This article is a part of Poland Unpacked. Weekly intelligence for decision-makers
Warsaw region leads in GDP per capita; other regions show mixed results
The highest GDP per capita is generated by the Warsaw Capital Region (RWS), reaching 200% of Poland’s average per capita GDP, according to preliminary regional GDP data for 2024 published by Statistics Poland (GUS). In other words, residents of Warsaw and the surrounding counties generate, on average, twice the income of a typical Pole. For context, Poland’s national GDP per capita amounted to PLN 97,400 (about EUR 22,700) in 2024.
Besides Warsaw, there are two other regions where GDP per capita exceeds the national average: Lower Silesia (107%) and Greater Poland (105%). Additionally, Silesia recorded a GDP per capita roughly equal to the national level.
The remaining regions can be divided into two groups. The first group has GDP per capita less than 10% below the national average: Pomerania and Łódź (95%), the Mazovian Regional Region (RMR) (91%), and Lesser Poland (90%).
After this, there is a notable drop: West Pomerania generates only 82% of the national average per capita GDP. Similar levels are seen in Kuyavia-Pomerania, Opole, and Lubuskie. The lowest levels are in eastern regions, ranging from 78% of the national average in Podlaskie to 71% in Kuyavia-Pomerania and Lublin.
The strong influence of cities
Interactive chart Less-developed regions form an inverted “U” shape - from Lubuskie and West Pomerania (west of the country), through Kuyavia-Pomerania (central north) and Warmia-Masuria (north-west), to Podlaskie and Lublin (east), through Świętokrzyskie (central Poland), and Subcarpathia (south-east). By contrast, regions in central and southwestern Poland are noticeably better developed.
However, data at the voivodeship level do not tell the full story, as they are heavily influenced by cities. In every region where GDP per capita reaches at least 90% of the national average, there is a metropolitan area with more than 500,000 inhabitants (with the exception of the Mazovian Regional Region). High per capita income is generated primarily in these cities, while the rest of the voivodeship usually lags behind.
Interactive chart This becomes even clearer when looking at GDP per capita data at the subregion level, according to the EU’s NUTS3 classification. In the largest urban agglomerations, income levels in 2023 (the most recent available data) were several dozen percent higher than the national average.
The division between more and less developed parts of the country is even more visible at this level than at the voivodeship level. The more developed regions cluster in central and southwestern Poland and along the coast (Tricity, Szczecin, Koszalin). The weakest economic regions are concentrated in the northern belt and in eastern Poland.
Partial convergence
Over the past decade, there has been partial convergence in the development levels of Poland’s voivodeships – some of the weaker regions have caught up with the stronger ones. This was particularly evident in Podlaskie (east), where GDP per capita rose from 75% of the national average in 2014 to 78% in 2024. Similar trends were observed in Świętokrzyskie (central) and Subcarpathia (south-east), as well as in some relatively better-developed regions, notably the Mazovian Regional Region (RMR). Other regions, however, fell behind relative to their 2014 levels.
Interactive chart Another phenomenon can be described as convergence within groups. Less-developed voivodeships approached the 80% mark, either through relative GDP growth compared with the national average (Subcarpathia, Świętokrzyskie, Podlaskie) or through a relative decline elsewhere (Lubuskie, Opole, Kuyavia-Pomerania, West Pomerania).
Among the better-developed voivodeships, a similar pattern occurred around the 100% national average. In some cases, this happened through GDP growth relative to the national level (Lesser Poland, Mazovian Regional Region, Łódź, Pomerania), while in others it resulted from a relative decline (Silesia, Greater Poland, Lower Silesia).
Conclusions: the future of regional development
Three key takeaways emerge from the data.
First, the classic notion of a weaker Eastern Wall is only partly accurate. Indeed, the voivodeships in this part of the country generate the lowest per capita income, but the levels in northern and northwestern Poland are only slightly higher.
Second, metropolitan areas are the true engines of economic development. Among voivodeships with GDP per capita of at least 90% of the national average, none lacks a city with more than 500,000 inhabitants (excluding the Mazovian Regional Region, which is a special case). One could reasonably argue that this reflects the accounting of profits located in these cities, but that only partially explains the phenomenon. More importantly, firms based in the largest cities exhibit higher productivity.
Third, the convergence of regions within groups can be evaluated from two perspectives. The positive view is that weaker regions are catching up with stronger ones within each group. The negative view is that the entire weaker group is not closing the gap with the stronger group.
These insights are crucial for shaping Poland’s future regional policy. How can policy better support northern regions? Should efforts focus on fostering convergence within groups, or between them? Can regions develop rapidly without a large metropolitan area? And when demographic changes are added to the mix, the questions become even more pressing.