Page 33 - IJPS-7-1

Miladinov

decline after that date (Yüksel, 2015). During that period, the population pyramid of Türkiye will turn to a “pillar” shape
and will look like the population pyramids in developed countries (Yüksel, 2015, p.24). According to Kröhnert (2010)
and based on the National Institute of Statistics and the UN, the Turkish population will continue to grow until 2050 due
to its age structure. Hence, the National Institute for Statistics in Türkiye predicted a total population of 95.0 million
for 2050, and the UN predicted as much as 97.3 million. In addition to the above, using the “Address Based Population
Registration System” registers and the Central Civil Registration System and cohort-component method in projections,
where the components are births, deaths and migration, Canpolat-Bese, Ucar, and Karakaya-Dogu (2013), showed that the
POPG rate will decrease by 2023 in Türkiye according to Türkiye’s projections as a whole. Based on these projections, the
POPG rate in Türkiye would reach very low levels by the next century and could reach zero during that time, and possibly
even reach negative values. Given the results of these projections, Canpolat-Bese, Ucar, and Karakaya-Dogu (2013) are
pessimistic that the dream of “Turkey of 100 million population size” will ever come true. It is proper here to note also
the forecasting by Ergöçmen and Özdemir (2005). They predict that in the next 15 years, the number of children aged
0 – 14 will stabilize, and the size of the working (productive) population, aged 20 – 54, will almost double. Therefore,
as a consequence of changes in the fertility rate and mortality, the population age structures will begin the process of
rapid ageing. In addition, Ergöçmen and Özdemir (2005) predict that the number of elderly people will increase from
3.6 million in 2005 to 10 million in 2030 and 15 million in 2050. Hence, the “demographic window of opportunities” in
Türkiye is expected to lead to significant changes not only in social and economic development trends but also in vital
rates and population structure.
What is very interesting to know for Türkiye as noted by Ergöçmen and Özdemir (2005) is that the changes in population
trends were not identical, that is, uniform all over the country. Despite the observed convergence in the past, there are still
significant differences in demographic trends and population structures between urban and rural communities and in the
geographical regions of Türkiye. Internal and international migrations are two other very important demographic issues
for Türkiye (Ergöçmen and Özdemir, 2005). With regard to internal migration, Western Türkiye in general and Istanbul in
particular are recipient regions, while the Black Sea region and eastern parts of Anatolia are sending regions. In the past,
the direction and size of emigration from Türkiye have been linked to foreign labor requirements. For example, during
the 1960s, some 810.000 people migrated from Türkiye to European countries, especially Germany, to meet the labor
demands of some European countries. That number dropped to 105.000 during 1975 – 1980 as these countries began to
restrict their immigration policies. Here, it is worth noting that migration plays an important role in supplementing or
counteracting fertility in population replacement in some Turkish regions. In the long run, most regions in Türkiye have
a combination of fertility and internal migration that hinders significant population decline. In Istanbul, East Marmara
and West Anatolia – despite the relatively low TFR, especially in the first two regions, net migration is so positive that
combined reproduction in these regions reaches around 2.5 or even higher (Ediev and Yüceşahin, 2016). Combined
reproduction is a composite product of the original TFR in the population of interest and of the migratory fertility. Thus,
it enables dynamic POPG in those three regions, by about 25 – 50% every 30 years. Alternatively, in Northeast Anatolia,
Central East Anatolia, and Southeast Anatolia, combined reproduction also reaches 2.5 – 3.0; so far in these regions, the
combined reproduction continues to be so high due to the high TFR despite the noticeable out migration. These three
regions are known as high POPG regions and as stable suppliers of migrants for other regions in Türkiye. The Kurdish
community of Türkiye represents at least 18% of the country’s overall population and it dominates the southeastern region
of the country and has a high birth rate (Gönder, 2017). Due to the unequal economic and socioeconomic development of
the country, considerable regional disparities in the population development are present in Türkiye. This generates social
disruptions, because the highest POPG and the largest share of the younger population are found precisely in the agrarian,
economically underdeveloped provinces in East Türkiye (Kröhnert, 2010).
Accordingly, it may be said that the migration has a capacity as a demographic stabilizer mostly in the western and
eastern provinces in Türkiye. Ediev and Yüceşahin (2016) point out that recent estimate of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees shows that there are currently more than 2 million Syrian refugees in Türkiye. Assuming
the permanent residence of the majority of Syrians in the country, it can be predicted that the population dynamics of the
Syrians is likely to have an impact on the population change in Türkiye and its models of reproduction in the near future.
Hence, for instance, Gönder (2017) notices that after Türkiye opened its door to Syrian refugees, TFR increased to 2.14
in 2015 compared with 2011 when its level was 2.05. Gönder (2017) notes that the fertility rate has increased in recent
years, despite the fact that the Turkish population has not increased. The influx of more than 2 million refugees can have
a significant demographic impact both nationally and for the particularly affected regions (Ediev and Yüceşahin, 2016,
p.391). Figure 1 shows the POPG rate, TFR, crude mortality rate (CMR), and net migration rate (NMR) in Türkiye for
the period 1965 – 2021.

International Journal of Population Studies | 2021, Volume 7, Issue 1 27