journalofthe internationalassociation oftibetanstudies · temporarymigrantsinlhasain2005 marong...

Journal of theInternational Association

of Tibetan Studies

Issue 4 — December 2008

ISSN 1550-6363

An online journal published by the Tibetan and Himalayan Library (THL)

www.jiats.org

http://www.jiats.org

Editors-in-Chief: José I. Cabezón and David GermanoGuest Editors: Ken Bauer, Geoff Childs, Andrew Fischer, and Daniel Winkler

Book Review Editor: Bryan J. CuevasManaging Editor: Steven Weinberger

Assistant Editors: Alison Melnick, William McGrath, and Arnoud SekreveTechnical Director: Nathaniel Grove

Contents

Articles

• Demographics, Development, and the Environment in Tibetan Areas (8 pages)– Kenneth Bauer and Geoff Childs

• Tibetan Fertility Transitions: Comparisons with Europe, China, and India (21 pages)– Geoff Childs

• Conflict between Nomadic Herders and Brown Bears in the Byang thang Regionof Tibet (42 pages)

– Dawa Tsering and John D. Farrington

• Subsistence and Rural Livelihood Strategies in Tibet under Rapid Economic andSocial Transition (49 pages)

– Andrew M. Fischer

• Biodiversity Conservation and Pastoralism on the Northwest Tibetan Plateau (Byangthang): Coexistence or Conflict? (21 pages)

– Joseph L. Fox, Ciren Yangzong, Kelsang Dhondup, Tsechoe Dorji and CamilleRichard

• Nomads without Pastures? Globalization, Regionalization, and Livelihood Securityof Nomads and Former Nomads in Northern Khams (40 pages)

– Andreas Gruschke

• Political Space and Socio-Economic Organization in the Lower Spiti Valley (EarlyNineteenth to Late Twentieth Century) (34 pages)

– Christian Jahoda

• South Indian Tibetans: Development Dynamics in the Early Stages of the TibetanRefugee Settlement Lugs zung bsam grub gling, Bylakuppe (31 pages)

– Jan Magnusson, Subramanya Nagarajarao and Geoff Childs

• Temporary Migrants in Lha sa in 2005 (42 pages)– Ma Rong and Tanzen Lhundup

• Exclusiveness and Openness: A Study of Matrimonial Strategies in the Dga’ ldanpho brang Aristocracy (1880-1959) (27 pages)

– Alice Travers

ii

• The Mushrooming Fungi Market in Tibet Exemplified by Cordyceps sinensis andTricholoma matsutake (47 pages)

– Daniel Winkler

• Interpreting Urbanization in Tibet: Administrative Scales and Discourses ofModernization (44 pages)

– Emily T. Yeh and Mark Henderson

Text Translation, Critical Edition, and Analysis

• The Sweet Sage and The Four Yogas: A Lost Mahāyoga Treatise fromDunhuang (67 pages)

– Sam van Schaik

A Note from the Field

• Population, Pasture Pressure, and School Education: Case Studies from Nag chu,TAR, PRC (21 pages)

– Beimatsho

Book Reviews

• Review of A History of Modern Tibet, Volume 2: The Calm before the Storm,1951-55, by Melvyn C. Goldstein (10 pages)

– Matthew Akester

• Review of Rulers on the Celestial Plain: Ecclesiastic and Secular Hegemony inMedieval Tibet. A Study of Tshal Gung-thang, by Per K. Sørensen and GuntramHazod, with Tsering Gyalbo (7 pages)

– Bryan J. Cuevas

Abstracts

Contributors to this Issue

iii

Temporary Migrants in Lha sa in 2005

Ma RongPeking University

Tanzen LhundupChina Tibetology Research Center

Abstract: In-migration of Han Chinese into Tibet has been a topic attracting manypeople’s attention. But there have been limited sociological surveys conducted inTibet regarding this issue. Peking University organized a survey in 2005 to studythe basic characteristics of temporary migrants in six cities in China’s west,including Lha sa. The 2005 Lha sa survey, the first major survey of temporarymigrants in Tibet, covered about 1,300 individuals who moved to and worked inLha sa without formal registration. This paper introduces the basic findings of thesurvey, including the migrants’ age structure, ethnic status, educationalbackground, marital status, current employment, income, housing, and dailyconsumption. In addition the paper presents data on the migrants’ places of origin,dates of migration, how long they plan to stay and work in Lha sa, and theirpotential future destinations. In general the majority of the temporary migrants inLha sa came from Han regions. There is a positive correlation between ethnicstatus and income, but the regression analysis indicates that the income gap betweenHan and Tibetans is mainly due to the factors of age, education, and whether theyare self-employed. Migration selectivity plays an important role among Hanmigrants who came from far away regions, leaving families at home where theyplan to return in two to three years.

IntroductionEver since China formulated and implemented “the strategy of developing thewest” in 1999, a huge amount of investment from the central government, thecoastal areas, and abroad has been flowing into the western provinces and

Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 4 (December 2008): 1-42.http://www.thlib.org?tid=T5561.1550-6363/2008/4/T5561.© 2008 by Ma Rong, Tanzen Lhundup, Tibetan and Himalayan Library, and International Association of TibetanStudies.Distributed under the THL Digital Text License.

http://www.thlib.org?tid=T5561

http://www.thlib.org/tools/licenses.php#essay=/thl/text-license/

autonomous regions of China.1 Many large-scale projects are currently beingplanned and promoted. It is hoped that “developing the west” will serve as a newstage on which the economy of China can keep growing around the beginning ofthe twenty-first century. Therefore, “development of the west” has become thefocus of attention of the enterprises and the media, both internationally anddomestically.

The Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) is located in the southwestern part ofChina with an area of about 1.2 million square kilometers and a population of 2.69million in 2006. This area is characterized by a fragile environment, less-developedinfrastructure, low level of industry, and high reliance on agriculture. Therefore,economic development in the TAR in the new century will certainly be associatedwith huge investments that will not only promote production, but also lead to atransformation of its economic structure from traditional planning economy tomarket economy.

A floating population from the east will come in the wake of large investmentsin transportation, communication, irrigation, energy production, and environmentalprotection, as well as with the development of manufacturing, commerce andservice industries. The labor market in the west will not only expand in size, butwill have to change its inner structure as well. Government assignment andregulations will play a lesser role in a local job market that will be more open tomigrants. As the west is the region where several important ethnic minorities live,labor migration will increase to an unprecedented extent the interactions betweenthe Han majority from the east and these local ethnic minorities. Under thecircumstances of rapid economic development, there is not only a broad space forcooperation between ethnic groups, but also an inevitable competition among themfor individual opportunities and group interests. The ethnic relations in the westof China therefore will enter upon a new phase.2

Supported by a grant from Ministry of Education of China, a project titled“Study of TemporaryMigration and Ethnic Relations in theWest” has been carriedout by the Institute of Sociology and Anthropology at Peking University since2004. A part of this project is to conduct a survey in major cities in the west. Basedon the information obtained from the Lha sa survey, this paper summarizes thebasic characteristics of this migration flow in Lha sa and analyzes its patterns incomparison to temporary migration in other cities of China.

1For example, 16.3 billion, 5.8 billion, and 15 billion US dollars have been invested in transportation,communication, and irrigation projects respectively in the west during 2000-2001 (Focus, CCTV, April2, 2002).2 MaRong, “Economic Development, Labor Transfer, andMinority Education in theWest of China,”

Development and Society 32 (2003): 125-45.

2Ma & Lhundup: Temporary Migrants in Lha sa in 2005

Literature Review and Survey Design

Studies of Migration in TibetThere have been many critics on migration of the Han Chinese into Tibetan areassince the 1950s. But for a long time, almost no systematical data analyses on thisissue have been based on reliable survey data. After “the Cultural Revolution,”demographic and sociological studies in China have paid much more attention tofertility and family planning programs in core regions rather than migration andethnic relations in the far west. One of the earliest studies of Tibetan populationwas carried out by Ma Rong in the late 1980s based on census data.3

During 1988-1992, a cooperative project was conducted by the Institute ofSociology and Anthropology (ISA) at Peking University and the China TibetologyResearch Center (CTRC) to study social and economic changes in Tibet. Thisproject conducted a household survey in both urban and rural areas in the TAR,covering 1,300 households. One of the aspects covered by this project wasdemographic change, and several reports and publications came out based on itsfindings.4

In late 1990s, a project led by Prof. Gelek and sponsored by the CCTSinterviewed 301 households in Lha sa to study families and marriages. In hisdoctoral dissertation, Dr. Tanzen Lhundup conducted a survey in Zhol Village atthe foot of the Potala Palace. He interviewed over seven hundred urban householdsin the late 1990s. The Institute of Population Study at Tibet University twice carriedout surveys on temporary migration in Lha sa and summarized some basiccharacteristics of temporary migrants.5 There are also some survey reports byscholars in different fields (for example, Sun Honglie and Zheng Du, CiwangJunmei, Tanzen Lhundup) analyzing and estimating the impact of the Qinghai-Tibetrailway on future migration patterns.

3 Ma Rong and Pan Naigu, “Mongolian-Han Intermarriages in Rural Chifeng,” Journal of BeijingUniversity 3 (1988): 76-87 (in Chinese).4 Li Li, “An Analysis of Migration in Tibet during 1986-1987” (unpublished report in Chinese,

1989); Ma Rong, “Han-Tibetan Residential Patterns in Lhasa,” The China Quarterly 128 (1991):814-35; Ma Rong, “Migration Patterns within the Tibet Autonomous Region,” Population Studies 5(1993): 26-42 (in Chinese); Ma Rong, “Economic Patterns, Migration, and Ethnic Relationships in theTibet Autonomous Region, China,” in Population, Ethnicity and Nation-Building, ed. CalvinGoldscheider (Boulder: Westview Press, 1995), 37-76; Ma Rong, Population and Society of Tibet(Beijing: Tong-Xin Press, 1996) (in Chinese); Ma Rong, “Economic Patterns of the Tibet AutonomousRegion,” in Development, Society, and Environment in Tibet, ed. G. E. Clarke (Wien: OsterreichischeAkademie der Wissensenschaften, 1998), 167-86; Ma Rong and Pan Naigu, “The Tibetan Populationand their Geographic Distribution in China,” in Tibetan Studies, ed. Per Kvaerne (Oslo: The Institutefor Comparative Research in Human Culture, 1994), 507-16; Institute of Sociology and Anthropology(ISA) and the Chinese Center for Tibetological Studies (CCTS), eds., Social and Economic Developmentin Tibet (Beijing: Press of Tibetology Studies, 1997) (in Chinese).5 Chen Hua and Suolang Renqing, “A Research Report on Temporary Migration in Lhasa City,”

Journal of Tibetan University 2 (1999): 2-12 (in Chinese); Chen Hua and Suolang Renqing, “AResearchReport on Temporary Migration in Lhasa City,” Journal of Tibetan University 3 (1999): 3-14 (inChinese).

3Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies, no. 4 (December 2008)

Western scholars also continually pay attention to Tibetan population studies,especially to the current development and demographic dynamics in Tibet. Basedon their field research, Melvyn Goldstein and Cynthia Beall published articles onTibetan fertility changes in Tibet and emphasized that birth control has not beenin practice in rural Tibet.6 Andrew Martin Fischer has published several reportson the Tibetan economy in recent years.7

Several doctoral dissertations in American universities also concentrated onTibetan studies. For example, Hu Xiaojiang at Harvard University analyzed“migrants’ enterprises” in the Lha sa market and emphasized that temporarymigrants from Han regions have been marginalized in Tibet’s job market andexperiencemany disadvantages in competition similar to those of “illegal migrants”in other nations.8 Dr. Emily Ting Yeh at University of Colorado investigated Hangardeners in Tibet. Those gardeners rented pieces of land in city suburbs to growvegetables. By selling the vegetables in the market, they make their living and alsoreduce the vegetable prices in Lha sa.

Research DesignWe have maintained a research interest in migration in Tibet since our 1988 survey.Many data and information related to migration have been collected and our studycontinually received support from the local administration and research institutionsin Lha sa. These collections established a solid base for the 2005 survey ontemporary migration.

Household interviews were conducted using a standard questionnaire designedfor specific research goals; this was a very useful method to obtain reliable datafor quantitative analysis. The 2005 Lha sa survey was a part of a research seriesorganized by Ma Rong and included the questionnaires administered in six citiesin China’s west: (1) Lha sa (the capital city of the TAR); (2) Wulumuqi (the capitalcity of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region); (3) Yinchuan (the capital cityof the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region); (4) Lanzhou (the capital city of Gansuprovince), (5) Xining (the capital city of Qinghai province), and (6) Germu (thekey intermediate city of the Qinghai-Tibet railway in western Qinghai). The samplesize in these six cities ranged from 1,500 to 3,500 and all interviews used the same

6 Melvyn C. Goldstein and CynthiaM. Beall, “China’s Birth Control Policy in the Tibet AutonomousRegion: Myths and Realities,” Asian Survey 31(1991): 285-303; Melvyn C. Goldstein et al., “Fertilityand Family Planning in Rural Tibet,” The China Journal 47 (2002): 19-39.7 Andrew Martin Fischer, Poverty by Design: the Economics of Discrimination in Tibet (Montreal:

Canadian Tibetan Committee, 2002); Andrew Martin Fischer, “Urban Fault Lines in Shangri-La:Population and economic foundations of interethnic conflict in the Tibetan areas of Western China,”Crisis StatesWorking Paper 42 (London: Crisis States Research Centre, London School of Economics,2004); Andrew Martin Fischer, State Growth and Social Exclusion in Tibet: Challenges of RecentEconomic Growth (Copenhagen: NIAS Press, 2004); Andrew Martin Fischer, “Close Encounters ofan Inner Asian Kind: Tibetan-Muslim Coexistence and Conflict in Tibet, Past and Present,” CrisisStatesWorking Paper, 68 (London: Crisis States Research Centre, London School of Economics, 2005).8Xiao Jiang Hu, “The Little Shops of Lhasa, Tibet: Migrant Businesses and the Formation ofMarkets

in a Transitional Economy” (PhD diss., Harvard University, 2004).


questionnaire designed at Peking University. Therefore, it is now possible toconduct a comparative study of temporary migration in these six cities.

Dr. Tanzen Lhundup from the China Tibetology Research Center (CTRC) wasin charge of organizing the research team and conducting the interviews in Lhasa. During the preparation period of July to September, 2005, the team conductedinterviews at six district offices and nine public security stations in urban areas ofLha sa city, as well as other government bureaus, in order to learn the basicresidential distribution patterns of temporary migrants, government policies inmanaging temporary migrants, details about the registration system, and thedistribution of migrants’ economic activities.

From the interviews, we learned that temporary migrants in old Lha sa urbanareas mainly concentrated in the Bar skor and Khrom gzigs khang trade centerswhile those living outsides the second circle roadmainly concentrated in the westernsuburb and Jinzhuxilu (along the Lha sa River), and in several neighborhoods forretired cadres and workers located in the northern suburb. There are certainconcentration patterns regarding their economic activities: (1) in old urban areas,the migrants are mainly Han, Hui, and Tibetans from the Khams region and Lhokha prefecture who mostly engaged in retail sales; (2) in the western suburb, themain activities carried out bymigrants includework in restaurants, the entertainmentindustry, and other services; (3) in the northern suburb, migrants work in vegetableproduction, automobile repair, and construction. There is abundant cheap housingavailable for temporary migrants to rent in the northern suburb. The target sitesfor this survey were identified on the basis of where temporary migrants live andwork intensively and accounts for the diversity of their economic activities.

In order to prepare for the celebration of the fortieth anniversary of the TibetAutonomous Region, the city government of Lha sa organized a campaign to checkregistration records of all rental housing and temporary migrants in Lha sa betweenJune and August, 2005. This campaign provided us with the most detailed andupdated information on temporarymigrants and are very helpful for sampling. Theteam also discussed our survey plans with officers and scholars from governmentinstitutions, the Academy of Social Sciences of Tibet, and Tibet University fortheir advice and support.

From September 25 to October 20, 2005, interviews were conducted by theresearch team. Data was gathered on both individuals and households byinterviewing an adult member of each household. Twenty students from theDepartment of Tibetan Language and Literature at Tibet University comprised theteam. They went through a very carefully designed orientation and training programto understand the purpose of the survey and the items in the questionnaire. For thesuccess of this survey, the structure of the interview team was very carefullydesigned and selected. Among the twenty interviewers, six were female, and sixwere from Chab mdo and spoke the Khams dialect. They were split up into smallgroups during interviews for easier contact with respondents.


The respondents in Lha sa were carefully selected from five target groups: (1)Workers employed by construction companies. Based on local statistics providedby the Lha sa Urban Construction Bureau, from a total 148 construction companieswith headquarters outside the TAR, we selected three companies according to theirplace of origin and number of employees. The team conducted 177 interviewsamong the workers of the three companies. (2) Small retail sales merchants whorent shops along the streets. Among this group, seven hundred households aroundthe Bar skor area and another 174 households in international “Zhonghe Town”were interviewed. (3) Gardeners producing vegetables in the northern suburb. Onehundred and twenty-eight interviews were carried out among this group. (4) Onehundred and eighty cooks, waiters, and waitresses who were temporary migrantswere interviewed, and (5) 226 taxi drivers (a special occupation filled mainly bytemporary migrants) were interviewed (see Table 1).

Table 1: Distribution of Respondents in the 2005 Lhasa Survey

%RespondentsOccupation (Locations)

15.4226Lha sa Taxi Drivers

4.668Construction Field (West Suburb)

0.35“Zuo-An” Coffee

0.812“Tao-Yuan” Restaurant

1.725“Tai Yang Dao” Apartment Areas

6.393“Jiangsu” Restaurant

6.291Zhol Residential Committee

3.044Construction Field (Bank) (West Suburb)

15.0220Intermediate Circuit (Bar skor) Lugu Residential Committee

17.0249Khrom gzigs khang Market

9.5140Khrom gzigs khang Street Salesmen (North Suburb)

8.7128Tea House, Vegetable Farmers

1.624“Tian-Lu” Temporary Labor Market

0.35Temporary Laborer on Street

0.69“Xiang Ba La” Restaurant

2.739Small Item Market (International Town)

1.015“Small Swan” Restaurant (International Town)

1.421Renting Apartments (International Town)

0.812Gold/Silver Craftsmen (International Town)

100.01,467Total


Population Distribution and Geographic Differences in the TAR

Regional Differences in Population Distribution within the TARAccording to residential registration, the total population of permanent residentsin the TAR has increase from 1,140,900 in 1951 to 2,554,400 in 2002, with Tibetansconsisting of 96 percent of the total. The 2002 Population Sampling Survey providesa larger number. It estimated that the total permanent residents were 2,668,800 inthe TAR.

Among the seven administrative units at prefecture level, Lha sa, Gzhis ka rtse,and Chabmdo are the three with the largest populations (Table 2). About 64 percentof the total TAR population lived in these three prefectures, which only consist of25 percent of the total area of the region. During 1985-2002, the highest rates ofincrease were found in Nag chu and Mnga’ ris, 1.96 percent and 1.95 percentrespectively (Table 3).

Table 2: Population in the TAR, 2000

PopulationDensity

(People/km²)

Population (in100,000)

Area (in100,000 km²)

AdministrativeUnit(Counties/Districts)

Region

13.8840.952.958Lha sa

6.7058.228.6911Chab mdo

3.9931.787.9612Lho kha

3.5264.1418.2018Gzhis ka rtse

0.030.9437.6810Nag chu

0.257.6630.507Mnga’ ris

1.2815.0111.707Nying khri

2.13255.44120.0073Total

Source: Statistical Bureau of TAR, Yearbook of the TAR (2001) (Beijing: China Statistical Press).

Table 3: Population Changes in the TAR, 1985-2002

AnnualGrowth Rate

(%)

2002*200019951985Region

0.3140.9540.3735.6632.39Lha sa

0.2758.2257.3349.7246.39Chab mdo

0.1031.7831.5328.3026.10Lho kha

0.4064.1463.0355.3849.98Gzhis ka rtse

0.9637.6836.2829.9526.58Nag chu

0.957.667.146.135.41Mnga’ ris


-0.0415.0114.3812.9112.63Nying khri

0.38255.44250.33218.05199.48Total

* Population in 2002 only included registered permanent residents.

Urban Population in the TARThe rural-urban structure of a population is an index of social-economicdevelopment, and the degree of urbanization is closely related to labor division inindustries. The proportion of urban population in the TAR increased during1978-2002, but the speed of urbanization in the TAR is still slow compared withthe national level.

In 1990, the urban population was 13.8 percent in the TAR, compared to 26.2percent for all of China. The percentage increased to 14.5 percent in the TAR in2002. Another indicator of urbanization in China is the percentage of the populationregistered as non-agricultural residents who mainly live in cities and towns. Itshould be noted that a certain number of people living in urban areas still registeras agricultural residents. The Chinese government restricts the transfer fromagricultural to non-agricultural status in peoples’ residential registration. The sizeof the non-agricultural population is generally smaller than that of the urbanresidential population. The distribution of the non-agricultural population in theTAR is presented in Table 4.

Table 4: Rural-Urban Distribution of Population in the TAR, 2002

Urban Population(%)

Non-AgriculturalPopulation (in 10,000)

Total Population (in10,000)

Region

34.6014.1740.95Lha sa

4.912.8658.22Chab mdo

3.781.2031.78Lho kha

6.694.2964.14Gzhis ka rtse

6.322.3837.68Nag chu

12.140.937.66Mnga’ ris

17.392.6115.01Nying khri

11.1328.44255.44Total

Source: Statistical Bureau of TAR, Yearbook of the TAR (2003) (Beijing: China Statistical Press).

The Ethnic Structure of the TAR PopulationAccording to 1990 census data, ethnic Tibetans consisted of 95.46 percent of thetotal population in the TAR, while Han consisted of 3.7 percent, Hui 0.14 percentand other groups made up 0.7 percent. The 2000 census shows that the percentageof Tibetans declined to 92.76 percent while Han increased to 6.06 percent, Huireached 0.34 percent, and the other groups rose slightly to 0.84 percent. During


this ten year period, the percentage of Tibetans in total declined 2.7 percent andHan increased 2.36 percent. This change was largely related to Han temporaryin-migration that is not counted in the residential registration system but is coveredby the censuses. The ethnic structures of registered residents in the TAR and thechanges during 1985-2005 are presented in Table 5. Compared with the censusdata, we found that the number of registered Han residents did not increase muchprior to 2000, but had increased by 2005. Meanwhile, the growth of the Hantemporary migrants was revealed more by registration records.

Table 5: Population of Ethnic Groups in the TAR by Registration, 1985-2005

20052000199519901985Group

%#%#%#%#%#

95.32,549,29396.42,421,85696.32,268,74996.12,095,56195.71,909,693Tibetan

3.9104,6472.872,1222.967,7723.167,4073.670,932Han

0.11,4530.12,1320.12,3570.12,2690.11,529Hui

0.12,9320.12,8560.12,6900.12,3250.12,036Luoba

0.49,4880.38,4710.48,0840.37,4630.36,445Menba

0.11,706-1,024-1,0920.11,260-871Naxi

-221-104-118-79-72Mongolian

-447-430-394-378-227Nu

-59-50-31-50-31Zhuang

-30-32-21-32-80Dulong

-21-41-23-15-62Lisu

-285-151-150-116-90Tu

-327-213-171-168-81Manchu

-121-61-61-173-36Bai

-44-15-5-7-12Buyi

-32-10-4-10-6Uygur

-203-89-82-70-42Miao

-133-39-35-36-21Yi

0.11,8800.12,1520.12,1310.11,8190.11,403Xiaorba*

0.11,6700.11,3950.11,4940.11,2480.11,097Deng*

-540-98-76-34-42Others

100.02,675,5201002,512,3411002,355,5401002,180,5201001,994,808Total

* These two groups have not been officially recognized by the government.-

Source: Statistical Bureau of TAR, Yearbook of the TAR (2007) (Beijing: China Statistical Press), 33-34.


The Changes in the Population Size and Structure in Lha saUrban Districts

Defining the Geographic Scope of “Lha sa”In order to examine the population changes in Lha sa, a discussion on how to definethe boundaries of “Lha sa” is necessary. In previous studies, different concepts of“Lha sa” with varying geographic coverage were applied. This caused a lot ofconfusion. Whereas some defined “Lha sa” by the current administration system,including seven counties and the Lha sa Urban District, others used the term toonly refer to the old Lha sa urban areas, and some used it only to refer to the centralBar skor (the area within the traditional “middle circle”). In this study, “Lha sa”refers to the administrative area of the Lha sa Urban District, excluding the sevencounties under Lha sa city at the prefecture level.

Urban Population in Lha sa CityThere are few data on the population in the Lha sa Urban District before 1959.One estimate is that there were about 50,000 to 60,000 residents in Lha sa urbanareas and that 30,000 to 40,000 of them were monks.9 The general agreementamong scholars and the local government in Lha sa was that there were about30,000 residents in urban Lha sa, including those in suburbs.More accurate numbersof Lha sa’s urban population were collected by the Statistical Bureau of the Lhasa Urban District and are presented in Table 6.

Table 6: The Population under Management of the Lha sa Urban District,1964-2004

PopulationHouseholdYear Animal

HusbandryAgriculturalUrbanTotalAnimal

HusbandryAgriculturalUrbanTotal

27010,49228,60139,363723,0797,11110,2621964

18212,33720,24432,763622,7626,7719,5951974

43712,50019,19132,128803,2056,6399,9241984

56512,80027,27840,6431063,41911,02914,5541994

78413,38228,90243,0711173,52411,30914,9501999

73614,71031,28446,7301163,67413,32517,1152004

Source: Lhasa Urban District Statistical Bureau, Yearbook of Lhasa Urban District (1964-2004).

The number of households and population in Lha sa declined during 1964-1984.There are no plausible factors to explain the reasons for such a decline. Oneexplanation is that some urban Tibetan residents moved out of Lha sa during the

9 Gelek and Jin Xisheng, eds., Lhasa (100 City-county Socioeconomic Study) (Beijing: ChinaEncyclopedia Press, 1995), 47.


Cultural Revolution to avoid political pressure. Another explanation is that someHan cadres who the government sent to Lha sa to work succeeded in transferringout of Tibet during the early 1980s. After Hu Yaobang’s visit to Lha sa and hisemphasis on the major role Tibetan cadres should play in the administration, manyHan cadres left. According to the registration records, there were 32,800 and 20,900net out-migrants in 1981 and 1982 respectively.10 A large proportion of Hanout-migration occurred in urban Lha sa.

The population in Lha sa has increased since the 1990s, accompanying theurbanization process in the TAR. The number of “agricultural residents” in urbanLha sa was assumed to decline, but this did not occur, mainly due to natural increasebased on higher fertility. In addition, many residents in rural areas moved to Lhasa after retirement and built houses in the Lha sa suburbs. They did not changetheir registration status and this might contribute to the increase of Lha sa’sagricultural population.

Some records in the Lha sa Urban District Registration show that there were2,896 in-migrants and 2,948 out-migrants during 1994-1998. These in-migrantsincluded those whose application for transferring from agricultural tonon-agricultural status andmoving to Lha sa had been approved by the governmentpolicy. Their applications were either related to “spouse/family union” or retirementof cadres for health reasons. The out-migrants were mainly the students who wentto other provinces for education (higher education in universities or entering Tibetanmiddle schools elsewhere). It should be noted that these records only covered theresidents registered and managed by Street Offices and Residential Committees,and did not include the people directly under the management of the governmentinstitutions of the TAR and military force.

China has conducted five national censuses: 1953, 1964, 1982, 1990 and 2000.But the first two were not really carried out in the TAR. The data for the first werereported by the Bka’ shag government and the data for the second were mainlyestimates based on residential registration. The 1990 and 2000 censuses providemore accurate and detailed data for Lha sa’s population.

From 1990 to 2000 the number of households increased from 32,131 to 71,942in the Lha sa Urban District. Among these, “family households” increased from30,960 to 66,316, while “unit households” increased from 1,556 to 5,626.11Duringthis ten year period, the average annual rate of increase was 4.6 percent for “family

10 Statistical Bureau of the TAR, Yearbook of the TAR (Beijing: China Statistical Press, 1985, 1995,2001, 2003, 2007).11 The TAR Census Office. In the residential registration system in the TAR, families (couples with

their children or other dependents) were registered as “family households.” Employees and theirdependents in work units living in unit dormitories register under the name of their unit and belong tothe category “unit households.” Those registered under the work units are mainly the employees whosethree-year work terms in the TAR were arranged by the central government. Some young Tibetanemployees recruited from the TAR might register under the unit before they formed their own familyand moved out of the dormitory.


households,” and 2.7 percent for “unit households.” At the same time, the annualpopulation growth rate was 5 percent.

Ethnic Structure of Lha sa’s Urban PopulationAs the capital city and the political, economic and religious center of Tibet, Lhasa has been the place where members of different ethnic groups have interactedthroughout history. Lha sa has the most diversified ethnic population structure inthe TAR.

Table 7: Population of Ethnic Groups in the Lha sa Urban District, 1985-2003

Ethnic groupPopulationYear

OthersHuiHanTibetan

187488731,65632,5091985

87697631,83432,6871986

77767532,31233,1701987

137977634,33835,2241988

118017736,04536,9341989

78426737,17938,0951990

78326538,16739,0711991

58516738,95939,8821992

88515439,08239,9951993

88487739,71040,6431994

98654940,16241,0851995

88425139,69640,5971996

68394939,78240,6761997

14103716241,57342,7861998

15088919641,83643,0711999

1178639042,29643,3662000

48248443,23044,1422001

28095143,93144,7932002

186445144,76946,0852003

Source: Development and Planning Committee of Lhasa Urban District, Collection of Economic Statistics of LhasaUrban District (2004).

The registration records of the Lha sa Urban District for permanent residentsliving under the management of Street Offices show some dynamics of thepopulations of all ethnic groups (Table 7). These numbers do not include thepopulation under the management of the TAR government units and therefore are


much smaller than the census data. This table and its coverage can show thepopulation changes in the old Lha sa urban areas around the Bar skor. The reasonwhy the period of 1998-2000 had more Han, Hui, and other residents remainsunknown.

More details on the ethnic structure of residents in the Lha sa Urban District isshown in Table 8. Most Han residents (470 by the end of 2004) lived in the unitsdirectly administered by the TAR government. Only a few Han (fifty-eight) livedunder Street Offices. But it should be pointed out that these were only registeredpermanent residents, and did not include temporary Han migrants who lived andworked in Lha sa urban areas.

Table 8: The Ethnic Structure of Registered Residents of the Lha sa UrbanDistrict, 2004

Ethnic groupTotal ResidentsStreet Office

OthersHuiHanTibetan

0024,0454,047Na Jin

0004,5904,590Cai Gong Tang

0002,1722,172Duo Di

0002,1782,178Niang Re

156316,6036,691Bar skor

11295,6405,662Chong Sai Kang

074486,4777,229Ji Ri

01988,6328,659Ji Beng Gang

03031,8271,830Gong De Lin

000335335Zha Xi

000601601Gemagusang

004122,3242,736TAR units

283447045,42446,730Total

Source: Development and Planning Committee of Lhasa Urban District, Collection of Economic Statistics of LhasaUrban District (2004).

Compared to the ethnic structure of the entire TAR, it is clear that the mostdiversified ethnic population lives in Lha sa City, although it is not necessarily thepopulation under the management of the Lha sa Urban District. The temporarymigrants, who were covered by censuses but not by residential registration, liveand work in Lha sa. Therefore, Lha sa is the place to study temporary migrationin the TAR.


Temporary Migrants in Lha sa: Statistical Records

Government Policies for Managing Temporary Migration in LhasaHow many temporary migrants live is Lha sa? This has been a hotly debated topicfor a long time. Two points deserve attention in looking at this issue. First, thegeographic coverage of the TAR cannot be mixed up with the Tibetan inhabitedarea which includes the Tibetan autonomous areas in Qinghai, Gansu, Sichuan,and Yunnan. Second, the study of temporary migrants should be based on academicsurveys, not on impressions or estimates. Some studies on temporary migration inTibet in western publications cannot provide data but mainly some estimates.12Some academic studies also cite estimates (for example, “between 40,000 and50,000”; “about 50,000”),13 or calculate Han temporary migrants based on the sizeof the Han population.

In fact, there have not been many surveys on temporary migration in Lha sacarried out by foreign scholars or scholars in China. Therefore, this survey hasspecial significance. In general, it is difficult to study temporary migrants in Tibet.On one hand, temporary migrants keep moving seasonally, and usually try to eludegovernment registration to avoid paying fees and management charges. On theother hand, the management system of local governments towards temporarymigration has been weak and incomplete, and cannot follow all the changes. TheProvisional Regulation of Social Security Management in the TAR was issued bythe Congress of the TAR in 1994. In Item 20, it was required that “the managementof temporary and circulating migrants will be led by public security bureaus, theunits hiring the temporary migrants and the Residential Committees where thosemigrants live will also be responsible in helping the management. The housing forrent in urban areas will be regulated according to the ‘Regulation of Urban Housingfor Renting in the TAR.’”14 But because of the lack of personnel and experiencein managing migrants, “the information of temporary migration in cities has beenbasically out of the management.”15

There are two systems under the Lha sa Urban District government for countingthe temporarymigrants in its area of administrative coverage: residential committeesand public security stations. Another group of temporary migrants, those who livein rented and purchased apartments directly under the administration of the TARand Lha sa City Government, was always missing from the statistics. Since the1980s, residential committees in Lha sa have played a very important role inmanaging temporary migration. One of the functions of the Committee Member

12 Andrew Martin Fischer, “Urban Fault Lines in Shangri-La,” 1.13 MaRong, Population and Society in Tibet, 415; Xiao Jiang Hu, “The Little Shops of Lhasa, Tibet,”

28.14 Congress of the TAR, The Provisional Regulation of Social Security Management in the TAR,

August 18, 1994.15 Tibetan Commercial Daily, Sept. 11, 2004.


for Security is to collect “registration fees” from temporary migrants living in theirareas, and to issue a “certificate for temporary residence” to them. Residentialcommittees were active in these functions because the “registration fee” is part oftheir income. But no city-wide standards have been set for the amount of each“registration fee”; they collect this “fee” at various rates. Besides, Tibetan temporarymigrants, regardless of whether they come from other parts of the TAR or fromother Tibetan inhabited regions of China, do not need to register or obtain atemporary residence certificate. This makes the registration records moreincomplete.

The City Congress of Lha sa issued a Regulation of Managing TemporaryMigration in Lha sa in 2000. This regulation declared that only public securitystations have the authority to issue a temporary residence certificate. Residentialcommittees no longer have the power to oversee temporary migration. The TARgovernment reformed regulations governing the household registration system in2001. This new regulation stipulated that, “[there is] no time limitation on residenceperiod, and if someone invests more than 100,000 RMBwithin the TAR, his spouse,children and cooperative partners may receive non-agricultural resident status.”16

The Lha sa City Government announced that “Since September 10, 2004, theCity Government will start to manage temporary migrants by a TemporaryResidence Certificate System. The PVCCertificates which started onMarch 1 willnot be issued but they will still be valid until the dates in the certificates. The newsystem will issue one certificate for one person and will be valid for one year.There will be no duplication in certificate issuing.”17 In 2005, the Lha sa CityGovernment started to issue national standard temporary residence certificates andcharged sixty RMB for each one.

The total number of temporary migrants who applied for temporary residencecertificates was 11,185 in 2000. According to the registration forms of the UrbanDistrict Public Security Bureau, the registered number of migrants was 52,812 in2005. Those who rented apartments numbered 69,924. It is clear that a large numberof temporary migrants neither applied for certificates nor reported their rentingactivities. The real number of temporary migrants is much larger. According tothe survey carried out by the Family Planning Committee of Lha sa City, anestimated seventy to eighty thousand temporary migrants were in Lha sa during

16Since the scores for university admission in the TAR are much lower than in Han provinces, “thereare some who help to register Han students from other provinces in Nying khri prefecture in the TAR.They charge the students about 5,000-10,000 RMB each. For example, Heze prefecture in Shandongprovince had seventy to eighty students registered in Nying khri to take exams. One reader informedus that the total registered students for university exams were 1,401 in 2004, 796 of them weretemporarily transferred into Nying khri, about 87.8 percent of the total Han students” (TibetanCommercial Daily, September 11, 2004, People’s Internet, accessed June 28, 2004). This is one resultof loose control over household registration in the TAR. This phenomenon is also found in other regionswhere the score of university admission is lower that other provinces. Students migrated from theirhome provinces to those “low score” regions for a better chance to enter universities. They are called“university exam migrants.”17 Tibet Commercial Daily, September 11, 2004.


the winter (November to April), while in summer (May to October) they numberedabout 170,000. The Lha sa Public Security Bureau estimated that population oftemporary migrants in Lha sa varies between one and two hundred thousand.

The impact of seasonal climates on temporary migration has been very strongin Lha sa. July to October is the peak period for Han and Hui temporary migrations.Tibetans have different patterns. Tibetan farmers and herdsmen in the TAR orother regions usually come to Lha sa after the harvest (September) for pilgrimageand trade. Tourists from foreign countries and other parts of China usually cameto Lha sa during June-October. They are accompanied bymany temporarymigrantsworking in all service activities related to tourism.

Statistics from the Commercial Bureau of the Lha sa UrbanDistrictThe Commercial Bureau of the Lha sa Urban District keeps registration recordsfor enterprises, shops, and persons working in commercial business. Because manytemporary migrants work in commercial activities, these records are useful forestimating the number of temporary migrants and their activities.

According to these records, there were 16,616 “commercial households”registered in the Lha sa Urban District Commercial Bureau in 2004. Among them,13,020 came from other provinces, and 3,596 came from the TAR. In early 2005the numbers changed to 13,524 and 3,130 respectively. On average, each“commercial household” only had 1.49 persons in 1999 and 1.54 in 2001.18 If weassume that all registered commercial households from other provinces aretemporary migrants and each of them has three persons (a couple and one child)on average, there would have been at least 40,572 temporary migrants in Lha saworking in commercial activities in 2005. But because many street peddlers didnot register with the bureau in order to avoid paying fees, the records are incomplete.

The 2005 Survey of Temporary Migrants: Structure andCharacteristics

Age Structure and Sex Ratio of Temporary MigrantsAmong the 1,470 respondents to our 2005 survey, 1,022 were males (69.5 percent)and 441 were females (30.3 percent). Two-thirds of the total temporary migrantswere aged 21-40.

Table 9: Age Structure of Temporary Migrants Recorded in the 2005 Survey

%PopulationAge group

0.011-10

13.820311-20

33.148721-30

18 Xiao Jiang Hu, “The Little Shops of Lhasa, Tibet,” 66.


33.549231-40

14.020641-50

2.84151-60

0.5761-70

0.0171-80

2.232Missing

100.01,470Total

Source: the 2005 Lhasa Survey.

In order to double check the age distribution of our survey samples, we alsoexamined the records of temporary migrants kept by public security stations.Among the 7,420 temporary migrants registered in the Public Security Station ofBeijing Zhonglu, 4,519 (60 percent) were males and 2,674 (36 percent) werefemales while the gender status for the other 227 was missing in the records.

Table 10: Age Structure of TemporaryMigrants Registered in Beijing ZhongluPublic Security Station, 2005

%PopulationAge Group

0.0310-15

14.81,10116-25

37.52,78626-35

30.42,25336-45

7.052246-55

1.07556-65

0.1466-75

8.4626Missing

100.07,420Total

From similarities in Tables 9 and 10, it is clear that the quality of our samplein the 2005 survey is valid. It is also clear that the majority of the temporarymigrants was concentrated in the 25-45 age group. They are the people of workingage who come to Lha sa to work.


Dates when Temporary Migrants Came to Lha sa

Figure 1: Dates When Temporary Migrants Came to Lha sa.

From Figure 1, the migration flows in Lha sa can be divided into three periods.The first period is between 1980-1995 with some increase but also a decline by1989. In-migration increased significantly during the period of 1995-1999. Thenthe most rapid growth of temporary migrants came in the period of 2000-2005.Among the 1,470 respondents in the 2005 survey, 68.1 percent came to Lha saduring 2000-2005, and 77.8 percent of them had stayed in their current jobs longerthan one year.

Places of Origin of Temporary Migrants in Lha saThe analysis of places of origin is an important aspect in migration studies and isvery helpful for understandingmigration trends and regional economic developmentpatterns. From Table 11, we can see that Sichuan and Gansu are the two majorprovinces where 54.6 percent of temporary migrants originated. Other parts of theTAR only contributed 13.8 percent of the migration flow, even though they havethe advantage of geographic proximity. Construction projects and tourism servicesare the main activities that absorb temporary labor. Han from Sichuan and Huifrom Gansu do have some advantages in the following services: restaurants, retailsales, vegetable growing, transportation, and so forth. Tibetans own small hotels,sell handicrafts, run tea houses, and so forth. There might be some competition,but there are also complementary relations between Tibetan, Han, and Hui migrants.

Table 11: Places of Origin of Temporary Migrants in Lha sa

MigrantsOrigin

MigrantsOrigin

%#%#

1.116Zhejiang30.3445Sichuan


0.69Jiangsu24.3357Gansu

0.69Hunan13.8204TAR

0.58Shandong7.6111Henan

0.46Ningxia3.957Hebei

0.35Jiangxi3.754Chongqing

0.23Liaoning2.537Qinghai

0.11Shanxi1.421Yunnan

1.421Anhui

100.01,470Total1.218Shaanxi


Job Stability of Temporary Migrants in Lha saThe main goal of people who come to cities is to find a job that is stable andwell-payingwhen compared with their earnings in their places of origin. In addition,urban aspirations of rural people include seeking better living conditions, moreinteresting lifestyles, better schools for their children, and better opportunities fortheir own education. In order to stay and live in cities in a sustainable way, themost important issue is finding a stable job. From Table 12, we can see that 77.8percent of the migrants in Lha sa had worked at their current job for longer thanone year. Only 22.2 percent, including newcomers, had worked at their current jobless than one year. Job stability provides migrants with a stable income and anenvironment for them to learn some skills.

Table 12: Length of Temporary Migrants’ Current Employment

Valid PercentPercentFrequency

77.872.51,066Longer than 1 year

22.220.7305Less than 1 year

100.093.31,371Total

6.799Missing

100.01,470Total


Estimated Period That Migrants Stay in Lha saEven when their jobs are relatively stable, not many migrants plan to stay in Lhasa for a long period of time. Among the respondents to our 2005 survey, 704 gaveestimates for how long they planned to stay in Lha sa. The largest groups plannedto stay in Lha sa for one (18.5 percent) and two (21.9 percent) years. Some plannedto stay for three years (14.9 percent), five years (16.1 percent), and even ten years


(12.5 percent) (Table 13). Tibetans seem to stay for shorter periods than Han. 57.6percent of Tibetan migrants planned to leave Lha sa within two years. The Hanmigrants came from a very long distance, so they need to stay longer to earn backtheir investment and travel costs.

Table 13: Estimated Period That Migrants Stayed in Lha sa in 2005

TotalOthersTibetanHuiHanYear

%count%count%count%count%count

0.965.911.010.000.840.5

18.51305.9129.32919.41416.7861.0

0.640.000.000.000.841.5

21.915441.2727.32716.71220.91082.0

1.395.910.000.001.682.5

14.91055.9110.11016.71215.9823.0

0.320.000.000.000.423.5

4.0280.007.170.004.1214.0

0.110.000.000.000.214.5

16.111317.6313.11312.5917.1885.0

0.110.000.000.000.215.5

2.3165.912.025.641.796.0

0.960.001.011.410.847.0

0.110.000.000.000.217.5

1.81311.820.001.411.9108.0

0.110.000.000.000.219.0

12.5880.005.1518.11313.67010.0

0.110.000.000.000.2111.0

0.110.000.000.000.2113.0

0.110.000.000.000.2114.0

0.750.001.014.230.2115.0

0.110.000.000.000.2118.0

2.1150.002.024.231.91020.0

0.320.001.010.000.2130.0

100.0704100.017100.099100.072100.0516Total



In general, 38.2 percent of Han estimated that they would stay in Lha sa lessthan two years, while those Han (eighty-six persons, or 16.7 percent) who intendedto stay in Lha sa for more than ten years thought they should have long-terminvestments. Among the Hui, there are also some (nineteen persons) who intendedto stay longer than ten years. The majority of migrants plan to stay in Lha sa forone to three years; only a small proportion of them might become permanentresidents.

Potential Destinations of Future MovesThe majority of temporary migrants (78.8 percent) plan to return home. Hui seemless intent on returning home compared with the other groups. 12.7 percent of Hanmigrants are considering moving to other cities in other provinces or regions afterthey leave Lha sa. In contrast, only 3.7 percent of Tibetan migrants consider leavingthe TAR. Table 14 clearly shows that the majority of these migrants are trulytemporary residents of Lha sa.

Table 14: Potential Destinations Upon Leaving Lha sa

Potential DestinationEthnic Group TotalOther City in

Other ProvinceOther City atHome Province

Back Home

81910471644CountHan

100.012.78.778.6%

1441129104CountHui

100.07.620.172.2%

217831178CountTibetan

100.03.714.382.0%

241023CountOthers

100.04.20.095.8%

1,204124131949CountTotal

100.010.310.978.8%


Religion and Political Status of Temporary MigrantsBecause there was a lot of confusion in understanding the term “political status,”only 897 respondents answered this question. Among the 897 respondents, sixty-five(7.2 percent) were members of the Chinese Communist Party and sixty-two (6.9percent) were members of the Communist Youth League. The other 769 (85.7percent) of the respondents did not belong to any political organizations.

In general, differences in people’s religious belief can pose barriers to theirinteraction. Some religions disapprove of people from other religions; other religions


are more open and tolerant. That is why we paid some attention to the religiousaffiliations of temporary migrants in Lha sa.

Among the respondents to the 2005 survey, 369 (25.1 percent) answered thatthey are Buddhists. Because there were only 235 Tibetans, a number of Han claimedto be Buddhists. Since there are 163 Hui migrants (the traditional religion of theHui is Islam) covered in this survey, this means at least six people from othergroups claimed their religion as Islam.

Table 15: Religious Affiliations of Temporary Migrants in Lha sa

%PopulationReligious Group

25.1369Tibetan Buddhism and Buddhism

11.5169Muslim

22.0323No Religion

6.088Others

35.4521No Answer

100.01,470Total


Marriage and Family of Temporary MigrantsThe family is an elemental component of society. Marriages result from interactionsbetween individuals from different families. Marriage, spouse selection, andintermarriage in Tibet have their own characteristics.19 Migrants have a relativelyhigher intermarriage rate compared with native residents in other ethnic minorityregions.20 Marriage and family life impact the decision to migrate, the duration ofone’s stay, economic activities, involvement in the local community, and the ethnicinteractions of temporary migrants.

Among the 1,470 respondents to the 2005 survey, 964 (64.4 percent) weremarried. The earliest date of their marriages can be traced back to 1953. Amongall married migrants, one percent married during 1960-1969, 3.6 percent during1970-1979, 29.4 percent during 1980-1989, 44.0 percent during 1990-1999, and22.0 percent during 2000-2005. Their marriage dates are closely related to theirage structure.

The majority of married migrants married within their own group (Table 16).But a few intermarriages did occur in Lha sa. Among 657 married Han migrants,twelve (1.8 percent) married Tibetan women, and four married Hui. Among 135married Tibetan migrants, three married Han and two married Hui.

19 MaRong, “Marriages and Spouse Selection in Tibet,”Development and Society 20 (2001): 79-117.20 Ma Rong and Pan Naigu, “Mongolian-Han Intermarriages in Rural Chifeng,” Journal of Beijing

University 3 (1988): 83 (in Chinese).


Table 16: Marriage Patterns of Temporary Migrants in Lha sa

TotalEthnic Status of SpouseEthnic Status of

Migrant OthersTibetanHuiHan

6571124640Han

8515781Hui

135013023Tibetan

1412011Others

8911414785645Total

Source: the 2005 Lhasa Survey.>

Among the 640 Han-Han couples, 536 (83.8 percent) of their spouses camefrom their hometown (the same village or neighboring villages); they had met athome. Fifty-five (8.6 percent) married spouses from their province of origin. Manyof them probably met in Lha sa and married due to sharing the same dialect andgeographic identity. Only twenty-two (3.4 percent) married someone from anotherprovince. Among the 130 Tibetan-Tibetan couples, ninety-seven (74.6 percent)married spouses from their hometowns, twenty-one (16.2 percent) married spousesfrom the same province, and seven (5.4 percent) married somebody from anotherprovince. This marriage pattern shows that the majority of temporary migrants inLha sa, regardless of their ethnic status, still keep close contact with theirhometowns.

School Enrollment of Migrants’ ChildrenThe interviews confirmed our impression that most temporary migrants left theirchildren at home to be raised and educated. Among the 754 respondents whoreported having school-age children, 542 (71.9 percent) left children to attendschool in their hometowns. Eighty-nine (11.8 percent) of these reported havingdifficulties paying tuition. About 198 (26.3 percent) of the migrants sent theirchildren to school in Lha sa, and 8.9 percent reported having difficulties due toschooling.

Table 17: School Enrollment of Migrants’ Children

TotalLocation for Attending School

EthnicGroup

Out ofSchool

Home withDifficulties

Lhasa withDifficulties

HometownLhasa

%#%#%#%#%#%#

100.05921.71011.7696.43868.240412.071Han

100.0611.6129.5186.6444.32718.011Hui

100.0902.222.2221.11920.01854.449Tibetan

100.0119.110.0045.5536.449.11Others


100.07541.91411.8898.86660.145317.5132Total


Among the ethnic groups, more Tibetan migrants (75.5 percent) brought theirchildren to Lha sa for education, but 21.1 percent reported having difficulties.Meanwhile only 12 percent of Han migrants brought their school-age children(Table 17). One purpose for migrating elsewhere to get a job is to earnmoremoneyfor children’s education. Because of this demand, a school named “Yu cai” (TalentTraining) was established in the Karma kun bzang community in Lha sa to recruitover one thousand students from migrants’ families. This school has all gradesfrom primary to high school, and hires teachers from other provinces at a highsalary. Its school buses run along the main streets of Lha sa.

Educational Background of Temporary MigrantsEducational background is one of the most important factors affecting occupation,income, and ethnic interaction. About 10 percent of migrants in Lha sa are illiterate.The junior middle school graduates are the largest group (45.7 percent) of migrants,representing the general progress of “the National Nine-Year Compulsory EducationProject” in recent years. This project provides basic education (primary and juniormiddle school) for all Chinese citizens with no tuition charges. 15.5 percent of themigrants received a high school education. As a result, they have some advantagesin job competition and better potential to build careers.

Table 18: Education of Temporary Migrants by Ethnicity

TotalOtherHuiTibetanHanEducation

%#%#%#%#%#

10.01370.0019.92932.3763.332Illiterate

22.430848.11343.86435.38315.3148Primary

45.762825.9728.84226.06153.7518JuniorMiddleSchool

15.521318.556.295.11219.4187High School

2.9403.711.420.923.635ProfessionalSchool

2.3313.710.000.413.029College (2year)

1.2160.000.000.001.716University

100.01373100.027100.0146100.0235100.0965Total


Among the ethnic groups, the illiteracy rate was only 3.3 percent for Han whileit was 32.3 percent for Tibetans and 19.9 percent for Hui. The Tibetan migrantshave less education compared with other groups. Among the Han migrants, 53.7


percent had a junior middle school education, 19.4 percent had a high schooleducation, and 8.3 percent received more education than high school. The Hanmigrants have a relatively higher educational background, and therefore have someadvantages in participating in local economic activities in Lha sa.

Occupational Change, Income, and Consumption of Migrants

Occupational ChangeThe occupational distribution of temporary migrants has changed greatly since the1980s. Around the beginning of the 1980s, temporary migrants from Sichuan andGansu mainly engaged in activities such as carpentry, blacksmithing, cloth sewing,bicycle repairing, shoe making, watch or tape recorder repairing, photo studiomanaging, glass sales, and so forth. They came in small numbers and workedindividually. Since the late 1980s, temporary migrants have come as constructionworkers, vegetable gardeners, as well as workers in all parts of the service sector.Their numbers have increased rapidly since 2000, when the central governmentlaunched the national strategy of “Developing theWest.”Migrant laborers followedthe huge number of investment and construction projects in the TAR and otherregions in the west of China.

Among the 1,395 respondents who answered questions about the channelsthrough which they found their current jobs, a large proportion (45.3 percent) saidthat they found the jobs by themselves. This group consisted of 38.4 percent amongthe Han, 68.4 percent among the Tibetans, and 51.0 percent among the Hui.Relatives, friends, and fellow villagers, the other channels for job searching, madeup 40.9 percent of the total (Table 19).

Table 19: Channels of Employment for Temporary Migrants

Ethnic GroupChannel ofEmployment TotalOthersHuiTibetanHan

%#%#%#%#%#

0.230.000.000.000.33No Job

1.5213.711.930.411.716Middle Man

45.463433.3951.07968.418238.4364By Self

12.918025.979.0147.52014.7139Village Fellow

12.21707.4214.2225.61513.8131Friends

15.82207.4210.31612.83417.7168Relatives

6.28614.847.7123.086.562Self-Employed

1.6223.711.930.001.918FamilyBusiness


1.9260.003.961.541.716Work forRelative/Friend

2.4333.710.000.823.230Construction

100.01,395100.027100.0155100.0266100.0947Total


We do find some ethnic differences among the job searching channels. Hanrelied more on fellow villagers, friends, and relatives (46.2 percent). Hui migrantsalso have their network of friends and relatives, while Tibetans relied more onthemselves. Middle men play a very limited role (1.5 percent) in job searches bytemporary migrants. The pattern is similar in other western cities. For example,among the 1,850 respondents in our Wulumuqi survey in Xinjiang, 1.3 percentfound their jobs through middle men, 46.3 percent by themselves, 25.6 percentwere helped by friends, 11.5 percent by relatives, and 15.3 percent by fellowvillagers.21

Table 20: Occupational Change of Temporary Migrants

%#Occupation in Lha sa%#Previous Occupation

7.6112In School

0.69Cadre, Manager2.029Cadre, Manager

1.217Professional1.014Professional

2.639Skilled Labor3.755Skilled Labor

0.58Office Staff0.57Office Staff

65.4961Service Labor22.8335Service Labor

9.5139Non-Skilled Labor8.5125Non-Skilled Labor

0.11Guard0.69Soldier

0.710Farmer29.9440Farmer

0.710No Job6.697No Job

3.146Others6.697Others

10.2150Self-Employed1.421Self-Employed

5.480Missing8.8129Missing

100.01,470Total100.01,470Total


Many temporary migrants changed their occupation after coming to Lha sa.Table 20 shows that 30 percent of these temporary migrants were engaged inagriculture before moving; 22.8 percent previously worked in the service industry,

21 Ma Rong, et al., “The Structural Characters and Employment Situation of Temporary Migrantsin Wulumuqi City, Xinjiang,” Northwest Ethnic Studies 3 (2005): 5-42 (in Chinese).


compared to 65.4 percent of temporary migrants who now work in this industry.Another 10.2 percent of migrants reported their occupation in Lha sa asself-employed businessmen. Ten reported that they remained farmers: these weregardeners in vegetable planting operations located in the suburbs. Vegetablegardening by Han in Tibetan towns has been a tradition for nearly a century, it waseven mentioned in Charles Bell’s book.22 Three-fourths of the temporary migrantswork in the service industry, confirming our impression that the service sector iswhere the majority of temporary migrants work.

About 84 percent of respondents claimed that they were satisfied with theircurrent jobs. Only 16 percent said they were unsatisfied. Attitudes towards currentjobs are very similar across the ethnic groups in Lha sa.

Income and Consumption of MigrantsThe living conditions of temporary migrants vary by location. Migrant laborersworking in construction teams have the worst living conditions. They inhabittemporary tents with no running water or heating. Those working in trade andservices usually can rent or share an apartment, and therefore have better conditions.Taxi drivers who make more money can afford better housing in suburbs.

In choosing the location of residence, 38.8 percent of the respondents preferredto live near their work site, 50.0 percent said they have other preferences (forexample, rent, condition of housing, and so forth) than proximity to the work site.We assumed that migrants would prefer to live near or share housing with thosefrom the same ethnic groups. But the survey reveals a different reality. The vastmajority of respondents (84 percent) denied that ethnic considerations factored intheir housing selection, and only 5 percent said they prefer to stay with peoplefrom the same ethnic group.

Table 21: Annual Income Distribution for Temporary Migrants in Lha sa,2005

Cum. %%#IncomeCum. %%#Income

47.10.229001-95000.50.560-500

65.318.22169501-100003.83.339501-1000

68.83.54210001-125004.91.1131001-1500

73.95.16012501-150008.23.3391501-2000

74.70.8915001-175009.10.9112001-2500

86.912.214517501-2000013.44.3512501-3000

89.32.42820001-2500014.61.2143001-3500

93.54.25025001-3000019.24.6553501-4000

22 Charles Bell, The People of Tibet (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1928).


93.90.4530001-3500020.00.8104001-4500

96.42.53035001-4000028.48.41004501-5000

96.90.3340001-4500028.90.565001-5500

98.41.41745001-5000034.25.3635501-6000

99.00.5650001-6000034.50.346001-6500

99.00.0160001-7000036.72.2266501-7000

99.20.2270001-8000038.41.7207001-7500

100.00.810100000+44.76.3747501-8000

46.11.4178001-8500

100.01,184Total46.90.8108501-9000


Income is a private issue everywhere, so it is very difficult to obtain informationon temporary migrants’ income in Lha sa. Since the interviews took place at worksites, people hesitated to mention their income in front of their co-workers.However, 1,184 respondents (80.5 percent) answered the question about theirannual income (Table 21); 65.3 percent of themigrants earned less than ten thousandRMB annually, or 833 RMB per month. The few (4.9 percent) who reported theirincome to be less than 1500 RMB might be new arrivals or people who have beenunemployed for a period of time. Meanwhile, about 8 percent of migrants earnedover twenty-five thousand RMB, or 2,083 RMB per month. Therefore, there weremany poor migrants while a few were relatively rich.

Many people reported their annual income by thousands (for example, one,two, five, or ten thousand), indicating that they reported estimates, not precisenumbers. Most temporary migrants work in services, so their jobs vary by season.It is natural to provide a general estimate instead of detailed numbers. The averageannual income of temporary migrants was 13,350 RMB, while their average annualconsumption was 6,774 RMB. The largest proportion of migrants’ consumptionwent to rent (the average rent was 3,832 RMB, or 56.6 percent of totalconsumption). The rent in Lha sa usually includes (1) rent (shop and dormitory),(2) sanitation fee (including garbage disposal), and (3) electricity, gas, and water.The second largest expenditure was for educating children (2,550 RMBon average).Migrants mailed money back to their hometowns to support children in school.Religious expenditures were only about 243 RMB on average. Even Tibetansreported that they only occasionally went to the monasteries, about four timesannually on average. Only Hui reported that they try to worship daily.


Figure 2: Annual Income Distribution for Temporary Migrants in Lha sa, 2005.

Table 22: Annual Expenditure Distribution for Temporary Migrants in Lhasa, 2005

Cum. %%#ExpenditureCum. %%#Expenditure

78.20.2129001-95003.13.1370-500

78.20.009501-1000010.87.790501-1000

88.29.911710001-1250014.53.7441001-1500

91.63.44012501-1500022.78.2961501-2000

94.12.63015001-1750026.23.5412001-2500

94.30.2217501-2000034.88.61012501-3000

96.92.63120001-2500035.81.0123001-3500

98.01.01225001-3000042.46.6783501-4000

99.41.41730001-3500044.01.6194001-4500

99.70.3435001-4000054.710.61254501-5000

99.80.1140001-4500056.62.0235001-5500

99.80.0045001-5000064.07.4875501-6000

99.80.0050001-6000064.60.676001-6500

99.90.1160001-7000068.03.4406501-7000

99.90.0070001-8000071.53.5417001-7500

100.00.11100000+75.54.0477501-8000

77.21.7208001-8500


100.01,176Total46.90.8108501-9000


The distribution of reported annual expenditures is shown in Table 22 by groupand in Figure 3. It is a normal distribution showing the common pattern that peoplereport their incomes and expenditures in round figures (for example, one or twothousand RMB). In general, migrants’ expenditures were lower than their incomes.They tried to save money as a reward for their long-distance travel and work in astrange city.

Figure 3: Annual Expenditure Distribution for Temporary Migrants in Lha sa, 2005.

Compared to annual incomes and expenditures among individual migrants, wemay know more about their savings. From Table 23, we can see only 12.9 percent(139 respondents) of the total respondents were in deficit in 2005. Probably thesewere the newcomers (311 migrants arrived in Lha sa in 2005 in our survey sample)who came to Lha sa in 2005 and needed to pay rent and other investments to starttheir new work in Lha sa. It seems that about 41 percent of the total respondentscan save at least five thousand RMB per year, 25.4 percent can save at least tenthousand RMB, and 2.9 percent can save more than forty thousand RMB per year.Knowing that the annual pure income in rural areas of Sichuan and Gansu provinceswas around two thousand RMB, we can see how strong the incentive is for thesefarmers to move to Lha sa to make money.

Table 23: Comparison of Temporary Migrants’ Income and Expenditures

Cum. %%#DifferenceCum. %%#Difference

63.93.4375501-60001.31.314> -3000

65.11.2136001-65002.20.910-2999 to -2000

68.43.3356501-70003.91.718-1999 to -1000


68.90.667001-75006.32.426-999 to -500

71.22.2247501-800012.96.671-499 to 0

71.30.118001-850015.82.9311-500

73.52.2248501-900019.03.234501-1000

74.61.1129001-1000022.53.5381001-1500

79.95.35710001-2000030.07.5811501-2000

93.613.714720001-3000032.82.8302001-2500

97.13.53830001-4000041.08.2882501-3000

99.52.42640001-5000042.81.8193001-3500

99.80.3350001-6000049.26.4693501-4000

99.90.1170001-8000050.71.5164001-4500

100.00.11>8000059.08.3894501-5000

100.01,075Total60.51.5165001-5500


Pearson correlations23 between several key variables are presented in Table 24.The major correlation patterns among the temporary migrants in urban Lha sa canbe generalized as follows: (1) males generally are slightly older (.069**), bettereducated (-.085**), and earn more (-.105**) than females; (2) Han are older(.157**), receivedmore education (-.370**), and earnmore (-.116**) than Tibetans(Han is coded as 1 while Tibetan is coded as 3); and (3) expenses are closely relatedto income (489**).

Table 24: Correlations between Variables

EducationExpenseIncomeYear ofBirth

GenderEthnicity

-.370(**)-.105(**)-.116(**).157(**).155(**)1PearsonCorrelation

Ethnicity .000.000.000.000.000Sig. (2-tailed)

1,3731,1691,1751,4271,4521,455N

-.085(**)-.040-.105(**).069(**)1.155(**)PearsonCorrelation

Gender .002.176.000.009.000Sig. (2-tailed)

1,3801,1721,1801,4361,4631,452N

23 A Pearson correlation is a common method used in social statistics to evaluate the relationshipbetween two variables, such as education and income. A positive correlation coefficient means thatwhen one variable’s value increases, so too does the other value. A negative coefficient means theopposite. The larger the coefficient is, the closer the relationship is between the two variables.


.060(*)-.040-.076(**)1.069(**).157(**)PearsonCorrelation

Year of Birth .027.178.009.009.000Sig. (2-tailed)

1,3561,1541,1631,4391,4361,427N

.210(**).489(**)1-.076(**)-.105(**)-.116(**)PearsonCorrelation

Income .000.000.009.000.000Sig. (2-tailed)

1,1161,1111,1841,1631,1801,175N

.146(**)1.489(**)-.040-.040-.105(**)PearsonCorrelation

Expense .000.000.178.176.000Sig. (2-tailed)

1,1141,1761,1111,1541,1721,169N

1.146(**).210(**).060(*)-.085(**)-.370(**)PearsonCorrelation

Education .000.000.027.002.000Sig. (2-tailed)

1,3851,1141,1161,3561,3801,373N

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).-

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Table 25: Regression Analysis

Sig.tStandardizedCoefficients

Unstandardized CoefficientsRegression

BetaStd. ErrorB

.0004.4361812.8478041.921(Constant)

.0122.521.07552.440132.224Age

.006-2.779-.0871750.423-4863.651Illiterate

.045-2.011-.0651270.203-2554.048Primary School

.0006.091.1931509.7319195.573High School

.0013.463.1062246.3257778.476College

.0013.294.0981591.7295242.554Self-Employed

* Dependent Variable: Annual income. F = 14.799; Sig. = .000.

We also analyzed the relationships between the annual income of temporarymigrants and a series of other variables. Table 25 shows the result of the regressionanalyses24 with annual income as the dependent variable, and age, ethnic status,education, and occupation in Lha sa as the independent variables. Through theregression analysis, ethnic status does not show any significance. Neither do mostoccupational variables except self-employed businessman. The educational variables

24 Regression Analysis is a method used to analyze the relationship between a dependent variableand several independent variables. Themethod is used to assess, for example, to what extent independentvariables such as age, education, and ethnic status affect a dependent variable such as income.


show the most important impact on migrants’ annual income. The final regressionequation is as follows:

Income = 8,042 + 132 Age – 4,863 Illiterate – 2,554 Primary + 9,195High-school + 7,778 College + 5,242 Self-employed

The regression used a junior middle school education as the reference groupfor educational background. The regression equation means that, among therespondent migrants, one year in age equates with 132 RMB in his annual income,and those who are illiterate or have only primary school education will earn 4,863RMB and 2,554 RMB less respectively, compared with those who have a juniormiddle school education. Migrants with high school or college educations earn9,195 RMB and 7,778 RMB more. Self-employed migrants in trade or servicesearn 5,242 RMBmore compared to migrants with other occupations. It seems thatprofessionals and skilled laborers in Lha sa have no significant advantages amongthe temporary migrants.

Housing of Temporary Migrants in Lha saAmong the respondents, 1,365 (92.9 percent) answered the questions about theirhousing. Eighty percent of the migrants live in housing they rent, while 16.6 percentstay in a place provided by employers, usually in shops, workshops, tents atconstruction sites, or dormitories shared with other workers. Only forty-threerespondents (3.2 percent) reported that they bought housing themselves (Table26).

Table 26: Housing of Temporary Migrants in Lha sa

Valid PercentPercentFrequency

3.22.943Bought

80.274.51095Rent

16.615.4226Provided by Employer

0.10.11Others

100.092.91365Total

7.1105Missing

100.01470Total


A large number of migrants lived in small rooms with areas between ten andtwenty square meters. About 42.5 percent and 41.5 percent of the respondentsreported that their housing had a toilet and a kitchen (Table 27). In general, thecheap housing rented to temporary migrants is in poor condition despite rent beingthe largest expense of migrants in Lha sa.


Table 27: Housing with a Toilet or Kitchen

Valid PercentPercentFrequencyFacilities

42.522.7334With a Toilet

57.530.7452Without a Toilet

100.053.5786Total

46.5684Missing

100.01,470Total

41.521.7319With a Kitchen

58.530.5449Without a Kitchen

100.052.2768Total

47.8702Missing

100.01,470Total


Ethnic Relations among Temporary MigrantsThe survey asked respondents about their impression of relationships with membersof other ethnic groups. Since this is a very sensitive issue, the reliability of theanswers might be questioned. We know that some respondents might not expresstheir real feelings in our interviews, but at least the information obtained by thisquestion can be used as a relative indicator of ethnic relations or a reference in thisregard. Table 28 shows that among Han respondents, 51.2 percent reported thattheir relationships with minorities is “good,” 40.6 percent said it is “okay,” and8.2 percent claimed that it is “bad.” Among Tibetans who answered the question,only 6.5 percent claimed their relation with other groups is “bad.” Therefore,although there are some problems in ethnic interaction in urban Lha sa, responsesto our survey questions suggest that the majority of temporary migrants (both Hanand Tibetan) feel that ethnic relations are smooth in general. Bear in mind, thisobservation is based on answers to a one-time survey, and the respondents mightnot express their true opinions since this is a very sensitive question.

Table 28: Ethnic Relations among Temporary Migrants in Lha sa

TotalRelation with Other Ethnic GroupsEthnic Status of

Respondent OkayBadGood

89336373457Han

153364113Hui

2145914141Tibetan

2211011Others


128246991722Total


An Evaluation of the Government Management of TemporaryMigrationSince the 1950s the Chinese government has strictly controlledmigration, especiallyrural to urban migration, under the planned economic system. Only the reformpolicies implemented in the 1980s started to loosen the control over migration.Now, with a status certificate of Chinese citizenship, people may travel freelywithin China. The government is also learning how to manage and regulatetemporary migrants in cities. Many various systems have been established indifferent cities. “Temporary residence certificate,” “work permit,” and “housingfor renting” are the basic regulations, among others. Many government institutions,such as public security stations (for registration), residential committees (for housingand registration), commercial bureaus (for issuing licenses for businesses),educational bureaus (for children’s schooling), civil affairs bureaus (for welfare),and others have different functions relating to migration management. In the 2005survey we addressed some pertinent questions: How do these regulations work inreality? How do migrants consider these regulations and government officers?How is the relationship between temporary migrants and government officers?Some of the respondents answered those questions and their answers can be areference in understanding the government’s work in migrant management.

From Table 29, we may see that only a small number of migrants (8.3 percent)keep in contact with the government; 12.9 percent feel that local governments posesome limitations on their job searching, and 8.6 percent claim that they pose somelimitations in renting or buying houses. But a large number of migrants (41.8percent) said the government did well in regulatingmigration. Only a small numberof respondents (10.2 percent) think that the government did not pay enough attentionto migrant management. Furthermore, 9.6 percent think it is necessary for thegovernment to establish a unified institution to manage migration, 15.2 percentfeel that the officers had some prejudiced attitudes towards migrants, 9.5 percentthink that migration regulations should be adjusted in the future, 25 percentcomplained that government charged fees that are too high, and 24.1 percent havesome suggestions to the government regarding migration management. Thesenumbers indicate that the basic relationship betweenmigrants and local governmentsis generally satisfactory. There are complaints, but they can get along.

Table 29: Temporary Migrants’ Comments on Government Management ofMigration

AnswerQuestion

MissingNo contactSome contactDo you keep contact withgovernment? 459889122


MissingNo limitationSome limitationsGovernment has some limitationson jobs? 430851189

MissingNo limitationSome limitationsGovernment allows you to rentor buy housing? 505839126

MissingNo goodGood jobYour evaluation of governmentin migration management 698158614

MissingNoYesDid Government pay lessattention to migrationmanagement? 1451175150

MissingNoYesDo you think government shouldestablish a unified institution inmigration management? 1471182141

MissingNoYesDo you think attitude of officerstowards migrants (prejudice)should be improved? 1471099224

MissingNoYesDo you think the regulations inmanaging migration should beimproved? 1471183140

MissingNoYesDid government charge too highmanagement fee? 147955368

MissingNoYesDo you have any suggestions toimprove governmentmanagement of migration? 145970355


DiscussionThe 2005 Lha sa survey is the first of its kind to study temporary migrants in theTAR and Lha sa. The results of this survey can provide a general picture oftemporary migrants in urban Lha sa: their age and gender structures, where theycame from, when they came to, what kind of work they engaged in before andafter arriving, how much they earn, how they spent their money, their livingconditions in Lha sa, and their relationships with other ethnic groups and the localgovernment. Temporarymigration has become a very important social phenomenonin today’s China and it is closely related to economic reform and a new processof urbanization. Because Lha sa is the capital city of Tibet, the situation oftemporary migration in Lha sa is an important part of the whole picture ofdevelopment in China’s west.

Based on our findings, it is clear that temporary migrants in Lha sa are mainlyengaged in the service industry. Their average annual income is above thirteenthousand RMB, less than that of the permanent residents of Lha sa but certainlymuch higher than what they can earn at home.


The TAR is an autonomous region established for Tibetans, and Lha sa is thereligious center for all Tibetan inhabited areas. Ethnic interactions that occur inLha sa will have a wide impact on ethnic relations even beyond the TAR. Lha sais therefore a very sensitive place for the study of ethnic relations. According tothe answers to our questionnaire, less than 10 percent of respondents claimed thattheir relationship with other ethnic groups is “bad.” It seems that the relationsbetween Han, Tibetan, and Hui have been better than many have suggested.

In the future, the number of temporary migrants in Lha sa is expected to grow,partly due to the large number of rural Tibetans who will gradually join themigration flow, and partly due to the completion of the railway linking Qinghaiwith Tibet, which will provide more convenient transportation linking Lha sa withother cities in nearby provinces. This survey therefore provides baseline data forfuture studies of migration and urbanization in Tibet.


GlossaryNote: these glossary entries are organized in Tibetan alphabetical order. All entrieslist the following information in this order: THL Extended Wylie transliterationof the term, THL Phonetic rendering of the term, the English translation, theSanskrit equivalent, the Chinese equivalent, other equivalents such as Mongolianor Latin, associated dates, and the type of term.

Ka

TypeDatesOtherEnglishPhoneticsWylie

PlaceKarma Künzangkarma kun bzang

OrganizationKashakbka’ shag

Kha


PlaceKhamkhams

PlaceTromzikkangkhrom gzigs khang

Nga


PlaceNgarimnga’ ris

Cha


PlaceChamdochab mdo

Nya


PlaceNyingtrinying khri

Na


PlaceNakchunag chu

Ba


PlaceBarkorbar skor

Zha


PlaceZhölzhol

PlaceZhikatségzhis ka rtse

Ha


PlaceLhasalha sa

PlaceLhokhalho kha

Chinese

TypeDatesChineseEnglishPhoneticsWylie

PlaceGansu

PlaceGermu

PlaceHeze


http://www.thlib.org/reference/transliteration/#essay=/thl/ewts/

http://www.thlib.org/reference/transliteration/#essay=/thl/phonetics/

PersonHu Yaobang

PlaceJinzhuxilu

PlaceLanzhou

PlaceQinghai

PlaceShandong

PlaceSichuan

PlaceWulumuqi

PlaceXining

PlaceYinchuan

TermYu CaiTalent Training

PlaceYunnan

PlaceZhonghe


BibliographyBell, Charles. The People of Tibet. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1928.

Census Office of the TAR. The 1990 Census Data of the Tibet Autonomous Region.Lhasa: People’s Press of Tibet, 1992.

Census Office of the TAR. The 2000 Census Data of the Tibet Autonomous Region.Lhasa: China Statistics Press, 2002.

Congress of the TAR. The Provisional Regulation of Social Security Managementin the TAR. August 18, 1994.

Chen Hua and Suolang Renqing. “A Research Report on Temporary Migrationin Lhasa City.” Journal of Tibet University 2 (1999): 2-12 (in Chinese).

Chen Hua and Suolang Renqing. “A Research Report on Temporary Migrationin Lhasa City.” Journal of Tibet University 3 (1999): 3-14 (in Chinese).

Development and Planning Committee of Lhasa Urban District, ed. Collectionof Economic Statistics of Lhasa Urban District, 2004.

Fischer, Andrew Martin. Poverty by Design: the Economics of Discrimination inTibet. Montreal: Canadian Tibetan Committee, 2002.

Fischer, Andrew Martin. “Urban Fault Lines in Shangri-La: Population andEconomic Foundations of Interethnic Conflict in the Tibetan Areas ofWesternChina.” Crisis StatesWorking Paper 42. London: Crisis States Research Centre,London School of Economics, 2004.

Fischer, AndrewMartin. State Growth and Social Exclusion in Tibet: Challengesof Recent Economic Growth. Copenhagen: NIAS Press, 2004.

Fischer, Andrew Martin. “Close Encounters of an Inner Asian Kind:Tibetan-Muslim coexistence and conflict in Tibet, Past and Present.” CrisisStates Working Paper 68. London: Crisis States Research Centre, LondonSchool of Economics, 2005.

Focus. CCTV, April 2, 2002.

Gelek, and Jin Xisheng, eds. Lhasa (100 City-county Socioeconomic Study).Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press, 1995.

Goldstein, Melvyn C., and Cynthia M. Beall. “China’s Birth Control Policy inthe Tibet Autonomous Region: Myths and Realities.” Asian Survey 31 (1991):285-303.

Goldstein,Melvyn C., Ben Jiao (Benjor), CynthiaM. Beall, and Phuntsog Tsering.“Fertility and Family Planning in Rural Tibet.” The China Journal 47 (2002):19-39.


Goodman, David S. G. “Qinghai and the Emergence of the West: Nationalities,Communal Interaction and National Integration.”China Quarterly 178 (2004):379-99.

Hu, Xiao Jiang. “The Little Shops of Lhasa, Tibet: Migrant Businesses and theFormation of Markets in a Transitional Economy.” PhD diss., HarvardUniversity, 2004.

Knud Larsen and Amund Sinding-Larsen. The Lhasa Atlas Traditional TibetanArchitecture and Townscape. London: Serindia, 2001.

Institute of Sociology and Anthropology (ISA) and the Chinese Center forTibetological Studies (CCTS), eds. Social and Economic Development in Tibet.Beijing: Press of Tibetology Studies, 1997 (in Chinese).

Li Li. “An Analysis of Migration in Tibet during 1986-1987” (unpublished reportin Chinese, 1989).

Ma Rong. “Han-Tibetan Residential Patterns in Lhasa.” The China Quarterly 128(1991): 814-35.

———. “Migration Patterns within the Tibet Autonomous Region.” PopulationStudies 5 (1993): 26-42 (in Chinese).

———. “Economic Patterns, Migration, and Ethnic Relationships in the TibetAutonomous Region, China.” In Population, Ethnicity and Nation-Building,edited by Calvin Goldscheider, 37-76. Boulder: Westview Press, 1995.

———. Population and Society of Tibet. Beijing: Tong-Xin Press, 1996 (inChinese).

———. “Economic Patterns of the Tibet Autonomous Region.” InDevelopment,Society, and Environment in Tibet, edited by G. E. Clark, 167-86. Wien:Österreichische Akademie der Wissensenschaften, 1998.

———. “Marriages and Spouse Selection in Tibet.” Development and Society20 (2001): 79-117.

———. “Economic Development, Labor Transfer, and Minority Education inthe West of China.” Development and Society 32 (2003): 125-45.

Ma Rong, et. al. “The Structural Characters and Employment Situation ofTemporary Migrants in Wulumuqi City, Xinjiang.” Northwest Ethnic Studies3 (2005): 5-42 (in Chinese).

Ma Rong and Pan Naigu. “Demographic Changes in China’s Tibetan-InhabitedAreas.” In Tibet: Myth vs. Reality, edited by Dai Yannian, Edna Driscoll,Ginghong, and Zhu Yuan, 63-70. Beijing: Beijing Review Publications, 1988.

Ma Rong and Pan Naigu. “Mongolian-Han Intermarriages in Rural Chifeng.”Journal of Beijing University 3 (1988): 76-87 (in Chinese).


Ma Rong and Pan Naigu. “The Tibetan Population and their GeographicDistribution in China.” In Tibetan Studies, edited by Per Kvaerne, 507-16.Oslo: The Institute for Comparative Research in Human Culture, 1994.

Shannon, Lyle, and Magdaline Shannon. Minority Migrants in the UrbanCommunity. London: Sage Publications, 1973.

Shaw, R.P.Migration: Theory and Fact. Philadelphia: Regional Science ResearchInstitute, 1975.

Statistical Bureau of the TAR. Yearbook of the TAR. Beijing: China StatisticalPress, 1985, 1995, 2001, 2003, 2007.

Tibetan Commercial Daily, September 11, 2004.

Tibet Commercial Daily, September 11, 2004.


journalofthe internationalassociation oftibetanstudies · temporarymigrantsinlhasain2005 marong...

Documents