Irkutsk
Ulan-Ude

Blagoveshchensk
Chita
Yakutsk

Birobidzhan
Vladivostok
Khabarovsk

Magadan
Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk

Anadyr
Petropavlovsk-
Kamchatsky
Moscow

This text is translated into Russian by google automatic human level neural machine.
EastRussia is not responsible for any mistakes in the translated text. Sorry for the inconvinience.
Please refer to the text in Russian as a source.

Plus minus the population of the Far East

EastRussia tried a little better to find out who exactly comes to the Far East, and who leaves it

Plus minus the population of the Far East
EastRussia continues a series of publications on migration statistics in the Far East, opened with a note "The outflow of the population is getting out of the explanation". This time, we studied the history of one real migration using the example of ex-Far Eastern Marina Khitrova (although she does not position herself as an ex-Far Eastern woman — not at all!) And often continues to go back home), and then we dug in statistics on the 2016 results of the year to confirm or refute previous own conclusions. Whether they are confirmed or not is in EastRussia.


OFF FROM THE EASTERN SUN
Marina Khitrova 27 years old. Four years ago she moved from Khabarovsk to Moscow. One day she resigned from one of the structures of the regional government, where she worked for a year and a half after graduating from the university, bought a one-way ticket, packed her things and flew to a city in which she had only two friends - a friend who left Khabarovsk a year earlier , And a barely familiar second cousin, in whose rented apartment Marina lived and lived for the first two months while she was looking for work, an apartment and herself.

"Why did I leave?" Marina reasoned, "Precisely not because I stopped seeing prospects for development or reached the ceiling in my career (it seems that usually they answer the question about moving to Moscow.) When I bought a one-way ticket, I was 23 a year, I lived with my parents and I had an interesting job with a decent salary, which is a good result for yesterday's graduate of the university. "

The capital was not easy to conquer. The girlfriend helped with an interesting work-up - it was necessary to write notes in the magazine for beginning businessmen. Marina for two months traveled almost the entire city, brought a lot of new acquaintances, took a couple with a new girlfriend (by the way, also a Far East) apartment in the center of the capital. A new city, a new environment, new challenges - Marina took the metropolitan rhythm, the Moscow movement. Today she has a husband, a son and a mortgage, many trips and an interesting job. True, there is one rule - every six months to fly to Khabarovsk. Let only for a week, but still. "I can not long without this high sky and bright sun, without my relatives and friends - those people that I never found closer to Moscow," she says.


MEETING FLOWS
The history of Marina is one of tens of thousands of stories of the Far East, who left their land. And with a variety of emotions. Someone left in search, fascinated by the prospects of megacities. And someone - on the contrary, from despair, a heavy climate and a collapsed infrastructure.

The Bulletin of the Federal State Statistics Service "The number and migration of the population of the Russian Federation in 2016" gives many reasons for thinking, primarily about the extreme ambiguity of data on the influx / outflow of the population, which are voiced by regional and federal officials, and the mass media are widely replicated. Yes, and what to say - if in a region with a population of just over 6 million people in 2016, 268 thousand people dropped out - this is 3,9% of the population!

The Far East in 2016 year is the leader in the country by the ratio of the number of retired to the average population. This indicator in the whole district is 3,9% (for comparison, NWFD is 3,55%, UrFO is 3,21%, SFD is 3,17%, and the lowest in the North Caucasus is 2,08%). Every 9-th (9,59%) left Chukotka - and this is an absolute record for the country. Next are the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District and the Altai (6,75% and 6,03%). In the Far East, actively leave the Magadan region (5,58%), with Sakhalin (4,31%) and Yakutia (4,18%). Interest for the sake of, the least willingness to change places is shown by Ingushetia, Chechnya, Moscow and Crimea. In all four regions, the indicator does not exceed 1,5%.

If we take the migration balance (the difference between those who arrived and those who left), we will get one more unpleasant "leadership" in the Far East: the federal district is the leader in outflow of population in the country (for the year the population decreased by 0,28%, negative indicators also for the NCFD (-0,21%) (-0,07%), PFO (-0,05%), the rate of population outflow in two Far Eastern regions was 1%, ie, the EAO and the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug .The nearest indicator - in the Republic of Komi and in the Nenets Autonomous District - fluctuates at the level of 0,8%.

Tomsk region Population Disposed of % Of retired Balance (USD / USD) Outflow,%
DFO 6 188 800,0 241 075 3,90 -17 367 -0,28
The Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) 961 200,0 40 149 4,18 -4 153 -0,43
Kamchatka 315 400,0 11 764 3,73 -1 805 -0,57
Primorsky Krai 1 926 100,0 69 371 3,60 -3 209 -0,17
Khabarovsk Krai 1 333 900,0 50 042 3,75 -1 586 -0,12
Amur Region 803 700,0 29 650 3,69 -3 270 -0,41
Magadan region 146 000,0 8 152 5,58 -739 -0,51
Sakhalin Region 487 300,0 20 980 4,31 -487 -0,10
Jewish Authors. region 165 200,0 6 174 3,74 -1 602 -0,97
The Chukchi Autobus. County 50 000,0 4 793 9,59 -516 -1,03


WHO IS WHERE, AND WE IN MOSCOW
268 thousands of retired - this means that just such a number of people notified the registration authorities about the change of their place of residence. This does not mean that such a number of people left the Far East. On the contrary, this figure includes intraregional migration. By subtracting which, you can calculate how much actually left (and even where).

Tables "Intra-Russian migration of the population in the territories of arrival and departure in 2016 year" are devoted to this statistics.Internal regional migration in the Far Eastern Federal District in 2016 is 159 thousand people.81 629 people left the macroregion to other regions of Russia.56 553 came from other regions of Russia The difference, as can be seen, is 25 thousand people.

Analysis of the details of this statistic allows us to discover several interesting processes. First, 90% of the outflow is in favor of the Central, North-Western and Southern federal districts. The leader in this case is the Southern Federal District - here came from the Far East to 8916 people more than moved in the opposite direction.

Secondly, immediately with two federal districts - the North Caucasus and the Siberian - the Far East has a positive migration balance. Although symbolic. Due to Siberia, the population of the Far East increased by 353 people, and at the expense of the North Caucasus - by 166 people.

But the most interesting begins when considering the ratio of village / city, which also gives Rosstat. The cities of the Far East are actively attracting the rural population from all federal districts except the Central and North-Western regions. Due to the rural population from all over the country the cities of the Far East grew by 4,7 thousand people. Of these, for 2,5 thousands - at the expense of the villagers from Siberia. With the urban population, the trend is reversed - the townsfolk from the Far East go to the villages of the Central, North-Western and Southern Federal Districts. And the leader, of course, is the Southern Federal District: over 4 thousand residents of Far Eastern cities in 2016 settled in rural areas in the South of Russia.


There is an influx!
The increase in the number of people for whom there is no information on education is most likely associated with an increase in the number of foreign workers and labor migrants. This is logical - in Kamchatka, the hands are urgently needed for the fishing industry, the EAO traditionally attracts cheap labor to work in agriculture. Rosstat has statistics on the sources of migration to the region - and, quite surprisingly, against the background of a general outflow of population, the number of those who come from abroad is growing in the Far East.

So, in 2016 year, none of the regions of the Far East as a whole showed a migration inflow of the population. Everywhere - outflow. Nevertheless, not one (!) Far Eastern region showed negative values ​​for international migration. Everywhere - only "plus", from + 73 person EAO to + 2,8 thousand people in the Khabarovsk Territory.

Rosstat divides international migration into "CIS countries" and "other foreign countries". The positive balance in the migration exchange with the CIS countries is 9 thousand people. Against the backdrop of absolute values ​​(total of 24 thousand people came from the CIS countries, and 15 thousand people left), these 9 thousand "remaining" are very significant dynamics.

As always, it's interesting to see the shares - which of the Far Eastern regions is more susceptible to migration from the CIS countries, which is less. Interestingly, the Magadan region is leading with a significant margin - the population growth due to the arrived from the CIS countries is 0,7% of the average number in 2016 year (on average in the DFO this indicator is 0,14%). The second place is occupied by the Kamchatka Territory (0,23%). The indicator, for example, of Yakutia is only 0,07%.

This result of the Magadan region is very high. For comparison, in Russia Magadan region in 2016 year by the ratio of the inflow of migration from the CIS countries to the available population has outstripped only 5 regions: the Republic of Mordovia, the Kaluga region, the Kursk region and the city of Sevastopol.

By the way, the migration exchange of at least three Far Eastern territories with "other foreign countries" (not the CIS) is also expressive. These are the Khabarovsk Territory, the Primorsky Territory and the Amur Region. The intensity of this exchange is quite clearly distinguished against the background of other regions of the Far Eastern Federal District and can be explained by the presence of a border with the PRC (and the proximity of the DPRK).


Arrived from other foreign countries Left for other foreign countries Balance
Khabarovsk Krai 5 200 4 882 318
Primorsky Krai 4 478 5 350 -872
Amur Region 1 042 1 854 -812
Kamchatka 236 146 90
Sakhalin Region 221 70 151
Jewish Authors. region 24 20 4
The Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) 19 20 -1
Magadan region 9 16 -7
The Chukchi Autobus. County 1 - 1


DOES NOT EARLY THE SOUL FAR EASTERN
One of the tables of the Rosstat bulletin is devoted to the age composition of migration. Age gradations are three - younger than the able-bodied, working age and older. Absolute leaders in migration, obviously, are people of working age. Their share in the number left from the Far East - 75% (the proportion of those older - 10%, those younger - 15%). Among the visitors - even more, 77% (old people 8%, children and teenagers - also 15%). Nevertheless, it left more than arrived, and for a year the region lost 9374 a man of working age. This is very little (-0,25%), considering that the total working-age population in the Far East today is almost 3,7 million people.

Nevertheless, it is interesting to see the dynamics in the regional context - how the statistics on individual subjects of the Far East behave. The graph shows that, for example, the migration loss of the able-bodied population in the Khabarovsk Territory, in the Magadan Region, on Sakhalin and in Chukotka, was almost completely replaced by an influx. Reduction of the number of able-bodied population occurred in Yakutia, Primorye, Amur region and EAO. The migration balance in the EAO is minus 1602, with 70% of them being of working age. The same percentage in the Amur region - from 3270 people the difference between the arrived and departed is the proportion of able-bodied age - 70%. For comparison - in the Magadan Region, Khabarovsk Krai and on Sakhalin, the lion's share of the migration balance is people older than the able-bodied age.




5 YAKUTSK DOCTORS OF SCIENCES
Interesting statistics give Rosstat on the structure of migration from the point of view of education. When looking at the balance, Khabarovsky Krai's losses in 23 the candidates who left the country, and the obvious acquisition of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) in the form of 5 (!) Arrived doctors of science. At the same time, scrupulous study of the figures allows us to make a number of absolutely sensitive conclusions.

Migration erodes the level of education and skills in the Far East. First, it is clear from the structure of the balance. The total outflow of persons older than 14 years in 2016 amounted to 15727 people, with almost every second of them (over 7,2 thousand people) with higher education. Nevertheless, in general, the regions maintain a balance in the level of education among those who leave and those who come. Although in absolute numbers people with higher education come and less than leave, but their number is more or less in proportion to the overall migration trend. The exception is the two regions - the Kamchatka Territory and the Jewish Autonomous Region, and this is very clearly seen in the graph below. In these regions, the proportion of people without education, or lack of information about education, has increased significantly over the year. And substitution in the first place is at the expense of people with higher education.




OUTPUT WATCH
Finally - another Rosstat table, describing the types and timing of registration for the flows of people leaving and arriving in the region. There are three options: registered / withdrawn from registration at the place of residence; Went to the place of temporary residence or returned from it. Here everything is quite simple - it was withdrawn from the registration at the place of residence for 21 thousand people less than registered in new apartments. We left for a temporary stay at 7,5 thousand people more than returned from it. But the third indicator - is growing. In the Far East, as on the territory of the temporary stay in 2016, 11 thousand people registered more than left at the end of such a temporary stay.




And all-why did I leave?
“So, after all, why did I leave?” Continues Marina Khitrova. “After all, there were prospects for development here, in Khabarovsk. I just wanted to leave the comfort zone, test my strength - can I achieve something in a completely unfamiliar city, in 8000 km from home, where there are no relatives, no friends, no work, no housing, I needed to feel like an adult, independent, able to support myself, pay for an apartment, buy food, make important decisions. And, of course, Moscow always attracted me with its scale and closeness Europe. "

Today, moving to Moscow Marina seems a rather reckless youthful act, which can be easily solved "only while you are slightly over twenty, parents are still in their prime and you have no obligations / husbands / children." However Marina is sure that this is a cool experience, which gave her exactly what she wanted. Although…

"I'm absolutely not ready to say that everything, I'm forever in Moscow," concludes Marina.


The editorial board of EastRussia invites expert demographers and migration specialists to comment on the data of Rosstat.