NEW MOBILITIES, NEW AGRARIAN FORMS?

Migration and agrarian transformations in Southeast

Jonathan  Rigg  Geography  Department  

Na0onal  University  of  Singapore

Development  writ  small: Two  villages,  77  households,  25  years

Ban  Non  Tae,  Northeast  Thailand:  1982

Ban  Non  Tae,  Northeast  Thailand:  1994

Ban  Non  Tae,  Northeast  Thailand:  2008

!1. Majority  of  households  dependent  on  non-­‐farm  work  &  individuals  

increasingly  mobile  2. Despite  25  years  of  profound  change,  tracked  down  77  of  original  81  

households    3. Large  majority  of  households  con0nued  to  own  and  farm  land

Three  surprises  here

Trends  vs.  turbulence

Household code Amount of money earned

Mobile  living:  counHng  and  catching  the  new  normal

!Vietnam    • 12-­‐16  million,  or  13-­‐18%  of  the  country’s  total  popula0on  in  2010  (UNDP  

2010:  5)  !

!China    • 130  mio.  rural-­‐urban  migrant  workers  • largest  migra0on  stream  in  human  history;  including  rural-­‐rural  migrants  • total  number  on  the  move  at  the  end  of  2008:  225  mio.  !!Thailand,  Indonesia,  Philippines    • several  million  migrants  in  each  of  these  countries

‘FloaHng  populaHons’  in  Vietnam  and  China

„For the most part, migration data remain patchy, non-comparable and difficult to access.  … !

Despite our ability to establish these broad contours of movement, what we know is dwarfed by what we don’t know. Unfortunately, migration data remain weak. It is much easier for

policy makers to count the international movements of shoes and cell-phones than of nurses and construction workers.“  

(UNDP  2009,  28)

‘FloaHng  populaHons’  in  Vietnam  and  China

Known  unknowns:  Ban  Khokmayom:    Gauging  the  populaHon  of  a  village  in  Thailand

!10

Households PopulaHonUthai  district  census  bureau  (2005) -­‐ 378

Tambon  data  (Kor  Chor  Chor  2  Khor  2003)

Tambon  health  staHon  (2005)Survey  esHmate  (2005)

!11

Known  unknowns:  Ban  Khokmayom:    Gauging  the  populaHon  of  a  village  in  Thailand

!12

Households PopulaHonUthai  district  census  bureau  (2005) -­‐ 378

Tambon  data  (Kor  Chor  Chor  2  Khor  2003) 126 425Tambon  health  staHon  (2005)Survey  esHmate  (2005)

Known  unknowns:  Ban  Khokmayom:    Gauging  the  populaHon  of  a  village  in  Thailand

Households PopulaHon

Uthai  district  census  bureau  (2005) -­‐ 378

Tambon  data  (Kor  Chor  Chor  2  Khor  2003) 126 425

Tambon  health  staHon  (2005) 288 1,257Survey  esHmate  (2005) -­‐ 3,000

!13

Households PopulaHonUthai  district  census  bureau  (2005) -­‐ 378

Tambon  data  (Kor  Chor  Chor  2  Khor  2003) 126 425Tambon  health  staHon  (2005) 288 1,257Survey  esHmate  (2005)

Known  unknowns:  Ban  Khokmayom:    Gauging  the  populaHon  of  a  village  in  Thailand

!14

Known  unknowns:  Ban  Khokmayom:    Gauging  the  populaHon  of  a  village  in  Thailand

Households PopulaHonUthai  district  census  bureau  (2005) -­‐ 378

Tambon  data  (Kor  Chor  Chor  2  Khor  2003) 126 425Tambon  health  staHon  (2005) 288 1,257Survey  esHmate  (2005) - 3,000

Ban Khokmayom

Ban  Khokmayom

Everyday  poliHcal  economies:    Ban  Khokmayom

Ban  Khokmayom

Land-­‐grabbing/global  enclosure  in  Laos

rubber  in  the  north

Mobility,  the  life  course  and  era-­‐defining  change

0,0000

25,0000

50,0000

75,0000

100,0000

10-19

years

20-29

years

30-39

years

40-49

years

50-59

years

60 ye

ars +

10-19

years

20-29

years

30-39

years

40-49

years

50-59

years

60 ye

ars +

Farming 1989Non-farm work 1989

Teasing  out  era,  life  course  and  generaHonal  changes  !

Gender,  genera0on  and  occupa0on  in  a  Northeastern  Thai  village

Rite of passage?

Male Female

0,0000

25,0000

50,0000

75,0000

100,0000

10-19

years

20-29

years

30-39

years

40-49

years

50-59

years

60 ye

ars+

10-19

years

20-29

years

30-39

years

40-49

years

50-59

years

60 ye

ars +

Farming 2000Non-farm work 2000

Or era-defining change?

0,0000

25,0000

50,0000

75,0000

100,0000

Farming 1989Non-farm work 1989

Male Female

Residency  classificaHon

Number  of  interviewees

%  of  sample Average  length  of  Hme  in  Hanoi  (years)

KT1 6 20 20

KT2 3 10 20

KT3 7 23 14

KT4 9 30 13

No  registraHon 2 7 9

Unknown 3 10 6

Total 30 100 14

Residency  classificaHon  of  interviewees  Hanoi,  Vietnam  (2010)

Note:  KT3  and  KT4  are  temporary  registra0ons;  these  interviewees  do  not  have  urban  residency  or  ho  khau

MulH-­‐sited  households,    mulH-­‐sited  livelihoods

Household  footprints,    Northeast  Thailand

Income  sources    Ban  Dong  Daeng,  Northeast  Thailand:  1981  &  2002  (%)

Source: data extracted from Funahashi 2009: 3.

0102030405060708090

100

!Village-based,!

agricultural

!Village-based, !

non-agriculturalNon-village based,!

wages and remittances

40:60  agricultural/non-­‐agricultural

60:40  in  situ/ex  situ

0102030405060708090

100

!Village-based,!

agricultural

!Village-based, !

non-agriculturalNon-village based,!

wages and remittances

Source: data extracted from Funahashi 2009: 3.

Income  sources    Ban  Dong  Daeng,  Northeast  Thailand:  1981  &  2002  (%)

40:60  agricultural/non-­‐agricultural

60:40  in  situ/ex  situ15:85  agricultural/non-­‐agricultural

20:80  in  situ/ex  situ

Sub-­‐livelihood  landholdings:  few  are  becoming  landless;  many  are  becoming  land  poor

% (

n=77

)

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0

40,0

45,0

Categories of farmholding (rail)

None 1-2 3-5 6-9 10-19 20-50 >50

1982/832008

The  %  of  landless  households  in  25  years  has  risen  from  5%  to  15%  -­‐  85%  sHll  own  (some)  land

Villages  sustained  through  absence    (Thanh  Hoa,  Vietnam,  2010)  ‘remieance  landscapes’  (McKay)

MigraHon  and  farming

MigraHon,  dissociaHon  and  the  geriatrificaHon  of  farming

Ageing  farmers

Farming 83,6 35,7 35,0 51,7 54,8 58

Casual wage work 5,1 42,1 39 12,5 39,3 39

Government employment 3,6 34,2 35 11,2 38,5 37

Private employment 1,8 20,2 18 9,9 35,0 34

Entrepreneurs 0,7 37,5 37,5 9,1 39,9 36,5

Others 5,1 23,6 22 5,6 33,8 32

% (N=275) Mean!! Median % !

(N = 232) Mean MedianOccupation categories

Age (1982/1983) Age (2008)

GeriatrificaHon  of  farming  &  reproducHon  of  farm  household  (Average  age  of  household  heads  risen  from  47  to  60  years  old)

• Mechanisa<on  • Geriatrifica<on  of  farming  • Disintensifica<on  • Land  use  change  • Cropping  changes  (transplant  –  broadcast  rice  culture)  • Idle  land

In  Japan  • Average  size  of  farm  =  1.9  ha  • 85%  of  farmers  are  part-­‐<me  • Between  1960-­‐2004  number  of  farmers  dropped  from  12.2  million  to  2.2  million  • In  2009,  66,000  people  took  up  farming;  just  1,850  were  from  non-­‐farming  

backgrounds  • The  average  age  of  farmers  exceeded  65  for  the  first  <me  in  2010  (65.8  years)  • In  many  areas,  just  10%  of  farmers  have  a  son/daughter  willing  to  take  over  the  farm

The  household  and  the  reproducHon  of  the  farm  household

Household  footprints,    Northeast  Thailand

Demographic  characterisHcs1982/83 2008

Baseline Re-­‐study

Household  head  or  relaHonships  to  household  head  (%)

Household  head  15.7                    

Spouse  of  HH  head  13.6                    

Child  of  household  head  54.2                    

Spouse  of  child  of  HH  head  3.9                        

Grandchild  of  HH  head  9.2                        

Spouse  of  grandchild  of  HH  head 0.2                          

Nephew/nieces  of  HH  head  0.2                        

Parent  of  HH  head/spouse  1.0                        

Sibling  of  HH  head/spouse  1.6                        

Other  extended  family  members 0.4                          

Household  complexity,  Maharsarakham,  Thailand

Demographic  characterisHcs1982/83 2008

Baseline Re-­‐study

Household  head  or  relaHonships  to  household  head  (%)

Household  head  15.7                     21.3Spouse  of  HH  head  13.6                     13.0Child  of  household  head  54.2                     22.7Spouse  of  child  of  HH  head  3.9                        8.8Grandchild  of  HH  head  9.2                        21.3Spouse  of  grandchild  of  HH  head 0.2                          0.0Nephew/nieces  of  HH  head  0.2                        2.5Parent  of  HH  head/spouse  1.0                        1.4Sibling  of  HH  head/spouse  1.6                        2.2Other  extended  family  members 0.4                          6.9

Household  complexity,  Maharsarakham,  Thailand

Two  issues:  1. What  is  ‘the  household’  (No  longer  a  co-­‐

residen<al  dwelling  unit)  2. How  will  the  farm  household  be  

reproduced?

Mobility,  the  natal  village    and  the  middle  income  gap

Date  of  departure  of  first  and  second    generaHon  migrants,  Thailand

0

10

20

30

40

74-7

980

-84

85-8

990

-94

95-9

900

-04

05-0

910

-12

1st genereation migrants2nd generation migrants

Source: survey, Nov-Dec 2012; n = 54 (1st generation migrants), n = 97 (2nd generation migrants)

First  generaHon  migrants  in  Bangkok,  circa  1990

Migrants  in  Bangkok  circa  1990

Second  generaHon  migrants  in  Bangkok  circa  2005

MigraHon  and  return:  the  migrants  of  the  1980s  departed  as  sojourning  farmers;  the  migrants  of  the  2000s  depart  as  school  leavers  with  only  a  tenuous  link  to  farming  and  the  land

Migrants  in  Bangkok  circa  1990

Second  generaHon  migrants  in  Bangkok  circa  2005

EducaHonal  status  of  first  and  second    generaHon  migrants  on  departure  (Thailand)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Primary

Lower Secondary

Upper Secondary

Higher Education

Vocational Certificate

1st generation2nd generation

Source:  survey    Nov-­‐Dec  2012;  n=54  (first  genera<on  migrants)  and  n  =  97  (second  genera<on  migrants

MigraHon  signatures    Northeast  Thailand  1974-­‐2012

020406080

100120140160

Migrants Total

Returnees Expected ReturneesMarriage Migrants Permanent labour migrantsTotal Migrants (current & returning)

MigraHon  signatures    Northeast  Thailand  1974-­‐2012

020406080

100120140160

Migrants Total

Returnees Expected ReturneesMarriage Migrants Permanent labour migrantsTotal Migrants (current & returning)

MigraHon  signatures    Northeast  Thailand  1974-­‐2012

020406080

100120140160

Migrants Total

Returnees Expected ReturneesMarriage Migrants Permanent labour migrantsTotal Migrants (current & returning)

MigraHon  signatures    Northeast  Thailand  1974-­‐2012

020406080

100120140160

Migrants Total

Returnees Expected ReturneesMarriage Migrants Permanent labour migrantsTotal Migrants (current & returning)

020406080

100120140160

Migrants Total

Returnees Expected ReturneesMarriage Migrants Permanent labour migrantsTotal Migrants (current & returning)

MigraHon  signatures    Northeast  Thailand  1974-­‐2012

22  migrants  or  15%  of  total  were  permanent  out-­‐migrants  !o 60%  of  first  generaHon  migrants  found  

their  skills  of  liele  use  in  the  village  o 75%  of  second  generaHon  migrants  did  so

Precarity  in  Thailand:    the  formalisaHon  of  employment,  1980-­‐2000

0

20

40

60

80

100

19801985199019952000

20052006200720082009201020112012

Informal sector employmentFormal sector employment

Precarity  in  Thailand:    the  informalisaHon  of  the  formal  sector,  1980-­‐2012

0

20

40

60

80

100

19801985199019952000

20052006200720082009201020112012

Informal sector employmentFormal sector employment

What  is  ‘urban’?    The  urbane  villager

In  the  rural…  but  of  the  rural?    The  rural  as  socially  urban,  and  also  in  terms  of  ameni<es  and  iden<<es  –  being  urbane  in  the  rural

In  the  rural…  but  of  the  rural?  Thompson  (2007):  ‘socially  urban’  Keyes  (2010):  ‘rural  cosmopolitans’  Walker  (2012):  ‘middle  income  peasants’

The  cosmopolitan  peasant...?  “Northeastern  families  today  have  become  increasingly  ‘cosmopolitan’  because  they  are  linked  to  a  global  labor  force,  have  sophis<cated  understandings  of  Bangkok  society,  and  yet  s<ll  retain  long-­‐standing  resentment  for  being  looked  down  on  as  country  bumpkins”  (Keyes  2010:  2  ).