Which has higher trade union density rate, Hong Kong, China or Tanzania, United Republic of?

Hong Kong, China, at 26.06 against 24.3 in Tanzania, United Republic of as of 2016.

What is the difference in trade union density rate between Hong Kong, China and Tanzania, United Republic of?

1.76, with Hong Kong, China ahead.

How many years of comparable data are there for Hong Kong, China and Tanzania, United Republic of?

6 years are reported by both, from 2010 to 2015.

Where does this data come from?

International Labour Organization, published as Trade union density rate. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Hong Kong, China vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Trade union density rate

Hong Kong, China

26.06

in 2016

Tanzania, United Republic of

24.3

in 2015

Hong Kong, China rank

28th

Tanzania, United Republic of rank

31st

Trade union density rate over time

Hong Kong, China
Tanzania, United Republic of

How they compare

Hong Kong, China currently reports 26.06 against 24.3 in Tanzania, United Republic of, a difference of 1.76.

That makes Hong Kong, China's figure about 1.1 times Tanzania, United Republic of's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2010 it was Tanzania, United Republic of ahead.

Hong Kong, China ranks 28th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 31st of 86 countries.

Tanzania, United Republic of has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trade union density rate, Hong Kong, China or Tanzania, United Republic of?: Hong Kong, China, at 26.06 against 24.3 in Tanzania, United Republic of as of 2016.
What is the difference in trade union density rate between Hong Kong, China and Tanzania, United Republic of?: 1.76, with Hong Kong, China ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Hong Kong, China and Tanzania, United Republic of?: 6 years are reported by both, from 2010 to 2015.
How do Hong Kong, China and Tanzania, United Republic of rank globally for trade union density rate?: Hong Kong, China ranks 28th and Tanzania, United Republic of ranks 31st of 86 countries.
Where does this data come from?: International Labour Organization, published as Trade union density rate. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Hong Kong, China vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Trade union density rate. Statizoid, drawing on International Labour Organization. Retrieved 05 September 2026, from https://labour.statizoid.com/compare/trade-union-density-rate/hong-kong-sar-china/tanzania/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under ILO Terms of Use (attribution required); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://labour.statizoid.com/compare/trade-union-density-rate/hong-kong-sar-china/tanzania/">Hong Kong, China vs Tanzania, United Republic of: Trade union density rate</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator: Trade union density rate
Source: International Labour Organization
Licence: ILO Terms of Use (attribution required)
Coverage: 86 places, 1,182 data points, 2000–2020
Last refreshed: 04 September 2026

A trade union is defined as a workers' organization constituted for the purpose of furthering and defending the interests of workers. This trade union density rate conveys the number of union members who are employees as a percentage of the total number of employees. For the purpose of this indicator in particular, trade union membership excludes union members who are not in paid employment (self-employed, unemployed, retired, etc.), unless otherwise stated in the notes. The statistics presented in this table result from an ILO data compilation effort (including an annual questionnaire and numerous special enquiries), with contributions from J. Visser. For more information, refer to the Industrial Relations data (IRdata) database description.