Anomalies need to be addressed before any conclusion is drawn: Kundu

Latest Survey presents estimates to challenge the conventional notion that migration in India is low

The latest Economic Survey presents estimates to challenge the conventional notion that migration in India is low. These estimates are based on data from the census and the railways. But the trends in the 2011 census data are at odds with the previous rounds. To understand this and its implications on migration estimates, Business Standard spoke to Amitabh Kundu, former professor at Delhi’s JNU. Edited excerpts:
 
In the Census data, the percentage of migrants whose duration of stay was not stated dropped from 14.5 per cent in 2001 to 0.17 in 2011. This is in the opposite direction of what was recorded in the prior Census rounds. What’s your view?
 
This dramatic change requires serious probing into the method of data collection and tabulation by the Census in the two years. This shift in 2011 is particularly intriguing, as the percentage of migrants not reporting their duration of stay at the destination had gone up in 2001 from 1991. This was explained in terms of migrants not wanting to admit that they are living at the destination for a short period, as certain civic and tenurial benefits were linked to five or ten years of stay at the destination in several states. Also, by not admitting that they are recent migrants, they were hoping to escape the antagonism from the local population, which unfortunately is growing, particularly in urban areas. The figure coming down to this low level, in 2011, certainly calls for an explanatory note from the Registrar General of India. Without a satisfactory explanation, drawing any inference, particularly with regard to migrants with different durations of stay and their temporal shifts or trends, would be extremely hazardous.
 
Will this sudden change impact the migration rates projected in the Economic Survey?
 
Most certainly. The high growth rate of the migrants with more than 10 years of duration (of stay), as reported by the Census, could be because many of the recent migrants have claimed to be residing at the destination for over a decade. Also, the decadal net rural urban migration works out to be about 20 million from the Census data. However, if computed by an alternative residual approach, by subtracting (a) the natural increase in the base year towns, (b) population living in new towns and (c) those in the expanded areas of the agglomerations from the total increase in urban population during 2001-11, the net migration figure works out as less than 15 million. Such huge anomalies need to be addressed before any conclusion can be drawn in policy context.
 
The Census 2011 data show a sharp rise in migrants who migrated from their area of residence more than 10 years ago. But, if that was the case, shouldn’t this increase have been reflected in Census 2001?
 
Myself and Mr P C Mohanan, retired director general of the NSSO, have written a note raising this issue. The claim made by the Economic Survey is that the rate of migration has accelerated during 2001-11. The disaggregated data from population censuses, however, show it is the high growth of migrants with more than 10 years duration in 2011 that explains the phenomenon. If that is the case, one would infer that migration during nineties was very high and not during 2001-11.

 
The common perception about migration is that economic reasons (jobs) tend to dominate. Many have argued that most migrants tend to move to the construction sector. But, the Census data show women migration has increased sharply, while the rates for men have stayed relatively the same.
 
The inference that mobility of women for economic reasons has gone up was drawn from the earlier Census and NSS data. Although I do not want to draw any conclusion from the 2011 Census data, until adequate explanation is provided by the Census organisation itself with regard to the change in the share of migrants with unspecified duration, there are other macro-level indicators that confirm the above hypothesis. The National Health and Family Survey 4 shows the percentage of women getting married below the age of 18 has become almost half. It should be no surprise if women work participation and their mobility for economic reasons show a happy rising trend.