penelitian sosial

Introduction Since the early days, migration had happen long time ago by our ancestors because of various reasons such as to find a more secure place to live, to get easy access to food and water, lost old home because of natural disasters and etc. According to Merriam-Webster online dictionary, migration is the act of moving from a country or place to another new place. Thus, the theory of migration can be used to explain this phenomenon by focusing on its characteristics where it highlights on the aspects of why and how migration happens. Ernst Georg Ravenstein was one of the researchers that come with a theory on migration which was in his research Laws of Migration published on 1885. Basically his theory discuss on the essentials of migration where his research looks on many aspects. According to Ravenstein (1885), there were many characteristics of migration such as migration often happen in a short distance, most migrants were adult which consist more female, major reason for migration to occur was because of economics reasons where people need to have a stable economic to survive, the urban area where there were lot of industries suitable for working was the place where most migrant were going and more. Besides, Ravenstein (1885) also mentioned that migration may happen in a small quantity or amount of people but however it happens throughout the globe and on the other hand pointed out that most people who live in urban area more likely to less migrate compared to people who lives at rural area. By referring to Ravenstein’s theory on migration, most of the points focus on the foundation of migration because it justify on factors of migration and how does migration happens because in the theory describe how it happens as the distance, amount of people involve and more. Although the time pass by, many researchers in their own respective field argues and improvise Ravenstein’s theory of migration. Stouffer (1940) argues that the abundance of migration between two places does not necessarily depend the distance between two places but however suggested that it is because the people wants to grab the opportunities which had been in the destination where they wants to migrate. It simply means that people migrate because they want to get the chances where it brings advantages to them. Besides, Lee (as cited in de Haas, 2008, p.12) stated about the push and pull factors that cause the migration happens and also the attributes that one need to have before migrate which depends on age, sex, marital status and more. It counters the argument by Ravenstein (1885) which suggest that the economic aspects cause the migration to happen. Moreover, Todaro (as cited in Eaton, 1992, p. 385) supports the point by recommend that the opportunities in urban area attract potential migrants because there a three characteristic of sector model which consist of rural sector, urban informal and urban formal where clearly in urban sectors get them more wage hence causing people to move to urban since more income can be obtain thus profit the migrants economically. On the other hand, According to de Haas (2008), Neomarxist sees migration as phenomenon which happens because of the capitalist system. Although migrants can increase their income but however it is not temporary therefore still causing the migrants to struggle. (Lewis as cited in de Haas, 2008, p.30). Gender studies also involve in the argument towards Ravenstein’s idea where in the report by BRIDGE (2005) which is an organization of gender and development, where it generally claims that the role of men and women are totally different in migration where there were gender discrimination exist in the labour market thus impacts both side. Hence, to conclude all the arguments towards Ravenstein’s theory of migration, we can see that since the world change along with time, there will be more improvisation, views and arguments towards the theory since everything keeps on changing and upgrading.

Social Phenomena and Theories Related Department of Statistics Malaysia (2011, 2012, 2013) has indicated that during the period 2010-2013 shows that residents in Malaysia tend to migrate in the same state. Statistic shows that in 2010-2013 migration still increase but in term of internal migration decreases which are 2010-2011 683136 peoples, 2011-2012, 678700 peoples and 2012-2013, 629400 peoples. Selangor is the main destination for migrants abroad with the number of migrants every year. However, rural-urban migrations still increase from 2010 until 2013 which is from 6.4 % to 7.7% people in Malaysia. Almost internal migrants occur in Malaysia because they followed their family members, environment, marriage & divorce and education. But, the main reasons people migrated were due to work-related factors. The people want to migrate because want to changes their life. Kochar (2004) stated that education is potential invests before migrating and human capital will be needed or better rewarded in the city. Migration can be explained by some theories. In that case, we try to relate the phenomena with Harris-Todaro Theory of Rural-Urban Migration and Push and Pull for explaining the rural-urban migration.

Push Factor of Migration
Based on the phenomena that we have study, push factor of migration is focuses on the factor that make people decided to leave their origin area. People from rural area in Malaysia usually migrate to the main cities like Kuala Lumpur, Johor Bahru, Ipoh and Kuching.
1. Income and unemployment
As we know, migration usually happens when people who have less income want to increase their income by moving to the different areas. According to the article written by Abdul Rahman Embong (2011), he found that most of the people who live in Kuala Lumpur or the nearest cities around it are not from Kuala Lumpur itself. They are mostly from other states like Kelantan, Pahang, Terengganu, Kedah, Johor and Penang. Most of them were migrated around 1970s and 1980s especially the youngster that had arrived in 1990s. This is because there a lot of economic opportunity that encourages them to have a higher income in the city. Basically, income often affects decision since people from rural searching the place who can provide better welfare for them. Income and unemployment always goes hand in hand together. When we are looking back to the migration theories, according to Lewis (as cited in de Haas, 2008, p.5), neo-classical migration theory sees rural to urban migration as an essential part for the development process by which the surplus labour in the rural sector supplies the workforce for the urban industrial economy. de Haas (2008) also stated that, at micro-level, neo-classical migration theory views migrants as individual that decide to move and they were expected to go where they can be more productive and able to earn the highest wages. Person decides whether to accept a job offer and workers with pessimistic expectation often have lower reservation wages.
In urban city like Kuala Lumpur or Kuching employment commonly fall under two categories, firstly is a formal sector traditionally occupation such as stuff office, banking and other characteristic this first sector are recognized by government as being legal. These sectors tend to pay more than informal sector which is fall under second categories. According to Harris and Sabot (1982), migrant who move from rural to cities would like to improve their quality of life then they like to obtain a job in formal sector however it is not quick easy as they think, to find it difficult to do so. Harris and Sabot (1982) assert that the migrant must have certain level education as a certificate to compete with urban resident for this job. Commonly for worker in formal sector have job security and retirement pensions. Hence, second sector is jobs include all activities. Some of new workers in the urban labor force tend to create their own employment such as entrepreneur with higher income.
Addition rural populations commonly experience by fluctuation of global economy such as a price of crop drops and directly will affect their sustainability. Rural area was seen as poor, low education level and skill, when their doing certain work at somewhere at small town they often get low paid and unavailability of job at origin so finding job at destination is motivating factor of migration. Harris and Sabot (1982) assert that this group of people will expected work at another geography location such as big city who far away from rural areas and get high income even thought they might do same work as their do at small town before and income at big cities better than at rural areas because of has certain right for worker to get enough income for what they have done. Beside they directly can improve life qualities and learn how to chasing any urban job opportunities. 2. Poverty and Migration Force
Poverty can linked directly to the level of income and unemployment at the origin areas. In developing countries like Malaysia, majority of poor people are living at rural areas. Means lack of financial status inhabit household or an individual from migrating since they knew not enough funds to finance (Harris & Sabot, 1982). Being poor tends to face up healthy risks because they do not have more money or income to secure themselves such as buying medicine, go to any specialist or high cost to general hospital because far away from rural area. Harris and Sabot (1982) assert that rural areas traditionally poor living condition such as housing, education and health care. Poorer often get lack access beside high inequality in distribution of asset in countries and mainly poor characteristic is their economic based on agriculture. So migration force starts to take place when they have no choice. Easy example is lack of facilities and resource or natural disaster. Sometime they heard success stories about people who leave their community and start move to cities (Harris & Sabot, 1982). As time goes by, because of better communication they start recognize what is urbanisation or globalization and directly help people around rural about information flow especially about what happening in urban areas. As we know, people want change over time and when this group start know something new they will start think relevant thing. Better service such as education at urban areas is the one example young people migration force. Better education they have tends to chase any opportunity with high income and will make their life comes better.

Pull Factor of Migration.
1. Basic social service better in urban areas In urban areas, there are more budgets to fund its services to its citizens so all basic need and others like entertainment. Kuala Lumpur is a capital city in Malaysia provides modern life people with new technology, in this city their life become better with all facilities as a health care is provided by government or private. Therefore education also provided because modern society believe with education we change our life better than before. Based on the data gathered from the Education Survey of the National Statistic Office and Department of Health (as cited in Dumaraog et.al, 2012) posted that literacy rate of the people in Kuala Lumpur is 99% which become highest in the country and is way higher to average national literacy rate 93% . Migrant commonly carry with dream and hope of better living and livelihood. When living in urban areas, the migrant do not have to worry about starvation because there are food securities for them. Some organisation responsibilities to manage, solve, and do improvement to any food supply problem with systematic management (Dumaraog et.al, 2012). So with the improvement technology in urban area can provided food to larger population around the cities compare to rural areas cannot survive if weather problem come face up so all their crop will destroy and no another food stock to survive in longer period, beside they are lack access of technology.
An additions, migrate to urban will cost household however urban housing system are better than at village. Not all houses at urban are at expensive cost, government policies always considers with citizens because of that some procedure to buy or get houses with low cost.
1. Economic opportunity are better in urban
Highly migrate to urban areas because people to look for better opportunities, then people tends to move not only because they have financial means to do so but they move in search of sources of funds at another geography location. Mainly, people move for better condition and it desired to improve its own self. It is the capacities to earn that mostly prevail in decision to move to urban areas. There is research from The Food Policy and Research Institute which claim that around 70% of male and female who transfer to urban places do so because of urban employment. Interestingly, only half of the 70% will find a job or will be occupied after a job hunt (Quisumbing & McNiven, 2005).Commonly movement of people from rural areas to urban concerning of labour and employment. People come to urban to start new job such as entrepreneur or look for a job in formal or informal sector. Harris and Tordaro (1970) assert that the migrants from rural areas are attracted by city wages due to the expected value of wage of the city for finding out relationship of agriculture wages and city wages. People from rural move to urban areas because the high wage in city attract them compare wage in their village. If agriculture wage average less than urban wages, the migrants choosing to migrate to urban area to earn more wages from urban. Migrants will make their choice as long as expected wage exceeds the agricultural wage.
Reveinstain mentions that are young people are more likely to migrate than older people. Finding from Department of Statistics Malaysia (2013), most people migrate between 25-34 years old and Richard (2007) in his research said that young people tend to migrate into Kuching City to find job or studies.

References
Abdul Rahman Embong. (2011). Pembandaran dan kehidupan bandar di semenanjung Malaysia, Akademika, 81(2), 23 – 39.

Migration. In Merriam-Webster.com. Retrieved March 19, 2015 from http://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/migrate .
Ravenstein, E.G. (1885). The Laws of Migration. Journal of Statistical Society of London, 48(2), 167-235. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.orglstable/2979181

Stouffer, S.A. (1940). Intervening Opportunities: A Theory Relating Mobility and Distance. American Sociological Review, 5(6), 845-867. Retrieved from http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1224%28194012%295%3A6%3C845%3AIOATRM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W

de Haas, Hain. (2008). Migration and Development: A Theoretical View (Working Paper No 9). Retrieved from International Migration Institute website http://www.imi.ox.ac.uk/pdfs/wp/WP9%20Migration%20and%20development%20theory%20HdH.pdf

Eaton, P.J. (1992). Rural-Urban Migration and Underemployment among Females in The Brazilian Northeast. Journal of Economic Issues, 26(2). 385-395. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4226552

BRIDGE (2005). Gender and Migration. Retrieved from http://www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/sites/bridge.ids.ac.uk/files/reports/CEP-Mig-OR.pdf

Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2011). Migration survey report. Retrieve from http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/download_Labour/download.php?file=migrasi/Laporan_Penyiasatan_Migrasi_Malaysia2011.pdf Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2012). Migration survey report. Retrieve from http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/download_Labour/download.php?file=migrasi/Migration_Survey_Report_Malaysia_2012.pdf
Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2013). Migration survey report. Retrieve from http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/download_Labour/download.php?file=migrasi/Migration_Survey_Report_Malaysia_2013.pdf

Dumaraog, E. K., Garcia L., Lanuza. A. L., Malit, E. A., & Marigmen, R, Marian. (2012). Push and full factors Affecting from Bicol to Metro Manila. Metro Manila, Philippines: University of the Philippines Diliman.
Harris J. R. & Sabot R. H. (1982) Urban unemployment in LDCs: Towards a more general search model, In Sabot, R. H. (Ed.), Migration and the labor market in developing countries (pp. 65-89). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Harris, J. R. & Todaro, M. P. (1970). Migration, unemployment and development: A two-sector analysis, American Economic Review, 60(1), 126–142.
Kochar, A. (2004). Urban influences on rural schooling in India. Journal of Development
Economics, 74, 113-36.
Quisumbing, A. R., & McNiven, S. (2005). Migration and the rural-urban continuum: Evidence from the rural Philippines. Washington D.C, United States: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Richard Anak Manggoi. (2007). Impact of rural-urban migration towards socio-economic and agriculture sector: A case study of kampong Semada, Selatok and kampong Plaman Nyabet. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia.

References: Abdul Rahman Embong. (2011). Pembandaran dan kehidupan bandar di semenanjung Malaysia, Akademika, 81(2), 23 – 39. Migration Ravenstein, E.G. (1885). The Laws of Migration. Journal of Statistical Society of London, 48(2), 167-235. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.orglstable/2979181 Stouffer, S.A de Haas, Hain. (2008). Migration and Development: A Theoretical View (Working Paper No 9). Retrieved from International Migration Institute website http://www.imi.ox.ac.uk/pdfs/wp/WP9%20Migration%20and%20development%20theory%20HdH.pdf Eaton, P.J http://www.jstor.org/stable/4226552 BRIDGE (2005) Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2011). Migration survey report. Retrieve from http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/download_Labour/download.php?file=migrasi/Laporan_Penyiasatan_Migrasi_Malaysia2011.pdf Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2012). Migration survey report. Retrieve from http://www.statistics.gov.my/portal/download_Labour/download.php?file=migrasi/Migration_Survey_Report_Malaysia_2012.pdf Department of Statistics Malaysia Dumaraog, E. K., Garcia L., Lanuza. A. L., Malit, E. A., & Marigmen, R, Marian. (2012). Push and full factors Affecting from Bicol to Metro Manila. Metro Manila, Philippines: University of the Philippines Diliman. Harris J. R. & Sabot R. H. (1982) Urban unemployment in LDCs: Towards a more general search model, In Sabot, R. H. (Ed.), Migration and the labor market in developing countries (pp. 65-89). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. Harris, J. R. & Todaro, M. P. (1970). Migration, unemployment and development: A two-sector analysis, American Economic Review, 60(1), 126–142. Kochar, A. (2004). Urban influences on rural schooling in India. Journal of Development Economics, 74, 113-36. Quisumbing, A. R., & McNiven, S. (2005). Migration and the rural-urban continuum: Evidence from the rural Philippines. Washington D.C, United States: International Food Policy Research Institute. Richard Anak Manggoi. (2007). Impact of rural-urban migration towards socio-economic and agriculture sector: A case study of kampong Semada, Selatok and kampong Plaman Nyabet. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia.