If you were given an unconditional amount of money every month, what would you do? For Irish musicians who took part in the country’s Basic Income for the Arts (BIA) pilot program, the answer was simple: they made more music. 22 per cent more music, to be exact.

That was just one of many striking outcomes from the three-year pilot scheme, which offered a guaranteed income of €325 per week to 2,000 creative sector workers. Throughout the process, participants reported positive impacts on their mental health, career sustainability, and creative output. So successful was this program that the scheme has now been made permanent by the Irish government.

• READ MORE: Are there too many synthesizers?

So, at a time when the music industry’s foundations seem to be eroding on a global scale, could some sort of guaranteed income be the solution?

That such a scheme is even politically possible tells you something about just how much disruption music makers currently face. The rise of music streaming platforms has allowed more people to release music than ever before in history, and at the exact same time, the amount of money artists can expect to earn from releasing music has fallen off a cliff, with many blaming the payment models and low subscription fees, of major players like Spotify.

At the same time, the rise of algorithmically driven music discovery, something that is ubiquitous across streaming platforms, seems to achieve the exact opposite of its stated intent. Recent studies indicate that those who rely primarily on algorithms are actually less likely to be exposed to new music, and that this is especially pronounced in younger listeners. For new and emerging artists trying to make a name for themselves, this is an especially concerning development.

Then there’s live music and touring. Traditionally, this has been the grassroots layer of the industry, in which most musicians learn and perfect their trade and earn a basic living. Post-COVID, however, we have seen live music venues struggle to make ends meet or close up shop entirely. At the same time, giants like Live Nation and its subsidiary, Ticketmaster, have been accused of predatory and monopolistic practices, leaving both artists and venues with less money in their pockets when the house lights go up at the end of the night.

Then there’s the multi-headed beast of AI. It’s only been a handful of years since music generators hit the mainstream, and yet it is now common for artists to compete against wholly generated music for streams. In some cases, musicians are left fighting artificial doppelgängers, who pilfer their name, image, music and royalties. Major labels, who initially cried foul the loudest, have now begun humming a much softer tune – as most clearly evidenced by Warner Music Group’s deal with Suno to license AI-music.

Making a career out of music has always been a narrow path, and emerging musicians especially have always been amongst the most economically vulnerable groups in society. Yet the current set of disruptions, when taken together, form a uniquely challenging environment.

Something clearly needs to be done – but is a guaranteed income scheme the only answer?

In the UK, artists, audiences, and politicians agree, at least in principle, that action is needed to tackle the country’s crisis of venue closures. A recent report has suggested a levy on arena and stadium tickets to help support smaller music venues, including live music clubs and spaces for electronic music. In the US, government action might help loosen the stranglehold that ticket companies currently have over the touring circuit.

On the streaming front, campaign groups like the Musicians’ Union are lobbying for the passage of new legislation on streaming remuneration with the aim of putting more money into the pockets of musicians. At the same time, booming vinyl sales and a surprising spike in people buying cassettes highlight a growing desire from music fans who want to get their hands on something tangible.

A revitalised live music scene, new laws on streaming royalties, increases in sales of physical media – all of these are promising developments that would, arguably, make guaranteed income schemes unnecessary.

Regarding Ireland’s pilot program, while many celebrated its success, a valid critique emerged regarding its exclusivity. While 2000 people saw a measurable benefit to their creative output and quality of life, some 6000 others applied and were not selected. Scaled up, such schemes necessitate uncomfortable conversations around who gets support, who doesn’t, and under what criteria.

Some less convincing pushback can be found outside the arts. One group of researchers skewered Ireland’s support for its cultural sector on moral grounds, writing: “Why should artists be entitled to or expect to earn all, or even most, of their income from their work as artists? And what is intrinsically unacceptable about an artist having more than one job?”

We can assume that these authors were not holding down a side hustle while they penned that research paper. But, on a more serious note, it’s worth noting that governments routinely subsidise entire industries when they are deemed to have national value or when that industry is struggling.

The music industry certainly has national value; in the UK, it brought in a record £7.6 billion just last year. But, despite plenty of profits at the top, the music industry as a whole is struggling. When a well-known, award-winning, double platinum-selling artist like Lily Allen has to sell feet pics to get by, just imagine how things look to young, emerging artists?

The key here is not that artists baulk at taking on secondary work; it’s that systemic income instability can become so overwhelming that emerging artists are not able to dedicate the time and energy necessary to get off that first rung of the ladder.

Ultimately, musicians are not clamouring for government-funded income schemes as a catch-all solution. By and large, they’re demanding society-wide action to strengthen the support pillars that let ‘musician’ become a viable working-class option for many, and a ticket to stardom for a few. Ireland’s Basic Income for the Arts is at least a bold step in a positive direction – but if we can’t get it together to push back against the wider forces that are hollowing out the music industry, then it will never be enough.

The post Ireland has given artists a guaranteed income – is this how we fix a broken music industry? appeared first on MusicTech.