Highest depopulation rates among the EU member states were observed in Lithuania 2,69% in 2010 and 1,47% in 1011

Transcription

1 Daugirdas V., Kriaučiūnas E., Ribokas G. DEPOPULATION IN EU COUNTRIES AND DISTRIBUTION OF SPARSELY POPULATED TERRITORIES IN LITHUANIA This research was funded by a grant (No. SIN-02/2012) from the Research Council of Lithuania Lithuanian Social Research Centre Department of Human Geography Vilnius Spatial transformation processes in Central Europe in XXI century Kyiv, Ukraine, march 2013

2 Increase of population in West and East Central Europe (%) Highest depopulation rates among the EU member states were observed in Lithuania 2,69% in 2010 and 1,47% in 1011 Sources: Statistical data on foreign countries. (1996). Statistical yearbook of Lithuania. 1996, Vilnius.;

3 Decrease of population in Lithuania, Sources:

4 Reasons of depopulation in Lithuania Sources:

5 Change of rural population, % (comparing 2001 and 2012) Sources:

6 Sparsely populated territories in EU in 2010 Sources:

7 Sparsely populated territories in Lithuania in 2006 and 2011 (where rural population density is less than 12.5 people per km2).

8 Conclusion 1 Large part of Lithuanian territory might be assigned to the sparsely populated as it covers around 45 % of the country. The major part of SPT is concentrated in the infertile and forestry North-eastern and Southern Lithuania, where such territories compound continuous habitats. Currently, it might be considered 184 local administrative units as extremely sparsely populated. The number of SPT in the country is increasing and will increase due to intensifying depopulation. The depopulation rates have doubled, and in some municipalities have increased even 3 or 4 times. It is likely that over the next years, the majority of Lithuanian rural territories (excluding the territories around major cities) will become SPT.

9 Distribution of population according to settlement classes, ,00 40,00 35,00 30,00 % 25,00 20,00 SPT Not SPT 15,00 10,00 5,00 0, and more Classes of settlements by number of residents

10 Conclusion 2 SPT might be distinguished not only by less densely populated territories, but also by smaller settlements. 35 residents was the average number in the village in SPT in 2011, while in Lithuania the average was 60 residents. In about half of SPT the villages were inhabited from 1 till 9 residents. The villages which had over 500 inhabitants could be found barely in every fourth SPT local unit. It seems likely that most of the former collective farm (kolkhoz) settlements will dwindle and lose local unit s administrate centre s functions.

11 Classification of lands unsuitable for farming Source: Dėl žemės ūkio ministro 2004 m. vasario 27 d. įsakymo Nr. 3D-72 Dėl mažiau palankių ūkininkauti vietovių pakeitimo. (2004). Valstybės žinios, Nr Vilnius.

12 Conclusion 3 The farms in SPT are smaller and less competitive. Agricultural activities are less effective as well. The village is losing primary agricultural function, as profit coming from agriculture is no longer the main source of income. There are many abandoned agricultural lands in SPT. But the areas of abandoned lands are decreasing as currently it is worth to declare agricultural land and work in there even without getting out of it the profit, as it is sufficient to receive the EU support. In the future development of agriculture will remain problematic, as the current owners due to old age soon will be unable to work their land and there will not be anyone to intercept their lands.

13 Conclusion 4 Depopulation in Eastern Lithuania is followed by the decline of education and other social institutions. The closed circle is forming: decreasing population declining social infrastructure decreasing population. This increases social and territorial exclusion of SPT residents. In particular, this trend is clear since Lithuania joined EU in 2004.

14 What should be done? What will happen?