Evaluation of the Internal Migration Policy Development Program in Kazakhstan: Effectiveness and Shortcomings

2023

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.36941/jesr-2023-0154
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The uneven distribution of the population across regions in the Republic of Kazakhstan, varying economic development among regions, and the emergence of the need for labor force redistribution have altered the approach to migration policy and intensified concerns regarding the regulation of internal migration. For instance, in four northern regions (Akmola, Kostanay, Pavlodar, and North Kazakhstan), the population has been decreasing, with a decrease of 12,000 people over the span of two years. In contrast, in four southern regions (Almaty, Zhambyl, Turkestan, and Kyzylorda), the population has increased by twice as much as in the northern regions, adding 186,000 people. This scientific study examines migration issues and government initiatives aimed at addressing these problems, taking into account the population distribution imbalance. Over the past five years, the state program "Enbek," which served as the main document for implementing measures to relocate residents as a labor force from densely populated southern regions to the declining northern regions, has clearly stimulated migration. However, despite its apparent effectiveness, the desired level of results has not been achieved. The authors of the research point out factors such as the inadequate implementation of an information campaign, distrust of the program, and negligent actions by local authorities, and propose causes for the problem as well as ways to address them. Received: 16 August 2023 / Accepted: 17 October 2023 / Published: 5 November 2023