Access to digital technologies and ensuring digital equity have gained traction in recent policy debates and become priority concerns for transforming smart cities across the world. According to the National Digital Inclusion Alliance, digital equity is defined as “a condition in which all individuals and communities have the information technology capacity needed for full participation in our society, democracy, and economy” [1]. When the state fails to ensure the capacity of accessing and using information and communications technology and services among different segments of its people, it is denoted as digital inequity or digital divide [2]. Access to critical services, jobs, lifelong learning, and civic and cultural involvement depend on digital equity [1]. This notion has gained further momentum during the COVID-19 pandemic and emerged as a dominant agenda in urban planning [3]. However, despite continued efforts to bridge the digital divide, numerous studies have reported issues of growing digital inequity concerning access to the internet, software, and hardware; level of digital literacy (the ability and skills to use); and adoption of digital technology [4-8]. Nevertheless, this underlying phenomenon of the digital divide is not an isolated thing but is, in fact, embedded in pre-existing structural and systemic inequities [6], often resulting from socioeconomic marginalization and socio-spatial disparities. Therefore, critical calls are increasing for a more careful analysis of the intersectionality of digital inequity with a special focus on the interplay between varying sociodemographic backgrounds or factors and urban socio-spatial factors [6].

Pandemic-induced restrictions and subsequent lockdowns, which had already placed disproportionate burdens on marginalized groups, have diminished (in-person) social interactions and resulted in increased dependency on digital technologies. Previous research highlighted that the COVID-19 pandemic has heightened the existing structural inequities [9] and further exacerbated the technology-related social divide, especially for older adults [10], the economically marginalized, and members of racialized communities (ie, immigrants, refugees, and ethnic minorities) [8,11], by limiting their access to health services [12], economic activity, and social life. Moreover, this crisis has also exposed the multifaceted nature of digital inequities, which are compounded by the ongoing equity challenges, and how they disproportionately impact those vulnerable groups who are already affected by socio-spatial inequities [13]. Emerging research on the pandemic has demonstrated that digital equity is not only a social determinant of health [12] but also a precondition for gaining access to economic activity, social life or sphere, and other urban services. Therefore, given the complexity, multidimensionality, and severity of the crisis for disadvantaged groups resulting from digital inequities, scholars and practitioners have emphasized developing robust mitigation and adaptation strategies by considering the broader socioeconomic [11] and socio-spatial context [13] of urban areas. Since access to digital technology has become fundamental to everyday life, if equity is not ensured, it may reinforce systemic inequity for digitally disadvantaged groups, who may fall behind during the postpandemic recovery phase.

Many studies reported that access to the internet for racialized communities is much lower than the national average [14,15]. Ethnic minorities were found to be significantly more worried (40%-53%) regarding the ability to pay for the internet than their counterparts (29%), according to a report on the digital divide in Toronto, Ontario [16]. Some members of this category are also at risk of the digital divide because of a lack of content accessibility [17], in addition to the barriers to access to devices and subscription vulnerabilities [18]. The capacity and ability of those in racial and ethnic minorities to navigate the digital sphere and space are constrained, which may shape or limit their ability to engage in a variety of complex web-based activities including accessing health [18,19] and social support services [20]. Immigrants and refugees are made up of varied groups with a range of skills and socioeconomic circumstances [21]. For example, economic migrants tend to be highly educated and have digital-literacy skills, whereas family migrants or refugees may have low digital-literacy skills [21]. However, regardless of the subtypes, immigrants and refugees usually undergo resettlement challenges including language, employment, and financial barriers, which may affect the accessibility and affordability of digital devices and services [22].

Previous research has mainly focused on digital inequity in limited-income countries when considering the global context [2,23]. In the context of Canada, most studies specifically have explored the rural-urban divide [15,24]. Previous literature reviews related to digital equities in racialized communities generally focused on motivation for internet adoption and information practices [25,26], the eHealth literacy aspect [27,28], older immigrants [29,30], and social media use [31]. What remains understudied is how systemic inequities and various social determinants affect the racialized population in multicultural urban centers, where people from diverse backgrounds and socioeconomic capacities thrive under the same jurisdiction, governing bodies, and supposedly same facilities of internet and digital services, yet live on the extreme ends of the digital equity spectrum [32]. There is a need for understanding how the intersection of various systemic inequities (racism, discrimination, ableism, etc) and characteristics of racialized communities (eg, culture and language) lead to and exacerbate existing digital inequities among racialized communities [33]. This study, therefore, aims to understand this complex issue by drawing on previously published studies and inform public policy on treating digital inequity by illustrating the interconnectedness of digital equity with systemic inequities and its spatial variations in the urban sphere.

We intend to capture the current understanding of digital equity through an integrative review of academic and gray literature to achieve the following two specific objectives:

As a part of a community-engaged program of research, we strive to engage with various communities through knowledge cocreation, knowledge comobilization, and equitable partnership strategies where the partners have decision-making capacities across the steps of the research process [34,35]. Community members, community champions, citizen researchers, nonprofit organizations, and policy makers such as municipalities, local government bodies, and others are involved in our research program at various levels of capacity [36]. Through our outreach activities, we have the opportunity to engage with the City of Calgary, which identified a research need regarding digital inequity, to explore why and how digital equity affects racialized communities in Calgary. Therefore, together with the city team, we developed the study protocol, which seeks to synthesize knowledge from existing research, policies, programs, and initiatives on this issue in the urban context in high-income countries. Textbox 1 presents the guiding questions of this research. The knowledge obtained through this study will allow us to understand the current extent of the research regarding digital equity and will inform policy makers and community partners to develop strategies to effectively address existing inequity.

We intend to identify and summarize key findings from existing digital equity–related initiatives, programs, activities, research findings, issues, barriers, policies, recommendations, etc from the peer-reviewed literature. This will give us an understanding of the landscape of research and initiatives that have been systematically reported. We expect to learn what barriers and facilitators of digital equity exist, which population groups are being affected the most and why, and what social, material, and political issues need to be addressed to establish equity in the context of a high-income and multicultural city. We will learn the findings and recommendations from research projects on digital equity and descriptions of which approaches may or may not work and why and the thoughts and behaviors of community members and private, nonprofit, and government stakeholders. From the gray literature, that is, non–peer-reviewed organization reports and reflections on digital equity–related programs and policies, we will learn about practical experiences from the implementation perspective. The integrative review will also allow us to understand the available and necessary resources in respect of digital equity and how to acquire more resources and apply them in an appropriate way.

This study has a narrow focus on digital equity in racialized communities in the urban areas of high-income countries. In an earlier period, ensuring internet connection and accessibility of internet-enabled devices were the key issues against digital equity in urban areas, which is often termed in the literature as the first level of the digital divide [46,47]. However, having an internet connection and internet-enabled devices accessible and available has shifted the focus of concern toward the second and third levels of the digital divide. The second level refers to the improvement of digital literacy of the urban population, while the third level focuses on enabling them to gain the maximum output (eg, gaining employment or health services using the internet) [48]. Improving individual digital skills or literacy, including using the internet and understanding and ensuring one’s digital privacy, contributes to a gain in digital capital that may contribute to human, economic, and social capital [49]. However, despite having the same level of digital skills, the same 2 people may not benefit at the same level. For example, one may want to learn more about a certain physical condition, but the information on the website is only available in medical terms and not in plain language. Therefore, with the same digital skills, a medically savvy person would gain more from the internet than one who is less so. Further, information may be available in one language but not in another, which also creates a discrepancy between the outcome levels for different users. Digital equity also improves trust in web-based activities and persons on the other side of the digital communication, thus increasing social interaction and harmony [49].

A key strength of this study protocol is its comprehensiveness in including both a traditional academic literature review and an internet scan. It also ensures rigor by following methodological frameworks for both types of activities. The research team is also a profound strength of this study, as partners represent several stakeholders, including the city, community, and multidisciplinary researchers. We have ensured that each of the research team members provides input in developing the search, screening, and analysis strategies and that all perspectives are addressed. In the same fashion, we also have generated a data extraction tool that ensures we extract the maximum relevant data and are able to generate meaningful themes and subthemes.

We also acknowledge certain limitations in this protocol. Digital equity is a very vague and multisectoral topic and can be viewed from numerous perspectives and contexts. For example, digital equity may mean one thing in medicine while certain issues may not apply in education. While we will attempt to capture studies from all disciplines, it might prove overwhelming to attempt to gather all elements of the topic most salient to every discipline and sector in this proposed study. In addition, while there may be certain similarities between cities, each city is unique and has its own strengths and limitations in relation to the topic. While it is crucial to know what activities have been undertaken in cities similar to Calgary to promote digital equity among racialized communities, their approaches and implementation may not be applicable to other cities.

We are taking a community-engaged research approach in this study [50] following the principles of integrated knowledge translation [51,52] where the research partner is involved in each step of the research process from research design to dissemination. Such involvement of the partner accelerates the research uptake and implementation. As our research questions originated from the knowledge user, our partner organization, the City of Calgary, and as they will be involved in each following step of the study, the knowledge generated here will be directly transferred to the actively involved knowledge users. In addition, we will create a report or policy brief for the City of Calgary stakeholders, which will be distributed by the partners. In addition to a peer-reviewed manuscript conveying the findings of this study to the academics, we will also create an infographic in plain language and a video doodle summarizing the findings in lay terms. We will disseminate these through our social and ethnic media networks to reach the extended group of stakeholders and the racialized communities in Calgary and beyond. The City of Calgary’s digital equity team also has established a cross-sectorial Digital Equity Advisory Panel, and the panel members will be important knowledge users for this review report as well as important knowledge mobilizers of this review’s findings.

Digital equity is complex to achieve, as it intersects with a variety of systemic inequities. Learning from previous studies and other high-income cities through an integrative review and internet scan will provide valuable insights into future research, development, and policy directions. The urban population is generally extremely diverse, and each population group within an urban area may have unique advantages and disadvantages in terms of digital equity. Being informed about those unique aspects will help develop workable and acceptable strategies to improve digital equity for all.