Basic Income will be a major stream at the ESPAnet conference in Leuven, Belgium, 2-4 September 2020
“Basic income across Europe: Exploring variation in proposals, policy windows, and trajectories”
Stream convenors: Jurgen De Wispelaere, Tim Vlandas and Hanna Schwander
The basic income proposal has generated exponential policy (and public) interest in a short time span. In many countries a majority of the population expresses support for a basic income, several recent prominent experiments have been launched, and a basic income has been mentioned in several recent elections and was the subject of a referendum in Switzerland.
This stream has two objectives. First, to examine what might explain the current policy interest. In addition to better understanding how to interpret the current momentum — a genuine policy window or a passing fad? — we are seeking contributions that theorise and empirically explore this resurgence. We are especially interested in possible answers to the puzzle of why basic income features prominently in policy debates yet still appears to resists policy implementation. A second objective is to explore where to go next, both academically and politically for supporters of a basic income. What are the wider theoretical implications of this mixed and varying support for the politics and economics of social policy in advanced economies? What are the leading avenues to maintain policy interest in basic income? What are the main political and policy challenges to overcome? What are the most feasible pathways or trajectories to move towards some form of basic income? What pre-existing policies or institutions serve as stepping stones that might promote basic income policy implementation under current conditions?
Answers to these questions have to account for the specific political and policy context that is present in different European countries, which in part accounts for why basic income proposals and the ongoing debate shows considerable cross-country variation, often at odds with prominent political economy typologies. We are particularly interested in papers that advance the comparative understanding of basic income variation across Europe employing diverse theoretical frameworks and empirical methods.
To apply to participate, send an abstract to the organizers.
Deadline for abstract submission is 15 April 2020. More info at https://kuleuvencongres.be/espanet2020/home
A panel on Politics of Universal Basic Income is being summoned at the next 27th International Conference of Europeanists, which will be held in Reykjavik (Iceland), on the 22-24th of June 2020. For that purpose, a Call for Papers has been launched, and submissions are being accepted up until the 10th of October, according to these instructions.
In this panel, there is an interest in empirical studies that look at the social and political processes surrounding UBIs discussions, including pilot test and experiment designs and implementations, either at the local, national or supranational level, in Europe and elsewhere.
The specific panel is being orgazined by César Guzmán-Concha (Marie Skłodowska Curie Fellow, Université de Genève; Visiting Fellow, European University Institute)
The UBIEXP research group and the journal Ethics, Politics & Society (EPS), from the Centre for Ethics, Politics and Society, together with the Portuguese Basic Income association, invite submissions for a international essay prize competition on the following topic: “What (if Anything) Can Justify Basic Income Experiments?” Details can be found here. The prize is €1000, and the essay will be published in the EPS journal.
Also, the International Political Science Association (IPSA-AISP), organizing the 26th World Congress of Political Science in Lisbon (25 – 29th July 2020), Portugal, is accepting abstracts for The Epistemology and Political Philosophy of Basic Income Experiments panel, to be sent here, up until October 10th 2019.
Johanna Perkiö, Doctoral Candidate, University of Tampere
A recent article on the Finnish basic income experiment has demonstrated how ‘framing’ the benefits of basic income in specific ways can make it acceptable to a wide political spectrum.
University of Tampere researcher Johanna Perkio has recently published an article examining how basic income has been perceived in Finnish political circle since the 1980s. Analysing party programmes and election manifestos, parliamentary motions and debates, and questions to ministers, she concludes that its take up within the current neo-liberal climate has been facilitated by seeing basic income as a way of dealing with economic problems of work and incentivisation.
Earlier debates, in the 1980s, emphasised notions of equal rights and fairness in employment. As more monetarist economic views began to dominate political thinking, basic income started being seen in terms of how it might incentivise the unemployed to find work. This was particularly true within political parties who were hesitant about supporting basic income.
Perkio also notes that the preliminary results from the Finnish experiment – which indicated that basic income led to increased well being amongst the recipients but did not necessarily help them find work – may mean that supporters of basic income need another frame to justify their support.
A blog post summarising the article is available online. The article itself is published by the Journal of Social Policy.
Economists Ori Katz (picture: on the left) and Michael Sarel (picture: on the right) believe the implementation of basic income is a task both necessary and desirable in the near future, within the Israeli social reality. So, as researchers, they conducted a thorough study on basic income applied to the economic reality of Israel (used figures from the year 2016). In that study, they considered the elimination of existing (conditional) benefits, abolishing tax exemptions and raising income tax as the financing mechanisms for sustaining an unconditional basic income for all the population.
If adopted in Israel basic income would, according to Katz and Sarel, induce significant bureaucratic savings, encourage employment, eliminate the poverty trap, reduce friction between citizens and the authorities, increase individual freedom of choice, (slightly) reduce inequality and reduce incentives to work in the black market.
In the conclusions it can be read:
Basic income is not a panacea to all the ills of the Israeli economy, and it is unable to create money “out of thin air.” However, it is a more effective way of providing a safety net for the entire population than the current welfare system, and it eliminates the perverse incentives this system creates. As a result of the transition to basic income, Israelis will be able to work, study and manage family life and relationships of their own accord, without fear that their income will be affected due to their choices and without having to justify the way of life they chose. Overall, we believe that this is a saner way of subsisting as a human society.
More information at:
Ori Katz, “Basic income in Israel”, KPF, Kislev 5779 Policy Paper nº42, December 2018
