just jobs index 2013

8/23/2019 Just Jobs Index 2013

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/just-jobs-index-2013 1/36

Just Jobs Index 2013Version 0.1

Tewodros Aragie Kebede, Huafeng Zhang, and Jon Pedersen April 2013

Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies, Oslo

WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.O



Just Jobs Index 2013Version 0.1

Tewodros Aragie Kebede, Huafeng Zhang, and Jon Pedersen April 2013

Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies, Oslo



Contents 1 Introduction and summary

3 Initial findings using the Just Jobs Index

13 Basic overview

19 Empirical properties of index components

25 Gaps and future directions

27 Conclusion

28 Data sources and endnotes



Introduction and summary | www.americanprogress.

Introduction and summary

Jobs have aken cener sage in he developmen agenda since he nancial crisis

o 2008. Te Jus Jobs Nework works o promoe jus jobs—hose complee wih

appropriae compensaion, social proecions, labor righs, and opporuniies or

economic mobiliy—as he basis or broad-based, susainable economic growh.

As par o ha eor, we have developed a new inernaional measure o air

jobs—he Jus Jobs Index—o broaden he global discourse on employmen

beyond he common emphasis on unemploymen and o address job qualiy.

Te Jus Jobs Index, or JJI, illusraes ha an iniiaive o examine he relaive

availabiliy o jus jobs in counries a dieren sages o developmen is no only

possible bu also insighul. A he same ime, our eors show jus how ar here is

o go in lling in he daa gaps or developing and developed counries alike.

Te JJI assesses he naure and exen o air jobs a a counry level and creaes a

vivid picure o work opporuniies, income and employmen securiy, and equal-

iy o reamen and working condiions. I is he rs inernaional measure o

is kind and oers an essenial complemen o various indices such as he human

developmen index, or HDI, ha aggregaely measure developmen. Te JJI

can be a useul analyical ool o ideniy counries ha are successully provid-

ing qualiy employmen opporuniies. I can also help researchers ideniy he

mechanisms by which economic growh ranslaes ino higher sandards o human

welare and more ecien economic and social developmen, and vice versa.

In addiion, he JJI reveals inerconnecions among he various dimensions o job

creaion and how working condiions can be improved. Tis enables policymakers

o arge resources and design policies more eecively.

Te ndings presened in his issue brie represen only he preliminary esimaes

and analyses o jus jobs in many developed and developing naions across he



2 Center or American Progress | Just Jobs Index 2013

world. Despie he exciing possibiliies, however, his version o he index is lim-

ied by he lack o daa in boh developing and developed counries.

Good policymaking requires good daa. Wihou good daa, we canno accu-

raely ideniy where policy is working and where i is ailing. Unorunaely, he

vas majoriy o counries do no have all o he relevan daa ha would allow researchers and policymakers o measure employmen availabiliy, opporuniy,

and qualiy. Dimensions such as social proecion and social dialogue, which we

sruggled o include in his iniial version o he JJI, could be more ully incorpo-

raed ino uure versions i he daa become available.

Tis issue brie summarizes he new index’s preliminary ndings, explains how

he index was consruced, and suggess ways he index migh communicae core

ndings ha governmens, developmen agencies, and oher sakeholders can use

o address he jobs concern and ideniy relevan policy measures.



Initial indings using the Jost Jobs Index | www.americanprogress.

Initial findings using

the Just Jobs Index

We analyzed daa or 183 counries or 14 indicaors rom 2000 o 2010. Te lis

o indicaors and heir groupings are shown in able 1.

Te resuls presened here should be considered he rs draf analysis o JJI raher

han a nal and comprehensive ranking. Wih ha in mind, he curren version o

he index is labeled as version 0.1. Key ndings o he analysis o JJI version 0.1 are

summarized below. Once he ull lis o counries is included and relevan sensiiviy

analysis is made, i will be upgraded o version 1.0.1 Addiional eors are needed ogaher hard-o-nd daa such as inormaion on social securiy and social dialogue.

Te inegraion o ha daa will enable a JJI upgrade o version 2.0.

TABLE 1

Just Jobs Index dimensions and indicators

Employment Rights at work

Employmentopportunities Income security Employmentsecurity

Safety at work

and healthy work conditions

Equality of

treatment andopportunity

• Labor-force

participation

rate

• Unemployment

rate

• Youth-

unemployment

rate

• Wage and

salaried

workers

• Average real

wages

• GDP per capita

in purchasing-

power parities,

or PPPs

• Vulnerable

employment

rate

• Share of

employment by

occupation

• Status in self-

employment

• Usual hours

worked: 49-59

hours

• Usual hours

worked: 60 or

more hours

• Female-to-male

employment

rate disparity

• Female-to-male

unemployment

rate disparity

• Number of

professional

women to

professional

men disparity




Te number o counries included in he index compuaion diers by year and

subdimension, boh o which deermine he availabiliy o daa. As able 2 shows,

he number o counries covered by each subdimension varies by year. Ou o he

183 counries or which daa were colleced, he “Employmen opporuniies”

dimension had he highes daa availabiliy consisenly across he years. Te daa

on subdimension 4, “Saey a work and healhy work condiions,” were limied,however, and deermined he lis o counries included in he overall index.

We consruced wo indices based on daa availabiliy in he subdimensions. Te

rs one is an overall index, JJI 1, which uses all ve dimensions, resuling in a

maximum o 39 counries or 2004 and 2005. Te second index, JJI 2, is consruced

excluding subdimensions 2 and 4, where counry daa availabiliy is limied. Te

number o counries covered by each o hese indices is shown in able 3.

Te ull index capures disinc and broader aspecs o he jus-jobs concep such

as employmen securiy, albei wih limied daa availabiliy or mos counries,including developing naions—see able 4. Among counries where daa were

available, European counries generally experienced he bes jus jobs peror-

mance in 2000 and rom 2005 hrough 2009. Counries in Cenral and Souh

Asia, including urkey and Pakisan, and in Arica, including Mauriius, ranked

lowes in 2005.




TABLE 2

Subdimensions and number of countries (N) covered by JJI

Year Employment Rights at work

Employment

opportunities

Income

security

Employment

security

Safety at work

and healthy

work conditions

Equality of

treatment and

opportunity

2000 83 75 78 41 81

2001 92 83 83 45 87

2002 93 87 83 40 87

2003 94 88 83 49 88

2004 97 94 88 49 93

2005 97 101 90 47 95

2006 100 103 93 30 93

2007 92 99 89 31 89

2008 88 93 81 31 80

2009 82 84 69 29 70

2010 59 51 35 28 35

TABLE 3

Subdimensions and number of countries (N) covered by JJI

Year Overall JJI (JJI 1)JJI with 3

subdimensions (JJI 2)

2000 25 65

2001 31 73

2002 30 72

2003 38 74

2004 39 78

2005 39 77

2006 26 80

2007 26 79

2008 25 72

2009 22 63

2010 11 33




TABLE 4

JJI ranks for selected years

Rank 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

1 Luxembourg Luxembourg Luxembourg Luxembourg Luxembourg Luxembourg

2 Denmark Norway Norway Norway Norway Norway

3 Netherlands Sweden Netherlands Sweden Sweden Denmark 4 Austria Netherlands Sweden Denmark Denmark Sweden

5 Australia Denmark Denmark Finland Finland Australia

6 United Kingdom Ireland Ireland Ireland Australia Finland

7 Belgium Australia Australia Australia Ireland Germany

8 Germany Finland Finland New Zealand Belgium Austria

9 Israel Belgium New Zealand Belgium Germany Belgium

10 France United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom New Zealand New Zealand

11 New Zealand New Zealand Belgium Germany Austria United Kingdom

12 Portugal Austria Germany Austria United Kingdom France13 Hungary Germany Austria Israel France Slovenia

14 Malta Israel Israel France Israel Hungary

15 Cyprus France France Hungary Estonia Estonia

16 Spain Cyprus Estonia Slovenia Slovenia Czech Republic

17 Italy Hungary Hungary Czech Republic Hungary Portugal

18 Bulgaria Slovenia Slovenia Estonia Czech Republic Spain

19 Estonia Estonia Spain Spain Spain Slovakia

20 Lithuania Macau Czech Republic Portugal Portugal Italy

Due o he lack o daa availabiliy or wo dimensions o he index, a second

indicaor was consruced using employmen opporuniies, employmen securiy,

and equaliy o reamen and opporuniy. Tis enabled a larger number o coun-

ries o be included in he index and provided beter comparisons rom 2000 o

2010. Te resuls or seleced years and heir rankings based on he reduced orm

o he index are shown in able 5.




Rank 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

21 Croatia Spain Portugal Slovakia Slovakia Poland

22 Macau Czech Republic Slovakia Italy Italy Turkey

23 Panama Portugal Italy Greece Poland24 Peru Lithuania Greece Poland Armenia

25 Tanzania Slovakia Poland Armenia Turkey

26 Malta Turkey Turkey

27 Italy

28 Bulgaria

29 Croatia

30 Greece

31 Moldova

32 Mexico33 Poland

34 Panama

35 Peru

36 Georgia

37 Mauritius

38 Turkey

39 Pakistan

Mos o he European counries perormed beter using he reduced orm o he

index; Iceland ranked rs in all ve seleced years. One ineresing nding is ha

counries such as Egyp and Syria ranked in he botom ve during he 2006 o

2009 period, suggesing a connecion o he social-economic sources o he 2011

uprisings in Egyp and Syria. Jus-jobs perormance is lowes in Pakisan, which

ranked a he botom consisenly rom 2006 hrough 2009.




TABLE 5

JJI ranks for selected years (excluding two dimensions)

Rank 2000 2005 2007 2008 2009

1 Iceland Iceland Iceland Iceland Iceland

2 Sweden Australia Sweden Norway Netherlands

3 Australia Sweden Norway Netherlands Norway4 Denmark Netherlands Netherlands Sweden Australia

5 Norway Denmark Australia Australia Denmark

6 United Kingdom Norway Denmark Denmark Sweden

7 Netherlands New Zealand Finland Finland Luxembourg

8 Austria Finland New Zealand New Zealand New Zealand

9 Israel Russian Federation Luxembourg Israel Finland

10 Ireland Ireland Russian Federation Russian Federation Switzerland

11 Finland Israel Israel Luxembourg Macau

12 Singapore Luxembourg Macau Switzerland Israel13 Russian Federation Switzerland Cyprus Macau Russian Federation

14 Switzerland United Kingdom Ireland Cyprus Austria

15 New Zealand Macau Switzerland Austria Cyprus

16 Germany Kuwait United Kingdom United Kingdom Germany

17 Czech Republic Singapore Singapore Ireland Singapore

18 Belgium Belgium Belgium Singapore United Kingdom

19 Luxembourg Cyprus Austria Germany Belgium

20 Barbados Austria Germany Belgium Slovenia

21 Hungary Germany Czech Republic France France22 Macau France France Czech Republic Czech Republic

23 Slovenia Estonia Hungary Slovenia Ireland

24 Portugal Hungary Slovenia Estonia Hong Kong

25 Hong KongUnited Arab Emir-

atesHong Kong Hungary Latvia

26 France Czech Republic Estonia Latvia Hungary

27 Cyprus Slovenia Spain Hong Kong Costa Rica

28 Malta Hong Kong Latvia Portugal Portugal

29 Malaysia Spain Lithuania Malta Malta

30 Slovakia Portugal Slovakia Slovakia Korea, South

31 Estonia Slovakia Portugal Spain Malaysia




Rank 2000 2005 2007 2008 2009

32 Costa Rica Korea, South Korea, South Costa Rica Bulgaria

33 Spain Latvia Malta Bulgaria Estonia

34 Romania Trinidad andTobago Bulgaria Korea, South Slovakia

35 Korea, South Lithuania Malaysia Lithuania Lithuania

36 Bulgaria Malaysia Costa Rica MalaysiaUnited Arab Emir-

ates

37 Trinidad and Tobago Malta Peru Croatia Croatia

38 Brazil Azerbaijan Croatia Romania Spain

39 Croatia Peru Romania Moldova Kazakhstan

40 Lithuania Romania Argentina Poland Romania

41 Peru Costa Rica Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Poland

42 Mexico Bulgaria Poland Peru Moldova

43 Thailand Argentina Mexico Brazil Peru

44 Argentina Croatia Kazakhstan Kazakhstan Mexico

45 Italy Moldova Thailand Mexico Thailand

46 Saint Lucia Mexico Brazil United Arab Emirates Azerbaijan

47 Latvia Brazil Italy Italy Italy

48 Poland Italy Moldova Panama Greece

49 Namibia ThailandUnited Arab Emir-

atesGreece Panama

50 Uruguay Poland Panama Thailand Jamaica

51 Georgia Greece Greece Jamaica Mauritius

52 Jamaica Panama Macedonia Macedonia South Africa

53 Vietnam Macedonia Ecuador Uruguay Macedonia

54 Panama Belize Jamaica South Africa Paraguay

55 Greece Ecuador South Africa Mauritius Cambodia

56 Ecuador South Africa Uruguay El Salvador Sri Lanka

57 Maldives Uruguay Nicaragua Lebanon Indonesia

58 Dominican Republic Nicaragua El Salvador Paraguay Turkey

59 Bolivia Kyrgyzstan Kyrgyzstan Cambodia Philippines

60 Turkey El Salvador Paraguay Armenia Bhutan

61 Philippines Lebanon Mauritius Turkey Iran




Trends in just jobs

Te need or counries o ocus no only on creaing jobs bu also on creaing

qualiy jobs—wih appropriae compensaion, righs, and economic securiy—is

eviden when examining he rends o counries’ perormances in jus-jobs mea-

sures. As shown in Figure 1, jus-jobs perormances declined airly seadily over

he 2006 o 2010 period and consisenly across counries in he reduced index.

Tis indicaes ha addressing he jus-jobs quesion—especially or he counries

ranking low on hese jus-jobs measures—will require a concered global eor.

Rank 2000 2005 2007 2008 2009

62 Tanzania Mauritius Lebanon Indonesia Morocco

63 Egypt Madagascar Cambodia Sri Lanka Pakistan

64 Algeria Paraguay Armenia Georgia

65 Bhutan Bhutan Bhutan

66 Georgia Georgia Philippines

67 Sri Lanka Indonesia Dominican Republic

68 Turkey Maldives Iran

69 Maldives Turkey Egypt

70 Tanzania Sri Lanka Syria

71 Iran Tanzania Morocco

72 Indonesia Iran Pakistan

73 Philippines Philippines

74 Burkina FasoDominican

Republic

75 Dominican Republic Burkina Faso

76 Egypt Egypt

77 Morocco Morocco

78 Ethiopia Pakistan

79 Syria Syria

80 Pakistan



Initial indings using the Jost Jobs Index | www.americanprogress.o

Year

20102009200820072006200520042003200220012000

I n d e x a f t e r e x c l u d i n g s u b - d i m e n s i o n 2 a n d 4

100

80

60

40

20

0

VietnamUruguayUnited KingdomUnited Arab EmiratesUganda Turkey Trinidad and Tobago Tonga

Thailand TanzaniaSyriaSwitzerlandSwedenSri LankaSpainSouth AfricaSloveniaSlovakiaSingaporeSaint LuciaRussian FederationRomaniaPortugalPoland

PhilippinesPeruParaguayPanamaPakistanNorwayNicaraguaNew Zealand

NetherlandsNamibiaMoroccoMongoliaMoldovaMexicoMauritiusMaltaMaldivesMalaysiaMadagascarMacedoniaMacauLuxembourgLithuaniaLebanon

Dominican RepublicDenmark Czech RepublicCyprusCroatiaCosta RicaChileCambodia

Burkina FasoBulgariaBrazilBoliviaBhutanBelizeBelgiumBarbadosBangladeshBahrainAzerbaijanAustriaAustraliaArmeniaArgentinaAlgeria

Countries

LatviaKyrgyzstanKuwaitKorea, SouthKazakhstanJamaicaItalyIsrael

IrelandIranIndonesiaIcelandHungaryHong KongGreeceGermanyGeorgiaFranceFinlandEthiopiaEstoniaEl SalvadorEgyptEcuador

FIGURE 1

JJI trend by year (excluding dimensions 2 and 4)



Basic overview | www.americanprogress.o

Basic overview

Indicaors are generally used o measure he exen o which a specied objec-

ive or oucome was achieved. Tey can hus be used o assess perormance and

evaluae progress over ime in he achievemen o specied objecives and can be

helpul in making cross-counry comparisons.

Currenly, here is no single measure o jus jobs, bu a combinaion o several

indicaors may give a relaively accurae measure. Looking a a single indicaor

does no provide a comprehensive undersanding o jobs. Tis is he case wihsocial securiy, where he proporion o people receiving dieren ypes o benes

is capured, bu here may be concern regarding he qualiy and eeciveness o

services. In order o obain an accurae picure o jus jobs, hereore, i is neces-

sary o combine several indicaors ino an overall index.

One o he basic consideraions in consrucing an index is he issue o relevance

o he seleced indicaors. o his end, he JJI is made o be relevan o everyone—

people in low-, middle-, and high-income counries irrespecive o he ype o

work or indusry.

Te JJI is primarily anchored wih he Inernaional Labour Organizaion’s decen

work dimensions: employmen, social securiy, basic righs, and social dialogue.

Due o he lack o daa or he social securiy and social dialogue dimensions,

however, he curren version o he index includes only he employmen and

basic-righs dimensions.

Dimension 1: Employment

Te operaional deniion o he employmen dimension includes indicaors in

hree subdimensions: employmen opporuniies, income securiy, and employ-

men securiy.




Employment opportunities are dened boh posiively and negaively. In a posi-

ive sense, he subdimension reers o employmen and labor-orce aciviy among

he relevan populaion base. In a negaive sense, i includes unemploymen and

lack o employmen opporuniies or specic groups o he populaions such as

youh. Te ollowing indicaors are used o measure he employmen opporuni-

ies subdimension:

1. Labor-force partici pation rate: he proporion o he populaion ages 15 and

older ha is economically acive—all people who supply labor or he produc-

ion o goods and services during a specied period.

2. Unemployment rate: he share o he labor orce ha is wihou work bu avail-

able or and seeking employmen.

3. Youth-unemployment rate: youh unemploymen as a percenage o he youh

labor orce.

4. Wage and salaried workers: hose workers who hold he ype o jobs dened as

“paid employmen jobs,” where he incumbens hold explici—writen or oral—or implici employmen conracs ha give hem a basic remuneraion ha is no

direcly dependen upon he revenue o he uni or which hey work.

Income security reers o he noion o an “adequae living wage” and can be mea-

sured using indicaors o rae o pay and GDP per capia. Te ollowing indicaors

are used o measure he income securiy subdimension:

5. Average real wages: he goods and services ha can be purchased wih wages

or provided as wages, expressed in real erms by adjusing or changes in con-

sumer prices.2

6. GDP per capita in purchasing-power parities, or PPPs: gross domesic produc

convered o inernaional dollars using purchasing-power pariy raes. An

inernaional dollar has he same purchasing power over GDP as a U.S. dollar

has in he Unied Saes. Purchasing-power pariies are he raes o currency

conversion ha eliminae he dierences in price levels beween counries.

Employment security reers o he sabiliy and securiy o work and is operaion-

alized using he ollowing indicaors:

7. Vulnerable employment rate: unpaid amily workers and own-accoun work-

ers as a percenage o oal employmen. Own-accoun workers are hose who

operae heir own economic enerprise or engage independenly in a proes-

sion or rade and hire no employees.3




8. Share of employment by occupation: percenage o proessional occupaions

in oal employmen wih he groups dened by he classicaion, according o

he Inernaional Sandard Classicaion o Occupaions.4

9. Employment by status in self-employment: percenage o sel-employed work-

ers and presened as percenages o he oal employed.

Dimension 2: Rights at work

Te operaional deniion o he second dimension—righs a work—includes

wo subdimensions: saey a work and healhy work condiions, and equaliy o

reamen and opporuniy.

Safety at work and healthy work conditions are dened as he general condiions

ha preserve and promoe he physical and psychological inegriy o workers.

Tese are operaionalized using wo indicaors:

10. Usual hours worked: he “usual hours worked” per week idenies he mos

common weekly working schedule o a person in employmen over a seleced

period. Te recenly adoped inernaionally agreed-upon saisical deniion

o “usual hours worked” reers o he hours worked in any job during a shor

period such as one week, a longer period o ime, or more echnically as he

modal value o he “acual hours worked” per week over a longer observaion

period. Te deniion is applicable o all ypes o jobs, even hose where he

worker does no possess a working conrac such as in small-scale or amily

enerprises or in sel-employmen. “Usual hours worked” includes overime

ha occurs sysemaically every day or week and excludes ime no worked

on a usual basis. Tis indicaor is operaionalized by share o persons working

beween 49 and 59 hours.

11. Usual hours worked: he same deniion as indicaor 10, operaionalized by

he share o people working 60 or more hours.

Equality of treatment and opportunity reers o he equaliy o opporuniy in

employmen, occupaion, and equal pay or work o equal value. Tis subdimen-

sion is operaionalized using hree indicaors:

12. Female-to-male employment rate disparity: dened as indicaor 2 and calcu-

laed as an absolue value o he dierence rom 100.




13. Female-to-male unemployment rate disparity: dened as indicaor 2 or emale

populaion and calculaed as an absolue value o he dierence rom 100.

14. Number of professional women to the number of professional men disparity:

reers o he deniion o indicaor 8 and is dened by reerring o he emale

share o employmen.

Constructing the index

Consrucing an index raises he quesion o how much weigh should be given o

dieren indicaors and which ormula should be used or combining qualiaive

and quaniaive indicaors. Te Jus Jobs Index atemps o demonsrae ha i is

possible o develop overall indices o air-jobs perormance. Tis involves deci-

sions on wheher o include quaniaive and qualiaive indicaors, he weigh o

be given o dieren indicaors, and heir combinaion ino an overall index.

Te consrucion o he JJI sars wih a simple approach o help assess he qualiy o

he daa, as well as o inerpre he resuls in a manner ha is ree rom mehodologi-

cal complexiies. Te variables used o consruc he JJI are measured in dieren

unis and wih dieren ranges. Average wages, or example, are measured dierenly

rom unemploymen raes. Te indicaors mus hereore be sandardized beore

being combined ino a single componen o he JJI. We sandardize each indicaor

on a scale o 0 o 10, wih 0 indicaing he wors and 10 indicaing he bes score.

Te sandardizaion is made based on specic ormulas depending on he value

and ype o indicaor and is implicaions oward he index. Each o he indicaors

in he ve subdimensions is relaed negaively or posiively o wha hey measure.

Te summary o he indicaors and heir implicaion is presened below. Based on

heir implicaion, he sandardizaion ormula is applied.

For indicaors wih posiive implicaions or he index—meaning a higher value indi-

caes a beter condiion—such as hourly wage raes, we use he sandardizaion as:

X i– min {X}

max{X} – min {X} I i = xS




TABLE 6

Inside the JJI

Indicator ID Indicator description Implications

IND 1 Labor-force participation rate Positive

IND 2 Unemployment rate Negative

IND 3 Youth-unemployment rate NegativeIND 4 Wage and salaried workers Positive

IND 5 Average real wages Positive

IND 6 GDP per capita in PPP Positive

IND 7 Vulnerable employment rate Negative

IND 8 Share of employment by occupation Positive

IND 9 Employment by status in self-employment Positive

IND 10 Usual hours worked: 49 to 59 hours Negative

IND 11 Usual hours worked: 60 or more hours Negative

IND 12 Female-to-male employment rate disparity NegativeIND 13 Female-to-male unemployment rate disparity Negative

IND 14 Number of professional women to professional men disparity Negative

in which I irepresens he value o he sandardized indicaor or counry i; X

iis he

acual value o he relevan variable or counry i; min {X} is he minimum value o

he variable across all counries; max{X} is he maximum value o he variable across

all counries; and S is he maximum value o he range or he sandardized indicaor.

For indicaors wih a negaive implicaion o he index—meaning higher value

indicaes a worse condiion—such as unemploymen rae, he sandardizaion will

be conduced as:

max{X} – X i

max{X} – min {X} I

i= xS

Te score or each o he dimensions o he JJI will be calculaed rom he simple

arihmeic average o all he sandardized indicaors associaed wih ha compo-

nen. Once all indicaors are sandardized, an addiive index is consruced.




For he purpose o consrucing he index, we used he ollowing seps:

1. Collecion o daa on 121 indicaors o decen work dimensions rom second-

ary daa sources or he 11 years rom 2000 o 2010

2. Daa cleaning and rening o he indicaors, resuling in 14 indicaors or ve

subdimensions o jus jobs3. Impuaions o missing daa or various counries

4. Consrucion o an addiive Jus Jobs Index



Empirical properties o index components | www.americanprogress.o

Empirical properties

of index components

In his secion, we examine individual componens o he indices described earlier

o undersand he underlying mechanisms ha led o he ranking o counries. Te

ollowing panel shows he rend o componens o he index by economic region.

Opporuniies or work and income securiy are dimensions ha conribued o

he decline in rends exhibied earlier.

Sub-Saharan AfricaSouth Asia

Middle East & North AfricaLatin America & Caribbean

High income: OECDHigh income: nonOECD

Europe & Central AsiaEast Asia & Pacific

100806040200 100806040200 100806040200 100806040200





100806040200





100806040200 100806040200 100806040200

201020092008

2007200620052004

2003200220012000

FIGURE 2

Opportunities for work





Middle East & North Africa

Latin America & CaribbeanHigh income: OECDHigh income: nonOECD


50403020100 50403020100 50403020100 50403020100





50403020100





50403020100 50403020100 50403020100

201020092008

2007200620052004

2003200220012000

FIGURE 3

Income security






Latin America & CaribbeanHigh income: OECD

High income: nonOECDEurope & Central Asia

East Asia & Pacific

100806040200

100806040200

100806040200

100806040200





100806040200





100806040200 100806040200 100806040200

201020092008

2007200620052004

2003200220012000

FIGURE 4

Employment security






Latin America & CaribbeanHigh income: OECD


East Asia & Pacific

100806040200 100806040200 100806040200 100806040200





100806040200





100806040200 100806040200 100806040200

201020092008

2007200620052004

2003200220012000

FIGURE 5

Safety at work and healthy work conditions





Middle East & North AfricaLatin America & CaribbeanHigh income: OECD


East Asia & Pacific

100806040200

100806040200

100806040200

100806040200





100806040200





100806040200 100806040200 100806040200

201020092008

2007200620052004

2003200220012000

FIGURE 6

Equality of treatment and opportunity



Gap and uture directions | www.americanprogress.o

Gaps and future directions

One o he challenges in he consrucion o a Jus Jobs Index is he lack o avail-

able daa on various indicaors relevan or jus jobs. Tis requires a remendous

amoun o work o veriy and cross-validae he daa obained rom secondary

sources or counries around he world.

Te ollowing seps would help he developmen o a more credible Jus Jobs Index:

• Procure beter daa a he inernaional level in order o expand he JJI o includecurrenly missing counries and oher imporan dimensions such as social secu-

riy and social dialogue.

• Veriy and cross-validae daa on jus jobs indicaors across counries when daa

on missing counries become available.

• Employ various weighing mechanisms such as he use o ranks.

• Conduc robusness checks on he index by carrying ou sensiiviy analysis on

he weighed index. Tis enails assessing he variaion o he index and ranking

o counries when some indicaors are included or excluded.



Conclusion | www.americanprogress.o

Conclusion

Wih he Jus Jobs Index, we developed a new inernaional measure o jus jobs

ha broadens he global discourse on employmen beyond he common emphasis

on unemploymen and ha also addresses job qualiy. Mos developed European

counries ranked high on he index, while Cenral and Souh Asian counries and

Arican counries perormed he lowes. In addiion o presening preliminary

analysis o he resuls o he indices, he echnical easibiliy and he poenial

implicaion and use or policy are explained as well.

Despie his progress in consrucing a comprehensive index ha can be used or

assessing jus jobs, urher work is needed o improve he index. Tis can be done

by procuring beter daa a he inernaional level and including missing counries

in he index.




Data sources

Daa relevan or he consrucion o he indices were gahered rom secondary

sources. Te iniial atemp was o gaher daa or 121 indicaors across he world.

Due o he lack o daa or mos indicaors, however, he index uses 14 seleced

indicaors. Te ollowing sources were he main providers o daa:

• International Labor Organization KILM database: htp://kilm.ilo.org/

manuscrip/kilm07.asp

• World Bank database of indicators: htp://daa.worldbank.org/indicaor

• U.N. Statistics Database, or UNSDS: htp://unsas.un.org/unsd/daabases.hm

Endnotes

1 Sensitivity analysis is an assessment o how the varia-tion in the nal index can be apportioned—qualitative-ly or quantitatively—to dierent sources o variationin the assumptions used to construct the indicators,including the selection o the indicators and o how theindex depends upon the inormation ed into it.

2 “Real wages” are dened in the International LabourOrganization, or ILO, resolution adopted by the EighthInternational Conerence o Labor Statisticians, or ICLS,in 1954. ILO, “Average monthly wages,” available athttp://kilm.ilo.org/manuscript/kilm15.asp (last accessedApril 2013).

3 ILO, “International Classication by Status in Employ-ment (ICSE),” available at http://laborsta.ilo.org/applv8/data/icsee.html (last accessed April 2013).

4 ILO, “Employment by occupation,” available at http://kilm.ilo.org/manuscript/kilm05.asp (last accessed April2013). International Standard Classication o Occupa-tions, 1988 (ISCO-88), with the ollowing major groups(1) Legislators, senior ofcials and managers; (2) Proes-sionals; (3) Technicians and associate proessionals; (4)Clerks; (5) Service workers and shop and market salesworkers; (6) Skilled agricultural and shery workers; (7)Crat and related trades workers; (8) Plant and machineoperators and assemblers; (9) Elementary occupations;and (10) Armed orces.

http://kilm.ilo.org/manuscript/kilm07.asp


http://data.worldbank.org/indicator

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/databases.htm


http://laborsta.ilo.org/applv8/data/icsee.html









http://unstats.un.org/unsd/databases.htm

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator





The Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational institute

dedicated to promoting a strong, just, and free America that ensures opportunity

for all. We believe that Americans are bound together by a common commitment tothese values and we aspire to ensure that our national policies reflect these values.

We work to find progressive and pragmatic solutions to significant domestic and

international problems and develop policy proposals that foster a government that

is “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

The Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies (Fafo AIS) is an independent and

interdisciplinary research institute with a particular focus on countries undergoing

structural changes through development, transition and conflict. Fafo implements

applied research world-wide, including large-scale surveys and qualitative fieldwork

involving vulnerable populations and under challenging conditions such as conflict

and natural disasters. In addition, Fafo conducts evaluations and policy research,

both at home in Norway and abroad. Fafo AIS has researchers with a range of

expertise in statistics, economics, political science, sociology, anthropology, law,

public health and nutrition. To find out more about Fafo visit www.fafo.no.

just jobs index 2013

Documents