As artificial intelligence (AI) and automation technologies rapidly spread, the conventional employment-based social security systems face structural challenges amid rising unemployment globally. Universal Basic Income (UBI)—a concept characterized by "unconditional, cash, and universal" payments—has re-entered mainstream academic and policy discussions. This article reviews influential studies and official reports over the past fifty years to systematically assess the real-world impacts of UBI across four dimensions: labor supply, psychological well-being, societal effects, and fiscal feasibility. We will explore why UBI has transitioned from theoretical debate to a serious policy option in the AI era.

1. UBI: An Idea with Historical Roots

Modern economic theories surrounding UBI can be traced back to mid-20th century experiments with Negative Income Tax. Large-scale randomized trials in the 1970s in the United States and Canada revealed that providing unconditional cash subsidies to low-income individuals resulted in only a minor decline in labor supply (approximately 2–9%). Notably, the reduction in work hours mainly involved parents caring for young children and young adults delaying employment to pursue education.

These findings carry crucial implications: cash support does not equate to disincentivizing work; rather, it reshapes individual choices concerning education, family, and employment. Early evidence laid the groundwork for subsequent UBI trials and refuted the oversimplified assumption that “giving money leads to mass laziness.”

2. Key Insights from National UBI Experiments: Finland's Case

In 2017-2018, the Finnish government conducted one of the most well-known national UBI experiments through the Social Insurance Institution (Kela). They randomly selected 2,000 unemployed individuals and provided a monthly stipend of €560, which remained unaffected by their re-employment status.

The findings were consistent and significant:

• Employment Effects: No notable difference in employment rates compared to the control group.
• Psychological and Social Effects:
• Increased happiness and life satisfaction.
• Reduction in anxiety, stress, and uncertainty about the future.
• Enhanced trust in government and institutions.

The key takeaway from Finland’s experience is that UBI's primary impact lies in enhancing individuals' sense of security and decision-making abilities rather than directly stimulating employment. This prompted scholars to shift UBI evaluation from purely employment metrics to broader "human welfare" indicators.

3. Are Cash Payments Recklessly Spent? Evidence from the U.S. and Global South

1. Stockton's Guaranteed Income Experiment

The guaranteed income experiment in Stockton, California, which provided $500 per month, offers compelling evidence contradicting critics. Findings showed:

• A rise in full-time employment.
• Expenditures mainly on: Food, Rent and Transportation
• No increase in spending on alcohol, drugs, or gambling.

This indicates that, in high-income nations, unconditional cash not only fails to diminish work motivation but may help individuals find more stable employment by alleviating short-term survival pressures.

2. Kenya's Long-Term UBI Experiment

In collaboration with MIT and Princeton, GiveDirectly conducted Kenya's largest and longest UBI randomized trial, covering over 20,000 individuals and extending tracking for up to 12 years. Results demonstrated:

• Overall improvements in consumption, health, and mental well-being.
• No emergence of a "dependency culture."
• Positive economic multiplier effects at local levels.

Although institutional environments differ between high- and low-income nations, the effects of cash transfers on human behavior demonstrate high consistency.

4. UBI's Confirmed Effects and Ongoing Controversies

A synthesis of research by the OECD, World Bank, and leading economic reviews have reached consensus on several points:

1. UBI consistently improves mental health and feelings of security.
2. It does not lead to mass labor market exit.
3. Cash transfers often prove more efficient than condition-laden welfare.

1. Fiscal Feasibility: Implementing a pure UBI model is costly and likely requires substantial tax reforms.
2. Replacement of Existing Welfare: Research shows a preference for mixed systems rather than a one-size-fits-all replacement.
3. Political Viability: Economic feasibility does not guarantee political acceptance.

5. Why AI Changes the Nature of UBI Discussions

AI and automation do not merely eliminate jobs; they instigate three structural shifts:

1. Dissonance between income sources and employment.
2. Concentration of technological benefits among a few enterprises.
3. An increase in unstable and fragmented work arrangements.

In this context, the World Bank and several political philosophers assert that UBI should not be seen merely as a welfare expansion but as a tool for redistributing technological rewards. Consequently, contemporary policy approaches lean toward a combination of:

• Partial UBI plus basic public services.
• AI/data dividend funds.
• Unconditional safeguards for vulnerable groups impacted by automation.

Conclusion

Reflection on half a century of empirical research reveals that UBI is neither a utopia nor a breeding ground for idleness. Under specific conditions, it serves as an effective tool for enhancing human welfare and institutional resilience. The advent of AI positions the question of “the necessity of some form of unconditional income support” as not solely a value debate but a matter of institutional design.

Future discussions should focus not on "whether to implement UBI" but on "how to design it, how to integrate it into existing systems, and how to equitably distribute technological benefits."