VIDEO: Experimenting with Basic Income in Finland and the Netherlands

VIDEO: Experimenting with Basic Income in Finland and the Netherlands

Videos of the workshop “Experimenting with Basic Income: Finland and the Netherlands” are available online. Additionally, Jurgen De Wispelaere has a new blog post describing the promises and challenges of a comparative approach to basic income experiments.

As described in recent articles in Basic Income News, both Finland and the Netherlands will be launching basic income experiments early in 2017. In each case, the experiment is planned to continue for two years, the target population under investigation will be restricted to individuals currently receiving social assistance benefits, and research questions will center on the basic income’s effect on work incentives. Despite such broad similarities, however, the experiments also have notable differences — in both design and political context.

 

Workshop at Kela

To address these issues, Kela, the Social Insurance Institute of Finland, hosted a day-long workshop on “Experimenting with Basic Income: Finland and the Netherlands” on November 8. Speakers included Sjir Hoeijmakers, Loek Groot, Timo Verlaat, Ernst-Jan de Bruijn, and Ruud Muffels on the Dutch experiments, and Johanna Perkiö, Olli Kangas, and Kathrin Komp on the Finnish experiments.

Videos of all sessions are now available (click on the above embedded links).

 

YouTube player

 

Lessons and Challenges

Jurgen De Wispelaere, a research fellow at Finland’s University of Tampere, presented opening and closing comments at Kela’s workshop, respectively titled “Putting Basic Income Experiments in Context” and “Comparing Basic Income Experiments: Lessons and Challenges” (see video below).

In a recent post on Kela’s blog, De Wispelaere outlines three main reasons to engage in a comparative study of basic income experiments: the comparative approach allows researchers to pool information about issues faced in running a basic income experiment, pool knowledge about the effects of basic income, and study the political forces behind the rapid rise in popularity of basic income.

Jurgen De Wispelaere (November 14, 2016) “Comparing Basic Income Experiments: Lessons and Challenges” Kela.

 

YouTube player

 

Other Experiments

While the Kela workshop and De Wispelaere’s brief article focus specifically on the experiments in  Finland and the Netherlands, we might note that other basic income pilots and experiments are about to begin around the world. In Canada, the provincial government of Ontario plans to roll out a basic income pilot study by April 2017. The government of France is also investigating the possibility of experimenting with a basic income, although no launch date has been specified. Several privately-funded basic income pilots and experiments are also scheduled to begin in 2017, including those of the Silicon Valley firm Y Combinator (in Oakland, California) and the charities GiveDirectly (in multiple Kenyan villages) and Eight (in a Ugandan village).

 


Reviewed by Genevieve Shanahan

Photo: Kela office, CC-BY-SA-4.0 Kotivalo

HELSINKI, FINLAND: Workshop on Basic Income experiments (Nov 8)

HELSINKI, FINLAND: Workshop on Basic Income experiments (Nov 8)

As previously announced on Basic Income News (and elsewhere), the governments of Finland and the Netherlands are both preparing to experimentally test a basic income, with trials beginning as early as January 2017.

On November 8, Kela, the Social Insurance Institute of Finland, will be holding a workshop on both countries’ upcoming experiments, fittingly titled “Experimenting with Basic Income: Finland and the Netherlands”. The workshop is open to the public and will be streamed live.

The goals of the event, which brings together leading researchers on both projects, are to “explore both similarities and differences between the proposed schemes, to examine the role of basic income experiments in each country, and to analyse the political and policy processes associated with piloting basic income in advanced welfare states”.

Kela researcher Olli Kangas will introduce the event, and Jurgen De Wispelaere, of the University of Tampere, will deliver opening and closing lectures that compare and contextualize the two experiments (“Putting Basic Income Experiments in Context” and “Comparing Basic Income Experiments: Lessons and Challenges”).

Additionally, three panels will be held concerning details of the respective experiments:

1. “Experimenting with Basic Income in the Netherlands: General Considerations” featuring panelists Sjir Hoeijmakers (independent scholar) and Loek Groot (University of Utrecht), moderated by Paula Laine (Sitra).

2. “Experimental design and implementation: Utrecht, Wageningen and Tilburg” featuring panelists Timo Verlaat (University of Utrecht), Ernst-Jan de Bruijn (University of Wageningen), and Ruud Muffels (University of Tilburg), moderated by Laine.

3. “The Finnish Basic Income Experiments” featuring panelists Johanna Perkiö (University of Tampere), Olli Kangas, and Kathrin Komp (University of Helsinki), moderated by Pertti Koistinen (University of Tampere).

“Experimenting with Basic Income” takes place as part of the research program Tackling Inequalities in Time of Austerity (TITA), funded by the Strategic Research Council at the Academy of Finland. (See TITA’s research plan for more information about its activities.)

Join in-person or on-line:

To attend, register by November 4 here: https://www.lyyti.fi/reg/workshop20161108.

The event will be streamed lived and recorded. Information will be available at this link: https://www.kela.fi/experimenting-with-basic-income-finland-and-netherlands.


Reviewed by Robert Gordon.

Photo: “Helsinki y la catedral” CC BY-NC 2.0 Mariano Mantel.

NETHERLANDS: Design of BI Experiments Proposed

NETHERLANDS: Design of BI Experiments Proposed

The Dutch State Secretary for Social Affairs and Employment has sent a document to Members of Parliament proposing a basic income experiment. However, the proposed design has met criticism from many scientists, activists, and others instrumental in the original development of the experiment. 

Jetta Klijnsma CC Roel Wijnants

Jetta Klijnsma CC Roel Wijnants

On the last Friday of September 2016, the Dutch government decided to allow basic income experiments on a limited scale and under strict conditions. Mrs. Jetta Klijnsma, State Secretary for Social Affairs and Employment, has sent a document Ontwerpbesluit Experimenten Participatiewet (Design for Experiments in the context of the Participation Act) to the Members of Parliament in which she outlines the rules, conditions and goals of the forthcoming basic income experiments. Mrs. Klijnsma, (PvdA, Partij van de Arbeid / Labour Party) is optimistic. As soon as both Chambers of Parliament accept the proposed framework, she can give permission to start with the experiments–hopefully, January 1st 2017.

However, many of the pioneers involved in the experiments (including scientists, activists, city counsel members, local councilors, and civil servants) are less excited. In order to overcome political arguments–mainly coming from the VVD (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy), a right-wing party that hates the idea of a basic income–the original study design has been changed in such a way that these stakeholders worry about the consequences for the pilots.

Proposed Design of the Dutch Basic Income Pilot

Before we return to their concerns, let’s look at the design of the experiment in more detail.

The research questions as they are now formulated are:

• Does the intervention in the research groups lead to acceptance of paid labor?

• Which intervention causes the most complete independence of social assistance benefit?

A maximum of 25 municipalities, or 4% of the total number of Dutch welfare claimants, will be allowed to participate in the experiments. According to Statline (Electronic Databank of Statistics Netherlands), there were 546.090 persons with a social assistance benefit in December 2015; thus, around 21.843 persons will be involved in the experiments. Only municipalities which have implemented the Participation Act in fullness will be selected for one of the pilots. The duration of the experiments is set at two years. Stakeholders criticize this as of ‘too limited duration’.

Each basic income experiment will consist of six groups. Larger municipalities will use all six groups, for smaller municipalities three groups are enough.

Welfare claimants are randomly assigned to one of these five groups:

1. A group who is exempt from formal obligations to find employment. Subjects in this group will not receive formal sanctions in case they fail to actively look for paid work [1]. However, after six and twelve months, the municipality will check whether sufficient efforts have voluntarily been made by the participant to find paid labor. When too few activities have been undertaken, the trial period will be terminated;

2. A group that will be subjected to additional obligations and duties during the experimental period in order to reintegrate them into the labor market, entailing at least a doubling of contacts with civil servants responsible for carrying out the Participation Act;

3. A group who is allowed to keep 50 percent of their earnings in addition to the welfare payments with a maximum of 199 EUR per month for single persons and 142 EUR for married couples (which is less than the legal minimum wage);

4. A combination of the above groups, whereby the first two groups always should be combined in an experiment;

5. A control group.

In addition to these five randomly-assigned groups, the experiments will use a reference group consisting of social assistance recipients living in the same municipality, but not participating in the experiment (e.g. benefit claimants in a neighboring municipality not involved in the trial).

Welfare claimants sign an agreement which states that their participation is strictly voluntary. However, it is forbidden to stop during the course of the experiment. They will receive their normal benefit allowances during the project (Sjir Hoeijmakers, email communication).

Criticism from Stakeholders

Meetings of activists in Groningen CC Zeptonn

Meetings of activists in Groningen CC Zeptonn

Stakeholders are critical about the design of the basic income experiments. In a letter addressed to Members of Parliament, scientists of the four collaborating universities (Tilburg, Utrecht, Groningen and Wageningen) contend that reliable scientific research cannot be tested within the proposed framework.

For example, Professor Dr. Ruud Muffels from Tilburg University criticizes the introduction of a group with more government control. “The effects of sanctions have been extensively studied. I wonder what kind of information you want to find. It will also complicate the interpretation of the results of the pilot. If freedom has consequences – the participant can be banned from the experiment after one year when he or she is not ‘active enough’ in seeking a paid job – this line of inquiry cannot be tested. It might also create an ethically difficult dilemma, because we are looking for volunteers for the research, and we have to clarify the implications of their participation.”

As a consequence of these concerns, researchers like Dr. Muffels fear that the proposed framework will deter benefit claimants from participation in the experiments, due to the use of a group that will experience much more control.

The researchers call upon the MPs to pay attention to their concerns when the framework is discussed with the State Secretary for Social Affairs and Employment in the Parliamentary Committee for Social Affairs and Employment.

Divosa (Association of Executives in the Social Domain) also has doubts about the value of the experiments. According to Divosa’s vice-president Jellemiek Zock, “It is more difficult to measure the effects of the pilots, because they are more limited than in the original design. Besides, activities like taking a part-time job, starting a business, caring for children or other family members are excluded from the experiments. Nevertheless, given the situation in the present government – a coalition of VVD and PvdA – I think this is the most we can get at this moment. But we will proceed.”

Another stakeholder in the experiment says, “We wanted a simple pilot based on trust rather than repression. We wanted to give benefit claimants more freedom, more choice, more purchasing power. Now we have a complicated set of rules. What remains is a puzzle, which makes it difficult to shape the experiments and understand the results. However, we are glad to start.”

For her own part, the State Secretary for Social Affairs and Employment is content with the outcome: the proposed framework is still miles away from a really unconditional basic income.

 

[1] Under Dutch social laws, a benefit claimant is normally sanctioned when he or she is not actively looking for paid work. These sanctions are described in the Participation Act and executed by civil servants employed by a municipality.


Cover Photo CC OuiShare

Thanks to Kate McFarland for reviewing a draft of this article.

FINLAND: Kela’s report on Basic Income experiments released in English

FINLAND: Kela’s report on Basic Income experiments released in English

As previously reported in Basic Income News, Kela, the Social Insurance Institution of Finland, submitted a report on basic income experiments to the Finnish Government on March 30. Previously released to the public only in Finnish, the report is now available in English. 

Kela’s report describes and analyzes several basic income models, including a “full” basic income of at least 1000 EUR per month, which would replace all existing social insurance programs, a “partial” basic income of under 800 EUR per month, and a negative income tax. It additionally examines conditional programs such as a participation income.

In the conclusion of its report, Kela advises the Finnish government to adopt a partial basic income model for its experiment.

In August, Finland’s Ministry of Social Affairs and Health drafted a bill authorizing the basic income experiment. This bill revealed that the government plans to test of a partial basic income of 560 EUR per month, distributed to a random sample of 2,000 individuals who are between the ages of 25 and 58 and currently receive unemployment assistance. The Ministry’s proposed legislation also made clear that experiment will be designed specifically to test whether a partial basic income incentivizes employment. 

The English version of Kela’s 62-page report is now available as a free download from its website (see link below). This version also includes a postscript concerning the bill drafted by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, including a summary of criticisms of the bill and an explanation of the government’s decision to adopt the chosen experimental design.

Kansaneläkelaitos Kela; Social Insurance Institution of Finland Kela (2016) “From idea to experiment. Report on universal basic income experiment in Finland”

Link: https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/167728

 


Photo: CC BY-NC 2.0 Aaronigma

Finland: Governmental announcement for the basic income experiment: the Pirates’ response

Finland: Governmental announcement for the basic income experiment: the Pirates’ response

As we’ve already reported here, Finland’s Ministry of Social Affairs and Health announced their plan for the basic income experiment, and requested citizens’ opinions on it, on 25th August. We’ve also reported Finnish experts’ responses here, and the Greens’ response here. This article reports the response by the Pirate Party of Finland (Piraattipuolue).

 

The Pirate Party of Finland endorses an unconditional basic income. On the day the Finnish government announced their detailed plan, UBI advocates from the Pirates Parties of Finland, Iceland and Sweden gathered in Turku for a seminar on UBI.

 

Tapani Karvinen, the former chair of the party, responded to BIEN on the government’s plan:

 

Largest problem is that [the] experiment is going to analyze the employment of the target group, not other factors, such as health, participation in unpaid communal work, arts or self-development by studying or hobbies. Target group of 2000 people is inadequate, as the preliminary study suggested 2000 + 8000 whose basic income costs would have been covered from the Finnish Social Insurance Institute’s unemployment fund, therefore creating no extra costs for the study. Excluding students and state pensioners means that there will be no information if basic income will encourage creation of innovations, entrepreneurship and employment of graduates, or mental and physical health of elders.

In short, [the] study’s target group is not wide enough and is not analyzing all the crucial factors, which affect the well-being of individuals and therefore also economy and costs of state. A further study is necessary to complete the analysis of the effects which basic income would have to Finland as a whole.

 

Petrus Pennanen, the deputy chair of the party, also told BIEN about his views of the plan:

 

It just replaces the application based minimum unemployment / welfare benefit with a fixed payment, but doesn’t change the tax system in anyway. In a realistic UBI experiment small income would be taxed more than now. Not sure what is the point of the experiment, on one hand it’s certainly better something is being done instead of nothing, but I don’t think there’s much practical benefit from this kind of experiment. One could think it’s like a stalling tactic, waiting 2 years for this instead of actually implementing a sensible reform of our welfare systems.

 

 

 

The full interviews with Tapani Karvinen and with Petrus Pennanen will be published here at Basic Income News shortly.

 

[photo caption]

Tapani Karvinen on the right, Petrus Pennanen on the left. Photo is taken from a video provided from The Pirate Party of Finland.

 

Reviewed by Kate McFarland.