Rethinking North American Integration Survey that replicated six questions from the 2000 EWCS for Canada and the United States, to compare these two countries with 15 European countries in five dimensions of job quality.

There have been notable efforts to measure multidimensional job quality at the regional level in developing countries, especially in Latin America, where relatively high-quality survey data are available (Brummund, Mann, and Rodríguez-Castelán 2018; González et al. 2021; Sehnbruch et al. 2020). Brummund, Mann, and Rodríguez-Castelán (2018) use harmonized data on 15 Latin American countries to focus on four dimensions that can be consistently identified in the literature: income, stability, benefits, and job satisfaction. This study includes both wage employment and self-employed workers. Sehnbruch et al. (2020) include nine Latin American countries and focus on the three dimensions proposed by the OECD (Cazes, Hijzen, and Saint-Martin 2016): income, stability, and employment conditions. González et al. (2021) focus on six Central American countries and follow a similar approach to Sehnbruch et al. (2020), but include job security as a fourth dimension. All three studies include similar indicators (contract work and tenure) in their stability or security dimension.<sup>8</sup> Benefits indicators (social security receipts, health insurance, or retirement benefits) are included as indicators in the benefits dimension by Brummund, Mann, and Rodríguez-Castelán (2018), in the security dimension in González et al. (2021), and in the employment conditions dimension of Sehnbruch et al. (2020). Bocquier, Nordman, and Vescovo (2010) have conducted the only other study that looks at developing countries (West Africa region), but, because of the data limitations, they only include capital cities in seven countries.

The limited attempts to measure multidimensional job quality in developing countries reflect the lack of comprehensive quality data in these countries. This paper contributes to the literature by developing a multidimensional JQM that is global in scope and applicable to developing countries across all regions. Similar to Brummund, Mann, and Rodríguez-Castelán (2018), it proposes four dimensions of job quality: income, stability, benefits, and working conditions. Given the data limitations, especially in the poorest countries, the proposed JQM measure allows a greater flexibility in the choice of indicators, which is discussed in the methodology section. It also focuses only on wage employment because information on the self-employed is lacking in many countries.

# **3. Job Quality Measure Methodology**

# **a. Dimensions of job quality**

Over the past decade, there has been a proliferation of job quality frameworks proposed by international panels of experts both on the macro and micro levels. Prominent efforts include decent work indicators (ILO 2013), the job quality index (Eurofound 2012), indicators of job quality (European Union Employment Committee), good jobs for development (World Bank 2012), quality of employment (UNECE 2015), and the OECD job quality framework (Cazes, Hijzen, and Saint-Martin 2016).<sup>9</sup> The main dimensions that overlap across these frameworks are (1) earnings, (2) benefits (social protection), (3) job security, and (4) working conditions (physical and mental well-being). Table 1 shows the types of indicators at both the micro and macro level that are common in the literature on the measurement of these dimensions.

> 8 In González et al. (2021) having a contract applies only to wage employees, while, among the self-employed, the indicator is measured as lack of higher education.

> 9 For the indicators of job quality, see “Annex 1: Definitions of Job Quality: EMCO Indicators” (EC 2015, 172–73).

6