|
Title
|
|
|
|
Not that basi : how level, design, and context matter for the redistributive outcomes of universal basic income
| |
|
Author
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
| Proponents of a basic income (BI) claim that, on top of many other benefits, it could bring significant reductions in financial poverty. Using microsimulation analysis in a comparative two-country setting, we show that the potential poverty-reducing impact of BI strongly depends on exactly how and where it is implemented. Implementing a BI requires far more choices than advocates seem to realise. The level at which a BI is set matters, but its exact specification matters even more. The impact of a BI, be it a low or a high one, also strongly depends on the characteristics of the system that it is (partially) replacing or complementing, as well as the socio-economic context in which it is introduced. Some versions of BI could potentially help to reduce poverty but always at a significant cost and with substantial sections of the population incurring significant losses, which matters for political feasibility. A partial BI complementing existing provisions appears to make more potential sense than a full BI replacing them. The simplicity of BI, however, tends to be vastly overstated. |
| |
|
Language
|
|
|
|
English
| |
|
Source (journal)
|
|
|
|
Journal of social policy. - Cambridge, 1972, currens
| |
|
Publication
|
|
|
|
Cambridge
:
Cambridge univ press
,
2023
| |
|
ISSN
|
|
|
|
0047-2794
[print]
1469-7823
[online]
| |
|
DOI
|
|
|
|
10.1017/S0047279423000582
| |
|
Volume/pages
|
|
|
|
(2023)
, 23 p.
| |
|
ISI
|
|
|
|
001117968900001
| |
|
Full text (Publisher's DOI)
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Full text (open access)
|
|
|
|
| |
|