Sluggish recovery of employment after the crisis and worsening job quality. Poverty and inequality on the rise in advanced economies. The sluggish recovery of employment from the crisis is worsened by continuing economic slowdown. Progress in reducing poverty was hampered in many developing countries and the upwards trend in poverty was clear‐cut in the developed world.

This chapter explores how innovation in firms (described as product, process, marketing and organizational innovation) is associated with firm performance and labour market outcomes. For this purpose, it first discusses the evidence to date at the aggregate (i.e. country) level – for as broad a set of economies as possible. Then, it focuses on the firm level based on a group of economies for which data from the Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Surveys (BEEPS) and MENA Enterprise Surveys (MENA ES) – surveys of transition and Middle East and North Africa (MENA) economies, respectively – are available. The chapter finds that there are considerable differences between innovative and non‐innovative firms: innovative firms tend to be more productive, create more jobs, employ more skilled workers (meaning that they employ more educated workers and offer more training) and hire more female workers. Yet, in some cases innovation is associated with more intense use of temporary workers (especially in firms that implement product and process innovations). Moreover, it has been found that sectoral differences might play a role. In this regard, considerable job contraction is observed in non‐innovative low‐technology firms in the manufacturing sector, highlighting the high risk of job loss among low‐skilled workers. Regarding sources of innovation, the chapter shows that while R&D engagement is an important determinant of successful innovation, other drivers, including training, public funding and external acquisition of technologies are relevant. On the basis of these findings, the chapter suggests that adequate education, training and social protection policies can play an important role in both fostering innovation and preparing workers (and firms) effectively for the changing job environment. This means that social partners and other stakeholders will be required to participate in reflections on the types of jobs and skills that will be relevant in the future.

Well‐designed tax reforms for improving employment and equity. Progressive taxation without a loss in employment

No abstract

Si Jevons est bien connu pour son analyse d’économie pure, ses contributions dans le domaine social le sont moins. Pourtant, du point de vue de l’histoire de la pensée économique, elles présentent un double intérêt : d’une part, elles témoignent de l’adhésion de Jevons à la philosophie utilitariste et, d’autre part, elles portent la marque de l’économie du bien-être naissante, tout en présentant une approche singulière du bien-être social qui fait clairement apparaître la possibilité d’une divergence entre le bien-être global et le bien-être économique. Dans cet article, nous nous proposons de reconstruire l’architecture globale de la position de Jevons relative à la « réforme sociale » : on présente d’abord le point de vue étroit que doit adopter l’économiste, tout en mettant en évidence les liens entre l’économie et la morale, à travers la mobilisation du calcul utilitariste benthamien (§. 1). Puis, dans le domaine de la législation, on montre que Jevons considère la nécessité d’abandonner un tel point de vue pour établir une sorte de calcul coût/avantage qui mobilise les différentes sciences permettant d’anticiper les conséquences d’une réforme : après en avoir détaillé la méthode (§. 2), on montre les conséquences d’une telle analyse qui conduit Jevons, en tant qu’économiste, à amender un certain nombre d’hypothèses qu’il avait posées dans le cadre de son économie pure (§. 3). JEL classification : B13, B3, D60, D63