8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
1/26
Circular Migration in IndonesiaAuthor(s): Graeme J. HugoReviewed work(s):Source: Population and Development Review, Vol. 8, No. 1 (Mar., 1982), pp. 59-83Published by: Population CouncilStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1972690 .
Accessed: 16/03/2013 02:26
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].
.
Population Council is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Population and
Development Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=popcouncilhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1972690?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1972690?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=popcouncil
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
2/26
Circular Migrationin Indonesia
Graeme
J.
Hugo
A
substantial
nd growing
ody of field vidence oints
not only to the
widespreadncidence, ut also
to the social
and economic
significance
f
circulation,easonal
migration,
nd commuting ithin
ndo-
nesia. The bulkof thismobility,
owever, oes
unrecordednlarge-scale e-
mographicurveys
nd censuses,whichroutinely
doptthefamiliar riteria
andquestions esigned o detect redominantlyonger istance,more-or-less
permanenthanges
n usualplace
ofresidence. he ow evels
ofthe atterype
of movement evealedbythesecensuses nd
surveys ppear
to confirm
he
conventionaltereotypingf
most ndonesians
and in particularhe
nhabi-
tants
f
Java)
s immobile easantswho are
born, ive,
and die
in
the ame
house,scarcely
ravelingeyond
heconfinesf their atalvillage.
Although
the
nterprovincial,
ore-or-lessermanent
igrationetected
ythe
ensus s
but
ne
subset
ftotal
opulation
mobilityn
ndonesia,nthe bsence f
more
comprehensiveational or evenregional) evel statisticsensus-definedi-
gration nd
populationmobilityave become
ynonymous
n the
iterature.1
Thispaper
eviews hefindingsf a
number f ntensive
tudies arried
out
n
several
arts f ndonesia o establish
whether onpermanentopulation
mobilitys a
phenomenonfsocial, economic,
nd demographicignificance
in
ndonesia.
vidence rom
largenumber fsurveys emonstrates
he
wide-
spread ccurrence
f
temporary
ormsfpopulationmobility
n
ndonesia
nd
themany ormshatmobility
akes.The major xplanationshat
avebeenput
forwardo explain hismobility
re then ummarized.
ccelerating
evels
of
temporaryopulationmobilityaveboth hort-nd ong-termmplicationsor
achieving
more
quitable
istribution
f wealth
within
ndonesia.
A
number
of
these
ssues
reraised
n
the oncludingection
f this
aper.
Several
irec-
tions
n
continuingesearch
ntononpermanentobility
re
dentified
n
which
demographers
ould make a
significantontributiono the
understanding
f
fundamental
hanges aking
lace withinndonesian ociety.
POPULATION
AND
DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW
8,
NO.
1
(MARCH
1982)
59
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
3/26
60
Circular Migration in
Indonesia
It snot asyto
distinguish
etween ermanentnd
nonpermanent
opu-
lationmobility.
elinsky 1971:225-226) defines
onventional
igrations
anypermanent
r
semi-permanent
hange
f
residence nd
circulations
a
great
ariety
f
movementssually hort
erm, epetitive
r
cyclical
n
nature,
but llhaving ncommon he ack ofanydeclaredntentionf a permanentr
long
asting hange n
residence. A further
istinctionan be
madebetween
commuting,efined s
regular ravel
utside hevillage usually
or
work r
education)or rom to24
hours, nd
circularmigration,
nvolving
ontinuous
but
temporarybsencesof
greater han one day. Some
fieldworkersave
adopted pper
hresholdsf continuousbsenceof
6
months r
12
months o
distinguishetween
ircular nd
permanent igration. owever,
hese
work-
ershave
also suggestedhatmuch
ssentiallyircular
mobility
as defined s
permanent
y adoptinguch
bsolute riteria.
learly,
hedifferenceies
n
the
intentionsf ndividualsnd thenature nd evelof theirommitmento par-
ticular laces, and such
phenomena efy ttempts
o establish bsolute
em-
poralcriteria.
espitethese
roblems,
hebulkof movementsan
be
readily
distinguisheds permanentr
temporary.
In
Indonesia hecensus and
most onventionalarge-scale
urveys re
designed o
systematicallyxclude
he
bulk fnonpermanent
ovement.
his
makes t
mpossible ofurnish
ccurate ational r
provincialstimates f the
extent f
commutingndcircular
migration.omepolicymakers
nddemogra-
phersmakethe vailabilityfsuchestimates he ine qua nonof the signifi-
cance of a
demographic
henomenon.learly
t is
important
o obtain
hese
estimates,
ut
the
fact hatnone are
availablehere
s
more
reflectionf the
inappropriatenessf current
ata collectionmethods
o Indonesia'sdemo-
graphic,
ocial, andeconomic eality
han f the nsignificancef
thephenom-
enon.
Accordingly
he
imof
the
irst
ection
s to demonstrate
ow
the
bulk f
nonpermanentobilitys
missed nconventional
ata collectionnd to draw
upon
he
catteredase
study vidence o establish
hat, lthough
ational
sti-
mates f
the
volume f
nonpermanentobilityre
not
available,
t
is a
phe-
nomenon fdemonstrableignificance.
Evidence of
widespread
nonpermanent
mobility
In
the
1971 ensus ome7.3
million
ndonesians, r
6.4
percent f
the
popula-
tion,
had
lived
at
some
time
outside heir
rovince f
present
esidence
nd
hence were
classified
s migrants. However,
as has been
demonstrated
elsewhereHugo,1978:
10-12) the
riteria sed
to
definemigrants
n
that
en-
susexcludedmost hort-distancendshort-termovers.2 heextent owhich
the
emporalriteria
dopted
n
the
ensus xcluded opulationmovements
f
significancean be
gauged rom ield
urveyvidence.
A
studyn
14
West
Java
villages hat ttemptedo
detect
ll
permanentndnonpermanent
oves sso-
ciated
withwork
nd formal ducation
ound hat
nlyone-thirdf all such
moves
met he ensus
migrationime riteria
Hugo, 1975,1978). Moreover,
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
4/26
Graeme J. Hugo
61
in the urvey illagesbetween
6 and 98 percent
f themoverswho met he
census ime riteria ovedwithin
heprovince
f WestJava ndhencedid not
qualify
s
migrants
s
far s
thecensuswas concerned ecause
they id
not
cross heboundaryf
a
census
migrationefiningegion.
The WestJava study oncentratedn populationmovementrom il-
lages to themajormetropolitan
enters f Jakarta
nd Bandung see map).
Several istinct
ypes f nonpermanent
obility ere dentified
s havingma-
jor significance.
hese
ncluded
ommutingverdistances f
up to 50 km, o
participaten full-timerban-based
mploymentr irregularly
o engage n
work upplementaryo village-based
obs. More
distinctives circularmigra-
tion,wherebymovers o not
change heir sual
place of residencen thevil-
lage but reabsent t an urban
estinationor
eriods onger han single ay.
Again uchmovementan be
associatedwith
ermanentull-timemployment
at the destination,ut usually nvolvesnonpermanentork n the nformal
sector f theurban conomy.
ircularmigrantssuallymaintain
omevillage-
based employment,
nd thefrequency
ithwhich heymigrate
s determined
by thedistancenvolved nd
thecosts of traversingt, their
arnings t the
destination,
nd the vailabilityf work n the
home
village.
Much,butby no
means
ll, circular
mobilitys seasonal, ccurring
uring
he xtended eriods
of imitedob opportunityetween
lanting
nd harvestingiceduring he
wet
season and
during he dry eason. Therewas
also significant
ong-distance
circularmigrationromWestJava o theOuterslands owork n plantations
or
oil/mineralevelopment
rojects,
ften
nder
ontract
nd
involving
b-
sences fupto twoyears.Rusli
1978) shows
hat hese ametypes f nonper-
manentmovement
ere
of significance
n
migration
etween ural reas
in
West
Java.
n
the14
study illages hree-quarters
f
thefamilieswere t least
partly ependent
n income
ources utside hevillage,mostly
n Jakartand
Bandung.
Community-based
tudies
n
Jakarta
ave
pointed learly
o
the
mpor-
tance f nonpermanent
igrantsn that ity.
n
particular
ellinek1978a,b),
n
her tudyfpetty radersnJakarta,asdescribedhe ondok ystem hereby
circular
migrants
usually
from
he ame
region
f
origin)
lusterogether
n
tiny ramped
ooming-houses
pondok) wnedby
a
tauke boss),
who also
provides
hemwith hecredit
nd
equipment
eeded o
set themselves
p
as
mobile raders.
he
points
ut
that he
pondok
dwellers were
usually
both
petty
raders
nd circular
migrants
. .
who came
intothe
city
from
he
village
merely
o seek
work
ut
aw their
ermanent
ome s
being
n
the
ountryside
where heirwives,children
nd few
possessions
emained Jellinek,978a:
1).
Of the
more
han200 mobile radersnterviewedy
Jellinek,
ll
butone
was a circularmigrant,nd shesuggestshatf her tudys representativef
mobile
raders
n
Jakartahen heremust e hundreds
f thousands f
circular
migrantsngaged
n
pettyradinglone,
n
addition o thosewho work
s
day
laborers, edicab
drivers,
nd the ike.
With
espect
o
daily ommuting
he
bulkof evidence elates o move-
ment
o
metropolitan
akarta rom ts mmediate
interland.
oentjaraningrat
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
5/26
wP:\s~~W~t
'4
WAl
s
i.,\~~~~~~~~~~b
k
8
NO
rA~t~
z 'S
O-P
c~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
W,4~~~~~~
e~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
k
La.
4 J L
*% 4
0
n 4
-
@
_
l l
__
,2
< e A 2~~~~~~~
I
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
I
_
2
I
@4
$@_sX~~~~~
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
6/26
Graeme J. Hugo 63
(1974, 1975)for xample, n his
study
f
villages
outh f
Jakarta,ecognized
widespread onpermanent
ovementso the
apital, ncluding aily
commu-
terswhoare absent nly
during
he
day
or for wo o five
ays
nd
temporary
non-seasonal migrants ho are forced
o
leave their amilies
or
several
weeks r months. s early s 1963Masri howed he ignificancefrailcom-
muting o Jakarta
rom
ogor,
some 60 km to
the south.The population
n
Serpong, 5kmwest f
Jakarta,
ncludes
oth
ommuters ith
ermanentobs
inJakartandmany etty
raders ho ell ocal productsfruit, egetables,
nd
handicrafts)t Jakarta
marketsBorkent-Niehof,974: 163). The fact that
many eople removingnto he rea
surrounding
akarta
n
order
o
commute
to thecity s evidenced n
the preliminaryesults f the 1980 census,which
showed hat he hree
abupatenregencies) djoining
akarta
ad annual
op-
ulation
rowth ates etween 971 nd 1980
of 4.6
percent,
.04
percent,
nd
3.6 percent ompared ith henational ate f 2.33 percentBiro PusatStatis-
tik,1981:3).
Preliminaryesults f
the1980 ensus ndicated hat akarta'sopulation
was 6.5 million, epresentingn annualgrowth ateof 4 percent. his was
soinewhatower han he4.4 percent uring 961-71 nd certainlyower han
most
ommentatorsredicted.
ndoubtedly
his
growth
ate
everely nder-
estimateshegrowth
f
Jakarta's unctional
opulation:
he
census riteria e-
ferredo
earlierwouldhaveensured hatmost ircular
migrants
ndcommuters
who pendmuch ftheirivesandderivemuch f theirncomenJakarta ere
not ctually numeratedn
that ity
ut n their
illage
of
origin.
A
widening
circulationadius round
akarta
as
clearly rought
bout reductionn
short-
distance
ermanent
overs o
the
city,
t the
very
minimum ithin he
prov-
inces f West nd Central
ava, nd a phenomenonimilar o that bserved y
Hawley nd others
n the
Western
orld,
where
he
lengtheningommuting
radius ffordedy the
utomobile as reduced he mount f migration eces-
sary, t least withinocal areas
(Boertlein
nd
Long,
1979:
23).
It
might
e
argued
hat he
ircumstancesbtaining
n
Jakarta-Westava
werehighly pecificothat egion nd conducive ononpermanentobility-
particularly huge metropolis
ith
large and expanding nformal
ector
providingmany ob
opportunitiesith lexible ime ommitments,ith ela-
tively asyentrynd
inked
y
a reasonablyheap, fficientransportystem
o
most
parts
f
theprovince.
However,
number f studies n other
arts
f
Indonesia aveproducedvidence
f
similar
atterns
f
mobility
n
quite
dif-
ferentontexts.
In
the
verydensely ettled entral
Java-Yogyakartaegion,
Mantra's
(1981)
ntensive
tudy
f movementut of two
villages
dentified
ommuting
(much f tbybicycle) s themajor orm fmobility. e explains hat onper-
manent
migration
s of
such
significancemong
he
Javanese hat
hey
have
several
distinct
oncepts
f
such movement:
nglaju
is
used
forthose
who
travel o a
place
butreturnack to their ome
within
he ame
day,nyinep
or
people
who
stay
n
another
lace
for
everal
ays
before
eturning
nd
mondok
for
hosewho
odge
n
a destination
ommunity
or
everalmonths
r
years.
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
7/26
64
Circular Migration
in Indonesia
Merantau
refers
o
those who
go
to another sland
for
a
relatively
ong period
but ventuallyeturn
ack to theorigin ommunity.he term
indah s used
for esidents ho
migrate o another lace.
Mudjiman 1978)has observed
circular
migrationo the
city
f
Surakartand
the
operation
f a
pondok-cen-
teredmigrationystemimilar othat nJakarta.Withinheprovince f Central
Java here
ppear
o be
twomain
ystems
f
nonpermanentobility
Zarkasi,
inHugo and Mantra,
orthcoming).
n
thewestern art hepatterns
re similar
tothosedescribed arlier
n WestJava,with
ubstantialircularmigrationo
Jakartarom uch reas
as Kedu, Cilacap,Tegal, nd Purwakarta.n
the ast,
however, he bulk
of
the movements
commutingnd,
to a lesser
extent,
circularmigration o the
major cities such
as
Semarang,
urakarta,
nd
Yogyakarta. astles 1967: 53), for xample,
notes hat he bulk
of thework
force
mployed
n
kretekhand-made
igarettes)
actories
n
Kudus and other
cities nCentral ndEastJava s madeup ofwomenwho ive nthe urround-
ing
rural
reas
nd
commuteongdistancesoften
n
foot).
n
East
Java,per-
haps
the
mostmobile
group
re the
Madurese,many f
whomhave
moved,
either
ermanently
r
temporarily,
rom
heir
mall
slandnortheastf Java o
mainland
astJava,
ther arts
f
Java,
Kalimantan,
nd Sulawesi.
The most mobile
of all major ethnicgroups n Indonesia
are the
Minangkabau eople,
whose
homelands the
province
f West
umatra.
Al-
though he highly
estrictive igrant
efinitionriteriameantthat many
Minangkabau overswouldnothavebeendesignatedmigrants,he1971 en-
sus showed
hat
1
percent
fall
persons
orn n West
umatra
ived utside he
province
nd a further2
percent
f
those esiding
n
theprovince ad
previ-
ously
ived n
another
rovince.
he
centrifugalendencies ithin
his
ociety
are
mbodied
n
their
oncept
f
merantau,
hich as beendefineds leaving
one's
cultural
erritory
oluntarily
hether or
short
r
long
time,
with he
aim of
earning living r
seeking urthernowledge r
experience, ormally
with he
ntentionfreturningome
Naim,
1976:
150). Maude
(1980)
in
a
recent
aper has
suggested,
n the
basis of his fieldworkn
several West
Sumatra illages, hat he ncidence fMinangkabaumigrantsettling erma-
nently utside f their
omland
as
increased.
In
southern
umatra ircularmigrations associatedwith he
coffee,
pepper,
nd
spiceharvests,
ith
argenumbers
f
seasonal
migrants
oving
n
from
elatively earbyettlementsr fromheBanten
rea
of West
Java.
The
Bantenese re one of
many roups
n
ndonesiawhoengage n
seasonal ircu-
lar
migration.
s Radial
1965: 34)
has
explained,
The culture
f
the
Banten
people
s
such hat
hey sually
ike o
go
merantau,specially
o the
Lampung
area,
o
seekother ources
f
ncome r
extra
ncome
uring
he
period
efore
theharvest easonbegins n Lampung.They go merantaufter lantingn
Banten
s
complete
nd
return ith
he
nset
f
theharvest eason. This
type
of
seasonalcircularmigrations
widespread
n Java.
Franke
1972: 181),
for
example,
described
ow
literally
housands
f
landless
families
riss-cross
theJavanese
ountryside,ollowing
he harvest romwestto
east,
and then
returning
or
he
next
eason s the
paddy tarts
o
yellow
n thefields
gain.
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
8/26
Graeme J. Hugo 65
In thefarnorth f Sumatra,
bdullah in Hugo and Mantra, orthcom-
ing) hows substantialolume f
temporary igrationmong
he
Acehnese,
whose dat (customaryaw) dictateshatmovers hould
not ravel oo far rom
their amilies. iegel (1969)
also shows that
many
Acehnese
men eave the
village o engage ntrade f onekind ranother,r npepper rowingo the
east.Thesemen eavetheirwives
ndfamilies ehind ndreturnt east nce
a
year,usually round heend
of
the Muslim
fasting
month.
ncreasingly
his
circularmigrationppears
to focus
on
the
major city
of Medan in
North
Sumatra rovince.
On the
sland f
Kalimantan
here as
been
ittle esearchnto
opulation
mobility, et
t s
apparent
hat
gain
nonpermanent
ovementsre
significant.
Studies
mong
he
dayakpeople
n
the
solated
UpperKapuas
area of
West
Kalimantan3nd heKenyan eopleofEastKalimantan
Colfer, 981)
evealed
noteworthyutmovement,ncluding hepractice f seeking emporaryork
outside
he
egion
n the
ilfields
f
Brunei,hepepper lantationsfSarawak,
or n
the oastal ities
f
East
and
West
Kalimantan,arawak,
nd
Brunei.
he
Banjarese eople of South
Kalimantan ave a long historyf movementut-
side
their ome rea. Rambe 1977:
22)
has
discussed
he
Banjarese oncept f
madam,
which
raditionally
as
meant
o eave one's
natal
village
ndcross he
sea
with
he
imof ncreasingne's wealthwithin time
eriod
hat s not ixed
(but
s
usually onger han neyear).
Johansyahin Hugo
and
Mantra,
orth-
coming) as ndicatedhatmadam susedmore roadlyncontemporaryouth
Kalimantan, ncompassing oth permanent nd nonpermanent obility.
Rambe's
1977) study f themobility f thepeople of Alabio, ocated ome
200 km
nland n theBarito
River, hows hat
many
esidents
ngage
n
circu-
lar seasonal migrationssociatedwith rading, speciallydownrivero the
provincial apital f Banjarmasin.
The islandof Sulawesi s thehomeland f several f ndonesia'smost
peripatetic
thnic
roups.
Abustam
in Hugo
and
Mantra, orthcoming)
as
discussed he
primaryoncepts
f
populationmobility
eld
by
the
hree argest
ethnic roupsntheprovince f South ulawesi-theBugis,Makassarese,nd
Torajan eoples. The Bugis are thedominant
roup
nd
have
a
very
distinct
pattern
f
mobility.
or
several enturies
hey
ave been
seafarers,roaming
the
rchipelago
n
search f trade n accordancewith hedirectionf the
pre-
vailingmonsoon, eturning
o Sulawesi
only
for fewmonths f each
year
o
refitnd
repair heir raus (sailing
boats) Lineton,
975:
174).
In
the
ight-
eenth
enturyhey egan stablishing
olonies
n
Kalimantan, outheast
ul-
awesi, Maluku,
East
Nustenggara,
nd more
ecently
n
Irian
New Guinea),
Jambi
eastern umatra),
nd
even
n
Java
especiallyJakarta).
While hishas
involvedmore-or-lessermanent igrationfBugis settlers,he olonieshave
also served
s bases
from
hich o
engage
n
circular
migrationLineton, 975;
Amiroelah t al., 1976; Suhartoko,
975). There s also substantial ugis
movement
ithin outh
Sulawesi, ncluding
easonal
circular
migration
e-
tween ural reas and
large-scale
ircular
migration
etween
illages
nd the
provincialapital ity
f
UjungPandang.Much
of this
ural-urban
ovement
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
9/26
66
Circular Migration in
Indonesia
also has a seasonal
hythmnd nvolves heMakassarese
ndTorajans
s well.
The seasonal
migrationsf Makassarese
rom heir illages n the poorest
southern art
f the province o engage n such nformal
ector ctivities
s
pedicabdrivingnd small-scale
ellinghave been studied
n detailbyForbes
(1978). Peasants egularlyeave their illages s early s midnightnbicycles
piled o gravity-defyingeights
ith griculturalroduce r handicrafts,
hich
they ell ncitymarkets uring
he
day
before
eturning
ome
n
the
ate
fter-
noonor evening.The Torajanpeople
from he denselypopulated
northern
mountainsre also extremely
obile.While
hey
ncreasinglyravel
o Kali-
mantan, akarta,nd rian, he
bulk ftheirmovements within heprovince.
Theirmigrationo Ujung Pandang
s particularly
ubstantial;much
of it is
circular
nd
involvesmovers ngaging
n
informalector ctivities.
everal
studies
estify
o the significant
olume
of
this
movementnd itsimportant
economic ndsocial mpacts ponthevillages forigin Abustam, 975;Sur-
atha,1977;
Mangunrai, 979;
and
Abustam,
n
Hugo
and
Mantra,
orthcom-
ing).
In
eastern
ndonesia, ucardie1979, 1981)has
described wide
variety
of
nonpermanent
igrations
n
the area
of
Halmahera
nd adjacent
slands
(especiallyMakian)
n
the province
f Maluku.These range
frommobility
associatedwith ago gathering
nd other ood ultivation
o short-termigra-
tion
ssociated
withwage abor.
n
IrianJaya,Rumbiak1978) found
hat he
migrationftheGenyem eopletotheprovincialapital ity fJayapura as
essentiallyircular.
Muchof rianhas longhad significant
atterns
f circula-
tion ssociatedwith
hifting
ultivation,rade,
ndexchange fsuchgoods
as
knives ndbuilding
materials.
owever, ommutingo urban reas, specially
Jayapura,
nd
circularmigration
oth o
towns nd to areas of
raw material
exploitation
reof
growingmportance,specially
with he
pread
f
the
prov-
ince's road
network
nd proliferation
f public
minibuses.
Little s known
boutpopulation
mobility
n
East
and
WestNusateng-
gara, lthoughhere re ndications
f
very omplex
ndsignificantatterns.
t
wouldbe interestingo know,for xample,whetherheperiods f faminend
food
hortagehat requently
ccur
n
parts
f
thoseprovincesnducenonper-
manent
migrations.
The aim of this ection as been
to
review
he
iterature
oncerning
he
incidence f nonpermanent igration
ithin ndonesia.
Attention as been
focused nly
n
population
movements
o
seekor engage
n
work,
nd a wide
range
f
somewhat
asual,adventitiousircular
moves o visit elatives,
eek
entertainment,o shopping,
nd the ike have been
ignored.
This
has been
donedeliberatelyo establish hedirect ignificancefnonpermanentobility
for
conomic
development.
he
patterns
f
mobility
ummarized
erehave
resulted
n
considerable
hysical
eparation
etween
lace
of residence
nd
place of work ormany ndonesians.
tudies n Western
ontexts ave shown
how the
availability
f
comparatively
heap
and efficient
ransport
ystems
have
permitted
ommuting
o
replacemigration
ver
relatively
hort
istances
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
10/26
Graeme
J.
Hugo
67
(Holmes,1965; Lewan, 1969).
The phenomenonf commutingas been con-
sidered o be of such economic
nd social significancehatourney-to-work
questions
re now an
accepted art
f censuses n mostEuro-Americanoun-
tries Termote, 975). However, ubstantialeparation
f
place
of usual resi-
denceand place of workhas been conventionallyegarded s peculiar o
developed ocietieswith heirmodern
means f
transportation,
hile
n
tradi-
tional ociety wellings
nd
placesof
work
were n
almost
dentical
ocations
(Hagerstrand,962: 61).
Nevertheless, e have seen not only that ommuting as
become of
immense ignificance
n
thedeveloping
world utthat proliferationf non-
permanent obilitytrategies
as
made
possible greater hysical
eparation
of
dwelling
nd
workplace
han
s possible
with onventional
ommuting.
e-
spite he apid rogressmade
n transportechnology,ime ndtravelosts till
severelyimit hedistance verwhichmasscommutingantakeplace. How-
ever,
n
Indonesia,
s in
much
ofthe non-Westernorld, here s growing
evidence
f
people iving eyond
and
often
great
istance
eyond)
he on-
ventionalommutingimit, et
gaining hebenefitsnjoyed ycommutersy
engaging
n
circularmigration
etween
heirhome
area
and their
lace
of
work.
The studies eviewed bove
have shown hatmany ndonesians
ork n
oneplace but onsume, pend,
nd nvest heir
arnings
n
another lace. Quite
apart rom he mportantmplicationsfsuchpatternsf mobilityor ocial
change,
his
ignificanthenomenon
ust e taken
nto
ccount
n
planning
he
investment
f
scarcedevelopmentesources. et
what an demographersell
economic nd
ocialplanners
boutmobility
n ndonesia hatwillhelp hem
n
their
ask?The
conventional
ensus
nd
arge-scale urveys
ndertaken
n
n-
donesia
llow
us to
make omehelpfultatementsoncerningong-distance,
more-or-less
ermanent igration.owever,
hese
ources llow
us very
ittle
scope
to
provide etailed, ationally
epresentativeataconcerninghe cale,
incidence, auses,
and
mpact
f
thenonpermanentobility nder
iscussion
here. erious onsideration ust e given o ncludingertainypes fnonper-
manent
mobilitymong
hevariables boutwhich irectnformation
s
sought
in
national
urveys
nd
censuses n
Indonesia.
Explaining nonpermanent
migration
The studies
eviewedn the
previous
ection ndicate he
widespread
ncidence
of
nonpermanentopulation
mobility
n Indonesia.
Moreover,
hese studies
provide mple field-basedvidence
o
reject he argument
hat he measure-
ment nd close study f thismobilityhouldnot be a priorityn migration
research ecause ocial change
nd economic evelopment
ntail
nly erma-
nent
edistributionf
population, specially
rom ural o
urban
reas. The
Indonesian vidence uggests
hat onpermanentobility,specially
etween
village
nd
city,
has
significant
ocial
and economic
mplications
ot
only
for
the
migrants
nvolved ut
lso for
heir
laces
of
origin
nd destination.
iven
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
11/26
68
Circular Migration
in Indonesia
the mportance
f
nonpermanent
igration, hat
retheforces ausing uch
movement?n
this ection everal
f he heoriesdvanced oexplain
he ccel-
erationn the
ncidence f
commuting
nd
circularmigration
n ndonesia re
discussed.
Sociocultural explanations
Some writers
ave suggestedhat emporary
igration as become
nstitu-
tionalized ithinome thnic roups
n ndonesia,
o
that
tbecomes henorm
for
articular
eoplewithin hat
roup o spendpart f theirives
outside heir
village fbirth.
hisexplanationas been nvoked
specially n the ase ofthe
highly eripatetic
inangkabau
eopleof WestSumatra.
Naim
1974),
who
has
studied
Minangkabau ommunities
hroughoutndonesia,
uggests
hat
theirmatrilineal
ystem as made
malesmarginal ithinhe ociety,
nd ed to
merantaubecominghenorm oryoungmen-with socialdisapprobationn-
curred
f
they
o not onformo
this
atternHadi,
1981).Similarly, bdullah
(1971:6) explains
Minangkabau
erantau
as an
effect f thematrilinealin-
ship ystem:
The custom
f
going
o
the
antaucan be regarded
s
an institu-
tional
utlet
or he
frustrations
f
unmarriedoung
men
who ack
ndividual
responsibilitynd rightsn their
wn society.
o a
marriedman,
going o the
rantau
means
temporaryelease
from wofamilies'
onflicting
xpectations
pressed pon
him s
a
husband
nd a member fthematernalamily.
Maude
(1979) andNaim 1974: 347) bothfound hat hemajorityf migrantshey
interviewed
ave economic
reasons for
moving,but they together
with
Murad, 980:
40) stress he ignificance
f thefact hat
merantauhas become
institutionalized
mong ome Minangkabau eople.
In thematrilocalystem
f theAcehnese
f northernumatra,women
receivehouses
nd sometimesice andat marriage,
hereasmen
re usually
without
esources
n
thevillage
untilheir arents
ie
Siegel,
1969:145).
This
peripheral osition
s a
strong
ncouragement
or
young
men to
go to
the
East (dja' utimo)
or on
the rantau
(leave
one's
home
area),
and
many engage
incircularmigrationoseekworknthepepper-growingreasofthemajor ity
of
Medanor set
off o trade n the
East. While
ociocultural
actors
learly
re
influential
ere, iegel 1969:
54)
warns hat
he
antau
pattern
hould
notbe
overly omanticized
nd that
f a
man
could
make
a
satisfactoryndependent
income ewould tay thome.
Hence, he
Acehnese ircularmigrations
o not
appear
o havethe rite f
passage
characteristics
hat
re
sometimesscribed
to
Minangkabaumigration
nd
very efinitely
o some of theDayak circular
movement
n Kalimantan4
Colfer,
981:
13).
Rumbiak
1978),
in
his
study
f
migration
rom
enyem
o
the
ity
f
Jayapura,
xplains hat eeking ufficient
wealth o meet ride-priceayments as a major auseofyoungmen eaving
the
illage
emporarily.
n
some
ases
outmigration
ecomes virtual
ecessity
for
ertain
illagers, specially
young
men.
The nstitutionalization
f a
particular
orm f
mobility,
hether
onper-
manent r
permanent,perates
ot
only
on
the scale of the ethnic
roup
ut
also
on a
regional
nd
ocal scale
(Lucardie,
981;Vredenbregt,
964; Hugo,
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
12/26
Graeme J. Hugo
69
1980).
Particularthnic roups n
Indonesiahavelong been
characterizedy
what s
referred
o in
the 1930
census
Volkstelling,
933-1936)
as
wan-
derlust. t is
common
o
find eighboring
illages,
imilar
n
their conomic
and
social
conditions,
ne
evidencing
ubstantialirculationnd theother
ir-
tually omobilityoandfrom hevillage.
The
institutionalizationf
mobility ithin particular
roup ften s-
sumes
n
element fcircularity,
n
that
utmigrationndreturn
migration
re
equally ncouraged. ut tradition
nd
institutionalization
an
also
encourage
stabilitynd
ack of
mobility.
n
this atter
espect
t
s
interesting
o note he
argumentf Mantra
1981)
that
hevery trong ttachmentf the
Javanese
o
their atal
villagemakespermanent
isplacementnathema o
them, ven
n
the aceofbleak conomic
ircumstances.
n
the ther
and,
hey
ave
readily
adopted
ommuting
ndother
onpermanentorms f
mobility
hen
henewly
developedroadtransportationystems ave made thempossible. Lucardie
(1981) aysgreat tress
pon he
motionalttachmentfthe
Makianese otheir
home
village, feelinghat
ncourages ircularity
ather hanpermanencen
their
mobility.
As
withmost opulation
mobility,
onpermanentigrationn ndonesia
takes
lace
n
response
o
a
complex
etof
nteractingorces,
he
eparation
f
which
must
nevitably
e
somewhat
rtificial. ne cannot
ay
that
henonper-
manent
mobility
f
particular
roups
n
ndonesia s
a
response
o
exclusively
socioculturalnfluencesf one typeor another, incemany ther orces re
clearly
t work.
However,
ome
of
the
ociocultural
actors
riefly
entioned
here re
often verlooked. ome
mayargue hat ocietal
mobility orms
re
merely
reflection
f,
and
determined
y,
economic
necessitynd
political
impositions
f
one
kind r
another. et
such arguments
ailto
explain
nter-
regional nd
ntergroup
ariations
n
types
nd
levels
of
mobility
here co-
nomic
nd political onditions
ppearto
be
relatively
omogenous Hugo,
1980).
Sociocultural
lements ppear romhis
writer's illage-levelieldwork
experience
n
ndonesia
o be
too
frequently
verlooked s an often
mportant
elementnfluencingopulationmobilityatterns.qually,however,hat xpe-
rience
aspointedo the
verwhelmingominancefeconomic
onsiderations
not
nly
n
shapinghe
volume
nd
direction
f
mobilityut lso
in
determin-
ing
whetherhat
movements
permanentr
temporary.
In
his pioneering orkon
circularmigrationo
towns,Elkan (1959,
1967)has
suggested
hat he
pattern
f
migrationetween
illage
and city
n
EastAfrica s
best
xplained
n
terms f
economic orces, ather
han y social
and
cultural
actors.We
now
discuss everal
f
the
conomic-based
rguments
put
forward
o
explain
nonpermanentopulation
mobility
n
Indonesia.
Economic
explanations
Maximizingamily
ncome
nd
utility
rom onsumption
he basic
argument
here
was
put
forward
y
Elkan
1959,1967)
n
his
East African
tudy
nd
by
Hugo
1975, 1978)
forWestJava.One
must,
owever,
tress
basic
difference
between
he
findings
f the African
tudies nd those
n
much
of
ndonesia,
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
13/26
70
Circular Migration in
Indonesia
especially ava.
t
s clear hat n rural
ndonesia, and hortage
nd
pressure
n
agriculturalesources
remuch reaterhan n most fAfrica.
n
Java
ess than
half
he ural opulationwnsorhasdirect ccessto
sufficient
gricultural
and
to
obtain ubsistence: ost f the
nonpermanentigrant ouseholdsouldnot
earn ufficientncomes n eitherhecity r thevillage o supporthemselves
andtheir
ependents.
hus,
ircular
migration
r
commutingrovides
means
for
amilies
o maximize heir
ncomes
yencouraging
ome members f the
household o work n
the villageat times
f
peak
labordemand nd to seek
work n the cityor
elsewhere
t
slower imes
while other
members f
the
household emain o
cope
with imited
illage-based
abordemands.
n
addi-
tion,by leavingdependentsn
the village
home,
the
migrantsmostlymen)
effectivelyeduce
hecosts
of
subsistence
n the
city
r other estinatione-
cause
the
olitary
mover
anputup
with
heaper
nd ess comfortableondi-
tions hanhis familywouldrequire nd thus cutpersonal osts to a bare
minimum.
hus,byeaming
n the
ity
ut
pending
n the
village
he
migrant
maximizes he
utility ained
from
onsumption.
The argumentor
maximizingamilyncome nd utility
rom onsump-
tion
ppears
o
gain
considerableupport romeveral f the
fieldwork-based
studies eviewed arlier. t
is particularly
ppropriaten Java,where and s
very
carce,the
demands or abor n thevillage are highly
easonal,and a
complex
nformal
ector
n
the
cities
llows
relativelyasy
access
to
employ-
mentalbeitforvery ow income nd often orgreatnvestmentf time nd
effort),long
with he
flexible ime ommitments
emanded y
nonpermanent
migrants.5
lements
f
this
rgument ave
been
putto the
presentwriter y
migrantsuring
ieldwork
n
several
parts
f
Indonesia nd thePhilippines.
One
s
constantly
eminded
fthe
hard-headed
conomic
ationality
f
circular
mobilitytrategies
n
situations here
ncome-earningpportunitiesre ex-
tremely
imitedn
both ural nd urban
ectors. here an be
no
doubt hat n
many egionsraditionallytrong amilynd
village
ies nd the
preference
or
a
rural-based
ay
of ife
xert
strong
ttractionn the
migrant,
ut t
s
rare
that he hoiceofnonpermanentverpermanent igrations aneconomically
irrational
esponse o the
ocial pull
of
thehomeplace.
Risk version r
minimization
second
spect
f
Elkan'seconomic
x-
planation
f
circular
migration
s
thatmovers onsidered
rban
mployment
o
offer
ittle
ecurity
n
old
age
or
n
times f
difficultyo that t
was imperative
to retain
ontacts
ith ural
ociety.
he WestJava
tudy
lso found his
o
be
an
important
onsideration
mong
movers.
A
circulation
trategy eeps
the
mover's
ptions
n
the
village ompletelypen
o that he isk f
not
being
ble
to eamsubsistences reduced y spreadingt between illage ndcityncome
opportunities.
oreover,
everal
village-based
upport ystems
an be
mobi-
lized n times
f economic
r
emotional
eed-namely,
he
nuclear nd wider
family,
he raditionf
gotong oyongmutual
elf-help)mong
he
wider
il-
lage
community,
nd the
traditionallyignificant
apaklanakbuah (patron/
client)
elations.
n
most
ases,
such
upport
s not vailable n
the
ity,
o that
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
14/26
Graeme J. Hugo 71
if a migrant aintains stake n his villagehe does notcut himself ff rom
what s often heonly vailable upport
n
times f direneed.
Again the risk aversion rguments ave considerable pplicabilityn
Java.Many fJava's
ural
wellers re
on the
very
nife
dge
of existence
nd
simply onothave ufficienturplusoallowthem o take he isks hat erma-
nent
migrationften
nvolves.A
mobilitytrategy
hatminimizes
uch
risks
obviously as more ppeal under uch circumstances.
Mobility esultingrom heuneven mpact f capitalism
The
argument
here s founded
n
political conomy ut s
not a
polar opposite o
the two
largely conomic xplanationsdvanced bove, although
t
s sometimes re-
senteds such.Basically, his rgumenteespopulationmobilitys
a
response
to broader ociostructuralhanges ssociatedwith heunevenpenetrationf
capitalism,which has created ubstantialectoral, lass, and spatial ne-
qualities.
n
a seminalworkAmin
1974)
has
argued
hat abor
migration
n
Africa an be bestunderstoodnterms fthe ffectsfuneven apitalistxpan-
sion
upon
those ocieties.
t
has
been
argued
hat
ontemporaryopulation
mobility
n
Indonesia annot
e
explainedwithout
eferenceo the
formative
influence
f
colonialism
n
thecountry's olitical, conomic,
nd social
sys-
temsHugo 1975,Ch. 2; 1980; forthcoming).hearguments
that he
funda-
mentallyxploitativeolonial ystem esigned o control he ocal population
andexpedite he extractionf raw materialsn the mostcost-efficientay
shaped he pattern
f
mobility
n
verydistinctive ays
that
have yet
to be
altered. he
concentrationf
nvestmentn
areas
of
exploitativectivityplan-
tations,mines,ports,garrisons)
nd its diversion
rom
he subsistence nd
semisubsistencegricultural
reas where hebulkof the
populationived;
the
removal f surplus o
the mother
ountry,tifling
he
developmentf local
industrializationnd a fully eveloped rbanhierarchy;nd the reation fa
dependentconomy, entralized olitical ystem, nd distinctivelass strat-
ification-allhave had a formativend enduringnfluence n mobility at-
terns.
Forbes
1980)
has shown hatAmin's
heory
an be
useful
n
explaining
circulation
y examining
he
movement
f a small
group
f
petty ommodity
producersn UjungPandang, outh ulawesi.He argues hat heres an mpor-
tant
heoreticalistinction
etweenmigrationnd circulation
nd concludes
(Forbes,
1980:
21)
that irculation s
.
.
.
a
result
f
the
ncompletepenetra-
tion f
capital,
nd also
.
.
.
[helps]
o
slow the ate f change n ndonesia y
helping
o
preserve etty ommodityndpeasant ubsistence roduction.
f
the
wage abour ector hould xpand, r f griculturehould ecome ncreasingly
capitalized, hen irculation aywell give way to anotherorm fmobility.
The
latter oint oncerningncreased apitalization f agriculture as some
immediacy
n
contemporaryndonesia ecause t
is
clear thatmany
f ndo-
nesia's, nd especially ava's, ural reashave n the astdecade or so
experi-
enced
the
mpact
f
major modernizing
nd
commercializinghanges
n
agriculturalechnology
nd
practice White,1979). The
full
mpact f these
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
15/26
72
Circular
Migration
in
Indonesia
changes n population
mobility
s not
yet pparent.
owever,
t s
clear
that
many f these
changes
have had
labor-displacing
ffectswithin
griculture
(Hugo,
1978) andcould
potentially
ave the ffect
f
ncreasing
utmigration
from
hose reas.Whether
uchmovement
s
to be
permanent,
onpermanent,
orbothsnot learbut heres little vidence fanimpendingreat xpansion
in
urbanwage abor
hatwould bsorb arge
numbers
f
permanent
utmigrants
displaced rom
gricultural
reas.
Forbes's
rgument,
hen, s that onpermanent
igrationsboth here-
sult nd the
ause
of nequalitiesn
ndonesian ociety.
t
plays
conservative
role n
preventing
hefull
roletarianizationf the
population. hissameargu-
mentwas
advanced ver60
years
arlier y
Ranneft
1916),
who
recognized
three hases nthe
development
f ndonesia's
conomy,
he ast
being pe-
riodof
capitalistic
roduction ating
rom round 860.
Ranneft oints ut
thedominance fnonpermanentorms fmobility uring hisphase in re-
sponse othe
distinctivelyifferentfrom
urope)
nature fcapitalist enetra-
tion xternally
mposed pon
thepopulation f Java.
He
explicitlytates hat
this
ircularmigration
elays
heformationf
a
proletariat;
nd
nstead f the
emergence
f
two social
groups-an urban-based
on-landowningroletariat
and
a small
farming
lass-there s an
undifferentiatedroup
nvolving
hem-
selves n
both hecapitalist
nd peasant
modes
of
production.
The
theoreticalxplanation riefly
utlined
n
this ection s sometimes
seen as beingcompetitive ith heeconomic xplanations iscussed arlier,
butthe
presentwriterees
themmore s
complementary.he first wo eco-
nomic
xplanations
re based argely n a
micro-levelpproach
nd ariseout
of
intensive ieldworknd
close
study
f
individuals,
ouseholds,
nd small
communities.he
uneven
evelopment
heoryuggests
hat
migration
annot
be
explained
without
nderstandinghe
macro-structuralorces n
society nd
the
ontextuallements
hapinghepattern
f
mobility.
ach of the
explana-
tions
hrows ome
ight
n
the ausesof
mobility.
ence an
importantriority
wouldbe to
explore nd establish
inkages etween heforces
hat perate t
the ndividualeveland nfluence hetherouseholdsr ndividuals illmove
or
stay
nd
thebroader
tructuralorces hat onstrainhe
options
vailable o
them nd
ultimatelyeterminehe verall
attern
f
movement.ieldworknd
the
tudies eviewed eredo
indicate hat here
re,
as
Gerold-Scheepers
nd
Van
Binsbergen1978: 28)
suggest,
nternal
actorsn addition
o the xternal
forces f
capitalistenetration
hat t least
partially
xplainwhy
ome
groups
or
someoftheir
members
igratemore han thers.
t s
at themicro evel
hat
the
wo
approaches
an come
together.
We know ittle
bout
hemicro-struc-
tural
etting
n
which opulation
movementccurs
or fails
o
occur.
How do
the xternal orces f colonialpenetrationndthe esultantnevennddistinc-
tive
patternf
capitalist
enetration anifest
hemselves t
the evel of the
village,
family,
r
individualnd
mpel
migration
f a
particular
ype
r en-
courage tability?
n
what
ways
re
these orces
erceived?
ow do
they
on-
strain
he
range
f
mobility/stabilityhoices
open
to
particularroups
within
the
village?
These
mportantuestions
ave
yet
o
be
approached
n
mobility
research
n
Indonesia.
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
16/26
Graeme J. Hugo
73
Transport
evelopment
nd temporaryopulation
mobility
ne of
the
most
undamentalistinctionsetween
onpermanent
nd
permanent
orms
f
population obilitys the elative
ignificance
f
the
ourney
etween
lace
of
origin
nd
destination.
n most
permanentnd
semipermanent
igrations,
travelosts, ime aken, nddistanceraversedetween rigin nddestination
generallyonstitute
minor lementn a
mover's verall alculus n
deciding
whether
r not o
migratendwhere. everal
writers
ave pointed otherela-
tive
unimportancef
travel osts
n
migration
e.g., Herrick, 965) andto the
fact
hat hecostsof the
ourney sually
onstitute
one-time
utlay
nd
are
not
continuingnd
significantlementn
themover's verall
udget. his,of
course,
s not he
ase with emporaryorms
f population
mobility hen
he
mover
s repeatedly
irculating
etween rigin
nd
destination.
he journey
itself
learly
ccupies muchmore entral
osition
mong
he
lementsnflu-
encingmovers ndnonmovers,ndtransportosts are a constantndsignifi-
cant
tem nthe
mover's udget.Clearly
prerequisite
or ong andmedium
distancemass
commutingnd
circularmigration f the
types hat
ccur n
Indonesia s a widespread,
heap, andefficient
ransportation
etwork.
The astdecadehas
produced veritable evolution
n
the
vailability
f
public
ransport
vermost f rural
ndonesia
Hugo, 1981b).
There
an be
no
doubt hat he
extension
f roads and the
proliferation
f
vehicles
of
many
types,
specially uses and
minibuses,
nto
hitherto
solated ural reas have
led to greatlyncreased patialmobility or wide spectrumfIndonesia's
rural
dwellers.The
precisenature f the
relationship
etween hisstriking
change
n
transportvailabilitynd
migrationas
been ittle
nvestigated;
ow-
ever,
t
s
clear hat
he
ransport
evolution
as
greatlyacilitated
heconcur-
rent pswing n
circularmigrationnd
commutingHugo
1975,1978, 1981b;
Naim,
1971;Mantra, 981).Much
earlier,
anneft
1916:61) similarly
howed
that
nnovation
n
transport
n
Indonesia
was influential
n
producinghanges
in
the ypes nd
evels
of
population
mobility.
In this ectionwe havesummarizedome of themajor rgumentsut
forward
o
explain
nonpermanent
igration
n
ndonesia.
We now
have
a sub-
stantial
ody
of
empirical
nowledgeoncerning
he
causes
of
nonpermanent
migration.
s has been
suggested
n
the
discussion,
here s
now
a
need
for
researchirected
ot nly owardloser
nvestigation
f
theforces
nfluencing
nonpernmanent
obility,
ut also
toward
he
ntegrating
f what
we
already
know
oncerning
he
auses
of this
mobility
nto
coherentheoreticalrame-
work.
Implications
of
nonpermanent
migration
A
fewof
themoremportantheoreticalnd
policy mplications
rising
ut
of
the
previous
iscussion
illbe
briefly entioned. ne
mportant
nitial
onsid-
eration
s whetherhe
present igh
evel of
nonpermanent
obility
s
simply
transitional
hase that
will
ultimately
e
replaced
y permanent
elocation
f
many
movers o
urban
reas as social
change
nd
economic
evelopmentro-
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
17/26
74
Circular
Migration
in Indonesia
ceed. The general
ormulationsfSkeldon 1977) and
Nelson 1978), based
predominantlyn LatinAmerican
xperience,would suggest hat his s the
case, as does someof
theAfricaniteratureVanBinsbergen
ndMeilink 978:
11).
The empiricalvidence rom
ndonesia, owever, s
somewhat
mixed n
this espect.Maude 1980) suggests hatMinangkabauutmigrationromWest
Sumatras becoming
more ermanent
ver ime, ndRambe's 1977) studyn
SouthKalimantanoints o a transition
rom onpermanento
permanentut-
movementmong he
Banjarese
of
Alabio.
On the other and,many f the
other tudies,
specially hosebased n
Java,found hat hegreatmajorityf
nonpermanent
igrants ave no intentionf shifting
ermanentlyo their r-
ban
destinations.
t
wouldbe prematureo nfer
rom his
hat heirmigration
will
remain ircular,
ormostmovers ave onlybeen
engaged n circularmi-
gration or fewyears.At presentt seems
hat, ormanyndonesian onper-
manentmovers, heirmobilitys notperceived s a preliminarytage eforen
ultimate
ermanent
elocation
f
themselvesnd
their amilies. heevidence s
that
ommutingndcircularmigration
remore han
imply
means
o
test he
destination
nvironmentefore ettling
here.Many emporary oversn ndo-
nesia
xhibit strong
nd
apparently
ong-term
ommitment
o
bilocality, pt-
ing for
thecombination f activities n
both rural nd urban reas that
nonpermanentigration
trategyllowsthem.
Anothermportantonsideration
s the mplications
f ncreased onper-
manentmigrationor roader ocialandeconomic hange n ndonesia.Much
ofthe
migrationboth
ermanent
nd
nonpermanent)
an be seenas a
response
to the substantial
patial, ectoral, nd class
inequalities
within ndonesia.
There
as been long
historyfconcentrationfpublic
ndprivatenvestment
and
resource
evelopmentctivity-andhence
expansion
n
employmentp-
portunities-in
articularocalities
especiallyJakarta, few
other rban en-
ters, nd regions f
resource xtractionuch as plantationsnd
timber,
il,
coal,
and mineral
reas).Much
of
the
nonpermanentigrationescribed
ar-
lierflows rom reas n
which here asbeen very ittle
nvestment
nd
devel-
opmentoward egions hathave receivednvestmentar utofproportiono
their hare
f
thenational
opulation.While
t s
clear hat hese
patial
ocio-
economic
nequalities
re
a
major
ausalfactor
n
nonpermanent
igration,
he
critical
uestion
emains
whetherhat
mobility
n
turn
as an effect n
those
inequalitiesnd,
f
so,
whether
t
tends
o
ameliorate r exacerbate hem.
According o one main ine of
argument,he
transferf income
from
urban o
rural
reas,
whichhave
been starved
f
investment,
s
leading
o a
reduction n
social
and
economic
disparities:
.
.
.since
netrural
migration
s
concentratedn
particular
reas,groups
nd
seasons,
smallnational low
an
considerablyedistributeesourcesmong nd within ural ommunitiesnd
between ural nd
urban
reas.
Most neoclassical conomistswould
expect
voluntaryopulationmovementso
reduce
both
nefficiency
nd
inequality
(Lipton, 980:1). Indeed
most f the ndonesian
tudies eviewed
n this
aper
refer o
a substantialackflow
f
money
nd
goods
to the
place
of
origin
s a
result
f
nonpermanent
igration.
n
theWestJava
tudy,
or
xample
Hugo,
1975,
1978),
all
temporary
overs
emitted oney o their amilies nd 81
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
18/26
Graeme J.
Hugo
75
percent
rought ackgoods. Among
ommuter
ouseholds,
n
average f 60
percentf
theirncomewas derived
rom
emittances,hile ircularmigrants'
remittancesccounted
ornearly alf heir ouseholds' otal
ncome n aver-
age.
Nevertheless,uch fthe ecentiteratureConnell, 980;Lipton, 980)
has
suggested hat he
mpact fmoney lows o
thevillageof
origin
s small
and n
many ases even
negativewhen
onsidered
n netterms.
The
sparse
evidence
uggests hatnet
remittancesre quite small relative o
village
n-
come, are
concentrated
n richer
illagehouseholds
nlikely
o
suffer rom
capital
onstraints,ndtend o be
little sed tofinance
nvestment,xcept
n
house-building
.
.
(Lipton,
1980:
3).
It
is
noticeable,
however,
in
Lipton's
(1980)
review f theremittance
iteraturehat
trong mphasis
s
placedon
monetary
lows
enerated ymore-or-less
ermanent igrantsndvery ong-
termmigrants.et, s Fan and Stretton1980: 23) suggest,From hepoint f
view
of the
rural ector,
emittancesepresentn
important
enefitf
circular
migration.
hilepermanent igrants
ay lso sendfunds
o
their
illage, he
amounts re
unlikely
o be as
large
or as
regular.
The WestJava
tudy
er-
tainlyupportshe
ontentionhat he
netremittancef
nonpermanentigrants
were
substantially
reater nd more ignificanthan
hose
of
permanent i-
grants.
Moreover, he
studymakesclear that,
nder urrent
onditions, he
flow
of remittancess
absolutely ritical
o the
well-being
f
manyvillage
households. rom heperspectivefrural evelopment,owever,t should e
mentionedhat hebulk f
these
emittancesre used topurchase
hemundane
necessitiesf ife food,
lothing,
tc.); and while here
s
some
nvestment
n
housingnd and, mounts
irected
oward
mployment-generatingnterprises
are
relatively
mall.
A
clear
understandingf theredistributive
mpact fnonpermanenti-
grationnIndonesia
must wait moredetailed
tudies f
remittancesnd the
effect
f
migration
n the
village.
Nevertheless,
xisting
tudies n
Java nd
manyparts f the Outer slands
ndicate hatwhen
both nonpermanent
nd
permanent igrantsreconsidered, henetflow f remittancesends o be in
favor
f
the
village,
hat
he easonal r
periodicoss of aborfrom
he
village
rarely
esults
n
any oss
of
overall
productivity
e.g., Colfer, 981), nd that
many ndividuals nd
villagecommunities ould
suffer
ire
consequences
should
heir ccess to
income-earningpportunities
n
cities nd other enters
of
investmente curtailed
n
any
way.
Proponentsf
the
rgument
upporting
he edistributiveffects
f
popu-
lation
mobility lso
suggest
hat
he
movers hemselves
ill
be
changedby
their
xperiencest their
estination,
specially
f t s
an
urban
rea,
and that
thiswill ead them o be innovatorsnd developmentaleaderswhen hey e-
turn o
the
village. Again
there s
little vidence rom ndonesia
o
support
judgment
ither
way.
It
is clear
that
eturning
igrants
re
generally ighly
respected
n
thevillagebecause
of
their
reaterxperience
nd
that
ome
have
taken
eading
oles
n
their
illages;yet here
s
little vidence
o
suggest
hat
they
ave
challenged
hetraditional
uthoritytructure
f
the
village.
The
second
main ine of
argument
egarding
he
relationship
etween
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
19/26
76
Circular Migration
in Indonesia
nonpermanent
igrationnd developmentn Indonesia
s that hisform
f
mobilitycts,at
best, o preservehe urrentattern
f wide nequalities
nd,
at worst, o exacerbate
hose nequalities. his argument
uggests hat he ir-
cularmobilityf abor einforceshe
xisting attern
f spatial oncentrationf
investmentn a fewprivilegedreas.The fact hat laces ikeJakartaannow
draw abor rom muchwider rea
than as everbeenpossible,without
aving
to provide ll of the workers nd
their amilies
withpermanent ousing,
schooling, ealth
acilities, tilities,
nd so on, may nfact
e
encouraging
he
concentrationf investmentn those
centers. he
destinationreas and the
local classeswith
olitical ndeconomic ower ain
doublebenefit.
irst, he
supply f abor
s so plentifulhat
wagesand conditionsan be maintained
t
low levels; andthere s some evidence
e.g.,
Breman, 979) to suggest hat
circularmigrantsrawn rom distant
reaconstitute
more ocileworkforce.
Second, hese lassesdo nothavetocontributevia taxation,tc.) to theprovi-
sion of overheads
permanent ousing,
tc.) for he
families
f the
circular
migrants ho remaint home.
Moreover,f circular
migrantshouldbecome
ill orotherwise
alluponbad times,
hey reable to seekout heir illage-based
social ndwelfare
ervices. n allofthese espects,
hen, heurban-based
lites
derive enefits
hile
hemovers nd their amiliesncur
osts.
In
short,
hisargumentuggests
hat
nonpermanent
obility
s not a
satisfactoryong-term
olutionto village poverty
nd maldistribution
f
wealth. n villageJava, ircularmobility ay ct na similarwaytothe gri-
culturalnvolution
echanisms escribed y Geertz
1963)
as
another
means
wherebyhepoor
reprovided
ith pportunities
o
earnustenough
o survive
at a baresubsistence
evel
but
re
given
ittle
pportunity
or
vertical
mobility
to mprove heir
iving onditions.hus,nonpermanent
obility
s really nly
a
stop-gapmeasure
hatwill
maintain
urrentnequalities.
ts
very uccess
n
providingemporary
elief
may,
n
fact,
be
counterproductive
n the
onger
term ecauseit diverts ttention
rom he
only
strategy
hat
will
ultimately
assist
the poor
n
rural
reas-a fundamental
ecentralization
f
investment
andcapital way from ities ndareasofresourceoncentrationoward ural
areas
and,
in
particular,
he
peasant gricultural
ector.
Current
nowledge
f
nonpermanent igration
n Indonesia
ends at
least artial upporto both inesof
rgumentutlined
bove. On
the
ne hand,
theres no
doubt
hat
rom
short-term
erspective,ertain conomic
enefits
usually
ccrue
othe
ndividualmovers,
heir amilies, nd
to
some
xtent heir
villages f origin.
n the ther and,nonpermanent
igration ost ikely lso
preserves
nd perhaps xacerbatesxisting nequalities,
nd the widespread
occurrence
f this
movement
may
n factdivert ttention
rom he
ong-term
needfor more quitablenvestmentf total esourcesnrural reas nd peas-
ant
agriculture.
Bothmajor rguments
ave
significantmplications
or
policy.
The
im-
plication f the
firstrgument
s that olicymakershould ncourage
onper-
manent
mobility ecause
of
ts
positive
evelopmentalffects-namely,
net
flow f wealth nd
perhaps
deas
from
ity
o
village
nd
a
reduction
f rural-
urban
nequalities.
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
20/26
Graeme J.
Hugo
77
The second rgument
as quitedifferentolicy mplications.f
nonper-
manentmigrationn fact
onsolidatesnequalities
nd preventsheformation
of a
significantrban-based
roletariat,t wouldappearpreferableo
encour-
age permanent igration nd
discouragenonpermanent
igration. ipton
(1980:3) has summed p theposition uccinctly:Even if evidenceon the
impact f emigrationn rural
reas eads to gloomy
onclusions, his oesnot
mean that . .
migration
hould be impeded. No; the mplications re
rather
that, incedevelopment
lmost ertainlymplies
teady abour ransfersutof
agriculture
. .
governmentshould top llocating
nvestmentnd ncentives
in ways hat ncourage
xcessive,prematurend,
therefore,isappointinga-
bour
ransfer.his means
orrectingnvestmentnd incentive iases
against
therural ector.
It is clear thatwe do
not yetknowenough bouthow
nonpermanent
migrations related o thewider ocial and economic ontext n which t is
occurring
n
ndonesia nd ts
mpact
n income
istribution
both patial
nd
vertical). n
the absenceof such knowledge t
would be prematureo
make
definitive
ronouncementsnwhat olicy
nitiatives,
f
any, hould e
taken.
In
a broader
olicy ontext, owever, t is
absolutely ritical hat
og-
nizance e taken f the cale,
causes,
and
mpact
f
nonpermanentigration.
Regional
evelopment
lanners end o take ccount f permanent
igration;
but, s Fan and Stretton1980:
21) havepointed ut, f patternf nonperma-
nentmigrations ofsignificancena region then he onsequences fmigra-
tory lows
maybe quitedifferent
rom hose enerally erceived yresearchers
and
policymakerswho tend o treat ll
migrations permanent. ne
impor-
tant
onsequence
s the
nterdependence
etween ifferentectors
especially
theurban nd
rural ectors)
reated y nonpermanentigration.olicies
nd
programs
nitiated
n
theurban
ector
will
often ave unanticipatedpin-off
effectsn
therural
ector hat re transmitted
hrough
he
migrantse.g.,
re-
strictionsn
job opportunitiespento circular
migrants
n
the
city,
s has
occurred
n
Jakarta).
imilarly,
he
mpact
f some
policies
nd
programs
ni-
tiatednrural reasmaybe felt ncities.
It
is apparent hat here re several
majorgaps
in
our knowledge
nd
understanding
f
nonpermanent
obility
n
ndonesia-its
scale, causes,
con-
sequences,
nd
implications
n
the
broader ocial
and
economic ontext f
national nd
regional evelopment
nd
change.Equally,
t is
apparent
hat
demographers
an
play
a
major
role n
increasing
ur
understanding.
ne
of
thepioneers f the
tudy
f
circulation,
itchell
1978:6-7)
has stated
enti-
ments
choed
by many
who have
followed im
n
the
tudy
f the
phenome-
non: . . . thetopic has, in my opinion,remainedremarkablyntractable o
thorough oing analysis.
. . .
Part of this
analyticalrecalcitrance erives from
the
greatdifficulties
n
collecting
uitable ata to
carry dequate heoretical
formulations.
The
studies eviewed ere an leave no doubt
egarding
ither
he
ub-
stantial
cale
of
mpermanent
obilityn ndonesia r ts
economic nd
social
significance.t
behooves s to
develop strategyor btaining
ure
stimates
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Mar 2013 02:26:49 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
8/19/2019 Circular Migration in Indonesia. Hugo
21/26
78 Circular
Migration in
Indonesia
ofthe
volume, ocation, irection,nd structuralharacteristics
f this orm
f
mobility. his nevitably
eans
ncorporatingppropriateuestionsn the en-
sus
and arge-scale ational ample urveys.
A
number f possibilitiesmme-
diately resent
hemselves. he firsts duringhefull ensus ount o askboth
a person's sualplace ofresidence ndhisplace ofresidence n thenightfthe
census.This de facto/de
ure comparison
as carried utwith ome uccess
n
the
1930 ndonesian ensus Volkstelling,
933-1936),enabling he colonial
census akers o create special category f
persons
emporarilyresent.
This
s a particularlymportantriority.n
addition,t wouldbe
highly esir-
able
to nclude
workplace uestion
n the
ensus.
Unfortunately
t
could
not
be
included
n
thefull ount,which s restrictedo
four r five uestions,
nd
would have to be
incorporatedn thesamplecensus.6 Sample
surveys hat
adopt luster-type
ampling rocedures
reatedifficultiesecause census-de-
finedmovements not a completelybiquitous opulationharacteristicnd
movers end o
be
concentratedn particularreas, eading o problemsn in-
flating
he
ample igures
o the
otal
opulation.
he
design
f the
workplace
question
nd the
tabulation
lan
would need extensive esearch nd
frequent
testing. he question
would need to be
applied to all occupations
eld
by