Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Israel and the OECDA Comparison Based on
The Herzliya Indices Approach
Presented by
Dr. Zalman ShifferThe Herzliya Indices Team
Herzliya Conference2008
2
Team MembersMs. Leah Achdut – Van Leer Jerusalem Institute; The
Ruppin Academic Center
Dr. Michel Strawczynski – Bank of Israel
Mr. Tommy Steiner – IDC Herzliya
Dr. Zalman Shiffer – Economic Advisor
Team LeaderProf. Rafi Melnick - IDC Herzliya
With thanks to Michal Ophir and Refaela Cohen (National Insurance Institute of Israel), Polina Dovman (Bank of Israel), and Gilad Skutelsky (IDC Herzliya) for their assistance with research.
Herzliya Indices Team
3
Purpose of the Presentation
The purpose of the present enquiry is to carry a systematic quantitative comparison between the economic, social and governmental/political performance of Israel and that of the current and potential future members of the OECD.
This will serve as background for evaluating the compatibility of Israeli achievements with the standards of the members of a leading advanced and democratic international organization.
4
Methodology
• Comparing Israel’s economic, social and governmental/ political achievements to those of:
- The OECD Members- Relevant Sub-Groups of the OECD- New Candidates to the OECD - “The Current Accession Talks”
group- Potential Future Candidates - “The Enhanced Engagement"
Group
• Using the Herzliya Indices wherever possible and partial components of these indices in other cases.
5
Groups of Comparison 26 OECD Members:• Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland,
France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea (Republic of), Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.
OECD sub-groups• Scandinavia :Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden• Western Europe: Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands,
Switzerland, United Kingdom.• Southern Europe: Greece, Spain, Portugal.• Central Eastern Europe: Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland.
Candidates:• Current Accession group: Chile, Estonia, Russia, Slovakia and Israel• Enhanced Engagement group: Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, South
Africa
6
59.263.2 64.0 66.8
56.0
46.5
110.1
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
Economic Herzliya Index | 2006
7
Evolution of the EconomicDimension 1990-2007
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Israel OECD Southern Europe Central Eastern Europe
8
89.1
100
121.5114.2
81.9
61.3
48.4
23.7
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
GDP Per Capita (% of OECD Level) | 2006
OECD Level
9
89.1
100
42.6
55.7
38.8
56.6
2924.9
12.2 13.6
38.7
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
GDP Per Capita (% of OECD Level) | 2006
OECD Level
10
95.299.2
104.5100.3
94.797.7
100.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
110.0
120.0
Social Herzliya Index | 2006
11
Evolution of the SocialDimension 1990-2006
90
92
94
96
98
100
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Israel OECD Southern Europe Central Eastern Europe
12
103.1100 101.2 101.5 100.8
92.6
88
75.9
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
HDI Life Expectancy (% of OECD Level) | 2005
OECD Level
13
103.1100 99.5
86.2
74.6
91.987.2 88.6
72.2
83.4
48.1
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
HDI Life Expectancy (% of OECD Level) | 2005
OECD Level
14
0.301
0.245
0.286
0.353
0.289
0.377
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
* No Data for Currant Accession and "Enhanced Engagment" Groups, New Zealand and Turkey
Gini Coefficient* | 2006
15
88.394.8 93.0
83.780.0
98.0
71.6
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
Governmental/PoliticalHerzliya Index | 2006
16
Evolution of the Governmental/Political Dimension 1996-2006
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
84
86
88
90
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Israel OECD Southern Europe Central Eastern Europe
17
40.8
100 102.6
90.5
61.5
112.7
94.1 94.5
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Political Stability and the Absence of Violence (% of OECD Level) | 2006
OECD Level
18
40.8
100 101.0
54.3
103.3
74.4
65.7
51.3
41.1
75.0
103.3
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
Political Stability and the Absence of Violence (% of OECD Level) | 2006
OECD Level
19
82.6
100
115.5
107.6
88.0
79.575.0
58.0
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
Rule of Law (% of OECD Level) | 2006
OECD Level
20
82.6
100
88.3
41.1
75.8
52.2 54.4
69.1
43.4
70.9
94.6
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Rule of Law (% of OECD Level) | 2006
OECD Level
21
91.7
100
117.6
106.2
85.882.4 82.1
64.8
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Government Effectiveness(% of OECD Level) | 2006
OECD Level
22
Overall Evaluation• In terms of past OECD standards, Israel has a
reasonable economic record, marginal achievements in the social dimension, and is lagging behind in the political dimension.
• In spite of these weaknesses, Israel is ready for OECD membership and is in the position of both benefiting from membership and contributing to the achievements of this organization.
• Israel could have qualified for OECD membership for some time; the timing of its invitation to join the organization may have been related to political considerations.
23
Overall Evaluation - continued
• More detailed assessment indicates that Israel’s mixed socio-political record reflects a combination of satisfactory and even good results in some fields with poorer achievements in other fields, notably the field of income distribution, and political stability and violence.
• Israel should be aware of its insufficient record in these important fields, and use its future OECD membership as leverage for improving its overall performance.
