Well-being and Sustainable Development of Mining Regions: the Universal Basic Income

Oleg Mazavin,Irina Roshchina,Mikhail Kaz,M Tyulenev,A Khoreshok,S Anyona,M Cehlár,S Vöth,D Marasová,D Nuray,P Stefanek,J Janocko,S Zhironkin,A Abay,Y Tan

doi:10.1051/e3sconf/201910504035

Abstract

The article presents the results of the analysis of the practice of implementation the concept of universal basic income. It is shown that in estimating the results of a series of experiments in this field, conducted in a number of countries, it is recommended to abandon the approach based on the positivist point of view. For a long time, it dominated science in general and economic research in particular, but it continues to influence many researchers today. This conclusion should be taken into account in the formation of the structure and composition of regions’ welfare indices. The research materials are placed in a broad historical context. On the one hand, this made it possible to more vividly present the prerequisites, characteristics and consequences of repeated attempts to introduce universal basic income into the practice of social insurance, undertaken in different countries of the world (Finland, Canada, Kenya, Iran, India, USA). On the other hand, to reveal the possibilities and problems of using universal basic income as a tool to help overcome the dysfunctional development of certain territories, including mining regions.

Highlights

The growth of social inequality in economic theory has traditionally been considered as a negative externality, which along with environmental pollution, has a negative effect on the level of welfare
Malkina [4], a number of mineral regions of the Russian Federation were included in the disadvantaged category: Kemerovo Region, Komi Republic and others
Let us consider in more detail the experiments on universal basic income and negative income tax, currently being conducted

Summary

Introduction

The growth of social inequality in economic theory has traditionally been considered as a negative externality, which along with environmental pollution (environmental factor), has a negative effect on the level of welfare. The welfare impact was quantified in an integral index such as the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare developed by Daley and Cobb (ISEW) [1]. It was subsequently modified to the Genuine Progress Indicator (GNI). Both are widely used in regional welfare practice [2], [3]. According to the Index of Social Wellbeing of the Regions, developed on their basis M.Yu. Malkina [4], a number of mineral regions of the Russian Federation were included in the disadvantaged category: Kemerovo Region, Komi Republic and others

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion