Considering the majority of the population, as if, they do not know as to what is their strength. This perhaps is due to their considerably lesser exposure to various possibilities, as a result under exploitation of visible potential indicators being observed perceivably reflective. This is somewhat mathematically to be calculated based on the following generic formula which could further be deepened by incorporating a finer level of referrals and parameters as per the identified essentials during the study.
Average calculated potential vs actual harvested potential vs differential potential = under or over harnessed potential
Over harnessed potential to be analyzed in terms of negative or positive impact in achieving socioeconomic equilibrium, so should be recommended to calculate in case of under harvested potential as well.
The above study should reflect socioeconomic loss vs gain due to under or overutilization of the human resource.
I would highly appreciate your view on the above.
Dear Shahida Anusha Siddiqui
Thank you for your question. I am sorry if I did not understand the problem and I would be grateful if you could correct me.
I take the liberty of adding some notions that are often mentioned in economic demographics - I hope they can be useful in some way. It becomes complex to estimate the employed population in a sector, using only the projection of the potentially active population, given that the employment rate is a very unstable factor. Therefore, we would be working with the errors of demographic and employment rate projections. It would then be necessary to face the difficulty of assigning productivity to the work carried out by the population employed in the agricultural sector - which is far from being homogeneous - as well as quantification in terms of economic value - it would be useless to compare quantities produced. Considering the trend towards the substitution of the labour factor in modern agricultural production Would it be a contribution to estimate the economic loss, or would it be enough to know the rate of underemployment or unemployment in the sector? Finally, if there were a methodology to incorporate the environmental factor, what would be the interpretation in terms of social benefit?
I apologise for not being able to answer your question, and instead add more uncertainty. We are waiting for the contributions of colleagues who are working on these issues, so that they can sort out the ideas.
Greetings and thanks
Fernando (from Argentina)
Estimada Shaida
Gracias por su pregunta. Disculpe si no comprendí la problemática y le agradecería que me corrija.
Me tomo el atrevimiento de adicionar algunas nociones que suelen mencionarse en demografía económica –espero puedan ser de utilidad en algún sentido–. Se torna complejo estimar la población ocupada en un sector, utilizando solo la proyección de la población potencialmente activa, dado que la tasa de empleo es un factor muy inestable. Por tanto, se estaría trabajando con los errores de la proyección demográfica y de la tasa de ocupación. Luego debería enfrentarse la dificultad de asignar una productividad al trabajo realizado por la población empleada en el sector agrícola –que lejos está de ser homogéneo–, así como cuantificación en términos de valor económico – de nada serviría comparar cantidades producidas–. Considerando la tendencia a la sustitución del factor trabajo en la producción agrícola moderna. Sería un aporte estimar la pérdida económica, o alcanzaría con conocer la tasa de subempleo o desempleo en el sector? Finalmente, si existiera alguna metodología para incorporar el factor ambiental, ¿cuál sería la interpretación en términos de beneficio social?
Disculpe por no poder responder su pregunta, y por el contrario agregar mayor incertidumbre. Esperamos los aportes de colegas que están trabajando estos temas, para que ordenen las ideas.
Un saludo y gracias
Fernando (desde Argentina)
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics