What practical alternatives exist for accessing government services without a digital identity?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Practical alternatives to a state-issued digital identity cluster around three realtime options: physical tokens or cards that link to the digital system, in‑person or paper-based verification channels, and third‑party identity providers (banks and private verification services) that can vouch for a person without a smartphone wallet; each approach is already being proposed or used in pilot schemes and deserves design safeguards to avoid exclusion or mission creep [1] [2] [3]. Governments and analysts also stress keeping conventional document routes and lower‑security authentication paths so vital services remain reachable for people who cannot or will not adopt electronic IDs [4] [5].
1. Physical tokens or “dumb” cards as a practical fallback
One concrete alternative under active consideration is a physical card or token that is “digitally enabled” — a simple chip, QR code or magnetic token that acts as a secure pointer to the individual’s record and can be read at a terminal without requiring a smartphone; UK ministers and industry commentators describe this model as a way to preserve centralized digital architecture while including people without devices [1] [2]. Proponents say such cards preserve the convenience and integrity benefits of the digital system while allowing face‑to‑face presentation; critics warn that a poorly designed card can become a de‑facto mandatory ID and recreate old exclusion problems unless distribution and privacy rules are tight [6] [1].
2. In‑person verification, assisted onboarding and existing offline channels
Governments plan to preserve—or expand—face‑to‑face routes: Post Office networks, local government service centers and assisted onboarding sessions are being floated as ways to verify and issue credentials for people who lack digital skills or connectivity [1] [6]. International experience shows pragmatic authentication regimes (e.g., username/password for low‑risk transactions and stronger checks for sensitive tasks) can keep many services accessible offline if agencies map risk tiers and offer straightforward in‑person options [4]. The trade‑off is staffing and cost: in‑person processes are slower and more expensive than fully digital flows and require policy choices about which services merit physical channels [4].
3. Private‑sector and financial institution verifiers
Banks and other regulated institutions already function as trusted identity anchors in several countries; Sweden’s BankID and an array of private identity verification vendors demonstrate how financial institutions or third‑party providers can authenticate customers to public and private services without a government‑issued digital wallet [3] [7]. Policymakers are exploring public‑private partnerships where a diversity of issuers—bank IDs, government portals like Login.gov, and accredited private verifiers—can interoperate, but this raises questions about commercial control over identity rails and data governance [3] [7].
4. Continue to accept existing physical documents and low‑barrier authentication
A core safeguard recommended by civil society and multilateral bodies is to continue allowing conventional identity proofs—passports, driving licences, paper records—and to retain low‑friction authentication modes for low‑risk transactions so people without digital IDs are not locked out of basic services [5] [4]. Evidence from countries that layered digital ID onto existing document systems shows that maintaining multiple authentication routes helps reduce exclusion, while the political debate centers on which services can reasonably accept weaker authentication without undermining fraud controls [4] [5].
5. Decentralized and self‑sovereign options, and activist proposals
Technologists and privacy advocates propose decentralized and self‑sovereign identity (SSI) tools—wallets and verifiable credentials under user control—as alternatives to centralized digital IDs; proponents argue these reduce single‑point risks and corporate capture, while skeptics warn that SSI adoption remains niche and can shift the burden of technical competence to users [7] [8]. Practical deployment of SSI at scale is not documented in the provided reporting as a ready replacement for government systems, so its operational viability remains an open question in current coverage [7] [8].
6. Political choices, hidden agendas and design trade‑offs
Every practical alternative carries trade‑offs and political incentives: governments emphasize inclusion to defuse resistance but also seek program integrity and cost savings [9] [1]; private vendors highlight convenience and scalability while standing to profit from identity markets [3] [2]. Independent voices urge rules to forbid coercive “mandate by proxy” (private actors requiring digital ID for unrelated services) and to ensure physical, assisted and low‑risk routes remain legally guaranteed to prevent new forms of exclusion [5] [8].