Emigration and Remittances in the Context of Surge in Oil Prices

1 Working Paper 424 MIGRATION MONITORING STUDY, 2008 EMIGRATION AND REMITTANCES IN THE CONTEXT OF SURGE IN OIL PRICES K.C.Zachariah S.Irudaya Raj an March 2010 2 Working Papers can be downloaded from the Centre’s website (www.cds.edu) 3 MIGRATION MONITORING STUDY, 2008 EMIGRATION AND REMITTANCES IN THE CONTEXT OF SURGE IN OIL PRICES K.C.Zachariah S.Irudaya Rajan March 2010 This Migration Monitoring Survey 2008 is financed by the Department of Non-Resident Keralite Affairs (NORKA), Government of Kerala and executed by the Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs (Government of India) Research Unit on International Migration at Centre for Development Studies (CDS), Kerala. We are grateful to Mrs Sheela Thomas, Principal Secretary to Chief Minister and Secretary, NORKA, for her continued support. The original version of this report was presented at an open seminar on August 13, 2009, chaired by Professor K.N. Nair, Director, CDS and Dr A.V. Jose, Honorary Visiting Professor, CDS, as a discussant. Comments received from Mr K. Mohandas, former Secretary, Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs, Government of India, chairman, discussant and participants of the seminar are gratefully acknowledged. We have incorporated most of the comments; however, all the remaining errors and shortcoming rest exclusively with the authors. 4 ABSTRACT A decade ago, the Centre for Development Studies started migration research based on large-scale field surveys covering the whole of Kerala State as a one-time study. However, it soon developed itself as an ongoing project called Migration Monitoring Study, Kerala (MMS). This report gives the results of the latest of these studies (fourth in the series) carried out during August-December, 2008. It provides the latest hard data on emigration, return emigration and remittances to Kerala. This study, reminiscent of the preceding ones, has brought out some unexpected goings-on in the migration trend in Kerala. The first of these unexpected events is the large increase in emigration and return emigration since 2003. The common belief was that emigration from Kerala would decline as a result of the global recession in the Gulf countries and other principal destination countries of Kerala emigrants. Yet, the facts contradict that belief. The number of emigrants from Kerala has increased from 13.6 lakhs in 1998 to 18.4 lakhs in 2003 and to 21.9 lakhs in 2008. Simultaneously, the number of return emigrants has increased from 7.4 lakhs in 1998 to 8.9 lakhs in 2003 and to 11.6 lakhs in 2008. As a result, the number of non-resident Keralites has increased from 21.0 lakhs in 1998 to 27.3 lakhs in 2003 and to 33.5 lakhs in 2008. While external migration has increased, internal migration has declined. The number of out-migrants from Kerala has declined from 11.2 lakhs in 2003 to 9.14 lakhs in 2008. The number of return outmigrants has declined from 9.9 lakhs in 2003 to 6.9 lakhs in 2008. The traditional tendency of Kerala youths to migrate to Mumbai, Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, Calcutta etc for employment is giving way to emigration to Dubai, Kuwait, and other cities across the globe. 5 In 2008, for every 100 households in Kerala, there were 29 emigrants [EMI hereafter], 15 return emigrants [REM hereafter] and 44 non-resident Keralites [NRK hereafter]. The distribution of emigrants and return emigrants by district of origin and country of destination followed the same pattern observed in the earlier reports. No major shifts were observed. Malappuram district, with about 55.4 lakhs NRKs and 89 NRKs per 100 households retained its premier position in the emigration scenario in Kerala. But Thiruvananthapuram and Thrissur districts are catching up. The Gulf region retained its predominant position as the preferred destination of Kerala emigrants. Surprisingly, the declining trend (from 94 percent to 89 percent) observed during 1998-2003 in the proportion of Kerala emigrants in the Gulf did not continue during 2003-08. The proportion of Kerala emigrants in the Gulf remained constant at 89 percent in 2008 as in 2003. Emigration to the Gulf seems to have moved into a faster track in 2007-08. There were, however, readjustments in the emigration pattern within the Gulf region. Saudi Arabia was the most preferred destination of Kerala emigrants in 1998 with 37.5 percent of emigrants from Kerala selecting Saudi Arabia as their destination. Since then, Saudi Arabia's share of Kerala emigrants had declined to 26.7 percent by 2003 and further to 23.0 percent by 2008. Saudi Arabia is certainly losing its shine for the Kerala emigrants. However, the absolute number of Kerala emigrants in Saudi Arabia has remained stable; it has not declined at all during the 10-year period. On the other hand, the share of Kerala emigrants to United Arab Emirates (UAE) has enormously increased since 1998. Over the decade UAE's share has increased from 31.0 percent in 1998 to 41.9 percent in 2008. The Muslim community continues to retain its pre-eminent position in emigration from Kerala. More than 40 percent of the 6 emigrants from Kerala are Muslims in 2008. Comparable figures are 37.7 percent for Hindus and 21.2 percent for Christians. Nevertheless, the increase in emigration during 2003-08 was much larger among the Hindus than among the other communities. The increase was 44.1 percent among the Hindus, but 12.0 percent among the Muslims and only 1.1 percent among the Christians. Thus, the Hindus of Kerala are catching up with Muslims in external migration. Until now, their dominance was in internal migration. In spite of the huge increase in the absolute number of emigrants, the proportion of households that has either one or more emigrant or a return emigrant has remained stationary during 1998-2008. The percent of households with one or more emigrant or return emigrant was 26.7 in 1998 and 26.5 in 2008. Thus, even today, nearly three-fourths of Kerala's households are not directly exposed to emigration. This is a very important aspect that has to be taken into consideration in assessing the impact of emigration on Kerala society. Emigration is expensive. On an average, the cost is Rs 57,000 per head. Much (54 percent) of it is for getting a visa. Ticket is another expensive item (23 percent). Emigrants dip into resources of the family, personal savings and savings of friends in order to emigrate. A few sell or pledge their land or house to raise resources. Others pledge their ornaments. Nobody get either Government or bank assistance for this purpose. If the increase in the number of emigrants from 18.4 lakhs to 21.9 lakhs between 2003-08 was a surprise, the increase in remittance from 18.4 thousand crores in 2003 to 43.3 thousand crores in 2008 should be mind-boggling. Emigration increased by 19 percent between 2003-08, whereas remittances increased by 135 percent! This happened at a time when global financial crisis should normally have depressed remittances. But in the case of Kerala (and India as a whole), the global crisis has partly contributed to the acceleration in remittances. 7 A few factors could be cited as reasons for this phenomenal increase. First could be the increase in oil price from $50 a barrel to $140 a barrel, which enabled Dubai and other Gulf countries to undertake construction activities at a pace unheard of earlier. The increased economic activity attracted a larger emigration to the Gulf and enhanced income for the emigrants. Second, the global financial meltdown and the collapse of many international banks encouraged most Kerala emigrants to park their savings in banks in Kerala. As they were nationalized banks, they were thought to be much safer than the foreign banks. Third, the exchange value of dollar (and Gulf currencies) increased from about Rs 38 per US dollar to over Rs 50 per US dollar in the course of a year. This 30 percent increase was a major factor in the flow of workers' remittances to Kerala. However, only about 17.1 percent of the Kerala households in Kerala in 2008 had received remittances from abroad (household remittances); the other 83 percent did not. In this study, as in earlier studies, a distinction is made between total remittances received in the state and remittances received by the household in the state for subsistence etc. We call the latter as 'Household Remittances'. 'Household Remittances' is only a fraction of the 'Total Remittances'. Among the three religious groups, the Muslims households received the largest (34.7) proportion of remittances and the Hindus received the lowest (11.3 percent). While about 36 percent of the households in Malappuram district have received remittances, only 1.2 percent of the households in Idukki district have received remittances. 8 Talukwise total remittances in Kerala varied from Rs, 2,159 crores in Kollam taluk to near zero in Peermade taluk in Idukki district in 2008. Inflow of about Rs 43,288 crores to the Kerala economy in 2008 by way of remittances has had a very significant effect on the state's economy and the living conditions. For a total population of 3.371 crores in Kerala in 2008, the total remittance of Rs 43,288 crores meant an average per capita remittance received of Rs 12,840. For an average household, the remittance received is Rs 57,215 per year. Remittances thus contributed substantially to the annual income of the households in Kerala. Remittances were as much as a third (31 percent) of Kerala's National State Domestic Product in 2008. The per capita income of the state was Rs 41,814 excluding remittances, but would be as much as Rs 54,664 if remittances were also included. The importance of remittances in Kerala is evident from the fact that remittances were 1.74 times the revenue receipt of the state, 5.5 times of the money Kerala received from the Central Government as a budgetary support and 2.3 times the annual non-plan expenditure of the Kerala Government. The remittances were sufficient to wipe out 70 percent of the state's debt in 2008. Remittances were 36 times the export earnings from cashew and 30 times of those from marine products. But there is a flip side to this rosy picture. As indicated earlier, not all households has directly benefited from remittances; only 17.1 percent. Others could have benefited, but only indirectly. There is also the regional disparity. While households in Malappuram district had received Rs 1,874 crores as household remittances, those in Idukki district had received only 45 crores. Thus, the averages for the state mask considerably the disparity experienced by households, by religious groups, districts, taluks, etc. 9 Emigration from Kerala had been, and still is, predominantly male dominated. Females constituted just 14.6 percent of the Kerala emigrants in 2008. Although the proportion of females among emigrants in 2008 was higher than that in 1998 (9.3 percent), it was lower than that in 2003. The rapid increase in emigration in 2007 and 2008 was particularly male dominated. 90 percent of the male emigrants and 66 percent of female emigrants from Kerala belonged to the age group 15-39 years. A fairly large number of emigrants belonged to very young ages of 0-4 years, but there were few in the 5-14 age groups. Majority of the male migrants from Kerala were unmarried, 63 percents, and majority of the female emigrants were married, 55 percent. Emigrants were better educated than the general population. They had 1.2 years more of schooling compared to the general population. About 47 percent of the emigrants had a minimum of secondary level education, and 20 percent had a degree. The corresponding percentages in the general population were 34.7 percent for secondary or higher levels, and 10.3 percent for degree level education. One noteworthy feature of the educational situation of Kerala emigrants is the significant number (149,000 or 6.7 percent of the total) of illiterates among the emigrants in 2008. Over the years 1998-2008, the educational level of the Kerala emigrants has improved substantially. The proportion with a minimum of secondary level education has increased from 40.5 percent in 1998 to 46.7 percent in 2008. Those with a degree has increased from 10.8 percent in 1998 to 20.0 percent in 2008 About 64 percent of the Kerala emigrants were gainfully employed before emigration, but 87.2 percent of them were gainfully employed at destination. About 20 percent of the emigrants were unemployed before 10 emigration, but at destination only 1 percent of them were unemployed. As a result of emigration, the number of unemployed persons in Kerala would have decreased by 446,000. Economic activity is classified into 11 sectors such as job seekers, self-employment, private sector etc. The noteworthy transition in the economic activity of the emigrants was the movement to the "private sector" from other sectors (mostly from job seekers and self-employment) of economic activity. Before emigration their number was 429,000, but after emigration 1,183,000 were employed in private sector. Decrease in unemployment and increase in employment in private sector are the most noteworthy features of employment transition associated with emigration. As regards internal migration, only about 24 percent of the outmigrants from Kerala were gainfully employed before migration, 25 percent were unemployed and 51 percent were outside the labour force. The unemployment rate among the out-migrants was as high as 51.5 percent compared to 8.7 percent in the general population. One out of two out-migrants was outside the labour force. At destination states, 56 percent were gainfully employed, just 2.1 percent were unemployed and 42.5 percent were not in the labour force. The unemployment rate was only 3.6 percent. Thus emigration as well as out-migration of Keralites was a major factor in reducing unemployment rate to a low level of 8.7 percent in Kerala. One significant aspect of internal migration of Kerala in recent years is the increase in out-migration of students. In 2008, among the 11 sectors of economic activities applied in this study, the "students" category scored the highest number of out-migrants from Kerala, 241,000 out of a total of 914,000 (26.4 percent). Forty percent of the student out- 11 migrants went to Karnataka and 24 percent went to Tamil Nadu. About 2.4 percent went as far to a state like Jammu and Kashmir. In the 2003 and the 2007 surveys, students were the second largest group among the out-migrants. In 1998, the students were the third largest group, after unemployed and non-agricultural labour. Thus, over the 10-year period, students have become the major group among the out-migrants from Kerala. "Students constituted the second largest proportion of outmigrants from Kerala (25.8 percent). Among them 47.5 percent were Christians although in the general population, Christians constituted only less than 20 percent. One of the smallest districts in the state, Pathanamthitta, sent out the largest number of students outside the state (17.2 percent of the total migrant students from the state). These statistics have a story to tell about the inadequacy of post-metric educational facilities in the state" CDS Working Paper 395 (December 2007) pp3536, The situation described above is valid in 2008 also. The difference is that students have become the number one group among the outmigrants, not number two. But the geographical and cultural concentration has eased a little. In 2008, only 38.1 percent of the student out-migrants are Christians (compared to 47.5 percent in 2007). It is no longer Pathanamthitta district, but Kottayam district, that sent out the largest proportion of student out-migrants. The three southern Kerala districts, Kottayam, Alappuzha and Pathanamthitta, together had send out 36 percent of the student out-migrants from Kerala. Palakkad district s has improved its rank among the districts that have sent out students out of Kerala. What Pathanamthitta Christians began as a pioneering effort to meet their educational needs, the other communities in other districts are following up now in larger numbers. If the trend during the past 10 12 years is any guide, out-migration to other states in India and emigration to countries outside India would emerge as a major solution to the shrinking educational opportunities for the young men and women in Kerala, especially for those constrained by the reservation policies of the state. In the past, the youths of Kerala used to get their education within the state and move out to other states for employment. Now, Kerala youths move out to other states for education and to other countries for employment. CDS Migration Monitoring Studies monitor not only migration, but also the employment situation in the state. Comparable statistics on employment and unemployment are provided by these studies for the 10-year period 1998-2008. The number of gainfully employed persons in 2008 was 8.4 million. The decade 1998-2008 saw a systematic decline in the number of employed persons in the state, from 9.9 million in 1998 to 9.7 million in 2003 and to 8.4 million in 2008. The ratio of employed persons to population 15 years or older decreased from 43.4 percent in 1998 to 39.8 in 2003 and further to 32.4 in 2008. The study revealed that there was a dramatic decline in unemployment rate in Kerala since 2003. In 2008, there were only 787,000 unemployed persons in Kerala, compared to 2,292,000 in 2003. Unemployment had decreased by 1.505 million persons during 200308, 602,000 among males and 903,000 among females. The unemployment rate was just 8.6 percent in 2008, 5.6 among males and 18.2 among females. Five years earlier, in 2003, the rates were 19.2 percent for the total population, 11.2 among males and 41.2 among females. Ten years earlier in 1998, unemployment rate was only 11.2 percent, 7.5 percent among males and 23.1 percent among females. 13 In 2008, the highest unemployment rate for any district in Kerala was in Pathanamthitta district (11.1 percent). Its neighboring district, Kollam had s more or less the same level of unemployment (11.0 percent). Malappuram district and Kasaragode district also had relatively high unemployment rates. Wayanad district recorded the lowest unemployment rate of 4.7 percent. The rate in Palakkad district was also relatively low, at 6.1 percent. These a were the two districts where National Rural Employment Guarantee (NREG) scheme was introduced first in Kerala Concluding Remarks: According to Migration Monitoring Study 1998, emigration and consequent remittances had provided the single most dynamic factor in the otherwise dismal economic scenario of Kerala in the last quarter of the twentieth century. At that time, remittances were 25 percent of Kerala's NSDP. Ten years later, in 2008, remittances were 31 percent of NSDP. Emigration and remittances continued to remain the single most dynamic factor even in the greatly improved economic scenario of Kerala in the first decade of the 21st century. There is however one sticky point. While everything about emigration from Kerala is dynamic, there is one element in Kerala's emigration scenario that is absolutely stagnant. The proportion of households with an emigrant or the proportion of households that has received remittances from abroad is absolutely stagnant at about 16-18 percent. This proportion has not moved a bit since 1998. The vast majority of Kerala households, over 80 percent, are still not direct participants of this great phenomenon that is transforming Kerala's economy and society. How to open up KERALA's GULF CONNECTION to a larger segment of Kerala households should be something of a challenge to planners and policy makers in the state. 14 The Migration Monitoring Study 2008 (MMS, 2008) The 2008 Migration Monitoring Survey, fourth in the CDS series, conducted ten years after the first survey in 1998, received financial support from the Department of Non-Resident Keralite Affairs, Government of Kerala. In this survey, the sample size was enhanced to 15,000 households (Table1) from 10,000 households, the sample size of the earlier three migration surveys. The increase in sample size - with a minimum of 1,000 households in any one district - is expected to yield reliable migration estimates at the district level. However, as the sampling was not proportional, estimation procedure became more complicated (see Table 2, sampling fraction by districts). As in 2003, the 2008 survey also had panel data from 3,168 households. The panel data generated by the MMS 2008 are as follows: Panel Number of Households 1998-2008 725 2003-2008 1061 1998-2003-2008 Total 1382 3168 As in the 1998 survey, the 2008 survey also canvassed five types of schedules. Schedule I dealt with household data and information on migrants. This schedule was canvassed in all the 15,000 sample households. It had 10 blocks. The first block brought out the identifying characteristics of the household. The second block elicited information on members; the third block was for identification of return migrants and their characteristics; in the next block, the number of emigrants and outmigrants and their characteristics were recorded; Blocks five and six provided additional information about households and remittances. Blocks seven and eight elicited information on the cost of migration 15 and source of financing migration. The last two blocks recaptured the information on emigrants and return emigrants. Schedule II is focused on return emigrants enumerated in all 15,000 households. It had six blocks: Block one provided s identification of return emigrants from the main module. Blocks 2 to 4 elicited information on the migrant's characteristics before emigration, emigration experience and working and living conditions in the country of destination. Blocks five and six collected information of post-return phases and their future plans. Schedule III collected information on annual household consumer expenditure, savings and investment behaviour among 3,000 households randomly selected from out of the 15,000 households. Ten households each were canvassed in all 300 localities in Kerala. This module was introduced for the first time in the MMS. Schedule IV focused on 'migration and the elderly' in 3,000 sample households. It had eight blocks. While the first two blocks collected data on identification particulars of the household and the general information about the elderly, the remaining blocks concentrated on gathering information about living arrangements, economic and financial security, health status and nutrition. Schedule V focused on women whose husbands were currently away (Gulf wives). This module was canvassed throughout Kerala. The schedule was used to collect information on the characteristics of the women and their husbands, history of the separation of wives, means of communication, remittances and autonomy, bringing up of children, coping with additional responsibilities and problems and prospects of emigration. Sample and Population, 2008 As mentioned above, the sampling fraction varied s from district to district. Wayanad district had the highest fraction (0.00528) and 16 Table 1: Sample Size by Districts of Kerala, 2008 Districts Number of sample Households Total Number of sample Localities Rural Urban Total Rural Urban Thiruvananthapuram 1200 800 400 24 16 8 Kollam 1150 950 200 23 19 4 Pathanamthitta 1000 900 100 20 18 2 Alappuzha 1000 700 300 20 14 6 Kottayam 1000 850 150 20 17 3 Idukki 1000 950 50 20 19 1 Ernakulam 1200 650 550 24 13 11 Thrissur 1150 850 300 23 17 6 Palakkad 1000 850 150 20 17 3 Malappuram 1150 1050 100 23 21 2 Kozhikode 1150 750 400 23 15 8 Wayanad 1000 950 50 20 19 1 Kannur 1000 500 500 20 10 10 Kasaragod 1000 800 200 20 16 4 15000 11550 3450 300 231 69 TOTAL Thiruvananthapuram district had the lowest (0.00139). Since sampling fraction varied considerably, simple comparison of the total from sample with the census total was not valid. Estimates from the sample at the state level are obtained as a weighted sum from the district totals. For example in the sample, - the total number of Hindus in Kerala is obtained first by estimating the number of Hindus in each district and the total for Kerala is obtained as a weighted sum from the district totals, the weights being the reciprocal of the sampling fraction (721.5 in the case of Thiruvananthapuram District). 17 In this paper, most variables are analysed further at two levels on the basis of (i) district and (ii) religion. A necessary input for this analysis is the number of households by district in 2008 and the number of households by religion. The number of households and population by districts in 2008 are given in Table 2. The number of households by district and religion is given in Table 3. These numbers are the basis for the estimation of all the variables such as EMI, REM, Household Remittances, total gainfully employed persons at the state level, total unemployed, employment rate, unemployment rate, etc. Table 2: Population, HHs, Sampling Fraction, Raising Factor by District, MMS 2008 Districts Population HHS Sample Samp- Raising 2008 2008 HHs ling Factor Census Census Survey fraction Based Based Thiruvananthapuram 3432154 865766 1200 0.00139 721.5 Kollam 2702360 673863 1150 0.00171 586.0 Pathanamthitta 1258357 323664 1000 0.00309 323.7 Alappuzha 2174580 545129 1000 0.00183 545.1 Kottayam 2034582 489996 1000 0.00204 490.0 Idukki 1159103 287827 1000 0.00347 287.8 Ernakulam 3305307 801124 1200 0.00150 667.6 Thrissur 3131320 730886 1150 0.00157 635.6 Palakkad 2777238 590947 1000 0.00169 590.9 Malappuram 4010654 626213 1150 0.00184 544.5 Kozhikode 3058467 655297 1150 0.00175 569.8 Wayanad 859832 189368 1000 0.00528 189.4 Kannur 2511940 527520 1000 0.00190 527.5 Kasaragode 1297935 258184 1000 0.00387 258.2 33713826 7565784 15000 0.00198 504.4 Kerala 18 The un-weighted estimates are found to be smaller (or underestimates) than weighted estimates in most cases. Table 3 Number of Households by District and Religion, 2008 Districts Hindus Christians Muslims Total Thiruvananthapuram 495651 222213 147902 865766 Kollam 505690 124811 43362 673863 Pathanamthitta 166040 145325 12299 323664 Alappuzha 415388 101394 28347 545129 Kottayam 243038 217558 29400 489996 Idukki 141611 125205 21011 287827 Ernakulam 381869 269712 149543 801124 Thrissur 411203 171599 148084 730886 Palakkad 436119 20092 134736 590947 Malappuram 169894 21237 435082 626213 Kozhikode 375514 18804 260979 655297 Wayanad 106614 47153 35601 189368 Kannur 391947 51169 84403 527520 Kasaragode 171951 20397 65837 258184 4412529 1556669 1596586 7565784 Kerala Emigrants According to Table 4, the number of Kerala migrants living outside India in 2008 was 21.9 lakhs. The corresponding number in 2003 was 18.4 lakhs and that in 1998 was 13.6 lakhs. During the 10-year period 1998-2008 the number of emigrants from Kerala has increased by 8.3 lakhs. The increase was larger during the earlier 5-year period 19982003 compared to that in the later 5-year period, 2003-08 (See Figures 1 and 2). Table 4: Number of Emigrants (EMI) 1998, 2003 and 2008 Districts EMI Increase 2008 2003 1998 Thiruvananthapuram 308481 168046 Kollam 207516 Pathanamthitta EMI per 100HHs 2003-08 1998-03 1998-08 2008 130705 140435 37341 177776 35.6 21.5 19.9 148457 102977 59059 45480 104539 30.8 24.4 18.4 120990 133720 97505 -12730 36215 23485 37.4 44.3 33.1 Alappuzha 131719 75036 62870 56683 12166 68849 24.2 15.2 13.2 Kottayam 89351 106569 35494 -17218 71075 53857 18.2 24.0 9.1 Idukki 2003 1998 7880 7390 -2088 490 -1598 2.0 2.9 2.9 120979 121237 103750 -258 17487 17229 15.1 16.9 17.0 Thrissur 284068 178867 161102 105201 17765 122966 38.9 27.2 25.6 Palakkad 189815 177876 116026 11939 61850 73789 32.1 32.6 21.8 Malappuram 334572 271787 296710 62785 -24923 37862 53.4 45.0 49.2 Kozhikode 199163 167436 116026 31727 51410 83137 30.4 28.6 22.0 13996 7704 4552 6292 3152 9444 7.4 4.4 2.9 119119 202414 88065 -83295 114349 31054 22.6 43.2 19.0 67851 71449 38747 -3598 32702 29104 26.3 30.6 19.1 1838478 1361919 354934 476559 831493 29.0 26.7 21.4 Wayanad Kannur Kasaragode Kerala 2193412 19 5792 Ernakulam 20 Figure 1 Num ber of Em igrants, Return Emigrants and N on-Resident Keralites, 1998-2008 3500000 3000000 2500000 20 0 8 2000000 20 0 3 19 9 8 1500000 1000000 500000 0 EM I REM N RK Return Emigrants Return migration is an inevitable aspect of any migration process. Migration begets migration; emigration begets return emigration. The larger the emigration, the larger would be return emigration. Return emigration is a built-in aspect of the emigration process. This is particularly true of Gulf migration where almost all emigration is of short duration and temporary in nature. Workers go out on a contract basis for a few years leaving behind their families and return to Kerala when the contract period is over or when they feel that they have earned sufficient income to meet their immediate financial needs. Return emigration statistics given in Table 5 tell this story convincingly. The increase in return emigration between 2003 and 2008 is commensurate with increase in emigration during the same period. The number of return emigrants in 2008 was 11.6 lakhs. The corresponding number in 2003 was 8.9 lakhs and that for 1998 is 7.4 lakhs. The number increased by 263,000 during 2003-08 and by 155,000 during 1998-2003. Thus, in the case of REM, the increase in the latter 5-year period was greater compared to the earlier 5-year period. Table 5: Number of Return Emigrants (REM) 1998, 2003 and 2008 Districts REM Increase 2008 2003 1998 2008 2003 1998 Thiruvananthapuram 215280 103059 118878 112221 -15819 96402 24.9 13.2 18.1 Kollam 124066 69314 74106 54752 -4792 49960 18.4 11.4 13.2 Pathanamthitta 60554 83502 54537 -22948 28965 6017 18.7 27.7 18.5 Alappuzha 51024 43109 34572 7915 8537 16452 9.4 8.7 7.2 Kottayam 26448 28368 18164 -1920 10204 8284 5.4 6.4 4.6 Idukki 2003-08 REM per 100HHs 1998-03 1998-08 3213 3766 5017 -553 -1251 -1804 1.1 1.4 2.0 68860 74435 45028 -5575 29407 23832 8.6 10.4 7.4 Thrissur 174655 86029 116788 88626 -30759 57867 23.9 13.1 18.6 Palakkad 85318 55008 39238 30310 15770 46080 14.4 10.1 7.4 219736 141537 123750 78199 17787 95986 35.1 23.5 20.5 72405 109101 60910 -36696 48191 11495 11.0 18.6 11.5 Ernakulam Malappuram Kozhikode Wayanad 3852 3327 -1922 525 -1397 1.0 2.2 2.1 26416 45394 28263 -18978 17131 -1847 5.0 9.7 6.1 Kasaragode 27222 47468 16667 -20246 30801 10555 10.5 20.3 8.2 1157127 893942 739245 263185 154697 417882 15.3 13.0 11.6 Kerala 21 1930 Kannur 22 F igu re 2 I ncr eas e in E mig ran ts and R etu rn E m igra nt s, 1 998 -20 03 and 20 03 -20 08 5 000 00 4 500 00 4 000 00 3 500 00 I n cr e a se i n EM I 3 000 00 I n cr e a se i n REM 2 500 00 2 000 00 1 500 00 1 000 00 5 000 0 0 20 03- 200 8 19 98- 200 3 Non-resident Keralites A 'non-resident Keralite' is a person who is either an emigrant or a return emigrant. The number of Non-Resident Keralites (NRK=EMI+REM) in 2008 was 33.5 lakhs. The corresponding number in 2003 was 27.3 lakhs and that for 1998 was 21.0 lakhs. The number of NRKs had increased by 618,000 during 2003-08 and by 631,000 during 1998-2003. Thus in the case of NRKs, the increase in the last 5-year period was lower compared to the earlier 5-year period; however, the difference is not impressive (just 13,000 persons). Migrants per Household The increase in the number of emigrants and return emigrants during 2003-08 was not entirely due to increase in population during the 10-year period. This is indicated by the trend in number of emigrants per 100 households. The number of EMI per 100 HHs increased from 21.4 per cent in 1998 to 26.7 per cent in 2003 and to 29.0 per cent in 2008. The increase during 2003-2008 (2.3 percentage points) was relatively small compared with the increase during 1998-2003 (5.3 percentage points). Table 6: Number of Non-Resident Keralites (NRK) 1998, 2003 and 2008 Districts NRK 2008 2003 Increase 1998 NRK per 100HHs 2003-08 1998-03 1998-08 2008 2003 1998 523761 271105 249583 252656 21522 274178 60.5 34.7 38.0 Kollam 331582 217771 177083 113811 40688 154499 49.2 35.8 31.6 Pathanamthitta 181544 217222 152042 -35679 65180 29501 56.1 72.0 51.6 Alappuzha 182743 118145 97442 64599 20703 85302 33.5 23.9 20.4 Kottayam 115799 134937 53658 -19138 81279 62141 23.6 30.4 13.7 9005 11646 12407 -2641 -761 -3402 3.1 4.3 4.9 Ernakulam 189839 195672 148778 -5833 46894 41061 23.7 27.3 24.4 Thrissur 458723 264896 277890 193827 -12994 180833 62.8 40.3 44.2 Palakkad 275133 232884 155264 42249 77620 119869 46.6 42.7 29.2 Malappuram 554308 413324 420460 140984 -7136 133848 88.5 68.5 69.7 Kozhikode 271568 276537 176936 -4969 99601 94632 41.4 47.2 33.5 15926 11556 7879 4370 3677 8047 8.4 6.6 5.0 145535 247808 116328 -102273 131480 29207 27.6 52.9 25.1 95073 118917 63503 39659 36.8 50.9 27.3 631256 1249375 44.3 39.7 33.0 Idukki Wayanad Kannur Kasaragode Kerala 55414 -23844 3350539 2732420 2101164 618119 23 Thiruvananthapuram 24 Figure 3 Em igra nts, Ret urn Emigrants and N on-Resident Keralite s pe r 10 0 households in Kera la, 1 998 -200 8 45 .0 40 .0 35 .0 30 .0 2 008 25 .0 2 003 20 .0 1 998 15 .0 10 .0 5 .0 0 .0 em i/ 10 0hh rem / 10 0hh nr k/ 10 0hh The number of REM per 100 HHs increased from 11.6 per cent in 1998 to 13.0 per cent in 2003 and to 15.1 per cent in 2008. The increase in REM during 2003-2008 (2.1 percentage points) was relatively larger compared with the increase during 1998-2003 (1.4 percentage points). It is important to note that the rate of increase in emigrants per household has decreased between the two five-year periods, 1998-2003 and 2003-08, while the increase in the rate of return emigrants per household has increased during the same period. This point is important in the context of the global recession. Emigration Trend Emigrants by year of emigration is obtained by updating the corresponding table in the report for Kerala Migration Survey 2003 using the information from the year of emigration of EMI and year of first emigration of the REM who were enumerated 2008. The data on the trend is given Table 7. 25 Table 7: Trends in Emigration from Kerala, 1982-2008 Year EMI 1982 230740 1983 Year EMI Year EMI 1991 566668 2000 1501917 274804 1992 637103 2001 1600465 1984 273342 1993 754544 2002 1717695 1985 313980 1994 819025 2003 1838478 1986 329083 1995 957388 2004 1900113 1987 364909 1996 1062376 2005 1990441 1988 405513 1997 1178589 2006 2093520 1989 449611 1998 1318489 2007 2165782 1990 510214 1999 1412649 2008 2193411 Migration Estimates and Global Recession: Some Observations The estimates of EMI, REM given above are based on a very large sample of households selected at random from all the Taluks in the state. Earlier calculations based on the results of the 2008 survey indicated that a sample of 15,000 households is more than adequate to give a statistically reliable estimate of migration. There is no reason to mistrust the migration estimate given above. Yet, the significant increase in emigration observed in 2008 is somewhat at odds with the common belief that emigration from Kerala should have declined as a result of the global recession that did not spare the Gulf countries and other principal destination countries of Kerala emigrants. Recent newspaper reports in India and abroad foresaw a dismal future for of the Indian emigrants, especially the vast number of construction workers in Dubai. Dubai was in crisis, said one report: "The real estate bubble that propelled the frenetic expansion of Dubai on the back of borrowed cash and speculative investment has burst. Banks have stopped lending and the stock market has plunged 70 per cent. 26 Luxury hotels are three-quarters empty…. At the airport, hundreds of cars have apparently been abandoned in recent weeks. Keys are left in the ignition". "Those who suffer the most are the construction workers from the Indian subcontinent. The Indian embassy is reportedly anticipating an exodus, with 20,000 seats on flights to India already "bulk booked" for next month". "Global financial crisis hits hard in Dubai": Guardian Newspapers Limited, reproduced in The Hindu, February 16, 2009 Three points are particularly relevant in evaluating the impact of global financial crisis on emigration from Kerala to the Gulf countries. First, the Gulf economy is completely reliant on foreign workers, and this reliance is not likely to go away any time in the near future. Kerala emigrants constitute a very large component of the foreign workers in the Gulf countries. Second, the Gulf economy is not anywhere near a complete standstill. "The building projects still in play are almost the equivalent of the US stimulus package" (Guardian Report). These projects would certainly require construction workers, not only architects and software engineers, but also just ordinary workers from Kerala. The Gulf can live without super luxury projects such as "Palm Jumeirah", the Atlantis or the Donald Trump tower. But can they manage without the Indian housemaids, hospital nurses, shop assistants, hotel waiters, bank clerks, and just ordinary construction workers who constitute the bulk of Kerala emigrants? Third, not all Gulf States are hit as hard as the State of Dubai by the depression. Therefore, it need not be all bad news for the Kerala emigrants in the region as a whole. 27 The main conclusion of this study is that there is no indication currently of any significant slowdown of emigration from the state. There is also no indication of any large-scale return of former emigrants back to Kerala. There is no evidence of an "exodus" of Kerala emigrants from the Gulf region (returning back to their motherland) before December 2008. It is, however, possible that the situation might have changed after December 2008. A few external statistics are available to provide independent support to the conclusions arrived from MMS 2008 about the level of emigration and return emigration. One is the number of passengers carried by the airlines from Thiruvananthapuram to the Gulf countries. The following data are provided by the Manager of Air India, Thiruvananthapuram. No. of Passengers during August-December 2007 2008 % increase Thiruvananthapuram to Gulf Countries (outward) Gulf to Thiruvananthapuram (inward) 190,693 193,063 +1.2 155,522 172,308 +10.8 These numbers indicate that there was an increase in air traffic between the Gulf and Thiruvananthapuram during the last quarter of 2008. Both outward traffic and inward traffic have increased during August-December 2008 compared to the corresponding period in 2007. It is important to note that there was no decrease in the number of persons who travelled to the Gulf from Thiruvananthapuram. The overall trend provided by these data is more or less in agreement with the trend shown by the MMS, 2008. A second independent source of supporting data is the number of Emigration Clearance Required (ECR) endorsements given by the 28 Ministry of Overseas Indians in Kerala. The number of such endorsements in Kerala was 129,083 in 2006, 150,475 in 2007 and 180,703 in 2008. The 2008 number is much larger than the corresponding number in earlier years. There is no evidence of a decline in emigration from Kerala. (Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs Annual Report, 2008-2009). A third is the NRI deposits in commercial banks in Kerala in 2008 and 2007. The deposits totaled Rs. 33,304 crores in March 2007, Rs. 29,890 crores in March 2008, Rs. 31,586 crores in September 2008 and Rs. 34,649 crores in December 2008. All these figures provide indirect support to the conclusion that emigration from Kerala has not decreased in 2008. Although return emigration had increased, the increase was not an 'exodus' of panic proportions. Two caveats are required to be mentioned by way of conclusion. First, the data given in this report refers to the pre-December 2008 period. The migration situation in this report could be reflecting the hangover from the $140 oil price on the Gulf economy. The effect of a $40 oil price could be different. That will be reflected in the AMS 2009 survey which will begin in a few weeks from now. The data on the number of ECR passports issued in Kerala in the first half of 2009 indicate a significant decline, especially of prospective emigration to the United Arab Emirates, particularly to Dubai. Second, emigration and emigrants' remittances are so critical to the Kerala economy that a more frequent monitoring of the migration situation in Kerala is urgently called for. G E O G R A P H I C A L A S P E C T S O F I N T E RT NAT I O NA L MIGRATION Emigrants by District of Origin in Kerala Estimates of the number of emigrants by district is much more reliable in MMS 2008 than in earlier surveys as the number of sample 29 households now is more than 1,000 in each of the districts. Therefore, migration estimates in earlier surveys in districts with a smaller number of households such as Pathanamthitta district is not as reliable as those with larger number of households such as Thiruvananthapuram district. (See Migration estimates by Taluk in Appendix I) Table 4 indicates that the largest number of emigrants from Kerala originated from Malappuram district, 335,000 out of a total of 21.9 lakhs for Kerala as a whole (15.3 per cent). Thiruvananthapuram district comes next with an emigration of 308,000 or 14.1 per cent of the total. As in previous years, Wayand and Idukki contain relatively few emigrants (see Figure 4). Like at the state level, the number of emigrants has increased in most districts. Thiruvananthapuram district showed the largest increase during 2003-2008, 140,000. Next in order was Thrissur district with an increase of 105,000. During the 10-year period (1998-2008), six districts experienced a decrease in the number of emigrants. The other eight districts showed increases of different magnitudes. The largest increases were in Figure 4 Number of Emigrants by Districts in Kerala, 2008 350000 300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 Idukki Wayanad Kasaragode Kannur Kottayam Ernakulam Alappuzha Pathanamthitta Palakkad Kollam Kozhikode Thrissur Malappuram 0 Thiruvananthapuram Thiruananthapur… 50000 30 Table 8: Percentage Distribution of EMI, REM and NRK by Districts of Kerala, 2008 Districts EMI REM Thiruvananthapuram 14.1 18.6 4.5 15.6 Kollam 9.5 10.7 1.2 9.9 Pathanamthitta 5.5 5.2 -0.3 5.4 Alappuzha 6.0 4.5 -1.6 5.5 Kottayam 4.1 2.3 -1.8 3.5 Idukki 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.3 Ernakulam 5.5 6.0 0.5 5.7 Thrissur 13.0 15.1 2.1 13.7 Palakkad 8.7 7.4 -1.3 8.2 15.3 19.0 3.7 16.5 Kozhikode 9.1 6.3 -2.8 8.1 Wayanad 0.6 0.2 -0.5 0.5 Kannur 5.4 2.3 -3.1 4.3 Kasaragode 3.1 2.4 -0.7 2.8 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 Malappuram Kerala Difference (REM-EMI) NRK Thiruvananthapuram and Thrissur. Surprisingly, Malappuram district experienced a relative smaller increase of just 63,000 emigrants. The districts which showed significant decreases were Kottayam, Pathanamthitta and Kannur. During 1998-2003, only Malappuram showed a decrease in emigration; all the other districts experienced increases of varying magnitudes. For the 10-year period 1998-2008, Idduki was the only district which experienced a decrease in the number of emigrants. Emigration Rate by Districts Malappuram district was the source of the largest number of emigrants in 2008; it also was the one with the highest emigration rate 31 (53.4 emigrants per 100 households). This compares well with 38.9 in Thrissur district, 37.4 in Pathanamthitta district, 35.6 emigrants in Thiruvananthapuram district. These are the districts where the impact of emigration is the highest. Over the 10-year period 1998-2008 emigration rate in Malappuram had increased from 49.2 per cent to 53.4 per cent. The increase was much larger in some other districts. In Thiruvananthapuram, for example, emigration rate increased from 19.9 per cent in 1998 to 35.6 per cent in 2008. In Thrissur, the rate had increased from 25.6 per cent to 38.9 per cent. The districts that experienced decreases in emigration rate were Ernakulam and Idukki. Figure 5 Emigrants per 100 households by districts, 2008 60.0 40.0 20.0 Idukki Wayanad Er nakulam Kannur Kottayam Alappuzha Kasar agode Kollam Kozhikode Palakkad Thr issur Pathanamthitta Thiruvananthapuram Thir uananthapur am M alappur am 0.0 Return Emigrants by District of Residence Return emigration is a consequence of emigration. As a result, districts that have a large number of emigrants should be expected to have a large number of return emigrants. 32 Figure 6 Percent Distribution of Emigrants and Return Emigrants by Districts, 2008 20.0 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 EM I 6.0 REM 4.0 Kannur Kasaragode W ayanad Kozhikode M alappur am Thr issur Palakkad Idukki Er nakulam Kottayam Alappuzha Kollam Pathanamthitta 0.0 Thir uananthapur am Thiruvananthapuram 2.0 This is generally true. However, the emigrants, when they return to their motherland, wish to settle down in more attractive places. This causes variations in the relative composition of return emigrants in different districts. Thiruvananthapuram district contained about 18.6 per cent of the return emigrants but had only 14.1 per cent of the emigrants. This is true of Malappuram district also, wherein 19.0 per cent of the Kerala return emigrants resided, but which sent out only 15.3 per cent of the emigrants. Surprisingly, Kozhikode district is not among the attractive places to the return emigrants for settling down. This is true also of Kannur district. Other unattractive districts for the return emigrants are Alappuzha, Kottayam and Palakkad districts. Thiruvananthapuram, Thrissur and Malappuram are the most attractive districts for the return emigrants to settle down. (See Tables 8 and 9 and Figure 6). Emigrants' Destination Countries The beginning of accelerated emigration from Kerala commenced in the 1970s. From that time, Gulf countries have been the principal destination of Kerala emigrants. It was true in 2008 also. Kerala Table 9: Percentage Distribution of EMI, REM and NRK by Districts, 1998-2008 Districts Emigrants Return Emigrants Non-Resident Keralites 2008 2003 1998 2008 2003 1998 2008 14.1 9.1 9.6 18.6 11.5 16.1 15.6 9.9 11.9 Kollam 9.5 8.1 7.6 10.7 7.8 10.0 9.9 8.0 8.4 Pathanamthitta 5.5 7.3 7.2 5.2 9.3 7.4 5.4 7.9 7.2 Alappuzha 6.0 4.1 4.6 4.5 4.8 4.7 5.5 4.3 4.6 Kottayam 4.1 5.8 2.6 2.3 3.2 2.5 3.5 4.9 2.6 Idukki 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.6 Ernakulam 5.5 6.6 7.6 6.0 8.3 6.1 5.7 7.2 7.1 13.0 9.7 11.8 15.1 9.6 15.8 13.7 9.7 13.2 Thiruvananthapuram Thrissur Palakkad 2003 1998 9.7 8.5 7.4 6.2 5.3 8.2 8.5 7.4 14.8 21.8 19.0 15.8 16.7 16.5 15.1 20.0 Kozhikode 9.1 9.1 8.5 6.3 12.2 8.2 8.1 10.1 8.4 Wayanad 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 Kannur 5.4 11.0 6.5 2.3 5.1 3.8 4.3 9.1 5.5 Kasaragode 3.1 3.9 2.8 2.4 5.3 2.3 2.8 4.4 2.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Kerala 33 8.7 15.3 Malappuram 34 emigration, even today, is essentially emigration to the Gulf countries. In 1998, 93.9 per cent of Kerala emigrants selected one of the Gulf countries as their destination. By 2003, the corresponding percentage declined somewhat to little less than 89 per cent. Between 2003 and 2008, the Gulf's relative importance as a destination region had changed very little. From 89.0 per cent, the percentage had declined to 88.5 per cent, a statistically insignificant change. The changes in the targets of destination among the Gulf region were more marked. Saudi Arabia was the principal destination in 1998 with 37.5 per cent of emigrants from Kerala emigrating to that country. Since then, Saudi Arabia's share of Kerala emigrants had declined to 26.7 per cent in 2003 and further to 23.0 per cent in 2008. Suadi Arabia is certainly losing its magnetism to attract the Kerala emigrants. However, the absolute number of Kerala emigrants in Saudi Arabia has remained stable; it has not declined at all during the 10-year period. On the other hand, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has enormousely improved its share of Kerala emigrants since 1998. Over the decade, the UAE's share has increased from 31.0 per cent in 1998 to 41.9 per cent in 2008. Figure 7 Number of Kerala Em igrants in the Gulf Countries, 1998-2008 1000000 900000 800000 700000 600000 2008 500000 2003 400000 1998 300000 200000 100000 0 UAE Saudi Ar abia Oman Kuwait Bahar in Quat ar Table 10: Emigrants by Country of Residence. 1998-2008 Countries Numbers 1941422 102440 13695 38894 9861 12600 11504 7091 12052 8766 21364 13726 2193415 2003 670150 489988 152865 113967 108507 98953 2047 1636477 98271 4777 22520 14331 15696 14331 13649 4777 7507 6142 .. 1838478 Percent 1998 421959 510895 139571 68163 74654 62969 … 1278211 29862 … … 53882 1361955 2008 41.9 23.0 7.6 5.9 4.6 5.5 0.0 88.5 4.7 0.6 1.8 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.4 1.0 0.6 100.0 2003 36.5 26.7 8.3 6.2 5.9 5.4 0.1 89.0 5.3 0.3 1.2 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.3 100.0 1998 31.0 37.5 10.2 5.0 5.5 4.6 0.0 93.9 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 100.0 35 United Arab Emirates Saudi Arabia Oman Kuwait Bahrain Qatar Other West Asia Sub-Total United States of America Canada United Kingdom Other Europe Africa Singapore Maldives Malaysia Other SE Asia Australia/New Zealand Other Countries Total 2008 918122 503433 167628 129282 101344 121613 36 Outside the Gulf region, the principal destination of Kerala emigrants is the United States of America with 102,000 emigrants or 4.7 per cent of Kerala emigrants. Between 2003 and 2008 the share of the USA has declined from 5.3 per cent to 4.7 per cent. The United Kigdom is another important destination of Kerala emigrants. Country of Departure of Return Emigrants While 88.5 per cent of the emigrants went to one of the Gulf countries, as much as 95 per cent of the return emigrants turned up from one of the Gulf countries. Emigrants in the USA, Canada, the UK, etc., seldom return. Most of them settle there on a permanent basis. About 42 per cent of Kerala emigrants resided in the UAE, but only 34 per cent of the return emigrants arrived from UAE. On ther hand, 23 per cent of the emigrants resided in Saudi Arabia, but as much as 33.4 per cent of the return emigrants came back from Saudi Arabia. The average number of years of residence of Kerala emigrants is much lower in Saudi Arabia than in the UAE. Saudi Arabia is not as attractive as the UAE for Kerala emigrants. This is somewhat true of Oman also where 7.6 per cent of the emigrants from Kerala live and from where 12.7 per cent of the return emigrants came back. If the percentage of Kerala emigrants who reside in a country is greater than the percentage of Kerala return emigrants from that country, then that country is deemed attractive. On the basis of this measure, attractive countries for the Kerala emigrants are UAE, Kuwait, Quatar, USA, Canada, UK, South Africa, Malayasia and Australia Table 11: Average Duration in Years of Residence Abroad among Return Emigrants, 2008 UAE 9.29 Saudi Arabia Oman Kuwait Bahrain Qatar 7.83 8.52 7.48 9.48 9.69 37 Religious Composition According to the 2001 Census, 56.3 per cent of Kerala's population are Hindus, 19.0 per cent are Christians and 24.7 percent are Muslims. The distribution of emigrants by religion is different from that of the total population. Majority of the emigrants are Muslims. About 41.1 per cent are Muslims, 37.7 per cent of them are Hindus and the remaining 21.2 per cent are Christians (Table 12). The differences among the three religious groups become all the more glaring when emigrants per 100 households are considered. The number of emigrants per 100 for the Hindu households is 18.7, indicating a significant increase in emigration among the Hindus between 2003 and 2008. It is 29.9 among the Christians indicating a decline in emigration propensity among them. Among the Muslims the percentage of emigrants per household remained constant around 56.4 . Table 12: Emigrants, and Emigrants Per 100 households by Religion, 2008 Religion Per cent distribution 1998 2003 Hindus 29.5 31.2 Christians 19.8 Muslims 50.7 2008 Emigrants per 100 households 2003 2008 37.7 14.6 18.7 25.1 21.2 31.4 29.9 43.7 41.1 56.1 56.4 Households With and Without Migrants In 2008, about 18 per cent of the Kerala households had a member living as an emigrant outside India.The corresponding number in 2003 was 18.9 per cent. Similarly, 11.8 per cent of the households had a return emigrant and 26.5 per cent had either a emigrant or a return emigrant or both. These proportions have not changed much since 2003 although there was considerable increase in the number of emigrants, return 38 emigrants and non-resident Keralites. Migrants per 100 households also increased considerably during this period. Yet, the proportion of household with at least one emigrant has not increased very much. These statistics seem to imply that emigrants from Kerala are not randomly selected. When a new person emigrates, it is more likely that he/she comes from a household that already had sent out an emigrant in the past (Table 13) Table 13: Percentage of Households With One or More Migrants, 2003-2008 Year EMI REM NRK 2008 18.0 11.8 26.5 2003 18.9 11.2 25.8 It was mentioned earlier that NRKs per 100 households was as much as 44.1. This, however, does not mean that 44.1 per cent of the households had an NRK. Several households had more than one NRK. In fact, in 2008, only 26.5 per cent of the households had at least one NRK. It follows from these statistics that a very large proportion of households in Kerala are not directly exposed to emigration. They do not have either an emigrant or a return emigrant. Religion is an important factor related to emigration in Kerala. The proportion of households with EMI, RMI or NRK is highest among the Muslims and the least among the Hindus. For example, the proprion of households with either an emigrant or return emigrant among Muslims is as much as 52.9 per cent (one out of every two households) compared with only 18 per cent among the Hindus. The broad distribution of households by the number of EMI, REM and NRK by religion is given in Table 14. 39 Table 14: Percentage of Households With one or more migrants by Religion, 2008 Religion EMI REM NRK Hindus 12.4 7.2 18.1 Christians 16.3 11.0 24.6 Muslims 36.4 25.7 52.9 Total 18.0 11.8 26.5 Figure 8 Percent of Households with Emigrants by districts, 2008 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 % of HHs W ith Emi 5 Idukki W ayanad Kottayam Er nakulam Kannur Alappuzha Palakkad Kollam Kasar agode Kozhikode Pathanamthitta Thr issur Thir uananthapur am Thiruvananthapuram M alappur am 0 The district of origin of emigrants is an equally critical variable in determining the proportion of households with an emigrant. In Malappuram district, 36.8 per cent of the households had one or more emigrants. Similarly, in Thrissur district 26.1 per cent of the household had at least one emigrant. On the other hand, in Idduki district only 1.3 per cent of the households had an emigrant. Wayanad also had few households with an emigrant. Surprisingly, Ernakulam district is the third district in the order from the bottom with respect to the proportion of households with at least one emigrant. 40 Cost of Migration Emigration is expensive. It involves considerable financial sacrifices to the emigrant, especially because many of the emigrants from Kerala turn up from poor families. Only a few Kerala emigrants could emigrate without financial support from other sources. Usually the family members or friends help in meeting the expenses connected with emigration. An emigrant needs funds for buying the air ticket, to pay the cost of visa, passport, emigration clearance, etc. Some of the emigrants need money to pay the recruitment agencies and other intermediaries. MMS 2008 collected information on the expenses incurred by emigrants and return emigrants. The results are summarised in Table 15. Table 15: Average Expenses Incurred for Emigration from Kerala, 2008 Item Average in Rs. Percent Recruitment Agencies 8087 14.2 Other Intermediaries 2003 3.5 Passport 1170 2.1 Visa 30566 53.8 Ticket 13266 23.3 1425 2.5 325 0.6 56842 100.0 Emigration Clearance Loss due to Fraud Total The most expensive item of expenditure was obtaining visa. On an average, an emigrant spent Rs. 31,000 to acquire a visa. The second most expensive item was the air ticket, which, on an average, cost Rs. 13,000 per emigrant. For some of the emigrants, the employer paid for the air ticket and so the costs came down by that much. Payment to recruiting agencies was another major item of expense. 41 We have also estimated the average cost of emigration for different migration corridors from Kerala. The lowest cost is estimated for Kuwait with Rs. 53,951 and the highest average cost is reported for Saudi Arabia (Table 16). Table 16: Average cost of Emigration for different Migration Corridors from Kerala, 2008 Countries Average cost (Rupees) Kerala-Bahrain 57172 Kerala-Kuwait 53951 Kerala-Oman 56840 Kerala-Qatar 66316 Kerala-Saudi Arabia 74606 Kerala-UAE 61308 Kerala-UK 56589 Kerala-USA 42080 Financing Emigration As mentioned above, many of the emigrants from Kerala are not wealthy enough to meet all the expenses related to emigration. More than 42 per cent of the emigrants borrowed money from friends. About 40 per cent used their personal savings. Parents helped in 38 per cent of the cases. Other members of the family were also an important source of funds. Government help was practically nil for financing emigration. A few of the emigrants mortgaged their assets to get the money needed for emigration. Sale/pledge of ornaments was a very common mode of financing emigration (almost 30 per cent). Characteristics of Migrants Migrants are, in general, a discrete group with respect to their socioeconomic characteristics. Their composition with respect to sex, age, 42 Table 17: Sources of Finances for Emigration, 2008 Source Per cent of Emigrants From Family Members 26.8 Personal Savings 40.1 Parents Savings 37.7 Borrow from Friends 42.1 Loans from money lender 12.6 Loans from Banks 14.1 Sale/Mortgage of Land 4.9 Sale/Mortgage of Other Assets 3.4 Sale/pledge Ornaments 29.2 Government Assistance 0.4 Others 7.0 *The total exceeds 100 as emigrants use more than one source. marital status, education and employment is different from those of the non-migrants. The section is devoted to an analysis of these differences. Age Composition of Emigrants As with migrants all over the world, emigrants from Kerala are also highly concentrated in the middle age groups. 90 per cent of male emigrants and 66 per cent of female emigrants belong to the age group 15-39 years. A fairly large number of emigrants belong to very young ages 0-4 years, but there are few in the age group 5-14 ages. The average age of migrants varies by type of migration. Return emigrants have the highest average age, and out-migrants have the lowest average age. This pattern holds for both males and females. Between males and females, the average age is higher among males. This is true among all migrant groups. The differences are more among migrants and out-migrants than among the return migrants. 43 Figure 9 Average age of Emigrants,2008 30 25 20 EMI 15 REM 10 OMI 5 ROM 0 M ales Fem ales Average Age Emigrants and Return Emigrants Return emigrants are on the whole older than emigrants, but the difference in average age is not very large. The average age for emigrants is 25.06 and that of return emigrants is 28.07 years, the difference being just 3 years. However, among females the difference is very large: 7.84 years for females. Female emigrants are fewer, but once they emigrate they stay abroad for longer periods of time. They get back to Kerala after a stay abroad, on an average, of 8 years. Figure 10 Age at the time of Emigration of EM I, 2008 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 M ale Female 44 Emigrants and Out-Migrants The average age of emigrants at the time of emigration is 25.06 years. The corresponding average of out-migrants is 19.27, almost 6 years younger. The difference between the average age of emigrants and out-migrants is much larger among males (5.63 years) compared to 1.67 years among females. 11 Percent age Distribution EM Iand and OM I, 2008 FigureFigure 11 Percentage Distribution ofofEMI OMI, 2008 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 EM I 15.0 OM I 10.0 5.0 0.0 0 - 4 5 - 9 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 - 35 - 40 - 45 - 50 - 55 - 60+ 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 While 23 per cent of the out-migrants are in the age-group 15-19 years, the corresponding proportion for the emigrants in that age-group is only 4 per cent. Whereas 25.8 per cent of the emigrants are 30 years or older at the time of emigration, only 10.6 per cent of the out-migrants are 30 years or older. Migrants by Marital Status Majority of the male migrants (emigrants and out-migrants) from Kerala are unmarried: 63 per cent of emigrants and 82 per cent of the out-migrants. Majority of the male return emigrants and out-migrants to Kerala are married. In the case of females, majority of the international migrants, both emigrants and return emigrants, are married: 55 per cent of emigrants and 69 per cent of the return-emigrants. As far as internal migration is Table 18: Marital Status Distribution of Migration Status (Per cent), 2008 Marital Status EMI REM OMI ROM Males Females Males Females Males Females Males Females Unmarried 63.3 44.2 42.9 23.7 82.3 63.2 16.2 18.7 Married 36.7 54.8 56.9 69.3 17.5 36.3 69.3 74.7 Widowed 0.0 0.3 0.1 5.0 0.2 0.2 12.1 5.6 Others 0.0 0.7 0.1 2.1 0.0 0.3 2.3 1.0 Total 3420 584 1796 241 1113 636 388 1259 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 45 46 concerned, while majority of the female return out- migrants are married (75 per cent), majority of the female out-migrants are not married: only 36 per cent of them are married. Widowed, divorced, separated persons are very few among emigrants and out-migrants, but there are about 15 per cent of such persons among male return out-migrants and 7 per cent among return emigrants. Those among migrants, internal and external, whose marriage gets dissolved for one reason or other, tend to return back to Kerala. Figure 12 Percetage of Unmarried M igrants, 2008 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 M ales 50.0 Females 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 EM I REM OM I ROM Educational Attainment of Migrants Table 19 gives the educational attainment of migrants of all types. It also provides a comparison with the educational attainment of the general population. Migrants are, on the average, better educated than the general population. One measure of the level of education is the average years of schooling. According to this index, return out-migrants are better educated than all the other migrant and non-migrant groups. They have, on an average, 9.2 years of schooling compared with 7.7 years of schooling for the general population. 47 Another way of measuring the educational level of a population is to compute the proportion of them with a minimum of secondary level of education. According to this computation, out-migrants have higher level of educational attainment than the other four groups. About 58.5 per cent of out-migrants have a minimum of secondary level of education. The lowest percentage is reported by the return emigrants, just 32.4 per cent. This is lower than the average figure of the general population (34.7 per cent) Emigrants are better educated than return emigrants, and out-migrants are better educated than return out-migrants. Among the four migrant groups, return emigrants have the lowest average years of schooling. Table 19: Percent Distribution of Migrants and Population by Educational Attainment, 2008 Educational status EMI REM OMI ROM Pop. !5+ Illiterate 6.8 1.7 15.8 1.6 5.4 Literate without education 0.1 1.7 0.2 0.6 2.6 Primary not completed 2.8 6.3 2.9 4.5 7.4 Primary 5.0 13.8 2.2 5.3 13.6 Upper primary 38.6 44.1 20.4 38.4 36.4 Secondary 26.7 22.0 31.9 31.5 24.4 Degree 20.0 10.3 26.6 18.0 10.3 Secondary +Degree 46.7 32.4 58.5 49.5 34.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 9.2 7.7 Total Average Years of Schooling 100.0 8.9 8.1 8.7 Among out-migrants 26.6 per cent have a degree. No other group has as high a proportion of degree-holders as out-migrants. In the general population (15+ years), only 10.3 per cent (less than half as much as among the out-migrants) have a degree. Internal migrants have a higher proportion of secondary certificate holders than external migrants. 48 Trend in Educational Attainment of Migrants Data from MMS 1998, 2003, and 2008 do not indicate a systematic trend in the educational attainment of migrants. The recent migrants are not necessarily better educated than those who went abroad in earlier years Table 20: Percentage with Secondary or Higher Levels of Education, 1998-2008 Trend in Educational attainment of Migrants Year Secondary + Degree EMI OMI EMI OMI 1998 40.5 69.3 10.8 13.4 2003 50.3 69.7 19.3 22.8 2008 46.7 58.5 20.0 26.6 Although there is a general increase in the proportion of migrants with a minimum of secondary level education, the trend is not linear. In the case of degree holders, the increase was more systematic. The proportion of degree-holders among migrants was the highest in 2008 and the lowest in 1998. Economic Activity Before and After Emigration About 64 per cent of the emigrants from Kerala were gainfully employed before emigration, 20 per cent were unemployed and 16 per cent were outside the labour force. The unemployment rate was 24.2 per cent compared to 8.7 per cent in the general population. At destination countries, roughly 87 per cent of the Kerala emigrants were gainfully employed, just one per cent was unemployed and about 12 per cent were not in the labour force. The unemployment rate was just 1.1 per cent. The distribution of emigrants by economic activity before emigration from Kerala and after emigration at destinations is given in 49 Table 21. The largest number of emigrants came from labourers in nonagriculture (31.6 per cent). Emigrants also included about 20.3 per cent each from job-seekers and 19.6 per cent from those working in the private sector. Table 21: Distribution of Emigrants by Economic Activity Before and after Emigration, 2008 Emigrants In Kerala In Destinations Gainfully employed 1397451 Percent of Total In In Kerala Destinations 1912388 63.7 87.2 Unemployed 445913 21912 20.3 1.0 Outside Labour force 350048 259112 16.0 11.8 2193412 2193412 100.0 100.0 24.2 1.1 Total Unemployment Rate (% of Labour Force) At the destination countries, 54 per cent were employed in the Private Sector and 26 per cent were working as labourers in nonagriculture. A cross-classification of emigrants by sector activity before and after emigration indicates that, out of a total of 446,000 emigrants who were jobseekers only 10,000 remained as jobseekers at the destination countries. From among the persons who were seeking jobs in Kerala before emigration, the survey results show that 63,000 got employment as non-agricultural labourer, 32,000 were employed in the private sector, 16,000 were self-employed, 15,000 in Government services, etc. About 10,000 remained job seekers (unemployed) even after emigration. From among the 694,000 persons who were in non-agriculture labour in Kerala, the survey results show that 426,000 remained in nonagriculture, 255,000 were absorbed in the private sector and about 8,000 became self-employed. Out of the total 2,193,412 emigrants, 1,040,830 50 Table 22:Economic Activity of Emigrants Before and After Emigration. 2008 Employment sector Before After Before After (in Kerala) (at Desti- (in Kerala) (at Destination) nation) State/Central Government 26295 43824 1.2 2.0 Semi- Govt. Aided school 22460 36703 1.0 1.7 Private Sector 429479 1183259 19.6 53.9 Self Employment 170915 70667 7.8 3.2 Unpaid family worker 19721 4382 0.9 0.2 Agricultural labour 34512 3835 1.6 0.2 Non-Agr.labour 694069 569717 31.6 26.0 Job Seekers 445913 21912 20.3 1.0 1096 2191 0.0 0.1 109561 123256 5.0 5.6 Household work 79980 70119 3.6 3.2 Too old to work 0 2191 0.0 0.1 Others 159411 61354 7.3 2.8 Total 2193412 2193412 100.0 100.0 Job Not required Students (47 per cent) did not change their sector of activity after emigration, but the other 53 per cent changed from one sector to the other Emigrants and Return Emigrants A comparison of the sector of economic activity of emigrants before emigration and of return emigrants after they returned (not the same cohort) is presented in Figure 13. There are some significant differences. The proportion of job seekers was 20.3 per cent before emigration, but it was only 6.3 per cent among the return emigrants. Similarly, the proportion employed in the private sector was 19.6 per cent before emigration, but was 9.7 per cent among the returnees. On the other hand, the proportion of self-employed, which was only 7.8 per cent before emigration went up to 22.9 per cent among the returnees. 51 The categories "too old to work" and "household work" are much higher among the returnees compared with emigrants. The proportion of persons in "non-agricultural labour" remained fairly stable, although there was a small decrease. Figure 13 Employment sector of emigrants before emigration and return emigrants after return, 2008 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 EM I Before Em igrat ion Other s Too old to wor k Students Household wor k Job Seeker s Job Not r equir ed Non-Agr .labour Agr icultur al labour Unpaid family wor ker Pr ivate Sector REM Aft er Return Self Employment State/ Centr al … 0.0 Semi- Govt. Aided … 5.0 Households With and Without Migrants Compared to households in Kerala with an international migrant, there are fewer households in Kerala with an internal migrant. The proportion of households with an intenal migrant is less than 7 per cent. Table 23: Percentage of Households with Migrants, 2008 Percent OMI 6.8 ROM 6.3 ISM 12.0 ISM+NRK 36.0 EMI 18.0 REM 11.8 NRK 26.7 EMI+OMI 23.7 REM+ROM 17.8 52 Table 23 indicates that more than a third of the Kerala households have a migrant, as an emigrant, out-migrant, return emigrant or return out-migrant. A large proportion of it is external migration. About 27 per cent of the households have an international migrant; only 6.3 per cent of the households have an internal migrant. An important aspect of migration from Kerala is that the proportion of households with migrants is fairly stable. More new migrants turn up from households which already have a migrant. Not many new households join the group. GULF WIVES "Guf Wives" are defined as married women in Kerala whose husbands work/live outside India. A rough estimate places the number of Gulf Wives in Kerala in 2008 at 1.06 million. This was more or less the case in 2003 also. There has been no noticable increase in the number of Gulf Wives, although the number of emigrants have increased significantly. Gulf Wives constitute 10.8 per cent of currently married women in Kerala. One in 10 married women living in Kerala has her husband working abroad. The proportion of Gulf wives varies from below one per cent in Idukki district to 25.8 per cent in Malappuram district. One in four married women living in Malappuram district has her husband working Figure 14 Percent of Gulf W ives with Religion, 2008 30 20 10 0 Hindus Chr istian M uslims 53 abroad. The proportion of Gulf wives is highest among the Muslims with one out four married women having her huband working abroad. The proportion is nearly the same among both Hindus and Christians, that is, about 6.5 per cent. Table 24: Number and Per cent of Gulf Wives, 2008 Districts No of GW % GW 149345 14.7 Kollam 85551 11.1 Pathanamthitta 45637 12.1 Alappuzha 43610 7.0 Kottayam 26950 4.7 2303 0.8 36718 3.8 Thrissur 137915 15.6 Palakkad 69732 9.4 Malappuram 242862 25.8 Kozhikode 115104 12.9 7954 3.6 Kannur 63302 9.2 Kasaragode 35629 11.0 1062612 10.8 Thiruvananthapuram Idukki Ernakulam Wayanad Kerala Sex Composition Emigration from Kerala has been and still is dominated by males. Among the emigrants from Kerala in 2008, the proportion of females was only 14.6 per cent. Although this proportion is much higher than the corresponding proportion 1998, it was lower than that in 2003. Surprisingly, there was a decline in the proportion of women emigrants between 2003 and 2008. 54 The dominance of males among emigrants is reflected also among return emigrates. The proportion of females among the return emigrants was only 11.8 per cent, down from 15.3 in 2003. Table 25: Sex Compositions of Migrants, 1998-2008 Emigration status Percent of Females Among 2008 2003 1998 Emigrants 14.6 16.8 9.3 Return Emigrants 11.8 15.3 10.9 Out-Migrants 36.3 34.9 24.1 Return Out-Migrants 30.8 27.0 29.2 District-Wise Variation The proportion of females among emigrants varies widely by district of origin and by religion. Christian emigrants constituted the highest proportion of females (30 per cent) and Muslim emigrants, the lowest (6.5 per cent). The average for Kerala is 14.6 per cent. South Kerala Districts have a relatively higher proportion of females among their emigrants than districts in the North. In this respect, Idukki and Kottayam districts lead all other districts. Malappuram and Kasaragode districts have the lowest proportion of female emigrants. Figure 15 Percent Females among EM I by Religion, 2008 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Hindus Chr istians M uslims All 55 Figure 16 percent Females among EM I, 2008 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 Variation by Country of Destination The proportion of females among emigrants varies by country of destination. A higher proportion of females among the emigrants from Kerala go to non-Arab countries such as USA, UK, etc. Among the Arab countries, Kuwait has the highest proportion of females among their emigrants from Kerala, and Saudi Arabia has the lowest. Table 26: Percent of Females among Emigrants by Country of Residence, 2008 Countries Percent of Females among EMI USA 46.5 UK 46.5 Kuwait 25.0 Bahrain 13.0 UAE 11.2 Qatar 9.1 Oman 8.6 Saudi Arabia 7.9 56 Remittances With the information available from MMS 2008 or other sources such as Reserve Bank of India or IMF data on workers remittanance, it is not possible to arrive at a precise estimate of remittances to Kerala state, or as a matter of fact, for any other state in India. In the KMS (1998), SMS (2003) and MMS (2007), several methods were tried and a final estimate was computed on an ad hoc basis. The same approach is followed in this study also. Household Surveys like MMS are not designed to measure Total Remittances* to the state However a part of the total remittances to the state is sent to households through different channels for different household purposes. It is possible through MMS to make an estimate of this part of the total remittances. This estimate (Household Remittances) along with a few other variables that are known to be correlated to Total Remittances are used to arrive at an approximation of the Total Remittances to the state. * In this study, as in earlier studies, a distinction is made between total remittances recevied in the state (Total Remittances) and remittances received by the household in the state for subsistence, etc. We call the latter Household Remittances. Household Remittances are only a fraction of the Total Remittances. Household Remittances A part of the total remittances to Kerala from emigrants abroad are received by members of the emigrant households in different forms. This is referred to in MMS 2008 as Household Remittances (HR). In this study, a concerted effort was made to get information about all the usual types of household remittances from abroad, cash, goods, etc. For that purpose, a number of questions were asked in the survey: Has any member of the household received cash from their relatives from abroad in the past one year?. This 57 question was followed by asking about the various goods that the household could have received from their relatives abroad. Their total vaue (in rupees) was assessed.. Additional questions were asked to get information on money received from abroad for construction or purchase of a house, purchase of land, car, etc. Similarly information about the amount received for the education of children, medical expenses, payment of dowry, debt repayment, etc., were collected. Household remittances was the total of all these items. According to Table 27, the total of all household remittances (HR) in Kerala in 2008 was Rs. 12,511 crores. This estimate may be compared with household remittances of Rs. 7,965 crores in 2003 and Rs. 3,530 crores in 1998. Thus, there was a 57 per cent increase in household remittances during 2003-08. Table 27: Trend in Household Remittances, 1998-2008 * Rs (crores) Percent increase 1998 3,530* ….. 2003 7,965 127.6 2008 12,511 57.1 Questions used to assess household remittances in 1998 were not strictly comparable to those asked in 2003 and 2008. The questions in 2003 and 2008 were the same. Most of the household remittances (82.4 per cent) was received by the households for their regular household expenses such as subsistence. Another 10.1 per cent was used for building or purchasing a house or buying land About 4 per cent was received as gifts from abroad. (Table 29). 58 Table 28: Household Remittances by Religion and District (crores), 2008 Districts Thiruvananthapuram Kollam Pathanamthitta Alappuzha Kottayam Idukki Ernakulam Thrissur Palakkad Malappuram Kozhikode Wayanad Kannur Kasaragode Kerala Percent Hindus 656 891 277 350 240 17 295 726 382 138 265 26 383 121 4767 58.3 Christians 352 307 332 160 394 26 263 213 34 29 0 27 102 15 2254 20.6 Muslims 380 96 30 59 22 2 305 784 581 1707 888 111 324 201 5490 21.1 Total 1388 1294 639 570 656 45 862 1723 997 1874 1153 164 809 337 12511 Table 29: Household Remittances by Type, Kerala, 2008 in Crores Percent 10306 82.4 515 4.1 1265 10.1 121 1.0 13 0.1 5 0.0 Dowry payment 55 0.4 Education 50 0.4 Medical expenses 53 0.4 Repaying debt 94 0.8 Others 34 0.3 12511 100.0 Cash for HH consumption Goods Received as gift For house construction/buy Car Shares/bonds For starting Enterprise Total HH Remittances 59 End Use of Household Remittances Households make use of remittances for many purposes. The proportions of households that used remittances for subsistence, education, etc., are given Table 30. Table 30: Proportion of HHs that used Remittances for Various Purposes, 2008 End Use % of HHs* Subsistence 78.4 Education 38.9 Repaying Debt 36.7 Bank Deposit 14.6 Buying/building houses 9.4 Land Reclamation 5.6 Dowry Payment 3.1 Purchase of land 2.6 Business 0.4 Others 6.3 *As the HHs use remittances for more than one purpose, these proportions will not add to hundred, and the sum will be greater than 100. Number of Households Receiving Remittances. In 2008, the emigration rate per 100 households was 29, but only 18 per cent of the households had at least an emigrant because some had more than one emigrant. The proportion of households that received remittances was even smaller. Only 17.1 per cent of the households had received remittances in cash from their relatives abroad (Figure 17). Variation by Religion Among the three religious communities, the Muslims had the largest proporion of households that received remittances and the 60 Figure 17 Percent age of Household t hat received cash remit t acnces w it h EM I 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 EM I per 100 HH Percent HH with an Emigrant Percent HH that Received Cash Remittances Hindus had the smallest proporion of households that received remittances. Figure 18 Percentage of Household that received Remittances by Religion 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0 Hindus Chr istians M uslims Variation by Districts There are wide variations in the proportion of households that received cash remittances. In Malappuram district, more than one-third of the households (35.7 per cent) had received cash remittances. The 61 corresponding proportion was 25.2 per cent in Thrissur, 22.3 per cent in Thiruvananthapuram district, 21.4 per cent in Kollam, and 20.3 per cent in Kozhikode.district. Strangely, in Ernakulam District only 8.7 per cent of the households have received cash remittances from abroad. Idukki district has the lowest proportion of households that receved cash remittances (1.2 per cent), preceded by Waynad (5.6 per cent). Figure 19 Percentage of Household Received Remittances 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Total Remittances Before the launching of the first KMS in 1998, it was a common pracrtice to estimate Total Remittances (TR) to Kerala by multiplying the total remittances to India (which is available from the Reserve Bank or IMF sources) by the proportion of Kerala emigrants to the total number of emigrants from India. In those days, this latter proportion also was not available, but it was arbitrarily assumed at 25 per cent. Thus, Total Remittances to Kerala was assumed then as 25 per cent of remittances to India. This ratio was however reduced progressively to 20 per cent by the year 2000. In this study, we follow the procedure which was followed in the earlier MMS. The 'Total Remittances' is estimated by three different methods. Among them, the one with the most credibility is accepted. 62 Remittances to Kerala: Estimates by Different Methods, 2008 1 2 20 Percent Rule Remittances India Remittance to Kerala = = Rs 221,220 221220*0.2 44,244 crores ECR Passports Method* The proportion of ECR passports holders who emigrated from Kerala (Kerala/India) in various years is given below. This proportion is multiplied by the total remittances to India to get an estimate of TR to Kerala. TR = ECR ratio(Kerala/India)* Total remittances to India Year ECR ratio* all-India remittances ECR Ratio of Kerala/India Total Remittances 2008 0.21294 47,108 crores 2007-08 0.19974 44,187 crores 2006-08 0.19326 42,754 crores 2005-08 0.19985 44,212 crors 3. Regression Method In this method, the ratio of Total Remittances to Household Remittances (TR/HR) is estimated by assuming that it is a linear function of: (1) Total number of emigrants, and (2) Total NRE deposits in Kerala Banks in December 2008 Results of these calculation are given below: Number of Emigrants = 2,193,412 Total NRE Deposit = 34,649 crores Regression estimate of the ratio TR/HR = 3.460 Household Remittances = 12,511 crores (see below) Total Remittances = 3.46*12,511 = 43,288 crores 63 Among the three estimates, the one based on the regression method was accepted (using household remittances (Rs. 12,511 crores), Emigrants in 2008 (2193412) and NRI deposits in Kerala Banks in December 2008 (34,649 crores). The Total Estimated Remittances to Kerala in 2008 = Rs 43,288 crores. This is the estimate used throughout this study Trend in Total Remittances A major finding of MMS 2008 is the phenomenal increase in the remittances to Kerala in the past five years. While the increase in 'Total Remittances' to Kerala during 1998-2003 was only 35 per cent, it went up during the next five years (2003-08) by as much as 135 per cent (it had more than doubled). Table 31: Total Remittances and TR per Household, 1998-2008 Years Crores Total Remittances Percent Increase Per Household (Rs) 1998 13,652 21,469 2003 18,465 35.2 24,444 2008 43,288 134.4 57,215 A number of factors could be cited as reasons for this phenomenal increase * Our experience with estimating total remittances to Goa and Kerala states indicates that the ECR Passport Method gives a good first approximation of total remittances to a state. One advantage of this method is that it is possible to estimate 'Total Remittances' to all major states in India, even to states that have not carried out an emigration survey. These estimates are worked out and given in Table 32. Compared to a total remittance of Rs. 42,922 crores to Kerala, Tamil Nadu received Rs. 41,400 crores, Andhra Pradesh received Rs.28,559 crores and Uttar Pradesh received Rs.28,249 crores, etc. Remittances to other states are given in Table 32. 64 Table 32: Estimate of Total Remittances by States of India, 2008 Number of ECR passports cleared for emigration States 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2004 Kerala 63512 Tamil Nadu 108964 Karnataka 19237 Gujarat 22218 Andhra Pradesh 72580 Maharashtra 28670 Punjab 25302 Uttar Pradesh 27428 Rajasthan 35198 Bihar 21812 Delhi 6052 Madhya Pradesh 8888 West Bengal 8986 Hariyana 1267 Goa 7053 Orissa 6999 Jharkand 919 Chandigarh 2405 Himachal Pradesh 1506 Assam 2695 Jammu and Kashmir 1944 Pondicherry 560 Uttaranchal 58 Andaman 29 India 474282 Estimate of Remittances using the proportion of ECR 2005 2006 2007 2008 2008 125975 117050 75384 49923 48498 29289 24088 22558 21899 9366 6024 5312 5102 2313 1627 1258 974 807 762 669 486 222 137 5 549728 120083 155631 24362 13274 97680 15356 39311 66131 50236 36493 9098 7047 14929 193 4063 4114 1427 6616 1180 1075 1661 2 93 190 670245 150476 150842 27014 20066 105044 21496 53942 91613 70896 51805 5327 3616 24817 1852 3102 6696 3651 9177 1119 1905 3276 45 179 87 808043 180703 128791 22413 15716 97530 24786 54469 139254 64601 60642 4512 2321 26094 1779 2210 8919 3561 1768 1345 1517 3588 397 523 89 847528 47167 33617 5850 4102 25457 6470 14217 36348 16862 15829 1178 606 6811 464 577 2328 929 461 351 396 937 104 137 23 221220 2007-08 2006-08 2005-08 44253 42922 37365 41400 6605 7018 4781 4666 27068 28559 6184 5863 14486 14051 30849 28249 18105 17666 15025 14166 1315 1801 793 1235 6803 6262 485 364 710 892 2087 1877 964 822 1462 1670 329 347 457 428 917 811 59 42 94 76 24 35 221220 221220 44408 42490 11476 7615 26830 6995 13218 24584 15973 12179 1920 1408 5458 472 846 1615 740 1413 339 397 693 51 72 29 221220 2004-08 42315 43670 11122 8004 27824 7898 13017 22915 16036 11895 2048 1795 5278 489 1192 1848 696 1372 390 519 723 81 65 26 221220 65 First, the increase in oil prices could be a major reason. Increase in oil price from $50 a barrel to $140 a barrel during 2006-08 enabled Dubai and other Gulf countries to undertake construction activities at a pace unheard of earlier. The increased economic activity resulted in larger emigration to the Gulf and enhanced income for the emigrants. Second, the global financial meltdown and the collapse of many international banks prompted most Kerala emigrants to park their savings in banks in Kerala which, being nationalised, were thought to be much safer than foreign banks. Third, the exchange value of the dollar increased from about Rs. 38 per US dollar to over Rs. 50 per US dollar during 2007-08. The exchange values of Gulf currencies also increased correspondingly. As the emigrants received their salaries in Gulf currencies, this 30 per cent increase was a major factor in the flow of workers remittances to Kerala. Total Remittances by Districts* * It is not possible to cross-classify the 'Total Remittances' by district, religion or any such variables. But such cross-classification is possible for 'Household Remittances' which is computed from estimated survey results. What is done below as cross-classification of 'Total Remittances' is actually a computation of 'Total Remittances' at the state level calculated on the basis of per cent distribution of 'Household Remittances' by districts, religion, etc. For example, 'Total Remittances' for Thiruvananthapuram district is obtained by multiplying percentage of 'Household Remittances' in Thiruvananthapuram district by 'Total Remittances' for Kerala. 'Total Remittances' by district are given in Table 33. Remittances vary considerably among districts. Malappuram district leads all the other districts in the matter of receipt of remittances from abroad. It received a total of Rs 6,486 crore as remittances. Thrissur district comes next with remittances amounting to Rs. 5,961 crore. Thiruvananthapuram 66 district with Rs 4,801 crore is the third. Idukki and Wayanad come last. While Malappuram accounts for 15 per cent of the state's remittances, Idukki accounts for less than half a per cent. Table 33: Total Remittances (crores) and Remittances per Household by Districts, 2008 Districts Total Remittances Percent Per HH Malappuram 6486 15.0 103585 Thrissur 5961 13.8 81588 Thiruvananthapuram 4801 11.1 55465 Kollam 4477 10.3 66460 Kozhikode 3988 9.2 60861 Palakkad 3448 8.0 58365 Ernakulam 2984 6.9 37254 Kannur 2800 6.5 53090 Kottayam 2271 5.2 46351 Pathanamthitta 2211 5.1 68361 Alappuzha 1970 4.6 36159 Kasaragode 1164 2.7 45077 Wayanad 571 1.3 30099 Idukki 156 0.4 5390 Kerala 43288 100.0 57227 The average remittance per household in Malappuram was more than Rs 1 lakh (Rs103,585) which is nearly double the state average (Rs 57,227). The other districts with high average remittance per household were Thrissur, Pathanamthitta, Kollam and Kozhikode. The average remittances per household in Idukki district was less than a tenth of the state average, and of the districts of Pathanamthitta, Kollam and Kozhikode. 67 Remittance by Religion The Total Remittance of Rs 43,288 crores to the Kerala State consists of Rs 16,493 crores recevied by Hindu households, Rs 7,800 crores receved by Christian households and Rs 19,000 crores received by Muslim households. The average remittances per household was Rs 37,385 among Hindus, 50,107 among Christians and as much as 119,004 among Muslims. The per centage increase in remittances during 2003-08 was much larger among the Hindus than among the other two communities. It was 201 per cent among the Hindus compared with an increase of 67 per cent among the Christians and 129 per cent among the Muslims. The average for the three communities together was an increase of 135 per cent. Table 34: Total Remittances and Remittances per HH by Religion, 2003-2008 Religion Remittances (Crores) Remittances per HH 2003 2008 Hindus 5475 16,493 6,134 37,385 Christians 4679 7,800 13,760 50,107 Muslims 8311 18,995 24,351 119,004 18,465 43,288 11,586 57,227 Total 2003 2008 Macro-Economic Impact of Remittances Remittances inflow of about Rs 43,288 crores to Kerala should have a very significant effect on the state's economy and the living condition of its citizens. For a total population of 3.371 crores in Kerala in 2008, the total remittance of Rs 43,288 crores meant an average per capita remittance of Rs 12,840. For a household, average remittance works out at Rs 57,227 per year. Remittances thus make a substantial contribution to the annual income to many of the households in Kerala. 68 Remittances can also be weighed against the macroeconomic indicators of the state. Remittances to Kerala in 2008 were as much as a third (31 per cent) of Kerala's NSDP. The per capita income of the state was Rs 41,814 without including remittances, but was as much as Rs 54,664 when remittances were also included. As mentioned above, on an average, Kerala households have received Rs 57,227 as remittances from abroad. Table 35: Macro-Economic Impact of Remittances on Kerala Economy, 1998-2008 [in crores] Indicators 1998 2003 2008 Remittances 13652 18465 43288 NSDP 53552 83783 140889 Per Capita Income 16062 25764 Modified NSDP 67204 102248 184177 Revenue Receipt of Government 7198 Transfer from Central Government 1991 2653 7861 Government Non-Plan Expenditure 5855 9908 18934 15700 31060 61653 Receipt from Cashew Export 1317 1217 1198 Receipt from Marine Products 817 995 1431 Modified Per Capita Income 20157 31442 54664 Remittances as per cent of NSDP (%) 25.49 22.04 30.73 Remittances as ratio of Revenue Receipt 1.90 1.74 1.74 Remittances as ratio of Transfer from Centre 6.86 6.96 5.51 Remittances as ratio of Government Expenditure 2.33 1.84 2.29 Remittances as ratio of State Debt 0.87 0.59 0.70 Remittances as ratio of Receipt from Cashew Export 19.37 15.17 36.13 Remittances as ratio of Receipt from Marine Export 16.71 18.56 30.25 State Debt 10634 41814 24936 69 The importance of remittances in Kerala is evident from a few other statistics also. Remittances were 1.74 times the revenue receipt of the state in 2008. This ratio had remained the same in 2003. Remittances to Kerala were 5.5 times the funding Kerala got from the Central Government and 2.3 times the annual non-plan expenditure of the Kerala Government. The remittances were sufficient to wipe out 70 per cent of the state's debt in 2008. Remittances were 36 times the export earnings from cashew and 30 times of those from marine products. But there is a flip side to this rosy picture. As indicated ealier, not all households have directly benefited from remittances. Only 17.1 per cent of the households have benefitted directly from household remittances. Many others could have benefited indirectly from the large flow of remittances to Kerala If we consider household remittances alone, the average remittances per household were Rs 16,536 per household (average for all households). But if we take only those households that had actually received remittances (numbering about 1,292,741 out of a total of 7,565,784 households) the average per household would increase to Rs 96,780. Thus, 17.1 per cent of Kerala households had received on an average Rs 96,780 per HH as remittances, while the vast majority of the household (82.9 per cent) had received no remittances at all. There is also the regional disparity in the receipt of remittances. While households in Malappuram district had received Rs 1,874 crores (as just household remittances), those in Idukki district had received only Rs. 45 crores. Thus, the averages for the state mask the considerable disparity by households, by religious groups, by districts, taluk, etc. Employment and Unemployment The employment and unemployment situation in Kerala has undergone very significant changes during the 10-year period 19982008. 70 The number of persons in employable ages (fifteen years and older) has seen moderate increase since 1998. There were 25.80 million such persons in 2008. The corresponding number was 22.89 million in 1998 and 24.30 million in 2003. The increase was 1.5 million during 200308 and 1.4 million during 1998-03. Increase in the number of persons of employable age has not resulted in increase in the number of employed persons. Gainfully Employed Persons There were 8.36 million gainfully employed persons in Kerala in 2008, 6.56 million males and 1.80 million females. They constituted 32.5 per cent of the '15 years and older' population. The rate was 53.2 per cent among males and 13.4 per cent among females. Table 36: Population by Employment Status for Kerala, 1998-2008 Year Total Males Females Total Population 2008 2003 1998 33776235 32562108 31375332 16402660 15816526 15240069 17373574 16745582 16135263 Total 15+ Population 2008 2003 1998 25802495 24303967 22895679 12344920 11611481 10937569 13457575 12692486 11958110 Gainfully Employed 2008 2003 1998 8360472 9682609 9946586 6561038 7824048 7925187 1799434 1858561 2021399 Unemployed 2008 2003 1998 787113 2292393 1243414 388006 989763 636301 399107 1302630 607113 Labour Force 2008 2003 1998 9147585 11975002 11190000 6949044 8813811 8561488 2198541 3161191 2628512 Not in Labour Force 2008 2003 1998 16654529 12328966 11701519 5395495 2797670 2371921 11259034 9531295 9329598 71 The number of gainfully employed persons in Kerala underwent significant decreases since 1998. The decrease was from 9.947 million in 1998 to 9.682 million in 2003 and further to 8.360 million in 2008. Thus the decrease during the 10-year period 1998-2008 was 1.586 million persons. The decrease was much larger in the recent 5-year period (1.322 million) than in the first 5-year period (265,000). The number of employed persons decreased by 3.6 per cent during 1998-2003 compared with a decrease of 11.0 per cent during 2003-08. Table 37: Percent of Population 15+ and their Employment status, 2008 Total Males Females Total 15+ Population 2008 2003 1998 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Gainfully Employed 2008 2003 1998 32.5 39.8 43.4 53.2 67.4 72.5 13.4 14.6 16.9 Unemployed 2008 2003 1998 3.1 9.4 5.4 3.1 8.5 5.8 3.0 10.3 5.1 Not in Labour Force 2008 2003 1998 64.5 50.7 51.1 43.7 24.1 21.7 83.7 75.1 78.0 Unemployment Rate 2008 2003 1998 8.60 19.14 11.11 5.58 11.23 7.43 18.15 41.21 23.10 Employment by Age The proportion of persons employed in 2008 increases from less than 10 per cent in the 15-19 age group to 58.8 per cent in the 35-39 age group. At higher ages, it decreases steadily to near zero at very old age. 72 Table 38: Employment Rate and Percentage Employed by Age, 2008 Age Employment Rate Per cent Employed 15-19 9.6 2.3 20-24 34.9 9.5 25-29 50.6 13.0 30-34 57.0 12.9 35-39 58.8 12.8 40-44 57.2 11.9 45-49 56.2 11.6 50-54 55.3 9.8 55-59 45.7 7.7 60-64 31.4 4.2 65-69 21.9 2.4 70-74 13.3 1.1 75-79 8.2 0.4 80+ 3.5 0.2 Total 32.5 100.0 Among the 5-year age groups, the largest proportion of working population is in the 25-29 and 30-34 age groups. The proportion starts increasing from the 15-19 age group, reaches a maximum at 25-34 age span and then decreases steadily to near zero at very old ages Employment by Education On the whole, there is no consistent relationship between the employment rate and the level of education. The employment rate is 45.6 per cent among degree holders. It is only 42.1 per cent among upper primary completed, and 29.7 per cent among those with just completed secondary school. The pattern is the same for males and females; the difference is only in the overall level. 73 Table 39: Employment Rate by Education, 2008 Educational Status Males Females Persons Illiterate 12.6 10.1 11.2 Literate without education 55.6 19.1 33.2 Primary not completed 26.4 9.4 17.5 Primary 58.4 14.0 35.6 Upper primary 72.4 12.6 42.1 Secondary 49.2 11.1 29.7 Degree 65.1 28.2 45.6 Others 60.1 40.8 51.4 Total 53.2 13.4 32.5 Employed Persons by Sector of Activity In 2008, the majority of the employed persons worked as labourers in the non-agricultural sector, i.e., 37.2 per cent of the total. Next in importance was self-employment which absorbed 20.6 per cent of the total. A third important sector of economic activity in Kerala was labour in the agricultural sector which employed 15.8 per cent of the total. Private sector absorbed an almost equal proportion (15.0 per cent) of employed persons. There were not many changes during the period 2003-2008 in the proportion of gainfully employed persons. The most significant change was the increase in this proportion in the private sector. From 6.4 per cent in 2003, the private sector's share increased to 15.0, an increase of 8.6 percentage points. This increase was compensated mostly by a decrease in the proportion of labour engaged in non-agriculture. On the whole, government and semi-government jobs lost ground and labour in agriculture gained ground, as indicated by an increase of 2.4 percentage points during the period 2003-2008. 74 Table 40: Sector of Employment of Gainfully Employed Persons (Percent), 2003-2008 Employment Status 2008 2003 Total Males Females Total Males State/Central Government 6.4 5.1 Semi- Govt. Aided school 2.5 Private Sector Self Employment 11.0 8.1 6.6 14.5 1.8 5.1 4.0 3.0 8.0 15.0 13.6 20.4 6.4 5.4 10.3 20.6 22.7 12.7 22.3 24.4 13.4 2.5 2.0 4.2 2.2 2.0 3.4 Agricultural labour 15.8 13.7 23.6 13.4 12.1 18.6 Non-Agr.labour 37.2 41.0 23.0 43.7 46.5 31.8 Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 Unpaid family worker Females 75 Unemployment In 2008, there were 787,000 unemployed persons in Kerala of whom 388,000 were males 399,000 were females. The unemployment situation in 2008 was dramatically different from that in 2003, but was closer to that in 1998. The number of unemployed person in 2003 was very much higher, 2,292,000. The number of unemployed person had decreased by 1.505 million during 2003-08. The decrease was 602,000 among males and 903,000 among females. The decline was 61 per cent among males and 69 per cent among females. Figure 20 Unemployment Rate w ith Sex, 2008 45.00 40.00 35.00 30.00 2008 25.00 2003 20.00 1998 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00 Per sons male female The unemployment rate defined as the proportion of the number unemployed to the number in the labour force was just 8.6 per cent in 2008. The rate was 5.6 among males and 18.2 among females. Five years earlier, in 2003 the rates were 19.2 per cent, 11.2 per cent among males and 41.2 per cent among females. Ten years earlier, in 1998, the unemployment rate was only 11.2 per cent, i.e., 7.5 per cent among males and 23.1 per cent among females. Decline in unemployment rate during 2003-2008 was more dramatic than the increase in unemployment rate during 1998-2003. The rate in 2008 was very much lower than the rate in 1998. The unemployment situation in Kerala has eased very much in 2008. 76 Unemployment by Districts Unemployment rate by districts in 2008 did not vary as much as it did in 2003. In 2008, the highest rate (11.1 per cent) was Pathanamthitta district. Its neighbouring district Kollam had more or less the same level of unemployment (11.0 per cent). Malappuram and Kasaragode districts also had a relatively high unemployment rate. Wayanad district had the lowest rate of unemployment at 4.7 per cent. The rate in Palakkad district was also relatively low at 6.1 per cent. Figure 21 shows the district-wise unemployment rates in 2008 placed in ascending order. For comparison, the total unemployment in 2008 and the corresponding rates in 2003 and 1998 are also shown in Figure 20. Table 41:Unemployment Rate by Sex and District, Kerala 1998-2008 Districts 2008 2003 1998 Males Females Persons Persons Persons Thiruvananthapuram 5.1 19.6 9.0 34.3 8.8 Kollam 6.9 22.5 11.0 15.0 7.0 Pathanamthitta 7.3 23.9 11.1 22.9 12.9 Alappuzha 7.6 14.4 9.6 21.7 14.5 Kottayam 5.1 21.7 8.2 16.5 6.8 Idukki 4.3 13.4 6.8 9.6 12.1 Ernakulam 3.4 19.1 7.4 24.5 14.8 Thrissur 5.0 15.0 7.2 10.4 10.8 Palakkad 5.2 8.7 6.1 11.2 14.1 Malappuram 7.7 29.2 10.6 12.3 10.1 Kozhikode 4.5 33.2 9.4 13.1 13.1 Wayanad 4.3 6.1 4.7 13.2 12.0 Kannur 4.5 28.4 9.5 25.5 16.1 Kasaragode 8.5 15.1 10.5 27.7 5.8 Kerala 5.6 18.2 8.6 19.2 11.2 77 Figure 21: Unemployment rate by Districts, 2008 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 Unemployment by Religion Unemployment rate by religion varied somewhat within a narrow range. The rate was highest among the Muslims and lowest among the Christians. In 2003, Christians had the highest rate and Muslims had the lowest. The situation in 2008 was somewhat similar to that in 1998 when Muslims had the highest unemployment rate. Table 42: Unemployment by Religion, 1998-2008 Religion 2008 2003 1998 Hindus 8.0 18.9 11.3 Christians 7.8 20.7 10.1 Muslims 11.6 18.4 12.0 Total 8.6 19.2 11.2 Differentials in unemployment by religion vary by district of residence. In most districts, Muslims experienced the highest unemployment rate. Thiruvananthapuram and Kannur districts were exceptions. In Thiruvananthapuram, the unemployment rate was highest among the Christians and in Kannur it was highest among the Hindus. 78 Table 43: Unemployment Rate by Religion and Districts. 2008 Districts Hindus Christian Muslim Total 8.3 10.4 8.8 9.0 Kollam 10.4 12.7 13.2 11.0 Pathanamthitta 11.6 9.7 17.6 11.1 Alapuzha 9.3 10.2 12.7 9.6 Kottayam 7.3 8.6 12.5 8.2 Idukki 5.5 7.7 11.0 6.8 Ernakulam 7.2 5.8 11.1 7.4 Trissur 6.7 5.8 11.7 7.2 Palakkad 5.0 6.7 9.5 6.1 Malappuram 7.8 6.1 12.2 10.6 Kozhikode 8.4 6.8 10.9 9.4 Wayanad 3.9 4.4 8.2 4.7 10.1 5.9 8.7 9.5 Kasaragode 8.0 5.2 20.1 10.5 Kerala 7.8 8.0 11.8 8.6 Weighted Average 8.0 7.8 11.6 8.6 Thiruvananthapuram Kannur Unemployment by Sex The unemployment rate in 2008 was higher among females than among the males. The rates were 5.6 among males and 18.1 among females. In 1998 and 2003 also the position was the same: 11.2 for males and 41.2 for females in 2003 and 7.5 for males and 23.1 for females in 1998. Unemployment by Age The majority (54.6 per cent) of the unemployed persons in 2008 were below 25 years. Nearly 43 per cent were in a specific 5-year age 79 group (20-24 years). Unemployment rate was the highest in the 15-19 age group. It decreased as age advanced. After age 30, there were very few persons who were unemployed. Table 44: Unemployment Rate and Percent Unemployed by Age, 2008 Age Unemployment Rate Percent Unemployed 15-19 31.8 11.5 20-24 29.9 43.1 25-29 15.4 25.2 30-34 7.0 10.4 35-39 3.7 5.3 40-44 2.1 2.7 45-49 0.4 0.5 50-54 0.6 0.6 55-59 0.5 0.4 60-64 0.5 0.2 65-69 0.0 0.0 70-74 0.4 0.0 75-79 0.0 0.0 80+ 0.0 0.0 Total 8.6 100.0 Unemployment by Education On the whole, the unemployment rate in 2008 increased with the level of education. The unemployment rate was 21.7 per cent among degree holders. It was only 14.8 per cent among secondary school graduates, and 2.7 per cent among those with just primary level education. 80 Table 45: Unemployment Rate by Educational Levels, 2008 Educational Level Males Females Persons Illiterate 0.2 0.5 0.4 Literate without education 1.3 0.6 1.1 Primary not completed 1.3 3.4 1.9 Primary 1.8 5.9 2.7 Upper primary 4.3 12.5 5.6 Secondary 9.8 31.1 14.8 Degree 12.5 35.6 21.7 Total 5.6 18.1 8.6 Table 46: Employment and Unemployment Rate by districts, 2008 Districts Districts Males Females Total Thiruvananthapuram Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 50.73 5.08 14.40 19.63 31.75 8.98 Kollam Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 55.72 6.86 15.49 22.53 34.81 11.02 Pathanamthitta Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 51.44 7.26 11.04 23.93 29.89 11.10 Alappuzha Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 52.75 7.62 18.00 14.38 34.31 9.61 Kottayam Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 54.20 5.12 9.91 21.71 31.53 8.25 Idukki Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 60.73 4.32 22.23 13.40 42.35 6.77 Ernakulam Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 55.52 3.39 16.17 19.08 35.92 7.41 Thrissur Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 51.56 4.96 11.73 14.97 30.19 7.24 cont'd......... 81 Palakkad Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 54.36 5.20 15.89 8.72 34.38 6.07 Malappuram Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 42.79 7.68 4.49 29.17 22.35 10.59 Kozhikode Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 54.14 4.46 7.04 33.23 29.43 9.36 Wayanad Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 58.06 4.27 20.35 6.07 39.19 4.74 Kannur Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 53.86 4.46 9.53 28.36 30.31 9.50 Kasaragode Employment Rate Unemployment Rate 51.94 8.50 18.52 15.14 34.35 10.48 KERALA Employment Rate 53.15 13.37 32.47 5.58 18.15 8.59 Unemployment Rate The pattern was the same for males and females; the difference was only in the overall level. K.C. Zachariah is Honorary Fellow at the Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram and former Senior Demographer, The World Bank, Washington D.C. Email: zachke@vsnl.com S. Irudaya Rajan is Professor at Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram. Currently he is Chair Professor of the Research Unit on International Migration set up by the Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs. His main areas of research interests are Aging, Migration and Kerala Studies. Email: rajan@cds.ac.in 82 Appendix I: Migration Estimates by Taluk and District, 2008 Sl. Taluks REM EMI ROM OMI No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Chirayinkeezhu 61668 97967 Nedumangad 31714 39145 Thiruvananthapuram 84469 131783 Neyattinkara 37430 39585 Thiruvananthapuram 215280 308481 Karunagapally 12056 17070 Kunnathur 2822 8078 Pathanapuram 13746 20313 Kottarakara 27220 60715 Kollam 68222 101340 Kollam 124066 207516 Thiruvalla 23268 43994 Mallappally 8751 22852 Ranni 3216 9642 Kozhenchery 15505 19888 Adoor 9813 24614 Pathanamthitta 60554 120990 Cherthala 8095 13488 Ambalapuzha 9332 13714 Kuttanad 2109 18239 Karthikapally 19564 46110 Chengannoor 5883 20255 Mavelikara 6042 19913 Alappuzha 51024 131719 3448 14396 22581 11497 51922 9059 11692 506 7688 9423 38368 29072 14542 5186 10131 8921 67851 11110 9519 7010 23019 25890 5361 81909 753 16124 55453 8236 80565 9820 15963 6430 13891 11764 57869 35768 18682 4201 11181 23397 93230 7988 8974 24629 22596 10527 24593 99308 Meenachil Vaikom Kottayam Changanaserry Kanjirapally 6430 14066 24317 14004 7834 7733 15323 20753 8893 6207 6477 4114 13187 1741 928 11844 17368 30313 18225 11602 83 Sl. No. Taluks REM EMI ROM OMI 42 43 44 45 46 Kottayam Devikulam Udumbanchola Thodupuzha Peerumade Idukki Kunnathunad Aluva Paravoor Kochi Kanayannur Moovattupuzha Kothamangalam Ernakulam Thalappilly Chavakad Thrissur Kodungalloor Mukundapuram Thrissur Ottapalam Manarkad Palakkad Chittur Alathur 26448 89351 66651 58908 0 235 260 0 1341 4219 3979 1006 1872 1337 1070 0 0 0 0 0 3213 5792 5308 1006 1308 14543 5505 10346 10310 15623 4365 2130 3244 20319 1153 4687 7431 3974 9762 7346 36396 52156 23794 22358 7854 10888 1884 4611 2317 3475 0 8109 120979 120979 46463 59586 45287 84803 18024 15427 35262 44630 12110 15288 42140 53802 57876 9917 23489 51834 7955 5228 28477 48999 41668 14225 174655 284068 137634 60085 49238 52620 14852 19510 10313 16459 7250 7889 8310 90843 55748 114801 9580 9771 18967 38975 7877 20123 30479 36119 47 48 49 50 Palakkad Ernad Nilambur Perunthalmanna Tirur 85318 189815 127296 217294 59636 67766 7915 4125 19540 23918 1289 3440 38866 73692 2697 1384 61376 96767 3211 3163 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 84 Sl. No. 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Taluks Thirurangadi Ponnani Malappuram Vadakara Quilandy Kozhikode Kozhikode Mananthavady Sultanbethery Vythiri Wayanad Thaliparambu Kannur Thalassery Kannur Kasaragode Hosdurg Kasaragode Kerala REM EMI ROM OMI 17757 42818 0 5846 22561 29611 0 25381 219736 334572 15113 43339 23585 63562 1081 5799 12976 52102 0 5578 35844 83499 16272 34756 72405 199163 17352 46133 0 3154 1417 4048 503 4971 5903 5592 1427 5871 1036 2787 1930 13996 8356 12427 8336 36280 10081 27329 7491 47582 6136 9035 10589 35257 1347 11046 26416 119119 17564 47410 12180 31804 744 21532 15042 36047 3665 15694 27222 67851 4409 37226 1183186 2193412 686198 914387 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 References Zachariah, K.C, ET Mathew and S Irudaya Rajan.1999. "Impact of Migration on Kerala's Economy and Society" Centre for Development Studies (Thiruvananthapuram) Working Paper No.297. www.cds.edu, also published in International Migration. Volume 39, No.1, 63-88. Zachariah, K.C, ET Mathew and S Irudaya Rajan.2000. "Socio-economic and Demographic Consequences of Migration in Kerala" Centre for Development Studies (Thiruvananthapuram) Working Paper No.303. www.cds.edu, also published in International Migration. Volume 39, No.2, 43-72. Zachariah, K.C and S Irudaya Rajan. 2001a. "Gender Dimensions of Migration in Kerala: Macro and Micro Evidences". Asia Pacific Population Journal, Vol. 16, No.3, Pp.47-70. Zachariah, K.C and S Irudaya Rajan. 2001b. "Migration Mosaic in Kerala: Trends and Determinants". Demography India, Volume 30, No.1, Pp. 137-165. Zachariah, KC, PR Gopinathan Nair and S Irudaya Rajan. 2001. "Return Emigrants in Kerala: Rehabilitation Problems and Development Potential". Centre for Development Studies (Thiruvananthapuram) Working Paper No.319. www.cds.edu Zachariah, KC, BA Prakash and S Irudaya Rajan. 2002. "Gulf Migration Study: Employment Wages and Working Conditions of Kerala Emigrants in United Arab Emirates," Centre for Development Studies (Thiruvananthapuram) Working Paper No.326. www.cds.edu Zachariah, K.C, K.P. Kannan and S. Irudaya Rajan (eds.). 2002. Kerala's Gulf Connection: CDS Studies on International Labour Migration from Kerala State in India. Thiruvananthapuram: Centre for Development Studies. Zachariah, K.C, ET Mathew and S Irudaya Rajan.2003. Dynamics of Migration in Kerala. Dimensions, Determinants and Consequences, Hyderabad: Orient Longman Private Limited. Zachariah, K.C, B A Prakash and S Irudaya Rajan. 2003. "The Impact of Immigration Policy on Indian Contract Migrants: The Case of 95 the United Arab Emirates". International Migration, Volume 41. No.4, Pp. 161-172. Zachariah, K C, B A Prakash and S Irudaya Rajan. 2004. "Indian Workers in UAE: Employment, Wages and Working Conditions". Economic and Political Weekly, Volume XXXIX, No. 22, May 29 2004, Pp.2227-2234 Zachariah, KC and S Irudaya Rajan. 2004. "Gulf Revisited: Economic Consequences of Emigration from Kerala. Emigration and Employment" Centre for Development Studies (Thiruvananthapuram) Working Paper No.363. www.cds.edu Zachariah, KC and S Irudaya Rajan. 2005. "Unemployment in Kerala at the Turn of the Century: Insights from CDS Gulf Migration Studies" Centre for Development Studies (Thiruvananthapuram) Working Paper No.374. www.cds.edu Zachariah, KC, PR Gopinathan Nair and S Irudaya Rajan. 2006. Return Emigrants in Kerala: Welfare, Rehabilitation and Development. Manohar Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi. Zachariah, KC and S Irudaya Rajan. 2007a. "Economic and Social Dynamics of Migration in Kerala, 1999-2004: Analysis of Panel Data" Centre for Development Studies (Thiruvananthapuram) Working Paper No.384. www.cds.edu Zachariah K.C. and S. Irudaya Rajan. 2007b "Migration, remittances and Employment: Short-term Trends and Long-term Implications," Centre for Development Working Paper 395, Thiruvananthapuram. www.cds.edu Zachariah K.C. and S. Irudaya Rajan. 2008 "Costs of Basic Services in Kerala: Education, Health, Childbirth and Finance (Loans)" Centre for Development Working Paper 406, Thiruvananthapuram. www.cds.edu Zachariah, K C and S Irudaya Rajan.2009. Migration and Development: The Kerala Experience. Daanish Publishers, New Delhi. Zachariah, K C and S Irudaya Rajan. 2010. Diasporas in Kerala's Development. Daanish Publishers, New Delhi (forthcoming). 96 PUBLICATIONS For information on all publications, please visit the CDS Website: www.cds.edu. The Working Paper Series was initiated in 1971. Working Papers from 279 can be downloaded from the site. The Working Papers published after April 2007 are listed below: W.P. 423 VIJAYAMOHANAN PILLAI N, Loss of Load Probability of a Power System: Kerala. February 2010. W.P. 422 JAYASEKHAR S, C. NALIN KUMAR, Compliance, Competitiveness and Market Access: A Study on Indian Seafood Industry. February 2010. W.P. 421 S. IRUDAYA RAJAN, V.J. VARGHESE, M.S. JAYAKUMAR Overseas Recruitment in India: Structures, Practices and Remedies. December 2009. W.P. 420 V.J. VARGHESE, Land, Labour and Migrations: Understanding Kerala’s Economic Modernity, December 2009. W.P. 419 R.MOHAN, D. SHYJAN Tax Devolution and Grant Distribution to States in India Analysis and Roadmap for Alternatives, December 2009. W.P. 418 WILLIAM JOE & U. S. MISHRA Household Out-of-Pocket Healthcare Expenditure in India Levels, Patterns and Policy Concerns, October 2009. W.P. 417 NEETHI P Globalisation Lived Locally: New Forms of Control, Conflict and Response Among Labour in Kerala, Examined Through a Labour Geography Lens. October 2009. W.P. 416 SUNIL MANI High skilled migration from India, An analysis of its economic implications, September 2009. W.P. 415 SUNIL MANI Has India Become more Innovative Since 1991? Analysis of the Evidence and Some Disquieting Features, September 2009. W.P. 414 WILLIAM JOE, PRIYAJIT SAMAIYAR, U. S. MISHRA Migration and Urban Poverty in India Some Preliminary Observations, September 2009. 97 W.P. 413 K. N. NAIR, T.P. SREEDHARAN, M. ANOOPKUMAR, A Study of National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme in Three Grama Panchayats of Kasaragod District, August 2009 W.P. 412 B.S. SURAN, D. NARAYANA, The Deluge of Debt: Understanding the Financial Needs of Poor Households. July 2009 W.P. 411 K. NAVANEETHAM , M. KABIR , C.S. KRISHNAKUMAR Morbidity Patterns in Kerala: Levels and Determinants. April 2009. W.P. 410 ARINDAM BANERJEE, Peasant Classes, Farm Incomes and Rural Indebtedness: An Analysis of Household Production Data from two States. March 2009. W.P. 409 SUNIL MANI, The Growth of Knowledge-intensive Entrepreneurship in India, 1991-2007 Analysis of its Evidence and the Facilitating Factors. February, 2009 W.P. 408 M. S. HARILAL, Home to Market: Responses, Resurgence and Transformation of Ayurveda from 1830s to 1920. November 2008 W.P. 407 HRUSHIKESH MALLICK, Do Remittances Impact the Economy ? Some Empirical Evidences from a Developing Economy. October 2008. W.P. 406 K.C.ZACHARIAH, S.IRUDAYA RAJAN, Costs of Basic Services in Kerala, 2007, Education, Health, Childbirth and Finance (Loans) September 2008. W.P. 405 SUNIL MANI Financing of industrial innovations in India How effective are tax incentives for R&D? August 2008. W.P. 404 VINOJ ABRAHAM Employment Growth in Rural India: Distress Driven? August 2008. W.P. 403 HRUSHIKESH MALLICK, Government Spending, Trade Openness and Economic Growth in India: A Time Series Analysis. July 2008. W.P. 402 K. PUSHPANGADAN, G. MURUGAN, Dynamics of Rural Water Supply in Coastal Kerala: A Sustainable Development View, June 2008 98 W.P. 401 K. K. SUBRAHMANIAN, SYAM PRASAD, Rising Inequality With High Growth Isn't this Trend Worrisome? Analysis of Kerala Experience, June 2008 W.P. 400 T.R. DILIP, Role O f Private Hospitals in Kerala: An Exploration, June 2008 W.P. 399 V. DHANYA, Liberalisation of Tropical Commodity Market and Adding-up Problem: A Bound Test Approach, March 2008 W.P. 398 P. MOHANAN PILLAI, N. SHANTA, ICT and Employment Promotion Among Poor Women: How can we Make it Happen? Some Reflections on Kerala's Experience. February 2008. W.P. 397 K.N.NAIR, VINEETHA MENON, Distress Debt and Suicides among Agrarian Households: Findings from three Village Studies in Kerala. December 2007 W.P. 396 K.N.NAIR, C.P. VINOD, VINEETHA MENON, Agrarian Distress and Livelihood Strategies: A Study in Pulpalli Panchaya t, Wayanad District, Kerala December 2007 W.P. 395 K.C. ZACHARIAH, S.IRUDAYA RAJAN, Migration, Remittances And Employment Short-term Trends and Longterm Implications. December 2007 W.P. 394 K.N.NAIR, ANTONYTO PAUL, VINEETHA MENON, Livelihood Risks and Coping strategies: A Case Study in the Agrarian Village of Cherumad, Kerala. November 2007 W.P. 393 S. IRUDAYA RAJAN, U.S.MISHRA, Managing Migration in the Philippines: Lessons for India. November 2007. W.P. 392 K.N. NAIR, R. RAMAKUMAR Agrarian Distress and Rural Livelihoods, a Study in Upputhara Panchayat Idukki District, Kerala. November 2007. W.P. 391 PULAPRE BALAKRISHNAN, Visible hand: Public policy and economic growth in the Nehru era. November 2007. W.P. 390 SUNIL MANI, The Growth Performance of India’s Telecommunications Services Industry, 1991-2006 Can it Lead to the Emergence of a Domestic Manufacturing Hub? September 2007. 99 W.P. 389 K. J. JOSEPH, VINOJ ABRAHAM, Information Technology and Productivity: Evidence from India's Manufacturing Sector. September 2007. W.P. 388 HRUSHIKESH MALLICK, Does Energy Consumption Fuel Economic Growth In India? September 2007. W.P. 387 D. SHYJAN,Public Investment and Agricultural Productivity: A State-wise Analysis of Foodgrains in India. July 2007. W.P. 386 J. DEVIKA, 'A People United in Development': Developmentalism in Modern Malayalee Identity. June 2007. W.P. 385 M. PARAMESWARAN, International Trade, R&D Spillovers and Productivity: Evidence from Indian Manufacturing Industry. June 2007. W.P. 384 K. C. ZACHARIAH, S. IRUDAYA RAJAN Economic and Social Dynamics of Migration in Kerala, 1999-2004 Analysis of Panel Data. May 2007. W.P. 383 SAIKAT SINHA ROY Demand and Supply Factors in the Determination or India's Disaggregated Manufactured Exports : A Simultaneous Error-Correction Approach. May 2007. 100 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial - NoDerivs 3.0 Licence. To view a copy of the licence please see: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/