EconStor >
Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit (IZA), Bonn >
IZA Discussion Papers, Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit (IZA) >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10419/35431
  

Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKanbur, Ravien_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-06-18en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-07-07T11:51:47Z-
dc.date.available2010-07-07T11:51:47Z-
dc.date.issued2009en_US
dc.identifier.piurn:nbn:de:101:1-20090612107en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/35431-
dc.description.abstractThe informality discourse is large and vibrant, and is expanding rapidly. But there is a certain conceptual incoherence to the literature. New definitions of informality compete with old definitions leading to a plethora of alternative conceptualisations. While some individual studies may apply a tight definition consistently, the literature as a whole is in a mess. This article proposes that informality and formality should be seen in direct relation to economic activity in the presence of specified regulation(s). Relative to the regulation(s), four conceptual categories that can help frame the analysis are: (A) regulation applicable and compliant, (B) regulation applicable and non-compliant, (C) regulation non-applicable after adjustment of activity, and (D) regulation non-applicable to the activity. Rather than use the generic labels 'informal' and 'formal', it would be preferable if the analysis focused on these four categories (or even more disaggregated as appropriate). A central determining factor in the impacts of regulation on economic activity across these four categories is the nature and intensity of enforcement. While lack of enforcement is well-documented, an understanding of its determinants - why and to what extent a government would not enforce a regulation that it has itself passed, and why non-enforcement varies from one context to another, is relatively neglected in the literature. Thus, specificity on regulation and on enforcement is the key to achieving conceptual clarity in the analytical literature and in the policy discourse on informality.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherIZA Bonnen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesIZA discussion papers 4186en_US
dc.subject.jelJ42en_US
dc.subject.jelJ88en_US
dc.subject.jelO17en_US
dc.subject.ddc330en_US
dc.subject.keywordInformalityen_US
dc.subject.keywordregulationen_US
dc.subject.keywordenforcementen_US
dc.subject.stwInformeller Sektoren_US
dc.subject.stwRegulierungen_US
dc.subject.stwRechtsdurchsetzungen_US
dc.subject.stwDefinitionen_US
dc.titleConceptualising informality: regulation and enforcementen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.identifier.ppn602117542en_US
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungen-
Appears in Collections:IZA Discussion Papers, Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit (IZA)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
602117542.pdf127.13 kBAdobe PDF
No. of Downloads: Counter Stats
Show simple item record
Download bibliographical data as: BibTeX

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.