Labour migration between developing economy to developing country: A case study of Bangladesh and Malaysia
Kazi Abdul, Mannan
Southern Cross University
2016
Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/97429/
MPRA Paper No. 97429, posted 12 Dec 2019 02:01 UTC
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 41 Labour migration between developing economy to developing country: A case study of
Bangladesh and Malaysia
Kazi Abdul Mannan1 Research Fellow
Southern Cross University, Australia
Abstract
This study examines and analyses the phenomena of unskilled temporary male labour migration from Bangladesh to Malaysia by focusing upon the decision making process, its economic and social impact at the point of origin, and the significance of the role of networks at origin and destination.
This analysis contributes to the knowledge on transnational migration flows particularly focused on the attributes studied in the topic. It is anticipated that this study is generate insights and deeper understanding of how the migration decision making process operates, how risks, costs and benefits are assessed by the household unit, to what extent temporary migration is a result of livelihood diversification strategies and how important social networks and social capital reduces the costs and risks of migration. The theoretical analysis and empirical outcomes provides a conceptual model between developing nation to developing country unskilled labour migration process and consequences. Moreover, the findings from this study contribute to migration policies and programs of both the sending and receiving countries by a deeper understanding of this phenomenon, its theoretical underpinnings and the formulation of relevant Government policies and programs pertaining to the international migration of workers.
Key words: decision-making; unskilled; labour; migration; transnational identity; prestige JEL Code: A10, B31, D00, E00, F00, G00, H00, J44, J62, J71, J08
1 Corresponding author: E-mail: mannankazi@yahoo.com
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 41 Introduction
International migration is a common livelihood strategy for many poor and other Bangladeshi households. Such labour migration contributed to the country's GDP.
Together with the potential economic incentives, such labour movements have both socio-economic roots and consequences for the short-term migrants. This study focuses on the factors contributing to the decision to migrate as well as its consequences for unskilled short term male Bangladeshi migrants (and their households) to Malaysia.
The specific research objectives are as follows:
1. To examine the socio-demographic profile of unskilled short term male Bangladeshi migrant workers to Malaysia and the factors considered in making the decision to migrate, whether individually or by the household.
2. To explore the socioeconomic impacts of this livelihood strategy on the migrant and his household.
3. To test the viability of the conceptual framework based on extant and major migration theories.
It is anticipated that the findings from this study will contribute to the understanding of this phenomenon, its theoretical underpinnings and the formulation of relevant policies by both the sending and recipient countries.
Literature Review
While international migration refers to the
‘Movement of persons who leave their country of origin, or country of habitual residence, to establish themselves either permanently or temporarily in another country (IMO 2004), the migrant worker is one “who migrates from one country to another with a view to being employed otherwise than on his own account and includes any person regularly admitted as a migrant for employment (ILO 1949).
International migration has accelerated both as a cause and consequence of globalisation;
about 215 million people or 3 per cent of the world’s population live outside their birth countries (Rodrik & Rosenzweig 2010).
International migration “provides wage differential advantages, reduces macroeconomic volatility, diffuses knowledge across borders, and facilitates trade which may endure substantial welfare gains for letting labour flow between countries” (Rodrik &
Rosenzweig 2010).
Over the past decades, temporary unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled labour migration schemes, regulated and otherwise, have become widespread in Asia and the Middle East as they enable more flexible labour markets than permanent migration and favour low-skill services, agricultural, construction and labour intensive manufacturing sectors (Abella 2004). However, lack of protection rights and regulatory frameworks discriminate against such workers (Rudnick 2009) but reduce overall labour importing costs (Ruhs &
Martin 2006).
Causes of migration
Migration is driven by labour demand arising from the uneven pace of economic development among countries as seen by the inflow of migrant labour into Malaysia, Hong Kong or Singapore, for instance (Piore 1979;
Skeldon 1992). The major pull factors include the wide range of wages differentials, economic shifts from manufacturing to the service sector and migrant community networks (Krishnan & Odynak 1987;
Appleyard 1989; Skeldon 1992; Salt 1992;
Castles 1998)
As migration experience in originating communities accumulate, migration flows become increasingly self-sustaining over time.
Community structures and characteristics, individual and household variables are become socio-demographic push variables. Many empirical studies such as those by Massey et
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 42 al. (1994), Massey and Espinoza (1997),
Massey and Zenteno (1999), Espinoza and Massey (1999), Kabaiupuni (2000), Winters et al. (200), Davis et al. (2002), Lindstrom and Lauster (1999), Fussell and Massey (2004), and Curran et al. (2005, 2007) have also examined the cumulative causation of a wide range of factors involved in international migration flows.
The economic determinants of international labour migration can be broadly categorized into cost and benefit factors (Greenwood &
MacDowell 1992). Costs are further divided into direct and indirect costs; direct migration costs arise due to distance (Marr 1977;
Greenwood & McDowell 1982, 1991; Lucas 1976; Berger & Webb 1987) and information (Parai 1969; Jasso & Rosenzweig 1986a; Shaw et al., 1973). Indirect migration costs are linked to occupational skills such as language similarity (Lucas 1976; Berger & Webb 1987), attending school in the destination country (Greenwood & McDowell 1982, 1991;
MacPhee & Hassan 1990;Vasegh-Daneshvary et al. 1987), originating country development level (Fleisher 1963; Greenwood & McDowell 1991; Borjas 1987), influence of past migration (Greenwood 1969; Dunlevy 1991;
Wilkinson 1970; Massey 1988; Stark & Taylor 1989), political conditions in the originating country (Jasso & Rosenzweig 1990; Huang 1987) and the importance of alternative destinations (Marr 1975, 1977; DeVoretz &
Maki 1983).
Consequences of migration
Along with national development (Farid et al.
2009), migrant remittances improve the living standards of household members with longer term migration enabling higher saving ratios than for other migrants. The ability to remit money to the country of origin depends on the intensity and duration of the migrant's experience and exposure at the destination.
Household members assume the role played by the migrant in extending community social networks (Nguyen et al. 2006). Unskilled migrants are invariably blamed for social ills, exploiting public services and lowering wages in the destination country (Huntington 2004).
Unskilled labour migration from underdeveloped countries facilitates human trafficking (Firoze 1997; Shamim 1997;
Blanchet 2002) increasing the number of refugee at the destination (Khondker 1995).
Thus, the causes and consequences of international migration include both economic and socio-demographic determinants the major ones of which will be investigated in this study.
Conceptualised labour migration between the countries
The conceptual framework of this study is given in Figure 1 below.
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 43 Figure 1: Conceptual framework for the study
Source: Author developed for the study Individual/household migration decision
making strategy
The household unit is a co-resident group whose sustainability is based upon group decision making regarding resource allocation for productive and social purposes (Schmink 1984, 1985; Wood 1981, 1982) and acts as a mediator between individuals and the migration process (Crummett 1987; Pedraza- Bailey 1985).
The pattern of migration is affected by such sociodemographic variables as household assets, household age and sex structure and its life cycle stage (Harbison 1981; Schmink 1984). Households with moderate financial resources would probably sponsor the migration of one or more household members more than poorer households (Dinerman 1978;
Pessar 1982). Households with fewer adults or many dependents may be less likely to participate because of fewer potential migrant candidates (Harbison 1981; Root & De Jong 1986) and the low income generating capacity of members left behind (Escobars et al. 1987).
For life cycle stage, men with young children are more likely than those recently married to migrate (Massey et al. 1987; Escobar et al.
1987). International labour migration is a rational household livelihood strategy designed to alleviate economic pressures at various life cycle stages and influences the type of migration (settlement, temporary and recurrent) (Escobar et al. 1987; Massey &
Denton 1987).
Individual migration represents a strategy at the household level to achieve a balance between resources such as land or capital, household consumption needs and the monetary or non-monetary generating options available (Pessar 1982; Wood 1982).
Remittance sent home by the migrant forms a significant part of the household strategy to maintain its economic viability and meet social obligations. However, this must be offset by migration costs including those for the agent, transportation, documentation, food, clothing, etc. Positive net remittance flows can reduce land fragmentation and downward mobility while contributing to household farm production; it may well induce more household members to migrate (Pessar 1982) creating family-based household units at the destination. Remittance flows perpetuate social network across space (Caces et al. 1985)
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 42 and strengthen and influence future migration
decision strategy (Fawcett & Arnold 1987).
Thus, the unit of analysis is the household although the sampling unit itself is the unskilled male migrant located in the destination, Malaysia.
Unskilled migrants
The word unskilled means either the skill required for a task, the task itself or the person’s education level (Iancu 2010).
Unskilled workers typically have low education levels and engage in menial and repetitive tasks earning low incomes. In studying unskilled labour migration, researchers such as Iancu (2010) and Rajan (2011) adopt study-linked definitions; Rajan (2011) defines unskilled migrants as those without specific skills including sweepers, construction workers, cleaners, peons, hawkers, vendors, petty traders, domestic workers and cooks, while . Iancu (2010) defines them as having below secondary education level. Unskilled migrants earn low income (Razin & Sadka, 1999), send limited remittances home (Hugo 2009), and are temporary or short term (Icuna 2010). In Malaysia, unskilled migrant workers are employed in manufacturing, service, construction, plantation and as domestic help and earn less than RM 2500 monthly (Kanapathy 2006; Mannan & Farhana 2015). ).
In this study, the ‘unskilled labour migrant’
refers to those who have been issued visit passes (Temporary Employment) by the Immigration Department of Malaysia under the Immigration Regulations, 1963 [Reg.
11(10)] and section 2(1) of the Passport Act, 1966.
Social networks and migration
Contacts with relatives and friends represent social networks that provide information and social and economic support and thus can significantly influence international migration decision making processes (De Jong et al.
1985, 1986; Fuller et al 1985, 1986, Anderson
1974; MacDonal & Macdonal 1964; Richey 1976; Hugo 1981)). Social networks connect migrants and non-migrants across time and space forging links between migrants in the host country and friends and relatives in the origin that can prolong the migration period or trip duration. The underlying role of household and community based networks affect migration patterns (Boyd 1989) while economic factors at the destination attract migrants and influence rational decision by individuals (Fernandez-Kelly 1983b; Pedraza- Bailey 1985; Portes & Bach 1985).
Equally important, households are socializing agents for geographically dispersed families creating partially dispersed kinship networks acting as information and support channels which in turn affect migration decisions (Harbison 1981; Caces et al. 1985).
Outcomes
Income differences between destination and origin are directly associated with household migration decisions. The outcomes of unskilled migration on the household are arguably economic (Azam & Gubert 2006) and social (Rahman 2007) and can be seen in the impact of remittances on household income, smoothening consumption patterns, investment in new business enterprises, accessibility to financial systems and accumulation of capital in land, machines, technology, building construction and renovation (Taylor 1992; Taylor & Wyatt 1996; Lucas 1987; Adams 2006b; Woodruff &
Zenteno 2001; Yang 2008). Additionally, migration remittances can reduce unexpected health hazards and encourage long term investment in education (Ratha et al. 2011), minimize the effects of economic shocks on household welfare (Quartey 2006), conserve cash resources by avoiding the sale of assets during calamities (Mohapatra et al. 2009) or even serve as an insurer for the whole household (Ponsot & Obegi 2010).
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 43 However, migration decisions can entail
negative impacts on the household through exploitation of migrants by unscrupulous recruiters or employers. Lipto (1980) notes that initially migration favours the relatively well-off households which can send household members and receive remittances thus increasing inequality in the country of origin.
However, as migrant networks become established in the host countries, migration costs fall enabling the less well-off to migrate (Taylor et al. 2005; Koechlin & Leon 2007;
Shen et al. 2010a).
Social contacts and networks serve to disseminate the impact of economic and social development on individuals and household, information about the destination, enable social assimilation and reduce income erosion of unskilled migrants in the host country. Thus social networks link individuals and households in the migration decision as a household livelihood strategy and as a consequence of a multiplicity of interacting socioeconomic factors.
Methodology
A mixed methodology approach involving both quantitative and qualitative methods of enquiry was adopted in this study. Given limited resources, a representative sample was chosen from a pre-selected community of Bangladeshi migrants in a locality near Kuala Lumpur comprising male unskilled workers who have been resident in the area between 1- 20 years (to enable the gathering of sufficient historical data on remittances etc.) and employed in one industry so as to eliminate any variations caused by inter-industry bias. A survey was conducted using structured, semi- structured interviews and focus group discussions conducted in the Bangladeshi language. Prior to the implementation of the questionnaire survey, the questionnaire was tested in a pilot study to improve its validity.
After the pilot study, two data collection exercises (interviews and focus group discussions) were conducted to collect the
research data. Based on the mixed method approach, the qualitative findings will provide an in-depth explanation for the understanding of the quantitative output of the study. The analysis of the questionnaire survey data was conducted using descriptive and inferential statistics. The data was analysed applying tabular (cross tabulation) and graphical formats for the individual and household characteristics and multivariate regression such as OLS and logistic model. In this way, the migration decision strategy was explored through the qualitative technique while the impact of this strategy was explored using both qualitative and quantitative methods.
This research focus on the unskilled Bangladeshi male migrants in Malaysia working in the service sector (hotels, resorts, restaurants, cafés, entertainment outlets, shopping complexes, hypermarkets, hospitals, airports, etc). They usually live near their work places and share accommodation either provided by employers or otherwise. The Bukit Bintang area in Kuala Lumpur has a significant range of service establishments and outlets and is a focal point for locals and foreign tourists. The total number of unskilled male Bangladeshi migrants working in the service sector in Malaysia is approximately 22,002 in December 2010 (Malaysian Parliament session, 2011). To obtain a representative sample of the population, Krejcie and Morgan (1970) has recommended the select a random sample of 300 individual migrants. For in-depth clarification of these perspectives related to impact, 10 focus group of 5-10 members each was selected based on certain pre-clarified criteria during the period of January-June, 2015. By rule, Malaysian government approves temporary work permit to the foreign unskilled workers aged between 20 – 45 years.
Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistical techniques where the SPSS (Statistical
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 44 Package for the Social Science) software
package was used as an instrument. The analysis of quantitative research results is planned while an interpretative technique was used to analyse qualitative data.
Discussion
Most of the migrant (61%) age was between 30-34 years old in this sector, although the mean age was 31.5. They have been working in this country for 1-20 years, but most of the workers have not been directly involved in this sector. The average result of their work in the service sector was 7.10 years. Mostly, 73% of migrants were married and 96% Muslims.
They have come with student visa, social visit pass, some were studying, so in the field of education, the analysis is a bit mixed-that is, pre-migration and post-migration educational qualification. Pre-migration educational background as follows; majority (53%) were passed secondary school certificate (SSC), but under SSC 7%, higher secondary school certificate (HSC) 21%, bachelor 3% and other 16%. However, 32% of students responded with a student visa, and 62% of them were going to continue with the annual tuition fee (visa renewal) for just continuing to continue the visa, with them there was no relation to education. Moreover, 28% were studying in various colleges and universities. However, 10% of migrants were working as supervisor / manager / contractor by completing different types of diploma.
It turns out that they do different types of work, 53% cleaning and washing, 27%
customer service, 8% cook, 5% bar tender, 4%
supervisor level and 2% manager. They have been working in two types of financial contracts such as per hour (RM 5-12) and monthly (RM 900-3,500) salary basis. Those who take advantage of legalization of Malaysian government at previous times, all of them were registered in the name of the same company, but all those who were visas in the student category or other organisation, few of them were working for hourly basis and others
on monthly salary. In both cases, the employer did not provide any kind of accommodation and transportation facilities. Migrants, in their own initiative, were making arrangements for resolving and passing accommodation problems.
It was seen that few of them were solved in the way to solve the residential problem to accommodate with others. Someone were sharing room and eating with other Bangladeshi near work place. Anyone else of the same community together with Nepal, India and Myanmar migrants, arranges to stay together, but due to lack of food habit, they were treating their own food differently, such as one day itself, but they were eaten at other times in the low quality of Bangladeshi restaurant. A little deeper discussion of the residential problem was seen in the existence of a transnational identity. As some numbers of Bangladeshi migrants were lived together for a long period in Indonesian girls and they have their own children too. Because of legal complications, they could not register marriage even in Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia or any other country. Their children were mostly growing up in mother's country of origin in Indonesia.
In most cases, the revenue and expenditure was not able to match the calculation, but the amount of remittance transmission (RM 500- 2000) was available in Bangladesh. However, it cannot be continued in all cases, because there were huge burdens on the renewal of the yearly visa as well as many additional costs besides the health and leisure. It is to be noted that the class which were growing transnational identity in Indonesia, can never send regular remittance to Bangladesh, most of their income went back to Indonesia for the maintenance and education of their children.
There were mixed answers about the reasons for migration in Malaysia, but all were agreed in one point that whether they work as a migrant, their social status as a migrant increases in the originating community. Those
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 45 who were unmarried migrants can marry
themselves in an upper class family, which also have significant influence on the marital relationship of other members of their household. Those who were involved in different occupations in the country were focusing more on the improvement of social status rather than financially. According to their information, the migration in Malaysia was because of the low risk and investment in Bangladesh and the possibility of earning more in some cases than the expense, risk and emotional turmoil for migrations, because of the family's social status down due to occupational reasons. The people who were unemployed, their opinion was that even they were educated, the lack of employment opportunity in the country and the amount of investment in employment due to corruption in most cases is very high and there was no guarantee of getting it, but they also provide social status to the fore.
The Migration decision also includes mixed comments. Those married and head of the household, though, said that the decision was their own and that they are here in their own finance. But they were also said that since it was a huge investment and there is considerable risk, so after making a discussion with the family, everyone has made the final decision. Those who were not the head of household head and they have no money at their own account, they present the family's logic and information about their families, their household members took the final decision in the search and information of the other migrant networks. In this case, at first, the family has already considered the improvement of social standard and the next thing must be financially.
In reality, the purpose of the family's improvement of social values was not entirely successful, but in many cases success was seen. As many migrant who were single were married in the country and they thought that they could marry so well because of migration.
In other cases, they also informed social status was increased especially in case of marriage of household members. There were 36%
respondents said that they has been able to cooperate with migration and financial network in Malaysia and other countries for household members. There were 68% of respondents said that due to the increase in the social status of the family, presently in the community has to make a lot of contribution, such as the rate of monthly donation in mosque, temple has increased greatly, in many social institutions, charity and election period to the candidate were actually being spent to peace everyone's mind. There were 76% of respondents informed that the family members were able to get higher education from their sent remittance. In addition to 56% of the respondents were indicated that the family has enjoyed medical facilities due to their remittance especially elderly members of the household.
But 17% responded stated that for migration to Malaysia, they has to sold such valuable assets (gold and land), which has been market value today is so high and the value of the land is speedy increasing in Bangladesh. Nowadays by fulfilling all kinds of family and personal needs there are may not be possible to buy such kind of land assets. Moreover, the Malaysian government changes the rules and regulations frequently and increasing the costs of levy and others and there is the risk to stay for a long period. Recently, the value of Malaysia's currency has decreased greatly, but the cost of living in Bangladesh and also in Malaysia is increasing, the savings in the present situation are getting tougher.
Although the level of social status has increased significantly in Bangladesh, however being a migrant in Malaysia were deemed to be socially and stately deprecated, in this case, 93% of respondents comment on this. Most landlords do not like to rent their house when they find the Bangladeshi migrant, such answers were 76% respondents. Being a
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 46 Bangladeshi migrant, were insulted using
malay word ‘orang bangla’ receptacles in most cases, especially in the working place, this situation were faced by 89% respondents.
Administratively, also has to be harassed, despite being a documented migrant, police and immigration authority have to pay monthly fixed amount through their agents, otherwise there were many threats, such comments were available from 73% of respondents. Most of the cases, a taxi driver do not like to carry fixed fares, in some cases, excess charge impose, 68% of respondents were commented on such fact and circumstances.
By analysing the table 1.1 below, it can be seen that the migrants who were working in the Malaysian service sector, in their migration decision, only three variables were significant and that is prestige, social network and household size. Although, prestige and social network are unable to account as economic value. In the migration decision making policy, the word (prestige) for the improvement of the social status of the family is new, though in the context of Bangladesh it is reason enough. If we do a deeper study of different destination countries in the socioeconomic aspect with migration costs, risk and benefits, then we may get new results.
Table 1.1 Result of logistic regression of migration decision model
Source: author calculation from survey data
While social networks play an important role in migrations especially migration motivation, but this study is seen as a leading role in migration decisions. In this case, maybe network is working, in the case of family member migration decision, it may be that a family member has migrated first and later he has got new benefits in his workplace or elsewhere and has brought some of his family or relatives. However, there is a need for deeper research in this matter.
In logistic regression model, the third variable is the household size significant. It has seen in
the literature review that many studies shows that it has played a great role in the family size migration decision. In this case, a simple formula is that if there is more number of members, especially male and competent to migrations, especially in the context of Bangladesh, the household likes that at least one of their members goes abroad. The number of family members who have a higher number of family members is also a significant factor, so migration decision is certainly logical.
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 47 Conclusion
In conclusion, it can say that Bangladeshi migrants who have been working for a long time in Malaysia's in the service sector, their demographic character is very consistent with the results of other research. But there are different patterns of migrations have found that means their entry process in Malaysia is different category. There are also variations in earnings at work. Everyone is describing migration as the first purpose and motivation of family social value increase (prestige). In the case of a migration decision, the family has come to the conclusion of the decision, but in this case, the family members jointly have taken the final decision. However, in the destination country, in Malaysia, discrimination is observed in workplace and other social sectors. Horizontal and vertical positive socioeconomic impacts are being observed in their family and society in
different areas of the origin country, such as the overall health of the family, including education has improved slightly. There is also evidence, the proposed conceptual model is theoretically and empirically supporting.
The expected research outcome is a clear understanding of how unskilled temporary male Bangladeshi migrant workers make the migration decision whether individually or as a joint household decision, how socio- demographic attributes affect the decision and what the costs and outcomes of the decision are. It is also a clearer understanding of the theoretical foundations of this phenomenon will be gained to throw light on the current migration theories. An opportunity to describe their socio-economic situations and the migration experiences during the migration period in Malaysia.
References:
Abella, MI 2004, ‘The role of recruiters in labour migration’ in International Migration Prospects and Policies in a Global Market’, Douglas Massey and J.
Edward Taylor (eds) IUSSP and Oxford University Press.
Abella, I 2006, ‘Policies and Best Practices for Management of Temporary Migration’, Policy paper for the International Symposium on International Migration and Development, Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs United Nations Secretariat, Turin, Italy, June 28-30.
Adams, RH 2006b, ‘International remittances and the household: Analysis and review of global evidence’, Journal of African Economies, 15(suppl 2), 396-425.
Anderson, GM 1974, ‘Networks of Contact:
The Portuguese and Toronto’: Wilfrid Laurier University.
Appleyard, RE 1989, ‘Emigration Dynamics in Developing Countrie’s’, Vol.II:
South Asia, Ashgate: Aldershot.
Azam, JP & Gubert F 2006, ‘Migrants' remittances and the household in Africa:
A review of evidence’, Journal of African Economies, 15(suppl 2), 426- 462.
Berger, MC & Michael AW 1987,
‘Commercial Policy and the Brain Drain’, Applied Economics, 19(2), 143- 153.
Blanchet, T 2002, ‘Beyond Boundaries: A Critical Look at Women Labor Migration and the Trafficking Within’, Drishti Research Centre, Submitted to USAID, Dhaka.
Bartolo, DA 1999, ‘Modern human capital analysis: estimation of US, Canada and Italy earning functions’: Citeseer.
Bedford, R 2009, ‘Circular migration:
Reflections on an enduring debate’, Roundtable 2.1: The development potential of circular migration, Labour
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 48 Migration and its Development
Potential in the Age of Mobility’. EU Presidency Conference, 15-16 October 2009, Malmo, Sweden.
Bedford, CR & Bedford, et al. 2009, ‘The social impacts of short term migration for employment: A review of recent literature’, Research report for NZAID, Population Studies Centre, University of Waikato, Hamilton.
Begum, A 1999, ‘Destination Dhaka: Urban migration: expectations and reality’, Dhaka: The University Press Limited.
Borjas, GJ 1987, ‘Self-Selection and the Earnings of Immigrants,’ American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 531-53, September.
Boyd, M 1989, ‘Family and personal networks in international migration: recent developments and new agendas’, International Migration Review, 638- 670.
Castles, S 1998, ‘Globalization and migration:
some pressing contradictions’, UNESCO, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Caces, F; Arnold, F; Fawcett, JT & Gardner, RW 1985, ‘Shadow households and competing auspices: Migration behavior in the Philippines’, Journal of Development Economics, 17(1), 5-25.
Crummett, A 1987, ‘Rural women and migration in Latin America’.
Curran, SR; Dyer, J; & Korinek, K 2007, ‘The Migration and Development Prism: A Lens on Vulnerabilities and Capabilities’, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 16: 4, 443-450.
Curran, SR: Garip, F; Chung, CY &
Tangchonlatip, K 2005, ‘Gendered Migrant Social Capital: Evidence from Thailand’.
Davis, B: Stecklov, G & Winters, P 2002,
‘Domestic and international migration from rural Mexico: Disaggregating the effects of network structure and
composition’, Population Studies, 56(3), 291-309.
De Jong, GF; Root, BD; Gardner, RW;
Fawcett, JT & Abad, RG 1985,
‘Migration intentions and behavior:
Decision making in a rural Philippine province’, Population & Environment, 8(1), 41-62.
Dejong, GF; Root, BD & Abad, RG 1986,
‘Family reunification and Philippine migration to the United States: The immigrants' perspective’, International Migration Review, 598- 611.
De Haas, H 2008, ‘Migration and Development: A Theoretical Perspective’, International Migration Review, 44(1), 227-264.
DeVoretz, D & Dennis, M 1983, ‘The Immigration of Third World Professionals to Canada: 1968-1973’, World Development, 11(1), 55-64.
Dinerman, IR 1978, ‘Patterns of adaptation among households of US-bound migrants from Michoacan, Mexico’, International Migration Review, 485- 501.
Dunlevy, JA 1991 ’On the Settlement Patterns of Recent Caribbean and Latin Immigrants to the United States’, Growth and Change, 22(1), 54-67.
Ellis, F 2003, ‘A livelihoods approach to migration and poverty reduction’.
Escobar, A; González, M & Roberts, B 1987,
‘Migration, labour markets, and the
International economy: Jalisco, Mexico, and the United States’, Migrants, Workers, and the Social Order, edited by Jeremy Eades, 42-64.
Espinosa, K & Massey, D 1999.
‘Undocumented Migration and the Quantity and Quality of Social Capital’, Pp. 106-137 in Migration and Transnational Social Spaces. Ed. Ludger Pries. Singapore: Ashgate.
Farid, KS; Mozumdar, L; Kabir, MS &
Hossain, KB 2009, ‘Trends in international migration and remittance
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 49 flows: Case of Bangladesh’, Journal of
the Bangladesh Agricultural University, 7(2), 387-394.
Fernandez-Kelly, MP 1983, ‘For we are sold, I and my people: Women and industry in Mexico's frontier’: SUNY Press.
Fawcett, JT & Fred, A 1987, ‘Explaining Diversity: Asian and Pacific Immigration Systems’, Chapter 19, Pp.
453-478 in Pacific Bridges: The New Immigration from Asian and the Pacific Islands. Eds. James T. Fawcett and Benjamin Carino. Staten Island, NY:
Center for Migration Studies.
Fleisher, BM 1963, ‘Some Economic Aspects of Puerto Rican Migration to the United States’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 45; 2245-53.
Firoze, F 1997, ‘Trafficking in Women and Children: A Bangladesh Perspective’, Paper presented at a Conference on Women Migrant Workers organised by Regional Office of International Solidarity Center, Colombo, Sri Lanka, October 7-9.
Fuller, TD; Lightfoot, P & Kamnuansilpa, P 1985, ‘Mobility plans and mobility behavior: Convergences and divergences in Thailand’, Population &
Environment, 8(1), 15-40.
Fussell, E & Massey, DS 2004, ‘The limits to cumulative causation: international migration from Mexican urban areas’, Demography, 41(1), 151-171.
Grasmuck, S & Pessar, PR 1991, ‘Between two islands: Dominican international migration’, University of California Press.
Greenwood, MJ 1969, ‘An Analysis of the Determinants of Geographic Labor Mobility in the United States’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 51(2),189-194.
Greenwood, MJ & MacDowell, JM 1982, ‘The Supply of Immigrants to the United States’, in Barry R. Chiswick (ed.), The Gateway: U.S. Immigration Issues and Policies (Washington D.C.: American
Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 54-85. 612-623.
Greenwood, MJ 1991, ‘Differential Economic Opportunity, Transferability of Skills, and Immigration to the United States and Canada’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 73(4).
Greenwood, MJ 1992, ‘The macro determinants of international migration:
A survey’, at a conference sponsored by the Institute for Advanced Studies, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, and the Institute for Future Studies on "Mass Migration in Europe: Implications in East and West," held in Vienna, Austria, March5- 7, 1992.
Gulati, L 1993, ‘In the absence of their men:
the impact of male migration on women’: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd.
Harbison, SF 1981, ‘Family structure and family strategy in migration decision making’, Migration decision making, 225-251.
Hadi, A 1999, ‘Overseas migration and the well-being of those left behind in rural communities of Bangladesh’, Asia- Pacific population journal/United Nations, 14(1), 43.
Huang, WC 1987, ‘A Pooled Cross-Section and Time Series Study of Professional Indirect Immigration to the United States’, Southern Economic Journal, 54(1), 95-109.
Hugo, GJ 1981, ‘Village-community ties, village norms, and ethnic and social networks: A review of evidence from the Third World’, (pp. 186-224): Nueva York, Pergamon Press.
Hugo, G 2009, ‘Best practice in temporary labour migration for development: A perspective from Asia and the Pacific’, International migration, 47(5), 23-74.
Huntington, SP 2004, ‘Who are we: the challenges to America's National Identity’: Simon & Schuster.
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 50 IOM 2004, ‘International Migration Law’,
Glossary on Migration.
UN 1990, ‘Convention on the protection of the right of all migrant workers and members of their families’.
ILO 1949, ‘Migration for Employment Convention (Revised)’.
Immigration Regulations, 1963 (Malaysia) Jasso, G & Rosenzweig, MR 1986a, ‘Family
Reunification and the Immigration Multiplier: U.S. Immigration Law, Origin Country Conditions, and the Reproduction of Immigrants’, Demography, 23(3), 291-311.
Iancu, N 2010, ‘Consequences of the Migration of Highly-Skilled, Low Skilled and Unskilled Workers’, The.
AGORA Int’l J. Jurid. Sci., ccciii.
Iancu, N 1990, ‘Self-Selection and the Earnings of Immigrants: Comment’, American Economic Review, 80(1), 299- 304.
Kabaiupuni, SM 2000, ‘Sustaining Families and Communities: Nonmigrant Women and Mexico-U.S. Migration Processes’, Center for Demography and Ecology, CDE Working Paper No. 2000-13, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Kanapathy, V 2006, ‘Migrant workers in Malaysia: an overview’, Institute of Strategic and International Studies (Malaysia).
Katz, E & Stark, O 1986, ‘Labor migration and risk aversion in less developed countries’, Journal of Labor Economics 4: 134-149.
Khondker, HH 1995, ‘Politics, Disaster and Refugees: The Bangladesh Case’, in Ong Jin Hui et al (ed.), Crossing Borders: Transmigration in Asia Pacific, Prentice Hall: New York.
Koechlin, V & Leon, G 2007, ‘International remittances and income inequality: An empirical investigation’, Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 10(2), 123- 141.
Krishnan, P & Odynak, D 1987, ‘A Generalization of Petersen’s Typology
of Migration’, International Migration, Volume 25, Issue 4, 385–397, December.
Lauby, J & Stark, O 1988, ‘Individual Migration As a Family Strategy: Young Women in the Philippines’, Population Studies 42(3):476-86.
Lewis, WA 1954, ‘Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labor’, Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, 22: 139-91.
Lee, ES 1966, ‘A theory of migration’, Demography, 3(1), 47-57.
Lindstrom, DP & Nathanael L 1999, ‘Local Economic Opportunity and the Competing Risks of Internal and US Migration in Zacatecas, Mexico’, International Migration Review, Vol.
XXXV, No.4.
Lipton, M 1980, ‘Migration from rural areas of poor countries: the impact on rural productivity and income distribution’, World Development, 8(1), 1-24.
Lucas, REB 1976, ‘The Supply-of-Immigrants Function and Taxation of Immigrants’
Income: An Econometric Analysis’, in J.N. Bhagwati (ed.), The Brain Drain and Taxation II (Amsterdam:North- Holland,1976), 63-82.
Lucas, REB 1987, ‘Models of business cycles’:
B. Blackwell.
Lucas, REB 2007, ‘Migration and rural development’, Electronic Journal of Agricultural and Development Economics, 4(1), 99-122.
MacPhee, CR. & Hassan, M.K 1990, ‘Some Economic Determinants of Third World Professional Immigration to the United States’: 1972-87,’ World Development, 18(8), 1111-1118.
MacDonald, JS & MacDonald, LD 1964,
‘Chain migration ethnic neighbourhood formation and social networks’, The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 82- 97.
Mannan, KA & Farhana, KM 2015, ‘An arithmetic analysis of Bangladeshi sending migrants stock and remittance
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 51 per capita in Malaysia’, Research
Journal of Social Science and Management, vol.4, no.10, pp.146-16.
Martin, PL & Taylor, JE 2001, ‘Managing migration: the role of economic policies’, (Vol. 120): New York:
Berghahm Books.
Massey, DS 1988, ‘Economic Development and International Migration in Comparative Perspective’, Population and Development Review (14), 383-413.
Massey, DS & Denton, NA 1987, ‘Trends in the residential segregation of. Blacks’, Hispanics, and Asians: 1970-1980.
American Sociological Review, 802- 825.
Massey, DS; Arango, J; Hugo, G; Kouaouci, A; Pellegrino, A & Taylor, JE 1993,
‘Theories of International Migration: A Review and Appraisal’, Population and Development Review, vol. 19, no. 3 (Sep): 431-466.
Massey, DS; Andrew, BG & Kumiko, S 1994,
‘Migration, Segregation, and the Geographic Concentration of Proverty’, American Sociological Review, vol. 59, Issue.3 (Jun): 425-445.
Massey, DS & Kristin E 1997, ‘What’s Driving Mexico-US. Migration? A Theoretical, Empirical, and Policy Analysis’, American Journal of Sociology (102): 939-99.
Massey, DS & Zenteno 1999, ‘The dynamics of mass migration’, Proc, Natl Acad, Sci, USA. Vol. 96: 5328-5335.
Marr, WL 1975, ‘Economic Determinants of Migration, Canada, 1950-1967,’
Nebraska Journal of Economics, 14(1), 47-62.
Marr, WL 1977, ‘The United Kingdom’s International Migration in the Inter-War Period: Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Testing,’ Population Studies, 31(3), 571-579.
Mohapatra, S; Joseph, G & Ratha, D 2012,
‘Remittances and natural disasters: ex- post response and contribution to ex-
ante preparedness’, Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1-23.
Nguyen, L; Yeoh, BSA & Toyota, M 2006,
‘Migration and the well-being of the
“left behind” in Asia’, Asian Population Studies, 2(1), 37-44.
Parai, L 1969, ‘Canadian International Immigration’, 1953-1965: An Empirical Study.
Passport Act, 1966 (Malaysia).
Pedraza-Bailey, S 1985, ‘Cuba's exiles:
Portrait of a refugee migration’, International Migration Review, 4-34.
Pessar, PR 1982, ‘The role of households in international migration and the case of US bound migration from the Dominican Republic’, International Migration Review, 342-364.
Piore, MJ 1979, ‘Birds of Passage: Migrant Labor and Industrial Societies’:
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Portes, A & Bach, RL 1985, ‘Latin journey:
Cuban and Mexican immigrants in the United States’: University of California Press.
Ponsot, F & Obegi, B 2010, ‘Etude de capitalisation des initiatives et mécanismes en matire de transferts de fonds au Mali’, Study conducted for Centre de Information et de Gestion des Migrations (CIGEM), Mali.
Preibisch, K 2010, ‘Pick-Your-Own Labor:
Migrant Workers and Flexibility in Canadian Agriculture’, International Migration Review, 44(2), 404-441.
Quartey, P 2006, ‘The impact of migrant remittances on household welfare in Ghana’, (Vol.158): African Economic Research Consortium.
Rahman, M 2007, ‘Migration and Social Development: A Family Perspective’
Rajan, SI 2011, ‘Migration, Identity and Conflict: India Migration Report 2011’:
Routledge India.
Ratha, D; Mohapatra, S & Scheja, E 2011,
‘Impact of migration on economic and social development: a review of
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 52 evidence and emerging issues’, World
Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series, Vol.
Razin, A & Sadka, E 1999, ‘Migration and pension with international capital mobility’, Journal of Public Economics, 74(1), 141-150.
Ritchey, PN 1976, ‘Explanations of migration’, Annual review of sociology, 2, 363-404.
Rodrik, D & Rosenzweig, M 2010,
‘Development Economics’, North- Holland.
Root, BD & DeJong, GF 1986, Family migration: conceptualizing the migrating unit in a developing country.
Nova York.
Rudnick, A 2009, ‘Working Gendered Boundaries:Temporary Migration Expriences of Bangladeshi Women in the Malaysian Export Industry from a Multi-Sited Perspective’, Ph.D thesis, University of Amsterdam.
Ruhs, M & Martin, P 2006, ‘Numbers vs rights: Trade-offs and guest workers Programmes’, Working Paper No.40.
Centre on Migration, Policy and Society, University of Oxford.
Salt, J 1992, ‘Migration Processes among the Highly Skilled in Europe’, International Migration Review, 26: 484-505.
Shen, IL; Docquier, F & Rapoport, H 2010,
‘Remittances and inequality: a dynamic migration model’, Journal of Economic Inequality, 8(2), 197-220.
Shaw, PE; Kliewer & Christine. G 1973,
‘Aspects of Canadian Immigration:
1951-1971,’ International Migration (Geneva), 11(3), 118-128.
Shamim, I 1997, ‘Trafficking in Women and Children: A Human Rights Concern’, Paper presented at a Conference on Refugees, Migrants and Stateless Persons: In Search of a National Concensus, organised by RMMRU, Dhaka 29-30 December.
Schmink, M 1984, ‘Household economic strategies: review and research agenda’,
Latin American Research Review, 19(3), 87-101.
Schmink, M 1986, ‘Women and urban industrial development in Brazil’ NASH AND SAFA, 136-164.
Sjaastad, LA 1962, ‘The Costs and Returns of Human Migration’, Journal of Political Economy, 70S: 80-93.
Skeldon, R 1992, ‘International Migration within and from the East and Southeast Asian Region’: A Review Essay’, vol 1 (1): 19-63.
Singh, IL; Squire & Strauss, J 1986,
‘Agricultural Household Models:
Extensions, Applications and Policy’, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Stark , O 1978, ‘Economic-demographic interactions in agricultural development:
the case of rural-to-urban migration’, ISBN: 9251007012.
Stark , O 1984, ‘Rural-to-Urban Migration in LDCs: A Relative Deprivation Approach’, Economics Development and Cultural Changes 32 (3): 475-86.
Stark , O 1991, ‘The Migration of Labor’, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Stark , O & Levhari, D 1982, ‘On Migration and Risk in LDCs’, Economic Development and Cultural Changes, (31), 191-6.
Stark , O & Bloom, E 1985, ‘The New Economics of Labour Migration’, American Economic Review, (75), 173- 8.
Stark , O & Taylor, JE 1989, ‘Relative deprivation and international migration’, Demography (26): 1-14.
Stark, O 2001, ‘The New Economics of Migration and Globalization’, Population Association of America Annual Meetings, Washington DC.
Taylor, JE 1986, ‘Selectivity of undocumented Mexico-US migrants and implications for US immigration reform’: Urban Institute.
Taylor, JE 1992, ‘Remittances and inequality reconsidered: Direct, indirect, and
Mannan, Kazi Abdul 53 intertemporal effects’, Journal of Policy
modeling, 14(2), 187-208.
Taylor, JE 2001, ‘Migration: new dimensions and characteristics, causes, consequences and implications for rural poverty’, Food, agriculture, and rural development: current and emerging issues for economic analysis and policy research.
Taylor, JE & Stark, O 1986, ‘Differential Migration, Networks, Information and Risk,’ In O.Stark, (ed), Migration Theory, Human Capital and Development, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, (147-171).
Taylor, JE & Wyatt, TJ 1996, ‘The shadow value of migrant remittances, income and inequality in a household and farm economy’ The Journal of Development Studies, 32(6), 899-912.
Taylor, JE; Mora, J; Adams, R & Lopez- Feldman, A 2005, ‘Remittances, inequality and poverty: Evidence from rural Mexico’.
Taylor, JE; Arango, J; Hugo, G; Kouaouci, A;
Massey, DS & Pellegrino, A 1996,
‘International migration and community development’, Population Index, 397- 418.
Todaro, MP & Maruszko, L 1987, ‘Illegal Migration and US Immigration Reform:
A conceptual Framework’, Population and Development Review, (13): 101- 114.
Vasegh-Daneshvary N; Henry. W; Herzog, J
& Schlottmann, AM 1987, ‘Immigration
of Engineers, Scientists, and Physicians and the U.S. High Technology Renaissance,’ Social Science Quarterly, 68(2), 311-325.
Wilkinson, KP 1970, ‘Phases and roles in community action’, Rural Sociology, 35(1), 54-68.
Winters, P; Janvry, A & Sadoulet, E 2001,
‘Family and Community Networks in Mexico-U.S. Migration’, Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 36(1), 159-184.
Woodruff, C & Zenteno, R 2001, ‘Remittances and microenterprises in Mexico’, UCSD, Graduate School of International Relations and Pacific Studies Working Paper.
Wood, CH 1981, Structural changes and household strategies: a conceptual framework for the study of rural migration. Human Organization, 40(4), 338-344.
Wood, CH 1982, ‘Equilibrium and historical- structural perspectives on migration’, International Migration Review, 298- 319.
Yang, D 2008, ‘International Migration, Human Capital, and Entrepreneurship:
Evidence from Philippine Migrants' Exchange Rate Shocks’, The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, 118(528), 591-630.
Zlotnik, H 1998, ‘International Migration 1965-1996: An Overview’, Population Development Review 24(3), 429-468.
