IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecstat/estat_0336-1454_2003_num_367_1_7309.html

Travail et pauvreté en Russie : évaluations objectives et perceptions subjectives

Author

Listed:
  • Ekaterina Kalugina
  • Boris Najman

Abstract

[eng] Work and Poverty in Russia: Objective Evaluations and Subjective Perceptions . . The relationship between poverty and labour market participation in Russia is analysed using two poverty measurements: a monetary measurement in terms of an absolute threshold line and a subjective measurement based on poverty level self-assessments. The individual panel data used are taken from the RLMS survey (Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey) covering the period from 1994 to 2000. Status on the Russian labour market (official, unofficial or diversification) has to be considered to understand the risks of poverty to which those in employment are exposed. It is not enough to observe solely labour market participation (employment/ non-employment). One fundamental finding is that having a single declared job (official economy) increases the probability of being and feeling poor, as opposed to working in the unofficial economy. However, individuals with a number of jobs (diversification) have a lower probability of being . or feeling poor. Wage-earning (official) employment is equated with the most precarious material situation in Russia today. [fre] Travail et pauvreté en Russie: évaluations objectives et perceptions subjectives . . La relation entre la pauvreté et la participation au marché du travail en Russie est analysée à l’aide de deux mesures de la pauvreté: une mesure monétaire en termes de seuil absolu et une mesure subjective selon l’autoévaluation du niveau de pauvreté. Les données individuelles de panel utilisées sont tirées de l’enquête . RLMS (Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey) entre 1994 et 2000. Il est nécessaire de prendre en compte les statuts (formel, informel ou pluri-activité) sur le marché du travail russe afin de comprendre quels sont les risques de pauvreté auxquels font face les personnes ayant un emploi. Observer seulement la participation au marché du travail (emploi/ non-emploi) ne suffit pas. Un résultat essentiel est que le fait d’avoir un seul emploi déclaré (secteur formel) augmente la probabilité . d’être et de se sentir pauvre relativement au fait de travailler dans le secteur informel. À l’opposé, les personnes ayant plusieurs activités ont la probabilité la plus faible d’être ou de se sentir pauvre. L’emploi salarié (formel) correspond à la situation matérielle la plus précaire aujourd’hui en Russie. [ger] Arbeit und Armut in Russland: objektive Bewertungen und subjektive Wahrnehmung . . Die Wechselwirkung zwischen Armut und Teilnahme am Arbeitsmarkt in Russland wird mit Hilfe zweier Armutsmessungen analysiert: einer monetären Messung in absoluten Schwellwerten und einer subjektiven Messung auf der Grundlage einer Eigenbewertung des Armutsniveaus. Die individuellen Paneldaten stammen aus der Erhebung RLMS (Russia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey), die zwischen 1994 und 2000 durchgeführt wurde. Zu berücksichtigen ist der Status (formeller, informeller Status oder mehrfache Tätigkeit) am russischen Arbeitsmarkt, um verstehen zu können, welchen Armutsrisiken die beschäftigen Menschen ausgesetzt sind. Denn es reicht nicht aus, lediglich die Teilnahme am Arbeitsmarkt (Beschäftigung/ Nichtbeschäftigung) zu beobachten. Ein wichtiges Ergebnis ist, dass eine einzige gemeldete Beschäftigung (formeller Sektor) die Wahrscheinlichkeit erhöht, im Vergleich zur Ausübung einer informellen Arbeit arm zu sein und sich arm zu fühlen. Dagegen ist bei den Menschen, die mehreren Tätigkeiten nachgehen, die Wahrscheinlichkeit geringer, arm zu sein und . sich arm zu fühlen. In Russland stellt die (formelle) lohnabhängige Beschäftigung heute die prekärste materielle Situation dar. [spa] Trabajo y pobreza en Rusia: evaluaciones objetivas y percepciones subjetivas . . La relación entre la pobreza y la participación en el mercado laboral en Rusia se analiza mediante dos mediciones de la pobreza: una medición monetaria en términos de umbral absoluto y una medición subjetiva según la autoevaluación del nivel de pobreza. Los datos individuales de panel utilizados son sacados de la encuesta RLMS (Rusia Longitudinal Monitoring Survey) entre 1994 y 2000. Es necesario tomar en cuenta los estatutos (formal, informal o pluriactividad) sobre el mercado laboral ruso para llegar a comprender cuáles son los riesgos de pobreza con los que deben enfrentarse las personas que tienen un empleo. No basta con solo observar la participación en el mercado laboral (empleo/ desempleo). Un resultado esencial es el que tener un solo empleo declarado (sector formal) aumenta la probabilidad de . ser y de sentirse pobre en comparación con la posibilidad de trabajar en el sector informal. Al contrario, las personas que tienen varias actividades tienen la menor probabilidad de ser o sentirse pobre. El empleo asalariado (formal) corresponde con la situación material más precaria hoy día en Rusia.

Suggested Citation

  • Ekaterina Kalugina & Boris Najman, 2003. "Travail et pauvreté en Russie : évaluations objectives et perceptions subjectives," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 367(1), pages 83-100.
    • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_2003_num_367_1_7309
    DOI: 10.3406/estat.2003.7309
    Note: DOI:10.3406/estat.2003.7309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/estat.2003.7309
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/estat_0336-1454_2003_num_367_1_7309
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/estat.2003.7309?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Ravallion & Michael Lokshin, 2001. "Identifying Welfare Effects from Subjective Questions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 68(271), pages 335-357, August.
    2. Tito Boeri, 2007. "Transition with Labor Supply," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Erik Berglöf & Gérard Roland (ed.), The Economics of Transition, chapter 5, pages 94-143, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. François Gardes & Christian Loisy, 1998. "La pauvreté selon les ménages : une évaluation subjective et indexée sur leur revenu," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 308(1), pages 95-112.
    4. Ravallion, Martin & Lokshin, Michael, 2002. "Self-rated economic welfare in Russia," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1453-1473, September.
    5. repec:bla:econom:v:68:y:2001:i:271:p:335-57 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Stéfan Lollivier, 2001. "Les choix d'activité des femmes en couple : une approche longitudinale," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 349(1), pages 125-140.
    7. Claudia Senik, 2002. "When Information Dominates Comparison. A Panel Data Analysis Using Russian Subjective Data," DELTA Working Papers 2002-02, DELTA (Ecole normale supérieure).
    8. Gary Chamberlain, 1980. "Analysis of Covariance with Qualitative Data," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 47(1), pages 225-238.
    9. Andrew Clark & Mathilde Maurel, 2001. "Well-Being and Wage Arrears in Russian Panel Data," Higher School of Economics Economic Journal Экономический журнал Высшей школы экономики, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 5(2), pages 179-183.
    10. Klugman, Jeni & Braithwaite, Jeanine, 1998. "Poverty in Russia during the Transition: An Overview," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 13(1), pages 37-58, February.
    11. Kim, Byung-Yeon, 2003. "Informal economy activities of Soviet households: size and dynamics," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 532-551, September.
    12. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kaliberda, Aleksander, 1996. "Integrating the unofficial economy into the dynamics of post-socialist economies : a framework of analysis and evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1691, The World Bank.
    13. Stephen P. Jenkins, 2000. "Modelling household income dynamics," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 13(4), pages 529-567.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Sessinou Erick Abel Dedehouanou, 2025. "The Employment Status of Young Heads of Households and the Level of Poverty Within Their Households in Benin," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 989-1004, May.
    2. Ekaterina Kalugina & Natalia Radtchenko & Catherine Sofer, 2008. "Une analyse du partage intrafamilial du revenu à partir de données subjectives," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(5), pages 101-116.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kseniya Abanokova & Hai‐Anh H. Dang & Michael Lokshin, 2022. "Do Adjustments for Equivalence Scales Affect Poverty Dynamics? Evidence from the Russian Federation during 1994–2017," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 68(S1), pages 167-192, April.
    2. Selezneva, Ekaterina, 2011. "Surveying transitional experience and subjective well-being: Income, work, family," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 139-157, June.
    3. Stephen Pudney, 2008. "The dynamics of perception: modelling subjective wellbeing in a short panel," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 171(1), pages 21-40, January.
    4. Koen Decancq & Marc Fleurbaey & Erik Schokkaert, 2015. "Happiness, Equivalent Incomes and Respect for Individual Preferences," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82, pages 1082-1106, December.
    5. Leonardo Gasparini & Walter Sosa-Escudero & Mariana Marchionni & Sergio Olivieri, 2013. "Multidimensional poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean: new evidence from the Gallup World Poll," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 11(2), pages 195-214, June.
    6. Nazim Habibov & Alena Auchynnikava & Rong Luo, 2019. "Does Community Level Trust Improve Self-Rated Welfare?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 146(3), pages 669-697, December.
    7. Lionel Prouteau & François-Charles Wolff, 2010. "La participation associative en France : une analyse longitudinale," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(1), pages 45-63.
    8. Michael Lokshin & Nithin Umapathi & Stefano Paternostro, 2006. "Robustness of subjective welfare analysis in a poor developing country: Madagascar 2001," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 559-591.
    9. Filandri, Marianna & Pasqua, Silvia & Struffolino, Emanuela, 2020. "Being Working Poor or Feeling Working Poor? The Role of Work Intensity and Job Stability for Subjective Poverty," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 147(3), pages 781-803.
    10. Jhonatan Clausen & Nicolas Barrantes & Carolina Trivelli & Fabio Salas, 2025. "Evaluating Poverty in all its Forms and Dimensions: Monetary, Multidimensional, and Subjective Poverty in Peru," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 179(2), pages 861-893, September.
    11. Byung-Yeon Kim, 2011. "The Unofficial Economy in Russia," KIER Working Papers 797, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    12. Jinan Zeidan, 2015. "Are Comparisons Luxuries? Subjective Poverty and Positional Concerns in Indonesia," AMSE Working Papers 1505, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    13. Kseniya Abanokova & Hai-Anh H. Dang, 2023. "Poverty in Russia: a bird’s-eye view of trends and dynamics in the past quarter of a century," Chapters, in: Jacques Silber (ed.), Research Handbook on Measuring Poverty and Deprivation, chapter 58, pages 627-635, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Carlo Azzarri & Gero Carletto & Benjamin Davis & Alberto Zezza, 2006. "Monitoring Poverty Without Consumption Data : An Application Using the Albania Panel Survey," Eastern European Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 59-82, February.
    15. Akay, Alpaslan & Martinsson, Peter, 2012. "Positional Concerns through the Life Cycle: Evidence from Subjective Well-Being Data and Survey Experiments," IZA Discussion Papers 6342, IZA Network @ LISER.
    16. Ekaterina Kalugina & Natalia Radtchenko & Catherine Sofer, 2009. "How Do Spouses Share Their Full Income? Identification Of The Sharing Rule Using Self‐Reported Income," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 55(2), pages 360-391, June.
    17. Lokshin, M. & Yemtsov, R., 2013. "Farewell to Destitution?," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 158-161.
    18. Ravallion, Martin & Himelein, Kristen & Beegle, Kathleen, 2013. "Can subjective questions on economic welfare be trusted ? evidence for three developing countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6726, The World Bank.
    19. Beegle, Kathleen & Himelein, Kristen & Ravallion, Martin, 2012. "Frame-of-reference bias in subjective welfare," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 556-570.
    20. Olivia S. Jin & Phanindra V. Wunnava, 2023. "“Feeling richer and happier? The effect of self-perceived economic welfare on life satisfaction: longitudinal evidence from a transition economy”," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 1-19, March.

    More about this item

    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:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_2003_num_367_1_7309. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/estat .

    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.