Entrepreneurship and the Informal Sector

Gurtoo, Anjula; Williams, Colin C.

doi:10.5367/000000009787414280

Cited by 166 publications

(116 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been contested for instance that the political economy perspective explains the informal economy in relatively deprived population groups and neo-liberal perspective in relatively affluent population groups (Gurtoo and Williams, 2009;Williams and Round, 2010;, that neo-liberal explanations are more relevant to developed economies and political economy explanations to developing economies (Oviedo et al, 2009) and that women are driven more by political economy exclusion motives and men more by neo-liberal voluntary exit motives (Franck, 2012;Grant, 2013;Williams, 2011).…”

Section: Evaluations Of the Rival Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining the Informal Economy: an Exploratory Evaluation of Competing Perspectives

Williams

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tous droits réservés © Département des relations industrielles de l'Université Laval, 2015Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne.https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit.Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'Université de Montréal, l'Université Laval et l'Université du Québec à Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. Résumé de l'article Le but de cet article est de procéder à une analyse exploratoire des conjonctures économiques et sociales générales associées aux grandes économies informelles. À cette fin, trois perspectives concurrentielles font l'objet d'une évaluation critique qui confirme, à maints égards, que les variations observées d'un pays à l'autre quant à la taille de l'économie informelle sont associées aux facteurs suivants : 1-le sous-développement (perspective de modernisation); 2-une taxation élevée, corruption et ingérence de l'État (perspective néolibérale); ou 3-une intervention étatique inadéquate pour protéger les travailleurs (perspective d'économie politique). En analysant la taille variable de l'économie informelle dans 33 économies développées et en transition, soit 28 pays européens et cinq autres pays membres de l'OCDE (Australie, Canada, Japon, Nouvelle-zélande et États-Unis), l'auteur arrive à la conclusion que les grandes économies informelles sont associées au sous-développement, lequel est mesuré en fonction de plusieurs facteurs : niveaux inférieurs de rNB par habitant; taux de participation à l'emploi; salaires moyens; force et qualité institutionnelle de la bureaucratie; taux élevés de corruption perçue au sein de la fonction publique; faibles niveaux de dépenses au chapitre de la protection sociale; et intervention du marché du travail pour protéger les groupes vulnérables, mais, également, recours restreint à des contrats de travail temporaires et des affectations temporaires. Au final, cette analyse est un encouragement à combiner les facteurs associés à ces trois perspectives pour en arriver à une compréhension plus nuancée et plus fine de la mesure dans laquelle les variations transnationales de la taille de l'économie informelle sont associées à des conjonctures socioéconomiques plus générales. En conclusion, l'auteur s'interroge sur les implications de cet exercice sur la théorie et la politique, et il souligne la nécessité de pousser plus loin l'analyse des différents impacts qu'aurait, sur la taille de l'économie informelle, une gamme plus large d'indicateurs de modernisation, de corruption, de taxation et de types d'intervention étatique. Explaining the Informal Economy: an Exploratory Evaluation of Competing PerspectivesColin C. Williams this paper evaluates critically whether the cross-national variations in the size of the informal economy are the result of: under-...

show abstract

Section: Evaluations Of the Rival Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining the Informal Economy: an Exploratory Evaluation of Competing Perspectives

Williams

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The support to this concept is given by are numerous researchers in the field of entrepreneurship (Gurtoo & Williams, 2009;Hessels et al, 2008).…”

Section: Motives Of Entrepreneurs'' Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between motives of entrepreneurial behavior and venture maturity

Bobera¹,

Leković²,

Berber³

2017

Industrija

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, nevertheless, a more nuanced perspective has started to emerge that views each perspective as more relevant in some contexts rather than others, and seeks to combine them so that a richer finer-grained understanding be achieved. For example, it has been argued that the political economy explanation is more relevant to relatively deprived populations and the neo-liberal explanation to relatively affluent populations within countries (Evans et al, 2006;Gurtoo and Williams, 2009;Pfau-Effinger, 2009; and that neo-liberal exit rationales are more common in developed economies and political economy exclusion rationales in developing economies (Oviedo et al, 2009). …”

Section: Explaining Variations In the Degree Of Informalisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classifying Latin American Economies: A Degree of Informalisation Approach

Williams¹

2014

IJBA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the commonality of employment in the informal economy, this paper moves beyond classifying economies by the composition of their formal economies and instead classifies economies by their degree of informalisation. Analysing International Labour Organisation data on the varying level of employment in the informal economy across 16 Latin American economies, the outcome is to reveal a significant correlation between cross-national variations in the degree of informalisation and cross-national variations in GNP per capita, poverty and social contribution levels. The paper concludes by discussing the implications for theory and policy.Keywords: informal sector, shadow economy, underground sector, varieties of capitalism, economic development, Latin America IntroductionReviewing the dominant classificatory schemas for differentiating economies, it becomes quickly obvious that countries are distinguished by the nature of their formal economic systems, such as their level of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita (World Bank, 2013), whether they are control, market or mixed economies (Arnold, 1996;Rohlf, 1998), or liberal or coordinated varieties of capitalism (Hall and Soskice, 2001). The problem, however, is that that the majority of the global labour force are working in jobs outside the formal economy (Jütting and Laiglesia, 2009;ILO, 2012ILO, , 2013Williams and Lansky, 2013). Recognising this, the aim of this paper is to develop a classificatory schema for differentiating economies according to their degree of informalisation. The intention in doing so is to de-centre the formal economy in economic discourse and bring to the fore the prevalence of employment in the informal economy so that greater attention is paid to understanding this realm where the majority of global jobs are found and how it can be addressed in policy.In the first section, therefore, a brief review will be undertaken of how to economies have been classified according to the character of their formal economic systems and an alternative typology will be provided that classifies economies according to their degrees of informalisation along with a review of the competing theories that have sought to explain the cross-national variations in the level of employment in the informal economy. In order to start to populate this classificatory schema and evaluate the competing explanations for the cross-national variations, the second section then introduces an ILO data set on the level of informal employment in 16 Latin American countries and the third section reports the descriptive findings on the cross-national variations in the degree of informalisation. The fourth section then conducts a preliminary evaluation of the competing explanations for these cross-national variations whilst the fifth and final section concludes by summarising the findings and discussing their theoretical and policy implications. Classifying Economic Systems: A Degrees of Informalisation ApproachReviewing the dominant classificatory schemas used to differenti...

show abstract

Entrepreneurship and the Informal Sector

Cited by 166 publications

References 27 publications

Explaining the Informal Economy: an Exploratory Evaluation of Competing Perspectives

Explaining the Informal Economy: an Exploratory Evaluation of Competing Perspectives

The relationship between motives of entrepreneurial behavior and venture maturity

Classifying Latin American Economies: A Degree of Informalisation Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About