This program provides young scholars with an opportunity to research Universal Basic Income (UBI). Through workshops and projects, the UBI Youth Scholars program offers a comprehensive understanding of basic income. Students will grasp the implications of basic income for their country and beyond. With an array of learning methods – lectures, readings, case studies, and project-based experiences – students will explore UBI’s history, principles, and real-world applications. After the workshops, the program will organize meetings with the group to develop their projects and update their progress with their mentors and the entire group.
Program Highlights
Lecture series: Gain deep insights from experts as they guide you through the principles of Universal Basic Income, its economic foundations, socio-political implications, and the real-world challenges of implementation.
Hands-on workshops: Build essential academic and professional skills through hands-on workshops in research methodology, data analysis, public speaking, and academic writing — empowering you to succeed in any research or policy environment.
Projects: Work side by side with brilliant peers and renowned professors on cutting-edge projects. Analyze real-world UBI data, assess its economic and social impact, and develop creative, evidence-based solutions to today’s policy challenges.
Final Presentation: Showcase your hard work at the internationally recognized BIEN Congress, presenting your findings to an audience of top researchers, policymakers, and thought leaders from around the globe.
What Participants Say
“Working on the project proposals, especially the comparison between UBI and alternative welfare programs, sharpened my analytical skills and allowed me to contribute to meaningful discussions. The mentorship provided throughout the program by my supervisor Tyler was invaluable, guiding me through the complexities of policy analysis and project development.”
– UBI Youth Scholar, Spring 2025)
Program Details
Who can apply: High-achieving high school and undergraduate students worldwide
Language: English
Host: UBI Taiwan, Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN)
Location: International (Virtual & In-Person Components)
Fall 2025 Session
About Us
Youth Scholars Program The UBI Youth Scholars Program is a program designed to cultivate the next generation of UBI researchers and advocates. Through mentorship, research projects, and participation in international summits, the program provides students with an opportunity to critically explore UBI’s feasibility and implications. Scholars will engage in expert-led lectures, workshops, and project-based learning, allowing them to contribute original ideas to the global conversation on basic income. The program also fosters cross-cultural collaboration by connecting students from different countries, culminating in the annual Youth Summit alongside the BIEN Congress.
Our Mission Empower young scholars to critically examine and advance Universal Basic Income as a transformative approach to economic and social equity.
Our Vision Create a global network of young researchers and advocates who can thoughtfully address complex socioeconomic challenges through innovative policy solutions.
Who is it for? Ambitious high school students passionate about Undergraduate students interested in economics, policy, and social change Young leaders committed to understanding systemic approaches to economic justice
Program Benefits Mentorship: 。Direct guidance from UBI researchers and experts 。One-on-one mentorship to support your research and personal growth 。Access to a global network of UBI professionals and academics Leadership and research skill development: 。Develop critical thinking and research skills 。Enhance public speaking and presentation capabilities 。Build international collaboration and communication expertise 。Gain experience in professional research methodologies Publication opportunities 。Potential to co-author research papers with distinguished professors 。Platform to publish findings in academic journals and conferences 。Opportunity to contribute to the global UBI research landscape Scholarship opportunities 。Potential financial support for outstanding participants 。Travel grants for attending international conferences 。Academic credit and recommendation letters for future educational pursuits Global collaborative experience
Program Structure
Application & Competitive Selection
Orientation & Onboarding
Expert-led Lectures & Workshops
Collaborative projects
Mentorship and Guidance
International Presentation Opportunity
Collaboration Vision
We are building a dynamic, international network of educational institutions committed to exploring Universal Basic Income. Our partnerships aim to:
Create interdisciplinary research opportunities
Foster global understanding of economic policy
Provide students with real-world research experience
Develop innovative solutions to socioeconomic challenges
Interested high schools, universities, and professors can contact us to explore collaboration opportunities.
HOW TO APPLY
Application Details
Email: contact@ubitaiwan.org
。Write a motivation letter explaining your interest in UBI 。Complete online application form 。Participate in a short interview with program coordinators
Selection Criteria
Demonstrated interest in social sciences, economics, or policy research
Passion for understanding innovative social and economic solutions
Strong communication skills
Why Join the UBI Youth Scholars Program?
Be part of a cutting-edge global movement
Gain unique research and professional development experiences
Contribute to meaningful social and economic research
Build an impressive academic and professional portfolio
Connect with like-minded students from around the world
Leadership and Mentors
Tyler Prochazka
Tyler is a PhD candidate at National Chengchi University and the founder of UBI Taiwan. He established UBI Taiwan in 2016 when he began planning the first-ever Basic Income Asia Pacific conference at NCCU. Tyler was previously a research assistant for the U.S. State Department on global Artificial Intelligence trends. As a former national and state champion in debate, journalism, and public speaking himself, Tyler has coached high school and middle school national champions in policy debate and public forum debate.
In 2018, Tyler received his MA from NCCU in Asia Pacific Studies as part of the U.S. State Department Fulbright Scholarship. He received honors degrees in Economics, International Affairs, and Asian Religions and Cultures at Western Kentucky University, and a certificate in Chinese from the U.S. Department of Defense’s Chinese Flagship program.
Dr. Cheng Furui
Dr. Furui Cheng is an associate professor in the Department of Capital Finance at the School of Business, China University of Political Science and Law. She holds a Ph.D. in Management from Tsinghua University, as well as a Master’s degree in Management and a Bachelor’s degree in Economics from Harbin Institute of Technology. She was also a visiting scholar in the United States for one year, supported by the China Scholarship Council’s Young Backbone Teachers Program. From 2015 to 2017, she completed her postdoctoral research at the Institute of American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
Dr. Cheng’s academic focus includes social dividends and basic income policy, and she actively contributes to international discussions in this field. She has presented papers at several global conferences organized by the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN), including in Finland, Portugal, Taiwan, and South Korea. She serves as an English editor for BIEN and leads the China Social Dividend/Basic Income Research Network (bienchina.com). Dr. Cheng has also demonstrated a strong commitment to student mentorship, having guided students to win a national first prize in the 14th “Challenge Cup” National Undergraduate Academic and Technological Works Competition.
Dr. Sarath Davala
Sarath Davala is an Indian sociologist, and President of Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN). He is co-author of the book: Basic Income: A Transformative Policy for India and contributing author to the Earth4All deep-dive paper Unconditional cash transfers and the five turnarounds: beneficiaries’ perspectives. He was Research Director of the Madhya Pradesh Basic Income Pilot (2010-2014) and is currently co-director of WorkFREE, a Basic Income pilot with waste collectors in Hyderabad. He is the co-founder of India Network for Basic Income and Mission Possible 2030 – both working on promoting informed conversation about Basic Income.
As part of the UBI Youth Scholars Program, the Youth Leadership Council is a group of select high school students working on social impact projects in the spirit of basic income. The Youth Leadership Council was founded by Miria Chung and Evan Tseng in 2023 in coordination with UBI Taiwan.
Events
Charity UBI debate tournaments
Date: December 2024July 2025 | Location: Ascent Academy
In order to promote civic dialogue on the issue of basic income, we expect to organise a debate open to all Taiwanese university and high school students at the beginning of July, with the best teams receiving prizes and participating in the BIEN Congress International Summit in Brazil this August.
To encourage Taiwanese students to participate in this debate competition, we are offering a free pre-competition training workshop, which is expected to be held in June. The workshop will teach basic knowledge about debate structure, debate techniques, etc. to equip students with the ability to cope with the competition.
Fundraiser Concerts
UBI Taiwan continues to conduct experiments on basic income for single-parent families to understand the possibilities of basic income in Taiwan. We need donations from all walks of life to support this endeavour. We will be holding a fundraising concert in June, inviting performers to perform in any format.
A discussion on Universal Basic Income (UBI) highlighted the potential of such a system to address deep-seated societal challenges, from the value of unpaid work to the psychological barriers that hinder social progress. The debate gains relevance as it unfolds against a backdrop of a rapidly evolving economic landscape, where the very definitions of work, skill, and contribution are being reshaped.
One of the key arguments for UBI centered on its potential to finally compensate unpaid and voluntary work. As one speaker, emphasized, “I kind of care a lot about the voluntary works.” She argued that a basic income could empower more people, especially students, to engage in activities that “contribute to the social welfare,” regardless of immediate financial payoff.
However, the conversation also introduced the practical and psychological hurdles. Han also voiced a common fear regarding implementation, noting that any such program would have to guard against corruption. She imagined a scenario where “government officials… might cut down the UBI that was supposed to be for the farmers,” a concern that speaks to the need for robust, transparent systems.
Beyond logistical issues, a deeper challenge lies in what one speaker, UBI Taiwan’s Tim, called the “scarcity mindset.” He argued that the biggest obstacle is that people are “so used to work[ing] against somebody else’s benefits.” This “competitive mindset,” he explained, makes it difficult for many to embrace a non-competitive system like UBI.
This “zero-sum game” mentality was illustrated by another participant, Jie. He recalled his high school experience, where “many of my classmates might not be willing to share their textbooks or… solutions to a difficult question,” believing that hoarding knowledge was the only way to “perform better in the entrance examinations for college.”
Interestingly, this discussion is taking place at a time when educational philosophies are themselves evolving to counter this very mindset. There is a growing emphasis in modern education on cultivating skills like critical thinking, collaborative problem-solving, and persuasive communication. By teaching students how to analyze complex issues and engage in reasoned debate, the focus shifts from pure competition to collective elevation and shared understanding.
This educational trend toward fostering empowerment and critical thought could be a key factor in nurturing the societal shift required for concepts like UBI to be seriously considered. If the next generation is equipped with a more collaborative and less competitive worldview, the psychological barriers that currently seem so daunting may begin to recede.
Ultimately, the debate around UBI is not just about economics; it’s about the kind of society we want to build. The path forward may be found not in a single policy, but in the parallel evolution of our social systems and the mindsets of the people within them.
In a presentation for the Spring 2025 UBI Youth Scholars Program, BIEN Executive Council Chair Dr. Sarath Davala discussed the meaning of Universal Basic Income (UBI), emphasizing five core components that distinguish it from other social welfare programs. Davala stressed that while many programs are associated with UBI, they often do not meet the “standard definition” of what a true basic income entails.
“When I use the word basic income, these are the five elements, core components of a basic income,” Davala stated, outlining a framework that champions universality, cash payments, and individual empowerment.
The five pillars of what the speaker called a “pure basic income” are:
Universal: The payment is for everyone. “Every man, woman and child, every human being,” Davala clarified, adding that it should be for every “normal resident of a political territory,” not just citizens. This is in direct contrast to targeted programs that provide aid only to specific groups such as the poor or disabled.
Cash: The benefit must be in the form of “hard cash,” not vouchers, food stamps, or digital currency that can be restricted. Davala emphasized the importance of choice, asking, “If your dad gives you a credit card and says you can only buy notebooks, would you like to have that card?” The underlying principle is to give recipients the “freedom and choice” to use the money as they see fit.
Individual: The money is given to each individual, not the head of the household. He said this is a crucial element for empowerment, particularly for women. “If you give it to the head of the household who is usually a male, the spending will happen according to the wishes of the head of the household,” Davala explained. For children under 18, the payment is typically given to the mother.
Periodic: Payments should be made regularly, such as monthly or even weekly. “It should be every month, like the way you get a salary, like the way you get a scholarship, like the way you get a pension,” Davala said. This regular, predictable income is different from a one-time grant.
Unconditional: There should be “no conditions whatsoever.” This means no requirements to qualify for the payment, and no strings attached to how the money is spent.
During the presentation, one of the youth mentors Tim questioned the monthly frequency, suggesting that more frequent payments could be possible. Davala agreed, stating, “Absolutely. I mean there’s no objection to that at all. It can be weekly.”
The proposed “ideal basic income” represents a significant shift in thinking about social safety nets, placing trust and freedom directly in the hands of individuals. This is “truly, truly very different from the way welfare is done in any country at the moment,” which is often “conditional, targeted, so on and so forth,” Davala concluded.
A Chinese accounting student, when asked about Universal Basic Income, experiences a rapid cognitive shift. First, instinctive skepticism: “Sounds utopian,” she says, fearing it would foster laziness. Then, after discussion, a recognition of its potential to alleviate anxiety and allow young people to be “freeing youth from survival-driven career choices.”
But the final verdict is a swift reversal. “The idea is beautiful,” she concludes, “but would this even work here (in China)?”
This whiplash is commonly seen when discussing basic income. While many embrace the policy for oneself, they reject it as a universal policy for others. This is one of the latest takeaways from the summer cohort of researchers in BIEN’s UBI Youth Scholars Program.
Recently, the youth scholars interviewed laypeople in China about their thoughts on basic income. Their interviews provide a look at the obstacles facing UBI, revealing hurdles that are less about economics and more about culture, trust, and control.
The appeal (and challenge) of UBI is, at its core, philosophical. One youth scholar found her interviewee describe the policy as “like a mirror,” reflecting a society’s deepest values. The goal, she concluded, was never about the money, but about redefining “the value of a person” and “returning the bravery to create and to make mistakes.” It’s a vision of a society where a single mother working three jobs can finally breathe, and where artists can “keep making things that make life feel richer.”
But that vision collides with a wall of pragmatic objections. The most immediate is the price tag. In a summary of a class debate, Jiani Wang noted the figure that loomed over the conversation: a concern that a full UBI could swallow much of China’s existing government revenue.
The problem isn’t just sticker shock. As a public policy graduate student named Floria explained to a youth scholar, the public asks, “Where will the money come from?” But experts are focused on politically fraught questions of reallocating welfare budgets and managing the risk of inflation, Floria worried that a sudden cash infusion “could distort local economies,” she said.
Deeper than the fiscal debate, however, is the challenge of the cultural code. In a country where the ethos of work is paramount, UBI confronts a moral barrier. “How do we make sure people don’t think ‘my sweat doesn’t matter anymore’?” one interviewee worried, articulating what one scholar calls a conflict between “new policies and old beliefs.”
One youth scholar identifies it as a “distrust in policy execution.” Her research points to a fear that even a well-intentioned UBI could be warped by “corruption” ultimately becoming a “tool for inequity.” In this light, implementing UBI could become a test of “governance capability and public trust.”
The scholars’ discussion also pointed to unintended consequences of implementation phases of basic income. In one interview, one interviewee raised the prospect of a guaranteed income (means-tested assistance) worsening school bullying due to stigma.
Faced with these hurdles, the consensus among the youth scholars was that the path forward is a communications battle. The first challenge is linguistic: framing UBI as a “structural economic tool,” not “free money.”
The larger task, as this scholar argued, is to change the terms of the debate entirely. Proponents must “replace grand narratives with micro-scenarios” and “depoliticize discourse for technical focus.” The key insight is that the conversation must include both “why UBI” as well as a pragmatic one about “how to implement UBI.”
For UBI to move from academic theory to public policy in a place as complex as China, researchers must better understand cultural values, political trust, and the messy realities of human behavior. be addressed if UBI is ever to move from proposal to reality.
With slightly trembling hands, a high school student takes the stage. He introduces his social impact project, providing mentorship to low-income children called BuddyUp, his voice gaining confidence as the presentation goes on.
In June, UBI Taiwan hosted its latest charity fundraiser concert with Ascent Academy to raise money for its basic income pilot program for single-parent households. Student volunteers performed and showcased their charity projects.
Over the past two years, UBI Taiwan and Ascent Academy have raised hundreds of thousands of New Taiwan Dollars (NTD) through these fundraisers, including a July charity debate tournament.
Recently, the result of this fundraising was seen at the premiere of UBI Taiwan’s documentary film, which was funded entirely through private donations. The documentary followed the first recipient of its single-parent basic income program.
After meeting its initial fundraising goal, UBI Taiwan has announced plans to select new candidates for the second phase of its expanded single-parent basic income program.
The Youth Leadership Council, which organized the concert fundraiser, is a student-led organization run by high school students under UBI Taiwan. The council designed these fundraisers to show “students have the power to make change.”
“This kind of experience strengthens their understanding of social issues and shows them that anyone, regardless of age, can contribute to positive change,” Wei Jiayou, UBI Taiwan’s Research Director, said.
Tyler Prochazka, UBI Taiwan’s co-founder, added that student-led volunteering is a vital antidote to the insulation of traditional education.
“Typically, students are overly insulated in the classroom and don’t get exposed to real-world problems,” Prochazka said. “Having them participate and meet other folks who are facing challenging situations gives them ownership and empowers both sides, and grants them the opportunity to uplift each other.
Council students shared their projects covering mental health for single mothers, as well as providing meals and basic income for homeless individuals.
Prochazka said that one motivation for creating the council was that it allows other forms of assistance beyond cash to be shaped under the “spirit” of basic income’s “respect for individual dignity.”
Wesley Low, the council president, is the student organizing the BuddyUp project to provide educational mentorship for low-income students. He said the most memorable aspect of the fundraiser is the speeches by his classmates.
“Each one of them was strong in influence and would always be received with massive applause or even inspire me on my own personal projects,” Low said.
The Youth Leadership Council is overseen by mentors who provide individualized guidance for each student’s project. Jonas Li is a mentor for the program who said these real-world efforts and events change students’ perspectives.
“It’s a place where people who care about their community gather with a common goal, so we have a great opportunity to showcase societal problems and connect with people who would otherwise be hard to reach,” Li said.
As China explores solutions to youth employment, an academic debate regarding welfare expansion is growing in the country. For BIEN’s UBI Youth Scholars Program, students held their own debate and evaluated the feasibility of basic income’s implementation in China as one possible solution.
The UBI Youth Scholars Program provides university students the opportunity to learn about basic income and conduct research under the mentorship of global UBI academics. In their mock debate assignment, student Kai Lechman-Su highlighted the structural and philosophical challenges surrounding UBI.
Lechman-Su outlined China’s evolving labor landscape. He argued that automation is steadily eroding low-skill employment, particularly in the vast manufacturing sector that powered China’s economic rise. For these workers, he explained, opportunities are contracting without adequate state compensation to ease the transition. A universal basic income, from his perspective, could serve as a economic cushion. “Low-skill labor is being phased out,” he stated. “UBI would be a really good way to offset a lot of the harm that’s being done in those industries.”
In his analysis, UBI functions as a platform for security and growth, rather than a simple handout. He contrasted it with traditional social assistance systems, which often involve means-tests and filters. UBI could streamline support by reducing administrative hurdles and broadening access to financial aid. Lechman-Su suggested that financial security empowers individuals to pursue education or entrepreneurship. To address funding, he proposed a strategy of fiscal reallocation. This would involve redirecting certainl subsidies, introducing more taxation, and trimming inefficiencies. Such an approach would largely redistribute existing revenue, not necessarily inflate the national budget. “It would free up funds in other sectors,” he said, “and could overall in the future increase China’s GDP.”
Another countered that the gross cost may be too high for China. Citing a 2014 estimate, she noted that even a modest UBI program could have absorbed nearly half of China’s total government spending for that year. She questioned the fiscal prudence of such a massive expenditure for a government also tasked with major investments in infrastructure, technological innovation, and support for an aging population. “These numbers would only get bigger over time,” she remarked, pointing to the compounding pressures of inflation and rising living standards.
The analysis also emphasized a critical factor for China: regional disparity. China’s economy is not monolithic. Incomes and costs of living in megacities are vastly different from those in rural villages. She argued that a uniform national payment would fail to account for these differences and could paradoxically worsen inequality. “A UBI that works in downtown Shanghai would be way too high for a small village in Guizhou,” she explained.
Her critique extended to the efficiency of social support. She contended that China’s current welfare programs are specifically designed to assist the most vulnerable populations. Replacing this targeted aid with universal payments could dilute its impact. “We would be spending money on people who are already financially stable,” she said. “That spreads resources thinner and weakens support for people still struggling.”
This student debate illuminates a divide over the nature of social welfare. China’s system is built on targeted intervention. It is a model where officials assess needs, determine eligibility, and tailor support to local conditions.
A universal program like UBI makes eligibility automatic for everyone. This concept may resonate with a younger generation navigating a highly competitive job market defined by unpredictability. Amid the issues of youth unemployment and the rise of platform-based gig work, traditional welfare may face increasing pressure. UBI speaks to a new form of economic stress in a world of Artificial Intelligence and automation..
The discussion also touched upon the potential impact on the labor supply. She questioned whether workers in essential sectors, including logistics, construction, and factory production, would remain in their jobs if provided an unconditional financial floor. She suggested that even with a strong cultural work ethic, a UBI could lead some to reduce their hours or leave certain industries, potentially weakening productivity.
Lechman-Su responded by citing research from the United Nations Development Programme. The findings indicated that most respondents would continue working even with a UBI, driven by career goals and family responsibilities. From his viewpoint, this suggests the financial freedom from UBI would enable people to pursue more meaningful work. “People would continue to work,” he argued, “but maybe on things that they have more passion for.”
While Lechman-Su and the other student disagreed on implementation in the mock debate, they both saw value in exploring the idea through smaller pilot programs. Conducting trials in specific provinces or for targeted groups, such as recent graduates or migrant workers, could provide valuable data on UBI’s real-world effects.
The core issue this debate raises is whether citizens be granted economic autonomy without direct oversight. UBI offers a model of simplicity and universality, but it requires relinquishing the filters that policymakers have historically used to target aid. Lechman-Su’s arguments emphasized the individual’s capacity to make productive choices. She argued that often the government can direct resources more efficiently.
Ultimately, the debate with Lechman-Su reveals that the most important question about UBI in China may not be whether it is affordable, but what it is for. Is the goal to patch the existing safety net or to build the foundation for a new one? The students’ dialogue signifies that automation will challenge us to keep asking these questions and probing the future of welfare for all countries.
