The State of the UBI Debate: Mapping the Arguments for and against UBI

Abstract

This article provides a map of the UBI debate, structured into the main themes that guide and group the arguments on both sides. It finds that UBI’s supporters and opponents both draw on core principles of justice and freedom, focusing on need and poverty, discrimination and inequality, growth, social opportunity, individuality, and self-development. From an economic perspective, they both appeal to business concerns about efficiency, risk, flexibility, and consumption, as well as labour interests on work fulfilment, working conditions, remuneration, and bargaining. Likewise, they focus on political questions around welfare state reforms, redistribution, taxation and funding sources, democratic citizenship, and the prospects for cross-party policy coalitions. By providing an overview of the thematic pillars of the UBI debate, this article helps researchers and activists locate and orient themselves within the wider spectrum of opinion on UBI.

Needs for Security and Certainty Relate Differently to Support for Universal Basic Income Versus Other Social Safety Net Programs Across European Nations

“…Universal basic income has received increased attention from policy scholars and political commentators as a potential strategy for ameliorating novel sources of insecurity and uncertainty in job markets, ranging from increased automation to pandemics (Afscharian et al 2022). By detaching subsistence from employment in ways not foreseen even by traditional welfare-state measures (Vlandas 2019), UBI proposals seek to protect individuals from uncontrollable developments that threaten access to stable work.…”

“…Job losses associated with technological changes, such as those related to automation and those threatened by the rise of artificial intelligence, have raised questions about long-term threats to the livelihood of many. In the short term, the COVID-19 pandemic left many temporarily without work and income, drawing the public's attention to the importance of income guarantees for those deprived of work through uncontrollable events (Afscharian et al 2022;Bruun and Duka 2018). In response to concerns about threats to mass employment and their potential consequences for income security, one policy idea that has received increased attention from public officials, scholars, and commentators is universal basic income (UBI), which would provide a minimum benefit to all regardless of work status or other sources of income and potentially replace traditional welfare-state measures (Vlandas 2019).…”

“…Although the details of these policies vary significantly by country, most proposals feature these same core elements. UBI, if implemented, would be highly novel: it is relatively unfamiliar to policymakers and citizens, as it has not been established in any major country (Afscharian et al 2022). Supporters argue that UBI may have many benefits, such as limiting instances of extreme income inequality, providing fair economic growth, and guaranteeing financial stability for low-income households (Afscharian et al 2021).…”

Into the unknown: Empirical UBI trials as social Europe’s risk insurance

“…Researchers have conducted various UBI trials in regions like the US (Jones and Marinescu, 2018), Canada (Hamilton and Mulvave, 2019), Uganda (Blattman, Fiala, and Martinez, 2014), Namibia (Haarmann, et al, 2019), India (Standing, 2013), Finland (Kangas et al, 2021), and Spain (Laín, 2019). While they provide information about the empirical validity of many of the arguments that dominate UBI debates (Afscharian et al, 2021), the explanatory capacity of trials also has severe limitations, and the potential consequences of implementing a UBI beyond direct policy impacts are often overlooked.…”

“…This potential becomes even clearer regarding EU social policy issues. So far, EU-focused contributions on UBI have largely revolved around developing the general policy idea of an EU-level UBI (Van Parijs and Vanderborght, 2001, 2017; Schmitter and Bauer, 2001; Bauer and Schmitter, 2001; Denuit, 2019; Afscharian et al, 2021), as well as critically engaging with it (Matsaganis, 2001; Van Parijs, 2018). While such work is firmly rooted in the large body of literature on UBI in general (e.g.…”