Graph and download economic data for Job Openings: Total Nonfarm (JTSJOL) from Dec 2000 to Aug 2025 about job openings, vacancy, nonfarm, and USA.

With the collapse of the U.S. housing market and the subsequent financial crisis on Wall Street in 2007 and 2008, economies across the globe began to enter into deep recessions. What had started out as a crisis centered on the United States quickly became global in nature, as it became apparent that not only had the economies of other advanced countries (grouped together as the G7) become intimately tied to the U.S. financial system, but that many of them had experienced housing and asset price bubbles similar to that in the U.S.. The United Kingdom had experienced a huge inflation of housing prices since the 1990s, while Eurozone members (such as Germany, France and Italy) had financial sectors which had become involved in reckless lending to economies on the periphery of the EU, such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal. Other countries, such as Japan, were hit heavily due their export-led growth models which suffered from the decline in international trade. Unemployment during the Great Recession As business and consumer confidence crashed, credit markets froze, and international trade contracted, the unemployment rate in the most advanced economies shot up. While four to five percent is generally considered to be a healthy unemployment rate, nearing full employment in the economy (when any remaining unemployment is not related to a lack of consumer demand), many of these countries experienced rates at least double that, with unemployment in the United States peaking at almost 10 percent in 2010. In large countries, unemployment rates of this level meant millions or tens of millions of people being out of work, which led to political pressures to stimulate economies and create jobs. By 2012, many of these countries were seeing declining unemployment rates, however, in France and Italy rates of joblessness continued to increase as the Euro crisis took hold. These countries suffered from having a monetary policy which was too tight for their economies (due to the ECB controlling interest rates) and fiscal policy which was constrained by EU debt rules. Left with the option of deregulating their labor markets and pursuing austerity policies, their unemployment rates remained over 10 percent well into the 2010s. Differences in labor markets The differences in unemployment rates at the peak of the crisis (2009-2010) reflect not only the differences in how economies were affected by the downturn, but also the differing labor market institutions and programs in the various countries. Countries with more 'liberalized' labor markets, such as the United States and United Kingdom experienced sharp jumps in their unemployment rate due to the ease at which employers can lay off workers in these countries. When the crisis subsided in these countries, however, their unemployment rates quickly began to drop below those of the other countries, due to their more dynamic labor markets which make it easier to hire workers when the economy is doing well. On the other hand, countries with more 'coordinated' labor market institutions, such as Germany and Japan, experiences lower rates of unemployment during the crisis, as programs such as short-time work, job sharing, and wage restraint agreements were used to keep workers in their jobs. While these countries are less likely to experience spikes in unemployment during crises, the highly regulated nature of their labor markets mean that they are slower to add jobs during periods of economic prosperity.

This table contains figures on the characteristics of mobility within, to and from the labor market care and welfare narrow; this is an aggregate of all sectors in the care and welfare sector, excluding childcare. The reference date of the figures is the last day of each quarter, with the exception of the 4th quarter. In the 4th quarter, the last Friday before Christmas is taken as the reference date. To determine the type of mobility, the population in a quarter is compared with the population in the same quarter one year earlier. If the employee was not working in care and welfare on one of the two reference dates and was on the other, there is mobility. As a result, employees who do not work every month in care and welfare, such as employees with a flexible employment relationship or employees with a zero-hour contract, are more often regarded as mobile. The figures are classified according to the Standard Industrial Classification 2008 (SBI 2008) of Statistics Netherlands and subdivided into AZW branches and various types of mobility for both inflow and outflow. The calculations relate to employees' main jobs. This table presents figures about flows on the labor market for the small care and welfare sectors. This means that figures on flows on the labor market for the care and welfare sectors are broadly not included (for a reference to these figures, see section 3). The narrow labor market for care and welfare means that the childcare sector is not included. As a result, the figures on flows in the care and welfare labor market narrowly relate to a different population than figures on care and welfare broadly. Figures on different populations are not published in the same table. The figures on the labor market in care and welfare are presented in their own table. This table was developed in the context of the Labor Market, Care and Welfare (AZW) research programme. For more trends and developments in the field of the healthcare and welfare labor market, see azwstatline.cbs.nl (see section 3). Data available from first quarter 2010 to fourth quarter 2019. Status of the figures: All figures are provisional. As long as the figures are provisional, minimal differences may occur. Both inflow and outflow are subdivided into different categories. A ranking is maintained when dividing into categories. An employee is only assigned to one category at a time. When entering, the following ranking is maintained: re-entrants, lateral entrants and then other. In the case of outflow, the following ranking is maintained: outflow to a job in another sector outside AZW, benefit, self-employed person, pension and other. For outflow to benefits, outflow into self-employment and outflow into pension, information becomes available with a delay. In that case, employees are first classified into the categories known at that time. In a later update, employees will be reclassified and the numbers will be adjusted. Since this table has been discontinued, the data is no longer finalized. Changes as of August 27, 2020: None, the table has been discontinued. The table has been followed by the table 'Mobility of employees; AZW (narrow), mobility characteristics, region' (see section 3). Changes as of 28 May 2020: The table has been supplemented with figures for the 4th quarter of 2019. Earlier figures have been adjusted due to the use of new, more recent sources. In addition, the number of categories for outflow has been expanded. Added are outflow to self-employment and outflow to pension. Finally, the method has been improved for the calculation of the flows. Previously, jobs of an employee with a temporary layoff were merged into one job. As a result, it could happen that the runway in question was not active on the reference date, but was included as such. From now on, only outflow to a job that is active at the reference moment will be considered and the temporary cessation of the job will not be compensated. When will new numbers come out? Not applicable anymore.

National defence operates through the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF), a Crown entity funded via annual appropriations approved by Parliament under Vote Defence Force. The NZDF receives both operating and capital funding, covering the maintenance of current capabilities and investment in future platforms and infrastructure. National defence revenue is expected to expand at an annualised 4.4% through the end of 2025-26, to 5.1 billion. This trend includes a rise of 2.9% in the current year. While funding has been rising, the NZDF has faced multiple challenges over recent years. It has not met recruitment targets, with employment remaining largely stable. A tight labour market has reduced incentives to join the armed forces, which means that the New Zealand Army may struggle to raise personnel numbers to a target of 6,000 by 2035. The 2025 Budget allocated $4.2 billion in new operating funding over four years, alongside $2.7 billion in capital investment, as the Government seeks to address capability gaps, ageing assets and workforce shortage. Meanwhile, depreciation expenses surged past $760 million in 2024, reflecting the high capital intensity of the industry and the age profile of key assets. These rising fixed and operational costs have placed downwards pressure on profitability, even as top-line revenue increases. Government capital expenditure on defence is projected to rise steadily over the coming years, supported by multi-year funding commitments in the 2025 Budget and the Defence Policy Review’s capability roadmap. However, forecast spending levels are likely to reinforce the NZDF’s current trajectory rather than deliver transformational change. Although new procurement programs and recruitment incentives are expected to bolster future capacity, industry revenue is forecast to grow at a moderate annualised 4.8% through 2030-31 to 6.4 billion. Strategic reorientation towards regional partnerships and technology upgrades may open new opportunities for suppliers, but execution risks remain elevated given inflationary pressures, capital delivery backlogs and human capital gaps.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.

The Swedish income panel was originally set up in the beginning of the 90s to make studies of how immigrants assimilate in the Swedish labour market possible. It consists of large samples of foreign-born and Swedish-born persons. Income information from registers is added for nearly 40 years. In addition income information relating to spouses is also available as well as for a subset of mothers and fathers. This makes it possible to construct measures of household income based on a relatively narrow definition. However, starting in 1998 there is also more information making it possible to include children over 18 and their incomes in the family. By matching with some different additional registers information has been added for people who have been unemployed or involved in labour market programmes during the 90s, on causes of deaths for people who have deceased since 1978 and on recent arrived immigrants from various origins. It has turned out that the data-base is quite useful for analysing research-questions other than originally motivating construction of the panel. The panel has been used for cross country comparisons of immigrants in the labour market and to analyse income mobility for different breakdowns of the population, and analyses the development in cohort income. There have been analyses of social assistance receipt among immigrants as well as studies of intergeneration mobility of income, the labour market situation of young immigrants and the second generation of immigrants. On-going work includes evaluation of labour market training programmes and studies of early retirement among immigrants. Planned work includes studies of the economic transition from child to adulthood during the 80s and 90s as well as studies of how frequent immigrant children are subject to measures under the Social Service Act and the Care of Youth Persons Act. The potentials of the Swedish Income Panel can be understood if one compares it with better known income-panels in other countries. For example SWIP covers more years and has a larger sample than the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). On the other hand, the fact that information is obtained from registers only makes this Swedish panel less rich in variables. There are striking parallels between the Gothenburg Income Panel and the labour market panel at the Centre for Labour Market and Social Research in Aarhus for the Danish population.