Invention Journal of Research Technology in Engineering & Management (IJRTEM)

ISSN: 2455-3689
www.ijrtem.com Volume 2 Issue 7 ǁ July 2018 ǁ PP 97-108

Migration as an Agent of Social Change in The Rural Areas: A

Case of Banke District, Nepal
KANHAIYA SAPKOTA
Central Department of Geography Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu
[email protected]

ABSTRACT: Recent research on the impact of labor migration on the socioeconomic development of
developing countries has provided opportunity to try and resolve some of the long-standing polemics that have
pervaded the literature on migration and development. This article focuses on findings concerning the labor,
remittance, and social impacts of emigration on countries that have participated in labor emigration. While a
great deal more research needs to be done, recent findings confirm that in some situations the sort-term impacts
of labor migration on sending countries have been considerable. In the study area (Titiheriya, Samserganja and
Rajhena VDCs of Banke district, Western Nepal total 6272 young adults left “home” to work as migrants in the
Gulf and Middle Eastern countries or in India. Random sample method has been used and selected 240
households (migrants) for the data collection. Better jobs with handsome earnings motivates them to migrate to
Arabian and Indian cities to secure livelihoods. But at the same time migrants are not free of risks. The findings
of this study have shown largely a positive outlook of migration in terms of livelihood security. This reflects the
wider themes with respect to socio-economic determinants of access and opportunity. Regardless of whether
migration is as accumulative process or coping strongly, most migrants receive little support and live in very
difficult conditions at their destinations. Thus, a rights-based approach to guarantee the overall security of
migrants is needed.
KEY WORDS: Social structure, rural migration, remittance, economic development, accumulation,
livelihood.

I. INTRODUCTION
Migration is a catalyst for change and development - it has the potential to enrich not only the economies, but
more importantly perhaps the culture and societies of both countries of origin and destination. For example,
while financial remittances are now widely recognized as a product of migration, social remittances, including
the transfer of ideas, behaviors, identities and social capital, have received much less attention (Sapkota, 2015;
2018). At the same time, migration transforms notions of national and personal identity and some societies
struggle with the process of re-defining their collective identities and maintaining social cohesion in the face of
increasing diversity. Lastly, migrants themselves may bring new ideas to their host countries; while at the same
time some migrant communities may hold on to lifestyles and traditions they associate with their places of
origin, even if those places have since changed. Such tensions need to be negotiated in daily social interaction.
Any research in developing countries that aims to analyses the impact of rural migration on economic
development and living standards in the area of origins should take into account that the livelihoods of the
people involved are characterized by risk sharing more than anything else (Subedi, 1991; Stark, 1991). In this
research the researcher has tried to show, especially livelihoods how, and risks are intertwined and managed by
rural households in Nepal (Subedi, 1991; 1993; Sapkota, 2015; 2018). Poor rural households in developing
countries have three principal options for w improve their livelihoods: 1) agricultural intensification or „natural
resource-based activities‟; 2) diversification into non-agricultural sources of income or „non-natural resource-
based activities‟; and 3) migration to other agricultural areas or to urban areas (Carney, 1998; Ellis, 1998).
These are not separate or mutually exclusive paths. The vast majority of rural households or families in Nepal
employ at least two of the three strategies simultaneously (Seddon & Hussein, 2002). Moreover, the three
strategies are linked in various ways and should be investigated accordingly. This research has focused on the
presence of rural out-migration in Nepal and is linked to the other rural livelihood options and to different levels
of livelihood security. „Sustainable rural livelihoods‟ framework, as developed by Scoones (1998); Carney
(1998) is used to identify gaps in our understanding of the consequences of migration in the area of origin. The
geographical focus is on the rural area of Tarai in Nepal. We have very little knowledge on migration, when
discussed as a livelihood strategy with specific reference to Nepal. In the wider social science debate, the issue
of population mobility and poverty has led to many studies,

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 97 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

Particularly from two contrasting theoretical traditions of economic perspective and Marxist/structuralist is
economic perspective (Subedi, 1993; 2016).
While there is indication that population mobility forms an important aspect of people‟s livelihoods, only a few
studies have been designed in this tradition. Most of the studies tend to be macro-level studies which take on
external view on the issue. There is definitely a lack of studies that have described the meaning of population
mobility to the people and their livelihoods from the actors‟ perspectives. Another conclusion that could be
drawn from the review is that population mobility has remained as under examined subject in Nepal, despite its
evident and critical importance at the household, local, regional and national level.
As discussed above, few studies have indicated the importance of population mobility in social change and
agrarian class structure. Other than these there have not been any systematic studies addressing the issue of
migration and poverty. While a recent study examined the importance of foreign labor migration at macro-level
and showed that it contributes significantly to the overall economy of Nepal, we do not know how it contributes
to the livelihoods of different individuals within the household, and across households of different social groups.
We do not know how other patterns or forms of population mobility contribute to the livelihoods of the people.
We are left with questions about decision-making process among different socio-economic groups and the role
of population mobility shaping in people‟s livelihood (Sapkota, 2014a; 2014b). While viewing migration as a
livelihood strategy, one of the important issues is to examine what kinds of opportunities are available for
different groups of people, and whether the type of migratory work allows the migrants and their households to
improve their assets and capital (Sapkota, 2016; 2017). The contextual and institutional factors, the choices and
constraints, provide a useful analytical framework to understand who migrates, who stays back and why given
the complex social structure that exists in Nepal, it is an equally important sociological puzzle to explore how
population mobility is structured and in turn structures social relations and norms. All this mean that there is a
knowledge vacuum in the field of population mobility and people‟s livelihoods both in wider social science
debate in Nepal.
This study is a micro-level study aimed at exploring people‟s understanding of migration as a social
phenomenon which is related with the everyday life of the rural people in Nepal. Therefore, this study has
focused on to exploring the way in which the concepts of social reality of migration and its link with the social
and economic
structure of the
community.

II. METHODOLOGY
Household surveys have become an increasingly recognized tool to illustrate bottom-up development planning
and policy in recent years. The dynamics of decision-making at the household level can reveal much about the
choices, constraints and preferences that are helps achieve greater livelihood security amongst the rural

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 98 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

population. Household surveys at pose the apprehension of the dynamics of decision-making in the family in
terms of livelihood security. The research is approached with the study objectives and the type of answers
research questions sought for. Both qualitative and quantitative framework has been used. In particular, in-depth
interviews and case studies of migrant households have been used in the research strategy. The argument is that
such a study is important and necessary to contribute long-standing debate on social reality of migration and its
relationships with family structure. Ethnographic research design has been implemented to enable micro level
analysis. The findings are based primarily on ethnographic field research that has been carried out between
September and December 2016. The research was mainly conducted through the use of informal interview.
Initially, respondents were not guided by the preset assumptions of the interviewer, but were asked to discuss
any issues and concerns related to migration and peoples‟ perception on migration. Triangulation and in-depth
interviews were used to focus on the research as specific issues emerged. Methods were used in conjugation
with quantitative analysis of household and survey data. In addition to that, various recorded documents were
consulted to understand mobility, migration and social change.
As part of study, the villages were selected on the basis of the exposure to late out-migration, its relation to
economic, social and political changes so that the structural changes due to migration could be analyzed. As the
study aimed to understand how exposure to the outer world for economic gain affects livelihood changes and
related economic and social security in the village. Titiheriya, Samserganja and Rajhena VDCs were selected
based on heterogeneity of caste and families from Banke District.
This study has been carried out in the Tarai of Mid-western Nepal. The district has been covered as study unit.
A total of 240 households were covered for data collection. Selection had been done through stratified random
sampling. Households for data collection were selected based on the information collected from the villages.
Since the last few years there has been a shift as labor migration, a new livelihood option. Further, households
were identified in terms of whether family members from have migrated to the Indian cities or Arabian countries
for work. Interviews were taken with migrants of similar households if they are presently working outside their
native place.
III. THEORETICAL NEXUS
Social and cultural geographers with a contemporary worldwide point of view will most likely concur that the
marvel of relocation and the test of improvement are vivaciously faced off regarding themes. Migration is
observable and measurable, despite the invisibility of clandestine migration and the challenges of collecting
good migration statistics. The global stock of migrants‟ people residing in a country different from their birth
country stands at 232 million, 3.3% of the world‟s population of 7.2 billion (UN, 2013). But stock figures are
static measures; they reflect the culmination of previous migrations. Given that both migration and development
are dynamic processes, flows of migrants are often seen as the more relevant variable either one-way or net
flows over a certain time span, such as a year or a decade. The notion of net migration, intuitively attractive in
the gravitational logic of economic push and pull factors, is problematic, however, as it is the residual product of
five types of migration flows: emigrants going out of a country, and those returning; immigrants coming into a
country, and those returning; and finally, transit migrants passing through. Moreover, if migration is seen as the
product of individual human decision-making events, then it has to be pointed out that there is no such
individual as a net migrant! Fischer, Martin, and Straubhaar (1997: 94–96) engage in a simple but interesting
correlation analysis between the “net stock” of migration for each country (the balance between that country‟s
immigrants and its emigrants, expressed as a percentage of total population) and the “dependent” variable of
development (gross domestic product (GDP) per capita measured in purchasing power parities). For the world
as a whole, the correlation is +0.46. Overall, then, the more immigrants the higher the GDP, and the more
emigration the lower the GDP.
Compared to “solid” migration, the conceptualization and measurement of development are contentious, with a
diversity of perspectives. Bakewell (2012: xiv–xvi) notes two older ideas of development. The first is the
European Enlightenment belief in the capacity of humanity to progress towards a stable and rational social and
economic order, which implies a duty of “advanced” countries to help and “civilize” the “unenlightened” parts
of the world. In practice, this was no more than a „moral cover for colonial expansion‟ (ibid.). Second, the mid-
twentieth-century collapse of colonial empires, combined with the Cold War, set the frame for an ideological
battle between, on the one side, the West‟s policy of “development” as modernization and economic growth
within the capitalist global order and, on the other, the heterogeneous communist or socialist ideas about
development espoused by the Soviet bloc, China, Cuba, etc. We return to this ideological duel presently. Over
time, narrowly economic interpretations of development (i.e., economic growth measured in trends in GDP per
capita as the magical indicator) broadened to a wider vision of human development. This is now well
established (since 1990) in the Human Development Index used in successive annual reports of the United
Nations Development Program to synthesize, alongside per capita GDP, quality-of-life variables like literacy,

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 99 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

health, life expectancy, infant mortality, human rights, and gender equality into composite indices. Such
measures take their cue from Sen‟s (1999) pioneering work on conceptualizing development as the capacity of
people to exercise autonomy and control over their lives.
Approaches to migration: Migration for work has been seen as one of the means of making a livelihood.
Before discussing migration and livelihoods in Nepal, I would like to emphasize on different approaches to
migration. The start of migration studies is usually traced back to Ravenstein‟s 1885 article that aimed to
describe „laws‟ of migration, in which the relation between distance and the volume of migration was central.
Lee (1966) similarly tried to build a general theory of migration to explain the volume of migration. Zelinsky‟s
transition model, in which modernization was linked to changes in patterns of migration has been much
discussed and criticized (Skeldon 1996). The migration model that is most often cited is probably Todaro‟s
analysis of rural-urban migration (Todaro, 1969, Harris & Todaro, 1970), which built on Lewis‟ (1954) analysis
of the process of development in economies with a labor surplus.
In the Todaro model, a prospective migrant weighs the difference between the expected earnings in the
village, and expected earnings from formal sector urban employment allowing for his or her assessment of the
probability of an initial period of unemployment or of informal sector employment. Hatton and Williamson
(1992), and Larson and Mundlak (1997) more recently re-affirmed the validity of the basic model, as did
Lucas‟ (1985) work on migration in Botswana. Thadani and Todaro (1984), in a little noted contribution
explore social determinants of migration, but other modifications have continued to focus on the economics of
the migration decisions. Stark, in his theory, that is often referred to as the „new economics of migration‟ – has
extended the Todaro model. (Stark & Levari, 1982, Katz & Stark, 1986, Lakshmansamy, 1990), takes account
of incomplete and imperfect information (Stark, 1991; Knight & Song, 1997), of imperfections in rural capital
markets (Stark, 1980, Collier & Lal, 1984), and of transaction costs. Finally, it stresses the importance in
migration decisions of relative deprivation in the local income distribution rather than absolute deprivation
(Stark & Taylor, 1989).
Push-pull models of migration as developed by Lee (1966) are a logical extension of the Todaro-type of
analysis. Some debate has gone into discussing whether push or pull is more important. For example, Bigsten
(1996), who has a „New Economics‟ approach, in which household decisions and personal networks are central
– argues that pull of high wages is more important than the push of land scarcity in explaining migration
decisions in Kenya, while Adams (1993) finds the reverse in international migration from Egypt. In Henan
Province pull factors or the demand side of the labor market were thought to be more important than
considerations of household labor supply or other factors determining productivity at home. Research shows
that continuity, in terms of social institutions, marks migration processes. Migration decisions are usually part
of a continuing effort, consistent with traditional values, to solve recurrent problems to do with a balance
between available resources and population numbers. Spontaneous movement and settlement, as in southern
Ethiopia for example, are not unique or unusual events but part of a long-term process of ecological and
cultural differentiation. Davies noted in Mali that in times of livelihood insecurity the timing of migration may
change but the pattern of migration fundamentally remains unaltered (Black & Sessay 1995). A central point in
the recent literature is that migration is usually not a disjuncture in society‟s history. It is usually part of
populations‟ survival strategies, and even population mobility in the face of destructive forces tends to build on
earlier migrations. Migration movements are embedded in the societies‟ strategies to obtain livelihoods. Socio -
cultural structures give migration particular forms. Also, the newer approaches, in different ways, show that
migration does not approximate a lottery. Migrations options are not open to all People do not move en-masse,
forced by economic or political factors. Migration streams are highly segmented and people‟s networks,
preceding migrations and various social institutions to a large extent determine, who migrates, and from which
areas. This also means that the gains from migration are not distributed equally.
In this research this is done with a focus on the relation between migration and rural livelihoods in Nepal at
people rather than resources or geographical areas. Moreover, people in their specific environments of social
and economic organization are considered. People do not operate individually, but in the context of larger
kinship groups. Structural-historical analyses of unequal development in Nepal provide essential insights in the
underlying are considered of migration (Gill, 2003, Seddon & Hussein, 2002, Shrestha, 1989).
Migration flow from Nepal to India: Discussion on movement proposes that work course isn't just constrained
to streams inside Nepal and to Bay nations. There is likewise impressive occasional movement in the two
headings over the Indian outskirt. The Punjab develops as the major country goal for Nepalese transients, while
Delhi is the most essential urban one. Punjab, together with Haryana and Uttar Pradesh are real green upheaval
states in India and this is known to have made overwhelming occasional work request, which is met by in-
relocation from different parts of India.

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 100 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

Transients from all finished Nepal join these streams. Wheat and rice overwhelm the work done by Nepalese in-
vagrants in these states. The principle design depends on the transients landing in time for the wheat gather and
post-reap tasks on this yield. They are then associated with arrive planning for and transplant of, the consequent
rice edit. Another less essential, however critical Nepal-India stream that rises up out of the information is to
Himachal Pradesh. This is one of India's most imperative plant states and Nepalese vagrants take a shot at
apples, potatoes and different vegetables. Street building develops as an imperative wellspring of regular non-
rural work in country regions of India. In urban zones work is commanded by low talented occupations,
especially broad working, manufacturing plant employments and rickshaw pulling albeit a few transients
supposedly participate in exchange as well. In Indian urban communities, in spite of the fact that the Punjab
incorporates essential urban territories, the vagrants detailed as heading off to this state were likewise revealed as
working fundamentally in horticulture henceforth Punjab is portrayed as a country goal (Gill, 2003).

IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

In the study area, a total 3272 labor potential young adults work as migrant either in Gulf and Middle East
countries or in India. A total 1950 has left to Arabian countries with the highest concentration of emigrants
among Sahu, Danuwar, Yadav, Muslim and Dalits. The other 1295 highest in Dalits has basically left to
Punjab, Delhi, Ahmadabad and Haryana of India.
The preferences of workers regarding their destination country are dependent on their socio-economic
condition, educational status, access to information, and their existing networks. For example, the poorer they
are the more likely they are to work either in Kathmandu or in India. Individuals often select the cities of
destination in India; based on the experiences of people they know who have all ready to migrated to the same
location. The salary pattern also attracts migrants to choose the employment.
Process of becoming a migrant : Migration to Arabian countries is a lengthier process than migration to
India. In the case of Gulf countries, the individual first needs to obtain a passport. There were numerous
cases where migrants first got their citizenships because they wanted to migrate to oil rich Gulf countries.
Once, after getting a passport and citizenships interested individual‟s approach a sub agent in the village. In the
case of the study villages of Banke District, there are quite a few sub-agents available in the respective tole
itself. There are 11 sub-agents who find ways for migrants to fly to Arabian countries for work. Through the
sub-agent an individual applies to a manpower agency based on skills and ability to work abroad. Most of the
time individuals go through layers of subagents, the first subagent is, a person from the same community or
village the migrant than goes to the agent of nearby towns such as Nepalgunj or Kohalpur before going to main
agents at manpower agencies in Kathmandu. Depends on the education and information migrant holds on
employability abroad. In the course of getting a visa to fly for work, migrants spend a minimum Rs.90, 000 to
Rs.115, 000 for unskilled and semiskilled jobs. Before the selection is made, migrant workers undergo a
medical check-up that includes a test for HIV. A positive test disqualifies the applicant. If a migrant worker is
found to be HIV positive at the destination, they are most often sent back to their home country. In most of the
cases, these tests are not accompanied with pre or post-test counseling and workers are often not informed of
the basis for their disqualification.
Cheating by subagent is a common feature among the migrants. Workers are often using to be called to
Kathmandu for health check-ups though such check-ups are available either in Kohalpur or in Nepalgunj. They
are charged inflated fees for health check-ups which are often double the actual cost. People normally pay Rs.1,
500 for health checkups that could be done for Rs.700. In most of the cases migrants are also not aware of the
mother organization in the country through with they go for work. They are not given all original documents so
that in case of problem, they seek justice. Sometimes migrant workers have sold their land and property in lieu
of overseas jobs. Nepalese workers are sometimes forced to work under inhuman conditions for with low
wages.
In the case of migration to India, there are relatives an easy course. People decide to go for a particular part or
state of India in group to seek work. There is a leader who finds a job at the destination. The leader has the
information about the availability of jobs and is aware of the place and situation in detail. The leader is called
„Nabedar‟ who collects the money for transportation from a moneylender and promises to pay back after
earning for a season that lasts from four to six months. He also takes care of the accounts and expenses of the
workers at the place of work. For all these services, the Nabedar takes extra Rs.100 from each migrant per
visit.
Who are migrants and where are they from?

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 101 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

Migrants are predominantly young adults from low-income families. People have seen migration to Gulf
countries in terms of immediate return in economic aspect. Earlier they used to go to Punjab. Earlier they could
earn just enough for food. Now they earn Rs. 80,000 per month in Dubai. In the case of migration, them India,
landless migrants are generally illiterate and unable to handle labor dealing by selves they are often from low
caste group such as Musahar, Dhanukh, and Chamar (Dalits) migrate. Young boys stop going to school once
they are in 4 or 5 standards. In a way, they are ready to work in Punjab. Mainly children aged between 13 to 16
years, accompanied by a few young adults and a leader called„ Nabedar‟ go in a group to work in Indian states
like, Delhi, Haryana and Panjab.
These groups of people mainly get involved in agricultural works though some get more in restaurants and
others get manual work in the cities. At the other end, those who have enough resources to take risk try to go to
the Arabian countries to work. These migrating to Gulf countries are mostly married, some of them newly
married. Of the total that migrated to gulf countries 90 percent of them were literate at least with a primary
education. Similarly, individuals migrating to India often did not complete a school and choose to work in
Indian cities as minors. Rather, they migrated for better and more rewarding employment opportunities than
what they had in rural areas. This has been expressed as the major reason for migration to India and the Gulf.
Migration has strengthened their networks with friends and relatives at the point of destination so that social
capital and inclusion with cultural patterns could be maintained. Hence, migrations occur from rural villages to
Gulf countries and India not merely due to pull or push factors alone but through an interactive process between
both push and pull factors combined with active support of social networks.
Place of migration : In the study villages, more than 60% of the people do not have citizenship cards because
their fathers did not acquire one, one of our interviewers‟ migrant complained. Every time they go to India they
borrow Rs. 2000 to Rs.5000 Indian Currency from moneylender. Migrants basically go to Delhi, Punjab and
Haryana where they get engaged in farm work. In 45 households of the Musher community almost 25 people
had gone to India for seasonal work during this field research. Young boys go to India to earn and save so that
they can get married once they are of around 16/17ys.
Being young, they are not matured to save money. They just land up spending money to enjoy the life what
they are exposed at urban centers. Parents sometimes compel their children to go to India for works are of 14 to
15 years. Conflict situations and related security problems in the community are other reasons that young
migrate. Household data justifies that due to ongoing conflict, 4% of the young people of the community are
opting to be migrant. In the case of migrants going to India there was hardly any communication with home
between when they left and when they came back. While at work in India, insecurity remains a problem, as
even family members do not know what the person does face work in India. Migrants who go to India show
distinct characteristics.
Characteristics of migrant workers who go to India: Earlier a majority of villagers used to go to India now
prefer to go to Arabian countries. In some cases, migrants first go to India to understand and learn the general
attitude of urbanization and the world outside so that they will be able to deal with the situation abroad,
whereby they also earn and save money for expenses incurred for visa and other documents.
People usually go to Punjab during the harvest season. They take thika (assigned work) and paid based on the
volume of work. A migrant gets Rs. 1000 IC for a hectare of rice harvest, potato or wheat. Migrants usually stay
3 to 6 months at the working station. Among the groups of laborers, it was found that respect at working place,
complimentary food and drink (tea) has become a big motivating factor for work. Some of them do take jobs as
naukar (servant). In this kind of job worker get paid around Rs.1500 Indian currency per month apart from
food and lodging. At the same time wageworker are paid Rs. 700 along with food and tea. Migrants go to
India return with 8 to10 thousand Indian rupees trip, along with clothes and other household goods for
family members.
Characteristics of migration to Gulf countries :There are varieties of jobs available in Arab states for
migrants of the study villages. The work can be divided to unskilled labor such as manual labor in oil refinery
as to put petrol in tank, mojara work (agriculture / Farm), labor in building construction/ other manual work,
garments work, poultry farmhouse work, factory labor and semiskilled labor such as, carpenter, electrician,
barber, driver, pipe fitter etc. Migrants earn Nepali Rs.35000 to 45000 on an average, earning increases
depending on extra work they do or the type of job they have.
The poorest rarely migrate : Cross-tabulation between land holding class and numbers of households
migrating (not presented here) shows that the small and marginal farmers have a slightly higher chance of
migrating to Gulf countries compared to agricultural laborers. In addition to that, migration among laborers is
most of the time restricted to India. Case studies on migration, suggest that a minimum level of capital assets

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 102 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

is required to make the investment for migration is also required for travel, preparing passport and visa and
citizenship card etc. A credit asset to get money from moneylenders. In the case of migration to India, costs
are marginal so laborers are able to manage this cost and are able to migrate.
The mechanism of social capital in operation: Thinking beyond entitlements and capability, social capital
may be defined as those features of social organization that networks of individuals and households and the
associated norms and values that create positive externalities for the community as a whole (Grootaert & Van
Bastelaer, 2002). Such an approach is particularly important in isolated environments where social networks
become the primary source of information. Of particular importance is the role of social capital, which
influences the ability of households to cope and adapt, under changing circumstances. There is a very strong
sense of community and cooperation between households that function in a natural environment. Villagers have
kept favorable relations with moneylenders and other influential members of the village. There are cases when
disputes arise between agents who send people for work and other household members in the case of low
income or unbearable conditions the work place. Strong community ties exist between the members of the same
sub-caste group. Migrants were found communicating with their family members about maintaining social
networks in the community. In almost all the communication, they greet influential members of the community
and neighbours so that social network keeps continuing with their family members. In all communications,
migrants pass greetings and regards as namaskar (regards) to all the villagers and influential members of the
village so that people will take care of their family if problems arise in the absences of the migrants. This is
stronger for people staying in nuclear families. They also greet agents and neighbors and moneylenders for help
if the family needs it in absence of the worker. There are distinct ways to maintain social networks as social
capital at their native place. If problems at office the work place, migrants communicate with the family
members and villagers to pressurize the sub agent in the village and the manpower agency in Kathmandu. It is
through the social network that they approach the host agency for rights if discrimination and any other job-
related problem occur at work place. Likewise, migrants also form social networks where they work. They
celebrate festivals together and gather on holidays regularly. This maintains their network with other people
working as migrants abroad.
Migrations and household status: As talked about before, movement acquires exceptional changes the status
of the household. Firstly, through the physical absence of the young members and secondly, through the inflow
of foreign remittances. All these changes can be analyzed in three dimensions, i.e. i) Physical changes: age,
head of house hold decision making, sex; ii) Economic- consumer goods, assets, consumption, saving and how
remittances change house hold economies, anf iii) Socio demographic and cultural changes.
Household, decision-making and gender : Households have been viewed as the essential unit in the town
for the transient, whom they allude back to. Family units depend on set of tenets that are preset and are
practically speaking because of the observations and customs of ages. But, for taught familie s, which have
utilized levelheaded reasoning as a method for separating the amazingly various leveled nature of town life,
the family unit component is socially decided. Diverse rank gatherings delineate comparative dispositions
and desire forever and employments. In the family all the individual individuals share the same social
reference point. Individuals in the family units share parts and duties among themselves. Age decides
significant variety.
Table 1: How people take decision to migrate
Decision of migration Number Percent
In the family 192 80
By own 44 18
By agent 4 2
Total 240 100

Source: Field Survey, 2016.

The oldest male tends to take choices in the joint family. This position passed on to oldest child when he turns
out to be monetarily more imperative in the family unit. In a joint family the relative appreciates self-
governance in regards to basic leadership throughout the everyday running of the family unit. There is an
exceptionally unbending pecking order between ladies of a similar family unit. The association of ladies in
basic leadership shifts impressively. The most essential wellspring of contention inside family exists among
moms and daughter– in– laws. The division of the family is because of the ceaseless contentions between
ladies of a similar family. Daughter-in-law are frequently regarded as slave of the family and given numerous

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 103 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

obligations in family tasks. Ladies in joint family have little commitment as far as creating out– of-home
financial advantages for the family unit and along these lines they give up monetary basic leadership.
Interestingly, in the atomic families the spouse of the transients has impact over basic leadership and a more
prominent level of flexibility of decision.
Eighty percent of the cases, decisions regarding migration take place in the family. The head of the family
arranges the financial support for migration. There are very few cases when individuals decide to migrate
without any family discussion on the matter, though at the end individual helped by the family members to
migrate.
Women empowerment : Better living conditions with new monetary request changing duty of ladies without
their male partners and the disturbance of conjugal association has impacted the fruitfulness conduct of the
ladies in vagrant family units. On account of spouses as they included as the leader of the family unit without
their accomplices, the parts and obligation have additionally expanded. Work has been observed to be a
profitable resource for the whole family unit. The significance of monetarily dynamic family individuals is
especially imperative for families. Amid field work it was discovered that families wanted to send the relatives
after their marriage as to repay his work with his partners.
Families having all the more winning individuals in the family units have had more prominent job security. On
account of relocation to Bay nations young fellows tend to wedded before they move for work at the same time
pay of work is kept up in the family unit. Further, marriage likewise fills in as an organization of control for
vagrants at the working spot. Scientist would state there is a move from 'working child' to 'working little girl'
happens as far as work in the family.
Table 2: Period of migration
Why People are becoming migrants? Year Number Percent
The overwhelming motive for international migration
from Nepal is an economic one. The country Less than 1 year 37 15
currently has a pool of about 200,000 unemployed 1-3 years 76 32
workers every year. Insecurity Lack of employment 3-5years 87 36
opportunities in the country is a main reason for
increases in migration patterns. In the case of the More than 5 years 40 17
study villages, migrants repent “if we work in the Total 240 100
agriculture field in the village we get 2 ser boin (1
and half Kg. of grain as exchange of labor) per day as Source: Field Survey, 2016.
return to the labor we put in a day, this is hardly feed
the family members”.
Why Migration? Table 3: Total no of members earning from the
family
No of earners Number Percent
In search of better livelihoods people in rural
1 51 21
Nepal migrate. Better jobs with handsome earning
motivate them to migrate to Arabian and Indian 2-3 110 46
cities. 62% of rural households migrate for work
3-4 76 32
because they want to earn more and have better
livelihood. The other 20% migrate because they 5 and more 2 1
are only employed seasonally at their native place.
Total 239 100
Another 18% say that they want to have savings
for social and cultural obligation therefore they Source: Field Survey, 2016.
migrate to different potential places for work. This
is only true of the migrants who go to the Indian Table 4: Trends of migration in a family
cities for work, as they belong to marginal groups
of the community. Rural life is changing fast and Migration in the family Number Percent
people are far less dependent on agriculture and 1 person 182 76
related work if they don‟t have enough land to take
care of family members. 1-3 person 58 24
Total 240 100
Household data depicts those families where
individuals have been working abroad for last three Source: Field Survey, 2016.
years or more is 53% of total migration. These are

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 104 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

the migrant households with significant changes in terms of quality of life compared to those families where
migrants have gone to work less than three years ago.

Household data says that almost 76% of household

have moredesire
Livelihood than 2 earning members Numberin the family.
Percent
This is significant in
Housing/Food/education terms of the economic
50 security
21
of the family, as other members in the household
help
Landtoand
runphysical
daily asset
livelihood expenses. 46 The earnings19
ofMoney
migrants are invested in creating 67assets for the
28
families. Also, the number of migrants from a
Others 77 32
particular household adds to household economic
security.
Total 240livelihood 100
Table 5: What one should look for

Source: Field Survey, 2016.

During the field research 24% of families had 2 or more than 2 members earning outside, compared to 76% of
family having one family member earning outside.
The major objective of the household is to secure livelihoods over longer periods. In the process of securing
livelihoods people value land as a major asset. However, there are exceptions to this rule at different ends of
the social spectrum. The members of well-to-do migrant households have changed their ambitions. Now they
want to educate their children in boarding schools. They are also creating alternative urban settlements at
nearby semi urban centers apart from their home in the village.
From the perspective of households, important things for better livelihoods are the presence a guardian in the
family, who takes responsibilities for the care of family members, house, assets and land holding and children‟s
education. To realize all these aspirations, remittances are required. Due to the remittance coming from abroad,
people who did not have assets before now have added some assets for livelihood security.
Economic status: Among migrant households 32% of their heads perceive an improvement in their economic
status. The extent of the improvement among the households however, is largely influenced by the duration
of the migrants‟ stay abroad. Fifty percent did not have any property before migration and that has been
reduced to 38%. This 38% represents a major chunk of the migrants who work in India.
Members of the households perceived improvement in their economic status, when at least one-member
working had been abroad for last 5 years. The satiability of a migrant plays a crucial role in influencing the
economic status of the native household. This is because migrants take heavy loans before they go to work. The
interest rate goes as high as 60% per year and it takes more than one year to pay back the money to the money
lender if they save Rs. 7,000 to Rs. 10,000 per month.
The background characteristics of the head of the household also propose some variations in terms of perceived
economic status. The most important characteristic in this regard is the educational background of the household
head. The household interviewed also talk about other kinds of things for their livelihoods that include, prestige,
fulfillment of social obligations etc. Table 6: Property after migration
Positive correlation can be established between Expenses of earning Number Percent
assets holding after migration (land and house)
House/food/education/Heal 17 7
and the perceived improvement in the
th
households‟ economy. The comparison between
Land 60 25
the assets they held before migration and assets
after migration clearly demonstrates out the Others debt/marriage 72 30
positive impact of migration on the economic Nil 91 38
status of household. At households, the
improvement reported by the head of a Total 240 100
household seems to be an underestimation of the
Source: Field Survey, 2016.
change in the economic status of the family.
Structural changes: In the rustic networks of the investigation zone, the majority of the family units currently
win some money wage because of relocation abroad, or to the adjacent locale town to Kathmandu. Relocation
has changed the trimming possession and exchanged some of it to the underestimated. Prior there was shabby
work accessible in the town, thusly proprietors used to gather the land by them yet because of movement worker

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 105 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

to work in the fields are in edge. Furthermore, if accessible expensive, accordingly landowners are constrained
to share arrive for cultivating.
Responsibility for is expanding among the land less in the examination region. Landowners are compelled to
pitch their territory to the vagrants at showcase cost. Landholding design is evolving gradually, with the inflow
of settlements, making a space for transients to discover job alternatives in their own town by including land as
an advantage. This is further driving towards an adjustment in the fundamental structures of the town.
Caste and class can indeed be seen as mutually constitutive forms of social identity. At the same time there are
clear limits to this congruence. Class and caste variation is very true in the study area through one must
understand the dynamism that it works within. For generations, those who had been labelled as high class
happen to continue the continuum. Though the system like Lagua (a servant from low class do agriculture work
for particular family) is disappearing, slowly. „Mainjan‟ system that was prevalent earlier now changing slowly
due to the change in societal norms.
People in the privileged positions of high and low caste, continue to pull away from the rest of the population in
terms of economic advancement. They are well educated, holding positions in the government, business,
agriculture and strong political and economic connections both inside and outside the village. The current
generation is now getting tertiary level education.
It was amazing to find that there is a Sarbariya caste too in Nepal yet not scheduled in national census. This
group belongs to Dalits. Once a caste group (Danuwar) member marries a Dalit they become, 'Biltaw' to
'Sarbariya'. Even they don‟t know what caste they belong to, as there are no records as such. Impressive growth
in the economic welfare of the Sahu Caste is an example of migration driven growth in Raghunathpur. The Sahu
sub-caste was found to be the most enterprising group in this area. Over generations they have secured their
livelihoods from agriculture and the caste occupation of oil extraction. The intensification of agriculture and
income from the caste occupation has led to diversification into other areas of business, namely money lending
and grocery shops. Even Sahu caste constitutes the highest concentration of as migrant workers in Gulf
countries. In this sub-caste migrants lend money to their own group members who have a reciprocal growth for
both; the borrower migrants‟ gets money easily and the lender no risk of losing money and grow parallel.
Migration has set good example for growth among the Sahus of the study area. Now people are aware about
their basic rights but they are not able to raise the issues of their concern. People's lives have changed in terms
of living standards and quality of life such as food clothing, and asset holdings.
Cultural continuum and change: Individuals are never again intrigued to fill in as worker, in return for grain.
They want to work in-bunches as opposed to alone. Desires have ascended, with individuals wishing to gain
more in less time. They like to fill in as contractual workers instead of day by day ways laborers. It was
discovered that individuals confront serious nourishment emergency yet they remain at home as opposed to go
and function as workers in the town. The propensity for burning through cash in the town is moderately high.
Vagrants come back from their work put on siestas and invest the vast majority of their energy in talking
around or conveying in their interpersonal organization. Some of them have a tendency to spend all the cash
while at their local place. They again get cash from moneylender to come back to the following nation.
Vagrants who choose to remain back are the ones who can't bear to work outside on account of physical issues
they have or family issues they confront. Transients need increasingly and put stock in their predetermination.
Religious and Cultural faith is still prevalent in the households of the migrant. They are compelled to eat 'tulsi'
(a plant's leaf that is for purification is used during Hindu religious ceremony) to purify the person as he had
come from a Muslim country and had possibly become impure. Households also offer 'pooja' or prayer to their
'kul devata' (family god) in favor of the migrant.

V. CONCLUSION
In the commonplace systems in Nepal, development has been seen as a probability for picking up. People
have shown energy to move to the nations, which offers the most critical possible results for settlement.
There have been quantitative and moreover subjective changes found in the desires for regular solaces of the
all-inclusive community with respect to assets gathering, care about central prosperity, sustenance and
guideline in the town. People earlier had no favorable position base can incorporate assets to the extent
arrive, animals, houses, saving et cetera. Another edge of reference is making with respect to show day
regards and social orders. As it were, society is at an advance and one of the genuine components
contributing towards this change is quick development to different countries. Meanwhile, there are risks that
drifters may be obliged to live with. This reflects broader points concerning money related determinants of
access and opportunity. Regardless of whether development is aggregate or adjusting, most homeless people

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 106 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

get little help and live in uncommonly troublesome conditions at their objectives. Disregarding the way that
their undertakings are the certifiable engine of advancement in a couple of sections, giving an unassuming
and versatile work source, they remain without an identity and can't ensure state resources for guideline,
restorative administrations, water and sanitation in the midst of the time that they are in their host countries.
There are a couple of unmistakable positions on what should be done to address the issue of development.
The standard view is that migration should be reduced or controlled by making work in towns. In the
meantime, steps ought to be taken to assist vagrants with the objective that their hardships are reduced and
they are ensured access to crucial requirements. A rights-based approach to manage guarantee the general
security of vagrants is required.
REFERENCES
1. Adams, R. H. (2005). The economic and demographic determinants of international migration in rural
Egypt. The Journal of Development Studies, 30(1): 146-67.
2. Bakewell, O. (2012). Introduction. In O. Bakewell (Ed.), Migration and development (pp. xiii–xxiii).
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
3. Bigsten, A. (1996). The circular migration of smallholders in Kenya. Journal of African Economies, 5
(1): 1–20.
4. Black, R. Sessay, M. F. (1997). Forced migration, environmental change and wood fuel issues in the
Senegal River Valley. Environmental Conservation 24 (3): 251–260.
5. Carney, D. (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: What contribution can we make? DFID, London.
6. Collier, P. and Lal, D. (1984). Why poor people get rich: Kenya 1960–1979. World Development, 12
(10): 1007-1018.
7. Eliakim Katz, E. and Stark, O. (1986). Labor Migration and Risk Aversion in Less Developed Countries.
Journal of Labor Economics, 4 (1): 134-49.
8. Ellis, F. (1998). Household strategies and rural livelihood diversification. Journal of Development
Studies, Vol.35, No.1, pp.1-38, UK.
9. Fischer, P. A., Martin, R. and Straubhaar, T. (1997) Interdependencies between development and
migration‟, in Tomas Hammar et al. (eds) International migration - immobility and development:
Multidisciplinary perspectives, pp. 91-132. Oxford and New York: Berg.
10. Gill, G. J. (2003). Seasonal labor migration in Rural Nepal, Preliminary overview, Working Paper, 218,
Overseas Development Institute, London.
11. Grootaert, C. and Van, Bastelaer, T. (2002). The role of social capital in Development, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
12. Harris, J. R. and Todaro, M. P. (1970). Migration, unemployment and development: A two-sector
analysis. The American Economic Review, 60 (1): 126-142.
13. Hatton, T. J. and Williamson, J. G. (1992). International migration and world development: A historical
perspective. NBER Historical Working Paper No. 41.
14. Knight, J. and Song, L. (1997). Chinese peasant choices: migration, rural industry or farming. Applied
Economics Discussion Paper Series no 1888, Institute of Economics and Statistics, University of Oxford,
1-29.
15. Lakshmansamy, T. (1990). Family survival strategy and migration: An analysis of returns to migration.
The Indian Journal of Social Work, 51(3): 473-85.
16. Larson, D. and Mundlak, Y. (1997). On the Intersectoral Migration of Agricultural Labor. Economic
Development and Cultural Change 45: 295- 319.
17. Lee, E. S. (1966). A theory of migration. Demography, 3 (1): 47-57.
18. Lewis, W. A. (1954). Economic development with unlimited supplies of labor, Manchester School of
Economic and Social Studies, 22: 139-91.
19. Lucas, R. (1985). Migration amongst the Botswana. Economic Journal, 95 (378): 358-82.
20. Ravenstein, E. G. (1889). The laws of migration. Bobbs-Merrill Reprint Series in the Social Sciences,
S483.
21. Sapkota, K. (2014a). International labour migration, remittances and social change in the middle hill of
Nepal: A case of Byas Municipality, Tanahu. Development Discourse, 1: 23-36.
22. Sapkota, K. (2014b). Migration as a response to relative deprivation. Development Discourse, 2: 49-70.
23. Sapkota, K. (2015). Seasonal labour migration, remittances and livelihoods: Case of rural community of
Bhatuliya Village Development Committee (VDC), Mahottari District, Central Tarai of Nepal.
International Journal for Social Development, 3 (1): 54-71.
24. Sapkota, K. (2016). The economic benefit and social cost of migration on left behind: A case of
Bhatauliya VDC, Mahottari District, Central Tarai of Nepal. Practising Geographer, 20 (1): 87-104.

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 107 |

 Migration as An Agent of Social Change in The Rural…

25. Sapkota, K. (2017). Contribution of community forestry to people‟s livelihoods in the Eastern Middle
Hills of Nepal. International Journal for Social Development, 5 (4): 34-60.
26. Sapkota, K. (2018). Seasonal labor migration and livelihood in the middle-hill of Nepal: Reflections
from Arghakhanchi District. Research Nepal Journal of Development Studies. 1(1): 42-57.
27. Scoones, I, (1998) Sustainable rural livelihoods: A framework for analysis, IDS Working Paper, Institute
of Development Studies, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
28. Seddon, D. and Hussein K., (2002). The consequences of conflict: Livelihood and development of Nepal,
Working Paper, 185, Overseas development Institute, London.
29. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30. Shrestha, N. R. (1989). Frontier settlement and landlessness among Hill Migrants in Nepal Tarai, Annals
of the Association of American Geographers‟, 79 (3): 370-389.
31. Skeldon, Ronald, 1996, „Migration from China‟, Journal of International Affairs, 49 (2): 434-55.
32. Stark, O. (1980). On the role of urban-rural remittances in rural development‟, Journal of Development
Studies, 16 (3): 369-374.
33. Stark, O. (1991). The migration of labor, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
34. Stark, O. and Levhari, D. (1982). On migration and risk in LDCs, Economic Development and Cultural
Change. 31:191-196.
35. Stark, O. and Taylor, I. E. (1989). Relative deprivation and international migration. Demography, 26(1):
1-14.
36. Subedi, B. P. (1991). International migration in Nepal: Towards an analytical framework. Contributions
to Nepalese Studies, 18(1), 84-102.
37. Subedi, B. P. (1993). Continuity and change in population movement: From inside a rural Nepali
community. An Arbor, Michigan: UMI Dissertation Services.
38. Subedi, B. P. (2003). International migration from Nepal: Emerging patterns and trends. In Y. Ishikawa,
A comprehensive study of migration changes in Asia and Pacific region. Kyoto: Japanese Society for
Promotion of Sciences, Kyoto University.
39. Subedi, B. P. (2016). Nepalma yowa berojgarsanga jodiyako basainsarai ra shram prawasan gatishila. In
K. B. Ghanashyam Bhusal, & Y. Sahi, Nepal: Capitalism and development (in Nepali) (pp. 33-103).
Kathmandu: Center for Nepalese Studies.
40. Thadani, V. and Todaro, M. (1984). Female migration: A conceptual framework. In women in the cities
of Asia: Migration and urban adaptation, edited by James T. Fawcett, Siew-Ean Khoo and Peter C.
Smith. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
41. Todaro, M. P., (1969). A model of labor migration and urban unemployment in less developed
countries‟, The American Economic Review, 59: 138-149.
42. UN. (2013). Trends in international migration stock: The 2013 revision. New York: United Nations
Population Division.

KANHAIYA SAPKOTA (2018). Migration as an Agent of Social Change in the Rural Areas:
A Case of Banke District, Nepal. Invention Journal of Research Technology in Engineering &
Management (IJRTEM), 2(7), 97-108. Retrieved July 30, 2018, from www.ijrtem.com.

|Volume 2| Issue 7 | www.ijrtem.com | 108 |