1. The impact of immigration on the population structure of Greece [1] [1] Viron Kotzamanis [2], Anastasia Kostaki [3] [3] [1][1] This research is a part of a research project conducted at the Laboratory of Demographic and Social Analyses, Department of Planning and Regional Development, University of Thessaly, financed by the Greek Ministry of National Education and Religious Affairs (PYTHAGORAS: e-demography, digital platform of information, documentation and analysis of demographic information). [2][2] Department of Planning and Regional Development, University of Thessaly, Greece email: bkotz@prd.uth.grDepartment of Planning and Regional Developmentbkotz@prd.uth.gr [3][3] Department of Statistics, Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece, email: kostaki@aueb.grkostaki@aueb.gr

2. After the 2 nd world war until roughly the middle of 70’s, the Greek population exhibited a strong emigration profile. A great amount of emigrants moved to highly industrialized countries especially to the USA, Canada, Australia and W. Germany. Then, at the early 80’s a part of them came back. Since the early 90’s the country experience a strong immigration wave, mainly from the neighboring Balkans countries (especially Albania) and secondary from the other East European countries.

3. Table 1: Population distribution (census data 2001) TOTAL Greeks Foreigners Albanians 0-141.660.8991.534.08812681193510 15-444.844.3524.344.020500332286063 45-642.601.6132.493.62010799347954 65+1.827.2331.800.5562667710509 TOTAL 10.934.09710.172.284 (93%) 761.813 (7%) 438.036 (4% 57,5%) 0-14 % 15,215,116,621,3 15-44 % 44,342,765,765,3 45-64 % 23,824,514,210,9 65+ % 16,717,73,52,4 Aged-Child Ratio 110,01117,3721,0411,24 Dependency Ratio 46,8548,7725,2331,14

4. This work, analyzing the information of the two recent censuses at a micro geographical level,  Studies the implications of the immigration on the spatial distribution of the population.  Investigates the impact of the immigration flow to the population structure of Greece, by comparing the population profile of the actual (real) population (comprised by natives plus immigrants), in each spatial unit (municipality), with the one of solely natives (i.e. the population to be, if immigration was not existed).

5. As confirmed by the evidence of the two recent censuses, during the last two decades Greece has altered from an emigration country to an immigration one; Immigrants increased dramatically, formed more than the 7% of the population in 2001, being roughly non-existed (less than 2%) in 1991.

6. Map 1: Percentages (%) of the foreigners in the total population (census data 1991) Map 2: Percentages (%) of the foreigners in the total population (census data 2001)

7. Map 3: Changes in the percentages of the immigrant population between 1991 and 2001 in the 1034 Greek municipalities (censuses data 1991 and 2001)

8. Map 3 : Location Quotient for the immigrants in municipalities (census data, 1991) Map 4: Location Quotient for the immigrants in municipalities (census data, 2001) Location quotient = the quotient between the percentage of immigrants in the municipality and the total percentage of immigrants in the country (actually it tells us about their spatial concentration)

9. Diagram 1: Concentration of the Greek Population and the Immigrant Population, in Greek municipalities, census data 2001. (Lorenz Curve) 2001 Giniindex Natives0,803 Immigrants0,868 group 1 (Developed countries)0,900 group 2 (Balkans)0,857 group 3 (East Europe)0,930 group 4 (other)0,968

10. Map 5: Immigrant population evolution between 1991 and 2001

11. Table 2 : Distribution of Population by major age-groups(census data 2001) TotalNativesImmigrantsgroup 1group 2group 3group 4 TOTAL 1093409710172284761813999015002268571575541 0-14 166089915340881268111145598530107945990 15-64 74459656837640608325794223902967243765790 65+ 182723318005562667790241140024843761 0-14 (%)15,1915,0816,6511,4719,7012,597,93 15-64 (%)68,1067,2279,8579,5078,0284,5187,09 65+ (%)16,7117,703,509,032,282,904,98 Aged-Child Ratio 110,01117,3621,0478,7811,5723,0162,79 Mean Age 39,9340,630,937,4528,7233,4233,86

12. Table 3 : Population distribution by sex (census data 2001) TOTALMalesFemales Males (%) Females (%)Sex ratio Total 1093409754134265520671 49,5150,49101,98 Natives 1017228449980585174226 49,1350,87103,52 Immigrants 761813415368346445 54,5245,4883,41 Table 4 : Population distribution of the immigrants by nationality (census data 2001) TOTAL MalesFemales Males (%) Females (%) Sex ratio IMMIGRANTS (total) 761813 415368346445 54,5245,4883,41 group 1 (Developed countries) 99901 4384056061 43,8856,12127,88 group 2 (Balkans) 500226 285941214285 57,1642,8474,94 group 3 (East Europe) 85715 3297952736 38,4861,52159,91 group 4 (Non European 75541 5228523256 69,2130,7944,48

13. Table 5: Distribution of Immigrants by sex and Nationality group (census data 2001) TOTAL % males%females% IMMIGRANTS (Total) 761813100,0415368100,0346445100,0 group 1 (Dev. C.) 99901 13,1 43840 10,6 56061 16,2 group 2 (Balkans) 500226 65,7 285941 68,8 214285 61,9 group 3 (East Europe) 85715 11,3 32979 7,9 52736 15,2 group 4 (others) 75541 9,9 52285 12,6 23256 6,7

14. POPULATION PYRAMIDES total (1), Natives (2), Immigrants (3)

15. Population pyramides for Immigrant population by nationality group

16. Percentages of Immigrants in every five year age group

17. Active population [15, 65) as a percentage of the population in active ages [15, 65) Total Population 61,84 Natives 61,07 Immigrants 70,58 group 1 47,50 group 2 74,12 group 3 69,50 group 4 78,65 Table 6: Percentages of active population (census data 2001)

18. In order to investigate the implications of immigration in the population structure of Greece, in a lower geographical level, we consider the native population, as well as the actual (real) one (natives plus immigrants) of each spatial unit (municipality), and then, we build the differences between the values of the following characteristics in each spatial unit, for the two populations. proportion of males mean age proportion of population aged [15, 65) proportion of population aged 65+ Finally, using statistical classification (statistical clustering) techniques, We classify municipalities in homogenous groups (clusters) according to specific statistical criteria based to the size of these differences. In order to reveal the optimal grouping of the municipality units into homogenous groups, we utilize the procedure of Two-step Cluster Analysis, an exploratory statistical technique designed to reveal natural grouping (or clusters) in a data set that would otherwise not be apparent. The analysis is implemented in the SPSS statistical package

19. CLUSTERING BY COUNTRY GROUP Cluster Distribution Cluster Profiles Attribute Importance

20. Findings Findings According to the nationality of the immigrant, the municipalities form five distinct profiles: Profile 1: Highest presentation of Group I and IV (for Group I more than 50% compared with country mean = 14,35%, and for Group IV, 8,77 in comparison to the country mean = 4,37%. Lowest presentation of Group II (less than a half of their mean presentation in the country). N=84 Profile 2: Highest presentation of Group III (more than 50% compared with country mean = 9,49%),Lowest presentation of Group II (less than the half of their mean presentation in the country), N=55 Profile 3: High presentation of Group II (more than double the country mean); Somewhat lower presentation of the other groups. N=120 Profile 4: Highest presentation of Group II ( 88%), Very low presentation of the other groups. N=513 Profile 5: Highest presentation of Group I; Low presentation of Groups II and III. N=242

21. Map 5: Municipalities profiles according to their nationality synthesis of the immigrants

22. CLUSTERING OF MUNICIPALITIES ACCORDING TO THE IMPACT OF IMMIGRATION IN THE PROPORTION OF MALES (Distribution by sex) Cluster Distribution Cluster Profiles N % of Combined Cluster1 363,6% 2 25926,0% 3 70170,4% Combined 996100,0% Excluded Cases 36 Total 1032 Increase of the Male Proportion Mean increaseStd. Deviation Cluster1,0355,0127 2,0113,0042 3,0013,0027 Combined,0051,0083

23. Cluster Distribution CLUSTER 1N Mini mum Maxi mumMean Std. Deviation Males in Total Population 36,50,63,544,028 Males in Greek Population 36,46,60,509,026 Proportions Differences 36,04,09,035,013 CLUSTER 2N Minim um Maxim umMean Std. Deviation Males in Total Population 259,48,57,513,014 Males in Greek Population 259,47,55,501,013 Proportions Differences 259,01,02,012,004 CLUSTER 3N Minim um Maxim umMean Std. Deviation Males in Total Population 701,461,00,507,027 Males in Greek Population 701,451,00,505,028 Proportions Differences 701-,01,01,002,003

24. MAP 6 : Classification of municipalities according to the impact of immigration on their sex distribution (on the proportion of males)

25. CLUSTERING BY MEAN AGE Attribute Importance Cluster Distribution Cluster Profiles N% of Combined Cluster1 56857,0% 2 31231,3% 3 11611,6% Combine d 996100,0% Excluded Cases 36 Total1032 Decrease of mean age MeanStd. Deviation Cluster1-,33,19 2-1,01,25 3-2,10,57 Combined-,75,64

27. Map 7: Clustering of municipalities according to the impact of immigrants in the mean age of their population

28. RESULTS: In 30% (295 out of 996) of the municipalities the proportion of males exhibit statistically significant increase. In 43% (428 out of 996) of the municipalities the mean age of the population becomes statistically significant higher. In 28% (282 out of 996) of the municipalities the population in active ages exhibit statistically significant increase. In 30% (299 out of 996) of the municipalities the proportion of population aged 65+ exhibit statistically significant decline.