Changes in the population figure

Similarly to the analysis of the net migration and its components, also with reference to the yearly changes in population there are vast discrepancies, which results from the adoption of various methods of calculation or referring to diverse kinds of population. In this chapter in order to assess the changes in the population figure, the difference between its amount in the base year and the subsequent year was used, with the value of 100% being the population figure in the base year. Due to the existence of various data, the author based his study fully on the information made available by WHO Copenhagen. In this way, yearly percentage changes in the population figure were obtained, which refer to the middle of subsequent years.

Thus calculated changes in the period of 1989–2002 are presented in Fig. 13.

proves that even a division into two separate states cannot destroy the connection between two nations living together in one country for many years. The changes in migration, with a clear dominance of departures in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania illustrate a thesis about former colonisers leaving their former colonies, after these gain independence. This process, however, is untypical because here we have to do with colonisers’ departures from colonies in which the standard of living is higher than in the former metropolis.

Fig. 13. A total change in the population figure in percentage of the previous year in EU–p8 countries Source: author’s own study based on WHO Copenhagen databases.

y = -0.13Ln(x) + 0.19; R² = 0.82

-0,20 -0,15 -0,10 -0,05 0,00 0,05 0,10 0,15 0,20 0,25

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

It emerges that the falling tendency predominates, but it gradually slows down.

However, since 1995 in EU–p8 countries the loss of population dominates. The third interesting issue is the yearly fluctuations in the changes of the population figure in EU–p8 countries for the period of 1989–1993, with lower ones for later years. On this basis, one can conclude that the changes in the social, economic and political situation of EU–p8 countries are partly reflected in the changes of the population figure. Because the beginning of the 1990s was a period of stormy economic, political and ethnic transformations in this part of Europe, this was reflected in high yearly fluctuation of the population figure. In the second period such stormy changes do not take place in these countries. The price that these countries and their societies have to pay for accelerated transformations and a relatively fast economic development (compared to other post-communist countries) is the decline in the population figure, which is mainly caused by negative natural increase. For example, in 2001 only Poland noted a positive natural increase (+0.13‰), and in 2002 in all eight countries there was negative natural increase.

Besides, dominating negative net migration is of significant importance as well.

One must remember, however, that a part of these foreign migrations takes place between EU–p8 countries.

As a result of the conducted research, a substantial differentiation of the situation between EU–p8 countries was noted (Fig. 14). Taking into consideration the mean of these changes for the period of 1989–2002, four groups of countries can be

-3 -2 -1 0 1

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Czech Rep.

Fig. 14. Changes in the population figure in % of the previous year Source: author’s own study based on WHO Copenhagen databases.

distinguished (Tab. 7). Estonia and Latvia were characterised by a very high loss in the population (about –0.94% per year); Lithuania and Hungary by a slightly smaller one (about –0.34% per year). An average yearly pace of the decrease in the population figure slightly below zero (about –0.05%) characterised the Czech Republic and Slovenia; whereas Poland and Slovakia could boast an increase in the population figure (about +0.16% per year).

Types of changes

A B C D E F very

negative

Estonia Latvia

negative Lithuania Hungary slightly

negative

Czech Rep.

Slovenia Average

intensity

positive Slovakia Poland Tab. 7. Distinguished types of situations with regard to the changes in the population figure

Source: author’s own study.

Taking into consideration the changes in the yearly pace of the population figure, as many as six groups of countries can be distinguished. The first one (type A) comprises Estonia and Latvia, characterised by a very high slump of the population figure in the period of 1989–1993, and then a reduction of the pace of that slump.

The changes in Lithuania (type B) were a little similar, but the decline in the period of 1989–1993 was much less rapid, and directly afterwards there was no reduction of the decrease in the population figure. In Hungary (type C) changes in the population figure are insignificant. Still, such a drastic fall of the population figure in 1990 compared to 1989 (–1.93%) must be surprising. The more so that, according to the World Bank data, in the same year the fall amounted to only –0.18%. Although in both cases different methods of calculation were used, in no way does it justify such wide discrepancies. Hence, one can be inclined to believe that such a drastic decrease results from a sudden change in Hungarian statistics, or even a mistake which was not corrected in later years. Type E is represented by the Czech Republic and Slovakia. In these countries the changes in the population figure are not significant, except for years 1991 and 2001. On the other hand, Slovenia (type E) can boast the highest yearly fluctuations of the changes in the population figure.

The lowest yearly changes in the population figure were noted in Poland (type F).

Considering both the direction, the intensity and the yearly changes in the population figure, a rather diversified picture of the situation emerges (Tab. 7).

natural increase

Fig. 15. Components of real increase (in ‰) Source: author’s own study based on various materials.

In an overwhelming majority of countries, the population figure started to dwindle after the fall of communism. The main reason was a substantial decline of natural increase, mainly caused by a decrease in live births. On the other hand, the influence of net migration is not so unequivocal. Slovenia is an exception to the rule of declining population figure, as it not only managed to maintain positive natural increase, but was also characterised by the dominance of immigration over emigration. In Slovakia and Poland throughout most of the analysed period the increase in the population figure also prevailed, which was mainly caused by positive natural increase. However, already at the beginning of 21^s c. it began to approach zero, and thus the number of natural increase also approached zero. In the remaining countries, the dominance of the loss of population dominated. Still, in Hungary and in the Czech Republic it was rather insignificant. In the former, the main reason was negative natural increase, whereas in the latter both net migration and natural increase. Then, in the countries of the Baltic Council the loss of population was substantial, which was caused both by negative natural increase and very unfavourable net migration.

Fig. 15 may be helpful in its analysis. However, it must be remembered that due to various data regarding the changes in the population figure and the data describing net migration – the picture revealed in Tab. 7. and in Fig. 15 should be treated merely as an approximation.

Just before the expansion of the European Union to new countries, in EU–15 countries there were opinions about flooding their job markets with migrants from the new, post-communist member countries. Voices drawing attention to the dangers connected with mass influx of population from EU–p8 countries were also frequent.

On the basis of the conducted research, it can be concluded that these fears were groundless. Apart from the economic factor, EU–p8 countries are characterised by too little a population potential to influence significantly the population situation in EU–15 countries.