IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/wbecrv/v35y2021i2p303-327..html

What Aspects of Formality Do Workers Value? Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Bangladesh

Author

Listed:
  • Minhaj Mahmud
  • Italo A Gutierrez
  • Krishna B Kumar
  • Shanthi Nataraj

Abstract

This study uses a choice experiment among 2,000 workers in Bangladesh to elicit willingness to pay (WTP) for job attributes: a contract, termination notice, working hours, paid leave, and a pension fund. Using a stated preference method allows calculation of WTP for benefits in this setting, despite the lack of data on worker transitions, and the fact that many workers are self-employed, which makes it difficult to use revealed preference methods. Workers highly value job stability: the average worker would be willing to forgo a 27 percent increase in income to obtain a one-year contract (relative to no contract), or to forgo a 12 percent increase to obtain thirty days of termination notice. There is substantial heterogeneity in WTP by type of employment and gender: women value shorter working hours more than men, while government workers place a higher value on contracts than do private-sector employees.

Suggested Citation

  • Minhaj Mahmud & Italo A Gutierrez & Krishna B Kumar & Shanthi Nataraj, 2021. "What Aspects of Formality Do Workers Value? Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Bangladesh," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 35(2), pages 303-327.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:wbecrv:v:35:y:2021:i:2:p:303-327.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/wber/lhz046
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Sanou, Awa & Liverpool-Tasie, Lenis Saweda O. & Caputo, Vincenzina & Kerr, John, 2021. "Introducing an aflatoxin-safe labeling program in complex food supply chains: Evidence from a choice experiment in Nigeria," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    3. Italo A. Gutierrez & Krishna B. Kumar & Minhaj Mahmud & Farzana Munshi & Shanthi Nataraj, 2019. "Transitions between informal and formal employment: results from a worker survey in Bangladesh," IZA Journal of Migration and Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Ricardo Hausmann & Ljubica Nedelkoska & Sehar Noor, 2020. "You Get What You Pay For: Sources and Consequences of the Public Sector Premium in Albania and Sri Lanka," CID Working Papers 376, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    5. Rafi, Arafat Hossain & Jeba, Jebunnesa & tabssum, Tasnim & Khan, Abdul Mahidud, 2022. "Job Preference of University Student: A Discrete Choice Experiment," MPRA Paper 118424, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Kumar, Krishna B. & Mahmud, Minhaj & Nataraj, Shanthi & Cho, Yoon Y., 2019. "Employer and Employee Preferences for Worker Benefits: Evidence from a Matched Survey on the Bangladesh Informal Sector," IZA Discussion Papers 12064, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Bossavie, Laurent & Cho, Yoonyoung & Heath, Rachel, 2023. "The effects of international scrutiny on manufacturing workers: Evidence from the Rana Plaza collapse in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J46 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Informal Labor Market
    • J32 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Nonwage Labor Costs and Benefits; Retirement Plans; Private Pensions
    • J81 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Standards - - - Working Conditions

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:wbecrv:v:35:y:2021:i:2:p:303-327.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wrldbus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.