Abstract
Background: India's abrupt nationwide Covid-19 lockdown internally displaced millions of migrant workers, who returned to distant rural homes. Documenting their labour market reintegration is a critical aspect of understanding the economic costs of the pandemic for India's poor. In a country marked by low and declining female labour force participation, identifying gender gaps in labour market reintegration – as a marker of both women's vulnerability at times of crisis and setbacks in women's agency – is especially important. Yet most studies of pandemic-displaced internal migrants in India are small, rely on highly selected convenience samples, and lack a gender focus.
Methods: Beginning in April 2020 we enrolled roughly 4,600 displaced migrants who had, during the lockdown, returned to two of India's poorest states into a cohort observational study which tracked enrolees through July 2021. Survey respondents were randomly selected from the states’ official databases of return migrants, with sampling stratified by state and gender. 85% of enrolees (3950) were working prior to the pandemic. Our difference-in-means analysis uses three survey waves conducted in July to August 2020, January to March 2021, and June to July 2021. Our analysis focuses on a balanced panel of 1780 previously working enrolees (the 45% of respondents present in the first wave that also participated in the subsequent two survey rounds). Primary outcomes of interest include labour market re-entry, earnings, and measures of vulnerability by gender.
Findings: Before the March 2020 national lockdown, 98% (95% CI [97,99]) of workers were employed in the non-agricultural sector. In July 2020, one month after the end of the lockdown, incomes plummet, with both genders earning roughly 17% of their pre-pandemic incomes. 47% (95% CI [45,49]) were employed in agriculture and 37% (95% CI [35,39]) were unemployed. Remigration is critical to regaining income – by January 2021, male re-migrants report earnings on par with their pre-pandemic incomes, while men remaining in rural areas earn only 23% (95% CI [19,27]) of their pre-pandemic income. Remigration benefits women to a lesser extent – female re-migrants regain no more than 65% (95% CI [57,73]) of their pre-pandemic income at any point. Yet men and women struggle to remigrate throughout – by July 2021, no more than 63% (95% CI [60,66]) of men and 55% (95% CI [51,59]) of women had left their home villages since returning. Gender gaps in income recovery largely reflect higher rates of unemployment among women, both among those remaining in rural areas (9 percentage points (95% CI [6,13]) higher than men across waves) and among those who remigrate (13 percentage points (95% CI [9,17]) higher than men across waves). As a result, we observe gender gaps in well-being: relative to male counterparts, women across waves were 7 percentage points (95% CI [4,10]) more likely to report reduced consumption of essential goods and fared 6 percentage points (95% CI [4,7]) worse on a food insecurity index.
Interpretation: Displaced migrants of both genders experienced persistent hardships for over a year after the initial pandemic lockdown. Women fare worse, driven by both lower rates of remigration and lower rates of labour market re-entry both inside and outside home villages. Some women drop out of the labour force entirely, but most unemployed report seeking or being available to work. In short, pandemic-induced labour market displacement has far-reaching, long-term consequences for migrant workers, especially women.
Funding: Survey costs were funded by research grants from IZA/FCDO Gender, Growth, and Labour Markets in Low Income Countries Programme, J-PAL Jobs and Opportunity Initiative, and the Evidence-based Measures of Empowerment for Research on Gender Equality (EMERGE) program at University of California San Diego.
Citation
Allard, Jenna, Maulik Jagnani, Yusuf Neggers, Rohini Pande, Simone Schaner, and Charity Troyer Moore. "Indian Female Migrants Face Greater Barriers to Post-Covid Recovery than Males: Evidence from a Panel Study." medRxiv (2022).