Page 86 - Koderman, Miha, and Vuk Tvrtko Opačić. Eds. 2020. Challenges of tourism development in protected areas of Croatia and Slovenia. Koper, Zagreb: University of Primorska Press, Croatian Geographical Society
P. 86
challenges of tourism development in protected areas of croatia and slovenia
Fig. 1 Settlements on the island Mljet by population in 2011
Sources: CBS (2013); CGA (2016)
to it, representing one-sixth of the population in 1961, and generating neg-
ative natural increase and a total depopulation of 14.8%. As expected, inte-
rior rural settlements were the most affected by out-migration, but settle-
ments in Mljet National Park were almost equally hit.
In the 1971–1981 and 1981–1991 periods, the population of the island
continued to decrease with a lower intensity (by 14.8% and 11.3%), and a de-
clining rate of out-migration (Tab. 2). Moderate growth in tourism in both
periods might be responsible for lower out-migration (Tab. 3), however, it
is also inevitably related to the exhausted potential migrant contingent, i.e.
those who wanted to leave the island had already left (See: Nejašmić, 1999;
2013). In the meantime, highly negative natural increase became main force
of depopulation, due to previous selective out-migration that resulted in a
disrupted age-sex composition.
On the other hand, instead of migration from the island, a part of
the population moved from interior to the settlements in the Park and the
coast, most probably due to tourism (renting accommodation, restaurants,
tourism services in the Park, etc.) (Tab. 3). The island still could not manage
to pull more people from the mainland that would stay there permanent-
ly, however, as the economic structure in most island regions was far sim-
pler than on the mainland, and highly seasonal tourism usually did not of-
fer year-round employment (Šulc, 2016).
84
Fig. 1 Settlements on the island Mljet by population in 2011
Sources: CBS (2013); CGA (2016)
to it, representing one-sixth of the population in 1961, and generating neg-
ative natural increase and a total depopulation of 14.8%. As expected, inte-
rior rural settlements were the most affected by out-migration, but settle-
ments in Mljet National Park were almost equally hit.
In the 1971–1981 and 1981–1991 periods, the population of the island
continued to decrease with a lower intensity (by 14.8% and 11.3%), and a de-
clining rate of out-migration (Tab. 2). Moderate growth in tourism in both
periods might be responsible for lower out-migration (Tab. 3), however, it
is also inevitably related to the exhausted potential migrant contingent, i.e.
those who wanted to leave the island had already left (See: Nejašmić, 1999;
2013). In the meantime, highly negative natural increase became main force
of depopulation, due to previous selective out-migration that resulted in a
disrupted age-sex composition.
On the other hand, instead of migration from the island, a part of
the population moved from interior to the settlements in the Park and the
coast, most probably due to tourism (renting accommodation, restaurants,
tourism services in the Park, etc.) (Tab. 3). The island still could not manage
to pull more people from the mainland that would stay there permanent-
ly, however, as the economic structure in most island regions was far sim-
pler than on the mainland, and highly seasonal tourism usually did not of-
fer year-round employment (Šulc, 2016).
84
