In an era marked by widening global disparities and persistent socio-economic vulnerabilities, an innovative and ambitious proposal emerges that seeks to address two fundamental Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) simultaneously: providing legal identity for all individuals and eradicating hunger worldwide. This groundbreaking project introduces a dual mechanism—the Humanity Identity Card (HIC) and a Basic Income Supplement (BIS)—that together aim to offer a unified solution for marginalized populations constituting the poorest half of the global society. Unlike prior efforts that tackled these objectives in isolation, this integrated approach envisions transcending traditional national boundaries, offering a truly global framework designed to empower the most deprived and reshape global social protection.
Central to this initiative is the recognition that legal identification remains a foundational prerequisite to human rights, social inclusion, and equitable development. Current global efforts, such as the World Bank’s ‘Identification for Development’ program, underscore the vital role of identification systems in enabling individuals to claim access to political, economic, and social entitlements. However, many of these national identification initiatives remain embedded within state architectures, exposing vulnerable individuals to risks of exclusion, misuse, and surveillance. The proposed HIC departs boldly from such models by situating authority beyond nation-states; it is envisaged as an autonomous, internationally governed instrument, accountable directly to the United Nations and global law rather than fluctuating national governments. This global governance structure aims to insulate cardholders from political interference and ensure universal legitimacy.
Technological advancements in digital identification have revolutionized population registration, yet they come paired with significant concerns regarding privacy, control, and state surveillance. The experience of programs like India’s Aadhaar, while transformative, also highlights the potential misuse of centralized biometric databases. Responding to these risks, the HIC’s design prioritizes stringent privacy protections and limits the scope of personal data collected. Crucially, the underlying database access would be exclusively managed by a designated UN agency, with no direct access permitted to national governments. The card itself empowers individuals to control when and how their identity information is shared, resembling personal financial instruments rather than state-issued credentials. This novel approach promises to empower marginalized individuals by preserving anonymity and agency.
Paired with the HIC, the Basic Income Supplement represents a reimagined form of social protection rooted in universal ethics but calibrated for the realities of global inequality. While not universal in the literal sense—in that it targets only the poorest 50% globally—the BIS functions as a quasi-universal safety net, particularly in low-income countries where a significant share of the population would qualify. This redistribution effort is financially supported through a globally coordinated taxation regime that mobilizes resources from all countries, proportional to economic capacity, reinforcing the formal equality of states within the international system. The BIS’s scale and scope transcend conventional national boundaries, negating classical concerns about free-riding and migration that undermine localized basic income schemes.
The design of the BIS draws inspiration from a rich lineage of basic income debates spanning decades and continents, from Alaska’s natural resource dividends to employment guarantee programs in India and contemporary reflections on Universal Basic Income (UBI). Distinctly, this supplement is deliberately modest in monetary value, aligning more closely with concepts like the Universal Ultra Basic Income proposed for national contexts, but expanded to a global scale. Its global reach addresses a critical limitation of previous proposals—the vulnerability to cross-border incentive distortions—and aspires to stabilize lives shattered by extreme deprivation. By offering a reliable economic floor, the BIS unlocks human potential, fostering participation in education, labor, and social engagement.
Financing this vision depends on revisiting and expanding the domain of global taxation—a contested but increasingly indispensable tool for addressing planetary-scale challenges. Historically, models such as the Tobin tax on financial transactions have demonstrated both potential and limitations in harnessing supranational fiscal power. Contemporary initiatives, including the OECD’s Global Minimum Tax on multinational enterprises, exemplify nascent progress in global fiscal governance. This project seeks to build upon these precedents, proposing a universal tax framework that channels resources toward mitigating scandalous inequalities that perpetuate economic and social exclusion worldwide. Through such global fiscal innovation, it envisions bridging moral imperatives with pragmatic policy instruments.
The political economy of this enterprise, however, is riddled with entrenched challenges. Powerful stakeholders, including multinational corporations and ultra-wealthy individuals who would bear the brunt of the tax contributions, represent significant sources of potential resistance. To navigate this terrain, the proposal underscores the necessity of anchoring legitimacy in the United Nations, a globally recognized and comparatively neutral authority experienced in orchestrating transnational social policies. Aligning with advocacy groups such as the ‘Patriotic Millionaires’, who actively support progressive wealth taxation, could bolster political support by foregrounding the moral and pragmatic rationales behind the HIC and BIS. Despite concerns, projections suggest that a modest tax rate would not erode the lucrative returns enjoyed by elite capital holders, softening resistance.
From the standpoint of international relations, the inclusion of all member states—regardless of income level—in the tax scheme embodies the principle of legal equality enshrined in foundational documents like the UN Charter. While imposing financial obligations on poorer countries may ostensibly appear counterintuitive, the progressive redistribution embedded in the BIS design ensures that low-income nations become net beneficiaries. This shared responsibility model redefines traditional donor-recipient relationships in aid paradigms, emphasizing collective participation in global equity mechanisms. The inclusiveness of this approach aims to fortify international solidarity and legitimacy while minimizing inequitable burdens.
Addressing an ever-present concern in identification systems, privacy and surveillance apprehensions merit robust engagement. Historically, resistance to identity cards in democracies has often rooted itself in fears of state overreach, control, and misuse. The project acknowledges these risks but differentiates itself by embedding institutional safeguards and technological designs to prevent panoptic surveillance. The HIC intentionally excludes sensitive personal data such as residential addresses and phone numbers, minimizing exposure to profiling. Legal recourses establish pathways for individuals and groups to challenge privacy violations in supranational judicial forums, underscoring the commitment to rights-based governance. Lessons from the COVID-19 digital certificate initiatives in the European Union elucidate practical frameworks for privacy-compliant digital verification at scale.
The effectiveness of the HIC registration hinges on voluntary participation, given the impossibility of enforcement in a non-national framework. Yet, the BIS’s inherent economic incentives function as powerful motivators for registration among eligible populations. The card’s utility could be further enhanced by negotiating acceptance as proof of identity for commercial services, thereby broadening its value among ineligible populations. This co-optation potential addresses registration gaps and underscores a pragmatic, incremental pathway to widespread adoption. While not perfect, these mechanisms collectively advance the project’s central goal of dismantling barriers to social inclusion and basic rights.
Economic critiques often focus on inflationary risks and potential distortions arising from large-scale cash transfers. The project confronts these concerns by emphasizing the planned, transparent rollout of the BIS, which mitigates sudden money supply shocks. The anticipation by economic actors encourages an adaptive response in production, particularly in food sectors, which are critical for achieving SDG 2.1 (ending hunger). Furthermore, nuanced interpretation of development economics literature is employed to differentiate the BIS from traditional official development assistance, which has often been conflated with aid exhibiting counterproductive macroeconomic consequences. Given that the BIS is direct, unconditional cash support, evidence suggests it can stimulate health, education, and labor participation, thereby promoting inclusive growth rather than undermining it.
A more systemic critique acknowledges that the BIS does not directly dismantle the complex structural roots of poverty and inequality—such as historical legacies, institutional quality, geographic challenges, and cultural dimensions—that firmly entrench global disparities. Scholars from varied disciplines have long underscored the multifactorial nature of development challenges, cautioning against simplistic remedies. However, the project’s proponents frame the BIS as a pragmatic, foundational intervention that alleviates immediate suffering and creates enabling conditions for more comprehensive development efforts. By lifting populations out of extreme deprivation and precarity, the supplement facilitates the nurturing of human capital and civic engagement critical for institutional evolution and social transformation.
Philosophically and practically, the BIS reflects a transition from purely redistributive transfers to an empowerment-oriented social policy. Because it is unconditional, it grants recipients agency and dignity, enabling choices that resonate with their aspirations and local contexts. This design avoids paternalistic pitfalls often associated with targeted aid and fosters trust in global governance frameworks. Importantly, while the HIC is conceived as a permanent identification tool, the BIS is deliberately designed as a temporary, albeit durable, safety net—one that sustains livelihoods until systemic improvements obviate the need. This phased perspective integrates immediacy with long-term vision.
As an integrated scheme, the HIC and BIS converge to form a nuanced response to ‘scandalous inequalities’—extreme, morally indefensible concentrations of poverty and marginalization that persist despite global prosperity. Neither component alone suffices; rather, their synergy holds transformative potential. The HIC dismantles identity barriers that preclude participation and access to rights, while the BIS addresses economic deprivation that immobilizes capability. Together, they embody a vision of global social citizenship, mediated through non-state yet globally authoritative institutions, aligned with universal human rights and social justice.
The technical and logistical underpinnings of such a global initiative are formidable. Establishing a robust, secure, and privacy-sensitive digital infrastructure for the HIC requires significant expertise in cryptography, database management, and international law. It also demands assertive governance structures to guarantee autonomy and accountability, preventing political capture or manipulation. Similarly, orchestrating the global BIS necessitates unified fiscal coordination among sovereign states, transparent mechanisms for tax collection and redistribution, and real-time monitoring of impact. These complexities suggest that pilot projects, iterative design, and multilateral collaboration will be critical in moving from concept to reality.
Ultimately, the proposed Humanity Identity Card and Basic Income Supplement represent more than policy innovations; they symbolize a moral and political imperative for the 21st century. In a world where half the population remains legally invisible and chronically hungry, this dual approach offers a tangible pathway toward inclusivity, dignity, and survival. Grounded in rigorous scholarship yet deeply practical, the project challenges entrenched paradigms of sovereignty, aid, and social protection. Its adoption and success could herald a transformative epoch in global governance—one where identity and sustenance are universal rights, not privileges.
Article Title:
Tackling ‘scandalous inequalities’: a global policy proposal for a Humanity Identity Card and Basic Income Supplement.
Article References:
Recchi, E., Grohmann, T. Tackling ‘scandalous inequalities’: a global policy proposal for a Humanity Identity Card and Basic Income Supplement.
Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 880 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05240-w
Image Credits: AI Generated
