Ex Ante Evaluation of Safety by Design in Social Gaming Platforms: Risk Vectors and Age-Assurance Trade-offs in Brazil
Resumo
Introduction: Children and adolescents in social gaming ecosystems face multiple online risks, while interventions such as age assurance may also impose costs in privacy, access friction, and digital inclusion. Objective: We propose an ex ante evaluability framework to assess Safety by Design measures for online child protection in Brazil. Methodology: Using TIC Kids Online Brasil 2024 and complementary parameters from TIC Domicílios, we construct five group-level risk vectors, represent mechanisms through two qualitative matrices (mechanism-to-risk and mechanism-to-cost), and run an exploratory net-benefit simulation under alternative cost scenarios. Results: Risk exposure is heterogeneous across groups, with higher concentration in contact, informational exposure, and harassment. The evaluated package is more coherent for reducing contact-related risks than for directly addressing content or scam-related harms, while the most protective mechanisms also tend to be the most costly in privacy and access friction. The framework makes these trade-offs explicit and supports evaluation before post-implementation causal evidence is available.
Palavras-chave:
Safety by Design, Age Assurance, Online Child Safety, Digital Risk, Platform Governance
Referências
CGI.br e NIC.br (2018). Pesquisa sobre o uso das tecnologias de informação e comunicação nos domicílios brasileiros: TIC Domicílios 2017. Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil, São Paulo.
CGI.br e NIC.br (2021). Pesquisa sobre o uso das tecnologias de informação e comunicação nos domicílios brasileiros: TIC Domicílios 2020 (Edição COVID-19). Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil, São Paulo.
CGI.br e NIC.br (2025). Pesquisa sobre o uso da Internet por crianças e adolescentes no Brasil: TIC Kids Online Brasil 2024. Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil, São Paulo.
Eltaher, F., Gajula, R. K., Miralles-Pechuán, L., Thorpe, C., e McKeever, S. (2025). The digital loophole: Evaluating the effectiveness of child age verification methods on social media. Technical report.
European Commission (2014). Guidelines for the ex-ante evaluation of 2014-2020 emff ops. Technical report.
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., e Rubin, D. B. (2013). Bayesian Data Analysis. CRC Press, 3 edition.
Jarvie, C. e Renaud, K. (2024). Online age verification: Government legislation, supplier responsibilization, and public perceptions. Children, 11(9):1068.
Kelemen, A., Szabó, Z. K., Bozóki, S., Szádoczki, Z., e Hartvig, Á. D. (2024). A sensitivity analysis of composite indicators: Min/max thresholds. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 23:100453.
Libório, M. P., Ekel, P., D’Angelo, M. F. S. V., Martínez, L., e Rabiei, H. (2024). Constructing composite indicators through extreme values reductions-ordered weighted averaging: Human development index. IEEE Access.
Liu, S. e Scheffler, S. (2026). Adequately tailoring age verification regulations. arXiv:2601.20241v2.
Livingstone, S., Nair, A., Stoilova, M., van der Hof, S., e Caglar, C. (2024). Children’s rights and online age assurance systems: The way forward. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 32(3):721–747.
Livingstone, S. e Pothong, K. (2025). Child rights impact assessment: A policy tool for a rights-respecting digital environment. Policy & Internet, 17:e70008.
Molnar, A. e Robinson, L. (2024). Towards digital safety by design for children. Technical report, OECD Digital Economy Papers.
Morgan, M. G. (2014). Use (and abuse) of expert elicitation in support of decision making for public policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(20):7176– 7184.
OECD e JRC (2008). Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Stardust, Z., Obeid, A., McKee, A., e Angus, D. (2024). Mandatory age verification for pornography access: Why it can’t and won’t save the children. Big Data & Society.
Tarantola, S., Nardo, M., Saisana, M., e Gatelli, D. (2006). A new estimator for sensitivity analysis of model output: An application to the e-business readiness composite indicator. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 91:1135–1141.
UNICEF EAPRO and YRRC (2022). Evaluating online safety initiatives: How to build the evidence base on what works to keep children safe online. Technical report, UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office and Young and Resilient Research Centre, Bangkok.
Woodley, G., See, H. W., O’Neill, B., Green, L., Staksrud, E., e Haskell-Dowland, P. (2025). Australian teen voices on age verification and age assurance measures. Policy & Internet, 17:e70019
CGI.br e NIC.br (2021). Pesquisa sobre o uso das tecnologias de informação e comunicação nos domicílios brasileiros: TIC Domicílios 2020 (Edição COVID-19). Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil, São Paulo.
CGI.br e NIC.br (2025). Pesquisa sobre o uso da Internet por crianças e adolescentes no Brasil: TIC Kids Online Brasil 2024. Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil, São Paulo.
Eltaher, F., Gajula, R. K., Miralles-Pechuán, L., Thorpe, C., e McKeever, S. (2025). The digital loophole: Evaluating the effectiveness of child age verification methods on social media. Technical report.
European Commission (2014). Guidelines for the ex-ante evaluation of 2014-2020 emff ops. Technical report.
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., e Rubin, D. B. (2013). Bayesian Data Analysis. CRC Press, 3 edition.
Jarvie, C. e Renaud, K. (2024). Online age verification: Government legislation, supplier responsibilization, and public perceptions. Children, 11(9):1068.
Kelemen, A., Szabó, Z. K., Bozóki, S., Szádoczki, Z., e Hartvig, Á. D. (2024). A sensitivity analysis of composite indicators: Min/max thresholds. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 23:100453.
Libório, M. P., Ekel, P., D’Angelo, M. F. S. V., Martínez, L., e Rabiei, H. (2024). Constructing composite indicators through extreme values reductions-ordered weighted averaging: Human development index. IEEE Access.
Liu, S. e Scheffler, S. (2026). Adequately tailoring age verification regulations. arXiv:2601.20241v2.
Livingstone, S., Nair, A., Stoilova, M., van der Hof, S., e Caglar, C. (2024). Children’s rights and online age assurance systems: The way forward. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 32(3):721–747.
Livingstone, S. e Pothong, K. (2025). Child rights impact assessment: A policy tool for a rights-respecting digital environment. Policy & Internet, 17:e70008.
Molnar, A. e Robinson, L. (2024). Towards digital safety by design for children. Technical report, OECD Digital Economy Papers.
Morgan, M. G. (2014). Use (and abuse) of expert elicitation in support of decision making for public policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(20):7176– 7184.
OECD e JRC (2008). Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Stardust, Z., Obeid, A., McKee, A., e Angus, D. (2024). Mandatory age verification for pornography access: Why it can’t and won’t save the children. Big Data & Society.
Tarantola, S., Nardo, M., Saisana, M., e Gatelli, D. (2006). A new estimator for sensitivity analysis of model output: An application to the e-business readiness composite indicator. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 91:1135–1141.
UNICEF EAPRO and YRRC (2022). Evaluating online safety initiatives: How to build the evidence base on what works to keep children safe online. Technical report, UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office and Young and Resilient Research Centre, Bangkok.
Woodley, G., See, H. W., O’Neill, B., Green, L., Staksrud, E., e Haskell-Dowland, P. (2025). Australian teen voices on age verification and age assurance measures. Policy & Internet, 17:e70019
Publicado
29/09/2026
Como Citar
SOUSA, Filipe Pessôa; MENDONÇA, Augusto Magalhães Pinto de; COELHO, Igor Machado; FARIA, Cristiane Oliveira de; COSTA, Rosa Maria Esteves Moreira da; WERNECK, Vera Maria Benjamim.
Ex Ante Evaluation of Safety by Design in Social Gaming Platforms: Risk Vectors and Age-Assurance Trade-offs in Brazil. In: SIMPÓSIO BRASILEIRO DE JOGOS E ENTRETENIMENTO DIGITAL (SBGAMES), 25. , 2026, Goiânia/GO.
Anais [...].
Porto Alegre: Sociedade Brasileira de Computação,
2026
.
p. 705-714.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/sbgames.2026.25411.
