Differences in Unemployment

Dynamics over the Business Cycle

across countries: Okuns Law
Introduction
The 2007 Financial/Economic Crisis has led to a deep decrease in GDP growth and hence to
unprecedented levels of unemployment in most OECD countries. After seven years of recession,
across the OCDE, there are almost 49 million unemployed persons, 16 million more than at 2007,
although the unemployment response to a similar decrease in GDP growth has varied across
countries. Why some countries, such as Spain, have destroyed so many jobs for similar output
reductions? This paper investigates the relation between unemployment rate and output for some
countries, and in particular also, whether such relationship differs depending on the business cycle
phase.
Traditionally, the relationship between changes in unemployment rate and output growth has
been measured through the statistical relationship known as the Okuns Law. In 1962, the
economist Artur Okun quantified the statistical relationship between unemployment and output.
Okun estimated the following relationship between these two variables using the equation:

Where u is the change in unemployment rate, y the real GDP growth rate, and k and c are two
parameters that are assumed to be constant (c is also named Okuns coefficient, which is a key
feature in this paper).The Okuns law reflects the elasticity of unemployment to output changes,
assuming that that elasticity is constant. This law has been taken by economists as a good point to
start an analysis. The equation is a practical tool whose parameters are often estimated to make
time and cross country comparisons.
Cazes et al. (2013), which is the base reference of this work, argue that Knotek (2007)
proposed that Okun s coefficient varies over time in the context of both longer-term trends and
asymmetry over the business cycle. In this literature, asymmetry is used to denote the phenomenon
where the correlation between the two series (change in the unemployment rate and output)
differs over specific phases of the business cycle (Neftci 1984)[Cazes et al. (2013), page 2].
Cazes et al. (2013) proposes a new methodology to take into account the variability of the Okuns
coefficient over the business cycle.

Our specific contribution is twofold: On the one hand, we expand the period analyzed by Cazes et
al (2013) including the post-recession data (from 2011 to 2015). Secondly, we also perform a
variant of Cazes et al (2013) analysis, by considering the relationship between changes in the rate
of total hours worked in the country and output growth instead of the unemployment rate used in
the Okuns law.
We consider a sample of four European countries: Spain, Germany, Sweden and UK. Each of them
represent not only a different cardinal point of Europe but also they are somehow representative
of different European Regions: Spain as the example of a Mediterranean country. Sweden as an
Scandinavian and northern economy. UK because its peculiarities, shared in part with Ireland and
anglo-saxon countries. Germany as a central European strong economy.
The structure of the paper is as follows. Section 2 shows the evolution of GDP and unemployment
rate across the last 25 years, along with data about the evolution of productivity, labor force and
hours worked per worker. In section 3 the Okuns parameter will be calculated following the
rolling regressions method. In section 4 the previous exercise will be repeated using annual growth
rates in total hours instead of the unemployment rate in the Okuns equation. Finally, section 5
concludes the paper.

2. Descriptive Evidence Output and Unemployment changes over

the cycle
Before estimating the relationship between changes in unemployment and output, it is important
to describe the behavior of such variables over time and for each of the countries which enter the
analysis.

2.1Output and Unemployment

Figure 1 reveals a very different evolution of unemployment rates, particularly between Spain and
the other three countries: On the first hand, Spain is the country where Unemployment Rate
decreased to a greatest extent since the mid-nineties to the start of the recession. However, the
increase in unemployment rate is huge from 2008 onwards. On the contrary, if we look at
Germany, it can be seen that unemployment rate has decreased from 2008 onwards. Sweden and
UK experience a mild increase in Unemployment Rates in the first years of the recession, to
decrease slightly after 2010.

10Unempl.
15rate 20

25

Unemployment

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

Year
Germany
Spain

Sweden
UK

GDP p. c. (US $ of 2010, pps)

GDP per capita

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

Figure 1: Unemployment rate of countries of the simple, period 1990q1-2015q1

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

Year
Germany
Spain

Sweden
UK

Figure 2: GDP per capita for the countries in the sample, period 1990q1-2015q1
Figure 2 shows the evolution of GDP Per Capita for the last 25 years. In the four countries
considered, output per capita grows since mid-nineties until 2008, the start of the actual
recession. From then on, it can be seen that countries like Germany and Sweden seem to have
experienced a quick recovery whereas UK and, specially, Spain are, after 7 years, still unable to
recover the pre-crisis levels.

2.2 Variables related with unemployment and GDP.

It is useful to do a descriptive analysis of additional variables deeply connected with
unemployment and output, such as Productivity, Working Hours and Labour Force. These variables
are not only interesting by themselves, but also allow us to understand some underlying facts
regarding the relationship between output and unemployment. Following Cazes et al. (2013) we
do a decomposition exercise to help the understanding of the underlying relationship between
unemployment and GDP.

Where H means total hours worked in the country, N net employment, LF labor force, and the
results for

are productivity and hours worked per worker respectively.

The evolution of productivity, which is mean output per hour worked, is clearly the most
important variable to relate GDP and unemployment. Regarding this variable, it can be said that in
two countries (Sweden and UK) grow in a continuous and fast way, whereas in Germany such
growth has been more moderate since 2000. Finally, in Spain no productivity growth has taken
place whatsoever until the start of the crisis. Indeed, the lack of productivity growth in Spain
during the 2000-2007 upturn is remarkable. The constant productivity shows that the relation
between output and labor has been constant along time. This apparent constancy is hiding a
dualistic development: when the productivity of some sectors (industry and services) was growing
, most of the employment creation was in the construction sector whose productivity was the
lowest (see Andres et al, 2009). When the recession started the employment destruction in
construction sector made the general productivity to grow, even when the employed workers
werent more productive than in the past.

-20

-10

10

20

30

Spain

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2005

2010

2015

2005

2010

2015

2005

2010

2015

Year

-20

-10

10

20

30

Germany

1990

1995

2000

30

Year

-20

-10

10

20

Sweden

1990

1995

2000

30

Year

-20

-10

10

20

UK

1990

1995

2000
Year

______ Productivity

______Hours per worker

______Labor force

Figure 3: Annual productivity, working hours and labor force growth taking 2000 as the reference year (2000 =0).
Period 1991-2014

Average hours of work per worker exhibit a general decrease during the period, with the only
exception of Sweden, and only until 2000. In Germany this decrease is much more pronounced
than in the rest of the countries being around 15% in 25 years (more than an hour per workday).
Finally, with respect to labour force trends, we can see a similar (steady) increase in the UK and in
Sweden. On the contrary, labour force seems to remain relatively constant during the whole
period in Germany. In Spain, the evolution of labour force exhibits large volatility: It increases to a
large extent from 2000 to 2007 due mainly to the immigration boom. From 2008 onwards, labour
force remains relatively constant.

3. Results from the Rolling Regressions of the Okuns Law

The most important assumption implied in Okuns law is that the relation between changes in
unemployment rate and output growth rate is linear. Since the year of publication of his paper,
the labor market has changed , and economists argue about its empirical validity. Although all the
shakes in Okuns parameter (which it is assumed to be constant) cant be count as structural,
European labor market has been experiencing many drastic reforms that change the relation
between the two variables.
Cazes et al. (2013) mentions that Knotek (2007) proposed that Okun s coefficient varies over time
in the context of both longer-term trends and asymmetry over the business cycle. In the literature,
some dynamic-versions of the Okuns law have been proposed: lag incorporation (of
unemployment and GDP) in the original Okuns equation (Pereira, 2013); the so called dynamic
betas method, (IMF 2010, Chapter 3) and the rolling regressions method, used in Cazes et al.
(2013) and which will be replicated in this paper.
In the rolling regressions method, instead of calculating a Okuns parameter with the complete
dataset by Ordinary Least Squares, it takes a specific number observations of one period to
calculate that periods parameter by OLS, then drops the first observation of the period and takes
the next one to repeat the process to build a set of parameters instead of one. In this exercise,
we calculate an Okuns parameter for each period of 40 quarters (10 years, 40 observations)
taking observations for the period 1980q1 to 1989q4, then, another parameter for the period
1980q2 to 1990q1 and so on. Remember that the estimated equation is the standard Okuns
equation referred at the beginning of the paper:

At this point, it must be reminded that the Okuns parameter c express how much will decrease
the unemployment rate for every point of growth in the GDP, and k the required GDP increase to
have zero change in unemployment rate. This paper only focuses in c values and their changes
throughout time.
The availability of quarterly data is more limited than annual data. In particular, Quarterly series
for unemployment and GDP (extracted from OECD dataset) start before 1985 for UK and Sweden,
but only from 1986 on in the case of Spain. For Germany, due to the reunification, almost all time
series data begin in 1991.

.2

.4

.6

.8

Okuns Coefficient

1995

2000

2005
Year
Sweden
UK

2010

2015

Germany
Spain

Figure 4: Okuns coefficient value for each series of 40 quarters. Period: 1995q12015q1 for UK and Sweden, 2001q1-2015q1 for Germany and 1996q1-2015q1 for
Spain.
Germany

Germany shows a low elasticity of unemployment to GDP changes. However, if we compare

different phases of the last business cycle, we can see a slight increase in the upturn, and from
2007 onwards, a slight decrease. Still, the values range from 0.05 to 0.2.
We might think that part of the explanation for this low response of unemployment to changes in
GDP, particularly during downturns, stem from the fact that Germany has a very flexible short-

time work programs as a way to cope with the recession. This means that an aggregate demand
reduction will be faced with the reduction of the working day instead of firing labor. As a
consequence, the work reduction is faced not as an extensive, but intensive way.
Sweden

Regarding Sweden, we can see a slight increase in the Okuns coefficient from 1997 to 2003. From
then on, we observe a continuous decrease until the Great Recession. To understand these
changes, we must notice from figure 1 that Sweden suffered an important increase in
unemployment from 1990-1997, but from then on, unemployment rate has stayed reasonably
stable. In addition, GDP per capita has grown continuously and at a high pace for the last 25 years,
except from 2008 to 2010, where an abrupt decrease can be observed. But from 2010 on, Sweden
has faced again a relatively high pace in the growth of GDP per capita. Hence, it looks like Sweden
has been almost no affected by this last Recession quick recovery, and this is probably why we do
not observe a particular change in the relationship between output growth and changes in
unemployment rate during this last recession. As in Germany, after the Great Recession the
Okuns coefficient is quite constant and its value ranges from 0 to 0.2 .

Spain

Spain is, by no means, the country with a highest and most volatile Okuns parameter. From 2000
to 2003, Spain faces a very sharp increase in the elasticity of unemployment rate to output
growth, growing from 0.2 to 0.75. From 2003 to 2006, the relationship stays remarkable constant
at 0.6. From then until the start of the Great Recession, the elasticity suffers another sharp
increase, reaching the value of 1. Lastly, from then on until 2015, we appreciate a continuous,
although slight, decrease. At 2015, the elasticity of unemployment to output reaches 0.8. To
understand what is behind such unstable relationship between output growth and unemployment
rate, we must rely on the mechanisms that Spain uses to adjust aggregate demand shocks. Barely
every adjustment to changes in aggregate demand is done through the hiring or firing of
temporary workers, i.e., the extensive margin. There is no adjustment whatsoever at the intensive
margin, i.e., hours per worker. Hence, unemployment changes greatly at aggregate demand
changes.
In particular, the spectacular growth of the Okuns coefficient since 2000 can be partially
explained by the enormous employment creation in the construction sector, characterized by
being very intensive in labour and with a very high proportion of temporary employment.
However, In 2008, when the economic crisis started hitting the country, a great deal of this
increase in temporary employment is destroyed, unemployment rates grow to unprecedented
levels, and the Okuns parameters takes the highest values. From then on, the observed slight
decrease might have to do with the two labour market reforms, which took place in 2010 and in

2012, and whose purposes, among others were to increase flexibility in the internal conditions at
the firm level, so as to be able to adjust at the intensive more that at the extensive level.
UK

Finally, Okuns parameter in the UK shows a continous decrease from 2000s to the start of the
Great Recession. By 2000, the elasticity of unemployment rate to output growth reaches the value
of 0.4, but from then on, we observe a continous decrease until 2007, reaching a value of 0.
However, after a sudden increase at the start of the recession, the parameter stays remarkably
stable at 0.2. Such value is similar to the one observed in Germany and in Sweden. In order to
understand such relatively stability, we may look at the figures displayed before: Although GDP
per capita has experienced a remarkable decrease in the UK in the last recession and still has not
yet reached the pre-recession levels, hours per worker have continuously decreased since then.
This means that adjustment to a decrease in aggregate demand is partly being done at the
intensive level and not so much at the extensive one. This may be part of the reason why we find
such stability and low elasticity of unemployment rate to output since the start of the Great
Recession till nowadays.
Summarizing, we have analyzed a representative sample of European countries and their Okuns
parameters. Some facts are remarkable: On the first hand, we would stress that in most countries,
we observe a relatively constant Okuns parameter since the start of the 2007-recession until
nowadays. In spite of the sharp drop in GDP growth, the relationship between unemployment and
output has not experienced a noticeable variation. On the second hand, we should note that UK,
Sweden and Germany show a very similar Okuns parameter from 2008 until today around 0.2.
And the parameter shows a slight decrease. This is also interesting given that labour market
institutions differ to a great extent across these countries. However, it looks that these countries
have managed to adapt to aggregate demand changes by adapting at the intensive, more than at
the extensive level. Thirdly, there is a clear difference between northern-central European
countries (Germany, UK and Sweden) and southern countries (Spain). The elasticity of
unemployment to output in Spain is much higher, and this is at least partly given that Spain adapts
to aggregate demand changes exclusively at the extensive, and not intensive level. It would be
interesting to know whether this is also the case for other south-european countries, or rather,
Spain represents an isolated case.

4. Hours worked and Okuns law

In the previous sections, we have mentioned that the dynamics of the labor force and hours
worked per worker differ across countries. Whereas in Germany, most of the variability is
observed in the hours worked per worker, in Spain employment (and hence unemployment) is
more volatile than hours worked per worker. It seems that the extensive margin in the labor

market in Spain (Germany) is more (less) responsive to output fluctuations than the intensive
margin.
In this section we will estimate the rolling regression using the quarterly increase percentage
change in the total hours worked in the country, this is, the sum of the quarterly hours worked by
each employed person. In this section, the last rolling regression exercise will be repeated using
the following equation:

Where ht is the quarterly increase growth rate in total hours worked in the country (
). To difference this Okuns coefficient c` from the original, it will be called Total Hours
Coefficient.
The use of Changes in Total hours as the dependent variable allows us to measure the total
employment response to changes in output, not only at the extensive, but also at the intensive
level, both of them taken together. In principle, we should notice that c, total hours coefficient,
should be higher than the original Okuns one: ccaptures not only the extensive but also the
intensive response of employment (and hence to some extent unemployment) to output changes,
whereas the original c would only capture the extensive margin response of labour to changes in
aggregate demand. Moreover, the vertical distance between cand c tells us about the extent to
which labour market adjustment at changes in aggregate demand are done at the intensive rather
than at the extensive level.
Given that, as we saw before, adjustment of labour to aggregate demand is done differently across
different countries, it is interesting to compare differences between c and c for the countries
under consideration. One drawback of using total quarterly hours is the more limited availability
for time series data. The sample begins in 1985 for UK and 1991 for Germany, 1993 for Sweden
and 1995 for Spain, and is more limited for the last two countries.

-.5

.5

1.5

Germany

1995

2000

2005
Time

2010

2015

-.5

.5

1.5

Sweden

2000

1.5

1995

2005
Time

2010

2015

.5

Spain

1995

2000

2005
Time

2010

2015

-.5

.5

UK

1995

2000

2005
Year

2010

2015

Okuns coef

Total Hours coef

Figure 5: Okuns coefficient and Total Hours Coefficient values for each series of 40 quarters. Periods
for the total hours coefficient:
Germany
Spain:
2005q1-2015q1
Germany:
2001q1-2014q4
Sweden:

2003q1-2015q1

UK:

1995q1-2015q1

As expected, the new c coefficient is higher than the original one. As we said before, Germany
adapts to aggregate demand changes basically through changes in hours worked per worker, and
not so much through hiring/firing workers. The response of total hours worked to aggregate
demand changes reaches 0.5 and it is relatively stable since the start of the Great Recession until
today. When we compare this coefficient with the original c, we appreciate that the latter has
decreased slightly whereas the new one, stays relatively stable and at a clearly higher level.
Sweden

When we compare the magnitude and evolution of the coefficients cand c for Sweden, we
appreciate the following issues: First, the distance between them is small, and decreases since
2008 onwards. Second, the value of c is smaller than the one observed for Germany. This is an
expected result given that as we saw before, in Sweden hours per capita have remained constant
not changed as much as in Germany, and GDP per capita and labor force show a continuous and
relatively constant growth rate. The observed reduction in the differences between both
parameters might be a result of a lower adjustment at the intensive margin (hours worked per
worker) at changes in aggregate demand.

Spain

When we compare the parameters c and cfor Spain, in particular from the start of the last
recession until today, we observe that the value of cis above 1 and remains as such for the whole
recession period. When we compare the evolution of the two parameters from 2008 onwards, we
observe that while c diminishes slightly, cdoes not do so and hence the vertical distance
increases. This may be at least partly a result of the consequences of the 2010 and 2012 labour
market reforms. Both of them tried to increase internal flexibility at the firm level so as to be able
to adjust to aggregate demand changes through changes in hours per worker (intensive level)
instead of the extensive level. It looks like in the latter years, such change in the adjustment is at
least partly taking place. Still, and besides differences between cand c, the most remarkable fact
to notice is that the coefficients c and cfor Spain are way above those found for some of our
European neighbors, which denotes the enormous elasticity of employment (and unemployment)
to changes in aggregate demand. Spanish employment and unemployment is too volatile and
something should be done to make it more stable at aggregate demand changes.
UK

Finally, the comparison between cand c for UK looks weird: On the first hand, from 2002 to 2008,
the Total Hours coefficient is smaller than the original Okuns one. This is something we cannot
explain. On the second hand, from the start of the recession onwards, it looks like c increases
slowly but steadily whereas c remains stable. This increases the vertical distance between cand c
which tells us that since the start of the recession, adjustment to aggregate demand changes
seems to be increasingly done at the intensive rather than at the extensive level. This is consistent
with the observed decrease in hours worked per worker observed in the UK since the start of the
recession.

Conclusions
This paper has looked at output growth and unemployment rate changes and the relation
between them across a sample of four European countries. The aim of the study is to provide a
deeper understanding about how such relation is determined and how it has changed across time,
focusing in the Great Recession of 2008 and the situation before and after it.
The data has been obtained from the compilation of statistics from national institutes made by the
OECD. In the case of quarterly hours of work series, those have been obtained directly from the
source (INE, SBC, ONS and BCEs Statistical Data Warehouse for Germany).
An important contribution of this paper is the performance of the original Okuns exercise using
total hours worked instead of the unemployment rate. Having an indicator that measures the

relation of output and employment could be a necessary complement to the Okuns approach.
The presence of important differences between both parameters shows the need to take into
account this indicator. The observed differences are very much consistent with the mechanisms
which each country use to adjust labor to aggregate demand changes. In those countries where
adjustment is more focused at the intensive (hours per worker) rather than at the extensive
(number of workers), unemployment rate responses more mildly at recessions. This has happened
in Germany and to some extent in the UK. On the contrary, in other countries, such as Spain,
where most adjustment is done at the extensive level, the elasticity of unemployment to output
changes is very big, and at a deep recession like the 2008, the fall in aggregate demand is coped
with an unbearable increase in unemployment.
One of the lessons to extract from this exercise is that Spain should try to increase the degree of
response of changes in output at the intensive, rather than at the extensive one so as to avoid at
least partly mass dismissals at downturns.

Appendix
Despite the aim of this work is the analysis of the Okuns parameter and to examine the relation of
elasticity between output and GDP, it will be illuminating to include the other parameter of the
Okuns equation, named k in (1).
k is the increase in the unemployment rate when the GDP growth is 0. Usually economic analysts
use the value for the opposite situation, the so called output growth threshold, the needed GDP
increase to maintain unemployment rate constant, the value k/c in the cleared version of the
Okuns equation:

In the alternative Okuns equation using total hours, the output growth threshold will show the
needed increase in GDP to maintain constant the number of hours worked in the country. Clearing
the equation of total hours:

The results from the replicated rolling regressions exercise show a very high cross country
similarity, at least between Spain, Sweden and UK (Figure 6). These three countries show both
similar absolute values and parallel trends. During the 2000s both coefficients start to rise slowly
to reach the peak on 2008. Then, with the economic crisis it comes a sudden fall followed with an
slower decrease.
Germany is a case apart. Its parameters are not only lower, but also decrease during the whole
period of the 2000s, if with the start of the crisis the decrease is more pronounced. In this values
may be part of the explanation of the high employment creation of Germany, simply its output
growth threshold is lower.
Regarding the differences between parameters, again Spain Sweden and UK are very similar. Both
parameters tent to have almost the same values during the 2000s to start differing after 2008. If
before the crisis the parameter of the total hours equation tent to be a bit higher than Okuns,
after 2008 its value falls faster, to create a differences in the threshold for hours and for
unemployment rate. Again, Germany is an exception, having an output growth threshold higher
for the working hours than for the unemployment rate.
The interpretation of the values of this parameters is not the aim of this paper, only to show the
data and to make a brief description in this appendix. The explanation of the output growth
thresholds is more related with productivity growth than with the elasticity of unemployment of
output, being it a very different subject.

-.2

.2 .4 .6

.8

Spain

1995

2000

2005
Time

2010

2015

2010

2015

2010

2015

2010

2015

-.2

.2 .4 .6

.8

Sweden

1995

2000

2005
Time

-.2

.2 .4 .6 .8

UK

1995

2000

2005
Time

-.2

.2 .4

.6 .8

Germany

1995

2000

2005
Time

Figure 6: Output growth thresholds. k/c (Okuns ecuation) and k/c (Total Hours ecuation) values for
each series of 40 quarters.

References.
Arthur Okun "Potential GNP: Its Measurement and Significance", 1962. Proceedings of the
Business and Economic Statistics Section of the American Statistical Association. Alexandria, VA:
American Statistical Association
Edward S. Knotek How usefull is the Okuns law?, 2007, quarter 4. Economic review of the
Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City
J. Andrs, J. E. Bosc, R. Domenech and J. Ferri Job creation: productivity growth, labor market
reforms or both?, 2009. BBVA Working Papers, Economic Research department N 10/13.
Jos Daniel Buenda Azorn and Mara del Mar Snchez de la Vega,Estimacin de los umbrales de
crecimiento econmico para la creacin de empleo y la reduccin del desempleo con datos de
panel de las provincias espaolas , 2014. International Conference on Regional Science.
Ravi Balakrishnan, Mitali Das,and Prakash Kannnan Unemployment dynamics during recessions
and recoveries: Okuns law and beyond, 2013. IMF World Economic Outlook, April, chapter 3.
Rui M. Pereira Okun's Law across the Business Cycle and during the Great Recession: A Markov
Switching Analysis, 2013. College of William and Mary, Department of Economics, Working Paper
Number 139.
Sandrine Cazes, Sher Verick and Fares al HussamiWhy did unemployment respond so differently
to the global finantial crisis across countries?, 2013. IZA Journal of Labor Policy.

Data Appendix
Time series data about employment and unemployment, GDP and annual hours of work has been
obtained from the OECD webpage http://www.oecd.org/

-Quarterly GDP growth: https://data.oecd.org/gdp/gross-domestic-product-gdp.htm

-Quarterly Unemployment rates: https://data.oecd.org/unemp/harmonised-unemployment-ratehur.htm
From http://stats.oecd.org/:

-Net employment and Labor Force: National Accounts/Quarterly National Accounts/

Quarterly National Accounts/ Population and Employment-National Concept.
- GDP per capita: National Accounts/Quarterly National Accounts/ Quarterly National
Accounts/ GDP per Capita.
-Annual hours worked per worker: Labour/Labour Force Statistics/Hours worked/Average
annual hours actually worked per worker.
-Annual total labor force and net employment: Labour/Labour Force Statistics/ Annual
Labour Force Statistics/ Population and Labour Force.
-Real GDP: National Accounts/ Annual National Accounts/ Main Aggregates/Gross
domestic product (GDP)/ GDP, US $, constant prices, constant PPPs, reference year 2010,
millions
-Productivity: Calculated using Real GDP (GDP), Labor Force (LF) and Hours worked per worker (h):

-Total Hours: Calculated using net employment (E) and Hours worked per worker (h):

Data about quarterly hours comes from the following national statistical institutes: INE (Spain),
ONS (UK) and SCB (Sweden). German quarterly hours have been obtained from the ECB Statistical
Data Warehouse:
-Spain: http://www.ine.es/jaxiT3/Tabla.htm?t=9377
-UK: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/search/index.html?nscl=Weekly+Hours&nsclorig=Weekly+Hours&content-type=Dataset&contenttype=Reference+table&sortDirection=DESCENDING&sortBy=pubdate
-Germany:
http://sdw.ecb.europa.eu/quickview.do?SERIES_KEY=119.ESA.Q.DE.Y.1000.TOTEMP.0000.
TTTT.N.H.A&periodSortOrder=ASC
-Sweden:
http://www.statistikdatabasen.scb.se/pxweb/en/ssd/START__NR__NR0103__NR0103B/N
R0103ENS2010T11Kv/table/tableViewLayout1/?rxid=40de06a9-042c-4542-9d31255fcc5d877b