rural – urban migration
TRANSCRIPT
RURAL – URBAN MIGRATION
Presented by
SURAMYA T.K. (HS14D022)
and
VIPIN V (HS14D024)
INTRODUCTION
How to interpret growth in the developingcountries?
Structural change and development
Arthur Lewis - two sector model – Theory of rural-urban migration - ‘economic development with theunlimited supplies of labour’ (Surplus Labour)
Development – Industrial Modernization (structuraltransformation)
PROCESS OF RURAL-URBAN MIGRATION
Surplus Labour Transfer from
Rural to Urban
Increase in the Urban
Employment
Increased Capital Accumulation
Increased Growth Rate of the
Modern Sector
Increase in the Rate of New Job
Creation
THE LEWIS MODEL(1954)
Economic Development –Progressive
transformation of “Traditional” sector into “Modern”
Sector
Dual Economy
Traditional: Agriculture-Older techniques which
are labour intensive
Modern: Industrial - Use modern technology-
Production organized in Capitalist principle
SURPLUS LABOUR
Traditional sector- supplier of labour
The capital accumulation in modern sector- engine
of development
Large surplus of labour in traditional sector-can be
removed at little or no potential cost(opportunity
cost)
Opportunity cost: the loss of traditional sector
output as labour supply is reduced
Rostenstein-Rodan(1943) and Nurkse (1953) also
held this view
PRODUCTION FUNCTION OF FAMILY FARM
o Land is fixed
o Diminishing Returns to
Scale
o After a point(B)
additional input of
labour not have effect
on Q
o It is not limited to
Agriculture(eg.Casual
jobs)
o At point A MPL=0
o𝐴𝑄
𝐴= 𝜔
Q
Will family
farm employ
beyond this
point??
EXTENSIONS OF SURPLUS LABOUR CONCEPT
The inability of labour to add anything to output was criticized(Viner 1957)
The useful extensions of this concept are:
a) Disguised unemployment
o Amount of disguised unemployment=L−L(MP=Wage)
o Why doesn’t market switch labour efficiently?
Ans. Zero MP is characterised by payment system
b) Surplus labour Vs. Surplus labourers
o Maintaining Agri. Output is essential
o We remove labourers not labour
o Remaining labourers will adjust their labour once some are removed(Sen,1966)
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND
THE AGRICULTURAL SURPLUS
Lewis explained the interplay of rural and urban
sectors
Later John Fei & Gustav Ranis(1961) extended it
Development proceeds by the transfer of labour
from agriculture to industry and the surplus food
grain production which sustains the labour force
engaged in non-agricultural activity
CRITIQUE OF LEWISIAN MODEL
Unrealistic assumption of a smooth structural
transformation of the economy
Unable to explain urban unemployment and the
existence of a large unban informal sector
Model couldn’t incorporate the possibility of surplus
capitalist profits getting reinvested in more sophisticated
labour-saving capital equipment
Assumption of the continued existence of constant real
urban wages until the point where the supply of rural
surplus labour is exhausted is not real
Limited analytical and policy guidance for solving the
third world employment and migration problems
HARRIS – TODARO MODEL OF RURAL –
URBAN MIGRATION
Two-sector model of rural-urban migration
Assumption:
1. migration is primarily an economic phenomenon
2. wage gap between the two sectors of the economy
Migration proceeds in response to urban-rural differences
in expected earnings rather than actual earnings, and the
urban employment rate acting as an equilibrating force
on such migration
Incorporation of the existence of urban unemployment
into the model and predicts that the probability of
obtaining an urban job is inversely related to the urban
unemployment rate
SCHEMATIC FRAMEWORK FOR THE ANALYSIS OF
THE MIGRATION DECISION
3 possibilities attached to a migrant:
The urban formal sector with high wage rate
The urban informal sector with a fixed wage rate and
abysmal conditions. The migrant will be absorbed in the
event that no formal job is forthcoming
Openly Unemployed with a zero wage rate
the probability of getting a job in the formal sector will be:𝐿𝐹
𝐿𝐹 + 𝐿𝐼Where,
LF is the no of employed people in the formal sector
LI is the no of employed people in the informal sector
LF + LI is the total no of potential job seekers
HARRIS – TODARO EQUILIBRIUM CONDITION
𝐿𝐹
𝐿𝐹+𝐿𝐼 𝑤 +
𝐿𝐼
𝐿𝐹+𝐿𝐼wI = wA
Where,
𝑤 is the formal sector wage rate
wI is the informal sector wage rate
wA is the agricultural wage rate
“Informal sector is an outgrowth of the fact that theformal sector has wages that are too high, so that noteveryone is capable of obtaining employment in thissector. At the same time, not everyone else can stay inagriculture as well, for that would make the formal sectorlook too attractive and induce a great deal of migration.Informal sector is a result of this migration”
(Development Economics, Debraj Ray, Chapter 10: Rural and Urban)
POLICY IMPLICATIONS – HARRIS-TODARO MODEL
The need to reduce imbalances in urban-ruralemployment opportunities
Urban job creation is an insufficient solution for theurban unemployment problem
Indiscriminate educational expansion will lead to furthermigration and unemployment
Wage subsidies and Traditional scarcity factor pricingcan be counterproductive
Programs of Integrated Rural Development should beencouraged
POLICY PROPOSITIONS AND CONCLUSION
Wage subsidies in the formal urban sector
Migration restrictions
Combination of both the above policies
Further improvements
Profit Tax on firms
Forcing manufacturers to employ all available labor
Production subsidy to agriculture
Serious policy concerns
political feasibility
Problems such as; the administration costs and feasibility of alternative policies
Risk averse agent
Role of social capital
Existence of Urabn Informal sector
Role of Micro Finance