Well-being elsewhere
As many goods and services consumers use are produced in other countries, choices Dutch consumers make to preserve or improve their sense of well-being indirectly also affect people living there, in terms of local jobs, income, resources and the environment.
Impact on the rest of the world
Here we describe the impact of Dutch well-being on the rest of the world, and particularly on the 46 least developed countries (LDCs) designated by the UN. International trade is a lifeline for a relatively small and open economy like the Netherlands. The dimension well-being ‘elsewhere’ distinguishes two themes: trade and aid, and environment and resources. The first theme describes the generally positive effects of Dutch international trade on the well-being of its trade partners; the second deals with the predominantly negative effects from the perspective of the environment.
Well-being and migration
Migration affects all dimensions of Dutch well-being. A bigger population means more pressure on domestic natural resources, on housing and on available space. The arrival of migrants in communities also affects social cohesion there, in terms of their integration and of concerns local residents may have (Netherlands Institute for Social Research (SCP, 2022).
On the basis of the CES Recommendations for Measuring Sustainable Development (UNECE, 2014), migration can be viewed as part of the ‘elsewhere’ dimension of well-being. We interpret it as specifically referring to the effect of immigration to and emigration from the Netherlands on well-being in the rest of the world, and not to the effect of migration on well-being in the Netherlands. According to the scientific literature referenced during the preparation of the first Monitor of Well-being in 2017, effects of human capital migration do not all point in the same direction: migration does not lead to just ‘brain drain’ or ‘brain gain’, but more often to ‘brain circulation’. For this reason, the dashboard for well-being ‘elsewhere’ contains only income transfers, and no other migration indicators.
It is difficult to determine how migration affects certain aspects of well-being ‘here and now’, ‘later’ and ‘elsewhere’. The relationship between migration and well-being is a complex one and cannot be captured in one indicator. Scientific evidence for the effects of immigration and emigration on the country of destination is ambiguous, and outcomes are often the result of offsetting positive and negative effects, not one absolute effect. In addition, these effects vary for different groups, and are valued differently. And lastly: whose well-being is the focus here? That of the migrant or that of the people already living in the Netherlands? The monitor describes the well-being of everybody living in the Netherlands, regardless of background, nationality or residential status.
The data presented in the monitor already incorporate some indirect effects of migration. For example, migration results in a larger population and many indicators in the monitor are expressed per capita. So population growth caused by migration is taken into account in these figures. For totals (e.g. total greenhouse gas emissions), population growth (i.e. net immigration) contributes to these total figures, although to exactly what extent is difficult to determine.
The Netherlands has strong trade relations with other countries. In 2021 nearly 32.6 percent of GDP was accounted for by exports of goods and services. Relatively many re-exports are destined for countries closest to the Netherlands – Germany, Belgium and France. Re-exports are goods imported into the Netherlands, enter Dutch ownership, and leave the country again without being further altered. Goods entering and leaving the country unaltered, but not under Dutch ownership are defined as transit trade. As re-exports and transit goods are not destined for the Dutch market, these trade flows are often viewed as posing less of a burden on the Netherlands. But Dutch companies do make a profit from these economic activities, and these forms of trade also lead to pressure on the Dutch environment. Many products manufactured in the Netherlands are exported to the United Kingdom and the United States. Dutch imports come mostly from Germany, followed by China and Belgium.
Colour codes and notes to the dashboards in the Monitor of Well-being
Trade and aid
Environment and resources
Trade and aid
Environment and resources
Resilience and well-being ‘elsewhere’
Trade and aid
Value of trade rising, partly pushed up by price increases
This theme looks at how the Netherlands contributes to well-being in other countries. In this context, in line with the Brundtland Report Our Common Future, the monitor focuses on income flows between the Netherlands and LDCs.
The medium-term trend in the total value of goods imports per capita is upward: the trend is green, as more trade is viewed as favourable for well-being of trade partners. Imports of goods from Europe, America, Asia and Oceania are growing, while for imports from African countries the trend is stable. The value of imports per capita from LDCs also shows an upward trend. As a result of sanctions against Russia and higher prices, the value of fossil fuels in particular imported from LDCs was substantially higher. Within the EU the Netherlands is the second largest importer of goods from LDCs after Belgium, and many of these goods enter the EU through the major seaports in these two countries.
Migrants living in the Netherlands are sending more money to their country of origin: 1.6 percent of GDP in 2021, up from 1.3 percent in 2015. The medium-trend is rising. The money transfers comprise wages and salaries of non-residents in the Netherlands, part of which is spent in or benefits the country of origin. These remittances help people living in other countries to make a living and this is seen as positive for well-being ‘elsewhere’. The trend is stable for the percentage of gross national income (GNI) spent on development aid: in 2021 it amounted to 0.5 percent. In 1970 UN member countries agreed to spend 0.7 percent of annual GNI on development assistance (the OECD standard). Only four EU countries (Sweden, Luxembourg, Germany and Denmark) achieved with this norm in 2021; the Netherlands is in fifth place behind these four.
Environment and resources
Living beyond our means
Every year, the Global Footprint Network Earth organisation calculates the impact that humanity has on earth: ‘Overshoot Day’ is the date on which the planet can still recover from the amount of renewable raw materials that have been used up until then. The last time we managed to live within these planetary boundaries was over 50 years ago: in 1970 Overshoot Day fell on 29 December. Since then, it has come earlier and earlier each year, and in 2022 it was on 28 July. These calculations show that we have been living beyond our planetary means for decades. Moreover, if every global citizen had the same lifestyle as the Dutch, the date would fall even earlier: by 12 April we would have used the amount of resources it would take the planet a whole year to regenerate. Overshoot Day is calculated on the basis of the National Footprint and Biocapacity Accounts and published by the Footprint Data Foundation in collaboration with Global Footprint Network and York University, Toronto.
Continued overutilisation of raw materials and auxiliary products is not sustainable; it results in us passing on major – possibly irreparable – problems to future generations. See also planetary boundaries.
The footprint indicators show how much pressure the Netherlands is placing on the environment and resources in other countries. In contrast to the trade and aid theme, from this perspective less trade is more favourable for well-being. The dashboard comprises indicators on imported volumes of raw and auxiliary materials. With their key ports, the Netherlands and Belgium are major importers.
Only one indicator shows a red trend: imported volume of biomass switched from neutral to rising. Trends for imports of biomass from LDCs and total volume of imported fossil fuels have become more favourable, however: they were stable and are now downward, and both are green. Where the theme trade and aid views higher trade value as favourable for trade partners, the theme environment and resources centres on depletion of resources. From this point of view, a decrease in the volume of imported raw and auxiliary materials is favourable for the sustainability of natural resources elsewhere.
The raw material footprint amounted to 8.2 tonnes per capita in 2020, and shows a neutral trend. This figure is not definite; CBS is working on improving methods to calculate all its footprint indicators. The greenhouse gas footprint also shows a stable trend. It amounted to 15.9 tonnes of CO2 equivalents per capita in 2021, compared with 16.3 tonnes in 2019 and 13.5 tonnes in 2020. The latest land footprint from the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (0.6 hectare per capita in 2019) shows the total area of land needed in the world to meet the needs of Dutch consumers; the data are insufficient to calculate a trend, but the figure for 2017 was in the same order of magnitude.
Resilience and well-being ‘elsewhere’
Dutch well-being is vulnerable in terms of dependencies on the rest of the world. The country is now largely dependent on other countries for its energy supply. In addition, essential products such as computers and mobile phones, and other products like solar panels and electric cars, contain rare and expensive metals. Demand for these scarce raw materials is high, and well-being in the Netherlands will be at risk if the country does not itself have access to these raw materials and security of supply is under threat, for example due to geopolitical tensions.
The theme ‘cross-border dependencies’ in the resilience dashboard includes indicators on dependency on energy imports, economic dependence on exports and the greenhouse gas footprint.
Energy security was traditionally high in the Netherlands, but since natural gas extraction is steadily being phased out in Groningen, the country has become increasingly dependent on imports of energy from other countries (the medium-term trend is red). The geopolitical tensions in Russia and Ukraine have highlighted this vulnerability. With the energy transition gaining traction, more energy is now supplied by domestic (renewable) sources. The proportion of energy imported (from all sources) fell to 56 percent in 2021, and the trend switched from rising to neutral. In this respect it is relevant that the installations in the Netherlands needed to generate renewable energy are to a certain extent also imported, so this also involves a certain level of dependency. The trend in the economic dependence on exports is downward. This is viewed as favourable from the point of view resilience of well-being: as a country we are becoming less dependent on exports.