One of the main reasons to be part of the EU enlargement process was to speed up the process of economic convergence in CEE transition economies. Against this background, the post-2004 period is commonly described in terms of a (moderate) economic success (Campos, Coricelli and Moretti 2014; Grycuk and Russel 2017; LE Europe 2017; WEF 2017; Weresa 2016). Analysis of macroeconomic data shows clear pro-gress in the case of the most important variables, including GDP, GDP per capita and levels of investment and consumption. Progress is also observable in labour market developments – employment, unemploy-ment, productivity – with (a risk of) growing inequalities (see Brzeziński 2017; Bukowski and Novokmet 2017) and the outflow of labour as major
‘costs’ of EU enlargement.
In terms of economic growth, measured by GDP or GDP per capita, Poland is one of the winners of EU enlargement. Over the period 2004–
16 average annual GDP growth in Poland amounted to 3.6 per cent and was significantly higher than the EU average (1.5 per cent), but also higher than the average rate of growth in the pre-accession period (2.85 per cent in the period 2000–3). Moreover, Poland was the only EU country that managed to avoid massive recession during the period of global financial crisis (2008–9). In terms of GDP per capita expressed in PPP (Purchasing Power Parity), Poland is gradually closing the gap towards the EU average:
in 2005 Poland’s PPP GDP per capita amounted to only 50 per cent of the average, to reach 69 per cent in 2009. GDP per capita increased in all Polish regions. Change was between 10 and 33 per cent from 2004 to 2016, with Mazowieckie region, around Warsaw, experiencing the biggest increase.
As discussed in chapter 2, in some regions, and in smaller towns and villages, growth was much less visible than in the ‘metropolises’.
THE IMPACT OF MIGRATION ON POLAND 92
Other macroeconomic indicators also improved: international trade (increasing shares of international trade in GDP); competitiveness (the competitiveness index increased from around 4.30 in 2004 to over 4.50 in 2016, when the EU average was 4.80); investment (according to UNCTAD data the annual inflow of FDI to Poland equalled 5.2 billion over the period 1994–2003 and 12.4 billion in the period 2004–2016); as well as other indicators (Eurostat data; Grycuk and Russel 2017; LE Europe 2017; WEF).
Grycuk and Russel (2017) emphasise that these developments are attributable to a number of factors, in particular to the implementation of EU legislation and institutional rules, and the introduction of the Euro-pean Single Market and EU funds. They also leave some space for migra-tion as a possible economic trigger. In particular, the impact of the Single Market (and Single Labour Market as a part of it) implementation on GDP per capita has been unequivocally positive in most of the EU member states, with the Polish outcome close to the EU average (LE Europe 2017, 35).
As suggested above, the labour market is a major area of change in the post-2004 period. Figure 5.1 presents several important variables depicting these developments in a synthetic way. Figure 5.1 documents a clear tendency for conditions on the Polish labour market to improve since EU enlargement, with its two major features being (1) a substantial decline
22%
Annual growth of nominal incomes Annual growth of real incomes Employment growth (annual changes)
‘Tightness index’ (no. of job offers per 1 unemployed) (right axis) Unemployment rate
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 0,00
0,01
Fig. 5.1 Labour market development in Poland, 2004–17.
Source: Based on Roszkowska et al. (2017).
in unemployment and (2) employment growth. The decrease in unem-ployment is noted since 2004 but was particularly high in the first post-accession phase (a decline from around 20 per cent in 2004 to around 6 per cent in 2008). Employment growth is almost steady, with two reces-sion episodes in 2010 and 2013. There is also a clear upward trend noted in terms of the level of wages, both nominal and real. Similarly to other variables, the effect was the strongest in the pre-crisis phase. Figure 5.1 includes an additional variable that can be used as a synthetic measure of labour market ‘fitness’: the labour market tightness index, defined as the ratio of vacancies to unemployment and as such shows how the labour market reacts throughout the business cycle. The tightness index presents a clear upward trend, with a minor interruption during the period of global economic crisis. Additionally, its recent values suggest that the very nature of the Polish labour market is changing from a state of permanent oversupply of the workforce to a situation of growing competition for workers (Roszkowska et al. 2017). The main question we ask in this chap-ter is to what extent those developments are attributable to migration.
A back-of-the-envelope analysis (figure 5.2) shows that increase in the scale of (temporary) migration in the post-2004 period was clearly associated with positive changes in terms of unemployment (as one of the key labour market-related variables). Figure 5.3, however, points to a far more complex and nuanced picture. The introduction of a number of
22%
Unemployment rate Stock of (temporary) migrants, in millions (right axis)
2010 2012 2014 2016 0,00
Fig. 5.2 Migration from Poland (stock of temporary migrants staying abroad) and Polish labour market, 2004–17. Source: Own elaboration based on GUS data and Roszkowska et al. (2017).
THE IMPACT OF MIGRATION ON POLAND 94
additional variables to the picture presented above may, rather, suggest that substantial changes in unemployment are cyclical in nature and related to GDP growth and the process of job creation (see detailed dis-cussion in next section).