| Literature DB >> 26455360 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study investigates the health impacts of a major liberalization episode in the textile and clothing (T&C) sector. This episode triggered substantial shifts in employment across a wide range of countries. It is the first study to empirically link trade liberalization to health via changes in employment and offers some of the first empirical insights on how trade liberalization interacts with social policies to influence health.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26455360 PMCID: PMC4601122 DOI: 10.1186/s12992-015-0126-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Global Health ISSN: 1744-8603 Impact factor: 4.185
Fig. 1Micro-level framework
Fig. 2Macro-level framework
Countries identified for inclusion
| Country | Year | T & C employment combined as % of total manufacturing employmenta | % of working population in industryc |
|---|---|---|---|
| Albania | 2004 | 26.76 | 13.6 |
| Azerbaijan | 2004 | 12.92 | 11.9 |
| Bangladeshb | 2004 | 40 | 13.7 |
| Bolivia | 2001 | 14.81 | 20.5 |
| Botswana | 2004 | 33.41 | 22.6 |
| Brazil | 2004 | 12.76 | 21 |
| Bulgaria | 2004 | 29.53 | 32.9 |
| Cambodia | 2000 | 73.60 | 10.5 |
| China | 2004 | 18.11 | 22.5 |
| China, Hong Kong SAR | 2004 | 27.90 | 15.6 |
| China, Macao SAR | 2004 | 82.70 | 25.2 |
| Colombia | 2004 | 22.30 | 19.9 |
| Costa Rica | 2003 | 17.60 | 22 |
| Croatia | 2004 | 13.78 | 29.8 |
| Ecuador | 2004 | 10.87 | 17.5 |
| Egypt | 2004 | 28.51 | 20 |
| Estonia | 2004 | 17.98 | 34.9 |
| Greece | 2004 | 13.73 | 22.5 |
| Guatemala | 2004 | 40.57 | 19.5 |
| Hungary | 2004 | 10.19 | 32.8 |
| India | 2004 | 21.03 | 16.1 |
| Indonesia | 2004 | 22.90 | 18 |
| Italy | 2004 | 11.14 | 30.8 |
| Jamaica | 2004 | 16.28 | 18.3 |
| Jordan | 2004 | 15.49 | 21.8 |
| Kuwait | 2001 | 16.75 | 18.3 |
| Korea | 2004 | 10.04 | 27.5 |
| Kyrgyz Republic | 2004 | 11.48 | 17.6 |
| Latvia | 2004 | 13.74 | 27.3 |
| Lithuania | 2004 | 21.97 | 28.2 |
| Mauritius | 2004 | 66.83 | 33.5 |
| Mexico | 2003 | 14.42 | 24.8 |
| Mongolia | 2004 | 51.23 | 16.1 |
| Morocco | 2004 | 41.53 | 19.5 |
| Nepal | 2002 | 28.28 | 13.4 |
| Peru | 2004 | 35.60 | 41.7 |
| Philippines | 2003 | 18.54 | 15.8 |
| Poland | 2004 | 10.24 | 28.8 |
| Portugal | 2004 | 24.24 | 31 |
| Puerto Rico | 2000 | 18.42 | 19.4 |
| Qatar | 2004 | 21.51 | 41 |
| Republic of Macedonia | 2004 | 36.42 | 32.8 |
| Romania | 2004 | 24.29 | 31.2 |
| Saudi Arabia | 2003 | 14.75 | 21 |
| Serbia & Montenegro | 2001 | 17.82 | 26.9 |
| Slovakia | 2004 | 10.56 | 39 |
| South Africa | 2004 | 12.82 | 26.1 |
| Sri Lanka | 2001 | 49.32 | 24.1 |
| Syrian Arab Republic | 2004 | 25.41 | 25.6 |
| Thailand | 2002 | 18.04 | 20.5 |
| Turkey | 2004 | 34.55 | 23 |
| Uruguay | 2004 | 13.14 | 21.4 |
| Vietnam | 2004 | 23.04 | 17.4 |
Sources: United Nations Industrial Development Organization (2011): INDSTAT2, Industrial Statistics Database (Edition: 2011). ESDS International, University of Manchester. doi: 10.5257/unido/indstat2/2011. Industrial Statistics Database 2011 at the 2-digit level of ISIC Code (Revision 3).
aISIC codes 17 for textiles, 18 for wearing apparel and D for total manufacturing
bSince data was not available on Bangladesh in the UNIDO database, and because the country is oft cited as extremely reliant on the textile and clothing sector, data for Bangladesh taken from the IMF Working Paper by Mlachila and Yang (2004): The End of Textiles Quotas: A Case Study of the Impact on The End of Textiles Quotas on Bangladesh
cWorld Bank (2011): World Development Indicators (Edition: September 2011). ESDS International, University of Manchester. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5257/wb/wdi/2011-09
Final set of included countries
| Azerbaijana | Hungaryb | Peru |
| Bangladesh | India | Philippines |
| Brazil | Indonesiaa | Poland |
| Bulgaria | Italy | Portugal |
| China | Korea | Romaniab |
| Colombia | Kyrgyz Republic | Slovakia |
| Croatia | Latvia | South Africa |
| Ecuador | Lithuania | Sri Lankaa |
| Egypta | Mauritius | Thailand |
| Estoniab | Mexico | Turkey |
| Greece | Moroccoa |
aonly for IMR
bonly for AFM
Excluded countries and reasons for exclusion
| Country | Reason for exclusion |
|---|---|
| Albania | AFM; IMR |
| Azerbaijana | AFM |
| Bolivia | ILO ISI, UNIDO |
| Botswana | ILO ISI |
| Cambodia | ILO ISI, UNIDO |
| China, Hong Kong SAR | ILO ISI |
| Costa Rica | UNIDO |
| China, Macao SAR | ILO ISI |
| Egypta | AFM |
| Estoniab | IMR |
| Hungaryb | IMR |
| Guatemala | ILO ISI |
| Indonesiaa | AFM |
| Jamaica | ILO ISI |
| Jordan | ILO ISI |
| Kuwait | ILO ISI: UNIDO |
| Mongolia | ILO ISI |
| Moroccoa | AFM |
| Nepal | AFM; IMR |
| Puerto Rico | ILO ISI; UNIDO |
| Qatar | ILO ISI |
| Republic of Macedonia | AFM; IMR |
| Saudi Arabia | ILO ISI |
| Serbia and Montenegro | ILO ISI |
| Sri Lankaa | AFM |
| Syrian Arab Republic | ILO ISI |
| Uruguay | ILO ISI |
| Vietnam | ILO ISI |
AFM Adult female mortality data unsuitable, IMR Infant mortality data unsuitable, UNIDO Employment figures not available from UNIDO, ILO ISI country not included in ILO Income Security Index
acountry included for infant mortality
bcountry included for adult female mortality
Relative changes in adult female mortality rates
| Country | Adult female mortality rate (per 1000) | Percent change in adult female mortality reduction | Difference between pre & post MFA periods | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 2004 | 2005 | 2009 | Pre MFA (2000–2004) | Post MFA (2005–2009) | ||
| Bangladesh | 135.6 | 126.1 | 124.8 | 121.4 | 7.01 | 2.72 | −4.28 |
| Brazil | 122.4 | 119 | 117.9 | 111.4 | 2.78 | 5.51 | 2.74 |
| Bulgaria | 97.8 | 91.8 | 92 | 88.5 | 6.13 | 3.80 | −2.33 |
| China | 118.6 | 105.4 | 102.5 | 92.5 | 11.13 | 9.76 | −1.37 |
| Colombia | 88.7 | 78.7 | 76.2 | 68.6 | 11.27 | 9.97 | −1.30 |
| Croatia | 74.9 | 66.1 | 64.9 | 62.9 | 11.75 | 3.08 | −8.67 |
| Ecuador | 98.6 | 90.7 | 88.7 | 80.6 | 8.01 | 9.13 | 1.12 |
| Estonia | 119.2 | 102 | 98.7 | 87.6 | 14.43 | 11.25 | −3.18 |
| Greece | 48.4 | 46.5 | 45.8 | 42.4 | 3.93 | 7.42 | 3.50 |
| Hungary | 115 | 107.7 | 106.6 | 104 | 6.35 | 2.44 | −3.91 |
| India | 188.6 | 166.4 | 161.7 | 147.3 | 11.77 | 8.91 | −2.87 |
| Italy | 50.5 | 45 | 44.2 | 42 | 10.89 | 4.98 | −5.91 |
| Korea | 61.7 | 51.2 | 49.1 | 42 | 17.02 | 14.46 | −2.56 |
| Kyrgyz Republic | 154.7 | 146 | 145.6 | 144.4 | 5.62 | 0.82 | −4.80 |
| Latvia | 120.9 | 116.7 | 117.9 | 120 | 3.47 | −1.78 | −5.26 |
| Lithuania | 105.1 | 104.5 | 108.5 | 115.5 | 0.57 | −6.45 | −7.02 |
| Mauritius | 110 | 108.5 | 108.1 | 106.6 | 1.36 | 1.39 | 0.02 |
| Mexico | 101.4 | 95.9 | 94.7 | 89.8 | 5.42 | 5.17 | −0.25 |
| Peru | 97.6 | 95 | 94.1 | 82.9 | 2.66 | 11.90 | 9.24 |
| Philippines | 118.8 | 120.1 | 119.8 | 116 | −1.09 | 3.17 | 4.27 |
| Poland | 86.3 | 78.3 | 78.8 | 78.3 | 9.27 | 0.63 | −8.64 |
| Portugal | 66.4 | 59.1 | 56.8 | 50.2 | 10.99 | 11.62 | 0.63 |
| Romania | 108.3 | 100.4 | 98.5 | 91 | 7.29 | 7.61 | 0.32 |
| Slovak Republic | 81.8 | 77.9 | 77.4 | 75.2 | 4.77 | 2.84 | −1.93 |
| South Africa | 316.5 | 430.2 | 444.2 | 450 | −35.92 | −1.31 | 34.62 |
| Thailand | 124.9 | 117.2 | 114.1 | 102.7 | 6.16 | 9.99 | 3.83 |
| Turkey | 102.7 | 92.8 | 91.2 | 86.1 | 9.64 | 5.59 | −4.05 |
Relative changes in infant mortality rates
| Country | Infant mortality rate (per1000) | Percent change in infant mortality reduction | Difference between pre and post MFA periods | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 2004 | 2005 | 2009 | Pre MFA (2000–2004) | Post MFA (2005–2009) | ||
| Azerbaijan | 24.5 | 19.1 | 17.8 | 13.2 | 22.14 | 25.84 | 3.71 |
| Bangladesh | 23.2 | 18.7 | 17.8 | 14.8 | 19.18 | 16.72 | −2.46 |
| Brazil | 13.3 | 10.9 | 10.4 | 8.6 | 18.23 | 17.71 | −0.52 |
| Bulgaria | 7.2 | 5.5 | 5.2 | 4.3 | 23.86 | 17.48 | −6.38 |
| China | 9.5 | 6.8 | 6.2 | 4.8 | 28.87 | 21.56 | −7.32 |
| Colombia | 8.9 | 7.3 | 6.9 | 5.3 | 18.39 | 22.30 | 3.92 |
| Croatia | 2.1 | 1.8 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 15.96 | 21.76 | 5.80 |
| Ecuador | 16.8 | 14.3 | 13.7 | 11.5 | 14.97 | 16.34 | 1.37 |
| Egypt | 15.8 | 11.8 | 10.9 | 8.1 | 25.47 | 26.01 | 0.53 |
| Greece | 1.9 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.1 | 19.68 | 26.90 | 7.22 |
| India | 22.4 | 19.4 | 18.8 | 16.4 | 13.06 | 12.66 | −0.40 |
| Indonesia | 17.2 | 15.1 | 14.7 | 12.9 | 11.89 | 12.19 | 0.31 |
| Italy | 1.5 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 35.17 | 13.33 | −21.84 |
| Korea | 2.7 | 2.4 | 2.3 | 1.8 | 10.00 | 23.58 | 13.58 |
| Kyrgyz Republic | 21.1 | 19.4 | 19.0 | 17.0 | 8.20 | 10.22 | 2.03 |
| Latvia | 4.8 | 3.7 | 3.5 | 3.2 | 22.96 | 7.98 | −14.99 |
| Lithuania | 3.9 | 3.3 | 3.2 | 2.6 | 16.20 | 16.51 | 0.31 |
| Mauritius | 5.0 | 3.7 | 3.5 | 3.1 | 26.89 | 11.11 | −15.78 |
| Mexico | 12.9 | 10.8 | 10.3 | 8.6 | 16.73 | 16.75 | 0.02 |
| Morocco | 16.0 | 12.9 | 12.2 | 9.8 | 19.16 | 19.89 | 0.72 |
| Peru | 13.9 | 11.1 | 10.5 | 8.6 | 20.60 | 18.13 | −2.47 |
| Philippines | 11.7 | 10.5 | 10.2 | 8.8 | 10.26 | 12.91 | 2.65 |
| Poland | 2.5 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 1.7 | 22.05 | 13.16 | −8.89 |
| Portugal | 2.5 | 1.4 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 41.94 | 22.05 | −19.89 |
| Slovak Republic | 3.6 | 3.1 | 3.0 | 2.3 | 13.65 | 21.96 | 8.31 |
| South Africa | 16.2 | 23.1 | 25.1 | 24.0 | −42.44 | 4.30 | 46.75 |
| Sri Lanka | 4.3 | 3.0 | 2.8 | 2.3 | 29.37 | 19.08 | −10.29 |
| Thailand | 3.1 | 2.5 | 2.3 | 1.9 | 19.61 | 19.74 | 0.13 |
| Turkey | 14.9 | 12.7 | 12.3 | 10.3 | 14.58 | 16.71 | 2.12 |
Scoring procedure for protective labour market policies
| Number of fundamental ILO conventions ratified in 2004 | Initial fuzzy set score | Score adjustment for additional ratifications by 2009 |
|---|---|---|
| 8 | 1 | NA |
| 7 | 0.6 | +0.2 |
| 6 | 0.4 | +0.2-0.4 |
| 4–5 | 0.2 | +0-0.6 |
| 3 or less | 0 | +0-0.8 |
Fuzzy-set data matrix for adult female mortality
| Country | Highly developed | Protective labour market polices | Protective welfare state policies | Employment growth | Employment loss | Improving AFM | Worsening AFM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Azerbaijan | 0.35 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.99 | NA | NA |
| Bangladesh | 0.06 | 0.6 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.01 | 0.99 |
| Brazil | 0.48 | 0.6 | 0.67 | 0.89 | 0 | 0.94 | 0.06 |
| Bulgaria | 0.62 | 1 | 0.67 | 0 | 0.98 | 0.09 | 0.91 |
| China | 0.42 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.98 | 0 | 0.2 | 0.8 |
| Colombia | 0.48 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 0.36 | 0.21 | 0.79 |
| Croatia | 0.8 | 1 | 0.67 | 0 | 0.98 | 0 | 1 |
| Ecuador | 0.41 | 1 | 0.67 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.75 | 0.25 |
| Egypt | 0.27 | 1 | 0 | 0.02 | 0.11 | NA | NA |
| Estonia | 0.85 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 1 | 0.04 | 0.96 |
| Greece | 0.97 | 1 | 0.33 | 0.01 | 0.29 | 0.97 | 0.03 |
| Hungary | 0.89 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 1 | 0.02 | 0.98 |
| India | 0.13 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.99 | 0 | 0.05 | 0.95 |
| Indonesia | 0.29 | 1 | 0 | 0.75 | 0 | NA | NA |
| Italy | 0.99 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 0.92 | 0 | 1 |
| Korea | 0.97 | 0.2 | 0.33 | 0 | 0.9 | 0.07 | 0.93 |
| Kyrgyzstan | 0.28 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.01 | 0.99 |
| Latvia | 0.79 | 0.8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.01 | 0.99 |
| Lithuania | 0.85 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Mauritius | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.67 | 0 | 0.95 | 0.51 | 0.49 |
| Mexico | 0.65 | 0.4 | 0.67 | 0 | 1 | 0.44 | 0.56 |
| Morocco | 0.17 | 0.6 | 0 | 0 | 0.73 | NA | NA |
| Peru | 0.42 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.97 | 1 | 0 |
| Philippines | 0.41 | 0.8 | 0.67 | 0 | 0.63 | 0.99 | 0.01 |
| Poland | 0.87 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.74 | 0 | 1 |
| Portugal | 0.96 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.89 | 0.65 | 0.35 |
| Romania | 0.54 | 1 | 0.67 | 0 | 1 | 0.58 | 0.42 |
| Slovakia | 0.84 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.99 | 0.13 | 0.87 |
| South Africa | 0.19 | 1 | 0.67 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Sri Lanka | 0.39 | 1 | 0.67 | 1 | 0 | NA | NA |
| Thailand | 0.46 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.71 | 0 | 0.98 | 0.02 |
| Turkey | 0.39 | 1 | 0.67 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.98 |
Fuzzy-set data matrix for infant mortality
| Country | Highly developed | Protective labour market polices | Protective welfare state policies | Employment growth | Employment loss | Improving IMR | Worsening IMR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Azerbaijan | 0.35 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.99 | 0.94 | 0.06 |
| Bangladesh | 0.06 | 0.6 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.14 | 0.86 |
| Brazil | 0.48 | 0.6 | 0.67 | 0.89 | 0 | 0.4 | 0.6 |
| Bulgaria | 0.62 | 1 | 0.67 | 0 | 0.98 | 0.01 | 0.99 |
| China | 0.42 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.98 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Colombia | 0.48 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | 0.36 | 0.95 | 0.05 |
| Croatia | 0.8 | 1 | 0.67 | 0 | 0.98 | 0.99 | 0.01 |
| Ecuador | 0.41 | 1 | 0.67 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 0.74 | 0.26 |
| Egypt | 0.27 | 1 | 0 | 0.02 | 0.11 | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| Estonia | 0.85 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 1 | NA | NA |
| Greece | 0.97 | 1 | 0.33 | 0.01 | 0.29 | 1 | 0 |
| Hungary | 0.89 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 1 | NA | NA |
| India | 0.13 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.99 | 0 | 0.43 | 0.57 |
| Indonesia | 0.29 | 1 | 0 | 0.75 | 0 | 0.56 | 0.44 |
| Italy | 0.99 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 0.92 | 0 | 1 |
| Korea | 0.97 | 0.2 | 0.33 | 0 | 0.9 | 1 | 0 |
| Kyrgyzstan | 0.28 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.82 | 0.18 |
| Latvia | 0.79 | 0.8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Lithuania | 0.85 | 1 | 0.33 | 0 | 1 | 0.56 | 0.44 |
| Mauritius | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.67 | 0 | 0.95 | 0 | 1 |
| Mexico | 0.65 | 0.4 | 0.67 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| Morocco | 0.17 | 0.6 | 0 | 0 | 0.73 | 0.63 | 0.37 |
| Peru | 0.42 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.97 | 0.14 | 0.86 |
| Philippines | 0.41 | 0.8 | 0.67 | 0 | 0.63 | 0.88 | 0.12 |
| Poland | 0.87 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.74 | 0 | 1 |
| Portugal | 0.96 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.89 | 0 | 1 |
| Romania | 0.54 | 1 | 0.67 | 0 | 1 | NA | NA |
| Slovakia | 0.84 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.99 | 1 | 0 |
| South Africa | 0.19 | 1 | 0.67 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Sri Lanka | 0.39 | 1 | 0.67 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Thailand | 0.46 | 0.2 | 0 | 0.71 | 0 | 0.53 | 0.47 |
| Turkey | 0.39 | 1 | 0.67 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.83 | 0.17 |
Results of sufficiency analyses
| Adult female mortality | Infant mortality | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Configuration | Cases | Health improving consistency | Health worsening consistency | Cases | Health improving consistency | Health worsening consistency |
| h*M*W*G*l | Brazil | 0.975* | 0.432 | Brazil, Sri Lanka | 0.486 | 0.993* |
| h*m*w*G*l | China, India, Thailand | 0.426 | 0.702 | China, India, | 0.540 | 0.887* |
| h*M*w*G*l | Bangladesh | 0.582 | 0.753* | Bangladesh, | 0.604 | 0.903* |
| h*M*W*g*L | Philippines, South Africa | 0.705 | 0.693 | Philippines, South Africa | 0.642 | 0.560 |
| h*M*w*g*L | Kyrgyz Republic, Peru | 0.613 | 0.720 | Azerbaijan, Kyrgyz Republic, Morocco, | 0.787* | 0.523 |
| h*M*W*g*l | Ecuador, Turkey | 0.629 | 0.629 | Ecuador, Turkey | 0.881* | 0.455 |
| h*M*w*g*l | Colombia | 0.681 | 0.676 | Colombia, Egypt | 0.933* | 0.603 |
| H*M*W*g*L | Bulgaria, Croatia, Latvia, Poland, | 0.398 | 0.821* | Bulgaria, Croatia, Latvia, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic | 0.469 | 0.660 |
| H*m*W*g*L | Mexico | 0.555 | 0.867* | Mexico | 0.673 | 0.667 |
| H*M*w*g*L | Estonia, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania | 0.416 | 0.816* | Italy, Lithuania | 0.685 | 0.606 |
| H*m*w*g*L | Korea | 0.578 | 0.894* | Korea | 0.887* | 0.492 |
| H*M*w*g*l | Greece | 0.745 | 0.532 | Greece | 0.954* | 0.526 |
Italicized countries represent deviant cases, they are members of the sufficient configuration but not of the outcome
H highly developed; M protective labour market; W protective welfare state; G employment growth; L employment loss (lower case signifies the negation of these conditions)
*Consistency greater than 0.75
Logical reduction results
| Adult female mortality | Cases | Solution path consistency | Solution path coverage | Overall coverage | Overall consistency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Health improving | |||||
| 1. h*M*W*G*l | Brazil | 0.975 | 0.082 | 0.082 | 0.975 |
| Health worsening | |||||
| 2. H*g*L | Italy, Korea, Hungary, Estonia, Lithuania, Slovak Republic, Croatia, Latvia, Poland, Bulgaria | 0.841 | 0.621 | 0.697 | 0.830 |
| 3. h*M*w* G*l | Bangladesh | 0.753 | 0.079 | 0.697 | 0.830 |
| Infant mortality | |||||
| Health improving | |||||
|
| Colombia, Egypt, Greece | 0.897 | 0.267 | 0.536 | 0.826 |
|
| Ecuador, Turkey Colombia, Egypt | 0.904 | 0.251 | 0.536 | 0.826 |
| 4. h*M*w*g | Kyrgyz Republic, Colombia, Azerbaijan, Morocco, Egypt | 0.824 | 0.400 | 0.536 | 0.826 |
| 5. H*m*w*g*L | Korea | 0.887 | 0.107 | 0.536 | 0.826 |
| Health worsening | |||||
| 6. h*w*G*l | Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, China, Thailand | 0.842 | 0.270 | 0.303 | 0.856 |
| 7. h*M*G*l | Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Brazil | 0.916 | 0.214 | 0.303 | 0.856 |
H highly developed, M protective labour market, W protective welfare state, G employment growth, L employment loss (lower case signifies the negation of these conditions)
Fig. 3FsQCA solution paths
Country case-studies
| Solution path | Outcome | Countries |
|---|---|---|
| 1. h*M*W*G*l | Improving AFM | Brazil |
| 2. H*g*L | Worsening AFM | Italy, Slovak Republic, Korea, Portugal (deviant) |
| 3. h*M*w*G*l | Worsening AFM | Bangladesh |
| 4. h*M*w*g | Improving IMR | Kyrgyz Republic, Peru (deviant) |
| 5. H*m*w*g*L | Improving IMR | Korea |
| 6. h*w*G*l | Worsening IMR | China, Thailand (deviant) |
| 7. h*M*G*l | Worsening IMR | Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Indonesia (deviant) |
H highly developed, M protective labour market, W protective welfare state, G employment growth, L employment loss (lower case signifies the negation of these conditions)