Don't fence them in. Quest for sustainable livelihoods keeps millions on the move

Why do so many people in developing countries leave their homes and travel long distances to make a living? This puzzle prompted studies recently reported on by researchers at the Poverty Research Unit at the University of Sussex, in collaboration with the Institute of Development Studies, the International Institute for the Environment and Development and other collaborators. Their studies took them to rural areas of several African and Asian countries to probe the part migration plays in helping rural people maintain and improve livelihoods. Their report confirms that migration has always been - and remains - a vital strategy in the battle the poor fight to maintain a living in many lands. It urges policymakers to remove counter-productive impediments to such migration whilst guarding against potential drawbacks.

Orthodox economic theories highlight the advantages of a free flow of labour. Yet the research literature repeatedly underlines negative aspects of economic migration. It is often seen as the last resort of impoverished peasants, whose presence may blight the natural environment in areas they adopt. Migrants are often, moreover, victims of exploitation and causes of dispute. In the outlook of many policymakers and scholars there has been a tendency to promote the interests of sedentary over migrant groups.

However, migration is generally the rule rather than the exception. Historically in Europe, in pre-colonial developing countries, and now in developing countries, migration figures as a key option among the livelihood strategies of the poor and better-off alike. Migration originates predominantly in rural areas, and migrants to urban areas tend to maintain close links with their areas of origin. Hence any attempt to understand how livelihoods can be maintained or improved should not be restricted to a narrow geographical region, but should incorporate extended analysis of the areas and activities from which migrants draw an income.

Field research in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and Mali reveals various kinds of migration. They range from short-haul migration for seasonal farming activities (for example, migrants from dryland areas in Mali who set up second farms elsewhere), to international migration such as movements of labour from Bangladesh to the Gulf States. Each form has different consequences. For example, inequality tends to increase as a result of international migration, but to decrease under the influence of short-haul migration.

Migration is one among many core livelihood strategies employed by poor rural households in search of a secure living. Others include more intensive farming techniques and a variegated mix of livelihoods. Members of many poor households pursue extra occupations outside agriculture. This trend is especially notable in marginal areas or places where population density is high. The research in hand probes ways in which households combine livelihood strategies and how each strategy affects the others. In respect of migration, the study focuses on effects of migrants' absence on production 'back home', and the impact of remittances.

People's livelihood strategies are structured by institutions. Formal institutions such as border police or 'sons of the soil' movements affect the extent of migration, but so do informal rules, norms and practices. The 'institution' of gender moulds people's decisions about who migrates, who controls the income generated, and what happens to those who stay behind. Migration is also structured by composition of households and personal networks at the point of destination, including relatives who migrated ahead. Policies should (says the study report) be designed to make the most of the positive contribution migration can make to sustainable livelihoods, for example by:

• easing integration of migrant populations in areas of destination
• minimising tensions between migrants and their hosts
• curbing environmental damage
• enhancing the welfare of migrant and host populations alike
• enabling repatriation of remittances to migrants' areas of origin
• setting up channels for remittances to finance productive and sustainable (and labour-intensive) production.

Source(s):
Migration and Sustainable Livelihoods: A Critical Review of the Literature , IDS Working Paper No. 65, by C. McDowell and A. de Haan (1997)

Funded by: ESCOR (Department for International Development, UK) 1996-1999

id21 Research Highlight: 1998-November-23

Further Information:
Arjan de Haan
Poverty Research Unit
School of African and Asian Studies
University of Sussex
Falmer
Brighton BN1 9QN
UK

Tel: +44 (0) 1273 678739
Fax: +44 (0)1273 623572
Contact the contributor: PRU@sussex.ac.uk

Poverty Research Unit, University of Sussex