2014 Final Figures

Figure 1
Annual average economic growth, 19952013 (GDP in constant prices)

10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
Real GDP growth (%)
2.0
0.0
-2.0
-4.0
World
Advanced economies
Emerging market and developing economies
Note: Country groups are those used by the IMF as described in the appendix of the IMFs World Economic Outlook, Apr. 2014.
Source: IMF World Economic Outlook database, Apr. 2014.
Figure 2
Annual average global real wage growth, 200613
Global
Global (without China)
3.5
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.5
2.4
2.2
2.2
2.1
2.0
2.0
Growth (%)
1.6
1.4
1.5
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.0
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.1
0.0
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Note: Global wage growth is calculated as a weighted average of year-on-year growth in average monthly real wages in 130 countries, covering 95.8% of all
employees in the world (for a description of the methodology, see Appendix I).
Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15
Figure 3
Annual average real wage growth in the G20, 200613
G20 - developed
G20 - emerging
G20
10.0
9.2
8.3
8.0
6.7
6.5
5.9
6.0
5.9
4.8
Growth (%)
4.0
4.0
3.0
2.6
2.4
2.0
1.6
1.2
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.9
2.4
2.2
1.2
0.3
0.3
0.0
2006
2007
2008
2009
-0.8
2010
2011
-0.4
2012
2013
-2.0
Note: The estimate for the G20 uses the methodology specified in Appendix I, but is restricted to 18 out of 19 individual countries for which data are
available (Argentina identified some inconsistencies in its wage series for some years and has been excluded).
Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.
year
G20 developed
2006
2007
G20
0.7
0.8
G20 emerging
2.6
3.0
8.3
9.2
Figure 4
Annual average real wage growth in developed economies, 200613
1.2
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.4 (%)
Growth
0.2
0.1
0.0
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
-0.8
Note: Wage growth is calculated as a weighted average of year-on-year growth in average monthly real wages in 36 countries (for a description of the methodology, see
Appendix I).
region
Developed Economies
Developed Economies
Developed Economies
year
realwagegrowth
2006
2007
2008
0.9
1.0
-0.3
Figure 5
Average real wage index for developed G20 countries, 200713
110
108.9
106
105.0
Index (base year=2007)

102.7
102
101.6
101.4
98.7
98
94.3
92.9
94
90
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

Country
Australia
Canada
France
Germany
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
100.0
99.3
101.9
104.2
104.7
107.3
108.9
100.0
100.5
101.7
103.5
103.1
104.2
105.0
100.0
100.5
101.8
101.8
101.7
101.6
102.3
100.0
99.6
99.4
100.5
101.3
102.1
102.7
Figure 6
Average real wage index for selected European countries most affected by the crisis, 200713
110
103.4
100
Index (base year=2007)
98.1
96.8
90
80
75.8
70
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

country
Greece
Ireland
Portugal
Spain
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
100.0
100.2
99.6
96.1
88.3
80.6
75.8
100.0
101.0
102.8
102.5
100.8
99.4
98.1
100.0
101.9
105.5
108.1
105.2
103.4
100.0
100.9
104.4
103.3
101.3
98.3
96.8
Figure 7
Trends in growth in average wages and labour productivity in developed economies (index), 19992013
118
115
Index (base year =1999)

112
109
106
103
100
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Note: Wage growth is calculated as a weighted average of year-on-year growth in average monthly real wages in 36 economies (for a descriptio
methodology, see Appendix I). Index is based to 1999 because of data availability.
2010
2011
2012
2013
conomies (for a description of the
Labour productivity, real wages, and estimated real compensation per employee
in developed economies (indices), 19992013
118
115
112
Index
(base year =1999)
109
106
103
100
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Note: Wage growth is calculated as a weighted average of year-on-year growth in average monthly real wages in 33 economies (for a description of the
methodology, see Appendix I). Iceland, Israel and Malta were excluded from this figure for reasons of data availability; these three countries collectively contribute
less than 1 per cent of the total employees in developed economies. Index is based to 1999 because of data availability.
Sources: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.
Figure 9
Estimated real labour compensation per employee and labour productivity growth in the largest developed
economies, deflated by the CPI and GDP deflator, 19992013
est developed
Figure 10
Adjusted labour income share in developed G20 countries, 19912013
68
64
Adjusted labour income share (%)
60
56
52
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Note: Adjusted wage share, total economy, as a percentage of GDP at current market prices (compensation per employee as a percentage of G
market prices per person employed).
011 2012 2013
e as a percentage of GDP at
Figure 11
Adjusted labour income share in selected European countries most affected by the crisis, 19912013
65
61
57

53
49
45
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Note: Adjusted wage share, total economy, as a percentage of GDP at current market prices (compensation per employee as a percentage of
GDP at market prices per person employed).
2011 2012 2013
mployee as a percentage of
Figure 12
Average real wage growth in emerging and developing economies, by region, 200613
Africa
Asia
15.0
15.0
12.0
12.0
9.0
9.0
5.8
6.0
Growth (%)
3.0
3.1
2.8
3.7
1.2
1.0
5.4
5.9
6.0
0.0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
-6.0
-5.5
Eastern Europe and Central Asia
Latin America and the Caribbean

15.0
14.2
15.0
3.0
5.1
-3.0
-6.0
Growth (%)
6.3
3.0
0.9
-3.0
6.0
6.5
Growth (%)
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
9.0
7.7
6.0
0.0
12.0
7.3
11.6
12.0
8.4
8.3
6.0
9.0
5.8
4.5
6.0
4.0
Growth (%)
3.0
Growth
2.9
2.3
0.2
0.8
0.9
1.1
0.8
9.0
8.4
8.3
6.0
6.0
9.0
5.8
4.5
Growth (%)
6.0
4.0
Growth (%)
3.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
Growth
2.9
2.3
0.2
0.8
0.9
1.1
0.8
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

-3.0
-3.0
-3.4
-6.0
-6.0
*Growth rates published as tentative estimates (based on coverage c.4074%).

( ) Growth rates published but likely to change (based on coverage of less than 40%).
Note: Regional wage growth is calculated as a weighted average of year-on-year growth in average monthly real wages. For a description of the meth
Middle East
15.0
12.0
9.0
6.0
5.0
Growth (%)
3.0
1.0
1.3
1.1
1.1
0.1
3.9
9.0
6.0
5.0
Growth (%)
3.0
1.0
1.3
0.0
-3.0
1.1
1.1
3.9
0.1
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

-1.5
-6.0
of the methodology, see Appendix I.
Figure 13
Real wage growth in the largest emerging and developing economies, 201213
15
12
9.0
8.5
8.2
7.3
Growth (%)
5.4
5.0
5.6
4.1
3.1
3
1.8
0.2
0
China
Brazil
-3
*Data for 2013 are not available for Egypt.

Mexico
-0.5 -0.6
Russian Federation
14.4
Ukraine
Egypt*
-0.1
South Africa
Saudi Arabia
5.0
5.6
3.1
-0.1
outh Africa
Saudi Arabia
2012
2013
Figure 14
Employees as a share of total employment, 1999 and 2013
90
1999
2013
75
60
45
30
Per centage of total employment
15

Region
1999
2013
54
45
36
27
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Note: Adjusted wage share, total economy, as a percentage of GDP at current market prices (compensation per employee as a percentage of GD
market prices per person employed).
2012
2013
e as a percentage of GDP at
hare in China, 19922011 (System of National Accounts revised series)
(%)
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
55
50
45
abour income share (%)

40
35
30
1995
1996
1997
1998
rce: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2011
2012
.0 00 8
Global monthly average wage distribution in 2000 and 2012 (2012 PPP$)
<--China
D e nsity
.0 00 4 .0 00 6
2000
2012
.0 00 2
<--United States
1000
2000
3000
Monthly average wage in 2012PPP$
4000
5000
risis years, 200610: (a) topbottom inequality (D9/D1); (b) middle-
ottom inequality
06
2010
le-class inequality
2006
2010
t decade: (a) topbottom inequality
12
Chile
Viet Nam South Africa Indonesia
India
Figure 23
Recent evolution of real household income in selected economies
Netherlands
Norway
Ind ex b ase y ea r(20 04)= 10 0
In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 04)= 10 0
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
110
10
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Denmark
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Spain
In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 04)= 10 0
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
10
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Portugal
Romania
110
In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 04)= 10 0
100
20
10
0
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
20
10
10
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Russian Federation
2010
2006
2007
2008
Brazil
In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 02)= 10 0
130
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
20
0
120
10
2002
2006
2012
2001
2006
2009
Ind ex b ase y ea r(20 01)= 10
In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 02)= 10
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
20
0
120
10
2002
2006
2012
2001
2006
Viet Nam
Mexico
In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 02)= 10 0
130
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
120
110
100
40
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
20
0
10
2002
2006
India
2000
160
160
150
140
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2008
South Africa
In d ex b as e yea r(1 9 99)= 10 0
2010
10
1999
2004
2011
2000
Note: For methodology, definitions and databases, see Appendix II.

2005
economies
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
01
2007
2008
2006
2009
2010
2012
01
2006
2012
00
2000
2008
2005
2012
2010
r market effect: wage effect and employment effect
Wage effect
Labour market effect

Employment effect
ffect
Change in inequality between the top and bottom 10 per cent (D9/D1) in developed economies, 200610
Spain
United States
Lithuania
Sweden
Cyprus
Latvia
Slovakia
Iceland
France
Estonia
Finland
Ireland
Poland
Austria
United Kingdom
Czech Rep.
Greece
Italy
Germany
Slovenia
Belgium
Luxembourg
Hungary
Denmark
Norway
Portugal
Netherlands
Romania
Bulgaria
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
Actual change in inequality (D9/D1)
-0.5
Other income sources
Note: For methodology, definitions and databases, see Appendix II.

0.0
0.5
Wage effect
Employment effect
1.0
1.5
Figure 26
Change in inequality within the middle class (D7/D3) in developed economies, 200610
Ireland
Spain
Estonia
Sweden
United Kingdom
United States
Lithuania
Latvia
Iceland
Cyprus
Luxembourg
France
Germany
Poland
Slovenia
Finland
Slovakia
Austria
Denmark
Norway
Hungary
Belgium
Greece
Czech Rep.
Portugal
Italy
Bulgaria
Netherlands
Romania
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
Wage effect
0.2
Employment effect
0.3
Figure 27
Change in inequality between the top and bottom 10 per cent (D9/D1) in selecte
economies, selected years
Viet Nam (2002-2010)
Chile (2000-2009)
Mexico (2000-2012)
Uruguay (2004-2012)
Russian Federation (2002-2012)
Peru (2004-2012)
Argentina (2003-2012)
Brazil (2001-2012)
-4.50
-3.00
-1.50
0.00
Wage effect
Em
Figure 28
Change in inequality within the middle class (D7/D3) in selected emerging and d
years
Viet Nam (2002-2010)
Chile (2000-2009)
Uruguay (2004-2012)
Mexico (2000-2012)
Peru (2004-2012)
Russia (2002-2012)
Argentina (2003-2012)
Brazil (2001-2012)
-0.60
-0.50
-0.40
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
0.00
Wage effect
Em
Figure 35
Motherhood wage gap in selected emerging and developing countries, latest year
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
Russian Federation
Argentina
Brazil
Chile
Mexico
Peru
Uruguay
Note: The motherhood pay gap is defined as MPG = ((Enm Em)/Enm)*100, where Enm is the gross average monthly earnings of women who
are not mothers and Em is the gross average monthly earnings of mothers.
Figure 37
Eliminating the unexplained gender wage penalty: Mean wage gap before and af
developed economies; (b) emerging and developing economies
(a) Developed economies
Sweden
Lithuania
Slovenia
Poland
Hungary
Portugal
Romania
Latvia
Denmark
Luxembourg
Spain
Italy
France
Bulgaria
Finland
Europe
Belgium
Slovakia
Greece
Germany
Netherlands
Austria
Norway
Cyprus
Czech Rep.
Iceland
Estonia
United Kingdom
Ireland
United States
-20.0
-10.0
0.0
(b) Emerging and developing economies

Viet Nam
Mexico
Peru
China
Chile
Brazil
Uruguay
Argentina
10.0
20.0
Brazil
Uruguay
Argentina
Russian Federation
-20.0
-10.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
Figure 40
Eliminating the unexplained migrant wage penalty: Mean wage gap before and after adjustment in selected
economies, latest year
(a) Developed economies
Slovenia
Germany
Sweden
United Kingdom
Latvia
Belgium
Poland
Norway
Finland
France
Explained wage gap

Actual wage gap
Luxembourg
Austria
Netherlands
Europe
Ireland
Denmark
Estonia
Iceland
Portugal
Italy
Greece
Spain
Cyprus
-20.0
-10.0
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
(b) Emerging and developing economies
Brazil
Chile
Explained wage gap

Actual wage gap
Uruguay
Argentina
-120.0
-100.0
-80.0
-60.0
-40.0
-20.0
0.0
20.0
40.0

2014 Final Figures

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

2014 Final Figures

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Figure 1

Annual average economic growth, 19952013 (GDP in constant prices)

Emerging market and developing economies

Global (without China)

Index (base year=2007)

Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.

Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.

Index (base year =1999)

conomies (for a description of the

011 2012 2013

Adjusted labour income share (%)

2011 2012 2013

Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Latin America and the Caribbean

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

*Growth rates published as tentative estimates (based on coverage c.4074%).

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

of the methodology, see Appendix I.

*Data for 2013 are not available for Egypt.

Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.

Adjusted labour income share (%)

Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.

hare in China, 19922011 (System of National Accounts revised series)

abour income share (%)

rce: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.

Monthly average wage in 2012PPP$

risis years, 200610: (a) topbottom inequality (D9/D1); (b) middle-

t decade: (a) topbottom inequality

Viet Nam South Africa Indonesia

Ind ex b ase y ea r(20 04)= 10 0

In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 04)= 10 0

Ind ex b ase y ea r(20 04)= 10 0

In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 04)= 10 0

Ind ex b ase y ea r(20 06)= 10 0

In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 04)= 10 0

Ind ex b ase y ea r(20 01)= 10 0

In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 02)= 10 0

Ind ex b ase y ea r(20 01)= 10

In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 02)= 10

Ind ex b ase y ea r(20 00)= 10 0

In d ex b as e yea r(2 0 02)= 10 0

Ind ex b ase y ea r(20 00)= 10 0

In d ex b as e yea r(1 9 99)= 10 0

Note: For methodology, definitions and databases, see Appendix II.

r market effect: wage effect and employment effect

Labour market effect

Other income sources

Note: For methodology, definitions and databases, see Appendix II.

Actual change in inequality (D7/D3)

Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.

Viet Nam (2002-2010)

Russian Federation (2002-2012)

Actual change in inequality (D9/D1)

Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.

Actual change in inequality (D7/D3)

Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.

Other income sources

(b) Emerging and developing economies

Explained wage gap

(b) Emerging and developing economies

Explained wage gap

Source: ILO Global Wage Report 2014/15.