% % % % % % ~

1001-5558 2015 03-0021-16 2010 C91 A 2014 5 2010 N. W. Journal of Ethnology 2015 3 86 2015.No.3 Total No.86

2010 2010 2181.58 882.99 40.47% 1298.59 59.53% 2013 2232.78 847.29 37.95% 1385.49 62.05% 1990 1.92% 2010 1.67% 1 20 80 80 80 1990 1 1991~ 1995 1980 21.28 1985 19.8 1990 26.41 2000 17.57 2000 15 2012 15.32 5 10 12 5 10.84 10 20 90 22

1955 13 2010 55 13 1000.13 882.99 141.83 98.3 15.63 18.05 3.44 0.85 4.73 1.01 0.32 1.87 0.55 2169.7 13 45.84% 40.47% 6.5% 4.51% 0.72% 0.83% 0.16% 0.04% 0.22% 0.05% 0.01% 0.09% 0.03% 99.50% 97.32% 77.02% 10.92% 7.57% 95.51% 2013 2012 13 1990~2000 2.18% 2000~2010 1.99% 2% 2000 2010 1.6% 1% 1 % 1 2 1.38% 1990 1529.16 944.95 61.80 2000 1849.4 1124.32 60.79 2010 2181.58 1298.59 59.53 1990~2000 1.92 1.75 2000~2010 2 1.65 1.45 1990~2000 3 1.90 1.64 2000~2010 4 1.57 1.70 1 2010 M.2012 2000 M.2002. 1990 M.1992. 2013 M.2013. 234 23

2010 260.72 12% 222.98 25.25% 85.52% 12012 5.67 5.62 20 90 2 % 2 1990 584.21 2000 725.08 2010 882.99 1990~2000 3 2.16 2000~2010 4 1.97 1990~2000 5 2.33 2000~2010 6 1.38 38.20 39.21 40.47 724.95 852.33 1000.13 1.62 1.60 1.62 1.77 47.41 46.09 45.84 116.13 131.87 141.83 1.27 0.73 1.46 1.37 7.59 7.13 6.50 70.37 83.93 98.3 1.76 1.58 1.97 1.59 4.60 4.54 4.51 1. 0~14 30% 65 7% 65 0~14 30% 2010 3 % 7 0~14 65 1990 2000 2010 1990 2000 2010 1990 2000 2010 33.05 22.27 27.27 20.03 20.45 13.49 3.91 3.18 4.67 4.94 6.48 8.92 58.63 34.14 46.93 33.28 36.86 28.88 39.54 39.45 42.95 32.21 33.09 30.84 25.19 25.99 24.12 4.35 4.78 2.64 4.48 4.63 2.91 4.82 4.82 3.79 78.22 79.31 83.79 57.95 60.57 50.94 42.88 44.52 38.71 35.39 27.03 20.41 3.26 4.33 6.12 63 45.69 36.11 1. J. 2013 7. 2 2010 M.. 2012 2000 M.2002. 1990 M.1992. 2013 M.2013. 3456 7 2010 24

0~14 20.45% 65 6.48% 31.69% 32.1 65 1990 3.91% 2010 6.48% 7% 3 2 1990 2010 2 2010 65 8.87% 0~14 16.60% 2010 65 9% 0~14 13.49% 66.13% 38.2 3 4 2010 875 40.1% 0~14 119 26.7% 0~4 21.1% 0 17.4% 2010 0~14 24%~26% 65 4%~5% 40% 20 1990 35%~45% 2010 20%~25% 1990 2%~5% 2010 4%~6% 1990 6%~12% 2010 15%~30% 20 45.8% 6.5% 0 66.2% 8.9% M.2012 2000 M.2002. 1990 M.1992. 25

6.12% 7% 20.41% 30% 3 4 3 1990 4 2010 2. 2010 4 % 1 1127.01 1990 2000 2010 1054.57 51.66% 48.34% 106.67 104.63 107.24 106.65 106.87 106.54 106.87 4 20 110.31 107.60 112.92 109.67 112.48 110.76 106~107 104.43 103.43 103.45 104.49 102.57 105.29 104.91 106.02 102.85 105.07 104.73 105.12 105.18 106.61 105.52 117.26 106.11 98.79 2010 106.54 119 1 2010 [M].2012 2000 [M]..2002. 1990 [M]..1992. 26

1. 2010 5 5 75.65% 24.6% 20 2010 50% 6 6 2010 37.55% 12.63% 19.54% 20.56% 2010 24.92% 40% 20 2. 5 60% 27.49% 11.21% 48.34% 24.16% 27.51% 13 27

5 1 % 2 41.00 32.05 26.94 1990 85.31 5.04 9.64 82.57 3.47 13.96 67.94 13.30 18.76 61.44 12.96 25.60 37.32 23.75 38.93 32.72% 2000 80.60 5.11 14.28 78.01 3.81 18.18 45.61% 60.90 9.60 29.50 61.31 11.21 27.49 32.72 21.67 45.61 2010 82.86 3.82 13.32 78.89 3.57 17.54 57.97 9.29 32.75 57% 78% 4% 18% 82.86% 3.8% 13.32% 6 61% 13.27% 11.64% 2010 50% 20 66.31 16.20 17.49 1 15 2 2010 M 2012 2000 M 2002. 1990 M 1992. 28

60% 80% 20 1 6 % 2 2.46 4.48 7.95 12.40 2.59 4.54 6.02 9.15 64.35 38.06 16.54 31.23 0.08 0.15 1990 0.87 4.14 1.07 3.62 84.14 6.14 0.02 1.85 5.32 2.04 8.67 66.92 15.13 0.08 1.81 8.77 1.79 2.89 80.35 4.36 0.04 2.29 3.99 8.16 11.12 3.86 6.10 10.57 17.20 61.10 36.77 13.91 24.73 0.11 0.08 2000 0.83 5.35 1.93 5.41 80.51 5.84 0.13 2.08 5.48 3.56 15.37 60.65 12.72 0.14 1.86 9.64 3.13 3.34 77.22 4.76 0.04 1.73 3.37 8.10 13.02 4.11 6.81 13.27 23.17 61.00 31.94 11.64 21.48 0.15 0.21 2010 0.45 4.24 1.92 5.81 83.01 4.45 0.12 1.35 6.09 3.62 18.86 57.53 12.40 0.15 1.23 7.36 3.64 5.03 78.10 4.59 0.05 3. 13 7 1. M. 2012 J,2014, 4. 2 2010 M 2012 2000 M 2002. 1990 M 1992. 29

2010 7 1264.37 97.36% 57.96% 2010 1000.13 141.83 98.3 18.05 79.10% 11.22% 7.77% 1.43% 99.52% 1 7 % 2 1990 2000 2010 1529.16 1849.4 2181.58 954.5 1124.32 1298.59 62.42 60.79 59.52 927.18 1090.53 1264.37 97.14 96.99 97.36 922.2 1084.6 1258.31 99.46 99.46 99.52 96.62 96.47 96.90 1. 2010 8 933.58 1248.01 42.79% 49.68% 40% 2000 33.84% 2010 42.79% 8 2000 624.75 1221.20 401.62 347.37 160.35 674.21 18.77 105.74 30.10 53.88 1. J., 2007 1 ; J,2008, 2 ;, J.,2014, 4. 2 2010 M.2012 2000 M 2002 1990 M 1992. 3 30 % 3 2010 33.84 53.62 19.21 15.07 35.84 933.58 620.61 219.72 31.30 42.08 1248.01 262.39 780.41 110.53 56.22 42.79 70.28 21.97 22.07 42.81 2010

70% 20% 42.81% 2. 1 2 1 9 10 9 1 74.18% 20% 26.41% 12.18% 2 65.01% 30.05% 3 73.43% 96.21% 78.06% M 2012 2000 M 2002. 1 J. 2001 3. 2 J 2001 3. 31

9 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 3.19 0.45 4.62 1.09 0.71 3.88 0.45 4.29 1.02 0.64 0.64 4.14 0.59 4.07 18.46 17.99 3.37 3.40 36.46 19.43 6.81 0.44 0.12 36.06 19.38 6.67 0.38 0.09 1.09 0.08 0.08 2000 2010 % 1 20.93 2.82 1.71 4.53 15.08 3.80 8.11 7.61 0.38 4.16 0.75 12.62 6.98 3.07 7.45 26.41 3.62 1.77 4.50 12.18 3.26 8.58 6.15 0.40 3.60 0.82 9.90 9.08 2.63 7.10 3.95 3.92 0.80 0.03 3.46 9.63 3.11 0.08 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 38.13 17.35 23.18 0.28 4.80 0.82 0.03 3.61 9.40 3.13 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.01 37.68 16.98 23.14 0.26 0.21 19.90 0.72 4.18 1.74 20.67 2.27 6.22 1.41 0.05 0.60 0.17 29.89 7.91 2.63 1.63 28.50 0.84 3.57 1.74 13.84 2.36 6.15 1.15 0.05 0.49 0.12 28.20 8.67 2.41 1.92 1.54 5.94 1.13 0.26 0.82 3.94 5.23 9.34 3.52 24.06 8.49 0.49 23.92 9.33 2.04 1.50 7.68 1.20 0.35 0.93 3.40 4.93 8.92 2.86 25.63 8.43 0.43 22.18 9.13 1.75 2.19 0.90 86.73% 28.50% 28.20% 13.84% 8.67% 79.21% 70.09% 18.81% 19.53% 16.08% 27.82% 82.24% 88.78% 98.8% 79.56% 84.87% 10 15 8 80% 1 2 8 2000 2010. 2010 M 2012 2000 M 2002. 32

10 2010 % 1 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 12.79 13.78 70.01 18.42 3.92 12.53 32.70 71.93 63.98 89.35 96.43 23.99 4.12 1.79 1.20 12.46 11.47 68.96 17.77 4.45 13.32 31.83 75.90 64.68 90.64 96.22 26.88 3.16 1.44 14.11 75.30 78.07 23.30 68.95 75.14 67.19 57.50 26.62 6.41 9.15 3.33 39.91 58.59 40.93 94.53 74.91 81.65 25.02 69.35 75.31 64.96 59.29 22.89 6.78 8.00 3.59 35.22 65.73 38.55 81.31 2.34 3.67 0.06 8.76 7.98 9.14 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 20.05 24.21 51.38 0.58 8 2010 10% 75% 60%~70% 9 10 27.32% 80% 1 2010 M 2012 2000 M 2002. 2.19 2.97 0.06 8.94 9.33 10.01 0.09 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 21.53 19.76 54.39 0.48 8.03 2.23 6.38 2.97 11.55 4.49 4.94 0.55 0.10 0.15 0.09 10.60 7.45 3.94 2.32 9.00 2.11 5.63 2.99 9.52 5.22 4.73 0.48 0.09 0.12 0.06 11.17 6.99 3.92 2.44 1.54 2.25 0.26 0.90 1.41 6.65 4.77 0.89 29.50 1.34 0.16 5.45 5.63 1.95 1.37 1.44 1.80 0.33 0.95 1.39 6.48 4.07 0.70 28.44 1.23 0.12 5.21 4.37 1.69 1.66 1.39 33

2 2010 1 7 7 2010 15 1 2 3 7 8 9 3 8 9 1 2000 20.93% 2010 26.41% 2 3 4 2000 19.9% 2010 28.5% 6.83% 1.69% 1 J. 2001 3. 34

2010 1990 2000 1 2 3 35

4 1, 2 2015-03-11 100871 100871 1 2 36. M 1999. J 2008 2.

2000~2010 1 2014-09-25, weiguo@nju. edu.cn 210023 Analyzing the Development of Chinese Uighur Population:2000~2010 Guo Wei Zhao Jiaying Abstract:Chinese Uighur is an important member of Chinese nation. Based on the aggregate data of Chinese 5 th and 6 th National Population Census in 2000 and 2010, this paper calculate a series of demographic indexes to demonstrate the solidification in geographical distribution and social class of Uighur population and its corresponding potential changes in social split. The results indicate some effective policies to help Chinese Uighur population efficiently and actively participate in ongoing modernization process in China. Key words:uighur population; population quality;social class The Current Status and Dynamic Characteristics of Xinjiang s Population of Major Ethnic Groups Li Jianxin Chang Qingling Abstract:Based on the 2010 national census and other data, this article makes a descriptive analysis of the population of Xinjiang s major ethnic groups (namely, the Uighur, Han, Kazak, Hui) from the perspective of dynamic structure. The main findings are as follows: Firstly, in terms of total population, Xinjiang s population is always keeping a growth trend,but the pace of it has slowed down recently. Among them, the population of Xinjiang s minorities, such as Uighur, Kazak, Hui, are mainly made up of natural growth, while the population growth of the Han is mainly from the inflows. Secondly, in terms of population structure, whether the natural structure or the socio-economic structure, there always exists a significant difference between the Han and the minorities in Xinjiang. Thirdly, in terms of population distribution, more than half of the minorities reside in rural areas and present a high level of residential centralization. However, most of the Han population live in cities or towns, and their distribution is relatively balanced and dispersed. Consequently, there is a certain degree of segregation among ethnic groups. Since the Reforms in 1980s, the development gap and imbalance still remains and exists among Xinjiang s ethnic groups in all those 30 years. Currently, it is necessary to totally comprehend the characteristics of population development and the reality of ethnic difference in this new era, which will lay the foundation for implementing the spirit of Xinjiang s work conference. Key words:xinjiang s population; major ethnic groups; quantity and structure;development gap see P.21 1 C 1988.173. 47