|
| Migration of Jharkhand: An important livelihood strategy for the poor |
JHARKHAND IS one of the richest in India in terms of mineral resources and industry but still very poor, with a large tribal population. The focus of this section is on migration which has become an important livelihood strategy for the poor.
In a study by Aloka(2008) 12 villages in Jharkhand, using household surveys and PRA methods. Data were collected in two rounds from these villages. In the first round a census level survey was conducted and then twenty-five percent of the sample were selected for further and detailed investigation. They found that one-third of the households had at least one member migrating. Around seventy percent of these were short term migrants who went out during the lean season. Short period migration is lowest from Gumla (56.6 percent) a village dominated by upper castes and highest from Palamau (78.5 percent) a village with a large SC and ST population In general short-term migration was higher among poorer groups, involving over 80 per cent of the landless and 88 per cent of illiterates. Another distinctive feature of this region is presence of a large number of labour contractors and the role played by them in the migration process. The proportion of migrants sending remittance to the village for the use of those who stay behind and the percentage of the income from migration, which is sent as remittance, also varies by caste and class. Migration has wide ranging consequences on both the migrants and those who stay behind. Around 98 percent of the migrants, without any noticeable regional (district wise) variation feel that their income has increased because of migration.
The wage rate in the village has also increased because of migration, which has benefited all the people of the labour class-both those who migrate seasonally and those who stay behind. Around one third of the migrants reported improvement in their housing condition 86 percent in the standard of their consumption and more than seventy percent in their expenditure on social occasions. As a result they feel more comfortable in comparison to those who do not migrate. Migration has enabled people to acquire skills and educate their children. 22 percent of the migrants said that they acquired skills such as better methods of cultivation and reported improvement in their agricultural production because of it. There are some adverse impacts of migration as well including a higher work load, exposure to disease, the neglect of children and their education. Migration has a profound impact on women. It affects both those who migrate and those who stay behind in the village. Some women in the sample mentioned that migration has saved their life otherwise they were heavily dependent on the Sahus (the business man and money lender community) of the village who used to give them loans at exorbitant rates of interest.
Box 5 Segmented migrant labour markets in Jharkhand A study of brick kiln migrants by Shah (2006) emphasises the highly segmented nature of this work: “While low-caste Bihari labourers specialise in moulding bricks and Bengali labourers extract clay, Jharkhandi tribal and low-caste labourers carry bricks to and from the furnace, trucks and stores. In the Daisy Factory, Jharkhandi labour accounted for almost half the labour force. Factory owners told me that, unlike Jharkhandis, Bengalis could not endure carrying bricks and considered it a menial task. Jharkhandi women balance up to eight uncooked bricks on their heads. Men either receive these bricks from women to line the furnace, or carry greater loads of up to sixteen cooked bricks on a bamboo sling across their shoulders.“ |
|
|
|
|
|