On 29th Aug. 2025, Southasia Institute of Advanced Studies (SIAS) hosted an insightful session on “The Migrant Labor Question” delivered by Prof. Jeevan R. Sharma, Chair of South Asia and International Development at the University of Edinburgh. Dr. Gyanu Maskey, Researcher and Climate Lead at SIAS, opened the session with a brief overview of the seminar, its format, and the focus of Prof. Sharma’s presentation.
Prof. Sharma began his presentation by framing the Migrant Labor Question as a paradox which attempts to understand why Nepali men and women continue to pursue foreign employment despite widespread reports of exploitation, health risks, and even death. His research questions explored why migration persist under such exploitative conditions, how it shapes and reshapes household strategies and gender relations, and what its broader consequences are for social reproduction, health, and the political economy of Nepal.
Drawing on Michael Burawoy’s System of Migration, Social Reproduction Theory, and Culture of Migration (his own work), Prof. Sharma developed a conceptual framework for a holistic understanding of Nepali migration. By linking the structural exploitation of global labor markets, the hidden dynamics of household reproduction, and the cultural aspirations that drive individuals to leave, he demonstrated that migration from Nepal cannot be explained by economics alone, and it must be understood as a phenomenon that is structural, systemic, and deeply cultural.
Prof. Sharma’s presentation shed light on multiple dimensions of migrant life. He began by discussing the health paradox where migrants leave Nepal “healthy”, i.e., only after passing mandatory medical screenings, yet many return with chronic illnesses such as kidney or heart related conditions and diseases. He referred to the mortality data from the Foreign Employment Board that has recorded thousands of deaths in just over a decade, with many categorized vaguely as “natural causes,” highlighting both systemic neglect and lack of accountability.
He emphasized the Nepali worldview of Rin Bokne,referring to the weight of debtthat migrants carry as most journeys are financed through high-interest loans, compelling migrants to work overtime, often 14 to 16 hours a day, to repay debts and support their families. Such burdens have stressed Nepali migrants, leading to health deterioration, and repeated cycles of migration. He also highlighted the gendered aspects of migration referring to the tendency of men to avoid seeking medical care to protect their notions of masculinity and breadwinner of the family. Prof. Sharma also described the ambiguous role of the Nepali state. He stated that while politicians publicly claim migration as undesirable and call for domestic job creation, in practice, the state facilitates migration through the Foreign Employment Act, bilateral agreements, and recruitment infrastructure. The Nepali economy is heavily reliant on remittances (which provide stability to households and foreign exchange reserves), yet the state remains uneasy with the erosion of sovereignty and political legitimacy that large-scale migration implies.
Importantly, he highlighted how migrants’ rights are suspended once they leave. In theory, migrants are entitled to fundamental human rights, citizenship rights, and labor rights, however in practice, they struggle to claim any of these protections. Instead, they primary rely on their own safety nets such as family and/or informal social networks.
Finally, he reminded the audience that migration is not solely about suffering. Migrants also find dignity and joy in their ability to consume, send their children to good schools, or fulfill aspirations like buying gold or smartphones. Migration thus carries both, hardship and hope.
An engaging discussion followed post the presentation that brought diverse perspectives into focus. Kunja Shrestha, Researcher at SIAS, reflected on whether Nepal’s migration policies are a continuation of Gorkha and Rana-era practices, where the Government is primarily concerned with revenue generation, and how to reconcile Rahar (aspiration) with Badhyata (compulsion). Prof. Sharma agreed that state position and policies show strong historical continuities, and stressed that rahar coexists with badhyata rather than contradicting each other.
Indra Poudel, Secretary for Social Affairs in Parliament, raised concerns about why bilateral agreements on migration have not ensured a more sustainable mechanism. Prof. Sharma noted that the state and recruitment agencies remain complicit in exploitative systems, while political discomfort persists despite economic reliance on remittances.
Online participant Laxmi Dhungel highlighted the lack of research on migrant health, particularly kidney disease, while Dr. Sunita Sharma questioned the vague categorization of migrant deaths as “natural causes.” Prof. Sharma acknowledged these gaps, pointing to scarce systematic studies and administrative shortcomings in mortality reporting.
Dr. Dilli Poudel, Senior Research and Urban Lead at SIAS, emphasized the role of education in raising aspirations, pushing youth away from agriculture to which Prof. Sharma responded that migration has become the main path for fulfilling these educated expectations. Similarly, Dr. Gyanu Maskey further questioned on the precarity of migration and whether it discourages or perpetuates migration. Prof. Sharma argued that migration begins as a response to precarity at home but often leads to precarious conditions abroad, sustained by household strategies such as taking loans, or sending multiple family members overseas, and by a wider culture of migration that normalizes mobility as a livelihood option.
Finally, Dr. Anusiya Shrestha questioned whether framing migration as “social protection” legitimizes exploitation. Prof. Sharma replied that while outcomes are often precarious, many families continue to see migration as their only form of protection against vulnerability at home.
The seminar shed light on why labor migration continues to define Nepali society and economy. It is sustained by structural necessity, as global markets demand cheap labor and Nepal’s economy relies on remittances. It is fueled by cultural imagination, as young people aspire to mobility, consumption, and freedom. It is enabled by a state that benefits economically but remains politically uneasy. And it is lived as a human story of endurance, sacrifice, aspiration, and dignity.
As Prof. Sharma concluded, migration will likely remain central to Nepal’s future as long as domestic opportunities remain scarce and global labor markets hungry for inexpensive workers. The challenge lies not only in reducing exploitation but also in understanding and addressing the deeper aspirations that drive migration.