Does Money Only Matter in Low-to-Middle Income Countries? Public Health Policymakers’ Assessments of Material Social Determinants in Different Development Contexts

Abstract There has historically been a paradox in public health policymaking. In international development, there has been a working assumption that improving the quantity, security and predictability of people’s material resources leads to overall improvements in health, education, employment and other outcomes. However, in domestic policy within high-income societies, opinion has been divided on causality. This has appeared contradictory: if poverty harms health and if development mechanisms in low-to-middle income countries include transfers of resources, why would the same considerations not apply in high-income societies and why would improving people’s resources via policies such as Basic Income not improve their health? In this article, we explore this apparent distinction through semi-structured interviews with 14 UK-based public health policymakers. We find that the distinction is not clear, with UK-focused policymakers viewing the UK as a ‘poor country with rich people in it’, subject to similar considerations as low-to-middle income countries.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Basic Income Studies
Published
2026-02-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/bis-2025-0012
Primary Topic
Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does Money Only Matter in Low-to-Middle Income Countries? Public Health Policymakers’ Assessments of Material Social Determinants in Different Development Contexts

Joe Chrisp, Christina Cooper, Emma Croft, Vibhor Mathur et al.
Basic Income Studies
Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
article

Does Money Only Matter in Low-to-Middle Income Countries? Public Health Policymakers’ Assessments of Material Social Determinants in Different Development Contexts

Joe Chrisp, Christina Cooper, Emma Croft, Vibhor Mathur, Sophie B. Johnson, Graham Stark, Matthew Johnson, Neil Howard, Howard Reed, Hugo Fearnley, Anna Thew, Elliott Aidan Johnson, Claire Hart, Daniel Nettle
article en

Abstract

Abstract There has historically been a paradox in public health policymaking. In international development, there has been a working assumption that improving the quantity, security and predictability of people’s material resources leads to overall improvements in health, education, employment and other outcomes. However, in domestic policy within high-income societies, opinion has been divided on causality. This has appeared contradictory: if poverty harms health and if development mechanisms in low-to-middle income countries include transfers of resources, why would the same considerations not apply in high-income societies and why would improving people’s resources via policies such as Basic Income not improve their health? In this article, we explore this apparent distinction through semi-structured interviews with 14 UK-based public health policymakers. We find that the distinction is not clear, with UK-focused policymakers viewing the UK as a ‘poor country with rich people in it’, subject to similar considerations as low-to-middle income countries.

Basic Income Studies
Cumbria Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Northumbria University (GB), University of Bath (GB)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 43%
Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.