People from disadvantaged backgrounds have fewer opportunities to climb the socio-economic ladder. In European OECD countries, children with the greatest socio-economic disadvantage grow up to earn as much as 20% less as adults than those with more favourable childhoods. Across OECD countries, it takes nearly five generations for children from low-income families to approach the average income in their country. Unequal opportunities are not only a moral concern, they also undermine economic and social prosperity.

Most people perceive that social mobility is limited: on average, OECD citizens believe that six out of 10 poor children will remain poor as adults. Around 65% of working-age OECD citizens worry they won't be as financially secure as their parents; an almost equal share fear their children will be even less secure. People who are most concerned about their chances in life are also less happy and feel less represented in politics.

So how can we promote equality of opportunity? Read on to learn about the policies that can make a difference.

A child's start in life is determined by its parents' wealth. Wealth is unevenly distributed: on average across OECD countries, the richest 10% of households own over half of all household wealth combined. Inheritances are also unequal: on average, households with the largest incomes receive more than double the capital transfer received by those with the lowest incomes.

Many drivers of long-term inequality are exacerbated during childhood. While almost six of 10 children from privileged socio-economic backgrounds are exposed to regular home learning before primary school, only just over three of 10 children from disadvantaged backgrounds are.

Socio-economic status also shapes a child's ambitions. Across OECD countries, only around half of 15-year-olds from households of low socio-economic status expect to complete higher education, compared to more than four of five from high-status households.

These unequal ambitions and resources affect achievements later in life. Children whose parents hold a tertiary degree are 45 percentage points more likely to graduate from university than those whose parents earned less than a secondary degree. They are also more likely to be in good health and have greater disposable income.

A child’s physical environment is a key determinant of upward social mobility. On average, one in five children in OECD countries live in areas characterised by noise, pollution or both, which can have long-lasting consequences for health and job prospects.

Data from the Netherlands show that children from the poorest areas go on to earn 5-6% less than those from wealthy neighbourhoods. Children from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds are also more likely to live in areas characterised by crime and violence.

When it comes to education, disparities rooted in socio-economic status widen throughout a student's life and are already evident by adolescence. Fifteen-year-olds with parents in the top 25% in terms of socio-economic standing, for example, tend to score better in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) than those whose parents belong to the bottom 25%.

Beyond family circumstances, the school environment is central to academic achievement. Students' performance tends to be worse in schools where most students come from disadvantaged backgrounds – regardless of their own parents’ socio-economic standing. Segregation and low social mixing can therefore reinforce inequality of opportunity.

Inequalities between socio-demographic groups also play a key role in academic outcomes. There are persistent gaps in educational achievements by gender, with girls performing worse in mathematics and numeracy, and young women under-represented in science, technology, engineering and mathematics at university.

Differences in education lead to a difference in access to high-quality jobs where youth can further develop professional skills, in particular those needed in an increasingly digital world. Youth from disadvantaged backgrounds may also face stronger barriers to mobility due to scarce local job opportunities, discrimination and limited availability of on-the-job training.  

Unequal starting points lead to unequal chances later in life. As adults, employment opportunities differ greatly according to where one lives, not only across regions but also within cities. For example, in the United States, fewer jobs tend to be available within commuting distance of neighbourhoods characterised by higher minority rates.

Social mobility is particularly challenging for those in low-quality jobs, with limited chances to leave low-paid or temporary work. Chances are also restricted for the less educated, who tend to have limited opportunities to re- or up-skill. This was observed during the COVID-19 pandemic, when prospects for informal training eroded for middle- and low-skilled workers.

Differences in opportunities for upward social mobility are exacerbated by inequalities between socio-demographic groups such as gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, race, ethnicity, and migrant status. Women earn substantially less than men across their lifetime and are much less represented in management – even though young women generally obtain more years of schooling than young men. Women also face barriers to entrepreneurship: the OECD estimates that of the 35 million potential entrepreneurs missing from today's workforce, 75% are women.

Minorities are also held back by widespread discrimination. Studies show that ethnic minorities and LGBTI+ people are less likely to be called for an interview after applying for a job. Young people whose parents are immigrants often face poor job prospects as well. Barriers that limit the participation of certain groups in the labour market not only pose ethical concerns, but are detrimental to the economy.