Household characteristics impact on rural to urban migration the case of quang ngai province

NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF HCM
UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS
VIETNAM

INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL STUDIES
THE HAGUE
THE NETHERLANDS

VIETNAM- THE NETHERLANDS
PROJECT FOR M.A IN DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS
--------()()()--------

HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS IMPACT
ON RURAL TO URBAN MIGRATION
THE CASE OF QUANG NGAI PROVINCE
;_

THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT
FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS

BY
DUONG DINH QUOC

BQ.GIAO DUe

VA DAo TA

TRUONG 8H K/NH

TE TP.HgM

cI_!/- 6y5g
.

THU'VIEN

Academic Supervisor:
Dr. LE THI THANH LOAN

HO CHI MINH CITY, OCTOBER 2007


CERTIFICATION

"I certify that the substance of this dissertation has not already been submitted for
any degree and is not currently submitted for any other degree.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge and help received in preparing this
dissertation and all sources used, have been acknowledged in this dissertation."

DUONG DINH QUOC


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Fist of all, let me express my thanks all organizations and member those found

.

Vietnam - Netherland project, all lectures and staffs of the project for useful lessons
and latest knowledge.
I would like to express my special thanks to my academic supervisor Dr. Le
Thi Thanh Loan for his helpful guidance and assistance during the writing of this

thesis. I also deeply thanks to Dr. Nguyen Trang Hoai and Dr. Nguyen Hoang Bao
for their valuable suggestions and advices to research this topic.
Following, I send my thanks to Librarian, Ms.Chi, who helps help me in
finding necessary document and reference books. Thank to my friends in Quang
Ngai - the interviewers help me in collecting surveyed data in Quang Ngai province.
Many thanks sent to my classmates, who shared with me joys and obstacles during
more two years attending this program.
My thanks send to my wife and sons who shared and encouraged me during my

..

·-

learning and doing this study.


ABBREVIATIONS

HCM:

HoChiMinh

GSO:

General Statistics Office

NEZ:

New Economic Zone

DAN:

Development Analysis Network

VLSS:

Vietnam Living Standard Survey

USD:

United State Dollar (American Currency)

VND:

Vietnam Dong (Vietnamese Currency)


TABLE OF CONTAINS
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1

Problem statement .......................................................................................................... 1

1.2

Research objectives ......................................................................................................... 2

1.3

Research questions ......................................................................................................... 3

1.4

Methodology .................................................................................................................... 3

1.5

Organization of the thesis ............................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER 2: LITERATE REVIEW
2.1

Overview of migration typical theories ......................................................................... 5

2.2

Lewis model ..................................................................................................................... 6

2.3

Push and pull factor theory ............................................................................................ 8

2.4

Harris -Todaro model ................................................................................................... 8

2.5

New Economics of Labour Migration theory ............................................................. 11

2.6

Comments on the theories ............................................................................................. 12

CHAPTER 3: MIGRATION IN VIETNAM
3.1

Overview of migration historical in Vietnam .............................................................. 14
3.1.1 Migration in feudal states ......................................................................................... 14

-·;,.

3.1.2 Migration under the French colonial period ............................................................ 15

..

3.1.3 Migration in the war against US army ..................................................................... 16

~

3.1.3 Migration after reunification 1975 ................................................................. 18

3.2

The factors speed up rural to urban migration ......................................................... 20
3.2.1 The poverty and inequity .......................................................................................... 20
3.2.2 Population dist!ibution and density .......................................................................... 21

3.3

Migration data and tendency ....................................................................................... 23

3.4

Migration to HCM city ................................................................................................. 25
3.4.1 The Socio-economic situation of HCM city ......................................................... 25
3.4.2 Overview of migration to HCM city ...................................................................... 26
3.4.3 Migrants characteristics to HCMC ................................................................ 27
3.4.3.1 Migrants origins ............................................................................................. 27
3.4.3.2 Educational attainment ................................................................................. 28
3.4.3.3 Age differentials ............................................................................................. 29
3.4.3.4 Gender ............................................................................................................ 30
3.4.3.5 Occupational differentials and income .......................................................... 31

3.5

Migration impacts ........................................................................................................... 33
3.3.1 Impacts on urban areas ............................................................................................... 33


3.3.2 Impacts on rural areas ................................................................................................ 34

CHAPTER4:METHODOLOGY
4.1

Definition of migrant .................................................................................................... 36

4.2

The objects of surveys ................................................................................................... 38

4.3 Data collection methods ................................................................................................. 38
4.3.1

Secondary data ...................................................................................................... 39

4.3.2

Primary data ............................................................................................................. 39

4.4

Regression model of rural to urban migration ........................................................... 40

4.5

Description variables in the model.. .............................................................................. 40

CHAPTER 5: HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS IMPACT ON
RURAL TO URBAN MIGRATION
5.1 Descriptive analysis ........................................................................................................ 44
5.1.1

The Socio-economic situation in Quang Ngai Province ...................................... 44

5.1.2

Statistical Analysis ................................................................................................... 45

5.2 Regression results .......................................................................................................... 48

5.2.1

Estimate coefficients ............................................................................................. 48

5 .2.2

Model test ................................................................................................................ 49

5 .2.3

Determinants of migration probability ................................................................... 49

5.3 Comment on results ......................................................................................................... 50

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 53
6.2 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 53
6.3 Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 54
6.3.1 Recommendations for original authorities ................................................................ 55
6.3.2 Recommendations for urban authorities .................................................................. 56
6.4 Limits and suggestion for further studies ...................................................................... 56

Appendix ! ................................................................................................................................ 57
Appendix 2 ................................................................................................................................ 58
Appendix 3 ................................................................................................................................ 59
_

Questionnaire ........................................................................................................................... 60
References ................................................................................................................................. 63

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Annual average population growth rate of the city(%) ................................ 26
Table 2: Migration from regions to HCM city 1999-2004 ....................................... 28
Table 3: Population rate in school by ages (%) ........................................................... 29
Table 4: Population structure by age group (%) .......................................................... 30
Table 5: Migrants gender index by ages ...................................................................... 31
Table 6: Distribution of employment of migrants in 2004 by economic sectors ........ 31
Table 7: Monthly average migrant income (VND) in 2004 ........................................ 32
Table 8: Description variables used in the model.. ...................................................... 43
Table 9: Household characteristics in survey ............................................................. 4 7
Table 10: Regression result of unrestricted model (7 variables) ................................. 48
Table 11: Regression result of restricted model (5 variables) ..................................... 49
Table 12: Influent levels of variables to household migration probability ................. 50


CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION
•

1.1 Problem statement:
Rural to urban migration is the natural process in economic development
m all countries, especially in less development countries. Migration is not a
consequence of economic development progress, but the economic growth has
promoted migrants from rural regions to economic centers and urbanization
areas.
The booming in economic growth in Vietnam for two decades has
changed remarkably economic structure. The production rate in agriculture has
decreased strongly in total GDP, from 27.17 % in 1995 to 24.37% in 2000 and

21.76% in 2004 1• In rural areas, beside traditional agricultural sector, service and
industrial production have been expanded. Therefore, income rate earnings from
farming fields are decreasing in total household income.
However, high natural population growth rate and new jobs created slowly
in rural areas have made the pressure on labor force in agriculture. Moreover, the
productivity in agriculture is still low, agricultural lands are reduced due to
demands of development industrial zones, urbanization and environmental
pollution caused by industry. These factors lead an increasing in working -off
time and an expanding working pressure in rural areas. In this situation,
migration is considered an acceptable solution for labor force in rural areas.
Rural to urban migration has played a very important role m
industrialization and urbanization process, migration labor force has met the large
labor demand in economic development progress. The migration also decreases
jobs pressure on jobs in agriculture and contributes poverty reduction by
remittances to households. On the other hand, an uncontrolled migration progress
overloads the urban infrastructure, affects on the social fundamentals and may
become a disadvantage factor to economic development progress in urban areas.

1

GSO 2005, available at www.gso.gov.vn

1


Being a less development country, Vietnam is still in the initial stage of
urbanization, given by about 70% population still lives in rural areas and

..

tendency of rural to urban migration will occur strongly in coming years,
especially in large city such as HCM city, Ha Noi, Da Nang. The thesis also

•

identifies the socio- economic consequences not only to rural but also to urban
areas
The research is to identify the household characteristics that effect on rural
to urban migration in Quang Ngai province by reviewing the different approaches
to migration decision. The study also allows us determine which are the main
factors affecting on migration decision of household in rural areas.

1.2 Research objectives
The main objective of this exploratory study is to get a better
understanding of rural to urban migration through out the features of households
in rural. The migration process of any individual in a family are considered as an
allocation the jobs amongst members of a household, therefore, in this research
individual's migration is also considered a migratory household.
Although many previous researches have mentioned about rural to urban
migration under the other viewpoints, but almost have focused on migrants'
characteristics and other socio- economic, geographic factors that affects on the
migration. This research focuses on the households characteristics to migration
decisions of members in the family. Moreover, this research implicates the policy
framework for rural to urban migration. Therefore, households in rural regions
are main objects in the research and are central units of migration survey. More
specifically, the study focuses on the following objectives:
•

To analyze the households characteristics in the rural areas that have
influences to migration possibility, and identify what the factors have

affected on migration possibility most strongly.

..

•

To understand the migrants' livelihoods in destination places and the
features of migration labored force in recent years.

2


•

To analyze public response and government policies to deal with the
increasing migration flows from rural to urban areas.

1.3 Research questions
To realize our main objective mentioned in the previous paragraph, the
following central question is formulated "How the household characteristics
affect on rural to urban migration in Quang Ngai province?"
From the central question the following sub-questions are formulated,
which are addressed in the subsequent chapters in the study as follows:
What are the household characteristics in original place?
What are the initial conditions for rural to urban migration?
What the features of household affect on migration probability?

1.4 Methodology
Descriptive analysis will be use to show an overview of rural to urban

..

migration based on secondary data analysis from Vietnam migration census 2004

_

conducted by General Statistics Office, mid-term population survey 2004
conducted by HCM city statistics department, the previous migration study in
Vietnam, and data extracted from various papers, magazines, books, and many
other related books.
Data for regression are collected from a migration survey in three
communes of Quang Ngai province with 102 observations. And a logistic model
will be run to analyze variables affecting on migration decision, regression results
will be used for explaining effective level by each variable.

1.5 Organization of the thesis
The thesis is organized into five chapters. Following the chapter of
introduction, the second chapter overviewed development theories, which link to
migration progress and some implications exacted from these theories. Next
chapter describes briefly historical development of migration in Vietnam, natural
element and social context speeding up migration, this chapter also shows

3


migrants' characteristics into HCM city in the period 1999- 2004 and impacts of
migration on socio - economic environment in rural and urban areas.
The fourth chapter states the methodology of study in term of scope and
location, including a regression model of rural to urban migration, describing
variables and method of collecting data. The answer of main question in the fifth

chapter, which is considered the central part of the study, presenting the impacts
of household characteristics on migration probability of household in rural
region. A logit regression model will be applied with data survey to identify the
key factors affecting on migration. The final chapter mentions some appropriate
solutions to the authorities concerning with migration. These solutions in order to
increase the positive impacts and to reduce the negative effects from migration
process, for both rural and urban areas.

4


CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Overview of typical migration theories
There are many different theories referring the migration, each is built
around a core model of wage or income differences in origin and destination
locations as predictors of migration, but each provides different interpretations of
other key variables based on it's important role in each theory. According to
Jakub Bijak (2006), most selected theories of migration can be grouped as
follows:

THEORIES OF MIGRATION

Economic

I

.
-

~

* Interventing
Opportunities
(Stouffer, 1940)
* Push- Pull factors
(Lee ' 1966'1I
* Migrant Networks
(Taylor, 1986)
* Transnational
Social Space
(Pries, 1999;
Faist,2000)

..

* Classical
(Lewis, 1940)

* Gravity Theory
(Steward, 1941)
(Zipt,1946)

* Neo-Classical
(Harris and Todaro,1970)

(lsard,1966)
(Lowry, 1966)

*Duo-labor
market theory
(Piore, 1979)

*Entropy
(Wilson, 1967)

*Value-Expectancy
(Dejong and

* Migration system
theory
(Krits el al.,1992)
* Multidisciplinary
approach plus
mobility transition
(Massey, 2000)

* Catastrophe theory
and bifurcation
(Wilson, 1981)

Fawcett, 1981)
* New Economics of
labor migration

* Mobility transition
(Zekinsky, 1971)

(Stark, 1991)

(Sources: "Forecasting international theories: Selected theories, models and methods"Jakub
Bijak, Central European Central for Migration Research, working paper 4/2006)

5


In fact, migration process is a phenomenon caused by economic elements
essentially and social environment, other key non-economic factors play the roles
as catalytic factors to impulse movement, followed by the current economics
viewpoints. Therefore, some of migration theories are usually detailed describe to
explain the reasons of migration. However, the nature of migration and the causes
for it are complex, and there is no general agreement among researchers on the
causes of migration. Arguments on the differences on migration causing factors
exist not only among researchers from different disciplines, but also among
researchers within one discipline. In this study, I have presented theoretical
discussion on migration into four different models: Two- sector model which
emerged in the 1950s by Lewis; Push and Pull factors approach in the 1960s by
Lee; Harris-Todaro models developed in the 1970s; and microeconomic models
on which much of the research has focused over the past 15 years, called new
economies of labor migration.

2.2 Lewis Model (1954)
Lewis's model was introduced in 19504, which called the Lewis' twosector model. In Lewis model, an underdeveloped economy exists of two basic
economic sectors: traditional agricultural sector and modern industrial sector. The
traditional agricultural sector was assumed as low productivity, surplus labor and
zero marginal labor productivity. While means, modern industrial sector was
considered as high productivity and advanced technology production
Lewis also assumed that the level of wages in urban industrial sector to be
constant, which was higher than the average wages in rural agricultural sector.

According to Lewis, a minimum different income of 30% between two sectors
will push labor force moving the sector having higher income, leading a growth
output in industrial sector. Speed of output growth in industrial sector determined
by the rate of industrial investment and capital accumulation in that sector. In
term of surplus labor and zero marginal labor productivity in rural, this labor
transfer to industrial sector is not only effectiveness on output in rural areas but

6


also increases total output of whole economy. However, the transition of labors
also drives down marginal productivity, that leading a decreasing of real wages in
industrial sector and wage in agricultural sector will equal the wage in industrial
sector step by step and industrial sector has no monetary incentive to promote the
•

migrants from agricultural sector. In the model, the main factor in labor transfer
is higher wage in industrial sector, not by working opportunities in urban areas.
Although Lewis' two-sector model was consider as the general theory of
the development process in developing courtiers during 1960s and 1970s, but the
model has been critized by economists (Todaro and Smith, 2003).
First, Lewis stated that the number of new jobs creation in industrial sector
is positive relation with the rate of reinvestment and capital accumulation in
industrial sector. However, when profit was invested in technology, it maybe
leads a decreasing labor demand. And result that, more capital flow of investment
in industrial sector maybe decreasing the jobs in that sector. Second, in Lewis
model, labor supplies in rural areas are unlimited and perfectly elastic. According
to Todaro, although labor productivity in rural areas is low but surplus labor is
rather small and assumption of full employment in urban as the model is not
reality. Third, in a competitive labor market of industrial sector, a constant real

urban wages as Lewis' assumption are unrealistic. In fact, real wages in industrial
sector tend to rise over time, both absolute term and relative to average rural
incomes. Finally, the assumption of diminishing return in industrial sector is
questionable because much evidence shown that in most industrial fields, returns

.

.

are mcreasmg.
However, Lewis model war for a long time considered as the basic model
of development, and applied for explaining the labor movements across countries
Northern Africa and Turkey to Europe during the postwar boom of the European
Community (Ranis, 2004).
In general, the key assumptions in the model do not fit the institutional and
economic reality in developing countries, and those assumptions should be
adjustment to fit the modern reality.

7


2.3 Push and pull factor theory
The theory explained the factors affecting on migration decisions in term
of positive and negative characteristics of the original and destination places. In
•

this theory, the movement people expected receiving more benefits or advantages
in moving from one place to another. Push factors considered as negative factors
that force people to leave the original place, while pull factors are positive factors
attracting the migrants to move to destination place.

According to Lee, the positive (pull) factors could be more important than
the negative factors. The negative (push) factors are difficult ones, including the
difficulties in rural areas such as poverty, unemployment, and land shortages. The
positive factors are attractive factors that the migration want to achieve, including
the new jobs with higher incomes than original place, the opportunities of better
educated or well healthy taking care. Therefore, the job and income opportunities
in urban areas are pulling factors that pull the people to settle and to work.
Although migration can occur either by 'push' or 'pull' factors, Lee assumes
migration mostly is a result of a combination of both. Usually, difficult economic

.

-

conditions at original place are the key "push" factors while improved economic
conditions at destination place are essential "pull" factors .
However, an unfavorable situation at original places, for example, war and
conflict can also played a role as push factors to induce migration. In many
developing countries, especially in Vietnam, rural-urban migration is also taking
place because of natural disasters because of without effective supports from
governments.

2.4 Harris -Todaro model
Harris and Todaro model attempts to explain the existence of rural to

"

urban migration in term of widespread unemployment in urban in less developed
countries.
The model assumed that and agricultural production and the labor market

in rural is perfectly competitive and unemployment are existent in both rural and
urban areas. According to Todaro' view, every people has an equal chance of
8


obtaining an urban job without mentioning the place, the probability of obtaining
a job is simply positive relationship with the urban employment rate and labor

.

skills .
The Harris-Todaro model describes the number of migrants from urban to

•

rural in time period t is a function of the difference between the urban expected
wage and the rural wage, the urban employment rate and the responsiveness of
migrants to economic opportunities in urban areas. The migration decision is
given in the following equation:
Mt = h (p Wu - Wr ) where p = Eu I (Eu + Uu ).
In which:
M = the number of rural to urban migrants in time period t
t

h

= the responsiveness of the migrant

p

= the urban employment rate, reflecting probability of finding an urban job .

Wu = the actual urban wage
Wr = the actual rural wage

Eu

= urban employment

Uu = urban unemployment

When considering whether to migrate from the rural sector, the labor will
compare the expected wage he will earn in the urban with what he earns in the
rural sector, in which, the urban expected wage is the weighted average of the
wages multiplied by the probability of finding an urban job.
Urban expected wage= pWu
The equilibrium condition is summarized in the following equation:
pWu =Wr
If urban areas are economically more attractive than the rural areas than

the model is in disequilibrium because pWu > Wr . There will be a greater number
of migrants going towards urban, thereby decreasing urban expected wages (by
increasing urban unemployment) and increasing rural wages. Hence, urban areas
become less and less attractive to the migrants until the model is again back in
equilibrium, implying that pWu = W.r At the equilibrium, the expected wage in
9


the urban is equal to actual rural wage in rural areas and potential migrants have
no incentive anymore to leave the rural.

Thus, the model has explained successfully the main reason of rural to
urban migration in case of existence high unemployment in urban areas. Besides,
we can understand the different levels of human capital, leading a higher
proportion of the educated or skilled migrants than the unskilled migrant, because
they have a better chance for getting a new job, or higher urban wages than
unskilled migrants.
However, some implications in this are questionable by some current
researchers. First, the model implied that for each urban job created, more than
one immigrant leave the rural area to move to urban, resulting an increase labor
surplus or unemployment in urban. But the empirical evidence has proved that
urban unemployment has been not affected significantly as Todaro's view and if
the migrant who do not receive jobs in the urban formal sector he can find work
in the informal sector, but the model has not mentioned this labor market. Then,
in reality, employment status in rural areas affected significantly on rural to urban
migration decision than mentioned in the theory. Another criticism of the model
that migration decision is absolutely made by an individual while family plays an
important role in the decision to migrate.
Although Harris -Todaro model could not explain completely the reasons
of migration on economic aspect, but the model has made useful implications to
the policy maker in management population movement.
The model stated that rural to urban migration will occur if the urban wage
is sufficiently higher than the rural wage even if there is unemployment in urban
areas. This population movement depends on unemployment rate in both rural
and urban areas, and economic opportunities in the urban formal and informal
sector. Therefore, the effective policies of migration should focus on increasing
living standard in rural and decreasing income gap between two areas.
Migration rate are assumed to respond positively to both higher urban
wages and higher urban employment probabilities. Therefore, the creation more

10

jobs in urban areas without simultaneous attempts to improve rural income and
employment opportunities can result in the paradoxical situation.

2.5 New Economics of Labour Migration theory
The new migration theory researched and developed by Oded Stark and
his colleagues since 1980s, the model explained the causes and consequences of
migration, especially in less developed countries.
The motivation to migrate is not only the salary differential between
migrants expected salary in the destination place and the salary gained in their
original place as Harris and Todaro model. In Stark's opinion, migration decision
making is interpreted more as a household livelihood strategy than as a
completely individual choice
The new economic theory of migration suggested that migration related
decision is made by households rather than by individuals. This finding coincides
with the observations that migration processes are characterised by visible family
patterns. From this view, "diversified migration strategies of particular household
members are instrument of risk management at household level, rather than a
simple maximization of the expected income" (Bijak, 2004: 12). In this approach,
wage differences between original and destination places are not prerequisite for
migration.
According Stark, individual savings earned from the migration can be seen
as another element of risk management at household level, related to remittances
transferred from migrants to their family at the place of origin. Migration is
explained as a family decision in the context of risk aversion. More specifically,
Stark suggests that the household head allocates labor to maximize the wellbeing
of the rural household. As primary decision-maker, the household head tries to
combine an increasing new risk in the production of food in the origin with the
compensation of remittances from destination, such combine can be seen as a

diversified strategy family manpower for controlling risks.
Rural-urban migration can also considered as a family migration which
emphasizes migration of a family member as a way to diversify the risk. Stark
11


shown that migration of a family member can result from a cooperative
arrangement that combines between the migrants and his family. The migrant is
insured by his family while looking for job, later on the migrant will be able to
compensate adverse shocks in the long-term program. This can also explain the
•

paradox of migration that in the first step forward to urban, the migrant still get
much support from the family in spite of the migrants can earn an expected
income differential. Because this stage can be seen as an investment, then it
might be a very profitable investment income from the migrants to whole the
family.
Stark has also focused on alternative motivations to migrate that can
contradict the view that the expected income differentials between rural areas and
urban areas are predominant factors in order to induce migration. This problem
can be explained when migration entails a small chance of getting a higher
income. For example, people can still choose to migrate to the city in the hope of
possible to increase his/her social status among rural residents and migrants.
Thus, this model predicts that people can decide to migrate in the hope to
increase his/her social status even with only a small chance of a monetary gain.

.-

Stark's theory is considered a Todaro model extended, by emphasizing
households rather than individuals as units of analyses, and remittances as an

inter-temporal contractual arrangement between the migrant and the family.

2.6 Comments on the theories:
The reasons of migration and are complex and there is no general
agreement between theories, but some factors that affected on rural to urban
migration can be extracted from the models as follows:
• The main reason of rural to urban migration is economic; the migration rates
depend on the differentials income between rural and urban areas, and depend
on economic opportunities in urban location.
• Household characteristics affect strongly on migration probability, household
size, characters of household head, household asset etc. may be consider as
important factors to migration probability.
12


• Individual abilities are determinants of the migration; it is often the better
educated people increase migration probability. Then, the ages and education
background are considered as important factors affecting on migration
probability .

•
The economic theories of labor migration, as well as all economics
theories in general, follmv either macro - level or micro - level perspective and
reflect a diversity of paradigms of theoretical economics.
Lewis' two sector model explained that given wage differentials between
two capitalist economies, one characterized by a surplus of labor and the other by
surplus of capital, migration and capital movement occurs. Similar framework is
explained in neoclassical economic theory of Harris and Todaro, that explained
population movement by expected wage and unemployment rate in urban. Both
the theories explained population movement followed by relation between

capitalist and labor, immigrants move usually from capital intensive to

labor

intensive field. Moreover, immigrant workforce is more flexible than local labor
one, protected by various institutions (trade unions, regulations of work

.
•

conditions, etc), which are resisting the effectiveness of Lewis and Harris-Todaro
theories. Thus, neoclassical macroeconomic migration and dual market labor
theories provide useful explanations for many features of migratory phenomena,
but nevertheless seem difficult to predict migration in macro -level.
The new economics of labor migration theory by Stark states that wage
differences between origin and destination places are not prerequisite for
migration. Stark points out that migration was treated as an investment in human
capital and result of a rational cost - benefit analysis. The theory is very
comprehensive an may cover different aspects of human decisions in migration
contexts, not only limited to economic ones, but also taking into account the
social and psychological spheres of life. Therefore, the new economics of labor
migration has covered various aspects of migration decision and made
implications persuasively for explanation of migration.

13


CHAPTER III

MIGRATION IN VIETNAM

"

This chapter brief the problem concerning to historical migration in
Vietnam and the specific characteristics in each internal migration period. The
chapter states find out two fundamental conditions for huge migration wares in
the past, those are the poverty and inequity in economic activities, high rate in
population growth and unbalance in population density between areas. This
chapter also mentions the important role of HCM city as a biggest destination
place in the country and some the migrants' characteristics to HCM city.

3.1 Overview of migration history in Vietnam
The section will summarize in to four movement population periods
along with the Vietnamese historical phases in feudal regimes, under the French
colonia1ist regime, in the war against US army and after reunification 1975. We
also find out the specific characteristics following each period and other
important factors affecting on migration wares, in which migration in pre-reform
and post-reform eras will be focused.

3.1.1

Migration in feudal states

Migration is not new phenomenon to the Vietnamese. Over two thousands
years in the past, migrant communities in the North moved and settled along the
riverbanks and enlarged areas of the Red River Delta, later than, the fertility
fields in Mekong river delta were destination of migration flows in the South.
Like spreading oil, migrants built up new villages located only miles away from
their home areas. This process was repeated in the flatland or fertility fields over
thousands years. Under many kingdom regimes, migration was considered as an

effective policy to expand their territories and to affirm the national sovereignty.
Some systems encouraged migration by issuing incentives such as exemption
from duty services and taxes, or setting ownership of new lands for migrant
communities (Dang, 2003). Overall, population movement in feudal regimes

14


moved mainly to the flatland where favorable conditions in rice cultivation and
other agricultural activities have.
Accompany with the war fares to take over other neighboring feeble
countries, the national boundary was expanded continuously. Historical accounts
of migration in Vietnam recognize that migration has occurred within the country
over most of its history and three fifths of the nation's current territory was
progressively invaded over long periods by kingdom regimes. Then, the
Vietnamese people conducted migration progress from the Red River Delta
towards the Southward and Mekong Delta, following the territorial expansion.
(Dang, 1999; Li, 1996).
In summary, migration m feudal regimes taken place on two mam
directions: population movement to flatlands, fertility fields along the Red river
and MeKong River, and migration following on the territorial expansion to the
Southward.

3.1.2

Migration under the French colonial period

Setting the government colonialist regime over Indochina territory, the
French began applying on the new capital production mode into Vietnam
economy. This change of production approach stimulated widely the population

movement during over the French colonial period (1884-1954).
Researchers have pointed out that migration in this period was a frequent
phenomenon followed by several main migration forms. First, rural-urban
migration of landless peasants caused by concentralization of cultivating lands
and despot of landowner class in rural. Second, there were seasonal rural-rural
movements of agricultural labors in search of temporary employment in farming.
Third, landless peasants from the overpopulated density regions of North moved
to the fertility areas of Mekong Delta and Highland for setting plantations. Four,
international migration of labors moved to other the French colonies. Last, there
were movements of rural labors to work in factories and mining industry operated
by the French. Among which, the circular movements of agricultural labors
between rural areas during the transplanting and harvesting seasons accounted for

15


the largest volume of the population movement in this period. (Dang et al., 1997;
Li, 1996)
It is argued that rural to urban migration during the period of the French

rule was the best choice by rural households to response to severe policies of
government authorities, it also occurred in satisfying of the labor market demand.
Seasonal migration occurred because of the different harvest seasons across
different locations in the Red River Delta. Labor flows towards plantation and
mining areas were largely due to the French efforts to recruit rural laborers for
mining and plantation work. It was reported, however, that this period witnessed
severe exploitation and brutal treatment of the native Vietnamese by the French
in plantations and mining industry. In consequence, there was increased
impoverishment amongst rural population.
Population pressure on arable lands in the Northern, particularly in the

Red River Delta also contributed to this historical Southward population movement. As one of the earliest cultivated areas, the Red River Delta has been
•

favourably supported with fertile soil and easy communication with other regions
of the country, particularly the major political and economic centers. It was
reported that in the 1930s the Red River Delta contained 33 percent of the total
population of the Indochina region on only 2 percent of the region's total land
area, and that its population density of 430 people/km was nearly 13 times higher
than that of Indochina on average (Dang, 2003). In addition, the Southern climate
is favorable by natural environment while the Northern is usually affected
seriously by natural disasters and difficult weather of cultivating. In corollary,
migration toward Southern became a principal direction of the population
movements in the period, beside migration to the Red River Delta.

3.1.3 Migration in the war against US army
Following Geneva signed 1954, Vietnam was divided into two territories,
resulting movement of hundred thousands people from the South to the North.
During the same period, there was a large movement of evacuees from the North
to the South. In general, about 900,000 people are estimated to have moved from

16


the North to the South, and 100,000 people move on opposite directions (Dang,
2003)
During the war against American army, people in the North were
evacuated from urban centers to the countryside to avoid bombing dropping by
US army, and implementing economic plans in conditions of war. In this
strategy, people were encouraged to leave their native places and resettle in the
New Economic Zones (NEZs) on a permanent basis, which were set up in

Northern Highland provinces for purpose of decreasing population density in the
urban areas and increasing production of food. It is estimated that by 1975 nearly
one million people from urban areas were relocated to the NEZs .
In opposite, the South of Vietnam witnessed substantial urban growth,
reflected by significant inflows of rural people to urban areas, particularly to
major cities like Sai Gon, DaNang, CanTho. Data reported a sharp increase,
from 20% to 40% in the proportion of the urban population in the South between
1960 and 1975.
•

The main reasons behind the rapid population increase in Southern cities
were generally seen as consequences of three coordinated factors. First, there
were warfare-refugee movements from countryside where armed conflicts war
escalating violently, the number of war-induced dislocations was estimated at
some 10 million between 1965-74. Second, the Southern regime attempted to
isolate the opposition forces operating in the countryside by forcing villagers
move into the specially fortified villages known as the 'strategic hamlet'. Last,
the crowded presence of the US military and civilian personnel brought a large
labor force of service in Saigon and other big cities that war over the figures of
500,000 soldiers at the high-top period of the war. Moreover, the United States
also provided the Southern regime with an annual military aid of US$700
millions and other development aids for building infrastructure. With that such
condition, urban economy became crowded, creating business opportunities for
local.people and promoting rural migrants to the cities.
BQ GIAO Dt,JC VA DAO T,~ 0
TRUONG DH KINH TE TP.I-.ICM

THtfVI~N

17

6 I 16 );f-8


3.1.4 Migration after reunification 1975
There were three main population movement streams in the period of 1975
- 1985. At the initial stage, a large number of people who have to evacuate to
cities for avoiding warfare repatriated back to their native homelands in the
South. Besides that, the urban middle class and the officials in "old regime"
considered as the potential hostile components, ware forced entering "the reeducated camps" or New Economic Zones (NEZs) in Highland areas. Therefore,
the first migration stream in this stage reduced urban population scale. This
migration stream considered as government's attempts to deal with the pos-war
urban unemployment and to stabilize law and order in the cities in the South
Accompany with urban to rural migration above, the historical trend of the
North to the South population movement has continued as second migration
component in that time. Immediately after reunification, there was a Southward
movement of significant number of Northern army to garrison in regions such as
Central Highlands and other Southern frontier provinces. After that, the Red
River Delta residents were encouraged to move to NEZs in Central Highland of
the South and Middle regions. From 1975 until the middle 1980s, the major form .
of internal migration in Vietnam was among rural areas as resettlement programs
(Dang, Goldstein and McNally, 1997), these large-scale movements were
planned, organized and controlled by the government. Motivations for the
resettlement program included security issues (especially during the first few
years after re-unification in 1975 and following the frontier war with China in
1979), as well as economic objectives: in the North, population pressure was very
high, while in the South and in the Central Highlands population density was
much lower. These motivations were reflected in the direction of flows: North to
South, and into resettlement sites (NEZs) in the South and in the Central
Highlands.

The process of reform and economic renovation implemented in 1986 has
shifted dramatically migration movements. With more economic advantages, the
Southeast region experienced high economic growth rates and attracted the
largest proportion of migrant labors. Besides that, a large number of urban
18