 Welcome to my poster then. My name is Lena and I work here at the UNU wider and I'm going to present the results of my master thesis which I did together with my very good friend Anders and in collaboration with the World Bank. I know that this is quite late in the afternoon and your heads are probably spinning with all the thoughts that you've been presented to today but our thesis is quite simple so I hope you will follow along. What do we actually ask for is just a simple precise definition of inclusive growth and a way to measure it and of course we have a suggestion to how to do this. We say that we should focus on productive employment instead of putting inclusive growth out to be a lot more than it maybe just could be and we suggest five criteria to measure productive employment. The first four criteria build on an accounting framework of the GDP from the income side and the internal distribution of this. And the last criterion builds on the CFSIA model used by Macmillan Rodrick and she's around here somewhere if you have questions related to that. The first criterion increased employment. This is quite simple. We assess whether there is more people participating in the growth process. So this measures the capacity building of the economy's capacity to produce employment. But it's also just a quantitative measure and unemployment is not the problem in most developing economics. It's more under employment so we need these next three criteria to assess the quality of employment. So the second criteria looks at the general wage growth in the country. And we say that there should not be a falling share of GDP accruing to the workers. This is also quite intuitive. The main income source of most people and especially the poor is the labor income. So that's why we want this to not be a decreasing share of the GDP. But we also look at the internal distribution in the workforce saying that the low wage sectors should catch up with the high wage sectors. And this is looked at to say that the wage growth in the low wage sectors should be higher than the wage growth in the high wage sectors just above and under average. And as the agricultural sector is often the main low wage sector, this criterion almost always looks at whether there has been an increased agricultural productivity. And agricultural productivity is often posed to be a way to reduce poverty. But another strategy to reduce poverty is structural transformation which is what we look at in criterion four where we say that we should have people moving from low wage sectors and into higher wage sectors. This is of course simply structural transformation but a structural transformation looked at from the workers point of view saying that the workers should be the one benefitting from structural transformation. But of course we also want the growth prospect to be there. So we also want the overall economy to benefit from the structural transformation and that is the last and fifth criterion. Looking at as the CFEA model whether this movement of workers into higher wage sectors has also increased the overall productivity in the country. And this is of course put in because structural change is a key to sustained growth. And now you look at these five criteria and you may ask why not put them into one because then you have one number and it's much more easy for everybody to understand. But doing that would require some kind of weighting of each criterion. I must say that I don't like to say whether a country should focus on increased employment or movement of workers. This should be the specific country context and this should be the policymaker making that decision. So by having these criteria standing differently the policymaker are able to look how they've done saying okay we've done really well on criterion one but not so well on criterion four. So maybe we should focus more on that in the future. In our paper we looked at five countries growth experience. We used household data from the international income and distribution database from the World Bank. And this database is still being built upon. So we hope that when this will be released and there will be more countries in and a larger time span then it will be possible to build an experience bank where policymakers are able to go in and say okay this country looking at a lot of ways quite similar to my country. But they have done completely different on these measures than I have. What can I learn from that and what experiences can be drawn. So this is one contribution that we hope our framework could do. I also hope that you find this framework at least interesting and maybe useful. And I thank you for your attention and look forward to questions.