Evaluating a 'UBI Plus' Intervention: A Needs-based Analysis of WorkFREE.

IF 2.8 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Social Indicators Research Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-10 DOI:10.1007/s11205-026-03806-y
Joel Lazarus, Sarath Davala, Maria Franchi, Neil Howard, Nick Langridge, Santosh Malviya, Vibhor Mathur
{"title":"Evaluating a 'UBI Plus' Intervention: A Needs-based Analysis of WorkFREE.","authors":"Joel Lazarus, Sarath Davala, Maria Franchi, Neil Howard, Nick Langridge, Santosh Malviya, Vibhor Mathur","doi":"10.1007/s11205-026-03806-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As pilots in Universal Basic Income (UBI) pilots proliferate, there is increasing recognition that cash alone may not be enough to support envisioned transformation. Consequently, recent years have seen pilots in 'UBI Plus' - combinations of unconditional cash transfers with other social interventions. In this article, we present a mixed-methods needs-based evaluation of WorkFREE, a major UBI Plus pilot. Between 2020 and 2024, WorkFREE brought together UK and Indian researchers, a local NGO, and over 1,400 slum residents (295 households) in city name, India. WorkFREE participants received monthly unconditional cash transfers for eighteen months whilst participating in regular needs-focused 'Plus meetings'. This article's authors oversaw the design, implementation, and evaluation of WorkFREE both as a research project and pilot intervention. Locating human needs at an essential layer of existence and experience, we conducted all stages and aspects of our work using a needs-based approach. In this article, we use Manfred Max-Neef's (1991) framework of fundamental human needs to evaluate WorkFREE's UBI Plus pilot through a combination of quantitative data from three household surveys conducted over eighteen months and qualitative data conducted with participants over two years. We find compelling evidence that points to the synergic power of UBI Plus in supporting participants to more effectively and extensively meet not just their material, but also their psychological and relational needs. We recognise limits to our model and implementation - particularly with regard to responding to social, especially gendered, difference - but see enough evidence to advocate for UBI Plus and for needs-based approaches to research and social interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":21943,"journal":{"name":"Social Indicators Research","volume":"182 1","pages":"16"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12975856/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Indicators Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-026-03806-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As pilots in Universal Basic Income (UBI) pilots proliferate, there is increasing recognition that cash alone may not be enough to support envisioned transformation. Consequently, recent years have seen pilots in 'UBI Plus' - combinations of unconditional cash transfers with other social interventions. In this article, we present a mixed-methods needs-based evaluation of WorkFREE, a major UBI Plus pilot. Between 2020 and 2024, WorkFREE brought together UK and Indian researchers, a local NGO, and over 1,400 slum residents (295 households) in city name, India. WorkFREE participants received monthly unconditional cash transfers for eighteen months whilst participating in regular needs-focused 'Plus meetings'. This article's authors oversaw the design, implementation, and evaluation of WorkFREE both as a research project and pilot intervention. Locating human needs at an essential layer of existence and experience, we conducted all stages and aspects of our work using a needs-based approach. In this article, we use Manfred Max-Neef's (1991) framework of fundamental human needs to evaluate WorkFREE's UBI Plus pilot through a combination of quantitative data from three household surveys conducted over eighteen months and qualitative data conducted with participants over two years. We find compelling evidence that points to the synergic power of UBI Plus in supporting participants to more effectively and extensively meet not just their material, but also their psychological and relational needs. We recognise limits to our model and implementation - particularly with regard to responding to social, especially gendered, difference - but see enough evidence to advocate for UBI Plus and for needs-based approaches to research and social interventions.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

评估“UBI +”干预:基于需求的WorkFREE分析。
随着全民基本收入(UBI)试点项目的激增,人们越来越认识到,仅靠现金可能不足以支持设想的转型。因此,近年来开展了“全民基本收入+”试点——将无条件现金转移支付与其他社会干预措施相结合。在本文中,我们提出了基于需求的混合方法对WorkFREE的评估,这是一个主要的UBI Plus试点。在2020年至2024年期间,WorkFREE将英国和印度的研究人员、当地一家非政府组织以及印度城市的1400多名贫民窟居民(295户家庭)聚集在一起。WorkFREE项目的参与者在18个月的时间里每月都会收到无条件的现金转移,同时定期参加以需求为重点的“Plus会议”。本文的作者监督了WorkFREE的设计、实现和评估,将其作为一个研究项目和试点干预。我们将人类的需求定位于生存和经验的基本层面,采用以需求为基础的方法进行所有阶段和方面的工作。在这篇文章中,我们使用Manfred Max-Neef(1991)的基本人类需求框架,通过结合从三个家庭调查中获得的超过18个月的定量数据和从参与者那里获得的超过两年的定性数据,来评估WorkFREE的UBI Plus试点。我们发现了令人信服的证据,表明UBI Plus在支持参与者更有效、更广泛地满足他们的物质需求,以及他们的心理和关系需求方面具有协同作用。我们认识到我们的模式和实施存在局限性——特别是在应对社会差异,尤其是性别差异方面——但我们看到了足够的证据来倡导UBI Plus,以及基于需求的研究和社会干预方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
174
期刊介绍: Since its foundation in 1974, Social Indicators Research has become the leading journal on problems related to the measurement of all aspects of the quality of life. The journal continues to publish results of research on all aspects of the quality of life and includes studies that reflect developments in the field. It devotes special attention to studies on such topics as sustainability of quality of life, sustainable development, and the relationship between quality of life and sustainability. The topics represented in the journal cover and involve a variety of segmentations, such as social groups, spatial and temporal coordinates, population composition, and life domains. The journal presents empirical, philosophical and methodological studies that cover the entire spectrum of society and are devoted to giving evidences through indicators. It considers indicators in their different typologies, and gives special attention to indicators that are able to meet the need of understanding social realities and phenomena that are increasingly more complex, interrelated, interacted and dynamical. In addition, it presents studies aimed at defining new approaches in constructing indicators.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书