Multiple moves and return migration within developing countries: A comparative analysis

Abstract

This paper sheds new light on internal migration processes by estimating stylized migration histories for populations in 31 countries. The focus is on repeat migration and on return migration back to rural areas from urban areas. Migration histories are portrayed by introducing migration pathway matrices, representing the shares of the population (by gender) that have moved or stayed in rural and urban areas over three periods (childhood and two forward periods). Using data from Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), the estimation of national migration pathway matrices was done with an information-theoretic procedure using maximum-entropy econometrics to estimate migration frequencies by population groups. Moving multiple times is found to be a consolidated practice in all countries analysed. Sizeable urban-to-rural migration flows are found, with rural returnees often contributing substantially to these flows. This phenomenon is more pronounced in countries in relatively early phases of economic development and among male migrants. For the sample of countries in sub-Saharan Africa, on average, 51% of men and 32% of women migrating from urban to rural areas are return migrants who lived in rural areas as children. Results indicate many migrants move multiple times: In the overall sample of countries, at least 43% of men and 36% of women who move once will move a second time (or more), accounting for nearly 120 million individuals. We find large differences in migration histories across genders, with these differences tending to be smaller for countries that are further along their economic development path and more urbanised.

Reurbanisation in my hometown? Effect of return migration on migrants' urban settlement intention

“…For other developing countries, internal return migration is the opposite of urbanisation. Cattaneo and Robinson (2020) found in study of 31 developing countries that the return migration to rural areas is negatively correlated with the level of urbanisation in the country. The proportion of return migrants decreases with the improvement of urbanisation level.…”

“…For developed countries, recent studies suggest that 20–30% of internal migration can be considered return migration (Cattaneo & Robinson, 2020; Niedomysl & Amcoff, 2011). For developing countries, return migration typically involves the return of migrant workers from developed regions and large cities to their countryside homes, studies have found that substantial evidence of internal return migration in countries such as China, Vietnam, Ethiopia and Kenya (Cattaneo & Robinson, 2020; Falkingham, Chepngeno‐Langat, & Evandrou, 2012; Junge, Diez, & Schatzl, 2015; Wu, Qiang, Gu, & Shi, 2018). As many internal migrants come from the rural areas, they constitute an important source of urban population growth.…”

“…Could the migration experiences strengthen the intention of return migrants to settle in cities or towns so as to promote their reurbanisation in their hometown? Despite the boom in the scholarship on return migration, the association between return migration and urban settlement intention of returnees has barely been studied although the issue is essential as in many developing countries (Brøgger & Agergaard, 2019; Cattaneo & Robinson, 2020). This is the aim of the present paper.…”

Urban Economics: Geography and Spatial Dependence Matter to the Sustainability of Cities

“…Once people relocate to cities, if they migrate further, researchers often find that these moves mostly tend to be to other cities, with urbanto-rural migration occurring on a relatively small scale. National and international trends of this type merit additional scrutiny, as demonstrated by Cattaneo and Robinson (2020). Although numerous data sources are available about urbanization and migration separately, few joint comprehensive, comparable, and reliably sources exist for them.…”

Reverse Migration Determinant Factor: A systematic literature review

“…This study adds to the literature by focusing on the determinant factors in reverse migration. Numerous studies on the factors that have influenced migrants to return to rural areas, mainly following family (Crow, 2010;Cattaneo and Robinson, 2020;Mulder and Lundholm, 2020;Mohapatra and Jha, 2020;Space et al, 2014;Harrison, 2018;Ikegami & Tsuruta, 2017;Hussain et al, 2017;Kanai, 2016;Farrell et al, 2012). Other scholars emphasize occupation, environment, economic reason, quality of life, and social aspect motivations as factors that could also influence migrants to migrate back to rural areas.…”