Participation Income and the Provision of Socially Valuable Activities

Abstract

In this article, I argue that a participatory income (PI)—the proposal originally presented by Anthony Atkinson in 1996—can potentially perform better than an unconditional basic income (UBI) in terms of addressing unmet social needs. I explain why we should expect that unmet social needs can be better alleviated by the recipients of a PI rather than by the voluntary actions of UBI recipients. In particular, the argument presented here seeks to develop a particularly forgotten point in the PI debate—namely, the importance of using income transfer programmes as a policy tool to motivate people to engage in socially valuable activities.

Basic Income in Ireland: The Development of Two Pilots

“…This idea of a participation income has not been progressed or adopted by the Irish Government. It has been argued that a participation income can address unmet social needs, and that an income transfer programme such as participation income can be a policy tool to motivate people to engage in socially valuable activities (Pérez-Muňoz, 2018). However, one of the main criticisms of a participation income is its administrative complexity.…”

“…Further work by Social Justice Ireland (Healy et al, 2012; Murphy, 2018, 2019; Murphy and Ward, 2016; Ward, 2018) spelled out developments on basic income in Ireland, including further costings and the potential effects of basic income on poverty. Social Justice Ireland deemed that the affordability of a universal basic income depended on the parameters of the payment, such as the level of the payment, the benefits it replaces and which (if any) remain, and the eligibility conditions.…”

Income Support in an Eco-Social State: The Case for Participation Income

“…The case for a PI was first made by Atkinson (1996), who proposed that it was more politically palatable in the short-term but which could open the doorway to unconditional welfare as a stepping-stone to UBI. Recently, however, PI and related proposals such as an 'ecological transition income' have received renewed attention as reforms worthy of support in their own right from post-productivists who remain concerned that a UBI may foster consumerism and unsustainable consumption (Pérez-Muñoz, 2018;Swaton, 2018). We further develop this argument, building the normative case for PI, elaborating its contribution to an eco-social recalibration of welfare, and briefly addressing issues of administrative and political feasibility.…”