Press Information
Bureau
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
31-January-2017 12:55
IST
Labour migration in
India increasing at an accelerating rate, reveals new study: Economic Survey
2016-17
New
estimates of labour migration in India have revealed that inter-state labor mobility
is significantly higher than previous estimates. This was stated in the
Economic Survey 2016-17 presented by the Finance Minister Shri Arun Jaitley in
the Parliament today. The study based on the analyses of new data sources
and new methodologies also shows that the migration is accelerating and was
particularly pronounced for females. The data sources used for the study are
the 2011 Census and railway passenger traffic flows of the Ministry of Railways
and new methodologies including the Cohort-based Migration Metric (CMM) .
The new Cohort-based
Migration Metric(CMM) shows that inter-state labor mobility averaged 5-6.5
million people between 2001 and 2011, yielding an inter-state migrant
population of about 60 million and an inter-district migration as high as 80
million. The first-ever estimates of internal work-related migration using
railways data for the period 2011-2016 indicate an annual average flow of close
to 9 million migrant people between the states. Both these estimates are
significantly greater than the annual average flow of about 4 million suggested
by successive Censuses and higher than previously estimated by any study.
Figure 1. Estimates of annual migrant flows
based on railway traffic data
The second finding from this new study is that
migration for work and education is accelerating. In the period 2001-2011
the rate of growth of labour migrants nearly doubled relative to the previous
decade, rising to 4.5 per cent per annum. Interestingly, the acceleration of
migration was particularly pronounced for females and increased at nearly twice
the rate of male migration in the 2000s. There is also a doubling of the stock
of inter-state out migrants to nearly 12 million in the 20-29year old cohort
alone. One plausible hypothesis for this acceleration in migration is that the
rewards (in the form of prospective income and employment opportunities) have
become greater than the costs and risks that migration entails. Higher growth
and a multitude of economic opportunities could therefore have been the
catalyst for such an acceleration of migration.
Third, and a
potentially exciting finding, for which there is tentative but no conclusive evidence,
is that while political borders impede the flow of people, language does not
seem to be a demonstrable barrier to the flow of people. For example, a gravity
model indicates that political borders depress the flows of people, reflected
in the fact that migrant people flows within states are 4
times than migrant people flows across states. However, not sharing Hindi as a common language
appears not to create comparable frictions to the movement of goods and people
across states.
Fourth, the patterns of flows of migrants
found in this study are broadly consistent with what is expected - less
affluent states see more out migration migrating out while the most affluent
states are the largest recipients of migrants. Figure 2 shows the strong
positive relationship between the CMM scores and per capita incomes at the
state level. Relatively poorer states such as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh have high
net out-migration. Seven states take positive CMM values reflecting net
in-migration: Goa, Delhi, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and
Karnataka. Fifth, the costs of moving for migrants are about twice as much as
they are for goods – another confirmation of popular conception.
Figure 2. Cohort-based Migration Metric vs.
Real Incomes across States
Policy actions to
sustain and maximize the benefits of migration include: ensuring portability of
food security benefits, providing healthcare and a basic social security
framework for migrants – potentially through an inter-state
self-registration process. While there do currently exist multiple schemes that
have to do with migrant welfare, they are implemented at the state level, and
hence require greater inter-state coordination.
******