PhilSys as a means of Digital Resilience

Protecting IDPs in the face of threats from natural disasters and livelihood challenges

---

By Krishna V Arora and Rohan Pai

The Philippine Identification System, more commonly known as PhilSys or PhilID, is an ongoing nationwide effort to create a population-scale, digitally-backed ID system in the Philippines. PhilSys was launched in 2018 with the objective of establishing a unified ID system across the archipelago and to kickstart a “transition into a digital economy—to enable presenceless, paperless, and cashless transactions”. 

This is part of a growing trend globally, where countries are adopting Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) to enable digitally-mediated service provision across public and private sectors, through foundational systems like digital ID, digital payments and data exchange. Specifically within the Southeast Asian region, a declaration at the ASEAN Digital Ministers’ Meeting (ADGMIN) last year stated plans to develop “a high quality, open, safe, flexible, interoperable digital public infrastructure and e-government services to connect people and businesses in ASEAN”. Since then, countries like Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia have actively initiated efforts to implement a national ID, supported by multilateral programmes such as the World Bank’s ID4D initiative which has catalysed more than US $2.3 billion in active and pipeline financing for the implementation of digital ID systems worldwide.

Recent developments in PhilSys, and emerging challenges in uptake of the digital ID

Figure 1: Insights from DPI Map on Digital ID efforts in the ASEAN region

As per evaluations done by the DPI Map project (shown in Figure 1), the Philippines is leading the charge on digital ID in the ASEAN region. With regulations covering the implementation of digital ID, a strong data protection framework and emerging digital infrastructure for identity authentication through government portals, PhilSys is ahead of its counterparts in terms of technical architecture, digital safeguards and rights-based implementation. This has been complemented by the Philippine Digital Infrastructure Project (PDIP), a US $288 million initiative approved by President Marcos last year to enhance broadband connectivity, improve digital literacy efforts and encourage public-private partnerships (PPPs) in the digital economy. 

As of now, PhilSys can be availed by all citizens of the Philippines; and immigrants residing in the country for at least 2 years are also eligible for being registered in the system. Administered by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) and the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT), it is reported that a total of 93.7 million registrations were made as of June 2025, but only a total of 54.9 million physical cards have been delivered thus far. However, the prevalence of close to 30 unique identification documents that are issued to Filipinos by various government departments and agencies is proving to be a major challenge for the uptake of PhilSys. Currently, there is a lack of public awareness on how the national government envisions PhilSys to alter the current landscape of digitally-mediated service provision—taking into consideration that a well-established but fragmented identity ecosystem is currently in place (as depicted in Figure 2 below). In addition to this, low digital literacy among ageing and rural populations, growing concerns about online scams, and a resistance to change among government departments and officials, are growing concerns that need to be addressed by the PSA and DICT to improve the effectiveness of a foundational identity system. 

Figure 2: ID documents in use by various departments, illustration by Nandini Jiva

Digital ID in the Philippines has to confront with the increasing risk of natural hazards and climate change-induced displacement of people internally

The aforementioned issues around PhilSys and its implementation have serious implications for internally displaced people (IDPs) in the country. Natural disasters remain the driving cause for internal displacement, with nearly 86% of internal displacement being caused by typhoons in 2024— these are usually temporary relocations as part of evacuation measures. Apart from rapid-onset events like floods, typhoons, volcanic eruption and earthquakes, Filipinos today are also facing the impact of slow-onset events on local livelihoods and being forced to relocate due to climate change. As per estimates by the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Philippines is categorised as the most at-risk country in the world, facing losses of 6% of its GDP annually by 2100 as per claimed estimates. 

During evacuation, IDPs and their families face poor living conditions with limited access to water, sanitation and other basic services through aid and assistance. Even with a well-established legal framework on disaster response through the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010 (DRRM Act), those working within humanitarian aid and civil society organisations across the archipelago emphasise the need for a human rights perspective, i.e., to integrate human rights standards within humanitarian support when people are forced to relocate. Inadequate aid and relief from local government units (LGUs) during disaster response procedures have increased the threat of financial exclusion and livelihood losses. Through our study, we have come across instances where evacuees reportedly attempted to escape from relocation sites in search for temporary employment, and even violated protocols during high-risk events by choosing to return to their homes that were actively prone to natural hazards, for a slim chance at preserving crops in their farmlands.

Seamless coordination is essential for disaster risk reduction to ensure LGUs are efficiently delivering food, shelter and other forms of aid to IDPs during crises. Robust mechanisms to report on the status of on-ground operations, dashboards to track available and required resources, and ensuring institutional efforts are reaching vulnerable populations during emergencies without redundancies or duplication of efforts is critical. However, the complexities in delivery of aid due to the involvement of multiple actors (government, humanitarian and community-led NGOs), siloed beneficiary databases due to a fragmented identity ecosystem and a combination of paper-based and digitally-backed ID requirements from various agencies have hindered efficiency in aid and assistance, leaving those under threat from being left out of institutional relief efforts. Within such an environment, there is an emerging need for a unified entry point within institutional structures—one that is interoperable, accessible to government agencies, humanitarian and local actors involved in disaster response, and with technical safeguards to ensure people are included within the system even when internet connectivity is failing to reach the margins. 

PhilSys, which is conceptualised to act as a foundational system to verify legal identity of Filipinos, is a promising digital layer that can address these emerging challenges. Across the world, Ukraine’s success in setting up the Diia digital wallet is a great example of how public infrastructure can be set up for success in times of emergencies—allowing citizens seamless online access to their identity documents, public services, business registries, and even emergency payments while they were displaced from their homes. Humanitarian programmes such as Governance4ID also highlight the potential for digital identity tools to foster greater inclusion and self-sufficiency for aid and assistance. By linking digital identity to digital payments and e-commerce platforms, displaced individuals could have the ability to participate in local economies, reducing dependency on external aid and contributing to their long-term resilience. However, these interventions need to be supported by investing in offline intermediaries that can support communities that come from low digital literacy backgrounds, offline infrastructure that is set up for seamless internet connectivity, safeguards from personal data-related harms and context-specific elements that prevent barriers to access. 

Recommendations to integrate PhilSys for disaster preparedness and response 

Based on insights from our study of DPI development in the Philippines, and conversations with actors involved in disaster response, risk reduction and management, the following are recommendations that need to be taken into consideration for PhilSys to be set up for success for IDPs:

1. Recognise evacuees, relocated families and those affected by crises as IDPs: Stuck between state policymaking that prioritises Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) and multilateral efforts focused on displacement caused by political conflict in the BARMM region; LGUs managing evacuees, relocated families and those affected by crises are often short on funding. There is a need for multilateral efforts to widen donors’ attention from the crisis in BARMM to the impending climate crisis that looms large over the archipelago and its people. Donors backing PhilSys will have to be pushed to recognise the critical role of ID for these vulnerable populations, and government agencies involved in disaster response will be required to cooperate with ongoing efforts to improve the adoption of PhilSys.

2. Leverage, don’t replace: One of the strengths of the Philippines identity ecosystem is that different government departments already have existing systems in place for legal identification of people accessing services. Harmonising databases from multiple agencies does not require greenfield efforts. Instead, PhilSys needs to be treated as an overarching digital layer that can be used to facilitate coordination efforts between various actors. The PSA and DICT will need to involve technical partners that can digitise existing processes, and plug open APIs to improve coordination. 

3. Engage in population-scale awareness campaigns on Digital ID: Currently, there is limited knowledge among Filipino populations about how a digital ID functions. A culture that only derives legitimacy from physical cards and paper-based IDs has restricted the digital ID from being an effective and trusted mechanism for online authentication, especially among rural and ageing populations. The DPIP will need to outline plans for digital literacy campaigns that specifically address how the physical ID card only serves as an interface for service providers to access digital credentials.