Data Cart

Your data extract

0 variables
0 samples
View Cart
INDGEN
Industry, general recode

Codes and Frequencies



Can't find the category you are looking for? Try the Detailed codes

Description

INDGEN recodes the industrial classifications of the various samples into twelve groups that can be fairly consistently identified across all available samples. The groupings roughly conform to the International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC). The third digit of INDGEN retains important detail among the service industries that could not be consistently distinguished in all samples.

"Industry" refers to the activity or product of the establishment or sector in which a person worked.

Comparability — Index

GENERAL
Argentina
Austria
Belarus
Benin
Bolivia
Botswana
Cambodia
Canada
China
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Egypt
El Salvador
Fiji
France
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Guatemala
Guinea
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
India
Indonesia
Iran
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Liberia
Malawi
Malaysia
Mali
Mexico
Mozambique
Nepal
Netherlands
Nigeria
Pakistan
Palestine
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Saint Lucia
Senegal
Spain
Switzerland
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago
Turkey
Uruguay
Venezuela
Vietnam
Zambia

Comparability — General

The industry codes are relatively comparable across samples, but there were numerous judgment calls in making the differing industry classifications conform to INDGEN. Not all categories are available in all samples because of the nature of the underlying classifications. The full detail of each original census industry classification is retained un-recorded in the IND variable.

Some service categories were not separately identifiable in all samples, and it may be necessary to combine all the service categories to make certain comparisons. The "other" service group includes miscellaneous personal and community services that are not identified elsewhere in the particular sample in question. This may include such things as sanitary services and entertainment activities.

Repair activities are inconsistently coded. Automobile repair is included with wholesale and retail trade where it is separately identified. Repairs that are clearly for business functions (e.g., office machinery) are coded with "real estate and business services". All other repairs and those that remain undifferentiated -- and may include the functions listed above in some samples -- are included with "other services".

Rental activities are also included with "other services" unless they are explicitly of a business nature, in which case they are coded to "real estate and business services".

The age of the persons to whom the question applies varies across countries. In some samples, the question was asked only of those who were employed at the time of the census. In others, persons were asked to report their last industry, even if they were no longer employed or in the labor force.

Note: An alternative weight variable must be used to yield accurate statistics for 1991 Argentina.

Comparability — Argentina [top]

In 1991, roughly half the cases in the sample lack data for this and several other variables. Users should apply the alternative weight variable AR1991A_0434 when using one of these variables.

Comparability — Austria [top]

The Austrian industry data are fully comparable.

The source data for Austria assigned industries to non-workers based on who "supported" them. INDGEN reports data only for economically active persons.

Comparability — Belarus [top]

This variable is only available in 2009.

Comparability — Benin [top]

The 1979 and 1992 samples provide much less detailed information than the later years, grouping all services together, among other things.

Comparability — Bolivia [top]

The samples are quite comparable in terms of categorization and universes. The 1976 sample does not have information on real estate services.

Comparability — Botswana [top]

The Botswana samples have comparable industry data.

There were significantly less response categories in the 1981 sample. The data for this sample has grouped some categories, thus creating some comparability issues. Responses for "hotels and restaurants" are merged with "wholesale and retail trade" and "business services" with "financial services and insurance;" some cases that would correspond to "other services" may be included in "health and social work."

Comparability — Cambodia [top]

The data are fully comparable between samples and report main activity last year.

Comparability — Canada [top]

There are differences in category availability across samples. Utilities are only identified in 1981 and 2011. Hotels and restaurants and education are not identified in 1971.

Real estate is included with financial services and insurance in 1971-2001. In 2011, financial services and insurance is a separate category from real estate.

Comparability — China [top]

The industry classifications for China were relatively similar. Services did not fit the INDGEN categories well. In 1990 and 2000, a large number of categories not identified in 1982 were coded to real estate and business services.

Comparability — Cuba [top]

The data report the industry category held in the previous week.

Comparability — Dominican Republic [top]

The data report the activity of the establishment or sector in which the person works or worked. While the universe is consistent across samples in terms of age, the reference period and employment categories included in the universe vary. Industry classifications are fairly comparable across samples, but there are some differences. The 1960 sample lacked a "hotels and restaurants" category and a "health and social work category," and the 1960 and 1970 samples did not include a separate category for education services.

Comparability — Egypt [top]

The underlying classification systems differ, but all samples are well adapted to the groupings in INDGEN, and the aggregate distribution is similar.

There is a very minor universe change from 1986 to 1996.

Comparability — El Salvador [top]

The universe includes the experienced unemployed in 2007, not in 1992.

Comparability — Fiji [top]

The identified service industries vary across samples.

Comparability — France [top]

The universe differs between samples with respect to the minimum age.

Industry in France was classified differently over the years. For the 1962 and 1968 censuses, no detail was available within services, making it impossible to identify education or health services.

Comparability — Germany [top]

The samples are coded from differing underlying classifications. Education is not separately identified in 1970. Several categories are not available in 1981.

Comparability — Ghana [top]

In both samples, the reference period is the 7 days preceding the census night. The age universe differs across samples, including persons age 7+ in 2000 and persons age 5+ in 2010. The identified industries are basically consistent across samples.

The 1984 sample lacks a separate category for education.

Comparability — Greece [top]

The 1971 sample lacked codes for the hotel and restaurant industries. These may be included among the "unknown" responses.

Comparability — Guatemala [top]

There are age difference in the universe of respondents between samples. Some categories are not separately identified in all years. The 1981 sample seems to combine education with health. The 2002 sample combines trade with hotels and restaurants, and it does not identify several categories.

Comparability — Guinea [top]

The 1996 census included an industry item, but the data are not included in the sample.

Comparability — Haiti [top]

The 1971 census asked the industry question, but the coded data are lacking many industries and are therefore not included in INDGEN. See the unharmonized variables.

Comparability — Honduras [top]

The 1961 sample lacks considerable detail. It does not separately identify mining and some other industry categories. The 1988 census asked an industry question, but the microdata lack labels.

Comparability — Hungary [top]

The data is comparable across the two samples. The 2011 sample includes scientific and technical activities within the "business services" category.

Comparability — India [top]

The India samples report current industry at the time of the census. The underlying classifications are only broadly comparable.

Comparability — Indonesia [top]

The 1971-1995 samples are mostly comparable, with slight universe differences in the inclusion of the experienced unemployed and persons who were temporarily absent from work. These samples do not offer enough detail to differentiate education and health/social work services -- these cases are contained within the "other services" category.

The 2005 sample is fully integrated into all categories; the 2010 sample differentiates education and health/social work, but does not for real estate/business services and private household services -- these cases are also contained within the "other services" category.

The 2000 sample only contains a simplified one-digit industry classification that could not be integrated into INDGEN.

Comparability — Iran [top]

The underlying classifications differ across samples, but are comparable when adapted to INDGEN.

Comparability — Ireland [top]

The Irish samples use 3 separate classifications for 1971, 1981-1996, and 2002-2011. Universe differences between samples are minor.

Comparability — Israel [top]

Mining is included with manufacturing.

The 1972 and 1983 industry classifications were highly aggregated and were not compatible with INDGEN. See IND.

Comparability — Italy [top]

The data are comparable across censuses.


The data are comparable across all survey years.

Comparability — Jamaica [top]

The data report industry last week.

All three samples use a classification that fits INDGEN well, the major exception being the lack of specifics for services in 1982.

Comparability — Liberia [top]

The universe differs across samples, including persons age 10+ in 1974, and persons age 6+ in 2008. Both samples included persons who worked in the last 12 months in the universe, although the response categories for economic activity were more detailed in 2008 and therefore explicitly included those who were paid employees, self-employed or contributing family workers. Categorization of industry was similar in both samples.

Comparability — Malawi [top]

The only notable universe difference between samples is the change in age universe from 10 and older in 1987-1998 to age 6 and older in 2008.

The 1987 and 1998 data are comparable. The 2008 sample is coded from a different underlying classification.

Comparability — Malaysia [top]

The samples have comparable industry data.

Comparability — Mali [top]

The underlying data are consistent between samples, recording the respondent's main industry category in the previous month.

Comparability — Mexico [top]

The 2005 sample does not include information on industry.

Comparability — Mozambique [top]

The universe differs across samples but the sample employs the same classification scheme.

Comparability — Nepal [top]

The 2001 data record the person's usual industry in the previous year, while the 2011 data identify the industry in the past 12 months.

Comparability — Netherlands [top]

Mining is included with manufacturing in all samples. The 2001 and 2011 samples include more detail among service industries.

Comparability — Nigeria [top]

The universe is consistent in the 2006-2009 samples; the 2010 sample had a lower minimum age for inclusion in the universe. Categorization of industry followed slightly different schemes in 2006-2007, 2008-2009, and 2010. The 2010 scheme contained the least detail and did not include "hotels and restaurants."

Comparability — Pakistan [top]

The data record the person's industry category in the previous week. The source category for education is actually the broader "social and related community services". The 1981 and 1998 samples do not include industry data.

Comparability — Palestine [top]

The age universe of respondents varies across samples. The data are otherwise completely comparable across samples, recording main activity last week.

Comparability — Panama [top]

The Panama samples have comparable industry data.

Comparability — Papua New Guinea [top]

The 1980 sample offers little detail among service industries.

Comparability — Paraguay [top]

The samples differ in their identification of service industry categories.

Comparability — Peru [top]

The samples use identical classifications. The 1993 sample records the person's industry in the previous week, or during the last time they were employed. The 2007 sample reports the industry category from the previous week only.

Comparability — Philippines [top]

The 1995 classification is very crude, and the resulting INDGEN codes lack a distinct category for education services -- which are probably included with public administration. However, the 1995 services categories seem particularly inconsistent with the other census years.

Comparability — Poland [top]

This variable is only available in 1978 and 2002.

The 1978 source data assigned occupation to non-workers based on who "supported" them. INDGEN reports data only for economically active persons. This sample lists few responses, and the data are not very consistent with the INDGEN coding structure. For more information, see the corresponding unharmonized source variable.

Comparability — Portugal [top]

The Portugal samples have comparable industry data.

Comparability — Puerto Rico [top]

The samples report respondents' industry category in the previous week, or during last time they worked. The universes statements differ in terms of the minimum age of respondents, as well as the time frame for recording the industry category of persons not currently working.

Comparability — Saint Lucia [top]

The data report the person's industry in the previous week. The 1980 sample does not include industry information.

Comparability — Senegal [top]

The data record the person's main industry category in the previous year. The 2002 sample lacks industry information.

Comparability — Spain [top]

Retirees are included in the 1991 universe and excluded from the 1981, 2001, and 2011 samples. Therefore, there are significantly more persons with industry responses in 1991 than in the other years. The 2011 source data were coded according to the ISIC classification system; source data in other samples use unique classification schemes, but are well adapted to the groupings in INDGEN.


The labor force surveys lack detailed industry information, and some major categories are not separately identified, such as education and health.

Comparability — Switzerland [top]

The samples are consistent over time in their underlying codes, and they report current industry.

Comparability — Tanzania [top]

This variable in the 2002 and 2012 samples record a person's main industry category. It applies to persons who have worked in their current industry for at least 7 days in the time before the census. The 1988 Tanzania sample does not include an industry variable.

Comparability — Thailand [top]

The data for all samples reports main industry category in the previous year. The universe statement for the respondent's age varies slightly between the 1970-1980 and the 1990-2000 samples.

Comparability — Togo [top]

The 1970 sample does not separately identify several categories.

Comparability — Trinidad and Tobago [top]

In 1980, 1990, and 2000, "education" and "health and social work" are not separately identified.

Comparability — Turkey [top]

The samples do not differentiate education and health/social work services -- these cases are contained within the "other services" category.

Comparability — Uruguay [top]

The universe differs across samples. In the 1963 sample, this question was answered by persons aged 8 years or older who were in the labor force; when the person was inexperienced unemployed, the industry indicated was coded with the person's profession. For the 1985 and 1996 samples, the industry was reported by persons aged 12 years or older who were employed or experienced unemployed. The 2006 unharmonized source data preserve a separate variable on the industry of the employer, while the one integrated into INDGEN is the industry of the establishment the person works in; in this sample the industry was reported by persons aged 14 or older who were employed. Industry is not available for the 1975 sample.

Comparability — Venezuela [top]

The 1971 sample asks persons about their industry. However, the data were too suspect to be included in INDGEN. Instead, they are included in the un-recoded variable IND, in case researchers can make something of these data.

Comparability — Vietnam [top]

The universe varies substantially across samples. The 1989 sample includes persons employed at any point during the previous year; 1999 includes persons employed for six months or more during the previous year; and 2009 includes persons who were currently employed.

Comparability — Zambia [top]

The universe is consistent across samples, except exclusion of absent household members in the 2010 sample.

Universe

  • Argentina 1970: Persons age 10+ who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Argentina 1980: Persons age 14+ who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Argentina 1991: Persons age 14+ who had a job last week
  • Argentina 2001: Persons age 14+ who had a job last week
  • Armenia 2011: Persons age 15 to 75 with a job
  • Austria 1971: Persons age 15+ who are economically active
  • Austria 1981: Persons age 15+ who are economically active
  • Austria 1991: Persons age 15+ who are economically active
  • Austria 2001: Persons age 15+ who are economically active
  • Austria 2011: Economically active persons
  • Belarus 2009: Employed persons age 15+
  • Benin 1979: Persons age 10+ from private households in the labor force
  • Benin 1992: Persons age 10+ from private households in the labor force
  • Benin 2002: Residents age 6+ in the labor force, not new workers
  • Benin 2013: Residents age 6+ in the labor force
  • Bolivia 1976: Persons age 7+ in the labor force
  • Bolivia 1992: Persons age 7+ who worked last week, and experienced unemployed
  • Bolivia 2001: Persons age 7+ who worked last week
  • Botswana 1981: Present residents age 12+ who worked regularly for cash
  • Botswana 1991: Persons age 12 + who worked for cash, for family business, or in agriculture in the last 30 days
  • Botswana 2001: Persons age 12+ working during the past 7 days except institutionalized non-residents
  • Botswana 2011: Persons age 12+ working during the past 7 days except institutionalized non-residents
  • Brazil 1960: Persons age 10+ in the labor force
  • Brazil 1970: Persons age 10+ in the labor force
  • Brazil 1980: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Brazil 1991: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Brazil 2000: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Brazil 2010: Persons age 10+ who have a paid job, are temporarily away from a paid job, help another resident with a paid job or work for subsistence
  • Burkina Faso 1996: Persons age 6+ who are household residents and employed or unemployed and looking
  • Cambodia 1998: who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Cambodia 2004: who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Cambodia 2008: Persons age 5+ who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Cambodia 2013: who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Cameroon 2005: Residents of the household age 6+ who are working or have worked in the past
  • Canada 1971: Persons age 15+ who worked this or previous calendar year
  • Canada 1981: Persons age 15+ who worked this or previous calendar year
  • Canada 1991: Persons age 15+ who worked this or previous calendar year
  • Canada 2001: Persons age 15+ who worked this or previous calendar year
  • Canada 2011: Persons age 15+ who worked this or previous calendar year
  • Chile 1960: Persons age 12+ who ever worked
  • Chile 1970: Persons age 12+ who either worked, did not work but had a job, or seeking work between April 13 and 18
  • Chile 1982: Persons age 15+ who ever worked
  • Chile 1992: Persons age 14+ who ever worked
  • Chile 2002: Persons age 15+ working or seeking work
  • China 1982: Persons age 15+ who were employed
  • China 1990: Persons age 15+ who were employed
  • China 2000: Persons age 15+ who worked or had a job last week
  • Colombia 1964: Persons age 12+ in the labor force
  • Colombia 1973: Persons age 10+, with a job or experienced unemployed
  • Colombia 1993: Persons age 10+ in the labor force; not new workers
  • Colombia 2005: Persons age 5+ who were ever employed
  • Costa Rica 1963: Persons age 12 + who were employed or unemployed
  • Costa Rica 1973: Persons age 12+ who ever worked
  • Costa Rica 1984: Persons age 12+ who ever worked
  • Costa Rica 2000: Persons age 12+ who were employed the week prior to the census
  • Costa Rica 2011: Persons age 12+ who were employed
  • Cuba 2002: Persons age 15+ who had a job
  • Dominican Republic 1960: Persons age 10+ who were employed during the reference period
  • Dominican Republic 1970: Persons age 10+ who were employed or unemployed at the time of enumeration
  • Dominican Republic 1981: Persons age 10+ who ever worked
  • Dominican Republic 2002: Persons age 10+ who ever worked
  • Dominican Republic 2010: Persons age 10+ who ever worked
  • Ecuador 1962: Persons age 12+ who were employed, unemployed or seeking employment
  • Ecuador 1982: Persons age 12+ who ever worked
  • Ecuador 1990: Persons age 8+ who were employed, unemployed, or an unpaid workers
  • Ecuador 2001: Persons 5+ who ever worked
  • Ecuador 2010: Persons age 5+ who are employed
  • Egypt 1986: Persons age 6+ who were economically active
  • Egypt 1996: Persons age 6+ who were economically active
  • Egypt 2006: Persons age 6+ who were economically active
  • El Salvador 1992: Persons age 10+ who worked last week
  • El Salvador 2007: Persons age 10+ employed or experienced unemployed
  • Ethiopia 1984: Household residents age 10+ who ever worked
  • Ethiopia 1994: Persons age 10+ who worked or were experienced workers looking for work
  • Fiji 1966: Persons age 15+ who reported an industry
  • Fiji 1976: Persons age 14+ in the labor force
  • Fiji 1986: Persons age 15+ who worked last week
  • Fiji 1996: Persons age 15+ who worked last week
  • Fiji 2007: Persons age 10+ who worked last week
  • Fiji 2014: Persons age 15+ who worked last week
  • France 1962: Persons age 14+ who were employed
  • France 1968: Persons age 14+ who were employed
  • France 1975: Persons age 17+ who were employed
  • France 1982: Persons age 14+ who were employed
  • France 1990: Persons age 14+ who were employed
  • France 1999: Persons age 15+ who were employed
  • France 2006: Persons age 14+ who were employed
  • France 2011: Active employed persons
  • Germany 1970: Economically active persons age 15+
  • Germany 1971: Employed persons age 14+
  • Germany 1981: Economically active persons age 14+
  • Germany 1987: Employed persons age 15+
  • Ghana 1984: Persons age 10+ who worked
  • Ghana 2000: Persons age 7+ in the labor force
  • Ghana 2010: Persons age 5+ who are economically active
  • Greece 1971: Persons age 10+ who were working
  • Greece 1981: Persons age 10+ who were working or seeking work
  • Greece 1991: Persons age 10+ who were working or seeking work
  • Greece 2001: Persons age 10+ who were working or seeking work
  • Greece 2011: Persons who worked or were seeking work last week
  • Guatemala 1964: Persons age 7+ in the labor force
  • Guatemala 1973: Persons age 10+ who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Guatemala 1981: Persons age 10+ who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Guatemala 1994: Persons age 7+ who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Guatemala 2002: Persons age 7+ who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Guinea 1983: Persons age 10+ who were employed or unemployed
  • Haiti 1982: Persons age 10+ who worked or had a job during the reference period
  • Haiti 2003: Persons age 10+ who worked or had a job during the reference period
  • Honduras 1961: Persons age 10+ in the labor force
  • Honduras 1974: Persons age 10+ in the labor force
  • Honduras 2001: Persons age 7+ in the labor force, not new workers
  • Hungary 2001: Employed persons
  • Hungary 2011: Persons 15+ who are working or unemployed
  • India 1983: Persons with a job last week
  • India 1987: Persons age 5+ who were currently employed
  • India 1993: Persons age 5+ who were currently employed
  • India 1999: Persons age 5+ who were currently employed
  • India 2004: Persons who worked last week
  • India 2009: Persons age 5+ that are economically active
  • Indonesia 1971: Persons age 10+ employed or experienced unemployed
  • Indonesia 1976: Persons age 10+ who worked last week
  • Indonesia 1980: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Indonesia 1985: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Indonesia 1990: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Indonesia 1995: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Indonesia 2005: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Indonesia 2010: Persons age 10+ in permanent household who were employed
  • Iran 2006: Employed persons age 10+
  • Iran 2011: Persons age 10+ who worked, were unpaid workers, or temporarily absent from work in the past 7 days
  • Iraq 1997: Persons age 6+ who were employed
  • Ireland 1971: Persons age 14+ in the labor force
  • Ireland 1981: Employed persons age 15+
  • Ireland 1986: Employed persons age 15+
  • Ireland 1991: Employed persons age 15+
  • Ireland 1996: Persons age 15+ who were working or experienced unemployed
  • Ireland 2002: Non-absent persons age 15+ who were working, experienced unemployed or retired
  • Ireland 2006: Non-absent persons age 15+ who were working, experienced unemployed or retired
  • Ireland 2011: Present persons age 15+ who were working or unemployed
  • Israel 1995: Persons age 15+ who worked as civilian last year
  • Italy 2001: Persons age 15+ who worked for pay
  • Italy 2011: Persons age 15+ in the labor force, not new workers
  • Italy 2011Q1: Employed persons age 15+
  • Italy 2012Q1: Employed persons age 15+
  • Italy 2013Q1: Employed persons age 15+
  • Italy 2014Q1: Employed persons age 15+
  • Italy 2015Q1: Employed persons age 15+
  • Italy 2016Q1: Employed persons age 15+
  • Italy 2017Q1: Employed persons age 15+
  • Italy 2018Q1: Employed persons age 15+
  • Jamaica 1982: Persons age 14+ in private households and selected group quarters, employed or experienced unemployed
  • Jamaica 1991: Persons age 14+ in private households or selected group quarters, in the labor force
  • Jamaica 2001: Persons age 14+ in the labor force
  • Jordan 2004: Persons age 15+ with a job
  • Kyrgyz Republic 1999: Persons age 16+ who were working
  • Kyrgyz Republic 2009: Persons age 12+ who are employed
  • Laos 2005: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Lesotho 2006: Pesons age 10+ in the labor force, not new workers
  • Liberia 1974: Persons age 10+ who worked in the last 12 months
  • Liberia 2008: Persons age 6+ who worked in the last 12 months
  • Malawi 1987: Persons age 10+ employed or experienced unemployed
  • Malawi 1998: Persons age 10+ working or unemployed
  • Malawi 2008: Non-visitors age 6+ employed, subsistence worker, or experienced unemployed
  • Malaysia 1970: Persons age 10+ in labor force
  • Malaysia 1980: Persons age 10+ in labor force
  • Malaysia 1991: Persons age 10+ with a job
  • Malaysia 2000: Persons age 10+ with a job
  • Mali 1987: Economically active persons age 6+
  • Mali 1998: Economically active persons age 6+
  • Mali 2009: Economically active persons age 6+
  • Mexico 1960: Persons with an occupation
  • Mexico 1970: Persons age 12+ with an industry response
  • Mexico 1990: Persons age 12+ with a job
  • Mexico 1995: Persons age 12+ with a job
  • Mexico 2000: Persons age 12+ with a job
  • Mexico 2010: Persons age 12+ with a job
  • Mexico 2015: Persons age 12+ with a job
  • Mongolia 2000: Persons age 15+ who worked last week
  • Morocco 1982: Employed or experienced unemployed persons
  • Morocco 1994: Employed or experienced unemployed persons
  • Morocco 2004: Employed or experienced unemployed persons
  • Mozambique 1997: Persons who worked or looked for a new job in the last week
  • Mozambique 2007: Residents age 7+ who worked or looked for a new job in the last week
  • Nepal 2001: Persons age 10+ who worked or sought work at least one month last year
  • Nepal 2011: Persons age 10+ who worked in the past 12 months
  • Netherlands 1960: Persons who were economically active
  • Netherlands 1971: Persons who were economically active
  • Netherlands 2001: Persons who were economically active
  • Netherlands 2011: Persons age 15+ who are working
  • Nicaragua 1971: Persons age 10+ employed or experienced unemployed
  • Nicaragua 1995: Persons age 10+ employed or experienced unemployed
  • Nicaragua 2005: Persons age 10+ employed or experienced unemployed
  • Nigeria 2006: Persons age 10+ who worked or had a job in the last week
  • Nigeria 2007: Persons age 10+ who worked or had a job in the last week
  • Nigeria 2008: Persons age 10+ who worked or had a job in the last week
  • Nigeria 2009: Persons age 10+ who worked or had a job in the last week
  • Nigeria 2010: Persons age 5+ who worked last week
  • Pakistan 1973: Persons age 10+ who worked last week
  • Palestine 1997: Persons age 10+ working or experienced unemployed
  • Palestine 2007: Persons age 7+ who were employed or experienced unemployed, except those in Jerusalem annexed by Israel in 1967
  • Panama 1960: Non-indigenous persons age 10+ in the labor force
  • Panama 1970: Persons age 10+ in the labor force
  • Panama 1980: Persons age 10+ in the labor force
  • Panama 1990: Persons age 10+ in the labor force
  • Panama 2000: Persons age 10+ who were employed
  • Panama 2010: Persons age 10+ who are economically active and have worked before
  • Papua New Guinea 1980: Urban persons age 10+ who worked last week
  • Papua New Guinea 2000: Persons age 10+ who worked last week
  • Paraguay 1962: Persons age 12+ who were economically active
  • Paraguay 1972: Persons age 12+ who ever worked
  • Paraguay 1982: Economically active persons age 12+ excluding new workers
  • Paraguay 1992: Persons 10+ with a job or looking for work
  • Paraguay 2002: Persons age 10+ who worked last week
  • Peru 1993: Persons age 6+ with work or experienced and seeking work
  • Peru 2007: Persons age 6+ who worked last week
  • Philippines 1990: Persons age 10+ who are employed
  • Philippines 1995: Persons age 5+ who are engaged in economic activity
  • Philippines 2000: Persons age 10+ who are working
  • Philippines 2010: Persons age 15+ who were employed in the past 12 months
  • Poland 1978: Persons who are economically active
  • Poland 2002: Persons age 15+ who are economically active
  • Portugal 1981: Persons age 12+ who are employed or looking for a job
  • Portugal 1991: Persons age 12+ who are employed or looking for a job
  • Portugal 2001: Persons age 15+ who are employed or looking for a new job
  • Portugal 2011: Persons age 15+ who were economically active
  • Puerto Rico 1970: Persons age 14+ who had worked within the previous ten years
  • Puerto Rico 1980: Persons age 16+ who worked within the past 5 years, not new workers
  • Puerto Rico 1990: Persons age 16+ who worked within the past 5 years, not new workers
  • Puerto Rico 2000: Persons age 16+ who worked within the past 5 years, not new workers
  • Puerto Rico 2005: Persons age 16+ who worked within the past 5 years, not new workers
  • Puerto Rico 2010: Persons age 16+ who worked within the past 5 years, not new workers
  • Romania 1977: Economically active persons
  • Romania 1992: Persons who are employed or seeking work not for the first time
  • Romania 2002: Persons who have at least one job
  • Romania 2011: Persons working during reference week or unemployed looking for another job
  • Rwanda 2002: Non-visitors age 6+ who are employed or experienced unemployed
  • Rwanda 2012: Persons age 5+ who are employed or experienced unemployed
  • Saint Lucia 1991: Persons age 15+ who have ever worked
  • Senegal 1988: Persons age 6+ employed or seeking work
  • Sierra Leone 2004: Persons age 10+ who worked in the last 30 days
  • Slovenia 2002: Employed persons
  • South Africa 1996: Persons age 15+ in private households who were employed
  • South Africa 2001: Persons age 10+ employed or economically active
  • South Africa 2007: Persons age 15 to 74 with a job, not in institutions
  • South Sudan 2008: Persons age 10+ who worked or were experienced unemployed
  • Spain 1981: Persons who work or have worked
  • Spain 1991: Persons employed, unemployed but worked before, and retirees
  • Spain 2001: Persons age 16+ who were working or studying last week
  • Spain 2005Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2005Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2005Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2005Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2006Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2006Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2006Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2006Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2007Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2007Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2007Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2007Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2008Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2008Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2008Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2008Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2009Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2009Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2009Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2009Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2010Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2010Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2010Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2010Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2011: Persons age 16+ who were working or were unemployed with previous work experience
  • Spain 2011Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2011Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2011Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2011Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2012Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2012Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2012Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2012Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2013Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2013Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2013Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2013Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2014Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2014Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2014Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2014Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2015Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2015Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2015Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2015Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2016Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2016Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2016Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2016Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2017Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2017Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2017Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2017Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2018Q1: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2018Q2: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2018Q3: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Spain 2018Q4: Persons age 16+ who worked for pay
  • Sudan 2008: Persons age 10+ employed or experienced unemployed
  • Switzerland 1970: Persons age 15+ who are employed
  • Switzerland 1980: Persons age 15+ who are employed
  • Switzerland 1990: Persons age 15+ who are employed
  • Switzerland 2000: Persons age 15+ who are employed
  • Tanzania 2002: Persons age 5+ who worked last week
  • Tanzania 2012: Persons age 5+ who worked last week
  • Thailand 1970: Persons age 11+ who worked last year
  • Thailand 1980: Persons age 11+ who worked last year
  • Thailand 1990: Persons age 13+ who worked last year
  • Thailand 2000: Persons age 13+ who worked last year
  • Togo 1970: Employed persons
  • Togo 2010: Persons age 6+ who ever worked
  • Trinidad and Tobago 1980: Persons age 15+ who had a job or are seeking work
  • Trinidad and Tobago 1990: Persons age 15+ who had a job or are seeking work
  • Trinidad and Tobago 2000: Persons age 15+ who had a job or are seeking work
  • Turkey 1985: Persons age 12+ who had a job
  • Turkey 1990: Persons age 12+ who had a job
  • Turkey 2000: Persons age 12+ who had a job
  • Uganda 2002: Persons age 5+ in the labor force
  • United Kingdom 1991: Persons age 16+ who worked within last 10 years
  • United Kingdom 2001: Persons age 16 to 74 who have ever worked
  • United States 1960: Persons age 14+ who had worked within the previous ten years; not armed forces, not new workers
  • United States 1970: Persons age 14+ who had worked within the previous ten years; not armed forces, not new workers
  • United States 1980: Persons age 16+ who had worked within the previous five years; not armed forces, not new workers
  • United States 1990: Persons age 16+ who had worked within the previous five years, not new workers
  • United States 2000: Persons age 16+ who had worked within the previous five years, not new workers
  • United States 2005: Persons age 16+ who had worked within the previous five years, not new workers
  • United States 2010: Persons age 16+ who had worked within the previous five years, not new workers
  • United States 2015: Persons age 16+ who had worked within the previous five years, not new workers
  • Uruguay 1963: Persons age 8+ employed or unemployed
  • Uruguay 1985: Persons age 12+ employed or experienced unemployed
  • Uruguay 1996: Persons age 12+ employed or experienced unemployed
  • Uruguay 2006: Persons age 14+ with a job
  • Venezuela 1981: Persons age 12+ who had a job at the time of the census, or during the prior year
  • Venezuela 1990: Persons age 12+ who were employed or experienced unemployed
  • Venezuela 2001: Persons age 10+ in the labor force
  • Vietnam 1989: Persons age 13+ who were employed during the year, regardless of current employment status
  • Vietnam 1999: Persons age 13+ who worked six or more months during the previous twelve months
  • Vietnam 2009: Persons age 15+ who had a job
  • Zambia 1990: Persons age 12+ who were economically active in the last year
  • Zambia 2000: Persons age 12+ who were economically active in the last year
  • Zambia 2010: Present members and visitors age 12+ who were economically active in the last year

Availability

  • Argentina: 1970, 1980, 1991, 2001
  • Armenia: 2011
  • Austria: 1971, 1981, 1991, 2001, 2011
  • Belarus: 2009
  • Benin: 1979, 1992, 2002, 2013
  • Bolivia: 1976, 1992, 2001
  • Botswana: 1981, 1991, 2001, 2011
  • Brazil: 1960, 1970, 1980, 1991, 2000, 2010
  • Burkina Faso: 1996
  • Cambodia: 1998, 2004, 2008, 2013
  • Cameroon: 2005
  • Canada: 1971, 1981, 1991, 2001, 2011
  • Chile: 1960, 1970, 1982, 1992, 2002
  • China: 1982, 1990, 2000
  • Colombia: 1964, 1973, 1993, 2005
  • Costa Rica: 1963, 1973, 1984, 2000, 2011
  • Cuba: 2002
  • Dominican Republic: 1960, 1970, 1981, 2002, 2010
  • Ecuador: 1962, 1982, 1990, 2001, 2010
  • Egypt: 1986, 1996, 2006
  • El Salvador: 1992, 2007
  • Ethiopia: 1984, 1994
  • Fiji: 1966, 1976, 1986, 1996, 2007, 2014
  • France: 1962, 1968, 1975, 1982, 1990, 1999, 2006, 2011
  • Germany: 1970, 1971, 1981, 1987
  • Ghana: 1984, 2000, 2010
  • Greece: 1971, 1981, 1991, 2001, 2011
  • Guatemala: 1964, 1973, 1981, 1994, 2002
  • Guinea: 1983
  • Haiti: 1982, 2003
  • Honduras: 1961, 1974, 2001
  • Hungary: 2001, 2011
  • India: 1983, 1987, 1993, 1999, 2004, 2009
  • Indonesia: 1971, 1976, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 2005, 2010
  • Iran: 2006, 2011
  • Iraq: 1997
  • Ireland: 1971, 1981, 1986, 1991, 1996, 2002, 2006, 2011
  • Israel: 1995
  • Italy: 2001, 2011, 2011Q1, 2012Q1, 2013Q1, 2014Q1, 2015Q1, 2016Q1, 2017Q1, 2018Q1
  • Jamaica: 1982, 1991, 2001
  • Jordan: 2004
  • Kyrgyz Republic: 1999, 2009
  • Laos: 2005
  • Lesotho: 2006
  • Liberia: 1974, 2008
  • Malawi: 1987, 1998, 2008
  • Malaysia: 1970, 1980, 1991, 2000
  • Mali: 1987, 1998, 2009
  • Mexico: 1960, 1970, 1990, 1995, 2000, 2010, 2015
  • Mongolia: 2000
  • Morocco: 1982, 1994, 2004
  • Mozambique: 1997, 2007
  • Nepal: 2001, 2011
  • Netherlands: 1960, 1971, 2001, 2011
  • Nicaragua: 1971, 1995, 2005
  • Nigeria: 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010
  • Pakistan: 1973
  • Palestine: 1997, 2007
  • Panama: 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010
  • Papua New Guinea: 1980, 2000
  • Paraguay: 1962, 1972, 1982, 1992, 2002
  • Peru: 1993, 2007
  • Philippines: 1990, 1995, 2000, 2010
  • Poland: 1978, 2002
  • Portugal: 1981, 1991, 2001, 2011
  • Puerto Rico: 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2005, 2010
  • Romania: 1977, 1992, 2002, 2011
  • Rwanda: 2002, 2012
  • Saint Lucia: 1991
  • Senegal: 1988
  • Sierra Leone: 2004
  • Slovenia: 2002
  • South Africa: 1996, 2001, 2007
  • South Sudan: 2008
  • Spain: 1981, 1991, 2001, 2005Q1, 2005Q2, 2005Q3, 2005Q4, 2006Q1, 2006Q2, 2006Q3, 2006Q4, 2007Q1, 2007Q2, 2007Q3, 2007Q4, 2008Q1, 2008Q2, 2008Q3, 2008Q4, 2009Q1, 2009Q2, 2009Q3, 2009Q4, 2010Q1, 2010Q2, 2010Q3, 2010Q4, 2011, 2011Q1, 2011Q2, 2011Q3, 2011Q4, 2012Q1, 2012Q2, 2012Q3, 2012Q4, 2013Q1, 2013Q2, 2013Q3, 2013Q4, 2014Q1, 2014Q2, 2014Q3, 2014Q4, 2015Q1, 2015Q2, 2015Q3, 2015Q4, 2016Q1, 2016Q2, 2016Q3, 2016Q4, 2017Q1, 2017Q2, 2017Q3, 2017Q4, 2018Q1, 2018Q2, 2018Q3, 2018Q4
  • Sudan: 2008
  • Switzerland: 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000
  • Tanzania: 2002, 2012
  • Thailand: 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000
  • Togo: 1970, 2010
  • Trinidad and Tobago: 1980, 1990, 2000
  • Turkey: 1985, 1990, 2000
  • Uganda: 2002
  • United Kingdom: 1991, 2001
  • United States: 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015
  • Uruguay: 1963, 1985, 1996, 2006
  • Venezuela: 1981, 1990, 2001
  • Vietnam: 1989, 1999, 2009
  • Zambia: 1990, 2000, 2010