According to latest Human Development Report2009 (HDR, U.N) - migrations are hugely beneficial for the poors; further it reveals that poorest and the low skilled could benefit the most by moving, yet they face the largest barriers to movement: legal, financial, and social.
Report that came through a well groomed survey team with statistical precision might be true in their observation since upward mobility to a productive posture indeed makes the migrant prosperous and if we could prolong it to international migration then its impacts seems more visible.But it’s regret to say that these perceptions are mechanized which normally taken into account by visiting the results on the basis of economies of scale that hardly able to judge the problems in its true light.
The gains are higher for international migrants, so international migration has received much public attention in recent years especially short term migration for work.
Such migration shows lucid distinction and separate avenues for male and female labors; male migrants tends to move in the productions and constructions sector and very few in low end service activities. Contrast to that most of female migrants are found to be working in less productive service activities.
Presently they accounts for around half of the world’s migrant population, so their plights are very worthwhile to judge the actuality of benefits that migration conferred …its quite striking to found that at least in lower strata, migration makes women’s more vulnerable in absence of education and proper exposure to outer world although its varies on patriarchal patterns and official policies of that specific areas as well.
Gender perspectives on migration is very crucial since the report estimates that nearly one billion peoples across the glob are migrants, among these 740 millions are internal migrants-almost four times as many as those who have moved internationally;so,it’s now an issue of survival to the one seventh of the world population.
As per the report, India stands at 134th position with HDF value of 0.612 which marks hardly a rosy picture for Indian growth story; what this report shatters most is the complete obliviousness of the rural migration from India and other developing countries and their same valuation with high profile migration that normally tends for positional change and career advancement rather than a quest for survival.
Mass migration from north Bihar, Terain region of Nepal, Chakmas of Bangladesh can’t be compared with the inter state migration in U.S or even it couldn’t comparable with the exodus from Kerala to Gulf countries.
The basic thing which this report is severely missing the distinction between low end migration and high profile migration; for understanding better the plights of forced migrants, it would be essential to look from cultural and ecological perspectives apart from economic ones.
Subordination of villages and degradations of city life are more or less the outcomes of same development agenda that pushes common men for wrenching migration for attaining even minimum rudimentary facilities that hardly appeared before them at their native places.
For saving the villages and stopping the forced migration, it should be first task for development agencies to end the disguised unemployment in rural areas by creating proper productive atmosphere and strive make these areas the true place of productions.
For ensuring the dream of equal and just societies as well the attainment of financial inclusion plan, it should be foremost task of every policy makers to strive for seizing these areas as place of consumption by spurting a new entrepreneurial revolution from villages. Hope in future time we would see some positive change in our rural landscape through inclusive planning.
Atul Kumar Thakur
October8th2009, New Delhi