Rural to urban migration refers to the movement of people from rural areas into cities and often involves migration of labour and change of carrier. This type of migration is caused by different push and pull factors. In this article, I will discuss the causes in the view of both theoretical as well as empirical literature. Also, I will examine the literature to see whether or not the low income households are better-off in large cities compared to their counterparts in small urban settlements.
Different theories have discussed different determinants and aspects for rural-urban migration. One of the early theories of rural-urban migration belongs to John R. Harris and Michael Todaro. According to Harris-Todaro (1970) model, rural-urban expected income differentials is the most important factor that determines rural to urban migration. While urban labourers/employees receive industrial wages, rural workers earn agricultural wage. In a developing country setting, assuming that the Lewisian turning point has not been reached, there will exist a significant wage differential between the two sectors, i.e. agricultural and industrial sectors. Thus, the model postulates that the rural workers will migrate to urban areas in order to receive a higher wage. The model implies that the rural poor will have a higher propensity to migrate given that their income is almost zero in the rural areas. However, some empirical results have shown just the opposite: propensity to migrate has been lower among the disadvantaged classes of rural areas.
Harris-Todaro model also considers another important determinant of rural-urban migration: distance. As the model suggests, larger the distance, lower will be the migration from rural to urban settings because the cost of migration goes up. This agrees with theories which suggest that, as cities are expanding their boundaries and more and more agricultural lands from rural areas are reallocated towards uses other than agriculture, the rural areas at the outskirts of cities get connected to cities through transport infrastructures; thus, the people of the rural areas near the cities need not migrate to cities. They can participate in economic activities in the cities without migration. Harris-Todaro model also suggests that rural-urban migration also depends on the extent of poverty in the two areas. If the extent of poverty in rural areas is very high, there will be high propensity to migrate to urban areas. Conversely, if the extent of poverty in the urban area is high, then there will be low propensity for rural-urban migration.
While Harris-Todaro model proposes that, due to high wage differentials, the rural poor has a higher propensity to migrate, Banerjee’s theory suggests that the poor cannot afford to migrate. According to him, the rural rich do not need to migrate, the rural poor cannot afford to migrate; so, it is the rural middle income who migrate to urban areas either for earning higher income or for accessing better healthcare, education and other public service facilities. Thus, Banerjee’s theory posits that the level of income is an important determinant of rural-urban migration.
In addition to the above, there are other theories such as Job-search, role of network, altruism versus principle of exchange etc. all of which suggest that migrants, before departing to urban areas, collect a great deal of information regarding their destinations.
From a historical and empirical point of view, we can list some more determinants for rural-urban migration. Net expected return, social norms, skills and education, literacy, gender-based demand, marriage, institutions and the concentration of pools of migrants are some of these factor. Families may send their young adults to urban areas because they are more likely to have a positive net expected return on migration since they are expected to have longer remaining life expectancy. In some societies, social norms determine who should migrate in search of job and higher earning. For example, in Afghanistan, it is usually not welcomed by the society to send a woman to urban areas alone for job purposes. In case of institutions, if strong property rights exist that can ensure safety of once property after migration, then such property rights might encourage rural to urban migration; or, when access to credit market is not possible for migrants in urban settings, this institutional issue might deter rural-urban migration. As an example of concentration of pools of migrants let me point out to the migration of Hazaras of Jaghori district of Afghanistan to Quetta, Pakistan and Sydney, Australia.
In addition to the above factors, one can list a set of push and pull factors (determinants). Push factors are generally tied to the poor economic conditions of household in the rural areas who migrate to urban settings in order to alleviate their poverty. For example, individuals who are unemployment, underemployment in rural areas, earn very low wages and lack assets and land, migrate to urban areas to improve their conditions. Other push factors can be lack of rural infrastructure such as housing, education and healthcare. However, push factors can include forced displacement such as conflicts and climate change. Pull factors refer to relatively better opportunities in the urban areas compared to rural areas. In other words, pull factors are those which attract migrants from rural settings to urban areas.
As to whether or not the low income households are better-off in large cities compared to their counterparts in small urban settlements, literature suggests that low income households are better off in large urban centers as they provide better job opportunities in relative sense. According to the literature, the living conditions in the informal sector is better than what the migrants accessed at the place of origin.
Reference:
Harris, J., & Todaro, M. (1970). Migration, Unemployment and Development: A Two-Sector Analysis. The American Economic Review, 60(1), 126-142. Retrieved March 27, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1807860
