Minimum Income Guarantee Expert Group work and potential trial in Scotland: intersectional analysis

Introduction

The Scottish Government commissioned an independent Expert Group to assess the viability of a Minimum Income Guarantee in Scotland in 2021. Since then, the group, alongside an Experts by Experience Panel of the general public, has deliberated on the most effective route forward for Scotland. This group is now approaching its final recommendations to the Scottish Government and, at this point, has sought to gain input from external consultants to review the extent to which intersectional analysis has been embedded in this work and how it can be improved upon to ensure that any form of Minimum Income Guarantee is able to deliver for those who experience compounding inequalities.

There is not a Minimum Income Guarantee model that pre-exists which could be built upon or adapted for Scotland; as such this group was tasked with the complex work of developing recommendations to build the foundations for this type of financial support, including the technical requirements of how this would operate within the social security system and devolved policy. There is very limited exploratory research on how a Minimum Income Guarantee can be operationalised and little to none available which applies an intersectional lens. Across a range of Minimum Income Guarantee style models, including the basic income pilot for carer leavers in Wales and the Utrecht trial in The Netherlands, intersectional analysis was not embedded in their design or the ongoing evaluation. Whilst equality considerations have been included, these have been based on (limited) protected characteristic or equivalent siloing of inequalities rather than the more accurate experience of how these systemic and historic inequalities overlap to create worsened outcomes.

Whilst intersectional analysis has not been adequately included in trials of Universal Basic Income (UBI), there has been a small number of retrospective assessments conducted by researchers and academics on how this could have been embedded more adequately. Goldblatt (2022) analysed in general terms how UBI interacted with gender equality and wider human rights. In particular, her paper emphasises that a lack of intersectional competency is likely to create unintended negative consequences on how UBI interacts with labour market engagement and social security for women, particularly older women, pregnant women and disabled women. Evidence from Goldblatt and feminist academics suggests that there is a risk that a UBI or Minimum Income Guarantee can impact women’s participation in the labour market with them opting to leave the paid workforce. This is not to say that radical investment in social security policy is in opposition to gender equality, rather increased investment in social security and public services will almost always disproportionately benefit women. What is being highlighted however is the need for a nuanced approach which brings in wider improvements in infrastructure and an intersectional, feminist approach. A Minimum Income Guarantee will need equal focus on delivering fair work, which enables women (in particular, women of colour, migrant women, women single-parents, disabled women and working class women) to remain in the labour market through quality work with improved conditions and tackling the low-pay and precarity found in the sectors where women are disproportionately represented. This alongside flexible, accessible childcare and social care is necessary to make a Minimum Income Guarantee fit for purpose for the majority of marginalised women.

Cittadini (2024) produced a systematic literature review on applying intersectional analysis into minimum income schemes (which are defined in this research as broad ranging social security interventions). Cittadini’s review of eighty articles on these income support models revealed a stark absence of intersectional analysis despite the evidence of the effectiveness of applying an intersectional lens to policy design. Furthermore, the analysis specifically found that even siloed equality considerations were not fully taken into account in these analyses, particularly for racialised communities and immigrants. Whilst multiple articles acknowledged the issue of intersectionality and named racialised or immigrant communities, the eligibility criteria continued to overlook them. Four articles of the eighty assessed included concepts linked to intersectionality, but no article explicitly referenced or utilised intersectional analysis. Scotland’s work on a Minimum Income Guarantee model can and must take a more effective and inclusive approach by including competent intersectional analysis which goes beyond mere acknowledgement of the consequences of multiple and compounding inequalities and instead designs a model to mitigate them.

This report provides a review of the work of the Expert Group to date and how intersectional analysis can be applied in a more meaningful way within the boundaries of the recommendations and analysis already developed. This intersectional analysis is, however, being commissioned as the work of the Expert Group draws to a close. It would have been more effective to have had a deeper and well-resourced intersectional analysis threaded throughout the work of the Expert Group including enabling this by the experts by experience participation work. This would have enabled discussions, recommendation setting and commissioned work to have had an intersectional foundation as these were being developed. As it currently stands, it is hoped the analysis within this report, though limited, can support the final report submitted to the Scottish Government and provide insight into the formation of final recommendations.

Goldblatt, Beth, Basic Income, Gender and Human Rights, 2020.

Cittadini. M, Integrating intersectionality into minimum income policy design: a systematic literature review, Social Policy Review, 2024.