Showing posts with label European Network on Measuring Progress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label European Network on Measuring Progress. Show all posts

Wednesday, 16 April 2014

Europe’s social polarisation and the generational struggle

This post, written by Bruegel's Olga Tschekassin, discusses the latest results on Europe's poverty rates, unemployment rates and income inequalities. The post is a part of the Wikiprogress Series on Jobs and Earnings.

According to the latest Eurobarometer survey on the social impact of the crisis, 80% of respondents believe that poverty has increased in their country over the past 12 months. Over 30% of respondents in Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary reported that their household ran out of money to pay for ordinary bills, food and other daily consumer items at some point during the previous 12 months. These alarming numbers are reflecting the perception of European citizens. But what do indicators measuring different dimensions of poverty and inequality actually show?

The best publically available indicator to assess poverty is the ”Severe Material Deprivation Rate” (SMDR). It is an absolute measure of poverty and represents the proportion of people who cannot afford at least four out of nine basic needs, like utilities, regular hot meals or heating to keep the home adequately warm. As you can see in the interactive map below, there is a strong dispersion across Europe. While Bulgaria has the highest rate (44.1%), in Luxembourg only 1.3% of people are severely affected by a lack of resources. The average rate in EU27 countries increased from 9% percent in 2007 to 9.9% in 2012. Even though this increase does not seem to be as dramatic as the survey implies, it is worth highlighting that a share of almost 10% is unacceptable and against the objective of promoting the well-being of EU citizens.



(To view an interactive version of this map, see the original post here.)
 
There were opposite developments for young and old people in the EU: the SMDR stood at 11.7% for those under 18 at the end of 2012, while the rate for the elderly (over 65) reached 7.5%. The evolution of these rates since 2007 is divergent: Between 2007 and 2012, in 20 out of 28 EU countries the elderly SMDR declined on average by 4.5 percentage points (pp). At the same time, however, in 16 out of 28 countries the children SMDR has increased on average by 4.4 pp. Therefore, a generational divide is emerging: while the fall in severely materially deprived elderly people is a welcomed development, the adverse development for children is worrying.

Looking at the unemployment rate, we observe an increase in all EU countries in the period 2007–2012 with the exception of Germany, while the rate remained practically unchanged in Austria, Malta, Finland and Poland. The EU28 average unemployment rate stood at 7.2 % of active population in 2007. By the third quarter of 2013, this rate had increased to 10.9%. The countries with the lowest unemployment rates are Austria, Germany and Luxembourg, as opposed to Greece, Spain, Croatia, Cyprus and Portugal, where the rate is very high. Overall we note that there was an increase in the South-North divide in terms of unemployment, which has reached unacceptably high levels in several south European countries and leads to more polarisation across Europe.

Directly related to this indicator is the share of people living in jobless households, which has increased significantly throughout the crisis. The situation is especially alarming in Ireland, where every fifth child lived in 2012 in a household where no one worked. The share of such children was also higher than 15 % in Bulgaria, the UK and Hungary. Besides, the share of young people not in employment and not in any education and training (NEET) more than doubled in seven countries. The reality for young people aged between 15 and 24 years is worst in Greece, Spain and Croatia.

Using the Gini coefficient as an indicator for inequality, we observe the highest levels of inequality in 2012 in Latvia, Spain, Greece and Portugal, while the lowest rates are reported in Slovenia, Czech Republic and Sweden. As Zsolt Darvas and Guntram Wolff outline in their Policy Brief published on the 1st of April 2014, inequality in most advanced economies has been rising since about 1980 and could have been a reason for the pre-crisis increase in household debt and the consequent consumption squeeze during the crisis.

Therefore, developments of various social indicators show a gloomy picture. Social pain has already undermined the citizens’ trust in the EU and their own governments. This could devitalize the acceptability of painful structural reforms and fiscal consolidation measures and, in turn, diminish the reform momentum or even lead to political instability.


This blog first appeared here at Bruegel.org on 1 April, 2014.
 
See Also:
 



Friday, 16 August 2013

Youth Unemployment and the OECD's Action Plan


This blog, by Wikichild Co-ordinator Melinda Deleuze, is part of the Wikiprogress Series on the European Network on Measuring Progress and Child Well-being. Today wraps up the spotlight on the European Network with this post on youth unemployment in Europe and the OECD Action Plan for Youth, which proposes how to tackle the issue.
  
It’s far too often that we hear the word “youth” immediately followed by “unemployment”. Hardship of the global economic crises are not spread equally among all individuals and households. According to the OECD’s Employment Outlook 2013, unemployment rates will remain high for the next 18 months across the board, but youth are hit the hardest (see the table below). While not all youth in Europe face difficulties when searching for a meaningful and practical job, there is without question a core group in each country that face either unemployment, inadequate jobs or social exclusion. The most disadvantaged youth are those with low skills or from migrant backgrounds.



Youth participation within the labor market is not only about their material benefits, but also about entering into adulthood, leaving home, building relationships and improving their overall well-being. Society also benefits, thanks to the boost in economic growth and greater social cohesion. The international community recognizes the advantages of higher youth employment rates and has create numerous initiatives to help policymakers tackle this issue (e.g. the ILO resolution on “The youth employment crisis: a call for action”; the G20 commitments on youth employment; the EU Council’s agreement on the Youth Guarantee).





Analyzing education, skills and youth-related employment policies, the OECD is among the organizations assessing the situation in order to find a solution. The OECD’s Secretary-General Angel Gurría has called for more youth-oriented policies, because “they advance the cause of building a stronger, fairer and cleaner post-crisis world.” In May 2013, the OECD endorsed “The OECD Action Plan for Youth: giving youth a better start in the labour market”, and is now working with countries to implement the plan in their national context.

The Action Plan identifies the urgency in finding short-term solutions to immediately tackle the current unemployment problem, but acknowledges that deeper structural changes will have to be dealt for the situation to improve in the long-term.


The Plan’s first objective is to confront current high levels of youth unemployment by:
  • Creating jobs, along with providing income support, employment services or conditional cash-transfer programs
  • Expanding apprenticeship and internship programs, which might include financial incentives for employers
  • Maintaining a reasonably low minimum wage (perhaps a separate, lower minimum wage for teens), not to discourage employers from hiring low-skilled workers
  • Strengthening employers’ incentives by lowering social security contribution or providing wage subsidies

The Plan’s second objective is to produce relevant skills and remove barriers by:


Strengthening the education system in order to prepare the young for work 
  • Effective investment in education and training to obtain relevant skills
  • Quality information about the necessary education and skills for certain careers 
  • Tackle education failure at the system and school level 
  • Provide second-chance opportunities for those who dropped out 
  • Reinforce the role and effectiveness of vocational education and training, promoting both workplace and classroom learning

Assisting with the transition from school to work 
  • Better link education to work world to help employers find people with the skills they need 
  • Help the educated youth find a job without crowding out lower-skilled youth 
  • Expand unemployment benefits to include school leavers, who are hard to contact and engage 
  • Create re-employment programs, perhaps making participation in programs compulsory after a certain period of job searching (e.g. 6 months)

Reshaping labor market policy to facilitate employment access and tackle social exclusion 
  • Encourage trial periods rather than unstable, fixed contracts 
  • Provide training, remedial education and adult mentoring to the youth with multiple disadvantages 
  • Expand access to unemployment and social assistance systems

The number of short-term options provided are few; however, there are still actions for governments to take if they want to incite immediate improvements. While there are many changes that could be made to produce long-term results, making decisions on which actions to implement may prove to be difficult. Fortunately, the OECD is prepared to help implement these action steps. Several experts across of the OECD are engaged and have offered to assist developing national and local action plans, tailoring national skills strategies, advising on specific youth policies, organizing workships on good practise and caring you comprehensive country reviews. The Organisation also provides a space where countries can discuss what works and what does not, and an update of the progress will be reported to the Ministerial Council Meeting 2014.

Melinda Deleuze

See Also:
The OECD Youth Portal 

Tuesday, 13 August 2013

What is the European Network on Measuring Progress?


This blog is part of the Wikiprogress series on networks. This week the focus is on the e-Frame European Network on Measuring Progress (eFrameNet).

The e-Frame European Network on Measuring Progress (European Network) was launched at the European Conference on Measuring Well-Being and Fostering the Progress of Societies, 26-28 June 2012,  with the objective to contribute to the establishment of a European position on the issues related to methodological and theoretical aspects of new indicators for the measurement of societal progress and well-being ‘beyond GDP’.

The Network aims to increase the visibility of the findings of pertinent projects on progressing beyond GDP and to elevate the debate via the highly global Wikiprogress platform to an international level.  The Network is hosted by the Wikiprogress platform and was set up by the Italian National Institute of Statistics. The European Network on Measuring Progress is an off-shoot of the e-Frame EU FP7 Project.

The European Network's Activities 
The Network’s structure allows members to communicate through the e-Frame website and the Wikiprogress platform in order to connect stakeholders, researchers, organisations, citizens and policymakers in the ongoing debate about what constitutes the most “accurate” measurement of well-being and societal progress.

The position of the European Network on the Wikiprogress platform represents a key strength, driving the European local, national and international debate towards a highly global perspective. The European Network sits alongside the regional Wikiprogress Africa and Wikiprogress Latin America networks and benefits from the synergies created with Global Progress Research Network (GPRNet), Wikichild and Wikigender, contributing to discussion at a regional and subject-specific level.

The European Network forms a community of academics, analysts, opinion leaders and citizens around the subject of measuring well-being who are able to contribute to the definition of “better statistics” produced by the European National Statistics Institutions (EU NSIs). Key members include the EU NSIs, civil society organisations, academia and research centres.

To subscribe to the European Network on Measuring Progress news alert, click here or email us for further information: info@wikiprogress.org.

Wikiprogress Team  

To find out more about the Wikiprogress family of networks see below: