Socio-economic impact of remittances in rural Bangladesh:

A unit analysis of the age of household head

Kazi Abdul Mannan1 and Khandaker Mursheda Farhana2

Abstract-This paper analysed the effect of the age the household head amongst 10 villages on the
remittance determinants and their socioeconomic impacts of remittance receiving households in rural
Bangladesh. Using micro-economic data from a survey conducted in 2013, statistical analysis was
carried out on 300 rural households. The empirical findings provided that the valuable discrimination
among the different age group of the household heads. The household unit analysis showed that
remittance determinants and socio-economic impact vary from household head age group at the same
community level of households. Moreover, relationship between the socioeconomic impact from
remittance and demographic determinants also vary due to the age of the household head
discrimination among the same rural area at the origin country.

Index Terms migration, remittance, age of the household head, determinants, socio-economic, impact
JEL classification: A12, B21, C51, C81, D19, J19, R23

Introduction
Bangladeshi migrants in Italy are predominantly single and male migrants who are living under
transnationally split (Yeoh, Graham, and Boyle, 2002) conditions and obligated to maintain
economic and social relations with their family members back home (Rahman and Kabir, 2012). The
obligation of maintaining sustained economic and social ties with home stems from the dominance of
the household in the social and economic affairs of the Bangladeshi society and their transnational
household members. Individual migrant is deeply enmeshed in a complex web of household relations
and dependencies: He/she moves internationally for work as an envoy of the extended household that
places the well-being of the extended family above the individual migrants interests (Rahman, 2011).
Whether it is temporary labour migration such as migration to the Middle East or more permanent
form of migration such as migration to Italy, maintaining sustained economic relations with left behind
households remain one of the key priorities for migrant members (Ullah, 2010, Rahman 2009). This is
comprehensive evidenced in the annual inflow of remittances to Bangladesh, which has increased from
around $4.2 billion in 2005 to nearly $10.9 billion in 2013 (BMET, 2014).
According to the World Bank (2014) remittances to developing countries are estimated at $404 billion
in 2013, up 3.5 percent compared with 2012. Growth in remittance flows to developing countries is
expected to accelerate to an annual average of 8.4 percent over the next three years, raising flows to
$436 billion in 2014 and $516 billion in 2016. These facts and gures indicate that international
migration and remittance is an intricate phenomenon, the dynamics of which are increasingly turning a
drastic policy topic global economic, social, legal and cultural topic (Mannan and Farhana, 2014).

Objective of the study

Based on the research problem this study has three objectives as follows:
1. To examine the socio-economic impact of remittances at the left behind rural household based on
the age of the household head of the Bangladeshi households receiving remittance from their family
members working in Italy.
2. To explore the relationship between socio-demographic factors and the age of household head.
3. To investigate the socioeconomic impact of such remittances of all age groups at the household
heads at the left behind households in Bangladesh.
1
Corresponding author: Research Fellow, Southern Cross University, Australia, Email:
mannankazi@yahoo.com
2
Dr.Khandaker Mursheda Farhana, Chairman, Migration Research, Development and Society of Bangladesh

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 100
Literature review on migration and remittances
Theory: The New Economics of Labour Migration (NELM)
This theory dealt with household and household considers as a single unit in the light of this theory.
This single unit of household is use in the analysis for migration. The individual migrant worker
considers a subset of the household. The costs and benefits of the migration decision shares with
migrant and his whole household. The individual migrant is part of the beneficial contract of the
household members (Stark and Bloom, 1985). Household benefits from the income generate from
different sources. This phenomenon became a form of coinsurance. This theory does not reduce the
importance of individual activity in decision-making for migration. The actions and performances of
individuals could be explained in the framework of decision-making unit with his whole household
(Stark, 1991). This theory has established a unique relation with analytical approach of migration from
an economic perspective and the more sociological view in which human behaviour has been
examined. Therefore, remittances among household are integral to migration under the new
economics of labour migration (NELM). Following below figure 1.1 show the mechanisms of the
theory of New Economics of Labour Migration.

Figure 1.1: The New Economics of Labour Migration (NELM) mechanisms

Source: Developed for this study

Previous empirical findings
According to Schrieder and Knerr (2000) international remittances defines as the part of international
migrants incomes send back from the destination country to the origin country and where the remitter
indirectly compensate by a counter of goods and services. However, Van Doorn (2001) explains that
such remittances includes in kind as the migrant usually send in cash to their left behind household
members as well communities at the origin country. Moreover, Levitt (2001) explains that
international remittances have implications in social capital, concepts, ideas, practices and identities
from destination country to the originating place which may impact household economic, political,
race, class, gender, relationship and also religion involvement.
The empirical literature on international migration reveal wide ranges of macro and micro economic
context such as Walsh (1974) explores the determinants of Irish migration to United Kingdom. Davis
and Stecklov (2002) explain the impact of rural migration upon the Mexican economy by employing
the data from the rural areas of Mexico. Garip (2006) shows that the determinants of migration and
remittance are gender, level of education, employment status and migration experience. Poveda (2007)
analyse the determinants of rural migration in Mexico. Atamanov and Berg (2012) describe the
heterogeneous impact of international migration and Remittances of Kyrgyz Republic. Recently,
Sprenger (2013) provides that the demographic characteristics of the migrants significant with origin

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 101
countries such as young migrant positively relate while education and gender show negative
relationship to the migration flows. Moreover, Schiopu, and Siegfried (2006) reveal that the average
amount of remittances reduces due to large number of unskilled worker in the country because these
workers have lower wages to send remittances to their countries.
The empirical studies on international remittances reveal wide ranges micro-economic context such as
Lucas and Stark (1985) explore the statistical evidence on determinants of remittances in terms of
motivation to remit to the rural households. However, Adams (1989), reveal that age, marital status,
employment status, size of land and gender in terms of number of household male member above 13
years old are the determinants of migration and remittances. In addition, Hoddinott (1994), finds out
that household and migrant characteristics influence the migration decision therefore remittances flow
partly depend on parent and household land while son migrant and the remittances determinants
always dynamics which may vary from household to household, migrant to migrant, geographical
location so on.
Recently, Brown (1997) explores that the motivational group of variables such as altruism, intent to
return, inheritance, household land, business investment, household head level of education and
implicit coinsurance significance to remit to the left behind household at the origin. However, the level
of significance differs from each origin. While Cox et al (1998) find that the strong remittance
determinant is altruism while consistent with exchange. Agrawal and Horowitz (1999) indicate that the
significance difference between the single and multiple migrant member at the household. de la Briere
et al (2002) reveal that due to heterogeneous characteristics of household migrants follow by
destination, household composition and gender contradicts in the causes to remit to the left behind
household members at the origin. Blue (2004) clearly argue that the relation to migrant and household
head strong remittance determinant and the relationship shows mainly parent, children and siblings.
According to de Hass (2006) international migration and remittances positive relationship to the home
country economic development improve household standard of living and increase freedom of
dominant cultural groups. However, Markova and Reilly (2007) finds that the strong relationship
between migrant legal status and remittances as illegal migrant substantially volume of remittance less
than those documented. Kelly and Solomon (2009) show that the religion an important factor of remit
to the origin. It vary from between two religion as well as practices of the own religion. Sackey (2010)
finds that the length of stay of the migrant at the host country and household size at the origin country
statistically significant. Mishra (2011) shows that inheritance, and intention return home highly
significant. McDonald and Valenzuela (2012) explore that altruism motive, gender and employment
status are factors of remittance but these depend on their overseas earning opportunities and capacities.
Busetta et al (2013) show that duration of migration and household composition key determinants of
remittances.
After independence in 1971 of Bangladesh, new economy tried to survive the country from overseas
income as remittance. Historically, initial stage, political migration to Germany and economic
migration to Middle East, therefore migration and remittance literature has been growing early 1980s
in Bangladesh. So far, the oldest study of remittance in Bangladesh Habibullah (1980), suggests to the
policy maker as taxes can be imposed on conditional terms depending upon the mode of use of the
remittance amount and setting up of a specialised organisation to look after investment opportunities of
the said remittances. After 25 years, policy maker take few initiatives which yet to be reviled.
Furthermore, micro and macro level study require as remittances play pivotal role in Bangladesh
present economy.
However, Stahl and Habib (1989), revel that only a little share of remittances are straight way used up
on investment goods, non-productive use and strong linkages with the .other economy of the country.
A comprehensive study (Murshed et al., 2002) provides the descriptive statistics of the socio-economic
characteristics vary within the region, household. Recently, Rahman (2007) finds a precise decline of
the migrant households dependent on remittances for basic and secondary living expenses respectively.
Barua et al (2007) find that income differential between origin and destination country positively
relates with the inflow of remittances. Ullah (2007) compares the socio-demographic characteristics of
the migrants between the two countries and shows that there is a small variation such as gender ratio,

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 102
educational attainment and religion. Rahman and Kabir (2012) explore the migration process occur
three distinctive way such as opportunistic, recruitment (formal and informal) and family reunion. Italy
for Bangladeshi migrant mainly male dominates where female migrations process either family
reunion or as spouse as for dependent category.

Methodology
This study chose a quantitative method approach as its methodology to accommodate method for an
explanation of the research objectives.

Selection of survey village and course of the survey

In line with the study focus, the selection of the study area in Bangladesh was based on the high
incidence of household members migrating to Italy at the sub-district level (Upazila) and the
prevalence of remittance-receiving households at the sub-sub-district level (Union Parisad). Shariatpur
is located in the Dhaka division and in the greater Faridpur District. Among the households, a
significant number of migrants are from Naria Upazila, Shariatpur District. Naria sub-district has 14
sub-sub-districts and Vogeshore union one of the sub-sub-districts, has been selected randomly for
census data because there is no available published data on Bangladeshi migrant workers in Italy.
Emigration from Bangladesh to Italy is predominantly a rural phenomenon. Therefore, the fieldwork
undertaken for this research consists of an ethnographic village study in Bangladesh with particular
reference to remittance sending migrant worker in Italy to bridge the micro and macro paradigms of
migration and remittance, and offer analytical insights into the determinants and impacts of such
remittance. In selecting a representative sample of the population, Krejcie and Morgans (1970)
recommendation was accepted in this study. After categorising the household migrant members in Italy
a random sample of 300 households was selected, the share in each village corresponding to their
proportion in the whole population (the remittance received household).
Ethical Issues
This research was conducted in compliance with the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human
Research (2007) and was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Southern Cross
University (Approval Number ECN-13-141).
Construction impact variable to determine socioeconomic impact
The measuring instrument consisted of matrix questions to be answered by employing the four point
Likert scale at the questionnaire. The socioeconomic impact variable comprises more than one item
and various respondent categories. From the descriptive or unvariate analysis, the each item or
statement is studied by tabulating the frequency distribution table and calculating the respective
percentage of the answer. In bivariate analysis, every single item in the matrix question is cross-
tabulated with the respective answer variable which is completely long and difficult. Further, it might
not be significant or yet not complete the aims of the research. To defeat this matter, an index variable
is commonly created to the study the associated outcome of all the items in forecasting the response
variable. In this context, all ascertains in the matrix questions are compiled simultaneously to all form
an index variable.
Nevertheless, at first the index variable is developed, consistency within all the items in the question
matrix has to free from the doubts. In this context, a reliability check is performed, and the value of
Cronbachs Alpha is determined. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS version 16.0)
enhances this facility using an analysis menu, pursued by sub-menu scale that includes the reliability
analysis test. Whether, by the reliability check, the value of Alpha keeps within the range of 0.7 to 1.0,
all of the statements in the question matrix can be complied to create an index variable. However, if
the value of Alpha is lower than 0.7, the component of consistency between diverse statements is
determined individually, and poorer one are cropped from the index variable to raise the value of
Alpha. On authorisation of consistency component, the scores on every item in a question matrix listed
with the help of responses categories are summed up. The minimum and maximum values are
ascertained by sub-menu descriptive statistics pursued by frequencies. The minimum values are

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 103
deducted from the maximum values, and the residuals are divided by the number of categories in the
index variable.
In order to study the associated outcome of the after remittance amenities was represented by the
participants assertions on the aggregate variable socioeconomic impact from remittances an index
variable was created. A reliability test provided the value of Cronbachs Alpha (0.842) that ensured the
availability of consistency components in all the statements. Therefore, they can be combined to create
a single assertion describing benefits obtained after remittances received. In this context, the score of
all statements was summed up and the minimum score attributed in the matrix question was 5 (five)
whereas the maximum score was 15 (fifteen). The score range from 5 to 15 was transfigured into three
ranges of answers. Score 5 to 8 is grouped as low outcome, range 9 to 12 namely medium, and 13
to 16 as strong. The three categories (low, medium and strong) reveal the strength of socioeconomic
benefits from the remittances. Descriptive statistics were used to ascertain the mean score and the
standard deviation, which were counted as 11.0933 and 2.46676 respectively.

Empirical Results
Descriptive statistics
The amount of remittance
The 300 household respondents were asked about the yearly amount of remittances received by them
from Italy of their household migrant member. Table 1.1 explores that the yearly amount of remittance
were twelve ranges. The maximum and minimum ranges were BDT 14,00,001-15,00,000 and
1,00,001-2,00,000 respectively. The majority 22.0% were sent at the range of BDT 5,00,001-6,00,000
and the 3% highest range BDT 14,00,001-15,00,000 while 12% minimum range BDT 1,00,001-
2,00,000. The results indicate that the factor influences to send remittance to their left behind
household members in rural Bangladesh.
Table 1.1: Yearly remittance frequency

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

Frequency of Remittance
The respondents were asked about the remittances received frequencies who remittance from Italy of
their household migrant member. Table 1.2 explores that the remittances received frequencies; the
majority 57.0% were sent bimonthly basis remittance to their left behind household members. The
others were sent 22% at any necessary, 20% monthly and 1% only festivals The 3% household were
received the maximum level of remittances range BDT 14,00,001 to 15,00,000.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 104
 Table 1.2: Cross Tabulation Household yearly remittance received and Frequency of Remittance

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

However, the following figure (1.2) shows that the bimonthly remittances received household were
received different ranges of remittances. Among the ranges, the highest percentage of household 39%
were received yearly BDT 500,001-600,000. However, their highest level of remittances BDT
9,00,001-10,00,000 of 2% and lowest level of remittances BDT 2,00,001-3,00,000 of 10%.
Figure 1.2: Distribution of bio monthly remittances received frequency

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

Age of household head and remittances
The cross tabulation of the household participant survey response about the remittance receiving
household head age and remittance shown in the table 1.3 and the results indicate that the majority
(23%) household head were the 56 to 60 aged group and their highest range of remittance (BDT
7,00,001-8,00,000). The lower aged group of migrants were (2%) which is (21 to 25). The following
aged groups were (26 to 30), (31 to 35) (36 to 40), (41 to 45), (46-50), (51 to 55), (56-60), (61 to 65),
(66 to 70) and (71 to 75) and their percentages 8%, 12% 12%, 5%, 4% 7%, 7%, 14% and 6%
respectively.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 105
 Table 1.3: Cross Tabulation Household yearly remittance received and age of household head

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

However, as depicted in the figure 1.3, also indicates that the 56-60 aged group of household head
highest (4%) remittances range BDT 700,001 to 8,00,000 and maximum percentage (30%) remittances
were received BDT 500,001 to 600,000 yearly from their household migrant member from Italy. It
assumed that the high range of household head receive more remittance than younger age household
head.
Figure 1.3: Distribution of remittances (56-60) group age of household head in percentage

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

Changes socioeconomic status over all households
The socioeconomic impacts acquired by the migrants households left behind in rural Bangladesh were
examined in this study. The highest number of the respondents reported an improvement in all four
indicators of remittances benefits, namely improvement of childrens education and improvement of
housing condition. Table 1.4 shows that 56.0% and 41.0% reported an improvement of housing and
childrens education to a great extent respectively. However, 16.3 % and 13.0% got a more social and
family network extended in the community and society respectively as well as other improvement also
reported 6.7% increase of living standard, 6% household members employment opportunity and 4.0%
savings were to a great extent.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 106
 Table 1.4: Socio-economic impact at the household for all the households in 10 rural villages

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

Determinants of remittances and socio-economic impact over all households
Following table 1.5 explored the significance relationship among the socio-economic impact and
socio-demographic characteristics of migrant, household head and household compositions. The
empirical results indicated the strong relationship with migrant characteristics such as age, education,
year of migration, legal status and number of visits; household head as marital status and educational
attainments; household compositions showed household size, investment in financial and housing
sector, living expenses and welfare.
Table 1.5: Remittances determinants associates with socio-economic impact at the household for all
households in 10 rural village

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

Unit Analysis-Age of the household

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 107
The study intended to delve out the different age group with other variables. Hence, the sample broken
into different sub-samples as follows:
The households head age below thirty five
The socioeconomic impacts explored that the household head age below thirty-five at the table 1.6.
The greatly extended was mainly improvement of children education and housing condition 68.2% and
45.5% respectively while others few sectors also improved such social network (27.3%) and living
standard increased 13.6%. However, all the other sectors indicated that the improvements were
increased reasonable and some extend.
Table 1.6: Socio-economic impact of households head age below thirty five

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

The empirical results at the table 1.7 indicated the significance relationship of the household age below
thirty-five among the socio-economic impact and socio-demographic characteristics of migrant,
household head and household compositions. It showed the strong relationship with migrant
characteristics such as age, education, year of migration, legal status and number of visits; household
head as age and education; household compositions explored investment in financial sector, housing
development, living expenses, investment in business, loan repayment and welfare.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 108
 Table 1.7: Remittances determinants associates with socio-economic impact at the age of household
head below thirty-five

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

The age of household head thirty six to fifty-five
The socioeconomic impacts explored that the household head age of thirty-six to fifty-five at the table
1.8. The greatly extended were mainly children education (35.7%) and improvement of housing
condition (64.3%) while others few sectors also improved as family network (17.9%), social network
(21.4), living standard (10.7%) and also employment opportunity (10.7). However, all the other sectors
indicated that the improvements were increased reasonable and some extend while no changes at the
business income (46.4%).
Table 1.8: Socio-economic impact of households head age among thirty six to fifty-five

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

The empirical result at the table 1.9 indicated the significance relationship among the socio-economic
impact and socio-demographic characteristics of migrant, household head and household
compositions. It showed the strong relationship with migrant characteristics such as year of migration,
legal status and number of visits; household head as age; household compositions explored investment
in housing development, land, living expenses and welfare.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 109
 Table 1.9: Remittances determinants associates with socio-economic impact at the age of household
head among thirty six to fifty-five

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

The age of the household head fifty six to sixty
The socioeconomic impacts explored that the household head age fifty-six to sixty at the table 1.10.
The greatly extended were improvement of housing condition (47.8%) and children education (39.1%)
although these sectors not as the highest number of participants while others few sectors also improved
very little margin. However, all the other sectors indicated that the improvements were increased
reasonable and some extend while no changes at the employment opportunity (52.0%).
Table 1.10: Socio-economic impact of households head age among fifty six to sixty

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

The empirical finding at the table 1.11 indicated the significance relationship among the socio-
economic impact and socio-demographic characteristics of migrant and household compositions. It
showed the strong relationship with migrant characteristics such as age, education, year of migration,
legal status and number of visits; household compositions explored household size, investment in
financial, housing development, land and welfare.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 110
 Table 1.11: Remittances determinants associates with socio-economic impact at the age of household
head among fifty six to sixty

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

The age of the household head above sixty-one
The socioeconomic impacts explored that the household head age above sixty-one at the table 1.10.
The greatly extended were improvement of housing condition (63.0%), children education (25.9%),
family network (22.2%) and also social network (22.2%) although these sectors not as the highest
number of participants while others few sectors also improved very little margin. However, all the
other sectors indicated that the improvements were increased reasonable and some extend level.

Table 1.12: Socio-economic impact of households head age above sixty-one

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

The empirical result at the table 1.13 showed the significance relationship among the socio-economic
impact and socio-demographic characteristics of migrant and household compositions. It showed the
strong relationship with migrant characteristics as the age of migrant; household compositions
explored investment in financial sector, housing development, business and welfare.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 111
 Table 1.13: Remittances determinants associates with socio-economic impact at the age of household
head above sixty-one

Source: Author calculation from the survey data

Discussion
Migrant age (Osili, 2007) is one of the important determinant influencing remittance behaviour. There
is a relationship between age of the migrants and the length of stay at the destination (Mejivar et al.,
1998; Rodriguez, 1996), often increase income and therefore also the available pool for remittance. .
Higher levels of remittances are sent by individuals under younger of age compared to older migrants
(de la Briere et al., 1997). But, likewise, the adjustment impact is inferred to turn as the migrant
becomes older, rendering all together remittances flows lower (DeSipio, 2000). This study found the
strong negative relationship the group of below thirty-five, fifty-six to above all household head as a
father, mother and wife and remittances impact at the rural household while no relationship with
brother while no relationship with thirty-six to fifty-five age group.
The empirical literature on micro-level studies indicates that the education level of migrants (Agrawal
and Horowitz, 1999) is linkage to the income of the migrant and the major determinant of remittance
(Fonchamnyo, 2012). Lucas and Stark (1985) and Stark and Lucas (1988) show remittances as
elements of a co-operative agreement, self-enforcing, agreement between the migrant and household
and also remittances repayment for the cost of migration and educational expenses. According to
McDonald and Valenzuela (2012), the higher the level of education of the migrant, the higher will be
the level of remittances. Rapoport and Docuier (2005) explain that the education level of the migrant
do not play vital role under the altruistic and exchange motives as educated migrants have lower
propensities to return but have a positive impact on remittances under the investment motive. This
study revealed that the strong negative relationship with below thirty-five and fifty-six to sixty years
old household head at the rural level to the remittances impact at the left behind households.
Several studies show that migrant marital status and residency pattern of household members,
including spouses and children, are significant determinants of remittance motivation (Johnson and
Whitelaw 1974; Menjivar et al. 1998; Vanwey 2004; Luke, 2007; Alba and Sugui 2009). According to
Sahu and Das (2009) single migrants and married heads living alone at the destination are likely to
remit more than married heads living with their spouse and children. Furthermore, remittances increase
while household head becomes a grandparent or the spouse lives outside or divorced, the household
head send monies to share with the number of nuclear household members living outside the
household (DeVoretz and Vadean, 2007). This research explored that there is no relationship between
household head and marital status of the migrant to the socio-economic impact.
The relationship between legal status of the migrant and the remittance linkage (Holst et al.,2008,
2010, 2011; Bettin and Lucchetti, 2012). Migrant remittances and their effect on the developing
economics rarely focus on the status that affect migrants remittance model (Mahuteau et al.,2010)
typically analyse the underlying motivations to remit. As risk-averse migrants, who, in the face of
higher income risk, remit more (Amuedo-Dorantes and Pozo, 2006a) and they also find undocumented
migrant likely to send monies more percentage than the documented. Markova and Reilly (2007) show
a positive determinant of remittances and the strong relationship between the legal status of the
migrant at the destination and remittance flow at the origin. This study found that the strong negative
correlation with all the age group of household head except above sixty-one years of the household
head at the origin in terms of socio-economic impact at the rural households.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 112
Many empirical studies explore that the number of visits to the household members influence
remittance behaviour (Lerch et al., 2006). During the visit at the origin, migrant bring gifts for their
household members, family, extended and fictive kin, and friends, they assert and keep up their
community networks (Goldring, 1998) therefore the remittance effect direct and indirect at the home
country in cash and kind. In contrast, rarely trip to the household members a lower likelihood to send
remittances either cash or kind, at the same time, there is a gender and origin discrimination as (Lerch
et al., 2006). Migrant who make frequent visits at the origin, not only to sustain community liaison, but
also to lead or to constitute critical economic linkages (Kemper, 1981). This paper revealed that the
number of visits by the migrant strong negatively correlated to the all age group of household head
except sixty-one and above household head and socio-economic impact at the origin.
Higher education levels of the household head may reflect better household resources and income
opportunities and so less economic need from overseas income, therefore the educational attainment of
the household head not significant with remittance amount and such provide some support the altruism
motive (McDonald and Valenzuela, 2012). However, this study revealed that the educational level of
household head also negatively correlated with the household head fifty-six to sixty for socio-
economic impact at the left behind rural household while other age group has no significance
relationship.
Conclusion
The present study investigated the age of the household head relation to the migrant and the variation
of remittance determinants and their socioeconomic impact in rural area at the origin. The findings
provided valuable discrimination among the different age group of the household heads. The
household unit analysis show that remittance determinants and socio-economic impact vary from
household head age group at the same community level of households. Moreover, relationship between
the socioeconomic impact from remittance and demographic determinants also vary due to the age of
the household head discrimination among the same rural area at the origin country.
REFERENCES

Adams, Jr. Richard, H. (1989): Worker remittance and inequality in rural Egypt, Economic
Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 38, No. 1.
Alba, Michael M and Sugui, Jessaine Soraya C.( 2009): Motives and Giving Norms Behind
Remittances The Case of Filipino Overseas Workers and their Recipient
Households, UP School of Economics, Discussion Paper No. 0907.
Agarwal, R. and A.W. Horowitz. (1999): Are International Remittances Altruism or
Insurance?
Evidence from Guyana Using Multiple-Migrant Households, World Development,
Vol. 30, pp. 2033-2044.
Atamanov, Aziz and Berg Marrit Van den. (2012): Heterogeneous Effects of International
Migration and Remittances on Crop Income: Evidence from the Kyrgyz Republic,
World Development, Volume 40, Issue 3, Pages 620630. 2012.
Amuedo-Dorantes, C. and Pozo, S. (2006a): Remittance Receipt and Business Ownership in
the
Dominican Republic, World Economy, 29 (7), 939-956.
Barua, S., Majumder, A. and Akhtaruzzaman, M. (2007): Determinants of Workers
Remittances in
Bangladesh: An Empirical Study, Bangladesh Bank, Dhaka. A Policy Analysis Unit
Working Paper Series No. WP01713.
Bettin, G and Lucchetti, R. (2012) Intertemporal Remittance Behaviour by Immigrants in
Germany,MOFIR Working Paper No.75, October.
Blue, S.A. (2004): State policy, economic crisis, gender, and family ties: Determinants of
family
remittances to Cuba, Economic Geography, 80 (1), 6382.
Brown, R. P. C. (1997): Estimating remittance functions for Pacific Island migrants, World

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 113
 Development, 25(4), 613-626.
Busetta, Annalisa; Cetorelli, Valeria and Stranges, Manuela. (2013): Remittance behaviours
of
foreigners in Italy, XXVII IUSSP International Population Conference,
http://busan2013.iussp.org/.
Cox, D., Eser, Z. and Jimenez, E. (1998): Motives for private transfers over the life cycle:
An
analytical Framework and Evidence for Peru, Journal of Development Economics,
55, 57-8.
Davis, Benjamin and Stecklov Guy. (2002): Domestic and international migration from
rural
Mexico: Disaggregating the effects of network structure and composition
Population Studies, 56 (2002), 291-309.
de Haas, Hein. (2006): Migration, remittances and regional development in Southern
Morocco,
Geoforum 37, 565580, 2006.
de la Brire, B., E. Sadoulet, A. de Janvry and S. Lambert. (2002): The roles of destination,
gender,
and household composition in explaining remittances: An analysis for the Dominican
Sierra, Journal of Development Economics, 68, 2: 309-28.
de la Briere, Bndicte; Janvry, Alain de; Lambert, Sylvie and Sadoulet, Elisabeth. (1997):
Why do
migrants remit? An analysis for Dominican Sierra, FCND Discussion Paper No.37.
DeSipio, Louis. (2000): Sending Money Home For Now: Remittances and Immigrant
Adaptation
in the United States, Working Paper. Institute, Inter-American Dialogue and Toms
Rivera Policiy, 2000.
DeVoretz, Don J and Vadean, Florin. (2007) Social relations and remittances-evidence
from
Canadian micro data, HWWI Research, Paper 3-6.
Fonchamnyo, Dobdinga Cletus. (2012): The Altruistic Motive of Remittances A Panel Data
Analysis of Economies in Sub Saharan Africa, International Journal of Economics
and Finance, Vol. 4, No. 10, Canadian Center of Science and Education.
Germenji, E., Beka, I., & Sarris, A. (2001): Estimating remittance functions for rural-based
Albanian emigrants, Working paper, ACE research project, P97-8158-R.
Goldring, L. (1998): The Power and Status of Transnational Social Fields. In
Transnationalism from
Below, ed. M. P. Smith and L. Guarnizo, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
Garip, Filiz. (2006): Social and Economic Determinants of Migration and Remittances: An
Analysis
of 22 Thai Villages Department of Sociology, Princeton University.
Hoddinott, John. (1994):A Model of Migration and Remittances Applied to Western Kenya,
Oxford Economic Papers, New Series, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 459-476, 1994.
Holst, Elke; Schfer. (2008): Andrea and Schrooten, Mechthild, Gender, Migration,
Remittances-
Evidence from Germany, Discussion papers // German Institute for Economic
Research, No. 800, 2008.
Holst, Elke; Schfer, Andrea and Schrooten, Mechthild. (2010): Gender, Transnational
Networks
and Remittances: Evidence from Germany, Discussion papers // German Institute
for Economic Research, No. 1005.
Holst, Elke; Schfer, Andrea and Schrooten, Mechthild. (2011): Remittances and Gender

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 114
 Theoretical Considerations and Empirical Evidence, IZA DP No. 5472.
Johnson G., Whitelaw. (1974): Urban-Rural Income Transfers in Kenya: An Estimated
Remittances
Function, Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 22, No. 3 pp 47379.
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1991): Determining sample size for research activities,
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
Kelly, Claudia Smith and Solomon Blen. (2009): The Influence Of Religion On Remittances
Sent
To Relatives And Friends Back Home, Journal of Business & Economics Research,
Volume 7, Number 1.
Kemper, R.V. (1991): Obstacles and Opportunities: Household Economics of Tzin-tzuntean
migrants in Mexico City, Urban Anthropology 10.3, 211-229.
Levitt, P. (2001): Transnational Migration: Taking stock and future directions, global
networks,
1(3), 195-216, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Lerch, Mathias; Dahinden, Janine and Wanner, Philippe. (2006): Remittance Behaviour of
Serbian
Migrants living in Switzerland A Survey, State Secretariat for Economic Affairs
(SECO) of the Government of Switzerland.
Lucas, R. E. B., & Stark, O. (1985):Motivations to remit: Evidence from Botswana, The
Journal of
Political Economy, 901-918.
Luke, Nancy. (2010): Migrants' Competing Commitments-Sexual Partners in Urban Africa
and
Remittances to the Rural Origin, American Journal of Sociology, Volume 115
Number 5: 143579.
Mannan, Kazi Abdul and Farhana, Khandaker Mursheda. (2014): Remittance Micro
Determinants
and Socioeconomic Impacts: A Household Unit Analysis of Gender Behaviour of
Rural Household Head in Bangladesh, International Journal of Management
Sciences and Business Research, ISSN (2226-8235) Vol-3, Issue 7.
Mannan, Kazi Abdul and Farhana, Khandaker Mursheda. (2014b): Legal status, remittances
and socio-economic impacts on rural household in Bangladesh: An empirical study
of Bangladeshi migrants in Italy. International Journal of Management Sciences and
Business Research, Vol-3, Issue 8, ISSN 2226-8235.
Mannan, Kazi Abdul and Farhana, Khandaker Mursheda. (2014c): Remittance micro
determinants
and socioeconomic impacts: An empirical analysis of religious background of
household, 3rd International Conference on Humanity, Culture and Society -
ICHCS, December 17-18, in Las Vegas, USA.
Markova, Eugenia and Reilly,Barry. (2007): Bulgarian Migrant Remittances and Legal
Status
Some Micro Level Evidence From Madrid, South-Eastern Europe Journal of
Economics 1: 55-69.
Mahuteau. Stephane; Piracha, Matloob and Tani. (2010): Massimiliano Selection Policy and
Immigrants' Remittance Behaviour, IZA DP No. 4874.
McDonald, James Ted and Valenzuela, Rebecca Ma. (2012): Why Filipino Migrants Remit
Evidence from a Home-Host Country Matched Sample, Monash University,
Department of Economics, Discussion Papers No. 9/12.
Menjivar, Cecilia; DaVanzo, Julie; Greenwell, Lisa and Valdez, Burciaga R. (1998):
Remittance
Behavior among Salvadoran and Filipino Immigrants in Los Angeles, International

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 115
 Migration Review, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 97-126.
Mishra, Pratikshya Bohra. (2011): Motivations to Remit-Evidence from Chitwan, Nepal,
Working Paper OPR-2011-04, Office of Population Research, Princeton University.
Murshed, K.S.A; Iqbal, Kazi and Ahmed, Meherun. (2002): A Study on Remittances Inflow
and
Utilization, International Organization for Migration (IOM), Regional Office for
South Asia.
Osili, U. O. (2007): Remittances and Savings from International Migration: Theory and
Evidence
using a Matched Sample, Journal of Development Economics, 83(2): pp. 446465.
Poveda, Alberto Rey. (2007): Determinants and consequences of internal and international
migration: The case of rural populations in the south of Veracruz, Mexico
Demographic Research: Volume 16, Article 10 http://www.demographic-
research.org 287.
Rahman, M. M. (2007): Migration and Social Development: A Family Perspective, Asia
Research Institute, National University of Singapore.
Rahman Md Mizanur. (2009): Temporary Migration and Changing Family Dynamics:
Implications
for Social Development, Population, Space and Place, 15, 161-174.
Rahman Md Mizanur. (2011): Emigration and the Family Economy: Bangladeshi labour
migration
to Saudi Arabia, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 20:(3-4) pp.389-411, 2011.
Rahman Md Mizanur and Kabir Mohammad Alamgir. (2012): Moving to Europe-
Bangladeshi
Migration to Italy, ISAS Working Paper, No. 142.
Rodriguez, Edgard R. (1996): Migrants Remittances in the Philippines, The Canadian
Journal of
Economics / Revue canadienne d'Economique, Vol. 29, Special Part 2, pp. S427-
S432.
Sackey, Frank Gyimah. (2011): Microeconomic Determinants of Privates of Private Inward
Remittances to Households in Ghana a case study, Journal of Economics and
Sustainable Development, ISSN 2222-1700 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2855 (Online).
Sahu and Das. (2009):How does remittance market function? Evidence from Surat city,
11th
Annual Conference on Money and Finance in the Indian Economy scheduled to be
held at the Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, (IGIDR), Mumbai,
23rd to 24th January.
Schrieder, G and Knerr, B. (2000): Labour migration as a social security mechanism for
small
holder households in Sub-Saharan Africa, Oxford Development Studies, Vol.28,
No.2.
Schiopu, L. and Siegfried N. (2006): Determinants of Workers Remittances: Evidence from
the
European Neighboring Region, Working Paper Series No. 688, European Central
Bank.
Sprenger, Ekaterina. (2013): The Determinants of International Migration in the European
Union:
An Empirical Analysis, IOS Working Papers, No. 325.
Stahl, Charles W and Habib, Ashanul. (1989): The Impact of Overseas workers remittances
on
indigenous industries- Evidence from Bangladesh, The Developing Economics,
XXVII-3.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 116
Stark , Oded. (1991): The Migration of Labor, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Stark , Oded and E. Bloom. (1985): The New Economics of Labour Migration, American
Economic Review, (75), 173-8.
Ullah, AKM Ahsan. (2010): Rationalising Migration Decisions: Labour Migrants in East
and
Southeast Asia, London: Ashgate.
Vanway, Leah K. (2004): Altruistic and Contractual Remittances between Male and Female
Migrants and Households in Rural Thailand, Demography, Vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 739-
756.
Van Doorn J. (2001): Migration, remittances and small enterprise, Geneva International
Labour Organisation, Weekly Bombay, pp-513-517.
World Bank. (2014): Migration and Development Brief, Migration and Remittances: Recent
Developments and Outlook, 11th April.
Yeoh, Brenda S.A., Elspeth Graham and Paul J. Boyle. (2002): Migrations and Family
Relations in
the Asia Pacific Region, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1.

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 117
 Appendix-I
Specification of variables for multivariate analysis

Source: Author developed for this study

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJSSM: Volume: 04, Number: 07, November 2014 Page 118