Research Tijs Laenen

Abstract

Amid growing debates on basic income (BI), the BI-RESPONS project examines the conditions under which policymakers respond to public preferences on BI. I argue that BI represents a particularly demanding case for the study of policy responsiveness, as it poses a theoretical puzzle that has not yet been empirically resolved. While BI is in many ways a likely case—given that its introduction would directly affect a large share of the population—it is also an unlikely one, as it combines relatively low issue salience with high policy radicalness compared to most other social policies. To address this puzzle, the project investigates (a) which policymakers are (un)responsive and whose opinions they take into account; (b) the spatial and temporal conditions under which responsiveness varies; (c) the mechanisms through which responsiveness or non-responsiveness emerges; and (d) how responsiveness differs across alternative BI designs and in comparison to the established policy of child benefits. The analysis is guided by a newly developed Multi-Level Framework of Contingent Policy Responsiveness. This framework advances existing research by arguing that key contingency factors—particularly salience and radicalness—not only differ between policy domains, but also vary within policy cases, across contexts, and between policymakers themselves. Empirically, the project adopts an innovative mixed-methods approach that combines in-depth qualitative interviews with policymakers and a cross-national public opinion survey conducted in eight European countries with varying levels of BI salience and radicalness. By doing so, BI-RESPONS seeks to provide a major step forward in understanding the politics of basic income and, more broadly, to deepen our knowledge of policy responsiveness and welfare state dynamics.

Researcher(s)

• Promoter: De Maeyer Sven
• Fellow: Laenen Tijs

Research team(s)

• EduBROn

Project type(s)

• Research Project

Abstract

In light of growing debates on the idea of basic income (BI), the BI-RESPONS project investigates under which conditions policymakers respond to public opinion about BI. I argue that BI is a scientifically challenging case because it poses a theoretical puzzle that has hitherto not been addressed empirically. On the one hand, BI is a likely case for responsiveness to occur because its introduction would directly impact the lives of many citizens. On the other hand, BI is an unlikely case compared to most other social policies because it is characterized by a lower salience and higher radicalness. The project will solve this puzzle by uncovering (a) which types of policymakers are (un)responsive and to whose opinions they are (un)responsive; (b) in which spatial and temporal contexts they are (un)responsive; (c) through which mechanisms they are (un)responsive, and (d) how their (un)responsiveness to public opinion varies across different BI proposals and compares to that of the well-established social policy of child benefits. These analyses are informed by the newly developed Multi-Level Framework of Contingent Policy Responsiveness, which argues that two of the main contingency factors identified in prior research –salience and radicalness– do not only vary between policy cases but also (a) within these cases, (b) across context and (c) between policymakers. This new theoretical framework is scrutinized empirically within an innovative mixed-methods design that links qualitative in-depth interviews with different types of policymakers to a quantitative public opinion survey in eight European countries that differ with regard to the salience and radicalness of BI. In doing so, the BI-RESPONS project forces a major breakthrough in the research on the politics of BI, and more broadly, expands our knowledge of (social) policy responsiveness and welfare state politics.

Researcher(s)

• Promoter: Laenen Tijs

Research team(s)

• Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy

Project type(s)

• Research Project