Measuring Decent Work with Statistical Indicators

By R. Anker, I. Chernyshev, P. Egger, F. Mehran, Joseph A. Ritter. 2003

388 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Political Science and International Relations, Public Administration

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/15d81801838d8e44f22edac89597bda3301d8759

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Political Science and International Relations

In Public Administration

Citations in the corpus

E pluribus unum? A critical survey of job quality indicators (2011, background): “DWI-3 Decent Work Index-3 Developed and developing countries Anker et al. (2003) ILO databases”
Decent Work and the Digital Gig Economy: A Developing Country Perspective on Employment Impacts and Standards in Online Outsourcing, Crowdwork, Etc (2017, positive): “Following from the earlier discussion about imminent and immanent impacts of the digital gig economy, one can see a similar distinction in the application of interventions.”
Seven indicators to measure decent work: An international comparison (2003, neutral): “In Measuring decent work with statistical indicators , Anker et al. (2002, and in this issue of the Review ) define adequate pay as half the median hourly pay among employees or as an absolute minimum, whichever is greater.”
Economic and social upgrading in global production networks: Problems of theory and measurement (2011, background): “Anker et al. (2003) propose eleven groups of indicators, with a series of measurable variables comprising each group.”
The quality of employment and decent work: definitions, methodologies, and ongoing debates (2014, background): “Among those institutions influenced by the ILO's approach, the European Union (EU) and some European governments stand out (see review in Muñoz de Bustillo et al. 2011; Alli, 2009; Reinecke & White, 2004; ILO, 2012).”
The ILO: An Agency for Globalization? (2008, background): “They felt reasonably comfortable with à-la-carte menus of proxy indicators (Anker et al., 2003; Ghai, 2002), but even then, no institutional position was taken, merely acceptance that it was an interesting area of debate.”