The Role of Rural Industry
Differences between rural and urban industry may explain the recent growth of
rural-to-rural migration and commuting. Rural industry has a larger private sector and
private firms are less influenced by the policies of local leaders, which makes them less
bound by community norms that might favor local workers over incoming labor (Jin and
Qian, 1998). Light industry also is more commonly found in rural rather than urban
areas, and these enterprises have a high demand for inexpensive, low-skilled labor (Chen
and Rozelle, 2000).
Our survey results show that rural-to-rural commuters and migrants have become
a vital source of labor for rural industry, both private and collective. Rural industry has a
far higher percentage of workers from other villages in 1995 than it did in 1988 (table 3).
Between 1988 and 1995, the proportion of workers from other villages rose from 40 to 62
percent in private enterprises and from 21 to 46 percent in collective enterprises (table 3,
rows 2+3 and 5+6, columns 1 and 4). Even though commuters and migrants comprise a
higher percentage of the workers in private enterprises, collectives also have come to rely
heavily on incoming labor.
While collectives now hire a significant number of incoming workers, the
majority of rural-to-rural commuters and particularly migrants still work in private rather
than collective enterprises. In 1988, only 38 percent of village residents with off-farm
industrial employment were employed by private enterprises (table 4, row 1, column 1).
In contrast, 65 percent of rural-to-rural migrants and 56 percent of commuters worked in
private enterprises in 1988 (table 4, column 3). The rise of the importance of the private
sector is consistent with the observations made by Oi (1998). The discrepancy is
15