The Political Theory of Universal Basic Income

Bidadanure, Juliana

doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-050317-070954

Cited by 106 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In strongly capitalist societies, such as the United States, UBI is often been viewed negatively as a radical social experiment or even referred to as a “utopian” proposal (Van Parijs, 2013). Yet changing perceptions and political debate in several nations are bringing UBI closer to the mainstream (Bidadanure, 2019). For instance, Andrew Yang, a contender for the 2020 Democratic nomination for United States president, advocated for a UBI to address wealth inequities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The COVID‐19 pandemic: Time for a universal basic income?

Johnson

Roberto

2020

Public Admin & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The COVID‐19 pandemic: Time for a universal basic income?

Johnson

Roberto

2020

Public Admin & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Against such contemporary conditions, in which money is indispensable for living and its sources are artificially created through public policies that are less and less efficient and environmentally destructive, universal basic income schemes are groundbreaking. Juliana Uhuru Bidadanure defines universal basic income "as a radical policy proposal of a monthly cash grant given to all members of a community without means test, regardless of personal desert, with no strings attached and, under most proposals, at a sufficiently high level to enable a life free from economic insecurity" [28] (p. 482).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fourth, we delineate some aspects of late modernity as a historical development as a part of which contemporary consciousness and relevances in terms of the environment-or indeed a lack of such relevances-are being constituted in the context of contemporary life-worlds. Finally, we conclude by discussing some implications of our argument on universal basic income schemes [28] and money.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Incomegetting and Environmental Degradation

Ollinaho

Arponen

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on Alfred Schütz’s thought, as well as on a number of modern pragmatists and practice theorists, we theorize incomegetting—referring to practices of getting income, typically salaried work—as the paramount structurer of everyday life and, therefore, also the chief mediator of the human–nature metabolism. Even though the pragmatics of everyday life as an aggregate underlie the bulk of environmental impacts, these insidious impacts impose little immediate influence on everyday life, in particular in the urban Global North. In other words, the pragmatic dimension of everyday activities—principally, work—that takes place within a vastly complex and globally interlinked productive world system, has most often no immediate connection to the “natural” environment. While parts of the populations are directly dependent in terms of livelihoods on the “natural” environment, these populations are typically pushed to the margins of the global productive system. The understanding formulated in this essay suggests that in environmental social sciences there is a reason to shift the epicenter of the analysis from consumption to everyday life, to the varied practices of incomegetting. Against the backdrop of this paper, universal basic income schemes ought to have radical impacts on the way we relate also to the “natural” environment and such schemes necessitate understanding the essence of money in our contemporary realities.

show abstract

“…Therefore, digitization processes may hit knowledge-based business models and cognitive workers as hard as-or even faster-than non-knowledge business models and manual workers. New work opportunities, whether employment or freelance, will undoubtedly emerge, and even if digitization results in a net loss of jobs, welfare will not necessarily be negatively affected by the change as it may be linked to the old [30]-and new-discussion of unconditional basic income [31].…”

Section: Impacts Of Digital Transformation and Innovations In Economymentioning

confidence: 99%

South American Expert Roundtable: Increasing Adaptive Governance Capacity for Coping with Unintended Side Effects of Digital Transformation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the main messages of a South American expert roundtable (ERT) on the unintended side effects (unseens) of digital transformation. The input of the ERT comprised 39 propositions from 20 experts representing 11 different perspectives. The two-day ERT discussed the main drivers and challenges as well as vulnerabilities or unseens and provided suggestions for: (i) the mechanisms underlying major unseens; (ii) understanding possible ways in which rebound effects of digital transformation may become the subject of overarching research in three main categories of impact: development factors, society, and individuals; and (iii) a set of potential action domains for transdisciplinary follow-up processes, including a case study in Brazil. A content analysis of the propositions and related mechanisms provided insights in the genesis of unseens by identifying 15 interrelated causal mechanisms related to critical issues/concerns. Additionally, a cluster analysis (CLA) was applied to structure the challenges and critical developments in South America. The discussion elaborated the genesis, dynamics, and impacts of (groups of) unseens such as the digital divide (that affects most countries that are not included in the development of digital business, management, production, etc. tools) or the challenge of restructuring small- and medium-sized enterprises (whose service is digitally substituted by digital devices). We identify specific issues and effects (for most South American countries) such as lack of governmental structure, challenging geographical structures (e.g., inclusion in high-performance transmission power), or the digital readiness of (wide parts) of society. One scientific contribution of the paper is related to the presented methodology that provides insights into the phenomena, the causal chains underlying “wanted/positive” and “unwanted/negative” effects, and the processes and mechanisms of societal changes caused by digitalization.

show abstract

The Political Theory of Universal Basic Income

Cited by 106 publications

References 48 publications

The COVID‐19 pandemic: Time for a universal basic income?

The COVID‐19 pandemic: Time for a universal basic income?

Incomegetting and Environmental Degradation

South American Expert Roundtable: Increasing Adaptive Governance Capacity for Coping with Unintended Side Effects of Digital Transformation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About