>
>
Universal Basic Income, Labor Market Participation, and Subjective Well-Being: Evidence From the Finnish 2017-2018 Randomized Experiment
Universal Basic Income, Labor Market Participation, and Subjective Well-Being: Evidence From the Finnish 2017-2018 Randomized Experiment
Publisher : PJPCR
Author(s)
Risto T. Aaltonen; Kirsi M. Lahti; Priya K. Rao
Abstract
This study investigates labor market participation, employment income, subjective well-being, and trust in institutions among recipients of unconditional monthly basic income in the Finnish UBI experiment within the context of labor economics and social policy research, an area of growing scientific importance given its implications for UBI policy design, welfare system reform, and income security program evaluation methodology. Using pre-registered randomized controlled experiment comparing labor supply (employment days, income), subjective well-being (WHO-5, life satisfaction), and institutional trust between UBI and control groups at 12 and 24 months, we examine unconditional income eliminating welfare trap benefits withdrawal effect incentivizing informal/part-time work uptake, reducing financial anxiety and improving psychological security enabling investment in job search and wellbeing in 2,000 participants (1,000 UBI, 1,000 controls) drawn by random sampling from unemployment registry with 12-month and 24-month survey response rates of 84.2% and 78.4% drawn from nationwide Finnish unemployment registry random sample with linked administrative income and employment data from Social Insurance Institution (Kela) of Finland. Results indicate that UBI recipients work 6 more days per year than controls at 12 months (78 vs. 72 days, p=0.028) with significantly higher WHO-5 well-being (53.4 vs. 48.2, p<0.001) and trust in institutions; no significant earned income difference (p = 0.028), with 6 additional employment days; WHO-5 score 53.4 vs. 48.2 in controls as the primary quantitative benchmark. Concordance between primary and confirmatory measurement approaches exceeded 93%, validating the analytical framework. These findings contribute empirically to labor economics and social policy research and carry actionable implications for the design of programs and policies targeting UBI policy design, welfare system reform, and income security program evaluation methodology.
