Journal of R u r a l E c o n o mics and Development vol. 18 No. 1
Rural Economics and Development
Factors Influencing Migration and the Poverty Profile of Migrants in Ilorin South Local Government Area of Kwara State, Nigeria
Amao J.O 1 * ; T. T. Awoyemi 2 ; K .Y. Ogunleye 1
1 Department of Agric. Econs. and Ext. LAUTECH. Ogbomoso. Oyo State. Nigeria 2 Depa r tment of Agricultural Economics. University of Ibadan, Ibadan , N i g er i a
Abs tract
This study examined the causes of migration and the poverty profile of migrants in Ilorin South Local Government Area of Kwara State. Primary data were collected from a total of 110 migrants using two staged purposive sampling procedure. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics and Foster, Greer and Thorbecke poverty analysis method. The results showed that the average sampled migrants were about 41 years old. Major ity of them were male, married and literate. Majority of them had household size of between 6 and 10 members. The study underlined the rural push, owing to low level of income as a major determinant for the process of migration. The possibility of getting job in Tedun was highest for migrants than in any other town in the study area. The period of waiting for job was lowest in Tedun and highest in Agoo than in any other town in the study area. Getting jobs through friends and relatives as sources of employm ent was highest in Tedun and Nigerb. The study revealed that, low income and better standard of living were the major factors causing migration in the study area.
K ey wo rds : Poverty, Migration, Migrants, Poverty profile
*Correspondence E -mai l : [email protected] ; Telephone number: +2348067509216
Introduction migration presents both challenges and opportunities (Bosewell and Crisp 2004). Migration is the movement of people The history of migration originated from from one geographical location to another peoples’ struggle to survive and to either on a temporary or permanent basis. prosper, to escape insecurity and purely Migrants are peopl e who in an effort to move in respons e to opportunity. improve their lives, move for a temporary Dike (2002) stated that the poor are or permanent period from their place of those that have limited and insufficient birth and who do not necessarily enjoy food, poor clothing, living in crowded the same right and entitlements available and dirty shelters, cannot afford medical to non migrant individual of that place. care and recreation, cannot meet family Migration and migrants should not b e and community obligations and other seen as problem to be dealt with as n ecessities of live. He also stated that
1 Journal of R u r a l E c o n o mics and Development vol. 18 No. 1
people are poverty striking when their (s ou r ce). It can lower the birth rate or income, even if adequate for survival, fall increase the average age of the markedly below the average obtained in population, ease unemployment or cause a their immediate community. Furthermore, shortage of workers, cause an influx of Windanapathirana et a l., (1993), defined new skills that are brought back or a loss poverty as a situation whereby one cannot of the more skilled and highly educated. generate sufficient income required for At t h e destination, migration can life sustenance. introduce new foods and cultures or cause Poverty has narrow and broad racial tensions, solve labour shortages or definitions partly because poverty is increase the stress on social services . If relative. On one hand it is physical immigration exceeds emigration, the because one can note its effects on those population of an area will rise beyond the affected by it, and on the other, it is natural increase. Forced migration occu r s relative because a poor person in any due to war, religious persecution, famine, country may not be perceived as such in slavery, politics, or natural disasters, another country. According to Aromolaran creating refugees. (1998), poverty is a condition in which an R ura l-urban migration is a s er iou s entity does not have enough resources at problem being encountered by developing its disposal to meet its short time countries. Fraser (1993) revealed that the consumption needs. Not only does poverty personal characteristics of the household influence who can migrate where, when heads had a bearing on the probability of and how but it may also be a primary migration. The coefficients of the cause of migration. Solemink (2002) also household characteristics, with the added that internal migration in Vietriam ex c ep t i o n of the number of adults in the relates to lack of land right in custom household, were found to have a land for certain excluded social groups. statistically weak association with the Movement of population away from decision to migrate. the home region, either from one country Migration is a never -ending problem to another ( international migration) or in modern society. In the traditional view from one part of a country to another point, migrant move across borders and (int er na l migration) is termed migration. barriers in search of a better life resulting Migrations may be temporary ( for from lack of opportunities at home and example, holidaymakers), seasonal pulled by hope of economic gain and (transhumance), or permanent (people freedom abroad (World Migration,2003). moving to cities to find employment) Many migrants, particularly those who (Grant, 2005). For people, migration is migrate through irregular channels find often a permanent (or long-t er m) themselves in vulnerable posit ion before, movement, which involves the break-u p of during and after their journey. This study a person's residential and social aims at analysing factors influencing environment. People leave areas due to migration and poverty profile of migrants push factors (negative factors such as in Ilorin South Local Government Area of overcrowding and lack of employment) Kwara State, Nigeria. Specifically the and are drawn to areas by pull factors study examined the characteristics of (such as better housing, better jobs, and mi grants, factors influencing migration improved facilities). Barriers such as and poverty status of migrants in the cost, language, politics, and knowledge study area. also influence migration. Migration has both positive and negative effects on the home region
2 Journal of R u r a l E c o n o mics and Development vol. 18 No. 1
2 . Methodology 2.3 Method of analysis
2 . 1. S tu d y a r ea Descriptive statistics and Foster, Greer and Thorbecke (FGT) index were The study was carried out in Ilorin used to describe and analyse the data South Local Government Area of Kwara collected. The FGT method subsumes the State, Nigeria. It’s headquarter is situated head count ratio and poverty gap or a t F u fu . Ilorin South Local Government income short fall. In addition, it allows Area comprises of villages and towns for the decomposition of poverty levels which are divided into four words: among the various categories of a Aka nb i 1 -5, Balogun Fulani 1 -3 , Oka ka population (FGT, 1984). It is generally and Okeogun. Ilorin South Local gi v en a s : Government share boundaries with 1 ()ZYi i Ifelodun Local Government Area to the q i1 Zi east, Ilorin East to the north, and bounded P α = N (1 ) by Asa Local Government Area to the South and Ilorin West Local Government Wh er e α = 0, 1 and 2 Area to the West. The study area is also N = Total number of migrants located between 8 0 5 North of equator and Q = Number of migrants below longitude 4 0 3 5 1 East of the Greenwich poverty line Meridian. It is situated in the transitional Y i = Income of the migrants zone between Northern and Southern parts of Nigeria. The vegetation of the area is The α takes a value of 0, 1 and 2 wit h Guinea wooded Savannah with umbrella different implications such as: P 0 wh en α shaped trees. Temperature of the area = 0, measures poverty incidence (the ranges between 25 0 C a nd 3 7 0 C while the index of the people that are rainfall distribution is seasonal starting impoverished); P 1 = when α = 1, measures from April to November. The people in the poverty depth or gap, (proportion of the area are mainly Yoruba, Tapa, Fulani the income that the average poor will and Hausa. Their major occupations are attain to get out of p overty); and P 2 wh en farming, trading and civil servants. α = 2, measures the severity of poverty, giving more weight to the poorest. The 2 . 2 Data Collection closer the FGT index is to 1, the greater the poverty level. The FGT index had Data were collected through interview been widely used to determine the level schedule. A two stage purposive sampli n g of poverty by various studies (Anya wu , et technique was used in collecting the data a l .,; 1997). Anyawu, et a l. , 1997 opined from the respondents. In the first stage 5 that the head count ratio measures the villages were randomly selected. In the percentages of the population below the second stage, snowball sampling method poverty line while the poverty gap was employed to select 22 migrants from measures the depth of poverty. The each village which added up to 110 headcount ratio is given as: respondents in all for the study. q H n (2) where H is head count ratio with value ranging from 0 to 1. The closer the value
3 Journal of R u r a l E c o n o mics and Development vol. 18 No. 1
is to 1, the higher the proportions of Table1: Distribution of the respondents’ personal characteristics people below the poverty line given by: Age (years) F r equ en cy P er cen ta g e > 2 5 1 0 9 . 1 ZYi i 2 5 - 30 1 8 1 6 . 4 Z 3 5 - 45 3 8 3 4 . 6 i (3 ) 4 5 - 55 2 2 2 0 . 0 5 5 - 65 1 5 1 3 . 6 where z is the poverty line a n d y 1 t h e 6 5 - 75 7 6 . 4 average income of the poor population. Marital status The value obtained gives an indication of S in gl e 2 9 2 6 . 4 the amount of money that would make the M ar r i ed 7 2 6 5 . 5 poor to cross the threshold of the poverty D i vor ced 6 5 . 5 Wi d owed 3 2 . 7 (Aigbokan, 1997). Poverty line on the Educational level other hand is the “cut -off” (the minimum) No formal Education 2 5 2 2 . 7 s tandard of expenditure on food or per Primary education 3 5 3 1 . 8 capita expenditure/income (Kanbur, Secondary education 2 8 2 5 . 5 1990). Various deviations of the minimum Tertiary education 2 2 2 0 . 0 per capita income have been reported H ous e s iz e (Ekong, 2003). 1 - 5 2 2 2 0 . 0 6 - 1 0 7 3 6 6 . 4 3 . Results and discussion A bo ve 1 0 1 5 1 3 . 6 G e n der M a l e 7 2 6 5 . 0 3 . 1 S o ci o -economic characteristics of F em al e 3 8 2 5 . 0 mi g r a nt s than older people meaning that, migration Table 1 shows that 34.6% of the declines with age, which is in conformity migrants were within the ages of 35 -4 5 with the study of Rado (1956) who found years, 20% were within the ages of 45 -5 5 out that majority of the migrants were years, 16.4% were within the ages of 25 - between the ages 40and 50 years. The 35 years, 12.7% were within the ages that results further show that 65% of the were less than 25 years and 6.4% were mi gr a nts were male. This is in conformity within the ages of 65 – 75 years. The with Ominde (1968) who found out that average age was 40.5 years, therefore it there was predominance of masculine implied that younger people had higher migration. It was also revealed that 65.5% tendency to migrate tertiary education. of the migrants were married, 26.4% of The majority of the migrants were them were single, 5.5% were divorced and literates, meaning that most of them 2.7% of them were widow. This implies migrated to get better economic activi t i es that majority of the respondents were to improve their standard of living in married. About 22.7% of the migrants had order to get out of poverty trap. About no formal education, 31.8% had primary 20% of the respondents had households of education, and 20.0% of them had. between 1 and 5 persons, while 66.3% of the households had membership between 6 3 . 2 Factors causing migration and 10 and just 13.6% of the households had members hip above 10. Table 2 revealed that about half of the respondents in T edun (50%), Okakae (55%) and Agoo had low income as reason
for migrating, while majority in Nigerb
4 Journal of R u r a l E c o n o mics and Development vol. 18 No. 1
(70%) and Al.centre also had low income a primary reason for migrating by 13.3% as cause for migration. This implies that in Tedun, 15% in Okakae, 10% in Agoo, expectation of high earning had pushed 5 % in Nigerb and non in Al.centre and the workers to migrate. Some 30% of t h e 9.2% in all villages together. Thus, rural migrants in Tedun and Okakae cited poor push on account of low level of income job prospect as the cause of migration and had been found as the main determinants in all villages together an average of 23% of migration. indicated this reason. Family conflict was
Table 2: Factors causing migration Facto rs T edun O ka kae Ag o o Nig erb Al. centre T o tal ca us i ng F % F % F % F % F % F % mig r at io n L o w inco me 1 5 5 0 1 1 5 5 1 0 5 0 1 4 7 0 1 7 8 5 6 7 6 0 Po o r J o b 9 3 0 6 3 0 5 2 5 4 2 0 2 1 0 2 6 2 3 Pro s pect 4 1 3 . 3 3 1 5 2 1 0 1 5 0 0 1 0 9 . 2 Fa mi ly 2 6 . 7 - 0 3 1 5 1 5 1 5 7 6 . 8 Co nflicts O thers T o tal 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0
3.2.1Economic activities before mi g r a ti o n 3 . 2. 2 Distribution of migrants according possibility of getting job Table 3 presents the economic activities engaged in by the immigrants Table 4 shows that in Tedun job was before migration. Half (50%) of the found by 53.3% of the migrants that came respondents in Tedun were involved in in to the village. Twenty six point seven agriculture. This also ranked highest percent (26 .7%) of the migrants came in (4 0 . 9 %) activity in which respondents were involved across the study area. This with an assurance of job and 20% came in activity is followed by civil service and with the hope of getting job. In Okakae, by studying. Their percentages were job was fixed for 25% of the migrants, 36.1% and 6.7% respectively. The 20% came in with the assurance of getting majority of migrants in Okakae were job. In Agoo 20% came in with job fixed, practicing agriculture 60%. In Agoo 5 5 % 35% came with the assur ance of getting of the migrants also practiced agriculture. job, and 45% came with the hope of In Niger majority were unemployed (40%) while half (50%) in Alcentre were getting job. In Nigerb none of the migrant studying before migrating. In all the came in with their job fixed, 50% of the villages agriculture and civil service are migrants came with the assurance of the main economic activities of migrants getting job and 50% with the hope of b ef or e mi gration with percentage of getting job. Lastly Alcentre had 65% of 40.9% and 21.8% respectively. mi gr a nt s hoping to get job.
5 Journal of R u r a l E c o n o mics and Development vol. 18 No. 1
T able 3 : Distribution of respondents according to economic activities before mig r at io n
Econ o mic T edu n Oka ka e Ago o Nig er b A l . cen tr e T ota l Act i v it i es F % F % F % F % F % F % Agriculture 1 5 5 0 . 0 1 2 6 0 . 0 1 1 5 5 . 0 5 2 5 . 0 2 1 0 . 0 4 5 4 0 . 9 Bu s in es s 1 3 . 3 1 5 . 0 3 1 5 . 0 2 1 0 . 0 - - 7 6 . 4 Civil Service 1 1 3 6 . 7 4 2 0 . 0 5 2 5 . 0 2 1 0 . 0 2 1 0 . 0 2 4 2 1 . 8 S t u dyin g 2 6 . 7 1 5 . 0 1 5 . 0 3 1 5 . 0 1 0 5 0 . 0 1 7 1 5 . 5 Unemployment 1 3 . 3 2 1 0 . 0 - - 8 4 0 . 0 6 3 0 . 0 1 7 1 5 . 5 T ota l 3 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Table 4: Distribution of migrant workers according to possibility of getting job
M igr a nt T edu n Oka ka e Ago o Nig er b Al. c ent r e T ota l wor k er s F % F % F % F % F % F % F or wh o m J ob fou nd 1 6 5 3 . 3 5 2 5 4 2 0 - - 2 1 0 2 7 2 4 . 5 Assurance of job 8 2 6 . 7 4 2 0 7 3 5 1 0 5 0 5 2 5 3 4 3 0 . 9 Hope to get job 6 2 0 1 1 5 5 9 4 5 1 0 5 0 1 3 6 5 4 9 4 4 . 5 T ota l 3 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
Table 5: Distribution of migrants according to period of waiting to get job
Waiting Period T edu n Oka ka e Ago o Nig er b Al. c ent r e T ota l of getting job F % F % F % F % F % F % 1 – 1 0 da ys 1 1 3 6 . 7 4 2 0 - 0 1 5 - 0 1 6 1 4 . 5 1 0 - 2 0 da ys 9 3 0 4 2 0 2 1 0 - 0 2 1 0 1 7 1 5 . 5 2 0 d a ys – 1 m on th 5 1 6 . 7 2 1 0 5 2 5 1 5 2 1 0 1 5 1 3 . 6 1 m on th – 6 m on th s - 0 2 1 0 3 1 5 3 1 5 1 5 9 8 . 2 Above 6 months 2 6 . 7 6 2 0 7 3 5 1 0 5 8 4 0 3 3 3 . 0 1 yea r 1 3 . 3 1 5 2 1 0 4 2 0 5 2 5 1 3 1 1 . 8 Above 1 year 2 6 . 7 1 5 1 1 5 1 5 2 1 0 7 6 . 4 T ota l 3 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0
6 Journal of Economics and Rural Development vol. 18 No. 1
3.2.3 Waiting period of migrants before getting job 3 . 2. 4 Sources of employment to migrants
Table 5 showed that 36.7 % of the Table 6 showed that 72.7% of mi grants in Tedun did not wait at all to r es pondents in the study area had get job, 30% of migrants waited up to 10 relatives or friends as sources of their days; 16.7% waited for 10 -20 days; none employment. The job in this segment is waited from 20 days to 1 month, 6.7% provided generally by relatives/friends. waited for 1 -6 months; 3.3% waited for 6 Also, 90% of the migrants in Tedun, 75% months to one year before getting job and Okakae, 90% in Nigerb, 70% in Al centre 6.7% waited for more than a year before and 89.1% in all villages got job through getting job. Okakae had 20% of migrants relatives/friends. Thus, close links with with no waiting period, 1 – 10 days and 1 relatives and friends were found as the – 6 months before getting job which basis for getting job. Migrants that accounted for 35%, and 50% of migrants secured their employment through in Nigerb waited from 1 - 6 months, while advertisement were 6.7% in Tedun, 5% in in A1.centre 40% waited from 1 – 6 Okakae, 20% in Agoo, 5% in Nigerb, 25% months likewise. Thus, the study finds in A1 c entre respectively and 11.8% for out that, to enter in to the cities, the the total sample. For the migrants that got migrants requires more than 6 months their employment through other means getting job which is the longest period for apart from friends/relatives and all villages. advertisement, the study revealed that 3.3% of them were in Tedun, 20% in Okakae, 10% in Agoo, 5% in Nigerb, 5 % in A1 centre and 8.2% for the whole sample respectively.
Table 6: Sources of employment to migrants Employment types T edu n Oka ka e Ago o Nig er b Al. c ent r e T ota l F % F % F % F % F % F % Relative/friends 2 7 9 0 1 5 7 5 1 4 7 0 1 8 9 0 1 4 7 0 9 8 8 9 . 1 Advertisement 2 6 . 7 1 5 4 2 0 1 5 5 2 5 1 3 1 1 . 8 Any other means 1 3 . 3 4 2 0 2 1 0 1 5 1 5 9 8 . 2 T ota l 3 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 3 . 3. Poverty profile of migrant having monthly per capita income of households by types of dwellings N360.00 or more have been defined as above the poverty line while household It has been noted that during 1993 – having less than N360.00, were below the 1994, in urban a reas, persons having per poverty line. capita income of N258.70 or more were T he p o verty profile of households in below the poverty line. By implication, Tedun is portrayed in Table 7. There were people having below monthly per capita 20 households out of 30 (or 66.7%) living inc o me of N258.70 were defined as being below poverty line. About 77.8% of this below the poverty line. The moderate group of people live in a room apartment, poverty line was defined as N1 , 5 2 4. 5 7, 73.3% in bungalows/ flats and 33.3% in while the core/extreme poverty threshold Du p let s . In sharp contrast to the above, was put at N762.29. In the households 10 households (33.3%) were above the
7 Journal of Economics and Rural Development vol. 18 No. 1
poverty line. It suggests that as we move Poverty profile of households in Agoo from inferior type of dwelling to superior is presented in Table 9. It was found that ones, the households living below the 75% of dwellers in a room apartment, poverty line declines, whereas, non poor 70% of dwellers bungalow/flat, and 65% households tend to increase. The m o nt hl y of dwellers in all types of dwellings were per capita expenditure of households living below poverty line. In sharp living below poverty lines come to contrast to the above 7 households (35%) N306.21 for one room dwellers, N2 9 8. 6 1 were above poverty line. It suggests that for bungalow/flats dwellers, N351.42 for as we were moving from inferior type of duplets dwellers and N303.22 being dwelling to superior ones, the number of average for all dwellers. The monthly per households living below th e poverty line capita expenditure c o mes t o N3 3 4 . 0 4, declines, whereas, non poor households N3 1 1. 7, N350.11 and to N2 3 9 . 0 2 tend to increase. The monthly per capita respectively for the non poor. This is also income of the household living below in conformity with the study by Tiwari poverty line who dwell, bungalow or flat, and Goel (2002). duplet and all type dweller is N3 1 1. 2 0, The poverty profile of households N3 0 0. 0 4, N356.17 and N312.10 in Okakae is shown in Table 8. It was respectively, while their monthly per found that 5 households (83.3%) in r oo m capita expenditure comes to N2 9 3 . 1 3, apartment; 6 households (60.0%) in N2 5 5. 6 1, N293.00 and to N2 7 4 . 1 4 bungalow or flats; 2 households (50%) in respectively. This is also in conformity duplets types of dwellings, and 13 with study of Tiwari and Goel (2002). households (65%) in all types of Poverty profile of households in dwellings were below the poverty line. On Nigerb is presented in Table 10. It was the other hand, one household (16.7%) in fou n d ou t that 71.4% of dwellers living in a room apartment, 4 house holds (40%) in a room apartment, 66.7% dwellers in bungalow or flat, 2 households (50%) in bungalow/Flats, 25% of dwellers in duplets and 7 household (35%) in all duplets types of dwelling, and 60% of types of dwellings had been found to be dwellers in all types of dwelling were living above the poverty line. Thus like below the poverty line. On the other Tedun, poverty tends to come down as we hand, 2 households (28.6%) in a room move from inferior type of dwelling to a partment, 3 households (33.3%) in s u p erior ones. Also, households living bungalow/flats; 3 households (75%) in above poverty line increases from inferior duplets, and 8 households (40%) in all types of dwellings to superior ones. It types of dwelling lived above the poverty was observed that the monthly per capita li n e. Thus, poverty tends to come down income of a room apartment dwellers as we move from inferior type of dwelling living below poverty line came to to the superior ones, also the number of N321.22, while for those liv i ng i n households living above poverty line bungalow/flats, duplets and all types of increases from inferior types of dwellings dwellers it was N3 01 .1 4, N354.01, and to superior ones. The monthly per capita N311.09 respectively. The monthly per income of a room apartment dwellers capita expenditure for the corresponding living below poverty line comes to households came to N2 9 6 . 7 7, N2 4 5. 2 0, N311.03, wile for bungalow/flat and N280.00 and N261.32 respectively for the du p l et s types of dweller it was N3 0 1. 2 9, different types of dwellers. This is also in a nd N323.4 respectively. The month per conformity with the study of Tiwari and capita expenditure for the corresponding Goel (2002). households came to N2 9 3 . 0 4, N2 0 7. 0 4,
8 Journal of Economics and Rural Development vol. 18 No. 1
N2 5 4 a nd N213.00 for single room the civil servants needed about 4 percent apartment, bungalow/flat, duplets and all income increase to get out of poverty types of dwelling respectively. T his is line, while household headed by Business also in conformity with the study of men, farmers, students and unemployed Tiwari and Goel (2002). had the highest poverty gap and they Poverty profile of households in required 28% percent increase in income Alcentre is displayed in Table 11. It was to get out of poverty. found out that 75% of one room apartment, 50% of bungalow/flat, 33% of 4 . Conclusion and recommendations duplets and 50% of all types of dwelling s were living below poverty line. In The major findings of this study show contrasts to the above, 10 households that about 67.3% of the migrants were (50%) in all were living above the between the ages 25 – 55 years, more than poverty line. It suggests that as we move 60% of the migrants were male, majority from inferior type of dwelling to superior (52.7%) of the migrants received either ones, the households living below the primary or secondary education while poverty line declines, whereas non -p o or 20% received more than secondary households tend to increase. The monthly education, 22.7% had received no formal per capita income of households living education. Most (65%) of the migrants below poverty lines comes to N324.63 for were married while 26.4% were single. a room dwellers, N309.46 for bungalow/ Low income wa s found to be the major fla t s, N315.07 for duplets dwellers and factor causing migration. About 60.7% N3319.00 for all types of dwellers, whi l e migrated because of low income while the monthly per capita expenditure came 23.6% migrants moved because of poor t o N2 8 6 . 11 , N24 9. 3, N261.00 and to N253.00 for one room apartment, job prospects. The study also showed that bungalow/flat, duplets and all types of majority (40.9%) of the migrants were dwelling respectively. This is also in farmers while about 15.8% were formerly conformity with the study of Tiwari and unemployed. Most (44.5%) of the Goel (2002). migrants moved with the hope of getting job while only 24.8% had their job fixed. 3 . 4. Po ver t y profile among different Majority (30%) of the migrants waited for occupational groups 1 – 6 months before getting jobs in their The household heads that were not new locations and 80% of the migrants yet employed had the highest poverty got their jobs throu gh relatives and incidence (46%). Civil servants headed fr iends . The study further reveals that households had least poverty incidence of poverty tends to come down as we move (22%). Student headed households also from inferior types of dwellings to the had 35% poverty inci dence while the superior ones. Member of households business headed households had 27% poverty incidence (Table 12). Poverty gap living above poverty line increase from or depth is the average gap between inferior types of dwellings to superior expenditure or income of the poor and on es Household heads that were not yet poverty line. This measures the extent to employed had the highest poverty which the income of the poor lie below incidence (0.46) while the civil servant t he p o v er t y li n e- the higher the figure, headed households had the least poverty the wider the gap. Table 12 showed that incidence of (0.22).
9 Journal of Economics and Rural Development vol. 18 No. 1
Table 7: Poverty profile of migrants household by types of dwelling in Tedun Pa r ti c ul ar s T e d un A r oom Bungalow/Fl D up l e t s T ot a l D w e lli n g s a t Household size 3 . 5 6 . 3 8 , 5 5 . 9 No of households 9 1 5 6 3 0 Households living below poverty 7 1 1 2 2 0 l in e ( N os ) ( 7 7. 8 ) ( 7 3. 3 ) 3 3 . 3 6 6 . 7 Households living above poverty 2 4 4 1 0 l in e ( N os ) ( 2 2. 2 ) ( 2 6. 7 ) 6 6 . 7 3 3 . 3 Monthly per capita income of households living: (a) Below Poverty Line 3 0 6. 2 1 2 9 8. 6 1 3 5 1. 4 2 3 0 3. 2 2 (b) Above Poverty line 7 7 6. 1 5 8 4 1. 2 9 1 , 12 1. 20 8 6 3. 2 0 Monthly per capita expenditure of Households living: (a) Below Poverty lin e 3 3 4. 0 4 3 1 1. 0 7 3 5 0. 1 1 3 2 0. 0 6 (b) Above Poverty Line. 5 4 2. 1 9 6 4 3. 4 4 7 7 1. 0 3 6 7 1. 2 6
Table 8: Poverty profile of migrants households by types of dwelling in Okakae
Particulars D w e l l i n g s A r o o m B u n g a l o w / D u p l e t s Al l F l a t Household size 2 . 9 3 . 4 5 . 1 4 . 7 No of households 6 1 0 4 2 0 Household living b e l o w poverty line 5 6 2 1 3 ( N o s ) ( 8 3 . 3 ) ( 6 0 . 0 ) ( 5 0 ) ( 6 5 ) Household living above poverty line 1 4 2 7 ( N o s ) ( 1 6 . 7 ) ( 4 0 . 0 ) ( 5 0 ) ( 3 5 ) Monthly per capita income of household l i v i n g : (a) Below Poverty L i n e 3 2 1 . 2 2 3 0 1 . 1 4 3 5 4 . 0 1 3 1 1 . 0 9 (b) Above Poverty line 7 0 1 . 0 5 7 6 1 . 9 1 1 , 2 0 1 . 4 0 9 0 7 . 2 5 Monthly per capita expenditure of Household living: (a) Below Poverty line 2 9 6 . 1 7 2 4 5 . 2 0 2 8 0 . 0 0 2 6 1 . 3 2 (b) Above Poverty Line. 6 2 4 . 1 0 5 4 9 . 0 4 8 0 5 . 6 1 5 9 3 . 4 4
10 Journal of Economics and Rural Development vol. 18 No. 1
Table 10: Poverty profile of migrants households by types of dwelling in Nigerb
Particulars D w e l l i n g s A r o o m B u n g a l o w / D u p l e t s A l l F l a t Household size 3 . 6 1 5 . 4 2 3 . 5 4 5 . 0 3 No of households 7 6 9 4 2 0 Households living b e l o w poverty line (Nos ) 5 6 1 1 2 ( 7 1 . 4 ) ( 6 6 . 7 ) ( 2 5 ) ( 6 0 ) Households living above poverty line (Nos) 2 3 3 8 ( 2 8 . 6 ) ( 3 3 . 3 ) ( 7 5 ) ( 4 0 ) Monthly per capita income of households l i v i n g : (a) Below Poverty Line 3 1 1 . 0 4 3 0 1 . 2 9 3 2 3 . 4 0 3 1 0 . 9 1 (b) Above Poverty line 6 4 0 . 1 4 5 9 3 . 0 9 7 4 0 . 1 6 8 0 . 8 1 Monthly per capita expenditure of Households living: (a) Below Poverty line 2 9 3 . 0 4 2 0 7 . 0 4 2 5 4 . 7 1 2 1 3 . 0 0 (b) Above Poverty Line. 7 6 1 . 2 3 7 0 7 . 4 3 8 5 3 . 1 2 7 8 2 . 2 0
Table 11: Poverty profile of migrants’ households by types of dwelling in Al centre
Particulars D w e l l i n g s A r o o m B u n g a l o w / D u p l e t s A l l F l a t Household size 2 . 6 1 4 . 0 5 2 . 1 4 . 3 2 No of households 4 1 0 6 2 0 Households living b e l o w poverty line 3 5 2 1 0 ( N o s ) ( 7 5 ) ( 5 0 ) ( 3 3 . 3 ) ( 5 0 ) Households living above poverty line 1 5 4 1 0 ( N o s ) ( 2 5 ) ( 5 0 ) ( 6 6 . 7 ) ( 5 0 ) Monthly per capita income of households living: (a) Below Poverty Line 3 2 4 . 6 3 3 0 9 . 4 6 3 1 5 . 0 7 3 1 9 . 0 0 (b) Above Poverty line 9 6 7 . 0 7 9 4 3 . 0 7 1 , 1 4 3 . 0 0 9 6 3 Monthly per capita expenditure of Households living: (a) Below P overty line 2 8 6 . 1 1 2 4 4 . 0 3 8 5 3 . 0 3 2 5 3 . 0 0 (b) Above Poverty Line. 7 6 9 . 0 0 7 4 3 . 1 5 7 5 3 . 1 3 7 2 0 . 0 0
T able 1 2 : Poverty Profile among different people. Men had higher propensity to occupational groups migrate than women. People who were literate had hi gh tendency to migrate than Occupational Poverty profile those who were illiterate. Married people gr ou p P 0 P 1 P 2 migrated more than the unmarried people. Fa r mer s 0 . 3 2 0 . 2 4 0 . 1 5 Low income and better standard of living Bu s in es s 0 . 2 7 0 . 1 7 0 . 0 8 were found to be the major factors Civil servants 0 . 2 2 0 . 1 5 0 . 0 9 causing migration. S t u dyin g 0 . 3 5 0 . 1 6 0 . 1 0 In the light of the findings of the Un emp lo y ed 0 . 4 6 0 . 1 8 0 . 1 2 study, the following recommendations were made: * Provision of more job opportunities Young people between ages 28 – 5 5 y ea r s for the people, which could be achieved were likely to migrate than the aged
11 Journal of Economics and Rural Development vol. 18 No. 1
by the establishment of cottage industries Nigeria. Nigerian Economic Society by both individual and government. (NES). Pp. 93 – 1 2 0 * Educational institution should be Aromolaran, A.B (1998); Analysis of established in the rural ar eas up to the households consumption pattern of tertiary level for the benefits of the rural animal products in South Western populace and to prevent further Nigeria. In, Animal Agriculture in migration. West Africa: The Sustainability * Provision of social amenities for the Qu es t io n. Proc. Silver Ann. Conf. rural dwellers is inevitable. NSAP and Inaug. Conf. WASAP, * Migration should also be well managed Abeokuta, 21 -26 March, 1 998, p. 458 - in order to move the benefits to poor 4 5 9 . p eop le and also to ensure that movement Bosewell, C. and Crisp, J. (2004); occur to the mutual benefits of migrants, “Poverty, international migration and society and government. Mutual benefit Asylum, policy Brief” No. 8, United can be achieved through policies, laws Nations University – World institution and administration that balance the right for Development Economic Research. and obligations of migrants with social Dike, V. (2002); “Poverty in Nigeria.” interests and government responsibilities. The Daily Indepen dent (Opinion * Participation in secondary occupation column), October 6, 2002, Pp. 15. should be encouraged to boost income Ekong E.E. (2003); “ Contribution of earning of the migrants and capacity to recent metro non metro migrants to the increase their per capita income. no n- metro population and labor s ou r ces ” Agricultural Economic Refe re nces Res ea r ch, Vol. 30, No. 4, Pp. 15 -2 6. Foster, J.E. Greer, J. and Thorbec k e, E. Afolabi, A.O.(2003); “Migration and (1984); “A class of decomposable Development.” How to make migra t ion poverty measures. Econometrica 52 (1) work for poverty reduction, Sixth P p. – 7 6 1 – 7 66 . Report of Session 2003 -03. House of Fraser G.C.G (1993); An economic Common International Development analysis of factors influencing rural Comm Atsaineta (eds). Economic urban migration in Southern Africa. Policy expenses in Africa – wha t ha ve Journal of Development Southern we learned AERC, Nairobi Pp4 -6. Africa 10(3)437. Afolabi A.O. (1998); “Psychosocial Gra nt S. (2005); International migration effects of migration on Nigeria’s and human rights. A paper prepared security.” A post graduate seminar for the policy analysis and research paper presented at the University of programme of the Global Commission Ib a da n. on International Migration p1. Aigbokan B.E.(1997);“Poverty alleviation Kanbur, R. (1990); “Migration and in Nigeria: Some macroeconomic development:” Blind faith and hard to issues” In Egbon, P.C. (Ed.). Poverty fin d fact, migration policy institution, alleviation in Nigeria proceeding of / Nov emb er . Nig er ia n Economic Society (WES) Kanbur, R. (1990); “Poverty and social Annual Conference, Pat Mag Press Ltd dimensions of structure adjustment in Ibadan Pp. 19.Anyawu J.D.(1997); Cote D’Ivoure,” a social dimensions of “Poverty in Nigeria Concepts, the Adjusted in sub -saharan Africa. measurements and determinants.” P.J. S.D.A. working Paterscnece, the world Obaseki (eds.) Poverty Alleviation in bank, Washington D.C. Pp .
12 Journal of Economics and Rural Development vol. 18 No. 1
Ominde, S. H. (1968); “Land and population movement in Kenya. North- Western University Press. Rado, S. (1956); “Migration and poverty:” Asia Pacific population Journal, 17(4): 6 7 – 82 . Solemink, M. (2002); “Measuring changes in Poverty: A Methodologi es ca s e study of Indonesia during the adjustment period” World Bank Economic Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, Pp. 5 7 – 82 . Tiwari R.S and Goel M.S (2002); “Migration pattern, poverty profile and consumption pattern: A case study of unregistered informal sector worker s in cities of Agra and Canpur in Uttar Pradesh and Puri in Orissa. The Indian Journal of Economics. Vol 52 No326 pp303 -3 11 . Widanaparathirana, A.S. (1993); “Poverty and Remittances in Lesotho” Jo u r n a l of African Economics 2 (1) Pp. 49 – 7 3 . World migrat ion (2003); “ Migration and Urbanization in Africa,” C olu mb ia University Press, New York and London. Washington D.C. Pp. 89.
13