QEF Spring 2012 (FINAL 26Mar) MC edits · QEF is to provide regular, accessible and timely...

ISSN 2009-4671

Spring 2012

AboutNERIandthispublicationThe Nevin Economic Research Institute (NERI) has been established to provideinformation, analysis and economic policy alternatives. Further information aboutNERImaybeobtainedatourwebsitewww.NERInstitute.netThis is the firstQuarterlyEconomic Facts (QEF) of the Institute.Thepurposeof theQEFis toprovideregular,accessibleandtimelystatistical informationsoastoequiptradeunionsandothersinunderstandingeconomictrendsandcomparisons.Alldataaresourced fromofficialsourceswithaclear linktothewebsiteorpublication fromwheretheyaredrawn.Everycarehasbeentakentoensurethatthedatawerevalidatthetimeofthisrelease.This first releaseofQuarterlyEconomicFacts is complementedbyanotherrelease–QuarterlyEconomicObserverwhichisavailableontheNERIwebsite.InthepreparationofthisQEFthefollowingstaffoftheInstitutewereinvolved:TomHealy,MicheálCollins,PaulMacFlynnandRoryO’Farrell.WhilethispublicationistheresponsibilityoftheNERIthehelpanddirectcontributionofthefollowingcolleaguesin various trade unions associated with NERI is acknowledged and appreciated:LorraineMulligan,MarieSherlock,PaulSweeneyandMichaelTaft.

The Nevin Economic Research Institute

Quarterly Economic Facts

Spring 2012

NERI • Quarterly Economic Facts • Spring 2012

1

Overview ................................................................................................................................3

1 PeopleinPaidWork..................................................................................................................5

Indicator1.1aEmploymentandUnemploymentTrendsintheRepublicofIreland ..............................................................................................................................................7 Indicator1.1bEmploymentandUnemploymentTrendsinNorthernIreland....9 Indicator1.2aEmploymentChangebySectorintheROI–PeaktoPresent......11 Indicator1.2bEmploymentChangebySectorinNorthernIreland–PeaktoPresent ...........................................................................................................................................13 Indicator1.3EmploymentVolatilitysince2008............................................................15

2 PeopleoutofWork.................................................................................................................17

Indicator2.1TheRateofUnemploymentacrossEuropeanUnionMemberStates ...........................................................................................................................................19 Indicator2.2RatesofUnemploymentamongYoungPeopleacrossEuropeanUnionMemberStates................................................................................................................21 Indicator2.3Long‐termUnemploymentTrends(RepublicofIreland)...............23 Indicator2.4Under‐employmentacrossEuropeanUnionMemberStates........25 Indicator2.5Under‐employmentoverTime(RepublicofIreland).......................27 Indicator2.6UnemployedPersonsperJobVacancy....................................................29

3 LabourCosts.............................................................................................................................31

Indicator3.1aCostofEmployingLabouracrossAdvancedEUeconomies(EU15) ...........................................................................................................................................33 Indicator3.1bHowmuchdoesitcosttoemploylabourintheAccommodationandFoodsectorsacrosssomeadvancedEUeconomies?(EU15)..........................35 Indicator3.2ComparingLabourCostsintheCivilServiceacrossOECDcountries(ClericalOfficer)......................................................................................................37

4 DistributionofIncomeandWealth...................................................................................41

Indicator4.1IncomeInequalityoverTime......................................................................43 Indicator4.2WealthperCapita............................................................................................45 Indicator4.3ShareofWagesinTotalIncome.................................................................47

5 PovertyandSocialExclusion..............................................................................................49

Indicator5.1PovertyandDeprivationintheRepublicofIreland..........................51 Indicator5.2ChildPovertyintheROI................................................................................53 Indicator5.3InWork‐PovertyintheROI.........................................................................55


2

6 SocialWelfarePayments......................................................................................................57

Indicator6.1UnemploymentBenefitsComparedtoEarnings(forOECDcountries).......................................................................................................................................59 Indicator6.2UnemploymentBenefitsComparedtoEarningsintheRepublicofIrelandandtheUnitedKingdom...........................................................................................61

7 PublicFinances........................................................................................................................63

Indicator7.1 TrendsinPublicExpenditureandRevenue(EU27andRepublicofIreland)...........................................................................................................................................65 Indicator7.2GovernmentRevenueas%GDP(EU27andRepublicofIreland)67 Indicator7.3GeneralGovernmentDeficitas%GDP(2011)....................................69 Indicator7.4GeneralGovernmentDebtas%GDP........................................................71


3

OverviewRecentyearshaveseenahugegrowthinthesupply,rangeandtimelinessofdatafromavarietyofofficialagenciesincludingtheCentralStatisticsOffice(CSO),theNorthernIreland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA), Eurostat, the Organisation forEconomic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the International Monetary Fund(IMF) aswell as other agencies.Much of the data are publicly and readily availableonlinetogetherwithdetailednotesaboutthedata.TheQEFisnotintendedtoprovideanalternative to thesesources. Itprovidesa signpost toavailablesourcesofdata. Itselects a few indicators from key areas of concern: employment, unemployment,earningsandlabourcost,inequalityinincome,poverty,publicfinancesanddebt.It is intended to expand the selection of indicator over time to cover a somewhatbroaderrangeoftopicsundereachheading.However,toavoidinformationover‐load(anotinfrequentfeatureofmanyofthemajorstatisticalsources)itisplannedtokeepthe overall number of indicators shown in this and subsequent editions within areasonable and manageable size. Comments, queries and suggestions are welcomebothinrelationtothecontentaswellastheoverallscopeofthispublication.Eachindicatorislaidoutasfollows:

Definition Chart DataTable TechnicalNotesandSources.

For the purposes of comparisons across European States typically two averages areusedwherepossible:EU27forallMemberStatesandEU15forthoseMemberStatesthatwereintheUnionpriorto2004.TheseconstituteamorehomogeneousgroupintermsofGDPpercapita.Unlessotherwisestated,averagesatthelevelofEU27orEU15areunweightedmeans.Pleasenotethat,unlessotherwisespecified,allreferencesto‘Ireland’inthiseditionofQEFrefers to theRepublicof Irelandonly. It isplanned toexpenddata coverage forNorthernIrelandalongwiththeRepublicformoreindicatorsinfutureeditionsofQEF.


4


5

1 PeopleinPaidWork


6


7

Indicator1.1aEmploymentandUnemploymentTrendsintheRepublicofIreland

IndicatordefinedShareofemployed,unemployedandeconomicallyinactiveinpopulationofworkingageintheRepublicofIrelandReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2010.Dataextractedon13March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart1.1a Shareofemployed,unemployedand‘economicallyinactive’

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Unemployed Economically Inactive Employed


8

Table1.1aTotalpopulationandshareofemployed,unemployedand‘economicallyinactive’

Totalaged15‐64

'000s Employed Inactive Unemployed1995 2,284.2 54.4% 38.2% 7.5%1996 2,334.8 55.4% 37.5% 7.4%1997 2,387.8 57.6% 36.9% 6.5%1998 2,457.2 60.6% 35.1% 5.1%1999 2,502.7 63.3% 33.4% 3.9%2000 2,546.2 65.2% 32.4% 3.0%2001 2,600.6 65.8% 32.2% 2.5%2002 2,660.8 65.5% 31.9% 2.9%2003 2,711.2 65.5% 31.7% 3.1%2004 2,761.3 66.3% 31.2% 3.1%2005 2,831.0 67.6% 29.2% 3.1%2006 2,919.3 68.7% 28.1% 3.2%2007 2,996.9 69.2% 27.5% 3.4%2008 3,041.1 67.6% 28.0% 4.4%2009 3,029.4 61.8% 29.2% 8.5%2010 3,001.8 60.0% 30.2% 9.7%

InterpretationSince 1995 there has been a gradual decline in the proportion of ‘economicallyinactive’ people. This trend has been partially reversed by the recession. The term‘economicallyinactive’isusedbyeconomistsandstatisticianstorefertopersonswhoarenotinpaidemployment(fortypicallymorethanonehourinthepreviousweekatthetimeofsurvey).Itisnotintended,here,toimplythatpersonsactivelyengagedinactivities that are not remunerated in the labour market are not contributing verysignificantlytoeconomicandsocialwell‐being.

TechnicalNotes:Thereisastatisticaldiscrepancybetweentotalpopulationaged15‐64(asrecordedintheQuarterlyNationalHouseholdSurvey)andthesumofemployed,unemployedandtheeconomicallyinactive.Theactualpercentages(ofpopulation)arepresentedinthetable,whileinthegrapheconomicallyinactiveistreatedasaresidual.Thediscrepancyisatitslargestin1997,at1%ofthepopulation.

Source(s):EurostatLabourForceSurvey(lfsi_emp,lfsi_act_a,lfsa_ugan,lfsa_igan)


9

Indicator1.1bEmploymentandUnemploymentTrendsinNorthernIreland

IndicatordefinedShareofemployed,unemployedandeconomicallyinactiveinpopulationofworkingageinNorthernIrelandReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2011.Dataextractedon13March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart1.1bShareofemployed,unemployedand‘economicallyinactive’

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Unemployed Economically Inactive Employed


10

Table1.1bTotalpopulationandshareofemployed,unemployedandeconomicallyinactive

Totalaged16‐64

'000s EmployedEconomically

Inactive Unemployed1995 1,003 60.4% 31.8% 7.8%1996 1,013 63.9% 29.5% 6.6%1997 1,024 64.3% 29.4% 6.3%1998 1,032 65.0% 28.9% 6.1%1999 1,039 65.1% 29.8% 5.1%2000 1,045 65.0% 30.3% 4.7%2001 1,055 65.0% 30.6% 4.4%2002 1,064 65.3% 30.3% 4.4%2003 1,072 68.6% 27.5% 3.9%2004 1,080 65.4% 30.9% 3.7%2005 1,092 67.1% 29.5% 3.4%2006 1,107 67.4% 29.5% 3.1%2007 1,121 68.7% 28.4% 2.9%2008 1,131 68.1% 28.6% 3.3%2009 1,139 64.7% 30.9% 4.4%2010 1,146 65.9% 29.2% 4.9%2011 1,152 67.0% 27.8% 5.2%

InterpretationThe high rate of economic activity is reflected in a very high claimant count forNorthernIrelandcomparedtotherestoftheUK.

TechnicalNotes:Economic Activity, Employment and Unemployment rate are all calculated as apercentageoftheWorkingagepopulation.Theterm'working‐age'referstothe16‐64populationforbothmalesandfemales.Unemploymentandeconomicallyinactivearecalculatedasresidualsfromemploymentandeconomicallyactive.Source(s):LFSKeydataHistoricalSeries(1992‐2011)here.


11

Indicator1.2aEmploymentChangebySectorintheRepublicofIreland–PeaktoPresent

IndicatordefinedEmploymentatNace2sectorallevelcomparingthelevelinQ42007withcurrentemploymentlevels(seasonallyadjusted).ReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatorisQ4of2011.Dataextractedon9March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart1.2a Employmentbysectorbetweenthepeakin2007tothelatestavailabledatain2011intheRepublicofIreland,(seasonallyadjusted)

0 100 200 300 400

Administrative and support service activities

Information and communication

Agriculture, forestry and fishing

Transportation and storage

Professional, scientific and technical activities

Other NACE activities

Public administration and defence; compulsorysocial security

Financial, insurance and real estate activities

Construction

Accommodation and food service activities

Education

Human health and social work activities

Industry

Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motorvehicles and motorcycles

Q4 2011

Q4 2007

'000s


12

Table1.2aEmploymenttrends Q42007

‘000sQ42011

‘000sAdministrativeandsupportserviceactivities 82.2 64.0Informationandcommunication 70.8 76.2Agriculture,forestryandfishing 114.1 80.3Transportationandstorage 98.0 91.9Professional,scientificandtechnicalactivities 113.0 94.6OtherNACEactivities 101.4 95.2Publicadministrationanddefence;compulsorysocialsecurity

103.4 102.3Financial,insuranceandrealestateactivities 104.0 102.4Construction 262.2 107.0Accommodationandfoodserviceactivities 133.4 114.8Education 138.0 140.7Humanhealthandsocialworkactivities 220.9 237.3Industry 284.2 238.1Wholesaleandretailtrade;repairofmotorvehiclesandmotorcycles

313.8 262.9

Interpretation:The wholesale and retail sector has remained the largest employment sectorthroughouttheboomandtherecession,notwithstandingthelossofsome16.2%ofalljobsinthesectorsincepeakinginQ42007.ThreeouteveryfiveconstructionworkershavelosttheirjobsduringtheperiodQ42007toQ42011,butthereissometentativeevidencetosuggestthatthelossofdirectconstructionemploymentisnowclosetothebottom.Industrialemploymenthascontractedby18%sinceQ22008,butitrecordeditsfirstnetexpansioninemploymentinQ42011withanadditional5800employedinthesectorTechnicalNotes:TheCSO’sQuarterlyNationalHouseholdSurvey is a conductedeachweekovera totalsampleof39,000householdsandispublishedonaquarterlybasis.Thehouseholdsaresurveyedoverfiveconsecutivequarters.TheILOdefinitionofthelabourforceincludesall those employed and unemployed over the age of 15, but excludes the inactivepopulation.TheNACEcodesareemploymentsectorclassifications.Seasonallyadjusteddataisdata thathasbeen treated forcalendareffects, seasonalvariationsetc.and isarrivedusing theX‐12‐ARIMAmodel. The seasonally adjusted factor is revised eachquarterforallpreviousquarters.

Source(s):CSOQuarterlyNationalHouseholdSurvey,Q42011.


13

Indicator:1.2bEmploymentChangebySectorinNorthernIreland–PeaktoPresent

IndicatordefinedEmployeejobsbyStandardIndustrialClassification(2007):allpersonscomparingthelevelinJune2007withcurrentemploymentlevels.ReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatorisJune2011.Dataextractedon13March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethethirdeditionofthispublication(bySeptember2012).Chart1.2bThechangeintheemployeejobssectorbetween2007tothelatestavailabledatain2011inNorthernIreland

0 50000 100000 150000

Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing

Mining and quarrying

Manufacturing

Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply

Water supply, sewerage, waste management…

Construction

Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor…

Transportation and storage

Accommodation and food service activities

Information and communication

Financial and insurance activities

Real estate activities

Professional, scientific and technical activities

Administrative and support service activities

Public administration and defence; compulsory…

Education

Human health and social work activities

Arts, entertainment and recreation

Other service activities

Jun‐11

Jun‐07


14

Table1.2bThechangeintheemployeejobssectorbetween2007tothelatestavailabledatain2011inNorthernIreland

SICClassificationJun‐07‘000s

Jun‐11‘000s

Agriculture,ForestryandFishing 12.0 11.84Miningandquarrying 2.27 1.59Manufacturing 84.07 74.30Electricity,gas,steamandairconditioningsupply 1.93 1.41Watersupply,sewerage,wastemanagementandremediationactivities 4.67 4.93Construction 44.71 32.91Wholesaleandretailtrade;repairofmotorvehiclesandmotorcycles 125.20 125.32Transportationandstorage 24.69 25.35Accommodationandfoodserviceactivities 43.02 41.68Informationandcommunication 16.07 15.43Financialandinsuranceactivities 18.79 19.24Realestateactivities 6.96 6.65Professional,scientificandtechnicalactivities 22.97 23.51Administrativeandsupportserviceactivities 38.93 42.32Publicadministrationanddefence;compulsorysocialsecurity 58.90 56.87Education 73.24 71.32Humanhealthandsocialworkactivities 113.79 115.87Arts,entertainmentandrecreation 13.58 14.61Otherserviceactivities 13.78 13.74Total 719.59 698.89

InterpretationOveralltotalemploymenthasfallenby3%.Thefallinconstructionwas26%and11%inmanufacturing.

TechnicalNotes:Estimates of the number of employee jobs are obtained from the QuarterlyEmploymentSurvey.Estimatesoftotalemployeejobsshouldbeaccuratetowithin+/‐1%oftheCensusofEmploymenttotal. Itshouldbenotedthatthesurveycountsthenumberofjobsratherthanthenumberofpersonswithjobs.Overallemployment(i.e.employeeandself‐employment)estimatesfortheagriculturalsectorareprovided,onanannualbasis,fromtheDepartmentofAgricultureandRuralDevelopment’s(DARD)FarmCensus.

Source(s):NISRAAbstractofStatisticsOnline.


15

Indicator:1.3EmploymentVolatilitysince2008

IndicatordefinedTheseasonallyadjusted(sa)quarterlymovementsarechartedtodemonstratepotentialsignsofvolatilityorstabilisation.ReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatorisQ4of2011.Dataextractedon9March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart1.3SeasonallyadjustedquarterlymovementsinemploymentQ12008‐Q42011(000s)

‐80

‐70

‐60

‐50

‐40

‐30

‐20

‐10

0

10

20


16

Table1.3 SeasonallyadjustedquarterlymovementsinemploymentQ12008‐Q42011

Period Changeinemployment(sa)‘000sQ12008 ‐2.4Q22008 ‐24.5Q32008 ‐22.8Q42008 ‐34.2Q12009 ‐77.5Q22009 ‐43.0Q32009 ‐26.2Q42009 ‐20.0Q12010 ‐19.2Q22010 ‐16.9Q32010 ‐11.6Q42010 ‐16.9Q12011 ‐8.5Q22011 ‐3.3Q32011 ‐14.4Q42011 +10.0

InterpretationThenumbers inemploymentgrewby10,000 inQ42011(seasonallyadjusted)– thefirstincreaserecordedafter15consecutivequartersoflossessincetotalemploymentbegantofallinQ42007.

TechnicalNotes:TheCSO’sQuarterlyNationalHouseholdSurvey is a conductedeachweekovera totalsampleof39,000householdsandispublishedonaquarterlybasis.Thesehouseholdsare surveyed over five consecutive quarters. The ILOdefinitionof the labour forceincluded all those employed and unemployed over the age of 15, but excludes theinactivepopulation.TheNACEcodesareemploymentsectorclassifications.SeasonallyadjusteddataareestimatedusingtheX‐12‐ARIMAmodel.

Source(s):CSOQuarterlyNationalHouseholdsurvey


17

2 PeopleoutofWork


18


19

Indicator2.1TheRateofUnemploymentacrossEuropeanUnionMemberStates

IndicatordefinedTotalunemployedasapercentageoftheLabourForce(ILOdefinition)ReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatorisJanuary2012.Dataextractedon20March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart2.1RatesofUnemploymentJanuary2012

14.8

0 5 10 15 20 25

AustriaNetherla…Luxembo…Germany

MaltaCzech…

RomaniaBelgiumFinlandSwedenDenmarkSlovenia

UK *Italy

CyprusFranceEU 27PolandEU15

HungaryBulgariaEstonia *Slovakia

Lithuania *Latvia ***

Rep IrelandPortugal

Greece **Spain

* Dec 2011 ** Nov 2011 ***Sep 2011


20

Table2.1 RatesofUnemploymentJanuary2012Country % Country %Spain 23.3 Italy 9.2Greece** 19.9 UnitedKing* 8.3RepofIreland 14.8 Slovenia 8.2Portugal 14.8 Denmark 7.9Latvia*** 14.7 Sweden 7.6Lithuania* 14.3 Finland 7.5Slovakia 13.3 Belgium 7.4Estonia* 11.7 Romania 7.2Bulgaria 11.5 CzechRepublic 6.9Hungary 10.9 Malta 6.5EU15 10.2 Germany 5.8EU27 10.1 Luxembourg 5.1Poland 10.1 Netherlands 5.0France 10.0 Austria 4.0Cyprus 9.6

Notes:datafrom*Dec2011**Nov2011***Sep2011

InterpretationTherateofunemploymentvariedconsiderablyacrossMemberStatesatthebeginningof2012.Theaverageacross thewholeUnionwas just inexcessof10%while in theRepublicofIrelandtheratewas14.8%.TechnicalNotes:The standarddefinitionsof the International LabourOrganisation (ILO) areusedbyEurostattocompareratesofeconomicactivityinthelabourmarketinEuropeanUnionMember States. Data refer to all unemployed persons aged 15 to 74whowere notemployedduring the referenceweek, had actively soughtworkduring thepast fourweeksandwerereadytobeginworkingimmediatelyorwithintwoweeks.Employedpersons are all persons whoworked at least one hour for pay or profit during thereferenceweekorweretemporarilyabsentfromsuchwork.Theunemploymentrateis thenumberofpeopleunemployedasapercentageof the labour force.The labourforce is the total number of people employed and unemployed. All data refer toseasonallyadjusteddataforJanuary2012exceptinthefollowingcountrieswherethereferencedateisearlier:Estonia,Greece,Latvia,LithuaniaandtheUnitedKingdom.Source(s):EurostatonlineDatabasehere.


21

Indicator2.2RatesofUnemploymentamongYoungPeopleacrossEuropeanUnionMemberStates

IndicatordefinedTotalunemployedundertheageof25asapercentageofthecorrespondingLabourForce(ILOdefinition)ReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatorisJanuary2012.Dataextractedon20March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart2.2 RatesofUnemploymentpersonsaged<25years‐January2012

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

GermanyAustria

NetherlandsMalta

LuxembourgDenmarkSlovenia *

Czech RepublicFinlandBelgiumEU 15

SwedenEU 27

United King *France

Romania ***Estonia *Cyprus *HungaryPolandBulgaria

Rep IrelandLatvia ***

ItalyLithuania *

PortugalSlovakia

Greece **Spain

29.6

* Dec 2011 ** Nov 2011 ***Sep 2011


22

Table2.2 RatesofUnemploymentamongpersonsaged<25‐January2012

Country % Country %Spain 49.9 EU27 22.4Greece** 48.1 UnitedKing* 22.4Slovakia 36.0 Sweden 22.3Portugal 35.1 EU15 21.4Lithuania* 34.4 Belgium 21.2Italy 31.1 Finland 19.9Latvia*** 29.9 CzechRepublic 19.8RepIreland 29.6 Slovenia* 15.3Bulgaria 28.9 Denmark 14.6Poland 27.5 Luxembourg 13.9Hungary 27.3 Malta 13.8Cyprus* 27.0 Netherlands 9.0Estonia* 25.1 Austria 8.9Romania*** 23.8 Germany 7.8France 23.3

Notes:datafrom*Dec2011**Nov2011***Sep2011

InterpretationTherateofyouthunemployment(forpersonsundertheageof25)is,onaverage,overtwicetherateforallpersons.However,insomeMemberStatesitiscurrentlyalmostonehalfoftheentireyounglabourforce.TechnicalNotes:SeeNotesforIndicator2.1,above.Source(s):EurostatonlineDatabasehere.


23

Indicator2.3Long‐termUnemploymentTrends(RepublicofIreland)

IndicatordefinedLong‐termunemployedasapercentageofallunemployedReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatorisQ3of2011.Dataextractedon20March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart2.3 RatesofLong‐termUnemployment(>12months)%oftotalunemployment

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

07Q1 08Q1 09Q1 10Q1 11Q1

Rep Ireland LT U% EU 15 LT U%


24

Table2.3 RatesofLong‐termUnemployment(>12months)%oftotalunemployment

Period RepIrelandLTU% EU15LTU%2007Q1 29.2 40.52007Q2 30.1 40.82007Q3 30.2 39.72007Q4 28.5 39.62008Q1 29.1 37.82008Q2 29.4 37.62008Q3 25.7 35.22008Q4 25.5 33.62009Q1 24.3 30.72009Q2 24.0 32.12009Q3 28.3 33.62009Q4 38.7 35.72010Q1 44.5 37.42010Q2 46.6 39.92010Q3 49.8 40.72010Q4 54.7 41.72011Q1 58.8 41.52011Q2 57.6 42.42011Q3 59.4 42.4

InterpretationAs total unemployment rates have increased across Europe the proportion of totalunemployedwho are long‐term unemployed has increased especially since the firstQuarterof2009.TherateintheRepublicofIrelandhasrisensharplyandovertooktheEU15average inthe lastQuarterof2009.Currently, long‐termunemployedaccountfor almost 60% of all unemployed in the Republic compared to just under 30% in2007.TechnicalNotes:SeeNotesforIndicator2.1,above.Source(s):EurostatonlineDatabasehere.


25

Indicator2.4Under‐employmentacrossEuropeanUnionMemberStates

IndicatordefinedRatesofunemploymentandunder‐employmentaspercentageof‘widelabourforce’Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2010.Dataextractedon20March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart2.4 RatesofUnemployment/Under‐employment‐2010

20.7

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Czech RepubNetherlandsLuxembourg

AustriaSloveniaBelgiumCyprus

DenmarkGermany

PolandPortugalFrance

United KingdFinlandGreeceSwedenHungary

EU 27EU 15

SlovakiaBulgaria

ItalyRep IrelandLithuaniaEstoniaSpainLatvia


26

Table2.4 RatesUnemployment/Under‐employment–2010Country % Country %Latvia 29.7 United Kingdom 16.4 Spain 28.7 France 16.3 Estonia 23.4 Portugal 15.1 Lithuania 22.3 Poland 15.1 Republic Irel 20.7 Germany 14.9 Italy 19.4 Denmark 12.8 Bulgaria 18.3 Cyprus 11.6 Slovakia 17.5 Belgium 11.4 EU 15 17.2 Slovenia 11.2 EU 27 17.0 Austria 11.2 Hungary 16.8 Luxembourg 11.1 Sweden 16.7 Netherlands 9.7 Greece 16.5 Czech Repub 9.3 Finland 16.4

InterpretationAsjobopportunitiesnarrowanincreasingnumberofworkersdropoutofthelabourmarket defined as all persons at work or actively seeking, and available for, work.Adding together all persons in employment including under‐employed, unemployed(ILO definition) and persons available for work but not actively seeking work(discouragedworkers)andpersonsnot immediatelyavailablebut seekingwork it ispossible to estimate the total rate of unemployment and under‐employment as aproportionofthe‘widelabourforce’.

TechnicalNotes:Underemployed part‐timeworkers are persons working part‐time who wish toworkadditionalhoursandareavailabletodoso.Part‐timework isrecordedasself‐reportedbyindividuals.Persons seeking work but not immediately available are the sum of personsneitheremployednorunemployedwho:(a)areactivelyseekingworkduringthelast4weeksbutnotavailableforworkinthenext2weeks;or(b)foundajobtostartinlessthan3monthsandarenotavailableforworkinthenext2weeks;or(c)foundajobtostart in3monthsormore;or(d)arepassivelyseekingworkduringthe last4weeksandareavailableforworkinthenext2weeks.Persons available to work but not seeking are persons neither employed norunemployedwhowanttowork,areavailableforworkinthenext2weeksbutarenotseekingwork.

Source(s):EurostatonlineDatabasehere.


27

Indicator2.5Under‐employmentoverTime(RepublicofIreland)

IndicatordefinedRatesofunemployment(ILOdefinition)andtotalunder‐employmentincludingunemployment

ReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatorisQ4of2011.Dataextractedon20March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart2.5 RatesofUnder‐employmentandUnemploymentsince2008‐ROI

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2008Q3 2009Q3 2010Q3 2011Q3

Under‐Employed Unemployed


28

Table2.5 RatesofUnder‐employmentandUnemploymentsince2008‐ROI

Period Unemployed Under‐EmployedS32008Q3 7.0 13.92008Q4 7.6 13.62009Q1 10.2 17.62009Q2 12.0 20.02009Q3 12.7 20.92009Q4 12.4 20.42010Q1 12.9 21.02010Q2 13.6 22.12010Q3 13.9 22.62010Q4 14.1 23.02011Q1 14.1 23.32011Q2 14.3 24.02011Q3 14.8 25.02011Q4 14.3 24.5

InterpretationAsjobopportunitiesnarrowanincreasingnumberofworkersdropoutofthelabourmarket defined as all persons at work or actively seeking, and available for, work.Adding together all persons in employment including under‐employed, unemployed(ILO definition) and persons available for work but not actively seeking work(discouragedworkers)andpersonsnot immediatelyavailablebut seekingwork it ispossible to estimate the total rate of unemployment and under‐employment as aproportionofthe‘widelabourforce’.TechnicalNotes: S1: UnemployedplusdiscouragedworkersasapercentageoftheLabourForceplusdiscouragedworkersS2:Unemployedplusmarginallyattachedplusothersnotineducationwhowantworkas a percentage of the Labour Force plus marginally attached plus others not ineducationwhowantwork.S3:Unemployedplusmarginallyattachedplusothersnotineducationwhowantworkplus underemployed part‐time workers as a percentage of the Labour Force plusmarginallyattachedplusothersnotineducationwhowantwork.Source(s):CSOQuarterlyNationalHouseholdSurveyDecember2011(forindicatorsofpotentiallaboursupply)here.andCSOStatbank–fordataonunemployment.


29

Indicator2.6UnemployedPersonsperJobVacancy

IndicatordefinedRatioofthestockofunemployedtothestockofjobvacanciesReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatorisQ2of2011.Dataextractedon2March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart2.6 Ratioofunemployedtojobvacanciesinthesecondquarterof2011–EU15

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Austria

Germany

Netherlands

Luxembourg

UnitedKingdom

EU15 (12countries)

Finland

Sweden

Denmark

France

Italy

Republic ofIreland

Portugal

50.0


30

Table2.6 Ratioofunemployedtojobvacanciesinthesecondquarterof2011–EU15

Country RatioPortugal 61.2RepublicofIreland 50.0Italy 28.6France 26.8Denmark 10.7Sweden 7.6Finland 7.4EU15(12countries) 7.1UnitedKingdom 6.8Luxembourg 4.0Netherlands 3.3Germany 3.0Austria 2.8

InterpretationTheratioofunemployedtojobvacanciesisameasureoftheextentoflabourmarkettightness. The higher the ratio the less opportunity for unemployed individuals toemployment.TechnicalNotes: DataarepublishedbytheCommissiononaquarterlybasis.Twosourcesareusedforthis indicator: the EU Job Vacancy survey and the Labour Force Survey (bothundertakenbyEurostat)Stockofunemployed:unadjusted,age15‐64.DataarenotavailableforBelgium,Greece,andSpain.ILOdefinition.Stock of jobvacancies: number of paid posts that are newly created, unoccupied, orabouttobecomevacantforwhichtheemployeristakingactivestepsandispreparedto take further steps to find a suitable candidate from outside the enterpriseconcerned, and which the employer intends to fill either immediately or within aspecificperiodoftime.Agricultureandthepublicsectorareexcludedfromthestockofjobvacancies.Source(s):European Vacancy Monitor of the European Commission (DG Employment, SocialAffairsandInclusion).Issueno.5/January2012here.


31

3 LabourCosts


32


33

Indicator3.1aCostofEmployingLabouracrossAdvancedEUeconomies(EU15)

IndicatordefinedHourlycostofemployinglabourfortheBusinessEconomy(Eurowith,andwithout,adjustmentfordifferencesincostoflivingPPS)Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2010.Dataextractedon20February2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart3.1aHourlyLabourCosts–BusinessEconomy(EU15)in2010

Note:Datafor2010werenotavailableforthefollowingEU15countries:Greece,ItalyandNetherlands

0 10 20 30 40 50

Portugal

United Kingdom

Spain

Republic of…

Austria

EU15 average…

Finland

Germany

Luxembourg

France

Sweden

Belgium

Denmark

€ (PPS) € (no PPS)

No PPS


34

Table3.1a HourlyLabourCosts–BusinessEconomy(EU15) €(noPPS) €(PPS)

Denmark 38.43 26.96Belgium 37.70 33.79Sweden 35.99 30.05France 33.15 29.64Luxembourg 32.46 27.07Germany 29.20 28.02Finland 28.97 23.57EU15average* 28.63 25.25Austria 28.23 26.37RepublicofIreland 27.76 23.48Spain 20.25 20.94UnitedKingdom 19.20 19.15Portugal 12.17 13.90Note:*Datafor2010werenotavailableforthefollowingEU15countries:Greece,ItalyandNetherlands.Therefore,averageisfor12countriesonly.

InterpretationComparativedataofwhatitcoststoemploylabourmaybepresentedinanumberofways.Inthispresentationthefocusisonthecostperhouradjusted,andnotadjusted,fordifferencesinthecostoflivinginacountryasmeasuredbyPPS–thepurchasingpowerstandardestimatedbyEurostat.

TechnicalNotes:The total business economy includes all sectors of industry and services excludingpublicadministration.Agricultureisnotincluded.Data forGreece, Italy andNetherlandswerenot available for2010.Greece reported€17.70in2009(latestyearavailable),Italyreported€24.41in2008andNetherlandsreported29.23in2008.

Source(s):Eurostatonlinedatabasehere.


35

Indicator3.1bHowmuchdoesitcosttoemploylabourintheAccommodationandFoodsectorsacrosssomeadvancedEUeconomies?(EU15)

IndicatordefinedHourlycostofemployinglabourfortheAccommodationandFoodSector(Eurowith,andwithout,adjustmentfordifferencesincostoflivingPPS)Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2010.Dataextractedon24March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart3.1bHourlyLabourCosts–AccommodationandFood

sector(EU15)

Note:Datafor2010werenotavailableforthefollowingEU15countries:Belgium,Greece,ItalyandNetherlands

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Portugal

United Kingdom

Spain

Austria

Germany

Republic of…

Luxembourg

EU15 average…

Sweden

France

Finland

Denmark

€ (PPS) € (no PPS)


36

Table3.1b HourlyLabourCosts–AccommodationandFoodsector(EU15)

€(noPPS) €(PPS)Denmark 27.06 18.98Finland 22.85 18.60France 22.44 20.06Sweden 21.96 18.33EU15average* 17.13 14.99Luxembourg 16.93 14.11RepublicofIreland 16.04 13.57Germany 14.30 13.72Austria 14.08 13.15Spain 13.40 13.86UnitedKingdom 10.63 10.60Portugal 8.69 9.92Note:*Datafor2010werenotavailableforthefollowingEU15countries:Belgium,Greece,ItalyandNetherlands.Therefore,averageisfor11countriesonly.

InterpretationSeeinterpretationforindicator3.1a,above.

TechnicalNotes:Seenotesforindicator3.1a,above

Source(s):Eurostatonlinedatabasehere.


37

Indicator3.2ComparingLabourCostsintheCivilServiceacrossOECDcountries(ClericalOfficer)

IndicatordefinedTotalcostof‘ExecutiveStaff’inCentralGovernmentin2009(USdollarsatconstantpurchasingpowerparity)Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2009.Dataextractedon13March2012.Nextupdateduein2013.Chart3.2Totalcostofemploying'ClericalOfficers'inthecivilserviceUS$‐2009(USDollarsatconstantpurchasingpowerparity)

‐ 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000

Slovenia

Estonia

Hungary

Great Britain

New Zealand

Republic of Ireland

Korea

Australia

OECD

Sweden

Denmark

Spain

Finland

Norway

Belgium

USA

Netherlands

Wages and salaries Employer Social contributions Working time correction

$44,184

$50,678


38

Table3.2 Totalcostofemploying'ClericalOfficers'inthecivilserviceUS$‐2009(USDollarsatconstantpurchasingpowerparity)

Wages and

salaries

Employer Social

contributions

Working time

correctionTotal

Netherlands 45,717 10,363 14,640 70,720 USA 44,808 16,471 8,197 69,476 Belgium 43,099 10,903 13,297 67,298 Norway 40,473 9,302 12,238 62,014 Finland 37,609 7,865 14,615 60,089 Spain 36,772 9,267 11,707 57,746 Denmark 38,550 5,552 12,293 56,394 Sweden 30,034 14,511 9,011 53,556 OECD 33,631 7,678 9,369 50,678 Australia 35,831 5,701 8,529 50,062 Korea 35,575 3,151 5,808 44,534 Republic of Ireland 29,940 3,219 11,026 44,184 New Zealand 35,579 2,476 5,136 43,191 Great Britain 25,075 6,719 7,996 39,791 Hungary 20,806 7,646 5,081 33,533 Estonia 18,874 7,029 4,974 30,877 Slovenia 21,117 3,400 3,865 28,381

InterpretationComparisons of the cost of employing staff across countries is challenging. In itspublicationGovernmentataGlance,OECDprovidescomparativedatainrelationtotheearningsandcostofemployingcertaincategoriesofstaff intheGeneralGovernmentsector according to an internationally agreed classificationofoccupations (ISCO‐88).Thisindicatorpresentsdataforjustonecategory–thegradeofClericalOfficeroritsequivalent in other countries. The comparison indicates that average cost peremployeeis lowerintheRepublicofIrelandthantheaverageacrossreportingOECDcountries.ThedataareexpressedinUSdollarscorrectedfordifferencesinthecostoflivingandrefer to theyear2009.The impactofpaycuts in thepublicservice in theRepublicin2010arenot,therefore,capturedinthiscomparison.TechnicalNotes:Secretaries(generalofficeclerks)(ISCO‐08411and4110)‘performarangeofclericaland administrative tasks in connection with money‐handling operations, travelarrangements,requestsforinformationandappointments.Theyrecord,prepare,sort,classify and fill information; sort, open and send mail; prepare reports andcorrespondence of a routine nature; record issue of equipment to staff; respond to


39

telephone or electronic enquiries or forward to appropriate person; check figures,prepare invoices and record details of financial transactions made; transcribeinformation onto computers; and proofread and correct copy’. The internationalcategoryof ‘Secretaries’ translates into ‘ClericalOfficer’gradestaff intheRepublicofIreland.Methodology and Definitions Note by OECD

Datareferto2009andwerecollectedbythe2010OECDsurveyontheCompensationofEmployees in Central/Federal Governments. Officials from central Ministries andAgencies responded to the survey through the OECD Public Employment andManagementWorkingParty.

Total compensation includes wages and salaries, employers' social contributions tostatutorysocialsecurityschemesorprivatelyfundedsocialinsuranceschemes,aswellasunfundedemployeesocialbenefitspaidbytheemployer,includingpensionpaymentspaidthroughthestatebudgetratherthanthroughemployersocialcontributions(mostlyforsomepay‐as‐you‐go systems).Compensationwasconverted toUSDusingPPPs forGDPfromtheOECDNationalAccountsDatabase.Workingtimeadjustmentcompensates fordifferences in timeworked (bothweeklyworking timeandholidays).A largerworkingtimeadjustmentgenerallymeansthatemployeesworkfewerhoursand/ordaysperyear.Thefocusontotalcompensationallowsacomparisonofthevaryingdegreeswithwhichgovernments remunerate their employees via social contributions or viahigherwagesandsalaries. Inmostcasesdataare forsixcentralgovernmentMinistries/Departmentsonly(Interior,Finance,Justice,Education,HealthandEnvironmentortheirequivalents).Positionsarebasedon the InternationalStandardClassificationofOccupations (ISCO).The main limitations of the data are the less‐than‐full comparability of occupationsacrosscountries, thewaycountrieshave interpretedthedefinitionofthepositions,andsome lackofclarityregardingthe levelofsocialcontributionsandthedifferingcostsoflivingacrosscountriesincapitalcities.

Compensation levelsarecalculatedbyaveragingthecompensationofthestaff inplace.(Itisnotthemiddlepointbetweentheminimumandmaximumsalary.)

ThefollowingpointsshouldalsobenotedinregardtodataprovidedfortheRepublicofIreland:

1. TheamountshowntakeintoaccountthedecreaseofthesalariesfollowingtheFinancial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Act 2009 (the publicservicepensiondeduction).

2. Theimpactofpaycutsin2010havenotbeenincluded.3. EstimatesforemployerSocialcontributions(10.45%)refertostaffhiredafter

1995(classA1). Thesocial insuranceelementof futurepension liabilities totheStateofemployingstaff is thereforecaptured in this figure.However, theoccupational element of future pension liabilities is not included. AnadjustmentbasedonNationalAccountsdatasourceshasbeenmadeforotherOECDcountriesshownintheaboveTableandChart.Hence,thepresentvaluetotheExchequeroffuturepensionliabilitiesislikelytobeunder‐estimatedforthe Republic of Ireland compared to some other OECD countries wherepensionsarefundedbyaseparateemployercontributionratherthanthrough


40

a ‘pay‐as‐yougo’mechanism.FurtheranalysisandsurveyworkisplannedbyOECDinregardtothisaspectofinternationalcomparison.

Source(s):GovernmentataGlance,OECD,Paris.Downloadtablehere.Source: 2010 OECD Survey on Compensation of Employees in Central/FederalGovernments,OECDSTANdatabase.For further country‐specific information aswell as details on themethodology usedseeAnnexD(availablehere)


41

4 DistributionofIncomeandWealth


42


43

Indicator4.1IncomeInequalityoverTime

IndicatorsdefinedWeusetwomeasurestosummarisetheincomedistribution:

1. TheGinicoefficient–anindexrangingfrom0to100where0representsaperfectlyequaldistributionofincomeand100representsaperfectlyunequaldistribution(i.e.alltheincomeisreceivedbyoneindividual).

2. Theincomequintileratio–comparesthe%ofthetotaldisposableincomereceivedbyindividualsinthebottom20%(quintile)oftheincomedistributiontothatreceivedbythetop20%.

Simply,thegreaterthesenumbers,thegreaterthelevelofincomeinequality.Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicator2010.Nextupdatedueearly2013Chart4.1a Ginicoefficient

Chart4.1bIncomequintileratio

31.8

32.4 32.4

31.7

30.7

29.3

33.9

27.0

28.0

29.0

30.0

31.0

32.0

33.0

34.0

35.0

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

5.0

5.1

5.0

4.9

4.6

4.3

5.5

4.0

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.8

5.0

5.2

5.4

5.6

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010


44

Table4.1GinicoefficientandincomequintileratioforIreland’sincomedistribution,2004‐2010

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Ginicoefficient 31.8 32.4 32.4 31.7 30.7 29.3 33.9Incomequintileratio 5.0 5.1 5.0 4.9 4.6 4.3 5.5

InterpretationBetween2004and2007Ireland’sincomedistributionwasreasonablystaticwithonlysmall movements in both themeasures reported above. Subsequently, during 2008and 2009, the gap between the top and bottom quintile (20%) narrowed meaningincome inequality fell to its lowest level since the introduction of the CSO’s annualSurveyonIncomeandLivingConditions(SILC).Between2009and2010therewasamarked increase in income inequality with the income of the top quintile climbingfrom4.3 to5.5 times thatof thebottomquintilewhile theGini coefficient increasedfrom29.3to33.9.

TechnicalNotes:Thedataused tocompile these figurescomes fromtheCSO’sSurveyon IncomeandLivingConditions(SILC).Thissurvey,whichhasbeencarriedoutannuallysince2004,collects data on a representative sample of the national population with the latestsurvey in 2010 providing data on over 11,500 individuals in approximately 5,000households. The income data used is disposable income, representing the incomeindividualshavetospendoncetheyhavepaidalltheirincometaxesandreceivedanywelfare entitlements. This income data has also been equivalised, or weighted, toaccount for differences in household size and composition using the nationalequivalence scale. Further details on the SILC survey and its income variables areavailablefromtheCSOdocumentsandwebsitereferencesbelow.

Source(s):CSO(2011)SurveyonIncomeandLivingConditions–PreliminaryResults,2010.Dublin,

StationeryOffice.CSO(2010)SurveyonIncomeandLivingConditions–Results,2009.Dublin,Stationery

Office.CSOSILCwebsite:www.cso.ie/en/silc/Forfurtherdetailsontheseincomeinequalityindicatorsandforanaccountofincome

distributiontrendspriorto2004see:CollinsM.L. and C. Kavanagh (2006) ‘The Changing Patterns of Income Distribution

andInequalityinIreland,1973‐2004.’InCollins,M.L.,S.HealyandB.Reynolds(eds.), SocialPolicy in Ireland,Principles,PracticeandProblems (2ndedition).Dublin,LiffeyPress.

Social Justice Ireland (2011) AnAgenda for aNew Ireland ‐ Socio‐EconomicReview2011.Dublin,SocialJusticeIrelandpp.67‐72.


45

Indicator4.2 WealthperCapita

IndicatordefinedNetFinancialAssetsperperson

Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicator2010.Chart4.2 NetFinancialWealthPerPerson

€0 €10,000 €20,000 €30,000 €40,000 €50,000 €60,000 €70,000 €80,000

Greece

Spain

Portugal

Finland

Ireland

Euro area (17 countries)

Germany

Austria

France

Denmark

Italy

Sweden

Netherlands

Luxembourg

Belgium

2010 2007


46

Table4.2 NetFinancialAssetsperpersonEuro 2007 2010Austria 37,695 41,119Belgium 66,182 67,002Denmark 41,518 43,423Euroarea 36,846 36,393Finland 21,624 21,985France 40,739 42,337Germany 35,384 38,120Greece 18,817 11,185Ireland 25,896 26,226Italy 49,469 45,124Luxembourg 55,775 66,048Netherlands 59,045 58,836Portugal 19,919 20,044Spain 22,106 17,721Sweden 37,976 45,754

InterpretationDespitethefinancialcrisis,netfinancialwealthperpersonhasbeenremarkablystableacrossEurope.Innetterms,theperpersonfinancialwealthofIrishresidentsisattheEuropean average, though considerably less than wealthier Eurozone average. Theaverage resident in Ireland owned 26,226 of financial wealth (such as cash, bankdeposits,or shares).Thisdoesnot includenon‐financialwealthsuchasproperty.Asmuch financialwealth isheldabroad, taxing this couldhelpbring somemoneybackintotheIrisheconomy.However, as these are netaverage figures, they give no indication as to the severefinancialstrainunderwhichmanyhouseholdsaresuffering.

TechnicalNotes:UKisomittedduetolackofdata.Theconsolidatednetfinancialassetsofhouseholdsand non‐profit institutions serving households was divided by population as of 1stJanuary.

Source(s):Eurostat[nasa_f_bs];Eurostatdemo_pjan.Dataaccessed2ndFebruary2012.


47

Indicator4.3 ShareofWagesinTotalIncome

IndicatordefinedAdjustedwageshareofGDPReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicator2011.Chart4.3 Shareofwagesintotalincome

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

1960

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

United Kingdom United States Denmark Ireland


48

Table4.3 ShareofLabourinincomeCountry Denmark ROI UK US1960 56.6 68.7 64.6 65.21970 60.2 68.1 65.6 65.91980 62.3 70.9 66.1 65.11985 58.2 63.6 63.0 63.11990 59.3 60.2 65.4 63.11991 58.9 60.4 66.2 63.31992 58.6 61.5 65.9 63.01993 58.7 60.9 64.4 62.81994 56.4 59.7 63.1 62.21995 56.5 56.7 62.1 62.21996 56.7 55.4 60.6 61.51997 56.3 53.0 60.4 61.31998 57.5 51.6 61.2 62.31999 57.8 49.8 61.5 62.32000 56.4 48.5 62.5 63.22001 57.5 48.2 63.3 63.12002 58.0 46.3 62.5 62.22003 58.3 46.5 62.4 62.22004 57.3 47.4 62.1 61.32005 56.9 48.5 62.2 60.72006 56.9 48.8 62.1 60.62007 58.3 50.2 62.0 60.62008 59.9 55.3 62.3 61.02009 62.5 56.2 64.8 60.62010 59.8 53.7 64.1 59.32011 59.2 52.5 63.6 59.1InterpretationThewage share isdeterminedby capital intensity, technology, and also institutionalfactors.Globallytherehasbeenageneraldeclineinthewageshare,butIreland’ssharpdeclinefollowedbypartialrecoveryisunique.

TechnicalNotes:Thewageshareisthetotalcompensationofemployees(wagesplussocialinsurance)dividedbyGDP.Thewageshare is adjustedbyAMECOtoaccount for self‐employedworkers.

Source(s):AMECO(ALCD0)


49

5 PovertyandSocialExclusion


50


51

Indicator5.1PovertyandDeprivationintheRepublicofIreland

Povertyismeasuredusingthreeindicators:Atriskofpovertyrate:Theproportionofindividualswithdisposableincomeoflessthan60%ofmedianincome.(Enforced)Deprivationrate:Theproportionofindividualswhocannotaffordtwoormoreitemsfromalistof11.Consistentpovertyrate:Theproportionofindividualswhoareat‐riskofpovertyandalsoexperiencingenforceddeprivation.Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2010.DataextractedonMarch2012.Nextupdatedueinearly2013.Chart5.1Trendsinpovertyanddeprivation,2004‐2010(%)

Table5.1PovertyandDeprivationratesfortheRepublicofIrelandasa%ofthepopulation,2004‐2010 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Atriskofpoverty 19.4 18.5 17.0 16.5 14.4 14.1 15.8Deprivation 14.2 14.9 13.8 11.8 13.8 17.1 22.5Consistentpoverty 6.6 7.0 6.5 5.1 4.2 5.5 6.2

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

At risk of poverty Deprivation Consistent poverty


52

InterpretationThe at risk of poverty or ‘relative income poverty’ rate fell from 2004 to 2009.However, the rate increased from14.1% in 2009 to15.8% in2010, despite the factthatthethresholdlevel(60%ofmediandisposableincome)declinedby10%between2009and2010(from€12,046to€10,831);thisreflectsanoveralldeclineinincomesoverthatperiod.Enforceddeprivation,measuring thenumberof individualsdeprivedof twoormorebasicitems(seetechnicalnotesforlist)felltoaslowas11.8%in2007.However,ithasincreasedsinceas the impactof therecessionhithouseholds.By201022.5%of theROIpopulationwereexperiencingdeprivation.Between2009and2010,theincreaseindeprivationwaspredominantlyamongthosenotatriskofpoverty,upfrom13.7%in 2009 to 19.3% in 2010. During 2010, the main items where people experienceenforced deprivation were: ‘unable to afford to replace any worn out furniture’(20.3%); ‘unable to afford amorning, afternoon or evening out in the last fortnight’(19.3%); and ‘unable to afford to have family or friends for a drink ormeal once amonth’(14.4%).Therateofconsistentpovertymeasuresthesub‐sectionofthepopulationwhoareatrisk of poverty and experiencing deprivation. This measure is the focus of thegovernment’s official poverty target which aims to reduce those experiencingconsistentpovertytobetween2%and4%by2012withtheaimofeliminating itby2016.Between2005and2008theratefell,butithassinceincreasedto6.2%in2010.

TechnicalNotesThedataused tocompile these figurescomes fromtheCSO’sSurveyon IncomeandLivingConditions(SILC)andhasbeendescribedinthetechnicalnotesaccompanyingindicator 4.1. The at risk of poverty threshold is calculated as 60% of mediandisposableincome.Theelevenindicatorsusedtomeasuredeprivationare:Withoutheatingatsomestagein the last year; Unable to afford a morning, afternoon or evening out in the lastfortnight;Unable toaffordtwopairsofstrongshoes;Unable toaffordaroastonceaweek;Unabletoaffordamealwithmeat,chickenorfisheverysecondday;Unabletoafford new (not second‐hand) clothes; Unable to afford a warm waterproof coat;Unabletoaffordtokeepthehomeadequatelywarm;Unabletoaffordtoreplaceanywornoutfurniture;Unabletoaffordtohavefamilyorfriendsforadrinkormealonceamonth;Unabletoaffordtobuypresentsforfamilyorfriendsatleastonceayear.

Source(s)CSO (2011). Survey on Income and Living Conditions – Preliminary Results, 2010.

Dublin,StationeryOffice.CSOSILCwebsite:here.Seeallthesourceslistedunderindicator4.1.


53

Indicator5.2ChildPovertyintheROI

ChildPovertyismeasuredusingtwoindicators:Childrenatriskofpoverty:Theproportionofchildrenlivinginhouseholdswhoseequivaliseddisposableincomeislessthan60%ofmedianincome.Childreninconsistentpoverty:Theproportionofchildrenlivinginhouseholdswhoareat‐riskofpovertyandalsoexperiencingenforceddeprivation.Childrenaredefinedasbeingagedbetween0‐17years.Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2010.DataextractedonMarch2012.Nextupdatedueinearly2013.Chart5.2 ChildPoverty,2006‐2010(%)

Table5.2ChildpovertyforROIasa%ofthepopulationofchildrenaged0‐17yrs,2006‐2010

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Atriskofpoverty 22.3 19.9 18.0 18.6 19.5Consistentpoverty 10.3 7.4 6.3 8.7 8.2

0

5

10

15

20

25

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

At risk of poverty Consistent poverty


54

InterpretationTheproportionof theROI’schildrenlivinginhouseholdswhoseincomeisbelowthe60%ofmedianincomepovertylinehasexperiencedlimitedchangeoverthepastfewyears.While the years 2006‐07 recorded a decrease from22.3% to 19.9%, by 2010almost1inevery5children(19.5%)livedinahouseholdexperiencingrelativeincomepoverty.Over the period 2006‐2008 the proportion of children living in householdsexperiencing both relative income poverty and deprivation (consistent poverty)decreasedfrom10.3%to6.3%.However,sincethenithasincreasedandin20108.2%oftheROI’schildrenexperiencedconsistentpoverty.

TechnicalNotesThedataused tocompile these figurescomes fromtheCSO’sSurveyon IncomeandLivingConditions(SILC)andhasbeendescribedinthetechnicalnotesaccompanyingindicator 4.1. The at risk of poverty threshold is calculated as 60% of mediandisposable income. The items used to measure enforced deprivation have beendescribedinthetechnicalnotesaccompanyingindicator5.1.Prior to 2006 the CSOmeasured child poverty for children aged 0‐14yrs and foundthat in both years 21.2% of children in this age group lived in households whoseincomeisbelowthe60%ofmedianincomepovertyline.Theconsistentpovertyrateforthisagegroupwas9.5%in2006and10.2%in2007.

Source(s)CSO(2011).SurveyonIncomeandLivingConditions–PreliminaryResults,2010.Dublin,StationeryOffice.CSOSILCwebsitehere.Seeallthesourceslistedunderindicator4.1.


55

Indicator5.3InWork‐PovertyintheROI

InWork‐Povertyismeasuredusingtwoindicators:Workersatriskofpoverty:Theproportionofindividualswhoseprincipleeconomicstatusis‘atwork’andwhoseequivaliseddisposableincomeislessthan60%ofmedianincome.Workersinconsistentpoverty:Theproportionofindividualswhoseprincipleeconomicstatusis‘atwork’andwhoareat‐riskofpovertyandalsoexperiencingenforceddeprivation.Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2010.DataextractedonMarch2012.Nextupdatedueinearly2013.Chart5.3a In‐workPoverty,2004‐2010(%)

Chart5.3bCompositionofthoseatriskofpoverty2010(%)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

At risk of poverty Consistent poverty

At Work,17.3%

Unemployed, 13.4%

Student, 12.1%

Home duties, 16.7%

Retired, 4.2%

Ill/disabled, 5.3%


56

Table5.3a In‐workpovertyintheROI,2004‐2010 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Atriskofpoverty 7.0 7.0 6.5 6.7 6.7 5.5 7.8Consistentpoverty 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.8

Table5.3bCompositionofthoseatriskorpovertyintheROI,2009‐2010

2009 2010AtWork 14.3% 17.3%Unemployed 12.9% 13.4%Student 14.6% 12.1%Homeduties 18.0% 16.7%Retired 4.7% 4.2%Ill/disabled 6.4% 5.3%

InterpretationBetween 2004 and 2008 there was limited change in the proportion of individualswhoseprincipleeconomic status is ‘atwork’ andwhowere livingat riskofpoverty.However,by2009theratedroppedto5.5%beforeincreasingtoalmost8%in2010.Similarly, consistent poverty levels among those atwork declined overmuch of theperiodbeforeincreasingonceagainin2010.Despitethefactthattherateofrelativeincomepoverty(7.8%)andconsistentpoverty(1.8%)islowamongthosewhoseprincipleeconomicstatusiswork,thefactthattheworkingpopulationcomprisesalargepartofthepopulationaged16yearsandaboveresults in a high number of workers being in poverty. Using the 2010 data, whenpovertyamongthoseaged16yearsandabove isdecomposedbyprincipleeconomicstatus,thoseatwork(theworkingpoor)emergeasthelargestgroupofpeopleatriskofpoverty.

TechnicalNotesSeenotesforindicators4.1,5.1and5.2.Thecompositionofthoseatriskofpovertyisdecomposedbyprincipleeconomicstatusforall thoseaged16yearsandabove.Thetablesandchartsaboveexcludefiguresforchildrenunder16yearswhoarelivinginhouseholdsthatareatriskofpoverty.

Source(s)Seeallthesourceslistedunderindicator4.1.


57

6 SocialWelfarePayments


58


59

Indicator6.1UnemploymentBenefitsComparedtoEarnings(OECDcountries)

IndicatordefinedWecomparepreandpostUnemploymentincomeusingthereplacementratio.Itreferstothelevelofwelfareprovidedimmediatelyaftertheindividualbecomesunemployedandcalculatesthisasaproportionofpreviousaftertaxornetincome.Thefiguresinthisassessmentarebasedonanindividualearning67%oftheaveragewageineachOECDcountrybeforebecomingunemployed.Figuresarepresentedforsixhouseholdtypes.Table6.1 NetReplacementRatesforsixfamilytypesininitialphaseofunemployment,OECDCountries2009

No children 2 children

OECD countries Single person

One-earner

married couple

Two-earner

married couple

Lone parent

One-earner

married couple

Two-earner

married couple

Australia 43 63 55 61 72 69 Austria 55 57 80 71 73 85 Belgium 89 77 85 87 77 87 Canada 64 65 81 75 76 85 Czech Republic 75 76 87 82 79 92 Denmark 83 85 91 89 88 93 Estonia 54 56 77 62 56 79 Finland 64 75 78 85 83 83 France 70 72 84 82 82 84 Germany 60 63 88 81 80 92 Greece 65 70 83 78 83 92 Hungary 73 75 86 81 79 89 Iceland 77 72 89 84 77 91 Ireland (ROI) 46 72 73 69 76 77 Israel 74 74 86 66 70 89 Italy 72 75 86 77 74 88 Japan 67 66 85 70 65 85 Korea 55 55 77 57 54 78 Luxembourg 82 81 89 88 89 93 Netherlands 76 88 84 75 84 81 New Zealand 52 71 57 70 75 64 Norway 67 69 84 88 89 86 Poland 67 69 71 86 62 77 Portugal 78 75 91 79 77 91 Slovak Republic 60 58 83 71 57 84 Slovenia 76 83 88 82 83 92 Spain 78 74 89 75 75 88 Sweden 69 69 85 83 80 86 Switzerland 82 83 89 84 84 90 Turkey 53 52 80 52 51 80 United Kingdom 55 66 59 72 77 69 United States 60 58 82 52 49 85 OECD Average 67 70 81 75 74 85


60

Chart6.1 RepublicofIrelandNetReplacementRatesforsixfamilytypesininitialphaseofunemploymentcomparedtotheOECDaverage,2009

InterpretationReplacementratescompareincomepriortounemploymentwithincomefromwelfareafterunemployment.AcrosstheOECDtheseratesrangefrom43%to93%.Giventhevariation in individual country replacement rates, reflecting the nature andcompositionofwelfareentitlements in thesecountries, thedatashows the futilityofmaking simple cross country comparisons based on one particular type ofindividual/household.TheROIpossessesthesecondlowestreplacementrateforsingleunemployedpeoplewithnochildrenwithintheOECD(46%),onlyAustraliahasalowerrate(43%).Ofthesix household types examined by the OECD (see table and chart) four recordreplacementratesbelowtheOECDaverageandtwoabovetheaverage.

TechnicalNotes:Data is fromtheOECD’sTax‐BenefitCalculator.TheOECDalsoexaminereplacementratesforindividualsat100%and150%ofaverageearnings.Thedatainthetableandchart is from 2009, the latest comparable data available from the OECD. Since thenchanges to welfare rates and average earnings will have altered these replacementrates.

Source:OECDTax‐BenefitCalculatorhere.

46

72

73

69

76

77

67

70

81

75

74

85

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Single person

One‐earner married couple

Two‐earner married couple

Lone parent

One‐earner married couple

Two‐earner married couple

No child

ren

2 child

ren

OECD Average ROI


61

Indicator6.2UnemploymentBenefitsComparedtoEarningsintheRepublicofIrelandandtheUnitedKingdom

IndicatordefinedWecomparepreandpostUnemploymentincomeusingthereplacementratio.Itreferstothelevelofwelfareprovidedimmediatelyaftertheindividualbecomesunemployedandcalculatesthisasaproportionofpreviousaftertaxornetincome.Thefiguresinthisassessmentarebasedonanindividualearning67%,100%and150%oftheaveragewageineachcountrybeforebecomingunemployed.Figuresarepresentedforsixhouseholdtypes.

Table6.2NetReplacementRatesforsixfamilytypesininitialphaseofunemployment,ROI,UKandOECDaverage2009 No children 2 children

Single person

One-earner

married couple

Two-earner

married couple

Lone parent

One-earner

married couple

Two-earner

married couple

67% of the average wage ROI 46 72 73 69 76 77 UK 55 66 59 72 77 69 OECD average 67 70 81 75 74 85 100% of the average wage ROI 33 52 61 60 63 65 UK 38 46 49 64 71 58 OECD average 58 61 74 70 67 77 150% of the average wage ROI 25 39 50 48 49 55 UK 26 32 39 46 51 47 OECD average 47 48 63 57 55 66

InterpretationReplacementratescompareincomepriortounemploymentwithincomefromwelfareafter unemployment. The table above compares replacement rates forindividuals/householdsintheinitialphaseofunemployment(ineffectthefirstyearofunemployment)inROIandtheUK.


62

The results show a variation in replacement rates between ROI and the UK andhighlighttheinappropriatenessofsimplecrosscountrycomparisonsbetweenthem.Inthecaseofthesixhouseholdswhosepre‐unemploymentincomerepresented67%oftheaveragewage, threehousehold typeshaveahigher replacement rate inROIandthreeintheUK.Asimilarpictureemergesfromhouseholdswhoseincomewasattheaveragewage prior to unemployment; replacement rates are highest in the ROI forthree of the six cases and highest in the UK for the other three cases. At 150% ofaverageearnings,fourofthesixreplacementratesarehighestintheROI.Acrossallofthe18householdtypesexamined,inonlytwocasesarethereplacementrateshigherthantheOECDaverageineitherROIortheUK:one‐earnermarriedcouplenochildrenat67%ofaverageearningsintheROIandone‐earnermarriedcoupletwochildrenat67%ofaverageearningsinbothROIandtheUK.Comparisonsofnetreplacementratesdonottakeintoaccountdifferencesinvarioustypes of non‐cash payment benefits to households such as subsidised services orexemptionfromvariouscharges.

TechnicalNotes:Data are from the OECD’s Tax‐Benefit Calculator. The data in the table and chart isfrom2009,thelatestcomparabledataavailablefromtheOECD.Sincethenchangestowelfareratesandaverageearningswillhavealteredthesereplacementrates.

Source:OECDTax‐BenefitCalculatorhere.


63

7 PublicFinances


64


65

Indicator7.1 TrendsinPublicExpenditureandRevenue(EU27andRepublicofIreland)

IndicatordefinedTotalGeneralGovernmentExpenditureandRevenue.Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2010‐2015.Dataextractedon24March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart7.1 TrendsinExpenditureandRevenue(includingprojectionsto2015accordingtoStabilityProgrammeUpdate)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

'98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10 11 12 13 14 15

% GDP

EU27 Exp IE Exp EU27 Rev IE Rev


66

Table7.1 TrendsinExpenditureandRevenue(includingprojectionsto2015)

EU27 Expend.

ROI Expend

EU27 Rev

ROI Rev

1998 47.3 34.4 45.3 36.61999 46.8 33.9 45.8 36.52000 44.7 31.2 45.3 35.92001 46.1 33.0 44.6 34.02002 46.6 33.4 44.0 33.12003 47.2 33.1 44.0 33.62004 46.8 33.5 43.9 34.92005 46.8 33.8 44.3 35.42006 46.3 34.3 44.8 37.22007 45.6 36.6 44.7 36.72008 47.1 42.8 44.7 35.42009 51.0 48.9 44.1 34.72010 50.6 66.8 44.1 35.52011 - 44.9 - 34.92012 - 43.1 - 34.52013 - 42.2 - 34.72014 - 39.8 - 34.82015 - 37.5 - 34.6

InterpretationPublicexpenditurerelatingtobankrecapitalisationin2010wasincludedintheabovechart.A feature of fiscal adjustment as pursued in the Republic, both before and after theNovember2010TroikaAgreement,isthatithasleanedonexpenditureandnotontax.WhenmeasuredasapercentageofGDP, theentireadjustment isontheexpendituresidewiththeshareoftotalrevenueinGDPstayingconstantovertheremainderoftheadjustmentperiod.Totalrevenueisprojectedtofallfromanestimatedlevelof34.9%ofGDPin2011toaslightlylowerlevelof34.6%in2015(pageD.19ofEconomicandFiscalOutlook).Ontheotherhand,totalspendingisprojectedtofallsharplyfromanestimatedlevelof44.9%ofGDPin2011to37.5%in2015.

TechnicalNotes:Total General Government Revenue includes taxes and other receipts of publicauthorities



67

Indicator7.2 GovernmentRevenueas%GDP(EU27andRepublicofIreland)

IndicatordefinedTotalGeneralGovernmentRevenueas%ofGDPReferenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2010.Dataextractedon24March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart7.1 GovernmentRevenue%GDP

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

SlovakiaLithuaniaRomaniaBulgariaIrelandLatviaSpain

PolandCzech Republic

MaltaGreece

United KingdomEstoniaCyprus

LuxembourgPortugalGermanySloveniaHungary

ItalyNetherlands

AustriaBelgiumFranceFinlandSwedenDenmark


68

InterpretationAsanalternativetocomparingcountrieswithreferencetoGDPGrossNationalIncome(GNI)maybeused.However,whereGNIisuseditisnecessarytodeductanestimateforcorporatetaxesonrepatriatedprofitswhichappearsaspartofGDPbutnotGNI.

TechnicalNotes:Total General Government Revenue includes taxes and other receipts of publicauthorities



69

Indicator7.3 GeneralGovernmentDeficitas%GDP(2011)

IndicatordefinedTotalGeneralGovernmentDeficitas%ofGDP–structuralandcyclical.Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2011.Dataextractedon24March2012.Nextupdatedueonorbeforethenexteditionofthispublication.Chart7.3 StructuralandCyclicalDeficits%GDP(2011)

‐12 ‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2 0 2

Ireland

Greece

Cyprus

Spain

Slovakia

France

Portugal

Slovenia

EA‐17

Netherlands

Italy

Belgium

Austria

Malta

Germany

Finland

Luxembourg

Estonia

Cyclical Structural


70

InterpretationThe ‘Golden Rule’ contained in the 2012 EU Fiscal Compact stipulates that aGovernment’s‘structuraldeficit’shouldnotbegreaterthan0.5%ofGDPforcountriesthat have a debt‐to‐ GDP ratio of over 60%. In 2011 three EUmember stateswerecompliantwiththe‘GoldenRule’withregardtothesizeofthestructuraldeficit.

TechnicalNotes:The ‘Golden Rule’ contained in the 2012 EU Fiscal Compact stipulates that aGovernment’s‘structuraldeficit’shouldnotbegreaterthan0.5%ofGDPforcountriesthat have a debt‐to‐GDP ratio of over 60%. The ‘structural deficit’ is defined as thedifference between total government revenue and spending adjusted for changes inthebusinesscycle.Suchanadjustmentismeasuredbyeconomistsandvariouspublicagenciesusingdataoveraperiodoftimetoidentifytheimpactofthebusinesscycleonthegovernmentdeficit.Typically,deficitsriseinrecessionsaspublicspendingrisesinresponsetohigherunemploymentandassociatedsocialpaymentswhilerevenuefallsoffaspeoplelosejobsorsufferlossofincome.Wheneconomicconditionsimprovethedeficit tends to fall. Analysts have attempted to estimate the portion of the deficitwhich can be explained by temporary cyclical factors. The remaining portion of thedeficitisreferredtoasthe‘structuraldeficit’–thegapbetweenspendingandrevenuethatremainswhenthetemporaryimpactofthebusinesscycleisignored.Forexample,Irelandmaintainedabalanceofgovernmentspendingandrevenueformostyearsupto2007.Withtheonsetofrecessionin2008spendinginitiallyroseandrevenuefellsothatalarge‘cyclical’deficitopenedup.

Source(s):European Commission (2011) Statistical Annex of European Economy. Autumn

2011.ECFIN.


71

Indicator7.4 GeneralGovernmentDebtas%GDP

IndicatordefinedTotalGeneralGovernmentDebtas%ofGDP.Referenceperiodforlatestavailabledatausedinthisindicatoris2011.Dataextractedon24March2012.NextupdatedueonorbeforeQEF2.Chart7.4 GeneralGovernmentDebt%GDP(2011)

0 50 100 150 200Estonia

Bulgaria

Luxembourg

Romania

Czech Republic

Lithuania

Slovenia

Sweden

Slovakia

Denmark

Latvia

Finland

Poland

Spain

Cyprus

Netherlands

Malta

Austria

United Kingd

EU27

Hungary

France

Germany

Rep of Ireland

Portugal

Belgium

Italy

Greece


72

InterpretationThe ‘GoldenRule’containedinthe2012EUFiscalCompactstipulatesthatwherethegovernment debt‐to‐ GDP ratio exceeds 60% countries must reduce it by 1/20 perannum. In2011 Irelandwasamong14EUmember stateswhowereabove the60%threshold.

TechnicalNotes:Seenotesforindicator7.3above.

Source(s):European Commission (2011) Statistical Annex of European Economy. Autumn

2011.ECFIN.


73

Notes

Nevin Economic Research Institute (NERI)

31/32 Parnell Square Dublin 1   Phone + 353 1 8897722

Carlin House 4-6 Donegall Street Place Belfast BT1 2FN,   Northern Ireland  Phone +44 28 902 47940 Email: [email protected]

Web: www.NERInstitute.net

mailto:[email protected]://www.nerinstitute.net/

QEF Spring 2012 (FINAL 26Mar) MC edits · QEF is to provide regular, accessible and timely...

Documents

Transcript of QEF Spring 2012 (FINAL 26Mar) MC edits · QEF is to provide regular, accessible and timely...