Zakat, Non-state Welfare Provision and Redistribution in Times of Crisis: Evidence from the Covid-19 Pandemic
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Around the world, the Covid-19 pandemic drew attention to state social protection and its limitations. Less attention has been paid to what is likely the world's largest system of predominantly non-state welfare provision: zakat, an annual Islamic obligatory payment of a percentage of productive wealth to the poor and other eligible recipients. We explore how states and citizens engage with zakat during crises through a case study of the Covid-19 pandemic in Pakistan, Egypt, and Morocco, drawing on novel and nationally representative survey data of 5484 respondents across the three countries. While we may expect that citizens may be less motivated to pay zakat in times of personal economic hardship, we find that a large majority of the general population and of zakat contributors perceives zakat as particularly important in the Covid context. We show that while zakat may play an important role in non-state social welfare provision supplementing state social protection and redistribution in times of crisis, state attempts to harness it are often ineffective. However, while we find that higher income individuals are more likely to pay zakat, even only among those that are eligible, there are potentially negative equity impacts given the flat rate at which it is levied and the fact that people tend to give through personal networks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it