 Well, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for joining us here today for this press conference to announce the launch of our brand new inclusive growth and development report 2015. I'd like to also welcome our audience watching us live online at weforum.org. Now, incoming equality has been a problem that is not exactly new. It's been growing now for decades. More recently the World Economic Forum has been listing it as one of the top global priorities in our global risks report. Every year since about 2009, 2010. We've done something about it. We've actually conducted a two year study into what we call inclusive growth and development. How to address the quality of unfair and unequal distribution of the proceeds of growth and how to grow a fairer and more dynamic society. Very, very pleased to be joined by my colleague Jennifer Blankey, chief economist at the World Economic Forum, who's going to start by offering us a few of the insights from the report. Thank you, Ollie. And what I'm going to do is I'll just walk you a little bit through why it is that we have decided to do this report. What goes into it in terms of the methodology and then some of the results and what comes out in terms of general findings and some findings for particular countries. So as Ollie mentioned, concerns about inequality and social exclusion have been with us for some time. This has been growing. And this is of great concern. It's come out in our global risks report that we put out every year. Why are we concerned about this? Because we see that rising income inequality is very highly linked with a number of risks that we're concerned about, such as social unrest at one extreme that we've seen in places like the Arab Spring, and that right now in Europe are leading to significant migration flows and in fact a big problem in Europe in terms of refugees. But at the other extreme in places like the United States, where we see that wages have just not been rising in line with growth and there is depressed consumption, which given how important the level of consumption is for GDP in the U.S. is just dampening growth. And so basically everybody out there, all the policy makers, really want more inclusive growth but nobody's really sure what to do about it. So this report is really the World Economic Forum's contribution to having some understanding of the many levers that countries can use in order to have a more inclusive growth process. And by that I mean a growth process that brings more of the society along with it that doesn't trickle up but really showers down. Now obviously we're looking at things like taxation and transfers and redistribution, which is very traditionally looked at as what you do when you're dealing with inequality and poverty. We're also looking at education and skills, which is clearly important. But I think the most important thing in this report is that there are many factors. And let me just go through the seven different pillars, which are made up of 15 sub pillars in the report so that you get a sense of what we're talking about. So just to start with, obviously we're looking at education and skills development, but we're pushing it a bit farther than normally people look at it because we're looking both at the quantity of education, how many kids are being touched, how much do they go to school, but also the quality of education and very importantly also the equity of outcomes. And by that we mean to what extent do socioeconomic backgrounds make a difference in the results that students are having. The second is employment and labor compensation. And there is very much the extent to which workers have productive and safe working environments and also the extent to which they're sharing in the proceeds of growth through rising wages and different kinds of compensation. The third area that often people do not think about is asset building and entrepreneurship. And here we're very much talking about new business creation, which is very important in terms of, especially in developing countries, but also in advanced economies, new business creation, own business ownership and things of that nature. The fourth is financial intermediation of real economy investment and there is really about financial inclusion and also how financing is used and the extent to which it's actually used for creating new activities that can be employment creating in the economy. The fifth area is corruption and rent, so the extent to which the economy, the proceeds of the economy are held in few hands, but also the extent that we're seeing both private sector and public sector corruption and bribes in the economy. The sixth is basic services and infrastructure. And there we're looking also, not just at transport infrastructure, which is important, but also health infrastructure, health services, as well as digital infrastructure. And finally, the seventh, last but not least, are the fiscal transfers, the extent to which the economy is making up for any shortfalls in the market mechanisms by taxing and providing the right kinds of redistribution mechanisms and making sure that these are progressive. And by that, I mean that they are reaching those that are most in need. So in terms of the results, unlike many of our other benchmarking reports, we don't actually summarize all of the results into one overall ranking. We do cover 112 economies and what we do is we separate them into four different income groups. So we have advanced economies, we have upper middle income, lower middle income and lower income. And then we don't even within those groups have one ranking per group because we don't know of these seven areas that I mentioned what are more important. Is it more important to be using taxation and transfers? Is education more important? Is employment creation more important? So what we do is we have rankings within each of the seven areas and the 15 areas that are under those. And we still are able to come up with a few general findings and let me just give you some of them. First, for example, if you look at the advanced economies, you find that the Nordic economies do very well on average in a few particular areas. I mean they do quite well across the board, but especially educational outcomes are very good in the Nordics. Employment outcomes, high wages, etc. Low levels of corruption. These are things that the Nordics are known for and it's probably not very surprising, but also they use taxation and redistribution after that to make sure that they're able to compensate for any market failure, so to speak. Another thing we can note in Europe is that there's a big divide between the northern European countries and the southern European countries. The northern European countries tend to really do a lot better across the board. And that's really important because often the southern European countries are sort of saddled with this idea that they need to be more social, and yet they're exactly not having the social outcomes one would expect. If you turn to the BRIC economies, which get a lot of attention, the large emerging market BRIC economies, you see that there's a very varied performance. They do well in some areas and less well in others. Brazil, for example, is struggling in a number of areas, not surprising, including things like corruption as well as unemployment issues. But very interestingly they do have some strengths. In Brazil they're using a lot of the taxation and redistribution mechanisms in a very interesting way, and so there are strengths we can point out. If you look at China, China has a number of strengths and probably overall is doing best of the different BRIC economies, although we don't wrap it up into one measure, but we do see that they do quite well across many of the areas. And again this is compared with the other upper middle income economies. And here we see that they're quite good in China, or the economy is quite good at fostering new business creation compared to other economies in its income group. There are strong employment outcomes, low unemployment, also youth unemployment relatively low in the country, high labor force participation. But of course there are things that need to continue to be tackled in China in order to create more inclusive outcomes, including things like tackling corruption, which clearly the government is already doing in earnest, but also extending the social safety net to more people in the economy. Finally I might mention just the US because I think quite often we look at the US and right now the US is getting back to growth after many sluggish years. And we do see that in the area of asset building and entrepreneurship not surprisingly the US being the world's innovation powerhouse is actually doing quite well. On the other hand we have seen high and rising inequality particularly in the US and this is of great concern as I mentioned before this has been dampening consumption and this is really holding back growth below levels that one might have expected before the crisis. And so really a number of things that will need to be tackled particularly in the wage area also in the redistribution area in the US in order to get the US back on a more inclusive growth track. I would just end with some main takeaways that we have in the report overall in terms of the findings, the preliminary findings of the report. I think first of all clearly all countries have room for improvement. No country scores above average in all of the different 15 areas that we measure and only a few come close. So even countries like the Nordics that tend to do very well in some areas they do have area for improvement in others. A second very important finding is that it's very possible and indeed preferable to be pro-inclusiveness and pro-growth at the same time. And if you look at the results of the inclusive growth report this one with the global competitiveness report you'll see that many of the countries that are very good at driving productivity and growth are also very good at driving an inclusive growth process. And so I think it's very important to think that you can be pro-growth, pro-business and pro-labor at the same time. The third is that fiscal transfers can be helpful and I did mention them many times but they're only part of the story and many other policies can be useful. And as I mentioned there are many things that should be done ahead of time through the market so that you can already have inclusive outcomes. And finally and I think particularly important sitting here in China is the idea that inclusive growth is not only a luxury of the wealthy economies. We see if you look across the board at countries at the different levels of development many countries are punching above their weight in a variety of areas particularly the ones that are more affected by policy rather than building things up over time. So if you look at financial inclusion, if you look at quality of the educational system, if you look at political ethics and things of that nature quite often some of the more developing economies are doing better than those that are at quite higher stage of development. And so I would just end by saying that this is an important piece of work that we're going to be carrying forward in discussions over the year to come and I'd say the years to come in order to really get a good discussion going about what are the different things that countries can do in order to have more inclusive growth process and really come up with specific solutions on how to do so particularly bringing together government, business, civil society. And finally obviously in line with the theme of the meeting this is very, very relevant and we will be carrying out the discussion throughout the next three days as well. Thanks. Thank you Jenna for charting a new course for inclusive growth. Now we'll just take a pause to see if there are any questions. Of course we have our translation devices here so you can ask your questions in Chinese. OK, so we'll move on. We'll have one of the questions we curated from our social media audience earlier in the day and it plays sort of the comment you made Jennifer about the fact that no country scores above average and all 15 of the separate indicators and the question is why has nothing been done sooner, inequality is not new, it's not a new problem. Well you know I think that and this is a personal opinion but the way that we've been, we have faced really great difficulty since the financial crisis but just when the advanced economies were slowing we had the emerging economies really taking off. We had everybody kind of looking to China, Brazil and different of the emerging economies, some of them larger than others. And we really, I think we got into a sense of complacency because it always felt like growth would come from someplace and I think we're finally in a situation where also we see that growth is sort of naturally slowing, sorry, naturally slowing in places like China which is to be expected but suddenly there's no sort of easy growth that will come along. First of all and second of all we do see that in places like the United States levels of inequality have now reached levels that we haven't seen since the 1920s and this is really worrisome. So it seems almost like we've reached a tipping point between the fact that growth is slowing and the fact that it's not reaching enough people that finally policymakers really realize that in order to get reelected probably they need to do something about it and business leaders realize that they have to do something about it if they want to stay in business. Which plays to a second question. Do governments really, do policymakers really have that will power when they have other priorities, pressing priorities, overburden balance sheets of their own austerity pressures, etc.? I think it's not an easy question to answer and I definitely think the world is way too short term right now. Whether it's because governments need to think about the next election, not in all countries but in many countries, that businesses, publicly quoted businesses anyway need to think about the next quarter and how investors are going to react. But I do think that again we really have reached this tipping point and there is a sense for example among the large emerging markets like Brazil that did not take advantage of the good times to make the changes. And now they're being pushed into making them during more difficult times and it almost feels like there's no choice anymore because people really won't stand it. They really are demanding a more of the pie in a sense and really that's good for the economy because that's what makes the economy more dynamic. If this is a report designed for leaders in business as well, what is the appetite amongst businesses and can you think of a gauge the will power amongst business to do what is often counterintuitive? Well I don't know if it's counterintuitive. Quite often we talk about the Henry Ford moment which is the moment that companies realize like Henry Ford did back in the day that if they don't pay people a living wage they can't buy their cars or they can't buy their goods. And we at the World Economic Forum have been seeing that business leaders, really among the top business leaders including our international business council have been telling us that this is something they're extremely concerned about. Because this affects both their top and their bottom lines. And we also see, and we're about to have a big symposium at the Harvard Kennedy School, also together with the Mastercard Center for Inclusive Growth, really looking at many cases what businesses can do. And there are cases where they're using their distribution chains for example, their distribution channels in order to improve the functioning of the different units and the different stores for example that are selling their goods. And this is both good for inclusive growth but this is good for their bottom line and I think it is sort of a case of doing well by doing good and they realize that if nobody is seeing rising wages that they're not going to be in business for very long. OK, thank you Jennifer. Last chance for any questions. OK, well with that I'd like to thank you for joining us in your business schedule. I'd like to thank you all for joining us here as well and for tuning in online this press conference is now over. Thank you.