In recent decades, income inequality has grown in almost all regions of the world, but at different rates. The strong difference in the level of inequality between countries, even when they are similar in terms of development, underlines the important role that national policies and institutions play in the evolution of inequality. In 2016, the share of national income accounted for 10% of the richest share of the population (the highest decile in terms of income) was 37% in Europe, 41% in China, 46% in Russia, 47% in the USA and Canada, and about 55% in Sub-Saharan Africa, Brazil and India. In the Middle East, the region with the highest level of inequality, the top decile accounts for 61% of national income.
Inequality in income is a global problem requiring global solutions. This includes developing programs that provide equal opportunities for all, including vulnerable and marginalized segments of the population, improving regulation and monitoring of financial markets and institutions, and encouraging foreign direct investment in lagging regions. Promoting safe migration and mobility is also key to bridge the widening gap.
In order to prevent a sharp social stratification of society over the years of independence, a set of measures has been taken in Uzbekistan to maintain an optimal level of income differentiation of individual segments of the population.
The results of measures taken in Uzbekistan contributed to a consistent decrease and stabilization at the optimal level of differentiation of incomes of the population. Thus, the income ratio of 10% of the most and least well-off strata of the population - the decile ratio - decreased from 53.3 times in 2000 to 6.8 times in 2016. During this period, another indicator of the differentiation of incomes of the population - the quintile coefficient - decreased from 16.7 times to 4.4 times, and in 2017 - 4.1 times.
The generally accepted indicator in the world of income stratification - the Gini index - in 2000 was 0.39, and in 2016 - 0.27 with the threshold value recommended by the UN of 0.35-0.37 and the optimal level of 0.25-0 , 26.
At the same time, regional imbalance in socio-economic growth within the country remains an urgent problem. The per capita GDP in Tashkent is 4 times higher than in the Namangan region.
In order to ensure an even distribution of the results of economic growth, Uzbekistan will strive to achieve an income growth rate of the poorest 40 percent of the population at a level exceeding the national average.
10.1- By 2030, progressively achieve and sustain income growth of the bottom 40 per cent of the population at a rate higher than the national average.
10.2-Empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or social status.
10.3-Ensure complete and rigorous implementation of anti-discrimination norms laws and regulations in practice, especially with regard to people in vulnerable situations.
10.4-Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social protection policies, and progressively achieve greater equality.
10.7-Facilitate orderly, safe, regulated labour migration and effective migration policy.
|1||Indicator 10.1.1. Growth rates of household expenditures or per capita income among the bottom 40 percent of the population and total population.|
|a) the growth rate of household income per capita among the least affluent 40 per cent of the population, %||-||-||-||-||-||136,8||131,6||136,6||142,7||146,2||148,2||148,1||140,7||136,9||138,3||135,6||125,6||119,0||118,5||116,9||114,9|
|b) growth rate of household income per capita among the entire population, %||155,8||149,8||142,4||123,4||117,3||124,8||131,5||128,4||133,5||132,5||129,2||128,7||121,4||121,8||114,0||110,1||114,6||117,3||125,9||120,2||113,7|
|2||Indicator 10.2.1. Proportion of people with income below 50 percent of median income by age and gender.||25,8||21,9||21,0||22,0||22,2||22,3||21,4||14,9||16,5||15,9||12,7||11,5||11,6||11,0||8,8||8,6||8,2||8,1||7,8||9,1||10,0|
|3||Indicator 10.4.1. Percentage of wages of employees as % of GDP. 1)||35,1||34,7||33,6||31,7||29,8||30,7||29,8||29,9||29,0||29,2||24,7||24,8||26,8||27,3||25,8||25,3||25,3||22,5||22,6||24,9||-|
|4||Indicator 10.7.1. Recruitment cost borne by employee as a proportion of annual income earned in country of destination.|
|5||Indicator 10.7.2. The share of labor migrants voluntarily registered on exiting the country and leaving according to the organizational hiring in their total number, %.||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||-||0,15||2,0||5,6||8,2|
1) For individual years, the data have been recalculated