Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Examining the ethical underpinnings of universal basic income as a public health policy: prophylaxis, social engineering and ‘good’ lives
  1. Matthew Thomas Johnson,
  2. Elliott Aidan Johnson
  1. Politics, Philosophy and Religion, Lancaster University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Lancaster, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Matthew Thomas Johnson, Politics, Philosophy and Religion, Lancaster University Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Lancaster LA1 4YW, UK; m.johnson{at}lancaster.ac.uk

Abstract

At a time of COVID-19 pandemic, universal basic income (UBI) has been presented as a potential public health ‘upstream intervention’. Research indicates a possible impact on health by reducing poverty, fostering health-promoting behaviour and ameliorating biopsychosocial pathways to health. This novel case for UBI as a public health measure is starting to receive attention from a range of political positions and organisations. However, discussion of the ethical underpinnings of UBI as a public health policy is sparse. This is depriving policymakers of clear perspectives about the reasons for, restrictions to and potential for the policy’s design and implementation. In this article, we note prospective pathways to impact on health in order to assess fit with Rawlsian, capabilities and perfectionist approaches to public health policy. We suggest that Raz’ pluralist perfectionist approach may fit most comfortably with the prospective pathways to impact, which has implications for allocation of resources.

  • ethics
  • health promotion
  • political philosophy
  • public health ethics

Data availability statement

There are no data in this work.

This article is made freely available for use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.

https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usage

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

There are no data in this work.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors MTJ drafted the content. EAJ provided comments and revisions and referenced the article.

  • Funding Research was conducted as part of the authors’ employment at Lancaster University.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.