 We have a great panel and a great discussion. The session is entitled Fast Forward Family. We're going to discuss the session title in a moment. I'm Mina Al Arabi. I'm a Young Global Leader and Yale World Fellow. I'm very pleased to be moderating the session. It is on the record and we're looking forward to participation of the audience. So please be prepared with your questions and comments. But first, I have the pleasure of introducing our panel. I'm going to start here from my right. We have Minister Shiozaki, who's Minister of Health, Labor and Welfare in Japan. And then we have Peter Matheson, who is President of the University of Hong Kong, but also the representative for the He-For-She UN campaign in Asia. We have Neelam Chibber from India. She is the Managing Director of Industry Mother Earth. She's also a Schwab Foundation Social Entrepreneur. And we have Kate Marie Sigfusson, who is the Founder and CEO of Babies for Babies. And she's also a Global Shaper. So thank you for joining us. We've entitled the session Fast Forward Family, but really what we want to talk about are all the different dynamics that you've been discussing over the last few days and probably in the last few months that we're seeing. From urbanization, to changing workplace practices, to aging societies that mean that caregivers are changing, there are shifts in our societies that are having immediate impacts on our lives, but also are going to impact our futures and the future of our children and the coming generations. So one of the things we have to think about is that by 2040, 55 countries are going to have to deal with aging societies in ways that we've never witnessed before. But at the same time, 28% of the people of the Middle East at the moment are between 15 and 29. So they're millennials who are coming into the workforce, who not only need jobs, but need better livelihoods. We have China that's just changed its one child policy. What impact does that have? And when we talk about a fourth industrial revolution and all the technological advances, the US still doesn't have maternity paid maternity leave. And what does that mean? So all of these issues to discuss, I'm going to start with you, Minister Shiozaki. There's different statistics, one of them says that 40% of Japan's population will be 65 years of age or older by 2060. So how do you prepare for that? Thank you very much for inviting me to attend this session. And as you introduced me, I'm Minister of Health, Labor and Welfare, and which probably has closest link to the topics that we are going to discuss. Actually, our Prime Minister Abe announced a so-called new set of three arrows. As top priority agenda in September last year. He used to have three years ago, three arrows, but first one was dynamic monetary policy and second was flexible fiscal policy. And third is a growth strategy. But now he has new set of three arrows. The first one is economic revival. So that's basically the same notion that he had in the first set of three arrows. But now he has two arrows. One is how we can take care of young couples raising kids or single mothers, well, whoever raising kids and how we can support those care. And second one is how we can go symbolically, he said, how can we stop people quitting jobs because of elderly care? And that really, well, the second and third new arrow showed how difficult and serious these problems are now. And of course, probably among us, maybe India and Japan are the most traditional countries with very old culture. But things are even in Japan changing a lot. For example, take, for example, about the aging as you correctly pointed out the possibility of having figure like 40% by 2060 over those over 65. Now we have 26%, 26% of population is over 65. And if you go to countryside, the figure might go all the way up to 40 or something like that. So there are many elderly people without youngsters because we have a strange, unique feature of demography within or geographic demography in Japan that people are flowing out to Tokyo. They used to flow out to Osaka or other big cities, but now only to Tokyo. But anyway, we realize that we have to socialize so-called elderly care in the 1990s, and we decided to introduce the elderly care public insurance scheme, which is close to the one they have in Germany. And we introduced in 2000. And now we have about 10 trillion yen size of spending a year, whereas we have 40, four times as many as elderly care for medical care. But the speed of increase is much faster in the case of elderly care. And the reason why Prime Minister symbolically said that we have to stop people quitting because of the elderly care. We socialized, we didn't have a so-called public insurance scheme for elderly care before 2000, but we decided to introduce it because wives, housewives used to be contained at home and taken care of the husband's parents or something like that with the word symbolically phrased elderly care hell or something like that. Well, we don't hear that phrase anymore, but still, first financially it's getting bigger and bigger and that means burden on the people is going to be going up. And but at the same time, we have to do something in order not to have the cases like people quitting because of the elderly care. And so what we immediately, we have to do is increase the housing facilities for facilities to have elderly care who need care. And also we have, more importantly, I guess, what we must do, I think this is the case, is the same for childcare too. We have to change the working behavior and also the institutionalize the system that could allow people to take care of elderly but at the same time working safely. And that means take official break for elderly care or childcare. And have the government support that? Or are you looking to the private sector to support that? The government, it's a public policy that could allow them to take recess for taking care of elderly or taking care of kids. And so I think people are more influenced by the way they work at home. And no, no, at the places where you work. And what we are now facing is the assignment that we have to change the employment policies and also the policies that are needed to allow people to work as safe as possible with childcare or elderly care. And now we have lots of double income families compared to in old days. That means we have more needs to have the correct policies to be applied to those who have elderly care, needs or childcare. I want to bring you in here because it's correct as Mr. Shiazaki said that there are traditional family structures in different parts of the world. And India is one of them, you grew up in a large family and the influence they had on their lives. So how do you balance that between wanting to increase, for example, female participation in the workforce and encouraging them, but at the same time having these constraints either taking care of the elderly or the young people? Is it something that you look to governments to support or the private sector can play a part in? The way it is in India, let's be frank, we have about 70% of our population in rural India, right? And I think the weight for government or private support because there's a huge amount of labor market in the unorganized sector in rural India. So it's critical that women work. That's what we see in the work we do. Rural women are very keen to work. They need access to the livelihood because their incomes give them a much better position at home. And there is more and more recognition within their larger families, within their mothers and their mother-in-laws. So let's be frank about it. Child support, elderly care support is coming from the extended family in rural India and to some extent even in urban India, yeah? So we have a policy with the private sector so we have to give three months of paid leave, maternity leave, yeah? I think paternity leave has also started. I think it's a month and they're trying to push it to a couple of months. But that's in the organized sector. That we have this huge unorganized sector. I think 90% of our workforce is in the unorganized sector. And there we see that it is the strength of the larger family. So when, as a topic we have today is fast-forward family, I would say there are huge strengths in the family structure and moving jobs to rural economies, like in India, move the jobs to rural India, stem migration, because the minute you have migration, then you break up the extended family. And then they are in the cities and then they need all these support structures which are going to take much longer to come in. So I think a good solution to this is create jobs in rural India, let the family stay together, and the elders look after the young, which is what has happened traditionally. And I just wanted to also bring in another topic in here about, I was just seeing the movie, the virtual reality film, Collisions, yeah? And so hundreds of years or hundreds of generations of knowledge was with the aborigines. So there's a lot of embedded knowledge that comes through close family structures, yeah? So in our strive towards modernities, like he's saying everybody's moving to Tokyo, but I think when you're looking at societies like India, whether if you move 70% of its population to its cities, you're going to see turbulence and you're going to see a whole lot of impact, even in terms of usage of traditional knowledge, greener economies, recycling, all sorts of knowledge that's passed on, you're going to start losing it. You're going to have a lot more problems, so. Well, Peter, that's also an issue in China at the moment and mass migration, around the world, you have 65 to 70 million people moving to cities annually and the trend is continuing to increase. So China, of course, there is the issue of migration, but it's also an issue for Europe in a different way because with your background in the UK, there's the issue of demographics that we need people to move and we need them to have an input not only in the workforce, but also in society and innovation. So how do you find the best ways to move on? So can I come back to China in a second? I mean, to address the topic, I mean, we've got two massive topics. One is aging and its consequences and the other one is family structures and maybe that can impinge on gender stereotypes and roles within the family and whatnot. So I was looking for the link between the two and I think the link between the two, as Minister Shizaki said, is actually probably about caring responsibilities. So there is this expectation that traditionally women care for the young and maybe increasingly as there are more and more elderly needing care, there could be a natural assumption that it will be the women that lead the care of the elderly and it's interesting what the minister was saying about the expectation being that the wife would look after the husband's parents as well as her own. And those are the kind of stereotypes which need to be changed, I think. And so to me, the link between the two topics of the afternoon is maybe about caring responsibilities and how they should be defined and how they should be shared out in a way that's not currently practiced in most societies. I didn't know that the United States doesn't have paid maternity leave so I've learned something today. The UK has just introduced what they call shared parental leave so where there's an allocation of leave to a pair of parents who may be the same sex or different sex or whatever, but there's an allocation of parental leave which can be split, however the couple wishes between the man and the woman or the two women or whatever it is. And I think that's actually rather imaginative. So I'm not here to speak in favor of the UK policy but I think that's quite a good idea. In relation to China, I mean many of the points that Nila made, I mean China is urbanizing at an enormous rate and so there is a drive for populations to move to cities and China obviously has huge rural areas. A lot of it is responsible for producing the food that the country needs. And so there needs to be automation of food production, otherwise there won't be enough food produced to feed all the people in the city. So that's one challenge to China. You mentioned the one child policy so one of the drivers to relaxing the one child policy was the recognition that there is an aging population and these aging people are gonna need someone to look after them and if each couple's only got one person and that one child is away somewhere else in the world making his or her way in the world then who's gonna look after the elderly. So that's been one of the drivers to the relaxation of the one child policy. If I made a contrast between Hong Kong where I live and work now and the UK where I lived and worked until two years ago. In the UK, the government has abolished retirement age and has lifted the pension age. So the pension age is getting higher. And you could say that represents a very emancipated policy by the UK. In reality, I don't think it does. I think in reality it's because the government couldn't afford the pension pot and wanted to encourage people to work longer in order to stave off the day when they need to take their pension. Hong Kong, which has the longest life expectancy in the world for men and the second longest for women or it could be the other way around, I can't remember, it's longest for one and second longest for the other has a mandatory retirement age of 60. And so people in Hong Kong spend a lot of their lives working for their old age and wanting to work beyond 60 because there's no state support for elderly care in the way that there is in the UK. So there's some very interesting similarities and some very interesting differences between the UK and Hong Kong. But ageing is a, I'm a medic as you know, so ageing is regarded as a success for my profession, but actually it creates all sorts of satirical problems. And my personal view is that the correct managing of ageing is actually nothing to do with medicine. It's actually much more about social science. And you're right. In the issue of social science, I'm going to turn to you, Kate Murray, on not only are you having to take care of aging populations in countries that have had successful health policies and therefore you have people living longer, but you're also still having to deal with the issue of the next generation coming in and how do you balance work and being a mother? And so you said to me, refer to yourself as a startup mom. So what does that mean? What does that mean at a time when we're expecting more flexible hours and women increasingly joining the workforce, but of course still having to deal with the gender gap in terms of pay. So while single mothers, for example, take on more work because they're having to financially, they're still being paid less than men. According to the World Economic Forum, the gender pay gap is not going to close for another 118 years. So this is a long-term policy that we have to talk about. Right. And I will say that actually a bigger indicator of inequality than gender in the US is actually motherhood. A woman in the US who's single and childless will earn 96 cents on the dollar a man makes and a mother will earn 76 cents. And we really need to look at these types of figures when we talk about women and work and caregiving. And I call myself a startup mom. I'm an entrepreneur and I'm a mother. And what that means for me being a startup mom or a startup dad is that you're uniquely positioned to reimagine and innovate the workplace because we need a lot of that. We talk about the fourth industrial revolution. I'm seeing a robot downstairs stand on one foot and then jump to the other. We're talking about nanotechnologies and self-driving cars and all this amazing progress we're making. And yet our traditional workplace has stuck decades or centuries in the past. So what we can do as entrepreneurs as startup moms and startup dads in being one key to achieving gender parity is to reimagine and reinvent the workplace. And I think that the corporate world has just as equal a hand in doing that. I just am speaking from my own personal advantage. And I think that we're talking so much about caregiving and that is the key, right? Because, and more so I think when we talk about caregiving we should talk about the value that we give caregivers because caregivers work is not factored into GDP dollars and just think of it were. Think of how many dollars that would be. And when we talk about women in the workplace and when women exit, women exit right before they reach senior management positions because it's the age at which they're becoming mothers. And I mean, this is such a wonderful conversation to have from different points of view because the real crux of it is that we don't value caregivers. Whether they are caregivers for aging populations for children and why is that? And I think that we really need to dig deep from a societal standpoint and consider why is a professional out earning in the workforce, wherever they are in the world valued more than somebody who is raising the next generation. And what are we doing here if not for the next generation? And so reimagining the workforce, giving caregivers the value that they deserve caring for our elderly, caring for our children, raising the next generations. It's a big conversation to have. I remain very, very hopeful. And to speak on behalf of American families, it is a travesty that we are one of the only countries in the world and the only developed country that does not have any paid parental leave. 25% of women in the US are back at work 10 days after giving birth, 10 days. And most of those women are in positions where they're on their feet. And this is barbaric. This is something that we need to, I mean, we are addressing in the US but it does go back to caregiving and I'd like to talk more about why we placed a little value on that because it is the most important role. Well, we're not now in both cases for children but also the elderly. So I guess we're looking for you of how you think you can have not only society but the economy and the market forces. Appreciate that those that need to take time out to care for families and those in society. There, we've, as always in good conversations at the World Economic Forum, there's so much to talk about and so little time. So I want to be fair and open up to the audience and then we can discuss some of these issues. So please raise your hand if you'd like to ask a question and we'll get a mic to you and if you'd like to introduce yourself. Okay, so I've got one person here and then one gentleman here and a lady here. So we'll go in that order. Toby Porter from Help Age International. Great to hear aging discussed. My experience in the World Economic Forum is that the development community and the humanitarian community spends too little time talking about demographic change and aging and it's very much portrayed here as a sort of rich world challenge and actually some of the fastest aging countries on Earth are in emerging countries. And I think the development world still very much organizes itself quite vertically on silos and the other aspect is how families are linked. So we surveyed families with elderly relatives in countries, in developing countries and the enormous proportion of those families suffer catastrophic health expenditure events often related to strokes, heart attacks, et cetera. And billions and billions of dollars invested in development health systems but still countries where so little on basic things like hypertension. The Minister of Health from South Africa is here at the meeting again this year. He has currently the highest rates of hypertension in over 50 segments has ever been recorded. And in rural areas people just don't get their blood pressure checked, there isn't even the most basic management of these things. It's all integrated and we need to be looking at whole life course, whole family approaches. So based on what you heard our panel speaking also on your wealth of knowledge and what you're referring to here what would you say is the number one factor that you could change in rural areas to help deal with aging or in developing countries with aging and managing aging, what can they learn? Well I think like a lot of the panelists I think care is a huge issue. So I think three areas, two we already know about so health as everybody talks that the changing demographic profile means that we need to get better at NCD and it's just, there's a target now in the sustainable development goal so it's there. It's not happening much. Social protection, pensions as well as payments for mothers, for children, et cetera. And I think the third area which is completely new is care. I think that it's a huge challenge all over the world that in developing countries it's not really even on the policy making table. 60% of global dementia caseload already is in in emerging countries. That's the huge issue. Can I just comment on that because Toby raises an interesting point about healthcare and particularly about hypertension. So I'm a kidney doctor so hypertension's right up my street. But there's an interesting paradox for the medical profession, every heart attack you prevent means that that person's gonna live longer and have different care needs later on. So it's actually very cost effective to let people die from their first heart attack. This is not the NHS approach. But actually that's not what doctors or indeed society want. We'd like to prevent the heart attack in the first place but we'd also like to manage it when it happens. And hypertension's a very good example. I mean hypertension in rural Africa which I know reasonably well kills people because they have a major stroke and the consequences of the stroke kill them. Now if you could intervene either to treat their blood pressure earlier you'd make the stroke less likely. You may not prevent it altogether but you may make it less severe or make it happen much later in their life. But also there's a huge issue around management of stroke. So stroke doesn't need to be the end of someone's useful life. But in societies without infrastructure it usually is. And they then become a dependent who needs somebody to care for them. And then that takes a woman out of the workforce in Africa it's usually a daughter rather than a partner. But so there is something very circular about preventive health. So when I say that elderly management of aging is not about healthcare I believe that because I think a lot of it's about social care. But there are aspects of healthcare that would alter the impact of aging and age-related diseases. Most non-communicable diseases have an element of age-related cancer. Heart disease stroke, they're all much more common in the elderly. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Moderator. Let me just raise one aspect that will even make elderly care situation worth. That is the increasing numbers of older people who have a problem with cognitive ability. Many of them will be developing a dementia eventually. Many of us? Well, yes. It's true, we all have a stake in it. As you can imagine, it will increase the demand for the care services. But we already have a shortage of care workers. And we know that the overall labor supply will be declining in the future, like country like Japan. So if you cannot have a adequate amount of care services as Minister Shiozaki said, you have to quit your job to take care of your parents. And that will even accelerate the declining trend of labor supply. In fact, last year, some of our colleagues calculated the total social cost of cost relating to the increasing number of people with cognitive decline is as much as 14 trillion a year. And a large portion of that social cost is opportunity cost of workers who have to quit the job. So my point is to promote the care services for older people is urgent, not only for helping these people, but also for economic growth. And invest in, it's not yet possible, but invest in prevention of dementia of our cognitive decline problem will produce enormous returns in economy. So I think people have to recognize the expenditures on elderly care or expenditures on the prevention of dementia will be a big investment. Mr. Shiozaki, at a time when we see, of course, concerns about the economy and growth and so forth while there are these demands, so investments, for example, in health, how do you balance it, especially at the time when there is such economic pressures? As I said, the cost is rapidly growing. And I think we didn't really expect that speed to be realized in the case of elderly care. And of course, medical care also faces increasing cost too, but I think elderly care costs is a much fast growing area. And I think in 2000, as I said, by introducing public insurance scheme, that means those care will be calculated in GDP. That means it could be a positive factor for economic growth, but that comes with a burden too on the side of general public. And now we are thinking of decreasing how we can decrease this cost or stop growing that fast. So preventive measures? First is, of course, preventive measures and also in the case of cognitive decline or dementia. I think R&D for the pharmaceutical development must be made to detect as early as possible and also to stop dementia to get worse. But I think what is needed in the real cases of elderly care, for example, in the facilities for elderly people, I think what is needed is productivity revolution. We just watched the robot that would be used in the elderly care too. And now we are encouraging any element that could enhance productivity growth through IT or robotics and all that. And that would stop the demand for elderly care people. But at the same time, more practical way of handling this, we are now trying to invite foreign labor forces as trainee status for elderly care. Because I think in Asia, Japan is the fastest aging country that have a long experience of taking care of elderly people. And Asian countries would face the same problem in some time. And even in China, I guess, population itself is going to decline in 20 years. And that means, and also in 30, 40 years time, the percentage of elderly people in the population that would be in the same as ours. So I think immediate response is to how can we increase the people working for elderly care domestically by paying more, but in cost. And that goes down to the burden of the general public through taxation and also insurance contribution. So then we are thinking of asking foreign labor forces to be in our market too, but at the same time, I think we might have to think about how much we will cover in the public insurance scheme. There was a question here, and this lady there, so we'll start here at the front. Hello, my name is Aditi and I'm a global shaper from the Amdabad Hub. My question is rooting from the concern of my fellow global shaper, Kate, when we lose so much of women force when they start their families. So my question is, why can't we look at, families are restructuring themselves, even in the developing nations. We are moving from a joint family to nuclear families and becoming more and more lonelier in our homes. So why can't we create a space or family inside in the workforce itself? My question to you is with the policy makers and also people who run the startup to restructure, is there a way we can restructure our work area or work environment where we provide that kind of family space to the women? For example, a care center or a place where they can feed their babies, a place where their babies can play. And could it be more like a policy where all the startups we started doing in our companies where we see, we face it firsthand and also from the government of how can it be more like a policy where all the offices should have, like we have pool tables and swimming pools and health center in all the offices but there is absolutely no crash or a place for to keep our child when we are working in the offices. So that's my question. The question, Milano, come to you. What do you do as an industry mother? To answer that, I mean in Indian manufacturing, it's a must to have a crash. So that's a global SOP. But I don't think it's a must in corporate offices. But it's a must in manufacturing. So that is, it's a no-brainer. It has to be done. But coming to the aging population bit, so I have a fellow Shobhi who was telling me yesterday who's got an aging mother. I've got, I have an 84-year-old mother and a 94-year-old mother-in-law who lives with me. And she said, why can't we have a crash for these people in office? I mean, not crash. I mean, you'd have to have another word for it. But honestly, I really believe, I mean, that it's assumed that we are going to look after our young. It's a travesty, I feel, that it's not assumed that we're going to look after our old. I just, because my son is just married in American. And, no, no, I'm not, my son is married in American My son is married in American and my daughter-in-law's grandmom came for the wedding and I could see the sorrow in her eyes because our moms are living with us. And she said, she said, I was taken to see a home. She lives alone. But how much longer is she going to live alone? And she's got a loving family. I mean, this is going to be broadcast. So they're all going to be seeing this. But I mean, it's an awesome family. It's a beautiful family. But it's just not assumed. And I just feel that we look after our kids. So I mean, looking after our old is just the same thing. How can it not be? Okay, Ray, do you see changes in American corporations or startups where we see, you're right. We hear about companies that have great places to work and then cafeterias and pool tables. Do you see that? So currently there is a race at the top to provide parental leave and accommodations and the workforce to be inclusive of family. And that's wonderful. That's at the very top. That's for the very few who are lucky enough to have those jobs. And I think it can be a great example. But the reality is we do need childcare in the workplace, in the corporate workplace. There is a whole sector of women in the US, professional women, who are being forced out of the workforce because they cannot out-earn the salary of the cost of a caregiver. Rather, their salary cannot earn the cost of caregiving. We have no universal childcare before the age of kindergarten in the US. With ages zero to five being the most important years of a human's life for development, we have no mandated care for them. So women, when we talk about, and I've heard a lot of conversations this week at Davos, about keeping women on a career track, keeping women in that funnel to get in those upward trajectories. And there's all the data that show that women are opting out right, as I said earlier, right before they're reaching these senior management positions. And that is because, disproportionately, the burden, and it is a beautiful thing. I'm a mother, so by burden, I don't mean that it's to be pejorative, but the burden of motherhood, because the woman biologically bursts the child, falls disproportionately on the woman, and caregiving, often, of elderly or children, falls disproportionately on the woman. So if we're talking about keeping women in the workplace, we need to be real, and we need to talk tangibly about the things across industries, across ranks in industries, what things we can do to help women who are pregnant, postpartum, nursing, and just new parents in the trenches. And let me say we cannot leave new fathers out of this equation. We need to do tangible things to help them stay in the workforce, because right now we're telling women, lean in, lean in, lean in, and we are, but we need something to lean on. And so to answer your question, yes, we can reimagine the workplace. It's absolutely possible to have on-site childcare, to have mother's rooms, to talk about breastfeeding in the workplace and what that looks like, because I cannot tell you how many women in my community, and I represent a large community of working mothers, and they're all asking me to ask questions of you all on my social media channels for what you can do to bring them these things, like on-site childcare and mother's rooms and paid parental leave, and then making a shift from a societal place, both at home and in the workplace, where we are not only giving fathers paid leave, but we're asking them to take it. We are being inclusive of young men in the conversation, and I could go on, but to answer your question, yes, we can redesign the workplace. Peter, isn't that part of what he for she really stands for? So you mentioned he for she, which is a UN women initiative to promote gender equity in the world, but focused on three sets of impact champions, university presidents of which I'm one, CEOs of global corporations who met in Davos this week, and then heads of state, and so it's an initiative not without its controversies, and I don't particularly want to get involved in its controversies, but the principle of promoting gender equity is something that I certainly subscribe to. The meeting that took place in Davos this week was focused on the corporate sector, and I was really struck by how the issues, the numbers, the initiatives that have been tried, and in some cases failed, and some of the things which have worked are very similar in the corporate sector than they are in the university sector. So in summer Davos, in Dalian last year, I was on a panel on gender equity, and I was the only university representative, and I was really struck by the fact that everybody else thought I was going to bring the answers. Everyone sort of said, oh yeah, we've got problems on gender equity. Who's the guy from the university? Tell us what the answers are, and I said to them, no, look, I'm here to learn not to teach, you know. I mean, I actually, I need to learn from you as well, because in the university sector, there is not gender equity. I mean, I worked in the UK in a medical school, because that's my background, and there is not gender equity in medical schools. The medical student populations have been female predominant for 25 years in the UK, and yet 25 years later, there's still not anything close to equal female representation at senior levels, and so I just do not buy the idea that it's a matter of time and that these women will eventually come through. There is something systematic which stops it. Clearly, caring responsibilities are part of that. It is partly about maternity leave and places to breastfeed and places to look after small children. It's also about re-entry into careers, and it's about tolerance of a woman taking longer to achieve the same progression that a man would take if she has other responsibilities, and universities can calibrate for that, and actually universities' medical schools in the UK now do that much more effectively than they did for one single reason, which is that there's a woman called Dame Sally Davis, who is a major controller of research funding in the UK, and she just overnight said, you're not getting any research funding from my agency unless you have decent equal opportunity policies in your medical school. And so every medical school in England, because it's devolved, so it's England rather than the UK, every medical school had to look through its equal opportunities policies, and that single intervention made a huge difference. And then the last thing I just wanted to say about Hifushi, I came from that session, and I was walking through the forum here, and I met a friend of mine from the University of Chicago, Ian Solomon, so if Ian's watching, I'm crediting him with this idea, not claiming it as my own, but I said to him, the thing that was a bit disappointing about this session that I went to was I didn't hear one really big bang idea about how to really make a difference. So Ian said, I'll give you one. He said, the World Economic Forum should become more family friendly. We should have crushed facilities. We should have more opportunities for women here, less than 18% of the delegates of the World Economic Forum are female. However, for the young global leaders and the global shapers, it's 52 because the World Economic Forum controls it more. It's more about the corporate sector who's coming and how they choose to go. I agree, and that's absolutely right, and I've heard this statistic quoted a lot, and it's not a criticism of the World Economic Forum, because as you say, the World Economic Forum doesn't, in general, decide who comes. The corporates decide who comes, but it is a sign of another sector where something big could be done to make a really important statement. If you made the World Economic Forum family friendly and child friendly, maybe that would send a message to some of these corporates that need to... And it's true also for governments. I mean, everybody this week was excited about having the Canadian Prime Minister here, Justin Trudeau and everyone's hailing the fact that we have gender parity in the Canadian government, but so many people are saying, well, shouldn't this have happened anyway? And it was his famous quote about it's 2015, last year of why there was gender parity. So I want to ask you, when you raised the issue about, there can be a single policy that would have incredible impact, whether it's about the medical schools in England or here in the World Economic Forum, what we can do to actually change. So I want to ask you, womenomics came out of Japan and what they tried to do there. So I want to ask you about specific policies that you fail, make a difference that can push this agenda forward? Well, I think Japan has been notorious regarding the gender equality, I guess. But our Prime Minister is very keen on this and I think female policy is one of the top priority policies of the present administration. And actually last year, we passed a bill that would facilitate the female to work more freely and giving obligation to large companies over employees of over 300 to have numerical targets to regarding female participation in the workplace. And also we are now introducing a new policy to encourage companies to have nursing facilities in their offices or plans or whatever. And so these policies are going to be the positive move to let female participation in the work and also at the same time to work with babies or childcare. And we also are trying to let part-time job female, mainly female, to have maternity leave because it's been very limited in the case of part-time female workers to have maternity leave. But at the same time, there is a rather different type of policy that we're going to introduce to encourage female to work and childcare to be handled easily. That is something to do with the old traditional culture of living within big families. We are now trying to introduce a taxation tax-preferential treatment of living three generations together in one house. And so if you, yeah. And for example, I happen to be my typical case living with, I used to live with my wife's parents. So my, of course, my wife works in a university. And so probably my wife would assert that I took care of all the children's problems. But I think living in, with three generations, that really helped my wife work safer, I guess, with two kids raising. Yeah, traditionally. So it's going to be a public policy to encourage three generations living together in one house or close by. Yeah, that's a very good one. Okay, so we have three questions and little time. So I'm going to take the questions together and then we'll address them. So if we can start with the lady here who's been waiting patiently. And then we'll come to questions here. Appreciate that you just brought up part-time work. And I think workplace flexibility is a big topic in terms of tangential actions that can happen to make an impact both on childcare and on caretaking as well as a wide other range of social issues. I'd be curious, especially from a federal level, I'm familiar with the United States regulations in this, but from the federal level in other countries, if there's any support for telecommuting and remote work, as well as flexible schedules. Okay, thank you. Okay, so telecommuting and flexible schedules. And then. Thank you. Laurel, Laurel, I'm going to flip it a little bit around this issue. If we can stipulate that families and the creation of families are an avenue to stability in a country. Okay, then I'd like to bring in rather sort of segment issue, which is the unnatural selection of girls and boys. This is particularly hit hard, obviously, in India and in China, but there's a book called Unnatural Selection, and it actually shows that there are a number of countries. We have substantial disproportion of boys being born instead of girls. So you have a large cohorts of young men, right, who will statistically, virtually have no capacity to enter into a family relationship. We even might see that over 70% of the refugees coming into Europe are unattached young men. So then the question is, how are we going to redefine family or rethink this if you have large cohorts of people who will not have access to family structure? Okay, thank you. Important points raised. Yes, definitely worth taking into. We'll take a final question and then come back to these issues. Please come ahead. My name's Mandi Parai, and for the purposes of this conversation, I'm a mumpreneur, although one of you ever heard of a dadpreneur, so it's a rather sexist term. My point is that we don't have to reinvent the wheel. There are plenty of countries that are actually looking at childcare in a very progressive manner. For example, Scandinavia, the Scandinavian countries, where they don't look at part-time work because often women lose out when they're doing part-time work. They look at flexiwork, both for men and women, and have done this very well for many years. And so my question would be, here we are talking about the Industrial Revolution, where more and more we're concerned about jobs and the lack of jobs. So for example, with looking at automated cars and how less truck drivers will be needed, well then why don't we think about less time at work for everyone rather than the few at the top becoming more and more stressed and us having to look at neuroscience and thinking about sleep and how are we going to fit in sleep as we all become more and more competitive at the top whilst losing jobs at the bottom. Why don't we all just think about taking a few more hours off and therefore instead of having to make it crushes at work as trying to fit in everything, we can actually look after our children and our elderly at home and all of us look after our children and our elderly. There we go, a health and labour policy rolled into one. Okay, so we've got some interesting questions. So I want to ask who'd like to tackle the flexiwork slash part-time work and not disadvantaged women by just saying, okay, well, you can go into part-time and then necessarily getting the rights that they deserve. Neela. So on flexiwork, all I can say is that yes, in the unorganized sector that we have in India, in rural India, there is an option that women work part-time. So they can work four hours a day, but we've got to stick to global standards so that wage rate should be fit for those four hours. And it's a great option. It's a fantastic option and we explore it all the time. And I think it's great. I think it should just, I mean, it's a no-brainer. But Kate Marie, is there that possibility when you're in a start-up and you're trying to cram in as many hours as you can to get something off the ground to make that happen? Well, speaking of the start-up mom, and like I said, I do call fathers who are entrepreneurs start-up dads, so you're a start-up mom and if you know a male father, entrepreneur, he's a start-up dad, it's equal. What we are, like I said, uniquely positioned to reimagine the workplace. And so while my life is not glamorous or easy, I equally value my family and my work and I just make that look like it works for me. On a daily basis, and that's constantly evolving. So I think that flex work is a little bit different for entrepreneurs because you don't stop working. I'm on all the time, but I do it in a way that works for me and that is what a start-up mom or a start-up dad is. I really like the comment about essentially working smarter and not necessarily just putting in the face time. I think that's something that we can really hope to do in this fourth industrial revolution is work smarter and really value our home life more. And I think that the sharing economy provides a lot of opportunity for that and it will remain to be seen whether that works out for better or worse. But for example, I know I don't have the statistic on it, but a vast number of mothers are becoming Uber drivers because it allows them to set their own schedule and work and then be with the family and then work again and be with the family again. So I think really my point is that we can reimagine work and we don't need to go into an office from nine to five and just put in those hours sitting at a desk. We can start, stop, start, stop, start, stop in order to give equal value to our work and our personal lives. And I think speaking from a millennial point of view, our generation really values this. Whether we're parents or not, whether we're caregivers or not, we really, and men and women across the board, value this idea of not just working to live but really doing both in a way that means something to us. So I have great hope for the future. Well, with hope for the future, there is also the issue about redefining families and really a valid and important point that raised that probably requires a session on its own about how we see the impact of unnatural selection and increasing young men rising up in different ways in life but not having the family support that they would necessarily need. How do you tackle that? No, I mean, that's a huge topic and it's a huge topic in China as the questioner raised. Just think, if I could just go back to workforces. I mean, for me, there's a couple of issues about workforces. One is hiring into the workforce in the first place and the second one is retention in the workforce. And there's no, in general, there's much less of a problem with hiring of women into the workforce. It's keeping them. But even in hiring, so in the university world, one of the other university partners in the He For She initiative is Nagoya University in Japan. And I was talking to my counterpart in Nagoya and in Hong Kong, I'm impatient to make change quickly but it's illegal for me to hire somebody preferentially on the basis of gender. So I can't go and try and fill a post with a woman in order to make the gender balance better because that's illegal under equal opportunities law. In Nagoya University, they've got in engineering which is a subject where women are traditionally even more underrepresented than they are in most other disciplines. It's legal in Japan to have women-only faculty positions and Nagoya University is hiring some women in engineering because it's designated as a priority area with a great underrepresentation of one group. And so that kind of legislation I think is very helpful and Japan is doing that, Hong Kong is not. On unnatural selection, well, I mean, I think the idea that some people won't ever have access to a family structure is one of the great saddenances of the modern world, I think. You know, and the disruption of the family structure with urbanization or with everybody being so obsessed with working so many hours and I'm no one to preach on this subject. I think that's one of the great saddenances and I think if the world can work to preserve family structures, whether it's by looking at the workplace or by looking at flexi-working or by looking at equal opportunities policies in more general, then I think the world would be a better place. And I think that is a major challenge. My last word would just be about, so it comes back to a little bit about respect for caregiving roles. My worry about the corporate world's approach to flexible working or to all these other policies is that somehow it's a bit apologetic. It's sort of trying to make life a bit easier for women because we think that's a good thing to do. It's not about getting the best out of the human race and making sure that we have access to 100% of the human race, not just 50% of it. And so it's got to be respectable for men to take time off to look after children. It's got to be respectable for men to have flexible working, not only for women, otherwise it'll make the situation worse, potentially not better. Okay, so we are out of time, but I'm going to ask your permission to extend just for five minutes because we actually have Anne-Marie Slaughter here and we wanted to ask her her take on it because of course she wrote that all important article on having it all or not. And really we don't want to expand the conversation even further, but it is about that, about how we make the choices that we do, how companies and governments make choices, but we as individuals. So I just wanted to take a word from you and then we'll wrap up the session. Oh, thank you. So I'm actually just going to emphasize what we heard here just at the end because I spent three years after that article rethinking what really needs to happen and concluded that the two single most important things we can do to get to real equality between men and women are to value care and to value care for everyone, to value care as the work of investing in the next generation, which is from a policy point of view, the single most important thing any nation can do. We're here at Davos talking about global competitiveness. Well, those first five years of life, you are not just teaching a child something, you are shaping that child's brain and determining what it will learn for the rest of its life. There's no greater way of combating inequality. There's no greater way of making a nation competitive, secure, et cetera. So care from that point of view is absolutely essential. And of course, at the other end of life it is the moral obligation to those who cared for us. So value in care and then second, value in care as men do it as well as women, there is no way to change women's roles without changing men's roles equally. And there is no way as exactly as you said they're startup moms and startup dads, they're working fathers as well as working mothers as long as this is a women's issue, it will never be resolved. It has to be a human issue. We have to recognize all human beings are likely to be caregivers at some point in their lives, whether that's children or parents or friends or community members, it's not about being married or any particular concept of family and workplaces have to make room for that care and value it both because it's important for us as a race, but it's actually hugely important for us as individuals and makes us better at everything we do. So this kind of global perspective where we think about it in terms of reinventing how we work as part of, I love that idea that that's part of the fourth industrial revolution. We just don't just revolutionize what we produce but how and where we produce it and thinking absolutely that this is for men every bit as much as for women. Excellent, okay so as we wrap up I want in 30 seconds for you to tell me one trend that you're excited about because we've thrown up some of the problems and some potential solutions but one trend that you're excited about that actually is taking us forward in that direction so Kate Murray, I'll start with you. I have to say young men. I think the generation of young men rising into influential positions in their careers and into fatherhood have a huge capacity for empathy. They want this work-life integration. They want to be caregivers and I think that we need to make sure we are always inclusive of them in this conversation. Excellent, thank you. I'm sorry, I have to say what I heard from Professor Kloshoff this morning that in the next, I don't know how many years, 10 years or something, the way we evaluate growth is what is going to determine the importance given to things like care. Like is it going to be, are we going to evaluate on GDPs? So I mean if he's saying that it's got to change let's hope in the next 10 years it starts changing because then that's one way of evaluating your growth. The thing I've heard this week which I think made me feel, I always try and find silver linings, I always try and turn every negative into a positive and the thing that I, it's a slightly cynical comment but the corporate world in the discussions I've heard has woken up to the idea that actually diversity improves performance and that's diversity not only in gender but also in race and background and everything else and to my mind that's likely to make progress much more quickly than anyone doing it because they think it's a good thing. If they do it because it'll make their businesses more successful then it's more likely to happen and that makes me optimistic about change. I think a conservative country like Japan what is the center core problem is one companies, two men. I think we have to, as she talked about it, we have to really try to change the mindset but can we do it through public policy or what? And I think we have to, as a public policymaker, I have to think about something that could change the atmosphere of workplace and mindset of mail. Well I'll just leave you with this one thought I come from the Middle East and there unfortunately young people are seen as a problem, a challenge we're gonna do with all these young people we have and here we are where the world is worrying about aging, well we've got the young people hopefully they will be welcomed with open arms and hopefully our countries will start to do better in keeping young people but also improving the state of the world with you all. Thank you, I'd like to thank our panel thank you for joining us. Thank you.