Wie in Online-Ausgabe 2004/17 versprochen, veröffentlichen wir umfangreiche statistische
Informationen über Grünau (in englischer Sprache). Lesen Sie dazu auch:
Grünau im Spiegel der Statistik.
A survey on Leipzig-Grünau
Presented by Dr. Leonhard Kasek
1. Introduction
The report contains the main information on Leipzig Grünau. In an appendix we will
give supplementary information in form of tables and figures. We can also give further
information on demand, if it is available. Please contact me as required:
Leo@Kasek.de.
2. Opinions on Leipzig-Grünau
Results of the Interviews
From the most important topics the people we asked are rather satisfied with the
following:
- feeling safe an traffic
- appearance of the buildings
- accessibility of Shopping facilities
- size of the house
- availability of repair and recycling shops
- quality of the children’s playgrounds
- quality of the public areas in the near (inner gardens or squares, walkways)
On the other hand from the most important topics people assess the performance of the
following very critical:
- state of maintenance
- level of cultural diversity
- safe during the day
- City council’s policy towards education
- Number of people involved in community activities?
- City council’s policy towards employment
- protected from noise pollution
- diversity and level of educational institutions
- facilities to meet each other and to organise together activities
- congestion as a problem
- City council’s policy towards pedestrians and cyclists
- City council’s policy towards waste
- Number of jobs in your urban area
- vandalism
- City council’s policy towards protection of environment
- City council’s policy towards quality of air
Opportunities and threats
main problems of Leipzig-Grünau
the growth and density (dimension of a medium-sized-
town), in some parts there are 8000 to 9000 residents per square kilometre. monotony of
architecture, up to now the redevelopment were not used to this boring outlook, problem: a new
standard of monotony, no innovation in architecture extremely few enterprises and working
places a growing number of empty flats: the number of residents is going back (from 1990 to
2000 about 25%) and in coincidence with this trend there is greater share of people from lower
social levels (according to income and education).
and on the other hand the qualities -
- the near lake Kulkwitz and in comparison to the other parts of Leipzig much green space
- quality of the green space. since 1993 a lot of projects are funded in the programme to enhance the environment of the large housing estates (called Development of the Large housing estates (in East Germany), goals out of the district plan are given in the material, main aim is to reach synergetic effects with housing reconstruction, infrastructure) projects: playgrounds, revaluation of pedestrian areas (3 avenues).
- new shopping mall in the centre of Grünau (since 1996) (was possible, because the holistic urban scheme has never been fully realized)
- good system of transportation well served by public transport through local train service, several tram and bus routes
- quality of the buildings: more than 50 % of the buildings are already refurbished
- ITC-information, communication, technology participation in community life
of Grünau is good developed, a lot of practice in participation accompanying the landscape
projects, different round-tables, residents groups, 2
»Stadtteilläden«
Forum Grünau (s.u.) -as a simulation model sustainable and innovative strategies for Grünau, which can be transferred to cities of Eastern Europe, which much more large housing estates (INTERREG II c)
Opportunities and threats
A important step to reconstruct Grünau and to chance problematic trends was the joint
formulation of guidelines of development of Grünau until the year of 2030 by all participants
of the project:
- Grünau - friendly to kids and families
- centre at the periphery
- work in Grünau to get higher net product and strategy for a dignified life
- ecological urban renewal
- Grünau - a laboratory of urban renewal
- and formulate a concept of measures (Maßnahmeplan)
The further diminishing of residents and the lack of working places are greatest dangers for the development of Grünau in the next years. At the moment the city counsel is attempting to demolish some houses in order to enlarge green space in front of the high rising blocks. These can improve the quality of live in Grünau and should help to stop the moving out of inhabitants.
3. Facts of Leipzig-Grünau
The people
| Short characteristics: | |
| Expanse: | 401 ha |
| Flats: | 36.000 appartment flats in 7 complexes |
| Construction period: | 1976-1988 |
| inhabitants development | 1989: 84.779 1999: 66.398 2003: ca. 63091 |
| rate of unemployment: | 15,8 % in the Leipzig-average, in Grünau 12.9% |
| vacancy rate: | ca. 15 % (spacial differentiation) |
| fluctuation rate: | about 15 % |
| rate of residents without German citizenship: | average in Leipzig 4,7 %, in Grünau 3,1% |
The boundaries are clear to recognise: against the other parts of Leipzig in the east
there is the green land with the so called harbour (a dead end of a not finished
channel). In the south and in the north are fields for agriculture and in the west the
Borderline is marked by lake Kulkwitz, the old village Miltitz and the brook
Zschampert. The kind of high-rising houses makes an other difference between
Grünau and the other parts of Leipzig next to it. For the feeling of the inhabitants to be
a »Grünauer«
these clear borderlines are very important.
Some information on climate: average temperature in 1999 = 10.6°C (= 1.5°C more as the normal temperature). The sun was shining in 1999 1602 hours, 7.2% more as usual. Average of rain/snow from 1961 to 1990 = 585 litres a square metre, in 1999 642 litres a square metre. Average of air humidity = 73% in 1999. Number of the days with rain/snow fall = 182 in 1999. Number of the days with mist 18 in 1999. Number of the days with thunderstorms = 23 in 1999.
Types of land use in Grünau
| type | ha | per cent | type | ha | per cent |
| residential buildings | 142,8 | 35.6% | Agriculture | 58,9 | 14.7% |
| areas for supplying and industry | 20,1 | 5.0% | forests, parks | 14,0 | 3.5% |
| green land | 33,7 | 8.4% | fallow land | 58,9 | 14.7% |
| stretch of water | 34,9 | 8.7% | Other | 12,8 | 3.2% |
| areas for traffic | 25,3 | 6.3% | |||
Residents per square kilometre 4817, in the average of Leipzig as a whole 1729.
Age of the residents of Grünau
| average | 42.6 years | 45 - 50 years | 10.6% |
| 0 - 5 years | 2.3% | 50 - 55 years | 7.4% |
| 5 - 10 years | 2.8% | 55 - 60 years | 8.3% |
| 10 - 15 years | 5.4% | 60 - 65 years | 6.3% |
| 15 - 20 years | 7.9% | 65 - 70 years | 4.4% |
| 20 - 25 years | 7.4% | 70 - 75 years | 4.0% |
| 25 - 30 years | 5.9% | 75 - 80 years | 3.3% |
| 30 - 35 years | 5.6% | More as 80 years | 3.8% |
| 35 - 40 years | 6.4% | ||
Gender: men 47.2 %, women 52.8%.
Professional education
| Professional education | 1995 | 2000 |
| Without any examination | 4.5% | 7.5% |
| Skilled worker | 49.1% | 53.2% |
| Technical college/master | 23.8% | 20.9% |
| University | 18.5% | 15.9% |
| Not known | 4.1% | 2.5% |
Level of employment
Employees per 100 residents capable of gainful employment = 50.5 Structure of unemployed residents in Grünau
| Of all unemployed residents are | |
| Blue collar workers | 58.5% |
| White collar workers | 41.5% |
| Men | 51.4% |
| Women | 48.6% |
| Unemployed below 25 years | 10.6% |
| Unemployed over 55 years | 21.5% |
| more as 1 year unemployment | 30.0% |
| Foreigners | 2.1% |
Car ownership (per 1,000 inhabitants) = 335 private cars
The physical and environmental conditions
the relevant issues of the built environment
History (background): the relevant issues of the built environment
The first buildings
were built in 1976. The construction of high-rise blocks of flats had finished in 1988. After
the withdrawal of the Russian army in 1994 former barracks had been demolished and on this area
were build residential buildings. From 1989 up to now in Leipzig-Grünau the number of
inhabitants diminished about 20% as in Leipzig as a whole.
In the GDR large housing estates were predominantly built between the 60s and 80s. They have more than 2.500 flats and are often constructed as suburban settlements. They provide of rental flats and an adequate social and physical infrastructure. The dimension of this housing forms is different in Germany: from 1.6 million flats in more than 240 large housing estates, more than 1 million in the new Länder. After all, one in four private household in East Germany lives on a large housing estate. Therefor large housing estate s are indispensable for long- term housing provision and the challenge for urban development is to develop them into attractive communities for the future.
Outside Berlin, Grünau is the largest location of pre-fabricated housing in eastern Germany - every 6th inhabitant of Leipzig lives in Grünau. With approximately 36.000 flats and 66.000 inhabitants this area has the dimension of a medium-sized town.
The housing area of Grünau was situated in the western outskirts of the city of Leipzig.
Between 1976-88 it was constructed with the technology of industrial prefabricated slabs. It
is structured by so-called 8 »housing complexes«
(WK) which are dominated by one and three
room flats mostly in 6 storey buildings, the average size is of 57.8 qm. Grünau is well served
by public transport through a local railway and many trams and bus routes.
the purpose of the urban area before the high-rise was built:
Up to 1975 in the area
were land for gardening, for agriculture, one village (Schönau), barracks of the red army and
one housing scheme with small houses (the old Grünau).
Why this location for the high-rise?
Near these location were most of the great
industrial plants of Leipzig (above all: iron smelting plants, heavy industry, mechanical
engineering). The goal were to provide the work force high quality (in relation to the average
flats in the GDR), but cheap flats and a short way to their working places. A strong division
between housing sites and industrial sites had dominated the building concepts.
target groups:
In theorie above all laborers (the »working class«
) but in practice also
many coworkers of the authorities, teachers, staff of the university and others. To obtain a
flat in Grünau were for a great part of the inhabitants of Leipzig very attractive and
therefore it was a hard struggling for it.
Why were these buildings built?
To build convenient flats as cheap as possible. Also to
save money for building infrastructure by a high density of inhabitants.
Related environmental problems
Grünau is related on the western outskirts of Leipzig. The
predominant direction of wind is south-west in the region of Leipzig. The air from this
direction were only few polluted. On the other hand the high-rise houses had only central
heating. Therefore Grünau was the part of Leipzig with the cleanest air.
Material use (fundament, inner and outer walls, floors, window and door frames, roofs,
kitchens, bathrooms, etc.)?
The most important material were concrete (in form of
prefabricated walls), beside also PVC (for the windows) and pieces of wood chips. The quality
of these materials were most low to save money.
the relevant issues of the green space
History (background):
The soil is quite fertile. Therefore it was used for agriculture
and the forests were moved already in the middle Age. There was no lakes in the region, only a
lot of small rivulets. The level of ground water was high (1.5 m below the surface), but it was
lowered by open air lignite mining (at the moment 4 to 5 m below the surface). With the ending
of lignite mining the ground water is rising again. Near the western outskirts of Grünau there
is a lake (about 150 ha expanse of water) in a former lignite pit, now a very attractive centre
for nearby recreation. About 5 km away is the next watered lignite pit, now the lake Cospuden
(about 430 ha).
Physical condition:
heavy clay soil, complete flat, only in the north-west of Grünau is a
low chain of ground moraines from the Ice Age.
Related environmental problems:
At the moment only: air pollution by car traffic and a
burden of lake Kulkwitz by urine of bathing people.
Protected nature in and near the urban area
At the moment there is no protected nature
in or around Grünau.
Habitats in and near the urban area
At the eastern borderline of Grünau: the so called
harbour (the dead end of a not finished channel with green land around. Next to it there is the
park of Schönau. At the western outskirts there are the lake Kulkwitz with park land and green
land around, near the western banks of lake Kulkwitz there is a young forest (about 35 years
old). Near lake Kulkwitz begins the brook Zschampert. The brook has no longer a natural well,
it was destroyed by lignite mining, and is therefore water is pumped in from lake Kulkwitz (it
is a must to lower the water level in the lake, otherwise the ground water would come in the
basements of the nearby houses (built in times with a low ground water level).
Ponds, lakes, streams:
The harbour, the Schönauer Lachen (three small ponds, former pits
for gravel mining), the brook Zschampert, in a distance from 2 km is a not finished piece of
channel (Elster-Saale-Kanal) and in a distance of 5 km each there the lake Cospuden (in the
south-east) and the rivers Elster and Luppe (in the north).
»Stay«
(to sit down, to play, to read) or »watch«
(or combination) green:
the green
around the »harbour«
, the Schönau-Park, the green space near lake Kulkwitz. Together around 50
ha (without the expanse of water). These greater green areas are combinations between stay and
watch greens. Between the houses are many lawns often lined with bushes. These lawns are for
stay.
What is the condition of the street furniture:
The streets has been rehabilitated in the
last years, in comparison to other parts of Leipzig they are in a quite good condition.
the relevant issues of energy
History (background)
Beside the houses in the old village and in the housing scheme all houses in
Grünau have central heating from the beginning. The mentioned older
settlements had had lignite fired heating up to the 90s, now the have all natural
gas heating. Also the new build small houses around the outskirts of Grünau
are natural gas fired.
Related environmental problems:
Because the warm water for central heating and the electric energy are not
generated in Grünau there are no greater emissions from energy generating.
But a greater part of houses are bad kept in, therefore the lose of heating
energy is partly great yet.
Where do the community’s energy supplies come from; and are these supplies diverse,
reliable, affordable and environmentally acceptable?
Heated Water for heating comes from
power stations (to generate electric energy). About 70% of the fuel for the power stations to
generate electric energy is lignite. The other part is natural gas. In future the cities
department of works will buy electric energy from hydroelectric power stations from Austria. At
the moment the energy from the lignite power station is quite expansive. Open air Lignite
mining is destroying landscape and the burning of lignite generates more CO2 each kWh as every
other fuel. Beside these the new lignite fuelled power station, which took off its work in
autumn 1999, emitted no greater amounts of problematic gases (like SO2 for example).
Is the community’s energy use compatible with other local goals (i.e., air quality,
transportation, etc.), and how does it compare with usage in other communities:
The
situation is similar in almost all eastern Germans cities. Besides the emission from green
house gases there are no longer greater amounts of emissions from problematic gases by the
power stations. On the other hand the loss of heating energy by walls bad insulated is far to
great yet. These is in conflict with the city of Leipzig’s goal to reduce CO2-emmission to 50%
in comparison to 1990. Lots of fuel is needed for stately growing car traffic. These growing
emissions of car traffic are the main factor of air pollution in Grünau.
What are the community’s opportunities for improving the efficiencies of its energy use, and
for replacing imported supplies with local renewable production?
Better heat insulation of
the houses, installation of termo-solar installations to heat the water, to give advise to the
inhabitants by which measures they can reduce their demand for electric energy (and also
heating energy) without to reduce their quality of live, at the moment are only few
possibilities for a greater enlargement of producing energy from wind power stations, fuelling
power stations with organic materials and using photovoltaic installations. The main energy-
resource in the region of Leipzig is only lignite with all its mentioned follows for the
environment: large scale emission of carbondioxid and destruction of landscape.
Are there economic development opportunities in renewable energy and efficiency projects,
and if so, of what type and magnitude?
Some Architects, enterprises and scientists attempt
to develop new methods to insulate the type of houses dominating Leipzig-Grünau to moderate
costs. At the moment we still cannot say in which scope these developments will be successful.
If the are then the demand for heating energy can probably reduced by 50% without loss of live
quality.
What proportion of supplies are produced locally versus being imported from outside the
community, and are they produced from renewable or non-renewable sources?
At the Moment
about 70% of the energy used in the houses (and in the few enterprises at Grünau) in Grünau
comes from burning lignite from our region. The other 30% comes from burning natural gas. All
power stations are situated ad maximum 30 km far from Grünau. Renewable sources have at Grünau
a share fare beyond 1%. Figures to the amount of energy-using for traffic in Grünau are not
available.
How much of the local economy is dedicated to importing supplies and how much local
employment is sustained by supply activities?
At Grünau there is no power station. In the
whole region there is only the new lignite power station in Lippendorf (about 30 km from
Grünau) that is exporting electric energy. From it depend about 2000 jobs. Beside from natural
gas as a source there is almost no import of electric energy and energy for heating from other
regions to Grünau. But of course the fuel for the cars must inevitably be imported. In future
(maybe from 2001 on) every user of energy can make his free decision from which supplying
enterprise he will buy his energy.
What are the overall costs of energy supplies for the community, and for typical households
and businesses?
The costs for an average houshold (3 persons) in Grünau are: for electric
energy between 750 DM (383,47 Euro) and 900 DM (460,16 Euro), for heating about 2000 DM
(1022,58 Euro) and for car using (only fuel) 2000 DM to 2500 DM (1022,58 to 1278,23 Euro) à
year. Data from enterprises are not avalaible.
What are the largest consumers of energy in the community, and in what sector is use growing
the fastest?
There are no greater enterprises in Grünau. The largest consumer is the Leipzig
owned public transport. The fastest growing using sector is the privat car traffic.
How do local consumption patterns compare to similar communities?
In similar eastern
Germanic communities the situation is comparable. Are there significant environmental effects
associated with particular end-uses? In Grünau has only the car traffic significant effect on
the environment (above all air pollution).
Which end-use sectors have the greatest potentials for efficiency improvements, and what are
the required investments and paybacks to achieve these potentials?
In Grünau: reducing the
amount of heating energy (to reduce it by 50% would probably cost 300 to 400 Mio. DM (153 to
205 Mill. Euro) for Grünau as a whole, as a follow the rent for an average flat (3 persons)
would risen by 110 DM (56,24 Euro) a month. Probably after six to eight years the rising of
rent would be by-passed by the prises for heating energy. Depending from the development of
prizes for heating-energy the investment in house insulation will amortise in 10 to 15 years.
After 25 years these investment would have a overall profit from 20000 DM to 25000 DM (10225 to
12782 Euro) in comparison to houses without an effective insulation. The problems are some of
the private owners do not have the money for such investment. They fear also that the tenants
would prefer flats with lower rents but higher costs for heating. On the other hand Leipzig
will probably loss in the next 15 years further 100.000 to 150.000 inhabitants, so a lot of
flats will became empty and the danger to loss the money for the investment caused by a lack
tenants is great.
What environmental problems can also be addressed through efficiency improvements?
In
Grünau only the air pollution and the noise could be reduced by using of cars with small fuel
demand.
Which efficiency opportunities have the greatest potential for benefiting the local
economy?
Reducing the demand for heating energy
What are the key organisations with authority to undertake efficiency projects, and what
types of technical and financial assistance are available to implement such projects?
The
great flat owners, technical assistance is available by a lot of specified enterprises and some
promoting organisations. Such projects can be financial supported by promoting programs from
the Federal Government and from the Saxon Government.
Which local undeveloped renewables have the greatest potential for producing beneficial
energy, and which can be feasibly developed in order to displace imported supplies?
In the
next 10 to 20 years in the region of Leipzig the renewables can take over only some per cent of
energy supply. The main sources will be using of solar installations for heating the water,
building of wind power stations ( the possibilities are contained because there are only few
suitable places with an average speed of wind sufficiently high) and using of organic material
(above all producing of rape seed oil as fuel for cars, but here are also contained
possibilities, because around Leipzig half of the fertile soil has been destroyed by open air
lignite mining). In the region of Leipzig there is only one possibility: large scale using of
solar power, if the technological progress can provide installations with a good value and with
a high degree of effectiveness.
What would be the major environmental effects of local renewable development? What would be
the local economic effects?
At the moment in Leipzig (not in Grünau) depend about 300 jobs
on producing of installations for using renewable energy (above all producing of towers for
wind power stations). By diminishing the demand for energy in the region of Leipzig it is
possible to create 10000 to 20000 jobs (above all in the field of insulation the houses). For
diminish the demand for heating energy to 50% in Leipzig-Grünau about 200 to 300 workers had
labour for ten years. For Leipzig Grünau the local renewable development had no direct effects
on environment and also not in the immediately neighbourhood.
Will local renewable development also require new or expanded energy transmission
facilities, and if so, what would be the impacts?
As far as we can see at the moment only
short ways have to bridged to connect the wind mills with electricity supplying net. That would
not have a greater impact for the region.
the relevant issues of water
History (background):
building of the not finished channel in the 30 years, development
of smal lakes in the gravel pits in the 70s. Watering of the old lignite pit (now lake
Kulkwitz) from 1962 up to the beginning of 90s. Destroying of the well of brook Zschampert by
lignite mining about 150 years ago, destroying of the brookbed of Zschampert in the 80s
(transformation to a concrete channel to draw off Grünaus rain water), from the 50s to the mid
of the 90s the water of the Zschampert was strong polluted and stinking. Transformation of the
bed of Zschampert in his natural conditions in 1997. Beginning of lowering the level of ground
water about 150 years ago (from 1.5 m beneath the surface to 6m 40 years ago), begin of rising
of the ground water level in the 80s. Now the average level is about 4 m beneath the
Surface
Physical condition:
Because there is chalky soil in the region the water contains much
calcium. All the surface waters are only moderate polluted and much more clean as 10 years
ago.
Related environmental problems:
The diminishing of ground water level destroyed also some
smaller humid habitats, the roots of the older trees could not follow the ground water in the
deep. The new lakes and the channel created new habitats in the region, similar habitats did
not exist before the 30s in the region. Water pollution extinguished all live in the brook
Zschampert. Now the bed of Zschampert is a way for animals and plants trough a densely
populated area with many streets. Water consumption per capita, per household, per toilet flush
Water consumption per capita is in Grünau about 85 to 90 litres a day. The toilet flush has in
average 7 to 8 litres every time.
Ground water situation:
The ground water is polluted with nitrate and nitrite from
fertilizer using on the nearby fields. It can not be drank.
Analysis of current situation:
Does your high-rise area discharge waste water either
directly or indirectly? Indirectly: the waste water pipes are partly defect and a part of
sewage is seeping in the soil.
Which internal methods of waste water treatment exist in the high-rise area?
All the
waste water goes to a modern sewage plant, the quality of the water after the purification is
similar to rain water. The threshold values of fresh water was not exceed for last 8 years.
Origin of water:
All the fresh water in Grünau is coming from Harz mountains. The
quality is very good. The water from these mountains contains much calcium.
In Grünau almost all the pipelines in the houses have been renovated in last ten years. The
great sewage pipes in Grünau are 25 years old and in quite good constitution yet. But the pipes
in the older parts of Leipzig between Grünau and the sewage plant »Rosenthal«
is low and there
an important part of the sewage is seeking in the soil.
Special installations to reduce the water consumption are not built in by the owners, that every tenant has to do for it self. Exact figures are not available. But we now from the shop keepers and sellers that the demand for household appliances with low water consumption is high.
The rain water is almost all collect in the sewage pipes and led to the sewage plant. But there are some activities to collect and use the rainwater because for 1 year the residents have to pay for rain water that is drained to sewage plant. Grey water using and recycling procedures for waste water did not exists in Grünau at the moment.
The requirements regarding the treatment of waste water are ruled in the following laws: Gesetz zur Ordnung des Wasserhaushaltes, Gesetz über Abgaben für das Einleiten von Abwasser in Gewässer und Gesetz über die Umweltverträglichkeit von Wasch- und Reinigungsmitteln. Special questions for the region of Leipzig are ruled in the statutes of the waste water association Leipzig-Westsachsen.
The communal waterworks of Leipzig are responsible for the water management. The waterworks
conduct stately analyses on the quality of the water. Beside this every resident can make proof
the water quality by an independent organization (for example by an environmental
organization). Such an analyze costs in average between 30 DM and 50 DM (15,34 and 25,56 Euro).
Because in Grünau is almost no industry there is also no producing of hazardous materials. The
data on hazardous materials in Leipzig are published regularly in a report on the environmental
situation by the city council. The water consumption per capita is in Grünau lower as the
average in Germany. By an consequent water management in the households it is possible reducing
the water consumption by about 25% yet, without any reduction of live quality.
Critical
water substances in Grünau are above all: nitrate, nitrite and in some regards also the high
content on calcium.
the relevant issues of waste
In 1999 in Leipzig as a whole the following amounts of waste were collected:
| Kinds of waste | Amount in tons | Amount in kg per capita |
| hazardous substances | 300 | 0.6 |
| bulky refuse | 29000 | 58.9 |
| Paper | 41400 | 84.1 |
| Glass | 16200 | 32.9 |
| Wrappings | 15700 | 31.9 |
| remaining garbage | 110000 | 223.6 |
the socio-economic conditions
the most dominant household structures
data only available for Leipzig as a whole
| Households in which are living | |
| 1 person | 39.4% |
| 2 persons | 34.8% |
| 3 persons | 17.3% |
| 4 persons | 7.2% |
| 5 or more persons | 1.3% |
The average household in Leipzig had 2.0 persons in Leipzig and 2.34 persons in Grünau. In Grünau children are living in 31% of the households.
the distribution of incomes
available only for Leipzig as a whole
| Net income a month | Euro | Per cent of adult persons |
| Lower as 600 DM | lower as 306 | 8.9% |
| 600 DM - 999 DM | 306 - 510 | 10.9% |
| 1000 DM - 1399 DM | 511 - 715 | 15.9% |
| 1400 DM - 1799 DM | 716 - 919 | 17.2% |
| 1800 DM - 2199 DM | 920 - 1124 | 17.9% |
| 2200 DM - 2499 DM | 1125 - 1277 | 11.3% |
| 2500 DM - 2999 DM | 1278 - 1533 | 7.4% |
| 3000 DM - 3499 DM | 1534 - 1789 | 4.1% |
| 3500 DM - 3999 DM | 1790 - 2044 | 2.6% |
| 4000 DM and more | 2044 and more | 4.3% |
In Leipzig the average is 1778 DM (909,08 Euro) in 1999, for Grünau the average is estimated with 1169 DM (597,70 Euro), about 30% lower as in Leipzig as a whole.
Crimes
Available only for Leipzig as whole
Criminal offences in 1999
| kind | number | Solved from it (in per cent) |
| total | 79967 | 45% |
| Crimes of violence | 1578 | 61.9% |
| From it murder | 27 | 96.3% |
| robbery | 861 | 48.8% |
| Crime against personal freedom | 1550 | 91.2% |
| Physical injury | 3199 | 83.7% |
| Sexual crimes | 402 | 70.1% |
| theft | 48447 | 25.7% |
| From it theft from or in cars | 15260 | 7.5% |
| From it theft in shops | 8935 | 88.5% |
| fraud | 7462 | 79.8% |
| Arson, fire-raising | 222 | 39.2% |
| Damage to property | 6409 | 29.4% |
| Drug offences | 1335 | 99.8% |
The number of criminal defences in Grünau is not higher as the average of Leipzig. The
centres of criminal offences in Leipzig are some parts of the town in the south and in the west
of the city centre.
Grey/black economy is probably an important issue? Exact figures are
not available. Experts estimate the worth with 20% to 30% of official income in average. The
main fields are trads and education.
Preferred using of means for mobility
Only available for Leipzig as a whole
| Destination | Public transport | car | Walking or bike |
| Workplace | 33% | 53% | 14% |
| Shopping | 16% | 59% | 25% |
| Leisure | 19% | 53% | 28% |
| City centre | 38% | 45% | 17% |
| education | 38% | 45% | 17% |
A lack of parking places and traffic jam in the rush hours are important problems for many residents of Grünau.
Appendix
Table 1: resultats of the survey: 41 active people and »normal«
residents
| performance | importance | |||||
| yes | Neutral | no | high | neutral | low | |
| 1. Are you satisfied with the quality of your house in reference to the price you pay? | 28% | 50% | 22% | 94% | 6% | 0% |
| 2. Are you satisfied with the size of your house? | 60% | 40% | 0% | 85% | 15% | 0% |
| 3. Are you satisfied with the state of maintenance? | 0% | 33% | 67% | 100% | 0% | 0% |
| 4. Are you satisfied with the comfort at your place (heating, air and water quality)? | 34% | 54% | 12% | 85% | 10% | 5% |
| 5. Do you feel you comfortable at your place? | 60% | 35% | 5% | 63% | 29% | 8% |
| 6. Are you satisfied with the entrance hall and storage floors or your high-rise buiding? | 31% | 46% | 23% | 81% | 16% | 3% |
| 7. Are you satisfied with the use of the ground floor level, the plinth of your high- rise building? | 47% | 36% | 17% | 76% | 19% | 5% |
| 8. Are you satisfied with the quality of the public areas near your place (inner gardens or squares, walkways)? | 49% | 38% | 14% | 92% | 6% | 3% |
| 9a. Is there enough public accessible green spare? | 28% | 33% | 40% | 63% | 34% | 3% |
| 9b. Are you satisfied with the quality of the green space? | 18% | 51% | 31% | 47% | 50% | 3% |
| 10a Is there enough spare for children to play? | 27% | 56% | 17% | 81% | 17% | 3% |
| 10b. Are you satisfied with the quality of the children’s playgrounds? | 54% | 33% | 13% | 81% | 19% | 0% |
| 11a. Do you think that vandalism is not a problem? | 22% | 59% | 20% | 83% | 17% | 0% |
| 11b. Do you think that graffiti is not a Problem? | 55% | 24% | 21% | 31% | 43% | 26% |
| 12. Do you think that street litter is not a problem? | 42% | 45% | 12% | 38% | 38% | 24% |
| 13a. Do you feel safe during the day? | 0% | 38% | 62% | 92% | 8% | 0% |
| 13b. Do you feel safe during the night? | 10% | 28% | 62% | 72% | 17% | 11% |
| 14. Are you satisfied with the air quality? | 31% | 51% | 18% | 78% | 22% | 0% |
| 15. Are you satisfied with the quality of ponds/canals? | 29% | 39% | 32% | 91% | 37% | 29% |
| 16. Are you well protected from noise pollution? | 11% | 39% | 50% | 91% | 37% | 46% |
| 17. Do you like the appearance of the buildings? | 63% | 29% | 8% | 83% | 27% | 7% |
| 18. Do you consider your housing environment as attractive? | 63% | 29% | 9% | 70% | 24% | 7% |
| 19. Are you satisfied with the diverse of businesses and institutions? | 30% | 39% | 30% | 46% | 38% | 15% |
| performance | importance | |||||
| yes | Neutral | no | high | neutral | low | |
| 22a. Are you satisfied with the number of Offices? | 16% | 40% | 44% | 38% | 46% | 15% |
| 21. Do you consider the level of pollution as hindrance? | 29% | 59% | 12% | 74% | 23% | 3% |
| 21a Do you consider the intensity of traffic as a problem? | 15% | 64% | 21% | 76% | 24% | 0% |
| 23. Are there enough jobs in your urban area? | 21% | 62% | 18% | 88% | 12% | 0% |
| 24. Are you satisfied with the quality of the Jobs offered in your urban area? | 10% | 27% | 63% | 77% | 20% | 3% |
| 24 d Are satisfied with high of unemployment in Grünau? | 7% | 31% | 62% | 63% | 27% | 10% |
| 25a. Is there a sense of community in the urban area? | 29% | 51% | 20% | 75% | 22% | 3% |
| 25b. Is the contact you have with your neighbours good? | 17% | 37% | 46% | 67% | 24% | 9% |
| 25c. Are there enough people involved in community activities? | 3% | 24% | 73% | 81% | 13% | 6% |
| 25d. Are there facilities to meet each other and to organise together activities? | 12% | 21% | 67% | 83% | 17% | 0% |
| 26a Are you satisfied with the level of cultural diversity? | 0% | 9% | 91% | 94% | 6% | 0% |
| 26b. Are you satisfied with the number of cultural activities? | 19% | 39% | 42% | 71% | 20% | 9% |
| 27. Are you satisfied with the possibility to be involved in local politics? | 43% | 35% | 22% | 78% | 14% | 8% |
| 28a. Are you satisfied with the possibilities and accessibility for handicapped people? | 17% | 44% | 39% | 53% | 33% | 14% |
| 28b. Are you satisfied with the possibilities and accessibility for the elderly? | 17% | 43% | 40% | 61% | 28% | 11% |
| 28c. Are you satisfied with the possibilities and accessibility for ethnic minorities? | 22% | 43% | 35% | 50% | 50% | 0% |
| 28d. Are you satisfied with the possibilities for the youth? | 33% | 53% | 14% | 42% | 53% | 6% |
| 29a. Are you satisfied with the number of shops? | 26% | 37% | 37% | 65% | 22% | 14% |
| 29b. Are you satisfied with the diversity of Shops? | 26% | 50% | 24% | 71% | 26% | 3% |
| performance | importance | |||||
| yes | Neutral | no | high | neutral | low | |
| 30. Are you satisfied with the availability of recreational facilities? | 29% | 54% | 17% | 77% | 20% | 3% |
| 31a Are you satisfied with the availability of educational institutions? | 25% | 47% | 28% | 56% | 31% | 13% |
| 31b. Are you satisfied with the diversity and level of educational institutions? | 11% | 30% | 59% | 88% | 12% | 0% |
| 32a Are you satisfied with the availability of PCs on schools? | 70% | 23% | 8% | 69% | 22% | 8% |
| 32b. Are you satisfied with the availability of telecommunication centres (internet cafe, telematic information points)? | 44% | 44% | 13% | 68% | 27% | 5% |
| 32d. Are you satisfied with the level of internet accessibility? | 45% | 47% | 8% | 49% | 43% | 8% |
| 33a. Are you satisfied with the availability of repair and recycling shops? | 56% | 38% | 5% | 83% | 17% | 0% |
| 33b. Are you satisfied with the separate waste colledion? | 32% | 29% | 39% | 74% | 23% | 3% |
| 34. Are you satisfied with the health services in your area? | 29% | 39% | 32% | 62% | 31% | 7% |
| 35. Is there enough policing in your area? | 13% | 39% | 48% | 59% | 26% | 15% |
| 36. Are you satisfied with the quality of ’services’ in your urban area? | 32% | 38% | 30% | 67% | 25% | 8% |
| 37. Are you satisfied with the availability of public transport? | 34% | 50% | 16% | 61% | 29% | 10% |
| 38. Are you satisfied with the bicycle roads? | 24% | 50% | 26% | 63% | 34% | 3% |
| 39. Are you satisfied with the possibilities to walk? | 56% | 28% | 17% | 69% | 29% | 3% |
| performance | importance | |||||
| yes | Neutral | no | high | neutral | low | |
| 40. Do you feel Safe an traffic? | 66% | 18% | 16% | 78% | 22% | 0% |
| 41. Do you consider congestion a Problem? | 14% | 56% | 31% | 83% | 14% | 3% |
| 42. Are you satisfied with the number of car Parks? | 27% | 68% | 5% | 69% | 29% | 3% |
| 43a. Are you satisfied with the accessibility of Grünau in general? | 64% | 28% | 8% | 71% | 26% | 3% |
| 43b. Are you satisfied with the accessibility of work places? | 45% | 47% | 8% | 76% | 19% | 5% |
| 43c. Are you satisfied with the accessibility of Shopping facilities? | 61% | 26% | 13% | 81% | 19% | 0% |
| The open questions 44 to 51 had been answered by 33 from the 41 people answered to the survey as a whole. | ||||||
| 52. The social situation in nearby urban areas is | 23% | 60% | 17% | 45% | 26% | 15% |
| 53. The economic situation in nearby urban areas is: | 4% | 63% | 33% | 45% | 48% | 7% |
| 54. The environmentat situation in nearby urban areas is: | 15% | 67% | 19% | 59% | 34% | 7% |
| 55. The industrial sduation in nearby urban areas is | 10% | 38% | 52% | 57% | 37% | 7% |
| 56. Reconstruction of Leipzig | 15% | 67% | 18% | 60% | 37% | 3% |
| 57. Promotion of social relations and neighbourhoods | 6% | 58% | 35% | 68% | 29% | 3% |
| 58. Integration from different groups of residents | 10% | 63% | 27% | 45% | 42% | 13% |
| 59. City councel’s policy towards education | 3% | 33% | 63% | 87% | 10% | 3% |
| performance | importance | |||||
| yes | Neutral | no | high | neutral | low | |
| 60. City councel’s policy towards public transport | 18% | 55% | 27% | 68% | 29% | 3% |
| 61. City councel’s policy towards car traffic | 6% | 38% | 56% | 58% | 33% | 9% |
| 62. City councel’s policy towards pedastrians and cyclists | 15% | 53% | 32% | 85% | 12% | 3% |
| 63. Promotion of ICT | 13% | 60% | 27% | 58% | 32% | 10% |
| 64. City councel’s policy towards architectur | 0% | 55% | 45% | 53% | 43% | 3% |
| 65. City councel’s policy towards emploiment | 6% | 18% | 76% | 94% | 6% | 0% |
| 66. City councel’s policy towards industry | 0% | 35% | 65% | 77% | 23% | 0% |
| 67. City councel’s policy towards energy | 13% | 59% | 28% | 70% | 30% | 0% |
| 68. City councel’s policy towards protection of environment | 22% | 56% | 22% | 81% | 19% | 0% |
| 69. City councel’s policy towards public green space | 24% | 62% | 15% | 73% | 27% | 0% |
| 70. City councel’s policy towards quality of water | 36% | 55% | 9% | 76% | 18% | 6% |
| 71. City councel’s policy towards quality of air | 24% | 64% | 12% | 81% | 16% | 3% |
| 72. City councel’s policy towards waste | 16% | 50% | 34% | 84% | 16% | 0% |
| 73. City councel’s policy towards noise | 18% | 58% | 24% | 75% | 25% | 0% |
Age average 45.2 years
Gender: 55% female, 45% male
Table 2 a 44. Why are you living in Grünau?
25 persons that have answered this question live in Grünau and 8 live in other parts of Leipzig.
| Absolute | Per cent | |
| much green space, near to lake Kulkwitz | 14 | 56% |
| rather low rents in relation to the comfort | 10 | 40% |
| live here already for a long time | 6 | 24% |
| friends or relatives are living in Grünau | 5 | 20% |
| high quality of public transport | 4 | 16% |
| I like Grünau | 4 | 16% |
| good shopping facilities in the near | 2 | 8% |
| my workplace is in the near | 2 | 8% |
| flats in high rising buildings are more suitable | 1 | 4% |
| good health service in the residential area | 1 | 4% |
| I’m a member of an owner co-operative | 1 | 4% |
| my garden is in the neighbourhood | 1 | 4% |
| the residential area is clean | 1 | 4% |
Table 2b 44. Why do you not live in Grünau?
| absolut | Per cent | |
| it is to boring there | 5 | 63% |
| other residential areas are mor beautifull | 3 | 38% |
| Grünau is to far from the city center | 2 | 25% |
| I hate the people of Grünau | 1 | 13% |
| I have friendly neighbours in my actual residential area | 1 | 13% |
| in my residential area there isn’t so busy as in Grünau | 1 | 13% |
| There is more green space here | 1 | 13% |
Table 3: 45. What are you worried about with resped to the neighbourhood?
| absolute | per cent | |
| apathy and aggressiveness of the neighbours | 16 | 48% |
| drunken people in front of shopping centres, to many social disabled, | 13 | 39% |
| a lack of communication with the neighbours | 8 | 24% |
| to many empty flats, move away of neighbours | 6 | 18% |
| vandalism and crime | 5 | 15% |
| to many fighting dogs in the neighbourhood | 4 | 12% |
| to many right wing radicals | 4 | 12% |
| a lack of facilities to spend ones leisure | 2 | 6% |
| disbalanced relations of the different age-groups | 2 | 6% |
| closed shops | 1 | 3% |
| dirty environment of residential area | 1 | 3% |
| nothing yet | 1 | 3% |
| rent increase | 1 | 3% |
| the residential area is overcrowded | 1 | 3% |
| to many foreign people | 1 | 3% |
| transformation of green space in car parks | 1 | 3% |
| youth without respect for the elderly | 1 | 3% |
Table 4: 46. What must be changed absolutely?
| absolute | per cent | |
| more rigorous action of the police | 9 | 27% |
| more and more attrativly green spaces | 8 | 24% |
| more facilities to spend ones leisure, above all for the youth | 8 | 24% |
| demolition of selected houses to reduce the number of empty flats | 6 | 18% |
| more clineliness | 5 | 15% |
| more cycleways | 4 | 12% |
| stop of moving of social disabled to Grünau | 4 | 12% |
| better architectur | 3 | 9% |
| better public transport | 3 | 9% |
| more parking spots | 3 | 9% |
| better image for Grünau | 2 | 6% |
| better noise prevention | 2 | 6% |
| cheaper flats | 2 | 6% |
| more jobs | 2 | 6% |
| no fighting dogs in the flats | 2 | 6% |
| reducing of building sites | 2 | 6% |
| shaping of neighbourhoods | 2 | 6% |
| broader roads | 1 | 3% |
| building of a multipurpose hall | 1 | 3% |
| integration of foreign people | 1 | 3% |
| more flats according to the needs of the elderly | 1 | 3% |
| more friendly neighbours | 1 | 3% |
| promotion of moving of people to Grünau | 1 | 3% |
| stop of feeding waterfowels by strollers | 1 | 3% |
| stop of school closing | 1 | 3% |
| stop of truck-parking in the residential areas | 1 | 3% |
| throwing out of right wing radicals | 1 | 3% |
| transformation of illegal paths in public ways | 1 | 3% |
Table 5: 47.What must absolutely remain as it is now?
| absolute | per cent | |
| parks and green space | 15 | 45% |
| public transport | 11 | 33% |
| business hours of the shopping centres | 4 | 12% |
| traffic calmed roads | 4 | 12% |
| all schools, no closing of schools | 3 | 9% |
| district information and consultation points of the city councel | 3 | 9% |
| free acces to all areas around lake Kulkwitz | 3 | 9% |
| commitment of the city councel to Grünau | 2 | 6% |
| social mixture of residents | 2 | 6% |
| weekly fresh food markets | 2 | 6% |
| cleaneliness | 1 | 3% |
| comfort of ones homes | 1 | 3% |
| commitment of residents to Grünau | 1 | 3% |
| cultural events in summer | 1 | 3% |
| good health service | 1 | 3% |
| KOMM organization | 1 | 3% |
| low rents | 1 | 3% |
| narrow connections with the other parts of Leipzig | 1 | 3% |
| no house demolition | 1 | 3% |
| number of children’s playgrounds | 1 | 3% |
| shopping centres | 1 | 3% |
Table 6: 48. If there was a significant amount of money, what kind of projects in your neighbourhood would you support?
| absolute | per cent | |
| facilities to spend ones leisure | 9 | 27% |
| for the enlargment of parks and green space | 9 | 27% |
| for the work with youth | 7 | 21% |
| building of streets | 3 | 9% |
| I would the money give to schools | 3 | 9% |
| social care | 3 | 9% |
| job creation | 2 | 6% |
| protection of nature | 2 | 6% |
| reconstruction of the environment of lake Kulkwitz | 2 | 6% |
| social integration of the elderly | 2 | 6% |
| to broaden the diversity of architectur | 2 | 6% |
| to finish the reconstruction of houses | 2 | 6% |
| a gardening exhibition | 1 | 3% |
| advertisement for Grünau | 1 | 3% |
| cleaning of public space | 1 | 3% |
| demolition of empty flats | 1 | 3% |
| I would the residentials ask what they want | 1 | 3% |
| looking after the victims of rape | 1 | 3% |
| preservation of social mixture of the residents | 1 | 3% |
reconstruction of »Elster-Saale-Kanal« |
1 | 3% |
| reconstruction of city train | 1 | 3% |
| supporting disabled people | 1 | 3% |
| supporting of families of social disabled people | 1 | 3% |
| to build more cycle stands | 1 | 3% |
| to build new children’s play grounds | 1 | 3% |
Table 7: 49.How would you describe the present state of Grünau?
| absolut | per cent | |
| part of Leipzig throughout the times | 8 | 24% |
| an attractive residential area | 3 | 9% |
| centre of right wing radicals violation | 3 | 9% |
| critical | 3 | 9% |
| grey | 3 | 9% |
| growing better | 3 | 9% |
| social decline | 3 | 9% |
| to many empty flats | 3 | 9% |
| a district in what is a lot to do yet | 2 | 6% |
| a green district | 2 | 6% |
| better as described in the newspapers | 2 | 6% |
| to many building sites | 2 | 6% |
| a lack of jobs in the environment | 1 | 3% |
| a lack of reconstructed houses | 1 | 3% |
| a lack of trees | 1 | 3% |
| better as other high rising areas | 1 | 3% |
| better as somme years ago | 1 | 3% |
| growing social tensions | 1 | 3% |
| important lacks on almost all fields | 1 | 3% |
| in parts a cheap reconstruction | 1 | 3% |
Table 8: 50. How would you describe the present image of Grünau?
| absolute | per cent | |
| bad | 15 | 45% |
| a lot of prejudices against Grünau | 6 | 18% |
| a mixture from attrative residetial areas and concrete blocks | 3 | 9% |
| high rising area | 3 | 9% |
| area of demolition of houses | 2 | 6% |
| boring | 2 | 6% |
| the residents like it | 2 | 6% |
| will be better in future | 2 | 6% |
| a centre of vandalisme | 1 | 3% |
| concrete blocks | 1 | 3% |
| grey | 1 | 3% |
| mediocre | 1 | 3% |
| slum | 1 | 3% |
| to many building sites | 1 | 3% |
| to many empty flats | 1 | 3% |
| to many foreign people | 1 | 3% |
| unemploiment | 1 | 3% |
Table 9: 51. What would you like to be the future image of Grünau?
| absolute | per cent | |
| garden district, green district | 11 | 33% |
| attractive residential area | 8 | 24% |
| better as now | 5 | 15% |
| clean | 4 | 12% |
| friendly residents | 4 | 12% |
| attractive to the youth | 3 | 9% |
| colourful | 2 | 6% |
| enough jobs in the environment | 2 | 6% |
| creativ | 1 | 3% |
| good infrastructure | 1 | 3% |
| houses shortend to 5 storages | 1 | 3% |
| it will be bad | 1 | 3% |
| modern | 1 | 3% |
| no aggressive young people | 1 | 3% |
| no problem citizens | 1 | 3% |
Table 10 Some results of an other survey in Grünau (spring 2000, 571 residents,
»stake holder«
)
| meanings of resident to their district Grünau | |
| good shopping facilities | 88% |
| Apart from cinema and swimming bath there is nothing happening | 64% |
| order, safety and cleanliness could be better | 60% |
| The environment of our has been more beautifull | 60% |
| To many trouble- makers are moving to Grünau. | 60% |
| Grünau is a family friendly district | 57% |
| In Grünau it is better living as in the older parts of Leipzig | 54% |
| Some blocks of flats should be pulled down | 52% |
| all generations are living well together in Grünau | 51% |
| Grünau is inviting you to go for a walk | 47% |
| If I had more money I would move away from Grünau | 47% |
| Grünau is a children friendly district | 46% |
| Here are no more criminal offences as elsewhere | 45% |
| Grünau is a elderly friendly district | 43% |
| Our landlord takes a lot of trouble for us | 41% |
| Grünau is a district friendly to disabled people | 41% |
| Schools should be used as a meeting point for all people | 37% |
| Foreign fellow citizens are wellcome in Grünau | 23% |
| the social milieu is quite good | 22% |
| There are lots of organizations in Grünau - for somebody something | 14% |
| I find wild graffiti quite tolerable | 13% |
| Young persons like it living in Grünau | 12% |
| what residents miss in Grünau | |
| working places | 35% |
| Cafés | 29% |
| Pubs | 24% |
| clubs for young residents | 20% |
| clubs for the elderly | 11% |
| post offices | 9% |
| swimming bathes | 9% |
| different services | 8% |
| Libraries | 6% |
| Banks | 5% |
| Cinemas | 5% |
| educational institutions | 4% |
| art exhibitions | 4% |
| fitness centres | 3% |
| school of dancing | 3% |
Table 11: persons per room (for Leipzig as whole) in 2000
| number of persons in the household | 1 room | 2 rooms | 3 rooms | 4 rooms | 5 rooms |
| 1 | 18% | 53% | 22% | 5% | 1% |
| 2 | 1% | 29% | 50% | 15% | 5% |
| 3 | 0% | 4% | 53% | 29% | 14% |
| 4 and more | 0% | 1% | 20% | 47% | 32% |
In the tendency the expanse per person and the number of rooms per person have been growing in the last years. The expanse of the flats is in Leipzig (year 2000): 1-person-households: 52,8 m2, 2-person-households 70,3 m2, 3-person-households 85,7 m2, 4 and more-person-households 101,5 m2.
Table 12: access to an PC (only for Leipzig as a whole)
| Access to PC | 2000 |
| at home | 23% |
| at work, school or university | 11% |
| both | 24% |
| no access | 42% |
Table 13: access to internet at home or at work, school or university (available only for Leipzig as a whole)
| Access | 1999 | 2000 |
| at home | 12% | 15% |
| at work, school or university | 10% | 12% |
| both | 7% | 11% |
| no access | 72% | 62% |
Table 14: seriously handicapped persons of the residents of Leipzig (available only for Leipzig as a whole) in per cent of all seriously handicapped
| age | 1999 |
| 0 to 6 years | 0.3% |
| 6 to 15 years | 1.6% |
| 15 to 25 years | 2.2% |
| 25 to 35 years | 4.6% |
| 35 to 45 years | 7.2% |
| 45 to 55 years | 12.1% |
| 55 to 65 years | 22.6% |
| 65 to 75 years | 24.4% |
| 75 years and older | 25.0% |
38692 of the inhabitants of Leipzig were in 1999 seriously handicapped. Seriously means a handicap of 50% and more.
Table 15: extent of handicap (available only for Leipzig as a whole) in per cent (100% means total handicapped) in 1999
| extent | Absolute number | Per cent of all handicapped persons |
| 30% and 40% | 12436 | 24.3% |
| 50% | 11755 | 23.0% |
| 60% | 6365 | 12.4% |
| 70% | 4335 | 8.5% |
| 80% | 5137 | 10.0% |
| 90% | 2376 | 4.6% |
| 100% | 8724 | 75.7% |
Table 16: persons being on drugs (available only for Leipzig as a whole)
| Kind of drug | 1994 | 1999 |
| Opium and similar substances | 82 | 899 |
| Hashish/marijuana | 38 | 70 |
| Hypnotics | 9 | 31 |
| Cocaine | 12 | 79 |
| Hallucinogens | 12 | 29 |
| Other drugs | 21 | 65 |
| total | 174 | 1173 |
At the moment the number of persons being on drugs is rising exponentiel.
Dr. Leonhard Kasek
Weiter>>>