Statement from the Anker Research Institute (ARI) Regarding Recent Comments on Living Wage Estimates in Costa Rica
19 August 2026
The Anker Research Institute (ARI) welcomes constructive discussion regarding living wage estimates and methodologies. Living wage research is intended to contribute to informed dialogue among workers, employers, governments, researchers, and civil society, and ARI values the participation of all stakeholders in that conversation. It is for this reason that we would like to respond to the many misrepresentations in the recent position statement from the National Banana Corporation (CORBANA, by its Spanish acronym) on the Anker Methodology®.[1]
Before responding in detail below, we must point out at the outset several serious misrepresentations in CORBANA’s post regarding both ARI’s work in Costa Rica and the Anker Methodology® developed and applied by the Institute.
CORBANA’s post claims that ARI’s living wage study and living wage estimate were imposed on Costa Rica by a foreign organization.
Fact: The study was commissioned by Costa Rica’s Ministry of Labor and Social Security, and CORBANA provided funding for the study.
CORBANA’s post claims that ARI refused to use official Costa Rican statistical sources.
Fact: The recently published Living Wage Report: Costa Rica – Rural Atlantic and North Huetar Region relies extensively on data from the National Institute of Statistics and Censuses (INEC). INEC sources are cited dozens of times throughout the report and constitute an important foundation for the analysis.
CORBANA’s post claims that the study lacked local knowledge and input.
Fact: The study’s principal investigators and lead authors are professors affiliated with the University of Costa Rica.
CORBANA’s post claims that ARI and the local researchers conducting the study failed to listen to CORBANA and other Costa Rican stakeholders.
Fact: The research team met with CORBANA on multiple occasions to discuss the study. In addition, the researchers held meetings with trade unions, the National Wage Council, government agencies, employer organizations, and civil society organizations to gather input and discuss the study’s methodology and findings.
Use of Official Costa Rican Data Sources
The assertion that ARI refuses to use official Costa Rican statistical sources is simply not true.
The recently published report Living Wage Report: Costa Rica - Rural Atlantic and North Huetar Region relies extensively on data from the National Institute of Statistics and Censuses (INEC). INEC sources are cited dozens of times throughout the report and constitute an important foundation for the analysis. As in all Anker Methodology® studies, official national statistics are used whenever they are relevant, reliable, and appropriate for the estimation of living costs and wage requirements.
ARI has always recognized the value and quality of Costa Rica's statistical system and its contribution to evidence-based policymaking.
Family Size Assumptions
CORBANA questions ARI’s use of a reference family of four because it is larger than Costa Rica’s current average household size.
This criticism overlooks an important methodological distinction. The purpose of a living wage is not to replicate current demographic outcomes, which are influenced by economic constraints and household decisions made under existing conditions. Rather, the purpose is to estimate the income required for a worker and family to enjoy a decent standard of living. And we believe that workers in Costa Rica should be able to afford to have two children -partly because actually Costa Ricans wish to have two children and partly because prime working age adults have formed their families when demographic conditions were different. This approach is also rooted in the principle of social reproduction and the long-term sustainability of the labor force.
Moreover, the report discusses strong evidence suggesting that Costa Rica's low fertility rates partly reflects delayed childbearing. It also notes that survey evidence indicates that desired family size often exceeds current fertility outcomes. For these reasons, average household size alone is not an appropriate basis for determining living wage requirements.
The ILO does not take a position on the appropriate family size and for this reason produces living wage estimates for families of different sizes. CORBANA’s selection a three-person household is one possible option among several, but it is not the only legitimate choice.
Housing Costs
CORBANA also questions the housing cost estimates used in the report.
The Anker Methodology® estimates housing costs based on the cost of obtaining access to healthy and adequate housing in the area under study, typically through market rents and, in some cases, through an estimated user cost approach for owner-occupied housing.
This reflects an essential principle: workers should be able to afford decent housing regardless of whether they inherit property, receive housing from relatives, or benefit from other fortunate circumstances.
A living wage should provide sufficient income for workers to secure acceptable housing through ordinary market mechanisms. For this reason, housing costs are estimated independently of assumptions regarding inherited assets or existing property ownership. Indeed, virtually all statistical offices around the world estimate housing expenditure by using both rental cost and the imputed value of owned housing.
Living Wage Versus Prevailing Compensation
Another source of CORBANA’s confusion concerns the distinction between a living wage and prevailing compensation practices. ARI has repeatedly clarified this distinction to CORBANA. Nevertheless, CORBANA’s post continues to conflate these two concepts.
ARI fully recognizes that many employers provide valuable benefits in kind or additional forms of compensation. Such benefits may increase the total remuneration received by workers and can reduce or eliminate the gap between prevailing earnings and living wage benchmarks.
However, the existence of such benefits does not alter the underlying cost of achieving a decent standard of living for workers in a particular region. Living wage estimates are designed to measure those costs. Whether workers receive part of their compensation through wages, benefits, or in-kind provisions is a separate question from the calculation of living wage requirements themselves.
Health, Education, and the Institutional Context
It is wrong to suggest that ARI ignores Costa Rica's institutional framework, including the public provision of health care and education.
On the contrary, the institutional context is a central component of the Anker Methodology®. Public services, government programs, and actual patterns of household access to health care and education are all evaluated when determining the expenditures that families must incur in practice. Indeed, they are reflected in the INEC statistics which were used to estimate living costs in our study.
Costa Rica's achievements in social policy are well known and are reflected in the assumptions used in living wage studies conducted in the country.
Comparison with ILO Estimates
CORBANA notes that the Anker living wage estimate is higher than the ILO estimate, which is based on a three-person family.
This comparison is unsurprising because the two estimates are based on different family-size assumptions. Larger families require greater resources to achieve the same standard of living.
A more appropriate comparison is between estimates based on the same family size. Notably, the ILO estimate for a four-person family exceeds the corresponding Anker estimate. This demonstrates that the differences between the methodologies cannot be reduced to the simplistic conclusion that one methodology systematically produces higher values than the other.
Meaningful comparisons require comparing like with like. Furthermore, it is important to note that the 2021 ILO report does not recommend a family size of three. Rather, it presents living wage estimates for both three-person and four-person families, deliberately avoiding taking a position on which family size should be preferred.
The Broader Discussion
Ultimately, living wage methodologies seek to answer a straightforward question: what income is necessary for workers and their families to achieve a decent standard of living?
Different methodologies may make different assumptions, and reasonable discussions regarding those assumptions are both legitimate and valuable. However, such discussions should accurately represent the methodologies being compared and should acknowledge the full range of available evidence.
The Anker Methodology® has been applied by ARI in over fifty countries around the world and is widely used by companies, multi-stakeholder initiatives, certification systems, trade unions, researchers, investors, and civil society organizations seeking internationally comparable living wage benchmarks.
The strong interest generated by the presentation of the recent Costa Rica living wage report, attended by representatives of numerous organizations from across sectors, reflects the continued relevance of this work and the importance of maintaining an open, evidence-based dialogue on living wages.
ARI remains committed to transparency, methodological rigor, and constructive engagement with all stakeholders interested in improving the living standards of working families in Costa Rica and beyond.
End.
[1] Boletín CORBANA, 11 de agosto de 2026: “Posición Institucional | CORBANA cuestiona metodología Anker por no reflejar la realidad laboral, social, demográfica e institucional de Costa Rica.”: published in social media.
Study mentioned in the statement: Benchmark Report: Living Wage for Rural Atlantic and North Huetar Regions, Costa Rica 2025