The level of net and gross labour mobility in Norway during the 1990s

Hypotheses are raised with the expectation of increases in labour market mobil-ity as economic recession recedes and we move to more affluent years with steady economic growth. Figure 4.1a shows the economic development in Nor-way and in the main urban centres 1994-1999 measured by net entries to job. At the national level there has been a positive growth of employment during the whole period, with strongest growth from 1996-1997 and 1997-1998 falling to a slight growth in the turn of the decade. The capital region of Oslo/Akershus shows the highest net growth of employment during most of the period, while the oil centre of Stavanger/Sandnes shows the highest growth from 1997 to 1998. The urban region of Trondheim is the only urban main centre showing years of negative growth of employment, towards the end of the period.

Different status groups further break down the annual net entries to job. Figure 4.1b shows the result for the whole nation, whilst figure 4.1c concentrates the net mobility results on the four main urban regions of the country. The highest contribution to net employment growth derives from education to job in the local labour markets. Net recruitment from local unemployment to job also tributes positively with an exception for the last year. Internal migration con-tributes positively to net job growth although with decreasing importance to-wards the end of the period. Net immigration also contributes positively with an increasing importance during the period. Net contributions from other transi-tions in and out of the labour force are generally negative throughout the whole period, with strongest effect in 1998-1999.

The net mobility results of the four main urban regions reflect the general struc-ture of net labour mobility in the nation as a whole, with some exception though. The net transition from education to job represents the main contribu-tion to net job growth in all four regions. This entry is, however, remarkably strong in the economic growth years of 1996-1997, but also 1997-1998 shows a very high net flow from the education system. This reflects first and foremost the very strong economic growth in this period, but this was accompanied by an increasing number of students about to enter the labour market because of the large student numbers during the economic recession at the end of the 1980s and the first part of the 1990s. The capital region of Oslo/Akershus and the re-gion of Stavanger/ Sandnes differ from the other two main urban rere-gions with respect to a much stronger net effect from internal migration to job. Internal migration do, however, also contribute positive in Bergen and Trondheim, but is of minor importance for the total net rise of employment. All urban main regions show a positive net effect from immigration to job, with a stronger importance in the capital region and in Stavanger/Sandnes. Net transitions from unem-ployment to job is mainly positive, except from the first year in Stavanger/

Sandnes and the last year for all regions. Net contributions from others to job locally are almost generally negative, with the exception of Trondheim showing a net balance in 1996-1997. On the other hand, the negative net effect of others

to job locally is remarkable in Trondheim towards the end of the period being investigated.

Figure 4.1a Total net entries to job 1994-1999 in Norway and the main urban centres. Per cent of stock of employed

-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5

1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 1998-1999

Norway Oslo/Akershus Bergen Trondheim Stavanger/Sandnes

Period Per cent of stock

of employed

Figure 4.1b Net entries to job 1994-1999 broken down by status group. Norway. Per cent of stock of employed

-1 0 1 2 3 4

Immigration to job Internal migration to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local others to job Per cent of stock

of employed

Figure 4.1c Net entries to job 1994-1999 broken down by status group. Main urban centres of Norway. Per cent of stock of employed

-2 Internal migration to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local others to job

Period Internal migration to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local others to job

Period Internal migration to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local others to job Per cent of Internal migration to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local others to job Per cent of

stock of employed

Period Stavanger/Sandnes

Figure 4.1d shows the level of gross mobility to jobs during the same period. The level of gross mobility to job definitely follows the business cycle, with the high-est level during the economic boom period 1996-1998. The gross entries to job is, however, significantly higher in the capital region of Oslo/Akershus and in the region of Stavanger/Sandnes compared with the other urban centres of Ber-gen and Trondheim, both showing lower job mobility than the national average.

These differences appear to be present both in the boom years as well as in years with somewhat lower employment growth.

Figure 4.1e shows national results where different status groups break down the total gross entry. This analysis also includes local job-to-job mobility between 28 sectors (see table 3.5 for sector classification). The results indicate that job-to-job mobility (or inter-sector mobility) contributes with almost 50 per cent of the total gross mobility to job. As for total gross mobility, job-to-job mobility in-creases significantly with the business cycle. Due to very strong economic growth, an important part of the gross entries also derives from persons outside the labour force. The mobility from local education to job is also important, al-beit of minor importance compared to what the net effects of the education to job mobility suggested. When experiencing low unemployment rates in most of the regions, the entries from unemployment to job represent a small and de-creasing part of the total gross mobility.

Figure 4.1d. Total gross entries to job 1994-1999 in Norway and the main urban centres. Per cent of stock of employed

18 20 22 24 26 28 30

1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 1998-1999

Norway Oslo/Akershus Bergen Trondheim Stavanger/Sandnes Per cent of stock

of employed

Figure 4.1e. Gross entries to job 1994-1999 broken down by different status groups. Norway.

Per cent of stock of employed

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998 1998-1999

Immigration to job Internal migration to job Local others to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local job-to-job

Period Per cent of stock of

employed

Figure 4.1f shows corresponding results for the four main urban regions. In ad-dition to different gross mobility intensity, the local job-to-job mobility contrib-utes somewhat more to the total gross mobility in Oslo/Akershus and Sta-vanger/ Sandnes compared with the two other urban main regions. Especially high is the gross job-to-job mobility in the capital region in the strong growth years of 1997-1998. The same regional differences are found for gross in-migration to job and imin-migration to job, with somewhat higher flows in Oslo/Akershus and Stavanger/Sandnes. On the other hand a somewhat lower unemployment rate in the capital region and Stavanger/Sandnes resulted in a somewhat lower flow from unemployment to job during the period. Gross mobil-ity from persons outside the labour force was somewhat higher in Oslo/Akershus than in the other regions, while the gross transitions from education to job seem to be more evenly distributed across the main urban labour markets.

Figure 4.1f. Gross entries to job 1994-1999 broken down by different status groups. The main urban centres of Norway. Per cent of stock of employed

0 Internal migration to job Local others to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local job-to-job Internal migration to job Local others to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local job-to-job Internal migration to job Local others to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local job-to-job Internal migration to job Local others to job Local education to job Local unemployed to job Local job-to-job

4.2. Total and specific local labour market mobility performance