Renunciation rates in Europe: five Swedes renounced citizenship in 2010

Following up on my last post about renunciation rates in Asia, here’s some extracts from EuroStat’s loss of citizenship table, which I ran across recently. (Like last time, all diaspora population figures are taken from the Global Migrant Origins Database, and don’t include ethnic descendants with other citizenships). The EuroStat data is not very good for longitudinal comparisons, since it only shows one or two years, but there’s still some interesting things to be learned from it. One of many instructive cross-sectional comparisons:

United States

• Diaspora population: 2.2 million
  
• Homeland population: 310 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 1,781 (2011; including former green-card holders)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 81
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 0.53

Sweden

• Diaspora population: 300,000
  
• Homeland population: 9.3 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 5 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 1.66
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 0.032

Greece

• Diaspora population: 930,000
  
• Homeland population: 11 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 27 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 3.00
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 0.25

Unfortunately, no breakdown was given for their new countries of citizenship.

Ireland

• Diaspora population: 990,000
  
• Homeland population: 4.6 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 24 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 2.42
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 0.53
  
• Popular new citizenships: United States (15)

Ireland has a similar overall renunciation rate to the U.S., but only because their diaspora population is proportionally so much larger, giving them more opportunities for foreign naturalisation. Interestingly, 15 out of the 24 naturalised in the U.S. and went on to formally renounce their Irish citizenship even though they could have kept it.

Renunciations due to prohibitions on dual citizenship

Poland

• Diaspora population: 2 million
  
• Homeland population: 38 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 354 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 17.7
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 0.93
  
• Popular new citizenships: Austria (151), Netherlands (73), Denmark (65), Germany (25)

Poland allows dual citizenship, but 314 of their 354 renunciants in 2010 naturalised in countries disallowing dual citizenship. (Edit: as pointed out by commenters, Germany actually allows dual citizenship in many cases). The other 40 were scattered around the globe.

Estonia

• Diaspora population: 190,000
  
• Homeland population: 1.3 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 122 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 64
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 9.4
  
• Popular new citizenships: Russia (121)

Estonia allows dual citizenship, but only for native-born Estonians, not naturalised citizens. Virtually all of the ex-Estonians became citizens of the Russian Federation, which also doesn’t permit dual citizenship except in cases governed by bilateral treaties (for example, the treaty with Tajikistan). My guess is that they were Soviet-era immigrants returning to their hometowns for a cheaper retirement. Basically a sui generis case.

Croatia

• Diaspora population: 610,000
  
• Homeland population: 4.3 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 1,231 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 200
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 29
  
• Popular new citizenships: Austria (443), Germany (686), Slovenia (54)

Croatia allows dual citizenship, but the Croat diaspora is heavily concentrated in countries which do not permit dual citizenship. Austria and Germany do not permit dual citizenship for adults at all; Slovenia does not permit naturalisation applicants to retain their prior citizenship. The remaining 48 ex-Croats were scattered around the globe. Croatia also has a much larger diaspora proportional to their population than the U.S. does.

Lithuania

• Diaspora population: 320,000
  
• Homeland population: 3.2 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 580 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 181
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 18
  
• Popular new citizenships: Russia (289), Germany (44), Sweden (44), Belarus (41), United States (26), Ukraine (23), Norway (19)

Lithuania does not do a very good job at keeping track of their diaspora; they listed 61 as having acquired “unknown nationality”. I believe that Lithuania does not allow dual citizenship in general.

Netherlands

• Diaspora population: 790,000
  
• Homeland population: 16 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 361 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 46
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 2.26
  
• Popular new citizenships: Turkey (178), Morocco (63), Bosnia and Herzegovina (29)

Guessing by the countries of new citizenship, the vast majority of Dutch renunciants are immigrants returning to their countries of origin. Only 5 ex-subjects of Queen Beatrix became Americans.

Renunciants in some countries retain significant rights

Denmark

• Diaspora population: 240,000
  
• Homeland population: 5.6 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 417 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 174
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 7.45
  
• Popular new citizenships: Sweden (157), Norway (45), Ethiopia (35), China (23), Afghanistan (18), Vietnam (15)

Denmark’s relatively high renunciation rate (comparable to that of Taiwan) can be explained by two factors. The first is the fact that they disallow dual citizenship. The other is that former Danish citizens can easily qualify for residence permits under Section 9d of the Aliens Act. They can then obtain permanent residence permits under the category of “applicants with strong ties to Denmark” after a year in the country. Thus, emigrants can put their minds at ease: they can gain the right to vote in their countries of settlement while still retaining the right to work in Denmark, instead of worrying about banished from the land of their birth like the ex-citizens of the “Land of the Free”.

Though I’m still rather mystified why someone would give up the world’s best passport (at least in terms of travel freedom) for some of the worst, like Ethiopia and Afghanistan. It’s also worth noting: only four ex-Danes became Americans, despite the rather large population of Danes working in the country. U.S. citizenship is not as attractive as those in the Homeland would like to think.

United Kingdom

• Diaspora population: 4.2 million
  
• Homeland population: 62 million
  
• Latest renunciation figure: 596 (2010)
  
• Renunciations per 100k diaspora population: 14
  
• Renunciations per 100k homeland population: 0.96

The UK permits dual citizenship, and also has very generous procedures for resumption of citizenship by former citizens. In general these provisions seem to have been designed to defeat their former colonies’ insistence on single citizenship or on politicians renouncing other citizenships before taking office. Many Britons “renounce” in order to gain citizenship in countries which do not permit dual citizenship, and then turn right around and resume citizenship.

Conclusions

Contrary to what the U.S. media would like us to think, 1,780 renunciants is a surprisingly large number for a first-world country, even one the size of the United States. Normal countries do not attempt to criminalise their overseas citizens’ ordinary daily activities, and thus renunciation of citizenship is generally an extremely rare phenomenon in those countries. As we can see from the European example, the vast majority of renunciations are undertaken the purpose of gaining citizenship in another country which does not permit dual citizenship.

The American diaspora is concentrated in Anglophone countries like Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand. Renunciation of citizenship is not a requirement for them to naturalise where they live, but they pursue it anyway, even against the threat of being permanently exiled by Congressional demagogues.