Daily Junction.mobi portalOpinion · December 31, 2025 · Liam Chen · 2 min
Universal basic income has been piloted in multiple countries. Here is what the evidence says — including the results that supporters and critics both rely on.
The two best-evidenced UBI pilots are Finland's 2017-2018 experiment (2,000 unemployed people receiving €560 per month with no conditions) and GiveDirectly's Kenya programme (long-term unconditional cash transfers to extremely poor households). The Finnish pilot found significantly improved wellbeing, mental health and trust in institutions, with a small increase in employment compared to the control group. The Kenya programme has found substantial improvements in economic activity, food security, asset accumulation and mental health.
A consistent concern raised against UBI is that paying people unconditionally will reduce their incentive to work. The empirical evidence from pilots and from natural experiments (lottery winners, native American casino dividend payments) does not support significant work reduction at income levels equivalent to current welfare payments. The most consistent finding is a modest reduction in working hours among mothers with young children and elderly recipients — arguably desirable outcomes — without a general withdrawal from employment.
The central policy challenge is cost. A meaningful UBI — paying each adult UK resident enough to cover basic needs (roughly £800-1,000 per month) — would cost in the region of £400-600 billion per year, the majority of government spending. This requires either replacing most existing benefits (which creates losers) or significant new taxation. The proposals that are cost-neutral tend to be insufficiently generous; the proposals that are sufficiently generous require very significant redistribution.
The empirical case for UBI is strongest in two contexts: replacing complex, means-tested benefit systems that have high administrative costs and create poverty traps (where earning more reduces benefits, producing effective marginal tax rates of 80%+); and in contexts of extreme poverty where basic financial security is transformative. The case for universal rather than targeted payments partly rests on the political sustainability and dignity of universal programmes, rather than purely on efficiency grounds.
![[View image]](/img/the-case-for-universal-basic-income.jpg){kind=link}