Table of Contents

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 1

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 2

2 Literature Review .................................................................................................................... 3

3 Objective .................................................................................................................................. 4

4 Methodology............................................................................................................................ 5

5 Results ..................................................................................................................................... 7

5.1 Labor Force Indicators ..................................................................................................... 7

5.2 Male and Female Participation ....................................................................................... 13

5.3 Youth Unemployment .................................................................................................... 15

5.4 Age Group Determination .............................................................................................. 18

5.5 Engagement in Formal and Informal Sector .................................................................. 22

5.6 Three Major Labor Sectors ............................................................................................ 23

6 Policy Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 30

7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 31

8 References: ............................................................................................................................ 33

Appendix ....................................................................................................................................... 35
Abstract

Bangladesh, a developing market economy, consists of a large group of working people which is
the core driving force of the economy. The labor force is increasing day by day as the population
of the country has also been increasing simultaneously. Between 2001 and 2019, the growth of
labor force was about 22,332,142. But the change in labor force participation rate in this period
was more or less declining except in the latest years. Furthermore, unemployment rate and youth
unemployment rate has been continuously rising during this period. Though labor force
participation has decreased over the years, the expanded labor force consists almost 44 percent of
female workers, which has advanced almost 24 percent compared to male participation. On the
one hand, age group of the laborer mostly belongs to 30-64 age group and this huge working group
is mostly engaged in informal sector both in rural and urban areas. The limitations of Bangladesh
labor market lie in lack of knowledge and technical skills accompanied with an inflexible wage
rate considered with the stable inflation rate.

Keywords

Labor Force participation, unemployment, formal and informal sector, underemployment.

1
1 Introduction

Bangladesh is characterized as a developing market economy. Though the country has been facing
so many financial and structural obstacles accompanied with political instability, it has made
remarkable progress in poverty reduction supported by sustained economic growth. Strong ready-
made garments industry and stable macroeconomic conditions have made possible for the country
to become a fastest growing economy in the past decade. In 2015, Bangladesh has reached lower-
middle-income status and within 2026, it is assumed it may join the UN list of developing
countries. Poverty declined from 44 percent in 1991 to 15 percent in 2016, based on the
international poverty line of $1.90 a day(Bangladesh Overview, n.d.). Since the 1990s, annual
gross domestic product (GDP) growth has accelerated. Although it has plateaued in recent years,
GDP growth has remained above 6% in most years since the early 2000s(ADB, 2018). However,
employment performance has been so less. Labor force, that is, the group of population aged over
15 years, the driving force of the economy has been growing through certain fluctuations over the
years. From 1999-2000 to 2015-16 the labor market of Bangladesh increased by 24.25 million
with the increase of population(Al Hasan et al., 2018). It is seen that unemployment and
underemployment problems arrive due to the lack of effective demand for labor(Woahid, 2009).
If a deep observation is made, the labor force is seen consisting of low skilled labor which is
leading the economy to the creation of wide range job opportunities. Modern agriculture and
expansion of the industries have altered the labor supply at a large scale. On the one hand, women’s
participation rate increases and superseding the South Asia average, they are less privileged than
men in the labor market. As an example, youth not in employment, education or training rate
(NEET rate) represents a gender gap of 33 percentage points(DTUDA,2020). This study examines
the dynamics in the labor market from the year 2001 to 2019. As the economy of Bangladesh has
been going through a steady and rapid development in the last decade (2010-2019), a comparative
approach to analyze the changes over the years in different indicators is selected only for the past
decade

2
2 Literature Review

Bangladesh, an agrarian economy with a large sector of labor participation involved in agriculture
has been shifted to some diversified non-farm activities in the last two decades. In the context of
socio-economic culture, the rapid change of labor into non-farm activities has been observed in
both rural and urban areas among both male and female. Research suggests that a process of
transformation involving a shift from agricultural employment to increase non-farm employment
as well as structural transformation within rural areas with close proximity to cities(Sen et al.,
2021). Due to this transformation, the economy is moving towards a broader GDP even though
the growth of employment is relatively slow at the rate of 1.6 percent per annum since the 1990s.
Moreover, female participation rate significantly changed in the years between 2002-2006. The
share of unemployed youth labor in the year 2003 was 60 percent and the trend for both female
and male youth was quite similar(PAU, 2008). The urbanization of Bangladeshi labor force is
typical among developing countries with a slight improvement from a 36.9 percent share in 2000
to 40 percent in 2010 in women participation. A huge gap in wages and benefits are seen in
between the informal and formal sector. In addition, there are people under employed almost 11
million and new 2.1 million Bangladeshis entering the labor force every year(Davidson et al.,
2014). The labor market is consistently facing the rapid cycle of inflation and wage adjustments
especially in recent years. One study confirms that there is a significant positive impact of inflation
rate on higher unemployment(M. S. R. Chowdhury & Hossain, 2014). Analysis conducted by
Mujeri et al., 2020 the daily wage laborers in both agriculture and non-agriculture sectors are
usually able to protect the level of the daily real wage in the face of rising inflation through upward
adjustment in the nominal wage rate without any substantial time lag. A similar behavior is also
noticed in the informal labor markets that set the daily wage rates in construction, services,
transport (including rickshaw pulling) and other low-paid activities in which the poor are the major
participants. Bangladesh has a fairly young population with 34 percent aged 15 and younger and
just five percent aged 65 and older. At present, more than 65 percent of our population is of
working age, between 15 and 64(“Demographic Dividend” Could Turn into a “Demographic
Disaster” | Undefined, n.d.). According to a study, population ages 15-64 explain the major
variations along with GDP, PPP itself(Sarker et al., 2016). The government of Bangladesh has
imposed some rules and regulations on the labor market in case of labor wages (real) and safety
nets program for the working poor people. These types of imperfections create rigidities in the
labor market and it can further deteriorate income distribution since the benefit formal sector
3
workers at the expense of informal and rural workers. So, they undermine the benefits of trade
reform and prevent the economy from reaching its efficient point. Study finds that regulation
affecting only 10 percent of the labor force that have a strong impact on the rest of the labor
force(Devarajana et al., 1999). One other fact- due to globalization, it has enhanced the
participation of women in labor force as well as the real wage in their employment. One of the
studies shows that there is negative coefficient between inequality and increasing participation of
women in labor force which means women participation generates less inequality and hence,
increase economic development(Sharmin & Rayhan, 2011). But another study confirms that the
participation rates of female labor in the informal sector is experiencing a very slow rise whereas
a stagnating demand in the formal sector(Mahmud & Bidisha, 2018). On the one hand, Islam &
Kotikula, 2017 added that the labor force participation between married and unmarried young
women shows no significant difference by the year 2013. Finally, the labor market is significantly
affected by international and domestic remittance. Individuals receiving remittance tend to have
less incentive to participate in the labor market and furthermore individuals are also switching
from non-agriculture to agriculture sector. In such cases, it is seen that there is a transition from
wage employment to self-employment(Raihan et al., 2018).

According to the literature we have explored, it can be clearly observed the different factors that
affect the labor market dynamics in the past two decades. So, our study holds the distinction from
to reveal the overall dynamics of the labor market of Bangladesh in those years and discuss the
core factors and policy implications behind the cycle.

3 Objective

This paper objectifies to examine the overall situation of the labor market dynamics in the past two
decades. After 2000, the country’s GDP has been continuously moving towards an upward
magnitude and in recent time, the country is trying to enter into the group of lower middle-income
countries. Bangladesh economy’s most driving sector is it’s working age population. At the current
moment, the number of working age people in our country 106.1 million(P. S. Chowdhury, 2020).
On the contrary, with the rising population the fertility rate has been perfectly controlled over the
last decades. So, in order to improve a sustained economic growth and domestic market expansion,
a working human capital with sustained supply of labor is sufficiently needed to be improved and
vigilant scrutinized. Thus, the broad objective of the study determines to present all the necessary

4
and sufficient indicators along with sectoral trends. The objective of the paper is to find out and
analyze the change in labor market of Bangladesh with respect to some key aspect and indicators
and then finally to bring out some policy suggestions to guide the trend of change toward overall
economic betterment of the country. So, the specific objectives of the study are:

To understand the growth trend of labor force of Bangladesh during the period of 2001 to 2019 by
analyzing the three major indicators of Labor Force: labor force participation rate, unemployment
rate and employment to population ratio.

a) To show the ratio of female to male and male to female participation rate on the labor force
over the specified years.
b) To show the trend of youth unemployment rate in Bangladesh for previous two decades.
c) To determine the age group distribution of the labor force nationwide as well as analyzing
on the basis of area and sex, that is, the distribution holds between male and female in rural
and urban areas.
d) To show the percentage ratio of workers involved in formal and informal sector of the
economy.
e) To analyze the change in trend in three major labor sectors of Bangladesh (Agriculture,
Service and Industry) and the gap trend between aforementioned labor sectors during the
period of 2010 to 2019.

4 Methodology

The labor market stringently constitutes the overall supply side of an economy as a whole. So, the
dynamics in this market are undoubtedly an important factor to assess a country’s economic pulse.
As the name of the paper dictates, the paper extensively analyzes the overall labor market trend of
Bangladesh in the years from 2001 to 2019. The data and information regarding various relevant
determinants like- youth unemployment, age group distribution, male-female participation rate,
etc. [mentioned under objectives] related to the labor market dynamics of Bangladesh have been
collected, processed, and analyzed to arrive at the significant findings and conclusions. In the
study, the data and estimates from secondary sources like- Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS),
International Labor Organization (ILO), the World Bank, etc. have been used. Most of the data
and the estimates were collected during late February and early March 2021. So, some estimated

5
slightly vary from the latest database. Though the mixed approach (both qualitative and
quantitative) has been adopted to conduct the study, it is mostly qualitative. Following the
objectives, firstly, the paper investigates the growing trend of the labor force in the years. For
assessing the labor force trend, there major indicators of the labor force- unemployment rate, labor
force participation rate, and the employment-to-population ratio have been chosen. The diffusion
index, an indexing method (procedure described in the appendix section A.2), also known as an
economic barometer, has been utilized for capturing the change in each of the indicators at each
year taking base as the preceding year (without evaluating the magnitude of the change) and the
overall change in the labor force trend. In addition, a time series analysis is provided for the years.
Secondly, the labor force participation rate (2001-2019) has been examined gender-wise (male &
female). According to the objective underlined, later on, the collected data has been transformed
to obtain the ratio of female to male participation rate (in percentages). For quantitative
comparison, Chain index (described in the appendix section A.1), another indexing method has
been used which captures not only ratio changes at each year from 2010 to that particular year
through the chain index calculation but also ratio changes at each year from the preceding year
(taking the preceding year as the base) through link relatives. In addition, a time series has been
included to enliven the analysis. Thirdly, the collected data on the youth unemployment rate (% of
male & female in the age group of 15-25 years from labor force) has been scrutinized year wise
with the use of Chain index number and time series analysis for further comparison. Fourthly, the
(working) age group distribution for each year has been appraised through Size distribution which
depicts the portion of different age groups in the total labor force (calculated in percentages) and
the processed data was compared across the years. In fifth place, the workers involved in the formal
and informal sector of Bangladesh have been analyzed through the ‘Test of Homogeneity’, a
statistical tool which has been used to evaluate whether two or more groups (the groups in the
study- male & female from the urban and the rural areas) have the identical
distribution/proportions in a single categorical variable (the variable in the study- sectors).
Eventually, the concluding part of the labor market trend analysis from 2010 to 2019 contains an
investigation on the proportion (in percentages) of the total labor force in each of the three major
sectors (service, agriculture, and industry) of Bangladesh in each year which has been analyzed
through Chain index and Diffusion index for quantitative comparison across the years. For further
comparison and analysis, a time series has also been included. Apart from the above methods used
and manipulations done to organize, process, and analyze the data and estimates, many figures and

6
diagrams like- bar graphs, trend lines, etc. have been included as graphical exposition for
supporting the paper’s narrative explanation and findings.

5 Results

5.1 Labor Force Indicators

Changing Trends: The three main indicators of the labor force are labor force participation
rate, unemployment rate and employment-to-population ratio. The following table lists the
trend data for the years 2001 to 2019 for the three major indicators.

Table 1: Labor Force Participation Rate, Unemployment Rate and Employment to

Population Ratio, 2001-2019

Labor Force Unemployment Employment to Population

Year Participation Rate rate Ratio
2019 58.993 4.22 56.62
2018 58.972 4.29 56.48
2017 58.859 4.37 56.29
2016 56.596 4.35 54.13
2015 56.644 4.38 54.16
2014 56.688 4.39 54.2
2013 56.734 4.43 54.22
2012 56.786 4.06 54.48
2011 56.846 3.71 54.74
2010 56.917 3.38 54.99
2009 57.012 5 54.16
2008 57.114 4.29 54.66
2007 57.224 3.91 54.99
2006 27.335 3.59 55.28
2005 57.493 4.25 55.01
2004 57.556 4.3 55.02
2003 57.607 4.32 55.04
2002 57.648 3.96 55.27
2001 57.69 3.59 55.53
[Source: World Bank Data]

The labor force participation rate is a measure of the proportion of a country’s working-age
population that engages actively in the labor market, either by working or looking for work; it
provides an indication of the size of the supply of labor available to engage in the production of
goods and services, relative to the population at working age. The breakdown of the labor force by
7
sex and age group gives a profile of the distribution of the labor force within a country (Bradley,
2012). The data table represents that the labor force participation (LFP) rate starting from the
year 2001 to 2005 is more or less stable, with a slight decline as the year progresses. But in the
year 2006, the LFP rate falls sharply to 27.335. Again, from the next year 2007, it is seen the LFP
rate moves to its stable position. Though the rate is more or less stable in the following years, it
has been on the decline till 2016. After 2016 we see a stable progression of LFP rate till 2019.
Using the data from the table we can fit the following trend line.

Figure 1: Labor Force Participation Rate Trend Line, 2001-2019

60
50
40
30
20

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Year

The above figure clearly represents that the LFP rate trend curve is a smooth slightly downward
curve till the year 2016. Since there is a sudden big fall in the LFP rate, the curve shows a giant
drop in the year 2006. Moreover, the trend line starts to move upward and at a stable increment
from the year 2017 as it has been mentioned earlier.

Second major indicator is the national unemployment rate. The unemployment rate measures
the number of people actively looking for a job as a percentage of the labor force (Bangladesh
Unemployment Rate | 1991-2020 Data | 2021-2023 Forecast | Historical, n.d.). From the data
table, it is depicted that during the years from 2001 to 2003, the unemployment rate is increasing.
Furthermore, in the next 3 years, i.e. from 2004 to 2006, the rate was on the decline. But it grew

8
 again in the next three years. However, between 2009 and 2010, the rate falls almost 47.93%.
Again, in the next three years, i.e. 2011 to 2013, the rate was growing. So, a common cycle of
growth and decline was occurring in every three years. However, from the year 2014, the has been
kept almost steady and a small decline is noticed in the progressive years till 2019. A time series
graph is provided to convey the scenario in brief.

Figure 2: Unemployment Rate Trend Line, 2001-2019

5
4.5
Unemployment rate

4
3.5

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Year

So, the figure shows the cycle of unemployment rate in the years 2001 to 2019. A stable and almost
smooth downward trend line can be noticed between the years 2014 and 2019. In these 19 years,
the highest rate is seen in the year 2009 and the lowest rate is noticed in the year 2010.

The third major indicator of the labor market, employment-to-population ratio provides
information on the ability of an economy to provide employment for those who want to work (1.5
Employment-to-Population Ratio - ScrewTurn Wiki, n.d.). The employment-to-population ratio
is defined as the proportion of a country’s working-age population that is employed. In the years
between 2001 to 2007, a smooth downward ration is observed which lies between 55.5 and 55.0.
However, in between 2005 and 2006, the ration rises for a short magnitude. Similar downward
trend is also noticed between the years from 2007 to 2016, with some growth in 2010. But the
economy faces a smooth upward trend from 2017 till 2019. The figure below depicts the trend line

9
for the years mentioned in the table. From the trend line, it is noticeable that in recent years the
economy is meeting with considerable growth in employment-to-population ratio.

Figure 3: Employment-to-population ratio trend line, 2001-2019

56.5
56
55.5
55
54.5
54

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Year

Comparative Index: Previously the trend reports of the three major labor market of Bangladesh
are analyzed presented with a trend line for the years 2001 to 2019. In this section, a quantitative
comparative analysis is presented reflecting the magnitude of changes over the years. Report says
expanding levels of economic growth has led to a rise in Bangladesh’s gross national income (GNI)
at 2005 Purchasing Power Parity (PPP), increasing by 79% from $985 GNI per capita in 2000 to
$1,768 in 2010 (Davidson et al., 2014). As Bangladesh has faced rapid economic growth after
2010, this study will cover the comparisons only for the years 2010 to 2019. In Table 2, the link
relatives and the chain indices (Chained to 2010) for LFP rate, unemployment rate and
employment-to-population ratio are included and the last three columns consist total link relatives,
average link relatives and aggregate chain indices of these three indicators. Here for each three
indicators, 2010 is chosen as the base year. The table generates that only in the recent years, that
is, in 2017, 2018 and 2019 the LFP rate is increasing mostly. On the one hand, in these three
consecutive years the percentage changes are 3.41, 3.61 and 3.65 respectively. In case of the
indicator unemployment rate, it is seen upward increment in the years 2011, 2012 and 2013.
Astonishingly the rate of this increment has dropped tremendously and started to decline than the
previous years. From the year 2015 and onwards, the indices values are below 100 and in the most

10
recent year 2019 the lowest value (96.57) is observed. So, beyond doubt this result clearly
represents that the unemployment rate of Bangladesh is decreasing day by day. It also poses a
positive sign in the national growth of the country’s economy. Furthermore, even employment-to-
population ratio index shows upward movement in the recent years. Though it is noticeable the
index falls in 2019 compared to the year 2018. But it is also a good sign that the index value
(100.589) denotes aggregate growth.

Although if we take a look on the aggregate indices for these three indicators, we see a slight
decline in 2019 compared to 2018 and 2017. The reason behind this situation is nothing but a huge
percentage drop-in unemployment rate compared to other two indicators. Moreover, employment-
to-population ratio has not shift to an eye-catching rate, so this indicator needs more attention.

11
 12
Table 2: Chain Indices for LFP, Unemployment Rate and Employment-to-population Ratio, 2010-2019
Year Chain Chain Employment Chain Chain
Labor Force Indices Indices to Indices Total Average Indices
Participation Link (Chained Unemployment Link (Chained Population Link (Chained Link Link (Chained
Rate Relatives to 2010) rate Relatives to 2010) Ratio Relatives to 2010) Relatives Relatives to 2010)
2019 58.99 100.04 103.65 4.22 98.37 96.57 56.62 100.25 100.589 298.65 99.55 99.12
2018 58.97 100.19 103.61 4.29 98.17 98.62 56.48 100.34 104.34 298.69 99.57 102.37
2017 58.86 103.99 103.41 4.37 100.46 99.77 56.29 103.99 103.93 308.45 102.82 102.53
2016 56.59 99.92 99.44 4.35 99.32 99.09 54.13 99.95 99.87 299.17 99.73 99.59
2015 56.64 99.92 99.52 4.38 99.77 98.87 54.16 99.93 99.88 299.62 99.87 99.53
2014 56.68 99.92 99.59 4.39 99.09 108.13 54.2 99.96 99.49 298.98 99.66 102.49
2013 56.73 99.91 99.68 4.43 109.11 119.41 54.22 99.52 99.05 308.54 102.85 105.88
2012 56.79 99.89 99.77 4.06 109.43 120.12 54.48 99.53 99.07 308.85 102.95 106.10
2011 56.85 99.88 99.88 3.71 109.76 109.76 54.74 99.55 99.55 309.18 103.06 103.06
2010 56.92 100 100 3.38 100 100 54.99 100 100 300 100 100
5.2 Male and Female Participation

Changing Trends: Female participation in workforce has been rising continuously over the years.
The collected data from the ILO estimates about the ratio of female to male participation rate
provide with an upward trend line from the year 2001 to 2019. On the contrary, the trend line of
the ratio of male to female participation rate represent a downward curve, depicting that overall
participation of female labor is increasing day by day.

Table 3: Ratio of Female to Male/Male to Female Participation Rate, 2001-2019

Ratio of Female to
Male Ratio of Male to Female
Year Participation Rate Participation Rate
2019 44.564 55.436
2018 44.323 55.677
2017 44.039 55.961
2016 41.19 58.81
2015 40.267 59.733
2014 39.347 60.653
2013 38.448 61.552
2012 37.571 62.429
2011 36.719 63.281
2010 35.887 64.113
2009 35.054 64.946
2008 34.245 65.755
2007 33.46 66.54
2006 32.698 67.302
2005 32.549 67.451
2004 32.272 67.728
2003 31.994 68.006
2002 31.709 68.291
2001 31.42 68.58
[ Source: World Bank Data, modeled ILO estimate]

Table 3 lists the data on the ratio of male-female participation rate over the years 2001 to 2019.
The data table confirms that ratio of female to male participation rate has been increasing from the
year 2001 till 2019. On the other hand, ratio of male to female participation rate has been declining
for the specified years. So, beyond doubt it is confirmed that as the years have progressed, so the
female participation in the labor market has been increasing continuously. The trend data is
presented by the following time series trend line. In the figure, the curve presented in the above
section is representing the male to female participation trend line which is a downward curve that
demonstrates declining male participation in labor market or it can be said as increasing
participation of female labor. The curve drawn in the below section representing the female to
male participation rate over the specified years.

Figure 4: Ratio of Female to Male/Male to Female Participation Rate, 2001-2019

70
60
50
40
30

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Year

14
Comparative Index: The table below lists the chain indices for the ratio of female to male
participation rate, these indices are chained to the value of the year 2010. By using these indices,

Table 4: Chain Indices for Ratio of Female to Male Participation Rate, 2010-2019

Ratio of Female to Male Link Chain Indices

Year Participation Rate Relatives (Chained to 2010)
2019 44.564 100.54 124.18
2018 44.323 100.65 123.51
2017 44.039 106.92 122.72
2016 41.19 102.29 114.78
2015 40.267 102.34 112.21
2014 39.347 102.34 109.64
2013 38.448 102.33 107.14
2012 37.571 102.32 104.69
2011 36.719 102.32 102.32
2010 35.887 100 100
we find a quantitative comparison over the years ranging within 2010 and 2019. It can be seen that
in the year 2011 the change in the ratio is 2.32% and as the value is greater than 100, so it means
rise of female participation with respect to male participation rate. Consecutively, the indices value
is rising about 4.69%, 7.14%, 9.64%, 12.21%, 14.78%, 22.72%, 23.51%, 24.18%. So, the results
tell us that participation rate of female labors with respect to male labors in the economy is
increasing with a higher percentage than the previous years. So, Bangladesh economy is
demonstrating higher contribution of female labors day by day.

5.3 Youth Unemployment

Changing Trends: Youth unemployment is the situation of young people who are looking for a
job, but cannot find a job, with the age range being that defined by the United Nations as 15–24
years old (Youth Unemployment - Wikipedia, n.d.). The youth unemployment rate trend line
depicts a result that a continuous fluctuation starting from the year 2001 to 2010 was aroused.
After 2010 and till 2017 an upward movement in youth unemployment rate is observed. However,
the situation started to turn opposite direction from 2018. The economy is observing a downward
youth unemployment rate after 2018.

15
 Table 5: Youth Unemployment Rate, 2001-2019

Year Youth Unemployment rate

2019 11.867
2018 12.147
2017 12.302
2016 11.124
2015 10.799
2014 10.456
2013 10.134
2012 8.709
2011 7.462
2010 6.402
2009 9.072
2008 8.417
2007 7.68
2006 7.326
2005 8.864
2004 7.764
2003 6.643
2002 8.243
2001 9.253
[Source: World Bank Data, modeled ILO estimate]

Table 5 consists the data for Youth Unemployment Rate (YUR) for the years 2001 to 2019.
During these years, the highest rate of YUR (12.302) is noticed in the year 2017 and the lowest
rate (6.402) is noticed in the year 2010. On the one hand, after 2010 and till 2017 the rate is
continuously rising each year. During the years 2001 to 2010, the YUR has been fluctuating around
the average value 7.9664 whereas between 2011 and 2019 the mean value is 10.556. So, it is
noticeable that the YUR has been increased almost 32.51 percent in two decades. Figure 5 shows
the trend line over the years which shows the clear fluctuations in YUR.

16
 Figure 5: Youth Unemployment Rate, 2001-2019

12
10
8
6

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Year

Comparative Index: A comparative analysis for YUR over the years will provide a concrete idea
about the fluctuations. In Table 6, chain indices of YUR for the years 2010-2019 is provided.

Table 6: Chain Indices, Youth Unemployment Rate; 2010-2019

Youth Unemployment Link Chain Indices (Chained to

Year rate Relatives 2010)
2019 11.867 97.69 185.36
2018 12.147 98.74 189.74
2017 12.302 110.59 192.16
2016 11.124 103.01 173.76
2015 10.799 103.28 168.68
2014 10.456 103.18 163.32
2013 10.134 116.36 158.29
2012 8.709 116.71 136.04
2011 7.462 116.56 116.56
2010 6.402 100 100
The indices are chained to the value of the year 2010. The table, provided above, shows
tremendous increase in youth unemployment from its base year 2010. Our calculation finds,
highest increment has occurred in the year 2017 with a percentage of 92.16. If it is looked closely,
in 2011, 2012 and 2013 the average rate increment of YUR was 19.44 percent each year.
17
Furthermore, in the progressive years, that is, in 2014, 2015 and 2016 the average rate of increment
was 5.14 percent each year. So, the economy was facing lower growth in YUR. However, the
growth rate has continued to rise in the next year and at 18.4 percent, close to the previous years.
Good news is the rate has started to fall from the year 2018. All this clearly view, Bangladesh
economy is facing higher percentages in youth unemployment as the day passes.

5.4 Age Group Determination

Trend Study: Labor Force Survey (LFS) of the years 2010, 2013 and 2016-17 (data presented in
appendix section B), carried out by Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS) provide that in the
consecutive years proportion of workers in the labor force aging between 15-29 and 65+ is
decreasing. On the other hand, proportions of workers aging between 30-64 is being increased in
2013 but decreased during the period of 2016-17.

Figure 6: Age Group Distribution (National)

Age Group Distribution (Total)
60 56.7
52.8
50
41.1
37.1 38.5
40

30 25.6

20

10 4.9 4.8 6.1

0
2016-17 2013 2010

15-29 30-64 65+

[Diagram prepared using LFS data, courtesy: BBS]

In figure 6, a bar diagram, showing Age Group Distribution, is presented for the years 2016-17,
2013 and 2010. If it is looked closely, we find the percentage for the age group (30-64) has dropped
significantly in 2016-17. The LFS did not include the reasons behind the huge decline in the
percentage of the respective age group. For the age group (15-29), the percentages are 41.1, 38.5
and 25.6 for the consecutive years. On the other hand, little changes in the percentage of the age
group 65+ is seen (4.9 in 2016-17, 4.8 in 2013, 6.1 in 2010).

18
Moving ahead figure 7 and 8 represent two sets of bar diagrams denoting the age group distribution
in the rural and urban areas respectively. No surprise that the changes in the percentages of the
specific age groups are similar to the national percentages. In the rural area, for age group (15-29)
43.5 in 2010, 38.6 in 2013 and 24.7 in 2016-17; for age group (30-64) 51.8 in 2010, 55.9 in 2013,
36.7 in 2016-17; for age group 65+ 4.7 in 2010, 5.5 in 2013, 5.3 in 2016-17. In the urban area, for
age group (15-29) 40.3 in 2010, 38.2 in 2013 and 27.8 in 2016-17; for age group (30-64) 53.1 in
2010, 58.9 in 2013, 38.2 in 2016-17; for age group 65+ 6.6 in 2010, 2.9 in 2013, 3.8 in 2016-17.

Figure 7: Age Group Distribution (Rural)

Age Group Distribution (Rural)
60 55.9
51.8
50
43.5
36.7 38.6
40

30 24.7

20

10 5.3 5.5 4.7

0
2016-17 2013 2010

15-29 30-64 65+

[Diagram prepared using LFS data, courtesy: BBS]

Figure 8: Age Group Distribution (Urban)

Age Group Distribution (Urban)
70
58.9
60 53.1
50
38.2 38.2 40.3
40
27.8
30
20
10 6.6
3.8 2.9
0
2016-17 2013 2010

15-29 30-64 65+

[Diagram prepared using LFS data, courtesy: BBS]

19
One more analysis on the basis of area and sex, that is, the distribution holds between male and
female in rural and urban areas also views another picture that are represented by the simplistic
diagrams in the figures 9,10,11 and 12.

Figure 9: Age Group Distribution (Rural Male)

Age Group Distribution (Rural Male)
70
60.1
60 55.1

50
39.8
40 35.9
33.5
30 23.8
20

10 6.1 5.1 6.4

0
2016-17 2013 2010

15-29 30-64 65+

[Diagram prepared using LFS data, courtesy: BBS]

Figure 10: Age Group Distribution (Rural Female)

Age Group Distribution (Rural Female)
60
50.6
50 47.1 48.5 46.1

40 37.5

30 25.5

20

10 4.5 4.3 3.3

0
2016-17 2013 2010

15-29 30-64 65+

[Diagram prepared using LFS data, courtesy: BBS]

20
 Figure 11: Age Group Distribution (Urban Male)
Age Group Distribution (Urban Male)
70 65.2

60 53.7
50
39.4 39.3
40
31.5
30 25.3

20

10 7
4.4 3.3
0
2016-17 2013 2010

15-29 30-64 65+

[Diagram prepared using LFS data, courtesy: BBS]

Figure 12: Age Group Distribution (Urban Female)

Age Group Distribution (Urban Female)

60 53.8
52.5
50 44.1
41.3
40 37
30.3
30

20

10 6.2
3.1 2.1
0
2016-17 2013 2010

15-29 30-64 65+

[Diagram prepared using LFS data, courtesy: BBS]

The age group distributions in rural and urban areas do not show significant gap for both sexes.
For age group (15-29) male percentages in rural area are 33.5 in 2010, 39.8 in 2013, 23.8 in 2016-
17; in urban area are 31.5 in 2010, 39.3 in 2013 and 25.3 in 2016-17. For age group (30-64) male
percentages in rural area are 60.1 in 2010, 55.1 in 2013, 35.9 in 2016-17, and in urban area male
percentages are 65.2 in 2010, 53.7 in 2013, 39.4 in 2016-17; for age group 65+ male percentages
in rural area are 6.4 in 2010, 5.1 in 2013, 6.1 in 2016-17, and in urban area male percentages are

21
3.3 in 2010, 7 in 2013 and 4.4 in 2016-17. More or less, similar proportional changes are also seen
in case of female age group in both rural and urban areas, except for age group 65+ in rural area
the percentages show an increasing trend, that is, 3.3 in 2010, 4.3 in 2013 and 4.5 in 2016-17. This
study states that in the mentioned years, the distribution of the age groups of labor in Bangladesh
is showing a very irregular cycle and quite unsatisfactory.

5.5 Engagement in Formal and Informal Sector

Trend Study: LFS of the years 2010, 2013 and 2016-17 (data presented in appendix section B)
demonstrate that the percentage ratio of workers involved in informal sectors is always higher at a
large degree than workers involved in formal sectors. Most surprisingly, the proportion over the
years in both national and urban area is almost similar. However, in rural area the ratio of labors
engaged in formal is increasing.

Figure 13: Workers Ratio in Formal and Informal Sectors

WORKERS RATIO IN FORMAL AND

INFORMAL SECTORS
Informal Formal

12.5 8.7 12.6 7.8 14.9 11.9

25 24.9 22.7

87.5 91.3 87.4 92.2 85.1 88.1

75 75.1 77.3

TOTAL URBAN RURAL TOTAL URBAN RURAL TOTAL URBAN RURAL

2010 2013 2016-17

[Diagram prepared using LFS data, courtesy: BBS]

Diagram presented in Figure 13 provides a certain comparison of the ratio of workers engaged in
formal and informal sectors. Over the years, that is, from 2010 to 2016-17 the ratio of informal
over formal workers has increased in the urban area. On the contrary, opposite movement is seen
in case of rural area. According to the data collected from LFS (2010,2013,2016-17), the national
scenario is somehow different. Between the years 2010 and 2013, the ratio is almost same whereas
22
in the period 2016-17 the percentage of informal workers has decreased from the previous two
periods.

Considering the facts found in the surveys, a homogeneity test using chi-square distribution has
been made to find out the distribution of labors in rural and urban area in the respective sectors is
similar or not. The null hypothesis is assumed as the distribution in the urban and rural area is same
and the opposite is assumed as the alternate hypothesis. The study finds chi-square calculated
values for the year 2010, 2013 and 2016-17 are 2838.824, 3276.217, 2057.644 respectively. For
each year the degrees of freedom equal to 3 and significance level is 5%, so chi-square
tabulation value for each year equals 7.815. As chi-square calculation value is greater than chi-
square tabulation value, so the null hypothesis may be rejected. Thus, it can be concluded that the
distribution of workers involved in formal and informal sectors in rural and urban area is not
similar.

5.6 Three Major Labor Sectors

Changing Trends: The labor force of Bangladesh comprises three major sectors, i.e., Agriculture,
Industry and Service. Agriculture is the most important sector of the economy and over the years
this sector has the largest portion of the total labor force. However, in Fiscal Year 2018, the
agriculture sector contributed 14.23% of the total GDP(BBS, 2018). In this study we have seen
that the labor force in the agriculture is signifying a downward trend line over the years from 2010
to 2019. On the contrary, service sector and industry sector is depicting upward trend line of labor
force in the years same as before.

23
 Figure 14: Share of Agriculture Sector in Labor

48
46
44
Agriculture

42
40
38

2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Years

The above diagram (Fig 14) shows the trend of share of agriculture sector in labor between the
years 2010-19. From the graph, it is demonstrated that in the year 2010 percentage of labor is 47.31
and straight decline till the year 2016 with a percentage of 42.66. Further, the trend falls sharply
in the year 2017. After that the curve becomes slightly flatter but still in the decrease and in the
year 2019 it falls to 38.3 percent.

24
 Figure 15: Share of Service Sector in Labor

40
39
38
Service

37
36
35

2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Years

The above exposition (Fig 15) shows the trend of share of service sector in labor between the years
2010-19. From the graph, it is represented that in the year 2010 percentage of labor is 35.04 and
continuous flat rise till the year 2016 with a percentage of 36.87. After that the trend rises sharply
in 2017 to 38.98 percent whereas further the curve becomes slightly flatter but still on the rise and
in the year 2019 it rises to 40.38 percent.

25
 Figure 16: Share of Industry Sector in Labor

22
21
Industry

20
19
18

2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Years

In Fig 16, the trend of share of industry sector in labor between the years 2010-19 is represented.
In the year 2010, percentage of labor is 17.63 which has been rising at a stretch till 2016 with a
percentage of 20.46. But during the period 16-18, the percentage remains stagnant. Again, the
percentage continues to rise almost as the previous rising rate from 2018 with percentage of 20.84
to 2019 with a percentage of 21.32.

In figure 17 and 18, gap trends of service and industry sector with agriculture sector is established
respectively. From the trend line (Fig 17), the gap between agriculture and service sector was
12.27% in 2010, in 2016 the gap reduced to 8.14%. But as the year proceeds to 2018, we see the
gap has been completely eliminated and in 2019 the gap becomes 2.08% with the higher percentage
in service sector. So, a clear concept can be deduced that labors are engaging themselves in service
sectors more rather in agriculture. In Fig 18, the trend line depicts gaps between agriculture and
industry in the year 2010-19. In 2010, the gap was 29.68% and in 2019 the gap becomes 16.98.
So, the reduction in between these two sectors show that the gap does not reduce to a great extent.

26
 Figure 17: Gap Trend Between Agriculture and Service Sector

50
45
Agriculture/Service

40
35

2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Years

Figure 18: Gap Trend Between Agriculture and Industry Sector

50
40
30
20

2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Years

27
 Comparative Index:
Table 7: Chain Indices, Share of Labor in Three Sectors; 2010-2019
Chain Base Index Numbers Chained to 2010
Years Percentages based on preceding year
Sectors Total of Link Average Chain
Relatives Index
Agriculture Industry Service
2010 100.00 100.00 100.00 300.00 100.00 100.00
2011 98.39 102.55 100.97 301.92 100.64 100.64
2012 96.72 105.28 101.83 303.83 101.28 101.92
2013 95.14 107.88 102.65 305.68 101.89 103.85
2014 93.57 110.32 103.54 307.44 102.48 106.42
2015 91.86 113.22 104.39 309.47 103.16 109.79
2016 90.17 116.05 105.22 311.45 103.82 113.97
2017 85.82 115.83 111.24 312.89 104.30 118.87
2018 83.26 118.21 113.50 314.97 104.99 124.80
2019 80.96 120.93 115.24 317.13 105.71 131.92
Table 8: Diffusion Index, Three Major Labor Sectors; 2010-2019
Diffusion Index:
Years Indicator Values for DI Index
Agriculture Industry Service Level
2010 - - - -
2011 0 1 1 66.67
2012 0 1 1 66.67
2013 0 1 1 66.67
2014 0 1 1 66.67
2015 0 1 1 66.67
2016 0 1 1 66.67
2017 0 0.5 1 50.00
2018 0 1 1 66.67
2019 0 1 1 66.67

28
The above tables. Table 7 and 8, show the index results of the changes of labor participation in the
three sectors Agriculture, Industry and Service. In table 7, chain indices for the period 2010-
2019 are shown. The leftmost column represents the total index, that is, average changes among
all the three sectors. From the table 7, it can be easily said during the period 2010-19, the
percentage share of labor in agriculture has been consistently decreasing. It is found from the table
the rate of decrease in the share was 2 percent on average from 2010-16. After that the rate of
decrease abruptly increases for the consecutive three years. During these ten years the share of
labor in agriculture sector has decreased about 19.04 percent. A complete opposite situation is seen
in industry sector. On an average, about 2-2.5% increment in labor in this sector is observed, with
an exception in between the year 2016-2017. The average change in these 10 years is about 20.93
percent. On the other hand, in the service sector we see a consistent increment rate in the share of
labor. But between the year 2016-17, a tremendous rise has been observed. Afterwards, the
increment rate falls to half but higher than the previous mentioned periods till 2016. So, the study
finds during the recent years the share of labor in service sector is increasing almost at the similar
rate in which the agriculture sector is losing its share. The index result shows the change in the
share of labor in service sector during 2010-2019 is almost 15.24 percent with an upward shift. On
the one hand, this study also includes the total change in the three major sectors and concludes that
till 2015, the upward movement in the labor participation rate was almost 2.5 percent, on average.
But as the year proceeds, the shift in the labor participation rate has been rising each year and at
last the change was almost 7.12 percent between the year 2018 and 2019. Most importantly, total
change in these 10 years is astonishingly above 31 percent with a positive movement.

Now, from our study, the final analysis represents the time of changes and the movement in the
trend line between the years 2010-2019. As table 8 shows the diffusion indices in the three major
sectors, it is undoubtedly found that the change in the share of agricultural labor was always on
the decline where the change in the share of service labor was always on the rise. The industry
sector also holds the similar changes as the service sector except for the year 2017 where the
participation rate was stable compared to the previous year. The total index finally suggests that
in each year, the aggregate share of labor participation rate has been increasing as a whole even
though the labor share of agriculture sector was always on the decline.

So, the table 7 and table 8 eventually propagates to a point that clearly defines the magnitude of
the changes in the labor share in each major sector and the direction of the changes for the

29
consecutive years. A conclusion can be deduced from the study the level of share in labor
participation has been continuously rising over the years and the rate of changes is quite
appreciating though as being agrarian economy, Bangladesh is losing its labor in the most
significant agricultural sector.

6 Policy Recommendations

According to the 2019 World Development Report, unemployment stems more from lack of the
right skills rather than scarcity of jobs(Skilling up Bangladesh’s Youth for a Changing Job Market,
n.d.). Another research finds Dynamism as well as unskilled labor in the agriculture, industry and
service sector are the two most significant characteristics in Bangladesh labor market in home and
abroad indicative of acceleration of economic growth. On the unskilled aspect, under/unemployed
labor is high and still significant, industrial employment is low and the proportion of day labor is
quite high(Kundu, n.d.). A study conducted between May and June 2019 by The General
Economics Division (GED) under the planning ministry states that the country has 1.38 crore
underemployed people now. Of them, 45.3 percent are in the service sector, 30.6 percent in the
agriculture sector and 24.1 percent industry sector (Unemployment in Bangladesh- 1.38cr People
Underemployed | Undefined, n.d.). One more study confirms that inflation rate was higher than
the WRI if the point-to-point growth rate is considered in 2014-15. The Wage Rate Index (WRI)
has increased compared to the inflation rate from the following year (2015-16) and maintained a
steady growth of more than 6 per cent each year until 2019-20, the inflation rate has also
maintained a steady growth of over 5.5 per cent every year until 2019-20. This indicates that a
worker does not experience real change in terms of her purchasing power as the steady growth of
WRI is coupled with steady or even increasing growth of the inflation rate. The ILO Global Wage
report 2020-21 reveals that Bangladesh has been experiencing an annual decline rate of 5.9 per
cent annually in real wage with the lowest one among the 22 Asia Pacific countries during last
decade(Hossain, 2021). In case of public vs private sector, the public sector offers a national pay
scale based on job class whereas there is no established minimum pay scale in private or corporate
jobs which demotivates public to participate in both formal and informal sectors. Additionally,
private sectors in most cases do not ensure social and retirement benefits. On the one hand,
Bangladesh is the most expensive country to live in South Asia but surprisingly the minimum
wages offered are not sufficient to live in relatively expensive country in South Asia. The cost of

30
living and minimum wages confirm the GINI co-efficient index of 0.482 in 2016, reflecting the
gap between poor and rich is high and life of poor people are very hard to survive(Siddiqui, 2020).
The problem of educated unemployment in Bangladesh is alarmingly increasing in recent years.
According to a study by the Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS), the graduate
unemployment rate of Bangladesh was 33.19 per cent in 2019. As per the latest report of the UN,
the gender wage gap in Bangladesh is 2.2% against the world average of 21.2% (“UN Report:
Bangladesh’s Gender Wage Gap Lowest in the World | Dhaka Tribune,” 2020).

As the points that have been mentioned, considering with some other studies, Labor market of
Bangladesh needs to be reformed in some certain cases. First, Bangladesh labor market lacks
Dynamism and government should build up sector wise training schools for the labors. Moreover,
the unskilled and under skilled aspect of the labors should be addressed with top concern.

Second, the Wage Rate Index (WRI) must be regulated with the steady inflation rate in each fiscal
year, so that people with low wage and daily wage earners may not find difficulty to improve their
standard of living. Furthermore, it is necessary to diminish the gap between the rich and the poor.

Third, government should initiate an agreement with the private sector employers that they must
add social and retirement benefits for their workers according to their institutional pay scale.

Finally, as the graduate unemployed people are rising, the higher education sector should be
reformed according to the job requirements of Bangladesh and foreign as well.

7 Conclusion

Bangladesh labor market has been expanding at a stretch since the birth of the nation. As
urbanization has been occurring rapidly, demand for creation of industries is the most important
reason behind the huge level of expansion. The study reflects that in the past two decades, precisely
between 2001 and 2019 the growth of the labor force was about 22,332,142 (estimates by ILO).
But it has been confirmed from our study that a stable progression in the LFP rate was seen only
in the recent years and till 2016 it was on the wane. A similar trend has also been demonstrated in
case of employment-to-population ratio. But unemployment rate and youth unemployment rate
has been continuously rising over the years. In both cases, a three-year fluctuation of advancement
and declination are observed, though recent years show stability in the progression. Advancement
in the female participation in the labor market is really appreciating. The study finds in the years
31
between 2010 and 2019, female participation has increased almost 24 percent compared to male
participation. The study also reveals that the core age group of the laborer is 30-64, both nationally
and locally. However, the proportion of laborer engaged in formal and informal sector is still to be
regulated, because the results found for the years 2010, 2013 and 2016-17 are not so much
differentiated; though in the rural areas people engaged in formal sectors have increased quite a
bit compared to urban areas and nationally. From a test of homogeneity, it has been found that the
distribution of workers involved in formal and informal sectors in rural and urban area is not
similar. The major change that shaped the aggregate labor market is the shift of agriculture to
service sectors. People are more reluctant to do work in the service sector than the agriculture
sector whereas the economy is still mostly agrarian. After analyzing various studies, it is concluded
even though the rising labor force accompanied with an upward unemployment, the reason is not
the scarcity of jobs. Rather it is due to unskilled labors and under-employment. On the one hand,
with a steady inflation rate, the laborers are facing no change in real income. So, the country needs
to upgrade its labor skills and regulate macroeconomic policy in favor of the laborer.

32
8 References:

1.5 Employment-to-population ratio - ScrewTurn Wiki. (n.d.). Retrieved August 1, 2021, from
http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mi/wiki/1-5-Employment-to-population-ratio.ashx
ADB. (2018). Adb Briefs. ADB Briefs, 7(47), 1–8.
Al Hasan, M., Sheikh, B., & Rahman, M. (2018). Structure and Dynamics of Labour Market in
Bangladesh. 13, 1–25. http://bsmrau.edu.bd/seminar/wp-
content/uploads/sites/318/2018/04/Mahmud-Al-Hasan-Paper13-05-3085.pdf
Bangladesh Overview. (n.d.). Retrieved June 24, 2021, from
https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/bangladesh/overview
Bangladesh Unemployment Rate | 1991-2020 Data | 2021-2023 Forecast | Historical. (n.d.).
Retrieved August 1, 2021, from https://tradingeconomics.com/bangladesh/unemployment-
rate
BBS. (2018). Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Bangladesh 2018. 17, 1–9.
http://bbs.portal.gov.bd/sites/default/files/files/bbs.portal.gov.bd/page/057b0f3b_a9e8_4fde
_b3a6_6daec3853586/F2_GDP_2017_18.pdf
Bradley, S. F. (2012). Labor Force Participation Rate. Encyclopedia of Social Problems, October.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963930.n306
Chowdhury, M. S. R., & Hossain, M. T. (2014). Determinants of Unemployment in Bangladesh:
A Case Study. SSRN Electronic Journal, 4(3), 16–20. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2402908
Chowdhury, P. S. (2020). Demographic dividend: A roadmap to progress. The Financial Express.
https://thefinancialexpress.com.bd/views/reviews/demographic-dividend-a-roadmap-to-
progress-1600268169?amp=true
Davidson, E., de Santos, A., Lee, Y., Martinez, N., Smith, C., & Tassew, T. (2014). Inclusive
Growth Diagnostic. June.
“Demographic dividend” could turn into a “demographic disaster” | undefined. (n.d.). Retrieved
November 2, 2021, from
https://www.thedailystar.net/lifestyle/perspective/news/demographic-dividend-could-turn-
demographic-disaster-1709272
Devarajana, S., Ghanem, H., & Thierfelder, K. (1999). Labor market regulations, trade
liberalization and the distribution of income in bangladesh. The Journal of Policy Reform,
3(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/13841289908523393
Hossain, M. N. A. (2021). The real wage trap in the labour market of Bangladesh. The Financial
Express. https://thefinancialexpress.com.bd/views/views/the-real-wage-trap-in-the-labour-
market-of-bangladesh-1619365953
Islam, T. M. T., & Kotikula, A. (2017). Analyzing the Rising Labor Force Participation Rates
Among Female Youth of Bangladesh. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1973.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2930152
Kundu, N. (n.d.). Skills for Dynamism in Labour Market of Bangladesh : Assessment of Allied
33
 Factors. 4, 1–16.
Mahmud, S., & Bidisha, S. H. (2018). Female Labor Market Participation in Bangladesh:
Structural Changes and Determinants of Labor Supply. Springer Singapore.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2071-2_4
Mujeri, M. K., Hossain, M., & Chowdhury, T. T. (2020). Labor Market Dynamics, Inflation and
Wage Adjustments in Bangladesh. In Bangladesh’s Macroeconomic Policy: Trends,
Determinants and Impact (pp. 51–87). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1244-5_1
PAU. (2008). Recent Employment Situation and Labor Market Developments in Bangladesh. June.
Raihan, S., Rahman, M. M., Afroze, A., & Uddin, M. (2018). How Does Remittance Affect Labor
Force Participation Behavior and Employment Choice in Bangladesh? Springer Singapore.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2071-2_11
Sarker, S., Khan, A., & Mahmood, R. (2016). Working Age Population & Economic Growth in
Bangladesh: A Time-Series Approach Sandip. In 1ST AISD INTERNATIONAL
MULTIDISCIPLINARY CONFERENCE (pp. 121–135).
Sen, B., Dorosh, P., & Ahmed, M. (2021). Moving out of agriculture in Bangladesh: The role of
farm, non-farm and mixed households. World Development, 144, 105479.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105479
Sharmin, S., & Rayhan, M. I. (2011). Does Globalization Always Increase Inequality? an
Econometric Analysis in Bangladesh Perspective. Journal of Globalization Studies, 2(2),
160–172.
Siddiqui, M. S. (2020). Bangladesh: High cost of living and high Gini co-efficient |
theindependentbd.com. The Independent BD.
https://m.theindependentbd.com/printversion/details/239679
Skilling up Bangladesh’s youth for a changing job market. (n.d.). Retrieved November 3, 2021,
from https://blogs.worldbank.org/endpovertyinsouthasia/skilling-bangladeshs-youth-
changing-job-market
UN report: Bangladesh’s gender wage gap lowest in the world | Dhaka Tribune. (2020). Dhaka
Tribune. https://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2020/03/08/un-report-bangladesh-s-
gender-wage-gap-lowest-in-the-world
Unemployment in Bangladesh- 1.38cr people underemployed | undefined. (n.d.). Retrieved
November 3, 2021, from https://www.thedailystar.net/frontpage/unemployment-in-
bangladesh-138cr-people-underemployed-1812961
Woahid, M. S. M. (2009). The Trends of Labor Market in Bangladesh and Its Determinants. The
Trends of Labor Market in Bangladesh and Its Determinants, March, 1–29.
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/32381/
Youth unemployment - Wikipedia. (n.d.). Retrieved August 3, 2021, from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youth_unemployment

34
Appendix

Section A. Statistical Methods

A.1

Chain Index Method1: The chain index is one in which the figure for each year (or sub-period
thereof) are first expressed as percentages of the preceding year. These percentages are then
chained together by successive multiplication to form a chain index.

Steps in Constructing Chain Index

i) Express the figures for each year as percentages of the preceding year. The results so
obtained are called link relatives.
ii) Chain together these percentages by successive multiplication to form a chain index.
Chain index of any year is the average link relative of that year multiplied by chain
index of previous year divided by 100. In the form of formula:
𝐶𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑘 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 × 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥
𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 =
100

The link relatives obtained in step (i) facilitate comparison from one year to another. The chain
indices obtained in step (ii) by a process of chaining binary comparison facilitate long-term
comparisons.

A.2

Diffusion Index Method2: A diffusion index is a cross-sectional method to analyze common

tendencies among multiple time-series. It is a statistical measure often used to detect economic
turning points. It aggregates multiple indicators by examining whether they are trending upward
or downward, but ignores the magnitude of the movement.

Many diffusion indices use 50 as a base value, indicating an equal number of advancing and
declining component indicators. Expansion and contraction are in balance, so the economic sector

1
Chapter 9 Index Numbers: Concepts and Applications; Business Statistics; S.P. Gupta, M.P.
Gupta
2
Diffusion Index. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/diffusionindex.asp

35
is on average unchanged. A diffusion index also refers to how many Business Cycle Indicators
(BCI) are moving together. This is useful for assessing the strength of the economy.

Formula:

𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 (𝐷𝐼) = (𝐴𝑑𝑣𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑠 − 𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑠) + 𝑃𝐷𝐼𝑉

where, PDIV = Previous DI Value

Since there are multiple indicators, that may all say different things, it helps to create a diffusion
index to see whether the majority of the indicators point toward an improving economy or a
deteriorating one. This sort of diffusion index is calculated differently and is often expressed as a
percent. Rising indicators are given a value of one, unchanged indicators are given a value of 0.5,
and falling indicators are given a value of zero. Assume that out of 10 indicators we get a score of
7.5. Divide that by the number of indicators (10 in this case), and then multiply by 100 to get a
percentage. In this case, 75% of the indicators signal increasing economic activity. This study has
followed this aforementioned rule.

Section B: Data Table

Table B.1 Employed population aged 15 or older, by formal/informal sector, sex and area (in 000),
2016-17

Sector of Rural Urban Bangladesh

employment Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total
Formal 4298 946 5244 3270 579 3850 7569 1525 9094
Informal 25511 13130 38641 9102 3991 13093 34613 17121 51734
Total 29809 14076 43885 12372 4570 16943 42182 18646 60828
%
Formal 14.4 6.7 11.9 26.4 12.7 22.7 17.9 8.2 14.9
Informal 85.6 93.3 88.1 73.6 87.3 77.3 82.1 91.8 85.1
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source 1 LFS 2016-17, BBS

36
Table B.2 Employed population aged 15 or older, by formal/informal sector, sex and area (in 000),
2013

Sector of Rural Urban Bangladesh

employment Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total
Formal 2624 646 3270 3039 989 4029 5664 1635 7299
Informal 26993 11655 38648 8570 3557 12126 35563 15211 50774
Total 29618 12300 41918 11609 4546 16155 41227 16846 58073
%
Formal 8.9 5.2 7.8 26.2 21.8 24.9 13.7 9.7 12.6
Informal 91.1 94.8 92.2 73.8 78.2 75.1 86.3 90.3 87.4
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source 2 LFS 2013, BBS

Table B.3 Employed population aged 15 or older, by formal/informal sector, sex and area (in 000),
2010

Sector of Rural Urban Bangladesh

employment Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total
Formal 3111 549 3659 2432 3669 12421 5542 1244 6787
Informal 26054 11986 38040 6337 2973 9310 32391 14959 47350
Total 29131 12533 41664 8752 696 3128 37883 16202 54084
%
Formal 10.7 4.4 8.8 27.8 19.0 25.2 14.6 7.7 12.5
Informal 89.4 95.6 91.3 72.4 81.0 75.0 85.5 92.3 87.5
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source 3 LFS 2010, BBS

Table B.4: Age Group Distribution (percentage), by sex in Rural area, 2010, 2013, 2016-17
Total Female Male
Age 2016-17 2013 2010 2016-17 2013 2010 2016-17 2013 2010
15-29 24.7 38.6 43.5 25.5 47.1 50.6 23.8 39.8 33.5
30-64 36.7 55.9 51.8 37.5 48.5 46.1 35.9 55.1 60.1
65+ 5.3 5.5 4.7 4.5 4.3 3.3 6.1 5.1 6.4
Source 4 LFS 2010, 2013, 2016-17; BBS

37
Table B.5: Age Group Distribution (percentage), by sex in Urban area, 2010, 2013, 2016-17

Total Female Male

Age 2016-17 2013 2010 2016-17 2013 2010 2016-17 2013 2010
15-29 27.8 38.2 40.3 30.3 41.3 53.8 25.3 39.3 31.5
30-64 38.2 58.9 53.1 37 52.5 44.1 39.4 53.7 65.2
65+ 3.8 2.9 6.6 3.1 6.2 2.1 4.4 7 3.3
Source 5 LFS 2010, 2013, 2016-17

Table B.6: Age Group Distribution (percentage) in Bangladesh, 2010, 2013, 2016-17

Total
Age 2016-17 2013 2010
15-29 25.6 38.5 41.1
30-64 37.1 56.7 52.8
65+ 4.9 4.8 6.1
Source 6 LFS 2010, 2013, 2016-17

Table B.7: Share (percentage) of Agriculture, Industry and Service Sectors

Agriculture Industry Service

47.31 17.63 35.04

46.55 18.08 35.38
45.76 18.56 35.68
45.01 19.02 35.97
44.27 19.45 36.28
43.46 19.96 36.58
42.66 20.46 36.87
40.6 20.42 38.98
39.39 20.84 39.77
38.3 21.32 40.38
Source 7 World Bank Data, ILO Estimate

38
 Table B.8: Total Labor Force, Ratio of Female to Male Participation Rate, Youth Unemployment
Rate, Unemployment Rate, Employment to Population Ratio. 2001 - 2019

Year Total Ratio of Labor Force Youth Unemployment Employment

Labor Female to Participation Unemployment rate (modeled to
Force Male Rate rate ILO estimate) Population
Participation Ratio
Rate(Modeled
ILO estimate)
2019 70,009,461 44.564 58.993 11.867 4.22 56.62
2018 68,791,250 44.323 58.972 12.147 4.29 56.48
2017 67,454,903 44.039 58.859 12.302 4.37 56.29
2016 63,698,450 41.19 56.596 11.124 4.35 54.13
2015 62,595,846 40.267 56.644 10.799 4.38 54.16
2014 61,480,265 39.347 56.688 10.456 4.39 54.2
2013 60,370,738 38.448 56.734 10.134 4.43 54.22
2012 59,275,453 37.571 56.786 8.709 4.06 54.48
2011 58,194,620 36.719 56.846 7.462 3.71 54.74
2010 57,127,914 35.887 56.917 6.402 3.38 54.99
2009 56,179,947 35.054 57.012 9.072 5 54.16
2008 55,255,746 34.245 57.114 8.417 4.29 54.66
2007 54,338,014 33.46 57.224 7.68 3.91 54.99
2006 53,399,097 32.698 27.335 7.326 3.59 55.28
2005 52,466,130 32.549 57.493 8.864 4.25 55.01
2004 51,320,867 32.272 57.556 7.764 4.3 55.02
2003 50,129,634 31.994 57.607 6.643 4.32 55.04
2002 48,905,212 31.709 57.648 8.243 3.96 55.27
2001 47,677,319 31.42 57.69 9.253 3.59 55.53
Source 8 World Bank Data, Modeled ILO Estimates

39
Table B.9: Share of Labor in three major sectors, 2010-2019

Year Agriculture Industry Service

2010 47.31 17.63 35.04

2011 46.55 18.08 35.38
2012 45.76 18.56 35.68
2013 45.01 19.02 35.97
2014 44.27 19.45 36.28
2015 43.46 19.96 36.58
2016 42.66 20.46 36.87
2017 40.6 20.42 38.98
2018 39.39 20.84 39.77
2019 38.3 21.32 40.38
Source 9 World Bank Data, Modeled ILO Estimates

40