Legitimising a radical policy idea: framing basic income as a boost to labour market activity

Abstract

The idea of universal and unconditional basic income is gaining increasing traction worldwide. Yet the proposal of unconditional cash seems to run counter to some key normative assumptions in society. This article contributes to an understanding of the political feasibility of basic income from the perspective of framing strategies to legitimise the policy. It examines a framing commonly used by Finnish parties and politicians advocating basic income, that emphasised basic income’s capacity to boost activity and labour market participation. The article finds that basic income was often defended with framing that appealed to activity as a value, and that this framing was most actively pushed by the Greens, and adopted by other parties during the upturns of the debate. The article provides an insight into a strategy of legitimising a politically controversial idea by framing it in a normatively and ideologically resonant way.

A Critical Analysis of the European Reference Framework of Key Competences for Lifelong Learning: The Limitations of the Human Capital Theory

“…The lack of sufficient empirical data proving the feasibility of a universal basic income, as well as the existing concerns related to its financial unsuitability and potential negative effect on work motivation do not allow for undisputable and definite policy solutions (Delsen, 2019;Perkiö, 2020). However, the challenges brought by the global knowledge economy call for more progressive policy reforms than the ones currently offered by the EU, which are characterised by a cost-cutting orientation and a less developed social net (Shanahan et al 2019).…”

Life on basic income - Interview accounts by basic income experiment participants on the effects of the experiment

“…As pointed out elsewhere in this book, the concept of basic income has been discussed from a variety of theoretical and practical vantage points. For example, in Finland, basic income has been given multiple conflicting definitions, because it has been posited as a response to various issues, such as problems of welfare bureaucracy, fulfilment of social rights, incentives for paid work, and insecurity of 'precarious' employment (Perkiö, 2020a(Perkiö, , 2020b. Thus, although basic income has often been presented as a simple and unified idea, concrete policy proposals have included varying goals and interpretations of it (De Wispelaere and Stirton, 2004).…”

More than a Free Lunch: A Content Analysis of the Controversies Surrounding Universal Basic Income on Dutch Twitter

“…Schwander and Vlandas (2020) find that leftist support for UBI is grounded primarily in a 'laborist' ideology, suggesting that concerns over-exploitation of the working classes is an important driver of UBI support. This is contrasted with UBI support amongst politicians, where especially the green parties and activist movements endorse UBI (Liu, 2020;Perkiö, 2020). Other studies focus on anti-immigrant sentiments as the main obstacle to UBI support (Bay & Pedersen, 2006;Stadelmann-Steffen & Dermont, 2020).…”

“…These concerns are especially relevant in the case of UBI because the proposal is flexibly defined (Chrisp & Martinelli, 2019), and arguments used to justify its implementation evolve (e.g. Perkiö, 2020). Moreover, particularly in the case of UBI, the general public is often underinformed, further fuelling fears of unreliable support measures (Rossetti et al, 2020, see also Roosma & Van Oorschot, 2020;Dermont & Weisstanner, 2020).…”

“…These studies generally indicate a much broader discussion in politics and media than suggested by survey research. For example, Perkiö (2020) shows that Finnish politics is most concerned with the activating potential of UBI, while newspapers across various countries predominantly frame UBI in the context of automated labour and reducing the need for full-time employment (Perkiö, Rincon & Van Draanen, 2019). However insightful, these studies do not cover the public response to UBI policy.…”