Racionalidad de agencia y activismo híbrido en la Generación Z: estudio comparativo regional desde el Enfoque de Capacidades  y el modelo REDGlobal

Isidro Lapuente Álvarez

doi:10.56200/mentor.v5i1.12092

Authors

Isidro Lapuente Álvarez Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia-UNED. España – Madrid https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0235-5027

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56200/mentor.v5i1.12092

Keywords:

Generation Z, hybrid protest, digital activism, Capabilities Approach, REDGlobal

Abstract

The global increase in digitally articulated youth protests in contexts of political crisis, inequality, and surveillance raises questions about their sociopolitical scope and the institutional conditions that shape their effectiveness. The general objective of the study was to compare global evidence on Generation Z’s hybrid protests in order to identify expressions of agency and analyze how conversion factors condition the expansion of sociopolitical capabilities across different contexts. The study followed a PRISMA 2020 systematic review of studies published between 2020 and 2025 in Scopus, Web of Science, and institutional repositories. Thirty-nine documents were selected; variables were extracted, and coding was conducted using MAXQDA through directed content analysis. The corpus shows predominance and growth between 2023 and 2025; hybrid protest integrates digital dissemination, coordination, and street mobilization. TikTok and Instagram enhance visibility, while messaging platforms facilitate coordination. Repression, surveillance, censorship, and digital divides limit political impact. It is concluded that hybridization expands visibility, coordination, and expression but does not guarantee sustained achievements; conversion depends on political openness, security conditions, surveillance, censorship, and informational governance. The Capability Approach and REDGlobal framework structure the interpretation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biography

Isidro Lapuente Álvarez, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia-UNED. España – Madrid

Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia-UNED. España – Madrid

References

Aboslaiman, L. (2023). Algunas reflexiones sobre racionalidad, espacio público y democracia deliberativa. Perspectivas de las Ciencias Económicas y Jurídicas, 13(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.19137/perspectivas-2023-v13n1a01

Ahmed, M. (2025). Attitudes, Behaviors, Social Norms and Social Media: A Study on Generation Z in Bangladesh. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202505.2290.v1

Álvarez Álvarez, José Francisco. (1995). Individuos, información y racionalidad imperfecta. Sociológica México, 28, 177-200.

Álvarez Álvarez, José Francisco. (2002). El tejido de la racionalidad acotada y expresiva. Revista internacional de filosofía, 25(2), 11-29.

Cortés-Ramos, A., Torrecilla García, J. A., Landa-Blanco, M., Poleo Gutiérrez, F. J., & Castilla Mesa, M. T. (2021). Activism and social media: Youth participation and communication. Sustainability, 13(18), 10485.

Deneulin, Séverine. (2008). Beyond individual freedom and agency: Structures of living together in Sen’s capability approach to development. In The capability approach: Concepts, measures and application. Cambridge University Press., 105-124.

Dobbs, K. L. (2025). #Political parties: Bridging divides between youth and political institutions. European Political Science, 24(4), 845-861. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-025-00529-5

Dobbs, Kirstie Lynn. (2025). Political parties: Bridging divides between youth and political institutions. European Political Science, 24(4), 845-861. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s41304-025-00529-5

Essafi, M., & Belfakir, L. (2025). From Screens to Streets: Reassessing Twenge’s iGen through Morocco’s Gen Z212 Movement. Journal of Cultural Analysis and Social Change, 10(2), 3891-3899. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.64753/jcasc.v10i2.2200

Fernández-Mateo, Javier. (2023). Racionalidad, universalidad y justificación en las sociedades digitales. Bajo palabra. Revista de filosofía, 2(34), 383-408.

Floridi, Luciano. (2013). The Ethics of Information. Oxford University Press.

Floridi, Luciano. (2018). Digital Ethics: An Environmental Approach. Philosophy & Technology, 31(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0303-z

García-Ferrando, Manuel, Ibáñez, Jesús, & Alvira, Francisco. (2003). El análisis de la realidad social. Métodos y técnicas de investigación. Alianza editorial.

Gigerenzer, Gerd. (2008). Rationality for mortals: How people cope with uncertainty. Oxford University Press.

Gonzales-Lara, Jorge Yeshayahu. (2025). Generación Z peruana y diáspora: Rebeldía conectiva y disputa simbólica. Transnacionalismo y ciudadanía migrante.

Gozálvez-Pérez, Vicent & Cortijo-Ruíz, Gemma. (2023). Desarrollo humano y redes sociales en sociedades digitales. Sophia, colección de Filosofía de la Educación., (34), 41-64.

Gyawali, S. (2025). A structural analysis of Nepal’s Maoist movement and Gen-Z struggles through a large-scale and long-run perspective. NPRC Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(10), 21-33.

Habermas, Jürgen. (2023). Teoría de la acción comunicativa: I. Racionalidad de la acción y racionalización social. II. Crítica de la razón funcionalista. Trotta.

Hortal, Alejandro. (2023). Evidence-based policies, nudge theory and Nancy Cartwright: A search for causal principles. Behavioural Public Policy, 7(2), 1-20.

Hortal, Alejandro. (2024). Economía del comportamiento y políticas públicas: Nudges, autonomía y responsabilidad individual. En Filosofía de la Economía: Una introducción a problemas metodológicos, de racionalidad y político-morales de la economía moderna. UNAM. Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas.

Iwamoto, Helga Midori, Cardoso Cançado, Airton, dos Santos de Sousa Teodósio, Armindo, & Ayres Marinho, Flávio. (2024). Movimentos sociais: ¿Ativismo gera emancipação? Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 22(2), 1-13. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-395120230083

Jakimovska, K., & Koščak, M. (2025). Is it protest or policy? What are young people saying that mainstream parties refuse to hear? European View, 17816858251386957.

Jerkov, A., Bešlin, M., & Radeljić, B. (2025). The depoliticization of protest: Understanding the 2024/2025 Serbian students’ uprising. Cogent Social Sciences, 11(1), 2583748. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2025.2583748

Kavada, Anastasia. (2016). Social Movements and Political Agency in the Digital Age: A Communication Approach, Media and Communication, 4(4), 8-12.

Koirala, J. (2025). Gen Z protests and role of social media in Nepal (September 8–10, 2025).

Lapuente Álvarez, I. (2025a). Agencia Crítica Digital consciente como marco ético-filosófico para el desarrollo humano en la era digital desde las políticas educativas. Revista REG, 4(2), 1284-1302.

Lapuente Álvarez, I. (2025b). Modelo ecosistémico de desarrollo humano y libertad. Deporte Compartido. www.deportecompartido.com. https://deportecompartido.wordpress.com/2025/09/10/modelo-ecosistemico-de-desarrollo-humano-y-libertad/

Lapuente Álvarez, I. (2025c). Redes Sociales como ágoras de cambio: El Caso de la GenZ 212 en Marruecos y la expansión de la libertad ecosistémica. www.deportecompartido.com. https://deportecompartido.wordpress.com/2025/10/09/redes-sociales-como-agoras-de-cambio-el-caso-de-la-genz-212-en-marruecos-y-la-expansion-de-la-libertad-ecosistemica/

Lapuente Álvarez, Isidro. (2023). Pensamiento crítico e interacción socioafectiva en entornos virtuales de aprendizaje. UNED.

Mbai, A. M. (2025). Faith, power and propaganda: The ethics of intergenerational dialogue intimes of Gen Z activism. African Journal of Emerging Issues, 7(2), 65-79.

McIntyre, Lee. (2018). Post-Truth. MIT Press.

McIntyre, Lee. (2025). Sobre la desinformación: Cómo luchar por la verdad y proteger la democracia. (Teorema. Serie mayor) [Kindle Android version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com.

Mondragón Reyes, Rogelio. (2023). El enfoque de las capacidades de Amartya Sen: Antecedentes, conceptos y debates filosóficos. [Kindle Android version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com.

Montero Corrales, L. (2025). TikTok y prácticas informativas en la generación Z universitaria. Revista de Comunicación de la SEECI, 58, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.15198/seeci.2025.58.e931

Muhtadi, B., Warburton, E. A., & Gammon, L. (2025). Complacent Democrats: The Political Preferences of Gen Z Indonesians. Journal of East Asian Studies, 25(2), 259-286. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1017/jea.2025.10011

Nhedzi, A., & Azionya, C. M. (2025). The digital activism of marginalized South African gen z in higher education. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 362. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04535-2

Nussbaum, Martha. (2012). Crear capacidades. Propuesta para el desarrollo humano. Paidós.

Pramesti, G. N. D. P. (2025). Virtual Social Movements and Gen-Z Activism: A Study of the# TolakOmnibusLaw Movement in the Digital Space. Return: Study of Management, Economic and Bussines, 4(5), 403-410.

Rädiker, Stefan & Kuckartz, Udo. (2020). Análisis de Datos Cualitativos con MAXQDA. Texto, Audio, Video. MAXQDA Press.

Rahayuningsih, Nur Octavia Dian, Aziz, Syamsuddin, & Akbar, Muh. (2025). Digital activism and social change: A review of the literature on social media movements. Spektrum Komunikasi, 13(3), 368-390.

Rheingold, Howard. (2002). Multitudes inteligentes. La próxima revolución social (Smart Mobs). GEDISA.

Robeyns, Ingrid. (2009). Justice as equity and the capabilities approach. Arguments for a Better World: Essays in Honor of Amartya Sen, (1), 397-413.

Sen, Amartya. (1999). La libertad individual como compromiso social. Ediciones Abya-Yala.

Sen, Amartya. (2000). Desarrollo y libertad. Planeta.

Sen, Amartya. (2001). La desigualdad económica. Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Shahabadi, A. Z., Asgari, A., & Javadian, R. (2025). Scrutinizing Generation Z’s Interpretation of Social Justice: A Case Study in Khomeinishahr, Iran.

Shahzad, F., Shahid, M., Bibi, H., & Shabbir, A. (2025a). Social Media as a Tool for Political Education among Gen Z. The Critical Review of Social Sciences Studies, 3, 1729-1741. https://doi.org/10.59075/70gydg86

Shahzad, F., Shahid, M., Bibi, H., & Shabbir, A. (2025b). Social media as a tool for political education among Gen Z. The Critical Review of Social Sciences Studies, 3(2), 1729-1741.

UNICEF-Innocenti. (2024). Youth, protests and the polycrisis. Research Report.

Ushie, B. O., & Garba, D. (2025). Is Democracy on the Rise? The Dynamics of Youth Participation in Nigeria’s Politics. African Renaissance, 22(3), 1744-2532.

Veronika, Restani, Camelia, Camelia, Febriliana, Rani, & Yapen, Yuce Eviona. (2023). Digital Literacy As A Social Mobilization And Learning Platform. SEIKAT: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik Dan Hukum, 2(23), 228-241.

Wekesa, Didmus. (2025). Protest Movements in Kenya: Drivers, Dynamics, and Implications for Foreign Policy. African Multidisciplinary Journal of Research, 1(1), 86-101.

Wilches, J., Guerrero, H., & Niño, C. (2024). Emociones políticas y narrativas prototípicas: TikTok en las campañas políticas, estudio de caso. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, (82), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.4185/rlcs-2024-2234

Yamahata, C., Takeda, M., & Tun, N. (2025). Youth Movements in Authoritarian Asia: The Responsibility to Protest. En C. Yamahata & M. Takeda (Eds.), Youth, Community, and Democracy in India, Myanmar, and Thailand (pp. 3-41). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-6378-8_1

Zhou, Xingchen. (2025). Social media communication and shifting attitudes toward social change across generations: A comparative study of Gen Z and older cohorts. Advances in Social Behavior Research, 16(4), 100-104.

Zuboff, Shoshana. (2020). La era del capitalismo de la vigilancia: La lucha por un futuro humano frente a las nuevas fronteras del poder. Paidós.