Perceptions among young people of school age of the functions and ranks of selected regional centres in Poland

Bibliogr. s. 414-418. Adam Parol podpisany: Adam R. Parol

Od 1999 r. zbiór 16 województw w Polsce nie uległ zmianie ilościowej (pomimo ustawicznej krytyki ówczesnej reformy administracyjnej). Stan ten spowodował powstanie obszarów wykluczonych, często skoncentrowanych wokół ośrodków o (teoretycznie) podobnym potencjale do najmniejszych miast wojewódzkich. Celem artykułu jest rozpoznanie, w jaki sposób obecnie obowiązujący podział administracyjny na województwa jest postrzegany przez tych, którzy nie mają możliwości porównania go z podziałem obowiązującym przed ostatnią reformą - młodzież ze szkół średnich. Badania ankietowe zrealizowano w dziesięciu miastach: sześciu ośrodkach mogących stać się w przyszłości stolicami województw (Częstochowa, Kalisz, Koszalin, Płock, Radom, Słupsk) oraz czterech stolicach województw o zbliżonym do tych miast potencjale (Gorzów Wielkopolski, Kielce, Toruń, Zielona Góra). Wyniki pokazują, iż młodzież z miast niewojewódzkich częściej wybiera funkcję administracyjną jako najważniejszą funkcję regionalnej stolicy, a uczniowie szkół ze stolic województw silniej podkreślają konieczność pełnienia przez stolicę również funkcji kulturalnej, edukacyjnej i religijnej. Zauważono zależność między ogólnym wyposażeniem miasta w usługi a opinią młodzieży - im więcej placówek i usług mieściło się w danym ośrodku, tym częściej był on wskazywany jako „regionalna stolica”. Nie wykazano natomiast występowania tzw. „kompleksu niższości” wobec mieszkańców stolic województw oraz związku między realnym wyposażeniem miasta w konkretne rodzaje placówek a funkcjami, które powinna pełnić regionalna stolica w opinii młodzieży.

The current administrative division of Poland has been in force for over twenty years in almost unchanged form, and thus seems “established” from the perspective of the third decade of the 21st century. Despite this, it continues to be assessed critically in the scientific community, and also among certain local groups. Controversies concern both the competences assigned to regional units of government, the number and area of existing units, and even the number of levels of division. Bearing in mind ideas on inclusive development (in the spatial dimension also) it is reasonable to consider perceptions of the state of affairs in place since 1999 among those who lack comparison with the previous situation, and might also be regarded as most excluded in this matter - young people associated with the Polish cities and regions recognised as marginalised by the country’s current division into voivodeships (units of administration combining provincial and regional status). The work detailed in this article has thus sought to address research questions as follows: • What differences in perceptions of regional-capital characteristics can be identified among surveyed young people of school age, in line with the status of the city in which they study from the point of view of the administrative division in place currently? • Do surveyed high-school students from cities that lost “voivodeship capital” status in 1999 in fact display any “inferiority complex” towards surveyed pupils from cities that retained that status? • Are there any differences in perceptions of the city as regional centre among young people surveyed in former voivodeship cities, as opposed to currently-recognised capitals of voivodeships? And if so, in what aspects do such differences manifest themselves? • In line with the expressed opinions of the young people surveyed, are the regional functions served by the surveyed cities reflected in their actual rank in the settlement network? The necessary data were obtained via surveys conducted in 2020 by ex-students of the University of Warsaw. For this purpose, two slightly different versions of the questionnaire were constructed, assigned to cities either enjoying or not enjoying the status of voivodeship capital (Appendix 1). The selection of cities was based mainly on their potential to act as capitals of voivodeships not established after 1998, but appearing most frequently in the often-heated debate ongoing since that time. Such a criterion denotes the urban centres of Częstochowa, Kalisz, Koszalin, Płock, Radom and Słupsk (Fig. 1), given that these cities meet the criterion of having been voivodeship cities (capitals) under the administrative division present previously in Poland, and were also pointed to as regional centres in the 2030 Conception for the Spatial Development of the Country (Koncepcja Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania Kraju, KPZK). For comparative purposes, four voivodeship cities (currently recognised capitals) were included, with the selection being such as to ensure a de facto position in the settlement network similar to those taken by the 6 aforementioned centres, as well as similar demographic potential (Table 1). The cities identified on that basis were Gorzów Wielkopolski, Kielce, Toruń and Zielona Góra. The research conducted in such way provided for the drawing of a number of conclusions, some of which reflect those appearing in the public debate, as well as in other scientific studies not yet verified through more in-depth testing in actual society. For example, it is shown clearly that young people studying in voivodeship cities are more likely than peers in cities lacking that status to perceive their city as a regional capital, and at the same time, to understand the concept of the capital as perceived more broadly (Table 4). Young people in the non-voivodeship cities mostly pay attention to the capitals’ administrative function, while they are less likely than their peers from the voivodeship capitals to invoke educational and cultural functions (Table 5, Fig. 3). However, the choices of the surveyed young people offered no basis to suggest the presence of an “inferiority complex” as a manifestation of social marginalisation among people from the cities not serving as capitals of voivodeships. Nevertheless, differences in a young person’s perception of “their own” city could be identified clearly, in line with the status conferred by the administrative division in force. This is seen in particular in the context of migration (outflow of population), as well as the uneven distribution of funds and investments. People from the experimental group were more likely to notice that their centre was being treated unfairly in these respects than were people from the control group (appreciating that the city in which they were at school was privileged). In turn, young people studying in the voivodeship capital cities were more inclined to point to the educational offer being better in the capital as compared with other cities in the same voivodeship (Table 6).A further valuable conclusion reflects the almost complete lack of evidence for a relationship between the actual number of service facilities in the cities surveyed and respondents’ answers as to the perception of functions adequate for a regional centre. This may not in fact be surprising, given that the question in the survey did not concern perceptions of the functions of the city in which respondents actually studied, but was rather aimed at discerning young people’s opinions on functions adequate for a hypothetical regional capital. The testing sought to identify the impact on respondents’ answers of a given city’s specialisation in certain services. In the event, the existence of such a connection could not be shown. A correlation was noted between the general provisioning of services in surveyed centres and respondents’ perceptions of them as regional capitals (Fig. 4), but the strength was such as to suggest that other (as-yet-unidentified) factors were also involved. The research detailed here can be seen as pioneering in a number of respects, and touches on various issues pertinent to the way in which Poland’s current administrative division at provincial/regional level is perceived. More research in this area is thus required to further confirm, or deny, the relationships and conclusions presented here. It is nevertheless clear that findings of importance to the discussed issue are present in this paper, and may serve as input in what is a still-raging debate on the administrative division of Poland into voivodeships.