WPS8307
Policy Research Working Paper 8307
Female Migration in Lesotho
Determinants and Opportunities
Ioana Botea
Shubha Chakravarty
Nell Compernolle
Africa Region
Office of the Chief Economist
&
Gender Global Theme
January 2018
Policy Research Working Paper 8307
Abstract
Migration, internal and external, continues to be a dom- crops. Migrants are often seen as “strugglers” and their
inant livelihood strategy for households in Lesotho, with households of origin are just as poor as rural households
almost half (43 percent) of households reporting at least one with no migrants. Moreover, the study finds conclusive
member living away. The past decade has seen a sharp increase evidence that women’s employment in sectors dominated by
in female migration, due to a halt in new hires of Basotho migrants is strongly correlated with HIV/AIDS: 55 percent
men in South African mines and a concomitant expansion of women working in garment factories and 38 percent
of jobs primarily for women in the export garment sector in of domestic workers are HIV positive, as opposed to the
Maseru and Maputsoe. This study analyzes female migration national average of 30 percent. These findings point to three
using three waves of the Demographic and Health Survey policy recommendations to support female migrants and
(2004, 2009, and 2014) as well as primary data collected by their families: (i) lower the barriers to secondary educa-
the research team in March-April 2015. The findings indi- tion in rural areas, (ii) diversify and expand employment
cate that female migration in Lesotho is primarily driven opportunities for men and women, and (iii) provide HIV/
by economic “push” (rather than “pull”) factors, often due AIDS prevention and treatment services to garment factory
to shocks to the household, such as job loss, death, or bad workers as well as migrants working in the informal sector.
This paper is a product of the Office of the Chief Economist, Africa Region and the Gender Global Theme. It is part of
a larger effort by the World Bank to provide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy
discussions around the world. Policy Research Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://econ.worldbank.org.
The authors may be contacted at schakravarty@worldbank.org and ibotea@worldbank.org.
The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development
issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the
names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those
of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and
its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent.
Produced by the Research Support Team
Female Migration in Lesotho: Determinants and Opportunities
Ioana Botea
Shubha Chakravarty
Nell Compernolle
Key words: Labor migration, gender, HIV/AIDS, textile factories, domestic work, Lesotho.
JEL codes: I18, J16, J61, O15, O17
Acknowledgments
This report was prepared by a team consisting of Shubha Chakravarty (team leader, GSP06), Ioana Botea
(analyst, AFRGI) and Nell Compernolle (consultant, AFRGI). Fieldwork was led by Maj Fiil‐Flynn, who
supported the design and implementation of the research. Daniel Kirkwood provided invaluable support
and guidance during the preparation of this study. The World Bank’s country management team for
Lesotho has championed this study and we are grateful for their support. We also benefited from the
guidance of the various agencies within the Government of Lesotho, including the Bureau of Statistics, the
Ministry of Labor, and the Lesotho National Development Corporation. We are grateful to many
colleagues from the World Bank and development partners for helpful discussions throughout this
research. Finally, we wish to thank the team of research assistants (Benedict Setlabocha Phatsoane,
Itumeleng Thoriase, Thato Mpeka, Palesa Makatise, Refiloe Nkune, Lineo Mahula, Libakiso Matlho,
Mokheseng Buti, Mpeli Mohlabula) and administrative support colleagues we worked with in Lesotho and
South Africa, as well as the men and women who gave their time as participants in this study. All remaining
mistakes are our own.
List of Acronyms
AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
AGOA African Growth and Opportunity Act
ALAFA Apparel Lesotho Alliance to Fight AIDS
BWL Better Work Lesotho
CCMA Commission for Conciliation, Mediation, and Arbitration
CHAL Christian Health Associations of Lesotho
COSATU Congress of South African Trade Unions
CPF Country Partnership Framework
DHS Demographic and Health Survey
FAWU Factory Workers’ Union
FGD Focus Group Discussion
HBS Household Budget Survey
HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus
IFC International Finance Corporation
ILO International Labor Organization
ISGA Integrated Social and Gender Assessment
LCMPA Legal Capacity of Married Persons Act
LECAWU Lesotho Clothing and Allied Workers’ Union
LNDC Lesotho National Development Corporation
LPPA Lesotho Planned Parenthood Association
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MCC Millennium Challenge Corporation
NGO Non‐governmental Organization
NUTEX National Union of Textile
RSA Republic of South Africa
SADC Southern African Development Community
SADSAWU South African Domestic Service and Allied Workers’ Union
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UNITE United Textile Employees
2
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 4
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 9
Study Objectives and Rationale ................................................................................................................ 9
Data and Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 10
Part I: The Migration Experience ................................................................................................................ 14
1. Overview of Migration Patterns ..................................................................................................... 14
2. Migration from the Households’ Perspective ................................................................................. 17
3. The Perspective of Female Migrants .............................................................................................. 25
Part II: Challenges and Opportunities ......................................................................................................... 33
1. Quality of Employment ................................................................................................................... 33
2. Living Conditions of Migrants ......................................................................................................... 37
3. Vulnerability to HIV/AIDS ................................................................................................................ 41
4. Financial Inclusion ........................................................................................................................... 45
5. Children’s Education ....................................................................................................................... 49
Summary and Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 51
References .................................................................................................................................................. 54
Annexes ....................................................................................................................................................... 56
Annex 1. Defining Migrants in Existing Data Sources ............................................................................. 56
Annex 2. Details of Fieldwork ................................................................................................................. 60
Annex 3. Determinants of HIV among Female Migrants ........................................................................ 65
Annex 4. Qualitative Analysis .................................................................................................................. 72
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Migration, both internal and external, continues to be a dominant livelihood strategy for households in
Lesotho, with almost half (43%) of households reporting at least one member living away (DHS 2014).
Female migration is on the rise, as a result of two concomitant trends. First, since the 1990s the number
of male migrants to South African mining jobs has dwindled, leaving households who were dependent on
remittances struggling to make ends meet. Concurrently, there has been a tremendous expansion of job
opportunities primarily for women in the export garment sector in Maseru and Maputsoe, driven in large
part by the preferential trade terms under the United States’ African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).
Coupled with a continued large demand for domestic work, the consequent increase in female migration
– which has not entirely replaced male migration but occurs increasingly alongside and, more recently, in
place of it – has fundamentally altered gender roles and family structures, with important implications for
the welfare of migrants and their families.
This study analyzes female migration using existing nationally representative data sources and primary
data collected by the research team in March‐April 2015. The study proceeds in two parts. Part I offers
an in‐depth exploration of the migration experience from the perspective of rural households and
migrants themselves. Due to the limited scope and budget for this study, the fieldwork focused
exclusively on women migrating internally within Lesotho. After reviewing the patterns of migration in
Lesotho today, we examine the perspective of rural communities on the role of migration in sustaining
households. We also elaborate the experience of female migrants, highlighting the benefits and
challenges of moving away from one’s family to work.
From the households’ perspective, three main findings emerge: First, female migration in Lesotho is
primarily driven by economic “push” factors, often due to shocks to the family household, such as job loss,
death, or crop failure, rather than “pull” factors. Second, rural perceptions of migration are
overwhelmingly negative: many understand migrants to be those who move away and come home just
to die from illness, and they believe that migrants do not make enough money for the hard work and
rough treatment to be worth it. And third, even with remittances, households that send internal migrants
are struggling financially and are not seen as better off than non‐sending households. Households only
experience substantial improvements in living standards when they have a male working in the mines in
South Africa, consistent with previous evidence suggesting that migration is only effective in sheltering
4
households from poverty “when it is directed outside the country and the migrants are men”.1 Taken
together, the conclusion of many rural households is that migration, and female migration in particular,
is a “necessary evil”, separating women from their families and offering not much more than survival in
return.
From the migrants’ perspective, a few general patterns emerge. Education is a primary motivation for
migrating: younger women migrate after having to drop out because their families can no longer afford
secondary school, and older women migrate to support their children’s education. Although they tend
to move with short‐term goals in mind, most stay longer than they wish because their earnings do not
allow them to accumulate savings or other assets, and their families grow dependent on their remittances
to meet basic needs. A minority of migrants remains in urban areas out of choice (because they have
grown used to the higher living standards and independence). Overall they find their working and living
arrangements to conform to their expectations: they expect it to be hard work and it is.
In Part II, in light of the overwhelming need for female migration to support rural households, we
identify potential entry points for policy to better support the needs of migrant workers, particularly
those in two primary employment sectors for women ‐ domestic and textile, and those of their families.
Specifically, we review the challenges faced by workers in five key areas and the opportunities for policy
to better support them to obtain quality employment, find low‐cost and safe urban housing, protect their
health, access financial services, and care for their children.
Quality employment: Our findings show that, as formal sector workers, textile workers have enjoyed
and valued basic labor protections, even though the work still comes with many challenges. Policies
to fill the gap left by the conclusion of the Better Work initiative2 by continuing to improve the working
conditions in textile factories as well as supporting migrants working in the informal sector would
boost the welfare of workers and their families back home. Despite the recent 10‐year extension of
AGOA, significant uncertainty regarding Lesotho’s continued eligibility in light of political and security
challenges remains, as do fears of massive layoffs in the textile industry. Improving the quality of
informal employment, where the majority of workers are concentrated, therefore remains critical.
Organizations of informal workers, such as those that exist in South Africa, offer a way to extend some
1
World Bank (2010).
2
The second phase of Better Work (2013‐2016) was still ongoing at the time of the data collection in March‐April 2015, but has been concluded
by the time the report has been published.
5
basic legal representation to informal workers, including domestic workers, even for occupations
where formalization is not yet feasible. Such organizations could also serve as a vehicle through which
to provide information on informal workers’ basic rights. Promoting the diversification of economic
opportunities for women into other productive sectors should also be prioritized.
Living conditions of migrants: Female migrants interviewed for this study value the independence and
infrastructure available in Maseru and Maputsoe, but they struggle to find affordable housing in safe
neighborhoods that are close to work. Governments around the world respond to heavy influxes of
migrants through a variety of urban planning efforts, often in collaboration with employers, but the
predominance of female migrants in urban Lesotho raises particular concerns. Improving the safety
of neighborhoods where large concentrations of female migrants live, including safe passage
corridors, street lights, and increased and more affordable public transportation, could allay security
issues. Policy could also prioritize the creation of more affordable housing for both informal and
formal workers, enabling women to save and remit as much as possible to their families back home.
The implications of absent wives and mothers further highlight the need for housing policies and
programs to focus on facilitating the movement of entire families to urban areas, should women and
their families choose to do so.
HIV response: Previous research has documented the role of migration in fueling the HIV epidemic in
Lesotho, which has the second highest prevalence rate (25%) in the world. Textile workers in Lesotho
are already well‐recognized as an at‐risk population (with HIV prevalence of 59%) and have received
specialized HIV prevention and response efforts through the Apparel Lesotho Alliance to Fight AIDS
(ALAFA). This study makes an important contribution to the research on HIV in Lesotho by applying
the methodology of a previous study on HIV and male miners in Lesotho3 to the case of female
migrants. We find that, after controlling for demographic and social factors, both textile and domestic
work is significantly associated with HIV status, even after controlling for other factors. In light of
ALAFA’s recent discontinuation, these findings highlight the urgent need for alternative efforts to
recover the gains made in the textile sector and extend the reach of services to migrants in the
informal sector as a high‐risk population.
3
Corno and de Walque (2012).
6
Financial inclusion: Our findings highlight the need for accessible financial services for migrants from
and within Lesotho. Formal sector employment seems to offer a route to financial inclusion, as textile
workers are much more likely to have bank accounts (set up with help from employers) and use
savings groups. Two policy recommendations emerge. First, efforts to promote financial inclusion
should leverage the fact that migration is so common and use remittances as their entry‐point, and
should include informal migrant workers as a key underserved population. Lower‐cost remittance
services, particularly using mobile money technologies, would benefit migrants and their families,
although our findings indicate that special efforts may be needed for women to try them out. Second,
female migrants could be targeted for specialized financial products to help meet their financial goals,
such as financing and saving for children’s education.
Access to secondary education: The challenges associated with accessing education underpin female
migration in Lesotho in a number of ways. Respondents interviewed for this study repeatedly
emphasized that the reason why Basotho women live apart from their families, and the primary use
of their remittances, are children’s educational expenses. Schooling also drives where children live:
they tend to remain with grandparents in rural areas during primary school, which is fully government‐
funded, but later join their mothers in urban areas where secondary school is more accessible. In light
of this, any efforts to improve access to quality education in rural areas, particularly secondary
education, would greatly benefit the welfare of migrants and their families and potentially reduce the
need for female migration.
The study’s findings point to a number of priority areas to support female migrants and their families:
First, the sheer prevalence of migration as a livelihood strategy emphasizes the need for better
migration indicators in nationally‐representative data. For example, embedding questions on
family members living elsewhere and respondents’ former residence would allow for tracking of
internal and external migration. Annex 1 makes specific and actionable recommendations.
Second, the study further justifies the need to lower barriers to secondary education particularly
in rural areas. The cost of secondary education is both a driver of female migration and
consumes a significant portion of the remittances that female migrants are able to send home.
Lowering the cost or otherwise increasing access to secondary education would ease this
7
financial pressure on migrant households, and possibly lessen the need for women to leave
home in the first place.
Third, the study clearly indicates the pressing need for diversification and expansion of
employment opportunities for both men and women. The sex‐specific migration patterns
documented in the study derive from the gendered occupational choices available in Lesotho
(mining for men, textile factories and domestic work for women). Particularly in light of the
decline in mining jobs and the persistent uncertainty around the AGOA, it will be critical to
create new opportunities for gainful employment for retrenched miners and textile workers.
8
Introduction
Study Objectives and Rationale
A number of factors make this a compelling moment to study the role of women in economic development
in Lesotho. On the surface, Lesotho offers a relatively positive environment for women compared to many
countries in Sub‐Saharan Africa, with small or nonexistent gender gaps in education and poverty, equal
status under the law, and relatively high representation of women in government. However, digging a
little deeper reveals a more complex picture. Only in 2006 were women freed from the legal authority of
their husbands, through the Legal Capacity of Married Persons Act (LCMPA), and implementation has
lagged behind in a cultural environment rooted in patriarchal norms. Rates of maternal mortality and HIV,
which affect women at higher rates than men, are persistently high, and opportunities for productive
employment are few for both men and women, especially for the bulk of the population in rural areas.
The purpose of this gender study is to explore in depth the role of female migration in Lesotho’s economic
development. Why female migrants? First, although migration as a livelihood strategy has a long history
in Lesotho, it is only in the past 20 years that females have increasingly left their families in search of work,
due to a decline in job opportunities for men in the South African mining sector and a concurrent increase
in jobs for women textile factories in Lesotho. Despite the large economic and social implications of female
migrants replacing males as breadwinners, almost no previous research has explored their experiences or
how rural households have adjusted to this trend. Second, female migration is a useful lens through which
to explore some of the most pressing development concerns in Lesotho, including employment and HIV.
Since most employment opportunities for Basotho men and women involve migration, which in turn is a
known driver of HIV, it is essential to consider the motivations, needs, and challenges of migrants when
designing development policies around jobs and health.
The overarching questions for this study are: (i) What are the drivers of female migration, from the
perspective of households and migrants? After reviewing the patterns of migration in Lesotho today, we
examine the perspective of rural households, those that send migrants and those that do not. We also
examine the experience of female migrants, highlighting their motivations, intentions, and process of
obtaining work. After providing the current context for female migration in Lesotho, we ask (ii) How can
policy better adapt to the needs of female migrants and their families to respond to development
9
challenges? In particular, we highlight key areas where, in the context of an increasing preponderance of
female migration, policy recommendations might differ from situations with lower levels of migration.
After describing the data and methods used, this study proceeds in two parts. Part I offers an in‐depth
exploration of the experience of female migrants in the formal sector (using textile workers as an example)
and informal (through domestic workers). In Part II, we examine the challenges faced by female migrants
in five specific areas, with an eye to understanding how policy can adapt to better serve the needs of
migrants and their families: quality of employment, living conditions of migrants, financial inclusion,
protection from HIV, and support for migrants’ children.
Data and Methodology
This study includes qualitative and quantitative analysis of both primary and secondary data sources. We
used existing nationally representative data sources to investigate a number of relevant aspects of female
migration, including the determinants of migration, individual and household characteristics, and HIV
prevalence among migrants. It included both internal and external migrants and disaggregated among the
different occupations of migrants to the extent possible.
Among the nationally‐representative data from Lesotho, the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS)
provided the most comprehensive information on socio‐economic and health indicators at both individual
and household levels. Using the most recent wave of the DHS available (DHS 2014), migrants were
identified in two ways: (i) the residence status of listed household members, and (ii) whether or not
surveyed individuals have undergone at least one trip of three months or longer during the previous 5
years (see Annex 1 for more detailed information). To focus our analysis on labor migration, only a
subsample of individuals who traveled for work4 was retained as our base specification. The DHS was also
particularly appropriate for the analysis of migrants’ vulnerability to HIV infection, because it contains HIV
test results that can be merged with socio‐demographic and health data collected in the individual
questionnaires. Based on the methodology employed by a previous study,5 we conducted multivariate
regression analysis to estimate the effect of working in predominantly migrant occupations on the
probability of being HIV positive.
4
The reason for their most recent trip of three months or more was work.
5
Corno and de Walque (2012).
10
The analysis of DHS data was complemented and cross‐checked with the 2010/2011 wave of the
Household and Budget Survey (HBS), administered quarterly by Lesotho’s Bureau of Statistics. Data on
financial inclusion was obtained from the 2011 Global Findex database.
However, the range of analyses that were feasible using existing nationally representative data was
limited, especially because of restrictions in how data on migrants are collected in these surveys.6 To
complement the available data sources, we conducted fieldwork to collect primary data in March‐April
2015 in Lesotho. Utilizing a mixed methods approach, this fieldwork focused on female migrants engaged
in formal (textile) and informal (domestic) sectors, and their sending households and communities. With
the assistance from nine local research assistants, the mission undertook (i) a survey with 210 female
migrants, (ii) seven in‐depth, semi‐structured, interviews with selected migrant women, as well as five of
these women’s family households in rural sending communities, (iii) four urban focus group discussions
with migrants, and (iv) six focus group discussions with women and men from sending communities.
First, the survey included 210 female migrants in urban Maseru and Maputsoe: 103 textile workers, most
of whom worked at three selected factories of varying size and ownership, and 107 domestic workers
from four neighborhoods of diverse income levels located throughout urban Maseru. Two cases were
ultimately dropped from analyses based on their migration and current work status, resulting in a working
sample of 208 female migrants. Concurrent with the structured interview, we conducted four separate
focus group discussions with textile and domestic workers: one group consisted of two domestic workers
and three groups consisted of 8 to 11 textile workers. Details on factory and neighborhood selection and
sampling of workers are provided in Annex 2.
Table 1: Descriptive statistics of survey respondents
All Textile Domestic
N 208 102 106
Age (years) 31.2 32.2 30.3
Marital Status
Single/never married 36.41 25.49 47.12
Married (monogamously) 33.98 37.25 30.77
Married (polygamously) 0.97 1.96 0.00
Living together/cohabitating 0.97 1.96 0.00
Widowed 14.08 18.63 9.62
6
Discussed further in Annex 1.
11
Divorced 3.88 4.90 2.88
Separated 9.71 9.80 9.62
Total 100 100 100
Marriage
Civil rites only 4.94 6.52 2.86
Customary rites only 88.89 89.13 88.57
Both civil and customary 6.17 4.35 8.57
Total 100 100 100
Parental status
Has children 74.27 87.13 61.9
Number living children 1.39 1.57 1.22
Education
No education 0.48 0.00 0.94
Primary, not completed 11.54 7.84 15.09
Primary completed 34.62 33.33 35.85
Secondary, not completed 26.92 27.45 26.42
Secondary, completed 15.87 21.57 10.38
High school completed 7.69 5.88 9.43
Vocational training 0.48 0.00 0.94
Tertiary certificate 1.92 2.94 0.94
Other (diploma) 0.48 0.98 0.00
Total 100 100 100
Next, from the survey data, five women were selected as case studies for further in‐depth interview based
on survey responses regarding current and family household compositions,7 marital and motherhood
status, and work history. Four were textile workers and one was a domestic worker. We contacted these
selected women’s family households in three rural locations, where we conducted in‐depth interviews
with the migrant‐sending households, with similar non‐migrant‐sending households nearby, and separate
focus groups with rural men and women. Because domestic workers had unforeseen difficulties in
7
“Current household” consists of those individuals living and eating in the migrant’s home in urban Maseru or Maputsoe at least four days a
week. “Family household” consists of those individuals living and eating in the migrant’s family home outside of urban Maseru or Maputsoe at
least four days a week.
12
participating in group discussions due to employment demands, two additional domestic worker case
studies were selected and interviewed in‐depth, although their family households were not visited.
Each activity provided unique insight into the lives of Basotho female migrants and their families. While
the sample was not representative, we endeavored to minimize bias by applying objective criteria to the
choice of locations and within those locations, choosing respondents as randomly as possible. The survey
provided a more nuanced and detailed picture of the migration experience than the nationally
representative data, but on a larger scale than the qualitative methods allowed. It also provided context
for the qualitative interviews and focus group discussions. Case studies involving in‐depth interviews with
selected respondents provided a fuller picture of the internal female migrant experience, both the process
of migrating, and of living and working away from the family home, including work conditions, living
arrangements, financial activities, and sexual behaviors and relationships. Focus group discussions with
textile and domestic workers complemented these detailed stories, providing broader, migrant‐level
perceptions of these women’s everyday realities. Next, in‐depth interviews with the case study families
shed light on to the migration decision process – how the decision to send or not send someone is made,
who makes the decision, why is the decision made regarding who/where/what/when – as well as how
households manage their finances and household members’ health and education (particularly children).
Interviews also provided detailed history of household migration and future migration plans, and captured
the sending household’s perspectives on how it is to have a female member working away from home.
Last, rural focus group discussions provided insight into communities’ attitudes toward and perceptions
of migration, particularly perceived risks involved, challenges migrants and their households might face,
and how migrants and their families are perceived in their sending communities.
13
Part I: The Migration Experience
1. Overview of Migration Patterns
Reliance on migration is deeply entrenched in Lesotho and has historically been dominated by male
employment in South African gold and diamond mines. For most of the 20th century, moving across the
border to work in the mining industry was considered a rite of passage, with almost all able‐bodied men
being offered a job in the mines. Up to 40 percent of Lesotho’s male labor force was employed in South
Africa in the 1980s, when remittances accounted for a third of GNP.8 The situation changed dramatically
in the 1990s, however, as the shift to more capital‐intensive production, stagnant gold prices, and
pressure from the post‐Apartheid government to employ more locals led to a drop in demand for Basotho
miners. By 2002, only 12 percent of households had someone working in the South African mines, down
from 50 percent 20 years earlier.9 According to the National Union of Mineworkers, no new workers
(‘novices’) have been recruited from Lesotho since 2002,10 thus undermining what used to be the
economic backbone of Basotho villages and rural communities for generations.
The retrenchment of miners from South Africa has led households to develop new livelihood strategies,
which, in the absence of local economic opportunities, continue to involve migration. Notably, the decline
in mining jobs for men has coincided with a growing stream of female migrants seeking employment in
export garment factories in urban Lesotho (see Figure 1). Fostered by a preferential trade agreement with
the United States under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), the textile sector has become
the single largest formal employer in Lesotho, providing 39,000 jobs in 2011 and up to 50,000 jobs at its
peak in the mid‐2000s.11 Despite dominating this area of employment – 90 percent of textile workers are
women ‐ the majority of female migrants still end up working informally in domestic service or as street
vendors, and even those employed in textile factories face a high level of insecurity and often bounce
between the formal and informal sectors. These figures highlight an unforeseen consequence of male
migrants’ retrenchment from the mines: Basotho women are increasingly compelled to migrate in order
to support their families, but they are limited to less stable and lower‐paying income opportunities than
the mining jobs formerly held by the male migrants.
8
World Bank (1995), citing 1986 Lesotho census.
9
Boehm (2003).
10
Interview with Head of Lesotho Office, National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), Maseru, January 2009 (Crush et al., 2010).
11
UNCTAD (2012).
14
Figure 1: Employment in South African Mines and Lesotho Garment Factories, 1990‐2006 (Crush et al.,
2010)
Despite the fact that an increasing share of women are now the main providers of income for their
households, their migration experiences are significantly different from men’s. Importantly, women are
less likely than men to engage in cross‐border migration. Although the share of Basotho women residing
in South Africa has doubled over the last decade, from 4% in 2004 to 8% in 2014, they remain almost half
as likely than men to do so (14% in 2014). Moreover, whereas men have largely kept their jobs as
mineworkers, women tend to work in the informal sector, mostly in domestic service (50%), small trade
(9%) or commercial agriculture (5%) (Crush et al., 2010). The informality of women’s work opportunities
in South Africa is a source of risk, since unregistered migrants can be arrested or deported and are often
forced to spend a large part of their income on bribes when crossing the border.12
Figure 2. Migration trends from 2004 to 2014 (DHS)
12
South Africa’s migration policies have recently tightened and remain the topic of considerable debate. As recent as 2014, cross‐border,
transit, quota, and exceptional skills work permits have been repealed, while a critical skills work visa has been introduced. In response,
Basotho are increasingly turning to risky and illegal alternatives to cross the border. For further information on these policies, see
http://www.acts.co.za/immigration‐act‐2002/index.html.
15
MIGRATION TO SOUTH AFRICA INTERNAL MIGRATION
18%
17%
16%
16%
15%
15%
14%
14%
13%
13%
13%
12%
11%
11%
8%
8%
7%
4%
ALL MALE FEMALE ALL MALE FEMALE
2004 2009 2014 2004 2009 2014
The decline in mining jobs for men and the relative difficulty for women to work in South Africa led to a
spike in internal migration from 2004 to 2009, which has largely been maintained in 2014. As internal
migration has become the dominant livelihood strategy in Lesotho, Basotho men and women moving to
urban areas tend to migrate individually, leaving their families behind, hence reproducing the historical
migratory patterns of cross‐border miners. While half of the migrants are young and unmarried (see Table
2 below), approximately a third of both male (39%) and female migrants (34%) are married. Interviews
conducted for this report revealed that people are often motivated to move away for work in order to
cover education costs and other basic needs for their dependents. The responsibility to provide for
children is particularly salient for women, 13% of whom are widowed, divorced or separated, and
therefore the sole caretakers. Notwithstanding the significant economic benefits of migration, segregated
migration patterns of men and women have altered the social fabric of Lesotho, with detrimental effects
on health, family structures, and the institution of marriage.
Table 2. Characteristics of male vs. female internal migrants (DHS, 2014)
MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE
Age group Highest educational level
15‐19 24.88 31.38 No education 10.42 1.73
20‐24 22.53 22.01 Primary 43.16 29.29
25‐29 15.70 16.51 Secondary 36.76 54.47
30‐34 12.11 9.81 Higher 9.67 14.51
35‐39 8.88 7.00 Total 100.00 100.00
40‐44 6.45 4.75
45‐49 4.36 4.71 Household wealth level
50‐54 3.32 2.43 Poorest 22.50 20.44
55‐59 1.76 1.40 Poorer 21.79 20.03
Total 100.00 100.00 Middle 20.49 20.42
Richer 18.68 18.53
16
Marital status Richest 16.54 20.59
Never married 56.75 52.68 Total 100.00 100.00
Married 38.56 34.38
Widowed 1.77 7.61
Divorced 2.93 5.34
Total 100.00 100.00
2. Migration from the Households’ Perspective
Determinants of migration
The results of our fieldwork indicate that female migration in Lesotho is primarily driven by economic
“push” factors, often due to shocks to the family household, such as job loss, death, or bad crops, rather
than “pull” factors. These push factors are closely linked with overall economic circumstances in rural
Lesotho and many households’ existing dependence on remittances.
Livelihoods in rural Lesotho typically revolve around subsistence agriculture. Outside of farming, local
work consists of odd, piecemeal jobs that are inconsistent and pay little. For most families, however, this
is not enough. They struggle to feed their families and keep their children in school, much less pay for
major expenses or recover from economic shocks. Given limited local options, most households look to
employment options outside their village. Rural communities understand these opportunities to vary by
sector, location, salary, and stability. Rural households previously opted to send males away for work and
often to the mines in South Africa. This is in part due to historically patriarchal norms, and in part because
these jobs are seen to be the most lucrative and attractive: they pay the best and are more stable and
longer‐term than other “male” jobs, such as in construction or agriculture, which tend to be project‐based
and/or seasonal. Given Lesotho’s historical gender norms and work opportunities, rural communities
understand “migration” as being mostly to South Africa and being done by males. However, in response
to retrenchment from the mines, or men becoming ill and returning home, households send other
members away for work both to recover from lost remittances, and to diversify their sources of income.
Consistent with the nationally‐representative data, rural communities understand job prospects to be
moving more in favor of women: domestic work is in high demand both in South Africa and urban Lesotho
and textile jobs are now perceived to be easier to get than mining or construction jobs. In contrast to male
migration to South Africa, communities understand internal moves for work – typically for factory or
17
domestic work ‐ as mostly done by females. While our sample of migrants is small, our survey data also
evidence the shift toward female migration: at the time they first moved for work, almost one‐fourth of
respondents experienced household job loss, the majority of which belonged to males (77 percent), and
one‐third experienced a death in the family, also the majority of whom were male (67 percent). However,
female migrants also move in response to other household shocks: 28 percent of respondents
experienced a major crop or livestock loss at the time they first moved away for work.
Education is another important “push factor” linked to female migration, although it operates differently
for younger and older women. First, primarily for younger women, dropping out of school due to lack of
finances serves as an impetus to move. Many migrants reported dropping out of school because their
parents or siblings could no longer afford their school fees. It is often after that, and related to the
household’s inability to pay, that women move for work. These women also find that, since they are no
longer in school, they are a burden to an already financially strapped household. Second, for older women,
education is linked to the purpose of migration, as children’s school fees and related expenses are key
motivating push factors and serve as a priority for women’s remittances.
Overall, these “push” factors – death, job loss, crop failures, and education ‐ are the main drivers of female
migration in Lesotho. “Pull” factors are not as important, although established personal networks ease
and expedite the process, and in rare cases start it. This is discussed in more detail below.
Perceptions of migration
Rural communities generally understand “migration” to apply to those crossing international boundaries;
they do not often use the term “migrant” for those who move internally, most likely due to Lesotho’s
history of male migration to South African mines. They have different terms for migrants based on the
work they do, “Some are called ‘Mapetoria’ (Pretorians), others are just called ‘Mamaenara’ (Miners),
others are called ‘Makhomosha’ (vendors) and women are called ‘Makitjikitji’ (Kitchen girls)”; “’ma
weekend’, Weekenders, that is people who come home on a weekly basis”. Despite the different names,
the most commonly used term sums up the harsh reality in which communities see these migrants to be
living: “Baitsokoli”: strugglers. “We call them that because some will go out and find little jobs to sustain
their lives”.
Rural perceptions of migration are overwhelmingly negative: many understand migrants to be those who
move away and come home just to die from illness. Older, hardened perceptions most likely stem from
males returning from South Africa and dying from HIV, or disabled and very ill. More recent perceptions
18
have grown to include female migrants’ working conditions: how little they are paid and how exploited
they are. They believe that textile workers are insulted and oppressed by their Chinese employers; they
work in very cold conditions and inhale dangerous chemicals; witchcraft sometimes happens among
factory workers trying to vie for better positions; and “thugs” in urban areas steal from them. They also
believe domestic workers are sexually harassed by their female bosses’ husbands; they are treated “like
slaves”, working from dawn until dusk; and paid very poorly. Overall, rural communities understand the
work that migrant women do to be in extremely harsh conditions and for women to be vulnerable and
cheated by men.
Aside from working conditions, rumors and thoughts about migrants themselves abound. Both men and
women in rural communities believe migrant men engage in extramarital relations: they spend their
money on other women and remit a smaller percentage of their money. Multiple stories emerged of
miners moving away, starting new families and never returning, leaving their families to fend for
themselves. Female migrants are not held in entirely favorable light either, although perceptions varied
by gender: rural men see migrant women as succeeding professionally because of sexual relations: “It is
women because they have a lot of challenges. Some of them get jobs as a result of sexual favors. Men do
not usually face those challenges. Women do not even go home often, so it is highly probable they will
engage in other extra affairs”. In contrast, some rural women see migrant women as engaging in
extramarital relations out of spite (“Men will start and women will revenge on them by also doing the
same”; “Women do engage in extra relationships if their husbands do not give them attention any more”)
but also due to a newly enjoyed freedom. Perceptions were also sector‐specific: textile workers are often
seen as “promiscuous, enjoying cohabiting with other men”, while domestic workers are rumored to
“bring their boyfriends over while their employers are gone” or steal their employers’ husbands. People
also dismissed women working in South Africa as “acting as a man’s wife”, living with him and making his
home as a way to live more comfortably and supplement their income.
Prevalence and necessity of migration
A brief look at the national data shows that despite half (43%) of Basotho households reporting at least
one member living away, migration tends to be a survival strategy rather than a strategy for creating
wealth. Remarkably, rural households with only internal migrants are as poor than households without
any migrants: more than a third (32%) of households with members elsewhere in Lesotho are among the
poorest, compared to 31% of non‐sending ones (see Figure 3). Having migrants in South Africa, however,
19
is associated with a much lower probability of being very poor (17%) and a correspondingly much higher
chance of falling into the top two wealth quintiles (31%). Consistent with these findings, an earlier World
Bank report also suggested that migration is only effective in sheltering households from poverty when
“migration is directed outside the country and the migrants are men.”13 Whether migrants to South Africa
are able to remit more money or migrants within Lesotho are moving in response to pre‐existing poverty,
internal migration seems to be correlated with lower benefits to the sending household.
Figure 3. In rural areas, RSA‐sending households are better off and domestic‐sending households as poor as
non‐sending households (DHS 2014)
RSA ONLY 17 26 26 23 8
poorest
poorer
LSO ONLY 32 27 20 14 7 middle
richer
richest
NON‐SENDING 31 27 23 13 6
Fieldwork findings are consistent with these data. First, rural communities see migration as a survival
strategy, and not a newfound freedom or opportunity for the migrants: they characterize migration as a
“necessary evil”. As such, most households send a family member away for work. In fact, in the rural
communities we visited, it was hard to find non‐sending households. Most participants in in‐depth
interviews and group discussions had either migrated for work themselves or had a member(s) of their
household who did. Furthermore, many households that had not sent a member away either plan to do
so in the future, or want to but cannot, mostly due to either a lack of financial or social resources to initiate
the move, or the absence of an able‐bodied adult household member.
Second, even with remittances, households that send internal migrants are struggling financially and,
critically, are not seen as better off. Communities see small differences around big holidays and the times
the migrant comes home to visit, when they bring foodstuffs and other small goods and cash; the rest of
the time, however, these households are struggling as much as others. More specifically, they see female
13
World Bank (2010).
20
migrant households as largely just getting by, with few major improvements to their homes or other big
investments. Interviewers found that the case study families are destitute, with multiple people living in
huts with one room. “The money is too little. They have a lot to cover such as rent where they are staying.
They also have personal needs to address. So it is difficult to share the money, which they earn between
the two families. Those people struggle. We feel for them,” a rural woman stated. Many migrant families
and rural communities in general do not see these households as living much different than other
households: “There is really no difference, that is why other family members would leave home too and
go and work in South‐Africa. Even if one may count the families in this community who have some of their
families working, we all look the same, they are still struggling to put bread on the table”, a rural man
noted. Overall, rural communities in our study came to the same conclusion: most migrants do not make
enough money for the hard and rough work and treatment to be worth it.
Fieldwork also confirmed that people in rural communities only perceive real changes in household quality
and wellbeing when a family has a male working in the mines: “The major difference can only be seen in
a family where the member, often men, is working in the mines in South Africa,” rural man. However,
households with female migrants do acknowledge their basic needs are met, which might not have been
the case otherwise: “There is a huge difference now, now I can afford to pay for my sibling’s schools fees”,
textile worker; “It is still the same except now that I can afford certain things; I am not a beggar anymore”,
textile case study; “I gain a lot of good things from it. I go to doctors, buy clothes for myself and buy food
from the money that she sends me”, sending household; “There is only a little difference that we see
because unlike the first instance when everyone was crowded in one house, you find that now that one
person is ensuring that everyone is at least getting food, electricity and clothes, soap and Vaseline,” rural
woman.
Where to move
If perceived risks and challenges do influence the migration decision, it is in the destination: South Africa
comes with higher pay, but also daunting paperwork, fears of human trafficking, higher upfront costs, and
increased risk, as many cross the border illegally. The costs and benefits of moving to South Africa are well
known among rural communities, with many sharing stories of individuals being trapped at the border
and paying large sums to return to Lesotho after overstaying their Visa: “Those that work in South Africa
say they get trapped in places where they cannot move out without their bosses’ consent. Their passports
are kept by the employer and they are only released when they are deported to Lesotho. In most cases,
they do not get paid for jobs they have carried out”, rural woman. “For those who work in South‐Africa,
21
most of them do not have visas or work permits so with the little that they have, they spend it extending
their stay through taking their passports to and from the boarder gate which is more money”, rural man.
Others tell of men who were handed over to authorities by their employers after months of work, without
pay. Still, for some, the higher pay offsets the risks and for those who can, go: “It has reasons, those who
go to Maseru usually cannot afford to go to South‐Africa and those who go to South‐Africa are those who
look for increased salaries”, rural man.
Whom to send
Given the fact that most households still need and depend on remittances, rural communities have mixed
feelings about whom exactly they should send. As stated above, households generally prefer to send
males away for work first, due to historically patriarchal norms and the higher salaries that mining jobs
offer. Rural men hold on to this preference more strongly than women do: they feel women should be
home caring for children and keeping the house: “Well, a man because it is our culture. Women should
look after the children; the family depends on them to improve”, rural man; their masculinity is still very
much wrapped up in their ability to provide for their family. However, they acknowledge this is changing:
“Men and women should discuss things and both have inputs but to be honest women are more listened
to when they have been working and bringing money home. It is a thing we grew up with as men, knowing
that a woman is inferior”, rural man.
Women, however, are split on this: they agree that women are better at raising the children (and thus
men should be those moving away for work), but also believe that women are more honest and
dependable when it comes to sending money home. Women in rural areas think migrant men spend their
earnings on themselves – other women and alcohol – and fail to remit as much money home as they can:
“Women leave because men are not sensitive to children’s needs like women. Men do get jobs but they
do not bring anything back and ‘woman would not do that.’ Even though women earn little, they also
remember those they have left behind. Men get married wherever they are”; “A woman makes a huge
difference in the family when she works but when a man does, it is a problem. Men do not often bring
money home, they support women whom they fall in love with at their new jobs”. On the other hand,
rural women worry that the money that working women send home is misspent by men in the family
household, although this did not come up with migrants themselves.
Lastly, many understand a mother being away from her children to be an important issue. Household
heads, rural community members, and migrants themselves all talk about how women should not be away
from their children, and that children who do not have their mothers at home behave badly. With their
22
mothers gone, many felt that fathers were inadequate caretakers of children, misspending remittances
or not making sure the children go to school or stay in line, and that children are vulnerable to others
(“neighbors take of the children”; “if a girl is left behind, one gets worried as to who they engage with
sexually and if the boys are left, you worry who they bring home”). The community knows the household
needs the money, but thinks it is not ideal the woman/mother has to move away. In this case, many have
conflicting views on women moving for work: they mostly think men should move, but believe men are
more careless and selfish in their remittances while women send more of their income home. At the same
time, women earn less (and thus send less home) but also take better care of the children. Ultimately,
rural communities agree that, while it is preferable for a man to migrate for work, families must accept
whatever jobs they can find (“Daughter? To be honest, I would not like it but I would have to accept it
because we are driven to go out and find work away from home by difficult circumstances in our villages”,
non‐sending rural household).
Impact on family structure
Given the (perceived) consequences for migrants’ children, women experience stress over whether their
children are being properly cared for, whether in daycare in urban areas or with extended family in rural
areas: “We really fear for our children’s safety, we struggle to find the right people to look after them.
Sometimes family members have other things to do, they may leave the children unattended and
unsupervised. My children are currently living with my uncle because he was the only person I could trust”,
domestic worker; “It affects us more because sometimes the people we leave our children with are not
the people we trust”, textile worker. Given the evolving nature of the institution of marriage (see Box 1),
spouses are not necessarily available to care for children when women migrate. When possible, women
prefer to leave their children with their parents ‐ typically mothers, since fathers are more likely to have
died, and typically their own parents rather than in‐laws, also due to increasing marital dissolution‐
because they are trustworthy and have their children’s best interests in mind. These grandmothers tend
to be the heads of intergenerational households and serve as a sort of rural base for their children and
grandchildren.
The children left behind with grandmothers are often living in very precarious situations. Grandmothers
report various difficulties in caring for children, often a large number of them, on top of many of them
being disabled or having difficulty caring even for themselves: “We grandmothers take care of them. We
struggle along with them”; “They return with the children and it becomes our responsibilities”; “One of
my granddaughters is actually delinquent and she is moving about all over and making babies”. Those
23
elderly women heading the sending households interviewed had various health ailments: one had high
blood pressure and visited a clinic regularly for medicine, one reported falling ill and having to leave her
job, and another was losing her eyesight due to sugar diabetes.
On top of physical limitations, these women tend to head large households with inconsistent and
insufficient funds. Those that can, brew beer to sell locally, although this is not lucrative and one noted
the risks involved and stopped brewing: “People would start fighting when they got drunk and I did not
want any trouble because of that.” In many cases, the fathers of their migrant daughters’ children are
absent: “[the fathers] are not around; some of them neglect their children. All they do is make children
and pass by”. Interviewers were surprised by how little farming the rural households were engaged in,
whether due to a lack of able bodies, climate change, or low agricultural productivity overall. A surprising
number of households rely solely on migrants’ remittances and old‐age pensions of grandparents living in
the family household.14 Instead, most case studies were the main breadwinners of their family
households. However, remittances are often inconsistent: “My daughters are the ones that buy me gas
when they want to”; “They do it randomly, it all depends on who is able to send me money”. The
grandmother of an unmarried domestic worker details the uncertainty: “What gets to me is my son’s [case
study’s father] working in South Africa as a miner because he barely helps with the children and I have no
one to seek help from. He knows very well the burden he has left me with of taking care of his children.
He does not come home often and does not even send money regularly. He does not help much in the
household necessities.” Further, remittances only cover education costs and basic needs: “I would die [if
she stopped remitting], I depend on her alone, I would be really affected.” One sending household even
reported being unable to feed children outside of breakfast: “I cannot afford [children’s lunch boxes].
They eat breakfast at home and that will be it. They will eat at school when every child is fed at lunch
hour.”
14
According to HBS 2013/2014, Q3, while 15% of households receive an average of M503 per month in old age pensions from the government,
only people older than 70 are eligible to receive them. Rural households receiving old‐age pensions are nevertheless less likely to report having
a member move away over the past 12 months. Among rural households, 19% of those without any members who moved away recently report
receiving old‐age pension, compared to only 16% of those with recent internal migrants. The HBS data do not enable us to identify longer‐term
migrants however.
24
Box 1: Migrants and marriage in Lesotho
Marriage remains common: 64 percent of our survey sample has been married at least once, and of
those, 89% are married under customary law only, 6% both customary and civil law, and 5% civil law only
(refer to Table 1). However, qualitative work suggests that the institution is changing. First, it points to
high rates of infidelity, and with it some level of acceptance for this and having multiple partners in
general (although still frowned upon). Marital dissolution is increasingly common: “I think it is all the
same, these children all return home from failed marriages,” rural women, and marriage overall fragile:
“A man can still separate from you when you live together so distance does not matter. When a man no
longer loves you, you have to accept it because there is nothing you can do about it. Even if you worked
hard and gave him money at the end of the month, once he does not love you it is over”, textile worker.
Divorce is not very common, in part because it involves extended family in rural areas. Instead, couples
separate and men (re)marry. Second, migrant women are choosing not to remarry after divorce or
becoming widowed. Instead, they value their independence too much, and some even left less‐than‐
ideal circumstances with spouses to move in the first place.
One of our key hypotheses going into this study regarded how having females living and working away
from home influences marital dynamics. Although we probed on this specifically, we did not find female
migration to have any major impact on bargaining power with their husbands – a finding consistent with
one of the few studies that has investigated the topic (Chaka, 2011). Rather, women often buy goods
themselves for their families in urban areas to bring home to their families, talk with the family
household on how to spend the money, or willingly give the family household complete control over the
money (as a “gift”). There is little room for flexibility in how money is spent anyways: any money earned
goes to covering basic expenses and school costs. Still, women reported a high degree of control and no
conflict over financial decisions in both their current and their family household, and over their personal
income as well. And while not directly assessed, women did not bring up the issue of gender‐based
violence during any of our qualitative work.
3. The Perspective of Female Migrants
Based on our fieldwork, we characterize two groups of women who tend to move to urban areas for
work in Lesotho. One group consists of slightly older women (25‐40 years) with children who move in
order to support them. For these women, some shock usually occurred to motivate their move: she
never married and her parents cannot provide for her and her children, her husband left and did not
return, they separated (or, less common, divorced), he died, he lost his job, or the household had a bad
crop or property stolen. These women are more likely to start in or transition into textile work. A second
group consists of younger, unmarried women (15‐30 years) who drop out of school because they or
their families can no longer afford the fees, which is often due to job loss or a death in the family, or
they finish school and find their parents can no longer support them. They understand themselves to be
financial burdens on their parents and move to try to support themselves and their families. They tend
25
to move for domestic work because this work has no minimum age restriction and demands little
experience and education.
The experience of textile workers
Female migrants working in the textile industry in Maseru/Maputsoe tend to be mothers who move in
order to support their children. Textile workers in our survey were on average 32 years old with 1.6
children. Eighty‐seven percent were mothers. Almost 25 percent experienced a loss of employment in the
household at the time they first moved for work (of these, nearly 40 percent was her husband, 27 percent
her father, and 14 percent her brother). Forty percent experienced a death in the family: 15 percent a
husband and more than half of these women had a parent die. Thirty‐four percent experienced a major
crop or livestock loss.
Overall, textile workers’ experiences are marked by the more formal nature of their employment:
contracts, legal representation, and benefits provide them greater flexibility and more independence than
other sectors would. This formality is linked to their intentions to stay in urban areas, the processes of
finding and starting a job, and their work trajectories and future plans. It is also related to textile workers’
general experiences living and working away from home, which involves increased financial and personal
freedoms, and new challenges as well. These pros and cons are discussed in more detail in Part II.
Textile workers tend to move with short‐term goals in mind: paying for their children’s education, related
fees, or helping their family household. However, they often end up staying longer than expected. Once
they move for work, these women appear to take one of three different paths. One, they realize how little
money they are able to earn and save, spending most of their money on living expenses and remitting
what they can. What they send home does not go very far, covering school fees, some food, and other
basic necessities. Unless the household has other sources of income, it becomes dependent on their
remittances, making it hard for the woman to leave the job. Two, the woman does not leave the job, but
in fact is retrenched. Three, the woman continues sending money, but actually chooses not to move back
home. It seems this group is torn, and is often comprised of those women with no or few kids residing in
the family household: they grow accustomed to the urban lifestyle and, while they miss their families, do
not want that quality of life again. Rather, they enjoy electricity and their independence, even if life is
hard and more expensive: “We want to start over here, we are now used to electricity and the city life.
Life in the rural is hard, here things are improved”.
26
Among survey respondents, textile workers have been working for an average of 8.3 years in the industry,
with their current employer for an average of 5.5 years, and living and working away from home overall
for an average of 10. One‐third has had other paid work away from home, more than half of which was
domestic work. Eight percent has previously worked in South Africa, almost all of which was in the
domestic sector.
When it comes to where to move, textile workers are drawn to a specific location (e.g., Maseru or
Maputsoe) because they have a family member or friend already living there with whom they can live
while they search for a job and then their own place to rent. About 60 percent of textile workers learned
about their job through family or friends. Personal connections do not help in getting a job at a particular
factory, but can help in navigating a new city and affording the move by providing temporary housing, and
perhaps addressing some of the potential migrant’s concerns prior to migration. Another factor is distance
from home and ability to visit family easily. For those who can, many women choose a particular city
based on distance from their family household: “Some people indicate that Maseru is too far so they
prefer to go to Maputsoe as it is closer to home”, rural woman.
Most textile workers do not have a job prior to moving (12 percent did), but rather move to where they
know someone, then wait outside factory gates until they get a job. Almost all textile workers surveyed –
93 percent ‐ applied for their job by waiting outside the factory gate, which can take time. Women waited
an average of 36 days to apply for their current job, with one waiting an entire year. Getting hired at a
factory for the first time is seen to involve a bit of luck. Many factories seek some experience so they do
not have to train workers, and the supply of women looking for work is deep. Once in the garment
industry, however, women feel that their employability increases with work experience and on‐the‐job
training.
Textile workers generally sign a contract: 92 percent of textile survey respondents did, and most of those
who did not reported being casual employees (still on probation). However, many women do not know
the terms of the contract, such as employment duration or sick and maternity leave, and perceive the
terms to be non‐negotiable anyways. For those who (think they) do know the terms, their understandings
of these rules and regulations vary widely. They report that contracts last anywhere between one month
and four years. Most telling is that contracts are in English. At best, someone in Human Resources goes
27
Case Study 1: “Lerato”, textile worker
Among the 208 workers interviewed for this study, the research team identified a small subset for
further investigation. For these “case studies”, the team conducted detailed semi‐structured
interviews with the migrant and then visited their family household to get both sides of the migration
story. The following is one such case study.
“Lerato” is a 35 year‐old widow with two children. When her husband, a contractor, died, they had
long been separated and, according to her mother, “his family did not accept [her] as their daughter
anymore. [She] had to go back home because the marriage had not been legitimized according to the
law.” Shortly thereafter she decided independently to move away for work, recognizing her family’s
struggles to cover their basic needs. She has been living and working away from her family household
as a textile worker at the same factory in Maseru since she left home ten years ago. When she first
moved, she did not have a job lined up but had heard of the opportunity through her sister. Despite
hearing rumors that “textile workers become sick and die from tuberculosis and HIV”, she moved to
Maseru out of necessity and “because there was no other job [she] could do since [she] [was] not
educated.” She borrowed money from her sister, who also worked in the textile industry, and spent
M60 on transportation and M400 on setting up her new home. She got her current job after waiting
only one day at the gate, although acknowledges that it is difficult to find work without qualifications.
After a 6‐month probation period, she signed a non‐negotiable 12‐month contract that has since been
renewed. Overall, she is unsatisfied with her job and would not recommend it, although thinks she will
still be living and working away from her family in five years doing similar work. Her mother believes
she would move to South Africa for the higher pay, but thinks Lerato “is afraid she would get arrested
because she does not have a work permit”. Ideally, she would be living closer to her family and sewing
her own work because she “loves being independent”.
Lerato has two children, one who lives with her and goes to school in Maseru (a 15 year old
daughter) and one younger daughter (11 years old) living in her family household with her mother.
She visits her family household once a month, traveling by public transportation and paying M94.
She has a boyfriend in Maseru – the one partner she has been with since her husband died. She
earns M1,128/month. She is the breadwinner of both households and, given her high living expenses
in Maseru, she rarely has any money left over at the end of the month (“all that is left is spent on
[her] children’s needs”). Still, she manages to send money home regularly and save with a stokvel.
Despite having a bank account for payment purposes, she prefers stokvels because there are no fees.
She remits money through a family member or friend and this money primarily goes toward
foodstuffs, children’s education and other related expenses. She is a member of a union.
Lerato’s family household consists of her mother and her daughter. She has two brothers who live in
Bloemfontein and two sisters, one who works in Maseru and one who lives in Mafeteng, near her
family household. Her mother is losing her eyesight due to sugar diabetes. She is too young to
receive her old age pension, and lives off of Lerato’s remittances and any other money her children
send home, which is too inconsistent to count on.
28
through the contract with the employees; at worst, they cannot read it in English and employers do not
translate the terms into SeSotho, but just tell the women where to sign. Workers do not remember what
was in the contract and few, if any, keep their own copy.
Because textile workers tend to have children to support, they do not see going back home as an option.
They tend to stay at a specific factory as long as they can, which is usually determined by the current size
and number of orders. When retrenched, women stand outside factory gates until they are hired again or
work piecemeal jobs to cover costs in the meantime. When given the hypothetical scenario of
retrenchment, few talked about moving home, but rather stressed the need to stay away and find other
work given their family’s dependence on their remittances: “I would look for another job because my
youngest child still needs financial care. He is in a private school... I would go for anything that would get
me money”; “Nothing at all, we are hopeless. I would go and look for another factory job”. These
intentions are also evident in survey data: 70 percent of textile workers expect to be working away from
home in five years, almost 65 percent of whom expect to still be working in the textile industry.
The experience of domestic workers
As noted above, the decision of when women move for work is linked to household finances. The first
group of female migrants moves to support their children after some household shock. Domestic workers
in Maseru generally belong to a second group, which consists of younger women who drop out of school,
often also due to household financial challenges. These women tend to migrate because they see moving
for work as one of the few opportunities for them to keep busy and to help their family. They choose
domestic service because the work does not have an age restriction and demands less education and
experience than other sectors. As such, migrant domestic workers are more likely to be single and not
have any children. Among survey respondents, domestic workers were on average 30 years old – slightly
younger than textile workers ‐ although their age range was quite large: 15 to 73. Almost half were single
and less than one‐third was married. Almost 40 percent had no children.
Overall, domestic workers’ experiences are strongly influenced by the more informal nature of their
employment, relative to textile work: they lack contracts, legal representation, and benefits, resulting in
little autonomy and greater vulnerability to the personal and professional nature of their specific
employer. Like textile workers, this lack of formality is linked to their intentions, the processes of finding
and starting a job, and their work trajectories and future plans. The informal nature is also related to their
29
overall migrant experiences, including living and working conditions, financial inclusion, and sexual health,
also discussed in Part II.
Similar to their initial motivations, domestic workers’ intentions differ from those of textile workers.
Domestic workers are somewhat less likely to see themselves living away from home in five years (57
percent) and only half of those expect to still be domestic workers. That domestic workers are less likely
to intend to stay away from home evidences their different reasons for moving: they are less likely to be
supporting children back home, and more likely to be young and unattached. As one domestic worker’s
sending household said, the migrant is “still young and has her whole life ahead of her”.
Regarding the decision of where to move, the most important factor is where the jobs are. Unlike textile
workers, who move to a specific location where they know someone and then look for a job, domestic
workers tend to move for a specific job, which is lined up in advance through personal networks. Almost
85 percent of surveyed domestic workers reported learning about their job through family or friends. They
also learn about potential employers through neighbors, pastors, or other community members, as well
as over the radio, although this is less common. The majority has a job lined up before moving for work ‐
60 percent of respondents – and many of their employers provide financial assistance for transport to the
urban area, with some even picking the domestic worker up in their village. Importantly, few domestic
workers sign a contract (less than 3 percent of domestic survey respondents did). Instead, some discuss
terms of employment with their employer, although the majority simply accepts work conditions as non‐
negotiable expectations of the household head.
Surveyed domestic workers’ work patterns and trajectories differ from textile workers: they have lived
and worked away from home for an average of 5.8 years, have worked in the domestic sector for 5, and
with their current employer for 3, all less than the corresponding averages for textile workers. Similar to
textile workers, about 7 percent of domestic workers have worked in South Africa previously. Surprisingly,
almost a third of survey domestic workers had previously worked in the textile district in Lesotho prior to
their current job, indicating a higher than expected degree of bi‐directional movement between these
two industries.
30
Case Study 2: “Mateboho”, domestic worker
“Mateboho” is 19 years old. She is single and has no children. She has completed some secondary school
but had to drop out after her mother died. Her father migrated to South Africa for mining work when
his first child was born and has since remarried and started another family. He stopped paying
Mateboho’s school fees when her mother died. In addition to her mother’s death, her family
experienced crop loss at the time she first moved for work, which was a little under a year ago. Not
being able to attend school, she moved in order to support her family, as well as to avoid what she sees
as destructive lifestyle choices: “I had just realized a lot of young people in my village do not seem to
have self‐respect and that they behave in ways I do not like. I wanted to make sure that I do not end up
like them … I could not just sit around and do nothing because I did not want to end up doing things that
would end up embarrassing my father.”
Prior to moving, she secured a job as a domestic worker through her grandfather’s younger sister, who
came and asked Mateboho’s grandmother if she had a problem if Mateboho took the job in Maseru.
She paid little to move for work, since the employer provided transportation. Overall, she is very
satisfied with her job and would recommend it. If she lost her current job, she would stay and look for
work: “I would try and find another job because we would struggle like we had been before I came to
work in Maseru”; of most importance to her is paying for her younger siblings’ education so they can
stay in school. She thinks that working in a shop would provide more income for the family household.
Her grandmother also believes that textile work would pay better. Still, she does not think she will be
living and working away from home in five years. Instead, she hopes to marry, perhaps her boyfriend
from her home village.
She earns M450/month and is paid in cash. She saves M100/month informally and reports sending 20%
home through friends, although her grandmother says she does not send money home as regularly.
Her family household consists of her grandmother, who is a widow, and a revolving combination of her
own children and grandchildren. She had ten children, but only three are still alive, including Mateboho’s
father. Mateboho has two brothers, one of whom still lives in the family household and goes to primary
school. The grandmother lives mostly with her grandchildren in a household that seems quite fluid: her
children often depend on her to care for their children, but she often sends them back to their parents
because she “no longer has the capacity and means to provide for them”. Importantly, Mateboho’s
father sends money infrequently and oftentimes not at all; the grandmother instead survives on her old
age pension, what little property she has, and the little remittances she receives from Mateboho.
Migrants’ perceptions and actual experiences
Migrants’ perceptions of migration prior to their initial move away for work are very similar to those of
rural communities. They had heard that working conditions for female migrants are brutal: women
employed in the textile sector work with chemicals and in very cold temperatures, and they are often
31
harassed and belittled by Chinese employers. Domestic workers work like “slaves”, all day and all night
with few breaks and little time to themselves.
Women’s actual experiences varied in how they compared to their perceptions prior to moving. Some
found their working and living arrangements to not be very different from what they expected – they
expected it to be hard work and it is. “I heard nothing good about it to tell the truth, they said it is difficult.
Back then I could not tell what they were talking about but now I see… the hardships of staying here”,
textile case study. “Paying for everyday needs is stressful because what we earn is little,” textile worker.
Some were happy that it was not as bad as they thought it was going to be, although this group consists
mostly of domestic workers who have very positive relationships with their employers: “I got good
treatment to be honest but I still heard sad stories from other domestic workers about the nasty
treatment they endured”. A third group, the largest, found living and working away to be tougher than
expected or were disappointed that their lives did not improve immediately: “I initially thought my life
would change, as well as the lives of my children”, textile case study.
Importantly, migrants’ needs and ability to support their children and family household outweigh any
negative light in which they perceive migration and female migrants in general. While it is not ideal that
they live away from their children – and most had a difficult time leaving those behind – female migrants
do what they can to make their living and working arrangements tolerable. They tend to accept the
conditions because the alternative is always worse: “I think people endure the pain because they know
what is at stake when they lose the jobs they have. The problems which they have left back home are
much worse than the bad treatment,” domestic worker.
32
Part II: Challenges and Opportunities
“I would like them to know women are the ones who take care of their families and when they go for
workplaces far away from home, it does not mean they enjoy it. Most of their husbands left or died and
for them to go out it means it is hard so they should protect women’s needs. Women should earn more
money so that they could be able to take care of their family members whom they have left behind”, case
study.
In this section, we turn our attention to the challenges faced by migrant workers, and ask what
opportunities exist for policies and programs to support these workers and their families. The application
of a migration lens – particularly that of the expanding female migrant population ‐ offers a fresh approach
and new insights to familiar policy questions regarding employment, urban development, financial
inclusion, health, and education.
1. Quality of Employment
Working conditions of textile workers
The results of our fieldwork are consistent with previous reports of textile workers’ working
conditions.15,16,17 Commonly experienced workplace problems reported by respondents are verbal abuse
and harassment from employers, very cold temperatures, hazardous chemicals and machines, job
insecurity if they do not meet their employer’s expectations, and poor conditions, including lack of running
water and working toilets at times (“when water gets finished at work sometimes we drink from the
toilets. They do not let us go home when there is no water”). Twelve percent of textile workers reported
being harassed or threatened in the workplace. However, sexual relations between employers and
employees appeared to sometimes be linked to promotion or preferential treatment.18 Qualitative work
points to textile workers’ vulnerability in such relationships: women enter them as a means to
employment benefits, but often suffer worse conditions when the relationship sours or the women do
not adhere to the employers’ demands. One group noted that such incidences are likely to increase as
15
International Labor Organization. (2013).
16
Pike and Godfrey (2014).
17
They’Daemane, Moses M. M. (2014).
18
Despite explicitly asking about transactional sex in our survey, only 8% of survey respondents reported having sex for money or gifts in the
past 12 months. Still, such behavior among female migrants emerged in qualitative work with rural communities and female migrants to be
perceived as occurring.
33
“men are increasing in number in the factories and so are women, so there is a high likelihood of it taking
place”.
Most factories operate at least five days a week, with work on Saturdays as orders demand, and Sundays
off. The typical workday is from 7am until 5pm, with the gates closing promptly at 7am. Workers do not
earn paid leave except in the case of illness proven with a doctor’s note, and hence they hesitate to take
any time off.19 On average, textile respondents are not satisfied with their job (3.3 on 1‐5 scale, with 1
being “very satisfied”, 3 being “indifferent”, and 5 being “very unsatisfied”) and are not likely to
recommend their job to a family member or close friend back home (3.3 on a 1‐4 scale, with 1 being “very
likely” and 4 being “not likely at all”).
Despite little job satisfaction, there is evidence that some factories have improved conditions with the
help of various programs, including Better Work.20 Better Work was a partnership program of the ILO and
the IFC that provided assessment, advisory, and training services to the industry in Lesotho from 2010 to
2016. The initiative further addressed common workplace issues – harassment by supervisors, violations
of occupational safety and health requirements, and compensation – through various training products,
including Supervisory Skills, HR Management, and Occupational Safety and Health. A 2013 assessment
found increased compliance efforts with regards to discrimination, union operations, minimum wages,
contracting procedures, discipline and disputes, and OSH management systems.21
While not entirely satisfied with their efforts,22 textile workers acknowledged the Ministry of Labor and
other associations/unions at their disposal, as well as a committee to help with workplace conflict: “To
solve conflicts amongst ourselves as employees, there is a committee chosen by us which deals with such
issues, they sit us down and talk to us”. Textile workers are highly unionized (54 percent of survey
workers). They are represented by five sectoral unions: the Lesotho Clothing and Allied Workers’ Union
(LECAWU), the Factory Workers’ Union (FAWU), the National Union of Textile (NUTEX), the United Textile
Employees (UNITE), and the Voice of Workers (Lentsoe La Sechaba). They report that the factories tend
19
Lesotho’s labor legislation is mainly documented in the Lesotho Labour Code 1992, with additional amendments made in subsequent years,
including those specific to the treatment and prevention of HIV. The laws include the ILO’s core conventions, including no child or forced labor,
non‐discrimination, freedom of association, regulated working hours of 45 normal and 11 hours of overtime a week, and minimum leave.
Additional codes of conduct include no forced labor, payment of minimum wages, and health and safety, and sexual harassment.
20
World Bank (2015).
21
International Labor Organization (2013).
22
Despite union membership among textile workers being around 50%, their ability to challenge constraints to labor law effectiveness remains
limited (They’Daemane 2014).
34
to stick to the 11 hours/week maximum for overtime as cited in labor codes (much to the frustrations of
the workers, who want the extra pay), and that they have some sort of maternity and/or sick leave.
Working conditions of domestic workers
Domestic workers also cite workplace problems, although as informal sector workers, their challenges are
quite different in nature from those reported by textile workers. Domestic workers report terrible working
hours – essentially all day, seven days a week, harsh treatment from employers, little privacy or time to
themselves, and very low pay (respondents earn an average of M590, ranging from M350‐M1,200).
Qualitative work suggests that domestic workers are more vulnerable than textile workers to sexual
harassment by their employer, although no migrants reported experiencing such behavior: “I had heard
that sometimes domestic workers are sexually harassed by the husbands of their female bosses especially
during times when the woman is away on work”, domestic worker. Almost all domestic workers live with
their employers, often sharing a room with the children they care for, leaving them with little autonomy
or time spent outside the employer’s family. In the worst cases, employers do not pay domestic workers,
pay them less and/or less often than the workers expected, they demand more and different types of
work than expected, decide how to spend the employee’s money, do not feed them, ask them to watch
other people’s children, or abuse and harass them.
Unlike textile workers, who are represented by a number of formal unions, no legal oversight or
frameworks exist for domestic work in Lesotho. Few domestic workers report currently being part of a
union (only two in the survey) or ever previously part of a union (four in the survey). Related to workplace
formality is migrants’ perceived ability to negotiate contracts and/or working conditions, and their desire
to do so. That few domestic workers even sign a contract signals their legal vulnerability to their employer,
and sets a precedent that they have little, if any, rights or voice to negotiate work conditions or concerns.
It essentially places them at the mercy of their employer. Because of this, domestic workers tend to accept
their working conditions as they are, rarely demanding or expecting any changes: “I have learned that
there are a lot of challenges in each job, hence moving from one job to another is not advisable. Personally
I learned to accept any conditions in my jobs. “’M’e, beggars are not choosers!’” domestic worker.
Despite the challenges in both occupations, textile work is seen as better than domestic work because it
pays better and comes with more independence, as well as more legal representation and workplace
regulations. Those who have done both types of work offered some comparisons: “The money as a
domestic worker was too little, I needed more for my needs. I was more independent working as a factory
35
worker because I could get my own place and items unlike working as a domestic worker where one is
always in doors with the employer”; “It was exactly like that, bad but I could manage. We all get bad
treatment in the factories, but if I was a domestic worker I would be alone in receiving that bad
treatment”.
What can be done? First, continue to improve working conditions in factories. In particular, Better Work’s
2013 assessment of 14 factories had several non‐compliance findings under multiple Working Conditions
clusters regulated by national labor law: Occupational Safety and Health, Contracts and Human Resources,
Compensation, and Working Time.23 These results are consistent with our findings from fieldwork and
indicate that continued attention is needed in addressing workplace conditions for textile workers. Of
additional importance for female migrants is the issue of paid leave. Many have children living with them
and, as the only adults living in their urban households, any health or child‐related concerns result in
women losing part of their paycheck for time missed at work to address these problems.
Second, extend some of the benefits of formal employment to those in the informal sector, such as
domestic workers. A handful of domestic workers suggested that some sort of organization similar to a
union would benefit their professional circumstances: “I would like us to have a committee that supports
domestic workers. The committee should help in problem solving between the employer and employees”.
In fact, international experience from South Africa and elsewhere points to a potential model. At the
international level, the government of South Africa ratified the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (189),
thereby acknowledging the vulnerabilities of workers in this sector and ushering in new international
dialogue of their unique needs.24,25 At the national level, the Labor Department has sought to regulate
labor conditions for domestic work, including hours and days worked, minimum wage, overtime, holidays,
termination rules, and sick/maternity/family leave.26 Since 2002, domestic workers have been included in
safety net programs as well: if working at least 24 hours a month for an employer, the employer must
register with the Unemployment Insurance Contributions Fund of the South African Revenue Service.
While actual implementation is difficult to assess, the country has at least formally identified domestic
workers as having specific working conditions needing formal regulations.
23
International Labor Organization (2013).
24
http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C189.
25
http://www.ilo.org/global/standards/information‐resources‐and‐publications/news/WCMS_216613/lang‐‐en/index.htm.
26
http://www.labour.gov.za/DOL/find‐more‐info/all‐about‐domestic‐workers.
36
In addition, informal work organizations can offer legal representation and support to workers even if
formal unionization or collective bargaining are still not feasible. South African Domestic Service and Allied
Workers Union (SADSAWU) provides services to domestic workers, including job training and workshops,
legal advocacy, mediation, support in cases taken to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation, and
Arbitration (CCMA), counseling concerning domestic workers’ rights and legal provisions, campaigning for
relevant laws, and providing information. Other organizations also advocate for domestic workers as part
of larger work movements, such as Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU). Importantly, such
organizations could provide information to informal workers on their basic rights even prior to legal
representation. While a lack of formal identification cards did not emerge as an issue during fieldwork,
many women were unaware of their rights prior to joining a union. This points to migrants’ general lack
of awareness of existing laws, and highlights the need to inform those workers lacking formal
organization. These informational sessions could prove critical in helping informal migrant workers
navigate professional landscapes within Lesotho, as well as assist migrants in making more informed and
prepared decisions about moving to work in South Africa. Domestic workers noted the value of such a
resource, which has since been discontinued: “There was a program on one radio station. It supported
domestic workers and we loved the host of the show, we just wished the government would have
supported the host. As domestic workers we had a platform to voice out our issues and most employers
were trying to improve conditions of work.”
Third, as a more comprehensive analysis of social and gender issues in Lesotho points out, diversify
economic opportunities for women into other productive sectors, such as wool and mohair.27 This is
particularly important given the vulnerability of factory jobs to specific orders and external factors, which
may lead to women increasingly moving out of factory work and into the informal sector. While not the
focus of this study, the MCC also highlights the need to address continued concerns for women working
as cross‐border traders.
2. Living Conditions of Migrants
Living conditions of domestic workers
As mentioned above, most domestic workers live with their employers’ families, which comes with both
advantages and disadvantages. The advantages are linked to the higher quality of housing they enjoy in
27
LMDA (2015).
37
the employer’s home: compared to textile workers they tend to live in larger houses and are more likely
to have electricity (80 percent), a tap inside the house (52 percent) or their own flush toilet (38 percent),
and to use electricity for heating and cooking. Importantly, they do not have individual living expenses.
The disadvantages are related to the lack of privacy and professional and personal boundaries.
In all, domestic workers seem torn in this arrangement: they are at the same time more satisfied (although
not by much) and feel overall safer in their current living quarters than textile workers, but many want to
live with their children and, more often, simply have a space of their own: “It is better if they stay on their
own, so that they take leave days especially on Sundays and for them to have some personal space”,
domestic worker. Half of surveyed domestic workers would not change anything about their living
arrangement, but the desires of the other half are quite consistent: “sleep with child but wants own
space”, “want own bedroom”, “would prefer to rent elsewhere”, “to cook own food”, “would love own
private space”, “not to sleep over”, “to live with son”, “to live with husband and son”, “to live alone”.
Living conditions of textile workers
Because they rent their own place, textile workers have a greater range of current living arrangements.
Of those who are monogamously married (37% of our textile sample), 84 percent live with their husband
in Maseru/Maputsoe and about 12 percent have husbands living back in the family household. It was rare
to have a husband currently working elsewhere within or outside Lesotho (4%); if they were, the women
would most likely not have felt the need to move for work herself since her husband’s income would cover
a significant portion of household costs. Instead, husbands either move to join their wives and work
piecemeal jobs when they can, or they make the decision to move to Maseru and find work together. 28
Living arrangements for children are different and are more complicated. Of the textile workers with
children – 87 percent of our textile sample – 72 percent live with at least one biological child in
Maseru/Maputsoe. At the same time, 39 percent have at least one biological child living in their family
household, usually with the female migrant’s parents, and often with nieces and nephews or siblings as
well. Of the textile workers with children residing in their family home, only 6 percent live with their in‐
laws (2 cases) in the family household, one case in which the husband also resided with them.
28
Combined with the few domestic workers who live with their husband, this amounts to a small share of our overall sample (34%). While a
third of female migrants currently live with their spouse, joint migration remains unusual in Lesotho, both because the majority of female
migrants are single or no longer married and because spouses do not necessarily make the move together. Rather, wives move first to seek out
employment and families make subsequent decisions based on various household factors, including husband’s income and children’s needs.
38
The 63% of textile workers who do not live with spouses often live with sisters, nieces, and nephews in
Maseru/Maputsoe, although this tends to be temporary until they can afford their own place. Some
cohabitate with boyfriends and few live with domestic workers (working for them), although these
arrangements are not common.
Like domestic workers, the overall living conditions for textile workers come with pros and cons. Living in
the city is expensive, so although textile jobs pay a lot more than domestic work (around M1,200 per
month compared to M550 for those in our sample), after paying for living expenses, the take‐home pay
of textile workers is not much more than domestic workers. Textile workers also struggle to find affordable
housing in a safe neighborhood that is close to work. They feel vulnerable to unfair and undependable
landlords, are scared of being robbed by thugs and taken advantage of by men: “Yes, I was afraid of the
thugs (tycoons) here in Maputsoe, I did not sleep well at night”; “There are many thugs here in Maputsoe
and they keep increasing in numbers. They have tactics they use to rob people. They steal many things
but the police really do not help”, textile workers). Many feel unsafe walking to and from work in the dark
(75% walk to work, often to save money), which is often the case because of their long working hours (“It
the same, we go to work in the early hours of morning and it is then that we are mugged, even in the
evening hours when we get back from work we come across problems”, textile worker). The average
commute is 35 minutes, but takes up to two hours for some. Still, textile workers highly value their
independence of living on their own terms (“No, we have our own places now; we are independent, which
is something you cannot do while you are a domestic worker because you cannot do as you please”).
What can be done? Migrants are a particularly vulnerable population when it comes to securing safe and
affordable housing. This is in part because they are by definition living away from their place of origin,
often lacking the local knowledge and networks relative to natives necessary to navigate housing markets.
Labor migrants are also often unskilled and earn low wages, severely limiting their housing options to
those accommodations within their budget. Finally, responding to low‐skilled labor demands, influxes of
migrants often outpace urban growth and put tremendous stress on local infrastructure. It is then no
surprise that housing challenges in heavy migrant‐receiving areas exist worldwide.
Policies to address migrants’ housing challenges vary and can be based on coordination efforts between
local government and sectors of employment. For example, Nepalese migrants, who tend to be men
working in construction or security, are highly segregated from local life in Doha, Qatar. They live in
39
industrial labor camps on the fringes of the city,29 where employers provide affordable housing and
transportation to and from work. While these barrack‐style conditions are at times highly criticized by
international agencies, cheap housing and a lack of transportation costs maximize migrants’ take‐home
pay and remittances. Singapore also receives a lot of semi‐ or low‐skilled migrants working in
manufacturing, construction, and domestic services. Numerous policies have addressed housing for
foreign workers, including housing market regulations conforming to statutory security requirements and
promoting greater employer initiatives to provide better accommodation facilities for migrant workers,
including dormitories, hostels, and apartments.30 These regulations ensure some minimum expectation
of safety and quality for migrants. Last, rural‐urban migrant housing in China is highly linked with formal
employment and social welfare, with the household registration system regulating residential markets.
Migrant‐housing complexes managed by sub‐district and township agencies are becoming increasingly
available for internal migrants excluded by the household registration system’s regulations.31 The World
Bank has also been working with local employers to improve living conditions for migrant workers.32
The fact that such a large proportion of female workers live on their own or with other women provides
a unique perspective for urban development. Elements of such policies discussed above can address the
particular needs of internal migrants in Lesotho, emphasizing safety and affordability. Working with the
LNDC and/or factories, policies could work to improve the safety of neighborhoods where large
concentrations of female migrants live, including safe passage corridors, street lights, and increased and
more affordable public transportation. Policy could also prioritize the creation of more affordable housing
for both informal and formal workers, enabling women to save and remit as much as possible through
safe and low‐cost housing options.
When designing housing policies, it is further important to consider the broader context in which these
women are moving away for work: their intentions to stay are not constant, but change over time, and
family members are often split between two households, moving between them based on available
resources and age‐specific needs. That migrants’ and their families’ plans and circumstances evolve over
time, particularly when considering those concerning their children, highlights the need for migrant
housing policies and programs to facilitate the movement of families should they choose to do so. The
reality that the internal female migrant population in urban Maseru is increasing, with many of them living
independently or with their children, is a real policy concern.
29
Brusle (2012).
30
http://www.mom.gov.sg/passes‐and‐permits/work‐permit‐for‐foreign‐worker.
31
Wu. (2002).
32
http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2013/07/22/providing‐services‐to‐rural‐migrant‐workers‐in‐china.
40
3. Vulnerability to HIV/AIDS
Migrants are more vulnerable than non‐migrants to HIV infection, partly because they are more likely to
engage in multiple and concurrent partnerships (MCPs). Qualitative work suggests that female migrants
are seen as particularly vulnerable: “Yes I do believe that [female migrants] are at risk of HIV. This is
because sometimes these boys cheat us and take out condoms whilst we are not aware during sexual
intercourse and that is how HIV is transmitted”; “I believe this to be true and that women living and
working away from their family are in danger because sometimes women get into romantic relationships
just because we cannot afford the things we desire or need”; “Women [are more at risk] because more
often, men trick them into getting in bed with them and they are mostly abused sexually.”
Figure 4: Age Profile of HIV Prevalence Across Time
Men
50
HIV Prevalence (%)
40
30
20
10
0
15‐19 20‐24 25‐29 30‐34 35‐39 40‐44 45‐49
2014 2009 2004
Women
50
HIV Prevalence (%)
40
30
20
10
0
15‐19 20‐24 25‐29 30‐34 35‐39 40‐44 45‐49
2014 2009 2004
41
Nationally representative data evidence migrants’ higher risk as well. While average HIV prevalence is 25
percent (second highest in the world), it is much higher for migrant‐dominated occupations: 38 percent
of male miners and 58 percent and 38 percent of female textile and domestic workers, respectively, are
HIV positive (see Figure 5). Two main reasons are typically offered as explanation. First, the total number
of lifetime partners and the exposure period increase with age, and both mining and textile sectors tend
to employ older men and women: there has been a lack of new hires of younger Basotho men in South
African mines, and garment factories in Lesotho prefer hiring mature women in their 30s. Second, both
sectors are highly localized, either in remote mines or in the industrial parks near Maseru and Maputsoe,
and living away from one’s family is associated with higher rates of MCPs and other risky sexual behaviors.
Figure 5. HIV Prevalence by Gender and Occupation (DHS 2014)
58%
38%
38%
30%
25%
20%
ALL WOMEN TEXTILE DOMESTIC MEN MINERS
WORKERS WORKERS
We explored factors associated with higher risk of HIV infection among women employed in migrant‐
dominated sectors by replicating an earlier study on male migration to South Africa (Corno and de Walque,
2012). A simple regression of HIV status by occupational category shows a strong correlation for both
textile workers and domestic workers: textile workers are 28 percentage points and domestic workers are
12 percentage points more likely to be HIV positive than the average Basotho woman (see Table 3). The
relationship holds even when controlling for other factors, such as age, education status, and urban status,
in a multivariate regression, albeit muted (see the methodological details and full results in Annex 3).
While occupation remains a strong predictor of HIV status, women are more susceptible to HIV/AIDS with
age, if they live in urban areas, or if they are divorced or separated.
42
Table 3. HIV Status and Occupation
Domestic
VARIABLES Textile workers w/controls workers w/controls
Textile worker 0.28*** 0.10**
(0.06) (0.05)
Domestic worker 0.12*** 0.05*
(0.03) (0.03)
Controls No Yes No Yes
Observations 3,318 3,318 3,318 3,318
Notes: The table shows marginal effects calculated at the mean from probit coefficients. Robust standard errors in parentheses are
corrected for the clustering of the residuals at the cluster level. Controls include age, age sq, dummies for age, age sq, dummies for
education (primary, secondary and tertiary), urban status, durable goods, religion, and dummy for whether she is widowed or divorced.
Although many factors may contribute to domestic and textile workers’ higher infection rates, one
potential vulnerability that arose during qualitative work was condom accessibility. While almost all (96%)
of the interviewed textile workers believed condoms were readily accessible, only 84% of interviewed
domestic workers believed so. Further, more textile workers had been tested for HIV (97% compared to
83% of domestic workers), as have their partners (51% of textile workers’ and 37% of domestic workers’).
These differences are also likely linked to accessibility: 76% of textile workers have a clinic at their
workplace, while 27% of domestic workers have a health clinic near their workplace. That said, women
employed in garment factories are less likely to participate in the decision about whether or not to use
contraception, with only 88% of surveyed women reported to do so, compared to 93% of all women and
97% of domestic workers (DHS 2014).
Women working in the textile sector used to benefit from the HIV prevention and treatment services
offered by the Apparel Lesotho Alliance to Fight Aids (ALAFA). Established in 2006 in response to the high
prevalence of HIV among textile workers, ALAFA provided free condoms, HIV testing, training on safe
sexual practices, and other activities to raise awareness across garment factories. The program’s crucial
role in addressing the issue of HIV/AIDS was recognized by surveyed textile workers, who credited ALAFA
with increasing their knowledge and awareness of HIV and for helping to provide condoms at work (“Yes
we negotiate using condoms with partners, women are now smart. We have also received a lot of capacity
sessions on HIV issues in our textiles. We know our rights.”). In fact, the workplace was mentioned as the
main source for condoms by the majority (53%) of textile respondents, ahead of stores (11%) and clinics
(24%) during the interviews conducted in 2015. The initiative also led to some small adjustments in
43
workplace practices, such as allowing short breaks for workers with HIV/AIDS who need to take food and
water with their medications.
However, the two main initiatives working to improve working conditions and provide HIV/AIDS services,
ALAFA and Better Work, have both been discontinued since our initial research. The government should
step up to help fill in this gap by continuing to target textile workers in order to maintain the gains made
in the fight against HIV as well as by expanding its efforts to include migrants working in the informal
sector. These efforts are critical in ensuring compliance with 2006 and 2010 Labor Code Amendments,
which require employers to provide information and ensure a safe and non‐discriminatory environment
regarding HIV.33 While migrant workers are indeed identified as a high‐risk population by the Ministry of
Health,34 the 2011‐2016 national HIV and AIDS strategic plan relies exclusively on ALAFA and a 14‐country
HIV/AIDS assistance program carried out in Southern Africa by the Global Fund.35 However, the evidence
presented in this report suggests that other internal labor migrants, especially domestic workers, are
similarly vulnerable and in need of assistance as those working in textile factories or in South Africa.
Besides frequently having less knowledge of sources for condoms at their new places of residence,
migrants are more likely to have higher lifetime numbers of sexual partners than non‐migrants, with each
additional partner increasing HIV risk.36
What can be done? In order to achieve its aim of reducing new annual infections by 50%, the government
may consider targeting migrant workers more directly in its HIV‐related interventions. First, a basic
package of interventions should be easily available whenever migrant workers seek out HIV‐related
services. Partnerships with non‐profit organizations already on the ground, such as Catholic Health
Association of Lesotho (CHAL) or Lesotho Planned Parenthood Association (LPPA), could establish a
presence in migrant‐dominated communities and help facilitate the delivery of health care for the control
and treatment of HIV/AIDS. Second, prevention efforts should target young, recent migrants who are less
likely to be HIV positive but potentially even more vulnerable than “settled” migrants. The World Bank
suggests that important efficiency gains in the fight against HIV could be achieved by improving intra‐
sectoral allocations: in 2006/07, 42% of AIDS spending went to treatment and care, 24.3% on impact
mitigation, 21.7% on management coordination and support, and only 11.7% went to prevention.
Although Lesotho has achieved impressive improvements in HIV testing (the share of women ever tested
33
See Labour Code (Amendment) Act (2006) and Labour Code (HIV and AIDS at Workplace) Guidelines (2010).
34
2011‐2016 National AIDS Strategic Plan. Other key populations include uniformed services, people with disabilities, sexual minorities, herd
boys, commercial sex workers, and children/adolescents living with HIV.
35
Lesotho Ministry of Health (2012).
36
Camlin et al. (2010).
44
for HIV jumped from 12% in 2004 to 84% in 2014)37 and modern contraceptive use (increased from 35%
in 2004 to 60% in 2014, among married women), the continuing high prevalence of HIV/AIDS in the
country makes intensifying prevention efforts as pressing as ever.
4. Financial Inclusion
For migrants, the need for inclusive financial services is particularly essential. Not only do migrants need
to send remittances to their families but they also would greatly benefit from increased access to other
financial services, including bank accounts to receive payments (for formal workers), funeral insurance,
long‐term savings and asset accumulation, and short‐term borrowing.38
Most Basotho still primarily access informal financial services. In 2011, only 18% of adults in Lesotho had
accounts at a financial institution, compared to 29% in Swaziland and 54% in South Africa.39 Women were
also less likely than men to own an account (17% vs. 20%), as were low‐income individuals (10% vs. 25%),
making poor women the least likely to have access to formal financial services. This is not to say that they
do not engage in financial transactions, but rather that their financial lives are characterized by
informality. For example, while only 3% of women borrowed from a financial institution, 5% did so from
a loan shark, and an overwhelming 51% of women borrowed from family or friends in 2011.40 Only 10%
of Basotho adults used an account to receive remittances, and only 6% used an account to send money,
with an even lower share among women as, unlike male migrants, they were not enrolled in any
remittance‐sending schemes.41 Female migrants are consequently even more reliant than men on
informal channels to send money home, carrying cash across the border or sending cash or goods home
with friends or relatives.42
37
DHS 2004, 2014.
38
CENFRI MAP study (http://cenfri.org/making‐access‐possible/map‐lesotho).
39
FINDEX, 2011. In 2014, 70.31% of adults in South Africa had bank accounts.
40
FINDEX 2011.
41
Based on Lesotho legislation, a third of male miners’ salaries in South Africa is automatically remitted to their households back home.
42
Other studies have found higher rates of financial inclusion. The FinScope survey, conducted in 2011, found that only 19% of Lesotho adults
were not financially served, as opposed to 27% in South Africa and 37% in Swaziland. 38% of adults have a bank account, 23% have another
form of formal financial service, and a further 20% are only served by informal financial services. 62% of adults have funeral insurance, either
formal or informal. The differences in these rates are definitional: this high level of inclusion is driven by the use of insurance, especially funeral
insurance.
45
Figure 6. Limited use of bank accounts to transfer remittances, especially for women (FINDEX 2011)
11.14
18.27
9.79
15.52
8.54
11.28
10.04
6.22
9.79
5.54
4.92
5.54
USED ACCOUNT TO USED ACCOUNT TO USED ACCOUNT TO USED ACCOUNT TO
RECEIVE REMITTANCES SEND REMITTANCES RECEIVE REMITTANCES SEND REMITTANCES
Total Female Male Lesotho Swaziland South Africa
The results of our fieldwork indicate that formal sector employment is an important entry point for
women to access financial services. Seventy percent of textile workers have bank accounts, most of which
were opened with their employers. Some factories also incorporate insurance schemes into employees’
monthly salaries, automatically deducting a percentage of their wage. This initial introduction to formal
banking services seems to induce participation in other financial services, such as savings groups.
Domestic workers generally do not have bank accounts (4 percent of those surveyed did), mostly because
they cannot afford the monthly fees or because they are paid in cash or goods and thus have no need for
one. Another one‐fourth of domestic workers cited not having an ID as the main reason they do not have
a bank account. While the survey did not explicitly ask about husband’s permission, none of our
respondents indicated any legal challenges in opening a bank account or access formal finances services;
instead, their reasons for not engaging in financial services was overwhelmingly due to the fact that they
had no need and/or not enough money to maintain activity. If there were legal constraints, it was a lack
of necessary formal identification. These findings indicate progress on women’s legal rights since the
Lesotho Bank Amendment Act of 2008, which allowed married women to open bank accounts without
their spouses' consent.
Textile workers are also more likely to participate in stokvels43: 21% of textile workers borrow money from
a stokvel when struggling to make ends meet, compared to only 10% of surveyed domestic workers. Their
participation with savings groups serves two main purposes. Our survey data suggest that some women
look to stokvels when their monthly salary does not cover their expenses (about 20 percent). However
43
A stokvel is a club serving as a rotating saving scheme or credit society to which members regularly contribute an agreed monthly amount.
Each month a different member receives the amount in the fund collected during that period.
46
qualitative data indicate that textile workers also use this money to improve their homes, buying furniture
and goods with the loan, which is significantly larger than their monthly salary.
Differences in financial inclusion are also apparent in what migrants do when they struggle to make ends
meet: textile workers borrow from a stokvel (21 percent) or take out a loan from a loan shark (43 percent),
as well as borrow from family or friends (11 percent) or cut back on expenses (14 percent). In contrast, if
domestic workers are short on money at the end of the month, they are more likely to do nothing (38
percent) or cut back on expenses (22 percent), consistent with the notion that domestic workers do not
have many living expenses. Ten percent report borrowing money from a stokvel and another 10 percent
borrow from their employer. Few domestic workers take out a loan (5 percent).
Our survey respondents report very low usage of mobile money, even to send remittances. Female
migrants generally send money home through family or friends (about 33 percent) or carry money home
themselves when they visit (41 percent). Thirteen percent send money home with a public bus driver and
about 7 percent use mPesa (more domestic than textile workers). A handful of women reported using the
post office or a bank teller, with one woman’s sibling actually traveling to Maseru to pick the money up.
Domestic workers also noted that they send money home with other domestic workers, pooling their
money and taking turns.
Women and their families spend an average of M65 remitting money, although women report paying up
to M320 to remit. They talk about risks involved in using informal channels – friends “lose” the money
and ask for a fee – but migrants often have no other options given the costs (“Some reasons are that, if
they wanted to send money to their families they would have to send it through banks and bank charges
are expensive,” rural man). However, even if cost were not an issue, only 16 percent of respondents would
use mPesa, still roughly half (51 percent) would carry the money home themselves, about 15 percent
would still use friends or family, and about 8 percent would use bank tellers (mostly textile workers). It is
unclear why more women do not or would not use mPesa or other formal options. It might be that women
are not fully aware of these options (one domestic worker said that someone tried to explain it to her but
she was unable to grasp how to use it) that they prefer to buy goods or foodstuffs in urban areas and carry
these home instead.
What can be done? Migrant labor is central to household structures and livelihood activities in Lesotho.
Remittances constitute almost one‐fourth of the GNP: many Basotho are dependent on others for their
47
main source of income or are dependent on remittances as a part of it.44 The CENFRI MAP study identifies
migrants as a key population that would benefit from the targeting of other financial services, such as
repatriation funeral insurance and cross‐border payment of dependents’ insurance premiums, retirement
or other long‐term savings, or cross‐border payment of loans. As such, efforts to promote financial
inclusion should leverage the fact that migration is so common and use remittances as their entry‐point.
Given households’ increasing dependence on female migrants’ remittances, policy can address two key
areas: 1) provide cheaper, more formal ways to send money to rural family households; and 2) promote
and/or provide some educational savings product to help finance children’s education. If successful,
remittances can be an important channel through which to promote broader financial inclusion among
women.
With regard to the first, female migrants continue to use informal channels of remitting money home.
This results in them sending money inconsistently and less efficiently, often when a trusted family or
friend travels to rural areas, or when the migrant herself can make the trip home. A better way for these
women to send money home is clearly needed, and the promotion of new technologies to do so, such as
mPesa, could be a priority. Consistent with CENFRI MAP study recommendations, low‐cost remittance
services need to be cheaper for both salaried workers and for private dependents (domestic workers and
cross‐border traders). This can be achieved by increasing resources in rural areas (recruit agents and
partner with more banks) and teaming with trusted retailers, such as Shoprite. At the same time, mobile
coverage has grown exponentially according to the Lesotho Communication Authority’s “The State of
Communications Sector and ICT Indicators in Lesotho” (2009). To take advantage, women might need
nudges, or incentives, to try them out. Customer incentives have been found to lead to early adoption of
mPesa.45 “Money back guarantees”, which emphasize the lack of risk involved, free top‐up offers, and
replicating loyalty credit card schemes have been highlighted as potential avenues to increase up‐take of
mobile money.
Second, providing female migrants some kind of educational savings product might be particularly useful.
Many migrants are working to finance their children’s education, and the need to finance education is a
key concern among migrants. Mechanisms, such as commitment savings products, might be particularly
useful to help women set aside money each month to pay for their children’s education both when
finances are tight and for the longer‐term.
44
CENFRI MAP study (http://cenfri.org/making‐access‐possible/map‐lesotho).
45
http://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/programmes/mobile‐money‐for‐the‐unbanked/mmu‐examples.
48
Box 2: Inheritance and the LCMPA
Related to financial inclusion is property inheritance, which the ISGA cites as a key economic and
social justice issue that exists at the center of Lesotho’s dual legal system. Customary law is
patrilineal and inheritance is intestate, meaning that daughters – married or not – cannot inherit
from their parents. Under common law, in contrast, all persons have equal rights to inherit property,
and the LCMPA gives women the right to own and manage property in their own names. The
coexistence of legal systems creates uncertainty as to which system prevails in which circumstances,
particularly when it comes to marriage because the validity of marriage – under customary or civil
rites ‐ determines the rights of spouses and children to inherit. As a result, property grabbing from
widows and girl children is rampant (ISGA).
Fieldwork suggests that female migrants are split in their perceptions of inheritance. For one,
respondents did not voice a lot of concerns about inheritance. In fact, many grandmothers in rural
communities own land and property and one‐quarter of migrants surveyed own land and/or
property in rural areas, with some owning in urban areas as well. Very few owned land/property
previously and had lost it. Two, although women did not voice concerns, many female migrants’
financial strategies did not seem to count on inheriting land/property, most likely due to hardened
perceptions of patrilineal inheritance customs. Instead, women focused their income strategies on
what they saw as real options: wage labor and domestic work.
5. Children’s Education
As discussed in Part I, education is a primary impetus for Basotho women moving for work. For one, it is
closely related to younger women’s decisions to migrate when they drop out of school, usually due to
family financial hardship. Two, older women are motivated to move to urban areas to provide for their
children’s education. Education also influences where migrants’ children live: small children and babies
too young for school tend to live with their working mothers in urban areas, and attend daycare in the
neighborhood during the day.46 Primary school age children live in rural areas, usually with the
grandmother, because schooling is government funded and non‐school living costs are too high in urban
areas. Older children often live with the mother in urban areas because secondary schools are more
available (when asked if children in Maseru are in school: “Yes they do, that is why they came in the first
place”, textile worker).
With financial support from their mothers, these children are able to attend school at very high rates: no
migrant children in rural areas were not in school, and many children in Maseru/Maputsoe attended
secondary school. In fact, these children are in urban areas because secondary schools are more accessible
46
This is not an option for most domestic workers, however, because they live with their employers and they do not allow it.
49
there than in rural areas. Although most non‐migrant children in rural communities were in government‐
funded school as well, rural respondents did mention children of non‐migrants who were not able to stay
in school and became herd boys or domestic workers at young ages instead: “[children not in school]
usually happens to children whose parents no longer work, for those whose parents work, they stay longer
at school.”
What can be done? These findings highlight the need to increase access to school, particularly secondary
school, and to make it easier for families to finance education. This could be done, for example, by creating
lower cost models of secondary school in rural areas or by expanding the availability and coverage of
bursary programs. To this point, female migrants acknowledged their families’ dependence on free
primary school, but note the often‐unmanageable costs of secondary school: “Once your child gets to high
school fees get expensive and you find that they have to drop out. The government should pay for high
schools and let us handle the primary school fees because they are not as expensive”. Support for families
might also be in the form of new financial products that help migrants and their families save for
education, as discussed previously in Section 4’s financial inclusion policy recommendations. Given the
centrality of children’s education to women’s motivation to migrate, interventions addressing accessibility
to school, particularly secondary school, could reduce the burden on female migrants and, in some cases,
reduce the need for women to migrate in the first place.
50
Summary and Conclusions
This study offers an in‐depth exploration of female migration in order to provide new insights for Lesotho’s
economic development. Our guiding questions are (i) What are the drivers of female migration, from the
perspective of households and migrants?; and (ii) How can policy better adapt to the needs of female
migrants and their families to respond to development challenges? Our findings can be summarized under
three themes: the role of migration in Lesotho, the dynamics of women’s employment, and the need for
policies and programs to support female migrant workers.
Role of Migration in Lesotho
The prevalence of migration in Lesotho is well‐known. Its ubiquity as a livelihood strategy in the rural
communities visited by the research team made it difficult to even find non‐sending households to
interview. Unlike other migration‐dependent countries, Lesotho has relied on migration for over a
century, which may explain why, despite declining opportunities in South Africa, 80 percent of Basotho
households continue to live in rural areas rather than move to the city for work. As the old model of relying
on the remittances of a single male family member becomes less viable, households now send multiple
migrants, including women, to live long‐term in the city or abroad. As a result, rural households
increasingly function as “anchors” where adult children return in between stints of work, and leave their
children with grandparents when they do have work. One implication of the shift to female migration, in
light of the low earnings of female migrants, is that households can no longer use remittances to build
assets. This was echoed throughout the focus groups with rural households. Remittances from women
are used only for basic needs, whereas with male mining workers, the amounts of remittances were larger
and hence were more able to support asset accumulation of receiving households.47 This finding is
consistent with that of an earlier World Bank report48 that migration only contributed to poverty reduction
in the case of male migration to South Africa. Finally, lack of access to secondary education is a key
contributor to female migration, as young women report migrating after dropping out of school, and older
women migrate in order to support their children’s educational expenses.
47
Crush et al. (2010) estimated that in 2002, miners earned an average of M2,900 per month, while garment workers received only M650 per
month. The situation was even worse in 2006, when miners were receiving a substantially higher wage of M4,500 a month, while the garment
workers’ salaries had not changed. Fieldwork indicated increases in salary since then: textile workers earned an average monthly salary of
M1230 while domestic workers earned an average of M600 per month.
48
World Bank (2010).
51
Along these lines, Lesotho’s historical and continued dependence on migration highlights the need for
national data to have better migration indicators collected by the Bureau of Statistics (see Annex 1).
Improved measures would allow for more precise estimates of the prevalence and trends of migration, as
well as the characteristics of migrants and their households.
Dynamics of Women’s Employment
In a context with limited employment options for men or women, the growth of the export garment
industry in Lesotho has been a boon for women. It offers one of the few opportunities for formal
employment. Despite being based in Lesotho, these opportunities do not lessen the link between
employment and migration, with the great majority (80%) of textile workers being internal migrants49. As
confirmed through qualitative interviews, these migrant women do not see returning home as an option,
so, even if they are to lose their jobs in the textile industry, they are likely to stay in Maseru and turn to
informal employment to sustain themselves and their families. Finding ways to support women in informal
self‐employment as well as support their children to stay in school will be essential.
This study offers insight into informal women’s employment through the experience of domestic workers.
We found a higher than anticipated degree of two‐way movement between textile and domestic work,
though most respondents showed a clear preference for the formality, higher pay, and independence of
textile work. Informal employment is characterized by risk and hardship, including lack of basic
protections and increased vulnerability to HIV, in addition to the security risks for all migrants associated
with low‐income housing in urban areas. The other main occupational category dominated by women is
informal business, particularly cross‐border trade, which evidence suggests to entail a high degree of risk
including sexual harassment and theft.50 Our findings also support the ISGA’s recommendation that more
diversification in women’s employment opportunities is needed.
Also important to note are the things we did not find. An increasing reliance on female migrants as
breadwinners brings with it the potential for changes, both good, if women’s bargaining power and
control over assets improve, and bad, if household conflict increases as male traditional roles and
identities are upended. Though we probed in our interviews with female migrants, we did not uncover
such changes. The lack of such impacts could be due to the evolving nature of marriage in Lesotho (see
49
DHS 2009.
50
LMDA (2015).
52
Box 1), because the low level of female earnings does not allow for much choice on how to spend
remittances, or because women already enjoyed a good deal of bargaining power in their households.
Respondents also did not voice a high degree of concern about land or inheritance (see Box 2) or any
increase in conflict with their spouses.
Supporting Workers
This exploration of women’s experiences living and working away from their families has uncovered a few
entry points where programs or policies might support migrants and their families. While this study is not
equipped to provide detailed policy recommendations, the perspective of female migrants may offer a
new approach to familiar development challenges in the areas of job quality, living conditions, HIV
prevention and response, financial inclusion, and education. The large concentrations of female migrants
working in the textile sector in Maseru and Maputsoe would benefit from improved access to safe,
affordable housing and a continuation of the progress made to improve working conditions (through the
Better Work initiative) and to improve access to HIV prevention and treatment (through ALAFA). Just as
important is to begin to expand some of these benefits to informal workers, especially because of the
greater vulnerability of informal work (e.g., increased risk of HIV, less financial inclusion, poorer working
conditions). Since there are not enough formal jobs to absorb the retrenched textile workers in the short
term, it would behoove the government to proactively improve the opportunities and conditions of
informal work. Support for small‐scale businesses or diversification into new sectors would improve the
productivity of informal enterprises, and offering basic services, particularly those not directly
employment‐related (such as HIV and financial services), could extend at least some of the benefits of the
formal sector to informal workers. Finally, anything that makes it easier to access secondary education
will improve welfare for the children of female migrants and possibly reduce the need for female
migration.
53
References
Boehm, C. 2003. “The Social Life of Fields: Labour Markets and Agrarian Change in Lesotho.” Journal for
Interdisciplinary and Cross‐Cultural Studies 3: 1‐18.
Brusle, Tristan. 2012. “What Kind of Place Is This? Daily Life, Privary, and the Inmate Metaphor in a
Nepalese Workers’ Labour Camp.” South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal.
Camlin, C.S., Hosegood, V., Newell, M.L., Barnighausen, T., and R. Snow. 2010 “Gender, Migration and
HIV in Rural KwaZulu‐Natal, South Africa.” PLoS ONE, 5(7): e11539
Chaka, Nthabiseng. 2011. “Female Migration, Gender Relations and Remittances in Lesotho: On whose
terms?” Paper submitted for the 4th European Conference on African Studies (ECAS), The Nordic
Africa Institute, Uppsala, Sweden.
Corno, Lucia, and Damien de Walque. 2012. “Mines, Migration and HIV/AIDS in Southern Africa.” Journal
of African Economies 0 (0): 1‐34.
Crush, Jonathan, B. Dodson, J. Gay, T. Green, and C. Leduka. 2010. “Migration, Remittances and
‘Development’ in Lesotho.” Migration Policy Series No. 52, Southern African Migration
Programme (SAMP).
ILO. 2013. “Better Work Lesotho: Garment Industry 2nd Compliance Synthesis Report.”
Lesotho Millennium Development Agency (LMDA). 2015. “Lesotho: Initial Social and Gender Analysis,
Compact II.” Consultation Draft.
Ministry of Health & Social Welfare, Lesotho. 2012. “Lesotho: Global AIDS Response Country Progress
Report.” Maseru, Lesotho.
Parker, Warren, C. Cawood, D. Khanyile, and Mojabend Malebo. 2012. “ALAFA Interventions in the
Lesotho Garment Industry: Progress and Outcomes.” Final Report.
Pike, Kelly and Shane Godfrey. 2014. “Workers' Perceptions of Compliance with Labour Standards:
Assessing Opportunities and Challenges for Better Work in Lesotho's Apparel Sector.” In A. Rossi,
A. Luinstra and J. Pickles (eds.), Towards Better Work: Understanding Labour in Apparel Global
Value Chains. Geneva and Basingstoke: ILO and Palgrave Macmillan.
54
They’Daemane, Moses M. M. (2014). “The critical exposure of Lesotho’s labor law effectiveness:
industrial relations’ calamity of textile industry workers in Lesotho.” Journal of Social and
Development Sciences 5(2):58‐72.
UNCTAD. 2012. “Who is Benefiting from Trade Liberalization in Lesotho? A Gender Perspective.” United
Nations.
World Bank. 2010. "Lesotho–Sharing growth by reducing inequality and vulnerability: choices for
change–a poverty, gender, and social assessment." Poverty Reduction and Economic
Management, Africa Region. Report No.: 46297‐LS.
World Bank. 2015. “Interwoven: A Case Study of the Better Work Program in Improving Job and Life
Quality for Apparel Workers.”
Wu, Weiping. 2002. “Migrant Housing in Urban China: Choices and Constraints.” Urban Affairs Review,
38(1): 90‐119.
55
Annexes
Annex 1. Defining Migrants in Existing Data Sources
The main nationally representative data source used for this study was the Demographic and Health
Survey (DHS), which contains comprehensive information on socio‐economic and health indicators at both
individual and household levels. Depending on the unit of analysis, migrants were defined in two ways: (i)
household members who are not residents, but living instead elsewhere in Lesotho or in South Africa, and
(ii) individuals who have taken at least one trip of three months or more during the previous five years.51
This dual approach was necessary in order to access both the household data set to examine
characteristics of sending households as well as the individual data set for information on migrant
characteristics, such as occupation and HIV status. While unique identifiers would enable the merging of
different data sets, only individuals present in the household at the time of the survey could be
interviewed and submit blood samples. As a consequence, our individual‐level analysis relies on
information about people who migrated but were back in their households of origin at the time of the
DHS survey.
The first approach uses the residence status reported in the household data set to identify migrants.
Because it includes both usual residents and members who usually live elsewhere in Lesotho, in South
Africa, or in another country,52 the household roster enables us to define migrant‐sending households as
those with at least one adult (over age 15) who is away. Household members identified as migrants live
somewhere else and did not sleep in the house the night before the survey ‐ a condition necessary to
avoid including visitors who do not usually live in the household either but who happened to be present
at that particular point in time. Defining migrants as absent household members is useful not only for
comparing sending and non‐sending households, but also households of internal versus external migrants.
By contrast, the individual‐level data set can only capture internal migration since the respondent had to
be in Lesotho to participate in the survey.
The second approach, based on whether or not respondents had taken at least one trip of three months
or more during the previous five years, is more suitable for analyzing individual‐level characteristics of
internal migration. An earlier version of the report using 2009 DHS data defined migrants as individuals
who did not always live in their current place of residence, which was consistent with other studies using
51
The subgroup of labor migrants consists of individuals who listed as “work” the reason for most recent trip of three months or more.
52
There are some discrepancies between the phrasing of the questions in the survey instrument (included at the bottom of the DHS report) and
variables available. We based our analysis on the answers available in the data.
56
DHS data (Brockerhoff & Biddlecom, 1999; Kimuna & Djamba, 2012; Temin et al, 2013). However, the
question was removed from the 2014 DHS and replaced by a series of questions on recent trips including
number of trips and duration, destination, and purpose of the most recent trip.
Finally, we cross‐checked migration and employment estimates using information from the 2010‐11 wave
of the Household Budget Survey (HBS). Data available in the HBS made it possible to identify household
members who lived somewhere else during the previous 12 months, whether elsewhere in Lesotho, in
South Africa, or in another country, and to determine the number of months spent away. Based on the
methodology employed in previous World Bank reports,53 migrant‐sending households were therefore
defined as those having at least one member who spent any time away from the household the previous
year. In the end, we decided to base our analysis on the DHS due to data limitations of the HBS (discussed
below) as well as important advantages of the DHS, notably HIV test results and occupation codes enabling
us to identify textile and domestic workers.
Challenges and recommendations
i. Demographic Households Survey (DHS)
We faced a number of challenges in trying to identify labor migrants based on existing nationally‐
representative data. First, the terminology employed in the DHS to indicates the residence status of
household members was inconsistent. In the accompanying report, people who usually live in the
households are referred to as de jure members, and people who slept in the household the previous night
are referred to as de facto members. Most household members are both de jure and de facto, whereas
migrants would be usual residents who were away at the time of the survey – de jure but not de facto. In
the data set, however, information on whether the person lives elsewhere in Lesotho or in South Africa is
only available for household members who are not usual – or de jure – residents. We contacted DHS
through the user forum and were told that, due to how prevalent labor migration is in Lesotho, “the
decision was made to include people who are part of the family, but who do not usually live in the
household nor slept in the household the previous night.” As explained above, we therefore defined
migrants as household members who are neither de jure nor de facto residents. Second, by only capturing
the last move, information on migrants in the individual data set may underestimate the length of the
migration experience. Lack of specific data on the geographic location of the previous place of residence
53
World Bank (2012); SGD (2014).
57
may, on the other hand, overestimate the scale of migration in instances where the move occurred over
administrative lines that are in close proximity (e.g. different outskirts of Maseru).
Ideas for how to improve data collection can be drawn from the 2011 Nepal DHS, which introduced a
module on migration. Specific questions included gender, date of departure, age at departure, reason for
moving, and destination for each former household resident who migrated elsewhere in the 10 years prior
to the survey. The choice of the 10‐year limit reflects the desire to capture both period migration and
lifetime migration, where period migration indicates the mobility patterns of migrants during the previous
five years, and lifetime migration indicates a permanent shift in place of residence that occurred more
than five years before. The DHS decided to include this new module to account for the mass internal and
external migration occurring in Nepal. Considering that migration is arguably as common in Lesotho as it
is in Nepal,54 and despite the recent changes introduced in the 2014 DHS, we strongly recommend
introducing a similar migration module in the next wave of the DHS.
ii. Household and Budget Survey (HBS)
The limitations presented by the HBS were harder to overcome.55 First, the materials we had at our
disposal did not explain how households were defined and whether, as in the case of the DHS, family
members who had been absent for some time were included or not. Our definition of migrants relied
exclusively on whether a person had been away during the previous 12 months, although the reason for
departure was unknown. Additional information on the length of time spent away was not extremely
useful either, as it was unclear whether the duration referred only to the last trip or to the entire period
the household member lived elsewhere. For instance, in the first quarter of the 2011‐12 HBS, 72 percent
of “migrants” were away for a period of less than 3 months. This makes it unlikely that work was the main
purpose of the travel. Finally, significant discrepancies across the different employment indicators also
made it impractical to restrict the study sample to labor migrants only.
Three simple questions could greatly improve the knowledge on migration and be used to better estimate
rates of migration:
Q1. “What was the main reason why name lived somewhere else?” with the answer options (a)
work, (b) study, (c) marriage, (d) visit family or friends, (e) shopping, (f) other. This question could
54
46% of households in Lesotho had a member away at the time of the survey, whereas 57% of households in Nepal had at least one person
who migrated at some time in the previous 10 years.
55
See the Technical Appendix 1 of the Lesotho Poverty Assessment (2010) for a detailed discussion of the low level of reliability in the HBS data.
58
be integrated in section B on demographic characteristics, immediately after the question about
whether or not each household member lived anywhere else.
Q2. “In what month and year did name move away?” to replace existing question on length of
time spent away and cover a period longer than 12 months.
Q3. “How often does the household usually receive remittances?” to follow the existing question
on whether the household received any remittances the previous month.56
An additional question could be included in the demographic section of the questionnaire to identify
return migrants among household members.
Q4: “Have you ever lived away from your household for at least [six months]?”
Considering the high degree of population mobility in Lesotho, improving data collection on key migration
indicators is essential. Better measures should be integrated in existing surveys, notably the DHS and HBS,
to facilitate the identification of migrants as well as to provide more detailed information on the migration
experience. Given how prevalent migration is in Lesotho, the role of evidence on migration trends in
informing decision‐making in a range of policy areas cannot be overstated.
56
We welcome the addition of questions on remittances from within the country in the 2013‐14 wave of the survey.
59
Annex 2. Details of Fieldwork
A mission was undertaken from March 16 to April 6, 2015 to collect primary data for this study. With the
assistance from a team of local researchers,57 the research team undertook i) 210 survey interviews with
female migrants, ii) four urban focus group discussions with migrants, iii) seven in‐depth, semi‐structured,
interviews with selected migrant women, as well as five of these women’s family households in rural
sending communities, and iv) six focus group discussions with women and men from sending
communities. Prior to the mission 15 key semi‐structured interviews were conducted with domestic and
textile workers to inform the interview design.
The quantitative survey utilized a structured questionnaire using pencil and paper and data were entered
for analysis. In‐depth interviews and focus groups were recorded and transcribed. All interviews with
migrants and their communities took place in SeSotho. For all interviews and focus groups conducted at
a non‐work location, local researchers made callbacks to workers to guide them to the correct place and
confirm the interview appointment. For remotely placed interviews, a transport allowance was provided
to cover the cost of participating. For each interview that took place in a work setting, a token ($1.50
value) prepaid phone card was offered as appreciation.
The sequencing of the methods was important: key informant interviews and semi‐structured interviews
with female migrants prior to the mission informed the quantitative survey instrument, and the survey
interviews helped identify a small, but diverse group of seven female migrants who had volunteered for
a more in‐depth study (more than 95 percent of those interviewed in the survey volunteered). These
seven women were subject to a more in‐depth interview and the research team visited five of these seven
women’s family households in three different rural areas. In these sending villages, in‐depth interviews
were conducted with the migrant‐sending family household and with a non‐migrant‐sending household
to serve as a comparison. Two separate focus groups, one with men and one with women, provided
community‐level perceptions of and attitudes toward labor migration and its effects on families.
A. Quantitative Survey of Migrants
Prior to the mission, information on factories in the textile industry was collected through Lesotho
National Development Corporation (LNDC), Better Work, and factory unions (UNITE, FAWU, LECAWU,
57
The local study team consisted of two smaller teams. A team of qualitative researchers consisted of one team leader with experience leading
FGDs and two assistants with research experience. A second survey team consisted of six researchers with enumeration experience. All
members were fluent in English and SeSotho. Two international researchers provided oversight throughout the fieldwork.
60
NUTEX, and Lentsoe Le Sechaba). These data enabled the team to identify a diverse set of factories from
which to randomly sample migrant workers. Factories were selected so as to maximize variation in the
following characteristics: the number of workers, the production size, export market, level of unionization,
owner identification, and the (current and past) membership of factory organizations (Better Work, the
Apparel Lesotho Alliance to Fight Aids (ALAFA), and the Lesotho Textile Exporters Association).
The team identified three factories of varying sizes and three back‐up factories with similar traits that
could be approached if the first choice was not possible. In reality, the team was not rejected from any
factories, but two of the ‘first’ choices were unreachable. Factories were all contacted prior to the mission,
but the arrangements for interviews were primarily negotiated in detail during the mission. The three
factories from which female migrant workers were sampled and interviewed were:
Mauri Garments. Mauri was the smallest factory in the study with approximately 250 workers.
The factory was established in 1991 by Mauritian nationals and located in the Maseru industrial
area. Mauri previously exported to the U.S. market, but now focuses on the South African market.
While exporting to the U.S. market Mauri was part of the Better Work initiative but withdrew
when production shifted to the South African market. Mauri participated in the now defunct
ALAFA program, but is not a member of the Exporters Association. With the help of the Human
Resources department, migrant garment workers were identified through a review of contracts,
in which the worker’s family household location is listed. Only workers whose family household
was located beyond Maseru District, and at a distance at which they would qualify as migrating
for work, were considered for interviews. A random sample was selected and workers were
invited to interviews on a Saturday at the LNDC building. A handful of workers who failed to show
up for the interviews were subsequently contacted and interviewed during their lunch hour at the
factory location.
Springfield Manufacturers. Springfield currently employs approximately 800 workers and was
defined in our sampling frame as a medium‐sized factory. The factory is located in Maputsoe and
primarily manufactures for Reebok. The factory is under South African ownership, which is
common in the Maputsoe factory zone, and was established in 2006. The factory engaged in
ALAFA programs and was a member of Better Work at the time of data collection, but not the
Exporters Association. Female garment workers were identified at Springfield exiting the factory
during their lunch hour over a two‐day period and interviewed at the textile‐training center in
Maputsoe on a Saturday. Only workers whose family household was located outside Leribe
61
District, and at a distance at which they would qualify as migrating for work, were considered for
interviews.
Tai Yuan Garments. Tai Yuan was the largest selected factory and based in Thetsane industrial
area in Maseru. It currently employs approximately 2,200 workers. Tai Yuan’s ownership is
Taiwanese based. The production is primarily for the U.S. market and the factory had membership
with Better Work, the Exporter’s Association, and participated in ALAFA programs at the time of
the interviews. The factory was established in 1996. The three‐person HR department at Tai Yuan
helped identify workers who were migrants and from the list of migrant workers, a randomly
sampled subsection of females were invited to sit for the structured interview, which took place
on a Sunday at a local hotel and nonprofit, Kick4Life.
The number of women at each factory targeted for interviews was based on the relative number of
workers at the factories. More than 100 women were identified for interviews as experience showed that
some would not be able to attend. Twenty‐two women from Mauri Garments, 30 from Springfield, and
42 at Tai Yuan were interviewed. Twelve migrant women identified as Springfield employees but actually
employed at other Maputsoe factories were also recruited and interviewed. One textile worker was
ultimately dropped from analyses because she did not leave her family household for work.
Domestic workers were sampled from four different locations in the Maseru urban area. Prior to the
mission, information was gathered from the 2006 Census to identify up to five diverse areas that would
provide representation of the different areas that domestic workers find work in Maseru. Approximately
40 potential areas in Maseru were identified with the local research team. These areas were entered on
a map from the Land Administration Authority (LAA), and the research team identified four villages of
various income levels and geographic locations throughout urban Maseru: Maseru West (high income),
Ha Hoohlo (medium income), Ha Lesia (medium to medium‐low income) and Mabote (medium‐high
income).
The enumerators’ goal was to identify 25 migrant domestic workers in each community for interviews.
Enumerators would split the neighborhood up into sections they were each responsible for and knock on
every 10th door. If there was no migrant domestic worker they would pick the 10th door once again.
Enumerators estimate they knocked on 120 doors, with very few refusals. Unlike the textile workers, the
domestic workers were interviewed in their workplace. Many domestic workers arranged for interviews
to take place later in the day during less busy periods. The homeowners were present in only a few cases,
62
and while some were angry that enumerators came during working hours, many were nice and
welcoming. However, enumerators asked for interviews to be done in private. One domestic worker was
dropped from analyses because she recently moved for work and had not yet secured a job.
The survey instrument focused on processes and experiences related to female migration, including
respondent demographics and (current and family) household composition; migration history and future
plans; financial inclusion and personal expenses; current living and working conditions; sexual
relationships and behaviors; and general attitudes toward female migration. The survey consisted of 243
questions and lasted an average of 60 minutes.
B. Focus group discussions with migrants
Selection of workers for focus group discussions was conducted in parallel with the selection for the
survey. In factories, workers were approached and first asked if they would be willing to participate in the
survey. If unable or unwilling, they were asked to join a group discussion. The focus groups and the
structured interviews took place in the same locations. For domestic workers, focus group participants
were identified in the neighborhoods where the structured interviews took place. During the first five
days of interviews, a domestic worker who was not available at the time they were initially approached
was, similar to textile workers, asked if she could schedule a personal interview for a later time. If not, she
was asked if she would be willing to participate in a neutral location focus group discussion.
The focus group discussions for factory workers were grouped by factory. Approximately 12 workers were
invited to each focus group with the aim of having approximately 10 present. Three focus groups were
conducted with textile workers: one in Maputsoe and two in Maseru. For domestic workers, enumerators
identified 24 workers with the aim of conducting two focus groups. However, despite callbacks, only two
domestic workers showed up. The domestic worker groups were both planned for a Sunday, technically a
day when workers are off. The workers reported either that they were not allowed to participate by the
homeowner or that they had been asked to look after the homeowner’s children and no longer had a day
off. To compensate for the small number of participants in the domestic worker FGDs, we conducted two
additional in‐depth interviews with domestic workers.
C. Migrant case studies and rural migrant‐sending communities
Five women who participated in the quantitative survey were identified for further investigation as case
studies based on their responses to the survey. The case studies consisted of in‐depth interviews with the
63
female workers and household interviews and focus group discussions in the community in which their
family households are located. Case studies were chosen based on characteristics identified in the survey,
such as marital status, number of children born and living, and current and family household composition,
as well as through their voluntary consent for follow up interview. We made lists of unique cases based
on these characteristics and selected a handful of rural areas within a reasonable distance. A number of
the migrants were unable to serve as case studies for various reasons, such as their family household was
unreachable by car, they gave the wrong phone number and could not be reached, or the migrant herself
was going to be home visiting her family during the scheduled time of interviews.
The five case studies came from rural areas in three different districts: Leribe, Mafeteng, and Mohale’s
Hoek. Selected migrants were contacted and a convenient time and place was arranged for the research
team to meet with them, usually at the place of employment. After obtaining consent from the migrant
to speak with her again and her family, we contacted her family in the rural village either directly or
through the village chief or other family members to arrange a date and time to talk with them. Case study
and household interviews lasted around an hour.
Separate focus groups for men and women were conducted in three of the women’s villages – two in each
district, totaling six ‐ between March 26‐27 (Leribe) and March 31 – April 2 (Mafeteng and Mohale’s Hoek).
The research team worked with the village chiefs to identify local men and women for group discussions
and convenient places for these discussions to occur. Group discussions lasted between 1.5‐2 hours.
64
Annex 3. Determinants of HIV among Female Migrants
The analysis of HIV prevalence among female labor migrants in Lesotho was based on an earlier study
(Crono & de Walque, 2012) focusing on Basotho miners in South Africa. Using data from the 2004 wave
of the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) for Lesotho,58 the study examined whether men working in
the mining sector have a higher probability of being HIV positive and whether women, with a partner
employed in the mines, are at higher risk of being infected with HIV. The probability of being HIV positive
was the dependent variable and dummies equal to 1 if a male respondent declared work in the mines as
his main occupation or if a female respondent had a miner as a husband were the key independent
variables. A series of controls, such as age, education, place of residence, durable goods, and religion,
were also included in the specification. The equation was estimated using a probit model, and separate
regressions were run for men and women.
The first stage of our analysis focused on replicating Crono & de Walque’s (2012) study and updating the
results based on the following wave of DHS (i.e. DHS 2009). Table A1 shows estimates in which the
dependent variable is HIV status (0 for HIV‐negative, and 1 for HIV‐positive). In columns 1‐6, we report
results for the sample of males, while in columns 7‐8 we consider women only. Marginal effects of probit
coefficients are reported together with robust standard errors adjusted for the correlation of the residuals
at the survey cluster level. According to the estimates in column 1, being a miner is indeed significantly
associated with HIV infection even when controlling for additional socio‐demographic characteristics. The
magnitude of the effect is even larger among married miners (column 3), who are 19.5 percentage points
more likely to be infected with HIV than the average.
The trend discussed at the beginning of this report, of male miners getting older, on average, in the
absence of new hires, is supported by data on HIV prevalence. While in 2004, miners aged 30‐44 were
most likely to be HIV positive, data from 2009 indicates that, instead, miners aged 35‐49 (column 5) exhibit
the greatest vulnerability to HIV/AIDS. The age difference between the two groups is proportional with
the time lapse between the two survey rounds (5 years), suggesting that it is the same generation of
miners displaying the highest probability of being HIV positive. Conversely, having a husband or partner
who works as a miner no longer has a significant effect on the likelihood of being HIV positive for women,
even when considering a slightly older (29‐44) age group.
58
Corno & de Walque (2012) looked at three countries: Lesotho and Swaziland, the countries with the highest HIV prevalence in the world, and
Zimbabwe, which served as a comparison due to its local mining sector. Only findings for Lesotho are summarized here.
65
We further replicated the analysis using the 2014 DHS data, but the correlation between working as a
miner and being HIV positive disappeared no matter the age or marital status. Consistent with previous
findings and the lack of new opportunities for Basotho miners in South African mines, the number of
male respondents listing mining as their occupation has shrunk. While 76 of the 3,075 (2.47%) men in
our 2009 sample identified as miners, only 16 of the 2,773 (0.5%) did so in 2014. A lack of statistical
significance may therefore be attributable to insufficient power to detect an effect. Interestingly,
however, having a miner as a partner has become a strong predictor of HIV status for women across age
groups (see Table A2). Even when controlling for partner’s age and other confounding factors, women
whose partners are miners are 10 percentage points overall, and as high as 16 percentage points among
women aged 30 to 44, more likely to be HIV positive.
66
Table A1. HIV Prevalence and Mining Status (DHS 2009)
Men Women
Currently Married,
Full sample Age 30‐44 married age 35‐49 Full sample Age 25‐39
Miner 0.13** 0.09 0.20*** 0.17*
(0.05) (0.11) (0.07) (0.10)
Partner miner 0.03 0.01
(0.03) (0.04)
Partner age 0.00*** 0.01**
(0.00) (0.00)
Age 0.05*** ‐0.10 0.07*** 0.21* 0.07*** 0.06
(0.01) (0.07) (0.01) (0.11) (0.01) (0.06)
Age sq. ‐0.00*** 0.00 ‐0.00*** ‐0.00* ‐0.00*** ‐0.00
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Primary education ‐0.01 ‐0.02 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.06
(0.02) (0.05) (0.03) (0.06) (0.06) (0.10)
Secondary edu. 0.00 ‐0.02 0.02 ‐0.02 0.05 0.07
(0.02) (0.05) (0.04) (0.07) (0.07) (0.10)
Tertiary edu. ‐0.08*** ‐0.23*** ‐0.18*** ‐0.08 ‐0.07 ‐0.07
(0.02) (0.06) (0.04) (0.11) (0.07) (0.12)
Urban 0.03 0.08* 0.02 0.13** 0.05* 0.09**
(0.02) (0.05) (0.03) (0.06) (0.03) (0.04)
Durable goods 0.00 ‐0.01 ‐0.00 ‐0.06*** ‐0.00 0.00
(0.01) (0.02) (0.01) (0.02) (0.01) (0.01)
Catholic 0.01 0.01 0.04 ‐0.04 ‐0.06 ‐0.10
(0.03) (0.08) (0.06) (0.10) (0.06) (0.10)
Protestant 0.00 ‐0.03 0.03 ‐0.03 ‐0.07 ‐0.11
(0.02) (0.07) (0.06) (0.11) (0.06) (0.11)
No religion ‐0.05 0.01 0.08
(0.09) (0.30) (0.28)
Observations 3,075 779 1,257 452 2,057 1,021
Standard errors in parentheses
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
67
Table A2. HIV Prevalence and Mining Status (DHS 2014)
Men Women
Currently Married, Married,
VARIABLES Full sample married Age 30‐44 age 30‐44 Age 35‐49 age 35‐49 Full sample Age 25‐39 Age 30‐44
Miner 0.05 0.10 0.24 0.29 0.08 0.09
(0.11) (0.15) (0.23) (0.22) (0.20) (0.21)
Partner miner 0.10** 0.14** 0.16***
(0.04) (0.06) (0.06)
Partner age 0.01** 0.01*** 0.01**
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Age 0.04*** 0.06*** 0.03 ‐0.00 0.08 0.08 0.07*** 0.08 ‐0.02
(0.00) (0.01) (0.07) (0.10) (0.10) (0.12) (0.01) (0.06) (0.08)
Age sq. ‐0.00*** ‐0.00*** ‐0.00 0.00 ‐0.00 ‐0.00 ‐0.00*** ‐0.00 0.00
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Primary education 0.01 0.01 ‐0.02 ‐0.04 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.06
(0.02) (0.04) (0.05) (0.06) (0.05) (0.07) (0.09) (0.12) (0.11)
Secondary education ‐0.02 ‐0.01 0.03 ‐0.00 0.07 0.09 0.01 ‐0.02 0.02
(0.03) (0.05) (0.06) (0.07) (0.07) (0.08) (0.09) (0.12) (0.11)
Tertiary education ‐0.11*** ‐0.15*** ‐0.19*** ‐0.18*** ‐0.23*** ‐0.23*** ‐0.10 ‐0.13 ‐0.07
(0.02) (0.04) (0.06) (0.07) (0.07) (0.08) (0.08) (0.11) (0.12)
Urban 0.06*** 0.07** 0.12*** 0.08 0.11** 0.05 0.05* 0.08* 0.03
(0.02) (0.03) (0.04) (0.05) (0.05) (0.06) (0.03) (0.05) (0.05)
Durable goods 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 ‐0.01 ‐0.01 0.01 0.01 ‐0.00
(0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.02) (0.01) (0.02) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01)
Catholic 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.07 0.08 0.10 0.04
(0.03) (0.05) (0.06) (0.07) (0.08) (0.09) (0.08) (0.11) (0.11)
Protestant 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.11 0.10 0.06
(0.03) (0.05) (0.06) (0.07) (0.07) (0.09) (0.07) (0.10) (0.10)
Observations 2,773 1,108 782 513 620 432 1,767 933 770
Standard errors in parentheses
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
68
The second stage of our analysis examined the association between HIV prevalence and migrant status
among women. The same methodology was used, with occupational dummies for (i) domestic workers,
and (ii) textile factory workers, instead of miners. Of the 3,318 women for which HIV test results were
available, 689 (21%) were migrants, and 230 (7%) were labor migrants. By occupation, the 92 respondents
listed as “manufacturing laborers” were identified as textile workers. Although other occupation
categories included “tailors, dressmakers and hatters” and “sewers, embroiders and related workers,”
these are skilled workers distributed relatively evenly across regions. The aim of our analysis was to
estimate the probability of being HIV positive among women employed in garment factories in urban
areas near Maseru and Maputsoe, so we restricted our sub‐sample to manufacturing. To our knowledge,
manufacturing jobs for women in Lesotho are virtually exclusively in the textile sector. The second
occupational group of interest includes 227 domestic workers, identified as women “employed in
household and domestic service.”
Table A3. Summary statistics covariates
VARIABLES N mean sd min max
Respondent's current age 3,318 28.18 9.71 15.00 49.00
Age squared 3,318 888.27 598.41 225.00 2,401.00
Primary education 3,318 0.41 0.49 0.00 1.00
Secondary education 3,318 0.50 0.50 0.00 1.00
Tertiary education 3,318 0.08 0.26 0.00 1.00
Urban 3,318 0.32 0.47 0.00 1.00
Durable goods 3,318 1.48 1.58 0.00 7.00
Catholic 3,318 0.39 0.49 0.00 1.00
No religion 3,318 0.01 0.10 0.00 1.00
Widowed, divorced, or separated 3,318 0.13 0.33 0.00 1.00
Table A2 reports summary statistics on all control variables for the sub‐sample of women with available
HIV results. The DHS collects information on adult women aged 15 to 49, and the average age in our
sample is 28. Half (50%) of respondents completed secondary school, closely followed by a large share
(41%) of respondents who completed primary school only. Only 8% of respondents completed tertiary
school. The sample is also relatively evenly split among Catholic (39%) and Protestant (59%) respondents,
with virtually nobody listed as having no religion (1%). Lesotho remains a predominantly rural country,
with a growing share of surveyed women (32%) living in urban areas. Finally, respondents owned 1.48
durable goods, on average, based on an index from 0 to 7 indicating the number of assets owned among
electricity, radio, television, refrigerator, bicycle, motorcycle/scooter, and car/truck.
69
The multivariate regression analysis examining the association between HIV prevalence and occupation
type among women yielded some interesting results. First, the positive relationship between HIV status
and working in a migrant‐dominated occupation remains statistically significant even when controlling for
other factors such as age, marital status, education, urban residence, asset ownership, and religion. We
repeated the analysis for street vendors in order to test whether it is the informality of domestic service
that is making women working in this occupation particularly vulnerable, but the coefficient for street
vendors was not significant. As illustrated in the last two columns in Table A4 below, simply being a
migrant is correlated with a significantly higher likelihood of being HIV positive, with an effect double in
magnitude for labor migrants (5 vs. 13 percentage points increase). In addition, keeping the age constant,
the likelihood of HIV infection is significantly higher among women who are widowed, divorced or
separated.
Table A4. HIV Prevalence and Migrant Status for Women
Textile Domestic Street Labor
workers workers vendors Migrants migrants
VARIABLES
Textile worker 0.10**
(0.05)
Domestic worker 0.05*
(0.03)
Street vendor ‐0.00
(0.04)
Migrant 0.05***
(0.02)
Labor migrant 0.13***
(0.03)
Respondent's current age 0.08*** 0.08*** 0.08*** 0.08*** 0.08***
(0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01)
Age squared ‐0.00*** ‐0.00*** ‐0.00*** ‐0.00*** ‐0.00***
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00)
Widowed, divorced, or separated 0.26*** 0.26*** 0.26*** 0.26*** 0.25***
(0.03) (0.03) (0.03) (0.03) (0.03)
Primary education 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.05
(0.07) (0.07) (0.07) (0.07) (0.07)
Secondary education 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.04
(0.07) (0.07) (0.07) (0.07) (0.07)
Tertiary education ‐0.09 ‐0.09 ‐0.10 ‐0.10* ‐0.10*
(0.06) (0.06) (0.06) (0.06) (0.06)
Urban 0.07*** 0.08*** 0.08*** 0.08*** 0.08***
(0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02)
Durable goods ‐0.01 ‐0.01 ‐0.01 ‐0.01 ‐0.00
(0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01)
Catholic ‐0.00 ‐0.00 ‐0.00 ‐0.00 ‐0.00
70
(0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02)
No religion ‐0.14*** ‐0.14*** ‐0.14*** ‐0.14*** ‐0.14***
(0.05) (0.05) (0.05) (0.05) (0.05)
Observations 3,318 3,318 3,318 3,318 3,318
Standard errors in parentheses
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
71
Annex 4. Qualitative Analysis
Focus group discussions (FGDs) and in‐depth interviews were conducted in urban Maseru, Maputsoe, and
various rural communities throughout Lesotho between March 27 and April 4. The qualitative study team
consisted of one team leader with experience leading FGDs and two assistants with research experience.
All members were fluent in English and SeSotho. The team conducted a total of 10 FGDs with female
migrants (4), rural men (3), and rural women (3) and 17 in‐depth interviews with selected case studies (7),
their family households (5), and similar non‐migrant‐sending households (5) nearby. Group discussion
guidelines and interview guides were first designed in English and translated into SeSotho. All FGDs and
interviews were audio‐taped and subsequently translated and transcribed into English. Assistants took
general notes of communities visited, including quality of homes and demographics of individuals present,
which were discussed in detail during a wrap‐up team workshop.
Group discussion and interview transcripts were analyzed using codes based on general themes identified
by the team as core research objectives: determinants of migration, risks and benefits of female
migration, and household outcomes. Information from the transcripts was first coded and organized
according to these broader themes, then placed into more specific sub‐themes: shocks to family
household, school enrollment, marital status, sexual behaviors, etc. In addition to organizing transcript
information by subthemes, new themes that emerged in the transcripts were coded and analyzed as well.
This allowed dimensions of migrants’ and their families’ experiences, as well as rural Basotho’s general
perceptions of the experience, not anticipated prior to fieldwork to be incorporated into the analysis.
Information was also color coded according to source type: domestic worker (case study), domestic
worker (FGD), textile worker (case study), textile worker (FGD), case study household, non‐migrant
sending household, rural man, and rural woman. This allowed for findings to also be sorted by participant
type after the coding was complete, making it possible to see variations in perceptions and experiences
across groups.
72