To prevent financial assistance from going to those who do not need it, it is appropriate to relax the universality principle by offering a monthly Basic Income specifically to unemployed individuals aged eighteen and older. This approach creates a targeted basic income aimed at reducing poverty among the unemployed who live in difficult circumstances and experience social exclusion.
The amount of cash transfers needed for this targeted approach could represent about 25% to 28% of the country’s Gross Domestic Product. Since this type of assistance will be used for buying goods and services, it can help drive GDP growth, provided the macroeconomic environment is supportive. To address affordability, this program could target 25% of the population in the first year of its implementation, to achieve 100% coverage by the end of the fourth year.
However, this gradual approach could cause an even greater injustice than it seeks to resolve, as those in greatest need of help might end up receiving it last or not at all. Furthermore, the administrative burden associated with implementing a basic income for the unemployed is, at best, Herculean, and the expected low cardinality of the eligibility data will be overwhelmingly cumbersome. However, it is worth facing and overcoming all these challenges to reduce the suffering and societal evils stemming from the lack of such a wide-ranging measure. Implementing a basic income for the unemployed could effectively reduce poverty and create a livable, hospitable, and sustainable society.
Basic Income Conditional on Unemployment, Participation, and Training
In addition to the unemployment status condition, individuals aged eighteen and older must agree to participate in community-focused work that supports sustainability initiatives in their local areas. They must also dedicate a pre-determined number of hours each week to training to enhance their skills. The introduction of the participation and training conditions is likely to reduce the number of recipients, thereby improving affordability.
The participation conditions offer an effective means of alleviating the responsibilities associated with service provision. Allowing people to participate in activities such as garbage collection, teaching basic reading and math, planting trees, working as agricultural workers, cleaning up watersheds, or maintaining parks can significantly reduce related expenses.
However, conditional cash transfers may not effectively address the root causes of poverty and could well foster dependence on such programs. Furthermore, the administrative complexities involved in managing a targeted program may outweigh the benefits expected from the participation condition itself. While a universal basic income approach is highly desirable, due to its simplicity, this multi-condition basic income remains the next best option for reducing poverty in the country.
Participation Incentive
To address affordability, proportionality, and necessity, one potential alternative could be to offer a Basic Income (cash transfers) exclusively to unemployed individuals aged eighteen and older (Employment condition) who voluntarily organize into mutual aid groups (self-help groups) to engage in common-interest projects centered on sustainability initiatives within their local communities (participation).
The Mutual Aid Group members would also commit to receiving a fixed number of hours of weekly training (participation) designed to enhance their skills and abilities. Conceived in this way, the Basic Income Conditional on Unemployment, Participation, and Training becomes a Participation Incentive aimed at fostering the creation and organization of Mutual Aid Groups in local communities, at the Communal Section level, thereby promoting civic engagement, solidarity, and reciprocity among citizens.
This approach not only relaxes the principle of universality but also addresses affordability concerns while empowering unemployed individuals to break the cycle of poverty. It allows them to transition from mere beneficiaries to active partners and decision-makers in improving their living conditions, fostering self-reliance and positioning them for sustained progress.
However, focusing on mutual aid groups that strive to escape poverty may inadvertently create a dependence on participation (those able to participate), potentially excluding population groups who face various barriers to engagement. The Participation Incentive model might not provide immediate relief to those in urgent need, especially when compared to a universal income. Additionally, it may not adequately tackle the root causes of poverty.
Fundamentally, Participation Incentive (PI) differs from Universal Basic Income (UBI) in that it requires participation rather than being unconditional. However, it is worth noting that participation incentives have the potential to evolve into inclusive national programs as their geographic coverage and scope expand over time, and barriers to participation and engagement are removed.
Participation includes contributing 20 hours to community-focused work and undertaking 10 hours of training each week. A participation incentive of $120 would not deter the unemployed from seeking employment, especially considering that the average monthly income in Haiti ranges between $150 and $180, which is significantly higher than the participation incentive.