The decline is large, even very large, in many ethnic groups. For Hungarians, the decline is almost universal. There is an impressive increase in the number of Roma by almost 27 percent. The size of the decline in the number of ethnic Turks is surprising.

1 Structure affected by non-registration

The article is the third and last of those devoted to the presentation of population structures by educational characteristics, level of completed education, demographic characteristics, marital status and ethno-cultural characteristics, ethnicity. The presentations tracked regional differences by county, using data from the second and final series of preliminary results released by the National Institute for Statistics on January 31.

Knowledge about the ethnic structure of the permanent population cannot be deepened, and its relevance is affected by the huge number of residents whose ethnicity is unknown – 2.5 million, that is, at least 13 percent of the country’s population. In an article published on January 13, I pointed out that the census questionnaire did not have this option unannounced to ethnicity and native language was the decision of the Department of International Relations (according to LAW No. 178 of August 18, 2020). This government body has an obligation to the 1.6 million residents who have been screened but denied the right to withhold their ethnicity and native language to justify the lack of opportunity unannounced in the census questionnaire, in the spirit of transparency in the governing act. The number of Peruvian women who do not want to declare their ethnicity, mother tongue and religion was expected to rise during the 2021 census in a deeply divided society with political parties based on ethnic criteria and a press that often lacks a sense of moderation and balance in Europe, where ethnic strife still exists, and in a world where conspiracy theories have exploded during the Covid-19 pandemic. We live in a society where we do not know the number of people who did not declare their ethnicity, mother tongue and religion in the 2022 national census. And this is the second census in a row in which we do not know these structures, which are so important in the life of society.

2. Geography of ethnic groups

With the help of these signs, the question of changes occurring in the structure of the population by ethnicity can be considered from a double point of view: both the entire permanent population of the country and the population whose ethnicity is known (including the population with a different ethnicity). According to the first criterion, Romanians make up 78 percent of the permanent population (1,905,3815 inhabitants), Hungarians – 5.3 and Roma – 3 percent. Other ethnicities, equally important and representative of the entire ethnic architecture of the country’s population, have shares below 1 percent. It is recognized that among the 2.5 million inhabitants with unknown ethnicity, a constant share belongs to Romanians, if we look at the number and large share of the unrevised population in the capital and in some counties with municipalities with large and very large populations. Compared with the known ethnicity of the population alone, the three ethnic groups have proportions of 89 percent, 6.1 percent, and 3.4 percent, proportions closer to the actual proportions in the entire population. The two types of proportions may cover different needs or demands depending on the purpose of approaches to the ethnic structure of the population.

It is better to graphically express numerous statistical data, rather than large tables, even if this can sometimes cause discomfort. Figure 1 provides the reader with a comparative overview of the distribution of the three most important ethnic groups by district. In most counties (26), the share of Romanians exceeds 80 percent of the permanent population, reaching the highest values ​​- 89 percent, in the county in the northeast of the country, Botosani, and in the county in the southwest of the country, in the north of Oltenia, Gorzh. In the capital, Romanians make up 73 percent of the population. Values ​​below 50 percent are in three districts – Mures-49, Covasna-21 and Harghita-12 percent. The last two counties are dominated by Hungarians with 80 and 67 percent of the population. They are followed by the counties of Mures, Satu Mare, Bihor and Salaj with 32, 28, 20 and 19 percent. In most districts of the country, registered shares are below 1 percent. The number of Roma is underestimated in the census data. The motivations can be the organization of reviews in settlements/districts with important Roma communities, the quality of work of reviewers, refusal to accept a reviewer, non-declaration or declaration of another ethnicity, emigration to other European countries. Roma make up 9 percent of the population of Mures County, the highest proportion. In more than half of the districts, this share is less than 3 percent, in the capital it is only slightly less than 1 percent.

It is not without interest to look at the countries where the majority of representatives of other nationalities live:

– Ukrainians (45.8 thousand): Arad, Botosani, Karash-Severin, Maramures, Satu-Mare, Timis, Suceava.

– Germans (22.9 thousand): Arad, Brasov, Karash-Severin, Satu-Mare, Sibiu, Timis.

– Turks (20.9 thousand): Constanta, Tulcea, Bucharest, Ilfov.

– Rusi-Lipoveni (19.4 thousand): Botosani, Braila, Constanta, Iasi, Suceava, Tulcea, Bucharest.

– Tatars (18.2 thousand): Constanta.

– Serbs (12 thousand): Karash-Severin, Mehedinci, Timis.

– Bulgarians (6 thousand): Dambovitsa, Timis.

– Croats (4.8 thousand): Karash-Severin.

– Italians (4 thousand): Ilfov, Bucharest, Timis, Brasov.

– Poles (2.1 thousand): Suceava.

– Czechs (1.6 thousand): Karash-Severyn, Mehedyntsi, Timis.

– Armenians (1.2 thousand): Constanta, Bucharest.

– Macedonians (1.1 thousand): Dolj, Timis, Bucharest.

3. Recession 2011-2021

With a regression in the permanent population of more than 1 million residents compared to the 2011 census, regression was expected to be found in all ethnic groups. The hypothesis is confirmed, with the exception of Italians and, on a small scale, those included in other ethnic groups (Fig. 2). It should be recognized that a significant share of the last heterogeneous group consists of ethnic groups from other countries of the European Union who, for various reasons, settled in our country after 1989. There remains the question of the ethnic affiliation of many Moldovans who received Romanian citizenship.

The decline is large, even very large, in many ethnic groups. The size of the regression of ethnic Turks, a population with a higher birth rate, is surprising. These ethnic groups also include Turkish citizens who settled in Romania after 1989, doing business, the increase in their number compared to the 2011 census is statistically significant, especially in the capital and in Ilfov County. However, this could not compensate for the significant decrease in the two counties that have historically been home to this minority, the counties of Konstanz (decrease of 8,200 people) and Tulcea (decrease of 2,400 people).

Without other data at this stage of knowing the results of the census, especially regarding the age structure of ethnic groups and the degree of aging of the population, about birth rates by ethnic groups, without data on external migration by ethnic groups, and also without knowing the ethnic structure of 2.5 million residents without known or of undeclared ethnicity, identification of causal factors and mechanisms of differentiated decline remains only a wish.

Examining the changes in county population for the three main ethnic groups, with coverage in all counties, compared to the previous census, in Figure 3, the decrease clearly dominates for all three ethnic groups and especially for Romanians and Hungarians.

Ilfov County has registered an impressive increase of 26 percent of Romanians in just 10 years, which continues the old developments and is likely to continue as real estate expansion in the county is in full swing and the population of the capital city offers significant potential for (only) housing in the surrounding communes and cities The minimum increase was recorded only in Bistrytsia-Neseud County, where there are only 308(!) residents of Romanian nationality. The capital lost almost a quarter of its permanent population (23 percent), followed by the districts of Karash-Severin – 20, Mehedyntsi – 19, Teleorman, Hunedoara and Braila – 18 percent. Figure 3 shows the entire process of decreasing the number of Romanian residents over 10 years.

In the case of the capital and Ilfov district, clarification is needed. The number of permanent residents in the Ilfov district increased by almost 40 percent compared to the previous census. The explosion of real estate in the suburbs of the capital meant and means the residence in the district of a very large number of Bucharest residents who, however, did not leave their homes in Bucharest to take advantage of the workplace, education, health care, numerous other services and opportunities. Here are two numbers that may be important: compared to the 2011 census, the permanent population of Ilfov County increased by 154,000 residents, while the population of the capital decreased by 166,000 residents.

And for Hungarians, the decline is almost universal, in particular in counties with a very important and important representation of the ethnic group – Harghita, Covasna, Satu Mare, Mures, Bihor, Salai. A regression of more than 50 percent is observed in 8 districts in the south of the country: Karash-Severyn, Dambovitsa, Prahova, Dolj, Arjesh, Kalerash (60 percent), Vilcha (62), and Mehedyntsi (65 percent). The graph highlights 5 counties where the number of Hungarians grew (Ilfov, Neamts, Ialomica, Teleorman and Bacau), with the number of people in the 2011 and 2021 censuses.

The decline prevails, but the picture is largely different for the Roma. The increase in the number occurred in no less than 16 districts spread across all regions of the country. We cannot know whether these increases, some impressive, are related to a more effective organization of the review in some districts and communities, the contribution of political and cultural organizations of the minority, a greater interest of the population in the review. There is a striking increase of almost 27 percent in the number of Roma in Brasov county, but also values ​​of 15-19 percent in Vilca, Mehedinci, Tulcea, Teleorman and Covasna counties. An impressive decrease occurred in the capital – 55 percent and in the counties of Ilfov – 41, Dambpvica – 31, Sibiu – 29, Hunedoara and Karash-Severin – 27 percent. Both increases and decreases are possibly related to the assumptions already mentioned. We draw attention to a minor failure in the county of Mures, a failure that did not affect the position of the county with the highest share of Roma in the permanent population at 9 percent.

4. Some recent assessments

This article concludes a series of 10 articles covering the 2021 Census, which ran from March 2022 to March 2023. The large national statistical operation was of exceptional importance in the context of the implementation of ambitious projects of economic and social development of the country from the National Recovery Program. and sustainability. The results of the census, especially the final ones, which are expected in the coming months, contain essential information about the human potential of the country at the level of localities, counties, regions, the whole country and about the living conditions of the population, a component of the standard of living in Romania at the beginning of this decade. The results of the census are a true mirror of what is good and what is not good in the country in its most important wealth – the population. It remains for governors, local and central administrations to use the results with responsibility, the foresight that the PNRR promotes and, above all, competence.

Census 2021 becomes history. It was a difficult operation in a context affected by the pandemic, in a divided society, with violent and irresponsible anti-census initiatives, disoriented and anti-census in large part in the capital and in big cities. However, the 8.9 million residents who completed the self-verification saved the census overall.

I will repeat, finally, in a modified form, the conclusion from the previous article: taking into account the dangers that lurked in it and the progress of the registration of reviewers in the Capital and in large cities, the most important thing in this census is that it happened. No census is perfect. The one from 2031 should be better, the experience of self-verification, the elimination of the shortcomings of the registration platform, new technologies for collecting and transmitting information and a higher level of skills in the use of verification tools are prerequisites for this desired Read the full article and comment on Contributors.ro