EU industrial structure - EU Bookshop - Europa
EU industrial structure - EU Bookshop - Europa EU industrial structure - EU Bookshop - Europa
EU industrial structure 2011 — Trends and Performance focus on how the recession has affected EU‑27 manufacturing and services industries. The latest recession did not affect all industries in the same way: some industries are more sensitive to cyclical fluctuations and were therefore hit harder. The impact of the recession on different EU industries will be analysed in terms of size, duration and diffusion. i11 manufacturing recession and recovery(?) Manufacturing growth rates in the EU, Japan and the US are presented below. The Japanese growth rate is 16 considerably more variable than those of the EU and US. The greater volatility of Japanese growth rates is probably due to a high specialisation in capital goods which are more sensitive to business fluctuations. The fall in Japanese manufacturing production was significantly larger than for the EU and the US. Following the trough in early 2009, Japanese manufacturing went through an impressive recovery in 2010. The sharp decline in the first half of 2011 can to a large extent be explained by the impacts of the earthquake. 6 Judging from the latest available data, growth rates seem to return to average levels, cf. Figure I.1. FIgURE I.1: growth rates (T/T-12) in manufacturing in the EU, Japan and the US from 1990 to June 2011 (monthly data) 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Source: own calculations using Eurostat data. 1997 1998 1999 2000 Japanese industrial production fluctuates much more than the EU and US industrial production: peaks are higher 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 EU growth Japan growth US growth TAbLE I.1: Descriptive statistics of the growth rates of EU, US and Japanese manufacturing industry production 2007 2008 2009 mean standard deviation max min Eu growth 1.26 5.11 9.23 ‑19.75 Japan growth 0.01 8.50 33.38 ‑35.24 us growth 2.19 5.24 10.27 ‑17.64 Source: own calculations using Eurostat data. 2010 2011 and troughs are lower. US industrial production grows on average faster than in the EU and Japan, cf. Table I.1. 6 The full extent of the impact of the earthquake in Japan on Japanese manufacturing is not known at the time of drafting.
The impact of the last downturn in the EU was unprecedented in size but did not last longer when compared to two other large recessions since 1990. 7 The 1992‑93 recession 7 It did not last longer in the sense that the number of months with falling industrial production relative to the previous month was not greater than for the 1992-93 recession. Another measure of the duration would be the number of months with decreasing 12-month growth rates. Measuring the duration of the recession this way yields 18 months of falling 12-month growth rates for both the 1992-93 and the latest recession. Chapter I — The aftermath of the crisis — a long and uneven recovery(?) lasted 19 months and the millennium recession only 13 months. The latest recession lasted 17 months before industrial production began to pick up again, cf. Figure I.2. FIgURE I.2: Downturns and recoveries in EU-27 industrial production since 1990 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Source: own calculations using Eurostat data. The size of the effects of the financial crisis for EU‑27 manufacturing was larger than the previous recessions since 1990. This is illustrated below where EU manufacturing growth between 1991 and June 2011 has been plotted with the mean of growth and the mean plus and minus the standard deviation of the growth. While EU Manufacturing 2010 2011 the downturns in 1992‑93 and in the beginning of the millennium caused growth rates below the mean minus one standard deviation, the financial crisis caused growth rates to fall significantly below the mean minus two standard deviations, cf. Figure I.3. 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 17
- Page 1: EU industrial structure 2011 Trends
- Page 4 and 5: ENTERPRISE & INDUSTRY MAGAZINE The
- Page 6 and 7: EU industrial structure 2011 — Tr
- Page 8 and 9: EU industrial structure 2011 — Tr
- Page 10 and 11: EU industrial structure 2011 — Tr
- Page 12 and 13: EU industrial structure 2011 — Tr
- Page 14 and 15: EU industrial structure 2011 — Tr
- Page 17: Chapter I The aftermath of the cris
- Page 21 and 22: The impacts of the latest recession
- Page 23 and 24: The previous figures imply that the
- Page 25 and 26: i12 services recession and recovery
- Page 27 and 28: Chapter I — The aftermath of the
- Page 29 and 30: nacE rev 2 growth 2009 Chapter I
- Page 31 and 32: The third step in assessing future
- Page 33 and 34: The business survey indicator used
- Page 37 and 38: Chapter II Changes in EU Industrial
- Page 39 and 40: While there is some variety in the
- Page 41 and 42: developments. This is confirmed by
- Page 43 and 44: Looking at the overall specialisati
- Page 45 and 46: TAbLE II.2: Sectoral specialisation
- Page 47 and 48: For countries as a whole, it should
- Page 49 and 50: Chapter II — Changes in EU Indust
- Page 51 and 52: technology scale. They are less and
- Page 53 and 54: ox II.4: SME definition FIgURE II.7
- Page 55 and 56: definition of shocks. Shocks, or di
- Page 57: Appendix figure FIgURE II.11: Secto
- Page 60 and 61: EU industrial structure 2011 — Tr
- Page 62 and 63: EU industrial structure 2011 — Tr
- Page 64 and 65: EU industrial structure 2011 — Tr
- Page 66 and 67: EU industrial structure 2011 — Tr
The impact of the last downturn in the <strong>EU</strong> was unprecedented<br />
in size but did not last longer when compared to two<br />
other large recessions since 1990. 7 The 1992‑93 recession<br />
7 It did not last longer in the sense that the number of months<br />
with falling <strong>industrial</strong> production relative to the previous<br />
month was not greater than for the 1992-93 recession. Another<br />
measure of the duration would be the number of months with<br />
decreasing 12-month growth rates. Measuring the duration of the<br />
recession this way yields 18 months of falling 12-month growth<br />
rates for both the 1992-93 and the latest recession.<br />
Chapter I — The aftermath of the crisis — a long and uneven recovery(?)<br />
lasted 19 months and the millennium recession<br />
only 13 months. The latest recession lasted 17 months before<br />
<strong>industrial</strong> production began to pick up again, cf. Figure I.2.<br />
FIgURE I.2: Downturns and recoveries in <strong>EU</strong>-27 <strong>industrial</strong> production since 1990<br />
120<br />
115<br />
110<br />
105<br />
100<br />
95<br />
90<br />
85<br />
80<br />
75<br />
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009<br />
Source: own calculations using Eurostat data.<br />
The size of the effects of the financial crisis for<br />
<strong>EU</strong>‑27 manufacturing was larger than the previous<br />
recessions since 1990. This is illustrated below where <strong>EU</strong><br />
manufacturing growth between 1991 and June 2011 has<br />
been plotted with the mean of growth and the mean plus<br />
and minus the standard deviation of the growth. While<br />
<strong>EU</strong> Manufacturing<br />
2010 2011<br />
the downturns in 1992‑93 and in the beginning of the<br />
millennium caused growth rates below the mean minus one<br />
standard deviation, the financial crisis caused growth rates<br />
to fall significantly below the mean minus two standard<br />
deviations, cf. Figure I.3.<br />
1<br />
0.9<br />
0.8<br />
0.7<br />
0.6<br />
0.5<br />
0.4<br />
0.3<br />
0.2<br />
0.1<br />
0<br />
17
Change language