Assessing the impact of a safety income model as an alternative approach to universal basic income: a case study in South Korea.

Purpose: This case study focuses on an alternative minimum-security model, the Safety Income (SI) Model, representing a nuanced departure from both established policies and UBI. StI is a welfare system that supplements households earning below the standard median income with 50% of the difference between the standard median and their current earnings. The quantitative case study presents the set-up of SI and assesses the cost of its implementation in South Korea. By employing a computable general equilibrium model method, the study compares the impacts of SI, UBI and the existing scheme in South Korea on income disparities, labor market outcomes and Gross Domestic Product. Design/methodology/approach: In the past decade, the Universal Basic Income (UBI) concept has gained international significant traction as a potential remedy for poverty and inequality. However, the practical implications of UBI implementation remain under extensive debate. It is unclear if UBI is an effective model for poverty alleviation. Findings: The analyses show that SI outperforms the other two welfare systems across all studied economic indicators. SI demonstrates more substantial reductions in income inequality compared with UBI and the existing scheme, minimal impact on unemployment rates compared with other schemes and a relatively modest decrease in GDP, making it a more favorable choice for South Korea when developing the minimum-security system within the specified budget constraint. Originality/value: This research contributes to the discourse surrounding basic income, economic security, poverty alleviation and inclusive social policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]