Show simple item record

hal.structure.identifierUniversité de Cambridge
dc.contributor.authorBurchell, Brendan*
hal.structure.identifieruniversidad de chile
dc.contributor.authorSehnbruch, Kirsten*
hal.structure.identifierUniversité de Cambridge
dc.contributor.authorPiasna, Agnieszka*
hal.structure.identifieruniversidad de chile
dc.contributor.authorAgloni, Nurjk*
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-19T08:36:16Z
dc.date.available2018-09-19T08:36:16Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.urihttps://basepub.dauphine.fr/handle/123456789/18037
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectDecent Worken
dc.subjectIndicatorsen
dc.subjectQuality of employmenten
dc.subjectJob qualityen
dc.subjectJob satisfactionen
dc.subject.ddc331en
dc.subject.classificationjelJ.J8.J81en
dc.subject.classificationjelJ.J2.J28en
dc.subject.classificationjelO.O1.O17en
dc.titleThe Quality of Employment and Decent Work: Definitions, Methodologies, and Ongoing Debatesen
dc.typeArticle accepté pour publication ou publié
dc.description.abstractenThis article explores the development of concepts related to the ‘quality of employment’ in the academic literature in terms of their definition, methodological progress and ongoing policy debates. Over time, these concepts have evolved from simple studies of job satisfaction towards more comprehensive measures of job and employment quality, including the International Labour Organization’s concept of ‘Decent Work’ launched in 1999. This article compares the parallel development of quality of employment measures in the European Union with the ILO’s Decent Work agenda and concludes that the former has advanced much further due to more consistent efforts to generate internationally comparable data on labour markets, which permit detailed measurements and international comparisons. In contrast, Decent Work remains a very broadly defined concept, which is impossible to measure across countries. We conclude by proposing three important differences between these two scenarios that have led to such diverging paths: the lack of availability of internationally comparable data, the control over the research agenda by partisan social actors, and a prematurely mandated definition of Decent Work that is extremely vague and all-encompassing.en
dc.relation.isversionofjnlnameCambridge Journal of Economics
dc.relation.isversionofjnlvol38en
dc.relation.isversionofjnlissue2en
dc.relation.isversionofjnldate2014-03
dc.relation.isversionofjnlpages459-477en
dc.relation.isversionofdoi10.1093/cje/bet067en
dc.relation.isversionofjnlpublisherOxford university pressen
dc.subject.ddclabelEconomie du travailen
dc.relation.forthcomingnonen
dc.relation.forthcomingprintnonen
dc.description.ssrncandidatenonen
dc.description.halcandidatenonen
dc.description.readershiprechercheen
dc.description.audienceInternationalen
dc.relation.Isversionofjnlpeerreviewedouien
dc.relation.Isversionofjnlpeerreviewedouien
hal.author.functionaut
hal.author.functionaut
hal.author.functionaut
hal.author.functionaut


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Projet Nopoor
    Projet européen NOPOOR Enhancing Knowledge for Renewed Policies against Poverty

Show simple item record