Why are percentages of national populations completing secondary education so different in Europe?
They are very high in the north and much lower in the south of Europe, some of which can be explained by historical contexts. The northern European education systems are not just efficient in lifting lots of people to high levels of education, they are also able to mobilise the skill potential of people with disadvantaged backgrounds. That is very different in countries like France and Germany, where this type of social background remains a powerful barrier to educational success. Southern countries are still somewhat behind, but given their rapid progress I would consider the glass rather half full than half empty: Spain saw the proportion of people with upper secondary qualifications doubling over the last two generations.

In most European countries, the 20- to 24-year-olds are better qualified than their elders. That’s good news, isn’t it?
Yes, all education systems have seen improvement. But European countries do not simply need to match the top performing education systems but to do better if our citizens want to justify higher wages and labour costs in a globalized economy. Take the example of Germany. In the 1960s, very few countries could draw on such a high proportion of people with strong baseline qualifications. Today, Germany ranks around 13th in the proportion of people with upper secondary qualifications, not because standards declined, but because they have risen so much faster elsewhere. The picture is similar in most of Europe’s large economies.

To the extent that we need to sound the alarm?
Yes. In today’s flat world, all work that can be digitized, automated and outsourced is done by the most effective and competitive individuals or enterprises from any place on the globe. Countries like India and China are starting to deliver high skills at low costs at an ever-increasing pace. Competition has simply shifted from the low skills field. By the year 2015, China alone is likely to supply more than twice the number of graduates than Europe and the US together. Are people sceptical as to the quality of Chinese graduates? Remember how we looked at Japanese cars when they first came out and what we think of them now.

Isn’t it paradoxical to advocate more higher education while overqualified people are out of work in some countries?
Of course, some people say that if education is expanding, everybody will have a university degree and work for the minimum wage. But that’s not what our data show.

In most OECD countries, the earnings gap between the better-educated and those with lower qualifications is growing rather than shrinking, and people without baseline qualifications face a significantly higher risk of unemployment. It’s not just a matter of producing more graduates from schools and universities. The quality of educational outcomes really count. School systems seem to have trouble adapting to rapid changes in demand. These days, an automobile technician needs to manage coded knowledge on the order of 14,000 pages for a single car. In the 1930s, it was less than 200 pages.

How should European countries improve their education systems?
EU countries must develop more challenging and supportive learning environments, and become more flexible and effective in improving learning outcomes. Some of these changes require additional investment. Countries will also need to implement financing and student-support policies that mobilise public and private funding in ways that reflect the social and personal benefits of tertiary education. East Asian countries and the US have improved access to higher education by making students pay for part of their education costs. The Nordic countries’ success results from massive public spending on higher education that pays high dividends to both individuals and society. In contrast, most continental European countries hold back their universities by neither making the required public investments nor allowing them to charge tuition fees.

What roles can companies play in these changes?
Citizens, companies and institutions all have a role to play because they all benefit from education in their own way. Individuals must want and be able to carry on learning throughout their lives. Companies and institutions are jointly responsible for providing learning opportunities. It is vital for companies to invest and participate in the management of universities, naturally in accordance with well-defined procedures, so that curricula can be geared more closely to demand. Universities must accept a method of governance that addresses the expectations of a wider range of partners than the educational authorities alone.
A new social process needs to be invented.