Immigration is proving to be a hot topic in the run up to EU parliamentary elections. While the focus has been on immigration’s cultural and social effects, changes in immigration policy could also impact future population numbers across Europe. This has consequences for citizens, the environment and ecosystems.
by Philip Cafaro
According to the European Union’s statistical bureau, 5.1 million people immigrated into the EU in 2022 (the last year for which full statistics are available). That represented a 117% increase over 2021. Meanwhile, approximately 1 million people left EU member states for other nations, resulting in net immigration of 4.1 million. Despite a short-lived decrease after the public outcry in 2015 and another decrease due to COVID in 2020, EU immigration numbers have rebounded and are now the highest they have ever been.
Much of the recent increase is due to the war in Ukraine, particularly migration into eastern and central Europe. But the numbers have also been climbing rapidly for migration from the Middle East, South and East Asia, and Latin America. According to the United Nations, “In 2022, almost 3.7 million new residence permits were issued in European Union (EU) Member States – not including the influx from Ukraine – compared to 2.9 million in 2021.” Again according to Eurostat, “Germany reported the largest total number of [new] immigrants (2.1 million) in 2022, followed by Spain (1.3 million), France (0.4 million) and Italy (0.4 million).”
Mass immigration, a relatively recent phenomenon in Europe, raises pressing social questions. How willing are Europeans to accept large numbers of people from cultures without a strong commitment to human rights and gender equality? How well do those migrants integrate into European societies? Should current citizens have a right to slow migration to a pace that allows for full integration (if possible)? How do different immigration levels affect Europe’s generous economic safety nets? And what would be the fate of the EU’s natural areas, including the network of protected nature (Natura2000) if the continent becomes even more densely populated?
Despite many Europeans stated desire for less immigration, political elites generally continue to offer up more. Over the past decade, this has strengthened the vote totals for far-right parties across the EU. Although center and social democratic parties in the coming election have started to follow right-wing ones in their migration policy proposals, it is not yet clear if mainstream parties really are willing to curtail immigration. But they may be, if only to remain in power. It is speculated, for instance, that Ursula von der Leyen, the liberal conservative president of the European Commission since 2019, may need to form a coalition with right-wing parties to continue on in that role.
*
One issue that is generally neglected by both opponents and proponents of mass immigration is its demographic impact. Yet as followers of TOP’s publications are aware, immigration levels are a major factor in determining future population numbers in the EU, while future EU population numbers will be a major factor in determining greenhouse gas emissions, the success of biodiversity protection efforts, and other sustainability efforts within the EU. As a general rule, fewer people provide multiple environmental benefits. Conversely, the more of us there are the more damage we do.
For those living in the EU who are curious to know how raising or lowering current immigration levels will affect future population numbers for your country, we encourage you to visit our TOP-grapher. This graphs various levels of annual net migration for all EU countries (and the United Kingdom) and the EU as a whole, allowing visitors to see how these changes affect population numbers in future decades.
For example, Germany’s annual net migration for the twenty years prior to 2016 was about 260,000. The TOP grapher shows five multiples of this annual number: zero, 50%, 100%, 200% and 400%. At 200% (or about 520,000 annual net migration) Germany’s population is projected to increase from 82 million to 113 million by 2100 (see graph). But in 2023, annual net migration was much higher, about 700,000, according to DeStatis, the German statistical office. If that level continues throughout the century, Germans can expect a population that is several tens of millions higher — with all the attendant environmental pressures. Conversely, decreasing or zeroing out annual net migration is likely to lead to population decline in Germany — with attendant environmental benefits.
Or consider France, where net migration reached 183,000 in 2023, the highest in years. In the two decades prior to 2016, annual net immigration to France averaged 100,000. So the 2X status quo net migration level, graphing 200,000 annual net migration, provides a fairly close approximation of where the 2023 net migration level will take France’s population in coming decades. In 2100, this scenario reaches 90 million, 33 million more people than today.
Finally, consider the European Union as a whole. The 4.1 million annual net immigration figure provided by Eurostat for 2022 is much closer to the 4X status quo net migration figure (4.75 million) than the 2X status quo net migration figure (2.4 million) calculated in our study published five years ago. It is humorous to remember how much pushback we received from some demographers, who said the 4X scenario was much too high to ever be sustained and should not be included in the study. Well, the EU is almost there now, and some advocate more permissive regulations that would raise immigration levels even higher.
If the EU were to continue accommodating its current high level of net migration throughout the century, the EU population would approximately double by 2100. At lower immigration levels, conversely, there are paths to gradual population decline. These differences of hundreds of millions of people more or less in 2100, a mere three generations in the future, will obviously make a big difference in Europeans’ ecological footprint and in their ability to create sustainable societies.
Leave a Reply