New research · Integral · October 2026
Redress is the missing layer of digital public infrastructure.
A first cross-country look at how well grievance systems actually work inside the payment, identity and data-exchange rails people are told to trust — and what it would take to fix them.
The report, in one paragraph
Grievance redress is the part of digital public infrastructure that only gets attention when it fails. This report is the first attempt to assess it systematically — testing 15 payment, identity and social-registry systems across Brazil, India, Benin, Ethiopia and South Africa against a simple question: can someone actually get their problem fixed? The answer, most of the time, is that no one outside the operator can tell. Only two of the fifteen systems publish enough data to know how well they perform, and even where data exists, it rarely means the same thing from one system to the next. The report proposes a way out: a minimum test any DPI can be judged against today, and the first building blocks of a common language for grievances that could let a complaint move safely between the institutions responsible for solving it.
15
GRM systems assessed across Brazil, India, Benin, Ethiopia and South Africa
2 of 15
publish grievance volumes in meaningful public detail
4 / 8 / 3
systems fully live, underway or not live, under a proposed minimum "liveness" test
57%
of adults worldwide reported experiencing a scam in the past year (GASA, 2025)
Assessing Grievance Redressal Mechanisms in Digital Public Infrastructure
David Porteous, Deepti George, Sahana Arun Kumar and Maria Luciano · Integral · October 2026 · Supported by the Gates Foundation
The full report: evidence from five countries, a proposed "liveness" benchmark any DPI can be tested against today, and the case for a common grievance data object that can travel safely across institutional boundaries.
About the authors
David Porteous
Founder, Integral: Governance Solutions
Advises governments, development finance institutions and funders on governance in digital public infrastructure. PhD in Economics, Yale; MPhil, Cambridge.
Deepti George
Founder, Yutadhi
Works to improve financial systems for citizens and enterprises, and has contributed to policy through committees of India's securities regulator and central bank.
Sahana Arun Kumar
Co-founder, Amarante Consulting
Twenty years building inclusive finance and DPI across more than 75 countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Based in Paris; MBA, HEC Paris.
Maria Luciano
Policy analyst
Specializes in technology policy, inclusive data governance and digital government. Law degrees from the University of São Paulo; MSc, LSE.
Go deeper
More on why dispute resolution and digital public infrastructure are converging.
Article · Tech Policy Press
No DPI Without Redress
Why effective remedy has to be treated as a foundational safeguard for digital public infrastructure — not an afterthought bolted on once systems are already at scale.
Read the articleVideo · ODR 2026 Forum, Harvard University
ODR for Digital Public Infrastructure
David Porteous (Integral: Governance Solutions), Moritz Fromageot (UN Office of Digital and Emerging Technologies) and Christopher Harrell (Mastercard Policy Center for the Digital Economy) on what online dispute resolution can bring to DPI.
Watch the sessionBlog · Digital Impact Alliance (DIAL)
Online Dispute Resolution and Digital Public Infrastructure — What's the Connection?
DIAL's own take on why ODR and DPI are converging fields, and what each has to learn from the other.
Read the postRead the full report.
Evidence from five countries, a minimum "liveness" test any DPI can be measured against today, and a path toward grievances that travel safely between institutions.
