Map 1
Location and administrative division of ROF
Source: Own study.
Tab. 1
Selected indicators characterising ROF in 2016
| Specification | Area | Population | Enterprises | Gmina total income | Gmina own income | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| in km2 | ROF = 100% | Number | 2012 = 100 | Net migration per 1000 population | Number | 2012 = 100 | in million zl | 2012 = 100 | in million zl | in % of total income | |
| PODKARPACKIE | 17,846 | 2127,656 | 99.9 | -0.8 | 148,369 | 107.9 | 6,608.6 | 127.9 | 2,338.4 | 35.4 | |
| ROF | 1048 | 100% | 363,680 | 102.7 | 5.1 | 35269 | 115.8 | 1 702.8 | 127.7 | 802.3 | 47.1 |
| Łańcut urban gmina | 19 | 1.8% | 17,749 | 97.8 | -4.1 | 1853 | 104.0 | 69.3 | 144.7 | 38.3 | 55.3 |
| Czarna | 78 | 7.4% | 11,638 | 103.8 | 2.3 | 800 | 111.1 | 46.8 | 143.6 | 17.2 | 36.8 |
| Łańcut rural gmina | 107 | 10.2% | 21,634 | 102.2 | 2.0 | 1287 | 109.6 | 76.8 | 133.6 | 24.0 | 31.3 |
| Boguchwała | 89 | 8.5% | 20,186 | 105.1 | 6.7 | 949 | 116.3 | 70.3 | 152.2 | 28.3 | 40.3 |
| Chmielnik | 53 | 5.1% | 6,815 | 101.6 | 3.4 | 386 | 117.7 | 24.7 | 137.2 | 7.8 | 31.6 |
| Głogów Małopolski | 145 | 13.8% | 19,628 | 103.1 | 3.4 | 978 | 114.1 | 73.1 | 146.2 | 35.5 | 48.6 |
| Krasne | 39 | 3.7% | 10,989 | 104.2 | 8.9 | 985 | 110.2 | 38.7 | 145.5 | 18.3 | 47.3 |
| Lubenia | 55 | 5.2% | 6,422 | 98.5 | -1.7 | 279 | 103.3 | 21.1 | 116.6 | 6.3 | 29.9 |
| Świlcza | 112 | 10.7% | 16,471 | 102.1 | 5.8 | 991 | 108.0 | 58.9 | 135.4 | 22.6 | 38.4 |
| Trzebownisko | 90 | 8.6% | 21,177 | 104.2 | 4.9 | 1592 | 119.3 | 79.0 | 149.3 | 36.2 | 45.8 |
| Tyczyn | 59 | 5.6% | 11,748 | 104.1 | 11.3 | 543 | 119.6 | 41.8 | 149.3 | 13.5 | 32.3 |
| Czudec | 85 | 8.1% | 11,801 | 100.2 | 0.9 | 673 | 111.4 | 44.0 | 133.3 | 10.9 | 24.8 |
| Rzeszów | 117 | 11.2% | 187,422 | 103.0 | 6.4 | 23,953 | 118.0 | 1,058.3 | 120.4 | 543.4 | 51.3 |
[i] Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 1
Income of gminas and cities of ROF per capita compared to the region and the country
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig 2
Expenditure of gminas and cities of ROF per capita compared to the voivodeship and the country
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 3
Dynamics of investments of gminas and cities with powiat status (2012 = 100)
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 4
Investment of gminas and cities of ROF per capita compared to the voivodeship and the country
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 5
Investment of gminas and cities of ROF per capita compared to the voivodeship and the country in 2016
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Map 2
Enterprises in spatial layout in 2017
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 6
Natural persons per 10,000 population
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 7
Commercial companies per 10,000 population
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 8
Newly registered and deregistered entities per 10,000 population
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Tab. 2
Synthetic indicators in the field of entrepreneurship
| Voivodeship | Aggregated measure | Hellwig method | Positional method median of Weber | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Index | Rank | Index | Rank | Index | Rank | ||
| 2012 | |||||||
| Poland | 0.636 | 1 | 0.378 | 1 | 0.527 | 1 | |
| Podkarpackie Voivodeship | 0.372 | 3 | 0.181 | 3 | 0.209 | 3 | |
| ROF | 0.501 | 2 | 0.272 | 2 | 0.399 | 2 | |
| 2016 | |||||||
| Poland | 0.470 | 2 | 0.295 | 3 | 0.498 | 2 | |
| Podkarpackie Voivodeship | 0.436 | 3 | 0.295 | 2 | 0.268 | 3 | |
| ROF | 0.714 | 1 | 0.462 | 1 | 0.666 | 1 | |
[i] Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 9
Revenues, costs and cost level indicator from all activities of companies based in ROF in 2012–2016
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 10
Share of net revenues from the sale of products, goods and materials for export in net revenues from the sale of products, goods and materials
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 11
Return on sales, return on assets and return on capital
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 12
Dynamics of investment (previous year = 100)
Source: Own study based on the data from the Statistical Office in Rzeszów.
Fig. 13
Share of net revenues from the sale of products, goods and materials for export in net revenues from the sale of products, goods and materials
Fig. 14
Return on sales, return on assets and return on capital
Tab. 3
Spatial inequalities in the functional areas of Eastern Poland
| Spatial units groups | Investment expenditures of gminas per capita | Investments of enterprises per capita | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lubelskie | Podkarpackie | Podlaskie | Lubelskie | Podkarpackie | Podlaskie | |
| Theil standardised index | ||||||
| Gminas in the functional area | 0.0022 | 0.0034 | 0.0021 | 0.0217 | 0.0287 | 0.0394 |
| Gminas outside the functional area | 0.0135 | 0.0080 | 0.0149 | 0.1087 | 0.0922 | 0.0786 |
| Gminas in total | 0.0151 | 0.0090 | 0.0190 | 0.1562 | 0.1115 | 0.1298 |
| Decomposition of Theil’s index | ||||||
| Intra-group inequality | 68.6% | 80.3% | 70.7% | 68.8% | 88.1% | 91.9% |
| Between-group inequality | 31.4% | 19.7% | 29.3% | 31.2% | 11.9% | 8.1% |
Fig. 15
Investments and expenses per capita in the gminas of the Podkarpackie Voivodeship in 2012–2016