How was life in 1820, and how has it improved since then? What are the long-term trends in global well-being? Views on social progress since the Industrial Revolution are largely based on historical national accounting in the tradition of Kuznets and Maddison. But trends in real GDP per capita may not fully reflect changes in other dimensions of well-being such as life expectancy, education, personal security or gender inequality. Looking at these indicators usually reveals a more equal world than the picture given by incomes alone, but has this always been the case? The new report How Was Life? aims to fill this gap. It presents the first systematic evidence on long-term trends in global well-being since 1820 for 25 major countries and 8 regions in the world covering more than 80% of the world’s population. It not only shows the data but also discusses the underlying sources and their limitations, pays attention to country averages and inequality, and pinpoints avenues for further research.
The How Was Life? report is the product of collaboration between the OECD, the OECD Development Centre and the CLIO-INFRA project. It represents the culmination of work by a group of economic historians to systematically chart long-term changes in the dimensions of global well-being and inequality, making use of the most recent research carried out within the discipline. The historical evidence reviewed in the report is organised around 10 different dimensions of well-being that mirror those used by the OECD in its well-being report How’s Life? (www.oecd.org/howslife), and draw on the best sources and expertise currently available for historical perspectives in this field. These dimensions are:per capita GDP, real wages, educational attainment, life expectancy, height, personal security, political institutions, environmental quality, income inequality and gender inequality.
Statistics Working Paper N. 58 - 2014/3 - This paper presents a set of indicators of income inequality and poverty across and within regions for 28 OECD countries. These indicators were produced through a new household-level data collection based on internationally harmonized income definitions undertaken as part of the OECD project on “Measuring regional and local well-being for policymaking”.
This Report encompasses a discussion on the role of trust in collaboration with microdata; a summary of the use of different methods of international collaboration with microdata; a review of using maturity modelling to improve practices in microdata collaboration; and detailed recommendations which, if adopted, will enable a statistical office to improve its maturity relative to microdata collaboration.
Statistics Working Paper N. 56 - 2014/1 - This paper compares long-run levels of real income growth at the very top, and for the bottom 90% and bottom 99% in the United States, Canada and Australia to illustrate the uniqueness of the post-WWII period of balanced growth (and consequent stability in the income distribution).
English, PDF, 1,819kb
This Statistics Brief presents a typology of non-observed economy (NOE) phenomena, discusses two broad classes of methods to estimate the size of the NOE (methods applied in the national accounts compilation versus macro-econometric methods), and presents national accounts based NOE estimates obtained through a survey of OECD countries in 2011-12.
The database on statistics of international trade in services provides statistics on international trade in services at the most detailed partner-country level available. To the extent that countries report them, data are also broken down by type of service according to the EBOPS classification.
The Composite Leading Indicators (CLI) are subject to many questions. These FAQs are made to help you answering them.
OECD unemployment rate stable at 7.5% in March 2014
Composite leading indicators point to weakening growth in major emerging economies but stable growth momentum in most OECD countries
OECD countries accounted for around 50% of the world’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) expressed in Purchasing Power Parities (PPPs) in 2011 - the latest benchmark year - compared with about 60% in 2005, the previous benchmark year, according to new data released today by the International Comparison Program (ICP).