**Table 3.2.  World urban population growth and urbanization change**

||**1960-1970**|**1970-1980**|**1980-1990**|**1990-2002**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|Countries with growing urban<br>populations|189|188|191|188|
|Countries with shrinking urban<br>populations|0|4|1|11|
|Ofthese,in ECA|0|0|0|11|
|**Total**|**189**|**192**|**192**|**199**|
|Urbanizing Countries|178|180|174|169|
|De-urbanizing (ruralizing) countries|10|9|17|18|
|Ofthese,in ECA|0|2|4|11|
|**Total **|**188**|**189**|**191 **|**187 **|

Source: SIMA.

# **Box 3.1.  Migration in the Kyrgyz Republic**

Kyrgyz is atypical in the ECA region in that it is still primarily rural and rapidly urbanizing, resulting in a 45 percent increase in the number of residents in Bishkek alone in seven years. It is estimated that one third of the national population (one million people) has moved within the country over the past ten years, although the official system of residency registration has been unable to keep up with the changes and the requirement of residency permits ( _propiska_ ) is evidently not being enforced.<sup>15</sup> While rural to urban migration is normal for a country at this level of development, the government is concerned that the very rapid pace since the transition strains both the rural and urban economies, and therefore it seeks to manage (i.e., reduce and stabilize) the internal movements. What is interesting is that with large scale emigration of the Russian-speaking population from the Kyrgyz Republic and internal relocation of inhabitants from poor mountainous areas into the two main cities (Bishkek and Osh), the socioeconomic profile of these cities is becoming poorer and their human capital base is lower than before _._ Therefore, an explicit understanding of urban poverty is becoming more urgent.

According to a 2000 survey of migrants to urban areas (IOM 2001)<sup>1</sup> the economic motivation (search for employment) was paramount to their decision. They come mainly to the two largest cities and most report that their expectations were met, even when city life is hard. The main concerns expressed by the migrants surveyed were access to cash, housing and employment. When asked what conditions would impel them to return to their home area, respondents ranked civil strife and economic deterioration in the city as the main potential factors. However, those who reported a desire to return to their area of origin said they would do so if the government provided or guaranteed a well paid job, housing, loans or grants, or other financial incentives.

On balance, while acknowledging that the urban destination posed many difficulties (after the first-ranked economic concerns, in the second ranking were concerns regarding food and health care, followed by education of children, and last relations with authorities), three-quarters of the migrants were rather satisfied with their situation as “normal or passable”. Yet, the same study of migration concludes that government policy should focus on making conditions more attractive in the rural areas to stem the outflow—which would be highly impractical if the population demands heavy financial incentives. It is clear that while migrants find life in the city economically demanding they have a realistic assessment of the trade-offs they face and believe their prospects are better there. A message that should be taken from the Kyrgyz study is that the large internal flow of residents does create an increasing urban poverty risk and this needs to be addressed—but that this flow is itself a _de facto_ poverty reduction strategy that much of the population has chosen for itself, with considerable success.

Source:<sup>1</sup> International Organization for Migration (IOM), “Internal Migration in the Kyrgyz Republic”, January 2001.

The decline in the urban population share due to emigration conceals the extent to which rural to urban net migration continues. In Estonia, for example, analysis of internal migration data shows that internal migrants continued to move to the large cities and the immediately surrounding areas during the 1990s. However, the number of internal migrants moving to urban areas was far surpassed by the number of people emigrating from large cities.<sup>16</sup> In Kyrgyz, Kazakhstan, and Moldova researchers found a similar situation, namely that the high level of emigration from large cities concealed continued, and substantial, rural to urban domestic migration.<sup>17</sup> Box 3.1 provides more information about migration in the Kyrgyz Republic.

> _15 Under the Soviet system the propiska was necessary to acquire basic rights as a resident._

> 16 _Tammaru, Tiit.  2001.  “Urbanization in Estonia in the 1990s:  Soviet Legacy and the Logic of Transition.”  Post-_ _<u>Soviet Geography and Economics</u> 42, No. 7, pp. 504-518._

> 17 _IOM.  2001.  “Internal Migration in the Kyrgyz Republic.”  Mimeo.;  Rowland,R. 2001.”Regional Population_

18