An explanation for vietnams recent migration pattern based on cumulative causation theory and relative deprivation theory

UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS
HO CHI MINH CITY
VIETNAM

ERASMUS UNVERSITY ROTTERDAM
INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL STUDIES
THE NETHERLANDS

VIETNAM – THE NETHERLANDS
PROGRAMME FOR M.A IN DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS

AN EXPLANATION FOR VIETNAM’S
RECENT MIGRATION PATTERN BASED ON
CUMULATIVE CAUSATION THEORY AND
RELATIVE DEPRIVATION THEORY

BY

Vu Thu Ha

MASTER OF ARTS IN DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS

HO CHI MINH CITY, DECEMBER 2017


UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS
HO CHI MINH CITY
VIETNAM

INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL STUDIES
THE HAGUE

THE NETHERLANDS

VIETNAM - NETHERLANDS
PROGRAMME FOR M.A IN DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS

AN EXPLANATION FOR VIETNAM’S
RECENT MIGRATION PATTERN BASED ON
CUMULATIVE CAUSATION THEORY AND
RELATIVE DEPRIVATION THEORY
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS IN DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS

By

Vu Thu Ha

Academic Supervisor:
Prof. Dr. Nguyen Trong Hoai

HO CHI MINH CITY, DECEMBER 2017


DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this thesis paper entitled “An explanation for Vietnam’s
recent migration pattern based on cumulative causation theory and relative
deprivation theory” has been written by me, representing the result of my own
work, in compliance with the guidelines and disciplines of Vietnam Netherlands
Programme. The contribution of my supervisor and collaboration with others,
specified in the acknowledgement, to fulfill this research are consistent with normal
supervisory practice. This dissertation, or any substantial part of this dissertation,

has not been submitted for any previous qualifications or any other institutions.
Date: 01 December 2017
Signature: _______________

Full name: Vu Thu Ha

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It is impossible for me to finish my thesis without the guidance from my
supervisor, Prof. Dr. Nguyen Trong Hoai, knowledges provided by Vietnam
Netherlands Programme, help from my classmates and supports from my family.
First and foremost, I would like to send my special thanks to my supervisor,
Prof. Dr. Nguyen Trong Hoai, who is always ready to steer me to the right direction,
to give me useful advices when I have trouble with my research and to motivate me
to explore my ability. I am so grateful for all of his dedication and devoted attention
in every single step in my journey of conducting this research. Having a chance to
work with him is really an unforgettable experience in my life.
I would also like to thank Dr. Pham Khanh Nam, Dr. Truong Dang Thuy and
all other lectures and mentors from Vietnam Netherlands Programme for their
valuable lessons, guidance and knowledge that they shared to me throughout the
program. I appreciate all of wonderful experience and fantastic friends in class
VNP22 that I’m luckily obtained thanks to attaining this course.
Last but not least, I must express my profound gratitude to my family for
providing me unconditional supports and unceasing encouragement that I can
pursue my learning desire.
From bottom of my heart, I want to say thank you all.

ii

ABSTRACT
This paper combines cumulative causation theory and relative deprivation
theory to explain incentives and influences on decision to send migrants of a
household, concerning interaction of the household’s characteristics, especially
factors related to income, and the features of the origin community. Two subsets of
data from two successive Vietnam Household Living Standards Surveys (VHLSS)
in period from 2010 to 2014 are established and employed to avoid endogeneity in
the analysis of migration pattern in Vietnam in 2012 and 2014. By using logit
method and combination of difference-in-difference (DID) and propensity matching
score method (PSM), we find some interesting results that have never been found in
previous empirical studies for Vietnam case. First, the competitiveness competence
level of the origin province may reduce possibility of work migrants. Furthermore,
relative income status before migration event, represented by ratio of income per
capita of a household over the average income per capita in the origin province,
may positively affect the possibility of sending migrants of the household. Then,
returns from migration, could create a significantly positive effect on the relative
income status of the household at the origin via remittance channel, generating an
automatic mechanism in migration progress as expected in the cumulative causation
theory.
Keywords: migration, cumulative causation theory, relative deprivation,
remittance, relative income, PCI
JEL classification: O15, F24, D31

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1
1.1

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

1.2

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

1.3

Research objectives ................................................................................................. 6

1.4

Data and methods .................................................................................................... 7

1.5

Thesis structure ........................................................................................................ 7

II. LITERATURE REVIEWS ............................................................................................. 8
2.1

Migration theory reviews......................................................................................... 8

2.2

Relative deprivation theory ................................................................................... 15

2.3

Remittance – the link between the migrants and their origin ................................ 17

2.4

Conceptual framework .......................................................................................... 18

2.5

Empirical studies ................................................................................................... 21

III.

METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................ 26

3.1

The dataset ............................................................................................................. 26

3.2

Main applicable concepts ...................................................................................... 27

3.3

Stage one: examining determinants of migration .................................................. 29

3.3.1

Model ................................................................................................................. 29

3.3.2

Variables ............................................................................................................ 31

3.4
IV.

Stage two: testing effects of migration .................................................................. 32
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................ 35

4.1

Determinants for migration in Vietnam in 2012 and 2014 .................................... 35

4.2

Impacts of migration on income and expenditure in Vietnam in 2012 and 2014 . 50

V. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 60
5.1

Main findings ......................................................................................................... 60

5.2

Policy implication .................................................................................................. 62

5.3

Limitation of the study .......................................................................................... 63

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 64
APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................... 68
Annex 1: Descriptive statistics of explanatories in year 2010 ..................................... 68
Annex 2: Descriptive statistics of explanatories in year 2012 ..................................... 71

iv


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: A general framework of migration decision making ................................... 10
Figure 2: The conceptual framework for the migration pattern in relation with the
relative income status of a household and the origin community................... 21
Figure 3: Difference-in-Difference estimation, graphical explanation ....................... 33

v


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Logit regressions of determinants of migration in period 2010-2012 .......... 36
Table 2: Logit regressions of determinants of migration in period 2012 -2014 ......... 42
Table 3: Impact of migration on income and expenditure in 2012 ............................. 52
Table 4: Impact of migration on income and expenditure in 2014 ............................. 55

vi

ABBREVIATION
DID

Difference-in-Difference

PCI

Provincial Competitive Index

PSM

Propensity Matching Score

US or USA

The United States of America

VHLSS

Vietnam Household Living Standards Survey

VMS

Vietnam Migration Survey

VNDHS

Viet Nam Demographic and Health Survey

VNMHS

Viet Nam Migration and Health Survey

WTO

World Trade Organization

vii


I. INTRODUCTION
1.1

Problem statement

According to Migration Policy Institute (MPI), an independent, non-partisan,
non-profit think tank of specialists and analysts on migration field, the year 2016 is
a remarkable one for the migration worldwide. Notably, the upheavals in the
political and economic situation of powerful nations and affiliates lead to a dramatic
crisis in movement of capital and labor around the world. For example, the
European migrant crisis began in 2015 with significantly increase of immigrants
and refugees arrived in the European Union. As stated by The New York Times,
there are over 123,000 migrants landed in Greece in the two first months of 2016,
which is more than twenty times greater in comparison with the same period of
2015. This fact challenges authorizes and policy-makers in the European Union to
take prompt actions and provide relevant policy to better manage immigration
issues and protect the living standard of native people. In the United States of
America, one of the most powerful country in the world, the new president, Donald

Trump, takes office, pledging a fasten immigration policy in the US that including a
crackdown on illegal immigration, construction of border walls, reductions in
refugee and immigrant admissions, and greater screening of newcomers. All of
these facts and actions in the last recent years illustrate for the increasing
importance meaning of migration problem in association with the socio-economic
situation.
The report of the World Trade Organization (WTO, 2008) notices the first
explosion of migration happened in the 1950s as the consequence of the World
Wars, then gradually increasing before booming in the latter half of the 20th century.
Castles, De Haas, and Miller (2013) describe the general patterns of International
population movements in the modern world as globalization of migration relating to
the diversification of sending countries and the spread in spectrums of economic,
social and cultural background; having changes in the direction of dominant

1


migration flows overtime; and growing the politicization of migration with more
and more intervention from the politics relationships.
As migration becomes an increasing importance factor in the development
process, investigation on the incentives and influences of migration to human
beings is necessary. Many researchers are attracted to find its characteristics, origin,
mechanism and impacts (Harris & Todaro, 1970; Katz & Stark, 1986; Lee, 1966;
Lewis, 1954; Ranis & Fei, 1961; Ravenstein, 1889; Sjaastad, 1962; Stark, 1984,
1991; Stark & Levhari, 1982; Stark & Taylor, 1989; L. Taylor, 1986; Todaro,
1969). Generally, there are three main schools of theory on migration, called macrolevel, micro-level and meso-level regarding different perspectives of views
(Hagen‐Zanker, 2008). A lot of empirical studies on determinants and effects of
migration has been conducted, especially regarding patterns in the two biggest
countries in the world including the USA (Douglas S Massey et al., 1993; Stark &
Taylor, 1989) and China (Sicular, Ximing, Gustafsson, & Shi, 2007; Zang, 1998;

Zhao, 1999; Zhu, 2002). Although each school of theory has specific perspective of
views on migration, their common objectives are revealing the determinants and
effects of this phenomenon. While classical theories generally concentrate on the
economic viewpoint, the modern theories expand the scope of research to other
social aspects, including networks, migration institutions and relative deprivation
(Hagen‐Zanker, 2008).
In Vietnam, the flows of migration have been dramatically increased through
times, especially since the country became independence and adopted renovation
policies in the 1980s. As reported in The World Bank data from 1960 to 2015, the
number of Vietnamese people migrated internationally in 1975 was about 4,661
individuals, starting to rocket nearly ten times in 1980, reducing slightly in the late
of the 80s before rising rapidly to reach the volume of 72,793 international migrants
in 2015 . Interestingly, in terms of fraction of international migration in the total
population, the World Bank data presents the migration pattern in Vietnam having
nearly similar upward trend as in China; but, at higher level of about 0.01 to 0.03

2


percentage points. These facts suggest for rousingly remarkable influences of
international migration to the socio-economic circumstance in Vietnam.
Apart from international migration, the phenomenon of internal migration in
Vietnam in recent years is also noticeable.

According to Vietnam Labor and

Employment Survey conducted by the General Statistics Office of Vietnam (GSO),
the amount of internal migrants aged 15 and over has exceeded 1 million in 2015
and 2016, about 1.245 million and 1.037 million or 1.8% and 1.5% of the
population respectively, much higher than the volume in the previous period 2012 2014 with approximately 832 thousands people aged 15 and over changed their

place of residence or 1.2% of the whole population.
1.2

Research questions

Despite of description by the World Bank as a dynamic country in East Asia
region with strong economic growth, remarkable mitigation of poverty and other
achievements in social improvements, Vietnam is facing with variety of difficulties
and challenges of an emerging country, especially fragility of poverty alleviation
and limitations in labor productivity. Apart from application of advanced production
models in different scales, the facts and figures on rising of migrants in all over
Vietnam suggest that migration has been selected by the authorities, many people
and households with the expectation of enhancing their income and living
standards.
In the 1970s and 1980s, with the aims of exploring new opportunities of
cultivation and reallocating population across the country, Vietnamese government
carried out migration policies to send a remarkable number of Red River Delta
inhabitants up to Northern areas or downward to the Mekong River Delta and
Central Highlands, generating motivation for movement wave in Vietnam (Cu,
2005). Cu (2005) indicates that the government-planned migration not only brings
many noticeable enhancement for migrants and their family in terms of
employment, income and housing but also creates remarkable changing in economic

3


structure in local and entire of Vietnam. As a consequence, attraction of fruitful
outcomes from migration encourages other residents to participate into this trend,
creating internal migration boom in many provinces in Vietnam. After that, at the
beginning years of 21st century, when Vietnam having higher integration with other

countries and areas around the world via opening the economy, actively
participating in regional and international organizations, Vietnamese authorities
continuingly employ advantage in human resource of the country by promoting
international migration. In particular, Vietnam rapidly becomes a major source of
unskilled workers for high-income East Asian countries, including Japan, Korea,
Taiwan and Malaysia (Ishizuka, 2013). In 2009, a project supporting poor districts
in promotion of labor export for purpose of mitigating poverty sustainably in phase
of 2009 - 2020 is approved by the Prime Minister. The main target of this project is
to send about 120,000 workers from 61 districts abroad for working; besides, poor
and ethnic minority workers is fully funded. This fact implies high expectation of
Vietnamese policy makers for outcomes of migration to improve living standards of
Vietnamese people.
Migration, in general and specifically in Vietnam, may have influences on
variety of aspects at different levels, including well-being of migrants and their
family and societies at the origin and the destination, in both positive and negative
ways (Cu, 2005; Dang, Tacoli, & Hoang, 2003; Ishizuka, 2013). On the one hand, a
huge number of unemployed and poor people, particularly in rural or less developed
regions, could get jobs with better earnings via migration. Simultaneously, labor
force in urban and more developed regions is supplemented, which plays as an
additional motivation for economic development in these areas. Hence, the
economic structure that contains resources and industries in both urban and rural
areas could be shifted towards more specialized, modernized and more efficient.
Additionally, thanks to migrants, there are more chances to exchange the cultures of
the origin and the destination, triggering diversity and enrichment in cultures.
However, there is existence of potentially negative impacts on movement of people.

4


First, migration could be a reason for lacks of rural labors in particular occasions,

such as on harvest, causing temporary imbalance and changes in allocation of labor
resource within the family, which may have significant effects on agriculture,
traditional occupations and other activities in the rural area. Second, the rapid
increase of immigrants in big cities, such as Ha Noi, Ho Chi Minh City or Binh
Duong, could trigger high pressures in terms of providing social services at the
destination, especially for accommodation and health services. Furthermore, the
development of rural-to-urban migration may lead to pollution, overcrowded and
traffic jams at the destination. Thus, the flow of migration may increase pressure on
the authorities concerning management of social order and assurance of social
welfares.
Therefore, along with the rapid development of migration phenomenon, many
researchers pay attention into investigation of determinants and influence of
migration in Vietnam (Coxhead, Nguyen, & Vu, 2015; Dang, 1999, 2001; Dang,
Goldstein, & McNally, 1997; Dang & Nguyen, 2006; Dang et al., 2003; Fukase,
2014; T. P. Nguyen, Tran, Nguyen, & Oostendorp, 2008). However, most of these
studies concentrate in the receiving place rather than in the sending regions.
Besides, previous determinants of migration in Vietnam are mainly defined directly
in absolute value, instead of relative comparison. Furthermore, the socioeconomic
circumstance changes very often, data need to be updated. Therefore, a fresher look
is needed to shed a new light on the picture of migration in Vietnam, concerning the
migration decision in not only characteristics of migrants but also their relations
with the mutual interests of the household as well as the linkages of the household
sending emigrants and the surrounding circumstance at the origin.
Furthermore, circumstance of the neighborhood has great influences on their
members as the control environment for all the group members (Wilson, 2012). In
the book The truly disadvantaged (Wilson, 2012), the vicious cycle of poor
education, high unemployment and low income is assumed to exist in the family,
the school and the community. Residents in the neighborhoods having dominant of

5

joblessness will suffer a social insolation which blocks them out of the job network.
As the consequence, they have less chance to get a good job or gain high salary, the
education and other social welfare will seldom receive sufficient attention and
investment. Therefore, hardly do the awareness, linguistic and work related skills of
people in these communities as good as in places with high level of education and
income. Moreover, the socioeconomic situation itself generates depressed attitude
for people and disincentives them to escape from the hardship. Neighborhood
effects is also revealed in terms of game theory (Akerlof, 1997) and consumption
externalities, referred as phenomenon “keeping up with Jonese” or jealousy (Dupor
& Liu, 2003). Hence, it is possible that decision to send migrants of household may
be significantly affected by their position in their commune, especially concerning
wealthy or living standards.
Derived from these concerns, two questions are arousing up for Vietnam
situation:
 Is there any relationship between the movement decision of household
and their relative income status at the origin community as in the
hypothesis of relative deprivation?
 Do the returns from migration create reversed effects on the relative
income status in the reference group as expected in the cumulative
causation theory?
1.3
Research objectives
The main objectives of this research are to expand investigation on the
possible determinants of migration patterns in Vietnam, in terms of relative income
with the origin community, and then to determine the feedback of movement action
to that community. In this paper, migration is expected to be motivated by the
relative deprivation in income, after that operates as a self-feeding process in
accordance with the cumulative causation theory of migration.

6


This research aims to contribute an empirical study in literatures of cumulative
causation theory on migration and relative deprivation theory. The potential results
of the research are expected to provide some helpful information to policy maker in
Vietnam and other emerging countries dealing with increasingly complicated
migration issues.
1.4
Data and methods
The data collected in Vietnam Household Living Standard Survey (VHLSS)
from more than 9000 households all around Vietnam in year 2010, 2012 and 2014
will be employed in quantitative assessments. Because different purposes may have
different motivation and actions, in order to specifically response for the former
question, dummy variables for existence of work, non-work and general migrants in
household will play as dependent variables in three different logit regressions. The
explanatories will contain general characteristics of the household, the commune,
the sending province and the relative income per capita of household in comparison
with the average income per capita of the sending province, as the origin
community.

Subsequently, the answer for the latter query will be found by

combined application of the propensity matching score (PSM) technique and the
difference-in-differences (DID) approach, that comparing the relative income status
of the two households which have almost similar features, except from migration
decision.
1.5

Thesis structure

The remaining of this paper would like to be organized as following. After
general introduction on the research problem in the first section, the second section
provides reviews on basic theories and previously outstanding empirical studies. In
Section 3, data descriptions and applicable methodology are demonstrated. Next,
the representation of the results and discussion are coming in Section 4. The final
section concludes the paper by providing the overall summary, some policy
implications and suggestions for further researches.

7


II. LITERATURE REVIEWS
This paper approaches to migration field through two streams of literature: one
is the cumulative causation migration theory and the other is the relative deprivation
theory, in combination with the impact mechanism of migration via remittance. The
main ideas of these schools of theory will be summarized below. However, rather
than mechanically employing the theoretical ideas to Vietnamese case, I suppose to
use these perspectives as guidelines to generate and test hypotheses to explain
recent migration pattern in Vietnam.
2.1

Migration theory reviews

With the aim of having deeper look on migration phenomenon, some reviews
on theoretical literature of migration is needed.
From different perspectives of views as well as looking at different aspects of
migration, there is variety of definitions for this terminology. The Oxford dictionary
defines “migration” as “Movement of people to a new area or country in order to

find work or better living conditions”. With National Geographic Organization, the
human migration is the movement in accordance with the purpose of permanent,
semi-permanent or seasonal residence. Migrant can be voluntary or be forced to
move. In other words, more specific in socio-economic area, the term “migrant” is
referred to “person who is to be engaged, is engaged or has been engaged in a
remunerated activity in a State of which he or she is not a national” in the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of Migrants (1998). Through different
expressions, “migration”, generally, can be understood as an action of people to
move from one place to another with the aims of working or residence. Due to this
movement changes the living circumstance of people, it is expected to have
influences on the human life in various aspects.
The early dawn of the migration theory starts with Sir Ernest George
Ravenstein (1889). The first theoretical perception on relationship between distance
and propensity to move, which is also known as “seven laws of migration”, is

8


considered as the empirical rules of thumb on migration literature. These laws are
general conclusions based on his observations in the 19th century; however, most of
them still have specifically significant meaning in modern society. The laws of
migration state that (1) the majority prefers migration in short distances than long
distance and towards larger centers; thus, (2) displacement and development process
shall occur in both sending and destination regions; (3) the process of dispersion
and absorption relate to each other; (4) migration chain develops overtime; (5) the
movement could exit when having balance in commerce and industry; (6) urban
residents have less motivation to migrate than rural people; and (7) so do the
females. Along with the explosion of migration in the 1950s, the vast of economic
migration theories has been developed to explain incentives of migration; analyze
and predict effects of this phenomenon to human being.

In general, the theories of migration can be divided into three main schools,
including macro-level, micro-level and meso-level. While in macro-level, the
migrant is considered in terms of interaction between aggregate demand and supply
of labor; micro-level theories explain migration as an individual decision. The
meso-level is connection between the two other schools, where it is believed that
migration decisions are highly affected by the living context.
Hagen‐Zanker (2008) visualizes the framework of migration decision making.
Figure 1 briefly shows possible causes and effects of migration; in which the
causing factors are classified into three levels from micro to meso and macro. The
micro level factors, which are able to be incentives of migration decision, consist of
individual and household’s characteristics, including demographic information,
factors related to value such as income and risks, and differences in needs of power
(structural tensions) and prestige (nominal tensions). On the macro level, migration
is considered as a consequence of interaction between demand and supply for labor
of the nation, effects of political institutions such as migration policies and laws, or
development of integration and globalization which may change industrial and
employment prospects world-wide. Regarding meso-level, decision of migration is

9


more likely to be motivated by socio-economic context, for example, existence of
migration networks, or relative deprivation or institution promoting migration in the
origin community. Furthermore, there are many effects of migration which may aslo
send feedback to selection of future migrants. For illustration, remittance as a main
outcome of migration, may improve well-being of receivers at the origin and better
finance for costs of further movements. On the other point of view, experience of
previous migrants may be lively evidence for migrant institutions, social capital and
networks to expand their influences. Additionally, cumulative and circular migration

refers to the self-feeding process of migration over time once it could commence.
These above determinants will be discussed in more details in the following
literature reviews of migration theories.
Figure 1: A general framework of migration decision making

Source: Hagen‐Zanker (2008)
 Macro - theories of migration
At first, the macro migration models consider migration decisions in relation
with “pull” and “push” factors. These factors are the economic characteristics at the
destination and original place, respectively, which are supposed to create incentives

10


to migrate of people. The neoclassical macro migration theory (Harris & Todaro,
1970; Lewis, 1954; Ranis & Fei, 1961) is developed from trade theory, combined
with the geographical discrepancy in the supply and demand of labor. The dual
labor market theory (Piore, 1979) defines migration as the consequence of a pull
factor in receiving countries, called structural labor demand. This theory concerns to
the social – political - cultural structures at the destination, where people work not
only for income but also for social status and prestige. Based on these models, the
direction of migration can be determined; however, the weakest point of this model
stays on its assumption of the equilibrium point of wages, which cannot be found in
reality, leading to the consequence that hardly can the volume of migration be
predicted.
On another perspective of view, Wallerstein (1974) builds up the world
systems theory which argues that international migration goes along with the
political and economic globalization. Under the influence of trade liberalization, the
movement of capital and natural resources generates flows of migrations (Massey,
1989). Linked with the connection between countries, Portes, Walton, and Labor

(1981) indicate that international migration is highly possible between past colonial
countries and their former colonies because of the early connection in cultural,
linguistic and so on.
Basically, the above theories basically analyze contextual structures of
aggregate level to explain the event of migration in one point of time. However,
there are arguments that migration should be considered as a dynamic process
(Boyd, 1989; Fawcett, 1989). In order to further support for this point of view, the
concept of migration is narrow from global level in system theory into migrant
networks in the network theory (Fawcett, 1989; Douglas S. Massey, 1990; L.
Taylor, 1986).
In general, macro-level theories of migration focus on relation and interaction
of countries more than people to identify the direction and development of

11


migration. Nevertheless, since migration is an action of human, it would be
determined by decision making mechanism concerning the human behavior in
connection with their context situation. Thus, the individual factors and interaction
of individual with intermediate structure such as family, community are likely a
remarkable problem of the macro theories on migration, leading to development of
micro - and meso - level literature.
 Micro - theories of migration
Besides, a school of theory paralleled with the macro theory of migration is
microeconomic model of individual decision making (Lee, 1966; Sjaastad, 1962;
Todaro, 1969). In this scheme, migration is considered as a personally rational
choice after assessment of costs and benefits related to this decision. Lee (1966) is a
pioneer in formulation of a push-pull framework, evaluating positive and negative
factors on migration at both the supply and demand side of migration. The
neoclassical micro-level treated migration as a form on investment in human

capital. People will move to where they can be most productive; however, in order
to capture the higher earnings, they are supposed to involve in some investments,
such as costs of traveling, effort and opportunity cost in learning new language,
getting acquaintance with new culture and applying for a new job (Douglas S
Massey et al., 1993). There are many variations of model can be applied in costbenefit calculation of this approach, for example, probability of legally acceptance
in the area of destination, probability of employment at the origin and the
destination, possible earnings in the destination and the cost of movement. If the
total benefit is expected to dominate the total cost of moving, then the migration
decision will be taken into action, except from other preferences.
Notwithstanding the human capital approach is useful in explanation of
migration decision making behavior of people, it is hard to examine this method. In
fact, not every people exactly show their rationality, and barely does such kind of
decision have effects on only the actor, but other members in their family or

12


community. The structural influencing factors are mentioned as external factors;
thus, the interaction between structural opportunities and individual is still ignored.
 Meso – theories of migration
The latest school of migration literature that appears as a bridge connecting the
two other strands is meso–level theory. Despite having different branches, mesolevel theory generally determines migration as an interpersonal or inter-group
decision, and the basic assumption of this scheme is continuing relationship
between potential migration group and other social structures (Schiller & Faist,
2010).
After some milestones in migration perception of family decision of Sandell
(1977) and Mincer (1978), a new stage of migration theory begins, called “The New
Economics of Labor Migration” (NELM). The outstanding features of the new
approach are not only at the decision-makers but also a broader view of migration
effects. The family may not migrate together; but each member’s movement

decision should be considered for the wellbeing of the family as a whole. The
attribute of migration action are supposed not only to maximize expected income or
social status; but also to minimize risks and to loosen restrictions related to market
failures of capital markets, insurances or governmental programs (Katz & Stark,
1986; Stark, 1984, 1991; Stark & Levhari, 1982; Stark & Taylor, 1989; L. Taylor,
1986).
This approach is likely a remarkable advance in migration theory. J. E. Taylor
and Fletcher (2001) declare that the NELM is the only migration theory that explicit
the connection between migration and impact of migration via remittance.
Moreover, this approach investigates both absolute income of household and
relative income in comparison with a reference group to reveal how implicit social
status incentives migration (Stark, 1991; Stark & Taylor, 1989). According to the
NELM, the motivation and influence of migration imply the possible effects of

13


government policies and economic changes concerning income distribution on the
relative deprivation of household income.
Afterwards, with the increasing development of network theories and
expansion of the NELM, another school of migration theory has been formulated
and improved to interpret the internal dynamics of migration, called cumulative
causation. Cumulative causation refers to the interaction process between individual
behavior and community structure that migration may contribute to alteration of the
social context, then likely facilitating the additional movement over time (Douglas
S. Massey, 1990; Stark & Taylor, 1989; Stark, Taylor, & Yitzhaki, 1986; J. E.
Taylor, 1992).
One of the most famous researchers, having crucial contributions in
foundation of cumulative causation migration theory, is Douglas S. Massey who
explains the patterns of migration in connection with the networks which links

people and household with larger structures; then creates increasing effects over
space and time (Douglas S. Massey, 1990). Migration is supposed to be facilitated
via two main manners. First, the risks and costs of migration would be lower for
potential migrants thanks to the network connections formed after the pioneer
movement. Second, migration would be considered as a household strategy to
increase the household’s absolute income by receiving remittance; to diversify risks
as adding one more source of income; and furthermore, improve their socioeconomic position in comparison with the reference group. The fact of the U.S
immigration from Mexico is employed as empirical evidence for his arguments.
After that, Douglas S Massey et al. (1993) point out six socio-economic factors that
potentially affected by migration, including: (1) the distribution of income; (2) the
distribution of land; (3) the organization of agriculture production; (4) culture; (5)
the regional distribution of human capital; regional distribution of human capital;
and (6) the social labeling.

14


Adding up all the ideas of meso-theories on migration, especially the
cumulative causation, there are some noticeable points on migration as following.
First, migration should be considered as a decision a group sharing the common
costs and benefits, for example a family, although that action may not be performed
by all the members. Second, migration is not only a way to improve absolute
income but also plays as insurance strategy for household to mitigate the
dependence of the household on the socio-economic context at the origin. Third, the
social structure in the sending community may create incentives to migrate and
migration can alter the context of that community afterwards, causing the expansion
of migration in momentum. In particular, the distribution of income of the origin
could generate motivation for emigrants before their movement sends feedback to
change features related to income at the origin, including local consumption, local
production, living standards and social label.

As this branch of theory is established later than the NELM as well as other
theory in micro- or macro-level, its development is still as not completely as the
others. For example, the limits of cumulative causation have been questioned
concerning in demographic characteristics of different structural contexts. The
function of principal mechanisms is argued only having effects in small cities, rural
town and villages, but not in large urban areas of Mexico (Fussell & Massey, 2004).
Overall, there are not many empirical tests conducted in association with this
literature, especially in an emerging country like Vietnam, hence, this research will
employ cumulative causation theory as theoretical frame to investigate the
relationship between relative income of household and migration in Vietnam.
2.2

Relative deprivation theory

It is a common saying that the grass is always greener on the other side of the
fence. To analyze different behaviors of people in conjunction with relative income
in a reference group, the theory of relative deprivation should be mentioned. This
theory concerns the feelings or experiences of an entity under comparison the

15


situation between that entity and the rest of society. Relative deprivation may refer
to the dissatisfaction of an individual when being deprived of something that he
believes of his entitlement himself.
One of the first formal definitions of the term “relative deprivation” is
launched out by a British historical sociologist named Garry Runciman. Runciman
(1966) describes four preconditions for an individual A to feel relatively deprived of
an object X as following:
(i)

Person A does not have X;

(ii)

He sees some other persons (possibly himself at some other points of

time as having X (whether or not that is or will be in fact the case);
(iii)

He wants X; and

(iv)

He believes that it is feasible to obtain X in reality.

It is notable that the feeling of deprivation comes from conditions (i) and (iii),
while the relativity of the concept is presented by the others.
Supposed that there are two households having the same level of absolute
income but they are living in two different villages. One village is more prosperous
than the other. Hence, in consideration of the village’s income distribution, the
household in the richer village is supposed to have lower rank than its counterpart.
If household utility is a function of not only absolute income by also income
position compared to the other households in the community. According to the
theory of relative deprivation, this household is more likely to have a stronger
motivation to improve their position status than the other in order to increase their
level of relative satisfaction. Assuming that migration is an effective mean to
enhance the family’s income, the possibility that the former commits to migration
should be higher than that of the latter, ceteris paribus.
The concept of relative deprivation has been employed into the cumulative

causation migration theory to explain the incentives of international migration
decision by Stark and Taylor (1989). Based on data of Mexico-to-US migration,
Stark and Taylor (1989) find evidence for a significant role of relative deprivation

16