The paper examines the complex relationship between gender and the digital economy, particularly in light of the contrasting perspectives revealed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Initially, the digital economy was seen as beneficial for gender equality. However, the pandemic highlighted the negative impact of online work on women's work-life balance, underscoring the need for further research into this intricate interplay. The study aims to answer the research question: How has gender been studied in the digital economy? This is explored through three specific research questions: (i) the volume of research activity and trends; (ii) identifiable gender approaches and their strengths/weaknesses; and (iii) the specific gender issues addressed. The findings will contribute to future research on feminist politics in the digital economy and guide policymakers toward achieving gender equality within this context. The paper provides a broad framework for the digital economy and gender analysis, detailing its methodology which involves a systematic literature review (SLR) of works from 1995 to 2020 across Google Scholar and Scopus, followed by a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the results.

The literature review utilized a systematic approach, encompassing a broad range of disciplines and sources. The researchers used keywords related to gender analysis (feminism, feminist theory, gender, women) and the digital economy (technology, ICT, digital economy, sharing/platform/gig economy). Initially, a large sample (1,026,666 results from Google Scholar) was collected to gain an overview of research activity. This was followed by a more focused sample (166 results) obtained through refining the search across both Google Scholar and Scopus and employing qualitative cluster analysis. This second sample facilitated in-depth qualitative analysis to identify gender approaches and issues.

The study employed a systematic literature review (SLR) methodology adapted from health sciences research for social sciences application. The SLR followed three main stages as proposed by Tranfield et al. (2003): planning the review, conducting the review, and reporting the results. The planning phase included developing a conceptual framework encompassing the digital economy and gender analysis, defining research objectives, identifying keywords for search equations, selecting search engines (Google Scholar and Scopus), defining inclusion and exclusion criteria, and outlining the sampling process and analysis methods. Twenty search equations were created combining keywords related to gender analysis and different facets of the digital economy. The sampling process involved three steps: (1) a broad initial sample from Google Scholar (1995-June 2020); (2) a refined sample including the top 25 relevant results from both Google Scholar and Scopus, with those not focusing on digital economy and gender excluded (resulting in 495 works); and (3) a final, highly selective sample of 166 works chosen for in-depth qualitative content analysis. The bibliographic manager Zotero was used for managing and analysing the bibliographies. Quantitative analysis of the first sample provided data on research volume and trends, while the qualitative analysis of the third sample facilitated the identification of distinct gender approaches and specific issues.

The quantitative analysis revealed several trends. The use of "gender" or "women" significantly outweighed "feminism" or "feminist theory," indicating a greater prevalence of surface-level gender analysis compared to critical, feminist approaches. Research on the technological dimensions of the digital economy outnumbered the economic dimension, with critical gender analysis predominantly focusing on technology, while less critical analysis centered on the economic aspects. Three main gender approaches were identified: (1) Feminist theory of technology and ICT focuses on the social construction of technology and its gendered nature, highlighting gender inequalities embedded in technological systems. It employs poststructuralist, postmodernist, and social constructivist frameworks, often addressing issues of gender exclusion and exploitation in technology. However, it often lacks exploration of material consequences for those experiencing gender discrimination, and its focus on identity may not thoroughly analyze the unequal economic systems. (2) Feminist political economy combines feminist theory with political economy, particularly Marxist and autonomist perspectives. It emphasizes the structural inequalities in the economy, analyses the role of gender in capital accumulation, including themes such as immaterial labour, social reproduction, and unpaid care work. It critiques neoliberal feminism and the individualistic market-based solutions it promotes. (3) Mainstream economic analysis focuses on women's participation and labor in the digital economy, often adopting a less critical and androcentric approach. While acknowledging gender differences in access and participation, this approach frequently lacks the depth of feminist theoretical frameworks. It often centers on women's differences in relation to men without adequately analyzing the root causes of inequality or the gendered nature of technological design or economic activity. Eight specific gender issues were identified within these approaches, relating to technology's gendered nature, feminist activism and empowerment, gender-based violence, value creation, the sexual division of labor, women's access to and use of the digital economy, and time/space flexibility in work.

The findings highlight the fragmented and inconsistent nature of gender analysis in the digital economy research. While the three approaches identified each provide valuable insights, the study emphasizes the need for a more unified and theoretically consistent feminist framework, particularly within the less critical, mainstream economic approaches. The lack of theoretical coherence and the predominantly surface-level analyses in much of the existing research point to the need for greater integration of feminist theories and methodologies. The diverse gender issues highlighted in the analysis further underscore the complexity and multidimensionality of the gender-digital economy relationship.

This SLR reveals a significant gap in the systematic study of gender within the digital economy, demonstrating a lack of theoretical consistency and a preponderance of superficial analyses. The identification of three main gender approaches—feminist theory of technology and ICT, feminist political economy, and mainstream economic analysis—highlights the need for integrating critical feminist perspectives. Future research should focus on developing a comprehensive framework for analyzing the diverse gender dimensions within the digital economy and bridging the gap between critical feminist analysis and mainstream economic approaches. The lack of attention to key elements such as platform economy and specific digital-sphere gender plans also warrants future investigation.

While the SLR employed a rigorous methodology, some limitations exist. The reliance on Google Scholar and Scopus might have led to the exclusion of relevant grey literature or works published outside the mainstream academic sphere. The sample selection, although rigorous, still presents a selection of the existing research, thus limiting the generalizability of some findings. Further, despite the extensive search, some relevant issues such as intimacy, sexuality, privacy, data and surveillance, and the free and open source software movement might not be fully represented due to their lesser presence in the literature during the research period.