Hukou, social-spatial inequality and migration intention Biqing Li 1 - PDF document

Hukou, social-spatial inequality and migration intention Biqing Li 1 Yan Tan 2 Dianne Rudd 3 Susan Oakley 4 1. Introduction Rural-to-urban migrants in China work or live in cities without urban household registration status ( hukou ) (Lin et al. 2011). Rural migrants amounted to 250 million in 2012 due to rapid urbanisation in China. One of the major driving force of this massive movement is inequality (Black et al. 2005; Lipton 1980). In the literature on migration intention (or settlement intention), many factors that measure social inequality has been studied (Cai & Wang 2008; Cao et al. 2015; Yue et al. 2010), so did factors that measure one type of spatial inequality — regional inequality (East-Middle-West) (Zhu 2003). Most studies addressed inequality issues from three dimensional differences — between rural and urban areas, between farmers and urbanites, and between eastern and western regions. There is little research into spatial inequality between tiered cities within the Chinese urban clusters. Spatial inequality in this paper refers only to the hierarchical disparities between tiered cities. Three crucial changes have been overlooked in current research on migration intention. First, the tiered city system calls for more detailed classification of migration intention. Migration intention of migrants was measured primarily through “stay or leave” or “stay in this city, go back to hometown or go to other cities” (Cai & Wang 2008; Fan 2011; Hao et al. 2015; Tang & Feng 2015; Zang et al. 2015; Zi-cheng & Wei-guo 2013). These measurements neglected the intrinsic differences of cities of different tiers. Second, some dimensions of inequality that migrants experienced in cities are a combination of both social and spatial disparities. Further study is needed to identify the relationship between the scale of a city (measured as residing population size of cities and the administrative ranks of cities) and the types and severity of social inequality in it. Third, hukou policies implemented across different tiered cities are different (Li et al. 2016; PRC-SCC 2014a, 2014b). There remains unknown how current hukou policy and reforms will impact on migrants’ intention to move or not, and where and when to move. This paper seeks to address three research questions. First, what is the spatial pattern of social inequalities across different tiered cities? Second, how do those social-spatial inequalities influence rural migrants’ future migration intention? Third, how do urbanisation policies, especially hierarchical hukou policies influence rural migrants’ further intention to migrate or not? 1 Biqing Li, PhD student, Hugo Centre for Migration and Population Research, Department of Geography, Environment and Population, School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, University of Adelaide, Australia 2 Dr Yan Tan, Associate Professor, Hugo Centre for Migration and Population Research, Department of Geography, Environment and Population, School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, University of Adelaide, Australia 3 Dr Dianne Rudd, coordinator, Department of Geography, Environment and Population, School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, University of Adelaide, Australia 4 Dr Susan Oakley, Associate Professor, Head of School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, University of Adelaide, Australia

2. Literature review 2.1 Migration theories Since Ravenstein’s (1885) pioneering work on “the laws of migration”, a number of theories have been developed in various social science disciplines to explain the reasons of migration. There are three levels of theoretical knowledge base of migration: individual or household decision making at the micro level, the migrant’s social context at the miso level, and the structural causes and the direction of migration at the macro level (Faist & Faist 2000). Neoclassical economics theory and new economics theory provide micro level explanations to migration. Neoclassical economics theory argues that migration is an individual level rational decision depending on the expected migration return of places of destination and individuals will seek greatest absolute return(Massey 1999). New economics theory of migration, on the other hand, consider migration as a decision made by households instead of individuals and claims that greatest relative return, rather than greatest absolute return is the decisive factor behind migration (Massey 1999). Historical-structural theories and segmented labour market theory center their attention on macro context. Historical-structural theories argue that individuals or households are fundamentally constrained by structural forces. Segmented labour market theory proposed that migration is driven by the intrinsic labour demand of modern industrial societies. World system theory deems migration as the structural consequence of the expansion of markets within a global political hierarchy. Migrant network theory, institutional theory and cumulative theory emphasize the meso-structure mechanisms. Those theories are not contradictory. They supplement each other. All the miso and macro factors have to work through influencing the micro factors to form a migration intention. 2.2 Migration intention Massive migration research has demonstrated that people with intentions to move in an earlier time are more likely to migrate later on than those showing no intentions (Böheim & Taylor 2002; Gordon & Molho 1995). In migration research, intention studies have afforded valuable insight into the influence of perceptions of place utility and the role of individual, familial, and macroeconomic factors in determining destinations chosen (Agadjanian et al. 2008; De Jong et al. 1996; De Jong et al. 1985). 2.3 Migration and inequality Among all the determinates of migration intention, the impact of inequalities (both of economy and amenities; of individual/household, social context and structure) were underlined (Castles 2014; Massey 1999). There are mainly two types of inequalities that concern rural migrants in China: social inequality and spatial inequality. Tang et al. (2015) and Zi-cheng et al. (2013) explored the influence of inequalities in employment situation to settlement intention in urban areas; Cai et al.(2008), Tang et al. (2015) and Fan (2011) analysed the relationship between income inequality and rural migrants’ intention to stay in urban areas or to leave; Cai and Wang (2008) also explained the impact of social status disparities on rural migrants’ migration intention. Fan (2011) took the inequalities of social network into account to explain migration intention; Zang et al. (2015) distinguished western, central and eastern part of China when discussing migration intention; Hao et al. (2015) distinguished the