↓ Skip to main content

Small scale migration along the interoceanic highway in Madre de Dios, Peru: an exploration of community perceptions and dynamics due to migration

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Small scale migration along the interoceanic highway in Madre de Dios, Peru: an exploration of community perceptions and dynamics due to migration
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12914-018-0152-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly E Jensen, Nehal N. Naik, Christina O’Neal, Gabriela Salmón-Mulanovich, Amy R. Riley-Powell, Gwenyth O. Lee, Stella M. Hartinger, Daniel G. Bausch, Valerie A. Paz-Soldan

Abstract

Madre de Dios, a southern state in the Peruvian Amazon basin, has experienced rapid development as well as an influx of migrants since the construction of the Interoceanic Highway (IOH) connecting Brazil, Bolivia, and the Peruvian coast. We explored perceptions of migration and development in up to eight communities along the IOH in Madre de Dios following construction of the highway. We conducted a multiple methods study involving focus group (FG) discussions and interviews with key informants (KIs) in eight communities in Madre de Dios. The data was used to develop and apply a survey on demographics, financial, personal, social, human, and physical capital in four communities between February 2014 and March 2015. We conducted 12 FGs and 34 KI interviews. A total of 522 people participated in the survey. Comparing migrants (those who had moved to the area after construction of the IOH) and non-migrants, we found no difference in food security or access to health services. The majority (67.6%) of respondents from both groups reported that illness was their primary threat to well-being. Non-migrants owned more land than migrants (p < 0.001), were more likely to have piped water directly in their home (p = 0.046), and were more likely to participate in community groups (p = 0.012). Looking at perceptions about migrants, KIs and FGs discussed both positive perceptions of migrants (increased cultural exchange and new technology) and negative perceptions (increased drugs and alcohol in their communities and a lack of investment in the community). Both migrants and non-migrants reported trusting the local government more than the national government. Although we hypothesized that migrants would have decreased access to food, water, health services, and land relative to non-migrants, our results show that the only significant differences were in land ownership and water access. Efforts to improve community infrastructure should be carried out at the local level and focus on improving issues reported by both groups, such as potable water, sewage, and increased access to health services. Furthermore, an emphasis on community cohesion, ensuring land rights, and increasing long-term job opportunities should help ease tensions between migrants and non-migrants.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Student > Master 10 12%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 31 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 7%
Engineering 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 5%
Other 22 27%
Unknown 33 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2020.
All research outputs
#3,122,842
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,821
of 17,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,419
of 454,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#112
of 307 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 454,408 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 307 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.