DOCSLIB.ORG

Population 1 Population

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Population 1 Population Population 1 Population comparability, population change and its two components Introduction are presented as crude rates per 1 000 inhabitants, i.e. Demographic trends vary across the EU’s regions, with relative to the size of the average population of the region certain phenomena making a stronger impact in some (see ‘Data sources and availability’). regions than in others. This chapter describes the regional The maps show how the population change varies across pattern of demographic phenomena in 2008, at NUTS 3 level regions from growth to decline (Map 1.2) due to positive or across the EU-27 and by level 3 statistical region for EFTA negative natural change (Map 1.3) and positive or negative and candidate countries. However, due to data availability net migration and statistical adjustment (Map 1.4). constraints, several demographic indicators were analysed at NUTS 2 regional level. The current demographic situation in the EU-27 confirms a trend of continuing growth, which has been unbroken since 1960. The population of the EU-27 grew by 4.1 per 1 000 inhabitants in 2008, due to a natural increase (see Main statistical findings ‘Data sources and availability’) of 1.2 per 1 000 inhabitants and net migration (1) of 2.9 per 1 000 inhabitants. Although Population size and density the population of the EU-27 as a whole increased in 2008, this population change was unevenly distributed across the On 1 January 2009, 499.7 million people inhabited the 27 Member States. In 2008, the population increased in 20 EU Member States of the European Union. The population Member States and declined in the other seven. density at EU-27 level in 2008 was estimated at 116 inhabitants per km2. The population decline was seen in most of the north- eastern and eastern and part of the south-eastern NUTS Map 1.1 shows the population density in 2008. Generally, 3 regions. The countries with regions most affected by this the NUTS 3 regions that include the capital city of the trend in 2008 were Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary, Romania, country, and in most cases the regions in their immediate Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Croatia, where the vicinity, are among the most densely populated. population declined in most of their NUTS 3 regions and The NUTS 3 region of Paris was by far the most densely outpaced the population growth observed in their other populated (21 022 inhabitants per km2), followed by Inner regions. A decline in population was also evident in the London West (10 094) and Inner London East (9 049). northern parts of Sweden, in the Finnish region of Itä-Suomi, Population densities above 5 000 per km2 were observed, in in many regions of Greece and Portugal and in several decreasing order, in the following NUTS 3 regions: Hauts- regions of Turkey. On the other hand, the population grew de-Seine (France), Bucureşti (Romania), Bruxelles-Capitale/ in Cyprus, Luxembourg and Malta, and in Montenegro, the Brussel-Hoofdstad (Belgium), Seine-Saint-Denis and Val-de- former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and, to a greater Marne (France), Melilla (Spain) and Basel-Stadt (Switzerland). extent, in Turkey. The least densely populated level 3 statistical region within In nearly all western and south-western regions of the EU, the territory covered in 2008 was Landsbyggd (Iceland) with the population increased during 2008. This is particularly 2 1.2 inhabitants per km . Within the EU-27, the least densely evident in Ireland and in almost every region of the United populated NUTS 3 region was Guyane (France) with 2.7 Kingdom, in Italy, Spain, France, including the French 2 inhabitants per km . overseas departments, and in the Spanish and Portuguese islands in the Atlantic Ocean. Positive population changes Population change in 2008 were also recorded in Austria, Switzerland, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Population change in a given reference year is the difference between the population size on 1 January of the following The picture provided by Map 1.2 can be sharpened by year and on 1 January of the given reference year. Changes analysing the two components of population change, i.e. in the size of population are the result of the number of natural change and net migration (1). births and deaths and of the number of people migrating Map 1.3 shows that, in many regions of the EU, more inward and outward. Population change therefore consists people died than were born in 2008. The resulting negative of two components: ‘natural change’ (the difference between natural population change is widespread and affects almost live births and deaths) and ‘net migration and statistical half the regions in the EU. A positive natural change in adjustment’ (see ‘Data sources and availability’). population can be identified across Ireland, the central parts Maps 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 present population change and of the United Kingdom, most regions in France, Belgium, these two components in 2008, by NUTS 3 regions. For Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Iceland, (1) Including statistical adjustments. 20 Eurostat regional yearbook 2011 eurostat Population 1 Map 1.1: Population density, by NUTS 3 regions, 2008 (1) (inhabitants per km²) 0600 km Population density, Guadeloupe (FR) Martinique (FR) by NUTS 3 regions, 2008 (1) (inhabitants per km²) EU-27 = 116 < = 50 025 020 50 - 100 100 - 150 Guyane (FR) Réunion (FR) 150 - 300 300 - 1 000 > 1 000 Data not available 0 100 020 © EuroGeographics Association, for the administrative boundaries Açores (PT) Madeira (PT) Cartography: Eurostat — GISCO, 03/2011 050 020 Canarias (ES) Malta 0 100 010 Liechtenstein Ísland 05 0100 (1(¹)) P Poopulationpulation density densit yis iscalculated calculated as asratio ra tibetweeno betwe en(annual (annual average) avera populationge) population and andsurface surf (land)ace (lan area.d) arLandea. areaLand is areaa country’s is a co totaluntry area,'s tota excludingl area, ex areacludin underg area inland unde water.r inla ndBulgaria, water. Bulgaria, DenmarDenmark,k, Germ Germany,any, FrFrance,ance, Cyprus,Cyprus Poland, Poland and and Portugal, Portugal total, tota areal ar eahas ha beens been used us insteaded inst ofead land of landarea; area;Poland, Po byland NUTS, by 2NU regions,TS 2 region Uniteds ;Kingdom; United King 2007.dom, 2007. Source:Source Eurostat: Eurostat (online (onlin edata dat acode: code demo_r_d3dens: demo_r_d3dens).) eurostat Eurostat regional yearbook 2011 21 1 Population Map 1.2: Population change, by NUTS 3 regions, 2008 (1) (per 1 000 inhabitants) 0600 km Population change, Guadeloupe (FR) Martinique (FR) 1 by NUTS 3 regions, 2008 ( ) (per 1 000 inhabitants) EU-27 = 4.1 025 020 <= -8.0 0.0 - 4.0 -8.0 - -4.0 4.0 - 8.0 Guyane (FR) Réunion (FR) -4.0 - -2.0 8.0 - 16.0 -2.0 - 0.0 > 16.0 0 100 020 © EuroGeographics Association, for the administrative boundaries Açores (PT) Madeira (PT) Cartography: Eurostat — GISCO, 03/2011 050 020 Canarias (ES) Malta 0 100 010 Liechtenstein Ísland 05 0100 (1) Belgium and United Kingdom, 2007. (¹) Belgium and United Kingdom, 2007. Source: Eurostat (online data code: demo_r_gind3). Source: Eurostat (online data code: demo_r_gind3) 22 Eurostat regional yearbook 2011 eurostat Population 1 Map 1.3: Natural population change, by NUTS 3 regions, 2008 (1) (per 1 000 inhabitants) 0600 km Natural population change, Guadeloupe (FR) Martinique (FR) by NUTS 3 regions, 2008 (1) (per 1 000 inhabitants) EU-27 = 1.2 025 020 <= -8.0 0.0 - 4.0 -8.0 - -4.0 4.0 - 8.0 Guyane (FR) Réunion (FR) -4.0 - -2.0 8.0 - 16.0 -2.0 - 0.0 > 16.0 0 100 020 © EuroGeographics Association, for the administrative boundaries Açores (PT) Madeira (PT) Cartography: Eurostat — GISCO, 03/2011 050 020 Canarias (ES) Malta 0 100 010 Liechtenstein Ísland 05 0100 (1(¹)) Belgium, Belgium, 2007; 2007; United United Kingdom, Kingdom 2007, 2007 and and NUTS NU 2TS regions; 2 region Turkey,s; Tu nationalrkey, na tilevel.onal level. Source: Eurostat (online data code: demo_r_gind3 and demo_gind). Source: Eurostat (online data code: demo_r_gind3 and demo_gind) eurostat Eurostat regional yearbook 2011 23 1 Population Map 1.4: Net migration (including statistical adjustment), by NUTS 3 regions, 2008 (1) (per 1 000 inhabitants) Net migration (including 0600 km statistical adjustment), Guadeloupe (FR) Martinique (FR) by NUTS 3 regions, 2008 (1) (per 1 000 inhabitants) EU-27 = 2.9 025 020 <= -6.0 0.0 - 2.5 -6.0 - -3.0 2.5 - 5.0 Guyane (FR) Réunion (FR) -3.0 - -1.0 5.0 - 10.0 -1.0 - 0.0 > 10.0 0 100 020 © EuroGeographics Association, for the administrative boundaries Açores (PT) Madeira (PT) Cartography: Eurostat — GISCO, 03/2011 050 020 Canarias (ES) Malta 0 100 010 Liechtenstein Ísland 05 0100 (1) Belgium, 2007; United Kingdom, 2007 and NUTS 2 regions; Turkey, national level. (¹) Belgium, 2007; United Kingdom, 2007 and NUTS 2 regions; Turkey, national level. Source: Eurostat (online data code: demo_r_gind3 and demo_gind). Source: Eurostat (online data code: demo_r_gind3 and demo_gind) 24 Eurostat regional yearbook 2011 eurostat Population 1 Liechtenstein and Denmark and most regions of Norway. 27, covering all regions of the Baltic States, Poland, Slovakia, In all these regions, there were more live births than deaths Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, the former Yugoslav Republic in 2008. of Macedonia and Montenegro and a few regions of the Deaths outnumbered births in most regions of Germany, Czech Republic, Portugal and Croatia, whereas values higher in Hungary, Croatia, Romania and Bulgaria and also in the than 80 years were observed in Åland (Finland) and Ticino Baltic States in the north and Greece and Italy in the south. (Switzerland). Map 1.7 depicts the regional distribution of Other countries showed a more balanced pattern overall.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Smart Specialisation in Sparsely Populated European Arctic Regions
    Smart Specialisation in Sparsely Populated European Arctic Regions Jukka Teräs, Viktor Salenius, Laura Fagerlund and Lina Stanionyte 2018 EUR 29503 EN This publication is a Technical report by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science and knowledge service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policymaking process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use that might be made of this publication. Contact information Name: Smart Specialisation Platform Address: Edificio Expo. c/ Inca Garcilaso, 3. E-41092 Seville (Spain) E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +34 954488318 EU Science Hub https://ec.europa.eu/jrc JRC114273 EUR 29503 EN PDF ISBN 978-92-79-98266-8 ISSN 1831-9424 doi:10.2760/960929 Print ISBN 978-92-79-98267-5 ISSN 1018-5593 doi:10.2760/963629 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2018 © European Union, 2018 The reuse policy of the European Commission is implemented by Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Reuse is authorised, provided the source of the document is acknowledged and its original meaning or message is not distorted. The European Commission shall not be liable for any consequence stemming from the reuse. For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not owned by the EU, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders.
    [Show full text]
  • The Status, Characteristics and Potential of SMART SPECIALISATION in Nordic Regions
    The status, characteristics and potential of SMART SPECIALISATION in Nordic Regions By Mari Wøien, Iryna Kristensen and Jukka Teräs NORDREGIO REPORT 2019:3 nordregio report 2019:3 1 The status, characteristics and potential of SMART SPECIALISATION in Nordic Regions By Mari Wøien, Iryna Kristensen and Jukka Teräs NORDREGIO REPORT 2019:3 Prepared on behalf of the Nordic Thematic Group for Innovative and Resilient Regions 2017–2020, under the Nordic Council of Ministers Committee of Civil Servants for Regional Affairs. The status, characteristics and potential of smart specialisation in Nordic Regions Nordregio Report 2019:3 ISBN 978-91-87295-67-6 ISSN 1403-2503 DOI: doi.org/10.30689/R2019:3.1403-2503 © Nordregio 2019 Nordregio P.O. Box 1658 SE-111 86 Stockholm, Sweden [email protected] www.nordregio.org www.norden.org Analyses and text: Mari Wøien, Iryna Kristensen and Jukka Teräs Contributors: Ágúst Bogason, Eeva Turunen, Laura Fagerlund, Tuulia Rinne and Viktor Salenius, Nordregio. Cover: Taneli Lahtinen Nordregio is a leading Nordic and European research centre for regional development and planning, established by the Nordic Council of Ministers in 1997. We conduct solution-oriented and applied research, addressing current issues from both a research perspective and the viewpoint of policymakers and practitioners. Operating at the international, national, regional and local levels, Nordregio’s research covers a wide geographic scope, with an emphasis on the Nordic and Baltic Sea Regions, Europe and the Arctic. The Nordic co-operation Nordic co-operation is one of the world’s most extensive forms of regional collaboration, involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland.
    [Show full text]
  • NGU Report 2012.005 Tropical Weathering in Norway, TWIN Final
    NGU Report 2012.005 Tropical Weathering in Norway, TWIN Final Report 2 Geological Survey of Norway NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway REPORT Tel.: 47 73 90 40 11 Telefax: 47 73 92 16 20 Report no.: 2012.005 ISSN 0800-3416 Grading: Open Title: Tropical Weathering In Norway, TWIN Final Report Authors: Client: Odleiv Olesen, Dag Bering, Marco Brönner, Einar Dalsegg, Karl Fabian, Ola Geological Survey of Norway Fredin, Jomar Gellein, Berit Husteli, Christian Magnus, Jan Steinar Rønning, and Norwegian Petroleum Terje Solbakk, Jan Fredrik Tønnesen & Jon Arne Øverland Directorate County: Commune: Vestfold, Vest-Agder, Sogn & Fjordane, Nord-Trøndelag, Nordland, Finnmark Map-sheet name (M=1:250.000) Number of pages: 188 Skien, Mandal, Florø, Ulsteinvik, Trondheim, Svolvær, Andøya Price (NOK): 645,- Fieldwork carried out: Date of report: Project no.: Person responsible: 2009-2011 02.05.2012 3307.00 Summary: The Geological Survey of Norway and the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate established the TWIN Project (Tropical Weathering In Norway) in 2009 to improve the understanding of deep weathering on mainland Norway as well as offshore. All known reports of deep weathering in Norway have been reviewed and registered in a GIS database. We have selected four representative locations for more detailed studies in southern Norway (Kjose, Lista, Vågsøy-Stad and Inderøya) and another four locations in northern Norway (Vestvågøya, Hadseløya, Andøya and Hamarøya). Geophysical studies (2D resisitivity and refraction seismic) reveal fairly continuous saprolite layers with a thickness up to 100 metres in Vestfold (Kjose), Lofoten- Vesterålen, Hamarøya and Varangerhalvøya. The results also show that the degree of weathering varies extensively over short distances.
    [Show full text]
  • Widespread and Accelerating Glacier Retreat on the Lyngen Peninsula, Northern Norway, Since Their ‘Little Ice Age’ Maximum
    Journal of Glaciology (2018), 64(243) 100–118 doi: 10.1017/jog.2018.3 © The Author(s) 2018. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Widespread and accelerating glacier retreat on the Lyngen Peninsula, northern Norway, since their ‘Little Ice Age’ maximum CHRIS R. STOKES,1 LISS M. ANDREASSEN,2 MATTHEW R. CHAMPION,1 GEOFFREY D. CORNER3 1Department of Geography, Durham University, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK 2Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE), PO Box 5091 Majorstuen, N-0301 Oslo, Norway 3Department of Geosciences, UiT – The Arctic University of Norway, PO Box 6050 Langnes, N-9037 Tromsø, Norway Correspondence: Chris R. Stokes <[email protected]> ABSTRACT. The recession of mountain glaciers worldwide is increasing global sea level and, in many regions, human activities will have to adapt to changes in surface hydrology. Thus, it is important to provide up-to-date analyses of glacier change and the factors modulating their response to climate warming. Here we report changes in the extent of >120 glaciers on the Lyngen Peninsula, northern Norway, where glacier runoff is utilised for hydropower and where glacial lake outburst floods have occurred. Glaciers covered at least 114 km2 in 1953 and we compare this inventory with those from 1988, 2001 and a new one from 2014, and previously-dated Little Ice Age (LIA) limits. Results show a − steady reduction in area (∼0.3% a 1) between their LIA maximum (∼1915) and 1988, consistent with increasing summer air temperatures, but recession paused between 1988 and 2001, coinciding with increased winter precipitation.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate in Norway 2100 Report
    M-741 | 2017 Climate in Norway 2100 – a knowledge base for climate adaptation NCCS report no. 1/2017 Photo: Anne Olsen-Ryum, www.hasvikfoto.no Lead authors I. Hanssen-Bauer, E.J. Førland, I. Haddeland, H. Hisdal, S. Mayer, A. Nesje, J.E.Ø. Nilsen, S. Sandven, A.B. Sandø, A. Sorteberg og B. Ådlandsvik CLIMATE IN NORWAY 2100 Commissioned by The Norwegian Centre for Climate Services (NCCS) is a collaboration between the Norwegian Meteoro- logical Institute, the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate, Uni Research and the Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research. The main purpose of NCCS is to provide decision makers in Norway with relevant information regarding climate change adaptation. In addition to the partners, the Norwegian Environment Agency is represented on the Board. The NCCS report series includes reports where one or more authors are affiliated to the Centre, as well as reports initiated by the Centre. All reports in the series have undergone a professional assessment by at least one expert associated with the Centre. They may also be included in report series from the institutions to which the authors are affiliated. 2 CLIMATE IN NORWAY 2100 Title: Date Climate in Norway 2100 April 2017 – a knowledge base for climate adaptation ISSN nr. Rapport nr. 2387-3027 1/2017 Authors Classification Lead authors: I.Hanssen-Bauer1,8, E.J.Førland1,8, I.Hadde- Free land2,8, H.Hisdal2,8, D.Lawrence2,8, S.Mayer3,8,9, A.Nesje4,9, J.E.Ø.Nilsen5,9, S.Sandven5,9, A.B.Sandø6,9, A.Sorteberg4,9, B.Ådlandsvik 6,9 Clients Norwegian Environment
    [Show full text]
  • European Communities Xvi/24/72-E
    XVI/24/72-E COMMISSION., OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES General Directorate for Regional Policy Regional Economic Structures and Policies in Norway March 1972 XVI/24/72-E N 0 T I C E From the statistical data and information supplied by the national administrations of the acceding States, the Directorate-General for Regional Policy has undertaken to produce an analysis of the regional structures and regianl policies of these States, to co~plete the analysis already made for the six Member States (1). The present study represents a first general deGct~tion. It will be supploment0d by more detailed statistical analyses which, in spite of many gaps, will provide n more complete picture of the regional struc­ tures in the acceding countries and the problems they present in the enlarged Community. (1) See Analysis, 1971 - 2 - XVI/24/72-E C 0 N T E N T S Pages I. Regional delimitation ................................... 4 II. Regional economic structures •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8 III. Nature of regional problems ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 17 IV. Evolution of regional problems and regional policy from 1950 to 1970 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 21 V. Current regional policy (1971) ........................... 23 VI. Regional programming .................................... 34 VII. Town and country planning ............................... VIII. Regional policy- responsible institutions ••••••••••••••• 36 IX. Results of regional policy .............................. 38 Bibliography ............................................ 43 Index
    [Show full text]
  • Green Growth in Nordic Regions : Eight Case Studies
    Arbeidsnotat 2019:07 Green growth in Nordic regions Eight case studies Allan Dahl Andersen, Markus Bugge, Marco Capasso, Suyash Jolly, Antje Klitkou, Markku Sotarauta, Markus Steen and Nina Suvinen Working Paper 2019:07 Green growth in Nordic regions Eight case studies Allan Dahl Andersen, Markus Bugge, Marco Capasso, Suyash Jolly, Antje Klitkou, Markku Sotarauta, Markus Steen and Nina Suvinen Working paper 2019:07 Published by Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education Addresse P.O. Box 2815 Tøyen, N-0608 Oslo. Visiting Address: Økernveien 9, N-0653 Oslo. Project No. 20764 Customer NordForsk Address Stensberggata 27, NO-0170 Oslo Photomontage NIFU ISBN 978-82-327-0389-0 ISSN 1894-8200 (online) Copyright NIFU: CC BY-NC 4.0 www.nifu.no Preface This working paper is an outcome of the research project “Where does the green economy grow? The Geography of Nordic Sustainability Transitions (GONST)”, funded by the Nordic Green Growth Research and Innovation Programme (appli- cation number 83130). The project started in 2017 is to be finalised in 2020. The working paper has been edited by Marc Capasso and Antje Klitkou and is based on a collection of eight case studies carried out in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, for each country two cases. The authors of the case studies are as following: Suyash Jolly (Lund University) authored the case studies on Scania, Sweden, Värmland, Sweden, North Jutland, Denmark and Southern Denmark. Markku Sotarauta (Tampere University) and Nina Suvinen (Tampere University) wrote the two Finish case studies on Tampere and Central Finland. The case study on Hordaland, Norway was written by Allan Dahl Andersen (NIFU) and Markus Bugge (NIFU).
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of Norway
    Quaternary Geology of Norway QUATERNARY GEOLOGY OF NORWAY Geological Survey of Norway Special Publication , 13 Geological Survey of Norway Special Publication , 13 Special Publication Survey Geological of Norway Lars Olsen, Ola Fredin & Odleiv Olesen (eds.) Lars Olsen, Ola Fredin ISBN 978-82-7385-153-6 Olsen, Fredin & Olesen (eds.) 9 788273 851536 Geological Survey of Norway Special Publication , 13 The NGU Special Publication series comprises consecutively numbered volumes containing papers and proceedings from national and international symposia or meetings dealing with Norwegian and international geology, geophysics and geochemistry; excursion guides from such symposia; and in some cases papers of particular value to the international geosciences community, or collections of thematic articles. The language of the Special Publication series is English. Series Editor: Trond Slagstad ©2013 Norges geologiske undersøkelse Published by Norges geologiske undersøkelse (Geological Survey of Norway) NO–7491 Norway All Rights reserved ISSN: 0801–5961 ISBN: 978-82-7385-153-6 Design and print: Skipnes kommunikasjon 120552/0413 Cover illustration: Jostedalsbreen ASTER false colour satellite image Contents Introduction Lars Olsen, Ola Fredin and Odleiv Olesen ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Glacial landforms and Quaternary landscape development in Norway Ola Fredin, Bjørn Bergstrøm, Raymond Eilertsen, Louise Hansen, Oddvar Longva,
    [Show full text]
  • Hospital and ICU Admission Rates in Norway
    medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.16.20155358; this version posted July 18, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . The risk of severe COVID-19: hospital and ICU admission rates in Norway. Corresponding Author: Morten Munkvik University of Stavanger, Department of Public Health 4036 Stavanger Norway Stavanger, NO 4036 Stavanger [email protected] +47 97127969 (no fax number) Co-authors: Ingvild Vatten Alsnes University of Stavanger, Department of Public Health Kjell Arholms hus Stavanger, NO 4036 Norway +47 97787317 Lars Vatten Norwegian University of Science and Technology Department of Public Health Faculty of Medicine Trondheim, NO 7021 Norway +47 73597777 Keywords: Epidemiology Infectious Diseases Public Health NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.16.20155358; this version posted July 18, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . The risk of severe COVID-19: hospital and ICU admission rates in Norway. Abstract Background: Epidemiological studies of COVID-19 with population based information may add to the knowledge needed to prioritise resources and advice on how restrictive measures should be targeted.
    [Show full text]
  • SNF REPORT NO 35/05 the Location of Norwegian Manufacturing
    SNF REPORT NO 35/05 The location of Norwegian manufacturing industry by Julie Riise Kolstad SNF project no. 1301 “Innovation, industrial structure and economic development: Determinants and policy design” The project is financed by the Research Council of Norway INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION BERGEN, DECEMBER 2005 © Dette eksemplar er fremstilt etter avtale med KOPINOR, Stenergate 1, 0050 Oslo Ytterligere eksemplarfremstilling uten avtale og i strid med åndsverkloven er straffbart og kan medføre erstatningsansvar. ISBN 82-491-0400-5 Printed version ISBN 82-491-0401-3 Electronic version ISSN 0803-4036 SIØS –CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS AND SHIPPING SIØS – Centre for international economics and shipping – is a joint centre for The Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration (NHH) and Institute for Research in Economics and Business Administration (SNF). The centre is responsible for research and teaching within the fields of international trade and shipping. International Trade The centre works with all types of issues related to international trade and shipping, and has particular expertise in the areas of international real economics (trade, factor mobility, economic integration and industrial policy), international macro economics and international tax policy. Research at the centre has in general been dominated by projects aiming to provide increased insight into global, structural issues and the effect of regional economic integration. However, the researchers at the centre also participate actively in projects relating to public economics, industrial policy and competition policy. International Transport International transport is another central area of research at the centre. Within this field, studies of the competition between different modes of transport in Europe and the possibilities of increasing sea transport with a view to easing the pressure on the land based transport network on the Continent have been central.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Differences in Technical Efficiency and Technological Gap of Norwegian Dairy Farms: a Stochastic Metafrontier Model
    Regional Differences in Technical Efficiency and Technological Gap of Norwegian Dairy Farms: a Stochastic Metafrontier Model Habtamu Alem1, Gudbrand Lien2, J. Brian Hardaker3, Atle Guttormsen4 1 Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research, Norway and Norwegian University of Life Science, Norway [email protected] 2 Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Norway and Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research, Norway [email protected] 3 University of New England, Armidale, N.S.W., Australia [email protected] 4 Norwegian University of Life Science, Norway [email protected] Contribution presented at the XV EAAE Congress, “Towards Sustainable Agri-food Systems: Balancing Between Markets and Society” August 29th – September 1st, 2017 Parma, Italy Copyright 2017 by Habtamu Alem, Gudbrand Lien, J. Brian Hardaker and Atle Guttormsen. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. 1 Regional Differences in Technical Efficiency and Technological Gap of Norwegian Dairy Farms: a Stochastic Metafrontier Model Habtamu Alem, Gudbrand Lien, J. Brian Hardaker and Atle Guttormsen Abstract This paper compares technical efficiencies (TEs) and technological gap ratios (TGRs) for dairy farms in the Norwegian regions accounting for differences in working environments. We used the 'true' random effect model of Greene (2005) and the stochastic metafrontier approach by Huang et al. (2014) to estimate TEs and TGRs. The dataset used was farm-level balanced panel data for 23 years (1992-2014) with 5442 observations from 731 dairy firms. The results of the analysis provide empirical evidence of small regional differences in technical efficiencies, technological gap ratios, and input use.
    [Show full text]
  • An Archaeology of the Second World War in Northern Finnmark, Norway
    Landscape of destruction: An archaeology of the Second World War in northern Finnmark, Norway Researches by Heinrich Natho North Cape Museum, Honningsvåg, Norway /University of Bamberg, Germany The Second World War left a long line of monuments on the Norwegian coast. In many regions of the northern parts of Norway especially in the county of Finnmark these monuments are the oldest buildings standing although they only remain as ruins in a modern rather rural landscape. With the carrying out of the so called "Weserübung", Norway was attacked and occupied by Germany on the 9th of April 1940. This occupation first comprised the southern half of Norway up to Narvik. It took two more months till the 10th of June before Norway surrendered. Although the occupation of the northern parts of Norway especially of the Finnmark was not planned from the beginning, Hitler gave the order for the occupation of this region on the 13th of August in the same year. By the 9th of September the Finnmark in common with the other regions of Norway had a German administration and at this point the occupation can be seen as completed. There are several reasons for the occupation of Norway. For a large part of the war Hitler was convinced that the allied forces would attack Germany through Norway despite military investigations by the Wehrmacht which concluded that Norway was not the right place for major invasions by sea due to its difficult coast and logistical problems. Nevertheless several minor and major raids on the Norwegian coast especially on the Lofoten in 1941 reinforced Hitler’s suspicion.
    [Show full text]