Rural Areas and Rural Population in Latvia

3-5 March 2014, Warsaw

Dr.sc.soc. Dina Bite, Dr.geogr. Zenija Kruzmetra Latvia University of Agriculture

Content

1. General information of Latvia

2. Rural transformations (Z. Kruzmetra)

3. Changes in population structure (Z. Kruzmetra)

4. Human and social capital in rural Latvia (D. Bite)

5. Final remarks

GENERAL INFORMATIONOF LATVIA

4

Latvia

Area - 64 589 km2

Total population - 2 023 825 (2012)

Density 1990-2013 decline by 41,3-31,3 pop. per 1 /km2

Urban population 67,6%

Rural population 32,4%

Rural population 1897-2012 decline 72%-32,4%

Employed in agriculture 2000-2009 decline by 38,2%(The fifth highest reduction: Bulgaria-48,1%, Estonia-55%, Romania-41,1%,

Slovakia -42,5%).

Average reduction EU 24,9%

Land use structure in Latvia, %

Type of land use

Year

1995 2000 2006 2012

Agricultural land 39,0% 38,5% 38,0% 37,1%

Forests 44,3% 44,4% 45,4% 46,5%

Brushwood 1,7% 1,9% 1,8% 1,7%

Swamps 0,2% 4,2% 3,9% 3,7%

Land under water 0,3% 3,3% 3,6% 3,8%

Farmyards 1,2% 1,4% 1,4% 1,5%

Roads 0,1% 2,0% 2,1% 2,1%

Other land 13,2% 4,4% 3,8% 3,7%

TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%

Latvia is ‘Shrinking region’ like numerous of the former Socialist states and theMediterranean countries

RURAL TRANSFORMATIONS

The end of the 20-th century and the beginning of the 21-st century are characterized with new features in the rural development.

GLOBAL and EUROPEAN• Idustrial society-postindustrial society

• Traditional society-modern society

• Productivism-postproductivism

EASTERN EUROPEAN• Collectivism-postcollectivism

They are called multi-level, multi-actor and multi-faceeted processes.

Rural transformations I

The features of these processes may be observed in Latvia too and lead the structural changes of the rural areas and society

Rural transformations II

Rural areas in Latvia have been increasingly studied over the last 20 years, especially in terms of the revaluation of the importance of these areas

Certain differences have been observed by the comparison of rural transitions in Western European and Latvian versions

The process of changes in Latvia takes place faster than in Western European countries during the last 25 years

Rural transformations III

The factors influencing the processes in total contain very different phenomenon's:

regaining of state independence (1991)land reform - reestablishment of private propertyrestituted land to former owners from large farms to small farmsmassive economical recession

Rural transformations IV

Rural transformations V

• joining the European Union

• integration in a common European economic spacegrowing mobility

• spreading (expanding) the globalization

• capability of people to adapt to the new system of values

• rate of change does not promote innovations

Rural transformations VI

• Economical changes is as driver for demographical changes

• Formation of new economic elite and new configuration of class, gender and interests

• In the post-socialism conditions the formation of new groups of population connected with the entrepreneurship of different character as well as structural unemployed groups are growing too

CHANGES IN POPULATION STRUCTURE

due to depopulation and mobility

Population dynamics in municipalities 2000-2011

In 2011 while comparing it with 2000, the density of population has:– grown in 15,7% of the municipalities,

– 84,3 % - has decreased,

– but in 40,7% of the municipalities it has decreased even more than 20%.

Population density, 2013

Changes in Rural Settlement Patterns of Peri-urban Areas of Latvia

• The detailed study is done in Riga peri-urban area. The author use data from Latvian Central Statistical Bureau and data from survey "Residents of the Riga Aglomeration" (2007-2009) as well as the case studies focused on the lives and areas of activity of local residents (2007-2012).

• The survey covered 2367 respondents: those who are born there, who moved to peri-urban territory of Riga prior to 1991, those who moved between 1991 and 2000, those who moved after 2000.

19

Long-term net migration around urban centres in Latvia, 2005-2011

Source: Kruzmetra Z (2011)

20

Model of the migration flows around urban centres: Riga case

Zon

e 2

rura

l are

a Zone 2 urban

area

Source: authors’ elaboration according data of Latvia CSB 2007-2011

Groups of residents

in the peri-urban areas

Locals Incomers from cities

Incomers from capital

Incomers from other cities and

towns

Incomers from rural areas

The typology of groups of residents in the peri-urban areas

Population structure by age & sex, 2012

Age group Male Female

0 - 15 11,6 % 11,0 %

16 - 62 32,0 % 33,3 %

+ 63 4,2 % 7,9 %

• Marupe municipality –peri-urban –optimal

• Akniste municipality –

remout -unbalanced

Age group Male Female

0 - 15 6,0 % 5,2 %

16 - 62 37,4 % 30,2 %

+ 63 7,6 % 13,6 %

23

Comparison of migrant groups by education level, %

With every stage the education level of newcomers grows, more and more newcomers have highest education (26,1% - 48,1%)

24

Labour market & mobility & society structure

• The population mobility could be largely explained by labour market processes

• Due to the political transformations of the end of the 20th century the structures of national economics and sector divisions have changed

• The proportion of people employed in agriculture and the industrial sector in Latvia has noticeably diminished and many private sector employers have entered the labour market, they also make up the majority of employers today

Data about Occupied Posts by Industry of Economic Activity in NACE groups. Central Statistical Bureau. Available: http://data.csb.gov.lv/

Economically active individual merchants and commercial companies per 1000 inhabitants in

municipalities, 2011

Political, socioeconomic transformations as well as demographical changes impact human capital and social capital as well

HUMAN AND SOCIAL CAPITAL IN RURAL LATVIA

Human and Social Capital II

• The capability has decreased in rural areas –modernization of agriculture, low flexibility of labour market, inappropriate skills, social problems;

• “voids of the state” – the way for developing self-sufficiency and independency.

Human and Social Capital III

-• The result of social inequality, social injustice and

distrust is impossibility to see meaning for collective action and positive development of the state

• Low level of social capital – reducing of population, lack of horizontal solidarity and trust

Human and Social Capital IV

0,8%

8%

29,6%

58,1%

3,5 %

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

To a very large extent

To a large extent

To a small extent

To a very small extent

NA

To what extent you can influence decisions of local government concerning your life and neighbourhood?

(%, n=1001, 2013)

Cooperation of Local Governments, 2012.

Human and Social Capital V

-• More than 50% inhabitants feel strong belonging to

their neighborhood, town or village, and Latvia;

• The land as a value, ideological element;

• Resilience motivates people to manage with difficult situations they face.

Human and Social Capital VI

+• Endogenous development begins in some rural

areas. Local partnerships and groups of action have potential to make rural life meaningful;

• Active NGOs and persons in rural areas (women, youth);

• High level of cultural capital in rural areas.

FINAL REMARKS

Hot problems

• Rural depopulation

• Decreasing of work places, services, emigration and ageing of population, weak infrastructure

• Insufficient and spatially unequal social capital

• Lack of long-term rural development strategies

34

Future perspectives

• Try to manage shrinking

• Implement rural innovation

• Social entrepreneurship

• Activate rural civil society

• Necessity for future research

Literature

• Rasnaca L,Kruzmetra Z. (2013) The Population and Labour Market Flows in the Ex-Socialist Non-urbanAreas of Latvia, Nitra 2013, draft

• Bite D. (2012) Cooperation of Local Governments, University of Latvia, Riga, 56p.

• Kruzmetra Z. (2011) Changes in Rural Settlement Patterns of Peri-urban Areas of Latvia, University ofLatvia, Riga, 74p.

• Bite D. (2011) Place Marketing and Specialization of Cities and Towns in Latvia. In: Economic Science forRural Development, No.26, pp. 33-39.

• Krisjane, Z., Eglite, P., Bauls, A., Lulle, A., Berzins, M., Brants, M., Cunska, C., Gnedovska, I., Ivbulis, B.,Kruzmetra, Z., Kule, L., Markausa, I.M., Niklass, M., Pavlina, I., Titova,N., Vanaga, S., Vilcins, A. andZarina, I.B. (2007) Darbaspēka ģeogrāfiskā mobilitāte (The Geographic Mobility of the Labour Force).Rīga: University of Latvia, Ministry of Welfare, 240 pp.

• Ķusis J.,Kr ūzmētra Ž. , Bite D. (2008) Pašvaldību stratēģijas teritorijas ilgtspējīgā attīstībā/Strategies ofLocal Municipalities for Sustainable Development of Territory. „Economic Science for RuralDevelopment” Proceedings of the International ScientificConference, Nr. 15, Jelgava, 88-94 lpp.

• Kruzmetra Z. , Rasnaca L. (2007) Small Towns as Employment and Service Centers.Ģeogrāfiski Raksti/Folia Geographica, 13, 134–145p.

• Rasnača L, Kr ūzmētra Ž., Bite D. (2007) “Changes in the Towns and Countryside of Latvia afterAccession to the European Union”/ LU, Stratēģiskās Analīzes Komisija “Uncertain Transformations – NewDomestic and International Challenges” Proceedings of theInternational Conference Riga, November 9-11,2006, LU 2007, pp. 343-357p.

37

Literature

• Doogan K. Long-term Employment and the Restructuring of the Labour market in Europe, Time & Society, Vol.14 no.1, 2005, Sage Publications, p. 66.

• Ford T. (1999) Understanding Population Growth in the Peri-Urban Region. International Journal of Population Geography, Vol.5, p.297-311.

• Marsden T., Smith E. Ecological Entrepreneurship: Sustainable Development in Local Communities through Quality Food Production and Local Branding. Geoforum, Vol.36, 2005, pp. 440-451.

• Stenning A. Re-placing Work: Economic Transformations and the Shape of a Community in Post-socialist Poland. Work, Employment & Society, Vol.19, 2005, pp. 235-259.

• Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia, http://www.csb.gov.lv/sites/default/files/infograph.pdf• Latvia. Human Development Report 2012/2013. Sustainable Nation. • Cimdina A., Raubisko I. (2013) Life – Development –Well-being in the Latvian Countryside (in

Latvian). Riga: Zinatne, p. 264.• Survey “Development of Regions in Latvia”, 2013 www.vraa.gov.lv

• Shrinking Regions: a Paradigm Shift in Demography and Territorial Development, Regional Development 2008

38

Thank you for your attention!

Welcome to LATVIA!