Migration and Household Welfare: An Empirical Study of Left-Behind Families in Rural India

Migration and Household Welfare: An Empirical Study of Left-Behind Families in Rural India

Dr Niti Arora

Associate Professor-Economics Mata Sundri College for Women University of Delhi

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.909000016

Received: 10 September 2025; Accepted: 16 September 2025; Published: 26 September 2025

ABSTRACT

This research examines socio-economic and non-economic effects of migration on left-behind families in India. A research design of descriptive and analytical research method was adopted in which 400 households were sampled using structured questionnaires as method of data collection. Its results indicate a quite strong positive effect of migration on household income, improved spending on education and medical services, and leads to the overall improved economic welfare. Nevertheless, this is not without burdens and emotional demands, more responsibilities, mostly on women, and psychological pressure to children. The confirmation of the dual-prong nature of the impacts of migration is seen through statistical outcomes of paired t-tests, chi-square test and regression analysis. This study indicates that though migration is a significant livelihood strategy, specific policy interventions are required to deal with non-economic issues of families that are left behind. The study also provides beneficial information to policy formulators, social workers, and practitioners, as well as philanthropies involved in rural development who may benefit by learning how to code a comprehensive approach to migrant-sending areas.

Keywords: Migration, Left-behind Families, Household Welfare, Remittances, Emotional Impact, Gender Roles, Socio-economic Effect

INTRODUCTION

Migration is a very important socio-economic aspect in the developing world especially in India where rural-urban and inter-state migration is a living reality. A majority of people are forced to move to the city or other countries in search of a better job and they leave their whole family in the countryside. This left-behind family phenomena attracts crucial attention as to the effects of migration on the welfare of households, particularly in terms of income, consumption, education, health, and mental state.

Migration is mostly a way of life by rural households in India as a form of livelihood in a bid to find a way out of poverty and unemployment as well as agricultural scarcity (Deshingkar & Grimm, 2005). The incomes (remittances) of the migrant members can take the rural households to a better level in terms of improving the levels of consumption, availabilities of education as well as healthcare services (Czaika & Vothknecht, 2014). Nevertheless, labour shortage, work load of women, emotional upset of relatives, and inability to make decisions within the house hold could also occur when the primary earning or an adult male person is absent (Toyota, Yeoh, & Nguyen, 2007).

Researches have reported the cause as well as the negative impacts of migration on households left behind. As an example, Lokshin and Glinskaya (2009) discovered that in Nepal attendance of children in school rose in the household of migrants who have better income but their emotional and care giving support usually went down. Also in India, it was observed that migration-based remittances helped in asset generation and poverty elimination in some regions, but not all across states or caste categories (Tumbe, 2011; De Haan, 2011). The implication of this is that the welfare consequences of migration are always dependent on the context and mediated by a multiplicity of socio-economic factors such as caste, gender and type of employment at the destination.

Although there is increased literature on migration, there still exists a research gap on a detailed appreciation of the subtle ways in which migration affects households left behind, especially in rural India. The majority of existing literature focuses on urban slums, rights of migrant labourers, or remittance flows but less literature can be found about the long-term welfare consequences of the left behind families.

This paper attempts to fill that gap by empirically analysing how migration has influenced different aspects of household welfare in the left-behind families (in rural India). Due to the use of a descriptive and analytical methodology by utilizing primary data obtained by means of a method of structured questionnaires, the paper should provide some answers as to how migration transforms the well-being of rural households, both materialistically and otherwise.

Objectives

• To examine the socio-economic impact of migration on the welfare of left-behind families in rural India
• To analyse the non-economic consequences of migration on left-behind family members

Hypothesis

The research aims to test the following hypothesis:

• H1: Migration has a significant positive impact on the overall household welfare of left-behind families in rural India

LITERATURE REVIEW

Migration has become to be treated as the main theme in the development discourse of India, especially focusing on the rural life and household patterns. As far as migration presents an economic potential due to remittances, its effect on the left-behind families is still complicated and multidimensional. An increasing literature has looked into the consequences of migration on different welfare outcomes of households including health, education, gender roles and structures in society.

Khatri (2007) evaluated the experience of Nepalese migrants and identified correlations in rural Indian settings and noted that migration has a tendency to enhance financial stability but at the same time interferes with the most effective relationship, ability to give and receive care, and family forms. According to Antman (2012), gendered faculty of migrations is evident in Mexico and in most cases paternal migrations bring more responsibilities and authority to the home front. In India, similar trends were noticed, as women take up new roles in financial matters and decisions made regarding the education of children (Dmurger & Wang, 2016).

Migration has also been associated with the shift in the household consumption as well as the investment behaviour. In the cross-country study conducted by Adams and Cuecuecha (2013), the authors noted that there would be greater remittances to be spent on the human capital investment, namely education, and health, as opposed to consumption per se. This is because in the rural set up in India, there is a support of the migrant households that point towards greater spending on education and medical expenses and a higher allocation to long-run welfare measures, a fact substantiated by Bhandari and Roy (2007). Nevertheless, psychological pricing of migration, particularly, social isolation, anxiety and emotional stress, is an underexplored concept in the Indian context even though dealt with in the world migration literature (Lu, 2012).

Moreover, research findings have underlined the migration outcome disparity with different regions, casts, and types of migration. As an example, Dutta and Sahu (2018) concluded that in Eastern India, the long-term welfare was minimal when circular and seasonal migration was involved because remittance flows were not stable and lacked formal support structures which made the households vulnerable. On the other hand, long term migration patterns with non-volatile remittance periods had a positive effect on asset building and household stability.

Although the literature at hand informs us a lot about the effects of the migration process, the majority of the given studies have the approach wherein many either concentrate on the usage of remittances or the status of migrants in the destinations. Even lesser have embarked on holistic evaluation of the long-term welfare implication of those left behind in the rural India. The reason behind the study is to fill in that gap by assessing economic and emotional aspects of household welfare in left-behind families.

Research Gap

Although we have a budding literature about remittances and better consumption habits, there exists a gap of knowledge in the effect of migration on the welfare of the left-behind families in the rural part of India in the long run. Earlier research has tended to fix either on the economic aspects of migration in terms of income and investment on the one hand; or on the situation of the migrant at destination on the other; and the emotional, social and gender-related implications of migration on left behind household members is relatively less studied. Besides, the regional variances, the matter of castes and the migration patterns and other disparities like permanent or seasonal migration have not been effectively dealt in a coherent empirical model. This paper aims to address this lacuna by looking into the economic as well as non-economic consequences of migration on left behind families in different rural environments in India, which can understand the overall picture of how migration transforms household-welfare.

METHODOLOGY

The descriptive and analytical research design was used in this research to look at how migration has affected condition of left-behind families in rural India. Structured questionnaire was used to administer the primary data using the following sampling of respondents taken in a sample of rural households which had at least one migrating member in the family. Multistage sampling technique was used, to represent the regions, and the sample size of 400 households, was calculated according to the standard statistical formulae of population proportion. The collected data consisted of economic and non-economic indicators (in terms of income, remittances, and expenditure patterns and education levels, healthcare, emotional well-being, and gender roles). Descriptive statistics was employed in depicting the demographic and the welfare parameters and, inferential statistical methods like t-test, chi-square test, and regression analysis were applied in measuring the effect of migration impact on household welfare outcomes.

The socio-economic impact of migration on the welfare of left-behind families

The socio-economic impact of migration on the welfare of the left-behind families in rural India is both positive and negative, though the former is greater than the latter. The economic impacts tend to make the household income better in terms of access to nutrition, education, health and enhanced living conditions with the inflow of remittances. Families can either invest in the education of children, accumulate assets, or abandon reliance on farming as an only option of making a living. Such gains, however, are not spread evenly and can depend on the frequency and the size of remittances, the stability of the migrant in terms of employment and socio-economic background of the household. Socially, migration may affect the family system between the migration source and the migration destination and force other (women and older persons) family members to take up more responsibilities, which has the effect of rearranging family roles. It can result in an emotional deterioration, since the migrant member will be separated on a long-term basis, which can result in mental stress, particularly among children and spouses. Thus, although migration is one of the most important mechanisms of economic mobility, its total effects on household welfare are mixed, and it is dependent on the intertwined economic benefits and social burdens.

Table 1 that follows shows comparative analysis of the average monthly household income of the left-behind families prior to the migration and also after it. The information also captures the monetary benefits of remittance sent by member of the family who migrates to another location, which they send back home pointing out changes in household levels of income.  Mean incomes values, as well as standard deviations play a role in the financial welfare of rural households. The relevance of this comparison is to be able to have an underpinning on the economic advantages of migration.

Table 1 Monthly Household Income Before and After Migration (in ₹)

Remittances had a prominent positive effect on the economy as shown by the fact that the average household income of left-behind families elevated to 69.1% after the migration. The difference was found to be significant (p < 0.01) in a paired t-test, and therefore the hypothesis is accepted that migration does enhance the levels of household income.

Fig. 1 Household Expenditure before and after migration

After migration, there was transfer of expenditure towards education (+9%), health care (+5%) and savings (+5%). This proves better financial stability and investment in human sustainable capital over the left-behind families.

Table 2: Socio-Economic Impact of Migration

The most significant statistical results of evaluating the effect of migration on the left-behind families in the rural Indian population can be seen in Table 2. A statistically significant positive change in the income of households after migration (t (399) = 19.45, p < 0.01) can also be demonstrated using the paired t-test, evidencing that the economic situation in the households greatly benefits due to remittances. As chi-square test (chi-square = 24.76, p < 0.01) indicates, there is significant change in household spending patterns (especially that of spending more in education) reflecting the change in financial priorities of the household as a result of increased income. There is also strong positive correlation between the amounts of remittance and household welfare (R Square = 0.51, p < 0.001) in the regression analysis that shows that the more remittance the better the welfare of the household with reference to multiple facets. Cumulatively, these findings highlight the fact that migration can be of great economic value to left-behind families but the magnitude of the improvement only depends on the size and frequency of remittance.

It may be seen that in regards to these tests, the null hypothesis (that migration would not have any significant effect on the household welfare) is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted.  Migration has a positive impact on the well-being of families in rural India, especially in terms of the improved income, more substantial present being given to the education, and improved access to health care delivery services.

The non-economic consequences of migration on left-behind family members

Migration does not just affect economic welfare of the rural households but there are extensive non-economic implications of the family members who are left behind. These effects are embodied as emotional pressures, family relationships, widening housework and changing social roles – especially that of women and children. Extended physical separation of a member of the household who has migrated usually the major adult or a bread-winner member of the family can cause psychological problems, loneliness and insecurity of the spouse, children and older dependent members. Women often have an obligation to play two roles; serving as care-givers and decision-makers and this can give them power in certain situations but also causes them to have more responsibility and more stress. The bereavement of a parent would leave a gap of emotions, which may affect the child and lead to academic or behavioural issues. Moreover, every traditional gender norm and social order may change with the household role change and occasionally, serve as a force of empowerment, yet in some cases, tension in the family or societal scrutiny. These non-economic outcomes are very important towards providing a comprehensive picture of the migration process altering the social structure of left behind families in rural India.

Fig. 2 gives figures showing the non-economic impact of migration on its victims, which is the left-behind family in rural India. The indicators are emotional stress, household burden, effects on children, shifts in responsibility of decision making and social stress. A five-point Likert scale was employed to collect responses and participants ranked to which extent they agreed with the statements. The figure indicates the level of impact that migration has on the emotional well-being of households, their social roles, and the psychological environment, which is very significant in pointing deeper insights into the larger social factors of the scale as compared to the financial factor.

Fig. 2 Emotional and Social Impact

As it is seen in Fig. 2 a large number of members left behind in the family have a substantial share of non-economic impacts as a result of the migration. Approximately 76.5 percent of the respondents indicated they were emotionally overwhelmed without the migrant member, and this means that many of them were psychologically strained. Most, 82.0%, prevailed that they increased their role in the household duties, expressing that migration brings with it a high level of household work especially to spouses and older family members. Besides, 68.2 percent of families witnessed emotional distress in children which was an indication of adverse effect of absence of a parent among the lowest ranked members of the household. Although 53.7 of the respondents indicated they had gained increased contact in the decision-making process in the household partly because of migration implying that the traditional roles as the household heads had been lost, almost 45.9 percent of the respondents also expressed the feeling of social pressure or scrutiny resulting out of the fact that they were being left alone to take care of the household. This indicates, in addition to the economic consequences, migration considerably changes the level of emotions, social, and roles distributions within the rural households.

Table 3 Statistical Summary

It is useful to focus on the major non-economic effects of migration on the family left behind with statistically revealing the impacts with the help of different tests. The statistical value of the one-sample t-test of emotional stress level in contrast to the neutral one (3.0) was t(399) = 16.74, p < 0.001, which means it was a significant difference between the emotional stress level in the respondents and the value of 3.0 as a neutral indicator. It proves the fact that the psychological distress is related to the absence of the member of the migrant family. The chi-square to determine association between gender and elevated household tasks yielded 28.95, chi square = (1, N = 400) p, < 0.01 to demonstrate that women are highly likely when compared to men to report the increment of household chores during and after migration. Lastly, the association between the topic of absence of a migrant and emotional problems in children was found to be strong positive (r = 0.62, p < 0.01) which means that the absence of the migrant longer the better children would not encounter any emotional issue. A combination of these bodies of findings emphasizes the notion that migration has both economic advantages and grave effects on non-economic factors of the families left behind, especially in the area of emotional well-being and role changes.

Besides the emotional pressure and the rise of household workload, migration influences the mental stability, social integration, and community involvement of the remaining family members. This lengthy analysis looks at the level or degree to which people feel secured psychologically, socially, and the feeling of community support when the migrant is absent. Its findings show that although some families can adjust as times goes by, most households experience a decline in their mental health, loss of interest in social life and lack of personal emotional or institutional sources of support. Women especially are also subjected to less engagement in other social and cultural activities because of the added responsibilities at home or even social stigma. The older members as well usually feel left out or used up by duties of looking after grandchildren. The given additional findings bring the necessity to discuss the problem of social isolation and mental support among the communities that are affected by rural migration.

Table 4 Indicators of Mental Health and Social Participation

Table 4 demonstrates that non-economic issues to the left-behind family members run high especially in relation to mental health and social participation. The prevalence of emotional distress was also high (72.8 percent of all respondents reported that they felt anxious or lonely very often after a family member had migrated). Also, 69.4 percent reported that they do not have time to look after themselves or even rest indicating that due to the heavier house load, their well-being is exposed to negative effects. Moreover, a majority of the respondents (65.5%) (most of them being women and elderly caregivers) reported that their caring role was overwhelming, including taking care of children and household tasks. The withdrawal to community life and feeling of social isolation was also revealed by more than half of the respondents (58.3%) who reported that they participated less in social and religious activities. These results should draw our attention to the fact that migration is not only a change of the structure of households but also a rather heavy psychological and social burden on the persons who stay, which has also a possible negative impact on the psychological and emotional well-being of people in the long term.

Table 5 Community Support and Coping Mechanisms

Table 5 shows that there is an absence of institutional support and community support system to left-behind families in rural areas. The 18.6 percentage of the respondents have access to emotional support groups and counselling services meaning that there is a significant breakdown in mental health infrastructure. Likewise, only 16.9 percent had been a recipient of any formal training or information on how to manage remittances or household finances indicating little financial literacy support even though there is more money to manage. Even though 42.7 of the respondents claim to have community support with extended family or neighbours in their everyday activities, nearly similar figure is 41.5 where a respondent does not have this kind of support, showing lack of uniform community participation. In addition, 39.4 percent had no idea of other families in their conditions and vicariously exchanged coping mechanisms, which is an indication of poor peer support systems and conversation at the community level on the migration-related issues. In general, the table highlights the necessity of well-organized support systems, including emotional and practical kinds, that could help left-behind families to overcome the non-economic costs of migration.

CONCLUSION

This paper examined socio-economic and non-economic consequences of migration on left-behind families in the rural parts of India using methodology to analyse the pattern. Findings indicate that migration enhances household welfare, including levels of income, rise in expenditures in education and access to healthcare, mainly contributed by remittances.

The study also indicates non-economic problems of the families especially the emotional burden, burdens on women, and the psychological effect of the children. The economic gain and social-emotional burden associated with the outcome of migrating presents a dual nature of migration gains and losses. The loss implies that though migration is an important tool in enhancing livelihood in rural areas, rural families experience the migration factor and implications as a multiplex issue at the family and community level. The study establishes that the welfare of households depends largely on the presence and absence of the migrant, and there is need to have a comprehensive picture before relevant mechanisms of support can be made.

RECOMMENDATIONS

There are some possible recommendations suggested according to the findings. Firstly, government and NGOs will need to institutionalize localized support systems (e.g. counselling services, community support groups and helplines) to help support left behind families (women and children) who are in desperate need of emotional and psychological support. Second, financial literacy programs are needed so as to enable the families to effectively manage the remittances and to invest on long-term welfare boosting activities such as education, health and savings. Third, policy structures must value and uphold the importance of the women who make professional steps in leadership and decision-making on behalf of the migrant, by training them with possibilities of empowerment and rural development schemes. Lastly, migration policies must be combined with rural welfare programs in order to make sure that families not only receive financial benefits but also remain safe in social and emotional sense of the term due to the fact that the long-term absence of family members.

Limitations of the Study

Although this study comes up with useful information concerning the socio-economic and non-economic effects of migration on the rural Indian left-behind families, it has limitations. To start with, the study rests on the self-reported findings gathered by structured questionnaires that could be prone to response errors of exaggeration or underreporting of the emotional or financial states. Secondly, only some rural areas are considered in the research which could make it hard to provide generalization of the results to the other areas having various migration patterns or social-cultural backgrounds. Thirdly, cross-sectional character of the study gives a picture at a given point of time and fails to consider the long run or dynamic relationship between household welfare on the one hand, and migration on the other. Fourth, the study tries to capture both economic and non-economic aspects but some qualitative losses like inter-personal relationships, dynamics of the society and the psychological outcomes in terms of long-term effects might not be able to be captured entirely using quantitative method over qualitative method. The limitations that can be overcome in future studies include the use of longitudinal and mixed-method due to the fact that they offer deeper and more comprehensive understanding.

Scope for Future Research

The results of this paper present a number of opportunities of future studies in the field of migration and household welfare. The longitudinal research design may also be used in the future research to capture the transformation of the household welfare over time and to learn how migration continues to have its effect. Also, analyses may be extended to comparisons among the different states or regions, or even different types of migration (e.g. seasonal migration versus permanent migration) to pick up regional differences and migration particularities. It is also possible to accomplish mixed-methods research, which can combine interviews of qualitative characteristics with surveys of quantitative nature and can discover more profound emotional, psychological, and social impact of migration that cannot be represented by numerical data only. Moreover, to follow up the study, one may explore how exactly return migration and reintegration of the migrants into the rural households affected the latter, and what the overall consequences of growing up in a migrant family were. Determining the effectiveness of policy interventions and social nets in nullifying the negative impacts on the left-behind families would also be beneficial to the governance and rural development planning processes.

REFERENCES

1. Czaika, M., & Vothknecht, M. (2014). Migration and aspirations–Are migrants trapped on a hedonic treadmill? IZA Journal of Migration, 3(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-9039-3-1
2. De Haan, A. (2011). Inclusive growth? Labour migration and poverty in India. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 54(3), 387–406.
3. Deshingkar, P., & Grimm, S. (2005). Internal migration and development: A global perspective. IOM Migration Research Series, No. 19.
4. Lokshin, M., & Glinskaya, E. (2009). The effect of male migration on employment patterns of women in Nepal. The World Bank Economic Review, 23(3), 481–507. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhp011
5. Toyota, M., Yeoh, B. S. A., & Nguyen, L. (2007). Bringing the ‘left behind’ back into view in Asia: A framework for understanding the ‘migration–left behind nexus’. Population, Space and Place, 13(3), 157–161. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.433
6. Tumbe, C. (2011). Remittances in India: Facts and issues. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 54(3), 579–593.
7. Adams, R. H., & Cuecuecha, A. (2013). The impact of remittances on investment and poverty in Ghana. World Development, 50, 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.04.009
8. Antman, F. M. (2012). Gender, educational attainment, and the impact of parental migration on children left behind. Journal of Population Economics, 25(4), 1187–1214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-011-0386-3
9. Bhandari, P., & Roy, D. (2007). Migrant workers in India: Insights from NSSO data. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(4), 3439–3445.
10. Démurger, S., & Wang, X. (2016). Remittances and expenditure patterns of the left-behind in rural China. China Economic Review, 37, 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2015.12.003
11. Dutta, D., & Sahu, P. K. (2018). Dynamics of migration and remittances in eastern India: Micro-level evidence. Migration and Development, 9(3), 456–478. https://doi.org/10.1080/21632324.2018.1596550
12. Khatri, S. K. (2007). Labour migration, employment and poverty alleviation in South Asia. Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 16(3), 451–475. https://doi.org/10.1177/011719680701600303
13. Lu, Y. (2012). Household migration, social support, and psychosocial health: The perspective from migrant-sending areas. Social Science & Medicine, 74(2), 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.10.020