Why I Left My Village:A Study on Migration from Rural

Bihar, India

Institute of Social Sciences

Supported by:

European Union Delegation to India

Study Team:

Sachindra NarayanDebraj Bhattacharya

Research Assistants:Ajay Kumar Singh, Satyendra Prasad, Archana Kumari,

Usha Kumari Deo, Naresh Kumar, Birendra Sharma, Manju Sharan Kumari, Koushalendra Kumar, Ranjan Kumar,

Janardan Thakur, Anil Kumar Singh, Kumari Kumkum, Rajesh Kumar Singh, Sanju Kumari, Kumar Jitendra Kishor,

Sushil Kumar and Sunil

OBJECTIVES

The study concentrated on a particular form of migration from rural Bihar – migration to urban areas in search of livelihood. Thus we are not considering migration due to marriage and migration within the state. More specifically the study seeks to understand the following:• The vulnerabilities at the source region that compels rural population to migrate to the urban centres in search of work.• The socio-economic profile of the migrants.• The destination points of migrant population.• The process of migration.• The benefits and the problems associated with migration.• The gender dimension of migration.• The role of local government in the process of migration.• The impact on Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme in stopping migration in the study area.

METHODOLOGY

• In the absence of any readily available data-base on migration prone districts the study districts were chosen purposively in consultation with the state officials of Bihar. The three chosen districts were not covered in earlier study by Girish Kumar and Pranab Banerji.• Similarly, the study Blocks/GPs were chosen in consultation with district and sub-district functionaries.• In each district two Blocks, and in each Block three Gram Panchayats and in each Gram Panchayat a minimum of three villages were chosen. In some cases more than three villages were chosen as per requirement. In each study village every third household was covered under the survey, hence the sampling method at the village level was systematic random.

METHODOLOGY (CONT…)

• Districts: Gaya, Bhojpur, Aurangabad• Blocks: 2 Blocks from each district; total 6 Blocks• Gram Panchayats: 3 GPs from each Block; total 18 GPs• Villages: At least 3 villages from each GP; total 57 villages• Household: Every third household in the village• Sample Size for Household Survey:

Household Survey was supplemented by Qualitative Research Methods like FGD, Semi-structured interviews, etc.

District Sample Size

Gaya 1037

Bhojpur 1000

Aurangabad 1000

Total 3037

KEY FINDINGS

1. In all three districts the overwhelming majority of the respondents live as daily wage earners or as agricultural labourers/marginal farmers.

Occupation

2. Majority of the migrant households are from Scheduled Castes and Other Backward Castes.

Caste Status

3. Fifty Eight per cent of the families are located below the official poverty line.

BPL Status

4. Only 9 per cent live in concrete houses and nearly 60 per cent live in kutccha houses, i.e. houses made of mud, straw and tin.

Type of House

5. Sixty five per cent of the households do not possess any cultivable land.

Possession of Land

6. Eighty One per cent of those who have land, have less than one acre of land.

Size of Land holding

7. In the absence of land or substantial amount of land, the two most important sources of income for the households are remittances from migration and daily wage labour at the local level. Income from agriculture forms the third most important source of income in all three districts.

Sources of Income

8. Only about 10 per cent of the households have access to credit from a bank. The majority rely on informal sources such as moneylenders and neighbours for their loans.

Access to Credit

9. PDS shops are functional but not adequately. Forty per cent of the respondents have said that they do not get rice and wheat from the PDS shops.

Access to Subsidised Essential Commodities

10. The two most important reasons cited by the respondents as causes of migration are inadequate fulfillment of livelihood and inadequate employment opportunity. 95 and 97 per cent of the respondents have cited these as reasons.

Reasons for Migration

11. Migration is still predominantly based on caste and family based networks. The source of information related to migration in 38 per cent cases is from another migrant of the same caste while in 41 per cent cases the informer is a member of the family. In only 12 per cent cases the source of information is a member of another caste. The role of middle men or agent is negligible. It can also be seen that migration hardly ever takes place without any prior information. Only in 2 per cent cases migrants have moved on the basis of information that is not directly from some source

Sources of Information

12. The migrant is almost without exception a single male. In 81 per cent cases one person from the household migrates. In 15 per cent cases the number of migrants is two. Thus the dominant trend is for one person per household to migrate to urban areas in search of work. It is very rare to migrate with family. Ninety nine per cent of the respondents have said that women do not migrate.

Gender

13. The migrants are moving to almost all parts of India. The capital of India, New Delhi, is the most favoured destination point with 18.3 per cent of the respondents choosing the city as their destination point. Gujarat and Maharashtra, understandably comes next as these are important industrial bases of India at present.

Destination Points

14. It is rare (6%) to remit more than INR 50,000 in a year. Fifteen per cent remit less than INR 12000 in a year or less than INR 1000 in a month. Another 10 per cent sends between 12001 and 20,000 INR. Thus about one-fourth of the total sends less than INR 2000 per month.

Remittances:

15. Only in case of 15 per cent of the respondents, remittances have resulted in construction of a concrete house. Nearly 50 per cent have however said that it leads to improvement of the resource base of the family. This means in some cases buying land and in some other cases buying inputs for agriculture and also paying off family debts.

Impact of Remittances

16. In 90 per cent cases the respondents have said that migration has resulted in an improvement of living conditions of the household and 85 per cent have said that it has led increase in family’s income. More than 30 per cent have said that it has led to improvement of their ability to repay loans and 34 per cent of the respondents have said that it had helped to meet medical expenses.

Benefits of Migration

17. The emotional loss due to separation from the family is considered to be the most important negative aspect of migration by the households. 92 per cent have said separation from the family is the most important negative aspect while 71 per cent have said migrant’s absence is felt by the family members.

Problems due to Migration

18. Gram Panchayats are not able to play any effective role in the lives of the migrant population. MGNREGS in the study districts is a failure. Seventy nine per cent of the respondents have said that they have received no work under MGNREGS. In case of Aurangabad district the all the respondents have said that they have not received any work under the scheme.

Effectiveness of MGNREGS

19. The study team has found evidence of child labour and child trafficking in Gaya district.

Some children migrate locally or within the country to work in various small restaurants popularly known as “Hotels”. These children are used for washing dishes and as support staff for the cooks. Typically the children are paid less than adult males but are given food and shelter. They are exploited as child labourers.

However there is a more dangerous form of “migration” which takes place. Some foreign tourists visiting Bodh Gaya also work as agents who lure poor parents by giving them some money as advances to let their children go abroad with them. Usually the parents do not see their children again. In some cases the agent who recruited the children calls the parents and says that their children have left and are missing or they have died. It is not clear whether the parents willingly sells the children or not but there is no doubt that this is a form of child trafficking.

Child Labour and Child Trafficking

RECOMMENDATIONS

SHORT TERM ( 0-2 YRS)

• Union Government may set up a committee to review the implementation of “The Inter-state Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1979”. • Central/State Government may give a block grant to the Gram Panchayats to support migrants through awareness generation, for helping migrants who have fallen seriously ill due to work at the destination point and for helping families who have suddenly lost their migrant earning member. • Gram Panchayats may be given the authority to certify a migrant worker before he leaves for the destination point. The migrant may be issued a certificate and a card with necessary phone numbers where he can call in case of any distress at the destination point.

• Gram Panchayats may also be encouraged to declare in a Gram Sabha that migration of persons below the age of 14 for work is illegal. The certificate from the Panchayat may only be given to persons above the age of 14. • Gram Panchayats may be encouraged to maintain a data-base of migrant workers. This data may be shared with the District Labour Officer.• State Governments should identify which migration prone districts are doing poorly in implementation of MGNREGS. The District Magistrate should be issued directives to address the problem on a war footing. • District Administration needs to be issued directives to address the issues of child labour and child trafficking in districts (such as Gaya) where such incidents are taking place.

MEDIUM TERM ( 0-5 YRS)

• Union and State Governments need to develop a data-base of migration so that appropriate planning interventions can be made regarding the problem of distressed migration. The migration prone districts need to be identified on the basis of that data-base. • Donor Agencies may consider distress migration as a priority issue to allocate more funds for Civil Society Organisations to play a greater role in the migration process. Civil Society Organisations may be involved in awareness generation, providing information to the migrants on good employers in different destinations, provide hand-holding support to the migrants while migrating and keeping in touch with them at the destination point in order to ensure that they get the facilities that are their rights as workers.

• The migrant workers, although huge in number, are largely unorganised. Trade Unions, Kisan Sabhas and appropriate Ministries/Departments need to find ways of organizing the migrant workers. There are several small-scale examples of organisations trying to improve the lives of the migrant workers. These need to be documented and replicated.

LONG TERM ( 0 – 10 YRS)

• More branches of rural banks need to be opened so that the rural poor can have access to formal credit. A plan to improve coverage by rural banks need to be developed. A push is required regarding formation of Self Help Groups in the villages so that a lower rate of interest is available to the rural poor. Support of NABARD and distinguished Civil Society Organisations may be sought for this purpose. • The National Rural Livelihood Mission needs to be properly implemented in the migration prone districts.

• A comprehensive district-level plan is required to boost irrigation and power supply to the villages so that agriculture can be improved. • Union and State Governments may consider providing some inputs at a subsidized rate through the Gram Panchayats so that input cost of agriculture is reduced. • Union and State Governments need to develop a plan for giving incentives to small-scale industries to develop in the region so that more full-time/part time jobs are created in the locality. • Union and State Governments need to start a process of re-thinking about current agricultural practice in densely populated parts of India. It is clear that some form of co-operative farming would have to be evolved in areas where the individual farmers own very small plots of land in order to achieve economies of scale and make agriculture profitable.

THANK YOU