Group Title: Serie A - Celade
Title: Migrants to Metropolitan Lima
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00086817/00001
 Material Information
Title: Migrants to Metropolitan Lima a case study
Series Title: Serie A - Celade
Physical Description: v, 135 p. : graphs ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Macisco, John J
Publisher: Centro Latinoamericano de Demografía
Place of Publication: Santiago de Chile
Publication Date: 1975
 Subjects
Subject: Migration, Internal -- Peru -- Lima   ( lcsh )
Rural-urban migration -- Peru -- Lima   ( lcsh )
Emigración e inmigración -- Lima
Genre: international intergovernmental publication   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
Spatial Coverage: Peru
 Notes
Bibliography: Bibliography: p. 122.
Statement of Responsibility: John J. Macisco, Jr.
General Note: Summary in Spanish and English.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00086817
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 02298551
lccn - 77577814

Full Text




John J. Macisco, Jr.


MIGRANTS TO METROPOLITAN LIMA,
a case study


rT


J1p~i


wI


wi.-- ~
Il


U..-."


(~)



V

-'N


Santiago de Chile


Agosto de 1975


C entro LWO I1IY 5 i noau m eri c d e u D em o ra fta. 5 iNI

















CEn T L A nTI 5*Br7AaD D5GAFIA,


John J. Macisco, Jr.


Serie A, No 133
Agbsto, 1975
300


MIGRANTS TO METROPOLITAN LIMA,
a case study














INDEX


PRESENTATION ... ............ .......... .. .........
I. THE MIGRATION PROCESS .........................
1. Sex and Age of Migrants: Sex Ratios .........
2. Age at Time of Arrival .........,..........
3. Size of Place of Previous Residence ..........
4. Where Were They Born? ........................
5. Similarity of Region of Birth with Last Place
of Previous Residence ........... ... ........
6. Number of Moves Prior to Arriving in Metro-
politan Lima ........... ...... .. .. .... ..
7. Educational Attainment .......................
8. Conclusions of "The Migration Process" .......
II. REASONS FOR LEAVING .......... ..................
1. Description of the Voluntary Migrants ........
2. Reasons for Leaving ... .... ..... .. .. ....
a) Reasons by Age and Sex ..................
b) Size of Place of Previous Residence and
Reasons for Leaving ................
c) Marital Status .......... ........ ........
d) Educational Attainment ....................
e) Previous Occupational Status ..............
3. Summary ........ .................. ....... ..
III, ADJUSTHENT OF HIGRAnITS ...,..........,..........
1. Demographic Background .......................
2. Economic Background Variables .............
3. Adjustment of Migrants ......................
a) Economic Adjustment ..................
b) Housing ......,.,...*,.. ...* ..... ...
c) Social Indicators .... .... ..... ...
BIBLIOGRAPHY ... .. *......... .............. ...
IV. DIFP ERENTIALS ........ ... .... C C ........... .. ...
1. Age and Sex
2. Civil Status ...*......., ...
3. Educational Attainment ......
4. Occupation .............. ..... .. ............
5. Fertility .... ........ .... ..........
6. Conclusion *.. **. ... ..*. **, .. ....
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................... ..... .......
ANNEX ..........* o ..... ........... ....... .....


1
5
6
8
12
17

19

21
22
26
45
45
48
50

51
52
53
53
54
59
63
66
70
70
74
78
86
103
106
107
111
118
118
120
122
134






) ii (


Index of tables and figures
Table Page
I- 1 Lima: Percent distribution of inmigrants by
period of arrival and sex ,..,,......,........ 28
2 Lima: Sex ratios of inmigrants by age ...,.... 28
3 Lima: Sex ratios of inmigrants by age and
period of arrival .............. ............ 28
4 Lima: Inmigrante by age and by period of
arrival .............. ,...,..,..... ., ...... 29
5 Lima: Inmigrants by age at-the time of
arrival, by period of arrival ................ 30
6 Lima: Inmigrants by period.of arrival and size
of place of previous residence ................. 31
7 Lima: Male migrants by age and period of.
arrival by size of place of previous residence. 32
8 Lima: Female inmigrants by age and period of
arrival by size of place of previous residence. 35
9 Lima: Sex ratio by period of arrival and size
of place of previous residence ................ 35
10 Lima: Male inmigrants by age at time of arriv-
al, period of arrival and size of place of
previous residence ..................... 35
-11 Lima: Female inmigrants by age at time of
arrival, period of .arrival and size of place of
previous residence .. ...... .. ............ 37
12 Lima: Innigrants by size of place of previous
residence, period of arrival and rural-urban
characteristics of place of birth .......o..... 38
13 Lima: Innigrants by period of arrival and
rural-urban characteristics of place of birth 39
14 Lima:- Percent of inmigrants whose last region
of previous residence was the sane as their
region of birth .............. .. .... ......... 39
15 Lina: Inmigrants to Metropolitan Lima who were
14 years old and over and who cane between
1955-1965, by size of place of previous resi-
dence and by number of moves ..,,.........,... 40
16 Lima: Innigrants to Metropolitan Lima.by age
at the tine of arrival, by.ievel of schooling
stained 40
attained ...................................... 40
17 Lina: Inmigrants-by level of education attain-
edby period of arrival and size of place of
previous residence .................. ....... 4
II- 1 Lima: Adult-male inmigrants-who cane.between
1956-1965, by-reasons for leaving their-prior
place of residence, by age.at the time. of
arrival .. ....... .. ..-. O .. .....* .. . 55
2 Liua:- Adult female innigrants who cane between
1956-1965, by reasons for leaving their.prior.
place of residence by age'at the tine of
arrival .. .. ..... ..... ..... .. ...... 55






) iii (

Table Page

II- 3 Liia: Adult innigrants who cane between 1956-
1965, by reasons for leaving their prior place
of residence, by sex and size of place of
prior residence ... .... ,... ......,. ........ 56
4 Lina: Adult innigrants who cane between 1956-
1965, by reasons for leaving their prior place
of residence, by marital status at the tine of
arrival ....................... .... ......... 57
5 Lina: Adult innigrants who cane between 1956-
1965, by reasons for leaving their prior place
of residence, by sex and level of schooling
attained ................ ... .. .............. 57
6 Lima: Adult nale innigrants who cane between
1956-1965, by reasons for leaving their prior
place of residence, by occupational status in
place of prior residence ..................... 58
7 Lina: Adult female innigrants who came
between 1956-1965, by reasons for leaving
their prior place of residence, by occupation-
al status in place of prior residence ........ 58
III- 1 Lima: Age at tine of arrival by size of place
of previous residence and sex ............. 87
2 Lina: Period of arrival by size of place of
previous residence and sex ......., ........ 88
3 Lina: Civil status at the time of arrival and
sex by size of place of previous residence and
percentage .............. ...... ......... ..... 88
4 Lina: Number of persons accompanying migrant
by size of place of previous residence and sex 89
5 Lima: Labour force status and type of oc-
cupation of migrants before migration by size
of place of previous residence and sex ..... 90
6 Lina: Labour force status and type of oc-
cupation of migrants before migration by age
and sex ........,............,....... ..... 90
7 Lina: Proportion "Looking for Work" prior to
coning to the metropolis.by size of place of
previous residence and sex ................... 91
8 Lina: Proportion "Looking for Work" prior to
coning to the metropolis by age and sex ..,... 91
9 Labour force status of migrants and tine it
took to get the first job, by size and sex ... 92
10 Lina: Labour status of migrants and time it
took to get the first job, by age and sex .... 92
11 Lima: Type of housing secured by migrants by
size of place' of previous residence and sex .. 93
12 Lima: Type of housing secured by migrants by
age and sex ... '. ... ... ... ...... 93
13 Lina: Section where migrants had their first
hone by size of previous residence and sex ... 94





) iv (


Table Page

III-14 Liua: Proportion of migrants not having a
Carnet de Seguridad and proportion using
Carnetby size of place of previous resid-
ence and sex ............ .......... .... 95
15 Lina: Proportion of migrants watching tele-
vision or listening to radio by size of place
of previous residence and sex ............. 96
16 Lina: Proportion of migrants who read news-
papers by' size of place'of previous residence
and sex x ,. ........... ... .. .. ... ..... 97
17 Lima: Proportion of migrants who go to es-
pectdculos by size of place of previous
Residence a.rid sex .. .. ..... ... ... 98
18...Lina: Possession and use of Garnet d' Segu-
ridad anong inmigrants, by duration of resi-
dence in Lima, present ago and sex .,...,... 99
19 Lina: .Proportion of migrants watching tele-
vision or listening to radio, by duration of
residence, present age and sex .... .,, ,...,, 100
20 Lima: Proportion of migrants who read news-
papers, by duration of residence, present age
and sex .. .. .. .. 101
21 Lina:.. Proportion of migrants who go to es-
pecticulosi,..by duration of residence,. present
a~ and "102
age and sex ....,..... ..* .. .. *,,...o......,* *.. 102
IV- 1 Lina: Age, sex and sex ratio of natives and
migrants ........,.. .......... ..*.. .. 123
2 Lina: Distri'butidri df 'natives and migrants by
sex and age ..* .... .. ........ .. .... 124
3 Lina: Male natives and migrants by:civil
status .......... ... ...... .. ... 125
4 Lina: Penale natives and migrants by civil
status ... ... .., .... 126
5 Lima: Male natives and migrants by age and
educational level .............. ........... 127
6 Linat Pendle'ndive .and migrants by age and
educational level ......,,, *.. ..*.. ... *.. ... 129
7 Lina: Natives and inmigrants by sex, age and
..occupationa.l groups ... .. ,, .,,...,.,,...... 131
8 Lina: Penale natives and migrants by age,
civil status and .average number of children
ever born.alive ... .. ..* .... ...,. .. .... 132

Figure .
I- 1 Lia: .Age at ti e of arrival for male in-
migrants by period of arrival *..;............ .10
2 Lima: Age at time of arrival for female in-
.igrants by period of arrival.,..,..,,.,,.... 11






)v (


Figure

IV- 1 Lina: Percent composition of male migrants
by civil status ....... ....... ..... ... 110
2 Lima: Percent composition of female migrants
by civil status .... ... ........ **o.., ** 110
3 Lina: Migrants and natives by educational
level ...., ....... .... ... .*.. .. 115



















RESUME


En este informed se presentan los resultados mas
significativos de un studio del Dr. John J. Macisco,
Jr. sobre la migraci6n al Area Metropolitana de Lima,
a base de dates de una encuesta en una muestra repre-
sentativa de aproximadamente 2 000 hogares, realizada
en 1965-66 por la Direcci6n Nacional de Estadistica y
Censos del Perd con la asistencia tecnica de CELADE.
Sendos capitulos estdn dedicados a cuatro t6picos
bdsicos de la investigaci6n micro social del fen6meno
migratorio a las grandes ciudades: i) el process,
ii) los motives, iii) la asimilaci6n y iv) los di-
ferenciales.
Del process migratorio se analizan sus patrons
mds significativos: categorfas de lugares de emigra-
ci6n, movilidad previa y nivel de educaci6n.
Las variables explicativas de las motivaciones
para migrar son aqu6llas relacionadas con el ciclo vi
tal del individuo y con la jerarqula de los lugares
de origin, esta tltima en t6rminos de urbanizaci6n y
de sus correlativos econ6micos y sociales.
Ciertamente, el interns dominant en los estu-
dios socioldgicos sobre esta material ha recaldo sobre
los aspects do la asimilaci6n de la poblaci6n nigran
to. En el capitulo torcero se analiza la asirilaci6n
respect de tres dimensions: ocupaci6n, vivienda y
seguridad social. Variables explicativas intervinien
tes on el an6lisis: "duraci6n de la residencia" en el
Area Metropolitana y "tanajo del lugar de la residen-
cia previa".
Por Altimo, el inforue dedica un capitulo a las
caracteristicas -demogrdficas, econrnicas y sociales-
diferenciales centre natives e innigrantes, utilizando
diversas variables de control.
A trav6s de 6sta y de otras contribuciones, re-
presentativas de una acumulaci6n de conocinientos sis
tendticos sobre la materia, CELADE desea poner al al-
cance de los lectores interesados los resultados nds
significativos de una cuidada labor de investigaci6n.
















PRESENTATION


This report gathers in its final form the most significant
contribution of the studies on migration to Metropolitan Lima
carried out by Dr. John J. Macisco, Jr., during the period he
served as a researcher in CELADE.

The statistical information used was derived from a survey
specially designed to investigate the main demographic and
sociological aspects of the migration process to Metropolitan
Lima and of inmigrants' assimilation. For purposes of the
survey Metropolitan Lima was defined as the area covered by
the fifteen districts which formed Greater Lima (1961 Census),
plus the districts of Comas, Independencia and El Agustino
(established after the 1961 Census was taken) and the urban area
of the Constitutional Province of Callao. An estimated popu-
lation (1965) of 2 250 000 inhabitants made up the universe thus
defined.

A Dr. Macisco was attached to CELADE during the years 1969
and 1970, working on a programme of studies on internal
migration in Latin America. His participation was made
possible through a grant from the Ford Foundation, which
also rendered financial support in other aspects of the
abovementioned programme.
A& The survey was undertaken by the "Direcci6n Nacional de
Estadistica y Censos" of Peru, with CELADErs technical
assistance, in 1965-1966. Similar research was promoted
and carried out in Santiago, Chile (1962), Caracas (1967)
and Asuncion, Paraguay (1973-1974). The "Direcci6n Nacio-
nal de Estadistica y Censos" of Peru made the main results
of the Metropolitan Lima survey available in three reports
published in the years 1966 and 1968 (Encuesta de Innigra-
ci6n. Lima Metropolitana, Inforne I (1966), Informe II
(1968) and Informe III (1968). Dirocci6n Nacional de Es-
tadistica y Censos, Lima, Perd).
AAA Barranco, Brefa, Chorrillos, La Victoria, Lima, Lince,
Magdalena del Mar, Miraflores, Pueblo Libre, Rinmao, San
Isidro, San Martin de Porres, San Miguel, Santiago de
Surco and Surquillo.







Research was carried out through a household probabilistic
sample, representative of the population of Metropolitan Lina.
In the sample design five strata composed of districts with
similar socio-economic characteristics were considered; within
each of them "blocks" were selected with probabilities propor-
tionate to the number of housing units and, finally, six housing
units, with systematic spacing, were selected from each "block".
Of a total of 2 208 housing units-which composed the sample, it
was possible to intervi.ew.2 093 households, that is, a response
rate of. 94.8-per cent was attained..

In carrying out interviews "two 'types"of questionnaires
were used, one of a collective.character'and the other.of an
individual nature. Through the first of then, information on.
the.main demographic and social characteristics of.all house-
hold members was collected and the..ni.gratory status.::of each one
of then was.identified. The individual .questionnaire was used
to make..direct interviews to those persons with.migrant. status,
provided that they had arrived in Metropolitan Lima. t the age
of 14 or over and during the decade previous to-the survey date
(1956-1966). This questionnaire contained a "nigratory history",
information on the migrant's living condi-tions before :oving,'to
Metropolitan Lima (economic activity, reasons for leaving, etc.)
and finally, several aspects on "adjustment" to the city way of
life,.

In four chapters this report deal's with what could be said
to be all the basic topics through which the migration phenomenon
in the big cities has been investigated at the micro-social level.
They refer specifically to:

Chapter I : The -nigration process
Chapter II : Reasons for leaving
Chapter III : 'Ad'jstnent
Chapter IV : Differentials-

The migration process is-analyzed through patterns, referred
to categories (size).of places of emigration, number of previous
movements and. educational level,, controlling in each case sex and
age variables.








In principle there was interest only in investigating the
reasons for leaving of persons who, because of their character-
istics of sex, age and position within the family group, were
assumed to have voluntarily decided to migrate. Since motiva-
tions are assumed to be related to the individual vital cycle,
as well as to the hierarchy of the places of origin in terms of
urbanization and its social and economic correlates, the analysis
is centered upon the variables sex, age, civil status, education,
occupation and size of places of previous residence of migrant.

No other topic has probably deserved more attention, con-
cerning sociological studies, than the subject of immigrants
adjustment to the receiving society. The Metropolitan Lima
survey was not designed to investigate this matter in depth, but
rather to provide parginal information which was expected to be
of use -combined with other data- in order to test a few general
hypotheses which are frequently used in specialized literature,
although they are not generally supported by results from em-
pirical research. In the present study the author resorts to
two explanatory independent variables, "size of place of previous
residence" and "duration of residence" in Metropolitan Lima,
through which degrees of adjustment in three aspects are attempt-
ed to be found: occupation, housing, and social security. An
important limitation in this study arises from the lack of in-
formation on the population born in Metropolitan Lima concerning
the aspects being analyzed. Consequently, comparisons are limit-
ed to those groups of immigrants defined according to the afore-
mentioned variables and others (i.e., sex and age) which are
control variables.

The final chapter, dealing with "differentials", has been
approached from two.interesting viewpoints. First, that of the
impact of the differences observed between immigrants and natives
regarding sex and age composition, civil status, education, oc-
cupation and fertility on population structure and dynamics.
Second, the study of differentials complements some aspects of
"adjustment" which have been already considered in Chapter.III.
A relatively complete explanation of the observed differentials,








as far as possible with data from a multiple purpose survey,
implies introducing in the analysis a minimum of control
variables in order to separate generational factors or influen-
ces from those of exposure time to the risk of "socialization",
at different ages, in the different environments in which
persons have lived, including Metropolitan Lima.

Migration and metropolization are inseparable aspects
of the same and universal demographic process of contemporary
societies. To define, to describe and to explain this popu-
lation phenomenon have been the aims of innumerable theoretic-
al works and of a great number of, empirical studies in countries
and regions with very different levels of economic.and social
development. It can be.paid that in.Latin America scientific
work in this field began during the 60's, particularly through
surveys done- in large cities. CELADE has played an important
part in this activity and this monograph is a partial result
of its efforts. Through it and other contributions which are
representative of the systematic knowledge being accumulated
on the subject, the most significant findings of careful re-
search work are made available to interested readers.





Juan Carlos Elizaga
Latin American Demographic Centre (CELADE)






k Among the CELADE .publications of greatest interest on the
subject are the following:
Elizaga, J.O., Migraciones a lns Areas Metropolitanas de
Am6rica Latina, Series E, N 6, 1970. Santiago, Chile.
Alberts, J., Migraci6n en Areas Metropolitanas de Anmrica
Latina: Un Estudio Comparativo. Work Progress Reports,
Parts I (1974) and II (1975).











In this chapter on the demographic structure of.the migration
flow to Lima, the following questions are considered: \ (C) What
is the age and sex composition of the migrant population living
in Lima in 1965? 7hen did they como to the city? (2) How old
were the migrants when they came? Were there differences in age
at the time of arrival by period of arrival? (3) Where did the
migrants come from? What were the sizes of place characteristics
of the last place of residence? Did the pattern vary by period
of arrival, by age, sex, and age at time of arrival? (4) What
is the place of birth of the migrants in terms of proportion,
rural or urban? (5) What is the degree of similarity of place
of birth and the last place of previous residence? (6) How
many moves were made prior to arriving in Lima? (7) What was the
educational attainment of the migrants at the time of arrival in
Lima?

In a primate city like Lima, it is generally found that
migrants form a relatively large-proportion of the population of
the metropolitan area. This conclusion is valid for-Lima as
about 40 percent of its residents are migrants to the area. That
is, they were not born there. Such an influx necessarily has a
strong influence on the socio-demographic characteristics of the
receiving city. What would be the age distribution or the sex
ratio if no migrants-were present? would d indexes such as educa-
tional attainment differ? In other words, do migrants bring
characteristics that vary from those of the natives to such an
extent that the overall pattern is substantially altered by their
presence?

Generally it has been found that migrants do have different
socio-demographie characteristics than the native-born urban
dwellers. If one is concerned with the social implications for
the urban social'system, it is differentials between migrant and
urban natives which may be crucial. What happens to the migrants
after they arrive? What does the influx mean to the urban social
system? How is the urban area different as a result of the
migration? Thile these questions are important, this first


I. THE 1I&IGRATION PROCESS







chapter will be limited to the migration process itself and com-
parisons with urban natives will be discussed. in the chapter
dealing with differentials.

With regard to the numbers of migrants and time of arrival
it can be seen that there were 4 290 migrants included in the
1965 survey. It is especially important to look at these migrants
by their time of-arrival. 7hile all persons not born in Lima are
defined as migrants, there is a vast difference between a "migrant"
aged -30 who just arrived from a rural place and a "migrant" aged
30 who moved to. Lima with his parents 28 years ago. The effect
of. such a difference 8ill be considered later. 3or the. present,
it is sufficient to note that no less than 37.3 percent of all.
migrants in Lima in 1965 arrived within the previous decade (See
Table 1). As migrants constitute'40 percent of the total pop-r
ulation, about.1 in 6 Lima residents have been in the city less
than 10 years. -A word of caution is in order. It should not be
concluded that the degree of migration is increasing in recent
years. mortality .exerts a toll, and the number of persons moving
to the city, before 1950 for example, was undoubtedly greater than
indicated in this study. It. is not possible to determine the.ef-
fect of mortality'.on the number of migrants in Lima at the time
of survey.


1. Sex and'Age' of Ligrants: Sex Ratios .

There were slightly mpre female migrants than male migrants
residing in Lima at the time,,of.the. 1965 survey,''the sex ratio
being 93.2.1 / This.index varies significantly .by age of-migrants

71 The sex ratio was calculated in the following manner:
Number of males
x 100
ITumber of females
The results of this .calculation give the number of males per 100
females. This type of index has been more. appropriately called a
masculinity index by many demographers.








however. Among those under 15, as seen in Table 2, there were
more males than females. This.is at least partially due to the
sex ratio at birth and of course, many migrants came with their
families and therefore were in a sense involuntary migrants. In-
asmuch as this under 15 age group does contain a large proportion
of involuntary migrants one would expect a more normal sex ratio.
Between ages 15 and 29, females predominate among the migrants ~
there being 79 males for every 100 females.-/ Kales are more
prevalent in the migrant population 40 years and over.

Looking at the sex ratio for those migrants who came in the
past 10 years, there is evidence that young females are more like-
ly than males to be migrants to the metropolitan area -a phenome-
non that has been noted elsewhere. From Table 3 it can be seen
that among migrants thirty and over coming in the last 10 years,
females also tend to be in the majority, but not to the extent
noted for the younger women aged 15-29. Turning to those who
arrived prior to 1956 among older migrants there are approximately
equal numbers of males and females. This is all the more striking
in light of the fact that mortality has undoubtedly affected older
males more than older females. However, when all migrants are
considered irrespective of their age at time of survey, females
predominate regardless of the time of arrival with the exception
of the very earliest migrants (i.e. 1945 or earlier). Indeed, the
sex ratio exhibits a secular increase with earlier time of arrival,
from 84 among those coming between 1956 and 1965, to 109 among the
earliest migrants.

It can perhaps be speculated that males were more likely to
move "to the city" in earlier periods as "push" factors may have
been more important. This would tend to resemble a "pioneer"
type of migration. As the years progressed and communication and
transportation improved, such a move was no longer "dangerous
and pioneering", The primate city began "pulling" people from


I/ The index would be even lower if only those who arrived at 15
years and over were considered, since part of the inmigrants
aged 15 to 29 came before being 15 years old.








the rural areas and, as has been noted for large cities in develop-
ed-nations, this usually resulted in the attraction of more fe-
males -especially young single women. At any rate, it is clear
that proportionately, more female migrants have moved to Lima in
recent years than was the case in the past. A continuation of
this pattern into the future may well have important effects on
the population structure of the city and hinterland.

Age differentials among migrants are not especially substan-
tial, as seen in Table 4. For all migrants, 56.6 percent were
between 15 and 39. As would be expected, these proportions in-
crease among.females (59.3 percent) and decrease among males
(53.6 percent). It should be stressed that these data are based
on age at the time of the survey and not on age at date of arriv-
al in Lima,-and that it is a description f only the migrant
population of the city;

In conclusion, it has been observed that of all people living
in Lima in 1965 who were not born there, slightly more were fe-
male. There were however, variations according to current age
with males dominating in the under fifteen and over thirty cate-
gories. The age distribution of the migrant population indicated
few children under age 15 and slightly more than half between the
ages of 15 and 39.


2, Age at Time of Arrival

There is a significant age variation among migrants by age
at time of arrival. Such a differential was masked when limited
to present age. Vor all migrants, male and female, and.for all
periods from 1941 to 1965, about 40 percent were between the age
of 15 and 24 when they moved to Lima (See Table 5). For example,
among those who migrated between 1961 and 1965, 44,5 percent
(males) and-41.3 percent (females) were 15-24; among those who
migrated between 1956 and 1960, 39.2 percent (males) and 35.1 per-
cent (females) were 15-24 and 40.8 percent (males) and 37.9 percent
(females) were 15-24 among those who came between 1946 and 1950.









Although this generalization is true for both sexes, the
evidence shows that females were likely to move at a slightly
younger age and this was especially true of the decade 1956-1965.
Within the 15-24 age group, the proportion of females 15-19 is
generally greater, while among the males the reverse is true.
Indeed, about 30 percent of all female migrants in the 1961-1965
period were between 15 and 19. Furthermore, the age category
10-14 (at time of migration) has a larger proportion of females
than males regardless of date of arrival. This finding suggests
that the traditional pattern of sending girls to work as domestics
in the city is still operative.

Figures 1 and 2 shoW the very distinct trend reflecting the
tendency of the migrants, both males add females, to be young
adults. The females are likely to be a little younger than the
males. This is true regardless of period of arrival back to 1941.
Before that time, the conclusion remainscorrect, but not to such
an extent. Again it is possible that mortality may be a factor
in this latter group.

Conclusions: This brief analysis of the basic demographic
characteristics of migrants to Lima indicates that, as of 1965,
there were both age and sex differentials with the former perhaps
more important. This was not evident from a static examination
of the migrant group. However, after utilizing data on time of
arrival, it was obvious that, regardless of period and sex,
migrants were likely to be young adults. Sex differences increased
with recency of urban move. That is to say, recent migrants were
more likely to be females than earlier migrants. Generally, it
appears that those who arrived prior to 1940 were apt to be a
little older and males predominated. By the late 1950's and
early 1960's, the characteristics of the migrants had changed
- they were younger and more likely to be female. It is specu-
lated that this may be an indicator of development in the sense
that Lima is no longer "psychologically removed" from rural areas.
The urban areas through mass media, and earlier migrants have most
likely interpenetrated the hinterland. Such a pattern of migra-
tion is generally to be found in advanced countries and it is







) 10 (


Figure 1

AGE AT TIME OF ARRIVAL FOR MALE IMMIGRANTS
BY PERIOD OF ARRIVAL


Per-
cent30r-


201-


101-


Periods of arrival

-- Total innigrants

-- 1965-1956


II
S 1955-1946
l
I/ .'\ --- 1945 or be




S'
I

/ I


I I



I



: / 1


30


- 40.


50: *


fore


60


Age at tine of.arrival


LIMA:


__


60
















Per-
cent 30,


) 11(


Figure 2

LIMA: AGE AT TIME OF ARRIVAL FOR FEMALE IMMIGRANTS
BY PERIOD OF ARRIVAL



Periods of arrival
-- Total innigrants

-- 1965-1956

/ -- 1955-1946


1945 or before


201-


Age at tine of arrival






) 12 (


apparent that this pattern is emerging in Peru as of 1965. This
changing nature of the migrant characteristics is bound to have
a strong effect on the demographic structure of Lima as increasing-
ly more females and younger people move into the city.


3. Size of Place of Previous Residence

-Some insights on the characteristics of migrants can be
gathered by looking at their place of origin. Certainly migrants
from rural areas differ in many attributes from those who come
from larger cities. These possible differences will be compared
and discussed in a subsequent chapter. For now, the emphasis is
on type of place of previous residence as defined by its size.
It is, of course, possible for place of origin to differ from
place of previous residence. However, in Peru, about 82 percent
of all the adult migrants to Lima the last decade 1956-1965 came
directly from their place of birth (See Table 15). Pew made
intervening stops on their way to the primate city of the country.

In interpreting these data it should be realized that the
proportion of citywards migrants coming from any particular size
of place is considerably affected by the proportion of such
cities and towns in the nation. The population coming from
villages under 1 000 in population, .for example, cannot be very
large if there are very few of these units in the hinterland.
Thus in the United States, migration from rural-farm areas to
urban areas has been decreasing over recent decades. This should
not be interpreted as a change in attitudes vis-a-vis urban living.
Rather it is due to the fact that there are very few "available"
rural-farm dwellers remaining to move to the cities.

Of all the migrants living in Lima at the time of the survey,
29.2 percent came from cities with populations of 20 000 or more,
with another 15.3 percent having been residents of towns with
populations between 5 000 .and 20 000. The greatest proportion of
migrants came from towns that were even smaller -between 1 000 and
5 000 (38.2). Few came from the smallest villages (under 1 000)
or from foreign countries. These proportions do not change when
sex of the migrant is considered. That is to say, sex differentials






) 13 (


among migrants with regard to size of place of previous residence
are not significant. Lore came from towns between 1 000 and 5 000
and this was true of both males and females (See Table 6).

When comparing size of place of previous residence with
period of arrival in Lima, differences are again not noteworthy.
In the 1956-1960 period close to half the migrants (45.3 percent)
came from towns of 1 000-5 000, while less than one-quarter came
from the largest cities. On the other hand, in the 1941-1945
period, slightly more were from these latter centres than from
those communities of 1 000-5 000 population. Male and female
migrants exhibited similar patterns with the peak years for the
small towns being between 1956 and 1960- and those for the largest
cities being 1941-1945.

It has been noted that 29.2 percent of all migrants came
from cities of at least 20 000 population. Controlling for age
at time of survey fails to uncover any important variations.
Among all age groups, the proportion coming from various size
communities does not differ very much, although there is a ten-
dency for older people to be in a greater proportion among mi-
grants from large cities, and the same'tendency is observed among
young adults who came from small localities (under 1 000 inhabit-
ants). -It is also interesting to note that close to 10 percent
of. all. migrants 50 years of. age and over are from foreign countries
(See Tables 7 and 8).

Whether it be for males or females, these same generalizations
tend to be valid. Any differentials, based as they are on relative-
ly small numbers of cases, are perhaps due to sampling error rather
than to basic social differentials. An additional control on
time of arrival (i.e., since-1960 or prior to that date) fails to
yield any more information on possible variations in the propor-
tion of migrants coming from various size communities.

It can be concluded that generally about 40 percent of all
Lima in-migrants came from communities with populations between
1 000 and 5 000. Another 30 percent or thereabouts came from the
largest cities in the country. Whether it be sex, age, time of






) 14 (
arrival, or combinations of these., deviations from these propor-
tions were minimal. (These results lead to the speculation that
the warning alluded to earlier may have been warranted. To a
considerable extent, the proportion of migrants coming from any
particular size area is dependent on the number'of people in
Peru who live in such communities).

Another analysisoonsiders the following possible questions.
Are migrants from large cities more likely to be female than
those coming from .smaller towns? Are they younger or older?
Did they move more recently than did rural'migrants?

It can be readily seen-from Table 8 that there is selectiv-
ity of females from the large cities, with the sex ratio being
91.4, and from those towns between 1 000 and 5 000 being 89.9.
These. comprise the two largest groups of migrants. On the other
hand, the sex ratio for those coming from the smallest villages
is 98.3.. Also, males are much more-likely to be predominant
among.the foreign born.

Little difference is to be noted between size of communitie-s
and period of arrival in Lima. There i:s, nevertheless, some
evidence that among migrants from communities under 5 000 pop-
ulation, a larger proportion have migrated :in 'the 'latest decade
(1956-1965) -about 41 percent being'. -n that .category. Among'
those- coming from larger cities and town (5 000 and over) about
35 percent came in that period. Also worth comment is the fact
that 47,6 percent of the foreign-born came prior to 1940 while
:only 29,5 percent moved to Lima since. 1956.

The relation between size of place of previous residence and
recency of migration is especially marked among -females-. UNo
less than 45 percent of all such migrants from places under
5 000 came since 1955. Only: one-third of those coming from the
largest cities are such recent movers. No such clear-cut rela-
tionship is noted for male migrants. Apparently the enticements
of. the large city are increasingly more appealing to. females
coming from small villages. One .can perhaps speculate that im-
provements in communication and ease .of transportation may have
contributed to such a change. It is also possible that the






) 15 (


opportunity structure in small villages offers little for the
female, This may also help explain the overall finding that
the proportion of recent migrants is greater the smaller the
previous place of residence. Earlier movers came from the
larger cities where presumably communications were superior.
lore recently the "migration spirit" has spread to the smaller
villages of the nation.

Further evidence for this suggestion can be noted when the
age (in 1965) of migrants is compared for the various size
places of previous residence. For all migrants, male and female,
the median age decreases with smaller community of origin, as
seen previously in Tables 7 and 8. For example, almost two-
thirds of all migrants from villages under 1 000 were under age
35. But just over one-half of such migrants from the large
cities were in that age group. At the other extreme, 16.5 per-
cent of those from small villages were 50 and over, while one
in five of the migrants from the cities were of that age. The
pattern is similar for males and females and suggests that
recent migrants are increasingly coming from the smaller areas
of the country, Purthermore, these migrants from small villages
are predominantly female and tend to be younger than average.

A further refinement of the analysis of Lima migrants by
size of place of previous residence can be made by studying
their age at time of arrival (See.Tables 10 and 11). This also
sheds additional light on some of the suggestions made above,
regarding possible differences in the characteristics of migrants.

The question to be considered is: Are there any differences
in the age'of migrants at the time of arrival in Lima by the
size of the locality from Which they moved? The answer is clear-
ly affirmative. For all migrants irrespective of sex or date of
arrival, substantially more coming from communities with popu-
lations under 5 000 were between 10 and 24 than was the case
among those coming from larger towns and cities. Over 60 per-
cent of all Lima newcomers who moved from the smaller areas
were in that age grzup, as compared to only about one-half of
those coming from the larger areas. However, the young (0-9)





) 16 (


and the adults (25 and over) were substantially more represented
in the groups who previously resided in the larger cities and
towns. About one-quarter of.all such migrants were "young",
while only about 20 percent of those coming from smaller vil-
lages were unde-r age 10 The difference among the adult mi-
grants is especially marked for those 25-34.

This overall general finding suggests that not only are the
smaller areas the point of origin of more females and younger
people, as well as.being the point of origin gaining in emphasis
within .the recent decade, but they.are also the starting point
for more "individual movers", whereas the larger communities
are .perhaps more likely to send more families 'tothe central
city. .

This same generalization apparently is true for both, the
recent migrants (1961-1965) and the earlier migrants. That is
to say, the 10-24 groups are overrepresented among those coming
from smaller areas, while the young and the adults are over-
represented among those coming from the larger areas.

Both males and females are likely to exhibit similar pat-
terns regarding age at arrival and size of place of previous
residence. However, the differential among males is greater
than among females. About 64 percent of all male migrants from
small areas were 10-24 at their time of arrival; only about 50
percent of all such migrants from larger-areas were-of the same
age when they arrived in Lima. Again the proportionsof young
and adults are greater for males coming from large cities than
for males coming from the more rural villages. The difference
in age at arrival by size of previous residence is not as sig-
nificant for females -although the difference nevertheless
persists. Female migrants from small-areas are still'more apt
to be between 10 and 24 than female migrants from: the larger
cities and towns. An interesting difference can be seen in the
10-14 age group where a secular increase in proportion migrant
is noted with decreasing size of the place of previous residence.
Only 16,2 percent of the females from the cities of at least
20 000 population are.between 10 and 14, but about one-quarter






) 17 (


of those from the small areas were that age at time of arrival
in Lima (See Table 11). As suggested earlier, it is possible
that most of these females might be individual movers, most
likely working as domestics. Among males, as in Table 10, the
predominant age at time of arrival was 15-19 with a secular in-
crease noted here as well -from 22.9 percent to 31.6 percent
among those coming from the small areas.

Comparisons of migrants according to period of arrival
yield similar results (Tables 10 and 11). In general, persons
coming from the smaller areas are more likely to be in the
10-24 age category and those from larger towns in the young and
adult categories.

Some tentative conclusions emerge from these data based on
size of place of previous residence. Females and slightly less
males are overrepresented in the very largest and the 1 000-5 000
size places of origin. Generally, the migrants from the small
areas are younger than those from the larger cities. Also, the
evidence indicates that those coming from such communities are
more likely to have moved within the past decade than those
coming from the larger centres. Finally, there is some evidence
that migrants from small areas, regardless of when they moved,
are proportionately more in the 10-24 age group while those
from the larger cities are proportionately more in the younger
(0-9) and the adult age (25 and over) groups. Thus it is spec-
ulated that earlier migrants were more apt to be from the larger
centres of population and consist of families. More recently,
the emphasis has shifted to the smaller'areas and these migrants
are likely to be young individuals.


4. Where Vere They Born?

A four-way typology of rural-urban provinces has been derived
to determine the kind of areas that were the birthplaces of the
migrant to Lima. "Urban areas" consist of those provinces which
were between 35 and 50 percent urbanized; "semi-rural" between





) 1i (

20 and 35 percent urbanized; and "rural areas" less than 20 per-
cent urbanized.-

It should-be made clear that a.migrant could have been born
in a rural setting and yet be characterized as coming from an
"urban type" province. These data merely classify migrants by
types of provinces of birth on a four-way urban-rural scale
rather than actual place of birth (See Table 12).

About two-thirds of all migrants to Lima were born in either
semi-urban or urban provinces -40 percent in the latter type.
A slightly greater percent of the early migrants (before 1956)
came from such areas than of the more- recent movers to Lima.
This is to be expected in light of the earlier noted phenomenon
that the more recent migrants are more likely to come from small-
er places of previous residence and in view of the fact that
most migrants come from the,.region of their place of birth,
Hales and females exhibit similar patterns regarding province of
birth -65,7 percent of the males and 65,6 percent of the.females
being born in either urban or semi-urban type provinces.

Females who migrated earlier are somewhat more likely to
have been born in the more urban provinces than the males who
migrated in the same period.- That is to say, the proportion of
early, female migrants coming from such.provinces was 68.7 per-
Scent -males 67.2 percent. Among more recent migrants the res-
pective percent were 61.4 and 63.3. It is also interesting to
!.note that almost 20 percent of the female recent migrants came
i., from rural provinces, as compared to only,12.2 percent of the
females who came to Lima prior to 1956,. Again this merely-re-
inforces earlier findings on the changing nature of migratiin to
Lima.

Another way of interpreting the' data is to ask: "Of all
persons born in urban provinces (1727), how many came since 1956
7/ In the 1961 Census of Peru it was considered as urban the
population living in ."populated centres" which were district
capitals, regardless of the number of inhabitants. The pop-
ulation living in other populated centres.with "urban char-
acteristics", whose population was equal or higher than that
of the administrative head of the same district, was also
considered urban.






) 19 (


and how many came prior to that date?" 1 156 or 61.3 percent
of all migrants living in Lima in 1965 came prior to 1956. This
proportion increases to 66,9 percent for those born in urban pro-
vinces. Among males, 64.0 percent werd barly migrants, but two-
thirds of those from urban areas were early migrants, as compared
to only 56.1 percent of those who came from rural provinces.
Similarly, the proportion for females was 58.7 percent overall,
but 66,3 percent from urban provinces and only 46.9 percent from
rural provinces (See Table 13).

These data indicate that a substantial majority (two-thirds)
of all migrants were born in urban or semi-urban type provinces.
It does not say anything about place of birth. More important,
the data show that recent migration tends to de-emphasize urban
place.of birth and this is more so among females than males.
Females have a larger percent from rural areas coming in the more
recent 1956-1965 period than in the earlier period. This is the
only place where the more recent migrants comprise the majority.

This conclusion together with the finding that 82 percent
of all migrants came from the region of birth, reinforces the
earlier suggestion that recent migrants are more likely to be
female and to come from small places of previous residence. Now
it can be added tentatively that this generalization may well
apply to province of birth as well.


5. Similarity of Region of Birth with Last Place of
Previous Residence

In order to get a crude approximation of the extent to which
migration to Lima has occurred by stages, a tabulation indicating
the proportion of migrants whose last region of residence prior
to Lima was the same as their region of birth, has been prepared.
Table 14 demonstrates that 93.8 percent of all migrants to Lima
had migrated from the same region as that of their birth. This
pattern is approximately the same for males and females. It is
slightly higher for those migrants who came to Lima before 1956.






) 20 (


When size of place of. last place of previous residence is
considered, it appears that. migrants coming front .places of less :
than 1 000 and rural areas exhibit the lowest proportion. This
finding is seen for.men as well as women and does not seem to
vary by period..of arrival. It indicates that's expected,
people coming from..rural areas:have-most .likely been born in
another region. On the other hand,.'migrants'whose last place of
residence was 20 .000 or over, have the next lowest similarity
proportion.

The proportion presented is a crude index of stage migration
for the-following reasons: (1) The index refers only to region
of birth and .region of last place of prior residence.. It there-
fore can miss whatever intermediary: moves have been made.
(2) Iloves within a region of whatever types are missed, since
the region is the unit of analysis.

Despite these shortcomings, which are to be expected in
this type of migration research, it is striking that this similar-
ity index. is generally the- same (i.e., about 90 percent) for both
males and females in both periods of arrival..

As pointed out earlier, 82 percent of the migrants came
directly to Lima, that is, have gotten there "in one move"'
How is this finding modified if size of place of previous res-
idence is considered? Do people from larger places come in many
steps to Lima, and do migrants from smaller places come directly?

In general, persons coming..from larger size places, that
is, 5 000 or over, seem to have slightly lower proportions who
migrated directly to Lima than persons whose previous residence
before Lima was less than 5 000. This finding is approximately
similar for males and females (See Table 15).

In sum, .around 82'percent of all adult. migrants came to
Lima in one move, that is directly. When size of place of last
residence is .controlled, .persons 'coming from.'larger places have
lower proportions of direct migrants, but it is still over three-
quarters of then. These findings suggest that for most of the
migrants who came to Lima in the last ten years and who were 14





) 21 (


years old and over when they arrived, stage migration has not
taken place. These migrants are coming directly to Lima. It is
possible that in countries of higher primacy, stage migration
will not be found since the primate city serves as the magnet
for migrants from all other places,

It should be pointed out that these data, while adequate,
do not present a definitive test of the stage migration hypotheses.
Since it is possible that some of these people had moves before
they reached 14, these figures miss these moves and therefore
understate the total number of previous moves. But on the other
hand, if we are interested in the voluntary migrants and there-
fore a refined statement of the stage hypotheses, using migrants
14 year old and over is appropriate.


6. Number of Moves Prior to Arriving in Metropolitan
Lima

In order to assess the stage migration hypotheses it is
useful to have data on the number of moves that a migrant has
made. For a subpopulation of Lima migrants, it is possible to
study the number of moves that a migrant has made prior to
arriving in Lima. This subpopulation is composed of 865 migrants
who arrived in Lima in the last ten years, that is, between 1955
and 1965, and who were 14 years old and over at the time of
arrival.

Of this group, 710 or 02.1 percent moved but once since
reaching age 14 -that move obviously being to Lima. 71 or 8.2
percent made two moves, with 38 or 4.4 percent making three of
more moves (See Table 15).

By sex, the proportions are fairly similar in that 80.9
percent of the males as compared to 83.1 percent of the females
came to Lima in one move. This suggests that migration by stages
at least for adult migrants who came in the last ten years, does
not seem to have taken place. This finding parallels that of
Elizaga for Santiago. He showed that half of the migrants to
Santiago came directly, that is, without stopping along the way.
(Elizaga, 1970: 67).






) 22 (

liargulis found that 87. percent of those migrants from
Chilecito, population 13 000 in the .northwestern La Lioja section
of Argentina migrated directly to Buenos'Aires (Ilargulis, 1968:
147).


7. Educational. Attainment

One:of-the more important characteristics of migrants that
must be considered in determining the effect's that such people.
have *on their receiving city is educational-attainment.. WThat is
the "education input" -of these newcomers to Lima? This section
is concerned with,'this topic and differentials .that may or may
not exist among migrants by a-ge, sex, date of arrival and type
of place of previous residence.' :.

About 37 percent of all persons living in Lima, but not born
there, have less than-five'years-of schooling. -About -20 percent
have had at least some college. Over one in four (27.4 percent)
are limited to having between five and eight years of school and
another 15.4 percent have had some secondary school 'training.
(See Table 16).

Hjale.migrants are significantly better educated than their
female counterparts presently residing in Lima. Indeed,-.no less
than 71.4 -percent .of all such females have less than a high school
education as compared to 56.6 percent of the males. On the other
hand, 42.7 percent of the males have had at least some high school,
with about one-quarter having 'had some college training. Slightly
more than one-quarter'of all female migrants have had at least
some high school, with 15.4 percent going beyond that ievel. "

Recent migrants (that is, since 1960), be they male or fe-
male have less education than the earlier migrants. For example,
about '80 percent of the females coming to Lima since 1960 have
less than a high school education.' About 70 percent of those
coming prior to 1960 have had such little education. Similar gen-
eralizations can be made for the male migrants.

On the surface, this last finding is not as should be expect-
ed. Certainly recent migrants, ceteris paribus, should have had
more education than those coming in earlier decades. This should






) 23 (


be especially true in a developing country like Peru. However,
these results merely reflect a basic problem in utilizing educa-
tional attainment data without taking age (at time of arrival or
at time of survey) into consideration. Unless the analysis is
limited to people who are at least 25 years of age, and thus
have presumably completed their education, the results include
the "educational attainment" of people under age ten. Thus the
chances of such a persons's being included in the category
"recent migrants" is much greater than if they had migrated prior
to that date.

Controlling for age at time of arrival overcomes some of
these difficulties. However, this added information does not
tell anything about "present age". Controlling for time of move
adds still another dimension and this too allows for more refined
analysis. Nevertheless, some questions remain due to lack of
information on age at time of survey. (Por example, of the 335
females who moved to Lima prior to 1960 and were between 10 and
14 at time of arrival, how many were 14 years old in 1965 or 24
years old, or 34 years old at the time of the survey?) Of course,
among those migrating between 1960 and 1965, some assumptions can
be made about their age at the time of survey. But any comparison
of the educational attainment of females 15-19 at time of arrival
who moved since 1960, with their counterparts who moved prior to
1960, is fraught with all sorts of difficulties. Indeed, in that
particular example, the educational attainment of the earlier
migrants is greater than that of those who recently moved. Pre-
sumably this is because the earlier migrants, arriving at ages
15-19, have had time to attend college. Some were probably 40-50
years of age by the time of survey. Consequently, the subsequent
analysis of the educational attainment of the migrants to Lima is
necessarily limited by the data and the concept "educational at-
tainment". Nevertheless, it does describe how much education has
been completed by these people, regardless of age.

Little difference is to be observed in educational attainment
by age at time of arrival in Lima. Regardless of age, the pro-
portion having had some college or having had less than a high






) 24 (


school education, for.example, tends -to cluster about the percent
for the total migrant population. This is true of males and fe-
males alike. A few minor exceptions are nonetheless to be noted.
For example, about one-quarter of the female migrants who were
30-34 at time of arrival had some college training. Among males
age 50 and over at time of arrival, the proportion with little,
if any, education was substantially higher than average -about
35 percent having had less than five grades of school.

The data for persons moving since 1960 are more meaningful
as present age is indirectly controlled. However, the small size
or the sample makes these results somewhat tenuous# Generally,
younger adults (25-34) are slightly better'educated than the old-
er migrants, but no general conclusion is possible for either
males or females. Close to half of the males who moved to Lima
between the ages of 30.and 39 had some college training -but
there are only 28 in the sample. Half of all the females 30-34
at the time of arrival had a similar type of education.

Among the earlier migrants there appears to be little re-
lation between age at time of arrival and educational attainment.
This.is especially true if it is limited to adults to. eliminate
persons who may not as 'e't have completed their education. Again
this generalization applies to both, males and females. Nonethe-
less, the above..results as 'described in Table 16 give some indi-
cation of how much education these "newcomers" to Lima have. A
later chapter will make comparisons between migrants and native-
born on such characteristics.

Looking at the educational attainment of Limats migrant pop-
ulation by size of place of previous residence yields more meaning--
ful findings if it is assumed that the .age distributions .of the
groups coming from the various size areas are .fairly -similar
(See Table 17). It has been noted earlier that there are indeed-
age differentials by size of place. However, these are not so
great as to greatly affect the present study of educational attain-
ment.







) 25 (


There is a significant. relationship between size of place
of previous residence and educational attainment. Overall,
36.9 percent of the migrants have had less than five years of
school and 19.6 percent have had some college. Among those
coming from the largest cities, 32.6 percent had little schooling
and about one-quarter had some college. Those coming from the
smallest villages had the highest proportion with little education
(one half had less than five years), and the lowest proportion
with some education beyond high school (less than one in ten).
It should also be noted that no less than 53.8 percent of the
foreing-born had some college. (This particular comparison may
be slightly biased. It has been previously noted that this group
is much "older" than other migrants and thus the chance of having
completed more years of school is greatly increased. Neverthe-
less, this high proportion with some college is significant).

The inverse correlation between size of place and education-
al attainment is to be observed for males and females in similar
fashion, although males have had more education than females re-
gardless of the size of place of previous residence. Consequent-
ly, the best educated migrants are males coming from cities of
20 000 or more population, and the least educated are females
who formerly resided in small rural communities. The contrast
is extreme. Among the former, 25 percent have had little school-
ing (under five grades) and 30 percent have gone beyond high
school. Among the latter, about 60 percent had little schooling
and but 4.4 percent had continued to college. Knowing that
recent migrants have tended to be increasingly female and from
smaller places, it may perhaps be speculated that such a change
is not improving the educational attainment of the migrant group
in Lima.

Time of arrival, that is, since 1960 or prior to that date,
does not significantly change the effect of size of place of last
residence on the educational attainment of the migrants to Lima.

The strong inverse relation previously noted is generally
not quite as significant among early migrants. This is particu-
larly true of the two largest town categories. That is to say,







) 26 (


differences in the.educational attainment of the early migrants
coming front (1) cities of: 20 000 or more and (2) cities of be-
tween 5 000 and 20 000 are slight. The most significant differ-
ence is among those coming from-the smallest villages. It is of
course not really.possible to compare recent migrants coming
from cities of 20 000 .or more, for example, to early migrants
from similar size places for the reasons cited earlier, The
general conclusion is that the" larger the place of previous res-
idence, the greater the likelihood that the migrant is better
educated, regardless of sex or time of arrival, In general,
males are better educated than females, regardless of place of
earlier residence.


8, Conclusions of "The Migration Process"

The migration process, which encompasses both the composition
of the migrants by number, age, sex, and education as well as
the processes or "steps" by which they have arrived at various
times, has been analyzed in the attempt to understand more about
the"possible'impact of the migrants on Lima, and to discover
possible trends of migration to Lima. Age is certainly one of
the most crucial characteristics with over half of the migrants
between 15 and 39 at the time of the survey. Females were more
likely to move at a younger age and consistently it was found
that the 10-14 year age group always had a larger proportion of
females. The implication of this finding:may be especially sig-
nificant because it may reflect the continuing practice of send-
ing-'young girls to the city to work as domestics. The discovery
that the females are the least educated migrants and are now even
less educated than before may have important implications for the
adjustment of these young girls in the city.

With regard to place of previous residence it has been found
that mostly one-step migration is occurring and the largest per-
centages of migrants are from towns between 1 000 and 5 000 (40
percent) and cities.20 000.(30 percent). The'sex ratios show
that females predominate among.migrants from both of these places
Sand more recently a large proportion of females have been coming
'V'






) 27 (


from the towns of under 5 000. It could-be reiterated that not
only are the smaller areas the point of origin of more females
and younger people, as well as gaining in emphasis within the
recent.decade,. but they are also the starting point for more
"individual movers", whereas the larger communities are perhaps
more likely to send some more families to the central dity.

It was discovered that earlier migration was more from the
largest cities' ~while more recent migration has a greater percent-
age from the smaller places of origin. This could reflect the
possible self development of the larger cities which.now can
provide more opportunities to their residents and cause them to
remain. Hales do have a greater proportion of young adults coming
from the large cities than the rural villages and this may reflect
a positive selective process where Lima still has opportunities
(such as education) that the other cities don't have as yet.
Perhaps as these cities develop, the number of male migrants
from them could be expected to drop.

It does seem that most of the migrants have had some type
of urban living experiences before coming to Lima with the find-
ing that almost two-thirds of the migrants were born in an urban
or semi-urban type of place. With about 80 percent of the mi-
grants coming to Lima in one move, little evidence for stage mi-
gration exists.

It has been shown that recent migrants have had less edu-
cation than the earlier ones, but perhaps the earlier ones have
had time to get more education since migrating. One relationship
that does appear indisputable is that those coming from the small-
est places do have the highest proportion.of migrants with the
least education, regardless of time of arrival. Also, males
always have more education than females, a finding that is most
likely closely connected with the motives for migrating.






) 28 (


Table 1
LIMA: PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF INIIIGRANTS
BY PERIOD OF ARRIVAL AND BY SEX

Period of arrival
Sexnumber Percent 1961- 1956- 1951- 1946- 1941- 1940 or Unknovn
1965 1960 1955 1950 1945 earlier
Male 2 069 100.0 17.2 17.5 14.1 14.0 10.4 25.5 1.3
Fenale 2 221 100.0 20.2 19.4 14.3 13.8 9.7 21.0 1.8
Total 4 290 100.0 18.8 18.5 14.4 13.9 10;0 23.1 1.5
a/ In some cases The percentages do not add up to 100.0 due to roundihg.

Table 2.
LIMAi-SEX RATIOS OF I11MIGRANTS BY AGE

AgMale Female Sex
Ag number number ratio

Less than 15 204 199 102.5
15 19 672 853 78.8
30- 49. 782... 753'. -103.8
50 and over ... 411 : .416 .: 98 .
Total 2,069 2,221 93.2.



Table 3
LIMA: SEX RATIOS OF IMMIGRANTS BY AGE AND PERIOD OF ARRIVAL

-1956- 1955- 1945 or Al periods
Ag 1965 1946 earlier

Less than 15 96.5 155.6 102,5
15 29 76.1 85.2 .80.3 78,8
30- 49 85.3 100.0 113.4 103.8
50 and over 80.9 82.7 110.8 98.8
Total 84.0 93.2 109.0 93.2






) 29 (


Table 4
LIMA: IMMIGRANTS BY AGE AND BY PERIOD OF ARRIVAL


A, Total all 1961- 1956- 1951 1946- 1941- 1940 and Unkwn
periods 1965 1960 .1955 1950 1945 earlier


Total
Number
Percent
0- 4
5 9
10 14
15 19
20 24
25 29
30 34
35 39
40 44
45 49
50 54
55 59
60 and over

Total
Number
Percent
0-4
5-9
10 14
15 19
20 24
25 29
30 34
35 39
40 44
45 49
50 54
55 59
60 and over


2 069
100.0
1,4
3.3
5.2
8.4
11.3J
12.7
10.6
10.6
8.5
8.1
6.0
4.5
9.4


2 221
100.0
.1.0
2.7
5.2
12.9
13.11
12.4J
10.9
10.0
7.0
,6.1
5.3
4.6
8.8


357
100.0
7.3
7.6
10.6
19.6
21.8
13.2
6.2
3.3
S2.8
1.1
1.7
1.7
3.1


448
100.0
4.2
7.2
11.4
29.7
19.2
8.7
4.5
2.2
1.8
2.2
2.0
3.3
3.6


362
100.0


9.7
11 .1
)1.3
18.8
21.5
7.7
6.4
3.0
1.6
2.8
2.5
3.6


430
100.0

6.1
10.2
17.4
22.1
17.2
8.4
5.6
3.7
2.8
2.3
0.9
3.3


292
100.0


0.3
8.9
8.9
12.7
21.2
17.4
8.6
5.8
4.1
3.1
2.8
6.2


Female

317
S100.0



5.7
12.9
13.9.
20.8
16.1
9.5
2.8 -
4.7
3.5
4.4
5.7


289
100.0



0.3
10.4
10.7
13.2
21.8
19.0
7.3
6.2
3.5
2.4
5.2


306
100.0




9.2
12.1
15.4
21.9
17.6
7.2
4.2
3.6
2.6
6.2


215
100.0





0.9
7.9
11.6
14.0
23.3
20.9
10.7
4.6
1.9
4.2


215
100.0




0.9
10.7
14.4
17.7
22.3
14.4
3.3
5.1
3.3
7.9


527
100.0





0.2
0.2
2.1
4.6
9.7
1349
19;0


11.0
24.3


466
100.0




0.2

3.0
5.6
11.6
14.6
16.7
13.7
11.6
23.0


27
100.0
11.1
18.6
7.4
14.8
7.4
11.1
3*7
7.4


14.8


3.7


39
100.0
10.3
5.1
7.7
17.9
15.4
10.2
7.7
5.1
2.6

2.6
2.6
12.8


------------







) 30 (


Age at the
time of
arrival

Total
Number
Percent
0 4
5-9
10 -14
15 -19
20 24
25 29
30 34
35 39
40 44
45 49
50 and over
Unknown

Total
Number
Percent
0-4
5'- 9
10 14
15 19
20- 24
25 29
30.- 34
35.- 39
40 44
45*- 49
50 and over
Unknown


Table 5
LIMA: IMMIGRANTS BY AGE AT THE TIME OF ARRIVAL,
BY PERIOD OF ARRIVAL

Inmigrants Period of arrival
all 1961- 1956- 1951- 1946- 1941- 1940 or
periods 1965 1960 1955 950 1945 before Unknown
al- eat


2 069
100.0
12.2
11.5
15.3
25.4
15.0
6.7
3.9
2.8
2.9


3.5
S0.8



2 221
100.0
10.4
12.5
18.8
S23.0
- 12.0
S6.2
4.4
2.6

4.6

4.0
1.5


357
100.0
12.3
6.7
12.1
28.0
16.5
8.4
3.1
4.8
2.2


362
100.0.
13.8
11.9
i1.9
24.0
15.2
6.9
5.0
1.6
4.1


* 5.9 5.3
S 0.3



448 430
100.0 100.0
7.8 8.1
8.5 13.5
17.8 19.3
.29.5 24,2
11.8 10.9
7.1 7.2
3.6 5,4:
2.2 2.1

3.6 5.6


7.6
0.5


3.0
0.7


292
100.0
12.7
10.3
16.8
21.9
14.4
6.8
3.1
3.7
5.5


4.8


Female

317
100.0
9.8
12.9
18.0
20.5.,
12.3
6.9
3.5
4.7


289 .215
100.0 100.0
12.1 12.1
9.7 10.2
16.3 16.3
26.3 31.2
14.5 12.6
4.1 7.9
7.3. 3.1
3.1 1.9
3.5 2.3


2.8 1.9
0.3 0.5


306
100.0
12.1
10.8
17.7
24.8
13.1
5.2
3.6 .
2.9 -


215
100.0
14.4
15.8
20.0
19.5
10.7
4.2
4.2
1.9


527
100.0
10.3
15.6
18.8
25.0
16.1
6.4
2.6
1.9
1.3


1.2
0.8


466
100.0
12.7
15.0
21.0
19.3
S13.7
6.2
5.4
S2.2


27.
100.0
22.2
29.6.
3.7


3.7


.3.7


37.1



39
100.0
7.7
10.2
S7.7
2.6
2.6


5.1


7.3 6.2 3.7 2.6


4,1 3.3
-0.3 -


4.2
1.4


1.5
0.4


5.1
59.0






) 31 (,


LIMA: INilIGRANTS
AND SIZE OF PLACE


Table 6
BY PERIOD OF ARRIVAL
OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE


Size of Place Period of arrival
Total
of Previous years 1961- 1956- 1951- 1946- 1941- 1940 and
Residence 1965 1960 1955 1950 1945 before nkn

Male


Total
Number
Percent
20,000 and over
5,000 19,999
1,000 4,999
Less than 1,000
From abroad
Unknown



Total
Number
Percent
20,000 and over
5,00 19,999
1,000 4,999
Less than 1,000
From abroad
Unknown


2 069
100.0
28.9
15.6
37.5
5.5
4.7
7.8


357
100.0
28.3
17.1
39.8
4.5
3.9
6.4


362
100.0
25.7
17.7
42.8
6.6
2.5
4.7


292
100.0
26.7
13.7
39.7
4.1
6.2
9.6


289
100.0
30.4
14.9
37.4
7.3
1.7
8.3


215
100.0
35.3
13.5
34.4
7.0
0.5
9.3


52
100.0
30.6
14.6
33.6
4.9
9.3
7.0


27
100.0
7.4
29.6
14.8


3.7
44.5


Female .


2 221
100.0
29.5
15.1
38.9
5.2
3.1
8.2


448
100.0
27.0
17.0
39.5
6.0
3.6
6.9


430
100.0
23.0
15.6
47.4
6.3
2.3
5.4


317
100.0
36.0
14.1
36.2
3.7
2.8
7.2


306
100.0
31.7
11.1
38.2
6.6
1.3
11.1


215
100.0
34.4
20.0
34.9
3.3


7.4


466
100,0
32.0
14.4
35.0
5.1
6.4
7.1


39
100.0
10.3
12.8
15.4



61.5






) 52 (


Table 7
LIMA: iALE IMMIGRANTS BY AGE AND PERIOD OF ARRIVAL
BY SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE

-Size of place of previous residence
Age Total LO 000 5 000- 000- Less than Unk.
n Abroad Unknown.
and over- 19 999 4 999 -1 000 .

(All periods)
Total
Number 2 069 599 322 776 114 97 161
Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.6 100.0
0 4 1.4 0.8 2.2 13.. 2.6 2.5
5 9 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.5 1.8 1.0 4.3
10 14 52 6.7 6.8' 4.4 0.9 1.0 5.6
15 19 8.4 8.2 8.7 89 7.0 1043 6.2
20 24 11.3 12.0 8.7 12&5 1449 4.1 9.9
25 29 12.7 9.4 13.7 14.2 18+4 -341 1886 -
30 34 10.6 7.9 12.4 12.2. 15.8 5.2 8,7
35- 39 10.6 10.7 10.2 11.7 6.1 9.3 9.3
40- 44 8.5 10.7 9.3 7.3 7.0 -9.3 5.6
45 49 8.1 9.5 7.5 7.6 7.0 6.2 8.1
50 54 6.0 7.0 6.2 4.9 4.4 11.3 5.0
55 59 4.5 4.3 3.4 3.2 5.3 13.4 7.5
60 and over 9.4 9.5 7.5 8.3 8.8 25.8 8.7
(1961-1965)
Total
Number 357 101 61 142 16 14 23
Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0' 1000 1000.0" 100.0
0 4 7.2 7.2 9.8 7.0 18..8 8.7
5 9 7.6 7.6 9.8 7.7 7.1 8.7
10 14 '10.6 10.6 16.4 8.4 4.3
15 19 19.6 19.6 18.0 25.4 18.8 14.3 4.3
20- 24 21.8 21.8 9.8 22.5 37.5 14.3 30.4
25 29 13.1 13.1 19.7 "' 14.1 7.1 21.7
30 34 6.2 6.2 6.6 4.9 6.2 -,21.4 8.7
35 39 34 .3.4 2.1 ...14.3 4.3
40 44 2.8 2.8 3.3 0.7 12.5 7.1
45 49 1.1 1.1 1.6 1.4 4.3
50 54 1.7 1.7 1.4 7.1
55 59 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.4 6.2 7.1 -
60 and over 3.1 3.1 3.3 2.8 4.3

(Continued)






) 33 (


Table 7 (Conclusion)
LIMA: MALE IMMIGRANTS BY AGE AND PERIOD OF ARRIVAL
BY SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE

Size of place of previous residence
Age 'Total
Age Tota 20 000 5 000- 1 000- Less than
Abroad Unknown
and over 19 999 4 999 1 000

(1960 or earlier)
Total
Number 1 685 496 293 630 98 82 126
Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
0-4 -
5 9 2.1 2.4 1.6 2.2 2.0 3.2
10 14 4.0 4.8 4.3 3.5 1.0 1.2 6.3
15 19 5.9 6.4 6.9 5.2 5.1 9.8 4.0
20 24 9.1 9.5 7.9 10.3 11.2 2.4 7.1
25 29 12.9 9.5 12.6 14.1 21.4 2.4 18.2
30 34 11.6 8.5 13.8 14.0 17.3 2.4 9.5
35 39 12.2 11.7 13.0 14.0 7.1 7.3 10.3
40 44 9.9 12.1 11.1 8.9 6.1 9.8 7.1
45 49 9.4 11.5 8.7 8.9 8.2 7.3 7.9
50 54 7.0 7.9 7.9 5.7 5.1 12.2 6.3
55 59 5.1 5.0 3.6 3.6 5.1 14.6 9.5
60 and over 10.9 10.7 8.7 9.5 10.2 30.5 10.3


Table 8
LIMA: FEMALE IMMIGRANTS BY AGE AND. PERIOD OF ARRIVAL
BY SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE

Size of place of previous residence
Age .Total 20 000 5 000- 1 000- Less than A d
Abroad Unknown
and over 19 999 4 999 1 000

(All periods)
Total
Number 2 221 655 335 863] 116 69 183
Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 100.0 100.0
0 4 1.0 1.1 .0.6 7 0.7 0.9 1.4 3.3
5 -9 2.7 2.4 4.2 2.4 3.4 1.4 2.2
10 14 5.2 4.7 5.4 6.3 6.0 1.4 2.7
15 19 12.9 10.8 13.4 14.1 15.5 2.9 15.8
20 24 13.1 11.6 14.0 14.8 14.7 2.9 11.5
25 29 12.4 12.4 10.7 12.1 17.2 11.6 14.2
30 34 10.9 11.3 11.8 10.5 9.5 11.6 9.3
35 39 10.0 10.4 9.9 10.8 5.2 13.1 7.1
40 44 7.0 7.5 6.3 6.5 7.8 7.3 8.2
45 49 6.1 7.5 6.3 4.9 6.0 13.0 3.8
50 54 5.3 6.1 4.2 4.3 2.6 14.5 7.1
55 59 4.6 4.1 3.6 4.4 3.4 10.2 8.2
60 and over 8.8 10.1 9.6 8.2 7.8 8.7 6.6






) 34 (


Table 8 (Continued)
LIMA: FEhALE IWRMIGRAITS BY'AGE AND PERIOD OF ARRIVAL
BY SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE,- :
Size of place of previous residence
.Age. Total 20 000 5 000-. 000-;. .Less than
Abroad Unknown
and over 19 999 4 999-. 1 000
(1951-1965)
Total
Number 448 121 76 177 27 16 31
Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
0 4 4.2 5.8 1.3 3.4 3.7 6.3 9.9
5 9 741 9.1 6.6 5.6 6.3 6*4
10 14 11.4 12.4 10.5 11.3 18.5 6.3 6.4
S15 19 29.7 2301 35.5 32.8 25.9 6.3 38.7
20 24 19.2 17.4 18.4 237 2549 6.4
-25- 29 847 8.3 13.2 6.2 3.7 25.0 9.7
30 34 4;5 4.1 5.3 2.3 31.2 6.4
35 39 2;2 3.3 2.8 6.3 -
40 44 1.8 3.3 1.3 1.1 3.7 -
45 49 2.2 2.5 1.3 2.3 12.5 -
50 54 2.0 2.5 2.6 17 -
55- 59 3.3 4.1 1.3 34 -
60 and over 3.6 4.1 2.6 3.4 7.4 3.2
Total .(1960 or earlier)
Nu- er 1 734 530 254 680 89 53 128
Percent 100.0 10060 100.0: 100*0 100.0 100.0 100.0
0- 4 -
5 -9 1.5 0.9 3.5 ;. 151.1 0.8
10 14 3.6 3.0 3.5 4.8 2.2 1.6
S15 -'19 8 #8 5 717 7.1 9.3 12.4 1.9 10.2
20- 24 11M5 10.4 12.2 12,6 1142 3.8 11.7
"25 29 '134 13.4 10.2 13.4 21.4 7.5 16.4
S30- 34 12.6 13.0 14,2 1. 2.8 12.4 5.7 9*4
35 39 -- 12.1 t 12.1- 12.6- 12.9 607 -15.1 9.4
40 44 8.4 8.5 77;9 7.9 9.0 9.4 10.9
45 49 7.2 8.7 7.9 5.6 7.9 13.2 5.5
50- 54 6.2 7.0 4.7 5.0 3.4 18.9 8.6
55- 59 : 5.0 4.0 4.3 4.7 4.5 13.2 9.4
60'and over- 10.1 11.3 11.8 9.4 7.9 11.3 6.2







) 35 (


Table 9
LIMA: SEX RATIO BY PERIOD OF ARRIVAL
PLACE OF 'r i .i l:, ::I


L AND SIZE OF


Size of place 1961- 1956- 1951- 1946- 1941- 1940 and
of previous Total Unknown
presvios 1965 1960 1955 1950 1945 earlier
residence

20 000 and over 91.4 83.5 93.9 70.3 90.7 102.7 108.0 50.0
5 000 19 999 96.1 80.3 95.5 93.0 126.5 67.4 114.9 160.0
1 000 4 999 89.9 80.2 76.0 95.9 92.3 98.7 108.6 80.0
Less than 1.000 98.3 59.3 88.9 109.1 105.0 214.3 108.3 -
From abroad 140.6 87.5 90.0 200.0 125.0 163.3
Unknown 88.4 74.2 73.9 127.3 70.6 125.0 112.1 -
Total 93.2 79.7 84.2 92.1 94.4 100.4 113.1 69.2


Table 10
LIMA: MALE IMMIGRANTS BY AGE AT TIME OF ARRIVAL,
PERIOD OF ARRIVAL AND SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE

Size of place of previous residence
Age at time Total
of arrival 20 000 5 000- 1 000- Less than Abroad Unknown
and over 19 999 4 999 1 000

Total (All periods)
Number 2 069 599 322 776 114 97 161
Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
0 4 12.2 13.4 13.7 10.2 9.6 4.1 21.1
5 9 11.4 11.8 16.2 9.7 11.4 6.2 12.4
10 14 15.3 16.2 10.2 17.5 16.7 10.3 13.2
15 19 25.4 22.9 22.3 29.9 31.6 16.5 18.6
20 24 15.0 13.4 15.2 15.8 15.8 23.7 11.2
25 29 6.7 6.3 8.1 6.3 5.3 12.4 4.3
30 34 3.9 4.8 '4.0 3.0 2.6 8.2 3.1
35 39 2.8 3.7 1.9 2.1 0.9 5.2 4.3
40 49 2.7 2.8 2.2 2.4 3.5 7.2 4.3
50 and over 3.5 4.3 3.4 2.8 2.6 5.2 3.1
Unknown 0.8 0.3 1.9 0.2 1.0 3.7

(Continued)






,. S (


Table 10 (Continued)
LIIIA: HALE INHIGRANTS BY AGE AT TIRE OF ARRIVAL,
PERIOD OF ARRIVAL AND SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE
Size of place of previous residence
Age at time Total. 20 000 5 000- 1 000- Less than
n-0 Lss4u-h..


Total
Number
Percent
0-4
5-9
5 9
10 14
15 19
20 24
25 29
30 34
35 39
40- 49
50 and over
Unknown

Total
Number
Percent
0- 4
5-9
10- 14
15 19
20- 24
25 29
30- 34
35- 39
40 49
50 and over
Unknown


and over 19 999


4 999


1 000


Abroao


(1961-1965)


357
100.0
12.3
6.7-.
12.0
28.0 '
16.5
8.4
3.1
4.7
2.2
5.9


101
100.0
9.9
5.9
13.9
28.7
15.8
5.9.
4.0
6.9
3.0
5.9


61
100.0
14.7
16.4
8.2
19.7
21.3
6.6
3.3
3.3
1.6
4.9


142 .
100.0
12.7
4-.9
14.8
31.0
16.2
8.4
2.1
2.8
1.4
5.6
-


16
100.0
18.8

6.2
43.8
6.2
6.2
6.2
6.2


14
100.0

S7.1
S7.1
7.1
21.4
.14.3
* .14.3
14.3

14.3


(1960 or earlier)


685
100.0
12.0
... 12.2
16.2
25.3
.14.9
6.4
S 4.1
2.4
3.1
3.0
S 0.4


496
100.0
S14.1
12.9
16.5
21.8
12.9
6.4
5.0
3.0
2.8
4.0
" 0.4


253'
100.0
13.0
15.8
11.1
24.9
.14.2
8.7
4.3
11.6
S2.4
3.2
0.8


630
100.0
9,7
10.3
18.2
29.8
15.9
5.9
S3.2
1.9
2.7
2.2
0.2


98
100.0
8.2
13.3
18.4
29.6
17.3

3.1

3.-
230
2-o


82.
100.0
4.9
-6.1----
11.0
18.3
24.4
.,2.2
7.3
3.7
8.5
3.7


inKnown


23
100.0
17.4

4.3
30.4
13.0
21.7
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3



126
100.0
20.6
S14.3
16.7
1.8.2
11.1
1.6
1-6
3.2
: 4.8
4.8
,.3.2
1.6


- -~--


1 000


ve oiri*~i


-- --






) 37 (


Table 11
LIMA: FEMALE IMMIGRANTS BY AGE AT TIME OF ARRIVAL,
PERIOD OF ARRIVAL AND SIZE OF.PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE

Sa Size of place of previous residence
Age at time *,,,_
of arrival Total 20 000 5 000- 1 000- Less than Ab d
Abroad Unknown
and over 19 999 4 999 1 000
I _-i -- J-ii


Total
Number
Percent
0-4
5-9
10 14
15 19
20 24
25 29
30 34
35 39
40 49
50 and over
Unknown


Number
Percent
0 -4
5-9
10 14
15 19
20 24
25 29
30 34
35 39
40 49
50 and over
Unknown

Number
Percent
0-4
5-9
10 14
15 19
20 24
25 29
30 34
35 39
40 49
50 and over
Unknown .


2 221
100.0
9.3
12.5
18.8
23.0
12.0
6.2
4.4
2.6
4.6
4.0
1.5


448
.100.0
S7.8
8.5
17.8
29.5
.11.8
11.6
3.6
2.2
S3.6
*7.6
*0.4

1 734
100.0
11.1
1i.6
19.3
21.7
12.3
6.2
4.6
2.7
5.0
3.0
0.5


655
100.0
10.4
14.0
16.2
22.8
12.2
7.3
4.3
3.2
4.7
4.1
0.8


121
100.0
10.7
10.7
13.2
24.0
12.4
8.3
1.6
5.0
4.1
9.1
0.8

*530
100.0
10.4'
14.9
.17.0
22.6
12.3
7.2
4.9
2.8
4.9
2.8
0.2


335 *
100.0
14.0
9.6
19.1
23.3
11.9
7.2
3.6
2.7
4.2
3.6
0.9
(1961-196
76
100.0
5.3
5.3
19.7
31.6
18.4
9.2
2.6
1.3
1.3
5.3
0.0
(1960 or ear
254
100.0
16.1
10.6
18.9
21.2
10.2
6.7
3.9
3.1
5.1
3.1
0.8


863 '
100.0
8a3
13.7
20.5
25.2
12.4
4.8
4.1
1.7
4.4
4.2
0.7
5)
177
100.0
5.1
9.0
20.3
35.0
16.7
4.0
2.8
1.7
4.0
6.8
0.6
rlier)
680
100.0
9.3
14.6
20.6
22.8
12.9
5.0
4.4
1.8
4.6
3.5
0.6


116
100.0
8.6
15.5
24.1
23.3
12.1
6.0
1.7
2.6
3.4
2.6



27
100.0
7.4
11.1
22.2
33.3
11.1
3.7
0.0
0.0
3.7
7.4
0.0

89
100.0
9.0
16.9
24.7
20.2
12.4
6.7
2.2
3.4
3.4
1.1


69
100.0
10.1
4.3
14.5
8.7
15.9
15.9
17.4
2.9
8.7
1.4



16
100.0
12.5
0.0
12.5
0.0
0.0
31.2
31.2
. 0.0.
.12.5
0.0
0.0

53
100.0
9.4
5.7
15.1
11.3
20.8
11.3
13.2
3.8
7.5
1.9


183
100.0
14.8
8.2
18.0
17.5
8.2
4.4
4.4
8.8
4.9
4.9
10.9


31
100.0
16.1
6.4
16.1
25.8
6.4
6.4
6.4
. 0.0


0.0

128
100.0
16.4
10.2
21.1
18.7
9.4
4.7
3.1
5.5
7.0
2.3
1.6


-~----~


l lA( periods )






) 38 (


Table 12
LIMA: INMIGRANTS BY SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE, PERIOD OF ARRIVAL
AND RURAL-URBAN CHARACTERISTICS OF PLACE OF BIRTH


Characteristics of place of birth


Size of place
and period


Total
number


Percent


S-Ur Semi-
Urban urban
urban


Semi-
rural


Rural Unknown


Total
20 000 +
5 000 19 999
1 000- 4 999
Less than I 000
From abroad
Unknown
1956-1960
20 000 +
5 000 19 999
1 000 4 999
Less than 1 000
From abroad
Unknown
Before 1956
20 000 +
5 000 19 999
1 000 4 999
Less than 1 00I .
From abroad
Unknown

Total
20 000 +
5 000- 19 999
1 000 4 999
Less than 1.000'
From abroad
Unknown
1956-1960
20 000 +
5 000 19 999
1 000- 4 999
Less than I 000'
From abroad
Unknown
Before 1956
20 000 +
5 000 19 999
1 000 4 999
Less than 1 000
From abroad
Unknown


2 069


100.0


599 1.00.0
322 100.0
776 100.0
114 100.0
97 100.0
161 100.0
719 .100.0
194 100.0
125 100.0
297 100.0
40 100.0
23 100.0
40 100.0
1 323 '100*.0


403
S189
475
74
73
109

2 221
655
335
863
116
69
183
878
220
143
381
54
26
54
1 304
431
187
476
62
43
105


100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0

100.0
10.00
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0


Mal
40 .
58.4
3958
32.4
25.4
3.1
46.5
S36.9
55.7
3444
30 6
22.5

35.0
42.7
59.8
43.9
33.5
27.0
4.1
54.1
Female
40.1
58.3
42.1
30.6
19.0
10.1
41.0
*32.7
46.8
31.5
28.9
20.4
7.7
29.6
45.3
64.0
49.7
31.9
S 17.7
11.6
51.4


S25.3
19.4
32.9
29.4
-32.4

23.0
26.4
2041
3942
2746
30a0

20.0
24.5
19.1
27.5
30.5
33.8

22.9

25.5
20.6
30.1
27.8
27.6

31.7
28.7
31.4
39.9
25.2
16.7

38.9
23.4
15.3
22.5
20.0
37.1

29.5


14.2
11.8
14.0
'17.4
'2248
1.0
943
13.8
12.4
-1346
*14.5
25*0

1245
1443
11.4
1.4.8
18.9
21.6
1.4
7.3

15.2
11.8
12,2
18.9
33.6
1.4
S9.3
15.6
10.0
- 10.4
. 19.7
38.9

7.4
15.1
12.5
13.9
18.5
S 29.0
2.3
9.5


14.2
8.3
S3.0
' 20.2
.18.4

14.9
17.5
8.2
1248
26,3
20.0

20.0
12.5
8.4
13.2
16.6
17.6

12.8

15.3
8.7
13.7
22.1
18.1

13.1
19.4
.10.9
.18.2
.25.7
.22.2

18.5
12.2
-7.6
10.7
18.9
14.5

6.7


5.9
2.0
0.3
0.6
0.9
95.9
6.2
544
3.6 .

1.0
2.5
100.0
1245
6.0
1.2
0.5
0.4

94.5
2.8

3.9
0.6
1.8
0.6
1.7
88.4
4.9
3.6
0.9

0.5
1.8
92.3
5.6
4.0
0.5
3.2
- 0.6
1.6
86.1
2.8


~---


1


-- --






) 39 (


Table 13
LIMA: IMMIGRANTS BY PERIOD OF ARRIVAL AND
RURAL-URBAN CHARACTERISTICS OF PLACE OF BIRTH

Period of Place of birth
arrival Total
Urban Semi-urban Semi-rural Rural Unknown
Total
Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number 4 290 1 727 1 090 631 633 209
1956-1960 37.2 32.0 40.6 37,4 46.8 34.0
Before 1956 61.2 66.9 57.7 61.2 51.2 63.2
Male
Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number 2 069 836 524 293 294 122
1956-1960 34.8 31.7 36.2 33.8 42.8 32.0
Before 1956 63.9 67.6 61.8 64.5 56.1 65.6
Female
Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number 2 221 891 566 338 339 87
1956-1960 39.5 32.2 44.5 40.5 50.1 36.8
Before 1956 58.7 66.3 53.9 58.3 46.9 60.0

Table 14
LIMA: PERCENT OF INMICRANTS WHOSE LAST REGION OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE
W'AS THE SAME AS THEIR REGION OF BIRTH

Period and Total Male Female
size of place Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
All periods 4 290 93.8 2 069 94.0 2 221 93.9

20 000 + 1 254 92.0 599 92.1 655 92.1
5 000 -19 999 657 95.0 322 95.6 335 94.6
1 000 4 999 1 639 95.6 776 95.1 863 95.6
Less than 1 000 230 90.1 114 89.0 116 91.1
1956-1960 1 597 93.3 719 93.0 858 92.8
20 000 + 414 90.8 194 93.9 220 90.0
5 000- 19 999 268 95.8 125 96.8 143 94.9
1 000 4 999 678 95.8 297 95.8 381 93.8
Less than 1 000 94 87.9 40 78.2 34 90.6
Before 1956 2 627 94.4 1 323 94.1 1 304 94.7
20 000 + 834 92.7 403 92.5 431 92.9
5 000 19 999 376 94,6 189 94.6 187 94.5
1 000 4 999 951 96.0 475 95.8 476 96.2
Less than 1 000 136 91.6 74 91.6 62 91.7






) 40 -(


Table 15.-
LIMA: IMMIGRANTS WHO WERE 14 YEARS OLD AND OVER AND iitHOCAME BETWEEN 1955-1965,
BY SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE AND BY iPUMBER OF' OVES

Size of.place Number of moves (percent)
and sex Number
Total .--- 0 1 2 3
Total 8. 65 100.0 82.1 6.2 5.3 4.4
Size of place
20:000 241 100.0I 78.0 8.7 6.7 6.6
5 000 19 999 167 100.0 75.4 12.6 7.6 4.2
1 000 4 999 394 100.0 86.9 5.3 4.3 3.5
Less. than 1 000 63 100.0 85.7 12.7 1.6
Male 408 100.0 80.9 8.1 5.9 5.1
20 000.* 114 100.0 763 7 79.0 8.8
5 000- 19 999 80 100#0 75.0 1142 7.5 6.3
1 000 4 999 182 100.0 86.8 5.5 4.9 2.8
Less than 1.000 32 100.0 78.1 18.8 3.1
Female 457 100.0 83* ..8.3 448 3.7
20 000 + 127 100.0 79.5 10.2 51*6 4.7
5 000 -19 999 87 .- 100.0 75.9 13.8 8.0 2.3
1 000- 4 999 212 100.0 86.8 52 3.8 .4.2. -
Less than 1 000 31.. 100.0 93.5 6.5 -

Table 16
LIMAM IMMIGRANTS TO METROPOLITAN LIMA BY AGE AT THE TIME OF ARRIVAL. BY LEVEL OF SCHOOLING ATTAINED


Age at the Total Level of schooling atfained!/(percent)
time of arrival number .Toa 2 3 4
TotaT 1. 2I .. .2 3 4
Male
Total 2 029 10.0. 28.3 28.3 .18.5 24.2
0 4 215 100.0 44.2 .13.0 16.8 25.1
5 9 234 100.0 27.4 .22.2 22.6 26.9
10 14 317 100.0 24.9 28.1 22.7 23.7
15 19 526 100.0 27.2 28.7 21.8 21.7
20 24 311 100.0 24.1 37.0 14.1 23.8
25 29 138 100.0 29.0 31.9 17.4 '21.0
30 34 .. 81 100.0 23.5 33.3 13.6 29.6
35 39 57 100.0 31.6 ?9.8 10.5 28.1
40 49 61 100.0 23.0 42.6 .8.2 26.2
50 and over 72 -100.0 34.7 29;2 9.7 26.4
Unknown 17 100.0 5.9 29.4 17.6 41.2
(Continued)






) 41 (


Table 16 (Continued)
LIMA: IMMIGRANTS TO METROPOLITAN LIMA BY AGE AT THE TIME OF ARRIVAL, BY LEVEL'OF SCHOOLING ATTAINED
Age at the Total Level of schooling attained/ (percent)
time of number
arrival Total 1 2 3 4


1961-1965
0-4
5-9
10- 14
15 19
20 24
25- 29
30 34
35 39
40- 49
50 and over
Unknown
1960 or before
0-4
5-9
10 14
15 19
20 24
25 29
30 34
35 39
40 49
50 and over
Unknown


Total
0-4
5-9
10 14
15 19
20- 24
25 29
30 34
35 39
40 49
50 and over
Unknown


323
11
23
43
100
59
30
11
17
8
21
0
1 683
201
204
273
426
251
108
69
40
53
51
7


2 192bj
206
277
418
510
267
139
97
57
102
88
31


100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0


100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0


39.3
81.8
87.0
51.2
32.0
22.0
40.0
9.1
29.4
25.0
52.4
0.0
26.0
41.8
1961
20.5
26.1
24.7
25.9
26.1
32.5
22.7
27.5
0.0
Female
44.9
41.7
41.5
46.9
48,3
44.2
38.8
41.2
43.9
40.2
56.8
41.9


0.0
8.7
23.3
18.0
39.0
23.3
27.3
11.8
50.0
23.8
0.0
29.4
13.4
24.5
29.0
31.2
36.3
34.3
33.3
37.5
41.5
31.4
28.6


26.5
22.3
25.3
24.9
29.4
25.8
30.9
25.8
29.8
29.4
23.9
19.4


18.6
0.0
4.3
23.2
34.0
10.2
16.7
18.2
11.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
18.7
17.9
25.5
22.7
19.0
15.1
17.6
13.1
10.0
9.4
13.7
28.5


18.6
9.1
0.0
2.3
15.0
28.8
20.0
45.4
47.0
25.0
23.8
0.0
25.2
26.4
29.9
27.1
23.2
22.7
21.3
27.5
20.0
26.4
27.4
28.6


18.0
15.2
15.8
8.6
12.4
13.0
9.3
10.5
11.8
5.7
9.7


17.5
17.3
12.2
13.3
16.1
17.3
23.7
15.8
17.6
10.2
29.0


(Continued)






)42 (


Table 16 (Conclusion)
LIMA: lilMUGRANTS TO METROPOLITAN LIMA BY AGE AT THE TME,.OF. ARRIVAL, BY LEVEL OF.SCHOOLING.G.ATTAIIEO

Age at the Total ..- l. ievel of.schooling attaineda- (percent)
time of-" T -
arrival .Uber... u -- ... Total ... 1 ... 2 3 4

1961-1965 423 100.0 59.3 19.4 10.7 .9.9
0 4 11 100.0 90.9 9.1 0.0 0.0
S5 9 37 100.0 94.6 5.4 0.0 0.0
10 14 80 100.0 67.5 1.2 18.8 2.5
15 19 132 100.0 56.0 25.0 9.1 9.1
20 24 53 100A0 604 17.0 11.3 11.3
25 29 32 100.0 31.2 21.9 21.9 25.0
30- 34 6 100.0 18-8 31.2 0.0 50.0
35 39 10 100.0 30.0 40.0 20.0 10.0
40 49 16 100.0 43.8 18.8 6.2 31.2
51n and over 34 100.0 6407 26.5 2.9 0.0
Unknown 2 100.0 50.0 0W0 50.0 0.0
1960 or before 1 734 100.0 41*2 28.4 13.2 16.6
0- 4 193 100.0 39.4 22.8 19.2 18.1
5 9 236 100,0 32.2 28.8 17.8 20.3
10 14 335 100.0 42.1 28.1 15.2 14.6
15- 19 377 100.0 45.4 31.0 8.5 14.8
20.- 24 213 100.0 39.9 28.1 12.7 17.4
25 29 107 100.0 41.1 33.6 10.3 15.0
30 .- 34 79 100.0 .. 45.6 24.0 11.4 19.0
35 39 47 100.0 46.8 27.7 8.5 17.0
40 49 86 100.0 39.5 31.4 12.8 15.1
50 and over 52 100.0 51.9 23.1 5.8 17.3
Unknown 9 100.0 33.4 33.3 11.1 22.2
a/ 1. Without schooling and with 1 to 5 years of primaria.


2. Primaria: 5 to 8 years.
3. Secundaria: 1 to 4 years.
4. Secupdaia: 5 years or more
Includes cases with level of s


, and with some or completed universitaria.
schooling attained not specified.


. r . .






) 43 (


LIMA: IMMIGRANTS BY LEVEL
ARRIVAL AND SIZE OF


Table 17
OF EDUCATION ATTAINEDBY PERIOD OF
PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE


Size of Place Total Level of Instruction (percent)
and period number Total 1 2 3 4 5

Male
Total 2 029 100.0 28.2 28.3 18.5 24.2 0.7
20 000 + 589 100.0 25.0 24.6 20.2 30.0 0.4
5 000 19 999 312 100.0 29.5 30.4 17.9 22.1 -
1 000 4 999 764 100.0 31.8 30.6 19.2 17.8 0.5
Less than 1 000 111 100.0 39.6 27.0 16.2 15.3 1.8
From abroad 97 100.0 9.3 17.5 17.5 55.6 -
Unknown 156 100.0 24.4 34.6 12.2 25.0 3.8
1956-1960 683 100.0 37.3 24.0 18.7 19.2 0.7
20 000 + 184 100.0 31.0 23.4 20.6 24.4 0.5
5 000-19 999 116 100.0 41.4 25.9 14.6 18.1 -
1 000 4 999 286 100.0 40.2 25.5 21.0 12,6 0.7
Less than 1 000 37 100.0 43.2 24.3 13.5 13.5 5.4
From abroad 23 100.0 4.3 13.0 82.6 -
Unknown 37 100.0 48.6 24.3 13.5 13.5 -
Before 1956 1 323 100.0 23.4 30.6 18.7 26.7 0.7
20 000 + 403 100.0 21.8 25.3 20.1 32.5 0.2
5 000 19 999 189 100,0 21.7 33.9 20.6 23.8 -
1 000 4 999 475 100,0 26.7 33.7 18.3 20.8 0.4
Less than 1O000 74 100.0 37,8 28.4 17.6 16.2 -
From abroad 73 100.0 11.0 23.3 19.2 46.6 -
109 100.0 15.6 37.6 11.9 29.4 5.5

1. Without schooling and with 1 to 5 years of primaria.


Primaria: 5 to 8 years.
Secundaria: 1 to 4 years.
Secundaria: 5 years or more,
Unknown.


and with some or completed universitaria.


(Continued)


^






) 44 (


Table 17 (Conclusion)
LIIA: INHilGRANTS BY LEVEL OF EDUCATION ATTAINED BY PERIOD OF
ARRIVAL A!D SIZE OF PLACE; OF PREVIOUS RESIDEiCE
.. Level of instruction (percent)
Size of place Total '---------- ---
and period number. Total 1 2 3 4-- 5

Female
Total 2 192 10040 44.9 26.5 12.5 15.4 0.6
20 000 + 645 100.0 39.5 29.9 12.7 18.8 1.1
5 000 19 999 331 100.0 44.4 26.3 11.2 17.8 0.3
1 00 4 999 856 100.0 51.2 25.5 13.1 10.3 -
Less than 1 000 115 100.0 59.1 28.7 7.8 .4.3
From abroad 68 100.0 16.2 13.2 19.1 51.4
Unknown 177 100.0 36,7 35.5 12.4 17.0 3.4
1956-1960. 853 10040 54.0 21.7 11.6 12.1 0.6
20 000 + 210 100.0 45.7 24.8 11.0 16.2 2.4
5000 19 999 1 40 100.0 57.1 7.1 10.7 15.0 -
1 000 4 99 374 100*0 59,5 20.6 12.3 7.5
Less than 1 000 53 100*0 62.3 26.4 7.5 .3.8 .....
From abroad 25 100I 0 12.0 8.0 20.0 60.0
Unknown 51 100.0 51.0 31.4 11.8 5.9 -
Before 1956 1 304 100.0 38.7 29.9 13.3 17.4 0.6
20 000 4 431 100.0 36.6 29.5 13.4 20.0 0.5
5 000 19~'99 187 100.0 35.3 33.7 11.8 19.2 -
1' 000 4 999 476 100.0 44.1 29.4 13.9 12.6 -
Less than 1 000 62 : 100.0 56.4 :. 30.6 8.1 4.8 : *
From abroad. 43 100.0 18.6 16.3 18.6 46.5 -
Unknown 105 100.0 26.7 32.4 14.3 21.0 5.7

1.--Without schooling and'-ithtl to 5 years'of primaria. .: : .. .: :
2. Primaria: 5 to 8 years.
3. Secundaria: 1 to 4 years.
4. Secundaria: 5 years or more, and with some or completed universitaria,
5. Unknown.











II. REASONS POR LEAVING


Of the 4 290 respondents who were migrants to Lima in the
1965 survey, 1 133 were re-interviewed and asked a series of
questions dealing with "reasons for leaving". This group was
limited to all those migrants who came to Lima within ten years
of the survey data (i.e. 1956-1965) and who were at least 14
years of age at time of arrival in Lima. By limiting analysis
to such a voluntary group, secondary migrants are excluded as
well as persons who came prior to 1956 when the socio-economic
milieu may well have been quite different from that emerging in
the late 1950's and early 1960's.


1. Description of the Voluntary Migrants

Age and Sex Distribution. Females predominate among this
voluntary group of adult migrants to Lima -the sex ratio being
82. Only among those 20-24 and 35-39 are males more likely to
be present. Both males and females tended to be young when they
arrived in Lima. Indeed, no less than two-thirds (66.0 percent)
of the males and 64 percent of the females were between 15 and
24 at that time. This, of course, is very similar to the pattern
generally found in most societies. The popular age period for
migration is "young adult". Such a pattern is clearly evident
among migrants to Lima and it can be seen in Tables 1 and 2 that
less than 25 percent came to the city after attaining their
thirtieth birthday.

Place of Origin and Time of Arrival. Where did the migrants
come from? In both the larger sample and this sub-sample, areas
of 1 000 to 5 000 were the place from which a larger number of
migrants came from, with the largest size cities (20 000 and over)
being second in source of move. Over 60 percent of both males
and females, came from these two types of points of departure.
On the other hand, 6 percent came from the smallest villages of
the nation. Of perhaps more interest is the age distribution
of these various migrant groups. The smaller the place of






) 46 (


residence where they previously lived, the greater the proportion
of migrants under age 25. Among males, this proportion increases
from 60.2 percent for those coming from the largest cities, to
73.5 percent for those coming from the small villages; for fe-
males, it increases from 59.2 percent to 73.0 percent. This
generalization also tends to hold for those coming to Lima prior
to attaining the age of 20.

When did they come? Slightly more migrants came to Lima in
the earlier five year period than in the 1960-1965 period, and
this is more so for males, than for females. In total, 48.4 per-
cent are most recent newcomers and 51.6 percent arrived before
1961. These figures do. not represent exactly the relation be-
tween the recent newcomers and those arrived before 1961, since
mortality has not been taken into account

Differences in time oC arrival' according to place of previous
residence are somewhat more meaningful. Among men, those coming
from larger places are more likely to be recent arrivers and the
proportion decreases in a secular manner to only 38.1 percent of
those from small villages having arrived since 1961. For women,
a somewhat similar pattern exists, but is much less distinct.
The general trend seems to be that in recent years, more people
are migrating to Lima from the larger places. However, a word
of caution is in order. First, the difference (especially among
females) is not that great.

Second, the large number of respondents who failed to indicate
size of place of previous residence (over. 10 percent of- the res-
pondents) may well account for the observed differences. Among.
males, 58.8 percent of those particular respondents came within
the past five years. It seems plausible to 'suspect that they
would more likely be coming from smaller villages than from the
larger cities of the nation. If this suggestion is valid, this
would at least partially explain the difference in time of arriv-
al by place of previous residence.

Number. of People Accompanying Migrant., Almost 60 percent of
all these-adult migrants to Lima arrived as."single" persons
-that is, they were not accompanied by either spouse of by:dhildren.






) 47 (


The proportion is slightly higher for males than for females.
Another 10 percent came with spouse, but with no children. This
is to be expected if it is recalled that about two-thirds of all
these newcomers to Lima were under age 25 at time of arrival.
(In line with the finding, it may be useful to add that 59.8 per-
cent of the male migrants and 56.6 percent of the female migrants
were single at time of arrival). However, these statements in-
dicating a large number of single and couple migration should
not be exaggerated. About 10 percent of all these migrants to
Lima came at least with three children. The effect of such mi-
gration is undoubtedly of significance for Lima.

Comparisons by size of place of previous residence yield
significant results and follow from the earlier findings indi-
cating that the smaller the place the greater the proportion of
young migrants. So too, the percent of migrants coming to Lima
without either spouse or children increases with smaller place
of previous residence. Among females, there is no difference
by towns under 20 000 but for those coming from the ,largest cities,
the variation is quite substantial. The data strongly suggest
that a fairly large number of migrants coming from the largest
cities are families. Indeed,-15 percent of all such movers
arrived with at least three children and another 10 percent with
one or two children. This is in marked contrast to those coming
from the smallest communities. Here slightly more than 10 per-
cent were "family movers" in that at least one child came with
the parents.

The general pattern is quite clear. Although a majority of,
all adult migrants are relatively young (under 25) and come to
Lima alone, 'there are noteworthy differences according to size
of place of previous residence. Those coming from smaller towns
are more likely to be young, "single", and the number of families
is minimal. Those coming from the larger cities are somewhat
older and a significant minority represent the movement of fam-
ilies. These major differentials should affect those responses
to the inquiries on "reasons for moving".






) 48 (


General Soci.o-Economic.-Characteri stics. Prior to analyzing
the actual reasons given for:moving,'it might be' useful to dis-
cuss very briefly the educational and occupational status of
these migrants to Lima. About two-thirds had attained no more
than a primary education with about 20 percent having some train-
ing -beyond-high school. --The difference by sex was significant.
About-half of all females were.functionally illiterate (ie. they
had..completed less than five grades of school) compared to 27
percent of the males. Almost one-quarter of the males had had
some-type of schooling beyond high school compared to 15.5 per-
cent of the females. Here it-should be added that these data
are.based on the educational attainment of. persons. 14.and over
at the time of arrival. A number of these are still of course
attending school and thus these data are biased in a.downward
direction.

As would.be expected because of the age of the migrants,
over half were "non-active" .economically, butagain this was
much truer of females..than of males (72.3 percent to 40.- percent).
Among .those who were. active, manual ..workersmade up a majority
of all.employed migrants.for b6th.males and females.

This brief description of this'selected group of migrants to
Lima who were asked "why they left" is intended to give'the read-
er a better understanding of the types of persons being studied,
'and thereby to better grasp 'the meaning 'of the "reasons for
moving". ..


S2.. Reasons for Lieaving


In this section an, analysis.of the "reasons migrants gave for
moving to Lima will be made-.'. First, the distribution of -these
reasons will. be given together. with a description and ratioral:e
for the categoriesa.to .be -used. This. will be followed With an
analysis. of how these :"reasons for .leaving" vary with a)' age at
time of arrival; b) .size of place of .previous residence; c)-mar-
ital status of migrants at the time of arrival; d) educational
attainment; e) previous occupational status of migrants.







) 49 (


The reasons given are of course subject to much individual
variation and it may well be relevant at this time to recall
Mortar's warning on such data: "The decision to leave the coun-
try for the city, like so many other decisions men make, is in
most cases the product of a number of convergent motives whose
relative weight the individual himself could not determine, even
if he could identify them." i-/

Three basic categories of reasons have been tabulated, these
being developed from the many types of answers given by the res-
pondents. The three categories are: economic, family, and
education. A fourth category is residual (i.e. "other"). Very
few respondents failed to give at least some indication of their
reasons for leaving and coming to Lima. The three categories are
somewhat arbitrary and represent a compromise in determining the
"meaning" of the reasons given. Despite these various weaknesses
inherent in minimal.categorization, certain conclusions can be
derived from these "reasons".

A majority (52.6 percent) of all male migrants cite economic
reasons as their main factor in leaving a previous residence and
coming to Lima. One in six male migrants selected a family
reason and another one in six selected education as their main
reason for moving. Females present a different picture. Almost
half (47 percent) gave family reasons, with 30.2 percent saying
"economic" and less than one in ten feeling that education is
their principal reason for moving.

These differences by sex are not particularly surprising in
view of the knowledge of the characteristics of these migrants,
and the development-level of the nation. In education for exam-
ple, it has been noted that'males have had much more schooling
than females and apparently a number plan to continue their edu-
cation in the city. 1ith one half of all females having had less
than five years of school, it is hardly conceivable that many would
cite education as a reason for their move.
SGiorgio MIortara, "Factors affecting rural-urban migration
in Latin America: Influence of economic and social condi-
tions in these areas". Proceedings of The World Population
Conference, Belgrade, Yugoslavia, 30 August 10 September
1965.






) 50 (

a) seasons by Age and Sex: Among male migrants economic
reasons always rank first regardless of age. However, *the per-
cent increases greatly from age 15-19 when it is only 56.6 to
age 30-34, when it attains a proportion of 86.2 of all such mi-
grants. The largest number of males giving family reasons is to
be found in the youngestt group *(22,5) .and nthe .oldest (2..6'), sug-
gesting that these may be part of the "dependent" population at
those ages. As would be expected., the percent citing, education
reasons is especially high among males under age 20, and even
among those 20-24, one in six giving such a reason for moving.
Beyond that .age, the number becomes small (See Tables 1 and 2)..

F' family reasons become increasingly important::among -females'
with advancing age. 'While only one-third of the youngest give
family reasons for moving, the proportion grow.s to well bver
one-half among those 25 and over, reaching 85.4 percent among
the oldest-migrants. Economic reasons, on the other..hand, tend
to decline in importance the oider the female is at.time of.arriv-
al.in Lima. Among the youngest however, it is cited more fre-
quently than family reasons, suggesting that a number of young
women move to Lima in search of jobs. Education is..also fairly
important for the young women migrants --16.3 percent.giving such
a reason. It is not meaningful among older women except for
those 35-39. However, this .is based on 19..replies. As of the
reason education it should be.mentioned that the given answer
can refer to both migrant and children, that is to say, that the
migrant can give the education of his children as a reason for
leaving.

.In looking.at reasons .giv.en by age at ariyval, it must be
stressed that about, two-thirds of all.migrants came to Lima prior
t.o reaching 25. .These young age categories are consequently of
much..more importance than the older age groups. In..these young
groups, .economic reasons clearly dominate among males with edu-
cational factors given.a relatively, strong emphasis .and family
reasons only strong among the youngest, :perhaps for' "dtdendent"
reasons.- Female"migrants under 25 give economic and-family
reasons about.equally and together these account.for about







) 51 (


three-quarters of all reasons. Education is only relatively
important for those under age 20. In general, young men come
to Lima (1) to get a better job and (2) to improve their educa-
tion. Young women come to Lima overwhelmingly for either econom-
ic or family reasons.

b) Size of Place of Previous Residence and Reasons for
Leaving. Regardless of size of place of previous residence,
slightly more than half of all male migrants came to Lima for
economic reasons. The proportion coming for educational reasons
increase gradually with decreasing size of place. At first
glance this may appear surprising. But it must be recalled that
males coming from such areas are younger, on the average, than
their counterparts moving from larger cities and towns, This
in undoubtedly reflected in the present finding. Hales giving
family reasons more prevalent among those coming from places of
1 000 5 000 than from other areas, but differences were not
especially meaningful (See Table 3).

Women coming from the largest and smallest communities were
more likely to give family reasons than those coming from inter-
mediate size areas. On the other hand, women from the two largest
places of previous residence were much more apt to give educa-
tional reasons than those from smaller places -only 2.9 percent
of those coming from the smallest villages giving such a reason.
Yet the smaller the place, the younger the migrants and this has
already been given as a possible reason for the high number of
rural males who express a desire for more education in the city.
How can this apparent contradiction be reconciled? It will be
recalled that 26.7 percent of all females from cities of 20 000
or more came to Lima with at least a spouse and one child. This
undoubtedly influenced the high proportion (54.1) giving family
reasons for moving. Those coming from small rural areas are
younger on the average. However, a review of the earlier tables
also indicates that 23.0 percent were between 20 and 24 and that
17.2 percent came to Lima with their spouse -by far the-largest
proportion on that particular category. In addition, this group
coming either "married or with a companion" amounts to 34.2







) 52 (

percent- the highest such proportion in these combined categories.
These data at least hint at an explanation for the .proportion
coming from the smallest villages giving family reasons. Perhaps
these people marry at a younger age than those living in the
larger cities and this too, is reflected in the findings. The
small number of female village migrants selecting education as
reasons as compared to the relatively large proportion among
those coming from more populated areas possibly reflects the
fact that a great number of those who have had at least a second-
ary education migrate for education reasons and most females from
the smaller areas would not. have had the opportunity for advance-
ment that far in school. Perhaps this is not so for males coming
from such areas. The role of the female may differ from that of
the male in .these rural sections of the nation. About half of
all female migrants had less than five grades of school. PIresum-
ably this percent increases among those coming from the smallest
areas,

Clearly, reasons for migrating differ for males and females
by size of place of previous residence. However, age tends to
blur the.relationship, especially among males. The greatest dif-
ference exists among.females where those from small areas are
apparently.concerned with family and economic reasons, whereas
those from the. larger areas tend to cite education factors, there-
by suggesting differences in the female role by size of place.

') Iarital Status: Unmarried, presumably younger persons
were much more likely to- select' educational reasons than were
married migrants, and this was especially noticeable for males
where one-quarter stated that'education was their main reason
for moving to Lima. This of course is to .be expected. The dif-
ference between males and'females selecting education ifs,caused
by the greater number of single females statiig.-family reasons.
But it is among married migrants that differences by reason and
by sex become especially meaningful. Almost three-quarters of
all married-male migrants selected economic reasons, but 11.6
percent gave family reasons. However, among married female mi-
grants, these proportions are almost exactly reversed -12.4







) 53 (


percent giving economic reasons and 73.7 percent giving family
reasons (See Table 4). This suggests the lack of independence
among Peruvian females and the subsidiary role played by women
in that society.

d) Educational Attainment: An interesting pattern is noted
when analyzing reasons for moving by educational attainment of
the respondents. For both, males and females, the proportion
citing economic factors declines with increasing educational at-
tainment and the proportion citing educational factors increases.
Family factors do not appear to be,significantly affected by the
degree of education completed. It can perhaps be assumed that a
significant number of young migrants with at least some high
school training have migrated to Lima to advance their education.
Thus 35.8 percent of such males and 24.2 percent of such females
indicated that education was their prime reason for moving (See
Table 5).. On the other hand, the very large proportion of males
indicating that economic reasons brought them to Lima suggests
that there may be a large number of poorly educated migrants
coming to the city to find jobs. This is also true of poorly
educated females of whom about one-third come to Lima for econom-
ic reasons.

e) Previous Occupational Status: The data based on occupation-
al status in place of previous residence yield additional infor-
mation which tends to strengthen the above suggestions. For
example, of the total male non-active population, 36.1 percent
came to Lima for educational purposes. These are probably young,
high school educated men pursuing advanced schooling in Lima. But
of the three occupational categories, manual and agricultural
workers cite economic factors more often than do non-manual work-
ers, again hinting at the possibility of poorly educated male
migrants coming to Lima in search of better sources of employment.
Furthermore, one in four of the males who were non-active came
to Lima for economic reasons, undoubtedly searching for a job.
Another one-quarter came for family reasons -these presumably
older migrants joining their relatives.






) 54 (


The proportion of non-active migrants is much greater for,
females than for males -about :three-quarters being in that cate-
gory. Xell over half indicated family reasons and many of these
are perhaps migrating with their spouse or meeting them in the
city. It is also noteworthy ,that 71.9 percent of those women
previously employed in manual occupations came to Lima for econom-
ic reasons, again suggesting that many poorly educated,, blue
collar working migrants, male and female, come to Lima in search
of work (See Tables 6 and 7).


3. Summary

Migrants to Lima are relatively young and this affects all
the 'other findings regarding reasons for moving, Generally,' there
seem to be two .principal types of male migrants. One is relative-
ly well-educated and comes to Lima to continue his schooling as
well as to find better employment. A second is less educated and
is being pushed from the rural area to the city in search of work.
This i.s not as true of the female migrants,.but it is nevertheless
still present. Of. course, many females cite family reasons for
their.'moving -indicating the inferior position of .females in Peru.

Generally then, these findings are in agreement with studies
.compl'e-ted.in other .areas of Latin America. Both economic and.
education factors predominate: in the ."reasons" why -people.:move to
the primate, city,.of the nation.







) 55 (


Table
LIMA: ADULT MALE INMIGRANTSa/
BY REASONS FOR LEAVIIIG THEIR PRIOR PLACE OF


1
WHO CAME BETWEEN 1956-1965,
RESIDENCE, BY AGE AT THE TIME OF ARRIVAL


Reasons for Age at the time of arrival
leaving Total 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-49 50 and over

Total number/ (513) (213) (124) (51) (29) (24) (23) (45)
Total percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Economic 52.6 36.6 58.9 66.7 86.2 70.8 73.9 53.3
Family 16.8 22.5 8.9 11.8 3.4 20.8 4.3 28.9
Education 16.6 28.2 16.1 3.9 8.7 2.2
Other 12.8 11.8 15.3 15.7 6.9 8.4 13.0 13.3
No information 1.2 0.9 0.8 2.0 3.4 2.2
a/ Inmigrants 15 years old or over at the time of arrival.
E/ Totals include non applicable cases.



Table 2
LINA: ADULT FEMALE INMIGRANTS-/ WHO CAME BETWEEN 1956-1965,
BY REASONS FOR LEAVING THEIR PRIOR PLACE OF RESIDENCE BY AGE AT THE TIME OF ARRIVAL

Reasons for Age at the time of arrival
leaving Total 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-49 50 and over

Total numberb (622) (289) (109) (68) -. (41). (19) (43) (48)
Total percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Economic 30.2 41.2 .31.2 23.5 29.3 5.3 7.0 4.2
Family 47.6 33.9 43.1 55.9 61.0 68.4 72.1 85.4
Education 9.6 16.3 4.6 2.9 2.4 15.8 4-7 -
Other 7.9 5.8 11.0 10.3 2.4 10.5 11.6 10.4
No information 4.7 2.8 10.1 7.4 4.9 47 -
a/ Inmigrants 15 years old and over at the time of arrival.
b/ Totals include non applicable cases.








Table 3
LIMA: ADULT INMIGRANTS1- WHO CAME BETWEEN 1956-1965, BY REASONS FOR LEAVING THEIR PRIOR PLACEOF RESIDENCE,
BY SEX AND SIZE OF PLACE OF. PRIOR RESIDENCE

Size of place of prior residence
Reasons for Males Females
leaving o 20 or 5 000 t00 0 to 00 to less than b/ 20 000 or 5 000 to 1 000 to less than
Total more 19 9.9 ~.999 o Total more 19 999 4 999 1 000
more n 1..0.---- _-- ....

Total number (511) (133) (86) (207) (34), (622) (157) (104) (262) '(35)
Total percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 lO0.0O, 100,0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100,0
Economic 52.6 53.4 ; 54.7 5037 50.0! 30,2 23.6 298 35,5 25.7
Family 16.8 17.3 12.8 20.3 17.6 47,6 54.1 462 43.5 57.1
Education 16.6 15.0 15.1 16.9 :23,5 .5 9.6 10.8 14,4 8.0 2,9
Other 12.8 13.6 17.4 9,6 8.8' 9 7,6 5.8. 8.4 5.7
No information 1.2 0.8 2,4 .4,7 3.8 3.8 4,6 8.6

a/ Inmigrants 15 years old and over at the time of arrival. .. -
E/ Totals include migrants coming from abroad and place of prior residence unknown.










.,. .






) 57 (


I Table 4
LIMA: ADULT INMIGRANTS.a./ WHO CAME BETWEEN 1956-1965, BY
REASONS FOR LEAVING THEIR PRIOR PLACE OF RESIDENCE,
BY MARITAL STATUS AT THE TIME OF ARRIVAL

Marital status at time of arrival
Reasons for Males Females
leaving T / / Widowed, divorced h/ of c idowed duorcod
leaving Totalk/ Single Married idoed, divorced Total-l Single Married' / idowed,diorcod
and/or separated and/or separated

Total number (511) (305) (155) (12) (622) (349) (202) (41)
Total percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Economic 52.6 46.2 72.3 41.7 30.2 43.0 12.4 9.8
Family 16.8 17.7 11.6 50.0 47.6 30.9 73.7 70.7
Education 16.6 23.0 2.4 9.6 14.0 2.5 2.4
Other 12.8 12.2 13.4 8.3 7.9 6.6 8.9 14.5
No information 1.2 1.0 0.8 4.7 5.4 3.0 2.4
a/ Inmigrants 15 years old and over at the time of arrival.
b/ Totals include non applicable cases, and cases where marital status was not specified.
c/ Includes convivientes.


Table 5
LIMA: ADULT INNIGRANTSIA/ WHO CAME BET';EEN 1956-1965,
BY REASONS FOR LEAVING THEIR PRIOR PLACE OF RESIDENCE, BY SEX AND LEVEL OF SCHOOLING ATTAINED

Level of schooling attained/
Reasons for
leaving Males Females
Total 1. 2. 3. 4. Total 1. 2. 3. 4.
Total number (511)/ (138) (152) (81) (123)' (622)_/ (308) (154) (48) (95)
Total percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100o0 100.0
Economic 52.6 62.3 60.5 43.2 39.8 30.2 38.3 31.8 16.7 11.6
Family 16.8 15.2 19.7 14.8 16.3 47.6 46.1 48.1 52.1 52.6
Education 16.6 3.6 9.2 22.2 .35.8 9.6 4.5 8.4 10.4 24.2
Other 12.8 14.5 10.5 19.7 8.1 7.9 7.4 7.8 10.4 6.3
No information 1.2 4.3 4.7 3.6 .... 3.9 10.4 5.3
1,


Inmigrants 15 years old and over at the time of arrival.
1. Without schooling and for with 1 to 5 years of primaria.
2. Primaria: 5 to 8 years.
3. Secundaria: 1 to 4 years.


4. Secundaria: 5 years or more; and with some or completed universitaria.
c/ Includes cases with level of schooling attained not specified.


--.. I






) 58 (


Table 6
LIMA: ADULT MtAL E INMiGRANTiS HlO CAME BETWEEN 1956-1965,
BY REASDOS FOR LEAVING THEIR PRIOR'PLACE OF RESIDENCE, BY OCCUPATIONAL
SSTATUS IN PLACE OF PRIOR RESIDENCE

S' Occupational status
...Reasons for.leaving. Total Non manual ....Manuql .Agricultural .. Total non Total
S. workers workers workers active

Total number- -304) (68) (133) .. (69) 205) (511)
Total percent 100.0 100.0 ;i00.0 100.0 .'100.0 100.0
Economic 70.3 '64.7 72.2 73.9 26.3 5.2.6
Family 10.4 16.2 11.3 7.2 26.3 16.8
Education 3.6 2.9 2.3 2.9 36.1 16.6
Other 14.1 14.7 14.3 14.5 10.8 12.8


No information 1.6 1.5 -' -
a/ .1nmigrants 15 years old and over at the time of arrival.
F/ Includes other cases*


Table 7


1.5 0.5


LIMA: ADULT FEMALE IMMIGRANTS!/ WHO CAME BETWEEN 1956-1965,
BY REASONS FOR LEAVING THEIR PRIOR PLACE OF RESiDENCEI BY OCCUPATIONAL
STATUS IN PLACE OF PRIOR RESIDENCE.
_____ .' .. *. '. '- ** r r -' '


-. ~ ..~ "Th+31


Occupational status


Reasons.Tr leaving. e Non-manual .Maanual Agricultural Total non
workers workers workers active

..Totai. number- ..... .. (172).. ...40) (89) (23) (450). (622)
Total percent" .100. 100.0 TO00.O 100.0 100.0 100.0
Economic 54.7 35.0 71.9 43.5" 209 ; 30.2
Family 23.8 37.5 15.7 34.8- 56.7 :47.6
Education 5.2 10.0 1.1 8.7 11.3 9.6
Other. 9.3 12.5 9.0 8.6 7.3 7.9
No information 6.3 5.0 '2.3 4.3- 3.8 4.7

a/ Inmigrants 15 years old and over at.th. time of arrival.
_ Includes other cases. .


1.2


i


TnoTlbf


_--













III. ADJUSTEI~TliT Of I:IGRAITTS


The study of migration to metropolitan areas should include
an attempt to understand the problems of "adjustment". The
shifting of large numbers of people from one or more areas to
another invariably results in numerous problems for both, the
migrants and the urban born residents of the host city. In
Peru, this i.s especially marked as such migration is concentrat-
ed in the one primate city, Lima.

Usually adjustment is defined in terms of consequences
for individual migrants at the place of destination. Thus a
United Nations publication (1958) considers adjustment as:

"The process by which immigrants adjust themselves to
conditions in the area of destination falls into sev-
eral categories: ... assimilation, integration into
the social structure ..., acculturation, the adoption
of the customs and values of the population in the
place of destination."

Although this approach has led to many useful studies,
adjustment can be viewed as a two-way process and at both the
individual and societal level (Borrie, 1959; and Beijer, 1963).
Furthermore it also may be worthwhile to study the adjustment
consequences for the social system in the area of origin as well
as destination. For example, adjustment is not necessarily a
one-way acceptance of the norms and values of the urban social
system. Migrants bring different values to their new environ-
ment and we should not overlook the question of mutual adjust-
ment or feedback. Why should migrants be expected to resemble
the native city dweller? This is a particularly moot point when
we look at the: a) selectivity of the migration, b) proportion
of persons who were born in the urban area, c) pattern of resi-
dential segregation that they obtain in the urban area, and d) mi-
grants participation in non-service work activities.







) 63 (


As has been stated earlier, migrants do not generally
represent a cross section of the sending and receiving p.opu-
lation, byt are selected on many demographic, social and social
psychological characteristics. Although the kinds of selecti-
vities that are found have implications for the adjustment of
the migrants to the urban and social structure, it is clear
that they also have implications for the ad-justment of the.
urban social structure to the inmigrants. This is a particular-
ly relevant point when we consider the volume of the immigra-
tion. CELADE data, as reported by Myers (1969), indicate that
in six major cities in Latin America more than half of the ever-
married women between the ages of 20-25 were not born in the
city. This suggests that for this select group of women deter-
mining urban norms of bahaviour might be problematido A more
pertinent question might be who is adjusting to what?

Another consideration is that the recent immigrant may.not
enter into the urban social structure in such a way as to be
exposed to urban-forces. To a large extent recent migrants may
be residentially segregated. To the extent that this is true,
the recent migrant may have little social contact with urban
natives. Furthermore, quasi-urban communities may develop their
own rural-based subcultures within the confines of the city.
Finally, even if the migrant is exposed to an urban environment,
he may initially adjust in a typically rural manner. Very much
depends.upon what the migrant brings to the new environment as
well as .how- he interacts with it.

Many rural-urban migrants change jobs.. An important question
is whether a greater proportion of these changes are to "produc-
tive" occupations or to service work. Do migrants move into the
industrialized sector of the economy or do they find. jobs wash-
ing the shirts of other migrants? On the social structural
level, is the rural migrant to the city merely another statistics
indicating increased urbanization, or rather is he affected by
urbanism as a-way of life? Many migrants may be in the city while
not of the city. Attention should be paid to the question of
whether the urban social structure itself will experience change






) 61 (


in the face of a rapid influx of rural urban migrants. The nor-
mative system of any group may be threatened by an excessively
rapid increase in new members.

Does the social and personal disorganization view of the
migrants need modifiation? The culture shock hypothesis which
explains migrants "problems" in terms of their entrance into a
new social system could usefully be compared with the view of
the migrantion process which has been emerging over the years.
This view suggests that personal and social disorganization of
the migrants may be minimal. As a result of positive selection,
the migrant may be in a better adjustment position than the
urban native. The presence of large numbers of inmigrants may
cause serious strains and imbalances in the social structure of
the urban area of destination, but this is a problem of adjust-
ment on the part of the urban social system. Squatter settle-
ments from the point of view of the urban administrator represent
disorganization. But these areas represent a high degree of nor-
mative integration and for the individual are most likely impro-
vements over previous conditions. It is perhaps for this reason
that many migrants define their situation as better than their
previous one, and tend to solve the housing problem.

Two basic independent (or causal) variables form the basis
of this chapter: the size of place of previous residence and the
duration of residence in Lima. Comparisons are limited to possi-
ble differences between those coming from larger towns and from
the smaller communities, and those coming between 1955 and 1960
with those coming since that date. Additionally, the analysis
is limited deliberately to those who arrived as adults.

A sizeable literature has emerged dealing with the implica-
tions of the size of place of origin (or of previous residence)
for migrant adjustment. Generally, it has been found that,
ceteris paribus, migrants coming from larger size places tend to
adjust more favorably to the exigences of the city than do those
coming from the more rural areas. Conversely, the receiving city
should be more able to cope with incoming migrants if the propor-
tion coming from larger areas is greater. The influx of rural







) 62 (


people into the large cities has proven to be a serious problem
for the urban social system in both the developing and developed
nations.

Length of residence in the host city is also a useful meas-
ure 'of adjustment. The l'on-ger a migrant re-sides in a given area
the.more likely he will resemble the people born in that city.
This general proposition has been tested in a number of studies.
While it is not possible to compare these people with the Lima-
born,/ .it is nevertheless important to note if indeed, a longer
..duration of residence actually affects these migrants on a number
of social indicators.

The focus of this chapter is on the effects of these varia-
bles on a number of such social indicators of possible adjustment
to the city. However a number of other analyses should be in-
eluded as well. Some information of both, a demographic and
economic nature on the background of the migrants.will also be
included. Thus large and small town migrants will be compared
on such economic indices as occupation (if any) in previous
.place of residence and the reasons for moving. Also considered
will be the age-sex structure, marital status, number of persons
accompanying the migrant, of these various classes of migrants at
the time of their move to Lima.

The topics for investigation (i.e. the dependent variables)
fall into three basic categories: economic, housing and social.
Under economic such questions as type of job (if any) did the
migrants find in Lima. How long did it take to find that first
job? Housing queries include the type of housing that the mi-
grant found and in which sections of the city did he settle upon
arrival. Finally some social questions are included on such
subjects as having a social security card, attendance at movies
and soccer games, listening and watching television and/or radio,
and the..reading of newspapers. These are all indicators of pos-
sible adjustment or a lack thereof among the migrants to Lima.
St
*/ Notwithstanding, from chapteriv in which differential
characteristics between migrants and natives are analyzed,
some conclusions can be drawn about civil status, education,
fertility and other variables.






) 63 (


They all give insights into the problems for the receiving city
as it increasingly becomes the haven of increasing numbers of
Peruvians.

1. Demographic Background

The comparison of adult migrants to Lina on basic denog-
raphic variables by size of place of previous residence is
covered nore extensively in Chapter IV. Nevertheless, a brief
sunnary is warranted at this point. Knowledge about such
characteristics is vital to better understand the additional
comparisons which will be made. This is especially important
in view of the fact that complex nultivariate analysis is not
possible due to the size of the sample.

Three demographic variables are briefly considered here:
age at the time of arrival, time of arrival, and marital status
at time of arrival. In addition, the number of persons accompany-
ing the migrant in his move to Lima will also be investigated.

Generally, the proportion of young migrants (under 25) in-
creases with decreasing size of place of previous residence, and
over 70 percent of those coming from communities under 5 000
came to Lima when they were between 15 and 24 (See Table 1).
Males and females exhibit similar patterns. People coming from
the larger cities (especially those with at least 20 000 popu-
lation) are more likely to be recent migrants (i.e. since 1961)
than are those from the smaller towns of Peru (See Table 2).
This is especially true of males but is generally valid for
females as well. Or, to analyze it differently, of all migrants
coming to Lima since 1956, a slightly greater proportion of
those moving between 1956 and 1960 came from towns under 5 000
than is the case with those coming since 1960.

The relation between age at arrival and marital status is
clearly noted when looking at the latter variable and comparing
the migrant groups by size of place of previous residence. Ob-
viously the larger the proportion of young persons, the greater
the proportion of single persons. Thus, those coming from the
smaller communities are more likely to be single than those coming
from the larger cities. This is especially significant among







) 64 (


males. About 63 percent of those coming from under 5,000 were
single at the time of arrival in Lima, as compared to 57 percent
of those from the larger towns. This pattern is not as clear
for females. Indeed if those coming widowed or divorced are
added to the singles, differences become insignificant (See
Table 3).

An important dimension in migration that should be studied
deals with the number of persons who accompanied the migrant
when he moved to Lima. The striking difference lies between
those coming from cities of 20,000 or more population and those
coming from all the smaller places (i.e. under 20 000) (See
Table 4). For males and females alike, about 60 percent of all
migrants from the latter places (regardless of their respective
sizes) were single at the time of arrival in Lima and between
70 and 75 percent were either single or came with their spouse
but with ni accompanying children. The pattern for those coming
from the nations largest cities is quite different. Less than
60 percent came either as singles or couples only. However no
less than- 15 percent were accompanied by at least 3 children.
Again this is frue of- both sexes. The proportion of "family
movers" coming from the-other areas is much smaller. Such a
finding is.not unexpected in light of the previous analysis
which indicates that those migrating from the'larger cities are
less likely .to be single and have a higher median age at the
time of arrival.. It is also interesting'to point -out that over
half of such. migrants (i.e. from larger cities) came -to Lima
since 19-60 thus suggesting -that many of.-these recent migrant's
are more likely to be "family movers".

Introducing present age as a control variable does not
significantly .alter the findings. Nevertheless some interesting
results emerge.- (The number of cases is often quite small and
precautions would be-taken before making broad generalizations).
Among males 20-24, the.proportion single coming from the larger
cities is somewhat smaller, but not significant pattern is ob-
served. Males 25-34, coming from cities 20 000 and over, begin
exhibiting the generalized pattern noted above.' That is to say,






) 65 (


the proportion single is less than among those coming from the
cities under 20 000. However they are underrepresented in the
"couples" category. On the other hand, over 15 percent came
with two or more children --a greater proportion than from any
other group.

Hale migrants presently 35 years of age or over were at
least 25 when they came to Lima. It is in this group that
differences are especially substantial. No less than 51.4
percent came to Lima with a wife and at least three children
and another 16.2 percent came with two children. Males coming
from the smaller areas do not exhibit such large proportions
of "family migrants". Indeed about 42 percent of those from
villages under 5 000 came either as single men or with only
-their spouse. This is somewhat surprising for a group who
had to be at least 25 years of age at the time of move.

Females presently 20-24 do not offer any additional in-
sights into this phenomenon, although, interestingly, it is
those from the smaller towns who are more likely to come with
spouse and children. Those 25-34 start exhibiting the expected
differential by size of place of previous residence. Over 35
percent of those coming from the largest cities came with their
husbands and at least one or two children, but only half came
as single women. The data on the older female migrants yields
more meaningful results. As expected, the proportion single
or "coupled" is smaller from those coming from the larger
cities while half came with spouse and at least three children.
No other group of women migrants comes close to this proportion.
It is also interesting that close to one-quarter of all such
women presently 35 or over came to Lima without husbands but
with one or more children --the proportion being about the
same regardless of the size of place of previous residence.
This compares to only 5.8 percent among males of the same age
who migrated under such circumstances.

It appears that Lima is the haven, not only for young
migrants --generally single or married with no children. It
is also the destination point for a fairly large number of women






) 66 (.


who cane with children but without husbands. It can also be
concluded that those who cane as "families" are more likely to
be from the largest cities of the nation than fron-the smaller
conuunities.

2. Economic Background Variables

The employment situation of migrants to'Lima in their former
place of residence yields meaningful information about these
people. -It-givds certain insights as to their economic stability
and indirectly --as to their motives for making a move. (It has
been noted in an earlier chapter that economic reasons p.redominat-
ed especially among the male migrants to Lima), Three questions
are included in this section which contribute to a better under-
standing of the economic background of these migrants according
to size of place of previous residence. First, were they em-
ployed prior to coming to lina? Second, if yes, what kind of oc-
cupation was it and in what type of industry? Third, were they
looking for work?

-Among male migrants, 40.1 percent were'"not working" prior
to moving to Lima; 72.3 percent of the females were not working
-many-of course being housewives (See Table 5). The proportion
of -males-not working varies according to "the age of the respond-
ants. -The overall tendency is that it declines drastically
with 'increasing age. Over 80 percent of all male migrants
presently 15-19 did not work before cdmifg to Lima. This is to
be expected, although in a lower proportion. Probably many of
.the-ei either stated that they looked for work for the first
time,:- becausoe.they-did not expect to find work.-/ On the other
hand, of those now 25-34 one third was not working prior to
coning to Lina, and the proportion amdng the older males was
a mere 10.7 percent.

The incidence of not working in the.previous place of
residence tends to be greater in the small communities. While.
39 percent of those coning from towns of 5 000 and over were
not working,.about 46-percent of those from towns under 5 000

6/ Notice should be taken of the fact that those who stated
that they were looking for work for the first time are
included in the working group.







) 67 (


were so categorized, Generally this pattern is to be noted in
the various age groups, especially among males 25-34. Numbers
of cases become quite small however and generalizations would
best be limited to the overall distribution.

While 72.3 percent of all females were not working prior to
coming to Lima, this statistics can be misleading including, as
it does, many not actually looking for work. This is evidenced
by the fact that the proportion not working does not vary signif-
icantly by present age and what difference that does exist is in
an opposite direction from that noted for males. That is to say,
while 70.4 percent of these women 14-19 were not working, over
three-quarters of the oldest women belonged to this category, it
can be assumed that the proportion of housewives also increases
with age. Women were also more apt to be employed if they had
been residing in the larger cities and this was equally true at
all ages.

About 60 percent of all males were employed before coming
to Lima. Of these 306 men, 22.2 percent were in non-manual oc-
cupations; 43.5 percent in manual jobs, another 22.5 percent
were in agriculture, and 11.8 percent fell into the residual
categories. Por men 20 and over it can be seen that the propor-
tion previously employed in white collar positions increased
with advancing age at time of interviews. This increase, from
10.9 percent among those 20-24 to 37 percent for the oldest, is
at the expense of both, the manual and agricultural occupations.
There were actually more men, presently 35 and over, in non-
manual occupations than there were in blue collar jobs. But in
the under 25 group about half had been manual workers and another
quarter had been rural workers (See Table 6).

The influence of the larger city is especially noteworthy
on these economic indices. Not only are males coming from the
larger cities less likely to have been not working, those work-
ing were also more likely to be in the non-manual occupations
than migrants coming from the smaller places of Peru. The pro-
portion of those previously farmers or manual workers increases
with smaller community of previous residence, and this is







) 68 (


especially significant in the agricultural occupations,- Close
to one-quarter-of all those coming from cities 20 000 or more
who had been. employed were .in. non-manual positions and only 11.1
percent were working in agriculture. Due to ever smaller sizes
of cells when controlling for present age of. the previously em-
ployed male migrants, such an analysis is made with caution.
Nevertheless, the same general pattern appears in all the relevant
age groups ..

Only about one-quarter of all female migrants were previous-
Sly employed and thus analysis becomes problematical. About one-
quarter (23.2 percent) of those working were in non-manual oc-
cupations; 5147 percent in manual; 13.4 percent in agriculture,
and 11,6 percent in the residual category. That is especially
noteworthy is that about 37 percent of all previous employed
female migrants were working as domestics. Although analysis
by present age is not feasible, this pattern of large numbers of
previously employed domestics is only noted among women present-
ly under 25. Of all these young previously employed women, 46
out of 78 (59 percent) were domestics. Otherwise the proportion
who were in non-manual jobs appears to increase with age (See
Table 6).

.As with males, size of place of previous residence is sig-
nificantly.-related to type of employment with 37.2 percent of
those coming from cities 20 000 and over having been in non-
manual work compared to only 12.2 percent of those coming from
communities under 5 000. Similarly the proportion with agricul-
tural backgrounds increases with smaller places. The large
number of previous persons who worked as domestics noted above
came predominantly from towns between 1 000 and 20 000. While
25.2 percent of all female migrants (irrespective of previous
occupation) came from the largest cities, only 19.0 percent of
the domestics came from such places. But, whereas 58.8 percent
of all females came from towns 1 000 to 20 000, no less than 73
percent of the former domestics came from such smaller communities.
It has been stated that many young females came to Lima to become
servants. Apparently many have had previous experience in that






) 69 (


occupation and this was learned in the relatively small towns
of the nation. Those coming from the largest cities were more
likely to have been employed in non-manual occupations.

Respondents were asked if they had been looking for a job
prior to coming to Lima. It is of course possible for a person
to be "looking for a job" while being employed. Realistically
however, it is perhaps more likely that such a person will be
unemployed or underemployed. Table 7 shows the proportion of
those "looking for work", males and females, by size of place
of previous residence. The male "looking for work" proportion
approximates 23 percent. The proportion increases according to
age, reaching a maximum (30.0) in the group with present age
between 25-29 years, which corresponds to migrants who arrived
(on the average) between 20-29 years of age. Presumably most
of the latter were included in the "not working" category. For
females, however,.only 12,4 percent were in the "looking for
work" category, suggesting that a majority of women consider
7/
themselves housewives and do not plan to do outside work.-

This summary of the demographic and economic background of
recent adult Lima migrants indicates that certain differentials
exist between those coming from the large and small areas of the
country. Those from the largest cities are more apt to be fami-
ly movers and tend to be a little older than other migrants.
Single migrants predominate among those who previously resided
in the rural communities. These findings are generally similar
for both, males and females.

Over half of all the adult migrants did not work prior to
coming to Lima. However, this may be partially attributable to
age (young men) and sex (a majority of the females did not work
or look.for work because of their wifely duties). Both, in-
creasing age and size of place are related to the type of previous
occupation. Those coming from the largest cities are more likely
to have been non-manual workers and with advancing age the


7/ The question "Are you looking for work?" was asked to all
persons, "working" and "not working".






) 70 (


percent who.had been in such jobs increases. Among females, the
high number of previous servants is to be noted, especially
anong- the young wouen coning front small towns (See Table 8).
This type of demographic and economic background is mirror-
e'd in the reasons given for moving. A separate chapter is de-
voted to this topic. At this point it is worth noting that the
economic reasons, cited most frequently by men, and the family
reasons, given by a majority of the wonen are to be expected in
view of the information analyzed above.

3. Adjustment of Migrants

Three najqr topics are considered under "adjustment in
Lina": economic, housing and social. The conparioon is prinari-
ly between those coning from large and small pldoes of previous
residence. In addition, the social indicators donpare early
and recent migrants. These comparisons allow for tentative
working hypotheses to be set up which can then form a frane of
reference for the analysis.

Based on previous studies it is hypothesized that in general
people coning front the bigger places will adjust more easily to
the. Lina environment as they will be more cosmopolitan in char-
acter. Thus they should take less time getting a job than those
.from smaller towns. They should have a better hone and live in
a.nore prestigious section of the city. More "should have a
social security card; they should be less likely to go to "es-
pocticulos" but would listen to the radio and watch television
nore and be nore likely to read the newspapers. A'second hypoth-
esis would assume that-in'general the longer the length of resi-
dence in Lima the nore likely migrants would adjust in a "city
way". Thus early migrants would be more apt to have a social
security card, less likely to go to "espectdculos", be more
likely to use the radio and television and be more likely to
read the newspapers.

a) Economic Adjustment. All' adult respondents who came to Lina
since .1956 were asked: "How long did it take before you got your
first job?" A number of course' still do not have a first job.
Indeed, 17.5 percent of the males fell into that category (See
Table 9). Presumably this neans that not only were they not






) 71 (


working at the, time of interview but also that they had not work-
ed since arriving in.Lima. Unfortunately these data do not tell
when those "never having had a first job in Lima" arrived in the
city. It is of course known that they were at least 15 years old
at the time, of.the move and this was sometime between 1956 and
1965. From these two facts, certain inferences can be made on
length of time spent.in Lima without any form of employmen.8-/

About half of the male migrants presently under 20 had not
had a first job. These are newcomers to Lima and presumably a
number still, attend school. The number presently out of work
declines precipitously with the other age groups, 13.8 percent
of those 20-24; 11.0 .percent of the 25-34; 16.5 percent.of those
35 and.over.. The latter .relatively high proportion may well
include a certain number of elderly migrants who are "retired"
(See Table 10).-/

Indeed the proportions without a first Job is greater among
males coming from the large cities. The proportion among -those
from the smallest (less than 5 000) communities is 14.9.percent
--those from the largest (20 000 and over) cities is 22.6 percent.
Controlling for present age leads to a possible explanation of
this differential. It is only among men under age 25 that "not
having a first job" is significantly higher for those coming .from
cities of 20 .00 or more. No definite pattern is observed among
older migrants. It is conceivable that young males from the
largest cities would be more likely to continue their education
in Lima and this is .reflected in these findings. Besides, single
migrants are more likely to come from smaller towns and their
level of. education is also lower, both factors (single and less
educated) leading them to work at a young age in whatever job
available, without considering status and earnings.


8/ .The percentage of males (present age over 15 years) "not
having a first job" (17.4) is probably an overestimation.
It may be that in a certain number of cases, the question:
"How long did it take to get your first .ob?": has been
interpreted as referring only to the first year of .living
in Lima. Whatever the percentage, it should be over 10.0
percent.
9/ See 8/above.







) 72 (


About half of the females have not had a first job. The
proportion tends to increase with advancing age and among the
oldest women, over three-quarters have not had a first job (See
Tables 9 and 10). This is, of course, a function of increased
proportions of married women (at the time of arrival) included
in the survey, with increasing age. Again the "not having a
first job" percentage is greater among those coming from the
largest cities of the nation although differences are not very
substantial. It will be recalled that such migrants were more
likely to come as families and these women are less likely to be
in the labour force.

Those respondents who did find a first job were asked how
long it took to locate that position. Over two-thirds (68.3) of
the male migrants were at work within three months of moving to
Lima. However, about one in eight took over one year to find
that first job. The proportion who were successful in locating
that first job quickly increases with age among those 20 and
over --from 61.6 percent of the:youngest to 75.8 percent of the
oldest.. This may partially reflect educational factors and may
explain the high proportion (21.4) of the 20-24 group who did not
get a job until after one year's residence in Lima.1- The very
youngest migrants who did get a job (51.7 percent) at all found
it in a hurry --77.4 percent in the first three months (See
Tables 9 and 10).

Any conclusion that men coming from the larger cities are
more adapted to the urban environment --and thus more likely to
find a job soon after moving to Lima-- is not substantially by
the data. There are no significant differences in the percent
of job holders getting their first job within three months by
size of place of previous residence. The overall pattern of about
two-thirds finding a job quickly is noted for all the areas of
origin. It is only among those 35 and over that the migrants
coming from the largest cities exhibit a clear superiority in


/ Includes the people who could not specify the time to get the
first job. In general this percentage is rather low.






) 73 (


finding a position quickly. At all other ages, no clear patterns
are discernible, but these conclusions are necessarily tentative,
bases as they are on very small numbers of cases.

About sixty nine percent of all "working females" found that
first job within three months of moving to Lima --about the same
proportion as for males workers. However, the pattern by age of
female is inverse to that noted for males. The younger the
woman the more likely she was successful in finding a job within
the first three months in Lima. Thus 14.5 percent of the 20-24
working wives did not find that first job until after at least
one year in Lima and 17.2 percent of those 25-34 also took that
long.l1/

Size of place of previous residence is definitely related
to time taken to find the first job for female migrants. How-
ever this is not in the expected direction. Differences among
the towns under 20 000 population are about nil, and this gener-
ally is true at all ages. But women coming from the largest
cities are much more likely to wait longer before getting that
first job. Whereas three-quarters of.all the other female
migrants find a job in three months, only .57.0 percent of those
from the largest cities were that fortunate. It is necessary
once again to speculate on the effects of other variables. First,
the proportion of married women migrants (often with families)
coming from the largest cities is greater. Second, over one-
third of all employed women were domestics in their place of
previous residence. These were overwhelmingly from towns5 000
to 20 000. It is quite possible that they could locate jobs
more easily (possibly working as domestics) than those "better
educated" coming from the largest cities of the nation.

It may well be that migrants (males and females alike) coming
from the largest cities are better educated and better trained
and indeed more "adaptable" to the metropolitan way of life.
However, in a developing country with one primate city, it may

Lj/ Includes the people who could not' specify the time to get a
first job.






) 74 (

also be true that such a receiving city is still more suitable
for rural and less educated migrants --at least in the economic
sector.

b) Housing. Two interview questions related to housing as a
possible measure of adjustment; One asks about the type house
the.migrant first inhabited when he moved to-Lima. The other
inquires into the section of the city where the migrant first
resided. .

-There are five categories'of housing: "casa independiente",
"departamento", 'casa de vecindad", "choza" and all other types.
With the exception of the last, these form a rough continuum
from best housing to poorest quarters.

About 55 percent of all males lived in solid construction
single family dwellings ("casa independiente" and "departamento")
upon arriving in Lima (See Table 8). Another 28,6 percent found
homes in -rooming houses ('icasa de vecindad") and 4,5 percent
were forced to settle for shanties ("chozas")'. This adds sup-
port to the finding that migrants do not settle at first in the
barriadas. Unfortunately over 10 percent fell into the "other"
category --a larger proportion than adviseable for such a "catch-
all" residual' group '(See' Table -11).

The oldest migrants were the most successful in securing
decent housing upon moving to ILima, Close to three-quarters
lived in better housing --a proportion significantly higher t.o:.,
that noted for the younger male migrants.. Those presently 25-34
were apparently the least successful, as less than half were
able to find private houses or apartments while 7.percent lived
in shanties --twice as great proportion as that in any other
age groups. The oldest migrants also had the lowest number
living in the poorest housing. It can be assumed that a .larger
percent of .the oldest migrants came before 1960 than was the
case far th.e younger males. Perhaps housing conditions were
better at that time. It is conceivable that the ever increasing
number of newcomers to the city has .resulted in ever mdre "dif-
ficult housing problems thus necessitating more shanty inhabit-
ations (See Table 12).







) 75 (


Hligrants coming from the larger areas were somewhat more
successful in setting decent housing than their counterparts
from the smaller places. This is especially to be noted in the
small number of migrants from cities living in the shanties
compared to the proportion among those coming from towns under
5 000. The proportion living in single houses is also somewhat
higher for those from the larger cities but the difference is
not substantial. Thus some difference between type of housing
and size of place of previous residence is generally to be noted
among all age groups. It appears that males coming from the
largest cities, while not any more successful in getting jobs,
have been more fortunate in their housing search. They may in-
deed be better suited for metropolitan living and this is indi-
cated in this manner.

Female migrants have been more fortunate than male migrants
as far as type housing is concerned. About 70 percent lived in
either single dwellings or apartments upon arriving in Lima (See
Table 11). Only 3.4 percent lived in shanties and 20.4 percent
were in rooming houses. In contrast to the males, young women
were more likely to be. living in "casa independiente" than the
older females. Generally such a pattern existed with reference
to shanty living as well. That is, the older the woman the
higher the proportion of shanty dwellers. However these dif-
ferences are not great and some could be masked if single houses
and apartments were combined. There was nevertheless a slight
tendency for younger women to be more successful in securing
good housing. Again a function of the high proportion in the
domestic service role.

Similarly to males, women from the larger areas found better
housing and fewer ended in the poorer sections of the city. With
the exception of those 25-34, this was generally true-at all ages.
Again however it must be emphasize that differences were not
especially meaningful (See Table 12).

Summarizing briefly, housing tends to be slightly related
to size of place of previous residence --the larger the place
the better the housing in Lima. For males, older migrants were







) 76 (

more likely to have found better housing when they arrived, but
the opposite is true of females. In no instances however are
these relationships significant. They merely suggest that pos-
sibly those coming'from the large cities may be somewhat more-
likely to find better housing if that is defined as single houses
and apartment. It is of course possible that the large numbers
of "family migrants" coming from cities of over'20 000 partially
accounts for the difference. Also, as will be discussedin the
next section, the roles of female migrants as domestics may well
be important..

It is.possible to discern various distritos of metropolitan
Lima. Attention in this section is concentrated solely on two
distritos which comprise a high socioeconomic status (HSES) area
and seven distritos which can be considered the poorer sections
(LSES) of Lima (See Table 13 for the names of the distritos).
It is realized that these are ecological areas and there is most
likely heterogeneity of socioeconomic levels within the'given
distritos'. -

About the same proportion, roughly.11 percent,,9f male
migrants found homes in the more affluent distritos as were found
in the:poprer areas. The proportion living in (HSES) areas in-
creases significantly with the age.of the respondent and among
those presently 35 and over,.15.7, percent. lived there when they
first came.,to the city. The percent living in the poorer sections
varies by age but no definite pattern is observed as other class
areas are also involved.

The (HSES) areas did not receive more migrants from the
larger cities of Peru as might have been expected, Indeed, there
are not any major differences by size of place of origin with
respect to that section of Lima. However, males from the larger
cities are less likely than others to have lived in the poorest
parts of the city when they did arrive in Lima.. This apparently
is true among most age groups.

Females are more apt to have lived in (HSES.) areas than
males --16.6 percent locating there upon arrival. But 8.2 percent







) 77 (


of all female migrants began their experience in Lima in the poor-
er distritos.. The proportion living in (HSES) declines with ad-
vancing age --a pattern diametrically opposite to that of the
males. A large majority of the 21.7 percent of females 14-19
living in (HSES) are probably domestics living .in.the household
of their employers. The.proportion declines with.age and with.
the increasing proportion of.women that are housewives.rather..
than domestics.

Analysis by.size of place of previous residence shows quite
conclusively that women who previously reside.-in the larger -cities
were more likely to find.homes inthe better sections of Lima.
On the other hand, 12.2.percent of those from towns of 1 000-5-000
population were. living' in.the (LSES) areas when they first arriv-
ed ii Lima. This:pattern is clearly exhibited at all'ages.
Again caution is urged in interpreting these data. It is quite
possible that many of the migrants from the large cities found
employment as domestics in Lima. Their semi-urban background
may have made them more adaptable to such positions while those
from the rural areas were perhaps mpre likely to do purely manual
labour --but not as domestics. At any rate, ,and regardless of
size of place of previous residence,..the larger proportion of
females than male migrants;who .ived in the (HSES),areas is no
doubt partially attributable to the female domestic service.
phenomenon still prevalent in a city like Lima.

The data on.housing do not yield any conclusive results that
suggest accepting the working hypothesis made earlier in the
chapter. There is, to be sure, a slight tendency for males from
the larger cities to be a little more successful in both,, securing
a "better" house and in a "better" nAeighbourhood, but -the rela-
tionship is not significant enough.to warrant making generaliza-
tions. However it is interesting to note that there is no evi-
dence 'of any massive movement of population from.the hinterland
to the barriadas of Lima, Again confirming the finding that
migrants do not settle initially in the barriadas. This may well
be the most significant finding that .is concerned with housing
patterns. It would of course be necessary.to gather data .on the-







) 78 (


actual populations of all the sections of Lima to note if the
migrants are overrepresented anywhere. The general conclusions
based on this survey is that they are not overrepresented in the
poorer sections of the city.

c) Social Indicators, A number of queries in the 1965 survey
can serve the purpose of "social indicators" of migrant adjust-
ment. Pour such inquiries are considered here. They deal with
various aspects of the migrants' lives in Lima but all are con-
cerned with present (i.e. 1965) behaviour. Thus they yield in-
formation on how these people have adjusted to metropolitan
living. Unfortunately it is not possible to compare the migrants
to those born in Lima. However, two independent Variables are
utilized: size df place of previous residence and duration of
residence in Lima. Migrants are compared to each other on these
dimensions.

The four questions whose replies will be analyzed include:
(1) the possession (and use) of social security cards; (2) the
watching and listening to radio/television; (3) the reading of
newspapers; (4) the attendance at so-called "spectaculars". The
intent of this investigation is to note if (a) those from larger
towns have adpated more easily than those from the smaller places
and (b) if a longer period of living in the city is indicative of
increased adaptation,

a) Place of Previous Residence: Half of all the male migrants
either do not have a social security card or did not reply to the
question (See Table 14). Another quarter have a card but do not
use it and 24.2 percent have used it at some time. Presumably,
having and using one's social security card is an indicator of
becoming accustomed to city living. The proportion not having
social security cards does not vary by age. (Males under 20 are
not included in the analysis). However age is clearly related
to the use of such cards by those who possess them. Older persons
are more likely to use and conversely young men are more likely
to be not users of such cards. This is to be expected in light
of possibly increasing medical problems with advancing age and
this does not really imply anything about adjustment as such.






) 79 (


More relevant for adjustment analysis is difference by size
of place of previous residence. However variation in percent
having a social security card is to be observed. Both, those
from towns of 20 000 and over and from villages under 5 000,
exhibit similar patterns of usage. However, those from the
medium size towns (5 000 20 000) are less likely to use their
cards. This U-shaped pattern is noted at all ages as well and
among those under age 25, males from the largest cities are very
likely not to possess a social security card. This may perhaps
be attributable to a larger proportion of such persons being out
of the labour force.

Among females over 85 percent either have no card or failed
to answer the question. The proportions remain exceedingly high
at all ages. With so few women having social security cards it
is difficult to arrive at any conclusions regarding the effect
of size of place of previous residence. It does appear as if
those coming from the. larger cities are more apt to use them,
but this is based on small numbers of cases.

Watching television, listening to the radio and reading the
daily newspapers are patterns of behaviour that are expected of
urban residents. Television and radio, especially the former,
typify the city milieu, and of course daily newspapers are part
of the everyday life of the typical urbanite. Some information
on the watching, listening and reading habits of migrants to
Lima should give insights on their adjustment to such a.new "way
of life".

About one in eight male migrants never watches television
or listens to the radio (See. Table 15). The remaining are
about equally divided between those who do both (42.3 percent)
and those who just listen to the radio (45.2 percent). The
proportion who enjoy both, television and radio, tends to increase
with advancing age. whereas only about 40 percent of those under
35 watch and listen, 54.5 percent of those 35 and over utilize
these technological improvements. Furthermore the percent who
neither watch television nor listen. to the radio decreases signi-
ficantly with age. The number who read the daily newspapers is






) 80 (
about the same as the number who uses the television and radio
-84.8 percent being readers and only 7,6 percent not reading
any papers. However, differences by age are opposite to those
noted regarding radio and television. Younger persons are less
likely to read newspapers and much less likely to be non-readers
than persons 35 and over. Perhaps the high incidence of illiter-
acy among this latter group contributes to this p.attern...Also it
is possible that older men have more. leisure time in which to
watch -television.

Male migrants from the largest cities are demonstrably more
likely to. watch television and listen to the radio than others
from smaller places. It follows that they are less likely to be
never users of television and radio. This relationship is seen
at all age groups in varying degrees and clearly indicates more
ease in adpatation among those from the bigger centres of the
nation --if watching television and listening to the radio is
such an index. The fact that there are no significant differ-
ences in reading habits by size of place of origin suggests that
radio and television usage may well be a good' indicator of urban
adaptation. Even rural residents read the papers, and these are
perhaps Lima ne7spa&pers. But the development of television is
almost exclusively an urban phenomen in a developing nation.
This is reflected in these findings at least with male migrants.

Half of all female migrants watch television and less than
10 percent never watch or listen to the radio. Differences by
age are dissimilar from those among males. Young women watch
television more than do older women and are .much less likely
to never turn on either a radio or a television set. The drastic
difference in education of males and' females is :reflected in the
findings on'newspaper readership. While 7.6 percerit of all males
never read, almost one-third (31.4 percent) of the women indicate
they never look at newspapers '(See Table 16). The proportion
of non-readers is greatest among the youngest and the oldest,
Similarly the proportion of women-who read two papers is least
among those two age groups. Illiteracy possibly explains these
proportions- among those 35 and over. It is difficult however to






) 81 (


explain why those under 20 are also less likely to read papers
than those 20-35.

As with males, women coming from the larger towns are more
likely to watch television than those coming from villages under
5 000. They are also slightly more apt to read newspapers than
their more rural counterparts. Thus there seems to be a definite
relationship between size of place of previous residence and the
use of the modern media, for both, males and females, who have
migrated to Lima since 1956 .Newspaper reading however does not
differ among males and only slightly among females. The intro-
duction of television and radio to migrants (and most certainly
their purchase) is associated with becoming an accultured resi-
dent of the city. It is part of the "urban world", Furthermore
once a television set is purchased it literally becomes an urban
culture trait. The reading of newspapers is perhaps not associ-
ated in such a manner in the thinking of these migrants. It does
not necessarily represent the "urban world".

A fourth dimension of social adjustment deals with attendance
at notion picture or athletic events such as football matches,
races and bullfights ("spectaculars"). The large city is tradi-
tionally the home of the newest movies and of the outstanding
athletic events. However itis quite possible that other fairly
large towns also offer this type of entertainment, while the
small villages rarely offer a motion picture or a professional
football match. It is quite possible therefore that adjustment
does not necessarily mean a greater attendance at such spectac-
ulars. The opposite may well be true.

About two-thirds (65.2 percent) of all male migrants attend
spectaculars at least once a month, but about 20 percent never
go to movies or athletic events-(See Table 17). This type of
entertainment is overwhelmingly a habit of, the..young.. The
relationship between.age and attendance isquite significant.
Over 78 percent of the males under age 20 go at. least once a
month compared to less than half of those 35 years of age and
over. One third of the latter group never attend.






) 82 (


Turning to size of place of previous residence as a possible
causal factor, variations from the aforementioned 65.2 percent
who attend at least once a month are practically nil, regardless
of place of origin. ..Those from the smaller places tend to be
"never attenders" a bit more than those coming from places of
5 000 or more, but differences are far from being meaningful.

Women are less likely to go to the theatre or the stadium
than males. Half indicate at least monthly attendance and al-
most 40 percent never go. As with the men, attendance is closely
related to age. Over half of all the women 35 and over never
attend these spectaculars. These data indicating such a dif-
ference by sex perhaps. typify the role of women in a developing
country such as Peru. They are much less educated, most likely
subservient to the men in many respects, and may not like spec-
taculars. The relationship of previous residence to attendance
for women closely resembles that for men. There is a slight
hint of a relationship in that those from the largest cities are
more likely to attend and less apt to never go to the movies or
other events. But the relation is very tenuous at best.

These data derived from the social indicators of the survey
do not warrant generalizing that migrants from the larger towns
are much more adjusted to metropolitan living than those from
the rural places-. 'Only with reference to watching television
and listening to-the radio is there a meaningful difference
between groups according to place of previous residence. It is
q~ite possible :that in a country having a primate city, the effect
of coming from a town of 20 000 or 1 000 is not that relevant
to the adjustment problems of all the city-bound migrants. All
appear to be similarly affected by the primate city and all
appear to react to it similarly as well.

b) Duration of Residence: All migrants to Lima who came since
1956 have been divided into recent migrants (1961-1965) and
early migrants (1956-1960)-. This makes possible a comparison
on the social indicators of adjustment by length of residence
in Lima. It seems logical to. assume that adjustment improves
with duration of residence and this should apply for males and
females and at all ages as well.






) 83 (


Recent male migrants are much less likely to possess social
security cards than those who came prior to 1961 (See Table 18).
The latter also use their cards more frequently. This relation-
ship is noted at all ages but statistical significance is pro-
bably noted solely for total males. Fewer female migrants possess
security cards -81.6 percent being without them as compared to
73.5 percent of the earlier migrants. This differential exists
through age 25 but no differences are to be found among women
25 and over.

Early male migrants watch television and listen to the radio
quite a bit more than do the recent male migrants. Indeed 16 per-
cent of the latter never watch or listen --a percent twice as
great as that among those coming before 1961 (See Table 19). A
similar pattern is observed at all ages. Recent migrants watch
less and a relatively large number never watch or even listen to
the radio. On the other hand, earlier migrants have apparently
become avid television and radio fans, with about 90 percent
being viewers or listeners.

Recent female migrants are more likely to watch television
and listen to the radio than the earlier migrants; they are also
less likely to only listen to the radio. There are also more
non-viewers or listeners among those coming since 1961. Thus a
different pattern emerges among women with television being ac-
cepted by the recent migrants, but radio still being utilized
more by earlier migrants. This generalization is applicable to
women under 25 as well, but less so for those 25-34. A.cross-
over takes place at about age 35 and it is only among women over
that age that the relationship resembles that noted for males.
In fact, 21 percent of the recent migrants 35 and over never
listen or watch the television set. These unexpected results
may be better comprehended if, once again, the question of
domestics is introduced. Perhaps young women watch television
more because they are working in homes where they are available.
This is not the case among recent male migrants and among older
women. Certain caution must be taken therefore when looking at
these findings. Furthermore it must be equally stressed that
when combining the categories of watching and listening only,






) 84 (


the pattern is clarified and early migrants are more likely to
be enjoying television and radio than the recent newcomers to
Lima.

Recent male migrants are both, more likely to read at least
two -newspapers and to not read at all than their earlier counter-
parts -(See Table 20) -Differences however are quite small. Pos-
sibly reading more'than one newspaper is indicative of a lack of
adjustment. A -more settled person will have decided upon a
favourite newspaper after reading in the city a few years. The
newcomer is still searching for his favourite type of publication
and may also need two sources to look for employment. Except
among males.35 and over, differences on percent not reading are
minimal, and for .those 20-24, the.early migrants tend to read
more than one paper t a .greater extent than the recent migrants,
Again, differences are minimal.

Over one-third of all recent female migrants never read the
newspapers compared to 27.1 percent `d' the earlier arrivers.
There is a similar difference at all ages' but it becomes exten-
sive among those 35 and overwhere about half oft the''recent
migrants never read the papers. There are no differences in
multiple reading by time of arrival. Thus, duration'of resi-
dence does not have the strong effect on newspaper readership
habits among female that it has.among male migrants.

Recent male.migrants tend to go to spectaculars more than
those coming before-1961 (S'ee Table 21) However, when controll-
ing for age, it c.an..be seen that this relationship is only valid
through age. 25. B-eyond .that age, differences become practically
non-existent, .,There is apparently a combination of youth and
recency of.arrival. that contributes to encouraging these migrants
to attend-movies and athletic'events. Conversely, with increas-
ing age and.duration of residence ii Lima, the novelty of these
urban attractions wears out and -the newcomer is gradually ad-
justed i-nto a more typical urban way of life.

The-effect of length of stay in Lima on the entertainment
habits of female migrants 'is at least as strong as has been
noted for males --53.7 percent of the recent migrants attend








) 85 (


at least once a month compared to. 47.4 percent of those coming
earlier. Fewer recent migrants never attend these spectaculars.
Differences by age are present to age 35 but the oldest women
exhibit little difference by time of move.

Conclusions: It is so very unfortunate that questions on
"social" adjustment" were not asked of the Lima-born residents.
Because of this comparisons are necessarily limited to sub-groups
with the migrant category of Lima residents. There can be little
doubt that duration of residence in Lima contributes to increas-
ing acculturation on the part of the migrants. More of the
early migrants have social security cards, more watch television.
Newspapers are read about equally by the two groups and recent
newcomers are more apt to be lured by the entertainment attrac-
tions of the "big city". Prom the point of view of the receiving
city, it is vital to learn if rural newcomers are having more
difficulty in adjusting to the metropolis than those coming from
the larger towns of the nation. There is little evidence of any
great deviation by size of place of previous residence. It is
quite possible that those from the larger cities of Peru are
better "prepared" for life in Lima. Their employment and edu-
cational backgrounds attest to that. But it is equally possible
that Lima, as the receiving city, is not prepared for migrants
that are better educated, have had better jobs and come as
families. Perhaps Lima, by virtue of being the primate city,
is still more receptive to the typical rural-urban migrant found
in developing societies than to the urban-urban migrant pre-
valent in advanced societies.










BIBLIOGRAPHY


Beijer, G.
1963 Rural Migrants in the Urban Setting
The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff


.Borrie, T.
1959 The Cultural Integration of4 Immi-grants
SParis: UNESCO


Myers, G.
1969 ..- Health Effects of Urbanization. and 4,jigration,
paper presented to the London Conference of
I.U ..S.P. (September)


United -Nations i
.1958 Multilingual Demographic Dictionary.
Nlev York: United Nations, p.. 46.








) 87 (


Table 1

LIMA: AGE AT TIME OF ARRIVAL BY SIZE OF FLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE AID SEX

(Inmigrants to Metropolitan Lima tho were 14 years old and
over by the time of arrival and who came between 1956-1965)


All
places,


15-19 41.7
20-24 24.3
25-29 10.0
30-34 5.7
35-39 4.7
40-49 4.5..
50 and over .8,8
Not applicable 0.4
Total percent 100.0
Number 511'


15-19 46,5
20-24 17.5
25-29 10.9
.30-34' 6.6
35-39 3,1
40-49 6.9
50 and over 7,7
Not applicable 0.8
Total percent .100.0
Number -622


20 000
and over


37i 6
22,6
10.5
5.3
8,3
6.0
9.0
0.7
100.0
133



42.0
. 17.2
* 14.0
3.2
5.7
6.4
10.8


1005,0
157-


-... Size of place
5 000 1 000
.to 19 999 to 4 999


Male
33,7
30.2
11.6
8.2
3,5
2.3
9.3
1.2
100.0
86

Female
45.2
20 .2'
14.4
5.8
1.9
4.8
7.7


100.0
104


48.3
25.1
5.8
5.8
2.9
3.9
* 8.2


100.0
S207


50.8
17.2
7.6
8.0
1.9
8.0
5.7
0.8
100.0
262


Less than
.- 1000


50.0
23.5.
8,8


3.0
5.9
* 8.8


100.0
'34



60.0
22.9
5.7



5.7
5.7


100.0
35


Not
appl ic able


33.3
15.7
23.5
5.9
5,9
5.9
S9.8


100.0
51



34.4
12.5
14.1 .
S 14.!.
4.7
7.8
9.3
3,1
100.0
64


I


- ~---







) 88 .(


Table 2

LIMA: PERIOD OF ARRIVAL BY SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE AND SEX

(inmigrants to Metropolitan Lima who were 14 years old and over
by the time of arrival and who came between 1956-1965)


Period of arrival
Size of place Both Both
e of place Both 1961-1965 1956-1960 Both 1961-1965 1956-1960
periods periods

1ales' I emal es
20 000 and over 26,0 29.2 23.1 25,2 25.9 24.6
5 000 to 19 999 16.8 15,6 17.9 16.7 18.7 14.8
1 000 to 4 999 40.5 37.4 43.3 42.1 39.3 44.8
Less than 1 000 6.7 5.4 7.8 5.6 5.6 5.7
Not applicable 10.0 12.3 7.8 10.3 10.5 10,1
Total percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number 511 243 268 622 305 317


Table 3

LIMA: CIVIL STATUS AT TIME OF ARRIVAL AND SEX BY SIZE OF PLACE
OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE AND PERCENTAGE
(Inmigrants to Metropolitan Lima who were 14 years old and over
at the time of arrival and who came between 1956-1965)

Civil status
N umber
Size of place (total) Single Married Widowed, divorced, Not
separated applicable
(Percent),
Male
20 000 and over 133 57.1 31.6 1.5 9,8
5 000 to 19 999 86 58.1 30.2 4,7 7,0
1 000 to 4 999 207 62.3 28.5 1.5 7.7
Less than 1 000 34 64.7 23.5 3,0 8,8
Not applicable 51 54.9 39.2 3.9 2.0
Total 511 59.7 30.3 2.4 7.6
Female
20-000 and over 157 50,3 33,8 9.5 6,4
5 000 to 19 999 104 62.5 27.9 3.8 5,8
1 000 to 4 999 262 58.0 32.1 5.7 4.2
Less than 1 000 35 60.0 34,3 2.9 2.8
Not applicable 64 50,0 37.5 9.4 3.1
Total 622 56.1 32.5 6.6 4.8







) 89 (


Table 4

LIMA: NUMBER OF PERSONS ACCOMPANYIIG ifGRANT BY SIZE OF PLACE
OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE AND SEX
(Inmigrants to metropolitan Lima who were 14 years old
and over at the time of arrival and who came
between 1956-1965)


Number life/ V!ife/spouse Iife/spouse life or Not
Size of place T Single 1 or 2 3 or more spouse and
Children children children

(Percent)
Hlal e
20 000 and over 133 56.4 4.5 8.3 15.8 15.0
5 000 to 19 999 86 59.3 11.6 7,0 7.0 4.6 10.5
1 000 to 4 999 207 60.9 10.6 7,7 9,2 1.5 10.1
Less than 1 000 34 61.8 8.8 2.9 8.8 5.9 11.8
Not applicable 51 66.7 15.7 9.8 3.9 3.9
Total 511 60.1 9.6 7.6 10.0 1.8 10.9

Female
20 000 and over 157 51.0 7.0 12.7 14.0 7.0 8.3
5 000 to 19 999 104 61.5 10.6 8.6 5.8 7.7 5.8
1 000 to 4 999 262 60.7 8.8 9.1 8.4 8.8 4.2
Less than 1 000 35 60.0 17.2 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7
Not applicable 64 53.1 20.3 11.0 3.1 9.4 3.1
Total 622 57.6 '10.3 10.0 8.7 8.0 5.4

x Includes 56 cases of men who were less than 16 when they arrived to Lima and who were not
asked this question.







) 90 (


Table 5

LIlA: LABOUR FORCE STATUS AND TYPE.OF OCCUPATION OF HIGRANTS BEFORE MIGRATIOIl
BY SIZE OF PLACE OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE AND SEX
(Inmingrants to Metropolitan Lima who were 14 years old and over
at the time'of arrival and:hho came between 1956-1965)

Labour force- working by type of occupation
t.umber :" status .: (Percent)
Size ofplace (Total) HNot king Iorking Non- Mnual Age 'nd Other
.(Percent) (Percent) Total annual .... time

Male 511 40.1 59.9 100.0 222 435 22.5 11.8
20 000 and over 133 39.1 60.9 100.0 23,5 46,9 11.1 18.5
5 000 to 19 999 86 .38.4 61.6 100.0 17.0 49,1 22.6 11.3
1 000 to 4 999 207 45.4 54.6 100.0 15,9 46.0 29.2 8.9
Less than 1 000 3 34 47.1 52.9 100.0 167' 55.5 27 .8
Not applicable 51 .19.6 80.4 100,0 46.3 17.1 24.4 12.2
Female- 622 72.3 27.7 100.0 23.3 51.7 13.4 11.6
20 000 and over 157 72,6 227.4 100.0 37.2 44.2 7;0 -
5 000 to 19 999 104 69,2 30.8 100.0 25.0 65.6 9,4
1 000 to 4 999 262 71.8 28,2 100.0 12.2- 56.7 .17.6 13.5
Less than 1 000 35 88,6 11.4 100,0 50,0 50.0
Not applicable 64 70.3 29,7 100.0 36.8 26.3 21.1 15.8

a/ Unpaid family workers, persons looking .for work for the first time and cases without
information.

Table 6

LIMA: LABOUR FORCE STATUS'AND TYPE OF OCCUPATION OF MIGRANTS BEFORE MIGRATION BY AGE AND SEX
immigrantss to Metropolitan Lima who'vere 14 years old and over at the time of arrival
and who came between 1956-1965)

Labour force workingg By~-ype of occupation
umbr status '(Percent) -
Number
Age (Total) Not working Wiorking Total Non- Manual Age and Other
(Percent) (Percent) Manual time 3

Male 511 40.1 59.9 100.0 22.2 43.5- 22.5 l1
14-19 60 83.3 16.7 100,0 50.0 40.0 10.0
20-24 130 57.7 42.3 100,0 10.9 49.1 27.3 12.7
25-34 200 33.5 66.5 100,0 16.5 47.4 24,1 12.0
35 and over 121 10.7 89.3 100.0 37.0 35,2 16.7 11.1
Female 622 72 277 1000 23.3 51.7. 13.4 11.6
14-19 115 70.4 29.6 100.0 79.4 11.8 8.8
20-24 155 71.6 28.4 100,0 15.9 54.5 18.2 11.4
25-34 203 71.4 28.6 100,0 34.5 46.5 6,9 12.1
35 and over 149 75.8 24.2 100.0 36.1 30.6 19.4 13.9
aJ Unpaid family workers, persons looking for work for the first time and cases without
information.







) 91 (


Table 7

LIMA: PROPORTION LOOKINGG FOR IORK" PRIOR TO COHililG TO THE METROPOLIS BY SIZE OF PLACE
OF PREVIOUS RESIDENCE AND SEX
(Inmigrants to Metropolitan Lima who were 14 years old and over at the time
of arrival and who came between 1956-1965)

Looking for work
Number (Percent)
Number
e o place (Total) Yes No Not
applicable

Male
20 000 and over 133 18.8 75.2 6.0
5 000 to 19 999 86 23.3 74,4 2.3
1 000 to 4 999 207 25.6 69.1 5.3
Less than 1 000 34 20.6 70,6 8.8
Not applicable 51 25.5 70.6 3.9
Total 511 23.1 71.8 5.1
Female
20 000 and over 157 9.6 81.5 8,9
5 000 to 19 999 104 6.7 90.4 2,9
1 000 to 4 999 262 14.1 77.1 8,8
Less than 1.000 35 11.4 74.3 14.3
Not applicable 64 21.9 71.9 6.2
Total 622 12,4 79.7 7,9


Table 8

LIMA: PROPORTION "LOOKING FOR I!ORK" PRIOR TO COMING TO THE METROPOLIS BY AGE AND SEX
(Inmigrants to Metropolitan Lima who were 14 years old and over
at the time of arrival and who came between 1956-1965)

Looking for work
Number (Percent)
Present age (Total) Yes No Not
Yes No .
applicable

Male 511 23,1 71.8 5.1
14-19 60 11.7 75,0 13.3
20-24 130 21.5 73.1 5.4
25-34 200 30.0 66,0 4.0
35 and over 121 19.0 78.5 2.5
Female 622 14 79 j 7.9
14-19 115 20.9 73.9 5,2
20-24 155 18,1 74.8 7,1
25-34 203 9.4 80.8 9.8
35 and over 149 4.0 87.9 8,1






) 92 (


Table 9

LIPA: LABOUR FORCE .STATUS OF MIGRANtTS AUID TIME IT TOOK TO GET THE FIRST JOB, BY SIZE AID SEX
(Inmigrants to Metropolitan Lima who were 14 years old and over at the time of arrival
and who came between 1956-1965)

Percent Having a first job
Size of place not having Time to get the first job
a first Number 3 3-11 1 Not
ob months months year applicable
(Percent)


20 000 and over
5 000 to 19 999
1 000 to 4 999
Less than 1 000
Not applicable
Total


20 000 and over
5 000 to 19 999
1 000 to 4 999
Less than 1 000
Not applicable
Total


22,6
18.6
15.5
.11.8
13.7
17.4


54.1
47.1
44.7
57.1
53.1
49.8


72
55
145'
15
30
317


Male
68,0
64.3
67.4
73.4
75.0
68.3
Female
57.0
74.6
71.7
73,3
70,0
68.8


18.4
25.7
19.4
13.3
15,9
19.4


20.8
12.7
15.9
6.7
10.0
15.4


10.7
8.6
12.0
6.7
9,1
10.7


16.7
9.1
10,3

6.7
10.8


5.5
3.6
2,1
20.0
13.3
5.0


Table 10

LIIfA: LABOUR FORCE STATUS OF MIGRANTS AND TIME IT TOOK TO GET THE FIRST:JOB, BY AGE AND SEX
(Inmigrants to Metropolitan Lima who were 14 years old and over at the time of arrival
and.who came between 1956-1965)

SPercent Having a first job
Age not having Time to get the first job
a first
:job Nunber 3 3-11 1
months months year

N ale 17.4 422 68.3 19.4 12.3
14-19 48-3 31 77.\ 19.4 3.2
20-24 13.8 112 61.6 17.0 21.4
25-34 11.0 178 67.4 / 21.9 10.7
35 and over 16.5 101 74.3 / 17.0 7.9
Female 49.0 317 68.8i 15.4 15.8,
14-19 35.7 74 86,55 9.5 4.0
20-24 29.0 110 70.9 10.9 18.2
25-34 51.2 99 57.6 18.2 24.2
35 .and over ... .77.2 34 55,9 35,3 8,8.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs