(Gemini Audio)
(de-news.net) – Thirty-five years after the reunification of Germany, Eastern federal states continue to demonstrate measurable progress in both economic and fiscal domains. However, recent findings suggest that the overall gap between affluent and economically weaker regions may be widening. This assessment was presented in a comprehensive study conducted by the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin), which has been widely cited in national media coverage. The study’s principal author, economist Kristina van Deuverden, reportedly emphasized that although the economic output of Eastern states remains below the national average, these regions have largely closed the gap with the less prosperous Western states.
Van Deuverden is understood to have noted that Saarland now ranks below Brandenburg in terms of fiscal capacity, and that the disparity with Lower Saxony has diminished substantially. Brandenburg, in particular, was said to be benefiting from its geographic proximity to Berlin, which has contributed to population growth and an expanding tax base. Saxony, too, was reported to be experiencing a marked increase in financial strength. Nonetheless, the study cautioned that the divide between economically dominant states—such as Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg, Hesse, and Hamburg—and the remainder of the federation may continue to grow. Van Deuverden projected that fiscal transfers between federal states are likely to increase as regional heterogeneity intensifies. She further suggested that the traditional East-West dichotomy is gradually being supplanted by a more nuanced rural-urban divide, with implications for future policy coordination and resource allocation.
A separate DIW study, referenced by the Funke media group, provided additional insight into productivity trends. According to this research, labor productivity in Eastern Germany stood at approximately 50 percent of the national average in 1991. However, recent data indicate that this figure has risen to nearly 90 percent, reflecting substantial convergence. The report highlighted that Eastern states have surpassed their Western counterparts in several service-oriented sectors, particularly in education, healthcare, and public administration. These gains were interpreted as evidence of successful structural adaptation and investment in human capital.
Further commentary was offered by Jens Südekum, a prominent economist based in Düsseldorf, who acknowledged the strategic advantages now present in Eastern Germany. He reportedly described the post-reunification infrastructure development as a formidable undertaking that ultimately yielded significant returns. Südekum pointed to the availability of well-developed land and access to climate-friendly energy sources as key locational assets. He also observed that Brandenburg and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern frequently rank among the top-performing states in national economic growth comparisons. Despite these strengths, Südekum was said to have conceded that Eastern Germany lacks metropolitan centers capable of rivaling cities such as Hamburg or Munich in terms of economic dynamism and global connectivity. He further suggested that the transformation of the former GDR’s economic system might have benefited from a more gradual and calibrated approach, particularly in light of the social and institutional disruptions that accompanied rapid liberalization.
In a statement made in September, Elisabeth Kaiser (SPD), the Federal Government Commissioner for Eastern Germany, had drawn attention to the region’s favorable conditions for family life. She reportedly recalled that both of her parents had been employed full-time, a pattern she regarded as typical in the East. Kaiser emphasized the importance of maintaining robust childcare infrastructure to support dual-income households and facilitate gender equality in the labor market.
