Income Support in an Eco-Social State: The Case for Participation Income

Michael McGann,Mary P. Murphy

doi:10.1017/s1474746421000397

Abstract

Contemporary models of welfare capitalism have frequently been critiqued about their fit-for-purpose in provisioning for people’s basic needs including care, and longer-term ecological sustainability. The Covid-19 pandemic has also exposed the need for better institutions and a new welfare architecture. We argue a post-productivist eco-social state can deliver sustainable well-being and meet basic needs. Arguing Universal Basic Services are an essential building block and prerequisite for a de-commodified welfare state, we focus on examining the form of income support that might best complement UBS. The article develops, from the perspective of feminist arguments and the capabilities approach, a case for Participation Income. This, we argue, can be aligned with targeted policy goals, particularly reward for and redistribution of human and ecological care or reproduction and other forms of socially valued participation. It may also, in the short term, be more administratively practical and politically feasible than universal basic income.

Highlights

Do pandemics and other emergencies lead to major reconfigurations in social policy (Castles, 2010)
We focus on what form of income support best complements this form of sustainable provision for basic needs, arguing that Unconditional Basic Income (UBI) overclaims on various fronts and unpacking the case for Participation Income (PI) as preferable from both a feminist and capabilities-promoting eco-social policy perspective
Before we examine how a new welfare architecture can enable recalibration on such a post-productivist trajectory, we need to first explore what we mean by sustainable well-being and its implications for how we understand the nature of the economy and value of work

Summary

Introduction

Do pandemics and other emergencies lead to major reconfigurations in social policy (Castles, 2010). We focus on what form of income support best complements this form of sustainable provision for basic needs, arguing that UBI overclaims on various fronts and unpacking the case for PI as preferable from both a feminist and capabilities-promoting eco-social policy perspective.

Results

Conclusion