Giornate di Studio sulla Popolazione Università di Bari 27 ... TRENDS IN FRY_ENG_FIN… ·...

Giornate di Studio sulla Popolazione

SIS-GCD

Università di Bari

27 - 29 gennaio 2003

Session. 1: Natural Demographic trends and migration in the Balkans

Population Trends in FRY (1948-1991) with emphasis on the case of Central Serbia and Vojvodina (1991-2002)

Prof. Byron Kotzamanis,Univ of Thessaly, Dept of Planning and Regional Development, Laboratory of Demographic and Social Analysis (LDSA)

Christos Trigonis, M.Sc. in Planning and Regional Development, Univ of Thessaly, Dept of Planning and

Regional Development, lDSA

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY, Laboratory of Demographic and Social Analysis Pedion Areos, 38 334, Volos, GREECE Tel: +30 24210 74432/33 – 74393, Fax: +30 24210 83666 – 74394

E-mail: [email protected]

Byron Kotzamanis- Crhistos Trigonis Population Trends in FRY (1948-1991) with emphasis on the case of Central Serbia and Vojvodina (1991-2002)1 This paper consists of two parts. In the first part we present the population changes in FRY (one of the 6 Republics of former united Yugoslavia-ex-RSFY) during the period 1948-1991 on the basis of the data of the successive post-war censuses., while the second part focuses on the population changes in new Yugoslavia (FRY) for the period 1991 – 2002 (more specifically in Central Serbia and in Vojvodina, to the extent that there hasn’t taken place a population census in the Republic of Montenegro – one is planned for 2003 – and in Kosovo too (has not been declared when there will be one). The findings of the second part derive from the processing of the temporary data of the last population census in Central Serbia and in Vojvodina (2002). In this second part we mapped the population rearrangements of the period 1991-2002 in the lower administrative levels (opstina/municipalities and settlements, 161 and 4500 spatial unities respectively) on the one hand, and on the other we estimated the special gravity of the refugees and the Internally Displaced Persons (IDP’s) for the population increase between the last two censuses in Vojvodina and Central Serbia.

SOURCES AND METHODOLOGY

The induction of the conclusions in the first part of the article was based on the average annual growth population rates between the successive censuses (1948, 1953, 1961, 1971, 1981 and 1991, de jure population). The data we used come from ex-RSFY (Federal Statistical Office). This central statistical office gave in 1993 in electronic form, the results of all the post-war censuses in ex-RSFY in the lowest geographical level (about 7500 settlements), reducing them to the administrative boundaries of 1991 (Federal Statistical Office, Popic, Belgrade, 1993). In order to imprint the changes of the period 1991-2002, as the concept of population in the last census has changed, we were obliged, for reasons of comparableness, to use the de facto population of the 1991 census. We must, at this point, mention that the 2002 census was held between 1-25 April and that the Yugoslavian citizens who stay abroad for a period of more than a year as well as the IDP’s (Internally Displayed Persons, basically refugees from Kosovo) are not included in the total population. The data that were used for the refugees and the IDPs concern the years 2000 and 2001 (UNHR, Commission for Refugees of the Republic of Serbia, Registration of IDP’s from Kosovo and Methohia, 2000 and Census of refugees and other War-affected Persons in the Federal republic of Yugoslavia, 2001) and it was substantially conceded that up to 2002 no upsetting spatial rearrangements had taken place. This concession is valid, and anyway, it is the only one that allows us to include the special gravity of these groups in the total present population of Central Serbia and Vojvodina, to the extent that the analytical results of the last census were not yet available at the time of the writing of the present paper. For the mapping we used the cartographic coverages created in the Laboratory of Demographic and Social Analyses (LDSA), within the context of a wider project which aims at the creation of a Demographic Atlas of the Balkans. These coverages were created by digitizing maps available in printed format. However, as the administrative boundaries at the

1 For a concise presentation of the post- war demographic evolutions in ex-RSFY, and especially in FRY, see B. Kotzamanis, Demographic evolutions in Greece and Eastern Europe, a comparative analysis. National Centre of Social Research (EKKE), Athens, 2000 (published in greek).

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

level of settlements in FRY have changed in some cases between the last two censuses (1991 and 2002), the necessary corrections have been made in the cartographic coverages so that the data for 1991 and 2002 are comparable. These corrections were made with the assistance of Mr. Goran Penev, researcher at the Demographic Research Centre (Institute of Social Sciences, Belgrade), whom we owe to thank for his precious help. We must also mention that this work constitutes part of the research projects of LDSA which specializes in the analysis of demographic developments in the Balkans on the one hand, and in applied demographic analysis, in the analysis of spatial dimension of demographic phenomena, in the development of analysis and management of demographical data bases software and in automatized mapping of the results, on the other.

PART ONE: POPULATION CHANGES IN FRY, 1948-1991

The population of ex-RSFY from 1948 to 1991 increased for about 3,5 millions, presenting for this period an annual growth rate 9,56 ‰. The biggest growth rate was in Kosovo (23,26 ‰) which almost tripled its population between 1948 and 1991 (see table 1). Undoubtedly, if we study the annual growth population rates for each Republic, we will see that Kosovo shows rates clearly higher than the other republics, coming to the point to have an index even more than 4 times higher than FRY during the decade 1981-1991(21,0 ‰ and 4,9 ‰ respectively, table 2). TABLE 1 – POPULATION OF FRY (CENSUS YEARS)

1948 1953 1961 1971 1981 1991 Average Annual

Growth Rate 48/91

Yugoslavia 6.905.155 7.399.027 8.114.121 8.976.195 9.897.986 10.394.026 9,56

Montenegro 377.189 419.873 471.894 529.604 584.310 615.035 11,44

Serbia 6.527.966 6.979.154 7.642.227 8.446.591 9.313.676 9.778.991 9,44

Central Serbia r

4.159.389 4.463.701 4.823.274 5.250.365 5.694.464 5.808.906 7,80

Vojvodina 1.640.757 1.699.545 1.854.965 1.952.533 2.034.772 2.013.889 4,78

Kosovo & Metohija

727.820 815.908 963.988 1.243.693 1.584.440 1.956.196 23,26

Source: G. Penev, “Natural Population Movement”, Yugoslav Survey – A Record of Fact and Information, 1, 1998

It is evident that the high positive natural balances (as a result of the difference between the crude birth rate and the crude mortality rate) of Kosovo played a decisive role in the population changes. The net migration, for all the studied periods, in this autonomous province of ex-RSFY, influenced the least the very fast population increase rates. On the other hand, we note that Voivodina had the lowest average annual growth population rate between 1948 and 1991 (4,78 ‰, 50% less than the average of FRY), as a result of the low natural balance and a negative migration rate, being the first one to have a negative total growth rate (-0,1 ‰, 1981-1991). Montenegro is also an interesting case, which together with Kosovo is characterized for all the decades by negative net migration rates. Nevertheless, in the case of Montenegro as well, the rate of natural increase, overbalancing the migration losses in the period 1948-1991, allow positif growth rates (a little bit higher than the average rates of FRY). The point, which is particularly significant, is that the population growth rates during the first post-war period in the entire FRY present decreasing tendencies. An exception is the decade 1971-1981, during which decreasing tendencies are slowed down, a result, on the one hand, of a slight increase in births, and on the other, of the turnaround of migration balance.

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

TABLE 2 – AVERAGE ANNUAL RATES OF POPULATION MOVEMENT BETWEEN CENSUSES, ‰

1948-1953 1953-1961 1961-1971 1971-1981 1981-1991

P o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h r a t e s

Yugoslavi (FRY)a 13.8 11.5 10.1 9.8 4.9 Montenegro 21.4 14.6 11.5 9.8 5.1

Serbia 13.4 11.3 10.0 9.8 4.9 Central Serbia 14.1 9.7 8.5 8.1 2.0

Vojvodina 7.0 10.9 5.1 4.1 -1.0 Kosovo & Metohija 22.8 20.8 25.3 24.1 21.0

N a t u r a l i n c r e a s e

Yugoslavia (FRY) 15.2 13.0 9.9 9.1 6.6 Montenegro 22.3 21.8 17.1 12.8 10.7


Vojvodina 11.1 8.6 5.1 3.5 0.6 Kosovo & Metohija 24.8 26.6 28.4 27.7 24.4

B i r t h r a t e s Yugoslavia (FRY) 28.2 23.3 18.9 18.0 16.2

Montenegro 32.0 30.4 24.0 19.1 17.2 Serbia 27.9 22.8 18.5 17.9 16.1

Central Serbia 26.6 20.6 15.4 14.9 12.9 Vojvodina 24.8 19.0 14.8 14.1 12.7

Kosovo & Metohija 42.1 42.1 39.0 34.7 30.1 D e a t h r a t e s

Yugoslavia (FRY) 13.0 10.4 9.0 8.8 9.6 Montenegro 9.8 8.6 6.9 6.3 6.5


Vojvodina 13.7 10.4 9.7 10.6 12.2 Kosovo & Metohija 17.4 15.5 10.6 7.0 5.8

N e t m i g r a t i o n r a t e s

Yugoslavia (FRY) -1.4 -1.5 0.2 0.6 -1.7 Montenegro -0.8 -7.2 -5.6 -3.0 -5.6

Serbia -1.4 -1.1 0.6 0.8 -1.5 Central Serbia -0.2 -1.5 1.6 2.1 -0.8

Vojvodina -4.1 2.3 0.0 0.6 -1.6 Kosovo & Metohija -1.9 -6.0 -3.3 -3.8 -3.5

TABLE 3 – AVERAGE POPULATION GROWTH IN INTER-CENSUS PERIODS (.000)

1948-1953 1953-1961 1961-1971 1971-1981 1981-1991

A v e r a g e a n n u a l i n c r e a s e

Yugoslavia (FRY) 98,774 89,387 86,207 92,179 49,604 Montenegro 8,537 6,503 5,771 5,471 3,073

Serbia 90,238 82,884 80,436 86,709 46,532 Central Serbia 60,862 44,947 42,709 44,410 11,444

Vojvodina 11,758 19,428 9,757 8,224 -2,088 Kosovo & Metohija 17,618 18,510 27,971 34,075 37,176

A v e r a g e a n n u a l n a t u r a l g r o w t h



Vojvodina 18,573 15,378 9,709 6,947 1,146 Kosovo & Metohija 19,104 23,858 31,579 39,455 43,397

A v e r a g e n u m b e r o f l i v e - b o r n




A v e r a g e n u m b e r o f d e a t h s




A v e r a g e a n n u a l n e t m i g r a t i o n b a l a n c e

Yugoslavi (FRY)a -9,683 -11,430 1,672 5,838 -17,347 Montenegro -336 -3,200 -2,794 -1,680 -3,339

Serbia -9,347 -8,230 4,465 7,519 -14,009 Central Serbia -1,045 -6,931 8,026 11,622 -4,553

Vojvodina -6,815 4,050 48 1,277 -3,234 Kosovo & Metohija -1,487 -5,348 -3,609 -5,380 -6,221

Source: G. Penev, op.cit

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

PART TWO: POPULATION CHANGES IN FRY, 1991-2002

The data about the natural balance of FRY accentuate the problems of Yugoslavian demography. The number of births decreases diachronically during the period 1991-2000, while the deaths increase as a result, on the one hand, directly of the population ageing, and on the other hand, indirectly of the crises of the last decade, resulting in a fast natural increase reduction (tables 4 and 5). TABLE 4 – NATURAL INCREASE, 1991 – 2000 (.000)

Population Live births Deaths Natural (January 1st)2 Total Under age 1 increase

Yugoslavia (FRY)

1991 10,384,236 152,250 101,573 3,187 50,677 1992 10,434,880 140,819 105,872 3,051 34,947 1993 10,469,784 140,985 107,396 3,081 33,589 1994 10,503,335 137,629 105,338 2,529 32,291 1995 10,535,592 140,504 107,535 2,366 32,969 1996 10,568,512 137,683 111,744 2,068 25,939 1997 10,594,475 131,394 111,845 1,876 19,549

Montenegro

1991 613,907 9,609 3,975 108 5,634 1992 619,527 9,524 4,393 126 5,131 1993 624,650 8,922 4,471 134 4,451 1994 629,093 8,887 4,660 137 4,227 1995 633,307 9,492 4,931 115 4,561 1996 637,868 9,094 4,982 127 4,112 1997 641,975 8,758 5,153 130 3,605 1998 645,565 9,211 5,312 128 3,899 1999 649,452 8,828 5,393 118 3,435 20003 652,883 [9,171] [5,486] [103] [3,685]

Serbia

1991 9,770,329 142,641 97,598 3,079 45,043 1992 9,815,353 131,295 101,479 2,925 29,816 1993 9,845,134 132,063 102,925 2,947 29,138 1994 9,874,242 128,742 100,678 2,392 28,064 1995 9,902,285 131,012 102,604 2,251 28,408 1996 9,930,644 128,589 106,762 1,941 21,827 1997 9,952,500 122,636 106,692 1,746 15,944

Central Serbia

1991 5,809,581 67,443 62,523 1,039 4,920 1992 5,814,472 64,828 65,569 1,094 -741 1993 5,813,685 65,913 67,131 1,142 -1,218 1994 5,812,434 63,697 65,493 1,000 -1,796 1995 5,810,605 63,737 66,756 955 -3,019 1996 5,807,545 60,924 69,218 930 -8,294 1997 5,799,244 59,071 69,422 718 -10,351 1998 5,788,865 56,436 70,125 689 -13,689 1999 5,775,152 53,536 72,173 602 -18,637

2000** 5,756,471 [56,620] [73,836] [668] [-17,216]

Vojvodina

1991 2,015,566 22,935 26,549 283 -3,614 1992 2,011,936 22,049 27,906 305 -5,857 1993 2,006,068 22,018 27,990 334 -5,972 1994 2,000,076 21,595 27,518 311 -5,923 1995 1,994,132 22,499 27,177 238 -4,678 1996 1,989,432 21,624 29,152 277 -7,528 1997 1,981,900 20,645 28,646 247 -8,001 1998 1,973,912 19,894 29,251 193 -9,357 1999 1,964,532 18,686 29,271 190 -10,585

2000** 1,953,931 [17,891] [30,728] [68] [-12,837]

Kosovo & Metohija

1991 1,945,182 52,263 8,526 1,757 43,737 1992 1,988,945 44,418 8,004 1,726 36,414 1993 2,025,381 44,132 7,804 1,471 36,328 1994 2,061,732 43,450 7,667 1,081 35,783 1995 2,097,548 44,776 8,671 1,058 36,105 1996 2,133,667 46,041 8,392 734 37,649 1997 2,171,356 42,920 8,624 781 34,296

Source: G. Penev, “Natural Movement of Population, 1991-99/2000”, Yugoslav Survey, 1, 2001

2 Population estimations from the το Demographic Research Centre of the Institute of Social Sciences 3

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

TABLE 5 – NATURAL INCREASE, per 1000

Crude Birth Rate Crude Death Rate Natural Increase Infant Mortality

Rate

Yugoslavia

1991 14.6 9.8 4.9 20.9 1992 13.5 10.1 3.3 21.7 1993 13.4 10.2 3.2 21.9 1994 13.1 10.0 3.1 18.4 1995 13.3 10.2 3.1 16.8 1996 13.0 10.6 2.5 15.0 1997 12.4 10.5 1.8 14.3

Montenegro

1991 15.6 6.4 9.1 11.2 1992 15.3 7.1 8.2 13.2 1993 14.2 7.1 7.1 15.0 1994 14.1 7.4 6.7 15.4 1995 14.9 7.8 7.2 12.1 1996 14.2 7.8 6.4 14.0 1997 13.6 8.0 5.6 14.8 1998 14.2 8.2 6.0 13.9 1999 13.6 8.3 5.3 13.4 2000 ... ... ... ...

Serbia

1991 14.6 10.0 4.6 21.6 1992 13.4 10.3 3.0 22.3 1993 13.4 10.4 3.0 22.3 1994 13.0 10.2 2.8 18.6 1995 13.2 10.3 2.9 17.2 1996 12.9 10.7 2.2 15.1 1997 12.3 10.7 1.6 14.2

Central Serbia

1991 11.6 10.8 0.8 15.4 1992 11.2 11.3 -0.1 16.9 1993 11.3 11.5 -0.2 17.3 1994 11.0 11.3 -0.3 15.7 1995 11.0 11.5 -0.5 15.0 1996 10.5 11.9 -1.4 15.3 1997 10.2 12.0 -1.8 12.2 1998 9.8 12.1 -2.4 12.2 1999 9.3 12.5 -3.2 11.2 2000 ... ... ... ...

Vojvodina

1991 11.4 13.2 -1.8 12.3 1992 11.0 13.9 -2.9 13.8 1993 11.0 14.0 -3.0 15.2 1994 10.8 13.8 -3.0 14.4 1995 11.3 13.6 -2.3 10.6 1996 10.9 14.7 -3.8 12.8 1997 10.4 14.5 -4.0 12.0 1998 10.1 14.9 -4.8 9.7 1999 9.5 14.9 -5.4 10.2 2000 ... ... ... ...

Kosovo & Metohija

1991 26.6 4.3 22.2 33.6 1992 22.1 4.0 18.1 38.9 1993 21.6 3.8 17.8 33.3 1994 20.9 3.7 17.2 24.9 1995 21.2 4.1 17.1 23.6 1996 21.4 3.9 17.5 15.9 1997 19.6 3.9 15.7 18.2

Source: G. Penev, op.cit

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

CHART 1 – NUMBER OF BORN ALIVE, DEATHS AND NATURAL INCREASE, 1950 - 1999

Source: G. Penev, op.cit The situation is much worse in Central Serbia and Vojvodina which started presenting a negative natural increase in 1991 and 1988 respectively, while the rest of the areas in New Yugoslavia presented a reduction in the natural population increase year by year, but up to 1999 they had not reached negative values. More specifically, Vojvodina is in a worse situation, as, on the one hand, it was the first one to present negative natural increase, and on the other, the decrease rates of this balance were very fast (in absolute values – 10.585 in 1999 or - 5,4‰ , one of the highest indices of negative natural increase in Europe, G.Penev,, 2001) However, at the same time, the populations of Central Serbia and Vojvodina are significantly influenced – in a different way each – by migration too. According to the provisional results of the 2002 census - Table 6 – the population of Central Serbia decreased by 25.800 while on the contrary that of Vojvodina increased by 77.700 inhabitants (on the basis of de jure population, G.Penev, 2001).

1951

1953

1955

1957

1959

1961

1963

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

0

50

100

150

200

250Thousand

19

51

19

53

19

55

19

57

19

59

19

61

19

63

19

65

19

67

19

69

19

71

19

73

19

75

19

77

19

79

19

81

19

83

19

85

19

87

19

89

19

91

19

93

19

95

19

97

19

99

0

5

10

15

20Thousand

19

51

19

53

19

55

19

57

19

59

19

61

19

63

19

65

19

67

19

69

19

71

19

73

19

75

19

77

19

79

19

81

19

83

19

85

19

87

19

89

19

91

19

93

19

95

19

97

19

99

0

50

100

150

200

250Thousand

1951

1953

1955

1957

1959

1961

1963

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Thousand

1951

1953

1955

1957

1959

1961

1963

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

0

10

20

30

40

50Thousand

1951

1953

1955

1957

1959

1961

1963

1965

1967

1969

1971

1973

1975

1977

1979

1981

1983

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

0

10

20

30

40

50

60Thousand

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

TABLE 6 – TOTAL POPULATION OF SERBIA (WITHOUT KOSOVO AND METOHIA), 1981, 1991, 2002

Enumerated Population Increase / Decrease Index (population T+x / Pop . t *100.

Opulaton t 1981 1991 2002 1981-1991 1991-2002 1981-1991 1991-2002

Serbia (without Kosovo and Metohija)

Total 7,729,246 7,839,142 7,874,762 119,896 35,620 100.8 100.4

In the country 7,460,234 7,548,978 7,478,820 88,744 -70,158 101.2 99.1

Abroad 269,012 290,164 395,942 21,152 105,778 107.8 136.4

Central Serbia

Total 5,694,464 5,808,906 5,783,127 114,442 -25,779 102.0 99.6

In the country 5,491,043 5,582,611 5,454,333 91,568 -128,278 101.7 97.7 Abroad 203,421 226,295 328,794 22,874 102,499 111.2 145.3

Vojvodina

Total 2,034,782 2,013,889 2,091,635 -20,893 77,746 99.0 103.9 In the country 1,969,191 1,966,367 2,024,487 -2,824 58,120 99.9 103.0 Abroad 65,591 47,522 67,148 -18,069 19,626 72.5 141.3

Source: G.Penev, “2002 Population Census”, Yugoslav Survey, 2, 2002

From the mapping of the average annual change rate of population, it is clear that the settlements, which are situated in the central-southeast part of Vojvodina as well as the settlements situated near Beograd (in the north part of Central Serbia and especially in regions which are near the value index of Vojvodina) show high average annual population growth rates, i.e. while, on the basis of the indices of the natural increase rate, we would expect a population decrease in these areas, on the contrary, it is ascertained that an increase in their population, which to a great percentage is due to the refugee movements (substantially, net migration in these areas is positive), a fact also proven by the number of refugees in the total population of the municipality. The mapping of the index (% of the refuges in the total population) verifies our initial assumptions: the spatial unities, which are characterized by high refugee percentages, are the ones which usually present high average annual change rates.

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

More analytically, as far as the average annual change rate of population is concerned, we give the following tables (Tables 7 and 8), which show that the vast majority (77,59%) of the municipalities (Opstina) of Central Serbia show a negative index value, while in Voivodina, the municipalities which have a negative index value are 26 as opposed to those with a positive value which are 19

TABLE 7 No OF MUNICIPALITIES BY AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATE

CENTRAL SERBIA VOIVODINA TOTAL

NEGATIVE 90 26 116

POSITIVE 26 19 45

TOTAL 116 45 161

PERCENTAGE %

NEGATIVE 77,59 57,78 72,05

POSITIVE 22,41 42,22 27,95

TOTAL 100,00 100,00 100,00

‰

No OF MUNICIPALITIES BY CLASSES CONCERNING AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATE

CENTRAL SERBIA VOJVODINA TOTAL

Less than -15‰ 7 0 7

-14.99 to -10‰ 16 1 17

-9.99 to -5‰ 33 10 43

-4.99 to 0‰ 34 15 49

0.01 to 4.99‰ 20 7 27

5 to 9.99‰ 2 7 9

10‰ and greater 4 5 9

TOTAL 116 45 161

PERCENTAGE %

Less than -15‰ 6,03 0,00 4,35

-14.99 to -10‰ 13,79 2,22 10,56

-9.99 to -5‰ 28,45 22,22 26,71

-4.99 to 0‰ 29,31 33,33 30,43

0.01 to 4.99‰ 17,24 15,56 16,77

5 to 9.99‰ 1,72 15,56 5,59

10‰ and greater 3,45 11,11 5,59

TOTAL 100,00 100,00 100,00

A special characteristic is that the municipalities of Vojvodina are the ones that present the highest refugee percentages in their total population (in 70,11% of the municipalities of this province the refugees are > 5% of the total population). The municipalities of Central Serbia are the very opposite, where only 14,66% present an analogous picture. Regarding the IDPs, we have a slightly reverted picture – at present the municipalities of Central Serbia are the ones that are presented as their main reception places, particularly those regions that are situated in the central vertical axis of Central Serbia. Respectively in Vojvodina the totality of the municipalities present percentages of IDPs in their total population less than 2%. By unifying the charts, which refer to the refugees and the IDP’s, we get an overall picture of the migration flux in Central Serbia and in Vojvodina. Undoubtedly, the municipalities of Vojvodina are the ones that present higher migration flux percentages.

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

The bipole Novi Sad (on the side of Vojvodina and Beograd (on the side of Central Serbia), is specifically dynamic as a reception and settlement place for refugees, a fact that is proven by the high refugee and IDP’s percentages which are observed in their influence area. More analytically, regarding the percentages of the migrants in the population of every municipality, we get the following table (Table 8), where it is shown by adding the refugees and the IDPs, in the 77,8% of the municipalities of Vojvodina (compared to the 36,21% of Central Serbia) these two categories make up more than the 5% of the total population. TABLE 8 No of MUNICIPALITIES BY CLASSES CONCERNING % OF REFUGEES AND IDP’s IN TOTAL POPULATION OF MUNICIPALITY

1. MUNICIPALITIES BY REFUGEES/TOTAL POPULATION MUNICIPALITY


0 to 2% 70 3 73

2,01 to 5% 29 10 39

5,01 to 10% 13 18 31

10,01 to 20% 3 12 15

20,01 to 30% 1 2 3

TOTAL 116 45 161

PERCENTAGE %

0 to 2% 60,34 6,67 45,34

2,01 to 5% 25,00 22,22 24,22

5,01 to 10% 11,21 40,00 19,25

10,01 to 20% 2,59 26,67 9,32

20,01 to 30% 0,86 4,44 1,86

TOTAL 100,00 100,00 100,00

2. MUNICIPALITIES BY IDP’s/TOTAL POPULATION MUNICIPALITY


0 to 2% 72 45 117

2,01 to 5% 25 0 25

5,01 to 10% 15 0 15

10,01 to 20% 3 0 3

20,01 to 30% 1 0 1

TOTAL 116 45 161

PERCENTAGE %

0 to 2% 62,07 100,00 72,67

2,01 to 5% 21,55 0,00 15,53

5,01 to 10% 12,93 0,00 9,32

10,01 to 20% 2,59 0,00 1,86

20,01 to 30% 0,86 0,00 0,62

TOTAL 100,00 100,00 100,00

3. MUNICIPALITIES BY (REFUGEES+IDP’s)/TOTAL POPULATION MUNICIPALITY

CENTRAL SERBIA VOJIVODINA TOTAL

0 to 2% 36 3 39

2,01 to 5% 38 7 45

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

5,01 to 10% 23 19 42

10,01 to 20% 16 14 30

20,01 to 30% 3 2 5

TOTAL 116 45 161

PERCENTAGE %

0 to 2% 31,03 6,67 24,22

2,01 to 5% 32,76 15,56 27,95

5,01 to 10% 19,83 42,22 26,09

10,01 to 20% 13,79 31,11 18,63

20,01 to 30% 2,59 4,44 3,11

TOTAL 100,00 100,00 100,00

CONCLUSIONS From the previous brief mapping of the post-war population developments in FRY, we see the limits of the comparative demographic analyses, where the uneven behaviors are very often covered by the national average rates (while at the same time the demographic borders intersect the national ones). New Yugoslavia, does not, of course constitute the only exception within the European scene, as far as the demographic inequalities are concerned. What makes the difference is, on the one hand, the “co-existence” in its interior of ethnic groups with radically differentiated demographic behaviors and strong spatial concentrations, and on the other hand, the emergence in the last decade of the variable “population” as a strong argument in the context of irredentist strategies. At the same time, from the observation of population changes of the last decade in “minor” Yugoslavia, we can clearly see the consequences of the conflicts in the southeastern Balkans and specifically the influence of the refugees and the IDPs. The administrative unities in the interior of Central Serbia and Vojvodina with zero and/or negative natural balance for at least over a decade have significantly differentiated courses. These differentiations are due to a great extent to the spatial concentrations of the refugees and the IDP’s. Thus, Vojvodina seems to be more “well-off” from such movements by presenting a population increase, while on the contrary, in most regions of Central Serbia, net migration flux from other countries of ex-RSFY and Kosovo were not enough to compensate the losses from the negative natural balances and emigration (it is estimated that net emigration from Central Serbia during the last decade exceeds 200.000). And in the best of cases they limited their population decrease, which in many regions would be even more intense because of the absence of refugee and IDP’s settlement.

Labo

rato

ry o

f Dem

ogra

phic

and

Socia

l Ana

lyses

Giornate di Studio sulla Popolazione Università di Bari 27 ... TRENDS IN FRY_ENG_FIN… ·...

Documents

Transcript of Giornate di Studio sulla Popolazione Università di Bari 27 ... TRENDS IN FRY_ENG_FIN… ·...