Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study aims to synthesise existing zakat distribution literature to develop a more integrated understanding of sustainable zakat practices. Adopting an umbrella review approach, the study systematically analyses 17 review-based articles retrieved from Scopus and Web of Science, following the PRISMA protocol. The critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) was applied to assess study quality, and inductive thematic analysis was used to identify key patterns across the literature. The findings reveal six dominant themes: consumptive zakat distribution, productive zakat and economic empowerment, institutional governance and efficiency, Islamic social finance integration, sustainability, and behavioural change–oriented assistance. The evidence indicates that zakat practices remain predominantly consumptive, with increasing but limited adoption of productive and integrated approaches. Importantly, behavioural mechanisms, particularly conditionality-based models, remain underexplored despite their potential to enhance long-term impact. Theoretically, the study advances the zakat literature by reconceptualising zakat as a multidimensional system aligned with Maqasid al-Shariah, extending beyond wealth redistribution to encompass human development and behavioural transformation. This reframing implies that sustainable zakat is not achieved through distribution alone, but through the strategic design of interventions that enable recipients to internalise and sustain maqasid outcomes. Practically, the findings highlight the need for zakat institutions to rebalance strategies by integrating welfare support with human capital development, strengthening governance, and exploring innovative approaches such as conditional cash transfers (CCT). The originality of this study lies in its use of an umbrella review to synthesise fragmented evidence and in identifying behavioural conditionality as a critical yet underdeveloped mechanism for sustainable zakat distribution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Esa et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: