• Keine Ergebnisse gefunden

DETERMINANTS OF THE INTERURBAN MOVE

As indicated previously (Table 4.6), the dominant reason (for 6 0 percent of the sample) for selecting a particular urban destination was the employment prospects per- ceived t o be available there. The presence of kin there ranked a distant second (24 percent).

*The difference bctween the two income levels is not statistically significant o n the basisof a "student- t" test.

**The difference between the two wage levels is not statistically significant o n the basis of a "student-t"

test.

***The average incomc level in Nyeri was also lower for t h e interurban migrants as was the average wage obtained by the interurban migrants t o Nanyuki, but the numbers involved here were too small t o considcr the estimates reliable.

t T h e difference is significant at the lcvel of p < 0.05 using a "student-t" test.

'TARLI: 10.4 A comparison between t h c interurban migrants and the remainder of the sample of the level of average income and wages obtained during the first quarter after migration (KShs./month).

Current urban location Interurban migrants Remainder of t h e sample Interurban migrant income as a R.

of the remainder of t h e sample Average income Average wage Average income Average wage

Average income Average wage N a i r o b ~

Mombasa Kisumu Nakuru Eldoret Thika Nanyuki Nyeri Total

If we compare this distribution of the answers to Question 7 for the total sample wit11 the responses given by the subset of the sample who were interurban migrants, we note that the two distributions are almost identical (see Table 10.5). The only real differ- ence is that the presence of kin is less important for the latter. Given that the current loca- tion is a second choice and that the interurban subset has a significantly higher proportion of "active" migrants, the smaller role of kin as a reason for selecting a particular destina- tion is to be expected. Among urban centers, the dominant differences in the distribution between the two tables are for Eldoret and Nanyuki, where all other reasons have collapsed into the employment prospects category for the interurban migrants.

Given the dominant role of employment prospects and the declining role of the presence of kin as a reason for selecting a particular urban destination, we need t o consider the difference in income earned by the interurban migrants in the two urban locations and whether they received assistance from kin on arrival in their current location. The extent of the income differential is reported in Table 10.6.

We note, first, that all column totals, except for the zero differential for Nanyuki, are positive. On the average, the interurban migrants t o each of the eight centers improved their earning power by KShs.87 a month through their change of location. This improve- ment in income is consistent with the improved employment status reported in Table 10.3 and the higher wages obtained by interurban migrants reported in Table 10.4. There are only four negative income differentials - two of these are in movements t o Nairobi. The four migration sources for these negative differentials were the four intermediate-sized towns. In only one case, Nakuru t o Nyeri, was the flow for a negative differential t o a destination smaller than the source. It is to be expected that the limited number of nega- tive differentials reflects primarily a migrant's inability to obtain employment in a location by the end of tlie first quarter.

With reference to assistance provided by kin, the relevant comparison is between Tables 10.7 and 7.4. Again, the distributions are strikingly similar; the average number of months of assistance received is only marginally lower for interurban migrants. Also, the proportions in the two tables not receiving any assistance are within 5 percentage points of each other. Among urban centers, there are substantial differences between the two for several urban centers. In Kisumu, Thika, and Nanyuki. a larger proportion of the inter- urban migrants were receiving assistance than of the total sample.

Combining the information from Tables 10.6 and 10.7, we found that the results are consistent with the emphasis that the migrants place on e~nployment prospects as the reason for selecting their destination. Even though the presence of kin is less important for tlie interurban migrants than for the total sample, the men did not receive significantly less assistance on arrival from kin than did the total sample. The interurban migrants are basically similar t o tlie total sample in their motivation and in their reliance on kin as a point of entry into the urban scene.

Finally, this similarity between the interurban migrants and tlie total sa~nple is also evident in the future migration intentions of the men (see Tables 10.8 and 9.2). The only real difference in the two distributio~is is that the interurban migrants with secondary education place less emphasis o n staying until retirement and more on staying for a given number of years. No doubt, should an opportunity to improve their situation arise, many of the men with secondary education would be willing to move on t o yet another location.

c

TABLE 10.6 Average difference in income between the previous urban location and earnings obtained in the first quarter after migration in thc current urban location (KShs./month).

Previous

Nairobi Mombasa Kisumu Nakuru Eldoret Thika Nanyuki Nyeri

4 9 629 96 0 137

TABLE 10.7 The percentage distribution of the average amount of assistance received in each urban center by interurban migrants during the f i s t full quarter after ~nigration.

Months of Nairobi Mombasa Kisumu Nakuru Eldoret Thika Nanyuki Nyeri Total assistance

TABLE 10.8 The percentage distribution of the future migration plans of the interurban migrants.

Migration plans Education Total

TABLE 10.9 A ranking by various characteristics of the eight urban centers.

Urban Population Amenity Modern sector Number of modern Number of in-migrants Inverse ranking of proportion center size index average wage sector jobs created from urban sources of in-migrants who left for

1964-1968 another urban center

Nairobi Mombasa Kisumu Nakuru Eldoret Thika Nanyuki Nyeri