Drawing on the findings of the 2026 BIK Policy monitor report, this article explores how the evidence base for children’s digital policy is generated across Europe. It looks at the availability of data across countries, the mix of actors involved in data collection, the key themes currently being researched, and the extent to which research and data inform policy.
High-quality evidence is essential for effective policymaking on children’s digital lives. Without reliable data on how children use digital technologies, the risks and harms they face, and the opportunities that foster learning, creativity and participation, policy responses may be poorly targeted or simply ineffective, becoming either overly restrictive or insufficiently protective against real harms. A robust evidence base enables policymakers to identify priority areas, track emerging issues (such as AI-related risks or addictive design), evaluate existing measures, and ensure policy aligns with the BIK pillars of protection, empowerment and participation. In this sense, evidence anchors policymaking in children’s lived experiences rather than in adult assumptions alone.
Drawing on the findings of the 2026 BIK Policy monitor report, this article explores how the evidence base for children’s digital policy is generated across Europe. It looks at the availability of data across countries, the mix of actors involved in data collection, the key themes currently being researched, and the extent to which research and data inform policy.
The evidence base is growing, but unevenly across countries
Across Europe, approaches to regular and systematic data collection on children’s digital lives remain highly uneven. While some countries have established regular systems for collecting policy-relevant data, others continue to rely on broader surveys, ad-hoc research exercises, or external sources. This means that the strength of the evidence base still varies significantly across countries, even where children’s digital lives are clearly recognised as a policy issue.
The 2026 edition of the BIK Policy monitor shows that only eight countries conduct a regular nationally representative survey1 specifically focused on children’s digital lives. In twelve countries, relevant quantitative data are collected as part of broader national surveys, while some countries continue to rely heavily on international studies such as EU Kids Online, Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC), or European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs (ESPAD)2. A further eight countries report that such surveys are carried out only irregularly3, while just one country4 reports no regular data collection on this topic. Compared with earlier Policy monitor cycles, this points to gradual progress rather than a major shift: the number of countries with dedicated regular surveys has remained unchanged at eight, while the number drawing on broader surveys has increased from eight in 2024 to twelve in 2026 (the current report).
A similarly uneven pattern can be seen in research on online risks, harms and digital well-being. Only ten countries report regular national research that specifically tracks these issues5, while eleven rely on ad hoc or irregular studies6. The unevenness is not only visible in the availability of data, but also in the capacity of countries to hold regular data collection over time.
A mixed research ecosystem is building the evidence base
The evidence base on children’s digital lives is not produced by a single actor. Across Europe, it is built through a mixed ecosystem that includes government institutions, academic researchers, NGOs, Safer Internet Centres (SICs), and cross-country research networks. According to the 2026 BIK Policy monitor report, eleven countries have established formal permanent structures7 dedicated to monitoring and researching children’s digital experiences, which include dedicated research units, think tanks, or advisory bodies. At the same time, fifteen countries report that they rely primarily on external sources8, including NGOs or academic studies, to inform policy development. This suggests that evidence-based policymaking is being sustained in different ways across Europe, with varying levels of institutional support.
Part of this body of research comes from recurring national study programmes. The Policy monitor highlights several established examples, including Belgium’s Génération 2020 and Apenstaartjaren surveys, Germany’s JIM and KIM studies, Hungary’s Digital Parenting research, and Sweden’s Ungar & Medier series. Together, these examples show that, in several countries, evidence is built not only through one-off studies, but through repeated national research infrastructures that generate regular inputs for policy discussion.
The report also shows that Safer Internet Centres’ and cross-country initiatives play an important role. Austria’s Youth Internet Monitor, for example, is run by Saferinternet.at, illustrating how actors linked to the SIC can contribute directly to the evidence base. More broadly, several countries refer to participation in the 2025 wave of EU Kids Online9, which for the first time also includes children’s use of generative AI. Taken together, these examples suggest that the evidence base for children’s digital policy is being built through a combination of national, networked and cross-border efforts, rather than through government systems alone.
Research is increasingly focusing on harms, well-being and AI
The 2026 BIK Policy monitor shows that national research is increasingly focusing on the quality and safety of children’s digital experiences, with particular attention to emerging risks and their impact on well-being. An important feature of this year’s findings is the growth of thematic research on online risks, harms and digital well-being, alongside new work on artificial intelligence and its implications for children. Cyberbullying, harmful online content, addictive design, and the psychological effects of digital environments are among the issues receiving growing attention across countries.
Artificial intelligence is one of the clearest emerging themes. The Policy monitor report shows studies focused on AI in several countries, including Luxembourg’s SCRIPT AI Survey (2025), which involved around 4,000 students and 240 teachers to explore AI knowledge and school rules, and Slovenia’s Safe.si Survey 2025 on teenagers and their interaction with artificial intelligence. Luxembourg is also developing a White Paper on Children and AI from an ethical perspective.
Other research focuses more directly on risks, harms and well-being. Belgium reported a 2025 study on the harmful effects of social media and screen use, while Romania published research on the effects of cyberbullying on children’s emotional well-being, alongside a joint UNICEF-Ministry of Education report on mental health in schools. Norway’s Media Authority also published different reports in 2025, including Feed, Reason, and Emotions on youth reflections on politics and influence, and Everyone Else is Allowed on young people’s experiences on Snapchat and YouTube. These examples suggest that the evidence base is not only expanding, but also adapting to new policy concerns around well-being, platform design and AI-related risks.
From evidence gathering to evidence-informed policy
Evidence does not inform policy automatically; it is most useful when countries have the structures, funding and review processes needed to turn research into practical policy decisions. The 2026 BIK Policy monitor suggests that, across Europe, this link between evidence and policymaking remains uneven. Some countries have formal structures, such as research units, think tanks or advisory bodies, which help connect evidence to policy development. Others rely mainly on external research from NGOs, academic institutions or international studies. This means that the influence of evidence depends not only on whether research exists, but also on whether it is embedded in a regular policy process.
Funding is one important part of this picture. The Policy monitor shows that only two countries report a dedicated research fund focused specifically on children and the digital environment10. Most countries rely on broader research programmes or occasional special initiatives. This limits the ability of policymakers to build evidence over time, particularly on emerging issues such as generative AI, addictive design, cyberbullying, digital well-being and platform-related harms.
Monitoring and evaluation is another key link between evidence and policy. While most countries have some form of policy review, only eight report systematic and regular monitoring and evaluation of BIK-related policies11. Fourteen others report regular but less standardised processes12. This suggests that evidence is increasingly present in national policy ecosystems, but it is not yet consistently used as part of a mature feedback loop between research, policy design, implementation and review.
Conclusion
The evidence base on children’s digital lives is growing across Europe. Countries are drawing on a wider range of sources, including national surveys, academic research, Safer Internet Centres, civil society initiatives, and cross-country studies. This is helping policymakers respond to emerging concerns such as AI, cyberbullying, addictive design, digital well-being and children’s rights online.
However, the overall picture remains uneven. Some countries have regular data collection, dedicated research structures and policy review systems, while others continue to rely on broader surveys, external sources or ad hoc studies. To strengthen the evidence base, more needs to be done not only to produce additional research, but also to build stronger systems to collect, compare and use evidence over time, so that policies on children’s digital lives remain grounded in children’s real experiences and can adapt as the digital environment changes.
Read the full BIK Policy monitor report 2026 for more insights. An executive summary is also available.
[1] DE, HU, IS, IT, LU, NO, SE, SK
[2] AT, BE, CY, CZ, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, MT, NL, PL
[3] BG, FR, HR, IE, LT, LV, PT, SI
[4] RO
[5] DE, EE, HU, IS, IT, LU, MT, NO, SE, SK
[6] CY, CZ, DK, EL, FR, HR, LT, PL, PT, RO, SI
[7] AT, BE, CY, DK, IE, IS, IT, MT, NO, PL, SE
[8] CZ, DE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HU, LT, LU, LV, NL, PT, RO, SI, SK
[9] AT, BE, EE, FI, HR, IE, LU, MT, NO, PL, ES, PT
[10] BE, NO
[11] CY, DE, LV, MT, NL, NO, PL, SK
[12] AT, BE, EL, ES, FI, FR, IE, IS, IT, LU, PT, RO, SE, SI
Interested in more?
Explore other relevant research in the Research and reports directory of the BIK Knowledge hub. Together with the BIK Policy monitor, it is updated annually and collates research that informs the implementation of the BIK+ strategy across the EU Member States, Iceland, and Norway.
Drawing on the findings of the 2026 BIK Policy monitor report, this article explores how the evidence base for children’s digital policy is generated across Europe. It looks at the availability of data across countries, the mix of actors involved in data collection, the key themes currently being researched, and the extent to which research and data inform policy.
High-quality evidence is essential for effective policymaking on children’s digital lives. Without reliable data on how children use digital technologies, the risks and harms they face, and the opportunities that foster learning, creativity and participation, policy responses may be poorly targeted or simply ineffective, becoming either overly restrictive or insufficiently protective against real harms. A robust evidence base enables policymakers to identify priority areas, track emerging issues (such as AI-related risks or addictive design), evaluate existing measures, and ensure policy aligns with the BIK pillars of protection, empowerment and participation. In this sense, evidence anchors policymaking in children’s lived experiences rather than in adult assumptions alone.
Drawing on the findings of the 2026 BIK Policy monitor report, this article explores how the evidence base for children’s digital policy is generated across Europe. It looks at the availability of data across countries, the mix of actors involved in data collection, the key themes currently being researched, and the extent to which research and data inform policy.
The evidence base is growing, but unevenly across countries
Across Europe, approaches to regular and systematic data collection on children’s digital lives remain highly uneven. While some countries have established regular systems for collecting policy-relevant data, others continue to rely on broader surveys, ad-hoc research exercises, or external sources. This means that the strength of the evidence base still varies significantly across countries, even where children’s digital lives are clearly recognised as a policy issue.
The 2026 edition of the BIK Policy monitor shows that only eight countries conduct a regular nationally representative survey1 specifically focused on children’s digital lives. In twelve countries, relevant quantitative data are collected as part of broader national surveys, while some countries continue to rely heavily on international studies such as EU Kids Online, Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC), or European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs (ESPAD)2. A further eight countries report that such surveys are carried out only irregularly3, while just one country4 reports no regular data collection on this topic. Compared with earlier Policy monitor cycles, this points to gradual progress rather than a major shift: the number of countries with dedicated regular surveys has remained unchanged at eight, while the number drawing on broader surveys has increased from eight in 2024 to twelve in 2026 (the current report).
A similarly uneven pattern can be seen in research on online risks, harms and digital well-being. Only ten countries report regular national research that specifically tracks these issues5, while eleven rely on ad hoc or irregular studies6. The unevenness is not only visible in the availability of data, but also in the capacity of countries to hold regular data collection over time.
A mixed research ecosystem is building the evidence base
The evidence base on children’s digital lives is not produced by a single actor. Across Europe, it is built through a mixed ecosystem that includes government institutions, academic researchers, NGOs, Safer Internet Centres (SICs), and cross-country research networks. According to the 2026 BIK Policy monitor report, eleven countries have established formal permanent structures7 dedicated to monitoring and researching children’s digital experiences, which include dedicated research units, think tanks, or advisory bodies. At the same time, fifteen countries report that they rely primarily on external sources8, including NGOs or academic studies, to inform policy development. This suggests that evidence-based policymaking is being sustained in different ways across Europe, with varying levels of institutional support.
Part of this body of research comes from recurring national study programmes. The Policy monitor highlights several established examples, including Belgium’s Génération 2020 and Apenstaartjaren surveys, Germany’s JIM and KIM studies, Hungary’s Digital Parenting research, and Sweden’s Ungar & Medier series. Together, these examples show that, in several countries, evidence is built not only through one-off studies, but through repeated national research infrastructures that generate regular inputs for policy discussion.
The report also shows that Safer Internet Centres’ and cross-country initiatives play an important role. Austria’s Youth Internet Monitor, for example, is run by Saferinternet.at, illustrating how actors linked to the SIC can contribute directly to the evidence base. More broadly, several countries refer to participation in the 2025 wave of EU Kids Online9, which for the first time also includes children’s use of generative AI. Taken together, these examples suggest that the evidence base for children’s digital policy is being built through a combination of national, networked and cross-border efforts, rather than through government systems alone.
Research is increasingly focusing on harms, well-being and AI
The 2026 BIK Policy monitor shows that national research is increasingly focusing on the quality and safety of children’s digital experiences, with particular attention to emerging risks and their impact on well-being. An important feature of this year’s findings is the growth of thematic research on online risks, harms and digital well-being, alongside new work on artificial intelligence and its implications for children. Cyberbullying, harmful online content, addictive design, and the psychological effects of digital environments are among the issues receiving growing attention across countries.
Artificial intelligence is one of the clearest emerging themes. The Policy monitor report shows studies focused on AI in several countries, including Luxembourg’s SCRIPT AI Survey (2025), which involved around 4,000 students and 240 teachers to explore AI knowledge and school rules, and Slovenia’s Safe.si Survey 2025 on teenagers and their interaction with artificial intelligence. Luxembourg is also developing a White Paper on Children and AI from an ethical perspective.
Other research focuses more directly on risks, harms and well-being. Belgium reported a 2025 study on the harmful effects of social media and screen use, while Romania published research on the effects of cyberbullying on children’s emotional well-being, alongside a joint UNICEF-Ministry of Education report on mental health in schools. Norway’s Media Authority also published different reports in 2025, including Feed, Reason, and Emotions on youth reflections on politics and influence, and Everyone Else is Allowed on young people’s experiences on Snapchat and YouTube. These examples suggest that the evidence base is not only expanding, but also adapting to new policy concerns around well-being, platform design and AI-related risks.
From evidence gathering to evidence-informed policy
Evidence does not inform policy automatically; it is most useful when countries have the structures, funding and review processes needed to turn research into practical policy decisions. The 2026 BIK Policy monitor suggests that, across Europe, this link between evidence and policymaking remains uneven. Some countries have formal structures, such as research units, think tanks or advisory bodies, which help connect evidence to policy development. Others rely mainly on external research from NGOs, academic institutions or international studies. This means that the influence of evidence depends not only on whether research exists, but also on whether it is embedded in a regular policy process.
Funding is one important part of this picture. The Policy monitor shows that only two countries report a dedicated research fund focused specifically on children and the digital environment10. Most countries rely on broader research programmes or occasional special initiatives. This limits the ability of policymakers to build evidence over time, particularly on emerging issues such as generative AI, addictive design, cyberbullying, digital well-being and platform-related harms.
Monitoring and evaluation is another key link between evidence and policy. While most countries have some form of policy review, only eight report systematic and regular monitoring and evaluation of BIK-related policies11. Fourteen others report regular but less standardised processes12. This suggests that evidence is increasingly present in national policy ecosystems, but it is not yet consistently used as part of a mature feedback loop between research, policy design, implementation and review.
Conclusion
The evidence base on children’s digital lives is growing across Europe. Countries are drawing on a wider range of sources, including national surveys, academic research, Safer Internet Centres, civil society initiatives, and cross-country studies. This is helping policymakers respond to emerging concerns such as AI, cyberbullying, addictive design, digital well-being and children’s rights online.
However, the overall picture remains uneven. Some countries have regular data collection, dedicated research structures and policy review systems, while others continue to rely on broader surveys, external sources or ad hoc studies. To strengthen the evidence base, more needs to be done not only to produce additional research, but also to build stronger systems to collect, compare and use evidence over time, so that policies on children’s digital lives remain grounded in children’s real experiences and can adapt as the digital environment changes.
Read the full BIK Policy monitor report 2026 for more insights. An executive summary is also available.
[1] DE, HU, IS, IT, LU, NO, SE, SK
[2] AT, BE, CY, CZ, DK, EE, EL, ES, FI, MT, NL, PL
[3] BG, FR, HR, IE, LT, LV, PT, SI
[4] RO
[5] DE, EE, HU, IS, IT, LU, MT, NO, SE, SK
[6] CY, CZ, DK, EL, FR, HR, LT, PL, PT, RO, SI
[7] AT, BE, CY, DK, IE, IS, IT, MT, NO, PL, SE
[8] CZ, DE, EL, ES, FI, FR, HU, LT, LU, LV, NL, PT, RO, SI, SK
[9] AT, BE, EE, FI, HR, IE, LU, MT, NO, PL, ES, PT
[10] BE, NO
[11] CY, DE, LV, MT, NL, NO, PL, SK
[12] AT, BE, EL, ES, FI, FR, IE, IS, IT, LU, PT, RO, SE, SI
Interested in more?
Explore other relevant research in the Research and reports directory of the BIK Knowledge hub. Together with the BIK Policy monitor, it is updated annually and collates research that informs the implementation of the BIK+ strategy across the EU Member States, Iceland, and Norway.
- BIK policy BIK policy monitor policy evidences
Related content
- < Previous article
- Next article >
- < Previous
- Next >
Related articles
