1

Impact of Migration on Older Age ParentsA Case Study of Two Communes in Battambang Province, Cambodia

Paper presented at Mekong Workshop, Salt Lake CityApril 29-30, 2011By Hak Sochanny

on behalf of Analyzing Development Issues Project and Institute of Public and International Affairs

CCC-ADI and the University of Utah-IPIA thank the Doha International Institute of Family and Developing Studies for their support in this collaborative research

2

Introduction • Labor migration has become persistent and an accelerating

reality in many developing countries.

• How this impacts on family members including intergenerational solidarity remains, however, a matter of considerable debate.

• Cambodia, the setting of the present study, provides a particularly interesting case for this purpose.

3

The overarching questions addressed in the study

• How does migration of adult children affect the well being of rural older-age parents who remain behind?

• How does this migration impact intergenerational solidarity?

4

Research methods• Survey questionnaires with 265 people aged 60 to 70 who have at

least one living child.• Two communes (Treng and Talos) in two districts (Ratanak Mondul

and Mong Reussey) of Battambang province.

5

The percent of elderly households having a migrant child is high.

But the percent having a child at home or in the village is even higher.

Average number of living children 4.8

Migration but not desertion characterizes the older-age households

Have current migrant child

Have ever migrant child

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

64%

68%

Have co-resident child

Have child living in same village

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

80%

91%

Only a minority of adult children ever migrated

Male Female 15-29 30+ Not married

Married No children Has children

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

34%33%

34%33% 32% 33% 33% 33%

% th

at e

ver m

igra

ted

6

Sex Age Current marital status Any children

7

Having migrant children does not leave the old and the young alone at home

Alone With spouse only With a grandchild but no child

With a child

2%8% 11%

76%

5% 3% 4%

86%

No current migrant child Has current migrant child

8

Except for having land, the situation of elderly people with or without migrant children is comparable

Migration StatusHas current

migrant child (n=170)

Has no current migrant child

(n=95)

Total (n=265)

Wealth score1 (mean) 4.8 4.6 4.8

Percentage of those who do not have land

36% 22% 31%

Physical ability score2 (mean) 4.5 4.6 4.5

Family satisfaction score3 (mean) 7.3 7.5 7.4

Psychological well-being score4 (mean)

11.1 11.4 11.2

There are no statistically significant differences in this table. 1. Measured as a summed score of thirteen household items plus two housing characteristics.2. Physical ability score is based on respondent’s perception on three measures. Highest physical ability score is 6 and lowest is 0. 3. Family satisfaction score is based on respondent’s perception of how family gets along and depends on each other and how children are doing with their lives. Highest family satisfaction score is 3 and lowest is 9. 4. Psychological well-being score is based on respondent’s perception on six measures. Highest psychological well-being score is 18 and lowest is 6.

9

Respondents with all children outside the village are small in number but many are landless and poor

Location of nearest child

In household In village Outside village

Number of cases 212 30 23

Wealth score1 (mean) 5.14 3.30 3.26***

Percentage of those who do not have land 25% 40% 74%

Physical ability score2 (mean) 4.52 4.73 4.61

Family satisfaction score3 (mean) 7.55 6.61 7.05***

Psychological well-being score4 (mean) 11.41 10.10 10.77**

Significance levels: *=.05 level; **=.01 level; ***=.001 level based on chi-square test and ANOVA test1. Measured as a summed score of thirteen household items plus two housing characteristics.2. Physical ability score is based on respondent’s perception on three measures. Highest physical ability score is 6 and lowest is 0.3. Family satisfaction score is based on respondent’s perception of how family gets along and depends on each other and how children are doing with their lives. Highest family satisfaction score is 9 and lowest is 3. 4. Psychological well-being score is based on respondent’s perception on six measures. Highest psychological well-being score is 18 and lowest is 6.

10

Children’s contribution to parents by child’s current location of residence

In household (n=374)

In village (n=345)

In district (n=125)

In province (n=95)

Outside of province (n=139)

Phnom Penh (n=60)

Outside of country (n=94)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

7%

22%

27% 29%32%

43%

71%

22%

16%7%

4%

17% 14%

Contribute money over 100,000 riels (n=858)

Helping with business or farm work regularly in past year (n=1,232)

Location of child

NA

11

Percent of children sending money to parents in past year by location of child

In village (n=345)

In district (n=125)

In province (n=95)

Outside of province (n=139)

Phnom Penh (n=60)

Outside of country (n=94)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

55%

70%59% 60% 60% 62%

7%

22%27% 29% 32%

43%

1%

5% 6%5%

17%17%

over 20,000 riels over 100,000 riels Over 500,000 riels

Location of child not living in the same household

12

Direction of contributions between migrant children and parents

Contribute more to parents

Parents contribute more

Contribute equally Did not contribute to each other

34% 36%

8%

22%

50%

30%

7%

14%

Male (n=174) Female (n=169)

13

Physical and psychological health of respondent and spouse by migration status of child

Migration status of child

Has no current or returned migrant child

Has current migrant child

Has returned migrant child

Number of cases 86 170 41

Percent distribution of current health status(a)

Good 8.1 3.0 2.4

Stayed the same 38.4 28.0 26.8

Got worse 53.5 69.0 70.7

Percent distribution of health status in past year(a)

Improved 11.6 6.5 7.3

Stayed the same 15.1 30.0 26.8

Got worse 73.3 63.5 65.9

Percent with functional limitation 74.4 74.6 73.2

Percent with a household limitation 43.0 52.1 53.7

Percent with an activity of daily living limitation 5.9 10.1 17.1

Mean family satisfaction score 7.5 7.3 7.5

Mean psychological well-being score 11.4 11.1 11.4

Statistically significant tests have not been made for this table(a) By lowest score of either respondent or spouse.

14

Children living outside the village maintain social contact with their parents at least once a month

Child and parent visited each other

Child talked with parent on the phone

Child and parent talked and/or visited each other

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

71%

0%

71%

17%

60% 62%

1%

51% 51%

Outside village within the district (n=128) Outside district within Cambodia (n= 295)Outside Cambodia (n=96)

NA

15

Conclusion

16

Social Impacts• High migration rates have not left older age

parents alone.• Not all able-bodied children have migrated.• Majority of migrant children living outside the

districts of their parents talked and/or had visits with their parents at least once a month.

17

Intergenerational solidarity

• Migration of adult children from the study communes does not leave elderly parents to work on their farms with no one to help.

• Children make different and complementary types of contributions to their parents depending on their location of residence.

18

Materials support and monetary exchanges

• Parents often provided material support to migrant children especially in financing costs incurred during the early stages of the migration process.

• During the entire time that the migrant children were away, a higher proportion contributed more to their parent’s material support (food, money, assets) than their parents contributed to theirs.

• The proportion of female migrants who contributed to this net positive flow was significantly higher than that of the male migrants.

19

Health and psychological well-being

• The situation of elderly parents with or without migrant children was comparable.

• Among respondents with or without a current or returned migrant child, percentages with functional limitations were virtually identical.

• Of note, a higher percentage of the elders with a returned migrant child suffered an activity of daily living limitation. This may indicate that some of the returned migrant children came home to care for their parents.

20

Future research, national development and policy

• Contrary to the view that the migration of adult children in Cambodia has negative social consequences on elderly parents, our research indicates generally positive impacts on the well-being of older age parents.

• The high average number of living children among the respondents allows them to benefit from complementary contributions from co-resident children, those living nearby and migrant children.

• At the same time, mobile phones enable parents and migrant children to maintain social contact with each other.

21

• Despite the general positive results of our survey, many challenges face older people in Cambodia. – First, there is a small percent with all children living outside the village

who are landless and poor. Programs should target these elderly. – Second, the intergenerational solidarity takes place within an overall

context of poverty. This means that remittances, though they are frequent, tend to be small.

– Third, the future will see declining family sizes, which could bring about changes to intergenerational exchanges.

Future research, national development and policy