Is migration a panacea for better economics, safety, security and social bonds? Evidence from households in Nigeria

Resumen

Migration has long been a critical survival strategy for Nigerian households, driven by economic hardship, insecurity, and the pursuit of better opportunities. While migration offers benefits such as remittances and employment, it also presents challenges, including safety risks and social disruptions. This study examines whether migration serves as a panacea for improving household economics, safety, and social bonds, drawing on empirical evidence from 480 Nigerian households (240 migrants and 240 non-migrants). Using a 5-point Likert scale, the study assesses safety perceptions, finding that migrants report significantly lower safety (Mean=3.0) compared to non-migrants (Mean=3.7). Economic findings reveal that migrant households earn 50.6% more income (₦85,200 vs. ₦56,500, p<0.001), primarily due to remittances. However, only 45% of migrant households receive remittances, indicating uneven benefits. Binary logistic regression shows that conflict exposure (OR=3.74, p<0.001) and household size (OR=1.91, p<0.001) strongly influence migration decisions, while education (OR=1.52, p<0.001) increases migration likelihood. Safety perception analysis highlights that 35% of migrants feel unsafe (vs. 15% of non- migrants), with urban migrants facing fewer risks than rural migrants. Social bonds are weaker among migrant households (-0.85 points, p<0.01), particularly in conflict-affected areas. The study concludes that migration is not a universal solution—while it enhances income for some, it fails to guarantee safety or social cohesion. Policy recommendations include safer migration pathways, financial inclusion programs, and conflict mitigation strategies to maximize benefits while minimizing risks.