio-demographic and entrepreneurial project data (nine items) and other groups of rights based on those identified in Gallego-Arrufat et al. (2023); (b) digital rights of equality and participation, including the right to universal access, participation, information and digital education (EPDR, 11 items); (c) digital rights of freedom, including the right to privacy, identity, security and protection of privacy (FDR, 10 items); (d) digital rights of development, creation and sustainability, including copyright, exploitation of information and participation, data management and environmental protection (DCSDR, six items). The data obtained were processed with the statistical software SPSS v. 25. Six items were removed because they were not of research interest (e.g., name of the member who extracted the information, province . . . ). Intercoder reliability was performed in order to ensure a degree of conformity and concordance between the three researchers in the assignment of the information contained in the selected cases. This was achieved by performing Krippendorf’s alpha. In a first round, seven cases with Krippendorf’s alpha below 0.67 were obtained, three cases with Krippendorf’s alpha between 0.67 and 0.8, and 16 cases with Krippendorf’s alpha higher than 0.8. According to Krippendorf (2004, pp. 241–242 ), data with reliabilities whose confidence interval is below the minimum acceptable (not less than 0.67) should not be accepted. Data between 0.67 and 0.8 and an acceptable reliability, with alpha above 0.8, can be considered beyond reasonable doubt. For this reason, after clarification of the differences found, a second round of intercoder agreement was carried out, obtaining an alpha above 0.8 in all cases except one. Reliability was analyzed through the Kunder–Richardson coefficient, KR-20, which De Vellis (2017) says is the appropriate coefficient for dichotomous variables. A result of alpha = 0.94 was obtained; this result is almost perfect (Landis & Koch,1977, p. 165). In order to detect differences between the level of protection of the different digital rights (objective 3), three ranks have been established: •Rank 1, between 0 and 3 digital rights have been registered—low level; •Rank 2, between 4 and 7 digital rights have been registered—medium level; •Rank 3, between 8 and 11 digital rights are registered—high level. Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 9 of 18 These levels are obtained by counting rights in the three sections analyzed in each case: digital rights to equality and participation; to freedom; to development, creation and sustainability. The information used on SM (item 9) refers to the dissemination of media types by the entrepreneur, (e.g., websites, blogs, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, . . . ). Twelve SM typologies were considered, with nine of them remaining in the final version because no cases were found or because they were specific to a particular business activity (e.g., Tripadvisor). 4. Results The Kolmogorov–Smirnov normality test was conducted on the data concerning digital rights, and p< 0.05 was obtained. This is normal for large samples. However, after checking the histograms and plots (Normal Q-Q Plot), the scores appear to be reasonably normally distributed. 4.1. Objective 1: What Are the Characteristics of Young Entrepreneurs, Their Projects and Business Activity According to Gender? Out of the projects analyzed, male projects account for 76.4%, while female projects account for 23.6%. Regarding the age of the entrepreneur at the start of the project, Figure 1 shows the distribution. Adm. Sci. 2025, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 20 • Rank 3, between 8 and 11 digital rights are registered—high level. These levels are obtained by counting rights in the three sections analyzed in each case: digital rights to equality and participation; to freedom; to development, creation and sustainability. The information used on SM (item 9) refers to the dissemination of media types by the entrepreneur. (e.g., websites, blogs, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, …). Twelve SM typologies were considered, with nine of them remaining in the final version because no cases were found or because they were specific to a particular business activity (e.g., Tripadvisor). 4. Results The Kolmogorov–Smirnov normality test was conducted on the data concerning digital rights, and p < 0.05 was obtained. This is normal for large samples. However, after checking the histograms and plots (Normal Q-Q Plot), the scores appear to be reasonably normally distributed. 4.1. Objective 1:What Are the Characteristics of Young Entrepreneurs, Their Projects and Business Activity According to Gender? Out of the projects analyzed, male projects account for 76.4%, while female projects account for 23.6%. Regarding the age of the entrepreneur at the start of the project, Figure 1 shows the distribution. Figure 1. Percentage of cases according to age at starting up and gender. Figure 1 shows that most of the men start up in a higher age band than women. That is, while most men start up between 27 and 29 years old, women start up between 24 and 26. At younger ages (18 years old or below), men and women undertake in a similar way. It is worth noting that, between the ages of 19 and 20, no female entrepreneurs were found in the cases analyzed. In the item on economic activity, a difference in the percentages between men and women can be seen. Figure 2 shows gender differences. The difference is especially apparent in the manufacturing industry and in activities related to agriculture, animal husbandry, forestry, and fishing. However, equal percentages were found in other sectors (e.g., accommodation and food services, education). In fewer cases, more female entrepreneurship was found than male entrepreneurship (e.g., health and social services, water supply). Figure 1. Percentage of cases according to age at starting up and gender. Figure 1shows that most of the men start up in a higher age band than women. That is, while most men start up between 27 and 29 years old, women start up between 24 and 26. At younger ages (18 years old or below), men and women undertake in a similar way. It is worth noting that, between the ages of 19 and 20, no female entrepreneurs were found in the cases analyzed. In the item on economic activity, a difference in the percentages between men and women can be seen. Figure 2shows gender differences. The difference is especially apparent in the manufacturing industry and in activities related to agriculture, animal husbandry, forestry, and fishing. However, equal percentages were found in other sectors (e.g., accommodation and food services, education). In fewer cases, more female entrepreneurship was found than male entrepreneurship (e.g., health and social services, water supply). Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 16 of 18 order to, on this basis, review European, national and regional policies and programs on entrepreneurship and the responsible use of SM and new information technologies. Supplementary Materials: The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https:// www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/admsci15010012/s1. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, E.G.-S. and M.F.-S.; methodology, E.G.-S.; software, E.G.- S.; validation, E.G.-S.; formal analysis, E.G.-S.; investigation, E.G.-S. and M.F.-S.; resources, E.G.-S. and M.F.-S.; data curation, E.G.-S. and M.F.-S.; writing—original draft preparation, E.G.-S. and M.F.-S.; writing—review and editing, E.G.-S. and M.F.-S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This study was funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) 2014–2020 Operational Program/Andalusian Government/Department of Economic Transformation, Industry, Knowledge and Universities/Project A.SEJ.46.UGR20. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: The research complies with the privacy policy of the University of Granada, Spain privacy policy (University of Granada,2019). Data Availability Statement: The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available but are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Acknowledgments: To the group of collaborators of the DiagnosticaTEC project and to Grian A. Cutanda for his help with the translation. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of this study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results. References Acosta-Velázquez, S. C., & Pedraza-Amador, E. (2020). La Brecha Digital de Género como factor limitante del desarrollo femenino [Digital gender gap as a limiting factor for female development]. Publicación Semestral,10, 22–27. [CrossRef] Aljuwaiber, A. (2021). Entrepreneurship research in the Middle East and North Africa: Trends, challenges, and sustainability issues. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies,13(3), 380–426. [CrossRef] Andalucia Emprende Fundación Pública Andaluza. (n.d.). Casos de éxito [Success stories]. Available online: https://guiajuvenil .andaluciaemprende.es/casos-de-exito-de-emprendimiento-en-andalucia/ (accessed on 12 May 2022). Arias, F. J., Ribes-Giner, G., Arango-Botero, D., & Garcés Giraldo, L. F. (2021). Factores sociodemográficos que inciden en el emprendimiento rural de jóvenes en Antioquia, Colombia [Socio-demographic factors influencing rural youth entrepreneurship in Antioquia, Colombia]. Revista Venezolana de Gerencia,26(96), 1218–1240. [CrossRef] Barbosa, B., Saura, J. R., & Bennett, D. (2024). How do entrepreneurs perform digital marketing across the customer journey? A review and discussion of the main uses. Journal of Technology Transfer,49, 69–103. [CrossRef] Bignotti, A., & Le Roux, I. (2018). Discovering the entrepreneurial endowment of the youth. African Journal of Economic and Management Studies,9(1), 14–33. [CrossRef] Bokhari, H., & Awuni, E. T. (2023). Examining employment and socioeconomic well-being in Morocco and Tunisia. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies,30(3), 1149–1169. [CrossRef] Brydges, T., & Hracs, B. J. (2019). What motivates millennials? How intersectionality shapes the working lives of female entrepreneurs in Canada’s fashion industry. Gender, Place & Culture,26(4), 510–532. [CrossRef] Camera of Italy. (2015). Declaration of internet right. Available online: https://www.camera.it/application/xmanager/projects/leg17/ commissione_internet/testo_definitivo_inglese.pdf (accessed on 25 May 2023). Carvalho, L., Mavlutova, I., Lesinskis, K., & Dias, R. (2021). Entrepreneurial perceptions of students regarding business professional career: The study on gender differences in Latvia. Economics and Sociology,14(3), 220–241. [CrossRef] Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Colombo, M. G., Dagnino, G. B., Lehmann, E. E., & Salmador, M. P. (2019). The governance of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Small Business Economics,52(2), 419–428. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 17 of 18 Council of Employment, Training and Self-Employment, Junta de Andalucía, Andalucía Emprende Fundación Pública Andaluza & The Forum of Digital Entrepreneurs of the South. (2021). Mujeres emprendedoras digitales [“Digital women entrepreneurs”]. Available online: https://cutt.ly/o3FG4oe (accessed on 15 May 2023). Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum,8(1), 139–167. De Vellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development. theory and applications. SAGE. Dini, M., Gligo, N., & Patiño, A. (2021). Transformación digital de las pymes. Elementos para el diseño de políticas [Digital transformation of SMEs. Elements for policy design]. Documentos de Proyectos (LC/TS.2021/99). Santiago, Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe. Available online: https://www.cepal.org/sites/default/files/publication/files/47183/S2100372 _ es.pdf (accessed on 18 December 2022). Duell, N. (2018). Employment and entrepreneurship under the youth guarantee. European Commission. [CrossRef] European Commission. (n.d.). Entrepreneurship and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Available online: https://single-market -economy.ec.europa.eu/smes_en (accessed on 25 May 2023). European Commission. (2023). European declaration on digital rights and digital principles for the digital decade. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ES/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32023C0123(01) (accessed on 9 May 2024). Eurostat. (2023). Unemployment statatistics. Available online: https://cutt.ly/Uwbk7nYn (accessed on 15 May 2024). Gallego-Arrufat, M. J., Torres-Hernández, N., García-Martínez, I., & Domene-Martos, S. (2023). An educational framework in digital rights and responsibilities for young entrepreneurs. SAGE Open,13(4), 1–17. [CrossRef] Gawel, A., & Minska-Struzik, E. (2023). The digitalisation as gender equaliser? The import and export of digitally delivered services in shaping female entrepreneurship in European countries. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship,15(3), 293–313. [CrossRef] Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM). (2022). Global entrepreneurships monitor 2021/22 women’s entrepreneurship report: From crisis to opportunity. Available online: https://www.gemconsortium.org/reports/womens-entrepreneurship (accessed on 19 December 2023). Government of Spain. (2021). Spanish digital agenda 2025, españa digital 2025 [Carta de derechos digitales]. Available online: https:// espanadigital.gob.es/sites/agendadigital/files/2022-02/E10M45 _ Carta _ de _ Derechos _ Digitales.pdf (accessed on 12 May 2022). Hamdani, N. A., Ramadani, V., Anggadwita, G., Maulida, G. S., Zuferi, R., & Maalaoui, A. (2023). Gender stereotype perception, perceived social support, and self-efficacy in increasing women’s entrepreneurial intentions. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research,29(6), 1290–1313. [CrossRef] Herranz, C., Lorente, J., & Sánchez Vítores, I. (2017, September 22). Una mirada desde la interseccionalidad a la brecha digital. XIII Congreso Español de Ciencia Política, Santiago de Compostela, Spain. Available online: https://aecpa.es/files/view/pdf/ congress-papers/13-0/1889/ (accessed on 29 December 2019). Ilynkh, S. A. (2015). Russian youth entrepreneurship in the context of three approaches. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences,6(4), 381–387. [CrossRef] Ionescu-Somers, A., & Shay, J. (2022). Preface. Available online: https://www.gemconsortium.org/reports/womens-entrepreneurship (accessed on 2 December 2023). Junta de Andalucía. (2022). Andalucía emprende, informe de gestión 2022. Available online: https://www.andaluciaemprende.es/ publicaciones-y-estadisticas/resultados-de-actividad-y-memorias/ (accessed on 18 May 2023). Krippendorf, K. (2004). Content analysis. An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). SAGE. KVK. (n.d.). Houvast voor ondernemers. Available online: https://www.kvk.nl (accessed on 15 May 2023). Labudová, L., & Jánošová, D. (2019). Analysis of support and identification of barriers to SMEs in Slovakia and in the Czech Republic. Serbian Journal of Management,14(2), 437–453. [CrossRef] Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics,33(1), 159–174. [CrossRef] Local Enterprise Office. (n.d.). Making it happen. Available online: https://www.localenterprise.ie (accessed on 20 May 2023). Lopes, D., & Nunes, J. (2021). Portuguese charter of human rights in the digital era. Available online: https://www.equalitylaw.eu/ downloads/5423-portugal-portuguese-charter-of-human-rights-in-the-digital-era-85-kb (accessed on 16 December 2022). López-Lemus, J. A., Garza Carranza, M. T., Schmitt-Revilla, M., & López-Lemus, J. G. (2024). The role of social media and innovation in Mexican industrial entrepreneurship. Innovar,34(92), 1–21. [CrossRef] Manolova, T. S., Brush, C. G., Edelman, L. F., & Elam, A. (2020). Pivoting to stay the course: How women entrepreneurs take advantage of opportunities created by the COVID-19 pandemic. International Small Business Journal,38(4), 481–491. [CrossRef] Ministry of Economic Affairs and Digital Transformation. (2021). Carta de derechos digitales. Gobierno de España [Charter of digital rights. Government of Spain]. Available online: https://portal.mineco.gob.es/RecursosNoticia/mineco/prensa/noticias/2021/ Carta_Derechos_Digitales_RedEs_140721.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2022). Naudin, A., & Patel, K. (2017). Entangled expertise: Women’s use of social media in entrepreneurial work. European Journal of Cultural Studies,22(5–6), 511–527. [CrossRef] Adm. Sci. 2025,15, 12 18 of 18 Nicolescu, R., Venkatraman, S., & Haynes, N. (2022). Working for your own folks: The microeconomics of social media. Journal of Cultural Economy,15(2), 168–183. [CrossRef] Nowi´nski, W., & Rialp, A. (2016). The impact of social networks on perceptions of international opportunities. Journal of Small Business Management,54(2), 445–461. [CrossRef] Oppong, G. Y. S., Singh, S., & Kujur, F. (2020). Potential of digital technologies in academic entrepreneurship: A study. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research,26(7), 1449–1476. [CrossRef] Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development [OECD] & European Union. (2020). Policy briefs on recent developments in youth entrepreneurship. Publications Office of the European Union. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/content/ dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2020/03/policy-brief-on-recent-developments-in-youth-entrepreneurship _ bf53d760/ 5f5c9b4e-en.pdf (accessed on 12 December 2021). Public Service of State Employment, SEPE. (2023). Datos nacionales de paro registrado [National data on registered unemployment]. Available online: https://www.sepe.es/HomeSepe/que-es-el-sepe/estadisticas/datos-avance/paro.html (accessed on 12 May 2024). Raman, R., Subramaniam, N., Nair, V. K., Shivdas, A., Achuthan, K., & Nedungadi, P. (2022). Women entrepreneurship and sustainable development: Bibliometric analysis and emerging research trends. Sustainability,14(15), 9160. [CrossRef] Saavedra-García, M. L. (2023). Women’s empowerment through entrepreneurship in the digital age. Multidisciplinary Business Review, 16(2), 37–52. [CrossRef] Sarkar, S., Osiyevskyy, O., & Hayes, L. (2019). Talking your way into entrepreneurial support: An analysis of satisfaction drivers in entrepreneur mutual aid groups. Journal of Small Business Management,57(2), 275–297. [CrossRef] Secundo, G., Del Vecchio, P., & Mele, G. (2020). Social media for entrepreneurship: Myth or reality? A structured literature review and a future research agenda. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research,27(1), 149–177. [CrossRef] Sharma, L. (2018). Entrepreneurial intentions and perceived barriers to entrepreneurship among youth in Uttarakhand state of India: A cross-cultural investigation across genders. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship,10(3), 243–269. [CrossRef] Shi, J., Nyedu, D. S. K., Huang, L., & Lovia, B. S. (2022). Graduates’ entrepreneurial intention in a developing country: The influence of social media and e-commerce adoption (SMEA) and its antecedents. Information Development,40(1), 20–35. [CrossRef] Siles-Moreno, R. (n.d.). Bienvenida [Welcome]. Available online: https://www.andaluciaemprende.es/bienvenida/ (accessed on 22 May 2023). Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. (2018). Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal,12(1), 151–168. [CrossRef] Steel, G. (2021). Going global—Going digital: Diaspora networks and female online entrepreneurship in Khartoum, Sudan. Geoforum, 120, 22–29. [CrossRef] Stough, R. R. (2016). Entrepreneurship and regional economic development: Some reflections. Journal of Regional Research,36, 129–150. Available online: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5819476 (accessed on 19 December 2024). United Nations. (n.d.-a). Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. Available online: https://www.un.org/ sustainabledevelopment/es/gender-equality/ (accessed on 19 December 2024). United Nations. (n.d.-b). Goal 10: Reduce inequality within and between countries. Available online: https://www.un.org/ sustainabledevelopment/es/inequality/ (accessed on 19 December 2024). University of Granada. (2019). Código de buenas prácticas en investigación [Code of good practice in research]. Available online: https://investigacion.ugr.es/sites/vic/investigacion/public/ficheros/extendidas/2020-02/BuenasPracticas2019.pdf (accessed on 18 September 2024). Vodă, A. I., & Florea, N. (2019). Impact of personality traits and entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intentions of business and engineering students. Sustainability,11(4), 1192. [CrossRef] Wasilczuk, J., & Karyy, O. (2022). Youth attitude to entrepreneurship in Eastern and Central European countries: Gender aspect. Problems and Perspectives in Management,20(3), 83–94. [CrossRef] Weiss, J., Anisimova, T., Shirokova, G., & Durst, S. (2023). The entrepreneurial gender gap: The role of in-group support and national embeddedness values in young women’s entrepreneurship. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship,41(8), 843–872. [CrossRef] Zhao, D., Tian, F., Sun, X., & Zhang, D. (2021). The effects of entrepreneurship on the enterprises’ sustainable innovation capability in the digital era: The role of organizational commitment, person–organization value fit, and perceived organizational support. Sustainability,13(11), 6156. [CrossRef] Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.