Group Economics writes regularly about developments in the macro economy. Here are our latest forecasts on interest rate and currency developments, energy prices and the economic trend in developed and emerging markets.

The economy is in limbo – caught between the US tariff drag and looming German fiscal largesse. The manufacturing sector saw renewed weakness in September. This is consistent with our expectation for zero growth in Q3, following a very subdued expansion of 0.1% q/q in Q2. As long as the economy remains resilient and on track for a recovery next year, we think the ECB will likely keep interest rates on hold. But the risk remains tilted towards cuts rather than hikes.

The budget presented on Prinsjesdag had few surprises, including a plan to boost purchasing power. Large policy changes were left to the next cabinet after the upcoming elections, and the political campaign is picking up steam. Growth is expected to remain subdued in the near term before picking up in 2026.

The Fed did a ‘risk management cut’ of 25 bps as inflation and employment risks approach balance. Tariffs and the immigration crackdown led to an immediate stagflationary impulse, but the overall picture is nothing like the 1970s yet. Early Q3 data is actually showing some signs of a modest recovery in consumption and investment.

Domestic weakness broadened over the summer, with investment growth cooling sharply. We expect Beijing to add targeted stimulus to safeguard growth, but a ‘bazooka’ is still unlikely. Meanwhile, China’s stock markets do not seem to care about weaker macro data.

Fossil fuels have long been the backbone of our global economy, powering industries, transportation, and households. In 2023, they accounted for nearly 80% of the global energy supply, according to the IEA. However, as the world races to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, our reliance on fossil fuels must drastically decrease. The solution seems simple: replace fossil fuels with alternatives that emit less or no carbon dioxide. But in reality, this transition is anything but straightforward. The path to more sustainable energy involves a complex landscape of alternative fuels, each with unique characteristics. Transitioning to these fuels also requires significant adjustments, such as changes to engines, infrastructure, and storage systems. Additionally, challenges like limited production capacity, high costs, and competition for green electricity and raw materials make the widespread adoption of alternative fuels even more difficult. In some cases, the technologies needed to produce these fuels at scale are still in development. Despite these obstacles, more sustainable fuels—in our report referred to as synthetic fuels—will play a vital role in the global journey toward a net-zero economy. This report dives into the world of these fuels, exploring if there is enough supply of affordable synthetic fuels for the hard to abate sectors in mobility namely shipping, aviation and trucking.

Using Bloomberg's EUCPM model, we run scenarios to simulate several market and policy changes in the EU ETS market. Our baseline scenario sees EUA prices rising to €145/tCO2 by 2030 and €200/tCO2 by 2035, driven mainly by lower supply of allowances and a decline in the Total Number of Allowances in Circulation (TNAC).

In this note, we analyze the impact of increasing ETS prices on companies’ results from the sectors under EU ETS and EU ETS2. According to our results, the impact on the electricity sector is quite benign, especially if we consider that the cost pass through is limited to 42%.

Considering the surge in renewable capacity to meet climate goals, a new challenge is facing power market operators, namely grid balancing. This is because of the intermittent nature of renewable generation, which makes supply vulnerable to weather conditions, especially in the absence of sufficient grid and flexible capacity. In such a case, curtailment and negative prices episodes become more frequent, along with frequency swings, which induces blackouts and economic costs. Furthermore, such situation would discourage investments and slowdown the transition process. The recent nation-wide blackout in Spain and Portugal put this challenge in the spotlight raising concerns about energy stability and security across Europe. This article dive into this topic with a focus on the Dutch case. We revisit the current and envisioned power mix in the Netherlands. We further explore the challenges, risks and opportunities facing development of flexible technologies in the Netherlands. We end with recommendations.

The ECB has recently announced a change to its collateral framework. From the second half of 2026, haircuts to non-financial institutions’ bonds will be adjusted by a climate factor. The latter will serve as a buffer, mitigating the potential financial impact of climate-related uncertainties on collateral value and is calculated based on a sector-specific stressor, an issuer-specific exposure and an asset-specific vulnerability.

Considering the surge in renewable capacity to meet climate goals, a new challenge is facing power market operators, namely grid balancing. This is because of the intermittent nature of renewable generation, which makes supply vulnerable to weather conditions, especially in the absence of sufficient grid and flexible capacity. In such a case, curtailment and negative prices episodes become more frequent, along with frequency swings, which induces blackouts and economic costs. Furthermore, such situation would discourage investments and slowdown the transition process. The recent nation-wide blackout in Spain and Portugal put this challenge in the spotlight raising concerns about energy stability and security across Europe. This article dive into this topic with a focus on the Dutch case. We revisit the current and envisioned power mix in the Netherlands. We further explore the challenges, risks and opportunities facing development of flexible technologies in the Netherlands. We end with recommendations.

The ECB has recently announced a change to its collateral framework. From the second half of 2026, haircuts to non-financial institutions’ bonds will be adjusted by a climate factor. The latter will serve as a buffer, mitigating the potential financial impact of climate-related uncertainties on collateral value and is calculated based on a sector-specific stressor, an issuer-specific exposure and an asset-specific vulnerability.

There was a noticeable surge in negative news related to ESG in the first half of the year, which has impacted the issuance of ESG-labelled bonds. Initially, we expected ESG issuance to total EUR 266bn in 2025, but we have adjusted our forecast down to EUR 247bn. In the financials space, that downward revision stems from less ESG-labelled senior non-preferred bonds in Q2. With regards to corporates, the issuance of ESG-labelled bonds by utilities’ companies has also fallen short of our forecast, and we now expect it to total EUR ~50bn by year-end. And, finally, concerning sovereigns, we are also downward revising our forecast for NextGenerationEU issuance in EUR 3bn, in line with the trend registered in the first half of the year.

Europe is striving to do its part in the effort to limit global warming. The first hurdle on the road to meeting the target of net zero GHG emissions by 2050 is meeting the EU climate and energy targets for 2030. The next hurdle is setting new intermediate targets for 2040. It is likely that chances of successfully setting a credible and sufficient 2040 target are influenced by the chances of meeting the 2030 target, as climate action will have to be stepped up during the period 2030-2040 in case the 2030 targets were missed. This note focuses on the probabilities of meeting the 2030 targets, based on the European Commission’s evaluation of the latest National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) of the individual Member States.

According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to housing, regardless of their employment status, health, or other conditions. In this note we dive deeper into the structures of social housing in four European countries: the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Germany and France.

In this publication, we answer the question of what the path of the Dutch economy and its sectors towards the ultimate 2050 climate-neutral goal might look like. In particular, we look here at the impact that low-carbon technologies can have on reducing greenhouse gases for 21 sectors in our so-called Sector Technology Pathways. What sectors are the heavyweights in the transition, where is reducing greenhouse gases most challenging and what are bottlenecks we need to overcome in the transition?

Climate change creates greater risks that are more frequent and cause more damage to Dutch homes. This study addresses the question of which districts can be deemed ‘climate-vulnerable districts’, i.e. those in which the risks of climate change, but also the costs of energy efficiency measures, may be too much for homeowners or properties to bear.

The energy transition is an economy wide process where a development in one part affects, directly or indirectly, other parts. Bottlenecks or costs challenges could harm an effective energy transition. The effect of today’s bottlenecks on the transition, such as the limited grid capacity, is magnified because of the mismatch in the timeframe for deploying grid extensions versus what is needed for electrification or renewable deployments.

The Rhine, the busiest river in Europe, is of great economic importance. Due to drought, both in 2018 and 2022, there have been episodes where the water level in the Rhine has dropped to critical levels, severely limiting inland shipping. According to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, in November 2018, low water levels led to a drop in industrial production by 1.5 percent, causing a decline of German GDP by 0.4 percent. 1)

Biodiversity stands for biological diversity. The loss of biodiversity translates into the loss of services provided by ecosystems to the real economy. There are two types of risks associated with biodiversity: physical and transitions risks. Physical risks stem from the loss of biodiversity (for instance, disappearance of animal pollinators, like bees), and transition risks stem from regulations/policies introduced by regulators to mitigate biodiversity loss (such as the introduction of a tax on fertilizers or the implementation of Natura 2000). Physical risks are captured by how much a sector depends on biodiversity (e.g. agriculture depends a lot on animal pollinators, like bees). And transition risks are captured by how much a sector impacts biodiversity (i.e. the more damage a firm causes, the more likely it is to be hit by policies acting against it). The ENCORE database provides qualitative assessments for each sector and sub-sector on their exposure to biodiversity risks and we use these to calculate quantitative biodiversity sector exposure scores. As per existing regulation, banks are required to report their loan book exposure per sector, according to the NACE categorisation. Hence, by combining banks’ loan book exposure per sector and sector scores on biodiversity dependence and impact, we were able to calculate individual banks’ exposure to biodiversity loss risks. Furthermore, we used Natural Language Processing to assess a bank’s awareness of its balance sheet exposure to biodiversity risks.

Jaap Teerhuis is a Senior Fixed Income Strategist at Group Economics of ABN AMRO Bank

Larissa Fritz is a Senior Fixed Income Strategist, with focus on ESG at Group Economics of ABN AMRO Bank.

Jan-Paul van de Kerke is Senior Economist covering the Netherlands and the eurozone at Group Economics of ABN AMRO Bank.