OECD/ECLAC REGIONAL CONSULTATION
Inclusive Growth in Latin America and the Caribbean
Education and Inclusive Growth in Brazil
Naercio Menezes FilhoInsper Institute and University of Sao Paulo
Introduction
EDUCATION
Labor Market
PovertyInnovation
Economic GrowthInequality
Bolsa-Familia
S
D
Doing Business
Recent improvements in Education
Net Enrollment Rate
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Fundamental HighSchool College
Falling education wage differentials
Growth in differentials wrt 1992
0,80
0,85
0,90
0,95
1,00
1,05
1,10
1,15
1,20
1,25
1992 1993 1994* 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000* 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Fundamental High School College
Leading to a fall in inequality
Income Ratios
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
20% richest/20% poorest 10% richest/10% poorest
Productivity still a major problem
Source: Conference Board (2011)
Relative Labor Productivity (GDP per Worker) - 2010
0 20 40 60 80 100
Brazil
South Africa
Chile
Mexico
Argentine
Portugal
Korea
Finland
Canada
UK
France
USA
Productivity Growth has been low
Source: Conference Board (2011)
Productivity Growth - 2005/2010
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Labor Productivity Real Gdp Employment
%
Major Emerging Economies Brazil
Labor Productivity: Industry
• Low productivity in the services sector • Poor infra-structure & complicated tax
system• Doing business• No international competition -> “close
& protect”• Universities distant from firms• Bureaucratic incentives legislation• Old-fashioned managerial practices • Education
Explanations
Quality of education still a problem
PISA 2009 - Share below level 1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
%
Quality Improving very slowly
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
190.6 190.8
181.0176.3 177.1
182.4193.5
204.3209.6
253.2 250.0246.4 243.4 245.0
239.5
247.4 248.7 250.6
281.9288.7
280.3 276.7 278.7271.3 272.9 274.7 273.9
4a Série do E.F. 8a Série do E.F. 3a Série do E.M.
Leading to low rate of innovations
12
Patents per Population and PISA
USAJPN
DEU KORFRA
GBR
NLD
CHESWE
CANITA
F IN
AUS
SPA
ISR
DNK
AUT BEL
NOR SGP
RUSBRA
IRL
TUR
NZL
LUX
POL
TUN
MEX
CZE
SVN
PTGRCCHI
THA
L IE
ISL
HRV
COL
SVK
EST
BGR
LVA
SRBKAZ
ARG
IDN
LTU
ROM
TUN
QAT
PER
URYPAN
-10,00
-8,00
-6,00
-4,00
-2,00
0,00
2,00
350 400 450 500 550 600
PISA 2009 - mathematics
ln(p
ate
nts
/po
pu
lati
on
) -
PC
T in
tern
ati
on
al a
pp
lica
tio
ns
It is Possible to Change!
2005 2007 2009 2011140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
Quality of Education in Selected Municipal-ities
SOBRAL FOZ DO IGUACU RIO DE JANEIRO SAO PAULO
Demographic Transition
Implications of Demography
• Education -> more money, need fewer teachers?
• Health -> more money, more beds available?
• Crime -> less crime?• Labor Market -> less people?• Pensions -> public deficit?• Imigration -> problem or solution?
Conclusions
1) Access to schools has improved substantially
2) Led to fall in inequality after a long time
3) But high productivity gap & low growth
4) Skills gap
5) Managerial practices, legislation, competition
6) Leading to low rate of innovations
7) Fall in potential growth rate
8) Management in public schools is essential
Naercio Menezes FilhoProfessor of EconomicsInsper Institute of Education and ResearchUniversity of Sao Paulo
Top Related