Inclusion and Exclusion Errors in Social Protection Programs: Policy Lessons from Nepal

Abstract

This research examines the inclusion and exclusion errors in social protection programs in Nepal and their effects on program effectiveness. These errors, where ineligible individuals receive benefits (inclusion errors) or deserving populations are excluded (exclusion errors), compromise the core goals of social protection, widening discrimination and reducing the intended impact on poverty alleviation. The research, carried out in Gaur Municipality Rautahat and Bhanu Municipality of Tanahun District in the month of April 2025. I have used qualitative interviews with key informants. Findings reveal that exclusion errors disproportionately affect marginalized groups, such as Dalits, Janajatis, and women-headed households particularly those residing in remote and underserved areas. Conversely, inclusion errors are more prominent in urban centers, where administrative loopholes and political patronage undermine targeting accuracy. It highlights how marginalized and remote communities face a higher incidence of exclusion errors, while more accessible regions exhibit greater inclusion errors. The research emphasizes the challenges of bottleneck in service delivery, communications barriers, resource limitations, and complex eligibility criteria in exacerbating these problems. This study underscores the need for policy reforms prioritizing equality, diversity, inclusion, and social justice. Addressing these errors will ensure that social protection programs are more effective in reaching vulnerable populations. The research provides actionable policy recommendations to improve targeting mechanisms, reduce errors, and promote inclusive and equitable access to social protection. Social protection initiatives contribute to social justice and uplift diverse communities in Nepal.

Introduction

Social protection programs in Nepal are essential for reducing poverty and supporting vulnerable groups, but their effectiveness is undermined by inclusion and exclusion errors. Inclusion errors occur when ineligible individuals receive benefits, wasting limited resources, while exclusion errors happen when deserving individuals are denied access, deepening inequality. These errors are influenced by factors such as corruption, weak verification, social discrimination, geographic remoteness, and bureaucratic hurdles.

Nepal’s social protection system operates under a complex legal and policy framework involving multiple acts and ministries, with over 80 schemes targeting groups like the elderly, disabled, women, and children. However, disparities persist—better-developed areas like Bhanu Municipality show higher beneficiary numbers and inclusion of marginalized groups compared to less developed areas like Gaur Municipality, which relies more on geographic targeting.

Data reveals that a large share of social protection funds benefits elderly and economically inactive groups, while marginalized populations such as Dalits, single women, and residents of remote regions receive fewer resources. Stringent eligibility criteria, especially for disability benefits and citizenship documentation, further exclude many vulnerable individuals.

The study highlights that social protection delivery is not just technical but deeply political, shaped by caste, gender, geography, and governance issues. To improve outcomes, policy recommendations include adopting more universal coverage, simplifying eligibility, strengthening grievance mechanisms, leveraging technology responsibly, enhancing community participation, and improving local administrative capacity. Also critical is making citizenship documentation more accessible to reduce exclusion of marginalized populations.

Conclusion

Social protection systems are essential for building resilient societies, especially in nations like Nepal with high levels of poverty, inequality, and vulnerability. However, targeting errors significantly compromise the effectiveness and fairness of these systems. This research, grounded in both data and lived experience, demonstrates that inclusion and exclusion errors are not isolated anomalies but systemic issues requiring urgent policy attention. Reforming Nepal’s social protection landscape demands not only technical improvements but also a transformation in governance, rooted in the principles of rights, inclusion, and justice. By addressing these challenges head-on, Nepal can build a more equitable and compassionate state where no one is left behind. These inclusion and exclusion errors demonstrate the need for urgent reforms in Nepal\'s social protection policies. Policies must be adapted to reflect regional disparities and the diverse needs of different vulnerable groups. By reducing these errors and ensuring that the most vulnerable are adequately supported, Nepal\'s social protection programs can more effectively uplift marginalized communities and promote social justice.

References

[1] Acharya, S., &Luitel, S. (2016). Targeting effectiveness of Nepal’s social protection programs. Kathmandu: South Asia Institute of Advanced Studies. [2] Asian Development Bank (ADB). (2019). Nepal: Social protection indicator. Manila: ADB. [3] Babajanian, B., Hagen-Zanker, J., & Holmes, R. (2015). How do social protection and labourprogrammes contribute to social inclusion? Evidence from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India and Nepal. ODI. [4] Barrientos, A. (2010). Social protection and poverty. International Journal of Social Welfare, 19(4), 342–349. [5] Bhanu Municipality Profile 2023 [6] Coady, D., Grosh, M., &Hoddinott, J. (2004). Targeting outcomes redux. The World Bank Research Observer, 19(1), 61–85.

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Kirti Raj Subedi. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.