berlin

migration

survey

2010-11.

berlinmigrationsurvey2010-11.

berlinmigrationsurvey2010-11.

Berlin migration and its political effects on immigrant communities

Image source: http://52suburbs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/the-original-prefabricated-Plattenbauten.jpg

A project entry for Cornell University’s Europe in the World 2013 contest

Preface/Hypothesis

• For the first time since the guest worker program of the 1950s and 60s brought immigrant laborers to Germany, immigrants in Berlin today are now forced to move from the city center—which has historically been a cheaper area to live in but has now seen massive re-development—to the lesser-developed, cheaper suburbs of former East Berlin.

Project purpose• Part 1: Analyzing how internal migration patterns in Berlin

have changed from 2005 to 2010, specifically focusing on where (i.e., which particular districts) members of Berlin’s immigrant population have decided to move to.

• Part 2: Additionally, I want to see where non-immigrants have been moving—which will either support or discredit my hypothesis that there are rising amounts of non-immigrants pushing others out of traditionally “immigrant” districts of Berlin via processes of gentrification.

• This study is limited strictly to the districts of Berlin (see Figure 1) and information compiled from the Berlin Amt für Statistik.

Figure 1

Historical context

• A 2005 microcensus survey revealed that, out of 85 million inhabitants in Germany, 15 million of them are “immigrants.”

• This is partly because due to the high influx of migrant labor that came to Germany from countries such as Italy, Turkey, and Greece in the 1960s and 70s.

• Many immigrants that moved specifically to Berlin resided in Kreuzberg, Mitte and Neukölln, 3 districts that still have relatively cheaper rent costs than in other places of the city. (See Figure 2)

berlinmigrationsurvey2010-11.

Figure 2

“Urban re-shuffling”• Things are now changing, however. Many upper-class, native German groups have

recently re-established their boundaries in Berlin (contrary to other major cities such as Paris and New York) in the form of small “ghettos” of the wealthy that suddenly appear in the middle of the city, in the form of upscale developments with pleasant names such as “Prenzlauer Gardens,” “Chestnut Gardens” or “Choriner Courtyards” (located, according to the urban sociologist Wolfgang Kaschuba, “at the center of a working and living space for an intellectual elite”).

• At the same time this urban “reshuffling” is being done by the German wealthy elite, Turks began to develop their own community infrastructure in Berlin and Kreuzberg, especially in the 1990s: community organizations were founded, mosques were built, and local methods of political participation (i.e., protests and labor strikes) became a commonplace practice for many of Berlin’s Turkish and Arabic immigrant spaces. This is how populations were distributed and formed in a city such as Berlin, which unlike its European neighbor Paris, kept the majority of its immigrant population concentrated in central districts such as Mitte, Friedrichshain-Kreuzberg, Neukölln, and Tempelhof-Schoeneberg (again, see Figure 2).

Is migration to the suburbs of Berlin strictly an immigrant phenomenon?

• As seen in Figures 3 and 4, however, it appears that both immigrants and non-immigrants are moving to the suburbs—the total net migration of all Berliners in 2010 saw flight from central districts as opposed to migration towards them—this perhaps indicates that gentrification and rising population levels are affecting everyone, not just immigrants per se.

• Net gains in Reinekendorf and Marzahn-Hellersdorf (both historically industrial and lower-income districts) indicates that everyone, not just immigrants, is looking to move to the outskirts of the city that remains the cheapest.

Figure 3

Figure 4

Which suburbs are growing more rapidly than others in terms of immigrant net migration gains?

• Wealthier suburban districts in former West Berlin such as Spandau and Steglitz-Zehlendorf also saw gains in total migration, though the same cannot be said once one compares Figure 3 to the immigrant net migration map in Figure 4; here, one can observe that immigrant net gains in internal migration have shifted from the former West to the former East, where rent prices are much cheaper.

• This falls more in line with the hypothesis presented at the beginning of this project, which is that while everyone is moving to the suburbs in Berlin, immigrants are statistically moving to “poorer” districts more frequently as opposed to “richer” ones.

berlinmigrationsurvey2010-11.

Image source: http://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large/berlin-skyline-ii-alexander-voss.jpg

what does this mean politically?

“Slums of the 21st century”• The urban sociologist Hartmut Häussermann, who once said that

“the slums of the 21st century are threatening to form on Berlin's outskirts,” authored a study called “Monitoring Social City Development 2010” for Berlin’s city government. His study describes these peripheral suburbs in former East Germany as “areas with a low development index” and a high “concentration of social problems.” Not much more is said in this report to address these said “problem districts.”

• If the city planning department in Berlin truly wishes to improve the economic standing of its city and reduce segregation, the question that should be posed is whether they are able to keep internal migration within the city at a pace that ensures immigrants and Germans are living amongst one another, not in separated “parallel” societies.

Sources

• “Wanderungen in Land Berlin (Migration in Berlin).” Berlin Consul for Statistics. Potsdam, 2011. Accessed from: < http://www.statistik-berlin-brandenburg.de/Publikationen/Stat_Berichte/2012/SB_A03-02-00_2011j01_BE.xls>.

• • Wensierski, Peter. “Berlin Fears Rise of New Slums.” In

Der Spiegel. March 2, 2011. Accessed from: < http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/gentrification-s-victims-berlin-fears-rise-of-new-slums-a-748532-3.html>.