WOMEN ON THE MOVE:

GENDER AND CROSS-BORDER MIGRATION TO SOUTH AFRICA

by:

Belinda Dodson

Southern African Migration Project

Migration Policy Series No. 9

PLEASE NOTE: Readers are welcome to reproduce and reference
this article as long as appropriate acknowledgments are given.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The traditional pattern of cross-border migration in the Southern African region has been one of impermanent (if long-term) labour migration of black males to South Africa from other Southern African countries. Yet it is likely that parallel female migration to South Africa has been underestimated, being of tenuous legality and therefore deliberately covert. In addition, female migration from outside the country appears to have undergone a significant increase since 1994. This study examines the experiences of women in relation to cross-border migration and compares these experiences to those of men. Among the questions it seeks to answer are:

• Who migrates?
• Why do women migrate to South Africa?
• What are the spatial and temporal patterns of female compared to male migration?
• Does the economic behaviour of female migrants differ from that of men?
• What are the social experiences of women migrants?
• How do men and women perceive the impacts of migration (male and female) at the individual, household, community and national scale?

The analysis is based on data from surveys conducted by the Southern African Migration Project (SAMP) in Lesotho, Zimbabwe and Mozambique in mid-1997. Findings reveal that Southern African women’s experience of migration differs from that of men in a number of ways:

• In terms of who migrates, it is apparent that migration to South Africa is still heavily male-biased, with a far lower incidence of migration experience among female respondents. Those women who do have migration experience tend to be married, older women rather than younger single women, whereas male migrants come from a wider range of age groups and marital status categories. Female migrants tend to be better-educated than their male counterparts, with lack of education seeming to discourage female mobility while encouraging male mobility.

• Men and women migrate to South Africa for different reasons. Men go primarily in search of employment, whereas women’s migration is driven by a wide range of social and reproductive factors in addition to economic incentives. Even the economic motives for migration are gender-specific, with women going to South Africa largely to trade and men to work, most in formal employment.

• Related to the differences in the purpose of migration, men and women go to different destinations in South Africa. Male migration is closely tied to places of employment, notably the mines, whereas female migration is to towns and cities offering opportunities for informal-sector trade and the procurement of a range of goods and services.

• The decision process and physical logistics of female migration differ from those of men. Women are less likely to migrate independently, and are more likely to be subject to the will of a (male) parent or partner in determining whether they migrate. In addition, although women’s migration cannot be seen merely as an adjunct to male migration, women’s migration is still commonly tied to that of men, with many women travelling to South Africa for the express purpose of visiting male family members. Women visit South Africa for shorter time periods, and are more likely than men to migrate legally.

• The social and economic behaviour of people migrating to South Africa is gender-specific, reflecting the different motivations and patterns of male and female migration. Men are more likely to have established social networks in South Africa, arising from their longer periods of stay in single locations and their ties to workplace-based social structures. Men participate more formally in the South African economy, while women’s migration experience is shaped by the temporary and contingent social and economic interactions involved in trading and retail activity. Both genders, migrants and non-migrants alike, hold generally favourable impressions of life in South Africa, although they would still generally prefer to remain in their home country.

• The impacts of migration, both positive and negative, are well understood by the men and women affected. But it was women with personal migration experience who were more likely to rate the impact of migration as negative. The economic benefits of migration are achieved at considerable social cost, with disruptions to family and community life. Both male and female respondents were also well aware of the national cost of migration through the loss of skills to the local economy, but nevertheless continue to support and participate in migration as a rational household reproduction strategy in a situation of limited alternative options.

Comparing the findings to those in other developing countries shows a number of parallels. As elsewhere, men in Southern Africa are more mobile than women, and it is women who are more often "left behind". The women left behind are disadvantaged in various ways by male out-migration, which may bring in earnings but adds to women’s productive and reproductive responsibilities at home. Certainly men’s migration in the region is undertaken more independently than that by women, although both are better understood as part of a "household strategies" approach. As in the international experience, male migration here is more closely tied to employment, and women have fewer legal employment opportunities than men in the South African labour market. Related to these gender-specific motivations for migration, men move further and to a wider range of destinations.

Two fundamental points emerge from this analysis:

• The migration experience in Southern Africa is deeply and profoundly gendered. To a long-established tradition of male labour migration is being added a growing stream of female migrants, coming to South Africa for a number of different reasons, both social and economic.

• The different motives and patterns of male and female migration arise from structural determinants in the social and economic fabric of source and recipient countries. Any sound migration policy therefore has to go hand-in-hand with regional development initiatives.

In addition, a number of specific guidelines for policy on gender and migration are suggested:

• Female migrants are law-abiding, responsible, entrepreneurial and resourceful women, who employ cross-border movement as a mechanism for their own and their families’ betterment. Current migration policy, together with a host of entrenched social norms and practices, discriminates against women in all sorts of ways, limiting their life choices and restricting their physical and socio-economic mobility. Migration policy should instead aim to facilitate female migration, thus aiding women’s empowerment and allowing them to become agents of development both in their home countries and in South Africa.

• Policy should be formulated not in terms of atomistic, genderless "persons" but in terms of men and women with specific biological, legal and social relationships. Cross-border migration, even when it is undertaken by individuals, takes place within a social framework, with implications for families, households and communities. Policy must not merely accommodate but actively encourage links between migrants and their families and communities "back home"; for example, by making it easy for migrants to make return visits and for family and friends to visit foreign migrants in South Africa.

• One category of female migrant that should be actively encouraged is women who come to South Africa for the purposes of trading and shopping. The latter activity certainly injects cash into the South African economy, and while there are complaints that foreign informal-sector traders undercut their South African counterparts, this competition must surely be part of the movement towards freer trade in the SADC region.

• The perpetuation of male foreign migrant labour on mines and farms to the virtual exclusion of female migrant labour is clearly discriminatory. Equitable opportunity for legal participation in the South African labour market by citizens of other Southern African countries, while difficult to achieve, should nevertheless be one of the objectives of migration policy, with particular attention being paid to the expansion of opportunities for women.

• In the formulation and drafting of policy and legislation, care must be taken to ensure that the adoption of gender-neutral language does not serve unintentionally to discriminate against women. Further, the drafting of non-sexist migration policy must be carried into the actual day-to-day implementation of that policy by officials.

Each of the above recommendations has development implications. While it is a common view that migration undermines development, with a loss of skills from source countries and an over-supply of labour in the recipient country, the pattern of "to-and-fro" migration practiced by Southern African women can serve to facilitate positive socio-economic change. Allowing women freer access to South Africa would encourage the exchange of goods, services and ideas that constitutes the very engine of development, and there is little to suggest that a more open migration policy would result in an unmanageable influx of women (or men) into the country. Indeed female migration to South Africa could be a mechanism for reducing both spatial and gender-based inequalities in the region, empowering women to be agents of development both in their home countries and in South Africa itself.