Journal of Global Resources
Biannual International Peer-Reviewed Journal
ISSN: 2395-3160 (Print)/2455-2445 (Online)

January 2021
Volume 07 (01)
Crossref DOI 10.46587

DOI: 10.46587/JGR.2021.v07i01.008

08
SELECTIVITY INDEX BASED ANALYSIS OF BLOCK-WISE RURAL OUTMIGRATION: A CASE STUDY OF EAST CHAMPARAN DISTRICT OF BIHAR,
INDIA
Abhay Kumar1 and Sandesh Yadav2
Alumnus, Department of Geography, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India
2
Freelance Researcher, New Delhi, India
Corresponding author’s Email: sandesh_official@yahoo.in

1

Abstract: Migration is a positive process on one hand and necessary evil on the other.
In former case, migrants contribute in the developmental processes of country byworking as skilled and non-skilled labourers while in latter case, migration also results
in problems like urban sprawl, urban poverty, social conflicts. The present research
paper focuses on the rural migrants engaged in workforce of unorganized sector andalso answers the question that ‘how urban and industrial regions attracting people fromrural areas to work and earn more money as compared to their place of origin?’ The
methodology involves the field survey of two Community Development Blocks namely
Motihari and Tetaria in the East Champaran district of Bihar, India. The selectivity index
was applied to analyses the religion, caste and education based mobility of rural outmigrants.
Key words: Rural outmigration, Unorganized sector, Selectivity index, Workforce.
Introduction
In today’s era of globalization, urbanization and industrialization, all regions irrespectiveof rural characteristics and urban characteristics are interlinked and interdependent
through improved network of communication and transport, hence have resulted inincreased flow of information and rapid mobility of migrants. In current scenario, various
push and pull factors at the place of origin and place of destination have played majorrole in determining the migrating patterns of human being (Joseph, 1988). Economic
opportunities serve as the major pull factors in making people to migrate from theirplaces of origin (Ranis and Fei, 1961). Migration on the one hand determines thedemographic attributes and flow of workforce on the other. An analysis of trends andpatterns of migration gives the percentage increase in the ‘add-on’ number of people
which are responsible for demographic changes in country or any part of the country(Davis, 1963). Consequently, place of origin become depopulated and place ofdestination become overpopulated and consequently, migration results in demographic
change.
Objectives of the Study To assess the block-wise rural outmigration in the East Champaran district, Bihar,India To analyze the mobility of rural out migrants by applying selectivity index on
religion, caste and education in the East Champaran district, Bihar, India.

71

Figure 01: Structure of the Research Study

Source: Prepared by the author

Methodology
Figure 01 shows the structure of the present research study and the various aspects
involved in the study.
Data Sources
The collection of primary data was carried out through comprehensive field survey
during the year 2017. The structured questionnaires were used to collect information
on demographic and socio-economic attributes of rural out-migrants of two Community
Development (CD) blocks namely Motihari (CDB-I) and Tetaria (CDB-II). Figure 01
shows the details of field survey (sampled villages and sampled households) conductedduring the year 2017.
Tools of Analysis
The following formula have been used to calculate the ‘selectivity index’ for various
aspects:
S.I.=( 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑚𝑖𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑠 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑚𝑖𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑠)
𝑋100( 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑠𝑒 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑦)72

‘Selectivity Index’ was used to study the movement of migrants, higher values of
selectivity index show the active migration while lower values of selectivity index show
the inactive migration.
Figure 02: Location map of East Champaran, Bihar, India

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Demographic Attributes of Rural Migrants
The CDB-I (Motihari) was having 1316 persons (Table 01) out of the total sampled
population of 2556. Out of the total population of 1316, number of out-migrants were322 (24.47 percent) which comprised of 219 males (68.01 percent) and 103 females(31.99 percent). On the other hand, the CDB-II (Tetaria) was having 1240 persons(Table 01) out of the total sampled population of 2556. Out of the total population of1240, number of out-migrants were 296 (23.87 percent) which comprised of 202 males(68.24 percent) and 94 females (31.76 percent).
Age Composition of Rural Male Migrants and Rural Male Non-Migrants
The sampled population consists of villagers of CDB-I (Motihari) and CDB-II (Tetaria).
The present research study discusses the age-composition of rural male migrants andmale non-migrants and become more specific to male migrants while discussing thebroad categories of age groups (Figure 03).
Figure 04 shows that maximum percentage of male migrants belong to age-groupsof 20-24 years (27.08 percent), 25-29 years (24.23 percent), 30-34 years (14.49
percent), 35-39 years (9.03 percent), 15-19 years (7.84 percent) and 40-44 years (7.36
percent). These age-groups constitute major section of migrant population because
they are considered as the main working population. Further, the age-groups which
seem less active as migrants include 0-4 years (0.48 percent), 10-14 years (2.14
percent), 45-49 years (3.33 percent), 50-54 years (1.43 percent) and 60+ years (0.48
percent).

73

Table 01: Village-wise Population of Out-migrants and Their Composition in
CDB-I (Motihari) and CDB-II (Tetaria), East Champaran, Bihar
C.D. Blocks

Villages

CD Block -I(Motihari)

Jhit Kahiya
Lakhaura
Barwa
Haraj Tola Lachhmipur
Chhatauni Ramsingh
Ray Singha
Patparia Moran
Bariyarpur
BankatBaswaria

Sample Population
Male
Female
Total
93
50
143
78
44
122
80
54
134
86
43
129
96
49
145
87
47
134
99
53
152
73
43
116
67
43
110
84
47
131
843
473
1316
90
43
133
71
41
112
73
49
122
79
49
128
91
39
130
81
41
122
93
51
144
71
40
111
67
42
109
84
45
129
800
440
1240

Total CD Block-I

CD Block -II(Tetaria)

Dhobwaliya
Fazilpur
Saraiya
SonaulTajpur
Kadma
KothiaPipra
Sobhitapur
SemrahaTotal CD Block-II

Total Out-Migrants
Male
Female
Total
21
11
32
23
13
36
33
17
50
21
9
30
23
10
33
29
14
43
19
7
26
17
6
23
11
5
16
22
11
33
219
103
322
21
10
31
23
10
33
30
14
44
21
8
29
23
10
33
22
13
35
15
7
22
17
6
23
11
5
16
19
11
30
202
94
296

Source: Field survey, 2017

Figure 03: Structure of Discussion On Demographic Attributes
Sampled population

Rural male non-migrants

Rural male migrants

Age composition

Broad categories of age
group

Age composition

74

Figure 04 Age-Composition of Male Migrants & Non-Migrants, East Champaran

0.95
4.75

0.48
1.72

1.43
6.71

3.33
7.77

7.36
8.19

9.03
8.18

14.49
10.39

2.14
4.5

24.23
15.63

27.08
19.8
1.19
4.58

7.84
4.66

0.48
2.37

POPULATION ( PERCENTAGE)

AGE-COMPOSITION

0-4
YRS

5-9
YRS

10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59
YRS
YRS
YRS
YRS
YRS
YRS
YRS
YRS
YRS
YRS

60+
YRS

AGE-STRUCTURE
Male Migrants
Male Non-Migrants

Table 02 shows the data related to broad categories of male out-migrants
containing more than one age-groups in the East Champaran. The broad category ofchildren includes age-groups of 0-4 years, 5-9 years and 10-14 years; young migrants
are in age-groups of 15-19 years and 20-24 years; middle aged migrants include agegroups of 25-29years, 30-34 years and 35-39 years; upper middle age groups include
40-44 years, 45-49 years, 50-54 years, 55-59 years; while aged migrants include
60+years. The highest percentage of male migrants belong to middle age groups (47.74
percent) followed by young migrants (35.92 percent) while the least number of migrants
are of children (3.80 percent) and aged migrants (0.48 percent).
Table 02: Broad Age-Group Categories of Rural Male Migrants, East Champaran
Age-Group

Broad Categories ofMigrants

0-4Children
5-9
10-14
15-19
Young Migrants
20-24
25-29
Middle Age Migrants
30-34
35-39
40-44
Upper Middle Age Migrants
45-49
50-54
55-59
60+
Aged Migrants
Total
Source: Field survey, 2017

Male Migrants

Percentage

16

3.80

147

35.92

201

47.74

55

13.06

2
421

0.48
100.00The younger section (15-19 yrs., 20-24 yrs., 25-29 yrs., 30-34 yrs.) of working
population shows high migration tendencies to earn more money (Kumar, Sarvottam,
2005). The societal pressure, family responsibilities and increased expenditure of newly
married couples collectively acts as push factors (Kothari, D.K., 1980). The tendencyof migration declines among the aged people (40-44 yrs., 45-49 yrs., 50-54 yrs., 55-59
yrs.) due to retarded health conditions and decreased energy level as compared toyounger people.
Rural Out Migration
Here, rural outmigration has been discussed from community development blocks todifferent states (domestic migration) and other countries (international migration). Now,domestic migration is also discussed in terms of ‘type of cities’ (Class-I type, class-II

75

type etc.) of different States receiving the rural male migrants from CDB-I (Motihari) and
CDB-II (Tetaria) of East Champaran district, Bihar (Figure 05).
Figure 05: Aspects of Rural Out Migration Covered

Source: Prepared by the author

Figure 06 shows that out of total 618 out-migrants, 5.18 percent moved within
district, 9.06 percent moved within State, 82.85 percent moved within country and 2.91
percent moved abroad. To obtain crystal clear picture of out-migrants and their regional
patterns of movement we analyzed the movement of out-migrants at the block level.
CDB-I (Motihari) had least percentage of out-migrants moving abroad (3.41 percent)while the majority of out-migrants (81.06 percent) have moved to different states. Apartfrom these two regional patterns of migration, out-migrants moving within district were
only 5.28 percent in comparison to out-migrants moving within state that is 10.25
percent. On the other hand, CDB-II (Tetaria) had least percentage of out-migrants
moving abroad (2.36 percent) while the majority of out-migrants (84.80 percent) have
moved to different states. Apart from these two regional patterns of migration, outmigrants moving within district were only 5.07 percent in comparison to out-migrants
moving within state that is 7.77 percent.
Figure 06: Block-Wise Domestic and International Migration from East
Champaran, Bihar
International

CDB-II

2.91

9.06

5.18

2.36

84.8
7.77

5.07

3.41

10.25
CDB-I

Within Country

82.85

Within State

81.06

Within District

5.28

MIGRANT POPULATION (PERCENTAGE)DOMESTIC & INTERNATIONALTOTALCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCKS

Source: Field survey, 2017

The block-wise analysis of out-migrants to class I cities, class II cities, smaller
towns, rural areas show clear picture of out-migrants from CDB I (Motihari) and CDB II(Tetaria). From CDB I (Motihari), (Figure 07) the out-migrants moving ‘within district’
include nil moved to class I cites, 4.82 percent moved to class II cities, 0.64 percent
moved to smaller towns and nil moved to rural areas. Likewise, the out-migrants moving
76‘within state’ include 6.43 percent towards class I cities, 1.61 percent towards class II
cities, 1.29 percent towards smaller towns, 1.29 percent towards rural areas. The
movement of out-migrants ‘within country’ shows that 55.31 percent towards class I
cities, 18.33 percent towards class II cities, 8.04 percent towards smaller towns and2.25 percent towards rural areas. Overall scenario shows 5.47 percent moved ‘within
district’, 10.61 percent moved ‘within State’ and 83.92 percent moved ‘within country’.
Figure 07: Block-Wise Regional Pattern of Rural Out Migration from CDB-I(Motihari), East Champaran, Bihar

WITHIN DISTRICTWITHIN STATE

2.25

8.04

18.33

55.31

Rural

1.29

Smaller Towns

1.29

1.61

6.43

Class II City

0

0.64

4.82

Class I City0

MIGRANTS POPULATIONCDB-I (BLOCKWISE)WITHIN COUNTRYSTREAMS OF OUTMIGRATION

Source: Field survey, 2017

From CDB II (Tetaria), (Figure 08) the out-migrants moving ‘within district’ include
nil moved to class I cities, 4.50 percent moved to class II cities, 0.35 percent moved tosmaller towns and 0.35 percent moved to rural areas. Likewise, the out-migrants
moving ‘within state’ include 3.11 percent towards class I cities, 3.11 percent towards
class II cities, 1.04 percent towards smaller towns and 0.69 percent towards rural areas.
The movement of out-migrants ‘within country’ shows that 56.40 percent towards class
I cities, 19.72 percent towards class II cities, 7.96 percent towards smaller towns and2.77 percent towards rural areas. Overall scenario shows that 5.19 percent moved‘within district’, 7.96 percent moved ‘within state’ and 86.85 percent moved ‘withincountry’.
Here, it was observed that poor and unskilled rural migrants have tendency to travel
short distances in order to find work suitable to them. Consequently, their migration
tendency was confined to ‘within district’ and ‘within State’ only. Contrary to this, skilled(driver, plumber etc.) and semi-skilled (rickshaw puller, labours, construction workeretc.) rural migrants travel long distances and work throughout the length and breadthof the country.
Figure 08: Block-wise Regional Pattern of Rural Out Migration from CDB-II(Tetaria), East Champaran, Bihar
CDB-II (BLOCKWISE)Class II City

Smaller Towns

Rural

WITHIN STATESTREAMS OF OUTMIGRATION

Source: Field survey, 2017

77

2.77

7.96

0.69

1.04

3.11

19.72
WITHIN DISTRICT

3.11

0.35

0.35

4.5
0

MIGRANTS POPULATION

56.4

Class I CityWITHIN COUNTRY

The scenario of CDB-I shows that 29.12 percent moved towards NCR of Delhi,
24.14 percent moved towards Maharashtra, 17.62 percent moved towards West
Bengal, 9.58 percent moved towards Jharkhand, 7.66 percent moved towards Punjab,
4.60 percent moved towards Haryana, 2.30 percent moved towards Uttar Pradesh, 1.15
percent moved towards Gujarat, 1.15 percent moved towards Rajasthan, 1.53 percent
moved towards Karnataka and 1.15 percent moved towards others State. The total
migration from CDB-I towards class - I city accounts the highest percentage (65.90
percent) followed by the class-II (21.83 percent), smaller towns (9.57 percent) and rural
areas (2.68 percent).
Figure 09: City-wise Rural Out Migration to different States from CDB-I(Motihari), East Champaran, Bihar

Class I City

STATESClass II City
Smaller Towns

1.15

0
0
0

1.53

0.38
0
0

0.77

0.38
0
0

0.77

0.38
0
0

1.15

0.38
0.77
0

4.21

0.38
0
0

3.83

2.68
0.77
0.38

5.36

2.68
1.15
0.38

11.88

2.68
2.68
0.38

16.09

4.98
2.3
0.77

19.16

7.28
1.92
0.77

MIGRANT POPULATIONCDB-I (CITYWISE)

Rural

Source: Field survey, 2017

The overall scenario of CDB-II shows that 21.91 percent moved towards NCR of
Delhi, 17.93 percent moved towards Maharashtra, 19.12 percent moved towards West
Bengal, 13.15 percent moved towards Jharkhand, 11.16 percent moved towards
Punjab, 7.97 percent moved towards Haryana, 1.59 percent moved towards Uttar
Pradesh, 1.99 percent moved towards Gujarat, 3.19 percent moved towards Rajasthan,
0.80 percent moved towards Karnataka and 1.20 percent moved towards others state.
The total migration from CDB-II towards class - I city accounts the highest percentage(64.94 percent) followed by the class-II (22.70 percent), smaller towns (9.16 percent)and rural areas (3.18 percent).
Figure 10 City-wise Rural Out Migration to different States from CDB-II (Tetaria),
East Champaran, Bihar

0
0.4
0.4
0

0.4
0.4
0
0

1.99
0.8
0.4
0

Rural

1.59
0
0.4
0

0.4
1.2
0.4
0

Smaller Towns

4.78
2.39
0.8
0

Class II City
8.37
2.39
0.4
0

9.56
1.59
1.59
0.4

11.55
4.78
1.59
0.8

Class I City
11.95
3.98
1.59
0.4

14.34
4.78
1.59
1.2

MIGRANT POPULATIONCDB-II (CITYWISE)

STATES

Source: Field survey, 2017

The comparative analysis shows that percentage of rural migrants moving
towards Class-I city and smaller towns is higher in CDB-I (Motihar) than CDB-II(Tetaria). On the other hand, percentage of migrants moving towards class-II city andrural areas is higher in CDB-II (Tetaria) than CDB-I (Motihari).
78

Now, the demand for ‘specific’ type of rural migrants at the ‘place of destination’determines the degree of migration towards a specific region. For example, Punjab andHaryana are known as agricultural States and demand for unskilled labour is very highduring sowing season and harvesting season of crops and thus, cheap, unskilled labour
from Bihar migrates towards these two States. Likewise, Mumbai and Delhi pull rural
migrants (unskilled) for constructional activities and other developmental processes.
Contrary to this, skilled and semi-skilled have better employment opportunities inmetropolitan cities and consequently, skilled rural migrants show high degree of
migration towards metropolitan cities.
Religion and Caste Based Analysis of Rural Out-Migrants
The caste-based analysis of out-migrants is based on three broad categories of castes
viz. General, Other Backward Classes (OBCs I and OBCs II) and Scheduled Castes(Dalit and Maha Dalit). Further, to give analysis an edge we have also considered
Muslim population and their part in outmigration. Table 03 shows the data related to outmigrants based on religion and caste, population of religious community and social category,percentage of out-migrants in their respective religious group and social category and share of
religious group and social categories in sample population. Out of 421 male out-migrants,
highest percentage of 77.90 percent is shown by Hindu migrants (General class, OBCs, SCs)
as compared to 22.09 percent of Muslim migrants.

The scenario of Hindu migrants can be analyzed more specifically in terms ofvarious social categories viz. General class (Brahaman, Bhumihar, Rajput, Kayasthetc.), Other Backward Classes [OBCs-I (Kanu, Kewat etc.) and OBCs-II (Yadav, Kurmi,
Kushwaha, Chanau etc.), Scheduled Caste [Dalit (Paswan etc.) and Maha Dalit(Musahar, Majhi, Dom etc.)]. Among Hindu migrants, highest percentage of 17.34
percent is shown by OBCs-I migrants followed by General class migrants (17.10
percent), Maha Dalit (15.91 percent) among SCs migrants, OBCs-II migrants (15.68
percent) and Dalit (11.88 percent) among SCs migrants.
Table 03: Share of Rural Migrants Based on Religion and Caste, East
Champaran
SocialCategories

Out migrants

Out migrants( percent)
17.10

Population of social
category(Total)220

Share in Sample
population( percent)
13.39

General
OBCs
OBCs – I
OBCs – II
SCs
Dalit
Maha Dalit
Muslim
Total

72
73
66

17.34
15.68

299
284

18.20
17.29

50
67
93
421

11.88
15.91
22.09
100.00

231
312
297
1643

14.06
18.99
18.08
100.00Source: Field survey, 2017

Table 03, the share of each category of caste/religion in sample population showsthat the percentage of 18.08 percent are from Muslim community as compared to Hindu(81.92 percent). The Hindu migrants show varying share in their respective social
categories, percentage of 18.99 percent is shown by Maha Dalit in SCs followed by
OBCs-I (18.20 percent), OBCs-II (17.29 percent percent), Dalit (14.06 percent) among
SCs and General class (13.39 percent). Table 04 shows that higher selectivity index
belongs to General category (127.71), Muslims (122.18), and OBCs I (95.27) showing
the higher rate of migration among these two sections of sampled population. Lower
selectivity index belongs to OBCs II (90.69), Dalit (84.50) and Maha Dalit (83.78)
categories showing the lower rate of migration among these two sections of sampled
population. The rural migrants belonging to ‘general category’ shown high selectivity
index (127.71) which justify their high degree of mobility as migrants. First reason
79

behind this was the better education which make people of general category moreaware and eligible for better job opportunities at the place of destination. Secondly,
hesitation due to social prestige associated with their caste prohibit the unskilled andsemi-skilled rural people to work or get engaged in petty jobs at the place of origin.
The selectivity index of Muslims is also high (122.18) but comparatively low to rural
migrants belonging to general category. The migration tendency of Muslims is more orless driven by circumstances. The prevailing poor economic conditions and less job
opportunities, poor wages at the place of origin collectively rural Muslim migrants toother places in order to earn more money. If we talk about international migrants, thenmajority of them belonged to the category of ‘rural Muslim migrants’ migrating towards
the Gulf countries.
The percentage of OBCs rural migrants [OBC-I (18.20), OBC-II (17.29)] is high but
selectivity index [OBCs-I (95.27), OBCs -II (90.69)] is low. The higher percentage is dueto the large number of migrants in OBCs category while the low selectivity index canbe attributed to the fact that proportion of population of OBCs is high. Previously, themigration among the rural migrants belonging to Other backward classes (OBCs) took
place due to the advancement in the tools, techniques and technology made thetraditional workers (craftsmen, artisans etc.) to starve and migrate to other places inorder to find alternate means of livelihood. Currently, the category of OBCs migrants
comprises of marginal farmers and laborers which either migrate or get engaged inprimary activities (selling of milk, farm labourers, shopkeepers etc.). The migration ofscheduled castes (SCs) is characterized by two important factors viz. (i) poverty
oriented (ii) feeling of ‘social alienation’. Former push rural migrants of this category tosurvive and latter, push them to migrate in order to live life of dignity and societal
acceptance.
Table 04: Selectivity Index (Religion and Caste Based) of The Rural Migrants,
East Champaran, Bihar
Social Categories

Out
migrants

General72
OBCs
OBCs – I
73
OBCs – II
66
SCs
Dalit
50
Maha Dalit
67
Muslims
93
Total
421
Source: Field survey, 2017

Percentage
among Outmigrants
17.10

Percentage
Share in Sample
Population
13.39

Selectivity Index

17.34
15.68

18.20
17.29

95.27
90.69

11.88
15.91
22.09
100.00

14.06
18.99
18.08
100.0084.50
83.78
122.18100.00127.71

Education of Rural Out Migrants
Table 05 shows the educational status in two prominent blocks of East Champaran viz.
CDB-I (Motihari) and CDB-II (Tetaria). In CDB-I (Motihari), the highest percentage of
27.85 percent is shown by migrants with ‘middle level’ educational status followed bymigrants with ‘primary level’ (26.03 percent), migrants with ‘secondary level’ (14.61
percent), illiterate migrants (10.96 percent), migrants with ‘senior secondary level(10.05 percent)’, migrants with ‘above senior secondary level’ (5.48 percent), migrants
with ‘graduation’ (3.65 percent) and migrants with ‘post-graduation level’ (1.37 percent).
On the other hand, In CDB-II (Tetaria), the highest percentage of 31.19 percent isshown by migrants with ‘primary level’ followed by migrants with ‘middle level’ (23.76
percent), illiterate migrants (17.82 percent), migrants with ‘secondary level’ (9.90
percent) migrants with ‘senior secondary level (9.90 percent percent)’, migrants with80‘above senior secondary level’ (3.96 percent), migrants with ‘graduation’ (1.98 percent)and migrants with ‘post-graduation level’ (1.49 percent).
Table 05: Percentage of Rural Migrants Based on Educational Background, East
Champaran, Bihar
Educational Status

Illiterate
Primary
MiddleSecondary
Senior Secondary
Above Senior Secondary
Graduation
Post-Graduation
Total
Source: Field survey, 2017

Percentage of Out migrants
CDB-I (Motihari)
CDB-II (Tetaria)
Percent
Percent
NumberNumber
24
10.96
36
17.82
57
26.03
63
31.19
61
27.85
48
23.76
32
14.61
20
9.90
22
10.05
20
9.90
12
5.48
8
3.96
8
3.65
4
1.98
3
1.37
3
1.49
219
100.00202
100.00The selectivity index (Table 06) shows that illiterates (68.48) and educated up to
primary level (99.82) are less among migrants. In other words, illiterate and primarylevel educated migrants are bound by their literacy level to work as labourers. On theother hand, out-migrants attaining education up to secondary level (106.01), seniorsecondary level (109.07) and above senior secondary level (110.21) showed higher
selectivity index which suggests that out-migrants are active in migration. Lastly, theout-migrants with highest selectivity index are graduates (190.00) and post-graduates(198.61) with high degree of migration. This clearly indicates that higher the selectivity
index value, higher the rate of mobility.
Table 06: Selectivity Index (Education) of Rural Out Migrants, East Champaran
Educational StatusOut
migrants

Percentage
among Outmigrants

Selectivity
Index

14.25
28.50
25.89
12.35
9.98
4.75

Percentage
among total
Community
Population
20.81
28.55
23.31
11.65
9.15
4.31

Illiterate
Primary
MiddleSecondary
Senior Secondary
Above Senior
SecondaryGraduation
Post-Graduation
Total
Source: Field survey, 2017

60
120
109
52
42
20
12
6
421

2.85
1.43
100.001.50
0.72
100.00190.00198.61100.0068.48
99.82
111.07106.01109.07110.21

Table 06 shows that selectivity index increases for the migrants belonging to
education level of senior secondary (109.07), above senior secondary (110.21),
graduation (190.00) and post-graduation (198.61) and this justify the fact that educatedmigrants have high degree of mobility. Also, educated migrants are more aware about
the job opportunities, wages, programs and policies. The educated migrant possesses
high level skills which make them eligible for good job opportunities and consequently,
their wages/payments (salary) are much higher as compared to unskilled migrants. The
higher wages of educated and skilled migrants result in higher remittances which in turnstrengthens the local economy. In other words, lack of job opportunities as per the skills
pushes the educated migrants towards metropolitan cities. The other aspect is that81

migrants after completing school/college education migrate in order to pursue higher
education.
Conclusion
Though the improper employment opportunities, poor wages and poverty are pushfactors for one and all rural migrants irrespective of religion, caste and education. The
point of consideration over here is that migration need to be checked at the place oforigin by providing considerable assistance (both monetary and non-monetary) tolandless villagers so that they begin their ‘start-up’ or small scale industry. Moreover,
government need to give due consideration on developing the ‘magnet towns’ so that
migrants find suitable employment opportunities in their neighboring areas. The idea
behind the magnet towns is to prevent the metropolitan cities or large urban centers to
go beyond their carrying capacity and result in urban sprawl, urban poverty etc.
References
1. Joseph. K.V. (1988). ‘Migration and Economic Development of Kerala’, Mittal
Publication, Delhi.
2. Ranis, G. and Fei, J.C.M. (1961). ‘A Theory of Economic Development’, American
Economic Review, Vol.51, No. 4, Sept., pp. 533-565.
3. Davis, K. (1963). The Theory of Change and Response in Modern Demographic
History. Population Index, 29, 345-366.
4. Kumar, Sarvottam (2005), Rural Male Out migration, Delhi: Vista International
Publishing House.
5. Kothari, D.K. (1980). Patterns of Rural-Urban Migration: A case Study of Four
Villages in Rajasthan, India, Canberra: Australian National University

82