cia

l Scienc
e Ali et al., Arts Social Sci J 2015, 6:5
So
DOI: 10.4172/2151-6200.1000144

s
Arts and Social Sciences Journal
Arts and

Jo
urnal
ISSN: 2151-6200

Research Article Open Access

Causes and Effects of Rural-Urban Migration in Rural Areas of Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan
Ali H1*, Shafi MM2, Rehman MU1 and Jadoon MA3
1
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan
2
Faculty of Rural Social Science, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan
3
Department of Rural Sociology, University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan

Abstract
The main objective of the study was to see the effect of migration on household income in rural areas of
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan especially in district Peshawar. A total of 93 sampled respondents were purposively
interviewed. The study indicates that about 71% of the total respondents migrated with their families during the period
(2001-2010). The study revealed that war against terror, quality education, and employment were observed as major
causes of rural-urban migration. Paired t-test was used to see before and after effect of migration on household
income and expenditure. Moreover, after migration the monthly income and expenditure of the respondents
increased. The earning members of 69.9% of the respondents increased after migration. The joint families were
scattered in to nuclear family. Before migration farming were the main occupation of about 42% of the respondents
while after migration most of them were engaged with private jobs and some have their own business. The education
ratio of 83.9% of the respondents increased with migration. Positive changes have been observed in pre and post
facilities under consideration. It is recommended that basic facilities like education, health and creation of off-farm
jobs, improved training opportunities and development programs should be provided to rural peoples.

Keywords: Rural-urban migration; Push and pull factors; Paired Majority of the people migrated to district Peshawar Khyber
t-test; Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan in search of livelihood and employment
opportunities. The remittances sent by these migrants significantly
Introduction develop the rural economy and prosperity of the rural people [5].
The UN reported that half of the world populations live in cities Business competition in Peshawar among the rural and urban
and expected that this will rise to 60% by 2030. In Nigeria and other population has been another positive effect of rural-urban migration,
developing countries, population in cities is estimated to increase which accelerates the pace of economic and regional development.
from 1.9 billion in 2000 to 3.9 billion in 2030. This is principally due to But further measures are required to increase the intermingling and
rural to urban migration which is consequent upon the dichotomous assimilation of the rural and urban communities. Thus, while rural
planning and development which many developing countries adopted migrants from the FATA region are in the process of adjusting to
especially after independence. These results in the rural underprivileged urban life, they are exposed to and often adopt new ways of thinking,
and the urban gifted that translates into better facilities and economic behaving and doing things that allow them to cope with problems and
opportunities in these urban centers than the rural areas [1]. complexities of urban living. Other problems which adversely affect the
The process of migration especially internal migration in Pakistan progress of Peshawar to increase the rural-urban integration include
is an old phenomenon. It not only improves the socio-economic administrative weaknesses, uneven development, rural-urban bias, and
condition of the migrant households but also provides opportunities careless planning policies [6].
for employment [2]. In Pakistan both the volume and nature of internal Peshawar city is also suffering a problem of rural urban migration
migration have varied overtime and so their impact on migrant which has somehow disturbed the valves, normative, structure, and
households and on economy [3]. urban development planning. So this study will be mainly conducted
In Pakistan the urban population is 35% of the total population and through this connection. Peshawar city is on the way to the development
its average annual growth rate is 3.4% (1990-2005) which is higher as and progress in each and every sphere of life. It not only provide the
compared to South Asia’s figure of 2.8% in the same years. The status of livelihood opportunities to local and migrants in the form of various
life time migrants in the total population of 12 largest cities of Pakistan
was about 15%, who moved into these cities from other districts of
Pakistan [4].
*Corresponding author: Ali H, Scholar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, The University
According to 1998 census the total population of Peshawar is 2.02 of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan, Tel: +923339350722; E-mail:
haiderkpk59@gmail.com
million, in which male are 1.061 million and female are 0.958 million
i.e., 11.38% of the population of KPK resides in Peshawar. Migrants Received  November 13, 2015; Accepted December 07, 2015; Published
from other parts of KPK and other provinces of Pakistan are about December 11, 2015
46.62% out of total population. The total number of life-time in- Citation: Ali H, Shafi MM, Rehman MU, Jadoon MA (2015) Causes and Effects
migrants in KPK was 0.647 million (3.7% of the population of KPK). of Rural-Urban Migration in Rural Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan. Arts
Social Sci J 6: 144. doi:10.4172/2151-6200.1000144
The Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) is situated in Copyright: © 2015 Ali H, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under
the northwest of Pakistan, lying between the province of Baluchistan, the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, and the neighboring country of Afghanistan. use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and
source are credited.

Arts Social Sci J

ISSN: 2151-6200 ASSJ an open access journal Volume 6 • Issue 5 • 1000144
 Citation: Ali H, Shafi MM, Rehman MU, Jadoon MA (2015) Causes and Effects of Rural-Urban Migration in Rural Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-
Pakistan. Arts Social Sci J 6: 144. doi:10.4172/2151-6200.1000144

Page 2 of 6

trade center and small industries but also provide the basic facilities Age group Locations Total
like health, education, transport, communication, water supply and (years) Wazir colony Latifabad No. 1
drainage system. No. % No. % No. %
Married 44 47.3 35 37.6 79 84.9
Thus this study is directed to find out the causes influencing the
Unmarried 8 8.6 6 6.5 14 15.1
migration from rural areas to Peshawar city and also to dig out the
impact of migration including the adjustment problem of the migrants Total 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100
too. It is prospected that this study will help to minimize the problems Source: Field survey, 2012
of the migrants and also make a sure through check on the erotic Table 2: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of marital status.
progress of urbanization.
Educational status Wazir colony Latifabad No.1 Total
Main objective were to find out the pull and push factors of rural-
No. % No. % No. %
urban migration as well as to see the effect of migration on house
Illiterate 36 38.7 29 31.2 65 69.9
hold income in the selected villages of district Peshawar, Khyber
Literate 16 17.2 12 12.9 28 30.1
Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan.
Literacy level
Materials and Methods Primary 6 6.5 4 4.3 10 10.8
Middle 1 1.1 2 2.1 3 3.2
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan constituted the universe of the
Matric 1 1.1 2 2.1 3 3.2
study. As the study examines the migrants households in the rural areas
Intermediate 1 1.1 - - 1 1.1
of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan specifically district Peshawar. The
graduation 3 3.2 2 2.2 5 5.4
study was conducted in rural areas (namely Wazir colony and Latifabad
Master 2 2.1 2 2.2 4 4.3
No.1) of district Peshawar because there were migrant households.
In these two areas there were total 930 migrant households. Due to Other 2 2.1 - - 2 2.1

limited time and resources only 10% of the total migrant households Total 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100
were taken as a sample size. According to Roscoe sample size above 30 Source: Field Survey, 2012
and below 500 are appropriate for research [7]. The data was analyzed Table 3: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of educational level.
in SPSS program using simple frequency distributions and percentages.
A paired t-test was applied to see the significance of the difference in Latifabad No.1 about 17.2% of the sampled respondents fall in the
between the income of the respondents before and after migration. age group 31-40 years. Table as a whole conclude that majority of the
Recommendations were made on the basis of personal observations. respondents were young. Usually individuals of this age group are
d considered more energetic and more responsible to meet the needs
t= (1) of themselves as well as of their youngsters. So, they decide easily to
sd / n migrate in search of better future.
Which under null hypothesis (H0) follows a, distribution with (n-1)
Table 2 concludes that about (84.9%) of the sample respondents
degree of freedom.
were married while the rest (15.1%) were unmarried. Out of the total
In equation (1), married respondents, 47% belonged to wazir colony while 38% were
from Latifabad No.1. Whereas out of 15.1% unmarried respondents,
n = number of pairs; d = ∑ d / n and
X A − XB;d =
8.6% belonged to wazir colony while 6.5% were from Latifabad No.1.
Data shows that majority of the respondents were married. In study
1  ( ∑ d )  , is the standard deviation.
2
area most of the people came from FATA. In these regions mostly
=sd
n −1 
∑ d2 −
n  people believe on early marriages.
 
Table 3 reveals that majority (69.9%) of the sampled respondents
Results were illiterate, whereas 30.1% were literate. Out of total (30.1%) literate
Table 1 illustrates that 27.9% of the sampled respondents belonged (10.8%) of the sampled respondents were having education up to
to the age group 20-30 years, 30.1% and 28% of sampled respondents primary level, (3.2%) were up to middle, (3.2%) were up to matric,
were in the age group 31-40 and 41-50 years respectively. 14% of the (1.1%) were up to intermediate, (5.4%) were graduates, (4.3%) were
sampled respondents had age above 50 years. Comparison of age of master degree holders while the remaining (2.1%) were doctors. There
sampled respondents of both villages shows that in Wazir colony, are more literate migrants in wazir colony as compared to Latifabad
18.3% of the sampled respondents have age group 41-50 years, whereas No.1 because they migrated earlier as compared to Latifabad No.1.
The table as a whole shows that majority of the respondents was
Age group Locations Total
illiterate because they were not availing better educational facilities
(years) Wazir colony Latifabad No. 1
and opportunities or were engaged in different income generating
No. % No. % No. %
activities to support their family members. While small numbers of the
20-30 years 15 16.1 11 11.8 26 27.9
respondents were literate in which most of them having education up
to primary level.
31-40 years 12 12.9 16 17.2 28 30.1
41-50 years 17 18.3 9 9.7 26 28 Data regarding the family size of the sampled respondents is
Above 50 years 8 8.6 5 5.4 13 14 given in Table 4. It is clear from the table that about (40.9%) of the
Total 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100 respondents were having 5-8 family members followed by (29%) who
Source: Field survey, 2012 live with 1-4 family members. It is evident from the table that minimum
Table 1: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of age group. i.e., 18.3% and 11.8% of respondents were having family size of 9-12

Arts Social Sci J

ISSN: 2151-6200 ASSJ an open access journal Volume 6 • Issue 5 • 1000144
Citation: Ali H, Shafi MM, Rehman MU, Jadoon MA (2015) Causes and Effects of Rural-Urban Migration in Rural Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-
Pakistan. Arts Social Sci J 6: 144. doi:10.4172/2151-6200.1000144

Page 3 of 6

Locations 1-4 5-8 9-12 Above 12 Total 6.5% respondents were from Wazir colony. Table as a whole conclude
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % that majority of the sampled respondents were migrated with families
Wazir colony 10 10.7 22 23.7 12 12.9 8 8.6 52 55.9 because most of the respondents leave their native land due to push
Latifabad No.1 17 18.3 16 17.2 5 5.4 3 3.2 41 44.1 factors that’s why they migrated along with their families.
Total 27 29 38 40.9 17 18.3 11 11.8 93 100 According to Table 8a economic motives loom large in all human
Source: Field Survey, 2012 movements, but are particularly important with regards to migration.
Table 4: Distribution of sample respondents on the basis of family size. Better economic opportunities, more jobs, and the promise of a
better life often pull people towards a new place. Sometimes this is
Year of Locations Total encouraged by the destination country, such as the employment
Migration Wazir colony Latifabad No. 1 campaign in the Caribbean by London bus companies in the 1960s,
No. % No. % No. % which actively recruited young men to move to London to work as
1990-2000 10 10.7 8 8.6 18 19.3 bus drivers, often followed by their families. Another example might
2001-2010 37 39.8 29 31.2 66 71 be the ‘brain drain’ to America that occurred in the latter half of the
2011 On-ward 5 5.4 4 4.3 9 9.7 20th Century from several other Western nations. Pull factors exist at
Total 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100 destination point and these are mostly positive factors. In my research
area the pull factors include better educational facilities available in
Source: Field survey, 2012
Peshawar city, more employment opportunities and an opportunity to
Table 5: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of period of migration.
acquire skill and gain new experience. Table 8a indicates that 41.9% of
the respondents migrated due to pull factors. Out of these about 17.2%
Place of Locations Total were migrated for educational facilities, 16.1% were for employment
migration Wazir colony Latifabad No. 1 opportunities, and 8.6% were migrated to acquire skill and gain new
No. % No. % No. % experience.
Rural 39 41.9 31 33.3 70 75.3
Sub urban 10 10.8 8 8.6 18 19.3
Table 8b illustrates that economic push factors are often the
exact reversal of pull factors, lack of economic opportunities and
Urban 3 3.2 2 2.2 5 5.4
Total 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100
Migration with Locations Total
Source: Field survey, 2012 Wazir colony Latifabad No. 1
Table 6: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of area migrated. No. % No. % No. %
Family 46 49.4 41 44.1 87 93.5
and above 12 members respectively. In research area family size was
Alone 6 6.5 - - 6 6.5
large because majority of the respondents migrated from rural areas
where each house hold has more members because they considered it Total 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100
as a source of income. Source: Field survey, 2012
Table 7: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of migration with family
Table 5 shows that 19.3% of the sampled respondents were migrated
or alone.
in the period of 1990-2000, about 71% of sampled respondents were
migrated in the period of 2001-2010 while 9.7% of sampled respondents Pull factors of Wazir colony Latifabad No.1 Total
were migrated in 2011 and onward. The number of respondents migrations No. % No. % No. %
migrated to Wazir colony was 10.7% in the period of 1990-2000, Educational 6 6.4 10 10.7 16 17.2
39.8% in the period of 2001-2010 and only 5.4% in 2011 and onward. facilities
Whereas respondents migrated to Latifabad No.1 in the period of Employment 10 10.7 5 5.4 15 16.1
1990-2000 were 8.6%, while in 2001-2010 and 2011 and onward 31.2% opportunity
and 4.3% of the sampled respondents were migrated respectively. The Acquire skill 5 5.4 3 3.2 8 8.6
and gain new
data indicates that majority of the respondents migrated from FATA experience
and Malakand division because of conflict, insurgency, and military Total 21 22.5 18 19.3 39 41.9
operation since 2008. Some of the people migrated because of better
life in cities. Source: Field Survey, 2012
Table 8a: Distribution of respondents on the basis of pull factors.
Table 6 illustrates that majority 75.3% of sampled respondents
came from rural areas. About 19.3% came from suburban and only Pull factors of Wazir colony Latifabad No.1 Total
5.4% came from urban. About 55.9% of the migrants were settled in migrations No. % No. % No. %
Wazir colony and 44.1% in Latifabad No.1. Results reveal that most enmity at village 2 2.2 - - 2 2.2
of the respondents migrated from the rural areas because of lack of familial conflict 2 2.2 1 1.1 3 3.3
security, unemployment, and lack of other social facilities in these Religious - - 2 2.2 2 2.2
areas. harassment
inadequate health 5 5.4 3 3.2 8 8.6
Data regarding migration with family or alone is given in Table facilities
7. The data shows that majority (93.5%) of sampled respondents War against 22 23.6 17 18.3 39 41.9
were migrated along with their families while (6.5%) of the sampled terrorism
respondents were migrated alone. About 55.9% of the sampled Total 31 33.4 23 24.8 54 58.2
respondents told that they migrated with family to wazir colony Source: Field Survey, 2012
whereas 44.1% settled in Latifabad No.1 with family. All of the alone Table 8b: Distribution of respondents according to push factors.

Arts Social Sci J

ISSN: 2151-6200 ASSJ an open access journal Volume 6 • Issue 5 • 1000144
Citation: Ali H, Shafi MM, Rehman MU, Jadoon MA (2015) Causes and Effects of Rural-Urban Migration in Rural Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-
Pakistan. Arts Social Sci J 6: 144. doi:10.4172/2151-6200.1000144

Page 4 of 6

employment opportunities are often push people to look out of their Income group Wazir colony Latifabad No.1
origin to their futures area. One such example is the migration of the No. % No. %
people of Mexican and other Central American countries into the Bellow 8000 48 51.6 17 18.3
United States, where they often work low-wage, long-hour jobs in 8001-16000 34 36.5 38 40.9
farming, construction and domestic labor. It is difficult to classify this 16001-24000 9 9.7 28 30.1
case purely with push factors however, as often the factors associated Above 24000 2 2.2 10 10.7
with the country of origin are just as important as the factors associated Total 93 100 93 100
with the country of destination. Forced migration has also been used
Source: Field Survey, 2012
for economic gain, such as the 20 million men, women and children
Table 11: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of monthly expenditure.
who were forcibly carried as slaves to the Americas between the 16th
and 18th Centuries. Push factors exist at the point of origin and mostly
Description Earning members in each Locations Total
these are negative factors. In the research area push factors are enmity
Wazir colony Latifabad No. 1
at village, familial conflict, religious harassment, inadequate health
No. % No. % No. %
facilities and war against terrorism. Table 4 reveals that (2.2%) of
Increased 36 38.7 29 31.2 65 69.9
sample respondents migrated due enmity at village, (3.2%) migrated
Decreased 2 2.2 2 2.2 4 4.4
because of familial conflict, (2.2%) left their native land due to religious
Constant 14 15 10 10.7 24 25.7
harassment, (8.6%) migrated due to inadequate health facilities while
Total 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100
(41.9%) migrated because of war against terrorism. It is clear from the
study that more than half of the respondents migrated due push factors Source: Field survey, 2012
so; it is a dominant cause of migration. The reason for this is the recent Table 12: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of earning members.
war of Pakistan army against terror.
Income group Wazir colony Latifabad No.1
Table 9 shows that before migration (40.8%) of respondents have No. % No. %
income up to 8000, (35.5%) were in the income group of 8001-16000, Farming 39 41.9 - -
(18.3%) were in the income group of 16001-24000 and (5.4%) have Labor 14 15 15 16.1
income above 24000. After migration the monthly income of the Government 8 8.6 10 10.8
migrants was high. (12.9%) of respondents were income up to 8000, servant
(28%) were in the income group of 8001-16000, (39.8%) were in the private job 12 12.9 20 21.5
income group of 16001-24000 and only (19.3%) have income above Business 9 9.7 18 19.4
24000. The results are in line with Zanker et al. [8] who studied the Driver 6 6.5 16 17.2
effects of internal migration on the wellbeing of migrants and their Technician 5 5.4 14 15
families and how it affects the relationship between family members. Total 93 100 93 100
They concluded that migrant households earn higher incomes after
migration. Source: Field Survey, 2012
Table 13: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of occupations.
In Table 10 the data was split on the basis of locations. In order to
test the income difference before and after migration, we incorporated The monthly expenditure of respondents increased after migration.
paired t-test carried out separately for each location to test the Table 11 indicates that before migration monthly expenditure of
hypothesis about two means with paired sources. Since the t-calculated (51.6%) of sampled respondents were up to 8000, (36.5%) were in the
value of both locations falls in the critical region, because probability group of 8001-16000, (9.7%) were in the expenditure group of 16001-
value is much smaller than level of significance i.e., 0.000 < 0.05, so 24000 and only (2.2%) of respondents have expenditure above 24000.
we reject our null hypothesis and conclude that there is significant While after migration the expenditure of (18.3%) of respondents were
difference between the two means and the results were significant at up to 8000, (40.9%) were in the expenditure group of 8001-16000,
95% significance level. (30.1%) of respondents were in the expenditure group of 16001-24000
and about (10.7%) have expenditure above 24000.
Income group Wazir colony Latifabad No.1
Table 12 describes that earning members of majority (69.9%) of
No. % No. %
respondents increased with migration. The earning members of (4.3%)
Bellow 8000 38 40.8 12 12.9
respondents decreased while the earning members of remaining
8001-16000 33 35.5 26 28
(25.8%) respondents remain constant. Table as a whole shows that with
16001-24000 17 18.3 37 39.8
migration there is in increase in the earning members of the majority
Above 24000 5 5.4 18 19.3
of the respondents.
Total 93 100 93 100

Source: Field Survey, 2012 Table 13 shows that before migration farming was the main
Table 9: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of monthly income. occupation of (41.9%) of sample respondents. (15%) were labor,
government servants were (8.6%), respondents who were involved in
Villages Mean before Mean after Difference t-value p-value private jobs were (12.9%), respondents having their own business were
migration migration (9.7%), respondents having occupation of driver were (6.5%), and about
Wazir colony 12432.69 19653.84 7221.15 13.191 .000 (5.4%) were technician. After migration no one engaged with farming,
Latifabad No.1 11170.73 17902.43 6731.7 11.443 .000 (16.1%) were labor, (10.8%) were involved in government services,
Source: Field Survey, 2012-Significant at 95% level
(21.5%) were having occupation of private job, (19.4%) of respondents
Table 10: Effect of migration on household income.
having their own business, (17.2%) were driver, (15%) were technician.

Arts Social Sci J

ISSN: 2151-6200 ASSJ an open access journal Volume 6 • Issue 5 • 1000144
Citation: Ali H, Shafi MM, Rehman MU, Jadoon MA (2015) Causes and Effects of Rural-Urban Migration in Rural Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-
Pakistan. Arts Social Sci J 6: 144. doi:10.4172/2151-6200.1000144

Page 5 of 6

Table as a whole shows that before migration occupation of most of the House Before migration After migration
respondents was farming while after migration most of the respondents Status
Wazir Latifabad Total Wazir Latifabad Total
were engaged with private jobs and business. colony No.1 colony No.1
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Table 14 illustrates that before migrations majority (86%) of Own 39 41.9 30 32.3 69 74.2 20 21.5 16 17.2 36 38.7
respondents was living in joint family system while (14%) of sample
Rented 4 4.3 4 4.3 8 8.6 32 34.4 25 26.9 57 61.3
respondents were living in nuclear family system. After migration
Non- 9 9.7 7 7.5 16 17.2 - - - - - -
sample respondents that were living in joint family system were (30.1%) Rented
while (69.9%) of sample respondents were living in nuclear family Total 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100
system. Table as a whole conclude that before migration majority of the
Source: Field Survey, 2012.
respondents belonged to joint family system while after migration most
Table 16: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of house status.
of the respondents belonged to nuclear family system. The results are
in line with Yasin et al. [9]. They analyzed that unplanned urbanization
give rise to environmental issues, including pollution, poor drainage
system, poor quality of drinking water, and poor hygienic conditions. Facilities Before migration After migration

The research was carried out in Multan city in Pakistan, through field No. % No. %

survey of 200 respondents. The results illustrate that urbanization is Electricity 93 100 93 100

one of the major causes of changing joint family system to nuclear Gas 18 19.4 86 92.5
family system [10-16]. Telephone 36 38.7 93 100
Water supply 24 25.8 93 100
Table 15 illustrates that (19.3%) of sample respondents were living Health 20 21.5 93 100
in pacca houses before migration while after migration this increased
Education 42 45.2 93 100
to (91.4%). Before migration (28%) of sample respondents had semi-
pacca houses while after migration there were (8.6%) of respondents Source: Field Survey, 2012
having semi-pacca houses. Majority (52.7%) of respondents had Table 17: Distribution on the basis of facilities available to sampled respondents.
kacha/mud houses before migration while after migration this ratio
Education ratio increase in If no reason
was zero. Table as a whole conclude that before migration most of the your family Child labor costly education
respondents were living in kacha/mud houses while majority of the
No. % No. % No. %
respondents were living in pacca houses after migration.
Yes 78 83.9 - - - -
Table 16 shows that before migration majority (74.2%) of No 15 16.1 9 60 6 40
respondents was the owner of their own houses while after migration Total 93 100 9 60 6 40
this reduced to (38.7%). Before migration (8.6%) of respondents were
Source: Field Survey, 2012.
living in rented houses while after migration (61.3%) of respondents
Table 18: Distribution of sample respondents on the basis of education ratio.
were living in rented houses. There were (17.2%) of respondents
who were living in not rented houses before migration while after
Locations Family System migration this trend is zero. Table as a whole indicates that majority
Before migration After migration of the respondents were the owner of houses before migration while
Joint Nuclear Total Joint Nuclear Total after migration most of the respondents were living in rented houses
Family Family family family [16-25].
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Table 17 shows that before migration electricity was available to
Wazir 45 48.4 7 7.5 52 55.9 16 17.2 36 38.7 52 55.9 (100%) of respondents, gas was available to (19.4%) of respondents,
colony telephone facilities were available to (38.7%) of respondents, (25.8%)
Latifabad 35 37.6 6 6.5 41 44.1 12 12.9 29 31.2 41 44.1 of respondents having facilities of water supply, (21.5%) having health
No.1 facilities and (45.2%) having education facilities. After migration gas
Total 80 86 13 14 93 100 28 30.1 65 69.9 93 100 facilities was available to (92.5%) of respondents, while educational,
Source: Field Survey, 2012. health, telephone, water supply and electricity were available to all
Table 14: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of family system. respondents. Table as a whole shows that there was increase in the
existing facilities of the sampled respondents after migration.
Condition Family System
of House
Table 18 shows that (83.9%) of sample respondents reported that
Before migration After migration their education ratio has increased after migration. While (16.1%)
Wazir Latifabad Total Wazir Latifabad Total of sample respondents reported that their educational ratio has not
colony No.1 colony No.1
increased with migration. Among these (16.1%) of respondents; (60%)
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
of respondents prefer for their children to do some work rather than
Pacca 10 10.8 8 8.6 18 19.3 48 51.6 37 39.8 85 91.4
to get education while (40%) of respondents reported that they can’t
Semi- 14 15 12 12.9 26 28 4 4.3 4 4.3 8 8.6
Pacca
afford the high cost of their children’s education [26-28].
Kacha/
mud house
28 30.1 21 22.6 49 52.7 - - - - - -
Conclusion
Total 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100 52 55.9 41 44.1 93 100 The effect of migration on household income in rural areas
Source: Field Survey, 2012. of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan especially in district Peshawar,
Table 15: Distribution of sampled respondents on the basis of house conditions.

Arts Social Sci J

ISSN: 2151-6200 ASSJ an open access journal Volume 6 • Issue 5 • 1000144
Citation: Ali H, Shafi MM, Rehman MU, Jadoon MA (2015) Causes and Effects of Rural-Urban Migration in Rural Areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-
Pakistan. Arts Social Sci J 6: 144. doi:10.4172/2151-6200.1000144

Page 6 of 6

positive changes have been observed in pre and post facilities under 14. Grau HR, Aide TM (2007) Are Rural - Urban Migration and Sustainable
Development Compatible in Mountain Systems. Mountain Research and
consideration and it is recommended that basic facilities like education,
Development 27: 119-123.
health and creation of off-farm jobs, improved training opportunities
and development programs should be provided to rural peoples. 15. Hasan A, Raza M (2009) Migration and small towns in Pakistan. International
Institute for Environment and Development.
References
16. Irfan ML, Demery, Arif GM (1983) Migration Pattern in Pakistan - Preliminary
1. The United Nations (2014) Human Settlements Program (UN-HABITAT). Results. Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.

2. Arif GM (2014) Internal Migration and Household Well-being-Myth or Reality. 17. Karim M, Nasar A (2003) Migration Patterns and Differentials in Pakistan-Based
In: Oda H (eds.) Internal Labour Migration in Pakistan. Institute of Developing on the Analysis of 1998 Census Data in Population of Pakistan.
Economies, Japan.
18. Khattak NR (2004) Socio-economic and Demographic Profile of KPK - An
3. Naseem SM (2014) Underdevelopment, Poverty and Inequality in Pakistan. Analysis of 1998 Population and Housing Census. Pakistan Institute of
Vanguard Publication Ltd. Development Economics.

4. Helbock WR (2013) Differential Urban Growth and Distance Considerations 19. Mahmood S, Khan IA, Maann AA, Shahbaz B, Siara C (2010) Role of
in Domestic Migration Flows in Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review international migration in agricultural development and farmer’s livelihoods - A
14: 1-15. case study of an agrarian community. University of Agriculture, Pakistan 47:
297-301.
5. Shinwari NA (2010) Understanding FATA - Attitude towards governance, religion
and society in Pakistan’s federally administered Tribal areas. Community 20. Mayda AM (2007) International migration - A panel data analysis of the
appraisal and motivation program 4: 122-136. determinants of bilateral flows. Georgetown University.

6. Khan A (2005) Urban centers as a catalyst for Socio-Economic and Regional 21. Munir A (2002) Causes and effects of rural urban migration. NWFP Agricultural
Development in TWC’s - A case study of Peshawar, KPK, Pakistan. Gomal University, Pakistan.
University, Pakistan.
22. Naeem J (2004) Socio-economic and Demographic Profile of Punjab Province
7. Roscoe JT (1975) Fundamental research statistics for behavioral sciences pp: 295. - An analysis of 1998 Population and Housing Census, Census Monograph
Series. Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.
8. Zanker H, Jessica H (2011) Causes and effect of migration on migrant
households in source countries. 23. Nil DG, Tansel A (2007) Brain Drain from Turkey - The Case of Professionals
Abroad. International Journal of Manpower, Turkey.
9. Yasin G, Sattar S, Faiz FA (2012) Rapid Urbanization as a Source of Social
and Ecological Decay - A Case of Multan City. Asian Social Science, Pakistan 24. Poveda AR (2007) Determinants and consequences of internal and
8: 180-189. international migration - The case of rural populations in the south of
10. Becker C, Hammer A, Morrison A (1994) Beyond Urban Bias in Africa of Asia. Veracruz, Mexico. Demographic Research, Mexico 16.
Westview Press, Boulder pp: 143-164. 25. Rukanuddin AR, Chaudhry MA (2004) Socio-economic and Demographic
11. Davis B, Stecklov G (2002) Domestic and international migration from rural Profile of Sindh - An Analysis of 1998 Population and Housing Census; Census’
Mexico-Disaggregating the effects of network structure and composition Monograph Series No.3. Institute of Development Economics, Pakistan.
Population Studies. Taylor and Francis 56: 291-309.
26. Skeldon R (1986) Migration and the population census in Asia and the Pacific
12. Chaudhry MJ (2004) Socio-economic and Demographic Profile of Balochistan- - issues, questions and debate. International Migration Review 21: 1074-1100.
An Analysis of 1998 Population and Housing census. Institute of Development
Economics, Pakistan. 27. Stephenson R, Matthews Z, Mcdonald JW (2003) The impact of rural-urban
migration on under two mortality in India. Journal of biosocial science 35: 15-31.
13. Gimba Z, Kumshe MG (2007) Causes and effects of rural-urban migration in
Borno state-A case study of Maiduguri metropolis. Asian Journal of Business 28. World Bank (2007) World Development Indicators 2007. The World Bank,
and Management Sciences. 1: 168-172. Washington.

Arts Social Sci J

ISSN: 2151-6200 ASSJ an open access journal Volume 6 • Issue 5 • 1000144