Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
Post on 03-Apr-2018
225 Views
Preview:
Transcript
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
1/24
Daniel Hall
1. Unemployment rates fell across OECD countries over the two
decades before the Great Recession (2008-). To what factors do you
attribute this fall? How far can your explanation also provide the basis
for explaining observed patterns of unemployment rates across OECD
countries since the on-set of the Great Recession?
In general we can say that the fall in unemployment across the OECD over the decades
preceding 2008 has not been down to the use of any individual policy tools in isolation, but
rather through a combination. Furthermore there has not been a specific combination of policy
tools, which has proved successful in unemployment reduction across OECD countries in this
period. The two decades prior to 2008 made it clear that there is not a one size fits all
combination of supply and demand side policies to reduce unemployment. Broadly speaking,
supply side models for reducing unemployment can be divided into Nordic (used by
Sweden, Denmark, Austria and Australia among others) and Anglo-Saxon (used by the
Ireland, U.S.A and the U.K among others) (Coats, D. 2006, pp. 22-23). The Nordic model has
focused on allowing large flows in and out of the unemployment pool, while providing high
levels of support to the unemployed with an emphasis on collective wage bargaining and
social dialogue. Policy in the Anglo-Saxon model has focused on combining low levels of
welfare support, limited taxation, weak trade unions and low employment protection. It is also
important to point out the following: unemployment has not fallen across all OECD countries
over this period (See Appendix 1); also, although unemployment did fall across OECD
countries between 1988 and 2008, for most, unemployment rose from 1988 into the early
90s, continuing an upward trend in unemployment rates from the 70s and 80s, before
beginning to fall. The upward trend in unemployment is generally accepted to have been
caused by the oil price spikes in the 70s1. The rise in unemployment was accompanied by
1 These spikes in the price of oil were caused by the Arab oil embargo 1973, The Iranian
revolution 1979 and the First Gulf War of 1980.
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
2/24
Daniel Hall
rising inflation, with both persisting through the 70s and into the 80s and early 90s. This
stagflation required policy makers to reconsider the original conception of the Phillips
curve2, which implied a trade off between unemployment and inflation. Instead policies were
implemented based around an expectations augmented Phillips curve3, where unemployment
could not be sustained below a certain level without an increase in the inflation rate. This lead
policy makers to look at supply side policys as a means of shifting the Phillips curve to the
left, to decrease unemployment for a given inflation rate, in order to lower the non-
accelerating inflation rate of unemployment, the NAIRU, (Friedman, 1968). With this in mind
the fall in actual unemployment across the OECD can be taken initially as a fall in the
NAIRU, from the early 1990s until 2000. From 2000 onwards as inflation remained stable,
the actual unemployment rate is roughly equivalent to the natural rate4, with variation coming
from cyclical demand side factors. (Blanchard, 2000) This is charted in Appendix 4.
The key recommendations made by the OECD in the early 1990s (OECD, 1994) to reduce
unemployment, serve as a good basis for examining which policy action we might attribute
the fall in unemployment levels to5. I will primarily focus on those policy recommendations,
which sought to increase the flexibility of the labour market as a way of reducing
unemployment. A dual account of what it is for labour markets to be flexible is given by
HMT (2003)6. Labour market flexibility is divided into two concepts. The first is the ability of
the labour market to return to equilibrium following a disturbance, through adjustments in the
wage, supply of labour and demand for labour. This concept of labour market flexibility
2For the derivation of the original Phillips curve seeAppendix 2
3 For the derivation of the original Phillips curve seeAppendix 34
Blanchard makes this assertion based on the assumption that when inflation increases,unemployment is below its natural rate and vice versa. When inflation is stable,
unemployment is at its natural rate.5 For the key recommendations see Appendix 56 It is important to note that many other definitions of what it is for a labour market to be
flexible have also been given. See Lagos, 1994; Pissarides, 1997; Forstater, 2000
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
3/24
Daniel Hall
implies that a flexible labour market will rapidly reallocate labour, following a downturn in an
industry, region or in a particular occupation to return the economy to equilibrium
unemployment. The second concept of labour market flexibility describes the institutional
determinants of the level of structural unemployment. Under this description of labour market
flexibility, a flexible labour market implies one that has a low structural level of
unemployment.
Policys aimed at reducing labour market rigidities as a means of reducing unemployment are
broadly part of the Anglo-Saxon model mentioned above. Policys that increase labour
market flexibility may reduce the NAIRU, the structural level of unemployment at which
inflation stabilises7. Theory suggests that a reduction in the factors that enable or encourage
workers to increase their desired real wage for a given level of unemployment will cause a
reduction in the NAIRU. All of these factors are captured by the parameterzin the wage
setting relation. The wage setting relation gives real wage as a function of unemployment and
z, a catchall variable, which stands for all of the factors which affect wages, given the
expected price level and the unemployment rate (Blanchard, Amighini, Giavazzi, 2010).
The wage setting relation:
= ,
,+
The natural rate of unemployment then, is where the wage setting relation is equal to the price
setting relation. The price setting relation represents the limit to the real wage that the
economy can provide, given the productivity of labour and the mark-up of prices over costs
by firms in the economy.
7 For a mathematical derivation of the NAIRU see Appendix 6
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
4/24
Daniel Hall
The price setting relation:
=
1
1+
The NAIRU, then is given by the point at which real wage demands by workers are equal to
the real wage firms are willing to pay:
!
, =
1
1+
Where Un represents the NAIRU. This implies that, given the mark-up, a reduction in any of
the factors captured byz, will lead to a reduction in the NAIRU8. The OECD (1994)
recommendations to increase the flexibility of labour markets then, were an attempt to reduce
labour market distortions captured byzand reduce the NAIRU. The wage floors created by
these distortions raise the cost of employment, and the consequences of this are particularly
harmful for lower-productivity workers. Flexibility in the labour market, as defined by the
OECD, lowers the cost of hiring these low skilled workers, enabling them to enter
employment.
The United Kingdom and the U.S embody the policy recommendations of the OECD,
operating highly flexible labour markets, and saw declining unemployment levels over the
two decades prior to 20089. However evidence that these policies had any direct effect on
unemployment rates over this period is not robust. Nickell (1998) argues that these policy
changes cannot explain the reduction in time-series unemployment. He argues that although
unemployment was much lower in the 1960s than the 1990s, the rigidity of the labour
market institutions in the two periods were not much different. This idea is supported by
8 For a graphical representation of the wage and price setting relations see Appendix 79 For a graphical representation of U.K and U.S unemployment rates 1988-2008 see Appendix
8
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
5/24
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
6/24
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
7/24
Daniel Hall
Taken from Ball (1999) p.213 Fig. 7
Ball argues that the successful countries were successful due to a combination of non-
monetary demand shocks overheating the economy and also due to limited use of
contractionary policy to slow down inflation during strong periods of output growth. This is
in contrast to the failure countries, which used excessively contractionary monetary policy,
which generally did not ease during recessionary periods, leading to hysteresis. Ball is not
suggesting that the reform of labour market institutions played no role in the reduction in
unemployment rates over time, but simply that it is exaggerated and does more to explain
cross-country differences rather than time series.
Given their usefulness in explaining cross-country unemployment rates (Nickell 1998), labour
market institutions may provide an explanation to why unemployment rates across OECD
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
8/24
Daniel Hall
countries were affected differently by the Great Recession of 200813. The comparison of peak
to trough changes in unemployment and the decline in output across OECD countries shows
no correlation.
Source: OECD Economic Outlook Database 2010
13 For thedifferencestheimpactoftherecessionhadonrealG.D.PincomparisontoitsaffectonunemploymentseeAppendix10
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
ISLTUR
IRL*
MEX JP
NLUX
SWE
DNK
HUNS
VK ITA
DEU
GBR
NLD
CZE
AUT
KOR E
SPBEL
FRA
USA
CAN
GRC
NOR
CHE
NZL
POL*
AUS
ChangeinOECDharmonisedunemploymentratesasa
percentageoflabourforce,December2007toMarch2010(%)
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
9/24
Daniel Hall
Source: OECD Economic Outlook Database 2010
Okuns law relates the degree to which the unemployment rate is affected by a deviation in
output growth from its normal rate by a factor. Okuns law:
! !!! = !" !
Where !is the normal rate of output growth (Blanchard, Amighini, Giavazzi, 2010). Here
labour market institutions affect the parameter across countries, and therefore the elasticity
of unemployment with respect to changes in output. The IMF (2010) described the theoretical
impact labour market institutions may have on the parameter in Okuns law. High levels of
EPL14
, the prevalence of temporary contracts and the replacement ratio in particular are
regarded as having a significant impact on the elasticity of unemployment in response to a
recession.
Nordic countries have experienced increases in both inflows and outflows of unemployment,
which Arpaia, A & Curci, N (2010) suggest may be due to relatively low levels of EPL
14 Employment Protection Legislation, see Appendix 11 for the OECDs index of
employment protection legislation.
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
PeaktoTroughChangeinOutpurinthe2008-09recession(%)
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
10/24
Daniel Hall
combined with an emphasis in ALMPs15. Spain and Ireland on the other hand are
experiencing strong inflows into unemployment. The high level of labor shedding in Spain is
attributed to the prevalence of short term working contracts (IMF, 2008 pp. 8-12). German
unemployment has not changed much since the onset of the Great Recession, which Burda, M.
and Hunt (2011) among others, believe is due to the introduction of subsidized short-term
working hours.
The general fall in unemployment levels in the two decades prior to 2008, is most likely due
to a combination of the introduction of more flexible labour market policys and growth,
leading to the reversal of unemployment hysteresis from the 1970s. This period however, has
challenged the convention that minimal government intervention is the key to a successful
labor market, with many of the Nordic countries standing in stark contrast to this conventional
wisdom.
15 Active Labor Market Policys
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
11/24
Daniel Hall
Bibliography
Ball, L., (1999) Aggregate Demand and Long-Run Unemployment,Brookings Papers
on Economic Activity, Vol. 1999, No. 2. (1999), pp. 189-251
Blanchard, O. (2005) European Unemployment: The Evolution of Facts and Ideas,
National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 11750,
www.nber.org/papers/w11750
Blanchard, O., Amighini, A., Giavazzi, F., (2010)Macroeconomics A European
Perspective, Prentice Hall, Essex
Blanchard, O., Summers, L. (1986) Hysteresis and the European Unemployment
Problem,NBER Macroeconomics Economics Annual, edited by Stanley Fischer, 1:
15-78
Blanchard, O., Wolfers, J., (2000) Shocks and Institutions and the Rise of European
Unemployment. The Aggregate Evidence.Economic Journal, 110 (1): 1-33, March
2000.
Coats, D. (2006) Whos Afraid of Labour Market Flexibility? The Work Foundation
Forstater, M. (2000) Full Employment and Economic Flexibility,Economic and
Labour Relations Review 11(0) Supplement, pp. 69-88.
Friedman, M., (1968) The Role of Monetary Policy,American Economic Review, Vol.
58, No. 1
Griffiths, A., Wall, S. (2007)Applied Economics, 11th Ed, Prentice Hall, Essex
HMT (2003)EMU and Labour Market Flexibility, HMT, London
Lagos, R.A. (1994) Labour Market Flexibility: What Does it Really Mean?, Cepal
Review 54, (December), pp. 81-95.
Nickell, S. (1998) Unemployment: questions and some answers,Economic Journal,
108, 48, May.
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
12/24
Daniel Hall
OECD (1994)Jobs Study: facts, analysis and strategies, OECD, Paris
OECD (1998)Jobs Strategy: Progress Report, OECD Working Paper, No.196,
OECD, Paris
OECD, (2004)Employment Outlook, OECD, Paris
Pissarides, C.A. (1997) The Need for Labor-Market Flexibility in European
Economic and Monetary Union, Swedish Economic Policy Review. 4, pp. 513-546.
Schmitt, J., Wadsworth, J. (2005). U.S. and U.K. Labor Market Success in the 1990s.
In: Howell, D., 2005. Fighting Unemployment: The Limits of Free Market Orthodoxy,
Oxford University Press, Oxford
Arpaia, A., Curci, N., (2010) EU Labour Market Behaviour During the Great
Recession,European Economy Economic Papers. No. 405. Available at
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2010/ecp4
05_en.htm
IMF. (2010) World Economic Outlook: Rebalancing Growth, Washington DC:
International Monetary Fund, chapter 3. Available at:
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2010/01/
Burda, M. and Hunt, J. (2011) What Explains the German Labor Market Miracle in
the Great Recession?Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, No. 1, pp. 273-319.
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
13/24
Daniel Hall
Appendix
Appendix 1:
Dataset:
LabourForce
Statistics
(MEI)
Time 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2009 2010 2011
Country
Australia i 7.2 10.9 7.7 5.9 4.2 5.6 5.2 5.1
Austria i 3.6 4.2 4.2 4.3 3.8 4.8 4.4 4.2
Belgium i .. 8.1 9.3 8.2 7 7.9 8.3 7.2
Canada i 7.8 11.4 8.3 7.6 6.1 8.3 8 7.5
Chile i 9.8 6.5 6.4 9.5 7.8 10.8 8.2 7.1
Czech Republic i .. 4.4 6.5 7.8 4.4 6.7 7.3 6.7
Denmark i 6.5 10.7 5.4 5.4 3.4 6 7.5 7.6
Estonia .. .. 9.2 10 5.5 13.8 16.9 12.5
Finland i 4.2 16.3 11.4 9 6.4 8.2 8.4 7.8
France i .. .. .. 8.5 7.4 9.1 9.4 9.3
Germany i 5.9 7.9 9.2 9.6 7.5 7.8 7.1 6
Greece i 7.7 9.7 11.3 9.8 7.7 9.5 12.6 17.7
Hungary i .. 12.1 7.9 5.9 7.8 10 11.2 10.9
Iceland i .. 5.3 2.7 3.4 3 7.2 7.5 7.1
Ireland i 16.2 15.7 7.6 4.8 6.1 11.8 13.7 14.4
Israel i .. .. 8.5 10.7 6.1 7.5 6.6 5.6
Italy i 12 9.7 11.3 8.5 6.7 7.8 8.4 8.4
Japan i 2.5 2.5 4.1 5.3 4 5.1 5.1 4.6
Korea i .. 2.9 7 3.6 3.2 3.7 3.7 3.4
Luxembourg .. .. 2.8 3.7 5.1 5.2 4.4 4.9
Mexico i 3.6 3.4 3.2 3.4 4 5.5 5.3 5.2
Netherlands 5.1.. 4.4 3.7 2.8 3.5 4.5 4.5
New Zealand i 5.7 9.8 7.7 4.8 4.2 6.1 6.5 6.5
Norway i 3.2 6 3.2 4.5 2.6 3.2 3.6 3.3
Poland i .. 14 10.6 19.7 7.1 8.2 9.6 9.6
Portugal i 5.7 5.5 4.9 6.3 7.6 9.5 10.8 12.7
Slovak Republic i .. .. 12.6 17.6 9.5 12 14.4 13.5
Slovenia i.. .. .. 6.7 4.4 5.9 7.3 8.2
Spain i 19.2 22.6 18.6 11.5 11.3 18 20.1 21.6
Sweden i 1.8 8.2 6.5 4.9 6.2 8.3 8.4 7.5
Switzerland i 0.6 3.6 3.3 3.9 3.2 4.1 4.2 3.8
Turkey i 8.4 8.9 6.9 10.5 11 14.1 12 9.8
United Kingdom i 8.6 10.4 6.3 5 5.7 7.6 7.9 8.1
United States i 5.5 6.9 4.5 6 5.8 9.3 9.6 9
Euro area (17countries) .. 10 10.1 8.9 7.5 9.5 10 10.1
European Union(27 countries) .. .. 10.2 9 7 9 9.6 9.6
data extracted on 02 May 2012 11:08 UTC (GMT) from OECD.Stat
Legend:B: Break
E: Estimated value
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
14/24
Daniel Hall
Appendix 2:
Deriving the original Phillips Curve
The original Phillips curve is based on the assumption that on average inflation will be equal
to 0 and therefore expected inflation is equal to 0.
(1)
!
!= 0
With the aggregate supply relation given in terms of the inflation rate as:
(2)
! = !!+ + !
Where the parameter captures the strength of the effect of unemployment on the wage.
Given expected inflation is equal to 0, (2) becomes:
(3)
= + !
This negative relation between inflation and unemployment is the original Phillips Curve
Appendix 3:
Deriving the Expectations-Augmented Phillips Curve
The assumption that inflation will be 0 on average is relaxed and therefore expected inflation
is given as:
(4)
!!= !!!
If we substitute this into (2) we get:
(5)
! = !!! + + !
In the expectations augmented Phillips curve = 1 as the unemployment rate affects the
change in the inflation rate. So the expectations augmented Phillips curve is given as:
(6)
! !!! = + !
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
15/24
Daniel Hall
Appendix 4:
Taken from Blanchard (2005)
Appendix 5:
OECD Key Recommendations
Set macroeconomics policy to encourage non-inflationary growth
Enhance the creation and diffusion of technology
Increase working time flexibility
Encourage entrepreneurship and eliminate restrictions on the creation and expansion
of enterprises.
Make wage and labour costs flexible and responsive to local conditions and skill
levels, particularly for young workers.
Reform employment security provisions that inhibit recruitment
Strengthen the emphasis on active labour market policies.
Improve the education and skills of the labour force
2
4
6
8
10
percent
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
actual natural
Figure 2. EU15 actual and constructed natural rate
Source: OECD database and text
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
16/24
Daniel Hall
Reform unemployment and related benefits and the tax system to improve the
functioning of the job market, whilst not jeopardising societys equity goals.
Enhance product market competition to reduce monopolistic tendencies and weaken
insider-outsider mechanisms, thereby leading to a more dynamic economy
Appendix 6:
Derivation of the NAIRU
The NAIRU is the unemployment rate at which !
!= !
Substitute this into the AS relation, given in terms of inflation:
(1)
! = !!+ + !
to get:
(2)
!=
+
Where Un is the NAIRU. Substituting (2) into the Expectations Augmented Phillips Curve
gives:
! !!! = + (! !)
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
17/24
Daniel Hall
Real Wage
W/P
Appendix 7:
1. Following a reduction in the replacement-ratio or duration of unemployment benefitscaptured by a fall inz, there is an inward shift of the wage setting relation curve from
WS to WS. The natural rate of unemployment is now found at the equilibriumbetween the price setting relation, PS, and the new wage setting relation WS. There is
a fall in the natural rate of unemployment of NAIRU NAIRU
2. The same shift in the WS curve to WS would occur following a reduction in unionpower, a reduction on the tax placed on earnings and a reduction in the degree ofemployment protection as they lower the wage targeted by workers for a given level of
unemployment.
Unemployment
(W/P)*
NAIRU NAIRU
WS
WS
PS
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
18/24
Daniel Hall
Appendix 8:
Appendix 9:
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Unemployment(%)
Year
UnitedKingdom
UnitedStates
Euroarea(17
countries)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Annual
Unemp
loyment(%)
Year
Australia
Australia
UnitedStates
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
19/24
Daniel Hall
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Unemployment(%)
Year
Austria
Austria
UnitedStates
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Unemployment(%)
Year
Denmark
Denmark
UnitedStates
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
20/24
Daniel Hall
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Unemployment(%)
Year
Sweden
Sweden
UnitedStates
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
21/24
Daniel Hall
Appendix 10:
Cross-countrydifferencesintheimpactoftherecessiononrealGDPareonlyoneofthefactorsdetermininghowsharplyunemploymentrose
a
Change in unemployment rates from peak to troughb
No/small unemployment
impact
(Less than a 1.5 pp increase)
Medium unemployment
impact
(At least a 1.5 pp increase
but less than a 3.5 pp
increase)
Large unemployment
impact
(At least a 3.5 pp
increase)
Change in
GDP from
peak to
troughb
No/small
GDP shock
(Less than a3 pp decline)
Australia New Zealand (H )
Norway
PolandSwitzerland (X,S)
Medium
GDP shock
(At least a 3
but less than
a 7 pp
decline)
Austria (X) Canada (X,L) Spain (L,H)
Belgium (X,S)Czech
Republic(X,S)
United
States(H)
France Greece (L)
Germany (X,P,S) Hungary (X)
Italy (X,P,S) Portugal (X)
Korea (X)United
Kingdom(H)
Netherlands (X)
Slovak Republic (X,P)
Large GDP
shock
(At least a 7
pp decline)
Japan (X,P,S) Denmark (X,L,H,P) Iceland (L,P)
Luxembourg (X,P) Finland (X,P,S) Ireland (C,L,H)
Mexico (X) Sweden (X,L) Turkey (C,P,S)
pp: Percentage-point.
a) Letters in parenthesis following countries names indicate that the recession has been characterised by: C: A decline
of at least 1 percentage point in the share of construction in total value added; H: A decline of housing prices of at
least ten percent; L: At least six quarters between the prior GDP peak and the trough; P: A decline of labour
productivity of at least 5 percentage points; S: At least 1% of total employees participating in short-time work schemes
during 2009; X: A decline in exports as a share of GDP of at least 5 percentage points.
b) Peak and trough defined in terms of real quarterly GDP.
Source: OECD calculations based on OECD Economic Outlookand OECD Quarterly National Accounts Databasesand national sources.
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
22/24
Daniel Hall
Appendix 11:
OECD indicators on Employment ProtectionVersion 2 - Lastupdated 24-09-2010
Employment protection in OECD and selected non-OECD countries, 2008*Scale from 0 (least restrictions) to 6 (most restrictions)
Protection of
permanent workers
against
(individual)
dismissal
Regulation on
temporary
forms of
employment
Specific
requirements for
collective
dismissal
OECD
employment
protection index
Australia 1.37 0.79 2.88 1.38
Austria 2.19 2.29 3.25 2.41
Belgium 1.94 2.67 4.13 2.61
Brazil 1.49 3.96 0.00 2.27
Canada 1.17 0.22 2.63 1.02
Chile 2.59 2.04 0.00 1.93
China 3.31 2.21 3.00 2.80
Czech Republic 3.00 1.71 2.13 2.32
Denmark 1.53 1.79 3.13 1.91
Estonia 2.27 2.17 3.25 2.39
Finland 2.38 2.17 2.38 2.29
France 2.60 3.75 2.13 3.00
Germany 2.85 1.96 3.75 2.63
Greece 2.28 3.54 3.25 2.97
Hungary 1.82 2.08 2.88 2.11
Iceland 2.12 1.54 3.50 2.11India 3.65 2.67 0.00 2.63
Indonesia 4.29 2.96 0.00 3.02
Ireland 1.67 0.71 2.38 1.39
Israel 2.19 1.58 1.88 1.88
Italy 1.69 2.54 4.88 2.58
Japan 2.05 1.50 1.50 1.73
Korea 2.29 2.08 1.88 2.13
Luxembourg 2.68 3.92 3.88 3.39
Mexico 2.25 4.00 3.75 3.23
Netherlands 2.73 1.42 3.00 2.23
New Zealand 1.54 1.08 0.38 1.16Norway 2.20 3.00 2.88 2.65
Poland 2.01 2.33 3.63 2.41
Portugal 3.51 2.54 1.88 2.84
Russian
Federation 2.79 0.79 1.88 1.80
Slovak Republic 2.45 1.17 3.75 2.13
Slovenia 2.98 2.50 2.88 2.76
South Africa 1.91 0.58 1.88 1.35
Spain 2.38 3.83 3.13 3.11
Sweden 2.72 0.71 3.75 2.06
Switzerland 1.19 1.50 3.88 1.77
Turkey 2.48 4.88 2.38 3.46
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
23/24
Daniel Hall
United Kingdom 1.17 0.29 2.88 1.09
United States 0.56 0.33 2.88 0.85
Note:
* For France and Portugal, data refer to 2009. This indicator refer to version 3 as defined in the
methodology.Source: OECD. To find out more about the methodology used to calculate the OECD employmentprotection indicators, see www.oecd.org/employment/protection.
7/29/2019 Falling Unemployment Rates in OECD Countries
24/24
Daniel Hall
top related