At the request of the Dutch Cabinet, CBS publishes the Monitor of Well-being & the Sustainable Development Goals annually on Accountability Day. The monitor describes how well-being in the Netherlands translates into quality of life ‘here and now’ and how the Dutch pursuit of well-being places pressure on future generations (well-being ‘later’) and on people in other countries (well-being ‘elsewhere’) .
This edition of the monitor covers 2019. It therefore does not address the huge impact of Covid-19 on many aspects of the Dutch economy and society. Since the second half of March this year, the global corona outbreak and the subsequent measures taken to contain it have resulted in an unprecedented plunge in economic activity. They have also changed the picture described by the social indicators used in the monitor. The significance of things like access to health care, social safety nets, trust in institutions and access to nature for purposes of well-being has been made very clear. The crisis illustrates once again how important it is to describe developments in society from the point of view of well-being.
Well-being ‘here and now’ high and rising
One of the main questions in public debate is how much the growth of gross domestic product benefits well-being. The results in this third edition of the monitor confirm that many aspects of well-being have improved in the period 2012-2019. Material well-being, income and consumption all show a clear increase. It should be noted, however, that while the volume of GDP has increased by more than 60 percent since 1995, real disposable income and the volume of household consumption have been slower to grow, with a rise of 40 percent. Non-material aspects of well-being have also improved in many areas: satisfaction with life, for example, has increased further in the Netherlands in recent years.
Some areas of well-being are under pressure, however. Traffic congestion is increasing, people are less satisfied with their amount of leisure time, and in line with this fewer of them are doing voluntary work and they have less of contact with family, friends and neighbours. This may be the downside of the already high labour participation rate, which has shown a further substantial increase in the last few years.
Trends in well-being: Here and now
Well-being ‘later’: increasing pressure on the environment
The economic capital necessary for long-term economic growth shows a mixed picture. The physical capital – the amount and quality of machinery, equipment and infrastructure – showed a declining trend in the period 2012-2019. This was offset by an clear increase in knowledge capital, however. The size of household debt, which is high compared to the rest of Europe, was also noticeable in this respect.
In terms of human capital, the Netherlands has seen important upward trends. Both the number of hours worked and the proportion of the population with a degree in higher education rose.
Social capital – often seen as the lubricant of society – is measured in terms of the quality of social networks. Social capital in the Netherlands is quite sizeable, and it is increasing. The Netherlands can be considered to be a high trust society in terms of trust in other people and in its most important institutions.
The Netherlands is at risk in the area of natural capital. Its nitrogen surplus is – in relative terms– one of the largest in Europe and its proportion of renewable energy one of the smallest. Nitrogen depositions exceeding the critical threshold to a greater or lesser extent affect just over seventy percent of natural land in the Netherlands. Added to this, all but one – which showed a neutral trend – biodiversity indicators are showing declining trends. The total area under nature management schemes is increasing.
Trends in well-being: Later
Well-being ‘elsewhere’: higher imports, including biomass and metal imports
Well-being elsewhere concerns the effects of the Dutch pursuit of well-being on the rest of the world. These include not only the positive effects that trade may have on employment and income in other countries, but also to what extent the Netherlands is using up scarce natural resources abroad.
While imports from Asia and Oceania show increasing rends, those from Africa have fallen. In principle, an increase in trade is seen as positive for well-being abroad: more trade may result in more employment opportunities and income. The relatively high proportion of GDP – compared to other countries in Europe – the Dutch spent on development cooperation is also a noticeable aspect in this regard.
Obviously, some forms of trade have a negative impact on well-being abroad. Imported volumes of biomass and metals, for example have shown increasing trends, as have imports of metals from the poorest countries. This is seen as negative for well-being from the perspective of sustainable levels of resources for future generations. Lastly, there has been a striking increase in the greenhouse gas footprint in 2019 from 2018.
Trends in well-being: Elsewhere
En route to a sustainable society
The monitor also examines how the Netherlands is moving towards becoming a sustainable society in the long term. To do this it looks at Dutch progress on the 17 Sustainable Development Goals formulated by the United Nations in 2015, on which 193 countries have built an agenda for sustainable development to be achieved by 2030.
Between 2012 en 2019, trends of the indicators used to quantify these goals have developed largely positively in the Netherlands. The country is on its way to realising the goals pertaining to gender equality (equal rights for men and women, equal positions in society) and decent work and economic growth (sustainable and productive use of capital, labour and raw materials).
Indicators of other goals are moving in a less positive direction: good health and well-being (the percentage of GDP spent on health care is decreasing, waiting lists for specialist care are increasing, more and more people are overweight), mobility and infrastructure (less spent on maintenance and development of infrastructure, decreasing investment in civil and hydraulic engineering projects), and housing (concerns about the feasibility of good quality, suitable, safe and affordable housing as residential construction is lagging, the large proportion of income people are having to spend on housing, and large mortgage debts).
Trends of indicators measured for each SDGplus
This figure shows the percentage share in the total number of indicators in the dashboard for each SDG.
40.0%
30.0%
30.0%
53.8%
38.5%
7.7%
13.3%
46.7%
40.0%
42.9%
35.7%
21.4%
61.5%
30.8%
7.7%
66.7%
22.2%
11.1%
70.0%
10.0%
20.0%
78.6%
7.1%
14.3%
46.7%
40.0%
13.3%
14.3%
50.0%
35.7%
41.7%
50.0%
8.3%
42.9%
50.0%
7.1%
7.7%
69.2%
23.1%
28.6%
42.9%
28.6%
21.4%
42.9%
35.7%
55.6%
11.1%
33.3%
38.5%
53.8%
7.7%
37.5%
50.0%
12.5%
75.0%
25.0%
8.3%
50.0%
41.7%
28.6%
64.3%
7.1%
44.4%
22.2%
33.3%
50.0%
50.0%
Status update of the SDGs in the Netherlands
Alongside the Monitor of Well-being & the Sustainable Development Goals 2020, Statistics Netherlands has drafted a status update of the official SDG indicators in as far as they can be measured for the Netherlands. This report provides a statistical update of progress towards the 17 SDGs in the Netherlands. It borrows two aspects from the Monitor of Well-being. The first concerns statistical methods to determine the direction of change over time and the performance of the Netherlands relative to other EU countries. The second aspect concerns the dashboard used to visualise the results. In addition to the statistical results for each individual SDG, it includes a short assessment of the quality of the current set of SDG indicators as used by Statistics Netherlands.
