The concept of human security, upon its emergence, significantly expanded the traditional understanding of security beyond a state-centric focus. Building on the idea of “capability” developed by Amartya Sen in 1993, the concept of human security was first introduced in UNDP's Human Development Report 1994. This initial framework laid the foundation for a sustained focus on huma-centred and context-specific security, defining human security as the agency of individuals to freely and safely make choices and shape their futures, with the assurance that opportunities would not be diminished in the future ​[1]​. In 2003, the Commission on Human Security further emphasized the protection of fundamental freedoms from "critical and pervasive threats," stressing the creation of systems that provide the "building blocks of survival, livelihood, and dignity" ​[2]​.

Human security has since evolved into a flexible, multidimensional framework grounded in the capability approach. Over time, its scope expanded to encompass responses to poverty, conflict, displacement and climate change. This evolution is reflected in The Cambridge Handbook of the Capability Approach​ [3]​. The Handbook presents the capability approach as a modular framework, adaptable to diverse social realities and normative priorities, and highlights the versatility of the capability perspective. This adaptability is central to human security, enabling the framework to respond to localized threats while upholding universal principles of dignity and agency. The absence of chapters on technology and digital issues signaled a gap that is now increasingly being addressed in emerging literature​ [4]​.

Despite the development of the human security concept, it is only in the 2020s that digital technology has become an increasingly prominent part of the approach. UNDP’s Special Report on Human Security warns of a troubling “development with insecurity” trend​ [5]​, noting that economic growth alone is insufficient to meet people’s needs. Against this backdrop, policy reports from 2023 and 2024 emphasize the transformative potential of digital solutions for human security, provided these are grounded in human-centered principles and designed to promote inclusion and agency​ [6, 7]​. The acceleration of digital technologies in all aspects of life makes it essential to reconsider what human security means in the 21st century. Digitalization has reached an unprecedented scale, with approximately 68 percent of the global population online in 2024 and connectivity in least developed countries increasing by 27 percentage points over the last decade, alongside a steady annual growth rate of 18 percent ​[8]​.  

The growing recognition of digital dimensions in human security is also reflected in national and regional policy approaches. Countries such as Canada and Japan were among the earliest adopters of the human security agenda in the 1990s, embedding people-centred principles into their foreign and development policies. Over time, this agenda has evolved in response to global shifts, particularly the rise of digital technologies, prompting states to broaden their focus. For instance, recent Japanese Diplomatic Bluebooks and national strategies frame digital inclusion as essential to human security, stressing equitable access and the role of digital tools as fundamental to human development and dignity ​[9, 10]​. Regional actors such as the European Union have similarly expanded their engagement, promoting a comprehensive approach that links peace, development, human rights and digital equity. Reflecting broader international priorities, multilateral initiatives such as the Human Security Network and the Commission on Human Security have gradually expanded their emphasis on the interconnectedness of emerging threats in an era of digitalization and globalization, and on the need for cooperation among governments, international organizations and civil society. This evolving focus reflects how digital technologies are increasingly seen as both a challenge and a tool for advancing human security.

There is no shortage of examples of how digital technological progress has improved human security and welfare. Internet connectivity has enabled distance learning for millions of children in remote areas, while mobile banking systems have advanced financial stability for the unbanked, with mobile money accounts reaching 640 million globally, driven by rapid growth in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and East Asia.​ Telemedicine platforms deliver real-time health care for prevention, diagnosis and management of non-communicable diseases, which account for 75 percent of global deaths​ [12]​.  Digital mapping and early warning systems have saved millions of lives during natural disasters, while online platforms have generated new economic opportunities for entrepreneurs worldwide and facilitated global collaboration on scientific breakthroughs ​[13]​. These advances demonstrate digital technology's tremendous potential to mitigate threats and expand opportunities across all dimensions of human security.

At the same time, technological advancement consistently creates winners and losers, and universal positive outcomes from digital technology are far from guaranteed. From the industrial revolution to today’s whirlwind of artificial intelligence innovation, a familiar pattern emerges: new technologies can concentrate power and benefit many people, while simultaneously creating security threats and harm for others through cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, data breaches, privacy risks, invasive surveillance and the misuse of personal information – impacts that fall most heavily on vulnerable and marginalized communities​ [5]​. Low-income communities, for instance, face algorithmic discrimination in hiring, lending and housing, where automated systems amplify existing biases and deny opportunities on the basis of postcodes, credit histories or other proxies for poverty​ [14]​. Migrants are also increasingly at risk: over 281 million people, representing 3.6 percent of the world’s population, ​[15]​ may face exposure through digital surveillance systems that track movement and transactions, turning everyday technologies such as mobile payments or transit cards into tools of control. Women and marginalized groups are subjected to amplified harassment on social media, with studies showing that between 16 percent and 58 percent of women globally experience online violence and abuse​ [16]​. Older populations can become targets of sophisticated online scams and struggle with digital interfaces that exclude them from essential services increasingly delivered online​ [17]​. Experience with technology shows that its outcomes are a reflection of the intentions and incentives of its creators and users.  

The negative consequences of digital technology extend beyond domestic contexts to create new forms of global inequality. Asymmetries between developed and developing countries are reinforced by the concentration of technological infrastructure, research and development capabilities and platform ownership in the developed world. Developing countries often lack the regulatory capacity and institutional strength to govern their digital infrastructure effectively. The volume of non-transparent IT contracts and vendor lock-in is a clear example, relegating national digital sovereignty to private sector and foreign actors. In addition, the global marketplace for IT expertise has fuelled brain drain in some countries, as skilled programmers, engineers and technologists migrate from developing countries, depleting local capacity to innovate, re-use and develop local solutions.

This reality makes the governance of technology a key priority. Open-source solutions, though not a panacea, offer a practical path towards more equitable technology governance. While open source faces real challenges – including sustainability concerns, coordination difficulties and varying quality standards – its fundamental architecture creates infrastructure-like properties that distinguish it from proprietary alternatives. Through shared ownership and contribution, open source provides digital public goods (DPGs) that everyone can use, modify and enhance without limiting access for others. When complemented by other essential technical measures such as robust data protection, privacy by design, broad consultations, early user engagement and testing, digital literacy programmes and accessible technology design, open source can strengthen the way digital solutions are implemented, adopted and sustained.  

A distinctive quality of open source, which enables the integration of human security into context-specific technology governance, is the set of Four Freedoms: to inspect, use, modify and distribute software. The freedom to inspect code enables individuals and communities to understand how their digital tools function at a deeper level, building technical literacy and transparency that bolster both personal autonomy and collective knowledge. The freedom to use software without restrictions ensures that powerful technologies remain accessible to journalists, farmers, activists and communities, regardless of their economic resources or geographic location. The freedom to modify software allows communities to adapt tools to their specific contexts – for instance, customizing climate monitoring systems to local environmental conditions or tailoring financial platforms to national regulations. Finally, the freedom to distribute software ensures that innovations can spread rapidly across communities facing similar challenges. This approach differs from proprietary models, which may be suitable in some contexts but can create artificial scarcity and information asymmetries that restrict community access to essential digital tools. When users cannot inspect, modify or freely distribute the technologies they rely on, power becomes increasingly centralized, often constraining the innovation and adaptation needed to address their most pressing challenges.

Human-centred open-source technologies, communities and practices can improve both the conditions that enable human security and people’s capacity to safeguard it. When individuals build digital literacy and security skills through open-source tools, they become more capable contributors to community resilience, sharing knowledge, identifying threats and developing solutions that benefit all. Conversely, when communities establish robust open-source infrastructure – such as new tools and systems, secure communication networks, reliable software repositories and collaborative development platforms – individual users gain access to more powerful tools and greater autonomy to customize their digital environments, thereby reinforcing their security. For instance, when journalists or digital activists gain direct access to encrypted communication tools such as Signal, an open-source text messaging platform developed and maintained by an active online community, they strengthen their ability to carry out their work while simultaneously enhancing community resilience. Similarly, farmers using Soil Moisture and Ocean Salinity (SMOS) open-source satellite data can make better crop decisions, improving food security for their communities and contributing local observations that refine climate models across regions facing drought or flooding. Like a forest, where strong trees and rich soil sustain each other in balance, robust open-source communities and digitally empowered individuals reinforce one another.

The impact of open-source solutions is not theoretical. They underpin collective online security for billions across all dimensions of human security – economic, food, health, environmental, personal, community and political. For instance, the Linux operating system powers more than 96 percent of the world’s top one million web servers, forming the backbone of global digital commerce and communication. The OpenSSL Project secures millions of encrypted connections every day, protecting everything from bank transfers to private messages. In health, Open Medical Record System (OpenMRS) supports electronic medical records for more than 22 million patients in over 80 countries, while Open Enterprise Laboratory Information System (OpenELIS) helps track outbreaks and manage public health responses. Environmental monitoring also relies heavily on open-source tools such as QGIS, used by governments and NGOs worldwide for mapping climate data, and OpenWeatherMap, which provides weather information to more than six million users and organizations, helping protect communities from natural disasters. The Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) coordinates security for critical tools, including the curl data transfer utility and the Python programming language, both essential to countless applications across the globe. These examples reflect only a fraction of the open-source ecosystem that quietly enables human security worldwide.  

Despite this impact, many opportunities remain untapped. One reason is that many governments still lack the awareness and skills to adopt open-source software and contribute back to communities, including local ecosystems. Today, in most sectors, there are sufficient open-source projects available to choose from. However, realizing the benefits of open source requires collective action across multiple stakeholders – IT vendors, system integrators, educational institutions, development financiers and technical-assistance providers – to ensure decision makers are well informed to reach strategic choices and have access to neutral guidance. This includes critical decisions such as whether to build custom systems or purchase commercial software, which functions should be managed internally and which are outsourced, and how to balance local capacity-building with external expertise. With or without open –source, governments that lack ecosystem-wide support risk taking technology and implementation decisions that undermine rather than advance development outcomes and human security.

In recent years, the international development and open-source community has worked to bridge policy, government digital transformation and open-source groups. Multi stakeholder initiatives such as the Digital Public Goods Alliance bring together diverse stakeholders and encourage the discovery of DPGs – open-source solutions and open data that seek to advance the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [1]. Since 2023, UN Open Source Week has provided a UN-led forum on opensource and digital collaboration. The Global Digital Compact also reflects many of these principles.

The Digital X 3.0 project seeks to advance the work of connecting government priorities and development needs with curated open-source solutions. It promotes collaborative and innovative approaches to matchmaking and visibility for open-source solutions. We collaborate with global consultants and companies, development professionals and procurement experts to support governments in their digital transformation journey, ensuring digital investments deliver the highest value, avoid vendor lock-in and promote human rights and human security for all.  

We call on organizations to participate by connecting with and reaching those in need, thereby amplifying the impact of open-source solutions in advancing human security.

​​Works Cited

​[1]  United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), "Human Development Report," Oxford University Press, 1994.

​[2]  Commission on Human Security, "Human security now : protecting and empowering people / Commission on Human Security," New York, 2003.

​[3]  E. Chiappero-Martinetti, S. Osmani and M. Qizilbash, The Cambridge Handbook of the Capability Approach, Cambridge University Press, 2020.  

​[4]  M. F. Byskov, "Book Reviews: Enrica Chiappero-Martinetti, Siddiqur Osmani, and Mozaffar Qizilbash (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Capability Approach," Utilitas, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 359-363, 2022.  

​[5]  UNDP, "Special Report: New threats to human security in the Anthropocene: Demanding greater solidarity," New York, 2022.

​[6]  United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) & Office of the United Nations Secretary-General’s Envoy on Technology (OSET), "Interim Report: Leveraging DPI for Safe and Inclusive Societies," 2024.

​[7]  United Nations, "Our Common Agenda Policy Brief 5: A Global Digital Compact - an Open, Free and Secure Digital Future for All," 2023.

​[8]  ITU, "Datahub: Individuals Using the Internet," 2024.

​[9]  Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, "Diplomatic Bluebook," 2022, 2023, 2024.

​[10]  Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan , "National Security Strategy of Japan," 2022.

​[11]  M. Roser, H. Ritchie and E. Mathieu, "Data Page: Active mobile money accounts as part of the following publication: “Technological Change”," 2023. [Online]. Available: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/active-mobile-money-accounts .

​[12]  ​World Health Organization, "Fact Sheets: Noncommunicable diseases," 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/noncommunicable-diseases.

​[13]  International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The World Bank, "Digital Progress and Trends Report," Washington DC, 2023.

​[14]  R. Bartlett, A. Morse, R. Stanton and N. Wallace, "Consumer-Lending Discrimination in the FinTech Era," National Bureau of Economic Research, 2019.  

​[15]  IOM, "World Migration Report," 2024.

​[16]  UN Women, "Accelerating Efforts to Tackle Online and Technology Facilitated Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG)," 2022.

​[17]  ​UNDP Global Centre for Technology, Innovation and Sustainable Development., "Anti-Scam Handbook v1.0: Collective Response and Tools to Safeguard Development," 2024.

For more information, reach out to: digital.support@undp.org

​​