The results of the KOF Economist Survey point to a significant impact of demographic change on the availability of labour. On the political side, participants see a need for action on the labour participation of women and older people, while they recommend wage increases and improved working conditions for companies.
Demographic change and the retirement of the baby boomer generation will lead to a significant increase in the age ratio, i.e. the ratio of retired to working people, in the coming years. According to a recent study by the Swiss National Bank (SNB), without immigration and assuming the employment rate remains unchanged, around 400,000 more people could leave the labour market than young people entering it over the next ten years. Against this backdrop, in December 2025 the KOF Institute surveyed academic economists about their assessments of the labour shortage in Switzerland. A total of 103 responses were received, representing a response rate of 13%.
Demographic change as the main factor in labour shortages
The survey participants were asked for their assessment of the most important factors contributing to a potential labour shortage in Switzerland. They consider demographic change to be the most important factor (87%), followed by skills mismatch (63%) and insufficient access to foreign labour (43%). Around 26% of participants see low labour force participation as an important reason, and only 9% cite insufficient wage growth (wage rigidity).
Disagreement on productivity effects – agreement on migration
Different schools of economic thought disagree on how a labour shortage would affect labour productivity. The survey participants were therefore asked whether they think a labour shortage has a positive, negative or no effect on labour productivity. The disagreement in the economic debate is also reflected in the responses: while 43% of participants state that a labour shortage has a (rather or clearly) positive effect on productivity, 36% think that the effect is (rather or clearly) negative. 16% assume that there is neither a positive nor a negative effect.
However, there is considerable agreement among survey participants on the importance of migration for structural labour shortages. Almost three-quarters of participants believe that immigration tends to reduce structural labour shortages (44%) or significantly reduces them (29%). Around 13% of participants, on the other hand, think that immigration tends to exacerbate (10%) or significantly exacerbate (3%) structural labour shortages by creating additional demand. A further 11% see neither an exacerbating nor a mitigating effect of immigration on structural labour shortages.
At the same time, a statistical analysis shows that there are significant differences in the responses given by different political camps: 86% of left-wing respondents believe that immigration reduces labour shortages (somewhat or significantly); the figure is 78% among centrists and 65% among right-wing respondents. Despite these differences, the majority view across the political spectrum is that immigration reduces labour shortages (somewhat or clearly).
Policy options: increasing labour force participation among women and older workers
The economists were also asked in which areas the Swiss government should take measures to counteract structural labour shortages, rather than leaving these areas to market mechanisms. The greatest support for active government intervention is found for measures to increase the labour force participation of women (80%) and older people (78%), as well as the promotion of continuing vocational training (78%). 49% believe that the Swiss government should remove barriers to migration, while 39% reject this. With only 20% approval, government measures to reduce part-time work are the least recommended by respondents.
Here, too, the political camps differ in their responses. Among economists who identify as (somewhat) left-wing or centrist, a majority support government measures to reduce barriers to migration (68% and 52% respectively); among (somewhat) right-wing participants, a majority of 63% reject these measures. Measures to increase women's participation in the labour market also receive the strongest support from (tending to be) left-wing respondents; however, a majority in all political camps are in favour of these measures (left 96%, centre 89%, right 63%). Government measures to reduce part-time work, on the other hand, receive the strongest support from right-wing participants: 29% agree, compared with 27% and 4% of centre and left-wing participants.
Higher wages and better working conditions as incentives
In addition to government measures, the economists surveyed also see opportunities for companies to counteract labour shortages. Around 94% consider improving secondary working conditions to be a (somewhat or very) effective means for companies to reduce labour shortages, while 90% consider increasing real wages to be (somewhat or very) effective. Only 35% and 34% of respondents respectively consider adjusting job profiles or outsourcing to other locations to be (somewhat or very) effective.
SNB monetary policy not a driver of labour shortages
A clear majority of 59% of survey participants (somewhat or strongly) disagree with the statement that the SNB's monetary policy has increased structural labour demand and thus contributed to a structural labour shortage. Just under 10%, on the other hand, agree (somewhat or strongly) with the statement that the SNB's monetary policy has contributed to the labour shortage. 21% neither agree nor disagree with this statement, and 11% actively refrain from commenting (“prefer not to answer”).
About the survey:
The KOF Economist Survey covers topics relevant to economic policy in Switzerland and is a tool for making the views of academic economists visible to the public. In December, the KOF conducted a survey on labour supply and structural labour shortages. The survey started on 1 December 2025 and ended on 24 December 2025. 798 economists were contacted. Responses were received from 103 economists from 19 institutions. This corresponds to a response rate of 13%.
Of the participants, 13% are younger than 36, 35% are between 36 and 45, 22% are between 46 and 55, and 28% are older than 56. 87% of participants are male and 10% are female. Broken down by age category, the proportion of women is highest in the 46 to 55 age group, at 20%. The proportion of women is lowest in the under-36 age group, at 0%.