Łukasz Kubiak

Articles

A demographic forecast for Warsaw

Przemysław Śleszyński, Łukasz Kubiak, Ewa Korcelli-Olejniczak

Przegląd Geograficzny (2020) tom 92, zeszyt 4, pp. 475-497 | Full text
doi: https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2020.4.2

Further information

Abstract

This article offers assumptions and results relating to six projection variants of demographic forecasting (scenario analysis of population change) elaborated for Warsaw City Hall (Śleszyński et al., 2019). The analysis was based on the population size estimated by reference to telemetry calculations obtained from the Orange Polska telephone company. It revealed that the so‑called ‘night population’ size is larger by 213,000 than the registered population size of the Polish capital (see details in Śleszyński and Niedzielski, 2018). Estimates were made for the 18 districts of Warsaw in one‑year intervals for the 2018‑2050 period, according to six variant scenarios (continuation, suburbanisation, concentration, polarisation, ‘low’ immigration and ‘high’ immigration). The scenarios were predominately differentiated in terms of internal and international migration levels, and was inter alia conditioned by the socio‑economic development model for Poland and the spatial policy pursued in the Warsaw Metropolitan Area.

Based on the respective variant, the population estimates for the city as a whole in 2030 range from 1,980,000 to 2,132,000, as compared with 1,785‑2,249,000 in 2050. The most important conclusion, which implies practical solutions is related to the finding that till 2050 there is no basis to anticipate a stronger population growth in Warsaw. This reflects both the exhaustion of traditional source regions for migrants and the fertility rates in the city, which remain low in real terms (insufficient to ensure straightforward replacement of generations), even if they are relatively high by the standards of Polish cities in general. Only a distinct intensification of immigration and a parallel inflow of migrants from other regions of Poland and abroad, would lead to a population growth of the city.

The most probable variant is that of continuation, as it reflects the inertia among the key factors. This would at first denote an increase in population to 2,044,000 in 2028, followed by a slow decline (in 2040 – 2,005,000, in 2050 – 1,929,000). The ageing of the population and a marked increase in post‑working age population are both inevitable. By 2050, the population in this category will most probably account for more than 25% of the total for Warsaw (as compared with around 18 per cent currently). It is predicted that the downtown districts (especially Śródmieście and Praga Północ) will witness declines in the number of inhabitants, even as the so‑called ‘developing’ parts of the city (like Białołęka, Wilanów or Ursus) continue to increase, while other external districts like Ursynów will move over to population stagnation.

The main factor determining the condition and structure of Warsaw’s population will thus be migration, predominately including internal and international immigration. Both correlate closely with Poland’s socio‑economic situation, including changes on the labour market. In the future, the most important factor determining mobility will be the absolute decrease in migration resources in the capital’s main basin. At the same time, the expected supply gap on the labour market (2‑7 million people nationally by 2050) will result in competition for employees between urban centres at a much greater level than at present. In the case of Warsaw this may result in an intensification of three complementary processes, i.e. increased internal drainage, foreign immigration and commuting to work.

There are several reasons why stagnation or population decline will pose no threat to Warsaw. Firstly, the capital ‘operates’ as a functional area, together with its suburban zone, for which (irrespective of the variant) at least weak population growth should be expected till 2050, with a rather favourable age structure still maintained. Secondly, the future development of the capital city depends less on its population size, and more on the quality of human capital, including the size of the so‑called ‘creative class’, i.e. the entrepreneurial, hardworking, creative people who are able to both meet the high requirements of an ambitious labour market and create a kind of ‘added value’ in the form of innovation (scientific, technical, organizational, etc.), as well as high quality cultural products. The typical demographic burden parameters associated with the ratio of people of non‑productive to productive age are also less important than the latter factor. While population loss in a city as large as Warsaw does not constitute a social problem, the occurrence and increase of social inequalities is a major one.

Keywords: demographic forecast, scenarios of demographic development, social and economic polarization, Warsaw, Poland

Przemysław Śleszyński [psleszyn@twarda.pan.pl], Instytut Geografii i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania im. S. Leszczyckiego PAN
Łukasz Kubiak [lukaszsebastiankubiak@gmail.com], Instytut Geografii i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania im. Stanisława Leszczyckiego PAN
Ewa Korcelli-Olejniczak [eko@twarda.pan.pl], Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization Polish Academy of Sciences Twarda 51/55, 00-818 Warsaw: Poland

Citation

APA: Śleszyński, P., Kubiak, Å., & Korcelli-Olejniczak, E. (2020). Prognoza demograficzna dla Warszawy. Przegląd Geograficzny, 92(4), 475-497. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2020.4.2
MLA: Śleszyński, Przemysław, et al. "Prognoza demograficzna dla Warszawy". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 92, no. 4, 2020, pp. 475-497. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2020.4.2
Chicago: Śleszyński, Przemysław, Kubiak, Łukasz, and Korcelli-Olejniczak, Ewa. "Prognoza demograficzna dla Warszawy". Przegląd Geograficzny 92, no. 4 (2020): 475-497. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2020.4.2
Harvard: Śleszyński, P., Kubiak, Å., & Korcelli-Olejniczak, E. 2020. "Prognoza demograficzna dla Warszawy". Przegląd Geograficzny, vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 475-497. https://doi.org/10.7163/PrzG.2020.4.2