The EU Craft and SME Barometer 2010/H2 European

The EU Craft and SME Barometer 2010/H2
European Crafts and SMEs sceptical about growth
Smallest of hikes measured - SME Business Climate Index at 65.5
The UEAPME SME Business Climate Index (Chart 1) for the European Union increased for a third time in a
row to 65.5, yet the pace of recovery slowed down markedly: only a 0.8 percentage points (pp) expansion
against the 5.4 percentage point hike in March. This modest progress confirms our previous analysis.
Businesses are confident to have left the worst wobbles behind, but remain unsure about the future. The 70points barrier, which we assume to represent a neutral business climate (dashed blue line), still remains out
of reach.
Two possible narratives arise: the
optimistic vision accepts that some
SME Business Climate Index
countries are doing better than
90
others, but believes that the growth
85
boost in certain Member States will
80
75
feed through the system. The
70
implementation of bold reforms will
65
60
further help the Union return to
55
more vigorous growth. The pessi50
mistic vision foresees a two-speed
45
40
Europe emerging. Plagued by bail07/H1 07/H2 08/H1 08/H2 09/H1e 09/H2e 10/H1e 10/H2e
outs, an absence of reforms and
short-term profligacy as well as the
lack of a unified labour market, the
The index is calculated as an average of companies that have reported positive or
EU fails to converge. Europe’s
stable business situations and expect a positive or stable development for the next
period. Therefore the index can range from 100 (all positive or neutral) to 0 (all growth performance mimics Japan’s
negative).
recent experience.
65,5
64,7
59,3
55,1
69,2
73,2
78,6
78,7
Chart 1
While pessimists still outweigh optimists, the small increase in our index suggests that the EU is moving
towards equilibrium. Balances are slowing moving back to zero but remain mostly negative. Optimism seems
to be stalling because the small economic expansion observed since Europe officially (i.e. statistically) left
the Great Recession behind has not meant a return to healthy profits for companies, which suffer from price
pressures.
UEAPME STUDY UNIT
MAISON DE L'ECONOMIE EUROPEENNE - RUE JACQUES DE LALAING 4 - B-1040 BRUXELLES
TEL +32 (0)2 230 75 99 - FAX +32 (0)2 230 78 61 - E-MAIL [email protected]
Introduction to the EU Craft and SME Barometer
The EU Craft and SME Barometer builds on the results of surveys that are conducted by UEAPME Member
Organisations twice or four times a year in different regions all over Europe. The survey is based on about
120.000 questionnaires, with 30.000 answers received. The data for this survey were collected between
July 2010 and September 2010, which gives a quite recent picture about the development and the
expectations of SME owners all over Europe.
At European level, we are able to provide data for size classes (micro, small and medium-sized enterprises)
and for four economic sectors (manufacturing, construction, business and personal services), which may
show different developments over business cycles and may react differently to external effects.
For each of these groups the Barometer provides balanced figures on the following categories: overall
situation, turnover, employment, prices, investment and orders, where balanced means the difference
between businesses that answered the questions about their expectation in these six categories in a positive
or negative manner (balance = positive answers – negative answers). In order to get European figures from
different national surveys, national results have been weighed with employment figures (see Table 1 and 2 in
the Annex).
This Barometer presents the results (experiences) for both semesters of 2009 (09/H1 and 09/H2) and the
first half of 2010 (10/H1) as well as the expectations for the second half-year 2010 (10/H2e).
UEAPME issues its EU Craft and SME Barometer twice a year, ahead of the European Summit in spring
and autumn.
Furthermore, UEAPME provides twice a year a European SME Business Climate Index (see page 1),
which is calculated as the average of the current situation and the expectations about the next period and
sums positive and neutral answers as regards the overall situation for the business.
Finally, UEAPME will only present European figures and will not disclose any national data. This is due to the
fact that we have not data for all Member States that are significant enough from a statistic perspective and
furthermore, the presentation of national data from SME surveys is a prerogative of our national
organisations, which are collecting these data.
______________________________________________________________
For further information on this document, please contact:
Gerhard Huemer, Study Unit Director
UEAPME
Rue Jacques de Lalaing, 4
B-1040 Brussels
Tel: +32 2 2307599
E-mail: [email protected]
Mario Gronert, Study Unit Economist
UEAPME
Rue Jacques de Lalaing, 4
B-1040 Brussels
Tel: +32 2 2850710
E-mail: [email protected]
2
Main Results of the EU Craft and SME Barometer 2010/H2
Overall, Europe’s SMEs uphold the trend observed over the last year. Chart 2 shows the balance of positive
vs. negative answers received regarding situation, turnover, employment, prices, investments and orders
over the last three semesters as well as the expectations for the current half-year. A positive balance means
more respondents viewed developments positively; a negative balance reports the opposite. The situation
indicator receded by 5 percentage points from -25 to -20. The expectation for the current semester is
dramatically better with a suspected 17.5 point jump to -2.5.
Chart 2 – balance +/-
SME main results
4,6
5,1
20,0
10,0
09/H1
-50,0
Employment
-3,8
-4,7
Prices
-20,7
-15,8
-13,1
-12,4
Turnover
-14,6
-13,5
Situation
Investments
-26,6
-18,6
-40,0
-20,6
-25,0
-30,0
-33,1
-25,0
-20,0
-20,0
-12,4
-14,6
-6,3
-1,1
-2,5
-10,0
-2,8
-0,9
0,0
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
Orders
Comparable developments can be seen for turnover and employment, rising from lows of -25 and -14.6 in
09/H2 to expected values of -0.9 and -1.1 respectively. Prices and orders behave similarly and even display
positive expected balances for the current half-year. The balance for prices is assumed to hit 4.6, the one for
orders shall reach 5.1. Investments also evolve favourably but at a much slower pace. The investment
environment will be discussed in more detail further below.
Positive expectations: do they come true?
To correctly analyse the current situation, it is advisable to take into account the difference between last
time’s expectations and the actual results for the first semester of 2010. Table 1 (next page) shows the
figures for the European SME average. Positive figures mean actual results were better than anticipated,
negative ones describe worse than expected results.
The balances for the first half of 2010 were better than expected for turnover (12.98), employment (4.66),
investments (12.46) and orders (7.06). However, overall situation was worse than anticipated (-10.98),
probably because of the worsening development in prices (-10.27).
3
Price pressures to blame for dashed hopes
Table 1
The worse than expected situation balance puts the striking 17.5 point
jump mentioned above into perspective. It also curbs the mood on
prices, where expectations were positive as well six months ago, but
had to be corrected downwards.1 The data seems to show that slim
profit margins are to blame for negative difference as regards
situation.
Despite being positively surprised by turnover, prices were reported to
be worse than expected. This most likely means that companies’ cost
increases caused by the expansion in turnover could not be passed
on fully to customers. Reduced per-unit earnings have put a damper
on entrepreneurs’ hopes.
SME All
10/H1 – 10/H1e
Situation
-11.0
Turnover
13.0
Employment
4.7
Prices
-10.3
Investments
12.5
Orders
7.1
Employment in Europe is stabilising
A more detailed analysis of the economy can be undertaken if we look at the employment figures and break
them down by size class and sector. Chart 3 presents this data for the expectations for the first half of 2010
back in March, the actual results reported over the summer for the same time period and the expectation for
the current semester.
The data points towards an improvement in the labour market. The first six months of 2010 have been better
than expected over all sizes and sectors with the exception of micro enterprises, which reported a negligible
step back. Expectations are even better. The SME mean shows employment figures in the first semester of
this year to have been 4.7pp healthier than expected. Another 5.2pp improvement is foreseen. However, the
balances reported are on average still slightly negative. This means that the growth in unemployment in the
SME sector is coming to an end – whether a hiring spree is to follow next is not certain.
Chart 3 – balance +/-
1
0,6
-6,4
-4,1
0,3
-8,3
-6,2
-14,3
-11,8
-7,4
-13,9
-10,5
-4,1
-11,0
-6,3
-1,1
-0,7
-16,7
-14,7
-3,5
-0,5
1,9
Employment
-8,4
-9,0
-3,2
20,00
10,00
0,00
-10,00
-20,00
-30,00
-40,00
-50,00
10/H1e
10/H1
10/H2e
10/H2e stands at +4.6; 10/H1e stood at +5.5 but was revised during the summer to -4.8 (10/H1).
4
By size, the data indicate better-than-expected results for small- and medium-sized companies. The largest
SMEs in fact anticipate more hiring than lay-offs (balance: +1.9). Micro firms also have an optimistic outlook
yet show a lower volatility: they reported better balances at the beginning of the crisis but show a slower
recovery to positive balances.2 The lower volatility in employment of micro-enterprises is probably due to a
threshold effect. Reducing staff from 90 to 82 people still allows a company to function around the clock.
Reducing personnel from 5 to 3 employees might be more difficult.
Lower employment volatility for micro enterprises due to threshold effect
A restaurant, for example, needs a minimum number of employees to attend to customers. Below that
number, the restaurant could not function properly. In fact, any company has that restriction. Nonetheless, it
can be argued that micro-enterprises reach that threshold earlier than larger ones. Once they reach the
threshold, entrepreneurs have but two choices: either keep the workforce in the hopes that output recovers
(i.e., labour hoarding) or close up shop. Two effects arise.
Firstly, micro companies might show lower volatility since they are more wary of firings and prefer to keep
labour. They often lack the resources to run large human resources operations to find skilled labour. Thus, it
might be more efficient to retain workers than incurring in (uncertain) recruitment and training costs at a later
stage. Secondly, the data may be biased as the companies that choose to shut down operations are no
longer active respondents. Their reduction in employment would not appear in the balances. If this happens
disproportionately at micro enterprises, it would artificially lower volatility in our figures compared to the other
size classes.
Services lead the way by sector
If we dissect the data by industry, the general picture does not change. We observe the above mentioned
better than expected results for the beginning of the year and rising expectations. The situation is best for
services. Business and personal services estimate narrowly positive employment balances for the second
half of 2010 (0.3 and 0.6 respectively). Manufacturing, where exports are on the rise, improves more
sluggishly: the expectation for the current semester is still negative with -4.1. The worst results come from
the construction sector. Despite having a better than anticipated first half-year, employers foreseeing less
employment still outnumber optimistic employers by 7.4 percentage points. The next segment deals with this
sector more specifically.
2
See Table 3 in the Annex
5
SME Construction: In the dark about their future
All our indicators point to a problem in the European SME economy: the construction sector. Chart 4 exhibits
the development of the sector over the last years. The recession’s worse effects were countered with
government schemes. The graphic shows a hike in the first half of 2009 after the plunge in the previous
semester. The realisation that government support programmes were unsustainable is most clearly seen in
the falling turnover and employment balances in the second half of 2009. Balances have picked up since, but
some indicators see the situation improving (situation, employment, prices and investments), while others
anticipate a worsening (turnover and orders). A factor to take into account when analysing the data is that
respondents might have subjectively lowered their expectations of what constitutes an improvement after
such troubling times.
Chart 4
SME construction
10,0
Situation
0,0
Turnover
-10,0
Employment
-20,0
Prices
Investments
-30,0
Orders
-40,0
08/H1
08/H2
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
On the whole, while other sectors show a trend towards stability, the construction sector appears to be in the
dark about its future. Sluggish growth in construction is a problem not only because it curbs overall growth by
reducing demand in other sectors. The construction sector is also relevant for Europe’s future as a green
economy. Building renovation is a cornerstone of the EU 2020 Flagship Initiative resource efficient Europe.
Around 80% of all construction works in the EU are done by SMEs.
How can the sector be in a crisis despite such rosy forecasts? One of the problems is that the structure of
the sector is still skewed towards the creation of new homes and offices, where overcapacities abound, as
opposed to the restoration and improvement of existing property. Furthermore, entrepreneurs bemoan the
lack of funding to finance green projects that are beneficial in the long-term both for society and individuals.
Finally, given the current uncertainty, potential customers are cautious of spending their savings now, even if
the investment pays off in the medium-term.
6
SME investment growing in confidence
A more auspicious picture arises when we look at investment data. We had observed in the last UEAPME
SME Barometer that investments turned out to be better than estimated six months ago. 3 This holds true for
this period as well (see column 4 in Table 2 below). What has changed is the now more positive forward
looking expectation. In the two previous semesters (columns 1 and 2), the difference between the expected
investment confidence for period t+1 and the actual investment for period t had been negative. Respondents
expected future investment to be smaller than current, expressing few hopes in future economic expansion.
This time (column 3), the difference is positive and stands at +0.8 for all SMEs.
Table 2
09/H2e – 09/H1
(1)
10/H1e – 09/H2
(2)
10/H2e – 10/H1
(3)
10/H1 – 10/H1e
(4)
SME All
-10.4
-6.1
0.8
12.2
Manufacturing
-4.6
-3.9
1.9
14.7
Construction
-14.7
-5.6
4.5
7.5
Business Services
-4.2
-7.2
-1.2
19.4
Personal Services
-30.0
-6.2
-0.5
16.2
SME Investment
A warning sign should be attached to this data. As we can see from breaking down the information by sector,
the biggest improvements come from the construction sector (+4.5), which we just saw to have had
somewhat erratic developments.4 Nevertheless, the trend is, with the exception of business services in
column 2, strong and persistent in all sectors. After having had problems with overcapacities (especially in
the manufacturing sector), companies were wary of investments. This is most likely the cause for the slower
pace of recovery in investments seen in Chart 2. Qualitatively, the current trend hints at a change with
entrepreneurs seeing better investment opportunities arising.
The most likely explanation for this mismatch, as mentioned in the previous edition, is that entrepreneurs think of investment,
when asked about it, as an expansionary activity. They are not confident enough to believe in the necessity for investments to
augment production capacities, yet later reassess and are possibly surprised by the amount of investment needed to keep
production stable.
4 It is wise to have reservations about such a positive figure since the upturn comes from a low base. A very bad situation can
improve markedly but still remain bad.
3
7
Towards a two-speed Europe or just another business cycle?
Discussing the UEAPME SME Business Climate Index at the beginning, we presented an optimistic and a
pessimistic view on Europe’s economy. In a final thought experiment, we have compared the European
average with the results for the (ill-named) PIIGS: Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain. Charts 5 and 6
present the results for employment for the first half of 2010 and the expectations for the current semester
respectively.
Both charts evidence that the PIIGS
are lowering Europe’s average. For
the first half of 2010, the balance
reported by the PIIGS was 6.9pp
worse than for the whole EU. By
sectors, the smallest differences was
logged for business services; the
largest for construction: the EUaverage (-11.8) is 13.2pp better than
the balance for the PIIGS (-25.0).
This comes as no surprise as Spain
and Ireland have suffered major real
estate bubble bursts. It further shows
the importance of the sector.
Chart 5
Employment 10/H1
10,00
-4,1
-10,0
-25,0
-30,00
-8,2
-6,2
-11,8
-12,1
-10,5
-20,00
-13,2
-10,00
-6,3
0,00
EU-Average
PIIGS
Chart 6
1,0
0,3
0,6
Employment 10/H2e
10,00
-6,1
-13,2
-7,4
-4,7
-4,1
-10,00
-5,6
0,00
-1,1
Looking at the current semester, we
witness a narrowing of the difference.
In all, the mismatch between the EU
and the PIIGS falls from 6.9pp to
4.5pp. This points towards a more
transitory nature of these differences.
After all, only a few years ago,
Ireland and Spain outperformed the
EU average. Moreover, their longterm development remains largely
positive despite the crisis.
-20,00
-30,00
EU-Average
PIIGS
In an environment riddled by a high degree of uncertainty but increasing optimism, what is needed is to
carry on with reforms so as to not make what is a current, transitory divide into a long-lasting disunion.
Special attention should be given to the construction sector, which is not only doubtful about its future but is
also strongly localised and seems to be one of the main wedges behind the current two-speed Europe.
8
Annex
Employment for the non-financial business economy broken down by enterprise size class and sector 2005 (%)
Table 1 / EUROSTAT
BE
1 to 9
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
EL
ES
FR
IE
IT
CY
LV
LT
26.72
43.53
39.26
47.35
29.82
31.98
29.03
58.39
49.01
38.13
33.99
58.39
49.10
28.75
EU Share
1.95
1.47
3.35
0.92
11.13
0.22
2.77
13.15
9.30
0.57
19.21
0.21
0.33
0.39
10 to 49
32.60
29.61
26.41
38.00
36.12
37.28
26.50
32.26
33.94
32.91
26.50
28.25
36.44
36.53
EU Share
2.06
1.56
2.62
1.65
17.66
0.40
1.77
12.16
11.63
0.78
12.25
0.17
0.59
0.75
50 to 249
23.87
31.13
26.24
32.18
31.90
33.69
15.11
18.73
27.93
33.10
15.11
22.65
34.81
36.75
EU Share
SME
EU Share
1 to 9
EU Share%
10 to 49
EU Share%
1.97
3.12
1.67
18.68
0.43
1.21
8.46
11.46
0.94
8.37
0.16
0.67
0.91
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
1.95
1.63
3.07
1.34
15.09
0.33
2.06
11.64
10.58
0.73
14.27
0.19
0.50
0.64
EU 27
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
33.57
55.05
49.45
32.01
36.33
57.67
50.17
32.57
39.40
20.12
37.84
44.00
36.84
43.37
0.10
3.03
0.11
2.86
1.60
8.59
3.32
2.29
0.49
0.25
0.78
2.06
9.55
100.00
35.76
23.69
24.66
35.07
35.26
16.52
28.38
30.43
27.58
32.80
31.25
30.43
33.62
30.86
100.00
0.08
4.40
2.18
3.46
2.64
3.00
0.49
0.57
0.90
2.01
12.24
30.67
21.27
25.90
32.92
28.41
25.80
21.45
37.01
33.01
47.08
30.92
25.57
29.54
25.77
0.15
1.97
0.10
4.95
2.10
6.47
2.39
4.37
0.70
0.98
1.07
2.02
12.89
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
0.13
2.38
0.09
3.87
1.91
6.46
2.87
3.04
0.54
0.54
0.89
2.03
11.24
100.00
0.15
50 to 249
EU Share%
SME
1.80
100.00
EU Share%
1.83
Table 2 / EUROSTAT
Business Sector
Manufacturing
EU Share %
24.86
Construction
14.06
Business Services
22.66
Personal / Social Services
SME
38.42
100.00
9
Results – European Crafts and SME Barometer – 2010/H2
Table 3 / UEAPME Study Unit
Balance between positive and negative answers / weighted by number of employees
∑SME
Micro Enterprises
Small Enterprises
Medium-sized Enterprises
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
Situation
-33.1
-24.96
-20.04
-2.54
-32.3
-26,21
-22.48
-5.48
-30.4
-24,50
-14.98
3.68
-34.8
-21,76
-4.84
8.11
Turnover
-20.6
-25.05
-2.82
-0.94
-19.4
-26,61
-6.10
-4.76
-20.1
-20,52
0.50
5.24
-15.2
-11,97
14.93
14.82
Employment
-12.4
-14.55
-6.29
-1.10
-9.1
-13,95
-9.00
-3.24
-13.3
-19,15
-3.45
-0.55
-17.9
-16,20
-0.69
1.88
Prices
-14.6
-13.46
-4.75
4.58
-4.1
-11,29
-4.24
4.14
-17.3
-13,93
-4.94
2.71
-19.8
-16,16
-3.37
2.22
Investments
-20.7
-15.79
-13.14
-12.36
-19.8
-14,74
-15.55
-14.62
-21.7
-15,24
-8.31
-8.75
-18.6
-16,58
-8.94
-7.03
Orders
-26.6
-18.64
-3.84
5.05
-25.8
-22,02
-7.87
-0.54
-26.3
-23,34
2.73
6.43
-29.9
-21,22
7.20
8.18
∑Manufacturing
Construction
Business Services
Personal Services
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
Situation
-39.7
-28,92
-19.97
-2.57
-28.1
-26,29
-23.88
-3.30
-36.9
-20,31
-23.04
-6.39
-33.0
-17,59
-18.72
-1.53
Turnover
-27.0
-27,18
2.19
2.56
-12.7
-29,88
-5.17
-9.22
-22.0
-23,89
-10.70
-3.19
-26.1
-20,09
-6.79
2.45
Employment
-22.4
-18,57
-10.52
-4.07
-6.5
-16,75
-11.79
-7.38
-20.9
-9,80
-6.18
0.30
-10.0
-10,58
-4.09
0.63
Prices
-16.4
-18,78
-7.18
-0.75
-23.5
-22,44
-10.66
-0.57
-13.0
-9,45
-3.22
7.21
-0.4
-0,99
-0.10
10.12
Investments
-23.7
-24,17
-13.91
-12.03
-23.3
-26,77
-24.88
-20.34
-27.9
-22,84
-10.71
-11.89
-17.6
-16,95
-7.02
-7.49
Orders
-35.0
-25,25
-10.80
3.23
-20.7
-24,33
-4.72
-6.63
-27.9
-15,12
-3.33
5.80
-28.6
-18,59
-6.70
3.50
10
Table 4 / UEAPME Study Unit
Difference between the balance expected and the in retrospect reported balance
∑SME
Micro Enterprises
Small Enterprises
Medium-sized Enterprises
09/H2 – 09/H2e
10/H1 – 10/H1e
09/H2 – 09/H2e
10/H1 – 10/H1e
09/H2 – 09/H2e
10/H1 – 10/H1e
09/H2 – 09/H2e
10/H1 – 10/H1e
Situation
-6,23
-10.98
-7,15
-12.77
-5,57
-7.04
-2,11
4.73
Turnover
-2,63
12.98
-6,12
10.77
-0,32
14.29
2,83
24.88
Employment
-1,88
4.66
-6,00
-0.61
-5,58
11.22
2,60
16.05
Prices
-0,82
-10.27
-8,43
-12.09
-1,98
-8.64
6,35
-0.20
Investments
15,28
12.46
16,06
10.29
16,77
18.06
6,15
11.51
Orders
-1,31
7.06
-6,96
3.21
-6,27
13.58
-6,82
17.34
∑Manufacturing
Construction
Business Services
Personal Services
09/H2 – 09/H2e
10/H1 – 10/H1e
09/H2 – 09/H2e
10/H1 – 10/H1e
09/H2 – 09/H2e
10/H1 – 10/H1e
09/H2 – 09/H2e
10/H1 – 10/H1e
Situation
-8,67
-8.07
-1,42
-13.52
2,82
-16.48
-0,14
-13.63
Turnover
-2,50
19.62
-6,60
14.08
3,06
1.82
-0,20
3.56
Employment
-2,25
3.37
-3,01
2.53
3,68
2.14
-1,85
2.28
Prices
-3,12
-9.47
-2,96
-7.42
-1,86
-8.30
1,35
-14.04
Investments
4,07
14.14
11,31
7.49
9,24
19.37
13,02
16.16
Orders
-11,89
1.67
0,24
8.98
9,91
4.51
-3,15
-0.07
11
-20,0
-30,0
-40,0
-50,0
-26,3
-23,34
10/H1
10/H2e
-30,0
-40,0
-50,0
-10,0
-20,0
7,20
8,18
-25,8
-22,02
-7,87
-0,54
-19,8
-14,74
-15,55
-14,62
-4,1
-11,29
-4,24
-9,1
-13,95
-9,00
-3,24
-6,10
-4,76
-5,48
5,05
4,14
10,0
-29,9
-21,22
2,22
1,88
-3,84
4,58
20,0
-18,6
-16,58
-8,94
-7,03
10,0
-3,37
20,0
-0,69
small enterprises
-19,4
-26,61
-32,3
-26,21
-22,48
-50,0
-19,8
-16,16
09/H2
-40,0
-17,9
-16,20
09/H1
-20,0
14,93
14,82
10/H2e
-30,0
8,11
10/H1
-10,0
-15,2
-11,97
0,0
09/H2
-4,84
-26,6
-18,64
-20,7
-15,79
-13,14
-12,36
-14,6
-13,46
-4,75
0,0
09/H1
-21,76
2,73
6,43
2,71
-2,82
-0,94
All SMEs
-34,8
-10,0
-12,4
-14,55
-6,29
-1,10
-20,6
-25,05
10,0
-21,7
-15,24
-8,31
-8,75
10,0
-2,54
20,0
-17,3
-13,93
-4,94
20,0
-13,3
-19,15
-3,45
-0,55
-50,0
0,50
5,24
-40,0
-20,1
-20,52
-30,0
3,68
-20,0
-33,1
-24,96
-20,04
-10,0
-30,4
-24,50
-14,98
Results – European Crafts and SME Barometer – 2010/H2
micro enterprises
09/H1
0,0
0,0
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
medium enterprises
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
12
-10,0
-20,0
-30,0
-40,0
-50,0
-9,80
-6,18
-27,9
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
-10,0
-20,0
-30,0
-40,0
-50,0
-6,70
10,0
-28,6
-18,59
SME personal services
3,50
10,12
20,0
-17,6
-16,95
-7,02
-7,49
SME business services
-0,4
-0,99
-0,10
-20,7
-24,33
-23,3
-26,77
-24,88
-20,34
-4,72
-6,63
-0,57
-6,5
-16,75
-11,79
-7,38
-5,17
-9,22
-12,7
-3,30
-23,5
-22,44
-10,66
-29,88
-50,0
0,63
-40,0
-28,1
-26,29
-23,88
-20,0
-10,0
-10,58
-4,09
09/H1
-30,0
2,45
10/H2e
-10,0
-6,79
0,0
10/H1
-1,53
-10,80
09/H2
-17,59
-18,72
5,80
-35,0
-25,25
-23,7
-24,17
-13,91
-12,03
0,0
3,23
09/H1
-26,1
-20,09
-3,33
7,21
-16,4
-18,78
-7,18
-0,75
-22,4
-18,57
-10,52
-4,07
2,19
2,56
20,0
-33,0
-15,12
-27,9
-22,84
-10,71
-11,89
10,0
0,30
20,0
-13,0
-9,45
-3,22
-20,9
-20,0
-27,0
-27,18
-10,0
-2,57
10,0
-22,0
-23,89
-10,70
-3,19
-6,39
-50,0
-39,7
-28,92
-19,97
-40,0
-20,31
-23,04
-30,0
-36,9
SME manufacturing
SME construction
20,0
10,0
09/H1
0,0
0,0
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
09/H1
09/H2
10/H1
10/H2e
13