IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/bistud/v3y2008i3n5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Basic Income Grants or the Welfare State: Which Better Promotes Gender Equality?

Author

Listed:
  • Bergmann Barbara R.

    (American University – Washington, D.C.)

Abstract

The implications for gender equality of three regimes are compared: a low tax-low benefit regime, a regime of Basic Income Grants (BIG), and a welfare state offering a generous menu of in-kind and cash benefits concentrated on people with special needs, but not including lengthy paid parental leave. It is argued that the special needs of women, particularly lone mothers, make the welfare state regime superior in promoting gender equality to a regime with BIG benefits, which spreads its cash benefits equally to all citizens. Further, the reductions in labor force commitment that BIG fosters (and which lengthy paid parental leave also fosters) would reverse the progress women have made in the labor market. That progress is the main basis for women's improved status, and undermining it may even make a BIG regime inferior to the low benefits regime in its effect on gender equality.

Suggested Citation

  • Bergmann Barbara R., 2008. "Basic Income Grants or the Welfare State: Which Better Promotes Gender Equality?," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-7, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:bistud:v:3:y:2008:i:3:n:5
    DOI: 10.2202/1932-0183.1128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1932-0183.1128
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1932-0183.1128?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barbara R. Bergmann, 2004. "A Swedish-Style Welfare State or Basic Income: Which Should Have Priority?," Politics & Society, , vol. 32(1), pages 107-118, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vollenweider Camila, 2013. "Domestic Service and Gender Equality: An Unavoidable Problem for the Feminist Debate on Basic Income," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 19-41, July.
    2. Prabhakar Rajiv, 2018. "Are Basic Capital Versus Basic Income Debates Too Narrow?," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 13(1), pages 1-6, June.
    3. Olli Kangas & Minna Ylikännö, 2023. "Basic Income and the Status of Women in an Established Gender-Equal Welfare State: Results from the Finnish Basic Income Experiment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-13, January.
    4. Ponczek, Vladimir & Grezzana, Stefânia, 2012. "Gender Bias at the Brazilian Superior Labor Court," Brazilian Review of Econometrics, Sociedade Brasileira de Econometria - SBE, vol. 32(1), March.
    5. Uhde Zuzana, 2018. "Caring Revolutionary Transformation: Combined Effects of a Universal Basic Income and a Public Model of Care," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Cameron, Anna & Tedds, Lindsay M., 2020. "Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA+) of Two Policy Alternatives: Basic Income and Basic Services," MPRA Paper 105939, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Robeyns Ingrid, 2008. "Introduction: Revisiting the Feminism and Basic Income Debate," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-6, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robeyns Ingrid, 2008. "Introduction: Revisiting the Feminism and Basic Income Debate," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 1-6, December.

    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:bpj:bistud:v:3:y:2008:i:3:n:5. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.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.