That is not a technical recession. The Eurozone uses a definition quite similar to the US definition [0]. It's like people commenting on the internet get all of their information from other internet comments, and refuse to read actual sources. This is not ambiguous, the current definition of recession has been established for decades.
>Why doesn’t the Committee accept the two-quarter definition?
>The Committee’s procedure for identifying turning points differs from the two-quarter rule in several ways. First, we do not identify economic activity solely with real GDP, but use a range of indicators, notably employment. Second, we consider the depth of the decline in economic activity. Recall that our definition includes the phrase, “a significant decline in activity.”
Thanks. The news articles I read last month regarding Eurozone technical recession mentioned Eurostat as their source. Eurostat themselves used the "2 quarters of declining GDP is a technical recession" line:
"The GDP decrease in the euro area is the second consecutive quarterly contraction, which means that the euro area economy is in a technical recession."
