GDP per capita
|Updated: 31.1.2018 - Next update: 16.3.2018|
Gross domestic product grew by 2.1 per cent in 2016
According to Statistics Finlands revised preliminary data, the volume of Finlands gross domestic product grew by 2.1 per cent in 2016, while previously the growth was estimated to be 1.9 per cent. The National Accounts for 2015 were also revised: gross domestic product grew by 0.1 per cent, previously it was estimated that the GDP had remained unchanged.Statistical release
Statistics Finland, Annual national accounts
Description of indicator
GDP, gross domestic product at market prices is the final result of the production activity of resident producer units. It can be defined in three ways: as the sum of gross value added of the various institutional sectors or the various industries plus taxes and less subsidies on products; as the sum of final uses of goods and services by resident institutional units (final consumption, gross capital formation, exports minus imports); as the sum of uses in the total economy generation of income account (compensation of employees, taxes on production and imports less subsidies, gross operating surplus and gross mixed income).
GDP per capita is often used in international comparisons as a measurement of national economy.
The volume index describes an economic series from which the effect of price change, or inflation, has been removed. The volume index includes the observed occurrence and changes in both quantity and quality.
Gross domestic product (GDP) indicators can be used to make assessments about the development of the national economy and its relationship to the overall development of society. The long-term goal of Finland’s public finances is to achieve sustainable economic growth and financial balance. From the perspective of the balance and funding of public finances, the key factors affecting economic development are the productivity and job-creating potential of the economy. Supporting economic growth that creates jobs is an essential social policy objective for ensuring that the present funding of the welfare state and public finances are structurally sustainable.
The use of the GDP indicator as a measure of wellbeing has also been widely criticised, and many citizens and decision-makers have expressed a desire for another index to replace it. An indicator based on economic theory does not take into account, for example, environmental damage or financial inequality among citizens. On the other hand, one of the strengths of the GDP indicator is its robust statistical basis and international comparability. Moreover, national accounting, on which GDP is based, has been regularly adjusted to correspond with social changes and it has been expanded by incorporating within it satellite accounts relating to human wellbeing, use of natural resources and the state of the environment.