英国的现代福利是对贝弗里奇的普遍(不)褒奖。现在是实行基本收入的时候了吗?

IF 2.6 2区 社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Social Policy & Administration Pub Date : 2024-01-11 DOI:10.1111/spol.13002
Dave Beck, Remco Peters, Gemma Bridge, Francis Poitier, Ben Pearson
{"title":"英国的现代福利是对贝弗里奇的普遍(不)褒奖。现在是实行基本收入的时候了吗?","authors":"Dave Beck, Remco Peters, Gemma Bridge, Francis Poitier, Ben Pearson","doi":"10.1111/spol.13002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Universal Credit signalled a revolution in the delivery and costs of welfare provisioning. UC aimed to reduce spending on welfare, but in doing so now threatens the stability of a functioning and cohesive society. Over recent years, and most notably during the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become ever clearer that adequate social security is vital to the functioning of society, as well as to the health and well-being of the population. Yet this period has also served to highlight the fragility and insufficiency of welfare in the United Kingdom. This article explores how the current welfare crisis, is associated with UC. In this article, we also consider the uncertainty that UC has created in most recipients. We argue that there are other ways to support the most vulnerable in society, and that we are now at that critical juncture in needing to make significant change. Universal Basic Income (UBI) offers one such alternative by offering stable, individual, non-means tested, and unconditional money transfers, to all citizens. Over the last decade, there have been multiple experiments around the world trialling basic income, each of which has a specific focus, or target population, as different elements of a UBI were scrutinised. In this article, we reflect upon what we consider to be the potential shortcomings of the current welfare system in the United Kingdom as a move away from its origin, arguing that the United Kingdom is now primed for UBI to be considered a fair and legitimate way to provide social security.","PeriodicalId":47858,"journal":{"name":"Social Policy & Administration","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modern welfare in the United Kingdom is a universal (dis)credit to Beveridge. Is it time for a basic income?\",\"authors\":\"Dave Beck, Remco Peters, Gemma Bridge, Francis Poitier, Ben Pearson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/spol.13002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Universal Credit signalled a revolution in the delivery and costs of welfare provisioning. UC aimed to reduce spending on welfare, but in doing so now threatens the stability of a functioning and cohesive society. Over recent years, and most notably during the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become ever clearer that adequate social security is vital to the functioning of society, as well as to the health and well-being of the population. Yet this period has also served to highlight the fragility and insufficiency of welfare in the United Kingdom. This article explores how the current welfare crisis, is associated with UC. In this article, we also consider the uncertainty that UC has created in most recipients. We argue that there are other ways to support the most vulnerable in society, and that we are now at that critical juncture in needing to make significant change. Universal Basic Income (UBI) offers one such alternative by offering stable, individual, non-means tested, and unconditional money transfers, to all citizens. Over the last decade, there have been multiple experiments around the world trialling basic income, each of which has a specific focus, or target population, as different elements of a UBI were scrutinised. In this article, we reflect upon what we consider to be the potential shortcomings of the current welfare system in the United Kingdom as a move away from its origin, arguing that the United Kingdom is now primed for UBI to be considered a fair and legitimate way to provide social security.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47858,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Policy & Administration\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Policy & Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.13002\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Policy & Administration","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.13002","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通用信贷标志着福利提供方式和成本的一场革命。普惠制旨在减少福利支出,但这样做却威胁到了一个正常运转且具有凝聚力的社会的稳定。近年来,尤其是在 COVID-19 大流行期间,人们越来越清楚地认识到,充足的社会保障对于社会的运转以及民众的健康和福祉至关重要。然而,这一时期也凸显了英国福利的脆弱性和不足。本文探讨了当前的福利危机是如何与 UC 联系在一起的。在这篇文章中,我们还考虑到了 UC 给大多数受助人带来的不确定性。我们认为,还有其他方法来支持社会中最弱势的群体,我们现在正处于需要做出重大改变的关键时刻。全民基本收入(UBI)通过向所有公民提供稳定的、个人的、无需经济状况调查的、无条件的货币转移支付,提供了这样一种选择。在过去的十年中,世界各地进行了多项基本收入试验,每项试验都有其特定的重点或目标人群,对全民基本收入的不同要素进行了仔细研究。在本文中,我们将对我们认为英国现行福利制度的潜在缺陷进行反思,以摆脱其起源,并认为英国现在已经具备了让全民基本收入被视为提供社会保障的一种公平、合法的方式的条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Modern welfare in the United Kingdom is a universal (dis)credit to Beveridge. Is it time for a basic income?
Universal Credit signalled a revolution in the delivery and costs of welfare provisioning. UC aimed to reduce spending on welfare, but in doing so now threatens the stability of a functioning and cohesive society. Over recent years, and most notably during the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become ever clearer that adequate social security is vital to the functioning of society, as well as to the health and well-being of the population. Yet this period has also served to highlight the fragility and insufficiency of welfare in the United Kingdom. This article explores how the current welfare crisis, is associated with UC. In this article, we also consider the uncertainty that UC has created in most recipients. We argue that there are other ways to support the most vulnerable in society, and that we are now at that critical juncture in needing to make significant change. Universal Basic Income (UBI) offers one such alternative by offering stable, individual, non-means tested, and unconditional money transfers, to all citizens. Over the last decade, there have been multiple experiments around the world trialling basic income, each of which has a specific focus, or target population, as different elements of a UBI were scrutinised. In this article, we reflect upon what we consider to be the potential shortcomings of the current welfare system in the United Kingdom as a move away from its origin, arguing that the United Kingdom is now primed for UBI to be considered a fair and legitimate way to provide social security.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Social Policy & Administration is the longest established journal in its field. Whilst remaining faithful to its tradition in academic excellence, the journal also seeks to engender debate about topical and controversial issues. Typical numbers contain papers clustered around a theme. The journal is international in scope. Quality contributions are received from scholars world-wide and cover social policy issues not only in Europe but in the USA, Canada, Australia and Asia Pacific.
期刊最新文献
The Use and Impact of Well‐Being Metrics on Policymaking: Developers' and Users' Perspectives in Scotland and Italy Practising Resilience: Lived Experience, Agency and Responses to the Cost‐of‐Living Crisis Profiles Among Women Without a Paid Job and Social Benefits: An Intersectional Perspective Using Dutch Population Register Data Work inclusion of marginalised groups in a troubled city district—How can active labour market policies improve? No welfare without workfare? Revisiting varieties of minimum income schemes in Europe (2008–2022)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1