Migration Intentions and Behavior

Transcription

Migration Intentions and Behavior: Decision Making in a Rural Philippine Province
Author(s): Gordon F. De Jong, Brenda Davis Root, Robert W. Gardner, James T. Fawcett and
Ricardo G. Abad
Source: Population and Environment, Vol. 8, No. 1/2, Migration Intentions and Behavior:
Third World Perspectives (Spring - Summer, 1985/1986), pp. 41-62
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27503043 .
Accessed: 21/09/2014 20:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Population and Environment.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 202.125.102.33 on Sun, 21 Sep 2014 20:12:03 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Intentions and Behavior:
Migration
Decision Making in a Rural Philippine Province
Gordon F. De Jong
Brenda Davis
Root
Issues
Center
Research
Population
State University
The Pennsylvania
Robert W. Gardner
James T. Fawcett
East-West
Population
Institute
Ricardo G. Abad
Institute of Philippine Culture
Ateneo de Manila University
to
intentions
between
and behavior
is basic
set
in
decision
research.
This
rural
the
migration
study,
on personal
of llocos Norte,
evidence
province
provides
Philippine
factors and value-expectancy
and structural background
perceptions
intentions
and behavior.
of place utility that predict migration
Sepa
are conducted
to move
rate analyses
intentions
and for
for general
The
micro-level
relationship
to both
the latter pertaining
intentions,
migration
destination-specific
and
internal migration
international
(Hawaii).
(Manila)
migration
to the data from a 1980-82
Logistic
regression
analyses
applied
are highly effi
models
survey show that the empirical
longitudinal
in explain
in explaining
intentions
cient
but less efficient
migration
ing actual migration behavior
in this ThirdWorld
setting. Important
at the annual meeting
Association
of the Population
Revised version of a paper presented
1984. Research
for this paper was supported
of America,
Minnesota,
May 2-5,
Minneapolis,
The Philippines,
the
Center
the Population
Foundation,
by NIH Grant No. R01-HD13115,
Issues Research Center,
and the Population
East-West Population
Hawaii,
Institute, Honolulu,
East-West Pop
for this project are Fred Arnold,
Park, PA. The other coinvestigators
University
of the Philippines.
for reprints
ulation
Requests
Institute, and Benjamin V. Cari?o,
University
22 Burrowes
Build
F. De Jong, Population
Issues Research Center,
should be sent to Gordon
ing, The
State University,
University
Volume
Environment,
41
Press
Sciences
8, Number
Pennsylvania
and
Population
?
1986 Human
Park, PA
16802.
1 & 2, Spring/Summer
1985-86
42
POPULATIONAND ENVIRONMENT
intentions
and behavior
for both
include fam
variables
explanatory
or
move
to
at
destina
alternative
stay, family auspices
ily pressure
to
the
and
life
move,
tions, money
cycle
experience,
prior migration
of internal
the determinants
stage (marital status and age). However,
are not the same.
The data
behavior
and
international
migration
only partially support the Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) position that
intentions
are
determinant
the dominant
factors are shown
structural background
effects on migration
and
of behavior.
Personal
to exert
direct
independent
behavior.
human
the attitude-behavior
pervades
relationship
to
Simon
and
(1980),
research,
which,
theory
according
decision-making
in the latter
scientific work
is one of the frontier areas of interdisciplinary
in migration
have
models
part of the twentieth century. Decision-making
with
attention
of
the
drawn
geo
economic,
experts
population
recently
In
this
and
connection,
perspectives.
psychological
sociological,
graphic,
intentions and migration behavior?and
the relationship between migration
intentions can serve as a proxy for behavior?have
the extent to which
The
become
character
salient
of
concerns.
in this issue, the underlying
framework for
As discussed
by Simmons
the
research
includes
decision
1)
components:
following general
migration
of
and
factors
2)
(both
structural),
perceptions
place
personal
background
The interrela
and 4) migration
behavior.
utility, 3) intentions to move,
yield six specific sets of prob
tionships of these four general components
back
research: the relationship between
lem areas for migration decision
intentions
to
between
the
intentions
and
factors
move,
relationship
ground
to move and migration behavior, and so on. The purpose of this paper is to
the fol
shed light on the intention-behavior
by addressing
relationship
a
context:
in
Third
World
research
questions
lowing
are the
and structural
important
personal
of place
factors and expectancy-based
perceptions
to move
and
intentions
determine
both general
intentions?
specific migration
are the
and structural
What
personal
important
of place
factors and expectancy-based
perceptions
and
behavior
determine
both
migration
general
1. What
background
utility that
destination
2.
background
utility that
destination
3.
4.
behavior?
specific migration
of internal and
Are the determinants
same or different?
the dominant
intentions
Are migration
gration behavior?
international
or single
migration
predictor
the
of mi
43
GORDON F. DE JONG ETAL.
Determinants
of general
intentions and behavior
and destination
(nondestination-specific)
are analyzed and compared. The increased
in
comparisons
allows,
by destination-specific
intention-behavior
for
internal
and
relationship
A companion
in this issue, "Best Laid
paper
the relationship between migration
intentions
on factors that may cause a change
evidence
specific
level of specificity afforded
this study, analysis of the
international destinations.
further addresses
Schemes,"
and behavior,
by presenting
in intentions and the numerous,
itators that intervene to modify
constraints and facil
largely unanticipated
the relationship
between
intentions and
behavior.
THE RESEARCH SETTING AND SAMPLE
The research setting for this study is llocos Norte, a predominantly
in the northwestern
rural province
Unlike
part of Luzon, the Philippines.
the rich lowlands of central Luzon, the llocos region is partly mountainous,
with soils of low quality and limited land suitable for irrigation. The llocos
is a rice deficit region, importing rice from other areas within
the Philip
Its
rain
seasonal
and
isolation
make
terrain,
short-fall,
pines.
cash-cropping
and marketing difficult. The major means of livelihood
include rice, garlic,
and tobacco farming as well as fishing. Laoag City, the provincial capital,
is about a ten-hour bus trip from Manila. The llocos region is of particular
rose dramatically
in this century
interest because
its population
density
from 4.55 persons per cultivated hectare in 1903 to 11.53 in 1970. In 1903
the region's density was below the Philippine average, but by 1970 itwas
two times the national average. Over forty percent (42.4) of the llocos
region farmers had farms of one hectare or less in 1975, a much higher
than in the rest of the country, where
degree of near landlessness
only
13.6% of the farms were one hectare or less (Smith, 1981).
in the Philippines.
llocos Norte is one of the less urbanized provinces
or
In 1970 only 57,933
16.9%
of
the
lived
persons,
province population
in urban areas, or poblaciones.
1980
the
of
the
By
proportion
population
about
(NCS, 1980). Most of the
living in urban areas had increased to 23.8%
or
in
lives
small
rural
barangays of fewer than 1,000
villages
population
as
as
In
250.
67.7%
small
of all llocos Norte families
1980,
persons, many
in the agricultural sector, and in 22.0%
had at least one member working
in agriculture.
of the families two or more of the workers were employed
Given this picture of population
and means of livelihood, where can
to other
to the Cagayan Valley,
llocos workers find jobs? Internal migration
and to Manila,
and
frontier areas on the islands of Luzon and Mindanao,
to western United States locations, notably Califor
international migration
44
nia and Hawaii, have characterized
the demographic
patterns of the llocos
in
Since
in
twentieth century.
the change
the U.S.
law
region
immigration
in 1965, llokano immigration to the United States?particularly
to Hawaii?
has increased markedly.
The Philippine Migration
individual and house
Study, using multiple
to assess motivational
hold
level surveys, was designed
and structural
intentions and migration behavior as well as the
of migration
determinants
to Manila and Honolulu
destinations.
The
adjustment of llokano migrants
is shown in Figure 1. The baseline
overall study design
survey, conducted
during the summer of 1980, was a multi-stage
probability
sample of 1,340
individuals 18 through 64 years of age living in randomly selected house
holds in llocos Norte province.
Interviews were conducted
in 575 house
a
rate
95.2%
of
604
with
the
of
households
contacted
holds,
completion
1981). This random sample was supplemented
(Abad and Cari?o,
by a
404
movers.
of
screened
intended
18
to
Adults
64
in
who
sample
aged
tended to move from their barangay at some unspecified
time in the future
met
in the screened sample. The purpose of the
for inclusion
was
to
provide a sufficiently
sample
large number of potential
a
for
behavior.
migrants
longitudinal follow-up survey of actual migration
The data presented here are derived from a combined
unweighted
sample
of the 1,744 individuals in the random and screened baseline
surveys, and
are thus not representative of the population
of llocos Norte as a whole.
In the longitudinal
was conducted
a little
which
survey,
follow-up
over two years after the baseline
an
was
to
made
locate
survey,
attempt
the criteria
screened
and reinterview the original respondents. Migrants were defined as respon
dents who
had moved
for at least one
away from their local barangay
month during the 1980 through 1982 time period. Data on migrants were
in most cases from other members
obtained
of the same household who
had remained
behind. All respondents who had moved and returned were
one-third of those
reinterviewed,
plus a random selection of approximately
In the baseline
who had not moved.
survey in 1980, a total of 452 or
25.9 percent of the total sample
intended to move during the next two
8.0%
to
12.6%
and 5.3% (92) to
(140)
years:
(220) to Hawaii
Manila,
other destinations.
next
two
the
years, a total of 386 or 22.1% of
During
a move: 5.4% (95) to Manila,
the total sample actually experienced
4.1%
Of the 219 respon
(72) to Hawaii and 12.6% (219) to other destinations.
dents who moved
to other destinations,
174 moved
to other provinces
in
the Philippines.
The logistic regression analyses presented
in this paper are based on:
intentions to move within the next two years and general move/
1) general
to Manila within
intentions to move
the next
2) specific
stay behavior;
0>
0>
O)
H O
& <UCO
<U?H00
c gr!
iaa
i
CO
K O? ?N
45
46
two years and Manila
to Hawaii within
move
and 3) specific
intentions to
behavior,
move/stay
the next two years and Hawaii move/stay
behavior.1
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEENMIGRATION
AND BEHAVIOR
INTENTIONS
The theory of reasoned action proposed by Ajzen and Fishbein (1980;
see also Fishbein and Azjen,
statements
1975) is one of the more complete
to this
intentions and behavior.
between
of the relationship
According
is the immediate determinant of behavior,
and when an
theory, "intention
itwill provide the most ac
appropriate measure of intention is obtained
curate prediction of behavior"
the prediction
of
(1980:41).
Theoretically,
intentions is synonymous with the prediction of actual behavior.
behavioral
A strong relationship
is hypothesized when behavioral
intentions are stable
over
over time, the individual has volitional control
in ques
the behavior
exists in the measurement
of intentions and be
tion, and correspondence
havior with
action, and target. In the present
respect to time, context,
study, 1) both intentions and behavior are specified for a two-year period,
is defined as the local barangay,
2) the context
3) both intentions and
out of the barangay, and 4) the target
behavior are measured
by movement
is defined
by well
and
Hawaii, Manila,
Prior longitudinal
tentions and behavior
terms as intentions,
known
alternative migration
destinations
including
other locations outside the local barangay.
in
research on the relationship between migration
often shows a lack of conceptual
clarity among such
and behavior
expectations,
plans, desires, wishes,
and Duncan,
1983; Newman
1979; De Jong et al., 1983;
(McHugh,
1974; Bach and Smith,
1982; Speare,
Speare, Kobrin, and Kingkade,
these studies
1977; Sell and De Jong, 1984). Despite conceptual
problems,
tend to show that intentions are important but not the only determinant
of
External or background
factors may influence the rela
migration behavior.
tionship between
Intervening and independent effects of external variables are central
to an alternative
of the behavioral
intention-behavior
conceptualization
relationship posited by De Jong and Fawcett (1981). In applying the inten
to migration,
to
tions-behavior
the causal flow is amended
relationship
include the direct influence of personal and structural background
factors
as well as constraints
intervene or moderate
and facilitators that may
the
relationship.
1Sample
sizes will
vary
in relation
to missing
values
for each
equation.
47
MIGRATION DECISION INFLUENCES
in the Third World
and migration decision
The literature on migration
themes
1981) suggests several common
(De Jong and Gardner,
making
intentions
of migration
of the determinants
which
guide our expectations
and behavior.
important in llocos Norte, because of its long
Particularly
is the impact of family network ties in alternative
history of out-migration,
locations (Caces et al., 1985; Banerjee,
1981; Thadani,
1981; Harbison,
1982). These ties, often built up over extended
periods of time, are ex
of intentions to
pected to be salient factors not only in the development
move but also in facilitating actual migration behavior.
In the llocos as elsewhere,
migration often does not involve the entire
the family owns land or has secure tenure rights, some may
family. When
stay to operate the farm while one or more other family members migrate
The one who migrates may
and establish a branch of the family elsewhere.
be the one whose
absence will
least harm the farm work and/or the one
who will have the best chance of high earnings through migration.
This
on
since the family is dependent
strategy is known as dual dependency,
in two or more separate areas and sectors (Forbes,
economic
activities
1981).
Indicators of family network ties in the present study include: 1) the
number of former household members
2) ver
living outside the barangay,
from family members
bal or written communication
living in alternative
loca
locations, and 3) the presence of relatives and friends in alternative
tions (particularly Manila and Hawaii) who can provide auspices
for find
used in the
ing housing and jobs. (See Table 1 for a listing of variables
present analysis.)
that is expected
Family pressure to move or stay is another dimension
to exert a strong impact on migration
in this devel
1981). While
oping country setting (Harbison,
only 6.1% of the intended
in our survey reported that the decision
to move was based mostly
migrants
on the desires of other people,
this does not mean that the views of close
are unimportant.
Further, the availability of family or per
family members
sonal resources to finance a move, particularly a move to the United States,
to be a key determinant
not only of migration
is hypothesized
intentions
but particularly of migration behavior.
are known
Individual demographic
and human capital characteristics
to be important correlates of migration
in Third
list of such vari
World
settings (Brown and Sanders, 1981). The potential
ables is large, but the more salient of these for the llocos are expected
to be: age?with
than older people,
younger people more
likely to move
never married more likely to move than married, wid
marital status?with
48
TABLE 1
Variables
Name and
Variable
Used
in the Analysis
Specification
Scores:
Value-Expectancy
Categories
Response
Values
VEIlocos:
Summed score
VEManila:
VEHawaii:
Expectancies
Same as for
Same as for
times
for Values
for 28 values
llocos
llocos
important
3=very
2=fairly
important
l=not
important
Expectancies
3=High
2=Medium
l=Low
Range=28-252
in
ahead
of luck."
"Getting
matter
life
is
mostly
Prior
migration
experience:
lived
the barangay
outside
one month
least
since
June,
a
Has R ever
for at
1975?
or household
members
family
outside
the barangay
Former
living
to help:
General
relatives/friends
llocos
in what place
do
"Outside
Norte,
or relatives
who could
you have friends
to stay
if you need
you a place
give
one and help
you find a job?"
l=Disagree
2=Slightly
3=Strongly
agree
agree
-l=No
l=Yes
Actual
number
-l=No one
l=Someone
mentioned
mentioned
Relatives/friends
to help
in Manila
-l=Manila
l=Manila
not mentioned
mentioned
Relatives/friends
to help
in Hawaii
-l=Hawaii
l=Hawaii
not mentioned
mentioned
"if you were
Money to move to Manila:
to move to Manila,
would
you have
enough money to make the move?"
Money
to move
Same as
General
specific
Same as
above
Same as
above
above
money
Same as
to Hawaii
have money,
and
l=Don't
can't
get it
2=DK or NA
have money,
3=Don't
but
can get
it
to move
4=Have money
above
to move
combining
responses.
destination
better educated
individ
owed, or separated
individuals, education?with
move
to
uals more
than
with
those
minimal
and
likely
education,
prior
those who have previously
lived outside of the
migration experience?with
than those who have never had such an
barangay more
likely to move
The literature also points to the importance of personal effi
experience.
49
TABLE 1 (continued)
Name and
Variable
Schooling:
Highest
status
Marital
Rs age
at
grade
last
completed
by R
R
of
Actual
Actual
birthday
in Manila
there.
-l=No
l=Yes
Any information
from friends
life
about
or relatives
in Hawaii
there.
-l=No
l=Yes
life
information
about
General
friends
and relatives
living
the barangay.
Intent
away
next
"If
yes,
Migration
Whether
Destination
Behavior:
of
population
to move:
"Do you
from this
barangay
two years?"
Destination
Specific
intend
within
Intentions
where?"
1980-1982
behavior:
moved or not?
Specific
1980-1982
years
Migration
from
outside
-l=No
l=Yes
barangay?
Actual
to move
the
number
of
years
stay
DK
care,
move
3=Encourages
about
life
or relatives
urban
of
l=Prefers
2=Doesn't
Any information
from friends
of
number
widowed,
-l=Married,
separated
married
l=Never
(single)
Index
pressure
Family
Summed score
of mother,
spouse
father,
mentioned
and other
relatives
by R:
or
Rs actual
their
about
feelings
move from llocos
Norte.
hypothetical
Percent
Categories
Response
Specification
percent
0=Do not
1=Intend
to move
intend
to move
0=Do not
1= Intend
to move
intend
to move to Manila
0=Do not
l=Intend
to move
intend
to move to Hawaii
0=stayed
l=moved
0=Stayed
l=Moved
in llocos
to Manila
Norte
0=Stayed
l=Moved
in llocos
to Hawaii
Norte
be
intentions and in actualizing migration
cacy in developing
migration
as having
themselves
It is expected
that individuals who perceive
havior.
more control over their life course are more
likely to move than are those
in
their future. Individuals
feel they have little control
who
determining
are
to
be
less
in
urban barangays
likely to move, because
expected
living
are
than
individuals
local
of greater
living in
opportunities,
employment
rural barangays.
50
to influence migration
of place utility are also expected
In this study, place utility ismeasured
by a value-expec
to
intentions
and
behavior
(De Jong and Fawcett,
tancy approach
migration
a tendency to act in a cer
1981). From the value-expectancy
perspective
tain way depends
that the act will be followed by a
upon the expectancy
to that
the
and
value
of that consequence
(or goal)
given consequence
individual (Crawford, 1973).
Perceptions
decision making.
MEASUREMENT
in the
definitions
and meanings
of most of the variables
used
are
1.2
the
in
evident
from
information
Table
present analysis
presented
an
as
to
variables
innovative
The value-expectancy
represent
approach
sessment of expected
locations. We asked re
place utility in alternative
to rate on a 3-point scale the personal
importance of each of
spondents
a
values
(e.g., having
security
high income, having economic
twenty-eight
near
in old age,
and
friends), and to judge the likelihood
living
family
The
of their achieving each of these values in three places: their home barangay,
and Hawaii
of the im
(also on a 3-point scale). A multiplication
Manila,
in
is
its
of
of
each
value
likelihood
achievement
each
portance
place
by
a
summation
of
these
for
all
values
for
each
followed
figures
by
place
(SiVjE^. A relatively high VE score for a place other than their home bar
to move
to that place. An alter
is posited to indicate a propensity
angay
scores between
is to calculate VE difference
the home
native approach
preliminary analyses showed
barangay and Hawaii and Manila. However,
that the two approaches were approximately
equal in their ability to predict
intentions
and
behavior.
migration
at two levels of speci
intentions and behavior are measured
Migration
more
the
At
remains
How
destination
the
unspecified.
general level,
ficity.
as
is
maintained
for
indicated
ever,
time, action,
earlier, correspondence
and context
1980). A two year time frame is used.
(Ajzen and Fishbein,
intentions is based on the 1980 survey
This general measure of migration
move
to
"Do
intend
the
away from the barangay within
you
question:
is opera
next two years?" A general measure of actual migration behavior
for a
of a move outside
the local barangay
tional ized as the occurrence
one
time
1980-82
the
at
the
of
least
month
of
period
longi
during
period
tudinal
survey.
the following
2Based on preliminary
and human capital charac
analysis,
demographic
not included
teristics were
in this analysis
of their minimal
because
to the pre
contribution
diction of migration
intentions and behavior:
sex, land ownership
status, employment
status,
of family
size of household,
and risk-taking personal
trait.
income,
adequacy
perceived
51
measures were derived as follows.
The destination-specific
If respon
move
to
at
dents
intended
the time of the 1980 survey,
information on
where
Dichotomous
destination
they intended to move was obtained.
to Manila
formed for intentions to move
and in
specific variables were
to Hawaii
tentions to move
Corre
(the two most popular destinations).
of destination-specific
behavior also were constructed
sponding measures
from the follow-up survey.
is used to analyze the intentions-behavior
relation
Logistic regression
Determinants
intentions and general migration
of general
behavior,
ships.
to Manila and Manila move behavior,
intentions to move
and intentions
to move
to Hawaii and Hawaii move behavior are estimated.
The proce
dure represents the appropriate mode of analysis for a situation that in
volves dichotomous
variables and both discrete and continuous
dependent
likelihood solutions are
independent variables
(Fienberg, 1981). Maximum
in Tables 2, 3, and 4 represents the
derived. The value for L2 presented
in the model with the depen
association
of all the independent variables
dent variable relative to a model where only the intercept is fit (baseline
in Tables 2, 3, and 4 may be interpreted
model). The R2 analog presented
as the proportion of the baseline model
that is accounted
for by the joint
to the squared
association
of variables
included in the model. Analogous
the higher the R2 analog, the greater the proportion
correlation,
multiple
in the model
of variation accounted
for by the variables
(Knoke and Burke,
are
are considered
errors
twice
Coefficients
that
their
standard
1982:41).
to be statistically significant.
RESULTS
Determinants
of Migration
Intentions
The results of the logistic regression analysis for determinants
of gen
are
move
to
in
intentions
eral (nondestination
column
specific)
presented
one of Table 2. Clearly the most
in predicting general
important variable
intentions to move or stay within
the next two years is family pressure by
close relatives of the respondent. The next most
important predictors are
move.
In
to
to these strong predic
and
addition
having money
being single
determinants
of
intentions
include prior
other
tors,
statistically
significant
the
number
former
of
household
members
migration
experience,
living
a planning orientation
toward the future (indicated
outside the barangay,
to the question of "getting ahead
is a matter
by the negative correlation
in potential places of destination,
of luck"), relative and friend auspices
as a
assessment
of Hawaii
age, and the respondents'
value-expectancy
so \o
co cm
M
vO N
CO vO CMOn
m
DO
C
00 CM CTi CO vO
rH O CO O CO
!-*. -<r LO CM CO
o3 ?
21
v?> CMO
-
tH rH m
c
o
3
.s> - c
.y
m
<
O
CO 0>
rH
CO
v?>
CM VO CO
U-5J
un
<L>"7=
M
*
S
m o
.y o
iH o
O
<7\ CO vO vO vO
o
CO O O CO
DO
O
.c ad -h c
13 t?
)-i <U
?+-tc3 M-t
t? M-l
>> -H -X3 ^ -H B?
52
m
oo cm
53
is domi
intentions
place to live. Thus, this equation of general migration
resources.
nated by family pressure, family ties, life cycle, and economic
The high model L2 (786.147) and R2 analog of 59.2% of the baseline model
in
is a strong predictor of general migration
indicates that the equation
tentions in this Third World
setting.
intentions reflect the general
of destination-specific
The determinants
intentions equation. As the data in column one of Tables 3 and 4 show,
to be the
and family ties continue
resources,
family pressure, economic
more
de
important factors for both internal and international destination
A favorable value-expectancy
based place utility perception
for the
some
and being single are also significant predictors. However,
vs.
are
in
of internal
inter
the determinants
apparent
important differences
cisions.
destination
intentions.
national migration
in the
Family pressure and family ties form the central components
intentions (Table 4). All four family
for international migration
equation
are statistically
indicators in the model
First, family
significant variables.
context.
Second,
pressure to move or stay forms the dominant decision
the higher the probability
live outside the barangay,
the more relatives who
in
that respondents will have more relatives living in Hawaii or elsewhere
the U.S. With
relatives living in the U.S., the immigration petitioning
pro
cess may be put into motion. Third, communication
takes on added value
as information
is gained about the petitioning
and immigration process.
intentions are determined
by the presence
Finally, international migration
of familial support and help in finding a job and providing a place to live
in Hawaii. Higher age and
tions to move to Hawaii.
less education
are unique
predictors
of
inten
For internal migration,
family pressure and family ties are important
to Manila,
but they do not form the crit
predictors of intentions to move
are im
inManila
ical linkages as in Hawaii.
Family and friend auspices
portant to provide help with housing and jobs (Table 3). Unique for Manila
intentions is the importance of prior migration experience
and a planning
orientation
toward the future. For those who have already lived outside the
this experience
provides a frame of reference for living in a dif
barangay,
location in the Philippines.
intentions models with the general
the destination-specific
Comparing
intentions model,
the specification
of destination
does not add to the fit
=
Intentions to move to Hawaii
of the intentions model.
53.2%)
(R2 analog
=
intentions model,
fares better than the Manila
but
40.5%)
(R2 analog
intentions model,
neither quite reaches the 59.2% R2 analog of the general
which
includes respondents who have not made a destination
decision
and
in
the
Ma
who
other
locations
besides
may prefer
respondents
Philippines
ferent
r^ m cm cm co as
cMvoa\o\corMOcr>co
CO CO CO
_
CM co o\
co
i?i m m
co
c
2
m
c
o
o
co
'y
LU 0)
_j
o
q? U
is
r-i O
CO
CO rH m
DO
?s
DO
O
m
<y> cm
co
cy> co co
ex <-*H
,o -h o
cd <u .u
t? 4-? ?H ?H
54
oo m
CO CO CO vO CO i?I
r^ cm r-. m on co
X) .H co co co
co
CM sD 0\
co cm m
vO
m as
00 CM CO
CO v?> .-H
co
03
I
vo oo cm r
v?> r^- iH CO
O CMO O
C
y
'u
^?
LU
<L>
-J O
c? u
m
cm oo
in cm vu
DO
DO
O
m
Ci) CUX
oo cm
?d -H
O ?O U >H
55
56
does point to some differences
the increased specification
nila. However,
intentions.
of internal and international migration
the development
between
Determinants
of Migration
Behavior
Jong and Fawcett (1981 ) argue that many of the personal and struc
intentions are also deter
related to migration
variables
tural background
In contrast, Ajzen and Fishbein
behavior.
minants
of migration
(1980)
intention is theoretically
the single proximate
maintain
that a behavioral
of behavior. To test these arguments, behavioral equations are
determinant
intentions. Our test of the determi
estimated with and without migration
two of Tables 2, 3, and 4,
in
nants of actual behavior,
column
presented
is based on the same set of predictor variables as the preceding
analysis,
De
in column
with the addition of intentions to migrate as a control variable
Before
the
about
the
these
tables.
three of
argument
considering
singular
intentions on behavior,
the results concerning
the per
impact of migration
of
factors
and
structural
sonal and
perceptions
place utility are
background
presented.
of living outside
As shown in column two of Table 2, prior experience
is the most
of
behavior
the home barangay
migration
important predictor
to
is not specified.
the destination
where
move,
Family pressure
being
single, and having a higher number of relatives living outside the barangay
are also statistically
the determinants
of
significant predictors. Comparing
the family pressure variable
intentions with migration
behavior,
migration
no longer dominates
the migration behavior equation.
Rather, prior migra
is the most statistically significant coefficient.
tion experience
some of the same variables that predict migration
intentions
Although
are important determinants
the
of move/stay
power
behavior,
explanatory
is much
L2 drops to 180.40,
less. The model
of the behavioral
equation
with an R2 analog of 13.2% compared to the L2 of 786.15 with an R2 analog
intentions. We conclude
that there are factors not
of 59.2% for migration
of the model
that are
in
other
and/or
the
present
specifications
equation
in the llocos.
migration behavior
is specified for internal (Manila) and international
the analysis
some common and other unique determinants
(Hawaii) migration behavior,
two of Tables 3 and 4, prior
in column
As
shown
of behavior
emerge.
move or stay are statistically
to
and
family pressure
experience
migration
with
in
both
variables
impor
equations,
family pressure more
significant
more
tant in international migration behavior and prior experience
impor
tant in internal migration
behavior. Age enters the equation as an impor
to
tant predictor,
but the sign is opposite?younger
age for migration
to Hawaii. The opposite
Manila and older age for international migration
important
When
in understanding
57
results suppresses
the significance
of age in the preceding
of
nondestination
behavior.
specific migration
analysis
to Manila
include the commu
Unique predictors of internal migration
context
and
of
Residents
of urban areas
years
schooling
nity
completed.
are less likely to move than residents of rural barangays and better educated
to Manila
for advanced
education
young people are more
likely to move
as well as work opportunities.
to Hawaii,
For international migration
the
resources becomes
salience of family ties and economic
The
apparent.
sign of
these
the home barangay and the
greater number of relatives that live outside
to
in
of
and
friends
presence
locating a job and providing a
family
help
move
to
to help actualize migration
to
with
combine
money
stay
place
behavior.
in
decisions
Increasing the model specificity by including destination
creases the fit of the behavioral models
from an R2 analog of 13.2% for
to 23.9% for the Manila and 38.2%
the nondestination
specific equation
for the Hawaii equation.
is indicative of the benefits
This analysis
in mi
to
move
studies
of
twin
increased
of
the
decisions
gration
specification
to move.
and where
Do Intentions Predict Behavior?
Our test of the Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) argument that an intention
is theoretically
the dominant
determinant
of behavior
is pre
proximate
in column
to Ajzen and
three of Tables 2, 3, and 4. According
sented
in the measurement
Fishbein (1980), increased specificity
of intentions and
behavior should increase the empirical correlation between behavioral
in
if other conditions
tentions and behavior,
have not changed
the character
of intentions prior to the measurement
of behavior. Our findings give mixed
to
The
Phi
this
coefficient
for the relationship between
support
proposition.
is
intentions
.350.
and
behavior
The correlation
increases
general migration
to .494 with the specification
of Hawaii
intentions and behavior but de
creases to .339 for the Manila
relationship.
The data also show that in all three equations
there are three or four
in addition
to
of migration
behavior
statistically
significant determinants
intention variable.
Intention to move
the migration
has the highest coef
ficient to standard error ratio for the Manila and Hawaii equations, while
is the most statistically significant variable
in
prior migration
experience
38.2%
and
the nondestination
to
the
Manila
23.9%
for
specific equation
intentions (columns two and three of
equations with and without migration
Table 2, 3, and 4) shows that the intention variable produces
consistent
increases in the model
but relatively modest
fit for the general and des
The impact for destination
behavior models.
migration
tination-specific
58
to Hawaii
is the greatest (R2 analog of 44.8% with
inten
specific moves
to 38.2% without) and the least for nondestination-specific
tions compared
migration behavior (R2 analog of 17.2% with intentions and 13.2% without).
behavior, with
Turning to specific variables that determine migration
we
intentions
find that the
the addition of destination-specific
migration
now
is
via
intentions
of
mediated
for Manila
family pressure
significance
not
5
3 and 4).
Hawaii
but
for
column
of
behavior
Table
(see
migration
In other words,
for internal migration
decisions,
family pressure to move
internal
from or stay in the local barangay helps form destination-specific
in
turn
For
intentions
which
affect
behavior.
international
migra
migration
ismediated
tion decisions,
family pressure
by intentions but retains a sig
behavior. Migration
nificant direct effect on Hawaii migration
experience
as an independent
determinant
of both internal
remains in all equations
even when migration
intentions are
and international migration
behavior,
Other variables with
effects
include
controlled.
independent
statistically
in
Hawaii
for
international
and
friend
auspices
migration
having family
for internal
behavior,
being young and living in a less urban barangay
to Manila,
and being single and having family and friend aus
migration
for
migration decisions.
pices
general nondestination-specific
SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
literature on determinants
of migration
Drawing on the demographic
literature in social psychol
decision making and on the intentions-behavior
to analyze personal and structural
ogy, empirical models were developed
of place utility that
and
factors
perceptions
expectancy-based
background
are
The models
determine migration
employed
in
and
destination
both
efficient
specific migra
explaining
general
highly
in ex
in this Third World
tion intentions
setting, but do not do as well
Further, the models explain nearly 60%
plaining actual migration behavior.
in general
statistical variance
of the base model
(nondestination-specific)
mi
variance for destination-specific
intentions to move, but the explained
was
not
antici
This
latter
intention
is
lower.
somewhat
finding
gration
for a
the contrary result, i.e., better prediction
expect
pated; we would
more clearly specified
intention.
indicate that our empirical
The results of the analyses of behavior
behavior
models
migration
explain only 17% of nondestination-specific
as pre
even when
the equation. However,
intentions are included within
of mi
increased specification
dicted by the Ajzen and Fishbein approach,
to
30%
the
models
the
of
enhances
power
explanatory
gration destination
45%
behavior
Manila
and
variation
for
of the statistical
nearly
migration
59
intentions data are included
in the
behavior when
migration
it
in
is important
These results suggest that
studies to
equation.
migration
to move and the decision where
to move.
deal with both the decision
Part of the explanation
for better prediction
of intentions, compared
to behavior, may lie in the emergence
of largely unanticipated
constraints
intervene between
the formation of intentions and
and facilitators which
actual migration behavior. This line of reasoning is pursued in a companion
the respondents' own expla
paper by Gardner et al. in this issue, inwhich
intentions and behavior are examined.
nations for ?ncongruence between
measurement
The 2-year time lag between
of intentions and subsequent
in this study for intervening events to
behavior provides more opportunity
occur than is the case with most studies, where
the time lag tends to be
for Hawaii
shorter.
in the explanatory
than difference
vari
There is more commonality
In llocos Norte, both
ables that are important for intentions and behavior.
intentions and behavior are largely determined
migration
by: the pressure
to move or stay, family auspices available
in alternative
of family members
to finance a move, prior migration experi
locations, availability of money
such as marital status and age. However,
ence, and life cycle variables
are
some
there
of each of these migration
decisions.
unique determinants
Determinants
include value-expectancy
of intentions but not behavior
to life course.
of place utility and a planning orientation
based perceptions
Furthermore, while
family pressure to move or stay is the dominant deter
it has little or no direct impact on actual
minant of migration
intentions,
in the predicting equa
intentions are included
behavior when
migration
tions. For actual migration
becomes
behavior,
prior migration
experience
a dominant explanatory
factor.
we
internal and international migration
Comparing
decision-making,
of intentions to move are quite similar but the
find that the determinants
of actual migration behavior are quite different. Specifically,
determinants
move
ex
an internal
to Manila
is primarily determined
by prior migration
an intention to move,
perience,
living in a less urban barangay, and being
On
young and better educated.
to the United States is primarily
to move,
Hawaii,
having money
such a move,
bers to undertake
assist in obtaining housing and a
the other hand,
international migration
to
determined
by an intention to move
pressure from family mem
experiencing
in Hawaii
to
the availability of auspices
and
One
of
older.
implication
job,
being
these data is that studies focusing on general move/stay
behavior may miss
or even suppress the unique determinants
of the destination/specific
be
havioral process.
our findings support the Ajzen and Fishbein argument
that
While
measurement
in
increase
of
and
behavior
should
the
intentions
specificity
60
intentions and behavior,
the
the empirical correlation between behavioral
of
behavior
determinants
data also show statistically significant
migration
to the migration
in addition
intentions variable. The results thus provide
that background
support for the De Jong and Fawcett position
personal
exert an independent effect on migration
be
and structural determinants
move.
to
intentions
havior that is not mediated
by
in his critical essay on the Fishbein
Liska (1984),
that from the attitude-behavior
concludes
perspective,
and Ajzen
model,
as a background
Social structure is conceptualized
Its
variable.
is thought to be mediated
effect on behavior
attitudes
and
by
social struc
subjective norms and then by intentions. Certainly,
ture in part functions this way, especially when
behavior de
alone, such as in laboratory experiments.
pends on motivation
in natural settings also depends on resources
But much behavior
ismore dependent on resources than motivation.
and sometimes
in natural settings show that social structure
Studies of behavior
resources and opportunities,
it allocates
is important because
which
influence behavior and which
directly
provide the me
dium through which attitudes, subjective norms and intentions
are expressed
in behavior.
In the natural setting of llocos Norte, our data show that perceived
and family pressure are indeed important, but, as anticipated
by
these
factors capture only part of the family and other structural
Liska,
influences that are significant for understanding migration behavior.
studies based on the theory of reasoned action and
Many previous
norms
related attitudinal models
in controlled
have been conducted
and artificial
or
measures
are
have
not
that
situations,
dependent
very im
employed
or
to
a
been
with
have
short
time
portant
respondents,
designed
lag be
tween
The present
field
survey of
longitudinal
over
a
intentions
and
behavior
cannot
be
two-year
migration
timespan
criticized on those grounds, but its quality of measurement
be
rela
may
and a sample of re
survey conditions
tively low, owing to Third World
attitudinal questions
and who
spondents who are not used to answering
biases.
the find
may be prone to culturally-induced
response
Nonetheless,
most
the
for
make
raise
the
about
sense,
part
ings
they
important questions
extent to which migration
intentions can serve as a proxy for migration
and they demonstrate
behavior,
quite clearly that the family and com
munity context are critical aspects of migration decisions.
61
REFERENCES
in the
of migration
B. V. (1981). Micro-level
determinants
intentions
R., & Cari?o,
Institute of Philippine
Ateneo
de
llocos: A preliminary
Culture,
analysis. Quezon
City:
Manila
University.
and predicting
social behavior.
attitudes
(1980). Understanding
I., & Fishbein, M.
Ajzen,
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Englewood
of moving
and migra
satisfaction,
Bach, R. L., & Smith, J. (1977). Community
expectations
Abad,
tion. Demography
14, \A7-}61'.
ties: An analysis
and family
of family con
Rural-urban
(1981).
B.,
migration
Banerjee,
in migration
in India. Oxford
behavior
Bulletin
of Economics
and Statistics
siderations
43, 321-345.
a development
L. A., & Sanders,
of migration
R. L. (1981). Toward
with
Brown,
paradigm
In G. F. De Jong & R. W. Gardner
to Third World
reference
(Eds.),
settings.
particular
to microlevel
in devel
decision
studies
Multidisciplinar
approaches
Migration
making:
New York: Pergamon
Press.
countries
(pp. 149-185).
oped and developing
R. W.
Shadow
households
and
(1985).
J. T., & Gardner,
F., Arnold,
F., Fawcett,
Caces,
in the Philippines.
Eco
behavior
Journal of Development
auspices: Migration
competing
nomics
17, 5-25.
T. (1973). Beliefs about birth control: A consistency
Crawford,
Representative
theory analysis.
De
De
De
in Social Psychology
Research
4, 53-65.
An assessment
for migration:
and a value
J. T. (1981). Motivation
Jong, G. F., & Fawcett,
research model.
deci
(Eds.), Migration
expectancy
to microlevel
in developed
sion making: Multidisciplinar
studies
and devel
approaches
New York: Pergamon
Press.
oping countries
(pp. 13-58).
R. W.
decision
(Eds.), (1981). Migration
Jong, G. F., & Gardner,
making:
Multidiscipli
to microlevel
and developing
countries.
New York:
studies in developed
nary approaches
Press.
Pergamon
R. G., Arnold,
B. V., Fawcett,
R. W.
J. T., & Gardner,
F., Cari?o,
Jong, G. F., Abad,
A value-expectancy
and internal migration
International
decision
based
(1983).
making:
from a rural Philippine
framework of intentions to move
International
province.
analytical
Review
17, 470-484.
Migration
S. E. (1981). The analysis of cross-classified
MA: MIT
data. Cambridge,
categorical
Fienberg,
Press.
An introduction
to
I. (1975). Belief, attitude,
intention, and behavior:
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen,
Co.
theory and research.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Publishing
in Indonesia: A critique of explanations
and uneven development
Forbes, D. (1981). Mobility
In G. W.
of migration
and circular migration.
Jones & H. V. Richter
(Eds.), Population
Asia and the Pacific.
and development:
Southeast
Studies Center
mobility
Development
No. 27 (pp. 51-70).
National
Canberra:
Australian
University.
Monograph
S. F. (1981).
in migration
decision
Harbison,
Family structure and family strategy
making.
decision
(Eds.), Migration
making:
Multidisciplinary
to microlevel
in developed
studies
countries
and developing
approaches
(pp. 225-251).
New York: Pergamon
Press.
Knoke, D., & Burke, P. J. (1982). Log-linear models.
Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
structure of the Fishbein/Ajzen
of the causal
atti
Liska, A. E. (1984). A critical examination
model.
Social Psychology
tude-behavior
47, 61-74.
Quarterly
K. E. (1983).
constraints
into an attitude-based
model
of migration
Incorporating
McHugh,
at the Population
intentions.
Association
of America
annual meeting,
Paper presented
PA.
April 14-16,
Pittsburgh,
National
Census
and Statistics Office
of Population.
Vol.
(NCS) (1980). Census
1, Manila:
Bureau of Census.
S. J., & Duncan,
G. J. (1979). Residential
and mobility.
Newman,
dissatisfaction,
problems,
Journal of the American
45, 154-166.
Planning Association
62
to move: Mobility,
R. R., & De Jong, G. F. (1983). Deciding
whether
wishful
thinking
and adjustment.
and Social Research
67, 146-165.
Sociology
Science
and social sciences.
209, 72-78.
Simon, H. A. (1980). The behavioral
in the Philip
pressure and social response on the llocos Coast
Smith, P. C. (1981). Population
HI.
paper No. 2, East-West Population
Institute, Honolulu,
pines. Working
as an intervening
in residential mobility.
satisfaction
variable
Speare, A. (1974). Residential
11, 173-188.
Demography
Sell,
bonds and
(1982). The influence of socio-economic
Speare, A., Kobrin, F., & Kingkade, W.
Social Forces 67, 551-571.
of interstate migration.
satisfaction
V. N. (1982). Social relations and geographic
Male and female migration
Thadani,
mobility:
in Kenya. New York: The Population
Center
for Policy Studies, working
Council.
paper
No. 85.

Migration Intentions and Behavior

Transcription

Similar documents

Dot Net Framework 1.1 to 4.0

by hand - Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak

Maintenance

to view the powerpoint presentation

File

go.bbb.org/hi-isthisforreal - Hawaii Credit Union League

M icro so ft Services P o rtfo lio

Attention All GSU Faculty and Staff Attention All GSU Faculty and Staff

allhiphop - Rackcdn.com

PSDM Success in the Cuban Fold and Thrust Belt