From Digital Citizenship to Global Competence: Why Online Civic Engagement Matters

Article information

Cleofas, J. V., & Labayo, C. C. (2024). Youth netizens as global citizens: Digital citizenship and global competence among undergraduate students. Frontiers in Communication, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2024.1398001

What this study is about

Young people today don’t just live in one community. They live in two overlapping worlds: their offline environment and the online spaces where they interact daily with people, ideas, and cultures beyond national borders. This study asks: does being a “good digital citizen” help students become more globally competent?

The authors focus on Filipino “youth netizens” because the Philippines is known for very high internet and social media use. At the same time, Filipino youth face digital challenges like unequal internet access and misinformation—issues that can shape what young people learn and how they relate to others online. 

Key ideas

Digital citizenship

Here, digital citizenship isn’t just “being online.” It is the set of prosocial behaviors that help make online spaces safer and more constructive. The study uses two parts:

• Online respect — being careful, civil, and non-threatening in online communication. 
• Online civic engagement — participating online in ways meant to help communities or contribute to social wellbeing. 

Global competence

Global competence is the capacity to function well in a connected, multicultural world. The study uses three facets:

• Self-awareness — knowing your own strengths/limits in intercultural situations. 
• Intercultural communication — skills to communicate across cultures (verbal and nonverbal). 
• Global knowledge — awareness of global issues and what individuals can do about them. 

The study’s theoretical intuition is simple: if your daily online life exposes you to global perspectives, then how you behave online (respectfully? civically?) might shape how much global competence you develop.

What the researchers did

• Design: cross-sectional online survey. 
• Participants: 698 Filipino undergraduates aged 18–24, recruited via social media and networks. 
• Measures:
  • Digital citizenship scale (online respect + online civic engagement). 
  • Global competence scale (self-awareness, intercultural communication, global knowledge). 
• Other factors considered: sex assigned at birth, household income, working status, degree track (HUMSS/ABM/STEM), and school type. 
• Analysis: bivariate tests then regression models (with bootstrapping) for each global competence domain. 

What they found

Overall profile

Students reported high online respect and high online civic engagement, while global competence levels were mixed: moderate self-awareness and global knowledge, but high intercultural communication. (See descriptive table on page 5.) 

The strongest and most consistent predictor: online civic engagement

When the authors adjusted for demographic and education factors, online civic engagement still predicted:

• higher self-awareness,
• higher intercultural communication, and
• higher global knowledge. 

In plain terms: students who use the internet not just to consume content, but to participate constructively in civic life online, also tend to show more competence in navigating the global world.

Online respect mattered—but in a more focused way

Online respect did not predict everything. It mainly showed up in one place:

• Intercultural communication improved among students with higher online respect. 

This makes intuitive sense: respectful online behavior requires awareness of tone, meaning, difference, and the possibility of misunderstanding—skills that are also central to intercultural dialogue.

A notable social gradient: working students

One of the most interesting non-digital findings is that working status mattered across the board:

• Working students tended to score higher in self-awareness, intercultural communication, and global knowledge. 

The paper suggests work settings may expose students to diverse people and real-world interaction demands, which can build cultural competence.

Other predictors (smaller but meaningful)

For intercultural communication, several factors mattered alongside digital citizenship:

• Female students scored higher than male students. 
• High-income students scored higher than low-income students. 
• Students in HUMSS tended to score higher than those in business (ABM). 

These patterns point to unequal access to cultural exposure and curriculum emphasis—which means global competence isn’t only about personality; it is partly structured by social and educational environments.

Why this matters (beyond the classroom)

A major message of this paper is: global competence doesn’t come only from traveling abroad or taking “international” subjects. It can also be cultivated through everyday online participation, especially when students engage in civic life online in a meaningful way.

So, the question for educators and youth programs becomes:

• Are we helping students become passive users of global content, or active and responsible participants in global conversations?

Bottom line

Digital citizenship—especially online civic engagement—is linked to stronger global competence among Filipino undergraduates. In other words, when young people practice constructive online civic participation, they are more likely to develop the skills and knowledge needed to thrive in a multicultural, interdependent world. 

---

Policy/practice recommendations (actionable takeaways)

Based on the paper’s implications section:

1. Make online civic engagement part of teaching

• Include assignments like creating online advocacy materials, running guided digital projects on global issues, or participating in structured online dialogues about local–global problems. 

2. Teach online respect as a core intercultural skill

• Don’t treat “netiquette” as trivial—connect respectful online communication to intercultural communication and dialogue skills. 

3. Create opportunities for intercultural dialogue

• Partnerships with schools abroad (even online-only exchanges) can strengthen intercultural competence. 

4. Support equity in access to global exposure

• Public/civil society orgs can subsidize cultural exposure opportunities for students from lower-income households. 

5. Target groups that may need additional support

• The paper flags that male students and ABM students may benefit from focused intercultural communication training. 

---

Glossary of key terms

• Netizens — People who participate in daily life online; citizens of the digital world. 
• Digital citizenship — Safe, responsible, prosocial online participation; here: online respect + online civic engagement. 
• Online respect — Civil, careful, non-threatening online interaction and communication. 
• Online civic engagement — Using online spaces to contribute to community wellbeing or civic life. 
• Global competence — Skills and knowledge to understand global issues and interact effectively across cultures. 
• Self-awareness (global competence domain) — Knowing your strengths and limits in intercultural contexts. 
• Intercultural communication — The ability to communicate effectively (verbally and nonverbally) across cultures. 
• Global knowledge — Understanding global issues and actions individuals can take to address them. 
• Cross-sectional study — A study that captures one time point; useful for associations but not definitive causality.