Trends and Patterns of Internal Migration in India, 1971-2001

R.Lusome* and R.B.Bhagat**

Abstract:

Internal migration is now recognized as an important factor in influencing social and

economic development, especially in developing countries. Indian censuses record that in

2001, 309 million persons were migrants based on place of last residence, which

constitute about 30% of the total population of the country. This is nearly double the

number of internal migrants as recorded in the census of 1971 (159 million). This

suggests that socio-economic changes in the last three decades have greatly affected the

mobility of the population. This paper attempts to provide the trends and patterns of

internal migration during 1971-2001 on the basis of census data for that period. Findings

show that the composition of internal migration has changed over the years. Moreover, it

is observed that the growth of internal migrants differs by sex as well as the streams of

migration and the mobility of Indian population has significantly increased during the

1990s.

*
Research Scholar, International Institute for Population Sciences, Mumbai.
**
Professor, Department of Migration and Urban Studies, IIPS, Mumbai.

Paper presented at the Annual Conference of Indian Association for the Study of Population (IASP) during 7-9
June, 2006, Thiruvananthapuram.
Introduction

Migration has become a universal phenomenon in modern times. Due to the expansion of
transport and communication, it has become a part of worldwide process of urbanization and
industrialization. In most countries, it has been observed that industrialization and economic
development has been accompanied by large-scale movements of people from villages to
towns, from towns to other towns and from one country to another country.
From the demographic point of view, migration is one of the three basic components of
population growth of any area, the other being fertility and mortality. But whereas both
fertility and mortality operate within the biological framework, migration does not. It
influences size, composition and distribution of population. More importantly, migration
influences the social, political and economic life of the people.
Indian constitution provides basic freedom to move to any part of the country, right to reside
and earn livelihood of their choice. Thus, migrants are not required to register either at the
place of origin or at the place of destination. A number of economic, social, cultural and
political factors play an important role in the decision to move. The effects of these factors
vary over time and place.
Analysis of migration pattern is important to understand the changes taking place in the
people’s movement within the country. It is most volatile component of population growth
and most sensitive to economic, political and cultural factors (Singh, 1998).
Proper understanding of the patterns of migration would help in the estimation of future
population redistribution. The reliability and dependability of these estimates depend much on
the consideration of all the temporal factors of birth, death and internal migration on which
population grows in its finest precision (Chakravarty, 1997).
During the days when there is a lot of economic and industrial development in various parts
of the country and when movement of the population has intensified, emphasis should be
given to further understanding and study of the trends and patterns of migration.
Several studies (Bose, 1977; Nair and Narain, 1985; Premi, 1990; and Singh, 1998;
Zachariah, 1963, 1964) found that volume of interstate migration in India was low but
asserted the fact that about one third of India’s population is enumerated outside their place of
birth indicating the importance of migration as a major demographic process in India.
Moreover, when regional fertility and mortality differentials decline, migration becomes the
foremost component influencing the redistribution of population (Beck, 1985).
Definition of Migration
Migration is defined as a move from one migration defining area to another, usually crossing
administrative boundaries made during a given migration interval and involving a change of
residence (UN 1993). The change in residence can take place either permanent or semi-
permanent or temporary basis (Premi, 1990). Internal migration involves a change of
residence within national borders (Dang 2005). Until 1951, district was the migration defining
area (MDA), implying that a person was considered a migrant in India only if he or she has
changed residence from the district of birth to another district or a state. Since 1961, data on
migration have been collected by considering each revenue village or urban settlement as a
separate unit. A person is considered as a migrant if birthplace is different from place of
enumeration.
In 1971 census, an additional question on place of last residence was introduced to collect
migration data. Since then, census provides data on migrants based on place of birth (POB)
and place of last residence (POLR). If the place of birth or place of last residence is different
from the place of enumeration, a person is defined as a migrant. On the other hand, if the
place of birth and place of enumeration is the same, the person is a non-migrant (Bhagat,
2005).
Since 1961 census, the duration of residence has been ascertained to provide data on timing of
movement. The duration data are published as less than one year, 1-4 years, and 5-9 years, 10-
19 years and 20 and above years. Migrants of all durations are defined as lifetime migrants
because the time of their move is not known. They are those who came to the place of
enumeration at any point during their lives and have been living there ever since, whether this
happened just a week before the census or a few decades ago (Premi, 1990). Intercensal
migrants are the migrants who have migrated within the duration of 0-9 years.
Migration can be measured either as events or transitions. The former are normally associated
with population registers, which record individual moves while the latter generally derived
from censuses compare place of residence at two points in time. A recent survey shows that
census is the largest source of information on internal migration at the cross-country level. A
study shows that 138 countries collected information on internal migration in their censuses
compared to 35 through registers and 22 from surveys (Bell, 2003).
In India, information on migration has been collected in a number of large scale and localized
sample surveys. Yet the population census has remained the most important source of
migration data.
The paper uses the place of last residence data from the census of 1971 to 2001 and attempts
to bring out the trends and patterns of internal migration in India.
Internal Migration in India
Table 1 gives the absolute figure (in million) of lifetime migrants and intercensal migrants
based on the place of last residence criterion. In 1971 census, 160 million comprising of 50
million males and 110 million females, were termed migrants on the basis of place of last
residence. This constitutes 30.6 per cent of the total population of the country.

Table 1: Internal migrants by sex, India 1971-2001

Lifetime Migrants (in million) Percentage of migrants
Year Persons Males Females Persons Males Females
1971 159.6 49.6 110.0 30.6 19.0 43.1
1981 201.6 59.2 142.4 30.3 17.6 43.9
1991 225.9 61.1 164.8 27.4 14.6 41.2
2001 309.4 90.7 218.7 30.6 17.5 44.6

In term of total volume of migration, the figure has increased to 201 million in 1981, 226
million in 1991 and 309 million in 2001. The percentages of migrants to total population
however declined to 30.3 per cent in 1981 and further to 27.4 per cent in 1991. It has however
increased to 30.6 per cent in 2001. Sex wise differences are very prominent in Indian
migration data. It has been observed that majority of migrants are females.
Table 2 shows the growth of migrants among lifetime migrants and intercensal migrants. It is
evident that there is a steep increase in the growth of migrants in 2001 with males achieving
about 50 per cent increase over that of 1991 figure.

Table 2: Growth of Internal Migrants by sex, India 1971-2001.

Lifetime Migrants (%) Intercensal Migrants (%)
Year Persons Males Females Persons Males Females
1971-81 26.30 19.43 29.40 18.77 13.74 22.02
1981-91 12.04 3.21 15.72 -0.01 -12.34 7.42
1991-01 36.96 48.33 32.75 20.52 21.85 19.87
1971-01 93.82 82.83 98.78 43.13 21.48 57.12

The table also shows the differences between lifetime migrants and intercensal migrants. It
may be seen that a negative growth among male intercensal migrants has occurred during
1981-91 in contrast to the growth of lifetime migrants. The growth in the lifetime male
migrants compared to negative growth in decadal male migrants shows that duration data are
not correctly reported. However, it remains undisputed that there was a deceleration of male
migration during 1981-91.
Table 3 shows that the growth of female migrants is greater than those of male migrants.
There is 169 per cent increase in female migration in urban category during the period 1971 to
2001, as against 156 per cent increase in male migration during the same period.

Table 3: Growth of Internal Migrants by rural urban status, India 1971-2001.

Total (%) Rural (%) Urban (%)
Year Person Male Female Person Male Female Person Male Female
1971-81 26.30 19.43 29.40 18.0 4.5 22.6 40.2 32.1 48.4
1981-91 12.04 3.21 15.72 10.9 -0.2 14.1 13.8 6.5 20.7
1991-01 36.96 48.33 32.75 29.5 33.6 28.4 49.6 57.2 43.3
1971-01 93.82 82.83 98.78 69.1 69.4 68.9 162.2 156.4 169.1

Distribution of migrants by migration streams

As per the place of last residence (or birth) and place of enumeration, internal migrants can be
classified into three migration streams, which are roughly indicative of distance of migration:
Intradistrict migrants: person with last residence outside the place of enumeration but within
the same district.
Inter-district migrants: person with last residence outside the district of enumeration but
within the same state.
Interstate migrants: person with last residence in India but beyond the state of enumeration.
Further, based on the rural and urban nature of the place of last residence and the place of
enumeration, internal migrants can further be classified into four migration streams: rural-to-
rural, rural-to-urban, urban-to-rural, and urban-to-urban.
 Table 4: Percent distribution of lifetime migrants of each sex by migration streams, India 1971-2001
Type of 1971 1981 1991 2001
migration Sex Sex Sex Sex
streams Males Females Ratio Males Females Ratio Males Females Ratio Males Females Ratio
I Intradistrict
Rural to Rural 36.8 61.2 271 32.2 56.6 237 30.9 54.7 210 19.1 50.6 157
Rural to Urban 9.3 5.3 791 10.7 6.0 744 11.3 6.3 664 8.3 5.3 645
Urban to Rural 3.6 3.0 550 3.6 3.0 510 3.6 2.9 464 2.6 2.2 510
Urban to Urban 3.3 1.8 838 4.6 2.5 772 4.3 2.3 685 5.3 2.7 810
Sub-total 53.3 71.4 336 51.1 68.1 313 50.4 66.5 281 52.2 66.9 324
II Interdistrict
Rural to Rural 9.5 12.1 353 9.3 13.4 289 8.9 14.0 235 6.2 12.4 207
Rural to Urban 8.0 3.2 1138 9.5 3.9 1010 10.5 4.5 867 8.9 4.2 884
Urban to Rural 2.4 1.5 698 2.6 1.8 595 2.5 1.9 508 1.5 1.2 501
Urban to Urban 7.2 3.4 953 8.4 4.1 848 8.0 4.0 735 7.2 3.9 765
Sub-total 27.2 20.3 604 29.9 23.3 534 30.1 24.5 456 26.7 23.0 481
III Interstate
Rural to Rural 4.5 3.5 592 3.8 3.3 477 3.5 3.3 393 3.4 3.6 392
Rural to Urban 6.7 1.7 1719 7.5 2.1 1478 8.0 2.3 1279 9.8 2.9 1392
Urban to Rural 1.5 0.6 1074 1.4 0.6 921 1.3 0.7 705 0.9 0.5 747
Urban to Urban 6.2 2.3 1189 6.2 2.5 1026 6.5 2.7 913 5.7 2.5 924
Sub-total 19.6 8.3 1059 19.0 8.6 915 19.4 9.0 803 21.1 10.1 865
All Streams
Rural to Rural 50.8 76.8 298 45.2 73.3 257 43.3 72.0 223 28.8 66.6 179
Rural to Urban 24.0 10.2 1057 27.7 12.0 960 29.8 13.2 841 27.0 12.4 902
Urban to Rural 7.5 5.1 660 7.6 5.5 578 7.4 5.4 509 5.0 3.9 538
Urban to Urban 16.6 7.5 1000 19.2 9.1 876 18.9 9.0 774 18.2 9.2 822
Total migrants (million) 49.6 110.0 451 59.2 142.4 416 61.1 164.8 371 90.7 218.7 415
Note: Sex Ratio is male per 1000 female.
 Table 5: Percent distribution of intercensal migrants of each sex by migration streams, India 1971-2001
Type of 1971 1981 1991 2001
migration Sex Sex Sex Sex
streams Males Females Ratio Males Females Ratio Males Females Ratio Males Females Ratio
I Intradistrict
Rural to Rural 34.8 54.7 412 30.2 49.1 370 27.6 48.5 280 22.5 47.1 238
Rural to Urban 9.2 5.9 1003 11.0 7.2 928 12.2 7.5 802 9.8 6.5 759
Urban to Rural 4.3 3.7 755 4.3 3.7 714 4.3 3.5 605 4.0 3.1 646
Urban to Urban 3.7 2.4 978 5.1 3.5 872 4.4 2.9 736 4.9 3.2 776
Sub-total 52.2 66.8 505 50.6 63.4 481 48.6 62.6 382 43.5 61.4 354
II Interdistrict
Rural to Rural 10.3 12.0 556 9.8 12.5 473 9.3 13.2 345 8.3 12.7 326
Rural to Urban 7.3 3.9 1220 9.2 5.1 1084 10.6 5.6 930 10.2 5.4 944
Urban to Rural 3.0 2.1 917 3.3 2.4 814 3.1 2.3 654 2.4 1.8 663
Urban to Urban 7.8 4.9 1044 8.9 5.9 911 8.7 5.4 792 8.6 5.3 808
Sub-total 28.6 22.9 808 31.2 26.0 724 31.7 26.6 587 30.3 25.8 587
III Interstate
Rural to Rural 4.8 3.7 843 4.1 3.5 713 3.9 3.4 569 5.4 4.2 648
Rural to Urban 5.9 2.2 1701 5.3 2.7 1167 7.5 2.9 1247 11.7 3.9 1481
Urban to Rural 2.0 1.0 1320 1.8 1.0 1053 1.7 0.9 903 1.6 0.8 986
Urban to Urban 6.0 3.2 1219 5.6 3.3 1007 6.4 3.5 913 6.8 3.5 962
Sub-total 19.2 10.2 1211 18.1 10.6 1033 19.6 10.8 895 26.2 12.8 1024
All Streams
Rural to Rural 50.0 70.3 459 44.1 65.0 408 40.8 65.1 308 36.1 64.0 282
Rural to Urban 22.4 12.0 1202 26.8 15.0 1077 30.3 16.0 929 31.7 15.8 1002
Urban to Rural 9.4 6.8 888 9.4 7.1 796 9.1 6.7 662 7.9 5.7 700
Urban to Urban 17.5 10.5 1082 19.9 12.7 941 19.5 11.8 814 20.3 12.0 845
Total migrants (million) 26.8 41.4 646 30.4 50.5 603 26.7 54.3 492 32.5 65.0 500
Note: Sex Ratio is male per 1000 female.
Table 4 depicts the percentage distribution of migration streams separately for males and
females lifetime migrants from 1971 to 2001. On the other hand Table 5 gives the
intercensal migrants side by side to facilitate comparison of lifetime and intercensal
migrants.
There is a substantial decline in the proportion of intradistrict migrants and a
corresponding increase in interdistrict and interstate migrants. The creation of three new
states in 2000 may have inflated the proportion of interstate migrants in 2001.
Rural to rural migration formed the most dominant stream at the national level, but its
importance declined over time for both males and females in all the three distance
categories. The decline was greater in case of males. There is a large share of female
intradistrict rural-to-rural migration, which is generally explained in terms of marriage
migration. Rural-to-rural intradistrict migration of males seems to be due to their
migration from areas of low agricultural productivity to sparsely populated areas with
new developmental activities (Gosal and Krishnan, 1975; Quoted in Premi, 1990).
While there has been a substantial increase in the proportion of rural-to-urban migrants
over time in all three distance categories, there has also been an increase in the proportion
of urban-to-urban migrants. Intradistrict, interdistrict and interstate migration streams
contributed almost equally in the net rural-to-urban male migration over the period under
consideration. The proportion of net rural-to-urban lifetime migration of females however
decreased with increasing distance.
The share of urban-to-urban migration of both males and females was comparatively low
in the intradistrict stream, but it increased substantially in the interdistrict and interstate
streams. As institutions of higher learning, particularly professional and technical
institutions, are not available in each district, an urge for higher education motivates
urban dwellers as well as some of the rural folk to migrate over long distances. This is
also partly due to the creation of jobs in the modern sector in major metropolises and big
cities (Premi, 1990)
As migration distance increases, the sex ratio also improves sharply in favour of females
in all four streams of migration. In 2001, the sex ratio is favorable to male only in
interstate rural-to-urban migration stream. In all other streams, females outnumbered
males.
Growth by migration streams
Table 6 to 8 show the percentage growth of migrants during the intercensal period of
1971-81, 1981-91 and 1991-2001 respectively. The percentage growth of lifetime
migrants (migrants with all durations) and intercensal migrants (migrants with 0-9 years
duration) have been presented to facilitate their comparisons.

Table 6: Growth of migrants by migration streams, India 1971-81

Lifetime Migrants Intercensal Migrants

Migration streams Persons Males Females Persons Males Females
All Internal Migrants
Rural to Rural 19.56 6.32 23.51 8.87 0.30 12.80
Rural to Urban 44.56 37.83 51.69 43.25 36.07 51.89
Urban to Rural 31.35 21.06 38.14 21.00 14.04 27.19
Urban to Urban 47.83 38.10 57.55 38.61 29.28 48.71
Intradistrict
Rural to Rural 16.49 4.57 19.72 6.26 -1.57 9.48
Rural to Urban 41.37 36.56 45.18 41.85 36.34 47.38
Urban to Rural 26.25 20.07 29.64 18.54 14.70 21.43
Urban to Urban 74.71 66.95 81.20 66.96 57.32 76.40
Interdistrict
Rural to Rural 36.00 16.70 42.83 20.88 8.71 27.64
Rural to Urban 50.51 42.11 60.06 50.42 42.35 60.27
Urban to Rural 44.83 31.52 54.11 30.71 22.58 38.16
Urban to Urban 49.65 40.73 58.16 38.63 29.33 48.35
Interstate
Rural to Rural 13.88 -1.17 22.79 5.81 -3.73 13.85
Rural to Urban 42.51 34.47 56.32 19.72 2.35 49.28
Urban to Rural 15.91 7.26 25.19 10.45 -0.41 24.79
Urban to Urban 28.43 19.70 38.82 15.97 5.91 28.25

Table 6 shows a positive growth for lifetime migrants for all migration streams but a
negative growth of male migration into the rural areas. Such finding suggests that male
migration has been mainly towards urban areas. The growth for female migration is
positive in all streams indicating increasing female migration during 1971-81.
 Table 7: Growth of migrants by migration streams, India 1981-91
Lifetime Migrants Intercensal Migrants
Migration streams Persons Males Females Persons Males Females
All Internal Migrants
Rural to Rural 10.64 -1.29 13.71 -0.03 -18.74 7.61
Rural to Urban 19.34 11.33 27.03 6.58 -1.03 14.79
Urban to Rural 9.40 0.73 14.42 -5.63 -15.17 1.96
Urban to Urban 8.32 1.22 14.54 -7.29 -14.20 -0.78
Intradistrict
Rural to Rural 9.34 -0.98 11.78 -0.73 -19.67 6.29
Rural to Urban 17.37 9.78 23.02 4.95 -2.93 12.25
Urban to Rural 9.01 2.32 12.42 -4.14 -13.23 2.36
Urban to Urban 3.95 -3.02 9.33 -17.04 -24.50 -10.54
Interdistrict
Rural to Rural 16.36 -1.03 21.38 3.54 -17.25 13.38
Rural to Urban 23.74 14.34 33.22 9.11 1.10 17.80
Urban to Rural 11.79 0.94 18.25 -5.88 -17.06 3.21
Urban to Urban 6.05 -2.07 12.94 -7.94 -14.64 -1.85
Interstate
Rural to Rural 9.13 -4.61 15.68 -3.40 -15.85 5.48
Rural to Urban 16.66 9.74 26.90 20.15 23.84 15.84
Urban to Rural 11.49 -3.86 25.61 -9.65 -16.43 -2.51
Urban to Urban 15.50 8.86 22.31 6.06 0.87 11.28

Table 7 also shows a negative growth for male migration into the rural areas during 1981-
91. Migration has decreased in this decade as shown by negative growth among male and
female intercensal migrants. However, it is to be mentioned here that the growth of
‘duration not stated’ has registered a significant increase from less than 1 percent in
1971-81 to more than 100 percent in 1981-91 in all streams of migration. This however
does not belittle the fact that the growth of male and female migrants registered an
increase in interstate rural to urban and urban to urban streams of migration during the
period 1981-91.
Table 8 shows a positive growth for lifetime as well as intercensal migrants and for both
male and female migrants during the decade 1991-2001. Male interstate rural to urban
migration stream shows an increase of nearly 90 per cent while females increased by
about 61 per cent. On the other hand, in interstate urban to urban migration stream males
 show an increase by 28 per cent while females have increased by 22 per cent. These
increases in rural - urban and urban - urban are greater than the increases in other streams
of migration for both male and female categories.

Table 8: Growth of migrants by migration streams, India 1991-2001

Lifetime Migrants Intercensal Migrants
Migration streams Persons Males Females Persons Males Females
All Internal Migrants
Rural to Rural 18.40 -1.41 22.82 15.37 7.78 17.71
Rural to Urban 29.51 34.37 25.41 22.84 27.68 18.35
Urban to Rural -3.56 0.00 -5.37 3.00 6.48 0.70
Urban to Urban 38.39 43.12 34.73 24.27 26.85 22.17
Intradistrict
Rural to Rural 17.42 -8.08 22.77 12.55 -0.99 16.34
Rural to Urban 9.83 7.93 11.10 1.25 -1.89 3.77
Urban to Rural 2.24 8.91 -0.86 8.24 12.69 5.55
Urban to Urban 66.51 83.37 54.97 33.41 37.44 30.45
Interdistrict
Rural to Rural 14.72 3.22 17.43 13.44 8.54 15.13
Rural to Urban 24.74 26.02 23.64 16.30 17.17 15.50
Urban to Rural -14.37 -15.15 -13.97 -8.65 -7.87 -9.16
Urban to Urban 30.08 33.07 27.88 19.05 20.42 17.96
Interstate
Rural to Rural 46.54 46.14 46.70 54.58 67.61 47.16
Rural to Urban 76.41 82.96 68.04 77.59 90.98 60.88
Urban to Rural 1.50 5.02 -0.99 12.02 17.19 7.35
Urban to Urban 28.05 28.83 27.33 24.92 28.37 21.76

Reasons for migration

Indian censuses started collecting information on reasons for migration since 1981 census
based on place of last residence. The data on reasons for migration by migration streams
and types of migration are presented in Table 9 for intercensal migrants. In 2001, the
reasons for migration have been classified into seven broad groups – work/employment,
business, education, marriage, moved at birth, moved with family and others. The data on
reasons for migration are useful to understand the motivational factors behind movement
of people.
 It is observed from Table 9 that employment among males and marriage among females
are the main reasons for migration. Associational reasons – movement on account of
accompanying parents or any other member of the family is elicited second most
important reason among both male and female intercensal migrants. Around 44 percent
of the total intercensal migrants have moved due to marriages. However, it is
predominantly led by females as 65 percent of females have migrated owing to their
marriages compared to 2 percent among males. Among male migrants, employment has
continued to be the main reason for migration with nearly 40 percent of them accounted
by it.
The intrastate migration as shown in Table 10 shows the importance of marriage as a
reason of migration.
When interstate migration is taken into account, as shown in Table 11, employment
emerges as the main reason for migration. Nearly 32 percent of all interstate migrants
during the intercensal period migrated for the reason of work or employment. This is
closely followed by ‘moved with household’ reason accounting for around 30 percent of
the intercensal interstate migrants.

Table 9: Percentage distribution of reasons for total intercensal migration by sex

and streams of migration, India 2001
Reasons for Migration (in %)
work/ Moved Moved with
Streams employment Business Education Marriage after Birth Household Others
Total 14.63 1.15 2.96 44.05 6.73 20.88 9.59
R-R 7.89 0.62 1.90 62.33 5.97 13.03 8.26
Duration 0-9 R-U 12.81 1.22 3.02 28.98 18.67 24.64 10.66
U-R 27.84 1.99 4.97 21.91 4.89 29.64 8.76
U-U 19.87 1.87 4.23 22.00 7.88 34.75 9.41
Total 37.58 2.90 6.22 2.08 10.53 25.11 15.58
R-R 28.87 2.15 6.27 4.26 14.46 25.17 18.82
Males R-U 26.51 2.44 5.16 1.58 24.19 24.93 15.19
U-R 50.64 3.63 7.08 0.83 5.11 22.68 10.03
U-U 38.53 3.55 6.16 0.84 9.01 30.12 11.79
Total 3.16 0.28 1.34 65.02 4.84 18.76 6.60
R-R 2.17 0.20 0.71 78.17 3.66 9.71 5.38
Females R-U 3.50 0.40 1.56 47.58 14.92 24.45 7.59
U-R 5.00 0.35 2.86 43.03 4.66 36.62 7.49
U-U 4.10 0.45 2.61 39.87 6.92 38.66 7.39
 Table 10: Percentage distribution of reasons for intrastate migration in the
intercensal period by sex and streams of migration, India 2001

Reasons for Intrastate Migration (in %)

work/ Moved after Moved with
Streams employment Business Education Marriage Birth Household Others
Total 11.04 1.01 3.03 48.57 7.35 19.16 9.83
R-R 6.81 0.58 1.96 63.54 6.20 12.55 8.36
Duration 0-9 R-U 11.23 1.10 2.90 29.79 20.88 23.40 10.71
U-R 21.89 2.01 6.26 25.27 5.34 29.89 9.32
U-U 17.20 1.70 3.93 23.23 9.34 34.64 9.96
Total 30.80 2.77 7.07 2.57 12.87 26.31 17.61
R-R 25.49 2.03 6.78 4.53 15.74 25.58 19.84
Males R-U 23.34 2.19 5.03 1.66 27.70 24.63 15.44
U-R 42.29 3.98 9.61 1.10 6.12 25.43 11.49
U-U 34.02 3.30 5.75 0.97 11.03 32.01 12.92
Total 2.68 0.27 1.33 68.03 5.01 16.14 6.54
R-R 2.01 0.20 0.73 78.69 3.75 9.21 5.41
Females R-U 3.32 0.38 1.51 48.13 16.43 22.60 7.63
U-R 4.71 0.36 3.45 45.64 4.70 33.65 7.50
U-U 3.81 0.44 2.49 40.95 7.99 36.72 7.60

Table 11: Percentage distribution of reasons for interstate migration in the

intercensal period by sex and streams of migration, India 2001

Reasons for Interstate Migration (in %)

work/ Moved after Moved with
Streams employment Business Education Marriage Birth Household Others
Total 31.85 1.85 2.63 22.31 3.80 29.12 8.44
R-R 27.75 1.31 0.94 37.47 2.54 22.90 7.10
Duration 0-9 R-U 23.02 1.91 3.47 20.81 5.05 31.56 14.18
U-R 41.11 1.95 2.09 14.40 3.87 29.10 7.49
U-U 25.74 2.24 4.90 19.28 4.66 35.00 8.19
Total 56.70 3.26 3.82 0.70 3.94 21.76 9.83
R-R 57.39 2.79 1.84 1.52 3.37 23.45 9.63
Males R-U 41.01 3.30 5.05 0.97 5.37 24.43 19.86
U-R 64.91 3.05 2.76 0.36 3.40 17.98 7.53
U-U 47.51 4.06 6.97 0.57 4.99 26.36 9.54
Total 6.42 0.40 1.41 44.44 3.66 36.66 7.01
R-R 8.54 0.36 0.35 60.76 1.99 22.53 5.46
Females R-U 5.30 0.53 1.92 40.37 4.74 38.58 8.57
U-R 5.86 0.31 1.09 35.18 4.56 45.56 7.44
U-U 4.79 0.48 2.90 37.28 4.35 43.31 6.88
However, sharp differences exist in the reasons for migration between males and females.
Moreover, there is a clear difference between different streams of migration. While
nearly 79 percent of females in intrastate rural to rural migrants during the intercensal
period reported marriage as the reason for migration, it is only 37 percent among females
in the case of urban to urban interstate migrants.
Observing the streams of migration and employment as the reason of migration, it is seen
that large proportion of urban to rural migrants has reported employment as the reason for
migration. In fact, more than 50 percent of urban to rural male migrants have reported
employment as the reason for the move.
‘Moved with household’ as a reason also emerges as an important cause for both male
and female migration in all streams of migration during the intercensal period.
Summary and conclusion
Short distance migration, largely that of women, has been the predominant migration
pattern in India. The traditional village exogamy could be the reason for this type of large
migration among females. Rural to rural migration has been another important migration
flow for both males and females. However, the proportion of rural to rural migrations has
declined steadily, while the proportions of other streams have increased over the period.
In the same manner, the proportion of short distance migrants has decreased while the
proportions of medium and long distance migrants have increased. Long distance
movements are more urban oriented than short distance movements. There has been a
significant increase in migration to urban areas both among males and females during
1991-2001. The urban to urban movements are also significantly increasing. Going by
this trend, long distance rural to urban and urban to urban streams are likely to emerge as
the dominant migration streams in future.
The reasons of migration data reveals that apart from employment among males and
marriage among females, moved with household emerged as another important factor for
migration among males as well as females. It is also evident that urban to rural streams
show an increased migration on account of employment or work as a reason of migration.
As such, two–third of urban to rural interstate male migrants have moved owing to
employment or work.
References
Beck, A.J., 1985. The Effects of Spatial Location on Economic Structure on Interstate
Migration, U.M.I. Dissertation Information Service, University of Michigan,
Michigan.
Bell, Martin. 2003. “Comparing Internal Migration between Countries: Measures, Data
Sources and Results.” Paper Presented in Population Association of America
2003, Minneapoplis, May 1-3.
Bhagat, R.B., 2005. “Conceptual Issues in Measurement of Internal Migration in India.”
IUSSP XXVth International Conference, Contributed Papers, France, July 18-23.
Census of India 1971. Series 1, India Part-II-D(i), Migration Tables. Registrar General
and Census commisioner, India.
Census of India 1981. Series 1, India Part-V A&B(i), Migration Tables. Registrar
General and Census commisioner, India.
Census of India 1991. Series 1, India Part-V D-series, Migration Tables. Registrar
General and Census commisioner, India.
Census of India 2001. Soft copy, India D-series, Migration Tables. Registrar General and
Census commisioner, India.
Chakravarty, B. 1997. “The Census and the NSS Data on Internal Migration”, in Ashish
Bose, Davendra B. Gupta, and Gaurisankar Raychaudhuri (eds.), Population
Statistics in India. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.
Chatterjee, Atreyi, and Ashish Bose. 1977. “Demographic Data on Internal Migration and
Urbanisation from Census and NSS – An Appraisal,” in Ashish Bose, Davendra
B. Gupta, and Gaurisankar Raychaudhuri (eds.), Population Statistics in India.
New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.
Dang, N.A., 2005. Internal Migration: Opportunities and challenges for the Renovation
and Development in Vietnam, APEC, Hanoi.
Nair, P.S., and Narain, V. 1985. “Internal Migration in India: Demographic Knowledge
and Policy Issues”. IUSSP Seminar on “Policy Formulation, Implementation and
Evaluation: The case of East, South and South East Asia”, Contributed Papers,
Bombay, India, January 24-28.
Premi, M. K., 1990. “India”. In Charles B. Nam, William J. Serow, and David F. Sly
(eds.), International Handbook on Internal Migration. New York: Greenwood
Press.
Singh, D.P., 1998. “Internal Migration in India: 1961-1991” Demography India 27(1):
245-261.
U.N. 1993. Readings in Population Research and Methodology, The United Nations
Population Fund, New York.
Zachariah, K.C. 1963. “Internal Migration in India from the Historical standpoint,”
Invited Paper, 34th Session, I.S.I., Ottawa, Canada.
Zachariah, K.C. 1964. Historical Study of Internal Migration in the Indian Sub
Continent, 1901-1931. Research Monograph 1, Demographic Training and
Research Centre, Bombay.