1、The Future of GrowthReport 2024I N S I G H T R E P O R TJ A N U A R Y 2 0 2 4ContentsCover:Anton Maksimov,Unsplash 2024 World Economic Forum.All rights reserved.No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,including photocopying and recording,or by any inf

2、ormation storage and retrieval system.Disclaimer This document is published by the World Economic Forum as a contribution to a project,insight area or interaction.The findings,interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are a result of a collaborative process facilitated and endorsed by the Wor

3、ld Economic Forum but whose results do not necessarily represent the views of the World Economic Forum,nor the entirety of its Members,Partners or other stakeholders.PrefaceExecutive summaryIntroduction1 The Future of Growth Framework 1.1 From the growth we have to the growth we need1.2 Overview of

4、framework construction1.3 Trade-offs,synergies and policy choices 2 Qualifying growth 2.1 Global results2.2 Results by pillar2.3 Growth Pathway ArchetypesConclusion3 Country DashboardsAppendix A:MethodologyA1 Framework design criteriaA2 Indicator selectionA3 NormalizationA4 AggregationA5 ClusteringA

5、ppendix B:Indicator detailsB1 Framework overviewB2 Country groupsB3 Indicator selectionB4 Indicator descriptionB5 NormalizationContributorsEndnotes3468895362552252254254256259265277280289The Future of Growth Report 20242PrefaceGlobal growth has lost momentum.On average,GDP grow

6、th has declined from more than 2%in advanced economies and nearly 6%in emerging and developing economies in the early 2000s to less than 1.5%and less than 2%in the post-COVID period.This sustained slowdown in growth has been compounded by a succession of crises.It is now more than 15 years since the

7、 beginning of the global financial crisis,yet it continues to cast a shadow,not least in the policy choices of many advanced economies.The COVID-19 pandemic and the shock of lockdowns left behind an aftermath of a surge in public debt levels and reversal of global development progress.Geopolitical t

8、ensions and conflicts have further reshaped an international order that is increasingly multipolar,with far-reaching implications for technology,growth and development.Overshadowing these developments is the growing awareness that the worlds rising temperature poses grave dangers to the long-term pr

9、ospects for humanity,with the world currently on track for a temperature rise significantly above the targets set out in the Paris Agreement in 2015.The key question for this pivotal moment is not whether the world still needs economic growth,but rather how that growth is achieved and whether it is

10、aligned with other important national and global priorities.This first edition of the World Economic Forums Future of Growth Report aims to provide an overview of global growth trends and a comprehensive analysis of the quality of these growth trajectories.The Future of Growth Framework introduced i

11、n this report underscores that a conventional GDP growth picture is incomplete without a deeper understanding of the underlying nature and quality of growth.The framework adopts a multidimensional approach,structured around four pillars,to complement and qualify traditional measures of growth:innova

12、tiveness,inclusiveness,sustainability and resilience.For each economy covered in the report,we provide a Future of Growth Dashboard that can support policy-makers,academics,civil society and business leaders in assessing the balance between growth and other priorities.The report also identifies dive

13、rse archetypes of growth pathways and the countries that fit within them,each reflecting unique characteristics and challenges.These archetypes offer potential policy inspiration for countries with similar constraints and opportunities.Finally,the framework allows for developing a global picture:whi

14、le global averages mask significant disparities between countries,reflecting diverse policy priorities and implementation outcomes,our analysis reveals that the global economy is only halfway towards combining todays growth with longer-term innovativeness,inclusiveness,sustainability and resilience.

15、This work builds upon and owes a particular debt to the Forums Global Competitiveness Index,which has long espoused taking a comprehensive approach to growth and productivity.Since 2020,we have engaged in extensive consultations on developing a new conceptual framework fit for a new global context.W

16、e would like to thank,in particular,the members of the Global Future Council on the Future of Growth for their feedback,the dialogues held at the World Economic Forums inaugural Growth Summit,and the views of the network of Partner Institutes of the Forum that support data gathering for this framewo

17、rk and other insights from the Forum.Finally,we would like to express our gratitude to the core team that developed this report Jesse Caemmerer,Aengus Collins,Roberto Crotti,Philipp Grosskurth,Kateryna Karunska,Till Leopold,and Sriharsha Masabathula and to Ricky Li and Attilio Di Battista for their

18、support.This report will serve as the basis for the work of the World Economic Forums Future of Growth Initiative,using this framework as a foundation,a two-year effort to foster dialogue between policy-makers,business leaders and academics on charting new economic growth pathways.We invite leaders

19、to join this initiative,embracing the urgency and ambition required to address the multifaceted challenges outlined in this report.The future of growth must shift to a better balance between quantity and quality.A simple“return”to GDP growth is not enough.Instead,each country must undertake a unique

20、 and complex journey towards achieving innovative,inclusive,sustainable and resilient growth,while contributing to global resilience.This report aims to serve as a call to action for leaders to critically reassess and recalibrate their growth models and policies for a new economic era.Saadia Zahidi

21、Managing Director,World Economic ForumThe Future of Growth Report 20243Executive summaryGlobal growth has been slower in the past decade compared to previous ones,and the post-pandemic recovery is losing momentum.Between 2018 and 2023 on average high-income economies GDP(in purchasing-power-parity t

22、erms)grew by 1.4%annually across economies featured in the report,by 2.2%across upper-middle income economies,by 3.1%across lower-middle income economies,and by 3.1%across low-income economies.Total global GDP today is higher than its pre-pandemic level,but growth rates in 2023 remain below 4%across

23、 all income groups.This conventional GDP growth picture is incomplete without a deeper understanding of the underlying nature and quality of growth,and whether it is in synergy with global and national priorities.The question is not whether the world still needs economic growth,but how the growth ca

24、n be better aligned with other important priorities.This report provides a framework for looking at growth in the context of its quality and serves as a starting point for the Forums Future of Growth Initiative.Framework overviewThe Future of Growth Framework introducesa multidimensional approach th

25、at focuseson evaluating the quality of growth and thebalance between various priorities rather thanaggregating them into a single index.It isgrounded in four pillars that assess the qualityof growth:Innovativeness,Inclusiveness,Sustainability and Resilience.In addition to global analysis,an accompan

26、yingset of Country Dashboards aims to supportpolicy-makers in assessing the character andnature of a countrys economic growth andidentify trade-offs to resolve or synergies toexploit.Each dashboard collates an overviewof GDP-derived statistics as well as all of theframework data for each of the 107

27、economiescovered.Qualifying growth The world economy as a whole is halfwaytowards an ideal trajectory of fully innovative,inclusive,sustainable and resilient growth.Countries differ considerably in terms of policypriorities set as well as policy implementationresults.Global averages draw a mixed pic

28、tureof the worlds trajectory toward innovative,inclusive,sustainable and resilient growth.Innovativeness is the dimension that attains thelowest global score(with a global average of45.2 out of 100).The sustainability dimensionsglobal average is 46.8 out of 100,while theinclusiveness and resilience

29、dimensionsglobal average scores are 55.9 out of 100 and52.8 out of 100,respectively.At an individuallevel,no economy has attained a pillar scorehigher than 80 on any of the frameworksfour dimensions,where 100 is the theoreticalmaximum outcome possible.InnovativenessDigitalization rates across advanc

30、ed anddeveloping economies are diverging rather thanconverging,leading to persistent economicdivides and missed opportunities for innovation.In high-income economies,talent availabilityis an increasing bottleneck to further advanceinnovativeness,while opening an opportunity fortrade in services from

31、 developing economies.Within the Innovativeness pillars global averageof 45.2 are large differences across countryincome groups.High-income economiesaverage score(59.4)is more than twice thatof low-income economies(26.8),and about50%higher than that of upper-middle incomeeconomies(39.3),revealing a

32、correlationbetween the innovation-alignment of countriesgrowth trajectories and their GDP per capita.InclusivenessRising inequality of income and opportunityrisk entrenching headwinds to inclusion.Widespread access to basic services,inaddition to adequate social protection,willbe key to inclusive gr

33、owth in developed anddeveloping economies.The Inclusiveness pillarsglobal average is 55.9,with marked outcomedifferences across income groups.High-incomeeconomies average Inclusive growth score(68.9)is more than twice that of low-incomeeconomies(30.0),and about 50%higher thanthat of lower-middle inc

34、ome economies(44.8),highlighting a strong correlation between levelsof per-capita income and inclusion outcomes.Upper-middle income economies(54.8)onaverage exhibit a somewhat stronger inclusivegrowth performance compared to their showingon innovation,yet nevertheless score wellbehind high-incomes e

35、conomies.SustainabilityInstitutional commitments are yet to translateinto systemic hardwiring of emissions reductionThe Future of Growth Report 20244into growth models.Green finance and technology are the missing links on the path to sustainability.The Sustainability pillars global average is 46.8,a

36、s most countries continue to grow in ways that are not aligned with climate targets.Income-group trends for this pillar diverge from the other three dimensions of the Future of Growth Framework,with low-income economies(52.7)and lower-middle income economies(50.0)exhibiting,on average,stronger susta

37、inability-aligned growth compared to the rest of the world,offsetting weaker performance on green finance and technology due to lower resource use to date.High-income economies(45.8)and upper-middle income economies(44.0),by contrast,partially compensate for higher emissions with a stronger performa

38、nce on environmental technology.ResilienceInward-looking approaches are insufficientfor resilience,but localized efforts such as forstrengthening financial architecture,are alsokey.Most countries need better preparationand proactive investment for demographicchange.The global resilience pillar avera

39、ge is52.8,with more moderate outcome differencesacross country income groups compared to theInnovation and Inclusion pillars.High-incomecountries exhibit the strongest resilient growthperformance(61.9),followed by upper middle-income countries(50.0)and lower middle-income countries(45.8)in relative

40、proximity.Low-income countries are showing the leastresilient growth(39.0).Growth Pathway ArchetypesWith an average GDP of USD 52,475 percapita in 2023,high income economies growthpathway is generally characterised by highscores on inclusiveness,innovativeness,andresilience,but room to improve on su

41、stainability.With an average GDP of USD 17,900 percapita,upper middle income economies growthpathway generally features higher emphasison inclusiveness and resilience,with room toimprove on sustainability and innovativeness.With an average GDP of USD 7,633 per capita,lower middle income economies gr

42、owth pathway has generally been focused on resilience,with higher scores on sustainability than richer economies but room to improve on inclusiveness and innovativeness.With an average GDP of USD 1,533 per capita,low income economies growth pathway is generally characterised by a much lighter enviro

43、nmental footprint per capitaresulting in a high sustainability performancebut with room to improve on resilience,inclusiveness and innovativeness.While every country has a unique growthpathway shaped by a wide range ofcircumstantial factors,the data from theFuture of Growth Country Dashboards helpsi

44、dentify clusters of countries with similar growthcharacteristics.We group these clusters intoseven distinct“growth pathway archetypes,”with the aim to identify countries most closelyrelated in their growth characteristics and oftenface similar constraints and opportunities.Thisalso allows policy-mak

45、ers to identify additionalareas of improvement and look to countries thathave leveraged opportunities for high quality indifferent ways.The resulting archetypes exhibitsimilar high-level patterns,but with uniquedistinctions.The data and analysis presented in this reportaim to support policy-makers i

46、n assessing thecharacter and nature of a countrys economicgrowth and can be used to identify potentialareas to improve,trade-offs to resolve orsynergies to exploit.A comprehensive set ofdetailed Country Dashboards collate data onrecent growth as well as all of the frameworkdata for each of the 107 e

47、conomies covered.The World Economic Forums Future of Growth Initiative is a two-year campaign aimed at inspiring dialogue across stakeholders and action by policy-makers to chart new pathways for economic growth that balance innovation,inclusion,sustainability and resilience goals.We invite leaders

48、to join this effort to co-shape new solutions to the challenges highlighted in this report,working together with the urgency and ambition that the current context demands.The Future of Growth Report 20245IntroductionThe recent sustained slowdown in growth has been compounded by a succession of crise

49、s and dislocations.These crises have raised questions not just about the stability of prevailing approaches to stimulating economic growth,but about the goals and values underpinning it.It is now more than 15 years since the beginning of the global financial crisis,but it continues to cast a shadow,

50、not least in the policy choices of many advanced economies.The COVID-19 pandemic and the shock of lockdowns,1 left behind an aftermath of a surge in public debt levels and reversal of global development progress.2 Geopolitical tensions and conflicts have further reshaped an increasingly multipolar i

51、nternational order,with far-reaching implications for technology,growth and development.Overshadowing these developments is the growing awareness that the worlds rising temperature poses grave dangers to the long-term prospects for humanity,with the world currently on track for a temperature rise si

52、gnificantly above the targets set out in the Paris Agreement in 2015.3 In parallel,polarization and mistrust is growing in many societies,with only 50%of people trusting governments and only 41%trusting government leaders.4All of this has taken place against and has also frequently contributed to a

53、backdrop of increasing global contention over economic policies,norms and structures.The extent to which there was previously agreement on these matters should not be overstated,with older prescriptions for growth,including the so-called“Washington consensus”,having broken down before the global fin

54、ancial crisis had erupted.5 But the forces of change have intensified over the past two decades,in particular as politics in many advanced economies have fractured,as the power and resources of emerging economies have increased,and as many leaders across the world have sought to strengthen national

55、economic policy-making as a counterweight to the political and economic effects of globalization.The work in this report starts from two key premises.The first is that economic growth is an essential policy objective and a key prerequisite for improving living standards and making progress on almost

56、 any other policy agenda.The second is that growth policy is an inherently normative exercise,with trade-offs and synergies.As such,there will inevitably be disagreements on these normative considerations.The question is not whether the world still needs economic growth,but the extent to which the u

57、nderlying nature of the growth that is needed is synergistic with other important priorities.To help respond to this context,this report introduces a new quantitative framework to help complement traditional growth metrics and develop a more holistic view of the quality of growth.There is currently

58、no consensus towards a one-size-fits-all model or one recipe for good growth.Instead,countries have divergent interests,priorities and starting points,even in the face of shared global challenges.The Future of Growth Framework applies a multidimensional approach that balances various priorities rath

59、er than aggregating them into a single index.It is grounded in four pillars:Innovativeness,Inclusiveness,Sustainability and Resilience.The multiple pillars of this framework provide space for those divergences to co-exist,rather than being assigned a weight and summed up.Each pillar in this normativ

60、e framework denotes a positive,e.g.it is positive for a country to be innovative or resilient,or to take account of distributional and environmental considerations.Yet the framework,and the report,stop short of prescribing which of the pillars is more important,or what the optimal balance between th

61、em might be.Different countries have different circumstances and that will lead to different conclusions on those questions.The goal of the framework is not to prescribe a particular approach,but to provide a tool with which countries can explore areas to improve,trade-offs to resolve or synergies t

62、o develop.Out of the scope of the framework and this report are questions around improving the measurement of GDP itself;for example,by taking into account intangible value from digital services or by integrating the value of care work.This report comprises four sections.The first discusses the curr

63、ent global growth picture the trade-offs between a conventional short-term growth focus and a longer-term emphasis on the underlying quality of this growth and provides an overview of the Future of Growth Framework and the choices made in the construction of each of its four pillars.The second part

64、presents key global findings and current trends regarding the innovativeness,inclusiveness,sustainability and resilience of growth across countries.It also presents multiple The Future of Growth Report 20246“growth pathway archetypes”that demonstrate commonalities and differences of choices between

65、the countries covered.In keeping with the non-prescriptive nature of the framework,the report does not provide traditional country or regional performance comparisons.This is followed by a comprehensive set of detailed Country Dashboards that present the latest data on growth for each economy,togeth

66、er with all of the data included in the framework,to develop a comprehensive view for each of the 107 economies covered.This section is designed for country specific analysis and calls the attention of policy-makers,investors,academics and civil society in various national contexts.The data can also

67、 be accessed online at https:/www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-growth-report.Finally,the reports technical appendixes contain the methodological details related to the framework.The Future of Growth Report 20247The Future of Growth Framework1Economic growth can be defined as an increase in

68、 the quantity or quality of production of goods and services in a country over time.It is typically measured by growth in gross domestic product(GDP).Growth is important primarily because many such goods and services contribute to peoples quality of life:from basic food and shelter to more complex t

69、hings such as medical technologies,leisure activities or security.While not everything important to societies can be reduced to goods and services,systematic attempts to improve the lives of people almost invariably entail an increase in the quantity or quality of at least some goods and services,wh

70、ether produced in the private sector,the public sector or a mixture of the two.The positive impact of more or better goods and services can be particularly significant in the lowest-income countries,where growth is more likely than in richer economies to mean the difference between basic human needs

71、 being met or not.Since the 2007 global financial crisis,global economic growth has lost momentum.On average,global short-term GDP growth has declined from about 2%in advanced and 5.8%in emerging and developing economies in the early 2000s to about 1.4%and 1.7%,respectively,in the post-COVID period(

72、Figure 1).GDP growth is often used as an indicator of a nations overall economic health and prosperity.However,any contemporary assessment of growth needs to look beyond quantity it is the underlying nature and quality of growth,and the way in which it is achieved,that ultimately matters most for po

73、sitive economic,societal and environmental outcomes.Countries policy choices today are shaping their long-term growth trajectories and have lasting implications for individuals,societies,international relations and the planet.In recent years,there have been debates around the continued need for From

74、 the growth we have to the growth we need1.102.5%5.0%7.5%Average annual GDP growth rate,%10.0%3.4%2.6%5.8%2%4.2%1.3%1.7%1.4%-20-2022GDP growth(%)by income group in selected periodsFIGURE 1SourceWorld Economic Forum,Future of Growth Report 2024;based on constant(2015)USD G

75、DP data from World Bank,World Development Indicators database.Low&middle incomeHigh incomeNotePeriods are defined as intervals between global recession/slowdown.1991,2001,2009 and 2020 are the four years where global growth was lowest over the past 30 years.Income groups include all countries identi

76、fied as such by the World Bank taxonomy.Low&middle income combines Low-income,Lower-middle income,and Upper-middle income countries.The Future of Growth Report 20248growth in advanced economies and how GDP as a measure could better account for the value of unpaid work or count intangible assets.The

77、core question,however,is how the future of growth can be better aligned with other important priorities.This report draws from the rich set of literature on this question over the last decade,including the World Economic Forums longstanding work on competitiveness,to propose a holistic tool for asse

78、ssing the quality of future growth.The Future of Growth Framework aims to contribute to a paradigm shift in assessing economic growth by adopting a multidimensional approach,focusing on the quality,balance and alignment of growth with broader global and national priorities.The framework therefore ca

79、ptures the character of a countrys growth by qualifying performance across four areas essential to driving more balanced growth:innovation,inclusion,environmental sustainability and systemic resilience(Figure 2).Economic policy is an inherently normative exercise,with trade-offs and synergies drivin

80、g policy choices.There will inevitably be disagreements on these normative considerations.The framework does not aim to suggest that innovation,inclusion,sustainability and resilience are the only priorities to be balanced against growth,nor that they should be prioritized equally everywhere.Instead

81、,it aims to provide a transparent and holistic way for countries to deliberate on how to prioritize them relative to growth and relative to each other.Overview of framework construction1.2The Future of Growth FrameworkFIGURE 2SourceWorld Economic Forum,Future of Growth Report 2024.GDP per capitacons

82、tant 2017 PPP5-year per-capita GDP growth%change5-year average GDP growth%changeInnovativenessExtent to which an economys trajectory can absorb and evolve in response to new technological,social,institutional and organizational developments to improve the longer-term quality of growth.InclusivenessE

83、xtent to which an economys trajectory includes all stakeholders in the benefits and opportunities it creates.ResilienceExtent to which an economys trajectory can withstand and bounce back from shocks.SustainabilityExtent to which an economys trajectory can keep its ecological footprint within finite

84、 environmental boundaries.Talent ecosystemAvailability of talent1-7(best)Education attainment0-4.5(best)Digital and technology talent1-7(best)Resources ecosystemMobile network coverage%pop.ICT capitalUSD per capitaInnovative provision of basic goods andservices1-7(best)Financial ecosystemLong term,v

85、enture and SME financeavailability1-7(best)Digital payments%adult pop.Domestic credit to private sector%GDPTechnology ecosystemBusiness culture and competition1-7(best)State of cluster development1-7(best)Exports of advanced services%GDPMedium and high tech%manufacturing v.a.Patent applicationstotal

86、Research and development expenditure%GDPScientific publicationsh indexKnowledge-intensive employment%total employmentTrademarks applicationsper 1,000 pop.Institutional ecosystemRegulatory quality-2.5/+2.5(best)Human capital in public sector1-7(best)Policy vision and stability1-7(best)Talent ecosyste

87、mInclusion in workforce1-7(best)Universal health coverage0-100(best)Lack of social protection%pop.Gender parity in labour force0-100(best)Inequality in education0-100(highly unequal)Income distribution%share bottom 50Social mobility1-7(best)Resources ecosystemAccess to transport and housing1-7(best)

88、Household financial security%adult pop.Healthy diet unaffordability%pop.Individuals using the internet%pop.Access to safe drinking-water%pop.Financial ecosystemWealth inequality%owned by bottom 50%Access to financial services1-7(best)Access to bank accounts and saving%adult pop.Rural electricity gap

89、%urbanTechnology ecosystemGender parity in knowledge-intensiveoccupations0-100(best)Inclusion in position of leadership1-7(best)ICT cost%GNI per capitaInstitutional ecosystemCivil rights0-60(high)Political participation0-1(best)Inclusion in public space0-1(worst)Equal opportunity in public sector1-7

90、(best)Budget pluralism0-4(most pluralistic)Talent ecosystemTalent for green and energy transition1-7(best)Buyer sophistication on environmentand nature1-7(best)Resources ecosystemBiodiversity intactness0-1(most intact)Annual greenhouse gas emissionstn CO equiv.per cap.Renewable energy consumption%to

91、talAgricultural environmental damage0-1.4(worst)Total water withdrawalm per capita/yearTotal wastetons per capita/yearFinancial ecosystemInvestment in renewable energy%GDPTechnology ecosystemGreen patentstotalEnvironmental technology trade%total tradeInstitutional ecosystemEnergy efficiency regulati

92、on0-100(best)Renewable energy regulation0-100(best)Fossil-fuel subsidiesUSD per capitaTalent ecosystemOld-age dependencyratio 64+to 15-64Fill vacancies by hiring foreign labour1-7(best)Investment in reskilling1-7(best)Participation in mid-career training%25-54 pop.Hospital bedsper 1,000 pop.Health w

93、orkersper 10,000 pop.Resources ecosystemExport product concentration0-100(high conc.)Energy source diversification0-100(high conc.)Water resourcesm per capita/yearFood supply concentration%share top importerCommodity supply concentration%share top importerInfrastructure quality1-7(best)Cybersecurity

94、 index0-100(best)Financial ecosystemCountry credit rating0-100(best)Bank concentration%total assetsFinancial system resilience1-7(best)Bank system default riskz-scoreTechnology ecosystemTechnology supply concentration%share top importerInstitutional ecosystemState legitimacy0-10(worst)Social polariz

95、ation0-4(no polariz.)Political stability-2.5/+2.5(best)Government adaptation1-7(best)Corruption perceptions index0-100(best)Rule of law-2.5/+2.5(best)Environmental treaties0-29(best)The Future of Growth Report 20249The starting point for the framework is an overview of a countrys recent economic gro

96、wth performance,measured by three core indicators:GDP per capita,GDP growth,and GDP per-capita growth over the past five years.Rather than reducing economic activity to a single indicator,this combination captures the growth of economic activity in absolute terms and relative to its population,as we

97、ll as the per-capita growth rates over five years to assess the longer-term economic trajectory of an economy.Although there are several methodological and conceptual shortcomings of the conventional GDP metric,it remains in widespread use today by most policy-makers,media,academics,civil society an

98、d business leaders.Our efforts,therefore,are focused on complementing its use with additional areas of relevance for the future of quality growth.Future editions of the report will continue to assess additional growth metrics within this on-going debate.6Beyond the context provided by GDP measures o

99、n the scale of growth,the Future of Growth Frameworks analytical core are four pillars that capture the extent to which a countrys economic activity is aligned with innovation,inclusion,sustainability and resilience goals.In other words,the quality of that growth.By aggregating scores of the individ

100、ual indicators in each pillar,the framework is designed to produce an aggregate result for each pillar on a 0-100 scale,where 100 is an ideal and hypothetical case where a country achieves perfect performance on every component of the pillar.The Innovativeness pillar captures the extent to which an

101、economys trajectory can absorb and evolve in response to new technological,social,institutional and organizational developments to improve the longer-term quality of growth.When countries are already at a relatively high level of innovation,moving their innovation frontier further out is more diffic

102、ult than adapting or absorbing existing technologies.Complementarities between technology and talent become more important and more specific,often focused on nascent branches of knowledge.As a result,research and development(R&D)levels and ease of finding talent are common bottlenecks to further exp

103、and innovation in these countries.In the context of developing economies,technology adoption requires adjusting production systems and developing capabilities that are not yet mature or available in their economic systems.For instance,the capacity to produce medium and high-tech manufacturing goods

104、often requires acquiring the technology and know-how to participate in international value chains.To capture performance across these various scenarios,the pillar includes areas such as financing to drive innovation,scientific and technological development,talent availability,and regulatory and poli

105、cy support.The Inclusiveness pillar captures the extent to which an economys trajectory includes all stakeholders in the benefits and opportunities it creates.At a global level,growth has been good for inclusion,driving up the incomes of those who have the least by a higher margin and narrowing the

106、gaps between rich and poor countries:over the past two decades average incomes in the top 10%of countries have gone from 50 times as high as average incomes in the bottom half of the global country distribution to being 40 times as high.Within countries,however,the trend has gone in the opposite dir

107、ection:the average incomes of the top 10%have gone from being 8.5 to 15 times as high as the average incomes of the bottom half.However,growth-relevant dimensions of inclusiveness go far beyond income distribution.The pillar takes stock of a countrys performance in areas such as participation in the

108、 labour force and education;access to services including housing,transport,and finance;gender parity in research and technology;and the equal application of civil rights.The Sustainability pillar captures the extent to which an economys trajectory can keep its ecological footprint within finite envi

109、ronmental boundaries.On current trajectories,the world is set to miss its Paris Agreement targets for global warming by a considerable margin.The consequences of rising temperatures are already becoming clear in changing patterns of extreme weather,and dramatic new annual records have been set on in

110、dicators such as air and ocean temperatures.It is estimated that global emissions must peak by 2025 to meet the Paris Agreement goals.Yet,global emissions are still rising even as countries agreed at the latest Conference of the Parties to transition away from fossil fuels.While continued growth is

111、vital to reduce poverty and increase living standards,policy-makers must address the environmental impact of their countrys growth.To that end,this pillar captures a countrys performance in areas such as the physical impact of production on the environment;conserving nature;support for the green tra

112、nsition in the financial,technological and institutional domains;and consumption behaviours of the population.The Resilience pillar captures the extent to which an economys trajectory can withstand and bounce back from shocks.The dramatic global disruptions triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic pushed

113、the concept of resilience rapidly to the fore.Compared to innovation,inclusion and environmental sustainability,there is relatively little consensus about what enables countries to recover and ideally to adapt or improve in the wake of a shock.Compared to responding to discrete risks,resilience invo

114、lves preparing for and adapting to systemic risks that span interconnected systems,which often require building some level of redundancy and slack.The pillar captures this at the national level in areas such as physical resource The Future of Growth Report 202410dependency,macroeconomic stability an

115、d the depth of the healthcare system.Resilience is also inherently global when it comes to cross-border spillovers or risks such as pandemics or climate change,highlighting the need for countries to contribute to shared global challenges.This is captured by indicators such as participation in enviro

116、nmental treaties.Although individual pillar scores are meaningful and informative in isolation,it is the pattern of results across the Innovativeness,Inclusiveness,Sustainability and Resilience pillars,in conjunction with GDP growth figures,that provides a multidimensional assessment of the characte

117、r of growth.As a result,the framework does not further aggregate pillar scores into a single index,nor does it rank countries.This is a departure from the approach taken in the World Economic Forums Global Competitiveness Report.Rankings can be a powerful tool for focusing policy attention and actio

118、n,but they also run the risk of glossing over complexity and encouraging a focus on the relative position of peers and rivals rather than the underlying substance.The focus here is instead on how countries performances are balanced against their growth performance and across the four pillars.The res

119、ults section in this report discusses which countries have performed well in various parts of the framework,but this is done with a view to highlighting drivers of success rather than presenting a list of the top performers.Over the two-year timeframe of the Future of Growth Initiative,this framewor

120、k will be refined and the merit of introducing rankings considered fully.A detailed methodological discussion of the Future of Growth Frameworks construction,as well as the selection and technical interpretation of each of its indicators is available in Appendix A and Appendix B.The multidimensional

121、 perspective of the Future of Growth Framework makes visible the potential trade-offs and synergies between its various dimensions.Unlike many composite indexes,the objective in this framework is not simultaneous maximization of performance across all its pillars and dimensions.While this may be con

122、ceptually desirable,it is challenging in practice.Instead,the tool is intended to bring greater clarity on a holistic view of the scale as well as the quality of growth and stimulate thinking around policy choices regarding trade-offs and synergies between these dimensions.Research suggests that the

123、re may be a direct trade-off between desirable pillar outcomes and growth maximization,at least in the short term,while longer-term growth performance and many pillar outcomes may be more synergistic.However,important policy choices often continue to be made under severe time pressure and within sho

124、rt political and business cycles.These potential trade-offs and synergies are documented below as background to the global results and as a guide ahead of using Country Dashboards.The relationship between Growth and Sustainability remains highly divergent,with much of the world struggling to create

125、conditions for environmentally sustainable growth.For example,a steady spate of recent economic woes has sidetracked efforts to ramp up environmental action.Lagging global growth has refocused leaders attention on immediate economic and financial issues,rate hikes to contain runaway inflation have i

126、ncreased borrowing costs for investments critical to the green transition,8 and surging prices hampered efforts to produce and buy green.9 Each of these cases stems from trade-offs,at least in the short term.Some have argued that“green growth,”as envisaged by several prominent international organiza

127、tions,is a feasible path by“decoupling”growth from environmental harm and instead tapping into longer-term synergies,citing cases of economies that have successfully reduced emissions while increasing growth.10 Skeptics argue that there is currently no evidence that the level of decoupling assumed b

128、y any of the scenarios needed to keep temperature changes below 1.5C is technologically feasible.The history of accelerating growth since the first industrial revolution is also the history of a remarkable decline in the proportion of humanity living in extreme poverty.11 Growth that delivers goods

129、and services taken for granted in the worlds richer societies to more of the worlds population continues to be in high demand across the world.However,the International Monetary Fund(IMF)estimates that a 1%rise in annual GDP is on average followed by a 0.7%rise in emissions in developing countries.1

130、2 Policy-makers across developed and developing economies must contend with advancing growth while reducing its environmental footprint.There are both trade-offs and synergies when it comes to the relationship between Growth and Inclusiveness,which continues to be reflected in domestic policy debate

131、s in many countries.Many of the factors that enabled rapid growth,including globalization and technological transformation,are believed to have exacerbated inequalities along the way.Although there is undisputed evidence that distribution of the economic benefits from these trends has been highly un

132、equal,establishing causality and clear patters of the relationship between growth and inequality has proved challenging.Trade-offs,synergies and policy choices1.3The Future of Growth Report 202411Some arguments suggest that,over short and medium term,higher inequality could have positive impact on g

133、rowth as stronger market incentives reward entrepreneurship and innovation.Other research suggests that high inequality is likely to be detrimental to growth over time due to lack of human capital development,low financial and political inclusion,and stagnant socioeconomic mobility.The Organisation

134、for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD)estimates that the rise of income inequality between 1985 and 2005 resulted in a contraction of cumulative economic growth between 1990 and 2010 by an average of 4.7 percentage points across OECD countries.13 More recent evidence highlights the non-line

135、ar nature of the relationship.For example,the IMF finds that at a particular level of inequality measured at a Gini coefficient of 27 the direction of the relationship changes and inequality can impair economic development.14Some researchers also highlight the central role of inequality of opportuni

136、ties in determining the direction and strength of the relationship between growth and inequality.Using intergenerational mobility as an indicator of inequality of opportunity,studies find that societies where opportunities are unequally distributed,income inequality exerts a greater drag on long-ter

137、m growth by undermining human capital development and reinforcing poverty cycles.15 The World Bank highlights the acute impact of inherited circumstances on income disparities in developing countries.According to recent estimates,as much as 20%of overall inequality in Botswana,Eswatini,Lesotho and S

138、outh Africa can be attributed to location,gender,age and parental background,with the figure reaching almost 50%when race factors are considered.16The synergistic relationship between Growth and Innovativeness is well-evidenced within economic theory whereby capacity to innovate improves with econom

139、ic development in virtuous cycles.However there are potential trade-offs in this area,largely revolving around ongoing debates regarding the efficacy of industrial policy to improve a countrys innovation capacity in a cost-efficient manner.17 In particular,the experiences of the pandemic and supply

140、shortages stemming from conflict have led more advanced economies to turn inward and boost localized innovation;but the long-term results from previous waves of government-incentivized innovation have been mixed in developed and developing economies alike.Additionally,the geopolitically competitive

141、nature of some aspects of innovation in technological advancements risks reducing the scope of options and opportunity for developing economies.Finally,the relationship between Growth and Resilience faces unavoidable tensions.Where efficiency aims to optimize resources in the current environment,res

142、ilience demands preparing for and adapting to future shocks,the nature and scope of which are often unknown.18 Resilient systems are typically characterized by the very features diversity and redundancy,or slack that efficiency seeks to overcome.19 Building resilience,then,often comes at the expense

143、 of short-term gains,while its benefits are uncertain and realized by performance around future crises of unknown scope and scale.However,resilience is not necessarily at odds with growth over time,especially in a global economy increasingly beset by shocks.As argued by one recent study,businesses t

144、hat prioritize near-term gains at the expense of long-term resilience building“may have a positive long-run expected value but a near certain probability of failure.if there is a 90%chance of doubling your investment each year and a 10%chance of going bust,the expected gain is 80%per year but over a

145、 long enough timeframe it becomes nearly 100%certain that you will eventually lose everything.”20 Countries may face similar probabilities if they pursue only efficiency and short-term gain over longer term resilience.Investing in long-term resilience-building measures may be especially difficult in

146、 an economic environment characterized by sluggish growth,high inflation and borrowing costs,and painful debt burdens.21 As a result,governments face serious short-term pressure to fund public services,often leaving little room for resilience-building measures.This is especially so in developing cou

147、ntries,where building resilience requires high upfront costs,making investments in climate adaptation or clean energy grids hard to establish,given their higher borrowing costs and often conditional debt burdens.22 No single growth model can be applied to all countries.Each countrys priorities and p

148、athways to innovative,inclusive,sustainable and resilient growth are unique.The Future of Growth Framework does not determine which dimension should be prioritized at any given moment in time.Instead,it provides a holistic overview of the current status of each of these qualitative dimensions.By doi

149、ng so,it aims to equip stakeholders with a guide to determine which trade-offs they are willing to make,and which synergies are most relevant to exploit in their particular context.The Future of Growth Report 202412Qualifying growth2Applying the Future of Growth Framework to a global country data se

150、t reveals disparities in growth as well as among the four qualitative dimensions.Global averages draw a mixed picture of the worlds trajectory toward innovative,inclusive,sustainable and resilient growth(Figure 3).Between 2018 and 2023 on average high-income economies GDP(in purchasing-power-parity

151、terms)grew by 1.4%annually across economies featured in the report,by 2.2%across upper-middle income economies,by 3.1%across lower-middle income economies,and by 3.1%across low-income economies.Total global GDP today is higher than its pre-pandemic level,but growth rates remain below 4%across all in

152、come groups.Global growth has been slower in the past decade compared to previous ones,and the post-pandemic recovery is losing momentum.Notably,in per-capita terms,growth is even slower than it is in absolute terms,especially in low-income countries,where GDP growth per capita is less than 0.2%.How

153、ever,as the Future of Growth Framework introduced in this report emphasizes,this conventional GDP growth picture is incomplete without a deeper understanding of the underlying nature and quality of growth,and whether it is aligned with other global and national priorities.Decision-makers can use the

154、 framework to evaluate the quality of their countrys growth,find potential areas for improvement,identify trade-offs to resolve or synergies to exploit,and act relative to their strategies,objectives and priorities.Global results2.1100SustainabilityWorld 46.8ResilienceWorld 52.8Innovativeness World

155、45.2InclusivenessWorld 55.9Income groupLow incomeLower middle incomeUpper middle incomeHigh incomeNo classificationFuture of Growth Framework scores,by pillar and income groupFIGURE 3020406080Pillar scoreA.PillarThe Future of Growth Report 202413With an average GDP of USD 52,475 per capita(at purcha

156、sing power parity)in 2023,high income economies growth pathway is generally characterised by high scores on inclusiveness(68.9),innovativeness(59.4),and resilience(61.9),but room to improve on sustainability(45.8).With an average GDP of USD 17,900 per capita,upper middle income economies growth path

157、way generally features higher emphasis on inclusiveness(54.8)and resilience(50.0),with room to improve on sustainability(44.0)and innovativeness(39.3).With an average GDP of USD 7,633 per capita,lower middle income economies growth pathway has generally been focused on resilience(50.0),with higher s

158、cores on sustainability(51.3)than richer economies but room to improve on inclusiveness(44.8)and innovativeness(34.9).With an average GDP of USD 1,533 per capita in 2023,low income economies growth pathway is generally characterised by a much lighter environmental footprint per capitaresulting in a

159、high sustainability performance(52.7)but with room to improve on resilience(39.0),inclusiveness(29.9)and innovativeness(26.8).0Low incomeLower middle incomeUpper middle incomeHigh incomeLow incomeLower middle incomeUpper middle incomeHigh incomeSourceWorld Economic Forum,Future of Growth

160、Report 2024.NoteThe Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela currently remains without classification in the applied World Bank income group taxonomy.Future of Growth Framework scores,by pillar and income groupFIGURE 3020406080020406080020406080020406080Pillar scorePillar scoreInnovativenessInclusivenessSus

161、tainabilityResilienceB.Income groupThe Future of Growth Report 202414Future of Growth Framework:Country results dashboardFIGURE 4EconomyGDP per capita PPP(2023)Average GDP per capita growth(2018-2023)Average GDP growth(2018-2023)Income groupInnovativenessInclusivenessSustainabilityResilienceScoreAlg

162、eria11,176-0.301.90Lower middle34.2050.1544.8043.79Angola5,781-3.500.00Lower middle17.9727.7447.9940.49Argentina21,652-1.00-0.20Upper middle34.6758.9438.6550.81Armenia16,1294.904.30Upper middle38.8660.9744.4046.01Australia52,8311.002.30High65.9276.2743.0569.47Austria56,4210.401.20High66.2773.7051.88

163、68.79Bahrain49,5970.502.40High53.4055.6930.8147.94Bangladesh7,0855.006.30Lower middle33.7239.3046.9246.37Belgium53,7620.901.50High65.7571.3845.6363.46Benin3,5172.905.20Lower middle39.5041.2653.4049.29Bolivia(Plurinational State of)8,447-0.602.70Lower middle29.1152.2043.2545.40Bosnia and Herzegovina1

164、6,0382.802.80Upper middle32.7053.3345.3545.40Botswana15,8431.103.00Upper middle40.2853.4745.7346.87Brazil16,4021.200.50Upper middle41.8155.3155.9951.98Bulgaria27,5954.202.50Upper middle47.0264.4944.9154.43Cameroon3,8070.503.80Lower middle29.0733.0653.6842.55Canada48,861-0.201.60High65.1275.8044.7765

165、.58Chad1,476-1.501.00Low22.2723.8362.0533.16Chile24,4530.201.80High46.2364.8949.4757.36Colombia15,9151.302.80Upper middle39.7553.3647.7847.94Costa Rica21,91.803.20Upper middle43.0062.7848.8356.57Cte DIvoire5,6862.906.30Lower middle34.6042.8754.0945.15Cyprus44,0561.703.40High55.3964.5138.4751.41Czech

166、ia40,0480.002.20High56.9871.8245.4657.97Democratic Republic of the Congo1,2332.204.90Low21.8827.5150.5135.68Denmark61,2321.602.20High73.4077.6454.7268.51Dominican Republic20,8492.604.80Upper middle33.8452.4838.6849.35Conceptually,the world economy as a whole has come halfway toward a hypothetically

167、ideal trajectory of fully innovative,inclusive,sustainable,and resilient growth.Innovativeness is the dimension that attains the lowest global score(with a global average of 45.2 out of 100),mostly driven by high concentration of innovation hubs within a limited number of economies.The sustainabilit

168、y dimensions global average is 46.8 out of 100,while the inclusiveness and resilience dimensions global average scores are 55.9 out of 100 and 52.8 out of 100,respectively.At an individual level,no country or economy has attained a pillar score higher than 80 on any of the frameworks four dimensions

169、,where 100 is the theoretical maximum outcome possible(Figure 4).Innovativeness has the largest spread between maximum and minimum values;very few economies are following a primarily innovation-aligned growth trajectory.Only 15 economies cross the two-thirds mark,with the highest country outcome rea

170、ching a score of 80.4.Over 70 economies exhibit an Innovativeness pillar score of less than 50 out of 100.Inclusiveness has the second-largest spread.On this pillar,30 economies all from the high-income category are at least two-thirds of the way toward the conceptual maximum,yet none exhibit a scor

171、e higher than 77.9.Over 30 countries score below the midway point.In terms of Sustainability,no country exhibits a score of more than 62.9 out of 100,while 69 countries exhibit a score of less than 50.This pillar has the lowest spread between maximum and minimum scores.In terms of Resilience,only ei

172、ght countries cross the threshold of being two-thirds of the way toward the conceptual maximum score.The remainder of this chapter provides details of the findings first,across each of the Future of Growth Frameworks four pillar dimensions and,second,by identifying particular clusters or“archetypes”

173、of countries and their growth trajectories observed in the data.The Future of Growth Report 202415Future of Growth Framework:Country results dashboardFIGURE 4EconomyGDP per capita PPP(2023)Average GDP per capita growth(2018-2023)Average GDP growth(2018-2023)Income groupInnovativenessInclusivenessSus

174、tainabilityResilienceScoreEcuador10,852-1.300.70Upper middle31.6252.9141.9446.18Egypt13,9882.804.30Lower middle39.6244.1049.6246.53El Salvador9,5721.702.10Upper middle31.5541.7543.9244.42Estonia36,9521.002.40High64.3275.6343.6965.07Finland48,9060.301.10High68.0377.6857.9971.25France48,0040.401.10Hig

175、h66.6771.8952.6964.31Georgia18,2635.004.30Upper middle44.1060.6641.5754.84Germany53,9450.101.10High69.4172.9356.3365.50Ghana5,6411.003.80Lower middle36.8848.6053.4851.20Greece32,5642.301.10High45.7363.6645.7853.98Guatemala8,6551.503.50Upper middle32.3041.3947.4843.81Honduras5,8510.603.10Lower middle

176、28.6444.2945.9142.34Hungary35,6172.503.10High49.4466.1051.6257.96Iceland57,045-0.303.00High58.9677.6739.3862.57India7,5023.105.50Lower middle40.2341.6956.0451.21Indonesia12,9362.304.10Upper middle44.6250.3545.0657.92Iran(Islamic Republic of)n.a.1.202.40Lower middle34.6645.4435.4938.88Ireland112,4345

177、.908.60High63.7770.1642.4463.21Italy44,3230.800.70High58.4266.8150.5558.78Jamaica10,6150.300.80Upper middle36.1055.5743.1344.52Japan42,5760.400.50High66.4068.6752.6466.34Jordan10,4640.801.90Lower middle45.0653.0158.2355.01Kazakhstan26,7221.002.70Upper middle34.6063.2028.9149.14Kenya5,3732.204.50Lowe

178、r middle37.5642.6457.2448.56Korea,Republic of46,3252.002.50High68.8170.4253.0960.96Kuwait42,286-1.600.10High40.9752.5829.7551.77Kyrgyzstan5,2590.303.20Lower middle32.0253.1144.1641.66Lao PDR7,9951.204.60Lower middle32.2743.1451.4342.32Latvia33,4042.202.30High43.8369.2646.7159.06Lesotho2,642-1.000.30

179、Lower middle29.6533.6747.9629.96Lithuania40,2272.502.80High53.2073.4147.8063.18Luxembourg117,0620.202.20High65.6375.2331.1572.57Malawi1,363-0.203.20Low33.7434.8656.8543.67Malaysia30,2922.404.00Upper middle52.3361.7241.5163.63Mali2,156-0.304.30Low31.5432.5851.4935.62Malta51,8572.105.80High57.9569.813

180、6.4456.87Mauritius23,9750.802.30Upper middle42.1555.8937.9456.70Mexico20,402-0.301.40Upper middle37.8851.4646.6646.00Mongolia12,3250.903.70Lower middle34.7854.5124.4048.61Morocco8,5020.302.20Lower middle41.2149.7350.3453.53Nepal4,0311.604.10Lower middle31.4641.7352.1043.44Netherlands59,8911.201.90Hi

181、gh73.3075.9349.1765.89New Zealand43,9561.102.90High63.1076.9838.2172.43Nigeria5,022-0.502.00Lower middle30.1235.5453.2640.61North Macedonia17,4741.702.20Upper middle39.1155.4648.7945.57Oman32,133-1.301.70High48.3155.6742.6555.72Pakistan5,5330.703.50Lower middle33.6138.8254.0743.47The Future of Growt

182、h Report 202416Future of Growth Framework:Country results dashboardFIGURE 4SourceWorld Economic Forum,Future of Growth Report 2024;GDP data based on International Monetary Fund(IMF)World Economic Outlook,October 2023.EconomyGDP per capita PPP(2023)Average GDP per capita growth(2018-2023)Average GDP

183、growth(2018-2023)Income groupInnovativenessInclusivenessSustainabilityResilienceScorePanama34,9121.503.90High36.5055.3143.3955.28Paraguay12,6890.102.70Upper middle33.0950.2343.0249.87Peru12,9830.002.30Upper middle33.7050.3642.7848.44Philippines9,2521.504.60Lower middle42.1148.3050.6854.14Poland37,19

184、93.103.60High49.1564.7050.6656.96Portugal36,9451.601.90High50.9369.3352.3662.69Qatar93,2970.301.80High58.7356.3937.4159.27Romania33,5163.003.60High43.3163.9351.7056.97Rwanda2,5633.706.20Low37.6639.6158.2352.82Saudi Arabia55,9180.202.30High55.9155.9335.0256.49Senegal3,5331.305.20Lower middle33.1740.0

185、453.4747.62Serbia21,3004.002.50Upper middle45.5160.0046.8656.05Sierra Leone1,7130.700.90Low22.2729.4247.6444.72Singapore108,7332.002.90High76.4369.5339.9563.55Slovenia41,9931.802.90High52.7672.0941.9358.77South Africa13,243-0.900.80Upper middle44.0952.8747.5748.79Spain41,2290.401.80High56.0670.6752.

186、4858.28Sri Lankan.a.n.a.n.a.Lower middle35.0350.4747.7345.18Sweden54,0850.502.10High74.9275.7862.8771.02Switzerland73,1420.801.80High80.3777.8649.8169.92Thailand18,3720.301.80Upper middle47.9455.6640.8451.51Tunisia10,823-0.901.00Lower middle35.5753.6449.9347.88Trkiye34,2173.504.70Upper middle40.0349

187、.7444.8844.24Ukraine11,685-1.20-3.90Lower middle46.4464.7950.9951.72United Arab Emirates72,6710.802.90High57.5556.0838.8964.56United Kingdom46,428-0.201.30High68.4572.2453.9961.43United Republic of Tanzania2,9372.205.80Lower middle33.0839.4954.6246.27United States of America65,6881.402.10High74.0970

188、.6443.5564.60Uruguay23,6760.701.20High42.7268.1940.7861.84Venezuela,Bolivarian Republic of6,523n.a.n.a.No class.28.6042.4933.1135.82Viet Nam11,6693.805.80Lower middle44.3556.2356.8756.92Yemen1,677-3.60-5.40Low17.9822.1341.8927.57Zimbabwe2,246-1.301.80Lower middle29.7235.2256.2134.97World19,0920.911.

189、86-45.2055.9146.8352.75The Future of Growth Report 202417InnovativenessThe global Innovativeness pillar average is 45.2,yet with large outcome differences across country income groups.High-income economies average score(59.4)is more than twice that of low-income economies(26.8),and about 50%higher t

190、han that of upper-middle income ones(39.3),revealing an increasing innovation-alignment of countries growth trajectories as they increase their GDP per capita.This result is in line with economic theory,whereby capacity to innovate improves with economic development in virtuous cycles.The more count

191、ries increase their capacity to adopt and produce new technologies and innovative business models,the more they can achieve higher standards of living.At the same time,at higher levels of income,countries tend to further specialize in technologically advanced sectors and value chains,thus improving

192、their capacity for innovation even more.In low-and middle-income countries higher innovativeness is also associated with higher growth rates.As countries are catching up with advanced economies,greater innovativeness leads to greater capacity to absorb technologies and develop capabilities,which in

193、turn contributes to attaining higher growth rates.Results by pillar2.21.011.321.950.221.382.183.053.1052,47517,90034.926.8ICT capital and connectivity2.Technology absorption1.ICT capital and connectivity2.Technology absorption1.ICT capital and connectivity2.Research capacity1.Talent availability2.In

194、sufficient R&D1.7,63339.31,53359.43.51.750SourceWorld Economic Forum,Future of Growth Report 2024;GDP data based on IMF World Economic Outlook,October 2023.NoteGroup values for GDP and pillar scores are based on countries covered by theFuture of Growth Report 2024.HighUpper middleLower middleLowInno

195、vativeness pillarFIGURE 5Income groupGDP per capitaPPP,2023Average GDP growth,%(2018-2023)Innovativeness scoreTop 2 Innovativeness challengesAverage GDP per capita growth,%(2018-2023)Higher growthLower growthDigitalization rates across advanced and developing economies are diverging rather than conv

196、erging,leading to persistent economic divides and missed opportunities for innovationDigitalization is one of the main reasons why developing economies Innovativeness scores,on average,lag those of advanced economies.Trend analysis shows that the speed at which developing countries adopt digital tec

197、hnologies is slower than that at which advanced economies improve their digital capabilities.Gaps in digital capabilities including computer hardware and equipment,telecommunication equipment,and computer software and services thus enlarge rather than reduce existing divergences(Figure 6).The fast d

198、iffusion of cellular phones and applications observed in most developing and emerging economies in the past two decades suggested the possibility of technology-driven“leapfrogging”traditional development pathways.Anecdotal evidence shows that while e-banking and other applications have greatly benef

199、itted inclusion of people into the economies of developing countries,there is a risk that these technologies become obsolete.New applications require increasingly larger internet bandwidth,stable internet connections and faster processing power.In 2022,more than half of the population in many Sub-Sa

200、haran African economies,and between 30 and 40%in some Latin American economies,was not covered by an above-3G-technology signal and this data may under-state the actual coverage required to run advanced applications.This has important implications for the future of growth in developing economies.In

201、the current geopolitical context,with limited space for further merchandise trade growth,important future development opportunities will likely pass through trade in services.23 Low levels of connectivity digitalization limit the possibility of countries to participate in new digital global value ch

202、ains.The global share of employment in services has increased from 35%to about 51%over the past 30 years.24 High-value added services are important to participate in manufacturing value chains.For instance,across OECD countries,digital-intensive services value added embodied in manufacturing The Fut

203、ure of Growth Report 20240022050002500ICT capital per person,USDYearHigh incomeLow&middle incomeSourceAuthors calculation,based on The Conference Board,Total Economy Database.NoteHigh income and Low&middle income values include the 43 high income and the 64 low and m

204、iddle income countries covered by this report,respectively.ICT capital consists of computer hardware and equipment,telecommunication equipment and computer software services.The widening digital divideFIGURE 6Low&middle incomeHigh-incomeDigital transformation talent00.20.40.81.00.6201620232016Data n

205、ot available2023Talent availability%of respondents whoanswered 5,6 or 7Business leaders views on talent availabilityFIGURE 7SourceWorld Economic Forum,Executive Opinion Survey,2016 and 2023 editions.NoteHigh income and Low&middle income values include the 43 high-income and the 64 low and middle inc

206、ome countries covered by this report,respectively.Talent availabilty corresponds to the question:In your country,to what extent can companies find people with the skills required to fill their vacancies in the local labour market?1=Not at all;7=To a great extent;Digital transformation talent corresp

207、onds to the question:In your country,to what extent is the workforce proficient in technology skills;1=Not at all;7=To a great extent.Data for digital transformation talent was only collected in 2023.The Future of Growth Report 202419exports represent about 24%of manufacturing export value.25 As of

208、2022,export of advanced services represents only 3%of GDP of developing economies,while in advanced economies,they are almost at 6%of GDP.Enhancing connectivity and developing globally competitive talent for digital services are important drivers for more innovation-aligned growth pathways in develo

209、ping economies.In high-income economies,talent availability is an increasing bottleneck to further advancing innovativeness,while opening an opportunity for trade in services from developing economiesBusiness leaders views collected through the World Economic Forums Executive Opinion Survey(EOS)reve

210、al that more than half of companies in high-income economies cannot find people with the skills required to fill vacancies in their respective domestic markets.This is a sharp increase from 2016,when just 38%of business leaders lamented difficulties to find adequate talent.At the same time,almost th

211、e same share(55%)of business leaders in high-income economies report that companies cannot find the talent needed for digital transformation.The future of growth in these economies is thus one where there is no shortage of employment opportunities for appropriately skilled workers,but where employer

212、s may find a shortage of readily available talent.Artificial intelligence(AI)despite important consequences on job re-organization and potential replacement of some positions will lead to the emergence of a range of new roles.Demand for other roles similarly driven by technology and digitalization s

213、uch as E-Commerce Specialists,Digital Transformation Specialists,and Digital Marketing and Strategy Specialists will increase.26 From an innovation growth point of view,an increasingly important question is where to find the talent needed in some of these fast-growing roles and avoid a scenario in w

214、hich talent availability becomes a binding constraint for economic development and growth.Reskilling,on-the-job-training,and investments in education are certainly an important part of the solution.Yet another opportunity might come from greater openness to trade in digitally delivered services from

215、 other geographies,where digital skills are on the rise.In developing economies,in contrast to high-income economy trends,the percentage of business leaders expressing confidence in finding skilled employees increased from 41%in 2016 to over 50%this year,while a comparable share(54%)of business lead

216、ers in emerging and developing economies expresses positive views regarding the availability of talent needed for digital transformation.These trends reveal that developing economies could offer increasingly matching talent for the growing roles where talent is insufficient in high-income economies.

217、Challenges such as digital infrastructure bottlenecks,regulatory barriers or adaptation to international quality standards currently impede talent in developing countries to take advantage of opportunities in high-income countries.However,there could be a win-win space in facilitating trade in digit

218、ally delivered service trade,benefitting countries innovation ecosystem in both higher-and lower-income countries,while opening a new pathway for the future growth of developing economies.InclusivenessThe global Inclusiveness pillar average is 55.9,with marked outcome differences across country inco

219、me groups.High-income economies average inclusive growth score(68.9)is more than twice that of low-income economies(30.0),and about 50%higher than that of lower-middle income ones(44.8),highlighting a strong correlation between levels of per-capita income and inclusion outcomes.Upper-middle income e

220、conomies(54.8),on average,exhibit a somewhat stronger inclusive growth performance compared to their showing on 30.0Access to internet and energy2.Access to water,health and food1.44.8Access to internet and energy2.Wealth and financial inequality1.Equal opportunities in research and public sector2.W

221、ealth and financial inequality1.54.8Equal opportunities inthe workplace2.Wealth and financial inequality1.68.91.011.321.950.221.382.183.053.1052,47517,9007,6331,5333.51.750SourceWorld Economic Forum,Future of Growth Report 2024;GDP data based on IMF World Economic Outlook,October 2023.NoteGroup valu

222、es for GDP and pillar scores are based on countries covered by theFuture of Growth Report 2024.HighUpper middleLower middleLowHigher growthLower growthInclusiveness pillarFIGURE 8Income groupGDP per capitaPPP,2023Average GDP growth,%(2018-2023)Inclusiveness scoreTop 2 Inclusiveness challengesAverage

223、 GDP per capita growth,%(2018-2023)The Future of Growth Report 202420innovation,yet nevertheless perform well behind high-incomes economies(Figure 8).For low-income countries,fostering inclusion is largely related to fiscal space and capacity for investments in infrastructure and comprehensive socia

224、l assistance policies for vulnerable and disadvantaged groups,which may help break the cycle of poverty and foster greater equality of opportunity.However,beyond a certain level of per-capita income,inclusion is less related to access to basic health,energy or food,and distributional or social-justi

225、ce elements become more important.In general terms,the growth-equity relationship is non-linear and characterized by a complex array of trade-offs and synergies.Research suggests that countries have a better chance at achieving inclusive growth when individuals are better educated,tax-benefit system

226、s are more redistributive,and labour-force participation and multifactor productivity growth are higher.27 Other studies also point to the importance of equitable access to finance,28 and institutional factors such as a countrys political system.29Inequality has been on the rise in recent years for

227、the first time in decades and is currently the most evident headwind to making growth more inclusive across economiesToday,the richest 10%of the global population earn 52%of global income,compared to 8.5%for the poorest half.Global wealth inequalities are even more pronounced,with the poorest half o

228、f the global population possessing just 2%of total wealth,while the richest 10%own 76%.30 This is a trend that has been ongoing for decades,and only made more evident by the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic followed by rising inflation,when a cost-of-living crisis pushed an estimated 95 million more people in

229、 extreme poverty while the richest 1%have accumulated$26 trillion in new wealth(Figure 9).Inequality in economic outcomes is strongly connected to intergenerational mobility as an indicator of inequality of opportunity:studies find that societies where opportunities are unequally distributed,income

230、inequality exerts a greater drag on long-term growth by undermining human capital development and reinforcing poverty cycles.Conversely,human capital development and policies that reduce educational inequality and focus on lifelong learning,reskilling and upskilling are essential for allowing worker

231、s to reach their full potential31 and unlock access to new jobs and opportunities.The impact of inequality surfaces from the early stages of education and limits educational opportunities,primarily for children of poor socioeconomic backgrounds.In this regard,policies that focus on early childhood d

232、evelopment and boost educational attainment and skills of vulnerable groups have been shown to yield significant economic returns.32,33 For example,a study commissioned by the United Nations Education,Scientific,and Cultural Organization(UNESCO)found that a 0.1 point reduction in the education Gini

233、coefficient was associated with a 0.53 percentage-point increase in the annual real per-capita GDP growth of 142 countries between 1965 and 2010.34 Access to labour-market opportunities remains an important bottleneck to inclusive growth in most countries,particularly so in high-and upper middle-inc

234、ome economies.According to a European Commission definition,labour markets are inclusive when“everyone of working 0.2500.50.751.0Share of wealth owned by top-10 percentileBrazilFranceUnited KingdomItalyMexicoUnited StatesIndia0.450.560.530.570.540.590.550.650.660.710.720.790.740.80Increasing wealth

235、inequality,selected countriesFIGURE 9SourceWorld Inequality Database.19952021NoteShare of net wealth owned by the top 10 percentile of the population in each country.The Future of Growth Report 202421age,in particular vulnerable and disadvantaged people,can participate in quality,paid work.”35 Vario

236、us groups,such as women and migrants,tend to be systematically under-represented in the labour force,with low inclusion in workforce being associated with on average higher levels on inequality.Making labour markets more inclusive,improving working conditions and finding an appropriate balance betwe

237、en regulation and labour market-flexibility can help foster both equity and growth.For example,it is estimated that about 40%of US GDP growth between 1960 and 2010 can be attributed to increased participation of women and people of colour in the labour force.36 Yet,only 28 out of the 107 countries c

238、overed by the report score more than 80 for gender parity in knowledge work,with no country attaining full parity.Access to basic services and social protection are essential to enhancing inclusion in high-and low-income economiesSocial protection mechanisms and distribution systems vary in design a

239、nd implementation,but where they are used,inequality is lower and some of the root causes of poverty and inequality are addressed.37 This includes both direct effects,such as bolstering financial resilience of households and increasing aggregate demand,and indirect effects,such as building human cap

240、ital and enhancing social cohesion.38While generally less of an immediate concern in higher-income countries,access to basic services and social protection remains a key limitation to inclusion in lower-income economies(Figure 10).In 47 out of the 107 countries covered by the report less than half t

241、he population has access to social protection.Social-transfer programmes are increasingly difficult to secure amid tighter fiscal space.For example,during the pandemic,high-income countries spent about 93 times more than low-income countries on social protection responses.39 In these countries,econo

242、mic development remains a key axis through which to achieve better inclusion outcomes.Investing in transport,energy and water infrastructure but also in programmes that strengthen social assistance and income security are synergistic in achieving both economic growth and inclusion in this context.In

243、 developed economies,social protection systems will need updating and adapting to prepare for the significant transformations that the digital and green focuses in these economies are likely to bring to labour markets.GDP per capita,PPPShare of population not covered by any social protection floors/

244、systems,%2550751000040k80k100k120k60k20kARERWAQATOMNCHEIRLLUXDNKUSAJPNGBRESPZAFMEXGEOINDKENSWEFRADEUSGPLack of social protection,by income levelFIGURE 10SourceInternational Labour Organization(ILO)and World Bank,World Development Indicators database.NoteData refers to year 2021.Countries represented

245、 are those covered by the Future of Growth Report 2024.The Future of Growth Report 202422SustainabilityOver half of global GDP is moderately or highly dependent on nature and natural resources.40 The global Sustainability pillar average is 46.8,highlighting a lack of sufficient progress on climate t

246、argets as most countries continue to grow in ways that are not sustainable.Income-group trends for this pillar diverge from the other three dimensions of the Future of Growth Framework,with low-income economies(52.7)and lower-middle income economies(50.0)exhibiting,on average,stronger sustainability

247、-aligned growth compared to the rest of the world due to lower resource use to date,offsetting weaker performance on green finance and technology.High-income economies(45.8)and upper-middle income economies(44.0),by contrast,partially compensate for higher emissions with a stronger performance on en

248、vironmental technology,providing ground for hope that a partial decoupling of environmental impact from output growth may become visible in the data,enabling stronger sustainability-aligned growth trajectories in years to come(Figure 11).Institutional commitments are yet to translate into systemic h

249、ardwiring of emission reductions into the quality of future growth Human activity has already increased global temperatures by 1.1C and is on track to breach the 1.5C target in the next five years.41 While economic growth has enabled a significant improvement in global living standards,growth at the

250、 expense of the environment is self-defeating.The challenge is particularly acute for developing countries,as most low-and lower-middle income economies face increasing trade-offs between developing much-needed industrial capacity that can bolster opportunity and income for their populations and bal

251、ancing that against their environmental footprint.For much of the world more growth is likely to continue to mean more emissions(Figure 12).Recent evaluations of the turning point at which increases in GDP have tipped the balance and enabled countries to move from emission-intensive early growth mod

252、els to implementing policies that lead to reductions in emissions are estimated to be$34,000 per capita.Barring radical changes in infrastructure,technology and funding,most moderately developed countries will not reach their emissions peak until around the middle of the 21st century,and emission ra

253、tes will not return to current levels before the end of the century,at which point the world will have far exceeded its carbon budget.Despite short term trade-offs,change is vital.On its current trajectory,the world is set to experience a 10%greater global economic loss than if the Paris Agreements

254、goals are achieved.42The globally weak performance on the Sustainability pillar of the Future of Growth Framework reflects systemic challenges in reducing the environmental footprint of economic activity.Going forward,emissions must not only level off but become negative if the world is to reach its

255、 climate goals.43 This requires decoupling that is global in scope,sustained over the long term,and addresses a wide range of pollutants and resources.44 Yet at present,cases of successful decoupling tend to be limited to advanced economies,temporary,and confined to specific areas of environmental d

256、amage.45Green finance and technology are the missing links for the path to sustainabilityWhile the slow pace of decarbonization and high levels of waste undermine the performance of most high-and upper-middle income economies,across all income groups there are suboptimal levels of climate finance es

257、sential to decarbonization and meeting net-zero targets.Investment in renewable energy,in particular,is a critical avenue to bridge the energy gap and limit the environmental impacts 52.7Limited environmental regulation2.Investments in renewables1.50.0Investments in renewables2.High non-renewable en

258、ergy intensity and waste production1.Investments in renewables2.High non-renewable energy intensity and waste production1.44.0Slow green-tech development2.High non-renewable energy intensity and waste production1.45.81.011.321.950.221.382.183.053.1052,47517,9007,6331,5333.51.750SourceWorld Economic

259、Forum,Future of Growth Report 2024;GDP data based on IMF World Economic Outlook,October 2023.NoteGroup values for GDP and pillar scores are based on countries covered by theFuture of Growth Report 2024.HighUpper middleLower middleLowHigher growthLower growthSustainability pillarFIGURE 11Income group

260、GDP per capitaPPP,2023Average GDP growth,%(2018-2023)Sustainability scoreTop 2 Sustainability challengesAverage GDP per capita growth,%(2018-2023)The Future of Growth Report 202423119962001Year200620530354555657075855040608090GDP(trillion USD)GHG emissions(billion tons)25303545

261、55657075855040608090GDPGHG emissionSourceOur World in Data and World Bank,World Development Indicators database.NoteGreenhouse gas emissions are expressed in billion tons of CO equivalent.GDP is expressedin USD trillions in constant(2015)terms.Global GDP and emissionsFIGURE 12of future growth.Howeve

262、r,the level of renewable energy investments remains insufficient across most of the world and is closely related to the lagging progress on the diversification of the energy mix and reduction of CO2 emissions.Eighty-seven out of the 107 countries covered by the report score less than 50 on this meas

263、ure.In many cases,green finance is either not available or investments in renewable energy fall short of what it would take to put the planet on a sustainable trajectory:in per capita terms,renewable investments in high-income countries are approximately four times higher compared to lower-income co

264、untries,despite the rapidly growing populations and energy needs of the latter group.While renewable investments have nearly tripled since the Paris Agreement was adopted in 2015,the majority of this funding went to advanced economies(Figure 13).46 Developing countries only attracted$544 billion ann

265、ual investment in renewable energy in 2021,out of a required$1.7 trillion,and over 30 developing countries havent registered a single large international renewables investment project.Achieving net-zero by 2050 requires current annual investment in clean energy to more than triple to$4 trillion by 2

266、030.47Technological development is a second factor limiting countries from hardwiring environmental sustainability into their economic systems.According to a recent International Energy Agency(IEA)study,48 almost half of the emissions savings between 2020 and 2050 in a hypothetical net-zero scenario

267、 should come from technologies currently under development and not yet on the market.Yet,green technologies are being developed and adopted at a much slower pace than is needed to achieve global climate targets and accelerate the green transition.Progress is being stalled by high concentration of gr

268、een innovation in a small number of innovation powerhouses as well as by the slow catch-up process in the rest of the world.The much-needed diffusion of environment-related technologies such as air pollution control,waste management,water supply and sanitation,energy storage and distribution,and lan

269、d and water protection is still insufficient to make a dent at a global level.Higher risk profiles of developing countries increase the cost of capital and limit their ability to attract investments into green transition.However,effective collaboration between international investors,public entities

270、 and multilateral banks can reduce these barriers by lowering the spreads on debt finance by as much as 40%.49The Future of Growth Report 202424ResilienceThe global Resilience pillar average is 52.8,with more moderate outcome differences across country income groups compared to the Innovation and In

271、clusion pillars.High-income countries exhibit the strongest resilient growth performance(61.9),followed by upper-middle income countries(50.0)and lower-middle income countries(45.8)in relative proximity.Low-income countries show the least resilient growth(39.0)(Figure 14).An inward-looking approach

272、to production of goods and services is insufficient for preparing for global shocks,but localized efforts are still essential for boosting financial system resilienceAs the world grapples with the enormity of global challenges such as climate change,peace and security,financial and economic stabilit

273、y,and the volatility of global health shocks,the fragility of resilience strategies that are nationally focused is becoming increasingly apparent.Yet,national forces are trending towards protectionism and isolationism and a more multipolar world order is limiting cooperation.The allure of self-suffi

274、ciency is undeniable.It holds out the prospect of control in a world that often seems uncontrollable.This inward pivot has been championed as a form of resilience,a way to reduce dependence on foreign entities and bolster domestic capabilities.It is a narrative that resonates with many but does not

275、withstand closer examination.Major crises,by their very nature,are global phenomena.Their impacts reverberate across borders,and no amount of isolation can shield a country from their effects.Instead,true resilience is frequently a result of diversity,openness and flexibility(Figure 15).Investment i

276、n renewable energy,%GDPRenewable energy regulation index,0-000122.53.531.50.5VENAGOARECHLDEUDNKFRAINDJORLAOSWEUKRUSAVNMITAIncome groupLow incomeLower middle incomeUpper middle incomeHigh incomeNo classificationRenewable investment,by renewable energy regulationFIGURE 13SourceAuthors calcu

277、lations based on Bloomberg New Energy Finance and The World Bank,Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy(RISE)database.NoteData refers to year 2021.Renewable energy regulation index includes:a)Legal framework for renewable energy;b)Incentives and regulatory support for renewable energy;c)Planni

278、ng for renewable energy expansion;d)Attributes of financial and regulatory incentives;e)Network connection and use;f)Carbon pricing and monitoring;g)Counterparty risk.Investments in renewable energy include newly built wind(onshore and offshore),solar(large and small scale),biofuels,biomass and wast

279、e,marine,geothermal,and hydro assets.It does not consider retrofits,or private financing.The Future of Growth Report 202425In the context of the production of goods and services,this translates into securing a diversity of suppliers,openness of logistics networks and flexibility of production method

280、s.Robust international value chains and vibrant trade networks are effective means of increasing global and national resilience.Consequently,the countries with the highest resilience scores overall also score consistently higher on all measures of diversification.In the context of global threats suc

281、h as climate change and future pandemics,countries need to be prepared to share resources,knowledge,and technology.However,interconnectedness can also reduce resilience if underlying risk factors are not mitigated.The global financial system remains vulnerable to cascading contagion,particularly in

282、an environment of higher inflation,higher interest rates and elevated national debt levels.Among the top 30 countries with the highest resilient growth scores,banking system default risk and bank concentration are among the weakest indicators.In more than half of the countries examined in this repor

283、t the three largest commercial banks owned more than two-thirds of total commercial banking assets.Addressing social polarization and fostering social 39.0Energy sources diversification2.Healthcare capacity1.45.8Financial stability2.Healthcare capacity1.Financial stability2.Healthcare capacity1.50.0

284、Financial stability2.Talent development1.61.91.011.321.950.221.382.183.053.1052,47517,9007,6331,5333.51.750SourceWorld Economic Forum,Future of Growth Report 2024;GDP data based on IMF World Economic Outlook,October 2023.NoteGroup values for GDP and pillar scores are based on countries covered by th

285、eFuture of Growth Report 2024.HighUpper middleLower middleLowHigher growthLower growthResilience pillarFIGURE 14Income groupGDP per capitaPPP,2023Average GDP growth,%(2018-2023)Resilience scoreTop 2 Resilience challengesAverage GDP per capita growth,%(2018-2023)20005200520023-1

286、021345-year per-capita GDP growth,%changeYearOpenClosedSourceAuthors calculations based on GDP data from IMF World Economic Outlook,October 2023.NoteOpenness calculated as top and bottom 20 countries with the highest average of indicators with an international or outward-looking component(Energy sou

287、rce diversification,Food supply concentration,Commodity supply concentration,Export product concentration,hiring foreign labour,Technology supply concentration).Bouncing back betterFIGURE 15The Future of Growth Report 202426cohesion is also becoming crucial for enhancing the resilience aspect of the

288、 quality of future growth.Most economies are insufficiently preparing for oncoming demographic changeResilient economies do not merely bounce back from shocks quickly,they also actively prepare to prevent them.Demographic change is affecting high-,middle-and low-income economies,with each group insu

289、fficiently prepared(Figure 16).The ageing of populations is an immediate reality in many countries.High-income countries account for 33 of the top 40 countries with the highest age dependency ratios.This exerts pressure on social and healthcare systems,disrupts labour markets,and forces education sy

290、stems to adapt quickly.The need for countries to prepare for this demographic shift is urgent,and the path to readiness needs to be paved with investment in key sectors and the infrastructure and talent needed for those sectors.In countries with high shares of very young populations,there are simila

291、r pressures.The scarcity of hospital beds already ranks among the top three most-constrained indicators in both the most and least resilient countries.A shortage of healthcare workers is of equally high concern in the least resilient countries,pointing towards a general need for investment in health

292、care.Ageing societies also face skills gaps in the labour market that cannot be filled through traditional means of education.Job vacancies accumulate due to a lack of young workers in the labour force,leaving countries with only two ways to bridge the gaps:reskilling domestic workers or opening up

293、to attract foreign talent.Most countries are falling short on both.Participation in mid-career training receives the lowest scores among all resilience indicators for the most and the least resilient countries alike.The number of people engaged in mid-career training exceeds 10%in only 15 countries,

294、suggesting that the vast majority of countries is missing the opportunity to prepare for demographic and technological change.Furthermore,executives do not think that their countries are sufficiently able to fill vacancies by attracting foreign talent:only 11 countries score relatively high on this

295、indicator.To navigate the shifting demographic landscape,countries will need to embrace more strategic openness,more localized investment and a proactive approach to future challenges.2022051510202530Average age dependency ratioHigh income Low&middle incomeSourceAuthors calculations based on World B

296、ank,World Development Indicators database.NoteData refers to old-age dependency ratio,which is the number of people 65+years-old divided by the number of people 15-64 years old.High income and Low&middle income values include the 43 high income and the 64 low and middle income countries covered by t

297、his report,respectively.Old-age dependency ratiosFIGURE 970519901995Year2000200520102015The Future of Growth Report 202427Overview of approachWhile every country has a unique growth pathway shaped by a wide range of circumstantial factors,the Future of Growth Framework helps id

298、entify clusters of countries with similar growth characteristics.Our analysis identifies 12 country clusters,which can be further grouped into seven distinct“Growth Pathway Archetypes”(Figure 17).50These archetypes highlight countries that are most closely related in their growth characteristics,the

299、 impact of policy choices of the past resulting in these outcomes and potentially similar future trade-offs and synergies within these archetypes.Policy-makers may find new inspiration by learning from countries that have faced similar constraints as well as by identifying those that have followed o

300、ther approaches.While these archetypes exhibit similar high-level patterns,they consist of countries that reflect these patterns with unique distinctions.Appendix A5 provides methodological details on the cluster analysis underlying how these archetypes were identified.Growth Pathway Archetypes2.3AB

301、CDEFG+30-30-25-20-15-10-50+5+10+15+20+25Growth Pathway ArchetypesFIGURE 17SourceWorld Economic Forum,Future of Growth Report 2024.InclusivenessInnovativenessResilienceSustainabilityArchetypesMean Pillar ValueThe Future of Growth Report 202428Archetype AGDP(per capita)growth,2018-2023:0.7%Growth Path

302、way ProfileGrowth:Innovativeness:Inclusiveness:Sustainability:Resilience:Countries with growth driven by afocus on fostering both inclusionand innovation,as well asexhibiting above-averageperformance on sustainabilitySeven archetypesThis section presents the seven archetypes introduced above,highlig

303、hting the distinctive features in each of them,and marking out policy choices around synergies and trade-offs between the scale of growth and its quality.In some cases,archetypes may be further differentiated into two or more distinct sub-types which,while distinguishable from each other by divergen

304、t growth rates or additional characteristic features,nevertheless follow the same distinctive overall pattern.These Growth Pathway Archetypes should not be thought of as closed groups with exact boundaries;rather,they represent an intuitive approach to spotlighting relevant common growth experiences

305、 among groups of countries.Not every country fits perfectly into one single archetype.Moreover,these archetypes are not meant to be deterministic but rather seek to capture patterns from current data,thus reflecting the outcomes of past policy choices.Countries may shape new and different pathways i

306、n the future by adopting new policy choices going forward.Archetype A is characteristic of a group of high-income economies Austria,Switzerland,Germany,Denmark,Finland,France,United Kingdom,Netherlands and Sweden from Europe,alongside Japan and Republic of Korea from East Asia and notable for its st

307、rong performance on the Inclusiveness(74.1),Innovativeness(70.6),and Resilience(66.7)pillars.The archetypes score on Sustainability(54.1)is notably weaker than the performance across the other pillars,and it is also characterized by moderate GDP per-capita growthof 0.7%over the past five years.The a

308、rchetypes profile suggests a strong push towards greater inclusiveness and innovativeness,as well as towards building resilience,yet while sustainability performance is above the global average,there is room for further progress.On the Inclusiveness pillar,countries represented by this archetype ten

309、d to score very high on measures of social protection,access to physical resources,and inclusion in political and public spaces.However,high wealth and income inequality remains a key challenge across many of these countries,coupled with weak performance on gender parity in knowledge-intensive occup

310、ations.For example,while Finland receives a perfect score on access to social protection,it scores notably worse on wealth inequality.Countries represented by this archetype are strong performers on the Innovativeness pillar,driven by high scores on measures of human capital,physical resources,finan

311、cing and the knowledge and technology ecosystem.The archetype typically features high education,high ICT capital,and a high proportion of medium and high-tech manufacturing in the economy.The financial ecosystem in these countries is characterized by a high proportion of digital payments,and strong

312、performance on domestic credit to the private sector.However,there remains wide variation among the countries on certain elements.The archetypes comparatively weaker performance on the Sustainability pillar(54.1)is driven by low performance on annual greenhouse gas(GHGs)emissions per capita,waste pe

313、r person per year,and renewable energy consumption as a proportion of total energy consumption.Moreover,investment in renewable energy and talent availability for the green and energy transition leave significant room for improvement.The archetype also registers a relatively strong performance on th

314、e Resilience pillar(66.7).Key elements which help build resilience to shocks in these countries tend to include strong performance on country credit rating,export product concentration,and high levels of cybersecurity.These countries also tend to have relatively high numbers of health workers per 10

315、,000 people.Furthermore,at an institutional level,they demonstrate strong performance on environmental treaties and state legitimacy.However,there are significant areas which display weak performance,including old-age dependency and participation in mid-career training for the 25-54 year age-group.T

316、he Future of Growth Report 202429Archetype CGDP(per capita)growth,2018-2023:1.8%Growth Pathway ProfileGrowth:Innovativeness:Inclusiveness:Sustainability:Resilience:Countries with moderate butbalanced growth profiles,as wellas above-average performance oninclusivenessArchetype BGDP(per capita)growth,

317、2018-2023:0.7%Growth Pathway ProfileGrowth:Innovativeness:Inclusiveness:Sustainability:Resilience:Countries with growth driven by afocus on fostering both inclusionand innovation,albeit withcomparatively low performanceon sustainabilityArchetype B is characterized by strong performance on the Inclus

318、iveness(74.1),Innovativeness(65.6)and Resilience(65.7)pillars,scoring above the global averages for these dimensions,along with moderate GDP per capita growth of 0.7%over the past five years.However,the archetype performs markedly weaker on the Sustainability pillar(41.5)scoring below the global ave

319、rage differentiatingit from the pattern observed in Archetype A.Countries characterized by this archetype includeAustralia,Belgium,Canada,Czechia,Estonia,Iceland,Luxembourg,New Zealand,Singapore andthe United States.On Inclusiveness,these countries outperform the global average and tend to score hig

320、h on measures of social protection,access to physical resources,and inclusion in public spaces and civil rights.However,wealth and income inequality remain key challenge across many of these countries.For instance,Singapore achieves full score on social protection but fares notably worse on wealth i

321、nequality and on gender parity in knowledge-intensive occupations.Australia,however,is a notable exception in the archetype on gender parity in knowledge-intensive occupations,with a strong performance of 93.1.This archetype exhibits a strong performance on innovativeness,driven by strong performanc

322、e on measures in the physical resources,knowledge and technology,and financial ecosystems.The archetype also tends to feature strong performance on mobile network coverage,ICT capital,digital payments,proportion of medium and high-tech manufacturing value added to the total manufacturing value added

323、,and regulatory quality.There is however significant variation among countries and areas for improvement,for instance,on R&D expenditure,where Belgium scores 69.1 while Canada scores 33.9.On Resilience,this archetype also features a strong performance of 65.7.Countries characterized by this archetyp

324、e tend to perform well on measures of energy source diversification,cybersecurity,country credit rating and rule of law.However,there are significant areas for improvement,including hospital beds per person,participation in mid-career training for the 25-54 year age-group,bank system default risk an

325、d bank concentration.Archetype B is characterized by a comparatively weak performance on the Sustainability pillar(41.5),scoring well below the global average(46.8).Key measures contributing to this include poor performance on annual GHG emissions per capita,total waste per capita per year,renewable

326、 energy consumption,fossil-fuel subsidies per capita and investment in renewable energy.Archetype C represents countries spanning a broad range of geographies and income groups that exhibit a moderate but characteristically balanced growth profile across the board.They generally perform in line with

327、 global averages across the framework but stand out for higher-than-average inclusiveness.Countries represented by this archetype which include Chile,Costa Rica,Greece,Hungary,Italy,Latvia,Poland,Portugal,Romania,Ukraine,Spain and Viet Nam are also characterized by accelerated GDP per-capita growth,

328、averaging 1.8%over the past five years.Archetype C places just above the global average on the Innovativeness pillar(48.5).While scores are mixed across the board,there is a notable distinction by income group on knowledge and technology indicators.More advanced economies especially Italy,Spain and

329、Portugal score relatively well,while scores on these indicators lower the pillar performance of lower-income economies.Similarly,this archetypes Inclusiveness pillar score(65.9)rises above the global average,with significant differences in what drives performance.In many cases,however,high levels of

330、 wealth inequality drag down countries performance on this pillar.Countries represented by this archetype score comparatively well on the Sustainability pillar(50.5).This performance is driven by many factors.In general,these countries have strong institutional support for sustainability and relativ

331、ely low fossil fuel subsidies.This is especially the case for Portugal,The Future of Growth Report 202430Archetype DSub-type D1GDP(per capita)growth,2018-2023:0.9%Growth Pathway ProfileGrowth:Innovativeness:Inclusiveness:Sustainability:Resilience:Countries with comparatively highgrowth in transition

332、 to a moreinnovative,inclusive and resilientgrowth trajectorySub-type D2GDP(per capita)growth,2018-2023:4.8%Growth Pathway ProfileGrowth:Innovativeness:Inclusiveness:Sustainability:Resilience:which scores 83.8 and 83.1 on energy efficiency and renewable energy regulation,respectively.There is a sign

333、ificant variance in physical resource scores.In general,lower-income countries with less resource-intensive economies score higher.Resilience performance among this group(57.7)is somewhat above the global average,indicating a robust ability to bounce back from shocks.In many cases,this reflects relatively strong performance on diversification,including food-supply concentration,energy-source diver