IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/bistud/v17y2022i2p213-237n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The State of the UBI Debate: Mapping the Arguments for and against UBI

Author

Listed:
  • Afscharian Dominic

    (Institute of Political Science, University of Tübingen, Tuebingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany)

  • Muliavka Viktoriia

    (Graduate School for Social Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, 00-901, Warszawa, Poland)

  • Ostrowski Marius S.

    (European University Institute, Fiesole, Toscana, Italy)

  • Siegel Lukáš

    (Bratislava International School of Liberal Arts, Bratislava, Slovakia)

Abstract

This article provides a map of the UBI debate, structured into the main themes that guide and group the arguments on both sides. It finds that UBI’s supporters and opponents both draw on core principles of justice and freedom, focusing on need and poverty, discrimination and inequality, growth, social opportunity, individuality, and self-development. From an economic perspective, they both appeal to business concerns about efficiency, risk, flexibility, and consumption, as well as labour interests on work fulfilment, working conditions, remuneration, and bargaining. Likewise, they focus on political questions around welfare state reforms, redistribution, taxation and funding sources, democratic citizenship, and the prospects for cross-party policy coalitions. By providing an overview of the thematic pillars of the UBI debate, this article helps researchers and activists locate and orient themselves within the wider spectrum of opinion on UBI.

Suggested Citation

  • Afscharian Dominic & Muliavka Viktoriia & Ostrowski Marius S. & Siegel Lukáš, 2022. "The State of the UBI Debate: Mapping the Arguments for and against UBI," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 213-237, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:bistud:v:17:y:2022:i:2:p:213-237:n:2
    DOI: 10.1515/bis-2021-0030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/bis-2021-0030
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/bis-2021-0030?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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    UBI; thematic analysis; debate;
    All these keywords.

    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:17:y:2022:i:2:p:213-237:n:2. 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: 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.