rural urban migrant poverty (rump) role of infrastructure in poverty eradication
DESCRIPTION
Poverty knows no boundaries! It is transientTRANSCRIPT
Rural-urban Migrant Poverty (RUMP)
Opportunities for using Infrastructure Development
as a poverty alleviation strategy
Mthokozisi Sidambe
November 2010
PURPOSE OF THE PRESENTATION
• To examine dynamics of rural-urban migrant poverty (RUMP).
• Identify implications of RUMP and gaps in development policy and practice.
• Identify further focus areas - for research, debate and policy consideration.
• Challenge development practitioners to reconsider/formulate poverty alleviation strategies that address RUMP.
INTRODUCTION
• Its been observed that, in extreme conditions, the poor “vote with their feet” – they migrate from rural to urban areas and vice-versa.
• The link between poverty and rural-urban migration (RUM) is not always clearly articulated or embedded into development strategies.
• Rural-urban dichotomy disguises the realities of rural-urban migrant poverty = development strategies continue to treat the rural & urban as distinct spaces & ignore the continuum of poverty.
• SA’s internal rural-urban migration (RUM) takes place within a context of intensifying rural development efforts, shrinking urban-based employment opportunities and poor (urban) service delivery.
INTRODUCTION (Cont…)
• The effect of rural-urban migration on total urban poverty needs thorough examination. Poverty, measured in terms of current income, may not capture current living conditions and the long term poverty of rural migrant households.
• Issues of rural-urban migration have not been properly treated by/through current development strategies, e.g. urban housing challenges are hardly linked to rural development. On the other hand, lack of a holistic rural development approach continues = rural development biased towards agriculture.
• Knowledge of rural-urban interface and the extent to which migrant workers currently live under poverty is vital for development and poverty alleviation targeting.
Source: CSIR 2007; www.csir.co.za
URBAN AND RURAL LINKAGES AND INTERDEPENDENCIES
Urban & Rural Linkages & InterdependenciesUrban Rural
Agric. TradeTransport centre
Agric. Production
Agric. Support Services• Production inputs• Repair services
• Information on production• Methods (innovation)
Agriculture Intensification• Rural infrastructure
• Production incentives• Education and capacity to
• adopt• And adapt innovation
Non-Agric. Consumer Markets• Processed agric. Products
• Private services• Public services (health, educ & admin)
Rural income and demandFor non-agriculture goods
And services
Agro-based industry
Non- agro-based Employment
Cash crop production And agricultural
diversification
All of the Above
POSITIVE RURAL-URBAN INTERFACE
Rural Side
• Access to farming assets (including land)
• Market for rural produced goods and services
• Diversification of rural livelihoods (to non-farm activities,
e.g. sand abstraction, rural tourism, etc)
• Remittances
Urban side
• Increase in labour pool and non-farm employment
opportunities
• Expanded markets
• Economies of scale in production and provision of goods
and services
Inte
rlinke
d fo
rtun
es
NEGATIVE RURAL-URBAN INTERFACE
Rural Side
• Export-oriented farming activities
• Limited opportunities for non-farm livelihood diversification
• Decline in small-farm production
• Environmental externalities (e.g. uncontrolled land abstraction)
Urban side
• Increased influx of migrants from poor rural areas
• Increase in “free riders” = overstretching of services
• Social and economic vices e.g. crime leading to low investment
• Exclusion/marginalisation of poor rural-urban migrants
HSRC’s social need index• Population/ health facilities• Road length/ km2
• Population density• Electricity and water provision• Dependency ratio• Pupil/ teacher ratio• Unemployment• Poverty gap• Etc.
HighMed-highMediumMed-lowLow
POVERTY & SPATIAL MOBILITY; SA
Source: CSIR 2007; www.csir.co.za
RUMP IMPLICATIONS
The mobile Poor
More risk If young,
single & female
Social &Economic
marginalisation&/or exclusion
Asset poverty
= Poor housing,Infrastructure &
services
Social capital dependency
Income poverty = result of 3G jobs (disgraceful, dirty, and dangerous).
EMERGING CHALLENGES FROM CURRENT DEVELOPMENT PRAXIS
1. Strategies meant to better rural areas usually have the opposite effects,
e.g. better education leads to rural out-migration in search of better
economic/job opportunities.
2. The effectiveness of current rural and urban development strategies (e.g.
ISRDP and URP) in addressing RUMP is doubtful and needs to be
addressed.
- The provision of social infrastructure is only a partial solution
- Sub-prime LED interventions, e.g. gardening projects, scratch the surface of economic aspirations of the rural poor
3. Rural areas lose the strong, “brightest and most promising” who are
relegated to informality in urban areas.
4. The poorest ruralites are the least likely to migrate = resource constraints.
5. The rural-urban continuum of poverty is poorly addressed by policy and in
development practice.
UR
BA
N G
RO
WT
H
RU
RA
L G
RO
WT
H
Primary and Non-primary Employment
1 Processing/ Manufacturing
2 Demand for Inputs
3
Increased Household Incomes
4
Rising Demand for Health, Welfare and
Leisure Services
Growth of Centers for Consumer
Shopping
5
7
Growing Sales of Inputs/Producer
Services
Expanding Marketing of Regional
'Exports'
6
8
TOWNS/CITIESE
Favorable international commodity prices/ Localization and diversification of foreign investment
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMY
NATIONAL GOVERNMENTAdequate provision of infrasturcture and basic services/ Support of local economic initiatives and organization
RURAL REGION
C
A
B
INVESTMENT IN BASIC/LEADING
SECTORS
D
Economic Diversification/
Increasing Productivity
Renewal of Resource Base/ Environment/
Ecology
Broad-based Increases in Income and
Welfare
GF H
VIR
TU
OU
S C
YC
LE
OF
RE
GIO
NA
L D
EV
EL
OP
ME
NT
& R
UR
AL
-UR
BA
N L
INK
AG
ES
RURAL REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROCESS: STRUCTURES, FLOWS AND POLICY INTERVENTIONS
RURAL-URBAN LINKAGES/FLOWS
POLICY INTERVENTIONS • Agrarian reform • Agriculture intensification/ diversification • Cooperatives • Enviromental programs • Irrigation, storage facilities and Other rural infrastructure
• Roads/transportation • Electricity • Communications • Seaports/airports
• market centers • commercial outlets • urban services • banking/credit • urban infrastructure • communications services
• Non-agricultural employment • Urban services • Production supplies • Non-durable and durable goods • Markets for selling rural products • Processing/ manufacturing • Information on employment, production, prices, welfare services
URBAN FUNCTIONS/
ROLES
RURAL STRUCTURE/
STRUCTURAL CHANGE
• Socio-economic Structure/ Relations • Rural Economy (Sectors) • Rural Production Regimes • Natural Environment & Resources • Infrastructure Built Environment
PRODUCTION • upstream linkages (inputs) • downstream linkages (processing, manufacturing)
PEOPLE • labor commuting/migration • other migration (e.g., education) • shopping/visiting/selling
CAPITAL/INCOME • value added • savings/credit • migrant remittances
COMMODITIES • inputs • consumer non-durables/durables • rural products
INFORMATION • production/sales/prices • welfare/social/political • employment
4
3
2
1
5
FURTHER AREAS FOR CONSIDERATION
A number of key issues need further examination, viz:
1. Implications of rural-urban migration and counter-urbanisation on land and agrarian reform.
2. The Gender dimensions of RUMP.
3. Provision of robust social infrastructure to meet rural-urban migration and demographic changes.
4. Social and economic capital value and costs of rural-urban migration.
5. The implications/impact of globalisation on RUM
6. Where is Best/Good Practice in addressing RUMP – Can SA follow and adapt the development path of the North?
Thank you …
Mthokozisi Sidambe
Email address: [email protected]
Acknowledgements:
For the sterling contributions and insight from James Chakwizira, with whom I originally did the research on the
presented work in 2008.
Email address: [email protected]