Argentina ocupa el 11º lugar entre los 79 países en desarrollo en el Índice de Desarrollo Inclusivo (IDI), con un puntaje de 4.43 sobre 7, lo que representa una ligera disminución (0,11%) desde hace cinco años. Si bien el PIB per cápita sigue siendo algo bajo y la tasa de pobreza es relativamente alta para un país en su nivel de desarrollo, los indicadores de desigualdad de ingresos y riqueza muestran que la desigualdad no es una preocupación tan importante como en muchos otros países. Los puntos fuertes de Argentina incluyen servicios básicos relativamente buenos, especialmente salud; un sistema fiscal progresivo; y una buena protección social. El país ha registrado pequeñas mejoras en la calidad de la educación, el empleo y la compensación laboral, así como en la creación de activos y el espíritu empresarial. Sin embargo, la burocracia sigue dificultando la creación de empresas, mientras que el acceso a la financiación sigue siendo difícil y la corrupción es alta. Argentina necesita crear más empresas nuevas para reducir el desempleo, particularmente entre los jóvenes, y mejorar su infraestructura.
Around the globe, leaders of governments and other stakeholder institutions enter 2017 facing a set of difficult and increasingly urgent questions: • With fiscal space limited, interest rates near zero, and demographic trends unfavorable in many countries, does the world economy face a protracted period of relatively low growth? Will macroeconomics and demography determine the world economy’s destiny for the foreseeable future? • Can rising in-country inequality be satisfactorily redressed within the prevailing liberal international economic order? Can those who argue that moder n capitalist economies face inherent limitations in this regard – that their internal “income distribution system” is broken and likely beyond repair – be proven wrong? • As technological disruption accelerates in the Fourth Industrial Revolution, how can societies organize themselves better to respond to the potential employment and other distributional effects? Are expanded transfer payments the only or primary solution, or can market mechanisms be developed to widen social participation in new forms of economic value-creation? These questions beg the more fundamental one of whether a secular correction is required in the existing economic growth model in order to counteract secular stagnation and dispersion (chronic low growth and rising inequality). Does the mental map of how policymakers conceptualize and enable national economic performance need to be redrawn? Is there a structural way, beyond the temporary monetary and fiscal measures of recent years, to cut the Gordian knot of slow growth and rising inequality, to turn the current vicious cycle of stagnation and dispersion into a virtuous one in which greater social inclusion and stronger and more sustainable growth reinforce each other? This is precisely what government, business, and other leaders from every region have been calling for. Over the past several years, a worldwide consensus has emerged on the need for a more inclusive growth and development model; however, this consensus is mainly directional. Inclusive growth remains more a discussion topic than an action agenda. This Report seeks to help countries and the wider international community practice inclusive growth and development by offering a new policy framework and corresponding set of policy and performance indicators for this purpose.
Policy Framework and Metrics The ultimate objective of national economic performance is broad-based and sustained progress in living standards, a concept that encompasses wage and non-wage income (e.g., pension benefits) as well as economic opportunity, security and quality of life. This is the bottom-line basis on which a society evaluates the economic dimension of its country’s leadership. Many countries have had difficulty in satisfying social expectations in this regard. For example, in the last five years, annual median incomes declined by 2.4% in advanced economies, while GDP per capita growth averaged less than 1%. To borrow from a business concept, growth can be thought of as the top-line measure of national economic performance, with broad-based or median progress in living standards representing the bottom-line. Inclusive growth can be thought of as a strategy to increase the extent to which the economy’s top-line performance is translated into the bottom-line result society is seeking, i.e., broad-based expansion of economic opportunity and prosperity. However, inclusive growth is more than that. An economy is not a business, and history and scholarship have shown that there is a feedback loop between the bottom- and top-lines (growth and equity) in a national economy. This feedback loop can run in either a positive or a negative direction. The extent to which it is a virtuous circle is influenced by a diverse mix of structural and institutional aspects of economic policy, going well beyond the two areas most commonly featured in discussions about inequality: education and redistribution. This Report presents a policy framework encompassing seven principal domains (pillars) and 15 sub-domains (sub-pillars) which describe the spectrum of structural factors that particularly influence the breadth of social participation in the process and benefits of economic growth. Societies that have had success in building a robust middle class and reducing poverty and social marginalization have tended to create effective economic institutions and policy incentives in many of these areas, while also pursuing sound macroeconomic policies and efficiency-enhancing reforms over time.