Gender and Migrant Workers Impact of Global Crisis on Asian Migrant Workers and Their Families: A Survey-based Analysis

with a Gender Perspective By Guntur Sugiyarto/Senior Economist/ERD The fear that labor migration and its remittances would collapse, due to the adverse impact of the global crisis started in 2008, was very strong in Asia. This is because the region is the main source of migrant workers worldwide, and receives the largest share of global remittances. Just to put this in perspective, Asia received 55% of global remittances in 2010 and the share increased to 62 % in 2011 (Ratha 2012). Fortunately, the large-scale migrant returnees and remittance slumps did not happen (World Bank 2011, Ratha 2011, OXFAM International 2010), but this does not mean that the crisis had no impact on migrant workers and their families. The seemingly no impact at the global or national level may hide impact dynamics at the migrant worker and migrant family levels. This concern is relevant as the recession, in some destination countries resulting from the crisis, seems to continue, and the economic environment and outlook for global job creation remain bleak (ILO 2012). In addition, the impact transmission channels of the crisis to migrant households are also passed on through the local labor market, generating economy-wide effects that may take some time to show the full impact. To examine the issue two migrant household surveys were conducted in Indonesia and the Philippines. The main purpose of the surveys was to try to capture the impact dynamics of the crisis on migrant workers earnings, working conditions, remittances, and return migration, as well as on their households income, expenditure, working conditions and intention to migrate given the current situation. The surveys were also to examine the coping mechanisms of migrant workers and migrant households. The examination pays particular attention to gender issues, especially on how the impact dynamics differ between men and women. The two countries were selected as they are amongst the largest labor-exporting countries in Asia, and the feminization of their labor migration is already very strong. More than 10% of Philippines population are migrants already, working in more than 200 countries in the world. An estimate from a household survey in the Philippines shows that about 27% of households receive remittances. The share of migrant households in Indonesia is much lower, at about 3%, with a more limited number of country destinations. The shares of women in the number of current migrant workers in the Philippines and Indonesia are already about 75%, and more than 50%, respectively, and their trends are increasing. The first survey was conducted in 2010 and the second or revisit survey with an additional gender perspective was done in 2012. Parallel to both surveys, a series of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Roundtable Discussions (RTDs) were conducted with heads and members of migrant households, return migrants and key informants. The main purpose was to validate the survey results and to shed further light on some topics covered in the surveys. The surveys were also part of a larger study to look at the impact of the crisis on remittance and poverty in Asia by looking at the impact at different levels, i.e., global, country, sector and migrant household levels using econometrics, computable general equilibrium modeling, and household survey methods. Overall results show that the effects of the crisis differ across countries and sectors, and are influenced by the characteristics of migrants workers and migrant households. Further results

from the gender-focused surveys and FGDs and RTDs show that women migrant workers were in a worse and more vulnerable condition than their male counteparts, due to their lower education and skills, which were in turn reflected in their relatively inferior jobs. Migrant women experienced declining earnings, deteriorating working and living conditions, and job losses that forced some of them to return home. They also faced more difficulties after returning, which made them seek to work abroad again. Those who managed to stay abroad coped by working in other jobs with lower quality, and/or in other countries if necessary, and depriving themselves by lowering their expenditure and life styles. Migrant households in the home countries were also adversely affected by the crisis, with women seeming to bear the brunt, as a result of their reproductive and gendered responsibilities in the family. More women were unemployed and in vulnerable employment reflecting a worsening domestic labor market. The adverse impacts of the 2008 crisis in Indonesia appeared worse than in the Philippines. Moreover, despite the strong view from the stakeholders gathered during the series of FGDs and RTDs, that men should be the breadwinners, and the ones going abroad for work, the reality is that women were the ones doing so. This illustrates a strong push factor out of necessity, that further strengthens the need for better gender mainstreaming policies in the labor and migration markets. Given the studys findings, it is apparent that the "one size fits all" policy approach will not address the differential impacts of the crisis on men and women migrant workers and their families, nor will they address other differences based on other characteristics. To be effective, policies should consider the nature of migration and the factors driving the dynamics of the impact. One important dimension of the migration agenda that offers room for better policies is the protection of migrant workers and their families to help them to weather the adverse effects of aggregate shocks. The study calls for a policy that offers solutions for host and home countries, and for men and women migrant workers and their families, i.e. a win-win-win solution. Finally, the findings of the study may also be relevant for other countries in the region, in the context of increasing the resilience of migrant workers and their families to future shocks.