The Sentinel

Human Rights Action :: Humanitarian Response :: Health :: Education :: Heritage Stewardship ::
Sustainable Development
__________________________________________________
Week ending 14 July 2018

This weekly digest is intended to aggregate and distill key content from a broad spectrum of practice domains and organization types including key agencies/IGOs, NGOs, governments, academic and research institutions, consortia and collaborations, foundations, and commercial organizations. We also monitor a spectrum of peer-reviewed journals and general media channels. The Sentinel’s geographic scope is global/regional but selected country-level content is included. We recognize that this spectrum/scope yields an indicative and not an exhaustive product. Comments and suggestions should be directed to:

David R. Curry
Editor
GE2P2 Global Foundation – Governance, Evidence, Ethics, Policy, Practice
david.r.curry@ge2p2center.net

PDF: The Sentinel_ period ending 14 July 2018

Contents
:: Week in Review  [See selected posts just below]
:: Key Agency/IGO/Governments Watch – Selected Updates from 30+ entities
:: INGO/Consortia/Joint Initiatives Watch – Media Releases, Major Initiatives, Research:: Foundation/Major Donor Watch -Selected Updates
:: Journal Watch – Key articles and abstracts from 100+ peer-reviewed journals

Security Council Seeks to Strengthen Protections for Children in Armed Conflict, Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2427 (2018)

Human Rights – Children in Armed Conflict/Security Council Resolution

.
Security Council Seeks to Strengthen Protections for Children in Armed Conflict, Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2427 (2018)
9 July 2018 SC/13412
Special Representative Paints Harrowing Picture of Violence, as Former Rebel Tells about Life with Guerrillas at Just 13

The Security Council, acting unanimously at the outset of a far-ranging open debate today, adopted a resolution aimed at further crystalizing the protection of children in armed conflicts, including by combating their recruitment by non-State armed groups and treating formerly recruited children primarily as victims.

By the terms of resolution 2427 (2018), the 15 member Council committed to taking concrete action in response to serious abuses and violations of human rights — including those of children — which could constitute early indications of descent into conflict. Expressing particular concern over the regional and cross border nature of such violations and the high number of children killed or maimed by indiscriminate attacks against civilians, aerial bombardments, excessive use of force, explosive devices and the use of children as human shields, it urged all conflict parties to uphold their obligations under international law.

The Council strongly condemned attacks against schools and hospitals, which impede children’s access to education and health care, as well as violations involving the recruitment and use of children, rape, sexual violence and abductions, among other crimes. Stressing the importance of the mandate of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children in Armed Conflict — which includes securing concrete child protection commitments from warring parties — it further called upon her to compile a comprehensive set of best practices for the protection of children in conflict situations.

By other terms of the text, the Council stressed the need to pay particular attention to the treatment of children associated or allegedly associated with non-State armed groups, emphasizing that such children, or those accused of committing crimes during conflicts, should be treated primarily as victims. Urging Member States to consider non-judicial measures as an alternative to the prosecution and detention of children, it welcomed the launch of a process to compile practical guidance on the integration of child protection issues in peace processes, and reaffirmed its intention to continue monitoring and reporting on parties that commit grave violations affecting children in situations of armed conflict, in a list annexed to the Secretary-General’s annual report on the issue…

Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration – FINAL DRAFT

Human Rights – Migration/Global Compact

.
Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration
FINAL DRAFT
11 July 2018 :: 36 pages
[Excerpts; Editor’s text bolding]
PREAMBLE
1. This Global Compact rests on the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

2. It also rests on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the other core international human rights treaties1; the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, including the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons Especially Women and Children and the Protocol against the Smuggling
of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air; the Slavery Convention and the Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery;  the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification; the Paris Agreement2; the International Labour Organization conventions on promoting decent work and labour migration3; as well as on the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development; the Addis Ababa Action Agenda; the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, and the New Urban Agenda.

4. Refugees and migrants are entitled to the same universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, which must be respected, protected and fulfilled at all times. However, migrants and refugees are distinct groups governed by separate legal frameworks. Only refugees are entitled to the specific international protection as defined by international refugee law. This Global Compact refers to migrants and presents a cooperative framework addressing migration in all
its dimensions…

12. This Global Compact aims to mitigate the adverse drivers and structural factors that hinder people from building and maintaining sustainable livelihoods in their countries of origin, and so compel them to seek a future elsewhere. It intends to reduce the risks and vulnerabilities migrants face at different stages of migration by respecting, protecting and fulfilling their human rights and providing them with care and assistance. It seeks to address legitimate concerns of communities, while recognizing that societies are undergoing demographic, economic, social and environmental changes at different scales that may have implications for and result from migration. It strives to create conducive conditions that enable all migrants to enrich our societies through their human, economic and social capacities, and thus facilitate their contributions to sustainable development at the local, national, regional and global levels.

13. This Global Compact recognizes that safe, orderly and regular migration works for all when it takes place in a well-informed, planned and consensual manner. Migration should never be an act of desperation. When it is, we must cooperate to respond to the needs of migrants in situations of vulnerability, and address the respective challenges. We must work together to create conditions that allow communities and individuals to live in safety and dignity in their own countries. We must save lives and keep migrants out of harm’s way. We must empower migrants to become full members of our societies, highlight their positive contributions, and promote inclusion and social cohesion. We must generate greater predictability and certainty for States, communities and migrants alike. To achieve this, we commit to facilitate and ensure safe, orderly and regular migration for the benefit of all…

15. We agree that this Global Compact is based on a set of cross-cutting and interdependent guiding principles:
People-centred:
The Global Compact carries a strong human dimension to it, inherent to the migration experience itself. It promotes the well-being of migrants and the members of communities in countries of origin, transit and destination. As a result, the Global Compact places individuals at its core.
International cooperation:
The Global Compact is a non-legally binding cooperative framework that recognizes that no State can address migration on its own due to the inherently transnational nature of the phenomenon. It requires international, regional and bilateral cooperation and dialogue. Its authority rests on its consensual nature, credibility, collective ownership, joint implementation, follow-up and review.
National sovereignty:
The Global Compact reaffirms the sovereign right of States to determine their national migration policy and their prerogative to govern migration within their jurisdiction, in conformity with international law. Within their sovereign jurisdiction, States may distinguish between regular and irregular migration status, including as they determine their legislative and policy measures for the implementation of the Global Compact, taking into account different national realities, policies, priorities and requirements for entry, residence and work, in accordance with international law.
Rule of law and due process:
The Global Compact recognizes that respect for the rule of law, due process and access to justice are fundamental to all aspects of migration governance. This means that the State, public and private institutions and entities, as well as persons themselves are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international law.
Sustainable development:
The Global Compact is rooted in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and builds upon its recognition that migration is a multidimensional reality of major relevance for the sustainable development of countries of origin, transit and destination, which requires coherent and comprehensive responses. Migration contributes to positive development outcomes and to realizing the goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, especially when it is properly managed. The Global Compact aims to leverage the potential of migration for the achievement of all Sustainable Development Goals, as well as the impact this achievement will have on migration in the future.
Human rights:
The Global Compact is based on international human rights law and upholds the principles of non-regression and non-discrimination. By implementing the Global Compact, we ensure effective respect, protection and fulfilment of the human rights of all migrants, regardless
of their migration status, across all stages of the migration cycle. We also reaffirm the
commitment to eliminate all forms of discrimination, including racism, xenophobia and intolerance against migrants and their families.
Gender-responsive:
The Global Compact ensures that the human rights of women, men, girls and boys are respected at all stages of migration, their specific needs are properly understood and addressed and they are empowered as agents of change. It mainstreams a gender perspective, promotes gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, recognizing their independence, agency and leadership in order to move away from addressing migrant women primarily through a lens of victimhood. 5
Child-sensitive:
The Global Compact promotes existing international legal obligations in relation to the rights of the child, and upholds the principle of the best interests of the child at all times, as a primary consideration in all situations concerning children in the context of international migration, including unaccompanied and separated children.
Whole-of-government approach:
The Global Compact considers that migration is a multidimensional reality that cannot be addressed by one government policy sector alone. To develop and implement effective migration policies and practices, a whole-of-government approach is needed to ensure horizontal and vertical policy coherence across all sectors and levels of government.
Whole-of-society approach:
The Global Compact promotes broad multi-stakeholder partnerships to address migration in all its dimensions by including migrants, diasporas, local communities, civil society, academia, the private sector, parliamentarians, trade unions, National Human Rights Institutions, the media and other relevant stakeholders in migration governance…

.

Objectives for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration
(1) Collect and utilize accurate and disaggregated data as a basis for evidence-based policies
(2) Minimize the adverse drivers and structural factors that compel people to leave their country of origin
(3) Provide accurate and timely information at all stages of migration
(4) Ensure that all migrants have proof of legal identity and adequate documentation
(5) Enhance availability and flexibility of pathways for regular migration
(6) Facilitate fair and ethical recruitment and safeguard conditions that ensure decent work
(7) Address and reduce vulnerabilities in migration
(8) Save lives and establish coordinated international efforts on missing migrants
(9) Strengthen the transnational response to smuggling of migrants
(10) Prevent, combat and eradicate trafficking in persons in the context of international migration
(11) Manage borders in an integrated, secure and coordinated manner
(12) Strengthen certainty and predictability in migration procedures for appropriate screening, assessment and referral
(13) Use migration detention only as a measure of last resort and work towards alternatives
(14) Enhance consular protection, assistance and cooperation throughout the migration
cycle
(15) Provide access to basic services for migrants
(16) Empower migrants and societies to realize full inclusion and social cohesion
(17) Eliminate all forms of discrimination and promote evidence-based public discourse to
shape perceptions of migration
(18) Invest in skills development and facilitate mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and
competences
(19) Create conditions for migrants and diasporas to fully contribute to sustainable development in all countries
(20) Promote faster, safer and cheaper transfer of remittances and foster financial inclusion of migrants
(21) Cooperate in facilitating safe and dignified return and readmission, as well as sustainable reintegration
(22) Establish mechanisms for the portability of social security entitlements and earned benefits
(23) Strengthen international cooperation and global partnerships for safe, orderly and regular migration

.

Press Release
‘Historic moment’ for people on the move, as UN agrees first-ever Global Compact on Migration
13 July 2018, New York
The text of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, was finalized today. This is the first time that Member States of the United Nations have come together to negotiate an agreement covering all dimensions of international migration in a holistic and comprehensive manner.

The Global Compact is the culmination of thematic discussions and consultations among Member States and such actors as local officials, civil society representatives and migrants themselves; stocktaking and reflection on the views that were shared; and intergovernmental negotiations. In total, this open, transparent and inclusive process lasting over 18 months led to unprecedented dialogue and learning by all participants on the realities of international migration.

The agreement now forms a basis to improve governance and international understanding of migration, to address the challenges associated with migration today, and to strengthen the contribution of migrants and migration to sustainable development.

Calling today a “historic moment,” the President of the 72nd session of the United Nations General Assembly, H.E. Mr. Miroslav Lajčák, said the Global Compact’s potential was huge. He added, “It can guide us from a reactive to a proactive mode. It can help us to draw out the benefits of migration, and mitigate the risks. It can provide a new platform for cooperation. And it can be a resource, in finding the right balance between the rights of people and the sovereignty of States. And, in December, it will formally become the first comprehensive framework on migration the world has ever seen.”…

OAS and PADF to Support Social Inclusion Policies in Destination Countries of Venezuelan Migrants

Venezuela “Crisis” – Social Inclusion of Venezuelan Migrants/Refugees

.
OAS and PADF to Support Social Inclusion Policies in Destination Countries of Venezuelan Migrants
July 12, 2018
The Organization of American States (OAS) and the Pan American Development Foundation (PADF) today agreed to support the governments of countries receiving Venezuelan migrants. The main objective of the agreement is to implement actions in areas related to the protection and local integration of Venezuelan migrants and refugees, the development of social inclusion policies, and the generation of economic opportunities that facilitate their autonomy and allow them to contribute to the communities that receive them.

At the signing ceremony, the OAS Secretary General, Luis Almagro, referred to the magnitude of the exodus of Venezuelan citizens and the social and political implications of the situation. “The issue is pressing, the crisis in Venezuela has alarming consequences in the region; already more than two million people have had to leave Venezuela, which is an extremely serious exodus and a drain of resources,” said Almagro. He also stressed that the agreement “will lead to integrated solutions that respond to these problems and promote more robust efforts with various actors at the Inter-American level.”

The Executive Director of PADF, Katie Taylor, recalled the joint work carried out by the organization she leads with the OAS during the last five decades and said “this agreement offers us a specific opportunity to join forces and provide better service to Venezuelans through timely protection services and provision of adequate information; mobilize resources and support so that migrants can rebuild their lives with dignity in the new places that host them, and take advantage of the convening capacity of the OAS for better coordination among governments, civil society and the private sector.”

PADF is an independent non-profit organization based in Washington DC, created in 1962 through a unique cooperation agreement between the OAS and the private sector. It has a presence in Latin America and the Caribbean, where it implements social development projects to strengthen communities.

Missed Opportunities : The High Cost of Not Educating Girls – World Bank Report

Education/Development

.
Missed Opportunities : The High Cost of Not Educating Girls
World Bank Report
QUENTIN WODON, CLAUDIO MONTENEGRO, HOA NGUYEN, AND ADENIKE ONAGORUWA
JULY 2018 :: 64 pages
PDF: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/29956/HighCostOfNotEducatingGirls.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y
Abstract
Too many girls drop out of school prematurely, especially in low income countries. Low educational attainment for girls has negative consequences not only for them, but also for their children and household, as well as for their community and society.

This study documents the potential impacts of educational attainment for girls and women in six domains: (1) earnings and standards of living; (2) child marriage and early childbearing; (3) fertility and population growth; (4) health, nutrition, and well-being; (5) agency and decision-making; and (6) social capital and institutions. The results are sobering: the potential economic and social costs of not educating girls are large.

Low educational attainment reduces expected earnings in adulthood, and it depresses labor force participation, leading to lower standards of living. When girls drop out of school prematurely, they are much more likely to marry as children, and have their first child before the age of 18 when they may not yet be ready to be wife and mothers. This in turn is associated with higher rates of fertility and population growth, which in low income countries are major impediments for reaping the benefits of the demographic dividend. Low educational attainment is also associated with worse health and nutrition outcomes for women and their children, leading among others to higher under-five mortality and stunting.

Girls who drop out of school also suffer in adulthood from a lack of agency and decision-making ability within the household, and in society more generally. They are also less likely to report engaging in altruistic behaviors such as donating to charity, volunteering, or helping others. Finally, when girls and women are better educated, they may be better able to assess the quality of the basic services they rely on and the quality of their country’s institutions and leaders.

These negative impacts have large economic costs, leading among others to losses in human capital wealth (future lifetime earnings of the labor force) estimated at $15 trillion to $30 trillion. Educating girls is not only the right thing to do: it is also a smart economic investment.

 

Press Release
Not Educating Girls Costs Countries Trillions of Dollars, Says New World Bank Report
WASHINGTON, July 11, 2018 – Limited educational opportunities for girls and barriers to completing 12 years of education cost countries between $15 trillion and $30 trillion in lost lifetime productivity…

Today, some 132 million girls around the world between the ages of 6 and 17 are still not in school —75 percent of whom are adolescents. To reap the full benefits of education, countries need to improve both access and quality so that all girls have the opportunity to learn. These investments are especially crucial in some regions, such as Sub-Saharan Africa where, on average, only 40 percent of girls complete lower secondary school. Countries also need policies to support healthy economic growth than will generate jobs for an expanding educated workforce.

Women with secondary education also have a better ability to make decisions in their household, including for their own health care. They are less likely to experience intimate partner violence, and they report higher levels of psychological well-being. They also have healthier children who are less likely to be malnourished and who are more likely to go to school and learn. Finally, better education for girls makes them more likely to participate fully in society and be active members of their community.

Educating girls and promoting gender equality is part of a broader and holistic effort at the World Bank, which includes financing and analytical work to remove financial barriers that keep girls out of school, prevent child marriage, improve access to reproductive health services, and strengthen skills and job opportunities for adolescent girls and young women. Since 2016, the World Bank has invested more than $3.2 billion in education projects benefiting adolescent girls.

The report was published with support from the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation, the Global Partnership for Education, and Malala Fund.

Achieving equal access to justice for all by 2030: lessons from global funds – ODI

Human Rights – Equal Access to Justice/SDG 16

.
Achieving equal access to justice for all by 2030: lessons from global funds
Working and discussion papers | July 2018 | Marcus Manuel and Clare Manuel
ODI – Overseas Development Institute 2018.: 32 pages
[Excerpts]
Introduction
This paper reviews the experience of global funds and explores whether lessons could usefully be applied to supporting Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16.3’s commitment to equal access to justice for all by 2030. In other areas, including agriculture, health, climate change and education, global funds focused on specific problems have become a key part of international aid architecture. Global fund performance has varied, but the best ones, particularly those relating to health, have been successful in improving both the quality and
quantity of aid: building multi-stakeholder partnerships, marshalling resources, enhancing the long-term visibility of resource flows, generating innovative approaches and delivering results.

The paper begins with a brief overview in section 2 of why access to justice matters and the challenges of providing it, including funding gaps. Section 3 briefly summarises donor engagement with justice to date, and section 4 looks at current promising international
initiatives to engage with SDG 16.3. Section 5 provides an introduction to global funds and then section 6 examines their common characteristics and explores how applicable these might be to the challenges of providing access to justice. Section 7 sets out three options for donor re-engagement. Section 8 sets out three key conclusions and possible next steps, namely:
1) it is premature to try and assess whether a large-scale global justice fund would be appropriate, as much more work needs to be done including on establishing funding gaps;
2) SDG 16.3’s two indicators for the first time provide an internationally agreed framework around two specific results for donor and partner countries to improve access to justice globally and there is a case for a small scale pilot fund focused on one or both of these indicators; and
3) there is a case for exploratory consultations on how to achieve significant donor re-engagement in low-income countries

Key Messages
:: Access to justice is associated with economic growth and social development and its provision is a core state function. But billions of people have limited access to justice. Donor support for justice systems is low in most countries and has fallen by 40% globally in the last four years. Thinking on long-term scaled-up funding for accessible justice is in its infancy.

:: The principles and approaches underlying global funds in other areas provide useful lessons for how to achieve Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16.3’s commitment to equal access to justice for all, including strengthening international commitment; stronger focus on learning and innovation; more effective collective donor effort and management of risk; deeper engagement with national government systems and strategies to scale up sustainable approaches; and creating new funding and partnerships.

:: It is too early to assess whether a large-scale global fund would be appropriate or feasible to support access to justice for all, given the challenges and political nature of the justice system. More work needs to be done first, including to establish precise funding needs.

:: In the meantime, there is a case for developing a small-scale pilot pooled donor fund focused on a specific SDG 16.3 indicator, available on a demand-driven basis to a limited number of countries. This would enable cross-country learning. It would also provide insights into the functioning of the system as a whole; global fund experience is that an initial focus on a specific ‘vertical’ issue over time turns into broader engagement.

:: There is also a case for undertaking exploratory consultations on how to achieve significant donor reengagement in low-income countries.

::::::

[p.15] Global vertical funds: a brief overview
…Vertical funds are global programmes for allocating aid that focus on a particular thematic issue across countries. They have been referred to as ‘goal-based investment partnerships’, working to deliver clearly articulated targets (Gartner and Kharas, 2013; Schmidt-Traub and Sachs, 2015). The aim is to scale up resources and impact, with donor funds crowding in other funding. By 2013 the top ten vertical funds represented approximately one seventh of all programmable aid, and in some important sectors accounted for over half of all donor commitments (ibid; ibid.). Most of these new generation vertical funds emerged in response to specific global challenges in the wake of the Millennium Development Goals.

Prominent examples include two health funds, namely the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (‘the Global Fund’) and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisations (GAVI), the International Fund for Agricultural Development,30 and the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program. There are also a range of climate funds (Nakhooda et al., 2015). Since 2013 the number of funds has continued to grow. Another health fund, the Global Financing Facility in support of Every Woman, Every Child, was launched in 2015 and the Education Cannot Wait Fund in 2016. Calls continue for further new approaches in the education sector to mobilise additional resources, reduce fragmentation and promote innovation (Schäferhoff and Burnett, 2016).

The funds have differing management, governance and implementation practices. Some have been more successful than others. In some cases, there has been criticism of vertical funds’ limited support to countries’ development of sustainable national systems and limited coordination with other donors in-country.31 A series of reviews (Isenman et al., 2010; Gartner and Kharas, 2013; Schmidt-Traub and Sachs, 2015; Sachs and Schmidt-Traub,2017; Schmidt-Traub, 2018a) suggest that performance is strongly connected to fund design. Funds with more
participatory governance structures, more independence and greater beneficiary involvement, clear performance-based metrics, and a close link between performance and
funding (including competitive allocation of funds) have demonstrated more success in resource mobilisation, impact, innovation, learning and scaling up. The Global Fund and GAVI stand out in this respect and have been credited with bringing in new private-sector actors and enabling rapid scale-up from a global goal to successful implementation on a global scale (Gartner and Kharas, 2013; Schmidt-Traub and Sachs, 2015).
30 Which dates from an earlier era (1971).
31 See for example DFID’s latest business case and annual review of the Global Fund (DFID, 2018a; 2018b).

The Long View: Scenarios for the World Economy to 2060 – OECD

Development – Long Term Scenarios for World Economy

.
The Long View: Scenarios for the World Economy to 2060
OECD Economic Policy Paper No.22
Authors: Yvan Guillemette and David Turner
12 Jul 2018 : 51 pages
PDF: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/deliver/b4f4e03e-en.pdf?itemId=%2Fcontent%2Fpaper%2Fb4f4e03e-en&mimeType=pdf
[Editor’s text bolding]

Overview
This paper presents long-run economic projections for 46 countries, extending the short-run projections of the Spring 2018 OECD Economic Outlook. It first sets out a baseline scenario under the assumption that countries do not carry out institutional and policy reforms. This scenario is then used as a reference point to illustrate the potential impact of structural reforms in alternative scenarios, including better governance and educational attainment in the large emerging-market economies and competition-friendly product market and labour market reforms in OECD economies.
Flexibility-enhancing labour market reforms not only boost living standards but, by raising the employment rate, also help alleviate fiscal pressures associated with population ageing. Another scenario illustrates the potential positive impact of linking the pensionable age to life expectancy on the participation rate of older workers, and in particular that of women.
Additional scenarios illustrate the potential economic gains from raising public investment and spending more on research and development. A final ‘negative’ scenario shows how slipping back on trade liberalisation – returning to 1990 average tariff rates – might depress standards of living everywhere.

Main Findings
Baseline scenario with no institutional or policy changes
:: World trend real GDP growth declines from about 3½ per cent now to 2% in 2060, mainly due to a deceleration of large emerging economies as these continue to account for the bulk of world growth. India and China take up a rising share of world output as the world’s economic centre of gravity shifts toward Asia.
:: Living standards (real GDP per capita) continue to advance in all countries through 2060 and gradually converge toward those of the most advanced countries, but to varying degrees. Living standards in high-growth emerging market and Eastern European economies converge most, driven by catch-up in trend labour efficiency, but GDP per capita in the BRIICS and some low-income OECD countries remains below half that of the United States in 2060. Demographic change weighs on growth in OECD living standards through 2060.
:: Stabilising public debt ratios at current levels while meeting fiscal pressures from higher health spending and demographic change requires the median OECD government to raise primary revenue by 6½ percentage points of GDP by 2060.
:: A global saving glut has been putting downward pressure on real interest rates in recent years, a trend that may persist.

Alternative scenarios with institutional or policy reforms
:: Relative to OECD countries, the BRIICS have substantial room to improve the quality of governance and raise educational attainment. In a scenario where both factors catch up with average OECD levels by 2060, living standards in the BRIICS are 30% to 50% higher in 2060 than in the baseline scenario.
:: Reforms through 2030 to make product market regulation in OECD countries as friendly to competition as in the five leading countries raise living standards by over 8% in aggregate (as much as 15-20% in the countries furthest away from best practices).
:: A reform package to improve labour market policy settings in OECD countries up to those of leading countries raises the aggregate employment rate by 6½ percentage points by 2040, mostly via higher youth and female employment. The package raises living standards by 10% by 2060 and helps alleviate future fiscal pressures related to ageing.
:: Tying future increases in pensionable ages to life expectancy, as some countries have done, raises the aggregate employment rate of older people in the OECD by more than 5 percentage points by 2060 and living standards by about 2½ per cent by 2060 (as much as 5-7% in countries with currently no explicit plans to change pensionable ages).
:: Boosting R&D intensity in all OECD countries to the level of the five leading countries raises aggregate living standards by 6% by 2060 (as much as 10-18% in countries currently spending little on R&D).
:: Permanently raising public investment in all OECD countries to 6% of GDP raises aggregate living standards by over 4% by 2060 (as much as 6-9% in some countries). Fiscal burdens rise by much less than the cost of the additional investment and the policy is even self-financing in some countries.
:: Slipping back on trade liberalisation – returning to 1990 average tariff rates – depresses long-run living standards by 14% for the world as a whole and as much as 15-25% in the most affected countries.