A recent report by the US think tank Carnegie Endowment for International Peace highlighted that, while Morocco’s shift to a digitized social targeting system has improved the efficiency and coordination of social programs, it also poses risks of exclusion and the reinforcement of austerity policies.
Titled, “The Political Economy of Social Data: Opportunities and Risks of Digitizing Morocco’s Social Targeting System,” the report explained that the system uses algorithms based on socioeconomic data to determine eligibility for benefits like cash transfers and health insurance. But technical flaws, digital inequality, and rigid criteria have unfairly excluded many vulnerable families.
It said that the policy framework behind the system’s design turns it into a tool for legitimizing austerity measures, resulting in reduced social spending and a more limited pool of beneficiaries eligible for social protection.
The government, continued the same source, frames the digitization of social databases as an urgent necessity to improve the effectiveness of social protection programs, especially in light of past inefficiencies in targeting.
But politically, it said that this digital shift also functions as a technical tool to legitimize neoliberal approaches to social governance.
It aligns with the priorities of international financial institutions, which have long promoted lean, targeted safety nets that limit beneficiaries and leave most citizens exposed to market uncertainties.
Yet, Digital solutions have improved accountability and refined targeting by adding newly eligible groups and removing others based on updated socio-economic data and Proxy Means Test results, highlighted the report.
But it said that information linkages between databases like the Agricultural and Handicraft Registers affect eligibility under the Unified Social Register.
It explained that inclusion can lead to exclusion from social safety nets, while removal may qualify households for care and protection programs due to reduced socio-economic status.
“Despite the promised prospects, digitization presents a host of challenges that may appear technical on the surface but, in reality, carry significant political repercussions for the right to social protection,” reads the report.
Limited digital access and skills among vulnerable groups, along with high fees from private intermediaries, often lead to exclusion from digital social services, added the same source.
The dilemma of effectiveness emerges as technical flaws in digital welfare platforms cause delays and backlogs in processing application, while limited data capacity leads to the unjust exclusion of a considerable number of eligible individuals.
It said that the rigid use of an extreme poverty line further dehumanizes the process, failing to truly recognize the impoverished.
Also, concerns persist about the credibility of data in the Unified Social Register (USR), particularly its accuracy in capturing the socio-economic realities of beneficiaries. These issues are amplified by low bancarization rates and difficulties in tracking informal workers, who make up over 60% of the labor force.
The USR’s algorithms have faced criticism, especially from opposition groups, for excluding families based on modest or unused assets like small plots of land or motorcycles.
Critics argue the system relies on an overly simplistic view of poverty, where minor indicators like a $10 electricity bill or a basic mobile recharge can push households above the eligibility threshold.
The political implications of digitally processing social data are increasingly clear. Errors or outdated information reduce beneficiary numbers, and the lack of oversight by the National Agency for Registers opens the door to political manipulation aimed at enforcing austerity in social programs.
The report argues that the social index itself can be politicized, such as by lowering eligibility thresholds during elections to gain voter support, which risks deepening clientelism in social welfare governance.
In this regard, “the digitization of social data must be framed within a human rights–based framework that safeguards both its credibility and its functionality,” added the same source.
This involves using eligibility criteria that prioritize dignified living standards over purely economic or external donor metrics, regularly updating household data, and combining automated processing with human oversight to support those excluded by algorithms.
Ensuring digital inclusion alongside social inclusion is essential so that vulnerable groups can access services easily. This approach would help create an integrated system to monitor social programs based on justice, efficiency, and sustainability.
add your comment
Terms of publication : Not to offend the writer, people, sacred things, or attack religions or the divine self, and refrain from racist incitement and insults.