INTRODUCTION

Internal migration is now recognized as an important factor in influencing social

and economic development, especially in developing countries. According to census
2001, the total population of India is 1028 million consisting of 532 million males and
496 million females. India is geographically divided into 28 states and 7 Union
Territories. There is a tremendous variation in the aggregate population size across the state.
It varies from 0.54 million in Sikkim to 166.2 million in Uttar Pradesh. In 2001, 309
million persons were migrants based on place of last residence, which constitute about 30%
of the total population of the country. This figure indicates an increase of around 37
percent from census 1991 which recorded 226 million migrants.1 In 2001, 309 million
persons were migrants based on place of last residence, which constitute about 30% of the
total population of the country. This figure indicates an increase of around 37 percent from
census 1991 which recorded 226 million migrants. Out of the total migrants 91 million are
males and the rest 218 are females. Thus migrants constitute around 30 percent of the total
population, male and female migrants constituting 18 percent and 45 percent of their
population respectively. Of the total migrants, 87 percent were migrants within the state of
enumeration while 13 percent were interstate migrants. Among the male migrants, 79 percent
moved within the state of enumeration while 21 percent moved between states. Among
females, 90 percent were intrastate migrants and 10 percent were interstate migrants.2
Migration is defined as the transfer of people from one place to another in search of jobs,
employment among other factors In 2001,309 million persons were migrants based on place
of last residence, which constitute about 30% of the total population of the country. This
figure indicates an increase of around 37 percent from census 1991 which recorded 226
million migrants. Out of the total migrants 91 million are males and the rest 218 are females.
Thus migrants constitute around 30 percent of the total population, male and female
migrants constituting 18 percent and 45 percent of their population respectively. Of the
total migrants, 87 percent were migrants within the state of enumeration while 13 percent
were interstate migrants. Among the male migrants, 79 percent moved within the state
of enumeration while 21 percent moved between states. Among females, 90 percent
were intrastate migrants and 10 percent were interstate migrants. Migration happens more
due to regional disparity in development. People move from backward underdevelopment

1
https://veronetwork.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/internal-migration-and-regional-disparities-in-india/
2
Ibid.

1|Page
regions to developed and prosperous areas in order to improve in their living conditions. This
is found to be true both in international as well as in internal migration. There is a close
relation of the people migrating and the regional disparities present in the specific regions.
Migration is age and sex selective and labor migration is highly selective. Most of the
workers are in young age group and in working age group. Migration is a selective process
which involves some population sub-groups more than the other.3

Reasons for Migration

98 million persons moved during the decade 1991-2001. Out of this, 33 million are males and
65 million are females. Of the total intercensal migrants, 83 percent were intrastate migrants
and 17 percent were interstate migrants. However, among the males, 74 percent migrated
within the state of enumeration while 26 percent moved between states. A corresponding
percentage of females (13 percent) were recorded as interstate migrants. This indicates that
mobility of Indian population has significantly increased during the 1990s. t is observed that
employment among males and marriage among females are the main reasons for migration.
Associational reasons – movement on account of accompanying parents or any other member
of the familyis elicited second most important reason among both male and female
intercensal migrants. Around 44 percent of the total intercensal migrants have moved due to
marriages. However, it is predominantly led by females as 65 percent of females have
migrated owing to their marriages compared to 2 percent among males. Among male
migrants, employment has continued to be the main reason for migration with nearly 40
percent of them accounted by it.

From the largest three or four magnitudes of out-migration proportions of each state, it
is clear that majority ofthe migrants have moved to neighboring states only. However
there are exceptions for this. For Uttar Pradesh, which constitutes 41 percent of all
our migrants, migration to Maharashtra accounts for 32 percent even though Maharashtra
is not a border state. Likewise, out migrants from Orissa preferred Gujarat and
Maharashtra as the destination even when these states are not border states. Out-migration to
these states made up to 34 percent of total out-migrants from Orissa.4

People migrate due to various reasons. As it is observed that the majority of internal
migration in India is from rural to urban areas, the reasons for this are scarcity of cultivated

3
http://uaps2011.princeton.edu/papers/110168.
4
https://veronetwork.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/internal-migration-and-regional-disparities-in-india/

2|Page
land, low agricultural productivity, concentration of rural economy mostly on agriculture,
etc., Every summer in India we see reports about people driven out of their homes by
drought. Nearly all the villages in the dry areas across India witness migration. The other
reasons related to the above are the need of money for repaying debts, covering deficits
created by losses in agriculture. Some of the other reasons for migration of people are
unavailability of enough job opportunities, lack of better educational opportunities, poor
medical care, loss of wealth, pollution, poor housing, natural disasters like famine/drought,
etc., All these factors are called Push factors- i.e. the reasons which make people leave the
place. Because of the above difficulties people migrate to areas where they can overcome
their problems. People move to regions where they can have better job opportunities, better
living conditions, proper educational facilities, better medical care, etc., These factors which
attract people to a place are called Pull factors.5

Consequences of migration

Economic Consequences

For the source region one of the major benefits is the remittance sent by the migrants. This
remittance plays an important role in the growth of economy of the source area. The
remittances sent by migrants are mainly used for food, repayments of debts, children’s
education, construction of houses, etc. Migration to the urban areas causes overcrowding in
those areas. Development of slums in industrial areas is a negative consequence of migration
within the country.

Social Consequences

People who migrate are agents of cultural and social change. Migration leads to intermixing
of people from different cultures which brings up a composite culture among the people.

Environmental Consequences

Overcrowding of people in a particular region creates pressure on the existing physical

infrastructure in that region. This may lead to unplanned growth of urban settlement and
formation of slums. Also due to over exploitation of natural resources problems like depletion
of ground water, air pollution, etc. may occur. Demographic Consequences Migration
produces a remarkable effect on size, structure and growth pattern of population in different

5
http://www.stannsannquest.com/pdf-2016/Usha-7.pdf

3|Page
areas of the country. Rural to urban migration is one of the important factors effecting the
population growth in the urban regions. High migration of males to urban areas for
employment brings an imbalance in the age sex composition of rural areas.

There is growing evidence in India to suggest that the country is moving fast in the overall
development. Structural transformation in the 1990s has propelled the growth of the economy
further. The percentage of people below poverty line has reduced and per capita consumption
has improved simultaneously. Although Indian economy is predominantly agricultural, the
proportion of work force engaged in agricultural activities has fallen significantly. This
reduction is perhaps, a sign of enhanced job opportunities in other sectors. With this scenario
of an optimistic economic growth at the national level, an attempt is made to relate the levels
of migration ofeach state with some social and economic indicators. The following variables
have been considered for the preliminary analysis: – proportion urban, per capita income,
proportion of non agricultural workers, density, economic dependency ratio, average earnings
of rural labor, sex ratio, proportion age 15-59 and sex ratio of age15-49.Zero order
correlation coefficients of these variables with migration levels is expected to providesome
insights on the mechanisms of push pull factors of spatial mobility in India. The measurement
errors in both the sets of variables, socio economic variables as well as migration, cannot be
summarily ruled out, although efforts will be made to maximize the reliability.

On an all-India basis, the fertility rate at 2.76 is still significantly behind China’s 1.77, no
doubt the result of the latter’s stringent one child policy. As a recent article by Indicus
Analytics in this newspaper pointed out, using one estimate of constant fertility rate, India’s
population is set to exceed China’s by 2022, just 11 years from now. This date could be
postponed by 18 years to 2029 if we use a lower fertility assumption. Either way, India is
going to have a lot of people. Global corporations and businessmen see this in terms of
burgeoning potential markets for a range of consumer goods and a useful talent pool. But as
the Indicus Analytics analysis pointed out, these numbers may set out probable scenarios but
“they do give some pointer to the huge resource requirements ahead for feeding, clothing and
housing India’s growing population”. Ergo: it’s no point having lots of people if they are
neither educated properly nor healthy. This is certainly a major issue even today; despite
being among the world’s top ten fastest growing economies, the Human Development
Indicators (HDI) provide a depressing dampener ever year. India’s 2010 HDI ranking was
119 (among 169 countries), to China’s 89, Brazil’s 73 and Russia’s 65, putting it way behind
all its BRIC competitors.

4|Page
Despite strenuous efforts and some notable successes (in primary schooling, for example), the
centre and state governments’ ability to provide its 1.2 billion people with adequate health,
sanitation and education remains poor, more so in the rural areas where the bulk of the
population lives. Going by its token investments in social sector schemes, any improvement
on this track record is likely to be incremental. With poorer states still recording high rates of
population growth, India needs a vigorous family-planning campaign, especially in these
states. The two-child —“hum do, hamare do” campaign must be relaunched and the pro-girl
child campaign must also be stepped up.6

In the foregoing sections, we have examined the various dimensions of interstate disparities.
An important aspect of regional disparities in India, which could not be covered by this
approach, is the significant level of regional disparities, which exist within different States.
An important cause of regional tensions which lead to popular agitation and at times militant
activities is such regional disparities in economic and social development which exist within
some of the States. Indeed, creation of some of the States in the past was in the wake of
popular agitation based on perceived neglect of certain backward regions in some of the
bigger States. The best examples of such cases are the creation of Andhra Pradesh and
Gujarat in the Fifties and creation of Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh in the Sixties.
The latest example is the creation of three new States caved out from an existing larger State
viz., Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh respectively. The past experience, by and
large, is that when two or more States are carved out from an existing one or a new State is
created by combining parts from more than one State on the basis of some homogeneity
criterion like language or some other common heritage, the newly created States develop
faster than the pre-partition States.

A number of States included in our analysis have clearly identifiable regions which are at
different stages of development and which have distinct problems to tackle. Creation of new
States, certainly, may not be a solution to such regional disparities. At the same time, it is
important to recognise such intra-State regional disparities explicitly and tackle them through
special efforts. As we have noted in an earlier section, Maharashtra is a typical example of a
State where overall development is quite good in terms of almost all indicators, but extreme
regional disparities exist.11 Andhra Pradesh has three distinct regions which are at different
stages of socio-economic development, viz. Coastal Andhra, Telangana and Rayalaseema.

6
https://veronetwork.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/internal-migration-and-regional-disparities-in-india/.

5|Page
Similarly, North Bihar and South Bihar before State reorganisation in 2000 were at different
stages of development with entirely different problems. Uttar Pradesh, even after caving out
Uttaranchal, has at least three regions with varying problems and different levels of socio-
economic development. Other States like Gujarat, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa,
Rajasthan and West Bengal also have regions with distinct characteristics of backwardness.

A closer examination of the nature of backward regions in each State will indicate specific
reasons for their backwardness. The major cause of backwardness of Vidharba and
Marathwada in Maharashtra, Rayalaseema and Telangana in Andhra Pradesh and Northern
Karnataka is the scarcity of water due to lower precipitation and lack of other perennial
sources of water. On the other hand, backwardness of certain regions in Gujarat, Madhya
Pradesh, Bihar and Orissa can be associated with the distinct style of living of the inhabitants
of such regions who are mostly tribals and the neglect of such regions by the ruling elite.
Topography of a region could also constrain the development of that region; the desert
region of Rajasthan is an example of such a case. Historical factors like the attitude of rulers
of the former Princely States towards development could have significantly affected the
development of a region. For example, the distinctly higher level of social development of the
Travancore and Cochin regions of Kerala can be traced back to the enlightened attitude of the
former rulers of the Princely States of Travancore and Cochin. On the other hand, the poor
social development of Telangana region of AP and certain other parts of the Deccan could be
traced back to the absence of visionary rulers in the respective princely

Their demographic disadvantage is implicit in the fact that major States in this region, viz.,
Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh are likely to have fertility rates
exceeding the replacement level well beyond 2025, a level which some of the forward States
like Kerala and Tamil Nadu have already achieved and others are expected to achieve within
a decade or so. We have noted that if the current trend is projected, Madhya Pradesh will
reach replacement level only by 2060, and Uttar Pradesh only by 2100.

The implications of these divergent demographic trends on population density, employment

opportunities, social sector investments and the overall development can be extremely grave.
One of the major objectives of development planning initiated immediately after
Independence has been, among others, reduction of regional disparities in social and
economic development. Direct investment by the Central Government and Centrally directed
investment of the private sector have been two powerful instruments to achieve this objective.

6|Page
During the first four decades of development planning, most of the large units in basic and
heavy industries were set up in the public sector in a regionally well-balanced manner.
Indeed, their location, other things being equal, was biased towards backward regions as
natural endowments such as mineral deposits were concentrated in those regions. Massive
public investments have been made to provide economic and social infrastructure in the
backward regions to accelerate their overall development.

The natural tendency of the private sector is to set up industries and other related activities in
developed regions. To counter-balance this tendency, various incentive and disincentive
schemes have been introduced as public policies to direct private investments to backward
regions. Fright equalization scheme was just one of them.

The efforts of the first four decades of planned development to reduce various imbalances
across the regions have been only partially successful. At best they have ensured that regional
disparities in terms of various indicators of development are not aggravating. Of course, even
this is no mean achievement.

Economic reforms initiated in 1991 implied among, other things, that the private sector
would be the principal engine of economic growth. Most of the restrictions on private
investment have been removed. Mounting debt burden of the government has imposed a cap
on public investment. As a result, while there was significant increase in the quantum of
private investment, there was a sharp fall in the public investment over the last decade.

The flow of private investment, both domestic and foreign, has been extremely biased in
favour of the more developed regions of the country. This has enabled the developed regions
to achieve accelerated economic growth during the 1990s. On the other hand, backward
regions of the country, which were unable to attract any significant private investment flows,
experienced decelerated economic growth during this period.

CONCLUSION

Internal migration in India is taking place at different levels for various kinds of reasons.
Migration in India is mainly from rural areas to urban areas. For majority of the people the
reason for migration is work or employment which reflects that there is inequality in regional
development. Migration has both positive as well as negative consequences across various
factors. On one side it is helping in re balancing the economy and intermixing of cultures and
on the other side it is creating problems related to over population, environmental effects, etc.

7|Page
There is a need for balanced development across all regions. More focus is needed on the
development of rural areas and better schemes should be designed to overcome the negative
effects of migration.

8|Page