Skip to main content

Table 2 Data Extraction Outcomes

From: Exploring different methods to evaluate the impact of basic income interventions: a systematic review

No Authors, Year Basic Income Experiment Type of Basic Income Country Main Outcome Main Outcome Results
1 Ashenfelter, 1990 [74] SIME/DIME NIT USA Labour supply Incentive effects on labour supply would have a real effect on the transfer costs of such a program
2 Baumol, 1974 [73] US IMEs (not specified) NIT USA Housing consumption behaviour Increase in home ownership
3 Bawden, 1970 [48] NJ, RIME NIT USA Work incentive None
4 Beck et al., 2015 [45] India UCT India Illness or injury in the household and vaccination coverage Less minor illness or injury in the household found in the intervention group, but no effect on vaccination coverage and serious illness and injuries
5 SEWA Bharat, 2014 [53] India UCT India Basic living conditions including sanitation, drinking water, energy sources Basic living improved including sanitation, energy sources
6 Bishop, 1980 [69] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME NIT USA Marital dissolution rates Rates of marital dissolution were higher
7 Brodkin and Kaufman, 2000 [87] NJ, SIME/DIME NIT USA Labour supply Labour supply showed very little evidence of a work disincentive
8 Burtless, 1986 [88] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME NIT USA Work hours and earnings Work hours and earnings are decreased among NIT recipients across all four experiments
9 Burtless and Greenberg, 1981 [68] SIME/DIME NIT USA Work hours The estimated reduction in hours is larger when the analysis focuses on those below the breakeven level
10 Burtless and Greenberg, 1982 [89] SIME/DIME NIT USA Labour supply Reduction in labor supply was larger in the 5-year experimental sample than the 3-year one
11 Burtless and Hausman, 1978 [90] Gary NIT USA Labour supply Labour supply is largely unaffected by NIT, but it may be reduced by poor health and aging
12 Byrne, 1973 [91] NJ, Gary NIT USA Mother’s work disincentives with day-care costs Mothers have a disincentive to work when faced with day-care costs
13 Cain and Wissoker, 1990 [72] SIME/DIME NIT USA Marital Stability when accounting for potential bias from different durations of experiments Impact of NIT on marital breakups decline with the length of the programs
14 Cain et al., 1974 [92] NJ NIT USA Labour supply of married women Disincentives with labor-force participation for white wives
15 Calnitsky, 2016 [55] MINCOME NIT Canada Community experience - Motives to participate in MINCOME are related to money/assistance
- Social stigma experienced by MINCOME recipients was lower than welfare recipients
16 Choudhry and Arvin, 2001 [93] MINCOME NIT Canada Family income level and marital dissolution Increase in marital dissolution with lower family income level
17 Choudhry and Hum, 1995 [94] MINCOME NIT Canada Income level and marital dissolution NIT payments did not encourage splits by lowering the financial costs of marital disruption
18 Connor, Rodgers, and Priest, 1999 [44] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME, MINCOME NIT USA and Canada Marital stability, nutrition, education No consistent effects on marital stability, nutrition or education
19 Curry, 1981 [95] NJ NIT USA Work effort Work effort did not decline
20 Davala et al., 2015 [76] India UCT India Debt and Borrowing Debt and borrowing reduced
21 Dickinson and Watts, 1975 [85] NJ, RIME NIT USA Uses of the Data: labor supply response Labor supply response was focus of experimental design
22 Elesh and Lefcowitz, 1977 [96] NJ NIT USA Health and health care utilization No effect observed on health and health care utilization.
23 Forget, 2011 [10] MINCOME NIT Canada Hospitalization rates Hospitalization rates fell
24 Forget, 2013 [64] MINCOME NIT Canada Hospital separations Hospital separations declined
25 Forget, 2010 [97] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME, MINCOME NIT USA and Canada Work effort US: reduction in work effort
26 Forget et al., 2013 [98] MINCOME NIT Canada Hospitalization rates Hospitalization rates fell
27 Greenberg and Halsey, 1983 [56] SIME/DIME NIT USA Underreporting of employment and quarterly earnings Higher degree of underreporting of employment status and earning by intervention recipients compared to that by the control group
28 Greenberg, Moffitt, Friedmann, 1981 [65] Gary NIT USA Underreporting and work effort Underreporting work effort was substantial
29 Groeneveld et al., 1980 [70] SIME/DIME NIT USA Marital dissolution SIME/DIME increased the rate of marital dissolution
30 Haarmann, 2008 [40] BIG Pilot Project (Namibia) UCT Namibia Nutrition and child development Reduced food shortages
31 Haarmann et al., 2009 [41] Namibia UCT Namibia Poverty Rates Poverty rates decrease
32 Haushofer and Shapiro, 2013 [36] Kenya UCT Kenya AssetsConsumption Increased Asset Values
33 Heffernan, 1977 [60] RIME NIT USA Awareness of social services No effect on awareness of social services
34 Hollister, 1974 [99] NJ NIT USA Total family hours and total family earnings Significant response to the experimental treatment by Whites and Spanish-speakers for total family hours and total family earnings.
35 Hum and Choudry, 1992 [100] MINCOME NIT Canada Family income level and marital dissolution Social roles expected of each partner, not family income, determines family stability
36 Hum and Simpson, 1991 [101] MINCOME NIT Canada Labour Supply Response of Families and Individuals Negative effect on work hours for single female heads
37 Hum and Simpson, 1993 [102] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME, MINCOME NIT USA and Canada Labor supply response Insignificant changes in work behaviour
38 Huston, 1999 [103] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME NIT USA Children’s educational outcomes Mixed effects on children’s school performance and attendance, achievement and aspirations, high school completion, educational attainment, employment.
39 Johnson, 1980 [61] US IMEs (not specified) NIT USA Risk taking in labour market Risk-taking rises with income
40 Jones and Marinescu, 2018 [42] Alaskan Permanent Fund Dividend UCI USA Evolution in labour market No change in employment within Alaska pre- and post-dividend payment, and no difference in labour market evolution between Alaska and other states
41 Kaluzny, 1979 [49] NJ, Gary NIT USA Home ownership Increases in homeownership
42 Kangas et al., 2019 [104] Finland UCI Finland Work effort No difference in average days in open employment, but slight increase in self-employment rate and their associated earnings
43 Keeley et al., 1978 [105] SIME/DIME NIT USA Labour supply Income effects are negative for wives and female heads; Substitution effects are positive
44 Keeley et al., 1978 [106] SIME/DIME NIT USA Labour supply effects and costs of alternative negative income tax programs Labor-supply response and program costs vary widely with the support level and tax rate
45 Keeley and Robins, 1979 [107] SIME/DIME NIT USA Work disincentives SIME/DIME reduced hours of work
46 Keeley, 1980 [58] SIME/DIME NIT USA Migration Increased rate of mobility for white married males and females
47 Keeley, 1980 [108] SIME/DIME NIT USA Fertility NIT negatively effects married whites’ and positively effects married Chicanos’ fertility
48 Keeley, 1980 [59] SIME/DIME NIT USA Rate of migration Increased rate of migration
49 Keeley, 1987 [109] SIME/DIME NIT USA Marital Dissolution Positive effect on marital dissolution/divorce rates
50 Kehrer and Wolin, 1979 [63] Gary NITTwo guarantee levels and two tax rates USA Birth weight No difference in birth weight
51 Kerachsky, 1977 [110] RIME NIT USA Farm family labor supply Changes in guarantee produce a pattern of negative effects on labor supply
52 Kershaw, 1972 [111] NJ NIT USA Earnings No evidence indicating a significant decline in weekly earnings
53 Kershaw and Fair, 1976 [84] NJ NIT USA Withdrawal from Work No substantial withdrawal from work
54 Levine et al., 2005 [112] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME NIT USA Labour supply Reduction of work effort
55 Maynard, 1977 [66] RIME NIT USA School performance Improvements in school performance; Increases in educational attainment.
56 Maynard and Murnane, 1979 [113] Gary NIT USA School performance Increase in average reading achievement for grades 4–6
57 McDonald and Stephenson, 1979 [114] Gary NIT USA School enrollment Being males increased rate of school enrollment and reduced labor force participation
58 Metcalf, 1973 [57] US IMEs (not specified) NIT USA Temporary NIT results extended to permanent NIT results A temporary experiment will 1) understate the income effect and 2) overstate the gross and compensated price effects of the NIT.
59 Moffitt, 1979 [115] Gary NIT USA Employment status and unconditional hours worked Labor supply reductions for husbands and female heads, but not for wives
60 Moffitt, 1981 [71] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME NIT USA Weekly work hours Reduced weekly work hours
61 Moffit and Kehrer, 1981 [75] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME NIT USA Weekly work hours Reduced weekly work hours
62 Munnell et al., 1987 [116] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME NIT USA The effect of the NIT Treatments on Work Effort and Labour Supply Reduction in work effort for most subsamples
63 Murray and Pateman, 2012 [67] MINCOME NIT Canada High school continuation Adolescent males did continue in high school longer
64 Neuberg, 1988 [62] SIME/DIME NIT USA Distortion in reporting hours worked Distortion revealed in reporting hours worked
65 Nicholson and Wright 1977 [37] NJ NIT USA Participants’ understanding of the NIT The NIT was not well understood by experimental participants
66 O’Connor and Madden, 1979 [117] RIME NIT USA Diet Little, if any, influence on the quality of the diets of the Iowa families; evidence of a beneficial effect on the quality of the diets of the North Carolina families.
67 Osterkamp, 2013 [78] BIG Coalition (Namibia) Universal Unconditional Cash Transfer Namibia Poverty reduction Poverty was substantially reduced
68 Robins, 1980 [38] SIME/DIME NIT USA The effect of the NIT treatments on the labor supply of youth The effect of the NIT Treatments on the Labor Supply of Youth
69 Robins, 1985 [118] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME NIT USA Labour supply Labour supply reduced
70 Robins, Tuma, and Yaeger, 1980 [119] SIME/DIME NIT USA Rates of leaving and entering employment Higher rate of leaving employment and lower rate of entering employment
71 Robins and West, 1986 [120] SIME/DIME NIT USA Impacts of accounting differences between study attriters and non-attriters on employment and earnings estimates Weighting techniques that considered differences between attriters and non-attriters did not have significant impact on the employment and earnings estimates
72 Ross, 1970 [121] NJ NIT USA Work Disincentive Effects No evidence of work disincentive response
73 Rossi and Rosenbaum, 1983 [77] NJ NIT USA Work effort Work effort declined slightly
74 Salkind and Haskins, 1982 [50] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME NIT USA Fertility, nutrition, birth weight Lower fertility; quality of nutrition increased; Fewer low birth weight babies
75 Skidmore, 1974 [46] NJ NIT USA None None (paper only describes the type of data that are available from the experiment)
76 Spiegelman and Yaeger, 1980 [83] SIME/DIME NIT USA Labor supply Husbands and single-family heads left employment more readily
77 Standing, 2015 [122] India UCT India Debt Less likely to increase debt and more likely to reduce it
78 Stephens, 2007 [123] SIME/DIME NIT USA Work hours for men in dual-headed households Hours of work reduction for men in dual-headed households was greater for the 5-year experiment than the 3-year one
79 Watts, 1969 [124] NJ NIT USA Participation Almost all of those who have been invited to participate in the payments program have chosen to do so
80 Weiss, Hall, and Dong, 1980 [125] SIME/DIME NIT USA Schooling investment Increase in schooling investment
81 West, 1980 [126] SIME/DIME NIT USA Wage rates Little basis to indicate any effect on wage rates
82 West, 1980 [127] SIME/DIME NIT USA Work effort among non-heads of families Reduction in work effort among non-heads
83 Widerquist, 2005 [51] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME, MINCOME NIT USA and Canada Work-effort reduction Work-effort reduced
84 Widerquist, 2013 [128] NJ, RIME, Gary, SIME/DIME, MINCOME NIT USA and Canada Work Disincentive Results Longer periods of nonemployment or return to work
85 Wright and Wright, 1975 [129] NJ NIT USA Labour force participation No difference in incentive to work
86 Wright, 1975 [39] NJ NIT USA Work disincentive effects No statistically significant work disincentive effects