positive association between household consumption and migrant remittances (Figure 1), after controlling for access to subsidized food grain, benefits through other government schemes,<sup>3</sup> a range of household characteristics<sup>4</sup> and household fixed-effects (see Appendix Table 1).<sup>5</sup> Yet, the correlation does not imply causality, given the possibility that unobserved variables may affect both migrant remittances and household consumption. A series of experimental studies, including on India, present more credible evidence on the causal impact of remittances on household consumption (McKenzie and Yang, 2010). Migrant remittances are also quantitatively important in lower-income Indian states. In Bihar, for example, remittances accounted for 35.6 percent of gross state domestic product (GSDP) in 2011–12, up from 11.6 percent in 2004–05 (Figure 2).

Yet, much of the literature on internal migration in India provides very little in terms of explaining the low mobility of labor over time and across space. The persistent lack of mobility in India has been consistently documented from the early 1960s (Srivastava and McGee, 1998; Singh, 1998; Bhagat and Lusome, 2006; Sasikumar and Srivastava, 2003). Most studies on the topic, however, have been concerned with patterns of migration and the characteristics of migrants (Singh, 1998; Bhagat and Lusome, 2006; Hnatkovska and Lahiri, 2015; and Pandley, 2014). There has been very little attempt to provide empirical explanations as to why this is the case (Rajan and Mishra, 2011).

In light of the above, the objective of this paper is to shed light on the incidence and potential barriers to internal labor migration in India. In doing so, it carries out empirical analysis based on the India Human Development Survey (IHDS), which provides a more recent source of data compared to the Census and household surveys conducted by India’s National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO). Further, unlike the NSSO and Census, the IHDS tracks the same households over time – 83 percent of the households in 2004–05 were re-surveyed in 2011–12. The IHDS also provides a more accurate assessment of the magnitude of circular or seasonal migration. In addition, the paper reviews the thin literature on the subject. The structure of the paper is the following. Section B describes the main migration definitions and associated trends based on several data sources. Section C explores socioeconomic determinants of internal migration. Section D reviews the role of administrative requirements in this regard. Section E analyzes patterns of circular or short-term migration. Section F presents conclusions.

> 3 The possession of a ration card and a dummy variable for participation in government programs are therefore included in the regression.

> 4 These include the level of household consumption, household size, household wage, and characteristics of the household head (age, age-squared, sex, marital status, occupation dummy variable, industry dummy variable, and education level dummy variable).

> 5 This result holds true for the all-encompassing definition of migrants in the IHDS as well as when migrants refer to ‘absent husbands’ only. All nominal values for consumption and remittances are expressed in real terms.

3