Construction Employment At Record High In Australia

Employment Increases as Work Done Falls

The number of people employed in construction is at record highs. In the ABS Labour Account for June 2023 there were 1,268,472 people employed, an increase of 135,693 people since 2018, the most recent peak in the volume of work done. There is only a weak relationship between changes in the volume of construction work done and the number of people employed in construction, as Figure 1 shows, employment typically rises or falls by one or two percent a year while the annual volume of work done has changed by more than five percent in nine of the 15 years between 2007 and 2022. 

Figure 1. Construction work done and people employed 

Note: The number of people employed includes all workers in June each year, and comes from ABS Australian Industry. The volume of work done is from the ABS chain volume Value of Construction Work Done, which is expenditure on construction adjusted for inflation.

Figure 1 also shows that, from 2007 to 2010, while the volume of work done was increasing the number of people employed barely changed (by 3,000 people). The 2011 bump in employment was due to increased Construction services employment in public building work done as part of the fiscal response to the financial crisis, and the following year employment fell by half the increase of 2011. The increase in work done in 2012 and 2013 was due to the doubling of Engineering work during the mining boom, which went from $76 billion in 2007 to $158bn in 2013, before falling below $100bn in 2017. The $94bn of engineering work done in 2022 was mainly infrastructure projects in transport and energy. The increase in Construction employment in 2017 and 2018 followed rising residential building, when employment in Construction services also began to increase, and in 2022 there was a total of 1,253,906 people employed in construction, an increase of 121,172 since 2018.

 

There have been significant changes in both employment and the volume of work done at the subsector level since 2011 that are not reflected in the industry’s total work done or total employment, and a more detailed picture emerges when construction employment in the three industry subsectors of Engineering, Building and Construction services is used, and construction work done is divided into engineering work and building work. There is a clear relationship between changes in engineering work done and Engineering employment, and in building work done and employment in Building. When the recent cycles in engineering and building construction are taken into account there are significant differences between the industry subsectors, and a comparison of changes in construction employment and work done since 2007 is below in Table 1, divided inro trough-to-peak and peak-to-2022 time periods. Between 2007 and 2022 the volume of engineering work done rose by 23 percent but the number of people employed by 51 percent and, for Building, work done rose by 36 percent and the number of people employed by 46 percent. Construction services employment rose by 26 percent, less than the 36 percent increase in building work done. 

Table 1. Changes in work done and employment 2007-2022

Industry		Work done	Employed people
Engineering Construction	2007-13 2018-22 2007-22	107% -20% 23%	76% 2% 51%
Building Construction	2013-18 2018-22 2007-22	29% -3% 36%	27% 7% 46%
Construction Services	2013-18 2018-22 2007-22	29% -3% 36%	9% 11% 19%
All Construction	2013-18 2018-22 2007-22	-4% -11% 29%	6% 11% 26%

Note: Engineering employment and engineering construction. Building and Construction Services and building work done.

The long-run averages used in Table 2 take the volatility of the year-on-year changes in Figure 1 out, particularly for work done. At the industry level, the long-run relationship between the average of annual changes in employment and work done is actually stable, with the average smoothing the cyclic variability and the effect of very large projects on the volume of work commenced. Since 2007 the average annual change in work done is an increase of 2 percent, and for employment it is 1 percent. This similarity in the average percentage changes over time indicates that, over this period, the industry has turned inputs into buildings and structures using current production technology (machinery, materials, management etc.) at a high level of technical efficiency. However, there has been no significant change in work done per person employed since 2007 when it was $173,192 and 2022 with $177,446. At the top of the mining boom in 2013 work done per person was $245,353. 

Table 2. Percent change in work done and employment 2007-22

Industry	Work done	Employed people
Engineering Construction	2%	3%
Building Construction	2%	3%
Construction Services	2%	1%
All Construction	2%	1%

Note: Engineering employment and engineering construction. Building and Construction Services and building work done.

 

Construction Services

 

The number of people employed in Construction services began to rise with increasing building work and the end of the mining boom. There were big jumps in 2018 and 2021 when residential building work was peaking in the recent cycle. In 2022 Construction services employment reached 854,000, an all-time high, despite the small decrease in the annual value of work done compared to 2018. Between 2013 and 2022 building work done increased by 25 percent and Construction services employment by 20 percent.

Figure 2. Construction services work done and people employed 

The increase in Construction services employment followed rising residential building work, as Figure 3 shows. Construction services employment began to increase in 2016, and continued to rise as the level of building work done peaked then fell. This increase in employment while the value of work is falling implies decreasing industry efficiency, possibly due to the large number of new and inexperienced workers that entered the industry. However, there have been a number of factors that affected the volume of work since 2020, such as wet weather, the pandemic, interest rates, shortages, cost increases and other supply chain issues. 

 

Increasing Construction services employment in recent years is in part due to the increasing number of apprenticeships. The construction trades share of all apprenticeships rose from 12 percent in 2016 to 16 percent in 2022 and the number of people in-training in construction trades increased from 52,700 in 2016 to 70,300 in 2022, when the total number of trainees was 419,600, nearly half the number of people employed in Construction services.

 

Figure 3. Residential and non-residential building work done

What is surprising about Construction services employment is how loosely it is actually connected to changes in the level of work done, both to total construction work and to building work more specifically, where the relationship would be expected to be stronger. However, as Figure 4 shows, in most years there is little connection between changes in the volume of building work done and employment in Construction services, it increased in the last couple of years of the 2014-18 increase in residential building but not during the first few years of the upswing. 

Figure 4. Annual change in Construction services employment

Engineering and Building Construction

The number of people employed in Engineering increased from 91,000 in 2007 to a peak of 160,000 in 2013, before falling to 110,000 in 2017 then recovering to 137,000 in 2022. Between 2007 and 2013 engineering work done increased by 107 percent and employment by 76 percent, accounting for the cyclic rise and fall in productivity discussed in the previous post. 

 

Figure 5. Engineering work done and people employed 

In Engineering, between 2007 and 2022 the annual percentage changes moved in the same direction and by similar amounts in many years, as Figure 6 shows. In some years the change in work done is 20 percent or more, due to the size of the largest projects, with frequent annual changes in employment of 10 percent.

 

Figure 6. Annual change in Engineering work done and employment

There is a similar story for Building work done and the number of people employed in Building construction. Over the recent building cycle, driven by residential building, between 2014 and 2018 the value of work done increased by 29 percent and the number of people employed rose by 27 percent. In 2022 the value of work done was slightly down on 2018, but employment had grown from 224,000 to 239,000 people. 

 

Figure 7. Building work done and people employed

Between 2007 and 2022 the annual percentage changes moved by similar amounts in many years (e.g. 2015-20) but, as Figure 8 shows, in other years there is a lag between changes in building work done and employment. Over time periods longer than one year these annual variations become more closely aligned.

 

Figure 8. Annual change in building work done and employment

Conclusion

For the construction industry, changes in employment numbers have not been closely linked to changes in work done. Between 2007 and 2022 volume of construction work done peaked in 2014 and 2018, but it took until 2016 before employment started increasing. By 2022 the volume of work done had declined from 2018 but the number of people employed had increased to 1,229,000 people, mainly because of the number of new people in Construction services. The volume of work done after 2020 will also have been impacted by pandemic-era supply chain issues, wet weather, interest rates and cost increases, although the extent of the effect is unknown. 
 

Figure 9. Australian construction work done and employment

Between 2007 and 2022 an increase in construction work done generally required more people, but there has been great variation between the subsectors, with significant changes in both employment and the volume of work done at the subsector level that are not reflected in the industry’s total work done or total employment. There is a clear relationship between changes in engineering work done and changes in Engineering employment, and changes in work done and employment in Building.

 

Although the number of people employed in construction has been affected by the composition of work, the relationship is weaker for Construction services, where over twice as many people are employed as in Engineering and Building combined. Construction services employment barely changed during the 2010-14 mining boom increase in engineering work, and if building work done is used still shows a limited relationship between changes in employment and changes in work done. Employment rose as building work increased and residential building work peaked in 2018. In 2022 Construction services employment reached a record 854,000, despite a decrease in the volume of building work done.

 

For the industry subsectors Engineering and Building, annual increases and decreases in employment follow increases and decreases in work done. At this level, annual increases in work done and employment vary greatly over the period 2007 to 2022, but become more aligned over longer time periods. At the peak of their respective cycles, engineering in 2013 and building work done in 2018 had increased by a few percent more than the number of people employed in Engineering and Building respectively, but the changes were similar.

 

At the industry level, the long-run relationship between the average of annual changes in employment and work done is actually stable, with the average smoothing the cyclic variability and the effect of very large projects on the volume of work commenced. Since 2007 the average annual change in work done is an increase of 2 percent, and for employment it is 1 percent. This similarity in the average percentage changes over time indicates the industry broadly has turned inputs into buildings and structures using current production technology (machinery, materials, management etc.) at a high level of technical efficiency. 

 

However, over the last few years the total volume of work done has been falling but employment has increased, which may in part be because many of these new employees have been replacing experienced workers retiring in their 60s. In 2022 there were 130,000 more people (19 percent) in Construction services than in 2016, and over that period employment also increased in Engineering (by 15,000) and Building (by 31,000). Construction employment has been growing strongly for several years, with increasing numbers of apprenticeships and graduates entering the industry, perhaps attracted by the very significant pipeline of major projects that will, in turn, require retention of these workers. 

An increase in employment while the volume of work done is falling implies decreasing industry efficiency, and since 2016 work done has declined by 4 percent while employment has increased by 17 percent. The number of new, inexperienced workers in the industry may be one of the causes of the widening gap between changes in work done and employment since 2020. Labour hoarding during a downturn in the volume of work done due to external factors may also have played a role, as firms retain workers in expectation of future work and potential labour shortages.

In recent years the annual volume of construction work done has been around $220bn. With many major projects still in the planning stage and higher interest rates leading to cancellation or postponement of some projects, building approvals are trending lower and the volume of work done may fall in the short-term. The mismatch between growing employment and a flat or falling volume of work done suggests the industry might have substantial unused capacity at the same time as commencing projects becomes increasingly difficult.

 

Construction Productivity Trends for Building, Engineering and Construction Services

 Australian Construction Productivity at the Industry Level

 

 

The rate of growth of productivity in the construction industry in a number of countries has lagged that of other industries for at least five decades, and the earliest studies that identified this problem date from the late 1960s. Two explanations for the lack of demonstrable improvement in construction productivity are possible. The first is the importance of measurement, data and issues about the structure and use of price indices for estimating real output (i.e. adjusted for inflation). 

 

The second is the nature of the product and the methods used in delivering and managing the processes involved.  Construction is a labour intensive industry in comparison with manufacturing, but there has been a significant increase in the prefabricated component of construction, which could have been expected to lead to productivity growth. Also, construction methods have become more capital intensive as machinery has got heavier, and the number of cranes, powered hand tools and other equipment used has increased.  However the productivity growth that one would expect to observe as a result of these trends has not occurred, according to measurements by national statistical agencies.

 

Productivity estimates require both a measure of labour inputs, such as hours worked or people employed, and a measure of output, called Industry value added (IVA, the difference between total revenue and total costs). IVA is then adjusted for changes in prices of materials and labour to estimate Gross value added (GVA) using price indexes that assume there has been no change in the quality of buildings. Another problem is the application of a single deflator to the diverse range of buildings and structures. This inability to capture functional differences and quality changes in buildings and structures has adversely affected the measurement of productivity, if construction value added is underestimated due to the deflators used, construction productivity has also been understated.

 

This post compares the deflated GVA per person employed to the IVA per person employed for Building, Engineering and Construction services (the trades), and Total construction. The GVA data comes from the ABS National Accounts (chain volume measures of economic activity). The IVA data and number of people employed in June each year comes from ABS Australian Industry. 

 

 

A Proxy for Construction Productivity

 

In Figure 1 industry output is in constant dollars (the deflated value adjusted for price changes). GVA is the quantity of output produced in a year. The employment data includes all workers but not whether they are full or part-time, or hours worked. 

 

Figure 1. Construction Productivity by Industry

Source: ABS, CER

 

As a measure of productivity GVA per person employed is very approximate, typically the number of hours worked would be used for employment and June may not be a representative month for employment in many industries. Nevertheless, this graph looks familiar, with flatlining growth in Total construction productivity over the period, despite a few bumps along the way. It appears to be a useful productivity proxy. 

 

Using the same data, GVA per person employed can be found for Building, Engineering and Construction services. Here a slight decline in Building has been offset by a small rise in Construction services output per person, with the effects of the pandemic on both apparent in the decline over 2020-21. Building construction may have been affected by a shift from commercial to an increased share of residential in the output mix and more high rise work. Because Construction services are generally labour intensive they will have a lower value of output per person, but this data shows there was increase in this measure of productivity between 2007 and 2021 and Construction services was the only one of the three industries to register a gain on this measure. 

 

Engineering construction activity took off in the mining boom from 2010, and output per person has followed the rise and fall in work done since and, although below the peak years of 2012-14, it now reflects the large volume of infrastructure work in transport and energy. Since 2011 GVA per person in Engineering has been much higher than Building construction, nearly twice as much in some years, and Construction services, nearly three times as much in some years. 

 

These differences in output per person employed reflect differences in capital requirements and expenditure on purchases of buildings, structures, software, equipment and machinery (known as gross fixed capital formation or GFCF). The higher the capital requirements, or capital intensity, of an industry the higher the level of output per person employed is expected to be, because workers with more capital are more productive. Both excavators and shovels require one operator but the former shifts more soil.

 

 

Current Dollar Industry Comparison 

 

The chain volume measure of GVA per person employed can be compared to the original, unadjusted current dollar Industry value added (IVA) per person employed. Again, this is an indicative but imprecise proxy for construction productivity. In Figure 2 there is a clear upward trend in all three industries, with increasing nominal value of output as prices rise faster than the number of people employed. 

 

The growth in IVA per employee for Building is the greatest contrast to the GVA data. Here, Building has had a sustained increase since 2012 compared to the flat, no growth trend in GVA per employee. This suggests there has been a better productivity performance by building contractors than the one recorded in official statistics. 

 

Engineering has a similar pattern in both GVA and IVA graphs, with a sharp rise in output per employee after 2010 that flattened out after 2016 at around 50 per cent higher than the pre-mining boom level. This has been a significant increase in productivity. Both Building and Engineering typically have larger firms than found in Construction services, which has lagged the other two industries in growth in IVA per employee. 

 

Without deflation the value of output could be expected to rise somewhere around the rate of CPI inflation, which totalled 35.8 per cent and averaged 2.2 per cent a year between 2007 and 2021. Over that period Building IVA increased by 120 per cent, Engineering IVA by 117 per cent, and Construction services by 50 per cent. More significantly, IVA per person employed for Building increased by 61.6 per cent, for Engineering by 57.3 per cent, but for Construction services only 27.7 percent, suggesting that is where the productivity ‘problem’ lies. However, the IVA and GVA figures are contradictory, with the latter showing better performance. 

 

 

Figure 2. Nominal output per employee

Source: ABS, CER

 

IVA per employee again highlights differences in the capital requirements of industries. In the long run, investment in GFCF determines industry growth rates and their level of labour productivity. Labour intensive industries like Construction services have a low level of IVA per person employed, but also have lower capital requirements. Engineering has always been more capital intensive than Building, but the gap seems to have closed with the increase in residential high-rise activity after 2016. 

 

Conclusion

 

Construction productivity estimates are usually given for Total construction, and typically show little or no growth over many decades. However, Total construction is measure of the combined performance of three different industries: Building, Engineering and Construction services. This post compared the deflated GVA per person employed to the nominal IVA per person employed for Building, Engineering and Construction services (the trades), and Total construction.

 

The deflated GVA per person employed data is a proxy for productivity because the value of output is adjusted for price changes, As a combination of deflated output and employment GVA per person employed looks like a measure of productivity, but while it is indicative that is not really the case. Although similar to the output and input data needed to calculate productivity, indexes of output and input are used for productivity analysis, not the original data, and hours worked not numbers employed used. 

 

When the mostly flat chain volume measures of GVA per person employed are compared to the current dollar IVA per person employed there is a clear upward trend in IVA all three industries, with increasing nominal value of output as prices rise faster than the number of people employed. IVA per person in Building and Engineering has increased at nearly twice the rate of CPI inflation, but Construction services by less since 2007. 

 

Construction services IVA per person employed grew significantly less than Building and Engineering. However, the GVA per person employed performance was much better, the only one of the three industries to register a gain on this measure. Construction services have a large impact on productivity because they account for 60 per cent or more of Construction output. 

 

The usefulness of both GVA and IVA per person employed as a proxy for productivity per person is limited, but indicative. In both cases the difference in capital intensity appears to be the determining factor in the level of productivity (measured as dollars per person employed), and the increase in apartment building would explain the rapid rise in Building IVA per person employed. The effect of changes in output (the mix of buildings and structures delivered) will be explored in another post. Why that increase in Building IVA per person employed was not picked up in the GVA per person employed estimates is also an interesting question. 

Employment Trends in Australian Built Environment Industries

 Record High in Built Environment Employment

The number of people employed in the 16 industries that make up the Australian Built Environment Sector reached 2.23 million in 2020-21, an increase of nearly 10 percent over the previous year, contributing 17 percent to total employment in Australia. 

Figure 1

The largest industry is Construction, which employed 1.2 million people (54%), followed by Property and real estate with 333,000 (15%), Professional services 269,000 (12%) and Building services 206,000 (9%). These four industries include a dozen smaller industry groups, and account for 90 percent of persons employed in construction and maintenance of Australia’s built environment. 

 

Figure 2

The big increase in 2021 was a rebound after the 1.3 percent fall in total BES employment in 2019-20. In all industries, with the exception of Water and Waste, employment fell in 2020, and by over three percent in Property and real estate services. In the post-lockdown recovery employment growth in 2020-21 was strong, at over eight percent in Construction and over six percent in both Building services and Professional services. 

 

Figure 3

In the decade from 2007 to 2017 there was a small increase in total built environment employment, however the rate of employment growth since 2018 has been much stronger. The only industry that has not increased employment is Property and real estate services, but in 2020-21 the other industries all had record numbers of people employed after a significant increase in employment. However, this was an unusually large upturn and much larger than the annual increase in output for these industries. 

 

Figure 4

The average growth rate of total employment in the five years to 2021 has been one percent higher than the 15 year average, at 2.5 percent a year. The highest 5 year average rates of growth in employment were five percent a year in the combined Water supply, sewerage and drainage services and Waste collection, treatment and disposal services, and over four percent a year in Professional services. Also of note is the growth in manufacturing employment after a decade of decline. 

 

Figure 5

The Australian Built Environment Sector

 

The Australian Built Environment Sector uses data provided in the Australian Bureau of Statistics annual publication Australian Industry, produced from a combination of directly collected data from the annual Economic Activity Survey conducted by the ABS, and Business Activity Statement data provided by businesses to the Australian Taxation Office. The data includes all operating business entities and Government owned or controlled Public Non-Financial Corporations. Australian Industry excludes the finance industry and public sector, but includes non-profits in industries like health and education and government businesses providing water, sewerage and drainage services. The industries included account for around two-thirds of GDP. Industries are groups of firms with common characteristics in products, services, production processes and logistics.

 

Figure 6

Data on the construction industry captures the onsite activities of contractors and subcontractors. However, onsite work brings together suppliers of materials, machinery and equipment, products, components and other inputs required to deliver the buildings and structures that make up the built environment. Consultants provide professional services such as design, engineering, urban planning, cost planning and project management as inputs into building and construction projects. There are also inputs from transport, finance and legal services, although data for these services is not available. 

 

Other industries like tourism and defence are structured around such value chains and production networks, and when firms from different industries share sufficient characteristics they are described as an industry cluster or sector. In the case of tourism an annual satellite account that combines the industries involved is produced by the ABS.

 

Table 1. Industries included in the Australian Built Environment Sector

Supply industries	Demand industries	Maintenance industries
Non-metallic mining and quarrying	Residential property	Water, sewerage and drainage
Building construction	Non-residential property	Waste collection, and disposal
Heavy and civil engineering	Real estate services	Building and industrial cleaning
Construction services		Building pest control services
Architectural services		Gardening services
Surveying and mapping services
Engineering design and consulting
Manufacturing industries

 

 

Construction in the Australian Economy

The Economic Role of Australian Building and Construction

This profile of the economic role Australian construction focuses on the industry’s contribution to output and employment, and is based on two publications from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. The first is the National Accounts data on gross domestic product (GDP), which provide the macroeconomic context of the industry. GDP includes construction as part of private gross fixed capital expenditure and is divided into dwellings, building and engineering construction. The second is Australian Industry, which provides data on the internal structure and performance of the industry, which have undergone significant change over the last decade[i].

In Australia in 2016 the construction industry accounted for 9.6 per cent of gross domestic product and 9.2 per cent of employment. Construction’s share of industry output was 6 per cent in 2000, and the fifty percent increase in GDP share was driven by the engineering work for the mining and gas projects commenced during Australia’s mining boom, which is usually divided into two phases, with mining boom 1 from 2001-2008 and mining boom 2 between 2010-2014. 

Table 1. Construction in the National Economy 2016

	Per cent of total	Value		Per cent of total	Value
Gross domestic product, bn	9.6	50.491	Employment, ‘000	9.2	1,110
Dwellings, $bn	5.7	25.283	Building, ‘000	2.6	317.4
Building, $bn	2.6	11.359	Engineering,’000	0.6	76.1
Engineering, $bn	1.3	13.849	Cnst services, ‘000	6.0	711.1

  Sources: National Accounts: Chain Volume Measures, ABS 5206; Labour Force, ABS 6291.

Figure 1. Industry Contributions to GDP 2015-16

 Source: National Accounts ABS 5206. Industry shares of Gross Value Added.

Changes in the level of construction are closely linked to changes in GDP, however the volatility of construction is much greater, as shown in Figure 2. When construction output is rising GDP is typically increasing, and tends to peak around the same time. In periods when construction is contracting, GDP grows slowly. While the residential and commercial building cycles get the most attention, in Australia it is the Engineering sector that has the greatest volatility, driven in part by the size of major projects, in Figure 3.

Figure 2. Construction Industry and GDP

  

Source: National Accounts ABS 5206. Private gross fixed capital investment

Figure 3. Construction Divisions and GDP

  

Source: National Accounts ABS 5206. Private gross fixed capital investment

 For the Australian construction industry, the most widely used data is the value of work done, shown in Figure 4, with the level of activity in residential building, non-residential building and engineering construction. The major phenomena of the last decade was the increase in engineering work during mining boom 1 from 2001-2008 to a historically high level, followed by a rapid rise and fall during mining boom 2 between 2010-2014. 

Figure 4. Construction 

  

Source: Construction Activity: Chain Volume Measures ABS 8782.

With the end of mining boom, the role of the building sector of the industry in the macroeconomic transition has been important as the contribution from engineering declined. This transition from the resource investment driven economy, when business investment peaked at an all-time high of 18 per cent of GDP, has required growth in residential building to support employment and output. That is currently being tested as the residential building cycle appears to have peaked. There were significant compositional and structural changes in construction during the mining boom, discussed in the next post.

---

[i] Beyond the regular detailed output and activity statistics from the ABS there are few data sources. An infrequent Construction Industry Survey is published (ABS 8772, last two in 2011 and 2003).