Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe the most stupid question ever, but I always asked this to myself.
I mean, in this modern age, you don't nessecarily have to live at places where agriculture is possible. Nevertheless, in places north of the 60th parallel, polulation growth is mostly negative (Iceland is an exception).
Cold and darkness will give some explanation but there should be more reasons.
Partly because traditional reasons. Because the area was so sparsely populated before, there is not much infrastructure there, work or housing. I don't see any reason why anyone would move there now, unless they want to be in total wilderness.
Oulu in Finland is one of the few exceptions. It had 37k inhabitants in 1950 and today the area has 200k.
We live above the 45th parallel.....We love winters and due to being on the west side of the time zone our days are longer than when we lived in Pennsylvania....People are woosies generally and don't want to shovel snow but its great exercise and it more than makes up for the low humidity blissful summers.
Iqaluit is actually growing fast. Between 2006 and 2011 the community grew 8.3%. I think that's mostly due to a high birth rate and not due to immigration.
Iqaluit is actually growing fast. Between 2006 and 2011 the community grew 8.3%. I think that's mostly due to a high birth rate and not due to immigration.
No it's not. It's because the Inuit are moving to the town and leaving their small hamlets.
-----
To answer OP: because it's too damn cold, cannot farm or anything.
Maybe the most stupid question ever, but I always asked this to myself.
I mean, in this modern age, you don't nessecarily have to live at places where agriculture is possible. Nevertheless, in places north of the 60th parallel, polulation growth is mostly negative (Iceland is an exception).
Cold and darkness will give some explanation but there should be more reasons.
Any ideas?
A different reason why Florida, Texas, Nevada and Arizona are growing very fast.
Maybe the most stupid question ever, but I always asked this to myself.
I mean, in this modern age, you don't nessecarily have to live at places where agriculture is possible. Nevertheless, in places north of the 60th parallel, polulation growth is mostly negative (Iceland is an exception).
Cold and darkness will give some explanation but there should be more reasons.
Any ideas?
well there is a lot of growth in cities near the oil fields in western Siberia
Sure there are farming north of 60N. At least in Europe.
Both Trondheim and the province are seeing population growth, some of that growth is due to young people moving to cities. But there is net growth.
Agriculture in the province is common, including grain fields.
Grainfield in Steinkjer, 90 km N of Trondheim: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/C...a_Overrein.jpg
Even far north Troms province has seen growth, mostly in Tromsø.
Hammerfest has grown a lot (percentage-wise) due to offshore oil and gas development.
Yes, but as Finland has half of the World's arable land above the 60 parallel, it's historically a big reason why the northern areas are sparsely populated. The Nordics are also by far the mildest larger region on Earth above that parallel.
Let's not forget about the brutal winters in most of these places. In North America brutal winters start at 40 degrees and up, so by the time you reach 60N it's just a frozen wasteland. In East Asia brutal winters also start at around 37-40 degrees, so most of the population lives south of there
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.