Covid, global warming, teleworking: society is moving… and so are the French. When we begin higher education, look for work, have a child add to the family or retire looming, we change location, sometimes region, in search of a better quality of life. .
The demographer Didier Breton, professor at the University of Strasbourg, associate researcher at the National Institute of Demographic Studies, and the geographer Sébastien Oliveau, lecturer at Aix-Marseille University, researcher at the Mesopolhis laboratory, closely observe these population movements. For l’Express, they deliver their latest observations on post-Covid France.
L’Express: according to an INSEE study, since Covid we have recorded “more departures from the centers of large metropolises and the Paris area”. Do you share this analysis?
Sébastien Oliveau : Even if these figures are not definitive, the answer is yes: since the epidemic, large metropolises are losing population. Is a good salary in a big city worth sacrificing your quality of life and that of your children? With the confinements, the question arose more acutely, and some families answered “no”.
Didier Breton : Just look at the evolution of the real estate market. The rise in interest rates penalizes all territories, but prices fall more in metropolitan areas, because demand is lower there.
Before the crisis, metropolises showed a positive migratory balance. Has the situation turned around?
SO : Yes, there are now more departures than arrivals. But watch out for analysis errors! At the same time, we continue to record more births than deaths there, in particular because they attract young workers. In total, the natural balance is greater than the migratory balance and they therefore continue to gain inhabitants.
“The peak of the Parisian population dates back to the 1920s”
Is Ile-de-France the big loser from this movement?
DB : Unquestionably. Its migration balance was already negative between 2016-2021, but the deficit has since increased.
SO : The capital is indeed losing more inhabitants than other metropolises, but it must be remembered that this is an old trend: the peak of the Parisian population dates back to the 1920s! It should also be remembered that Paris is loosening up, that is to say that some of its employees live in Oise, Eure or Marne, i.e. outside Ile-de-France. This is why I prefer to talk about rebalancing. The Parisian urban area represents approximately 20% of the country’s total population. If this share decreases a little, it is not dramatic, especially if this leads to a drop in real estate prices.
Is this trend towards “demetropolisation” sustainable?
SO : It is too early to say because we have to take into account the phenomena of inertia. We are in fact faced with two hypotheses. Either those who left have been ready for a long time, which would mean the movement will end quickly. Either these precursors have on the contrary given ideas to others and it is then possible that we are at the start of a larger phenomenon which will continue. Only the next censuses will make it possible to decide.
We cannot therefore conclude that there is an “urban exodus” since the epidemic…
SO : The term does indeed seem excessive. The countryside that is gaining residents, particularly around Toulouse, Rennes, Montpellier or Paris, are often those that operate in conjunction with large cities.
Precisely: where have the populations who left the metropolis settled?
SO Mostly in small and medium-sized towns that were already attractive before, particularly along the Atlantic coast. The same therefore applies to the countryside located near dynamic metropolises and finally to isolated but dynamic towns, such as Vitré or Les Herbiers. In this sense, the epidemic has above all amplified pre-existing trends.
Are more people living inland than in the past?
DB : No. The “diagonal of the void”, which runs from the northeast to the center of the Pyrenees via the Massif Central, has not resolved, unfortunately. And it is logical because, in population redistributions, transport plays a major role. Changing where you live is one thing, but as workplaces generally remain the same, there is an obvious premium for areas well connected to large metropolises, whether by train or car.
SO : For the moment, we are not observing significant movements in Lozère, Creuse, Burgundy or in the north-east of the country. These territories in demographic crisis continue to lose inhabitants – perhaps a little less than before.
Can we say that Covid and teleworking have changed the French people’s choice of place of residence and that this is now determined less by employment and more by personal life choices?
DB : This seems obvious to me, and the phenomenon is even more significant among young professionals. Covid served as a trigger, especially since with teleworking, it is possible to keep your job in Paris without living there permanently. If the four-day week were to develop, the decorrelation between place of life and place of work could further increase.
SO : The teleworking effect is real, but it should not be overestimated, for two reasons. First of all, not everyone can telework: nurses, shopkeepers, garbage collectors – among others – must go to their workstation every day. Second, some companies are starting to backtrack in this area because fully teleworking complicates relationships between colleagues. It is therefore likely that this movement will decrease in the coming years. I add that global warming could disrupt these post-Covid trends. Heatwaves will be less and less well tolerated in the future. This should serve the Mediterranean regions and once again benefit the Atlantic coast.
An article from the special report of L’Express “Cities”, published in the weekly of November 16
.