Loading...

 

What is it about?

This paper evaluates critically competing explanations for participation in undeclared work that either read engagement through a structuralist lens as driven by ‘exclusion’ from state benefits and the circuits of the modern economy or through a neo-liberal and/or post-structuralist lens as driven by the voluntary ‘exit’ of workers out of formal institutions.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Reporting a 2005/6 household work practices survey involving 313 faceto- face interviews in contemporary Moscow, the finding is that there is no single unique logic underpinning undeclared work in this post-Soviet city; such work is neither universally driven by exclusion nor exit. Different mixtures of the two prevail across different populations and forms of undeclared work. The outcome is a call for greater appreciation of the multifarious character of undeclared work and a move beyond simplistic explanations and policy responses.

Perspectives

Sorry, your browser does not support inline SVG.

This paper evaluates competing ways of explaining the undeclared economy using evidence from Moscow.

Professor Colin C Williams
University of Sheffield

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: EXPLAINING PARTICIPATION IN UNDECLARED WORK, European Societies, July 2010, Taylor & Francis,
DOI: 10.1080/14616691003716910.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page