eco migrtn prjct

7/29/2019 Eco Migrtn Prjct

1/36

1

INTRODUCTION

Migration has become a universal phenomenon in modern times. Due to the

expansion of transport and communication, it has become a part of worldwide

process of urbanization and industrialization. In most countries, it has been

observed that industrialization and economic development has been accompanied

by large-scale movements of people from villages to towns, from towns to other

towns and from one country to another country. From the demographic point of

view, migration is one of the three basic components of population growth of any

area, the other being fertility and mortality. But whereas both fertility and mortality

operate within the biological framework, migration does not. It influences size,

composition and distribution of population. More importantly, migration

influences the social, political and economic life of the people. Indian constitution

provides basic freedom to move to any part of the country, right to reside and earn

livelihood of their choice. Thus, migrants are not required to register either at the

place of origin or at the place of destination. A number of economic, social,

cultural and political factors play an important role in the decision to move. The

effects of these factors vary over time and place. Analysis of migration pattern is

important to understand the changes taking place in the peoples movement within

the country. It is most volatile component of population growth and most sensitive

to economic, political and cultural factors (Singh, 1998). Proper understanding of


2/36

2

the patterns of migration would help in the estimation of future population

redistribution. The reliability and dependability of these estimates depend much on

the consideration of all the temporal factors of birth, death and internal migration

on which population grows in its finest precision (Chakravarty, 1997). During the

days when there is a lot of economic and industrial development in various parts of

the country and when movement of the population has intensified, emphasis should

be given to further understanding and study of the trends and patterns of migration.

Several studies (Bose, 1977; Nair and Narain, 1985; Premi, 1990; and Singh, 1998;

Zachariah, 1963, 1964) found that volume of interstate migration in India was low

but asserted the fact that about one third of Indias population is enumerated

outside their place of birth indicating the importance of migration as a major

demographic process in India. Moreover, when regional fertility and mortality

differentials decline, migration becomes the foremost component influencing the

redistribution of population


3/36

3

DEFINITION OF MIGRATION

Migration is defined as a move from one migration defining area to another,

usually crossing administrative boundaries made during a given migration interval

and involving a change of residence (UN 1993). The change in residence can take

place either permanent or semipermanent or temporary basis (Premi, 1990).

Internal migration involves a change of residence within national borders (Dang

2005). Until 1951, district was the migration defining area (MDA), implying that a

person was considered a migrant in India only if he or she has changed residence

from the district of birth to another district or a state. Since 1961, data on migration

have been collected by considering each revenue village or urban settlement as a

separate unit. A person is considered as a migrant if birthplace is different from

place of enumeration.

In 1971 census, an additional question on place of last residence was introduced to

collect migration data. Since then, census provides data on migrants based on place

of birth (POB) and place of last residence (POLR). If the place of birth or place of

last residence is different from the place of enumeration, a person is defined as a

migrant. On the other hand, if the place of birth and place of enumeration is the

same, the person is a non-migrant (Bhagat, 2005).


4/36

4

Since 1961 census, the duration of residence has been ascertained to provide data

on timing of movement. The duration data are published as less than one year, 1-4

years, and 5-9 years, 10- 19 years and 20 and above years. Migrants of all

durations are defined as lifetime migrants because the time of their move is not

known. They are those who came to the place of enumeration at any point during

their lives and have been living there ever since, whether this happened just a week

before the census or a few decades ago (Premi, 1990). Intercensal migrants are the

migrants who have migrated within the duration of 0-9 years.

Migration can be measured either as events or transitions. The former are normally

associated with population registers, which record individual moves while the

latter generally derived from censuses compare place of residence at two points in

time. A recent survey shows that census is the largest source of information on

internal migration at the cross-country level. A study shows that 138 countries

collected information on internal migration in their censuses compared to 35

through registers and 22 from surveys (Bell, 2003).

In India, information on migration has been collected in a number of large scale

and localized sample surveys. Yet the population census has remained the most

important source of migration data.


5/36

5

HISTORY OF MIGRATION

Migration in an Earlier Era of Globalization

The most recent era of mass voluntary migration was between 1850 and 1914.

Over one million people a year were drawn to the new world by the turn of the

20th century. A World Bank report, International Migration and the Global

Economic Order, estimates that 10 percent of the worlds population was

migrating in this time period, whereas migration today is about three percent.

Growing prosperity, falling transport costs relative to wages, and lower risk all

helped to facilitate this era of mass migration. (A situation not unlike that of

today.) It was also at this earlier time that states developed a formal and regulated

system of passports and visas to control the flow of people across national borders.

The effects of the first era of migration can be seen in the composition of many

countries in the Western Hemisphere. In the latter part of the 19th century, for

example, nearly 15 percent of the U.S. population was foreign born, with the

overwhelming majority of these immigrants arriving from Europe. Irish and Italian

immigrants came in particularly large numbers, as did Russian and East European

Jews, as well as Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, and Germans. Most current U.S. citizens

of European decent are a product of this period of immigration.


6/36

6

At the same time, Chinese and Japanese immigrants came to the West Coast of the

United States and Hawaii. Elsewhere in the hemisphere, rapidly developing

countries such as Argentina, Brazil, and Chile experienced large influxes of

Spanish and Portuguese immigrants facilitated by the past colonial connection

between their countries, but also received immigrants from Germany, Britain,

Italy, Poland, China, and Japan.

This wave of immigration resulted in a counter-reaction, however. In the United

States, immigrants were blamed for crime, disease, and the persistence of poverty

in the urban centers of the Northeast and Midwest. Furthermore, immigrants

formed a large and restless population that seemed ripe for social conflict.

Groups calling for worldwide socialist revolution found adherents among poor

immigrants, and immigrants were also prominent members and leaders of labor

unions, at the time viewed as potential sources of foreign, socialist opposition to

American capitalism. In 1919 and 1920, then- Attorney General of the U.S. A.

Mitchell Palmer instigated numerous roundups of immigrants, labeled Palmers

Raids, that led to the deportation of thousands of people, on the basis that they

were Communist agitators.

At the same time, Asian immigrants were viewed with suspicion and outright

racism on the West Coast. In 1878, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Chinese


7/36

7

could be prohibited from becoming naturalized American citizens. In 1882, the

U.S. Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act preventing Chinese laborers from

coming to the United States for ten years, and later the act was amended to prohibit

virtually all Chinese immigration, a situation that lasted until the mid-1900s.

Similarly, Japanese immigration was restricted by the 1907 Gentlemans

Agreement between the government of Japan and the United States and banned

entirely by the Immigration Act of 1924.

These developments and the global depression of the 1930s significantly reduced

migration to the Western Hemisphere. Even as World War II and the Holocaust

were on the horizon, Jews trying to get out of Germany and Austria were refused

entry to other countries. At the 1938 Evian Conference in France, delegates from

dozens of countries declined to increase quota numbers to admit the Jews fleeing

persecution, with only one, the Dominican Republic, offering to take in any

refugees

Post-World War II Migration

As the countries of Europe recovered from World War II, they again became

attractive destinations for potential migrants and opened their doors to immigrants

to help rebuild their economies. Furthermore, during the post-war period,

technological improvements in land and air travel decreased the cost of migration.


8/36

8

Emigration from developing countries to Western countries expanded rapidly as

incomes in the developing world rose enough to make emigration feasible, but not

enough to make it moot.

Most noticeable were immigrants to Germany from Turkey, who were brought into

the country as Gastarbeiter or guest workers in the 1950s and 1960s as the

countrys post-war economic miracle demanded labor. They were never intended

to stay permanently, however, and the German government never granted them

citizenship or tried to integrate them into German society, creating social conflict

that has lasted until today.

Approximately 22 percent of Turkish citizens living in Germany do not possess

German nationality despite being born there (Turks in Germany, n.d.). In 2000,

legislation was passed, which now grants German-born children of foreigners,

German citizenship. According to newspaper Todays Zaman (2012), this

legislation though does not allow Turks to hold dual citizenship and, if the Turks

become German, they must renounce their Turkish citizenship.

Likewise, many workers from former colonies of European powers migrated to

Europe in search of work, facilitated by still-existing ties between the colonial

home countries and their colonies, such as Indians, Pakistanis, and West Indians


9/36

9

who moved to England, and Vietnamese, Cambodians, Algerians, Tunisians,

Moroccans, and other Africans who moved to France.

Thus, the previous pattern of migration was reversed. This stirred major social

changes in European countries that were not used to multicultural societies. At the

same time, immigration to the United States, opened up after the restrictive

policies prior to World War II, came not from Europe but primarily from Latin

America and Asia.

Migration Today

Migration patterns today reflect world economic trends. For the past thirty years

Chinese workers moved from the inland to the coastal cities in search of jobs and

new economic opportunities not found at home. The Economist (2012) called it

the largest migration in history. Now, the migrants are leaving the coastal cities

and are moving back to inland cities because the government is starting to invest in

these inland cities since land and labor is cheaper inland. Foreign companies have

invested in China for decades because of its cheap land and labor and the country

wants to maintain its competitive advantage.

For the last several decades, migrant workers and immigrants travelled from

Mexico to the United States. The U.S. built a wall in various spots along the border


10/36

10

to prevent illegal immigration. Law enforcement in many border states passed

legislation making it difficult for immigrants to receive services and find work. In

early 2012, migratory patterns started changing. In 2011, arrests made at the U.S.

southwest border fell to lowest level since 1972. Mexicans are migrating to border

towns in Mexico and staying there. Immigrants from other Latin American

countries, such as Bolivia, Paraguay and Peru, are now migrating to Argentina

instead (Cave, 2012). Numbers of migrants though started rising in 2012 as

economic conditions improve.

According to the International Organization for Migration website, the total

number of migrants has increased over the past ten years from 150 million in 2000

to 214 million in 2010. This means that 3.1 percent of the worlds population is

migrants; this percent has remained relatively stable over the past decade. The

percent of migrants changes vastly depending on the country of origin. Qatar and

United Arab Emirates have a high percent of international migrants living in their

county, 87 percent and 70 percent respectively. On the other side, Indonesia and

India have a low percent of international migrants, .1 percent and .4 percent

respectively.

The 2009 Human Development Report notes that 37 percent of the worlds

migrants move from developing countries to developed countries. Most migrants,


11/36

11

(60 percent) move within countries of the same category of development. Only

three percent of migrants moved from developed countries to developing countries.

Half of all migrants moved within their own region, while 40 percent moved to a

neighboring country.


12/36

12

DETERMINANTS OF MIGRATION

The analysis of migration determinants is not limited to movements from Africa to

Europe as a one-off move. We distinguish between first departure (from the home

country), return (from destination to the homeland) and repeated migration

(circulation). We compare the relative weight of economic and non-economic

factors in shaping people's decision to migrate. The project looks at whether the

same factor influences the likelihood of migration in a different manner when

individual and contextual characteristics vary. Some variables are of special

interest: education, family size and structure, household's economic resources,

prevalence of international migration at the local/community level, size and

strength of networks and changing macro-economic and policy conditions in both

origin and destination countries.

Poverty

African migration is commonly perceived as a flow of poor or destitute people.

Does out-migration actually affect the poorest households or, on the contrary, is it

inequality and relative deprivation that promote international migration to Europe?

In relation to the importance of economic needs as the main driving force behind

the migration decision, some recent policy initiatives seem to accept the idea that

development in the sending areas is a means to curb international migration. Yet
http://mafeproject.site.ined.fr/en/research/determinants_migration/http://mafeproject.site.ined.fr/en/research/determinants_migration/


13/36

13

this idea is contested in the academic literature. In the particular case of African

migration to Europe, are relatively deprived households more likely to engage in

international migration than better-off households? Do poverty and/or relative

deprivation also affect return migration and circulation?

Education

African migration to Europe is often presented by the media as a mostly unskilled

migration inflow. However, the better educated also have the most to gain. In fact,

this is probably the reason behind an increased perception of "brain drain" in

Africa over the past decades. What is the role of education on the migration

decision? Are more educated people, and especially those with skills in demand in

Europe, more likely to leave their home countries? Are they also more likely to

return, or do they rather circulate back and forth?

Gender

African migration to Europe has long been conceived largely as a "male-affair".

However, the number of African women involved in both independent and family-

related migration is increasing steadily, especially among the more educated.

MAFE pays special attention to the gender and family dimensions of international

migration between Africa and Europe by analysing how the determinants of


14/36

14

migration, return and re-migration vary between men and women, how selectivity

works differently depending on the migrant's gender and his/her family status. In

addition, in relation to the analysis of migration within the family, MAFE

examines the role of social networks in both origin and destination countries in

promoting and sustaining both international migration and transnational family

strategies.

Policy measures

African migration has become one of the major policy challenges according to the

EU. MAFE studies to what extent public policies in sending and destination

countries influence the probability of moving to Europe or returning to Africa; and

to what extent they affect circulation patterns. The objective is to analyse the

impact of policy measures, directly or indirectly designed to affect migration, at

both the national and European levels. We, for instance, look at the effect of

integration policies on the probabilities of return migration, and of waves of

migrant regularization on the probabilities of departure


15/36

15

MIGRANTS' CHARACTERISTICS

A first set of analyses focuses on the migrants' socio-demographic characteristics

(educational levels and skills, age, etc.) and on how they change over time, in a

context where very little statistical information is available. The analyses considers

gender aspects especially. Various studies indicate a feminization of African

migration to Europe, notably as a result of family reunification. There is also

increasing anecdotal evidence of the independent migration of women. Data on the

gender dimension of migration - especially on "autonomous" female migration -

are lacking however. MAFE helps to give quantitative insights in this matter.

Routes of migration and choice of destination

A second range of descriptive analyses focuses on migration routes to Europe.

Three aspects are analysed: (1) how the travel is organized (who decides and pays

for the migration, what modes of transportation are used, whether smugglers or

traffickers are involved or not, whether trips are made alone or not, etc.); (2) the

itineraries used to reach the EU (means of transport; transit countries; length of the

trip...); and (3) the extent of mobility within the EU (especially in relation to

seeking asylum or other forms of legal status). These analyses shows to what

extent stricter controls at European borders during the last decades have

encouraged African migrants to reshape their routes to Europe (new paths, longer

trips, etc.).


16/36

16

Return Migration and Circulation

The analysis of circulation inside the EU sheds light on how migrants exploit the

opportunities available in different countries (thanks to specific national policies)

for obtaining documents, jobs, etc. Standard migration statistics are not suited to

studying migrants' comings and goings. The MAFE surveys, on the contrary, is

specifically designed to explore return and circular migration. A chief objective is

to document the extent of these types of flows, the duration of the migrants' stays

in Europe (and in their home country, in case of circulation), and the migrants'

socio-economic characteristics.

We expect to find evidence that return migration (from Europe to Africa) has been

a significant phenomenon for many years, that it is not necessarily related to policy

incentives (programmes encouraging return or expulsion) and that it is strongly

correlated with the legal status of migrants. In addition, we expect to find that

circular migration is increasing but also that it is concentrated among migrants

with specific skills and characteristics - mainly skilled workers, traders,

documented migrants.

These analyses are of crucial interest for policy makers in a context where

temporary migration is believed to be a pathway for improving migration

management in Europe


17/36

17

TRENDS AND PATTERNS IN INTERNAL MIGRATION

The two main secondary sources of data on population mobility in India are the

Census and the National Sample Survey (NSS). These surveys may underestimate

some migration flows, such as temporary, seasonal and circulatory migration, both

due to empirical and conceptual difficulties. Since such migration and commuting

is predominantly employment oriented, the data underestimate the extent of labour

mobility. Furthermore, migration data relate to population mobility and not worker

mobility, although economic theories of migration are primarily about worker

migration. It is not easy to disentangle these, firstly because definitions of migrants

used in both surveys (change from birthplace and change in last usual place of

residence), are not employment related. Secondly, migration surveys give only the

main reason for migration, and that only at the time of migration. Secondary

economic reasons could be masked, as in the case of married women, who would

cite other reasons for movement. Another problem is that migration data relate to

stocks of migrants and not to flows, although different policy concerns relate to

stocks (of different ages) and flows. Many of these concerns can be handled only

by micro surveys, which have their own problems.


18/36

18

Population mobility

In one view, population mobility in India is low (Davis, 1951; Kundu and Gupta,

1996). Migration statistics to the early 1990s also suggest a decline in mobility. In

the 1991 census, using the change in residence concept, 27.4% of the population is

considered to have migrated (that is, 232 million of the total 838 million persons),

which shows a considerable decline from 30.6% in 1971 and 31.2% in 1981. This

is true for male and female migrants. In the case of males, it declined from 18.1%

in 1971 to 14.7% in 1991. In the case of females, it declined from 43.1% in 1971 to

41.6% in 1991. However, recent evidence based on NSS figures for 19921993

and 19992000, and indirectly supported by the census, suggests an increase in

migration rates from 24.7% to 26.6% over that period. This evidence suggests

the proportion of migrants of both sexes, in both rural and urban areas, increased

during the last

decade of the 20th century. Migration in India is predominantly short distance,

with around 60% of migrants changing their residence within the district of

enumeration and over 20% within the state of enumeration while the rest move

across the state boundaries. A significant proportion of women migrates over short

distances, mainly following marriage. The proportion of male lifetime migrants is

low in most poor states except Madhya Pradesh and high in most developed states.

For inter-state migration, a similar trend is observed: developed states show high


19/36

19

inter-state immigration while poor states, except Madhya Pradesh, show low rates

of total and male immigration. Rates of interstate lifetime emigration are

complementary to the above trends (Srivastava, 1998). Based on place of last

residence and on place of birth, migrants are generally classified into four

migration streams. Rural areas are still the main destination for migrants, but urban

destinations are more important for male migrants (49% of male migrants moved

to urban destinations in 1991, compared to 29.5% female migrants). Between

19921993 and 19992000, NSS data indicate an increase in urban migration, but

this is mainly due to urban-urban flows (Srivastava and Bhattacharya, 2002).

Migration for work

The primary motive for migration, recorded by the census as well as the NSS, is an

important indicator of how mobility is influenced by conditions of the labour

market. Of the 27.4% who changed place of residence, as per 1991 census, 8.8%

moved for employment reasons and 2.3% had business motives. The proportion

moving due to economic motives was higher for males (27.8% moved for

employment reasons, and 7.1% for business reasons), compared with females (only

1.8% moved for employment reasons and 0.5% for business reasons). The

proportion migrating for economic reasons is greater among long-distance

migrants; most male migrants moving between states did so for economic reasons.


20/36

20

Again, economic motives are more significant in urban migration streams,

especially for males. While the share of inter-state to total migrants was only

11.8% in 1991, such migrants comprised 28% of all

economic migrants. Similarly, while 49% of male migrants were in urban areas,

69.2% of such migrants migrated for employment (Srivastava, 1998). A distinct

regional variation emerges in the work pattern of migrants. In the northeastern

states and some others, migrants are mainly employed in the tertiary and secondary

sector of the economy. Elsewhere, the primary sector attracts the migrant most

(Annex 4, Table A10). An analysis of the occupational division of igrant workers

(other than cultivators and agricultural labourers) shows that among males, 43%

are engaged in production related work. In the tertiary sector, significant

proportions of male migrants are engaged as sales workers, followed by clerical

and related work. All the western states have a significant proportion of male

migrants in secondary activity and in the southern and north-eastern states they are

mainly engaged in the tertiary sector (Annex 4, Table A11). In the case of female

migrant workers, 40% are in production related works and a significant proportion

are in technical and professional activity


21/36

21

Migration for work in the 1990s

Analysis of the recent trends of labour mobility, on the basis of NSS estimates

from the 49th (199293) and 55th rounds (199900) have been carried out by

Srivastava and Bhattacharya (2002) and a few central conclusions from that

analysis are discussed below. This period shows a sharp increase in urban male

mobility, with a significantly larger percentage of male migrants reporting

economic and employment linked reasons for mobility. For other streams, there

has been a decline in the percentage of migrants giving economic reasons for

mobility. A comparison of the decadal migrant streams (migrants who had

migrated in the decade preceding the period of survey) shows that (a) a greater

percentage of the urban migrant workers were from the non-agricultural sector

(self-employed or regular

employed); (b) a greater percentage of the male migrant workers were self-

employed or in regular employment in 199900; (c) in the case of females,

however, a larger percentage of decadal female migrant workers worked in 1999

00 as casual labourers (in the rural areas in agriculture). Comparing activity status

before and after migration

for all migrants, we find that migrants in general show much higher work

participation rates for both urban and rural areas In the urban areas, the NSS 55th


22/36

22

round figures show a significant transition towards regular employment and self-

employment among males, with a small decline in the percentage of casual labour.

In the rural areas, there is an increase in all three categories including casual

labour, but the most significant shift is towards self-employment. In the case of

female migrants, however, along with an increase in the percentage of workers to

population in all three categories after migration, there is also an increase in

casualisation both in rural and urban areas, but quite significantly in the former.

These results, along with the decline in short duration migration, which we discuss

below, suggest that the 1990s may have provided greater opportunity for labour

mobility to those who were better positionedmales in urban areas and in the non-

agricultural sector. However, these results are still tentative and need to be

corroborated with further analysis from other sources.

Profile of migrant workers

Migration encompasses enormous economic and social diversity. Migrants are

concentrated in different types of work in rural and urban areas. In the rural areas,

self-employment is the predominant activity for both male and female migrant

workers followed by casual work which, according to the NSS 55th round

findings, engaged 33.4% of male migrant workers and 44.2% of female migrant

workers in 199900. In urban areas, regular employment engaged 55.6% of the


23/36

23

male workers while self-employment and casual work engaged 31.1 and 13.3% of

male migrant workers

respectively. In the case of females, the highest percentage were self-employed

(39.7) followed by regular employment (35.1%) and casual work (25.2%) This

naturally implies that there is considerable economic differentiation among migrant

households. Further a little under 50% of the urban and rural migrants and more

than 50% of male migrants in both sectors are in the top two consumption

quintiles. Among other factors, this may reflect the higher work participation rates

among migrants and the propensity of the well-off to migrate Micro studies show a

bi-modal relationship with respect to wealth/income and land: migrants cluster

both at low and high levels (Connell et al, 1976).The NCRL report suggests that

labourers and land poor farmers have a high propensity to migrate as seasonal

labourers. Data on individual migrants gleaned from micro surveys shows a

significant clustering of migrants in the 1640 year age group (Conell et al, 1976).

This is even more the case with poorer semi-permanent or

temporary labour migrants (Srivastava 1999, and forthcoming). With respect to

education, migration rates are high both among the highly educated and the least

educated, and among seasonal migrants there is a high preponderance of illiterate

people (Connell et al,1976; Rogaly et al, 2001; Haberfeld et al, 1999). In the

overall migrant population, differencesacross caste groups are not significant, but


24/36

24

ST and SC migrants are more involved in short duration migrants, with migration

rates among them being 2% and 1% respectively, compared with an overall

rate of 0.7% for all short duration migrants (NSS, 2001). This is also corroborated

by field survey data showing that low castes are predominant in short duration

migration flows. The nature of migration primarily reflects ousehold subsistence

strategies in the face of social, cultural, demographic and other constraints. Males

predominate in most labour migration streams. But in a number of other cases,

both men and women migrate together for work, especially among lower caste and

tribals where constraints on womens participation in non-household economic

activities are

fewer. The pattern of labour migration (whether males alone, males and females, or

females alone) is related to the social structure, the pattern of demand, and the

nature of the migration process. In some sectors such as construction, brick kiln

and sugarcane cutting, family migration is prevalent as it is more economical for

employers. The proportion of women outmigrants (predominantly to agriculture

and the construction sector) ranges from 18% to 42% in the case of some tribal

areas (Haberfeld et al, 1999; Mosse et al, 1997). Rogaly et al(2001), focusing on

four source areas for labour migration to West Bengals rice bowl, find male only

migration in two of the source areas they studied whereas migration from the other

two areas was both by men and women. The fish processing industry has


25/36

25

seen the migration of large numbers of single women (Sarodamoni, 1995). In the

domestic maid sector, there is increasing trend of independent migration of

females; A study by the Institute of Social Sciences (1991) indicates that 20% of

total women migrants to Delhi are employed as domestic maids. There are also

important regional differences in the pattern of female labou mobility between the

northern and southern states (Singh, 1984). Among inter-state economic migrants,

the share of the northern states (Bihar, UP) is very large in male migration, but the

southern states have a comparatively larger share in female economic migrants

(Srivastava, 1998). On the whole, however, females move smaller distances for

work compared to males.


26/36

26

CAUSES OF MIGRATION

Given the diversity in the nature of migration in India, the causes are also bound to

vary. Migration is influenced both by the pattern of development (NCRL, 1991),

and the social structure (Mosse et al, 2002). The National Commission on Rural

Labour, focusing on seasonal migration, concluded that uneven development was

the main cause of seasonal migration. Along with inter regional disparity, disparity

between different socioeconomic classes and the development policy adopted since

independence has accelerated the process of seasonal migration. In tribal regions,

intrusion of outsiders, the pattern of settlement, displacement and deforestation,

also have played a significant role.

Most migration literature makes a distinction between pull and push factors,

which, however, do not operate in isolation of one another. Mobility occurs when

workers in source areas lack suitable options for employment/livelihood, and there

is some expectation of improvement in circumstances through migration. The

improvement sought may be better employment or higher wages/incomes, but also

maximization of family employment or smoothing of

employment/income/consumption over the year At one end of the migration

spectrum, workers could be locked into a debt-migration cycle, where earnings

from migration are used to repay debts incurred at home or in the destination areas,

thereby cementing the migration cycle. At the other end, migration is largely


27/36

27

voluntary, although shaped by their limited choices. The NCRL has recognised the

existence of this continuum for poor migrants by distinguishing between rural

labour migration for survival and for subsistence. The landless poor, who mostly

belong to lower caste, indigenous communities, from economically backward

regions, migrate for survival and constitute a significant proportion of seasonal

labour flow (Study Group on Migrant Labour, 1990). The growth of intensive

agriculture and commercialisation of agriculture since the late 1960s has led to

peak periods of lab our demand, often also coinciding with a decline in local labour

deployment. In the case of labour flows to the riceproducing belt of West Bengal,

wage differentials between the source and destination have been considered as the

main reason for migration. Moreover, absence of non-farm employment, low

agricultural production has resulted in a growth of seasonal migration (Rogaly et

al, 2001). Migration decisions are influenced by both individual and household

characteristics as well as the social matrix, which is best captured in social-

anthropological studies. Factors such as age, education level, wealth, land owned,

productivity and job opportunities influence the participation of individuals and

households in migration, but so do social attitudes and supporting social networks

(Haberfeld et al, 1999; Rogaly et al, 2001; Mosse et al, 2002). Where migration is

essentially involuntary, it makes little sense to use voluntaristic models to explain

the phenomenon. In Dhule region (Maharashtra) sugarcane cultivation leads to


28/36

28

high demand for labour, but landowners recruit labourers from other districts for

harvesting as they can have effective control over the labour. Local labourers are

thus forced to migrate with their households to South Gujarat (Teerink 1995). In

Kerala, trawler-fishing has depleted marine resources. With unemployment in

other industries like cashew and rubber, this has led tolarge scale outmigration of

girls (Sardamoni, 1995).


29/36

29

INTERNALS MIGRATION AND REGIONAL DISPARITIES IN INDIA

Introduction

Internal migration is now recognized as an important factor in influencing social

and economic development, especially in developing countries. According to

census 2001, the total population of India is 1028 million consisting of 532 million

males and 496 million females. India is geographically divided into 28 states and 7

Union Territories. There is a tremendous variation in the aggregate population size

across the state. It varies from 0.54 million in Sikkim to 166.2 million in Uttar

Pradesh. In 2001, 309 million persons were migrants based on place of last

residence, which constitute about 30% of the total population of the country. This

figure indicates an increase of around 37 percent from census 1991 which recorded

226 million migrants.

Objectives

This paper is aimed to address mainly the following aspects of spatial mobility

within India during the last intercensal decade of 1991-2001.

1. Reasons for migration

2. In-migration, out-migration and net migration levels of all states.

3. State to state migration flows.

4. Some insights on the determinants of internal migration in India.

Data Source


30/36

30

This paper uses data from census 2001, which was released recently. Census in

India collects information on migration based on spatial and temporal aspects. In

India, the place of birth and place of last residence of a person provide information

on the spatial aspects of movement, while duration of residence provides data on

the temporal aspects of migration. The data covers spatial movement of persons

within a state or between the states based on crossing geographical / administrative

boundaries. Census, however, does not provide economic characteristics of the

states. For the economic variables, the paper uses data of various sources,

including publications of the Reserve Bank of India, Central Statistical

Organization and Planning Commission, India


31/36

31

INTERNAL MIGRATION IN INDIA

In 2001, 309 million persons were migrants based on place of last residence, which

constitute about 30% of the total population of the country. This figure indicates an

increase of around 37 percent from census 1991 which recorded 226 million

migrants. Out of the total migrants 91 million are males and the rest 218 are

females. Thus migrants constitute around 30 percent of the total population, male

and female migrants constituting 18 percent and 45 percent of their population

respectively. Of the total migrants, 87 percent were migrants within the state of

enumeration while 13 percent were interstate migrants. Among the male migrants,

79 percent moved within the state of enumeration while 21 percent moved between

states. Among females, 90 percent were intrastate migrants and 10 percent were

interstate migrants.

In all censuses, rural to rural migration stream has been the most important.

Females constitute a significantly higher proportion of rural ward migrants mainly

on account of marriage.

As regards long distance (inter-state) movement in India, a clear sex differential is

found from census 2001. Among the male interstate migrants, rural to urban stream

emerged as the most prominent accounting for 47 percent. On the other hand, rural

to rural has remained the major pattern of female movement, with 36 percent of

them migrating from rural to rural areas.


32/36

32

Interstate migration flows 1991-2001

Although out-migration and in-migration are enough to measure the amount of net

migration, the direction to/from which the migrants moved can be used to explain

the structure and pattern of internal migration in a country. Flow matrices are not

readily available from the census publications. However a directional flow matrix

(28 * 28) between the states can be developed from census data.

From the largest three or four magnitudes of out-migration proportions of each

state, it is clear that majority of the migrants have moved to neighboring states

only. However there are exceptions for this. For Uttar Pradesh, which constitutes

41 percent of all our migrants, migration to Maharashtra accounts for 32 percent

even though Maharashtra is not a border state. Likewise, out migrants from Orissa

preferred Gujarat and Maharashtra as the destination even when these states are not

border states. Out-migration to these states made up to 34 percent of total out-

migrants from Orissa.


33/36

33

A close look at the pattern of each states out-migration is as follows. 56 percent of

out-migrants from Uttar Pradesh have gone to Maharashtra, Haryana and Madhya

Pradesh. In the case of Bihar, nearly 50 percent out-migrants have moved to

Jharkhand, West Bengal, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. Out-migrants from these

two states made up to 70 percent of total out-migrants. More than one-third of

Tamil Nadu migrants moved to Karnataka. The rest of the out-migrants have

chosen mainly Kerala, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. More than three-fourth of

out-migrants from Andhra Pradesh have moved to the border states namely,

Karnataka, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. For the out-migrants from Rajasthan,

destinations are Maharashtra, Haryana, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh. Turning to

Kerala, about 48 percent have moved to the neighboring states, Karnataka and

Tamil Nadu. However, a slightly more than one-fourth of the out-migrants from

Kerala have moved to Maharashtra, which is not a bordering state.

Overall it is observed that majority of the out-migrants have moved to the

bordering states. Nevertheless, it is observed that migration to non bordering states

has also been significant. Here, one has to remember the enormous variations in

the geographical sizes of Indian states. With the distance covered by an inter-

district migrant in state like Rajasthan, a migrant in smaller states can reach

another state, thus qualifying as interstate migration.


34/36

34

From the flow matrix, Maharashtra emerges the most favored destination for

migration. Half of the entire interstate migrants have moved to Maharashtra.

Gujarat and Haryana are the other preferred destinations with nearly 30 percent of

the migrants moving to these states. The three states, thus, attracted 80 percent of

all interstate migrants during the intercensal period 1991-2001.


35/36

35

CONCLUSION

Short distance migration, largely that of women, has been the predominant

migration pattern in India. The traditional village exogamy could be the reason for

this type of large migration among females. Rural to rural migration has been

another important migration flow for both males and females. However, the

proportion of rural to rural migrations has declined steadily, while the proportions

of other streams have increased over the period. In the same manner, the

proportion of short distance migrants has decreased while the proportions of

medium and long distance migrants have increased. Long distance movements are

more urban oriented than short distance movements. There has been a significant

increase in migration to urban areas both among males and females during 1991-

2001. The urban to urban movements are also significantly increasing. Going by

this trend, long distance rural to urban and urban to urban streams are likely to

emerge as the dominant migration streams in future.

The reasons of migration data reveals that apart from employment among males

and marriage among females, moved with household emerged as another important

factor for migration among males as well as females. It is also evident that urban to

rural streams show an increased migration on account of employment or work as a

reason of migration. As such, twothird of urban to rural interstate male migrants

have moved owing to employment or work.


36/36

BIBLIOGRAPHY

www.treasury.govt.

www.globalization101.org

www.treasury.govt

www.community.eldis.org

ww.google.com
http://www.treasury.govt/http://www.treasury.govt/http://www.globalization101.org/http://www.globalization101.org/http://www.treasury.govt/http://www.treasury.govt/http://www.community.eldis.org/http://www.community.eldis.org/http://www.community.eldis.org/http://www.treasury.govt/http://www.globalization101.org/http://www.treasury.govt/

eco migrtn prjct

Documents