Public administration in Switzerland’s ten largest has grown significantly. In 2022, the latest available date, these cities employed a combined total of 36,254 staff members. That’s equivalent to the population of the city of Chur and represents an 13.3 percent increase compared to 2011. Meanwhile, population growth in these cities during the same period was only 9.7 percent. This disproportionate expansion of public administration raises questions.

Large urban-rural divide in administrative staffing

The key question is whether the current staffing level is high or low. To answer this, we must look at the number of employees in relation to the population: in 2022, there were 23.3 full-time equivalent (FTE) administrative staff in Zurich, Geneva, Basel, Lausanne, Bern, Winterthur, Lucerne, St. Gallen, Lugano and Biel.1In this entire study, only civil servants in the strict sense have been counted. Employees of public-law corporations have not been considered. In contrast, the remaining 2,138 Swiss municipalities had an average of just 9.9 FTE per 1,000 residents.

In other words, Switzerland’s ten largest cities have more than double the number of public employees per capita compared to the rest of the country. This can partly be attributed to the central services that these cities provide which benefit not just local residents but also people from surrounding areas. Additionally, managing large cities is inherently more complex. Political preferences might also play a role: urban areas tend to lean significantly more left than rural areas, which drives demand for public services and, consequently, the need for additional personnel.

However, the mere levels between the cities should be compared with caution. Wwith the exception of Zurich and Winterthur, the cities belong to cantons, each with its own administrative structure. A canton with a high degree of decentralization leaves more tasks to its municipalities, which also justifies a higher number of municipal employees. As a result, distinguishing between administrative inefficiency and the effects of decentralization is challenging.

  • Zurich and Winterthur, for example, have the highest administrative staffing ratio, but at the same time the canton of Zurich is also known for its strong decentralization.
  • Geneva has a relatively low staffing ratio, primarily because many responsibilities there are managed at the cantonal level.
  • Basel presents an even more complex case, as there is no clear distinction between city and cantonal administration. To make a meaningful comparison, an estimate must be made. Given that the city of Basel has a tax rate of 100 points and the two other municipalities in the canton – Riehen and Bettingen – contribute 50 points to the canton, a rough 50/50 split between city and cantonal administration was assumed for Basel’s staffing numbers.
  • Lucerne stands out in this context: despite being one of the most decentralized cantons in terms of government spending, it has the lowest municipal administrative staffing ratio among the ten largest cities, at 15.6 FTE per 1,000 residents. This suggests that Lucerne operates with a particularly lean administration.
  • Conversely, Lausanne has a large municipal administration (24.1 FTEs per 1000 residents), even though the canton it belongs to is relatively centralized.

Disproportionate growth in five cities, absolute decrease in Lausanne

Examining trends since 2011 reveals that, overall, the gap between the largest cities and the rest of Switzerland has not widenedfurther: While the ten largest cities saw an increase of 13 percent in government employees, their population increased by 10 percent. Meanwhile, In the other municipalities, the number of government employees surged 27 percent by 2022, while the population growth of 11 percent was barely higher than in the largest cities. This means that administrative staffing levels per capita have risen more sharply in smaller municipalities than in major cities.

The development of the number of jobs is easier to compare between the cities than the levels. A closer look at the individual cities reveals a range of different trends:

  1. Lausanne stands out as the only city where the absolute number of administrative employees has declined. The city has therefore managed to significantly reduce its administrative staff while its population grew reducing its ratio since 2011.
  2. The cities of St. Gallen, Lucerne, Winterthur and Geneva all saw their absolute number of administrative employees increase since 2011. However, their population grew at an even faster rate, leading to a relative decrease in their ratio since 2011. In Winterthur, this decline – due to the strong population growth – was almost as strong as in Lausanne, while in St. Gallen the number of civil servants grew almost in line with the population.
  3. Biel, Lugano, Zurich, Bern and Basel experienced an over-proportional increase in public administration jobs compared to their population growth. Basel saw the most dramatic rise, with a 24 percent increase in administrative staff, while its population grew by just 6 percent. This development is likely fueled by an increase in tax revenues from the cities booming pharmaceutical industry. Bern and Zurich also recorded a significant increase in their ratio. In Berne, the number of administrative employees rose by 20 percent and the population by 8 percent. In Zurich, the administration increased by 21 percent, while the population grew by 14 percent.

It is unsurprising that municipal administrations grow alongside the population, as economies of scale play a limited role in municipal government functions: Tasks with strong economies of scale tend to be located at cantonal or federal level. However, the disproportionately high growth of the administrations in half of the cities raises concerns.

Firstly, such disproportionate growth is not sustainable in the long run. Secondly, disproportionate growth of public administration may indicate a lack of efficiency in the fulfillment of tasks. Over time, technological and social developments create redundancies and inefficiencies, necessitating adjustments. Unlike private companies, which must adapt to remain competitive, public administrations face no such pressure – especially in cities like Zurich, where tax revenues continue to rise. It is therefore probably no coincidence that Zurich’s administration has grown considerably, while the administration of the city of Winterthur, which has not benefited from the same tax windfall, has grown considerably less.

Thirdly, a rapidly growing public sector risks draining well-qualified staff from the private sector. If Basel, Bern and Zurich want to prevent a brain drain from the private sector towards public administration, they should endeavor to reverse this trend sooner rather the later.