Human Development Report 2014
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
4 likes•38,968 views
The document is a summary of the 2014 UN Human Development Report. It discusses increasing vulnerabilities globally from factors such as overlapping deprivations affecting over 2.2 billion people, lack of social protections, and precarious employment. It emphasizes building resilience through universal basic social services, social inclusion, responsive institutions, full employment, and social protection systems. Achieving inclusive, resilient, and sustainable human progress requires collective action at both the national and global levels.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Human Development Report 2014
Similar to Human Development Report 2014 (20)
More from UNDP Türkiye
More from UNDP Türkiye (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Human Development Report 2014
- 1. Human Development Report 2014 Kamal Malhotra, UNDP Resident Representative 3 September 2014 , Ankara #hdr2014 hdr.undp.org Sustaining Human Progress: Reducing Vulnerabilities and Building Resilience /undpturkiye
- 2. 2/23 Human Development Report 2014 Why this Human Development Report? • Post-2015: from getting to zero poverty to staying at zero • In our increasingly connected world we face – and must manage - new vulnerabilities • Vulnerability is often managed in silos. Human Development theory is an holistic approach. /undpturkiye
- 3. 3/23 Human Development Report 2014 Who is Vulnerable and Why? • Over 2.2 billion with overlapping deprivations in health, education and living standards. Some 1.5 billion deprived in all three. • 80% of the globe’s population lacks comprehensive social protection. About 12% in chronic hunger. • Nearly half of all workers—more than 1.5b—in informal/precarious employment. /undpturkiye
- 4. 4/23 Human Development Report 2014 Poverty /undpturkiye
- 5. 5/23 Human Development Report 2014 Conflict /undpturkiye
- 6. 6/23 Human Development Report 2014 New Concepts, Old Realities • Life capabilities, sensitive periods Threats faced by individuals from infancy through youth, adulthood and old age • Structural vulnerabilities e.g. The poor, minorities, women and the elderly • Violence, personal insecurity 45 million displaced by violence or conflict /undpturkiye
- 7. 7/23 Human Development Report 2014 Gaps Open Early and are Hard to Close /undpturkiye
- 8. 8/23 Human Development Report 2014 Young People and Jobs /undpturkiye
- 9. 9/23 Human Development Report 2014 Universal Basic Social Services • Universal access to basic social services enhances resilience • Universal or targeted spending? When benefits are narrowly targeted the middle class are less willing to fund them • Imperative and feasible even at early stages of development • Addressing life cycle vulnerabilities - timing matters, so resources should be available when most needed /undpturkiye
- 10. 10/23 Human Development Report 2014 Get the Timing Right /undpturkiye
- 11. 11/23 Human Development Report 2014 Full Employment • Full Employment - a central policy goal in the 1950s/60s - has fallen out of fashion. It must return. • Jobs bring benefits far beyond a salary. They foster social cohesion, bring dignity and belonging, help individuals to manage shocks and volatility /undpturkiye
- 12. 12/23 Human Development Report 2014 Social Protection • Time to introduce social protection floors to protect immediate choices and help individuals make better long term decisions during crises. /undpturkiye
- 13. 13/23 Human Development Report 2014 Social Inclusion, Responsive Institutions • Social inclusion builds resilience and by transforming norms helps address violent conflict. • Take direct measures to address group inequalities, such as affirmative action, alongside broader pro-poor policies. • Responsive institutions that give a voice to the poor - and react to their concerns - can be hard to build but worth the effort. /undpturkiye
- 14. 14/23 Human Development Report 2014 In an Interconnected World National action can only go so far; collective action is essential. Two profound challenges for the 21st Century • Under provisioning of global public goods, e.g. reducing CO2 emissions • Architectural deficits in global governance (which are perhaps growing), e.g. financial governance Inaction risks social instability whether from financial crises, climate change, or mass unemployment. /undpturkiye
- 15. 15/23 Human Development Report 2014 Can Globalization Work for People? • Elements of a Global Social Contract. • Renewed attention on fragile states and conflict. • Greater fiscal space and less tax avoidance. • Stronger global/regional shock absorbers e.g. Regional Monetary Funds. /undpturkiye
- 16. 16/23 Human Development Report 2014 Towards Inclusive, Resilient, Sustainable Progress? • A better balance between private and public interests. • We need more than markets. Collective action and public goods are essential. • Sustaining progress takes work and requires protecting achievements against vulnerability and building resilience. Targeting vulnerable groups and reducing inequality are essential. /undpturkiye
- 17. Performance of Turkey in Global HDR 2014 Human Development Report 2014 17/23 /undpturkiye
- 18. Human Development Indicators for Turkey • Human Development Index (HDI) HDI value: 0.759 ; Rank: 69 out of 187 countries /undpturkiye • Inequality Adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI) IHDI value: 0.639 ; %15.8 Loss of HDI value • Gender Inequality Index (GII) GII value: 0.36 ; Rank: 69 out of 149 countries • Gender Development Index (GDI)–A new indicator GDI value: 0.884 ; GDI is computed as the ratio of the female to the male HDI for 148 countries 18/23
- 19. HDI Performance of Turkey, OECD and EU Human Development Index (HDI) Value 2013 0.874 0.857 0.759 0.9 0.88 0.86 0.84 0.82 0.8 0.78 0.76 0.74 0.72 0.7 OECD EU TURKEY HDI 2013 Average 19/23 /undpturkiye
- 20. HDI 2013 Performances of Countries including Turkey HDI Rank Countries HDI 2013 Value 57 Russia 0.778 79 Brazil 0.744 91 China 0.719 118 South Africa 0.658 135 India 0.586 29 Greece 0.853 58 Bulgaria 0.777 75 Iran (Islamic Republic of) 0.749 76 Azerbaijan 0.747 79 Georgia 0.744 87 Armenia 0.730 118 Syrian Arab Republic 0.658 120 Iraq 0.642 15 Korea (Republic of) 0.891 69 Turkey 0.759 71 Mexico 0.756 108 Indonesia 0.684 98 Colombia 0.711 108 Indonesia 0.684 110 Egypt 0.682 118 South Africa 0.658 121 Viet Nam 0.638 /undpturkiye 20/23
- 21. Turkey’s HDI Long-term trends Life expectancy at birth Expected years of schooling Mean years of schooling GNI percapita 2011 PPP$ HDI value 1980 58.7 7.5 2.9 8,656 0.496 1985 61.7 8.3 4.0 9,266 0.542 1990 64.3 8.9 4.5 10,546 0.576 1995 67.0 9.6 4.8 11,372 0.604 2000 70.0 11.1 5.5 12,890 0.653 2005 72.5 11.9 6.0 15,060 0.687 2010 74.3 13.9 7.2 16,587 0.738 2011 74.6 14.4 7.4 17,814 0.752 2012 74.9 14.4 7.6 18,011 0.756 2013 75.3 14.4 7.6 18,391 0.759 21/23 NOTE: (1) It is misleading to compare values and rankings with those of previously published reports, because of revisions and updates of the underlying data and adjustments in the methodology. (2) Alternatively in order to assess progress in HDI values; the above table indicates real changes in values and ranks over time, reflecting the actual progress countries have made.
- 22. Turkey’s HDI components’ Long-term Trends; 1980-2013 /undpturkiye 22/23
- 23. #hdr2014 #igr2014 to download the report: bit.ly/2014igr Kamal Malhotra, UNDP Resident Representative kamal.malhotra@undp.org 23/23 Human Development Report 2014 /undpturkiye
Editor's Notes
- This report comes at an important moment as the world discusses the next set of development goals for post-2015. The Post-2015 development goals will focus on getting to zero: zero poverty, zero hunger, and so on. But that’s not enough: we must stay at zero poverty, zero hunger too. Meanwhile globalization has brought benefits to many. But it has created new risks and concerns. In our increasingly connected world we face – and must manage - new vulnerabilities And most work on vulnerability has dealt with one risk at a time . Applying the lens of human development gives a new holistic approach. One that recognises that broad based human development can reduce many vulnerabilities and improve underlying resilience in individuals and society.
- So who is vulnerable and why?” Despite recent progress in poverty reduction, there are still more than 2.2 billion people with overlapping deprivations in health, education and living standards, with almost 1.5 billion of them deprived in all three. That means more than 15 percent of the world’s people remain vulnerable to multidimensional poverty. Meanwhile three-quarters of the world’s poor live in rural areas, where agricultural workers suffer the highest incidence of poverty, caught in a cauldron of low productivity, seasonal unemployment and low wages. At the same time, nearly 80 percent of the global population lack comprehensive social protection. About 12 percent (842 million) suffer from chronic hunger, and nearly half of all workers— more than 1.5 billion—are in informal or precarious employment
- Although linked and often mutually reinforcing, poverty and vulnerability are not synonymous. People who are poor are more vulnerable than others in society because for the most part the risk of adverse shocks is greater for the poor than others. As you can see in this graph, some 1.2 billion people live on less than $1.25 a day, and 2.7 billion below $2.50 a day. Moreover, 1.4 billion people are multidimensionally poor—as measured by the multidimensional poverty index. These numbers are declining but progress is fragile: many people live just above the poverty threshold. A shock could easily push them back into poverty.
- Conflict and a sense of personal insecurity affect billions of people. Many countries in the bottom tier of the Human Development Index are emerging from long periods of conflict or still confront armed violence. More than 1.5 billion people live in countries affected by conflict—about a fifth of the world’s population. Internal and non-state armed conflicts account for the vast majority of conflicts worldwide. The number of non-state conflicts has risen recently, and although the total number of internal conflicts is declining, the number of internationalized internal conflicts is on the rise.
- The report presents two new ways of thinking about vulnerability. The first is to look at how capabilities are formed over a life-time and the threats that individuals face across different stages of their life—from infancy through youth, adulthood and old age. Focusing on life cycle vulnerabilities looks at sensitive phases when a person may be particularly susceptible. Structural vulnerabilities occur when institutions, power structures, political space, norms and traditions do not serve society equally. For example the poor who suffer more from many risks, such as natural disasters or women, who suffer the pervasive discrimination globally. Violence is also a major concern as we saw in the earlier graph. 4,400 people die every day from intentional acts of violence. 45 million people have been displaced by violence or conflict - the highest number in 18 years.
- As an example of the life cycle approach consider children’s early exposure to language. Here we can see that family status and income makes a difference. Evidence from the United States and Ecuador highlights the importance of good parent–child interaction and stimulation. Children’s success depends on the quality of early home environments. This graphs shows vocabulary for children in Ecuador. Gaps in the vocabularies of children from richer and poorer families open up even at 3 and a half and widen thereafter.
- Consider young people’s experience in the labour market. Because of declining fertility in many developing countries the proportion of young people has increased over the past 40 years, creating a ‘youth bulge’. But the growing youth labour force has not been matched by increasing employment opportunities. There are important regional heterogeneities. Under a ‘business as usual’ scenario the gap would continue to grow, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa. But ambitious policies (fast track education policies and accelerated economic growth) would close the gap for South Asia and reduce it for Sub-Saharan Africa.
- Universal access to basic social services—education, health care, water supply and sanitation, and public safety—enhances resilience. Social policies that have a universal aim not only protect those who currently experience poverty, poor health or unemployment; they also protect individuals and households that are doing well but may find themselves struggling if things go wrong. Universal provision has in many instances been associated with greater poverty reduction, greater redistribution and lower inequality. This is something of a paradox since targeted benefits are theoretically more redistributive. A key factor is that when benefits are narrowly targeted, the middle class are less willing to fund them through taxes. If provision is universal, however, they are more willing to fund services, and some inefficiencies in redistribution are offset by the larger pool of available funds. The following two graphs demonstrate that universal provisioning is possible even at early stages of development. Another graph shows why it is important to be smarter about when – during the life cycle – the money is spent.
- Ideally, governments should integrate health, education, family and social protection services for children and families throughout their lives. However, it is common for fewer resources to be available for early childhood development and for social spending per capita to increase with age as the graph shows. But brain growth is extremely rapid during the earliest years, when the budget allocations in public social services are usually lowest.
- Full employment was central to macroeconomic policies in the 1950s and 1960s. It then disappeared from the global agenda and it is now time to return to that commitment. Universalism also applies to labour markets by ensuring that everyone has access to decent opportunities for paid employment. True, not everyone will choose to engage in paid employment; but universalism implies that they should have the option to do so. Full employment is also desirable for its social benefits that far exceed the wages paid. Jobs foster social stability and social cohesion, and decent jobs strengthen people’s ability to manage shocks and uncertainty. Unemployment has high economic and social costs. Economic costs, because the loss of production and associated tax revenue can require higher public spending to support unemployment insurance. Social costs because long-term unemployment is a serious threat to health (physical and mental) and to the quality of life and is associated with crime, suicide, and other social problems.
- In 2009 the Social Protection Floors Initiative set forth a global framework for universal access to essential social transfers and services, such as health care, primary education, pensions, unemployment protection and childcare. The initiative believes that nearly all countries at any stage of development can provide a basic floor of social transfers. It also encourages countries to progressively expand to higher levels of social protection as fiscal space allows. The approach depends on country circumstances and resources and varies according to level of development. Providing basic social security benefits to the world’s poor would cost less than 2 percent of global GDP. The International Labour Organization’s 2010 estimates of the cost of providing a basic social floor—universal basic old age and disability pensions, basic childcare benefits, universal access to essential health care, social assistance and a 100-day employment scheme in 12 low-income African and Asian countries—ranged from more than 10 percent of GDP in Burkina Faso to less than 4 percent of GDP in India.
- Persistent vulnerability is rooted in historic exclusions. For example, Black people in South Africa and the United States have suffered grievous wrongs. Norms and laws that favour members of these groups to improve their chances for equal opportunity can make society fairer and more inclusive. How do societies do this? By improving the availability of basic social services, strengthening employment policies and extending social protection. Yet these broader universal policies may not be enough particularly when social norms and laws do not protect the rights of specific groups that face discrimination. Responsive and accountable institutions of governance are critical to overcoming the sense of injustice, vulnerability and exclusion that can fuel social discontent. Civic engagement and collective mobilization, in turn, are also indispensable for ensuring that states recognize the interests and rights of vulnerable people.
- Two profound challenges require collective action between States. The under provision of global public goods—ranging from disease control to global market regulations— permits shocks that have global reach. How can the global community ensure the provision of goods that enhance resilience? Managing and controlling food price volatility, global recessions and climate change are all essential public goods that markets are ill-equipped to provide. Despite efforts to act and cooperate at the global level, structural deficits in governance architectures are limiting the pace of progress. This needs to be addressed since no single country or community can alone resolve global market failures. Inaction risks social instability, whether induced by financial crises, climate-related disasters or mass unemployment and poverty. Indeed, recent numbers of local and global protests (843 recorded between 2006 and 2013) are similar in scale to the waves of rebellion in 1848, 1917 and 1968. These protests, usually local and national, are directed against a common global experience: increasing insecurity and inequality.
- So how can globalization work better for people? Capabilities can be enhanced and choices protected at the national level through the universal provision of such services as education, health care, water and electricity, as well as through universal social protection. These public goods reduce the need for people to make difficult decisions: People should not have to choose which of their children should leave school when jobs are lost or to enter demeaning and dangerous trades. But national measures are more easily enacted when global commitments are in place and global support is available. That is why the post- 2015 agenda should include national universal public services, national social protection floors and full employment as key goals for the global community. These elements of a global social contract can balance maximizing the benefits of global integration and minimizing the costs and insecurities. Protecting people’s choices in fragile states and conflict settings requires special consideration. The New Deal for Fragile States, a joint initiative of the 19 fragile countries of the G7+ and the donor community, is one platform for supporting elements of social contracts in fragile states. Where will the resources to provide universal social protection and social services come from? Some will be provided by traditional donors. Several emerging economies also have vast international reserves that could finance public goods. Individual states can raise funds through more-effective taxation of cross-border activities and reduction of illicit financial outflows and tax avoidance. Regional financial institutions are one example of the sort of global (or regional) shock absorber we need to reduce the transmission of shocks and diminish the potential for global contagion. They can also help stabilize exchange rates, provide regional expertise in addressing financial crises and provide liquidity during crises with countercyclical financing. And they can give small countries a stronger voice.
- To conclude how can we move towards inclusive, resilient and sustainable progress? It is clear that markets will not provide adequate social and environmental protection alone. We need a global public domain that strikes a better balance between private and public interests. And we need policy norms that depict public provision of social protections as positive. The international system suffers from gridlock that limits collective action in many areas. In the meantime, vulnerability intensifies as global bodies fail to agree on appropriate responses and fall short of introducing the right regulations to minimize risks and ensure that global systems support the common good. Progress takes work. Many of the Millennium Development Goals are likely to be met at the national level by 2015, but success is not automatic, and the gains are not necessarily permanent. Taking development a step further requires protecting achievements against vulnerability and shocks, increasing resilience and deepening progress. Identifying and targeting vulnerable groups, reducing inequality and addressing structural vulnerability are essential to sustaining development over an individual’s lifetime and across generations.
- The 2014 Human Development Index (HDI) (values and ranks) for 187 countries and UN-recognized territories, along with the Inequality-adjusted HDI for 145 countries, the Gender Development Index for 148 countries, the Gender Inequality Index for 149 countries, and the Multidimensional Poverty Index for 91 countries. The HDI is a summary measure for assessing long-term progress in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to knowledge and a decent standard of living. Turkey’s HDI value for 2013 is 0.759— which is in the high human development category—positioning the country at 69 out of 187 countries and territories. The Inequality-Adjusted HDI (IHDI) takes into account inequality in all three dimensions of the HDI by ‘discounting’ each dimension’s average value according to its level of inequality. As the inequality in a country increases, the loss in human development also increases. Turkey’s HDI for 2013 is 0.759. However, when the value is discounted for inequality, the HDI falls to 0.639, a loss of 15.8 percent due to inequality in the distribution of the dimension indices. The average loss due to inequality for high HDI countries is 19.7 percent and for Europe and Central Asia it is 13.3 percent. The Gender Inequality Index (GII) reflects gender-based inequalities in three dimensions – reproductive health, empowerment, and economic activity. The GII can be interpreted as the loss in human development due to inequality between female and male achievements in the three GII dimensions. Turkey has a GII value of 0.360, ranking it 69 out of 149 countries in the 2013 index. The Gender Development Index (GDI), a new measure introduced in the 2014 HDR, based on the sex-disaggregated Human Development Index, defined as a ratio of the female to the male HDI. The 2013 female HDI value for Turkey is 0.704 in contrast with 0.796 for males, resulting in a GDI value of 0.884.
- When Turkey’s HDI was compared with OECD and/or EU averages, it was observed that both OECD and EU averages was higher than Turkey’s HDI. It has to be noted that member countries of both OECD and EU were mostly developed economies. The comparison of HDI performance of Turkey with OECD and EU averages also implies that there was a significant gap between Turkey and the developed countries in terms of development capacity. In other words, there were key challenges for Turkey to be successful in its convergence process.
- Turkey’s 2013 HDI of 0.759 is above the average of 0.735 for countries in the high human development group and above the average of 0.738 for countries in Europe and Central Asia. In order to see the relative performance of Turkey, BRICS countries, neighbor countries of Turkey, MIST countries, and CIVETS countries were given in this slide. Among the BRICS, Turky has better performance than China, South Africa and India in HDI 2013 value. In case of neighbors, Greece and Bulgaria have better scores than Turkey, whereas the rest of the neighbors have poorer performances. Alternatively, among the MIST countries, Turkey has the highest second score after South Korea’s HDI value. Finally, Turkey has the best performance among the CIVETS countries in HDI 2013 values.
- Between 1980 and 2013, Turkey’s HDI value increased from 0.496 to 0.759, an increase of 53.0 percent or an average annual increase of about 1.30 percent. Between 1980 and 2013, Turkey’s life expectancy at birth increased by 16.6 years, mean years of schooling increased by 4.7 years and expected years of schooling increased by 6.9 years. Turkey’s GNI per capita increased by about 112.5 percent between 1980 and 2013.
- The graph shows the contribution of each component index to Turkey’s HDI since 1980. As mentioned, HDI was composed by three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to knowledge and a decent standard of living. Turkey has performed an upward trend in all dimension of HDI. The life expectancy was less than 60 years in 1980 but it increased to above 75 years as of 2013. Furthermore, while GNI per capita was less than $ 9000 in 2011 PPP $ prices in 1980, it was more than doubled in 2013. However, accessing to knowledge indicators did not perform well, mostly due to recently implemented 8 years compulsory education programme did not significantly increased the stock value of both expected and realized years of schooling.