Eurostat, the European statistics institute, shows Romania to have had a 6.2% actual GDP growth, 1% lower than the figure published by the National Statistics Institute, which amounts to a 1 billion-euro gap.
Were the figure published by Eurostat true, Romania's economic performance last year would have been an illusion, and the other macroeconomic indicators would significantly change.
Where is the mistake?
The National Statistics Institute sent the final GDP figure for 2007 to Eurostat in September, and it is higher than the value published in the preliminary data.
"Because the value of the GDP for 2008 was not revised, with a higher comparison base, the economic growth is lower," says Adriana Ciuchea, manager with the INS in charge of national accounts.
In January, when INS sends the recalculated 2008 GDP to Eurostat, the European data will show an economic growth in the neighbourhood of 7.1%.
"A one percentage error for the GDP growth pace is out of the question, because it compares against a different GDP version for 2007. To calculate the 2008 GDP the scope of the data was narrower," Ciuchea says. In the preliminary data's case, the previous year's GDP is multiplied by a volume index (which in 2008 changed as a result of the increase in the 2007 value) and in the final data, the GDP is calculated based on more complete and detailed data sources.
Eurostat, the European statistics institute, shows Romania to have had a 6.2% actual GDP growth, 1% lower than the figure published by the National Statistics Institute, which amounts to a 1 billion-euro gap.
Were the figure published by Eurostat true, Romania's economic performance last year would have been an illusion, and the other macroeconomic indicators would significantly change.
Where is the mistake?
The National Statistics Institute sent the final GDP figur
