User:Shaminamomin/sandbox

The idea of eradicating poverty by giving individuals money is an idea which can be dated back to the sixteenth century. Discussion of UBI in India began due to concerns about technologically driven unemployment and poor results of welfare programs. Given the geographical and socio-economic scale of India, implementation of UBI would have to be state-administered. This large-scale welfare program could be revolutionary, as it would provide a blueprint for every other developing country. Supporters believe that UBI could be the antidote for the already established underperforming poverty programs and would be about real change for poverty alleviation. However, critics are wary of establishing such a wide-scale program because it might undermine the fragile social security architecture, cause already employed workers to drop out of labor force and encourage idleness, and also encourage wasteful spending. From June 2011 to November 2012, Self Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) and the United Nation’s Children’s Fund (UNICEF), launched two pilot programs to examine the impact of unconditional, monthly transfers through a modified and controlled trial. The pilot program was notable in three main ways. First, it was universal, meaning that every individual test subject, irrespective of gender, ethnicity, or level of wealth, received a cash transfer. Second, these grants were provided beyond the existing welfare program, meaning it was not a substitute to payments which were already received. Third, these two pilot programs were the latest of the eight UBI pilots which have been conducted around the world. Furthermore, these pilot programs were one of the first in Asia and the second experiment to be conducted in the developing world.

In 2009, SEWA began organizing pilot programs to test the effect of an unconditional cash transfer in Madhya Pradesh, one of India’s least developed states. SEWA is a trade union that was established in 1972 to promote the rights of self-employed, low income women throughout India. Its mission is to improve the standards of living for women in India and help women achieve full employment. The purpose of the Madhya Pradesh Unconditional Cash Transfers Project (MPUCTP) is to test the potential for cash transfers to address vulnerabilities that low income Indians face. The unconditional cash transfer is a form of a universal basic income, which provides a set allowance to all civilians in a village every month without any restrictions on what the money can be used for. The MPUCTP, backed by funding from UNICEF and implemented by SEWA, consisted of two pilot programs in 2011-2012, both in Madhya Pradesh, a rural area in which SEWA tried to alleviate poverty and inequality. In the first pilot, which lasted 18 months, 20 similar villages were chosen. Eight villages received grants while the remaining 12 did not. In half of all the villages, regardless of whether a village received a grant or not, there were SEWA representatives present to monitor the village. These test villages had similar variables of socio-economic levels, service access, geographical location, and similar infrastructure. The second pilot, which lasted 12 months, two similar tribal villages were chosen. One village received grants whereas the other village received nothing. Between both pilots, over 6,000 individuals received cash transfers. In both pilots, every man, woman, and child in the selected villages were given a moderate unconditional cash grant: 200 per adult per month and 100 per child per month for 12 months. After 12 months, their grants were raised to 300 and 150, respectively, per month for 6 months. A child’s grant was given to its mother or other designated guardian. These amounts accounted for 20 to 30 percent of a monthly income for a low-income family. Although these pilot programs were carried out, there was a challenge of how to distribute money. SEWA first had to collect information about population size who had no household, as well out a distribution method for families who did not have access to a bank. In order to address these problem, SEWA used a “door-step” banking. Furthermore, a new project such as this was “new” to the villagers who were fearful of the ulterior motives of SEWA giving “free money.” The villagers were wary of stipulations that might accompany the money. SEWA could not directly address these issues and were dependent upon time and understanding. On May 30th and 31st of 2013, SEWA presented its preliminary findings from the studies at a conference on "Unconditional Cash Transfers: Findings from Two pilot studies" in Delhi. The findings show numerous improvements in health, productivity, and financial stability. In terms of impacts to health, the unconditional cash transfers were associated with better food security and lower rates of malnutrition in female children. Less food deficiency improved children nutrition and led to more balanced diets. Recipient villages had lower rates of illness, more consistent medical treatment, and more consistent medicine intake. Families receiving cash transfers had more livestock, which helped improve health and financial stability. Additionally, productivity rates increased, as children in recipient villages had higher rates of school attendance. Villages receiving cash transfers had higher expenditures on schooling and agricultural inputs, promoting better education and higher agricultural yields. Some concerns of the universal basic income are that it will discourage labor and encourage consumption of alcohol. However, cash recipients had higher rates of labor and work, especially in self- employed contexts. And, there was no evidence of higher alcohol consumption in recipient villages than control villages; in fact, in the recipient tribal village, alcohol consumption actually decreased. The effect on labor productivity was especially strong for women and tribal communities. Financial stability improved significantly in villages receiving cash transfers. Households with cash grants were three times more likely to open a new business or take on a new production activity than households that did not receive the cash transfer. These households also decreased their indebtedness and increased their savings, and some were even able to open bank accounts to remit the cash grants. One important factor not addressed in the study was the impact of natural hazards on the sustainability of the project and thus the larger universal income idea. In conclusion, the MPUCTP was a first step towards a universal basic income program in India. Although the positive results of the pilot programs were overwhelming, the long-run impacts of such short term (12-18 months) projects cannot be measured. The results of the pilot program disprove many criticisms of the program, but further investigation and experimentation is necessary to test the feasibility of a basic income. For more information on the MPUCTP, a full report by SEWA Bharat can be accessed here.