This article was downloaded by: [Aston University]On: 28 January 2014, At: 13:00Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Asian GeographerPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rage20

Urban attraction: Bhutanese internalrural–urban migrationMayur A. Gosai a & Leanne Sulewski ba United States Government , Washington , DC , USAb Department of Geography , University of South Carolina ,Columbia , SC , USAPublished online: 25 Apr 2013.

To cite this article: Mayur A. Gosai & Leanne Sulewski , Asian Geographer (2013): Urban attraction:Bhutanese internal rural–urban migration, Asian Geographer, DOI: 10.1080/10225706.2013.790830

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10225706.2013.790830

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Urban attraction: Bhutanese internal rural–urban migration

Mayur A. Gosaia* and Leanne Sulewskib

aUnited States Government, Washington, DC, USA; bDepartment of Geography, University of SouthCarolina, Columbia, SC, USA

(Received 14 October 2012; final version received 26 March 2013)

Internal migration in developing countries often occurs in a rural–urban migration context. Inmany Asian countries, rural–urban migration has been widely documented; however, it has notbeen widely documented in the Bhutanese context. Bhutan, a landlocked country in SoutheastAsia, is situated between China and India, with China to the north and India to the south. Thisresearch documents the rural–urban migration that is occurring in Bhutan using data from themost recent Population and Housing Census of Bhutan, conducted in 2005, and GeographicInformation Systems to identify spatial migration patterns, identifying Bhutanese urbanareas as having the highest percentage of in-migrants, and the rural areas as having thehighest number of out-migrants. This research also uses ancillary information to helpexplain the patterns from the Population and Housing Census of Bhutan data.

Keywords: Bhutan; migration; rural–urban migration

Introduction

Rural–urban migration in developing countries often occurs in response to modernization press-ures, especially when evolving from an agricultural-based economy to more service and indus-trial-based economy (Lall, Selod, and Shalizi 2006). Modernization pressures on developingcountries are manifested in a variety of different ways. In the case of Bhutan, these modernizationpressures are exhibited through reduction of forest cover and urban growth (Gosai 2009). Todaro(1969) indicates movement to urban, higher productivity jobs is one of the major pull factorsbringing rural residents to the urban areas. Push factors include, but are not limited to, lack ofaccess to markets, transportation, and education. Although this phenomenon has appeared tohave slowed in many countries, in many less-developed countries this phenomenon is a majorcontributing factor to urban growth. Lall, Selod, and Shalizi (2006) cite the experiences ofAfrica, with rural–urban migration accounting for 25% of the urban growth from 1980 to1990, and India, with rural–urban migration accounting for 30% of the urban growth in the1990s. Bhutan is also one such less-developed countries experiencing urban growth due torural–urban migration (United Nations Development Program 2009).

Bhutan is a unique country, secluded in the foothills of the Himalayas between China andIndia, but it is still subject to many of the same modernization issues that other developingnations are facing (Figure 1). This country is most famous for its unique gross national happiness(GNH) philosophy, but it has also come to be known as the country with the highest internal

© 2013 Hong Kong Geographical Association

*Corresponding author. Email: magosai@gmail.com

Asian Geographer, 2013http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10225706.2013.790830

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

migration rate in Southeast Asia, with an internal migration rate of 6% (United Nations Develop-ment Program 2009). Although this high rate of internal migration may be viewed as a negativetrend, Deshingkar (2006) indicates that internal migration could reduce poverty and contribute toeconomic growth in Asia.

Trends in migration literature

Theories of migration have changed and grown over time as a better understanding of why peoplemigrate emerged; however, every migration theory is not without its proponents and opponents.Theories have ranged from neoclassical theories to contemporary theories. Some of these theorieshave built upon each other, while other theories sought new explanations for migration.

The original source of neoclassical theories of migration was Lewis’ “Economic Developmentwith Unlimited Supply of Labor”, where dual economies are the key to explaining migration.Dual economies refer to economies that are still developing, where one economy is connectedto other countries, which is called the modern sector, and the other relies on subsistence agricul-ture. The modern sector expands and takes labor from the agricultural sector. Out-migration from

Figure 1. Bhutan’s location in the Asian context.

2 M.A. Gosai and L. Sulewski

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

the agricultural sector is the only way to get rid of surplus labor, making migration crucial to thedevelopment of economies (Lewis 1954; Arango 2000).

Neoclassical theories of migration, on the other hand, maintain that migration results from theuneven geographical distribution of money and labor. Migration results from the decisions ofpeople who seek to improve their lives whether the rewards for their work are higher (Sjaastad1962). Arango (2000) maintains that the downfall of neoclassical theories was the changing char-acter of international migration since the mid-1970s. Arango (2000) also discusses that a short-coming is its exclusion of political dimensions. It is important to note that these changes donot pertain as much to Bhutan, for Bhutan does not experience as much international migrationas internal migration, and so the political dimension is not as important in Bhutanese migration(Norbu 2008).

Contemporary migration theories include the new economics of labor migration, the duallabor market theory, the world system theory, and migration networks. Most of these theoriesmainly refer to international migration, of which, as stated, Bhutan has very little.Contemporary theories of migration often only deal with one aspect of migration (e.g. receivingversus sending). For example, the dual labor market theory (Piore 1979) deals mainly with thereceiving end, dealing with the reasons why foreign labor will be necessary in advancedsocieties.

Another contemporary theory is the new economics of labor migration, developed by Starkand Bloom (1985), dealing mainly with the sending side of migration. This contemporarytheory builds on the neoclassical theory, but focuses more on the family unit as a primaryreason for migration. The family, rather than the individual, is the deciding factor in migrationto help increase income (Taylor 1999). Arango (2000) maintains that this theory is flawed,particularly because it seems to describe unusual cases, drawing the majority of its evidencefrom Mexican villages.

Asian migration

Migration studies in Asia have shown a rural–urban migration trend throughout the continent(Deshingkar 2006). While the majority of India’s current migration includes the migration of tem-porary labor and Indonesia’s migration is characterized by return migration, other Asiancountries, such as Vietnam, are having more permanent internal migration trends to largecities. In Vietnam’s case, migration primarily takes place from rural areas to Ho Chi Minh City(Deshingkar 2006). Dang, Goldstein, and McNally (1997) presented an internal migrationstudy utilizing census data in Vietnam, showing the importance of economic and employmentopportunities as key magnets for internal migrants. China has also had a history of rural–urbanmigration, with the government attempting to partially address this migration using the Hukousystem beginning in 1958, where mobility was restricted with a series of permits, recruitment,and enrollment certificates (Chan and Zhang 1999).

Research goals

Since most research on rural–urban migration in Asia had been conducted prior to 2000, withno reference to migration in the Bhutanese context, the goal of this research is fill this voidin Asian migration literature by examining Bhutanese internal migration. This researchdetermines the spatial migration patterns within the country of Bhutan and determines potentialreasons for internal migration in the unique Bhutanese context, using 2005 Bhutanese censusdata.

Asian Geographer 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Study area

Bhutan is about the size of Switzerland, though it only has about a tenth of Switzerland’s popu-lation, with a population of only 691,141 (RGoB 2005). Thimphu is the capital city, and currentlyaccommodates one-third of the total urban population in the country, which was 137,864 in theyear 2000 (RGoB 2005). With regard to its administrative boundaries, Bhutan is subdivided into20 dzongkhags, which are structurally similar to states in the USA (Figure 2). Dzongkhags arefurther subdivided into 209 gewogs (which are structurally analogous to counties in the USA),which are even further subdivided into 1906 chiwogs. The boundaries of the gewogs are ever-changing, as well. In early 2008, Toepisa and Bapisa gewogs were removed from Thimphudzongkhag and given over to the Punakha dzongkhag. Although there is no documentedreason for this transition, it can be speculated that Toepisa and Bapisa gewogs were transferredto Punakha dzongkhag because they are culturally more similar to those gewogs in Punakhadzongkhag than those in Thimphu dzongkhag.

Bhutan is most well-known for its unique developmental and cultural philosophy of GNH. Itrecognizes the need to balance material well-being with the spiritual, emotional, and cultural well-being of the individual and society for holistic development (RGoB 1999; Kezang 2004; Thinley2005; Rossellini et. al. 2006; Wangchuck, Kunsel Newspaper, November 8, 2007). This philos-ophy consists of four basic pillars: sustainable and equitable socioeconomic development, conser-vation of the environment, preservation and promotion of culture, and promotion of goodgovernance (The Centre for Bhutan Studies 2012).

Bhutan’s economy is dominated by growth in the development of hydropower and the utiliz-ation of natural resource-based industries that make use of low-priced power. Hydropoweraccounted for 12% of their GDP in 2003 (Rosellini et al. 2006; Uddin, Taplin, and Yu 2007).Its exports accounted for about 45% of government revenues in 2003 (Rosellini et al. 2006;Uddin, Taplin, and Yu 2007). With several hydropower projects currently under construction

Figure 2. Bhutan’s subdivision into 20 dzongkhags.

4 M.A. Gosai and L. Sulewski

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

as of the latest publication of the Bhutan National Urbanization Strategy (2008), hydropower isprojected to remain a critical engine of economic growth. Forest environments are an importanteconomic resource, as they are associated with approximately 90% of Bhutan’s economy (RGoB1999).

Data-sets and methods

The need for a population and housing census in Bhutan was recognized by the government inMarch 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs received an order from the Royal Government toconduct a nationwide census. Prior to the 2005 census, the country’s population was based onestimates from various surveys and administrative (dzongkhag) records (Dorji, Kuensel Newspa-per). The ministry consulted the United Nations Population Fund and submitted a proposal thatfollowed international standards of conducting a census. His Majesty approved the proposal andauthorized the Office of the Census Commissioner to conduct the Population Housing Census ofBhutan (PHCB) by the end of 2005. The PHCB of 2005 was conducted over the course of twodays (30 and 31 May 2005). A total of 7500 enumerators, supervisors, and administrators wereinvolved throughout the country in the census exercise (RGoB 2005). The (i) PHCB 2A (house-hold list), (ii) PHCB 2B (Household member list), (iii) PHCB 2C (Individual details), and (iv)PHCB 2D (Household information) forms were used to collect the raw census data. Householdto gewog aggregated census data were created for population characteristics, migration, health,education, labor and employment, and household and housing characteristics. This census wasa very thorough count of the nation’s population yielding a 100% census count. Prior to thecensus, personnel were trained and prerequisite questionnaires and data, such as mapping ofall administrative units (dzonkghags, gewogs, and chiwogs), were created. On 30 May 2005,all people, regardless of their nationality, were counted, and people on the move were documentedin the enumeration untied they were found in. The data were tabulated in SPSS at all the gewog,dzongkhag, and national levels. No accuracy assessment was conducted on the data, as it is a100% count of the population (National Statistics Bureau 2005).

The key definitions for understanding the migration data collected by the PHCB include thedefinitions of migration, in-migrant, out-migrant, place of enumeration, place of birth, lifetimemigrant, and net-migration (Table 1).

These census data were acquired in tabular form, requiring the creation of dzongkhag andgewog shapefiles (vector data utilized by geographic information systems for display and analy-sis) for the spatial context. Much of the detailed data for Bhutan are not available for downloadfrom any of the government departments, and so it needed to be manually created. First, a gewogscale map from the PHCB was rectified, matching the map without geographic reference to themost recent shapefile of the dzongkhag boundaries, which had geographic coordinates. Thiswas done to ensure that all of the geographic data used for these analyses had the same projection.

A gewog shapefile was created in ArcGIS’s ArcCatalog, using the same projection as theexisting dzongkhag shapefile (WGS_1984_UTM_Zone_46N). Utilizing the “Editor Toolbar”in ArcGIS, new features were created for each individual gewog. The gewogs were snapped tothe dzongkhag boundaries, using the “trace” features, to ensure that any common boundariesbetween the dzongkhags and the gewogs were not misaligned. In total, all 205 gewogs weremanually digitized.

Once all of the gewogs were digitized, variables from the PHCB were joined to the gewogs.The tabular data were obtained from the National Statistic Bureau’s ArcIMS website (http://www.nsb.gov.bt/GIS/phcb/index.htm), where it was downloaded and organized in an excel spreadsheetfor easy importation into ArcGIS. Some of the variables extracted include; population,in-migration, out-migration, net-migration, rural population, urban population, water facilities,

Asian Geographer 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

toilet facilities, access to health care, distance to motor road, source of lighting, and source ofcooking fuel. Each gewog feature had a unique feature identification number (FID) in the shape-file, which is also a column in the tabular data. These unique identification numbers were used tojoin each gewog to its respective data. For example, if the FID for Thimphu was 2, all of the attri-butes in the “2” row of the tabular data would be joined to the shapefile feature of the samenumber. After the initial data creation, population and migration numbers were analyzed inArcGIS at the dzongkhag and gewog levels for overall spatial patterns in migration.

Results

The following sections will detail the internal migration trends in Bhutan. The first section willdiscuss the general migration patterns that are occurring within the country. The secondsection discusses the dzongkhag-wise migration that is occurring, and the third section discussesthe gewog-wise migration. Overall, the dzongkhags that received the highest number of migrantswere the dzongkhags containing larger urban centers. In terms of gewog migration patternsKawang and Chang gewogs had the highest number or percentage of migrants. Kawang andChang gewogs are located in Thimphu dzongkhags and Thimphu city is split into these twogewogs (Figure 3).

Demographics in Bhutan

It is important to understand the population demographics before discussing migration issues inBhutan. The actual resident population of Bhutan, using the definition of the PHCB 2005, whichstated it measured “population that is known to occupy a specific area for at least a part of theyear”, surveyed on the census day of 30 April 2005 stood at 634,982 persons, out of which333,595 persons (52.5%) were males and 301,387 persons (47.5%) were females (National Stat-istics Bureau 2005, 17). The most populated dzongkhag is Thimphu, with 98,676 persons,

Table 1. Definition for the migration data for the National Statistics Bureau (2005, 139) verbatim.

Term Definition

Migrant A form of geographical mobility or spatial mobility between one geographical area toanother, generally involving a change of residence form the place of origin to theplace of destination

In-migrant A person who enters a geographical area crossing its boundary from a place outside itwithin the same country

Out-migrant A person who departs a geographical area crossing its boundary to another placeoutside it, within the same country

Place ofenumeration

The place where an individual was found and enumerated on the day of the census

Place of birth Place of the mother’s usual residence at the time of his/her birth. If the person was bornoutside Bhutan, the name of the country was taken as the person’s birth place. Theplace of birth data make it possible to classify the population into migrants andnonmigrants

Lifetime migrants A person whose area of residence at the time of the census date differs from the area ofbirth is a lifetime migrant. The migrants are defined as people who were enumeratedin a place different from the place where they were born

Nonmigrant A person who enumerated where they were bornNet-migration The difference between the in-migration and the out-migration, which can be positive

or negative

6 M.A. Gosai and L. Sulewski

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

accounting for 15.5% of the total population, followed by Chhukha, with 74,387 persons (11.7%),and Samtse with 60,100 persons (9.5%). These three dzongkhags account for 36.7% of the totalpopulation of Bhutan. The least populated dzongkhag is Gasa, with 3116 persons (0.5%), fol-lowed by Haa, with 11,648 persons (1.8%), and Pemagatshel with 13,864 persons (2.2%).These three dzongkhags are all considered to be rural dzongkhags. Rural dzongkhags primarilyhave settlements that have less than 10,000 households. Agriculture is the main source ofincome (National Statistics Bureau 2005).

Thimphu dzongkhag has the largest urban population, with 79,185 persons residing inThimphu city, accounting for 80.3% of the dzongkhag’s total population. Thimphu is followedby Chhukha and Sarpang dzongkhags, with urban populations of 32,926 (44.3%) and 12,596(30.3%), respectively (Department of Urban Development and Engineering Services 2004).With a total surface area of 38,816 square kilometers and a total population of 634,982, thepopulation density of Thimphu is 54 persons per square kilometer. Thimphu is the mostdensely populated dzongkhag, whereas the least densely populated is Gasa with apopulation density of 1 person per square kilometer (National Statistics Bureau 2005). Gasahas a total area of 3,117.74 square kilometers, and a population of 3116 persons. However,it is important to note that nearly one-third of Gasa dzongkhag is covered by perennial snowand ice. The population density of 54 persons per square kilometer is relatively small comparedwith other capitals around the world. For example, the population density of Washington, DC is3722 square kilometers with an area size of 177 square kilometers (US Census Bureau 2008).

Dzongkhag migration patterns

Among the dzongkhags, Thimphu has received the highest number (54,685) of migrants,followed by Chhukha (25,951) and Sarpang (17,997). In these dzongkhags the urban centers,Thimphu and Phuntsholing, are ranked highest in population nationwide. In terms of

Figure 3. Location of Thimphu City (capital city) in the gewog and dzongkhag context.

Asian Geographer 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

out-migration, Trashigang, with a total of 23,802, is the highest, followed by Monggar with12,871 persons (Figure 4). There were a total of 111,770 migrants who had moved from ruralareas to the urban, while 19,992 have moved from urban to rural areas. Net-migration inThimphu has the highest net gain with 39,770 persons, and Trashigang has the highest net lossof 16,697 persons as shown in Figure 5 (National Statistics Bureau 2005). Figure 6 shows themigration flows between the dzongkhags. The overall movement is from east to west, from themore rural Bhutan to the more urban Bhutan. There are, however, some interesting migration pat-terns that emerge other than the migration into Thimphu. There are also a large number of in-migrants to Chhuka dzongkhag, just south of Thimphu dzongkhag. Chhuka dzongkhag is thesite of two major hydropower plants in Bhutan. These hydropower plants provide a number ofemployment opportunities for people not only in western Bhutan, but also for migrants fromeastern Bhutan (Figure 7). There is also a large amount of migrants into Sarpang dzongkhagfrom Zhemgang dzongkhag. Sarpang dzonkhag in the southernmost central dzongkhag inBhutan, and is considered the commercial hub of central Bhutan. This in part helps to explainthe in migration to Sarpang from the surrounding dzongkhags.

A study by the Ministry of Agriculture (MoA 2005) describes several reasons for migration inBhutan. Two broad types of factors (push and pull) exist in rural–urban migration. On the receiv-ing end, with regard to Thimphu and other urban areas, pull factors accelerate the process ofrural–urban migration. Opposite to that, in the rural areas, push factors are the main motivators.

Figure 4. Out-migration by dzongkhag as enumerated by the Population and Housing Census of Bhutan in2005.Source: Royal Government of Bhutan, National Statistics Bureau, 2005.

8 M.A. Gosai and L. Sulewski

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

The lack of educational facilities (46%) is the most common push factor. Other reasons forleaving rural areas include: lack of job opportunities (17%), inadequate service facilities(15%), and small land holdings (7%). In terms of pull factors the primary reason for migratinginto the city was the availability better employment opportunities (33%). Many of these migrantslive with relatives or friends. Other pull factors include: spouse relocated (24%), religious pur-suits (9%) and better business opportunities (4%). The Bhutan Times reported that the majorreason for migration to urban areas is due to poverty, few amenities, and poor living standardsin rural areas (Tenzin, Bhutan Times, November 16, 2012). Urban areas often contain the hopeof better employment, higher wages, and amenities that are not readily available in rural areas.Tourism is a major industry, and western Bhutan, as well as the Bumthang area of centralBhutan are major tourist destinations. Bhutanese looking to leave rural areas would likelymigrate to these areas to try to start a business or become employed with an existing businessdue to the inflow of money that is generated from the tourist economy of these places. Whilesome might argue that there are more complexities at work with Bhutanese rural–urbanmigration, such as those described in the New Economies of Labor Migration theory, there isnot as much globalization and contact with the western world in Bhutan as there is in manyother less-developed countries, such as India. Bhutan’s capital city of Thimphu does not evencontain a modern traffic light!

Figure 5. Net-migration by dzongkhag as enumerated by the Population and Housing Census of Bhutan in2005.Source: Royal Government of Bhutan, Population and Housing Census, National Statistics Bureau, 2005.

Asian Geographer 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Figure 6. Proportional flow map of dzongkhag migration flows.

Figure 7. Attractions for migrants.Source: Royal Government of Bhutan, Population and Housing Census, National Statistics Bureau, 2005.

10 M.A. Gosai and L. Sulewski

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Gewog migration patterns

The migration trends at both the dzongkhag and gewog scale follow similar patterns on the receiv-ing end. At the gewog scale Kawang and Chang located in Thimphu dzongkhag had the highestin-migrants similar to the dzongkhag patterns. The population demographics differ slightly at thegewog scale in terms of density along the main road connecting western Bhutan to the east. Asnoted earlier, the most populated dzongkhag is Thimphu and within this dzongkhag, Thimphucity is located in two gewogs, Chang and Kawang. Chang’s total population is 38,586 andKawang’s total population is 38,599. Together, both gewogs account for 83% of the total popu-lation for Thimphu dzongkhag (Figure 8).

Discussions

The results at both the dzongkhag and gewog scale indicate a strong east to west migration in thecountry, with the majority of the migration occurring into the capital city’s dzongkhag andgewogs. The vast majority of the positive net-migration occurred in the western part of thecountry (Thimphu and Chhuka with the highest number of net migrants). Western Bhutan is con-sidered more developed than the rural eastern region. The majority of urban centers such asThimphu, Phuntsholing, and Paro are located in western Bhutan. The one exception to this isBumthang dzongkhag, which is also a popular tourist destination for foreign tourists.

Examination of several census variables related to the quality of life illustrates this dichotomyas well as factors that would push migrants from the rural areas to the urban areas. The rural

Figure 8. In-migration by gewog as enumerated by the Population and Housing Census of Bhutan in 2005.Source: Royal Government of Bhutan, Population and Housing Census, National Statistics Bureau, 2005.

Asian Geographer 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

communities, by far concentrated in the eastern part of the country, face many problems such asmarket access, insufficient means of transportation, lack of business expertise, low levels of lit-eracy, acute shortages in modern skills, poor nutrition and health indicators, gender disparities,and inequitable access to better paying employment opportunities within their environment(ADB 2001). The rural areas are facing many economic problems with lack of access to edu-cation, which may “push” the younger generation in rural areas to leave their communities inorder to accomplish their economic and social goals (MoA 2005). The variables examinedinclude access to piped water facilities, access to toilet facilities, access to health care, andaccess to electricity for lighting.

A total 84.2% of the households in Bhutan have access to piped water facilities (22.7% withinthe house and 61.5% outside the house). In the urban areas, 53.7% of households reported thatthey have piped water within the house, but only 9.2% did so in the rural areas. Of the totalrural households 69% have access to piped water outside the house and 19.9% still depend onspring, river, or pond as their main source of drinking water. The vast majority of the areaswith access to piped water facilities are in the western part of the country (Figure 9). Withlimited access to water indoors, water facilities and access to these facilities can be considereda push factor from rural areas.

Another amenity of extreme importance is access to toilet facilities. Of the total, 89.2%households in Bhutan are reported to have access to toilet facilities. According to the census49.8% of the households that have access to toilet facilities use a pit toilet followed by those

Figure 9. Geographic distributions of homes with access to piped water facilities.Source: Royal Government of Bhutan, Population and Housing Census, National Statistics Bureau, 2005.

12 M.A. Gosai and L. Sulewski

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

with independent flush toilets inside the house. Among the households that use independentflush toilets inside the house, 32.3% are in Thimphu dzongkhag and 22.4% are in Chhukhadzongkhag. Majority of these are in urban areas of Thimphu and Phuentsholing cities. In therural areas, 64.1% of the households use a pit toilet, which is equivalent to an outhouse witha hole dug in the ground. The majority of these flush toilets are located in the western partof the country, in a similar geographic pattern to that of access to piped water inside thehouse (Figure 10).

Another major push factor to move from rural to urban areas is access to using electricity as asource of lighting. It is reported that 57.1% of the total households in Bhutan use electricity astheir main source of lighting followed by firewood and kerosene with 36.5%. In the urbanareas, 96.4% of the households reported that they use electricity as their main source of lightin comparison with 3.6% of the rural households. The National Statistics Bureau (2005) reportedthat most households in rural areas depend on firewood as their main source of lighting. Onceagain, the geographic distribution of houses using electricity for lighting are disproportionallylocated in the western part of the country (Figure 11).

While all three of the displayed census variables indicate this west–east dichotomy, there are afew exceptions. In central Bhutan, Bumthang dzongkhag has gewogs that have a relatively largenumber of these amenities present. This is partly due to the interest in Bumthang as a touristattraction for incoming tourists. These amenities are probably reflective of hotels and othertourist destinations in Bumthang. Additionally, Orong gewog in Samdrup Jongkhar, in the

Figure 10. Geographic distribution of homes with flush toilets.Source: Royal Government of Bhutan, Population and Housing Census, National Statistics Bureau, 2005.

Asian Geographer 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

southernmost part of east Bhutan, also is characterized by a large number of places with electricityfor lighting. This is once again likely largely due to tourism, as this is the only entry point toBhutan in eastern Bhutan. Future research will further examine variables such as these to high-light the west–east and rural–urban dichotomy.

Migration and policy

All of the variables described help explain the overall pull toward urban centers and push awayfrom rural areas. Although internal migration is not necessarily a negative occurrence, the Bhu-tanese government has taken several steps to reduce rural–urban migration. One such initiative isthe rural electrification project. The project was funded by the ADB from 1992 through 1997. Theprimary goal of this project was to provide a gradual replacement by electricity of other types offuel in rural areas. The secondary objective was to provide a basic infrastructure to supportBhutan’s transformation from a subsistence economy to a market economy. The lack of electricpower is a major bottleneck in achieving the country’s development goals. Bringing electricity torural areas would improve the living standards of rural communities and possibly minimize therate of migration. At the time of project assessment in 1995, firewood accounted for about77% of energy consumption; 80% of the population did not have access to electricity (ADB2003). At the end of the project in 2000 the rural electrification ratio in the country increasedonly 4% from 20% to 24%. Notably the project did not have a significant impact in other ruralparts of Bhutan. Further work with rural electrification may decrease migration.

Figure 11. Geographic distribution of homes with electricity for lighting.Source: Royal Government of Bhutan, Population and Housing Census, National Statistics Bureau, 2005.

14 M.A. Gosai and L. Sulewski

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

In addition to the rural electrification project, there have been additional initiatives by theBhutanese government to help reduce rural–urban migration while promoting their GNH philos-ophy, especially the pillar of promotion of sustainable development. One initiative to promotesustainable development in Bhutan is to create regional urban hubs, which will help generatemore balanced urban development and create markets for the surrounding rural areas. Thepurpose of this initiative is to more equally spread urban opportunities across the country,while lowering the economic and infrastructure pressures (National Environment Commission2012). The ultimate goal is to deter the rural populations from migrating to the urban areas bycreating more opportunities closer to the rural areas.

Conclusions

Internal migration in developing nations often occurs as rural–urban migration, which is the casein Bhutan. This research determined the highest areas of in-, out-, and net-migration, showing adichotomy between western and eastern Bhutan. The western region of Bhutan contains many ofthe urban centers, including the capital city of Thimphu. Like many other developing nations,there are various factors pulling migrants to these urban centers, including access to healthcare, electricity, piped water, and toilet facilities. Despite the government’s best efforts withpolicy and other means migration still continues. To discourage and slow migration, governmentpolicies need to address issues such as: access to land, opportunities, and skills development. Ifpoverty and migration reduction are key objectives, the initiatives need to be accompanied byother efforts that increase their access to markets, skills, and seed capital.

ReferencesADB (Asian Development Bank). 2001. “Poverty Reduction Partnership Agreement between the Royal

Government of Bhutan and the Asian Development Bank.” Accessed September 6, 2008. http://www.adb.org/Documents/Poverty/pa_bhu.pdf

ADB. 2003. Project Performance Audit Report on the Rural Electrification Project in Bhutan. Manila: AsianDevelopment Bank.

Arango, J. 2000. “Explaining Migration: A Critical Review.” International Social Science Journal 52 (165):283–296.

Chan, K. W., and L. Zhang. 1999. “The Hukou System and Rural-Urban Migration in China: Processes andChanges.” China Quarterly 160: 818–855.

Dang, A., S. Goldstein, and J. McNally. 1997. “Internal Migration and Development in Vietnam.” InternalMigration Review 31 (2): 312–337.

Department of Urban Development and Engineering Services. 2004. “Thimphu Structural Plan.”Department of Urban Development and Engineering Services. http://www.duddh.gov.bt/Thimphustructural/Index.html

Deshingkar, P. 2006. “Internal Migration, Poverty and Development in Asia.” Promoting Growth EndingPoverty Asia 2015, March 6–7.

Gosai, M. A. 2009. “Land Use Change in Thimphu, Bhutan from 1990-2007: Effects of Cultural, Political,and Economic Frameworks.” PhD Thesis, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro.

Kezang, W. J. 2004. “Telecommunications in the Land of the Thunder Dragon: Recent Developments inBhutan.” Telecommunications Policy 28 (11): 785–800.

Lall, S. V., H. Selod, and Z. Shalizi. 2006. Rural-Urban Migration in Developing Countries: A Survey ofTheoretical Predictions and Empirical Findings. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3915.

Lewis, W. A. 1954. “Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labour.” Manchester School ofEconomic and Social Studies 22 (2): 139–191.

MOA (Ministry of Agriculture). 2005. Rural Urban Migration in Bhutan. Policy and Planning Division ofthe Ministry of Agriculture. Thimphu: Royal Government of Bhutan.

National Environment Commission. 2012. Bhutan: In Pursuit of Sustainable Development. Thimphu:National Environment Commission.

Asian Geographer 15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

National Statistics Bureau. 2005. Population and Housing Census of Bhutan 2005. Thimphu: NationalStatistics Bureau.

Norbu, N. 2008. “Labour Migration Trends, Policies, and Challenges.” Accessed April 12, 2013. http://www.adbi.org/files/2008.05.29.cpp.norbu.country.presentations.bhutan.pdf

Piore, M. J. 1979. Birds of Passage: Migrant Labor in Industrial Societies. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

RGoB (Royal Government of Bhutan). 1999. Forest Resources of Bhutan: Country Report. Rome: ForestResource Division.

RGoB. 2005. Population Fact Sheet. Thimphu: Bhutan Census, National Statistics Bureau.Rosellini, N., D. Gustafson, A. Wijeyesekera, and G. Daly. 2006. Bhutan Common Country Assessment.

Thimphu: UN House.Sjaastad, L. A. 1962. “The Costs and Returns of Human Migration.” Journal of Political Economy 70 (5):

80–93.Stark, O., and D. Bloom. 1985. “The New Economics of Labor Migration.” The American Economic Review,

75 (3): 173–178.Taylor, J. E. 1999. “The New Economics of Labor Migration and the Role of Remittances in the Migration

Process.” International Migration 37 (1): 63–88.The Centre for Bhutan Studies. 2012. “Gross National Happiness.” Accessed October 21, 2010. http://www.

grossnationalhappiness.com/Thinley, J. 2005. “What Does Gross National Happiness (GNH) Mean?” Keynote speech, 2nd international

conference on GNH, Halifax, Canada.Todaro, M. 1969. “A Model of Labor Migration and Urban Unemployment in Less Developed Countries.”

American Economic Association 59 (1): 138–148.Uddin, S., R. Taplin, and X. Yu. 2007. “Energy, Environment and Development in Bhutan.” Renewable and

Sustainable Energy Reviews 11 (9): 2083–2103.United Nations Development Program. 2009. Human Development Report 2009: Overcoming Barriers:

Human Mobility and Development. New York: United Nations Development Program.United States Census Bureau. 2008. “District of Columbia Quick Facts.” Accessed October 21, 2011. http://

quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/11000.html

16 M.A. Gosai and L. Sulewski

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Ast

on U

nive

rsity

] at

13:

00 2

8 Ja

nuar

y 20

14