University of Ontario Institute of Technology BASIC INCOME, SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRACTICES, AND POST-CONSUMERISM Food: Locally Embedded: Globally engaged Sustainable food systems Dr. Timothy MacNeill Amber Vibert University of Ontario Institute of Technology FLEdGE

Purpose ! To explore the current environmental and food consumption considerations made with regards to pre-existing and current BIG pilot projects and research. Why? We must assess and include considerations on the environmental impact of everything that we do BIG is an opportunity to implement policies that create a more sustainable society

This study is exploratory and seeks to gather feedback on the following questions of consumption and sustainability with regards to BIG.

INTRODUCTION There is a gap in BIG research. This includes environmental considerations for BIG. This gap needs to be addressed as current and new pilot studies expand Basic income studies have a focus on past and current BIG pilots as well as related programs implemented internationally The current study seeks to measure this gap, and collaboratively work towards suggestions for how environment can be implemented in BIG pilots and studies

OUR GOAL 1 2 3 4 5 Quantify previous environmental sustainability considerations in literature Quantify considerations at NABIG Qualitatively assess the work presented at NABIG Pose questions and generate discussion at NABIG Measure the gap and collaboratively pose solutions to addressing this issue/gap Reference : The basics you can find anywhere 5 Steps To Successful Storytelling Published on April 5, 2014 Featured in: Marketing & Advertising

Basic income guarantee PAST STUDIES Current state of environmental sustainability discussion in current literature Search criteria through UOIT e-library (books & journal articles): Basic income guarantee 2% of top 100 Food insecurity (Tarasuk, 2017) General “green” consequences of BIG (Teoretyczna, 2017) Proquest UOIT By searching more in-depth through reverse searches via reference/citation listings, more relevant studies were found, in particular 2010 issue of Basic Income Studies, but drops off from there UBI search – very general Proponents: Andersson (2010), Van Parijs (1992, 2010, 2013), Birnbaum (2010), Boulanger (2010), Lewis and Karl Widerquist (2009) here today, Calder (2010), Emery, Fleischb, McIntyre (2013) More support in literature for productive and less consuming time use

Questions being asked A number of questions will be posed throughout the conference including: Why haven’t we/ or how much have we been thinking more about the environmental impacts of all policies? If questions are being asked among other researchers – are they being considered practically, such as in pilots? What studies or pilots are you aware of that address the environmental impact of BIG? What is your knowledge on current environmental impact assessments in pilots? Who is looking into this? What are your thoughts on addressing this better?

POLICY IMPLICATIONS Food purchasing and consumption Slow food movement Grow and purchase food locally Less environmentally damaging foods (less beef) Incentives? BIG is an opportunity to build in policies that support a more sustainable society. This incoming change should not be disregarded from an environmental standpoint. Positive leisure time Producing rather than consuming Care work and maker culture Can you incentivize leisure time? Women paid for care they’re already not being paid for, children and older generations Do we really want people to work more to contribute to capitalism, or is this actually is better for the environment Should we be incentivizing different types of consumption?

THANK YOU