IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uma/periwp/wp107.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Work Environment Index: Technical Background Paper

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Pollin
  • Jeannette Wicks-Lim
  • James Heintz

Abstract

The vast majority of Americans work for a living. The track record of different states varies widely when it comes to providing decent opportunities for working people. The Work Environment Index (WEI) captures these differences and provides a basis for evaluating how well each state does in creating an economy that supports its working population. The purpose of this article is to detail the construction of the WEI and to explain the design of the Index. This paper serves as a technical companion to the report Decent Work In America: The 2005 Work Environment Index. Many factors contribute to a good environment for working people: quality jobs, adequate opportunities for employment, basic social protections, and being treated fairly. The WEI is a composite measure of these different dimensions and provides a basis for comparing the quality of the work environment in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The WEI has multiple objectives: 1) to capture and quantify the various dimensions of the work environment on a state-by-state basis. 2) to provide a direct, relatively transparent, and easy-to-understand measurement that is firmly rooted in publicly available data sources. 3) to provide a basis for making comparisons between the states that are fair and objective. 4) to create a tool for analyzing other socio-economic issues at the state level: e.g. poverty rate differentials, job quality and quantity trade-offs, and patterns of economic growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Pollin & Jeannette Wicks-Lim & James Heintz, 2005. "The Work Environment Index: Technical Background Paper," Working Papers wp107, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
  • Handle: RePEc:uma:periwp:wp107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://per.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/working_papers/working_papers_101-150/WP107.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Loudi Njoya & Ibrahim Ngouhouo & Moussa Njoupouognigni & Schneider Friederich & Zenabou Tourere, 2024. "Can we understand the simultaneous evolution between economic and informality growth in Africa? A preliminary explanation," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(1), pages 398-414, January.

    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:uma:periwp:wp107. 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: Judy Fogg (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/permaus.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.