Q.2 Discuss Migration as a Social Phenomenon.

Migration is a very complex phenomena in the perspective of socio-

cultural and economic life. Human migration is the movement of people
from one country to another for the purpose of taking up permanent or semi-
permanent residence, usually across a political boundary. For thousands of
years people have migrate to search for food, survive conquer frontiers,
colonize new territories, escape from war zone or political authorities and look
for new and more rewarding and existing opportunities. People can either
choose to move or voluntary migration and be forced to move or
involuntary migration. According to a widely used definition, migrants are
persons who have been outside their country of birth or citizenship for a
long period of time and stay there for different reasons. On the migrant side,
one can usefully distinguish three main groups: economic, forced and
family migrants, which is a distinction based on the motivations for
leaving one’s country of origin.
Migration: An engine for social change
The movement of people into societies that offer a better way of life is a more
powerful driver of cultural evolution than conflict and conquest.
Migration has a profound effect on how societies evolve culturally because it is
selective. People move to societies that provide a more attractive way of life
and, all other things being equal, this process spreads ideas and institutions
that promote economic efficiency, social order and equality.
Immigration is not a modern phenomenon. The growth of ancient empires
seems to have owed much to the assimilation of border peoples. Conquering
elites, such as the Mongols in China, the Mughals in India and the Goths in
Rome, largely adapted to their highly successful host culture rather than the
other way around. In every case, these durable systems had institutions — the
Confucian merit-based bureaucracy, the Hindu system of self-governing castes,
Roman law — that endure today in one form or another. These examples
support the idea that societies that attract immigrants tend to have ideas
and institutions that cause them to be richer, less violent and less exploitative
than the societies that supply them.
Confucian humanism, with its concern for good government, replaced the
predatory and quarrelsome landed elite as the backbone of Chinese society.
Hindu tolerance and productive organization of cultural diversity led to one of
the world’s wealthiest societies in medieval times. Medieval Islam attracted
converts spanning from North Africa to southeast Asia because it supported
effective statecraft, intellectual advancement and trade on a vast scale.
Societies that achieve more order and economic efficiency will grow even if
they begin by conquest, because people are attracted to join them. Alexander
the Great and Genghis Khan were successful conquerors, but they made a less
durable impact on the world than, say, Mohammed, Buddha, Christ and the
institution builders they inspired such as Constantine and the Umayyad caliphs.
The government envisioned by Confucius, and implemented by Han Dynasty
emperors centuries after his death, was the engine of assimilation for the
peoples of south China. US revolutionaries and British Commonwealth
reformers built societies that have proven highly attractive to incomers.
Social Integration and Dilemmas of Social Identity of Migrants
Migration involves a series of events that can be highly traumatizing of identity
and problems of integration. The process involves uprooting, being separated
from traditional values, being placed in new social and cultural different
situations of hosted countries. So for many migrants, social integration process
is not quite easy. Most of the time integration brings out social and cultural
identities problems. Resistance to migrants participation in society results
from language problems and culturally defined behavior that often
reinforce stereotypes and prejudices. This situation, in turn, ensues
many challenges in the social identity and integration problems of
migrants life in hosted countries.
The concept ‘integration’ is used form social researches in migration field
to refer to the degree of involvement of migrants, and their families, in the
social, cultural political and economic life of the host country. Integration
emphasizes respect for and incorporation of differences and the need for
mutual adaptation.
At the same time, integration does not mean that emigrants must sever ties to
their countries of birth nor abandon their cultures, traditions, values, and
identities. For most newcomers, the initial focus upon arrival will be on
adoption to the host society social life. But sometimes facing the social and
economic realities pose formidable barriers to integration of many migrant.
For the members of hosted countries they need to accept diversity of
migrants for helping social solidarity and cohesion of society.
So integration is a process that takes time and not all time is successful for
both migrants and hosted societies too. Integration may be defined as a
two-way process where new migrants and the hosted societies members
have responsibility for wellbeing and social cohesion of society.
Social impacts on the origin country
At its best, migration can be a rewarding experience that is made in the
interest of the household welfare, but in most cases moving to another
country and being separated from one’s immediate family takes place at
considerable emotional cost. Especially temporary circular migration
increases the risk for family breakdown, fragmentation of social networks
and psychosocial stress. The emotional impact is not just limited to the
migrants themselves, but also to the family left behind. Especially in poorer
households where the whole family cannot afford to emigrate together,
they emigrate one member at a time resulting in eroded family structures
and relationships. The longer the separation between the migrating
parents and their children, the more children lose parents’ reference in
the management of the household, their authority and their role as
providers of love and material care.
Parents are gradually replaced by other family members, or the children
take upon themselves the task of parenting. The feelings of rejection,
abandonment and loss follow the children left behind, and cannot
be compensated by the material gifts and remittances sent from abroad. To
some extent the recent technological advances in terms of e-mail and
affordable telephone calls might allow the transnational families to form
and foster social ties even at a distance.
Separation from the parents has also long-term consequences in all aspects of
the children’s lives. Evidence from Mexico points to the fact that the offspring
from migrant families have lower educational attainment than other
children, as the boys of the migrants are more likely to opt for migration
themselves (implying decreasing returns to education) while the domestic
workload of the daughters increase.
Adolescents left behind are also commonly overrepresented in adapting risky
behavior, and absence of mothers has been found to be associated with
the involvement of children with violence: 80 percent of children in conflict
with the law in Jamaica had their mothers absent, while this was the case
for only 30 percent of other children.
On the other hand, recent evidence suggests that migration could also
strengthen social networks as the higher income from remittances reduces the
cost for the migrant-sending household to participate in these networks.
This closer inter-family collaboration can, to some extent, remedy the absence
of within-family cohesion and safety nets. Even though migration is usually
a voluntary and planned choice of the individual, the reality might
turn out to be very different from the original expectations. Too often
the intended aspirations of the migrants do not materialize but many are
trapped in trafficking.
Social impacts on the destination countries.
Apart from the increased competition at the labor markets, increasing inflows
of migrants impose an integration challenge in all areas of social life. In
many of the developing countries, however, policies to manage immigration
are lacking while control of the same is failing to curtain the inflow of
migrants due to scarce resources, weak administrative capacity, and porous
borders. Some of the cross-border migration is often widely accepted, but
sometimes immigrants even from neighboring countries are treated as
unwanted foreigners.
When the economy is already under pressure, failure of integration has
sometimes led to massive expulsions of migrants mostly in the South.
The Nigerian Government, for instance, expelled over 2 million immigrants
mainly from Ghana in 1983 due to a domestic economic crisis. More
recent examples of forced repatriation can be found both in the North as
well as in the South: the United States deported more than 350,000
immigrants and South Africa 300,000 in 2008 alone (UNDP 2009).
The challenge of integration is most prominent in urban areas. Most internal as
well as international migrants end up in the cities of developing countries
because of employment opportunities with many working in the informal
sector of business, transport, crafts and services. If the excess supply of
labor is combined with poor ability of the local authorities to manage
immigration, the result is commonly increased disparities and expansion of
slum areas in the cities.
Forced migration can also contribute to urbanization. War, environmental
degradation, and economic crisis lead to large population movements
from rural areas into cities where people take refuge. In Dhaka, Bangladesh,
60,000 people were forcibly cleared from the slums in early 2007; in
Jakarta, Indonesia, migrants are required to show proof of employment
and housing to enter the city (UNDP 2009).
Migration is only a part of the urbanization challenge, but the interaction
between migration and rapid urbanization is likely to be important for
policy in the destination countries in the South.