Datastream
One Year In: How the Pandemic Impacted Employment Around the World
The Briefing
- The global pandemic had a significant impact on average working hours across the globe
- In 2020, 8.8% of global working hours were lost compared to Q4’2019
- The amount of working hours lost in 2020 is equal to 255 million full-time jobs
How the Pandemic Impacted Employment Around the World
One year in, the global pandemic has impacted employment and changed the nature of work in a multitude of ways.
As job loss rose across the globe, many countries introduced job retention schemes to steady unemployment rates. At the same time, working hours for many who held on to their jobs were reduced.
To put it in perspective, COVID-19’s negative impact on working hours globally has been around 4x more than that caused by the Global Financial Crisis in 2009.
Working Hard or Hardly Working?
As of January 2021, an estimated 93% of the world’s workforce lives in a country with some type of workplace closure restrictions still in place.
While profits were slashed across many industries, a majority of companies actually avoided firing people. However, 64% of firms either reduced wages, hours, or furloughed workers temporarily.
Compared to Q4’2019, total global working hours were reduced 8.8% in 2020. This is equivalent to approximately 255 million jobs.
Here’s a look at the working hour losses in a number of different countries.
| Country | 2020 Work Hour Losses Compared to Q4'2019 |
|---|---|
| Peru | 27.5% |
| Honduras | 24.3% |
| Panama | 23.5% |
| Argentina | 21.0% |
| Colombia | 20.9% |
| Bolivia | 20.5% |
| El Salvador | 19.4% |
| Ecuador | 17.6% |
| Costa Rica | 17.5% |
| Nepal | 17.4% |
| Armenia | 16.8% |
| Chile | 16.7% |
| Guatemala | 16.4% |
| Kuwait | 16.4% |
| Dominican Republic | 15.5% |
| Brazil | 14.9% |
| Bahamas | 14.8% |
| Eritrea | 14.7% |
| Turkey | 14.7% |
| Cyprus | 14.6% |
| Azerbaijan | 14.1% |
| Morocco | 14.1% |
| North Macedonia | 13.8% |
| India | 13.7% |
| Venezuela | 13.7% |
| Philippines | 13.6% |
| South Africa | 13.6% |
| Italy | 13.5% |
| Myanmar | 13.4% |
| Portugal | 13.4% |
| Cape Verde | 13.3% |
| Spain | 13.2% |
| Georgia | 13.1% |
| Oman | 13.1% |
| United States Virgin Islands | 13.0% |
| Moldova | 12.9% |
| Slovakia | 12.8% |
| United Kingdom | 12.8% |
| Greece | 12.6% |
| Cuba | 12.5% |
| Guyana | 12.5% |
| Ireland | 12.5% |
| Mexico | 12.5% |
| Bangladesh | 12.2% |
| Uganda | 12.2% |
| Bhutan | 11.9% |
| Suriname | 11.8% |
| Kyrgyzstan | 11.7% |
| Algeria | 11.6% |
| Kazakhstan | 11.5% |
| Maldives | 11.4% |
| Paraguay | 11.4% |
| Jamaica | 11.3% |
| Trinidad and Tobago | 11.3% |
| Uruguay | 11.2% |
| Belize | 11.1% |
| Malaysia | 11.1% |
| Iraq | 10.8% |
| Malta | 10.6% |
| Austria | 10.5% |
| Barbados | 10.4% |
| Jordan | 10.4% |
| Lebanon | 10.3% |
| Eswatini | 9.9% |
| Sri Lanka | 9.9% |
| Saint Lucia | 9.8% |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 9.7% |
| Guam | 9.6% |
| Egypt | 9.5% |
| Ethiopia | 9.5% |
| Kenya | 9.5% |
| Qatar | 9.5% |
| Rwanda | 9.4% |
| Canada | 9.3% |
| Congo | 9.3% |
| Libya | 9.3% |
| Saint Vincent and the Grenadines | 9.3% |
| United Arab Emirates | 9.3% |
| Israel | 9.2% |
| Pakistan | 9.2% |
| United States | 9.2% |
| Sudan | 9.1% |
| Zimbabwe | 9.1% |
| Bahrain | 9.0% |
| Liberia | 9.0% |
| Guinea-Bissau | 8.9% |
| Nigeria | 8.9% |
| Sao Tome and Principe | 8.9% |
| Romania | 8.8% |
| Ukraine | 8.8% |
| South Sudan | 8.7% |
| Angola | 8.6% |
| Hong Kong | 8.6% |
| Puerto Rico | 8.6% |
| Equatorial Guinea | 8.5% |
| Russia | 8.5% |
| Uzbekistan | 8.5% |
| Chad | 8.4% |
| France | 8.4% |
| Gabon | 8.3% |
| Saudi Arabia | 8.3% |
| Indonesia | 8.2% |
| Western Sahara | 8.2% |
| Slovenia | 8.0% |
| Montenegro | 7.8% |
| Singapore | 7.8% |
| Syria | 7.8% |
| Gambia | 7.7% |
| Guinea | 7.6% |
| Haiti | 7.6% |
| Serbia | 7.5% |
| Lesotho | 7.4% |
| Tonga | 7.4% |
| Belgium | 7.3% |
| Comoros | 7.1% |
| Madagascar | 6.9% |
| Djibouti | 6.8% |
| Mauritius | 6.7% |
| Democratic Republic of the Congo | 6.6% |
| Afghanistan | 6.5% |
| Botswana | 6.4% |
| Fiji | 6.3% |
| Germany | 6.3% |
| Iceland | 6.3% |
| Senegal | 6.3% |
| Lithuania | 6.1% |
| Bulgaria | 6.0% |
| Tunisia | 6.0% |
| Channel Islands | 5.9% |
| Iran | 5.9% |
| Namibia | 5.9% |
| French Polynesia | 5.7% |
| Croatia | 5.5% |
| Japan | 5.4% |
| Mauritania | 5.3% |
| Vanuatu | 5.3% |
| Hungary | 5.2% |
| Mozambique | 5.2% |
| Sweden | 5.2% |
| Vietnam | 5.2% |
| Malawi | 5.1% |
| Central African Republic | 5.0% |
| Togo | 4.9% |
| Cambodia | 4.8% |
| Samoa | 4.8% |
| Australia | 4.7% |
| Ghana | 4.7% |
| Estonia | 4.5% |
| Thailand | 4.5% |
| Brunei Darussalam | 4.4% |
| North Korea | 4.4% |
| Czech Republic | 4.3% |
| Laos | 4.3% |
| Netherlands | 4.3% |
| Cameroon | 4.2% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 4.2% |
| China | 4.1% |
| Albania | 3.9% |
| Taiwan | 3.9% |
| Sierra Leone | 3.8% |
| Switzerland | 3.8% |
| Turkmenistan | 3.8% |
| South Korea | 3.7% |
| Luxembourg | 3.7% |
| Nicaragua | 3.7% |
| New Caledonia | 3.5% |
| Poland | 3.5% |
| Denmark | 3.3% |
| Latvia | 3.3% |
| Mali | 3.3% |
| Benin | 3.2% |
| Tajikistan | 3.2% |
| Timor-Leste | 2.7% |
| Burkina Faso | 2.6% |
| Zambia | 2.6% |
| Mongolia | 2.5% |
| Norway | 2.5% |
| Somalia | 2.5% |
| Macau | 1.9% |
| Papua New Guinea | 1.8% |
| Solomon Islands | 1.8% |
| Tanzania | 1.8% |
| Belarus | 1.3% |
| Finland | 1.3% |
| Yemen | 1.3% |
| Niger | 1.1% |
| New Zealand | 0.8% |
| Burundi | -0.1% |
The loss of working hours has impacted Southern Europe, South Asia, the Americas, and the Caribbean most significantly. Not surprisingly, these regions are all heavily reliant on tourism and hospitality to fuel their economies.
Job Losses and the Future of Work
Working hour losses, however, do not just come from reductions in hours. The ILO approximates that the blame for working hour losses can be shared equally, with around half due to job losses and half due to a reduction in working hours.
Worldwide employment losses in 2020 were equal to 114 million jobs.
However, a large number of people have notably been deemed ‘inactive,’ rather than unemployed, reducing the global labor force participation rate overall.
Although a rebound in working hours and jobs is expected in 2021, the pandemic’s effects on how we work, and the kinds jobs that are available will have a deeper long-term effect on the global labor force participation.
» Want to learn more? Check out our COVID-19 information hub to help put the past year into perspective
Where does this data come from?
Source: ILO
Details: The source defines workers as individuals aged 15-64. Full time jobs are defined using a 40 hour or 48 hour work week depending on the country. Additionally, the ILO used a multitude of national data sources on unemployment, furlough schemes, etc. to calculate working hour losses. Their methodology can be explored further here.
Datastream
Ranked: The Top Online Music Services in the U.S. by Monthly Users
This graphic shows the percentage of Americans that are monthly music listeners for each service. Which online music service is most popular?
The Briefing
- Two-thirds of music listeners in the U.S. used YouTube at least once per month
- 64% of music listeners use multiple music services per month
The Top Online Music Services in the U.S.
The music streaming industry is characterized by fierce competition, with many companies vying for market share.
Companies are competing on multiple fronts, from price and features to advertising and exclusive content, making it a challenging market for companies to succeed in.
YouTube (the standard offering and YouTube Music) has the highest amount of users, attracting around two-thirds of music listeners in the U.S. during a given month. This is largely due to the YouTube’s massive reach and extensive catalog of music.
Here’s a full rundown of the top music streaming services in the U.S. by monthly listeners:
| Rank | Music Service | % of U.S. Music Listeners Who Use Monthly |
|---|---|---|
| #1 | YouTube | 61% |
| #2T | Spotify | 35% |
| #2T | Amazon Music | 35% |
| #4 | Pandora | 23% |
| #5 | SiriusXM | 21% |
| #6 | Apple Music | 19% |
| #7 | iHeartRadio | 15% |
| #8 | SoundCloud | 10% |
| #9 | Audacity | 6% |
| #10T | TuneIn | 5% |
| #10T | Deezer | 5% |
| #10T | Napster | 5% |
| #10T | Tidal | 5% |
Two companies are in the running for second place: Spotify and Amazon Music.
Spotify leads in one important metric: number of paid users. Meanwhile, Amazon Music has a large user base since the service is bundled into Prime—however, recent changes mean that without a premium subscription, shuffled playback is the primary option. Time will tell what impact those changes will have on the service’s market share.
Prices for premium music services are beginning to creep upward. Apple Music and Amazon Music raised their prices, and it’s rumored that Spotify will not be far behind. This move would be significant because, in the U.S., Spotify hasn’t raised its prices in over a decade.
Rising prices and more aggressive promotion of premium subscriptions could be a signal that music streaming services are transitioning from a focus on capturing market share to monetizing existing users.
Where does this data come from?
Source: Activate Technology and Media Outlook 2023 by Activate Consulting
Data note: “Music services” include free and paid services used for listening to music through any format excluding terrestrial radio. “Music listeners” are defined as adults aged 18+ who spend any time listening to music.
-
Markets2 days agoMapped: GDP Growth Forecasts by Country, in 2023
-
Markets2 weeks agoCharted: The Dipping Cost of Shipping
-
Markets17 hours agoCharted: Tesla’s Unrivaled Profit Margins
-
Technology4 weeks agoTimeline: The Most Important Science Headlines of 2022
-
Technology2 weeks agoRanked: The Top 50 Most Visited Websites in the World
-
Datastream11 hours agoRanked: The Top Online Music Services in the U.S. by Monthly Users
-
Money4 weeks agoVisualizing $65 Trillion in Hidden Dollar Debt
-
Automotive1 week agoThe Most Fuel Efficient Cars From 1975 to Today