news-details

Guaranteed income programs unlikely to improve health but still a valuable tool for alleviating poverty

Guaranteed income programs don't appear to improve the health of recipients, but they remain an important tool to consider for reducing poverty, according to research from University of Michigan and others.

The findings come from research released by OpenResearch's Unconditional Income Study, which gave 1,000 adults $1,000 per month for three years. The randomized controlled trial examined the effects of the cash transfers on recipients, including their overall health, employment outcomes and how they spent the money.

Leading the study on health effects was Sarah Miller, U-M associate professor of business economics and public policy. She said the cash generated only short-lived (one-year) improvements in stress and mental health and no effect on physical health, as measured by self-reports.

Not seeing a longer-term reduction in stress was a disappointment, Miller said, since that could be one way that more income improves health.

"There's so much energy in health policy now for addressing 'social determinants of health'—and poverty in particular," Miller said. "Could cash transfers be the way to meaningfully and effectively reduce health disparities? It's hard for me to look at these results and say yes."

Related Posts
Advertisements
Market Overview
Top US Stocks
Cryptocurrency Market