Support For Basic Income Research Articles

Support for universal basic income: A cross-disciplinary literature review

The technological development and the rise of artificial intelligence are driving a significant transformation of the labor market. The technological unemployment predicted by Keynes poses challenges for the global labor market that require new solutions. Basic income research has become a significant field of study, attracting attention from various disciplines such as political science, law, economics, and sociology. The aim of this paper is to explore on the basis of a literature review, what factors influence the support for basic income among the population. A systematic literature review based on the Web of Science and Scopus databases, after screening 2623 publications, identified 23 articles that contained findings relevant to the research question. A significant number of authors (12/23) analyzed data from the same source, the European Social Survey 2016 (ESS Round 8, 2020), conducted in 2016, first published in 2017 and updated several times since then. The paper shows that the study of the topic has a strong European focus. The social, economic, social and cultural diversity of European countries makes these studies important from a European and EU perspective, but from an international perspective, further research on the topic is needed.

Social trust and the support for universal basic income

This paper presents a theoretical model showing how political mistrust affects people’s preferences for Universal Basic Income (UBI) when its implementation involves a reduction in spending for other public services (welfare retrenchment). The model shows that individuals with lower levels of political mistrust are more likely to endorse UBI, reflecting their trust in the government’s ability to manage public resources and avoid wasteful retrenchment of other public services. The model also shows that generalised mistrust – characterised by agents’ expectations of their fellow citizens’ misbehaviour that can reduce the government’s fiscal capacity – does not significantly influence preferences for UBI when it involves a partial retrenchment of other public services. This result is driven by the agents’ perception that their fellow citizens’ misbehaviour would occur irrespective of the UBI implementation. The empirical analysis with 265 European regions from the European Social Survey (ESS) confirms the predictions of the model.

Support for unconditional basic income in Spain: A materialist or post‐materialist issue?

AbstractUnconditional basic income (UBI) is a redistributive policy proposal that is receiving increasing attention in the Spanish political sphere. Welfare attitudes literature has shown that support for UBI is higher among left‐wing citizens and those of lower socioeconomic status. However, previous studies have not addressed the mediating role of ideological values such as egalitarianism or meritocratism in supporting UBI. Furthermore, studies have not considered the interactive relationship between ideological and self‐interest motives when studying attitudes toward UBI. Drawing on modernization theory, we propose that individuals' socioeconomic status conditions the role of ideological motivations in shaping support for UBI. To test this hypothesis, we study data from two different surveys conducted in Spain in 2017 (N = 1958) and 2021 (N = 2004). Our findings suggest that ideology is a less relevant motivation for supporting UBI among the Spanish citizens of lower socioeconomic status, but it becomes increasingly salient among higher‐status citizens. Among the latter, egalitarian values lead leftists to support UBI, whereas anti‐egalitarian and meritocratic values lead rightists to anti‐UBI positions. We discuss these findings within the framework of modernization theory, addressing support for UBI by different social groups and the ability of this policy proposal to elicit broad‐based support.

Come together? The unusual combination of precariat materialist and educated post-materialist support for an Australian Universal Basic Income

International studies using the European Social Survey (ESS) reveal higher support for Universal Basic Income (UBI) in poorer countries with less generous welfare systems, and among individuals with lower income and education, and leftist political leanings. We present data from the 2019−20 Australian Survey of Social Attitudes mirroring the ESS question. Australia falls in the middle of European opinion, with 51% supporting a UBI, increasing slightly during the onset of Covid-19. We also find higher support among two different groups: (1) those facing greater ‘material’ precarity, including younger, low-income, unemployed, suburban renters, and (2) those who have more post-materialist concerns, including Green-left voters and those favouring redistributive values. Unlike in other countries, higher education predicts more support, while homeownership predicts less. The article concludes with challenges to introducing UBI to Australia, including potentially contradictory strategies for different support bases (material vs post-material), ongoing commitments to means-testing, and negative framing in the media.

Dimensions of controversy: Investigating the structure of public support for universal basic income in the Netherlands

AbstractAs interest in universal basic income (UBI) policy has peaked in recent years, the study of public support for such a policy is rapidly developing. While recent studies recognise the multidimensionality of the UBI proposal, we still know little about to what extent support for UBI is unambiguously supported or rejected. We show that the public holds distinct but related opinions towards three dimensions of UBI: universalism, redistribution and unconditionality. The higher and lower educated are equally ambivalent towards the policy, suggesting a lack of political entrenchment towards UBI in Dutch society. Post hoc comparisons show that key demographics and constituencies support some dimensions while rejecting others, enabling both compromise and division on the issue. Despite these distinct controversies, however, the strong correlation between attitudinal dimensions suggests that survey experiments tend to overstate the degree of multidimensionality by ignoring the strong commonalities in support for policy aspects.

Increasing inequality and voting for basic income: Could gender inequality worsen?

This paper examines the link between political support for basic income funded by linear income taxation and income inequality by household and gender. We develop a model with an increasingly right-skewed distribution of skill across households and a gender wage gap within households. Household preference for basic income decreases as skill level increases and female labour supply decreases with time spent rearing children. Majority voting supports the basic income scheme as mean relative to median household skill increases. Household fertility and skill level are inversely related under the scheme. An increase in the marginal tax rate to fund required government revenue could exacerbate gender inequality by reducing female labour supply. Quantitative illustrations suggest that the recent peak in the mean to median wage gap would provide voting support for basic income from the majority of households in the United States. Basic income of $12,000 conditional on below-median wages would increase government spending by 10.8% which, if funded by progressive income taxation, could reduce the adverse effects on gender inequality.

The multidimensionality of public support for basic income: a vignette experiment in Belgium

ABSTRACT Despite the much-increased political salience of basic income in recent years, we still know relatively little about its public support. The current article contributes to existing knowledge by studying public support for basic income from a multidimensional perspective, using a vignette experiment that charts popular support for a broad range of differently designed types of basic income. The results demonstrate that support for basic income is indeed inherently multidimensional, for three main reasons. First, some types of basic income are more popular than others, especially those that are conditional and equity-based. Second, people make significant trade-offs between various policy design dimensions and the deservingness criteria associated with them. Third, there are important differences in the types of basic income preferred by specific ideological groups: while left-wing people differentiate little between various proposals, their right-wing counterparts clearly prefer more-restrictive proposals. By situating these findings in a comparative perspective, the article proposes a novel conceptual framework, which postulates that the multidimensionality of support for basic income is context dependent. From a policy point-of-view, this is relevant in light of the crucial role played by public opinion in determining the political feasibility of implementing some form of basic income in a real-world setting.

What’s not to like? Benefit design, funding structure and support for universal basic income

After decades of debates on the economic and philosophical merits and shortcomings of a universal basic income (UBI), more recent literature has started to investigate the politics of a UBI. While several studies shed new light on the individual characteristics associated with higher or lower support for a UBI, we still do not know what features of a UBI itself are attractive or not to people, nor whether other slightly different policy alternatives like means-tested and minimum incomes would be more popular. This article addresses this gap by employing a conjoint experiment fielded in Finland, where a UBI has received significant media and political attention. Our findings show that the most contentious dimension of a UBI is – surprisingly – not its universality, but instead its unconditional nature. Individuals are more likely to support policies that condition receipts upon searching for employment or being genuinely unable to work, and less likely to support policies that are fully unconditional. On the funding side, support tends to be lower for a UBI that is linked to reducing existing benefits, but higher if the UBI is to be funded by increasing taxes, especially on the rich. These findings contribute to a wider literature on the politics of UBI and to our understanding of the potential popularity of competing policy reform alternatives.

A Robin Hood for all: a conjoint experiment on support for basic income

ABSTRACT Support for universal basic income is one of the key conundrums of the politics of welfare reform. Research shows that the predictors of UBI favourability also explain support for other policy alternatives, which differ substantially from a UBI, like targeted or conditional cash transfers. What is attractive or objectionable about a UBI to individuals, and which policy alternatives does public opinion actually prefer? In this paper, I tackle these questions with a conjoint experiment conducted in Spain. The results show that the universality of UBI, i.e., the fact that it is given to everyone, is what generates opposition. On the other hand, its unconditionality or the idea that it does not attach any conditions to recipients, is not particularly unpopular. However, the results also reveal that progressive funding mechanisms and restricting eligibility criteria to citizens only, can boost approval for this policy. These results have far-reaching implications for the study of welfare preferences, UBI support and theories on deservingness.

Measuring and framing support for universal basic income

AbstractWe execute an original survey experiment to examine the extent and determinants of support for a nascent policy issue, universal basic income (UBI), in the American public. We explore the effects of how UBI is framed (either in the context of values or the context of policy), finding three key results. First, UBI is primarily a Democratic and liberal policy. Second, negative arguments against UBI move support for UBI more than positive arguments. Third, and surprisingly, respondents are equally affected by both policy‐driven and value‐driven arguments about UBI. In conclusion, an increase in messaging about UBI is likely to widen existing partisan differences in UBI support. These differences are unlikely to be won over by policy or values arguments.

Social Investment, Redistribution or Basic Income? Exploring the Association Between Automation Risk and Welfare State Attitudes in Europe

AbstractRapid technological change – the digitalization and automation of work – is challenging contemporary welfare states. Most of the existing research, however, focuses on its effect on labor market outcomes, such as employment or wage levels. In contrast, this paper studies the implications of technological change for welfare state attitudes and preferences. Compared to previous work on this topic, this paper adopts a much broader perspective regarding different kinds of social policy. Using data from the European Social Survey, we find that individual automation risk is positively associated with support for redistribution, but negatively with support for social investment policies (partly depending on the specific measure of automation risk that is used), while there is no statistically significant association with support for basic income. We also find a moderating effect of the overall size of the welfare state on the micro-level association between risk and preferences.

The social legitimacy of basic income: a multidimensional and cross-national perspective. An introduction to the special issue

AbstractIn this special issue, authors present and discuss the findings of a series of recent national and EU cross-national empirical studies on public support for basic income. As such, the special issue offers new and innovative insights on such support and its individual and contextual drivers. The articles employ heterogeneous data and methods and therefore, as a whole, navigate the multi-dimensional nature of (opinions on) basic income. Three of the contributions use unique survey data to study the levels of support for basic income among various European populations and the complex ideological and social divides that explain such support. The other two contributions use qualitative data, from democratic fora, focus groups and in-depth interviews, to explore how citizens interpret basic income and what types of arguments they use in favour or against the implementation of the policy.

Snowballing or wilting? What affects public support for varying models of basic income?

AbstractRecently, the idea of a universal basic income has received unprecedented attention from policymakers, the media and the wider public. This has inspired a plethora of surveys that seek to measure the extent of public support for the policy, many of which suggest basic income is surprisingly popular. However, in a review of past surveys, with a focus on the UK and Finland, we find that overall levels of support for basic income can vary considerably. We highlight the importance of survey design and, by employing new survey data in each country, compare the levels and determinants of support for varied models of basic income. Our results point to the importance of the multi-dimensionality of basic income and the fragility of public support for the idea. The findings suggest that the ability of political actors to mobilise the public in favour of basic income will eventually depend on the precise model they wish to implement.

The Left and universal basic income: the role of ideology in individual support

AbstractFew studies to date have analysed individual support for universal basic income (UBI). This article theorizes and explores empirically the relationship between different strands of left ideology and support for UBI across European countries. We delineate three types of concerns about capitalism: “Labourist Left” worry aboutexploitation; “Libertarian Left” aboutrepressionand “Social Investment Left” aboutinefficiencies. Contrary to expectations we derive from political theory and welfare state literature, our results based on data from the European Social Survey suggest that having high concerns about exploitation is positively correlated with support for UBI, whereas repression concerns are negatively correlated with support. In line with our hypothesis about social investment ideology, left-leaning individuals with efficiency concerns are more likely to support UBI. Our findings call for more detailed surveys as well as further research on the different ideologies within the Left and how these relate to variation in support for UBI, which crucially shapes the potential political coalition behind the introduction of UBI.

Introduction: Basic Income in European Welfare States: Opportunities and Constraints

In the space of a mere five years, basic income has become something of a global policy phenomenon. The proposal to grant all permanent residents of a political territory a regular cash transfer on an individual basis, without means-test or work requirement (Van Parijs and Vanderborght, 2017) is actively discussed at the highest levels of policy-making across the world, including by international institutions such as OECD, IMF or the World Bank. At the same time, several country surveys indicate the basic income idea is gaining considerable traction amongst the general public, with support for basic income in the latest wave of the European Social Survey (ESS) averaging slightly above 50 per cent (Lee, 2018). This suggests basic income has now firmly moved away from a mere ‘philosophical pipe dream’ to being considered as a serious alternative to conditional income assistance (Van Parijs, 2013; Haagh, 2017).

Basic Income in the UK: Assessing Prospects for Reform in an Age of Austerity

Of all the European welfare states, the UK most clearly represents the liberal regime type – notwithstanding a shift towards ‘social investment’ under New Labour – as defined by its residual, targeted benefit structure and increasingly punitive activation regime. The idiosyncratic institutional characteristics of the UK welfare state give rise to challenges and opportunities with respect to prospects for the introduction of (some form of) basic income. Despite a large and growing population of ‘disaffected’ precarious and low-paid workers and widespread dissatisfaction with the increasingly punitive sanctions regime, significant barriers to the emergence of a sufficiently large and coherent constituency of support for basic income remain. Thus, while institutional inertia and political considerations may preclude anything more than marginal changes to the existing system, a number of policy options falling short of a ‘full’ basic income – but retaining some of its core features – appear relatively feasible.