Abstract
Over the last decades, rather than decreasing, informality has grown and furthered debates and studies among academics, activists and policy-makers. Nevertheless, the heterogeneity of the phenomena commonly associated with the concept of informality and correlates, such as informal sector and popular economy, results in a lack of consensus within the current literature. This is partly due to some theoretical and conceptual choices which hinder the formulation of frameworks capable of distinguishing among the various aspects of informality. The first aim of this paper is to clarify some of these issues, such as the prevailing understanding of the various realities that intertwine under the mantle of informality only by contrasting them with the formal economy, the use of all-encompassing concepts of little discriminating value, and, still, the mainstream theories’ lack of recognition of the plurality of logics underlying economic institutions and behaviors. Secondly, the paper puts forward a conceptual distinction between informal employment and informal economy, as well as a clearer understanding of the scope of concepts such as informal work and popular economy. In order to capture these nuances, a bottom-up perspective is adopted, allowing to apprehend the informal economy according to its specific features, such as its relational assets and the role fulfilled by the principle of domesticity. Finally, the article stresses the need to recognize the plurality of logics underlying the economy, in order to properly assess the meanings of the economic practices of the popular sectors and their role in development processes.Key words: informal economy; popular economy; ILO
Highlights
Over the last decades, informality has remained a significant economic standard in many countries and several continents
Contrary to the expectations raised by some modernization theories that anticipated the progressive formalization of the economy and labor, there has been no waning of informality (ILO, 2013; Bromley and Wilson, 2018)
Informality is not bound to disappear as long as the spread of the formal economy continues to run into persistent obstacles which, strictly speaking, sometimes keep it as a particular sector located in the midst of a predominantly informal economy
Summary
Informality has remained a significant economic standard in many countries and several continents. We must question approaches to the informal economy through its opposition to the formal one, whose starting point and background is the modern economy, identified by such analyses mostly with the capitalist market economy From this point of view, informality uses to be seen merely as a defective form of economy, a reflection of the deficiencies and weaknesses of its economic agents or, according to a critical and opposite bias, as a result of the structural relations of subordination and exploitation to which such agents are subjected by the capitalist logic. This has led to the conclusion that we need, as stated by Chen (2012: 20), “a new economic paradigm: a model of a hybrid economy that embraces the traditional and the modern, the small scale and the big scale, the informal and the formal”
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
