Apolitico’s 100 Most Influential People in Gender Policy

Thank you Apolitico!

What an honour to be included in ’s 100 Most Influential People in Gender Policy in 2018. The OECD will continue fighting for Gender Equality, by providing evidence, analysis and arguments for change, working with countries and fora like the , .

Check out the full list here:




Opportunities for ALL: OECD Framework to Drive “Urgent, Concerted Effort” for Inclusive Growth

Delivered 29-05-2018, OECD Forum, Paris


Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen,

I am delighted to open this session on the “Empowering State”, a concept that the OECD developed in the context of the NAEC and the Inclusive Growth Initiatives.

The Empowering State sets a vision for the Future of  governments’ intervention in the face of the current and forthcoming challenges that our economies and societies face.

To help governments move towards Empowering States, we are  launching today a Framework for Action on Inclusive Growth.


This is much needed in a context where inequalities continue to be the defining challenges of our lifetimes.

Low- and middle-classes are being left out of the equation. The wages of the top 1% earners are now 50% higher than they were twenty years ago, as opposed to only 15% for median earners [First panel]. The current upswing in the global economy, while welcome, will simply not be enough to turn the tide on rising inequality which is in the meantime has already compounded through wealth: in the OECD the top 10% own 70% of financial assets and the top 1% more than 40%. And in several countries the poorest households are heavily indebted, with little or no collateral wealth [Second chart].

Despite progress on labour market participation, gender gaps remain pervasive. For example, gender pay gap in Japan (at 26%) is among the highest in OECD, even though women are more educated than men. More needs to be done to help women take leadership roles in society, starting by strengthening the parental leave system.


We are going one step further here and show evidence that inequalities are increasing from one generation to another. Income inequality for those born in the 1980s is much higher than among their parents at the same age, which in turn was higher than for their parents.

For example, between the 1950s and 1980s birth cohorts, Gini at the same age increased by 1.5% points across OECD, 8% points in Slovakia, 6% points in the US; but decreased by 8% points in Switzerland and remained constant at 0.25 in Slovenia – the lowest in OECD.

So, it can be done!


How to explain these trends? Globalisation,  financialisation and technological change curbed economic dynamism at the bottom of global, national and local value chains and played in favour of super star-firms and super-star workers at the top of the chain.

In Japan, the number of SMEs has dropped by 21%, from 4.8 million to 3.8 million between 1999 and 2014. Labour productivity in small firms is much lower than in big firms in Japan – about half for firms with less than 50 employees.

In France self-employment rate of about 11% is below the EU average (14%); even though, the crisis pushed about 15% people ‘out of necessity’ to create their own business.

So there is clear scope for policy action – which French 2017 ordonnances ought to steer, for example, through more effective firm-level negotiations, secured economic dismissals, and reflecting better smaller firms in branch-level agreements.


Economic growth is also held back by lagging productivity growth and income disparities in regions. For example, in the US, Italy, Turkey, Spain or Mexico, disposable household incomes in the richest region are between 30 and 50% higher than in the respective country’s poorest region.

Citizens in regions with the highest life expectancy live two and a half years longer than citizens in regions with the lowest life expectancy.

But, it can be done. The 50 members of the OECD Champion Mayors for Inclusive Growth initiative committed to take concrete actions to tackle the gap between the rich and poor and today we are proud of supporting these commitments [Refer to Anne Hildalgo, in the Forum opening]

SLIDE 5 – show IG dashboard scheme

Evidence is key to understand what needs to be done. This is why today we release a new Inclusive Growth Dashboard.

It tells us:

  • How strong is growth but also how equitably its benefits are shared.
  • If marketplaces are Inclusive and well-functioning markets.
  • If we are investing sufficiently in foundations of future prosperity by providing equal opportunities to all people and places.
  • And finally how holistically and coherently we are acting on this agenda as governments.

SLIDE 6 – show example of OECD poverty rate and Canada median income

The dashboard will allow countries track progress over time over the several outcomes and drivers of inclusive growth. For example you can see that the relative poverty has increased across the OECD group [First panel].

But behind these average trends, countries need to take a look at their strengths and weaknesses. Canada, for instance, does well in terms of median household income as compared to its G7 peers [Second panel]; income inequality is around G7 average and wealth inequality at the top has declined recently. But more needs to be done on gender: the wage gap is almost 19%, higher than the OECD, and only 26% of members of parliament being women. For other countries, the lack of inclusive growth manifests itself as limited social mobility (Germany for instance) or with low percentages of resilient students (Italy). 


While the roadmap may change, all countries need to make it future-proof. With this spirit and in connection with the dashboard that I just presented to you, the new OECD Framework for Policy Action on IG provides concrete solutions along three lines:

  1. Investing in people and places left behind, while providing equal opportunities.
  2. Support business dynamism and inclusive labour markets.
  3. Build efficient and responsive governments.

The first point is about preparing people and places for the future – this requires deep and targeted interventions on skilling and reskilling, as well as a focused attention to equitable access to quality housing and infrastructures, aspects that we have long neglected but that increasingly predict resilience.

The second point is about sustaining broad-based innovation and sharing productivity gains. It is also about creating better jobs and markets and firms that, while adapting to the new digital economy, are also secure from workers’ standpoint.

This leads me to my third point: how we rethink government as a strategic actor that anticipates and prepares for change, which is the gist of an Empowering State. At the Social Policy Ministerial that we held just two weeks ago we learned that many countries are experimenting new promising approaches of social support – for instance the individual activity accounts and the life-cycle training accounts in France, or the portable pension accounts in Denmark; or finally universal approaches to social benefits emphasising collective rather than individual solutions. 


To conclude, if we want inclusive growth, we need to move away from a “grow first, redistribute later” model, we need fair rules and we need to put our people first.

Thank you.






COPE Conference on Wealth inequalities: measurement and policies

Delivered 26-04-2018

Traditional growth models are not working. Although growth has return in all major regions of the world since the 2008 financial crisis – it has not translated into significant improvements in most people’s lives.

Median wages and living standards continue to stagnate, wages have become decoupled from productivity growth, and meanwhile corporate profits are at record highs in many countries.

People are angry because they still see massive income and wealth gains going to the already very wealthy. This anger is being fuelled by increasing transparency in some cases – we can think of the Panama and Paradise Papers – and also by less benign forces: we’re witnessing the return of populism and spread of misinformation in many places.

This anger is understandable – as inequalities continue to rise, and social discontent with the established political and economic order becomes more widespread, it has never been more important to further our evidence-based work on wealth inequalities and how they affect our societies.

I hope that today we will learn more about why and how such significant wealth inequalities continue to rise, and what we can do about it.

Before Sir John’s speech I would like to set the scene with some of the work the OECD has been doing on inclusive growth and wealth inequalities.

We launched our Inclusive Growth Initiative in 2012 as part of our broader response to the 2008 crisis, and a reappraisal of our entire approach to policymaking called New Approaches to Economic Challenges. This was borne from the reflection that traditional growth models failed to deliver broad-based prosperity for everyone and has failed to deliver sustainable growth within ecological limits.

The IG’s remit is to help governments tackle rising inequalities and provide them with integrated policy packages that address growth and inclusiveness simultaneously. The Initiative has seen several significant successes to date, including the establishment of COPE (the Centre for Opportunities and Equality), the launch of our Champion Mayors for Inclusive Growth, extending the OECD’s research on the productivity-inclusiveness nexus, contributing to the policy recommendations of several multi-lateral fora (such as the G7, G20 and APEC) and influencing many governments’ national IG strategies, such as Canada, Scotland or Italy.

Part of this work is coordinating the research the OECD is doing on inequalities. We have done great work on the statistics side, on issues relating to employment and social policy, on tax policy, and we have produced some fascinating work on wealth inequalities in recent years. And understanding wealth inequality is crucial for our inclusive growth initiative.

We have all heard about the rapid rise in income inequality in recent years. But what’s more troubling is the concentration of wealth at the very top of the distribution.

OECD data indicates that wealth inequality has grown over recent decades, with the richest 10% in the OECD owning around half of all household assets, whilst the bottom 40% owns barely 3%. At the very top of the distribution, the top 1% holds a staggering 19% of total wealth.[1]

For the top quintile of the distribution, financial assets and property make up the biggest shares of their portfolios. Financial assets are particularly important in the Anglophone world.

And what’s interesting is that financial assets are much more unequally distributed than non-financial ones. Across the 28 OECD countries covered by our Wealth Distribution Database, households in the top quintile have on average financial wealth around 72 times that of those in the bottom quintile, compared with around 23 times for real-estate wealth.[2]

OECD research highlights three key mechanisms through which finance contributes to inequalities:

  • finance workers are concentrated at the very top of the income distribution and earn premiums unlinked to their productivity compared with their peers in other sectors;
  • high earners can and do borrow more so the majority of credit goes to high earners;
  • and most of the benefits of stock market expansion goes to affluent households who are able to invest in equities

There is also a strong relationship between home ownership – or lack of – and wealth inequality. We see that generally, high levels of home ownership are linked to low levels of wealth inequality, but the opposite is true when home purchases are highly leveraged through mortgages – lower house prices following purchase can lead to a large number of households experiencing negative equity, thus contributing to higher levels of wealth inequality.

The US, the Netherlands and Denmark are the three countries with the highest levels of wealth inequality and have among the lowest shares of households owning their home outright.

The issue of home ownership is particularly critical in countries where access to quality and affordable housing is limited. As you can see in the graph, many households in OECD countries are overburdened by housing costs.

The median housing cost burden for mortgage payers is about 18% of disposable income and 23% for tenants. The cost burden is much higher for low-income households, on average by more than one-third of disposable income.

Housing conditions, the neighbourhood and environment affect the quality of people’s lives, particularly children’s, and fundamentally influence our capacity to develop as happy, healthy, productive individuals.

Housing and its associated costs is also important for understanding the limited mobility of labour in some countries – this has knock on effects for the productivity of certain regions and firms.

Furthering our research on the interrelationship between housing, wealth inequality and inclusive growth is therefore one of the top priorities for the OECD.

Let me outline briefly what the OECD is doing to help government redress wealth inequalities and promote inclusive growth.

We are working on a Framework for Policy Action on Inclusive Growth. This aims to guide countries on how to design and implement policy packages to improve their performance on a number of key inclusive growth outcomes.

The Framework is underpinned by a dashboard of indicators that diagnoses key inclusive growth trends and challenges for countries and includes a policy mapping exercise that builds on various OECD strategies, such as the Jobs Strategy, Skills Strategy, Innovation Strategy, Growth Strategy and Digital Strategy.

This Framework aims to better sustain and share the benefits of growth by promoting dynamics in a couple of key areas including:

  • enabling strong, inclusive markets that prepare people and firms for the future of work by promoting inclusive labour markets, updating social protection systems and boosting productivity growth and business dynamism;
  • establishing equal opportunities for all by investing in lifelong learning, promoting regional catching up and investing in communities’ well-being and social capital;
  • and re-building trust in government by embedding inclusiveness in policy-making and using data and digital technologies to design citizen-centred policies.

Tax is an important part of the Framework and a policy area where many governments have scope for tax reforms to reconcile growth and inclusiveness. They can do this by broadening tax bases, eliminating loopholes, especially those that mostly benefit wealthier individuals, and by relying more on revenues from immovable property and inheritance taxes.

OECD research has found that recurrent taxes on property are among the least detrimental to growth and are difficult to evade due to the immobility of the assets.

Recurrent taxes on property are also a more efficient alternative to transaction taxes on property, as they do not discourage labour mobility and are less sensitive to macroeconomic volatility, and volatility in the housing market.

Recurrent taxes on immovable property are also progressive, as those with high levels of income are more likely to have more housing wealth.

The inclusive growth agenda, particularly regarding taxation, goes beyond national borders, however. And so of course we should continue to make progress on limiting tax avoidance by wealthy individuals through the use of offshore tax havens and that of multinationals through BEPS and Automatic Exchange of Tax Information.

We will finalise the IG Framework for the OECD’s Ministerial Council Meeting at the end of May. We need to continue to strengthen our research on the drivers of wealth inequalities and provide governments with high-quality policy recommendations to tackle such inequalities. Part of this agenda is the development of national inclusive growth country studies, to help governments design and implement inclusive growth policy reforms.

Let me conclude by reiterating the importance of our work on this topic and on inclusive growth more generally – it is not an easy time to pursue the work we are doing, and we are facing resistance in many places. But that makes our work, and the research being presented by all of you today, even more crucial and I look forward to continuing to push this agenda forward with all of you.

Thank you.


[1] OECD (2015), In It Together: Why Less Inequality Benefits All, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/els/soc/OECD2015-In-It-Together-Chapter1-Overview-Inequality.pdf



Regional Meeting: Economic Reform Programmes for South East Europe

Delivered 24-04-2018

We are pleased to be working hand in hand with you on these Programmes to strengthen their transformative power, and assist you in aligning better and faster with OECD and EU good practices.

These Programmes are key drivers of change. And they require a coalition for reforms, which has been brought together by the European Commission and economies from the region. They chart macro-economic and fiscal policy frameworks and set reform agendas for the well-being of the citizens of South East Europe.

And to make these Programmes as effective as possible, we have built on a long cooperation – the OECD has had a presence in the region for nearly twenty years. So the OECD South East Europe regional programme – launched in 1999 – is uniquely placed to support partners in the Western Balkans and Turkey in preparing their annual Economic Reform Programmes.

To support policy makers in this process, the South East Europe programme has distilled OECD expertise and knowledge on the region by developing a Toolkit with practical guidance. It is based on a transparent and inclusive approach involving policy makers, business sector experts, academics and other stakeholders in developing the Economic Reform Programmes.

The Economic Reform Programmes exercise is an example of how our co-operation can bring about change to make an impact.

The OECD’s work with partners has helped to strengthen institutional capacities of government officials in the region. It has also led to the emergence of a “new approach” to reforms across South East Europe, which prioritises economic, social impact and stakeholder involvement over top-down decision-making.

Together we have made decisive steps to implement structural reforms, such as efforts to ease access to finance for SMEs; fight the informal economy; better align education and the labour market; and ensure that vulnerable group – including minorities – benefit from equal opportunities.

And this is important because, in the broader context, we are seeing renewed growth everywhere, including across the Western Balkans; growth is forecast to rebound to 3.2% in 2018 and 3.5% by 2019, creating new job opportunities across the region. But this should not distract us from the challenges lying ahead.

I’m referring to the major, global trends that need to be addressed, such as climate change, changing demography and a rapidly ageing population, the high levels of inequalities of wealth, income and of opportunities, and of course the acceleration of digital, the long-term effects of which are still largely unknown. We also need to deliver on the SDGs.

Added to this are the regional challenges, and the need to tackle two key obstacles to economic performance: declining productivity growth and rising inequality – two challenges, which also plague most OECD economies.

If the region is to lock in progress, foster productivity, and increase growth – which I have to emphasise must be inclusive and must be green – then the power of structural reforms needs to be fully harnessed.

This means that the work on the Economic Reform Programmes needs to be intensified.

And in this respect, the comprehensive nature of your Economic Reform Programmes and the focus on coherent, multidimensional approaches can help.

After the economic crisis, the OECD launched the New Approaches to Economic Challenges initiative, to look at economic policy-making in a fundamentally different way.

In this context, our Productivity-Inclusiveness Nexus highlights the need to break up traditional policy silos, to pursue reforms and institutional capacity building, to encourage a coherent policy making.

This is also what your Economic Reform Programmes aim to achieve. This is why, in our co-operation, we have taken inspiration from these OECD initiatives, but also from our horizontal work on Green Growth, Innovation, Skills and Better Lives.

At the OECD, we advocate putting the person at the centre of public policy. And our Inclusive Growth Initiative looks into investing more and better in improving people’s potential and leaving no one behind, including women and youth enhances the economy’s growth potential and deliver tangible results.

There has been too much of a focus on economic growth at all costs, and then redistributing the benefits later. But that doesn’t work.

The benefits haven’t trickled down to most of the population and what we’re seeing is that there is a bottom 40% that is becoming left behind.

We have to consider ex-ante inclusive policies to ensure that growth is even and benefits everyone. And in the Balkans, it’s important to bear this in mind.

The OECD South East Europe Competitiveness Outlook

This morning, the Secretary-General launched the 2018 edition of the OECD South East Europe Competitiveness Outlook.

This impressive policy assessment[1]  – which is one of the most comprehensive policy benchmarking exercises for the 6 Western Balkan economies – shows that the challenges are serious and cross-cutting.

Our analysis shows that it’s necessary to improve policy design, reform labour markets and promote innovation in the region.

For example, addressing the persistently high levels of youth unemployment of 37.6%[2] in the Balkans is crucial. Having policies that help young people into work will enable them to also have a share of the growing pie. We’re seeing talented young people leave the Balkans to seek opportunities abroad, which aggravates the region’s demographic challenge. In fact, the Western Balkan population is ageing and shrinking with a median age of the region 8.7 years above the world average.[3] This may severely impact human capital formation, competitiveness and economic convergence.

Economic Reform Programmes need to support an imminent pick-up in the pace of reforms.

Countries implementing bold reforms prove to be more resilient and successful in achieving their policy objectives in OECD and non OECD members.  For example, Japan has introduced significant reforms in access to childcare services; Greece – where I was last week to discuss education reforms – is undertaking reforms in competition law, regulatory policy and administration; Slovenia is taking reforms to promote its 2030 Economic Development Strategy, or Argentina, which is undertaking comprehensive tax reforms.[4]

My home country – Mexico – has begun to implement the most ambitious reform package in the OECD, including labour, telecommunications, competition, education, financial, fiscal and energy reforms. These reforms address challenges that have remained unresolved for decades and have required a historic Pact for Mexico, involving all key stakeholders.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Structural reforms play a crucial role for economic growth and resilience. We, at the OECD, are more than ever committed to supporting you in fostering reforms in favour of competitiveness, stability and shared prosperity leaving no-one behind.

Let’s keep the well-being of citizens at the core of the Economic Reform Programmes in order to lift living standards and bring about lasting progress in the region.

I wish you an inspiring discussion.

Thank you.

[1] The SEE Competitiveness Outlook is unique insofar it is one of the (if not the) most comprehensive policy benchmarking exercises for the 6 Western Balkan economies, focusing on 17 policy areas.

[2] The World Bank, Western Balkans Labor Market Trends: 2018, http://www.worldbank.org/en/region/eca/publication/labor-trends-in-wb

[3] Bruegel, The Western Balkans on the road to the European Union, Policy Contribution, Issue n˚04 | February 2018, http://aei.pitt.edu/93432/1/PC-04_2018.pdf.

4The European Commission adopted a Strategy for the Western Balkans on 6 February 2018. It provides a credible enlargement perspective for the EU with the region, https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/news_corner/news/strategy-western-balkans-eu-sets-out-new-flagship-initiatives-and-support-reform_en

[4] Based on “Going for Growth”, “Getting it Right” (Mexico).

Growth has returned since the global financial crisis, how can it be made more inclusive?

Delivered 04-04-2018 London, UK

Inclusive Growth

Inclusive Growth


In our last Economic Outlook, for the first time in many years we confirmed that the global recovery is broadly based, and has by last reached the growth level that we attained before the crisis. This is good news, but should not led to complacency as the major challenges of increased inequalities an sustainability are here to stay. Besides, the rapid decline in unemployment in recent months has not translated yet into significant and broadly-based wage and well-being gains for workers.

The scale of the challenge is huge, as after rising rapidly in 80s and 90s, inequalities have worsened in the aftermath of the financial crisis as market incomes mainly went to the rich and redistribution weakened or stagnated in most OECD countries.

The top 10% in OECD countries now take home around 10 times the income of the bottom 10%, up from just 7 times 30 years ago.

Wealth inequalities are even more pronounced than income: the top 1% holds a staggering 19% of total wealth.[i] Material inequalities feed inequalities of opportunities and outcomes. Through all of our reports, we confirm that being born in the wrong neibourhood, could determine a lifecycle of deprivation.

And gender disparities remain a huge problem. Gender wage gaps, for example, have changed little since 2010 and remain substantial, averaging at 15% across the OECD in terms of the median monthly pay gap for full-time employees.[ii]

Our recent report Preventing Ageing Unequally shows that inequalities in education, employment, income and health build up from early ages and compound in old age. Children whose parents did not complete secondary school have only a 15% chance of making it to university – compared to a 60% chance for peers with at least one parent who had attained tertiary education.

More troubling still is the fact that the very same children at a disadvantage in the education system, connect if they do with lower quality jobs, with lower salaries, and may  most worryingly of all, to leave shorter lives.

A 25-year old university-educated man can expect to live almost 8 years longer than his lower-educated peer, on average across OECD countries..[iii] The trends are not receding, and the emergence of the digital revolution raises questions related to winner takes all dynamics. Redistribution systems have also become less effective.

There is also a strong regional component to these growing divides. In many countries, we have seen a rise in regional inequalities in terms of income and productivity but also in  many other dimensions, eg life expectancy, jobs and access to public services.


Here in the UK, this trend is worrisome, regional disparities are the highest across OECD regions, with productivity in London versus the rest of the regions diverging since the early 2000s. This regional divergence has is more pronounced than in other OECD countries. This is contributing to widening disparities in regional living standards and giving rise to “geographies of discontent”.

How can we redress these inequalities and promote inclusive growth?

To build an inclusive growth model we need first to move away from the old mantra of neoliberal economics that claimed that we need to “growth first, redistribute later”. We need models of inclusive growth that ensures not only that the benefits of growth is fairly shared, but that growth itself allows for everybody to participate and contribute.

This is not only a matter of equity. The OECD’s work on the Productivity-Inclusiveness Nexus shows that these two components are mutually reinforcing. Investing in human capital of children from low income families supports both growth and inclusiveness. Giving a fair chance to workers to have quality jobs do not only improve their living conditions, but boost demand, and reduces government spending to address social problems.

An inclusive growth agenda

More inclusive societies are also more resilient societies.

There are several interrelated parts to this agenda.

We must raise employment and strengthen social protection in the context of digitalisation and the changing nature of work, particularly for previously marginalised groups. Lots of efforts have already been made in this area, particularly in facilitating the labour market integration of women, youth and low-skilled workers. These efforts are paying off but in all these areas there is still much ground for improvement.

Consider first the role of skills development. Under current policies and institutions future advances in digital technologies and the expansion of knowledge-based capital are likely to further increase inequality through skill-biased technological change, accelerated job displacement and winner-takes-all dynamics. This at least needs to be considered as a serious risk.  Young people need to be prepared for the dynamic labour market of the future by acquiring strong cognitive and socio-emotional skills.

Indeed giving equal chances to all students to succeed would increase equity in education and improve long-term productivity. In the United Kingdom, family background is more important for an individual’s skill level than in most other OECD countries. Young people whose parents have low levels of educational attainment have the lowest level of basic skills proficiencies than in all other countries surveyed. Moreover, higher child poverty threatens to increase the number of children whose disadvantaged background affects their educational chances. Recent projections show that relative child poverty, after stalling since 2010, could increase from around 30% to about 35% by 2021-22.[iv]

Another response, likely to yield more rapid and inclusive results, is to devote much more attention to the significant share of workers who are either over- or under-skilled for their job. Addressing skills mismatch through better vocational education and training systems as well as adult or lifelong learning programmes is both a priority and a challenge for most countries.

There are many factors that underpin productivity growth and inclusiveness – and policies to take an holistic approach to unlock the potential of firms and people. These include quality and affordable health services, education and housing.

At the moment, the lack of affordable housing is a significant challenge for inclusive growth, particularly in the UK. The median housing cost burden for mortgage payers is about 18% of disposable income (around the OECD average) but 28% for tenants, five percentage points higher than the OECD average. The cost burden is much higher for low-income households, on average, by more than one-third of disposable income.

Reforms of housing market policies are therefore strongly needed, as well as urban planning policies and transportation policies that allow people to be highly mobile across places avoiding segregation and exclusion.

Consider next the role of businesses. Recent OECD analysis has shown that one way to achieve higher overall productivity is to promote stronger and faster diffusion of innovation from leading to lagging firms. But to catch up with industry leaders and make the most of new technologies and workers’ skills, lagging firms must be given incentives to make the necessary investment in R&D, new digital equipment and organisational know-how.

At the moment R&D spending and ownership of intellectual property is highly concentrated amongst leading firms. In 2012, among the world’s 2000 largest corporate R&D investors, the top 250 firms accounted for more than 70% of R&D and patents and 44% of trademarks amongst the group, whilst amongst the top 100 firms the top 5% of the accounted for 55% of that group’s R&D expenditure, 53% of patents and 30% of trademarks.[v]

Governments can help by improving the level and efficiency of public support for private R&D, particularly smaller firms, as well as by creating a strong eco-system, with sound collaboration between research centres (or universities) and industry.

We must also strengthen the effectiveness of redistribution through tax and transfer policies to ensure that the benefits from technological progress and globalisation are more broadly shared.

In fact, taxation is one area where governments in many countries have ample scope for tax reforms that can reconcile growth and inclusiveness by broadening tax bases, eliminating loopholes, not least those that mostly benefit better-off individuals, and by relying on revenues from immovable property and inheritance taxes. Internationally, progress continues to be made to limit tax avoidance by multinationals through the BEPS action plan elaborated under the auspices of the G20 and the OECD.

An opportunity for reforms that governments should not miss

These are all difficult challenges that need to be tackled in a context where political resentment has been on the rise. However, the return of higher global growth offers a window of opportunity to reinvigorate trust in the power of governments to make a positive difference in people’s lives. But to do so, we must make inclusive growth our priority.

To help governments do so the OECD will launch its Framework for Policy Action on Inclusive Growth at its Ministerial Council Meeting in May 2018. The Framework will provide governments with guidance on how to design and implement policy packages to tackle key inclusive growth challenges. This will build on other OECD initiatives in this area, such as the network of Champion Mayors for Inclusive Growth and the Business for Inclusive Growth platform, which you’ll hear more about tomorrow.

We’re looking forward to sharing more of our work with you, hearing about your experiences and what you’re doing in your own parliments to tackle these issues over the coming days.

Thank you.

[i] OECD (2015), In It Together: Why Less Inequality Benefits All, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/social/in-it-together-why-less-inequality-benefits-all-9789264235120-en.htm

[ii] OECD (2017), Bridging the Gap: Inclusive Growth 2017 Update Report, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/inclusive-growth/Bridging_the_Gap.pdf

[iii] OECD (2017), Preventing Ageing Unequally, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/employment/preventing-ageing-unequally-9789264279087-en.htm

[iv] OECD (2017), OECD Economic Surveys: United Kingdom, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/eco/surveys/United-Kingdom-2017-OECD-economic-survey-overview.pdf

[v] OECD (2017), Bridging the Gap: Inclusive Growth 2017 Update Report, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://www.oecd.org/inclusive-growth/Bridging_the_Gap.pdf

Satyarthi Summit: Leaders & Laureates ‘Building a safe, educated and healthy childhood’

Delivered 26-03-2018

[..] The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, also known as the ‘house of best practices” is a proud partner of this Laureate and Leaders Summit, and of Kaylash Satyarthi. We are proud to  to join forces with our Inclusive Growth Initiative to ensure children well being across the world.

Children need safe, caring environment, and they need education. Children on the move should be prioritized, as their numbers continue to mount.  Last year, they reached 400,000 of children reaching OECD countries. One in four migrant or refugee is a child.   It is highly pertinent that this Summit is taking place in Jordan, which has received over 660,000 Syrian refugees, over half of which are children[1]. I would like to convey my deepest gratitude to His Majesty King Abdullah II ibn Al Hussein for his leadership on this crucial agenda

The current situation in Syria is unbearable: in the first two months of this year, 1,000 children were killed or injured. And 1.75 million children in Syria remain out of school, with many living without access to safe water, sanitation or food. Not being able to attend school marks their future in a dramatic way!

This should be a priority, although there are multiple barriers to learning.cess.. First and foremost is their mental, physical and health conditions.

I visited Gaziantep Refugee Center in Turkey and many small kids would spent months without speaking after what they have witnessed and lived. They have huge losses, including their homes, their language, their families, their peace. Teachers need to be well equipped to help them overcome their tragedies.

There are other important barriers like language, the biggest one; transportation; affordability, quality access, parental level of education. The age at which they arrive matters as after 12 years of age, learning gets more complicated. But the disadvantage starts early. Toddlers from disadvantaged families have hearing deficits of more than 30 million words!

There is also the pressure to start working to send remittances back home. And there is plain slavery, that Kailash has been fighting for so many years. All matters. 168 million children are trapped in child labour, accounting for 11% of overall child population, with more than half working in hazardous conditions.[2]

So what should be done to help children on the move have a safe, educated, and healthy childhood?

First, we need better data to identify and address children on the move needs. To upscale the effort, the OECD joined the UN and others[3] in a Call to Action that is part of the the Global Compact on Refugees.

Second, improving the integration of child migrants is vital, to ensure they belong, and increase their well being, as well as to tap the full benefit of migration  in receiving countries.  They need education, but within a comprehensive strategy that includes housing, health, housing, social welfare and migration services.  Many countries have successful programs and I invite you to look at Canada, Ireland, Sweden stands, as well as Germany.

Third, migrant students are often the victim of bullying and harassment which leads to depression, loneliness and low self-esteem. We should fight harassment, and teachers need to be trained to educate in values, including intercultural awareness, tolerance and respect for diversity. The OECD global competency framework is a tool in this domain.

Finally, besides integrated strategies we better tools to measure the effectiveness of policies.

I am glad now to report OECD actions from the last Summit:

First and foremost, we raised awareness about child slavery at the G20 Summit in Hamburgh. Secretary General Gurría asked leaders to support heroes like Kailash in their fight against slavery. The UK is particularly keen on this agenda.

Second, we launched in November the Child Well-Being Data Portal, which contains 50 indicators covering children’s home and family environment, health and safety, education, activities and life satisfaction.

In addition to that, we advanced our research on causes and drivers of child labour, and we will make it count at the G20.

We also developed due diligence guidance to help companies identify and tackle child labour in their  supply chains.

We will continue redoubling our efforts. We will continue to be a committed institution in this agenda. Count on the OECD!

[1] UNICEF, February 2018

[2]ILO (2015), World Report on Child Labour 2015: Paving the way to decent work for young people, http://www.ilo.org/ipec/Informationresources/WCMS_358969/lang–en/index.htm; Global Slavery Index (2016), Global Slavery Index Global Findings, http://www.globalslaveryindex.org/findings/

[3] UNICEF, UNHCR, IOM, Eurostat

Closing the Gender Gap – have we reached the tipping point?

Delivered 08-03-2017

Hello everybody, and welcome to the OECD’s series of events that we have called March on Gender, to mark International Women’s Day.

We like to celebrate and continue to increase awareness, but I am happy to say that gender issues are not issues for a day at the OECD. All year long we promote gender equality, in our member and partner countries, and inside the Organization. We even have guidelines not to have panels with men only (manels), although in this occasion I am so glad to have so many men to talk about gender.


Indeed, if there is progress in one area, this is the awareness that we have to make progress in this agenda. In fact, this year’s global theme for International Women’s Day is #Press for Progress.  But where are we?

The OECD Pursuit of Gender Equality: an Uphill Battle report shows that there’s further to go.

There has been progress in some areas, for example, education, where girls in OECD countries now out-perform boys and are reaching higher levels of education.

Gender gaps in employment have also narrowed although we continue to have 10 percentage points difference, and some countries like mine can reach 30.

We have made progress to bring this issue to the leaders agenda in the G20 and G7, and to establish a narrowing of the gap of labour force participation by “25 by 25” target – which the OECD helped establish at the 2014 Brisbane Summit.

Nowadays, gender is a crosscutting issue both in the G20 and in the G7, and we will be hearing from Prime Minster Trudeau’s personal appointee to the G7 Gender Equality Advisory Council on this afternoon.

But even if the will is there, it doesn’t translate into fast change.

Even with higher levels of education, girls are not well represented in rewarding disciplines like STEM, and in developing countries they are still lagging behind.

The digital revolution is also opening another possible divide, where girls are really lagging behind on ITC and women have very low representation in the ICT industry. Yes, maybe the new technologies will open opportunities that are more flexible, but they can also be linked to low quality jobs.

We still have a wage gap of 15% in OECD countries, and there are still many, many positions in senior management, public leadership and entrepreneurship that are unreachable for women. And it’s the private sector that is lagging behind.

In 2016, women made up only 4.8% of CEOs. Women has less access to finance, and to networks if they dare to become entrepreneurs. I would be interested to hear from Eric [Eric Labaye from McKinsey] about this. No wonder until last year, the Mexican Council of Businessmen was about that, only men.

Politics is better, but not much women held 28.7% of seats in lower houses of OECD Parliaments.  Progress has been slow in breaking the glass ceiling, or even of cleaning the sticky floor!

Some countries promote gender balance on company boards and affirmative action within public office – quotas are the only measures that seem to be effective, quickly.

And I know, quotas need to be carefully designed, but there are not great risks. Actually, my country has parity in the Federal Congress, and when the worried President of Congress told me that they were going to be full of incompetent women, I said that in many places we are full of incompetent men without quotas!

And then you have the really serious issue of violence against women; 35% of all women have experienced sexual violence. And this happen all over the world, but is a particularly difficult problem in developing countries with weak justice institutions, or with violent practices like genital mutilation, or early marriage. In Niger 3 in 4 girls are married before their 18th birthday.  36 countries do not have specific legislation to address sexual harassment. And yes, many girls are subject to exploitation and slavery.

That’s why we commend the initiative of the UK on Modern Slavery, or the leadership of people like Nobel Prize winner Kailash Satyarthi is doing to save hundreds of thousands of children from the slave trade. For our part, the OECD last month launched the Call to Action to protect migrant children.

 Analysis and solutions

So why are we not tipping over into gender equality yet? Notwithstanding progress in public awareness and policies in many countries, lack of equality has much to do with entrenched gender-bias in cultural patterns and institutions, beliefs and behaviours.

Cultural norms are especially strong in some developing countries, and this concern women and men.  For example, in Afghanistan, 80% of women believe domestic violence can be justified for some reasons.

These gender norms have enormous spillover effects into the rest of society, and purely economically speaking, they are costly: last year, the OECD estimated that discrimination in laws, attitudes and practices costs the global economy close to 12 trillion dollars[1].

And the cultures and norms define gender roles, both at work and at home. The sharing of caring responsibilities – of children and the elderly – is still seen as a woman’s role.

In OECD countries, women spend an average of over 1.5 hours per day on unpaid work; in Mexico it’s a staggering 4.5 hours per day.

Women’s careers are also more likely to be ‘non-linear’ and interrupted to care for family members.

These gender norms are everywhere – they’re confirmed in the home, at school and in the workplace. And they’re hard to treat – unconscious bias is strong.

Studies have shown that while 69% of people explicitly say they believe men and women are equally effective leaders, 55% of people implicitly associate leadership with men only.

And the media and social networks are not helping. Actually, in our PISA for well-being publication, we have found that pressure and cyberbullying is affecting boys and girls, but for girls it always related to their image, and to impossible role models that question their own lives. Girls at age 15 report 10 points less of life satisfaction than boys.

Of course we need better policies, parental leave for fathers, flexible working arrangements and good quality childcare to enable both parents to work. We need better education and encouragement of girls at school, we need gender blind textbooks and teachers that can deal with them, we need quotas in business and support for women entrepreneurs. But countries are doing a lot of this and we still have a gap.  So we need a culture change, and this is not only about women. It is about man and women that are conscious and respectful of human dignity and that build balance and caring societies. The same way we have stereotypes for women, we have it for men that has to be a warrior, compete with no mercy and work 18 hours a day. Besides, they cannot cry. Not a fantastic model.

Culture change for gender equality requires system change.  It is not only about women “leaning in” but as the Australian Ambassador to France said to me yesterday it’s about men “reaching out” and it’s about making a system that works for both – men and women.  This calls for sound policies, powerful role models and appropriate capacities and resources.

Let’s ask ourselves: how gender-sensitive are the policies that we are putting in place in all areas – from education to employment, from banking to housing?  Are they good for all, or only for certain groups of the population? How do we know?  Are our policies equally benefitting men and women?

We need to systematically adopt a gender lens across all policy-making and budget processes, and ensure sufficient resources, capacity and political will to see how men and women are impacted differently by our policies and systems.

This is why today we are launching the OECD Toolkit for Mainstreaming and Implementing Gender Equality [hold up publication].

This toolkit will help governments, parliaments and judiciaries design gender-sensitive public policies and services, through self-assessment, and by helping them identify what works or what is missing. It’s full of examples of effective practices to support the implementation of policies and initiatives.

It considers that gender issues need to be cross cutting, and that it should be mainstream in all decisions. Five key actions are identified:

  1. Strategy –Gender Equality Strategies must be integrated into the overall national priorities or strategies.
  2. Roles and responsibilities – it needs to identified who is in charge of this agenda.
  3. Tools and data – policymakers need to know how to implement a gender lens, including through gender impact assessment.
  4. Accountability – policymakers need to know if what they’re doing is working.
  5. Parity – both men and women, from diverse background, need to be part of decision making, on an equal basis (50/50) – across the board – spanning all leadership roles.

I hope that this will help countries to bridge the implementation gap.

I know Canada will already be using it, and we’ll hear from Ambassador D’Auray shortly.


As I said at the beginning, we have made progress I am optimistic, and I believe we are reaching the tipping point: the younger generation is more gender progressive about women’s equal role in society, and there is evidence that attitudes are evolving with time.

Because this isn’t just about women; it’s about men, children and building more caring societies. This is why the OECD is pursuing an agenda of well-being and inclusive growth.

We are really putting the person – the women, men and children – at the centre of our policies.

Thank you

[1] Ferrant, G. and A. Kolev, (2016), “Does gender discrimination in social institutions matter for long-term growth? Cross-country evidence”, OECD Development Centre Working Papers No. 330, OECD, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jm2hz8dgls6-en