Secondly, quantitatively, the residence settlements were more numer- ous in the urban areas than in the rural ones. But, the rate of the residence settlements in the rural environment will be higher than the ones from the city, starting in 1995. In 1990, there was a big migration of the rural population to the cities. Thus, between 1st January 1990 and 1st July 1990, the city popula- tion increased with 354 000 people because of the migratory total, on the one hand, and because of the legal redesign of the residence settlement of the population, on the other hand. In the second part of 1990, there was a de- crease of the urban population, around 215 000 people (- 16.94%) because of the city people’s rejection of accepting the newcomers in such a short time. This was obviously due to the wide offer of jobs, to houses and services, as well as, the rapid growth of the living standard, the decrease of the city econ- omy and the perspective of getting property certificates **. Given the circum- stances, there was a decrease in the demographic attractiveness of the cities and even an increase in the movements from the urban area to the rural one. That was the reason for the decrease of the internal migration in the urban area which was of about 521 422 people in 1990 to 3683 people in 1996. Later on, there was a balance and a change in value, as it follows: 12 588 in 1997 and 17 998 in 1998.


THE SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE INDEX OF DEMOGRAPHIC ATTRACTIVENESS


The analysis of residence settlement in some places and of the resi-


dence movement between 1990 – 1995 emphasizes the contrasts related to the number of people involved in the spatial mobility directly connected to the demographic attractiveness specific to each district or to Bucharest.


111


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161