IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/pal/etbchp/978-3-030-89120-6_8.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Conclusion: Why Should We Conduct Basic Income Experiments, Pilots, or Policies?

In: Basic Income Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Roberto Merrill

    (University of Minho)

  • Catarina Neves

    (University of Minho)

  • Bru Laín

    (University of Barcelona)

Abstract

The main goal of this book is to inform students, researchers, practitioners, and policymakersPolicymakers about the main philosophical, epistemological, and sociologicalSociology questions stemming from UBI experiments, pilots and policies past, present, and future. To do so, we believe we should engage with those who have been involved in bringing about or evaluating such experiments, pilots, and policies. Therefore, we interviewed 18 stakeholders mostly to understand how the cases in which they have been involved provide interesting information on the goals, contexts, methodologies, and of course implementation and aftermath of UBI experiments, pilots, and policies. Based on their comprehensive answers, and the literature on UBI and cash grants, we aimed to provide a set of findings and discussions that contribute to the ongoing debate on the benefits, hurdles, and legitimacy of conducting basic income experiments and pilots, but also in the assessment of basic income policies of basic income that have been implemented. In chapter 8, we summarize the main insights of the book and we highlight three main conclusions: the first and one of the key conclusions is the role played by the context. Our case studies cannot escape their context. The second conclusion is about the nature of our case studies. In fact, they share two features: (1) they are all social science experiments or policies which are being evaluated as such, which means they inherit the limitations of the methodologies employed in such experiments, and (2) they all differ from the definition of what a UBI is. In that sense, they should probably be called quasi-basic income experiments, pilots, or policies. The third is that none of our case studies has directly led to political implementation. However, they all have been influenced by political processes and agendas. Based on these three conclusions we argue that experiments can be justified as research, political, and advocacy tools if we take the limitations and considerations discussed in this book into account and include them in the way we design, implement, and evaluate experiments. To do so, we conclude by proposing seven general principles that experiments and pilots (and even small-scale, quasi-basic income policies) should try to respect, to be justified as meaningful research, political, and advocacy mechanisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Roberto Merrill & Catarina Neves & Bru Laín, 2022. "Conclusion: Why Should We Conduct Basic Income Experiments, Pilots, or Policies?," Exploring the Basic Income Guarantee, in: Basic Income Experiments, chapter 0, pages 207-218, Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:etbchp:978-3-030-89120-6_8
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-89120-6_8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:etbchp:978-3-030-89120-6_8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.