Migration is not "out of control" says the OECD

A new study from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development says that the recent global recession slowed migration. The amount of people leaving poor or developing countries into rich nations fell by seven percent during 2009. The OECD says that the results of the study prove that rich nations can not say that migration is "out of control" as we often hear in the US.

From the Guardian, writer Angelique Chrisafis unpacks the study details.

The inflow of permanent immigrants to 24 OECD countries, including founder EU members, the US, Canada and Australia, fell by 7% in 2009. Much of this decline was the result of a 36% drop in "free-movement" migration within the EU between 2007 and 2009. There was a drop in migration from new EU member countries, notably Romania, Poland and Bulgaria. The number of temporary workers also fell sharply, particularly seasonal low-skilled agricultural workers and fruit-pickers. Seasonal migration dropped by 13% between 2008 and 2009, largely in Spain where people hit by the economic downturn took poorly paid, low-skilled work such as salad-picking, once only done by immigrants.

The growing economic power of China and India had led to more people emigrating for work. Chinese citizens are now the number one migrants to OECD countries, accounting for around 9% of all arrivals. They tended to move to Japan, Korea or Australia and much less to the UK. Indian citizens were the third biggest group of migrants, butmany came to the UK.

The number of asylum-seekers remained stable and relatively low compared with the early part of the decade or the historical highs of the early to mid-1990s. Iraq, Serbia and Afghanistan are the biggest countries of origin. But South Africa was the main destination for asylum-seekers, with many fleeing Zimbabwe, Malawi and Ethiopia.

However, the report warned that the world economic crisis had had a "disproportionate effect" on immigrants who now faced problems of long-term unemployment, particularly low- and medium-skilled immigrant men, as well as youths in their late teens and early 20s. This was particularly so in countries where immigration had soared in recent years, namely Ireland and Spain. In Spain in the last quarter of 2010, unemployment among foreigners was 29%, against 18% among the native Spanish.

Report says food prices to rise by 40 percent

A new joint report from the OECD and the United Nations says that food prices will continue to rise in the next decade. The report warns that prices will rise over 40 percent making investment into small farms even more important. The rising prices are attributed to bio-fuel production and the growing demand from developing countries.

From the Guardian, writer Katie Allen details what is in the report.

Farm commodity prices have fallen from their record peaks of two years ago but are set to pick up again and are unlikely to drop back to their average levels of the past decade, according to the annual joint report from Paris-based thinktank the OECD and the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).

The forecasts are for wheat and coarse grain prices over the next 10 years to be between 15% and 40% higher in real terms, once adjusted for inflation, than their average levels during the 1997-2006 period, the decade before the price spike of 2007-08. Real prices for vegetable oils are expected to be more than 40% higher and dairy prices are projected to be between 16-45% higher. But rises in livestock prices are expected to be less marked, although world demand for meat is climbing faster than for other farm commodities on the back of rising wealth for some sections of the population in emerging economies.

Although the report sees production increasing to meet demand, it warns that recent price spikes and the economic crisis have contributed to a rise in hunger and food insecurity. About 1 billion people are now estimated to be undernourished, it said.

Fairtrade campaigners said the predictions of sharply rising prices provided a "stark warning" to international policymakers.
...

Another factor driving up food prices is the controversial biofuels industry. The report predicts that continued expansion of biofuel output – often to meet government targets – will create additional demand for wheat, coarse grains, vegetable oils and sugar.

Israel is now a developed nation, but poverty is still widespread

Israel is about to enter the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The OECD entry for Israel means that the world will recognize the country as a developed economy instead of an emerging one. The new classification will help it's stature with foreign investors. Despite the new designation for Israel, poverty still looms large within it's population.

From this AFP article that we found at Google News, writer Steve Weizman gives us these new statistics for Israel.

.

By the OECD's definition, 20 percent of Israel's population of 7.6 million currently live below the poverty line -- more than in any member state.

And about 40 percent of people of working age have no jobs, compared to about 33 percent in OECD countries, the organisation reported in January.

This is largely due to cultural traditions among Israel's large Arab and ultra-Orthodox Jewish minorities -- each of which has low participation in the workforce but higher than average birthrates.

"All told, nearly half of children entering primary school belong to one or other of these communities," the OECD said.

"Israel will have to take action on a number of fronts including education, training, childcare, support for jobseekers and working conditions if it is to ensure these children do not inherit their parents? economic disadvantage," the OECD said.

Jerusalem's Taub Center for Social Policy Studies said the current trend must change, or Israel will find it hard to survive.

"In order for tomorrow's adults to be employed 30 years from now, then today's pupils need to receive an education befitting the needs of a modern economy," it said last week.

OECD says that international aid is "off-track"

From IRIN, the OECD weighs in on international aid and the gap between aid pledges and commitments.

Members of the Organisation for Economic Coooperation and Development’s (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC) gave US$121.5 billion in bilateral aid in 2009, reaching a historic high, but the gap between commitments and promises made in 2005 is widening, says the UK’s Overseas Development Institute (ODI).

In 2005 DAC donors collectively promised to commit 0.56 percent of gross national income to aid by 2010, but reached just 0.31 percent in 2009, according to OECD’s 2010 aid report issued on 23 April.

“Though aid commitments have continued to increase, the rate of increase has dropped off in the past few years…making donors increasingly off-track,” ODI research fellow Alison Evans told IRIN.

DAC donors gave $27 billion to Africa in 2009, an increase of 3 percent on 2008, but this is still less than half of the extra aid they promised at Gleneagles in 2005, said Evans.

Norway, France, the UK, Korea, Finland, Belgium and Switzerland all increased their aid commitments, while Japan, Greece, Ireland, Spain and Portugal, among others, reduced theirs.

“For EU [European Union] members these DAC figures are particularly sobering,” Evans told IRIN. Recognizing many donors have had difficult years amid financial recession, she continued, “were these commitments made just for good times? That isn’t the case. They were made because of a commitment to reduce poverty globally and boost international development… for those receiving this aid; they are clearly going to be worried.”

The largest donors by volume were the USA, France, Germany, the UK and Japan, according to the OECD, but just five countries met or exceeded the UN overseas development aid target of 0.7 percent of national income: Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.

Donors pledged to increase aid to US$130 billion by 2010; but the OECD predicts they will fall short by $78 billion (both figures in 2004 US dollars).

G-8 falling short of promises, again

A think tank that monitors international aid contributions says that the G-8 is falling way short of meeting their pledges. In the 2005 Gleneagles summit, the G-8 promised an extra 25 billion pounds in aid to poor countries, so far they have contributed less than half of that. The findings are in a published report just released by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development

From UTV Buisnees, we find out more about the survey and some reaction to it.

The OECD praised some countries – including Britain – for continuing to increase financial help to developing countries but said other rich nations were cutting back as a result of the deepest global recession since the second world war.

While the UK increased development assistance by 14.6% in 2009, budget cuts resulted in Irish aid being reduced by 19%, while Italy – already one of the least generous G8 countries – cut its support by 31%.

Overall, the OECD said there had been a 0.7% increase in aid once inflation was taken into account, but a much bigger effort was needed to meet the Gleneagles targets, which were set in order to meet the 2015 millennium development goals (MDGs) set by the United Nations for poverty relief.

To fulfil their pledges, the OECD said the west would have to increase development assistance, measured in 2004 prices, to £126bn this year, but current estimates by the thinktank put the likely total at £108bn. Africa will receive only £11bn of the £25bn promised five years ago.
...

The OECD said there were wide variations in the level of support provided by rich countries. Sweden will provide just over 1% of national income in aid this year, while Britain will contribute 0.6% of national output, up from 0.36% at the time of the Gleneagles summit. By contrast, the United States and Japan – the world's biggest economies – will give 0.19% and 0.18% respectively.

Max Lawson of Oxfam said aid had actually fallen in 2009 when compared with 2008 prices. "This lacklustre performance from donors is not close to meeting the needs of poor countries, who are suffering now from the impact of the economic crisis. It is a scandal that more than half of rich nations have cut their aid this year and are giving less of their income than last year – just 31 cents in every $100."

Oliver Buston, Europe director of the development organisation ONE, was highly critical of Italy, which gives a smaller proportion of national income in aid – 0.20% – than any other EU donor. "Prime minister Berlusconi should be thrown out of the G8," he said. "There are plenty of other leaders who could make a strong case for being at the table. There's no point in having someone at these summits who shows up, shakes hands, eats the banquet, signs the communiqué and then makes absolutely no effort to deliver on his commitments."

1 in 6 suffers with poverty in Japan

A new survey shows that Japan has one of the highest rates of poverty amongst developed nations. One of every six Japanese lives in poverty.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development says that Japan's poverty rate is the fourth highest amongst developed nations. Only the countries of Mexico, Turkey, the United States and Luxembourg were poorer.

From The Straits Times, we read more statistics from Japan.

In Japan's first official calculation of its relative poverty rate, the ministry said 15.7 per cent of Japanese people lived on less than half the median disposable income in 2006.

The figure, based on national statistics of income in 2006, was up from a figure of 14.6 per cent for 1997 according to the newly released ministry data.

The ratio could be worse by now as Japanese workers' salaries have fallen amid the economic slump following the 2008 global financial crisis.

Doing Better for Children report released

A new survey on child well being along developed nations shows that the UK has the highest rates of teen pregnancy, drunkenness and unemployment. This is despite high spending by it's government to improve teen's health and well being.

The study from the Organization for Economic Development also shows that Turkey, Mexico, Greece, the US, New Zealand and Poland all do poorly in child well being. Iceland and Sweden are the best performing developed nations.

The Guardian story focuses on the results for the UK, writer Owen Bowcott gives us more details from the OECD report.

The report, by the Paris-based International Organisation for Economic Development (OECD), points out that Britain, although moderately well placed in the rankings, has relatively high rates of teenage pregnancy, drunkenness and young people not in education, employment or training (neets).

The survey, entitled Doing Better for Children, suggests that globally girls do better than boys and that, while bullying is on the decline, children are smoking and drinking more.

Controversially, the report proposes that "over-investment" in post-natal care may be a waste of health resources. It also says money is more effective if spent on younger children, who are more susceptible to positive change, rather than teenagers.

The UK, along with a handful of other countries, is criticised for spending "considerable amounts on single-parent benefits" that last until children are into their teens. "There is little or no evidence that these benefits positively influence child wellbeing, while they discourage single-parent employment," the study notes.

Out of 30 OECD countries, the UK does relatively well on schooling but not for social achievements. The UK spends more on children than most OECD countries, the report says, at just over £90,000 per child from birth through to the age of 18. The OECD average is just under £80,000.

But the proportion of neets in the UK is high, at more than one in 10 15- to 19-year-olds. "This is the fourth highest rate in the OECD, ahead of Italy, Turkey and Mexico," the survey says.

Income Inequality is still growing

The Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development has released a new survey of income inequality in the developed world. The OCED report says that again income inequality has grown even during the global recession.

From the OCED press release is a summary of the key findings of the report. You can download this media fact sheet which also provides a good summary to the report.

Why is the gap between rich and poor growing?

In most countries the gap is growing because rich households have done significantly better than middle-class and poor households. Changes in the structure of the population and in the labour market over the past 20 years have contributed greatly to this rise in inequality.

* Wages have been improving for those people who were already well paid.
* Employment rates have been dropping among less-educated people.
* And, there are more single-adult and single-family households.

Who is most affected?
Statisticians and economists assess poverty in relation to average incomes. Typically, they take the poverty line to be equivalent to one-half of the median income in a given country.

* Since 1980, poverty among the elderly has fallen in OECD countries.
* By contrast, poverty among young adults and families with children has increased.
* On average, one child out of every eight living in an OECD country in 2005 was living in poverty.

What does this mean for future generations?
Social mobility is generally higher in countries where income inequalities are relatively low. In countries with high income inequalities, by contrast, mobility tends to be lower.

* Children living in countries where there is large gap between rich and poor are less likely to improve on the education and income attainments of their parents than children living in countries with low income inequality.
* Countries like Denmark and Australia have higher social mobility, while the United States, United Kingdom and Italy have lower mobility.

What can be done?
In some cases, government policies of taxation and redistribution of income have helped to counteract widening inequalities, but this cannot be their only response. Governments must also improve their policies in other areas.

* Education policies should aim to equip people with the skills they need in today’s labour market.
* Active employment policies are needed to help unemployed people find work.
* Access to paid employment is key to reducing the risk of poverty, but getting a job does not necessarily mean you are in the clear. Growing Unequal? found that over half of all households in poverty have at least some income from work.
* Welfare-in-work policies can help hard-pressed working families to have a decent standard of living by supplementing their incomes.

Development aid at highest level ever: OECD

A 30 country group that monitors development aid says giving to the under-developed world is at the highest levels ever.

Poverty fighting advocates are applauding the following figures, but urge that the poor nations must receive the money immediately.

Our snippet of the release comes from the Straits Times.

DEVELOPMENT aid given by OECD member states rose by 10.2 per cent in 2008 to a record US$119.8 billion (S$182 billion), despite the global financial downturn, the organisation said on Monday.

The total marks the highest dollar figure ever recorded, the 30-country Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development said, three days before the G20 summit to tackle the financial crisis is held in London.

The figures refer to the OECD's aid agency, its 22-member Development Assistance Committee (DAC) which includes the world's most advanced economies.

Aid to Africa totalled $26 billion in 2008, of which $22.5 billion went to sub-Saharan countries.

The largest donors by volume in 2008 were the United States, Germany, Britain, France and Japan.

Five countries exceeded the United Nations target of 0.7 per cent of gross national income: Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.

Half of South Korea's elderly in poverty

In scanning over some of the stories from over the weekend, we wanted to be sure to include this one from South Korea.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development says that 45 percent of the elderly in South Korea are below the poverty line. The average for a nation in this organization is 13 percent.

The United Press International reports that societal changes may be to blame.

Experts say the change in South Korean society -- from traditional households in which several generations lived together -- is responsible for the large number of elderly poor. Yoo Kyung-joon, a researcher at the Korea Development Institute, said more elderly now live on their own with little help from their children or the government.

"There still aren't many people benefiting from the national pension system as the program is still in its early stages," he said.

Income inequality rising in the developed world

More proof that the rich are getting richer while everyone else stays the same was released today. The Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development released a new study called "Growing Unequal?"

The spread between the rich and the poor is important for two reasons. The wider the spread, the harder it is for people to move up the income ladder. A wide spread also means there are more people in poverty.

The OCED says there are several factors that have increased the spread between the rich and poor. The attribute it to more low skill and poorly educated people being out of work. Another factor is the rise in the number of single parent homes or those living alone.

The OCED report is one you have to buy. So here is a link to their page that has many summaries. Our clip contains the key findings found in their press release.

Why is the gap between rich and poor growing?
In most countries the gap is growing because rich households have done significantly better than middle-class and poor households. Changes in the structure of the population and in the labour market over the past 20 years have contributed greatly to this rise in inequality.

*Wages have been improving for those people who were already well paid.
*Employment rates have been dropping among less-educated people.
*And, there are more single-adult and single-family households.

Who is most affected?
Statisticians and economists assess poverty in relation to average incomes. Typically, they take the poverty line to be equivalent to one-half of the median income in a given country.

* Since 1980, poverty among the elderly has fallen in OECD countries.
* By contrast, poverty among young adults and families with children has increased.
* On average, one child out of every eight living in an OECD country in 2005 was living in poverty.

What does this mean for future generations?
Social mobility is generally higher in countries where income inequalities are relatively low. In countries with high income inequalities, by contrast, mobility tends to be lower.

* Children living in countries where there is large gap between rich and poor are less likely to improve on the education and income attainments of their parents than children living in countries with low income inequality.
* Countries like Denmark and Australia have higher social mobility, while the United States, United Kingdom and Italy have lower mobility.

What can be done?
In some cases, government policies of taxation and redistribution of income have helped to counteract widening inequalities, but this cannot be their only response. Governments must also improve their policies in other areas.

*Education policies should aim to equip people with the skills they need in today’s labour market.
*Active employment policies are needed to help unemployed people find work.
*Access to paid employment is key to reducing the risk of poverty, but getting a job does not necessarily mean you are in the clear. Growing Unequal? found that over half of all households in poverty have at least some income from work.
*Welfare-in-work policies can help hard-pressed working families to have a decent standard of living by supplementing their incomes.

Developed countries fall behind in meeting foreign aid pledges

from the Guardian

Mark Tran in Seoul

Rich countries need to increase their foreign aid by unprecedented levels if they are to meet ambitious targets set out at the Gleneagles summit three years ago, leading development officials said today.

The extent to which the developed world is failing to live up to its pledges was spelt out in stark terms at an international conference in Seoul, South Korea to review the progress towards meeting the UN millennium development goals and to assess aid effectiveness.

This year is the halfway point in the attempt to meet the millennium development goals of halving poverty and hunger, providing primary education for all, promoting gender equality and tackling diseases such as HIV/Aids.

This year is shaping up to be a critical one for official development assistance (ODA) with key conferences coming up in Accra in Ghana and Doha in Qatar. Rich countries will be under pressure to match their rhetoric with action, although the outlook for significant increases in foreign aid looks bleak.

While the world's poorest countries are most vulnerable to soaring food and energy prices, belt tightening in the developed world will mean western governments will find it hard to win public acceptance for massive rises in foreign aid.

Even before the economic slowdown began to bite in the west, preliminary aid figures for 2007 were disappointing.

Stephen Groff, a development official at the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), said increases in foreign aid were not sufficient to meet targets set at the 2005 G8 summit at Gleneagles, Scotland.

The summit, hosted by Tony Blair, agreed to increase aid from $80bn (£40bn) in 2004 to $130bn in 2010 – a rise of more than 60% over six years.

"The preliminary data shows that halfway through those six years, total aid has risen by only 15%, well short of the rate required to achieve the increase envisaged at Gleneagles," Groff told the audience of diplomats, aid specialists and non-governmental organisations.

"A few donors have since scaled back their targets somewhat, but even these more modest targets remain very challenging."

Africa, which was given special attention at Gleneagles, is being particularly short-changed, officials said. The G8 projected a doubling of its aid commitments to the continent, but initial data for 2007 showed bilateral ODA rose by only 9% once debt relief was excluded.

"It is clear that donors still face a real challenge to meet their promises and need to rapidly increase their aid to Africa to meet the 2010 target," Groff said.

Among the countries named and shamed was Japan, where net ODA fell to 0.17% of national income, the lowest level since it joined the OECD in 1964.

France's figure of 0.39% was more than 20% below its pledge of 0.5% made at Gleneagles. Greece, Italy and Portugal gave less than 0.2% of national income, far below the EU targets of 0.33% for 2006 and 0.51% in 2010.

However, the development picture was not totally bleak. Experts said the first of the millennium development goals – halving poverty by 2015 – was within reach and there had been progress on other fronts, though not fast enough to guarantee their achievement in the timeframe envisaged.

Sarah Cliffe, the director for strategy and operations for east Asia at the World Bank, cited the success story of Vietnam, which managed to reduce poverty from 48% of the population to 16%, one of the fastest cases in poverty reduction on record.

Cliffe attributed Vietnam's success to strong government leadership, good coordination among donors in key sectors, their willingness to pool funds and their readiness to allow the country's own institutions to handle the aid. There were plaudits for South Korea, once a recipient of foreign aid but now an active aid donor thanks to its economic success as an Asian tiger.