Filipinos

on the
Move
Current Patterns and Factors of Internal
Migration in the Philippines
Dr. Juan Antonio Perez III
Executive Director, POPCOM
BACKGROUND
• The process of urbanization is an intrinsic
dimension of economic and social
development
• Internal migration remains the main driver
of rapid urbanization in the country
• As the Philippines goes through the
process of urbanization, socio-economic
inequality between rural and urban areas
is becoming more prominent
BACKGROUND
• Migration has economic, social and
environmental implications - both positive and
negative - for the places of origin and
destination
• Thus, there is a need to understand internal
migration patterns and factors to foster a
more balanced spatial distribution of the
population by promoting in an integrated
manner the equitable and ecologically
sustainable development of major sending
and receiving areas
RAPID APPRAISAL OF INTERNAL
MIGRATION FACTORS
• The Commission on Population conducted a
rapid appraisal of the key factors of internal
migration (September-November 2014) that
looked into:
• Existing patterns and trends of Filipinos
mobility
• The prevailing factors associated with
decisions to migrate and decision to stay in a
locality (not move)
RAPID APPRAISAL OF INTERNAL
MIGRATION FACTORS
• Methodology
• Focused Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key
Informant Interviews (KII) among:
• 9 Local Chief Executives
• 9 Local Planning and Population Officers
• 32 Barangay Officials
• 270 residents and in-migrants (youth,
men, and women)
 Study Area Date of FGD/KII
Bgy. Cayabu, Tanay, Rizal September 26, 2014
Bgy. Victoria, San Andres, Romblon October 15, 2014
Bgy. Igpalge, Barbaza, Antique October 23, 2014
Bgy. San Roque, Socorro, Surigao del October 21, 2014
Norte
Sitio Payag-eo, Sagada, Mt. Province November 20, 2014
Olongapo City February 2015
Mandaluyong City February 2015
Cebu City February 2015
Davao City February 2015
CONCEPTS
Migration- movement of people into or out of an
area to establish new permanent residence in the
area of destination crossing a defined territorial
boundary
Migrant- a person who changed his/her
municipal/city residence between 1995 to 2000
Residence- the place where an enumerated
person usually resides
 HISTORICAL MIGRATION
•PATTERNS
Internal migration in the country has been
historically dynamic
1965-1970 1975-1980
HISTORICAL MIGRATION
PATTERNS
1985-1990
 1995-2000
• Region IVA became
the destination of
most migrants with
significantly large
CALABARZO
N proportion coming
from Metro Manila

METRO
MANILA
 MIGRATION DATA FROM 2010 CPH
Place of Residence in 2005
(Figures are in thousand)
Different City/
Same City/
Household Municipality but the Different Province Foreign
Municipality as in
Population 5 same Province as in as that in 2010 Country
Region of Residence 2010 Not
Years and 2010
Report
Over
ed
(Domestic Short- (Domestic Long
(Non-Movers) (Immigrants)
distance Movers) Distance Movers)

Philippines 81,866 78,987 1,300 1,442 120 17

National Capital Region 10,624 10,121 200 284 19 1
CAR 1,442 1,383 26 28 5 *
I-Ilocos Region 4,248 4,149 37 46 16 *
II-Cagayan Valley 2,881 2,821 29 23 7 *
III-Central Luzon 9,044 8,705 135 188 15 *
IVA-CALABARZON 11,216 10,572 226 400 18 *
IVB-MIMAROPA 2,400 2,340 28 29 2 *
V-Bicol Region 4,748 4,625 55 63 5 *
VI-Western Visayas 6,351 6,220 77 46 8 *
VII-Central Visayas 6,033 5,821 131 73 8 *
VIII-Eastern Visayas 3,611 3,508 44 56 3 *
IX-Zamboanga Peninsula 2,990 2,925 39 23 2 *
X-Northern Mindanao 3,775 3,652 73 47 3 *
XI-Davao 3,938 3,806 73 55 4 *
XII-SOCCSKARGEN 3,614 3,516 54 39 3 2
XIII-Caraga 2,136 2,061 35 39 1 *
MIGRATION DATA FROM 2010 CPH
• There were around 2.9 million Filipinos who moved
within the period 2005-2010
• There were 50.4% (1.4M) long-distance movers or
people who lived in a different province in 2005
• Region IVA continues to be the most preferred area
of migrants with 28% of long distance movers
• Metro Manila has 20 percent and Region III has 13
percent of the long distance movers
• Persons who resided in 2005 in a different city or
municipality but within the same province accounted
for 45.4%
 37% of Filipinos are living in CALABARZON, Metro
Manila, and Central Luzon in 2010
12.6
11.8
10.1

7.1 6.8
5.4
4.7
4.1 4.3 4.5 4.1
3.2 3.4 3.3
2.7 2.4
1.6

C R A R n
I II III IVA IVB n V V I
V II III IX n X XI XII ga M
N C gio o n n o n n V n o n n ra M
e e gi gio ion ion
e gi
gio
gi o i o n gio
e gi gio gio C a
A R
R R Re Re g Re g R Re Re Re g Re R Re Re

Source: PSA, 2010 CPH

Provinces with level of urbanization higher than the
national level (2010)

Rizal 92.7
Laguna 71.9
Bulacan 70.9
Cavite 63.9
Davao del Norte 63.1
Negros Occidental 58.4
Pampanga 56.5
South Cotabato 49.4
Bataan 48.1
OTHER FACTS
• The urban population in the Philippines increased on
average by 4.0 percent annually during the period
2007 to 2010
• 13.6 percent or 5,697 barangays in 2010 were
classified as urban
• Majority (64.8%) of the urban barangays in 2010
have a population size of at least 5,000
 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR
UNDERSTANDING INTERNAL MIGRATION
DECISIONS
Intention to Move
Decision
Factors for
External/Environmental to Stay
Individual Factors Cost-Benefit
Factors Analysis Decision
to Move
• Demographic (age, sex, PUSH FACTORS
number of children, • Socio-economic conditions in
marital status) area of origin
• Socio-economic • Education, employment
conditions (wage rate or income), • Cost of moving/ staying
• Income / Savings housing/residence
• Education
• Transportation
• Family affiliation • Proximity of prospective
• Employment
• Health
• Security area of origin
• Housing • Full information
• Psychological Factors PULL FACTORS • Environment
• Level of confidence • Socio-economic conditions and
• Family values availability in area of destination
• Need for autonomy • Prospective benefit
CHARACTERISTICS OF
•MIGRANTS*
Migrants tend to be selective of persons in the
prime ages (52% among working age 20-39)
• Highly selective of females in the 20-29 age group
(33.6% of female migrants)
• Migrants usually move as single or unmarried
(46% of migrants)
• Most of the migrants in the country were at least
high school graduate (24%)
• 75% were employed

* Based on the 2000 CPH

FACTORS
AFFECTING
MIGRATION
DECISIONS
FACTORS AFFECTING MIGRATION
DECISIONS
Why are people moving out?
• Migration is often a rational and dynamic effort
to seek new opportunities in life
• Movement is economically motivated due to
lack of employment, livelihood and economic
opportunities in their locality
• Education as a critical factor in migration
decision (mismatch with educational
attainment and available economic activities
in the area of origin pushes migrants to the
cities)
FACTORS AFFECTING MIGRATION
DECISIONS
Why are people moving out?
• Perceived availability of better income and
opportunities in the city (i.e. as illustrated in
media or conveyed by people who have been in
the city)
• Migration decisions are facilitated by existing
social support and network in the destination area
• Individuals decide to move when they have
relatives or friends in the area of destination
• Successful migrants then invite and support
their family or friends to the city
FACTORS AFFECTING MIGRATION
DECISIONS
Why are people moving out?
• Political factors
• Population transfer agreement between
LGUs (e.g. relocation or human settlement
sites some institutional conditions)
• Some LGUs prefer influx of migrants to their
cities to increase market and labor force for
their economic activities
FACTORS AFFECTING MIGRATION
DECISIONS
Other expressed reasons for migration
• Some people moved because of marital
arrangements
• Internally displaced due to environmental
disasters (e.g. typhoon Yolanda) and armed
conflicts
• Older migrants return to the rural area due to:
• Failure of achieving migration objectives
and expectations
• High cost of living in the city
• Retirement
 FACTORS AFFECTING MIGRATION
DECISIONS
Why are people opting to stay in their locality?
• Residents in the GIDAs opted not to move
because of:
• Simpler and less expensive cost of living in
the rural areas;
• Better peace and order situation in the
locality;
• A greater sense of neighborhood and
community (e.g. bayanihan) that provides
support to them in times of difficulties
 FACTORS AFFECTING MIGRATION
DECISIONS
Why are people opting to stay in their locality?
• Non-movers prefer comfort and security provided
by network of family and relatives than
uncertainty of economic stability in the cities
• Parents in GIDAs, however, support their children
to move to the cities
• Return migrants know and experienced the
difficulty of living in the urban areas
• Some have properties that can somehow help
them to survive and which they cannot easily
dispose of
 FACTORS AFFECTING MIGRATION
DECISIONS
Why are people opting to stay in their locality?
• Families who would want to migrate are
constrained because of lack of skills, education,
and resources to survive in the city
• Somehow, the local governments are supportive
of their health and social needs although much is
to be desired
KEY EMERGING ISSUES
• Internal migration facilitates rapid growth of urban
areas resulting to challenges in urban
development and management
• Demographic implications:
• Change in age-sex structure usually resulting
to youth bulge (e.g. high proportion of working
age population) in the urban areas –
opportunity for demographic dividend
• Changing pattern of population distribution -
trend towards concentration in a few large
cities giving way to a more widespread
distribution in medium-sized urban centers
(e.g. urban sprawl)
KEY EMERGING ISSUES
• Demographic implications:
• Decline in working age population in the rural
areas resulting to challenges in economic
productivity (i.e. agriculture)
POLICY AND
PROGRAM
IMPLICATIONS
• Need to formulate population distribution
policies that are consistent with development
goals, policies and basic human rights
• Need to assess how the consequences of
economic and environmental policies, sectoral
priorities, infrastructure investment and
balance of resources among regional, central,
provincial and local authorities influence
population distribution and internal migration,
both permanent and temporary
• In order to achieve a balanced spatial
distribution of production employment and
population, there is a need formulate
sustainable regional development strategies
and strategies for:
• encouragement of urban consolidation
• growth of small or medium-sized urban
centers and the sustainable development
of rural areas, including the adoption of
labor- intensive projects
• training for agricultural and non-agri jobs
for youth
• effective transport and communication
systems
• To create an enabling context for local
development, including the provision of
services, there is a need to consider
decentralizing administrative systems
• Equal efforts and investments for improving
urban infrastructure and environmental
strategies to provide a healthy environment
for residents in urban and rural areas
• Provision of incentives to encourage the
redistribution and relocation of industries and
businesses from urban to rural areas
• Improve access to ownership or use of land
and access to water resource
• Protecting the lands of indigenous people and
their communities from activities that are
environmentally unsound or that the
indigenous people concerned consider to be
socially and culturally inappropriate
• Educational curriculum needs to respond to
the development and human resource needs
of the locality
• Strengthening disaster risk reduction and
mitigation strategies to prevent internal
displacement of population
• There is a need quantitative study on internal
migration for development planning and policy-
making
• There is a need to establish reliable mechanism
for tracking population movement for planning
and program development (as mandated in the
UDHA law)