In recent years, the IMF has released a growing number of reports and other documents covering economic and financial developments and trends in member countries. Each report, prepared by a staff team after discussions with government officials, is published at the option of the member country.

Abstract

In recent years, the IMF has released a growing number of reports and other documents covering economic and financial developments and trends in member countries. Each report, prepared by a staff team after discussions with government officials, is published at the option of the member country.

Structural Health Check1

Finland is a high-capacity economy, known for its skilled workforce, favorable business environment, and leadership in innovation. However, the recovery from the deep recession of 2008–2009 has been disappointing at best, indicating that deeper, structural issues could be holding back growth. Despite rising unemployment, Finnish unit labor costs have outrun European peers, reflecting high wage growth as well as an ongoing decline in productivity. Furthermore, a combination of relatively low labor market participation, as well as population aging, adds to the drag on growth, while longstanding issues such as the weak competitive environment in the services sector and the fragmentation in the provision of local public sector services remain unaddressed.

A. Weakening Growth

1. Finland is widely recognized for its strong business environment and track record of good policies. Among euro area economies, it stands out as having met the Maastricht requirements every year since the introduction of the euro. The economy’s strong public institutions, governance, rule of law, and well educated labor force regularly help it earn top rankings in a number of survey-based indexes. Specifically, the Doing Business Indicator2 (DBI) and Global Competitiveness Index3 (GCI) rank Finland among the most competitive economies in the world.

A02ufig01

Finland: Export Market Shares

(Percent)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: International Financial Statistics and Fund staff calculations.

2. However, growth has slowed, reflecting the unfavorable external environment but also more fundamental weaknesses. The demand for Finnish exports, especially investment goods, weakened globally during the crisis. Finland has also lost market share due to non-price factors, in particular in the area of electronics along with Nokia’s fading fortunes in the mobile handset business. In addition, the demand for traditional Finnish exports of paper and pulp has been decreasing with the global shift from paper to electronic media. Domestically, fixed investment has been weak as corporations postponed projects in light of the diminishing outlook for growth. As a result, compared to its peers, growth per capita has declined in Finland since the financial crisis, which is particularly problematic for a rapidly aging society requiring higher productivity growth in order to maintain its living standards.

A02ufig02

Merchandise Exports

(Percent of GDP)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: Finnish Customs, Statistics Finland and Fund staff calculations.

3. A number of structural issues are holding back growth. The drop in export shares also reflects a loss in competitiveness due to the relatively strong growth of Unit Labor Costs (ULC). This is due both to high wage growth and a decline in labor productivity, which, in turn, is linked to rigidities in the labor market and a significant drop in Total Factor Productivity (TFP) growth.

A02ufig03

GDP per Capita and Age Dependency, Avg 2009–2012

(X-axis: population 65+ as a percent of population 20–64; Y-axis: percent change)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: IMF World Economic Outlook, OECD and Fund staff calculations.

4. This points to opportunities for improving Finland’s growth performance. In order to lift its prospects in what will remain a difficult external environment Finland can boost TFP growth, while ensuring that wages develop in line with labor productivity. Overall productivity could also be bolstered by improvements in the provision of public services, particularly at the municipality level, and the continued deregulation of the retail sector. Last but not least, strengthening the efficiency of the labor market and further improving the business climate will facilitate structural adjustment.

B. Unit Labor Costs, Wages, and the Labor Market

5. Finnish labor costs have seen a strong upward trend relative to some of its peers. While broadly in line with other high income OECD economies, ULC have risen faster than in Sweden and Germany since 2000, and sharply accelerated since the global financial crisis.

A02ufig04

Unit Labor Costs

(Index: 2000=100)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD and Fund staff calculations.
A02ufig05

Unit Labor Cost, post-crisis

(Average ULC growth, 2009–2012)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD and Fund staff calculations.

6. Wage growth has contributed to the high ULC. After a period of restraint following the Nordic crisis of the 1990s, real wage growth re-accelerated, often exceeding productivity growth since the early 2000s. The collective wage agreements of 2007–2008 led to a surge in wage growth just prior to the Great Recession, and wages reacted only moderately to the rise in unemployment, which has remained elevated at around 8 percent since 2009. The most recent wage agreement, negotiated in the fall of 2013, is set to slow wage growth, but may not be sufficient to restore competitiveness in light of decelerating productivity growth in the short-term (see also the discussion in section C).4

A02ufig06

Wages and Productivity

(Year on year change, percent)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: Eurostat, Haver Analytics, Statistics Finland and Fund staff calculations.

7. These developments draw attention to key characteristics of the Finnish labor market.

  • A strong collective bargaining system has contributed to the reliable Finnish business climate through wage agreements broadly in line with productivity growth in the past—a practice that would benefit the competitiveness of Finnish exports in the future, as well. At the same time, it will be important to ensure sufficient wage flexibility at the firm level, especially in sectors that are facing structural change (see section E).

  • Unemployment insurance (UI) replacement rates are relatively high compared to other advanced economies. High replacement rates are likely to reduce the incentives for unemployed workers to search for and accept jobs. This is especially the case when, as in Finland, monitoring may not always be sufficient or existing requirements for active labor market participation are not fully enforced.

  • Finland has a relatively high share of workers on temporary contracts. On the one hand, this provides a measure of flexibility by facilitating employment adjustment as contracts approach renewal. On the other, it also raises potential duality problems as firms tend to invest less in the human capital of temporary employees (see Section E).

  • Labor market participation rates are low, in particular for older workers, which not only narrows the labor supply given the relatively fast pace of population aging in Finland, but also adds to upward wage pressures.5

A02ufig07

Unemployment Rate

(Percent of labor force)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: Eurostat, Haver Analytics, and Fund staff calculations.
A02ufig08

Labor Market Institutions

(Rate, Y-axis; Index:0-6 (6 indicates stricter regulation), X-axis)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD and Fund staff calculations
A02ufig09

EPL and Share of Temporary Workers, 2008–2012

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: Eurostat, OECD and Fund staff calculations.
A02ufig10

Labor Force

(Percent of 15–64 population, left; Millions of persons,

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: Statistics Finland and Fund staff calculations.

C. Labor Productivity

8. Productivity in the Finnish economy grew steadily up until the mid-2000s. It was boosted by the rapid recovery after the 1990s recession which, in turn, was fueled by the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector. Government policies played an important role in this, including a competitiveness policy targeted at private sector innovation—focused heavily on the development of the ICT sector, with Nokia as the central player—and structural reforms, as well as Finland’s European Union (EU) accession in 1995 (OECD, 2010a).

A02ufig11

Contributions to GDP Growth

(Average annual growth in percent, 1985–2010)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD and Fund staff calculations

9. Recently, labor productivity has slowed, reflecting mostly weaker TFP growth (Figure 1). Between 1991 and 2008, Finland closed the gap to the best performing OECD countries, mirroring strong TFP developments and a shift in investment from physical capital towards R&D. However, the combination of the Great Recession and the decreasing importance of Nokia and the ICT sector has significantly damped productivity growth, and Finland is now lagging behind many European economies.

Figure 1.
Figure 1.

Labor Productivity

(Percent change; percent; percentage points of GDP; EUR; thousands)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: European Commission, Eurostat, Haver Analytics, OECD, Statistics Finland, and Fund staff calculations.

10. While R&D spending remains high, it may not be as effective as it could be. Finland continues to have relatively high private and public R&D intensity compared to other OECD economies, with aggregate R&D spending of about 4 percent of GDP in 2010. At the same time, these investments may not be effective, considering firms’ measurable innovation performance remains in line with peers.6 For example, innovation activity related to production and process innovation has declined and the number of patents granted to Finnish firms has been contracting since 2008.7 In part, the shrinking patent activity is a reflection of the diminishing role of Finland’s ICT industry in recent years, with Nokia’s market share in the global mobile handset market falling from 36 to 17 percent between the third quarters of 2010 and 2011 (Gartner, 2011). Another factor could be a lack of innovation and entrepreneurship outside the core ICT cluster and among SMEs. Based on recent surveys, the number of SMEs innovating in-house or in collaboration with others shrunk by about 5 and 8 percent, respectively, from 2012 to 2013 (Figure 2).8

Figure 2.
Figure 2.

Innovation Union Scorecard, 2013

(Annual average growth)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: European Commission Innovation Union Scorecard 2013 and Fund staff calculations.
A02ufig12

Introducion of Product or Process Innovation, 2010

(Percent of all firms)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD and Fund staff calculations.
A02ufig13

R&D Intensity, 2010

(Percent of value added)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD and Fund staff calculations.

D. Productivity in the Service and Network Sectors

11. Further deregulating Finland’s retail sector promises to generate additional productivity gains. Despite recent progress, regulatory barriers are still among the highest in the EU. This includes zoning and planning restrictions, which, in addition to restricting entry, keep down the size of retail stores as existing locations cannot be expanded and large size shops can only be built outside of the city center. The passing of the 2011 Competition Act tightens merger control and is expected to lower market concentration. However, as of now, market concentration remains high, which likely curtails activity and contributes to higher prices. Restrictive legislation on opening hours further holds back retail productivity.

A02ufig14

Wholesale and Retail Trade Productivity

(Value added per hour)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD and Fund staff calculations.
A02ufig15

Regulation in Retail Trade, 2008

(Scale from 0 (least restrictions) to 6 (most restrictions))

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD and Fund staff calculations.

12. Productivity could also be bolstered by improvements in the provision of public services. Since 2000, the efficiency of public services has deteriorated. Many of these services are provided at the local level, and there are indications that the fragmentation of municipalities and municipal services is a key factor in this regard. Individual municipalities are often small and serve sparsely populated areas, which prevents them from achieving economies of scale and reduces their ability to hire qualified and adequately skilled employees. The problem is particularly difficult in the area of public healthcare. Faced with an aging population, municipalities are increasingly hard-pressed to ensure equal, high-quality access to health and long-term care for all citizens.

A02ufig16

Productivity in Public Services

(Index: 2000=100)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: Statistics Finland Statistics on Local Government Productivity and Fund staff calculations.

13. There is also some scope for further lowering regulatory boundaries in network industries. Recent reforms have aided competition, but less so than in other OECD economies. Specifically, productivity remains low in sectors where the government is a dominant player such as electricity, gas, and water distribution as well as transport, storage and communication. Further opening these sectors up to private provision, and thus more competition, could lead to significant productivity gains.

E. Adjustment

14. Is Finland ready for adjustment? At the peak of the ICT boom, Nokia’s business accounted for nearly 4 percent of Finnish GDP, and the ICT sector employed roughly 2.3 percent of the Finnish labor force in 2010. The cooling-off of the ICT boom brings the need to reallocate factors of production—especially the shrinking workforce of the Nokia mobile phone cluster. While Nokia will continue to produce and export network services, the sale of its mobile telecommunications business to Microsoft (to conclude in 2014) could potentially affect 4,700 ex-Nokia employees in Finland, or about 0.2 percent of the labor force. Another structural challenge is the decline of the wood and pulp industry resulting from the contraction in the global demand for paper. The question therefore is whether Finland has an environment conducive to the required adjustment that will continue to foster innovation and entrepreneurship outside past patterns and would help the economy to rebound.

A02ufig17

Shares of Gross Value Added

(Percent of gross value added)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: Statistics Finland and Fund staff calculations.

15. Surveys suggest that important aspects of the business environment could still be improved (Figure 3). The World Bank’s Doing Business Indicators (DBI) ranks Finland 12th out of 189 economies in 2014 and the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) ranks the country 3rd in terms of overall competitiveness. However, Finland receives significantly lower grades in areas that would seem to matter most as the economy adjusts to its structural challenges. In particular, DBI ranks it only 55th and 42nd on starting a business and getting credit, respectively. There are also indications that not all firms see the climate for innovation as optimal. Furthermore, access to financing as well as insufficient capacity to innovate, are among the top most problematic factors for doing business listed by the respondents of the GCI survey.

Figure 3.
Figure 3.

Global Competitiveness Index and Doing Business Indicators

(Ranking)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: World Economic Forum GCI 2013, World Bank Doing Business 2014, and Fund staff calculations.

16. While there are no indications of decreasing matching efficiency, lowering EPL and encouraging job search would also help the ability to adjust. After the outward shift of the Beveridge curve in the early 1990s, vacancy-unemployment movements seem to be largely along the (new) curve with no further structural shifts during the recent crisis episode, suggesting a broadly unchanged pattern of matching efficiency. At the same time, Finland is farther away from the spirit of “flexicurity” than other economies undergoing structural change, such as Ireland (see Section B). Specifically, the fact that unemployment insurance replacement rates are high and benefits are paid for relatively long periods (550 days) could mean that, in the absence of proper monitoring and other incentives, job searches might be less intensive than otherwise. In addition, high levels of EPL tend to slow down structural adjustment.

17. Active labor market policies (ALMP) and better enforcement of existing activation rules can aid the adjustment (Figure 4). Earlier intervention to get people back to work would help raise the labor participation rate. Currently, referral to an active labor market program in Finland takes place after 100 weeks, compared to mandatory referral after 60 weeks in Sweden and 40 weeks in Denmark (OECD, 2010b). This means lower incentives for the unemployed to search for jobs early. The authorities have taken steps in 2010 towards earlier activation, including by removing the age limit on the compulsory activation requirement, demanding individualized work plans, and guaranteeing work or training for young workers after an unemployment spell of three month. Given the mixed evidence on the effectiveness of different ALMP–with training and matching programs generally considered more effective than other measures–and their fiscal cost (Estevao, 2007), continued monitoring of their effectiveness remains crucial.

Figure 4.
Figure 4.

Active Labor Market Policies

(Percent of GDP and Percent of Labor Force, respectively)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD and Fund staff calculations.
A02ufig18

Finland Beveridge Curve

(X-axis: Thousands; Y-axis: Percent of labor force)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: Haver Analytics, Statistics Finland and Fund staff calculations.
A02ufig19

Permanent Contracts, 2012

(Percent of total employment)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: EUROSTAT and Fund staff calculations.

18. The Finnish workforce is highly skilled, and there is little evidence of qualification mismatches. About 87 percent of the population has completed education that exceeds upper secondary level, putting Finland in the top tier of OCED economies. Survey results point to a small shortage of low-skilled laborers and a small oversupply of laborers with upper-secondary qualification, while jobs and skills requiring more than upper secondary education look on par.9

A02ufig20

Finland Education GPS

(OECD PISA Scores)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD PISA and Fund staff calculations.
A02ufig21

Enrollment Rates 20–29 Year Olds

(Percent of population ages 20–29)

Citation: IMF Staff Country Reports 2014, 140; 10.5089/9781498331333.002.A002

Sources: OECD Economic Survey Finland and Fund staff calculations.

19. That said, there is room for improving the education system in certain areas. Finnish secondary school students score high and above the OECD average, but results have been deteriorating in recent years across all measured categories (reading, mathematics, and science). And even though universities rank higher than the OECD along most dimensions, their performance is lagging behind Nordic neighbors as well as European top performers. An important factor is the relatively long time it takes for students to enter the labor force, which can be linked, among other things, to cumbersome entrance procedures and requirements. In addition, tertiary study times are long, and only about 45 percent of the students complete their degrees in the targeted time (OECD, 2012).

20. In principle, a downsizing ICT cluster should provide the economy with a well-educated and experienced workforce ready to fuel growth in other sectors. Even though there are indications that many startups have been founded by ex-Nokia staff in the past, recent developments are more difficult to interpret. Between 1989 and 1994, about two-thirds of employees leaving Nokia staff joined a start-up (i.e. a firm less than two years old).10 Between 2008 and 2010, this share dropped to about 15 percent as about half of ex-Nokia employees were moving to more established firms (11 years old or more), suggesting that the shift towards innovative activity in young startups may have lost pace.

F. Conclusion

21. Finland can grow faster than the current outlook indicates. Scope for action exists along a number of dimensions, specifically:

  • Strengthening labor market performance. Wage growth in line with productivity—a feat Finland’s social partners have achieved in the past—will help Finnish exports regain lost competitiveness. Labor market participation can be increased, including by improved monitoring of search and training requirements, an earlier phase-out of UI benefits and/or reduction in replacement rates, effectiveness-tested ALMP, and measures to improve the participation of older workers (e.g., through further pension reform).

  • Improving TFP growth and productivity. Raising labor productivity is at least as crucial for realigning ULC with global market conditions, which requires steps to adjust R&D policies to the post-Nokia era, where innovation and growth might be found in smaller firms outside the existing ICT cluster (e.g., consideration could be given to strengthen tax incentives at the expense of R&D Dsubsidies). At the same time, regulatory reform can facilitate the business conditions for start-ups, and service sector reforms would improve competitiveness and productivity, especially in retail. There is also room to reverse the negative productivity trend in the public sector, where municipality reforms promise to enable economies of scale in the provision of healthcare, among other things.

  • Facilitating adjustment. Measures that facilitate job change (including, by improving search incentives and training) will help Finland make the most of its capable and highly-skilled workforce. Shortening the duration of higher education would contribute to the flexibility of labor supply by allowing quicker adjustment to changing sectoral labor demand. In addition, employment protection should not become an impediment to adjustment—for example in the context of local government reform.

22. The government’s reform program promises to address many of these issues. The government has agreed on an ambitious agenda outlined in its “Decision on Implementing the Structural Policy Program” from November 2013 (see Table 1 in the Appendix). Among the specific measures with clear time-tables, it includes elements of labor market reform (e.g., initiatives to increase labor market participation of older workers and the obligation of unemployed to take on jobs), service and product market reform (e.g., shopping hours and competition policy), and municipalities reform (e.g., streamlining local government in the Helsinki area). Other elements of the program are still awaiting specification, including possible changes to ALMP such as training programs, and the details of pension reforms.

23. The effectiveness of the reform program is hard to gauge The government program does not provide estimates of the growth impact of reforms, but does provide some numbers regarding the expected impact that broad areas of reform (in their nomenclature) will have on the fiscal sustainability gap, estimated by the government to be 4.7 percent of GDP (see text table). In many cases, there is insufficient detail in order to make an independent assessment of the claimed impact of many measures. However, the claimed impact of the specified reforms may be optimistic. The simulation results in Chapter IV suggest that a vigorous implementation of reforms, starting with those in the current government program and going further over time, could feasibly close the sustainability gap. This would occur directly through fiscal savings (e.g., expenditure control and reductions) and indirectly through higher growth over the medium-term (relative to the baseline).

Summary of the Government Structural Policy Program

article image
Sources: Finland Government Decision on Implementing the Structural Policy Program (2013) and Fund staff assessment.Notes: Reform areas and possible impact numbers are taken from the government’s program.

References

  • Council of the European Union, 2013, “Employment and Social Developments in Europe 2012,” European Commission, January 2013.

  • Estevao, Marcello, 2007, “Labor Policies to Rise Employment,” IMF Staff Papers Vol. 54(1), pp. 113138.

  • Eurofound, 2013, “Third European Company Survey: First FindingsEuropean Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 2013. http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/htmlfiles/ef1386.htm

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Commission (EC), 2013, “Innovation Union Scoreboard 2013”, European Union 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/innovation/files/ius-2013_en.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Commission (EC), 2013, “Digital Agenda Scoreboard 2013,” Commission Staff Working Document 2013.

  • European Commission (EC), 2013, “Finland’s High House Prices and Household Debt: a Source of Concern?Economic Analysis from EC Directorate General for Economic and Financial Affairs, October 2013.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • IFC, 2013, “Doing Business 2014 Economy Profile: Finland,” World Bank Group Corporate Flagship http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/finland/

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gartner, 2011, “Samsung overtakes Nokia on smart phones”. Available online at: www.marketwatch.com/story/samsungovertakes-nokia-on-smartphones-gartner-2011-11-15

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Labor Organization (ILO), 2013, “Global Employment Trends,” International Labor Organization.

  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2010a, “Finland: Slow and Steady Reform for Consistently High Results,” OECD Publishing (Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2010b, “OECD Economic Surveys: Finland 2010,” OECD Publishing (Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2012, “OECD Economic Surveys: Finland 2012,” OECD Publishing (Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development). http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eco_surveys-fin-2012-en

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 2013, “Finland: Fit for the Future,” OECD Publishing (Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • World Economic Forum (WEF), 2013, “Global Competitiveness Index: Country Economy Profile Finlandhttp://www3.weforum.org/docs/CSI/2012-13/Finland.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
1

Prepared by Borislava Mircheva

4

Contractual wages will rise by 0.7 percent in 2014 and 0.5 percent in 2015, compared to 1.4 percent in 2013 while the index of wage and salary earning will rise by 1.3 percent in 2014 and 1.2 percent in 2015, compared to 2 percent in 2013.

5

At about 40 percent, the employment rate for those aged 60–64 is broadly in line with other OECD countries. However, only about 12 percent of the population aged 65–69 is working, compared to the OECD average of about 23 percent (numbers as of 2011) (OECD, 2013).

7

For additional information see Selected Issues Paper, Chapter III, Finland: Stylized Facts on Innovation and Growth.

9

World Economic Forum, “Matching Skills and Labor Market Needs. Building Social Partnerships for Better Skills and Better Jobs” Davos-Klosters, Switzerland, 22–25 January.

10

See Selected Issues Paper, Chapter III, Finland: Stylized Facts on Innovation and Growth.

Finland: Selected Issues
Author: International Monetary Fund. European Dept.
  • View in gallery

    Finland: Export Market Shares

    (Percent)

  • View in gallery

    Merchandise Exports

    (Percent of GDP)

  • View in gallery

    GDP per Capita and Age Dependency, Avg 2009–2012

    (X-axis: population 65+ as a percent of population 20–64; Y-axis: percent change)

  • View in gallery

    Unit Labor Costs

    (Index: 2000=100)

  • View in gallery

    Unit Labor Cost, post-crisis

    (Average ULC growth, 2009–2012)

  • View in gallery

    Wages and Productivity

    (Year on year change, percent)

  • View in gallery

    Unemployment Rate

    (Percent of labor force)

  • View in gallery

    Labor Market Institutions

    (Rate, Y-axis; Index:0-6 (6 indicates stricter regulation), X-axis)

  • View in gallery

    EPL and Share of Temporary Workers, 2008–2012

  • View in gallery

    Labor Force

    (Percent of 15–64 population, left; Millions of persons,

  • View in gallery

    Contributions to GDP Growth

    (Average annual growth in percent, 1985–2010)

  • View in gallery

    Labor Productivity

    (Percent change; percent; percentage points of GDP; EUR; thousands)

  • View in gallery

    Innovation Union Scorecard, 2013

    (Annual average growth)

  • View in gallery

    Introducion of Product or Process Innovation, 2010

    (Percent of all firms)

  • View in gallery

    R&D Intensity, 2010

    (Percent of value added)

  • View in gallery

    Wholesale and Retail Trade Productivity

    (Value added per hour)

  • View in gallery

    Regulation in Retail Trade, 2008

    (Scale from 0 (least restrictions) to 6 (most restrictions))

  • View in gallery

    Productivity in Public Services

    (Index: 2000=100)

  • View in gallery

    Shares of Gross Value Added

    (Percent of gross value added)

  • View in gallery

    Global Competitiveness Index and Doing Business Indicators

    (Ranking)

  • View in gallery

    Active Labor Market Policies

    (Percent of GDP and Percent of Labor Force, respectively)

  • View in gallery

    Finland Beveridge Curve

    (X-axis: Thousands; Y-axis: Percent of labor force)

  • View in gallery

    Permanent Contracts, 2012

    (Percent of total employment)

  • View in gallery

    Finland Education GPS

    (OECD PISA Scores)

  • View in gallery

    Enrollment Rates 20–29 Year Olds

    (Percent of population ages 20–29)