CC BY
15
MIGRATION MOVEMENT IN THE REGION
<i>
MIGRATION TRENDS IN THE BALTIC REGION STATES:
THE SPATIOTEMPORAL ASPECT
Tatiana Kuznetsova
This article analyses the migration streams in the Baltic Sea region in 1950—2009. The geography of migration movement is considered at the level of state and at the mesolevel. The author assesses the influence of migration on the socioeconomic situation in the region.
Key words: Baltic region, migration movement, migration factors, socioeconomic development.
<f>
The Baltic region is a transnational region, a platform for cooperation between all states that have access to the Baltic Sea [2]. According to the features of migration movement in the region, its countries can be divided into two groups: the first one brings together states with a stable migration increase — developed countries with traditional market economies (Sweden, Finland, Germany, Denmark) and Russia, the second is represented by post-socialist countries with negative migration balance (Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia).
Since the mid-20th century, the vector of migration movement in the countries of the region has been repeatedly changing. Stable positive migration rate has been registered only in Sweden, which was the first developed country in the Baltic macroregion to engage a significant number of migrants in order to provide the economy which was rapidly growing in the post-war years with labour force (table 1). When the demand for labour force was met (that happened in the early 1970s), the migration policy became stricter. In the 1990s, a number of military conflicts arouse in the former Yugoslavia, the CIS countries, Africa, and Asia, which resulted in a considerable increase in the migration streams to Western Europe. Sweden was ranked first in the region in terms of per capita number of political migrants.
In 1960—1970, a considerable net migration rate was observed in the Federal Republic of Germany, which had just undergone an economic boom. In the post-war years, Germany was recruiting workforce from the countries of Southern Europe. In 1955—1973, Germany concluded bilateral guest worker agreements with Italy, Spain, Greece, Portugal, and Yugoslavia. West Germany was the first European country to sign an agreement on workforce engagement with Turkey and has since been the main target country for Turkish migrants. In the first half of the 1990s, after the collapse of the Socialist system in Eastern Europe, thanks to the Germans, who resi-
Tatiana Kuznetsova -
ded in Eastern European countries, the migrant inflow reached its peak. At the beginning of the 21st century, 7.5 % of the residents of the FRG do not hold German citizenship.
Table 1
Net migration rate in the countries of the Baltic macroregion, 1950—2009, per 1,000 people
Year Germany Latvia Lithuania Poland Finland Sweden Russia Estonia Denmark
1950 0.26 0.6 - 16.4 - 2.1 - 3.9 2.1 - 1.4 2.3 - 0.7
1955 - 0.1 - 0.8 - 0.3 0.1 - 0.1 2.4 - 1.1 - 1.9 - 4.1
1960 2.4 9.2 1.8 - 0.8 - 2.06 1.5 - 1.7 4.6 0.65
1965 4 5.9 1.8 - 0.8 - 4.6 4.3 - 1.4 5.5 0.1
1970 7.0 2.8 4.5 - 0.4 - 7.9 6.0 - 0.9 4.4 2.3
1975 - 2.7 4.9 1.8 - 0.2 - 0.8 2.0 0.8 4.0 - 0.7
1980 3.9 1.0 0.6 - 0.6 - 0.25 1.1 0.5 4.1 0.07
1985 0.9 4.7 3.5 - 0.5 0.5 1.4 1.9 4.1 1.8
1990 8.3 - 3.3 2.4 - 0.4 1.4 4.1 1.9 - 2.5 1.6
1995 4.9 - 4.2 - 6.5 - 0.5 0.8 1.3 4.4 - 5.4 5.5
2000 2.0 - 2.0 - 5.7 - 0.5 0.5 2.8 2.5 - 1.2 1.8
2005 1.0 - 0.2 - 2.6 - 0.3 1.7 3.0 0.9 - 2.3 1.2
2009 0 - 2.1 - 4.7 - 0.1 2.7 6.7 1.7 - 0.6 4.0
Source: [1].
As to Denmark, a small migration inflow began as early as in the 1950s, later it stabilised at the level of 1—2 people per 1,000 residents per year (excluding the mid-1990s, when the net migration rate significantly increased). According to the 2009 data, 5.8% of the population of the country are foreign citizens.
Finland, until the 1980s, was losing population (in particular, due to the outflow to Sweden). Later, as other economically developed countries of the Baltic macroregion, being guided by the needs of economy, Finland started to engage a significant number of migrants. A considerable increase in immigration resulted from the collapse of the USSR (in 1992, citizens of Russia, Estonia, and Yugoslavia started to arrive in Finland), as well as the accession of Finland to the EU in 1995.
Russia, from the second half of the 1950s until the mid-1970s, was a population donor for many republics of the USSR. In the mid-1970s it became the main recipient, which attracted population from the majority of other republics. The main reason for this migration "turnaround" was changes in labour force availability. In Kazakhstan and Central Asia, a considerable increase in labour force outstripped the job creation rate. In Russia, labour force grew slowly; however, the accelerated populating of development areas in the north of the RSFSR and the exploration of oil and gas regions in West Siberia required a mass staff inflow.
After the demise of the USSR, a positive net migration rate has been stable in Russia, however, mostly thanks to the Russians leaving the former
Soviet republics. As most of them had moved to Russia, the positive net migration rate decreased in the 2000s.
The population inflow (predominantly from the RF, but also from Belarus and Ukraine) was oriented in the Soviet period towards the Baltics, which stood out for its higher standards of living, on the one hand, and the need for industrial workers, on the other hand. A modest in absolute numbers, it was quite significant relative to the population of Estonia and Latvia. It led to a steep decrease in the share of titular nations in these countries.
After the disintegration of the USSR in 1991, the migration balance in the Baltics turned negative. The peak of population outflow fell on the beginning of the 1990s. In 1990—1994, approximately 250,000 residents left the Baltics. Since it was mostly the Russians who were leaving Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia — and they were unevenly distributed over the territories of these states — the migration outflow rate substantially varied in different regions. The greatest population losses were registered in the areas of compact Russian settlement. Since the second half of the 1990s, the migration outflow has reduced due to a number of reasons: most of those, who were willing to, had already left the Baltics; the Russian migration legislation was toughened; a part of the Russian-speaking population integrated into the new life of the state; many of them got an opportunity to move to the countries of West Europe. Over the last decades, statistics has indicated a modest migration outflow; however, it is well-known that, nowadays, an increasing part of the population, which is accounted as residing in those countries, works and, over a long period of time, lives abroad in the EU countries.
Poland, with its relatively high natural increase, has experienced population outflow over the whole post-war period. Since the 1990s, a considerable decrease in birth rate, natural increase as well as the emigration of working age population have caused a reduction in the human resources of Poland.
By 2008, the most significant migration stream to the countries of the Baltic macroregion (as to Russia, the analysis covers only the North-West federal district), was coming from the USA and Turkey (more than 30,000 people) — 90 % of the Turks and 70 % of the Americans arrived in Germany. The analysis of statistical data shows that most migrants, who enter the countries of the macroregion, immigrate to Germany. An exception is the former USSR republics — Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia, Kirgizia, and Moldova, the migration streams from which are mostly aimed at the NorthWest federal district of Russia. The centre of gravity for migrants from Iraq, Somalia, and Saudi Arabia is Sweden, where the procedure of obtaining a residence permit is simplified for the residents of these states.
The migration streams from the countries of the Baltic Sea region predominantly target the economically developed states of Europe and America. A high rate is also peculiar to intraregional migration. A general trend is a great number of residents arriving in the UK and the USA from throughout the region. However, there are certain differences in the emigration routes from the countries of the region. From Germany, people head for Poland
Tatiana Kuznetsova
(more than 20 %) and Turkey (6 %), which is mostly return migration. A significant number of people leave for the economically developed countries of Europe — Italy (5 %), Austria, Greece, Spain, and France (around 3 %). The Swedish migration streams are mostly oriented towards Scandinavian countries (Norway — more than 13 %, Denmark — approximately 10%, Finland — 7 %). Those leaving Finland mostly head for the Scandinavian countries; there is also a large share of migrants going to Estonia (around 7 %, mostly return migration). There is an active mutual migration interchange between the Baltics; a lot of people leave for Germany and the UK. Estonia is characterised by a significant number of migrants heading for Finland. From Poland, people predominantly move to the UK (it is the largest in the region migration stream to this country) and Germany. In the North-West federal district of Russia, most migrants (mostly Belarusians and Ukrainians) leave for Belarus and Ukraine.
The highest positive net migration rate in the countries of the Baltic macroregion is accounted for by Iraq, Ukraine, Romania, Kazakhstan, Thailand, the Netherlands, China, Hungary, and India; the greatest negative rate owes to the UK, Switzerland, the USA, Greece, and Italy. Thus, the net migration rate is predominantly supported by the countries of a lower development level. The population outflow is targeted at highly developed countries with favourable living conditions.
There are significant differences in the features of migration interchange between the states. One can establish a direct relation between the per capita GRP value and positive/negative migration rate (fig. 1).
Fig. 1. The interconnection between per capita GRP and net migration rate in the mesoregions of the Baltic Sea macoregion
By means of clustering, the mesoregions (the administrative-territorial units of the first level) were divided into five clusters on the basis of data on net migration rate and per capita GRP (table 2, fig. 2).
Table 2
Central cluster values
Indicator Cluster
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
Net migration rate, %o 6.17 2.80 7.70 - 1.66 - 4.96
per capita GRP, EUR 44380 30800 6000 18400 6500
Fig. 2. The clustering of the Baltic Sea macroregion by the level of socioeconomic development and migration
Cluster 1 (six members)
The most developed regions in the Baltic Sea macroregion (three of them are metropolitan areas), which actively engage human resources. Finland: Uusimaa, the Aland Islands. Sweden: Stockholm County. Denmark: Capital Region, South Jutland, Zealand.
Tatiana Kuznetsova
«P -
Cluster 2 (40 members)
The regions of this cluster belong to economically developed countries of the macroregion and are characterised by high standards of well-being, which facilitate migration inflow.
Sweden: Uppsala County, Sodermanland County, Ostergotland, Jonko-ping, Kronoberg county, Kalmar, Gotland, Blekinge, Skâne County, Hal-land, Vâstra Gotaland, Vârmland, Orebro, Vâstmanland, Dalarna, Gâvleborg, Vâsternorrland, Jâmtland, Vâsterbotten, Norrbotten.
Finalnd: Eastern Uusimaa, Finland Proper, Satakunta, Tavastia Proper, Pirkanmaa, Pâijânne Tavastia, Kymenlaakso, South Karelia, Southern Savo-nia, Nothern Savonia, North Karelia, Central Finland, Southern Ostroboth-nia, Ostrobothnia, Central Ostrobothnia, Lapland.
Germany: Schleswig-Holstein.
Denmark: Central Jutland, Southern Denmark.
Cluster 3 (4 members)
These regions are characterised by a high positive migration rate and low GRP. In Latvia, intensive migration to Pienga can be explained by the geographical expansion of the capital and active development of suburban territories. As to the Russian regions, the level of their socioeconomic development is higher than that of most constituent entities of European Russia, which facilitates intensive migration.
Russia: Kaliningrad region, Leningrad region, Saint Petersburg.
Latvia: Pienga.
Cluster 4 (5 members)
This group brings together the metropolitan areas of the post-socialist Baltic States characterised by the highest national GRP and net migration rate and the most depressed regions of Finland and Germany, whose level of development is lower than the national average. They are characterised by quite modest per capita GRP and small negative net migration rate.
Finland: Kainuu.
Germany: Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
Lithuania: Vilnius region.
Lativa: Riga region.
Estonia: Harju County.
Cluster 5 (32 member)
The regions constituting this group are characterised by a low level of socioeconomic development, which leads to a considerable population outflow to more prosperous territories. Their net migration rate is negative.
Russia: Pskov and Novgorod regions.
Poland: Warmian-Masurian, West Pomeranian, and Pomeranian Voivo-deship.
Lithuania: Alytus, Kaunas, Klaipeda, Marijampolè, Panevézys, Siauliai, Tauragè, Telsiai, Utena Counties.
Latvia: Vidzeme, Zemgale, Largale regions.
Estonia: Hiiu, Ida-Viru, Jogeva, Jarva, Laane, Laane-Viru, Polva, Parnu, Rapla, Saare, Tartu, Valga, Viljandi, Voru.
Thus, the macroregion shows a direct dependency between the socioeconomic development of regions and migration features. The existing migration trends exacerbate the significant disparity in the level of territories' development. In the depressed regions, the population outflow (first of all, that of young and qualified people) aggravates the labour market situation (which is an important factor under the conditions of depopulation) and curbs its further development. Their prospects, to a great extent, depend of the efficiency of migration policy implementation: the engagement of migrants and reduction in population outflow, which is difficult to achieve in competitive conditions given the lack of economic resources.
In the economically developed regions with a positive net migration rate, authorities also face a number of problems, namely, ensuring legal migration, the integration of migrants, and the prevention of social conflicts.
However, despite the existing territorial differentiation in the framework of socioeconomic and migration situation, all the regions have a need for migrants, which relates both to the limited reproduction of human resources, and structural unemployment (a significant share of people with higher education in humanities against prevailing demand for operatives). The objective of the authorities is to make this process as efficient as possible. Another important aspect is the maintenance of their own demographic potential.
References
1. Kuznetsova, T. Ju. 2009. Geodemograficheskaja obstanovka v stranah Baltij-skogo makroregiona: problemy i perspektivy.
2. Fedorov, G. M., Korneevets, V. S. 2009. Baltijskij region, №2, pp. 32—42.
3. Fedorov, D.G. 2009. Vestnik Rossijskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta imeni I. Kanta, № 1, pp. 117—122.
About author
Dr Tatiana Kuznetsova, Associate Professor, Department of Socioeconomic Geography and Geopolitics, Immanuel Kant State University of Russia.
Email: tikuznetsova@kantiana.ru
