Page 88 - IJPS-10-3

International Journal of
Population Studies Pandemic spurs interstate outmigration in India

The coefficient of variation analysis across states out that female migration is often linked to marriage or
(Figure 2) reveals a wide variation in outmigration levels. associational migration, which is expected. In addition,
In 1991, the variation of outmigration was relatively high other studies (Agnihotri et al., 2012; Mehrotra & Parida,
for all agents of migration (total, male, and female), and 2017; Parida & Madheswaran, 2020; Rajan et al., 2020)
it rose continuously till 2011. The maximum coefficient have also pointed out that female migration differs from
of variation observed for all the census periods is male male migration in terms of employment orientation, as it is
outmigration. significantly influenced by social, economic, political, and
policy issues.
Here, we have also presented economic-related
(migration for work/employment and business) 3.2. Issues with inter-state outmigration
outmigration using Census data in Table 3 to support
the above discussion on the causes of migration. There is The constitutional guarantees free mobility, but until
no difference observed in the case of Uttar Pradesh and recent decades, migration in our country was very low,
mainly driven by social reasons such as marriage and
Bihar, as these states account for the majority of interstate
outmigration for economic reasons. Furthermore, family movement (Mishra, 2021). Moreover, people with
Tables 1 and 3 highlight that Rajasthan is the third-largest high skills, education, or resource endowments migrated
source of inter-state outmigration for both economic and between states in a country (Srivastava, 2020a). However,
it is believed that since the economic reforms in 1991,
non-economic reasons. One interesting fact is that Odisha, migration of all kinds (skilled and unskilled, educated and
which was not on the list of top 10 inter-state migrating uneducated, male and female, temporary and permanent,
states, appears on the list of top 10 migrating states for etc.) has increased as connectivity, communication, and
economic reasons. This indicates that a large section of opportunities (Bhagat, 2010; Rosenzweig & Munishi,
individuals from Odisha are migrating to other parts of the 2009). Nonetheless, migrants, especially those with meager
country in search of livelihood opportunities.
means and networks, and those at the lower end of the
When analyzing female migration for economic labor market, encounter various difficulties on reaching
reasons, we observed inconsistencies across different their destination. These challenges are explained in the
census years. As we can see, in the 2001 Census, Rajasthan following sub-heads.
is the top female migrating state for economic reasons,
while Uttar Pradesh held this position in both the 1991 3.2.1. Poor living conditions
and 2011 Censuses. Similarly, in the 1991, 2001, and 2011 Interstate migrants, especially interstate circular migrants,
Censuses, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Madhya Pradesh were live in the most deplorable conditions at their destination
the three most female-migrating states, respectively, for (Deshingkar & Akter, 2009; Rani & Shylendra, 2001;
economic reasons. This inconsistent position of states Srivastava & Sutradhar, 2016). These migrants enter the
regarding female migration persists throughout the labor market through contractors/middlemen, or networks
table. A critical point of discussion is that, in most cases, and are engaged in various industries such as agriculture,
the top female migrating states differ from the top male brick manufacturing, quarrying, and construction. The
migrating states. This difference between top male and characteristics of these migrants include an absence of
female migrating states is the opposite of the traditional civic identity and citizenship at the destination, limited
belief that female migration is associational migration with access to housing and basic amenities, poor entitlements,
their male counterpart. The previous studies by Srivastava unfavorable working conditions, and discrimination in
(2011), Verick (2017), Rajan & Sivakumar (2018), Rajan the labor market. According to Srivastava (2020b), there
& Sumeetha (2019), and Rajan et al. (2020) have pointed were 52 million interstate vulnerable migrants in the
country in 2018. These vulnerable migrant workers are in
lower occupational categories, ranging from five to nine,
according to the National Classification of Occupations
(NCO) classification.

3.2.2. Health issues
Migrants suffer from various health issues as they work
in harsh circumstances and live in unhygienic conditions
Figure 2. Coefficient of variation of outmigration of Indian states from (Srivastava & Sasikumar, 2003). They generally undergo
1991 – 2011. Note: Coefficient of variation represents the variation of
states in terms of outmigration. Source: Author’s calculation based on various problems such as obesity, diabetes, tuberculosis,
1991, 2001, and 2011 Census. and febrile illness. Moreover, studies highlighted that

Volume 10 Issue 3 (2024) 82 https://doi.org/10.36922/ijps.0916