The Impact of Basic Income Initiatives on Mental Health

The Impact of Basic Income Initiatives on Mental Health

By Beau Peters, Guest Contributor

Income and mental health are integrally tied. Severe mental health disorders are 4.5 times more prevalent among children who grew up in poverty and folks who face housing insecurity are twice as likely to have a “common mental health problem,” according to the Mental Health Foundation.

Despite this, most universal income initiatives have been limited in scope and have been focused on economic productivity, rather than well-being. Countries that have trialed UBI schemes — like the U.S. and Canada — found that UBI improved wellbeing but had little impact on economic growth.

To read the full article, click here.

Positive evaluation of basic Income pilot in Uganda

Positive evaluation of basic Income pilot in Uganda

In August 2020 the Dutch NGO INclusion started a basic income pilot in the village Welle in Nebbi District in Uganda, together with Ugandan partner AFARD. All 350+ people of the village, adults as well as children, have received a basic income amounting to the equivalent of 15 euros, currently 60.000 Ugandan shilling, for the past three years. Now, the first major study by researchers of the University of Groningen of the project shows very positive results.

The midline evaluation report analyses the results 2,5 years into the project, comparing the situation during the baseline study before the start of the project, and the latest measurement in December 2022. The report is written by PhD Elisa van Dongen under the supervision of Professor Dr. Robert Lensink and Associate Professor Annika Mueller.

This basic income pilot of INclusion has some unique features. To begin with the intended duration of seven years. Most basic income experiments and projects only run for one or two years. Secondly, children receive the same basic income as adults, whereas usually children are excluded or receive less. Because of this, the amount a family receives is relatively large, amounting to 80% of the international poverty line. Thirdly, 10% of the basic income is not given to people individually but to the village as a whole. Because a generally accepted characteristic of basic income is that it is individual, these 10% do not count as basic income. But it is unconditional, and the village fund enables the community to invest in public facilities that benefit everyone.

The study took a broad look at the project results. Some of the findings:

  • extreme poverty diminished from 55 to 10 percent
  • food security improved considerably
  • much better access to clean drinking due to a water well that was the first investment from the village fund
  • the percentage of children going to primary school increased from 70 to 87 percent
  • the number of days missed at school or work due to illness decreased by 75 percent
  • 60 percent of the families built a new, better house
  • the basic income was also used to buy and hire more land for farming
  • the percentage of households owning cattle increased from 9 to 49 percent
  • ownership of solar panels rose from 19 to 74 percent

Not surprisingly, the study also found that the residents of Welle experience much less stress than before and are more optimistic about their future.

Not included in the report but also an important outcome of the project is the fact that before the project started many people in Welle earned a small income by producing charcoal. This has ceased altogether. Although this might count as a negative result just looking at economic figures – a decrease in economic activity – in reality it is very positive. Not just because it was hard and ill paid work, but also because a lot of trees were cut for the charcoal production. Since the start of the project the number of trees around the village, and greenery and biodiversity in general, has improved visibly.

A more detailed discussion of the report on the website of INclusion: Scientific research: many positive results after the first 2.5 years of the basic income project in Uganda.

The full report: LIFE-Basic Income Project in Welle, Uganda – Midline Evaluation Report.

Hugh Segal, basic income champion, would want others to carry baton for him, say supporters

Hugh Segal, basic income champion, would want others to carry baton for him, say supporters

“Hugh Segal, perhaps Canada’s most ardent defender of a basic income policy to lift people out of poverty, has died at 72.

A Kingston resident, Segal was born in Montreal. His career included public service as chief of staff to prime minister Brian Mulroney and before that for Ontario premier Bill Davis. Former prime minister Paul Martin appointed him to the senate and later Segal would serve as principal of the University of Toronto’s Massey College.”

Read more

It’s Basic: Guaranteed Income Works.

It’s Basic: Guaranteed Income Works.

The Guaranteed Income Works national tour is underway! Following its debut at the Tribeca Festival in June, the new documentary, It’s Basic, is starting a 50-city national tour to show how guaranteed income can end poverty in the United States. In July, the tour included stops in Long Beach, CA and Saint Paul, MN.

Watch the It’s Basic trailer

Geoff Crocker’s Critique of “Power and Progress”

Geoff Crocker’s Critique of “Power and Progress”

“Power and Progress: Our Thousand-Year Struggle Over Technology and Prosperity”, by Simon Johnson & Daron Acemoglu (two well-known MIT economists), is critiqued by BIEN member Geoff Crocker who argues that this book, just published in May 2023, presents a selective narrative, unsupported assertions, and wrong assertions about basic income. This opinion is contrary to extensive praise of the book, that you can read about here.

With regard to basic income, Crocker writes “The superficiality of their argument is particularly evidenced in their dismissal of universal basic income (p416-417) which they regard as ‘defeatist’ and ‘fanciful’, arguing instead for conditional targeted benefits and creation of new work opportunities from technology. They make no reference to the literature on UBI, to the huge deficiencies of conditionality creating unemployment and poverty traps as well as intrusion, humiliation, and low take-up rates. Working hours per week have reduced consistently over many decades and are set to continue to fall. In-work poverty and rising household debt show that work and wages are insufficient for household income. Technological automation is sucking income out of the economy and increased non-labour income is required, the best proposal being UBI.”

Read the full review here.