| Resumen: |
We find the alternative methodology proposed by Kidd et al. (2025) to be weak for several reasons. First, it includes only 10 out of the 25 low-income countries, making it unrepresentative. Second, it lacks justification for using a proportion of GDP per capita to determine benefit levels—a method that results in extremely low benefit levels, in some cases nearly ten times lower than the national poverty line. Additionally, the financing gap estimate by Kidd et al. (2025) fails to account for existing social protection coverage, thereby overlooking the progress made in extending coverage and providing additional benefits to current recipients. |
