Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

The Netherlands’ NAMEA; presentation, usageand future extensions

Steven J. Keuning *, Jan van Dalen, Mark de HaanStatistics Netherlands, Prinses Beatrixlaan 428, P.O. Box 4000, 2270 JM, Voorburg, The Netherlands

Accepted 27 October 1998

Abstract

The national accounting matrix including environmental accounts (NAMEA) containsfigures on environmental burdens in relation to economic developments as reflected in thenational accounts. In the NAMEA, existing national accounts matrices have been extendedwith accounts in physical units. Since 1994, the NAMEA is a regular part of the annualDutch national accounts. In this article, an aggregate NAMEA will be described. Next, thecontribution of economic activities to economic indicators is compared with their contribu-tion to environmental themes, both based on the information in the NAMEA. In addition,the cumulative contribution of economic activities to economic and environmental indicatorsare also given, thus taking into account the relations between the production activities.Finally, a number of recent applications and extensions of the NAMEA in the Netherlandsare described. © 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: NAMEA; Environment; Greenhouse effect

JEL classification: C82

1. Introduction

Since 1994, the standard national accounts publication in the Netherlands (CBS,1998) has contained not only the conventional economic accounts and indicators,but also: (1) an integrated system of environmental and economic accounts,indicated as the national accounting matrix including environmental accounts(NAMEA); and (2) an integrated system of labour accounts, economic accounts

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +31-70-3374823; e-mail: skng@cbs.nl.

0954-349X/99/$ - see front matter © 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.PII: S0954 -349X(98 )00058 -7

16 S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

and income distribution accounts, better known as a social accounting matrix(SAM); cf. Chapter XX of the 1993 SNA (United Nations et al., 1993).

The Dutch NAMEA-system yields consistent estimates for all conventionaleconomic aggregates as well as for five summary environmental indicators. Moreimportantly, this system enables a comparison between the contribution of alleconomic activities to conventional policy goals (GDP, exports, employment, etc.)and their contribution to major environmental problems (greenhouse effect, ozonelayer depletion, acidification, etc.).

Following the NAMEA’s conceptual design by Keuning (1993), in co-operationwith others, the first ‘pilot’ NAMEA for the Netherlands was compiled in 1993.This pilot greatly benefited from the work carried out on environmental indicatorsat the Ministry of the Environment (Adriaanse, 1993). Subsequently, the DutchNational Accounts Advisory Committee, a sub-committee of the Central StatisticalCommittee that decides upon the CBS work programme, advised a regular compi-lation of this framework. Since 1994, the National Accounts Department and theEnvironment Statistics Department at the CBS jointly compile a NAMEA everyyear. At present, the NAMEA becomes available approximately two-and-a-halfyears after the reference year. Each NAMEA is fully consistent with the nationalaccounts for the same year.

The first release of this new system was the subject of an ‘Economics Focus’ inThe Economist (1993); it also made it to the front page of a leading Dutch morningpaper, under the title ‘Importance agriculture outweighed by environmental damageby this sector’ (De Volkskrant, 1993). Although this head-line did not do full justiceto the nuances in the press release by Statistics Netherlands, it provides anindication of the kind of messages that can be conveyed by the NAMEA. Partly asa consequence of this type of information, stringent measures to reduce thephosphorus and nitrogen emissions by factory farms have recently been approvedby the Dutch Parliament. Besides, a recent report by the World Resources Institutesignalises that the summary environmental indicators, combined with informationon the relative contribution of each industry, have played a stimulating role inreaching voluntary agreements between the Dutch government and industry repre-sentatives on a significant reduction of toxic emissions (Hammond et al., 1995).

At present, a consistent time-series of NAMEAs is available for the years1986–1992 and another one for the years 1993–1996. CBS (1996a) discussessources and methods at some length; see also De Haan et al., 1994. TheseNAMEAs cover the depletion of two types of natural resources—crude oil andnatural gas—as well as six types of environmental degradation, i.e. the greenhouseeffect, ozone layer depletion, acidification, eutrophication, waste and waste water.Each of these problems are monitored with the help of a single summary indicator.All problems concerned have also been identified in the National EnvironmentPolicy Plans (Netherlands Ministry of Housing, 1989, 1993), as approved by theDutch Parliament. Thus, the NAMEA generates consistent summary indicators forthose environmental problems which are considered most pressing at the politicallevel. This is discussed in Section 2.

17S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

2. An aggregate NAMEA1

In the Netherlands’ NAMEA, a standard national accounting matrix is extendedby two accounts describing the environment (Tables 1a and 1b) which include asubstances account (account 11, Tables 1a and 1b) and an account for environmen-tal themes, local, national as well as global (account 12). These accounts presentinformation on environmental facts, and are thus expressed in physical units2. Boththe pollution generated by economic activities and the accumulation of hazardousagents in the Dutch environment are incorporated in these supplementary accounts.The accumulation is equal to the domestic generation of pollutants, minus theirabsorption by environmental cleansing (e.g. waste water treatment) and minus thebalance of trans-boundary pollutant flows to and from other countries.

Accounts 1–10 contain a summary of the transactions in the regular nationalaccounting matrix. Transactions which are relevant to the environment are shownseparately. For instance, account 2a isolates the consumption of environmentalservices (e.g. the extra costs of cars fitted with catalytic converters) from theconsumption of other goods and services. The NAMEA fulfils all requirements ofmatrix accounting, as set out in Section XX.B of the 1993 System of NationalAccounts (United Nations et al., 1993); this means, for instance, that receipts arereflected in the rows and outlays in the columns. Most of the accounts contain abalancing item in the column, defined as the difference between total receipts in therow and the total outlays in the column. These balancing items ensure that row andcolumn totals are the same for each account, which in turn guarantees theconsistency of the entire accounting system. Of course, currency units and physicalunits are not added up. Tables 1a and 1b presents the 1994 aggregate NAMEA forthe Netherlands. The rest of this section gives a concise description of the entries inthis table.

The first row and column contain the goods and services account. Intermediateand final use are presented in the row, while total domestic and foreign supply arepresented in the column. Taxes, less subsidies, on products are recorded in aseparate tax account (account 8), which is classified by tax type. In the mostdetailed NAMEA, six kinds of environmental levies are distinguished. The environ-mental product tax (cell 8a, 1b) concerns the energy tax, which has been introducedto curtail CO2-emissions.

The supply and use of environmental cleansing services is reflected separately, inaccount 1a. Two types of environmental cleansing are distinguished in theNAMEA: internal and external environmental cleansing. External cleansing ser-vices are sold to other economic activities (intermediate consumption), to thegovernment and to households (private consumption). These services, such as thecollection and incineration of waste, are also incorporated in the standard national

1 This section is based on De Haan and Keuning (1996).2 See the introductory article to this issue and Keuning (1993) for arguments against an imputation of

hypothetical prices to physical flows within an accounting framework.

18S

.J.K

euninget

al./S

tructuralC

hangeand

Econom

icD

ynamics

10(1999)

15–

37

Table 1aA national accounting matrix including environmental accounts (NAMEA) for the Netherlands, 1994 (account 1–10 in million guilders)

CapitalGoods and services Taxes (tax categories)Consumption of householdsAccount Production Distribution Rest of the worldGeneration of(product-groups) (purposes) (kind of eco- currentand use of in-(classification) income (value

nomic activ- added cate- come (sectors)ity) gories)

Env. Services Other goods OtherEnvironment Other purposes Environmen-and services taxestal taxes

1a 1b 2a 2b 3 4 5 6 8a 8b 9

ConsumptionTrade and Gross capitalConsumption Exports (fob)Goods and Intermediateformationof govern-transport consumptionservices of house-

ment(product margins holdsgroups)

1a 210 13940Environmental 1210cleansingservices

3144401b 0 0 550 368690Other goods 526940 86820 116020and services

Consumption Consumption ofof house- householdsholds(purposes)

2a 760Environment2bOther purposes 368690

Production 3 Output atbasic prices(kind of

economicactivity)

15180 1081330

VAT not4Generation Net value added Compensation ofat factor costof income handed over employees from

(value to the gov- r.o.w.ernmentadded

categories)478720 1790 930

Taxes lessProperty5Distribution Net national Property incomeand use of subsidesgenerated and currentincome and

income at transfers fromcurrentincometransfers(sectors) r.o.w.factor cost

480480 695620 6180 142580 58310

19S

.J.K

euninget

al./S

tructuralC

hangeand

Econom

icD

ynamics

10(1999)

15–

37

Table 1a (Continued)

Account Generation of DistributionGoods and services Consumption of households Rest of the worldProduction Taxes (tax categories)Capital(classification) income (value current(kind of eco-(purposes)(product-groups) and use of

added cate- income (sectors)nomic activ-gories)ity)

Env. Services Other goods Environment Other Other taxesEnvironmen-tal taxespurposesand services

1a 1b 2a 2b 3 4 5 6 8a 8b 9

Capital 6 Consumption of Net nationalsavingfixed capital

70980 79840

Financial 7 Net lending(+) or netbalanceborrowing(−)31020

Current taxesTaxes less sub- Current taxes onOther taxes less VAT on land andTaxes (Taxsides on prod- subsides oncategories) on income and income andlevies on fixed

productionucts wealth capital goods wealth from r.o.w.Environmen- 8a 0 1310 1360 3510

tal taxes8b 180 55650 4570Other taxes 81810 1500 880

Property incomeRest of the 9 imports (cif) Compensa- Current taxesand current on income andtion of em-world cur-transfers torent ployees to wealth tor.o.w.r.o.w. r.o.w.

275170 960 64910 220

10Rest of the Current externalCapital transfersbalance of r.o.w.world to r.o.w.

capital3780 −33300

Substancesa Absorption of Cross border flowof pollutants tosubstances in the

production pro- r.o.w.cess

11aCO2

11bN2O11cCH4

CFCs and 11dhclons

20S

.J.K

euninget

al./S

tructuralC

hangeand

Econom

icD

ynamics

10(1999)

15–

37

Table 1a (Continued)

Account Generation DistributionGoods and services Consumption of households Rest of the worldProduction Taxes (tax categories)Capital(classification) of income current(kind of eco-(purposes)(product-groups) and use of in-

(value added come (sectors)nomic activ-categories)ity)

Env. Services Other goods Environment Other purposes Environmen- Other taxestal taxesand services

1a 1b 2a 2b 3 4 5 6 8a 8b 9

11eNOx 45011fSO2 10011gNH3 7511h 19P 29

N 11I 110 57811j 2924Waste

11k 27416Wastewater11l 2480Natural gas11m 152Crude oil

Environmental Environmentalindicatorsthemes

Greenhouse 12a 227970(CO2-equiv-alents)

196812bOzone layerdepletion(CO2-equiv-alents)

12cAcidification 155(AEQ)

12dEutrophication 264(EEQ)

12eWaste (kg) 1502312fWastewater 6221

(i.e.)Depletion (−)

of naturalresources

12g −1657Fossil fuels(p.j.)

Supply of Current ex-Consumption Capital expen-Input of Tax receiptsTotal Destination Current re-ceipts fromof households basic pricespurchasers’ (less subsidies)of generated diturespenditures

incomeprices the rest ofthe world

15360 1413460 760 1096510 481440 152320 152320 6180 144590 341260

a CFCs and halons in 1000 kg wastewater in 1000 inhabitant-equivalents (1000 i.e.), gas and oil in in petojules (p.j.). Other substances in mln kg.

21S

.J.K

euninget

al./S

tructuralC

hangeand

Econom

icD

ynamics

10(1999)

15–

37

Table 1bOther domestic emission of pollutants and changes in natural resources

TotalRest of the world Substances a Environmental themes Depletion(−) ofcapitalnaturalresources

CO2 N2O CH4 CFCs Natural CrudeNOx SO2 NH3 P EutrophicationN Waste Waste FossilAccumulation WasteGreenhouse Ozone- WasteAcidificationwaterGas fuelseffectwater layerOiland of substances

halons depletionto theenvironment

10 11a 11b 11c 11d 11e 11f 11g 11h 11i 11j 11k 11l 11m 12 12a 12b 12c 12d 12e 12f 12g

Use at pur-chasers’prices

1a 153601b 1413460

Emission of pollutants by consumers Consump-tion ofhouseholds

35840 3 22 121 134 5 7 13 113 5673 153822a 7602b 368690

Emission of pollutants by producers Output atbasic prices

137150 63 676 1500 376 142 165 160 1366 12274 126253 1096510

4 Origin ofgenerated in-come

481440

5 Currentreceipts

1383170

Capital Other domestic emission of pollutants and changes in natural resources6 Capitaltransfers. receiptsfrom r.o.w. 340 — 505 34 5630 1080 −105

1500 152320

Net lending7from the restof the world

−31020 0

Tax pay-ments (lesssubsidies)

8a 61808b 144590

22S

.J.K

euninget

al./S

tructuralC

hangeand

Econom

icD

ynamics

10(1999)

15–

37

Table 1b (Continued)

TotalRest of the world Substances a Environmental themes Depletion(−) ofcapitalnaturalresources

CO2 N2O CH4 CFCs Natural CrudeNOx SO2 NH3 P EutrophicationN Waste Waste FossilAccumulation WasteGreenhouse Ozone- WasteAcidificationwaterGas fuelseffectwater layerOiland of substances

halons depletionto theenvironment

10 11a 11b 11c 11d 11e 11f 11g 11h 11i 11j 11k 11l 11m 12 12a 12b 12c 12d 12e 12f 12g

87 120 23 20 400 payments tothe rest ofthe world

341260

Capital pay-10ments to therest of theworld

−29520

Contribution of pollutants to environmental themes Destinationof substances

11a 173330 173330 17333011b 66 20550 6611c 1203 25260 120311d 1655 8830 1968 165511e 147 32 59711f 167 52 267

120 7111g 19511h 145 145 19311I 1191 119 187911j 15023 15023 1794711k 6221 6221 3363711l −1400 −1400 108011m −257 −257 −105

Theme-equivalents

12a 22797012b 196812c 15512d 26412e 1502312f 6221

12g −1657

Capital Origin of substances Theme-equivalentsreceipts fromthe rest of theworld

−29520 17330 66 1203 1655 597 267 195 193 1879 17947 33637 1080 −105 227970 1968 155 264 15023 6221 −1657

a CFCs and halons in 1000 kg wastewater in 1000 inhabitant-equivalents (1000 i.e.), gas and oil in petojules (p.j.). Other substances in mln kg.

23S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

accounts. Internal cleansing services (e.g. the maintenance of filters), though, areproduced by the same activity that uses it. As a result, the standard accounts do notseparately record this output, and treat the concomitant cost items as an indistin-guishable part of the production costs of the industry concerned. In the NAMEA,however, this internally used output and its costs are singled out, in order to enablea computation of the total financial burden of industries on behalf of the environ-ment. Hence, both production and intermediate consumption are higher in theNAMEA than in the standard national accounts. Net domestic product (NDP) andthe other balancing items, though, are not affected.

In the second account, household consumption expenditures (submatrix 1,2) areallocated to consumption purposes (vector 2,5). These purposes are more homoge-neous with respect to their environmental impact—in this aggregate table shownfor total consumption only, in vector (2,11)—than the general product groupsdistinguished in the first account. For instance, consumer goods purchased in orderto protect the environment are presented separately, in account 2a. Pollutiongenerated by the government is connected to the production, and not the consump-tion, of government services in the NAMEA.

The third account shows the production of goods and services in the row, and theintermediate inputs and value added in the column. The row also records theoutput (quantity) of pollutants, as by-products of the production activities con-cerned (vector 3,11). In the column, other taxes on production are recorded in theseparate tax account (vector 8,3). The detailed NAMEAs thus reveal which types of(environmental) taxes and subsidies are paid, respectively received by which indus-try. Vector (11,3) contains the environmentally relevant, non-monetary inputs byindustry. Examples of these inputs are: natural resources (cf. cells 11l,3 and 11m,3)and waste processed in incineration plants. In the future, vector (11,3) will alsoincorporate the re-cycling of waste.

The fourth row in the NAMEA shows incomes generated by national productionfactors, in domestic industries or abroad. In the column of this account, theseincomes are allocated to the institutional sectors in the economy (financial andnon-financial corporations, households and the government) and to the rest of theworld. The fifth account presents the (re-)distribution of income and its use forconsumption and saving. Note that most of the environmental taxes are in fact paidby households as general waste disposal charges (cell 8a,5), and are thus not relatedto either the purchase of specific products (cell 8a,1b) or production processes (cell8a,3).

In the sixth account, savings and the balance of capital transfers are convertedinto capital formation. The balancing item is net lending or net borrowing (cell 7,6).Vector (6,11) records domestic environmental changes which are not due to currentconsumption or production. This refers to additions to proven reserves of naturalresources, the leakage of pollutants (particularly methane) from waste dumps, etc.The seventh account presents the financial balances of the total economy and of therest of the world. By definition, these balances add up to zero, which explains theabsence of an (empty) column 7. The eighth account shows all the taxes, classifiedby the type of tax and by incidence.

24 S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

Accounts nine and ten present the current and capital transactions with therest of the world. This refers not only to the trade in goods and services (importsin the rows and exports in the columns), but also to trans-boundary flows ofpollution; cf. vectors (9,11) and (11,9). Unfortunately, data on waste flows to andfrom abroad are still lacking. Account 9 demonstrates that the Netherlandscreated a distinct trade surplus for goods and services, and as well as forpollutants (except SO2).

In columns 11a–11k, the origin of 11 types of pollution is registered. Emis-sions come from production (vector 3,11), consumption (vector 2,11), other do-mestic sources (vector 6,11) and from the rest of the world (vector 9,11). Rows11a–11k record the absorption of pollutants, in the production of environmentalcleansing services (vector 11,3) and by the rest of the world (vector 11,9). Theresulting national environmental pressure by substance is shown as the row totalof sub-matrix (11, 12); cf. the first column. A similar procedure is followed fornatural resources, as shown in accounts 11l and 11m. In this case, a negativebalancing item reflects a net depletion (vector 11l–11m,12).

The environmental themes in account 12—greenhouse effect, ozone layer de-pletion, acidification, eutrophication, waste, waste water and natural resourcedepletion—reflect major environmental problems in the Netherlands. The columntotals of account 12 are converted into theme-related units in the interior ofsubmatrix (11,12), in order to enable an aggregation over substances in columns12a–12g. The weight of each substance reflects its potential contribution to theenvironmental problem concerned. For instance, N2O, CH4, and CFCs andhalons are converted into (CO2-equivalent) global warming potential units by amultiplication with such weights, which are 311, 21 and 5.34 respectively (com-pare column 12a with column 12). This yields a total of 227,970 global warmingpotential units in column 12a. These aggregation methods have been accepted bythe Dutch Parliament and are for the major part based on international researchon the effects of different substances on environmental quality (Adriaanse, 1993).The conversion of the substance units, as given in the heading of account 11,into the corresponding theme-related stress equivalents can be found in, e.g. DeHaan and Keuning, 1996.

This method yields a limited number of physical environmental indicators,shown in vector (12,6). The aggregate NAMEA in Tables 1a and 1b thus pre-sents the inter-relationship between macro-indicators for the economy (NDP, netsaving, current external balance) and the environment (environmental theme indi-cators). These indicators are conceptually and numerically consistent. As a conse-quence, if a time-series of NAMEAs is available, directly comparable growthrates for the economy and the environment can be computed. In turn, a com-parison of those growth rates yields a useful insight into changes in averageeco-efficiency of the economy. Besides, underlying this table, a much more de-tailed information system on the environment-economy interactions is available.This is illustrated in Section 3.

25S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

3. Who contributes to what?

Table 2 compares the contributions to environmental problems of several eco-nomic activities with their share in GDP, employment and consumption. In thisway, a more balanced view is obtained of the economic meaning of these activities.Note that only the direct contributions to environmental themes are registered inTable 2, i.e. the pollution elsewhere in the production chain is not taken intoaccount (cf. Table 3 for a review of cumulative pollution).

The domestic emission sources consist of three groups: household consumptionexpenditure, production and other domestic sources. As said above, the latterrelates to the leakage from waste dumps. Not surprisingly, most pollution is causedby production. More than a third of the problem originates from householdconsumption in the case of waste only.

Concerning the household consumption purposes, the contribution of owntransport to most environmental problems (far) exceeds its expenditure share3. Inparticular, the bulk of the acidification caused by consumers is due to the exhaustfumes of private cars and motor-cycles. On the other hand, this consumptionpurpose causes relatively little waste (car wrecks, worn out tires and oil residues).

Production activities account for the larger part of environmental pressures in theNetherlands. The differences by industry are quite striking. For instance, agricul-ture, hunting, forestry and fishing together contribute much more to most of thepressure indicators (8–80%) than to GDP (4%). Their paramount influence on theeutrophication problem is mainly due to the use of manure and fertilisers.

Not surprisingly, manufacturing activities contribute a relatively high share withrespect to all themes, except eutrophication. The chemical industry, for instance,creates 3% of GDP and 1% of employment, but it is responsible for 20% of the(production-related) greenhouse effect, 14% of the waste and 15% of the ozonelayer depletion. The food, beverage and tobacco industry has a high share in thewaste generated by production activities (15%), while the petroleum industry causesrelatively much acidification. The acidifying as well as greenhouse gas emissions by‘other’ manufacturing activities are fairly modest.

Public utilities account for a quarter of the greenhouse effect due to production;this mainly concerns electricity generation. Construction activities yield 6% ofGDP, but cause 27% of the emissions, by production activities, of ozone layerdepleting substances and 25% of the waste. Transport and storage services causefairly much acidification.

With regard to environmental cleansing and sanitary services, Table 2 shows theiremissions of eutrophicating substances and waste, but of course not their absorp-tion of these substances. Other services, including commercial services, financialservices, government etc., contribute a much larger share to GDP (60%) andemployment (63%) than to all major environmental problems in the Netherlands.

3 The contribution of the consumption of environmental cleansing services (cf. cell (2a,5) in Table 1a)to pollution is negligible and has therefore been omitted in Table 1b.

26S

.J.K

euninget

al./S

tructuralC

hangeand

Econom

icD

ynamics

10(1999)

15–

37

Table 2Contribution of production and consumption activities to GDP, employment and some environmental themes according to the 1994 NAMEA for theNetherlandsa

Environmental indicators(%) Environmental themes

GDP WasteEmployment Consumption EutrophicationGreenhouse AcidificationOzoneexpenditure(factor cost) effect layer

depletion

17 7 14Household consumption expenditure 7 3278Production 91 87 93 68

Other domestic sources 5 2 – – –

100 100 100 100 100 100Household consumption expenditure13 42Own transport 45 73 15 187 58Other 55 27 85 99

100 100Production 100 100 100 100 100Agriculture, hunting, forestry and 84 5 17 4 46 80

fishing3 0Mining and quarrying 3 – 1 0 1

18 16 38Manufacturing 40 23 7 44Food, beverage and tobacco 153 3 3 9 1 3industry

1 0Petroleum industry 7 – 10 0 03 1 20Chemical industry 15 6 2 14

Manufacturing of basic metals 1 1 4 0 3 0 211 11 4 16Other manufacturing 4 2 12

2 1 25Public utilities 0 8 1 2Construction 6 7 1 27 2 0 25

8 7 6 3 15Transport and storage 1 610 0Environmental cleansing and 3 21 1 8

sanitary servicesOther services 60 63 7 5 4 2 15

a Due to rounding, error numbers may not sum up to totals.

27S

.J.K

euninget

al./S

tructuralC

hangeand

Econom

icD

ynamics

10(1999)

15–

37

Table 3Cumulative pollution per unit of final demand relative to the aggregate cumulative pollution per unit of final demand (1994)

Greenhouse effect Ozone layer depletion Acidification Eutrophication Waste Labour

Emission by producers2.92 1.00 8.32 14.23Agriculture and forestry 1.69 1.770.03 0.05 0.05Fishing 0.01 0.13 0.05

Mining and quarrying excluding crude0.03 0.01 0.02petroleum and natural gas production 0.00 0.11 0.020.54 0.04 0.10 0.02 0.03Crude petroleum and natural gas production 0.05

ManufacturingManufacture of food products

4.70 4.09Beverages and tobacco 8.83 14.97 6.62 1.090.26 0.39 0.12Manufacture of textile and leather products 0.21 0.33 0.310.31 0.06Manufacture of paper and paper products 0.11 0.20 0.78 0.170.11 0.09 0.06Publishing and printing 0.04 0.18 0.622.23 0.10 3.03Manufacture of petroleum products 0.11 0.17 0.075.99 5.17 2.43Manufacture of chemical products 0.83 4.69 0.560.23Manufacture of rubber and plastic products 0.86 0.10 0.04 0.25 0.231.32 0.14 0.78Manufacture of basic metals 0.09 0.45 0.190.27 0.15 0.15Manufacture of fabricated metal products 0.07 0.25 0.630.35 0.29 0.21Manufacture of machinery n.e.c. 0.12 0.43 0.560.38 0.86 0.20Manufacture of electrical equipment 0.12 0.35 0.680.34 0.35 0.19Manufacture of transport equipment 0.12 0.39 0.370.04 0.02 0.02Manufacture of wood and wood products 0.01 0.11 0.130.29 0.05 0.26Manufacture of construction materials 0.04 0.31 0.240.28Other manufacturing 3.04 0.10 0.06 0.43 0.29

Electricity, gas and water supply4.84 0.08Electricity supply 1.45 0.16 0.29 0.250.09 0.02Gas and water supply 0.03 0.01 0.12 0.061.87 8.68 1.41Construction 0.36 8.31 2.83

Trace and repair of motor vehicles 0.13 0.09 0.08 0.05 0.10 0.850.28 0.12 0.13Wholesale trade excluding motor vehicles 0.05 0.16 2.63

Retail trade, repair (excl. motor 6ehicles)0.56 0.41 0.53Hotels and restaurants 0.73 0.60 4.40

28S

.J.K

euninget

al./S

tructuralC

hangeand

Econom

icD

ynamics

10(1999)

15–

37

Table 3. (Continued)

Greenhouse effect Ozone layer depletion Acidification Eutrophication Waste Labour

1.05 0.74 1.69 0.25 0.31Land transport 1.260.62 0.17 2.36Water transport 0.20 1.45 0.120.25 0.11 0.21Air transport 0.09 0.10 0.160.20 0.10 0.10Supporting transport activities 0.06 0.15 0.430.90 1.46Business services 0.66 0.44 1.65 6.491.21 2.50 0.85Public administration and social security 0.89 2.44 3.130.37 0.33 0.17Education 0.14 0.49 1.840.87 0.88 0.52Health and social work activities 0.72 1.05 3.65

Sewage refuse disposal services 0.59 3.25 0.20 1.27 0.14 0.090.79 0.32 0.29Other services n.e.c. 0.18 0.72 1.56

Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

29S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

The figures in this table do not completely cover the environmental issues. Forinstance, mining and quarrying contribute relatively little to the themes registered inthe present NAMEA, but may harm biodiversity if the drilling is carried out in avulnerable nature reserve. Moreover, air transport emissions are limited to thosecaused during domestic take-offs and landings (by all airlines), in accordance withthe so-called IPCC conventions. However, that treatment largely underestimates theglobal emissions by this industry. It is also not consistent with the nationalaccounts, which estimate total value added of domestic airlines and thus futureNAMEAs should estimate total emissions by the domestic fleet. A similar deficiencyconcerns the present emission data for fishing and sea transport.

As noted above, the (final) demand for goods and services also causes pollutionthrough the intermediate inputs into the production of these goods and services.The matrix format of the NAMEA enables the calculation of total, cumulativeemissions per product group. This is the subject of Section 4.

4. Cumulative pollution per economic activity

This section presents the results of an input–output analysis of cumulativeenvironmental pressures per production activity (Keuning and De Haan (1997)).This means that, for example, the pollution caused by agriculture is now partlyattributed to the (final) demand for processed food, in accordance with the share ofagricultural products that is supplied as intermediate inputs to the food processingindustry. In the analysis, it has been assumed that the emissions ‘embodied’ inimports are equal to those in domestic goods and services classified in the sameproduct group. The results are presented in Table 3 below. This table shows thecumulated pollution for each producing activity caused by one unit of finaldemand, relative to the average cumulative pollution for all producers togethercaused by one unit of final demand. In the last column of this table, results of asimilar calculation for total labour input are shown. For instance, total employmentgenerated per unit of final demand for business services is more than six times thenational average.

It is interesting to compare the results in Table 3 with the direct contributionsfrom economic activities to pollution, shown in the previous table. From Table 2,comparable (albeit less detailed) results can be obtained by dividing the percentagecontribution to each environmental theme by the percentage contribution of thesame production activity to GDP. This yields a direct contribution of agriculture,hunting and forestry to eutrophication, for example, which is almost 22 timeshigher than its GDP contribution. With all backward linkages taken into account,this ratio drops to a little over 14 (Table 3). A similar result can be seen whenlooking at the direct and cumulative contributions to the greenhouse effect ofpublic utilities, relative to its contribution to GDP. The ratio in this case dropsfrom 14 times the national average for the direct contribution to less than five timesthe average for its ‘total’ contribution. On the other hand, product categories thatuse intermediate goods from heavily polluting activities, have an increasing ratio.

30 S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

This is very clear for food, beverages and tobacco; the direct contribution to theeutrophication theme, relative to its contribution to GDP, is less than 1, whichimplies a below-average direct pollution. However, this ratio increases to almost 15when all backward linkages are taken into account.

All in all, the following economic activities contribute most to the respectivethemes per guilder of final demand: the chemical industry (greenhouse effect),construction (ozone layer depletion, waste), and the food products, beverages andtobacco industry (acidification, eutrophication). The food products, beverages andtobacco industry even ends up in the top three polluters for all environmentalthemes, when all backward linkages are incorporated.

When looking at the cumulative labour input, it is obvious that a guilder of finaldemand for services generates the most employment. For instance, health care andsocial work combine a high employment coefficient (3.65) with low pollutioncoefficients (practically all below the national average).

5. Applications of the NAMEA in the Netherlands

The NAMEA is a multi-purpose information system. Firstly, it serves to generatejoint accounts and summary indicators for the environment and the economy. Thesimultaneous release of economic and environmental aggregate figures has alreadyincreased public awareness that economic development cannot be judged fromGDP volume change only4. For instance, a newspaper article reviewed the CBSpublication ‘The Dutch Economy’ and stated: ‘This study auspiciously starts witha series of core indicators which includes, apart from the well-known macro-eco-nomic figures, statistics that co-determine the measurement of welfare: incomeinequality, educational level of the population, criminality, life expectancy andenvironmental pressure. In particular with the series of data on emissions thatcontribute to the greenhouse effect, ozone layer depletion, acidification, eutrophica-tion and the increase of waste dumps, the CBS provides an important contribu-tion … ’ (Parool, 1995).

In the first pilot NAMEA, the summary indicators for five major environmentalproblems were confronted with norms set for these problems for the year 2000 (DeHaan et al., 1994). These norms had been endorsed by the Dutch Parliament.Subsequently, the five theme indicators were aggregated into a single environmental‘core’ policy indicator by using the distance to the norm as a weight for each theme.This procedure acknowledges that essentially the gravity of each environmentalproblem can only be determined as the outcome of a political process. This is inaccordance with modern ideas on sustainable development, which attach a crucialrole to society’s attitude toward risks (Netherlands Scientific Council for Govern-ment Policy, 1994). At the same time, however, the NAMEA’s themes and thepossibility to set norms for these themes provide the politicians an instrument toquantify their choices; refer also to Adriaanse (1993).

4 See The Economist, 1998.

31S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

In the present NAMEAs, however, this aggregation into a single indicator hasbeen abandoned. The National Accounts Advisory Committee was not in favour ofa combination of statistics and policy norms in an official CBS-publication. Theaggregation procedure was also criticised by Alfieri and Bartelmus (1995), becauseit would give equal a-priori significance to each of the themes. Of course, thisdepends on the way the norms are set. Their criticism does not hold if thegovernment sets more severe norms for more serious problems. The experience withthe zero-norm for ozone layer depletion may serve as an illustration of thismechanism.

In addition to a joint monitoring of economic and environmental trends, theNAMEA serves an analytical purpose. For example, Section 4 presented thecumulative ecological effects per guilder of final demand. Besides, with the help ofa NAMEA time-series, changes in emissions (by industry) can be decomposed into:(a) output growth effects; (b) demand composition shift effects; and (c) eco-effi-ciency change effects. In addition, a recent government-commissioned study (Slobet al., 1996) used the NAMEA time-series to analyse the interaction between trendsin consumption patterns and in environmental pressures. Further, the NAMEA hasbeen used in a linear programming model that produced a very rough andpreliminary, yet consistent estimate for a environmentally sustainable nationalincome (De Boer et al., 1994). In that model, the consequences of reducingpollution levels to the norms set by the Dutch Parliament have been estimated, ina situation without technological change5. Bearing in mind this rather unrealisticassumption, it did not come as a surprise that the required ‘optimal’ reduction ineconomic activity was enormous and very unevenly distributed by industry.

De Haan (1996) has connected the NAMEA with a data base on estimated costsand emission reductions of a range of potential energy saving measures by industryin the Netherlands. Subsequently, he used the NAMEA-inverse to estimate, notonly the direct costs and emission reductions of energy saving measures in theindustries applying these measures, but also the concomitant benefits and emissionchanges in the rest of the economy (e.g. with the suppliers of the energy savingdevices). Assuming that the most efficient energy saving measures are applied first,he found that up to a certain level of CO2-emission reductions, monetary benefitswould exceed monetary costs for the economy as a whole. After that level, overalleconomic costs would rise steeply and moreover the total emission reductionswould be much smaller than the direct emission reductions. The main reason forthese findings is that the production of energy saving devices also causes CO2-emis-sions, which gets an increasing weight once the most efficient energy savingmeasures have already been implemented. At a certain stage, these indirect emissionincreases would even surpass the direct emission reductions, so that the overallenvironmental effect would become negative.

Another use of the NAMEA to date has been as a basic data framework in astudy that has analysed sustainable economic development scenarios for the

5 It is assumed that these levels reflect the societal preferences.

32 S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

Netherlands until the year 2030 (Verbruggen et al., 1996; Dellink et al., 1997).Using economic forecasts from a long-term economic development scenario with-out environmental indicators, four scenarios have been simulated with a NAMEA-based linear programming model: (1) ‘strong together’; (2) ‘strong alone’; (3)‘negotiated sustainability’; and (4) ‘weak sustainability’6. The main differencesbetween these scenarios concern: (a) the degree to which substitution amongenvironmental, physical and human capital is allowed (Serageldin and Steer, 1994);and (b) the assumptions regarding the direction and the speed of technical progress.The first two scenarios are identical but for the assumption whether or not the restof the world has a similar strong preference for sustainability. Remarkably, in eachof the scenarios, it appeared feasible to reconcile sustainability with continued(albeit limited) GDP volume growth.

Recently, the NAMEA was extensively discussed in a letter of the Netherlands’Minister of Economic Affairs, also on behalf of the Minister of the Environment,to the Parliament (Tweede Kamer, 1996). The Ministers promised that the medium-term economic outlook of the government ‘ … will deal more systematically than inthe past with environmental indicators as well as economic developments (such aseconomic growth and employment)’ (Tweede Kamer, 1996). Meanwhile, this hasbeen carried out in the so-called ‘economic outlook for the next cabinet period’(CPB, 1997), the model-based policy document that served as a major economicguideline to political parties preparing their programme for the 1998 generalelections. The NAMEA may have acted as a catalyst in incorporating environmen-tal concerns in the standard macro-economic government models.

In addition to scenario analyses, NAMEA-based models can be used for calculat-ing, e.g. the effects of a shift in tax incidence, from labour to energy use, say, on theenvironmental and economic indicators in the system. Finally, Statistics Nether-lands has recently started a research project that investigates whether more reliableearly estimates for aggregate environmental indicators can be obtained with thehelp of the NAMEA-framework. These and other future extensions are discussed inthe next section.

6. Future extensions of NAMEA

At present, the further development of the NAMEA in the Netherlands focuseson three aspects: (1) increasing its timeliness; (2) increasing its level of detail and thenumber of environmental themes; and (3) integration with other accounting frame-works, in order to arrive at a comprehensive information system of environmental,economic and socio-demographic accounts.

It is obvious that the NAMEA’s policy relevance depends to a large extent on itstimeliness. Whereas, thus far the Dutch NAMEAs are available after two-and-a-half years, the CBS currently investigates the feasibility of compiling preliminary

6 Note that this is another utilisation of sustainability than in De Boer et al., 1994.

33S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

NAMEAs for air emissions within 7 months after the reference year. TheseNAMEAs will then be estimated by combining: (a) the structure of the most recentdefinitive NAMEA; (b) economic estimates from the preliminary national accounts;(c) early environmental data, if available; and (d) some fixed coefficient assump-tions. In this way, it is expected that the reliability of the early environmentalindicators will improve, as at present these indicators are based on just part (c)above. An essential precondition to the estimation of these timely NAMEAs is thecompilation of energy use balances that are consistent with the national accounts.These energy use balances are an important data source for the preliminaryCO2-emission estimates.

A second project deals with the estimation of more detailed NAMEAs, in orderto arrive at more homogeneous ‘pollution clusters’. For example, the high energyintensity of fertiliser production is not revealed in the present NAMEAs becausethis activity forms part of the chemical industry. Obviously, modelling and policyanalyses will also benefit from the availability of larger NAMEAs. Particularly,studies on the so-called de-materialisation of the economy call for fairly detailedinformation. Because of the past experience in integrating data from differentsources, it has now become easier to fill in the NAMEA.

Three more projects deal with broadening the NAMEA’s scope. Presently, not allthemes from the national Environmental Policy Plans are captured by theNAMEA, partly because of the lack of data and partly because of conceptualproblems. Recently, however, De Haan (1997) incorporated water accounts in theNAMEA. These water accounts are not restricted to water extraction, but alsoregister the emissions to water of nutrients, biological oxygen demand, heavymetals, etc. In this way, a better view is obtained of water quality, which evidentlyplays a major role in the potential use of this resource. Unfortunately, the survey(CBS, 1994) that provides the basic data for linking water use to economic activitiesjust covers mining, manufacturing, electricity production and households, and isheld only once every five years.

A second project that serves to obtain a more complete picture deals with thedispersion of toxic substances. Here, the great number of substances poses aproblem, especially because they should also be aggregated to one or a few‘themes’. Otherwise, it is impossible to communicate the results to the policy-mak-ers or to the general public. To solve this dilemma, Gorree (1997) proposes twoindicators to describe the emission of toxic substances. Both indicators are indepen-dent of policy goals, which is an important advantage. The first indicator weighstoxic substances by their impact on the ecological system and is fairly easy tocalculate. The second indicator weighs the toxic substances by their impact onhuman beings. Further research is needed before it can be decided which indicatoris most suitable. The methodologies proposed by Gorree can also be applied toimprove the NAMEA’s waste and waste water indicators. Thus far, these indicatorsonly reflect the quantity of waste, without taking into account that not everykilogram has the same environmental impact.

Thirdly, research is being carried out to make the environmental expendituresmore explicit in the NAMEA. In the current revision of the National Accounts, the

34 S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

(external) environmental cleansing services that are still registered in the account forgovernment expenditures, will be allocated to environmental cleansing services. Thiswill lead to a sharp increase in the production value of this activity. Another projectdeals with internal environmental cleansing services. These are services that takeplace within production units and are not explicitly paid for by these units. It isstudied what costs these production units make, in connection to expenditures forthe environment. These costs are subdivided in three groups, namely the purchaseof intermediate goods and services, wages and salaries, and investment in environ-ment-related projects. This will in the future provide a good indication on theactual costs that production units make for the environment.

Another theme that should be added to the NAMEA concerns the use of space.In countries with a high population density, i.e. the Netherlands, such an extensionis of particular importance. In this regard, a recent study on the demand and supplyof commercial land use in the Netherlands (NEI, 1996) may prove to be useful.This study contains a regional breakdown of the components that determine thepressure on land use. This study will be juxtaposed with the industry distribution asit appears from the regional accounts, and with the overall (less detailed) CBS landuse statistics. In addition, an intensive user of the present NAMEAs has alreadymade some experimental estimates on this theme (Verbruggen et al., 1996).

Finally, the heart of the policy debate gradually shifts towards the interrelationsbetween environmental, economic and social issues. In the Netherlands, theNAMEA and a SAM have already been integrated into a so-called social account-ing matrix including environmental accounts (SAMEA) (Keuning and Timmerman(1995), Keuning and De Haan (1997)). This study has demonstrated, for instance,that women and highly educated men are typically employed in industries whichburden the environment less than the industries in which most lower educated menare working. Such a finding evidently has a bearing on the expected distributionalconsequences of more stringent environmental policies. Similarly, it appears thatthe (direct) contribution of the old-aged to the environmental problems caused byhousehold consumption surpasses their population share. The opposite applies tohouseholds that mainly depend on other transfer income (unemployment benefits,etc.).

The current strategic plan of Statistics Netherlands mentions: ‘An environmentalsatellite module [NAMEA] has been developed to describe various environmentalaspects in relation to the description of the economic process … This ap-proach … will be continued in the future. An important stimulus is the developmentof ‘SESAME’: a ‘System of Economic and Social Accounting Matrices andExtensions’. This … multi-dimensional accounting system enables an integrateddescription of most economic, social and ecological phenomena. Its coherenceallows data relations to be produced which may underwrite … policy measuresinvolving these phenomena.’ (CBS, 1996b). The SESAME-approach is set out inKeuning (1996) while a summary can be found in Keuning (1997) and in a recentaccounting Handbook of the United Nations (1998).

35S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

7. Conclusions

Approximately 5 years after its initial design, the compilation of NAMEAs hasbeen institutionalised as a regular part of Statistics Netherlands’ work programme.It is increasingly used for modelling and policy analysis in the Netherlands. Forinstance, the official economic forecasting agency has recently taken into accountNAMEA’s core environmental indicators in its medium-term economic outlook. Inthis outlook, the expected contributions to economic and environmental objectiveshave also been juxtaposed by industry.

At present, research is going on in three areas: (1) increasing the NAMEA’stimeliness (objective: publication of a NAMEA for air emissions within sevenmonths after the reference year); (2) expanding the NAMEA’s level of detail andscope (incorporating water use, the dispersion of toxic substances and the use ofspace); and (3) incorporating the NAMEA into a comprehensive informationsystem of environmental, economic and social accounts.

The Netherlands’ Minister of Economic Affairs, in his recent letter to Parliament,reports on this as follows: ‘At the macro-level … (national) income cannot beregarded as equivalent to (national) welfare. Developments in welfare are deter-mined by many factors: not only the development of the national income, but alsochanges in available environmental functions, the distribution of income, employ-ment and health. It is therefore important to have information systems at ourdisposal that yield an integrated picture of the connections between various aspectsof welfare. Statistics Netherlands has already started setting up an integratedinformation system in the form of environmental accounts (NAMEA) and labouraccounts (SAM) linked to the national accounts. This should finally result in anextensive SESAME.’ (Tweede Kamer, 1996).

References

Adriaanse, A., 1993. Environmental policy performance indicators, Netherlands Ministry of Housing,spatial planning and the environment, The Hague.

Alfieri, A., Bartelmus, P., 1995. Valuation of the environment and natural resources—some unresolvedissues. Conference papers from the second meeting of the London group on natural resources andenvironmental accounting, US Bureau of Economic Analysis, Washington DC.

CBS, 1994. (Statistics Netherlands). Water supply of manufacturing industry and power-plants 1991 [inDutch], SDU, The Hague.

CBS, 1996a. (Statistics Netherlands). Accounts and indicators for the economy and the environment; the1986–1992 NAMEAs [in Dutch], Statistics Netherlands, Voorburg/Heerlen.

CBS, 1996b. (Statistics Netherlands). From assembly line to electronic highway junction; a twin-tracktransformation of the statistical process. Netherlands Official Statistics, Voorburg/Heerlen.

CBS, 1998. (Statistics Netherlands). National Accounts 1997, SDU, The Hague.CPB, 1997. (Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis). Economic Outlook for the Next

Cabinet Period [in Dutch], SDU, The Hague.De Boer B., de Haan, M., Voogt, M., 1994. What would net domestic product have been in a

sustainable economy? preliminary views and results. National accounts and the environment; papersand proceedings from a conference, London, 16–18 March, Statistics Canada, Ottawa.

36 S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

De Haan M., 1996. An Input–Output Estimation of Avoidance Costs. Paper presented at the fourthbiennial meeting of the international society for ecological economics, Boston, 4–7 August.

De Haan M., 1997. Water Accounts in the Dutch NAMEA: a ‘NAMWA’ for 1991. Paper presented atthe fourth meeting of London Group on Natural Resource and Environmental Accounting inOttawa, 17–20 June.

De Haan, M., Keuning, S.J., 1996. Taking the environment into account: the NAMEA approach. Rev.Income Wealth 42, 131–148.

De Haan M., Keuning, S.J., Bosch., P.R., 1994. Integrating indicators in a National Accounting Matrixincluding Environmental Accounts (NAMEA); an application to the Netherlands. National accountsand the environment; papers and proceedings from a conference, London, 16–18 March, StatisticsCanada, Ottawa.

De Volkskrant, 1993. Importance agriculture outweighed by environmental damage by this sector [inDutch], de Volkskrant, 26 May.

Dellink, R., Bennis, M., Verbruggen, H., 1997. Sustainable Economic Structures; scenarios for sustain-ability in the Netherlands, Institute for Environmental Studies, Amsterdam.

Gorree, M., 1997. Dispersion in the NAMEA [in Dutch], Statistics Netherlands, Voorburg.Hammond, A., Adriaanse, A., Rodenburg, E., Bryant, D., Woodward, R., 1995. Environmental

indicators: a systematic approach to measuring and reporting on environmental policy performancein the context of sustainable development, World Resources Institute, Washington, DC.

Keuning, S.J., 1993. An information system for environmental indicators in relation to the nationalaccounts. In: de Vries, W.F.M., den Bakker, G.P., Gircour, M.B.G., Keuning, S.J., Lenson, A.(Eds.), The Value Added of National Accounting, Statistics Netherlands. Voorburg/Heerlen, pp.287–305.

Keuning, S.J., 1996. Accounting for economic development and social change. IOS Press, Amsterdam.Keuning, S.J., 1997. SESAME: an Integrated Economic and Social Accounting System. International

Statistical Review 65.Keuning, S.J., de Haan, M., 1997. Netherlands: What’s in a NAMEA? Recent results. In: Uno, K.,

Bartelmus, P., Stahmer, C. (Eds.), Environmental Accounting in Theory and Practice, Kluwer,Dordrecht.

Keuning, S.J., Timmerman, J.G., 1995. An information system for economic, environmental and socialstatistics: integrating environmental data into the SESAME. Conference papers from the secondmeeting of the London group on natural resources and environmental accounting, US Bureau ofEconomic Analysis, Washington DC.

NEI, 1996. (Netherlands Economic Institute). Development of Demand and Supply in BusinessLocations [in Dutch], Buck Consultants International and Dutch Economic Institute, Nijmegen/Rot-terdam.

Netherlands Ministry of Housing, spatial planning and the environment, 1989. National EnvironmentalPolicy Plan [in Dutch], Netherlands Ministry of Housing, spatial planning and the environment, TheHague.

Netherlands Ministry of Housing, spatial planning and the environment, 1993. Second NationalEnvironmental Policy Plan [in Dutch], Netherlands Ministry of Housing, spatial planning and theenvironment, The Hague.

Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy, 1994. Sustainable risks: a lasting circumstance [inDutch], Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy, The Hague.

Parool, 1995. CBS opens its doors [in Dutch], Parool, 20 December.Serageldin, I., Steer, A. (Eds.), 1994. Making development sustainable: from concepts to action, The

World Bank, Washington DC.Slob, A.F.L., Bouman, M.J., de Haan, M., Blok, K., Vringer, K., 1996. Trend Analysis Consumption

and the Environment [in Dutch], Netherlands Ministry of the Environment.The Economist, 1993. The price of everything, the value of nothing, The Economist, 31 July.The Economist, 1998. An invaluable environment, The Economist, 18 April.Tweede Kamer, 1996. [Lower House of Netherlands’ Parliament]. Action Plan for Green National

Accounting; letter of the Minister of Economic Affairs to the President of the Lower House of theStates—General of the Netherlands, Ministry of Economic Affairs, The Hague.

37S.J. Keuning et al. / Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 10 (1999) 15–37

United Nations, 1998. Handbook on Household Accounting, United Nations, New York.United Nations, Eurostat, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development, and World Bank, 1993. System of National Accounts 1993, Series F, No. 2, Rev. 4,United Nations, New York.

Verbruggen, H., Bennis, M.J., Dellink, R.B., Jansen, H.M.A., Kuik, O.J., Ruygrok, E.C.M., 1996.Sustainable economic development scenarios for the Netherlands in 2030 [in Dutch], Publikatiereeksmilieustrategie, No. 1996/1, Netherlands Ministry of Housing, spatial planning and the environment,The Hague.