Introduction to the journey of the Finnish basic income experiment

Kangas, Olli; Jauhiainen, Signe; Simanainen, Miska; Ylikännö, Minna

doi:10.4337/9781839104855.00009

Cited by 30 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…When the long-awaited results from the two-year Finnish BI experiment were finally released in May 2019, almost 1.5 years after the experiment was concluded, they cast serious doubt on popular beliefs on BI and employment. The verdict was that there was very little difference in employment or earned income between the experiment and control groups (Kangas et al 2020). Average number of days of employment between November 2017 and October 2018 was 78 for the BI group, while the corresponding figure for the control group was 73.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Participation Income

Hiilamo¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Participation Income

Hiilamo¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In that project, however, evaluation is primarily focused on individual young participants. A cash transfer trial may look at impacts on one individual in a household alone (as in [ 56 ], 52), but, as we have argued [ 46 , 54 ], it is important to consider the effect of such interventions on households, communities and society as a whole. Measurement on the basis of heads of household alone is likely to replicate issues identified in several previous interventions.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Where transfers reduced poverty, research found increased birth weight [ 9 ], illness and injury reduction [ 4 ], and decreased hospital admissions [ 23 ]. Where schemes reduced conditionality, qualitative studies found improved adult mental health ([ 34 , 55 ], 24), fibromyalgia and coeliac disease [ 33 ]. Where schemes increased predictability of income, studies showed reduced substance misuse [ 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing a generic, adaptive protocol resource for the measurement of health impact in cash transfer pilot and feasibility studies and trials in high-income countries

Johnson

Kypridemos

et al. 2023

Pilot Feasibility Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, upstream interventions that tackle social determinants of health inequalities have never been more important. Evaluations of upstream cash transfer trials have failed to capture comprehensively the impacts that such systems might have on population health through inadequate design of the interventions themselves and failure to implement consistent, thorough research measures that can be used in microsimulations to model long-term impact. In this article, we describe the process of developing a generic, adaptive protocol resource to address this issue and the challenges involved in that process. The resource is designed for use in high-income countries (HIC) but draws on examples from a UK context to illustrate means of development and deployment. The resource is capable of further adaptation for use in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). It has particular application for trials of Universal Basic Income but can be adapted to those covering other kinds of cash transfer and welfare system changes. Methods We outline two types of prospective intervention based on pilots and trials currently under discussion. In developing the remainder of the resource, we establish six key principles, implement a modular approach based on types of measure and their prospective resource intensity, and source (validated where possible) measures and baseline data primarily from routine collection and large, longitudinal cohort studies. Through these measures, we seek to cover all areas of health impact identified in our theoretical model for use in pilot and feasibility studies. Results We find that, in general, self-reported measures alongside routinely collected linked respondent data may provide a feasible means of producing data capable of demonstrating comprehensive health impact. However, we also suggest that, where possible, physiological measures should be included to elucidate underlying biological effects that may not be accurately captured through self-reporting alone and can enable modelling of long-term health outcomes. In addition, accurate self-reported objective income data remains a challenge and requires further development and testing. A process of development and implementation of the resource in pilot and feasibility studies will support assessment of whether or not our proposed health outcome measures are acceptable, feasible and can be used with validity and reliability in the target population. Discussion We suggest that while Open Access evaluation instruments are available and usable to measure most constructs of interest, there remain some areas for which further development is necessary. This includes self-reported wellbeing measures that require paid licences but are used in a range of nationally important longitudinal studies instead of Open Access alternatives.

show abstract

“…The results also called into question punitive workfare policies based on the deterrent effect of unemployment services. During the first phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, activity requirements for unemployed persons were abandoned (Mäntyneva et al, 2021). When the pandemic situation temporarily improved, the requirements were reinstituted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Truly Missed Opportunity: The Political Context and Impact of the Basic Income Experiment in Finland

Hiilamo

2022

European Journal of Social Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Finland conducted the first nationwide field experiment with partial basic income between 2017 and 2018. The experiment and its results were widely reported in international media and featured in political debates across the globe. Domestically, the experiment had an impact on social policy debates but no impact on social policy. For example, it did not feature in the Social Security 2030 project or in the work of the Social Security Reform Committee (2020–2027). The research setting for the experiment was compromised from the beginning due to political reasons; but the scientific power was further undermined by a new sanctioning model, which was implemented in 2018 at the beginning of the second year of the basic income experiment. The new Government taking office in 2019 promised to continue with a negative income tax experiment; however, no such experiment was conducted. The article will unpack these developments in Finland and discuss possible explanations for denouncing basic income as a policy idea.

show abstract

Introduction to the journey of the Finnish basic income experiment

Cited by 30 publications

References 0 publications

Participation Income

Participation Income

Designing a generic, adaptive protocol resource for the measurement of health impact in cash transfer pilot and feasibility studies and trials in high-income countries

A Truly Missed Opportunity: The Political Context and Impact of the Basic Income Experiment in Finland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About