Sunday, May 09, 2004
>On migration, Carl, you say that migration needs to be regulated effectively - any ideas on what an effective regulation might be?

Rachit, regulated in two ways:
1) Holistic policy, involving all those areas covered in our posts.

2) Specifically regulated by providing good information to rural folk-- many rural people have exaggerated expectations of opportunities in the city. Some are naive, some are conned into a vicious cycle of urban poverty. Govt representatives at village levels need to discuss this as a specific issue with village folk, and then they can throw up ideas for co-operative development in rural areas itself; among rural settlements itself.

On the other hand, urban areas must tighten squatter laws, etc which dissuade rural immigrants without a clue about what they're coming into cities to do. In China they have a permit system that requires proof of employment in the urban area. I'm not usggesting that we replicate this model, but its gives you an idea. In the interest of the rural folk, their illusions about urban opportunity must be dispelled. Then they will be forced to work co-operatively for self-employment in rural areas or smaller towns. Self-employment is already a keystone message of govt programs in rural areas, and that includes Naidu's programs too. But Naidu's overdone hype about Hyderabad, etc goes against this information asymmetry problem that causes this excess supply of labour.

One very good example of an idea that helps promote economic links b/w Hyderabad and rural areas is the Ra'yat Bazaar idea of Naidu's govt, in which the state provided transport for rural peasants to bring their agricultural produce into well-laid out bazaars at different points in Hyderabad. The exploitative middleman was eliminated, the farmers got a bigger slice of the sales, and the urban customer got ridiculously lower prices for his gorceries.

Comments: Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger