Migration and Rural-Urban Linkages in Ethiopia

such a development strategy could undermine the opportunities that might have beengained from exploring the positive outcomes of migration.The recent Participatory Poverty Assessment (MoFED, 2005) indicated that in ruralareas, migration for longer than a certain duration results in revocation of the land rightsof the person. In some rural sites it was reported that engagement in non-farm activitiessuch as trading in consumer goods could result in the forfeit of a person’s rights to land.This has, therefore, limited the mobility of rural people since engagement in non-farmactivities for longer durations (often more than a year) has not been permitted, as a mixedlivelihood strategy was perceived to be irregular. Thus, rural people must choose in anabsolute sense whether to stay entirely in agriculture or to change to non-farm businesses.Nonetheless, it is worth noting that the draft PASDEP (FDRE, 2005) acknowledges theneed for the strengthening of rural-urban linkages and a rebalancing of the growthstrategy with an emphasis on the development of small towns and growth poles, andemployment creation, particularly in urban areas. Even if the role of internal migration inthis poverty alleviation strategy is not directly addressed, such strategic priorities seem tocreate a more favourable enabling environment towards the mobility of people.1.4. Theoretical Framework1.4.1. Perspectives on the migration-development nexusAs discussed in the previous section, this study capitalises on recent perspectives on themigration-development nexus and in particular builds on the discourse of the migration–livelihood framework. It subscribes to the argument that migration is an essentialelement, and one of the most important methods of diversifying rural livelihoods (deHaan, 1999; Ellis, 1998b; Kothari, 2003; Stark, 1991). As Tacoli (1998a) states,migration refers to a social process, in which many poor households move between ruraland urban livelihood options as appropriate to their members’ needs through casual,periodic or permanent migration experiences.The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (see figure 1 below), which focuses on thethings people do and the resources they access in pursuit of a living, is very muchconnected to migration since the mobility of people is about the movement of humancapital, which includes the mobility of labour together with a person’s experience, skills,education level and health status. The multiple types of migration are also important inoffering opportunities to reduce the vulnerability of households or in creating thecapability to build a satisfactory living. Moreover, migration is a conduit to offset or copewith risk factors that threaten the level of resources or the conducive institutional andpolicy contexts that are relevant to an individuals’ or households’ livelihood (Carney,1998; Ellis, 2003).In general, the dynamics of migration can be better explained and studied in light of itsrelationship with livelihoods diversification. This often depends on various factors12