{"title":"The politics of piloting. The case of minimum income schemes in European cities","authors":"Giorgia Nesti, Matide Cittadini, Matteo Bassoli","doi":"10.1111/ropr.12611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"EU member states have adopted Minimum Income Schemes (MIS) to prevent destitution and ensure a minimum standard of living through means‐tested income support combined with Active Labor Market Policies (ALMPs). However, the effectiveness of MIS has been hindered by limited coverage, low take‐up rates, inadequate cash transfers, strict conditionalities, and the limited impact of ALMPs. Public opinion is polarized, leading to potential policy changes. Pilot projects have emerged as a strategy to address implementation barriers, facilitate evidence‐based policy making, and improve stakeholder relationships. This paper investigates the political conditions under which pilots are promoted and the effects these policy decisions have on scaling up through a qualitative analysis and comparison, using two exemplary cases—B‐MINCOME in Barcelona and <jats:italic>Weten Wat Werkt</jats:italic> in Utrecht.","PeriodicalId":47408,"journal":{"name":"Review of Policy Research","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Policy Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12611","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
EU member states have adopted Minimum Income Schemes (MIS) to prevent destitution and ensure a minimum standard of living through means‐tested income support combined with Active Labor Market Policies (ALMPs). However, the effectiveness of MIS has been hindered by limited coverage, low take‐up rates, inadequate cash transfers, strict conditionalities, and the limited impact of ALMPs. Public opinion is polarized, leading to potential policy changes. Pilot projects have emerged as a strategy to address implementation barriers, facilitate evidence‐based policy making, and improve stakeholder relationships. This paper investigates the political conditions under which pilots are promoted and the effects these policy decisions have on scaling up through a qualitative analysis and comparison, using two exemplary cases—B‐MINCOME in Barcelona and Weten Wat Werkt in Utrecht.
期刊介绍:
The Review of Policy Research (RPR) is an international peer-reviewed journal devoted to the publication of research and analysis examining the politics and policy of science and technology. These may include issues of science policy, environment, resource management, information networks, cultural industries, biotechnology, security and surveillance, privacy, globalization, education, research and innovation, development, intellectual property, health and demographics. The journal encompasses research and analysis on politics and the outcomes and consequences of policy change in domestic and comparative contexts.