Berlin-Institute
for Population
and Development
Steffen Kroehnert, Franziska Medicus, Reiner Klingholz
The Demographic State of the Nation
How sustainable are Germany’s regions?
ble
ail a
v
a
is
n”, org
o
i
t
a
ut .
er N instit
d
in age
e L . b er l
h
c
ww
afi s
ogr e a t w
m
de
lin
D ie e r d o n
“
,
ud y o r d
ounding countryside +++ no future without children +++ some cities…
+++ lynx and wolves come +++
e s t an b e
g
a
c
p
r
n Rhineland Palatinate +++ few parents, even fewer children +++
+++ the Renaissance of cities +++ Sma
92
so
te 1 s t o r e
e
l
p
k
com in boo
The
RY
A
M
UM
S
DY
U
T
S
The Berlin Institute would like to thank the following organizations
for their support in this research project:
Robert Bosch Foundation, Stuttgart
DKV Deutsche Krankenversicherung, Cologne
Software AG – Foundation, Darmstadt
Editor:
Berlin Institute for Population and Development
Schillerstrasse 59
10627 Berlin
Germany
Telephone: +49 (0)30 31017324
Fax: +49 (0)30 22324846
Email: [email protected]
www.berlin-institut.org
Abstract of the study published in March 2006 by dtv, Munich
Authors:
Steffen Kroehnert, Franziska Medicus, Reiner Klingholz
Database:
Nienke van Olst
Documentation:
Ronald Smutny
Design:
Traktor, Cologne
2 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
GERMANY IS SHRINKING
For 33 years, the number of children being
born in Germany has been less than what
is needed for a long-term sustainable
population. But only slowly has the country
begun to rise to the challenge.
The low number of children, coupled with
simultaneously increasing life expectancy,
means high costs for the aging society and
dwindling economic productivity. The entire
social welfare system – including the pension
Birth rate (annual number of
births per 1,000 total population)
(Source: United Nations
Population Division)
1970
2003
system and health and long-term care
insurance – is coming under threat.
At the same time, the ever-shrinking,
younger generations are confronted with
increasing obligations of mounting national
debt. The country is facing multifaceted
challenges – these changes will affect
the various regions of Germany at highly
differing degrees. The following study
demonstrates the consequences of these
demographic changes for the regions.
By looking at the birth rate, it can be
seen that Germany has held last place
worldwide for over 30 years. This value
is especially important, as it represents
the strength of the younger generations
responsible for solving future issues. This
value, in comparison to the number of
elderly who need to be provided for, is
in no other country nearly as small as in
Germany.
30
25
20
15
10
5
USA
3 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
Spain South Korea Poland
Germany
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
A functioning society needs a population
composed of all age groups, as well as
an economy that produces sufficient
revenue and offers all necessary services.
Demographic and economic development
are equally important for the prospects of
the regions: a blossoming economy ensures
prosperity. At the same time, an economy
needs consumers and a continuous supply
of well-motivated, qualified employees and
businesses to be productive.
Throughout Germany, the number of people
under 35 is declining. This is resulting in
growing competition among the regions
for productive, young people. Stable
development is only possible in areas that
either have a sufficient supply of young
people in order to build a demographic
foundation (of which there are only very few
in Germany), or are economically attractive
enough to recruit people from elsewhere.
Based on the varying economic development
of each of the German states, thousands are
on the move. The regions suffering the most
from this condition are those, which already
have problems, while the areas of growth still
profit from internal migration. In areas with
long-standing low levels of offspring, stability
and growth are only possible by attracting
population, thereby intensifying competition
among the regions.
4 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
This study evaluates all counties and towns in
Germany on the basis of 22 indicators for the
demographic, economic and social status.
Additionally, two indicators are included
that measure the trend of development of
each county according to demographic and
economic values from the recent past.
The overall grade combines all of the
measurements and gives an overview of the
sustainability of German cities and counties.
The variety of incoming data produces a
widespread picture: economically strong
counties score points primarily through
revenue, while rural counties, even those
with a weak economy, gain ground through
favorable demographic values and a better
social and natural environment.
The overall grades of the study range
from 2.66 in Biberach near Ulm in BadenWurttemberg to 4.77 in the county of
Bernburg in Saxony-Anhalt. The most
sustainable regions are the southern states of
Baden-Wurttemberg and Bavaria. Here, the
modern, innovative economy has attracted
immigrants from within Germany and
beyond for decades. Twelve of the 20 best
counties in the overall assessment are in
Baden-Wurttemberg, while seven are in the
neighboring state of Bavaria. However, unlike
its neighbor, the first signs of demographic
problems in Bavaria are showing on its
borders. Numerous Bavarian border counties
in Upper Franconia near the Czech Republic,
Thuringia and Saxony are already being
plagued by demographic and economic
problems. The more rural Lower Saxon
county, Vechta, combines comparatively high
birth rates with very good economic data and
is therefore, the only county north of the Main
River included in the 20 most sustainable
counties.
The situation in many areas in the new
German states is extremely critical. For
15 years, young people have been leaving
the East; a large portion of the economic
weakness in this region can be attributed
to the loss of an active, motivated and
qualified young class of the population. Even
counties, where the economy is steadily
growing, can barely profit demographically
from this condition. The communities, which
have low revenue, are stuck with the high
costs of an oversized infrastructure and in
many cases, can only cover running costs
through further debt. It is the most critical in
Saxony-Anhalt, where half of the 20 German
counties with the worst values are located.
High risks weigh heavily on almost all of
Saxony-Anhalt.
In the new German states, islands of
stability are found only in the suburbs of
important, large cities. This is how the
suburban counties around Berlin, Dresden
and around a group of cities in Thuringia
– Jena, Weimar, Erfurt, Eisenach – achieve
favourable evaluations. Here, emigration
has come to a halt; some cities, like Dresden,
Leipzig, Jena and Potsdam, are even growing
in population. Here, people have already
realized that despite population declines,
the maintenance of important infrastructure
is worthwhile – something only just starting
to be understood by policy-makers.
Economic development, population and
recreational opportunities define the
attractiveness of regions. Where there
is too little employment, young people
are leaving. Where families are missing,
the economy is ailing. On the basis of
24 indicators, the Berlin Institute has
assessed the sustainability of German
counties and cities. Green indicates a
positive outlook; the redder the color,
the more problematic the outlook is
for the region. Throughout Germany,
large changes are taking place due to
demographic transition. And still, 15 years
after unification, the land still remains
divided: while the South is thriving, the
East is declining.
3YLT
&LENSBURG
2àGEN
2$
&2)
%MDEN
,%2
.%
"-
-34
,'
502
$%, "REMEN
6%2
$!.
5%
3&!
/02
,àCHOW
.EURUPPIN
/(6
$(
"!2
(ANNOVER
3('
(&
'¾
(3+
!3,
3+
(ALLE
3'(
(2
-1
(%&
!7
,$+
+OBLENZ
-9+
#/#
,
2Ä$
-4+
''
(5
&RANKFURT
$RESDEN
/&
/&
,)&
$ARMSTADT
37
%2"
(0
7/
&4
7.$
-:'
,5 -ANNHEIM
$Ä7
(0
-/3
+, +,
($
,5
.+
3,3 3AARBRàCKEN
.7 30
,$
($
3" (/- :7
,$
03
+!
03 3Ä7
(. (.
'%2 +ARLSRUHE
0&
,"
#7
%3
4Ä
24
27
4""
&Ä
3!$
#(!
.2(
!.
3(!
2EGENSBURG
75'
32
+%(
$/.
$,'
0!&
.5
!
':
0!
,!
&3
$!(
!UGSBURG
0!
,!
!)#
5LM
5,
$'&
.$
($(
%$
0!.
-Ä
!¾
&&"
454
+.
3)'
"#
-àNCHEN %"%
-.
34!
,,
--
-
2/
+&
26
43
2/
7-
+ONSTANZ &.
/!,
+EMPTEN
,)
/!
'!0
4¾,
'ARMISCH
0ARTENKIRCHEN
&2'
$%'
)NGOLSTADT
'0
2%'
32
2
%)
!!
",
&REIBURG &2
74
!-
.àRNBERG
3#
!.
+Ä.
7%.
!3
,!5
&Ä
%63
4)2
.%7
%2
.%!
7.
""
&$3
75.
"4
&/
%2(
7Ä
3TUTTGART
"!$
/'
"!
7àRZBURG +4
+)"
0&
+5
"!
"4
-),
+53
2! +!
!.!
!3:
(/
(/
+#
(!3
37
-30
-%+
6
#/
!"
!"
:WICKAU
$7
#HEMNITZ
34,
'2
:)
0)2
&'
'#
:
":
-%)
$,
0,
#OBURG
+'
+-
-7
3/+
3/.
$!
-:
!:
")2
3,&
(".
.%3
&"
-AINZ
+(
,¾
'ERA
3(+
'2:
3(,
('
7IESBADEN
3)-
7),
3-
&ULDA
2'
30.
(9
-4,
!"'
*ENA
!0
&$
,-
%-3
42
6"
')
77
$!5
7%
%RFURT
)+
"ONN
.2
'4(
7!+
-2
/3,
4/
,EIPZIG
73&
",+
3¾-
7!+
3)
3IEGEN
!+
%%
./,
+9&
5(
$:
/%
'-
+ÚLN
5 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
7"
"4&
.$(
%37
#OTTBUS
$%
""' +¾4
1,"
-,
%)#
+"
,$3
!:%
3"+
'ÚTTINGEN
+ASSEL
4&
"¾
/(!
(8
+3
-+
-AGDEBURG
7&
72
./-
&&
,/3
0-
'3
0ADERBORN
(!
(%
*,
("3
(/,
0"
"2"
/+
7&
()
'4
(!-
"3
(ILDESHEIM 3:
"IELEFELD ,)0
5.
$ORTMUND 3/
(%2
"/
-( %
%.
-%
7
23
3'
0%
"ERLIN
0OTSDAM
7OLFSBURG
-)
-/,
(6,
'&
(
7!&
"/4 '%
3$,
3!7
.)
(-
2%
")4
#%
/3
-àNSTER
!ACHEN
42
-Ä2
%,
35
%5
5%2
.EUBRANDENBURG
0#(
,7,
734
/,
$-
3CHWERIN
(AMBURG 2:
7,
2/7
/(:
#,0
,%6 ',
!# $.
'Ä
/LDENBURG
$UISBURG /"
-'
((
34$
"2!
+,%
(3
(7)
.7-
"REMERHAVEN
7ILHELMS
HAVEN
/60
/$
#58
74!52
#/%
$àSSELDORF
,àBECK
0)
5SEDOM
('7
2OSTOCK
$"2
3%
#UXHAVEN
"/2
+2
.60
/(
.-3
34
6)%
(34
0,¾
):
/SNABRàCK
7%3
+IEL
(%)
./(
2.66 - 3.00
3.01 - 3.25
3.26 - 3.50
3.51 - 3.75
3.76 - 4.00
4.01 - 4.25
4.26 - 4.50
4.51 - 4.77
&EHMARN
2Ä'
6%#
Overall rating
3,
.&
-"
"',
COUNTRY-WIDE
SHORTAGE OF CHILDREN
In 2004, the fertility rate in Germany was
at a low of 1.36. Because the number of
births has been at a persistently low level
for over three decades, the size of each new
generation has been one-third smaller than
that of their parents’. For a while, immigration
could counterbalance the surplus of deaths
over births: starting in 2003, however, this
no longer occurred and the population of
Germany has been declining since.
After unification, the fertility rate in the East
dropped to 0.77. Such low numbers have
never been registered elsewhere. As shown
by today’s fertility rates, 1.37 in the West and
1.30 in the East, the rates in the new German
states are approaching those in the West.
Large cities generally have fewer children,
since they offer families too little room for
development. By far, the area with the most
offspring is in the west of Lower Saxony, in
the counties of Cloppenburg and Vechta and
their surroundings. This area, at one-time
poor and agriculture-based, traditionally has
had high numbers of children. Meanwhile,
thanks to a strong small-scale industry, it has
evolved economically into a model region
with a strong labor market.
Fertility rate 2003
(lifetime births per woman)
(Source: Federal Statistical
Office Germany)
3YLT
&LENSBURG
1.3 and less
1.31 - 1.4
1.41 - 1.5
1.51 - 1.6
1.61 - 1.7
more than 1.7
3,
.&
&EHMARN
2àGEN
2Ä'
2$
+IEL
(34
0,¾
.60
(%)
/(
.-3
3%
):
,àBECK
!52
"REMERHAVEN
&2)
%MDEN
,%2
$-
/$
((
34$
(AMBURG
5%2
3CHWERIN
2:
.EUBRANDENBURG
0#(
-Ä2
-34
,7,
"2!
7,
2/7
/(:
734
,'
5-
/LDENBURG
02
$%, "REMEN
/,
6%2
#,0
$!.
5%
3&!
/02
,àCHOW
.EURUPPIN
/(6
"!2
%,
$(
6%#
./(
-àNSTER
#/%
2%
"/4 '%
+2
6)%
-'
.%
(3
"-
3+
$:
4/
(9
./,
-1
,EIPZIG
73&
",+
3¾-
2'
-4,
,
#/#
$RESDEN
-4+
-AINZ
-30
+)"
"!
-),
7àRZBURG +4
%2"
7/
&4
,5 -ANNHEIM
(0
-/3
($
,5
.+
.7 30
3,3 3AARBRàCKEN
,$
($
3" (/- :7
,$
03
+!
03 3Ä7
(. (.
'%2 +ARLSRUHE
2! +!
0&
7Ä
#7
&Ä
&$3
%3
4Ä
24
27
3!$
#(!
.2(
2EGENSBURG
75'
32
+%(
$/.
$,'
5,
.5
$'&
0!&
$!(
!UGSBURG
0!
,!
&3
!
':
0!
,!
!)#
5LM
454
3)'
"#
%$
0!.
-Ä
!¾
-àNCHEN %"%
-.
34!
,,
--
-
2/
+&
26
43
2/
7-
+ONSTANZ &.
/!,
+EMPTEN
,)
/!
'!0
4¾,
'ARMISCH
0ARTENKIRCHEN
&2'
$%'
)NGOLSTADT
.$
($(
'0
2%'
32
2
%)
!!
&&"
+.
74
!-
.àRNBERG
!.
3(!
",
&REIBURG &2
,¾
7%.
!3
,!5
&Ä
%63
4)2
.%7
&/
3#
!.
+Ä.
7.
""
75.
"4
%2
.%!
4""
3TUTTGART
"!$
/'
,"
0&
+5
"!
%2(
$Ä7
+,
+#
"4
+53
+,
37
$!
(0
!.!
!3:
(/
(/
#/
,)&
!"
-%+
6
(!3
37
$7
#HEMNITZ
34,
3/+
3/.
#OBURG
+'
!"
$ARMSTADT
!:
")2
/&
/&
''
-:
+(
(5
&RANKFURT
&'
'#
:
:WICKAU
":
'2
:)
0)2
-7
0,
(".
.%3
('
2Ä$
3)-
'ERA
3(+
'2:
3(,
&ULDA
&"
7IESBADEN
7),
!0
3,&
&$
,-
%-3
$!5
3-
')
77
+OBLENZ
42
6"
+-
-%)
$,
!"'
*ENA
)+
,$+
-9+
'4(
7%
%RFURT
30.
/3,
%%
(ALLE
3'(
+9&
7!+
-2
!+
.2
!7
7.$
-,
7!+
(%&
3IEGEN
35
42
""' +¾4
1,"
5(
(2
+ÚLN
")4
7"
/%
'-
"ONN
%5
#OTTBUS
$%
"4&
%)#
+"
,$3
!:%
3"+
!3,
.$(
%37
4&
"¾
'ÚTTINGEN
+3
3)
!ACHEN
0-
/(!
+ASSEL
(3+
-+
,%6 ',
!# $.
./-
&&
,/3
*,
-AGDEBURG
("3
'¾
(!
/+
(%
7&
72
(8
0"
"2"
'3
0ADERBORN
$ORTMUND 3/
(%2
"/
-( %
%.
-%
7
3' 23
"3
7&
()
(/,
(!5.
$UISBURG /"
0%
(ILDESHEIM 3:
"IELEFELD ,)0
'4
7!&
+,%
$àSSELDORF
(ANNOVER
3('
(&
"ERLIN
0OTSDAM
7OLFSBURG
-)
-/,
(6,
'&
(-
"/2
3$,
3!7
(
/3
/SNABRàCK
7%3
#%
.)
34
-:'
6 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
'Ä
.70)
#58
7ILHELMS
HAVEN
/60
(7)
#UXHAVEN
74-
5SEDOM
('7
2OSTOCK
$"2
-"
"',
SHORTAGE OF WOMEN
IN THE EAST
Between West Pomerania and the Vogtland
Region the number of men and women has
become increasingly disproportionate. There
have been significantly more women than
men leaving the region since unification.
63 per cent of those who left since 1991
have been women. In 2004, in the age
group 18-29, which is statistically important
for starting families, there were only 90
women for every 100 men in East Germany
(including Berlin). Two reasons exist for
the migration of women: first, on average,
women today are more successful in school
and higher education, which makes it easier
for them to study or find a job in the West or
abroad. Second, in the East it is much harder
for women to find a job locally than for men.
This imbalance has dramatic consequences
for demographic development: the women
who have left will at most have children
elsewhere. And, the socially disadvantaged
men, who have been left behind, rarely start
a family.
Number of women per 100 men
in the age group 18-29, 2003
(Source: Federal Statistical
Office Germany)
3YLT
&LENSBURG
82 and less
82.01 - 86
86.01 - 90
90.01 - 94
94.01 - 98
98.01 - 102
102.01 - 106
more than 106
2àGEN
2Ä'
+IEL
(34
0,¾
.60
(%)
/(
.-3
,àBECK
!52
&2)
%MDEN
,%2
((
34$
5%2
3CHWERIN
.EUBRANDENBURG
0#(
7,
2/7
/(:
/,
-Ä2
-34
,7,
"2!
734
#,0
$-
/$
(AMBURG 2:
,'
5-
/LDENBURG
02
$%, "REMEN
6%2
$!.
5%
3&!
/02
,àCHOW
.EURUPPIN
/(6
"!2
%,
$(
-àNSTER
2%
"/4 '%
(%2
"/
-( %
%.
-%
7
3' 23
.%
(3
"-
'-
(2
-9+
4/
73&
",+
-4+
-AINZ
+(
(5
&RANKFURT
/&
/&
%RFURT
2'
-4,
,
*ENA
!0
'ERA
3(+
$RESDEN
$ARMSTADT
#OBURG
37
"!
7àRZBURG +4
0&
,"
0&
#7
&Ä
&$3
%3
4Ä
24
27
3!$
#(!
.3(!
2(
2EGENSBURG
75'
32
+%(
$/.
)NGOLSTADT
$,'
5,
.5
$'&
0!&
$!(
!UGSBURG
0!
,!
&3
!
':
0!
,!
!)#
5LM
%$
0!.
-Ä
!¾
&&"
454
+.
3)'
"#
-àNCHEN %"%
-.
34!
,,
--
-
2/
+&
26
43
2/
7-
+ONSTANZ &.
/!,
+EMPTEN
,)
/!
'!0
4¾,
'ARMISCH
0ARTENKIRCHEN
&2'
$%'
.$
($(
'0
2%'
32
2
%)
!!
",
&REIBURG &2
74
!-
.àRNBERG
!.
%63
7%.
!3
,!5
&Ä
3#
!.
+Ä.
7.
""
4)2
.%7
&/
%2
.%!
4""
3TUTTGART
"!$
75.
"4
"!
%2(
7Ä
+53
2! +!
+5
"4
-),
(0
7/
&4
,5 -ANNHEIM
$Ä7
(0
-/3
+, +,
($
,5
.+
.7 30
3,3 3AARBRàCKEN
,$
($
3" (/- :7
,$
03
+!
03 3Ä7
(. (.
'%2 +ARLSRUHE
(/
(/
+#
(!3
37
%2"
+)"
!.!
6
,)&
-30
-%+
!3:
0,
#/
!"
$7
#HEMNITZ
34,
'2
:)
0)2
&'
'#
:
:WICKAU
":
-%)
$,
3/+
3/.
$!
!:
/'
3,&
+-
-7
!"'
'2:
(".
+'
!"
''
-:
")2
,¾
7%
3(,
.%3
&"
2Ä$
3)-
3-
&ULDA
('
%-3
7),
'4(
30.
(9
./,
&$
,-
7IESBADEN
42
6"
')
77
+OBLENZ
#/#
7.$
$:
,EIPZIG
)+
,$+
$!5
-:'
(ALLE
-1
3¾-
7!+
-2
!+
.2
!7
42
(%&
3IEGEN
35
")4
3+
+9&
7!+
3)
+ÚLN
"ONN
%5
-,
/3,
%%
/%
,%6 ',
!# $.
""' +¾4
3'(
5(
%37
7"
"4&
%)#
+"
#OTTBUS
$%
1,"
.$(
+ASSEL
(3+
-+
,$3
!:%
3"+
!3,
'ÚTTINGEN
+3
(!
4&
"¾
/(!
'¾
,/3
0-
72
./-
&&
*,
-AGDEBURG
7&
("3
(8
0"
"2"
/+
(%
"ERLIN
0OTSDAM
'3
0ADERBORN
$ORTMUND 3/
"3
7&
()
(/,
(!5.
$UISBURG /"
0%
(ILDESHEIM 3:
"IELEFELD ,)0
'4
7!&
+,%
+2
(ANNOVER
3('
(&
#/%
$àSSELDORF
'&
7OLFSBURG
-)
-/,
(6,
(
(-
"/2
3$,
3!7
.)
/SNABRàCK
7%3
#%
/3
34
!ACHEN
7 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
'Ä
.70)
#58
"REMERHAVEN
7ILHELMS
HAVEN
/60
(7)
#UXHAVEN
74-
5SEDOM
('7
2OSTOCK
$"2
3%
):
./(
-'
&EHMARN
2$
6%#
6)%
3,
.&
-"
"',
POORLY INTEGRATED
IMMIGRANTS
In Germany, 7.3 million people hold a
foreign passport; on top of this, there
are approximately the same number of
naturalized citizens and immigrants of
German origin. In total, roughly one in six
German residents has an “immigration
background.” Because foreigners were
recruited for work in industry during times
of economic boom, a considerable portion
has settled in large cities. For this reason,
the number of foreigners living in rural
areas – and throughout East Germany
– has remained low. The degree to which
foreigners have been poorly integrated,
can be demonstrated by looking at
their unemployment and welfare rates
– foreigners are twice as likely as Germans
to be unemployed and dependent on social
welfare. Immigrants’ children are twice
as likely as German children to attend the
Hauptschule (basic secondary school), while
they are not even half as likely to attend a
Gymnasium (qualification for university
entrence), as should be expected based on
proportion of the population. In total, 18 per
cent of immigrants’ children do not complete
school, which basically defines the path to
unemployment. Without any further flow
from abroad, Germany’s population would
shrink to 24 million by 2100, if birth rates
remain as they are today. Currently, there are
83 million people in Germany.
Graduates during the 2003/2004
school year according to degree
(Source: Federal Statistical Office
Germany)
Germans
no degree
Hauptschule (basic secondary school)
Realschule (advanced secondary school)
Fachhochschulreife (upper
secondary degree)
allgemeine Hochschulreife (qualification
for university entrance)
8 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
Wasted potential: Immigrant’s children
often attend Hauptschule and only rarely
Gymnasium. Due to this, they are over
proportionately represented in groups
of young people who begin their careers
without completing school. This, however,
often leads directly to unemployment.
Foreigners
SOCIAL SYSTEMS
IN DANGER
In 1900, only three per cent of the
population had reached the age of retirement
– age 70. Today, almost 25 per cent of all
Germans are over the age of 60 – and have
reached the average age of retirement. In
2020, 24 million people in Germany will
be over 60 – four million more than today.
The social welfare system, through which
the work force finances those who are not
working, faces enormous challenges. Already,
the national budget allocates over 80 billion
Euro annually for pension funds – in other
words, one third of its total spending is on
pension. The actual demographic problem
is still in the making: when the “baby boom
generation” reaches retirement, starting
in 2015, the ratio of those paying into the
pension system and those receiving pension
payments shifts from roughly 2 : 1 today,
towards 1 : 1. Today’s pension system would
no longer be functional in this situation.
Portion of age groups in per cent
of total population
(Source: Federal Statistical Office
Germany)
Germany in 2005
Today, where the average person retires
in his or her early sixties, about one fourth
of the population is retired. In 2050, 37
per cent of Germany will have reached
the age of 60. The size of the workforce
contributing to the pension system will
have diminished respectively.
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Men
1
9 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
Germany in 2050
0.5
Women
0
0.5
Men
1
1
0.5
Women
0
0.5
1
GERMANY IS SEPARATING
INTO SHRINKING
AND BOOMING REGIONS
Since reunification, approximately 1.5
million people have left East Germany. In the
states of Thuringia, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt
and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania,
the population has reduced by between
eight and twelve percent, since the time of
reunification. In the western states there are
also shrinking regions: in the Ruhr Basin,
Saarland and along the former GermanGerman border. Economically strong areas
in the West have profited from the migration
of young and qualified people. Particularly
Bavaria and Baden-Wurttemberg have been
able to increase their population, and both
states continue to profit.
Population development
in per cent 1990 – 2004
(Source: Federal Office for
Building and Regional Planning)
3YLT
&LENSBURG
3,
.&
&EHMARN
2àGEN
2Ä'
2$
+IEL
(34
0,¾
.60
(%)
/(
.-3
– 15 and less
– 14.9 - – 10
– 9.9 - – 5
– 4.9 - 0
0.1 - 5
5.1 - 10
10.1 - 15
more than 15
,àBECK
!52
&2)
%MDEN
,%2
((
34$
5%2
3CHWERIN
.EUBRANDENBURG
0#(
"2!
/,
-Ä2
-34
,7,
7,
2/7
/(:
734
#,0
$-
/$
(AMBURG 2:
,'
5-
/LDENBURG
02
$%, "REMEN
6%2
$!.
5%
3&!
/02
,àCHOW
.EURUPPIN
/(6
"!2
%,
$(
6%#
./(
-)
+2
6)%
-'
.%
(3
-àNSTER
(!
"-
(2
-9+
4/
,EIPZIG
73&
",+
3)-
%RFURT
(5
&RANKFURT
/&
/&
2'
$RESDEN
37
-30
37
"!
-),
7àRZBURG +4
(0
7/
&4
,5 -ANNHEIM
(0
-/3
+, +,
($
,5
.+
.7 30
3,3 3AARBRàCKEN
,$
($
3" (/- :7
,$
03
+!
03 3Ä7
(. (.
'%2 +ARLSRUHE
0&
,"
&Ä
#7
&$3
%3
4Ä
24
27
!-
.àRNBERG
3!$
#(!
.2(
2EGENSBURG
75'
32
+%(
$/.
)NGOLSTADT
$,'
5,
.5
$'&
0!&
$!(
!UGSBURG
0!
,!
&3
!
':
0!
,!
!)#
5LM
%$
0!.
-Ä
!¾
&&"
454
+.
3)'
"#
-àNCHEN %"%
-.
34!
,,
--
-
2/
+&
26
43
2/
7-
+ONSTANZ &.
/!,
+EMPTEN
,)
/!
'!0
4¾,
'ARMISCH
0ARTENKIRCHEN
&2'
$%'
.$
($(
'0
2%'
32
2
%)
!!
",
&REIBURG &2
74
7%.
!3
,!5
&Ä
%63
4)2
.%7
&/
!.
3(!
7.
""
75.
"4
3#
!.
+Ä.
3TUTTGART
"!$
+5
%2
.%!
4""
$Ä7
0&
(/
(/
+#
"!
%2(
7Ä
+53
2! +!
!.!
!3:
"4
%2"
+)"
-%+
3/+
#/
!"
$7
#HEMNITZ
34,
'2
:)
0)2
&'
'#
:
:WICKAU
":
-%)
$,
6
(!3
$!
+-
-7
0,
,)&
$ARMSTADT
!:
/'
3,&
3/.
#OBURG
+'
!"
''
-:
")2
,¾
'ERA
3(+
'2:
(".
30.
(9
-4,
,
!"'
*ENA
!0
3(,
.%3
&"
-4+
-AINZ
+(
42
3-
&ULDA
('
2Ä$
7IESBADEN
7),
'4(
7%
&$
,-
%-3
7.$
$:
./,
-1
3¾-
7!+
6"
')
77
+OBLENZ
#/#
-:'
(ALLE
)+
,$+
$!5
42
(%&
-2
!+
.2
!7
")4
3+
+9&
7!+
3)
3IEGEN
35
"ONN
%5
-,
/3,
%%
/%
'-
+ÚLN
!ACHEN
""' +¾4
3'(
5(
%37
7"
"4&
%)#
+"
#OTTBUS
$%
1,"
.$(
+ASSEL
(3+
-+
,$3
!:%
3"+
!3,
'ÚTTINGEN
'¾
4&
"¾
/(!
+3
,/3
0-
72
./-
&&
*,
-AGDEBURG
7&
("3
(8
0"
/+
(%
"ERLIN
0OTSDAM
"2"
'3
0ADERBORN
$ORTMUND 3/
"3
7&
()
(/,
(!5.
"/4 '%
(%2
"/
-( %
%.
-%
7
3' 23
0%
(ILDESHEIM 3:
"IELEFELD ,)0
'4
7!&
2%
,%6 ',
!# $.
(ANNOVER
3('
(-
$UISBURG /"
$àSSELDORF
'&
(&
#/%
-/,
(6,
7OLFSBURG
/SNABRàCK
"/2
3$,
3!7
(
/3
34
7%3
#%
.)
+,%
10 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
'Ä
.70)
#58
"REMERHAVEN
7ILHELMS
HAVEN
/60
(7)
#UXHAVEN
74-
5SEDOM
('7
2OSTOCK
$"2
3%
):
-"
"',
which half as many people live as in the new
German states. People are rushing into the
suburbs of large cities. Remote, rural regions,
both in the East and West, are losing large
numbers of residents. The shrinking regions
are aging quickly and, in the future, will
drastically decrease in population due to a
surplus in deaths.
In its prognosis through 2020, the Federal
Office for Building and Regional Planning
calculates that this trend will persist. The
East will continue to empty, as well as the
Ruhr Basin, a comparably small region, in
Population development
in per cent 2004-2020
(Source: Federal Office for
Building and Regional Planning)
3YLT
&LENSBURG
3,
.&
&EHMARN
2àGEN
2Ä'
2$
+IEL
(34
0,¾
.60
(%)
/(
.-3
– 15 and less
– 14,9 - – 10
– 9,9 - – 5
– 4,9 - 0
0,1 - 5
5,1 - 10
10,1 - 15
more than 15
3%
):
,àBECK
!52
"REMERHAVEN
&2)
%MDEN
,%2
'Ä
.70)
$-
/$
#58
7ILHELMS
HAVEN
/60
(7)
#UXHAVEN
74-
5SEDOM
('7
2OSTOCK
$"2
((
34$
(AMBURG
5%2
3CHWERIN
2:
.EUBRANDENBURG
0#(
"2!
-Ä2
-34
,7,
7,
2/7
/(:
734
,'
5-
/LDENBURG
02
$%, "REMEN
/,
6%2
#,0
$!.
5%
3&!
/02
,àCHOW
.EURUPPIN
/(6
"!2
%,
$(
6%#
./(
-)
-àNSTER
2%
"/4 '%
+2
-'
.%
(3
"-
+"
$:
4/
(9
./,
,EIPZIG
73&
2'
-4,
,
#/#
$RESDEN
-4+
-AINZ
-30
+)"
"!
-),
7àRZBURG +4
%2"
7/
&4
,5 -ANNHEIM
(0
-/3
($
,5
.+
.7 30
3,3 3AARBRàCKEN
,$
($
3" (/- :7
,$
03
+!
03 3Ä7
(. (.
'%2 +ARLSRUHE
2! +!
0&
7Ä
#7
&Ä
&$3
%3
#(!
2EGENSBURG
75'
32
+%(
$/.
$,'
5,
.5
$'&
0!&
$!(
!UGSBURG
0!
,!
&3
!
':
0!
,!
!)#
%$
0!.
-Ä
!¾
&&"
454
"#
3)'
-àNCHEN %"%
-.
--
-
2/
+&
26
43
2/
7-
+ONSTANZ &.
/!,
+EMPTEN
,)
11 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
34!
,,
/!
'!0
4¾,
'ARMISCH
0ARTENKIRCHEN
&2'
$%'
)NGOLSTADT
.$
5LM
2%'
32
2
%)
($(
'0
",
+.
74
3!$
.-
2(
!!
4Ä
&REIBURG &2
,¾
!-
.àRNBERG
%63
7%.
!3
,!5
&Ä
!.
3(!
24
27
4)2
.%7
&/
3#
!.
+Ä.
7.
""
75.
"4
%2
.%!
4""
3TUTTGART
"!$
/'
,"
0&
+5
"!
%2(
$Ä7
+,
+#
"4
+53
+,
37
$!
(0
!.!
!3:
(/
(/
#/
,)&
!"
-%+
6
(!3
37
$7
#HEMNITZ
34,
3/+
3/.
#OBURG
+'
!"
$ARMSTADT
!:
")2
/&
/&
''
-:
+(
(5
&RANKFURT
&'
'#
:
:WICKAU
":
'2
:)
0)2
-7
0,
(".
.%3
('
2Ä$
3)-
'ERA
3(+
'2:
3(,
&ULDA
&"
7IESBADEN
7),
!0
3,&
&$
,-
%-3
$!5
3-
')
77
+OBLENZ
42
6"
+-
-%)
$,
!"'
*ENA
)+
,$+
-9+
'4(
7%
%RFURT
30.
/3,
%%
(ALLE
-1
",+
3¾-
7!+
-2
!+
.2
!7
7.$
3+
+9&
7!+
(%&
3IEGEN
35
-:'
-,
3'(
5(
(2
"ONN
42
""' +¾4
/%
'-
+ÚLN
")4
7"
"4&
%)#
%37
#OTTBUS
$%
1,"
.$(
+3
,$3
!:%
3"+
!3,
'ÚTTINGEN
+ASSEL
(3+
-+
4&
"¾
/(!
'¾
3)
!ACHEN
%5
0"
(!
,%6 ',
!# $.
./-
,/3
0-
72
(8
&&
*,
-AGDEBURG
7&
'3
0ADERBORN
$ORTMUND 3/
(%2
"/
-( %
%.
-%
7
3' 23
$UISBURG /"
/+
(%
"ERLIN
0OTSDAM
"2"
("3
(/,
(!5.
"3
7&
()
"IELEFELD ,)0
'4
7!&
0%
(ILDESHEIM 3:
(-
+,%
6)%
(ANNOVER
3('
(&
#/%
$àSSELDORF
'&
7OLFSBURG
/SNABRàCK
-/,
(6,
(
/3
"/2
3$,
3!7
.)
34
7%3
#%
-"
"',
SOME TOWNS ARE LOSING
THEIR PURPOSE
25
Pirmasens
5
Freising, Lk
Bremerhaven
Zwickau
Stralsund
Magdeburg
Chemnitz
10
Erding, Lk
–5
Gera
5
Brandenburg
10
Dessau
15
Neubrandenburg
15
Görlitz
20
Suhl
20
Halle/Saale
Proportion of unemployed
and social welfare recipients
(ages 18-65) 2003
Predicted
population development
2004 -2020
Population
development
1990 -2004
Cottbus
Population development and the
proportion of unemployed and social
welfare recipients in the most strongly
shrinking cities. For comparison, the two
counties with the highest growth.
(Source: Federal Statistical Office
Germany, Federal Office for Building
and Regional Planning)
390,000 empty residences will be torn
down in the East alone. This kind of “urban
development” is unprecedented? What
occurred in Manchester and Liverpool over
three decades ago and is happening today in
the Ruhr Basin, is based solely on industrial
transitions, while the new German states are
fighting against a deindustrialization.
available. Towns, like Gera and Dessau in
the East and Pirmasens and Bremerhaven in
the West, are carrying the stigma of decline.
Everywhere, where traditional employers
are disappearing and not being replaced
by other opportunities, and due to aging
population, there is little chance to alter the
demographic development. In the 15 cities
that have registered the largest population
declines since 1995, a continuation of this
process through 2020 is predicted. By 2009,
Hoyerswerda
In many industrial cities in Germany, as
employment opportunities vanished in the
past ten years, so did the population. In
Hoyerswerda, the one-time “most socialist
city in the GDR” with Europe’s largest brown
and black coal refinery, the population has
decreased by 30 per cent since the collapse
of industry after reunification. Meanwhile,
this scenario can be found everywhere, since
cities can only grow, where employment is
–5
– 10
– 10
– 15
– 15
– 20
– 25
– 30
12 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
AFTER MANKIND
COMES THE WOLF
According to predictions, the number of
people living in Germany will continue to
decline. At the same time, the remaining
population will shift more into metropolitan
areas. While regional planners, economists
and demographists are distressed, some
environmentalists are pleased. Particularly in
regions that are sparsely populated, a natural
habitat has developed for small and large
plants and animals. Low mountain ranges and
forests in Germany’s lowland offer a potential
habitat for lynx. This cat species is once again
living in the Harz Mountains, the Eifel Region
and the Palatine and Bavarian Forests. The
wolf has also returned to Germany, migrating
from Poland to the Saxon Lusatia. Currently
there are two wolf packs with sufficient
offspring in this region.
Kleinräumige Bevölkerungsdichte
und -trends 2005
(Datengrundlage: Statistisches Bundesamt)
Sylt
Shrinking regions with
Flensburg
more than 150
25 -150
25 and less
SL
NF
Fehmarn
Rügen
RÜG
RD
Kiel
HST
PLÖ
NVP
HEI
OH
NMS
Lübeck
Growing
regions with
Bremerhaven
FRI
Emden
LER
HH
STD
more than 150
25 -150
25 and less
Neubrandenburg
PCH
WL
ROW
OHZ
CLP
MÜR
MST
LWL
BRA
WST
LG
UM
PR
DEL Bremen
VER
DAN
UE
SFA
OPR
Lüchow
Neuruppin
OHV
BAR
EL
DH
VEC
CE
NI
NOH
Hannover
SHG
HF
PE
Münster
COE
Bielefeld LIP
HOL
RE
WES
PM
BM
AC DN
KS
DZ
TO
HEF
Leipzig
WSF
BLK
LDK
VB
RG
MTL
Dresden
FB
RÜD
MTK
Mainz
GG
Wiesbaden
OF
OF
LIF
ERB
HP
WO
FT
LU Mannheim
DÜW
HP
MOS
KL KL
HD
LU
NK
SLS Saarbrücken
NW SP
LD
HD
SB HOM ZW
LD
PS
KA
PS SÜW
HN HN
GER Karlsruhe
Würzburg KT
PF
LB
FÜ
CW
BB
FDS
ES
RW
CHA
Regensburg
WUG
SR
DEG
Ingolstadt
DLG
PAF
GZ
DAH
Augsburg
NU
PA
LA
PAN
FS
A
PA
LA
AIC
Ulm
BL
DGF
ND
HDH
UL
FRG
KEH
DON
GP
REG
SR
R
EI
AA
ED
MÜ
AÖ
FFB
TUT
SIG
BC
KN
München EBE
MN
STA
LL
M
RO
MM
Freiburg FR
LÖ
SAD
RH
AN
SHA
EM
VS
AM
Nürnberg
NM
TÜ
RT
WEN
AS
LAU
FÜ
SC
AN
KÜN
Stuttgart
BAD
TIR
NEW
ER
NEA
TBB
WN
PF
WUN
BT
FO
ERH
WÜ
KIB
KUS
RA KA
KU
BA
BT
MIL
BIR
OG
CO
BA
Darmstadt
AZ
ANA
V
HO
HO
KC
HAS
SW
SW
MSP
MEK
ASZ
PL
Coburg
KG
AB
AB
DW
Chemnitz
STL
SOK
SON
DA
MZ
KH
HU
Frankfurt
SIM
TR
SLF
SHL
NES
KF
RV
TS
RO
WM
Konstanz FN
OAL
Kempten
WT
LI
OA
TÖL
GAP
GarmischPartenkirchen
ZI
PIR
FG
GC
Zwickau
GR
MEI
DL
MW
Z
GRZ
FD
HG
COC
WIL
Gera
SHK
KM
BZ
L
ABG
Jena
AP
HBN
EMS
DAU
SM
Fulda
GI
LM
Koblenz
MYK
WE
Erfurt
IK
WW
NR
GTH
WAK
MR
AK
SPN
HY
NOL
SÖM
WAK
SI
Siegen
WND
UH
HR
AW
TR
Halle
MQ
KYF
ESW
KB
SU
MZG
EIC
SK
SGH
OSL
EE
OE
GM
Bonn
EU
ML
NDH
Kassel
HSK
MK
WB
BBG KÖT
BTF
GÖ
HA
Cottbus
DE
QLB
OHA
LDS
AZE
SBK
ASL
Göttingen
Dortmund SO
Köln
Aachen
BIT
NOM
HX
PB
TF
BÖ
GS
Paderborn
HAM
UN
BOT GE
HER
Duisburg OB
BO
MH E
KR
EN
ME
VIE
W
Düsseldorf
MG
SG RS
NE
HS
LEV GL
FF
LOS
JL
Magdeburg
WR
KLE
BRB
OK
HE
WF
HBS
GT
WAF
BS
Hildesheim SZ
WF
HI
HM
BOR
Berlin
Potsdam
Wolfsburg
MI
MOL
HVL
GF
H
OS
Osnabrück
residents per km2
SDL
SAW
ST
13 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
UER
Schwerin
Hamburg RZ
Oldenburg
OL
DM
OD
CUX
Wilhelmshaven
GÜ
NWM
PI
AUR
OVP
HWI
Cuxhaven
WTM
Usedom
HGW
Rostock
DBR
SE
IZ
residents per km2
East Germany offers the most potential for
renaturation. Especially, in already sparsely
populated areas in Mecklenburg-West
Pomerania and Brandenburg, but also in the
low-mountain regions, a large, new habitat
is being established. It stretches from the
north over the Harz Mountains, through
the Thuringian Forest to the Rhoen and the
Frankonian Spessart; to the East past the
mountaines of Erzgebirge, the Sächsische
Schweiz, or so-called “Saxon Switzerland”,
into the Zittauer Gebirge; as well as to the
south through the Franconian Forest to the
Bavarian-Bohemian Forest.
single animals
sighted
constant
sightings
MB
BGL
imnetz.de
www.
ABOUT US
FOUNDING AWARENESS
The Berlin Institute for Population and Development is an independent think tank, which deals with questions of global
demographic changes and development policy. The Institute was founded in 2000 as a non-profit organization aiming to
improve the perception of and dealing with international demographic changes in the context of sustainable development.
In this respect, the Berlin Institute concentrates on the development and promotion of concepts and scientific findings to
contribute to a sustainable future.
The Berlin Institute generates studies, discussion and background papers, prepares scientific information for political
decision-making processes and operates an online handbook on the topic of population.
More information, as well as subscription information for the online newsletter “Demos” is available at www.berlininstitut.org.
The Berlin Institute is financed through project grants, donations and research contracts. The Institute is a registered charity
and receives no public funding for general support.
Contact:
Berlin Institute for Population and Development
Schillerstrasse 59
10627 Berlin
Germany
Phone: +49 (0)30 22324845
Fax: +49 (0)30 22324846
Email: [email protected]
14 Berlin-Institute – The Demographic State of the Nation
Berlin-Institut
für Bevölkerung
und Entwicklung
The population structure in Germany has changed
considerably in the past 41 years – and it will
continue to change dramatically. The “pine tree”
from 1965 continues to evolve into a mushroom.
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
2046
2047
2048
2049
2050
dtv
Berlin-Institut
fŸr Bevšlkerung und
Entwicklung
DIE DEMOGRAFISCHE
LAGE DER NATION
Wie zukunftsfŠhig sind
Deutschlands Regionen?
Die demografische Lage der Nation
Wie zukunftsfähig sind
Deutschlands Regionen?
Daten, Fakten, Analysen
ISBN-13: 978-3-423-34296-4
ISBN-10: 3-423-34296-X
Daten
Fakten
Analysen
Berlin-Institute
For Population and Development
Schillerstrasse 59
10627 Berlin
Germany
www.berlin-institut.org
This project was supported by:
+++growing East-West gaps +++ Saxony: region with problems +++ economic miracle in the South +++ Berlin: ailing capital, blossoming surro
+ declining port cities +++ West Pomerania is emptying +++ growing debt in Saxony-Anhalt +++ the Renaissance of cities +++ Small-Europe in