The flexibilization of the labour markets and the 2008 crisis led to a destandardization of the employment relations (Kalleberg, 2011). The basic income appears many times in the debate as a possible response to the consequences of non-standard forms of employment. Should social policies be universal? Policies like universal basic income and participation income puts the debate between conditionality and unconditionality of social policies in the political spectrum. The following study proposes to analyse the basic income in one of his cognates – the participation income (PI) (Atkinson, 1996) in “case studies” regarding the experiments in Netherlands and Catalonia. We aim to analyse the relation between the PI policy and the labour market. Literature regarding this theme has discussed, theoretically and with simulation based-evidence, the potentialities and risks of such a policy (Groot and Veen, 2000, Groot, 2004, Calintsky, 2016, Sommer, 2016 and Van Parijs and Vanderbroght, 2017), but it has failed to show the empirical evidence in the “fieldwork”. This study aims to answer to what extent can the PI be a valid structure / a “Stepping Stone” towards a sustainable trajectory? How is the PI policy a better policy than other social assistance benefits? Our hypothesis sustained on previous studies (Marimon e Zilibotti, 1999, Amine, Gavrel e Lebon, 2007) is that by giving more time (in social protection) to people, they will have better and sustained labour trajectories. This project is focused on the individual. We will analyse the mobility trajectories of the beneficiaries of the PI policy and compare them with the mobility trajectories of people on other social benefits. In order to do this we will analyse secondary data from the questionnaires applied to the beneficiaries of the experiments and analyse survey-administrative data from people on other social assistance benefits. The mix method analysis will be completed with semi-directive interviews to some of the beneficiaries of the basic income and social relevant actors in the field. We hope this study will contribute to a more sustained debate on the basic income and the welfare reform. 

​

​