Migration and well-being: an impact study of migrant cashew farmers in the Bono East Region of Ghana

Figures & data

Table 1. Respondents’ demographics.

Variable	Categories	Frequency	Percentage
Sex	Male	93	58.9
	Female	65	41.1
Age at last birthday	20–30	26	16.5
	31–45	84	53.2
	46–60	37	23.4
	61+	11	7.0
Age during migration	<19yrs	3	1.9
	19–30yrs	111	70.3
	31–45yrs	40	25.3
	45yrs +	4	2.5
Part of Ghana migrated from	Southern Zone	25	15.8
	Coastal Zone	12	7.6
	Forest/Middle Zone	23	14.6
	Northern Zone	98	62.0
Description of origin	Urban	37	23.4
	Rural	121	76.6
	< 5yrs	27	17.1
Length of stay at destination	6 − 10yrs	46	29.1
	11–15yrs	28	17.7
	16–20yrs	25	15.8
	20yrs+	32	20.3
Home visit	No visit since migrated	3	1.9
	Less than 36 months since the last visit	102	64.6
	Between the last 36 and 48 months	45	28.5
	More than 60 months since the last visit	8	5.1
Reason for visit	Family care	60	38.0
	Death of a family member	62	39.2
	Heath reasons	14	8.9
	Joblessness	1	.6
	To manage business/project at home	4	2.5
	Others	17	10. 8
N	158

Source: Computed from field data (October, 2021).

Table 2. McNermar’s test.

Disease
	Before migration	After migration
		Suffered	Non-suffered
	suffered	153	0	3.00
Malaria	Non-suffered	3	2
	Before migration	After migration
		Suffered	Non-suffered
	suffered	150	1	1.000
Cholera	Non-suffered	3	4
	Before migration	After migration
		Suffered	Non-suffered
	Suffered	101	24	9.32***
Chicken Pox	Non-suffered	7	26
	Before migration	After migration
		Suffered	Non-suffered
	Suffered	147	2	2.000
Typhoid	Non-suffered	6	3
	Before migration	After migration
		Suffered	Non-suffered
	Suffered	47	41	18.84***
Infectious Disease	Non-suffered	10	60
	Before migration	After migration
		Suffered	Non-suffered
Chronic Disease	Suffered	42	71	48.05***
	Non-suffered	9	36
	Before migration	After migration
		Negative	Positive
Health Status	Negative	2	5	0.50
	Positive	3	148
	Before migration	After migration
		Secure	Insecure
Food security	Secure	80	3	33.80***
	Insecure	42	33
n	158

Note: 1) *** is the McNemar’s exact P. value at P < 0.01(significance at 1%), 2) X² is McNemar’s chi-square.

Table 3. McNermar test results of migrants’ healthcare service.

Healthcare service
	Before migration	After migration
		Practice	Not practice
	Practice	81	15	2.91
	Not practice	7	55
Self-treatment	Before migration	After migration
		Visit	Not visit	26.13***
	Visit	6	29
Traditional	Not visit	1	122
	Before migration	After migration
		Visit	Not visit
	Visit	3	38	17.89***
	Not visit	9	108
CHIPS compound	Before migration	After migration
		Visit	Not visit
	Visit	88	2	46.30***
District hospital	Not visit	52	16
	Before migration	After migration
		Registered	Unregistered
	Registered	76	0	70.00***
Registered NHIS	Unregistered	70	12
	Before migration	After migration
		Valid	Invalid
	Valid	66	4	57.88***
Validity of NHIS Card	Invalid	69	19
n		158

Note: 1) *** is the McNemar’s exact P. value at P < 0.01(significance at 1%), 2) X² is McNemar’s chi-square.

Table 4. Paired t-test result of the differences in migrants’ well-being before and after migration.

Variable	dif	t value	[95% Confidence interval]
Economic condition indicators
Income A – Income B	381.329***	16.6(22.992)	−426.744	−335.915
Exp. A – Exp. B	257.88***	15.85(16.287)	−290.049	−225.711
Savings A – Savings B	747.911***	10.9(68.76)	−883.725	−612.098
Asset A – Asset B	−5.70e-07	−0.00(0.089)	−0.177	0.177
Social condition indicators
Com’ty A- Com’ty B	0.011	0.75(0.015)	−0.039	0.018
Social Group A - Social Group B	0.12***	12.25(0.010)	−0.140	−0.101
Leadership A– Leadership B	0.058***	5.4(0.011)	−0.080	−0.037
Decision A - Decision B	0.089***	5.75(0.015)	−0.119	−0.058
Marital stat A – Marita stat B	0.073***	3 (0.024)	−0.120	−0.025
Socioeconomic condition indicators
Education A – Education B	0.034***	3.7(0.009)	−0.052	−0.016
Land A – Land B	4.5***	7.75(0. 58)	−5.646	−3.354

Note: 1) *** is p. value < 0.01, 2) values in parentheses are standard errors, 3) dif. = mean difference, Exp. = Expenditure, Com’ty = community.

Table 5. Migrants’ wealth distribution.

	Before migration wealth distribution		After migration wealth distribution
Category	Frequency	Percentage (%)	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Poorest	35	22.15	34	21.52
Poorer	29	18.35	30	18.35
Middle	32	20.25	31	19.62
Richer	31	19.62	32	20.25
Richest	31	19.62	31	19.62
Total	158	100.00	158	100.00

Table 6. McNemar’s test result for migrants social condition.

Marital status		After migration
	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
Single	Yes	47	31	44.08***
	No	79	1
	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
Married	Yes	47	31	8.67***
	No	42	37
	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
Divorced	Yes	148	0	7.36**
	No	1	10
	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
Widowed	Yes	0	0	14.00***
	No	144	14
n	158

Note: 1) **, and *** is the McNemar’s exact P. value at P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively, 2) X² is McNemar’s chi-square.

Table 7. McNemar’s test results for migrants socioeconomic conditions.

Accommodation ownership
	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
Owned	Yes	6	7	17.78***
	No	34	111
	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
Owned or rented	Yes	20	3	67.46***
	No	76	59
	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
Public/civil service	Yes	27	3	8.89***
	No	16	112
Farming	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
	Yes	56	3	36.75***
	No	45	54
Artisanal	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
	Yes	2	28	20.16***
	No	3	125
Trading	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
	Yes	6	16	13.24***
	No	1	135
Others	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
	Yes	2	28	20.16***
	No	3	125
Unemployed	After migration	After migration
		Yes	No
	Yes	0	17	17.00***
	No	0	141
	After migration	After migration
Tertiary		Attained	Not attained
	Attained	34	0
	Not attained	10	114
Tertiary & Secondary	After migration	After migration
		Attained	Not attained
	Attained	56	0	5.00
	Not attained	5	97
Formal Education	After migration	After migration
		Attained	Not attained
	Attained	99	0	1.00
	Not attained	1	58
N		158

Note: 1) *** and ** is the McNemar’s exact P. value at P < 0.01(significance at 1%) and p < 0.05 (significance at 5%), respectively, 2) X² is McNemar’s chi-square.

Figure 1. The study communities in Bono North region of Ghana.

Data availability statement

Data will be made available upon request.