Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 732 entities
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 31c
- Paragraph text
- [While the present report has thus far addressed a more or less generic approach to basic income, the reality is that there are a great many variations on the theme and that trying to distinguish them from one another, and then from other social protection schemes, is a major challenge. Following the analysis of David Piachaud, it is helpful to divide the various proposals into four different types:] A supplemental basic income involves the introduction of a modest basic income alongside the existing social security system. Some commentators do not distinguish between partial and supplemental income. A Finnish pilot project, for example, describes partial income as involving a level of benefit that is “substantially lower” and not aiming to replace other current transfers “to the same extent as in full basic income”. Partial and supplemental basic income approaches can also overlap. The Finnish pilot provides €560 over a two-year period (2017-2018) to some 1,500 randomly selected individuals who are aged between 25 and 58 years and are already receiving a labour market subsidy or basic unemployment allowance. The payment is automatic, unconditional and not means-tested. Consistent with Van Parijs’s approach, the basic income payment substitutes only for existing benefits that are lower than it. It can therefore be cumulated with existing earnings-related benefits and housing allowances. Thus, the Finnish model is partial in the sense that it has been targeted at a specific recipient group on the basis of age and income, and it is supplemental in the sense that it does not completely replace the existing social security system. The preliminary report concluded that the deficiencies of the partial basic income are that it would not substantially change the current system or reduce bureaucracy, it would not solve incentive problems arising from a generous housing allowance, and it is a low amount, especially for single parents.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 31d
- Paragraph text
- [While the present report has thus far addressed a more or less generic approach to basic income, the reality is that there are a great many variations on the theme and that trying to distinguish them from one another, and then from other social protection schemes, is a major challenge. Following the analysis of David Piachaud, it is helpful to divide the various proposals into four different types:] A full basic income involves the characteristics set out above in part II, section A — namely an income that is basic, individual, cash, regular, universal and unconditional. Nowhere in the world has such a scheme yet been implemented. One was considered in Finland, at a level of €1,000 per month, but concern was expressed about “possible work disincentives, conflicts with earnings-related unemployment security, political controversies, high costs, regional differences in housing costs and possibly the lack of legitimacy”, with the level “too high for some groups and too low for the others”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- While Van Parijs and Vanderborght write in the liberal-egalitarian tradition, basic income also has strong support from libertarians. Matt Zwolinski argues that in order to justify the system of property rights, it is necessary, as John Locke wrote, to leave “enough, and as good, in common for others”. Thus, a State-financed social safety net might be necessary. For that purpose, a basic income scheme would be preferable to the welfare state because the latter incentivizes wasteful competition among interest groups and is costly and invasive. He avoids addressing questions of the design and implementation of a basic income system but is supportive of the approach developed by another libertarian, Charles Murray.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- All developed societies have welfare states in one or other of the three principal forms. First, welfare for the poor in the form of non-contributory means-tested programmes. Second, social insurance, social rights and social services, which include a wide array of institutions from contributory pension and unemployment schemes to public education and health insurance. Third, and the least familiar, is the role of the government in the economy, through regulatory, fiscal, monetary and labour-market policies and “in shaping markets, promoting growth, providing employment, and ensuring the welfare of firms and families”. While some see these three conceptions as competing, David Garland argues that none “of these three sectors can exist in that form without the others as structural supports”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 7
- Paragraph text
- There is a strong risk that when confronted with the challenge of addressing economic insecurity the human rights system will proceed in zombie mode. It will keep marching straight ahead on the path mapped out long ago, even as the lifeblood drains out of the enterprise. Its supervisory and monitoring organs will address themselves ever more insistently to State actors that have made themselves marginal, and they will continue to demand respect for standards that have long since been overtaken by the grim realities of global supply chains. For the most part, the human rights machinery is cumbersome, lacking in agility, and poorly placed to develop new thinking in such contexts. But it will need to do so if it is to remain relevant.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 31a
- Paragraph text
- [While the present report has thus far addressed a more or less generic approach to basic income, the reality is that there are a great many variations on the theme and that trying to distinguish them from one another, and then from other social protection schemes, is a major challenge. Following the analysis of David Piachaud, it is helpful to divide the various proposals into four different types:] A bonus basic income is akin to a royalty scheme in which resource-based dividends are distributed directly to citizens annually. Funding comes directly from an external source, such as mineral royalties. Thus, the Alaska Permanent Fund annually distributes dividends from investment earning on mineral royalties to people who have lived in Alaska for at least a year and intend to remain there indefinitely. Some commentators consider this to be a poor example of basic income, because it is predistributive as opposed to redistributive, and involves a small sum and a fluctuating level of payment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 58
- Paragraph text
- Van Parijs and Vanderborght admit that a universal basic income at 25 per cent of GDP per capita would result in “far higher rates of taxation because of the need to keep funding other public expenditures”. They then proceed to point to some (relatively small-scale) basic income experiments, negative income tax experiments and econometric models, none of which provides a clear answer on affordability. After discussing alternative financing models, such as taxes on capital, nature, money and consumption, they conclude that “none of these alternative sources offers a panacea, or any robust assurance that a generous basic income is economically sustainable, or any reason to believe that, in the short run at any rate, we can dispense with the income tax”. That leads them to explore alternatives to their core idea of a universal basic income — including a categorical basic income, a household basic income and tax surcharge, and their preferred alternative, a partial basic income: “one that makes no claim to being sufficient to live on if one lives alone”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- Thus, the basic income concept should not be rejected out of hand on the grounds that it is utopian. Policymakers at the national and international levels need to develop the sort of creativity in social policy that is capable of matching and responding to the technological innovations and other developments that have brought us to this crossroads. Despite the magnitude of the challenge and the breathtaking scope of the proposed solution, there is an option, which Van Parijs seems to have subtly embraced, to move in an incremental fashion towards the overall goal. As Anthony Atkinson has observed, inspired by Amartya Sen’s work, “the aim is progressive reform rather than transcendental optimality”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 62
- Paragraph text
- The most prominent path chosen to date has focused on respect for labour rights. But significant questions arise as to whether the tools used to tackle economic insecurity in that context have been, or are likely to be, effective in responding to the emerging conditions in the global labour market. For example, in its general comment No. 18 (2005) on the right to work, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights calls on States “to reduce to the fullest extent possible the number of workers outside the formal economy”, “to ensure that privatization measures do not undermine workers’ rights”, and to ensure that enhanced labour market flexibility does “not render work less stable or reduce the social protection of the worker”. All of these important objectives are grounded in human rights law, but the question is how best to respond to the reality that the trends in most industries seem to be heading rapidly in the opposite direction.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 9
- Paragraph text
- In its comprehensive and ideal form, a basic income is explicitly designed to challenge most of the key assumptions underpinning existing social security systems. Rather than a system where there are partial payments, basic income guarantees a floor; instead of being episodic, payments are regular; rather than being needs-based, they are paid as a flat rate to all; they come in cash, rather than as messy in-kind support; they accrue to every individual, rather than only to needy households; rather than requiring that various conditions be met, they are unconditional; rather than excluding the well off, they are universal; and instead of being based on lifetime contributions, they are funded primarily from taxation. And simplicity of design promises minimal bureaucracy and low administrative costs.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 69
- Paragraph text
- The starting point is to acknowledge that economic insecurity represents a fundamental threat to human rights. It is not only a threat to the enjoyment of economic and social rights, even though they are a principal concern. Extreme inequality, rapidly increasing insecurity, and the domination of politics by economic elites in many countries, all threaten to undermine support for, and ultimately the viability of, the democratic systems of governance upon which the human rights framework depends.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- The neoliberal policies encapsulated in the 1980s-era Washington Consensus can be seen, especially in retrospect, to have greatly exacerbated economic insecurity, whether or not that was the intent. The State was assumed to be intrinsically inefficient and corruption-prone, and this led to constant pressure to shrink all those parts of it that provided social and basic economic services to the populace, while vindicating and reinforcing the State in its role as the regulator facilitating and legitimizing the privatization of the economy. Social security and social protection was transformed, including through the explicit policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, into a minimalist notion of “social safety nets” designed to avoid the very worst outcomes and make the State look beneficent while empowering officials dedicated to devising ever more efficient “targeting” mechanisms and to rooting out overinclusion while playing down underinclusion. The objectives of promoting tax reform and prudent fiscal policies turned into a race to the bottom to set the lowest individual and corporate tax rates, attracting businesses through expensive exemptions, turning a blind eye to illegal or unconscionably evasive tax practices, and eliminating estate taxes and other measures that would bring about even minimal redistribution. Privatization was promoted even in relation to what were once seen as basic State functions, such as prisons, education and security. In some States, even the justice system has been partly privatized, whether through onerous court fees for the poor or the channelling of consumer and other complaints into private arbitration.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 5
- Paragraph text
- For its part, the human rights community has had all too little to offer in response to the profound challenges associated with deep economic insecurity. The human rights to an adequate standard of living, to work and to social security have been very low on the list of priorities of the major human rights groups and of the principal international and regional human rights organizations, with the exception of the International Labour Organization (ILO). The reasons for this include long-standing arguments that economic issues belong on the agenda of economic rather than human rights bodies, a perception that human rights specialists are not qualified to engage with issues that are presented as technical matters of economic policy, a preference to avoid addressing issues involving redistribution of income or expenditure from a human rights perspective, and the assumption that if civil and political rights are protected, respect for economic and social rights will automatically follow.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- The past two decades have seen a dramatic increase in cash transfer programmes in low- and middle-income countries, including conditional cash transfers and unconditional cash transfers. The World Bank, which strongly supports conditional cash transfers, defines them as “periodic monetary benefits to poor households that require beneficiaries to comply with specific behavioural requirements to encourage investments in human capital (such as school attendance, immunization, and health check-ups)”. Unconditional cash transfers have no such strings attached. The largest conditional cash transfer in the world is Bolsa Família in Brazil, with more than 70 million beneficiaries, while the largest unconditional cash transfer is Dibao in China, with about 75 million beneficiaries. Conditional cash transfers have long been considered a hallmark of Latin American countries. While African countries have focused more on unconditional cash transfers, conditional cash transfers have expanded in Africa in recent years, albeit with relatively “soft” conditions attached.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- In the United States of America in the 1960s, Milton Friedman advocated a negative income tax, a concept that bears a close resemblance to a basic income. In the late 1960s, Martin Luther King Jr. called for a guaranteed income as the solution to poverty. And by the end of that decade, Richard Nixon, the then President, came close to implementing a universal income supplement, but the scheme was defeated in the Senate by conservatives who thought the programme was too expensive and by liberals who thought the benefit was too low.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- In recent years, there has been a strong resurgence in support for the idea of a basic income. Its advocates include philosophers, economists, politicians, Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, trade union leaders, futurists and others, and in addition to concerted promotional efforts by civil society groups, support has come from within governments in countries as diverse as Finland and India. Most strikingly, basic income proponents come from many different positions on the political spectrum, ranging from libertarians to socialists.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- Further support for the theory comes from the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington, D.C., which reviews the support given to basic income by free-market and libertarian thinkers such as Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Robert Nozick, Charles Murray and Matt Zwolinski. Its view is that while the idea may look good on paper, the “further one moves from theory to implementation, the more the theoretical advantages dissipate”. The main objection is affordability, since a universal basic income scheme “would cost far more than the current welfare system”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 31b
- Paragraph text
- [While the present report has thus far addressed a more or less generic approach to basic income, the reality is that there are a great many variations on the theme and that trying to distinguish them from one another, and then from other social protection schemes, is a major challenge. Following the analysis of David Piachaud, it is helpful to divide the various proposals into four different types:] A partial basic income is limited, such as to a particular group of recipients. For example, the Netherlands and New Zealand both have universal basic pensions, under which all persons above a certain age receive an income without means testing.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- To understand the differences and similarities between cash transfers and basic income, it is helpful to look at the experience in particular countries. Mexico had one of the first conditional cash transfer programmes, PROGRESA, which was introduced in 1997. It was greatly expanded over time and was renamed Oportunidades. It is aimed at combating intergenerational poverty and is targeted only at poor households. The conditions are that children do not miss more than three days of school per month and that household members attend a medical clinic once a month. Mexico also has unconditional cash transfers, such as the Pensión Ciudadana Universal in Mexico City, a monthly electronic transfer to senior citizens of at least half the minimum wage, with no conditionality other than age and residency, and Setenta y Más, another unconditional cash transfer for people over 70 years of age who reside in smaller localities.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- Many African countries have unconditional cash transfers in the form of “social pensions” provided to all citizens above a certain age, without prior conditions. A newer phenomenon is the introduction of universal unconditional cash transfers in the context of subsidy reform. In 2010, the Islamic Republic of Iran introduced a “cash subsidy” of around $45 per month payable to all Iranians living in the country, to compensate for subsidy reductions on gasoline, gas, water and electricity. Similarly, Saudi Arabia is currently introducing a “household allowance” — a cash transfer to the poor and the middle classes (decreasing with income) to compensate for planned subsidy reforms.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 44
- Paragraph text
- While Van Parijs and Vanderborght claim that such programmes are “still a long way from an unconditional basic income”, others have argued that experience with these cash transfer schemes “gives empirical support to arguments in favour of a universal unconditional basic income”, and that they offer guidance for the optimal design of basic income schemes in high-income countries. Still, whether these existing cash transfer programmes are a stepping stone to full basic income schemes remains uncertain. Lavinas has argued that the Bolsa Família is the “antithesis” of a citizen’s income and “cannot be seen as a starting point toward a universal and unconditional income”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 8e
- Paragraph text
- [The present report is premised on the view that the human rights movement needs to address and respond to the fundamental changes that are taking place in economic and social structures at the national and global levels. These include, among others:] The ascent of a new neoliberal agenda, which involves further fetishization of low tax rates, demonization of the administrative State, deregulation as a matter of principle, and the privatization of remaining State responsibilities in the social sector, risks leaving the State in no position to protect or promote social rights meaningfully.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 2
- Paragraph text
- The focus of the present report is on the idea of replacing or supplementing existing social protection systems with a universal basic income (“basic income”). In recent months, this proposal has drawn increased attention from governments, scholars, and practitioners in a range of different fields, and four major books on the subject have been published in rapid succession. As a report of the Government of India concluded, if “thinkers on both the extreme left and right” have all become basic income supporters, then it is “a powerful idea” which must be discussed seriously, even if that report concludes that the time has not yet come for its implementation. Before exploring the details of the concept and its relationship to human rights, consideration needs to be given to the context in which the proposal has attracted such attention.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 66b
- Paragraph text
- [One of the biggest challenges in relation to basic income is to move beyond its chameleon-like character. There are many versions of it, and each is supported by a diverse array of actors, precisely because they see different attractions in the concept. To assess the utility and acceptability of basic income from a human rights perspective, it is helpful to identify the main categories of motivation.] Efficiency, in terms of avoiding welfare fraud, duplicative programmes, double-dipping, and bloated bureaucracies. As one commentator rejoiced: “we get to fire a couple of million bureaucrats”;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 66c
- Paragraph text
- [One of the biggest challenges in relation to basic income is to move beyond its chameleon-like character. There are many versions of it, and each is supported by a diverse array of actors, precisely because they see different attractions in the concept. To assess the utility and acceptability of basic income from a human rights perspective, it is helpful to identify the main categories of motivation.] Adaptation to technological advances, both in terms of compensating for vast numbers of jobs lost in an age of automation and robotization and to ensure some basic redistribution of wealth in an era characterized by exponential growth in the wealth of technology entrepreneurs;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 74
- Paragraph text
- Sixth, and most important, the debates over social protection floors and basic income need to be brought together. They have thus far been kept largely separate, in a counterproductive and ultimately self-defeating way. It is true that there are points of divergence between the two concepts, but they have vastly more potential if their synergies are recognized, rather than being ignored. Among the differences are the following: (a) the social protection floor mostly draws on experience in developing countries, while basic income advocates tend to emphasize developed countries; (b) social protection floors aim to guarantee both income security and access to essential social services, while basic income schemes only guarantee income; (c) the concept of basic income security is broader than basic income cash transfers, since it also includes in-kind transfers; (d) social protection floors focus not only on achieving social guarantees for all, but also on gradually implementing higher standards; (e) social protection floors are not viewed as alternatives to social insurance institutions, while some basic income proponents aim to replace existing social insurance institutions; and (f) the Social Protection Floors Recommendation, 2012 (No. 202) is premised upon human rights, unlike most basic income schemes. But the proponents of the two approaches have an immense amount in common, and if it is recognized that basic income is not an idea that can be achieved in a single leap, there could be no better and more elaborate and widely supported programme than that for the social protection floor.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 8b
- Paragraph text
- [The present report is premised on the view that the human rights movement needs to address and respond to the fundamental changes that are taking place in economic and social structures at the national and global levels. These include, among others:] The fact that traditional forms of labour market regulation are becoming ever less relevant to the emerging economy, and that an insistence on their continuing normative validity, however strongly justified, is increasingly impotent in the face of the evolution of global supply chains and other developments based on worker insecurity;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 68
- Paragraph text
- How then should human rights actors and institutions respond to the crisis of economic insecurity and the phenomena associated with it? And where might a campaign to achieve a basic income fit into the overall equation?
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 3
- Paragraph text
- The fundamental values of the international human rights system are under attack in new and diverse ways in 2017. While competing explanations have been proffered, one that is included in most lists is that there is a rapidly growing sense of economic insecurity afflicting large segments of many societies. There is an increasing feeling of being exposed, vulnerable, overwhelmed and helpless, and of being systematically marginalized, both economically and socially. This situation, which previously seemed to be a fate reserved only for those living in low-income countries or in extreme poverty in high- and middle-income countries, now afflicts not just the unemployed and the underemployed, but also the precariously employed and those likely to be rendered unemployed in the foreseeable future as a result of various developments. Many of these individuals previously enjoyed a modicum of security and respect and felt that they had a stake in the overall system of government. As the new insecurity has ballooned and affected ever-greater numbers, many mainstream political parties have either remained oblivious, or have offered solutions that have only exacerbated the problems, further undermining faith in electoral democracy.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extreme poverty and human rights on universal basic income 2017, para. 8c
- Paragraph text
- [The present report is premised on the view that the human rights movement needs to address and respond to the fundamental changes that are taking place in economic and social structures at the national and global levels. These include, among others:] The likelihood that vast swathes of the existing workforce will be made redundant by increasing automation and robotization, accompanied by the ever-greater concentration of wealth in the hands of the technology elites and the owners of capital;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph