Compulsory payments made by general government in respect of their employees. Voluntary and imputed contributions are excluded from these data. Contributions for the following types of social security benefits would, inter alia, be included: unemployment insurance benefits and supplements, accident, injury and sickness benefits, old-age, disability and survivors’ pensions, family allowances, reimbursements for medical and hospital expenses or provision of hospital or medical services. Contributions may be levied on both employees and employers.
Since the oil price shock in 1974 unemployment increased significantly and also did not really decline in periods of economic upswings in Europe. This is especially the case for the countries of the European Union; therefore we face a special need for explanation. Looking at the member states on finds considerable differences. Since 1977 the unemployment rate within the EU is higher than the average unemployment rate of all OECD countries. The economic upswing in the second half of the 80s relaxed the labor market but nevertheless the unemployment rate remained on a high level. This study deals with the development of unemployment between 1974 and 1993 in four different G7 countries: Germany, France, Great Britain and Italy.
Besides the common trend of an increasing unemployment rate, there are significantly different developments within the four countries. The analysis is divided in two parts: the first part looks at the reasons for the increase in unemployment in the considered countries; the second part aims to explain the difference between the developments of unemployment during economic cycles in the different countries.
After the description of similarities and differences of labor markets in the four countries it follows a long term analysis based on annual data as well as a short and medium term analysis on quarterly data. This is due to the fact that short and medium term developments are mainly influenced by cyclical economic developments but long term developments are mainly influenced by other factors like demographical and structural changes. A concrete question within this framework is if an increase in production potential can contribute to a decrease in unemployment.
For the long term analysis among others the Hysteresis-hypothesis (Hysteresis = Greek: to remain; denotes the remaining effect; in this context: remaining of unemployment) used for the explanation of the persistence of a high unemployment rate.
According to this approach consisting unemployment is barely decreased after economic recovery despite full utilization of capacity. According to the Hysteresis-hypothesis there are two reasons for this. The first reason is that for long term unemployed the abilities to work and the qualification level decreased, their human capital is partly devalued. The second reason is that employees give up wage restraint, because they do not fear unemployment anymore and therefore enforce higher real wages. Besides economic recovery companies are not willing to hire long term unemployed with a lower expected productivity for the higher established tariff wages. In the context of the empirical investigation a multiple explanatory approach is chosen which takes supply side and demand side factors into consideration.
The short and medium term analysis refers to Okun´s law (=an increase in the unemployment rate is connected with a decrease of the GDP; if the unemployment rate stays unchanged, the GDP grows with 3% p.a.) and aims to analyze more detailed the reactions of unemployment to economic cycles. A geometrical lag-model is compared with a lag-model ager Almon. This should ensure a precise as possible analysis of the Okun´s relations and coefficients.
Register of tables in HISTAT:
A.: Unemployment in the European G7 countries B.: Analysis of unemployment in the Federal Republic of Germany C.: Basic numbers: International comparison
A.: Unemployment in the European G7 countriesA.1. Determinates of unemployment in the EU, Germany (1974-1993)A.2. Determinates of unemployment in the EU, France (1974-1993)A.3. Determinates of unemployment in the EU, Great Britain (1974-1993)A.4. Determinates of unemployment in the EU, Italy (1974-1993)
B: Analysis of unemployment in the Federal Republic of GermanyB.1. Growth of unemployment in the Federal Republic of Germany (1984-1991)B.2. Output and unemployment in the Federal Republic of Germany (1961-1990)
C: Basic numbers: International comparisonC.1. Unemployment in EU countries, the USA, Japan and Switzerland (1960-1996)C.2. Gainful employments in EU countries, the USA, Japan and Switzerland (after inland and residency concept) (1960-1996)C.3. Employees in EU countries, the USA and Japan (1960-1996)C.4. Population in EU countries, the USA and Japan (1960-1996)
Youth unemployment rose sharply as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent sector lockdowns in the UK and across the world with 18.5% of young people aged 15-24, unemployed across EU, 40% in Spain (European Parliament Study, 2021), and 14.9% in the UK (House of Commons Library, 2023). Although, the employment rates are showing some recovery, research shows that youth unemployment has delayed long-term negative impacts on future well-being, health and job satisfaction of individuals. It increases young people’s chances of being unemployed in later years and carry a wage penalty (Bell and Blanchflower, 2011). Young people (15-24 year olds) are also more likely to work part time, often not out of choice (Pay Rise Campaign 2015), are at higher risk of ‘in-work poverty’ (Hick and Lanau 2018), more likely to be employed in low-paid and insecure jobs (across OECD countries). In the UK, labour market disadvantage is coupled with the rising cost of higher education and crucially the tightening of social security conditionality through Welfare Reform (since 2012) which could be linked to a drop in eligible young people claiming welfare support (Wells 2018). A vast body of literature has emerged in the West on youth policies and the nature of welfare state (Esping-Andersen 1990; Taylor-Gooby 2004; Wallace and Bendit 2009; Pierson 2011). It, however, remains silent on the crucial question of devolution. This ESRC funded research examines the impact of devolution on welfare provision and the sub-state welfare regimes in the UK in the focused context of youth unemployment. The project is progressing in three phases (Wave 1: 2020-21 / Wave 2: 2022-23). Wave1 identified, categorised and compared scales and types of civil society involvement in youth unemployment policy between the three devolved nations of the UK: England, Scotland and Wales. In doing so examined the implications of these differences for both youth unemployment provision and devolved policy arrangements. It has provided an internationally salient analysis located in the global phenomenon of state reconfiguration, the emergence of sub-state welfare regimes and the adoption of welfare pluralism. The research found that devolved social policy in Scotland and, to a lesser extent, Wales goes some way to mitigating the work first policy approach emanating from Westminster. Crucial to this are the key points of convergence and contention between devolved (education) and non-devolved (welfare) areas of youth employment policy on the ground (Pearce and Lagana 2023). The way in which these key points of policy tension play-out in key institutional areas like Jobcentre Plus, is the focus of the second phase of project. Wave 2 focused on ground level sites of service delivery (2022-2023). Research shows that the policy structures and the perceptions of frontline staff about the policy provisions and people claiming them, shape the nature, attitudes and processes of service delivery, and have implications for service claimants and unemployment addressal (Cagliesi and Hawkes 2015; Fletcher 2011; Fletcher and Redman 2022; Rosenthal and Peccei 2006). This phase of project was a more in-depth, critical and comparative examination of the way policy plays out on the ground through a systematic investigation of the perspectives of frontline staff interacting with the young people, in the specific context of devolution. We interviewed frontline staff in England, Scotland and Wales to study how policy is perceived and translated on ground level at the sites of service delivery in these three devolved nations from the following five categories: 1). Work Coaches (Jobcentre Plus- All ages) 2). Youth Employability Coaches (Jobcentre Plus- Young People) 3). Additional Work Coaches (Youth Hubs) 4). Careers Wales / Fair Start / National Careers Service Advisers 5). Civil Society job advisers (CWVYS/Skills Development Scotland /Youth Employment UK) This research will continue to take advantage of the UK’s unique, asymmetrical devolved arrangements to address the identified gap in research examining youth (un)employment under devolved systems of governance. The broader aim is to critique the notion of 'one UK welfare state' and, in doing so, progress our understanding of the impact of decentralisation, devolution and territorial rescaling on welfare state formation across Western Europe.
Not seeing a result you expected?
Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.
Compulsory payments made by general government in respect of their employees. Voluntary and imputed contributions are excluded from these data. Contributions for the following types of social security benefits would, inter alia, be included: unemployment insurance benefits and supplements, accident, injury and sickness benefits, old-age, disability and survivors’ pensions, family allowances, reimbursements for medical and hospital expenses or provision of hospital or medical services. Contributions may be levied on both employees and employers.