THESIS Date 0-7 639 “VT";‘TI'I .t n .9 ‘1‘. '. 3,5 {1; #1" 25.1 _\'.. .'_l‘.‘,.~..i':k:"vr sh “ -. i . . "Q _ ~«. wwnaemea 1 ‘. 1.‘-J‘.;H ' — L 3:9”.ch U"), i o,. ,. -.- '. _' it“""-.".‘,"5:11“.- XL; '4 9.3 " ’ ' ‘ ..“_;\.. "3’ 'J 0‘ “—m—k '7 —~—~-—..V‘...—w This is to certify that the thesis entitled Rainy Season Labor Migration in the Experimental Units of Koumbidia and Thysse Kaymore/Sonkorong of Sine- Saloum Region in Senegal presented by Desire Yande Sarr has been accepted towards fulfillment M.A. of the requirements for Sociology z /é//["> degree in 7 ,. ”(/41 L{(¢/:fl (!-f\Q_’ i7 Major professor MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution / i i i l )V‘ESI.) RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LIBRARIES remove this Checkout from ”Jill’— your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. r W iii“ ii? M We; mm t. u RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION IN THE EXPERIMENTAL UNITS OF KOUMBIDIA AND THYSSE KAYMOR/SONKORONG OF SINE-SALOUM REGION IN SENEGAL By Desire Yande Sarr A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University In Partial Fulfillment Of The Requirements For The Degree 0f MASTER OF ARTS Department of Sociology 1983 ABSTRACT RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION IN THE EXPERIMENTAL UNITS OF KOUMBIDIA AND THYSSF KAYMOR/SONKORONG OF SINE-SALOUM REGION IN SENEGAL By Desire Yande Sarr This is a study of rainy season labor migration in the Sine-Saloum region of Senegal. It focuses on migrants in the Experimental Units of Koumbidia and Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong. Four factors which lead to the development of migration patterns and the decision to migrate are examined: 1) the motivational factor, 2) the facilitating factor, 3) the precipitating factor, and 4) the conditional factor. Using a sample of one hundred farm operators (njatigues) and one hundred farm laborers (navetaans) in each of the two Experimental Units, it is concluded that a holistic approach is essential to understanding the movement of labor people from one rural area to another for the period of the rainy season. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my deep appreciation and sincere gratitude to Dr. Chris Vanderpool, my major professor, for his encouragement and guidance throughout my program. I would also like to thank the members of my guidance committee: Dr. Craig Harris and Harry K thwarzweller. I express my gratitude and dedicate this work to my wife Juliene Ndiaye and to my children, Charles Pierre and Rose 0dile for the moral support provided. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ............................ ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................ LIST OF TABLES ......................... LIST OF FIGURES ......................... INTRODUCTION .......................... Chapter I. OVERVIEW OF THE PHENOMENON OF RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION IN SENEGAL SINCE THE COLONIAL PERIOD ............ Patterns of Migration in Senegal .............. Internal Migration ................... Rural-rural labor migration .............. Rural-urban labor migration .............. International Labor Migration .............. Rainy Season Labor Migration ............... Evolution of Rainy Season Labor Migration ........ The Contract of Migrants ................ Actual Situation of Rainy Season Labor Migration II. RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION IN THE EXPERIMENTAL UNITS OF KOUMBIDIA AND THYSSE KAYMOR/SONKORONG IN SINE- SALOUM REGION . . . . ...................... Characteristics of the Sine-Saloum Region ........ The Experimental Units of Sine Saloum .......... Location ........................ Objectives ....................... Problem Identification .................. Statement of the Problem ................ Importance of the Problem ............... Research Objectives .................. Limitations of the Study ................ Methodology ....................... Sampling Procedure ................... Methods of Investigation ............. .. . . III. RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION IN THE EXPERIMENTAL UNITS PRESENTATION OF RESULTS . ................. Evolution of the Number of Migrant Farm Workers Estimated by Experimental Unit from 1975-1982 ...... . 15 17 17 . 20 22 22 22 25 2? 27 Demographic Characteristics of Migrants in Our Samples by Experimental Unit ............ Origin of Navetaans by Experimental Unit ...... Characteristics of Migrants ............ Age distribution of migrants by Experimental unit ...................... Marital status of Migrants ............ Situation of migrations and age of migrants by Experimental Unit .............. Determinants of the Decision to Migrate ........ Reasons for Migrations According to Migrants by Experimental Unit ................. Reasons for Migrations According to Farm Operators. . . Relations of Production between Farm Operators and Migrants ...................... Contracts of Migrants in the Experimental Units . . . . Distribution of Migrants According to the Type of Contract ..................... Farm Circumstances and the Hiring of Migrants ..... Typology of Farms in the Experimental Units ..... Distribution of Migrants by Dimension of Farm . . . . IV IMPACT OF RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION ......... Impact of Rainy Season Migration at the Level of the Migrant ...................... Evaluation of the Income Earned . . . . ....... Patterns of Expenditures of Income ......... Impact of Rainy Season Migration at the Level of the Migrant's Family ................. Impact of Rainy Season Migration at the Level of the Receiving Locality ................ Reasons for Hiring Migrants According to Farm Operators ................... Degree of Integration of Migrants in the Receiving Locality ................. Integration to the receiving household ....... Integration to the receiving community ....... CONCLUSION ......................... BIBLIOGRAPHY ............... APPENDIX iv Page 30 30 31 32 32 34 35 37 45 46 47 52 53 54 56 58 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Evolution of the Number of Migrants from 1934 to 1960 . . . 11 2. Composition of the Sample of Farm Operators in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia ............... 24 3. Composition of the Sample of Farm Operators in the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong ........ 24 4. Estimated Number of Migrants by Experimental Unit from 1975 to 1982 ........................ 29 5. Origin of Migrants by Experimental Unit .......... 31 6. [Age Distribution of Migrants by Experimental Unit ...... 32 7. Marital Status and Age of Migrants in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia ..................... 33 8. Marital Status and Age of Migrants in the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong . ............. 34 9. Situation of Migration and Age of Migrants in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia ............... 35 10. Situation of Migration and Age of Migrants in the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong ........ 35 11. Degree of Importance of Reasons for Migration in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia .u. . ..._ .......... 41 12. Degree of Importance of Reasons for Migration in the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong ........ 42 13. Distribution of Migrants by Type of Contract by Experimental Unit ..................... 53 14. Distribution of Farms According to the Dimension by Experimental Unit .................... 55 15. Distribution of Migrants in 1982 According to the Dimension of the Farms in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia .................... '. . . 57 Table Page 16. Distribution of Migrants in 1982 According to the Dimension of the Farm in 'The Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor Sonkorong ................ . 57 17. Use of the Income from Rainy Season Migration in The Experimental Unit of Koumbidia ........... 62 18. Use of the Income from Rainy Season Migration in The Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong , , , 63 19. Attitude of Migrants towards the Existence of Grouping in The Experimental Unit of Koumbidia.. . . . . . 69 20. Attitude of Migrants towards the Existence of Grouping in The Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong ................. . . . . 69 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Contracts of Migrants: Clauses ............. 51 2. Characteristics of Farms ................ 55 vii INTRODUCTION This study focuses on the rainy season migration of labor in the Experimental Units of Kumbidia and Thysse Kaymor SonKorong located in Eastern Saloum of Senegal. Labor migration, although not as dramatic as a population movement or resulting from political upheaval, war and famine, it is nevertheless an important component of economic development, social change and political organization. Defining migration, Magalam (1968:5) stated: Migration is a relatively permanent moving away of a collectivity, called migrants, from one geographical location to another, preceeded by decision making on the part of the migrants on the basis of hierarchic- ally ordered set of values or valued ends and result- ing in changes in the interactional system of the migrants. For Eisenstadt (1954), migration is defined as: The physical transition of an individual or group from one society to another. This transition usually involves abandoning one social setting and entering another and different one. For Jansen (1969:80l, Migration is a demographic problem; it influences sizes of populations at origin and destination; it is an eco- nomic problem: a majority of shifts in population are due to economic imbalances between areas; it may be a political problem: this is particularly so in interna-~ tional migration where restrictions and conditions apply to those wishing to cross a political boundary; it in- volves social psychology in so far as the migrant is involved in a process of decision making before moving and that his personality may play an important role in the success with which he integrates into the host society; it is also a sociological problem since the social structure and cultural system both of places of origin and of destination are affected by migration and in turn affect the migrant. These definitions of the phenomenon of migration do not prevent as noticed by Magalam and Harry Schwarzweller (1958:10-12), "inadequacies in the manner that migration is abstracted", this leads, as they affirmed, to a "misconception about the nature of migration." The same judgment can be given to several models used to approach migration. Among them are: a) Sorokin's model which according to Magalam and Schwarzweller (1968), contended that the idea of migration is a random phenomenon. They reported Sorokin's conclusion that, "although migrants were predominantly young adults and females, net urban selection was, in the main, a chance selection." b) Samuel Stouffer's (1960) model of "Intervening Opportunities" according to which: There may not necessarily be a relationship between mobility and geographical distance, but the number of migrants is directly proportional to the number of opportunities in the distance, inversely propor- tionate to the number of intervening opportunities. c) The "Push and Pull" model, which Caldwell(1968:87) referred to fecuses much more on one aspect of the analysis of migration phenomenon - the economic aspect.‘ Different individuals can have diverse interpretations and diverse evaluations of a situation. Besides, individuals are a part of and operate within a given system. Therefore, their decision to move will reflect in a certain way their evaluation of the situation but also the effect of the system to which they belong. Samuel Stouffer's model, on the other hand, reduces the phenomenon of migration to a mere 'rite of passage' through which pe0ple have to go. In contrast, in the "Push and Pull" model, the preponderance given to economic factors very often hides the principal reasons for moving, for example, the interaction of phenomena which give rise to economic needs is very often neglected. It seems that the fundamental cause of moving must be looked at by questioning the origin of the economic need felt by the migrants. A lesson to draw from Jansen's conception of migration and from the insufficiency of the model mentioned to explain the phenomenon of migration is the necessity of a holistic approach when dealing with migration, in general and with labor migration, in particular. A full understanding of the phenomenon of migration is more likely to emerge from a holistic approach. Such a holistic approach characterizes the emphasis of this study on the causes, effects and implications of rainy season labor migration. Besides specifying the demographic characteristics of rainy season labor migrants, the following questions will be examined: 1) Who migrates? 2) Why do they migrate? 3) What would they do if they didn't migrate? 4) Are there any changes related to-the decision to migrate ' and what are they? 5) How does the decision to move occur? 61 What effects result from these changes on both origin and destination of the migrant as well as on the migrant himself? ‘These questions were in part, addressed by Schwarzweller (1979:15). CHAPTER I OVERVIEW OF THE PHENOMENON OF RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION IN SENEGAL SINCE THE COLONIAL PERIOD Senegal is the most westerly country of Africa. It also was France's oldest African colony. The first contact of the French with Goree occurred in 1659. Dakar, the capital of the Republic of Senegal, was from 1904 to 1959 the Federal Capital for French West Africa. At the eve of achievement of independence in 1960, the Senegalese economy was overwhelmingly dependent upon groundnuts cultivation as cash crop. The development of groundnut production required not only land but mainly labor. Labor migration grew rapidly from this need. However, migration was already existing and made possible economic transactions between the coastal populations and populations of remote areas. In this connection, Harris (1978z3) stated: "Sahelian populations have been among the most mobile in the world and migration particularly to the coastal economies, has been a strong response." Several reasons contributed to increase the movement of labor migration. Amdng these were: the system of forced labor developed by the colonial administration for the construction of the Dakar-Niger railroad and the system of taxes imposed on the populations which forced them to move in areas where groundnuts were cultivated in order to get the cash money required. Besides the number of Senegalese involved in the process, labor migration brought thousands of people per year from neighboring French colonies, French Sudan1 and Guinea, to the 1French Sudan is now the Republic of Mali. areas of Senegal where groundnuts were produced (Diallo, 1972; Colvin, 1979; David, 1960, 1980; Diop, 1976; Lacombe, 1970). Similar to the rural-oriented labor migration, the colonial ad- ministration needed labor in the cities of Dakar, Kaolack, Fatick where the groundnut production was shipped for export. It also needed labor to work in the oil factories located in Dakar and in other industrial factories. As a consequence, another pattern of migration was developed: rural-urban migration (Lericollais et Verniere, 1975; Riddle. 1978; Amin, 1976; Lacombe, 1970). This rural-urban migration increased very rapidly as a reSponse to the constant low prices of groundnuts. A similar situation has been described by Caldwell (1968) in Ghana, and by Potekin, and Zusmanovich, (1979:98) who stated: Mass ruin and starvation are becoming increasingly wide- spread and acute among the peasantry due to the impossi- bility of obtaining any suitable price for peasant produce. Peasants are leaving the village en masse to seek work in the towns, the mines and in tranSports. All the authors cited recognize a common basic reason for migra- tion be it from one rural area to another rural area or from rural area to urban cities within the same country or outside national boundaries. Though presented differently, this common view consists in the continual economic depression in peasant communities created by a colonial admini- stration looking out only for its own interests and by the subsequent "independent" governments which followed step-by-step this line of development. It consists also in the politics of city development which leaves the rural areas without amenities. In connection with this general view, the distinction between patterns of migration that follows should not be misleading. Indeed, as affirmed by Caldwell (1968:203): Rural-urban migration should not be regarded as the antithesis of rural-rural migration; both have been movements from the less developed to the more dev- eloped parts of the country, from the more tradition- al to the less traditional, and often from the largely subsistence to the largely cash. Patterns of Migration in Senegal Internal Migration Internal labor migration indicates the movement of people from one region to another or within the same region inside national fron- tiers for the purpose of seasonal and/or temporary employment. There are two forms of internal labor migration. Rural-rural labor migration Rural-rural labor migration is closely linked to agriculture ac- tivity. People move from densely p0pulated areas to areas where labor is needed. This movement of migration which very often takes place during the rainy season is called navetanat2 when it lasts the period of the rainy season. Farm workers involved in the movement are called navetaans (Nolan, 1975; Calvin, 1979; Diallo, 1972; Fouquet, 1958; David, 1960 and 1980). Rural-rural migration in Senegal has also taken the form of a permanent movement called "colonat." Two forms of colonat must be distinguished. First, Pelissier (1966:303) described the settlement of Amadou Bamba3 and his brotherhood at Diourbel in the heartland of ground- nut belt. Then in 1945 the movement of colonization spread out to the zone of Kaffrine in the North-East of Sine-Saloum region. Describing such a move, Elkan, (1960) talked of the "Trek to the Department of 2From navet (Wolof words) meaning rainy season. 3Amadou Bamba was a prestigious Muslim leader. He created the Muslim sect called Mouridisme. The movement described by Pelissier is dated in 1912. Kaffrine." This movement Spread along the line of the Dakar-Niger railroad. O'Brien, (1971:81) very much interested in the organization of these colonats, described the major colonization institution, the DAHRA, as a community of young males who were subjected to the authority of a sheickh and worked without pay. These young men were taught the prin- ciples of the Koran in return. "These Dahra, said O'Brien, moved into areas dominated by pastoralists and put new lands into cultivation." The second form‘of colonat consisted in the settlement of the "Terres Neuves"* by pe0ple recruited from the West Sine-Saloum, Diourbel and Louga. This project of colonization which began in 1971 was aimed at alleviating the high pressure on land in the West Saloum by providing land to each migrant who would permanently settle in the area: (Milleville and Dubois, 1979; Club du Sahel, 1978). Rural-Lnban labor migration Rural-rural seasonal labor migration has received scant attention from researchers. In addition, government policy abolished it in 1961 (Aghassian, Balde; 1976). Rural-urban migration, however, continues to attract attention particularly from urban planners. Rural-urban labor migration occurs when peOple leave their rural villages of origin *This World Bank financed project is known as the PROJECT DE MISE EN VALEUR DES TERRES NEUVES DU SAHEL. . for the towns and cities. This move takes place during the dry season which corresponds in Senegalese rural areas to the slack season in which no farming occurs. For many migrants, the movement to the towns does not go beyond this period. Indeed at the beginning of the rainy season, they return to their village for agricultural activities. For some, the return to their home village can last several seasons. It can be con- sidered as a temporary rural-urban migration. Finally, some migrants decide to settle in towns. In this case, the movement is permanent. As revealed (Diop, 1976; Lacombe, 1970; Gerry, 1976), rural-urban migration can be a way to find a job in order to satisfy personal and family needs, e.g., clothing, money for fiscal taxes, wedding expenses and so on. Rural-urban migration studies have found that the overpopulation and the depressed financial situation in the village of origin, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the attraction of earning some cash income if one is hired, as major factors stimulating this migration pattern. Deepening further our understanding of the reasons for rural- urban migration, Amin (1976:65-122) and Gerry (1976) explain migration from villages to towns as a consequence and a manifestation of capitalist exploitation. As Amin points out: Foreign capital which moves into regions where the development of an export-oriented economy is possi- ble - the only one in which it is interested - itself causes the flows of migration, i.e. labour shifts to areas determined by the needs of capital and not the reverse. Migrants were peasants who had been driven from their land by the de- velopment of agrarian capitalism. They emigrated because the colonial system of taxes obliged them to earn money. They also use the same argument to explain an additional pattern of migration observed in Senegalzinternational migration. International Labor Migration Rural migration in Senegal doesn't recognize national frontiers. Senegal has been, since the introduction of groundnuts cultivation, a destination for migrants originating from other French colonies. Concerning the migration of Senegalese to other countries, they are particularly oriented to France (Adams, 1977). This movement affects mainly villages on the Senegal River Valley. Concerning foreign migration into Senegal, it was mainly inhabi- tants from neighboring countries, French Sudan (Mali) and Guinea, who largely contributed to the development of groundnuts cultivation. After the achievement of independence in 1960, the movement from Mali st0pped, while Guineans continued coming but in smaller numbers. Besides, there is in Senegal a large number of Mauritanians. They are mainly shop- keepers. Rainy Season Labor Migration The histbry of the colonial development of Senegal has been based On groundnut cultivation. First confined to areas under French control, it Spread very rapidly after the establishment of French authority over the country. This extension of groundnuts cultivation was facil- itated by the construction of a railroad whose objective was to link the remote areas suitable for groundnut production to the ports where the production was shipped. A difficulty confronted in the extension of this cultivation in the Eastern Saloum was the very low density of popu- lation and, therefore, the lack of available labour. According to Martin (1979:79), this problem was resolved in two ways by the system of colonat as shown earlier and by seasonal labor migration. Evolution of Raigy Season Labor Migration Rainy season labor migration in the Senegambian zone is an old phenomenon. As early as the 1850's, there was noted (Diallo, 1970) the presence in the Gambia of labor migrants designated as "stranger workers". These rainy season labor migrants are called navetaan in Senegal. Fouquet (1958:83) describes the situation of rainy season migration as follows: The Senegalese who settled the sparsely populated Eastern half of the Circle of Koalak didn't have labour to farm the tracts of land that they claimed. During the 1920's, they began to rely on season- al laborers from French Sudan and Guinea, and areas in Senegal lying outside the groundnut zone to increase output. The necessity to appeal to rainy season laborers from outside Senegal was mainly felt after the first World War. The price of ground- nuts as a result of the war was too low to create an incentive and peasants manifested an interest in returning to subsistence production. Such a situation led the colonial administration to force former Sudanese soldiers to move to Senegal. These migrants were given provisions for the trip and a train ticket to get to Senegal. Once there, they had to identify themselves as soon as they arrived, indicate the name of the village of their choice and pay a tax to the traditional authority. A permit to stay was given to each migrant farm worker (David, 1980). Table One shows the number of migrant farm workers since the beginning of registration in 1934 to 1960. It also gives the distribution of the navetaans between the Region of Sine-Saloum which covers a large part of the groundnut belt and the other Senegalese areas where migrant farm workers were needed. 10- ddddd it ‘1 TABLE 1. Number of Migrant Farm Workers from 1934 - 1960 SENEGAL SINE-SALOUM % PER SINE-SALOUM (1) (2) (2/1) en % 1934 38000 29450 78.00 1935 59000 41618 70.50 1936 64119 41620 64,90 1937 45307 32685 65.72 1938 69717 57715 82.80 1939 64460 46173 71.60 1940 39324 30950 78.70 1941 24504 18286 74.60 1942 22625 11000 48,60 1943 45600 38483 84.40 1944 41772 36602 87.60 1945 35000 28566 81.60 1946 12000 10500 87.50 1947 24884 17000 68.30 1948 21300 17207 80.80 1949 51332 40700 79.30 1950 34100 26075 76.50 1951 40000 28000 70.00 1955 43115 30852 71.60 1956 27021 23000 85.10 1957 38781 26000 67,00 1958 17850 12900 72.30 1959 12260 8400 68.50 1960 8461 8461 100.00 SOURCE: Founou-—Tchuigoua (1981:59) 11 This table shows for the period 1934 to 1959 an average number of mi- grant farm workers of 37,925 per year with the highest number in 1938 of 69,717 navetaans registered. World War Two was followed by a lowering of the number of migrant farm workers to 12,000 individuals in 1946. Besides the effect of the World War II on groundnut prices, the year 1946 marks the abolition of forced labor. This new situation explains the reduction of the number of migrant farm workers. Finally, the table indicates the high percentage of migrant farm workers working in the Sine—Saloum region, average 76%, only this region has used migrant farm workers in 1960. It must be clear that in 1961, the rainy season labor migration was abolished. Did such an abolition mean the disappearance of the phenomenon of rainy season migration? This study gives an answer to that question. The Contract of Migrants Senegalese farmers who hired migrant farm workers in the groundnut zones make an agreement with the migrant farm workers to work their fields. With respect to this agreement, migrant farm workers work the land of the employer in return for the right to cultivate land for his own purposes. Migrant farm workers also help the employer in domestic work. They are provided with food and lodging and must work an average of four mornings a week in the field of their employers. The migrant farm workers stay in the household of their employer until the marketing of groundnuts. Actual Situation of Rainy Season Labor Migration The abolition of rainy season labor migration early after independence involved the movement of pe0ple from outside the country. Still, the 12 Eastern Saloum receives migrants not only from highly densely populated western Saloum, but also migrants from Guinea. As noted earlier, our ultimate goal is to examine the causes, effects and implications of labor migration. Furthermore, besides migrant's demographic characteristics,the following questions will be examined: 1. Who migrates to or from the Experimental Units? 2. Why do they migrate? 3. What would they do if they didn't migrate? 4. Are there changes related to the decision to move? 5. What are those changes? 6. How does the decision to migrate occur? 7. What effects result from the changes on both origin and destination of the migrant as well as on the migrant 13 CHAPTER II RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION (NAVETANT) IN THE EXPERIMENTAL UNITS 0F KOUMBIDIA AND THYSSE KAYMOR SONKORONG IN THE SINE-SALOUM REGION Characteristics of the Sine-Saloum Region The Sine-Saloum Region is located in the West Central part of Senegal with a population of 1,120.825 composed mainly of Wolofs and Serersa, it covers 24,000 km2 and constitutes the largest part of what has been called since the colonial period the "bassin arachidier."5 As stated by Sall and Chamard (1973), the density of the popula- tion which is 32.1 h/km2 for the whole region, varies significantly from the West 85 h/km2 to the South 39 h/kmz. With a variation of rainfall from 500 mm in the North West to 900 mm in the South East, the main feature of the economy of this region is characterized by the dualism between a subsistence production of millet and a cash crop particularly based on groundnuts production. The sandy soil "dior" which covers a large part of the region is very suit- able to groundnut cultivation and explains why the colonial administration chose this region as the pilot region for production. It is also this region of Sine-Saloum which was chosen by the agronomic research to cover the site of the Experimental Units created by IRAT6 in 1968. 4Wolofs, Serers are ethnic groups in Senegal. 5Bassin arachider stands for groundnuts belt. 6IRAT stands for INSTITUTE FOR TROPICAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH. 14 ar by No th 01‘ Th Sal the nat Sly C9D Cert the! The Experimental Units of Sine Saloum Region Claude Reboul (1974) defined the Experimental Units in these terms: Ce projet qui releve de la theorie maintenant classique du “Package Deal" consiste a concentrer en differents points du territoire, choisis en fonction de leurs po- tentialites naturelles et sociales de developpement une action intense et globale d' experimentation et de vulgarisation de maniere a creer des foyers de developpement susceptibles de rayonner dans les regions avoisinantes...Ces foyers de developpement sont appeles les Unites Experimentales.9 Location of the Experimental Units The Experimental Units - the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia (UEKBD) and the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong (UE TK/S) are located in the South East of the Sine-Saloum Region. They are limited by the Republic of Gambia in the South and by the isobar 800 mm to the North. To the East,is the Senegal Oriental region where was located the project of land colonization "Terres Neuves" whereas the West limit of the Experimental Units was characterized by a very high density of population 70 to 80 h/km2 (Pelissier, 1966). The Experimental Unit8 of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong is located in the Arrondissement of Medina- Sabbakh, where the density of population is estimated as 50 h/km2 7This project, drawing upon the now classic "Package Deal" theory, consists in concentrating at different points chosen for their natural and social potential for development an intense and comprehen- sive experimentation and extension effort. The intention is to create centers of innovation diffusion for the neighboring regions. These centers of development are called "Experimental Units." f 8The Experimental Units are named after villages names where they are located. -15 (Ramond and Tournu, 1974). They also estimated the density of population at 15 h/km2 in the Arrondissement of Koungheul where is located the Expermiental Unit of Koumbidia. Objectives of the Experimental Units In creating the Experimental Units, the aim was to study the introduction of a new farm system based on the findings of research, the economic, social and environment around a village's cooperative structure. The Experimental Units are an attempt to test the technologi- cal package in the realistic milieu. As expressed by Reboul (1974), "The objective was to study the farming system in its entirety, adapt it to real economic, social and physical constraints, and propose the resulting model to agricultural extension programs." This farm system included improved seeds, mineral fertilization, crop diversification, animal power, land management and a balancing of hectarage in cash and industrial craps, this being complemented by efforts in farm management and credits programs. This move from traditional to "modern" agricultural practices intended in the Experimental Units9 implied an increase in the amount of work required for seeding, spreading of fertilizers, weeding, care of animals and so on. Therefore, "labour could become a limiting factor making it necessary to recruit seasonal workers" (Amin, 1974:5). This was likely true for the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia as the density of p0pulation in the Arrondissement of Koungheul was 15 h/kmz. 9The creation of the Experimental Units in 1968 was financed by the Senegalese government from 1968 to 1972, then by the French AID and COOperation Fund until 1977. Since 1981, the project UE has been called S.A.R. (service d' application de la recherche). .15. l‘i ii c’f)’ {ti Problem Identification Statement of the Problem The observation but particularly the follow-up of some farms effected in both Experimental Units show moVements of persons coming in or leav- ing the villages of the Experimental Units at the beginning of each rainy season. This movement in and out of the Experimental Units con- stitutes the focus ofcnn'study. Our purpose is to describe and to analyse . the pattern of migration called navetant. The factors that induce pe0ple of the rural area to temporarily leave their village for another village and the impacts of this form of migration on rural communities will be examined. Importance of the Problem A better understanding of rainy season labor migration is important from a sociological, agricultural and policy making point of view. From a sociological point of view, our analysis of the phenomenon will take into account factors in the area of origin of migrants as well as factors in the locality of destination. The intervening variables between these factors and the decision which leads to a move will be examined. These factors are contained in four complexes of variables: the motivational factor, the facilitating factor, the precipitating factor and the conditional factor. The motivational factor can be viewed as the desire of the migrant to improve his/her personal socio-economic situation. The latter can be designated as "Personal Achievement." It can also be considered as the migrant's desire to increase his/her family situation, called "Family Achievement." .17. Although it is a fact widely recognized that throughout all patterns of migration, individuals move in reSponse to personal and/or family circumstances, we found it important to examine the way personal achievement and family achievement influence rainy season labor migration in the Experimental Units. However, this motivational factor, be it the migrant's personal achievement or family achievement, cannot by itself explain the reason why people move. It must be related to the migrant's expectations of the locality where they contemplate moving. These expectations arise from the existing information network system. The facilitating factor consists of the existing information network system and the role of social family ties. Social family ties consist of the social-psychological and economic support provided to migrants. Several central questions are germaine to this factor: (Goldsmith and Beegle, 1962; Crawford, 1966:292-300) 1) 00 parents in the case of rainy season migration urge and encourage the move to another village?; 2) Do they provide their relatives who decide to move with the necessary financial support to get to their destination? and 3) How does this attitude of parents affect rainy season labor migration? Concerning the information network system as a variable of the facilitating factor, the presence of a parent or friend in the locality of the destination may be important. In addition, early migrants to an area are a direct influence on the attitude of later immigrants. Finally, the accesibility of the destination can play a significant role as facilitator. ~18 The precipitating factor consists in the worsening of the social and economic conditions in the village of departure as compared to the opportunities apparently offered by the locality of destination through the information network system. As far as this precipitating factor is concerned, the situation of shortage of land in the village of departure will be examined. We will examine how the situation of the bride seeker and the obligations that are accruing can result in a selectivity of the age and sex composition of migrants involved in rainy season migration. Conditional factors are general background conditions influencing the other three factors. For example, the conditional factor can be re-r lated to the situation created in rural areas by the type of "development" instituted by the colonial system. In other words, by drawing farmers to cash-crop cultivation from subsistence cultivating, the colonial adminis- tration had created the conditions for the displacement of labor wherever the cash capital was available. These factors are linked to one another. They refer to the values and expectations migrants have towards economic improvement, social net- works, environmental pressure and familial or individual migration strate- gies. Therefore, besides describing the phenomenon of migration, we expect the responses to the following question to contribute to isolating the major factors involved in rainy season labor migration: - How do migrant farm workers relate economically and socially to the receiving locality? - How do their network of relationships and those based on kinship village affect integration into the receiving community? - What induces people to move from one rural area to another to practice an activity they would perform if they stayed home ? - What is this pattern of migration expected to provide at the per- sonal level of the migrant; the level of the migrant's family as a unit of production and as a social unit; the level of the rec- eiving community? From an agricultrual point of view, a better understanding of 19 rainy season migration reveals how this phenomenon can shape the activity of production on both origin and destination of migrant farm workers. Indeed, one rural area can be drained of working age people because of migration whereas through migration, an area deficient in labor resources may acquire the needed labor force. Such considerations can be respective- ly related to Ritchey's (1974:12-27) functional and disfunctional effects of migration. Finally, from a policy-making point of view, it is important for a planner of rural development projects as well as for institutes involved 10 in conducting research on agricultural development like I.S.R.A. to know about rainy season labor migration into and out of project areas. Research Objectives This paper, we hope, constitutes a first approach for further study of rainy season labor migration. The investigation on migrant farm workers and farm operators give the characteristics of migrants. It also makes possible to fulfill our objectives of study. These are: - to determine the causes for this pattern of migration - to analyze its impacts on both locality of origin and of destination and on the migrant From the results of our investigation and in relation to the motivational, facilitating and precipitating factors, the relation that exists between the decision to move and the following variables will be examined. First, the relation between personal achievement and the decision to become a navetaan will be examined. Personal achievement will be measured as the improvements of the migrant farm worker's means 10Senegalese Institute for Agricultural Research. C-fi {Ill £1 (_’ .- I , I]: (I) (T! to satisfy personal needs, e.g., clothing, wedding expenses, social obligations. In addition, the impact of family circumstances on the decision to move will be looked at. Family circumstances can be viewed in different ways. It can be viewed as family support to the migrant farm worker which has a socio-psychological dimension as well as an economic dimension as already pointed out. The socio-psychological dimension will be measured as the degree to which parents suggest, urge, encourage the individual to migrate. concerning the economic dimension, it is measured as the money provided by the parents to the migrant to support the move. Family circumstances consist also of the duty a migrant farm worker could feel toward helping or even contributing to family investment. These variables will be measured from the importance migrant farm workers give to each of them in expenses paid for from the migration income. Furthermore, family circumstances can place some stress on the young member of the family tied to their status of dependence on the head of the household for clothing, having a plot to cultivate, getting inputs from the cooperative and so on. We need to estimate how such a situation can be considered as a variable of the precipitating factor of migration. In addition, land availability for the family and its relation with the decision of a family member to move.during the rainy season will be examined. One can expect a positive relation between the eventuality of being hired and the decision to move. In connection with that idea, the determinants for hiring a migrant farm worker will be examined from the (njatigue) farm operator's point of view. 21 Limitations of the Study In dealing with rainy season labor migration, we are not taking into account all of the kinds of movements that could occur during this period. The following are excluded: 1) the movement of pe0ple visiting parents in other villages; 2) the change in residence of widows when they return to the carre of their parents; and 3) the movement of Firdous which takes place during the harvesting of groundnuts. They are particularly hired for the threshing. Furthermore, from discussions with farmers as well as with the extension agents employees of ISRA, it was assessed that rainy season migration in the Experimental Units is a men-oriented movement. Women who are "involved" in it only follow their husbands. As a consequence, women will not be part of the sample of migrant farm workers even ‘though their number has been determined. Finally, we omit a focus on the impact of rainy season migration on the population growth. The reason being that a very few number of migrant farm workers stay in the village that received them once the grodndnut is marketed. Methodology Sample Procedure The interviews on rainy season labor migration carried out in the Experimental Units of Koumbidia and Thyssee Kaymor/SonKorong involved two samples. In each Experimental Unit, one hundred farm operators (njatigues) and one hundred migrant-farm workers were interviewed. Several steps marked the establishing of these samples. ~22 First, personal meetings were organized with the head of the Department "System of Production" at the headquarter office of I.S.R.A. at Dakar. This person with whom discussions were organized around the objectives of my study as well as around both questionnaires on farm operators and migrant farm workers, has been directing the Project Exper- imental Units for five years. From these discussions resulted a decision to enlarge the size of our samples from forty farm operators and forty migrant farm workers in each UE as initially proposed, to one hundred farm operators and one hundred migrant farm workers each UE. Furthermore, very important suggestions were made with reSpect to the questionnaires. The second step consisted in modifying the questionnaires on the basis of suggestions made and in the translation of these questionnaires into French. Third, the first meeting with interviewers was organized at the headquarter of I.S.R.A. at Kaolack. It acquainted the interviewers with the objectives of study and with both questionnaires on farm operators and migrant farm workers. 0n the basis of all the information provided in these meetings, the following procedures of sampling were undertaken. Concerning the sample of farm operators to interview in each Experi- mental Unit, we took as a criterion of choice ethnicity. Different ethnic groups compose the population of the Experimental Units: Wolofs, Peulhs, Soces in the UE of K80 and Wolofs, Peulhs, Toucouleurs in the UE of TK/S. These ethnic groups are very different in their size. Then, in construct- ing our samples, we decided to consider as a criterion of choice ethnicity with the idea that each ethnic group be proportionally represented in the sample vis a vis its size. 23 These considerations taken, the choice of farm operators to interview was done randomly within each ethnic group. Farm Operators met at the public place (penc) those present in the village at the time of interview, and those whose names were obtained by asking were interviewed. Based on that choice, the samples of farm operators were composed as follows: Table 2. Composition of the Sample of Farm Operators in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia. Ethnic Group Total # of Households Sample Size Wolofs 125 41 Peulhs 105 35 Soces 73 . 24 Table 3. Composition of the Sample of Farm Operators in the Experimental Units of Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong. Ethnic Group Total # of Households Sample Size Wolofs 173 88 Peulhs . 5 5 Toucouleur 9 7 Concerning the samples of persons subjected to the questionnaire on migrants in both Experimental Units they were drawn from various social groups. The survey conducted involved interviewing migrants for 1982, former migrants who may have a clear idea of the phenomenon of rainy season migration that they have already experienced, and potential migrants. For the 1982 migrant farm workers, those who were still in the villages or who just returned from migration were interviewed. 24 They were determined by asking people found at the pench, by asking the farm operator interviewed the households they may know which received a migrant or where a migrant just returned in. The same procedure made possible the location of former migrants in the village. Finally, informal discussions with peasants but also with the interviewers who have been working in the Experimental Units for several years allowed a determination of the age range (seventeen years old) from which young men in the villages are potential migrants. After this age is determined, we proceeded in the same fashion as for 1982 migrants and fermer migrants by asking who in the villages was in this age range. Method of Investigation From January seventeenth to February twentieth, 1983, the study was conducted in the field using interviews as the procedure for data collection. These interviews were carried out by two teams composed of I.S.R.A. extension agents. Three were based in the UE of KBD and two in the UE of TK/S. These interviews were carried out on the basis of structurally open questionnairesll, one addressed to the farm Operators and the other to navetaans. Discussions and very open talks with individ- ual peasants were also held on all major features related to the attitudes, problems and apprehensions of the peasants with reSpect to rainy season labor migration. During the time of the interviews, I was weekly visit- ing each team, discussing with interviewers any problem they might have concerning the survey. These weekly visits were the occasion to partici- pate in informal discussions and to control the carrying out of the interviews. I also Spent a good deal of time checking documents on 11These questionnaires were intitially in English. They were translated into French and the interviews were done in Wolof language. See Appendix. 25 migration at Dakar University Library. After finishing the field work, the sifting of questionnaires was done at I.S.R.A. headquarter at Kaolack by two interviewers, one from each team. The sampling procedure used was not an ideal statistical technique. Therefore, the tabulated data given in this paper should be taken as exploratory. Besides, it has to be noted that by the time the interview began, many migrants had already returned to their villages. In conclusion, one can easily think that: - the location of the Experimental Units between the West part of the densely populated Sine-Saloum Region and the region of Senegal Oriental, the zone of colonization of new land(Terres-Neuves); - the new type of farming system introduced in the Experimental Units which requires labor; and r finally, the low density of population particularly in the Arrondissement of Koungheul make the Experimental Units very attractive. This is the case for young men whose situation in the village of origin doesn't allow for the immed- iate satisfaction of personal needs. 26 a.“ «3.3 Ale . l Chapter III RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION IN THE EXPERIMENTAL UNITS: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS Discussions in this chapter will be centered around the following topics: 1) the origin of migrant farm workers for 1982 2) their demographic characteristics - age, sex, marital status; 3) the determinants of the decision to move; and 4) the relation of production between migrant farm workers and farm operators. Evolution of the Number of Migrant Farm Workers Estimated by_Experimental Unit from 1975 to 1982 The answers of farm operators to question (4) in the interview schedule allow the following estimation of the number of migrant farm workers by Experimental Unit for the period considered in this study. The Distribution of Migrants In Table 4 we observe an increase in the number of navetaans hired from 1975 to 1980 for the sample of farm operators interviewed in the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor. For the whole period considered, the average rate of migrants is 34 per year in the UE of TK/s. The slowdown fbr 1981 and 1982 vis a vis this average can be explained by the lack of seeds for farmers over the last few years.12 12The government through cooperatives didn't provide farmers with sufficient quantities of selected seeds of groundnuts. Besides, the quality of seeds provided the previous year was so bad that the production of peasants was lowered significantly. Such a situation resulted in lessening a farm's means to hire a migrant. We observe the same trend in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia from 1975 to 1981, with an average rate of migration of 48.6 migrants per year. Because some farm operators interviewed might not have had this status in 1975, or simply, because some of them didn't recall the exact number of migrants hired, the table should be interpreted with caution. In both Experimental Units, only a few women are involved in the rainy season labor migration. For the whole period considered, women represent 5.8% of the total number of migrants estimated in the UE of KBD, with an average rate of three women migrants a year. In the UE of Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong, women represent 3.4% of the total number of migrants at an average rate of 1.1 per year. As already said, these women follow the move of their husband and therefore, have not been interviewed. Finally, Table 4 shows a difference in the size of migrants. The investigation has shown that the movement of migrants is more important in the UE of KBD. Several reasons can explain such a situation. First is the geographical location of the UE of Koumbidia at about 12 km from the town of Kougheul which is on the crossroad for people coming from or going to Guinea, Mali, Gambia and from the East Senegal to other regions. Second is the very low density of population in the Arrondisse- ment of Koungheul evaluated at 15 km2 increasing the need fbr rainy season workers. Finally, there is the possibility of forest exploitation fbr charcoal, an activity which attracts particularly those originating from Guinea. Most of these Guineans work as migrant farm workers befbre being hired fur felling and burning the wood for charcoal during the dry $9650". 28 Table 4.--Estimated Number of Migrants by Experimental Unit from 1975 to 1982. Distribution of Migrants by Experimental Unit UE KBD UE TK/S Years Males Females Total/Year Males Females Total/Year 1975 30 3 33 5 - 5 1976 32 4 36 20 1 21 1977 44 2 46 26 2 28 1978 44 2 46 43 - 43 1979 57 4 61' 47 - 47 1980 56 3 59 51 3 54 1981 64 2 66 31 - 31 1982 62 4 66 33 3 36 Total 389 24 413 256 9 265 The migration of men sometimes followed by their spouses seems to be more and more important. However, it remains very closely dependent on some variables such as the availability of seeds or even the geographical location as we have seen in the UE of Koumbidia. Besides the male selectivity of rainy season labor migration shown in Table 4, what are the other characteristics of those involved in the movement? 29 Demographic Characteristics of Migrants in Our Sample by Experimental Unit Origin of Navetaans in our Samples by Experimental Unit Table 5 shows that rainy season labor migration in the Experimental Units is mainly a movement performed by Guineans and Senegalese. Due to the geographical situation of the Experimental Units but also to the existence of an activity particularly performed by those originating from Guinea, the population of migrants is different in the UE. Thus, among 93 persons who have experienced rainy season migration in the UE of TK/S, 55.7% are originating from Senegal and 27.6% from Guinea. In the UE of Koumbidia, among 71 persons who have experienced rainy season migration, 64.8% originate from Guinea and only 28.2% from Senegal. The important number of Guineans in the UE of KBD is linked, as already said, to the possibility of forest exploitation for charcoal. Furthermore, it is interesting to note the presence of migrants from Mali in the UE of TK/S (12.9%). Concerning Gambians, they are quite absent from this movement. A conclusion to draw is that rainy season labor migration which was mainly performed by people from outside the national frontiers of Senegal tends to be restricted to Senegalese leaving their village for the Experimental Units where land is still available but mainly where improvements introduced in agriculture contribute to raise the production of peasants. How large is the number of migrants who move to the UE and what are the characteristics of these migrants? 30 Table 5.--Origin of "igrants by Experimental Unit T _- f- — Locality Origin UE TK/S UE KBD Senegal 55.9% 28.2% Guinea 27.6% 64.8% Gambia 3.8% 7.0% Other 12.9% - Total 100.0% 100.0% (N = 93) (N = 71) Characteristics of _Migragt5 In dealing with rainy season labor migration, the identification of. migrant. characteristics is important from two points of view. First, it helps us understand the reasons for migration and, secondly, these characteristics bear upon the effects the migrants will have on both the host community and the community of origin.. Age distribution of migrants by Experimental Unit Rainy season labor migration to the zone of the Experimental Units is largely a young men-oriented move. Thus, we notice that 95% of the persons interviewed in the UE TK/S are between 15 and 35 years old, among whom 70% are between 15 and 25 years old and 25% between 25 and 35 years old. For the interval of age 15 to 35, we notice a similar situation in both Experimental Units. However, there is a marked difference in the UE of KBD as compared to the UE of TK/S if we look at the interval of age 15 to 25 years old. Indeed, only 41% in the UE 31 of KBD are between 15 and 25 years old against 70% in the UE of TK/S. And forty-seven percent are between 25 and 35 years old in the UE of KBD against 25% for the UE of TK/S. This difference in the age distribution between the two Experi- mental Units leads us to the conclusion that although rainy season migration in general is youth-oriented, the population of migrants in the UE of KBD is older than that in the UE of TK/S. This difference can be explained by the ethnic composition of migrants in both Experimental Units. Indeed, while the majority of tnigrants in the UE of TK/S originate from Senegal about 65%. of' the migrants in the UE of KBD originate from Guinea. They are usually older than the Senegalese migrants. Table 6.--Age Distribution of Migrants. by Experimental Unit Migrants by Experimental Unit Age UE TK/S UE KBD 15-25 70% .41% 25-35 25% 47% 35 & over 5% 12% Total 100% 100% (N = 100) (N = 100) Marital status and age of migrants When comparing Table 7 and Table 8, it appears that most of the people in the samples are unmarried men. The sample in the UE of KBD is composed as follows: 32 66% are unmarried; 30% are married but have migrated without their wives; 4% are married and have moved with their wives. For the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong, the sample is composed as follows: 80% are unmarried; 17% are married but have migrated alone; 3% are married and have migrated with their wives. Furthermore, there is a very low percentage of' migrants who move with their spouses, only 4% in the UE of KBD and 3% in the UE of TK/S. Concerning the higher percentage of total married in the UE of KBD, it results from the presence as already mentioned of migrants from Guinea who, during the dry season are specialized in forest exploitation. This temporary_stay leads them to have their wives accompany them. Table 7.--Marital Status and Age of'IVigrants in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia Age Marital Status 15 - 25‘ 25 - 35 35 & over Bachelors 87.8% 57.4% 25.0% Married without spouses 2.4% 42.6% 50.0% Married with spouses 9.8% - 25.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% (N = 41) (N = 47) (N = 12) 33 Table 8. Marital Status and Age of Mlgrants in the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong. Marital Status Age 15 - 25 25 - 35 35 & over Bachelors 95.7% 52.0% - Married without Spouses 4.3% 48.0% 40.0% Married with spouses - - 60.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% (N = 70) (N = 25) (N = 5) Situation of migration and age of migrants In this section, we examine the distribution of persons in our samples according to the situation of rainy season migration. AS described in the methodology, the samples are composed of persons who never migrated, pe0ple who migrated in 1982 and pe0ple who have migrated before 1982. The Tables 9 and 10 Show that only 14% of people in our samples have never migrated, among whom 10.5% in the Experimental Unit of Koum— bidia and 3.5% in the UE of Thysse Kaymor SonKorong. Looking at those who migrated in1982, we can state that for the UE of TK/S, 78.8% are between 15 and 25 years old whereas 12.1% are in the interval of age 25 to 35 years. Again we have confirmed that the rainy season migration is mainly a young meneoriented movement. For the UE of KBD, the following distribution is found: 30.6% of migrants belong to the class of age 15 to 25 years and 61.3% to the class of 25 to 35 years old. Rainy season labor migration in the Experimental Units is a young oriented movement. In this migration the single male largely predominates. 34 Contrary to the situation described by Lacombe (1979) where females constitute an important number in the migration to Dakar, in the Experimental Units, the movement from one rural area to another involves a very small number of women. The movement of these women is totally confined to marriage and therefore is a dependent form of migration; whereas the movement of females in the town involves an active search for opportunities. In such migration to urban cities, many females, mainly young, move alone. Table 9. Situtation of Migration and Age of Migrants in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia Situation of Migration Age 15 - 25 25 - 35 35 & over Migrants in 1982 46.3% 80.9% 41.7% Have migrated before 21.9% 10.6% 25.0% Never migrated 31.8% 8.5% 33.3% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% (N = 41) (N = 47) (N = 12) 35 Table 10.--Situation of Migration and Age of lhigrants in the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong. Age Situation of Migration 15 - 25 25 - 35 35 8 over Migrants in 1982 37.1% 16% 60% Migrated before 1982 54.3% 84% 20% Never migrated 8.6% — 20% Total 100.0% 100% 100% (N = 70) (N = 25) (N = 5) In conclusion, rainy season labor migration is age selective. Migrants are mainly young men from 15 to 35 years old. It is also sex selective in this sense that a very few women are involved in the movement and that their movement is totally dependent on their husband. Why is it that young males and particularly single young men are mostly involved in rainy season labor migration? The analysis of determinants of the decision to migrate will help answer this question. Determinants of the Decision to Migrate Why do people migrate in the Experimental Units while at the same time people leave the village of the Experimental Units for the time of rainy season? Why is there a predominance of young males between 15 and 35 years old? Can we from that observation accept as granted the idea of Thomas (1961): "to some degree, migration is a part of the Rite de Passage, thus, persons who enter the labour force or get married tend to migrate from their parental home." What are the reasons that induce 36 the migrants to move from their village of origin to other villages where they will be involved in the same activity as that performed batk home at the same period? In dealing with the elements of the decision of migrants, the relation which exists between the following will be examined: 1) shortage of land and decision to migrate; 2) personal achievement and decision to migrate; 3) family achievement and the decision to migrate. In addition, the extent to which the presence of a parent in the locality of destination can affect the decision will be examined. For a better understanding of the phenomenon of rainy season migration we will take into account the perception of the movement by the farm Operator and compare it to the view migrants have of their move. Reasons for Migration Accordinggto Migrants Interviewed in the ExperimentaTFUnits As we have pointed out, several factors can predispose persons to moving into the Experimental Units. These factors, however, do not by themselves explain the variety of responses which have been made by migrants and which are reported on Table 11 and Table 12. The analysis of the causes of migration, in general, and of rainy season labor migration, in particurticular, is dependent on both objective and subjective elements in the situation of the migrant and the way he evaluates it. The presence of a parent in the locality of destination is con- sidered by most of the respondents as fairly or not important. In the UE of KBD, 24.5% of the responses obtained, judge this variable as fairly important and 57.4% not important. The same responses are observed in the UE of TK/S where 32.5% of responses view it fairly important and 32.3% not important. 37 The explanation is that the migrant does not have to worry, as it is the case for the migrant to urban centers, about lodging, eating, etc. ( Lacombe» 1974) These accommodations are a part of the contract and therefore, are provided to him by the njatigue who hires him. In the Experimental Units there are jobs. Therefore, one doesn't need to rely on a parent to be hired. As a result, we can say that the presence of a parent in the locality of destination has little impact on the decision to migrate. The same interpretation could be done in the UE of KBD concerning the fact that those of the same age leave the village. This is not the case, however, for persons interviewed in the UE of TK/S. Indeed, 66.7% of responses view this factor as important. One can describe this as a phenomenon of imitation. Young men model their behavior after that Of prior migrants or other men who are planning to migrate in the same age class. However, there also exists probably a certain competition among individuals of the same age and the same village. The idea of lagging behind those of the same age in the village is so shaming that everybody in the village may be ready to leave as previous migrants did and get as many benefits as they can. The situation may be different when the migration distance is such that one cannot affort it. In this case, the phenomenon of imitation can be inhibited and not have a direct effect on the decision to move. But in the case of rainy season migration within the same country, this factor is important. This phenomenon explains the differ- ence in responses in the UE of KBD where the number of Guineans among migrants is high and the UE of TK/S where a large majority of migrants originate from the Sine-Saloum region. 38 Concerning the possibility of assisting his family, it is consi- dered important in the UE of TK/S by 57.0% of respondents. Once again, we observe a difference in the UE of KBD where only 47.5% view the assistance to the family as important. Probably the distance from the family of origin plays an important role. Indeed, the difficulty of sending money to parents in Guinea or the lack of contact with parents for a long period reduces remittances without necessarily eliminating them. Besides, in the UE of KBD, Guineans who work in forest exploitation during the dry season and cultivate as inigrants during the rainy season tend to get married. They, therefore, attach much more importance to their own family rather than the family of origin. Obviously, most of migrants want to assist their families. But an important question is: does the idea of familial helping occur after the migration has produced positive results or does it precede and impede the decision to migrate? Farm Operators interviewed unanimously view helping of the family as an eventual consequence of the navetanat rather than as a determinant of the decision to migrate. From informal discus- sions with migrants, we were told that being financially independent discharges parents from responsibilities. Therefore, the person who decides to migrate for so-called personal achievement is also deciding to move in order to assist his family. Concerning personal achievement made possible by obtaining a larger income, 85.0% of respondents in the UE of TK/S consider it as important in the decision to migrate. Similarly, we notice that 85.2% of respondents in the UE of KBD find it important. The importance given to obtaining a larger income as a determinant of the decision to move is well interpreted by Lewis (1954): 39 Farmers will not leave their farms unless wages are at least equal to the average product on the land. In other words, to compensate for cash of travel and to induce labour to leave the rural areas, wages in the locality of destination will have to be somewhat higher than average subsistence earnings. Why is a larger personal income important? What lies behind the obtaining of such an income? All along in this thesis, we linked the different responses to the age and sex composition of migrants. The reason is that besides the satisfaction of immediate needs, e.g., clothing, the cash money earned allows young males in the age of marriage to pay expenses for bride price and marriage, whereas for young, married migrants, it can be a way to find accommodations and to settle as well as purchase material for cultivation. It can also be a way to contribute to family investment, e.g., buying cattle or equipment. Concerning the problem of land shortage, the responses in both Tables 11 and 12 lead to the conclusion that it constitutes an important cause of migration for migrants in the UE of TK/S. Fifty-eight percent of the respondents judge it important in the UE of TK/S against 34.4% in the UE of KBD. The high percentage 55.7% of respondents in the UE of KBD who consider this factor as not important represents the percentage of Guineans who have migrated in this UE. One common explanation they gave us was the following: "Back home we do not have a problem of land Shortage. The reason why we have moved is to get involved in cash culti- vation of groundnuts as in Guinea, we only grow subsistence crops." The forty-four percent of respondents that take the Shortage of land as important represent those who originate from other villages of Senegal where pressure on land added to soil erosion makes production more and more uncertain}3 Navetaans answering to question (10) confirmed these 13It must be made clear that the lessening of social pressure added to the equipment available in the Experimental Units also contributed with the availability of land to make possible the cultivation of larger plots. 40 .umumcmwe cm>m= m>mz xmsh .co_umm=c one o» cmzmcm 9.:upu vmzmw>gmucw mcomcwa mcwcuxucmzht Age u zv :Papco mo mmmppp> ANo.00.” NNomm Nwom thoHN NN ”H “S“ cm. VCQP $0 mmmpkopm Ash 1 ZS xo.oofi xe.o Rm.m N~.¢H xm.on msoozw pacomcma Lumen; AHA . zv No.oofi 5N.Hm RM.HN am.m~ No.mfi S__Eac up; mcpapmg to SSE—Sawmmoa AHA u zv _ mam . . . . . . . . . FFP> on» m>mmp so ooH he Rm SN om 9m HH &m a man we mmmpu mamm on» do mmosh AH“ u zv :o . . . . . . . _Sa=_umme to Suwpauop so ooH he mm an «N &m HH Rm o mg» g? acmcan a mo mucmmmca acmucogsw «subconsp ucmucoasp Page“ no: xpcwmw “awesome? agm> mucmpcoaem mo mmcmmo cowumsapz Low mcommma «mvcwnE:o¥ mo awe: Pmucmergmaxu mg» cw ccvumgmpz cow mcommmm to mucausoasm to mwgmmoun.afi «Pack 41 .vmpmgmws cm>mc m>ms xmzw .cowwmwzc mcp op gmzmcm u.:ku mcomcmg =m>mm« Amm u zv :wmwwo wo Am@ 1 ZS wo.oofi wfi.m wo.mfi 55.0H ww.mo msoucw .acomtma gauges Ana . zv $0.005 RN.AH ww.mm gm.mm ww.mm Swwsaw aw; mcwa_m; we wuwwwawmmoa Amm u zv mom . . . . . www> ms» m>mmw ”mm n zv cow . . . . . . . .pocwummu wo xuwwmuo— we ooH wm Nm xm mm am mH aw ow ms» cw ucmcma a we mucmmmca pcmucoasw acmpcoasw ucmucoasw Papa» we: wwwwmw ucmpcoasw Acm> :owumcmwz Low mcomama mucmpcoasw wo mmcmwo .amcocoxcom\woszmx mmmmgw wo awn: wapcwswcmgxu 8:6 cw :owuogmwz cow mcommom wo mucmucoasw wo mmcamouu.mfi mwamw, 42 facts. Indeed, 97.4% of Inigrants in the UE of TK/S say they cultivated a larger plot in the village of migration compared to the plot allocated to them in their village the year preceding their move, whereas only 59.1% in the UE of KBD respondents were in the same position. It is clear from the distribution of responses in both Tables 11 and 12 that for '"lgfants , be they in the UE of KBD or in the UE of TK/S, what most determines the decision to move is the desire for personal achievement. Concerning family circumstances, the same point of view as expressed by Metge (1964:107) was revealed in informal discussion with farm Operators at the penc. Metge stated: There was remarkably little opposition from parentS--they accept it as part of a normal pattern that their offspring should leave when they were old enough to support themselves and seek work and experience elsewhere. They don't try to persuade them against migrating. Several parents argue that it was good for young people to go away because they learn to stand on their own feet and to manage their own money. Sure, parents do not persuade young people against migrating. They don't encourage rainy season migration either because such migration would mean a loss of labor force for exploitation. But, on the other hand, when young men stay at home, they rely on parents to help them out financially and out of other problems they might have. That creates for parents, at least for rainy season migra- tion, an attitude of neutrality at the time of the decision to migrate. They may help fulfill the desire of their sons. However, most of the migrants get money for their move from savings accumulated in previous rainy seasons or from borrowing from someone the amount necessary for the trip. Therefore, we can conclude that family circumstances in the sense of the help or encouragement from parents do not play a major role 43 in the decision to go for migration. This is not the case for dry season migration to urban centers because parents very often provide the support needed for the trip and sometimes suggest the move (Lacombe, 1970). On the other hand, for most migrants , earning money is a way to alleviate the financial burden of parents, to contribute eventually to family investment by buying equipment or cattle, to help members of the family in clothing and even to maintain social ties by the gifts system. If we agree to consider these preoccupations as part of family attachment, then we can say that family attachment plays a motivational role positively related to the decision to migrate. Concerning the shortage of land for the family as a unit of production we must distinguish the situation of migrants from Guinea whose movement is free of any land shortage from the Situation of other migrants particularly those originating from the West Sine-Saloum. For these latter, the decision to move is positively related to the shortage of land inasmuch as the move corresponds to the period when land is needed. Are these factors sufficient enough to explain the decision by young persons to migrate from their village? Such a preoccupation made necessary a comparison of the interpretation and the causes of departure as expressed by the njatigues who receive navetaans and njatigues from the carre of whom inigrants sometimes leave. Indeed, why would young men leave the Experimental Units to spend the rainy season elsewhere when young men came from other rural areas to work in the Experimental Units? Such a comparison will help us to better understand the economic but also the socio-psychological process involved in the decision to migrate during the rainy season.- 44 Reasons for Migration According To Farm Opgrators The following information has been Obtained from the interview of farm Operators of our samples and from informal discussions held with njatigues at the penc. Farm Operators give different reasons for migration ranking from the flight from compulsory duties towards parents-in-law to the degree of equipment that characterizes many farms of the Experimental Units. Rainy season labor migration in the UE is largely a young men- oriented movement. It is also, at least for most of those originating from rural areas in Senegal, a movement of unmarried young men who have a status of surga familiaux characterized by their total dependence on the head of the household to which they belong. This movement for the farm operators results from two major reasons, flight from compulsory duties and land suitable for groundnut cultivation. Flight from compulsory duties towards parent-in-law Young married men whose Spouses have not yet joined the connubial residence and young unmarried males but who are engaged are subjected to give services to their parents-in-law, e.g. they must help working in the field of the stepfather, build a house for the stepmother and so on. In addition, they are obliged to work in the fields of their father. As a consequence, they have little time to devote to work in their own fields. FOr these reasons, young men of marriage age_and young married men who seek accommodations view rainy season migration as the best way to accumu- late the money necessary to reach these goals. 45 Land suitable for groundnut cultivation Farm Operators link land suitability, land availability and the degree of equipment in the Experimental Units as very important in the choice of destination for rainy season labor migration. Migrants need money. Therefore, they have to go where land is available but mainly where the soil still allows a good production possibility. This view of rainy season labor migration is important in explaining why it is young men of marriage age and young married men who particularly leave their village . Running away from compulsory duties towards parents- in-law cannot be reduced to a mere "Rite of Passage." What really deter- mines the move is the need young men feel to move away from the oppressive social structure in their village of origin which makes it difficult for them to fulfill their goals. Concerning the attraction these migrants have for the Experimental Units, it indicates how improvements in rural areas can play the role of giving an alternative to the move to urban cities. Relations of Production Between Migrants aid Farm Operators From informal discussions held with farm Operators as well as with migrants in both Experimental Units it fOllows that mainly, two types of economic activities attract people in these zones. These are agriculture fOr migrants in both UE and exploitation of the forest fOr charcoal particularly in the UE of KBD. The exploitation of the forest, although very important has not been looked at in our investigation because it is a dry season activity. However, the possibility of finding work during this dry season plays an important role in the decision to migrate of those originating from Guinea. 46 Concerning agriculture, migrants who arrive or leave the Experi- mental Units frequently have a choice of contracts. These contracts can be more accurately described as tacit agreements between farm operators and navetaans, since there is no agricultural labor legislation in this matter. There is, however, a kind of left-over from colonial legislation which generates in both UE a pseudo-collective agreement governing the status of navetaans as will be shown. Contracts of Migrants in the EXperimental Units Four types of migrant contracts exist in the zone of the Experimental Units. These are: 1) the contract of sharecropper(navetaan exploitant) 2) the contract of tenant farmer(navetaan mbidaan) 3) 3) the contract of farm laborer (navetaan temporaire) 4) the contract of cattle herder (navetaan samkat) The characteristics and clauses of each contract are shown in Figure 1. These clauses are basically the same in both Experimental Units. However, the nature of relations developed within each carre might create some differences. For instance, a migrant who shows strong ardor to work will benefit from better treatment than a migrant whose ardor is under- estimated by the farm operator. In some cases, there are not sharing of days, farm operator and migrants cultivate fields one after the other; whereas the sharing of days is strictly followed in other cases. Migration from one rural area to another is not characterized by a shift from agriculture. Thus almost all migrants are involved in the same activity they would be in their village at the same period. 47 Except the cattle keeper, all migrants are involved in cash crop production of groundnuts. This obviously reinforces the cash income orientation of their move. All these agreements last 6 to 7 months, from the seeding until the marketing of groundnuts. The contract of sharecropper The migrant under this contract, besides working in the fields of the farm operator, has his own plot for his personal production. He can therefore be considered as an "independent" producer as compared to migrants under other forms of contract. For this type of contract, the following aSpects need to be brought out: The sharing of days. A migrant sharecropper shares the week days with the farm operator. This gives him the opportunity to satisfy his obligation vis a vis the farm operator, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the possibility of devoting time to work his own field or to provide paid services to other farm operators. The procedure of sharing days varies according to the period of the cultivation schedule . Thus, during the seeding period, the migrant works every morning from 7:30 to 1:30 PM in the field of the farm operator and in the afternoons, he works his own field. After seeding and until the weeding, the migrant has no days off. After the weeding, migrants and farm operators share the work days as fOllows. On Saturday, Sunday, Tuesday and Wednesday mornings from 7:30 to 1:00 PM, the migrant works for the farm operator. But all of the after- noons of these days and all day Monday, Thursday and Friday, the migrant can work in his own field or do any other activity of his choice. 48 For the harvesting of souna14 the migrant once again loses all the time allocated to him. After the harvesting of souna, the farm operator only keeps three mornings whereas the Inigrant. has four complete days and three afternoons. He uses this time working in his field, sometimes helping women of the household who do the laundry for him. He also sometimes uses it to work for pay in the field of someone else in the village. That is called "sade."15 Farm Operators can force the migrant to do whatever activity he wants during the time allocated to him. He can even have the migrant represent him to the santane16'or work in the women's fields. Utilization by the migrant of farm operator’s equipment to work his field. In some cases, the migrant. takes care of the drawing animals. Then, besides using them for the work in his field, the migrant will be allowed to use animals for sade. Otherwise, he will be authorized to do 17 so only if he effects the sade accompanied with the surga familial. ‘ Problem of seeds. The migrant who arrives in a village is registered in the carre of his njatigue for a fiscal tax of 1000 FCFA per capita. Anybody who has paid this fiscal tax has the right to 100 14Souna = three months cycle cereal cultivated for self- subsistence in Senegal. AS the migrant. only cultivates groundnuts, he works full time in the cereal field of the farm operator. 15Sade = the migrant. or the surga familial who effect a sade is paid 250 FCFA to 300 half day if he works manually 1000 to 1200 FCFA if he uses horse traction 1200 to 1500 FCFA if he uses oxen drawn. 1 $ US = 350 FCFA. 16Santane, see Terms of Reference. 17Surga familial, see Terms of Reference. 49 Kilogram of groundnut seeds from the COOperative. These seeds will be paid by direct deduction of 60 FCFA/kg during the marketing of groundnuts. It sometimes happens that a migrant finds these 100 kg not enough to seed his field. In such a case, the farm operator must provide him with the quantity of seed needed in surplus. This extra quantity of seeds will be paid by the migrant in kind after threshing of groundnuts. The contract of farm tenant From a chronological point of view, it seems that the contract of farm tenant preceded all other forms of contract of migrant in the .Experimental Units; The clauses of this contract as described in Figure 1. provide the migrant with a plot. He is also given food and lodging but he buys his own seeds and pays from 15,000 FCFA to 25,000 FCFA, based on the presence or not of his spouse in the same carree as he. The migrant farm tenant does not work in the field of the farm operator. That explains why he pays for the plot provided. In the case where he is accompanied by his Spouse, this latter will be obliged to participate with other women of the carre to the grinding of cereals, the drawing of water and the shelling of grains. However, she will not be assigned days for cooking alternating with other married women but she will be responsible for washing her family's clothes. Contract of cattle herder In order to avoid having to pay damages caused in the fields by rambling animals, farmers who own cattle sometimes hire migrants for keeping animals away from fields. The migrant under such an agreement receives from 50,000 FCFA to 60,000 FCFA fixed according to the size of the flock. In addition to these benefits, he receives a payment of two liters of milk every day and has one day off per week. 50 mowwca Popcoswcooxm osp cw momoowu cwocw oco poocmwz wo uoocucou wo wow» .H ogzmww mwoswcm >8 oomomo momoEoo cow owowmcoommc mw msucoa w cow xooww ocu wo ocoo moxo» woo coo xwws wo Lopww oz“ oco mcwmoow oco ooow moow>oco xooz coo wwo woo woo mo>wm wpwzo cow powo o oco mcwmoow .ooow u moow>ogo poocow Econ mwzcocsocm wo mcwuoxcos ago 05 mcwoooa ago Eocw osmwoawz mg“ wo mowoww may cw mew» wwaw mxcoz :omoom wo oco yo wm :wmoow .ooow u moow>ooo cocoon; some woswco ocwzoco wo memo moxou moewpmeom o>wuocooooo one Eocw coxop ax cow wo oopxo cw co>wm mooom mama EQOOHH on omuw socw xooz\mmcwccoe o asmwoawz ago we mowoww ago cw mace: .ucocmwe saw: mxom mcwxcoz mococm .wow -couos oco cowuo>wuwzo cow gown .mooom .mcwmoow .ooow u moow>owo coooocoogogm Egon cowocooo Ecow ogp mw> o mw> ucocaws on» wo mcowuomwwno poocmws on» mw> o mw> cowocooo Ecow wo mcowuomwwoo woocucou wo momaowu woocpcou wo ooaw 51 If there are goats and sheep in the flock, the cattle herder will receive 200 FCFA tp 250 FCFA per head. This arises from the fact that goats and sheep usually belong to women and are not included in the number Of animals for which the migrant is hired. Some peOple do not fall in any of the contracts described. For example, there are craftsmen whose activity is to repair damaged agricul- tural equipment. They don't have a specific contract except that they pay for food and lodging. Their work is remunerated by piecework. How migrants are arrayed according to the type of contract will be the emphasis of the next section. Distribution of Migrants According to the Type of Contract The distribution of migrants according to the situation of migration revealed that out of our samples, 79 persons have experienced migration in the UE of TK/S and 93 persons have experienced migration in the UE of KBD. Table 13 shows how these migrants fall into the different types of contract of migrants. First, we observe that nobody was in a contract of farm tenant in the UE of TK/S whereas the contract of temporaire was missing in the UE of KBD Table 13 shows a high proportion of migrants in both Experimental Units involved in a contract of migrant sharecropper, 87.3% in the UE of K80 and 82.8% in the UE of TK/S. Whatever the type of contract, farm operators who hire migrant' workers stress the need to treat them well if one wants to have a reliable supply of them. Furthermore, as a result of the obligations 52 Table 13. Distribution of Migrants by Type of Contract by Experimental Unit. Type of Contract Location UE KBD UE TK/S Farm Sharecropper 87.3% 82.8% Farm Tenant 1.3% - Farm Laborer - 8.6% Cattle Herder 7.8% 5.4% Migrant Craftsmen 3.6% 3.2% Total 100.0% 100.0% (N = 79) (N = 93) for farm operators to feed, lodge and provide a plot to migrants, farm circumstances may affect the hiring of migrants. Farm Circumstances and the Hiring of Migrants By farm circumstances we mean all resources available to the farm. These farm circumstances are considered from the perSpective of the typology of farms in the Experimental Units of Koumbidia and Thysse Kaymor SonKorong as developed by ISRA. These resources of the farm include: 1) the size of total population of the farm and particularly the size of the active population; 2) the economic situation of the farm (revenues and situation of cereals); 3) the equipment available for the farm; 4) the size of land owned. Even though peasants (11 in the UE of KBD, 15 in the UE of TK/S) affirmed 53 oak "I don't hire migrants anymore as my sons are old enough to effect the same work as migrants," we will not treat this variable separately. Rather we will examine the way they are interdependently related to each other and the manner in which they affect and/or orient the decision of the njatigue to hire a navetaan as well as how they contribute to the. development of a given level of farm. Typology of Farm in the Experimental Units The farms in the Experimental Units fall into three different categories: 1) small farms; 2) medium farms 3) large farms Figure 2 shows the characteristics of each categroy of farm in terms of size; land owned, active population; degree of equipment and cereal situation of the farm. 54 Figure 2. Dimensions and Characteristics of Farms. glmension Characteristics of Farms Farms Pop. Active Size of Equipment Situation of land Cereals Small 1 household 3 to 6 1 cultivator very often in a Farms with 3 pers active, ha usually horse Situation of Short- 1F and 2 M drawn age of cereals Medium 2 households, 1 8 to 15 2 cultivators generally not in Farm dependent. 6 act- ha with one drawn shortage of cer- ives with at by oxen eals least 2 F 15 & there is a very often in a t::ge hgldgaiit: gguse- over trend for 1 situation of sur- active 0 of 10 cultivator/ plus of cereals p p. household along with 1 ariana The farms to which the farm operators belong in our samples are distributed as follows: Table 14. Distribution of Farms According to Dimension by Experimental Unit. Dimension of Farm Location UR KBD UE TK/S Small Farm 39.0% 47.0% Medium Farm 27.0% 27.0% Large Farm 34.0% 26.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% (N = 100) (N = 100) 55 Distribution of Migrants for 1982 According to the Size of the Farm Tables 15 and 16 Show how migrants were distributed in 1982 in relation to the Size of the Operation. The medium farm seems to be more inclined to hire workers than the small farm or the large farm. Several explanations can be offered. First, a small farm may have difficulties in satisfying migrant's needs. Even if the farm operator of a small farm can borrow land to give to the navetaan, he will not be able to feed him for the whole period of rainy season viewed his situation of Shortage Of cereals. Furthermore, the medium farms may need a greater labor force supply to fully use the equipment available which is not generally the case for large farms. The problem arises when comparing the situation of hiring migrants in the small farms to that of the large farms. One can imagine that the characteristics of the large farm particularly the availability of labor force, reduces the hiring of migrants. However, a surplus of cereal added to the possibility of allocating land are viewed as a way to achieve social status. Indeed, as pointed out by Venema, L.B.(1978), the support of a migrant is an indicator of social status as evidenced by a well-off family without any lack in savings. Besides, we must note that migrants themselves prefer to be hired in well-off farms which can properly accom- modate them and where there is available adequate equipment for production. Then why do we have a difference in the medium number of migrants fOr small farms and large farms (.36 and .15) for the UE of TK/S and (.58 and 2) for the UE of KBD? It may be that considerations on the ethnicity of the farm operators will provide an answer as different ethnic 56 groups Table ] \ \ Dimensi of D L. .arm hall F RVErage Large f groups may have different propensity to hiring migrants. Table 15. Distribution of Migrants in 1982 According to the Dimension of the Farm in the UE of Koumbidia. Dimension Distribution of Migrants of Farm # of Farms # of Migrants Average Migrant By Dimension Small Farm 39 23 .58 Average Farm 27 18 .66 Large Farm 34 21 .62 'Total 100 62 Table 16. Distribution of Migrants in 1982 According to the Dimension of the Farm in the UE of Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong. Dimension Distribution of Migrants of Farm . . # of Farms # of Migrants Average Migrant By Dimension Small Farm 47 17 .36 Average Farm 27 . 12 .44 Large Farm 26 4 .15 Total 100 33 57 kl.) If, l :1)! H CHAPTER IV IMPACT OF RAINY SEASON LABOR MIGRATION Discussions in this chapter focus on two different aspects of the study of rainy season labor migration. First, the impact of seasonal labor migration will be examined at three different levels: a) at the level of the migrant himself; b) at the level of the locality of origin; and c) at the level of the locality of destination. The second aSpect to be develOped in this chapter concerns the inte- gration of the migrant in the locality of destination. Impgct of Rainy Season Labor Migration at the Level of the Migrant All migrants interviewed agree that the cash income from rainy season migration is always larger than what they would have had had they stayed in their village. How much is earned and what are the expenditure patterns of migrants. Income Earned from . Rainy Season Migration Figure 1. shows the differenct contracts of migrants and the estimated income from each of them. Thus: 1. For the migrant farm sharecropper as well as for the 18 migrant farm tenant, a cash income between 45,000 FCFA in a bad season and 110,000 FCFA in a good season is estimated. However, the migrant farm 1851 U.S. = 350 FCFA. tenant will pay 15,000 FCFA or 25,000 FCFA19 to his njatigue. 2. Concerning the migrant farm laborer and the migrant cattle herder, their income is fixed at the time of the agreement. It varies from 50,000 FCFA to 75,000 FCFA for the migrant farm laborer and from 50,000 FCFA to 60,000 FCFA for the migrant cattle herder who also receives two liter of milk 20 every day. Use of the Income from Raipy Season Migration As one can expect, migrants use their income from navetanat to satisfy their immediate personal needs, e.g. clothing, wedding expenses, etc. This income also assists them in fulfilling their duty to help their family as Shown in Tables 17 and 18. The description of the use migrants have for their income reveals a concern in the Experimental Units for family help, but particularly for personal achievement. However, the latter's break-down reveals some differences. ReSpondents in the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong (Table 18) give much more importance to clothing (95.7%) and to wedding expenses (83.9) than respondents in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia (Table 17) where clothing is judged important by 71.7% of respondents and wedding expenses 74.1%. Respondents in the UE of Koumbidia give more importance to cattle buying (100%), to acquisition of agricultural equipment (92.3%) and house 19When the migrant farm tenant has migrated alone, then he pays 15,000 FCFA. If he is accompanied by his Spouse, he pays 25,000 FCFA. 20One liter of milk is sold for 75 FCFA to 100 FCFA according to season. 59 Stu building (90. %) than respondents in the UE of TK/S, respectively (80.6%), (57.0%) and (80.7%). These differences are linked to the characteristics of migrants in each Experimental Unit and mainly to their marital status. In other words, expenditure patterns of migrants vary according to the age and family responsibilities of the nfigrant --bachelorsseekingnmch more for clothing and wedding expenses and married inigrants for accommodations. Responses in both Experimental Units give less importance to the gift system as compared to personal achievement or help to the family. Wedding expenses in the Experimental Unit Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong can be estimated as follows: Step 1 b) C) d) Step 2 a) b) d) Step 3 The young man must give 25,000 FCFA and one kilogram of cola to his fiancee; 5,000 FCFA and one kilogram of cola to his stepmother; 5,000 FCFA and one kilogram of cola to his stepfather; 25,000 FCFA and one kilogram of cola for the fiancee's relatives: brothers, uncles, aunts, sisters. The young man for the marriage gives 25,000 to 30,000 FCFA as payment of the dowry; 20,000 FCFA as payment for a meal to those who have been to the mosque; 65,000 FCFA for buying a bed, radio to the fiancee; 20,000 as payment for a reception when the bed will be installed. The young man will give to his fiancee 100,000 FCFA before she joins the conjugal domicile; 60 b) 30,000 FCFA as payment for a reception when she takes up residency. The total estimated cost is 325,000 FCFA. This sum is for most of young unmarried men in the village a target income thatlnigration can help obtain. To some degree then, the entire process of navetanat is basically a dynamic answer toward personal achievement. Ordinarily, however, persons who leave their village on their way back home, buy things that they will offer to parents, friends and fiancees. These can be clothes, sandals. tobacco, bread, any kind of small things not available or very difficult to find in the villages. The importance of this phenomenon is not in the amount of money put in it, but in its role of strengthening social ties. Thus, after marketing their groundnuts, migrants go to the nearest town to buy personal goods and gifts. Finally, the "other" category, in general, involves the payment of debts contracted at the time of departure from the village of origin or during the stay in the locality of destination. From informal discussion, we were told that if a migrant leaves his wife in his village, he must give something in compensation of the expenditures done for his family. However, the amount is not fixed, it is up to him to determine how much he can give. In conclusion, migrants who do not have to worry about lodging, eating, smoking and having a plot to cultivate, gain a large benefit from their move particularly in a good rainy season. The income earned provides to migrants the means to satisfy personal inmediate needs as well as providing family assistance. 61 Ir Table 17.--Use of the Income from Rainy Season Migration in the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia. .Nature of Expenses Degree of Importance very . fairly important 1mportant important total Help to the family 18.5% 78.5% 3.0% 100.0% (N = 65) Personal achievement 95.3% 4.7% - 100.0% (N = 65) clothing 28.3% 43.4% 28.3% 100.0% (N = 65) wedding expenses 41.5% 32.3% 26.2% 100 0% (N = 65) building a house 49.2% 41.5% 9.3% 100 0% (N = 65) acquisition of agri- cultural equipment 41.5% 50.8% 7.7% 100 0% (N = 65) buying cattle 69.2% 30.8% - 100 0% (N = 65) Gifts 5.0% 9.8% 85.2% 100 0% (N = 65) Other 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 100.0% (N = 6) 62 I‘T.’ Table 18.--Use of the Income from Rainy Season Migration in the Experimental Unit of Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong. Nature of Expenses Degree of Importance very fairly important important important total Help to the famiLy 34.4% 63.4% 2.2% 100.0% (N = 93) Personal achievement 97.8% 2.2% - 100.0% (N = 93) clothing 75.3% 20.4% 4.3% 100.0% (N = 93) wedding expenses 58.1% 25.8% 16.1% 100.0% (N = 93) building a house 22.6% 58.1% 19.3% 100.0% (N = 93) buyi"9 agricu‘tura' 7 5% 49 5% 43 0% 100 0% material ' ° ' (N = 93) buying cattle 38.7% 41.9% 19.4% 100 0% (N = 93) Gifts 3.2% 36.6% 60.2% 100 0% (N = 93) Other 44.4% 44.4% 11.2% 100.0% (N=9) 63 Impact of Rainy Season Migration at the Level of the Migrant's Family The factors associated with the migrant's decision to migrate have pointed out the importance migrants attach to helping the family. However, rainy season labor migration has both negative and positive impacts on the migrant's family and on the village of departure. The positive aSpect is that rainy season migration helps relieve the congestion on land mainly in the case of migrants who have left the West Sine-Saloum or other North-West villages in Senegal where there is a high density of pOpulation. Besides, the help provided to the family in the form of remittances or the migrant's contribution to the family process of investment can supplement the family income. Could they afford to buy similar agricultural equipment as that used in the Experimental Units, navetanat would result in accelerating the Spread effect of techniques of cultures introduced in the UE. Concerning the negative aspect of rainy season labor migration, one can think that the departure of "able bodied men" (Udo, 1975) would be detrimental to the village of departure. Indeed, in the context of navetanat, the transfer of the young population obviously constitutes a loss of productive forces for the family and for the village of departure. Does such a departure result in a reduction in the production for these Villages? Further studies can help answer this question. Impgct of Rainy Season Labor Migration at the Level of the Receiving Locality Rural areas in Senegal are characterized by their lack of remunerative employment Opportunities and particularly, by the non- existence of social amenities. As a consequence, migrants who leave their Village for another village are attracted mainly by the availability 64 of land. For the migrants interviewed, getting hired by a njatigue is the only condition under which they can Obtain land to cultivate. Any impact that rainy season labor migration can have in the Experimental Units is very closely linked to the reasons why njatigues hire migrants. Furthermore, the extent of integration of migrants in the receiving household as well as in the community where they migrate illuminates the importance migrants attach to the locality of destination. Reasons for Hirinngigrant Farm Workers According to the Farm Operators Interviewed Farm operators interviewed in both Experimental Units unanimously cite two main reasons for hiring a migrant. First, the hiring of a migrant overcomes a permanent?1 Shortage of labor in the household particularly of male labor as women are very often kept aside from mechanized work. The second reason invoked by the farm Operators is to increase production. These two reasons Show how important it can be for an_0perator to hire a migrant. Indeed, seasonal labor bottlenecks can possibly act as a limit to the expansion of agricultural production. As noticed, the move from traditional to "modern" agriculture practices which is the goal of the Experimental Units implied an increase in the amount of work required for seeding, spreading of fertilizers, weeding, and care of animals. That raised for some operators the need for using seasonal workers. Theselnigrants who are attracted to the Experimental Units of Koumbidia and Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong are involved in cash crop 2ilPermanent as compared to the shortage of labor resulting from the departure or sickness of a family member during the season or resulting from the very demanding nature of some activities like threshing of groundnuts. ' 65 production of groundnuts for their own needs. They also participate in food production as well as in cash crop production in the fields of the farm operators as a counterpart to the agreement reached. From the point of view of farm operators, this participation contributes to increasing the production of households using migrant's labor. Degree of Integration of Migrants in the Receiving Community The agreement reached by farm operators and migrants predisposes the latter to a close integration to the farm operator's household economically and socially. Furthermore, the existence of similar characteristics in rural Senegalese areas facilitates the migrant's adaptation to the host community, at least for those of migrants originating from one of these rural areas. Integration of migrants to the receiving household This integration has two dimensions, an economic dimension and a social dimension. In the economic dimension the migrants are totally integrated to the economic activities of the household. They take part in the process of production in the fields of farm operators; they also work in the fields of other members of the family like the surga familiaux22 with whom migrants sometimes exchange work. Besides the work in the fields of women requested by the farm operator, migrants voluntarily work in the fields of women who do the laundry for them when they are not fOllowed by their spouses. Finally, migrants very often represent farm operators in village community work santane23 which have 22See Terms of Reference. 23See Terms of Reference 66 an economic aspect as well as a social aSpect of mutual assistance. Concerning the social dimension of integration, migrants live in the carre of the farm operator and share meals with all members of the household. Like all members of the household, migrants take part in ceremonies happening in the household - baptisms, weddings and funerals. They develOp with the household members a gift exchange system particu- larly after the marketing of groundnuts and before going back to their village of origin. Among the 93 persons of the sample of migrants in the UE of TK/S, 95.6% affirm they were well integrated into the host household while 4.3% estimate they were fairly integrated. The same is true of the UE of KBD, 95.1% of respondents say they were well integrated. However, there are a large number of non-reSponses as only 41 out of the 71 who were or have already migrated responded. Even though the case was not observed among the migrants interviewed in both Experimental Units, we learned from informal discussions that sometimes, a misunderstanding arises between a farm operator and the migrant he has hired. Such a Situation occurs when the migrant behaves in a totally disapproved way, e.g. if the migrant shows no ardor to work; if he develops relationship with a woman within the household of the farm operator or if the migrant, after marketing his groundnuts, objects to paying back the surplus of seeds received from the farm operator. With the exception of these rare cases, migrants are generally well integrated into the household Of the farm operator. However, this integration into the social life of host families called "Fraternities 24 dr hivernage" (David, 1960) does not eliminate the relation of 24Fraternitie d' Hivernage = Rainy Season Brotherhood. 67 dependence of the migrant to the farm operator. Integration of migrants into the receiving community Migrants, by taking part in the process of production in the receiving locality, play an important role in its development. Besides this economic role, other factors facilitate the integration of the migrant into the receiving community. Among these are: the development of a rural sense of peOplehood25 which creates an attitude of hOSpitality in the host community and the common characteristics of Senegalese rural areas which facilitate the process of adaption at least for Senegalese migrants. As affirmed by a farm operator in the UE of TK/S, "If a migrant does not have difficulty in communication, you may not distinguish him from other young men of his age in the village." There is no discriminatory behavior on the part of the host community manifested in such a way that migrants feel a strong need to get together by ethnic group or by common locality of origin. Futhermore, the insecure situation of most unskilled rural-urban migrants which forces them to join together for mutual assistance is absent in rural areas where migrants are fed, provided lodging and given a plot to cultivate for their own needs. Tables 19 and 20 on the attitude of migrants towards the existence of grouping are very explicit of this situation. The only comment related to these tables concerns the relative importance given to the necessity that migrants hired by the same farm operator create a grouping. The reason for 25PeOplehood must be referred to as the "Terranga Senegalaise" 0r Senegalese HOSpitality. 68 he ‘41 Table 19.--Attitude of Migrants towards the Existence of Grouping in the UE of Koumbidia. Degree of Importance Nature of the Grouping . fairly not 1mp0rtant important important total Ethnicity based 8.4% 11.3% 80.3% 100.0% grouping (N = 71) Grouping based on a , common locality of 5.6% 8.4% 86.0% 100.0% origin (N = 71) Grouping of migrants , carre (N = 71) Table 20.--Attitude of migrants towards the Existence of Grouping in the UE of TK/S. Degree of Importance - Nature of the Grouping . fairly not important important important total Ethnicity based 26.9% 1.1% 72.0% 100.0% G’°"p'"9 baSEd °" 3 13 0% 2 0% 85 0% 100 0% common locality of ‘ ’ ' ' origin (N = 93) Grouping ofinigrants hlPEd in the same 42.0% ' 58.0% 100.0% carre (N = 93) this distribution is that if there are several Inigrants in the same carre. they share the lodging. In conclusion, rainy season labor migration as observed in the Experimental Units, provides a mean for migrants to satisfy personal but 69 also family needs. It also contributes to the growth of the economy of the destination as well as it relieves the pressure on land as is the case in Western Sine-Saloum. 7O we Iii! t). and tail harp CHAPTER V GENERAL CONCLUSION The purpose of this study has been, on the one hand, to determine the characteristics of migrant navetaans and, on the other hand, to examine the reasons why peOple migrate from their village during the rainy season. In addition, the implications of such a move were explored. Concerning the characteristics of migrants, rainy season labor migration is selective; these migrants are not a random sample of the pOpulation of origin, There is selectivity with respect to age. The study has shown a predominance of young males of 15 to 35 years old among whom the single migrant largely dominates. Rainy season labor migration from one one rural area to another, as observed, is also sex selective. Indeed, there are no female migrants moving independently. Females involved in such a pattern of migration are wives of migrants following their husbands. Concerning the determinants of the decision to move, it seems that migration, in general, and rainy season farm labor migration (navetanat) in particular, cannot be understood without taking into account motivations and constraints. The examination of the motivational, facilitating, precipi- tating and conditional factors of the decision to move goes beyond the mere look at the navetanat as resulting from: bride seeking, which involves obtaining money to pay dowry; fiscal taxes which had to be paid as was the case during the colonial administration; the overpopulation of regions or villages of departure. 1'“ I. 3(- .. 7'! 3111 ha )1)? g Furthermore, without neglecting the reasons invoked by migrants themselves, I would tend to look at them as a "manifestation" of the fundamental causes of the move. These latter as derived from informal discussions and interviews of njatigues include in particular, the flight from an oppresive social structure and the nature of the alternatives available. Escaping compulsory duties towards parents-in-law and towards the the situation of total dependence on the head of the household to which migrants belong cannot be reduced either to a mere "Rite of Passage." The results of the study indicate that what basically impels people to leave their village is the social pressure on "surga familiaux" which put them in a situation of complete dependence. It is also the social system which overburdens the "surga familiaux" when they stay in the village and, therefore, becomes an obstacle to personal achievement. Concerning the choice of destination, the migrant tries to maximize the benefit derived from his move. Because groundnuts still are the more important cash crop, migrants who leave their village, tend to go to localities where groundnut cultivation is developed. This choice indicates, in the case of the Experimental Units, as shown by the responses to Question (24), how improvements in rural areas can play a part in providing an alternative to the moving to the cities. In terms of the effects of rainy season labor migration, the departure of young able-bodied males constitute a loss in the working age pOpulation of the village. What are the implications of this labor loss for the production system? Further examination must f0cus on this effect of rainy season migration or show how well populations adjust to the new situation created by departures. As far as the situation at the receiving locality is concerned, migrants represent a substantial supply of labor for the host households. 72 .._. (u .'. 7.42 47.01 In return, they are provided with lodging and Share meals with all members of the household. This situation, which David (1960) referred to as "Fraternite d' hivernage'I should not hide the relations of production which link migrants and farm operators. With respect to that, it is important to examine how the situation of migrants as workers in the host village is different or coincides with their situation of bride seeking. Finally, concerning the income from migration, migrants estimate they have achieved a degree of improvement in their situation as a result of their move. It remains very important that the amount from the income devoted to each pattern of expense be quantitatively estimated. This study of rainy season labor migration that we have presented emerges out of sociological studies carried out on the phenomenon of migration, in general, and migration in Africa in particular. This study has indicated that the complexity of migration requires a holistic approach if one wants to fully understand it. Whatever its pertinency, Amin's model is insufficient to explain the factors internal to a society which motivate or lead to a decision to move. Concerning Caldwell's approach, this study has found that the economic orientation of this model is so emphasized that it hides the social aspects involved in the decision to move which are the primary determinants of migration. The holistic approach to migration which has been developed in this study is critical to understanding migration because it focuses on both the external and internal causes of migration. This holistic approach combines: the description of migration as well as the description of the characteristics of the individual migrants; 73 the investigation of the causes of migration external but also internal to the individual migrant; and the analysis of the effects of the phenomenon of migration on the migrant but also on both the locality of origin and the host locality in terms of economic, social, political and environmental conditions. Finally, the holistic approach to migration suggests several important directions for future research on rainy season labor migration as it exists since achievement of independence in Senegal. First, the loss of labor and its consequences for the villages of origin must be explored. Critical here are the forms of adjustment these villages make tO'a decline in the labor force. Secondly, futher explor- ation of the nature of the "contact" between farm operator and migrants is warranted. In particular, the relations of production established between them is important in understanding both the factors initiating migration and the consequences of migration for exploitation, that is, for farming production systems. The difference or coincidence of the migrant as a hired worker and his situation as a surga familial in his village need to be examined. Finally, this study suggests the need for further follow up studies of the range of activities of migrants during the rainy season and of the pattern of expenditures by migrants after the marketing of ground- nuts. In general, this study was asking respondents for their attitudes . and evaluations about factors related to migration. However, one must round out this infOrmation with actual observations of the migrants in the village or origin and destination. If such future research builds on the implications suggested here, a further understanding of the process of rainy season migration will be achieved. 74 BIBLIOGRAPHY \ Aim Dz Alllh W BIBLIOGRAPHY Adams, Adrian 1977 Le long voyage des gens du Fleuve. Paris: Francois Maspero. Aghassian, M.; T. L. Amselle; M. S. Balde and M. Fieloux 1976 "Les migration Africaines et processus migratoires." F. Maspero, pp. 75-82. Amin, Samir 1974 Neo-Colonialism in West Africa. P.B. 373 Monthly Review Press, p. 5. 1976 "Modern migrations in Western Africa." Published for the International African Institute. Oxford University Press, pp. 65-122. Balde, S. Mamadou 1970 "Les migrations rurales vers la zone arachidiere Orientale," tome II. Dakar Avril,Secr.cW Etat au Plan/DAT. Caldwell, John 1969 African rural-urban migration: the movement to Ghana's towns. Australian National University Press, Canberra C. Hurst and Co., London, p. 87, 203. Club du Sahel 1978 Seminaire sur la mise en valeur des "Terres-Neuves" au Sahel, Ouagadougou, 10-13 Octobre 1978: Synthese du Seminaire. Colvin, L. Gallistel 1979 The Uprooted of the Western Sahel: a history of migrants' quest for cash in the Senegambia. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Meeting of the African Studies Association, Los Angeles. Crawford, 0. Charles 1966 Family attachment and family support for migration and migration plans of young peOple. Rural Sociology, vol. 31, Sept., pp. 293-300. David, Philippe. 1960 Fraternite d' hivernage (le contrat de navetanes): Theorie et patique. Presence Africaine, XXXI. 1960 Les navetanes: Histoire des migrants Saisonniers de l' arachide en Senegambie des origines a' nos jours. N.E.A. Diallo, Ibrahima 1972 Border migrations: a survey of the Senegambian rural areas. I DEP/ET/R/2428/Rev 1. 76 Diop, A. Babacar 1976 Societe Toucouleur et migration: enquete sur l' immigration toucouleur a Dakar. Initiations et Etudes no. XVIII, Dakar. Eisenstads, S. N. 1954 The Description of Immigrants: A comparative study based mainly on the Jewish Community in Palestine and the state of Jews. London, p. 5. Elkan, Walter 1959 "Migrant labor in Africa: an economist's approach, "American Economic Review, XLIV, May. 1960 Migrants and Proletarians. Oxford University Press. Fouquet, Joseph 1958 "La traite des archides dans la region de Kaolak et ses consequences economiques, sociales et Juridiques," Etudes Senegalaises, No. 8, Ifan, p. 83 Founou-Tchuigoua, Bernard 1981 Fondements de l' Economie de Traite au Senegal: la surrexploitation d' une colonie de 1880 a 1960. Eol Silex, p. 59. Goldsmith, Harold; J. Allen Beegle 1962 The initial phase of voluntary migration. Mich, Ag. Experimenta- tion, Rural Sociology Studies No. 1. Harris, R. John 1978 Economic causes and consequences of migrations within the context of underdevelopment in West Africa. Brookline, Mass.: African Studies Center, Boston University (Working Paper No. 6). Harrison, R. J. Church 1963 Environment and Policies in West Africa. 0. Van Nostrand Company (Canada). p. 40. Jansen, Clifford 1968 "Some sociological aSpectS of migration," in Migration by Jackson, Sociological Studies 2. Cambridge: University Press, p. 60. Lacombe, Bernard 1979 Exode rural et urbanisation au Senegal: Sociologie de la migration des Serers de Niakhar vers Dakar en 1970. Paris: O.R.S.T.O.M., Travaux et Documents de l' 0.R.S.T.O.M. No. 73. Mangelam, J. J. 1968 Some guidelines toward a general theory of migration. p. 5. Presen- at the Second Congress of Rural Sociology. Martin, A. Klein 1979 "Colonial rule and structural change: the case of Sine-Saloum" in The Political Economy Of Underdevelopment: dependence in Senegal by C. D. O'Brien, Sage Publication, Beverly Hills/London, p. 79 77 Metge, Joan 1964 New Maori migration: rural and urban relations in Northern New Zealand. p. 107. Milleville, Paul; J.P. Dubois 1979 "Reponses paysannes a une operation de mise en valeur de Terres Neuves au Senegal" in Maitrise de l' eSpace agraire et develop- ment en Afrique Tropicale. Paris: O.R.S.T.O.M., pp. 513-521. Niang, Madicke 1976 Les migrations de travail dans l' Unite Experimentale de Thysse Kaymor SonKorong durant le campagne 1975-1976. Bulletin du departement d' Economie et de Sociologie rurale, No. 2, I.S.R.A., Avril. Nolan, W. Riall 1975 "Labor migration and the Bassari: a case of retrograde develop- ment? Man... N.S. Vol. 10, p. 571—588. Nzula, A. T.: I. I. Potekin and A. Z. Zusmanovich 1979 Forced labor in colonial Africa. Ed. Robin Cohen, p. 98. O'Brien, Donald 1971 The Mourides of Senegal: the political and economic organization of an Islam Brotherhood. London: Oxford Univ. Press, p. 81 Pelissier, Paul 1966 Les paysans du Senegal: les civilisations agraires du Cayor a la casamance. Febregue St. Yrieux, p. 303 Ramond, Cladde, G. Tournu 1974 Les facteurs de la production agricole dans les Unites Experi- mentales: Bilan de 4 annees d' observation. C.N.R.A., Mai. Reboul, Claude 1974 Structures agraires et problemes du development an Senegal: les Unites Experimentales. Seminaire sur 1' emergence du Capitalisme agricole en Afrique Sud-Saharienne. C.N.R.A., Juillet. Riddel, J. Barry "The migration to the cities of West Africa: Some policy considerations," Journal of African Studies (New York), Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 241-260. Sall, Mamadou, Philippe Chamard 1973 The region of Sine—Saloum: Senegal Geographic, N.E.A. Schwarzweller 1979. Migration and the changing rural scene. p. 15. Sorokin, Pitirim; Carle Zommerman C. and Charles Galpin J. 1932 A systematic source book in rural sociology, Vol. 3, Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, p. 507. 78 Stouffer, Samuel A. 1940 "Intervening Opportunities: a theory relating mobility and distance," American Sociological Review, Vol. 5, December, pp. 845-857. Thomas, Dorothy Swaine 1941 Social and Economic Aspects of Swedish Population Movement. Vanhaeverbeke, Andre 1970 Remuneration du travail et commerce exterieur, Leuven. Venema, L. Bernard 1978 The Wolof of Saloum: Social structure and rural development in Senegal, Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, Wageningen. 79 APPENDIX Appendix 1. Ouestinnaire for (Njatigues) Farm Operators 1. Date 2. Name Age Ethnic group Village Experimental Unit: KBD: TK/S 3. Farm characteristics: total population of the farm - active population of the farm Males Females - total hectares owned - total hectares borrowed - degree of equipment for the farm 4. Have you ever hired a migrant? yes no if yes: year # of migrants origin migrant's marital status 1 MS MF S 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1Ms - married who migrated alone MF - married migrant who migrated with his Spouse. S - unmarried 81 5. Did you keep them for the whole rainy season? Yes NO Why? 6. Have you ever hired a Firdouz? Yes No If yes, how many did you hire in: b3§gre 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 7. Can you indicate the reasons which lead you to hire migrants or use firdous. (Rank them.) (1) (-2) (3), (.4) 8. Does the hiring of migrants exclude using Firdous' labor? Yes No Why? 9. What do you think are the reasons why other peasants in your village hire migrants? (Rank) (1) (2) (3) (4) 10. What are the modalities of work contract that link migrants and farm operators? 11. Have they always been the same since you are using services of migrants? Yes No 12. Are the modalities of contract the same in the village? Yes ' NO_ Why? 2 Firdou = late season migrants hired for the threshing of ground- nuts. ‘ 82 20. 21. 22. 24. Give justifications for your answer. Are there peOple who migrate from your village to other localities in search for better opportunities? Yes No If yes, where do they go? Which class of age is more affected? Are both men and women involved? Yes No What do peOple in your village generally think of those who come in the village as migrant(s)? Don't know Strongly dislike Dislike Favorable S. Favorable How well do you think the migrant(s) you have hired is integrated into your household? Don't know Not Integrated at all Fairly Integreted Well Integrated Are there migrant's grouping in the village? Yes No If yes, how are they organized? Yes No by locality of origin by ethnicity grouping of migrants hired in the same carre 83 Appendix 2. Questionnaire for Migrants.1 Date 1. Name Age Ethnic group Marital status:2 5 ; MS ; MF Village of origin Village of migration Experimental Unit IS it the first time you have migrated from your village? Yes No If no, how many times did you leave your village and where did you go? in this same village Yes NO in another village in urban city When was the last rainy season you spent in your native village? Were you, then, allocated a plot ot cultivate for your own needs? yes NO If yes, how large was it? What would you be doing in your village a‘the same period if you didn't migrate" Which of the following factors is more important to you in the decision to migrate? 1 2 3 4 5 - Presence of relative(s) in the village of destination - Fact that peOple of the same age leave the village - Helping the family - Desire to satisfy own needs (earning income) - Scarcity of land available to family - Other T1) Recall, women are not part of the sample of migrants] (2) S = Single (unmarried migrant); MS = married migrants but who migrated alone; ME = married migrants who migrated with their spouse. 84 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. How did you get to be hired? By making contact by yourself Yes No Somebody else made the contact Yes No If somebody helped you, was he Migrant Yes No Relative Yes No Did you have to pay for the service Yes No Compared to the field that would be provided in your village, is the plot allocated to you by your njatigue Larger Smaller Same size In case of a married navetaan who is with his wife, is his wife given land to cultivate? Yes No If yes, in what condition? What type of crop do you cultivate in your field? Yes No Subsistence crops Cash crops Both How many days a week do you work in your own field(s)? 1‘2 3 4 5 6 In the field(s) of your njatigue? 1 2 3 4 5 6 Do you use the equipment of your njatigue to cultivate your own field? Yes No If yes, is it part of the contract or do you pay for it? Can you work for someone else in the village and get paid? Yes No Is there any restriction to that? Are food and lodging provided to you as part of the contract? Yes No Who provides you with seeds, fertilizers? Njatigue Yourself, 85 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Do you have to pay back after marketing your product? Yes No Do you support relatives back home? Yes No If yes, what kind of support? Can you evaluate the revenue you expect to receive? Yes No IS it going to be significantly different from what you would have if you stayed in your village? Smaller Same - Larger Which of the following benefits from migration is more important to you? a. Personal use 1 2 3 Clothing, housing in your village, wedding cere- monies, acquisition of agricultural equipment, buying cattle b. Help to the family buying food clothing c. Gifts to friends, to parents d. Others IS what you found in the village of migration different from your expectations? Would you stay in your village if you were allocated more land for your own needs? Yes No Would you stay in your village if significant improvements were done in order to improve the Situation in your village? Yes ’ No 86 25. 26. Do you feel integrated to the life of the household that received you? Not at all Fairly Well Very well Do you feel integrated to the community of the village which received you? Not at all Fairly Well Very well 87 Appendix 3. List of Maps Map 1. Location of the Experimental Units of Koumbidia and Thysse Kaymor SonKorong. Map . Groundnut Belt in 1900 Map 3. Groundnut Belt in 1910 Map 4. Groundnut Belt in 1937 Map 5. Migrant's Direction for Migration to the Goundnut Belt (after war period, before and after 1925). It is interesting to notice how the Spreading of groundnut cultivation and the development of railroad transportation have been related. 88 Map 1.--Location of the Experimental Unit of Koumbidia (UE Koumbidia) and Thysse Kaymor/SonKorong (UE TK/S). (3" (901 51 L005 ' / 0 (.00ch '/ ./ mf‘y'k I.) CoN-R-A. BOIHDCy \ Kaolack O .(f. F- Kaylru'o r’gr‘. - . “ ”'if' Ohmnbuaxmea \ ! Cusumancg ‘\ » .. ' ,’ .- .' I'gui . m 1 «- " . (“ME “3540 00qu 1) J 89 Map 2.--Groundnut belt in 1900. r' I} ’- :‘/"’;I ’7 ’ My?“ I . I I “47422 o'er . I ..‘, . Mlbfl 7/ /.: - /’///: é/l;9gfultclk/’1/ .1, , I’M/l). ;.’,//,7// JV Iére. 199“" .......... SENEGAL ZONE macumn‘mc EN 1900 {2/{41 Fem production {‘ 1 ram: 00 H) “00 I m SOUDAN (MALI) some: PORT o _ U “Sr-J‘s o u I N t E an: intense production 1243 low production railroad 90 Map 3.--Groundnuts belt in 1910. :-- -o-n-o—c --—.-—- .... ~.- . . -... Hawaii-11 ANT-E- zowc anacmouéne EN 1910 1%.} I'm" P'vduclwn '. /‘/' l O... 5 Low» ’7// you turn 081 on 1065 [ limb“ u / . . /: ' .//"' L{“g° M050". "#00 “m fl/// 7 .—_.._.. - -1. ,%/a;..,:..-.... l/'// / ////////// Hotel ‘9‘ . ,. "’ Dombcy ","NQ‘S F". / Unto: ~// ”WW9" wabcl on two r/m // [lo a I / .//.n... V." In!" M u Ovmymuru on 7909 mum (4%" mm, M m, S o u u A n 2%»..«1 ._'.‘°".'.‘"'..' . 13.35:;51;;gimemigmu ....... ' Tomboteundo Se'flw'ou /GU NEIL POHIUCAISL G U I N E. E intense production low production —- ,-_. railroad 91 Map 4.--Groundnut belt in 1937. SéNéGAL zow: anacmonénz EN 1937 V/fl Forte production [it] (Clue w W 100 Ma 51 Louis 1 7' Wave Ieue'e do Onto! (192941) 7 ». > . I 3"“ .4 / I o, ’1‘ ‘ ’ . e 44' , 5 ..v Lmqueie 74,"- ; Mb'e'mei Veie Iene'e flu Uuel ("JO-J1) SOUDAN ,2/4, Gwinvwlne'o ( HA H l 1,1,». I". ’//I/4/Il\"ulu¢'l- ' yfiwaa " " 911092911) , '_I,'/I.”/ ’ .’ an22tw/9 I /y t ’ / (.7/1/ 7/ lemmkeundo 222 intense production 523 low production ._S,__.__..— railroad 92 5.--Directi0n of lNigrant's Migration to the Groundnut Belt. . C ' I 11111:. 01: MIGRATION oes uavcimcs vans LA 2011: anacmména 1 11111100: owns-cutest. event :1 nuts 1m 1 sum. IA'POII ecumut state» an. enema 1.11.1101: t-e-u-w I 4 rue": Ire ~ I Saint-L001: ‘ J‘\ 6‘ 00'” / -". I °’ .. .7 “ ' )“fl/ Z Z / 11.111100“ . ,17-7’9’91 Bout / , h1e . " ’ plow"; I ll _ , /5/{7n/’/// “ GI, ” ':974:/4,g§i{¢1;.", ‘ ~\ I [499210; "K‘ 1"“ I “NM" 1.19 l/, . ~ ' in e 11) “(lane ~~ a 0’ n d V Sualum 1 \ “Dawn “*- I] U ~ I \ "w . 77 ij,. 1 "fig '41 \ //./ ‘ \ '\ comic 1101111101113: 6 «Fulton i e 1. WI, . .. I 5 I (ewe emeemere 4e hm preevee'ee lene encoded" on “to" red ' -—o Nevltenes se'eeyelm —-e vi 7 “u” 3: Jones non-senigoleu. mien hoards e rangers e 50 DOI- intense production zone ///A iii low production zone movement of Senegalese navetaans - movement of non Senegalese navetaans 93 CARRE: PENC: SANTANE: SAT: SURGA: TERM OF REFERENCE indicates a unit of residence in rural Senegalese areas. Within a carre, can coexist several households. public places in the villages where people, particularly adult males, meet. indicated diverse types of mutual assitance work. It can indicate the help given to a sick person in a village by those of the same age class. It designates collective work initiated by religious leaders in fields owned by them. When young married men call for help in the field of their stepfather, that is called santaan. or sade indicates the paid work called for by a farmer who is late in the cultivation schedule or who is short of labor for Specific activities. designates any person in the exploitation under dependence of the njatigue. In its ethymological sense this word is composed of: SUR = fed GA = force and is translated: feed someone and in exchange have him work for you. SURGA FAMILIAUX: sons, younger brother of the farm operator who depend on him for food supply and for land allotments for cultivation. *With the exception of njatigue which is a Bambara word, all words used are Wolof words. The dominance of Wolof words can be explained by the fact that the Wolof ethnic group largely dominates the zone of Experimental Units. **The definitions given are those used by Cattin, M.B. and Jacques Faye in: L 'Exploitation Agricole Familiale en Afrique Soudana-Sahelienne. P.U.F. , 1982 Oil