Digital transformation in the Maldives is slow and inefficient because government agencies often act independently, without shared leadership or a coordinated plan. This has led to duplicated systems that don’t connect well or serve people effectively. While the government is advancing multiple digital policies and projects, these efforts often lack coordination and meaningful public consultation. During UNDP’s stakeholder engagement for the national digital assessment, many stakeholders expressed frustration over the lack of transparent, inclusive processes in national-level studies and regulatory development - and noted that UNDP’s work was being unnecessarily duplicated by several government agencies instead of being leveraged collaboratively. Meanwhile, the government-led “Maldives 2.0” initiative - a nationwide push for digital transformation - has become highly politicized, creating limited space for constructive engagement with development partners like UNDP. Moving forward, the Maldives needs a clearer governance model, stronger collaboration across sectors, and more inclusive mechanisms to ensure digital transformation is built on trust, coherence, and shared benefit.

The work on this challenge has informed a strategic shift within the UNDP Maldives Country Office, particularly in how we approach digital transformation- moving from project-based support to more systemic, policy-influencing work. While the work has helped clarify the gaps and needs in digital governance and strengthened UNDP’s thought leadership on the issue, it has not yet been formally adopted or scaled by government stakeholders. The national “Maldives 2.0” digital transformation initiative has become highly politicized, and government engagement with partners like UNDP has been limited, preventing a full handover or uptake of our insights at policy level. Additionally, during our consultations, several partners raised concerns about overlapping studies and policy efforts by different government agencies, which further complicated cooperation and handover.

We chose key informant interviews, stakeholder consultations, and citizen-generated insights because existing national data did not capture lived experiences, perceptions of digital services, or institutional barriers to coordination. While quantitative indicators showed the Maldives’ digital performance, they did not explain why progress was slow or fragmented. These qualitative methods filled critical gaps on issues such as public trust, digital literacy, exclusion of vulnerable groups, and the lack of transparent consultation in policy and strategy development. They also helped uncover institutional duplication and disconnects between agencies - data not reflected in formal reports or surveys.

Applying innovative methods like participatory consultations, crowdsourcing, and storytelling was essential for this frontier challenge because traditional policy analysis alone could not capture the complexity of digital transformation in the Maldives. The digital system is highly fragmented, politically sensitive, and shaped by multiple actors working in silos - so we needed tools that could surface hidden tensions, institutional gaps, and real-world impacts that quantitative data alone could not reveal. These methods helped unpack the system by bringing diverse perspectives into the conversation, highlighting where processes were breaking down, and exposing the lack of collaboration and transparency in digital policymaking.

The combination of innovation methods, new forms of data, and engagement with diverse partners - especially outside traditional government channels - allowed us to uncover insights that would not have surfaced through standard assessments alone. Participatory consultations and citizen-generated data revealed the real-world frustrations and priorities of stakeholders, who valued UNDP’s inclusive and neutral approach amid an increasingly politicized digital ecosystem. These methods also enabled stronger engagement with the private sector and civil society, who appreciated the transparency and responsiveness of the process. Working closely with the Chief Digital Office was particularly impactful. Their early digital readiness surveys and assessment methodology were integrated into our initial findings, which helped refine and validate the overall analysis. This uncommon collaboration strengthened credibility, helped align evidence across institutions, and fostered a shared language for understanding digital transformation challenges. Together, this interplay not only produced richer and more actionable insights but also built trust and momentum among partners who are critical to driving inclusive change.