Basic Income—A Transformative Policy for Sustainable Welfare? Part 2

Four Paradoxes in the Eco‐Social Case for Basic Income

Bibliographic Data

ID21787706
AuthorsSimon Birnbaum (0000-0002-6765-918X, Södertörn University, corresponding author)
Year2026
Volume21
Issue3
Publication date2026-05-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePhilosophy Compass (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1747-9991 • E-ISSN: 1747-9991
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/phc3.70102
OpenAlexW7163008211
LanguageEN
References cited33

There are compelling arguments for why basic income may be a powerful, transformative eco‐social policy tool in advanced welfare states. However, closer scrutiny reveals that the relationship between BI's ecological and social objectives is also marked by deep tensions. This second part of the article—Part 2 of 2—identifies and explores four paradoxes that seriously complicate the green case for basic income. These paradoxes help explain why the ecological and social goals expressed in post‐growth BI discourse often conflict more deeply than green BI proponents may admit. They also suggest that common claims of BI as a radically transformative, green policy are overstated. Still, the tensions exposed are paradoxes, not fatal contradictions. Rather than undermining the eco‐social case for BI, they can be addressed constructively and used to guide the formulation of BI's precise role and value in the green transformation of welfare states

Basic income · Scrutiny · Social transformation · Transformative learning · Welfare · Income, Poverty, and Inequality · Social Policy and Reform Studies · Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access