Header

Search
Simplify! | Reducing burdens to improve access to social benefits

Results of the Simplify! Project

Our own findings, reports, and recommendations from the Simplify! project will be published here on an ongoing basis. This page will be updated regularly throughout the course of the project.

 

Selection of Key Studies

For those who would like to learn more about the topic, we have compiled a selection of key studies and reports that shed light on the scientific background of the project.

 

Non-Take-Up in Switzerland

  • Non-take-up of Supplementary Benefits in Switzerland.

    Gabriel et al. (2023). Non-take-up of Supplementary Benefits. Partial Report 2, Swiss Ageing Monitor 2022. ZHAW.

    Although supplementary benefits (EL) constitute a legally established entitlement in Switzerland, many older people do not receive these benefits. The results show that a lack of information and uncertainty about one’s own eligibility are key drivers of non-receipt.
    Read the Article More about Read the Article

  • Non-take-up of Social Benefits in the Canton of Basel-Stadt

    Hümbelin et al. (2021). Non-take-up of Means-Tested Social Benefits in the Canton of Basel-Stadt. BFH.

    Approximately 29 percent of eligible individuals in Basel-Stadt do not receive supplementary benefits. The main reasons identified are a lack of knowledge about benefits, feelings of shame, and the complexity of the application process.
    Read the Article More about Read the Article

  • Non-receipt of social assistance among the migrant population

    Meier et al. (2021). Non-receipt of social assistance among the migrant population. ZHAW.

    People with a migrant background are disproportionately represented among those who do not receive social benefits. Limited knowledge of the official language hinders access to information and complicates interactions with authorities.
    Read the Article More about Read the Article

Explaining Non-Take-Up

  • Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means

    Herd & Moynihan (2019). Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means. Russell Sage Foundation.

    Many people are unable to access government benefits—not because they are ineligible, but because the process is too cumbersome. The authors distinguish three types of barriers: learning costs, compliance costs, and psychological costs.
    Read the Article More about Read the Article

  • How Effective are Interventions to Increase Social Benefit Take-Up?

    Daigneault et al. (2025). How effective are behavioral interventions to increase the take-up of social benefits? JPAM.

    This systematic review analyzes 93 interventions from 35 studies. Two types of measures show particularly clear effects: more understandable information and direct assistance with the application. The study also points out that further research outside the U.S. is urgently needed.
    Read the Article More about Read the Article

  • How-to Bureaucracy: A Concept of Citizens' Administrative Literacy

    Döring (2021). How-to Bureaucracy: A Concept of Citizens' Administrative Literacy. Administration & Society.

    Complex bureaucratic language and confusing procedures pose a barrier for a significant portion of the population—not just for people with a migration background. Those with lower administrative literacy are less likely to take advantage of government services.
    Read the Article More about Read the Article