I was invited to speak at a half-day seminar for the officers-trainees of the Royal Institute of Management in Thimphu on the topic of Bhutan becoming a remittance economy. I offered to provide some sociological perspectives to explain why the exodus is happening in the first place – based on studies and experiences from other countries.
My qualification to speak on the topic stems from my PhD dissertation, which was an interdisciplinary reasearch that combined communication, technology, sociology, literary theory and Buddhism, and explored the question of identity, community, and spirituality.
Migration is complex
First of all, is this Australia exodus a migration or an emigration? Is it economic migration or brain drain? These differences need to be clear because each phenomenon requires different theoretical frameworks to make sense of, and diverse solutions to address them – if they are recognised as a problem at all.
Second, migration is multifaceted, and calls for a multidisciplinary approach to fully comprehend it. Sporadic, ad-hoc or piece meal plans won’t help address it. For example, to think that by simply raising the income we would put a stop to this exodus is a fallacy. Studies have shown that migration rate from developing countries increases as the GDP per capita rises, because of the enhanced capacity to migrate. The rate of migration starts declining only at around USD 10,000. Bhutan’s current GDP per capita stands at around 3,200. Out-migration, thus, will only gain steam for a decade or so. Unless other measures are implemented, the upward trend will continue till 2038. This year has been arrived using the Rule of 70 from economics.
Third, on the question on why people leave, the neoclassical theory of migration (aka the functionalist paradigm), which characterises migration as “seeking greener pasture”, and which is the dominant narrative in our government, needs to consider other broader perspectives such as the aspirations-capabilities framework.
Aspirations-capabilities framework views migration as complex, non-linear and, in many cases, counter-intuitive – and as shaped by macro-structural changes such as urbanisation, economic policies and system of governance. If Bhutanese are opportunists then why is it that every student from my generation returned to serve the country?
This Aspirations-Capabilities theoretical approach allows us to investigate migration as a constitutive part of the broader social process. In a pilot study that I conducted in 2019 among professionals who moved to Australia (I couldn’t do the actual research because of Covid), preliminary findings showed that money was not the main factor. Sense of self-worth and belonging, followed by perceived lack of negative liberty, preceded money, which in turn was viewed as the counterbalance to the two main factors. Statements such as, “If I have money, I can do anything”, or “I can now repay my parents”, or “I feel so suffocated there”, or “It doesn’t matter whether I am in Bhutan or outside” all index to these findings.
Furthermore, Covid-19 and subsequent lockdowns forced many people to reflect on their life’s meanings and purpose. Is this life worth it? What if I died tomorrow? I have not even bought a mobile phone for my parents. The exodus gained momentum thereafter. The monthly departure rate is four times the pre-covid level.
Migration thus occurs as a result of, and which could later drive, deeper psychosocial changes in the country. To oversimplify it as chasing the dollar tree, or to underestimate it as not-a-major-issue, would be a mistake with long-term consequences.
So, what are the solutions? Well, honestly, we all know what to do. It is just that we don’t do what needs to be done. Ego, arrogance, and indifference seem to stand between us and our duty. And yet, complex and multifaceted as it is, it will only be through multiple agencies, including the populace, working together that a lasting solution will be found.
Here are a few ideas, nonetheless. (I could not mention the third one at the seminar because of time)
Public service that facilitates
Like it or not, bureaucracy occupies the centre stage in Bhutan. While it has done well to pull the country out of poverty and underdevelopment, it has not kept up to the changing times and needs. Every little service that we seek requires multiple visits to a government office, or to multiple government offices. This has not only stunted the growth of other sectors but it has stalled itself with a cobweb of rules.
Worse still, there is a perception among the general public that if you know someone you can get anything done. Otherwise you won’t get the service at all. This is terrible, because perceptions may be just that – perceptions, but they bite deeper into the public psyche than the actual reality. In psychological terms perceptions penetrate into the limbic brain. Facts and logic remains in the frontal neocortex. But the thing is, people make serious decisions in life in the limbic system.
One former senior government official also told me that rules are designed to protect the public officials and not the public, or the public interest. The need to submit heaps of documents with undertakings signed on legal stamps for a regular service to the same office, over and over again, is a perfect example. On the other hand, in my six years in Macau I don’t remember submitting anything other than showing my passport to avail the services, including when doing my visa and the stay permit.
Our old ways of doing things need to change. Otherwise our people, the youth especially, don’t have the patience. They will walk away. Or worse still, do nothing. There is a new term in sociology to refer to this phenomenon. It is called quiet-quitting.
Our Parliament may like to do a thorough review of all the rules and regulations of each government agency. As the legislative arm, it falls on them. Regulatory overreach slows down or blocks everything. There is no use of passing a perfect legislation if the sub-legislations drawn by the bureaucrats do not comply with the original intent of the law. Repeal those rules that do not conform, or are outdated – some are even unconstitutional – and those that hinder the movements of goods, people and services, or curtail ideas and innovations.
Every state institution has to chip in. Only then will it set the right conditions for our country to achieve its full potential. If we have policies and public services that facilitate, ideas and entrepreneurship will flourish, employment will be created, taxes will pour in, wages and salaries will increase, everyone will be better off. As things stand, there are no winners. Everyone is losing.
Keeping the emotional connections
To quote Tom Friedman, the world is flat. Australia and Canada are far but for me physical distance is not an issue. What bothers me is the emotional distance that may develop with our people there. It would be a disaster if that happens. And yet, from my own experience, it just takes one generation to disconnect. My wife is Japanese. My daughters don’t know any of their Japanese cousins. Not even one. It is that easy for people to disappear in your life.
Individuals and families must make extra efforts to maintain the connections. Family gatherings for annual rituals can be shared through social media platforms to create a virtual space for blessings. Caretakers and lamas can be reached on WhatsApp and WeChat. Influential Bhutanese must engage in conversations with young Bhutanese living abroad. These days it is not too difficult, thanks to technology. Everyone is just one click away.
Coming back to legislative or executive overreach, we need to amend some provisions of our existing laws, lest we lose some of our people forever. A simple example: the postal ballot facility is not available to Bhutanese outside the bureaucracy. So says our electoral law. We should recognise that it is also in the interest of the State that subject engage in civic duties. If this provision of the law persists, and is not amended, a large section of the population cannot vote. That would disengage the people who will then lose touch with the affairs of the country. There are other provisions and practices in other line ministries that are becoming a wedge between the people and the State. This is not good for a country with less than a million.
Emotional connections can also be maintained if, for example, physical connections are improved. What about direct air connectivity to Australia, Kuwait and Japan? We can negotiate more Fifth Freedom Agreements with countries like Thailand, Singapore, and India right now. With our own scheduled flights, there will be frequent movements of people, which could even lead to a circular migration, and to investments and capital inflow from our own citizens, and not just the monthly doles.
The opening of our embassy was a great move. More such initiatives should be brainstormed. Otherwise migration will become emigration.
Liberalising some key sectors
Some of the world’s biggest companies are in the health, education, energy and entertainment. In Bhutan they remain fully under government control or as public services with no competition whatsoever. While this arrangement was necessary in the past, it does not serve the present circumstances or the future needs. We have to open up. We can not build an economy by retailing Dhaka garments or Uniqlo jackets. We should let our people dream big.
These four sectors are also where we can compete globally. Any economist will tell you that a country’s economy is either based on manufacturing or services – or both. Being surrounded by three of the world’s biggest manufacturing giants – India, China and Bangladesh, Bhutan can only develop its service and knowledge industry as its core economic base. Even hydropower is questionable now.
We can start small, like dishing out private dental services, and allowing private schools to try new curriculum. Our music and movies should be spared from government certifications and censor boards, and instead go for peer-reviews. There is no good rationale behind strangulating Bhutanese content creators while allowing the public to access billions of YouTube channels and Peppa Pig.
Coming back to health service, the wealthy and the affluent, plus those who value their health but not necessarily rich, are jetting off to Thailand and India. Just one hospital – Phyathai, in Bangkok treats over 3,000 Bhutanese out-patients and over 100 in-patients in a year. Read these numbers again. That’s just one hospital. And there are people I know who go to Bumrungrad, Samitavej, and Bangkok Hospital. And, what about patients going on their own to Delhi, Kolkata, Vellore and Siliguri?
All in all, around a billion ngultrums of private money is flowing out annually and that too in foreign currency. Since people are spending money anyway, why don’t we open up our minds, and the health sector, and make them spend that money in our own country? Similarly other areas of growth should be explored instead of slamming every idea as mitub (not allowed).
If our entrepreneurship is limited to importing cars, Korean cosmetics and consumer goods, then I am afraid that the temporary economic migration will become a permanent one-way brain drain.
In conclusion
These days I dread reading government circulars. Seriously. I often ask myself, where is that can-do mentality we once had? Where is the excitement to do, to serve and to build? TV, telephones, Internet, air transport, we got them. It wasn’t easy. Not for our King to find the money, and not for us the engineers to build them. But we did it. Our parents were even better. They scratched the mountains with bare hands to build the first highways. Now everything is about bans and rules and no-budget. Where and when did we lose our optimism, the grit and our sense of humour?
Our bureaucrats need to relax, smile, and develop more confidence. Knee-jerk reactions, myopic policies, narrow and subjective interpretations of rules will wear out the population. Show some strength and give space for people to breathe, make mistakes, cry, learn, laugh and move ahead.
Covid has drained our foreign reserve, and the state coffers. It has also revealed our strengths and weaknesses. Like many countries ours is also at a crossroad. Which road do we take? The familiar and the comfortable one, or the one that is unknown and uncharted?
The choice is not easy but we have to roll the dice. And give a go.
#bhutan #migration #thimphu #seminar #rim
NB:
I also invited the young officer-trainees not to look at us, the oldies, only for inspirations, or to point the fingers, but to roll their sleeves, and get to work immediately. And that from next year, today, they will be sitting in the board rooms, and their opinions will be sought. I shared that in 1999 after lots of back-and-forth in the government, I was cornered and the final decision to bring television into the country rested on my yes-or-no. It was 1999. And I was only 31. Just 5 years into my service.






















































