Programs, pathways, and implementation factors: Exploring linkages between LGBTI+ inclusive social protection and Comparative and International Education

• In Event: Poster Session 9
  In Poster Session: Programs, pathways, and implementation factors: Exploring linkages between LGBTI+ inclusive social protection and Comparative and International Education

Proposal

Recent years have witnessed a resurgence of gender-based repression and backlash worldwide, alongside rising inequality and austerity (Edström et al., 2024; Lewin, 2024). This has acute consequences for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, and more (LGBTI+) persons who face heightened risks of income loss, eviction, harassment, violence, and discrimination in education, employment, healthcare, and housing (Madrigal-Borloz, 2019). In today’s climate of rising polarization, LGBTI+ inclusive social protection is paramount. In order to re-examine education and foster peace in a divided world, we must challenge deeply held assumptions about who is considered “deserving” of state support. Furthermore, as misogyny, homophobia, biphobia, interphobia, and transphobia intensify, identifying concrete measures within social protection mechanisms such as cash transfers, subsidies, and social insurance are urgent to mitigate vulnerabilities.

Despite the rapid growth of gender-responsive social protection research (Cookson et al., 2023a; Staab et al., 2024), scholarship has largely overlooked LGBTI+ populations. This study addresses this gap in the literature by conducting a comprehensive literature review at the intersection of social protection and LGBTI+ inclusive policy. It also provides comparative insights that can inform international development initiatives, educational programming, policy implementation, and advocacy strategies in addressing structural marginalization. Generating evidence on LGBTI+ inclusion is critical to identifying barriers, generating sustainable solutions, and highlighting effective interventions. This study follows a scoping review methodology (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005) utilizing three primary strategies: database searches, reference list reviews, and key stakeholder outreach. From this process, we identified 51 relevant documents: 29 practice-oriented (policy briefs, reports, advocacy papers) and 22 academic resources spanning national, regional, and global focuses.

Across the studies, a range of social protection instruments were discussed in relation to LGBTI+ persons, including formal social protection, informal support mechanisms, and systems linkages. Five main pathways emerged across the evidence mapping: addressing economic vulnerability, expanding opportunities through asset transfers or job referrals, improving healthcare access through insurance, supporting access to care, and helping individuals escape violence and persecution. While the majority of documents focused on barriers to initial access (e.g., discriminatory norms, eligibility criteria, administrative hurdles, privacy risks), fewer assess benefit quality (e.g., adequacy, predictability).

Overall, the evidence highlights how prevailing norms and values shape LGBTI+ individuals’ access to formal and informal social protection due to legal frameworks, policy implementation, and everyday practices (Daley et al., 2023; Edge Effect, 2021; Matthews et al., 2024; United Nations Development Programme, 2025). This study demonstrates that inclusion requires a systems lens that bridges formal and informal mechanisms, strengthens linkages across policy domains, and acknowledges the role of both state and community actors in addressing the diverse vulnerabilities of individuals within the LGBTI+ umbrella. Building these systems requires technical prowess and a long-term educational and political commitment to reshape societies through principles of fairness, trust in public institutions, and the advancement of peace.

Authors

• Maria Klara Kuss, University of Bonn-Rhein-Sieg (H-BRS)

• Cody Freeman, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities