Determinants of migration streams in Myanmar Nyi Nyi and Phillip Guest September, 2017 A scientific paper presented at the 2017 International Population Conference of the International Union for the Scientific Study of Population (IUSSP) in Cape Town, South Africa at the Cape Town International Conference Centre (CTICC) from 29 October to 4 November 2017 .
Determinants of migration streams in Myanmar Introduction The 2014 Myanmar Population and Housing Census is the first census to be undertaken in the country since 1983. Findings from this census suggest that the level of internal migration in Myanmar is similar to that of neighbouring countries (Bell and Charles-Edwards, 2013). Many of the differences between countries can be explained by the level of aggregation used in defining migration. For Myanmar, migration is defined as moving between townships (a relatively small administrative unit) which leads to a relatively high level of movement. Over the lifetime of individuals, 19.3 per cent reported moving at least once. For internal migration within the five-year period before the Census, 7 per cent reported moving (Department of Population, 2016). Before the 2014 Census there had been limited research on internal migration or urbanization within Myanmar (Department of Population, 2013) although the demographic structure of the country had been studied. The country is predominately rural, with only 29.6 percent of the population residing in urban areas. This is the second lowest level of urbanization in Southeast Asia (UNESCAP, 2014). Yangon, with a population of 5.2 million, is the most urbanized region of the country, accounting for about 35 per cent of the total urban population, although it contains approximately 40 percent of migrants measured in the 2014 Census. It is projected that by 2040, the city will become a megacity with a population of 10 million, catching up with the trend of the rest of the Southeast Asian nations (JICA, 2013). With the recent opening up of the country, it is also expected that urbanization will take place at an increasingly rapid rate across many cities and towns of Myanmar. This increasing tempo of urbanization was expected to be fed by increasing rural to urban migration. The definition of migration used in the Census is designed to capture permanent or semi- permanent changes of residence. The criterion of six months used to establish the time spent in their usual residence results in those who move on a temporary basis of less than six months not being included in the definition of migration. Temporary forms of migration are typically the predominant form of movement in Southeast Asian countries (Hugo, 2012) and the exclusion of this type of mobility will result in estimates of the level of migration recorded from the Census as being too low, particularly the movement for agricultural workers which are generally seasonal in nature (Mahajarn and Myint, 2015). Differentials in the characteristics of migrants, who move for a short period of time, often circulating between areas of origin and destination, are also likely to differ. For example, Guest (1999) has shown for Viet Nam, temporary migrants are likely to be older, married and have less education than migrants who move for longer periods. However, the inclusion of questions in a census questionnaire that would allow temporary migrants to be identified is not feasible given the dual needs to include questions that measure a range of characteristics and events while also restricting the length of the questionnaire. Hence, censuses worldwide focus on movement of a longer duration (Deshingkar and Grimm, 2005). 2
Migration is measured in the 2014 Census as movement between townships. Myanmar is comprised of 414 townships (including 84 sub-townships). Movement within a township was not asked. Much of this movement likely involves changes of place of residence rather than a change of social networks. These may occur over a very short distance and without disrupting social patterns, although some moves may take place over a longer distance as townships range in size from 1.6 square kilometer for Latha Township in Yangon West district to 11,452 square kilometers for Tanintharyi Township in Myeik District. Internationally there is considerable variation in the number of administrative districts used to define migration: in Southeast Asia in the 2010 round of censuses Indonesia used 33 provinces to define migration while Vietnam used 9,111 administrative units to define migration (Bell and Charles-Edwards, 2013). One of the most striking findings from the Census is the direction of the flow of migration. Almost half of recent migration (that which occurred within the five years prior to the Census) occurred between urban areas and less than 10 per cent of movement was from rural to urban areas. Meanwhile, migration from rural areas was directed primarily towards other rural areas. These patterns are unusual when viewed from a regional or international perspective. A population that is predominately rural would be expected to have levels of rural to urban flows that were approaching the flows of rural to rural movement. In addition, it was found that there were more inter-state/region movements than intra-state/region movements. Another interesting finding was that a large proportion of movement within Myanmar revolved around Yangon, either as movement into Yangon or movement among districts Yangon. Thus, the purpose of this study if to examine the determinants of migration streams in Myanmar. Data and research methods The data used in this paper comes from recent surveys conducted by the Department of Population and the 2014 Census. The methodology used in the Census has been described elsewhere (Department of Population 2015). The total number of persons enumerated in the Census was 50,279,900. It is estimated that 1,206,400 were not enumerated. The analysis focuses on individuals who are living in what is called in the 2014 Census, ‘conventional’ households. This analysis does not include the 2,349,901 persons who were enumerated as living in institutions. These persons were not asked the questions that are used to determine the migration status of an individual. It can be assumed, however, that the levels of mobility are likely to have been high among some segments of the institutional population. The analysis concentrates on the following four major streams of migration: rural-rural, rural-urban, urban-rural and urban-urban. International comparisons of levels of urbanization are hampered by variations in the definitions of urban and rural areas. There is no consensus as to how an administrative area is classified as urban or rural. The 2014 Myanmar Population and Housing Census adopted the designations employed by the General Administration Department (GAD) of the Ministry of Home Affairs in designating lower level administrative areas as urban (wards) or rural areas (villages). 3
Drawing upon interviews with officials from the GAD, the UN Habitat states that there were 288 urban centers under the Towns Act and the Municipal Act (UN-Habitat, 1991). The Towns Act may apply to centers of population less than 10,000, “with densities and functions of a sufficiently urban nature for urban wards (as opposed to rural village tracts)” (UN -Habitat, 1991:53), whereas municipalities are (were) defined as centers with over 10,000 population. In addition to property- based taxation, other urban functions — from planning to implementation and management of physical and social services —were also described as criteria for being “urban”. Consequently, other than the population within some well-defined administrative boundaries such as Yangon City, it is more challenging to identify urban centers or towns from the 2014 Census data. Results Estimates of the share of the four major migration streams are shown in the figure below (Figure 1). These are defined as the four flows that occur between rural and urban areas (that is, urban-urban, urban-rural, rural-urban and rural-rural). The figure displays lifetime migration rather than five-year migration rates because the earliest points in the data series are only available for lifetime migration. There was a large increase in the proportion of lifetime migrants moving between urban areas over the 23-year time period being considered. At the time of the 2014 Census, almost 47 per cent of migrants were classified as having engaged in this type of movement. Rural-to-rural migration comprised the second largest stream accounting for almost 30 per cent of migrants. The only stream that had declined over the whole period was the rural to urban stream, which accounted for less than 10 per cent of migrants at the time of the 2014 Census. Figure 1. Estimates of percentage of lifetime migration streams from surveys and the 2014 Census 50 46.9 45 40.5 % Lifetime Migration 38.6 40 33.5 35 32 30.4 29.04 30 25.6 25.4 24.7 Urban - Urban 25 Urban - Rural 18.1 20 Rural - Urban 14.16 12.9 15 Rural - Rural 9.53 9.1 9.2 10 5 0 1991 PCFS 2001 FHRS 2007 FHRS 2014 Census Source: Data for 1991 PCFS, 2001 FHRS and 2007 FHRS are from DoP (2013). 4
Recommend
More recommend
