Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.4337/9781839104855.00019
Miska Simanainen, O. Kangas
There is growing interest in understanding the popular support for basic income in Finland and globally. On the one hand, researchers have tried to evaluate the level of support in different countries, and, on the other hand, to explain the variation of support within populations. In addition to scientific curiosity, there are practical reasons for surveying population support. These reasons are closely linked to politics and policymaking: for example, political parties aim to understand the opinions of the electorate to frame their political agenda in a way that resonates with opinions among their possible voters and maximises their political support in elections. During the last two decades, support for basic income has been stable in Finland. Surveys carried out before the Finnish basic income experiment showed that about 60 to 70 percent of Finns were in favour of universal basic income (Airio et al., 2016; Andersson and Kangas, 2005). However, recent studies on popular support have provided highly divergent results. Differences in the results of separate surveys are likely related to differences in the definitions of basic income given in the questionnaires. Previous research has shown that there tends to be a substantial framing effect on the level of support for policy issues (Rasinski, 1989). Moreover, such general questions as ‘Are you in favour of or against basic income?’ and ‘Is basic income good or bad?’ tend to produce much higher support levels than more specific questions that aim to explain the content of the basic income model (Pulkka, 2018). One obvious feature of general survey questions on basic income is that they do not give any indication to the respondent about the possible costs of implementing basic income. In some Finnish surveys, the respondents were given more detailed information about the costs and tax levels needed to finance the benefit. Such more-detailed information decreased the support levels to lower than 30 percent (Airio et al., 2016).
人们越来越有兴趣了解芬兰和全球对基本收入的普遍支持。一方面，研究人员试图评估不同国家的支持水平，另一方面，解释人群中支持的差异。除了对科学的好奇，调查人口支持度也有实际的原因。这些原因与政治和政策制定密切相关:例如，政党旨在了解选民的意见，以一种与潜在选民的意见产生共鸣的方式来制定他们的政治议程，并最大限度地提高他们在选举中的政治支持。在过去的二十年里，芬兰对基本收入的支持一直很稳定。在芬兰基本收入实验之前进行的调查显示，大约60%至70%的芬兰人支持全民基本收入(Airio等人，2016;Andersson和Kangas, 2005)。然而，最近关于民众支持率的研究提供了高度分歧的结果。不同调查结果的差异很可能与调查问卷中对基本收入的定义不同有关。先前的研究表明，对政策问题的支持程度往往存在实质性的框架效应(Rasinski, 1989)。此外，诸如“你是赞成还是反对基本收入?”以及“基本收入是好还是坏?”的问题往往比旨在解释基本收入模型内容的更具体的问题产生更高的支持水平(Pulkka, 2018)。关于基本收入的一般性调查问题的一个明显特征是，它们没有向受访者提供任何关于实施基本收入的可能成本的指示。在芬兰的一些调查中，答复者得到了有关资助该福利所需的成本和税收水平的更详细信息。这些更详细的信息将支持水平降低到30%以下(Airio et al.， 2016)。
{"title":"What explains the popular support for basic income?","authors":"Miska Simanainen, O. Kangas","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00019","url":null,"abstract":"There is growing interest in understanding the popular support for basic income in Finland and globally. On the one hand, researchers have tried to evaluate the level of support in different countries, and, on the other hand, to explain the variation of support within populations. In addition to scientific curiosity, there are practical reasons for surveying population support. These reasons are closely linked to politics and policymaking: for example, political parties aim to understand the opinions of the electorate to frame their political agenda in a way that resonates with opinions among their possible voters and maximises their political support in elections. During the last two decades, support for basic income has been stable in Finland. Surveys carried out before the Finnish basic income experiment showed that about 60 to 70 percent of Finns were in favour of universal basic income (Airio et al., 2016; Andersson and Kangas, 2005). However, recent studies on popular support have provided highly divergent results. Differences in the results of separate surveys are likely related to differences in the definitions of basic income given in the questionnaires. Previous research has shown that there tends to be a substantial framing effect on the level of support for policy issues (Rasinski, 1989). Moreover, such general questions as ‘Are you in favour of or against basic income?’ and ‘Is basic income good or bad?’ tend to produce much higher support levels than more specific questions that aim to explain the content of the basic income model (Pulkka, 2018). One obvious feature of general survey questions on basic income is that they do not give any indication to the respondent about the possible costs of implementing basic income. In some Finnish surveys, the respondents were given more detailed information about the costs and tax levels needed to finance the benefit. Such more-detailed information decreased the support levels to lower than 30 percent (Airio et al., 2016).","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124662503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.4337/9781839104855.00012
Anna-Kaisa Tuovinen
The Finnish basic income experiment was planned and conducted as a mandatory experiment to avoid selection biases and obtain statistically generalisable and reliable results (HE 215/2016 vp). It appears to have been the very first basic income experiment in the world based on mandatory participation and a randomised nationwide sample (2000 persons). An experiment of this kind could not have been implemented without amendments to the social security legislation. Therefore, this chapter examines, albeit rather briefly, the constitutional preconditions for the legislation governing the Finnish basic income experiment. The rule of law is a fundamental principle of democratic society. The Constitution of Finland (731/1999) requires, among other things, that ‘[t]he exercise of public powers shall be based on an Act. In all public activity, the law shall be strictly followed’ (Section 2.3) and that ‘the principles governing the rights and obligations of private individuals and the other matters that under this Constitution are of a legislative nature shall be governed by Acts’ (Section 80.1). Owing to these constitutional provisions, individuals cannot be compelled to participate in an experiment in the absence of relevant legislation. Hence, participation in the basic income experiment was made mandatory by law for those who were selected as part of the treatment group via random sampling. This group received the basic income benefit during the course of the experiment in 2017–18 (henceforth, the treatment group). In addition, the right to social security is not only a human right, but also a fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of Finland: ‘[e]veryone shall be guaranteed by an Act the right to basic subsistence in the event of unemployment, illness, and disability and during old age as well as at the birth of a child or the loss of a provider’ (Section 19.2). The treatment group comprised 2000 persons who were recipients of the basic unemployment allowance or labour market subsidy in November 2016.
{"title":"Constitutional preconditions for the Finnish basic income experiment","authors":"Anna-Kaisa Tuovinen","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00012","url":null,"abstract":"The Finnish basic income experiment was planned and conducted as a mandatory experiment to avoid selection biases and obtain statistically generalisable and reliable results (HE 215/2016 vp). It appears to have been the very first basic income experiment in the world based on mandatory participation and a randomised nationwide sample (2000 persons). An experiment of this kind could not have been implemented without amendments to the social security legislation. Therefore, this chapter examines, albeit rather briefly, the constitutional preconditions for the legislation governing the Finnish basic income experiment. The rule of law is a fundamental principle of democratic society. The Constitution of Finland (731/1999) requires, among other things, that ‘[t]he exercise of public powers shall be based on an Act. In all public activity, the law shall be strictly followed’ (Section 2.3) and that ‘the principles governing the rights and obligations of private individuals and the other matters that under this Constitution are of a legislative nature shall be governed by Acts’ (Section 80.1). Owing to these constitutional provisions, individuals cannot be compelled to participate in an experiment in the absence of relevant legislation. Hence, participation in the basic income experiment was made mandatory by law for those who were selected as part of the treatment group via random sampling. This group received the basic income benefit during the course of the experiment in 2017–18 (henceforth, the treatment group). In addition, the right to social security is not only a human right, but also a fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of Finland: ‘[e]veryone shall be guaranteed by an Act the right to basic subsistence in the event of unemployment, illness, and disability and during old age as well as at the birth of a child or the loss of a provider’ (Section 19.2). The treatment group comprised 2000 persons who were recipients of the basic unemployment allowance or labour market subsidy in November 2016.","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124007741","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.4337/9781839104855.00020
Helena Blomberg, C. Kroll, Laura Tarkiainen
{"title":"Life on basic income - Interview accounts by basic income experiment participants on the effects of the experiment","authors":"Helena Blomberg, C. Kroll, Laura Tarkiainen","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00020","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116350185","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.4337/9781839104855.00011
O. Kangas
{"title":"Making of the Finnish basic income experiment","authors":"O. Kangas","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126890209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.4337/9781839104855.00021
Katja Mäkkylä
In 2017–2018 Finland conducted a basic income experiment. The randomly selected experiment group consisted of 2000 unemployed persons between 25 and 58 years. The group received a monthly payment of €560, unconditionally and without means testing. The main purpose of the experiment was to study the effects of the basic income on employment and well-being. The Finnish basic income experiment was exceptional in many ways and generated interest worldwide. Coverage of the Finnish experiment, in both the Finnish and international media, has been remarkable before, during and after the experiment. Social experiments cannot be implemented in a laboratory, but rather take place within communities, and their participants are individuals living their everyday lives. Social experiments occur in public; therefore, publicity is one characteristic of such experiments, and it is important to shed light on it. One way to study publicity is to study the media coverage of the issue. The news media, among other forms of mediated communication, has a significant role in the construction of reality (Couldry and Hepp, 2018). One way the news media can construct reality is by framing how an issue is approached. Frames can be described as ‘organizing principles that are socially shared and persistent over time that work symbolically to meaningfully structure the social world’ (Reese, 2001: 11). In this chapter, I explore coverage of the Finnish basic income experiment in both the Finnish and international media. Specifically, I address the research question of how the Finnish and international media have framed the Finnish basic income experiment. To study media coverage, its characteristics, and prevailing perspectives, I used media framing analysis, concentrating on identification of media frames and frame-building. In this chapter, I first present media framing theory, and the theoretical and conceptual approaches to media frames, and the media framing process. Thereafter, sections on data and methods used in this study are presented. In
2017-2018年，芬兰进行了一项基本收入试验。随机选择的实验组由2000名年龄在25岁到58岁之间的失业者组成。这群人每月无条件地收到560欧元，没有经济状况调查。实验的主要目的是研究基本收入对就业和福祉的影响。芬兰的基本收入试验在许多方面都是例外，并引起了全世界的兴趣。芬兰和国际媒体对芬兰实验的报道在实验之前、期间和之后都非常引人注目。社会实验不能在实验室中进行，而是在社区中进行，其参与者是过着日常生活的个人。社会实验发生在公共场合;因此，公开性是这类实验的一个特点，阐明它是很重要的。研究宣传的一种方法是研究媒体对这个问题的报道。在其他形式的媒介传播中，新闻媒体在构建现实中起着重要作用(Couldry and Hepp, 2018)。新闻媒体构建现实的一种方式是构建如何处理问题的框架。框架可以被描述为“社会共享的组织原则，并随着时间的推移而持续存在，象征性地有意义地构建社会世界”(Reese, 2001: 11)。在本章中，我将探讨芬兰和国际媒体对芬兰基本收入实验的报道。具体来说，我将探讨芬兰和国际媒体是如何构建芬兰基本收入实验的研究问题。为了研究媒体报道及其特征和流行观点，我使用了媒体框架分析，重点是媒体框架的识别和框架的构建。在本章中，我首先介绍了媒体框架理论，以及媒体框架的理论和概念方法，以及媒体框架过程。随后，介绍了本研究中使用的数据和方法。在
{"title":"Media coverage of the Finnish basic income experiment","authors":"Katja Mäkkylä","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00021","url":null,"abstract":"In 2017–2018 Finland conducted a basic income experiment. The randomly selected experiment group consisted of 2000 unemployed persons between 25 and 58 years. The group received a monthly payment of €560, unconditionally and without means testing. The main purpose of the experiment was to study the effects of the basic income on employment and well-being. The Finnish basic income experiment was exceptional in many ways and generated interest worldwide. Coverage of the Finnish experiment, in both the Finnish and international media, has been remarkable before, during and after the experiment. Social experiments cannot be implemented in a laboratory, but rather take place within communities, and their participants are individuals living their everyday lives. Social experiments occur in public; therefore, publicity is one characteristic of such experiments, and it is important to shed light on it. One way to study publicity is to study the media coverage of the issue. The news media, among other forms of mediated communication, has a significant role in the construction of reality (Couldry and Hepp, 2018). One way the news media can construct reality is by framing how an issue is approached. Frames can be described as ‘organizing principles that are socially shared and persistent over time that work symbolically to meaningfully structure the social world’ (Reese, 2001: 11). In this chapter, I explore coverage of the Finnish basic income experiment in both the Finnish and international media. Specifically, I address the research question of how the Finnish and international media have framed the Finnish basic income experiment. To study media coverage, its characteristics, and prevailing perspectives, I used media framing analysis, concentrating on identification of media frames and frame-building. In this chapter, I first present media framing theory, and the theoretical and conceptual approaches to media frames, and the media framing process. Thereafter, sections on data and methods used in this study are presented. In","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130687102","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.4337/9781839104855.00015
Miska Simanainen, A. Tuulio-Henriksson
The existence of the relationship between poverty and poor health has been known for ages, although the actual mechanisms that connect poverty to health have not been well understood. A growing body of literature indicates that unemployment (which often goes hand in hand with poverty) can pose substantial health risks by negatively affecting, in particular, the mental health, psychological well-being and cognitive capabilities of those who experience it (for example, Acevedo et al., 2020; Wahrendorf et al., 2019; Wanberg, 2012; Pelzer et al., 2014; Van der Noordt et al., 2014; Kim and von dem Knesebeck, 2016). Moreover, we know that the psychological, social and economic dimensions of well-being are strongly interconnected. Unemployment usually leads to a lack of financial resources, and financial resources serve as an important determinant of well-being (Paul and Moser, 2009). Unemployment can also decrease life satisfaction and happiness by means other than income, such as reducing social participation (Kunze and Suppa, 2017). From a practical perspective, whether we can govern the complex relationship between poverty and well-being through a policy action is an important question. Unconditional cash transfers (UCT) are one potential group of policy instruments for organising social security. UCTs are regular cash transfers that are paid without screening for eligibility and without income-testing or means-testing. Earlier studies have indicated that the introduction of a UCT policy could improve population health. For example, Forget (2011) reports positive results from a Canadian experiment with a guaranteed annual income. Another body of evidence suggests that UCTs may improve some health outcomes in low and middle-income countries, although the relative effectiveness of UCTs and conditional cash transfer programmes (CCT) remains uncertain (for example, Costello et al., 2003; Davala et al., 2015; Pega et al., 2017).
人们早就知道贫穷与健康状况不佳之间存在关系，尽管人们对贫穷与健康之间联系的实际机制还没有很好地了解。越来越多的文献表明，失业(往往与贫困密切相关)尤其会对失业者的精神健康、心理健康和认知能力产生负面影响，从而构成重大健康风险(例如，Acevedo等人，2020年;Wahrendorf等人，2019;Wanberg, 2012;Pelzer et al.， 2014;Van der Noordt et al.， 2014;Kim and von dem Knesebeck, 2016)。此外，我们知道，幸福的心理、社会和经济层面是紧密相连的。失业通常会导致缺乏财政资源，而财政资源是幸福的重要决定因素(Paul and Moser, 2009)。失业还可以通过收入以外的方式降低生活满意度和幸福感，例如减少社会参与(Kunze和Suppa, 2017)。从实践的角度来看，我们能否通过政策行动来治理贫困与福祉之间的复杂关系是一个重要的问题。无条件现金转移支付(UCT)是组织社会保障的一组潜在政策工具。uct是定期的现金转移支付，没有资格筛选，没有收入调查或经济状况调查。早些时候的研究表明，实行综合技术支助政策可以改善人口健康。例如，《忘记》(2011)报道了加拿大一项有年收入保证的实验的积极结果。另一个证据表明，uct可能改善低收入和中等收入国家的某些健康结果，尽管uct和有条件现金转移支付方案(CCT)的相对有效性仍然不确定(例如，Costello等人，2003;Davala et al.， 2015;Pega et al.， 2017)。
{"title":"Subjective health, well-being and cognitive capabilities","authors":"Miska Simanainen, A. Tuulio-Henriksson","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00015","url":null,"abstract":"The existence of the relationship between poverty and poor health has been known for ages, although the actual mechanisms that connect poverty to health have not been well understood. A growing body of literature indicates that unemployment (which often goes hand in hand with poverty) can pose substantial health risks by negatively affecting, in particular, the mental health, psychological well-being and cognitive capabilities of those who experience it (for example, Acevedo et al., 2020; Wahrendorf et al., 2019; Wanberg, 2012; Pelzer et al., 2014; Van der Noordt et al., 2014; Kim and von dem Knesebeck, 2016). Moreover, we know that the psychological, social and economic dimensions of well-being are strongly interconnected. Unemployment usually leads to a lack of financial resources, and financial resources serve as an important determinant of well-being (Paul and Moser, 2009). Unemployment can also decrease life satisfaction and happiness by means other than income, such as reducing social participation (Kunze and Suppa, 2017). From a practical perspective, whether we can govern the complex relationship between poverty and well-being through a policy action is an important question. Unconditional cash transfers (UCT) are one potential group of policy instruments for organising social security. UCTs are regular cash transfers that are paid without screening for eligibility and without income-testing or means-testing. Earlier studies have indicated that the introduction of a UCT policy could improve population health. For example, Forget (2011) reports positive results from a Canadian experiment with a guaranteed annual income. Another body of evidence suggests that UCTs may improve some health outcomes in low and middle-income countries, although the relative effectiveness of UCTs and conditional cash transfer programmes (CCT) remains uncertain (for example, Costello et al., 2003; Davala et al., 2015; Pega et al., 2017).","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"22 S11","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132388784","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.4337/9781839104855.00014
Minna Ylikännö, O. Kangas
In the Finnish basic income experiment, the main interest was in its employment effects. The centre-right government of Prime Minister Juha Sipilä (2015–19) wanted to know whether the provision of basic income would reduce bureaucracy, income traps, and other disincentives linked to the present social security system (see Kangas and Pulkka, 2016; De Wispelaere et al., 2019; Chapter 2 above), thus boosting labour supply and increasing employment. The target group of the experiment consisted only of unemployed jobseekers (see Chapter 3). This is not the first time that the unemployed are direct targets of measures to increase labour supply. Since the 1950s, elements of active labour market policies (ALMPs) have been gradually introduced in Finnish employment policies. Most social benefits given are intended to activate the benefit recipients in their job search. This policy paradigm culminated in the activation model implemented at the beginning of 2018. The same government that implemented the two-year basic income experiment introduced the activation model in the middle of the experiment. The activation model introduced a set of stricter criteria for all unemployed persons in Finland who were receiving unemployment benefits. Within a three-month surveillance period, unemployed jobseekers had to work for 18 days, take part in active labour market services for five days, or earn income from their own business to avoid a 4.65 percent cut in unemployment benefits during a three-month surveillance period. Owing to massive criticism from citizens and trade unions, the newly-elected centre-left government, the Social Democratic Party, with leader Antti Rinne as Prime Minister, abolished the activation model at the beginning of 2020.1 The emphasis of the government, now led by Prime Minister Sanna Marin, is more carrot than stick when promoting active citizenship. Considering the strong path dependence in policymaking, it is still unlikely that conditionality in the current unemployment benefit system would radically decrease.
{"title":"Basic income and employment","authors":"Minna Ylikännö, O. Kangas","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00014","url":null,"abstract":"In the Finnish basic income experiment, the main interest was in its employment effects. The centre-right government of Prime Minister Juha Sipilä (2015–19) wanted to know whether the provision of basic income would reduce bureaucracy, income traps, and other disincentives linked to the present social security system (see Kangas and Pulkka, 2016; De Wispelaere et al., 2019; Chapter 2 above), thus boosting labour supply and increasing employment. The target group of the experiment consisted only of unemployed jobseekers (see Chapter 3). This is not the first time that the unemployed are direct targets of measures to increase labour supply. Since the 1950s, elements of active labour market policies (ALMPs) have been gradually introduced in Finnish employment policies. Most social benefits given are intended to activate the benefit recipients in their job search. This policy paradigm culminated in the activation model implemented at the beginning of 2018. The same government that implemented the two-year basic income experiment introduced the activation model in the middle of the experiment. The activation model introduced a set of stricter criteria for all unemployed persons in Finland who were receiving unemployment benefits. Within a three-month surveillance period, unemployed jobseekers had to work for 18 days, take part in active labour market services for five days, or earn income from their own business to avoid a 4.65 percent cut in unemployment benefits during a three-month surveillance period. Owing to massive criticism from citizens and trade unions, the newly-elected centre-left government, the Social Democratic Party, with leader Antti Rinne as Prime Minister, abolished the activation model at the beginning of 2020.1 The emphasis of the government, now led by Prime Minister Sanna Marin, is more carrot than stick when promoting active citizenship. Considering the strong path dependence in policymaking, it is still unlikely that conditionality in the current unemployment benefit system would radically decrease.","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"133 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127792537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.4337/9781839104855.00010
O. Kangas, Miska Simanainen
All basic income experiments so far have been planned and implemented in national or local contexts. Thus, the questions posed in the experiments and the answers achieved are bound to time and place. To understand the motivations behind the experiments and the results achieved, we need familiarity with the institutional frameworks in which they occur. This also applies to the Finnish basic income experiment. In this chapter, we shed light on the context in which the experiment was planned, implemented, and carried out. The Finnish social protection system is comprehensive, and because of its comprehensiveness, it is complicated and difficult to describe in a simple way. We shall try anyway. In its simplest form, the Finnish social security comprises three parts. The first part guarantees minimum income security for all Finnish residents (rather than citizens, as explained below). It includes ‘basic level’ social benefits paid either at a flat-rate or after means-testing based on personal or household income. The second part consists of income-related social insurance for those in employment. The third part of the system includes municipal social and health care services covering all residents from cradle to grave. (Kela, 2019). In large part due to this comprehensiveness, the Finnish welfare state ranks top in the world in many aspects of economic and non-economic well-being. In Finland, shares of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion are among the lowest in the EU, for the total population and among all age groups. The income transfer system effectively lifts low-income people above the poverty line and equalises income differences (for example, Olafsson et al., 2019; Eurostat, 2020). Free or affordable public services just as effectively promote social inclusion through good quality education, health and social services, and public employment services, among many others.
{"title":"The Finnish social security system: Background to the Finnish basic income experiment","authors":"O. Kangas, Miska Simanainen","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00010","url":null,"abstract":"All basic income experiments so far have been planned and implemented in national or local contexts. Thus, the questions posed in the experiments and the answers achieved are bound to time and place. To understand the motivations behind the experiments and the results achieved, we need familiarity with the institutional frameworks in which they occur. This also applies to the Finnish basic income experiment. In this chapter, we shed light on the context in which the experiment was planned, implemented, and carried out. The Finnish social protection system is comprehensive, and because of its comprehensiveness, it is complicated and difficult to describe in a simple way. We shall try anyway. In its simplest form, the Finnish social security comprises three parts. The first part guarantees minimum income security for all Finnish residents (rather than citizens, as explained below). It includes ‘basic level’ social benefits paid either at a flat-rate or after means-testing based on personal or household income. The second part consists of income-related social insurance for those in employment. The third part of the system includes municipal social and health care services covering all residents from cradle to grave. (Kela, 2019). In large part due to this comprehensiveness, the Finnish welfare state ranks top in the world in many aspects of economic and non-economic well-being. In Finland, shares of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion are among the lowest in the EU, for the total population and among all age groups. The income transfer system effectively lifts low-income people above the poverty line and equalises income differences (for example, Olafsson et al., 2019; Eurostat, 2020). Free or affordable public services just as effectively promote social inclusion through good quality education, health and social services, and public employment services, among many others.","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"102 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122969198","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.4337/9781839104855.00013
Signe Jauhiainen, O. Kangas, Miska Simanainen, Minna Ylikännö
The aim of the Finnish basic income experiment was to provide information for the coming social security reforms and to test a new type of social security benefit that would better meet the challenges of the future labour market. From the outset, the idea was to run a randomised controlled trial that could be reliably evaluated. Randomised controlled trials have been used in medicine for several decades to examine the effects of various medicines. In addition, randomised controlled trials have become widespread in development economics, and they have extended over the social sciences. Randomised controlled trials conducted in natural settings are often called field experiments. Randomised controlled trials are utilised in cases where it is unclear what the actual effect would be and whether a treatment, such as development programmes, is effective (Gerber and Green, 2012; Glennerster and Takavarasha, 2013). Trials can also be informative for policy implementation because costs and risks are significantly lower in an experiment organised in a small scale than in a full-scale implementation process (Haynes et al., 2012). In real life, we cannot observe both outcomes for the same individual simultaneously with and without treatment. In other words, we cannot observe the counterfactual. Units of the target group, such as individuals or villages, are divided into groups in a randomised controlled trial. The assignment to the treatment and control groups is random, ensuring that the average effect of the treatment can be evaluated. The treatment and control groups have no systematic differences affecting the results, which imitates the counterfactual. In addition, the effects of external factors, such as economic fluctuations, can be excluded. As a result, randomised controlled trials allow causal inferences to be made. When the treatment and control groups are identical at the beginning of the experiment, the observed difference between the groups is attributed to
芬兰基本收入试验的目的是为即将进行的社会保障改革提供资料，并试验一种新的社会保障福利，以更好地应付未来劳动力市场的挑战。从一开始，我们的想法就是进行一项能够可靠评估的随机对照试验。几十年来，医学界一直在使用随机对照试验来检验各种药物的效果。此外，随机对照试验已在发展经济学中广泛应用，并已扩展到社会科学领域。在自然环境中进行的随机对照试验通常被称为实地试验。在不清楚实际效果是什么以及治疗(如发展计划)是否有效的情况下，使用随机对照试验(Gerber和Green, 2012;Glennerster and Takavarasha, 2013)。试验也可以为政策实施提供信息，因为小规模实验的成本和风险明显低于全面实施过程(Haynes et al.， 2012)。在现实生活中，我们无法同时观察到同一个人接受治疗和不接受治疗的两种结果。换句话说，我们无法观察到反事实。在随机对照试验中，目标群体(如个人或村庄)的单位被分成不同的组。治疗组和对照组的分配是随机的，以确保可以评估治疗的平均效果。治疗组和对照组没有影响结果的系统差异，这模仿了反事实。此外，可以排除经济波动等外部因素的影响。因此，随机对照试验允许进行因果推论。当实验组和对照组在实验开始时相同时，观察到的组间差异归因于
{"title":"Evaluation of the experiment","authors":"Signe Jauhiainen, O. Kangas, Miska Simanainen, Minna Ylikännö","doi":"10.4337/9781839104855.00013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839104855.00013","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the Finnish basic income experiment was to provide information for the coming social security reforms and to test a new type of social security benefit that would better meet the challenges of the future labour market. From the outset, the idea was to run a randomised controlled trial that could be reliably evaluated. Randomised controlled trials have been used in medicine for several decades to examine the effects of various medicines. In addition, randomised controlled trials have become widespread in development economics, and they have extended over the social sciences. Randomised controlled trials conducted in natural settings are often called field experiments. Randomised controlled trials are utilised in cases where it is unclear what the actual effect would be and whether a treatment, such as development programmes, is effective (Gerber and Green, 2012; Glennerster and Takavarasha, 2013). Trials can also be informative for policy implementation because costs and risks are significantly lower in an experiment organised in a small scale than in a full-scale implementation process (Haynes et al., 2012). In real life, we cannot observe both outcomes for the same individual simultaneously with and without treatment. In other words, we cannot observe the counterfactual. Units of the target group, such as individuals or villages, are divided into groups in a randomised controlled trial. The assignment to the treatment and control groups is random, ensuring that the average effect of the treatment can be evaluated. The treatment and control groups have no systematic differences affecting the results, which imitates the counterfactual. In addition, the effects of external factors, such as economic fluctuations, can be excluded. As a result, randomised controlled trials allow causal inferences to be made. When the treatment and control groups are identical at the beginning of the experiment, the observed difference between the groups is attributed to","PeriodicalId":254675,"journal":{"name":"Experimenting with Unconditional Basic Income","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133607158","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：