Despite the active digitalisation of the social sphere and the shift towards the “social contract” mechanism, state policy in this area continues to face systemic contradictions. The government is focusing on targeted assistance and the automation of benefit distribution, but these tools do not address the underlying problems: an undervalued subsistence minimum, limited access to labour resources, and persistent poverty that official statistics fail to capture.
According to Ratel.kz, after 2020 Kazakhstan switched to the Targeted Social Assistance (TSA) model. The authorities claim that targeting is the path to fair distribution of budget funds: only those who are genuinely in need receive support. But the criteria for need remain so narrow that thousands of people living on the edge of poverty are not formally considered poor.
According to official data, the poverty rate has remained around 5% for the past five years. Formally, this is an almost favourable indicator, comparable to developed countries. However, experts have repeatedly noted that this is an “optical illusion”, since the indicator is calculated based on the subsistence minimum.
The subsistence minimum for 2026 has been set at 50,851 tenge. This means a family of four with an income of around 200,000 tenge per month does not qualify for support measures. According to available information, government programmes “pass by” such families, even though their financial situation is close to the risk zone.
It is noted that there is also a lack of open data. The state does not publish statistics on the number of citizens living “on the poverty line”. The scale of the problem can only be estimated from indirect figures.
For example, at the end of last year, more than 1.5 million workers were receiving a monthly salary of between 100,000 and 200,000 tenge, and in the Turkestan region more than 175,000 families were living on an income of up to 52,500 tenge per person.
The concept of the “social contract” implies mutual obligations: the state provides opportunities, and the citizen takes steps — looking for work, undergoing training, or starting a sole proprietorship.
“In theory, this is a modern, incentivising approach. In Kazakhstani practice, however, it is a bureaucratic filter. To receive help, you must sign an agreement and prove you are ready to leap ‘into the comfort zone’,” the report states.
It also notes that in villages and small towns there are not enough jobs, and government courses often do not guarantee subsequent employment. If a TSA recipient fails to meet the conditions, they are excluded from the programme.
Thus, “mutual responsibility” turns out to be a situation where real obligations exist only for the citizen. Officials report a reduction in the number of benefit recipients, but this does not mean a reduction in poverty.
It is reported that the launch of the “Digital Family Card” was a step towards full automation of social support. The algorithm analyses dozens of databases and automatically determines who is entitled to payments. However, automation creates new risks.
“It is convenient, but only for officials. Errors in the system, incomplete data or failure to meet formal criteria mean that help does not reach those who truly need it,” the report states.