The level of disposable income in the BMW region as a whole is estimated at 93.2% of national levels in 2004. In contrast, the level of disposable income in the S&E region was at 102.5% of national levels. In addition, data on Gross Added Value shows that the three regions with the lowest GVA per person are the three NUTS III regions of the BMW area, although the BMW region now exceeds the EU27 average.
The key objective of EU regional policy and of this proposed OP is to improve convergence in the growth of regional living standards as measured by income per capita. This is a function of output per person employed and the number of persons employed as a percentage of the population. This second factor can be further broken down into:
unemployment rate (unemployed/labour force);
participation rate (labour force/population aged 15-64); and
age dependency (population aged 15-64 as a percentage of total population).
For 2004 the gap in per capita incomes results from these factors including lower productivity in the BMW region, higher unemployment rates, lower labour force participation and a higher dependency ratio. Incomes per person employed also show a gap, indicating that differential productivity performance is a factor, but also indicating that differences in employment as a percentage of the population are also important. These differences are primarily due to differences in population structure (i.e. higher dependency ratio) and to a lesser extent unemployment and labour force participation.
Labour market developments since 2003 show some convergence in performance as there has been a general upward trend in participation rates in the BMW Region over the last 5 years. The overall level of participation in the three sub-regions has remained below national levels; however, the gap has narrowed somewhat in recent years. There has also been some convergence in unemployment rates. The gap in unemployment between the two regions has fallen significantly over this period and closed for a short period in 2005. Unemployment in the BMW region actually fell below the national average in the third quarter of 2005.
This performance is summarised in Table 3.3. There is still a gap between the two regions in Ireland in terms of employment as a percentage of population but this is mainly due to differences in the age profile of the population. Overall labour market data since 2002 show some regional convergence in terms of lower unemployment and higher labour force participation in the BMW region. Even accounting for this, the BMW region faces significant developmental challenges and structural deficits that need to be addressed through targeted interventions.
Table 3.3: Comparative Assessement of Employment 2005 |
|||||
| State | BMW | S&E | EU 15 | EU 25 | |
| Employment as % of population | 46.7% | 44.9% | 47.4% | 43.0% | 42.4% |
| Unemployment as a % of labour force | 4.2% | 4.3% | 4.2% | 7.9% | 8.8% |
| Labour force as a % of working age population | 71.5% | 70.5% | 71.9% | 68.9% | 68.2% |
| Working age population as a % of total population | 68.2% | 66.5% | 68.8% | 66.7% | 67.1% |
Source: Central Statistics Office and Eurostat, 2005
Summary data by gender, where available, shows that both males and females have benefited from the turnaround in labour market performance. These are set out in Table 3.4. This shows that the gender gap in labour force participation rates in the BMW region remains wide compared with the national level. The data also show that Ireland is now approaching various Lisbon Targets in respect of labour market performance (see Chapter 2).
Table 3.4 Unemployment, participation and employment growth by NUTS II Region and gender Q1 2003 and Q4 2006 |
||||||||
BMW |
S&E |
State |
EU 15 |
EU 25 |
||||
| Indicator | 2003 |
2006 |
2003 |
2006 |
2003 |
2006 |
2006 |
2006 |
| Unemployment Rate | 5.3% |
4.4% |
4.3% |
4.0% |
4.6% |
4.1% |
7.6% |
8.2% |
| Female Unemployment Rate | 4.7% |
4.3% |
3.8% |
3.6% |
4.0% |
3.8% |
8.7% |
9.3% |
| Male Unemployment Rate | 5.7% |
4.2% |
4.7% |
4.7% |
5.0% |
4.4% |
6.7% |
7.4% |
| Participation Rate | 57.4% |
61.1% |
60.3% |
63.7% |
59.5% |
63.0% |
69.4% |
68.3% |
| Female Participation Rate | 46.0% |
48.9% |
49.8% |
53.4% |
48.8% |
53.0% |
62.0% |
60.8% |
| Male Participation Rate | 68.9% |
71.4% |
71.2% |
72.9% |
70.6% |
72.5% |
71.1% |
75.8% |
| Source: Central Statistics Office | ||||||||
Details of unemployment and participation rates at NUTS III level are provided in Table 3.5. This reflects the region of residence of the labour force and not necessarily the region where they work. The table highlights the relatively poor performance of the Border region with the highest unemployment and lowest participation rate.
Table 3.5: Unemployment and participation by NUTS III region Q4 2006 |
|||||
| Indicator | BMW | Border | Midland | Western | State |
| Unemployment rate | 4.4% | 5.1% | 3.0% | 4.3% | 4.1% |
| Numbers in employment (000s) | 555.5 | 225.1 | 123.0 | 207.4 | 2,154.8 |
| Participation rate | 61.1% | 60.5% | 61.7% | 61.3% | 63.0% |
Source: Central Statistics Office, 2007
