Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the insurance industry. Core Insights - The insurance industry is unevenly developed globally, with lower coverage in less advanced economies [28][29] - Non-life insurance premiums grew by 12.4% on average in nominal terms in 2023, with a real growth rate of 6.2%, indicating a recovery in demand post-COVID-19 [23][76] - Life insurance premiums showed stable growth overall, but some jurisdictions experienced declines due to higher interest rates affecting consumer behavior [25][33] - Investment performance for insurers improved significantly in 2023, reversing previous negative trends, with two-thirds of jurisdictions reporting positive real investment returns [26][32] - Insurer profitability broadly improved in 2023, with positive underwriting performance and investment gains contributing to increased shareholder equity [27][33] Summary by Sections 1. Global Insurance Market Overview - The penetration of the insurance industry varies widely, with higher levels in advanced economies where premiums can exceed 10% of GDP [22][37] - The non-life sector dominates the insurance industry, accounting for 55% of total premiums written in 2023 [40] - Life insurance is more prominent in regions with higher per capita income, with advanced economies showing a higher share of life premiums [56][57] 2. Non-Life Sector Performance - Non-life premiums grew across all reporting jurisdictions, driven by increased claims costs and higher policy rates [23][72] - The nominal growth of non-life premiums was visible in major classes such as motor vehicle, fire, and health insurance [72][80] - Insurers faced higher claims costs, with gross claims payments increasing by around 17% in nominal terms in 2023 [88][94] 3. Life Sector Performance - Life sector premium growth remained stable overall, with some jurisdictions experiencing declines due to higher interest rates impacting consumer choices [25][26] - The demand for annuity products increased in a higher interest rate environment, while some customers surrendered policies for alternative investments [24][25] 4. Investment Performance - Insurers achieved positive investment returns in real terms in about two-thirds of reporting jurisdictions, contrasting with negative returns in 2022 [32] - Developments in financial markets, including falling government bond yields and strong equity market performance, contributed to improved investment outcomes [26][32] 5. Profitability Trends - Insurer profitability improved in 2023, reversing previous negative performance, with gains in shareholder equity noted across many jurisdictions [27][33] - The implementation of new accounting standards (IFRS 17) in several jurisdictions impacted recorded liabilities and equity [33]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the Digital Economy sector Core Insights - The report outlines a roadmap for measuring the Digital Economy, emphasizing the need for a common definition and a set of indicators to assess jobs, skills, and growth in this sector [21][47] - It highlights the critical role of digital technologies in transforming economies and the importance of measuring their impact on employment and productivity [21][22] - The report identifies major trends in the Digital Economy, including the increasing reliance on digital inputs and the emergence of new business models [22][23] Summary by Sections Executive Summary - The report builds on previous G20 work to develop a common framework for measuring the Digital Economy, proposing a definition and indicators for jobs, skills, and growth [21][47] Chapter 1: Measuring the Digital Economy - The chapter provides context for the Digital Economy, showcasing key trends and updating indicators from the 2018 G20 Toolkit [22][23] - It discusses the importance of infrastructure, societal empowerment, and innovation in driving the Digital Economy [23][24] Chapter 2: Definitions and Measurement Challenges - The chapter proposes a comprehensive definition of the Digital Economy, emphasizing economic activities reliant on digital inputs [25][26] - It introduces a tiered framework to categorize different aspects of the Digital Economy, including core, narrow, broad measures, and the digital society [27][28] Chapter 3: Jobs, Skills, and Growth - This chapter presents indicators related to jobs in the Digital Economy, highlighting the growth of digital-intensive sectors and the impact of digitalization on employment [36][37] - It emphasizes the need for skills development to meet the demands of the Digital Economy and the importance of monitoring gender disparities in ICT-related occupations [36][37] Chapter 4: Roadmap for a Common Framework - The chapter outlines practical steps for implementing the G20 definition and indicators, focusing on building capacity and improving data collection [778][779] - It emphasizes the need for collaboration among G20 countries and international organizations to enhance measurement efforts [780][781]

Investment Rating - The report does not provide a specific investment rating for the industry Core Insights - The report emphasizes the need for improved performance auditing in the public sector of Poland, highlighting the current focus on compliance auditing and the lack of managerial accountability [9][10] - It outlines the principles of performance auditing, which include economy, efficiency, and effectiveness, and stresses the importance of integrating these principles into the auditing process [11][27] - The guidance aims to enhance the competencies of internal audit functions in Poland, providing a structured approach to performance audits [10][12] Summary by Sections Introduction to Performance Auditing - The report defines performance auditing as an independent assessment of the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of government policies and programs [24][23] - It highlights the increasing expectations for performance audits to meet higher international standards [27] Planning an Audit Engagement - The planning phase is crucial for gathering relevant information and defining the audit scope, objectives, and methodology [60][61] - A scoring matrix can be used to prioritize audit topics based on criteria such as materiality, auditability, and potential impact [66] Conducting the Audit - The report discusses various approaches to performance audits, including system-oriented, result-oriented, and problem-oriented methods [73] - It emphasizes the importance of stakeholder engagement and the need for a clear understanding of the audit subject [70][72] Development of Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations - The report outlines the process for developing audit findings and recommendations, stressing the need for clear objectives and criteria [76][78] - It highlights the importance of documenting the audit process and maintaining independence throughout [62][61] Reporting - The reporting phase includes communicating results to stakeholders and ensuring quality control of the audit work [39][41] - The report suggests that performance audits should be flexible and tailored to the specific context of the audit subject [28][29] Follow-up - The report discusses the importance of follow-up audits to assess the impact of previous audits and ensure that recommendations are implemented [21][44]

Investment Rating - The report does not provide a specific investment rating for the industry or initiatives assessed Core Insights - The OECD alignment assessments aim to evaluate sustainability initiatives' alignment with OECD due diligence guidance and credibility criteria, enhancing clarity for stakeholders regarding the initiatives' scope and credibility [6][22] - The methodology is designed to adapt to various initiatives, focusing on their specific activities and governance systems, rather than conducting a broad evaluation [24][25] - The assessments include a comprehensive approach involving document reviews, stakeholder interviews, and shadow assessments to ensure a thorough evaluation of the initiatives [52][72] Summary by Sections Purpose, Focus, and Process of OECD Alignment Assessments - The purpose of OECD alignment assessments is to evaluate sustainability initiatives against OECD due diligence guidance, aiming to strengthen and harmonize approaches to due diligence [22] - The assessments focus on the standards, activities, processes, and systems of sustainability initiatives rather than the due diligence of individual enterprises [23] - The selection of initiatives for assessment considers factors such as scope, due diligence integration, and the status of policies and implementation activities [30][34] Assessment Methodology - The assessment methodology consists of three main components: standards assessment, implementation assessment, and credibility assessment [35] - Each component involves specific activities such as document reviews, interviews, and shadow assessments to gather evidence and evaluate alignment with OECD standards [72][75] - The methodology allows for flexibility, enabling assessments to be tailored to the specific context and activities of the initiative being evaluated [24][25] Interpretation and Ratings - The assessment process includes interpreting criteria, documenting analysis, and providing ratings based on the findings [3.1][3.2] - Detailed public assessment reports are essential for explaining the scope and outcomes of the assessments to stakeholders [26][28] Stakeholder Consultation and Publishing Assessment Results - Stakeholder consultation is a critical part of the assessment process, ensuring that diverse perspectives are considered [4.1] - The final assessment results are published to provide transparency and clarity regarding the initiative's alignment with OECD standards [4.2]

Investment Rating - The report does not provide a specific investment rating for the industry or companies involved Core Insights - The (Q)SAR Assessment Framework aims to create a systematic and harmonized approach for the regulatory assessment of (Q)SAR models, predictions, and results based on multiple predictions, applicable regardless of the modeling technique, predicted endpoint, or regulatory purpose [19][20] - The framework emphasizes that the assessment of (Q)SARs should extend beyond model validity, as valid models can yield unacceptable predictions under certain conditions, necessitating dedicated assessments for individual predictions and results from multiple predictions [20][23] Summary by Sections 1. Assessment of (Q)SAR Models (Model Checklist) - The Model Checklist evaluates models based on OECD principles, including defined endpoints, unambiguous algorithms, defined applicability domains, and measures of goodness-of-fit, robustness, and predictivity [33][50] - Each principle is further detailed with assessment elements to ensure compliance and transparency in model evaluation [33][41][50] 2. Assessment of (Q)SAR Predictions (Prediction Checklist) - The Prediction Checklist establishes four principles for assessing predictions: correct inputs, substance within the applicability domain, reliability of predictions, and fitness for regulatory purposes [60] - Each principle is broken down into specific assessment elements to facilitate thorough evaluation [60][70] 3. Assessment of a (Q)SAR Result Derived from Multiple Predictions (Result Checklist) - The Result Checklist includes additional assessment elements to evaluate the integration of predictions for determining final results, focusing on the reliability and applicability of the predictions [24][70] - The assessment process is designed to streamline evaluations while ensuring that all relevant factors influencing prediction reliability are considered [24][70] 4. Final Considerations - The report includes updates to the (Q)SAR model reporting format (QMRF) and (Q)SAR prediction reporting format (QPRF), reflecting the newly established OECD (Q)SAR Prediction Principles [25] - The document encourages the application of the QAF principles in case studies and further research to enhance the understanding and implementation of (Q)SAR methodologies [26][27]

Investment Rating - The report does not provide a specific investment rating for the industry Core Insights - The G20 emphasizes the urgent need to reduce inequalities and promote equal opportunities for all individuals, regardless of their background [9][10] - The report highlights the significant and persistent income and wealth inequalities globally, with the richest 10% earning 52% of global income while the poorest half earns only 8.5% [18][21] - It stresses that high levels of inequality are detrimental to long-term social and economic development, potentially undermining social cohesion and democratic institutions [19][20] Summary by Sections Background and Context - The G20 Development Ministers convened in July 2024 to address inequalities and reaffirmed their commitment to the 2030 Agenda, particularly focusing on reducing income inequality [9][10] Promoting Equal Opportunities - The report identifies alarming trends in income and wealth inequality, noting that while global inequality has declined, within-country inequality has risen [18] - It states that the richest 10% of the global population owns 76% of total wealth, while the poorest half possesses only 2% [21] - The report discusses the intersection of economic inequality with other forms of disadvantage, emphasizing the need for policies that promote equal opportunities [19][20] Informal Employment and Vulnerability - High levels of inequality are often associated with significant informal employment, where workers face greater risks and lack access to social protection [32][45] - Informal workers are less likely to benefit from social protection programs compared to formal workers, with only about 37% of informal workers covered by any social protection scheme [36][37] - The report highlights the need for better data on informal workers to inform policies aimed at reducing their vulnerability [33][34] Discriminatory Social Norms - The report discusses how discriminatory social institutions are major drivers of gender inequality, calling for urgent action to address these issues [11][19] - It emphasizes the importance of promoting gender equality and empowering women and girls as part of the broader agenda to reduce inequalities [11][12] International Cooperation - The report underscores the role of international cooperation in addressing inequalities, particularly in the context of development assistance and policy alignment [4][30] - It suggests that a holistic approach is necessary to tackle the multi-dimensional drivers of inequality, including both global and country-specific factors [30][32] Recommendations for Action - The report outlines several policy recommendations, including extending social protection to informal workers, improving occupational safety, and raising productivity in the informal economy [53] - It advocates for a comprehensive strategy that combines social protection, formalization of employment, and empowerment of informal workers [53]

Investment Rating - The report indicates that Portugal has fully implemented 5 recommendations, partially implemented 20 recommendations, and not implemented 20 recommendations regarding the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention [6]. Core Insights - Portugal has made progress in implementing several Phase 4 recommendations, particularly in increasing resources and expertise for law enforcement authorities, which has led to indictments in ongoing foreign bribery cases [7]. - However, significant concerns remain regarding the legal framework and enforcement actions, with no convictions or sanctions imposed for foreign bribery since the adoption of the Phase 4 report [9]. Summary of Findings - Portugal's efforts include the effective implementation of the National Anti-Corruption Mechanism and improved feedback from the Financial Intelligence Unit regarding suspicious transaction reports [7]. - Despite these efforts, Portugal has not adequately addressed recommendations related to whistleblower protection and maintaining detailed statistics on foreign bribery cases [7]. - Longstanding legal framework concerns persist, particularly regarding the lack of sanctions for natural persons and the absence of amendments to ensure effective corporate liability for foreign bribery [7][9]. Recommendations Regarding Prevention and Detection of Foreign Bribery - Portugal has partially implemented measures to raise awareness of corruption among public officials, but specific training on foreign bribery remains insufficient [10]. - The country has taken limited steps to clarify whistleblower protections and broaden the definition of retaliation [11]. - There are ongoing efforts to enhance training for law enforcement and public officials regarding money laundering and foreign bribery, but further action is needed [12]. Recommendations Regarding Enforcement of Foreign Bribery and Related Offences - Portugal has not implemented key recommendations regarding the imposition of fines as sanctions for foreign bribery, which raises concerns about the effectiveness of penalties [15]. - While some training sessions for judges and prosecutors have been organized, there is a need for broader dissemination of good practices related to sanctions [15]. - The country has made progress in confiscation measures related to foreign bribery cases, but further training and awareness are necessary [15]. Recommendations Regarding Liability of, and Engagement with, Legal Persons - Portugal has not taken steps to ensure that the liability of legal persons for foreign bribery is not contingent on the conviction of associated natural persons [20]. - Concerns remain regarding the vague definition of the defense of acting against express orders, which could allow companies to evade liability for foreign bribery [20].

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry. Core Insights - The report emphasizes the importance of building and maintaining trust in public institutions in Chile, particularly in the context of ongoing socioeconomic and political challenges [5][18][19] - Trust levels in Chilean public institutions have been declining since 2010, which is consistent with trends observed across Latin America [19][35] - The OECD Trust Survey indicates that only 30% of Chileans have high or moderately high trust in the national government, significantly lower than the OECD average [20][21] Summary by Sections Executive Summary - The report outlines that low trust in public institutions can hinder social cohesion and effective governance, especially in addressing complex challenges [18] - It highlights that trust can be fostered through responsive institutions that meet public expectations and adhere to principles of openness and fairness [18] Trust in Context: Chile - The chapter discusses various socioeconomic, political, and institutional factors that influence public trust in Chile, including economic inequalities and the impact of misinformation [30] Trust in Public Institutions in Chile - The report presents findings from the 2023 OECD Trust Survey, revealing that trust in the national government (30%) and civil service (24%) is below the OECD averages [20] - Trust in the police (52%) and local government (36%) is higher compared to national institutions, while political parties (14%) and Congress (19%) are the least trusted [20] Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions - Key drivers of trust include the government's ability to cooperate with stakeholders, transparency in decision-making, and ensuring that citizens feel their voices are heard [24][25] - The report identifies that perceptions of effective checks and balances are crucial for trust in all public institutions [25] Recommendations for Enhancing Trust - The report suggests five areas for improvement: enhancing public service quality, strengthening government preparedness for complex issues, improving communication with citizens, reinforcing public integrity, and promoting fairness across institutions [26] - Specific recommendations include establishing a common vision for public services, enhancing user experience, and implementing training for front-line civil servants [27][28] Trust and Values in Chile - The report notes that perceptions of fairness are low, with only 39% of Chileans believing their applications for government services would be treated fairly [29] - It emphasizes the need for policies that address economic vulnerabilities and discrimination to foster trust among all population groups [29]

Investment Rating - The report does not explicitly provide an investment rating for the industry under review Core Insights - The OECD Anti-Bribery Convention establishes legally binding standards to criminalize foreign bribery in international business transactions, requiring countries to hold companies liable and impose effective sanctions [13][29] - Thailand aims to align its anti-corruption framework with OECD standards as part of its Country Programme, which includes enhancing participation in OECD committees [14][20] - The assessment identifies areas for improvement in Thailand's legal and policy frameworks to combat transnational bribery [16][27] Summary by Sections Introduction - The report emphasizes the importance of combating foreign bribery to maintain integrity in international markets and outlines Thailand's commitment to aligning its legal framework with international standards [19][20] Economic Profile and Foreign Bribery Risks - Thailand's GDP in 2023 was estimated at USD 495.3 billion, making it the second largest economy in Southeast Asia [38] - The country has significant trade relationships with partners that present corruption risks, such as Vietnam and China [48] - The report highlights that Thai companies are exposed to foreign bribery risks, particularly in sectors like electronics and chemicals [49] Foreign Bribery Offence - Thailand's legal framework criminalizes the bribery of foreign public officials, but there have been no prosecutions under the relevant laws, indicating a lack of jurisprudence [59] - The report assesses the elements of the foreign bribery offence against OECD standards, noting that while the law covers various aspects, there are gaps in its application, particularly regarding intermediaries [71][74] Recommendations - The report provides recommendations for strengthening Thailand's legal and enforcement framework to better align with OECD standards and enhance its capacity to combat foreign bribery [27][49]

Group 1: Overview of Living Income and Living Wage - Many workers globally earn below living wage standards, risking poverty and human rights issues[5] - The International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that half of the world's workers do not receive formal wages, often working as smallholders or family workers[5] - In agriculture, low wages and seasonal labor contribute to unstable employment conditions, while the garment industry faces low wages due to high competition and poor procurement practices[5] Group 2: Responsible Business Conduct - Companies are expected to conduct due diligence to address adverse human rights, labor, and environmental impacts in their operations and supply chains[5] - The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises emphasize the need for companies to provide the best possible wages and working conditions within the framework of government policies and international standards[5] - Addressing living income and wage gaps is crucial for companies to contribute to sustainable development goals (SDGs) and mitigate risks associated with labor practices[25] Group 3: Steps for Due Diligence - The manual outlines a six-step risk-based due diligence framework for companies to address living income and wage gaps[7] - Companies should integrate commitments and actions related to living income and wages into their policies and management systems[23] - Identifying and assessing living income and wage gaps, along with their impacts on operations and supply chains, is essential for effective risk management[23] Group 4: Stakeholder Engagement and Communication - Companies are encouraged to communicate their commitments and actions regarding living income and wage gaps to affected stakeholders[23] - Engaging with workers, unions, and organizations representing smallholders is vital for understanding risks and prioritizing actions[34] - Public awareness and advocacy from civil society organizations are increasing pressure on companies to take responsibility for living wage issues[29]