KARAPETYAN R.S. MIGRATION IN CITIES OF ARMENIA

Transcription

1 KARAPETYAN R.S. MIGRATION IN CITIES OF ARMENIA 1

2 NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF REPLIC OF ARMENIA INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND ETHNOGRAPHY ETHNO-SOCIOLOGICAL STUDIES OF ARMENIA AND THE DIASPORA 3 KARAPETYAN R.S. MIGRATION IN CITIES OF ARMENIA Ethno-sociological Study Yerevan GITUTYUN PUPLISHING HOUSE OF NAS RA

3 вڲêî²ÜÆ Ð²Üð²äºîàôÂÚ²Ü ÆîàôÂÚàôÜܺðÆ ²¼ ²ÚÆÜ ²Î² ºØƲ Ðܲ ÆîàôÂÚ²Ü ºì ²¼ ² ðàôâú²ü ÆÜêîÆîàôî вڲêî²ÜÆ ºì êöúàôèøæ ¾ÂÜàêàòÆàÈà Æ²Î²Ü àôêàôøü²êæðàôâúàôüüºð 3 βð²äºîÚ²Ü è.ê. ØÆ ð²òæ²ü вڲêî²ÜÆ ø²ô²øüºðàôø ¾ÂÜàêàòÆàÈà Æ²Î²Ü Ðºî²¼àîàôÂÚàôÜ ºñ ³Ý ÆîàôÂÚàôÜ

4 НАЦИОНАЛЬНАЯ АКАДЕМИЯ НАУК РЕСПУБЛИКИ АРМЕНИЯ ИНСТИТУТ АРХЕОЛОГИИ И ЭТНОГРАФИИ ЭТНОСОЦИОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ АРМЕНИИ И ДИАСПОРЫ 3 КАРАПЕТЯН Р.С. МИГРАЦИЯ В ГОРОДАХ АРМЕНИИ ЭТНОСОЦИОЛОГИЧЕСКОЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЕ Ереван ИЗДАТЕЛЬСТВО ГИТУТЮН НАН РА

5 UDC Printed according to decision of the Academic Council of the Insttute of Archeology and Ethnography of NAS RA. Editor-in-chief: Doctor of Economics H. Manasyan Reviewers: Doctor of Philosophy E.R. Grigoryan Doctor of History S.S. Mkrtchyan Karapetyan R.S. Migration in Sities of Armenia. Ethno-sociological Study. Yerevan, Gitutyun, p. The book includes a review of migration processes history in the cities of Armenia for the entire period of XX century and early XXI century. Statistically illustrated data, generated according to a version developed by the author, is based on the international OSY project, reflects several aspects of systematic perception of migration processes. First aspect is the identification of reference parameters of migrants; second aspect is the research of factors and adaptation and integration trends of those groups in the urban environment; third aspect is the definition of output data for parties intending to migrate into other countries; and finally, the analysis of migration potential outside of Armenia and opportunities for re-emigration. Based on the long-term comparable ethno-sociological surveys of the urban population conducted in Armenia in, and, the aforementioned processes are reviewed in retrospective, in aggregate of economic, demographic, social, cultural and psychological components, integrated into general ethno-sociological problems. The book is intended for experts and policy makers, students, faculty of the subject and readers of different categories. ISBN Gitutyun,

6 Foreword The migration processes underway throughout XX century had been proportionate to the economic development in Armenia and were determined by numerous factors of general and specific nature. Among general factors one can identify the events of vital importance for the entire post Soviet region formation of the Soviet and autonomous republics, collectivization, political repressions, Patriotic War,, collapse of the USSR and the obtaining of independence, formation of the CIS, etc 1. Specific factors were conditioned by the peculiarities of the reference boundaries of those republics in the stage of the USSR formation. The status of natural and human resources, the level of urbanization, the structure of economy, the specifics of historical development 2 and the cultures of populating ethnic groups and other parameters of those republics and regions comprise the short list of factors being for each of them the determinant feature of ethnical, social, demographical composition involved in the processes of population. This particular circumstance requires special focus on the role and place of migration in the constitution and development of modern ethno-social specifics of the urban population in Armenia. That process persisted throughout XX century, due to the cities of Armenia were generally replenished due to human injections large scaled for our country and the Armenian ethnic group on the whole, both from the outside and inside of the country. 3 The particular circumstance played a definite role in establishment of the modern ethno-social picture of population in Armenia today. Obviously, the origins of those processes result from the recent history 4, which can be newly comprehended by reconstruction of the past events. The reconstruction of past migration processes implies screening of factors separately or in group in chronological sequence in the context of concrete events throughout Armenia. The author used the data of three-scale ethno-sociological researches for that purpose, wherein the biographies of participants in the past events (in this instance, the migration processes of the population is the focus of our interest) had been stated; and the main stages of their life have actually reflected those events.furthermore, the appraisals, opinions and 1 Покшишевский В.В., Население и география, М.,1976, с ²ÉåáÛ³çÛ³Ý ²., Ð³Û ³ÕÃûç³ËÝ»ñÇ å³ïùáõãûáõýá. γÑÇñ», 3 ѳïáñ, : 3 Êáç³µ»ÏÛ³Ý ì., г۳ëï³ÝÇ µý³ïãáõãûáõýá Ýñ³ í»ñ³ñï³¹ñáõãûáõýá, ÐÊêÐ ² Ðñ³ï., ºñ ³Ý, 1979; Карапетян Р., Ереван новый центр социально-культурного развития армянского народа, в кн: Население Еревана. Этносоциологические исследования. Ереван, И-во АН АрмССР,1986; ²í³ Û³Ý., г۳ëï³ÝÇ µý³ïãáõ- ÃÛáõÝÁ, ºñ ³Ý, 1975; Ø»ÉÇùë»ÃÛ³Ý Ð., гÛñ»ÝÇù -ê Ûáõռù ³éÝãáõÃÛáõÝÝ»ñÁ ѳÛñ»- ݳ¹³ñÓáõÃÛáõÝÁ, ºñ ³Ý, 1985: 4 История армянского народа. И-во ЕГУ, Ереван, с , , , , ; ÎáñÏáïÛ³Ý ¼., êåçï³ï ç³ñ¹çó ¹»åÇ Ï³ñÙÇñ ßÇݳñ³ñáõÃÛáõÝ, гÛå»ïÑñ³ï, ºñ ³Ý, 1927, ÎáñÏáïÛ³Ý ¼., г۳ëï³ÝÇ µý³ïãáõãûáõýá í»ñççý ѳñÛáõñ ï³ñáõù, гÛå»ïñѳï, ºñ ³Ý, 1932, ç : 6

7 conceptions of respondents reflect the processes of ethno-social changes happening during the life of any generation. 5 The main purpose of this publication is to analyze three aspects of the role of migration in the development of ethno-social processes in Armenia on the basis of longitudenal ethno-sociological surveys of the urban population of Armenia. During those subsequent studies, among other parameters, questions with identical wording and a set of answers with similar wording had been offered, the comparative analysis of results constitutes a major cognitive interest for studying the dynamics of interlinked migration processes and composition of the urban population in Armenia. It is also important to note that the particular researches were carried out by the nation-wide urban sampling (see below), in each case taking into account both general parameters revealing the dynamics of existent processes and the specific parameters needed to disclose the peculiarities of the given period. Thus, the survey series included from 120 to 150 variables, containing in average approximately 1,200 characteristics that were formalized by a uniform pattern. 6 The overall urban population of Armenia was taken as the subject of longterm researches of migration and processes of the modern urban population formation. Back in 1976-, the author of this publication conducted a special survey for the purpose of identifying the principles of sampling and the methodology for further ethno-sociological surveys. During the period of 1976-, the surveys were conducted within the scope of OSU All-Union Program 7 : the particular research was led by the Corresponding Member at RAS, Professor Yuri Harutyunyan and the Doctor of History Emma Karapetyan. The participants of the research also included R. Karapetyan (the author of sampling and principles of mathematical analysis of the subject, co-author of questionnaire and coordinator of survey), M. Hakobyan, L. Vardanyan, H. Galstyan, T. Zakaryan, S. Obosyan, R. Ohanjanyan, K. Khanagyan, G. Sargsyan, etc. The second survey was conducted in and led by R. Karapetyan, and employees of Ethnosociology Department L. Vardanyan, M. Galstyan, S. Mkrtchyan, T. Zakaryan and E. Kyuregyan. The third survey was conducted in and led by R. Karapetyan with K. Hakobyan as a co-author. Financial assistance for the survey was also provided by CRRC - Armenia. The surveys were conducted with the participation of H. Yeghiazaryan, H. Sargsyan, S. Barseghyan, N. Susliyan, A. Gevorgyan and L. Hakobyan, and undergraduates of Sociology at various universities of Yerevan SEUA, YSU and Russian-Armenian (Slavonic) University. Due to the aforementioned surveys during the stated periods a certain number of indicators were picked out, intended to reflect the dynamic picture of changes in the essential parameters of the population. Such indicators included those reflecting the population characteristics, the course of life of each genera- 5 For details see: γñ³å»ïÛ³Ý è.ê., ä³ïù³ï³ý í»ñ³ï³½ùáõãû³ý Ù»ç ëáóçáéá Ç³Ï³Ý Ñ»ï³½áïáõÃÛ³Ý ÝÛáõûñÇ ï»õ»ï³ïí³ï³ý û ï³ï³ñáõãû³ý ݳѳïÙ³Ý ËݹÇñÝ»- ñá. Ð³Û ÅáÕáíñ¹³Ï³Ý Ùß³ÏáõÛÃ. XIV, ºñ ³Ý 2008; ç : 6 Visit the website of Caucasus Research Resource Centers (CRRC): 7 Арутюнян Ю.В., Социально-культурные аспекты развития и сближения наций в СССР (программа, методика и перспективы исследований) Советская этнография, 1972, N3 7

8 tion, a wide spectrum of opinions, appraisals and judgments referring to social relations, vital values, etc. 8

9 Principles of Sampled Formation A multistage area sampling was conducted in, to achieve a reliable reflection of life realities and to have an opportunity to determine the scales of events and processes based on the taxonomic method 8 by characteristics fixing by censuses and statistics, and based upon the analytical requirements of the survey. The development of the first stage was conditioned by the regional and hierarchic structure of settlements of the urban population in Armenia, which was specified by more than 25 taxons of natural-climatic, economic, social, demographic, ethno-cultural and other exponents. 9 Those taxons were picked out based on both the results of various statistical studies (censuses, appraisals, surveys, etc.), 10 and by the analysis method used during our past researches of the population of Armenia, during which 13 urban settlements of the republic had been surveyed in In succeeding, after the analysis of the results from those urban settlements, five cities were selected for replicated survey. In that way, the results of the first survey acquired major importance in the identification of the sampling for the second and third surveys: they allowed to achieve a more economical and thrifty representative level of sampling for as well as for its five historical-ethnographical regions, the hierarchic structures of urban settlements and other indicators. Consequent to appraising and weighing the data of the aforementioned indicators, four marzes of the republic Syunik, Gegharkunik, Shirak, Tavush, and the capital city Yerevan were selected. Based on the requirements stated above, the following logical operations were performed for identifying the general population and the sampled population. The first operation has implied the deduction of sampled urban population. In addition to the requirements stated above, it had to provide in its array the proportional correspondence existing in the general population. For instance, the sampling from nearly 2 million urban population of more than 50 urban settlements was determined in in the 8 For details see Кондратьев В.С., Проблемы представительности данных в массовых этнографических и этносоциологических исследованиях. Автореферат кандидатской диссертации, М.,, с.15-18; Россияне: жители города и деревни. М., 1995, с Republic of Armenia in the Armenian ethnographic science traditions is divided into 8 historical and ethnographic regions where there also are micro zones of migrants move from historical Armenia. With the approval of this zoning author, D. S. Vardumyan, we reunited these zones to larger regions. Such regions are Ayrarat, Gekharkunik, Shirac- Aragatsotn, Lori-Tavush and Syunik-Vayotsdzor. At these large historical and ethnographic regions there also are micro zones of other regions, for example, the Chambarak subdistrict (the former Krasnoselsky district) of Gekharkunik region which enters into another historical and ethnographic region. See Вардумян Д.С., Раздел Народы Армянской ССР, Общие сведения.в: Народы Кавказа, т.2, М. Издательство АН СССР, М.1962, с.440; Саргсян Г.Г., Население Восточной Армении в ХIX начале ХХ в., Ереван 2002, с For the particular work, we used the materials of 1926, 1959, 1970, 1979, 1989 and 2001 surveys and statistical publications in «Народное хозяйство СССР » Юбилейный статистический сборник. М., 1972; Народное хозяйство СССР 1985 г. М

10 range of about 4,000 people, in and 2,000 people, who were allocated proportionate to the residents of similar cities in the whole urban population of Armenia. Finally, the following datas were taken into consideration for identifying the total quantity of subjects of representation: 1. Number of general population /N/ 2. Number of sampled population /n/ 3. Share of general population in total urban population /Pn/ 4. quantity of sampling by each type of population /nq/ 5. Average rate of population by number of residents in each type of cities. It was considered as important to set up the typology of cities by population density indicators. 11 Accordingly, in Armenia, apart from the capital city where half of the urban population is concentrated, large cities (Gyumri and Vanadzor), medium cities like Hrazdan, Abovyan, Echmiadzin, Kapan, etc, and small cities like Gavar, Dilijan, Charentsavan and cities with population up to 20 thousand Artik, Ijevan were selected (m q cp). Hence, the number of cities for survey was determined by the following expression: L N npn 10 E nq q mqcp It is obvious that the proportions of each city type in the general population determined the same proportions in the sampled population. In that way, the sampled array of cities other than the capital did not have the capacity to meet the analytical requirements set forth in the surveys, and specifically to reflect the panorama of events on the level of individual region city. It is worth to mention with respect that each of the selected cities, apart from economic, social, demographic, natural-climatic and other taxons, reflected certain historical-ethnographic characteristics of population in Armenia. The aggregate of those features requires a more detailed analysis of phenomena on the level of each settlement. For that purpose, the sampled population of each of them was increased so that it was possible to form a comparable regional, residential survey picture. For the purpose of analysis of the already existing general, national data, coefficients were introduced in the sample array of those cities, where their proportions reached the level of proportions of similar type settlements in the general population. It is important to note that during the sampling both average and polar indicators were taken into consideration, which the sampling provided a more diverse picture of real events and processes in Armenia. The difference between the sampled and parent urban populations in Armenia, by main indicators (gender-age composition, average size of family, ratio of natives to migrants, etc.) comprised about 2.3%. The figure resulted from the comparison of sampling data with the 1979 census results (study in ), the 1989 census results (study in ) and the 2001 census results (study in ). The subsequent stage of sampling selection of respondents, the number whereof was determined by the aforementioned quotas for certain urban settlements.the final stage of sampling was performed on-the-site by lists of voters, 11 Хорев Б.С. Чапек В.Н., Проблемы изучения миграции населения. М., Мысль,1978, с. 60

11 in the following way: the total number of voters was divided by triple array of sample quota and the step of selection of respondents was derived; afterwards the full name (first name, family name, patronymic name) and address of the respondents were picked out and recorded from the list(s) by the particular interval. Further, two arrays of sampled population was created through simple apportionment of one third and two thirds. The first array became principal for the survey and the second served as a backup. Consequently, based on the sampling research was conducted with regard to the population of 13 cities in and 5 cities in and. Ratio of sampled to general populations Table 1 Number of population in city type group * (thousand). Structure of allocation of population Sample quote of quantity of respondents Number of population in city type group (thousand) ** Structure of allocation of population Sample quote of quantity of respondents Number of population in city typegroup (thousand) * Structure of allocation of population Sample quote of quantity of respondents Yerevan Gyumri Kapan Ijevan Gavar * The general array of cities in Armenia does not include the urban settlements with population below 10 thousand. The structure of allocation is based on the results of 1979 All-Union census in Soviet Armenia, Yerevan,. **The used data are highly approximate. ***The structure of allocation of the urban population by types of cities is based on the results of 2001 census in Armenia (see Census in Armenia). Note: The Yerevan sampling is reduced twice for saving purposes. Once the data are processed, the respective indicators will be introduced in the total array by a specific coefficient. 11

12 Sexogenous structure of the sampled and general populations*** Table 2 Yerevan Gyumri Kapan Gavar Ijevan 60 and above **** c* s** c* s** c* s** c* s** c* s** c* s** c* s** Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female * gender and age structure of RA urban population by certain cities is made on the basis of population censuses of Armenia in 1979 and See. Итоги Всесоюзной переписи населения 1979 года по Армянской ССР, том 1, Yerevan,, 2 раздел, табл. 4,5,6,7,8; Результаты переписи населения Республики Армения 2001г. (Показатели по Ширакскому марзу), Yerevan 2003, табл.2.1; Результаты переписи населения Республики Армения 2001г. (Показатели по Сюникскому марзу), Yerevan 2003, табл.2.1; Результаты переписи населения Республики Армения 2001г. (Показатели по Тавушскому марзу), Yerevan 2003, табл.2.1; Результаты переписи населения Республики Армения 2001г. (Показатели по Гехаркуникскому марзу), Yerevan 2003, табл.2.1; Результаты переписи населения Республики Армения 2001г. (Показатели Республики Армения), Yerevan 2003, табл.2.1. ** sampling ***In the table above thus has been presented the relative data of the two surveys (1981 and ), for the year of the survey was somewhat correlating with the census 12

13 data collected on 1971 and The summary of the survey of can t be conclusive, for the closest survey that was conducted was the survey of 1989, but because of the events of Spitak earthquake and Karabakh events lest the mark on conclusivеness of that survey in particular. ****The precentage is calculated with the total for every given period, thus the final total is not shown. Tools The tool for the aforementioned ethno-sociological surveys served the questionnaireб 12 designed for standardized interview and held face to face with a specially trained interviewer. In addition, a special passport was prepared for each settlement surveyed, wherein the statistical data, archives and other accessible materials were entered. The questions contained in the questionnaires could be divided in three groups. The first group of questions included those required for comparison. The socalled face to face questions had uniform wording and encoding for all three surveys; and importantly, will be kept uniform in the further surveys. Those were questions like: How long have you been living in this residential area? Where have you moved from? etc. Such questions comprised 40% of the total number of questions included in the questionnaires. The second group included new questions for the survey and asked to check their quality. Those were pilot questions, which after testing could be recommended for subsequent surveys. Importantly, such questions have been tested in other studies as well, which allows to create a database of questions necessary for our future developments. The third group included questions asked for identification of the specific situation present in the country during the period of each survey; for instance, questions intended to fix the period of employment of the respondent in. This was done to reveal new circumstances and indicators of the labor activity, which were determined by the current status of the labor market; whereas, back in the problem had not been actual. The anticipated effectiveness of those questions was based on the aforementioned groups. Almost all face to face questions, with a few exceptions, were answered by 80-90% of respondents; the majority of questions of the third group were effective as well 70-80%; whereas the indicator was 40% for the second group. Thus, not withstanding the time distance, the validity level of the questions had remained rather high. In the process of materials collection, the participants of each project faced problems well known by any fieldworker, which had their effect on the obtained 12 The questionnaires were published in various periods. See Арутюнян Ю.В., Карапетян Р.С., Овсепян А.А., Опросной лист, Ереван, 1976; γñ³å»ïÛ³Ý è. ÐÐ µý³ïãáõãû³ý ÃÝáëáóÇáÉá Ç³Ï³Ý áõëáõùý³ëçñáõãû³ý гñó³Ã»ñÃ, ºñ ³Ý, ; γñ³å»ïÛ³Ý è. ÐÐ µý³ïãáõãû³ý ÃÝáëáóÇáÉá Ç³Ï³Ý áõëáõùý³ëçñáõãû³ý гñó³Ã»ñÃ, ºñ ³Ý, ; Arutunjan Ju.V., Sabah G., Karapetjan R., Questionaire (Interview schedule) for the study of Ethnic Identity in Comparative Perspective: Armenians in Los Angeles, Moscow and Yerevan, Los Angeles,; γñ³å»ïÛ³Ý è. ÐÐ µý³ïãáõãû³ý ÃÝáëáóÇáÉá- Ç³Ï³Ý áõëáõùý³ëçñáõãû³ý гñó³Ã»ñÃ, ºñ ³Ý, ; γñ³å»ïÛ³Ý è., гÏáµÛ³Ý Î. ÐÐ µý³ïãáõãû³ý ÃÝáëáóÇáÉá Ç³Ï³Ý áõëáõùý³ëçñáõãû³ý гñó³Ã»ñÃ, ºñ ³Ý,. 13

14 material. In that respect, the management of the project made certain corrections in the work. For instance, in, apart from the Yerevan survey, the surveys in each city were conducted sequentially after the completion of the preceding one, since it was important to collect the data by the research group rather than by people attracted from the outside. That was why the data were collected first in Gyumri, then in Kapan, Gavar and Ijevan. The most changes in address, as anticipated, were recorded in Gyumri. That was conditioned by the unordered recording of both addresses and residents of the city. For that reason, more than half of the sampled array was replaced from the backup array, whereas one quarter was changed repeatedly. That was resulted by mass spatial reallocation of the population due to the earthquake, intensive emigration; as well as by the fact that the available lists of residents of the city had not actually been updated, and even if updated, only by adding new residents. Accordingly, the lists did not reflect the urban population s real status. It was not surprising that one third of addresses did not correspond to reality. Another problem faced in the process of organizing the survey was the refusal from the interview. The major portion of refusals was recorded in Yerevan 10% of respondents % of addresses revealed inconsistencies with persons registered at those addresses. The indicators were slightly lower in Gavar, Kapan and Ijevan in the range of 8-10%, mainly due to the emigration of a certain part of their residents. Based on the sampling provided and corrected, a number of conclusions can be made that could increase the value of this research. For instance, the ratio of real indicators of the particular cities (number of residents, proportions of migrants, people having moved to a new place of residence, etc.) to the presented statistics can be determined. The aforementioned drawbacks faced during the organization of surveys in Gyumri in, had been more expressive in 1995: the percentage of change in respondents had been significantly higher. Importantly, the picture was the same for Kapan and Ijevan for the same period; those were the cities surviving the bombardments and military actions during the particular period. The particular drawback had been an exception rather than a norm back in. In Yerevan only three people refused to respond and only 30 addresses were changed. As for the other cities, those indicators were either identical or even smaller. The complete statistical data of refusals, changes, wrong addresses, inconsistencies between addresses and residents, etc, have been entered in the database of each survey, and will be published once the works of the particular surveys are prepared. 14

15 FIRST SECTION Structure of migratory streams, directed to the RA cities This Section covers the source characteristics of migrants that are considered as a reference point in their further life in new conditions. This section takes into account the move-out environment context and period of adaptation of migrants, and reflects the retrospective of migration processes in Armenia by quantitative/qualitative contents almost throughout XX century. Such method allows studying both the factors of those processes and the specific processes, based whereon it is possible to analyze the dynamics of social, ethnic, psychological changes in the society and the ethnic group in general, to identify the role of various groups of the movable population in such processes. Such role is basically determined by parameters the migrants have to contact in the new environment and in the new surroundings, which allows identifying the disposition of various migration groups and in many cases will serve guidance for the scientific perception of the interrelated ethno-social processes, urbanization and movement of population on the mono-ethnical array. For those purpose features of movable population, such as genetic structure of migration, reference parameters of migrants and factors of migration are selected. It is important to note that although the particular features presented in the studies are based on subjective replies of respondents, they are still strictly objective merely for the reason that they are based on the responses mainly of fixing character: i.e. migrants gender, age, occupation, job skills, language of secondary education, education, social indicators of parents, etc. As for the factors of migration, which are recorded in the studies as the motives of moving into the particular settlement, their subjectivity is also rather relative, since the reasons forcing to change the place of residence still remain in the memory of the migrant 13 for a long time. The Section presents in the first place the features that reflect the regional and settlement characteristics of move-out of migrants, and on the other hand, the ratio of migrants to natives in the composition of the population in the cities surveyed. The Section further presents the reference characteristics of migrant groups and motivations of their moving into the particular settlement. All the stated data are reviewed in the chronological sequence of migration (in a specific historical interval), which allows studying the phenomenon in dynamics and the source of migration in regional and hierarchic segment. Such method allows describing the panorama of the particular phenomenon from the perspective of time and structure. The Section includes three types of materials. The sur- 1 E.T.Karapetyan notes that migrants memory of the last events, connected with their family, is much deeper, than at locals. Migrants their genealogy remember from the date of resettlement, that took place four to five generations back, while locals three generations back. Э.Т. Карапетян, «Родственная группа «азг» у армян», Ереван, И-во АН Арм.ССР, 1965, с

16 vey materials are the first. Those include the most substantial data, since they cover a greater number of urban settlements (the first survey covered 13 cities in Armenia), parameters identifying the characteristics of migrants. For instance, in the materials of those two surveys, the place of birth of the respondent s father is fixed. In the light of the tradition of patrimonial location of Armenians, this indicator is decisive for identification of genetic (origin) structure of migration groups; the indicator includes the type of settlement (specifying its typology based on the number of population), region and the country. In addition, the respondent s place of birth and place of move-out are stated. The second source constitutes the results of - surveys. Their range is rather limited due to the absence of certain questions that are essential for the analysis of reference parameters in the place of settlement of migrants. However, those studies provide much wider opportunities for a better quality analysis. Moreover, the latter study presents to a better extent another aspect of migrating behavior of population in the cities of Armenia identification of migration potential inside and outside of the country. The details are presented in the final chapter of this research. The third source, the author considered important to include in this Section, is the first Census after the independence of Armenia. The inclusion of those materials was necessary to confirm the representativeness of sociological data, and on the other hand, to clarify the level of relevance of description of the structure of sources forming the modern urban population with the life realities. The analysis of materials of the four subsequent (in fact, longitude) social studies conducted in the course of almost 30 allow to identify the dynamics of migration processes based on the compatible indicators (e.g. age groups, periods of move, etc.) included in each study, as well as while comparing the data of periodically repeated surveys. The Section consists of three chapters: Chapter 1 Sources of Migration: Genetic Structure of Urban Population in Armenia, Chapter 2 Reference Social- Demographic and Ethnic-Cultural Characteristics of Migrants in Places of Movein, and Chapter 3 Factors of Migration. 16

17 Chapter 1. Migration sources: the genetic structure of urban population The sources of migration in the studies are recorded through the passport related questions. The move to a new settlement becomes one of the turning-points in the life of any person, and all the facts relating to that event are engraved in the respondent s memory; accordingly it is not difficult to obtain those data. The Chapter includes the relationship between various groups of sources (region and settlement), their correlation with the duration of residing in the particular settlement. The chapter introduces the data on the ratio of migrants in the modern structure of urban population of the country according to both the chronology of move into and the duration of residing in the particular settlement. Thereafter the regional and settlement structure of migration sources are introduced, including the fathers birth place and the place of birth of the respondent and the place of his/her move-out. This allows identifying the routes of the provisionally called genes from the regional and settlement perspective. Table 1.1 Correlation of period of residence of natives and migrants, based on results of, and surveys. Native-borns and migrants, grouped respondingly Year of survey to a city residence period 1-2 2,0 0,8 1, ,0 2,0 1, ,2 1,9 1, ,8 3,6 6,0 20 and and more 26,3 19,4 17,4 Native 50,7 72,3 72, Structure of migration sources in cities of Armenia, based on results of, and surveys. Table 1.2 Migration moved from : Year of survey Village in Armenia 40,3 37,3 33,7 Village in ex-soviet republics 6,1 3,0 4,8, from village Western Armenia and Turkey 2,8 0,8 4,6 City in Armenia 24,4 28,4 37,1 City in ex-soviet republic 22,5 27,7 16,2 Foreign countries 3,9 2,8 3,

18 Respondent s father RA* Genetic structure of migration flows of Armenia (inter-generation segment), based on results of survey. Place of Birth Respondent Respondent s move-out before Moved: Table 1.3 after 1971 RA RA ES ES ES RA RA RA ES ES** ES ES RA Western Armenian and Turkey (WA) (WA) Western Armenia and Turkey FC (WA) ES RA Foreign Countries (FC) FC ES RA ES ES RA RA , FC*** FC FC RA ES ES RA RA *RA Republic of Armenia ** ES ex-soviet republics *** FC Foreign countries 18

19 Table 1.4 Chronological segment of genetic structure of migration sources (inter-generation perspective), based on results of survey. Moved: before 1940 year in in in after 1971 year Moved out from:* Place of Birth of Respondent s father and Respondent WA FC ES RA FC ES RA FC ES RA FC ES RA FC ES RA FC ES RA FC ES RA *WA Western Armenia and Turkey, FC Foreign Countries, ES ex-soviet republics, RA Republic of Armenia Table 1.5 Inter-generation spatial movement of population in Armenia in, based on results of survey. Place of Birth of Respondent s Father Respondent moved from: Type of Settlement Village City Region* Village City RA ES WA RA ES WA RA ES WA RA ES WA RA ES WA * WA Western Armenia and Turkey, FC Foreign Countries, ES ex-soviet republics, RA Republic of Armenia 19

20 Table 1.6 Spatial dislocation of population in cities of Armenia in inter-generation (father son/daughter) and generation (three age groups) segments, based on results of survey Place of Birth of Respondent s Father Respondent moved from: Type of Settlement Village City Region * Respondent s Age Village City RA ES WA RA ES WA RA 50and> ES 50and> WA 50and> RA ES WA RA ES WA and> and> and> and> and> and> and> and>

21 Table 1.7 Structure of migration sources of cities under study depending on place of birth of migrant s father, based on results of survey. Survey in city Yerevan Gyumri Kapan Ijevan Gavar Place of Birth of Respondent moved from: Respondent s Village: City: Father Type of Settlement Region RA ES WA RA ES FC RA Village ES WA RA City ES FC RA Village ES WA RA City ES FC RA Village ES WA RA City ES FC RA Village ES WA RA City ES FC RA Village ES WA RA City ES FC

22 Survey in city Yerevan Gyumri Kapan Ijevan Gavar Table 1.8 Settlements and regions of birth of parents of particular groups of migrants in cities under study (based on results of survey) Place of Birth of Respondent moved from: Respondent s Village City Father Type of Settlement Region RA ES WA RA ES FC RA Village ES WA RA City ES FC RA Village ES WA City RA ES FC RA Village ES WA RA City ES FC RA Village ES RA ES City FC RA Village ES FC RA City ES FC

23 Table 1.9 Chronological structure of migration flows in 12 cities of Armenia, based on results of survey Survey in city before 1950 Migration Period after 1971 Share of Migrants 1 Byureghavan Tashir Yeghegnadzor Ashtarak Ijevan Sisian Kapan Hrazdan Armavir Vanadzor Gyumri Yerevan Table 1.10 Correlation of natives and migrant groups by period of life at particular settlements in 5 cities of Armenia, based on results of, and survey Survey in city Yerevan Gyumri Kapan Ijevan Gavar Residents for city: Year of migrants Survey and > Natives

24 Table 1.11 Dynamics of change in regional and settlement structure of migration sources, based on results of survey Respondent moved out from: before 1940 Moved to particular settlement: after 1971 City Village City Village City Village City Village City Village Western Armenia and Turkey Foreign Countries Ex-Soviet Republics Republic of Armenia

25 Table 1.12 Structure of migration sources by duration of residence in 5 cities of Armenia, based on results of, and surveys Yerevan Gyumri Kapan Ijevan Gavar RA ES RA ES FC RA ES RA ES FC RA ES RA ES FC RA ES RA ES FC RA ES RA ES FC Up to and more Village City Village City Village City Village City Village City The aforementioned data have been estimated by specific group of sources and by duration of residing at the given settlement. 1. Duration of residence at the particular settlement 2. Type of move-out settlement: V village, C city 3. Place of move-out: ES ex Soviet republics, RA Republic of Armenia, FC Foreign countries 25

26 Table 1.13 Duration of residence in five cities of Armenia by particular migrant groups,based on results of, and surveys Yerevan Gyumri Kapan Ijevan Gavar RA ES FC Village City Village City City Village City up to and > up to and > up to and > up to and > up to and > up to and > up to and > The aforementioned data have been estimated by specific group of sources and by duration of residing at the given settlement. 1. Place of move-out: ES ex Soviet republics, RA Republic of Armenia, FC Foreign countries 2. Type of move-out settlement: V village, C city 3. Duration of residence at the particular settlement 26