2. British Rule in Bengal
During British rule, two devastating famines were instigated costing millions of lives in 1770
and 1943. Scarcely five years into the British East India Company's rule, the catastrophic Bengal
famine of 1070 one of the greatest famines of history occurred. Up to a third of the population
died in 1770 and subsequent years. The Indian Mutiny of 1857 replaced rule by the Company
with the direct control of Bengal by the British crown.
A centre of rice cultivation as well as fine cotton called muslin and the world's main source of
jute fibre, Bengal, from the 1850s became one of India's principal centres of industry,
concentrated in the capital Kolkata (known as Calcutta under the British, always called 'Kolkata'
in the native tongue of Bengali) and its emerging cluster of suburbs. Most of the population
nevertheless remained dependent on agriculture, and despite its leading role in Indian political
and intellectual activity, the province included some very undeveloped districts, especially in the
east. In 1877, when Victoria took the title of "Empress of India", the British declared Calcutta
the capital of the British Raj.
India's most popular province (and one of the most active provinces in freedom fighting), in
1905 Bengal was divided by the British rulers for administrative purposes into an
overwhelmingly Hindu west (including present-day Bihar and Orissa) and a predominantly
Muslim east (including Assam) (1905 Partition of Bengal). Hindu - Muslim conflict became
stronger through this partition. While Hindu Indians disagreed with the partition saying it was a
way of dividing a Bengal which is united by language and history, Muslims supported it by
saying it was a big step forward for Muslim society where Muslims will be majority and they
can freely practice their religion as well as their culture. But owing to strong Hindu agitation, the
British reunited East and West Bengal in 1912, and made Bihar and Orissa a separate province.
Another major famine occurred during the second world war, the Bengal famine of 1943, in
which an estimated 3 million people died.
Bengal famine of 1770
The Bengal famine of 1770 (Chhiattōrer monnōntór; lit The Famine of '76) was a catastrophic
famine between 1769 and 1773 (1176 to 1180 in the Bengali calendar) that affected the lower
Gangetic plain of India. The famine is estimated to have caused the deaths of 10 million people
(one out of three, reducing the population to thirty million in Bengal, which included Bihar and
parts of Orissa). The Bengali names derives from its origins in the Bengali calendar year 1176.
Background
The famine occurred in the territory which was called Bengal, then ruled by the British East
India Company. This territory included modern West Bengal, Bangladesh, and parts of Assam,
Orissa, Bihar, and Jharkhand. It was originally a province of the Mughal empire from the 16th
century and was ruled by a Nawab, or governor. The Nawab had become effectively
independent by the beginning of the 18th century, though in theory was still a tributary power of
the Great Mughal in Delhi.
In the 17th century the British East India Company had been given a grant on the town of
Calcutta by the Mughal emperor Akbar. At this time the Company was effectively another
tributary power of the Mughal. During the following century the company obtained sole trading
rights for the province, and went on to become the dominant power in Bengal. In 1757, at the
2
3. battle of Plassey, the British defeated the-then Nawab Siraj Ud Daulah and plundered the
Bengali treasury. In 1764 their military control was reaffirmed at Buxar. The subsequent treaty
gained them the Diwani, that is, taxation rights: the Company thereby became the de facto ruler
of Bengal. About ten million people[5][6], approximately one-third of the population of the
affected area, are estimated to have died in the famine. The regions in which the famine
occurred included especially the modern Indian states of Bihar and West Bengal, but the famine
also extended into Orissa and Jharkhand as well as modern Bangladesh. Among the worst
affected areas were Birbhum and Murshidabad in Bengal, and Tirhut, Champaran and Bettiah in
Bihar.
A partial shortfall in crops, considered nothing out of the ordinary, occurred in 1768 and was
followed in late 1769 by more severe conditions. By September 1769 there was a severe
drought, and alarming reports were coming in of rural distress. These were, however, ignored by
company officers. By early 1770 there was starvation, and by mid-1770 deaths from starvation
were occurring on a large scale. Later in 1770 good rainfall resulted in a good harvest and the
famine abated. However, other shortfalls occurred in the following years, raising the total death
toll.
As a result of the famine large areas were depopulated and returned to jungle for decades to
come, as the survivors migrated in mass in a search for food. Many cultivated lands were
abandoned—much of Birbhum, for instance, returned to jungle and was virtually impassable for
decades afterwards. From 1772 on, bands of bandits and thugs became an established feature of
Bengal, and were only brought under control by punitive actions in the 1780s.
East India Company responsibilities
Fault for the famine is now often ascribed to the British East India Company's policies in
Bengal.As a trading body, the first remit of the company was to maximise its profits and with
taxation rights the profits to be obtained from Bengal came from land tax as well as trade tariffs.
As lands came under company control, the land tax was typically raised fivefold what it had
been – from 10% to up to 50% of the value of the agricultural produce. [7] In the first years of the
rule of the British East India Company, the total land tax income was doubled and most of this
revenue flowed out of the country. [8] As the famine approached its height in April of 1770, the
Company announced that the land tax for the following year was to be increased by a further
10%.
Sushil Chaudhury writes that the destruction of food crops in Bengal to make way for opium
poppy cultivation for export reduced food availability and contributed to the famine. [9] However,
this claim has been disputed on the grounds that the total area under opium poppy cultivation in
the Bengal region constituted less than two percent of all the land. The company is also
criticised for forbidding the "hoarding" of rice. This prevented traders and dealers from laying in
reserves that in other times would have tided the population over lean periods, as well as
ordering the farmers to plant indigo instead of rice. By the time of the famine, monopolies in
grain trading had been established by the company and its agents. The company had no plan for
dealing with the grain shortage, and actions were only taken insofar as they affected the
mercantile and trading classes. Land revenue decreased by 14% during the affected year, but
recovered rapidly (Kumkum Chatterjee). According to McLane, the first governor-general of
British India, Warren Hastings, acknowledged "violent" tax collecting after 1771: revenues
earned by the Company were higher in 1771 than in 1768. Globally, the profit of the company
increased from fifteen million rupees in 1765 to thirty million in 1777.
3
4. The Indian Rebellion of 1857
The Indian Rebellion of 1857 began as a mutiny of sepoys of the British East India Company's
army on 10 May 1857, in the town of Meerut, and soon erupted into other mutinies and civilian
rebellions largely in the upper Gangetic plain and central India, with the major hostilities
confined to present-day Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, northern Madhya Pradesh, and the Delhi region.
The rebellion posed a considerable threat to Company power in that region, and it was contained
only with the fall of Gwalior on 20 June 1858.[3] The rebellion is also known as India's First
War of Independence, the Great Rebellion, the Indian Mutiny, the Revolt of 1857, the
Uprising of 1857, the Sepoy Rebellion, and the Sepoy Mutiny.
Other regions of Company-controlled India—Bengal province, the Bombay Presidency, and the
Madras Presidency—remained largely calm. [3] In Punjab, the Sikh princes backed the Company
by providing both soldiers and support. The large princely states, Hyderabad, Mysore,
Travancore, and Kashmir, as well as the smaller ones of Rajputana did not join the rebellion.[5]
In some regions, such as Oudh, the rebellion took on the attributes of a patriotic revolt against
European presence.Rebel leaders, such as the Rani of Jhansi and Rani of Tulsipur Ishwori
Kumari Devi of Tulsipur-State, became folk heroes in the nationalist movement in India half a
century later; however, they themselves "generated no coherent ideology" for a new order. The
rebellion led to the dissolution of the East India Company in 1858, and forced the British to
reorganize the army, the financial system, and the administration in India.[8] India was thereafter
directly governed by the Crown in the new British Raj.
Bengal famine of 1943
The Bengal famine of 1943 is one among several famines that occurred in British-administered
Bengal. It is estimated that around three million people died from starvation and malnutrition
during the period making the number of Indian deaths higher than the two world wars, the entire
independence movement and the massive carnage that followed the Partition of India.
Background and Possible causes
The Second World War began simultaneously with a series of crop failures and famines. By
August 1939, out of 14 states in Rajasthan, the 9 largest had declared that they were suffering a
famine under the Indian Famine Code as it then stood.[3] In Bengal in 1940-41 there was a small
scale famine although quick action by the authorities prevented widespread loss of life. Food
prices increased throughout India, and the Central Government was forced to undertaking
meetings with local government officials and release regulations of price controls .
The United Kingdom had suffered a disastrous defeat at Singapore in 1942 against the Japanese
military, which then proceeded to invade Burma in the same year. Burma was the world's largest
exporter of rice in the inter-war period, the British having encouraged production by Burmese
smallholders, which resulted in a virtual monoculture in the Irrawaddy Delta and Arakan. By
1940 15% of India's rice overall came from Burma, while in Bengal the proportion was slightly
higher given the province's proximity to Burma.
4
5. British authorities feared a subsequent Japanese invasion of British India proper by way of
Bengal (see British Raj) and a scorched earth policy was hastily implemented in the Chittagong
region, nearest the Burmese border, to prevent access to supplies by the Japanese in case of an
invasion. In particular, the Army confiscated many boats (and motor vehicles, carts and even
elephants), fearing that the Japanese would commandeer them to speed an advance into India.
The inhabitants used the boats for fishing and to take goods to market, and the Army failed to
distribute rations to replace the fish and the food lost through the stoppage of commerce. [8] The
dislocation in the area forced many of the inhabitants into the Military Labour Corps, and the
break-up of families left many children and dependents to beg or to starve.
On 16 October 1942 the whole east coast of Bengal and Orissa was hit by a cyclone. A huge
area of rice cultivation up to forty miles inland was flooded, causing the autumn crop in these
areas to fail. This meant that the peasantry had to eat their surplus, and the seed that should have
been planted in the winter of 1942-3 had been consumed by the time the hot weather began in
May 1943.[10][11] The famine reached its peak between July and November 1943. Famine fatality
statistics were unreliable and a range of between 2-4 million has been suggested. According to
author John Keay, even if the lower number is accepted, the famine killed more Indians than the
two world wars, the entire Indian freedom movement, and the massive death toll that followed
Partition of India.[2].
Amartya Sen holds the view that there was no overall shortage of rice in Bengal in 1943:
availability was actually slightly higher than in 1941, when there was no famine. [12] It was partly
this which conditioned the sluggish official response to the disaster, as there had been no serious
crop failures and hence the famine was unexpected. Its root causes, Sen argues, lay in rumours
of shortage which caused hoarding, and rapid price inflation caused by war-time demands which
made rice stocks an excellent investment (prices had already doubled over the previous year). In
Sen's interpretation, while landowning peasants who actually grew rice and those employed in
defence-related industries in urban areas and at the docks saw their wages rise, this led to a
disastrous shift in the exchange entitlements of groups such as landless labourers, fishermen,
barbers, paddy huskers and other groups who found the real value of their wages had been
slashed by two-thirds since 1940. Quite simply, although Bengal had enough rice and other
grains to feed itself, millions of people were suddenly too poor to buy it. [13
Response
During the course of the famine, the Government of Bengal mobilised 'considerable
resources',[14] however its efforts were undermined by its own lack of understanding of the
situation, the poor coordination of relief efforts and the failure of government officials and
departments to work together to combat the famine.[15] During the Famine Inquiry Commission's
investigation, one official stated that 'We felt difficulty about one thing. That was lack of one co-
ordinating authority at the time of famine'[16]
In December 1942 there was a shortage in Calcutta itself. Therefore focused on getting supplies
to Calcutta.[17] by trying to buy surplus stocks in the region. The quantities that District Officers
were able to locate and purchase were considered too small to end the famine, so the
Government introduced free trade in rice in Eastern India, hoping that traders would sell their
stocks to Bengal, however this measure also failed to move large stocks to Bengal. [18] In April
and May there was a propaganda drive to convince the population that the high prices were not
justified by the supply of food, the goal being that the propaganda would induce hoarders . [19]
When these propaganda drive was followed by a drive to locate hoarded stocks. When these
5
6. drives continually failed to locate large stocks it convinced the government that the scale of the
loss in supply was larger than they initially believed[18]
Bayly and Harper claim that in contrast to the incompetence of the civil service, the British
military commanders and the British military in general performed as best as it could to combat
the famine,[20] providing food to the suffering and organising relief. During the course of the
famine the government organised roughly 110,000,000 free meals which proved too small to
cope with the disaster.
In response to an urgent request by the Secretary of State for India, Leo Amery, and Viceroy of
India Achibald Wavell, to release food stocks for India, Winston Churchill the Prime Minister of
that time responded with a telegram to Wavell asking, if food was so scarce, "why Gandhi
hadn’t died yet."[22][23] Initially during the famine he was more concerned with the civilians of
Greece (who were also suffering from a famine) compared with the Bengalis. [24]
Overall, Sen argues, the authorities failed to understand that the famine was not caused by an
overall food shortage, and that the distribution of food was not just a matter of railway capacity,
but of providing free famine relief on a massive scale: "The Raj was, in fact, fairly right in its
estimation of overall food availability, but disastrously wrong in its theory of Famines".[25] The
famine ended when the government in London agreed to import 1,000,000 tons of grain to
Bengal, reducing food prices.[26] Mark Tauger and Peter Bowbrick argue the opposite; that the
government had the same view of the famine as Sen did, and tried to locate surplus stocks
during the course of the famine, but was unable to do so because no such stocks exist. [27]
During the course of the famine, 264 thousand tons of rice, 258 thousand tons of wheat and
wheat products and 55 thousand tons of millets were sent to Bengal for the purposes of famine
relief from the rest of India and overseas[28]
The Bengal Famine may be placed in the context of previous famines in Mughal and British
India. Deccan Famine of 1630-32 killed 2,000,000 (there was a corresponding famine in
northwestern China, eventually causing the Ming dynasty to collapse in 1644). During the
British rule in India there were approximately 25 major famines spread through states such as
Tamil Nadu in South India, Bihar in the north, and Bengal in the east; altogether, between 30
and 40 million Indians were the victims of famines in the latter half of the 19th century (Bhatia
1985).
"Food availability decline" or "man made"
Severe food shortages were worsened by World War II, with the British administration of India
exporting foods to Allied soldiers. The shortage of rice forced rice prices up, and wartime
inflation compounded the problem.
Food deliveries from other parts of the country to Bengal were refused by the government in
order to make food artificially scarce. This was an especially cruel policy introduced in 1942
under the title "Rice Denial Scheme." The purpose of it was, as mentioned earlier, to deny an
efficient food supply to the Japanese after a possible invasion. Simultaneously, the government
authorised free merchants to purchase rice at any price and to sell it to the government for
delivery into governmental food storage. So, on one hand government was buying every grain of
rice that was around and on the other hand, it was blocking grain from coming into Bengal from
other regions of the country.[29] The price controls on wheat were introduced on December 1941,
and on rice in 1942.[30]
6
7. Amartya Sen has cast doubt on the idea that the rice shortage was due to a fall in production. He
quotes official records for rice production in Bengal in the years leading up to 1943 as reported
in the table to the right.[31] According to Ó Gráda, he also argues that famine and democracy are
"virtually incompatible".[32] The 1943 yield, while low, was not in itself outside the normal
spectrum of recorded variation, and other factors beyond simple crop failure may thus be
invoked as a causal mechanism.
Others have drawn attention to the quality of the data that Amartya Sen cites. Mark Tauger has
drawn attention to the manner in which the statistics were gathered [33] whilst Peter Bowbrick
has described them as 'wildly unreliable'[34]
Year Rice production(in million of tons)
1938 8.474
1939 7.922
1940 8.223
1941 6.768
1942 9.296
1943 7.628
Indian Independence Movement
Bengal played a major role in the Indian independence movement, in which revolutionary
groups such as Anushilan Samiti and Jugantar were dominant. Bengalis also played a notable
role in the Indian independence movement. Many of the early proponents of the freedom
struggle, and subsequent leaders in movement were Bengalis such as Chittaranjan Das,
Surendranath Banerjea, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, Prafulla Chaki, Bagha Jatin, Khudiram
Bose, Surya Sen, Binoy-Badal-Dinesh, Sarojini Naidu, Aurobindo Ghosh, Rashbehari Bose and
many more. Some of these leaders, such as Netaji, did not subscribe to the view that non-violent
civil disobedience was the only way to achieve Indian Independence, and were instrumental in
armed resistance against the British force. During the Second World War Netaji escaped to
Germany from house arrest in India and there he founded the Indian Legion an army to fight
against the British Government, but the turning of the war compelled him to come to South-East
Asia and there he became the co-founder and leader of the Indian National Army (distinct from
the army of British India) that challenged British forces in several parts of India. He was also the
head of state of a parallel regime named 'The Provisional Governmeent of Free India' or Arzi
Hukumat-e-Azad Hind, that was recognized and supported by the Axis powers. Bengal was also
the fostering ground for several prominent revolutionary organisations, the most notable of
which was Anushilan Samiti. A large number of Bengalis were martyred in the freedom struggle
and many were exiled in Cellular Jail, the much dreaded prison located in Andaman.
7
8. History of the Indian National Congress
From its foundation on 28 December 1885 until the time of independence of India on August 15,
1947, the Indian National Congress was the largest and most prominent Indian public
organization, and central and defining influence of the Indian Independence Movement.
Although initially and primarily a political body, the Congress transformed itself into a national
vehicle for social reform and human upliftment. The Congress was the strongest foundation and
defining influence of modern Indian nationalism.
Founded upon the suggestion of British civil servant Allan Octavian Hume, the Congress was
created to form a platform for civic and political dialogue of educated Indians with the British
Raj. After the First War of Indian Independence and the transfer of India from the East India
Company to the British Empire, it was the goal of the Raj to support and justify its governance
of India with the aid of English-educated Indians, who would be familiar and friendly to British
culture and political thinking. Ironically, a few of the reasons the Congress grew and survived in
the era of undisputed British hegemony, was through the patronage of British authorities, Anglo-
Indians and a rising Indian educated class.The theory of safety valve has also been associated
with the birth of congress. It says that congress provided a platform to Indians to bring out their
resentment vocally. Its initial aim was to divert the minds of Indians from any sort of physical
violence.
Hume embarked on an endeavor to get an organization started by reaching-out to selected
alumni of the University of Calcutta, writing in his 1883 letter that, "Every nation secures
precisely as good a Government as it merits. If you the picked men, the most highly educated
of the nation, cannot, scorning personal ease and selfish objects, make a resolute struggle to
secure greater freedom for yourselves and your country, a more impartial administration, a
larger share in the management of your own affairs, then we, your friends, are wrong and our
adversaries right, then are Lord Ripon's noble aspirations for your good fruitless and
visionary, then, at present at any rate all hopes of progress are at an end and India truly
neither desires nor deserves any better Government than she enjoys."[1]
In May 1885, Hume secured the Viceroy's approval to create an "Indian National Union", which
would be affiliated with the government and act as a platform to voice Indian public opinion. On
12 October 1885, Hume and a group of educated Indians also published "An Appeal from the
People of India to the Electors of Great Britain and Ireland" to ask British voters in 1885 British
general election to help support candidates sympathetic to Indian public opinion, which included
opposition to the levying of taxes on India to finance the British Indian campaigns in
Afghanistan and support for legislative reform in India. [2] The appeal was a failure, and was
interpreted by many Indians as "a rude shock, but a true realization that they had to fight their
battles alone."[3] On 28 December 1885, the Indian National Congress was founded at Gokuldas
Tejpal Sanskrit College in Bombay, with 72 delegates in attendance. Hume assumed office as
the General Secretary, and Womesh Chandra Bonnerjee of Calcutta was elected President. [2]
Besides Hume, two additional British members (both Scottish civil servants) were members of
the founding group, William Wedderburn and Justice (later, Sir) John Jardine. The other
members were mostly Hindus from the Bombay and Madras Presidencies.[2]
8
9. Though there has been discussion over the fact that the congress was founded by a retired civil
servant and not by Indians G.K.Gokhale with his characteristic modesty and political wisdom,
stated this explicitly in 1913: "No Indian could have started the Indian National Congress...if an
Indian had come forward to start such a movement embracing all Indians, the officials in India
would not have allowed the movement to come into existence. If the founder of the Congress
had not been an Englishman and a distinguished ex-official, such was the distrust of political
agitation in those days that the authorities would have at once found some way or the other to
suppress the movement.
Reactions
Many Muslim community leaders, like the prominent educationalist Syed Ahmed Khan viewed
the Congress negatively, owing to its membership being dominated by Hindus. The Orthodox
Hindu community and religious leaders were also averse, seeing the Congress as supportive of
Western cultural invasion.
The ordinary people of India were not informed or concerned of its existence on the whole, for
the Congress never attempted to address the issues of poverty, lack of health care, social
oppression and the prejudiced negligence of the people's concerns by British authorities. The
perception of bodies like the Congress was that of an elitist, then educated and wealthy people's
institution.
Rise of Indian nationalism
First session of Indian National Congress, Bombay, 28-31, December, 1885.
Lokmanya Tilak was the first to embrace Swaraj as the national goal. The first spurts of
nationalistic sentiment that rose amongst Congress members were when the desire to be
represented in the bodies of government, to have a say, a vote in the lawmaking and issues of
administration of India. Congressmen saw themselves as loyalists, but wanted an active role in
governing their own country, albeit as part of the Empire. This trend was personified by
Dadabhai Naoroji, considered by many as the eldest Indian statesman. Naoroji went as far as
contesting, successfully, an election to the British House of Commons, becoming its first Indian
member. That he was aided in his campaign by young, aspiring Indian student activists like
Muhammad Ali Jinnah, describes where the imagination of the new Indian generation lay.
Bal Gangadhar Tilak was the first Indian nationalist to embrace Swaraj as the destiny of the
nation. Tilak deeply opposed the British education system that ignored and defamed India's
culture, history and values. He resented the denial of freedom of expression for nationalists, and
the lack of any voice or role for ordinary Indians in the affairs of their nation. For these reasons,
he considered Swaraj as the natural and only solution in the abandonment of all the British
things. He was backed by rising public leaders like Bipin Chandra Pal and Lala Lajpat Rai, who
held the same point of view. Under them, India's three great states - Maharashtra, Bengal and
Punjab region shaped the demand of the people and India's nationalism.
9
10. The moderates, led by Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Pherozeshah Mehta and Dadabhai Naoroji held
firm to calls for negotiations and political dialogue. Gokhale criticized Tilak for encouraging
acts of violence and disorder. But the Congress of 1906 did not have public membership, and
thus Tilak and his supporters were forced to leave the party.
But with Tilak's arrest, all hopes for an Indian offensive were stalled. The Congress lost credit
with the people, while Muslims were alarmed with the rise of Tilak's Hindu nationalism, and
formed the All India Muslim League in 1907, considering the Congress as completely unsuitable
for Indian Muslims.
The "Traditionalists"
According to one approach, the traditionalist point of view, though not in a political sense, was
represented in Congressmen like Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Rajendra Prasad, C.Rajagopalachari,
Purushottam Das Tandon, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan and Maulana Azad, who were also
associates and followers of Gandhi. Their organizational strength, achieved through leading the
clashes with the government, was undisputed and proven when despite winning the 1939
election, Bose resigned the Congress presidency because of the lack of confidence he enjoyed
amongst national leaders. A year earlier, in the 1938 election, however, Bose had been elected
with the support of Gandhi. Differences arose in 1939 on whether Bose should have a second
term. Jawaharlal Nehru, who Gandhi had always preferred to Bose, had had a second term
earlier. Bose's own differences centred on the place to be accorded to non-violent as against
revolutionary methods. When he set up his Indian National Army in South-east Asia during the
Second World War, he invoked Gandhi's name and hailed him as the Father of The Nation. It
would be wrong to suggest that the so-called traditionalist leaders looked merely to the ancient
heritage of Indian, Asian or, in the case of Maulana Azad and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan,
Islamic civilization for inspiration. They believed, along with educationists like Zakir Husain
and E W Aryanayakam, that education should be imparted in a manner that enables the learners
also to be able to make things with their own hands and learn skills that would make them self-
supporting. This method of education was also adopted in some areas in Egypt. (See Reginald
Reynolds, Beware of Africans). Zakir Husain was inspired by some European educationists and
was able, with Gandhi's support, to dovetail this approach to the one favoured by the Basic
Education method introduced by the Indian freedom movement. They believed that the
education system, economy and social justice model for a future nation should be designed to
suit the specific local requirements. While most were open to the benefits of Western influences
and the socio-economic egalitarianism of socialism, they were opposed to being defined by
either model.
10
11. Creation of Pakistan
As the independence movement throughout British-controlled India began in the late 19th
century gained momentum during the 20th century, Bengali politicians played an active role in
Mohandas Gandhi's Congress Party and Mohammad Ali Jinnah's Muslim League, exposing the
opposing forces of ethnic and religious nationalism. By exploiting the latter, the British probably
intended to distract the independence movement, for example by partitioning Bengal in 1905
along religious lines. The split only lasted for seven years.
At first the Muslim League sought only to ensure minority rights in the future nation. In 1940
the Muslim League passed the Lahore Resolution which envisaged one or more Muslim
majority states in South Asia. Non-negotiable was the inclusion of the Muslim parts of Punjab
and Bengal in these proposed states. The stakes grew as a new Viceroy Lord Mountbatten of
Burma was appointed expressly for the purpose of effecting a graceful British exit. Communal
violence in Noakhali and Calcutta sparked a surge in support for the Muslim League, which won
a majority of Bengal's Muslim seats in the 1946 election. Accusations have been made that
Hindu and Muslim nationalist instigators were involved in the latter incident. At the last moment
Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy and Sarat Chandra Bose came up with the idea of an independent
and unified Bengal state, which was endorsed by Jinnah. This idea was vetoed by the Indian
National Congress.
British India was partitioned and the independent states of India and Pakistan were created in
1947; the region of Bengal was divided along religious lines. The predominantly Muslim eastern
half of Bengal became the East Bengal (later renamed East Pakistan) state of Pakistan and the
predominantly Hindu western part became the Indian state of West Bengal.
Pakistan's history from 1947 to 1971 was marked by political instability and economic
difficulties. In 1956 a constitution was at last adopted, making the country an "Islamic republic
within the Commonwealth". The nascent democratic institutions foundered in the face of
military intervention in 1958, and the government imposed martial law between 1958 and 1962,
and again between 1969 and 1971.
Almost from the advent of independent Pakistan in 1947, frictions developed between East and
West Pakistan, which were separated by more than 1,000 miles of Indian territory. East
Pakistanis felt exploited by the West Pakistan-dominated central government. Linguistic,
cultural, and ethnic differences also contributed to the estrangement of East from West Pakistan.
When Mohammad Ali Jinnah died in September 1948, Khwaja Nazimuddin became the
Governor General of Pakistan while Nurul Amin was appointed the Chief Minister of East
Bengal. Nurul Amin continued as the Chief Minister of East Bengal until 2 April 1954. The
abolition of the Zamindari system in East Bengal (1950) and the Language Movement were two
most important events during his tenure.
India's independence from Great Britain in August 1947 resulted in the partition of British India
into India and Pakistan. Pakistan was created out of the Muslim-majority provinces of British
India, with no regard for geographical contiguity. The resulting state was formed into two
physically separate wings, with the territory of India intervening between the two. The eastern
wing was created by the partition of the British province of Bengal, and the principal language
spoken there was Bengali. Although it was principally the language of those who fled India to
Pakistan, the government of Pakistan decreed that Urdu would be the national language.
11
12. Creation of Bangladesh
In the evening of March 25, 1971, the Pakistan army attacked East Pakistan, as the future
Bangladesh was then known. The attack was an effort to put down East Pakistani protesters who
demanded that the national government recognize the right of the elected majority party, the
Awami (People's) League, to assume political office. The attacks by the Pakistanis, and
resistance by the Bangladeshis, continued until December of that year, with the Bangladeshis
seeing this as a war of independence, and the government forces viewing it as a civil war.
Throughout the year, India provided support for the East Pakistani rebels, and received a large
number of refugees. Early in December, Pakistan's internal conflict assumed international
dimensions with the direct intervention of Indian troops. The violence ended on December 16,
when the Pakistani commander at the time, General A. K. Niazi, surrendered to General Jagjeet
Singh Arora, commander of the Indian forces.
The discontent of East Pakistanis in the united state of Pakistan had a long history before it
finally culminated in war. The Muslim League government of Pakistan, led by Muhammad Ali
Jinnah, had long ignored East Bengal. However, during his only visit to the eastern province, in
March 1948, Jinnah was confronted by Bengalis who demanded that their language be
recognized along with Urdu as a co-official language of Pakistan. Jinnah stated that anyone who
opposed the status of Urdu as the official language of Pakistan was a traitor to the country. This
angered the Bengali faction, and in 1952 that anger gave rise to the "language movement" in
East Pakistan.
After independence, the Pakistani government was constituted according to the Government of
India Act (1935) as modified by the India Independence Act of 1947, both acts of the British
Parliament. It was not until 1956 that a formal constitution was promulgated (India adopted its
own constitution in 1950). The constitution of 1956 changed the name of the eastern wing of the
country from East Bengal to East Pakistan and the four provinces of the west wing were
consolidated into West Pakistan. The constitution also instituted the concept of parity between
the eastern and western regions. This meant that representation in the National Assembly would
be equal from each province, even though East Pakistan had about 54 percent of the total
population of Pakistan. The Bengalis of East Pakistan viewed this as an affront.
This shortchanging of representation in the National Assembly was also seen in the military
services. There were very few officers from East Pakistan in a military overwhelmingly
dominated by West Pakistanis. There was a similar disparity in representation within the civil
service. Although a quota system was later instituted, the disparity persisted at the higher levels
throughout the 1960s.
In 1954 a major and violent strike occurred at the Adamjee Jute Mill in Narayanganj, a suburb
of Dhaka. In addition to disputes over pay and labor practices, the East Pakistani workers felt
that the company was showing favoritism to Urdu-speaking Biharis in employment. Bihari is a
general term applied to those Urduspeaking Muslims, most of them from the Indian state of
Bihar, who fled east at the time of partition but who never learned to speak Bengali. In addition,
the East Pakistani strikers were protesting the fact that the majority of East Pakistan's
manufacturing and banking firms were owned by West Pakistanis, among whom the Adamjee
family was prominent.
12
13. The leading Muslim political party in Bengal prior to Pakistan's independence had been the
Muslim League, which dominated the Bengal Provincial Assembly. At the time of
independence, the sitting members of the Bengal Provincial Assembly chose their future
membership in either the assembly of West Bengal in India or the assembly of East Bengal in
Pakistan. The Muslim League maintained control. Although elections were held in each of the
provinces of the west wing as early as 1951, elections in East Bengal were delayed until 1954.
The election, when it was finally held, resulted in an almost total rout of the Muslim League,
which was looked upon locally as a proxy of the central government.
The winning coalition in East Pakistan was comprised of the Awami League and the Krishak
Sramik (Farmers and Workers) Party. The principal founder of the Awami League was Husain
Shahid Suhrawardy. The Krishak Sramik Party was led by Fazlul Haq. Haq had been a prime
minister of united Bengal (i.e., prior to independence) when his party was known as the Krishak
Praja (Farmers and Peoples) Party. For the 1954 election, the Awami League and the Krishak
Sramik Party joined forces as the United Front and ran for office on a platform called "21
Points." Among the issues addressed by the coalition were the recognition of Bengali as an
official language of Pakistan; autonomy for East Bengal in all matters except defense, foreign
affairs, and currency; land reform; improved irrigation; nationalization of the jute industry; and
other points that, if enacted into law, would give East Bengalis greater control of their own
governance.
The demand that Bengali be recognized as an official language was an outgrowth of the
language movement of 1952. Since the early days of independence, East Pakistanis had
demanded that Pakistan recognize two official languages: Bengali (the most widely spoken
language) and Urdu. An attempt by the central government to devise a means to write Bengali in
the Urdu script was met with widespread opposition and rioting, mainly from academics and
university students. On February 21, 1952, in an attempt to suppress the violence, the police
fired on a crowd of demonstrators, and about twenty students were killed. Today, a monument
stands at the site of the killings, and February 21 is celebrated annually as Martyrs' Day.
For its championing of this and other issues important to the majority of East Pakistanis, the
Krishak Sramik–Awami League coalition won the 1954 election. Eventually, however, the
Krishak Sramik Party withered away, and the Awami League became the most important party
in the province. It would become the leader of the independence movement and dominate
emerging Bangladeshi politics.
In October 1958 General Muhammad Ayub Khan proclaimed himself president of Pakistan
following a military coup, declared martial law, and dissolved the National Assembly and the
provincial legislatures. He then set up what he called "Basic Democracy," which he described as
a more representative government. Elections at the local level would be direct, and those elected
at this level would be designated Basic Democrats. Elections for the provincial and national
assemblies and for the presidency would be indirect, with the Basic Democrats serving as the
electoral college. He retained the principle of parity, however. This meant that each province
was allocated an equal number of Basic Democrat electors, so that East Pakistanis continued to
be underrepresented at the higher levels of government. Not unexpectedly, Ayub was elected
president in 1962 and reelected president in 1967. Although he won majorities in each wing in
each election, his majority in the east wing in 1967 was dramatically less than in 1962.
13
14. Nonetheless, Ayub's power began to slip after his reelection to office, as did his health.
Opposition to his rule spread, even in West Pakistan. Ayub grew concerned about a growing
secessionist movement in East Pakistan. The Awami League, now headed by Sheik Mujibur
Rahman, demanded that changes be made in regard to East Pakistan. These changes were
embodied in Mujib's Six Points Plan, which he presented at a meeting of opposition parties in
Lahore in 1966. In brief, these Six Points called for:
1. A federal and parliamentary government with free and fair elections;
2. Federal government to control only foreign affairs and defense;
3. A separate currency or separate fiscal accounts for each province, to control
movement of capital from east to west;
4. All power of taxation to reside at the provincial level, with the federal government
subsisting on grants from the provinces;
5. Enabling each federating unit to enter into foreign trade agreements on its own and
to retain control over the foreign exchange earned; and
6. Allowing each unit to raise its own militia.
If these points had been adopted, it would have meant almost de facto independence for East
Pakistan. Many observers saw point six, a separate militia, as the point most unacceptable to the
central government, but they were wrong. The 1965 Indo-Pakistan War had demonstrated the
lack of local defense forces in East Pakistan, which would have left the province defenseless had
India attacked there. In fact, it was point four, regarding taxation, that proved to be the problem,
because the enactment of this point would make it all but impossible for a central government to
operate.
In 1968, in response to the Six Points Plan, the Ayub government charged Mujib and his
supporters with treason. This later became known as the Agartala Conspiracy Case, so-called as
it was alleged that Mujib had met with Indian agents in Agartala, the capital of the Indian state
of Tripura, which borders on Bangladesh. Mujib and the Awami League denied that any such
meeting had ever taken place. In early 1969, as hostility to Ayub increased in both East and
West Pakistan, he invited opposition leaders to meet with him. Mujib, having been jailed
awaiting his trial for treason, was not invited to this meeting. The opposition leaders refused to
come to the meeting unless the charges against Mujib were withdrawn and demanded that he,
too, be invited to attend. Ayub complied with these demands. The meeting, which Ayub hoped
would work to his advantage, instead strengthened the opposition's position, which called for the
end of the policy of Basic Democracy and the return to direct parliamentary elections.
The opposition movement expanded beyond the political sphere to the military, and Ayub was
forced to resign on March 25, 1969. He was replaced by General Agha Muhammad Yahya
Khan, who promised to reinstate direct elections. These were held in December 1970 in most of
the country, but flooding in East Pakistan forced a few constituencies to delay their elections
until January 1971. In addition to reinstating free and direct elections, Yahya also acted to
restore the former provinces of West Pakistan, which had been united into a single unit by the
1956 constitution. More important for East Pakistan, he ended the principle of parity. In the
1970 election for the National Assembly, East Pakistan would have 162 general seats out of a
total of 300, reflecting the 54 percent majority that Bengalis enjoyed according to the 1961
population census.
14
15. Yahya also introduced legislation that, in his view, would limit the changes that could be made
to the constitution by the National Assembly. This legislation, called the Legal Framework
Order, touched upon seven points:
1. That Pakistan would be a federated state;
2. Islamic principles would be paramount;
3. Direct and regular elections would be held;
4. Fundamental rights would be guaranteed;
5. The judiciary would be independent;
6. Maximum provincial autonomy would be allowed, "but the federal government
shall also have adequate powers, including legislative, administrative, and financial
powers, to discharge its responsibilities"; and
7. Economic disparities among provinces would be removed.
The result of the election in East Pakistan startled outside observers, and even took some
supporters of the Awami League by surprise. The party won 160 of the 162 seats in East
Pakistan, thereby gaining a majority in the National Assembly without winning a single seat in
West Pakistan, which had thrown its support behind the Pakistan People's Party, led by Zulfiqar
Ali Bhutto. Neither Yahya, nor his military associates, nor Bhutto looked favorably on a
government comprised solely of the Awami League and headed by the author of the Six Points
Plan. Yahya began a series of negotiations, perhaps in the hope of creating a coalition
government, but more in an effort to sideline Mujib. As the talks became more rancorous and
compromise seemed impossible, the Pakistani government began to increase the strength of its
rather small contingent of military forces stationed in East Pakistan.
Yahya negotiated with Bhutto and Mujib, the former declaring that there were "two majorities"
in Pakistan, and the latter insisting on the full enactment of the Six Points, even where these
were at variance with Yahya's Legal Framework Order (i.e., on the issues of taxation).
Demonstrations supporting the Awami League's position spread across East Pakistan. Violence
began to look more attractive than political activism as a means of protecting East Pakistan's
interests. By this time, the term Bangladeshi was widely adopted by the Awami League and its
supporters to replace the designation East Pakistani.
The army struck back on March 25, 1971. Its first move was to attack the faculty and students at
Dhaka University and to take Mujib into custody. By one estimate, up to 35,000 Bangladeshis
were killed at the university and elsewhere on the first few days. Mujib was transported to jail in
West Pakistan. (There were fears that he would be executed, but these later proved unfounded
when he was released at the end of the conflict.) A number of Mujib's associates fled, first to a
village on the border with India, then to Calcutta. Major Ziaur Rahman, who would later become
president of independent Bangladesh, issued a declaration of independence.
Bangladeshi police and border patrol forces organized a resistance force to oppose the Pakistani
army, and they were later joined by several civilians, many of whom had been university
students. It was, however, almost nine months before India intervened, triggering the December
16, 1971, surrender of the Pakistani army. India intervened both for strategic reasons (as
weakening Pakistan) and for humanitarian reasons, to alleviate the suffering of Bangladeshis.
15
16. Pakistan complained about India's invasion of its sovereign territory to the UN Security Council
in early December. In an often emotional speech, Bhutto argued, with reason, that this
intervention was a violation of international law. The Security Council agreed, but the question
soon became moot with the surrender of the Pakistani troops in Bangladesh.
The number of Bangladeshis killed, disabled, raped, or displaced by the violence of 1971 is not
fully known. Estimates by Bangladeshi sources put the number killed at up to three million, and
it is estimated that as many as ten million may have fled to India. Initially, the Pakistani army
targeted educators, students, political leaders, and others who were generally considered to be
prominent sympathizers of the Awami League. As the Bangladeshis formed military units,
however, these units also became the targets. Some of these units were formed by Bangladeshis
who had formerly served in the Pakistani army; others were recruited from the police and the
East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) Rifles, a border security force. These units, based in rural and
outlying areas of Bangladesh, were able to take advantage of the Pakistani army's initial focus
on the student-led demonstrations in the Dhaka region. Survivor accounts, such as that by
Jahanara Imam, suggest that much of the killing soon devolved into little more than
indiscriminate slaughter.
The Pakistani surrender and the termination of conflict left several unsettled questions. Many
Bangladeshis—mostly civil servants or military troops and their families—were still detained in
Pakistan. In Bangladesh, there were non-Bengalis—again, mostly civil servants or military
troops, but also some business owners and professionals—who wished repatriation to Pakistan.
In addition, the fate of de facto prisoners of war held by Bangladesh, and Pakistani prisoners of
war held by India had yet to be decided. Bangladesh wanted to place 195 Pakistani military
personnel on trial for war crimes and genocide. On August 9, 1975, a tripartite agreement
between Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan was reached to create a panel that would attempt to
settle these issues. Bangladesh also agreed to drop all charges against the 195 Pakistanis accused
of war crimes and to permit their repatriation to Pakistan.
In the end, and at great cost, Bangladesh achieved its independence. Slowly, the two countries
were able to establish diplomatic relations. Pakistan recognized Bangladesh as independent on
February 22, 1974, primarily at the urging of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC),
which was meeting in Lahore at that time. The OIC insisted that Bangladesh, a Muslim state, be
permitted to attend the conference. Bangladeshis, however, remained unsatisfied. They wanted
an apology from the Pakistanis for the excesses committed during the war. They received one
finally from the Pakistani president, Pervez Musharraf, when he visited Bangladesh in July
2002.
16
17. Age-Sex Structure of the Population
A population's age-sex structure is the number and/or proportion of the population to be found in
each age-sex group. If each population could be got together for a day and lined up in their age
groups - females at one end, males at the other, a plane flying overhead would look down on a
certain shape.
There are many different ways to graphically present population data. The most important
demographic characteristic of a population is its age-sex structure, and the use of an age-sex
pyramid, also known as a population pyramid, is considered the best way to graphically
illustrate the age and sex distribution of a given population.
An age-sex pyramid consists of two horizontal histograms joined together. It displays the
percentage or actual amount of a population broken down by gender and age. The five-year age
increments on the y-axis allow the pyramid to vividly reflect both long-term trends in the birth
and death rates, and shorter-term baby-booms, wars, and epidemics.
The fertility rate of a population is the single most important influence on the shape of a
population pyramid. The more children per parent, the broader will be the base of the pyramid.
The median age of the population will also be younger. While mortality will also have an
influence on the shape, it will be far less important an influence than fertility, but somewhat
more complex. One would assume that lower mortality rates in a population would result in an
older age distribution. However, just the opposite is true: a population with lower mortality rates
will display a slightly younger age distribution. This is due to the fact that any disparities in the
mortality rates of a population are more likely a result of variations within the younger age
groups, usually infants and children.
There are generally three types of population pyramids created from age-sex distributions:
expansive, constrictive and stationary. Examples of these three types of population pyramids
appear at the end of this report. Definitions of the three types follow.
1. Expansive population pyramids show larger numbers or percentages of the population in
the younger age groups, usually with each age group smaller in size or proportion than
the one born before it. These types of pyramids are usually found in populations with
very large fertility rates and lower than average life expectancies. The age-sex
distributions of Latin American and many Third World countries would probably display
expansive population pyramids.
The following figure is an example of such an age-sex pyramid. This pyramid of the
Philippines shows a triangle-shaped pyramid and reflects a high growth rate of about 2.1
percent annually.
17
18. 2. Constrictive population pyramids display lower numbers or percentages of younger
people. The age-sex distributions of the United States fall into this type of pyramid.
In the United States, the population is growing at a rate of about 1.7 percent annually.
This growth rate is reflected in the more square-like structure of the pyramid. Note the
lump in the pyramid between the ages of about 35 to 50. This large segment of the
population is the post-World War II baby boom. As this population ages and climbs up
the pyramid, there will be a much greater demand for medical and other geriatric
services.
3. Stationary or near-stationary population pyramids display somewhat equal numbers or
percentages for almost all age groups. Of course, smaller figures are still to be expected
at the oldest age groups. The age-sex distributions of some European countries,
especially Scandinavian ones, will tend to fall into this category.
Germany is experiencing a period of negative growth (-0.1%). As negative growth in a
country continues, the population is reduced. A population can shrink due to a low birth
rate and a stable death rate. Increased emigration may also contribute to a declining
population.
18
19. Bangladesh
Age:
Age structure:
0–14 years: 32.9% (male 24,957,997/female 23,533,894)
15–64 years: 63.6% (male 47,862,774/female 45,917,674)
65 years and over: 3.5% (male 2,731,578/female 2,361,435) (2006 est..)
Median age: 23.3 years
Male: 22.9 years
Female: 23.5 (2009 est.)
Gender ratio
At birth: 1.04 male(s)/female
Under 15 years: 1.01 male(s)/female
15–64 years: 0.9 male(s)/female
65 years and over: 0.94 male(s)/female
Total population: 0.93 male(s)/female (2009 est.)
Bangladesh Population Pyramid for 1995
Age and sex distribution for the year 1995:
19
20. Bangladesh Population Pyramid for 2010
A Definition of Migration
The definition of the word can be "the movement of people from one place to another". There
are two main types of migration: first, internal migration, i.e. migration within one country, and
secondly international migration, which means the movement from one country to another. A
good example of internal migration is the movement from East Germany to West Germany,
which causes big problems for East Germany. A good example of international migration is the
movement from third-world countries to Europe or America. The next question is: What makes
people migrate from one place to another?
The reasons for migration can be divided into two main aspects, the so-called "push" and "pull"
factors.
Push factors are those in their old place which force people to move. For example, there may be
civil wars or wars in general in the country, but political or religious oppression, climate
changes, lack of jobs or simply poverty are all important push factors.
Pull factors are factors in the target country which encourage people to move; these include
peace and safety, a chance of a better job, better education, social security, a better standard of
living in general as well as political and religious freedom.
Calculation:
MIGRATION = M
M ( P2 P ) ( B D)
1
M=Total Migrations
P Initial Population
1
P2 Final Population
B=Total birth during the time period
D=Total Death
20
21. Pattern of rural urban migration in Bangladesh
Migration, Rural-Urban Migration is a flexible and dynamic phenomenon that encompasses
territorial mobility of the people and involves movements like commuting, absence from home
place for periods from a couple of days to several years, seasonal migration and permanent
relocation. Although diversified in forms, it involves a certain degree of commitment on the part
of migrants to the place of origin and of destination. This shows whether the migration is of
permanent or non-permanent nature. Non-permanent forms of migration are now becoming
increasingly important given the massive improvement in the transportation networks and in the
information technology. Migration is one of the vital forces that contribute to rapid urbanization
generally associated with higher levels of productivity and development.
Migration also plays an important role by linking people with spaces and transferring people
from places of lower opportunities to those of higher opportunities and a subsequent transfer of
resources. Bangladesh is one of the few countries where remittances from temporary migrants
working abroad contribute nearly 10% to the GDP and finance a substantial proportion of trade
deficit. For rural areas, remittances constitute a form of income, which not only helps in
sustenance of families but also cushions against income erosion, a recurrent threat faced by poor
households.
In the 90 years between 1901 and 1991, the urban POPULATION of the country increased almost
30 times (from 702,000 to 21.56 million) as opposed to only about a three-fold increase (30.7 to
88.3 million) of the rural population. The urban population grew at an annual rate of 1 - 2%
during the British period (1757-1947) and about 4% during the Pakistan period (1947-1971).
The relatively low rate of urbanization during the British period can be explained by the slow
pace of industrialization. With the growth of JUTE and TEXTILES industries, mainly in Dhaka and
its surrounding areas, urbanization accelerated during 1951-1961. The rate of urbanization
increased sharply after liberation of Bangladesh. This was associated with spread of economic
and commercial activities in the urban centers. The number of urban centers rose dramatically
from 78 in 1961 to 198 in 1974 and 522 in 1991.
Before 1974, there was no city in Bangladesh that had a population of one million or more but
now DHAKA emerged as a mega city with a population of around 10 million. Distribution of the
urban population over the years reveals significant increases in the size of four major cities
(Dhaka, Chittagong, Rajshahi and Khulna), particularly in recent years. In the first half of this
century, they contained around a third of the total urban population and in 1991, about 50% of
them lived in these cities. The level of urbanization raised from a very low base (7.6%) in 1970
to 20% in the 1990s. The annual growth rate of urban population in Bangladesh during 1975-
1995 was 3.4%, which is higher than that in the neighboring countries and in other largely
populated countries of Asia.
The rural-urban migration along with reclassification contributes nearly 60% to the urban
growth. Rural-urban migration occurs in a particular type of setting marked by limited industrial
but rapid commerce-centered growth around major cities, especially after the liberation.
Empirical evidence suggests that the development of road infrastructure and transportation and
the rapid expansion of manufacturing, trade, hotel and restaurants, and housing and construction
generated demand for unskilled and semi-skilled labor in these cities. This had dramatically
increased migration for job-related reasons. Also the unequal land relations and loss of land due
to natural calamities influence the spatial movement of population. Available statistics suggest
that top 10% of the rural households controlled 51% of land and had a share of 32% of the total
income. The share of the bottom 40% of the households was 2% and 16% of land and income
respectively. Subsequently, three-quarters of rural out-migration occurred from landless
21
22. households. However, there had been many cases of migration from the landowning households,
the members of which migrated to maximize income from diversified sources and the migration
remained largely non-permanent in nature.
Most male migrants from rural areas were agricultural laborers at their original places. Rural-
urban migration also takes place from the districts that had better performing agricultural sector
and this is particularly witnessed in the case of migration to Dhaka city. A great deal of
population mobility results from survival and adaptive strategies to maximize family income by
allocating their labor in diversified income earning activities to a number of locations. Migration
of independent women has been on rise since middle of 1980s as a result of establishment of
export oriented garment manufacturing factories in Dhaka and Chittagong. In the 1970s,
educational selectivity and population density played an important role in the process of rural-
urban migration. Micro-level surveys show bi-polar pattern of educational selectivity suggesting
that both the highly educated and illiterate sections of people have a great propensity to migrate
as both groups undertake equal risks in this regard.
Along with education, other characteristics of migrants such as age, gender, marital status, roles
and responsibilities assumed in the family, and resource endowment (particularly, landholding)
play an important role in migration motivation. Role of social networks as sources of
information prior to migration and other aids and assistance at the place of destination emerged
as a pre-condition for migration. Similarly, rapid expansion of the rural non-farm activities and
greater value addition in these activities in urban sector fail to support the thesis that high
population density determines the migratory flows in Bangladesh. Migration is rather induced by
jobs available in a particular area and the laws that regulate employment there, the threat of
income erosion, level of development of physical and infrastructural facilities, and
mechanization of agriculture.
Rural-urban migration often leads to a broad range of consequences both beneficial and
detrimental, and also mixed in the receiving and sending communities. In terms of employment
and cash earnings, existing evidence weighs heavily in favour of migration. The flow of
remittances contributes significantly to the welfare of the relatives left behind by the temporary
migrants in rural areas. The migrants now residing in the slums of the Dhaka city tend to spend
increasingly more of their earnings in nutritious food and children's education.
Yet school enrollment of slum children (6-14 years) is much lower (around 35%) than their age
cohorts from rural landless households (nearly 50%). Similarly, infant mortality rate in the urban
slums is comparable with rural areas. In the absence of government intervention and adequate
NGO support to improve basic social services and human resources development in urban areas,
the urban poor, especially poor women, are more susceptible to health and environmental
hazards than their non-poor counterparts. Poor migrant households also face potential threat of
income-erosion arising out of eviction, extortion by musclemen, frequent sickness and sexual
harassment of women. However, contrary to the conventional wisdom, migrants living in urban
poor agglomerations do manage access to urban amenities such as gas, electricity and water
through informal sources.
Persistent migration from rural areas to a few large cities has serious implications for the level of
productivity, the state of urban infrastructure and environmental conditions since with migrants
cities grow faster than the capacity of the economy to support them. Whilst rapid and huge
growth of urban population exacerbates the growing degradation, the inability to enforce basic
cannons of cost recovery in delivering basic amenities, lack of coordination among different
service giving agencies, and weak capacity and inadequate authority of the city corporations and
municipalities are the major causes of the environmental problem.
22
