Exploring dynamics of internal migration to slums of ...

Exploring dynamics of internal migration to slums of Dhaka city in Bangladesh: A study on drivers and factors Kazi Md. Mukitul Islam1 and Mohammed Abdul Baten 2 Masters Student, Department of Development Studies, University of Malaya, Malaysia. 1 Lecturer, Independent University Bangladesh& Adjunct faculty, Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh. 1

Abstract Rural-urban or urban-urban migration contributes a major part into growing rate of urbanization. With increasing industrialization and enhanced economic opportunities provide incentives, real or perceived for relocation to urban cities. This paper thus tries to identify major factors that influence the decision of migration. This is an explanatory research that tries to explain the intentions and motives that enthused migrants for Dhaka city. Semi structured questionnaire is used to interview migrants in three slums of Dhaka city employing both quantitative and qualitative approaches in order to investigate the drivers and factors of internal migration. From this study, it has been evident that both push and pull factors play substantive role in migration decisions. Desire of better job facility, better wage, education of children and their future are some of the most important pull factors that brought many of the individuals to these slums of Dhaka city. Similarly, loss of lands, river erosion, loan repayment and low wage are some of the major push factors that reinforced the decision as well. Among major sub-factors, economic factor happens to be the key incentive followed by environmental and social factors. However, both social and environmental factors show downward sloping trend while economic factor shows upward movement (i.e. over the years economic factor happens to be the dominant motor for ) in recent years. Looking at the status of migrants, the findings show that internal migration is dominated by rural-urban movement, than urban-urban, or urban-rural. The study also recognizes improved post migration status of migrants in case of access to basic amenities and services. However, overall satisfaction and level of education found very low among the migrants and their children. These dynamics in outcomes create scope for further studies and policy implication on factor specific attention. Keywords: Migration, Urbanization, Push factor, Pull factor, Industrialization, Rural urban migration, Urban rural migration

1. Introduction People migrate from one place to another place, either voluntarily or involuntarily, due to political, religious, economic or even ethnic reasons. In this sense, migration could be viewed as an integral part of human civilization that contributes to promulgate language, religion, culture, trade and commerce among civilizations. Even though migration occurs both internally and across the national borders, but internal migration dominates in terms of number of people migrating (Skeldon, 2003).Since urbanization has been rising in developing countries with more people moving towards cities, rural-urban migration could be viewed as an outcome of economic process by which rural surplus labour or low paid agriculture labour shift their livelihood to modern urban based industrial complex. In 1970s, the urban populations were 30 million less in developing countries compare to its developed counterpart. But it rapidly reversed into 300 million excess urban populations in developing countries within few decades (Mukharjee, 1988). Being a developing country, rural-urban migration is not also a new experience in Bangladesh. Historically, migration has been a common phenomenon among Bangladeshi people as a strategy to secure livelihood. Mohit (1990, p.48),shows that rural-urban migration existed during Mughal period in Bangladesh, but the pace accelerated during Post-colonial period (after 1947). The rural-urban migration pattern in Bangladesh could be better described by the population increase statistics of both rural and urban areas during 1941-2001; by this time the rural population in Bangladesh only doubled, but urban population increased fifteen folds (BBS 2011).

278

Many studies were carried on different aspects of migration that identified different causal factors of (Siddiqui, 2011; Rabbani, 2009; Nazrul, 1999 and 2008, Afsar, 2003; Datta, 2004.Selina Siddiqui (2001) argues that economic, social and catalytic factors influence mostly to rural urban migration. While, study of Nazrul Islam (1999, p.10) identified a number of push and pull factors (e.g. population pressures, law and order situation in push factor side, while job opportunity and socio-cultural facilities in pull factor side) that motor behind migration. Environmental migration is also high in Bangladesh. Alam (2003) examines migration pattern between Bangladesh and India and identifies environmental crisis as a reason for the continued migration of people from Bangladesh to India. Ahmed (2009) opines that regular natural calamities and underdevelopment coupled with possibility of sea level rise force people to migrate. Rabbani (2009) predicts that 35 millions of people may be displaced from 19 coastal districts if sea level rises to 1 meter. On this backdrop, broader scope of this paper is to explore the dynamics of factors that motivated or influence the decision of internal migration to Dhaka. More specifically objectives of this paper are to: recognize drivers and factors of internal migration; explore the link between duration and factors of migration; examine the pre and post migration status of respondents. The structure followed in this paper starts with brief discussion of methodology, followed by theoretical framework and general overview of migration based on secondary literatures.Findings of the study are presented in the third part and finally the overall discussion of research findings in the light of objectives and in the context of literature are linked. This research has limitation in relation to number of respondents and depth of interview taken that could have been increased. Again, previous studies show that result varies owing to location of survey and for this study data only collected from migration destination. Place of origin could have been incorporated for increasing robustness of the research.

1.1. Research Methodology 1.1.1. Research Design The study is designed based on the principles of Explanatory Research approach (more focus is given A combination of quantitative and qualitative method is employed to depict the current scenario of the migrants in Dhaka city. Probability sampling based on cluster random sampling method is used for this study. The population of Dhaka is divided into three clusters depending on slums in Dhaka city. The unit of analysis is individual based on data collected from individual level within the slums using random sampling method. The overall size of the sample is 40 individuals; 10 respondents from Kalyanpur, 10 from Shyamoli and 20 from Mirpur 12 (Pallabi). The sample size was determined base on the availability of respondents and other resources required. 1.1.2. Data Analysis: The information collected from respondents has been processed and stored using Microsoft Office Word and Excel. At the beginning, the transcription of the interviews was conducted in Bengali language. Subsequently, the necessary information for the report was translated into English language. General tabulation is formed with all the data available from the questionnaire sheets. Then factor wise tabulation was formed with sub questions under different factors in the questionnaire. Then cross tabulation is formed with different sections of data. Some of these tables are transformed into different charts and trends for further analysis and better understanding. Analysis of socio-economic status of pre and post migration is also shown in the analysis.

2. Theoretical framework and Literature Review Magnitude, frequency and the patterns of migration have changed considerably over the last three decades (ADB, 2011). In many places, voluntary migration has superseded the numbers of forced migration or vice-versa. Migration is not a random consequence (Skeldon, 2003). Migration that brings about by force has misery and ruthless outcome associated with it. This section of the paper is based on literatures printed or online, published or unpublished that attempts to explore the idea of migration, theory and practical work on its dynamic patterns and consequences on migrant at different levels. 2.1. Migration theories: Ravenstein, during 1885 and 1889, first contributed to migration study in scholarly e stated that migrants tend to travel short distances and there is negative

279

relationship between number of migrants and distance of migration (Ravenstein, 1889).His hypothesis was urban dwellers migrate less than the rural people and identified financial crisis as the major cause of migration. While investigating causes of migration,the neo-classical approach regards rural-urban migration as an integral part of overall development process where surplus labor from rural areas migrates to urban industrial economy (Lewis, 1954). More importantly, this theory postulates that people migrate not only to maximize gains but also to minimize risks associated with the decision of migration. (Haas, 2008: p.8).Harris-Todaro model asserts that than real income. People generally migrate to maximize their expected gains (Todaro & Smith 2003: pp.33738). The Push and Pull model has gained enormous popularity in the migration literature and has become the dominant migration model. According to this model, pull factor generally originate at the destination level and push factor at origin. There are generally two main forces distinguished to create the pushes and pulls: (1) rural population growth 1 (2) economic conditions (higher wages in cities) tempting people for cities (Skeldon 1997; Schwartz and Notini 1994). 2.1. Defining Migration: Since the beginning of human civilization, people are migrating from place of birth to place of destination or perhaps other placesin search of better movement of people across a specified boundary for the purpose of establishing a new permanent or semi permanent residence" (Haupt & Kane 1998: p. 35). Ravenstein (1889: p. 288) defines sedentary population stagnation 2.2. Types of Migration: Migration can be of several types based on characteristics and causal factors. Datta (2004, p.335) explained migration in terms of push-pull factors, whether it is documented or undocumented, forced or voluntary. At the center of its origin, push factor attributes to negative characteristics, but pull factors identify the positive characteristics (Datta, 2004). Broadly, from geographic perspective, migration is divided into internal (within country) and international category (between countries). Siddiqui (2005) has attempted to make a distinction between forced and voluntary migration and argued that migration decision is traditionally tied to physical coercion. Migration is not always choice of luxury, but painful and forced reconciliation. People may be displaced by number of reasons ranging from economic to social, environmental to human induced projects and events. According to The Harriet and Robert Heilbrunn Department of Population (2013) 2, forced migration or displacement can be; Conflict-Induced Displacement 3, Development-Induced Displacement 4 and DisasterInduced Displacement5. Nevertheless, there need to have certain caution in ascribing a single cause for forced

1

Indicating the Malthusian theory of population pressure on natural and agricultural resources that push people out of marginal rural areas. 2 Website study (last sighted in August 27, 2013), 3 It occurs when people are forced to flee their homes as a result of armed conflict including civil war, generalized violence, and persecution on the grounds of nationality, race, religion, political opinion or social group (The Harriet and Robert Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health, 2013). 4 Occurs when people are compelled to move as a result of policies and projects implemented to advance -scale infrastructure projects such as dams, roads, ports, airports; urban clearance initiatives; mining and deforestation; and the introduction of conservation parks/reserves and biosphere projects (The Harriet and Robert Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health 2013). 5 Occurs when people are displaced as a result of natural disasters (floods, volcanoes, landslides, earthquakes), environmental change (deforestation, desertification, land degradation, global warming) and human-made

280

migration. Contrary to this, some scholars are unwilling to specify single particular cause for forced migration. In his paper Zetter (2012) justifies that forced migration usually, a blend of multiple triggers. 2.3. Internal migration: From the perspective of contemporary territorial state, migrations in developing countries are divided into two categories, internal and international (Skeldon, 2003). In Bangladesh, approximately two-thirds of emigration happens to urban areas, 10 percent to rural to rural and 24 percent for overseas migration (Afsar, 2003). According to Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics(BBS, 2011), rate of rural to urban migration is 4.29 and urban to urban migration is 0.85. Due to lack of national level data in Bangladesh, estimation of internal migration is guesswork for researcher. The veryfirst research on the patterns of internal migration in this country was conducted based on census data by M. Obaidullah in 1967 (Islam 1999: p.8). Even though few micro-level studies are found focusing on the different aspects of migration but Afsar (1999), Majumder et al. (1989) and Chaudhury (1978) particularly focused at the destination place of migration while giving little attention to the causes of outmigration from villages. Moreover, Afsar (2003) studied the economic consequences of migration based on sample surveys conducted in Dhaka city. Kibria (2001) and Siddiqui (2001) separately conducted gender based study of migrants. While most of the work of Nazrul Islam focus on urbanization more specifically than migration (1999, 2002 and 2008).

2.4. Socio-economic factors of migration Based on the most popular Push-Pull model, pioneered by Everett S. Lee (1966), Nazrul Islam (1999, p.10) identified some sub-factors in the context of Bangladesh. Among the pull factors, real or perceived job opportunities, higher wages in the city and socio-cultural facilities are identified major factors by the report. Some push factors are identified for Bangladesh as:population pressure (adverse person-land ratio, landlessness) and poverty; frequent and severe natural disasters (particularly river bank erosion); law and order situation; lack of social and cultural opportunities (applicable for rural rich). (Islam, 1999, p.10). In the same report Islam (1999, p.11) summarized the findings of Push and Pull factors that influence migration based on study in Dhaka city and found that about 55.4 percent of overall migration occurred in Dhaka due to economic reason, 26.6 percent for riverbank erosion, 9.1 percent for family reason and 7.9 percent for different other reasons. Moreover, Hossain (2005, p.49) has found another set of push and pull factors of migration: (14.6%), small income in the rural areas (20%), available job services in the city (32.8%) and accompanying the family (17%). Besides, a number of other studies have pointed out low income, population growth, high unemployment rate, unequal distribution of land, demand for higher schooling and dissatisfaction with housing have been the prominent determinants of rural out-migration (Nabi, 1992; Sekhar, 1993; Hossain, 2001). Outmigration is generally higher for villages due to land scarcity, unequal distribution of land, and high proportion of agricultural labor (Chaudhury, 1980). Kuhn (in Afsar, 2003: p.1), nonetheless, based on the studyat Matlab Thana, contradicts with previous proposition and state that loss of homestead land does not necessarily lead to emigration. This was further established Hossain (2001, p.12), that risk of out-migration is significantly higher for the households with agricultural land more than 50 decimals than landless. Focusing on the other way round (i.e. pull factor), study of Mukharjee (1988, p.77) identifies that process of urbanization in 20 th century is impetus for development of big city as center of trade, industry, commerce and cultural activities. Poverty is a major economic factor for migration. Takashi Kurosaki et a.l (2007) studied socioeconomic profiles of rickshaw pullers, owners and contractors in North-East Delhi and found that, a significant number of these rickshaw pullers were migrated from rural areas in search of job opportunities and in order to

disasters (industrial accidents, radioactivity) (The Harriet and Robert Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health 2013).

281

escape from rural poverty. According to Khan (2011, p.184), the total number of urban poor6 in Bangladesh exceeds population of 102 countries in the world. HIES (2000) estimates 28 percent of population or 3.36 million people in Dhaka were poor, and 12 percent as extremely poor (BBS, 2000). 2.5. Environmental factor of migration: Environment has always been regarded as an important factor in migration literatures. Despite debate over the number of migrants, many studies indicate that approximately 25 million people worldwide have been uprooted for environmental reasons, that is, from floods, toxic spills, desertification, hydroelectric projects, soil erosion, land degradation and other environment related disruptions (Myers, 1999; Baker, 2001). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) also identified human migration as the greatest single impact of climate change (IPCC 2007). It estimates that up to 150 million migrants will be created as a result of climate change by 2050. When it comes the case of Bangladesh in terms of natural disasters and distress migration, there might have disagreements on relative contribution of factors to migration but consensus is found on the premise that environmental factors play most significant role for internal migration in Bangladesh (Brown, 2004; Ahmed, 2009; Roy 2011). Roy7 (2011, p.2) states the coastal areas of Bangladesh are most disaster prone and vulnerable to climate change. Along with other natural disasters, Bangladesh vulnerability to climate induced hazards is now evident (IPCC, 2007). Pender, (2008) 8 recognized Bangladesh as the third most vulnerable country to sea level rise and warned that it future it would be the single most causal factors of migration. According to Brown (2004) even a one metre sea level rise would inundate hal riceland, forcing the relocation of easily 40 million; which would have been an overburden for this most densely populated country. 2.6. Status of the Migrants Skeldon (2003, p.21) tried to answer a very vital question of who moves for migration. In both Vietnam and China, migrant are not the poorest of the poor, rather unemployment is one of the major cause of migration (Skeldon, 2003:p.21). However, in Bangladesh, landless and rural poor (moderate not absolute) migrate to urban areas to improve their condition. Historically, most of the econo mic migrants to urban areas are young males, but this has changed significantly with the recent demand of female labor in the ready- made garment industries (Asfar, 2003). Hossain (2001, p.18) shows that rate of migration and increase of age has a negative correlation. Marital status is another key factorof migrationwhich is also linked with the distance moved both for male and female migrants. Several studies find that migrants are more educated with respect to the place of origin and less educated with respect to the place of destination than non-migrants (Singh, 1985). World Bank (2007) conducted a study in Dhaka city and found that 52 percent male migrant workers (aged 15 and older) are literate, while the rate for women is 33 percent. Hossain (2001, p.7) revealed that 50 per cent migrants attained secondary and higher-secondary education and 12 per cent attained graduation among young migrants. Family size is related to out-migration. Many studies find that out-migration is more in larger family size than smaller family ( Sekhar, 1993; Upton 1967). Hossain (2001, p.13) finds that the average size of the migrant and nonmigrant households was 7.3 and 5.6 members respectively. Afsar (2003) identifies a number of problems for migrants: lack of low cost housing, physical insecurity, unequalaccess to basic services and subsequent health problems. World Bank 9 (2008) shows that unemployment rate of poor is almost double than that of the non-poor 6

Total number of urban poor in Bangladesh is 10 million to 14.8 million that has been estimated using CBN (Cost of Basic Needs) method. 7 Vulnerability and population displacements due to climate-induced disasters in coastal Bangladesh 8 Pender, J. (2008): Community-led adaptation in Bangladesh, Forced Migration Review, Issue 31, , 15 April 2010. 9 World Bank. (2008), Dhaka: Improving Living Conditions for the Urban Poor

282

among migrants. The report also shows that approximately 20 percent of all children from migrants families aged between 5-14 years are working and ratio of boys and girls are almost same. Afsar (2003,p.4) also finds an unequal work burden among male and female migrants; a female slum resident travels an average distance of 69 m daily to fetch water for drinking and cooking. Study also states that nearly 90% of the slum dwellers use non-sanitary toilets in Dhaka city, contrary to 90% of non-slum residents who have modern toilets.

3. Findings of the study The findings of the study are presented into four categories. Initially the findings are categorized based on major sub factors (i.e. economic, social, environmental and others), then the drivers of migration indicators are divided into two broad categories, push and pull factors. The third category shows the dynamics between duration of stay in destination area and factors of migration. This section ends with describing the pre and post migration status of the migrant respondents of three slums.

3.1 Major sub factors of migration: The study finds more than half of the respondents (55 percent) were migrated due to economic reasons, followed by environmentally induced migrants (22.2 percent). 20 percent respondents were found migrated due to social factors and only 2.5 percent was found migrated for non-specific reason. To explore economic reasons of migration, six sub-factors were ranked based on response. Lack of job facility was found to be the main stimuli behind migration to Dhaka (41 percent), followed by low wage rate in rural areas (18 percent). Landlessness is another factor that comes third and 14 percent respondents were found migrated due to landlessness. Other three sub-factors such as cost of living, repayment of loan and non-specified factors were responsible for only 9 percent migration. Overall decision of migration is rarely influenced by only one factor; rather several factors contribute at different scales that forces individuals to move out for better options. In case of environmental factors, riverbank erosion and degradation of land fertility were found dominating in this study.Even though social factors and conflicts are major contributors to migration in elsewhere, but this study only accounts 20 percent of the respondents migrate due to social factors. Among some social factors identified, more than one third of social migration occurred due to consideration of the ducation and insecurity werefound sharing equal importance for internal migration (25 percent each). On the other hand, 12.50 percent of migration occurred due to ageing of parents that allowed the children go out to look for better prospect both for themselves and for the family.

3.2 Push and Pull factors of Migration: Graph 1: Pull factors of migration

Respondents composition 11.12

Pull Job Facility Education Future of Child Living standard

16.66 16.66

55.56

Graph 2: Push factors of migration

283

Respondents composition Push 14

Low Wage

18

Land loss 18

14

22.5

Insecurity

9

Loan repayment

4.5

Broadly migration factors are divided into Push and Pull factors. Push factor generally associated with the place of origin and pull factor to the place of destination. This study finds that (Table 1 and 2) push factors contributes 55 percent of total migration decision and pull factors contribute 45 percent. Among pull factors, better job facilities was found most influencing factor (57 percent). For push factors on the other hand, every fifth individual migrated for river erosion (22.5 percent). Education and future of child together contributes to one third of decision in pulling migrants to Dhaka city (33.32 percent). Landlessness and productivity losscontribute around one third decision in pushing migrant to Dhaka city (32 percent).

3.3. Relation between duration of stay and factors of migration Migration can be both temporary and permanent. In terms of duration of stay, this study categories the respondents into permanent (more than 10 years) and temporary (less than 10 years) migrants (Table 3). Using cross tabulation, the studyfinds different factors in Dhaka. The study shows that almost all economic migrants have been staying Dhaka for less than two years; in this sense is of recently migrated. Share of economic and social factors are same for people who are living for over 2 to 3 years in slums of Dhaka. Other than this group of respondents, impact of economic factor is evident at all the levels. Respondents of this group moved for more social or environmental consequences than other. One third of the respondent was found staying in Dhaka more than 10 years due to economic purposes. On the other hand, effect of environmental factors is almost steady with around one third of share at each level for those living over 3 years in Dhaka. But, impact of social factor fluctuates more than any other factors of migration. Table 3: Duration and factor of migration Duration in Dhaka (years)

2-3

>3-4

5-10

10