Global Social Mobility Index
The Global Social Mobility Index is an index prepared by the World Economic Forum. The inaugural index from 2020 ranked 82 countries and has not been updated since. The Index measures social mobility holistically through 5 determinants. The findings from the index were then used in the World Economic Forum's Global Social Mobility Report 2020, which provided recommendations for governments and businesses. Researchers have used the index to analyze income inequality and have determined reasons for countries to improve social mobility.
Context
The Global Social Mobility Index was established by the World Economic Forum in 2020 in light of the changes caused by globalization and technological advancement. The results and findings of the index are summarized in the Global Social Mobility Report 2020. The index differs from previous measures of social mobility because it uses a more holistic methodology, ultimately measuring the causes of social mobility. Previous measures focused on comparing intergenerational incomes. These comparisons drew data from different time periods, and thus it was more difficult to draw clear conclusions about the present.Methodology summary
The World Economic Forum measured social mobility through five determinants: health, education, technology, work, and institutions. These five determinants are measured by the following ten pillars, each with its own set of parameters.Pillar 1: Health
- Adolescent birth rate per 1000 women
- Prevalence of malnourishment
- Health access and quality index
- Inequality-adjusted healthy life expectancy index
- Pre-primary enrollment
- Quality of vocational training
- NEET ratio
- Percentage of school-age children that lack access to education
- Inequality-adjusted education index
- Children below minimum proficiency
- Pupils per teacher in pre-primary/primary/secondary education
- Harmonized learning outcomes
- Social diversity in schools
- Percentage of disadvantaged students in schools which report a lack of education material
- Extent of staff training
- Active labor market policies
- Impact of ICTs on access to basic services
- Percentage of firms offering formal training
- Digital skills amongst the adult population
- Internet users
- Fixed-broadband internet subscriptions
- Mobile-broadband subscriptions
- Percentage of population covered by at least a 3G mobile network
- Percentage of rural population with electricity access
- Internet access in schools
- Unemployment among labor force with basic/intermediate/advanced education
- Unemployment in rural areas
- Ratio of female to male labor force participation rate
- Workers in vulnerable employment
- Low pay incidence
- Ratio of bottom 40% to top 10% labor income share
- Ratio of bottom 50% to top 50% labor income share
- Mean income of bottom 40%
- Adjusted labor income share
- Worker’s rights index
- Cooperation in labor-employer relations
- Pay and productivity
- Employees working more than 48 hours a week
- Collective bargaining coverage ratio
- Guaranteed minimum income benefits
- Social protection coverage
- Social protection spending
- Social safety net protection
- Corruption perceptions index
- Government and public services efficiency
- Inclusiveness of institutions
- Political stability
Global Social Mobility Index (2020) results
| Rank | Country | Index Score |
| 1 | 85.2 | |
| 2 | 83.6 | |
| 3 | 83.6 | |
| 4 | 83.5 | |
| 5 | 82.7 | |
| 6 | 82.4 | |
| 7 | 82.1 | |
| 8 | 80.1 | |
| 9 | 80.1 | |
| 10 | 79.8 | |
| 11 | 78.8 | |
| 12 | 76.7 | |
| 13 | 76.4 | |
| 14 | 76.1 | |
| 15 | 76.1 | |
| 16 | 75.1 | |
| 17 | 75.0 | |
| 18 | 75.0 | |
| 19 | 74.7 | |
| 20 | 74.6 | |
| 21 | 74.4 | |
| 22 | 74.3 | |
| 23 | 73.5 | |
| 24 | 72.0 | |
| 25 | 71.4 | |
| 26 | 70.5 | |
| 27 | 70.4 | |
| 28 | 70.0 | |
| 29 | 69.4 | |
| 30 | 69.1 | |
| 31 | 69.0 | |
| 32 | 68.5 | |
| 33 | 68.1 | |
| 34 | 67.4 | |
| 35 | 67.1 | |
| 36 | 66.7 | |
| 37 | 65.8 | |
| 38 | 64.8 | |
| 39 | 64.7 | |
| 40 | 63.8 | |
| 41 | 63.8 | |
| 42 | 63.1 | |
| 43 | 62.0 | |
| 44 | 61.6 | |
| 45 | 61.5 | |
| 46 | 61.2 | |
| 47 | 60.3 | |
| 48 | 59.8 | |
| 49 | 59.6 | |
| 50 | 57.8 | |
| 51 | 57.3 | |
| 52 | 57.1 | |
| 53 | 55.6 | |
| 54 | 55.6 | |
| 55 | 55.4 | |
| 56 | 53.9 | |
| 57 | 53.9 | |
| 58 | 52.6 | |
| 59 | 52.3 | |
| 60 | 52.1 | |
| 61 | 51.7 | |
| 62 | 51.7 | |
| 63 | 51.4 | |
| 64 | 51.3 | |
| 65 | 50.3 | |
| 66 | 49.9 | |
| 67 | 49.3 | |
| 68 | 47.4 | |
| 69 | 46.8 | |
| 70 | 45.5 | |
| 71 | 44.8 | |
| 72 | 43.8 | |
| 73 | 43.7 | |
| 74 | 43.5 | |
| 75 | 43.5 | |
| 76 | 42.7 | |
| 77 | 41.4 | |
| 78 | 40.2 | |
| 79 | 36.7 | |
| 80 | 36.0 | |
| 81 | 36.0 | |
| 82 | 34.5 |
Global Social Mobility Report 2020 summary
The World Economic Forum compiled its findings from the Global Social Mobility Index in its Global Social Mobility Report 2020 which includes information about the current state of economic inequality and provides recommendations for governments and businesses to alleviate inequalities.' This section provides a summary of the report’s findings.'The World Economic Forum finds that the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which has involved rapid globalization and technological advancements, has led to increased inequality.' For example, the World Economic Forum notes that the top percent of US earners made 158% more in 2018 than in 1979, whereas the bottom 90 percent of earners made only 24% more.' In a review of the report, Hanna Ziady, a CNN Business contributor, states that in order for an American household with low income to reach the American median household income, it would require five generations.' In light of these findings, Bhowmick, a researcher for the Observer Research Foundation, argues that policies that address social mobility are essential for countries with high income inequality to reduce poverty levels.'
In a review of the report, Dr. Helal Uddin Ahmed writing for The Financial Express highlights that a social mobility agenda is needed to reduce inequality, and thus the organization created a set of goals that governments should prioritize.' The World Economic Forum advises that governments use taxation for equality-focused public spending.' To increase social mobility in the labor force, the World Economic Forum urges governments to find ways to support the expansion of education and lifelong learning which includes developing human capital along with workers’ careers.' Dr. Helal Uddin Ahmed, in agreement with the World Economic Forum, states that improving education effectively involves spending on programs that target disadvantaged youth, placing quality of education as a priority.'
The Global Social Mobility Report lists a set of goals for businesses: providing fair wages, educating their workers, and having a more merit-based hiring process.' The report states that businesses benefit from socioeconomic equality because their consumer bases increase, consumer-business relations strengthen, and the economic environment stabilizes.' Dr. Helal Uddin Ahmed finds that these benefits incentivize businesses to contribute to equality for economic reasons, not just ethical ones.
As Jones, managing editor for the Visual Capitalist, highlights, the Global Social Mobility Report 2020 also warns countries of the potential risks associated with low social mobility: unstable work and living environments, distrust in institutions, distrust in politics, and societal unraveling. Jones argues that the economic cost is high as well. She points out a statistic from the report claiming that if every country were to raise its score on the index by ten, global GDP could grow an additional 4.41% by 2030.