{"title":"Diamond Ashiagbor, ed.Re-Imagining Labour Law for Development: Informal Work in the Global North and South. Oxford: Hart/Bloomsbury, 2019. 275 pp.","authors":"A. Zbyszewska","doi":"10.1017/cls.2022.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The perennial project of rethinking labour law’s conceptual and normative narratives gets fresh treatment in Diamond Ashiagbor’s edited collection Re-Imagining Labour Law for Development: Informal Work in the Global North and South. An outcome of a conference that took place at the University of London’s Institute of Advanced Legal Studies in 2016, the book gathers contributions from emerging researchers and leading international scholars in the field of work regulation. As the title suggests, the book centres on informality. Its key contribution lies in approaching informality not simply as an aberration or a new challenge to examine, but rather as a vantage point from which to reassess and rearticulate labour law and its role in development projects, albeit the latter thread is more clearly pulled through some of the book’s contributions than others. Informality is a condition that remains thematerial reality for a significant and, indeed, a growing share of the world’s workers. Introducing the volume, Ashiagbor observes that while it tends to be associated with work relationships in countries of the Global South, informal work is now proliferating everywhere. Processes of vertical disintegration and labour market flexibility policies long promoted by international institutions like the World Bank and the IMF and embraced by national policymakers around the world are also driving informalization in countries of theGlobal North. Against this backdrop, and in light of the deficits in decent work associated with informality, strategies of formalization, such as those currently promoted by the ILO, seem to be something to embrace. After all, for informal workers, legal protection remains elusive, making labour law “a luxury” of sorts, as expressed by Pamhidzai H. Bamu, one of the book’s contributors writing on the situation in Zimbabwe (Chapter 5, p. 122). Yet as this book shows, what informality entails, whether formalization is the best way to address the associated insecurities, and how labour law or work regulation are implicated in both, are questions that need careful unpacking. The book interrogates these questions through a range of individual and comparative case studies from diverse jurisdictions spanning most continents. It draws upon an eclectic mix of conceptual and methodological tools, embracing contextual, historical, political-economic, and pluralist approaches already popular with labour lawyers, while also drawing on insights from actor network theory, postcolonial theory, regulatory theories, and institutional ethnography.What most of the book’s contributors agree on is that informality, while hard to define and capture precisely (see, e.g., Introduction, Chapters 2, 3, 7, and 10), provides a useful vantage point from which to examine the regulation of work relations more generally. Heeding Liam McHugh-Russell’s caution, the book eschews binaries that juxtapose economic forms and the “standard” work relations privileged in the Global North against “folk images of informal work and production” in the Global","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"37 1","pages":"184 - 185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2022.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The perennial project of rethinking labour law’s conceptual and normative narratives gets fresh treatment in Diamond Ashiagbor’s edited collection Re-Imagining Labour Law for Development: Informal Work in the Global North and South. An outcome of a conference that took place at the University of London’s Institute of Advanced Legal Studies in 2016, the book gathers contributions from emerging researchers and leading international scholars in the field of work regulation. As the title suggests, the book centres on informality. Its key contribution lies in approaching informality not simply as an aberration or a new challenge to examine, but rather as a vantage point from which to reassess and rearticulate labour law and its role in development projects, albeit the latter thread is more clearly pulled through some of the book’s contributions than others. Informality is a condition that remains thematerial reality for a significant and, indeed, a growing share of the world’s workers. Introducing the volume, Ashiagbor observes that while it tends to be associated with work relationships in countries of the Global South, informal work is now proliferating everywhere. Processes of vertical disintegration and labour market flexibility policies long promoted by international institutions like the World Bank and the IMF and embraced by national policymakers around the world are also driving informalization in countries of theGlobal North. Against this backdrop, and in light of the deficits in decent work associated with informality, strategies of formalization, such as those currently promoted by the ILO, seem to be something to embrace. After all, for informal workers, legal protection remains elusive, making labour law “a luxury” of sorts, as expressed by Pamhidzai H. Bamu, one of the book’s contributors writing on the situation in Zimbabwe (Chapter 5, p. 122). Yet as this book shows, what informality entails, whether formalization is the best way to address the associated insecurities, and how labour law or work regulation are implicated in both, are questions that need careful unpacking. The book interrogates these questions through a range of individual and comparative case studies from diverse jurisdictions spanning most continents. It draws upon an eclectic mix of conceptual and methodological tools, embracing contextual, historical, political-economic, and pluralist approaches already popular with labour lawyers, while also drawing on insights from actor network theory, postcolonial theory, regulatory theories, and institutional ethnography.What most of the book’s contributors agree on is that informality, while hard to define and capture precisely (see, e.g., Introduction, Chapters 2, 3, 7, and 10), provides a useful vantage point from which to examine the regulation of work relations more generally. Heeding Liam McHugh-Russell’s caution, the book eschews binaries that juxtapose economic forms and the “standard” work relations privileged in the Global North against “folk images of informal work and production” in the Global
在Diamond Ashiagbor编辑的文集《为发展重新构想劳动法:全球南北的非正式工作》中,重新思考劳动法的概念和规范性叙述的长期项目得到了新的处理。这本书是2016年在伦敦大学高级法律研究所(University of London’s Institute of Advanced Legal Studies)举行的一次会议的成果,汇集了新兴研究人员和国际知名学者在工作监管领域的贡献。正如书名所示,这本书以非正式为中心。它的关键贡献在于,它不仅将非正式性视为一种失常现象或一种需要研究的新挑战,而且将其视为重新评估和重新阐述劳动法及其在发展项目中的作用的有利位置,尽管后者的线索在本书的一些贡献中比其他贡献更清晰。对于世界上相当一部分(实际上是越来越多的)工人来说,非正式状态仍然是一种物质现实。在介绍这本书时,Ashiagbor观察到,虽然它往往与全球南方国家的工作关系有关,但非正式工作现在无处不在。长期以来,世界银行和国际货币基金组织等国际机构推动了劳动力市场的纵向解体进程,并得到了世界各国政策制定者的支持,这些政策也推动了全球北方国家的非正规化。在这种背景下,鉴于与非正式性有关的体面工作的不足,诸如劳工组织目前提倡的正规化战略似乎是值得接受的。毕竟,对于非正规工人来说,法律保护仍然难以捉摸,使劳动法成为某种“奢侈品”,正如书中关于津巴布韦局势的撰稿人之一Pamhidzai H. Bamu所表达的那样(第5章,第122页)。然而,正如本书所展示的,非正式意味着什么,正规化是否是解决相关不安全感的最佳方式,以及劳动法或工作法规如何涉及这两者,都是需要仔细分析的问题。这本书通过一系列来自不同司法管辖区的个人和比较案例研究来询问这些问题。它借鉴了概念和方法工具的折衷组合,包括语境、历史、政治经济和多元主义方法,这些方法已经受到劳工律师的欢迎,同时也借鉴了行动者网络理论、后殖民理论、监管理论和制度人种学的见解。这本书的大多数贡献者都同意,虽然非正式性很难精确地定义和捕捉(参见,例如,引言,第2、3、7和10章),但它提供了一个有用的有利位置,从这个位置可以更普遍地检查工作关系的规则。注意到利亚姆·麦克休-罗素(Liam mchuugh - russell)的警告,这本书避免了将全球北方享有特权的经济形式和“标准”工作关系与全球“非正式工作和生产的民间形象”并列的二元对立
期刊介绍:
The Canadian Journal of Law and Society is pleased to announce that it has a new home and editorial board. As of January 2008, the Journal is housed in the Law Department at Carleton University. Michel Coutu and Mariana Valverde are the Journal’s new co-editors (in French and English respectively) and Dawn Moore is now serving as the Journal’s Managing Editor. As always, the journal is committed to publishing high caliber, original academic work in the field of law and society scholarship. CJLS/RCDS has wide circulation and an international reputation for showcasing quality scholarship that speaks to both theoretical and empirical issues in sociolegal studies.