社会登记的全球见解_覆盖范围及未来演进_60页_1mb

Global Insights on Social Registries: Coverage and Beyond

Core Content

This report provides a comprehensive overview of the global status and trends in the establishment and use of social registries, highlighting their critical role in supporting social protection and labor programs. It outlines the evolution of social registries since the 2000s, their current coverage across 131 countries, and the challenges and opportunities in their implementation.

Main Points

1. Evolution of Social Registries

• Social registries have evolved significantly since the 1990s, with the first wave in Europe and Central Asia and Latin America.
• The first wave (1995–2000) saw early adoption by countries like Armenia, Colombia, and Italy.
• The second wave (2001–10) saw increased adoption, particularly in Latin America, with countries like Brazil, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Türkiye leading the way.
• The third wave (2011–20) marked rapid adoption in the Middle East and North Africa, and Sub-Saharan Africa, where social registries are increasingly used to address vulnerability due to climate shocks, food insecurity, and fragility.
• The fourth wave (post-2020) continues to expand, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, with the pandemic accelerating their adoption.

2. Global Coverage

• 131 countries were surveyed, and 62 have established social registries, representing 48% of developing countries.
• 48% of low- and lower-middle-income countries (38 out of 82) have social registries.
• 50% of lower-middle-income countries (27 out of 54) and 43% of low-income countries (12 out of 28) have social registries.
• 36% of upper-middle-income countries (19 out of 53) also have operational social registries.
• High-income countries are underrepresented due to limited data collection feasibility and their status as non-World Bank client countries.

3. Regional Distribution

• Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest rate of social registry establishment at 52% (25 out of 48 countries).
• Latin America and the Caribbean follows at 38% (16 out of 42 countries).
• South Asia has a low prevalence, with only Pakistan having a national-level operational social registry.
• Europe and Central Asia has limited data, but some countries are in the process of establishing them.

4. Types of Social Registries

• Static registries are common, relying on periodic surveys and being less responsive to real-time changes.
• Dynamic registries are increasingly adopted, allowing for continuous data updates and real-time beneficiary identification.
• Dynamic registries are more cost-effective and support adaptive social protection, especially during emergencies.

5. Functions and Benefits

• Social registries help reduce fragmentation by streamlining the intake and assessment processes across multiple programs.
• They enable shock-responsive social protection by capturing household vulnerability and linking with early warning systems.
• They support case management by providing a centralized source of socioeconomic data, improving efficiency and targeting.
• Social registries also play a key role in monitoring and evaluation, allowing for real-time dashboards and feedback loops.

6. Challenges

• Data protection and privacy mechanisms are not universal across all countries.
• Static registries often result in outdated information, increasing the risk of exclusion and inclusion errors.
• Fragmentation of social protection programs leads to inefficiencies and duplicated efforts.
• Limited interoperability between systems can hinder the effectiveness of social protection responses.

7. Support and Funding

• External financing plays a significant role in supporting the implementation of social registries.
• The World Bank has committed to supporting an additional 500 million poor and vulnerable individuals with social protection and labor programs by 2030.
• This support includes the development of dynamic and interoperable social registries.

Key Insights

• Social registries are essential for effective social protection delivery, especially in times of crisis.
• Dynamic and interoperable registries are more efficient and cost-effective, enabling real-time data updates and integration with other systems.
• Integration across the social protection delivery chain is a growing trend, improving coordination and efficiency.
• Regional differences exist in the adoption and implementation of social registries, with some areas lagging behind.
• Institutional arrangements vary, with some countries using centralized systems and others implementing subnational registries.

Conclusion

Social registries are a vital tool in the delivery of social protection and labor programs. As the global momentum continues, their role in enabling adaptive, efficient, and inclusive social protection systems becomes increasingly important. The report emphasizes the need for strong institutional capacity, interoperability, and data protection to ensure the success and sustainability of these systems.