THE STATUS OF MICRONESIAN MIGRANTS IN 1998
A Study of the Impact of the Compacts of
Free Association
based of Censuses of Micronesian Migrants
to Hawaii, Guam and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands
1. INTRODUCTION
The Compact of Free
Association between the United States and the Federated States of Micronesia
(FSM) and the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) went into effect in late
1986, and with the Republic of Palau (ROP) in late 1994. These three countries together make up what
is frequently called the Freely Associated States (FAS). The Compact, as a joint
congressional-executive agreement, charts relationships between the United
States and the three island nations.
Under the Compact, the United States funds the FSM, the RMI, and the ROP
for a range of development programs, the use of United States currency,
immigration privileges, federal processing of applications for air services,
United States transportation of mail, and other benefits. In exchange, each Pacific nation guarantees
the United States exclusive use of its land for military purposes.
Several key provisions
in the Compact between the FSM, RMI, ROP and the United States concern its
impact on United States areas,
discussed in Section 104(e) as follows:
(1)
Statement of
Congressional Intent.
In approving the Compact, it is not the
intent of the Congress to cause adverse consequences for the United States
territories and commonwealths or the State of Hawaii.
(2)
Annual Reports and
Recommendations. One year after the date of enactment of this
joint resolution and at one year intervals thereafter, the President shall
report to the Congress with respect to the impact of the Compact on the United
States territories and commonwealths and on the State of Hawaii. Reports submitted because of this paragraph
will identify adverse consequences resulting from the Compact and shall make
recommendations for corrective action to eliminate those consequences. The reports shall pay particular attention
to matters relating to trade, taxation, immigration, labor laws, minimum wages,
social systems and infrastructure, and environmental regulation. With regard to
immigration, the reports shall include statistics concerning the number of
persons availing themselves of the rights described in section 141(a) of the Compact
during the year covered by each report.[1] With regard to trade, the reports shall
include an analysis of the impact on the economy of American Samoa resulting
from imports of canned tuna into the United States from the Federated States of
Micronesia and the Marshall Islands.
(3)
Other Views. In preparing the reports, the President
shall request the views of the Government of the State of Hawaii, and the
governments of each of the United States territories and commonwealths, the
Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, and shall
transmit the full text of these views to the Congress as part of reports.
(4)
Commitment if Congress
to Redress Adverse Consequences. The
Congress hereby declares that, if any adverse consequences to United States
territories and commonwealths or the State of Hawaii result from implementation
of the Compact of Free Association, the Congress will act sympathetically and
expeditiously to redress those adverse consequences.
(5)
Definition of U.S.
Territories and Commonwealths. As used in this subsection, the term
"United States territories and commonwealths" means the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth
of the Northern Mariana Islands.[2]
(6)
Impact Costs. There are hereby
authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years beginning after September 30,
1985, such sums as may be necessary to cover the costs, if any, incurred by the
State of Hawaii, the territories of Guam and American Samoa, and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands resulting from any increased
demands placed on educational and social services by immigrants from the
Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia.
CHAPTER
2
PURPOSE OF STUDY AND FREELY ASSOCIATED STATES POPULATIONS
This study focuses on
the numbers and social, economic, housing and expenditure characteristics of
Micronesian migrants to Hawaii, Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands (CNMI). It will not, however,
look specifically at the impact that the Compact of Free Association has
had on any of the receiving areas. This
impact can be either positive (e.g. by increasing tax revenues) or negative
(e.g. by increasing the demands on public services). This report will not
assess financial impact – the positive, negative or net impact – of Compact
implementation.
The 1997 Censuses of
Micronesian Migrants to Hawaii and Guam, and 1998 Census of Micronesian
Migrants on Saipan were developed to measure both:
·
the
negative impact of the Micronesian Migrants (as noted in the parts of the
Compact shown earlier), but also
·
the
positive impact of the migrants in terms of salaries earned, purchases made,
and taxes paid.
THE
FREELY ASSOCIATED STATES
The Federated States of
Micronesia (FSM) and the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) implemented
their Compacts of Free Association with
the United States in November 1986. The
Republic of Palau implemented its Compact in October 1994. Historically, these island groups were
sovereign entities until they came under the control of Spain from the 1500s to
1898, Germany from 1899 to 1914, Japan from 1914 to 1945 and finally under an
American Administration from about 1945.. After World War II B and Japan’s successful
bombing of Pearl Harbor from the Marshall Islands B the Trust Territory of
the Pacific Islands (TTPI) was created
by the United States as a Astrategic@ trust territory and administered for the United
Nations from 1947 until 1986. The TTPI consisted of what became the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of Palau, the
Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The
following is a brief summary of population size and migration trends of the
RMI, ROP and FSM.
Marshall Islands. The Republic of
the Marshall Islands is made up of two parallel chains of islands and has more
than 50,000 persons. The Marshall Islands implemented its Compact at the same
time as the FSM, but the pace of out-migration from the RMI has been much
slower than that from the FSM. Most of the Marshall Islands migration, in fact,
has been to Hawaii and the U.S. mainland rather than to Guam and the CNMI. Part of the reason for this flow is
geographic C transportation is better to Hawaii than to Guam C and part is
almost certainly economic. Based on the
1990 Census, at least 350 Marshallese were living in Hawaii while only 88 were
living on Guam and 103 in the CNMI. The 1992 Office of Insular Affairs Survey
of Micronesian migrants to Guam recorded 150 Marshallese. The 1993 Survey of
Micronesian migrants to CNMI recorded 177 Marshallese, while the 1995 Census of
the CNMI reported 130 individuals born in the Marshall Islands. Thus, Marshall Islands emigration west to Guam
and the CNMI is relatively small (unfortunately, differences in reporting
preclude stating that the 1995 data show a reverse trend). Most of the Marshall Islands migration is to
Hawaii, with about 2,500 present there in 1997.
Palau. Palau is located southwest of Guam and has a population of about 18,000 people, with approximately 1/3rd foreign-born. Compared to the Marshall Islands, Palauan out-migration to Guam, CNMI and Hawaii has been more significant. Both Guam and CNMI have attracted Palauan migrants since the 1950s, during the early TTPI administration. Many Palauans came to Guam to study at the University of Guam, some enlisted in the U.S. Armed Forces (one was killed in Vietnam during the war) and returned to Guam to live and work, and others have simply migrated to work, even when doing so was illegal. Many Palauans went to Saipan to work in the TTPI government, and many of these stayed in Saipan after the Commonwealth was formed in 1986; many Palauans have responsible positions in the CNMI government. The 1990 Census recorded 1,233 Palau-born on Guam and 1,407 in the CNMI. In 1995, the CNMI Census recorded 1,594 Palau-born, while the concurrent survey of Palauans on Guam reported 1,089; however, latter figure is likely an undercount. Of the three Freely Associated States groups, Palauans have had the longest history of residence in Hawaii and Guam.
Federated States of Micronesia. Four states C Chuuk, Kosrae,
Pohnpei, and Yap C constitute the
Federated States of Micronesia. Kosrae
is composed of a main island, a smaller island (Lelu), and a number of even
smaller islands. Pohnpei and Yap both
have main islands and inhabited and uninhabited atolls, creating easy
geographic differentiation. Chuuk,
because it is the most populated state, and because of its history, is divided
into five geographic regions C Northern and
Southern Namoneas, and Faichuk in the Chuuk Lagoon, the Mortlock Islands to the
south, and Oksoritod to the north and west.
Oksoritod itself is made up of the Western Islands (Pulusuk, Puluwat,
Pulap, and Tamatam), Namonuito, and the Hall Islands. Historical census and survey data for the FSM appear in Chapter
13.
CHAPTER 3
WHO IS A POST-COMPACT MIGRANT
One of the problems in
studying the impact of the Compacts of Free Association on Guam, the CNMI, and
the State of Hawaii – the receiving areas – is defining who, exactly, is a
“Compact migrant”. Many Micronesians[3]
came to these receiving areas before implementation of the Compacts, either on
visas or through other arrangements, whether legal or not. During the early years of the TTPI Administration,
very few migrants could afford to emigrate. The first migrants were students,
who used a combination of TTPI scholarship and U.S. Federal scholarships and
grants (particularly the Pell Grant, when it was implemented) to attend
schools, first in Guam and Hawaii, and later on the U.S. mainland.
During the Carter
Administration, in the late 1970s, the TTPI experienced a flood of emigrants
for schooling, because the Pell Grant’s $2,000 funding at that time was enough
to get the potential student to a school, even if the migrant was more
“potential” than “student”. In fact, so many students or ex-students were in
the States at the time of the 1980 TTPI Census that the data were artificially
skewed. In the early 1980s, at a time when jobs were still plentiful, many of
these migrants returned to the TTPI after having their adventures (see, for
example, Levin 1976), taking over the government jobs that were being vacated
throughout the TTPI by expatriate contract workers and Peace Corps volunteers.
Some of these students,
whether they finished their studies or not, however, remained in Guam, Hawaii
and the U.S mainland. They married and
started families, got entry level jobs which eventually led to higher positions,
and generally acted like the typical U.S. immigrants they were enrolling their
children in schools, renting or buying houses or apartments, and paying
taxes. These immigrants, who were born
in the TTPI and migrated before the Compacts of Free Association were
implemented, are considered “pre-Compact” migrants. As we discuss below, it is not clear whether the U.S. Federal
Government must act “sympathetically” to whatever impact these individuals have
on social and educational services. Further, many of these early migrants now
have families, with either
Micronesian or non-Micronesian
spouses, and it is not clear whether the children of these migrants, many of
whom have never been in Micronesia, are to be considered part of the impact of
the Compacts of Free Association.
Also, before the Compacts
of Free Association were implemented, a few Micronesians joined the U.S.
military as a means of entry into the United States, sometimes with a wink from
the recruiters, sometimes with their collusion. This means of entry to the
United States went from a trickle to a minor cascade after Compact
implementation. Like the American Samoans before them, the modern military is
attractive because of the minor chance of death or injury and the opportunity
to have free room and board and medical attention, to learn a skill, and to
earn many times the money which would be available for a similar job in the
sending country. Those who do not
become career military apparently can retire to the United States. If they
initially came before Compact implementation, they are considered “pre-Compact”
migrants and, if they came after implementation, they are considered
“post-Compact” migrants.
The TTPI itself ended up
contributing a type of migrant. As the TTPI wound down in the late 1970s and
early 1980s, many Micronesians from Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia,
and the Marshall Islands who were working in Saipan for the TTPI government
returned to their home areas to work.
The population of Kosrae, for example, went from about 3,000 to over
5,000 between 1973 and 1980, and while fertility was high, return
migration also contributed to the
population increase. Other TTPI employees, though, had either married Saipanese
or chose to remain in Saipan, where they were relatively welcomed (particularly
compared to the reception of Micronesian government workers on Guam, where they
were not welcomed), where they had houses, better schools, and better health
facilities. Many of these people also would be considered “pre-Compact”
migrants because they came long before the Compact was implemented, and either
never returned to their home areas, or only returned for a short time before
returning to Saipan to live and work.
The children of these persons, also, might never have lived in the TTPI
areas, so it is not clear, even with both parents having been born in the TTPI,
whether or not these persons should be considered impact persons.
Many other persons
originally went to Guam, the CNMI or the United States, either as students or
tourists, and overstayed their visas and resided illegally in their respective
receiving areas. A few cases were caught by the U.S. Immigration and
Naturalization officials and deported but, because of their very small numbers,
in most cases they were ignored. When the Compacts of Free Association were
implemented, these people suddenly became “legal” and, because their
immigration status had been regularized, they no longer had to accept low-wage
jobs from employers willing to risk legal sanctions and hire illegal aliens.
When the Palau Compact was implemented in 1994, many
Palauan students were paying out-of-state tuition, long after the FSM and
Marshall Islands students were able to pay in-state tuition. These students now were able to reduce their
hours working (often at quasi-legal jobs), go to school full-time, finish their
schooling and either return to Palau or continue working in the United States.
These persons would probably be considered “pre-Compact” migrants. Once again,
it is not clear whether the children of these migrants, many of whom have a
non-Micronesian mother or father and have been outside of the Guam, the CNMI or
the United States, should be considered “Compact” persons or not.
3.1 DEFINING
“PRE-COMPACT” AND “POST-COMPACT” MIGRANTS
In order to assess the
impact of the Compacts of Free Association, it is first necessary to define who
is a “pre-Compact” and “post-Compact” migrant. It is possible, as the
Government of Guam does in its impact report, to define any person born in
Palau, the FSM or the Marshall Islands – whether pre- or post-Compact – as
having an impact on social and educational services. It is also possible to
adopt the Compact reporting requirements and to look solely at the burden
caused by Compact implementation, which means considering only post-Compact
migrants. As discussed earlier, this report does not assess the impact of
Compact implementation. However, in order to facilitate the use of the
information provided in this report, both
pre- and post-Compact migrants are included in the analysis. Also, because the
1997/8 Censuses of Micronesian Migrants enumerated households with at least one
Micronesian migrant, the data includes the children of Micronesian migrants as
well as their non-Micronesian relatives. The members of these households are
classified in one of the four following ways:
1.
Post-Compact Migrants are those who migrated
after implementation of the Compacts of Free Association (after 1986 for
persons born in the Federated States of Micronesia or the Republic of the
Marshall Islands and after 1994 for persons born in the Republic of Palau).
2.
Children of Micronesian
Migrants
are those children who were not born in one of the Freely Associated States and
who have at least one Micronesian-born parent. All children of Micronesian
migrants are included in this category, whether or not their parent(s) came
before or after the implementation of the Compacts of Free Association, because
it is often difficult to determine their pre- and post-Compact “status.” For example, if a child has at least one Micronesian
parent present in the household, a link could be made and the information about
pre- or post-Compact migration could be determined. However, if a child has two
Micronesian parents present who migrated at different times, or if neither
parent was present, ambiguities occurred. For this study, it was decided to
include all U.S. or territory-born children of Freely Associated States
migrants in the category of children of Micronesian migrants
3.
Pre-Compact migrants are those who migrated
to Guam, the CNMI, or Hawaii before implementation of the Compacts of Free
Association (before 1987 for persons born in the FSM or the Marshall Islands or
before 1995 for persons born in Palau).
4.
Other persons are all non-Micronesian
persons living in a household with at least one Micronesian migrant. In most
cases, these were non-Micronesian spouses and persons related to those
spouses. In some cases, particularly in
the CNMI, maids or other household workers might also be included.
Clear definitions of
these migrant categories are essential to determine the impact of the
population on the receiving areas. This is because the number of “Compact” persons depends on how they are
classified. If we look at all persons in households with at least one
Micronesian migrant, the total “impact population” would be greater and its
characteristics would be different than if we looked only at the migrants
themselves. The same is true if we looked only at the post-Compact migrants; we
would have a different population with a different impact. It is not the
purpose of this exercise to state which set of persons is the “true” impact
population. The wording of the Compact
law is sufficiently obscure that different populations can be selected for
analysis, depending on the actual criteria selected.
Because of the Office of
Insular Affairs, Department of the Interior’s reading of the Compact law, this
report will focus on two groups: 1) the pre-Compact migrants and 2) the
post-Compact migrants and all the children born of Freely Associated States
immigrants not born in Micronesia. In order to assess the maximum impact that
immigration initiated by Compact implementation is having on Guam, the CNMI and
Hawaii, all non-migrant children are included in the post-Compact category,
regardless of the when their parents actually arrived in the receiving areas.
It is important to
remember that when households had members of more than one Freely Associated
States, the household was placed in one or the other groups, usually by the
enumerator who got to the house first (but finally determined by the Census
coordinator). This situation did not
happen very often and should not have appreciably affected the results. Hence,
in a few cases, when a Chuukese married a Palauan, for example, the individuals
would appear in their appropriate country statistics, but the household
characteristics would only appear for one or the other.
The distribution of
migrants among the pre-migrant, post-migrant, children of migrants and other
persons categories varies among both receiving states and among the Palauan,
FSM and RMI migrant communities. Table 3.1 shows the number of persons
enumerated by the census of Micronesian migrants in Hawaii. As can be seen, the
census collected information on 6,744 persons.
Almost 5,000 were post-Compact migrants, 700 were children of migrants,
and 600 were pre-Compact migrants.
About 3,800 persons were enumerated as FSM migrants and their families,
2,500 Marshallese, and about 500 Palauans.
Table 3.2 shows that of
the 6,744 persons enumerated in Hawaii, 82 percent were post-Compact migrants
or their children (71 percent were post-Compact migrants only and 10 percent
were their non-Micronesian born children), 9 percent were pre-Compact migrants
and 9 percent were other persons. Based on the largest groups of persons in the
household, 486 (7 percent) were Palauan, 3,786 (56 percent) were associated
with the Federated States of Micronesia, and 2,472 (37 percent) were associated
with the Marshall Islands.
Table 3.3 shows the
number of persons enumerated by the census of Micronesian migrants in Guam. The
census collected information on 8,338 persons. The 5,446 post-Compact migrants constituted the largest group,
but Guam also had 730 pre-Compact migrants and more than 1,100 children. The FSM migrants were the overwhelming
majority, with very few enumerated from the Marshall Islands.
Table 3.4 shows that of
the 8,338 persons, 79 percent were
post-Compact migrants or their children (65 percent were post-Compact migrants
only and 13 percent were their non-Micronesian born children), 9 percent were
pre-Compact migrants and 13 percent were other persons. Based on the largest
groups of persons in the household, 1,257 (15 percent) were Palauan, 6,949 (83
percent) were associated with the Federated States of Micronesia, and 132 (2
percent) were associated with the Marshall Islands.
Table 3.5 shows the
number of persons enumerated by the census of Micronesian migrants in the CNMI.
The census collected information on 4,469 persons. About 1,200 were post-Compact migrants, 600 were children of
migrants, and another 1,200 were pre-Compact migrants. The other persons were not migrants or their
children, but could have been third or later generation persons of Micronesian
migrant ethnicities. For example, the
children of children of Palauan migrants would not be included because neither
they nor their parents were born outside of the CNMI.
Of the 4,500 migrants to
the CNMI, 39 percent were post-Compact migrants or their children (27 percent
were post-Compact migrants only and 13 percent were their non-Micronesian born
children), 27 percent were pre-Compact migrants and 34 percent were other
persons (Table 3.6). The percentage of post-Compact migrants in the CNMI is
smaller than either Guam or Hawaii, which can be partially explained by the
later implementation of the Compact in Palau. Based on the largest groups of
persons in the household, 2,154 (48 percent) were from Palau, 2,199 (49
percent) were associated with the Federated States of Micronesia, and 116 (3
percent) were associated with the Marshall Islands. Clearly, Marshallese migrants were much more likely to go to
Hawaii than either Guam or the CNMI, probably because Hawaii is closer to the
Marshalls and has more affordable housing, food and other amenities.
Table 3.7 shows the
number of persons enumerated by all three censuses. In total, the censuses
collected information on 19,551 persons.
Of these, more than 11,000 were post-Compact migrants, and another 2,400
were the children of migrants. About
2,500 were pre-Compact migrants. And,
about 3,000 other persons lived in these households. The FSM enumerated population was about 2/3rd of the
total for the three areas. RMI also contributed substantially to the
post-Compact component, while most of the Palauans, partly because of the later
Compact implementation date, were mostly pre-Compact migrants.
Of the 20,000 persons in
the three censuses, 71 percent were post-Compact migrants or their children (59
percent were post-Compact migrants only and 12 percent were their
non-Micronesian born children), 13 percent were pre-Compact migrants and 16
percent were other persons (Table 3.8). Approximately 20 percent were from
Palau, 66 percent were associated with the Federated States of Micronesia, and
14 percent were associated with the Marshall Islands.
We will look at just two
variables using the various selection criteria to get a better idea of how the
migrant categories might influence the extent of the impact of the immigration
resulting for the implementation of the Compacts of Free Association.
Table 3.9 shows the
labor force participation rates of the 4,715 persons over the age of 16 in the
labor force for Freely Associated States in Hawaii. The total labor force participation rates was 47 percent.,
meaning that less than half of the population 16 years and over was in the
labor force (whether employed or unemployed). However, 58 percent of the
Palauan adults were in the labor force, compared to 54 percent of the FSM associated
persons but only 33 percent of the Marshallese.
More than 58
percent of the pre-Compact migrants were in the labor force (60 percent of the
Palauans, 66 percent of the FSM migrants, and 46 percent of the Marshallese),
compared to only 45 percent of the post-Compact migrants. This latter figure is not completely
surprising since many of the migrants arrived in Hawaii only shortly before the
census. These persons may not have had
time to get a job, or, like many persons just joining the work force, may have
been moving in and out of entry level jobs until they established themselves as
workers. About 48 percent of the
Palauans, 53 percent of the FSM migrants, and 30 percent of the Marshallese
post-Compact migrants were in the labor force.
It is also important to
note that about 55 percent of the “others” in Freely Associated States
households were in the labor force, significantly higher than the Freely
Associated States migrants themselves, indicating that marriage to outsiders
boosts labor force participation within the household. Almost 2/3rds of the “others” in Palau
associated households were in the labor force compared to about half of those
in FSM and Marshall Islands households.
So, the rates of labor
force participation for the Freely Associated States migrants change depending
on the criteria for selection for inclusion in the “impact” population.
A second variable – per
capita income – further illustrates the differences caused, depending on
selection criteria. Per capita income is calculated by dividing all of the
income obtained by a population in a year by the number of people in that
population. Income from all sources C earnings, own business
income, interest and dividends, welfare, etc C is usually included in the per capita
income determination, as it is here.
The per capita income for 1996 for the post-Compact migrants and their
children in the 1997 Hawaii Census of Micronesian Migrant was $3,759 (Table 3.10). The per capita income
for post-Compact Palau associated migrants was $4,688, more than that of either
FSM ($4,213) or the Marshall Islands ($2,977).
Pre-Compact migrants presented a much more positive impact. They had per capita incomes of about $13,622
-- $15,372 for Palauans, $17,629 for FSM, but only $6,770 for RMI.
The Marshallese had the
lowest per capita incomes across the board, but even here, the pre-Compact per
capita income of almost $7,000 was more than double that of the post-Compact
migrants showing that length of residence has a positive impact on income
levels (as represented by the per capita numbers). Once again, the per capita
income levels change rather dramatically depending on what criteria are used to
determine the “impact” population.
We can summarize the
distribution of pre-Compact and post-Compact migrants and their children for
the three sending areas and three receiving areas, as in Table 3.11. As noted before, of the 16,346 migrants and
children, 7,280 were in Guam in 1997, 6,119 were in Hawaii in 1997, and 2,947
were in the CNMI in 1998. Almost 12,000 of the migrants were from the FSM,
while about 2,500 came from the Marshall Islands, and less than 2,000 from
Palau (which was still about 1/6th of the Palau-born population in
Palau itself.)
Of the 16,000
migrants and children, almost 14,000 (85 percent) were post-Compact migrants
and their children, and about 2,500 (15 percent) were pre-Compact
migrants. This last group was heavily
influenced by the late implementation of the Palau Compact – 1,500 (more than
60 percent) of the 2,500 were Palau born.
The influence of the
post-Compact migrants is also seen in the distribution of the three sending and
receiving areas’ migrants attending public elementary and high school. More than 3,184 migrants (and children) were
enrolled in public school in the three areas in 1997/8 – 1,360 in Guam in 1997,
1,192 in Hawaii in 1997, and 632 in the CNMI in 1998 (Table 3.12). Of these, 2,250 (more than 70 percent) were
from the FSM, 705 (22 percent) from the Marshalls, and 229 (about 7 percent)
were from Palau. As before, the
majority of the pre-Compact migrants (131 of the 212 – or 62 percent) were Palauan,
and most of those were in the CNMI.
These tables show that
the numbers of migrants are small in international terms, and even compared to
the size of the receiving populations of Guam, Hawaii, and the CNMI. But, the migrant populations are very large
as a segment of the sending populations.
Finally, Table 3.13
shows another aspect of the difficulties in determining exactly who should and
who should not be included in an analysis of the impact of the Micronesian
migrants. Only migrants and their
children are included; non-FAS spouses and other relatives are excluded. Of the 16,346 first and second generation
migrants in the three areas, more than 2,000 were actually born in the
receiving areas. Most of these
children, of course, had parents born in the FSM, but about 300 had parents
born in the Marshalls and about 50 had parents born in Palau. Hence, 87 percent of the migrants and
children were born outside the receiving area – 85 percent of the FSM migrants
were born outside of the receiving areas compared to 89 percent of the Marshallese
and 97 percent of the Palauans.
The data show a snapshot
of the population at the time of enumeration.
The migration flows show generally increased migration in the two-year
periods in the 1990s. Of course, we
show only net migration. It is
important to remember in assessing flows that some return migration also occurs
over time, so it is dangerous to use estimates from continuing sources. Tax data, for example, will include persons
who were in an area some time during the year – some people might be in the
area at the beginning of the year and leave, others might come to the area
partway through. Depending on when the
census is taken, we might count both of these individuals, only one of them, or
neither. The snapshot approach is not
perfect, but it does allow us to see a kind of change over time by taking a
series of snapshots, and then assessing what we have.
In this paper we use
additional sources, besides the series of Office of Insular Affairs Surveys:
The United States collected the 1990 Decennial Census on Guam and in the
CNMI. These data sets are used here, in
both published and unpublished form, to provide insight into the numbers and
characteristics of pre- and post-Compact Micronesian migrants. During the early 1990s, the Office of
Insular Affairs, Department of the Interior, funded two surveys: the first, a
1992 census of Micronesians residing on Guam, was supervised by Donald
Rubinstein, an anthropologist at the University of Guam. The second funded survey was a 1993 survey
of Micronesians (from the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands,
and Palau) residing in the CNMI. Data
from the 1995 Census of the Northern Mariana Islands are also being used, with
the approval of the Central Statistics Division, Department of Commerce,
CNMI. The University of Guam collected
a survey of Palauans on Guam in 1995.
Some data from that survey are used here. Finally, in 1997, the Office of Insular Affairs funded censuses
of Micronesian Migrants to Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI.
CHAPTER
4
NUMBERS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF MICRONESIAN MIGRANTS IN GUAM
In this and the next two
Chapters we will look only at the post-Compact migrants and their
children. We already described how the
different sets of migrants were identified.
At the International Programs Center, we wrote a computer program in the
Census Bureau’s Integrated Microcomputer Processing System (IMPS) Consistency
and Correction (CONCOR) edit package to add a variable to each person and
housing record for the 1997 Censuses of Micronesian Migrants to Hawaii and Guam
and the 1998 Census of Micronesian Migrants to the CNMI to indicate migration
group for that person.
For the CNMI, in
addition to the 1998 Census of Micronesian Migrants to Saipan, we used the 1995
CNMI Census results to obtain more information about Freely Associated States
migrant trends to the Commonwealth.
Also, in order to see changes in the post-Compact migrant populations,
we also used data from the 1990 Censuses of the CNMI and Guam. As noted elsewhere in this paper, the 1990
Census of Hawaii could not provide useful comparative data, so the data
presented here use data only from the 1997/8 Censuses of Micronesian migrants.
In order to use the 1990
Census data for Guam and CNMI and the 1995 CNMI data, Michael T. Stroot of the
Census Bureau’s International Programs Center and the author developed a
research subset from the censuses. The
subset contained only those households containing at least one person born in
one of the Freely Associated States areas – Palau, the Federated States of
Micronesia, or the Marshall Islands.
These new data sets were comparable to the data sets collected in the
1997/8 Censuses of Micronesian Migrants to Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI, since in
1997/8, we collected data only from households having at least one Micronesian
migrant. So, the analysis uses the
following data sets: the 1990 Guam Census subset and data from the 1997 Census
of Micronesian Migrants to Guam; the 1990 and 1995 CNMI Censuses, and the 1998
Saipan Census of Micronesian migrants; and, the 1997 Census of Micronesian
Migrants to Hawaii.
4.1 Demography
The earliest Micronesian migrants to Guam – like the earliest migrants in most migration streams – were predominantly young males in search of jobs. Many of the original households were inherently unstable, composed as they were of several young men in their twenties or thirties working at low-paying jobs and pooling their income to cover rent and other expenditures (Hezel and McGrath 1989:58-60). In the absence of a more viable authority structure and generational depth, such "peer-group households," as Rubinstein terms them, were continually "dissolving and reforming, with new arrivals coming in, others moving out" (Rubinstein 1993:260). Rubinstein went on to note the gradual evolution of this fragile type of household into more typically Micronesian forms.
And, as in most
migration flows, in the second stage of the pattern Rubinstein identified on
Guam, two-generation households emerged around a nuclear family, but they
contained a potpourri of loosely related kin and friends. Later on, household membership followed
kinship principles similar to those back home, with grandparents and other
older people being added, giving households important generational depth
(Rubinstein 1993:260-261).
Guam has had a broad
range of migrant household types, extending from "peer-group
households" to the much more stable types that mirror social organization
in the migrant's home islands. Data on
gender and age distribution of migrants in Guam show how far households in each
place have advanced along Rubinstein's spectrum.
Table 4.1 shows some
demographic characteristics of the Micronesian migrants and their children in
Guam. Because of the very small sample size, information about the pre-Compact
Marshallese for this and the following tables in this Chapter will not be
shown. The 1997 Census reported a total of 7,280 Micronesian migrants,
including 730 pre-Compact migrants and 6,550 post-Compact migrants and
children. Of the 6,550 post-Compact migrants, 97 percent were from the
Federated States of Micronesia, 2 percent were from the Marshall Islands, and
approximately 2 percent were from Palau. Of the total post-Compact migrant
category, 1,104, or approximately 17 percent, were the children of Freely
Associated States-born persons.
The sex ratio for the
pre-Compact migrants was 100, indicating that the number of males was the same
as the number of females in the population. Among the post-Compact migrants,
the ratio was 83, showing more females than males. However, the sex ratios
varied among the three Freely Associated States groups. The pre-Compact sex
ratio of FSM was 141, indicating a large surplus of males, while the
post-Compact ratio of 103 is more balanced, indicating the sex ratio has only
slightly more males than females. Among the Marshallese, the post-Compact sex
ratio was 120, indicating a surplus of males. The sex ratio of the pre-Compact
Palauan community, however, was 82, indicating a surplus of females, while the
post-Compact ratio was 100, indicating a balance between the sexes.
The median age of the
post-Compact migrants and their children was 21.7 years, while the median age
of the pre-Compact migrants was 37.4, almost 16 years older than the post-Compact
migrants. This age difference has two aspects. First, the pre-Compact migrants
have been residents of Guam for a longer period than the post-Compact migrants.
Second, the post-Compact migrants include all children born of Freely
Associated States-born persons who were not born in the Freely Associated
States, which would lower the median age. Of the post-Compact migrants, the
Palauans were the oldest (24.3 years), followed by the FSM (21.7 years) and the Marshallese (17.5
years). Among the pre-Compact migrants, the Palauans were the oldest (41.1
years) followed by the migrants from FSM (34.9 years).
Of the 6,550
post-Compact migrants to Hawaii, approximately 35 percent were less than 15
years old, while about 40 percent were between 15 and 29 years, indicating that
many migrants were coming as young families. The post-Compact Marshallese
migrants had the largest percentage of children, with 43 percent less than 15
years old. Approximately 35 percent of the FSM and 21 percent of the Palauan
post-Compact migrants were less than 15 years old. The low proportion[4]
may be the result of the relatively shorter period of post-Compact migration
time Palauans had (three years) compared to Marshallese and FSM migrants (10
years), which could have limited Palauan household formation in Hawaii. In fact, 48 percent of Palauan post-Compact
migrants were 15 to 29 years old, compared to 35 percent of the Marshallese and
39 percent of the FSM post-Compact migrants. Approximately 19 percent of all
post-Compact migrants were 30 to 44 years, while less than 7 percent were 45
years or older.
With 69 percent of the
total population below the age of 30, clearly, the Micronesian migrant
community in Guam was a young population in 1997. This youth is reflected in the proportion of never-married pre-
and post-Compact migrants.
Approximately 52 percent of the adult post- and 22 percent of the
pre-Compact males were never married, compared 44 percent of the adult post-
and 19 percent of the pre-Compact females were never married.
The average household size of the 979 post-Compact Freely Associated States households was 6.7 persons B 6.8 for the FSM households, 5.6 for the Marshall Islanders, and 3.9 for the Palauan households. The average family size was 7.0 person