A CHARTBOOK OF HARTBOOK OF

INTERNATIONAL NTERNATIONAL

LABOR COMPARISONS

OMPARISONS

THE AMERICAS MERICAS  ASIA-PACIFIC  E

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR  JANUARY 2007
Material contained in this document is in the public 

domain and may be reproduced, fully or partially, without permission of the Federal Government. Source credit is requested.
A CHARTBOOK OF HARTBOOK OF

INTERNATIONAL NTERNATIONAL

LABOR COMPARISONS

OMPARISONS

THE AMERICAS MERICAS  ASIA-PACIFIC  E

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR  JANUARY 2007

FOREWORD

All countries are unique and their cultures, histories, economies, and the challenges they face can be very different. Yet despite these differences, the economies of theworld are becoming increasingly interrelated as technology and world trade grow. As a result, local economies are increasingly affected by changes in worldwide markets.For the United States to continue to succeed in the global economy and create more jobs at home, it is important to understand the economic relationships that are transforming the world. U.S. workers have long enjoyed one of the highest standards of living in the world—thanks to technology, the flexibility of our workforce, and the remarkable productivity ofour workers. To preserve these advantages, it is critical thatU.S. workers have the skills necessary to compete in the worldwide economy of the 21st century.By understanding how the United States compares with other advanced and emerging economies, our nation will be better prepared to take the steps necessary to ensure that our workforce and our economy continue to thrive and prosper. Therefore, this Chartbook of International Labor Comparisonsprovides a comparative labor market perspective—including employment levels, jobless rates, hours worked, labor costs, and productivity trends.

As the charts reveal, the United States In other cases, our trading partners have This information provides a snapshot States stands today in relation to key ecothe world. It can assist policy and decisia course that will help prepare our natiochallenges of tomorrow. I hope you find 

relevant and informative.Elaine L. ChaoSecretary of Labor

PREFACE

This chartbook focuses on the labor market situation in selected countries in the 1995-2005 period. Each chart in sections 1 through 4 includes countries in North America (the United States, Canada, and Mexico) and selected Asian-Pacific and European countries. Weighted aggregates for 15 European Union countries (EU-15) areshown on most charts. These represent European Union member countries prior to the expansion of the European Union to 25 countries on May 1, 2004. The EU-15 countries are Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Due to the lack of suitable data, some of the countries do not appear on all charts. It should be noted that the selected countries are not representative of all of Europe and the Asian-Pacific region; rather, they tend to be the more industrialized economies in these regions. In a final section, several indicators are presented for five large emerging economies: Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, and the Russian Federation. The appendix describes the definitions, sources, and methods used to compile the data in the chartbook. For some series, the appendix provides cautions about the exact comparability of the measures. Section 1, on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, shows charts that portray overall measures of comparative living standards. Section 2 highlights the state of the labor market by comparing major labor force, employment, and unemployment indicators. Charts in section 3 examine several features of the competitive position of the United States in foreign trade of goods by comparing hourly compensation costs in manufacturing and trends in manufacturinglabor productivity and unit labor costs. Section 4 includes charts that compare public expenditures on labor market programs, regulation measures on labor and product markets, taxes on labor, and foreign 

trade in goods as a percent of GDP. Sectcharts for the large emerging economies. The charts are color coded as follows: North A

blue, Asian-Pacific countries are red, and Euyellow. A different color scheme is used, homore than one chart-bar per country, and addfor the emerging economies charts in section 5The chartbook was a cooperative effort of Department of Labor: the Bureau of Inter(ILAB), the Office of the Assistant Secretary f

the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Since 19selected labor market data of foreign councomparability with U.S. data. The chartbook imain output of BLS’s program of international order to increase country and indicator coverasupplemented by data from the OrganizCooperation and Development (OECD) anorganizations. A team led by Marie-Claire Guillard of the BLLabor Statistics (DFLS) in cooperation with Kenneth Swinnerton, and Rebecca Dilender o

Economic and Labor Research and Lisa Stuthe chartbook. The following persons compDiana Dobrovetsky, Susan Fleck, Mubarka HLysko, Gary Martin, Jennifer Raynor, and ChrSorrentino, Chief of DFLS, and Ronald Bird aof OASP provided overall guidance. 

CONTENTS

Section 1. Gross Domestic Product Per Capita 11.1 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, 2005 2 1.2 Average annual growth rates for real GDP per capita, 1995-2005 3 Section 2. Labor Market Indicators 52.1 Size of the labor force, 2005 6 2.2 Average annual growth rates for the labor force, 1995-2005 7 2.3 Labor force participation rates by sex, 2005 8 2.4 Labor force participation rates by age, 2005 9 2.5 Employment as a percent of the working-age population, 2005 10 2.6 Average annual growth rates for employment, 1995-2005 11 2.7 Average annual growth rates for full-time and part-time 

employment, 1995-2005 12 

2.8 Annual hours worked per employed person, 1995 and 2005 13 2.9 Unemployment rates, 2005 14 2.10 Youth unemployment rates, 2005 15 2.11 Ratio of youth to adult unemployment rates, 2005 16 2.12 Persons unemployed one year or longer, 2005 17 

2.13 Ratio of unemployment rate of persons without high school 

degrees to that of persons with college or university degrees, 2004 18 

2.14 Educational attainment of the adult population, 2004 19 

 

Section 3. Competitiveness Indicators for Manufacturing 21

3.1 Hourly compensation costs, 2005 22 3.2 Average annual growth rates for hourly compensation costs, 

1995-2005 23 

3.3 Employer social insurance expenditures and oth

percent of hourly compensation costs, 2005 

3.4 Average annual growth rates for manufacturing 

1995-2005 

3.5 Average annual growth rates for manufacturing 

worked, 1995-2005 

3.6 Average annual growth rates for manufacturing 

1995-2005 

 

Section 4. Other Economic Indicators 4.1 Public expenditures on labor market programs a

GDP, 2004-05 

4.2 Measures of regulation on labor and product ma4.3 Share of labor costs taken by tax and social sec

2005 

4.4 Dependency ratios, 2005 4.5 Trade in goods as a percent of GDP, 2004  

Section 5. Indicators for Large Emergin5.1 World population distribution, 2005 5.2 Age composition of the population, 2004 5.3 Dependency ratios, 2004 5.4 GDP per capita, 2005 5.5 GDP per employed person, 1995 and 2004 5.6 Labor force participation rates by sex, 2004 5.7 Trade in goods as a percent of GDP, 2004 Appendix. Definitions, Sources, and Met

Gross

Domestic

Product

Per Capita

Gross D

SECT

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capiU.S. dollars using Purchasing Power Pmost widely used income measucomparisons of living standards. It shouincome measures do not capture a affecting economic well-being, such as safety, and cultural resources.PPPs are the number of foreign currency goods and services in a foreign country ebe bought with one dollar in the United Stto equalize the purchasing power of differare used instead of exchange rates becarates do not necessarily reflect the relative different currencies. Charts 1.1 and 1.2 compare the level of Gand the trend from 1995 to 2005 in 21 shown on various charts in this chartbookare also included. Data were not available capita for Taiwan. 
42.1

34.0

10.2

32.0 30.9 31.0

21.9 22.5

29.9 29.7

33.8 34.4

30.2 29.8

40.9

25.5

34.1

43.2

05

101520253035404550

U.S. CanadaMexico Australia

Hong Kong SARJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy NetherlandsNorway Portugal

NOTE: Hong Kong SAR stands for Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) is the number 

required to buy goods and services in a foreign country equivalent to what can be bought with one dollar in the United States.

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics and World Bank.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, 2005converted at PPP rates

2 | Gross Domestic Product Per Capita

Thousands of U.S. dollars

 Norway, the United States, and Ireland were the countries with the highest GDP per capita among 

economies compared.

 The other economies showed levels of GDP per capita between 82 percent (Denmark) and 24 pe

the U.S. level.

CHART 1.1
NOTE: Hong Kong SAR stands for Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. 

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, including special tabulations using data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Dev

and national sources.

2.2 2.3 2.2 2.5

2.8

1.1

3.7

1.9

2.9

1.8 1.9 1.7 1.6

1.3

6.3

0.9

1.7

2.2

02468

U.S.

CanadaMexico Australia

Hong Kong SARJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIrelandItaly Netherlands Norway Portugal

Average annual growth rates for real GDP per capita, 1

Gross D

CHART 1.2

 In most of the 21 economies, real GDP per capita grew during the decade at a rate of 1.6 to 2.8 p

the U.S. growth rate was in the middle of the range.

 Ireland and Korea registered the greatest increases in real GDP per capita; Italy and Japan had th

increases.

Percent

Labor Market

Indicators

SECT

Charts 2.1 through 2.14 show comparisoemployment, unemployment, and related of the labor force is shown in chart 2.1(chart 2.2) sums up changes in bounemployment over the period. Labor fo(charts 2.3 and 2.4) express the extent to are either working or unemployed. Hshown by sex and for two selected age grand older workers.Employment and unemployment are kfunctioning of labor markets both within Charts 2.5-2.8 compare the proportion population employed, employment growttime and part-time employment, and annemployed person. Charts 2.9-2.14 exrates, long-duration unemployment, abetween unemployment rates and levels oAll charts cover 19 or 20 countries. In ashown on all but three of the charts. Comindicators were not available for Taiwan and some indicators were not available fo
149.3

17.1

42.5

10.5

65.9

23.7

2.2 2.2

181.9

4.0 2.8

27.0

40.8

2.0

24.2

8.5

2.4 5

0

4080

120160200

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

Millions

Size of the labor force, 2005

6 | Labor Market Indicators

CHART 2.1

 The U.S. labor force was the largest, by far, among the 20 countries compared. The EU-15 countries combined had a larger labor force than the United States.

NOTE: 2004 for Singapore.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and International Labor Office.
1.

1.0

1.6

0.7

3.3

0.4

0.9

0.3 0.4

0.9

2.7

1.8

1.3

0.0

1.6

2.0

1.7

1.2

01234

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea

New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

Percent

Average annual growth rates for the labor force, 1995

CHART 2.2

 The other North American countries and the Asian-Pacific countries, except for Japan, recorded h

growth rates than the United States. 

 U.S. labor force growth outpaced that of the EU-15 average; in Europe, labor force growth was st

Spain, the Netherlands, and Portugal than in the United States.

NOTE: 1995-2004 for Singapore.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and International Labor Office.
69.4 69

73.7

60.5

71.6

65.5 62.6

70.3

66.1 64.7

76.2 74.3

71.3

73.1 73.0

78.9

72.7 73.3

61.4 59.3

40.7

58.1

47.7

50.3

60.1

54.9

48.7 51.0

60.3

50.3 51.4

37.8

57.4 59.8

50.9

0

20406080

100

U.S.

CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

Men Women

Labor force participation rates by sex, 2005

 Across countries, women’s labor force participation rates varied more than men’s rates. In Canad

countries, New Zealand, and Australia, women participated in the labor force at about the same hwomen. Italian and Mexican women had the lowest participation rates.

 Participation rates for men were 70 percent or higher in 12 out of 21 countries; the lowest rates we

France.

8 | Labor Market Indicators

Percent

CHART 2.3

NOTE: 2004 for Singapore.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and International Labor Office.
60.8 65.9

46.8

71.3

44.6

33.3

62.8

47.6

59.2 67.2

33.7

50.2 50.5

33.5

68.5 60.2

43

0

255075

100

U.S. CanadaMexico Australia Japan Korea 

New Zealand EU-15Austria Denmark France Germany Ireland Italy NetherlandsNorway Portugal

Youth participation rates Percent

NOTE: Youth are defined as persons under age 25 and over age 14 or 15. Older workers are defined as persons ages 55 to 64.SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Labor force participation rates by age, 2005 for youth and older workers

CHART 2.4

 Youth in Canada and the United States participated in the labor market to a much greater extent t

Korea, Japan, Mexico, and most of Europe.

 Older persons in non-Scandinavian European countries were less likely to remain in the labor forc

counterparts in North American and Asian-Pacific countries.

62.9 57.9 53.6 55.5 66.6 60.2 71.0 46.7

33.0

62.9

43.6 52.1 53.2

32.6

47.0

68.8

53

0

255075

100

U.S. CanadaMexico Australia Japan Korea 

New Zealand EU-15Austria Denmark France Germany Ireland Italy NetherlandsNorway Portugal

Older workers participation rates Percent
57

62.3 61.5

44.9

58.8

51.0 51.2

61.9

55.2 51.7

61.8 64.6

57.3 58.5 62.1 56.6 62.7 63.4

0

20406080

100

U.S.

CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

NOTE: 2004 for Singapore. The working-age population is defined as persons ages 15 or 16 and over.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and International Labor Office.

Employment as a percent of the working-age populatio

10 | Labor Market Indicators

Percent

CHART 2.5

 New Zealand, Canada, the United States, and the Netherlands had the highest percentages of the 

population employed.

 In Italy, less than half of the working-age population was employed.
1.3

2.0

2.2

1.9

-0.2

1.1

2.0

2.4

1.2

0.2

0.5

1.1

0.1

4.2

1.1

1.8

1.1

1

-1

012345

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

Percent

Average annual growth rates for employment, 1995-2

CHART 2.6

 Ireland and Spain had the highest growth rates in employment. Employment declined only in Jap U.S. employment growth outpaced that of 8 of the 12 European countries; the remaining countries 

employment growth than the United States, except for Japan and Korea.

NOTE: 1995-2004 for Singapore. SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and International Labor Office.
NOTE: 1995-2004 for Mexico. Full-time employment is defined as persons usually working over 30 hours per week in their main job. U

salary workers only. Data for other countries refer to total employment, which includes wage and salary workers, self-employed persons

workers. SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

1.5

2.0

2.8

1.6

-1.0

0.6

1.9

0.8

-0.4

0.4

1.0

-0.8

3.8

0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3

1.7

0.5

2.8

1.5

2.3

8.7

2.4

3.1

4.1

1.1

0.5

4.5

7.1

4.6

3.8

0.7

-3-1

13579

11

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New ZealandEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy NetherlandsNorwayPortugal

Full-time Part-time

Average annual growth rates for full-time and part-timemployment, 1995-2005

12 | Labor Market Indicators

Percent

CHART 2.7

 Full-time employment grew faster than part-time employment in six countries, including the United 

majority of countries, part-time employment was the main or sole source of employment growth.

 Full-time employment growth was strongest in Ireland and Spain, both of which also had rapid gro

employment.
NOTE: 1995 and 2004 for Korea. 

SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Annual hours worked per employed person, 1995 and 

18491775 1863 1872 1884

2658

1842

16461499 16511529 1823 1876 1344 1414 1799 

1435 1638 1791 1367 1360 1

1535 1551 1636 1809 19091811 1775 1804 1737

2394

0

100020003000

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New ZealandAustria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway PortugalS

1995 2005

Hours

CHART 2.8

 In 2005, annual hours worked per employed person in European countries, except Italy and Spain

in the North American and Asian-Pacific countries. Koreans worked the highest number of annua

 Korea and Ireland experienced the largest reductions in annual hours worked per employed perso
7.

4.6 4.7

7.8

4.4

11.2

4.8

9.7

5.2

7.9

4.8

3.7 3.7

4.5

5.1

3.5

6.0

5.1

02468

1012

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria Denmark France GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

NOTE: 2004 for Singapore. SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and International Labor Office.

Percent

Unemployment rates, 2005

14 | Labor Market Indicators

CHART 2.9

 Half of the European countries had much higher unemployment rates than the United States. All but one of the Asian-Pacific countries had lower unemployment rates than the United States.
Youth unemployment rates, 2005

21.

17.4

10.5

36.8

11.0

14.8

27.9

7.6

13.5

19.1 20.0

12.9 12.5

10.4

15.2

7.0

15.4 16.6

8.8 9.0 

6.3

7.7 8.4 9.9

6.6

15.6

8.7

6.3

8.1

21.4

15.9

7.4

21.1

6.5

9.1

0

10203040

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

Teenagers 20- to 24-year-olds

Percent

CHART 2.10

 Italian teenagers had the highest unemployment rate, followed by their counterparts in Sweden an Unemployment rates of teenagers were higher than those of 20- to 24-year-olds in all countries ex

and Germany.

NOTE: 2004 for Singapore. Teenagers are defined as persons under age 20 and over age 14 or 15.

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and International Labor Office.
NOTE: 2004 for Singapore. Youth are defined as persons under age 25 and over age 14 or 15. Adults are defined as persons ages 25 

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and International Labor Office.

Ratio of youth to adult unemployment rates, 2005

2.8

2.3

2.5

2.9

2.2

3.3

3.8

2.0

2.3 2.4

1.8

2.8

1.5

2.4

3.9

2.0

3.4

2.4 

012345

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea

New Zealand SingaporeEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

Ratio

16 | Labor Market Indicators

CHART 2.11

 Unemployment rates were higher for youth than for adults. The ratios of youth to adult unemploym

highest in Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

 The smallest differences in the unemployment rates for youth versus those of adults were in Denm
 Long-duration unemployment was least prevalent in Korea and Mexico.

 The EU-15 countries combined had a relatively high percentage of persons unemployed one year 

than half of the unemployed were without work for at least one year in Germany and Italy.

Persons unemployed one year or longer, 2005as a percent of total unemployment

48.6

9.5

40.1

52.2

34.3

54.0

42.5

25.9 25.3

44.3

9.4

0.8

33.3

17.7

2.4

9.6

11.8

0

204060

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea

New ZealandEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

Percent

CHART 2.12

NOTE: 2004 for Sweden. SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Ratio of unemployment rate of persons without high schoo

that of persons with college or university degrees, 2004

2.6

1.3

1.7

1.5

1.2

2.4

3.7

1.5 

2.0

4.7

1.7

3.2

2.5

0.6

2.1

3.1

4.2

2.0 1.9

2.9

1.6 1.7

1.3

2.2

1.9

2.8

2.4

1.7

0.8

1.4

1.9

0.6

0246

U.S.

Canada 

Mexico 

Australia 

Japan

Korea 

New Zealand

Austria 

Denmark 

France 

Germany

Ireland 

Italy

Netherlands

Norway 

Portugal 

Ratio Men Women

NOTE: 2003 for Japan. The unemployment rates used to calculate these ratios are for men and women ages 25 to 64.SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

CHART 2.13

 Unemployment rates were higher for persons without high school degrees, except for men and wo

and for women in Korea.

 The unemployment rates of persons without high school degrees were at least three times that of 

college or university degrees for men in Germany, Ireland, Austria, and the United Kingdom, and f

women in the United States. 

18 | Labor Market Indicators
48 39

7

33

47

44 53 62

51

41

59

35

38

42

57

12

39 45

16

31 37 30 25

18

32

24 25 28

11

29 32

13

75

11

29

51

37

16

35

17

26 22 20 16

36

77

13 16

0

20406080

100

U.S.

Canada Mexico Australia JapanKorea New Zealand Austria Denmark France GermanyIreland Italy NetherlandsNorway Portugal 

Below upper secondary Upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary 

NOTE: 2003 for Japan. The adult population is defined as persons ages 25 to 64. Below upper secondary education is equivalent to le

Upper secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education is equivalent to high school and also includes trade school. Tertiary educat

higher education provided by a college or university.SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Educational attainment of the adult population, 2004by highest level of education attained

CHART 2.14

 More than one-third of the adult population have tertiary (university) education in Canada, the Uni

and Sweden.

 In Mexico, Portugal, Spain, and Italy, more than half of the adult population have less than upper 

education.

Percent

Competitiveness

Indicators for

Manufacturing

Competitiveness Ind

SECT

Relative levels and changes in mcompensation costs and relative changlabor productivity (output per hour) and uused to partially assess international comdata are available on a comparative manufacturing sector. Charts 3.1 and 3and trends of hourly compensation costs fin manufacturing. The data are adjustmarket exchange rates. Changes over tcosts denominated in U.S. dollars renational wage and benefit trends mcurrencies, as well as frequent and somein currency exchange rates. The hourly in U.S. dollars provide comparative measucosts; they do not provide inter-country purchasing power of worker incomes. employer social insurance expenditures aas a percent of hourly compensation costsCharts 3.4 through 3.6 provide comparisproductivity growth rates, the composition in terms of changes in output and hours wunit labor costs. Unit labor costs are dlabor compensation per unit of output. Ccosts reflect the net effect of changecompensation and in labor productivity. when compensation per hour rises productivity. Conversely, if labor producthourly compensation, unit labor costs declThe compensation costs indicators providcountry coverage in this chartbook. Twand the EU-15 are shown on those chartscoverage is limited to 14 economies.
 Canada, Australia, and eight European countries had higher hourly compensation costs than the U

 Hourly compensation costs were well under $10 in Mexico, Hong Kong SAR, Taiwan, Portugal, an

Hourly compensation costs, 2005for production workers in manufacturing in U.S. dollars

39.14

31.81

21.05 22.76

33.00

24.63

35.47

29.42 27.52

6.38 7.66

14.97 13.56

21.76

5.65

24.91

2.63

23.65 23.82

0

1020304050

U.S.

CanadaMexico Australia

Hong Kong SARJapanKorea New Zealand Singapore TaiwanEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portug

NOTE: Hong Kong SAR stands for Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics.U.S. Dollars

22 | Competitiveness Indicators for Manufacturing

CHART 3.1
3.7

3.3

4.9

4.5

1.6

-0.8

0.1

0.6

3.1

1.5

3.4

2.5

0.9

5.2

3.0 2.8

4.7

6.4

3.8

-2-1

012345678

U.S. CanadaMexico Australia

Hong Kong SARJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeTaiwanEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy NetherlandsNorway Portug

Average annual growth rates for hourly compensation costs, 1for production workers in manufacturing in U.S. dollars

Competitiveness Ind

Percent

NOTE: Hong Kong SAR stands for Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

CHART 3.2

 Growth in hourly compensation costs in U.S. dollars was similar for the United States and the EU- Only Japan had a decrease in hourly compensation costs.
22.5

19.4

10.9

20.3

8.5

17.0

21.7

4.5

14.0

12.1

23.5

27.1

10.3

31.2

22.6

12.7

30.9

21.5 20.0 

0

10203040

U.S.

Canada Mexico Australia

Hong Kong SARJapanKorea New Zealand Singapore TaiwanEU-15Austria Denmark France GermanyIrelandItaly Netherlands Norway Portug

Percent

24 | Competitiveness Indicators for Manufacturing

Employer social insurance expenditures and other labor taxes of hourly compensation costs, 2005for production workers in manufacturing

NOTE: Hong Kong SAR stands for Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

CHART 3.3

 Employer social insurance costs as a percent of hourly compensation costs were similar for the U

the EU-15 as a whole, but U.S. costs were higher than in all of the non-European countries.

 In Europe, social insurance costs as a percent of total hourly compensation costs ranged widely: 

had higher costs than the United States, while Denmark and Ireland had much lower costs.
2.8

3.2

0.1

3.6

4.3

1.1

5.4

8.9

3.3

3.0

2.5

5.7

02468

10

U.S.CanadaAustralia Japan Korea TaiwanDenmark FranceGermany Italy NetherlandsNorway

Percent

Competitiveness Ind

Average annual growth rates for manufacturing produ1995-2005 CHART 3.4

 Korea had, by far, the largest increase in manufacturing labor productivity, followed by Sweden, th

and Taiwan.

 Italy and Denmark recorded the lowest gains in manufacturing labor productivity.

NOTE: Productivity is defined as output per hour worked.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
3.4 3.3

1.8

0.9

4.8

2.5

1.9

-0.3

1.7 1.5

-2.2

0.8

-1.2

-2.3

-1.5

-0.6

-1.2

-1.7 -1.6 -1.4 -1

-0.1

7.3

-0.4

-4-2

02468

U.S.

CanadaAustralia Japan Korea TaiwanDenmark FranceGermany Italy NetherlandsNorway

Output Hours worked

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics.Percent

26 | Competitiveness Indicators for Manufacturing

Average annual growth rates for manufacturing outpuworked, 1995-2005 CHART 3.5

 Manufacturing output increases were highest in Korea and Sweden; output slightly decreased in I The United States showed the third largest decline in hours worked; hours worked increased only 
 Unit labor costs (ULC) are a component of total production costs and product prices. Declines in 

a country is becoming more cost-competitive.

 ULC declined in over half of the economies shown, including the United States.

-4.0

-3.7

-4.9

-1.8 -1.9

3.3

-0.3

1.7

1.5

1.9

1.4

-1.0

-6-5-4-3-2-1

01234

U.S.CanadaAustralia Japan KoreaTaiwanDenmark FranceGermany Italy NetherlandsNorway

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Percent

Competitiveness Ind

Average annual growth rates for manufacturing unit labor cosin U.S. dollars CHART 3.6

SECT

Other

Economic

Indicators

O

Charts 4.1 through 4.5 show indicators of and population issues, some of these in t4.1-4.3 compare the following policy isslabor market programs, the extent of laboregulations, and the level of taxation on laChart 4.4 compares dependency ratios. is an overall measure of the dependence elderly have on people of working age. Hratios show the age composition of a popueconomic dependency. Some children apart of the labor force and some working-aChart 4.5 presents data on trade in goods This indicator shows an economy’s degree The number of countries covered in this sto 20. EU-15 data were available only dependency ratios.
2.0

1.7

3.7

1.5

3.5

2.7

4.5

2.0

1.0

0.3

0.7

1.0

0.5

1.0

012345

U.S.

CanadaAustraliaJapanKorea New ZealandAustria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland NetherlandsNorwayPortugalSpai

Percent

Public expenditures on labor market programs as a peGDP, 2004-05

30 | Other Economic Indicators

NOTE: Fiscal year 2004 for the United States and the United Kingdom. Fiscal year 2005 for Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealan

for the remaining countries.SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

CHART 4.1

 Expenditures on labor market programs were less than 1 percent of GDP in Korea, the United Sta

the United Kingdom.

 The highest relative expenditures were by Denmark, the Netherlands, and Germany.
1.1

1.3

2.4

0.7

1.8

2.3

1.5 1.3

1.8

2.6

2.0

2.5

2.2

2.9

3.5

3.2

1.0 

1.

1.5 1.4

1.9

1.1 1.2

1.4

1.7

1.1

1.4

1.1

1.5 1.3

0.9

2.2

0123456

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea

New ZealandAustria DenmarkFrance GermanyIrelandItaly NetherlandsNorway PortugalS

Labor market Product market

Measures of regulation on labor and product markets, 

O

CHART 4.2

 Regulations on market activity were least restrictive in the United States and the United Kingdom.  Portugal and Mexico were characterized by more restrictive labor markets, followed by Spain and 

product markets were most pronounced in Mexico, Italy, and France.

Scale 0-6 from least to most restrictive

SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
38.6

45.4

50.1

47.4

20.5

36.2 37.3

25.7

51.8

41.4

17.3

28.3 27.7

18.2

31.6 29.1

0

102030405060

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New ZealandAustria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway PortugalS

NOTE: Data refer to a single worker who earns the income of the average production worker.SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Percent 

32 | Other Economic Indicators

Share of labor costs taken by tax and social security co2005 CHART 4.3

 For a single production worker, the combined employer-employee tax burden was lower in the Un

all but one of the European countries.

 The combined employer-employee tax burden was higher in the United States than in all non-Euro

except Canada. 
NOTE: The dependency ratio is the ratio of dependents (persons under age 15 or over age 64) to the working-age population (persons 

SOURCE: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Dependency ratios, 2005

0.49

0.44

0.59

0.49 0.51

0.39

0.51 0.50 0.48 0.51 0.54 0.50 0.47 0.50 0.48 0.52 0.48 0

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.7

U.S.

CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New ZealandEU-15Austria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway PortugalSpain 

O

Ratio

CHART 4.4

 Korea had a significantly lower dependency ratio than the other countries compared. Mexico had the highest dependency ratio, mainly because it had a larger proportion of persons un

all other countries compared.
SOURCE: World Bank.

Trade in goods as a percent of GDP, 2004

20

61 59

31 22

70

44

322

81

60

45

59

91

42

117

52 54 

0

50

100150200250300350

U.S. CanadaMexico AustraliaJapanKorea New Zealand SingaporeAustria DenmarkFrance GermanyIreland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal

Percent

34 | Other Economic Indicators

CHART 4.5

 This indicator shows the relative importance of trade in goods to an economy; the United States a

lowest ratios, at about 20 percent of GDP.

 The relatively high figures for Singapore and the Netherlands reflect their status as platforms for r

trans-shipments.
Indicators for

Large Emerging

Economies

Indicators for La

SECT

Charts 5.1 through 5.7 provide a broaeconomic indicators for large emerging ecCharts 5.1-5.3 show population data in world population distribution, age composand dependency ratios. Gross Domcomparisons are shown in chart 5.4 (GDP 5.5 (GDP per employed person). Chart 5participation rates by sex. Chart 5.7 comas a percent of GDP.All of these charts include the United Statreference point, and five large emerging China, India, Indonesia, and the Russian F
India

17%

Rest of the World

50%

U.S.

5%

Brazil

3%

China

20%

Russian Federa

2%

Indonesia

3%

World population distribution, 2005 

SOURCE: World Bank.

36 | Indicators for Large Emerging Economies

CHART 5.1

 The five large emerging economies—Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, and the Russian Federation—

percent of the world’s population.

 China and India together comprised well over one-third of the world’s population.
Age composition of the population, 2004

66.8

65.9

70.5

62.3 66.0

12.3

6.0 7.5 5.2 5.4

20.9

28.1 22.0 32.5 28.6

0

102030405060708090

100

U.S. Brazil China India Indonesia Rus

Under age 15 Ages 15 to 64 Over age 64

SOURCE: World Bank.

Indicators for La

Percent

CHART 5.2

 The Russian Federation had the highest proportion of persons over age 64 and the lowest propor India had the largest proportion of persons under age 15, comprising almost one-third of its total p
Dependency ratios, 2004

0.50

0.52

0.42

0.61

0.52

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.7

U.S. Brazil China India Indonesia 

NOTE: The dependency ratio is the ratio of dependents (persons under age 15 or over age 64) to the working-age population (persons SOURCE: World Bank.

38 | Indicators for Large Emerging Economies

Ratio

CHART 5.3

 India had a much higher dependency ratio than the United States and the other large emerging ec The Russian Federation and China had the lowest dependency ratios.
NOTE: Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) is the number of foreign currency units required to buy goods and services in a foreign country 

bought with one dollar in the United States.SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics and World Bank.

GDP per capita, 2005converted at PPP rates

3.5 3.8

6.6

8.7

41.9

0

1020304050

U.S. Brazil China India Indonesia 

Thousands of U.S. dollars

Indicators for La

CHART 5.4

 Among the five large emerging economies, the Russian Federation and Brazil had the highest GD

quarter to one-fifth of the U.S. level; India and Indonesia had the lowest, at less than one-tenth of 

 China was in the middle of the group, with a GDP per capita at nearly 16 percent of the U.S. level
 Among the five large emerging economies, GDP per employed person was highest in Brazil and t

Federation.

 China had the largest increase in GDP per employed person from 1995 to 2004, with an average 

of 5.5 percent.

NOTE: Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) is the number of foreign currency units required to buy goods and services in a foreign country bought with one dollar in the United States.SOURCE: International Labor Office.

GDP per employed person, 1995 and 2004in 1990 U.S. dollars converted at PPP rates

51.8

14.1

5.1 4.3

8.2

8.7

6.2

8.2

15.4

62.1

0

10203040506070

U.S. Brazil China India Indonesia 

Thousands of 1990 U.S. dollars 1995 2004

40 | Indicators for Large Emerging Economies

CHART 5.5
Labor force participation rates by sex, 2004

81.7 84.1

88.0

84.4

87.0

52.8

36.1

76.2

60.6

70.1

0

20406080

100

U.S. Brazil China India Indonesia R

Men Women

NOTE: Participation rates are for the working-age population (persons ages 15 to 64).

SOURCE: World Bank.

Percent

Indicators for La

CHART 5.6

 China had the highest labor force participation rates for both men and women. The participation rate for women was lowest in India.
Trade in goods as a percent of GDP, 2004

20.0

26.9

59.8

25.0

49.4 

0

10203040506070

U.S. Brazil China India Indonesia 

SOURCE: World Bank.Percent

42 | Indicators for Large Emerging Economies

CHART 5.7

 This indicator shows the relative importance of trade in goods to an economy. China had the highest percentage of trade in goods, followed by Indonesia and the Russian Fede

States had the lowest proportion.
Definitions,

Sources, and 

Methods

Definition

Ap

Introduction 

This chartbook is based partially upon the o

Labor Statistics (BLS) program of internationa

force, compensation, and productivity. In order indicator coverage, BLS data are supplemeOrganization for Economic Cooperation and Deother organizations. BLS adjusts foreign statistics to a common thereby aiding users in making meaningful intComparability issues arise due to, for exdefinitions, time periods, and population descriptions of the BLS comparative series are detailed information can be found in the sowhich are available on the BLS foreign labohttp://www.bls.gov/fls/. BLS publications a

available free of charge by contacting the DivStatistics, 2 Massachusetts Avenue, NE, RoD.C. 20212-0001, phone (202) 691-5654, FAX (To increase country coverage for some of thlabor market indicators charts (sections 1 asupplemented by data mainly from OECDInternational Labor Organization’s InternationWorld Bank, and national sources. The data sources are judged reasonably comparable witotherwise noted. The charts on hourly compe(charts in section 3) have not been supplement
A2 | Definitions, Sources, and Methods

the data charted are from the BLS series for these indicators. To provide other indicators of interest, 18 of the charts (charts 2.4, 2.7, 2.8, 2.12-2.14, and all charts in sections 4 and 5) are based on statistics compiled by other organizations, mainly OECD, but also the World Bank and ILO. Discussion of the data from the non-BLS sources is included below. Although some adjustments may have been made by the source organizations to enhance comparability, these data generally are not considered fully comparable across countries. Where applicable, some caveats concerning comparability are noted. Country coverage varies by indicator. Twenty-two economies appear on the hourly compensation charts (charts 3.1-3.3); while 14 economies are included on the productivity and unit labor costs charts (charts 3.4-3.6). Coverage in the remaining charts varies from 17 to 21 countries. In addition, weighted aggregates for 15 European Union countries (EU-15) are shown on most charts. These represent European Union member countries prior to the expansion of the European Union to 25 countries on May 1, 2004. The 15 countries are Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. It should be noted that some countries for which data are available are not included on the charts for analytical or presentation purposes. Twelve countries appear on all charts in the first four sections: the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, Korea, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. In addition, data for Mexico, New Zealand, Austria, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain appear on almost all charts in sections 1-4; data for Hong Kong SAR, Singapore, and Taiwan were only available for some charts. Section 5 covers the United States, which is used as a reference point, and five large emerging economies: Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, and the Russian Federation. In most cases, 2005 is the latest year that data are available for the charts. All data are either annual averages or mid-year estimates. 

There are some breaks in the historical continemployment data for trends from 1995 onwabreaks is documented in the source publicationdo not substantially affect the trends depicted. In the descriptions that follow, some charts are while others warrant individual treatment. 

Gross Domestic Pro

(charts 1.1, 1.2, 5.4, 5.

A country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) 

value added by all producers in that country. Vof the gross output of producers less the value and services used in production. It is generalsize of an economy. However, it should necessarily measuring the wealth and well-bethat country. A better measure of the latter is GGross National Income (GNI), which used to bProduct (GNP), measures the total domestic aclaimed by residents. It includes GDP plus income from non-resident sources, where "primas compensation of employees and propertcountries, the inflows and outflows of primary out, leaving little difference between GDP and Gcountries, the difference can be substantial. Fopercent higher than GNI in Ireland in 2005. Purchasing Power Parities (PPPs) are currencallow output in different currency units to be eunit of value. A PPP is the ratio between th
Definition

country's currency and the number of dollars required to purchase an equivalent basket of goods and services within each respective 

country. 

GDP per capita (charts 1.1, 1.2, 5.4) GDP per capita converted at PPP rates (charts 1.1 and 5.4). The 

comparisons shown in charts 1.1 and 5.4 are based on measures of GDP converted at PPP rates and on population size. Measures for chart 1.1 are taken from the data underlying a periodic report published by BLS for the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, Korea, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. For the remaining countries, the measures are based on data published by the World Bank. For chart 5.4, BLS data are used for the United States while the comparisons shown for the emerging economies also are based on World Bank data. 

Source: BLS, "Comparative Real Gross Domestic Product Per Capita and Per 

Employed Person, Fifteen Countries, 1960–2005," June 16, 2006, <http://www.bls.gov/fls/>; and World Bank, World Development Indicators 

Database, <http://www.worldbank.org/>. 

Average annual growth rates for real GDP per capita (chart 1.2). Real 

GDP is GDP that has been adjusted for overall price changes over time, in order to remove the effects of inflation. Change in real GDP per capita over time is the result of changes in both a country's real GDP and in its population. For chart 1.2, the estimates of real GDP are based on data from BLS, OECD, and national sources. Measures are taken from the data underlying a periodic report published by BLS for the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, Korea, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Data for Hong Kong are from the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department; 

for Singapore, from Statistics Singapore; acountries, from OECD. 

Source: BLS, "Comparative Real Gross Domestic P

Employed Person, Fifteen Countries, 1960–2<http://www.bls.gov/fls/>; World Bank, World 

Database, <http://www.worldbank.org/>; OEC

<http://www.oecd.org>; Hong Kong Census an<http://www.info.gov.hk/censtatd/>; and <http://www.singstat.gov.sg/>. 

GDP per employed person (chart 5.5

This indicator gives GDP measured in 1990 UPPP rates divided by the number of emploextensive discussion of the indicator, incconstruction and some limits to comparabdocument. The use of employed persons in the denominanot standardize sufficiently the measure of labo

hours worked, on average, by each emplomarkedly across countries and over time. This indicator may be viewed as giving the amoon average to each employed person, working inputs or factors of production. Source: ILO, Key Indicators of the Labor Market C

2005, table 18a. 
A4 | Definitions, Sources, and Methods

Labor market indicators

(charts 2.1-2.14, 5.6) 

Charts in section 2 depict aspects of the labor force. Charts 2.1-2.3, 

2.5, 2.6, and 2.9-2.11 contain BLS comparative data on labor force, employment, and unemployment and are supplemented by data from OECD and ILO. This is the first set of charts discussed in this section. Charts 2.4, 2.7, 2.12, 2.13, and 5.6 also show data on labor force, employment, and unemployment, but data are from OECD, except for chart 5.6, which uses World Bank data. This set of charts is discussed as a separate group. Chart 2.8, annual hours worked per employed person, and chart 2.14, educational attainment of the adult population, are discussed individually at the end of this section.  

Labor force, employment, and unemployment (charts 2.1-2.3, 2.5, 2.6, 2.9-2.11)  BLS comparative measures of the civilian labor force, employment, unemployment, and related indicators are used for the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Other organizations provided the data for Mexico, Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, the EU-15, Austria, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Portugal, and Spain. In the BLS comparisons program, adjustments are made in each country's published data, if necessary, to provide measures approximately consistent with U.S. definitions. The data are adjusted to the U.S. concepts used in the Current Population Survey (CPS), the official source of U.S. labor force data. To adjust the data, BLS employs data from several sources, including data obtained by special request from the central statistical offices of the foreign countries. Further information on the nature of the adjustments for each country can be found in the BLS source document cited at the end of this section. 

The labor force is the sum of the employed plunemployment rate is the ratio of the unemploythe United States, the unemployed are those n

for work in the reference week, and actively seweeks. Those persons waiting to be recalled seeking work to be classified as unemployed. T

persons who during the reference week did wopaid employees, worked in their own business

own farm, or worked 15 hours or more as enterprise operated by a family member. Thfrom work but who had jobs or businesses to reas employed. The labor force participation rate 

force to the population of working age (ages 16 States and ages 15 or 16 and over in the employment-to-population ratio is the ratio opopulation of working age. The BLS data are supplemented in charts 2.12.11 with data mainly from OECD; data for SThe OECD and ILO data are generally from lare based on the ILO guidelines for measurememployment, and unemployment. These guidthe Internet at http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/stat/dowThe ILO guidelines have become standardconsequently, definitions used in labor force ssimilar in outline and spirit if not in all of tguidelines facilitate cross-country comparisons draw countries toward a common conceptual fOECD and ILO data are reasonably comparabBLS data, although some adjustments for comby BLS are not made by OECD or ILO. 
Definition

OECD produces a series of "standardized unemployment rates" (SURs) that are adjusted to ILO concepts. In recent years, the OECD series yielded unemployment rates virtually identical to the BLS comparative series of unemployment rates for the countries common to both programs, except for Canada. ILO produces a series of "ILOcomparable" measures of unemployment rates that are adapted to ILO concepts. This series is closely comparable with the results from the BLS and OECD comparisons programs. The OECD unemployment series are used to broaden the coverage of the unemployment data on chart 2.9. The unemployment rates for the following countries are obtained from the OECD SURs: Korea, New Zealand, the EU-15, Austria, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Portugal, and Spain. The ILO-comparable series is the source for the unemployment rate for Singapore. The unemployment rate for Mexico is not from the OECD SURs or ILO-comparable series; it is the figure from Mexico’s labor force survey as published by the OECD and it is not comparable to the other rates shown. The OECD data used to broaden the country coverage of charts 2.1-2.3, 2.5, 2.6, 2.10, and 2.11 are not adjusted by OECD for comparability to the extent that the SURs are adjusted; OECD does not publish standardized labor force and employment figures or standardized unemployment figures for subgroups. Data for Singapore on these charts are from the ILO-comparable series and include the armed forces. For a full discussion of comparability issues regarding the BLS, OECD, and ILO series, see Constance Sorrentino, "International unemployment rates: how comparable are they?" Monthly Labor 

Review, June 2000, pp. 3-20. This article is available on the Internet at 

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2000/06/art1full.pdf. 

Source: BLS, "Comparative Civilian Labor Force 

1960-2005," October 19, 2006, <http://www.bls.gov

Statistics 1985-2005, 2006 Ed., Paris, August 200

Labor Force Statistics Database, <http://www.oecd.o

ILO-Comparable Estimates Database, <http://laborst

Labor force, employment, and unem(charts 2.4, 2.7, 2.12, 2.13, 5.6) The charts discussed below are derived from data sources. Data from OECD are used becacomparisons program does not provide indicatoby age (chart 2.4); full-time and part-time eduration of unemployment (chart 2.12), aeducational attainment (chart 2.13). Data from because the BLS labor force comparisons prolabor force participation rates by sex for larg(chart 5.6). Labor force participation rates by age (chart 2.4

for a given age group is defined as the ratio 

civilian) labor force for the age group divided population for the age group. Two age grou(ages 15 or 16 to 24) and older workers (ages generally derived from labor force surveys. attempt to standardize these data to inAccording to OECD, international comparisons made with caution. In countries where young into the armed forces, their measured particconsiderably according to whether the figures armed forces. Differences in the lower agcomparability of the data. 
A6 | Definitions, Sources, and Methods

Source: OECD, Employment Outlook, 2006 Ed., Paris, June 2006, table C; 

and OECD, Labor Force Statistics 1985-2005, 2006 Ed., Paris, August 2006, 

part II. 

Rates of growth in full-time and part-time employment (chart 2.7). 

OECD has adjusted full-time and part-time employment to a common conceptual basis, insofar as possible. Full-time employment is defined 

as persons usually working over 30 hours per week in their main job. Part-time employment is defined as persons usually working 30 or fewer hours per week in their main job. Data are limited to persons declaring usual hours worked. Except for the United States, the data relate to total employment. For the United States, the data cover wage and salary employment only. This difference should not materially affect the comparisons because paid workers account for more than 90 percent of total U.S. employment. The data are obtained from labor force surveys and refer to persons ages 15 or 16 and over, except for Norway and Sweden, where the data refer to persons ages 16 to 74 and 16 to 64, respectively. Data for Japan are not comparable to those of the other countries for two reasons: (1) the Japanese data are based on "actual hours worked" rather than "usual hours worked," and (2) part-time employment in Japan is defined as working fewer than 35 hours per week. Thus, the Japanese data should not be used for comparisons of the level of full-time and part-time work. They are included in chart 2.7 to track the broad trends in full-time and part-time work. For Korea, data also are based on “actual hours worked” rather than “usual hours worked.” 

Source: OECD, Labor Market Statistics Database, <http://www.oecd.org/>. 

Persons unemployed one year or longer 

unemployment (chart 2.12). The OECD 

unemployment represent the length of time thhave been looking for work. The OECD standardized, but they are all from labor force sto persons ages 15 or 16 and over, except fowhere the data refer to persons ages 16 respectively. 

Source: OECD, Employment Outlook, 2006 Ed., ParRatio of unemployment rate of persons without that of persons with college or university Because educational systems vary widely aadopted a broad classification system based 

Standard Classification for Education (ISCED) dNations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural OOECD summarizes the UNESCO categories attainment groupings—ISCED 0 to ISCED 6—education. The OECD grouping "below upincludes ISCED 0 through 2, corresponds tdegrees." The grouping "tertiary-type A aprograms," a subset of ISCED 5, correspon

university degrees." The data on unemplostandardized but they are all from labor force sto men and women ages 25 to 64. Source: OECD, Education at a Glance: OECD In

September 2006, table A8.2a; and OECD, Employ

Paris, June 2006, table D.  Labor force participation rates by sex (chart 

participation rate is the ratio of the labor force to to 64. These participation rates are conceptushown in chart 2.3, for which there is no upper a
Definition

In many developing countries, children under age 15 work full or part time. In some high-income countries, many workers postpone retirement past age 65. As a result, labor force participation rates calculated using age limits of 15 to 64 may systematically over- or 

under-estimate actual rates. Furthermore, the data have not been adjusted for comparability across countries. 

Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators, Washington, D.C., 2006, 

table 2.2. 

Annual hours worked per employed person (chart 2.8) The concept used is the total number of hours actually worked over the year divided by the average number of persons in employment. Annual hours worked per employed person are affected by legislation and agreements on normal and overtime hours. They also are influenced by factors such as the proportion of part-time workers and selfemployed, who work fewer and longer hours, respectively. The ILO standard definition for hours actually worked includes hours actually worked during normal periods of work; time worked in addition to the normal periods and generally paid at higher rates; time spent at place of work in preparation, repair, and record keeping; time spent at place of work on stand-by basis or under a guaranteed work contract; and time corresponding to short rest periods, including tea or coffee breaks. Hours actually worked should exclude hours paid for but not worked, such as: annual leave, public holidays, paid sick leave, meal breaks, and time spent on travel between home and work. Comparative data on annual hours worked based precisely on this ILO definition are not available. The comparisons shown in chart 2.8 are the published OECD data series on annual hours actually worked per employed person, which include some adjustments towards the above definition. The data 

generally cover all persons in employment, incpart-time workers. OECD states that the data acomparisons of trends over time. Comparishours levels for a given year are not precise bdata sources and methods of estimation. Datforce surveys, establishment surveys, and admdata reported from establishment surveys or exclude unpaid overtime. Hours data reported are subject to respondent error. Methods of eestimates using one survey source, and commore than one survey source or a combinatioand administrative or legislative information. Sowith national accounts concepts. The source of hours and employment data varestimates are based on actual or usual weekly 

force and establishment surveys, or from norsurvey or administrative data. Only two cZealand and the United Kingdom, directly mworked with a continuous labor force survey, wweek of the year and avoids the need to adjusdays lost. OECD adjusts national data for IreNetherlands, and Portugal, and for France and for effective weeks worked during the year; thehours not worked due to annual leave and puthe underreporting of hours lost due to illness aestimates for the Netherlands do not accounillness/accident, bad weather, industrial responsibilities, nor do they cover overtime woestimates do not really measure actual hours wData for the United States are OECD estimateunpublished BLS statistics of annual hours wofrom the Current Employment Statistics Survey 
A8 | Definitions, Sources, and Methods

adjusts these unpublished BLS statistics for multiple jobholding using data from the CPS to produce estimates of annual hours worked per employed person. Data for all countries are on a per employed person basis. Source: OECD, Labor Force Statistics Database, <http://www.oecd.org>. Educational attainment of the adult population (chart 2.14) As discussed for chart 2.13, OECD uses UNESCO categories for seven educational attainment groupings. In chart 2.14, these are grouped into three broad categories. The grouping “below uppersecondary” includes early childhood education (ISCED 0), primary level of education (ISCED 1), and lower secondary level of education (ISCED 2). The grouping “upper secondary and post-secondary nontertiary” includes upper secondary level of education (ISCED 3) and post-secondary non-tertiary level of education (ISCED 4). The grouping “tertiary” includes the first stage of tertiary education (ISCED 5) and advanced research qualification (ISCED 6). The data refer to persons ages 25 to 64. Source: OECD, Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators, 2006 Ed., Paris, 

September 2006, tables A1.1a and A1.3a. 

Competitiveness indi

for manufacturin

(charts 3.1-3.6) 

Section 3 focuses on several key labo

competitiveness in world markets for goods: manufacturing hourly compensation costs anand unit labor costs. The manufacturing sectofor such comparisons, and the BLS indicatoadjusted to a common conceptual framework to Nevertheless, it should be noted that these indpartial assessment of international competitiveaggregate (all manufacturing) nature of the important variations in competitiveness of manIn addition, competitiveness relationships in mathe same as the relationships in services, a gflows. Although competitiveness is heavily dethere are many other factors that also influincluding the quality of the product, the timelinesales service, and the flexibility needed to customers' requirements. The following two hourly compensation costs and productivity indicators. Note that the hourly compensation levels and trends, whereas the productivity indicators are limited to trend comparisons. 

Hourly compensation costs for prodin manufacturing (charts 3.1-3.3) 

These charts present data on comparative houfor manufacturing production workers in order differences in employer labor costs. Comparisreadily available average earnings statisticcountries can be very misleading—national 
Definition

earnings differ considerably, average earnings do not include all items of labor compensation, and the omitted items of compensation frequently represent a large proportion of total compensation. The compensation measures are computed in national currency units and are converted into U.S. dollars at prevailing commercial market currency exchange rates. The foreign currency exchange rates used in the calculations are the average daily exchange rates for the reference period. They are appropriate measures for comparing levels of employer labor costs. They do not indicate relative living standards of workers or the purchasing power of their income. Hourly compensation costs include (1) hourly direct pay and (2) employer social insurance expenditures and other labor taxes. Hourly direct pay includes all payments made directly to the worker, before payroll deductions of any kind, consisting of (a) pay for time worked and (b) other direct pay. Pay for time worked includes basic time and piece rates plus overtime premiums, shift differentials, other premiums and bonuses paid regularly each pay period, and cost-of-living adjustments. Other direct pay includes pay for time not worked(vacation, holidays, and other leave, except sick leave), seasonal or irregular bonuses and other special payments, selected social allowances, and the cost of payments in kind. Social insurance expenditures and other labor taxes include (c) employer expenditures for legally required insurance programs and contractual and private benefit plans and (d) other labor taxes. Social insurance expenditures include employer expenditures for retirement and disability pensions, health insurance, income guarantee insurance and sick leave, life and accident insurance, occupational injury and illness compensation, unemployment insurance, and family allowances. Other labor taxes includes taxes on payrolls or employment (or reductions to reflect subsidies), even if they do not finance programs that directly benefit workers, because such taxes are regarded as labor costs. 

The BLS definition of hourly compensation costILO definition of total labor costs. Hourly cominclude all items of labor costs. The costs of training, and plant facilities and services—smedical clinics—are not included because damost countries. The labor costs not included a4 percent of total labor costs in any country available. Production workers generally include those engaged in fabricating, assembly, and relahandling, warehousing, and shipping; maintenaand guard services; auxiliary production (for eand other services closely related to the abosupervisors are generally included; apprentices generally excluded. Total compensation is computed by adjusting earnings series for items of direct pay not incluemployer expenditures for legally required insprivate benefit plans, and other labor taxes. Foother countries that measure earnings on an figures are also adjusted in order to approxim

hour worked. Earnings statistics are obta

employment, hours, and earnings or from s

manufactures. Adjustment factors are obtained from periodic 

interpolated or projected to non-survey years information for most countries. The infotabulations of employer social security contribthe International Social Security Association, infand legislated fringe benefit changes from bulletins, and statistical series on indirect la
A10 | Definitions, Sources, and Methods

countries, adjustment factors are obtained from surveys or censuses of manufactures or from reports on fringe-benefit systems and social 

security. For the United States, the adjustment factors are special calculations for international comparisons based on data from several surveys. The statistics are also adjusted, where necessary, to account for major differences in worker coverage; differences in industrial classification systems; and changes over time in survey coverage, sample 

benchmarks, or frequency of surveys. Nevertheless, some differences in industrial coverage remain and in many countries other than the United States the data exclude very small establishments (less than 5 employees in Japan and less than 10 employees in most other countries). For the United States, the methods used, as well as the results, differ somewhat from those of other BLS series on U.S.compensation costs. Hourly compensation costs are converted to U.S. dollars using the average daily exchange rate for the reference period. The exchange rates used are prevailing commercial market exchange rates as published by either the U.S. Federal Reserve Board or the International Monetary Fund. The hourly compensation figures in U.S. dollars shown in the tables provide comparative measures of employer labor costs; they do not provide inter-country comparisons of the purchasing power of worker incomes. Prices of goods and services vary greatly among countries, and the commercial market exchange rates used to compare employer labor costs do not reliably indicate relative differences in prices. Purchasing Power Parities (defined previously in the Gross Domestic Product section) must be used for meaningful international comparisons of the relative purchasing power of worker incomes.

Total compensation converted to U.S. dollars 

Parities would provide one measure for compa

of labor income. It should be noted, however, includes employer payments to funds for the 

addition to payments made directly to workers

funds provide either deferred income (for retirement funds), a type of insurance (for unemployment or health benefit funds), or cur

example, family allowances), and the relationpayments and current or future worker benefits hand, excluding these payments would under

income derived from work because they substor self-insurance to cover retirement, medical coTotal compensation, because it takes account into funds for the benefit of workers, is a broadeither total direct earnings or direct spendabbroader concept would take account of all socworkers, including those financed out of genethose financed through employment or payroll ta

Source: BLS, “International Comparisons of HourProduction Workers in Manufacturing, 2004,” Novem

of Labor News Release USDL 05-2197, <http://www.

Manufacturing productivity and un(charts 3.4-3.6) The productivity estimates refer to labor prodoutput per hour worked. It is based on the produced in each country, and on the total la

hours worked. Output is defined as the real (din the manufacturing sector of the economy. previously (see Gross Domestic Product sectiopublished as part of each country's national acc
Definitions

Hours worked in manufacturing include the hours of all persons engaged in the manufacturing process, including the self-employed. For some countries, the data on the number of hours worked in manufacturing are also published with the national accounts. For other countries, BLS constructs its own estimates of aggregate hours worked, multiplying employment figures published with the national accounts by estimates of average annual hours worked. Manufacturing unit labor costs are defined as the cost of labor 

compensation per unit of output. Because labor costs are frequently a major factor in total production costs, changes in unit labor costs affect the prices of manufactured products. Labor compensation includes employer expenditures for legally required insurance programs and contractual and private benefit plans, in addition to all payments made in cash or in kind directly toemployees. Data on labor compensation are usually taken from the countries' national accounts. When data for the self-employed are not available, total compensation is estimated by assuming the samehourly compensation for self-employed and employees. Changes in a country's unit labor costs, expressed in U.S. dollars, are estimated by combining changes in the unit labor cost expressed in each nation's currency with changes in the exchange rate of thecountry's currency against the U.S. dollar. 

Source: BLS, "International Comparisons of Manufacturing Productivity and 

Unit Labor Cost Trends, 1950-2005," September 26, 2006, Department of Labor News Release USDL 06-1655, <http://www.bls.gov/fls/>. 

Public expenditures on la

programs as a percent 

(chart 4.1) 

 Public expenditures on labor market programprograms, although not all countries have employment services and administration; recruitment and maintenance incentives; integ

direct job creation; business start-up incentincome maintenance and support, inccompensation; and, early retirement incentiverefer to 2004 for Austria, Denmark, France, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, and S2005 for Korea. For the United States and thdata refer to fiscal year 2004, which begins on 

respectively. For the remaining countries, the 2005, which begins on April 1st for Canada, Kingdom, and on July 1st for Australia and N

been defined previously (see Gross Domestic P

Source: OECD, Employment Outlook, 2006 Ed., Par

            
A12 | Definitions, Sources, and Methods

Measures of regulation

on labor and product markets 

(chart 4.2) 

 The measure of labor market regulation gauges the extent of regulations governing the hiring and firing of workers—often termed employment protection legislation. It is a summary measure that ranges from 0 (no restrictions) to 6 (very restrictive). The following factors are considered: the extent of procedural requirements that employers must follow in individual or collective dismissals, notice and severance pay requirements, and the degree of regulation of temporary forms of employment. The measure of product market regulation is based on a simple average of indicators for seven industries, where each industry is rated from 0 (no restrictions) to 6 (very restrictive). The industries are gas, electricity, postal and courier activities, telecommunications, air transport, railways, and road freight. Depending on the industry, the following factors are considered: barriers to entry, public ownership, market structure, vertical integration, and price controls. Both indicators are constructed by OECD from a variety of national sources as well as from multi-country surveys. The construction of these summary measures involves difficult choices of quantification and weighting. For further information on these choices, see the source documents. 

Source: OECD, Labor Force Statistics Database and Indicators of Product 

Market Regulation Database, <http://www.oecd.org/>. 

Share of labor costs 

by tax and social security c

(chart 4.3) 

This series, taxes on a single production difference between the salary cost of a sinworker to their employer and the amount of wage) that they receive. Labor costs are gros

social security contributions and payroll taxes. 

income taxes paid by the employee, emcontributions, employer social security contrieffect, payroll taxes. The types of taxes inclufully comparable across countries, as they adefinitions agreed upon by all OECD countriesfrom chart 3.3, which covers only employer-paid Because income taxes and access to work-relby family status and in complex ways in neacross-country comparisons require a restrictcommon family status. The figures presented single full-time production worker in the maearns the wage of the average production workeThe information on the average production supplied by the ministries of finance in all OECD on national statistical surveys. The amount of production worker is calculated by applying the concerned. Thus, the tax rates are the result rather than direct observation of taxes actually p

Source: OECD, Taxing Wages: 2004/2005, 2006 Ed

I.3. 
Definitions

Population

(charts 4.4, 5.1-5.3) 

Population estimates are usually based on national population censuses, but the frequency and quality of these vary by country. Most 

countries conduct a complete enumeration no more than once a decade. Pre- and post-census estimates are interpolations or extrapolations based on demographic models. The dependency ratio (charts 4.4 and 5.3) is the ratio of dependents 

(persons under age 15 or over age 64) to the working-age population 

(persons ages 15 to 64). The dependency ratio is an overall measure of the dependence that children and the elderly have on people of working age. Whereas dependency ratios show the age composition of a population, they do not necessarily show economic dependency.Some children and elderly people are part of the labor force and some working-age people are not. The world population distribution (chart 5.1) shows each country’s 

share of the total world population. Total population of an economy 

includes all residents regardless of legal status or citizenship—except for refugees not permanently settled in the country of asylum, who are generally considered part of the population of their country of origin. The total population presents one overall measure of the potential impact of the country on the world and within its region. The age composition of the population (chart 5.2) refers to the 

percentage of the total population that comprises the specific age group. Three age groups are presented in chart 5.2: persons under age 15, persons ages 15 to 64 (often referred to as the working-age population), and persons ages 65 and over. Data for chart 4.4 are from OECD. Data shown in charts 5.1 to 5.3 are from the World Bank. 

International comparability of population indifferences in the concepts, definitions, data coestimation methods used by national statisticorganizations that collect population data. Fualways reported accurately, particularly in devel

Source: OECD, Labor Force Statistics: 1985-2005

2006, part I; World Bank, World Development Ind

2006, table 2.1; and World Bank, World Developm

<http://www.worldbank.org/>. 

Trade in goods as a perce

(charts 4.5 and 5.7) 

 Trade in goods as a percent of GDP is the sum and imports divided by GDP, all of which are dollars. The value taken by the indicator doe

GDP generated by imports and exports; rathvalue of imports and exports is equivalent to the 

GDP. GDP has been defined previously (see Gsection). 

Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators

table 6.1.