The evolving digital landscape and best interests of the child
Tracking child participation, policy changes and impact assessments
As part of the Children’s Best Interests in a Digital World project, in February 2025 UNICEF published a working paper stressing the need to incorporate the best interests of the child principle – a core tenet of the UN Convention on the Rights (UNCRC) of the Child – into the governance of digital products and services. The working paper noted that while upholding the best interests of the child principle is increasingly found in policies and regulations in relation to the digital environment, there is little guidance on how to implement this in practice.
The paper also highlighted the importance of meaningful child participation in this context and pointed to the fact that there were no child consultations specifically on this topic — a gap needing urgent attention. Since the publication of the working paper, the digital environment has continued to evolve. This article reviews the recent developments in the digital landscape including child consultations, policy changes and other debates on children’s use of digital technologies, and provides an update since the publication of the working paper.
Children’s participation
In the UNCRC, the best interests of the child (Article 3) and the right to be heard (Article 12) are set out as complementary to each other. Since the publication of the paper, there have been positive developments for including children’s voices about their best interests through child consultations and also for policy and regulation about the impacts of social media on children.
The Select Committee on the Impacts of Screens and Social Media on Young People’s Health and Development in Quebec, Canada published a report that puts best interests of the child principle at the heart of the debates on children’s health and development. The Committee based its report on the public, school, and online consultations they held in 2024 and 2025, when they heard the voices of almost 1,500 children (aged 14-17) about their online experiences, in addition to consultations with specialists, stakeholders and the general public.
The Select Committee acknowledged the significance of such multistakeholder consultations for “balanced, nuanced proposals that are in [children’s] best interests”. The report states that children’s rights as set out in the UNCRC and the principle of the best interests of the child should guide technology companies when making decisions about children’s personal information. The results of the consultations also call for “increased accountability for platforms” and a “stricter legal framework to protect young people based on the best interests of the child”.
In Australia, as part of developing the Children’s Online Privacy Code, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner consulted 235 children aged 8 to 17 to learn their views about online privacy. Children stressed the importance of having their voices heard, as articulated by one child: “I think young people should have more say in these important things.”
The child consultations were accompanied by consultations with 102 parents and carers. In some of the responses, parents shared their perspectives on their children’s best interests in relation to privacy and targeted advertising:
“At my youngest child’s school, she was connected to 16 edtech apps via one platform consent form. The privacy risks in many of the added layers in the schools tech stack were very high. The school had no answer for me when I asked why they didn’t explain the different apps on top of the school portal — this eroded the trust I had in the school to look out for the best interests of my child.”
“Yes, [targeted advertising should be] restricted to at least the age of 15, and with controls that still apply to adulthood to ensure that any advertising is in the child’s best interest.”
"The school had no answer for me when I asked why they didn’t explain the different apps on top of the school portal — this eroded the trust I had in the school to look out for the best interests of my child.”
UNICEF Innocenti consulted children aged 10 to 17 about their best interests in relation to the digital environment in Brazil, India, Malaysia, Sierra Leone, Spain, Uganda and the United States, and listened their ideas about a future that is in their best interests. Children expressed that they felt deeply empowered through this engagement.
New legal provisions
Since the working paper, there are new policies and regulations that put best interests at the heart of discussions about age-appropriate design and children’s data privacy.
In Brazil, the Digital Statute of the Child and Adolescent (ECA Digital — Law No.15,211/2025) was enacted in September 2025. The Ministry of Human Rights and Citizenship describes ECA Digital as “establishing itself as one of the first pieces of legislation in the world to set clear duties and shared responsibility among digital platforms, families, and the State in safeguarding the best interests of children and adolescents on the internet”. ECA Digital also highlights one of the important tenets of the best interests principle — proportionality — meaning that the measures taken to protect children and safeguard their rights should be adequate and proportionate (art. 3). What best interests of the child means for the purposes of the ECA Digital is articulated in art. 5 para. 2: “[…] the protection of their privacy, security, mental and physical health, access to information, freedom of participation in society, meaningful access to digital technologies, and well-being.”
In Canada, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada published a joint resolution on protecting the privacy of children and youth through responsible use of educational technologies in the classroom. The Resolution highlights the importance of best interests of the child for protecting children’s privacy in relation to EdTech: “[…] privacy rights and the best interests of the child are paramount in the development, procurement, and deployment of educational technologies”.
Indonesia became the first country in Asia that passed a regulation on age-appropriate design: The Government Regulation on the Governance of Electronic System Providers in Child Protection - PP TUNAS (PP No. 17). The regulation aims to prioritise children’s best interests and explicitly refers to the UK Age-Appropriate Design Code, the EU General Data Protection Regulation, and the UNCRC.
In the United States,following the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (2022, currently enjoined) and Maryland’s Kids Code (2024, in effect), Nebraska and Vermont passed design codes: Nebraska Age-Appropriate Online Design Code Act (LB504) and Vermont Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (SB 69). While neither of these acts explicitly mention the best interests of the child principle (as their California and Maryland counterparts do), they both aim to protect children online by protecting their data, requiring design features to combat compulsive use, and allowing parents to have control over children’s privacy and account settings.
While these new provisions offer valuable contributions for making children’s best interests a primary consideration in relation to the digital environment, it will be important to see how they are implemented in practice as the legal instruments differ in scope, application and enforcement.
Safety-by-design or blanket bans?
The minimum age limits for social media access are now widely contested. When balancing children's access to social media with safety, protective measures should be proportionate. Our working paper suggests that social media bans may infringe on children’s best interests. Since the publication of the paper, the Australian Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024 came into force. [DO1] [SV2] The law sets “age restrictions for certain social media platforms” and requires the providers of those platforms “to take reasonable steps to prevent children who have not reached a minimum age from having accounts”. The minimum age is now 16 years.
There are calls from other countries to legally restrict access to social media by children based on older ages than currently in place, which would have a wider impact. Regional bodies and countries that debated such an updated restriction include the European Union, a range of European countries, Denmark, France, and Malaysia (to be enacted as part of the Online Safety Act 2025 (Act 866)). Other approaches to regulate children’s use of social media, in addition to blanket bans, include the ‘digital curfew’ in France.
As argued in UNICEF’s statement on age restrictions, “social media bans come with their own risks, and they may even backfire.” In the statement, which calls for a holistic approach to upholding children’s rights, UNICEF outlines what a proportionate, balanced and fair approach should look like and calls on “governments, regulators, and companies to work with children and families to build digital environments that are safe, inclusive, and respect children’s rights.”
Importance of CRIAs, once again
While many privacy laws require data protection impact assessments, Child Rights Impact Assessments (CRIAs) are the procedural safeguards to uphold children’s best interests in relation to the digital environment. UNICEF published a D-CRIA Toolbox along with guidelines for technology companies on how to conduct CRIAs to uphold children’s rights. The D-CRIA Toolbox arrived at a critical moment, as calls for industry accountability translate into regulatory action. The European Commission’s Guidelines on measures to ensure a high level of privacy, safety and security for minors online (July, 2025), state that “to ensure that measures to achieve a high level of privacy, safety and security for minors on an online platform are appropriate and proportionate, all children’s rights should be considered and their best interests taken as a primary consideration.” The Guidelines explicitly reference UNICEF’s D-CRIA Toolbox.
Looking ahead
Children are not a homogenous group, and they have diverse needs and backgrounds. For a digital environment that primarily considers children’s best interests, we need to design the future — technologies, business models, and policies — based on children’s rights.
The ‘digital environment’ is an evolving landscape that includes many technologies that children can benefit from if they are designed with their rights in mind. UNICEF’s recently updated Guidance on AI and Children calls for AI policies and systems that prioritize children’s best interests. Tomorrow a new technology will take the place of AI, and something else after that.
As a contribution to this, the findings and recommendations from the UNICEF Best Interests project will be published in 2026.
