A street vendor (Layer 1) may have higher net cashflow and household impact than a small tech startup (Layer 4).
A factory in Layer 2 may be critical for supply chain resilience, even without digital visibility.
This de-hierarchization of value is especially relevant in the Indonesian context, where Layer 1 and Layer 2 actors may remain persistently productive without transitioning to digital or AI economies. It opens new debates on what counts as 'progress' in a plural economy.
3. Layer-Specific Labor Absorption and Livelihood Dynamics
Existing Blind Spot: Digital economy discourses often celebrate growth, but overlook net labor absorption, wage stability, or social protection.
 Novelty: This model foregrounds how each layer interacts with labor in distinct ways:
Layer 1: High labor absorption, low wage volatility, minimal barriers to entry, but lacks protection.
Layer 2: Moderate wage, medium formality, but vulnerable to shocks due to dependence on export or supply-chain integration.
Layer 3: Gig-based volatility and platform dependency.
Layer 4: Skill-intensive, capital-intensive, low absorption but high productivity per capita.
This classification enables policy focus on layer-sensible employment interventions, rather than assuming digitalization will automatically solve employment issues.
4. Interoperability Without Forced Assimilation
Existing Policy Limitation: Most integration efforts seek to "formalize" or "digitize" informal sectors without understanding their internal logic.
Novelty: This model promotes soft interoperability, i.e., enabling interaction across layers without requiring assimilation into a dominant logic.
For instance:
QRIS can be adopted by a vendor without forcing them to register a legal business entity.
AI credit scoring can be improved by integrating informal transaction records, not erasing them.
This opens the way for multi-systems coordination---an idea more in line with adaptive systems theory than classical linear integration.
Synthesis
The 4-Layer Asymmetric Economy Model reframes Indonesia's economic complexity not as a developmental "problem" but as a systemic ecology of diverse economic practices. Its novelty lies in:
Displacing vertical assumptions with horizontal recognition,
Embracing plural value systems,
Centering labor and livelihoods beyond productivity,
Designing for interoperability over uniformity.
This framework aims to inform both economic theorists and policy architects in rethinking how transformation, inclusion, and productivity are conceptualized and operationalized in stratified emerging economies.
