Exploring the Purpose, Mechanics, Economic Principles, Sustainability, and Global Scalability Through Case Studies and Multidisciplinary Analysis
Prepared by: Gerald A. Daquila, PhD. Candidate
ABSTRACT
Universal Basic Income (UBI) has emerged as a compelling policy proposal to address economic inequality, poverty, and the disruptions caused by automation and globalization. This dissertation provides a comprehensive exploration of UBI, defining its core components, purposes, and economic underpinnings. It examines the mechanics of implementation, evaluates sustainability through fiscal and social lenses, and analyzes case studies from diverse global contexts to uncover lessons and challenges.
Using a multidisciplinary approach—integrating economics, sociology, political science, and environmental studies—this work assesses UBI’s potential to foster equitable societies while addressing scalability across countries with varying economic development levels. The findings suggest that while UBI holds transformative potential, its success hinges on tailored design, robust financing, and adaptive governance. Challenges such as labor market effects, political feasibility, and administrative complexity underscore the need for context-specific strategies to ensure sustainability and scalability.
Table of Contents
- Introduction
- What is Universal Basic Income?
- Definition and Core Features
- Historical Context
- Purpose and End Goals of UBI
- Addressing Poverty and Inequality
- Enhancing Economic Security
- Promoting Freedom and Social Justice
- Mechanics of UBI
- Design Dimensions: Coverage, Generosity, and Progressivity
- Financing Mechanisms
- Delivery Systems
- Economic Principles Underpinning UBI
- Redistribution and Equity
- Behavioral Economics and Incentives
- Macroeconomic Implications
- Sustainability of UBI
- Fiscal Sustainability
- Social and Political Sustainability
- Environmental Considerations
- Case Studies: Lessons and Challenges
- Finland (2017–2018)
- Kenya (2011–2013)
- India (2011–2012)
- Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend
- Scalability Across Diverse Economies
- High-Income Countries
- Middle-Income Countries
- Low-Income Countries
- Challenges to Implementation
- Administrative Barriers
- Political Resistance
- Economic Trade-offs
- Conclusion
- Glossary
- References
1. Introduction
Imagine a world where everyone receives a regular, no-strings-attached payment to cover their basic needs—food, shelter, and security—regardless of their job, wealth, or circumstances. This is the essence of Universal Basic Income (UBI), a policy gaining traction as societies grapple with rising inequality, job displacement from automation, and the economic fallout of crises like COVID-19. But what exactly is UBI, and can it deliver on its promise of a fairer, more secure world?
This dissertation dives into the concept of UBI, exploring its purpose, mechanics, and economic foundations while assessing its sustainability and global scalability. By analyzing case studies and drawing on multidisciplinary research, we aim to unpack the potential and pitfalls of UBI, offering a balanced perspective that bridges analytical rigor with human-centered storytelling.

Glyph of Stewardship
Stewardship is the covenant of trust that multiplies abundance for All.
2. What is Universal Basic Income?
Definition and Core Features
Universal Basic Income is a system where all citizens of a country—or a defined group—receive regular, unconditional cash payments, regardless of income, employment status, or other factors. Unlike traditional welfare programs, UBI is universal (available to everyone), unconditional (no requirements to qualify), and typically uniform (same amount for all recipients) (Van Parijs & Vanderborght, 2017). Key features include:
- Universality: Covers all individuals, not just specific groups.
- Unconditionality: No work or behavioral requirements.
- Regularity: Payments are consistent (e.g., monthly or annually).
- Sufficiency: Ideally sufficient to cover basic needs, though amounts vary.
Historical Context
The idea of UBI dates back centuries. Thomas Paine proposed a form of basic income in Agrarian Justice (1797), suggesting land taxes to fund payments for all citizens. In the 20th century, economists like Milton Friedman (negative income tax) and modern advocates like Philippe Van Parijs have shaped the discourse. Today, UBI is debated globally, fueled by concerns about automation, precarious employment, and social inequality (Standing, 2019).
3. Purpose and End Goals of UBI
Addressing Poverty and Inequality
UBI aims to eradicate poverty by providing a financial safety net. Trials, such as Brazil’s Bolsa Família, have shown significant poverty reduction, with similar outcomes in India’s pilot, where access to medicine and sanitation improved (Davala et al., 2015). By ensuring a baseline income, UBI reduces inequality, particularly in contexts where existing welfare systems fail to reach the poorest.
Enhancing Economic Security
In an era of gig economies and automation, UBI offers stability. The Stockton, California, experiment (2018–2021) demonstrated reduced homelessness and improved mental health among recipients, highlighting UBI’s role in cushioning economic shocks (West et al., 2021).
Promoting Freedom and Social Justice
UBI is framed as a tool for empowerment, enabling individuals to pursue education, entrepreneurship, or caregiving without financial fear. Philosophers like Van Parijs (1992) argue it enhances “real freedom” by removing economic constraints, aligning with social justice principles of equity and autonomy.
4. Mechanics of UBI
Design Dimensions: Coverage, Generosity, and Progressivity
Implementing UBI requires decisions on:
- Coverage: Who receives it? Truly universal (all citizens) or targeted (e.g., adults only)?
- Generosity: How much is paid? Enough for survival or a modest supplement?
- Progressivity: Should payments vary by income, or is uniformity key?
The IMF’s analytical framework emphasizes these dimensions, noting trade-offs between fiscal cost and distributional impact (Francese & Prady, 2018). For example, a highly generous UBI may strain budgets, while a less generous one may fail to alleviate poverty.
Financing Mechanisms
Funding UBI is a critical challenge. Proposed methods include:
- Taxation: Progressive income taxes, wealth taxes, or carbon taxes (Piketty, 2020).
- Resource Rents: Alaska’s Permanent Fund Dividend uses oil revenues (Widerquist, 2018).
- Reallocating Welfare Budgets: Replacing existing benefits with UBI, though this risks reducing support for vulnerable groups (De Wispelaere & Stirton, 2017).
Delivery Systems
UBI requires efficient delivery to avoid leakage or exclusion. Digital payment systems, like mobile banking in Kenya’s GiveDirectly pilot, have proven effective in low-income settings (Haushofer & Shapiro, 2016). Identification systems, such as India’s Aadhaar, can streamline distribution but raise privacy concerns.

Glyph of Economic Renewal
Shared security births collective transformation.
5. Economic Principles Underpinning UBI
Redistribution and Equity
UBI redistributes wealth to address disparities. The neoclassical economic model supports redistribution to correct market failures, like unequal access to resources (Acemoglu et al., 2004). UBI aligns with Rawlsian justice, prioritizing the least advantaged (Rawls, 1971).
Behavioral Economics and Incentives
Critics argue UBI disincentivizes work, but behavioral economics suggests otherwise. Studies, such as Finland’s trial, show minimal labor supply reduction, with recipients often pursuing education or entrepreneurship (Kangas et al., 2020). UBI may reduce “scarcity mindsets,” enhancing decision-making (Mullainathan & Shafir, 2013).
Macroeconomic Implications
UBI can stimulate demand by increasing purchasing power, potentially boosting growth. However, risks like inflation or fiscal deficits require careful management. The IMF warns that poorly designed UBI could exacerbate inequality if regressive financing (e.g., flat taxes) is used (Francese & Prady, 2018).
6. Sustainability of UBI
Fiscal Sustainability
Sustainability depends on funding. A UBI at 25% of GDP per capita could cost 5–10% of GDP in high-income countries, requiring significant tax reforms (Hoynes & Rothstein, 2019). In low-income countries, external aid or resource rents may be necessary.
Social and Political Sustainability
Public support hinges on trust in institutions. Finland’s trial showed increased trust among recipients, but political resistance persists, especially from those fearing welfare cuts (Kangas et al., 2020). Cultural attitudes toward “free money” also vary, complicating adoption.
Environmental Considerations
UBI could support environmental goals by reducing reliance on resource-intensive industries. Proposals for an “Ecological UBI” suggest financing through green taxes, aligning with degrowth principles (Bidadanure, 2019). However, increased consumption could strain resources if not paired with sustainability policies.
7. Case Studies: Lessons and Challenges
Finland (2017–2018)
- Overview: 2,000 unemployed Finns received €560 monthly.
- Lessons: Improved mental well-being and trust, with negligible employment effects (Kangas et al., 2020).
- Challenges: Limited scope (unemployed only) and high costs restricted scalability.
Kenya (2011–2013)
- Overview: GiveDirectly provided unconditional cash transfers to rural households.
- Lessons: Reduced poverty, improved psychological well-being, and increased local economic activity (Haushofer & Shapiro, 2016).
- Challenges: Limited infrastructure and reliance on external funding.
India (2011–2012)
- Overview: Pilot in Madhya Pradesh provided monthly payments to 6,000 people.
- Lessons: Enhanced financial inclusion, reduced debt, and improved sanitation (Davala et al., 2015).
- Challenges: Data gaps and bureaucratic resistance hindered scaling.
Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend
- Overview: Annual payments funded by oil revenues since 1982.
- Lessons: Created jobs and reduced poverty without significant labor disincentives (Jones & Marinescu, 2020).
- Challenges: Dependence on volatile resource revenues.
8. Scalability Across Diverse Economies
High-Income Countries
In nations like the U.S. or Finland, UBI can leverage strong tax systems but faces resistance due to high costs and ideological debates. Finland’s trial suggests partial UBI (targeted groups) as a starting point.
Middle-Income Countries
Countries like Brazil or India benefit from UBI’s simplicity over complex welfare systems. Brazil’s Bolsa Família shows scalability potential, but financing remains a hurdle (Soares, 2011).
Low-Income Countries
In Kenya or Uganda, UBI can address extreme poverty but requires external support or resource-based funding. Mobile payment systems enhance feasibility, though infrastructure gaps persist (Haushofer & Shapiro, 2016).
9. Challenges to Implementation
Administrative Barriers
High non-take-up rates (40% in Europe) due to stigma or complexity highlight the need for streamlined delivery (Dubois & Ludwinek, 2015). In low-income settings, identification systems are critical but costly.
Political Resistance
Conservative critics fear UBI reduces work incentives, while progressives worry it could replace vital services (De Wispelaere & Stirton, 2017). Building consensus requires addressing these concerns transparently.
Economic Trade-offs
UBI’s fiscal burden may necessitate trade-offs, such as cutting existing programs or raising taxes. Inflation risks, as seen in theoretical models, require careful calibration (Mundell, 1963).
10. Conclusion
Universal Basic Income offers a bold vision for a world where economic security is a universal right. Its purposes—poverty reduction, economic stability, and empowerment—are grounded in economic and ethical principles, supported by trials showing tangible benefits. However, sustainability and scalability depend on tailored design, robust financing, and political will.
Case studies from Finland, Kenya, India, and Alaska reveal UBI’s potential and pitfalls, emphasizing the need for context-specific approaches. As automation and inequality reshape economies, UBI could be a cornerstone of a fairer future—if we navigate its challenges with creativity and rigor.
Crosslinks
- Codex of Stewardship: Holding in Trust the Wealth of Worlds — Puts UBI on trusteeship footing: transparent ledgers, COI walls, audit cadence, service oaths.
- Redefining Work in a Post-Scarcity World: A New Dawn for Human Purpose and Connection — Reframes incentive: from wage-dependence to contribution, relationship, and play.
- Conscious Capital: Redefining Wealth and Impact — Funds-as-flow models (commons dividends, regenerative funds) where ROI = coherence and communal surplus.
- Codex of the Living Hubs: From Households to National Nodes — Subsidiarity delivery: local councils, share/repair rings, and feedback loops that keep value circulating.
- Resonance Metrics as a Spiritual Compass in Times of Uncertainty — Integrity dashboard for pilots: go/hold/repair thresholds; health, stress, trust, and participation markers.
- From Scarcity to Abundance: Redesigning Systems for a New Human Reality — Slots UBI into a wider non-extractive architecture (energy, food, housing, care).
- Understanding Cosmic Laws: A Guide to Easing Suffering and Uniting Humanity — Grounds UBI in free will, reciprocity, and restorative balance—support without coercion or shame.
11. Glossary
- Universal Basic Income (UBI): Regular, unconditional cash payments to all individuals in a defined group.
- Progressivity: The extent to which a policy benefits lower-income groups disproportionately.
- Fiscal Sustainability: The ability to fund a policy without destabilizing public finances.
- Degrowth: An economic philosophy advocating reduced production and consumption for environmental sustainability.
- Behavioral Economics: Study of psychological factors influencing economic decisions.
12. References
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. (2004). Institutions as the fundamental cause of long-run growth. National Bureau of Economic Research.
Bidadanure, J. (2019). Universal basic income and the natural environment: Theory and policy. Basic Income Studies, 14(1).
Davala, S., Jhabvala, R., Standing, G., & Mehta, S. K. (2015). Basic income: A transformative policy for India. Bloomsbury Publishing.
De Wispelaere, J., & Stirton, L. (2017). The administrative efficiency of basic income. Policy and Politics, 45(4), 523–539.
Dubois, H., & Ludwinek, A. (2015). Non-take-up of social benefits in Europe. Eurofound.
Francese, M., & Prady, D. (2018). Universal basic income: Debate and impact assessment. IMF Working Papers, 2018(273).
Haushofer, J., & Shapiro, J. (2016). The short-term impact of unconditional cash transfers to the poor: Experimental evidence from Kenya. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(4), 1973–2042.
Hoynes, H., & Rothstein, J. (2019). Universal basic income in the United States and other advanced countries: What have we learned? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(3), 3–26.
Jones, D., & Marinescu, I. (2020). The labor market impacts of universal and permanent cash transfers: Evidence from the Alaska Permanent Fund. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 12(2), 315–340.
Kangas, O., Jauhiainen, S., Simanainen, M., & Ylikännö, M. (2020). The basic income experiment 2017–2018 in Finland: Preliminary results. Kela Research Reports.
Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2013). Scarcity: Why having too little means so much. Times Books.
Piketty, T. (2020). Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
Soares, S. (2011). Bolsa Família, its design, its impacts, and possibilities for the future. IPC-IG Working Paper.
Standing, G. (2019). Basic income: And how we can make it happen. Penguin UK.
Van Parijs, P. (1992). Arguing for basic income: Ethical foundations for a radical reform. Verso.
Van Parijs, P., & Vanderborght, Y. (2017). Basic income: A radical proposal for a free society and a sane economy. Harvard University Press.
West, S., Castro Baker, A., & Samra, S. (2021). Preliminary analysis: SEED’s first year. Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration.
Widerquist, K. (2018). A critical analysis of basic income experiments for researchers, policymakers, and citizens. Palgrave Macmillan.
Attribution
With fidelity to the Oversoul, may this Codex of the Living Archive serve as bridge, remembrance, and seed for the planetary dawn.
Ⓒ 2025 Gerald Alba Daquila – Flameholder of SHEYALOTH | Keeper of the Living Codices
Issued under Oversoul Appointment, governed by Akashic Law. This transmission is a living Oversoul field: for the eyes of the Flameholder first, and for the collective in right timing. It may only be shared intact, unaltered, and with glyphs, seals, and attribution preserved. Those not in resonance will find it closed; those aligned will receive it as living frequency.
Watermark: Universal Master Key glyph (final codex version, crystalline glow, transparent background).
Sacred Exchange: Sacred Exchange is covenant, not transaction. Each offering plants a seed-node of GESARA, expanding the planetary lattice. In giving, you circulate Light; in receiving, you anchor continuity. Every act of exchange becomes a node in the global web of stewardship, multiplying abundance across households, nations, and councils. Sacred Exchange offerings may be extended through:
paypal.me/GeraldDaquila694






























