O. Kangas
{"title":"The feasibility of universal basic income","authors":"O. Kangas","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Finnish basic income experiment is central when discussing the feasibility of the universal basic income and its status as a nationwide attempt to implement basic income on a trial basis. This chapter discusses whether the experiment increased the feasibility of the universal basic income in Finland. A typology of four factors (strategic, institutional, psychological, and behavioural) was used to assess the feasibility of the universal basic income. Regarding strategic feasibility, advocates of the universal basic income do not form a powerful discrete group. Instead, they form a diffuse group that lacks the political power and organisation to translate their advocacy into a powerful social action. When it comes to institutional feasibility, there are constraints limiting the implementation of the universal basic income and these include the Finnish social security system (in which social partners have a strong influence) and the difficulty of coordinating national-and EU-level policies. Regarding psychological feasibility, popular support for basic income depends on how we measure it and that the relatively cheap popular support that it enjoys is not strong enough to make significant changes to the prevailing discourse on social policy. Finally, in terms of behavioural feasibility, the experiment did not produce effects on employment - or at least not to a significant level - to convince decision-makers. However, universal basic income may improve recipients’ feelings of freedom, dignity, and self-determination. The conclusion is that there are serious obstacles to the political feasibility of basic income in Finland. However, the COVID-19 pandemic had neither increased nor intensified political discussions on the implementation of basic income in Finland, as it has done in many other countries. © Olli Kangas, Signe Jauhiainen, Miska Simanainen and Minna Ylikännö 2021.","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
全民基本收入的可行性
芬兰的基本收入实验是讨论全民基本收入的可行性及其作为在全国范围内试行基本收入的地位的中心。本章讨论了该实验是否增加了芬兰全民基本收入的可行性。采用四个因素(战略、制度、心理和行为)的类型学来评估全民基本收入的可行性。就战略可行性而言,全民基本收入的倡导者并没有形成一个强大的独立群体。相反,他们形成了一个分散的群体,缺乏政治力量和组织,无法将他们的倡导转化为强有力的社会行动。当谈到制度可行性时,普遍基本收入的实施受到一些限制,其中包括芬兰的社会保障体系(社会伙伴在其中有很强的影响力)和协调国家和欧盟层面政策的困难。关于心理上的可行性,民众对基本收入的支持取决于我们如何衡量它,以及它所享有的相对廉价的民众支持不足以对社会政策的主流话语产生重大改变。最后,就行为可行性而言,该实验没有对就业产生影响——或者至少没有产生显著的影响——来说服决策者。然而,全民基本收入可能会改善接受者的自由、尊严和自决感。结论是,在芬兰,基本收入的政治可行性存在严重障碍。然而,与许多其他国家不同,2019冠状病毒病大流行既没有增加也没有加剧芬兰关于实施基本收入的政治讨论。©Olli Kangas, Signe Jauhiainen, Miska Simanainen和Minna Ylikännö 2021。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。