Countries by Employment in services, male (% of male employment) (modeled ILO estimate)

Djibouti ranks first globally for male employment in services at 89.9% of male employment, while Burundi sits at the opposite extreme with just 17.2%. That gap of more than 72 percentage points spans 186 countries and reflects the full range of economic structures worldwide, from service-dominated urban economies to agrarian ones where most male workers remain in agriculture.

Ranking 2025

Values shown in %.

Countries by Employment in services, male (% of male employment) (modeled ILO estimate)
Rank Country %
1Djibouti89.91
2Luxembourg86.51
3Singapore82.66
4Macao80.87
5Jordan78.05
6Puerto Rico77.42
7Netherlands76.68
8Israel75.94
9Hong Kong75.38
10French Polynesia75.35
11United Kingdom74.87
12Malta73.89
13Barbados73.08
14Bahamas72.85
15Maldives72.45
16Brunei72.13
17Cyprus71.74
18Sweden71.69
19Saudi Arabia71.22
20Lebanon70.80
21U.S. Virgin Islands70.75
22Canada70.64
23Denmark70.14
24United States70.14
25Belgium69.54
26Guam69.35
27Norway68.81
28Switzerland68.78
29France68.33
30Montenegro68.33
31Kuwait67.73
32Australia67.70
33Ireland67.59
34Mauritius67.49
35Iceland67.37
36Venezuela67.36
37Spain66.26
38New Caledonia66.26
39Greece65.69
40Japan65.34
41South Africa64.85
42Iraq64.17
43New Zealand64.04
44Saint Lucia63.40
45Libya63.39
46Sao Tome and Principe63.31
47Finland62.67
48Portugal62.49
49Dominican Republic62.46
50Trinidad and Tobago62.27
51Chile62.13
52South Korea61.99
53Costa Rica61.89
54Brazil61.60
55United Arab Emirates61.31
56Germany61.17
57Uruguay61.13
58Austria60.90
59Argentina60.75
60Palestine59.86
61Italy59.85
62Kazakhstan59.04
63Belize58.46
64Bulgaria58.32
65Latvia58.31
66Yemen58.02
67Panama58.02
68Cuba57.84
69Lithuania57.46
70Malaysia57.35
71Croatia57.35
72Estonia57.27
73Bahrain57.14
74Russia56.42
75Algeria55.85
76Colombia55.59
77Türkiye55.51
78North Macedonia55.46
79Suriname55.38
80Cabo Verde55.08
81Saint Vincent and the Grenadines54.86
82Mexico54.37
83Jamaica54.34
84Paraguay53.93
85Syria53.83
86Hungary53.09
87Slovenia52.78
88Somalia52.76
89Peru52.74
90Qatar52.52
91Botswana52.13
92Papua New Guinea52.11
93Tunisia52.07
94Eswatini51.93
95Namibia51.77
96Gambia51.26
97Kyrgyzstan51.24
98Poland51.22
99El Salvador50.74
100Czechia50.08
101Oman50.02
102Iran49.77
103Liberia49.31
104Mauritania49.27
105Slovakia49.18
106Morocco48.89
107Fiji48.83
108Comoros48.83
109Bolivia48.76
110Timor-Leste48.76
111Bangladesh48.74
112Ukraine48.62
113Egypt48.37
114Samoa47.93
115Serbia47.05
116Solomon Islands47.01
117Philippines46.85
118Sri Lanka46.85
119Romania46.79
120Tonga46.61
121Albania46.58
122Rwanda46.48
123Azerbaijan46.42
124Uzbekistan46.13
125Sudan46.08
126Bosnia and Herzegovina45.57
127Armenia45.46
128Nepal45.37
129Belarus45.17
130Gabon45.01
131Ecuador44.59
132Indonesia44.58
133Bhutan44.27
134Pakistan44.20
135Honduras44.08
136Cameroon43.83
137Georgia43.63
138Republic of Congo43.31
139Thailand43.21
140Togo43.06
141Tajikistan42.29
142Vanuatu42.12
143Senegal41.77
144Kenya41.38
145Turkmenistan41.30
146Mongolia40.75
147Guatemala39.94
148Nigeria39.82
149Guyana39.64
150Angola39.38
151Ghana39.22
152DR Congo38.53
153Sierra Leone38.27
154China38.14
155Cambodia36.87
156Guinea36.52
157India35.93
158Vietnam35.81
159South Sudan35.80
160Benin35.79
161Nicaragua35.78
162Côte d'Ivoire35.66
163Zimbabwe32.92
164Zambia32.44
165Myanmar32.37
166Equatorial Guinea31.81
167Moldova31.76
168Burkina Faso31.40
169Guinea-Bissau31.12
170Afghanistan31.08
171Malawi30.89
172Uganda29.88
173Lesotho29.84
174Haiti29.69
175Eritrea29.23
176Mali26.38
177Tanzania25.70
178North Korea25.14
179Ethiopia24.73
180Mozambique24.33
181Niger23.84
182Laos22.33
183Central African Republic21.64
184Chad20.04
185Madagascar19.44
186Burundi17.16

Analysis

This metric measures male employment in services as a percentage of total male employment, using modeled International Labour Organization estimates. Employment is defined as persons of working age who were engaged in any activity to produce goods or provide services for pay or profit, whether at work during the reference period or not at work due to temporary absence from a job, or to working-time arrangement. The services sector consists of wholesale and retail trade and restaurants and hotels; transport, storage, and communications; financing, and related activities. Values are expressed as percentages, and higher figures indicate a greater share of male workers employed in services rather than agriculture or industry. The dataset covers 186 countries, all with data from the last seven years, and 100% of datapoints are classified as official-quality estimates. No extreme outliers were identified using a three-standard-deviation threshold.

The top of the ranking is dominated by small, trade-dependent, or Gulf-oriented economies. Djibouti leads at 89.9% (rank 1), followed by Luxembourg at 86.5% (rank 2) and Singapore at 82.7% (rank 3). Macao SAR, China reaches 80.9% (rank 4) and Jordan 78.0% (rank 5). Among larger economies, the United Kingdom ranks 11th at 74.9%, Canada 22nd at 70.6%, and the United States 24th at 70.1%. These high-ranking countries share heavily urbanized labor markets and economies centered on finance, trade, hospitality, and public services. Saudi Arabia appears at rank 19 with 71.2%, reflecting its large government and services workforce among male employees.

In the middle of the ranking, countries show values broadly in the 45 to 60 percent range. Poland ranks 98th at 51.2%, China ranks 154th at 38.1%, and India ranks 157th at 35.9%, illustrating that even very large economies can sit in the lower half when agriculture and industry still absorb a substantial share of male labor. A notable anomaly appears with Somalia, which ranks 88th at 52.8%, placing it above several European economies including Hungary (rank 86, 53.1%) and Slovenia (rank 87, 52.8%). At the bottom, sub-Saharan African nations cluster heavily: Burundi ranks last at 17.2%, Madagascar 185th at 19.4%, Chad 184th at 20.0%, and Central African Republic 183rd at 21.6%, all reflecting labor markets where male employment remains concentrated outside the services sector.

This metric carries important limitations. The figures are modeled ILO estimates rather than direct survey outputs, meaning they are generated through statistical methods that impute data where direct measurement is unavailable or incomplete. Comparisons across countries are affected by differences in how informal work is captured, since informal services employment may be underreported in lower-income settings. The metric covers only male employment and says nothing about the overall size or productivity of the services sector. A high share of male services employment can reflect either a developed, diversified economy or a very small agricultural and industrial base. Changes in the denominator, that is, total male employment, can shift rankings independently of any change in services employment itself.

Methodology

Data are drawn from the World Bank World Development Indicators, indicator code SL.SRV.EMPL.MA.ZS, for the reference year 2025. The metric measures male employment in services as a percentage of male employment using modeled ILO estimates. Per the source definition, employment is defined as persons of working age who were engaged in any activity to produce goods or provide services for pay or profit, whether at work during the reference period or not at work due to temporary absence from a job, or to working-time arrangement. The services sector consists of wholesale and retail trade and restaurants and hotels; transport, storage, and communications; financing, and related activities. Coverage spans 186 countries, all meeting the recency threshold of data from the last seven years, with 100% of datapoints rated as official quality. No extreme outliers were detected at the three-standard-deviation threshold. Average year-over-year change across the dataset is 1.5%, indicating high stability. Values range from 17.2% (Burundi) to 89.9% (Djibouti), a spread of approximately 424%. Rankings should be interpreted with awareness that modeled estimates carry uncertainty, particularly for countries with limited survey infrastructure.

Sources