DOCSLIB.ORG

Denmark, Finland, Netherlands and Sweden: the Four Nordic Countries?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Denmark, Finland, Netherlands and Sweden: the Four Nordic Countries? Denmark, Finland, Netherlands and Sweden: the four Nordic countries? Jenni Blomgren Senior researcher The Social Insurance Institution of Finland (Kela) GINI concluding conference, Amsterdam, 4–5 June 2013 Finland Sweden Denmark The Netherlands 2 This presentation • The presentation is based on those facts that were highlighted in the country chapters (not on the 442 pages of the big reports…) • Each country chapter is structured slightly differently, and only few things are presented exactly similarly – therefore some comparative data from Eurostat (concerning some issues treated in the country reports) are also used • Similarities and differences between the country experiences 3 Context of the four countries • Traditionally strong welfare states, with benefits and services to guarantee means for living for those who are unable to provide for themselves • Even after retrenchment of the welfare state, high level of redistribution through taxes and transfers • Also traditionally low inequality – but substantial increases during the last decades • Universal access to education, strive for equality of opportunity 4 Context: GDP volume growth, 1975–2012 8,0 6,0 4,0 2,0 Denmark Finland % 0,0 Netherlands 2011 2011 -2,0 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 Sweden -4,0 EU 27 -6,0 -8,0 Source: -10,0 5 Eurostat Context: unemployment rates among 15–74-year-olds, 1983–2012 % 18 16 14 12 Denmark 10 Finland 8 Netherlands 6 Sweden EU 27 4 2 0 2011 2011 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2012 Source: 6 Eurostat Context: Social spending, % of GDP % of GDP 40 35 Denmark 30 Finland 25 Sweden Netherlands 20 15 OECD 10 United States 5 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 7 Source: OECD SOCX database Gini of equivalized disposable income, 1980–2010 Gini 0,40 Denmark 0,35 Sweden * 0,30 Netherlands ** 0,25 Finland 0,20 0,15 0,10 Source: country reports 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 * Old household definition 1980–1990, new definition 1991–2010 8 ** Series break in 2000 Rise in Gini – slower or steeper • Netherlands: rise in inequality particularly in the second half of the 1980’s, then rather stable • Total rise of Gini from lowest to highest point: 19 % (+0.05) • Denmark: slow but steady rise from the mid-1980’s • Total rise of Gini from lowest to highest point: 28 % (+0.07) • Finland and Sweden: steep rise especially after the recession of the early 1990’s • Total rise of Gini from lowest to highest point: • Finland: 42 % (+0.08) • Sweden: 54 % (+0.11) • These countries are now on the same level of Gini as the Continental European welfare states 9 Reasons for growing income inequality • Countries emphasize different things – but it is difficult to compare the relative role of the explanations • To which extent are there real differences • Or do the country chapters just reflect differences in the effort to quantify things • For example: The Netherlands chapter (also Denmark to some extent) mentions changing household structure as a key driver – possibly this is a key driver also in other countries but they have not tried to quantify it 10 Points that the countries emphasize (1) Sweden • Tax reform in 1991: flat-rate tax on capital income • Increasing share of income to the top • Decreasing coverage of social policy programmes after the recession of the 1990’s, and later in the 2000’s • Lowest deciles lagging behind also relative to the median • The gap between the insiders and outsiders of the labour market has increased Finland • Tax reform in 1993: flat-rate tax on capital income à shift of income from earnings to capital income • Increasing share of income to the top • Cut-backs or lagging behind of the levels of social security benefits after the recession of the 1990’s 11 • Persistently high unemployment rate Points that the countries emphasize (2) Denmark • Growing share of students and young people taking up low- paid jobs • Higher labour market participation of women in full-time jobs • Increasing proportion of singles • Recent increase due to changes in tax system: marginal tax of top incomes decreased Netherlands • Wages are a core determinant of rising income inequality: top incomes • Policy changes: lower the minimum wage and social benefits after the recession of the 1980’s • Government’s ”work work work” strategy • Tax reform in 1990: higher effective tax rate on low incomes 12 • Household formation patterns affect equivalization Common to all countries • Increase in inequality fuelled by increase of top incomes – either by earnings or capital income • Changing policies are key reasons of rising inequality, for example: • Benefits are left lagging behind • Changes in taxation • The pro-work attitudes of the governments • Changing demographics, though this is not always documented 13 At risk of poverty (60 % of median), 1995–2011 At risk of poverty rate (%) 18 EU 27 16 Sweden 14 12 Finland 10 Denmark 8 Netherlands 6 4 2 0 2011 2011 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 14 Source: Eurostat EU2020 indicator: % persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion * % 30 25 20 EU 27 15 Denmark Finland 10 Sweden Netherlands 5 0 2011 2011 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 * At risk of poverty / severely materially deprived / lives in a low work intensity household 15 Educational attainment • Educational attainment has increased in all countries à more equality in education • However, returns to education have increased – the employment rates of those with only compulsory education are more and more lagging behind • One further reason of this may be increasing selection to the groups with only basic education 16 Social and cultural impacts of increasing inequality? • No clear and unambigous effects of inequality on social and cultural issues such as family formation, health, trust, life satisfaction and social participation • Some outcomes seem to be more affected by economic cycles than inequality (for example: fertility in Finland, trust in Denmark) 17 Total fertility rates 1970–2011 2,60 2,40 2,20 Sweden 2,00 Finland 1,80 Denmark Netherlands 1,60 EU 27 1,40 1,20 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Source: Eurostat database 18 Health: life expectancy at birth, years MEN WOMEN 84 84 82 82 80 80 Sweden Sweden 78 78 76 76 Netherlands Finland 74 74 Denmark Netherlands 72 72 Finland Denmark 70 70 EU 27 EU 27 68 68 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Source: Eurostat database 19 Life satisfaction: very or fairly satisfied 1 0,95 0,9 0,85 0,8 Sweden 0,75 Denmark 0,7 Netherlands 0,65 Finland 0,6 EU 0,55 0,5 11/1985 11/1985 11/1988 11/1989 11/1999 11/2010 04/1980 10/1982 04/1984 05/1987 03/1991 05/1994 01/1996 05/2001 10/2004 04/2006 10/2007 06/2009 10/1992 05/2012 20 Source: Eurobarometer Political participation: voter turnout in general national elections % 95 90 Denmark 85 Sweden 80 Netherlands 75 Finland 70 EU 27 65 60 55 50 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 21 Source: Country reports; Eurostat Trust in government (% who tend to trust) 80% 70% 60% 50% Denmark 40% Netherlands 30% Finland Sweden 20% EU 10% 0% 11/2011 11/2003 11/2009 05/2011 10/2004 06/2005 10/2005 04/2006 09/2006 05/2007 10/2007 04/2008 10/2008 06/2009 06/2010 05/2012 22 However: widening differences between socioeconomic groups • Effects are not visible in the averages but they may be hidden in the margins of the society • Trends of increasing socio-economic differences can be observed (especially in health and mortality), but not sure whether these are caused by increasing inequality • Socioeconomic gap in the level of trust is increasing at least in Finland and in Sweden • General polarization, lack of trust and satisfaction in some groups • Consequences: rise of anti-immigration political parties 23 Role of politics • Changing policies are key drivers of rising inequality: less redistributive policy through cutting back social benefits and changing taxation • Despite cuts of the welfare benefits, support for a strong welfare state remains high in (at least) Finland and in Sweden • In Finland and in Sweden, shift in political power have taken place in favour of right-wing policies favouring the well-off strata and employers • Demands to increase incentives for work – especially Sweden has cut back benefits and 24 tightened eligibility rules Summary • Traditionally strong and equal welfare states but moving towards higher inequality – speed of change among the highest in OECD • Simultaneous retrenchment of the welfare state • However, social and cultural consequences are difficult to see: what is the role of inequality? • Some polarization of the society may have occurred: increasing socio-economic gradients observed in many phenomena • However, inequality is still on a comparatively low level; satisfaction is high; the countries still fare well 25 as welfare states Paradises in the world? Thank you! 26 Source: Google images search, first page search results for country name .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Application of the Republic of Finland for the Relocation of the European Medicines Agency to Helsinki TABLE of CONTENTS
    Application of the Republic of Finland for the relocation of the European Medicines Agency to Helsinki TABLE OF CONTENTS In safe hands 3 A SMOOTH TRANSITION 5 The new location of the European Medicines Agency 7 Continuity and a smooth handover 10 LIFE IN HELSINKI 13 Livable Helsinki 15 Easily accessible 17 Superb and internationally acclaimed education 21 Employment, social security and healthcare 26 A NEW CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN HEALTH 28 A strategic decision – EMA alongside ECHA 30 Helsinki – a hub for the life sciences 32 emahelsinki.fi 2 — Helsinki for EMA In safe hands The most crucial criterion for transferring the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to its new location is the ability to affect a smooth transition. To get the job done. Placing EMA alongside the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) in Helsinki enhances the EU’s global regulatory competitiveness. Finland, simply stated, is known synergies to create a centre of Finland and the Helsinki region for its capacity to get the job excellence for the protection of possess top class expertise in the done. As a committed EU member human health. life sciences in terms of a high- and in our many roles on the glob- quality talent pool, world-leading al stage – from diplomatic conflict This decision is not a simple research, strong support servic- resolution initiatives to UN Peace- question of competition within es, and functioning networks of keeping missions – we are viewed the EU or among potential host collaboration among academia, as a partner to be entrusted with states. This is a global compe- industry and the public sector.
    [Show full text]
  • GOING GLOBAL EXPORTING to NETHERLANDS a Guide for Clients
    GOING GLOBAL EXPORTING TO NETHERLANDS A guide for clients #GlobalAmbition Capital city Amsterdam Population 17.3m1 GDP per capita ¤41,5002 6th in the World North Sea Competitiveness Ranking3 Unemployment (2019)AMSTERDAM 3.4%4 Predicted economic growth for 20195 3% GERMANY Enterprise Ireland client exports (2018) ¤1.07bn6 BELGIUM 2 WHY EXPORT TO THE NETHERLANDS? Only half the size of Ireland, yet the Dutch have left their mark on the world as innovators, trail blazers and world-class business professionals. The Dutch are active worldwide in providing creative and sustainable solutions for global challenges relating to water, food, energy, health, environment, and security. The Dutch data centre community, which also The Netherlands already has a robust healthcare GDP per capita houses the Amsterdam Internet Exchange (AMS-IX), and pharma landscape with companies like MSD, 2 is growing continuously with 18% average growth Jansen, TEVA, Takeda, Omron, Konica Minolta and ¤41,500 in take-up of data centers in the last 7 years in the many more. This is strengthened by the recent Amsterdam region.7 Co-locations like Interxion opening of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) but also hyper-scale data centres like Google and in Amsterdam in March 201913. The Netherlands Microsoft are well established and various new data represents an ideal market for first-presence and centres are being built over the coming years8. scaling-up in mainland Europe, from which a European export strategy can be grown. The culture Ranked number one in the world for overall logistics is direct and early-adopting which makes for shorter performance9, the Netherlands is home to world- sale cycles, reducing client risk.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 1168 BELGIUM, DENMARK, FRANCE, IRELAND, ITALY
    No. 1168 BELGIUM, DENMARK, FRANCE, IRELAND, ITALY, LUXEMBOURG, NETHERLANDS, NORWAY, SWEDEN and UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND Statute of the Council of Europe. Signed at London, on 5 May 1949 Official texts: English and French. Registered by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on U April 1951. BELGIQUE, DANEMARK, FRANCE, IRLANDE, ITALIE, LUXEMBOURG, NORVÈGE, PAYS-BAS, ROYAUME-UNI DE GRANDE-BRETAGNE ET D'IRLANDE DU NORD et SUÈDE Statut du Conseil de l'Europe. Signé à Londres, le 5 mai 1949 Textes officiels anglais et fran ais. Enregistr par le Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d* Irlande du Nord le II avril 1951. 104 United Nations Treaty Series 1951 No. 1168. STATUTE1 OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE. SIGNED AT LONDON, ON 5 MAY 1949 The Governments of the Kingdom of Belgium, the Kingdom of Denmark, the French Republic, the Irish Republic, the Italian Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Kingdom of Norway, the Kingdom of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland : Convinced that the pursuit of peace based upon justice and international co-operation is vital for the preservation of human society and civilisation; Reaffirming their devotion to the spiritual and moral values which are the common heritage of their peoples and the true source of individual freedom, political liberty and the rule of law, principles which form the basis of all genuine democracy; Believing that, for the maintenance and further realisation of these ideals and in
    [Show full text]
  • Trade and Investment Factsheets: Denmark
    Denmark This factsheet provides the latest statistics on trade and investment between the UK and Denmark. Date of release: 17 September 2021; Date of next planned release: 7 October 2021 Total trade in goods and services (exports plus imports) between the UK and Denmark was £11.6 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021, a decrease of 16.5% or £2.3 billion from the four quarters to the end of Q1 2020. Of this £11.6 billion: • Total UK exports to Denmark amounted to £5.5 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021 (a decrease of 10.2% or £626 million compared to the four quarters to the end of Q1 2020); • Total UK imports from Denmark amounted to £6.1 billion in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021 (a decrease of 21.5% or £1.7 billion compared to the four quarters to the end of Q1 2020). Denmark was the UK’s 22nd largest trading partner in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2021 accounting for 1.0% of total UK trade.1 In 2019, the outward stock of foreign direct investment (FDI) from the UK in Denmark was £6.4 billion accounting for 0.4% of the total UK outward FDI stock. In 2019, the inward stock of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the UK from Denmark was £7.2 billion accounting for 0.5% of the total UK inward FDI stock.2 1 Trade data sourced from the latest ONS publication of UK total trade data.
    [Show full text]
  • Agreement Between the United States and the Netherlands
    Agreement Between The United States And The Netherlands Contents Introduction 1 Coverage and Social Security taxes 2 Certificate of coverage 3 Monthly benefits 5 How benefits can be paid 7 A Dutch pension may affect your U.S. benefit 8 What you need to know about Medicare 8 Claims for benefits 9 Authority to collect information for a certificate of coverage (see pages 3-5) 9 Contacting Social Security 10 Introduction benefits. It does not cover benefits under the U.S. Medicare program or Supplemental An agreement effective November 1, 1990, Security Income program. between the United States and the Netherlands This booklet covers highlights of the agreement improves social security protection for people and explains how it may help you who work or have worked in both countries. It while you . helps many people who, without the agreement, work and when you apply for benefits would not be eligible for monthly retirement, The agreement may help you, your disability or survivors benefits under the social family and your employer security system of one or both countries. It also • While you work — If your work is covered helps people who would otherwise have to pay by both the U.S. and Dutch social security social security taxes to both countries on the systems, you (and your employer, if you are same earnings. employed) normally would have to pay social The agreement covers social security taxes security taxes to both countries for the same (including the U.S. Medicare portion) and social work. However, the agreement eliminates security retirement, disability and survivors this double coverage so you pay taxes to only one system (see pages 2-5).
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom Convention between the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital gains. Done at The Hague, on 7 November 1980 text published: Trb. 1980, 205 authentic texts: Dutch and English treaty into force: 6 April 1981 (see Trb. 1981, 54) treaty applicable: 6 April 1980 Protocol amending the convention between the government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital gains signed at The Hague on 7 November 1980 Done at The Hague, on 12 July 1983 text published: Trb. 1983, 128 authentic texts: Dutch and English treaty into force: 20 December 1990 (see Trb. 1991, 13) treaty applicable: 1 January 1991 Protocol further amending the convention between the government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to taxes on income and capital gains signed at The Hague on 7 November 1980 as amended by the protocol signed at London on 12 July 1983 Done at The Hague, on 24 August 1989 text published: Trb. 1989, 128 authentic texts: Dutch and English treaty into force: 20 December 1990 (see Trb.
    [Show full text]
  • Recovery from Acidification of Lakes in Finland, Norway and Sweden 1990–1999
    Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 5(3), 327–337Recovery from(2001) acidification © EGS of lakes in Finland, Norway and Sweden 1990–1999 Recovery from acidification of lakes in Finland, Norway and Sweden 1990–1999 B.L. Skjelkvåle1, J. Mannio2, A. Wilander3 and T. Andersen1 1 Norwegian Institute for Water Research, PB 173 Kjelsås, N-0411 Oslo, Norway 2 Finnish Environment Institute, PB.140, FIN-00251, Helsinki, Finland 3 University of Agricultural Sciences, PB 7050, S-75007 Uppsala, Sweden Email for corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract Sulphate deposition has decreased by about 60% in the Nordic countries since the early 1980s. Nitrogen deposition has been roughly constant during the past 20 years, with only a minor decrease in the late 1990s. The resulting changes in the chemistry of small lakes have been followed by national monitoring programmes initiated in the 1980s in Finland (163 lakes), Norway (100 lakes) and Sweden (81 lakes). These lakes are partly a subset from the survey of 5690 lakes in the Northern European lake survey of 1995. Trend analyses on data for the period 1990-1999 show that the non-marine sulphate concentrations in lakes have decreased significantly in 69% of the monitored lakes. Changes were largest in lakes with the highest mean concentrations. Nitrate concentrations, on the other hand, were generally low and showed no systematic changes. Concentrations of non-marine base cations decreased in 26% of the lakes, most probably an ionic-strength effect due to the lower concentrations of mobile strong-acid anions. Acid neutralising capacity increased in 32% of the lakes.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards the Kalmar Union
    S P E C I A L I Z E D A G E N C I E S TOWARDS THE KALMAR UNION Dear Delegates, Welcome to the 31st Annual North American Model United Nations 2016 at the University of Toronto! On behalf of all of the staff at NAMUN, we welcome you to the Specialized Agency branch of the conference. I, and the rest of the committee staff are thrilled to have you be a delegate in Scandinavia during the High Middle Ages, taking on this challenging yet fascinating topic on the futures of the three Scandinavian Kingdoms in a time of despair, poverty, dependence and competitiveness. This will truly be a new committee experience, as you must really delve into the history of these Kingdoms and figure out how to cooperate with each other without sending everyone into their demise. To begin, in the Towards the Kalmar Union Specialized Agency, delegates will represent influential characters from Denmark, Norway and Sweden, which include prominent knights, monarchs, nobles, and important religious figures who dominate the political, military and economic scenes of their respective Kingdoms. The impending issues that will be discussed at the meeting in Kalmar, Sweden include the future of the Danish and Norwegian crowns after the death of the sole heir to the thrones, Olaf II. Here, two distant relatives to Valdemar IV have a claim to the throne and delegates will need to decide who will succeed to the throne. The second order of business is to discuss the growing German presence in Sweden, especially in major economic cities.
    [Show full text]
  • Homelessness Research and Policy Development: Examples from the Nordic Countries Lars Benjaminsen and Marcus Knutagård
    10th Anniversary Issue 45 Homelessness Research and Policy Development: Examples from the Nordic Countries Lars Benjaminsen and Marcus Knutagård SFI – The Danish National Centre for Social Research, Copenhagen, Denmark School of Social Work, Lund University, Lund, Sweden >> Abstract_ The interaction between research and policy development has played an important role in the transformation of homelessness policies and services over the last decade. Evidence from research on Housing First programmes and interventions in North America has informed the develop- ment of experimental Housing First programmes in many European countries. Moreover, studies on the profiles of homeless people and patterns of service use have supported an ongoing transition from mainly emergency and temporary responses towards strategic approaches with a focus on long-term and permanent solutions. This article will focus on the Nordic countries, where there has been close interaction between research and policy development in the formation of national strategies and programmes. In Denmark, Norway and Sweden, comprehensive national counts of homelessness have been carried out based on similar definitions and methodology and in Finland, monitoring of the extent and profiles of homelessness has been carried out for several years. In Denmark and Finland, national data have been used in the formation of national homelessness strategies that have been based on the Housing First principle, and data have been used to monitor developments in homelessness following implementation of these programmes. In Sweden, influential research on the staircase system has contributed to in-depth understanding of the unintended exclusion mechanisms that may sometimes be inherent in home- lessness policies. >> Keywords_ Homelessness research, policy development, strategic response, Housing First ISSN 2030-2762 / ISSN 2030-3106 online 46 European Journal of Homelessness _ Volume 10, No.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nordic Model: Embracing Globalization and Sharing Risks
    The Nordic Model The Nordic The Nordic Model Is there a Nordic model? What are the main characteristics of the Nord- ics? What challenges are they facing? Is the Nordic welfare state viable -Embracingglobalizationandsharingrisks in conditions of globalization and ageing populations? What reforms Embracing globalization and sharing risks are needed? The Nordic countries have attracted much international attention in re- cent years. The school system in Finland has repeatedly been ranked the best in the world. The Swedish pension reform is a benchmark in the international debate. Danish “flexicurity” figures prominently on the policy agenda in the EU and the OECD. The economic performance of the Nordic countries has been impressive in comparative terms: rapid growth, high employment, price stability, healthy surpluses in government finances. The Nordics have embraced globalization and new technologies. Cross-country comparisons sup- port the view that the Nordics have been successful in reconciling eco- nomic efficiency with social equality. While successful in the past, the Nordic model is facing increasingly Andersen, Holmström, Honkapohja, Korkman, Söderström,Vartiainen Andersen, Holmström,Honkapohja,Korkman, serious challenges in the future. Globalization and the demographic transformation have major consequences for labour markets and the public sector. The viability of the Nordic welfare state as it exists today is put into question. This report offers an in-depth analysis of the Nordic model, explaining its key features and evaluating its performance as well as setting out its challenges. It examines many of the “quick fixes” put forward in public debate and explains why they are unrealistic or based on erroneous rea- soning.
    [Show full text]
  • The Swedish Economy Showed a Relatively Robust Performance in The
    2.27. SWEDEN The Swedish economy showed a relatively robust performance in the first quarter of 2020, in spite of the COVID-19 pandemic triggering a sharp deterioration in economic activity from mid-March onwards. Real GDP grew 0.1% q-o-q in the first quarter, mainly due to positive net exports. Even though only some restrictions were put in place to counter the spread of the disease, both the demand and supply side of the economy took a hit. While the rather less restrictive measures helped cushion the immediate impact on the economy, particularly on domestically oriented branches, exporting industries experienced strong declines in output as cross-borders value chains were disrupted. Durable consumer goods, travel services and capital goods-producing sectors were particularly affected. Real GDP is expected to show a sharp fall in the second quarter of 2020, with a recovery following in the second half of the year. The uncertain outlook for demand and lower capacity utilisation should lead to a sharp decline in capital formation this year. Equipment investment is also expected to suffer, as it is the investment category that reacts most strongly to the business cycle. Private consumption decreases follow on from substantial job losses and uncertainty, as well as the impact of restrictions. The sharp fall in economic activity forecast in Sweden’s main trading partners is expected to translate into a large decline in exports. Economic growth is set to turn positive in 2021 as impediments slowly dissipate and the economies of major trading partners recover. A return to work should foster a bounce back in consumption growth in 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Nordics - Alberta Relations
    Nordics - Alberta Relations This map is a generalized illustration only and is not intended to be used for reference purposes. The representation of political boundaries does not necessarily reflect the position of the Government of Alberta on international issues of recognition, sovereignty or jurisdiction. PROFILE NORDICS OVERVIEW . Danish, Norwegian and Swedish are the working languages of official Nordic co- Capital: Copenhagen (Nordic Council and . The Nordic countries are a geographical and operation. Council of Ministers Headquarters) cultural region in Northern Europe and the Northern Atlantic and include Denmark, Population: 26.7 million (2016) TRADE AND INVESTMENT Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, plus Languages: Danish, Faroese, Finnish, the associated territories of Greenland, the . The Nordic region is the world’s eleventh Greenlandic, Icelandic, Norwegian, Sami and Faroe Islands and the Åland Islands. largest economy. Swedish . The Nordic Council is a geo-political inter- . From 2012 to 2016, Alberta’s goods exports to Secretary-General of the Nordic Council: Britt parliamentary forum for co-operation between the Nordics averaged CAD $98.1 million per Bohlin Olsson (since 2014) the Nordic countries. It consists of 87 year. Top exports included machinery (CAD $31.6 million), nickel (CAD $12.5 million), President of the Nordic Council: Britt Lundberg representatives, elected from its members’ (elected for the year of 2017) parliaments. plastic (CAD $11.3 million), and food waste and animal feed (CAD $10.8 million). The Vice President of the Nordic Council: Juho . Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and export figures do not include trade in services Eerola (elected for the year of 2017) Sweden have been full members of the Nordic (e.g.
    [Show full text]