Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/unumer/2021002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Access to social protection for platform and other non-standard workers: A literature review

Author

Listed:
  • Kool, Tamara

    (UNU-MERIT, Maastricht University)

  • Bordon, Giulio

    (UNU-MERIT, Maastricht University)

  • Gassmann, Franziska

    (UNU-MERIT, Maastricht University)

Abstract
The need to extend social protection to include new forms of employment has progressively been recognised by policymakers in the last decade. Several countries introduced new schemes particularly for this group or made provisions to existing schemes to cover new forms of employment. In order to get a better overview of the different measures applied, this paper systematically reviews the existing literature with a focus on European countries and a subset of OECD countries, by focusing first on how non-standard, and in particular platform workers are classified and legally protected. Secondly, the paper reviews the extent to which platform and other non-standard workers have access to the different forms of social security provisions. While there is a clear conceptualisation of how platform work can be classified, the challenge lies in the legal construct underlying the work activities. Differing practices prevail between countries and only a few have thus far explicitly recognised platform work or crowd work as a form of employment. The lack of statutory and effective social protection coverage of platform workers can be addressed in various ways. These include adjusting existing schemes in terms of eligibility criteria, portability of transfers, incorporating digital innovation, and providing flexible security. Current shifts in policies have the potential to decrease socio-economic differences between different employment statuses. Ultimately, these shifts promote the transferability of individuals' social rights between employment statuses and ease the use of individual social protection accounts.

Suggested Citation

  • Kool, Tamara & Bordon, Giulio & Gassmann, Franziska, 2021. "Access to social protection for platform and other non-standard workers: A literature review," MERIT Working Papers 2021-002, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    • Handle: RePEc:unm:unumer:2021002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://unu-merit.nl/publications/wppdf/2021/wp2021-002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gassmann, Franziska & Martorano, Bruno, 2019. "The future of work and its implications for social protection and the welfare state," MERIT Working Papers 2019-039, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    2. Tito Boeri & Giulia Giupponi & Alan B. Krueger & Stephen Machin, 2020. "Solo Self-Employment and Alternative Work Arrangements: A Cross-Country Perspective on the Changing Composition of Jobs," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 170-195, Winter.
    3. Lenaerts, Karolien & Kilhoffer, Zachary, 2017. "Government Responses to the Platform Economy: Where do we stand?," CEPS Papers 12773, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    4. De Groen, Willem Pieter & Maselli, Ilaria, 2016. "The Impact of the Collaborative Economy on the Labour Market," CEPS Papers 11625, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    5. Annarosa Pesole & Maria Cesira Urzi Brancati & Enrique Fernandez Macias & Federico Biagi & Ignacio Gonzalez Vazquez, 2018. "Platform Workers in Europe: Evidence from the COLLEEM Survey," JRC Research Reports JRC112157, Joint Research Centre.
    6. Christina Behrendt & Quynh Anh Nguyen & Uma Rani, 2019. "Social protection systems and the future of work: Ensuring social security for digital platform workers," International Social Security Review, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(3), pages 17-41, July.
    7. Gerald Friedman, 2014. "Workers without employers: shadow corporations and the rise of the gig economy," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 2(2), pages 171-188, April.
    8. Colin Busby & Ramya Muthukumaran, 2016. "Precarious Positions: Policy Options to Mitigate Risks in Non-standard Employment," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 462, December.
    9. Maria Cesira Urzi Brancati & Annarosa Pesole & Enrique Férnandéz-Macías, 2020. "New evidence on platform workers in Europe: Results from the second COLLEEM survey," JRC Research Reports JRC118570, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Weber, Enzo., 2018. "Setting out for Digital Social Security," ILO Working Papers 995008793202676, International Labour Organization.
    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. Hoose, Fabian & Beckmann, Fabian & Topal, Serkan & Glanz, Sabrina, 2022. "Zwischen institutioneller Verwilderung und Restrukturierung: Soziale Sicherung und industrielle Beziehungen in der Plattformökonomie," IAQ-Report 2022-11, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Work, Skills and Training (IAQ).
    2. Habiyaremye, Alexis & Jacobs, Peter & Molewa, Olebogeng & Lekomanyane, Pelontle, 2021. "Macroeconomic stimulus packages and income inequality in developing countries: Lessons from the 2007-9 Great Recession for the Covid-19 crisis in South Africa," MERIT Working Papers 2021-006, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).

    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. Heiland, Heiner, 2020. "Workers' Voice in platform labour: An Overview," WSI Studies 21, The Institute of Economic and Social Research (WSI), Hans Böckler Foundation.
    2. Tauhid Hossain Khan & Ellen MacEachen & Debra Dunstan, 2022. "What Social Supports Are Available to Self-Employed People When Ill or Injured? A Comparative Policy Analysis of Canada and Australia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-23, April.
    3. Serpil ÇİĞDEM, 2019. "Endüstri 4.0 ve Dijital Emek Platformlarının İnsana Yakışır İş Bağlamında Değerlendirilmesi," Journal of Social Policy Conferences, Istanbul University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 0(77), pages 157-199, December.
    4. Ana Diakonidze, 2023. "Internalising precariousness: experiences of Georgian platform workers," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 29(4), pages 439-455, November.
    5. Meri Koivusalo & Arseniy Svynarenko & Benta Mbare & Mikko Perkiö, 2024. "Disruptive (dis)engagement: platformisation as a global social policy," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Purificación López-Igual & Paula Rodríguez-Modroño, 2020. "Who is Teleworking and Where from? Exploring the Main Determinants of Telework in Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-15, October.
    7. Maciej Berk{e}sewicz & Dagmara Nikulin & Marcin Szymkowiak & Kamil Wilak, 2021. "The gig economy in Poland: evidence based on mobile big data," Papers 2106.12827, arXiv.org.
    8. Paola Tubaro & Clément Le Ludec & Antonio A. Casilli, 2020. "Counting ‘micro-workers’: societal and methodological challenges around new forms of labour," Post-Print hal-02898905, HAL.
    9. Valerio De Stefano & Antonio Aloisi, 2018. "European legal framework for "digital labour platforms"," JRC Research Reports JRC112243, Joint Research Centre.
    10. Maria Cesira Urzi Brancati & Annarosa Pesole & Enrique Fernandez Macias, 2019. "Digital Labour Platforms in Europe: Numbers, Profiles, and Employment Status of Platform Workers," JRC Research Reports JRC117330, Joint Research Centre.
    11. Luka Bulian, 2021. "The gig is up: who does gig economy actually benefit?," Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems - scientific journal, Croatian Interdisciplinary Society Provider Homepage: http://indecs.eu, vol. 19(1), pages 106-119.
    12. Antonio Menor-Campos & María de los Baños García-Moreno & Tomás López-Guzmán & Amalia Hidalgo-Fernández, 2019. "Effects of Collaborative Economy: A Reflection," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-13, May.
    13. Cirillo, Valeria & Guarascio, Dario & Parolin, Zachary, 2023. "Platform work and economic insecurity in Italy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 126-138.
    14. Mukhopadhyay, Boidurjo Rick & Chatwin, Chris R., 2021. "The Significance of Herzberg and Taylor for the Gig Economy of China: Evaluating Gigger Incentives for Meituan and Ele.me," GLO Discussion Paper Series 849, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    15. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Gómez-Herrera, Estrella, 2022. "Mobility restrictions and the substitution between on-site and remote work: Empirical evidence from a European online labour market," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    16. repec:zna:indecs:v:19:y:2021:i:4:p:106-119 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Dumančić, Kosjenka & Čeh Časni, Anita, 2021. "The State of the Sharing Economy in Croatia: Legal Framework and Impact on Various Economic Sectors," MPRA Paper 110230, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Andrey SHEVCHUK & Denis STREBKOV, 2023. "Digital platforms and the changing freelance workforce in the Russian Federation: A ten‐year perspective," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 162(1), pages 1-22, March.
    19. Rossella Bozzon & Annalisa Murgia, 2022. "Independent or Dependent? European Labour Statistics and Their (In)ability to Identify Forms of Dependency in Self-employment," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 199-226, February.
    20. Gilles Paché, 2020. "Inside Delivery Platforms: The Covid-19 Pandemic And After," Post-Print hal-03041080, HAL.
    21. Santana, Monica & Cobo, Manuel J., 2020. "What is the future of work? A science mapping analysis," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 846-862.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    platform work; platform workers; social security; social protection; non-standard workers; workers rights;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions
    • J20 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - General
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:unm:unumer:2021002. 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: Ad Notten (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/meritnl.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.