The affirmatives “universal” conception of Social Security prescribes itself into forms of “gender blindless” where gendered economics is seen as a side constraint in favor of productivity.

The overall purpose of this book is to draw attention to the confining nature of mainstream economic theorising in the policy process and to outline how a feminist economic perspective could contribute to the development of a more inclusive and realistic understanding of state welfare arrangements. The main subject of the book is an exploration of the Citizens’ Basic Income (CBI) proposal and how it presents as an invaluable opportunity to reshape the future of social security provision in advanced capitalist states. The proposal itself involves the granting of a universal and unconditional minimum income guarantee and has evolved in recent decades as a possible reform package that would address effectively the dual and often conflicting objectives of social justice and economic efficiency. However, the CBI proposal remains a theoretical concept in that no advanced capitalist state has implemented a universal, unconditional minimum income guarantee. Within a global context, the reform of social security policy is currently high on the political agenda. This is due mainly to the significant level of public resources dedicated to state-supported income maintenance programmes combined with growing concern over the persistence of widespread poverty and the related problem of social exclusion. Furthermore, concern regarding gender-based inequalities, particularly those directly associated with the operation of modern labour markets, is receiving greater attention in terms of public policy interventions. The ‘social justice’ case for the promotion of gender equality has been strengthened by a heightened awareness regarding the negative consequences of gender-based inequalities on overall economic performance. The concept of ‘gender mainstreaming’ is now considered a principal driving force in the design, implementation and monitoring of all public policies and programmes. The systematic integration of a gender equality perspective into every aspect of policymaking, implied by the concept of gender mainstreaming, is thus considered an important issue across Europe, both at an institutional and a national government level. Although the CBI proposal has evolved in recent decades as a possible reform package that effectively would provide the foundations for transforming the nature of state welfare provision in line with a ‘gender mainstreaming’ strategy, the existing literature is devoid of this perspective. Arguments in favour of a CBI have been presented from a range of academic perspectives and there is a growing body of literature focused on evaluating the concept of a universal unconditional income guarantee with reference to the dynamics of modern socio-economic conditions. However, in line with current debates on the future of social security policy, the existing CBI literature is characterised by an emphasis on ‘paid work’. That is, debates regarding the effects an unconditional income grant would have on individual behaviour have been dominated by analysis of its impact on existing patterns of formal labour market participation. Although the workings of the formal labour market is accepted as an extremely relevant factor in the design of any statesupported income maintenance programme, the prioritising of such above all else is indicative of a biased approach. That is, the focus on the world of paid work demonstrates a gender bias in that the life experiences of many women are largely ignored. Gender concerns are central to any debate on the future of social security policy in that state intervention in the field of income redistribution has differential impacts on men and women. This is due to the very crucial role that gender plays in determining individual behaviour and the failure to adequately account for such implies that current welfare reform agendas are ‘gender blind’. It will be argued that this ‘gender blindness’ is the direct result of an analytical approach to study that treats gender issues as ‘add-ons’ rather than an integral feature of the research process. It is in this respect that parallels can be drawn with the structures and processes associated with mainstream economic analysis. With reference to welfare reform debates, the claim is made that the emphasis on preserving a traditional productivist work-and-pay relationship, evident in the CBI literature, follows from an immutable acceptance of the governing principles associated with neoclassical economic theory in the research process. Gender concerns have remained at the periphery, and any attempts to include women have been made without altering the analytical framework. Conjectures regarding individual responses have been hypothesised within a model based on assumptions applied exclusively to all members of society. Such theorising follows the same pattern as the practice of economics as an academic discipline and as such fails adequately to address issues relating to gender inequalities. In terms of policy responses, this leads to a focus on ‘acting’ upon inequalities as they are identified or arise rather than ‘transforming’ the processes and structures that create and sustain such inequalities. Subsequently, the advantages of the CBI proposal in promoting the equal citizenship rights of women are not adequately considered and in many instances are misunderstood. The aim of this book, then, is to develop a feminist economics perspective on social security reform with a particular emphasis on the CBI proposal. Evidence of the continually dominant influence of mainstream economic theorising in the analytical process will be presented. It will be argued that this represents a biased and exclusive perspective and, when applied, results in policy designed in accordance with a view of how the world should operate. Thus, the subjective nature of the neoclassical approach is exposed and the subsequent influence of value judgements is made explicit. From a feminist economics perspective, attempts to incorporate gender concerns within such an inherently biased analytical framework are limiting. The practice of including issues and concerns specific to women, previously neglected, may serve to enrich the discipline by ensuring that the subject matter studied is a more accurate reflection of real world economic phenomena. However, if in studying this broader subject matter the methods and analytical processes associated with the dominant neo-classical approach remain unaltered, the practice of ‘doing economics’ will fail to provide us with a framework for developing an understanding of the actual nature of such ‘real world economic phenomena’. Accounting for the social construction of gender divisions and the influence this has on individual choice is key in developing an understanding of both the causes and consequences of gender-based inequalities. In terms of welfare reform it is therefore considered crucial that feminist economic theory is embraced, as much of what policy is trying to address results from socially constructed inequalities. Rather than ‘add women and stir’, a feminist economics perspective facilitates transparency in the policy process, effectively by adapting the existing analytical framework to account for the very different social experiences of men and women in market-based economies. Given the current mainstreaming agenda, adopting an approach that serves to transform the research process to ensure the systematic integration of gender as a primary influencing variable is considered desirable and indeed necessary. This introductory chapter will outline the main aspects of the CBI proposal within the context of providing a foundation for transforming the nature of state welfare provision. In presenting the case for adopting a feminist political economy approach in arguing for a CBI, the purpose is to demonstrate why this is considered a necessary next step in current welfare reform debates.