natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
III Ç åîÝëéîç ôçò óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò Ðßíáêáò 8 ( á ) Ïëëáíäßá : Óôáèåñüôçôá óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò ( â ) Âáóéêïß äåßêôåò ðéÝóåùí óôï öéïñßíé Ïëëáíäßáò ÄéÜãñáììá 6 Öéïñßíé Ïëëáíäßáò : Áðïêëßóåéò áðü äéìåñåßò êåíôñéêÝò éóïôéìßåò ÌÓÉ Ðßíáêáò 9 Öéïñßíé Ïëëáíäßáò : Äåßêôåò ðñáãìáôéêÞò óôáèìéóìÝíçò óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò Ýíáíôé ôùí Êñáôþí-Ìåëþí ôïõ ÌÓÉ Ðßíáêáò 10 Ïëëáíäßá : ÅîùôåñéêÝò åîåëßîåéò
III Exchange rate developments Table 8 ( a ) Netherlands : Exchange rate stability ( b ) Key indicators of exchange rate pressure for the Dutch guilder Chart 6 Dutch guilder : Deviations from ERM bilateral central rates Table 9 Dutch guilder : Measures of the real effective exchange rate vis - - vis ERM Member States Table 10 Netherlands : External developments
ÉV Ç åîÝëéîç ôùí ìáêñïðñüèåóìùí åðéôïêßùí Ðßíáêáò 11 Ïëëáíäßá : Ìáêñïðñüèåóìá åðéôüêéá ÄéÜãñáììá 7 ( á ) Ïëëáíäßá : Ìáêñïðñüèåóìá åðéôüêéá ( â ) Ïëëáíäßá : ÄéáöïñÝò ìáêñïðñüèåóìùí åðéôïêßùí êáé ðëçèùñéóìïý ÄÔÊ Ýíáíôé ôùí ÷ ùñþí ôçò ÅÅ ìå ôá ÷ áìçëüôåñá ìáêñïðñüèåóìá åðéôüêéá
IV Long-term interest rate developments Table 11 Netherlands : Long-term interest rates Chart 7 ( a ) Netherlands : Long-term interest rate ( b ) Netherlands : Long-term interest rate and CPI inflation differentials against EU countries with lowest long-term interest rates
Ïëëáíäßá : Ðëçèùñéóìüò âÜóåé ôïõ ÅíÄÔÊ ( åôÞóéåò åêáôïóôéáßåò ìåôáâïëÝò ) 1996 Ðëçèùñéóìüò âÜóåé ôïõ ÅíÄÔÊ ÔéìÞ áíáöïñÜò ÐçãÞ : ÅõñùðáúêÞ ÅðéôñïðÞ .
Netherlands : HICP inflation ( annual percentage changes ) 1996 HICP inflation Reference value Source : European Commission .
ÍïÝ . 97 2,5 -
Nov 97 2.5 -
Äåê . 97 2,2 -
Dec 97 2.2 -
Éáí . 98 1,6 -
Jan 98 1.6 -
97-Éáí . 98 1,8 2,7
Feb 97 - Jan 98 1.8 2.7
Ïëëáíäßá : Äåßêôåò ðëçèùñéóìïý êáé óõíáöåßò äåßêôåò ( åôÞóéåò åêáôïóôéáßåò ìåôáâïëÝò , åêôüò åÜí áíáöÝñåôáé äéáöïñåôéêÜ ) 1990 Äåßêôåò ðëçèùñéóìïý Äåßêôçò Ôéìþí ÊáôáíáëùôÞ ( ÄÔÊ ) 2,4 ÄÔÊ ÷ ùñßò ìåôáâïëÝò êáèáñþí Ýììåóùí öüñùí ( â ) 2,1 ÁðïðëçèùñéóôÞò éäéùôéêÞò êáôáíÜëùóçò 2,2 ÁðïðëçèùñéóôÞò ÁÅÐ 2,4 ÔéìÝò ðáñáãùãïý - 0,6 Óõíáöåßò äåßêôåò Áýîçóç ðñáãìáôéêïý ÁÅÐ 4,1 Ðáñáãùãéêü êåíü ( åêáôïóôéáßåò ìïíÜäåò ) 2,2 Ðïóïóôü áíåñãßáò (%) 6,0 Êüóôïò åñãáóßáò áíÜ ìïíÜäá ðñïúüíôïò , óýíïëï ïéêïíïìßáò 1,7 Áðïæçìßùóç áíÜ áðáó ÷ ïëïýìåíï , óýíïëï ïéêïíïìßáò 2,8 Ðáñáãùãéêüôçôá åñãáóßáò , óýíïëï ïéêïíïìßáò 1,0 ÁðïðëçèùñéóôÞò ôéìþí åéóáãïìÝíùí - 1,3 Áíáôßìçóç íïìßóìáôïò ( ã ) 4,0 ÐñïóöïñÜ ÷ ñÞìáôïò ìå åõñåßá Ýííïéá ( Åíáñì .
Netherlands : Measures of inflation and related indicators ( annual percentage changes unless otherwise stated ) 1990 Measures of inflation Consumer price index ( CPI ) CPI excluding changes in net indirect taxes ( b ) Private consumption deflator GDP deflator Producer prices Related indicators Real GDP growth Output gap ( p.pt s ) Unemployment rate (%) Unit labour costs , whole economy Compensation per employee , whole economy Labour productivity , whole economy Import price deflator Exchange rate appreciation ( c ) Broad monetary aggregate ( M3H )( d ) Stock prices House prices 2.4 2.1 2.2 2.4 - 0.6 4.1 2.2 6.0 1.7 2.8 1.0 - 1.3 4.0 9.9 - 10.0 2.0
Ì3 )( ä ) 9,9 ÔéìÝò ìåôï ÷ þí - 10,0 ÔéìÝò êáôïéêéþí 2,0 1991 3,1 2,6 3,2 2,7 1,5 2,3 1,8 5,4 3,9 3,8 - 0,1 0,4 - 0,8 6,0 2,3 2,6 1992 3,2 2,6 3,1 2,2 0,4 2,0 1,1 5,3 3,1 4,0 0,9 - 1,4 2,3 6,4 8,4 8,3 1993 2,6 2,4 2,1 2,0 - 1,0 0,8 - 0,8 6,4 2,2 3,0 0,8 - 2,3 2,8 6,7 14,3 8,3 1994 2,8 2,4 2,8 2,2 0,7 3,2 - 0,4 7,5 - 1,3 1,5 2,8 0,1 0,3 4,4 22,3 8,7 1995 1,9 1,8 1,5 1,7 2,6 2,3 - 1,0 7,0 1,2 1,6 0,4 0,9 4,2 0,7 6,7 3,6 1996 1997 ( á ) 2,0 1,5 1,3 1,3 1,7 3,3 - 0,7 6,6 0,2 1,3 1,1 0,7 - 1,9 6,1 26,8 10,3 2,2 2,2 1,8 1,7 1,9 3,3 - 0,4 5,9 0,1 2,5 2,4 3,2 - 4,5 7,0 49,4 6,8
1995 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.7 2.6 2.3 - 1.0 7.0 1.2 1.6 0.4 0.9 4.2 0.7 6.7 3.6 1996 1997 ( a ) 2.0 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.7 3.3 - 0.7 6.6 0.2 1.3 1.1 0.7 - 1.9 6.1 26.8 10.3 2.2 2.2 1.8 1.7 1.9 3.3 - 0.4 5.9 0.1 2.5 2.4 3.2 - 4.5 7.0 49.4 6.8
ÐçãÞ : ÅèíéêÜ óôïé ÷ åßá . Áýîçóç ðñáãìáôéêïý ÁÅÐ êáé ðáñáãùãéêü êåíü : ÅõñùðáúêÞ ÅðéôñïðÞ ( ðñïâëÝøåéò Üíïéîçò 1998 ) .
Source : National data except real GDP growth and the output gap ( European Commission , spring 1998 forecasts ) and exchange rate ( BIS ) .
( â ) ÐñïâëÝøåéò ãéá ôïí ðëçèùñéóìü 1998 ÅõñùðáúêÞ ÅðéôñïðÞ ( Üíïéîç 1998 ) , ÅíÄÔÊ ÏÏÓÁ ( ÄåêÝìâñéïò 1997 ) , áðïðëçèùñéóôÞò éäéùôéêÞò êáôáíÜëùóçò ÄÍÔ ( Ïêôþâñéïò 1997 ) , ÄÔÊ ÐçãÞ : ÅõñùðáúêÞ ÅðéôñïðÞ ( ðñïâëÝøåéò Üíïéîçò 1998 ) , ÏÏÓÁ êáé ÄÍÔ .
( b ) Inflation forecasts European Commission ( spring 1998 ) , HICP OECD ( December 1997 ) , private consumption deflator IMF ( October 1997 ) , CPI Source : European Commission ( spring 1998 forecasts ) , OECD and IMF . 1998 2.3 2.3 2.3
Ïëëáíäßá : ¸ ëëåéììá êáé ÷ ñÝïò åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá ( ùò ðïóïóôü ôïõ ÁÅÐ ) 1996 Ðëåüíáóìá (+) / Ýëëåéììá (-) åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá ÔéìÞ áíáöïñÜò Ðëåüíáóìá (+) / Ýëëåéììá (-) , ÷ ùñßò ôéò äáðÜíåò äçìüóéùí åðåíäýóåùí ( â ) ÁêáèÜñéóôï ÷ ñÝïò åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá ÔéìÞ áíáöïñÜò - 2,3 - 3 0,4 77,2 60 1997 - 1,4 - 3 1,4 72,1 60 1998 ( á ) - 1,6 - 3 .
Netherlands : General government financial position ( as a percentage of GDP ) General government surplus (+) / deficit (-) Reference value Surplus (+) / deficit (-) , net of public investment expenditure ( b ) General government gross debt Reference value Source : European Commission ( spring 1998 forecasts ) and EMI calculations .
ÄéÜãñáììá 2
70.0 60 Chart 2
Ðßíáêáò 5 Ïëëáíäßá : ÄéÜñèñùóç áêáèÜñéóôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá 1990 Óõíïëéêü ÷ ñÝïò (% ôïõ ÁÅÐ ) ÄéÜñèñùóç êáôÜ íüìéóìá (% óõíüëïõ ) Óå åã ÷ þñéï íüìéóìá Óå îÝíá íïìßóìáôá Åóùôåñéêü ÷ ñÝïò (% óõíüëïõ ) ÌÝóç äéÜñêåéá ( á ) ( Ýôç ) ÄéÜñèñùóç êáôÜ äéÜñêåéá ( á ) (% óõíüëïõ ) Âñá ÷ õðñüèåóìç ( â ) ( < 1 Ýôïò) Ìåóïðñüèåóìç (1-5 Ýôç) Ìáêñïðñüèåóìç (> 5 Ýôç ) .
Netherlands : General government gross debt str uctural features Total debt ( as a percentage of GDP ) Composition by currency (% of total ) In domestic currency In foreign currencies Domestic ownership (% of total ) Average maturity ( a ) ( years ) Composition by maturity ( a ) (% of total ) Short-term ( b ) ( < 1 year) Medium-term (1-5 years) Long-term (> 5 years ) 1990 79.2 1991 79.0 1992 80.0 1993 81.2 1994 77.9 1995 79.1 1996 1997 77.2 72.1
Óõíïëéêü ÷ ñÝïò : ÅõñùðáúêÞ ÅðéôñïðÞ ( ðñïâëÝøåéò Üíïéîçò 1998 ) .
Source : National data except for total debt ( European Commission ( spring 1998 forecasts )) .
Ïëëáíäßá : ¸ óïäá êáé äáðÜíåò åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá ( ùò ðïóïóôü ôïõ ÁÅÐ ) 1990 Óýíïëï ôñå ÷ üíôùí åóüäùí Öüñïé ÅéóöïñÝò êïéíùíéêÞò áóöÜëéóçò ¢ ëëá ôñÝ ÷ ïíôá Ýóïäá Óýíïëï äáðáíþí ÔñÝ ÷ ïõóåò ìåôáâéâÜóåéò ÊáôáâëçèÝíôåò ôüêïé Äçìüóéá êáôáíÜëùóç ÊáèáñÝò êåöáëáéáêÝò äáðÜíåò Ðëåüíáóìá (+) Þ Ýëëåéììá (-) ÐñùôïãåíÝò áðïôÝëåóìá Ðëåüíáóìá (+) Þ Ýëëåéììá (-) , ÷ ùñßò ôéò äáðÜíåò äçìüóéùí åðåíäýóåùí ( á ) .
Netherlands : General government budgetary position ( as a percentage of GDP ) Total current receipts Taxes Social security contributions Other current receipts Total expenditure Current transfers Actual interest payments Public consumption Net capital expenditure Surplus (+) or deficit (-) Primary balance Surplus (+) or deficit (-) , net of public investment expenditure ( a )
Óôáèåñü ðñùôïãåíÝò áðïôÝëåóìá ÉóïóêåëéóìÝíïò ðñïûðïëïãéóìüò ÐçãÞ : ÅõñùðáúêÞ ÅðéôñïðÞ ( ðñïâëÝøåéò Üíïéîçò 1998 ) êáé õðïëïãéóìïß ÅÍÉ .
Netherlands : Potential future debt ratios under alternative assumptions for fiscal balance ratios ( as a percentage of GDP ) Constant overall balance 70 65 60 55 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Constant primary balance Balanced budget
Óçìåßùóç : Ôá ôñßá óåíÜñéá õðïèÝôïõí üôé ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò èá äéáìïñöùèåß ôï 1998 óýìöùíá ìå ôçí ðñüâëåøç ( 70,0% ) êáé üôé åßôå ôï óõíïëéêü áðïôÝëåóìá (- 1,6% ) Þ ôï ðñùôïãåíÝò áðïôÝëåóìá ( 3,3% ) èá äéáôçñçèåß óôáèåñü óå üëï ôï ðáñáðÜíù äéÜóôçìá , åßôå üôé ï ðñïûðïëïãéóìüò èá åßíáé éóïóêåëéóìÝíïò áðü ôï 1999 êáé åîÞò . ¢ ëëåò ðáñáäï ÷ Ýò åßíáé : áýîçóç ðñáãìáôéêïý ÁÅÐ : 3,1% ôï 1998 , üðùò ôï åêôéìÜ ç ÅðéôñïðÞ , ðëçèùñéóìüò : 2 % êáé , óôï óåíÜñéï ôïõ ðñùôïãåíïýò áðïôåëÝóìáôïò , ïíïìáóôéêü åðéôüêéï 6 %.
Source : European Commission ( spring 1998 forecasts ) and EMI calculations . Note : The three scenarios assume that the debt ratio of 70.0% of GDP for 1998 is as forecast and that the 1998 overall balance of - 1.6% of GDP or the primary balance of 3.3% of GDP will be kept constant over the period considered ( as a percentage of GDP ) , or , alternatively , that a balanced budget is maintained from 1999 onwards .
Ïëëáíäßá : Äåßêôçò åîÜñôçóçò çëéêéùìÝíùí : ðñïâëÝøåéò 1990 Äåßêôçò åîÜñôçóçò çëéêéùìÝíùí ( ðëçèõóìüò 65 åôþí êáé Üíù åðß ôïõ óõíüëïõ ôïõ ðëçèõóìïý çëéêßáò 15-64 åôþí ) 19,1 20,8 24,2 33,9 45,1 ÐçãÞ : Bos , E. et al. ( 1994 ) , World population projections 1994-95 , ÄéåèíÞò ÔñÜðåæá , ÏõÜóéãêôïí . 2000
Netherlands : Projections of elderly dependency ratio 1990 Elderly dependency ratio ( population aged 65 and over as a proportion of the population aged 15-64 ) 19.1 2000 20.8 2010 24.2 2020 33.9 2030 45.1 Source : Bos , E. et al. ( 1994 ) , World population projections 1994-95 , World Bank , Washington DC .
( á ) Ïëëáíäßá : Óôáèåñüôçôá óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò ( 1 Ìáñôßïõ 1996 - 27 Öåâñïõáñßïõ 1998 ) Óõììåôï ÷ Þ óôï Ìç ÷ áíéóìü Óõíáëëáãìáôéêþí Éóïôéìéþí ( ÌÓÉ ) Óõììåôï ÷ Þ áðü Õðïôßìçóç äéìåñïýò êåíôñéêÞò éóïôéìßáò ìå ðñùôïâïõëßá ôçò ÷ þñáò ÌÝãéóôåò ðñïò ôá Üíù (+) êáé ðñïò ôá êÜôù (-) áðïêëßóåéò áðü ôéò êåíôñéêÝò éóïôéìßåò óôï ðëÝãìá éóïôéìéþí ôïõ ÌÓÉ (%) Ýíáíôé ( á ) ÖñÜãêïõ Âåëãßïõ Êïñþíáò Äáíßáò ÌÜñêïõ Ãåñìáíßáò ÐåóÝôáò Éóðáíßáò ÖñÜãêïõ Ãáëëßáò Ëßñáò Éñëáíäßáò Ëßñáò Éôáëßáò Óåëéíßïõ Áõóôñßáò Åóêïýäïõ Ðïñôïãáëßáò ÌÜñêïõ Öéëáíäßáò 0,5 2,0 0,8 0,5 2,8 4,6 1,3 0,8 1,8 - 0,2 - 0,1 - 0,3 - 0,0 - 1,7 - 0,3 - 10,5 - 1,7 - 0,0 - 2,5 - 2,8 Íáé 13 Ìáñôßïõ 1979 ¼÷ é
( a ) Netherlands : Exchange rate stability ( 1 March 1996 - 27 February 1998 ) Membership of the Exchange Rate Mechanism ( ERM ) Membership since Devaluation of bilateral central rate on country 's own initiative Maximum upward (+) and downward (-) deviations from central rates in the ERM grid (%) against ( a ) Belgian franc Danish krone Deutsche Mark Spanish peseta French franc Irish pound Italian lira Austrian schilling Portuguese escudo Finnish markka
Ïé áðïêëßóåéò Ýíáíôé ôïõ ìÜñêïõ Öéëáíäßáò áöïñïýí ôçí ðåñßïäï áðü 14 Ïêôùâñßïõ 1996 êáé åîÞò , åíþ ïé áðïêëßóåéò Ýíáíôé ôçò ëßñáò Éôáëßáò áöïñïýí ôçí ðåñßïäï áðü 25 Íïåìâñßïõ 1996 êáé åîÞò . ( â ) Âáóéêïß äåßêôåò ðéÝóåùí óôï öéïñßíé Ïëëáíäßáò ÌÝóïò üñïò 3 ìçíþí Ýùò : Ìåôáâëçôüôçôá óõíáëëáã / êÞò éóïôéìßáò ( á )
Deviations against the Finnish markka refer to the period from 14 October 1996 onwards , while deviations against the Italian lira refer to the period from 25 November 1996 onwards .
98 0,5 - 0,6 0,5 - 0,5 0,3 - 0,4 0,3 - 0,2 0,4 - 0,1 0,3 0,0 0,2 0,0 0,1 - 0,1 ÄéáöïñÝò âñá ÷ õðñüèåóìùí åðéôïêßùí ( â )
( b ) Key indicators of exchange rate pressure for the Dutch guilder Average of 3 months ending : Exchange rate volatility ( a ) Short-term interest rate differentials ( b ) May 96 Aug 96 Nov 96 Feb 97 May 97 Aug 97 Nov 97 Feb 98 0.5 - 0.6 0.5 - 0.5 0.3 - 0.4 0.3 - 0.2 0.4 - 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 - 0.1
éóïôéìßåò ÌÓÉ ( çìåñÞóéá óôïé ÷ åßá , óå åêáôïóôéáßåò ìïíÜäåò , 1.3.96 - 27.2.98 ) NLG / BEF NLG / DKK NLG / DEM NLG / ESP NLG / FRF
1 March 1996 to 27 February 1998 ) NLG / BEF 15 10 5 0 - 5 - 10 - 15 Q2 1996 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 1997 Q3 Q4 Q1 NLG / DKK NLG / DEM NLG / ESP NLG / FRF
NLG / IEP
NLG / IEP 15 10 5 0 - 5 - 10 - 15 Q2
Ðßíáêáò 9
Table 9 Dutch guilder : Measures of the real effective exchange rate vis - - vis ERM Member States ( monthly data ;
Öéïñßíé Ïëëáíäßáò : Äåßêôåò ðñáãìáôéêÞò óôáèìéóìÝíçò óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞò éóïôéìßáò Ýíáíôé ôùí Êñáôþí-Ìåëþí ôïõ ÌÓÉ ÌÝóïò üñïò ÐñáãìáôéêÝò óôáèìéóìÝíåò óõíáëëáãìáôéêÝò éóïôéìßåò : ÂÜóåé ôïõ ÄÔÊ ÂÜóåé ôïõ Äåßêôç Ôéìþí Ðáñáãùãïý /× ïíäñéêÞò Õðüìíçóç : ÏíïìáóôéêÞ óôáèìéóìÝíç óõíáëëáãìáôéêÞ éóïôéìßá 11,9 1,8 - 3,1 3,9 - 0,3 2,5 ÌÝóïò üñïò
February 1998 compared with different benchmark periods ) Average Apr 73-Feb 98 Real effective exchange rates : CPI-based PPI / WPI-based Memo item : Nominal effective exchange rate Source : BIS and EMI calculations .
( ìçíéáßá óôïé ÷ åßá , åêáôïóôéáßåò áðïêëßóåéò , ÖåâñïõÜñéïò 1998 óå óýãêñéóç ìå äéáöïñåôéêÝò ðåñéüäïõò âÜóçò ) ÌÝóïò üñïò 1987 - 3,2 3,2 4,8 Áðñ .
Note : A positive ( negative ) sign indicates an appreciation ( depreciation ) . Average Jan 87-Feb 98 - 0.3 2.5 1.8
73 - Öåâ . 98 Éáí .
Average 1987 - 3.2 3.2 4.8
Ïëëáíäßá : ÅîùôåñéêÝò åîåëßîåéò ( ùò ðïóïóôü ôïõ ÁÅÐ ) 1990 Éóïæýãéï ôñå ÷ ïõóþí óõíáëëáãþí óõí êßíçóç êåöáëáßùí ( â ) ÊáèáñÞ èåôéêÞ (+) Þ áñíçôéêÞ (-) åîùô . èÝóç ( ã ) ÅîáãùãÝò ( áãáèÜ êáé õðçñåóßåò )( ä ) ÅéóáãùãÝò ( áãáèÜ êáé õðçñåóßåò )( å ) 20,9 54,2 49,5 20,9 55,4 50,4 17,7 55,9 50,4 19,8 56,3 49,0 16,9 58,2 50,7 13,4 60,9 53,1 .
Current account plus new capital account ( b ) Net foreign assets (+) or liabilities (-) ( c ) Exports ( goods and services )( d ) Imports ( goods and services ) ( e ) 1990 3.2 20.9 54.2 49.5
61,7 54,2 . 63,2 55,7 3,2 1991 2,6 1992 2,3 1993 4,4 1994 5,3 1995 5,9 1996 1997 ( á ) 5,2 7,3
1995 5.9 13.4 60.9 53.1 1996 1997 ( a ) 5.2 7.3 .
( ä ) ÅíäïêïéíïôéêÝò åîáãùãÝò åðß ôïõ óõíüëïõ ôùí åèíéêþí åîáãùãþí áãáèþí , 1996 : 78,1% , Direction of Trade Statistics Yearbook 1997 , ÄÍÔ .
( d ) In 1996 the share of intra-EU exports of goods in total national exports of goods was 78.1% ; Direction of Trade Statistics Yearbook 1997 , IMF .
( å ) ÅíäïêïéíïôéêÝò åéóáãùãÝò åðß ôïõ óõíüëïõ ôùí åèíéêþí åéóáãùãþí áãáèþí , 1996 : 60,0% .
( e ) In 1996 the share of intra-EU imports of goods in total national imports of goods was 60.0% ;
Ïëëáíäßá : Ìáêñïðñüèåóìá åðéôüêéá ( åðß ôïéò åêáôü ) 1996 Ìáêñïðñüèåóìï åðéôüêéï ÔéìÞ áíáöïñÜò ÐçãÞ : ÅõñùðáúêÞ ÅðéôñïðÞ .
Netherlands : Long-term interest rates ( percentages ) 1996 Long-term interest rate Reference value Source : European Commission .
ÍïÝ . 97 5,5 -
Nov 97 5.5 -
ÁÕÓÔÑÉÁ Ç åîÝëéîç ôùí ôéìþí Óôç äéÜñêåéá ôçò ðåñéüäïõ áíáöïñÜò ( ÖåâñïõÜñéïò 1997-ÉáíïõÜñéïò 1998 ) ï ìÝóïò ñõèìüò ðëçèùñéóìïý âÜóåé ôïõ ÅíÄÔÊ óôçí Áõóôñßá Þôáí 1,1% , äçë . áñêåôÜ êÜôù áðü ôçí ôéìÞ áíáöïñÜò 2,7% .
198 AUSTRIA Price developments Over the reference period from February 1997 to January 1998 the average rate of HICP inflation in Austria was 1.1% , i.e. well below the reference value of 2.7% .
Ôï ßäéï óõíÝâç óå üëç ôç äéÜñêåéá ôïõ 1997 .
This was also the case in 1997 as a whole .
Ôï 1996 ï ìÝóïò ðëçèùñéóìüò âÜóåé ôïõ ÅíÄÔÊ Þôáí 1,8% ( âë . Ðßíáêá 1 ) .
In 1996 average HICP inflation was 1.8% ( see Table 1 ) .
Áðü ôçí åîÝôáóç ôùí ìÝ ÷ ñé óÞìåñá åîåëßîåùí ðñïêýðôåé üôé ï ðëçèùñéóìüò óôçí Áõóôñßá , üðùò ìåôñÜôáé âÜóåé ôïõ ÄÔÊ , åß ÷ å ðôùôéêÞ ôÜóç ìåôÜ ôï 1992 ( âë . ÄéÜãñáììá 1 ) .
Looking back , consumer price inflation in Austria , as measured on the basis of the CPI , has followed a downward trend after 1992 ( see Chart 1 ) .
¸ öèáóå óôï õøçëüôåñï óçìåßï ( 4,1% ) ôï 1992 êáé ìåéùíüôáí ôá åðüìåíá ÷ ñüíéá .
Inflation peaked at 4.1% in 1992 before declining in subsequent years .
Ç íïìéóìáôéêÞ ðïëéôéêÞ óõíÝ ÷ éóå íá êáèïñßæåôáé áðü ôï óôü ÷ ï ôçò óôåíÞò óýíäåóçò ôïõ áõóôñéáêïý óåëéíßïõ ìå ôï ãåñìáíéêü ìÜñêï , áðü ôïí ÉáíïõÜñéï 1995 óôï ðëáßóéï ôïõ ÌÓÉ .
Monetary policy has continued to be determined by the objective of closely linking the Austrian schilling to the Deutsche Mark , since January 1995 within the framework of the ERM .
Ï ãåíéêüò áõôüò ðñïóáíáôïëéóìüò õðïóôçñß ÷ èçêå åðßóçò áðü ðïëéôéêÝò ðïõ åðéäßùêáí íá åíèáññýíïõí ôï ìåôñéáóìü ôùí ìéóèïëïãéêþí áõîÞóåùí , áðü ôïí áõîçìÝíï äéåèíÞ áíôáãùíéóìü ùò ðñïò ôéò ôéìÝò ìåôÜ ôçí Ýíôáîç ôçò Áõóôñßáò óôçí ÅÅ ôï 1995 êáé áðü ôéò ðñïóðÜèåéåò äçìïóéïíïìéêÞò åîõãßáíóçò .
This general orientation has also been supported by policies seeking to encourage wage moderation , increased foreign price competition following Austria s accession to the EU in 1995 and consolidation efforts of fiscal policy .
Åéäéêüôåñá , óôï ðëáßóéï ôçò åðéâñÜäõíóçò ôçò ïéêïíïìéêÞò äñáóôçñéüôçôáò ôï 1992-1993 êáé ôçò ìÝôñéáò ìüíï áýîçóçò ôïõ ÁÅÐ óôá åðüìåíá Ýôç , óôáäéáêÜ ðñïÝêõøå áñíçôéêü ðáñáãùãéêü êåíü ( âë . Ðßíáêá 2 ) .
In particular , in the context of the slowdown in economic activity in 199293 and only modest GDP growth since then , a negative output gap has gradually emerged ( see Table 2 ) .
¸ ôóé , ïé ìéóèïëïãéêÝò áõîÞóåéò áíÜ áðáó ÷ ïëïýìåíï ðåñéïñßóôçêáí êáé ç Üíïäïò ôïõ ïíïìáóôéêïý êüóôïõò åñãáóßáò áíÜ ìïíÜäá ðñïúüíôïò õðÞñîå õðïôïíéêÞ áðü ôï 1994 .
Against this background , growth in compensation per employee has been restrained , and the increase in nominal unit labour costs has been subdued since 1994 .
× áìçëïß ñõèìïß ðëçèùñéóìïý ðñïêýðôïõí åðßóçò êáé ìå âÜóç Üëëïõò óõíáöåßò äåßêôåò ôéìþí ( âë . Ðßíáêá 2 ) .
Low rates of inflation are also apparent when it is measured in terms of other relevant price indices ( see Table 2 ) .
¼ óïí áöïñÜ ôéò ðñüóöáôåò ôÜóåéò êáé ðñïâëÝøåéò , ïé óçìåñéíÝò åðéäüóåéò ùò ðñïò ôïí ðëçèùñéóìü , ìå âÜóç ôï 12ìçíï ñõèìü áýîçóçò ôïõ äåßêôç ôéìþí êáôáíáëùôÞ , äåß ÷ íïõí üôé ïé ìçíéáßïé ñõèìïß ðëçèùñéóìïý åßíáé óôáèåñïß ãýñù óôï 1 %, áëëÜ õðÜñ ÷ ïõí êÜðïéåò åíäåßîåéò üôé èá áóêçèïýí áíïäéêÝò ðéÝóåéò , üðùò ðñïêýðôåé áðü ôïõò äåßêôåò ôïõ Ðßíáêá 3á .
Looking at recent trends and forecasts , current outturns for consumer price inflation ( measured as a percentage change over the corresponding month a year earlier ) indicate that monthly rates of inflation have been stable at around 1 % but there are some signs of upward pressure on the basis of the measures shown in Table 3a .
ÐñïâëÝðïíôáé ñõèìïß ðëçèùñéóìïý ãýñù óôï 1,5% ãéá ôï 1998 êáé ôï 1999 ( âë . Ðßíáêá 3â ) .
Forecasts of inflation suggest rates of around 1‰ % for 1998 and 1999 ( see Table 3b ) .
ÄçìïóéïíïìéêÝò åîåëßîåéò Óôï Ýôïò áíáöïñÜò ( 1997 ) , ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò ôïõ åõñýôåñïõ êõâåñíçôéêïý ôïìÝá Þôáí 2,5% , äçë . ÷ áìçëüôåñïò áðü ôçí ôéìÞ áíáöïñÜò 3 %, êáé ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò Þôáí 66,1% ôïõ ÁÅÐ , äçë .
Fiscal developments In the reference year 1997 the general government deficit ratio was 2.5% , i.e. below the 3 % reference value , and the debt ratio was 66.1% , i.e. above the 60 % reference value .
õøçëüôåñïò áðü ôçí ôéìÞ áíáöïñÜò 60 %. Óå óýãêñéóç ìå ôï ðñïçãïýìåíï Ýôïò , ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò ìåéþèçêå êáôÜ 1,5 åêáôïóôéáßá ìïíÜäá êáé ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò êáôÜ 3,4 åêáôïóôéáßåò ìïíÜäåò .
Compared with the previous year , the deficit ratio has been reduced by 1.5 percentage points and the debt ratio has decreased by 3.4 percentage points .
Ôï 1998 , 217 ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò ðñïâëÝðåôáé íá ìåéùèåß óôï 2,3% ôïõ ÁÅÐ , åíþ ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò óôï 64,7% .
In 1998 the deficit ratio is forecast to decline to 2.3% of GDP , while the debt ratio is projected to decrease to 64.7% .
Ôï 1996 ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò õðåñÝâç ôï ëüãï ôùí äáðáíþí äçìüóéùí åðåíäýóåùí ðñïò ôï ÁÅÐ , åíþ ôï 1997 ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò áíáìÝíåôáé íá åßíáé ó ÷ åäüí ï ßäéïò ìå ôï ëüãï ôùí åðåíäýóåùí ( âë . Ðßíáêá 4 ) .
In 1996 the deficit ratio exceeded the ratio of public investment expenditure to GDP , while in 1997 the deficit ratio is expected to be virtually identical to the investment ratio ( see Table 4 ) .
Áðü ôçí åîÝôáóç ôùí åôþí 1990-1997 ðñïêýðôåé üôé óôçí Áõóôñßá ï ëüãïò ÷ ñÝïõò / ÁÅÐ áõîÞèçêå êáôÜ 8,2 åêáôïóôéáßåò ìïíÜäåò .
Looking back over the years 1990 to 1997 , the Austrian debt-to-GDP ratio increased by 8.2 percentage points .
ÌÝ ÷ ñé ôï 1992 ï ëüãïò áõôüò åß ÷ å ðáñáìåßíåé áìåôÜâëçôïò ãýñù óôï 58 % êáé áêïëïýèùò áõîáíüôáí áðü ÷ ñüíï óå ÷ ñüíï , öèÜíïíôáò óå åðßðåäï 69,5% ôï 1996 , åíþ åí óõíå ÷ åßá ìåéþèçêå óå 66,1% ôï 1997 ( âë . ÄéÜãñáììá 2á ) , äçë .
Until 1992 the debt ratio had remained stable at around 58 %, 199 while the ratio increased year by year thereafter to reach 69.5% in 1996 before declining to 66.1% in 1997 ( see Chart 2a ) , i.e. a decline of 3.4 percentage points in one year .
¼ ðùò áðåéêïíßæåôáé ëåðôïìåñÝóôåñá óôï ÄéÜãñáììá 2â , ôï 1991-92 õðÞñ ÷ áí ðñùôïãåíÞ ðëåïíÜóìáôá éêáíÜ íá áíôéóôáèìßóïõí ôéò áíïäéêÝò ðéÝóåéò ðïõ õðÝóôç ï ëüãïò ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò åîáéôßáò Üëëùí ðáñáãüíôùí .
As shown in greater detail in Chart 2b , in 1991-92 primary surpluses were sufficiently high to compensate for the upward pressure exerted on the debt ratio by other factors .
Ìüíï ôï 1997 ìðüñåóå íá áíáóôñáöåß áõôÞ ç ôÜóç , êõñßùò ÷ Üñç óôá Ýóïäá áðü ôéò éäéùôéêïðïéÞóåéò , óôéò ðùëÞóåéò ÷ ñçìáôïïéêïíïìéêþí áðáéôÞóåùí êáé óôçí åðáíÝíôáîç ïñéóìÝíùí äçìüóéùí åðé ÷ åéñÞóåùí óôïí éäéùôéêü ôïìÝá ( âë . ôçí ðñïóáñìïãÞ ôùí ìåôáâëçôþí ñïÞò êáé ôùí ìåôáâëçôþí áðïèÝìáôïò ) .
Only in 1997 could this trend be reversed , largely as a result of privatisation receipts , sales of financial claims and the reclassification of certain public companies to the private sector ( see the stock-flow adjustment items ) .
Ç åîÝëéîç ðïõ ðáñáôçñåßôáé óôç äåêáåôßá ôïõ 1990 ìðïñåß íá èåùñçèåß åíäåéêôéêÞ ôùí êéíäýíùí ðïõ ìðïñïýí íá ðñïêýøïõí ó ÷ åôéêÜ ìå ôï ëüãï ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò üôáí õðÜñ ÷ åé áñíçôéêÞ äéáöïñÜ ìåôáîý áíÜðôõîçò êáé åðéôïêßùí êáé ôï ðñùôïãåíÝò ðëåüíáóìá äåí åßíáé áñêåôÜ õøçëü þóôå íá áíôéóôáèìßóåé ôéò åðéðôþóåéò óôï ÷ ñÝïò ðïõ ðñïÝñ ÷ ïíôáé áðü ôï ìáêñïïéêïíïìéêü ðåñéâÜëëïí .
The patterns observed thus far during the 1990s may be seen as indicative of the risks to the debt ratio which can arise when there is an unfavourable growth / interest rate differential and the primary surplus is not sufficiently high to compensate for the effects on debt resulting from the macroeconomic environment .
ðëáßóéï áõôü , óçìåéþíåôáé üôé ôï ôìÞìá ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò ìå ìéêñÞ åíáðïìÝíïõóá äéÜñêåéá åßíáé óçìáíôéêü êáé üôé ç ìÝóç äéÜñêåéá ôåßíåé íá ìåéùèåß ( âë . Ðßíáêá 5 ) .
In this context , it may be noted that the share of debt with a short-term residual maturity is noticeable and that the average maturity has tended to decrease ( see Table 5 ) .
Ùò ðñïò ôï 1997 , ëáìâáíïìÝíïõ õðüøç ôïõ óçìåñéíïý åðéðÝäïõ ôïõ ëüãïõ ôïõ ÷ ñÝïõò , ôá äçìïóéïíïìéêÜ áðïôåëÝóìáôá ó ÷ åôéêÜ äåí åßíáé åõáßóèçôá óôéò ìåôáâïëÝò ôùí åðéôïêßùí .
With regard to 1997 , taking into account the current level of the debt ratio , fiscal balances are relatively insensitive to changes in interest rates .
Óôç äéÜñêåéá ôçò äåêáåôßáò ôïõ 1990 ç ðáñáôçñïýìåíç ðïñåßá ôïõ ëüãïõ åëëåßììáôïò / ÁÅÐ Þôáí ç åîÞò : áñ ÷ éêÜ ðáñÝìåéíå áìåôÜâëçôïò , áêïëïýèùò ÷ åéñïôÝñåõóå êáé êáôüðéí âåëôéþèçêå .
During the 1990s a pattern of first stable , then deteriorating and subsequently improving outturns can be observed in the deficit-to-GDP ratio .
Áñ ÷ ßæïíôáò áðü 2,4% ôï 1990 , ï ëüãïò ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò áñ ÷ éêÜ âåëôéþèçêå öèÜíïíôáò ôï 2,0% ôï 1992 .
Starting from a ratio of 2.4% in 1990 , the deficit first improved to 2.0% in 1992 ; it deteriorated thereafter , reaching a peak of 5.2% of GDP in 1995 .
Åí óõíå ÷ åßá ÷ åéñïôÝñåõóå , öèÜíïíôáò Ýùò êáé 5,2% ôïõ ÁÅÐ ôï 1995 , åíþ óôá ôåëåõôáßá äýï Ýôç õðÞñîå âåëôßùóç ôïõ ëüãïõ , ï ïðïßïò ðåñéïñßóôçêå óôï 2,5% ôï 1997 ( âë . ÄéÜãñáììá 3á ) .
Finally , an improvement took place in the 200 past two years , with the ratio being reduced to 2.5% in 1997 ( see Chart 3a ) .
 Ïðùò öáßíåôáé áíáëõôéêüôåñá óôï ÄéÜãñáììá 3â , ôï ïðïßï åðéêåíôñþíåôáé óôéò ìåôáâïëÝò ôùí åëëåéììÜôùí , êõêëéêïß ðáñÜãïíôåò óõíÝâáëáí óôçí Ýíôïíç Üíïäï ôïõ åëëåßììáôïò ôï 1993 , áíôáíáêëþíôáò ôç âáèìéáßá åîáóèÝíçóç ôçò èåáìáôéêÞò ïéêïíïìéêÞò áíüäïõ ôùí ðñïçãïýìåíùí åôþí , áëëÜ ï ñüëïò ôïõò ðåñéïñßóôçêå óôá åðüìåíá Ýôç .
As is shown in greater detail in Chart 3b , which focuses on changes in deficits , cyclical factors contributed to the sharp increase in deficit in 1993 , reflecting the fading of the boom of the preceding years , but played less of a role thereafter .
Ôá äéáèÝóéìá óôïé ÷ åßá õðïäçëþíïõí üôé ìÝôñá ìå ðñïóùñéíÞ åðßäñáóç ðåñéüñéóáí ôï Ýëëåéììá êáôÜ 0,5% ôïõ ÁÅÐ ôï 1997 , óå óýãêñéóç ìå 0,2% ôïõ ÁÅÐ ôï 1996 .
Evidence available suggests that measures with a temporary effect reduced the deficit by 0.5% of GDP in 1997 , compared with 0.2% of GDP in 1996 .