This paper examined the effects of rural-urban migration on the rural communities of Southeastern Nigeria. Data were obtained using mixed methods approach comprising questionnaire surveys and key informant interviews. Six rural local government areas (LGAs) were selected based on population size and spatial equity from two states of Southeastern Nigeria. From each of the rural LGAs, fifty migrant-sending households were sampled for the study. Multiple regression and hierarchical cluster analyses were used to estimate and categorize the effects of rural-urban migration due to remittances and community projects executed by the rural-urban migrants, respectively. In addition, the Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were utilized in prioritizing areas for development interventions in the rural communities. The regression analysis shows that rural-urban migration contributes significantly towards the development of their rural communities through monetary remittances and the involvement of the rural-urban migrants in community development projects. Based on the findings, recommendations such as initiation of development projects based on the identified needs of each of the rural communities to augment the effects of migration in the study area are made.
Globally, the nexus between migration and development has remained an issue under vigorous academic debate [
In this regard, rural-urban migration results from the search for perceived or real opportunities as a consequence of rural-urban inequality in wealth [
Migration has also been identified as a survival strategy utilized by the poor, especially the rural dwellers. The assessment of the effects of migration on rural areas has remained relevant since migration acts as a catalyst in the transformation process of not only the destiny of individual migrants but also the conditions of family members left behind, local communities, and the wider sending regions. One significant source of development for the rural populace as a result of this increasing drift towards the cities is remittances. Recently, migrants’ remittances and the income multipliers they create are becoming critical resources for the sustenance strategies of receiving households as well as agents of regional and national development [
Consequently, the effects of rural-urban migration in the rural places of origin of migrants may be manifest in two ways. First, the rural-urban migrants send remittances to their relatives in the rural areas and these remittance-receiving households use the remittances for various purposes. Secondly, these rural-urban migrants execute various rural developmental projects in their rural areas of origin. In Nigeria, most migrants coming from a particular rural community to live in an urban area usually form rural community associations in the urban area. These community associations in the urban areas articulate, from time to time, the developmental needs of their rural communities of origin and contribute resources to execute projects such as road construction and the award of educational scholarships to students in the rural areas.
A combination of these rural community projects executed by the rural-urban migrants and the uses of remittances by rural remittance-receiving households serve as indicators of the effects of rural-urban migration on the population concerned. In this regard, and in tandem with contemporary praxis, the paradigm shift in the meaning of development emphasizes personal satisfaction consequent on improvement in the quality of life of the “individual” and/or “population” involved in the developmental process [
In different parts of the world, Nigeria inclusive, research has been carried out on the effects of migration on the migrants’ rural communities of origin. Some of these studies include those of Glytsos [
Rural out-migration is important in the Igbo speaking areas of Southeastern Nigeria. This is because the mass exodus of people from the overpopulated areas of Igboland has been one of the most spectacular phenomena of the 20th century in Nigeria [
In other parts of Nigeria, the factors associated with drift of youths from rural to urban areas in Kwara state have been examined [
From the review of the literature, it is clear that most of the rural-urban migration studies done in Nigeria virtually excluded the effects of these rural-urban migrations on the rural sending communities and are in most cases sample surveys on characteristics and determinants of migration. There is, therefore, a need for studies that will determine the effects of rural-urban migration on rural communities in developing countries especially in Nigeria where rural-urban migration has been on the increase in recent times. The estimation of the effects of rural-urban migration on the rural communities will aid policy interventions by governments and development agencies in their quest to facilitate the development of these rural communities. The purpose of this research is therefore to examine the effects of rural-urban migration on rural communities of Abia and Imo states of Nigeria.
The study area comprises six rural local government areas (LGAs) in Abia and Imo states. They exhibit homogenous, environmental, and agro-climatic characteristics, are part of the Igbo-speaking areas of Nigeria, and were formerly a single state (i.e., old Imo state) before Abia state was carved out of the old Imo state in 1991. These states are located between latitudes 4°80′′ and 8°47′′ north of the equator and longitudes 6°67′′ and 7°13′′ east of the Greenwich meridian. The population of the rural LGAs used in this study according to the 2006 population census is 593,222 persons. This number is made up of 298,171 males and 295051 females as shown in Table
Population distribution of the study area.
LGA | Males | Females | Total population |
---|---|---|---|
Ikwuano (Abia state) | 70,509 | 67,388 | 137,897 |
Isikwuato (Abia state) | 56,660 | 59,134 | 115,794 |
Ukwa East (Abia state) | 29,410 | 28,729 | 58,139 |
Nkwerre (Imo state) | 40,845 | 39,425 | 80,270 |
Onuimo (Imo state) | 50,779 | 48,589 | 99,368 |
Owerri West (Imo state) | 49,968 | 51,786 | 101,754 |
Source: Federal Government of Nigeria [
From Table
In Nigeria, a rural area is defined as an area having a population of less than 20,000 persons [ Abia state: Imo state:
From each of the rural local government areas (LGAs), fifty rural-urban migrant-sending households were used for the study totaling three hundred households. In the selection of the households, the communities in each LGA were arranged in terms of their population size based on the results of the 1991 population census. The results of the 1991 census were used because the results of the 2006 census do not contain community level data. After arranging the communities according to their population sizes, the five least populated communities were selected from each LGA for sampling. In each of the selected rural communities, ten rural-urban migrant-sending households were randomly selected and used for this study.
This study utilized a mixed methods approach for data collection and analysis. Mixed methods approaches have recently been utilized in development research in Nigeria and have been noted to be user-friendly especially where there is paucity or absence of baseline data or when dealing with research participants with low literacy levels [
In addition, two key informant interviews (KIIs) were also conducted with one traditional ruler and one opinion leader considered to be adequately knowledgeable in each of the sampled rural LGAs. Thus, in each of the states, six KIIs were conducted giving a total of twelve KIIs for the two states. The interviews were used to gather ethnographic information, especially those which may be difficult to be adequately captured by questionnaires because African social dynamics do not always or often find expression, fully or partially, in figures [
The nature of remittances sent to the rural households by the rural-urban migrants, the uses of these remittances by the rural receiving households, and the nature of developmental projects executed by the rural-urban migrants in their rural communities of origin were highlighted with descriptive statistics. Furthermore, regression analysis was used to quantify the effects of rural-urban migration on the rural migrant-sending communities in the study area using data on the projects executed by the rural-urban migrants in these rural communities and the various uses of remittances by the rural receiving households. According to Anyadike [
In addition, the Chi-square analytical technique was used to test the variations observed in the effects of rural-urban migration in the rural areas, while the Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance by ranks test (Kruskal-Wallis test) was used to prioritize the developmental impact variables in the study area for policy formulation and implementation. The Kruskal-Wallis test which is a nonparametric method of analysis is an advanced form of the Mann-Whitney
A major contemporary issue in migration research is that of remittances. Literature abounds, as noted in earlier section of this work, on the importance of remittances as most people left behind by migrants always look up to the migrants for remittances. The importance of remittance transfer is that it will help those left in the rural areas to cope with the hardship associated with diminishing and/or complete depletion of the environmental resources on which their livelihood depends. According to our respondents, the rural-urban migrants remit any or all of the food, money, and clothing to their rural households of origin. The results in Table
Nature of remittances and community projects by the migrants.
Abia | Imo | |
---|---|---|
Send remittances | ||
Yes | 81.00% | 20.60% |
No | 19.00% | 79.40% |
Nature of remittances | ||
Money | 82.50% | 14.70% |
Cloth | 65.00% | 8.80% |
Food stuffs | 27.50% | 2.90% |
Frequency of remittances | ||
Every week | 22.50% | 5.90% |
Once every month | 40.00% | 44.10% |
Twice a month | 22.50% | 26.50% |
Once a year | 7.50% | 0.00% |
Less than once a year | 0.00% | 8.80% |
During festivals | 7.50% | 14.70% |
Amount of remittances (in Nigerian naira*) | ||
Less than 2000 | 18.40% | 0.00% |
2000–4000 | 28.90% | 35.30% |
4001–6000 | 26.30% | 23.50% |
6001–8000 | 7.90% | 5.90% |
8001–10000 | 7.90% | 11.80% |
More than 10000 | 10.60% | 23.50% |
Involvement in community projects | ||
Yes | 72.10% | 27.90% |
No | 17.60% | 82.40% |
This sharp difference in the proportion of rural households that receive remittances between the two states may be due to the fact that most of the heads of the rural households in Imo state are very educated and retired civil servants who live on their pension and depend less on remittances from their wards who migrated to the city. On the other hand, the majority of the heads of the rural households in Abia state are not too educated, engage more in petty trading than in paid and pensionable employment, and lack sufficient money for the sustenance of their households. They therefore depend so much on remittances from their wards in the urban area as a means of livelihood. In addition, the most common remittance to these rural households according to findings of this study is in the form of money as revealed by 82.50% and 14.70% of the heads of the rural households in Abia and Imo states, respectively. It can also be seen that the majority of the rural households comprising of at least 40% of the rural households in Abia and Imo states receive remittances once every month. The information on the amount of remittances shows that most remittances in both states range between 2,001 and 6,000 Nigerian naira. The proportions of rural households that receive remittances within this range of money make up over 50% of respondents in both states.
Key informant information reveals that most of these rural households depend solely on agriculture and other primary economic activities for their livelihood. As such, a steady supply of remittances is viewed with utmost importance in augmenting their farm proceeds and their other sources of livelihoods despite the fact that the amount may appear to be too small. Furthermore, this study found out that the majority of these rural households does not even earn up to 5000 Nigerian naira per month from the sale of their agricultural produce in a month, and as a matter of fact they eagerly expect these remittances from the rural-urban migrants. The fact that the rural-urban migrants mostly remit once a month is also an indication that whatever resources left at home for their relatives in the rural areas are inadequate to cater for their needs. It also seems that they mostly remit once a month when they have collected their salaries or wages.
Finally, the results in Table
Some of the rural projects these migrants engage in include road construction and rehabilitation, sinking of community water boreholes, rehabilitation of schools, and awarding of scholarships to brilliant and indigent students.
In this study, the estimation of the effects of rural-urban migration in the rural communities (places of origin of migrants) is anchored on two categories of independent variables. The first category of variables is the various rural developmental projects executed by the rural-urban migrants in their rural communities of origin. The second category of variables is the various ways the rural remittance-receiving households use remittances received from the rural-urban migrants. A combination of these two categories of independent variables, according to the respondents, leads to the development of the rural communities, and/or the improvement in the quality of life of the rural populations.
Consequently, the regression analysis results shown in Table
Regression analysis results of effects of rural-urban migration.
Migration impact variables | Regression coefficients | Significance level |
---|---|---|
Debt repayment | 0.080 | 0.03* |
Buying of food | 0.001 | 0.02* |
House building/maintenance | 0.043 | 0.12 |
Savings | 0.013 | 0.14 |
Education of children | 0.054 | 0.02* |
Investments | 0.044 | 0.12 |
Funerals | −0.067 | 0.16 |
Purchase of household goods | 0.029 | 0.03* |
Education project | 0.044 | 0.00* |
Electrification project | 0.124 | 0.02* |
Water supply project | 0.097 | 0.04* |
Road project | 0.007 | 0.13 |
Agricultural project | −0.091 | 0.02* |
Church project | 0.046 | 0.35 |
Other projects | 0.052 | 0.23 |
The results in Table
These regression coefficients were subsequently multiplied by the frequency of respondents that indicated that they engage in the projects and the frequency of usage of remittances for different purposes in the study area so as to quantify the aggregate magnitude of the effects of rural-urban migration in the different rural communities using all the independent variables. As shown in Table
Aggregate magnitude of the effects of rural-urban migration.
Area of study | Aggregate developmental impact |
---|---|
Senatorial zones | |
Abia North | 12.56 |
Abia Central | 13.66 |
Abia South | 13.72 |
Imo West | 7.13 |
Imo North | 7.52 |
Imo East | 25.72 |
States | |
Abia | 13.57 |
Imo | 7.39 |
However, the aggregate results of the effects of migration between the two states show that Abia state has an impact score of 13.57 as against a low score of 7.39 recorded in Imo state, despite the fact that Imo East zone recorded the greatest score of 25.72. The aggregate low score for Imo state means that the lower scores recorded for Imo West and Imo North were significant enough so as to neutralize the high score from Imo East. This aggregate score is further explained by the results of the analyses in Table
Even though the recipients of these remittances use them for specific purposes, the frequency which they expect the remittances also varies from recipient to recipient. As stated in the quote above, that particular recipient usually expects the school fees once in three to four months which represents an academic term in the school that his daughter attends. Elsewhere, the remittances may be expected on a biweekly or a monthly basis as noted below by a respondent in a focus group discussion at Onuimo LGA:
In addition, only 27.90% of Imo state rural-urban migrants are involved in community projects as against 72.10% of their counterparts in Abia state. Subsequently, using hierarchical cluster analysis, the area of study was grouped into three categories to show the relative developmental importance of migration in the study area using hierarchical cluster analysis as shown in Figures
Aggregate magnitude of the effects of rural-urban migration on rural communities in the study area.
Aggregate state-level magnitude of the effects of rural-urban migration in the study area.
Figure
The Regression results have established the fact that rural-urban migration exerts varying effects in different parts of the study area. Subsequently, Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis analyses were used to pinpoint the exact influences of the independent variables across the different LGAs in the study area. The Chi-square test was used to determine whether the observed effects of the independent variables across different parts of the study differ significantly from the general effects of these variables as indicated by the regression analysis. The purpose is to prioritize areas of interventions with regards to maximizing the effects of rural-urban migration in different parts of the study area. Subsequently, the results of the Chi-square analyses for the two states in the study area indicate that some of the independent variables differ significantly in their effects in the study area. In Abia state, the variables that differ significantly in their impact are the uses of remittances for debt repayment, buying of food, house building/maintenance, savings, education of children, and the involvement of rural-urban migrants in education projects. In Imo state, it is only the involvement of rural-urban migrants in education that differs significantly in its effects across the state. Again, to be able to isolate the senatorial zones where the effects of these variables vary significantly, the Kruskal-Wallis test was applied to the data as shown in Table
Kruskal-Wallis results of developmental impact variables of rural-urban migration.
Migration impact variable | Abia North | Abia Central | Abia South | Imo West | Imo North | Imo East |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Debt repayment | 46 | 41 |
|
43 | 44 | 46 |
Buying of food | 44 |
|
32 | 47 | 43 | 43 |
Savings | 48 |
|
|
42 | 48 | 42 |
House building/maintenance | 43 | 48 |
|
42 | 49 | 42 |
Education of children | 35 | 36 |
|
|
41 | 42 |
Investments | 40 | 48 | 39 | 45 | 44 | 44 |
Funerals | 42 | 41 | 41 | 45 | 43 | 45 |
Purchase of household goods | 42 | 44 | 39 | 45 | 44 | 44 |
Education project | 32 | 41 |
|
|
36 | 43 |
Electrification project | 42 | 39 | 43 | 44 | 44 | 45 |
Water supply project | 46 | 42 | 37 | 41 | 47 | 45 |
Road project | 47 | 41 | 37 | 44 | 45 | 44 |
Agricultural project | 46 | 41 | 38 | 46 | 45 | 42 |
Church projects | 42 | 40 | 42 | 44 | 46 | 43 |
Other projects | 39 | 44 | 41 | 45 | 45 | 43 |
In the results shown in Table
This study revealed that upon migration, the rural-urban migrants usually send back remittances in the forms of money, food, and clothing and at a definite interval with most of them remitting once a month. In addition, the rural-urban migrants also embark on and execute some developmental projects in their rural communities of origin. Both the availability or otherwise of these developmental projects and the various uses of the remittances are viewed by the rural population as an indicator of socioeconomic development. Consequently, as long as these projects and the uses of the remittances are concerned, they improve the population’s quality of life and well-being and increase their happiness and satisfaction, all of which according to respondents represent socioeconomic development. This study was also able to quantify the contributory effects of these rural developmental projects and the various uses of remittances in the study using regression analysis. The different parts of the study area were categorized into areas that experience low, moderate, and high effects of rural-urban migration.
The Kruskal-Wallis test was able to pinpoint areas that require more and urgent developmental intervention in the study area. Having quantified the effects of rural-urban migration in the various parts of the study area, it is expected that the findings of this study will make it easy for governments, NGOs, policy makers, and so forth to initiate appropriate development interventions to augment the contributions of rural-urban migration in the area. These interventions should be aimed at the projects which the Kruskal-Wallis test identified as needing priority attention in the different parts of the study area. As noted earlier, each state in Nigeria has three senatorial zones and each senatorial zone has a senator. These senators are regularly paid some money to execute some developmental projects in their senatorial constituencies. It is therefore recommended that the senators take cognizance of the needs of their various constituencies in the initiation and execution of constituency projects.
Second, governments at Federal, State and LGA levels should ensure that social infrastructures are put in place in the rural areas so as to improve the quality of life of the population. Consequently, skills acquisition centers should be established in different parts of the study area. These centers would be used to inculcate self-sustaining skills in the youth, at the same time providing them with employment and helping to stem the tide of rural-urban drift. Finally, concerted effort should be directed towards improving the agriculture capacities of the rural populations since agriculture is their main source of livelihoods. If their agricultural capacities are improved, it will translate to increased agricultural produce and ultimately reduce the dependency of the rural households on remittances for survival. It should be noted these this recommendations are not exhaustive but as noted earlier more appropriate ones can be added based on the unique nature of the area concerned. However, if diligently executed these recommendations will go a long way in augmenting the contributions of rural-urban migration towards socioeconomic development of the study area.
This research was supported by the International Foundation for Science (IFS), Stockholm, Sweden, through a grant to Chukwuedozie Kelechukwu Ajaero. The authors are also grateful to the two anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions.