Abstract
In India, at present, there is a lot of hue and cry for and against the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam. All the arguments are however based on false perception of migration and its ill or well effects on the economy. The latest 2011 Census does not provide the migration tables in detail. Hence, we had no other option but to use the Census 2001 data to understand the nature and trend of migration in Assam. Our analysis suggests that the recent uproar over illegal migrants from neighboring country in Assam is more of a myth than reality and does not hold much economic justification. Firstly, official data suggests that the flow of internal migration in various districts of Assam is miniscule. Moreover, it is showing a declining trend over the last few decades. The historical international migration that took place in Assam was due to mainly ‘push’ factor and no such ‘push’ factors have been in sight in the last few decades. Secondly and more importantly, migration of any form (though waning in Assam) adds to the prosperity and well-being of the state.
Introduction
In the Greek mythology, Pandora was gifted with a box. She was repeatedly told not to open the box or face the consequences. However, curiosity ruled over her defence. She opened the box. A swarm of bees emanated out of the box. Bees bit her cruelly. Sorrow was born in the world.
Recent furore in India was raised by publication of National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam on 31 July 2017. There was huge hue and cry due to the omission of roughly 4 million people from the NRC. The final list of the NRC published on 31 August 2019 excluded 1.9 million people. The list of omission cuts across religions, caste, linguistic differences, education and all other hierarchy of structure we know off. The list led to some omissions and commissions that have resulted in some hot, bitter debates.
In response to these criticisms, the ruling party made a virulent counterattack. They quote that NRC has large history starting from the days of the deceased Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. The register was first visualized on Assam Accord in 19851 1 . It was decided on the Accord that foreigners who had migrated to India on or after 25 March 1971 should be declared as migrants and practical steps should be taken to oust such foreigners. The NRC was promulgated during the Congress regime of Dr. Manmohan Singh under the auspices of the Supreme Court of India. Presently, the report has been published and revised to strike out the ‘illegal’ immigrants from the country.
On the other hand, the critics have drawn on human rights and ethical issues. It is bare view that migrants from other country should be treated on human considerations. The critics seem to accept migrants as drain to the country’s resources. However, such drainage should be tolerated on greater logic of human rights (Patnaik, 2018).
In this debate, somewhere a line of clear thought has been lost in muddy water. There seems to be a strange ‘convergence’ of the views. They all find migrants to be a ‘nuisance’—a drain of country’s resources.
There are numerous issues and points that can be raised in this context (Anand, 2006, 2007, 2008; Roy & Mukhopadhyay, 2018; Yabuuchi, 2002). We are, however, concentrating on the economic valuation of the publication of NRC and emphasising on the points that are of interest to the economists. In order to better understand whether there is any economic logic or not of such de-enfranchising exercise and assess the migration situation, we first evaluate the migration pattern in Assam vis-a-vis India in Section 2. Section 3 deals with the inter districts migration scenario in Assam. However, though detailed migration tables are not available as per 2011 Census but some data on migration at the state level are available as per 2011 Census. So, in Section 4, we try to have a glimpse of the migration situation at the aggregative level in more recent times. Then, we unfold the hype and delusion associated with migration in various districts in Assam both by using official statistics and through econometric technique in Section 5. In Section 6, we conclude.
Assam and India: Migration Scenario
Perhaps the most important asset of the poor in developing counties is labour. The movement of labour can happen across occupations, sectors and of course across geographical areas. Historically, it has been observed that several successful development and growth episodes have been set off through productive movement of labour or in its popular acronym—migration. Development economists have long been investigating the relationship between migration, wages, employment and capital accumulation (Fei and Ranis, 1964; Harris & Todaro, 1970; Lewis, 1954; Stark & Bloom, 1985). Lewis (1954) and Fei and Ranis (1964) beautifully showed how the migration of surplus labour from traditional agrarian sector to the modern industrial sector could help in capital accumulation. However, in India, which possesses its own ethos and which has been under colonial rule for around two hundred years, the migration picture is very intricate and sensitive too. As of 2001, in India, the share of internal migrants in total population is 30 per cent. But, this number is deceptively large. With a closer look at the Census 2001, the migration delusion is busted. Among the total internal migrants, two-thirds are intra-district migrants. 2 Among the intra-district migrants over half are women migrating due to marriage.
Migration may arise due to a variety of reasons—some consciously and other of force and displacement. 3 The impact of migration is also a very contentious issue. Without delving much into the theoretical analysis of the impacts of migration, it can be simplistically said that the flow of a pool of people brings more flexibility in the labour market of the host area. The problem of labour shortage, if any, is diminished as migrants offer supply of cheap labour. The immigrants are even willing to do unskilled jobs, while some immigrants may actually be very skilful too. Another positive aspect is the huge scope of cultural diversity and enrichment of the arts, science and various other finer aspects of the receiving region.
On the other hand, migration has its share of disadvantages to the receiving region too. A large pool of a new set of people put strain on the available resources. Housing and health care facilities are severely pressurised. Racial and ethnic tensions may sometimes destabilise the social fabric of the host region. The threat of job loss to the alien migrants creates panic too. Given this unresolved enigma of the net positive or negative effects of the impact migration towards the receiving region, we look at the migration scenario in India as well as in Assam.
Inter-State Migration Based on Last Residence (0-9), Migration Rate and Population Growth—15 Major States.
Inter-State Migration Based on Last Residence (0-9), Migration Rate and Population Growth—15 Major States.
It is true that ‘about 65.2 per cent of these migrants from the neighboring countries had migrated to India at least 20 years back perhaps at the time of partition and later during the Bangladesh war in 1971. In comparison to 1991, there is 31.6 per cent decline in international migration to India (excluding J&K) in 2001. This is due to substantial decline in the number of recent migration together with the death of earlier migrants due to old age’ (Census of India 2001, Data Highlights).
The net migration (difference between in-migration and out-migration is highest for Maharashtra, followed by D elhi, Gujarat and Haryana. Assam has a migration rate of -0.7 per cent between 1991 and 2001, whereas over this time frame population grew 18.9 per cent in the state. For the country as a whole, between 1991 and 2001, migration rate is 0.09 per cent, whereas population grew by 21.5 per cent. Other than Assam, other states where number of out-migrants exceeded the number of in-migrants in 2001 were Bihar (-2.7 per cent), Uttar Pradesh (-2 per cent), Manipur (-1.4 per cent), Nagaland (-1.4 per cent), Orissa (-0.7 per cent), Tamil Nadu (-0.7 per cent), Chhattisgarh (-0.6 per cent), Kerala (-0.6 per cent), Rajasthan (-0.6 per cent), Jharkhand (-0.5 per cent), Jammu & Kashmir (-0.4 per cent) and Mizoram (-0.1 per cent). In all other states, except, Madhya Pradesh, migration rate was positive. In Madhya Pradesh, migration rate was zero. Migration rate was highest in Daman & Diu (44.1 per cent), which was followed by Dadra & Nagar (33 per cent), Chandigarh (21.4 per cent), Delhi (18.7 per cent), Pondicherry (8.8 per cent), Goa (8 per cent) and other states.
Now, if we look at the migration pattern according to the duration of residence, we find that for majority of the states, as of 2001, a large volume of migrants came to their present location at least more than twenty years ago. In India, as a whole, more than 32 per cent of the migrants came to their present location at least before 1981. Around 15 per cent of the total migrants of the country did not specify the duration of their stay at the current location. Again, more than 22 per cent reportedly came to their current location between 1981 and 1991. In Assam, as of 2001, around 27.8 per cent of the migrants came to their current place at least 20 years ago. About 9.4 per cent of the migrants in Assam did not divulge anything about the duration of their stay at the present location. Around 39 per cent of the total migrants in Assam are dwelling in the present location since 1991. However, decomposition of the total migrants into various categories—migration from other states, international migration and migration from other districts of the same state—provides a clear picture of the gravity of the international migration, which came to the limelight due to the publication of NRC.
In fact, Assam is never a precariously affected state of in-migration, at least within the time period 1991–2001. Most of the in-migration is of historical in nature—the huge pool of workers in the tea plantation and due to the effect of 1971 Bangladesh war. It must thus be argued that the present NRC debate cannot be related to either the flow of migration or its present status. In most cases, it is like correcting a long historical record of the foregone years. Economists have little to contribute in this politically sensitive issue.
The second issue is more of a theoretical nature. In most debates, the argument seems to visualize the migrants as a set of people who should be viewed as very vulnerable section—either to be pitied or thrown away. This indeed is not an economic arena.
In economics, migrants can be treated as flow of human resources. It is true that such resources could put strain on local facilities and resources. However, it is also true that they themselves create new avenues and resources through the productive contributions of skills and endeavours.4 The human capital that is embedded in them may create a new vista that is unimaginable to the locales. Institutions, ideas and the growth potentials of the migrants are huge. This is not to justify any illegal migrants but to keep the pros and cons of migration open. This chapter is missing in the current NRC controversy.
Percentage of Migrants According to Duration of Residence.
The issue of migration is not a recent phenomenon in Assam. This process of movement of people has been happening since the British colonial period. However, from the last two available migration data of Census 2001 and 1991, we see that over these two time frames, there has been a distinct decline in the share of migrants in almost all the districts for all types of migration—from other states, from other countries and internal migration. Again, it is evident that in both the time points, among these three types of migration, the share of internal migrants, i.e., migration across districts has been highest for all the 23 districts.
For the districts of Barpeta, Nagaon, Karimganj and Cachar, both for 1991 and 2001, the share of international migrants in district population was higher than that of the share of migrants from other states. In 1991, in the districts of Bongaigaon, Goalpara, Morigaon and Hailakandi, the share of international migrants in total population was higher than the share of the migrants from other states in total population. However, in 2001, for these four districts, this trend reversed and the share of the international migrants in total population came lower than the share of migration from other states.
Now, we look at the migration profile in Assam according to the duration of residence and place of original residence (Table A.2). As of 2001, more than 45 per cent of the total migrants of Assam have entered the state at least a decade ago, that is before 1991. Slightly over 30 per cent of the migrants have not stated anything about the duration of their stay in the state. For all the districts, except Kokrajhar, the share of migrants who entered the districts more than two decades ago, that is at least before 1981, is highest among various categories of migrants according to the duration of residence.
Now, if we look into the total international migration and migration from Bangladesh (from where the majority of the international migrants have come to the state), we see that the share of total international migrants in total migrants in the state is below 2 per cent and roughly 1.7 per cent from Bangladesh as of 2001. In the last two decades (between 1981 and 2001), only 0.17 per cent of the total migrants in Assam came from various other countries, whereas 0.11 per cent came from Bangladesh. Again, 1.6 per cent and 1.5 per cent of the total migrants in Assam came to the state from various other countries and Bangladesh at least before 1981. The same trend is more or less witnessed across the districts.
Only two districts where migration rate from international countries as a percentage of total district migrants is over 5 per cent as of 2001 are 5.8 per cent in Cachar and 6.8 per cent in Karimganj. The corresponding figures for these two districts from migration from Bangladesh are 5.7 per cent and 6.7 per cent respectively. For these two districts, 4.4 per cent and 5.7 per cent Bangladeshi migrants came to this state before 1981.
All these amply indicate the fact that migration in Assam has mostly its roots perhaps in the Bangladesh war of 1971. The subsequent consecutive decadal decline in the share of international migration in various districts of Assam indicates the issue of international migration in the state is more of hype than reality.
Some Forays into the Recent Data
The latest 2011 Census data does not provide the district level migration tables, which is our main concern. The non-availability of 2011 district level migration data constrains us to conduct the district level migration study till 2001. However, some latest migration data at a more aggregative level are available in Census 2011. This also helps us obtain a glimpse of the overall migration scenario in the country as well as at the state level in not so distant time. This enables us to understand and compare the migration scenario of Assam vis-a-vis the country as a whole as well as with other states in 2011. However, district level comparison is not possible with 2011 Census data.
Census 2011 migration data reflects that 45.4 crore Indians (about 37 per cent of the total population) can be dubbed as migrants whose current residence and previous residence are different. Gender wise comparison reveals that, in 2011, among the total migrants 70 per cent were females. As per Census 2011, marriage again turned out to be the strongest reason behind migration with 49 per cent migrating due to marriage. As per 2001 Census, 43.8 per cent migration was due to marriage. Again, 2011 migration profile reveals that lesser number of people got relocated to other places for work and employment related factors. As per 2001 Census, 14.7 per cent migration was due to work and employment related factors which declined to 10.2 per cent in 2011.
Now, if we take the case of Assam, we see that as per 2011 Census, 6.3 per cent of total migration is due to work and employment related factors while around 51 per cent of the total migration in the state is due to marriage. For the all India level, these two figures are 10.2 per cent and 49.5 per cent respectively. Again, for Assam, data shows that more than 66 per cent of the migrants moved to the state more than 10 years ago and for the country as a whole, this figure is 64.2 per cent. Among other reasons for migration, for the state of Assam, 2.3 per cent migration was due to business purposes and 1.1 per cent was due to education purposes. Migration for the state of Assam due to ‘moved after birth’, ‘moved with households’ and others were 3.1 per cent, 16.8 per cent and 19.3 per cent respectively. For the country as a whole, 0.9 per cent and 1.8 per cent migration was due to business and education purposes respectively. For India, as per 2011 Census, migration due to ‘moved after birth’, ‘moved with households’ and others were 10.6 per cent, 15.4 per cent and 11.7 per cent respectively.
Myths and Reality: The Significance of Migration Rates
Now we are at the cross-roads to check the impact of migration in Assam. Before entering into that task, we review some related studies both at the international and country level. IMF (2016) study finds that immigration raises the per capita GDP of advanced host countries, particularly through enhancing the labour productivity. Both the low-skilled and high-skilled migrants add to the existing skill sets of the population of the host country. Lall, Selod, and Shalizi (2006) surveyed the existing theoretical models of rural-urban migration in developing countries. They found that migration can be beneficial or at least be turned into a beneficial phenomenon. They are of the opinion that general migration restrictions are not desirable. Chandrasekhar and Sharma (2014) analyse the issue of internal migration for education and employment among the youth in India aged between 15 and 32 years. The study finds that the states with better job opportunities such as Delhi, Maharashtra, Gujarat and Karnataka are gaining with respect to human capital, whereas traditionally backward states of Bihar, UP, Orissa and Rajasthan are losing human capital. In the south, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh are possibly losing out workers to Karnataka and Maharashtra. Again, the study of Roy and Debnath (2011), using pooled cross sectional data for fifteen major states in India found that net migration is positively influenced by the level of per capita income and the level of road infrastructure and negatively influenced by unemployment rate and cost of living. However, the overwhelming majority of people who migrate do so inside their own country. According to the United Nations (2017) data, internal migration in the world is three times higher than international migration. The migration situation India is of special interest due to a host of factors comprising large heterogeneity across different regions, peculiar demographic characteristics, wide variation in per capital income, unevenness in agriculture and industrial attainments across regions.
However, in order to statistically analyse the effects of different quantitative and qualitative aspects of migrants in various districts of Assam on per capita gross district domestic product (PGDDP), we employ both ordinary least squares (OLS) and weighted least squares (WLS) methods. The values of the variables for the 23 districts in Assam are taken from 2001 Census.
In Model 1, we consider the quantitative aspects of the migrants—percentage of migrants from other states and percentage of migrants from other countries. We also consider three other general variables for all the residents (including the migrants as well as the non-migrants)—Index of poverty, literacy rate and percentage of households availing banking services. In both the models, Model 1A (OLS) and 1B (WLS), poverty index turns out to be an insignificant factor influencing the district output. Both these models ascertain overall district literacy rate and the banking habits of the districts as positive factors inflating the district output. High educational level and high propensity of formal banking which in turn implies higher probability of obtaining credit through formal channels encourage better business and entrepreneurial activities. This is in turn is likely to add to the district output.
Regarding quantitative aspects of migration, both the OLS and the WLS estimates predict percentage of migrants from other states as positive factor determining the district domestic product. Both the models fetch percentage of migrants from other countries insignificant in influencing per capita gross domestic product. This amply proves the non-harmful effects of the migrants from other countries, particularly the neighbouring countries. Additionally, the positive influence of migration from other states does not put any stain on the age-old process of migration that is prevalent since the beginning of civilization.
In Model 2 (2A and 2B), we concentrate on some qualitative variables pertaining to the migrants and their impact on the district output. Regarding the general variables, we keep the same variables that we kept in Model 1. In 2001 Census, district wise data of the migrants pertaining to various occupational divisions is available. We categorize the migrants engaged in different lines of occupation in three main groups. First group contains migrant workers who are engaged in cultivation and agricultural sector. Migrants engaged as professional, technical and related works, administrative, executive and managerial works, clerical and related works, sales and services have been clubbed as migrant employees in services and others. This group is likely to contain mainly the skilled workers. Lastly, the migrant workers including farmers, fisherman, loggers and related workers, production and related workers, transport equipment, operators and labourers have been combined as migrants engaged in semi-skilled activities. Migrants who have not specified their occupation been omitted.
We find that the migrants engaged in cultivation and agriculture as well as migrants in semi-skilled activities having a positive effect on output. Effect of the skilled migrants on district output proves out to be insignificant in both the OLS and the WLS models. The positive association of the migrants in agricultural activities and the semi-skilled activities on the per capita gross domestic product of the district supports the view that is put forth by Banerjee and Duflo (2019) in their recent book Good Economics for Hard Times. In their analysis, they argue that the flow of unskilled migrants tends to increase the wage rate. Factors that are responsible for this upliftment are many. However, it is argued that the flow of such migrants raises demand for consumer goods that tend to push up the market wage rate. Similar views have been expressed in a number of theoretical constructs (Chaudhuri, 2000, 2004; Yabuuchi & Chaudhuri, 2006).
In a nutshell, we find that the migrants from other states tend to positively influence the gross domestic product of the district where as the migrants coming from other countries prove out to be insignificant in affecting the district output. Perhaps, huge inherent human capital embedded in migrants has indelible impact on the domestic product of the host area. Flexible supply of labour, skill transformation and indomitable power of the vibrant flow of lives through migrants outweigh the cost of pressure on the available resources due to the addition of a huge pool of people. On the other hand, migrants who are actually relatively more vulnerable in terms of occupational division, tends to have positive effects in district output. Creation of demand for consumer goods, eagerness and zeal in being engaged in different semi-skilled and low-skilled activities add more zing to the job market. The result is the net addition to gross domestic product of the district.
Out of the Pandora’s Box
Our analysis suggests that the recent pandemonium over illegal migrants from neighbouring country in Assam is more of a myth than reality. First of all, official data suggests that the flow of internal migration in various districts of Assam is miniscule in recent years and moreover it is showing a declining trend over the last few decades. The historical international migration that took place in Assam was due to mainly ‘push’ factor and no such ‘push’ factors have been in sight in the last few decades. Secondly and more importantly, migration of any form (though waning in Assam) adds to the prosperity and well-being of the state. The recent uproar over NRC in Assam and the issue of illegal migration do not hold much economic justification.
Our analysis shows that the preparation of NRC in Assam and dropping of the names of 4 million people (and subsequently 1.9 million people) from that list and the consequent furore over the incidence of illegal immigration do not have a strong economic justification. The episode of migration in Assam is mostly historical in nature with a significant decline in their numbers in recent decades.
On top of it, our analysis further statistically shows that migrants have positive impact on the growth of the districts of Assam. The huge positive effect of the huge pool of human resources outscores the negative externalities associated with them in the host area.
At the end of our discussion, we again come to the story of Pandora. After the bees were set free, she quickly closed the box. From within the box came a sweet murmur ‘please let us out’. Pandora was determined not to open the box again. She would not make the mistake second time. The murmur became more intense with continuous pleading noted with sweet tones of humility. At last, Pandora’s resolve was broken. Her kind heart felt for those locked in. She opened the box again. This released a sweet breeze that filled the world and healed the bee bite. Hope was born. Today not only Assam, but the entire India is hoping such a gentle breeze to come out.
Perhaps, a time has come when we can go with the idea of Noam Chomsky. In his book, Democracy and Power – The Delhi Lectures Chomsky (2014) spoke of world state with flexible borders where people can move wherever he/she wish and stay there. Common sense economics says that it will increase production, efficiency and lead to the general growth in the pool of knowledge. It will also increase welfare and probably remove poverty, deprivation and inequality. Political interventions will raise walls that would turn down the tide of universal brotherhood.
Regression Results.
Appendix
Percentage of Migrants.
Percentage of Migrants According to Duration of Residence and Place (District Wise).
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments that have greatly enriched the current paper.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.