The Many Faces of Universal Basic Income

Wispelaere, Jürgen De; Stirton, Lindsay

doi:10.1111/j.1467-923x.2004.00611.x

Cited by 121 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Universality usually refers to the scope of a given policy, that is, to the “extent of the population that is covered by a particular policy” (De Wispelaere and Stirton , 267). Universal policies “are open to all.” Conversely, selective measures only treat a subset of the population as beneficiaries (De Wispelaere and Stirton , 267). For instance, in many countries, education and health services are commonly provided in a comprehensive way.…”

Section: Policy Goals and Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To put it simply, conditionality refers to the existence of conditions that may restrict individuals' eligibility for a policy or service. Welfare policies usually come with different conditions attached that need to be satisfied before a recipient can gain or maintain eligibility (De Wispelaere and Stirton , 268). While it is possible to have a targeted policy without imposing any kind of conditions, redistributive policies appeal most of the time to different sorts of conditions.…”

Section: Policy Goals and Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Is Wrong with Conditional Cash Transfer Programs?

Pérez-Muñoz¹

2017

Journal of Social Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Policy Goals and Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Policy Goals and Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Is Wrong with Conditional Cash Transfer Programs?

Pérez-Muñoz¹

2017

Journal of Social Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This point, while not entirely without force, should not be overstated: even in its most inclusive formulation such a grant must restrict entitlement to some subset of the inhabitants of one country, or perhaps of some supra-national region such as the EU (Van Parijs 1995;Vanderborght and Van Parijs 2001;also Howard 2006). In addition there will be rule specifications pertaining to the level of the grant, its uniformity, the time scale at which it operates and so on, all of which involve considerably more regulation than is appreciated by many UBI supporters (De Wispelaere and Stirton 2004a). Nevertheless, reducing a proposal for a radical UBI scheme into a set of transparent, accessible and congruent rules is likely to be a relatively straightforward matter, based on comparably well-defined criteria compared with other forms of welfare grants, including PI.…”

Section: A Standards Conferring Entitlementmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Public Administration Case against Participation Income

Wispelaere

Stirton

2007

Social Service Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Anthony Atkinson's proposal for a participation income (PI) has been acclaimed by social philosophers and policy experts as a workable compromise given the problems besetting an unconditional basic income (UBI). While some see PI as the first step towards a fully unconditional scheme, others regard PI as superior to UBI on ethical grounds as well as in terms of political feasibility. Both of these views disregard the administrative complications associated with introducing a broad participation requirement into welfare entitlements. In this paper we identify three essential administrative tasks that any welfare scheme must perform -establishing criteria of entitlement, determining compliance with those criteria, and allocating benefits to qualified beneficiaries -and show that PI performs poorly in terms of all three tasks. This suggests what we call the trilemma of participation income: only at significant costs to administrators and welfare clients does the scheme retain its apparent ability to satisfy the requirements of both activation and universal approaches to welfare. Consequently, the main apparent strength of PI -its capacity to unite different factions within the basic income debate -is shown to be illusory precisely because competing factions strongly prefer different resolutions of the trilemma. This, we argue, has far-reaching implications for the political strategy of basic income advocates as well as the wider debate on universal welfare reform.

show abstract

“…1 1 The bottlenecks we examine below are concerns that arise particularly for the most radical form of a basic income as advocated by Philippe Van Parijs (1992, 1995, 1996, 2004). Elsewhere, we argue that the basic income ideal constitutes a family of cognate proposals (De Wispelaere and Stirton, 2004), and that less radical cognates face their own set of problems (De Wispelaere and Stirton, 2007, 2011a). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A disarmingly simple idea? Practical bottlenecks in the implementation of a universal basic income

Wispelaere

Stirton

2012

Int Social Security Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article considers the implementation of a universal basic income, a neglected area in basic income research. We identify and examine three important practical bottlenecks that may prevent a basic income scheme from attaining the universal reach desired and proclaimed by its advocates: i) maintaining a population‐wide cadaster of eligible claimants ensuring full takeup; ii) instituting robust modalities of payment that reach all intended beneficiaries; and iii) designing an effective oversight mechanism in a policy context that actively opposes client monitoring. We argue that the implementation of universal basic income faces unique challenges that its proponents must consider carefully.

show abstract

The Many Faces of Universal Basic Income

Cited by 121 publications

References 9 publications

What Is Wrong with Conditional Cash Transfer Programs?

What Is Wrong with Conditional Cash Transfer Programs?

The Public Administration Case against Participation Income

A disarmingly simple idea? Practical bottlenecks in the implementation of a universal basic income

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About