Population Growth and Reurbanization in the Spanish Inner Cities:
the Role of Internal Migration and Residential Mobility
Antonio López-Gay
Centre d’Estudis Demogràfics
[email protected]
PAPER PREPARED FOR THE CHAIRE QUETELET 2011: URBANISATION, INTERNAL
MIGRATIONS AND DEMOGRAPHIC BEHAVIOUR
Summary:
After 25 years of an intense population decrease, the central cities of Barcelona and Madrid
have experienced a remarkable increase of population during the last decade. Less intense
trends, but in the same direction, have been identified in the largest Spanish cities: population
growth has started again in the inner city of Valencia, Sevilla’s urban core is still growing, and
the population decrease experienced in the central city of Bilbao for the last two decades has
come to an end. Thus, Spanish largest metropolitan areas have come to share the reurbanization
processes that other Southern European cities like Rome, Milan, Turin and Marseille are
currently going through, and that many other cities in Central and Northern Europe and in the
United States underwent during the last two decades of the 20th century.
In the Spanish case, the arrival and settlement of foreign population in the urban centers have
played a major role in this comeback. The total gains of population in these areas should not
hide, though, the negative balance that central cities still have in the residential relation with
their own metropolitan areas. However, a growing appeal of central areas for metropolitan
residents has been stated. In some cases, a remarkable increase of the out-migration rates of the
metropolitan municipalities with destination to the central city has been observed. Likewise, the
proportion of movements leaving the central areas with destination to their metropolitan areas is
decreasing year after year.
This paper aims at analyzing the back to the city movements in the largest Spanish metropolitan
areas, mainly from a geo-demographic perspective. The excellent temporal and geographic
coverage of the Spanish Register of Residential Movements — a 100% microdata dataset
including each residential movement occurred in Spain and the migrant’s demographic
characteristics — enables the research to analyze the territorial areas of residential relation of
the city center, its temporal evolution, and the demographic structure of the individuals
participating in these residential flows.
Keywords: Urban demography, reurbanization, residential mobility, central cities, Southern
Europe.
1
1. The comeback of the central city
The two largest central municipalities in Spain, Madrid and Barcelona, have
recently experienced a period of population growth, which has stopped the intense
population decrease that was registered during the last quarter of the 20th century. This
whole process has been widely followed with some delay by the rest of the major cities
in Spain. Positive growth in Valencia has started again after a remarkable decrease of
population during the 90s. In Seville the demographic growth has become more intense
and in Bilbao the population decrease known since 1981 has recently arrived to an end.
Other Southern cities in Europe have experienced similar processes in the recent
past. Rome’s central municipality lost more than 200,000 inhabitants between 1981 and
2001, and it has already recovered almost the same amount during the last decade.
Milan and Florence inner cities have never reached the population counted in 1971, but
the population increase experienced during the last years ends three decades of negative
growth. Marseille also shows a similar pattern, while in Athens it is expected to see a
population increase in the current census round. On the other hand, the population
decrease continues in the main Portuguese inner areas. This trend has come to share the
processes that many other cities in Europe and in the United States registered during the
last two decades of the 20th century. In the U.S., the majority of the urban cores have
experienced a population growth since 1990 (Frey, 2006), and the same has occurred in
London and Paris, where a long period of dramatic shortfall came to an end during the
80s (Atkinson, 2000; Odgen y Hall, 2000).
These processes fall in a highly accepted literature of reurbanization, the return of
inhabitants to central city areas, a pattern that should be linked to a new functional
specialization of the inner city (Musterd, 2006) and to its new emergence (Cheshire,
2006; Storper and Manville, 2006). In the case of the Spanish cities, it is essential to
identify the demographic components that are behind the increase of population. A
quick look into the data foresees the importance of the international migration in this
comeback. It should be questioned, however, if an increase of the attractiveness of the
central areas have simultaneously emerged in the context of the residential mobility and
internal migration.
2
2. Data and methods
The small size of Spanish municipalities is an essential attribute for the
development of this paper, since it allows to clearly distinguish the urban core from the
rest of the metropolitan area. Central municipalities of each province are understood as
the central city, and provinces have been used as a measure of metropolitan areas.
However, there are some differences in the extension of these units among the major
metropolitan areas in Spain, and they have to be taken under consideration in the
analysis of the results.
Five major cities have been included in the study: Barcelona, Bilbao, Madrid,
Sevilla and Valencia. Barcelona and Madrid are the biggest metropolitan areas in the
country, with a remarkable difference compared to the rest of the major cities (Table 1).
Although both provinces occupy a similar area and have analogous population
(approximately 6 million people in 8,000 km2), there are significant differences in the
area of both central municipalities. It has to be considered that Barcelona’s central
municipality is six times smaller than Madrid. Nevertheless, the attributes that literature
assigns to the central cities of metropolitan areas are clearly distinguished in both units.
Valencia and Sevilla have similar characteristics in terms of area and population of the
central municipality and the rest of the province. In both cases the central municipalities
occupy an area slightly bigger than Barcelona’s, and far smaller than Madrid. Bilbao is
included in the research mainly due to the small area of its central municipality; in
consequence, centrality processes may be more powerful in this case.
Table 1: Geographic characteristics of central municipalities and provinces
Central municipality
Population
2
Km
Province (metro area)
Density
Population
Km2
Density
Barcelona
1,619,337
98.21
16,488.51
5,511,147
7,728.17
713.12
Madrid
3,273,049
605.77
5,403.12
6,458,684
8,027.69
804.55
Sevilla
704,198
141.31
4,983.36
1,917,097
14,036.09
136.58
Valencia
809,267
134.63
6,011.05
2,581,147
10,806.09
238.86
Bilbao
353,187
41.31
8,549.67
1,153,724
2,217.28
520.33
Source: National Statistical Institute of Spain. Populations updated at 1-I-2010
The study mainly relies on data from the Spanish Register of Residential
Mobility. This is probably one of the world’s most reliable sources of information
tracking residential changes. It registers all the residential movements crossing
3
municipal borders in the entire territory of Spain. Besides the municipalities of origin
and destination, the microdata dataset provides the migrant’s demographic information.
The wide coverage of this source allows the research to analyze the territorial
relationships of the urban cores in the context of reurbanization, its temporal variations,
and the demographic structure of individuals participating in residential flows with the
central city involved. Using this data source, two main types of movements have been
identified. On one side, residential movements that have been generated in the central
cities with destination the rest of the province and the rest of Spain. These movements
have been grouped in different categories according to the straight line distance. On the
other side, flows generated in the rest of the province with destination to the central
municipality have been grouped under the same categorization.
3. Geo-demographic dynamics of the Spanish urban areas: concentration,
suburbanization and reurbanization
Spanish urban centers have known demographic processes of opposite sign in the
last decades. The concentration of population in the urban cores that characterized the
Spanish urban and demographic systems since the Industrial Revolution was followed
by an intense period of metropolitan dispersion and decrease of population in the urban
centers. This phase has been recently interrupted by the demographic recovery of those
central areas.
Demographic concentration in urban centers has been the predominant process in
the largest Spanish cities until 1970. In the case of the two most populated inner cities,
Barcelona and Madrid, a remarkable increase in the number of inhabitants and
households is identified in the period 1950-1970 (Figure 1). In Barcelona, the relative
growth of the two analyzed variables during the 50s is higher than in the 60s, while in
Madrid the highest growth is reached during the 60s. This situation is caused by the
smaller surface of Barcelona’s central municipality, which anticipated the saturation of
its urban fabric and, as a consequence, the arrival to its population peak. The rest of the
large central cities in Spain, significantly smaller than Barcelona and Madrid,
experienced their urban explosion during the 60s and the 70s. This is also the period of
the formation and extension of the metropolitan areas in Spain, with the growth of its
functional areas and the consolidation of the metropolitan networks (Nel·lo, 2004).
Thus, the areas located close to the inner cities also experienced an intense increase of
population and households. The demographic and urban growth of this period is mainly
4
explained by the existence of intra and inter-regional migrations, associated to the labor
market and the transfer of active population from the primary sector to the industry,
construction and services (Nel·lo, 2004; Terán, 1999).
Figure 1: Total population and number of households in the provinces of Barcelona, Madrid, Sevilla,
Valencia and Vizcaya, by distance to the central municipality, 1950-2001
Prov. Barcelona - Central municipality
Prov. Barcelona (mun. <15km)
4.5
2,000,000
2,000,000
4
1,500,000
3.5
3
1,000,000
Prov. Barcelona (mun. >15km)
4.5
1,500,000
3.5
3
1,000,000
2.5
500,000
1.5
0
4.5 3,500,000
3,000,000
4
3.5
Prov. Madrid (mun. >15km)
3,000,000
2
3.5
4
2,500,000
3.5
2,000,000
3
3
1,500,000
2.5
1,000,000
2
500,000
1.5
0
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
2.5
1,000,000
2
500,000
1.5
0
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Prov. Sevilla - Central municipality
4.5
3,000,000
4
2,500,000
1,500,000
2.5
1.5
4.5 3,500,000
3
1,500,000
0
0
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
2,000,000
500,000
2
1.5
Prov. Madrid (mun. <15km)
3,500,000
1,000,000
2.5
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
2,000,000
3
1,000,000
2
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Prov. Madrid - Central municipality
3.5
500,000
2
2,500,000
4
1,500,000
2.5
500,000
0
4.5
2,000,000
4
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Prov. Sevilla (mun. <15km)
Prov. Sevilla (mun. >15km)
750,000
4.5 750,000
4.5 750,000
4.5
625,000
4
4
4
500,000
3.5 500,000
3.5 500,000
3.5
375,000
3
3
3
250,000
2.5 250,000
2.5 250,000
2.5
125,000
2
2
2
0
625,000
375,000
125,000
1.5
0
600,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
400,000
200,0000
200,000
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Prov. Valencia (mun. <15km)
Prov. Valencia (mun. >15km)
4.5 1,000,000
4.5
4
4
4
800,000
800,000
3.5
600,000
3
400,000
400,000
2.5
2
1960
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Population
3.5
600,000
3
0
0
4.5 1,000,000
3.5
1950
125,000
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Prov. Valencia - Central municipality
800,000
375,000
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
1,000,000
625,000
2.5
200,000
1970
1981
0
200,000
2
1991
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Households
3.5
3
1.5
2.5
2001
0
2
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Household size
5
Prov. Vizcaya - Central municipality
Prov. Vizcaya (mun. <15km)
Prov. Vizcaya (mun. >15km)
600,000
4.5 600,000
4.5 600,000
4.5
500,000
4
4
4
400,000
3.5 400,000
3.5 400,000
3
3
1,000,000
800,000
300,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
200,0000
100,000
500,000
300,000
2.5 200,000
1950
0
2
1.5
100,000
1960
1970
1981
0
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Population
Households
3.5
300,000
3.5
3
2.5 200,000
1.5
2.5
2
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
500,000
100,000
1991
2001
0
2
1.5
1950 1960 1970 1981 1991 2001
Household size
Source: Population and household censuses, 1950-2001
Clear evidences of urban maturity and saturation are identified in Barcelona and
Madrid during the 70s, when the central cities experienced a very low increase of
population. Moreover, this weak increase was exclusively the consequence of a high
natural growth that compensated the negative net migration that urban cores began to
register. Inter-regional migratory flows stopped, and the demographic scattering, the
urban dispersion and the expansion of the functional areas emerged as the main
processes occurring in the urban territory (Recaño, 2004). Residential mobility became
the key element to explain the demographic and migratory dynamics of Spanish
metropolitan areas (Módenes, 1998). Adults and young adults (and their families)
looking for a new residence in the suburban rings is the synthetic profile of many
individuals participating in these processes. The chronology of the occurrence of these
processes in the Spanish cities is not the same, since the cities that started earlier
processes of population concentration are the first ones registering demographic losses.
In order to explain the negative demographic growth of central areas during the last
decades of the 20th century, the following elements should be taken into account: i) pure
demographic elements, with the arrival to the age of leaving home of the boomer
generations, born between 1960 and 1975, that have significantly increased the housing
demand in the urban areas, ii) the revalorization of the suburban spaces, either by the
relocalization of the economic activity, the expansion of the transportation
infrastructure, or by the new residential patterns, which give a high value to the
characteristics of the dwelling and its environment, and iii) the housing market itself,
with cheaper prices in the farther rings, and the evolution on people’s willingness to
face longer commutes (López Gay, 2008). In all our studied cases, the relative growth
of the population and the number of households in the metropolitan rings between 1981
6
and 2001 have always been higher than in the central city. In the cases of Barcelona and
Madrid, the metropolitan extension to the second ring is clearly stated after 1981.
The evolution of the number of households and their size is an essential aspect to
understand the process of urban dispersion from a demographic approach. The decrease
of the population registered after 1981 in the central cities has never gone together with
a decrease of the total number of households. Thus, the inability of central areas to
increase the housing supply at the same speed that the decrease in the household size
generated a new housing demand should be taken into account to understand the
Spanish suburbanization processes. The arrival at the age of leaving home of the
boomers living in the urban cores, with the subsequent creation of new households that
did not find balance in the disappearance of households in the top of the pyramid, has
played a major role in this process.
The total population of the central municipalities of Barcelona and Madrid
reached the lowest levels in the late 90s. In the case of Barcelona, the inner city lost
more than 250,000 inhabitants in 20 years and went under the 1.5 million. In Madrid,
the decrease was similar in absolute numbers, and the total population went under the
2.9 million at the end of the 20th century. Valencia’s central municipality also knew a
period of population decrease during the 90s, and Sevilla interrupted its demographic
growth even having a large natural balance. The small municipality of Bilbao reached
its urban and demographic saturation during the 70s; the total population has
continually decreased since that moment, although a new period of population
stabilization has been recently consolidated.
The largest increase of population during the last decade has been registered in
Barcelona, Madrid and Valencia (Figure 2). The update of the Spanish Register of
Population shows that the total population of Barcelona has been increased in almost
150,000 persons. Madrid and Valencia have reached a new maximum value. The largest
extension of those central municipalities compared to Barcelona makes this situation
possible, because a substantial number of new housing units has been recently added to
their urban fabric. Sevilla and Bilbao are not experiencing the same increase of
population; their overalls have remained around the same values during the last decade.
7
Figure 2: Total population in the selected central municipalities: Barcelona, Bilbao, Madrid, Sevilla y
Zaragoza, 1991-2010
Barcelona
Madrid
3,300,000
1,650,000.00
3,200,000
3,100,000
1,550,000.00
3,000,000
2,900,000
1,450,000.00
2,800,000
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Sevilla
Valencia
750,000
850,000
725,000
800,000
700,000
750,000
675,000
650,000
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
700,000
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Bilbao
400,000
375,000
350,000
325,000
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Fuente: Population census (1991) and Register of Population (1996-2010)
4. Demographic components of the population growth in central cities
But what is the demographic element that explains the population growth in the
main central municipalities in Spain? After taking apart the components of the
demographic growth1 from 1998 to 2010, there is a clear answer to the question (Figure
3). Four out of the five cities (Barcelona, Bilbao, Madrid and Sevilla) wouldn’t have
experienced a population growth if it wasn’t for the contribution of the international
migration. Only the municipality of Sevilla did not have a significant contribution of the
international migration; actually, in this case the high level of the natural increase is the
responsible for the fact that the city did not have a substantial loss of population. It
should be emphasized the case of Sevilla as the only case in which the natural growth
acquires very high positive values. In other cities like Barcelona, Bilbao or Valencia, the
natural growth is negative or slightly positive.
This exercise enables to identify another crucial element to understand the
demographic systems of the central cities that have been analyzed throughout the last
1
The factorization of the demographic components have been developed using the basic demographic
equation. In this case, and taking into account that the registers from the Vital Statistics and from the
Register of Residential Mobility offers a high degree of reliability, the difference between the total
growth of the municipality and the addition between the natural increase and the internal net migration
has been assigned to the international net migration.
8
decade: the whole population growth in the central cities hides a negative internal net
migration. Although the analyzed cities have gained population in the recent years, they
still show a loss of population due to internal migration. All the analyzed cities show a
negative internal net migration that is particularly noticeable in the relation with the
municipalities of their own metropolitan areas. Thus, the results point at the fact that the
pattern of the metropolitan residential dispersion is still going on in the Spanish largest
cities.
Figure 3: Demographic components of population growth in central cities. Annual average, 1998-2010
Barcelona
Madrid
50,000
37,500
25,000
12,500
0
-12,500
-25,000
60,000
45,000
30,000
15,000
0
-15,000
-30,000
-45,000
1998-2001
2002-2005
2006-2010
Sevilla
1998-2001
2002-2005
2006-2010
1998-2001
2002-2005
2006-2010
Valencia
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
-2,000
-4,000
-6,000
-8,000
1998-2001
2002-2005
Bilbao
2006-2010
16,000
12,000
8,000
4,000
0
3,000
-4,000
1,500
-8,000
0
-1,500
-3,000
1998-2001
3,000
1,500
0
-1,500
-3,000
1998-2001
2002-2005
2006-2010
2002-2005
2006-2010
Internal Net Migration
International Net Migration (Compens.)
Natural Growth
Total Growth
Source: Register of the Population, Register of Residential Mobility, and Vital Statistics (1998-2010).
However, in four of the five analyzed cities (Barcelona, Madrid and Sevilla), the
negative rates of internal net migration during the last period shows a decrease
compared to the values at the beginning of the decade. The annual analysis –which
includes a territorial approach–, leads to develop these arguments (Figure 4). In general,
the migratory balance of the central cities has lost the negative intensity that showed in
the mid 2000s. This relation became especially strong in the territorial relation of the
central cities with the municipalities of their own province.
Barcelona is one of the cases where the negative net migration has significantly
decreased. On the one hand, the absolute number of residential movements generated in
the central city with destination to the second metropolitan ring has shown a continuous
9
decrease since 2003. On the other hand, the number of residential changes moving into
the central cities from the first and second metropolitan rings shows a clear raising
trend. Consequence of these divergent trends between the two flows, internal net
migration has been remarkably reduced. In 2003, the central city of Barcelona lost
25,000 individuals in the migratory relation with the rest of its province. In 2010, the
city lost 6,500 individuals in the same migratory relation, one fourth of the 2003 value.
The reduction of the negative net migration has been experienced by both Spanish and
foreign nationals. This second group of population also showed a important process of
metropolitan dispersion during the first half of the decade (Bayona and López Gay,
2011), that have lost intensity in the most recent years. In the last observed year, net
migration of foreign nationals has been very close to zero.
In Madrid, it seems clear that there is a moderate reduction of the negative net
migration from the year 2006. In this case, and due to the large area of the central
municipality, most residential flows takes place in connection with the municipalities
located beyond the 15 km distance. The number of departures towards these areas has
decreased from more than 55,000 movements per year to 45,000 since 2006, while the
number of arrivals from the same municipalities has remained steady. In Valencia, the
number of movements leaving the central city to its province has decreased from 22,000
in 2006 to 17,000 in 2010. Reproducing the pattern of the largest cities, an increase has
been experienced in the flows moving into the urban core: from 10,000 in 2005 to
14,000 in 2010. In the case of Valencia, the reduction has been specially remarkable in
the migratory relation with the closest municipalities. Sevilla also shows a similar
pattern: the number of residential movements generated in the urban cores towards their
own provinces have significantly decreased from the year 2006, whereas the arrivals
from the same areas have experienced a slightly increase. Bilbao is the only city among
the studied in this research that does not show the same pattern. In this case, both the
arrivals and departures to/from the central city have experienced an increase during the
last years, and the net migration seems to remain stable.
The absolute number of movements arriving to the central cities with origin in
other Spanish provinces has also experienced an increase during the second half of the
decade. As a consequence, the net migratory balance in the relation with the rest of
Spain has became positive in all the studied cities. In all cities but Bilbao, trends of both
Spanish and foreign nationals have contributed to this new scenario.
10
Figure 4: Internal net migration of the central municipalities by type of movement, 1998-2010
Barcelona and first Metro ring (<15km)
Barcelona and second Metro Ring (>15km) Barcelona and rest of Spain
25,000
25,000
25,000
20,000
20,000
20,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
0
0
0
-5,000
-5,000
-5,000
-10,000
-10,000
-10,000
-15,000
-15,000
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Madrid and first Metro ring (<15km)
-15,000
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Madrid and second Metro Ring (>15km)
Madrid and rest of Spain
60,000
60,000
60,000
45,000
45,000
45,000
30,000
30,000
30,000
15,000
15,000
15,000
0
0
0
-15,000
-15,000
-15,000
-30,000
-30,000
-30,000
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Sevilla and first Metro ring (<15km)
Sevilla and second Metro Ring (>15km)
9,000
9,000
9,000
6,000
6,000
6,000
3,000
3,000
3,000
0
0
0
-3,000
-3,000
-3,000
-6,000
-6,000
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Valencia and first Metro ring (<15km)
Sevilla and rest of Spain
-6,000
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Valencia and second Metro Ring (>15km)
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Valencia and rest of Spain
16,000
16,000
16,000
12,000
12,000
12,000
8,000
8,000
8,000
4,000
4,000
4,000
0
0
0
-4,000
-4,000
-4,000
-8,000
-8,000
-8,000
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Bilbao and first Metro ring (<15km)
Bilbao and second Metro Ring (>15km)
6,000
6,000
6,000
4,000
4,500
4,500
3,000
1,500
0
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
-5,000
-10,000
-15,000
Bilbao and rest of Spain
3,000
2,000
1,500
0
1998
2000
2002
2004
-2,000
-1,500
-3,000
Internal Net Migration (INM)
2006
2008
-1,500
-4,000
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
0
-3,000
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
INM (Spanish Nationals)
INM (Foreign Nationals)
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Out-Migration (internal)
In-Migration (internal)
Source: Register of Internal Migration, 1998-2010
11
5. Intensity and demographic structure of the migratory flows involving the
central cities
Thus, the largest Spanish central cities have been priority destination of the
international migratory flows. Observing the results of the previous chapter, we could
ask ourselves if, moreover, the attractiveness of the central areas has also increased in
the context of the internal migration and the residential mobility. To answer this
question, total mobility rates have been calculated by area of destination and origin. The
total mobility rate is an accurate indicator to compare the evolution of the intensity of
migration during the last years (Figure 5).2
A global lecture of these results states two divergent trends: in most cases, the
residential movements originated in the central city with destination to the rest of the
provinces have significantly lost intensity in the last years, while the residential
movements generated in the rest of the province moving into the central cities, either
have increased the intensity or have not decreased.
The case of Barcelona is a good example to illustrate this process. The Total
Mobility Rate of the residential movements originated in the central city with
destination to the metropolitan municipalities located farther than the 10km ring was
1.30 in 2003. Seven years later, in 2010, the indicator has experienced a 30% reduction.
This decrease has specially been registered in the flows moving into the farther
metropolitan locations. On the other hand, the residential movements originated in the
rest of the province with destination to the central city have experienced a 50% increase
in the same period, moving from 1.26 to 1.86. The case of Valencia is similar too: a
decrease of the intensity of the movements leaving the central city (mostly since 2006),
and, on the contrary, an increase of the intensity in the residential flows moving into the
central city from the province. In this case, the TMR has moved from 1.08 in 1998 to
1.97 in 2010.
2
Total Mobility Rate (TMR) indicates the number of residential movements a person would experience
during his life if the current rates remain stable throughout his life. Although the interpretation could be
slightly different, the elaboration of this indicator is identical to the Total Fertility Rate (TFR).
12
Figure 5: Intensity of the residential mobility originated or with destination to the central municipality by
type of movement. Total Mobility Rate (TMR), 1998-2010
Origin: Barcelona’s province with destination to the central municipality
Origin: municipality of Barcelona
1.50
1.50
1.25
1.25
1.00
1.00
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.00
0.00
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Origin: municipality of Madrid
Origin: Province of Madrid with destination to the central municipality
1.50
1.50
1.25
1.25
1.00
1.00
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.00
0.00
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Origin: municipality of Sevilla
Origin: Province of Sevilla with destination to the central municipality
1.50
1.50
1.25
1.25
1.00
1.00
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.00
0.00
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Origin: municipality of Valencia
Origin: Province of Valencia with destination to the central municipality
1.50
1.50
1.25
1.25
1.00
1.00
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.50
1.50
1.25
1.00
0.00
1998 2000 2002 0.75
2004 2006 2008
0.50
0.25
Origin: municipality of
Bilbao
0.00
1.50
1998
0.25
0.25
0.00
2010
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Origin: Province of Vizcaya with destination to the central municipality
2000
2002
1.50
1.25
1.25
1.00
1.00
0.75
0.75
0.50
0.50
0.25
0.25
0.00
2004
2006
2008
0.00
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
<10km
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
10-19km
>20km
Rest of Spain
Source: Register of Residential Mobility and Register of Population, 1998-2010
13
The proportion of residential changes staying in the central city has been added to
this analysis to evaluate the decrease of the flows moving out of the urban core (Figure
6). Is this a consequence of a decrease in the intensity of the mobility generated in the
urban core or has the inner city improved its capacity and attractiveness to retain the
residential mobility that is being generated there? To answer this question, registers of
residential movements within the central city is needed. This type of movement is not
included in the Spanish Register of Internal Migration, because there is no crossing of
any municipal border. The availability of this data relies on each city council.
Barcelona, Madrid and Valencia publish this information by citizenship, but not Sevilla
and Bilbao. Some degree of risk is assumed when two different sources are combined to
create this indicator, but there is no evidence that the quality of each type of data has
suffered substantial changes during the analyzed period. Thus, strong trends on time
should be interpreted as meaningful. This is the case of Barcelona for Spanish and
Foreign Nationals. In 2004, almost 40% of the movements generated by Spanish
Nationals in the central city crossed the municipal border (only in the context of intraprovincial mobility). In 2010, less than 30% of movements crosses this border. This is
also valid for Foreign Nationals, who are more willing to remain in the central city
when starting a residential change. Series in Madrid and Valencia are shorter, but an
increase of the intra-municipal movements is also stated.
Figure 6: Proportion of residential changes staying in the central municipality (out of all the flows moving
within the province) by citizenship,
2000-2010
90%
85%
80%
75%
Barcelona
Madrid
70%
90%
90%
65%
60%
85%
85%
55%
80%
80%
2000
2002 2004
Valencia
90%
85%
2006
200880% 2010
75%
75%
75%
70%
70%
70%
65%
65%
65%
60%
60%
60%
55%
55%
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
55%
2000
2002
2004
Spanish Nationals
2006
2008
2010
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
Foreign Nationals
Fuente: Register of Residential Mobility and Municipal Register of Intra-municipal Movements, 20002010.
Patterns in Madrid are not as illustrative as the ones in Barcelona or Valencia. On
the one hand, there is a clear decrease of the flows moving to the farther metropolitan
rings, but the intensity of the mobility with destination to the nearest municipalities has
remained stable in the last years. On the other hand, the intensity of mobility with
14
destination the central city coming from the metropolitan suburbs is higher during the
second half of the decade, but the differences are not as remarkable as in the previous
two cases. Finally, Bilbao and Sevilla do not show a decrease on the mobility generated
in the central city, although a slight increase of the attractiveness generated by the
central areas could be stated.
The shape of the curve resulting of representing the age and sex structure of the
residential flows is aligned with the classic curve of internal migration in Spain (Figure
7). In a context of very low mobility compared to the countries of Western and Northern
Europe, the peaks of higher intensity are associated with the main changes in the
individual and familiar life cycles (Clark and Onaka, 1982; Módenes, 1998). Most of
the movements are concentrated around the age of leaving home, a period that is
followed by a stage of higher residential stability.
However, some differences could be identified in the curve’s shape of each type
of movement by taking close attention. Are the age and sex structure of the individuals
participating in the residential flows generated in the inner city identical to the
demographic structure of the individuals who are moving into the city center from the
suburbs? Are we talking about different profiles that respond to different residential
strategies? A first look to the residential mobility curves of the flows generated in the
central cities points out the oldest age of the individuals moving into farther areas of the
metropolitan area. Thus, in all capitals but Valencia, the age group 30-34 is, among
men, the modal age in the movements with destination to the farther municipalities in
the metropolitan area. Residential movements from the urban cores to the nearest
locations normally show a younger age structure in all the studied cities. There are no
significant differences between men and women in this type of residential movement,
beyond the earlier age at which women moves.
As it was expected after reviewing the evolution of the Total Mobility Rates, the
intensity of the residential movements generated in the metropolitan municipalities with
destination to the central cities does not reach the levels of the movements originated in
the urban cores. In Barcelona and Madrid, however, the intensity of residential flows
generated in the nearest municipalities is remarkable. Generally, the shape of the curve
of the residential flows moving into the city center does not show the same
concentration in groups associated with the age of leaving home. Thus, it seems clear
that the decision of including central spaces in the residential strategies of the
metropolitan residents can be taken in a wide range of age groups. The case of males in
15
35‰
30‰
25‰
20‰
15‰
0‰
10‰
5‰
Originated in BIL
Originated in prov. of VAL
20‰
Men
15‰
0‰
10‰
5‰
Originated in prov. of VIZ
<15km
Originated in MAD
Men
Originated in SEV
Men
Originated in VAL
Originated in BIL
>15km
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
Men
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
Originated in prov. of SEV
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
Originated in BCN
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
15‰
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
Men
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
20‰
Originated in prov. of MAD
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
25‰
Originated in prov. of BCN
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
Originated in VAL
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
Originated in SEV
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
Originated in MAD
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
0‰
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
Originated in BCN
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
0‰
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
0‰
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
0‰
0-4
5-9
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75+
Madrid and Valencia is illustrative: residential rates moving from the suburbs to the
central city are higher in the age group 40-44 than in the group 20-24. The attractiveness
of central spaces seems to go beyond the age, mostly among the men.
Figure 7: Age and sex structure of the residential mobility with the central municipality as origin or
destination, 2006-2010
Women
Originated in prov. of BCN
35‰
30‰
25‰
20‰
15‰
10‰
5‰
Women
Originated in prov. of MAD
35‰
30‰
25‰
20‰
15‰
10‰
5‰
Women
Originated in prov. of SEV
35‰
30‰
25‰
20‰
15‰
10‰
5‰
Women
Originated in prov. of VAL
35‰
30‰
35‰
30‰
25‰
Women
Originated in prov. of VIZ
10‰
5‰
Rest of Spain
Source: Register of Residential Mobility and Register of Population, 2006-2010
16
6. Conclusions. The future of the Spanish central cities: towards the inflexion of
the sign of the internal net migration?
The arrival and settlement of foreign nationals in the urban centers have played a
major role in the population increase of the largest central Spanish municipalities. The
demographic growth of these areas should not hide that the net migration is still
negative in the relation with their metropolitan areas. However, signs of a recent
recovery of the attractiveness exercised by the central areas have been stated in this
research. This trend converges with the reurbanization processes experienced in many
other mature cities in Europe and North-America.
In most of the Spanish metropolitan areas analyzed in this research, a significant
increase of the intensity of the movements with destination the central city has been
registered during the second half of the last decade. Likewise, leaving the city
movements have experienced a decrease of the intensity in most of the inner cities. For
the first time in many years, trends in internal migration in Barcelona and Madrid
suggest that the negative balance may have a deadline. However, this new scenario may
not occur immediately, at least in the case of Madrid, where the decrease of population
due to internal migration is still remarkable.
If that happened, it would mean the end of a period of more than 50 years in
which these central cities have lost population in favor of their metropolitan areas. The
moment seems favorable to achieve this milestone. Vinuesa (2005) points out the effect
of the aging of central city households on the housing supply. Spanish central cities
have a singular accumulation of households in the top of the pyramid, which are
expected to disappear during the upcoming years. Blanes and Menacho (2007)
announced a progressive reduction of the net generation of households caused by the
effect of the structure of the population living in Barcelona. According to their
projections, at the end of the 2010 decade a larger number of households will disappear
because of mortality reasons than households will be created in the city due to the effect
of its demographic structure. This would be the first time in the contemporary history of
Barcelona under those circumstances. There is no doubt that the arrival of post-boomers
generations at the age of leaving home, combined by the disappearance of households at
the top of the pyramid is going to reduce the stress of the housing market in central
locations and is going to introduce changes in the metropolitan residential dynamics. In
addition, results showed in this research suggest that there is a remarkable amount of
population that was forced to leave the central city in previous years that may consider
17
of moving back. The participation of foreign nationals in this process should also be
taking into consideration, as well as the effect of the economic crisis on the housing
market and on the residential behavior of the population.
References
ATKINSON, R (2000) ―Measuring gentrification and displacement in Greater London‖, Urban
Studies, vol.37, n.1, pp.149-165.
BAYONA, J.; LÓPEZ-GAY, A. (2011) ―Concentración, segregación y movilidad
residencial de los extranjeros en Barcelona‖ Documents d’Anàlisi Geogràfica, 57 (3), p.
381-412.
BLANES, A.; MENACHO, T. (2007) ―Projeccions de població i llars dels municipis del Pla
Estratègic Metropolità i districtes de la ciutat de Barcelona‖ en COSTAS, A (ed.) Llibre blanc de
l’habitatge a Barcelona.
CLARK, W. A. V.; ONAKA, J (1983) ―Life cycle and housing adjustment as explanations of
residential mobility‖, Urban Studies, 20, pp. 47-57.
CHESHIRE, P. (2006) ―Resurgent cities, urban myths and policy hubris: What we need to
know‖, Urban Studies, vol.43, n.8, pp. 1231-1246.
FREY, W. H. (2005) Metro America in the new century: metropolitan and central city
demographic shifts since 2000. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution, Living Cities
Census Series.
LÓPEZ-GAY, A. (2008) Canvis residencials i moviments migratoris en la renovación
demogràfica de Barcelona, Barcelona: Consell de Treball, Econòmic i Social de Catalunya.
MÓDENES, J. A. (1998) Flujos espaciales e itinerarios biográficos: La movilidad residencial
en el área de Barcelona. Tesis doctoral, dirigida per Anna Cabré, leída en el Departamento de
Geografía de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Mimeo.
MUSTERD, S. (2006) ―Segregation, urban space and the resurgent city‖, Urban Studies, vol.43,
n.8, pp. 1325-1340.
NEL·LO, O. (2004) ―¿Cambio de siglo, cambio de ciclo? Las grandes ciudades españolas en el
umbral del siglo XXi‖, Ciudad y Territorio. Estudios territoriales, 141-142, pp. 523-542.
OGDEN, P.E.; HALL, R (2000) ―Households, reurbanisation and the rise of living alone in the
principal French cities, 1975-90‖, Urban Studies, vol. 37, n. 2, pp. 367-390.
RECAÑO, J. (2004) ―Migraciones internas y distribución espacial de la población española‖ en
Leal, J. Informe sobre la situación demogràfica en España, pp. 187-228. Madrid, Fundación
Fernando Abril Martorell.
STORPER, M; MANVILLE, M (2006) ―Behaviour, preferences and cities: Urban theory and
urban resurgence‖, Urban Studies, vol.43, n.8, pp. 1231-1246.
TERÁN, F. (1999) Historia del urbanismo en España. Siglos XIX y XX, Madrid, Cátedra
VINUESA, J. (2005) ―Dinàmica demogràfica, mercado de vivienda y territorio‖, Papeles de
Economía Española, n.104, pp. 253-269.
18