Global but uneven progress made on digital public infrastructure: IIPP report

Findings led by the Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose (IIPP) at the University College of London (UCL) show there’s global progress on digital public infrastructure (DPI), although its implementation is uneven across different regions of the world. Not just that, pathways to developing DPI also vary, the notes.

The findings are contained in the 2025 State of Digital Public Infrastructure Report, a publication which takes a look at DPI measurement and prevalence as its deployment at scale continues. The report, which analysed 210 countries, is part of the DPI Map project to track global DPI prevalence.

One thing the report finds is that there’s growing consensus around what DPI actually is, in terms of its definition, functions and attributes with an increasing number of countries having DPI-like digital ID, digital payments and data exchange systems. The consensus, per the report, is vital in providing a widely accepted framework for DPI as it matures.

The publication’s executive summary mentions that “as of 2025, at least 64 countries have DPI-like digital ID systems, 97 countries have DPI-like digital payment systems, and 103 countries have DPI-like data exchange systems.”

Per the report, Europe leads in mature and high-alignment systems which are supported by a number of robust regional frameworks like the GDPR and eIDAS cited as examples.

Africa, Asia, Latin America and Caribbean show dynamic growth, with many systems either in pilot or planned stages. Some systems in these regions show less consistent alignment with DPI attributes, but high-alignment examples like Peru and Tanzania are mentioned.

Looking at implementation pattern, the report notes high level of unevenness, “with identifiable maturity clusters and income- level patterns shaping implementation.” The report also notes a correlation between country income level and DPI investment, with higher income earners having highest number of implemented systems. Interoperability and adoption were also found to be a fitting pair in DPI rollout, suggesting that the design of DPI components and real-world application are interdependent.

Another major finding in the report is the inadequacy in gauging the efficacy of DPI, given that different methods and approaches currently exist in doing so, including assumptions through “proxies” which end up giving an incomplete perspective of real-world performance.

The report also features country stories and some examples that explore the evolution of DPI systems in different country contexts, with attention to governance models, implementation challenges, and enabling factors.

In order to address some of the DPI deployment and measurement challenges, the report proposes that countries need to go beyond just the availability of technology to scale DPI responsibly. This means that deploying and assessing DPI outcomes should not just be about what factors exist, but how impactful they prove to be in day-to-day transactions. The DPI Map report also notes that DPI governance, inclusion, and real-world interoperability are as critical as technical deployment.

In another report, the DPI Map project team had identified five major factors driving DPI adoption around the world.

Democratic DPI

In a related reflection, a Tech Policy perspective argues that countries should look more towards building DPI that is democratic and inclusive, rather than technical and state-centric.

The authors of the piece make a critique of the current state of DPI, saying it is too technocratic and productized, and insist that DPI must be used as a tool for public empowerment. Aligning with frameworks like the UNDP’s DPI Safeguards Initiative can help achieve this goal, they believe.

They also note the relationship between DPI and digital sovereignty, but assert that nations have to move away from rigid notions of sovereignty to more practical ones like ‘relational sovereignty’ and ‘strategic autonomy.’

To them, DPI should be designed and implemented in a manner that that expands public power, and not tighten state control.

Article Topics

data exchange platform  |  digital ID  |  digital inclusion  |  digital payments  |  digital public infrastructure  |  financial inclusion  |  interoperability