Governance and Local Development are two processes that converge in the framework of sustainability, as the discussion and consensus pose axes and issues that lays around to resources, opportunities, capabilities and municipal responsibilities. In this sense, the objective of this work was to expose the relationship from a desk study. In the first phase indexed with ISSN and DOI registration issued during the period from 2010-2015 data bases representative of Latin America (DIALNET, LATINDEX and REDALYC) sources were selected. Subsequently, in the second phase, the information was processed in a matrix of content analysis in order to extract the topics of discussion for the construction of an agenda. In the third phase, the selected information is contrasted with a specific case of endogenous development. Finally, based on the state of knowledge the themes were compared.

Digital entrepreneurship involves the emergence of empathy, commitment, innovation and satisfaction that make up a process aimed at building a global digital village. In this scenario, the deregulation of the State envisions citizen participation through electronic devices in order to generate ideas for Human Development. However, in any of the scenarios, digital exclusion or inclusion, differences between resources and groups exacerbate asymmetries between individuals. This paper suggests that in both contexts, the digital divide or the digital village, entrepreneurship generates Human Development, but also intensifies the defenselessness of people exposed to harassment. A review of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks, as well as the findings reported in the state of knowledge, warns that entrepreneurship is generated by perceptions of opportunity that, when associated with expectations of compatibility, utility and ease, generate asymmetrical relationships between cyberusers. Therefore, a model for the study of both phenomena is proposed in order to open the discussion about the relevance of electronic devices in the diffusion of equity. 

Human Development involves the intensification of education in virtual scenarios, but the problems related to the groups that make up digital networks exacerbate differences that inhibit the development of computational skills. This is the case of cyberbullying, which is the product of the usefulness and self-efficacy in the use of information protocols and electronic devices while these are complemented with strategies of ridicule, sexism or aggression on the Internet. In this sense, human capital, as proposed by rational choice, shapes skills, knowledge and values that not only lead them to self-training, but also to the establishment of asymmetrical relationships with their peers and the networks they form are rather an extension of social exclusion in the network. 

In contrast, digital entrepreneurship understood as perceptions of opportunity and management and innovation capacities of knowledge oriented to Human Development involves responses by a community to the problems related to the digital divide. 

Within the framework of the Information Society, digital entrepreneurship is the product of scientific and technological advances in which the intensive use of electronic devices allows the diversification of initiatives, as well as the discussion of issues that, due to their degree of tendency, will impact public opinion. 

However, digital entrepreneurship, unlike social entrepreneurship, is subject to technological progress and the adoption of lifestyles compatible with the electronic and discursive innovations of Internet users. While digital entrepreneurship involves specialising and updating knowledge and skills, social entrepreneurship involves perceptions of risk and opportunity. 

A review of psychological studies of social and digital entrepreneurship shows that perceptions of risk, self-efficacy and opportunity are determinants of personal, group or organizational initiatives, but it is the perceptions of compatibility, usefulness and ease of use of electronic devices that explain the generation and innovation of ideas, but also harassment among users. 

If social entrepreneurship determines Human Development, then the perception of opportunity, risk and self-efficacy are explanatory factors of educational, labor and health progress, but in the case of digital entrepreneurship, the perception of compatibility, usefulness and ease of use not only explain the progress of human capital, but also harassment among peers when interacting through a technology or electronic device. 

Therefore, the objective of this paper is to review the studies related to digital entrepreneurship, knowledge management and innovation to specify the relationships between the determining factors and to be able to discuss the scope and limits of the specified model. Such an exercise will allow anticipating scenarios of discussion, harassment and intervention oriented to Human Development through the explanation of the digital entrepreneurship of human capital. 

There are three scenarios that this review expects; 1) Digital entrepreneurship as an indicator of the digital divide between Internet users and cybergroups. In this scenario, knowledge management and innovation is deregulated by the State and subordinated to for-profit organizations, 2) digital entrepreneurship as an indicator of informational equity between activists and Internet users. Management and innovation depend on empathetic relationships, commitment and life satisfaction generated by the exchange of information, 3) digital entrepreneurship as an indicator of informational diversity promoted by the transformation of the State and the intensification of citizen participation, as well as the openness of the media and access to technologies and electronic devices. 

Each of the three scenarios involves the interrelation between computer agents, cyberpolitical actors, Internet users and artificial intelligences that, due to their degree of compatibility, usefulness and self-efficacy, will build other scenarios of power, influence, control and social domination

However, the perception of opportunity seems to be a key factor in the advent of some of the scenarios, since as long as the State does not guarantee access to the Internet and citizens do not self-manage their access to the Internet, the cyberspheres of Internet users generate opportunities that, when perceived by other cyberusers, represent the investigative focus in this process.

What would be the dimensions of the perception of opportunity in a context of digital divide, equity and electronic inclusion or hactivism?

The answer to this question has not yet been elaborated by the theoretical and conceptual frameworks nor has it been reported as a finding in the state of knowledge, but it has been raised by classical entrepreneurship in which it is possible to identify eight dimensions that could be antecedents of the dimensional factors of digital entrepreneurship. 

It is for this reason that this work is of a documentary nature since the studies from 2010 to 2014 are reviewed following the keyword search criteria; "entrepreneurship", "innovation", "utility", "compatibility", "ease" or "accessibility" in three search engines: DIALNET, REDALYC and LATINDEX considered as bastions of information for university communities. 

Problems Related To The Digital Divide 

If Human Development involves the digital inclusion of vulnerable, marginalized or excluded sectors and cyberbullying implies a barrier to inclusion and reduction of the digital divide, then it seems contradictory that skills and knowledge related to electronic devices and digital protocols serve Human Development. 

However, the social differences between Internet users are not only transferred to electronic networks, but are also exacerbated as the predominant language is English, or updates, require better electronic devices that only those who have the economic resources and social recognition could have, although there are underground networks that reduce these differences by creating their own protocols.  the differences are intensifying. 

However, the skills, knowledge and values involved in the formation of the skills and capacities of cyberpeople are a way of inclusion that, when disseminated, could reduce the digital divide and digital exclusion. 

Mexico occupies a peripheral place in the problem of the digital divide, which consists of the scientific and technological advancement of electronic devices with access to academic information. 

In the area of Internet accessibility, Mexico ranks last with respect to other member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). In contrast, Switzerland, Iceland and Finland have 100% coverage 

In terms of Internet penetration, cities in Mexico that have between 10 and 49 thousand inhabitants as well as those with between 50 and 249 thousand inhabitants are slightly below the OECD average, but in cities with more than 250 thousand inhabitants penetration is limited. 

In terms of subscriptions, Mexico ranks fifth among the economies with the fewest Internet subscribers. In this sense, Mexico is not among the countries with the highest intensive use of electronic devices and their corresponding applications. 

However, the sixth place in terms of e-commerce is occupied by Mexico, while Iceland occupies the last place with respect to the United States, which consolidated with the first place in terms of exports and imports of technology. 

In summary, the problems related to the digital divide and electronic exclusion show that intervention is required among the countries that make up the OECD in order to reduce the gap, promote inclusion and information equity. As the State guarantees digital services, it not only accelerates the process of inclusion and development, but also generates networks of empathy, knowledge, entrepreneurship, innovation and satisfaction that explain the differences with respect to the OECD countries themselves 

Theory Of Digital Entrepreneurship

Digital entrepreneurship refers to freedoms and capacities that precede agents of change. Unlike Internet users who react by saturating the servers in protest of public policies, cyber agents are the ones who 1) establish the topics of dissemination in the media and 2) influence the electorate through the systematic dissemination of their rights to unrestricted access to information and the privacy of personal data. 

In this way, digital entrepreneurship is linked to social agency in that it promotes change based on the digital skills of Internet users rather than on the use of violence or civil disobedience. 

Therefore, the establishment of issues related to the public agenda is the result of an inverse process that the media maintained to influence mass societies by attributing stereotypes to social groups, but now in the information society, communication networks exceed audience levels, but above all they influence the decisions and actions of citizens by establishing some issue on the public agenda that is related to with some unfortunate decision of the authorities or rulers. 

If digital entrepreneurship is the result of public policies that promote the inclusion of citizens in government affairs through digital services, then the Theory of Digital Entrepreneurship would explain two processes: conformity and innovation. 

If domination and social control is the purpose of a state and its citizens, then the reproduction of conformity and obedience would be two indicators that contrast with the entrepreneurship and innovation characteristic of the transformation of the state and citizen participation in public policies. 

These are four areas in which the relationship between State and society generates representations, habitus, fields and capitals from which equity and inclusion, but also inequity and exclusion, are reproduced. 

The digital divide as a product of domination and social control, conformity and obedience is explained by the power exercised by majority groups over minority groups. 

In contrast, the global village would involve the dissemination of trust, entrepreneurship, commitment, innovation, and satisfaction as central elements of state deregulation and citizen participation, but as a propelling scenario for perceptions of compatibility, utility, and self-efficacy that are determinants in relations of domination such as peer harassment. 

In this way, the Theory of Digital Entrepreneurship explains the emergence of information agents, political cyberactors, Internet users and electronic devices that can widen or reduce the digital divide itself, which would be indicated by equity and inequity, inclusion and exclusion, conformity and innovation, domination and liberation, control and deregulation, obedience and disobedience. 

Also, the Theory of Social Entrepreneurship would anticipate the emergence of new agents, actors and subjects to the extent that electronic devices evolve, innovation intensifies and risks increase. 

State Of Knowledge About Cyberbullying As A Factor Of Digital Exclusion

If we consider the definition of cyberbullying and empirical proof with other variables in a period from 2010 to 2014 yielded by a search in Radalyc, Latindex, Dialnet, the main references of data in Spanish for Latin America, then psychological studies of cyberbullying (see figure 3) have demonstrated the direct, positive and significant effect of the perception of usefulness on bullying.  aggression or violence on the Internet or social networks.

Cyberbullying, understood as a deliberate, treacherous and systematic aggression by a group or individual against another group or individual in a defenseless situation (see Table 7), has been explained based on differences between ethnic groups (Campbell & Smalling, 2013; Kupczynski, Mundi, & Green, 2013), gender differences (Elizalde, 2010; León et al., 2011; Buelga & Pons, 2012), and pairwise differences (Quintana et al., 2012; Romera, Rey, & Ortega, 2011), differences between aggressors, bystanders, and victims (García et al., 2011; Mendoza, 2011; 2012; Valdés, Yañez, & Martínez, 2013), by type of harassment (Martínez, & Reild, 2013), differences by socialization (Garaigordobil, & Oñederra, 2010), by use of devices (García et al., 2010), and by discourse (Gómez, 2013). However, cyberbullying has not been explained from perceptual variables. 

Although the relationships between the perceptual variables put forward would explain cyberbullying, it is necessary to consider one more perceptual factor, namely: the perception of bullying. 

If cyberbullying refers to a series of actions that intimidate or ridicule the use of a technology by defenseless individuals or groups, then the perception of harassment would refer to those symptoms that users of a technology present when interacting with other users that are perceived as threats that affect the adoption of a technology or in any case encourage the development of skills and knowledge for self-defense of a victim of cyberbullying or the intensification of harassment by an aggressor. 

State Of Knowledge Around Digital Entrepreneurship

Psychological studies of entrepreneurship warn that the perception of opportunity, derived from the digital services that the State manages or citizens self-manage, is indicated by capacity, opportunism, commitment, propensity, innovation, confidence, motivation and dedication. 

Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), by influencing educational and organizational systems, promote the development of useful perceptions that are directly related to decisions about the production, management, and reproduction of knowledge (Zamiri, Mahamed, & Baqutayan, 2012). Learning software involves not only expectations of benefits and gains, but is also accompanied by the generation of a climate of trust and commitment within the learning group. 

However, the intensive use of ICTs requires technical support since most of them are devices that require constant maintenance. That is why the perception of usefulness increases when the technological device or software is supported by expeditious and efficient technical support (Zaidel & Zhu, 2010). When technical support is inefficient, the perception of usefulness of technology is associated with the perception that technologies and teaching and learning processes are independent and that the intensive use of a device or software does not significantly increase classroom instruction. In contrast, those users who consider technical support essential for the use of technologies assume that the service must be expeditious since it implies losses and costs that can be eliminated if the maintenance of the devices were done constantly. 

Because instructors in education systems determine the use of devices and software based on their relationship with students rather than with technical support, this implies that the intensive use of technologies is often interrupted by lack of maintenance (Bakabulindi, 2012). Faced with such a situation, instructors develop perceptions of risk that gradually replace perceptions of usefulness. 

Uncertainty, risk, and insecurity are factors that affect satisfaction in the use of the electronic device or software (Sharma & Abrol, 2011). In this sense, the profitability of a technological or electronic system is understood as one that reduces costs and maximizes benefits in terms of investment, time and maintenance of the system. 

However, despite the fact that organizations are exposed to contingencies, decision-makers see in chaos, development opportunities from the implementation of information technologies. The decisions that will affect the work environment are subordinated by perceptions of usefulness in management (Wang & Huynh, 2013). It is precisely these expectations of opportunity that encourage the acceptance, adoption, purchase and implementation of devices or software in transnational corporations. 

By associating perceptions of usefulness with privacy and security, they determine the adoption of the technology, the corresponding maintenance and the update it implies (Jalal, Marzooj, & Nabi, 2011). In cases where the handling of personal data involves the perception of risk due to the mishandling of personal information, credibility and privacy are determining factors in the electronic capture of personal data. 

In reference to the perception of control, perceived capacity, and perceived ease of use at the time of training, training, or induction to familiarize oneself with technology, the perception of usefulness determines through the three perceived skills, the use of the electronic device (Kotaman, 2010). This is because users are motivated to use technologies by developing perceptions and skills in their intensive use. 

As users orient these skills according to their objectives, meet their goals, and disseminate their achievements among their work team, trust, commitment, and satisfaction will determine efficiency, effectiveness, and effectiveness, forming a virtuous and innovative circle (García, Carreón, Hernández, Bustos, Morales, & Limón, 2013). 

However, when it comes to the adoption, purchase, and consumption of a technology, the accessibility of the device rather than its ease of use, control, or manipulation determines the implementation of the technology (Ramayah & Ignatius, 2010). Because technology is constantly changing, the inclusion of multiple functions generates helplessness or ambivalent in those users who perceive these dizzying changes as barriers in their attempt to update and specialize in technology. In the case of helplessness, users who do not adapt to technological changes at the pace they dictate end up dismissing their use. In the case of ambivalence, this is observed in those users who have positive attitudes towards electronic devices, but their use means a greater cost than benefit since without them the results vary to a lesser degree than with their implementation. 

Both cases of helplessness and ambivalence are explained by the relationship that perceptions have with beliefs, attitudes, decisions, and behaviors (Tekeher, 2013). It is an automatic or linear, improvised or deliberate, spontaneous or planned, asystematic or systematic relationship in which:

• Risk perceptions determine general beliefs, unfavorable attitudes, heuristic decisions, and unforeseen actions. Or:
• Perceptions of usefulness affect specific beliefs, favorable attitudes, planned decisions, and systematic actions.

Although the two processes explain the acceptance or rejection of a technology, when the perception of usefulness is associated with sociodemographic factors such as sex, age, occupation, and income, they predict resistance to change or updating of the technology (Mutengezanwa & Fungai, 2013). Older microentrepreneurs resist the use of electronic money, while professionals with incomes of more than $10,000 are more prone to the intensive use of technologies that are constantly updated. 

In the case of digital financial protocols, an indicator of economic and sustainable development, updating software in order to guarantee the security of investors generates uncertainty, risk, dissatisfaction and insecurity that inhibits alliances between transnationals and SMEs in local markets, or the internationalization of SMEs through multinationals in the global market. 

However, compatibility seems to have a greater influence on technology acceptance (Di Russo & Douglas, 2013). Users who have accepted other technologies associated with the one they intend to adopt are closer to their consumption compared to those who have not been users of any technology linked to the one they intend to acquire. 

Indeed, technological services and products are not only devices or software that are updated according to market demands, but are also part of networks of technologies that innovate and transform the lifestyles of users. In this sense, the technologies that have been adopted generated enough confidence in users to acquire a device or related software. 

In organizations, trust in technology as well as in work groups is essential for the achievement of goals (Hsuan, Hsu, Shan, & Ming, 2013). It is a process in which users can select a technology that will enhance their performance. If users perceive a high degree of usefulness in the technology, then they approach a climate of trust that will spread to work groups, technology providers and customers. In contrast, those users who have had unfavorable experiences with some technology inhibit the selection of other related technologies. 

This is how accessibility, compatibility, usefulness, trust, commitment, performance, and satisfaction are part of an organizational and technological process in which electronic devices or software are considered as instruments for the achievement of goals, planning, quality control, knowledge management, and innovation. 

These are digital ecosystems in which users, managers, suppliers, customers and technologies are immersed in perceptual, emotional, attitudinal, motivational and intentional environments (Wiedmann, Hennings, Varelmann & Reeh, 2010). In these digital ecosystems, trust in users or technological devices underlies as an organizational dilemma. Both are fundamental for the development of the digital ecosystem, but only trust in users generates commitment. In contrast, trust in technology affects performance and satisfaction. 

In the case of electronic devices, intensive use is linked to user satisfaction (Sago, 2013). An increase in the frequency and hours of use leads to an increase in levels of satisfaction with technology. It is a compatibility between technology and the user's lifestyle since in their daily activities technology allows greater comfort, entertainment, performance or satisfaction. 

In fact, the intensive use of a technology is related to the lifestyle of the users, since the greater the number of hours in the use of a technology, the needs and expectations adjust to the changes experienced by the electronic device or computer software (Ruíz, Sanz, & Tavera, 2010). However, this relationship between perceived compatibility and the use of technology, being mediated by attitudes towards technology, reduces its predictive power since the categorization of devices implies the reasoned, planned and systematic acceptance of technology. This implies prior knowledge about the possibilities of technology, which does not always correspond to lifestyles. 

Precisely, the formation of attitudes towards technology implies the emergence of perceptions regarding the quality of electronic devices (Almahamid, McAdmas, Kalaldeh, & Alsa, 2012). When users perceive the usefulness of technology in improving their performance, perceived quality often emerges as a mediating factor that regulates job expectations and orients skills towards a certain product or service. 

Although the perceived quality determines the usefulness of the technology, it is the perception of efficacy that determines the usefulness of said technology (Ramírez, Rondán, & Arenas, 2010). In this sense, users develop expectations not only of improving their functions, but also of the possible results that they will be able to obtain by accepting a given technology. 

Because effectiveness refers to the difference between the expected objectives and the results obtained in work groups, social influence underlies it as a determinant of technology adoption (Kabeer & Muhammad, 2013). A decrease in the values of the expectations of the members of a work group affects the perception of the usefulness of the technology. Similarly, in the case of the perception of risk as it derives from the expectations of the group, it also regulates the relationship between utility and the decision to use a technology. 

Perceived efficacy, expected utility, expectations of ease of use and control of the technology, as well as attitudes, intentions, and uses are aimed at user satisfaction (Thiruchelvi & Koteeswari, 2013). It is a virtuous circle in which perceptions increase as technology produces user satisfaction or generates trust, commitment and innovation in work groups. In other words, the intensive use of technology not only makes it compatible with an individual or group lifestyle, but also modifies its social appropriation. 

The relationship between the individual and technology entails two perceptions of usefulness and ease of use that will affect attitudes, intentions and behaviours. At the individual level, the effects of the intensive use of technology can be extended to groups. In the case of communities or societies, the perceived usefulness of being associated with sociodemographic, socioeconomic, and sociocultural variables offers the possibility of explaining the conflict and social change that the acceptance of technology entails (Torres, Robles, & Molina, 2011). In the first case, social conflict is observable in the resistance to technological change since societies were guided by a dominant social paradigm in which technologies were not necessary for daily or productive activities. The advent of ICTs led to a social conflict that led to the acceptance of technology and with it a New Technological Paradigm, the main indicator of social change. 

The acceptance of information and communication technologies may have been due to compatibility or utility, but it was scalability understood as the inclusion of other technologies in a single one that determined the increase in sales of electronic devices (San Martin & López, 2010). As technologies merged and included other services, portability emerged as another ICT value-add. 

The inclusion of several technologies in a single device was not enough, it was essential that the companies in charge of offering digital services could compete openly without restrictions (Pepper, Aiken, & Garner, 2011). That is why portability, understood as the ability of a technology to be managed by more than one company, boosted the acceptance of mobile and electronic devices, as well as virtual social networks.

It is about the adaptation of technology to the lifestyle of users, or to other information technologies. When there is informational adequacy, technology investment decisions are intensified (Shaheen, 2010). On the contrary, distrust is the factor that inhibits investments since it implies an inadequacy of information. The available information is insufficient for decision-making, or it is biased information that implies investment in devices of higher cost and uncertain benefits. This implies that technology is not flexible with respect to the environment in which it is used. 

Organizations that are characterized by flexible management styles and innovative collaborative networks often adopt flexible technologies that allow them to carry out multiple functions, and that quality determines investment in human capital (Mehra and Omidian, 2010). The technology that will enhance their skills, knowledge and values is one that prevents traffic or loss of information. 

In summary, psychological studies of the acceptance of technology have focused on perceptions of usefulness, efficacy, control, and quality, as well as on attitudes and intentions as they are considered determinants of the intensive use of electronic devices. 

Users develop technological skills that allow them to increase their performance as long as there is a deliberate, planned and systematic process. This implies the formation of collaborative groups with climates of trust, commitment, innovation and satisfaction. In this sense, the relationship between user and technology is determined by processes of compatibility, flexibility, scalability, portability, credibility and privacy that make the adoption of a technology and its eventual use more feasible. 

However, when the relationship between user and technology is ambiguous and uncertain, there is an underlying perception of risk, unfavorable attitudes towards technology and intentions of resistance to change that promote helplessness or ambivalence. 

By associating psychological variables with sociological factors such as age, sex, occupation or income, they explain individual and group situations that can be extended to the diagnosis of an organization, community or society. In this sense, a model of dependency relations would be relevant for the diagnosis of a social group that intensively uses ICTs with an emphasis on electronic and virtual social networks. 

In summary, studies on digital entrepreneurship show that perceptions of compatibility, usefulness, and ease of use are essential to explain the process of adoption, acceptance, and intensive use of technologies. In reference to the Theory of Digital Entrepreneurship, the state of knowledge warns that opportunism could explain the asymmetries between Internet users and cybergroups when establishing relations of power and influence where domination and social control would be associated with a perception of risk that would affect conformity, or perceptions of usefulness that would determine the innovation of minorities. 

However, while studies related to digital entrepreneurship warn that electronic protocols and devices as well as competencies are essential for the establishment of topics in a virtual public agenda, theoretical and conceptual frameworks have developed models to explain the establishment of a virtual public agenda. Theories have advanced towards the relationship between skills and innovations, ignoring social entrepreneurship and reducing it to the mere administration of a cyberblog. 

Within the framework of the transformation of the State, the deregulation of the risks derived from information and communication technologies, as well as the right to information and privacy, digital entrepreneurship would be made up of dimensions of affectivity rather than rationality, since once the economistic bias has been removed, entrepreneurship would be the exercise of freedoms,  skills and responsibilities that transform the Internet user into an agent of social and digital change.   

Specification Of Relationships Between The Determinants Of Digital Entrepreneurship

The specification of a model involves the explanation of relationships between variables that, when interacting, can be correlated with a third variable. Or, the specification can allude to the dimensions that make up a construct or latent variable from which it is intended to explain the emergence of an unprecedented process such as digital entrepreneurship. In this way, a model of reflective dimensions assumes that each of the indicators is linked to each other by the influence of a common process or factor that is also emergent. 

The model would include the most cited variables, although the specifications of other models would also have a place in the explanatory logic of the use of electronic social networks. Indeed, perceptions of control, efficiency, utility, and risk would be interrelated with attitudes, intentions, and use of technology to explain satisfaction. 

In this network of relationships, sociocultural variables related to norms, beliefs and values, socioeconomic and demographic variables such as sex, age, occupation, income and marital status, as well as organizational variables related to compatibility, flexibility, scalability, portability, credibility and privacy would be excluded. This is because the model explains the rational, deliberate, planned and systematic processes that underlie users and technologies. 

However, since satisfaction with technology and perceptions of control and risk are constructs that psychological studies have not empirically established, the model of specified dependency relations only included perceptions of efficiency and utility as exogenous constructs that directly affect the use of technology as well as indirectly through mediating variables such as attitude towards technology and intention to use. The model includes nine hypotheses considering the direct and indirect relationships between perceptions and the use of technology. 

In this way, the interrelationship between the perception of efficiency and the perception of utility would directly and indirectly determine the intensive use of technology (hypothesis 1). Consequently, the expectations of efficient operation from the adoption of the technology would have a direct impact on its intensive use (hypothesis 2). Or, the perception of efficiency in influencing decisions to adopt electronic devices increases their predictive power on the use of technology (hypothesis 4). Similarly, expectations of improvement by impacting electronic consumption decisions would determine the use of technology (hypothesis 5). 

However, when efficiency expectations are increased by the adoption of a technology, they produce categories that will influence consumption decisions and these will influence the use of technology (hypothesis 6). Similarly, the expected benefits from the use of a technology generate favorable attitudes to their acceptance decisions and these will improve the use of the technology (hypothesis 7). 

However, the use of technology may be due to the fact that consumers simply categorized a device as favorable to the achievement of their objectives, or the use of a technology may be due to the fact that the acceptance decisions had an emotional origin (hypothesis 8). In other words, technology as a product or service is susceptible to being promoted as an object of desire and it is from this phenomenon that consumers accept, buy, adopt and use technology. 

Discussion

This work has exposed the problem of the digital divide to insert itself in the discussion of the topic and to be able to review the theoretical and conceptual frameworks, as well as the most recent findings in order to propose a model of reflective relationships for the study of entrepreneurship with emphasis on the perception of opportunity, a preponderant factor in the documentary review. 

However, digital entrepreneurship, unlike social entrepreneurship, involves perceptions of opportunity focused on electronic devices rather than trust. In this sense, it is necessary to study the impact of technological advances on the lifestyles of Internet users, their capacities and decisions of use. As research becomes more specialized, it will be possible to anticipate scenarios in which Human Development will be the result of the undertaking of civil or citizen cyberspheres rather than of the regulation and administration of the State, since the transculturality and transterritoriality of the Internet implies a digital government that ensures the same principles of freedom, justice and equity. 

However, studies related to digital entrepreneurship, in its area of intensive use, show that perceptions of compatibility, usefulness and ease are determinants of asymmetrical relationships between cyberusers and thus asymmetries. This is because social exclusion seems to be reproduced on the Internet, but it is the capacities to process information as a function of the evolution of technology that would explain the digital divide between Internet users themselves. 

The difference between Internet users and cyber-agents lies not only in their capacities or competencies, but also in the opportunities and freedoms that the State restricts by monitoring digital protocols, or deregulates by allowing the violation of privacy. According to the theoretical and conceptual frameworks, the adoption of the Internet entailed risks that users decided to take when compared to the informational and communicative benefits. In contrast, the state of knowledge warns that cyberbullying is the main factor of exclusion, thereby reducing the problematization of electronic devices and digital skills that exacerbate digital divides in the same users of the same generation. 

Consequently, a model was proposed to bridge the discrepancies between theories, models and studies related to social entrepreneurship. In this specification of relationships, cyberbullying is only considered an indicator of the digital divide, although eight dimensions are proposed for the study of a factor associated with entrepreneurship, the perception of opportunity should have more dimensions that deal with the use of electronic devices and the development of competencies for the harassment of users who are unaware of their digital civil rights. 

However, the digital divide will not be reduced only with the promotion of rights on the Internet, but also with the transformation of protests or electronic demonstrations with the development of skills and knowledge that allow not only to react to exclusion, but also to promote equitable and non-discriminatory relations between users of the same network or electronic protocol. 

In other words, it is necessary to train the victims of cyberbullying to increase their self-esteem, but also to perfect their skills that allow them to build virtual scenarios of respect and solidarity, commitment and empathy towards those who do not have the computer skills or digital capabilities that the information society demands every day. 

The empirical test of the specified model will make it possible to move towards the prediction of violent and aggressive lifestyles, as well as to compare devices that facilitate empathy, commitment and satisfaction without users confronting each other. 

This work has systematized the state of knowledge focused on establishing differences between ethnic groups, sexual groups, peers, aggressors, bystanders, victims, or differences in terms of socialization; devices or discourses regarding cyberbullying. 

However, these findings have contributed to the discussion about Human Development as a scenario in which perceptions of usefulness, self-efficacy and compatibility are inherent to the differences between groups and the socialization of devices and discourses. 

As the differences between the groups are exacerbated, a debate emerges around the perceptual factors that make them different from the requirements of Human Development focused on the formation of human capital and that would have in cyberbullying a direct consequence of the differences found in the literature review. 

However, the state of knowledge does not establish a link between group differences with respect to the differences observed in the socialization of devices and the corresponding discourses. 

A study of differences between groups and differences in the use of technologies is therefore necessary. In this process, perceptions of usefulness, self-efficacy and compatibility will make it possible to clarify the connection between groups and devices in academic training. 

 It is likely that differences between groups allow us to anticipate perceptual differences and device uses, but it could happen that in symmetrical groups, perceptions of usefulness, self-efficacy and compatibility generate or at least exacerbate the differences observed. 

If perceptions are determinants of differences between groups and the use of technologies, then it will be possible to anticipate the emergence of cyberbullying no longer as a group phenomenon, but as a phenomenon in which electronic devices generate perceptions that exacerbate harassment between peers or disparate groups. 

Conclusion

The contribution of this work to the theoretical and conceptual frameworks, as well as to the findings reported by the state of knowledge, lies in the proposal of a model for the study of exclusion and digital divide, or the construction of a global digital village in which entrepreneurship and innovation would be its preponderant indicators. 

However, the model does not include technological and organizational variables that allow anticipating differences between users not only from their skills and knowledge, but from the resources they have and the groups to which they belong. 

This paper has exposed the theoretical, conceptual and empirical axes of cyberbullying around which human development has been considered as a scenario of opportunities, perceptions and capacities. This trident explains to a large extent the relationship between users and technology when establishing asymmetrical relationships. 

The theoretical frameworks reviewed propose cyberbullying as a consequence of the compatibility between aggressive lifestyles and information technologies that potentiate bullying among peers. The asymmetrical relationships that are developed in social networks mean the emergence of information technologies that facilitate anonymity and encourage the diversification of aggressions. 

The Internet is a scenario in which opportunities and capacities converge, factors that allow us to understand cyberbullying as a particular phenomenon of social networks whose impact on perceptions focuses attention on the individual and the devices that he or she is capable of using for aggressive purposes. 

In relation to the study by Carreón and García (2013) in which violence is understood as a preponderant factor in the transformation of public security into perceptions of insecurity, this work has expressed that electronic devices accelerate the transformation in question. This is because violence, according to the aforementioned study, derives from the asymmetrical relationship between authorities and citizens. 

Indeed, violence, being the result of perceptions related to social exclusion, involves the dissemination of beliefs, attitudes, decisions and behaviours in technological areas such as the Internet and social networks. 

However, theories, concepts, and findings are still focused on posing cyberbullying as a psychological state between victim and aggressor. Thus, the review of variables alluding to the impact of ICTs on lifestyles highlights perceptions as the determinants of the adoption of an electronic device, the main instrument of aggression against Internet users and social networks. 

In this way, Human Development is not only a scenario of asymmetrical relationships that lead to violence and aggression, it is also an area of perception of usefulness in which technologies and devices become instruments of harassment. 

Cyberbullying in reference to human development involves:

Opportunities, technologies and capacities to reproduce the asymmetrical relationships that are developed in everyday life. In this sense, harassment, aggression and violence on the Internet and social networks indicate the convergence of electronic devices and computer skills used to exacerbate the differences between aggressors and victims. 

Theories, concepts, and findings that explain the asymmetrical relationships between Internet users. In this way, the profile of the aggressor on social networks seems to have a perception of usefulness that activates perceptions of ease, attitudes, intentions and behaviors of harassment to users who do not perceive the usefulness of the networks for their defense, or have not learned the strategies that allow them to inhibit harassment, report aggressions or prevent violence. 

The Internet and social networks as potential scenarios for harassment, aggression and violence since these technologies inhibit loneliness with the continuous and permanent interaction of users.