Press enter to search

Mistreat Workers and Get a Good Score

The World Bank's annual business climate report card uses flimsy arguments to promote deregulation as a means of reducing inequality.

Research & Commentary
November 01, 2016

by Peter Bakvis

For the second time in less than a month, the World Bank has used its major publications to minimize the phenomenon of growing inequality in many countries, or to claim that the problem can be resolved by freeing up private business to do what it wants — the opposite of what most analysts conclude.

The first example was a report on Poverty and Shared Prosperity published at the beginning of October, which used a very selective analysis of some recent income data to announce that inequality has been declining in most countries.

The second was the launch on October 25 of the Bank’s annual Doing Business report, which for the past 13 years has advocated a broad deregulatory agenda.

Always seeking new angles to justify its promotion of reduced regulation on business, the 2017 edition of Doing Business (DB) asserts that “economies with more business-friendly regulations tend to have lower levels of income inequality.”

The claim is made in the overview section of DB on the basis of three figures and two paragraphs of narrative, with only the DB database and one other World Bank source provided as reference. The report states that results on the association between DB scores and inequality “differ by regulatory area” but it only mentions two, starting a business and resolving insolvency, for which it found a negative correlation (i.e. higher DB scores associated with less inequality).

Presumably the Bank also found examples of lack of or positive correlation in the other areas its DB index covers, which altogether cover ten categories and 45 sub-indicators. The latter include, for example, a total tax rate indicator where the best scores are given to countries with the lowest level of taxes and social contributions (such as payments for social security) that businesses must pay. The Bank chose not to divulge information for the other indicators.

DB 2017 continues the practice of not including measures of labor market flexibility in the index although it still collects the data. The Bank suspended the DB labor indicator in 2009 following objections voiced by trade unions, several governments, and the International Labor Organization (ILO) against its use to pressure countries to weaken worker protections.

The report does include a narrative annex on labor market regulation, which states that labor regulations can “reduce the risk of job loss and support equity and social cohesion.”

However, it gives far more space to claims that regulations such as limits on fixed term contracts with minimal benefits and severance pay requirements are a cause of informality.

DB 2017 references three World Bank-authored studies from several years ago in support of this contention. It does not mention the extensive review of economic literature in the Bank’s more recent World Development Report 2013: Jobs, which examined claims that labor regulations push people out of the formal economy and otherwise negatively affect job creation.

The WDR 2013 found that “most estimates of the impacts [of labor regulations] on employment levels tend to be insignificant or modest.”

In an attempt to show its relevance to another widespread social concern, gender discrimination, DB 2017 adds gender components for three of its indicator sets — starting a business, registering property and enforcing contracts — on the grounds that “several studies highlight the importance of equal opportunities for women entrepreneurs” in fostering economic development.

As this annual “flagship” World Bank report typically does, DB celebrates both countries that are top performers by virtue of their low levels of regulation and those that showed the biggest improvements in making their regulations more business-friendly.

Eight of this year’s DB “top 10 improvers” cited in the Bank’s press release — Kazakhstan, Kenya, Belarus, Serbia, Georgia, Pakistan, United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain — have demonstrated poor and in some cases worsening performance in terms of respecting workers’ rights, according investigations by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).

Peter Bakvis directs the Washington, D.C., office of the International Trade Union Confederation, which represents 180 million workers in 162 countries.

Originally published by Equal Times.

Explore More


Wall Street Sets Political Outlay Record

November 2, 2016

by James Lardner

Trade and Globalization

The Executives of a Global Mining Corporation Assumed It Would Be Easy to Get Their Way in Rural Northern El Salvador. They Were Wrong.

October 21, 2016

by Robin Broad

by John Cavanagh

Stay informed

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter