Mobilize technical standards to address these issues There are already substantial efforts to develop normative frameworks for identity governance that would support the objectives set out in this brief.32 In general, however, discussions of the standards applicable to digital ID among government and private sector actors focus much more on technical standards than on governance standards.33 These two discussions must be integrated. A focus on “inclusiveness” during the introduction of digital identity technologies can potentially address some of the practical barriers faced by stateless people in accessing services. For example, the W3C Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0 and related standards provide technical architectures that could enable privacy-preserving approaches to functional ID, allowing stateless individuals to prove specific attributes—such as age, educational qualifications, or vaccination status—without revealing nationality where irrelevant.34 The European Digital Identity Wallet framework demonstrates how interoperable standards can facilitate crossborder recognition of credentials, potentially reducing the documentary barriers that often exclude stateless people from services.35 However, as the OpenID Foundation’s Human-Centric Digital Identity framework acknowledges, these technological advances risk replicating existing patterns of exclusion unless explicitly designed with vulnerable populations in mind, requiring “values-based trade-off decisions and risk mitigation strategies” that prioritize human rights over administrative efficiency.36 The path forward requires integrating technical standards development with governance frameworks that address the institutional roots of statelessnessrelated exclusion. Digital identity standards bodies should incorporate statelessness considerations into technical specifications, ensuring that systems can accommodate alternative credential issuers beyond nation states—such as UNHCR’s exploration of blockchain-based identity systems for refugees37—and build into the system decision-trees the kind of referral pathways and due process mechanisms outlined above. Trust frameworks must explicitly address how to establish trust relationships for credentials issued to those whose nationality status is unresolved, building on initiatives like the Open Identity Exchange’s work on cross-framework interoperability.38 32 Among these are UNDP’s Digital ID Governance Framework and Universal DPI Safeguards framework, and the Recommendation of the OECD Council on the Governance of Digital Identity, OECD/LEGAL/0491. 33 Manby, “The Governance of Digital Public Infrastructure.” 34 World Wide Web Consortium, “Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0.” 35 Regulation (EU) 2024/1183 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 amending Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 as regards establishing the European Digital Identity Framework (European Digital Identity (EUDI) Regulation). 36 OpenID Foundation, Human-Centric Digital Identity: For Government Officials. 37 Burt, “UNHCR Embraces Blockchain, Zero-Knowledge Proofs to Improve Aid Systems.” 38 Open Identity Exchange, “A Guide to Trust Frameworks for Smart Digital ID.” Statelessness and digital identity 12