CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 68South Asian Studies and DiasporaMigration, Health, Geopolitics, Historical GeographySouth Asian Studies and Conflicts

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Big March: Migratory Flows after the Partition of India

Open access
Bharadwaj, Prashant, Khwaja, Asim Ijaz, Mian, Atif R.·2008·SSRN Electronic Journal
DOI 10.2139/ssrn.1124093
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The partition of India in 1947 along ostensibly religious lines into India, Pakistan, and what eventually became Bangladesh resulted in one of the largest and most rapid migrations in human history. We compile district level census data from archives to quantify the scale of migratory flows across the sub-continent. We estimate total migratory inflows of 14.5 million and outflows of 17.9 million, implying 3.4 million "missing" people. We also uncover a substantial degree of regional variability. Flows were much larger along the western border, higher in cities and areas close to the border, and dependent heavily on the size of the "minority" religious group. The migratory flows also display a "relative replacement effect" with in-migrants moving to places that saw greater out-migration.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2139/ssrn.1124093

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The replacement effect was significant and very large for both India and Pakistan.

    “The replacement effect was found to be significant and very large for both India and Pakistan (Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian, 2008).”

    From Displacement and development: Long term impacts of population transfer in India (2019) · cites this paper as Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian, 2008

  • The distance to the border effect was statistically significant only in India and generally of small size.

    “The distance to the border effect was found to be only statistically significant in India and generally of small size (Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian, 2008).”

    From Displacement and development: Long term impacts of population transfer in India (2019) · cites this paper as Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian, 2008

  • Migratory inflows tended to be greater in the major urban centres of India and Pakistan (big city effect).

    “Another important pattern the Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian (2008) study uncovers is the tendency of migratory inflows to be greater in the major urban centres of India and Pakistan.”

    From Displacement and development: Long term impacts of population transfer in India (2019) · cites this paper as Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian, 2008

  • An estimated 14.5 million people were displaced within a short span of just four years after partition.

    “An estimated 14.5 million people were displaced within a short span of just four years after partition (Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian, 2008, p. 39).”

    From Displacement and development: Long term impacts of population transfer in India (2019) · cites this paper as Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian, 2008

  • The big city effect held strongly for India and was not statistically significant for Pakistan.

    “The big city effect was found to hold strongly for India and was not statistically significant for Pakistan (Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian, 2008).”

    From Displacement and development: Long term impacts of population transfer in India (2019) · cites this paper as Bharadwaj, Khwaja, and Mian, 2008

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. K Davis, 1931, Government of India, Census of India, Government of Pakistan, Census of Pakistan, 1954
  2. K Hill, 2005, The Demographic Impact of Partition: Bengal in 1947 downloaded from iussp2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=52236
  3. R Srivastava, 2006, An Overview of Migration in India, its Impacts and Key Issues, www.livelihoods.org. U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, World Refugee Survey

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Bharadwaj, P., Khwaja, A. I., & Mian, A. R.
Affiliations
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
Corresponding author
Bharadwaj, Prashant
ORCID
Bharadwaj, Prashant
Venue
SSRN Electronic Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008
ISSN
1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2139/ssrn.1124093
OpenAlex
W2146796783
Cited by
68
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › South Asian Studies and Diaspora
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Migration, Health, Geopolitics, Historical Geography
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › South Asian Studies and Conflicts
Keywords
Partition of India, mass migration, religious minorities, missing persons, migration flows, census data, border migration, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review