oecd skills strategy youth employment forum 14 december 2011 translating better skills into better...
TRANSCRIPT
11O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11
Translating better skills into better economic and social
outcomes
Youth Employment Workshop14 December 2011
22O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11Overview
Skills matter for individuals... because skills have an increasing impact on labour market
outcomes and social participation
…and for economies because failure to ensure a good skills match has both
short- term consequences (skills shortages) and longer-term effects on economic growth and equality of opportunities
…but better skills do not automatically translate into higher incomes and higher productivity
Success with converting skills into jobs and growth depends on whether
– we know what those skills are that drive economic outcomes– the right mix of skills is being taught and learned in effective,
equitable and efficient ways– economies and labour-markets fully utilize their skill potential– Governments build strong coalitions with the social partners to find
sustainable approaches to who should pay for what, when and where .
33O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11
Many countries have done well in getting more people to higher
qualifications
44O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
1995
Expe
ndit
ure
per
stud
ent
at t
ertia
ry le
vel (
USD
)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
Graduate supply
Cost
per
stu
dent
55O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
1995
Expe
ndit
ure
per
stud
ent
at t
ertia
ry le
vel (
USD
)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
Graduate supply
Cost
per
stu
dent
United States
Finland
66O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2000
Expe
ndit
ure
per
stud
ent
at t
ertia
ry le
vel (
USD
)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
United Kingdom
77O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2001
Expe
ndit
ure
per
stud
ent
at t
ertia
ry le
vel (
USD
)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
Australia
88O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2002
Expe
ndit
ure
per
stud
ent
at t
ertia
ry le
vel (
USD
)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
99O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2003
Expe
ndit
ure
per
stud
ent
at t
ertia
ry le
vel (
USD
)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
1010O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2004
Expe
ndit
ure
per
stud
ent
at t
ertia
ry le
vel (
USD
)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
1111O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2005
Expe
ndit
ure
per
stud
ent
at t
ertia
ry le
vel (
USD
)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
1212O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2006
Expe
ndit
ure
per
stud
ent
at t
ertia
ry le
vel (
USD
)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
1313O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2007 Ex
pend
itur
e pe
r st
uden
t at
ter
tiary
leve
l (U
SD)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
1414O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2008 Ex
pend
itur
e pe
r st
uden
t at
ter
tiary
leve
l (U
SD)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
Finland
1515O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11AustraliaAustriaBelgiumCanadaChileCzech RepublicDenmarkEstoniaFinlandFranceGermanyGreeceHungaryIcelandIrelandIsraelItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMexicoNetherlandNew ZealandNorwayPolandPortugalSlovak RepublicSloveniaSpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited KingdomUnited States
A world of change – higher education
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 700.0
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
2008 Ex
pend
itur
e pe
r st
uden
t at
ter
tiary
leve
l (U
SD)
Tertiary-type A graduation rate
United States
1616P
IAA
CO
EC
D P
rogr
amm
e fo
r th
e in
tern
atio
nal
asse
ssm
ent o
f adu
lt co
mpe
tenc
ies
Lisb
on C
ounc
il1
5 S
ep
tem
be
r 2
011
An
dre
as
Sch
leic
he
r
The composition of the global talent pool has changed…
Countries’ share in the population with tertiary education, for 25-34 and 55-64 year-old age groups, percentage (2009)
55-64-year-old population 25-34-year-old population
About 39 million people who attained tertiary level
About 81 million people who attained tertiary level
1717P
IAA
CO
EC
D P
rogr
amm
e fo
r th
e in
tern
atio
nal
asse
ssm
ent o
f adu
lt co
mpe
tenc
ies
Lisb
on C
ounc
il1
5 S
ep
tem
be
r 2
011
An
dre
as
Sch
leic
he
r
United States, 35.8
Japan, 12.4
China, 6.9Germany, 6.3
United Kingdom, 5.3
Canada, 4.2
France, 3.5
Brazil, 3.5
Spain, 2.1Italy, 1.9
Mexico, 1.8
Australia, 1.7
Korea, 1.6other, 12.9
55-64-year-old population
United States, 20.5
Japan, 10.9
China, 18.3
Germany, 3.1United Kingdom, 4.4
Canada, 3.1France, 4.1
Brazil, 4.5
Spain, 3.5
Italy, 2.0
Mexico, 3.9
Australia, 1.6
Korea, 5.7
other, 14.5
25-34-year-old population
The composition of the global talent pool has changed…
Countries’ share in the population with tertiary education, for 25-34 and 55-64 year-old age groups, percentage (2009)
1818P
IAA
CO
EC
D P
rogr
amm
e fo
r th
e in
tern
atio
nal
asse
ssm
ent o
f adu
lt co
mpe
tenc
ies
Lisb
on C
ounc
il1
5 S
ep
tem
be
r 2
011
An
dre
as
Sch
leic
he
r
Skills matter for individuals……because skills have an increasing impact on labour
market outcomes and social participation
1919O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11
0 1 2 3 41.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
In lowest two quin-tiles of personal income
Unemployed
Received social assistance in last year
Did not receive in-vestment income in last year
Number of skills domains with low performance
Increased likelihood of failure (16-65 year olds)
Low skills and economic outcomes
Odds are adjusted for age, gender and immigration status.
2020O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11Marginal probability of being unemployed by skill decile
Adjusted for age, gender, foreign language status, and country.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
-0.02
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
f(x) = − 0.00772664172839507 x + 0.11537928664903
f(x) = − 0.0047602224691358 x + 0.0751142450088183
Skill decile
Prob
abili
ty o
f bei
ng u
nem
ploy
ed
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4/5
2121O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11
Low skills and social outcomes
Odds are adjusted for age, gender, pand immigration status.
Level 5 Level 4 Level 3 Level 2 Level 11.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6Has fair to poor health
Does not volunteer for charity or non-profit organizations
Poor understanding of po-litical issues facing coun-try
Poor level of general trust
Higher propensity of be-lieving people try to take of advantage of others
Lower propensity to reciprocate
Poor political efficacyPIAAC skill level
Odds ratios
2222O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11Keeping learning beyond school
Cross-sectional skill-age profiles for youths by education and work status
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
310
320
Age
Mean skill score
Youth in education
Youth in education and work
Youth in work
Not in education, not
in work
2323P
IAA
CO
EC
D P
rogr
amm
e fo
r th
e in
tern
atio
nal
asse
ssm
ent o
f adu
lt co
mpe
tenc
ies
Lisb
on C
ounc
il1
5 S
ep
tem
be
r 2
011
An
dre
as
Sch
leic
he
r
Matching supply and demand.
2424O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11
Skill use by occupational groups
Source: PIAAC Field trial
Problem solvingTeamwork
Oral communication
Influence others
Plan own time
Plan others time
Fine motor skills
Gross motor skillsRead prose type texts
Read document type texts
Write
Advanced numeracy
Basic numeracy
Internet use
Computer use
-1.00
0.00
1.00
Total Service (low-skill) Goods Information (low-skill) Information (high-skill)
Managers Knowledge (expert)
2525O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11
HIGH-SKILL MATCH
MISMATCH-SKILL SURPLUS
LOW-SKILL MATCH
MISMATCH-SKILL DEFICIT 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Goods Service (low-skill) Information (low-skill)
Information (high-skill) Managers Knowledge (expert)
Skill mismatch by occupational groups
Source: PIAAC Field trial
2626O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11Evidence on the link between skill mismatch and
earnings Skill mismatch and earnings are strongly related
30 35 40 45 50 55 60 651000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Age
Mon
thly
wag
es U
S$
2727P
IAA
CO
EC
D P
rogr
amm
e fo
r th
e in
tern
atio
nal
asse
ssm
ent o
f adu
lt co
mpe
tenc
ies
Lisb
on C
ounc
il1
5 S
ep
tem
be
r 2
011
An
dre
as
Sch
leic
he
r
We can do better(probably a lot)
2828P
IAA
CO
EC
D P
rogr
amm
e fo
r th
e in
tern
atio
nal
asse
ssm
ent o
f adu
lt co
mpe
tenc
ies
Lisb
on C
ounc
il1
5 S
ep
tem
be
r 2
011
An
dre
as
Sch
leic
he
rWhat we need to resolve…
Some people have poor foundation skills Shortages, skills gaps exist Skills are underutilised (unemployment, low
rates of labour market participation) There is evidence of mismatch Are we skilling for future jobs
(quantity and quality)?
2929O
EC
D S
kills
Str
ateg
yY
ou
th E
mp
loym
en
t F
oru
m1
4 D
ece
mb
er
20
11
Thank you !