.. . 3‘. MIL—IE?
e '9... .1 x? p 1 1 1.. . V q . y
.. u I. .btxiu‘zi hm. .. u . v VI .. ‘ .V 114E? {5’ I... . a? V V
«r! ..-.r~rv “8.0-." . . . . V 2 $ V has—t .1 .rV I] ...... .. 1|! 1141M .11.. y . . |IV
Fianna ...wmutfirnmmuu .. . .. V a V. n2... £111... 53%. $ . 1m .mmfiwuhu‘hl. ukuw Hugh? nflavmw... fififinfimmmmziiiitmfl
. . n9.:r#hfl‘$.x.v»a¥. . . V. .. x . V .. y .. 3.212? M R V .51 V a... . 3. "Jimmy. uni. 34.3.»..iflbfifiitftivtd
. Vv bmvh.s$...:v.wfihr1th%h I . n . V . a . 1 L. ... . . math- 5x110. N l I! 3 3:. ... ...hxwyz 5‘“: “8%.? . .0 Iflfl‘fi V 399%....“ ‘qtf. 1. .E.
V . v.5. . V . . . . . . . . ‘an V E £5.18.
1V. 0 l ... 11% guru... I . a .. V V I . .V . i .1 avkos hfwu. . uqxx‘li‘lx 3“. .14: L31} go. 3” liL‘.K 7' githll;
. . “N! t I...” v... . \ a V. b}. 21. 3.x \\r it»? §é\)fls a... .‘ rig... '4. {4.
..v P . 3 I I ». . x . . xx Vla\,\ia>‘ 1. 2). g x x {.at \K. :3 :01. In“! {‘ISIOI
.... .. . ...... zen... . . ......» s x 14.... . . V . . V .nmanfl‘lwnnmfixswn .31..) .V in. ... 1% V. V ..Zibti.§$iv$wn: Rv?d..nxuztunt .3...
V ... .. V V. . . . v
.. u .8 .....uASdtw - s 4 V .n. , V .V V.Vu%.am.&ma ow $2§w¥fi§n§$ AWL. :Mownfiv nafieamtsfifidafignmkx “......Pfifuui
I. it! '1!!! {‘13 I? V n 1 1 . . V . lax"... . VV 33k . v . 1... s1 .1 gtu V “V... t. . :5!“ Bi... ... In. ”9.5.0.5.;
.ii...fl1tfi..§¢t. fagfih. .. x V V .... mm) 1mm». . .....w a x . fii...mm.fi?i§«&éfi V. i... Swazua 5.... a»... . atzisummw .5... Ex. arsiitifi
I!!! . . u. .mvnzczi WW8: . r1 . hum, with raw. 14.33..) \. «fifi 2 . 3) . .. 0?. one!!! .
frazwnmffiluuvénnmqa. :1...» V. 1 . firm, Vw, Rh?» 3. 1.3.8 ....wmqv fiqmuxflwwmfii. . ”v.1. van......vw4.h mewmnu mnfiqhfiq. 3&9 .93? .arfls. “1.53.3. .. ... a . finkivzkxsi
n: 0!! 8. 3 .I )\ ... 1.1V _ A . . 2 , ) L >‘ 1.): r I \ 5);“ .33V 3\§ \. V .1, V 3» V. {her it‘s-A.
1...... 3H $5. 3 I 53:. ha . {)1 3)}. as)?“ s 10. .1\ s 3 a: .. w V .... \Uw. RR. 3 Au)“. ny‘h... V3. ha. 1 »
0....“ v.07 It!!! . 1.. 1 as ..\ 1 Vflsu 3.71.? \ 11.53. .1)? d... u 501.53g... . 913.“... V \ x... .. nan. is a? .25.)-
xiinI' var. . final. 3%u‘11h .31.... i 5». 5.1 . 3.30 .s ... 3...... 1.. V. V Izafiusxfdi he 3.}. \u. . «I 915121.? .
a 1%: .2. . I . a ... V k1§v5finxfiu 1 xx. 2 ...‘yb‘ x1. ”:11... .24 xx; ‘5‘)?‘1 . ) . 7 1516.. .
a . .8. 131.533. 1.39m” ghfi I. 0.3.... #930. ..V 9.6.er V Flauvfigairlaflfl: u. a.“ A . suing. A: AA
3“ u I t .‘pl Acuit-

    

           
 

y a V
v . . > x k
1.9!." V 1 \x. x .1
3.3:... . .... . ...».x \ xxaafifiusist, at? z. 8... . JV. .
V .‘ v til. ‘95! {"5 0A.,“ . V 55‘»: I?) \. }1%\%xifl\yu )3)». fig? u. h. w. l. . .. .. .81 V
. V...... .515... ix“ £3.33. .13.; :1... 1.13%.... 2?... $42.36.}. {1.32 ...: .3. I 11: mm. «iifiilgf ...... Kara... 2T3 x .V - ..-.i. viii! it.
n . . ... lihgvacii . .8. 3, g. .vuzm&§aw$zsfmaw§§t$m film» r.mvaum+hsal‘unmpufiz-h3¥ah \ {Quizzffinw‘éfiieii .. .1 i. 2.. EEWF .1.»
. . . .. 1.2.. i 5.13% -. l... V a ,1 £1235.-. 1V {x2913 .. .1... :5)... .. a. 1.11:... hum“... :3:
v u r. u . v0 :1 fly... . $33! ..Ixu.» . I . L \L.) v ...-3113!. Lung; .... 35% $.11}. Elia“. .. .11 . .gth.‘ ... cam“!!! «88a
~ I... . V g 50:! a vvvttV-N.‘\Jnu “F411.“ hfhuflELHEVLMUx flau.uu.h.\x)im.4mt%hhmh§.xmr$..fixhbfl... mu“): .inmrlvminhsT-NEJVJMVNV.‘323uhuvx\~.§\§11w.%uvq I u..1.\s . is. 30 k ‘1 .V
i - . 1.. 13.5.3. .1. . . I
v v . 1. .Ll. 3\ Lu. §)§1\%‘B\¥V\ .lithu. ...‘31.\ ‘1‘ rigfl‘a ? S.§.§Q\18 1x)lnrh‘\.hs.r\sflw.\h.fi\\vu.3\11\h.\ v.‘ \M.‘ «53.... ~~~~~ .X\5\.\n
. . . V I . . . '1‘“ » , V . \ . 5
s .... V. Lao... Hafiqribaauw... $84. . $3.. ......rzfin. Kawhna..bwnvflh§$.>w§fihfi V$sfihuubwwkfa‘zfiv‘sfivswfifilknw.....fiufia....}..Vsiszfillwxiw! V:
{V .441: . \al. th}!$+1.;fifl1fl.hnv 1%....» l9§u§4jnflm§mrfis V 59.11%... 1533).“-séi V Juan... Sm? it .5 3.1:“.
V 1 . .. $14.2... \ gnleuhu. 3. i... 4. V .V 2 V . . \W w‘uw 2.. \. C... ‘nvé it
.89. £461.. .. mu“ 0 u . . s )3. ’1‘
... flfiwgfibll afifiwwumnu ..- .1. .gnwbfiflb3xsrls ...: 3.194%»..533? VV.
. x V: .....Wmuzbmii vshimfihbzhnmnww» Rfifirfififlfli‘fiafifi. {inahmflixfihnfififi 1.4 . , V l. s .1 .
1 xx. ...) fiat". 5111.»... ‘5‘ 5 . :1\ .....«Naflasfiflfiflfilfiumm 83 \fia\.v\uw.nu.uu+x .9634} ...". Lsuflfluwmflflig) .1-
... in... ‘18:. nu. 5.3))... 15‘ ...xflgsxm.
hi.‘

       

                 

     

. x
3 . ii \
%\ v.3 vik‘zmzi h...

\
\ V
g‘z;£\3\\
V»

  

            

 

 

 
     
    
   

 

x. [115‘ ~ 1\ _ .. x x
t V (.3. 2:). If. 3... 3.5 .3 {is .1311 Risk. 50. 13‘}. \l... Iii-‘19 . 5.. s»).
: .hubnraammmv. MR.“ -.x .5. - a a. .... saw»..- 2%.:i.a.}n:3 EVIé.»152.§R¥:iini48.3%...3315’ , .....tVs‘».
V . 4.51 1L)..\.$$ \1 ‘\)s.\to\\.\nx 1 \u. (l 3§1x\‘\;3 ~73. fl5§1i$fi3551<<{3§|1l\ \thi“ .1: . 172.11! \..(.. s‘)‘7\l»?1l_...
. u. ...x I 315 3 IR... xzixnzu 1V\ \. 5‘ 5 V V» I 1 tilzayxulw“ ‘3‘».2‘.) .JGQVXI..\.:KSD\\1 $013.31 \Yslzlagfifiizl
are“. tfltbn\1:2 ‘Wx..\fi.~.n.)llwhlfi 5.11! . 11111)}..50 a.) ‘13“ 1%: 1}\§w}\ \J: ‘ iii: i3...) \
.12. . ii“. 3.1.11... «In: V V. . $15. 313.93%}?! >7 . ziginfiaflytsimfiu \iiagvflgx--..u%lifi.¥2§§lifl.§a¢l§2huh... 4?. .8311,
.... . V V . uEtI. ... V... V, 2 as“? Vb... ‘ I. V . ...“..k} ...:c!..2n}iis saliitliikrifiuuw . . ~
publfinu;l.2fie. .. ......» . .5... 2. V V ‘ ..er ...] .3.li.§H§.u..:.thkh~MhN ...H... .1 ... V . .....vxianniwl .1. €.?.v22.x.....lxlmunnaalel§3\ I333... t
.L.‘ V..lelet.... .V i Ithg Vii... . 22-3) ‘31.; “‘1. a.) \ \ 1|. 313.. K. 11151.1; 2!. .o x 37... s.\ x. 1} 114.1131} 9.1.1.11? .
3“ JUNE 5“. t v t ‘h V 31%.. 1: 31513.11... fins. V0“ 1 $\\. x) 5? 09111.91. ...: ...... 1500\3‘7‘98; \155! r 533.5111! 1§£11.1!\7 \31 3‘5:
3.5:}: ...:etsv.v!...vv.r.h1{943 1:233:31? "inazbflisxl\)zléfin.3szhnh aliglaggrthriflym. . Vflflfilfl‘helhnsigszzxgnfl aliifizlisal .hnmvilxzcltzyv?‘ gs 132.25 ......
)V‘Esrikigr v... 7.0.: h . t1. . .... . Vni§\\xtk\§?..)z{ ‘3 \. Tax.nl“(lo)\n\ V .r .ldhur‘xuugs It“ \Wshfiufi‘.‘)iusi\i 18! ..VI. .lI\ V \x1311‘ilu‘. \\ )\ %‘:i V .
0 5x171 V9.10!!! i? ..ng (01%... 31.)». 3. V .1. )1}. )‘TngixL. “fiatttxirf‘xx‘SIZ‘. .0. 1:51». if“! I\ I 1
.- r .u tat-oi, Eularitvilv .v in $171" L..N\\n\1n‘1\$x )\\ fiwqa{;EV)RnW\.MQ-\xuflr)\9fl.i \5k:1x>.fi\wpv)1fi§.yhfiv3al‘v 131$ L51.“ . \{sluuxu‘}! 3 It} ‘3‘ \ 1
“I... liq a201,? {val-II): . [tori-“v.71. 1.... DI. in“. xiihlt. I)‘. ifié}! iLWTfiir7:1...332......)‘xfwfl..x....1n§x 5%)...) )\>4\... 3“ .11“ \1sf4nuitlixifl... 3\S)1.Ir.fln\z$.flfl.xv d4 {31% I)
vthdhwvobngiibiboti out...) V!- . ‘13,. .V. \5hfi‘%\i11§§\zkifinaflialbflufi gigging. iixV It! 35 \ .K0r.1~l.. 1 ‘(Ifixhlifirzxx V‘)’ Mafia-1;} \ i
a}, 1'0.) u. 9‘?» . . 3.1%. . 5S )1... )1 )3 V. )1. 5111.31. A» . V ... n
1 ...-I‘ll . V ._ 332.111... 19“! v9! i%§31155§§.q\w\5<~1v\gahkn)xlasi.‘§.v§.ufiinfi)xz\+a\\uaiXxx. 33.5))1‘vthWiflfigx .‘xs .(‘fafmo‘lfiiflsii‘g \gkv )1; V ~ iv v
:2! v1: ' I... t a.» III MVI’UH. I. H gt 3:! v5.1.2.1. ii}.\:¢.SM.B;V..VH‘1V3..\1x)ws$1$§\.flklf\\sx1hu.ul.k€.fiisu5ta133%09‘ 91‘}. §1).))y\ nflnfiv‘... V \1 r Illa”: \“ “3"!!! V
I. l iii-oi. V . HEEIO“ V gill-Skills .l‘niifili 1.“ VI. \ Hula! 3}“?!{3-11 11111 Jfi‘i..r:.1\.\$.).vx>.<l$\. I 3‘1}!\\.IF§.J}I¢MV \t V
.33.... ..“xiii.......»......m..L...VtLfl.tV. 1131?}? 9 3i; )3... 3311.341 ($33“: .3... ...ul...s31...nn<, $}?§..231)§s§9513%hfl2eb.‘\1s§.t§.h§ii\.fiiib?,1.mu{:.a§s 31333.... .3... E.shus!§!¢isuuh \ 21 ,
. 7 ,1 . . V. \ .. . v .: I \ V V
. .. wt! It. ....u...u.flib..:.§.lil% 15}\19u.112 111:1..30 2(3). ix?u3§€;§ 13.1123»..st“3 3.....1t31:4i§§1h§2§%% 1.1...
7 ?sV«||\vt II. It ii‘ii: 3:13.!!! \\ )ru\ik‘1;:\§.$.ifiiii.fiz1\)\ .115 11H3\\$§J\..111\Iz17\V\s=x\?\v\\.x\ .1\ V \
iv V: . 5.“ Q‘altcc. . \. \;V\J\)~r.l?iai) \ixsxé. Vu\i\1\11$¥x511\\1\\\$3111d07t\i§$35fi31 z
. s rill 5‘. flifl 511333 §§%§L.fi1§§h§511\\3§5 WIMH.1.R.1I.\$ \i
u y . 1.1 . \Xk.‘ L97} dawn.“h‘ln‘gvfilul....(331\111\n|\...u..|:u1$11\\\\12.13:.1‘1“...3.x\.au.\l¢..r\suvPSLBhfl...‘ 11%;... 1.3.”... .
. 53:2)... \1‘5igfl3x .. 52.12.11 fiaisi$1il.i§1{\ii\%)ljh3¥§azlssisifigahx .
3.2.13! 811! $1553.31} M»\5\T\1\41-<.313x§1§i§)§ . \;\\) \1: {iii 1.1 \ V
)2... irqnbé ...?“ Slaqxfi 1\;\17)\(I5§€1~(.31711111l§7 \Vfi\.\)\\l3\(w0.\§“. 3w. 1 V .I
all-'11...“ A211...- Jfigint g5 .xc‘k.\z~((r)\)\v» ‘\u\.\s.l.!i1.1§.\s.\slv§§1)1\ 7“}Liii \i
I“) .\ \3 l1 .1 .V m‘ SfiitJleuM ASISLiIifi...\~¢$\ i3i‘lt.’§¥)slf5§11~u 1ihtx17‘iitb‘i
13319.55 1 u ¥‘\.\3I.n\ 1333.113 l‘hlti‘flhtl». iii! 112%: 173...:
.... 1‘1; x‘.\i§§\\i}‘§gfifizin s It‘ll}. ’11} ‘i‘5133.1%1311‘h\¥1$dmvf
3:5 iiiig‘ixt‘\u‘13 1.1}14; ..I? V 7‘55 lib)‘. 31%... liklfl. 101
mu": 1.35.1.3 79173. )V\u3 luau“: if!) 291:2}...le . .. 5509a‘i1)! ~13. s.
V: ‘7‘; “NW.“‘ttsC‘lh 1311234.!“ . «av-AI); 1 1)}1\\\..1...1§x)..\. I‘N‘aufis. . a. z
mliug.’ J11)! 3’11)? ..i int-1111.51 311.1)? 35V )‘1131131.
i??§§a V Elihu 3.. .~ 3.. fl.1(u$1t1).21..? 3?. bx 1.2.
{iilikéhzx \NVfi}... $51 1 “311.1%". 1»! i .\ tum; “nil. .
1.1311 31.11 in) 5x 3):: Euzriilld} i.‘»’:§i§i\q\i“4§§l£§§ifi Ifivfifiz‘1513.
I». I t 1 V. . «.1 331\19\.{u¥fi131\§~(.\~l(12v.‘\§11 2151?)?! .
.... .15....“ \3V )1 \1..5.{.r.)!~.1 nu 5%;3 xi\.15\3;!}:)\7)15)1} is 3313.34,, 32:71.. 192.“... n. . \
1.2%: It". 1‘3iIxa)1‘c€¢h¢ln hizsizqul.‘ a I stilt... .5
1 .2 \1 34443.11} )1... 1‘2313.) 11‘. it)! )‘Nut... 2%
V V iszxzztggazfi $\ 1x231\\g\4fl. J)...
. ‘ . I
i V u.

     

x‘KA ‘4‘?! ‘7‘ , .
Vazéifi E\)1fi\:¢e.fi§\ {dirt-533i .. \ ‘ x . . . V .
.....xhvititztszflibzisl. 2.5.1.... 15531.43»? 31¢.~¥m§x§2.iihfi¢8¥%- 5.QVV§§fi$ , VV 2.1.1 V \ V
2%.!st ....Q‘ iiiilu) ET‘}§¥P13)..<\1K1\51N3 5“,- snuunhwihivlltfi 1.235)) vii-“dual. 1%
v w Air-331V . V 1.." §1{\\§nz)iix§§.zlixr.niu v\1£7))§\93 13:? 1.5:: .31 . \»
.... . x 3 gaiélr‘i ..«fluuwifl‘fiiii‘fihlfg \1ky‘xuflhflflfi.‘
\ L1 i“!~.)\5§51|§9 5331‘
éiuflfifluw‘1
... x 331x b! 1)....

1| (1..
a {skid-$.51!“

 

    

. .91.; .g ‘
’qgflifié.‘ i .
it». 3.3%
.2z‘ili ...... A.- L
2‘ I! ~[r?I-ll7gvti.n .99 .5.§.¥.\\
, ...nrluce... ghgé £55....Vgia E: tenztfifin. «13.1.9.2; ......
V V 35$ ... .
13.85 2x. 131%. ......)Axummvxxf. .12 ‘vb‘téitliaipto... ..
éwttl. mud. . Ell (yfiiidwad...ufinfl.fiuuui szzunuLfvs:
.....fi’. 14 3‘ EELE ~ PT. A‘tiui ti. -9!
...r.... Vi . 21:931.... I is.....uslvhtnfi.I.»}5b.-.:§i1fifi\i.vt$l.-fn5...

  
    

 

»
. if!!!"
nu . 11 A 3 I v 1.. Elxlinh z't ’Z‘z‘gv' gérql“ifi§;lh i§t~l
r . hair}. i . y ...‘w - ...qu snail} £03 §£lbilzlli V band.» 95:6;V6tl5! . ‘Juhniauu.
1,7332% K P..\1|.v if: ii? . 37!. is . .. x bi$nfib$b \t J . . .
silk-3715‘ (It 3 .....Iii-tzrlnzi .l‘ f‘ ‘lIr-I‘Jik... ‘1}?! L
. y y . ~ . . A\‘E¥§i§af§lé . I L . :1 hut". .20“ Iii?! .snkxg.“ g.
[5.111. V . .1?! v1.59} if: f‘élt. . E124 ‘2 §I.¥ 2.9.... is. £0.23 it‘ll: . \5 ...
l£llt§khflfi5 11.7»... Afl‘fiifixz.\.§ y‘l'?’?¢) iv! fiMHuliltVQ.z§LA‘ .[ti‘t‘tS-LT P‘cA t. V ..xltuv’vbtl 55.51.. taunt}. 14??“
~ ert T... 1 193...... 7.1...“le ... hi‘f‘l :‘EE.‘;I.T¢:V¥~E§. . zttfi-tfi 559.5%: taictTE ~ n.~LL6....I..(
V 9:19;; 5“; I: it... .3 ..IEL. ‘ 377: Ll... {5.2115 37.... tMII&..\‘h: 51. .7»!..o.l Lt.:ib|i«i..: ..K k 0...: t...
is a“: .h ‘figtuzt3tzLXA sit-Llint ..E. $~h|§t§itx
571:... x 7...“. ......OJJQ’LCI nilMathstx »

       

 

 

   
   

Eli.

           

               

  

z...
t Igl ~v\\%.
. . V. if...) 11A «81.5.. A \ / 1.5.9:. Elia .
uzhflyéuuti... hf“... ...Lsxthzirtiaufifizzxitl . t, lmnaikfiurtmfixxhfi .. n.3:2§...§i§ ct ...»:
DEE Skittungfltfinflvhrli . z thug: ..t. z. z fig :33... fifififiufififiuF‘flfi
. v 4’}... ~ .5 D I\t-' L V V y
...V. .Vtz}:h$vlaz\:_... ..-...v ... V . V V .. V. : . . {kg-Erflufigfix . w... ... V .lt..u.fl..§¢tl
. V V .V . V , V . {ESE .2132.

    

     

..VVrr (R. Q if.

 

"\
y 0: V
' ' I u l
«4; . -
x t... (a ' ; 3.
33m...» .4 Ez‘fig‘? mtg, ....
«‘0 v Y‘;£'.'-_?JI_ _\; . X ' '5‘;
'3?
._- I" "u' .. a... ”‘5. ..L‘,..I’.
OJ. ’ I a K - . \ l/
.0 J 9“" "~55. 'J-i-u , ‘7

  

C .
M'lmczmmm Tm”,
_ . . - “~!:“’¥7'm7‘1‘3,»-

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled
77/5 (HANG/Mc- D€M0&PA PH/C CHAR/9676267763
0F 7H5 Rafi/M POPL’MWOA/ 0F 625666

presented by

€60?£— fly)! z/os b06961 f gym/CS

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

”/4 degree in SOC/0 4019/

    

Major professor

 

DIEM /4 [7521

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

0"; a

 

 

MSU

LIBRARIES
"

\r

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

 

 

 

 

v-

6/0 W5

THE CHANGING DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

OF THE RURAL POPULATION OF GREECE

BY

George Argyrios Daoutopoulos

AgTHESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Sociology

1982

ABSTRACT

THE CHANGING DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE RURAL POPULATION OF GREECE

By

George Argyrios Daoutopoulos

This study is concerned with the changes that have taken place
in the demographic characteristics of the rural population of Greece,
mainly during the period 1950 to 1976.

The analysis was based on official statistics collected through
the censuses and the vital registration system that were further analyzed
for the purposes of this study. The longitudinal analysis of the demogra-
phic characteristics of the rural population was carried out with a
parallel analysis contrasting with the same characteristics of the urban
population of the country.

The main finding of the study is that migration, both external
and internal, was a major demographic characteristic of the rural popula-
tion and became the number one component in accounting for differential
growth rates and for changes in the composition of the population between

the rural and urban ares.

 

Miracles are many
but man is the greatest.

SOPHOCLES (Antigone, verse 302)

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my thanks to professor J. Allan Beegle,
my committee chairman, for his encouragement and support which made the
completion of this thesis possible.

I would also like to express my thanks to professor Loukas Anani-
kas and flu? colleagues at the Department of Agricultural Extension and
Rural Sociology, Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki, for supplying

all the necessary statistical data.

******

iii '

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . .'. .

II.

1. The Main Objectives . . . . . . .
2. Concepts and Definitions . . . . .

DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CHANGE

A. Population and Household Size
1. Population Size
2. Family (Household) Size .

B. Ascribed Characteristics .
1. Age Composition .

2. Sex Composition .

C. Achieved Characteristics
1. Educational Attainment
2. Illiteracy . .

D. Components of Population Change
1. Migration .
1.1 External
1.2 Repatriation
1.3 Internal
2. Fertility .
2.1 Marriage Rates
2.2 Crude Birth Rates
2.3 Total Fertility Rates .

2.4 Illegitimate Births . . . .
3. Mortality . . . . . . . . . .

3.1 Crude Death Rates . . . . .

3.2 Infant Death Rates . . .

3.3 Life Expectancy at Birth. .

iv

.

Page

vi

12

16
16
22

24
24
26

34
34
34
44
49
53
53
53
54
55
62
62
62
63

 

page
III. SUMMARY AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS . . . . .. . . . . . . .‘ . 67

IVREFERENCES 72

Table

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

LIST OF TABLES

Page
Rural and total population and intercensus growth rates
during the last five censuses, 1928 - 1971 . . . . . . . . 9
Rural population as a percentage of the total population
in the various geographical regions, and intercensus
change during the last three censuses . . . . . . . . . . 10
Annual intercensus rates of growth of the rural popula-
tion in the various geographic regions during the last
three censuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Distribution of households living in rural areas accord-
ing to their number of members during the last three
censuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Number of households, members, and average size of house-
holds in rural areas during the last three censuses . . . . 14
Mean and median size of households in rural and urban
areas during the last three censuses . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Distribution of households living in regular dwellings
and sharing or not the dwelling, in rural and urban
areas. 1951, 1961, and 1971 census . . . . . . . . .'. . . 15
Rural and urban population classified by sex and
age-groups. 1951 census . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Rural and urban population classified by sex and age-groups
1961 census. . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . , 19
Rural and urban population classified by sex and age-groups
1971 census. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Median age of the rural and urban population during the
last three censuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Age dependency ratios for the rural and urban population
during the last three censuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Sex ratios in rural and urban areas for various age
groupings during the last three censuses . . . . . . . . . 23

Distribution of the rural population aged 10 years and over
by educational level and sex in 1961 and 1971 . . . . . . . 28

‘vi

Table
15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

 

Distribution of the urban population aged 10 years and
over by educational level and sex in 1961 and 1971

Rates of university graduates among the rural and urban
population aged 10 years and over by sex in 1961 and
1971 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Median years of school completed by sex in the rural and
urban areas during the 1961 and 1971 census (persons
aged 10 years and over)

Crude illiteracy rates of the total population aged 10
years and over by sex: 1907 to 1971 censuses . .

Rural illiterate population by age and sex in 1971
Urban illiterate population by age and sex in 1971

Proportion of illiterate population aged 10 years and
over by sex in each area, and out of the total popula-
tion in 1971 .

Crude and age-specific illiteracy rates of persons aged
10 years and over by sex in the rural areas during the
last three censuses

Crude and age-specific illiteracy rates of persons aged
10 years and over by sex in the urban areas during the
last three censuses

Migration to USA and other countries during the period
1851 - 1975

Total number of emigrants and proportion received by
various countries during the period 1959 - 1976

Emigration during the period 1955 - 1976 by major age
groups, and in comparison with the excess of births over
deaths, and rates of emigration per 1000 population

Number of emigrants by sex and sex ratio during the
period 1957 - 1977 .

Greek immigrants by country of origin (percentages)
during the period 1968 - 1976 . . . . . .

Sex and age composition (Z) of Greek emigrants and
immigrants during the period 1968 - 1976 .

Greek emigrants and immigrants from and to rural areas,

and proportion of total emigration and repatriation
during the period 1968 to 1977 .

vii

Page

29

30

30

31
31

32

32

33

33
40

41

42
43
47

47

48

Table

31.

Page

Population of the Greater Athens and Thessaloniki
Metropolitan areas and percentage increase during

‘ the laSt five censuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

:2.
33.
34.
35.
36.

37.
38.

39.

40.
41.

42.

Household members migrating to and from rural areas,
after 1965, by age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Comparison of net rural and urban migration after
1965, by age . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Comparison of in-, out-, and net migrants of rural
and urban areas after 1965, by sex . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Marriage rates, birth rates and stillbirth ratios in
urban and rural areas during the period 1956 - 1975 . . 56

Total fertility rate among the urban and rural
population during the period 1956 - 1975 . . . . . . . . 57

Sex ratio of legitimate and illegitimate births and
illegitimacy ratio in rural and urban areas during
the period 1956 - 1978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Percentage of live births by the person who was
responsible for the delivery in rural and urban
areas. Selected years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Live births by place of permanent residence of the
mother, and by place of birth. Selected years . . . . . 60

Percentages of live births by place of birth, and
by place of permanent residence of the mother.
Selected years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Death rate and uncorrected and corrected infant death
rates in urban and rural areas during the period
1956 - 1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Life expectancy at birth for the total population

and the rural population by sex in 1928, 1940, 1950,
1960, and 1970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

viii

 

I. INTRODUCTION

While modern Greece was born in 1821 when the revolution against
the Ottoman Empire was declared by a handful of brave men, its territo-
rial integration was not accomplished until after the second WOrld war.
During this 160 year period, several events greatly affected the popula-
tion of the newborn Creek State. A series of wars followed by famines
and infectious diseases, along with heavy outmigration to the USA occured
during the first two decades of the present century, the influx of appro-
ximately 1.5 million Greek refugees from Asia Minor in 1922, and a new
outmigration stream to European countries (especially to west Germany in
the 1960's), brought major changes in the demographic characteristics of
the population.

It was not until the beginning of the 50's that the modern Greek
State reached political stability and started, along with other nations,

on the path of development.

1. The Main Objectives

The focus of this thesis is on the demographic characteristics
of the rural population of Greece as they were shaped during the last
three decades. This period was associated with a heavy”rural.exodu3’that
recently caught the attention of many journalists and scholars, who
mainly in short reports and sentimental captions tried to attraet the
attention of the Government to the implications of continuing depopula-
tion of the rural areas of the country. Lack of a thorough consideration

of the problem is the main characteristic of these reports. Only recently

1

(1980) the National Statistical Service of Greece (NSSG), under the super—
vision of Prof. Valaoras, published a systematic report on the demogra-
phic characteristics of the rural and urban population, providing for the
first time very useful tables on various demographic components using
the rural-urban dichotomy.

Thus, the main reason for not having complete elaborations of the
rural population dynamics was the fact that the annually published vital
statistics lacked the rural and urban place of residence distinction,
plus other secondary reasons such as lack of resources for research in
this area and inadequate personnel to deal with these problems.

It is hoped that the present study will provide some insight on
the main rural population trends in Greece, by examining closely the main
changes that have taken place in the demographic characteristics of that

population.

2. Concepts and Definitions

Several concepts will be used in the analysis that follows, and
although they are used throughout the world, the criteria used to define
them.vary making cross-national comparisons very difficult, if not impos-
sible. Even within the same country there are variations over time that
impede a longitudinal analysis.
Rural-Urban distinction: Rural and urban categories were employed by the
NSSG, for the first time, in the publication of the results of the 1961
census. The only criterion used is based on the size of the population
present in the largest settlement within the lower administrative unit
(municipality) at the time of the census. Thus, grb§§_population is defi-

ned as the population of an municipality with a settlement of 10,000 or

more inhabitants. On the other hand, rur§l_is defined as the population
of 'a. municipality where the larger settlement is less than 2,000 inha-
bitants. Municipalities having a settlement with a population between
2,000 and 9,999 inhabitants are classified as semi-urban. Therefore the
distinction employed is trichotomous rather than dichotomous.

In a recent publication (NSSGzl980) the statistical service
employed a dichotomous distinction by merging the semi-urban with the
rural category. This may be an indication that this distinction will be
employed in the future. The present study employing data that define. the
rural population under the above mentioned two different base figures
will clarify that in cases where the latter designation of the rural
population is used (settlements up to 9,999 inhabitants) in order to
avoid confusion insofar as possible.

The rural and urban distinction of the population, although asso-
ciated with certain inconsistencies as is the case with every classifi-
cation system invented by scholars, is still very useful since subStantial
differences still exist in various characteristics between the two and
even the three segments of the population (rural, semi-urban, urban). The
argumentvmade by Lewis (1979i21) for\W. Europe and N. America'thatw"preVTous
bases of distinction between town and country, such as population density,
settlement size, and agricultural employment, are of little relevance
today” do not hold true in the case of Greece. Lack of integration and
differential regional development in an area isolated by physical barriers
(mountains, rivers and sea waters) helped maintain a pluralism of norms,
attitudes and values not only between the rural and urban population
but even within the rural population.

FamilyeHousehold:The NSSG,instead of the family,uses the concept of the

 

household. A household is defined as: a) Any person living alone in a
separate housing unit or occupying a room as a lodger, provided that, in
this case, he does not share meals with the family he is staying with,
and b) A group of two or more persons (related or not) living together
in the same housing unit and sharing meals (Statistical Yearbook 1978,
p. 13). Thus, the menbers of a household need not be related by blood
while such relation is necessary to define whether a person is a member
of a particular family.

Emigration-Immigration: Data on emigration and immigration are provided
by the Passport Control Service, which compiles the relative data through
the arrival and departure cards filled by Greek citiZens crossing the
borders. According to the NSSG emigration includes only persons emigrating
abroad, distinguished as "permanently" or "temporarily" emigrating.
"Permanent migrants" are defined as those Greek citizens who are perma-
nently residing in Greece and who go abroad to settle there for a period
exceeding one year. On the other hand, "temporal migrants" include Greek
citizens, permanently residing in Greece, who a) go abroad for less than
one year to work in and be paid by the destination country, and b) go
abroad for "signing on". In the present work only data on permanent
emigration have been used in the analysis of the phenomenon of external
migration.

Immigrants or repatriates are those Greek citizens who, after
having permanently and continually stayed in a foreign country for'more
than one year, returned to Greece for a permanent stay, or at least for a
stay exceeding one year. Immigration data have been collected since 1968.
From october 1977, due to changes in the entries of the "arrival" and

"departure" card, filled by the Greek citizens, no data are collected on

 

 

emigration and immigration of Greek citizens. It is probable that from
now on the statistical service will rely totally on information provided
by the population census, although such procedure cannot totally replace

the valuable information collected through the frontier statistics.

 

II. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS AND CHANGE

Shryock and Siegel (1976: 1) define demography in its narrowest
sense; what they call "formal demography" is concerned "with the size,
distribution, structure, and change of populations". On the other hand
Weller and Bouvier (1981: 7), using the wider' sense of demography, define
it as "the study of:

(1) the size, composition, and distribution of the population in a

given area;
(2) changes in population size, composition, and distribution;
(3) the components of these changes;
(4) the factors that affect these components; and

(5) the consequences of changes in population size, composition, and

,distribution or in the components themselves".

This latter definition will be used in the following chapters in
an effort to study the size, composition, and distribution of the rural
population in Greece during the last three decades. The study will focus
on the changes that have taken place, the factors responsible for those
changes and the consequences, present and future, not only for the rural
population but for the entire population of the country.

Of course the latter objectives cannot be accomplished by relying
only on aggregate data from the censuses or vital registration statistics
not only because they are incoplete and/or the level of analysis is
insufficient, but mainly because they are too general and lack the detail
information that can acchieved only through special research surveys.

‘ Such research is lacking in Greece and therefore the insight into demo—

6

 

graphic problems associated with the rural population is greatly impeded.

A. Population and Household Size
1. Population Size

By 1971 the rural population accounted for slightly more than 3
million people, the lowest figure reported from the last five censuses.
The highest, 3.8 million, was reached in l9h0, just a few months before
the declaration of the Greek-Italian war which was the beginning of a
series of wars that ended with the civil war. All of the wars caused
enormous human and material losses and affected the dynamics of both the
rural and urban population. While the total population managed to keep
increasing at a lower rate in each successive census, the rural population
could not keep pace for various reasons which will be analyzed at a later
point. As a result, the rural population of the country decreased from
sh.h% of the total population in 1928 to 35.2% in 1971 (Table 1). or
course, it is probably less than 35.2% but unfortunately the data from
the last census taken on April 5th, 1981 are not yet available.

The picture changes drastically if you break down the statistics
by taking into consideration the geographic region. From table 2 one can
easily conclude that Greece is more rural in each one of its geographic
regions than it is as a whole. This not only was true in 1951 and 1961
but in 1971 as well. With the exception of Macedonia which more closely
resembled the national picture, all other regions (and even the region
of the Rest of Central Greece) in the last censuses were more rural than
urban. Specifically, in 1951 the rural population in every region, with
the exception of Macedonia, formed the majority of the total population.

In some areas e.g. Epirus, Ionian Islands, Crete, and Peloponnesos the

 

 

rural population accounted for more than two thirds of the total popula-
tion in each area. In 1961, the picture had not changed substantially.
There was a downward trend in the rural populations in all areas, with
the exception of the Agean Islands and Thrace, where a small increase
took place. However, in all of the regions (except for Macedonia), the
rural population was a majority of the total. In the next decade the
downward trend continued and as a result, by 1971 in three regions
(Macedonia, the Rest of Central Greece, and Thessaly) the rural population
accounted for less than 50 per cent of the total population in each area.
At the same time, the rural population in Epirus and the Ionian Islands
accounted for two thirds of the total population.

The calculation of the annual rates of growth between the last
three censuses, namely 1951-1961, 1961-1971, and 1951-1971 reveals some
interesting trends which are presented in table 3.

Thus, during the first period, 1951-1961, although the total
population increased at an annual rate of .1% the rates of growth in the
particular regions varied not only in size, but in direction as well.

In four regions (Ionian Islands, Peloponnesos, Crete and Agean Islands)
the rural population decreased at an annual rate of -1.2, -.6, —.h and
-.3%, respectively. The Rest of Central Greece region remained almost
the same (.05%) but increased in the remaining four regions at an annual
rate ranging from..3% to .8%, which is below the annual rate of growth
for the total population (.95%), as shown in table 3. During the next
decade, 1961 to 1971, the downward trend entirely swept over the regions
.at a nearly equal pace which resulted in a decrease of the entire rural
population. The annual rate of change in the rural population was -l.7%

(table 3) while the total population continued to increase although at

9

 

a smaller annual rate (.4h%) as shown in tables 1 and 3 . This slowdown

was the result of heavy rural exodus to urban centers in Athens and

Thessaloniki and to the industrialized European countries.

Table 1. Rural and total population and intercensus growth rates during
the last five censuses, 1928-1971.

 

 

 

 

 

Census Rural Population Total Population
Year Growth Growth
Number % rate(1) Number % rate(1)
1928 3,373,281 54.4 6,204,68h
. 1.10 1.h2
19ho 3,8h7,13h 52.h 7,3hh,86o
- .55 .35
1951 3,622,619 h7.5 7,632,801
.1h .95
1961 3,67h,592 h3.8 8,388,553
—1.7h .hh
1971 3,081,731 35.2 8,768,6h1
1928-1971 - .21 .81

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1978, p.

by the author.

18 and calculations

(1) The annual intercensus rate of growth was calculated using the

formula:

Where,

t

r = ( ‘%%-- 1)

Po= the population in time period 0

Pt= the population in time period t

t

I‘

= the annual rate of growth

the number of years between time periods 0 and t

 

10

Table 2. Rural population as a percentage of the total population in the
various geographic regions, and intercensus change during the

last three censuses.

 

 

Geographic Region Census: Intercensus Change:

 

1951 1961 1971 1951/61 1961/71 1951/1971

 

 

Rest of Central Greece" 58.0 54.5 45.8 -3.5 —8.7 -12.2
Peloponnesos 65.5 63.7 57.8 -1.8 -5.9 - 7.7
Ionian Islands 71.8 68.7 65.6 -3.1 -3.1 - 6.2
Epirus 76.0 73.4 68.1 -2.6 -5.3 - 7.9
Thessaly . 55.7 54.1 48.4 -1.6 -5.7 - 7.3
Macedonia 47.3 46.1 . 39.0 -1.2 -7.1 - 8.3
Thrace 59.5 60.4 57.9 .9 -2.5 - 1.6
Agean Islands 52.7 56.5 53.2 3.8 -3.3 .5
Crete 69.6 64.0 55.7 -5.6 -8.3 -13.9
Total Greece 47.? 43.8 35.1 -3.9 -8.7 -12.6

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author.
(*) Excluding the Metropolitan area of Athens

 

 

11

Table 3. Annual intercensus rates of growth of the rural population in

the various geographic regions during the last three censuses.

 

 

Intercensus Period:

 

Geographical Regions
1951-1961 1961-1971 1951-1971

 

 

Rest of Central Greece -.053 -l.52 - .73
Peloponnesos - .58 -2.00 -1.29
Ionian Islands -l.16 -1.86 -l.51
Epirus .30 -2.01 - .86
Thessaly .72 -l.62 - .45
Macedonia .80 -1.66 - .43
Thrace - .32 -l.91 -l.12
Crete - .39 -l.93 —1.16
Total: Rural Population .10 ‘ -l.74 - .83
Total Population .95 .44 .70

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author.

12

2. Family (Household) Size

Due to the fact that statistical data are not available for fami-
lies but for households, our analysis will be restricted to changes which
took place within the rural household rather than the rural family. In
this case we are losing valuable information about the patriarchal fami-
lies (families in which married children are living in the same housing
unit along with their parents and unmarried brothers and sisters). These
families are of great interest to rural sociologists, since such families
follow a more traditional life pattern. Of course, during the last few
decades the developments which took place in rural areas resulted in a
rapid decrease in the number of patriarchal families. Unfortunately, we
lack appropriate statistics to pinpoint directly, this movement. As a
close approximation and a rather valid indicator, we have used the break-
down of households according to number of members as presented in table 4.

It is very clear from table 4 that the rural household became
progressively smaller during the last three censuses. While the total
number of rural households increased by 4.5% during the period 1951 to
1971, households with 1,2,3 or 4 members increased, and those with 5 or
more members decreased by rates varying from -8.8% to -81.9% for the
same period. As a result, the average size of the rural household has
decreased from 4.45 members in 1951 to 3.57 in 1971, as shown in table 5.

Although the size of the rural household became progressively
smaller during the last three censuses it was still greater in comparison
with the urban household. The difference between them had the tendency

to become smaller and smaller (table 6).

'13

Of course this tendency toward a smaller household in rural areas
is not due entirely to the fact that young couples now tend to live in
separate house more often than before. Table 7 confirms that the proportion
of households sharing their dwelling decreased drastically in both rural
and urban areas and even became slightly lower in rural areas by 1971 ,
namely 4.2% compared to 4.8% in urban areas. It is also due to the fact
that some members, especially from oversized rural households, migrated
to urban areas and abroad. Furthermore, changes in childbearing patterns
now favor smaller families. Unfortunately, it is difficult, if not impos-
sible, to separate the three different components from the overall change

without appropriate statistical information.

Table 4. Distribution of Households living in rural areas according to

their number of members, during the last three censuses.

 

 

Number of 1951 census 1961 census 1971 census Percent Change
Household
Members Number % Number % Number %' 1951- 1961- 1951-

1961 1971 1971

 

61,868 7.6 76,887 8.6 86,416 10.

l 1 24.3 12.4 39.7

2 111,310 13.7 137,428 15.4 186,080 21.9 23.5 35.4 67.2

3 128,526 15.8 161,378 18.1 161,112 18.9 25.6 4 .2 25,4

4 143,189 17.6 179,031 20.0 182,092 21.4 25.0 1.7 27,2

5 132,163 16.2 142,778 16.0 120,516 14.2 8.0 -15.6 -8.8

6—7 169,355 20.8 148,657 16.6 97.884 11.5 -l2.2 -34.2 -42.2
8-9 53,709 6.6 38,170 4,3 14,260 1.7 -28.9 -62.6 -73.4

10 and over 13,783 1.7 9,261 1.0 2,500 .3 -32.8 -73.0 -81.9

 

T o t a 1 813,903 100.0 893,590 100.0 850,860 100.0 9.8 -4.8 4.5

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Results of the 1951 Population Census, p. CXCV and 1961
Census, p. 184, and Statistical Yearbook of Greece, 1978, p. 35

14

Table 5. Number of Households, members, and average size of household

in rural areas, during the last three censuses.

 

 

 

Number of Number of Average Number
Census Households Members of Members
1951 813,903 3,622,619 I 4.45
1961 893,593 3,674,592 4.11
1971 850,860 3,033,952 3-57

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Results of the 1951, 1961 and 1971 Population Census

Table 6. Mean and Median size of households in rural and urban areas,

during the last three censuses.

 

 

 

 

 

Census
Year Rural Areas Urban Areas Difference (rural-urban)
M e a n S i z e
1951 4.47 * *
1961 4.11 3.70 .41
1971 3.57 3.24 333
M e d i a n -S i z_e_
1951 3.74 * .*
1961 3.40 3.86 - .46
1971 2.95 2,70 .25

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author

* Data were not available

15

Table 7. Distribution of households living in regular dwellings and
sharing or not the dwelling, in rural and urban areas. 1951,

1961, and 1971 census.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

R u r a l A r e a s U r b a n A r e a 5
Census S h a r e Do not Share S h a r e Do not Share“
Year
Number % Number % Number % Number 75
1951 * * * * * * * *

1961 75.188 8.8 778,618 91.2 154,183 16.6 776,995 83.4
1971 35,412 4.2 808,608 95.8 65,508 4.8 1,293,560 95.2

 

SOURCE: NSSG. Statistical Yearbook of Greece, 1968, p.53 and 1978, p. 35

* Data were not available

16

B. Ascribed Characteristics

1. Age Composition

Traveling in the country, and especially through the rural mount-
aneous areas, one can hardly miss noticing that the majority of the people
living in those areas are either young children or elderly people 65 years
of age and older. Adults in the productive ages are becoming fewer.

The same picture is revealed by the statistical data from the
last three censuses which are presented in tables 8, 9, and 10. Namely,
persons 65 years of age in rural areas outnumber the same group in urban
areas by 1.4% in 1951, 1.6% in 1961 and 3.8% in 1971. Also, children up
to 14 years of age in rural areas outnumber the same group in urban areas
by 9.7% in 1951, 6.8% in 1961 and 4.8% in 1971. It is interesting to note
that while the difference between rural and urban areas is increasing
progressively for the older group (65 and over), it is decreasing pro-
gressively for the younger group (up to 14 years of age). On the other
hand, the age group 15 to 44 years in urban areas overwhelmingly out-
numbers the same group in rural areas at all three census dates (9.7% in
1951, 7.4% in 1961, and 9.2% in 1971). Further, there is no evidence of
an increasing trend but rather of a stabilizing one, since the differences
fluctuate around the same figures.

It is logical at this point to ask: What are the factors responsible
for the differences in the age composition of the population in rural and
urban areas? The larger proportions of children in rural areas can be
attributed to higher fertility rates among the rural population of the
country, while the smaller proportions of persons between the ages of 15

to 44 years in rural areas is the result of the selectivity process of

 

I!

17
migration (internal and external) and serves to remove many within that
age group.

As to whether the population is becoming older or not, the calcu-
lation of the median age for the two populations in each of the last three
censuses reveals some interesting trends (table 11). First, both popula—
tions became older as a result of lower fertility ratesand higher life
expectancy, due to improvements in health conditions, better nutrition
and other related factors. Second, while the rural population was younger
than the urban by 4.1 years in 1951 (median age for rural: 18.83 years
and urban 22.94 years), the difference was halved by 1961 (2.0 years).

By 1971 it was reversed by the same amount, thus making the rural popula-
tion older than the urban (median age for rural 29.36 years as compared
to 27.33 years for the urban populatiOn).

As a result of these changes, the burden for adults increased in
rural areas as fewer and fewer people had to support more and more younger
and older age group48JThe age dependency ratios (table 12) revealed that
in 1951 every hundred adults aged 15 to 64 years had to Support 68
younger and older persons in rural areas but only 41 in urban areas, i.e.
26.5 additional persons. By 1971, the age dependency ratio continued to
increase in both areas but at a faster pace for urban areas (70.1 for
rural and 48.3 for urban areas) thus lowering the difference to 21.8
persons. Taking into account the fact that the rural income is less than
the urban, one can easily realize how much the rural family must struggle
in order to provide its members an adequate level of living and at the

same time, to resist strong economic "push" factors in rural areas.

 

(1) Under the assumption that migrant remittances did not offset their
previously generated income in these rural areas.

18

Table 8. Rural and urban population classified by sex and age-groups.

1951 census

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Age Groups R u r a l A r e a s U r b a n A r e a 3
(Years) Number % Number %
Both Sexes (1) 3,605,498 100.0 2,789,474 100.0
Up to 14 1,191,260 33.0 648,597 23,3

15 - 24 683,243 19.0 603,984 21.7
25 - 44 872,004 24.2 871,125 31.2
45 - 64 594,756 16.5 499,740 17.9
65 and over 264,235 7.3 166,028 5.9
Males (1) 1,735,269 100.0 1,364,461 100.0
Up to 14 615,830 35.5 327,452 24.0
15 - 24 315,446 18.2 311,112 22.8
25 - 44 409,804 23.6 417,560 30.6
45 - 64 272,254 15.7 240,140 17.6
65 and over 121,719 7.0 68,197 5.0
Females (1) 1,870,229 100.0 1,425,013 100.0
Up to 14 575,430 30.8 321,145 22.5
15 - 24 367,581 19.7 292,872 20.6
25 - 44 462,200 24.7 453,565 31.8
45 - 64 322,502 17.2 259,600 18.2
65 and over 142,516 7.6 97,831 6.9

 

SOURCE: NSSG. Results of the Population-Housing Census of

April 7, 1951. pp. 135-6

(1) Persons with not declared age have been substracted from totals.

Table 9. Rural and urban population claSsified by sex and

age-groups, 1961 census (In thousands)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Age Groups Rural Areas Urban Areas
(Years) Number % Number %
Both Sexes 3,657.2 100.0 3,641.5 100.0
Up to 14 1,096.6 30.0 844.5 23.2

15 - 24 539.7 14.8 616.7 16.9
25 - 44 959.4 26.2 1,146.1 31.5
45 - 64 731.7 20.0 764.9 21.0
65 and over 329.9 9.0 269.1 7.4
Males 1,770.8 100.0 1,787.7 100.0
Up to 14 562.4 31.8 432.8 24.2
15 - 24 242.5 13.7 334.1 18.7
25 - 44 464.5 26.2 538.6 30.1
45 - 64 356.3 20.1 367.3 20.6
65 and over 145.1 8.2 114.9 6.4
Females 1,886.4 100.0 1,853.7 100.0
Up to 14 534.2 28.3 411.7 22.2
15 — 24 297.2 15.8 282.6 15.3
25 - 44 494.9 26.2 607.5 32.8
45 - 64 375.3 19.9 397.6 21.4
65 and over 184.8 9.8 154.2 8.3

 

SOURCE: NSSG.

Results of the Population—Housing Census of

March 14, 1961. Sample Elaboration.

20

Table 10. Rural and urban population classified by sex and
age-groups. 1971 census (1).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rural Areas Urban Areas
Age Groups
(Years)_ Number % Number %
Both Sexes 3,082,988 100.0 4,665,836 100.0
Up to 14 864,184 28.0 1,081,716 23.2
15 - 24 371,796 12.1 781,844 16.8
25 - 44 763,640 24.8 1,382,120 29.6
45 - 64 676,672 21.9 981,668 21.0
65 and over 406,696 13.2 438,488 9.4
Males 1,498,568 100.0 2,280,288 100.0'
Up to 14 444,180 29.7 555,880 24.4
15 - 24 178,252 11.9 409,976 18.0
25 — 44 364,408 24.3 665,120 29.2
45 - 64 330,236 22.0 461,584. 20.2
65-and over 181,492 12.1 187,728 8.2
Females 1,584,420 100.0 2,385,548 100.0
Up to 14 420,004 26.5 525,836 22.0
15 - 24 193,544 12.2 371,868 15.6
25 - 44 399,232 25.2 717,000 30.1
45 - 64 346,436 21.9 520,084 21.8
65 and over 225,204 14.2 250,760 10.5

 

SOURCE: NSSG. Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1978. p. 39

(l) 25% Sample elaboration of the 1971 Population Census

questionnaires.

21

Table 11. Median age of the rural and urban population during the

last three censuses.

 

1r

 

 

Census Rural Population Urban Population (giiiirfns:ban)
1951 18.83 22.94 -4.11
1961 23.31 25.31 -2.00
1971 29.36 27.33 2.03

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author

(1

Table 12. Age dependency ratios for the rural and urban population

during the last three censuses.

 

 

 

Census Rural Population Urban Population (Rugifffrgggzn)
1951 67.7 41.2 26.5
1961 63.9 44.1 19,8
1971 70.1 48.3 21,8

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author

P + P
(1) Calculated using the formula: ADR= O'lh 65+

P15-64

.100

Where,
ADR= The Age Dependency Ratio

P0-14= Number of persons under 15 years of age
P15-64= Number of persons with age 15 to 64 years

P65+ = Number of persons 65 years of age and over

22

2, Sex Composition

In analyzing the sex composition of the rural population in
contrast to urban, the sex ratio (the number of males per 100 females)
was calculated for the three censuses and the various age groupings in
which each of the populations was divided. According to the figures pre-
sented in table 13, the following statements can be made:

First, the sex ratio for the total urban population was higher
than the sex ratio for the total rural in each of the last three censuses.
The higher sex ratio for the urban population can be attributed to three
factors: a) the sex selectivity of the internal rural to urban migration;
b) the fact that high schools, colleges and other higher educational
institutions with a predominate male population are located in urban
areas and thus pull a substantial proportion of male population from the
rural areas; and c) the fact that military installations most often are
located within urban areas. The last two factors aresupported by the
fact that the sex ratio of the age group, 15 to 24 years, which includes
persons attending high schools, colleges, and other higher educational
institutions and males serving in the armed forces, shows a great excess
of males for each of the three cenSuses. The relevant sex ratios for this
age group in urban areas are: 106.2 for 1951, 118.2 for 1961 and 110.2
for 1971 ; in contrast the corresponding ratios for rural areas are: 85.8,
81.6, and9 2.1

Further, the fact that "the sex ratio tends to be high at the
very young ages and then tends to decrease with increasing age" (Shryock,
and Siegel; 1976:108) is also observable in both populations and in each

of the three censuses (See table 13).

 

23

Finally, although the rural population was younger than the urban
according to the 1951 and 1961 censuses CSee table 11), and had higher
fertility rates, the sex ratios do not reflect higher values for the
rural population. On the contrary the opposite was true. The explanation

of course lies in the reason given in the first remark,

Table 13. Sex ratios in rural and urban areas for various age groupings

during the last three censuses.

 

 

 

 

 

Age groups R u r a 1 A r e a s U r b a n A r e a 3
(Years) 1 . . ‘ _,
1951 1961 1971 1951 1961 1971

Up to 14 107.0 105.3 105.8 102.0 105.1 105.7
15 - 24 85.8 81.6 92.1 106.2 118.2 110.2
25 — 44 88.7 93.9 91.3 92.1 88.7 92.8
45 ~ 64 84.4 94.9 95.3 92.5 92.4 88.8
65 and over 85.4 78.5 80.6 69.7 74.5 74.9

 

T o t a 1 92.8 93.9 94.6 95.8 96.4 95.6

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author

C. Achieved Characteristics

Shryock and Siegel (1976;177) characterize education as "an imv
portant variable in accounting for demographic behavior" and also as "one
of the social characteristics of persons covered frequently in population
censuses and demographic surveys and occasionally in registration systems".

In the present chapter an analysis of the educational status will
be carried out through measures of educational output with respect to the
rural and urban population, An effort will be made to pinpoint the diffe-

rences between the two segments of the Greek population and the changes

that have taken place in each one during the last three post war censuses.

1. Educational Attainment

Early in the 50‘s a tremendous effort was made to improve the
educational status of the Greek population. During the preceding decades,
with wars succeeding one another, the education of the population, espe-
cially in the rural areas,was neglected. The establishment of primary
schools in every locality, the enforcement by law of compulsory primary
education and the progressive establishment of more and more high schools,
technical and vocational schools, and higher educational institutions
served to increase educational attainment at a rapid pace. These forces
along with making education free of charge at all levels in 1963, and
most of all, the high prestige placed upon education by all segments of
Greek society resulted in an enormous increaSe.in.the eduCational attain;

ment of the population as revealed by the last threecensuses.

24

2f3

Of course, differences between the rural and urban population are
obvious which even now reflect the shortcomings of the educational process
in rural areas. Such areas were the last provided with educational opportu—
nities, as well as the fact that the rural family could not easily afford
the resources necessary to support its young members forerhigher education
available in the urban centers. Even now, college students argue that
students from rural areas and low income families are handicapped in the
attainment of college education since they cannot easily afford the
expenses associated with food and lodging in the urban centers,

From.tables l4 and 15 that present the educational attainment of
the rural and urban population (aged 10 years and over) by sex during the
1961 and 1971 census (data on 1951 census were not presented using the
rural-urban distinction), it is evident that progress towards more school-
ing has been made in all groups. Using these tables two measures (rates
of university graduates and median years of school completed) have been
calculated and presented in tables 15 and 17, respectively.

As shown in table 16 although the rate of university graduates
increased in every area and in each sex group, differences among areas
and among males and females in each area became even greater. Specifical-
1y, while the male rate exceeded the female by15.3 units in 1961 in rural
areas, and by 38.3 units in urban areas, in 1971 the same differences
became 6.7 for rural areas and 41.8 for urban areas. At the same time for
both sexes, urban areas had a higher rate of 25,2 units over the rural.
areas in 1961 which increased to 3511 units in 1971. Of course, this is
evidence for and a result of the fact that Job opportunities requiring
higher education were far greater in urban areas than in rural areas for

the period being studied.

265

Median years of school completed (table 17) in rural areas by
persons aged 10 years and over increased from {5.2 in ‘1961 to 6.0 in
1971, or by .8 years} compared With a {15 year increase in urban areas.
As a result the differential in formal educational attainment between the
two areas diminished from 1.1 years in 1961 to .45 in 1971. This was the
result of the fact that while formal educational facilities were provided
in rural areas much higher numbers of illiterates and elderly people were
removed from rural areas through mortality than in urban areas. This
argument is further supported by the fact that the improvement in educa-
tional attainment was much higher for females than males since the majo-
rity of illiterate people are predominately older and female, as is clear
in the following Chapter focusing on the illiterate population. Median
years of school completed are still far from the respective measures of

USA non-metropolitan population - 11J4 years in 1970( Zuiches, and Brown,

1978:62).

2. Illiteracy

What has been accomplished by the education of the Greek people
is clearly'evident from the statistics on illiteracy, presented in tables
18 through 23.

While in the :907 census, 60 out of 100‘ ‘people were illiterate
(80 out of IOO‘~ for females and 10 ‘out of 300', ’for males) , and of course
the figure was much higher for rural areas. By 1971 the crude illiterate
rate dropped dramatically to onlyflll. Of course by now the illiteracy
rate is even lower as those people who are removed from the population
through mortality are predominately illiterate. At the same time those

who enter the population through natality obtain increasingly higher

.27
formal education than their predecessors.

The fact that today illiterate people are the elderly in both
rural and urban populations is evidenced in tables I? and 2) where almost
40% are 65 years and older. Also they live predominately in rural areas
(52.6%) compared to 34.6% in urban areas (table 21) and females (8) %' in
rural areas and.7735% in urban areas). The last fact is evidence of the
role differentiation along sex lines that was practiced in the traditio-
nal Greek society, especially in rural areas.

Age-specific illiteracy rates for persons aged 1) xaars and over
for rural and urban areas (tables 22 and 23) show how low the illiteracy
rates have decreased in both areas, and how equalitarian the two sexes
have become as to education in both areas. Further, the lower age-speci-
fic illiteracy rates for young groups in contrast to higher rates for old
groups pinpoint further improvement which is expected to be achieved in

the near future in both the rural and urban areas of the country.

28

Table 14. Distribution of the rural population aged 10 years and over,

(1)

by educational level and sex in 1961 and 1971 .

 

 

 

 

 

Males Females Both Sexes
Educational level Number % Number % Number %
1961 Census
University graduates 12,001 .9 5,352 17,353
High School graduates 33,923 2.5 11,760 45,683 1.

Elementary School grad.
Not finished Elem. Sch.

Not declared

690,410 50.0 465,194 30.
639,618 46.3 1,035,326 67.
4.651 .3 6,779

F’\O\n0)4-"

1,155,604 39.
1,674,944 57.
11,430

memm

 

T o t a 1

1,380,603 100.0 1,524,411 100.

0 2,905,014 100.0

 

University graduates

High School graduates

Elementary School grad.
Not finished Elem. Sch.

Not declared

1971 Census

 

14,604 ' 1.2 7,008
36,324 3.0 16,792 1.
677,992 56.4 502,836 38
443,428 36.9 660,608 50.
30,380 2.5 117,788 9.

6
3
.5 1,180,828 47.
6
0

21,612
53,116 2.

1,104,036 44.
148,168 5.

\OOI-‘i—‘O

 

T o t a 1

1,202,728 100.0 1,305,032 100.

0 2,507,760 100.0

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1978, p.

(1) 25% sample elaboration of the 1971 population

133 and 1970, p. 81

census questionnaires

29

Table 15. Distribution of the urban population aged 10 years and over,

by educational level and sex in 1961 and 1971

(

l)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Males ,Females Both Sexes
Educational leVel
Number % Number % Number %
1961 Census
University graduates 76,056 5.1 20,095 1.3 96,151 3.1
High School graduates 237,677 15.9 202,235 12.7 439,912 14.3
Elementary School grad. 773,633 51.8 665,793 41.9 1,439,426 46.7
Not finished Elem. Sch. 399,905 26.8 691,299 43.5 1,091,204 35.4
NCt declared 6,375 .4 9,926 .6 16,301 .5
T o t a 1 1,493,646 100.0 1,589,348 100.0 3,082,994 100.0
1971 Census
University graduates 124,672 6.5 48,156 2.4 172,828 4.4
High School graduates 364,528 19.2 355,876 16.6 7001104 17.8
Elementary School grad. 1,027,563 54.1 958,560 47.3 1,986,128 50.6
Not finished Elem. Sch. 3581756 18.9 611,836 30.2 $970,292 24.7
Not declared 24,236 1.3 71,776 3.5 961312 2.5
T o t a 1 1,899,460 100.0 2,026,204 100.0 3,925,664 100.0

 

SOURCE: As in table 14

( 1) See table 14

30

Table 16. Rates of university graduates among the rural and urban

population aged 10 years and over by sex in 1961 and 1971.

 

 

 

 

 

R u r a l '.A r e a”s (U.r b'a n, ..A r.e a,s
Sex
1961 f 1971. m a . 1961 ' 1971
Males 8.7 12.1 50.9 65.6
Females. 3.4 5.4 12.6 (23.8
Both sexes 6.0 8.6 p 31.2. ' 44.0

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author

Table 17. Median years of school completed by sex in the rural and urban
areas during the 1961 and 1971 census. (Persons aged 10 years

and over).

 

 

 

 

 

 

R u r a l A r e a s U r b a n A r e a 3
Sex
1961 ‘ 1971 1961 1971
Males 6.07 6.19 6.44 6.55
Females 1.54 ' 4.86 6.14 6.36
Both sexes 5.16 6.00 6.30 6.45

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author

31

Table 18. Crude illiteracy rates of the total population aged 10 years

and over, by sex: 1907 to 1971 censuses.

 

 

 

Census Year -Both sexes Males . Females
1907 60.5 40.4 80.5
1920(1) 52.0' 33.9 69.7
1928 41.8 23.8 59.3
1951 24.2 11.6 35.8
1961(2) 17.8 7.6 27.3
1971(2) 14.0 6.2 21.3

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1966, p. 79 and 1978, p. 132,
and calculations by the author
(1) Within the boundaries established by the Lausanne Treaty of 1923

(2) Illiterate also include persons not reporting whether they know
to read and write.

 

 

 

 

 

Table 19. Rural illiterate population by age and sex in 1971(1).

Age M a l e s ' F e m a l e s B o t h S e x e 8
groups Number Z Number Z Number Z

10 - 19 3,808 3.6 ' 4,372 1.0 8,180 1.5
20 - 29 4,820 4.5 '10,740 2.5 15,560 2.9
30 - 44 21,760 20.4 77,220 18.1 98,980 18.6
45 - 64 36,644 34.3 162,704 38.1 199,348 37.3
65+ 39,804 37.2 172,152 40.3 211,956 39.7
Total 106,836 100.0 427,188 100.0 534,024 100.0

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical yearbook of Greece 1978, p. 133

(1) 25Z sample elaboration of the 1971 population census questionnaires

32

Table 20. Urban illiterate population by age and sex in 1971(1).

 

 

 

 

 

 

M a l e s ' F e m a'l e s .B o t.h S e x e 5
Age groups
Number 'Z " Number) . Z,. (Number Z
10 - 19 3,648 4.6 4,188 1.5 7,836 2.2
20 - 29 4,832 6.1 7,844 2.9 12,676 3.6
30 - 44 18,212 23.1 48,580 17.8 66,792 19.0
45 - 64 29,264 37.0 103,176 37.9 132,440 37.7
65+ 23,064 29.2 108,840 39.9 , 131,904 37.5
r o t a 1 79,020 100.0 272,628 100.0 351,648 100.0

 

SOURCE: As in table 19
(1) See table 19

Table 21. Proportion of illiterate population aged 10 years and over by

sex , in each area, and out of the total population in 1971(1).

 

 

0-7

or

 

 

 

 

Z out of z 6f5;;£;i
A r e a S Sex Number Z total population in
population each area
Males 106,836 20.0 10.5
Rural Females 427,188 80.0 42.1
Both sexes 534,024 100.0 21.3
Males 31,084 24.0 3.1
Semi — urban Females 98,424 76.0 9.7
Both sexes 129,508 100.0 15.5
Males 79,020 22.5 7.8
Urban 'Females 272,628 77.5 26.8
Both sexes 351,648' 100.0 9.0
T o t a 1 1,015,180 100.0 _ 14.0

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1978

(1) 25Z sample elaboration of the 1971 census questionnaires

_ 33

Table 22. Crude and age-specific illiteracy rates of persons aged 10 years

and over, by sex in the rural areas during the last three censuses.

 

Age ' M a l e s ' F e-m'a l'e s B o t h S e x‘e s

 

 

 

(years) 1951 1961 1971 1951.,1961].1971. 1951 1961 1971.
10 - 19 * * 1.5 * t 1.7 t * 1.6

20 - 29 * * 3.3 * 4 6.7 * * 5.1

30 - 44 * t 7.3 t t 23.8 * t 15.9

45 - 64 t a 11.1 k t 47.0 4 t 29.5
65+ * * 21.9 * t .76.4 * * 52.1
Crude rate * 9.7, 8.9 * 36.7 32.7 t 23.9 21.3

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author

* Have not been calculated due to lack of published data

Table 23. Crude and age-specific illiteracy rates of persons aged 10 years

and over, by sex in the urban areas during the last three censuses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Age. M a l e s F‘e m‘a l e s B o t h S e x e 3
(years) 1951 1961 .1971 1951 1961 1971 1951 1961 1971
10 - 19 * * 1.0 * * 1.2 * * 1.1
20 - 29 * * 1.3 * * 2.3 * * .1.8
30 - 44 * * 3.5 * * 8.7 * * 6.2
45 - 64 * * 6.3 * * 19.8 * * 13.5
65+ * * 12.3 * * ’43.4 * * 30.1
Crude rate * 5.4 4.2 * 17.9 13.5 * 11.8 9.0

 

SOURCE: Calculated by the author

* Have not been calculated due to lack of published data

D. Components of Population Change
1. Migration

'Migration‘is traditionally associated with Greek history and life.
Since ancient times, when the Greek city-states founded their colonies,
and through their merchant fleets established strong ties with them and
the other Mediterranean countries, Greeks can be found today settled in
most countries of the world.

In the present century migration appeared in many of its forms,
including external (free and refugee movements), internal and even sub-
stantial repatriation of previous migrants during the last two decades.
During this period, migration was responsible for the greatest modifica-
tion of the demographic characteristics of the population, even greater
than the effect of the other two components of population change, ferti-
lity and mortality.

The present chapter deals with each one of these migration streams
in an effort to pinpoint their dynamic effects on the population of the

country and especially on the rural segment.

1.1 External Migration

During the present century three main streams of international
migration characterized Greece, with various magnitudes, places of desti-
nation and consequences for the country.

The first stream started during the last decade of the 19th century
when 370 thousands people (or 7.4Z of the 1920 population) migrated, .
mostly to USA (see table 24). This massive migratory movement to the USA

34

35
was the result of the currant crisis (starting in 1895) in southern
Greece where the majority of the migrants originated, and was only came
to a halt with the abrupt change in USA immigration policy after 1921
(Mouzelis, 1978:165).

The second stream appeared in the early years of the next decade
when almost 1.5 million Greek refugees from Turkey settled in the country,
following the exchange of populations between the two countries under the'
Lausanne treaty, This massive refugee.immigration in 1922, although ini-
tially causing many settlement problems, with many arguing that the
country was unable to feed its native population and therefore famine for
the whole population was unavoidable, very soon turned out to be a bless-
ing for the country. The desperate need to accomodate this huge mass of
uprooted people had as one of its consequences the acceleration of the
land-reform program, already initiated by Venizelos toward the end of the
previous period. The result of this land-reform was a tremendous increase
in the acreage of cultivated land that had been previously left fallow
and thus an increase in agricultural production resulted. At the same
time a sizeable number of refugees were settled in the big urban centers
and especially in Thessaloniki, Pireaus, and Athens either because it was
impossible to be accommodated through the land distribution program or
because they did not want to for reasons of living preferences and/or
skills acquired. Those refugees who had occupied important positions in
industry, trade and finance of the Greek communities in Asia Minor brought
with them badly needed enterpreneurial skills as well as considerable
money savings. Thus, in the long run the refugees gave a substantial
and compelling impetus to the Greek economy (Mouzelis, 1978:22-23).

Thirty years later in the 50's and 60's a new stream of outmigra-

'36

tion carried many Greeks, especially from rural areas, to the highly
industrialized European countries, mainly to West Germany (see tables

24 and 25). At the same time a new outburst of emigration to the USA
appeared, especially in the late 60's, probably as a result of the poli-
tical situation in the country. It is estimated that this wave carried
approximately one million migrants out of the country, that is 12Z of the
mid-period population (NSSG, and Valaoras, 1980195)

Other countries that received substantial numbers of Greek
migrants, especially after World War II, were Australia and Canada, where
numerous Greek communities have been established.

What were the consequences of those migration streams on the
Greek population? Tremendous is the answer, based on the data provided
in table 26. First of all, the majority of the migrants were young people
aged 15 to 44 years (82% on the average for the period 1955 to 1976 and
ranging from 67.0Z to 90.4Z). Thus, the country has not only lost a
substantial part of its productive population in the short-run, but it
is going to exhibit for many years in the future a loss in its reproduct-
ive capacity. Secondly, during the period 1955 to 1976 on the average
67.4Z of the excess of births over deaths compensated for the losses
caused by migration and only 32.6Z were added to the Greek population as
a net increase. Taking into account that a downward trend is clearly
evident' from the statistics on the excess of births over deaths (from
the upper 90 thousand they dropped to mid 60 thousand) the effects of
migration can easily be understood in bringing the Greek population to
the zero level of growth. Further, the fact that the population removed
by migration was not evenly distributed among all areas of the country

but originated mainly from rural areas, explains the radical distortions

37

in the age pyramid of the rural population.

(The NSSG (1980:100) calculating the effects of migration on the
population of the various administrative prefectures during the period
1961 to 1972 found that 25 out of 51 prefectures lost population due to
outmigration at an annual rate ranging from -1.5 to -24.7 per 1000 inha-
bitants. Six prefectures had an annual rate of increase.from .2 to 1.0
and the rest from 2.6 to 9.0 per 1000 inhabitants. Summarizing the admi-
nistrative prefectures of the country into three broad regions, the
results were as follows:

Rates per 1000 inhabitants (per year)

 

 

,BEEEEE Migration ExCess of Births Difference
South Greece 6.0 ' 9.5 3.5
North Greece 15.4 10.5 - 4.9
Island Greece 1 8.3 6.9 - 1.4

Thus according to these data two of the major geographic regions
of the country (North and Island Greece) exhibited a negative increase
as a result of heavy outmigration .

In reference to the sex composition of the migrants, data for the
period 1957 to 1977 (table 27) clearly shows that the majority were males,
especially during the first years of the above period. This is evidence
that most of the young migrants were single at the time of migration or
were married and left their wives and children behind during their first
years of migration which were associated with many strains in the receiv-
ing countries. Many migrants, as soon as they established themselves in
their new surroundings, sent for their immediate family members and even
their parents to look after their children (as is evidenced in table 26)

since their wives have gotten an occupation also to help the family attain

38

its goals as soon as possible, thus shortening the length of residence
in the foreign country. This was especially the pattern of migration to
European countries.

As to the reasons for migration, several causes have been propo-
sed by various scholars. Bernard and Ashton-Vouyoucalos (1976:31) although
they focused on return migration to Greece also pointed out in their
introduction as a cause for emigration the fact that "meager and inferti-
le lands have never been enough to support a continually expanding popu-
lation". Candilis (1968:152) blames "the rate of unemployment and under-
employment that has plagued Greece for decades...". Valaoras (1980:95)
in explaining the reasons for emigration to USA points out three main
reasons: a) the backward and underdeveloped Greek economy, b) the great
opportunities opened by the fast developing United States and c) to the
communication channels that were opened through the letters of early
emigrants to their relatives and friends at home (chain migration). The
later case had an even stronger effect on the migration stream in
European countries since the shorter distance allowed frequent visits
home accompanied by strong evidence of their economic betterment through
emigration e.g. cars, home appliances e.t.c. Mouzelis (1978:125) attri-
butes the huge rural exodus during the 60's and 70's to low labour
absorption of the Greek industry, that left no other way than to parasi-
tic jobs in the tertiary or artisan sectors, or to emigrate to the
industrial centers of Western Europe. According to him this large-scale
emigration operated as a huge safety valve by eliminating politically
explosive situations.

Of course emigration was an easy solution to the long-faced

unemployment and underemployment phenomena of the country and especially

39

of the rural areas. At the same time migration provided a golden Opportu-
nity for the badly needed foreign currency to finance the development
plans that were carried on during the last three decades. Emigration was
considered by many as "the goose laying golden eggs" but soon voices were
raised as to whether the development of the country and the balance of
payments should be based indefinitely on those golden eggs (the migrants'
remittances). They were also joined with other voices emphasizing the
demographic consequences of the prolonged and heavy emigration on the
rural population of the country and the future growth of the total popu-

lation as well.

Table 24. Migration to USA and other countries during the period

1851 - 1975

40

 

 

 

 

 

All Destinations To U.S.A. To other countries
Years . .. . . . .. . .
Number Z~ Number- Z - Number Z
1851 1860 31 100.0 31 100.0 - -
1861 1870 72 100.0 72 100.0 - -
1871 1880 213 100.0 210 98.6 3 1.4
1881 1890 2,310 100.0 2,310 99.9 2 .1
1891 1900 16,979 100.0 16,979 100.0 - -
1901 1910 173,513 100.0 167,519 96.5 5,994 3.5
1911 g 1920 196,119 100.0 184,201 93.9 11,918 6.1
1921 1930 91,369 100.0 69,675 76.3 21,694 23.7
1931 1940 30,500 100.0 21,903 71.8 8,597 28.2
1941 45 * x x x x x
1946 50 20,176 100.0 9,317 46.2 10,859 53.8
1951 55 68,063 100.0 22,788 33.5 45,275 66.5
1956 60 84,407 100.0 20,748 24.6 63,659 75.4
1961 65 118,116 100.0 18,167 15.4 99,949 84.6
1966 70 137,885 100.0 58,010 42.1 79,875 57.9
1971 75 64,821 100.0 31,830 49.1 32,991 50.9
18

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1978, p.

(*)

No data were available

41

Table 25. Number of Emigrants and proportion received by various

countries during theperiod 1959 - 1976

 

 

Number of

Year

Countries.) of . Destination (Z).

 

 

Emigrants Overseas European Other Medif Undeclared
. terannean
1959 23,684 58.6 28.3 11.4 1.7
1960 47,768 37.2 56.4 5.9 .5
1961 58.837 29.5 67.2 2.9 .4
1962 84,054 26.1 72.3 1.4 .2
1963 100,072 24.4 74.2 1.1 .3
1964 105,569 24.0 75.3 .7 .05
1965 117,167 24.8 74.5 .7 O8
1966 86,896 38.1 61.0 .7 .2
1967 42,730 61.6 36.6 1.6 .2
1968 50,866 50.9 46.2 1.5 1.4
1969 91,552 31.0 68.2 .6 .2
1970 92,681 26.1 ,73.5 .3 .2
1971 61,745 30.3 68.9 .3 .5
1972 43,397 30.5 67.0 .5 2.0
1973 27,525 42.5 55.0 .7 1.8
1974 24,448 50.6 44.6 1.8 3.0
1975 20,330 43.3 49.7 4.5 2.5
1976 20,374 40.0 50.3 5.1 4.6

 

SOURCE: NSSG,

Statistical Yearbook of Greece, 1960 to 1977 and

calculations by the author.

42

.Honusm 654 an mcofiumasoamo mam mm .a .mom4 mooouo 40 4003466? Hmofiumwumum .ommz “momaom

 

 

 

 

6.46 646.6 466.66 666.6 666.66 446.46 o6auo>6
44.4 6.64 7666.4 666.64 466.4 646.64 664.66 6464
64.4 4.44 644.4 644.64 666.4 666.64 664.46 6464
64.4 6.46 666.4 466.64 464.6 666.64 664.46 6464
66.6 6.44 666.4 666.64 466.6 646.44 646.66 6464
66.6 6.64 666.6 666.46 664.6 466.66 466.66 4464
66.6 6.64 646.6 664.66 664.44 664.46 466.46 4464
66.64 4.46 664.6 444.64 444.44 466.46 646.64 6464
66.64 6.66 666.6 666.64 464.64 466.46 464.46 6664
46.6 6.64 664.6 664.46 664.6 666.66 646.46 6664
66.6 4.44 666.6 466.66 664.4 664.46 666.66 4664
66.64 4.66 666.4 644.64 666.6 666.66 464.66 6664
64.64 6.66 664.4 646.66 666.6 464.444 644.66 6664
66.44 4.66 666.6 666.66 446.6 666.664 466.66 6664
66.44 4.66 466.6 644.66 464.6 446.664 666.46 6664
66.6 6.66 646.6 646.64 644.6 666.66 666.66 4664
46.4 6.66 466.4 464.46 664.6 466.66 464.66 4664
64.6 6.66 664.4 466.46 446.6 664.46 646.66 6664
46.4 6.66 666.4 466.64 664.4 666.64 466.66 6664
66.6 6.44 466.4 646.64 666.6 446.64 664.46 6664
64.6 6.46 666.4 664.64 666.6 646.66 644.66 4664
66.6 6.64 446.6 466.44 466.6 666.66 664.66 6664
64.6 6.44 464.4 666.44 466.6 464.64 466.66 6664
noso 6 66 66 I 64 64 1 6 4 6 n o 4
:ofiumasaoa 66 1 m4 new»
ooo4 mom N masouw own an use anuou .mucmuwfifim mauufin mo mmooxm

 

..sowumasaoa ooo4 nod cofiumuwfiao mo women use mausou uo>o mauufin
mo unooxw 034 £463 :omHMmano :4 was .nasoum own moans an .c4a4lmmm4 uowuma may msfiusu sowumumaau .om manta

43

Table 27. Number of emigrants by sex and sex ratio during the period

 

 

 

1957-1977.
Year Both sexes Males Females Sex. ratio
1957 30,428 ' 19,196 11,232 170.9
1958 24,521 12,889 11,632 110.8
1959 23,684 14,044 9,640 145.7
1960 47,768 33,278 14,490 229.7
1961 58,837 36,209 22,628 160.0
1962 84,054 51,868 32,186 161.1
1963 100,072 61,966 38,106 162.6
1964 105,569 66,265 39,304 168.6
1965 117,167 65,341 51,826 126.1
1966 86,896 46,369 40,527 114.4
1967 42,730 22,885 '19,845 115.3
1968 50,866 27,232 23,634 115.2
1969 91,552 51,633 39,919 129.3
1970 92,681 53,030 39,651 133.7
1971 61,745 33,935 27,810 122.0
1972 43,397 24,470 18,927 129.3
1973 27,525 14,753 12,772 115.5
1974 24,448 13,223 11,225 117.8
1975 20,330 11,718 8,612 136.1
1976 20,374 12,349 8,025 153.9
1977(1) 16,510 10,215 6,295 162.3

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1974, and 1980

(1) Data for 1977 refer to January - September period. From October
1977 due to changes in the entries of the "arrival" and
"departure" card, no data are collected on emigration and
immigration of Greek citizens.

44

1.2 Repatriation

Although repatriation is as old as emigration, only lately, name-
ly in 1968, did this variable appear in the official statistics on migra-
tion. Unfortunately these data were abolished altogether by October 1977
when changes in the entries of the arrival and departure card filled by
Greek citizens, resulted in stopping the collection of data on emigration.
and immigration.

Three main reasons can be associated with the phenomenon of re-
patriation that can at the same time distinguish three categories of Greek
immigrants.

The first category consists of all those migrants who failed to
adapt in the new surroundings for various reasons and decided to return
to their homeland before the fulfilment of their migration goals. Their
period of residence abroad was the shortest of the three categories and
their number was higher immediately after a new migration stream. The
establishment of Greek communities in the new places of migration provi-
ded support for new migrants and a buffering system for the relaxation
of various tensions arising from their contact with the host culture.

The second category consists of all those migrants that returned
due to the fact that they had fulfilled their migration goals or those
who did not see any benefit in prolonging their stay abroad or that
their prolonged stay was not compensated for by the continuing loss of
the direct love and affection of their relatives and friends in the home-
land. we may say that this group represents a living example of the
Odyssean spirit that not only brought them to the foreign countries but

brought them.back to the paternal land. There are many examples of such

45

Greek immigrants who left the foreign countries in times of continuing
prosperity. Even recently many of those overseas Greek immigrants belong
to this category (see table 28).

The third category consists of all those who, in some way were‘
forced to return home due to setbacks in the economy of the receiving
countries. When the economic crisis is sudden and deep, as was the case
with the depression in the 1930's in the USA, a massive return migration
can occur. Unfortunately there are no data on how many Greek migrants
returned to Greece at that period from the USA, and how many of them
emigrated again as soon as the American economy started to pick up. In
cases where the drawbaCks of the economy of the receiving countries is
gradual, as was the case with the situation which developed in W. Germany
and other European countries as a result of the oil crisis, a different
pattern has developed in the process of return. First of all children,
women and older persons return first, while migrants remained in an
effort to prolong their stay as much as possible, in order to qualify for
retirement benefits or increase their savings which would allow them to
improve their economic situation when return was unavoidable. This pat-
tern is documented in the data provided in table 29 where the percentages
of women and very young (0-14 years) and older (45 and over) people are
higher among immigrants than among emigrants. Of course there is one limi-
tation in interpreting these data,Those who returned to Greece during the
period 1968 to 1976 did not necessarily migrateJ during the same period
and thus,the assumption that the present immigrants had the same chara-
cteristics at the time of their emigration as the emigrants of the 1968
to 1976 period is necessary, which is not far from reality.

An interesting question on the phenomenon of repatriation is

46

whether people that migrated from rural areas returned to them or prefer-
red to settle in the urban centers of the country. Data gathered on this
problem and arranged in table 30 support the argument that those who
emigrated from rural areas returned to those areas in smaller proportions.
Of course the data was based on information provided by the immigrants

at the time of crossing the borders and we do not know whether they
changed their minds a few months later and moved to urban centers. Also
the difference might be greater in reality since some of those who were
counted as immigrants were not counted as emigrants since they were born
abroad, and those who immigrated at a certain year were not a part of
those who emigrated at the same year. Calculation of totals for the
period 1971-1977 for emigration and for 1970-1977 for immigration reveal-
ed that while 48Z of the emigrants came from rural areas, immigrants
settled in rural areas consisted of only 38.7Z, thus leaving a gap of

9 percentage units. The question posed is worth being investigated since
those immigrants who were in touch with other cultures will work as
change agents in their rural areas in case of permanent residence to
those areas and thus there is a great potential simultaneously for change

and conflict in those areas.

47

Table 28. Greek immigrants by country of origin (percentages) during
the period 1968 — 1976.

 

 

 

 

 

Number of Countries of origin (Z)
Year immigrants, Overseas European Other MediaNot declared
. . terranean
1968 18,882 25.1 60.3 7.8 6.8
1969 18,132 28.4 62.6 5.8 3.2
1970 22,665 31.4 61.5 4.5 2.6
1971 24,709 33.3 60.8 2.8 3.1
1972 27,522 30.8 62.7 3.0 3.5
1973 22,285 28.4 63.1 2.9 5.6
1974 24,476 19.6 74.9 1.6 3.9
1975 34,214 13.6 81.6 .8 4.0
1976(1) 32,067 16.7 79.7 1.3 ' 2.3

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece, 1969 to 1977 and
calculations by the author

(1) Immigration data have been collected only from 1968 up to
September 1977.

Table 29. Sex and age composition (Z) of Greek emigrants and immigrants
during the period 1968 - 1976.

 

 

 

 

Migration . c

From and To By sex (Z) By age groups (Z)
Greece Males Females O - 14 15 - 44 45+
Emigrants 58.6 41.4 10.9 82.0 7.1
Immigrants 54.0 46.0 17.5 65.1 17.4

 

SOURCE: NSSG, The population of Greece in the Second Half of the 20th
Century, p. 102

48

Table 30. Greek emigrants and immigrants from and to rural areas, and

proportion of total emigration and repatriation during the

 

 

 

 

 

period 1968* to 1977(1)
. E m i g r a t e d .R e p.a t r i a t e d
Year

Number Z Number Z

1968 *9: ** *‘k *1!

1969 *9: ** ** **
'1970 I ** ** 5,080 23.2
1971 32,019 53.3 8,629 36.9
1972 22,157 53.0 9,728 38.3
1973 12,576 48.8 8,154 40.5
1974 9,523 42.4 9,835 42.8
1975 7,373 39.5 14,926 45.7
1976 6,999 38.6 12,286 40.8
1977(1) 5,757 41.8 4,049 . 35.5

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1969 to 1978
(*) Data on repatriation were not available prior to 1968
(**) Were not available using the rural-urban distinction

(1) See table 27

49
1.3 Internal

Although internal migration and specifically rural to urban
migration appeared only at the beginning of the present century, it was
not until the mid 50's that it gained a momentum that pulled millions of
people from rural areas. As a result of centralized development and admit
nistration for over thirty years, by 1971 over one third (35.3Z) of the
country's population was conCentrated in two urban centers, the greater
Athens and Thessaloniki.Metropolitan areas. Table 31 clearly presents the
enormous rates of increase of the two metropolitan areas during the last
five censuses. It is also evident from.the same table that during the last
decade the rate of increase has slowed down substantially in both metropo-
litan areas (from 37.1Z for the period 1961-1971 to 18.8Z for 1971-1981
for Athens, and from 46.4Z to 20.9Z for Thessaloniki, respectively).

This slowdown process was not mainly the.result of redistribution
policies implemented by the Greek government, although.$ome policies espe-
cially through tax incentives to new industries established outside of the
Greater Athens area, contributed to the slowdown. Congestion and environ-
mental degradation, mainly in Athens, plus the mathematics involved - mi—
gration had reached its peak point and thus a decrease was expected — are
also equally possible reasons for this slowdown.

Statistics on internal migration are gathered through a specific
question placed in the population census questionnaire referring to the
place of residence 5 years before.the date of the census. Cross tabula—
tions of various demographic variables of those persons with a dif-
ferent place of residence provide useful information about who is migrat-
ing. Of course the lack of information about the reasons for their

migration greatly impede the full analysis of the phenomenon, since part

50

of the movers had no choice other than to move, e.g. public officials,
army officers, e.t.c.

Looking at the data provided by the 1971 census and using the
rural-urban dichotomy for both the place of origin and destination,'one
can easily note that each of the four streams (rural to urban, rural to
rural, urban to rural and urban to urban) was present. Of course, the
dominant stream was the rural to urban migration. Unfortunately the
available data provide information on the number of in and out migrants
of rural and urban areas without any reference to the place of origin
and destination of those migrants. Thus, during the five year period
preceeding the 1971 census, 144,300 people moved to rural areas from
other rural, semi-urban, and urban areas and at the same time 392,840
people left the rural areas for an unspecified destination. As a result
rural areas lost nearly a quarter of a million of their population. It is
interesting to note that in and out-migrants had almost the same age
composition, with the exception of the group 15 to 24 years of age, which
was greater among out—migrants than in—migrants (see Table 32). Similarly
the age composition among the net migrants of rural and urban areas gives
evidence to support the argument that those who left rural areas were
[settled in the urban centers (Table 33). Also the sex composition of net

migrants of rural and urban areas (Table 34) was similar.

51

Table 31. Population of the Greater Athens and Thessaloniki Metropolitan

areas and percentage increase during the last five censuses.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Census Greater Athens (Greater Thessaloniki Total Greece
Year Number intercensus Number .Tntercensgs Number Intercensus
a. increase(Z).. increase(Z) A increase(4)

1940 1,124,109 278,145 7,344,860

22.6 8.8 3.9
1951 1,378,586 302,635 7,632,801

34.4 25.8 9.9
1961 1,852,709 ' 380,648 8,388,553

37.1 46.4 4.5
1971 2,540,241 557,360 (1) 8,768,641,

18.8 20.9 (2) 10.7
1981 3,017,806 ,* 9,707,000

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece, 1968, and 1978 and Intercom,
vol. 9, No 6, p. 6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(1) For the entire Prefecture of Thessaloniki and not only for the
Greater Thessaloniki Metropolitan area.
(2) Preliminary results of the 1981 census reported in "Intercom"
(*) Data were not available
Table 32. Household members migrating to and from rural areas, after 1965,
y age .
In-migrants Out-migrants Net .migration
Age groups
Number Z Number Z Number Z
5 - 14 23,160 16.0 74,220 18.9 - 51,060 20.5
15 - 24 35,020. 24.3 121,420 30.9 - 86,400 34.8
25 - 34 37,000 25.6 72,260 18.4 - 35,260 14.2
35 - 44 20,360 14.1 52,340 13.3 - 31,980 12.9
45 - 64 19,400 13.5 48,340 12.3 - 28,940 11.6
65+ 9,360 6.5 x 24,260 6.2 + 14,900 6.0
Total 144,300 100.0 392,840 100.0 -248,540 100.0

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1978, p. 37

(l)

5Z sample elaboration of the 1971 census questionnaires

Table 33. Comparison of net rural and urban migration after 1965, by age

52

 

 

 

 

 

R u r-a l 7A.r e a s U r b a n A r e a.s
Age groups

Neu m b e r Z N u m b e r Z
5 - 14 - 51,060 20.5 45,460 17.2
15 - 24 - 86,400 34.8 100,640 38.2
25 - 34 - 35,260 14.2 34,400 13.1
35 - 44 - 31,980 12.9 34,340 13.0
45 - 64 — 28,940 11.6 31,940 12.1
65+ - 14,900 6.0 16,840 6.4
Total -248,540 100.0. . 263,620 100.0

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical Yearbook of Greece 1978, p. 37

(1)

sample elaboration of the 1971 census questionnaires.

 

 

 

 

 

Table 34. Comparison of in-, nut-, d net migrants of rural and urban
areas after 1965, by sex(T?. ‘
R u r a l A r e a s U r b a n r e a s
Sex
N u m b e r Z N u m b e r Z
In-migrants
Males 67,100 46.5 255,680 49.1
Females 77,200 53.5 266,200 50.9
Both sexes 144,300 100.0 521,880 100.0
Out-migrants
Males 182,020 46.3 134,140 51.9
Females 210,820 53.7 124,120 48.1
Both sexes 392,840 100.0 258,260 100.0
Net migrants _
Males -114,920 46.2 121,540 46.1
Females -113,620 53.8 142,080 53.9
Both sexes -248,540 100.0 263,620 100.0

 

 

 

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Statistical

(1)

Yearbook of Greece 1978, p. 37

5Z sample elaboration of the 1971 census questionnaires

(l)

53

2. Fertility

2.1 Marriage Rates
Marriage rates for the twenty year period, 1956 to 1975 presented
in Table 35 seems to be relatively stable and almost equal for urban and

(1)

rural areas of the country. The division of the entire period into two
equal sub-periods and the calculation of average marriage rates for the
two areas revealed a slight increase in the average marriage rates for
urban areas (from 8.0 in period 1956 to 1965 increased to 8.2 in 1966 to
1975) and a major drop for rural areas (from 8.7 in the period 1956 to
1965 to 8.0 in the period 1966 to 1975). This fact is further evidence

of the rural to urban migration that removed young unmarried people from
rural areas. Of course part of this trend may be attributed to the fact
that people in urban areas, due to higher divorce rates, remarry a second

or third time, which is rarely practiced in the traditional cocieties of

rural areas.

2.2 Crude Birth Rates

During the period 1956 to 1975 the crude birth rate remained
steady in urban areas, around 16 to 17 births per thousand population for
most years of the period. On the other hand, crude birth rates for the
rural population exhibited a steady decrease, dropping from about 21
births per thousand population to about 15 births. This dramatic drop of
the crude birth rate at the end of the period and of levels even lower
than the urban population birth rate (see Table 35) can be attributed

to two factors. First, a dramatic change in the fertility behavior of

 

(1) Settlements with up to 9,999 inhabitants

'54

the rural population and/or a substantial decrease in the proportion of
the population of childbearing ages (15 to 49 years) in the rural areas
of the country. The fact that the decrease was so rapid and in such a
short time (20 years) combined with the fact that the birth rate dropped
even below that of urban population, cast doubts on accepting the first

explanation.

2.3 Total Fertility Rates

Calculation of the total fertility rate, which is a more refined
measure, as it takes into account not the total population but only
women of childbearing ages, 15 to 49 years, revealed that there was no
change in the fertility behavior of the rural women during the period
examined. Data on total fertility rates presented in Table 36 show that
rural women had a consistently higher total fertility rate throughout
the entire-period than urban women. On the other hand, total fertility
rates for urban women climbed steadily during the first half of the.
period examined (from 1956 to 1967) and then remained almost at the same
level throughout the rest of the period. This trend provides strong evi—
dence of how the rural to urban migration of people of young ages affect-
ed the fertility rates of the urban centers - the period of increasing
fertility rates in urban areas coincides with the period of heavy rural
to urban migration - and how strongly the growth potential was affected
in the rural areas.

It also provides another very useful insight for population poli-
cy consideration for a country like Greece which would like to increase
its population growth which has approached the zero level. If policy

makers want to increase the rate of growth of the Greek population, the

55
best way to do so is by keeping the population in the rural areas of the
1
country( ). Not through compulsory measures, of course, but through

policy measures that will provide job Opportunities and better living

conditions for the-rural population.

2.4 Illegitimate Births

The illegitimacy ratio, that is the number of illegitimate live
births per 1,000 total live births, revealed a slight decrease through—
out the entire period in rural areas (9.2 in 1956 as compared to 8.6 in
1978) and a more rapid decrease in urban areas (24.1 in 1956 as compared
to 16.4 in 1978), as it is shown in Table 37. This lower ratio of ille—
gitimate births in rural areas over the urban areas cannot be attributed
entirely to stronger puritanical sexual mores that persist in the rural
areas of the country. It is probable, that part of these births_ go
unregistered as such, especially in the rural areas of the country (NSSG.,
and Valaoras; 1980:39). The social stigma attached to illegitimacy of
parenhood within the Greek society and especially within the rural socie-
ty, is forcing the parents either to marry and declare the previously
born child as legitimate or, in case marriage could not take place, the
unfortunate young mother has to give her child through illegal procedures
to a married'and.childless couple that declares it as their own and thus

avoids the long and tedious procedure of legalized adoption.

 

(1) Of course this does not imply that the same results can be accomplish«
ed by redirecting part of the urban population in the rural areas of
the'country.

56

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 35. Marriage rates, birth rates, and stillbirth ratios in urban
and rural areas<1> during the period 1956 — 1975
Year Marriage rate Birth rate Stillbirths
Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural
1956 6.2 7.4 20.5 19.5 19.6 8.0
1957 8.2 8. 16.5 21.1 21.9 7.6
1958 7.7 16.3 21.0 22.7 8.5
1959 8.6 16.5 21.6 21.8 8.9
1960 6.2 7.6 15.9 21.2 23.1 9.6
1961 8.5 8.4 16.1 19.5 21.1 9.4
1962 8.2 8.6 16.4 19.4 20.4 10.5
1963 9.2 9.2 16.6 18.3 19.3 11.6
1964 8.8 9.0 17.4 18.3 21.6 11.4
1965 8.4 9.5 17.5 17.8 20.2 11.9
1966 8.1 8.5 18.3 17.6 19.6 12.7
1967 9.8 9.1 19.1 18.5 17.5 12.5
1968 7.4 7.7 18.5 18.4 16.0 12.0
1969 8.4 8.2 17.7 17.5 16.1 12.8
1970 7.6 7.7 17.0 15.8 14.9 11.4
1971 8.5 8.1 16.6 15.3 14.7 12.3
1972 6.8 6.8 16.8 14.9 13.6 11.8
1973 8.6 7.9 16.3 14.4 12.8 11.7
1974 7.8 7.4 16.9 15.0 12.9 11.2
1975 8.7 8.3 16.6 ' 14.8 12.4 10.9

 

(1)

Century, Athens 1980, p. 35, Table 14.

Settlements with up to 9,999 inhabitants

SOURCE: NSSG, The Population of Greece in the Second Half of the 20th

57

Table 36. Total fertility rate among the urban and rural(l) population,

during the period 1956 - 1975.

 

 

. T o t a.lf F e r t i l i,t y , R a t e(2)

 

 

Year , . H . , . ., ,
.Urban .. .Rural, . .Difference

1956 ’ 1,754 2,883 1,129
1957 1,762 2,778 1,016
1958 1,737 2,740 1,003
1959 1,769 2,817 1,048
1960 1,718 2,779 1,061
1961 1,756 2,590 834
1962 1,828 2,621 793
1963 1,893 2,534 641
1964 2,022 2,612 590
1965 2,045 2,568 523
1966 2,172 2,608 436
.1967 2,323 2,821 498
1968 2,292 2,901 609
1969 2,211 2,845 634
1970 2,136 2,628 492
1971 2,088 2,618 530
1972 2,123 2,640 517
1973 2,071 2,664 593
1974 2,155 2,268 113
1975 2,104 2,948 844

 

SOURCE: Same as Table 35
(1) See Table 35
(2) Per 1,000 women

 

58

Table 37. Sex ratio of legitimate and illegitimate births and illegiti-
macy ratio in rural and urban areas during the period

1956 - 1978.

 

 

"Sex ratio of births:. Illegitimacy ratio

 

Year Legitimate.births Illegitimate births

 

 

Urban

 

 

Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural
1956 108.0 107.9 106.5 111.1 9.2 24.1
1957 107.8 106.7 106.0 100.7 9. 25.2
1958 109.7 105.5 98.7 103.3 8. 21.5
1959 109.0 105.1 113.7 93.8 8.1 20.7
1960 106.9 107.6 109.0 104.1 7.7 19.5
1961 108.0 107.1 114.5 113.7 7.4 19.2
1962 105.7 106.7 103.2 99.2 7.2 17.4
1963 107.0 106.6 124.2 103.3 7.6 17.5
1964 106.5 106.1 127.1 116.6 7.0 15.7
1965 106.7 107.7 98.0 122.3 6.2 15.1
1966 107.8 107.3 105.7 109.1 5.9 13.4
1967 105.8 107.5 103.8 113.7 6.0 113.3
1968 105.8 106.1 105.9 107.7 6.9 14.8
1969 108.1 106.1 102.7 103.9 6.5 15.2
1970 105.5 108.6 119.4 107.2 6.8 14.1
1971 107.6 106.0 110.8 108.2 7.0 15.4
1972 106.4 106.1 108.6 108.8 6.5 15.3
1973 107k8 107.9 96.5 99.9 6.6 16.7
1974 107.6 106.3 102.8 109.4 6.8 15.4
1975 107.1 106.1 94.2 108.0 7.4 16.2
1976 109.1 106.7 129.3 101.0 6.6 16.2
1977 107.5 104.5 86.9 116.5 7.0 16.4
1978 107.0 .108.3, 790.8 103.1 8.6 ..16.4
-All,'years 107.41 106.7 “1075.1 , 106.81

 

 

SOURCE:NSSG., Vital.Statistics of Greece, 1956-1978 and calculations by
the author.

(*) The irregularity of the annual sex ratios is probably the result of
the small number of illegitimate biths.

Table 38.

59

Percentages of live births by the person who was responsible

for the delivery in rural and urban areas. Selected Years.

 

 

Year Physician

Midwife and Nurse

Other PerSon

Not declared

 

1956
1957
1958

1966
1967
1968

1975
1976
1977
1978

. 1956

1957-

1958

1966
1967
1968

1975
1976

1977

1978

19.4
21.0
23.6

47.7
49.5
52.5

70.7
73.5
77.6
79.3

67.2
70.2
73.3

92.6
93.3
94.1

97.4
97.6
98.0
98.2

Rural areas

 

40

35

22.1
.4
2
1

20

18.
17.

.0
39.
39.

8
7

.2
34.
33.

2

...a

37.
36.

34.4

17.

16.3

14.

Urban areas

 

30.
27.
24.

6.

U!

H H N N
o . o o .
\l a) 1" b.)

0
2
1

NW

@150“

4..\

ONNr—IN

O'\

HNNW

3.5
3.2
2.3

.01
.002
.003

0000

0"

.01
.01
.006
.004

 

SOURCE:

See Table 37

60

Table 39. Live births by place of permanent residence of the mother and

place of birth. Selected years.

 

 

 

Year Urban areas - Semi-urban areas Rural ~areas All areas(l)
(a) 52,791 22,134 83,174 158,099
1956 (b) 65,986 20,708 71,509 158,203
(a) 54,277 21,504 80,127 155,908
1957 (b) 67,208 20,668 68,064 155,940
(a) 75,132 19,184 60,200 -154,516
1966 (b) 106,821 15,338 32,454 154,613
(a) 80,758 19,265 62,712 162,735
1967 (b) 116,487 15,299 31,053 162,839
(a) 90,940 15,268 40,272 164,480
1976 (b) 128,591 7,937 10,038 146,566
(a) 90,180 14,952 38,537 143,669
1977 (b) 129,455 7,051 7,233 143,739
(a) 92,549 15,428 38,482 146,459
1978 (b) 132,964 7,363 6,261 146,588

 

SOURCE: NSSG., Statistical Yearbook of Greece

(a) By permanent residence of the mother

(b) By place of occurence of birth

1957, 1967, 1977,and

(1) Totals are not the same because a small number of births took

place abroad and were not included in line (a).

1980

61

Table 40. Percentages of live births by place of birth, and place of

permanent residence of the mother. Selected years.

 

 

Other place and

Year Residence Hospital Other establishment - -
. A . . Not, declared

 

Rural Areas

 

 

1956 81.0 17.4 1.0 .5
1957 79.5 19.2 .7
1958 76.2 23.2 .1 .5
1966 48.0 51.5 .2
1967 44.4 55.3 .1
1968 40.4 59.3 .1 .
1975 24.3 75.6 .03 .1
1976 21.3 78.5 .02 .1
1977 15.6 84.2 .02 .1
1978 15.6 84.2 .02 .1
Urban Areas
1956 30.1 64.4 5.0 .5
1957 26.1 67.1 6.3 .5
1958 23.7 75.0 .9 .4
1966 9.6 90.3 .01 .1
1967 7.6 92.2 .1 .1
1968 6.2 93.7 .01 .1
1975 2.2 97.8 .002 .03
1976 97.9 .01 .04
1977 1.4 98.6 .003 .02
1978 1.1 98.9 .004 .03

 

and Calculations by the Author.

SOURCE: NSSG, Vital Statistics of Greece, 1956 to 1978, Athens, Greece

62

3. Mortality

3.1 Crude. Death Rates

Statistics on the crude death rates during the period 1956 to
1975 in the rural and urban.areas of the country (Table 41) reveal little
or no change for urban areas (mostly 7.5 to 7.8 deaths per thousand
population) and a substantial increase for rural areas (from 7.4 to 10.7
deaths per thousand population). Although health care is better in urban
than in rural areas, and at the same time, better in both areas than they
were even a few decades ago, quality of health care cannot explain the
difference in favor of the urban areas, for the additional reason that
the slight difference at the beginning of the examined period increased
progressively. The only possible explanation left is again the effect of
the rural to urban migration and emigration that removed, for the most
part, the young and adult population of low risk and left behind the
elderly with the high risk of death that is associated with.advanced age.
The period of increased death rates followed the massive departure of
young people from rural areas that altered their age composition in favor
of the older group (people beyond the age of 65), and thus provides

further evidence for the casual explanation of this trend.

3.2 Infant Death Rates

The way in which the quality of data can distort the conclusions
is clearly evident from the statistical data on infant death.rates pro-
vided in Table 41, with.and without correction for the undeclared infant
deaths.

Using the uncorrected data the picture that results is that while

infant death rates exhibited a slight decrease over the period 1956 to

63

1975 in urban areas, the decrease was faster and even greater in rural
areas, which at the end of the same period had lower infant.death rates
than the urban areas!. Of course this cannot be accepted as valid - it is
too good to be true - although during the period there was a substantial
improvement in child delivery practices in the rural areas where midwives
were replaced by specialized doctors and also deliveries were progressive-
ly taking place in hospitals and specialized clinics instead of in the
home. Thus, better health care was available to newborn babies during their
first period of life which is associated with high risk (see Tables 38,
39, and 40).

On the contrary, using the corrected infant death rates the pictu-
re is quite different and closer to reality, since infant death rates
were higher in rural areas than in urban areas throughout the entire
period. It is encouraging that the decrease was substantial for both areas
but there is still room for further improvement, especially in the rural
areas of the country. At the same time, although the registration of
infant deaths was almost complete in the urban areas, there are still

many things to be done in that direction in the rural areas of the country.

3.3 Life Expectancy at Birth

The fact that life tables provide an index of the level of morta-
lity by representing a summarization of a whole series of age specific
mortality rates enables their use in comparing two populations at a time
or one p0pulation over time.

Unfortunately, life tables are prepared in Greece only for the
total population. Even the late special publication of the NSSG (1980)

under the supervision of Professor Valaoras which gave many demographic

64

measures using for the first time the rural - urban distinction, did not
publish separate life tables for the rural population of the country.
Although no explanation was provided for that omission, several reasons
can be assumed (e.g. lack of completeness in the registration system in
rural areas, e.t.c.). What is important to note here is how far the ana*
lysis of various aspects of the rural population is impeded by the lack
of available data.

Of course one can easily make resonahle guesses for the rural
population using the data on the urban population bearing in mind that
infant mortality rates and infectious and parasitic diseases are higher
in rural than in urban areas. The only available life tables for the
rural population of the country are those constructed using the 1961
census data.

Using the life expectancy at birth as a measure of comparison one
can easily conclude by looking at the data provided in Table 42 that the
progress towards lowering mortality rates at early ages through better
health care was tremendous. Namely, the life expectancy at birth increased
from 45 years for males and 47.5 years for females in 1928 to 70.1 years
and 73.6 years, respectively by 1970. Similar data for the rural popula-
tion in the year 1961 shawed about a year difference in the life expect-
ancy in contrast to the urban population (66.8 years for rural males in
comparison to 68.2 for urban males and 70.1 for rural females compared to
71.5 years for urban females). The near-worldwide superiority in the life

expectancy of females over males was also present in the Greek data.

65

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 41. Death rate and uncorrected and corrected infant death rates
in urban and ruralCl) areas during the period 1956 - 1975.
Infant .death. rates
Year Death rate s , g _ .
Uncorrected Corrected
Urban Rural 1 Urban (Rural, Urban Rural
1956 7.5 7.4 27.9 46.5 46.8 58.7
1957 7.3 7.9 39.3 46.7 46.0 57.6
1958 .8 7.3 36.2 40.6 44.9 55.6
1959 7.0 7.7 37.5 42.4 44.1 54.2
1960 6.7 7.7 37.0 41.8 43.2 53.4
1961 7.4 7.9 38.2 40.9 42.9 53.2
1962 7.6 8.1 38.8 41.5 43.4 53.9
1963 7.5 8.2 37.3 40.8 40.6 51.4
1964 .7 8.5 37.3 34.6 39.2 49.0
1965 7.6 8.1 35.4 33.3 37.6 46.2
1966 7. 8.2 35.4 38.6 36.1 45.2
1967 7. 8.8 36.0 32.6 35.1 44.5
1968 7.8 9.0 36.4 32.5 34.2 43.6
1969 7.6 8.8 33.3 30.2 33.3 42.4
1970 7.6 9.3 31.2 27.8 31.8 40.6
1971 7.6 9.3 29.3 24.0 30.3 37.6
1972 7.8 9.8 31.1 22.4 29.2 35.6
1973 7.6 10.1 25.7 22.0 28.1 34.1
1974 7.5 10.0 25.3 22.0 27.3 33.0
1975 7.6 10.7 26.0 20.1 26.8 32.1

 

SOURCE: Same as Table 35

(1) Settlements with up to 9,999 inhabitants

66

Table 42. Life expectancy at birth for the total population and the
rural population by sex in 1928, 1940, 1950, 1960, and 1970

 

 

 

 

 

Total Population Rural Population
Year -

Males ‘Females ' A Males Femalesl
1928 44.95' 47.46 4* 4*
1940 52.94 55.80 ** **
1950 63.44 66.65 ** **

* *

1960 67.30 70.42 66.8 70.1
1970 70.13 73.64- . v ** **

 

SOURCE: NSSG, Vital Statistics of Greece 1977, p. XLV and p. XIX

(*) For the year 1961 and both the rural and semi-urban areas. The
respective data for the urban population were: 68.2 years for

males and 71.5 years for females.

(**) No data were available

III. SUMMARY AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The preceding analysis revealed two major findings. First, demo-
graphic differences between the rural and urban areas still persist.
Second, the common denominator for most of the changes in those characte-
ristics is the heavy exodus of young people from the rural areas of the
country. In the following paragraphs an attempt is made to summarize those
changes and to pinpoint the effect on them by the migration momentum that
was at its heighth during the period studied.

The rural population is decreasing and the country as a whole
gives the impression that it is turning into an urban nation. On the
other hand, it still remains an overwhelmingly rural country if you consi-
der each of its geographic regions, with the exception of the two geogra-
phic regions that include the two and the only two, great metropolitan
areas of the country, Athens and Thessaloniki. Thus, the country is be-
coming more and more polarized, with two urban centers having all the
problems of the megalopolis (congestion, environmental deterioration etc).
Furthermore these areas absorb vast amounts of resources in trying to
ameliorate those problems, and the rest of the country, on the other hand,
with their small communities struggle to retain their population and
depend for resources upon the charity of the authorities in the capital.

Household size became progressively smaller throughout the period
studied due to the effect of three factors; The migration of some of its

members, the separation of new couples from their immediate parents

67

68

through the availability of greater opportunities to establish their
own separate households. even within the same village, and the changing
attitudes towards family size that now favor a smaller number of off-
springs. Although the rural family became smaller in size, it is still
larger than the urban family since urban values and attitudes towards
fertility have not been fully assimilated by the rural population.

The changes in the age composition of the rural population pin-
pointed very clearly the enormous consequences of the huge rural exodus.
The few adults that were left behind are struggling to support greater
numbers of dependents (young and old). By 1971 every 10 rural adults had
to support 7 dependents as compared to only 5 in urban areas. The burden
becomes even greater if one takes into account the income differentials
that discriminate heavily against the rural population.

The sex ratio was also distorted in the rural population through—
out the period 1951 - 1971, especially in the productive ages, 15 to 64,
as a result of the selective process of migration that removed more males
than females from the rural areas.

Statistics on education and illiteracy showed a great improve-
ment in the education of the rural people but still many things have to
be done in rural areas and mainly towards providing the conditions that
are necessary to keep educated people in local areas. The difference in
the rates of university graduates in rural and urban areas has been
widened (from 25.2 persons every 1000 population in 1961 to 35.4 in
1971); also 21.3Z of the illiterate population 'lives in rural areas as
compared to 9.0Z for the urban areas.

Crude birth rates for the rural population exhibited a steady “

decrease throughout the period 1956 - 1975, dropping from about 21 births

69

per thousand population to about 15 births, while urban rates remained
steady, around 16 to 17 births per thousand population. The fact that
this rapid drop in birth rates in the rural areas, even.to levels lower
than the urban areas, was caused by the heavy rural exodus that was main-
ly composed of young adults in the reproductive ages and not by changes
in the fertility patterns, was evidenced by the calculation of the total
fertility rates. This refined measure revealed that rural women are still
having more births (about one more) throughout their reproductive ages
than urban women do. This finding also emphasizes that if the population
growth of the country has to be enhanced - as some voices have pointed
out - this would be done more easily and more securely through policy
measures that build within the rural population.rather than the urban
population.

The fast drop of birth rates in rural areas was accompanied, as
expected, by an equal increase in the death rates, as a result of the
heavy rural exodus that left behind the very young and the elderly.
Hundreds of villages and even entire areas are experiencing more deaths
than births and their near-complete depopulation is only a matter of a
few decades.

Fortunately, the migration streams, both internal and external,
have lost their momentum and according to the statistical data many
Greeks return to their home villages from the industrialized countries
of the Western Europe. Will they settle permanently in those areas in the
future or will they head for the two urban monsters is still an.unanswer-
ed question. At the same.time the.SIOthown in migration should not be
taken for granted. It was caused by external forces operating in the

countries of destination and was not a response to changes within the

70

country. Therefore, it is possible that new conditions can create in the
future a new migration stream while the push factors will be kept opera-
ting within the country.

Thus, the need to adopt and implement population distribution
and redistribution policies is greater than ever before. Although some
policy measures were implemented in the past, especially through tax
incentives to new industries established outside of the Greater Athens
area, they did not substantially contribute to the slow-down of rural
exodus. Lack of strong commitment, lack of long-term orientation and
lack of efficient administration were the main reasons. In addition, no
attention was paid to "hidden" policies that result from the fact that
"migration is linked to many variables" and consequently a sheer number
of programs can have a negative or positive influence on migration
(Findley, 1977:139).

,A new package of policy measures on population distribution and
redistribution is necessary to be developed after a thorough study of.
the existing migration streams (volume, direction, and structure) in
line with social and economic trends. Lack of such consideration tends

"...touch on the

to generate policies with little success since they
symptoms rather than on the roots of the ills" (Wander, 1973:361). At
the same time government officials have to follow that program.over a
long period of time. As Morrison (1973:368) pointed out "...achieving
significant changes (of the population) would require decades of sustain-
ed intervention".

Before achieving a population turnaround in Greece, rural socio-

logists have no other choice than to keep using "the gloomy language of

rural depopulation: flight from land, lack of jobs, exodus of young

.71

people, erosion of community institutions, difficulties in maintaining
a minimum level of necessary public services, and the withering of morale

in our small towns and rural hamlets" (Schwarzweller, 1979:7).

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

REFERENCES

Bernard, H. Russell, and Ashton-Vouyoucalos, Sandy. "Return Migration
1976 to Greece". Journal of the Steward Anthropological Society.
Vol. 8, No 1:31-51

 

Candilis, O. Wray. The Economy of Greece: Efforts for Stability and
1968 .Development. N. York: Frederick A. Praeger. pp. 152-167

Findley, Sally. Planninggfor Internal Migration: A Review of Issues
1977 and Policies in Developing Countries. Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office.

 

 

 

Lewis, J.G. Rural Communities. London: David and Charles (Publishers)
1979 Limited.

Morrison, A. Peter. "A Demographic Assessment of New Cities and Growth
1973 Centers as Population Redistribution Strategies". Public
Policy 21(summer):367-382.

 

.' Mouzelis, P. Nicos. Modern Greece: Facets of Underdevelopment.N. York:

1978 Holmes and Meier Publishers, Inc.

National Satistical Service of Greece. Statistical Yearbook of Greece:
1955-1980. Athens: Government Printing Office

Vital Statistics of Greece: 1956 - 1978. Athens: Govern-
ment Printing Office.

 

, and Valaoras, V. The population of Greece in the Second
Half of the 20th Century. Athens: Government Printing
Office.

 

1980

Panhellenic Confederation of Unions of Agricultural Cooperatives.
1978 Greek Agriculture. Athens. (in Greek, English, and French).

Population Reference Bureau. "Greek Census: 9.7 Million Now". In
1981 Intercom. Vol. 9. No. 6.

Schwarzweller, Harry K. "Migration and the Changing Rural Scene".
1979 Rural Sociology. 44(1): 7-23.

SthOCk, 3- Henry, and Siegel, Jacob S., and Associates. The Methods
1976 and Materials of Demography. N. York: Academic Press.

Weller, H‘ Robert, and BOUVier, Leon F. Population: Demography_and
o . . r
1981 Polio . N. York. St. Martin 8 Press.

 

72

73

15. Wander, Hilde. "Population Policies Affecting Internal Migration and
Urbanization". In International Population Conference

1973 1973 (Liege, 1973); v61. 3, pp. 359-371-

James, and Brown, David L. "The Changing Character of the
1978 Nonmetropolitan Population, 1950-75- In Rural USA; Persist-
ence and Change. Ames: Iowa State University Press.

pp. 55-72.

16. Zuiches, J.