Oost Vlaanderen (BE23), West Vlaanderen (BE25), Vlaams Brabant (BE24), with an AROP rate around 9%. The EBLUP estimation for these provinces is very stable over the time too. Figure 6 : AROP direct estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2011 - 2016 Figure 7 : AROP EBLUP estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2011 - 2016 The analysis for the indicator is similar. For 2016, the direct and the EBLUP estimation of AROPE is quite the same, except for few NUTS-2 (see table 14). The regional correction is weak and the indicator is stable over the time. The gap between the two estimators can be explained by the difference of the auxiliary variables between the sample and the entire population. Figure 8 and 9 illustrate the effect of the EBLUP estimation from 2011 to 2016 for AROPE. The four clusters defined for AROP are quite similar for AROPE. Table 12 : AROPE direct and EBLUP estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2016 Direct EBLUP Corrected estimation EBLUP 38.30% 42.86% 38.30% BE10 (Brussels) BE21 16.19% 18.19% 17.06% (Antwerpen) BE22 (Limburg) 15.32% 18.21% 17.08% BE23 (Oost 12.94% 14.55% 13.65% Vlaanderen) BE24 (Vlaams 12.74% 12.68% 11.89% Brabant) BE25 (West 14.94% 13.00% 12.20% Vlaanderen) BE31 (Brabant 19.22% 19.06% 18.02% Wallon) 29.42% 32.08% 30.34% BE32 (Hainaut) BE33 (Liège) 26.66% 29.34% 27.75% BE34 16.47% 16.30% 15.42% (Luxembourg) 27.54% 25.51% 24.12% BE35 (Namur) Figure 8 : AROPE direct estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2011 - 2016 Figure 9 : AROPE EBLUP estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2011 - 2016
Oost Vlaanderen (BE23), West Vlaanderen (BE25), Vlaams Brabant (BE24), with an AROP rate around 9%. The EBLUP estimation for these provinces is very stable over the time too. Figure 6 : AROP direct estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2011 - 2016 Figure 7 : AROP EBLUP estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2011 - 2016 The analysis for the indicator is similar. For 2016, the direct and the EBLUP estimation of AROPE is quite the same, except for few NUTS-2 (see table 14). The regional correction is weak and the indicator is stable over the time. The gap between the two estimators can be explained by the difference of the auxiliary variables between the sample and the entire population. Figure 8 and 9 illustrate the effect of the EBLUP estimation from 2011 to 2016 for AROPE. The four clusters defined for AROP are quite similar for AROPE. Table 12 : AROPE direct and EBLUP estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2016 Direct estimation EBLUP Corrected EBLUP BE10 (Brussels) 38.30% 42.86% 38.30% BE21 (Antwerpen) 16.19% 18.19% 17.06% BE22 (Limburg) 15.32% 18.21% 17.08% BE23 (Oost Vlaanderen) 12.94% 14.55% 13.65% BE24 (Vlaams Brabant) 12.74% 12.68% 11.89% BE25 (West Vlaanderen) 14.94% 13.00% 12.20% BE31 (Brabant Wallon) 19.22% 19.06% 18.02% BE32 (Hainaut) 29.42% 32.08% 30.34% BE33 (Liège) 26.66% 29.34% 27.75% BE34 (Luxembourg) 16.47% 16.30% 15.42% BE35 (Namur) 27.54% 25.51% 24.12% Figure 8 : AROPE direct estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2011 - 2016 Figure 9 : AROPE EBLUP estimation by NUTS-2, SILC 2011 - 2016
RapportMetho_SAE.docx