Now Is the Time to Accelerate Digital ID Adoption for Universal Access

Digital identities are no longer just a technical convenience; they are a fundamental enabler of access to essential services, economic participation, and the protection of individual rights. As the world strives toward universal recognition of legal identity by 2030 under the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 16.9, the stakes are high. The potential of digital IDs to replace fragile, physical documents with secure, portable, verifiable credentials is attracting unprecedented attention from governments, civil society, and international funders alike. This shift is particularly urgent in contexts where ID documents are lost or destroyed by disaster or conflict, yet the path forward must balance inclusion with privacy, security, and cultural nuance. The following comprehensive examination outlines why digital IDs matter, what benefits they bring, the substantial challenges ahead, and a practical framework for building reliable systems that can be scaled across diverse national environments.

The Imperative of Legal Identity in a Digital Era

Access to essential services—ranging from healthcare and banking to property registration and social protection—depends on having some form of recognized identity. Yet a sizable portion of the global population remains without legally recognized identification, creating obstacles to fundamental rights and opportunities. The pursuit of universal legal identity is not merely a bureaucratic objective; it is central to safeguarding dignity, enabling fair participation in economies, and ensuring equitable access to public goods. The 2030 target within SDG 16.9 emphasizes the ambition of providing legal identity for all, recognizing that reliable identity systems underpin inclusive development.

Digital IDs offer distinct advantages over traditional, paper-based documents. They can be stored securely in digital wallets, transmitted quickly for verification, and updated in real time to reflect changes in status or eligibility. Unlike physical credentials, digital identities can be designed to resist loss, theft, or damage, and they can support continuous authentication without requiring repeated in-person visits. In practice, digital IDs have proven especially valuable in conflict-affected or disaster-stricken settings. For example, in war-torn Ukraine, digital credentials have facilitated continued access to essential services when physical documents were compromised, damaged, or inaccessible. In flood-ravaged Brazil, digital IDs enabled citizens whose paper documents were destroyed to receive critical support through both in-person and online channels, demonstrating the resilience and continuity that digital systems can provide during crises.

Despite these clear benefits, roughly 850 million people remain without legal identification globally. This represents a significant barrier to realizing sustainable development goals, including inclusive economic growth and robust governance. Yet the demand for digital ID solutions is intensifying as governments, development partners, and the private sector seek scalable, interoperable, and citizen-centered approaches. The shift from paper to digital identity is not simply a matter of digitizing old processes; it requires rethinking governance, architecture, and incentives to ensure identities are accurate, privacy-preserving, and trusted by the public.

The road to universal digital IDs is complex and multifaceted. It requires careful consideration of diverse governance models, varying levels of technological maturity, and the cultural norms that shape how identities are conceived and used. No one-size-fits-all blueprint will suffice. Instead, the emphasis must be on adaptable, context-aware designs that can be tailored to national realities while maintaining core standards of safety, privacy, and accountability. The aim is to translate the aspiration of SDG 16.9 into real, measurable progress across countries with different political systems, administrative capacities, and social expectations.

The Economic and Social Promise of Digital IDs

Digital IDs have far-reaching implications beyond individual empowerment. They can drive substantial improvements in financial inclusion, increase opportunities for formal economic participation, and help curb benefit fraud by reducing leakage and error in social protection programs. When a reliable digital identity system can verify a person’s eligibility and prevent duplicate claims, administrative costs decline, leakage is reduced, and public resources can reach more people who genuinely need support. The potential macroeconomic impact of digital ID programs is particularly striking. Studies and expert analyses have suggested that digital IDs could boost a country’s gross domestic product by a meaningful margin by 2030, reflecting gains from more efficient service delivery, improved credit access, broader formal participation in the economy, and stronger data-driven governance. In practical terms, digital IDs facilitate faster, safer, and cheaper onboarding for financial services, enabling people to access credit, savings, and payments with confidence in the verification process.

From a household perspective, digital IDs unlock pathways to better health outcomes, through secure access to digital health records, telemedicine, and streamlined enrollment in public health programs. They enable individuals to prove identity for land or property rights, enabling efficient registration and transfer of ownership, reducing disputes, and accelerating investment in housing and land development. For small businesses and entrepreneurs, digital IDs simplify compliance, enable easier access to formal financial channels, and strengthen trust in digital marketplaces. In disaster scenarios or humanitarian settings, digital IDs help maintain continuity of aid distribution, ensuring that assistance reaches intended recipients quickly and accurately, even when faces-to-face verification is constrained.

On the demand side, digital IDs also promote inclusion by lowering barriers to entry for marginalized groups who historically faced obstacles to obtaining traditional documentation. By offering user-centric verification methods, opt-in privacy protections, and progressive disclosure of data, digital ID systems can be designed to maximize legitimate access while minimizing the collection and exposure of sensitive information. The strategic appeal of digital IDs for governments and international organizations lies in their potential to unlock broad-based participation in national economies, improve the targeting and efficiency of public programs, and support more robust social contracts through transparent governance.

From a policy perspective, the anticipated benefits of universal digital IDs must be weighed against potential risks. Privacy and data protection concerns are central to public trust. The success of digital ID ecosystems hinges on balancing the ability to verify identities with the need to safeguard individuals’ personal data, giving people control over what information they share and with whom. This balancing act requires rigorous privacy-by-design approaches, independent oversight, and transparent governance practices to ensure that digital IDs enhance rather than erode civil liberties. As nations pursue universal IDs, they confront critical questions about who issues identities, how data is stored and used, how consent is obtained, and what recourse exists for individuals who fear misuse. Addressing these questions head-on is not optional; it is essential to maintaining public confidence and ensuring that digital IDs deliver the intended social and economic benefits.

The supply side—how to build, sustain, and govern digital ID infrastructures—also matters. The emergence of low-cost, flexible tooling, including modular open-source identity platforms, demonstrates that digital ID programs can be both affordable and scalable. These tools enable governments to deploy systems rapidly, customize them to national contexts, and avoid vendor lock-in that can create long-term dependency. The ability to implement digital IDs at lower cost without compromising quality or security is particularly relevant for middle- and smaller-income countries, where budgets for technology programs are constrained and the demand for inclusive services remains high. In short, the economic and social promise of digital IDs is substantial, but realizing it requires thoughtful design, prudent governance, and sustained international collaboration to ensure that benefits accrue broadly and equitably.

Demand-Driven and Supply-Side Dynamics Shaping Digital ID Programs

The momentum behind digital ID initiatives is driven by two interlocking streams: demand-side imperatives and supply-side capabilities. On the demand side, digital IDs promise to expand financial inclusion and broaden participation in formal economies. They can enable individuals to access banking services, secure employment, and participate in digital economies with confidence that their identity is reliable and verifiable. When people can verify themselves digitally, they are more likely to open bank accounts, receive credit, and engage with government services online. This, in turn, supports economic growth by expanding the pool of active participants in the formal economy and reducing transaction costs associated with identification and verification.

Moreover, digital IDs can help curb benefit fraud. By providing a secure, auditable, and privacy-preserving method of proving identity and eligibility, digital ID systems can reduce duplicate benefits, misreporting, and leakage in social protection programs. This leads to more efficient use of public resources and improved trust in welfare systems. The potential GDP uplift associated with digital ID programs has been highlighted by consultants and researchers, with estimates suggesting a range from a few percentage points to a more substantial improvement depending on the country context, the design of the ID system, and the surrounding ecosystem of services and governance. In some analyses, digital ID programs could contribute meaningfully to a country’s GDP by creating an enabling environment for digital financial services, e-government workflows, and streamlined regulatory compliance.

On the supply side, a decade of experimentation and implementation has yielded valuable insights into how best to design, deploy, and manage digital ID systems. Notably, low-cost, modular, and open-source identity platforms have demonstrated that governments can implement digital ID programs efficiently, with a reduced risk of vendor lock-in and without compromising essential security and privacy features. These tools support rapid prototyping, experimentation, and scaling, allowing countries to tailor their ID systems to local needs and governance norms. The modularity of such platforms means that components—ranging from identity verification, credentials issuance, to credential verification—can be swapped or upgraded as technology and policy landscapes evolve. This flexibility is critical in environments with varying levels of digital literacy, infrastructure, and regulatory maturity.

The broader supply-side reality also includes developing the human capacity and institutional arrangements necessary to sustain digital ID programs over time. Governments must invest in the technical talent needed to design, implement, and maintain these systems, while ensuring that independent oversight, privacy protections, and transparent governance structures are in place. Open data standards, interoperable APIs, and modular architectures enable different agencies and even international partners to participate in a shared digital ID ecosystem without compromising sovereignty or security. Collaboration with civil society, the private sector, and international organizations can help align incentives, establish credible accountability mechanisms, and promote trust in digital ID infrastructures. In addition, the experience of deploying digital IDs in diverse contexts has underscored the importance of testing, pilots, and phased rollouts that account for local realities, including language, cultural norms, and access to digital channels.

The interplay between demand and supply highlights a central paradox: the greatest benefits arise when digital IDs are designed with the user at the center, while the most significant risks emerge when governance is weak, data is over-collected, or verification processes become opaque. To navigate this, policymakers and practitioners emphasize a set of guiding principles that prioritize privacy, security, and user control, while enabling broad access to services. These principles are not abstract ideals; they translate into concrete design choices, governance arrangements, and capacity-building initiatives that determine whether digital IDs become a vehicle for inclusion or an instrument of exclusion. The following sections outline concrete patterns, safeguards, and strategies that have emerged from diverse experiences and expert collaboration, aiming to help governments tailor their digital ID programs to their own social contracts and development objectives.

Governance, Safeguards, and the Path to Responsible Digital ID Systems

One of the most robust truths about digital ID deployment is the necessity of strong governance structures that can prevent misuse, protect privacy, and build public trust. In the absence of a standardized global framework, policymakers must design robust national and subnational safeguards that reflect local legal traditions, cultural norms, and the evolving technology landscape. The risk of misuse or abuse by authorities is a critical concern. Without well-defined legal frameworks, oversight, and accountability, digital IDs can drift toward surveillance-enhancing capabilities or become tools for exclusion. A responsible approach requires transparent, independent standards for design, implementation, and ongoing maintenance, as well as governance mechanisms that involve multiple stakeholders beyond the government—a principle that helps safeguard civil liberties while enabling innovation.

To advance these safeguards, a recent international collaboration explored practical pathways for improving and expanding digital ID systems under a framework aimed at identifying “good patterns” that could be reinforced by international organizations and funders. The goal is to establish guidelines that governments can adopt and adapt, balancing the need for reliable identity verification with privacy protections and democratic norms. A key concept arising from this collaboration is the idea that national statistics agencies—often relatively insulated from political pressures—offer a useful model for data privacy protection, credibility, and public trust. When data custodians operate with independence, they can build legitimacy by upholding high standards of data governance, even amid shifting political winds. This underscores a broader point: credible, privacy-respecting identity systems require trusted institutions with clear mandates, transparent processes, and accountability to the public.

An essential element of any robust framework is the establishment of transparent, independently defined standards for design, implementation, and maintenance. Such standards help ensure that digital IDs remain secure, interoperable, and scalable while protecting personal information. They also facilitate responsible, cross-border cooperation, which is increasingly important in a globally connected digital economy. In practice, this means adopting interoperable data schemas, clear data minimization requirements, auditable verification processes, and modular architectures that can accommodate evolving privacy-preserving techniques and risk-based access controls. The emphasis on independent standards is not about rigidity; it is about creating a stable reference point that fosters trust, reduces ambiguity, and enables consistent evaluation of systems across different jurisdictions.

The five approaches proposed for designing reliable digital ID systems, drawn from cross-country experience and expert discussions, provide a practical blueprint for implementation. These approaches are not prescriptive recipes; rather, they offer adaptable patterns that can be tailored to national conditions and policy priorities. They also emphasize the critical role of international support and collaboration to sustain open-source ecosystems, share best practices, and provide technical and financial resources to countries at different stages of maturity.

First, trust grows when both digital and physical IDs are designed to be testable, customizable to individual preferences, and optimized to minimize data collection. A noteworthy example is Taiwan, which collects only the data strictly necessary for each transaction. This targeted approach enables users to disclose personal information selectively, using secure verification methods—a concept known as meronymy. Meronymy is not just a technical feature; it embodies a design philosophy that prioritizes consent, user autonomy, and data minimization. By limiting the data requested and making disclosures highly controllable, systems can reduce risk while maintaining verification reliability. This approach aligns with broader privacy standards and supports public acceptance by ensuring that people can manage their personal information in a transparent, predictable manner.

Second, governments must collaborate closely with civil society to mitigate risks, test use cases, and ensure that ID systems respond to real-world needs. A practical mechanism is the creation of public-facing channels that allow civil society organizations to experiment with ID systems, raise concerns, and flag issues early in the development cycle. Jamaica’s experience with digital IDs illustrates the consequences of insufficient stakeholder engagement: distrust can proliferate, adoption can stall, and overall system effectiveness can suffer. In contrast, the engagement strategies of civil society groups in other regions—such as the West Africa Journalists Association—show how capacity-building and accountable use of digital public infrastructure (DPI), including digital IDs, can enhance governance and governance reporting. Other regional initiatives, like SlashRoots in the Caribbean and Taiwan’s g0v movement, demonstrate the importance of broad-based participation from media professionals, technologists, and civil society in shaping robust, resilient, and trusted ID ecosystems. Building a culture of collaboration helps ensure that ID systems reflect diverse perspectives and guard against overreach, bias, or unintended exclusion.

Third, reducing the cost of digital ID programs is essential, particularly for smaller or resource-constrained countries. Achieving affordability requires nurturing an ecosystem of open-source solutions that can be deployed with local talent, infrastructure, and preferred technologies. Open-source components empower governments to innovate without depending on expensive proprietary vendors, enabling customization while maintaining national sovereignty. While off-the-shelf systems may seem attractive for rapid deployment, they often trade flexibility for speed and can lock countries into vendor-specific roadmaps. An open-source approach, conversely, enables adaptation to local contexts, supports interoperability with other government services, and facilitates ongoing improvements driven by local developers. In practice, cost-effective digital ID programs rely on community-driven development, shared maintenance costs, and the transfer of knowledge to domestic technical teams, thereby strengthening resilience and long-term sustainability.

Fourth, stronger global technical and governance standards are essential to ensure safety, inclusion, and interoperability. The United Nations Development Programme’s digital identity safeguards—embodied in broader global commitments and frameworks—provide a solid foundation for safe, inclusive digital public infrastructure, including digital IDs. The Global Digital Compact represents a framework for international cooperation on digital governance, data protection, and privacy. However, translating high-level guidelines into action requires practical toolkits and implementation guidance that help governments establish multi-stakeholder governance structures, balance privacy controls with public interest objectives, and ensure effective implementation across agencies and sectors. Toolkits should cover governance design, risk assessments, privacy impact analyses, incident response planning, and user-centric verification methodologies. The objective is not mere compliance with guidelines but the operationalization of safeguards in day-to-day administration, procurement, and service delivery.

Fifth, sustained international support is critical for emerging economies to develop, deploy, and maintain digital ID systems. Civil society organizations also require ongoing training to monitor and evaluate implementation effectively. Donor agencies and international funders can play a pivotal role by directing resources toward strengthening open-source software ecosystems, supporting capacity-building, and enabling sustainable business models. This support should not create dependency but rather empower local stakeholders to own, adapt, and scale digital ID solutions in ways that reflect national priorities and cultural contexts. A strategic emphasis on open-source and local capacity helps ensure long-term viability, fosters innovation, and reduces vulnerability to external shocks or supplier constraints. Collaborative efforts should also focus on building regional knowledge hubs, cross-border data interoperability where appropriate, and shared safety nets for countries in early stages of adoption.

These five approaches—testability and data minimization, civil society engagement, cost-effective open-source ecosystems, robust global standards, and sustained international support—are not universal prescriptions but flexible, context-responsive patterns. They can and should be tailored to the realities of each country. Large, resource-rich nations like South Africa and Indonesia have the means to pilot and scale customized, large-scale digital ID systems that can serve as potential models for others. Mid-sized economies should cultivate a vibrant ecosystem of civil society actors to deter state overreach and ensure accountability. Smaller countries with limited state capacity and weaker private-sector incentives may need to lean more heavily on internationally supported, open-source, and low-cost solutions that still uphold key standards of privacy and security.

The Sustainable Development Goals’ emphasis on legal identity as the foundation of inclusion and opportunity is more than a symbolic statement. It reflects a clear understanding that identity systems are a precondition for broad social and economic participation. Today, the challenge is translating that understanding into practical, scalable, and trustworthy digital ID programs that work in varied political and cultural landscapes. The journey toward universal access to digital IDs will require sustained collaboration among governments, civil society, the private sector, and international organizations. It will demand careful balancing of rights and responsibilities, continuous learning, and a willingness to adapt. The benefits—enhanced inclusion, improved service delivery, reduced fraud, and stronger governance—are substantial, but achieving them will require persistent effort, iterative design, and a commitment to protecting individuals’ privacy and autonomy at every stage of implementation.

Implementation Patterns Across National Contexts: Large, Mid-Size, and Small States

A practical path to universal digital IDs recognizes that countries are not monolithic in their political structures, infrastructural capacities, or social contracts. The most effective rollouts align with national realities, administrative cultures, and public trust. Large countries with diverse populations and expansive geographies can model large-scale systems that accommodate regional variations while maintaining core standards. South Africa and Indonesia, for instance, demonstrate how centralized strategies, when combined with strong institutional safeguards and inclusive stakeholder engagement, can yield scalable, resilient digital ID ecosystems. In such contexts, a broad, phased approach—starting with foundational identity verification, moving to credential issuance, and then enabling cross-agency interoperability—can help ensure that the system remains adaptable to evolving needs and technological advancements. These countries often have the administrative capacity to manage complex governance structures, invest in cybersecurity, and maintain rigorous privacy protections at scale. Their experiences offer valuable lessons about how to coordinate across multiple ministries, align national strategies with local realities, and ensure consistent policy outcomes.

Medium-sized economies often face tighter budget constraints but can benefit from deliberate, targeted investments in digital ID infrastructure. A strategic approach for these countries involves cultivating a diverse ecosystem of partners, including civil society organizations, academic institutions, local technology firms, and international development partners. The goal is to create a collaborative environment in which different stakeholders contribute to design, testing, and deployment in ways that reflect local conditions and cultural expectations. For medium-sized states, governance arrangements might emphasize stronger public accountability, transparent standards, and clear channels for public input. They can leverage modular, open-source ID platforms to accelerate deployment while maintaining the flexibility needed to adapt to evolving policy landscapes. In such contexts, it is crucial to build capacity within government agencies to manage contracts, oversee open-source communities, and ensure ongoing maintenance without locking the state into single-vendor solutions.

Smaller countries and jurisdictions face unique challenges, including limited administrative bandwidth, constrained financial resources, and the need to strike a balance between national sovereignty and international interoperability. These states may rely more heavily on international support, open-source tools, and regional collaboration to achieve scalable solutions. The emphasis for smaller nations is to develop lean, targeted pilots that demonstrate impact and build public trust, followed by careful scale-up that preserves privacy, security, and user control. In many cases, smaller states can be laboratories for rapid experimentation, testing governance models, data protection regimes, and citizen-centric features in an environment where feedback loops between users and policymakers are tight and responsive. The overarching principle for all contexts is that the public interest must be central to the design, implementation, and governance of digital ID systems. The system should be inclusive, privacy-preserving, interoperable where appropriate, and adaptable to changing circumstances.

Across all national contexts, several cross-cutting themes emerge. First, trusted institutions matter: independent data custodians, neutral standards bodies, and civil society watchdogs are essential to sustain public confidence. Second, privacy-by-design must be a non-negotiable baseline: data minimization, consent controls, and transparent data flows should be embedded from the outset. Third, interoperability—where feasible and appropriate—facilitates cross-border recognition of identities and services, enabling smoother mobility and economic activity. Fourth, capacity-building and knowledge-sharing are critical: governments should invest in human capital, not just technology, to ensure that digital ID programs remain resilient in the face of evolving threats and opportunities. Finally, continuous governance and audit mechanisms must be standard features, with mechanisms for redress, accountability, and independent evaluation. By weaving these themes into policy design, countries of all sizes can pursue universal digital IDs with greater confidence that the systems will be trusted, effective, and sustainable over time.

Global Standards, Open-Source Ecosystems, and International Support

A credible path toward universal digital IDs hinges on the establishment of robust, globally informed technical and governance standards. The international community has moved toward consolidated norms in digital public infrastructure, including safeguards that emphasize privacy, security, inclusivity, and accountability. The UN Development Programme’s DPI safeguards are among the referential benchmarks cited by policymakers as they seek to align national digital ID initiatives with broader commitments to human rights and responsible data governance. These safeguards provide a framework for balancing the competing demands of effective verification, user privacy, and multi-stakeholder governance. They also underscore the importance of interoperable, secure infrastructure that can support a diverse array of identity-related services while maintaining consistent protections for individuals.

The Global Digital Compact—an emerging, overarching framework for digital governance—advocates for principled cooperation, shared norms, and practical tools to support safe and inclusive digital ecosystems. While high-level guidelines provide direction, there is a need for tangible, action-oriented toolkits that assist governments in translating principles into real-world practices. Governments require step-by-step guidance on establishing multi-stakeholder governance structures, designing privacy protections that align with local law, and implementing verifiable, auditable identity systems. These toolkits should address governance models, risk assessment methodologies, privacy impact assessments, data minimization strategies, and practical verification workflows. They should also consider the governance of open-source components, community stewardship, and mechanisms to sustain long-term maintenance and security.

Open-source software plays a pivotal role in reducing costs, promoting transparency, and fostering local innovation. An ecosystem built around open-source identity platforms enables governments to tailor solutions to their own contexts, adjust to evolving policy requirements, and avoid dependency on proprietary vendors. This approach supports continuous improvement, community-driven security audits, and shared learning across jurisdictions. It also aligns with the broader goal of sustainable development by empowering local technology ecosystems to participate in global standards discussions and to contribute to the evolution of interoperable identity systems.

International support remains critical for countries at various stages of maturity. For emerging economies, well-directed investments in open-source software, capacity-building, and technical assistance can accelerate the design and deployment of robust digital ID solutions. For established economies seeking to reform or upgrade their systems, international collaboration can help harmonize privacy regulations, share best practices for data governance, and facilitate cross-border recognition where appropriate. The ultimate objective is to create a resilient, globally coherent yet locally adaptable digital ID landscape that respects sovereignty, protects privacy, and ensures broad social and economic benefits.

The path ahead involves translating high-level standards into implementable policy, technology, and governance actions. It requires balancing the imperatives of accessibility and inclusion with the non-negotiable protections for privacy and civil liberties. It calls for international cooperation to fund and sustain open-source development, share expertise, and provide technical assistance that respects diverse regulatory environments. If effectively pursued, global standards and cooperative open-source ecosystems can reduce fragmentation, enable safer cross-border recognition, and help ensure that universal digital IDs deliver lasting value to people and economies around the world.

Country Contexts and Policy Pathways: Tailoring for What Works

A universal approach to digital ID is not a universal template. The policy pathway must be shaped by the country’s constitutional framework, administrative capacity, and social contract with its citizens. Large nations with diversified populations and extensive administrative networks can implement comprehensive ID ecosystems that coordinate multiple agencies, manage complex data flows, and sustain long-term governance mechanisms. The lessons from such contexts emphasize the importance of robust privacy protections, transparent oversight, and strong institutional capacity to manage dynamic risk environments. The complexity of these systems requires careful sequencing of milestones—from establishing baseline identity verification to enabling multi-agency credentials, to enabling cross-sector interoperable services. In these settings, success often hinges on building public trust through engagement, ensuring data protection, and delivering tangible benefits early in the program to demonstrate value to citizens.

Mid-sized economies offer a balance between scale and agility. They can pilot modular, open-source ID components, test innovative governance models, and scale gradually as civil society and the private sector adapt to the new framework. The approach emphasizes stakeholder collaboration, transparency, and capacity-building across government agencies. It also highlights the importance of risk-based governance that can evolve as the system grows. Mid-sized states have the opportunity to learn from larger counterparts while avoiding some of the bureaucratic frictions that can accompany large-scale reforms. The focus is on building a trustworthy foundation that can support a broader array of identity-related services over time, with a clear emphasis on privacy-preserving features, secure data handling, and user empowerment.

Smaller jurisdictions face distinctive constraints but can still achieve meaningful progress through strategic partnerships, regional cooperation, and targeted pilot programs. International support, open-source tooling, and regional knowledge-sharing networks can help these states overcome limited internal capacity. The emphasis for smaller countries is on lean, demand-driven pilots that demonstrate impact, followed by careful scale-up that preserves privacy, security, and public trust. In such contexts, it is crucial to align digital ID initiatives with essential services that deliver clear, direct benefits to citizen wellbeing—such as healthcare access, social welfare enrollment, and property registration—thereby sustaining public buy-in and facilitating gradual expansion of the identity ecosystem.

Across all country contexts, a core principle is the alignment of digital ID initiatives with people-centered development goals. The governance architecture should reflect the social contract, ensuring that identity services contribute to inclusion, economic opportunity, and trust in public institutions. The path to universal digital IDs must account for local legitimacy, language and literacy considerations, and the digital divide. It should also integrate protective measures for marginalized groups who might face barriers to participation if ID systems are poorly designed. Equally important is maintaining a flexible approach that can adjust to evolving technologies—such as more advanced forms of cryptographic verification, privacy-preserving techniques, and secure, user-friendly digital wallets—without compromising core values of safety, fairness, and human rights.

The overarching conclusion from cross-country experience is clear: universal digital IDs require context-aware design, principled governance, and sustained international cooperation. The more a country can blend technical excellence with inclusive governance and transparent accountability, the more likely it is to realize the profound social and economic gains associated with a reliable identity system. This is not only a technology project; it is a governance and public policy endeavor that demands patient, iterative investment, continuous stakeholder engagement, and a vigilant commitment to protecting civil liberties while expanding access to essential services.

Conclusion: Toward Universal Digital IDs with Trust, Privacy, and Opportunity

The case for universal digital IDs is compelling and multi-faceted. Digital identity systems promise to extend access to health care, financial services, property rights, and social protections; they can reduce fraud, improve program efficiency, and unlock new forms of economic participation. The potential GDP gains, while context-dependent, reflect the broad economic opportunities stemming from more efficient identity verification, streamlined service delivery, and enhanced financial inclusion. Yet the path to universal digital IDs is not without peril. The very features that enable trust and efficiency—centralized verification, data sharing across agencies, and real-time eligibility checks—also raise legitimate concerns about privacy, civil liberties, and the risk of misuse. The design challenge is to preserve the benefits while mitigating risks through principled governance, user-centered design, and transparent oversight.

To move from vision to reality, five core approaches have emerged as practical, adaptable patterns for reliable digital ID systems:

• Emphasize testability, data minimization, and meronymy to build trust and reduce privacy exposure.
• Foster sustained collaboration with civil society and media professionals to test, critique, and refine ID systems, ensuring public legitimacy.
• Build an open-source ecosystem that lowers costs, supports local capacity, and reduces vendor lock-in, enabling more countries to deploy robust IDs without sacrificing sovereignty.
• Develop and apply global technical and governance standards, accompanied by practical toolkits that translate guidelines into actionable steps for multi-stakeholder governance and implementation.
• Ensure continuous international support for emerging economies and ongoing training for civil society to monitor implementation, sustain open-source initiatives, and promote durable, ethical deployment.

These approaches are not rigid mandates but flexible templates that countries can adapt to their unique contexts. Large nations with diversified populations can model scalable, integrated ID ecosystems; mid-sized countries can leverage civil society and regional collaboration to maximize impact; smaller states can rely on international support and low-cost, adaptable solutions that still uphold core protections for privacy and human rights.

In pursuing SDG 16.9, governments, civil society organizations, private-sector partners, and development funders must collaborate to design, fund, and govern digital ID systems that are inclusive, privacy-protective, and secure. The ultimate measure of success will be not only the creation of a digitized identity but the realization of true inclusion: people gaining legitimate access to essential services, protections, and opportunities that strengthen their economic and social prospects. If done thoughtfully, digital IDs will help create a more equal, more prosperous society where identity verification supports, rather than constrains, personal and collective development. The journey is long and complex, but the potential gains—social inclusion, economic resilience, and strengthened public governance—are well worth the sustained effort, experimentation, and collaboration required to reach universal digital IDs by 2030 and beyond.