In Argentina, the participation to the platform economy is a recent but rapidly expanding phenomenon. The severe recent economic crisis and its reinforcement with the Covid-19 crisis have been destabilizing to standard work relations, in an environment where informality is widespread and where gender inequalities are experienced across occupations. The high rate of internet connectivity (with coverage among the highest in Latin America) as well as the hardship of the economic conditions experienced in the labour market provide a particularly favorable environment for the expansion of the platform modality.

The research partnership between AFD and the Economics Department at the Instituto de Ciencias of the Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento (UNGS) seeks to create some primary qualitative and quantitative data on platforms in Buenos Aires Metropolitan Area.

It explores app-based platforms for the personal service sector, such as the ones for domestic work, office repair services, food delivery and ride-hailing services. The project develops articles inspecting various aspects of the platform economy, characterizing the workers that engage in it, their labour conditions, as well as their perceptions about this type of insertion. It enquires about the levels of flexibility and/or control posed by platforms on the work process, inspecting the relationship with existing labour regulations and its implications for workers’ labour conditions. Moreover, the research identifies the opportunities/obstacles for entry and permanence in the analyzed occupations and the way in which gender restrictions operate.

The project is based on a mixed methods’ approach, developing its primary qualitative and quantitative data.

In the first phase of the project, a series of in-depth interviews and focus groups is conducted with workers of each occupational group in order to delve deeper into the different dimensions of platform work. 

In the second phase of the project, building on the information from the qualitative data collection, an ad-hoc quantitative survey is designed to collect data about workers on the platform to strengthen knowledge on their experience. The survey is based on a non-probabilistic sample with gender quotas per platform, seeking to ensure comparability among occupations and demographic groups. Moreover, thanks to a collaboration with the ILO Country Office for Argentina, the data is inspected jointly with an existing dataset produced by ILO. 

Several articles and presentations stem from this fruitful collaboration, with five initial research papers available for download in the AFD repository.

• The first article investigates whether working through a digital platform increases labour registration in high-informality occupations. It analyses how labour entry occurs in three selected platform-based occupations in Argentina. Considering the peculiarities of each occupation, it identifies which elements may contribute to a “formalization effect” and how this is experienced by workers. The main results of this working paper show that “formalization” is dependent on several factors: a platform’s business model, or the company’s interest and need to promote or encourage such process; the pre-existing occupational dynamics in terms of formalization; and general labour market conditions. In the context of an Argentine labour market harmed by a prolongued recession, most transitions to formality via the platform occur to previously unemployed workers who join them. However, given that in many cases unemployment is preceded by stable waged jobs, formalisation promoted by platforms (usually through the figure of the registered independent workers) is often perceived as a setback.
• The second article explores the challenges posed by regulation of platform labour, based on the case of Argentinean riders. The article analyses the treatment of three dimensions that tend to be at the centre of riders’ own concerns when it comes to the regulation of their occupation. First, the preservation of flexible schedules is found as a strong driver for riders participation into the platform. Second, the continuity of income self-regulation is a very relevant aspect for workers, even though this often implies overworking. Third aspect is an effective access to social protection, found as a major threat for riders’ job safety and well-being, and the absence of an occupational hazards insurance for riders stands out as a real barrier for workers.
• The third article explores how the digitalization of the work relation affects domestic workers in Argentina at the onset of the Covid-19 crisis. It analyses the use workers do of Zolvers, the only digital platform for domestic service in the country, and it compares what are the differences between jobs that have been taken on the platform and those outside. The working paper argues that the association between domestic service and the platform economy should be analysed in context: the uberisation of the activity is not a linear and uniform trend, but rather a contextual one. Compared to off-platform jobs in the sector, the article finds significantly higher levels of registration among Zolvers workers. This is particularly relevant since Zolvers’ jobs are characterized by few weekly hours, a kind of insertion that has proved most resistant to formalisation policies in the sector. The article delves into the reasons behind these phenomenon, which are tightly related to the platform business model. However, in the context of the Covid-19 crisis, the working paper also shows that registration, although having a protective effect, does not counteract the vulnerability implied by short-hours job positions, whose termination is substantially cheaper than full-time work.
• The fourth article investigates gender inequalities among platform riders and drivers. It identifies whether there exist gender gaps in terms of hours and income and what is their magnitude. Moreover, it analyses some possible determinants, including features specific to these occupations. The working paper finds that platforms are facilitating an increase in female participation due to three main factors: the impossibility of finding another job, the impersonal recruiting mechanisms and time flexibility offered by platforms. This trend still implies significant gender gaps. The analysis suggests that the differentiated economic performance of male and female riders and drivers is mainly associated to pre-existing gender inequalities that are reinforced by algorithmic bias in the platform. In particular, the scoring system of platforms tends to reward intensive workloads and participation in the more profitable shifts, such as nights and weekends. This implies important obstacles for women in terms of both their care responsibilities and their need to prevent street insecurity events.
• The last article delves deeper into female platform drivers’ labour market trajectories.  It inspects the profile of female drivers joining the platform in exploring which previous job experiences may have helped them to dare into a male-dominated occupation. Additionally, it reviews how, once in the platform, female drivers juggle between this activity and their socially assigned care responsibilities. The working paper shows that female drivers participation defies the idea that occupations involving driving or circulating in public spaces are inappropriate for women. However, this conquest has strong limits. The working paper finds that the daily efforts to reconcile paid work together with domestic care activities imply negative impacts in terms of earnings levels and health. The situation exposes an omnipresent unequal gender order, which still needs to be systematically questioned and confronted.

The Research Conversation webinar "Digital labour platforms: what challenges and opportunities for Argentina?" has been organized to discuss the results of the research project.

• Dr Francisca Pereyra, Adjunct Professor, Economics Department, Instituto de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento (UNGS)
• Dr Cecilia Poggi, AFD Research Officer

Addressing persistent inequalities in income and other dimensions of wellbeing is a key policy objective of the Sustainable Development Goal 10. Multilateral and bilateral donor agencies have been directing their efforts towards promoting good governance, human and economic development, fighting hunger and reducing inequality. 

The increase in development funding towards inequality reduction is accompanied by a need to monitor progress on the SDG 10 but most importantly, by the need to evaluate the contribution of development towards achieving this goal. However, measuring the distributional impacts of development cooperation projects is a challenging task due to a myriad of factors, including the effects that domestic redistributive policies, the structure of labour markets and other factors, such as institutions, have on inequality. The methodology developed by Morabito et al. enables the analysis of the potential contributions of development projects on inequality by looking primarily at the extent to which they disproportionally benefit the most vulnerable through a mix of analytical tools (a scoreboard, a statistical analysis of development projects based on the Equity Tool, a fiscal incidence analysis).

This methodology has first been tested on three development projects funded by AFD in Cameroon, Colombia and Tunisia as part of the first phase of the Research Facility on Inequalities. 

A second phase of the research project was launched in 2022 with the aim to extend the initial phase, to further test the validity of the methodology with respect to income and other forms of inequalities and to develop the guidelines for an inequality marker.

The initial phase of the  project aimed at piloting the application of the methodology developed by the researchers on three projects funded by the AFD: 

1. A programme supporting urban housing improvements in Tunisia;
2. A programme focusing on capacity-building of Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Cameroon;
3. A budget support operation aimed at supporting a health sector reform in Colombia.

The objective was to test the methodology and evaluate the relevance of its results, and, based on these findings, to review and adjust the methodology itself.

The second phase of the project aimed:

1. To develop the guidelines for an inequality marker for development cooperation;
2. To further test the methodology on four AFD and EU development programmes: a programme promoting sustainable access to electricity for the unserved poor rural populations in Benin; a programme improving the health and living conditions of the inhabitants of the rural district of Isingiro (Uganda) and its refugee camps; a programme facilitating trade between Ethiopia and Djibouti and enabling businesses and producers, as well as the most vulnerable populations, to benefit from these improvements; and a programme contributing to the adaptation of the communities to climate change in Vietnam. 

The initial study identified whether programmes’ beneficiaries of the three selected interventions belonged to the Bottom 40% of the wealth distribution, through a mix of analytical tools:

1. First, a scoreboard that assessed whether or not inequality reduction was a central objective of development programmes;
2. Second, the Equity Tool, which helped assess the position of direct beneficiaries within the national (urban or rural) wealth distribution;
3. Third, the Commitment for Equity Tool, which helped estimate the distributional impact of general or sectoral budget support.

The methodological steps of the second phase of the research project were the following:

• Refining and upgrading the inequality markers and the scoreboard to provide clear benchmarks and indicators, aligned with evaluation approaches used by the European Commission, to assess whether development interventions focus on the poorest bottom 40% individuals, households or vulnerable groups that are targeted by specific development policies;
• Extending the scope of the Equity Tool questionnaire to include questions that capture the distribution of projects beneficiaries among vulnerable groups (women, ethnic, religious minorities, etc.);
• Applying the revised methodology to the four case studies.

Results of the first phase of the project

Overall, the results underscore the importance of considering a pro-poor targeting ex-ante when designing development cooperation interventions that explicitly (or implicitly) aim to contribute to the reduction of inequalities in partner countries. The main strength of the methodology is that it allows an assessment of the potential reach of interventions for the bottom 40 percent of the income distribution. Therefore, the information provided thanks to this methodology can be critical to fine-tune policies before they are implemented and maximize their redistributive impact.

You may find the research paper here: The distributional impacts of development cooperation projects

Results of the second phase of the project

The second phase of this project resulted in:

• The elaboration of guidelines for the implementation of the methodology, which were used to develop the European Commission's Inequality Marker. The I-Marker assesses whether, and to what extent, inequality reduction is an objective of development intervention. For this purpose, a set of criteria has been developed to establish if: - I-0: Inequality reduction is not targeted; - I-1: Inequality reduction is a significant objective; - I-2: Inequality reduction is the principal objective. The I-Marker focuses on the bottom (poorest) 40% or socio-economically disadvantaged individuals, households or groups. Watch the video on the Inequality Marker for more information.
• A report on the testing of the methodology on the four case studies : Assessing the distributional impacts of development interventions - the Inequality Marker

This project highlighted the importance of identifying direct and indirect beneficiaries of the projects, but also, more broadly, of having a complete understanding of the development cooperation interventions, which are being analyzed, especially their objectives and conditionalities. 

Equally important is the involvement of key stakeholders to communicate the objectives, scope and limitations of the studies. In some cases, the inclusion of a qualitative component in the form of interviews, consultations, or eventually field missions, may be required to ensure the successful implementation and completion of studies.

The world has seen a significant reduction in the extreme poverty levels in the past decades, led by strong economic growth from emerging economies. Despite the economic growth, the incomes of the poorest people all over the world are not keeping up. Eight out of ten people in developing countries live in nations where the income of the bottom 40% has grown slower than the rest of the economy (Hoy & Samman, 2015) and 7 out of 10 people live in a country where inequality has risen in the last 30 years.
Regarding Latin American and the Caribbean, although the region achieved considerable success in reducing extreme poverty over the last decade, its still-high levels of income and wealth inequality have damaged sustainable growth and social inclusion.

In West Africa, the sub-region had the largest average economic growth at 6.2 percent between 2010 and 2014 among Africa's regions, and compared with 4.4 percent for Africa during the period. However, there is growing concern that the benefits of this impressive growth have not been inclusive and equitably shared. The combination of high economic growth and stubbornly high income inequality rates remains a puzzle.

This project is part of a European facility for a research program on inequalities in developing and emerging countries which is coordinated by the AFD. Financed by the Development Cooperation Instrument of the European Union, this facility enables to implement 20 research projects over the period 2017-2020, in partnership with donors and research centers from the South to the North.

Even if we know less unequal societies are desirable given their beneficial economic, social and political outcomes, there is still uncertainty on which are the best routes to understand and tackle inequalities through a multidimensional perspective. To contribute to this global conversation on inequalities, Oxfam, the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and the School of Oriental and African Studies of the University of London, are joining efforts to develop a conceptual and measurement framework on inequalities. The purpose of the framework is to provide analysts and practitioners with a theoretically-grounded means by which to gain a clear understanding of the nature of inequality and to use this information to develop and devise effective policy responses with the long-term goal of reducing inequalities, tackling deprivation and improving well-being.

The framework is designed to capture the multidimensional nature of inequality, which is experienced across a number of 7 life domains, and given that there are many different forms of inequality (such as concentrations of wealth, pay gaps, dispersion of income, social gradients in mortality, and greater social isolation experienced by the elderly). The framework is based on Amartya Sen's capability approach. The focus of this approach is an assessment on what life we lead and what we can or cannot do, and can or cannot be; the quality of life that individuals are able to achieve. Equally important, this framework should enlighten the discussion on inequalities in a way that allows for context-specific diagnosis and policy recommendations, so that it can support the strategic work of practitioners and key stakeholders of the development arena.

See this project's 2 minutes pitch from Ana Claver, Project Manager on Inequalities at Oxfam Intermón:

Evidence from more than 150 countries, rich and poor alike, spanning more than 30 years, shows that overall, investment in health, education and social protection reduces inequality. Nevertheless, we still need to know more about what are the concrete mechanisms that make these inequality reductions happen, and how certain policies should be designed so that they tackle spatial, gender and ethnic inequalities in an effective manner. We expect to draw lessons from those different scenarios by this comparative research.

The researchers involved in this project anticipate that active citizenship is a means to achieve development, because it enables women and men living in poverty to raise their voice in defence of their rights (health, education, jobs, dignity). Moreover, they presuppose that public policies amplify their effectiveness when citizens are involved in their cycle. They also presume that women and girls plus youth are the groups especially impacted by multidimensional inequality and thus, they should be carefully considered in the research.

Find the presentation of the research paper "Multidimensional inequality in Western Africa" by Ana Claver Muñoz and Cristina Rovira Izquierdo, project manager on inequalities and inequality programme advisor at Oxfam Intermón during the fifth webinar of the Research Facility on Inequalities:

You may find the deliverables linked to this project here: 

West Africa Report: 

- Analysis of multidimensional inequalities in West Africa and a strategy for inequality reduction (in English)

- Análisis de las desigualdades multidimensionales en el Africa Occidental y sus consecuencias en la estrategia regional contra la desigualdad (in Spanish)
 

Central America and Dominican Republic Report:

- Analysis of multidimensional inequalities in Central America and Dominican Republic, and a strategy for inequality reduction (in English)

- Análisis de la desigualdad multidimensional en Centroamérica y República Dominicana (card) y de una estrategia política regional para reducir las desigualdades (in Spanish)
 

Policy briefs:

- A strategy for reducing inequalities in West Africa (in English)

- A strategy for reducing inequalities in Central America and the Dominican Republic (in English)

You may also find a short presentation video of the Multidimension Inequality Framework (MIF) used in this research project (in English).