Standards and Performance in Informal Activities

Examining the evolution of social protection systems in Africa against international aid goals on health, work, and poverty. This study delves into whether current changes remain externally influenced or show signs of local appropriation and impact.

Morocco, Côte d’Ivoire

Axis: Social equity in the context of informality

Coordinating investigators:

– Combarnous François, UB
– Silué, Nanga, Université Alassane Ouatarra
– Porta, Jérôme, UB
– Rougier, Eric, UB

Teams:

– BSE, UB, France
– UFR Sciences Juridiques Administratives et de Gestion, Alassane Ouattara University, Bouaké, Côte d’Ivoire
– COMPTRASEC, UB, France

Funder: IPORA internal

Status: accepted

Impact:

1 doctoral fellowship is associated to the project.
– Name of doctoral fellow: Josias Ouédraogo

Background and rationale

In Sub-Saharan Africa as well as in North Africa, informality persists in practices as well as in the labor and production market statistics, despite numerous formalization policies or programs that have been deployed for several decades. In 2016, informal employment accounted for an average of 76.89% of non-agricultural continental employment (Bonnet et al., 2019), while informal production contributed to 36% of the official regional GDP between 2010 and 2018 (Ohnsorge Yu, 2022). Although slight decreases have been recorded in the last two decades, informality is destined to persist, according to Gutiérrez-Romero (2021), and optimistic macroeconomic scenarios are consistently out of step with this reality (Roubaud, 2013). Economic theory, especially models of dualist economy or structural change and urbanization, has long struggled to explain the persistence of the informal economy and especially its coexistence or even coevolution with the formal economy considered as an unsurpassable standard. It is now known that informal production units are both sources of flexibility and sub-efficiency for African economies. For example, informal employment allows a large part of the youth in Africa to find a job, especially for the many graduates who have difficulties in finding formal employment. However, at the same time, the financial and legal vulnerability of informal firms strongly conditions their future evolution, notably through the entrepreneurs investment behaviors.

In parallel, political interventions implemented over the last two decades have generally consisted of promoting the formalization of businesses and workers. The different types of interventions implemented, such as reducing entry costs and ongoing costs of formality, increasing its benefits, or strengthening the enforcement of taxes and regulations (Ohnsorge Yu, 2022; Jessen Kluve, 2021) have yielded very mixed results depending on the nature of the interventions (Ulyssea, 2020; Jessen Kluve, 2021; Floridi et al., 2020; Campos et al., 2023).

Since the 1990s, the perception of the role of the informal sector in the literature has nonetheless evolved, notably by giving increasing attention to small businesses and the efficiency elements of these informal units (Grimm et al., 2012). This evolution has been accompanied by growing optimism about their ability to create employment opportunities and contribute to the economic development of countries through informal activities and entrepreneurship. The paradigm of political action has also started to change, with the objective shifting from formalization at all costs to supporting informal activities in order to make them more efficient and contributory to the economy, including remaining informal. Whereas international institutions and public policies had traditionally focused on informal employment, the new paradigm also considers actions on the productive capacities of businesses and the investments underpinning them.

Conceptual and Theoretical Framework

This project is part of this paradigm shift by focusing on how the interaction between legal and social norms shapes and influences the behaviors of informal entrepreneurs and the performance of their businesses. Among these behaviors, investment plays a central role as it sits at the crossroads of the companys size and efficiency trajectory and the complex play of legal norms (corporate law, tax law, and social law) and social norms (informal redistribution, risk aversion, etc.) that affect the entrepreneur.

At the heart of the issue is the opposition between intensive and extensive investment. Intensive investment involves acquiring equipment, technology, and skills aimed at improving productivity, quality, and competitiveness of businesses. This improvement in productivity and quality can also facilitate informal businesses access to financing sources, thereby contributing to their growth and development. This may encourage businesses to comply with norms and regulations to access new markets and opportunities, thereby promoting formalization. However, several studies converge on the idea that the informal sector tends to move primarily towards extensive investment. In this type of investment, financial surpluses are mainly devoted to household needs, followed by the simple reproduction of productive activities and the creation of other small activities parallel to the main activity. Informal entrepreneurs also use extensive investment as a means of protecting their assets from fiscal and community predations, with the multiplication of small investments in diversified activities allowing these assets to be made invisible. While they provide protection against predation or they also have a redistributive function through the jobs they create, these investments do not allow for productivity gains and growth on intensive margins, that is, on the main activity of the business, and only serve to increase the informal sector and, consequently, economic vulnerability.