Want to learn more about this #UBI study? RSVP this is free webinar: givedirect.ly/webinar It's a discussion of the evidence on lump sum payments for poverty reduction vs. regular social assistance "flow" payments. GiveDirectly will share the initial findings from the world’s longest?Universal Basic Income (#UBI) study, which includes 3 treatment arms - 2 groups receiving rmonthly payments (2 years & 12 years) and 1 receiving a lump sum payment as basis for the discussion: https://lnkd.in/eW4NDQ79 Panelists from UNICEF, the Malawi Government, and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill will discuss the policy implications of these findings and other related evidence - addressing key issues including the replicability of these findings in different contexts, complementarity of lump sums and social assistance payments, and the implications for fiscal space. ? Speakers: Miriam Laker-Oketta Research Director, GiveDirectly Ashu Handa, Professor of Public Policy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Sarah Hague, Regional Adviser - Social Policy and Social Protection, UNICEF Dalitso Kalimba, Deputy Director in the Poverty Reduction and Social Protection Division, Malawi Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning Peter Atego Obedo, Senior Chief, South West Sakwa, Bondo Subcounty, Siaya County, Kenya Moderator:?Isabelle Pelly, Policy Director, GiveDirectly RSVP: givedirect.ly/webinar
Here’s a break down of findings form the world’s longest #UBI study from Miriam Laker-Oketta. ? ? A monthly universal basic income (UBI) empowered recipients and did not create idleness. They invested, became more entrepreneurial, and earned more. The common concern of “laziness” never materialized, as recipients did not work less nor drink more. ? ? Both a large lump sum and a long-term UBI proved highly effective. The lump sum enabled big investments and the guarantee of 12 years of UBI encouraged savings and risk-taking. ? A short-term UBI was the least impactful of the designs but still effective. On nearly all important economic measures, a 2-year-only UBI performed less well than giving cash as a large lump sum or guaranteeing a long-term UBI, despite each group having received roughly the same total amount of money at this point. However, it still had a positive impact on most measures. ??People need larger sums to make bigger investments. To quote the researchers: “Discussions about UBI usually begin from a narrative of meeting basic needs. But even the most destitute households often look for ways to accumulate sums of money large enough to make larger, lumpier purchases. Designing [cash transfer] schemes in ways that respond to this need could make them a more compelling strategy for addressing extreme poverty over time.” -?Tavneet Suri?et al. ?? Governments should consider changing how they deliver cash aid. Short-term monthly payments, which this study found to be the least impactful design, are the most common way people in both low- and high-income countries receive cash assistance, and it’s how most UBI pilots are currently designed. ??https://lnkd.in/e9cqUt2V Thanks to our research partners at?Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)?&?Innovations for Poverty Action?#research?#ubi?#universalbasicincome