Emigration and Development: The Case of a Bangladeshi Village1

Md. Mizanur Rahman*

ABSTRACT

This article examines the developmental consequences of international labour migration in a Bangladeshi village. The data are from Hoglakandi, a village 30 kilometres south-east of Dhaka, capital of . A structured questionnaire with both open-ended and closed category questions was used among 50 returnees, supplemented with additional in-depth interviews.

International labour migration has often been seen by many sending countries as a short cut to development because of its role in unemployment relief, balance of payments relief, and capital formation at national level. The study argues that the causes and effects of emigration can better be understood only when the process is placed within its local context, since what may prove to be advantageous at the national level may prove to be detrimental to a household or community or vice-versa.

It demonstrates how the contribution of labour migration is merely the transformation of labour into a structural component of the international political economy. The Hoglakandi experience reveals that labour migration does not fuel the local economy from an external pipeline of and skill acquisition, rather it drains local resources that retard the development.

INTRODUCTION

Although Bangladesh is one of the major manpower exporting countries in Asia and has a long history of labour migration, its impacts have been largely under- researched, especially consequences at the micro level. Government and policy makers are much more concerned with the glittering coin of remittances. Three million overseas workers remitted US$ 1.51 billion in 1998 (from US$ 1.34 billion

* Department of Sociology, National University of Singapore, Singapore.

Published by Blackwell Publishers Ltd., © 2000 IOM 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK, and International Migration Vol. 38 (4) 2000 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. ISSN 0020-7985 110 Rahman in 1997), despite the recent financial crisis in South-East Asia (Asian Migration News, 1-15 November 1999). Over the past few years, manpower export has been the third and sometimes the second largest source of foreign currency earnings. Mired in economic stagnation, the Bangladesh Government views the opportunities for emigration of unemployed and underemployed workers as a blessing, eliding its developmental impacts on the local economy.

Effects of emigration can be pursued at different levels. Adepoju (1991: 59) argues that the economic effects of emigration should be analysed at three levels: the migrant, the migrant’s family/household/community, and the migrant’s country. These distinctions have more than academic value because what may prove to be advantageous at a national aggregate may prove to be detrimental to an individual or household, or vice-versa. It is often argued that remittances increase the incomes of migrant households, increase national income and savings and generate foreign exchange. Recent criticisms that potential migrant workers in Bangladesh collect the sunk cost by siphoning out of their subsistence household economies; that remittances hardly get converted into job-creating investments; and that returnees are not often the missing spark plugs needed for development, make the study viable, interesting, and worth pursuing. The objective of this article is to examine the development impacts of labour migration on a sending village economy. The study was carried out on Singapore’s returning workers at Hoglakandi.

The majority of Bangladeshi workers in Singapore are from only a few of the country’s 64 districts – Munshigang, Comilla, Tangail, Narsingdi and Narayangang. Interviews conducted in Singapore with Bangladeshi workers during the third quarter of 1998 confirmed this pattern: 60 to 80 workers from certain villages, and from one village, Hoglakandi, under Munshigang district, there were hundreds of workers. Hoglakandi was therefore chosen for field study during July and August 1999. Table 1 (page 124) shows its general features. Like most villages in Bangladesh, Hoglakandi presents a picture of serenity, a portrait of tranquillity. But the appearance of unparalleled natural beauty hides the harsh reality of political economy. Paradoxically, nature is at the same time both bountiful and punishing. All arable land in this village remains under water approximately from May to November each year when most villagers are unemployed. While water is everywhere, there are hardly any fish to catch, and so fishing has not evolved as a source of earnings. Potato is the only crop; produced once a year, and so household earnings are shaped by the quantity and quality of its production.

THEORETICAL ISSUES

Migration literature unfolds two fundamental views on the migration-develop- ment relationship: neoclassical (or equilibrium) and structural (or dependency) Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 111 theory. The neoclassical tradition focuses on equilibrium models that treat migration as a voluntary and economic rational choice. Individuals seek to enhance their economic position by responding to higher wages offered away from home. Their mobility ensures their optimal distribution and hence their efficient allocation. Individuals will have adequate information which they use in a rational, cost/benefit fashion and will move to areas where they can best sell their labour. Such mobility serves to restore the balance between unequally distributed resources across space in a manner that presumably benefits both destination and sending places (through remittances), and the migrants them- selves (Todaro, 1969, 1976; Massey, 1993, 1994). The neoclassical position has been criticized because it does not find sufficient empirical support and does not recognize the structural factors which originate and control migration- “non-automatic reducibility of self interest to the interest of the community and the fundamental role of the state” (Battistella, 1992: 116).

The structural theory shifts the focus from individual action to national and international political and economic forces, from the study of micro-level to macro-social processes. Migration is viewed as a component of the process of capital accumulation, generated and instrumental to the strengthening of developed economics to the detriment of developing economics. The long-term result is therefore not restored equilibrium between uneven economies, but reaffirmation of dependence of “periphery” societies on “core” societies. The decision to migrate is, therefore, far from a free, rational choice of profit maximization: it is instead a forced decision from lack of alternatives at the local level (Portes and Walton, 1981; Massey, 1993, 1994, 1999).

In the case of Hoglakandi, the structural approach explains contract migration better than theories that attempt to explain the behaviour of migrants in terms of income differentials and the probability of getting a job. The structural approach not only recognizes the fundamental importance of economic factors as the cause of international labour migration, but also addresses the causes of increasing landlessness and lack of educational, cultural and institutional services in labour exporting countries. Several community studies in Asia uphold the structural hypothesis. For example, in his study of Tambon Don Han in North Eastern , Rigg (1989: 19) asked people why they believed it was necessary to go abroad to increase their wealth, and found that factors such as environmental constraints on increasing crop yields, limited availability of land, and drought were important in their decisions. In his study of Malinow in the , Lindquist (1993) found that scarcity of fish in the waters around Malinow was a major determinant of emigration. Increasing competition for fewer fish, and few opportunities for employment in other sectors, led many to see little hope of achieving desired wealth or escaping poverty through local employment. Potential migrants viewed overseas employment as either a source of subsistence earnings, socio-economic mobility, or personal fulfilment. 112 Rahman

Empirical analysis of the effects of emigration has produced abundant literature. A cursory overview of relevant migration literature reveals various models of migration-development analysis. Tapinos (1982) suggests that the effects of emigration on labour-exporting countries can be analysed at three levels: the impact of the departure of workers on employment, production and wages; the transfer of funds and its effects on the living standard of family members, the resultant income distribution, and productive accumulation and growth; and the effects of return migration on the stock of human capital (from Adepoju, 1991: 53). Papademetriou and Martin (1991) have proposed a model for the study of effects of labour emigration in the name of “three R’s”. They link recruitment, remittances, and return to the major effects of worker emigration on development. The “three R’s” occur at different levels. First, recruitment affects those who emigrate, thus making an impact on employment and production. Second, remittances affect the living standards of migrant house- holds and thus the growth of communities and regions. Third, returning migrants affect the quantity and quality of the workforce. Many scholars have followed this model to evaluate the developmental effects of emigration on a sending region.

One important variable missing in these models is the economic cost of migration. This is important when, in the Bangladeshi context, contract workers bank on families and other traditional sources for raising the sunk cost of migration. This entails a heavy impact on the subsistence economy of workers’ households and thus influences the nature and extent of developmental effects at the micro level. Along with “three R’s”, the economic cost of labour migration is also addressed in this article.

BANGLADESHI WORKERS IN SINGAPORE

Contract migration from post-independent Bangladesh began with the migration of Bangladeshi workers to oil-rich Arab countries in mid-1970s. Until the Gulf Crisis of 1990-1991, newly industrialized countries in Asia were little known to Bangladeshi workers. However, massive deportation of Bangaldeshi workers from Arab countries following the Gulf crisis led to diversification of new destinations, mainly Singapore, , and . Numbers of contract workers to Singapore were very low during the 1980s but the flow increased markably during the 1990s (Figure 1, page 128). The actual number in Singapore is likely to be higher than the official figure due to the lack of sophisticated mechanisms for maintaining records of return migrants and the departure of workers through individual and private initiatives. It is generally believed that there are around 70,000 Bangladeshi workers in Singapore, and although evidence on the skill composition is largely anecdotal, it is generally assumed that around 80 per cent are unskilled construction workers. Wong (1997) points out that the Singapore foreign labour market is ethnically Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 113 segmented: the construction sector is dominated by Thai semi-skilled and Bangladeshi (general) workers, and Malaysians in the construction industry tend to be skilled workers. Between 1993 and 1997, an estimated 140,000 foreign workers, mostly from Non-Traditional Source (NTS) countries such as Bangladesh, Myanmar, , and Thailand have been employed in the con- struction sector (Hui, 1998). Recent data show that there are more than 200,000 foreign construction workers and 100,000 foreign maids in Singapore (The Straits Times, Singapore, 23 February 1999) (Table 2, page 124).

Recent financial turmoil in South-East Asia had considerable impact on migrant workers within the region (Table 3, page 125). An estimated one million were affected (Business Asia, 10 August 1998). However, the economic crisis did not lead to massive retrenchment and repatriation of foreign workers from Singapore because of the Government’s policy of retaining workers by perform- ance rather than nationality. This was a significant departure from the conventional wisdom that foreign workers are “disposable”, although around 16,800 (estimated) work permits were cancelled and 23,000 illegal immigrants and over-stayers were arrested in 1998 (The Straits Times, Singapore, 29 June 1998 and 6 February 1999).

Prior to September 1998, foreigners working in Singapore were divided into two categories: Work-permit holders (generally manual or domestic workers) and Employment pass holders (higher-level personnel). The new Work Pass framework, with effect from September 1998, provides three classes of work permit: Class R, Class Q, and Class P. These three major categories are also divided into two sub-categories for a total of six classification levels. Presently, Class R Pass is for manual semi-skilled and unskilled workers. This study covers former work-permit holders who were skilled, and unskilled workers. Initially, workers are given two-year work permits, and depending on the availability of jobs, can renew the permits for another 2 years. Skilled workers can renew their permits for a longer period.

DETERMINANTS OF EMIGRATION

The environmental and economic backdrop of Hoglakandi induced villagers to look for alternatives. Not only does land remain under water for around 7 months every year, but land holdings are shrinking as population pressures increase. Rahman (1986: 99) reports an inverse relationship between house- holds and landholdings in Bangladesh from 1951 to 1981. In his village study, he found 138 households in 1951, 173 in 1972, and 200 in 1981, while average landholding per household was 4.12 acres in 1951, 2.66 in 1972 and 2.18 in 1981. The Hoglakandi experience also shows a poor land-man relationship. On average, households of returnees in the sample had less than one acre of land before and after migration. Acreage is much lower than a rural household 114 Rahman requires for its subsistence level of income. In his study of Indian rural to urban migration, Banerjee (1998: 191) showed that there is a non-monotonic relation- ship between land ownership or land operation and the propensity to migrate. To a farm size of up to 2.5 acres the propensity to emigrate rose and thereafter declined. Bertocci (1972) concluded from close observation in two villages in Bangladesh that two acres is needed by an average Bangladeshi rural family of 5.5 to maintain a consistent subsistence level of income.

Villagers produce only one potato crop per year and production is strictly limited by environmental constraints. Flood is another factor that frequently affects this village, and while the effects of flood on migration decision-making has not been researched in general, in the context of Hoglakandi, and Bangladesh as a whole, it is a major issue. Villagers cannot rely on agriculture to fulfil their needs and are forced to look for work elsewhere. Thus, recurring floods, poor land-man relationship, water logging, and single crop production are structural forces that have induced and shaped patterns of contract migration from Hoglakandi.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILES OF RETURNEES

Contract migration is age selective. This study shows that 34 per cent of returnees were in the 21-25 years age group, 24 per cent were aged 26-30, and 20 per cent aged 31 to 35. Migration amongst the younger and older population is also noticed in Hoglakandi: 10 per cent of returnees were aged 20 and under and 12 per cent were aged 36 and over. These findings differ from those of Karim et al. (1999: 53) who found that 96 per cent of Bangladeshi workers in Malaysia were aged 36 and under and 2.7 per cent were aged between 36 and 50.

The returnees have a poor educational background: 84 per cent had primary education (1-5 years schooling), 10 per cent and 2 per cent had secondary education (6-10 years schooling) and tertiary education (12+ years schooling) respectively, while 4 per cent were completely illiterate. Bangladesh is a rural country where the extended family pattern predominates. Sixty-four per cent of returnees were married and 36 per cent were unmarried, and 76 per cent belonged to extended families compared with 24 per cent to nuclear families. There was no case of divorce or broken family in the sample. The average household size was seven compared with average household size in rural Bangladesh of 5.4 (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 1996). Twenty-eight per cent of households had more than one .

EMPLOYMENT

Bangladesh is a developing country with a total population of 127 million and a civilian labour force of 56 million (in 1996) (CIA World Fact Book, Bangladesh). Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 115

The public sector is small and the bulk of the working population is in agriculture which, in 1996, constituted 63.9 per cent of total civilian labour force (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 1996a). According to the 1991 census, 80.37 per cent of the population lived in rural areas (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 1996b) despite the adverse ratio of land per person. Persons who are principally agricultural labourers are unlikely to be fully employed throughout the year. On average, they are employed 185 days per year, including 115 in crop production and 70 in allied activities, which leaves 180 days free (Huq and Sultan, 1991: 155). Labourers therefore require either high wages for agricul- tural work to carry them through the lean period, or additional non-farm jobs. An estimated 85 per cent of farm workers on farms of less than 2.5 acres are surplus in the sense that they have to depend on other farms or other activities for their livelihood. Even farms operating on 2.5-5.0 acres and 5.0-7.5 acres, 12.11 per cent and 2.35 per cent of farm workers, respectively, are surplus (Masum, 1989: 22). Despite rich soil, ideal growing conditions and potential and abundant supply of labour, agricultural yields are amongst the lowest in the world: average 1.2 mt/ha for rice compared with 2.5 in and 2.7 in Malaysia, which are climatically similar (Karim, 1992: 112). Landlessness or near landlessness and rural social deprivation are closely related in Bangladesh. Thus, a complex combination of historical circumstances, geopolitical location, and unfavourable ecology has turned Bangladesh into a major “reserve of cheap labour”. Emigration has therefore been a means of relieving the domestic labour market of unemployed persons, as well as a source of foreign exchange earnings.

Although there are no reliable estimates of unemployment and underemployment, Ahmed (1998: 372) suggests that 16 to 18 million persons are unemployed and underemployed. Other estimates indicate that about 40 per cent of the labour force is underemployed (Asian Development Bank, 1998). Ahmed (1998) also estimates that 1.8 to 2.0 million persons enter the labour force each year and that the total cumulative figure for Bangladeshi migrants until 1996 was approximately 2.4 million. The figure for 1998 was around 3 million (Asian Migration News, 1-15 November 1999). This does not represent the total stock of Bangladeshi workers abroad, as no figures are available on return migrants. The cumulative estimate represents about 5.3 per cent of the labour force, which is significant but not an overwhelming number. It can be concluded that the greater the rate of emigration, the greater the relief to unemployment pressures. Emigration is viewed as a “safety valve”, fear of future labour shortage hardly applies to Bangladesh which could afford to double or triple the rate of emigration of unskilled workers.

Ninety per cent of returnees’ households hinge primarily on agriculture and only 10 per cent on non-agricultural occupations. Thirty-six per cent of households have no earning members, 34 per cent one member and the remaining 30 per cent two to four members. Villagers are busy farming from 116 Rahman

November to April, but for the rest of the year they do not get much work. As a result, the extent and nature of unemployment is different at Hoglakandi compared with a rice-growing village. Rice is produced usually more than once a year. The impact of migration on agricultural production can be an important consideration, especially in a situation where farming relies heavily on physical input in a predominantly hoe-and-cutlass technology. However, this does not apply to Honglakandi. Because of its huge surplus labour, emigration has hardly any effect an agricultural production.

With regard to the occupational status of returnees before their emigration, 36 per cent were unemployed, 58 per cent were employed in agriculture and 6 per cent in some blue collar jobs, mainly in rural markets. After migration, 92 per cent were unemployed, 4 per cent had returned to their previous agricultural occupation and the remaining 4 per cent had started small businesses. Many returnees intended migrating to the city because of lack of local opportunities, and a few because of their inherited human endowment, for example, family and lineage prestige or honour. Working in the rural informal sector would bring shame and infamy. This applied to some returnees from Barobari. Baro means big or large; bari the complex of households inhabited by a number of families which share the same courtyard and whose male heads are usually patrilineally related to each other. There were 23 families in this Barobari. Two generations ago, members of Barobari were rich and influen- tial, and though no longer rich they are still influential in the village where they enjoy high social status.

THE COST OF MIGRATION

An area of major concern for villagers is to try and control the outflow of financial resources. This is important in the Bangladeshi context where the average farmer has very little capacity to save and is perennially dependent on borrowing at the start of each planting season. Given this situation, two objectives for the survey were to obtain an indication of the extent to which funds flow out of the village, and to identify the major areas affected by this outflow.

Potential migrants pay for migration in the form of money to local agents in Bangladesh whom they call “Bangla Agents”. These agents have contacts with recruitment agents in Singapore, known as “Chinese Agents”. Bangla agents undertake all migration procedures on behalf of potential migrants in Bangladesh. The cost for the returnees was quite substantial. On average, 80 per cent had paid between Tk. 180,000 to 220,000 (US$ 4,000 to 4,700) for their migration (Table 4, page 126). Those who had paid below Tk. 180,000 (US$ 4,000) were mainly early migrants and in some cases skilled workers. The cost for skilled workers was much less than for unskilled workers. Workers pay native agents Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 117 for the completion of all migration procedures, but the agents spend no more than US$ 800 for each worker, including the airfare from Bangladesh. Where does the rest of the money go? Migrant workers claim that the foreign recruitment agents appropriate about two-thirds of sunk cost from each worker, which represents a lot of money being piped out from both the village and the national economy.

As the high expenses were definitely beyond the immediate means of nearly all the workers, most had to borrow. Amongst the returnees, 72 per cent borrowed from traditional moneylenders. On average, 51.38 per cent of the total cost of migration came from traditional moneylenders, 19.23 per cent from land selling or mortgaging, and the remaining 29.22 per cent from the returnees’ personal savings, family savings, loan from relatives and in some cases, selling livestock or gold ornaments. Ninety-one per cent of workers who borrowed money paid 6 to 11 Tk. and the remainder 2 to 5 Tk. per month in interest (Table 5, page 126). Thus, a worker who borrowed Tk. 1,000 at 10 per cent interest per month would pay Tk. 2,200 in total for one year. Most of them needed five to six months and even one year to migrate to Singapore after paying money to agents. Thus they paid a handsome amount for their borrowed money even before their migration. All moneylenders were from the district-city and had a long tradition of money lending within the district. Previously they loaned money to peasants and businessmen but in the last few years potential migrants have become their major targets. Moneylenders are locally called Mahazon.

REMITTANCES

The highest cost of migration for a returnee was Tk. 250,000 (or US$ 5,434). In terms of economic benefit, the study found that 60 per cent of returnees remitted less than Tk. 250,000, while 40 per cent remitted more than this amount (Table 6, page 126). This experience raises the question whether returnees were affected by the Asian financial crisis. Their years of migration ranged from 1991 to 1998 and many worked less than two years, which is a breach of contract. Forty per cent migrated to Singapore at the outset or mid- financial crisis (between 1997 to 1998), but 38 per cent were affected directly by the financial crisis in that their work permits were cancelled before two years and they were sent back home. Data on the percentage of victims of financial crisis (38 per cent), and unsuccessful migrants – 60 per cent of returnees remitted below their sunk cost as defined above – emphasize the operation of such “other forces” as higher sunk cost, patterns of working and salary, and being duped by Bangladeshi money traders in Singapore (most of the workers in Singapore remit money through native money traders). These “other forces” clearly contributed to the gap between expectations and reality regarding the benefits of contract migration. 118 Rahman

Data on expenditure of remittances unveil the nature of returnees and their vulnerability to exploitation. On average, returnees spent 52.41 per cent of their accumulated remittances on loan repayments, 30.64 per cent on family main- tenance, and 8.60 per cent on the migration of relatives to Singapore (Table 7, page 127). The data support Urzua’s (1981) description of strategy of survival migrants. The nature and composition of Bangladeshi workers, their status, and tenure of stay in Singapore match Urzua’s typology that classified migration into “survival” and “mobility”. Survival migrants are persons pushed abroad by lack of alternatives at home; mobility migrants are pulled abroad to better themselves. Survival migrants are compelled to remit large amounts back home just to augment the living conditions of family members left behind. Our data show that, on average, 30.64 per cent of remittances were used for the maintenance of households, mainly for food and clothing.

These findings on the use of remittances in Bangladesh differ from those by Mahamood (1992). Using 1985 and 1986 Middle East returnees’ data to examine the use of remittances in Bangladesh (N=306), he found that, on average, 19 per cent of remittances were used in building houses, 15.25 per cent for the purchase of land, 4.04 per cent for business, 4.39 per cent in repayment of loans, 8.86 per cent in weddings, 3.34 per cent on medical treatment, 2.07 per cent in donation to relatives, 1.88 per cent on education, 9.11 per cent on fixed bank deposit and 4.69 per cent for other purposes. These findings are incomparable with the Hoglakandi experience on several grounds. First, it was not a village study but rather a general study aimed at explaining the general trend of use. Second, it did not deal with socio-economic features which delineated subjects’ determinants on the basis of accumulation or survival. Third, the data are very old. However, the study provides scope to compare the experience of unskilled migration in two major destinations – Middle East and South-East Asia. It is clear that the age of the great honeypots is over, especially for unskilled workers, although the highly skilled will continue to gain from migration.

TWO IMPORTANT FEATURES

Two features of returnees’ households attracted my attention: size of land holdings and nature of toilets: size of land holdings as a sign of economic prosperity, and nature of toilets as a sign of social prosperity. Villagers often pride themselves on possessing a large landholding as well as a good type of toilet. Even matchmaking in rural Bangladesh is considerably shaped by the nature of toilets. Possession of new land is inherently linked to the motive of contract migration. Many workers had sold or mortgaged their land with the hope of re-purchasing it by remittances.

In rural Bangladesh, 8.67 per cent of rural households are landless and 49.65 per cent have less than 99 decimal land (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 1996a). Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 119

In the present study, 24 per cent of households were landless before migration and 76 per cent had less than 99 decimal land (Table 8, page 127). After migration, 42 per cent of households have become landless and 58 per cent had less than 99 decimal land. Households lost their land completely or partially not only at the time of meeting the economic cost of migration, but also at the time of repaying debt after an unsuccessful migration. The Hoglakandi data show that landless and near landless peasants are the contract workers, and that contract migration is a class phenomenon that ironically contributes to the dispossession of land and speeds up the depeasantization process.

According to the 1991 population census, 3.89 per cent of households in rural Bangladesh had sanitary and semi-sanitary toilets, 96.11 per cent had traditional ones or none (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 1996b). The present study showed that before migration 14 per cent of households had sanitary and semi- sanitary toilets and 86 per cent had traditional ones (Table 9, page 127). After migration, 32 per cent of households possessed sanitary and semi-sanitary toilets and 68 per cent had traditional ones.

Data on the changing patterns of toilet facilities have been presented here with a connotation to report the attitudinal changes of migrant workers. Many workers compared law and order, transportation, value of work, discipline, cleanliness, and political culture of Singapore with Bangladesh. One can quickly identify migrant workers after a brief talk. The way they think and express ideas differ remarkably from non-migrants. One worker commented on the “importance of women’s social security in Bangladesh”, noting that “if a government can not guarantee women’s social security, it can not guarantee nation’s economic prosperity”(translated from Bengali). This view stemmed from his social experience in Singapore.

RETURN MIGRATION

It is generally argued that contract migration can result in an addition to the emigration economy’s stock of human capital if the skills learned abroad contribute more to the home economy’s development than the skills the worker would have learned at home (Stahl and Habib, 1991). Return migrants in the present study were mainly unskilled construction workers in Singapore. It would therefore be unrealistic to expect any remarkable changes in their profession or in their economic activities upon return, and naïve to expect that the work experience abroad would transform a poor rural peasant into a modern farmer, or a poor working class urban dweller into an industrial entrepreneur. The Hoglakandi experience shows that 94 per cent of returnees worked as unskilled construction workers or cleaners or grass-cutters and only 6 per cent worked as skilled construction workers. The skill that the workers acquired during their stay in Singapore is hardly relevant or useful to the village 120 Rahman economy. Many returnees were reluctant to return to farming, their intentions were to move to urban areas.

CONCLUSION

This article paints a sobering picture of the effects of emigration on Hoglakandi. Contract migration has not fuelled the local economy through an external pipeline of remittances; rather it drained local resources and impeded local development. The article has demonstrated how structural forces induce and shape the patterns of contract migration, and upholds the asymmetric hypothesis that labour migration increases inequalities or differences between sending and receiving countries rather than diminishes them. It acknowledges the paramount importance of migrant networks that have brought peasant communities and households into direct contact with international capital, and confirms that migration can be understood only when it is placed in a human and geographical context.

The Hoglakandi experience also reveals the class character of contract migration and shows how vested interest groups (the propertied and money lending groups) are using contract migration as a mechanism for uprooting landless and near landless people from the village economy. It is these interest groups who are appropriating the fruits of emigration whether it is economically successful from workers’ perspective or not. Contract migration is neither capable of correcting the underlying weaknesses of socio-economic structure of rural society nor can it provide a substantial and sustained impetus for the socio- economic transformation of rural economies. The major contribution of contract migration may thus be only the transformation of labour into a structural component of the international political economy.

NOTES

1. I wish to thank Habibul Haque Khondker, Lian Kwen Fee and Hing Ai Yun, National University of Singapore, and Abrar Chowdhury, University of Dhaka, for their support. 2. Contract migration is one form of temporary labour migration. The term “contract migration” is used widely in Asia to denote labour arrangements for a finite duration and which occurs within legal parameters involving both the country of origin and the country of destination. The present study is on contract workers, but the terms “contract worker”, “migrant worker” or “foreign worker” will be used interchangeably. Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 121

3. The cost of migration, i.e. the amount of cash money that workers pay to the agents, is an indicator to evaluate overt economic benefits. The cumulative interest of borrowed money that doubles within ten months, and the economic effects of land and livestock dispossession that entail a heavy pressure on households’ subsistence economy, are excluded from the discussion. However, I have taken the highest economic cost (highest cash payment at the time of migration) from the data to assess economic benefits.

REFERENCES

Adepoju, A. 1991 “Binational communities and labour circulation in Sub-Saharan Africa,” in D. Papademetriou and P. Martin (Eds), The Unsettled Relationship: Labor Migration and Economic Development, Greenwood Press, New York. Ahmed, S.N. 1998 “The impact of the Asian crisis on migrant workers: Bangladesh perspective”, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 7(2-3). Asian Development Bank 1998 Outlook, Oxford University Press, New York. Banerjee, B. 1998 “Migration motivation, family links, and job search methods of rural-to- urban migrants in India”, in R.E. Bilsborrow (Ed.), Migration, Urbanization, and Development: New Directions and Issues, UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund), Kluwer Academic Publishers. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS) 1996a Statistical Pocket Book, Ministry of Planning. 1996b Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh, Ministry of Planning. Battistella, G. 1992 “Migration: opportunity or loss?”, in G. Battistella and A. Paganori (Eds), Philippine Labour Migration: Impact and Policy, Scalabrini Migration Center, Philippines. Bertocci, P.J. 1972 “Community structure and social rank in two villages in Bangladesh”, Contribution to Indian Sociology, New Series VI, December. CIA World Fact Book, Bangladesh www.odci.gob/cia/publications/factbook/bg.html. Hui, Weng-Tat 1998 “The regional economic crisis and Singapore: implications for labour migration”, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 7(2-3). Huq, M., and M. Sultan 1991 “Informality in development: the poor or entrepreneurs in Bangladesh”, in A. Chickering, and M. Salahdine (Eds), The Silent Revolution-the Informal Sector in Five Asian and Near Eastern Countries, ICP Press, California. Karim, Md. Rezaul 1992 “Bangladesh”, in Rural Poverty Alleviation Programmes in Asia, APO (Asian Productivity Organization), Tokyo. 122 Rahman

Karim, AHM, Zehadul, Moha Asri Abdullah, and Mohd Isa Haji Bakar 1999 Foreign Workers in Malaysia: Issues and Implications, Utusan Publications and Distributions, Kuala Lumpur. Lindquist, B.A. 1993 “Migration networks: a case study in the Philippines”, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 2(1). Mahamood, R.A. 1992 “Bangladeshi returned migrants from the Middle East: process, achievement, and adjustment,” in G. Gunatilleke (Ed.), The Impact of Labour Migration on Households: A Comparative Study in Several Asian Countries, United Nations University Press, Tokyo. Massey, D.S. 1993 “Theories of international migration: a review and appraisal”, Population and Development Review, September, 19(3). 1994 “An evaluation of international migration theory: the north Mexican case”, Population and Development Review, December, 20(4). 1998 “Why does occur? A theoretical synthesis”, in C. Hirschman, P. Kasinitz, J. De Wind (Eds), The Handbook of International Migration: The American Experience, Russell Sage Foundation, New York. Masum, M. 1989 “Report of a national consultant”, report prepared for the ILO, Dhaka, ILO, mimeo. Papademetriou, D., and P. Martin (Eds) 1991 The Unsettled Relationship: Labour Migration and Economic Development, Greenwood Press, New York. Portes, A., and J. Walton 1981 Labour, Class and the International System, Academic Press, New York. Rahman, A. 1986 Peasants and Classes: A Study in Differentiation in Bangladesh, Zec Books Ltd, London. Rahman, Md. M. 1998 “The Asian economic crisis and Bangladeshi workers in Singapore”, working paper series, no. 147, Department of Sociology, National University of Singapore, Singapore. Rigg, J. 1989 “International contract labour migration and the village economy: the case of Tambon Don Han, North-Eastern Thailand”, papers of the East-West Population Institute, no. 112, East-West Center, Honolulu. Stahl, C., and A. Habib 1991 “Emigration and development in South and South-East Asia”, in D. Papademetriou and P. Martin (Eds), The Unsettled Relationship: Labor Migration and Economic Development, Greenwood Press, New York. Tapinos, G. 1982 “The economic effects of intra-regional migration”, in ECWA, Inter- national Migration in the Arab World, ECWA (United Nations Economic Commission for Western Asia), Beirut. Todaro, M.P. 1969 “A model of labour migration and urban unemployment in less developed countries”, The American Economic Review, 59: 138-148. Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 123

1976 International Migration in Developing Countries: A Review of Theory, Evidence, Methodology and Research Priorities, A WEP Study, Inter- national Labour Office, Geneva. Urzua, R. 1981 Population Redistribution Mechanisms as Related to Various Forms of Development in Population Redistribution Politics in Development Plan- ning, United Nations, New York. Wong, D. 1997 “Transience and settlement: Singapore’s foreign labour policy”, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 6(2). 124 Rahman

TABLE 1 BACKGROUND DATA ON HOGLAKANDI, 1999

Description Hoglakandi

Area 4 square km. (around) Population 2,600 (around) Number of households 350-375 Number of migrant workers 225-235 Cultivable land remains under water From May to November Main source of income Potato farming Number of crops One (potato) Average yield for 30 decimal land 20-25 metric tons Cost of potato production Tk. 40,000 to 50,000 (for 30 decimal land) (US$ 800 to 1,000) Profit from potato production Tk. 90,000 to 120,000 (from 30 decimal land) (US$ 1,800 to 2,400) Other economic activities Fishing, day-labouring; rickshaw-pulling Mosques 4 (brick-built) Primary school 1 (brick-built) Madrassa (religious school) 1 (tin-sheet) Main communication within village Boat (May to November) Communication with district-city Paved road and boat Natural hazards Flood-prone area

Source: Author's field study.

TABLE 2 SINGAPORE: FOREIGN LABOUR FORCE, 1970-1998

Year Total labour force Foreign workers Percentage of labour force

1970 650,892 20,828 3.20 1980 1,077,090 119,483 7.40 1990 1,480,000 200,000 13.50 1995 1,749,300 384,800 21.99 1996 1,801,900 454,200 25.20 1997 1,876,000 506,600 27.01 1998 1,931,800 450,000 23.29

Source: Rahman, Md. Mizanur, 1999. Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 125

TABLE 3 THE IMPACT OF THE ASIAN ECONOMIC CRISIS ON MIGRANT WORKERS (1997-1998)

Country Legal Illegal Total migrant Impact of migrant workers: workers migrant migrant workers sacked and sent back home workers workers

South 300,000 123,299 423,299 From 12/1997 to 3/1998 under an Korea Some amnesty programme for observers undocumented migrant workers, estimate 45,569 left Korea. There were 95,027 the number foreigners who had overstayed their would be visas as of June 1998. 300,000 were more than deported (6/1997-1/1998). 100,000 700,000 more are to be expelled by 1999. Malaysia 1,140,000 560,000 1,700,000 Malaysia targets to repatriate about Some others 900,000 migrant workers, estimate the documented or undocumented, in number will 1998. Malaysia deported 255,483 be as high migrant workers by November 1998. as 3 million In February and March 1998, about 7,000 illegals had been arrested and awaiting repatriation. In mid-March 1998, 17,000 Indonesians were held in detention centres awaiting deportation. Thailand 316,000 943,000 1,260,000 Thailand planned on repatriating over Some others 900,000 undocumented migrants, with estimate the the first 300,000 scheduled for number will repatriation on 1 May 1998. 800,000 be more Burmese political refugees are at risk than of repatriation from Thailand. 6,000 2.5 million Burmese were expelled (6/1997- 1/1998). Singapore 506,600 n/a 506,600 More than 7,000 foreign workers had their work permits cancelled in the first 5 months of 1998 compared with about 6,000 cancellations for the whole of 1997. If this pace continues, there could be 16,800 cancellations for 1998. In 1998, 23,000 illegal and overstayers were arrested. In 1997, the number was 14,000. 170,000 130,000 300,000 Filipino workers protested on 6 December 1998 against proposed 20 per cent cut in their minimum wage, now $494 a month. Hong Kong has about 170,000 foreign domestic workers, of whom 80 per cent are Filipinos. 106,000 288,000 394,000 In 1997 Japan repatriated 40,000 Filipino and Korean workers. 239,000 100,000 339,000 Not available.

Source: Rahman, Md. Mizanur, 1999. 126 Rahman

TABLE 4 COST OF MIGRATION BY RETURNEE, 1999

Economic cost of migration (in Taka) Number Per cent

120,000 to 180,000 9 18 180,000 to 200,000 11 22 200,000 to 220,000 29 58 220,000 to 250,000 1 2

N = 50 100

TABLE 5 INTEREST RATES OF LOANS TO RETURNEES, 1999

Rates of interest (per cent) Number Per cent

2 to 5 3 6 6 to 7 9 18 8 to 9 16 32 10 to 11 8 16 Total 36 72 Non-borrowing involved 14 28

N = 50 100

TABLE 6 REMITTANCES OF RETURNEES, 1999

Volume of remittances (in Taka) Number Per cent

Below 180,000 18 36 180,000 to 220,000 8 16 220,000 to 250,000 4 8 250,000 to 350,000 10 20 350,000 to 450,000 4 8 450,000 to 750,000 4 8 750,000 to 1,100,00 2 4

N = 50 100

Source: US$ 1 = Taka 46 in 1996, 48 in 1998, 50 in 2000. Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 127

TABLE 7 PATTERNS OF REMITTANCES USE, 1999

Areas of use Average remittances used (per cent)

Loan repayment 52.41 House-making or renovation 2.59 Maintenance of family 30.64 Migration of relatives 8.60 Crop production 1.32 Business 1.52 Other purposes 2.92

N = 50 Total = 100

TABLE 8 EFFECTS ON PATTERNS OF LAND-HOLDINGS OF HOUSEHOLDS, 1999

Average land-holdings Before migration After migration Number Per cent (decimal) (decimal)

57.69 Nil 9 18 42.55 33.80 25 50 37.5 88.50 4 8 Nil Nil 12 24

N = 50 100

TABLE 9 NATURE OF LATRINES OF HOUSEHOLDS, 1999

Nature of latrine Before migration After migration (per cent) (per cent)

Sanitary 8 16 Semi-sanitary 6 16 Traditional 86 68

N = 50 100 100 128 Rahman

FIGURE 1 GROWTH OF BANGLADESHI WORKERS IN SINGAPORE (1980-1998)

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 May- 98

Source: Rahman, 1999. Emigration and development: the case of a Bangladeshi village 129

ÉMIGRATION ET DÉVELOPPEMENT: LE CAS D’UN VILLAGE AU BANGLADESH

Cet article examine les répercussions qu’a eues sur le développement la migration internationale de la main-d’œuvre dans un village du Bangladesh. Les données proviennent de Hoglakandi, un village situé à 30 km au sud-est de Dacca, la capitale. Un questionnaire structuré, avec des questions tantôt ouvertes tantôt à catégories fermées, a été rempli par 50 personnes rentrées de Singapour et complété par des entretiens approfondis.

L’émigration de la main-d’œuvre a souvent été considérée par de nombreux pays de départ comme une solution de facilité au problème du développement, en raison de son rôle dans l’atténuation du chômage, le renforcement de la balance des paiements et la formation de capital au niveau national. L’étude fait valoir que les causes et effets de l’émigration ne sont mieux compris que si l’on replace le processus dans son contexte local, puisque ce qui peut être utile au niveau national ne l’est pas nécessairement pour un ménage ou une communauté, et inversement.

L’article montre comment la contribution que la migration des travailleurs apporte à un pays ne consiste qu’à transformer la main-d’œuvre en un élément structurel de l’économie politique internationale. Le cas de Hoglakandi révèle que l’émigration de la main-d’œuvre n’alimente pas l’économie intérieure à partir d’une filière extérieure de transferts de fonds et de connaissances acquises: elle a plutôt tendance à absorber des ressources locales, ce qui a pour effet de freiner le développement.

EMIGRACIÓN Y DESARROLLO: EL CASO DE UNA ALDEA DE BANGLADESH

El artículo estudia las consecuencias que va a tener la migración internacional de trabajadores para el desarrollo de una aldea de Bangladesh. Los datos se refieren a Hoglakandi, una aldea situada a 30 Km al sudeste de Dacca, la capital de Bangladesh. Se utilizó un cuestionario estructurado que contenía cuestiones de las categorías abierta y cerrada y que se distribuyó entre 50 retornados de Singapur, habiéndose realizado además entrevistas suplementarias y en pro- fundidad.

Numerosos países de partida han considerado con frecuencia que la migración laboral internacional brindaría un cortocircuito para el desarrollo de los países de partida a causa de su acción mitigadora del desempleo, y de sus efectos benéficos sobre la balanza de pagos y la formación de capital en el ámbito nacional. El estudio considera que las causas y los efectos de la emigración 130 Rahman sólo pueden comprenderse bien cuando se sitúa el proceso dentro del contexto local, ya que lo que podría resultar ventajoso en escala nacional puede ir en detrimento de una familia o de una comunidad, o viceversa.

Se demuestra cómo la contribución de la migración laboral representa simplemente la transformación del trabajo en un componente estructural de la economía política internacional. La experiencia de Hoglakandi revela que la migración laboral no actúa como estimulante de la economía local a modo de aportador externo de remesas y adquisición de pericias, sino que más bien drena recursos locales que retrasan el desarrollo.