The origins: an idea, a collective, a prize. In the Autumn of 1983, Paul-Marie Boulanger, Philippe Defeyt and Philippe Van Parijs, three young researchers attached to the departments of demography, economics and philosophy of the University of Louvain (Belgium) decided to set up a working group in order to explore the implications of an extremely simple, unconventional but attractive idea which Van Parijs had proposed to call, in a paper circulated in December 1982, “allocation universelle”. The group chose as a collective pseudonym Collectif Charles Fourier. Its main output was a special issue of the Brussels monthly La Revue nouvelle (April 1985). But along the way, it won a prize, with a provocative presentation of the idea and its putative consequences, in an essay competition on the future of work organised by the Brussels-based King Baudouin Foundation.
The first meeting.With the money it thus unexpectedly earned, the Collectif Charles Fourier decided to organise a meeting to which they would invite a number of people to whom the idea of an Unconditional Basic Income had, they gradually discovered, independently occurred. This meeting became the first international conference on Basic Income, convened by Philippe Van Parijs in the university town of Louvain-la-Neuve on 4-6 September 1986, with sixty participants individually invited. It turned out to be quite an extraordinary event, with many seemingly lonely fighters suddenly discovering a whole bunch of kin spirits. They included, among others, Gunnar Adler-Karlsson, Jan-Otto Andersson, Yoland Bresson, Paul de Beer, Alexander de Roo, Rosheen Callender, Nic Douben, Marie-Louise Duboin, Gérard Roland, Ian Gough, Pierre Jonckheere, Bill Jordan, Greetje Lubbi, Annie Miller, Edwin Morley-Fletcher, Claus Offe, Hermione Parker, Riccardo Petrella, David Purdy, Guy Standing, Robert van der Veen, Georg Vobruba and Tony Walter.
A network is born. At the final session of the conference, several participants expressed the wish that some more permanent association be created, with the task of publishing a regular newsletter and organising regular conferences. Guy Standing proposed calling this association Basic Income European Network, which gathered an easy consensus, since no one could beat the beauty of the corresponding acronym (BIEN, which means “good” in French and Spanish). Its purpose, later enshrined in its Statutes adopted in 1988, was formulated as follows: “BIEN aims to serve as a link between individuals and groups interested in Basic Income, i.e. an income unconditionally granted to all on an individual basis, without means test or work requirement, and to foster informed discussion on this topic throughout Europe”. Peter Ashby (National Council for Voluntaty organisations), Claus Offe (then at the University of Bremen) and Guy Standing (then at the International Labour Organisation) became BIEN’s first chairpersons. Walter Van Trier (then at the University of Antwerp) became secretary, Alexander de Roo (then parliamentary assistant at the European Parliament) treasurer, and Philippe Van Parijs (University of Louvain) newsletter editor, subsequently combined with secretary. Ashby and Offe left as co-chairs in 1988 and were succeeded by Edwin Morley-Fletcher (1988-1998) and Ilona Ostner (1996-2004), jointly with Guy Standing (1986-2008).
Lifeline of the network: the newsletter. In the pre-internet era, the regular dispatching of a printed newsletter formed the very core of the existence of a network. From 1988 to July 2001, BIEN published a printed Newsletter that was sent to fee-paying members three times per year (36 issues). In order to facilitate the management of the subscriptions, the annual membership was replaced by a life membership formula in the Autumn of 1998, The emergence of electronic communication made it possible to intensify and widen the spreading of information. From January 2000 onwards, BIEN News flashes were sent several times per year to a large number of subscribers far beyond BIEN’s membership (138 issues between January 2000 and January 2020, when BIEN adopted a new style of Bulletin). In 1996, BIEN also inaugurated a website. Initially, it did little more than making newsletters and newsflashes available for downloading. It later grew rapidly to provide a wealth of information and resources on Basic Income and the Basic Income movement.
Congresses of growing scope. Starting with the founding conference, BIEN organized a congress every second year, with a growing and increasingly diverse set of participants:
Louvain-la-Neuve, BE (UCLouvain, 4-6 September 1986, convenor: Philippe Van Parijs)
Antwerp, BE (Universitaire Faculteiten St Ignatius, 22-24 September 1988, convenor: Walter Van Trier)
Florence, IT (European University Institute, 19-20 September 1990, convenor: Edwin Morley-Fletcher)
Paris, FR (Université de Paris-Val de Marne, 18-19 September 1992, convenors: Yoland Bresson & & Pierre Lavagne)
London, UK (Goldsmith College, 8-10 September 1994, convenor: Richard Clements)
Vienna, AT (United Nations Centre, 12-14 September 1996, convenors: Lieselotte Wohlgenannt, Michael Tepser & Bernd Marin)
Amsterdam, NL (Universiteit van Amsterdam, 10-12 September 1998, convenors: Robert J. van der Veen, Loek Groot & Paul de Beer)
Berlin, DE (Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin), 6-7 October 2000, convenor: Claus Offe)
Geneva, CH (International Labour Office, 13-14 September 2002, convenor: Guy Standing)
Barcelona, ES (Forum Universal de las Culturas, 19-20 September 2004, convenors: David Casassas & Jose Noguera)
Archive from the early days. Contributions to some of the congresses were published in a number of collective volumes:
Anne G. Miller ed. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Basic Income (Louvain-la-Neuve, September 1986). Antwerp: BIEN & London: BIRG, 1988.
Walter Van Trier ed. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Basic Income. (Antwerp, September 1988). Antwerp: BIEN & London: BIRG, 1990
Philippe Van Parijs ed., Arguing For Basic Income. Ethical Foundations for a Radical Reform. London & New York: Verso, 1992.
Robert J. van der Veen & Loek Groot eds., Basic Income on the Agenda. Policy Options and Political Feasibility, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2000.
Guy Standing, ed., Promoting Income Security as a Right. Europe and North America, London: Anthem Press, 2004.
Along with a great many other books, papers and reports on Basic Income from before the internet era, the papers presented at BIEN’s first few congresses are kept in BIEN’s Archive at UCLouvain’s Hoover Chair of Economic and Social Ethics, 3 Place Montesquieu, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
From a European to a worldwide network. By 2004, 20% of the online subscribers and 25% of BIEN’s life members were from outside Europe. Pressure therefore increased to turn BIEN from a European into a worldwide network. The development of internet communication and of low-cost air travel made this option more realistic. And in January 2004, President Lula signed into law Senator Eduardo Suplicy’s proposal for a “basic citizenship income” for all Brazilians. This finished convincing the sceptics who thought that an Unconditional basic income could only make sense in European countries with a developed welfare state. At the September 2004 congress in Barcelona, BIEN’s executive committee proposed to change the name of the network from “Basic Income European Network” to “Basic Income Earth Network”. This proposal was adopted by BIEN’s General Assembly on 20 September 2004.
Structuring the movement. The newly elected committee undertook to modify and expand the statutes (until then no more than a single page), a new version of which was approved by the General Assembly in 2008. Owing to the growth of the network, the size of the executive committee had to increase, with the managing of the website gaining in importance. The committee of the expanded network was successively co-chaired or chaired by Guy Standing and Eduardo Suplicy (2004-2008), Ingrid van Niekerk (2008-2014), Karl Widerquist (2008-2017), Louise Haagh (2014-2020) and Sarath Davala (2020-). An Advisory Board that includes all past committee members is chaired by Philippe Van Parijs (2004-). In May 2016, the position of general manager was created, the incumbent of which is not elected by the General Assembly but appointed by the Executive Committee. Malcolm Torry has held this position since its creation. In 2016, the network was officialized as an international non-profit organization (AISBL) under Belgian law and two years later turned into a charitable incorporated organization (CIO) under British law, with its official seat moved from Brussels to London, and the statutes amended accordingly.
From biennial to annual congresses. As a result of becoming a worldwide network, BIEN started recognizing national networks outside Europe as affiliates and decided in 2004 to start alternating non-European and European locations for the congress. In 2016, given the increasing popularity of the idea of basic income across the world, it decided to start organizing a congress every year instead of every second year. The Basic Income Earth Network met in the following places:
Capetown, ZA (University of Capetown, 3-4 November 2006, convenor: Ingrid van Niekerk)
Dublin, IE (University College, Dublin, 21-22 June 2008, convenors: Sean Healy & Brigid Reynold)
Sao Paulo, BR (Universidade de São Paulo, 30 June-2 July 2010, convenors: Eduardo Suplicy & Fabio Waltenberg)
Ottobrunn, DE (Wolf-Ferrari Haus, 14-16 September 2012, convenor: Dorothee Schulte-Basta)
Montreal, CA (MacGill University, 27-29 June 2014, convenors: Jurgen De Wispelaere & Daniel Weinstock)
Seoul, KR (Sogang University, 7-9 July 2016, convenor: Hyosang Ahn)
Lisbon, PT (Lisbon School of Economics, 26-27 September 2017, convenor: Roberto Merrill)
Tampere, FI (University of Tampere, 24-26 July 2018, convenor: Jurgen De Wispelaere)
Hyderabad, IN (NALSAR University, 23-26 August 2019, convenor: Sarath Davala)
[20. Brisbane, AU (University of Queensland, 28-30 September 2020, convenors: Troy Henderson & Greg Marston): postponed to 2022 because of the covid19 pandemic]
21. Glasgow, UK (Online, 18-21 August 2021, convenor: Mike Danson)
Providing enthusiasm, imagination, mutual understanding and tenacity keep feeding the worldwide basic income movement, this is only the beginning of BIEN’s history.
It is undeniable that the new wave of engouement for UBI (universal basic income) that has shaken the US, the EU, India and so many other parts of the globe in the wake of COVID-19 has also reached Brazil. Everywhere, the simple idea of guaranteeing a regular income, duty-free, underwritten by the State, appears to be the way forward to mitigate the still unmeasurable consequences of the appalling disruptions brought about by the pandemic. UBI would swiftly reduce income insecurity, preventing poverty; it could also significantly contribute to accelerate the economic recovery in the post-COVID-19 era by stimulating aggregate demand.
The idea of a UBI was galvanized when governments promptly decided to extend the amount, coverage, and length of different sorts of monetary transfers to confront the gravity of the multiple crises created by the COVID-19 outbreak. Unemployment benefits, job allowances, one-time pay-checks, welfare benefits, or even special forms of credit line have spread out to inject liquidity in the economy. All of a sudden, we have a new opportunity for making the case for UBI.
Brazil was no exception. The comprehensive national social security system created in 1988 that provides free, universal health care (among many other rights) had been made vulnerable by years of underfinancing. But the system continues to be the most effective and democratic institution when it comes to guaranteeing social rights and wellbeing in Brazil. When the COVID crisis hit, the federal government and Congress could have reinforced social assistance, public healthcare, unemployment insurance, and other job allowances — all constitutive dimensions of the Brazilian social protection system. Instead, they united to favor ad hoc measures that, though sounding generous, are inevitably temporary.
The ultraliberal government of President Jair Bolsonaro backed a bill that Congress approved unanimously early April to adopt an “emergency basic income” program that would last the entire state of emergency declared on March 20, 2020. In principle, this program should expire on December 31, 2020, along with the state of emergency. In Brazil, a state of emergency allows extraordinary spending, suppressing the 2016 cap imposed by a constitutional amendment that impeded any real increase in social spending until 2036 regardless of economic growth or rise in tax revenues.
It bears reminding that Brazil is the only country in the world to have passed a law on Basic Income in 2004, hours prior to the adoption of the Bolsa Familia Program. Yet the law remained a dead letter and largely unknown to most Brazilians. To date, it remains unclear why the Workers’ Party started its mandate presenting a bill on UBI, which was approved without encountering any opposition, too soon after paying no heed to it. Today, despite the existence of a UBI Law, activists, progressive parties, and members of Congress chose the easiest way out, bypassing the already existing institutional framework. They chose a transitory and short-term program over existing law. This narrowed sighted strategy further debilitates Brazil’s social security system, because it deepens defunding. It also fails to bring greater comprehension of what a UBI is in the public opinion, thereby further diminishing the chances to make it a true, permanent, and unconditional right.
Today’s “emergency basic income program” provides a three time-payment – now extended to four months – of R$ 600.00, the equivalent of $120 USD per month. It is means-tested. Anyone over 18 years old (threshold waived for single mothers) living with a monthly per capita household income below half a minimum wage (R$ 552.00 / $110 USD) qualifies. The Minister of the Economy estimates that this benefit has reached 54 million people, encompassing the target-population previous recipients of Bolsa Familia, informal and precarious workers, and the unemployed who registered. Let’s not forget that Brazilian monthly median per capita household income, including labor income and all forms of social benefits, like pensions and welfare schemes, corresponds to R$ 862.00, equivalent to $172.00 USD. A monthly stipend of R$ 600.00 is therefore a very significant figure that amounts to 70 percent of the median per capita income and is three times higher than the Bolsa Familia cash transfer. It was the first time that Brazil set the bar so high with regard to compensatory benefits.
It is worth noting that indigenous and traditional black communities who were proportionally the most hardly hit by the pandemic have been denied the right to this temporary benefit, which is very telling about the challenges for universalizing rights in Brazil. The mortality rate among indigenous in the Legal Amazon is 150 percent higher than the national average. The deficiency of the specific care system for native peoples, the invasion of their lands by miners who can take the virus into their territories and communities, and continuous deforestation are pointed out as reasons that can explain such a high mortality rate and lethality. Faced with the threat posed by COVID-19 to indigenous communities, opposition parties passed a law in early July in Congress that provides for a set of 16 emergency measures to protect some 800,000 indigenous people. President Bolsonaro, however, immediately vetoed the most important ones, such as guaranteeing the supply of drinking water, food baskets, hygiene products and specific ICU beds for indigenous people infected with the virus, arguing that the Union could not afford mounting non-essential expenditures. Brazil remains a very unequal society and has not yet reckoned with its colonial structures of racialized discrimination.
The Brazilian Bureau of Census (IBGE) just published the first results regarding the impact of the Emergency Basic Income Program: 38.7 percent of all Brazilian households received the program, with the bottom 40 percent benefitting most. 45 percent of all Brazilians received the temporary emergency workers’ allowance and three-fourths of all monetary transfers benefitted the 50 percent at the bottom of the distribution scale. According to IPEA, this allowance has compensated 45 percent of outstanding earning losses due to the pandemic. It also increased by 2,000 times the average income of the poorest 10 percent. This is good news, especially because the recovery of the economic activity that has been noticed in early July significantly relies on the rebound of household consumption.
There is now strong evidence that providing monetary transfers at large scale and in substantial amounts that make a real difference in people’s lives is a powerful mechanism to boost economic activity, prevent destitution and humiliation, and help people cope with all sorts of hardships.
Did the crisis and the measures adopted increase the support for a true UBI? Are Brazilians really aware of the challenge and motivated to fight for it? In 2013, I carried out a national survey to assess how Brazilian society values social policies. There was a specific question on UBI. Back then, 51 percent disagreed, and one-third agreed with the idea of implementing a UBI. The current estimates are unknown since no survey asking the specific question has yet been re-conducted. But let us keep in mind that the current emergency workers’ allowance is no UBI.
The question is whether or not the evidence aforementioned would suffice to bolster the implementation of a true UBI in Brazil.
During the pandemic, doctors, health workers, and the many who support the universal public health care system (SUS) persevered in order to advance a temporary program, called ICU Beds for All. In Brazil, for every 5 ICU beds fully equipped in the private sector, we have only 1 in public hospitals. The problem is that only 25 percent of all Brazilians have subscribed to private health insurance, whereas 75 percent go public. Given that a significant and growing number of ICU beds were underutilized in the private sector, a campaign was launched to create a pool of ICU beds, coordinated by a public entity, to improve access and sort out the waiting list problem. But no agreement could be reached and today Brazil is second only to the United States, with 1,7 million confirmed cases, and 68,000 fatalities, both figures broadly underestimated given that testing is rather rare in Brazil. It is now obvious that the COVID-19 pandemic was insufficient to unite Brazilians, even when so many lives are lost.
This paradox raises two major concerns:
Is UBI the most urgent need for Brazilians? Will it be possible to couple a universal basic income at a relatively significant amount at least to eradicate abject poverty with other universal social policies that are urgently needed such as public healthcare, good public education, social housing, adequate sanitation? Is this affordable?
To what extent would endorsing UBI strengthen the social security system already threatened by austerity measures derived from the cap on public spending and by attempts of the Bolsonaro government to fully reshape it through tax reform and the merging of different social benefits restricting them to poverty relief programs?
————————————————————
In regards to the first question, what would be the cost of a UBI in Brazil? Of course, the cost depends on the design of the program. To get a rough idea of the cost of a very basic program, let us consider a stipend that would be equivalent to the monthly benefit of Bolsa Familia today, which is R$ 200 per month ($40 USD). This amount should be acceptable by all parties and civil organizations across the political spectrum. The difference lies in the fact that it would apply to individuals (UBI) rather than households (Bolsa Familia Program).
Let us then imagine that when the law was approved in 2004 the Brazilian government decided to implement the program starting with children under 5. Given that it would be impossible to grant a stipend to all Brazilians, the idea is that we would launch a UBI by targeting the children to prevent intergenerational poverty. The new benefit will accompany the beneficiaries throughout their lifetime as an unconditional right. Focusing on children sounds appropriate because the pension system in Brazil provides a satisfactory income security to the elderly: 85 percent of all seniors over 65 receive a public pension, either contributory or non-contributory, whose monthly amount (floor) corresponds to no less than a minimum wage.
By providing a UBI of R$ 200.00 to children under 5 in 2004, today’s number of potential recipients under 20 years old totals 60,7 million people (IBGE, PNAD 2004 & PNADc 2020). This would cost R$ 323 billion, or 10 times the annual spending with the Bolsa Familia Program (R$ 32 billion or, 4.4 percent of GDP in 2019). The good news is that 57 percent of all stipends would go the bottom 40 percent of the distribution. The current Emergency Workers’ Allowance Program amounts to R$ 150 Billion, consequently less than half of the proposed UBI, reaching an almost equal number of recipients.
To grant $40 USD a month to 60 million people in 2019 is three times higher than the federal spending, with the public healthcare system (only R$ 117 billion or 1.64 percent of GDP). Such a program would also surpass by 11 percent of all benefits conveyed by the federal government (including higher education, housing, sanitation, labor, and agrarian initiatives), which accounts for R$ 289 billion (Lavinas 2020).
In 2019, outstanding federal social spending amounted to R$ 1.73 trillion. Paying a basic income of R$ 200.00, therefore at the level of the current anti-poverty Bolsa Familia program, would compromise 27.5 percent of all social spending. That same year federal social spending in kind corresponded to only 4.12 percent.
Monetary transfers remain the bulk of social spending, accounting for 68 percent. Should Brazil continue to expand cash transfers, to the detriment of providing running water, sanitation, housing, equal standards in education and healthcare? The most recent data from IBGE (2018) show that 31.1 million Brazilians (16 percent of the population) have no access to tap-water, whereas 72.4 million (37 percent of the population) lack proper sanitation. Not to mention decades of deep housing shortage affecting millions of poor and low-income families who end up living in slums, which makes them less immune to all sorts of diseases in times of pandemics.
The second question relates to the future of the Brazilian social protection system, which was underfinanced for quite a long time, and now risks being completely dismantled. The Minister of the Economy, an old member of the Chicago Boys who worked for the Pinochet Regime, intends to overhaul social security. He initiated a pension reform in 2019, making it harder for informal workers to get a full pension at retirement.
Now, that same ultraliberal minister proposes the creation of a “Brazil Income Program”, resulting from the merging of a large number of benefits, both contributory and non-contributory. Workers’ rights like job allowances, unemployment benefits, and other benefits alike will all be suppressed and replaced by an anti-poverty program to reach 57 million people, granting a monthly stipend of R$ 232 per month, 15 percent above the average payment of Bolsa Familia. They expect to spend R$ 52 billion per year with this new program, which is less than one percent of the 2019 Brazilian GDP. This means that the coverage against risks and poverty will be shortened and people’s autonomy and wellbeing consequently corroded.
In addition, the government intends to provide a voucher to pay for private daycare for two million children up to three years old, which will increase prices and fees and discriminate based on income. Lessons from Chile are well-known to envision that in Brazil things could be different. A voucher of R$ 250,00 corresponds to 10 percent of what middle-class families pay for private childcare in cities like Rio and São Paulo. The best daycare centers, however, charge double or triple. According to the government, churches could be interested in providing this service, an idea that breaks with the logic of secularism in the provision of public education.
Both concerns point to the ineluctable call for a joint perspective associating basic income and universal public provision to democratize access and opportunities by fully de-commodifying wellbeing. Otherwise, under financialized capitalism, a guaranteed income will just serve as collateral propelling citizenry to take out loans and go indebted in order to meet their financial obligations.
Early July, that same Congress that approved the Emergency Workers’ Allowance Program voted for the full privatization of water supply and sanitation, maybe having in mind that enlarging access to cash to those most affected by the pandemic would also make it easier to expand further a business model grounded in denying basic human rights and ensuring huge profits for pension and mutual funds that today drive investments in infrastructure in developing and emerging countries. After the longest and most severe recession Brazil has faced over a century since 2015 and given the growth projections ahead (-9.1 percent for 2020, according to the IMF), fiscal resources will dry up while competing and clashing issues will fill up antagonisms, stirring tensions. All the care may not be enough in designing social policies if the goal is eventually to forge a truly egalitarian society in the country.
The major differential of a UBI is to de-commodify labor. It is thus equally crucial to de-commodify the social reproduction of labor, by ensuring that education, daycare, healthcare, training, and other basic needs will also be fully de-commodified. Otherwise, UBI will perform as a powerful pro-market mechanism, upholding income-related and highly segmented private provision, mostly through the financial sector, and fueling rather than overcoming discrimination and inequality.
The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, a regional organism of the United Nations Secretariat has declared itself in favour of a new regime of welfare and social protection that includes the gradual, progressive and sustained establishment of universal basic income in the region of Latin America and the Caribbean.
To address the socioeconomic impact of the crisis, ECLAC proposes that governments guarantee temporary cash transfers to meet basic needs and support household consumption, which will be crucial to achieving a sound, relatively rapid recovery (p. 14)
The Proposal however, is not limited to this emergency programme which would involve at least one cash transfer, equivalent to a poverty line, for 1/3 of the population, but rather:
From a long-term perspective, ECLAC reiterates that these transfers need to be ongoing, should reach beyond those living in poverty and cover broad strata of the population that are highly vulnerable to falling into poverty, such as the low-income non-poor and the lower-middle income strata. This would make it possible to move towards a universal basic income that could be implemented gradually over a period suited to each country’s situation. (p.15)
ECLAC has held the position now for 10 years that the current dominant development style needs to be replaced, as it has brought low economic growth, high social inequality and accelerated environmental destruction. It has been 10 years since ECLAC highlighted that this should be the hour of equality in Latin America and the Caribbean, and as such has been working on developing and deepening far reaching initiatives and proposals aimed towards building a new style of development centred around a core of equality and sustainability.
This is the perspective that corresponds to the proposals for progressive structural change, equality pacts and the initiative for a great environmental push. Through all these years ECLAC has insisted on and reiterated the need for social policies that are universal and with a focus on rights. In this decade there have been different mentions of the importance of guaranteeing income, of the possibilities of basic income as an emancipation mechanism and the possibility of implementing basic income for women as a tool for building their economic autonomy. Now, ECLAC is declaring the need for universal basic income and rates it, beyond the emergency and the short-term, as a strategic objective.
Facing the profound weaknesses in the welfare and social protection regimes that have been laid bare by the pandemic, and the unprecedented growth in the volume of cash transfers that, through different modes, have been implemented by the region’s governments, the interest in basic income has grown exponentially. Its appeal is not only philosophical, but also includes its power and utility for solving practical problems and achieving an immediate, opportune and far-reaching impact.
It has been said many times that the most intense debates are not solved by new arguments, but rather by great outcomes. This seems to be the case for the basic income proposal, a proposal whose debate, analysis and experimentation increased significantly after the great recession of 2008-2009 and which has placed itself, with a previously unknown force up until a few weeks ago, into the public and political spheres of various countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. It is an idea whose time, it seems, has arrived.
The question regarding what would have been the impact and dynamic of the pandemic if instead of having highly precarious and unprotected societies there had been a practical, operating basic income is ever more present. We would surely be talking about a different story in terms of poverty and inequality and uncertainty. Likewise, the physical distancing and home confinement measures involving people that, facing a sudden loss of income had to continue going out into the street to try and earn a survival income, would have been implemented more successfully and with less suffering.
Due to all this, ECLAC highlights the importance of having a universal basic income, within the broad framework of a welfare state and a strong social protection system. That is, basic income as an additional pillar for a new welfare regime, where most importantly the fragmentation, hierarchization and commodification of health services must be overcome, as the same document states.
Regarding the types of policies to be implemented, ECLAC says:
Before the pandemic, the social situation in the region had been deteriorating since 2014 in terms of poverty and extreme poverty, with a slowdown in the pace of inequality reduction.
In view of the major persistent gaps that the pandemic has widened, ECLAC reiterates that it is time to implement universal, redistributive and solidarity-based policies with a rights-based approach, to ensure that no one is left behind.
From a rights and welfare perspective, emergency responses rooted in social protection must be developed to avoid a serious deterioration in living conditions.
Social protection responses must link the short-term measures needed to address the most acute manifestations of the crisis to medium- and long-term measures aimed at guaranteeing the exercise of people’s rights, by strengthening the welfare State and providing universal social protection. (p. 18)
If the covid-19 pandemic is, as Ignacio Ramonet says, a comprehensive social fact, the least that can be done is to learn from it and to understand that social precariousness and the fragility of life cannot be part of the new normal, of the new post-pandemic reality. So much suffering for so many people cannot be and must not be, repeated or assumed to be natural.
This article was originally published in Spanish at Sin Permiso. www.sinpermiso.info
Regional Research Coordinator for the subregional headquarter of ECLAC in Mexico. The opinions stated here may not be those of the United Nations System.
Videos of all the plenary sessions are available on youtube. Abstracts of all the concurrent sessions are available here. Full papers and slides of some presentations are available below.
This table contains the papers uploaded to the congress website prior to the congress. If other authors submit their papers then they will be added to this list.
Videos are available of many of the congress sessions. Click here to see them.
BIEN 2016, Seoul
The Proceedings of the 2016 congress are contained in a single document, in which can be found plenary session addresses and parallel session papers. Click here to download the document.
Toward a renovation of economic circulation and institutionsMorley-Fletcher, Edwin (IT) Opening AddressOzanira da Silva e Silva, Maria (BRA) The Minimum Income as a Policy for Increasing Child Education in BrazilPelzer, Helmut (GE) Funding of an Unconditional Basic Income in Germany via a Modified Tax/Transfer SystemPioch, Roswitha (GE) The bottom line of the welfare state in Germany and the NetherlandsQuilley, Steven (UK) Sustainable Funding of Basic Income: Environment, Citizenship & Community, and a Trajectory for Basic Income Politics in Europe (published in Basic Income on the Agenda)
Reynolds, Brigid (IRE), with Sean Healy
From Concept to Green Paper: Putting Basic Income on the Political Agenda (published in Basic Income on the Agenda)
Robeyns, Ingrid (B)
An emancipation fee or hush money? The advantages and disadvantages of a basic income for women’s emancipation and well-being (published in Basic Income on the Agenda)
Roos, Nikolas (NL)
Basic Income and the justice of taxationSalinas, Claudio Caesar (ARG), with Philippe Van Parijs Basic income and its cognates. Puzzling equivalence and unheeded differences between alternative ways of addressing the new social question (published in Basic Income on the Agenda) Scharpf, Fritz (D) Basic Income and Social Europe (published in Basic Income on the Agenda)
Schutz, Robert (US)
More Basic IncomeSerati, M. (IT), with E. Chiappero & F. Silva Basic income: an insidious trap or a fruitful chance for the Italian labour market?Silva, F. (IT) ), with E. Chiappero & M. Serati Basic income: an insidious trap or a fruitful chance for the Italian labour market?Smith, Jeffery (US) From Potlatch to EarthshareStanding, Guy (SWI) Seeking Equality of Security in the Era of GlobalisationTerraz, Isabelle Redistributive Impact of a Basic Income: A Focus on Women’s SituationVan Parijs, Philippe (B), with Claudio Caesar Salinas Basic income and its cognates. Puzzling equivalence and unheeded differences between alternative ways of addressing the new social question (published in Basic Income on the Agenda) Widerquist, Karl (US) Reciprocity and the guaranteed income
Sarath Davala is an Indian sociologist based in Hyderabad, India. He co-founded India Network for Basic Income and Mission Possible 2030 – both organisations working on basic income related issues. From 1993 to 2000, he was an Associate Professor at the Indian Institute of Management Bangalore. Between 2010 and 2014, he was the Research Director of the Madhya Pradesh Basic Income Pilot Project. He is the co-author of the book: “Basic Income: A Transformative Policy for India”, which summarised the findings of the MP BI pilot study. He is currently co-leading another basic income pilot with waste collectors in the city of Hyderabad, India, a project initiated by University of Bath, and supported by European Research Council. Sarath is also collaborating with different agencies to innovate solutions to reach cash the last mile in the rural parts of India.
Deputy Chair: Hilde Latour
Hilde Latour has a background in biomedical sciences and cultural anthropology and years of experience in program and knowledge management. She is a life member of BIEN, board member of Basisinkomen Nederland (Dutch BIEN) and co-founder of Mission Possible 2030 – Basic Income the key to SDG. As a guest lecturer at the blockchain minor – International Financial Management and Control at The Hague University of Applied Sciences, she explores the boundaries of paradigm shifts, such as Building Commons on the blockchain, a new narrative for Basic Income.
Treasurer: Lindsay Stirton
Lindsay is a Professor of Public Law at the University of Sussex. His academic interests are wide-ranging academic, spanning administrative law and public administration in the UK and elsewhere. Lindsay’s interest in basic income has to date been centred on the administrative analysis of basic income policies, and he has published widely on this topic. More recently, Lindsay’s interest has extended to understanding the dynamics of political and governmental support for basic income policies, in which the administrative factor is just one of several components.
Lindsay lives in Seaford, on the South Coast of England, where he serves as Liberal Democrat Town Councillor for the Seaford South ward.
In his spare time, Lindsay trains for and runs marathons.
Secretary: Fabienne Hansen
Fabienne Hansen is a PhD student in social anthropology at the University of Freiburg, Germany. She is also associated with Universidade Federal Fluminense in Niterói, Brazil, where she looks at the integration of UBI within municipal social policies in Brazil. Generally, Fabienne is interested in the effects basic income could have on everyday livelihoods as well as the shaping of policyscapes that stand behind policy decisions. She was elected BIEN Secretary in 2024.
UN Liaison: Diana Bashur
After serving three years as BIEN Secretary, Diana will focus her work within BIEN on expanding BIEN’s partnerships with United Nations entities, presenting basic income as a complement to international development and peacebuilding efforts. This builds on BIEN’s collaboration with UNDP, the Office of the UN Secretary-General, the UN Peacebuilding Support Office and UNIDO, which Diana has led since 2021.
Diana is a PhD candidate at the University of Vienna researching basic income’s potential for social cohesion. In the past, she has worked for the United Nations and the French Development Agency in Damascus, New York and Vienna. Diana was elected BIEN UN Liaison in August 2024.
Social Media Manager: James Grant
James has been contributing to BIEN’s online presence since 2018, becoming the Social Media Manager for the organisation in 2021. He studied International Relations at Queen Mary, University of London, and currently works in the tech sector.
Public Outreach: Julio Linares
Julio Linares is an economic anthropologist from Guatemala. He holds an MSc in Anthropology and Development from the London School of Economics and Political Science and a MA in Applied Economics and Social Development from National ChengChi University (國立政治大學) in Taipei, Taiwan. His research focus dwells on the relationship between money, direct democracy and unconditional basic income. Julio is currently based in Berlin, Germany, where he explores these topics in practice with the Circles UBI project. Julio is currently serving his second term as Public Outreach for BIEN. He speaks Chinese, English, Spanish, German and a bit of Hungarian.
Research Coordinator: Jurgen De Wispelaere
Jurgen De Wispelaere is a political theorist turned public policy scholar, specialising in the political economy of basic income. He has published extensively on the politics of basic income, including most recently on basic income and crisis politics, basic income as national-regional-local policy, and the political origin story of basic income in Maricá (Brazil) and its diffusion across Rio de Janeiro state. He is the co-editor of four volumes as well as the Founding Editor of the interdisciplinary journal Basic Income Studies. Jurgen was a member of the BIEN EC in 2002-2004 and co-organised the BIEN Congresses in Montreal (2014) and Tampere (2018). He is currently leading the UBIdata Project for BIEN.
Volunteer Coordinator: Lee Seng Kiat
Prior to his career in architecture and project management, Seng Kiat coordinated volunteers as polling and counting agents nationwide to observe the momentous 2018 Malaysian General Election. Since moving from Kuala Lumpur to London, Seng Kiat volunteered for BIEN before serving as Volunteer Coordinator. Seng Kiat has advocated for Basic Income from 2019 and resonates with BIEN’s role in fostering discussions over Basic Income. He is also fluent in Malay and Mandarin. Seng Kiat was elected BIEN’s Volunteer Coordinator in August 2024.
Hubs Supervisor: Dr. Neil Howard
Dr. Neil Howard is Reader in International Development at the University of Bath, where he leads UBI Bath, the UK’s first centre of basic income scholarship. He is an anthropologist of development turned social protection scholar. His research investigates the governance of exploitative labour practices, as targeted for eradication by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). He also explores innovative forms of labour and social protection, focusing on Unconditional Basic Income (UBI) combined with participatory community organizing. Neil co-led two international policy experiments trialling this combination in Dhaka, Bangladesh, and Hyderabad, India. He also sits on the Executive Committee of the Basic Income Earth Network.
Affiliates Coordinator: Olaf Ostertag
Olaf Michael Ostertagis based in Berlin, Germany, and has been a grassroots activist for Basic Income since 2004. He co-founded the “BAG GE” (Basic Income Working Group) within the political party DIE LINKE (“The left”), together with Katja Kipping, Ronald Blaschke, Stefan Wolf and others. This action committee was successful in convincing a majority of this party’s membership to adopt Basic Income as a political demand until recently. His first professional education was actor’s training, at Valentin Plátáreanu’s studio. Olaf wrote over two dozen satirical plays for ensemble casts and stand-up comedy shows, the latest of which he is currently performing in Berlin. Olaf worked briefly as a journalist and as office manager for members of parliament, on state and national levels. In 2017, he began training as a tax accountant and has worked at the same consultancy firm consecutively since 2018. He currently chairs two charities in Berlin: A local history association and an artist’s social club. As Affiliates Coordinator, he aims for collecting the knowledge, experience and objectives from all over the world, and hopes to be able to foster exchange and inspiring debates between BI activists from different backgrounds. He encourages to reach out to him to induce conversations: olaf [(at)] basicincome.org
News Service Editor: Peter Knight
Peter Knight joined BIEN in 2017. He is a PhD (Stanford University) economist and strategic analyst with broad international experience in digital transformation, e-development, e-government, distance education, electronic media, telecommunications reform, international banking, foundation work, and teaching. Peter is devoted to leveraging information and communication technologies to accelerate social, economic and political development. He currently focuses on promoting thought, communication, and action across three areas: sufficiency, sustainability, and innovation; he is Coordinator of the Sufficiency4Sustainability Network.
Features Editor: Tyler Prochazka
Tyler Prochazka is the opinion editor for BIEN. He is the chairman of UBI Taiwan and a PhD student at National Chengchi University.
Bank account trustees (not members of the Executive Committee): Jacob Eliot, Anne Miller, Simon Duffy, Reinhard Huss
Chair of the International Advisory Board: Philippe Van Parijs
Tasks related to the different posts
The task of the EC
BIEN’s purpose is: To educate the general public about Basic Income, that is, a periodic cash payment delivered to all on an individual basis, without means test or work requirement; to serve as a link between the individuals and groups committed to, or interested in, Basic Income; to stimulate and disseminate research about Basic Income; and to foster informed public discussion on Basic Income throughout the world.
The task of the EC is to ensure that BIEN fulfils its constitutional purpose and to set policy to that end.
General duties of EC members
To attend EC meetings, and if not attending to send apologies. At least 50 % of meetings must be attended between one General Assembly and the next
To fulfil and develop the tasks related to the post to which you were elected
To work with any working group(s) to which you are allocated in order to fulfil the tasks allocated to the group(s) by the EC
Individual duties
Chair
The role of the Chair is to collectively develop a vision, mission and long-term strategy for BIEN. In all aspects the Chair should work closely and in consultation with the Deputy Chair.
She / he should seek new partnerships globally and develop meaningful collaborations with people and organizations that will further the strategic objectives of BIEN in terms of strengthening research about Basic Income, its dissemination worldwide in as many languages as possible so that basic income discussion becomes rigorous and robust. In addition to these strategic aspects of the role, Chair in consultation with the Deputy Chair and the EC members should fulfil the following tasks:
To chair meetings of the EC and the General Assembly
To propose policy and initiatives for BIEN and to lead them
To ensure that decisions made by the EC conform to BIEN’s purpose
To take any urgent decisions required between EC meetings
To represent BIEN to other organizations and individuals
To liaise with the congress Local Organizing Committees over the content of congresses
To submit an annual report to the General Assembly
To raise funds for BIEN and make it financially sustainable
To encourage new organizations to affiliate to BIEN, and work for growth of membership
Deputy Chair
To fulfil all of the functions of the Chair whenever the Chair is absent
To fulfil any of the tasks of the Chair by mutual agreement
To support and help the chair in proposing policy goals and initiatives for BIEN and to assist with leading them
Secretary
In consultation with the treasurer, to keep an up to date register of BIEN members and of members of the EC
To take minutes of EC and GA meetings
In consultation with the Chair, to prepare meeting agendas
To prepare papers required by the EC
To send agendas, minutes and other papers to EC members before EC meetings and to BIEN members before meetings of the GA
To receive correspondence and ensure that it is acted on
To undertake correspondence as required by decisions of EC and GA meetings
To ensure that all requirements of registration by the UK’s Charity Commission are met
To administer elections, including proposing tellers to the EC
Treasurer
To keep income and expenditure accounts along with evidence of income and expenditure
To make payments as agreed by the EC
To submit regular financial reports to EC meetings
To prepare annual accounts
To liaise with the auditor over auditing of the accounts
To prepare budgets if asked to do so by the EC
To manage the bank and other accounts
To propose financial rules to the EC
Hubs Supervisor
The Hubs Project involves building regional BIEN hubs in Africa, Asia and Latin America and professionalising BIEN’s day-to-day activities. The project aims to strengthen the basic income ecosystem and BIEN’s role in it.
Regular oversight of the Hubs project
Meeting with BIEN coordinator and regional hubs managers to check progress and course correct
Strategic support to coordinator and regional hubs managers
Reporting to the BIEN EC about project progress
Connecting with partners and donors around the project.
News Service Editor
In consultation and cooperation with the EC and Chair to develop news policy
To oversee BI News posts on the website
To issue monthly BIEN Bulletin emails
To supervise the work of the volunteers allocated to the news service
To ensure that guidelines agreed by the EC are adhered to by volunteers
Social Media Manager
In consultation and cooperation with the EC, Chair and News Editor to develop social media policy
To oversee social media channels
To supervise the work of the volunteers allocated to social media
To ensure that guidelines agreed by the EC are adhered to by volunteers
Affiliate and Public Outreach
To maintain an up to date register of affiliated organizations and their contact details
To liaise between affiliated organizations and the EC
To convene meetings of representatives of affiliated organizations at and between congresses
To oversee BIEN’s relationships with international and other organizations in consultation with the Chair and in conformity with policy set by the EC
To assist with convening meetings between BIEN and other organizations both at congresses and on other occasions in consultation with the Chair and Congress local organizing committees
Volunteer Coordinator
To oversee the recruitment, allocation and training of volunteers
In consultation with the Chair and in conformity with policy set by the EC to liaise with volunteers and to manage volunteer policy
Research Coordinator
To develop research policy and initiatives in consultation with EC and Chair
To review and update information related to research pages on the BIEN website
To assist and suggest measures to promote quality of research at BIEN congresses
To serve as point of contact for outside research-related organizations and activities
To facilitate research initiatives in collaboration with external research and community partners
To engage in exploring strategic funding options for basic income research initiatives
Congress Organiser (appointed by the EC and the Local Organizing Committee)
To co-ordinate the Local Organising Committee (LOC) that plans the congress
To liaise between the EC and the LOC by attending EC meetings and in other ways
Website Manager
To manage the website and liaise with its other users in consultation with the Chair and in conformity with policy set by the EC
Bank account trustees
To facilitate the relationship between BIEN and the Charity Commission
To facilitate the efficient management of the bank account