For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/anthology.php#8

Migration as a sociological process of transfer of human resource has acquired wider economic, political, cultural, and social dimensions in the modern times. Such migratory flow calls for a well-designed and implemented policy framework for various reasons: pressure on the demography of the cities, on their natural resource base, impact on native places, disintegration of the family and traditional occupations, health related problems due to pressure on availability of basic amenities like housing, drinking water, sanitation etc, care of children are the chief ones here.
The paper aims to analyse state policies regarding migration and highlight their limitations. It also aims to critically reflect upon the need for addressing the problems faced by the migrants by looking at the relevance of these policies to their lives. The GoI has brought out the Migration Policy of Niti Aayog emphasising upon greater legislative protection to workers,in accordance with the UNDP’s Sustainable Development Goals’Target 10.7. Besides reflecting upon some issues regarding international migration and diaspora, the paper will also present an analysis of preliminary insights gathered from an on-going research work for my Ph.D on the migrant construction workers from Kalyana Karnataka to Bengaluru city.

The focus of this paper is to project the role and impact of legislation on migration/migrants.In the midst of such antagonism against them by local communities and the vulnerability of migrant populations, the economic and political systems of receiving  countries/societies take upon themselves responsibilities towards protecting the cohesive social groups from getting into chaos and disorganization, on the one hand, while on the other, making suitable economic and politico-legal preparations/arrangements to accommodate and protect the immigrant population while at the same time enabling its safe and successful stay in the alien society; and if possible to get assimilated, in course of time. It is in this context the role of the law or legal enactments and policies for immigrants appear on stage. A sociological discussion about the nature, functions and implications based on a brief literary review forms the main objective of this paper.

Conceptual Framework of the Paper

The important sociological interpretations relevant to the present paper regarding migration are discussed below:

Labelling Theory

The Immigration Act of 1924 passed by the US government, placed several restrictions on the immigrant population entering the country. Many immigrants came to be branded as criminals. A section of American society accused them as causing social disorganization by introducing their cultural elements. The immigrants were also blamed for disrupting the country’s economic, cultural, and political systems. According to the Labelling Theory, such cases are true of all societies where migration takes place; the immigrants begin to assimilate into the host society’s culture, being conscious of this attribution. The immigrants began to assimilate into the American society forming social networks and contributing to socio-economic development; they also began to rise in their power – economic and political – besides numerically.

Structural-Functional and Social Conflict Theory

Structural-Functionalists have studied how, the world over, mass migration has caused disruption in normal life, when labour market flourished in the developed countries. This has heightened particularly after the introduction of structural adjustment policy (SAP) and the processes of liberalization, privatization, and globalization (LPG). Frictions and conflicts arising out or such labour markets between immigrants and native workers has been captured by studies based on social conflict theory.

Symbolic Interactionism Theory

Symbolic Interactionism Theory looks at migration from the perspectives of migrants’ motivations, orientations and assumptions which form the base of their actions in the place of destination. Competition, threat and confrontation between migrants and native population, anti-migration sentiments causing trouble in assimilation and other processes of those immigrants who prefer to settle down in the host society are the key concepts studied here.Literary evidence shows that instituting of laws itself stirred up mass fear and tensions among the native population, who resisted assimilation by the aliens (to their culture) in the form of migrants[1]. Thus, here we have a sociological issue in the form ofa dilemma before the government or administration.

i. One is the rising groupism, sentimental reactions, threats and movements against the migrants by the native population, displayed or expressed in various forms like non-co-operation, abuse, economic and social deprivations like denial of work opportunities, being ready to work for lower wages than what the immigrants expect etc

ii. The second is inevitability (caused by the so-called push-factors) for the poor to migrate looking for survival opportunities and the middle and upper social groups too, looking for further socio-economic growth in developed countries

Thus, developing societies send their poor and others to the developed ones thereby contributing to the latter’s development. However, a major dimension of increased immigration is the complex process of acceptance, denial, assimilation, and acculturation (of the immigrants) and associated social conflict and social disorganization situations.

Social Disorganization and Migration

The fear of existing social milieu and established culture of theirs being disrupted because of immigrant population, losing work opportunities, polarization, and social disequilibrium. It is argued by scholars that in today’s world, migrants deserting their native places and moving towards better, developed places in search of opportunities, is a significant sociological issue for research and studies.

Immense types of the above significance of migration do exist, but the important one among them is the vulnerability of the immigrants, the racial, caste and class-based tensions, the poverty of the new immigrants in terms of accessibility to basic amenities, impact on their families back in the native place.  Rising terrorist attacks in various parts of the world has given rise to disorganization in both the sending and receiving societies. Hatred and non-acceptance of ‘others’ in their existing society has given rise to several results like what is known as “islamophobia’ after the terrorist attack in the USA on September 11, 2001, persecution of South Asians, Latinos, Africans, and others based on their anthropological features, cultural practices and mainly rising economic accomplishments. It is also a response by native society towards struggle for economic power and resources, resulting from competition – ultimately leading to social disorganization and social transformation. These are explained by studies based on social conflict theory. 

While the above discussion on theoretical perspectives spells out the relevance of symbolic interactionist and social conflict theories on the issue of migration, as the third perspective, structural functionalism, draws upon the original ideas of classical sociologists like Emile Durkheim, and others. Inherent in all this is the theory of social disorganization, that emphasizes the role played by certain sections of society (like the immigrants in the present context) in the maintenance or otherwise of the social order and its unity or cohesion. Entry of workers from outside and their families hailing from different castes, practices and living habits, language, and other cultural components of them as different social groups can disrupt the receiving society; the rural and tribal background of immigrants is another major contributory factor in this difficulty and consequential disorder in the host society.

This is the context where structural functionalism as a conceptual tool in understanding migration is close to the theory of social disorganization. This (social disorganization) theory argues that the result of immigration is nothing but introducing socio-linguistic and other cultural attributes into the local society, creating social disorder, deviance, and delinquency (Shaw and McKay 1969). Holding all social groups (immigrants and already existing populations) together would increase group solidarity, while lessening the chances of disorganization and (to use the term given by Durkheim) anomie. Such integration of immigrants, or at least their peaceful living would contribute to the society’s holistic development. Both communities – already existing and the immigrant – would be able to put together their social and economic capitals to lead their respective lives amicably and in an organized manner. This, obviously comes from not willful acceptance by both parties but often by exercise of force or compulsion through law or legislation. This is the chief argument of the present paper.

Statement of the Issue (on which the paper is based)

Immigration laws in India are relatively of recent origin, but migration as a social process has existed for many decades. People moving out ofIndia to countries looking for jobs and livelihoods has increased in recent years, while internal migration from state to state and within a state has also reached high levels with construction, industrial and commercial sectors booming with growth and expansion particularly after globalization and other processes. Labor migration is seasonal. It is estimated by the United Nations that around 190 million people migrated in 2005 internationally, accounting to about 3 per cent of the population of the world.

As established by a plethora of studies, economic reasons are primarily responsible for migration, as push factors, but education, and other reasons are also not unimportant. Urban areas, particularly mega-cities are acting as pull factors due to the presence of wage work in their upcoming construction, industrial, business, service and self-employment sectors; factors that push labourers/people from rural and tribal areas are mainly economic in nature, but the role of natural disasters, failure of local sources of income generation like on and off-farm labour, arts and crafts/village industries/handicrafts, practice of untouchability and other forms of oppression of the poor, low castes and women, political instability, large family size – is equally significant in forcing the vulnerable people to move out of their native homes towards cities.

State or Governmental Policies for the Migrant (Diaspora&Internal) Indians

State policies and laws govern movement of people in large numbers from one place to another. In the case of India, it has a large percentage of its skilled, highly educated men and women living in the developed world. Here again, there is a divide as Old Diaspora, New Diaspora and Guld Diaspora (Jayaram 2012). The Old Diaspora are the Indians who were sent during and by the British colonial administration in the mid-19^th century till 1910 in the 20^th century to work in their rubber, tea and sugarcane plantations across several countries and continents.The British and other European colonialists owned those plantations and abolition of slavery in the late 19^th century had deprived them of slaves who were working tin these plantations before the abolition. The migration of skilled and educated Indians after the country’s independence especially in the 1950s and 1960s formed the first layer of New Indian Diaspora in the West (USA, UK, Germany, France, and Australia, in the main). Similarly, those Indian workers from Kerala, parts of other states who emigrated to the Gulf countries after oil was discovered there and worked in the construction industry but receiving handsome wages. They are titled as the Gulf Diaspora. It was from them that India began to receive huge amounts of remittances to the families of these emigrated men. Gradually as higher education in technical, management, law and medical sectors grew, increasingly even women joined in forming the diaspora in the developed countries working as doctors, professors, and the emergence of IT and BT found or resulted in a further increase in their numbers in the foreign counties.

The government of India (GoI) has brought out several legislative enactments and made provisions for the protection and advancement of its diaspora in many outside countries. PravasiBharatiya Divas is celebrated annually in January to which the diaspora is invited to participate and place their products in the exhibition. Selected children of diaspora are invited to travel to India for sight-seeing trip to become aware of their parents’ native country’s cultural splendour. The government of India has signed several bilateral agreements relating to trade, business with the countries where it has its diaspora; thereby also ensuring their safety and well-being. There was a demand by the Indian diaspora to obtain dual citizenship – both in India and the country where they are staying, but that could not be assured for political reasons, as it involved voting rights too.

Back in the countries where they are staying as Indian diaspora, be it the USA, UK, Germany Canada, France or Australia (in the main), Indians are contributing very highly and qualitatively and quantitatively to those countries’ economic development. In fact, it is even argued that if the Indian diaspora withdraw their participation from their work in those countries – like in the UK, USA or the Gulf countries – there is going to be a huge loss and void in the economic development of those countries. Thus, the Indian diaspora is a force to reckon with economically, socially and now politically too with the PM in UK and Vice President in the USA being from Indian origin.

Guaranteeing citizenship in India is guarded by its Constitution, contained in Articles 5 to 11 in Part II. These refer to migration to India from other countries and Articles 6, 7 & 8 deal with their rights of citizenship. These were especially required after the partition of the country, The Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 guaranteed safety and security of local tribals by taking action against any illegal immigrants from outside trying to reside in Assam.

But legislative provisions are inadequate in the case on internal migrants. The second issue this paper upholds is regarding the dearth of adequate data on the demographic, economic and social characteristics of internal migrants, such as their actual number gender and age wise, sectors of work and regional distribution vis-à-vis place of origin/native place.

The paper has based itself on a critical review of some studies, government reports and published research papers to present certain key issues regarding the role of state policy in migration. In addition,a few insights from an on-going study about the immigrant construction labourers hailing from the backward Kalyana Karnataka region to Bengaluru city are discussed.

Critical Analysis

When we speak of state policies on migration, we refer to two types of migrants:

i. Internal, and

ii. International

Interlinkages between Internal and International Migration

Discussing about the situation of both segments on the same platform is not feasible,because the two vary in their concepts, methods, and data (Kundu 2003). Sociological literature on migration is dense with studies on internal migration caused by modernization, industrialization, and urbanization processes (Rao 19; Srinivas 1966). Demographers have also studied internal migration emphasising upon population distribution (UNDP2009). Internal migration is generally discussed as rural-urban migration; some scholars have even criticised it as a threat to development and hence needs to be controlled (Dang 2003). Worse, the amount of attention in policy and law to internal migration is low as compared to that given to international migration (Hugo 2016). Thus, it is questioned by scholars whether this bias towards internal migrants is caused by their non-association with citizenship and nationalism because they are from within the country, hence failed to draw the attention of policy makers (Skeldon 2006). The British funding organization DFID also commented that the invisibility of internal migrants is a disadvantage despite their “immense potential … to contribute to development (DFID 2003).

Convergence of both forms: International and Internal Migration

It is interesting to note that internal and international migration somehow converge as far as their impact on overall development is concerned, as the two are “different spatial responses to similar forces” (Skeldon 2006, quoted in Kundu 2003), differing only in opportunities and location of work. Lack of attractive incentives locally for economic gains or survival, mobility and advancement contrasted with availability of such opportunities at the place of destination is identified to be the chief driving factor for both forms of migration as acknowledged by Srivastava& Pandey, 2017.

Then why are the two forms of migration treated as different? The studies by DeWind and Holdaway (2008) seem to provide some justification. Despite being motivated by similar forces (of better employment with lucrative income generation), staying within or going out of the country of origin has led to differential treatment guarded by national security and governance perspectives. This has conditioned their treatment under uniform law or policies. Mention is made in the policies that migrants need to be protected from exploitation and abuse to encourage effective economic growth, but internal migration has lost to compete with its counterpart – international migration – in making an equal dent on state policy on migration. It is also ridiculed in the studies that even poverty reduction strategies for sustainable development have ignored this need for protecting internal migrants.

Internal migration from state to state or district to district, rural to urban – in any form – is not without its great significance to economic development. Plus, it encompasses many sectors of growth – urban industrial development, housing, public institutional infrastructure and so on. In the words of Deshingkar (2005), it is representative of many concerns, crossing several departmental boundaries demanding their holistic cooperation and coordination for its own secure survival. “Joined-up policy making or whole-of governmental approach” is the term that Castles (2004) has coined to describe this importance. Internal migration has been successfully helping many livelihoods to increase their income and reduce poverty. Even here, remittances back to native homes in villages are a significant contribution addressing native household poverty and economic insecurity as demonstrated by several studies (Deshinkar 2005; Srivastava & Pandey 2017). Its (remittances’) role in filling the need for expenditure on food, health and education is highlighted by Chellaraj and Mohapatra in their study (2014). In fact, it is argued that remittances by internal migrants are double the amount of what is remitted by the diaspora or migrants outside the country (NSSO 2010). Such remittances enabled the native families to free themselves from indebtedness, provide better education and health facilities to the family and meet expenditure on marriage, festivals, and religious ceremonies (ibid). social networking among the internal migrants is widespread and strong thereby helping both the migrants and their families left behind in villages. Another argument is by Skeldon (2006) that internal migration at times becomes the platform or ‘launching point’ for international migration, like to the Gulf, pre-empting higher economic gains as well as exposure leading to socio-economic mobility of internal migrants and family members (Hugo 2003; ibid).

Although construction labourers are a major segment in both internal and international migrations, state policy poses challenges to internal rural and urban migrant labourers than their counterparts going abroad for construction wage work to Dubai and other Gulf nations. Both groups encounter problems relating to wages, exploitation in terms of hours of work, absence of safety, unhygienic and poor living conditions and so on. There is discrepancy in data available about them – insufficient data about internal labourers. Moreover, governments are pressurised to take on the overseas Indians’ responsibility than internal migrants. Rural-urban construction migrant workers are held to be a common phenomenon and neglected in national statistics (Kumar and Fernandez 2015). This is a gap which must be filled up by state policy on migrant workers in India. Hugo has urged that it must consider both forms of migrant labourers on a similar platform, because nation’s sustained development is resting upon internal labour flows and in the process also facilitating international labour flows (Koser 2007).

International Migration

India stands first in the diaspora population of the world as well as the recipient of largest sum as remittances coming after China. Put together, its migrant population – both internal and international – crosses 481 million (453 million internal and 28 million international migrants according to Census 2011). The large numbers of international migrants from India have led to formulation of several emigration policies, as compared to ones concerning internal migrants. It is also blamed that these workers’ welfare is not clearly integrated into national and state level development policies and schemes. An alarming 37.5 per cent of the country’s population are migrants (mainly males), with a rise of about 44 per cent from the beginning of this century (Census 2011). Female migration has found a steep increase in the last two decades (NSSO 64^th Round; Mahapatro 2012; Parida and Madheswaran 2010). Rising strides were witnessed even for international migration, where it rose to 7.9 million in 2000 from 7 million in 1991 and to 16.8 million in 2017. Likewise, between 2008 and 2017, international migration also rose from 4.60 per cent to 6.39 per cent – both types leading to high amounts of remittances. Not only the market of remittances touched $10billion in 2008 itself, but much (80%) of the remittances were towards rural homes, mainly used for consumption purposes by them, because especially in UP, Bihar, Rajasthan they are the main source of survival. States of Kerala, Punjab and Goa top the list of states receiving international remittances, India being at the top among all nations which had sent their people for work abroad (World Bank 2015). RBI has classified remittances into three categories, viz., family maintenance, deposits, gifts and donations to religious and charitable institutions and the contribution was 50 %, 43% and 6% respectively (RBI 2010).

Internal Migration

Important Potential States of Internal Migration

In 2015, according to Handbook of Migration GoI, 87 % were migrants within a state (highest being in Union territories) while the remaining migrated from state to state (% share being high in Goa, Arunachal Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, Uttarakhand, and Maharashtra). Workers from poor states moved here considering their prosperity in agriculture and allied sectors, industrial and expanding metropolises.

Upper and lower classes – both emigrate

While we have seen above the details of from which state internal migrants hail from,data also suggests that people from all castes and economic groups undertake to leave native homes in villages, to look for employment opportunities in towns and cities. Here lies the important point of difference in their goals or why they migrate. Those from higher socio-economic background generally emigrate to cities for improving their existing conditions. Several studies have found that the poor among SCs, STs and other lower castes are pushed out of villages for lack of wage work locally either completely or seasonally, and to seek shelter in cities as a survival strategy (Mosse, Gupta and Shah 2005 and NSSO). These are the groups which are pushed to suffer discrimination, lack of resources to survive, untouchability and other forms of oppression and marginalization. Adults migrate more than aged and females migrate to undertake gender specific work such as housemaids, service sector in health, etc. (Pandey 2015).

Need for Migration Policy

Irrespective of the type of migration – internal or international – the growing volume and class character of migration necessitates the need for a comprehensive migration policy in India. Migration is increasing each day in its number and complexity in terms of migrants’ profile, and their regional and occupational diversities. This need was recognised when the government passed legislation in this regard (such as The Emigration Act, 1983, replacing the Immigration Act 1922 passed by the British). However, changes in the volume and direction of internal migration in the country has placed new demands for revision of existing laws and make amendments. The migrants are marginalized in many non-work-related contexts, such as access to basic amenities like housing, drinking water, sanitation, education, and health of their family members. Migrant women, alone or even when they have accompanied by their husband, face sexual and other forms of violence, trafficking, wage discrimination, and deprivations of many sorts (UNESCO 2011). The 1983 Act is tor international immigrants applicable to less than 20 countries and migrants with low educational qualifications. Restrictions were also placed for girls migrating below the age 25, but forced by abject poverty at home it induced women below25-30 years to resort to illegal means to leave India to find work outside (Singh and Rajan 2016; Thimothy and Sasikumar 2012). The increased density of immigrant international laborers has led to competition for overseas jobs between states. Some states like Kerala and Telangana have ensured the protection of those from their state who have migrated in search of employment to the Gulf and other countries. Non-Resident Telugu Society and Kerala Non-Residents welfare association are some examples here to make migration a systematic, legal, and smooth process.

Gaps in Data

Data gaps is a major constraint here to provide the needed services by the states. Besides, the number of returnees from the Gulf and other places is also steadily increasing from 2011 onwards (from 1.16 million in 2008 to 1.25 million by 2014).

Important Legislations? Governmental Provisions

The Government of India (GoI) has come up with several initiatives to safeguard the interests of overseas Indians/diaspora. Connecting aspirant migrants through electronic mode with the Ministry of External Affairs for passports, Insurance agencies, etc is one such. PravasiBharatiyaBima Yojana is the other attempt to cover work-related expenses on travel due to death or permanent disability; The Mahatma Gandhi Pravasi Suraksha Yojana assures pension and life insurance due to death, adding with assistance for return and resettlement.

The Interstate Migrant Workmen Act 1979is the only Act that attempts to cover welfare of workers moving from state to state. Its chief concerns are regulation, recruitment, working conditions, housing, and other amenities of immigrant workers. However, Srivastava and Pandey in their study found much ignorance and lack of clarity among workers about this law (2017). A leaning and bias towards the workers from the organized sector, absence of state level implementing agency, regular registration of workers, etc., have rendered the Act almost useless and ineffective in monitoring unregistered and harmful elements like contractors and agencies. The other limitations of this law were lack of assistance in accessing social protection schemes, special needs of women, children, disabled and other infirm family members and benefits of living in the city. High growth and expansion of labour supply contracting systems and the heterogeneity in work, workers and locations are supposed to be the cause of ineffective legislation. Rural development programmes like watershed development, employment generation, common property resources management and agricultural development have not been capable of reducing migratory flow towards cities.

The first 5 five-year plans have not passed any legislation to this effect. But at least, there was decentralization of urban expansion with the establishment of the National Commission on Urbanization in 1988 and Integrated Development of Small and Medium Towns together led to growth of suburban and non-metropolitan areas also. It led the aspiring migrants from rural areas towards upcoming towns and smaller cities lessening the pressure on mega cities by migrants. Successive plans made provision for further industrial investments in small and medium towns, increased work opportunities at place of origin with wage enhancement plans[2].

Even the popular flagship programme of the government, MGNREGA In the 10^th plan), or the Prime Minister’s Awas Yojana have also failed in arresting distress migration of rural labourers. A marginal decline was found by studies in the pace of rural urban migration due to MGNREGA (Mahapatro 2012).

A major complaint against the aboveActs is that they have not subscribed to a holistic and Rights-based approach. It was the 11^th Plan that addressed this lacuna by placing its policies on the rights of workers. For example, the village Grain Bank Scheme attempted to safeguard the poor against starvation during unemployment periods. Rural non-farm sector, Khadi and Village Industries received a boost in the 12^th plan, just as residential schools for girls (Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalayas) empowering girls’ education.

The NITI Aayog, replacing the Five-Year Plans in 2015 prepared a 15-year Vision and other documents, such as the Vision, Strategy and Action Agenda (2017).  Setting up of Overseas Employment Promotion Agency by the MEA was a big step in addressing certain priorities of international migrants. Bilateral agreements, memorandums were drawn with many countries; Skill Centres were set up across India and diasporas were encouraged to participate in them with the help of good communication systems. Make in India programme called for Indians abroad to develop, design, and build products in India by employing locally available resources – human, material and technical.

Preliminary Insights from an on-going study

A sociological study of the Migrants from Hyderabad Karnataka region to Bengaluru City has been undertaken[3] to look into the nature, causes and impact of migration with social reference to construction labour. As the study is under way, a few preliminary observations are presented as under:

A large majority of construction labourers have migrated from the most backward districts (of Yadgir and Raichur) and taluks (Yadgir, Surpur, Raichur, Devadurga and Sindagi) of Kalyana Karnataka region[4]. More than 85 per cent have arrived in Bengaluru city directly, and to work in the construction sector. Migrant workers from SC, lower OB communities are higher in number. Adolescent and adults of less than 45 years are more in number. Masons and their assistants have formed the majority of the migrants covered in the study based on a sample of 257 construction workers drawn from 4-5 zones in the limitation of Bruhat Bengaluru MahanagaraPalike (BBMP).

The chief driving force for about 65 per cent (an estimate) to emigrate from native villages was mentioned to be lack of availability of wage work locally due to failure of agriculture to provide continuous wage employment. Incessant weather (either excessive or lack of rain), crop failures, landlessness, large family to support, are the main push factors. However, ambition to rise in economic status by earning a little more than what is possible in the native place was expressed by many of the respondents, supporting the existing literature thatargues that even better off families take to migration to further improve economic level, education of children and good quality of living in the cities.

For more than half of migrants, networks with already migrated fellow caste people, neighbours or villagers have enabled their own emigration to Bengaluru. Prior knowledge of availability of wage work is true of many of them, no one has migrated first, and then looked for work. But work is not always in the same zone; they keep moving from zone to zone, depending upon where they obtain construction work.

The nature of work is tough and exposes them to risks, accidents, indebtedness due to irregular payment and/or the need to send remittances to parents back in the village, expenditure incurred for sister’s marriage, or celebration of festivals or medical treatment for family members. Most of them have stated that their earnings in Bengaluru are spent to pay off loans taken by parents or self back in the native place.

Impact of health and well being is quite marked but the workers do not make mention of those ailments. They believe that such sicknesses are part of their profession. Almost all of them have addiction to alcohol saying that it heals their tiredness, muscular pain and prepares them for next day’s work.

As the paper is about legal issues in themigration sector, we present here some preliminary outcome of study, based on focused discussions held with respondents in different zones of the study area. Knowledge about legal rights is very poor among them. Those who were educated and aware, expressed helplessness that they cannot demand benefits as per law. They feared being thrown out of work by demanding fair treatment in higher payments, medical allowances, residential provisions are their main problems. Although some of them are aware of Minimum Wages Act, workmen’s compensation Act etc., they have stated that they do not demand all that with their employer with the fear of losing employment. A few others stated that the contractors building super structures/multi-storeyed apartment complexes cannot provide more than what is given at present. These are the workers who remain on the spot day-in and day-out, with families left behind in the native place. They recommended that the government has to provide special safety-nets to their dependent families in villages in the form of wage work, better education to children, more benefits in the SHGs where their wives and mothers are members, basic amenities like loan for housing, income generating activities etc by the local Grama Panchayat.

The paper concludes that migratory inflows for the present-day mega cities and even towns for their residential, industrial, and commercial growth is an essential part of present-day development process. We must acknowledge that a large segment of labour force is vital for industrial and commercial development of a country.

The force of speedy urbanisation and industrialisation processes brushed aside the conservative stand taken by a few country governments such as in Germany, to encourage only homogenous descent and culture. Thinking about migration by governments is the presumption that market forces determine migratory trends. But they have ignored the role played by border control rules. These apply to those skilled workers who try to leave the country or emigrate to other places where they find better chances to live better. Change of regimes in the 1990s led to smoother emigration and immigration policies in the western countries.Globalization significantly removed this with a shift from “citizenship to descent” to “citizenship by birth on the territory” with a strong immigration policy (Siissmuth 2001).A migrant-friendly immigration policy in many countries, right from the 1970s onwards, has always led to better assimilation and integration of outsiders despite residential and labour market segregations and formation of separate ghettos and workers’ colonies. Multiculturalism became an essential trait of ethnically diverse societies, be it Australia, Germany, or the USA.

Migration policy should not base itself upon narrow and short-term plans and policies. Their success or otherwise is dependent upon the various stages of migratory process such as arrival in the place of settlement, work and community formation and finally acculturation. Policy on migration faces failure when it is not holistic and obviously failing in achieving its stated objectives.

Irrespective of control by state policies on excess migration, its flow and incidence are not affected when economic compulsions or push factors are dominant in their operation. Survival intensions and compulsions make the migrants to continue with their plans and strategies to seek livelihoods in different places, but depending upon availability of work opportunities. Migrants are also careful in choosing those options/places to move to where their survival is best met and pushing aside less resourceful places of work. Policies of the state cannot be effective if they disregard this reality about the needs and expectations of migrants and ‘fail in influencing migration (Castles 2004). Short-sighted and narrow policies fail in their objective in reaching or controlling migrants’ flow. Sociological perspectives have voted for keeping integration as the goal along with regulating migration by State policy on migration. A successful Migration Policy depends much upon an effective Integration Policy However, paucity of data in the context of internal migration, except from national statistics by NSSO and Census has called for systematic and scientific sociological research in this area.

1. Bhagat, R B (2014). Urban migration trends, challenges, and opportunities in India (Background Paper). In World Migration Report, 2015. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Migration,http://www.unesco.org

2. Bhagwati, Jagadish (2003). Borders Beyond Control. Foreign Affairs, Vol. 82. No. 1, Jan-Feb.

3. Castles, S (2004). Why migration policies fail? Ethnic and Racial Studies, 27(2), 205–227.

4. Castles, S. (2004) ‘The factors that make and unmake migration policies’, International Migration Review, 38(3): 852–884.

5. Census of India 2011, Government of India Publication

6. Chellaraj, G., & Mohapatra, S. (2014, April 30–May 1). Internal and international remittances in India: Implications for household expenditure and poverty. Paper presented at the KNOMAD International Conference on Internal Migration and Urbanization, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

7. Dang, Nguyen Anh, Cecilia Tacoli, et al (2003). Migration in Vietnam: a review of information on current trends and patterns, and their policy implications, Regional Conference on Migration, Development and Pro-Poor Policy Choices in Asia, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

8. DeWind, J., & Holdway, J. (2008). Migration and development within and across borders: Research and policy perspectives on internal and international migration. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Migration.

9. Department for International Development (DFID). 2003. Highlights from the conference, migration, development, and pro-poor policy choices. London: DFID.

10. Deshingkar, P., & Grimm, S. (2005). Internal migration and development: A global perspective (International Migration Research Series). Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Migration. Retrieved from https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk

11. Hugo, G. (2003). Circular migration: Keeping development rolling? Migration information source (The online Journal for the Migration Policy Institute). Retrieved from https://www.migrationpolicy.org

12. Hugo, G. (2016). Internal and international migration in East and South East Asia: Exploring the linkages. Population, Space and Place, 22(7), 651–668.

13. Jayaram, N (2012). Diversities in the Indian Diaspora: Nature, Implications, Responses, Oxford Indian Paperbacks, September 24^th.

14. Koser, K. (2007). International migration: A very short introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

15. Kumar, S. K., & Rajan, S. I. (2014). Emigration in 21st Century India: Governance, legislation, and institutions. New Delhi: Routledge.

16. Kumar, S., & Fernández, M. (2015). Urbanisation-construction-migration nexus in 5 cities in South Asia. London: LSE Enterprise. Retrieved from http://eprints.lse.ac.uk

17. Kundu, A. (2003). Urbanisation and urban governance: Search for a perspective beyond neo-liberalism. Economic & Political Weekly, 38(29), 3079–3087.

18. Kundu, A., & Saraswati, L. R. (2012). Migration and exclusionary urbanisation in India. Economic & Political Weekly, 47(26–27), 219–227.

19. Kundu, A., & Saraswati, L. R. (2012). Migration and exclusionary urbanisation in India. Economic & Political Weekly, 47(26–27), 219–227.

20. Mosse, D., Gupta, S., & Shah, V (2005). On the margins in the city: Adivasi seasonal labour migration in western India. Economic & Political Weekly, 40(28), 3025–3038.

21. Mahapatro, S. R. (2012, June). The changing pattern of internal migration in India: Issues and challenges. Paper presented at European Population Conference, Stockholm University, Sweden. Retrieved from http:// epc2012.princeton.edu/papers/121017

22. National Sample Survey Organization, 64^th Round (2010). Migration in India (2007–08)New Delhi: Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation, Government of India

23. Pandey, A. K. (2015). Anatomy of rural-urban migration in India: Socio-economic selectivity in the process of male migration based on national sample surveys. Man & Development, 37(1), 73–92.

24. Parida, J. K., & Madheswaran, S. (2010). Spatial heterogeneity and population mobility in India (Working Paper 234). Bangalore, India: The Institute for Social and Economic Change.

25. Rao, M S A (ed.) (1974). Urban Sociology in India: Reader and Source Book, New Delhi: Orient Longman

26. Reserve Bank of India. (2010). Invisibles in India’s balance of payments: An analysis of trade in services, remittances, and income. RBI Monthly Bulletin.

27. Shanthi, K. (1991). Issues relating to economic migration of females. The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 34(4), 335–346.

28. ———. (2005, July). Gender dimensions in rural-urban migration in India: Policy imperatives. Paper presented at XXV International Population Conference, International Union for the Scientific Study of Population, France. Retrieved from http://iussp2005.princeton. edu/papers/51757

29. Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1969). Juvenile delinquency in urban areas: A study of rates of delinquency in relation to differential characteristics of local communities in American cities. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.

30. Singh, D. A., & Rajan, S. I. (2016). Politics of migration: Indian emigration in a globalized world. New Delhi: Routledge.

31. Skeldon, R. (2006). Interlinkages between internal and international migration and development in the Asian region. Population, Space and Place, 12(1), 15–30.

32. Srinivas, M N (1956). The Industrialization and Urbanization of Rural Areas. Symposium on Rural Urban Relations, Sociological Bulletin, Vol. 5, Issue 2

33. Srivastava, R., & Pandey, A. K. (2017). Internal and international migration in South Asia: Drivers, interlinkage, and policy issues (Discussion Paper). New Delhi, India: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

34. Timothy, R., & Sasikumar, S K (2012). Migration of women workers from South Asia to Gulf. Noida, India: V. V. Giri National Labour Institute and Delhi; UN Women.

35. Todaro, Michael P (1969). A Model of Labor Migration and Urban Unemployment in Less Developed Countries, The American Economic Review, Vol.59, No.1, pp 138-148, publication by American Economic Association.

36. United Nations Development Programme (2009). Population distribution and migration. New York: Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 

37. UNESCO (2011). Internal migration in India: An overview of its features, trends and policy challenges. In Workshop Compendium, Vol. II: Workshop Papers, National Workshop on Internal Migration and Human Development in India. New Delhi, India: UNESCO/ UNICEF.

38. World Bank. (2015). Migration and development (Brief No. 24). Washington, DC: The World Bank. Retrieved from http://pubdocs.worldbank.org

1. The Persona Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 in USA is an example here
2. Employment Assurance Scheme, Rural Electrification Scheme of 8th and 9th plans are examples here
3. For my Ph.D work, under the supervision of Dr Jayapal H R, Associate Professor of Sociology, Department of Studies and Research in Sociology, KSOU, Mysuru
4. or HK region as it was referred to earlier