Why has the COVID-19 pandemic increased support for Universal Basic Income?

Nettle, Daniel; Johnson, Elliott; Johnson, Matthew; Saxe, Rebecca

doi:10.31234/osf.io/csr3u

Cited by 18 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Building on the literature postulating that people facing difficulties keep resources to themselves rather than sharing them with others (Hobfoll, 1989), we predicted and found that AFS was positively related to support Universal Basic Income (Nettle et al, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Anticipated Food Scarcity Scale (AFSS)

Folwarczny

Sigurðsson

et al. 2021

Appetite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mass media extensively inform societies about events threatening the global food supply (e.g., pandemics or Brexit). Consumers exposed to such communication may perceive food resources as becoming scarcer. In line with the evolutionary account, these perceptions can shift decision-making in domains such as food preferences or prosociality. However, the current literature has solely focused on actual and past food insecurity experiences threatening mostly low-income families, thus neglecting the future-oriented perceptions among the general population. This paper broadens the food insecurity research scope by developing a new construct-anticipated food scarcity (AFS)-which is defined as the perception that food resources are becoming less available (in the future). We have developed and psychometrically validated the 8-item Anticipated Food Scarcity Scale (AFSS) in eight studies (N = 1333). The 8-item AFSS is unidimensional and has good psychometric qualities. The scale is sensitive to food scarcity cues and, therefore, can be used in experimental research. Moreover, the scale's relatively narrow set of items makes it an exceptionally potent tool for use in online surveys, field settings, and lab studies. Taken together, the AFSS presents an alternative approach to food scarcity measurement in affluent societies and, consequently, can foster novel research on food waste, sustainability, prosocial behaviors, and other similar topic areas.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Participants read a definition of the Universal Basic Income and stated their support for this idea ("How bad or good an idea would it be to introduce a Universal Basic Income in your country?") on a sliding scale ranging from 0 = Bad idea to 100 = Good idea (Nettle et al, 2020).…”

Section: Short Form Of the State-trait Anxiety Inventory (Stai)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Anticipated Food Scarcity Scale (AFSS)

Folwarczny

Sigurðsson

et al. 2021

Appetite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are three crucial reasons for rejecting Martinelli’s conclusions. First, perceptions of public spending have been transformed by the pandemic (Nettle, Johnson, Johnson & Saxe 2021 ), in which greatly enhanced public spending has become the norm. This extends even to governments, including in the UK, that have traditionally been committed to fiscal conservatism.…”

Section: Reassessing Martinellimentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling the size, cost and health impacts of universal basic income: What can be done in advance of a trial?

Johnson

Webber³

et al. 2021

Health Serv Outcomes Res Method

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Opposition to Universal Basic Income (UBI) is encapsulated by Martinelli’s claim that ‘an affordable basic income would be inadequate, and an adequate basic income would be unaffordable’. In this article, we present a model of health impact that transforms that assumption. We argue that UBI can affect higher level social determinants of health down to individual determinants of health and on to improvements in public health that lead to a number of economic returns on investment. Given that no trial has been designed and deployed with that impact in mind, we present a methodological framework for assessing prospective costs and returns on investment through modelling to make the case for that trial. We begin by outlining the pathways to health in our model of change in order to present criteria for establishing the size of transfer capable of promoting health. We then consider approaches to calculating cost in a UK context to estimate budgetary burdens that need to be met by the state. Next, we suggest means of modelling the prospective impact of UBI on health before asserting means of costing that impact, using a microsimulation approach. We then outline a set of fiscal options for funding any shortfall in returns. Finally, we suggest that fiscal strategy can be designed specifically with health impact in mind by modelling the impact of reform on health and feeding that data cyclically back into tax transfer module of the microsimulation.

show abstract

“…Indeed, we agree that people’s perception of the policy is influenced more clearly by evidence of impact 5 and by the salience of that impact to their circumstances. 78 Moreover, ethical concerns may seem moot. Given that UBI is intended to be ‘basic’ rather than comprehensive, it is unclear that it can promote any one particular ‘good’ life.…”

Section: Conclusion: the Practical Importance Of Understanding Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the ethical underpinnings of universal basic income as a public health policy: prophylaxis, social engineering and ‘good’ lives

Johnson

2021

J Med Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At a time of COVID-19 pandemic, universal basic income (UBI) has been presented as a potential public health ‘upstream intervention’. Research indicates a possible impact on health by reducing poverty, fostering health-promoting behaviour and ameliorating biopsychosocial pathways to health. This novel case for UBI as a public health measure is starting to receive attention from a range of political positions and organisations. However, discussion of the ethical underpinnings of UBI as a public health policy is sparse. This is depriving policymakers of clear perspectives about the reasons for, restrictions to and potential for the policy’s design and implementation. In this article, we note prospective pathways to impact on health in order to assess fit with Rawlsian, capabilities and perfectionist approaches to public health policy. We suggest that Raz’ pluralist perfectionist approach may fit most comfortably with the prospective pathways to impact, which has implications for allocation of resources.

show abstract

Why has the COVID-19 pandemic increased support for Universal Basic Income?

Cited by 18 publications

References 14 publications

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Anticipated Food Scarcity Scale (AFSS)

Development and psychometric evaluation of the Anticipated Food Scarcity Scale (AFSS)

Modelling the size, cost and health impacts of universal basic income: What can be done in advance of a trial?

Examining the ethical underpinnings of universal basic income as a public health policy: prophylaxis, social engineering and ‘good’ lives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About