High-Level Expert Group Meeting
19 December 1985
Paris, France
Chaired by Jacques Chaban-Delmas
The mandate of the Expert Group was to formulate initial
proposals for new policies to lower the level of
unemployment in the developed countries, while ensuring
that such policies remain compatible with faster growth
and higher employment in the developing world.
I. RECOGNlZlNG THE lSSUE
There is a need to recognize the alarming state of
employment throughout the world and in particular in the
industrialized nations. The problem is political and
economic, but also has wider human significance. It is
also a universal issue, which expresses the growing
.interdependence in the world today. Wherever it arises,
unemployment means a major handicap in terms of the
wastage of resources, and also forms an obstacle to
development.
At the end of 1985 there were almost 31 million unemployed
in the countries of the OECD, and some 20,000 jobs would
need to be created each day in those countries to return
to the 1979 level of unemployment by 1991. The short-term
and long-term prospects, based on scenarios of relatively
low economic growth of the type now being experienced, are
in fact that initially there will be a rise in the number
of unemployed, as the population increases and
productivity rises: by the end of 1986, unemployment could
increase by 250,000 or 500,000, with the increase mainly
affecting Western Europe and Japan. Generally speaking,
unemployment rates should remain stable but high: about
8.25% of the active population in the countries of the
OECD as a whole, but 11% in European countries.
It would be wrong to conclude that the relative
stabilization of unemployment rates means that the
phenomenon is becoming less acute. The relative
stabilization of unemployment levels in Europe, and the
slight fall expected in the United States are accompanied
by the accentuation of particularly worrying trends. One
is the increasing segmentation of the employment market,
which poses a major threat for our societies, alongside
those who have a job or have hope of finding one, there is
a growing mass of young people, women, and older workers
put out of work by economic conditions or technical
changes, who have received unsuitable training or no
training at all. Moreover, those without a job usually
remain in this situation for long periods in Europe (the
situation is different in the United States and Japan);
for example, a quarter of the British unemployed in 1984
had been in this position for more than two years, and in
the Netherlands more than half the unemployed had not
found work for more than a year. Surveys have shown that
the likelihood of a person finding work decreases
proportionally as the period of unemployment increases.
Motivation to find work is gradually eroded, a
particularly serious matter for the youngest members of
the unemployed, and the damage caused to human potential
is considerable and in some cases irremediable.
The employment situation is very serious in the
industrialized countries, and indeed is no less so in the
developing nations. In the Third World, there are
currently 500 to 700 million workers who are out of work
or seriously underemployed (the figures vary according to
the criteria adopted). To achieve something close to full
employment by the end of the century (even allowing for
low levels of productivity and income), after taking the
increase in population into account, about a billion jobs
need to be created. The enormity of this figure compared
with the scale of the employment problem in the North, and
the opposite demographic trends in the industrialized and
developing countries, clearly foreshadow the risks of
confrontation which would arise if unsuitable approaches
were adopted to employment problems. Perhaps there has
already been too much complacency with regard to
population problems, particularly in the Third World.
Imposing in scale, the employment problem - throughout the
world and in the industrialized countries in particular -
is at the same time, although perhaps less obviously, a
social cancer. It attacks the very bases of our societies,
which are founded on the work ethic. Work takes on such
importance in terms of individual and collective
psychology that being deprived of it constitutes a
traumatism whose consequences can be irreversible for
individuals, as we mentioned earlier, and serious for our
societies and the values on which they are founded.
Political regimes are running a serious risk. Even in
countries with a long tradition of democracy, there is
only a short distance between democracy and its opposite,
and the sense of exclusion felt by those consistently
refused a job by the economic system could trigger
violence and ultimately result in dictatorship.
The disruptive effects of unemployment are not limited to
national frontiers, for they also complicate and hinder
international relations in whatever form. The main cause
of national selfishness, and in particular of
protectionism, is the fact that no success has been
achieved in dealing satisfactorily with unemployment by
policies of adjustment aimed at achieving growth, and not
merely at re-establishing overall economic balances.
II. AN APPROACH
The participants at the meeting agreed that the
seriousness of current unemployment problems was to a
large extent the result of the insufficient attention paid
by governments up to now to the issue of employment, and
that we were today paying the price of inappropriate
policies applied in the past which may have activated
unemployment. Too much importance has been attached to
solving short-term problems (inflation being one of them)
without taking due account of the mid- and long-term
impact of the policies pursued. In terms of general
political philosophy, economic growth and employment in
the North and in the South are closely interdependent. To
reverse current trends, the experts believe that some
major policy decisions, whether concerted or not, must be
taken.
International measures
The group agreed that the increased interdependence of
national economies was such that a new perception of
employment problems was necessary, transcending the
frontiers of each state. International considerations are
now at the forefront of issues in all fields, and
international co-operation has become a necessity. In
particular, the economy of one country cannot be
stimulated and unemployment rolled back in one country,
unless the world as a whole is moving in the same
direction.
In this respect, it was noted that rates of growth
achieved in the United States have had an extremely
positive impact on the rest of the world. However, the
difficulties facing the U.5.A. should not be
under-estimated, as they mean that we cannot continue
indefinitely to regard as the only locomotive of world
development. The situation will remain difficult in
political terms, even if the budgetary deficit problem is
resolved: the issues of the value of the dollar and
interest rates will not be resolved at a stroke, and the
risks of inflation have not disappeared. lt is therefore
necessary that the efforts of the United States should be
backed by the rest of the world. No doubt the United
States needs to put its affairs in order, but the other
industrialized countries also need to adopt less timid and
hesitant policies, now that inflation has fallen
considerably.
To this end, a minimum level of international concertation
in the choice of objectives is necessary for action to be
taken, and the adoption of an international employment
objective would be particularly desirable. Up to now,
concertation has been very limited. However, the climate
may be changing, and it has been said, particularly after
the talks in Washington and Seoul in September and October
1985, that "the United States has joined the world", and
is now ready to play a part in that concertation.
The problems of development in the South must be taken
into consideration as international measures are devised.
Action in respect of the Third World is not only a matter
of charity, but of exchange and reciprocity; it is
essential for development even in the countries of the
North. Although may be misleading to consider the
countries of the Third World on the one hand, and the
industrialized nations on the other, as forming
homogeneous groups, the experts nonetheless believed it
was possible to formulate s number of observations of
general scope.
Thus, although overall an economic upturn and a rollback
of unemployment in the industrialized countries are
necessary for an upswing in economic growth and employment
in the developing countries, the industrialized countries
cannot themselves create a durable upturn in their
economies without development in the countries of the
South. Moreover, the absence of development in the South
gives rise to considerable risks for the peace of the
world, and imperils democracy in countries which believe
in liberty and human values.
The struggle against protectionism, which is important in
the context of the economic relations between the
countries of the North themselves, takes on fundamental
significance in terms of its implications for the South.
There is however s need to abandon the current hypocrisy
of denouncing protectionism while continuing to practice
and promote it. "Access to markets of the North of
products like textiles as well as agricultural products
like sugar, which are of crucial importance to the
developing countries, is severely limited. It is urgently
needed to roll back protectionist measures affecting
products that are of particular importance for employment
in the poorer countries and for heavily indebted
countries." In this connection, agriculture must not be
considered as a taboo subject by the countries of the
North: the dumping of agricultural products by the
industrialized countries in the countries of the South has
disastrous effects on Third World economies, and helps to
reduce the priority granted to agriculture, when in fact
this should be one of the very bases of their
development.The interdependence which characterizes the
current situation means that international exchanges must
be governed by an ethic, and that problems be dealt with
in a framework of precise legal rules, and not be settled
by the balance of power.
Moreover, resource transfer policies (concerning both
capital and know-how) are indispensable to ensure that the
upswing spreads to the developing countries. Developments
over the last few years have not borne out the "trickle
down" theory. The handling of debt issues must be
considered in this light, although it is essential that
the transfer issue is not limited only to the case of the
debtor countries (there should be no confusion between the
terms Third World and debtor countries). From this
viewpoint, the Seoul talks and the presentation of the
Baker Plan were opportunities to recognize that the South
must be helped to re-establish its situation through
growth. The decisions taken marked a step in the right
direction, although many observers are still highly
skeptical and many questions remain to be resolved,
particularly the issues of modes of adjustment and
conditions (could it not be suggested in this connection
that creditors also should comply with some conditions?).
ln addition to higher loans, lower interest rates and an
increase in public development aid (perhaps in a form
inspired by the Marshal Plan?) would probably be the most
effective contributions the North could make to the
development of the South in terms of finance. The
opportunity which emerged st Seoul must not be missed,
although the South also needs measures of a non- financial
nature: the raising of the price of basic commodities is
one example, and the Common Fund must be rapidly
implemented to this end.
Technological progress also constitutes a potential danger
for the transmission of the upswing to the developing
countries. These countries have not yet been able to
absorb the fruits of the first industrial revolution, and
one may well ask how they will come to terms with the
fruits of the second (and automation in particular). The
North is currently developing high technology which the
countries of the Third World cannot assimilate unaided,
and which will probably not affect the great mass of poor
people, particularly in rural zones: the new technology is
after all generally labour saving. Moreover, current
technological developments can be extremely damaging to
the exports of the South, as they use only limited
quantities of raw materials, while microbiology for
example constitutes a direct threat to plant and animal
production.
National measures
Most of the international measures to which reference has
just been made are explicitly or implicitly complementary
to national measures; indeed, if national measures are not
taken, insurmountable political and economic problems will
arise. The experts agreed that the extreme heterogeneity
of national situations made it particularly difficult to
make any generalizations about orientations or
recommendations to be formulated; in particular, the quite
specific aspects of the Japanese and United States
situations cannot be ignored. The participants nonetheless
considered that a range of pertinent observations could be
made, and could contribute to the development of specific
policies aimed at increased employment.
There is a consensus of opinion that there can be no
solution to the problem of unemployment without an upturn
in growth. "To what extent monetary or fiscal policies
could contribute more actively to stronger sustainable
growth in Europe is a contentious issue. It would seem
that there is relatively little room for manoeuvre on the
fiscal side: attempts to strengthen demand through fiscal
reflation would almost certainly compromise medium-term
objectives and could therefore prove counter-productive
even in the short term. Some modest action in certain
countries might however be possible and helpful. As
regards monetary policy there may be increasing scope for
action to bring interest rates down if weakness of the
U.S. dollar persists; and such scope could be used without
compromising inflation objectives. It seems clear that
U.5. action on the budget would tend to enlarge the scope
for bringing down interest rates generally."
It should, however, be emphasized that higher growth does
not necessarily lead to correspondingly higher creation of
jobs. Low levels of job creation can be the result of high
labour costs, which trigger rationalization, and cutbacks
in the number of people employed. The investment made in
Europe up to now has been essentially aimed at increasing
productivity, and not at development. Over the last three
or four years, Europe has failed to adapt to changing
circumstances; this has resulted in resistance to change
and the development of the "wrong" type of investment:
investment which saves on labour costs. However, it would
seem that the limits of increased production without the
creation of jobs will soon be reached, and today almost
everywhere increased production is bringing with it
recruitment (although often made in a very prudent way:
temporary staff, part-time jobs, sub-contracting, and so
on).
What can governments do to ensure that this policy is
increasingly effective? Perhaps above all it is moderation
in wages and labour costs (including those which are not
linked to wages, such as social security costs) which has
an essential part to play. A well-chosen fiscal policy can
undoubtedly also be effective in this respect. But the
solution to today's problems - in a world where
competitivity is the key to success - lies in increased
flexibility and in strengthening the adaptability and
resilience of the economy in the face of changes. This
involves combating rigidity in each market wherever it
appears, and not only in the employment market:
flexibility is just as necessary in the products market as
in the capital market.
The flexibility of the employment market is undoubtedly
indispensable if the desired change is to be achieved; it
is generally understood to include - in addition to
flexibility in wages and the adjustment of relative wage
levels - encouragement for geographical and professional
flexibility, and more flexible legislation concerning
hiring and redundancy. This has been particularly clear in
recent experiences in the U.S.A. and Japan. However,
although some rigid structures do need to be smoothed out,
this must not be used as an opportunity to dismantle trade
unionism, as this would call into question the social
benefits workers have achieved. Flexibility must be
accompanied by measures aimed at social reinsertion,
organized after concertation between government, employers
and workers.
"These policies will over time bring unemployment back to
more acceptable levels. Public opinion should understand
that it will take time (for many countries into the
nineties) before the appropriate policies for sustainable
growth and job creation will show substantial results.
Meanwhile major efforts should be made to stop the process
of segmentation of the labour market, referred to above.
Special action is needed to get the long-tern unemployed
back to work. Co-operation between governments, employers
and labour should make it possible to create special
facilities in the field of training, labour costs,
etc."
Transitional jobs, preferably including a degree of
training, should facilitate the integration of newcomers
to the employment market, but more generally, in the face
of a changing labour force with new aspirations, the
possibilities offered by new forms of employment
(part-time work, work sharing, employment by several
employers at once, and so on) should be explored and
encouraged.
The search for new solutions is all the more important in
that the long-term impact of the current rapid technical
advances (and particularly the development of
microelectronics, which is also affecting the service
sector) is difficult to determine; there is clearly a need
to make in-depth studies in this field, but in any case
the problem of adaptation will remain serious. If there is
an effort to reach consensus and not confrontation between
labour, management and government, this should enable the
achievement of harmonious and socially acceptable
growth.
The discussion could not cover all the aspects of the
subject. Centered mainly on problems as seen from the
industrialized North, it should clearly be accompanied by
a similar and complementary discussion from the viewpoint
of the countries of the South. Despite these limitations,
some key ideas have emerged.
In the first place, it is imperative that urgent measures
be taken to cut unemployment; any failure to do so, and
any excessive delay in achieving this aim would place
democracy, our societies, and the human values on which
they are based in mortal danger. The measures to be taken,
which should tend to bring back flexibility in the
economies of the industrialized countries, must be based
on a national consensus, achieved by the joint
contributions of government, labour and employers.
Secondly, economic growth is a necessary condition but not
a guarantee of increased employment; this means that not
only is faster growth in the industrialized countries
indispensable, and which inflation is still an important
concern - concerted reflationary policies are needed -,
but also that special attention must be paid to the
problem of overcoming unemployment, which is unlikely to
show any spontaneous tendency to improve.
Thirdly, the employment issue is today an international
matter: it can only be dealt with effectively in a
framework of co-ordinated national policies; when policies
are being developed, their implications for the countries
of the South - whose development is conducive to that of
the industrialized countries - cannot be ignored.
The participants hope that their discussions will make a
positive contribution to the work of the lnterAction
Council; they trust that the Council will agree that
employment is one of the major problems of the day, and
join in calling for immediate action.