The economic costs of childhood socio-economic disadvantage in European OECD countries

Abstract

The OECD Papers on Well-being and Inequalities Series -managed by the OECD Centre on Well-being, Inclusion, Sustainability and Equal Opportunity (WISE) -features working papers on the measurement agenda for well-being, inclusion, sustainability and equal opportunity as well as papers seeking to deepen the understanding of the drivers of these issues, the ways in which they interact and how they evolve. These papers are prepared by OECD staff, external experts or by outside consultants working on OECD projects.This series is designed to make available to a wider readership selected labour market, social policy and migration studies prepared for use within the OECD. Authorship is usually collective, but principal writers are named. The papers are generally available only in their original language -English or French -with a summary in the other. This paper is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and the arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD member countries. This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law.The release of this policy paper has been authorised by Romina Boarini, Director of the OECD Centre on Well-being, Inclusion, Sustainability and Equal Opportunity (WISE). Child Well-being Policy PapersThis paper charts the well-being of children from socially and economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Built around the Child Well-being Measurement Framework set out in the 2021 report Measuring What Matters for Child ), and constructed using key comparative indicators from the forthcoming OECD Child Well-being Dashboard, it examines how the well-being of children from disadvantaged backgrounds compares both across OECD countries and relative to their more advantaged peers. Results highlight how growing up at the bottom end of the socio-economic ladder leads to poorer outcomes in almost all well-being areas, and how these well-being inequalities are rooted in the poorer environments that disadvantaged children face at home, in school, and in the community.

The Geneva Charter—Realising the potential of a well‐being society

“…For example, evidence shows the importance of improving wellbeing for children and young people 13 including addressing deprivation and poverty. Identifying overarching child and youth well-being objectives against which all policies can be assessed, efforts aligned and accountability enhanced would potentially support multiple wellbeing objectives both current and into the future.…”

Mobilising evidence to enhance the effectiveness of child well-being policies

“…The cost of doing too little too late has been evaluated by several studies. According to the Early Intervention Foundation, GBP 17 billion was spent in the United Kingdom in 2016 on treating children and young people affected by issues such as domestic violence and abuse, child neglect and maltreatment, mental health problems, youth crime and exclusion from education and the labour market (Chowdry H, 2016 [42]). This represents around 0.78% of the UK GDP.…”

Better jobs and incomes in Bulgaria

“…Internal migration can improve living and working conditions for those who are willing to move to places that offer better jobs, salaries or amenities. Higher regional GDP and lower regional unemployment are "pull" factors for internal migration (Causa, Abendschein and Cavalleri, 2021 [25]), (Cavalleri, Luu and Causa, 2021 [26]). Typically, attractive regions and cities, such as the capital Sofia, benefit from a constant inflow of workers that support growth and compensate for a generally declining population at the expense of regions where internal migrants add to considerable international emigration, resulting in depopulated regions of mostly elderly and immobile population groups.…”