Table 7 Relative volatility
|
(1980-2001, in percentage points) | |||||||||
|
Agriculture |
Industry |
Construction |
Trade |
Finance |
Business |
Public |
Country |
Country | |
|
Belgium |
22.3 |
4.6 |
15.8 |
2.1 |
18.9 |
2.1 |
0.6 |
4.4 |
2.0 |
|
Denmark |
12.2 |
5.2 |
21.0 |
3.5 |
18.3 |
2.2 |
0.7 |
4.8 |
2.1 |
|
Germany |
10.4 |
4.3 |
4.9 |
2.8 |
6.4 |
1.4 |
0.3 |
3.0 |
0.8 |
|
Greece |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
|
Spain |
18.0 |
1.8 |
10.9 |
1.1 |
11.7 |
2.1 |
0.5 |
3.4 |
1.8 |
|
France |
11.6 |
3.5 |
12.2 |
3.4 |
8.8 |
1.4 |
0.4 |
3.3 |
1.2 |
|
Ireland |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
|
Italy |
22.4 |
5.3 |
6.9 |
1.6 |
4.9 |
1.5 |
0.3 |
3.5 |
1.6 |
|
Luxembourg |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
|
Netherlands |
8.5 |
2.9 |
10.3 |
4.2 |
7.0 |
3.2 |
0.4 |
3.5 |
1.0 |
|
Austria |
24.6 |
4.1 |
10.3 |
1.7 |
5.3 |
2.3 |
1.4 |
3.7 |
1.5 |
|
Portugal |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
na |
|
Finland |
5.7 |
2.3 |
6.0 |
2.1 |
8.6 |
0.5 |
0.3 |
2.2 |
0.8 |
|
Sweden |
7.0 |
4.9 |
4.4 |
1.4 |
17.2 |
2.0 |
0.4 |
3.1 |
1.4 |
|
United Kingdom |
7.3 |
2.3 |
2.5 |
6.8 |
6.6 |
3.3 |
1.2 |
3.3 |
0.7 |
|
EU average |
13.7 |
3.8 |
5.5 |
2.6 |
8.2 |
1.7 |
0.6 | ||
|
std. dev. |
18.2 |
0.5 |
10.4 |
0.7 |
5.7 |
0.2 |
0.1 | ||
Sources: Eurostat, NCBs, ECB calculations.
Note: The table reports the variance of the business cycle component of the logarithm of sectoral gross value added divided by the
variance of the business cycle component of the logarithm of total gross value added. Country and EU averages and standard deviations
refer to weighted values.
In addition, important cross-country
differences exist, as indicated by the EU-wide
standard deviation of relative volatility
measures. Variation46 is strongest in
agriculture, construction and finance. Overall,
however, country differences seem to be more
important than sectoral differences, as indicated
by the country-specific standard deviations of
relative volatility across sectors.
A comparison of the relative volatility measure
between the 1980s and the 1990s also reveals a
substantial decrease in sectoral volatility, at
least for some countries (see Table 8). Most
notably, sectoral volatility has decreased in
construction, with the exception of Spain,
France and Italy where an important increase
was detected. The decrease in volatility was less
pronounced in agriculture, where Belgium and
the UK experienced increasing volatility. In the
remaining sectors, changes in sectoral volatility
were either more country-specific (such as in
finance) or barely discernible, owing mostly to
the already low levels during the 1980s,
especially in the services sectors.
Although there have been some differences in
sectoral volatility, the impact of sectoral
specialisation in the EU is likely to be rather
limited given that differences in the sectoral
composition of countries are moderate.
3.2.2 RELATIVE VOLATILITY IN
MANUFACTURING
The level of aggregation used for the business
cycle analysis in this section hides an important
degree of sectoral heterogeneity at a more
detailed level of disaggregation. In particular,
manufacturing sectors can be further
characterised on the basis of their technological
intensity.47 This, in turn, is likely to have a
bearing on the business cycle characteristics at
the disaggregated level.
46 Regarding trade, the particularly high volatility in the UK has a
decisive impact on the standard deviation.
47 The analysis in this section has been carried out on the basis of
monthly industrial production indices. These monthly industrial
production indicators for manufacturing sectors have been
grouped according to the same principles as those applied for
annual data in the preceding chapter. See Annex 4.1.1 for more
details on how manufacturing sectors have been aggregated.
38
ECB
Occasional Paper No. 19
July 2004