The Federal Planning Bureau (FPB) is an independent public agency. It draws up studies and projections on economic, social and environmental policy issues and on the integration of these policies within a context of sustainable development.
L’éducation est cruciale pour le développement de la société. Elle est aussi un élément clé pour notre économie. Cet article se penche sur le niveau scolaire des élèves en Belgique. Alors qu’il était déjà en baisse ces dernières années, ce niveau a encore diminué à la suite de la pandémie de Covid-19. Sans rattrapage, le coût économique à long terme de cette baisse du niveau scolaire serait considérable.
Onderwijs is van cruciaal belang voor de ontwikkeling van de samenleving. Het is ook een sleutelelement voor onze economie. Dit artikel bestudeert het onderwijsniveau van de Belgische leerlingen. De laatste jaren was er al sprake van een achteruitgang, maar na de covid-19-pandemie is het onderwijsniveau nog verder gedaald. Zonder inhaalbeweging zou het dalende onderwijsniveau resulteren in aanzienlijke economische kosten op lange termijn.
End April 2021, Belgium has submitted its national recovery and resilience plan to the European Commission. This report assesses the impact of this plan on economic, institutional and social resilience resilience, as well as on social and territorial cohesion. The main conclusion of this impact assessment is that the many measures of the plan should have numerous positive impacts on the SDG’s (Sustainable development goals) and thus on social cohesion and resilience. Many impacts, either positive or negative, will depend on the way such measures will be implemented.
What progress has Belgium made towards sustainable development? The assessment of 51 indicators for monitoring the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the UN shows that on current trends, few SDGs will be achieved by 2030. New policies will therefore be needed to achieve all these goals. These conclusions remain unchanged from those drawn in the ten assessments conducted since 2005.
Au-delà des impacts sanitaires et économiques, la crise du covid-19 a un impact négatif sur le bien-être des Belges et ses principaux déterminants, tels que la santé ou les relations sociales. Certains groupes sont particulièrement vulnérables : les femmes, les 16-49 ans, les personnes avec de faibles revenus, vivant seules, en incapacité de travail ou sans emploi. À partir des informations disponibles, le BFP estime que l’impact de la crise sur le bien-être est plus important que lors de la crise économique et financière de 2008.
Naast de gezondheids- en economische impact, heeft de covid-19-crisis een negatieve impact op het welzijn van de Belgen en de belangrijkste determinanten ervan, zoals gezondheid of sociale relaties. Sommige groepen zijn bijzonder kwetsbaar: de vrouwen, de 16-49-jarigen, personen met een laag inkomen, zij die alleen wonen, arbeidsongeschikt of werkloos zijn. Op basis van de beschikbare informatie meent het FPB dat de impact van de crisis op het welzijn groter is dan tijdens de financieel-economische crisis van 2008.
This Working paper proposes four new composite indicators to measure the wellbeing’s sustainability by using the stock of capitals passed on to the future generations. These indicators measure the evolution of the human, social, natural and economic capital. Their analysis shows that wellbeing’s sustainability in Belgium is questioned due to the diminution of the natural capital.
The 2019 Federal Report on Sustainable Development takes stock of 51 indicators monitoring the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): the extrapolation/continuation of current trends does not allow all the objectives to be reached. The Report assesses the current sustainable development policies. It concludes that the federal public services have achieved concrete results, despite the lack of political momentum to reach the SDGs. This Report also analyses the impact on the SDGs of different modalities for applying a carbon tax and of alternative policies to company cars.
This Working paper proposes eleven new composite indicators to measure changes in well-being for women, men, four age groups and five income categories (quintiles) in Belgium. They were constructed using a statistical analysis of the drivers of well-being specific to these population groups. These indicators are complementary to the indicator Well-being here and now that measures the average development in well-being in Belgium.
This report presents the annual update of a set of indicators complementary to GDP. These indicators cover the period from 1990 to 2017, depending on the availability of the data. The Act of 14 March 2014, which complements the Act of 21 December 1994 establishing social and diverse provisions with a set of complementary indicators to measure the quality of life, human development, social progress and the sustainability of our economy, entrusts the National Accounts Institute with the development of this set of indicators and assigns this mission to the Federal Planning Bureau.
This Working Paper proposes an indicator to measure the development in well-being in Belgium. It was built from a statistical analysis of the determinants of well-being in Belgium. It has the advantage of being transparent, divisible and easy to communicate. The analysis shows that the well-being of Belgians generally decreased between 2005 and 2016. This decrease is mainly due to a deterioration in the health of Belgians.
This report presents the update of a set of indicators complementary to GDP. These indicators cover the period from 1990 to 2016, depending on the availability of the data. The Act of 14 March 2014, which complements the Act of 21 December 1994 establishing social and diverse provisions with a set of complementary indicators to measure the quality of life, human development, social progress and the sustainability of our economy, entrusts the National Accounts Institute with the development of this set of indicators and assigns this mission to the Federal Planning Bureau.
This report also proposes a composite indicator to measure well-being Here and now‘. It should be completed in the forthcoming updates by composite indicators for the two other dimensions of sustainable development, ’Later‘ and ’Elsewhere‘.
The data are available on www.indicators.be.
The 2017 Federal Report on Sustainable Development takes as its starting point the Sustainable Developments Goals (SDGs) adopted at the UN. The report assesses 34 indicators showing the evolution of Belgium towards the SDGs and examines the gap between existing scenarios and the SDGs in 3 areas: poverty, energy and transportation. Current developments usually go in the right direction, but most often lag far behind the quantified objectives.
This Working Paper analyses the determinants of individual well-being in Belgium, using data from the EU-SILC survey. The analysis shows that on average health, both mental and physical, is the key determinant of well-being for Belgians. Enjoying sufficient income to access what is regarded as the prevailing standard of living in Belgium, having a job and being surrounded by loved ones also have a significant and positive impact on well-being. Besides these results for "average" Belgians, the analysis of different sub-groups highlights that these determinants are not of equal importance to all Belgians. These results contribute to the FPB’s work on the search for indicators complementary to GDP.
This report presents a first update of a set of indicators complementary to GDP. These indicators cover the period from 1990 to 2015, depending on the availability of the data. The Act of 14 March 2014, which complements the Act of 21 December 1994 establishing social and diverse provisions with a set of complementary indicators to measure the quality of life, human development, social progress and the sustainability of our economy, entrusts the National Accounts Institute (NAI) with the development and calculation of a set of indicators representing the four above-mentioned components. The calculation results are published every year. The same Act of 14 March 14 2014 assigns the development of this set of indicators to the Federal Planning Bureau. The NAI published a first edition of this set of indicators in February 2016.