Marxism and informal labour

Marxism and informal labour. Researchers influenced by Marxism have sought to grapple with the rise of labour in the informal economy. The notion of 'informal labour' has been used to modify and challenge the  already-contentious idea that capitalism produces its own  'gravediggers'. In response to informal labour's rise, contemporary theorists have revised the link between capitalist  development, proletarianisation and political strategy. This article critically explores keynote examples of how these radical thinkers have attempted to update and strengthen Marxist  analysis. It tries to synthesise them into a framework for analysing changes to the composition of labour forces. Although some of the discussion is relevant to rich as well as poor countries, the article  focuses on the Global South, where the majority of the world's  workers live. Its first section outlines Marx's views on class formation from the first volume of Capital. These views are contrasted with radical theorists who have pointed to the expansion of informal  labour since the 1960s, as well as contemporary Marxist responses to  informal labour. Having taken stock of these developments, the second section of the article outlines a typological approach to labour in the  informal economy, drawing upon the insights of Chen 2006, Chang 2009  and Banaji 2010. The third section outlines the different 'forms of exploitation' that constitute labour in this typology, exploring  examples within each type and areas of complexity, overlap and potential  modification. The final section summarises the article and reiterates the potential to critically apply Marx's ideas about class  formation to the expansion of informal labour in the Global South. The intention is to offer a basic analytical guide to the variety of work  and employment types found in the contemporary urban informal economy. This approach, it is argued, is consistent with Capital, in which Marx developed a method of contrasting broad historical tendencies while  taking stock of contradictory tendencies and counter-evidence. The purpose of this exercise is to develop an analytical framework that is  both empirically-sensitive to changes in class structure and could  potentially be used to modify underlying theoretical propositions of  Marxism. This article locates this framework by interpreting each type of informal labour as a 'form of exploitation'. Capital and its Critics   Marx assumed that industrialisation would draw workers into factory  labour. However, in Capital Vol 13 he also argued that capitalism generated surpluses of unwanted labour. The result was a dynamic market for labour power in which waged employment overlapped with 'a  relatively redundant population of workers; that is to say a population  larger than suffices for the average needs of the self-expansion of  capital--in short, a surplus population' Marx, 1939: 695. Marx implied that competition between workers for jobs undermined the  collective power that he and Engels had attributed to waged workers. He emphasised three kinds of surplus population: first, a 'floating  population' which subsisted around centres of industry, rising and  falling with the economic health of industry and following it as it  became established in new areas; second, a 'latent population'  of agricultural labourers which was 'continually on the move, in  course of transference to join... the manufacturing proletariat';  third, a 'stagnant population' with irregular employment, the  conditions of which 'fall below the average conditions of the  working class'. This third group offered capital 'an inexhaustible reservoir of available labour power' Marx, 1939:  711. These workers were 'superfluous' to industry, agriculture and, especially, to traditional handicraft production which had been  undermined by competition with modern manufacturing: '[This group]  forms a self-reproducing and self-perpetuating element of the working  class, and it takes a proportionally greater part in the general  increase of that class than do the other elements' Marx, 1939:  711. In addition, Marx discussed a fourth group encompassing 'the lowest sediment of relative surplus population, which dwells in the  world of pauperism' Marx, 1939: 711-2. Finally, Marx pointed to the existence of a fifth group of nomadic workers which formed 'the  light infantry of capital, which moves them rapidly from point to point,  as its need for them varies' Marx, 1939: 734. Although he generalised about the impact of industrialisation on the formation of  factory labour, Marx suggested that his typology was specific to Britain  and open to modification. He did not regard the working class as a homogeneous category and his typology was neither absolute nor static:  'Like all other laws, it is modified in its actual working by  numerous considerations, the analysis of which we are not here [in  Capital Vol 1] concerned' Marx, 1939: 712. Of course, this analytical openne Find out more on  wage day advance