myanmar

7/15/2018

Myanmar | International Organization for Migration

         English

Français

Español

Enter your keywords

h

MYANMAR

- Select a Country -

ENGAGE IN YOUR COUNTRY

COMPARE MONEY TRANSFER COMPANIES Individual

E-Learning by HP Life

Business

Sending from:

UK (GBP) The HP Foundation’s free online learning program is designed to help entrepreneurs develop business in their

Sending to:

USA (USD)

countries of origin or countries of destination.

Amount (GBP)

Send Powered by

10,000

COMPARE

iDiaspora Forum

https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

1/17

7/15/2018


A moderated online platform for diaspora members to contribute their opinions on the Global Compact for Migration and share ideas on migration related issues.

Multimedia Resources Here, you can nd webinars, podcasts, videos, toolkits and other resources related to diaspora. These resources, from IOM and its partners, will facilitate better engagement with your country.

IOM IN YOUR COUNTRY

SOCIAL MEDIA (https://iamamigrant.org/)

GENERAL INFORMATION (/COUNTRIES/MYANMAR?QT-COUNTRY_TABS_2=1#QT-COUNTRY_TABS_2) by @UNmigration

Tweets

Than Zaw Oo 194 kms from home

IOM - UN Migration FACTS AND FIGURES (/COUNTRIES/MYANMAR?QT-COUNTRY_TABS_2=2#QT-COUNTRY_TABS_2)

Read more

@UNmigration

(http://iamamigrant.org/ (http://iamamigrant.org/stories/myanmar/z stories/myanmar/zaw-oo oo ) )

Fact: almost 1 in 10 players in the CONTACT US (/COUNTRIES/MYANMAR?QT-COUNTRY_TABS_2=3#QT-COUNTRY_TABS_2)

JOBS (/COUNTRIES/MYANMAR?QT-COUNTRY_TABS_2=4#QT-COUNTRY_TABS_2)

#WorldCup were born outside of their country bit.ly/2IWfDCW#FRACRO

1,281 kms from home

Overview Migration within Myanmar and across its long borders, which cover Thailand, Laos, China, India and Bangladesh, is subject to a range of drivers which are complex and are critical in a ecting how and why people decide to move. Of the 53.9 million people living within Myanmar, 70 per cent live in rural areas. Following the general election held on 8 November 2015 there have been dramatic economic and cultural changes which have brought an increase in foreign investment and has also been a driver of urbanization and rural to urban migration. Many people migrate internally as they want to improve their livelihoods, to follow their family members, for marriage, for education or to avoid poor socio-economic conditions. In 2014, 9.39 million people were internal migrants (which is approximately 20% of the population). Regionally, Myanmar has grown to be the largest migration source country in the Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS). The Myanmar Government estimate that there are 4.25 million Myanmar nationals living abroad. Regionally, drivers of migration can include higher wages in neighbouring countries, con ict and environmental migration due to natural disasters among other factors.


Shwe Read more

38m

(http://iamamigrant.org/ (http://iamamigrant.org/stories/thailand/sh stories/thailand/shwe ) )

IOM - UN Migration @UNmigration

1,236 kms from home Read more

Safety. Dignity. Human Rights. For all migrants. Regardless of their status. Embed

Ting Ting

View on Twitter

(http://iamamigrant.org/ (http://iamamigrant.org/stories/thailand/tin stories/thailand/ting-ting ting ) )

Thant back home Read more

(http://iamamigrant.org/ (http://iamamigrant.org/stories/myanmar/t stories/myanmar/thant ) )

View more stories at iamamigrant.org (http://iamamigrant.org/)

2/17

7/15/2018


It is also reported that up to 70% of migrants living abroad are based in Thailand, followed by Malaysia (15%), China (4.6%), Singapore (3.9%) and the USA (1.9%). IOM estimates there could be as many as 3 million Myanmar migrants living in Thailand as at 2016. The highest numbers of migrants, according to the latest census, came from Mon State (427,000), Kayin State (323,000) and Shan State (236,000). The protection of migrants within Myanmar and in their destination countries is a national priority for the Government. Migrants are often vulnerable to poorer health access and treatment and IOM works with the Myanmar Government and a range of international and local partners to improve migrant health outcomes. Migrants, whether travelling regularly or irregularly (http://www.iom.int/key-migration-terms#Irregular-migration) can become victims of tra cking (http://www.ap.org/explore/seafood-fromslaves/) and smuggled migrants who are exposed to abuses such as extortion, debt bondage and physical exploitation. However, the majority of migrants do not experience these issues. Migration brings huge bene ts, fuelling growth and innovation in both their host and source countries. Myanmar migrants in the region send large amounts of remittances which help boost the economy, much of it through uno cial channels. While o cial estimates are that Myanmar only receives $118 million USD in remittances in 2015, the then Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security estimated that remittances could be as high as $8 billion USD.1 Promoting the mainstreaming of migrant issues into Government policy and programmes, building capacity of our partners and ensuring e ective advocacy and protection of Myanmar migrants are national priorities for the management migration in Myanmar. Read More

Activities Movement, Emergency and Post-crisis Migration Management Migration Health Regulating Migration Facilitating Migration Migration Governance

Movement, Emergency and Post-crisis Migration Management Donors O ce of US Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), USAID (http://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/organization/bureaus/bureau-democracy-con ict-andhumanitarian-assistance/o ce-us)

US Department of State (http://www.state.gov/) UN Peace Building Support O ce (http://www.un.org/en/peacebuilding/pbso/) ECHO (Humanitarian Aids and Civil Protection) (http://ec.europa.eu/echo/) https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

3/17

7/15/2018


Movement Assistance IOM provides logistical and operational support to the family reuni cation of Myanmar nationals whose family members are residing overseas. The support includes communicating with the travelers on the ight and logistic information related to overseas travel; providing information on how to y on an airplane, what to pack, and what procedures to follow at departure, transit and arrival in the nal destination; and assistance for departure at the airport. Emergency and Preparedness IOM’s programming in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Disaster Management is aimed at reducing risk, while improving preparedness in disaster management and resilience associated with natural disasters. There is a particular focus on communities in con ict and border areas where there are high concentrations of internal migrants and cross-border migrants. Additionally there is a focus on the seasonally disaster prone coastal area of Rakhine and the mountainous region of Chin and Sagaing, which is prone to ooding and landslides. Myanmar is exposed to multiple natural hazards including cyclones, storm surges, oods, res, forest res, earthquakes, tsunamis, droughts and landslides. Its western and southern coastlines are exposed to cyclones, storm surges and tsunamis while major parts of the country are at risk of earthquakes and res. Alongside the risk of natural disasters, the border areas experience intense population movements, due to long-standing con icts and internal population displacements. There are multiple connecting points between Myanmar’s varied displacement/movement pro les and with the areas susceptibility to natural disaster it makes for a unique combination of vulnerability. IOM is presently implementing the Program for Improved Disaster Management and Resilience Against Natural Disaster in Rakhine State, Chin State and Sagaing Region, Burma/Myanmar (IDM-RAND), a programme funded by USAID’s O ce for Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA). The programme aims to improve the readiness of the government, to increase the resilience of the communities, to prevent potential migration out ows from disaster a ected areas, and to promote safe and orderly migration to safe relocation areas. Priority activities include: Improving the quality of risk mitigation/preparedness and emergency response at both State and Township levels Providing planning tools and information for evacuation and resettlement planning Encouraging community-based, organization-led DRR Improving disaster management skills among full range of Disaster Risk Management (DRM) actors at State and Township levels The programme is concerned with the inclusion of internal migrants due to the fact that natural disasters are one of the major causes of outwards migration. IOM provides humanitarian assistance in cases of natural disasters, covering the initial emergency response all the way to early recovery. One such case was support provided after Cyclone Komen in 2015 and the resulting oods and landslides. IOM assisted in disaster recovery for communities in Rakhine State, Chin State and Sagaing Region that were most a ected by the extensive ash oods and landslides caused by Cyclone Komen. https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

4/17

7/15/2018


IOM’s activities include: Providing psychosocial support to displaced and a ected populations Carrying out basic infrastructure improvements in displacement sites including by promoting safe construction practices and local employment through ‘cash for work’ programmes. Ensuring livelihood recovery through provision of livelihood assets, seeds for farming and building capacity and skills building Carrying out repairs of community water infrastructure and the rebuilding of the damaged homes of the a ected Developing a Shelter Improvement Training Package together with the provision of Safe Construction Kits and Winterization /Non-Food Item (NFI) kits. Humanitarian Response and Clusters IOM is the global co-lead for the Camp Coordination and Camp Management (CCCM) Cluster along with UNHCR in Myanmar. IOM, in coordination with UNHCR and the Shelter/NFI/CCCM Clusters is providing targeted capacity building to organizations working in camp management of the Internally Displaced Person (IDP) camps in Rakhine and Kachin States. IOM is implementing the CCCM Support and Capacity-Building in Rakhine and Kachin States Project with the support of USAID’s O ce for Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA). The intervention is aimed at building the capacity of national and international NGOs to deliver camp management services, to ensure the e ective delivery and equitable access to services and protection for those living in IDP camps in Rakhine and Kachin states. IOM has conducted needs assessments and is providing organizations and government counterparts with capacity-building, training and support on CCCM. This activity is in support of Myanmar’s e orts at national contingency planning for the risk of natural disasters. Community Stabilization Project The Community Stabilization project aims to help reduce the ow of irregular migrants from Rakhine State by improving living conditions of both Muslim and Rakhine communities. The project builds upon IOM’s existing disaster risk reduction (DRR) coverage of ve townships of Rakhine State, as well as humanitarian support within the area. In pursuit of this objective, IOM Myanmar helps ensure resilience against natural disasters by improving facilities, livelihoods and economic conditions in target communities of Rakhine State in addition to the development of short and midterm community development plans. These plans include identifying community priorities and implementing community-development focused approaches for the construction or rehabilitation of infrastructure, provision of quick impact livelihood options which utilize ‘cash for work’ approaches, and improving access to markets and farm practices. By adopting a community stabilisation and resilience-based approach, IOM proposes to establish clusters of target villages rather than targeting disparate townships. This aims to capture opportunities for collaboration and interaction between communities by encouraging economic and social linkages. IOM will promote cohesive communities and work through existing government structures, such as the village tract development committees. Community resilience will also be increased through upgrades to essential services, infrastructure, livelihood and economic conditions in target communities of Rakhine State. https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

5/17

7/15/2018


Main Projects Family reuni cation to the United States CCCM Support and Capacity-Building in Rakhine and Kachin States, Myanmar Post- ood support, funded by EU Humanitarian Aid, with implementation of WASH component (€400,000) by Action Contre La Faim - ACF International DRR – Disaster Risk Reduction [top]

Migration Health Donors The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (http://www.theglobalfund.org/)

3MDG Fund (http://www.3dfund.org/) Asian Development Bank (ADB) (http://www.adb.org/) World Food Programme (WFP) (http://www.wfp.org/) United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) (http://www.unfpa.org/) Migration Health For the past 10 years, IOM has been working with Ministry of Health and Sports (MOHS), State and Township Health Authorities and Communities and partner to develop and deliver extensive and comprehensive health programming with focus on HIV, TB and Malaria; Maternal and Child Health, Sexual Reproductive Health Gender Based Violence; and Health System Strengthening for migrants, mobility impacted communities and host communities across Myanmar. Health Assessments IOM implements the UKTB Programme in Myanmar on behalf of the UK Government which provides Tuberculosis screening for applicants for UK visas. All Myanmar resident applicants for UK visas of 6 months duration or longer must undergo a screening and examination to detect or rule out active tuberculosis (TB). IOM is the only authorized organization to provide this service in Myanmar and operates an independent Health Assessment Clinic located within the Pun Hlaing Hospital in Yangon. Due to the screening tests involved, applicants should undertake their screening at least 10 weeks before planned departure for the UK.

For information and appointments for UKTB Screening – call +95 9254036310 Migration Health Policy, Research and Technical Support IOM works closely with the Ministry of Health and Sports (MOHS) in Myanmar to strengthen migration health management through research, policy and technical advice and to assist Myanmar in e orts to implement the World Health Assembly Resolution 61.17 on the Health of Migrants. IOM supports MOHS to view health policies and systems with a migration lens https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

6/17

7/15/2018


and to bring together multi-sectoral stakeholders to coordinate and mainstream migration health initiatives. HIV, TB and Malaria In the South East of Myanmar, IOM provides antiretroviral therapy (ART) for over 1,800 patients in Mon and Kayin States, diagnoses approximately 650 new TB cases per quarter, oversees 100 active Outreach Health Workers providing community based HIV and TB services. IOM also oversees 200 volunteers for Malaria community case management (CCM), providing malaria tests to 60,000 malaria suspect patients and treating those who are positive with malaria in Mon and Kayin States. IOM distributed more than 70,000 long lasting insecticide treated nets in the two States. These programs are currently supported by Global Fund with a total budget of approximately USD 15 million over ve years. With the funding from Asian Development Bank (ADB), IOM also implements malaria projects to increase access to malaria prevention, testing, and treatment for Mobile and Migrant Populations (MMPs) in Myanmar, Lao PDR and Cambodia, targeting for employees at work site setting. IOM has undertaken operational research on the links between Mobility and HIV linked to the ASEAN Economic Corridors in order to provide health providers with up to date information about HIV hotspots and for better targeted intervention strategies with ADB funding. IOM has also conducted operational research on “Evaluation of the surveillance system of day 3 P.falciparum positive cases in migrant and host communities of Mon and Kayin States” to evaluate the surveillance system for day 3 P. falciparum positive cases in migrant and host communities in Mon and Kayin States. In addition, IOM also conducted an operational research on “Factors associated with tuberculosis treatment default amongst migrants and mobile population in Myanmar”, currently in process to identify prevailing factors associated with tuberculosis treatment default and analyse the barriers for tuberculosis treatment adherence as well as the health and social needs of migrants to ensure tuberculosis treatment are completed. Maternal and Child Health IOM is a key implementing partner of the 3MDG Fund, and supporting township health departments by collaborative approach to increase access to maternal, newborn and child health services among poor and hard-toreach populations. IOM implements MNCH activities in 2 townships in Ayeyarwaddy Region, 7 townships in Kayah State and 2 townships in Rakhine State. Through these programs, IOM supports approximately 7,500 emergency obstetric and child referrals per year, has supported the training for over 1,500 voluntary health workers, and these activities have led to yearon-year reductions in maternal and child mortality. IOM also conducted operational research on accessibility and utilization of maternal and child health care services among migrant population in the delta region. This evidence based approach has provided inputs for policy makers at di erent levels in order to enhance their awareness on promoting equity and better understanding of demand side interventions, and providing possible mechanisms to promote the health care utilization among migrant mothers and children. Health System Strengthening In Rakhine State, IOM works with township and state health departments to address barriers in the accessibility, availability and quality of health services for all communities. By addressing both the barriers of accessing health care https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

7/17

7/15/2018


including identi cation of cases needing referral, cost of transport and treatment, and knowledge of community and health workers; as well as addressing barriers in providing health care such as technical capacity, equipment and supplies, and ability access health facilities, IOM assists MOHS to improve standards for all populations within project townships in Rakhine State. Sexual Reproductive Health and Gender Based Violence IOM in partnership with UNFPA works closely with the State and Township Health Departments to increase the access of women and girls to comprehensive, rights-based sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services. The approach follows the integrated approach on health system strengthening for the whole township and will leverage existing relationships and programs two townships of Rakhine State. The project focus on; strengthening government capacity in the provision of quality SRH and GBV service provision; increasing knowledge of GBV basic concepts understanding and referral pathway amongst service providers, Community Based Organisations (CBOs), INGOs, NGOs and duty bearers; bridging service delivery gaps in hard to reach areas of the townships; and increasing community and youth awareness and engagement in SRH and GBV issues and services. Main Projects Targeted HIV prevention and Community based HIV prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care and support in mobility impacted communities Community based TB awareness, detection, diagnosis and treatment in mobility impacted communities Community based Malaria awareness, detection, diagnosis and treatment in mobility impacted communities Increasing access to malaria prevention, testing, and treatment for Mobile and Migrant Populations (MMPs) Essential Maternal, Neonatal and Child Health (MNCH) Services for Hardto-Reach Populations in Ayeyarwady Region Essential Maternal, Neonatal and Child Health (MNCH) Services for Hardto-Reach Populations in Kayah State and Rakhine State Supplementary Feeding for Vulnerable HIV and TB Patients In IOM’s Integrated Migration Health Programme with WFP support in Eastern Myanmar United Kingdom Tuberculosis Detection Programme (UKTB) Township Approach to Improve Access for Women and Girls to Integrated GBV and SRH Services in Rakhine State [top]

Regulating Migration Donors US Department of State (Bureau of Population, Refugee and Migration) (http://www.state.gov/)

Migrant Protection Irregular migration from Myanmar takes various forms, including economic migrants, internally displaced persons, smuggled migrants, tra cked https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

8/17

7/15/2018


persons, unaccompanied and separated children, stranded migrants, victims of exploitation and abuse, as well as refugees, asylum seekers among others. The root causes of irregular maritime migration in Myanmar are complex and multi-dimensional, including issues of poverty, underdevelopment, communal violence, internal displacement and statelessness. Lack of livelihood opportunities at home and labour migration through regular channel are the primary drivers for irregular migration - creating an environment in which smuggling and tra cking may ourish. IOM continues to strengthen the capacity of the Government by providing technical expertise in the development and implementation of the Central Body for Suppression of Tra cking in Persons (CBTIP)’s National Plan of Action to combat tra cking in persons. IOM further supports the development and implementation of the bilateral SOPs between Thailand and Myanmar through technical support in nalizing the SOPs on case management and the return and reintegration of tra cking victims and development of a SOP implementation strategy. The capacity of Myanmar and Thai government caseworkers to identify Special Needs Cases through case workers visits to Thai shelters in order to conduct thorough needs assessments continues to be strengthened, ensuring that the protection and reintegration needs of the most vulnerable migrants are adequately addressed. IOM also continues to support government with the development of a National SOPs on protection and reintegration of VOTs as well as supporting regional dialogues aimed at facilitating the development of an e ective cross border referral mechanism to e ectively protect vulnerable migrants. Combatting Tra cking in Persons Prevention With funding support from The US Department of State’s O ce to Monitor and Combat Tra cking in Persons (JTIP), IOM continues to contribute to the prevention of tra cking in persons and the protection of victims in Myanmar by addressing priority weaknesses identi ed in the US TIP Report and to collaborate with anti-tra cking actors in Myanmar to respond to key recommendations of the TIP report. To achieve this, IOM implements a sustained capacity building program aimed at creating a broad network of NGOs and government ‘anti-tra cking focal points’ in con ict-a ected States and Regions. With funding support from the US Department of State Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM), IOM implements large-scale information campaigns and outreach activities at various hot spot areas across the country, addressing the risk of irregular migration, tra cking in persons, and promoting safe migration. For instance in 2016, IOM carried out campaigns that reached a total of 71 locations throughout Myanmar, encompassing key eight hotspot cities recognized as origin and transit points for tra cking in persons. The campaigns were also carried out in targeted sites including markets, bus terminals, passport o ces, schools, remote villages, and IDP camps. The process to develop information, education and communication (IEC) materials during the campaigns necessitated signi cant coordination with CSOs and local authorities, for which IOM organized a range of bilateral consultations with individual CSOs including a media workshop. The joint workshop constituted a unique approach and provided a platform for members CSOs, religious leaders, and government o cials to openly discuss and exchange their experience and expertise, to enable IEC materials, key messages, and methods for outreach to be adopted by participants in a consultative manner. The information campaign – encompassing dramatic performances, songs, public Q & A sessions, and the distribution of brochures and posters – achieved signi cant outreach and mobilization of the general public. Throughout the consultative process IOM played a crucial role to mobilize various stakeholders and constructed a https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

9/17

7/15/2018


bridge between government, CSOs and UN/INGOs, thereby contributing to the peace building process. Protection IOM work in providing direct assistance to vulnerable migrants include medical, legal, psychological, shelter and rehabilitation, food and clothing, formal and informal education, vocational training, life skills training among others. Since 2015, the Unit provided direct assistance to 1577 victims of tra cking. Additionally in 2016, other vulnerable migrants totaling to 1652 were also provided with direct assistance. IOM is also supporting the government of Myanmar’s e orts in the development of an e ective cross border and national referral mechanism (NRM) to strengthen direct assistance interventions to victims of tra cking (VoTs) and vulnerable migrants throughout various steps - identi cation, documentation, reporting, data collection and management, family reuni cation, return and reintegration. In addition, IOM in coordination with the Department of Social Welfare (DSW) Ministry of Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement conducted a series of capacity building trainings on enhancing protection and direct assistance to VoTs. Partnership IOM provides technical and nancial support to the Government of Myanmar to enhance bilateral and regional collaboration mechanism to address tra cking and irregular migration. For instance IOM has facilitated the development of Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of Myanmar and Thailand with a view to strengthen partnership on Protection of Tra cked Victims, especially women and children in Thailand. Furthermore, IOM Myanmar also provides technical and nancial support to Myanmar Department of Social Welfare to organize and participate in Myanmar-Thai Case Management Meetings intended to enhance partnership on victim protection. IOM further supported the Central Body for Suppression of Tra cking in Persons (CBTIP) in the recently concluded Myanmar and China consultative dialogue whose main objective was to establish and strengthen cooperation and collaboration e orts and e ective mechanism to combat human tra cking between China and Myanmar. Other activities that IOM is involved in include research and needs assessments tra cking and irregular migration including vulnerabilities that Myanmar migrant face abroad during emergencies. IOM is also building the capacity of governments and other stakeholders to reduce migrant-speci c vulnerabilities during emergencies through improved protection. Main Projects Enhancing Government Capacity to Assist Vulnerable Migrants in the Greater Mekong Sub-region and Malaysia Building a National NGO Network to Combat Tra cking, especially in Con ict and Cease re Areas in Myanmar Reducing the Vulnerability of Migrants in Emergencies The Fishing Sector & Tra cking in Persons in the ASEAN region (FISH-TIP ASEAN Programme) Phase I Immigration and Border Management With Myanmar currently undergoing an unprecedented transition supported by key political and socio-economic reforms, increasing mobility, together with Myanmar’s emerging position on an increasing number of international air routes, road links and new border crossings, has created a need for https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

10/17

7/15/2018


strengthened immigration and border management. To this end, IOM supports the e orts of the Government of Myanmar through building technical and operational capacities at ports of entry and on an institutionwide basis through two projects. With the support of the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement A airs of the US Department of State, IOM is producing and implementing a comprehensive training package for frontline o cers from the Department of Immigration, Myanmar Police Force and Department of Social Welfare on how to better address transnational crime. The program is designed to ensure frontline o cials have the necessary knowledge and skills to better respond to the growing trends in migrant smuggling and human tra cking, and includes a fully updated package of training materials speci cally tailored to the Myanmar context, training of trainers and enduser trainings. Complementing these e orts, IOM, with the support of the Department of Foreign A airs, Trade and Development of the Government of Canada, is working closely with the Department of Immigration to better address migrant smuggling through a multifaceted institution-wide approach. The project aims to promote the development of counter-smuggling legislation, increase the detection of fraudulent travel documentation, improve the induction training provided to frontline o cers and encourage cross-border cooperation with neighbouring Thailand. Main Projects Building the Capacity of the Government of Myanmar to Combat Transnational Crime through Comprehensive Law Enforcement and Protection Training Supporting the Government of Myanmar to Combat Migrant Smuggling through Improved Legislation, Operational Skills, Induction Training and Cross-Border Cooperation [top]

Facilitating Migration Donors Swisscontact (http://www.swisscontact.org/en/home.html) Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) (http://www.sdc.admin.ch)

IOM Deveopment Fund (http://www.iom.int/developmentfund/) Labour Migration IOM Myanmar supports the Government of Myanmar’s on-going e orts to promote safe cross-border labour migration and to adopt a comprehensive and systematic approach to both the challenges and opportunities presented by growing international and internal migration. IOM’s work on labour migration and skill development has the two-fold objective of; ensuring that labour migration is safe and bene cial and; strengthening the link between labour migration and socio-economic development through enhanced skills mobility and mobility-sensitive skill development. In furthering such objectives, IOM and Myanmar’s Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population (MoLIP) cooperated to develop and review of the key strategic documents related to the management of international https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

11/17

7/15/2018


labour migration –The Five-Year National Plan of Action for the Management of International Labour Migration 2013–2017. IOM supports the Government of Myanmar to improve its migration management capacity in the context of national reforms, as well as expand cooperation at bilateral and regional levels. IOM works in close collaboration with the Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population (MOLIP) as well as selected members of Myanmar’s inter-ministerial Overseas Employment Supervisory Committee. IOM Myanmar undertakes a range of essential activities such as (i) organizing capacity building for Myanmar’s Labour Attaches in order to ensure the protection of rights of Myanmar’s migrant workers abroad and to maximize the bene ts of organized labour migration (ii) supporting the Government in establishing Migrant Resource Centers (MRCs) which act as a hub for information on safe migration and complaints mechanism, (iii) developing Information, Education and Communications materials to promote safe migration and protection of migrant workers and (iv) support development of policy, legislation and bilateral MoUs, including the new National Plan of Action for the Management of International Labour Migration 2018-2023. Human Development In close collaboration with relevant ministries in the target countries Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and Viet Nam (CLMTV) and with support of the Swiss Development Cooperation, IOM is developing a multi-year project aimed at promoting poverty reduction in CLMTV. This would enable the migrants from CLMV, especially poor women, to have better employment opportunities and conditions in Thailand, through enhanced skills and knowledge of safe migration, leading to poverty reduction in communities of origin. In Myanmar, the project will be implemented in close collaboration with the Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population (MOLIP) and other relevant government agencies responsible for skills development and sending and receiving labour migrants, private skills training providers and NGOs. Main Projects Local Vocational Training (as part of the Vocational Skills Development Programme) Poverty Reduction Through Safe Migration, Skills Development And Enhanced Job Placement (PROMISE) in Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, Thailand and Viet Nam. Supporting Myanmar’s Migration Management in the Context of National Reforms and Regional Transition. [top]

Migration Governance Donors Livelihoods and Food Security Trust Fund (LIFT) (http://www.lift-fund.org/) United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF) (http://www.unicef.org/) Singapore Management University (http://www.unisim.edu.sg/) IOM Development Fund (http://www.iom.int/developmentfund/) Migration is a de ning issue of the 21st century, and Myanmar is not an exception. Today, over 10 million Myanmar people, or 20% of its population, https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

12/17

7/15/2018


are migrants whether they migrate internally or internationally. Migration is a fact of life for millions of people in Myanmar, who participate in the phenomenon as migrants, left-behind family and community members, and employers of migrants. A variety of reasons exist in Myanmar which prompt people to move, including growing income gaps between Myanmar and neighboring countries, income disparities across and within various employment sectors in Myanmar, an absence of viable livelihood opportunities in communities of origin, insecure land tenure and land grabbing, poor access to markets, di erences in access to public infrastructure and social services, policies that have favoured big businesses over the rights of the rural poor, a weak legal and institutional framework and displacement due to environmental and man-made disasters. The major shifts that the country is experiencing – industrialization, urbanization, greater connectivity, peace process, regional integration and climate change, to name a few – will further induce greater movements of people. The prospect of economic growth alone suggests that an additional 10 million people, or nearly one-third of Myanmar’s rural population of 36 million, will migrate from villages to cities to take up non-farm employment in a couple of decades. Migration, whether it is internal movement or international, has increasingly become a widespread livelihood strategy for people in Myanmar. At the same time, a closer look at the migration dynamics of the regions clearly shows that migration takes place as a result of complex local conditions, including the proximity to livelihood opportunities and established social networks. Capitalizing Human Mobility for Poverty Alleviation and Inclusive Development for Myanmar (CHIME) is a project funded by the Livelihoods and Food Security Trust Fund (LIFT) that contributes to the development of an informed dialogue on migration in Myanmar. A consortium consisting of IOM, the University of Sussex and Metta Development Foundation will conduct a mixed-method study on labour migration patterns and impacts at the individual, household and community levels in four regions of the country. A situation analysis on migration governance in Myanmar will also be developed. These activities will be used to generate common, evidencebased migration narratives that will in uence national and local stakeholders’ analyses and actions, allowing actors to capitalize on mobility and create more e ective development and poverty reduction interventions. Migration as Livelihood Diversi cation Strategy in the Delta (MILDAS) is a LIFT funded project that examines migration and its relationship with development in the Ayeyarwaddy Delta. The project seeks to harness the positive e ects of migration while mitigating its risks by providing trainings to locals. This includes trainings on safe and gainful migration decisions for aspirant migrants and trainings on remittance management and adaptations to absent family members for migrant-sending households. Capitalizing Human Mobility for Poverty Alleviation and Inclusive Development for Myanmar (CHIME) is a project funded by the Livelihoods and Food Security Trust Fund (LIFT) that contributes to the development of an informed dialogue on migration in Myanmar. A consortium consisting of IOM, the University of Sussex and Metta Development Foundation will conduct a mixed-method study on labour migration patterns and impacts at the individual, household and community levels in four regions of the country. A situation analysis on migration governance in Myanmar will also be developed. These activities will be used to generate common, evidencebased migration narratives that will in uence national and local stakeholders’ analyses and actions, allowing actors to capitalize on mobility and create more e ective development and poverty reduction interventions. https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

13/17

7/15/2018


‘Increasing the Developmental Impact of Labour Migration through Strengthened Governance and Partnership (Twe Let)’ is the newest LIFTfunded project which aims to improve the governance and outreach capacities of national actors to subsidize the developmental impact migration has on Myanmar. Target bene ciaries of the Twe Let project are aspiring migrants and their families. The governance component of the project will involve IOM’s technical support to the Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population as the lead within the Myanmar Government as it initiates a migration policy to support the sustainable and inclusive development of Myanmar. The outreach component will be implemented in Chin State, Shan State, the Southeast region as well as the Dry Zone. The unique consortium of civil society organizations is composed of Chin Human Rights Organization, Mon Women’s Organization and Parami Development Network and Pact Global Micro nance Fund. This consortium enables Twe Let to have a strong footprint in 30 of Myanmar’s townships, providing direct assistance to 50,000 bene ciaries. Twe Let has four main focus areas: premigration outreach, nancial literacy, skills development and job matching. The pre-migration outreach pillar assists aspiring migrants and their families in making informed, safe and strategic decisions. The nancial literacy pillar assists remittance-receiving households in managing the money they receive. The skills development pillar trains aspiring migrants and remittance receiving families with skills to seek better employment. IOM and the CSO partners will collaborate on skills development training to ensure migrants are trained in skills that will be marketable during migration and upon return to villages. Finally, the job matching pillar assists graduates of skill development programmes in nding employment through collaboration with businesses and the Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry. Growing up in the time of increased mobility: Impact of migration on children in Myanmar is a research study funded by United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF). The main objective of this study is to ll in a knowledge gap about the lives of children a ected by migration in Myanmar based on data drawn from their own perspective. It placed the children at the centre of the enquiry, rather than treating them as passive participants /benefactors of the process. Myanmar Grandparents Caring for Grandchildren: Impact of Cross-border Migration is a research study funded by Singapore Management University (SMU). The objectives of the project are to examine prevalence and di erentials in older persons living with and caring for grandchildren who are left behind as a result of cross-border migration. The project will also examine patterns and factors associated with grandparent caregiving and investigate pathways to becoming custodial grandparents among grandparents co-residing with grandchildren under 15 years old in the target areas. Another objective is to explore the association between caregiving for grandchildren left behind from cross-border migration and the wellbeing of grandparents in Myanmar versus caregiving for grandchildren whose parents are co-resident. Finally the project will also examine the roles of remittances in mediating the associations between grandparental custodial care and wellbeing of the grandparents, and to provide an empirical basis for evidence-based policy and program recommendations to maximize advantages and to minimize disadvantages for grandparents of custodial caregiving for grandchildren. Main Projects Increasing the Developmental Impact of Labour Migration through Strengthened Governance and Partnership (Twe Let) Capitalizing Human Mobility for Poverty Alleviation and Inclusive Development for Myanmar (CHIME) https://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

14/17

7/15/2018


Migration as Livelihood Diversi cation Strategy in the Delta (MILDAS) Growing up in the time of increased mobility: Impact of migration on children in Myanmar Myanmar Grandparents Caring for Grandchildren: Impact of Crossborder Migration [top]

1

(2015) World Bank, Migration and Development Brief 25 – Migration and Remittances – Recent Developments and Outlook, p.14 (http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/102761445353157305/MigrationandDevelopmentBrief25.pdf)

Last updated: Facts and gures: July 2017 Main text: July 2017

DIASPORA RESOURCES

+

3 12

2 4 5

6

2

2

2

4

Leaflet | © OpenStreetMap contributors

HIGHLIGHTS

- Any -

Press Release

Press Release


15/17

7/15/2018


Press Release

Press Release

Press Release

Press Release

Press Release

Video

Press Release


16/17

7/15/2018


Press Release

Featured Stories

Press Release

Press Room Publications Report Abuse, Fraud or Misconduct Scam Alert


Job Vacancies Procurement Opportunities Contact Us

IOM’s Global Migration Data Analysis Centre Governing Bodies International Dialogue on Migration Regional Consultative Processes IOM Development Fund

Address: 17 Route des Morillons 1218 Grand-Saconnex Switzerland Tel: +41.22.717.9111 IOM Manila Administrative Centre IOM Panama Administrative Centre

17/17

7/15/2018

DG Swing Discusses Myanmar Crisis with Aung San Suu Kyi | International Organization for Migration

         English Français Español Enter your keywords h

DG Swing Discusses Myanmar Crisis with Aung San Suu Kyi Posted: 07/13/18 Themes: Others Nay Pyi Taw - IOM’s Director General William Lacy Swing said rebuilding community cohesion in Myanmar is key to resolving the crisis created by the ight of 700,000 refugees to Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh since last August. Swing made the remarks in a meeting Thursday with Aung San Suu Kyi, State Counsellor of Myanmar in the nation’s capital Nay Pyi Taw. He also welcomed a plan recently agreed between UNDP and UNHCR (respectively the UN agencies for development and refugees) and the Myanmar government.

(https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ les/press_release/pictures/13_07_2018_p

The Joint Myanmar Government-UN plan is designed to IOM DG William Lacy Swing Meets with Myanmar’s Aung create the conditions for voluntary, safe and digni ed return San Suu Kyi on Refugee Crisis. Photo: IOM and reintegration of the refugees with quick impact projects to bene t communities. The aim is to create con dencebuilding and social cohesion measures leading to economic growth and development. “Myanmar faces great challenges, and there is an urgent need to help bring communities together to enable the country to achieve its great potential” Swing said. IOM has a track record in peace and reconciliation worldwide, and he o ered its support in this regard. In wide-ranging discussions, Swing and Aung San Suu Kyi discussed IOM’s decade-long, active presence in Myanmar where its 600 sta are providing a range of services to vulnerable communities in 13 of the country’s 14 states and regions, including Rakhine state. IOM’s work focuses on safe and orderly migration, community development, health care, disaster risk reduction and preventing human tra cking and smuggling. The meeting coincided with peace and reconciliation talks in the capital which Aung San Suu Kyi is leading. With a number of the country’s multiple ethnic groups still involved in active con ict, the government faces many challenges beyond the immediate humanitarian crisis of the refugees. One of those is migration with its long borders with Thailand, Laos, China, India and Bangladesh. (Some 25 per cent of https://www.iom.int/news/dg-swing-discusses-myanmar-crisis-aung-san-suu-kyi

1/2

7/15/2018

DG Swing Discusses Myanmar Crisis with Aung San Suu Kyi | International Organization for Migration

Myanmar’s population are migrants, whether internally or in foreign countries.) For more information contact Leonard Doyle Tel +41 792857123 / Email [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])



https://www.iom.int/news/dg-swing-discusses-myanmar-crisis-aung-san-suu-kyi



2/2

7/15/2018

စိန္ေ◌ခၚမႈေ◌ တနဲ႔ ◌ျမ ာရ င ◌ိင္ေ◌နရဟ IOM အရာရွ ိ ေ◌◌ျပာၾကား

စိနေ ္ ခၚမႈေတြနဲ႔ ျမန္မာရင္ဆုိငေ ္ နရဟု IOM အရာရွိ ေျပာၾကား 2018-07-13

IOM ညႊနၾ္ ကားေရးမွဴးခ်ဳပ္ William Lacy Swing ကို ေတြ႔ရစဥ္ Photo: FABRICE COFFRINI / AFP

ျမန္ မာနိုင္ငံအေနနဲ႔ မတူတ့ ဲ လူမႈအသိုင္းအ၀ိုင္းႏွစ္ခုကို အတူေနထိုင္ဖို႔ ေဆာင္ ရြက္ေနတာမွာ စိန္ေခၚမႈေတြ အမ်ားႀကီးရွိၿပီး အကူအညီေ တြ အေရးေပၚလိုအပ္ ေနတယ္လို႔ ျမန္ မာႏိုင္ငံကို ေရာက္ရွိလာတဲ့ အျပည္ျပည္ဆိုင္ရာ ေရႊ႕ေျပာင္ းသူမ်ား အဖြဲ႔ IOM ညႊန္ၾကားေရးမွဴးခ်ဳပ္ William Lacy Swing က ေျပာဆိုလိုက္ပါတယ္။

IOM ညြန္ခ်ဳပ္ ဟာ ႏိုင္ငံေတာ ္ အတိုင္ပင္ ခံ ပုဂၢိဳလ္ ေဒၚေအာင္ ဆန္ းစုၾကည္နဲ႔ ေနျပည္ေတာ ္ မွာ ေတြ႔ဆံုေဆြးေႏြးၿပီးေနာက္ ခုလိုေျပာဆိုလို က္တာပါ။ IOM ညႊန္ခ်ဳပ္ က ဘဂၤလာေဒ့ရ္ွႏိုင္ငံကို ေရာက္ရွိေနတဲ့ ဒုကၡသည္ေတြကို ျပန္ လည္လက္ခံဖို႔ ျမန္ မာႏိုင္ငံဟာ ကုလသမဂၢ အ ဖြဲ႔အစည္း ၂ ရပ္ နဲ႔ သေဘာတူလက္မွတ္ ေရးထိုးတာကိုလည္း ႀကိဳဆိုလိုက္ပါတယ္။

https://www.rfa.org/burmese/news/william-lacy-swing-07132018224337.html

1/1

7/15/2018

Media+Technology Enables Myanmar Migrants to Access Crucial Information | International Organization for Migration

         English

Français

Español

Enter your keywords

h

Media+Technology Enables Myanmar Migrants to Access Crucial Information Posted: 07/06/18 Themes: Counter-Tra cking Yangon - Access to vital information and resources is crucial for Myanmar workers looking for jobs in other cities and countries. And that access is rapidly evolving with the explosion of media and technology in the country. Speakers at IOM X’s “Media+Tech for Migration” forum in Yangon this week highlighted the role of innovation and how it is reshaping migration throughout the region. “The digital landscape in Myanmar has rapidly changed, necessitating the availability of new platforms to e ectively communicate with migrants here,” said Tara Dermott, IOM X Programme Leader. “With so many people looking for trustworthy information online or through media via Internetconnected mobile devices, technology-led approaches are being adopted to bridge the resource gap.”

(https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ les/press_release/media/pbn0 7myanmar.jpg)

Myanmar singer Chan Chan performs at IOM X’s “Media+Tech for Migration” forum in Yangon. Photo: IOM 2018.

IOM X screened its Make Migration Work video series during the “Media+Tech for Migration” forum. The eight videos, produced with community input over the past nine months, highlight important issues faced by aspiring migrants in Myanmar alongside trusted resources. These include IOM Myanmar’s Facebook Chat Bot called Miss Migration, which helps process information queries e ciently, and IOMX.org/mm, a website that provides migration tips and o cial government contacts for migration information.

https://www.iom.int/news/mediatechnology-enables-myanmar-migrants-access-crucial-information

1/2

7/15/2018

Media+Technology Enables Myanmar Migrants to Access Crucial Information | International Organization for Migration

Since premiering in May of this year, the videos have been viewed over 1.5 million times. Myanmar broadcasters, Democratic Voice of Burma and Mizzima, began regular airings of the videos on television following the forum. These airings are expected to reach millions of people this month. For further information and to view the Make Migration Work videos, visit IOMX.org/mm (http://iomx.org/mm/) (Myanmar language) or IOMX.org/mm/english (http://iomx.org/mm/english/). To chat with Miss Migration on Facebook, visit Facebook.com/MissMigration (https://www.facebook.com/MissMigration). Over 200 people participated in IOM X’s “Media+Tech for Migration” forum, including representatives from the Issara Institute, Myanmar’s ICT4D network and the country’s top media outlets. Myanmar singer Chan Chan performed at the closing. IOM X is the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)’s campaign to prevent exploitation and human tra cking in Asia Paci c.

For more information please contact Mia Barrett at IOM X, Email: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]),Tel: +66847052114




https://www.iom.int/news/mediatechnology-enables-myanmar-migrants-access-crucial-information


2/2

7/15/2018

IOM X Video Series Targets Myanmar Migrants | International Organization for Migration


IOM X Video Series Targets Myanmar Migrants Posted: 05/08/18 Themes: Counter-Tra cking, Human Smuggling Nay Pyi Taw – “Information is power”; that was the central message at the premiere of IOM X’s Make Migration Work video series yesterday (07/05). The short dramas illustrate why it pays to seek information and guidance before migrating, and provide di erent ways that people can do this, including through IOM Myanmar’s “Miss Migration” Facebook page. IOM X is a campaign to prevent human tra cking and exploitation led by IOM, the UN Migration Agency, and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).

(https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ les/press_release/media/mm2 1.jpg)

Government o cials at IOM X’s “Make Migration Work” video series launch in Nay Pyi Taw. Photo: The Make Migration Work video series was produced Minzayar Oo/IOM in partnership with the Myanmar Government’s Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population, and aligns with national e orts to increase Myanmar migrants’ access to information through Labour Exchange O ces and Migrant Resource Centres, which also feature in the videos. “Migrants who seek information before they migrate usually have more successful experiences,” said Tara Dermott, IOM X Programme Leader. “But nding trustworthy information is not always easy. Recognizing that more and more people in Myanmar are accessing the internet every day, through IOM X’s Make Migration Work series, we are showing potential migrants how a visit to a Migrant Resource Centre or how a query posted to Miss Migration on Facebook may make the di erence between a good or bad experience for themselves and their families.”

https://www.iom.int/news/iom-x-video-series-targets-myanmar-migrants

1/3

7/15/2018


The eight-video Make Migration Work series comprises four stories, each told from two di erent perspectives. The videos are in Burmese, with running time of under four minutes each. IOM Myanmar's Miss Migration Facebook page points visitors to reliable safe migration information online. The page includes an easy-to-use chat function that guides users through a series of topics related to migration and directs them to the speci c information they are looking for. You can view the Make Migration Work video series at IOMX.org/mm.

FACTS ABOUT MIGRATION IN MYANMAR Most Myanmar nationals migrate for better economic opportunities. The Myanmar National Census estimates that 4.25 million Myanmar nationals migrated abroad in 2014. [1] There is also vast internal migration, with around 9.4 million Myanmar nationals migrating within the country, accounting for around 17 per cent of the population. [2] The majority of remittances received from Myanmar come from Thailand, with a total of USD 1.85 billion sent home from Thailand in 2015. On average, Myanmar migrants in Thailand remit between USD 150-3,100 a year. [3] Based on a study of two regions in Myanmar, internal migrants remit an average about USD 300 per year. [4] A recent survey of over 1,000 Myanmar nationals in Yangon in September 2017 showed that only 53 per cent of respondents were aware that they needed a passport, work visa and a contract to migrate to another country for work. [5] Costs of arranging irregular migration (including transportation) range between USD 275-585, although some migrants pay as little as USD 3 to cross into Thailand irregularly. [6] Many migrants cannot pay migration fees up front and as a result go into debt. On average, Myanmar migrants end up with a debt of around USD 300-500. Often, migrants are not aware of the full extent of their debt or how long they need to repay it. [7] ENDNOTES [1] IOM Myanmar, General Information – Overview. Available from www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

(http://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar). [2] IOM Myanmar, General Information – Overview. Available from www.iom.int/countries/myanmar

(http://www.iom.int/countries/myanmar). https://www.iom.int/news/iom-x-video-series-targets-myanmar-migrants

2/3

7/15/2018 [3]


Tra cking in Persons from Cambodia, Lao PDR and Myanmar to Thailand (2017), pp. 103-105.

[4] UNODC, Tra cking in Persons from Cambodia, Lao PDR and Myanmar to Thailand (2017), pp. 108. [5] [6] [7]

IOM X, Baseline Study: IOM X Roadshow Myanmar (October 2017 – forthcoming). UNODC, Tra cking in Persons from Cambodia, Lao PDR and Myanmar to Thailand (2017), pp. 137. UNODC, Tra cking in Persons from Cambodia, Lao PDR and Myanmar to Thailand (2017), pp. 138



https://www.iom.int/news/iom-x-video-series-targets-myanmar-migrants



3/3

7/15/2018

Myanmar Launches Manual for Return and Reintegration of Trafficking Victims from Thailand | International Organization for Migration

         English

Français

Español

Enter your keywords

h

Myanmar Launches Manual for Return and Reintegration of Tra cking Victims from Thailand Posted: 04/13/18 Nay Pyi Taw – Myanmar’s Ministry of Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement this week launched a manual of standard operating procedures (SOPs) for case management, repatriation and reintegration of victims of human tra cking from Thailand. The manual was produced with the support of IOM, the UN Migration Agency, which has been supporting the e orts of both countries to provide protection for tra cking victims since the signing of a government-to-government Memorandum of Understanding in 2003. Since then the two countries have held regular meetings to coordinate the timely, safe and digni ed return of over 500 victims from Thailand to Myanmar. IOM has provided nancial and technical support for case management meetings, case worker visits and the drafting of SOPs.

(https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ les/press_release/media/pbn0 myanmar.jpg)

The new manual lists standard operating procedures for the return of tra cked victims. Photo: IOM

The manual, which will be distributed by the government, describes step-by-step procedures for the two countries to take in combatting human tra cking and providing assistance to victims. It will be used to train frontline o cials from government agencies, local police, border guard police, and members of Myanmar’s human tra cking task force. Most of the victims assisted under the agreement between the governments were tra cked to Thailand for forced labour or sexual exploitation. In 2017, they included 66 men and 13 women and in 2016, 67 men and 14 women. https://www.iom.int/news/myanmar-launches-manual-return-and-reintegration-trafficking-victims-thailand

1/2

7/15/2018

Myanmar Launches Manual for Return and Reintegration of Trafficking Victims from Thailand | International Organization for Migration

“Myanmar continues to make progress in the protection of victims of tra cking. This manual will help all the stakeholders, including IOM, to provide to all the women, girls, men and boys victims of tra cking, with safe and sustainable options,” said Akio Nakayama, IOM Chief of Mission in Myanmar.

For more information, please contact Akio Nakayama at IOM Myanmar. Email: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]), Tel. +951210588.




https://www.iom.int/news/myanmar-launches-manual-return-and-reintegration-trafficking-victims-thailand


2/2

7/15/2018

FAO, IOM Joint Statement on World Food Day 2017: "Change the Future of Migration. Invest in Food Security and Rural Development" | …


FAO, IOM Joint Statement on World Food Day 2017: "Change the Future of Migration. Invest in Food Security and Rural Development" Posted: 10/17/17 Themes: Migration and Development Nay Pyi Taw – Myanmar is a country with high level of mobility. It has over 9.39 million internal migrants and estimated 4.25 million international migrants. Together, they represent 25 per cent of the country’s total population of 51 million. This level of mobility one in every four citizens is a migrant – is considerably higher than the world average of (https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ one in seven.

les/default_images/IOM

logo-standin.jpg)

While Myanmar is already a highly mobile country, projections suggest that internal and international mobility will continue to grow. Currently, Myanmar remains a predominately rural country with 70 percent of the population living in rural areas. Urbanization, as in the rest of the world, is a growing trend. As the economy grows and diversi es in the industrial and service sectors, millions of farmers, whose main source of livelihood is agriculture, will continue to move to cities to take up non-farm employment. Overseas employment opportunities in neighboring countries as well as new https://www.iom.int/news/fao-iom-joint-statement-world-food-day-2017-change-future-migration-invest-food-security-and

1/5

7/15/2018


destinations will also continue to attract Myanmar workers with better wages. Improved communication channels, personal networks, availability of information, the brokerage and recruitment industry, and transport infrastructure will also enable more aspiring migrants to nd employment abroad. But migration should be a choice, not a necessity created by food insecurity. Migration for the rural poor is often a means of seeking out alternative income-generating opportunities. Millions are compelled to migrate in pursuit of safety and livelihoods opportunities, often congregating in urban slums where they face new risks associated with insecurity, poverty, marginalization and exposure to natural hazards. It is therefore now more critical than ever that we intensify our collective e orts to build the resilience of at-risk rural communities to crises and displacement, increase e orts to ensure food security of all people, and shift to longer term policies and practices that enable states, communities and individuals to embrace potential opportunities. Agriculture and rural development are directly contributing to address the root causes of migration including food insecurity. Actions directed to achieve food security and sustainable, inclusive rural development are therefore needed to make migration a choice not a necessity. Food security has long been a priority for the United Nations and achieving food security was already a key objective of the 2000-2015 Millennium Development Goals. Goal 1 was: “Eradicating extreme poverty and hunger.” https://www.iom.int/news/fao-iom-joint-statement-world-food-day-2017-change-future-migration-invest-food-security-and

2/5

7/15/2018


In the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, food security retains a very important place, but recognition of the linkages between the di erent goals stresses the need for a crosssectoral approach to each goal which cannot be achieved without strong partnerships. Overall, food security needs to play a larger role in the debates on migration and development, and migration needs to be better integrated in the debates on agricultural and food security policies and programmes. FAO and IOM can have a major impact in bringing these conversations together. FAO’s work in this area mainly focuses on addressing structural drivers of large movements in the development and emergency contexts. In development settings this includes interventions directed at ensuring a more productive agriculture sector, climate change adaptation, poverty reduction, enhancement of decent rural employment and social protection, and sustainable management of natural resources among others. Meanwhile, FAO’s emergency interventions aim to foster the resilience of vulnerable agriculture-based communities, which mitigate displacement, laying the ground for long-term recovery after shocks, and pave the way for durable solutions. IOM, the UN Migration Agency, is dedicated to promoting humane and orderly migration for the bene t of all. IOM works to help ensure the orderly and humane management of migration, to promote international cooperation on migration issues, to assist in the search for practical solutions to migration https://www.iom.int/news/fao-iom-joint-statement-world-food-day-2017-change-future-migration-invest-food-security-and

3/5

7/15/2018


problems, and to provide humanitarian assistance to migrants in need, including refugees and internally displaced people. FAO and IOM collaborate on projects related to natural hazards, climate change, food security and displacement in many di erent parts of the world. At the international level, FAO and IOM will co-chair the Global Migration Group (GMG) in 2018, an inter-agency body which promotes dialogue on migration issues. This is very timely as states negotiate a Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. Here in Myanmar, FAO and IOM will continue to join forces to ensure that the food security, rural development, and migration nexus is adequately re ected and addressed in relevant national policies and programmes. However, the challenges remain colossal and will require a more joined up response from the UN system, governments, civil society, the private sector, academia and other relevant actors. FAO and IOM are committed to expanding their support to the people and the Government of Myanmar towards the achievement of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals that pertain to food security and migration.

For more information please contact Akio Nakayama at IOM Myanmar. Email: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]), Tel. +41227232848.

Press Room Publications Report Abuse, Fraud or


IOM’s Global Migration Data Analysis Centre

https://www.iom.int/news/fao-iom-joint-statement-world-food-day-2017-change-future-migration-invest-food-security-and

Address: 17 Route des Morillons 1218 Grand4/5

7/15/2018


Misconduct Scam Alert

Governing Bodies International Dialogue on Migration Regional Consultative Processes IOM Development Fund

https://www.iom.int/news/fao-iom-joint-statement-world-food-day-2017-change-future-migration-invest-food-security-and

Saconnex Switzerland Tel: +41.22.717.9111 IOM Manila Administrative Centre IOM Panama Administrative Centre

5/5

7/15/2018

UN Migration Agency (IOM) Calls for Restraint, More Aid for Civilians Fleeing Myanmar | International Organization for Migration


UN Migration Agency (IOM) Calls for Restraint, More Aid for Civilians Fleeing Myanmar Posted: 08/30/17 Themes: Humanitarian Emergencies, Internally Displaced Persons, Refugee and Asylum Issues Geneva - UN Migration Agency (IOM) Director General William Lacy Swing today called on all parties in Myanmar to exercise restraint following fresh violence in Rakhine State. He also appealed to the international community to provide more support for civilians eeing into neighbouring Bangladesh.

(https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ les/default_images/IOM logo-standin.jpg)

According to IOM Bangladesh, which coordinates humanitarian assistance to some 200,000 Undocumented Myanmar Nationals living in makeshift settlements in Cox’s Bazar, an estimated 18,500 people have crossed into Bangladesh from Myanmar since latest outbreak of violence on 25 August. Thousands more are still trapped in the no-man’s land between the two countries. Director General Swing joined UN SecretaryGeneral Antonio Guterres in his condemnation of the coordinated attacks against Myanmar’s security forces, but called for a proportionate response on the part of the Myanmar authorities that recognizes the need to protect vulnerable civilians. https://www.iom.int/news/un-migration-agency-iom-calls-restraint-more-aid-civilians-fleeing-myanmar

1/3

7/15/2018


He noted that most of the civilians crossing the border are women, children and the elderly and appealed to Bangladesh, which already hosts an estimated 400,000 Undocumented Myanmar Nationals, to continue to admit desperate people eeing the violence. IOM, he said, is at the request of the Bangladesh government, working with the local authorities, UN, NGO and other partners coordinating humanitarian assistance including deliveries of food, water and medical support in Cox’s Bazar. While new arrivals who have entered Bangladesh are able to access these services, he appealed to Bangladesh to either admit people caught on the border or facilitate better access to enable humanitarian aid to reach them. He also called on the Myanmar authorities in Rakhine State to facilitate the work of humanitarian agencies and provide access to vulnerable people in need of assistance to stabilize the situation and reduce the number of people trying to ee the country. Welcoming the recommendations of a report published this week by the Advisory Commission on Rakhine State, he noted that, if implemented, they would also contribute to greater stability. Limited resources mean that IOM and its humanitarian partners in Cox’s Bazar are now struggling to cope with the in ux of new arrivals. IOM is committed to supporting both Myanmar and Bangladesh in addressing the humanitarian needs of people a ected by this https://www.iom.int/news/un-migration-agency-iom-calls-restraint-more-aid-civilians-fleeing-myanmar

2/3

7/15/2018


emerging humanitarian crisis on both sides of the border. But in order to achieve this, more support will be needed from the international community, he added.

For more information please contact Leonard Doyle at IOM's Headquarters in Geneva, Tel: +41792857123, Email: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) or [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])




https://www.iom.int/news/un-migration-agency-iom-calls-restraint-more-aid-civilians-fleeing-myanmar

Address: 17 Route des Morillons 1218 GrandSaconnex Switzerland Tel: +41.22.717.9111 IOM Manila Administrative Centre IOM Panama Administrative Centre

3/3

7/15/2018

Myanmar’s Religious Leaders Meet to Combat Human Trafficking, Smuggling | International Organization for Migration

         English

Français

Español

Enter your keywords

h

Myanmar’s Religious Leaders Meet to Combat Human Tra cking, Smuggling Posted: 05/30/17 Themes: Capacity Building, Human Smuggling Myanmar - Myanmar Buddhist and Christian religious and community leaders met in Yangon last week at a workshop organized by IOM to discuss community-based solutions to human tra cking and migrant smuggling. Every year some 250-350 Myanmar nationals are identi ed as victims of tra cking in neighbouring countries. Most are tra cked for purposes of forced (https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ les/press_release/media/mm2 labour, sexual exploitation, forced marriage or 1.jpg) organized begging. The workshop attracted 42 participants including Buddhist Monks participating in Yangon AntiBuddhist monks, Christian nuns and priests, the Tra cking Workshop. Photo: IOM / Liam Best 2017 Myanmar Police Anti-Tra cking Task Force (ATTF) and representatives from other faith-based community organizations, including Karuna Mission Social Solidarity (KMSS) and Good Shepherd. “There are currently no anti-smuggling laws in Myanmar, but for tra cking cases we can use the Anti-Tra cking in Persons Law and human rights law, as tra ckers often abuse human rights. I encourage everyone here to apply the lessons learnt in the workshop in your respective communities,” ATTF Police Major Khin Maung Kywe told delegates. The workshop, which was funded by the US State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM), highlighted the need for a coordinated approach to combating smuggling and tra cking, and focused on the role of religious leaders in addressing the challenge in the https://www.iom.int/news/myanmars-religious-leaders-meet-combat-human-trafficking-smuggling

1/3

7/15/2018


community. Participants learnt about migration, the risks of tra cking and working collaboratively towards community-based solutions. “Religious leaders are particularly in uential in Myanmar and are highly respected and trusted members of their communities. Many people turn to them in times of hardship and crisis such as after natural disasters – when people are at their most vulnerable,” said IOM Myanmar protection specialist Yoko Kimura. “Previously, there were many challenges for Buddhist religious leaders being involved in social work in Myanmar. We could not participate in this type of social work due to our discipline, which primarily focuses on purely religious matters. But now we can participate without breaking Buddhist principles. When we give sermons, we can also include information about tra cking,” said a senior monk taking part in the workshop. Other interventions discussed at the workshop included the inclusion of counter-tra cking messages in religious sermons and links with Buddhist and Christian teachings. Strengthening collaboration among churches and incorporating youth education programmes at Dhamma schools and churches on the risks of tra cking and safe migration were also discussed. For further information please contact Sharon Dimanche at IOM Myanmar. Tel. +951523509, Email: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])

Press Room Publications Report Abuse, Fraud or Misconduct


IOM’s Global Migration Data Analysis Centre Governing Bodies

https://www.iom.int/news/myanmars-religious-leaders-meet-combat-human-trafficking-smuggling

Address: 17 Route des Morillons 1218 Grand-Saconnex Switzerland 2/3

7/15/2018

Scam Alert


International Dialogue on Migration Regional Consultative Processes IOM Development Fund

https://www.iom.int/news/myanmars-religious-leaders-meet-combat-human-trafficking-smuggling

Tel: +41.22.717.9111 IOM Manila Administrative Centre IOM Panama Administrative Centre

3/3

7/15/2018

IOM Myanmar combats natural disasters | International Organization for Migration


IOM Myanmar combats natural disasters

Date Publish: 05/23/17 Region-Country: Asia Myanmar Myanmar is repeatedly hit by deadly cyclones, landslides, oods and earthquakes. IOM Myanmar combats natural disasters by building safer shelters in a ected areas through cash for work activities that increase incomes after disasters.



https://www.iom.int/video/iom-myanmar-combats-natural-disasters

IOM’s Global Migration Data Analysis Centre Governing Bodies

Address: 17 Route des Morillons 1218 GrandSaconnex Switzerland 1/2

7/15/2018

IOM Myanmar combats natural disasters | International Organization for Migration

International Dialogue on Migration Regional Consultative Processes IOM Development Fund

https://www.iom.int/video/iom-myanmar-combats-natural-disasters

Tel: +41.22.717.9111 IOM Manila Administrative Centre IOM Panama Administrative Centre

2/2

7/15/2018

IOM Supports Myanmar Communities to Manage Displacement | International Organization for Migration


IOM Supports Myanmar Communities to Manage Displacement Posted: 03/28/17 Myanmar - In the Kachin and northern Shan States of Myanmar, over 98,000 people are still displaced as a result of the con ict that erupted in June 2011. In Rakhine State, it is estimated that there are over 120,000 displaced people and over 70,000 have ed the state. To improve the ability of the Myanmar Government, national and international organizations, civil society, faith-based organizations and displaced populations to manage and cope with displacement, IOM and the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) conducted a veday training of trainers (TOT) beginning 20 March. This initiative, which was held under the auspices of the national CCCM cluster in Myanmar, was funded by USAID and UNHCR.

(https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ les/press_release/pictures/mm2 1.jpg)

Life in displacement can be signi cantly improved if those displaced can be part of the decision-making process with regard to the assistance they receive. It is equally important that the provision of basic services, such as food, shelter, health, water and sanitation, meet minimum SPHERE standards. Camp coordination and camp management (CCCM) is about improving the lives of displaced persons to help them live with dignity, even during displacement. The aim of the training was to increase the pool of trainers from Rakhine, northern Shan and Kachin States and will be added to a national roster of people capable to manage displacement in camp settings. The Department of Relief and Resettlement State Director, U Soe Naing, opened the ve-day training in Taunggyi, the capital city of Shan State. The initiative brought together 23 camp management practitioners https://www.iom.int/news/iom-supports-myanmar-communities-manage-displacement

1/3

7/15/2018

IOM Supports Myanmar Communities to Manage Displacement | International Organization for Migration

who will be supporting various CCCM training needs in their respective States and also be deployed around the country to respond to displacement crises when needed. During the ve-day training, participants were introduced to CCCM tools, adult learning methods, coaching techniques, minimum standards and best practices in camp management in addition to strengthening their CCCM networks within Myanmar. “This is a unique opportunity for me to improve my knowledge and develop the skills to help my community to cope with displacement,” says Maji Mung Hpan, a 25-year-old CCCM Facilitator from the Kachin Baptist Convention in Kachin State, Myanmar. By promoting an understanding of the roles and responsibilities in CCCM, the camp management activities during the di erent phases of the camp life cycle and the role of community participation can ensure a more accountable provision of assistance and protection for displaced populations. It is important to recognize that camps are designed to be temporary settlements and are the last places of refuge for people displaced through man-made or natural disasters. When camps are set up, all e orts have to be made to provide the displaced populations with the support they deserve. For further information, please contact Kieran Gorman-Best, IOM Myanmar at Tel: +95 1210588, Email: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])



https://www.iom.int/news/iom-supports-myanmar-communities-manage-displacement

IOM’s Global Migration Data Analysis Centre Governing Bodies International Dialogue on Migration Regional Consultative

Address: 17 Route des Morillons 1218 Grand-Saconnex Switzerland Tel: +41.22.717.9111 IOM Manila Administrative Centre 2/3

7/15/2018

Unique Partnership Seeks to Increase Developmental Role of Migration in Myanmar | International Organization for Migration


Unique Partnership Seeks to Increase Developmental Role of Migration in Myanmar Posted: 03/17/17 Themes: Labour Migration, Migration and Development Myanmar - One in four people in Myanmar is a migrant, many migrating in search of work. In this environment of high mobility, IOM and partners this week launched the project Twe Let – Increasing the Developmental Impact of Labour Migration through Strengthened Governance and Partnership.

Twe Let, which means "hand in hand" in the Myanmar language, seeks policy and community (https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ level partnership to increase the developmental role 1.jpg) of migration. Supporting the e orts of the Government of Myanmar at the policy level, the project is led by the Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population (MOLIP) and will establish Myanmar’s rst-ever comprehensive migration policy.

les/press_release/pictures/mm2

The project supports Myanmar’s development priorities and will address international migration as well as internal migration. Additionally, it is a mechanism to "mainstream" migration into national and local sectoral development planning. At the community level, Twe Let supports migrants and their families from rural communities ensuring that their migration decisions improve their living conditions, helping them out of poverty to lead to inclusive and sustainable development. Twe Let aims to provide direct assistance to 50,000 potential migrants and members of migrant-sending households from rural communities in 29 townships of Chin State, Mandalay Region, Magway Region,

https://www.iom.int/news/unique-partnership-seeks-increase-developmental-role-migration-myanmar

1/3

7/15/2018


Shan State, Mon State, Kayin State and Thanintharyi Region. The Twe Let project was launched by U Myo Aung, Permanent Secretary of MOLIP, and was attended by over 80 participants from the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, including state and regional governments, members of parliament, civil society, international organizations, the private sector and the donor, Livelihoods and Food Security Trust Fund (LIFT). “This partnership formed between MOLIP, IOM and CSOs to implement the Twe Let project is the key to capitalize the impact of migration on Myanmar’s development. It will contribute to the protection of the rights of Myanmar migrants for safer and more gainful migration,” said U Myo Aung. The project, worth USD 6.5 million, to be implemented over 30 months, provides aspiring migrants and their families with practical information and tools to help them take the best migration decisions and actions. Migrant-sending families are supported through nancial literacy training with the aim of increasing their ability to manage remittances and increase the developmental impact of remittances. Skills development training will also be provided for aspiring migrants and migrant‐sending households, including practical skills for employment and selfemployment through migration and job-matching support to trainees. “People choose to migrate for better lives for themselves and their families. However, migration does not guarantee a better life. Without good planning and preparation, people could end up migrating from one form of poverty to another. Through this project, we aim to support migrants and their families to place migration in their broader livelihood strategies and to increase developmental outcome of migration,” said Michiko Ito, Programme Manager at IOM Myanmar.


2/3

7/15/2018


Twe Let is implemented by a unique consortium of organizations which include IOM, Chin Human Rights Organization (CHRO), the Mon coalition led by Mon Women’s Organization (MWO), Parami Development Network (PDN), and Pact Global Micro nance Fund (PGMF), with MOLIP as the counterpart Ministry. National actors are central to delivering the Twe Let project throughout the targeted townships, while two international organizations renowned for their respective areas of expertise will be providing technical and operational support. Twe Let is the largest project funded through the migration section of LIFT. LIFT's Migration Programme was launched in 2016 in recognition of the extensive impact that migration has on rural and urban transformation. Currently, the migration programme provides funding to 15 partners from international and national organizations, the Government of Myanmar, academia and media to jointly make migration safe and a real prospect for development. For further information, please contact Michiko Ito, IOM Myanmar, Tel: +95 943170624, Email: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])






3/3

7/15/2018

The Women Who Move Mountains


One year after Cyclone Komen shattered rural Myanmar, women are building back their communities Words: Liam Best All photos © 2016 IOM/Mayco Naing Design: Liam Best, Miko Alazas 25 October 2016

Cyclone Komen In late July of 2015, tropical Cyclone Komen formed off the southern coast of Bangladesh. As Komen intensified in the Bay of Bengal, the people of Myanmar were unaware of the scale of destruction to come. Komen brought an immense deluge of rain that caused flooding, the likes of which had not been seen in Myanmar since Cyclone Nargis hit in May 2008. Numerous villages across the country were left underwater, with residents' scant possessions swept away by forceful currents.

https://features.iom.int/stories/moving-mountains/

1/7

7/15/2018


Some 1.6 million individuals were temporarily displaced from their homes by the disaster, and 132 lost their lives.In many areas, livestock were drowned and harvests were ruined for the season, leaving farmers with no source of income to provide for their families. This meant extra hardship for women, struggling to feed children. In parts of Chin State, the rain would precipitate a series of violent landslides that would flatten houses, cover roads and disrupt services, leaving a trail of devastation where the only choice for many was to salvage what they could and prepare to start their lives again. Many are still, at the time of writing, rebuilding in new areas, where the risks of further landslides or flooding is less severe.

The worst-affected areas: Chin State and Sagaing Region lie in the mountainous northwest of Myanmar, and both share a border with India. Sagaing Region is partly located in Myanmar's dry zone and is a key agricultural region, also home to a Farm elds in Sagaing Region.

range of industries. Water scarcity and sanitation are major concerns in some parts of the region, while other parts are prone to seasonal flooding. Chin State remains the poorest and least developed area of Myanmar, with 73 per cent of Chin's 478,801 people living below the poverty line, according to the latest census data. Additionally, there is low literacy, inadequate access to healthcare, poor road infrastructure and limited power. Southern Chin

Poor roads and transportation is the norm in Chin State, Myanmar.

State is home to some of the most isolated and remote communities in Myanmar.

"Of course I don't want to leave my homeland, but it is impossible to stay there. We lost our land due to landslides, but my son still has a job here, so at least we are safe now," says Daw Lawng Hngel.


2/7

7/15/2018


Women at the Forefront When IOM spoke with communities in Chin State and Sagaing Region in late 2016, the women in these communities stood out as taking a lead role in the efforts to rebuild and restore their villages. In Myanmar, women are largely under-represented in positions of power, and there are still deeply entrenched social inequities in the treatment of women and the opportunities available to them. Despite this, it was clear that during and after this time of crisis, the women interviewed play a significant role in keeping these communities together through their hard work and determination. In both Sagaing Region and Chin State, many women are active in helping rebuild their villages by participating in cash-for-work programmes, where they are paid to engage in a number of development programmes. Normally, 90 per cent of households in Chin State and 60 per cent of households in Sagaing Region engage in agricultural work. However, traditional, agricultural work has been heavily affected by the landslides and flooding. Post-Komen development programmes run by IOM and partners are an effective way to engage people to participate in disaster and emergency recovery activities in villages which have been hard-hit by natural disasters. There are limited options for villagers to resume their normal livelihoods straight away; thus, for many, there is dignity and pride in resuming work and in the common purpose of rebuilding and helping their communities. Women are rebuilding the community in a variety of ways, including repairing, strengthening, relocating or rebuilding houses and key infrastructure, as well as improving services for affected villages. The activities, which don't require specialist skills, are a welcome source of supplementary income while villages are still recovering.


3/7

7/15/2018


At the New Nat Nan village in Sagaing, a work crew made entirely of women, in their traditional longyis, works steadily throughout the day, shovelling load after load of dirt to ensure the drainage channels are complete. This offers some protection for when the next heavy rains hit their newly constructed village. In these communities, manual work is not the sole domain of men. Re-establishing a sense of normality for the people who have been disrupted by the recurring natural disasters is central to the rebuilding efforts. The women in villages across Sagaing Region and Chin State are involved in rebuilding their All-women work crew in Sagaing.

communities through the restoration of services and establishment of small services, along with being involved in much of the manual work needed.

Building materials are salvaged from the school in Bai La Village, Chin State, in preparation for voluntary resettlement.

Adapting to Climate Change In Chin State, where the mountainous terrain is notoriously prone to landslides, packing up and moving entire communities is not out of the ordinary. Voluntary resettlement schemes are in place to mitigate against the risk of further landslides. While many villages have stood for generations and hold their own places in the hearts of the residents, in recent years the floods and landslides have shown their devastating power. It has proven too risky to remain living in these areas. https://features.iom.int/stories/moving-mountains/

4/7

7/15/2018


"Old Laizo village is 300 years old and is an important place for the Laizo ethnic group. Landslides made the village disappear, and the villagers left with almost nothing. But, I still have my three children and they are all in school now," says Ma Van Siang Hniem. Landslides in Chin State destroyed around 2,500 hectares of agricultural land, which needed to be rehabilitated by heavy machinery clearing sediment and debris

Agriculture & Livelihood Impact Assessment in Myanmar, 2005). Click here to read the full report. (World Food Programme,

(https://www.wfp.org/sites/default/files/FinalImpactAssessmentReportfinal.pdf)

For the residents of Bai La Village, there is sadness in leaving a part of their history behind and in the struggle of having to start again. However, there is also a sense of emotional strength and resilience in the way that they deal with these changes. Resuming their livelihoods following Tropical Cyclone Komen gives them back their pride and dignity, especially after taking an active role building back their communities.

"I have a small garden at my new house, and we received plant distributions from the Ministry of (Environmental Conservation and) Forestry and IOM. Agriculture is the main source of livelihood for Chin people,'' says Ma Nisung, 30, Chin State. Currently, Sagaing Region produces 10.5 per cent of Myanmar's overall monsoon paddy production and is the largest producer of cereals and seed oil crops, representing 30.3 per cent and 31 per cent of total national production respectively. Sagaing Region is also one of the largest areas for livestock production. While seed distribution and agriculture is an important part of feeding the villages, the planting of seedlings can also help stop erosion and provide some protection against further landslides.

Psychosocial support (https://www.iom.int/jahia/webdav/shared/shared/mainsite/activitie s/health/mental-health/Mental-Health-and-PsychosocialResponse.pdf): https://features.iom.int/stories/moving-mountains/

5/7

7/15/2018


The picture shows a group psychosocial support session being conducted for villagers in Tedim, Chin State. The psychological impact of losing homes, livelihoods or friends and family to natural disasters can be high, placing people under great stress. Support is offered to villagers in the hope of promoting psychological well-being in response to emergency situations.

Rebuilding through Education At New Laizo Village, Chin State, the village school is now held in a temporary structure after their community was voluntarily relocated to avoid further landslides. Construction of the new school is underway, but students happily attend their classes in the makeshift school despite the cold Chin State climate and the lack of modern teaching aids that one would find in many schools around the world. There are no laptops and state of the art sports facilities, yet the students here are keen to learn.

"We thank IOM, as it is not easy work relocating from our old village on a high Chin hill. With transportation assistance, villagers are getting paid for their contribution to build a shelter and school for students," says Daw Lal Fak Mawi, Teacher New Laizo Village, Falam, Chin State.

"Three generations of my family have attended this school. The school, together with the village, is over 100 years old," says Daw Fam Thluai.

A Resilient Future A year after tropical Cyclone Komen ripped a path of devastation across Myanmar, the flood waters have resided and the immediate landslides have stopped. The work to rebuild in Chin State and Sagaing Region is still ongoing.


6/7

7/15/2018


Like the force of the flood water that eventually breaks the river banks, the gradual efforts of the communities here are starting to forge a new path. Through cumulative efforts, new villages are taking form, small businesses are starting up, children are attending schools and basic facilities and services are being restored. Amidst the destruction, there is much to be celebrated about the determination and resilience of the communities who live here and their endeavor to resume their lives. . International Organization for Migration (IOM) Myanmar has been delivering programmes funded by EU Humanitarian Aid (ECHO) in Chin State and Sagaing Region, Myanmar since early 2016.


7/7

7/15/2018

IOM Trains Frontline Myanmar Officials in Combating Transnational Crime | International Organization for Migration

         English

Français

Español

Enter your keywords

h

IOM Trains Frontline Myanmar O cials in Combating Transnational Crime Posted: 08/02/16 Themes: Capacity Building Myanmar - Myanmar is currently undergoing a fast-paced ‘opening-up’ that has seen a major acceleration of trade, migration ows and integration into the global economy. The government is responding by updating legislation, expanding bilateral cooperation, and training frontline o cials in how to combat transnational crime, including human (https://www.iom.int/sites/default/ tra cking and migrant smuggling.

les/default_images/IOM

logo-standin.jpg)

IOM and Myanmar’s Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population have now produced a comprehensive training package for frontline o cers from the Departments of Immigration and Social Welfare, and the Myanmar Police Force, on how to address transnational crime. "This training package is designed to ensure frontline o cials from Immigration, Police, and Social Welfare have the necessary knowledge and skills to better respond to the growing trends in transnational crime, particularly in the areas of human tra cking and migrant smuggling," said IOM Myanmar Chief of Mission Kieran Gorman-Best.

https://www.iom.int/news/iom-trains-frontline-myanmar-officials-combating-transnational-crime

1/3

7/15/2018

IOM Trains Frontline Myanmar Officials in Combating Transnational Crime | International Organization for Migration

Some 500 frontline o cers will be trained in recognizing and investigating cases of migrant smuggling and tra cking in persons, prosecuting tra ckers and protecting the victims. Targeted areas will include Ayeyarwaddy Division, Shan State, Kachin State and Rakhine State, due to their high actual level or potential level of tra cking activity. “This training programme will greatly bene t us in better preparing our frontline immigration o cers to detect migrant smuggling and human tra cking,” said Director General of the Department of Immigration Myint Kyaing. The project is part of an ongoing IOM immigration and border management capacity building programme in Myanmar funded by the US State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement A airs (INL). For further information please contact Josh Hart at IOM Myanmar, Email: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]), Tel: +95 925 200 5314.



IOM’s Global Migration Data Analysis Centre Governing Bodies International Dialogue on Migration Regional Consultative Processes

https://www.iom.int/news/iom-trains-frontline-myanmar-officials-combating-transnational-crime

Address: 17 Route des Morillons 1218 GrandSaconnex Switzerland Tel: +41.22.717.9111 IOM Manila Administrative 2/3

International Organization for Migration

IOM APPEAL (MYANMAR / RAKHINE STATE) (April 2016 - April 2018)

Flood affected family from Rakhine State roofing their house with shelter kit received from IOM. © IOM 2015 (Photo: IOM)

15 March 2016

SITUATION OVERVIEW

118,000 Internally Displaced People

416,000 People in urgent need of humanitarian assistance

1,300,000 Affected by Cyclone Komen and Floods (nationally)

Total Beneficiaries 865,000 individuals IOM APPEAL 19.5 MILLION (USD) (April 2016 - April 2018)

TOTAL

19.5 M

i

Protection

f

Health

3M

T

Community Stabilisation and Development

5M

b

Early Recovery and Disaster Risk Reduction

8M

3.5 M

Established in 1951, International Organization for Migration (IOM) is the principal intergovernmental organization in the field of migration with 162 member states. IOM promotes orderly and humane migration management globally and international co-operation on migration issues. IOM Myanmar was established in 2005, with a head office in Yangon and over 600 staff and 12 sub-offices. IOM works actively with a number of ministries and at national, state, township and community levels. IOM has been active in Rakhine State since Cyclone Giri (2010) with emergency health and shelter support. IOM currently is active in Rakhine State in the fields of Camp Coordination and Camp Management (CCCM) capacity-building support, disaster risk reduction (DRR), WASH, emergency health, reconstruction and emergency relief, and safe migration activities. IOM Myanmar mainly works in five townships – Maungdaw, Myinbya, Pauktauw, Sittwe, and Myebon – which are the most risk prone of natural disasters and which contain the highest number of IDP caseloads. Rakhine State is the least developed of Myanmar’s 14 states and regions and is characterized by widespread poverty, weak infrastructure and a lack of opportunities for employment and income generation. This is exacerbated by the state’s vulnerability to natural disasters, and prolonged internal displacement of around 140,000 IDPs as a result of communal violence. The World Bank has estimated poverty incidence in Rakhine to be the highest in Myanmar at 78% - set against a national average of 37.5% - and it is thought that some 416,000 people are in urgent need of humanitarian assistance. Many people from across all communities struggle to gain access to adequate food security, education, healthcare, clean drinking water, and other basic services. For example, it has the lowest percentage of households with access to improved sanitation in the country (48% compared to a national average of 84%), as well as the lowest primary school enrolment rate (71.4% compared to a national average of 87.7%).

1

(IOM Myanmar/ Rakhine State) ● IOM Appeal

g

April 2016 - April 2018

Migration context in Rakhine State Due to chronic poverty, lack of development and employment opportunities, natural disasters, and communal violence, people from Rakhine State are increasingly migrating to other states/regions for work as itinerant day labourers. Seasonal and temporary labour migration to other villages or towns within the state (mostly ruralrural) is also a common phenomenon in Rakhine State. Migration of landless agricultural labourers, or those with a poor quality of land, is a growing phenomenon in Rakhine State.

The inability to access basic services and low levels of socioeconomic development afflict both Rakhine and Muslim populations. As a Migrant workers traveling with a truck to another place for job opportunities. result, many IDPs and other vulnerable people – especially in central © IOM 2015 (Photo: IOM) and northern Rakhine State – attempt to flee to neighboring countries. The most recent national census confirms the high unemployment rate in Rakhine at 10.4% - excluding the entire Muslim population – which is more than three times the national average. This has led to the migration, in particular, of many young people who wish to break the cycle of agricultural work. A recent study revealed that employment-related movement was the main reason for out-migration and that 80% of young people from Mrauk U Township have migrated. This exodus of working-age persons has led to labour shortages in some villages in particular in the farming sectors. The migration of young people is mostly financed by family members whom reportedly pay up to 800,000 kyat for brokers. While some people migrate abroad with a passport and valid visa, the majority of migrants from Rakhine State do so irregularly, and are as such vulnerable to human trafficking and exploitation. For instance, of thousands of Myanmar nationals who were trafficked to work on foreign fishing boats in Indonesian waters and rescued in 2015, more than 10% were from Rakhine State. Although many are aware of the risks of irregular cross-border migration, they feel that they are left with no choice. In order to maximize and sustain the benefits of safe migration, a system of migration support is necessary to disseminate information on destination countries, safe legal migration channels, the risks of irregular migration, and the key skills required for seeking employment overseas. Natural disasters and conflict also play a part in migration in Rakhine State. In 2007, Rakhine had a low rate of out-migration (31 per 1,000) and the lowest gross migration rate (36 per 1,000), mostly to other countries such as Thailand, Malaysia and China. In October 2010 Rakhine State was hit by Cyclone Giri, displacing more than 71,000 people and destroying at least 14,000 homes. Following Cyclone Giri in 2010 and the communal violence of 2012, this mass departure of Rakhine people accelerated.

i

Protection

The drivers of irregular migration from Rakhine Funding required State, where significant numbers from all Target no. of individuals: communities have left, are not unique. The Rakhine State Emergency Coordination Committee (ECC) recently estimated 10,000 Rakhine were leaving the state each month. Men, predominantly from central and southern Rakhine State, increasingly travel to other parts of Myanmar to work as itinerant day labourers. IOM has recently assisted a large number of trafficked Rakhine men IOM assisted trafficked Myanmar fishermen for their return home. return home safely, as many had found themselves recruited by © IOM 2015 (Photo: IOM) brokers and then sold to human traffickers who exploit them as fishermen on boats off the coasts of Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. In the absence of durable solutions to the IDP crisis in Rakhine State, there continues to be large numbers of IDPs are undertaking irregular maritime migration to other countries in the region, especially Malaysia.

$ 3.5 million 125,000

2


i


Protection (Cont:)

For the Muslim communities who lack legal channels for migration, many have chosen to engage migrant smugglers to assist them in travelling abroad via the Bay of Bengal. Approximately 54,000 people undertook irregular maritime journeys through South-East Asia in 2014 with the vast majority—an estimated 53,000 people— departing from Bangladesh or Muslims departing from Northern Rakhine State. The first quarter of 2015 saw 25,000 people depart from the Bay of Bengal – double the number from the first quarters of 2013 and 2014 – with an estimated 300 of these dying at sea. Human trafficking originating in Rakhine State has become an acute regional issue with migrants at high risk of perishing at sea and becoming the victims of trafficking networks. The recent crisis in the Andaman Sea/Bay of Bengal and the discovery of encampments in Thailand and Malaysia highlight the scale of the human rights abuses which migrants are routinely subjected to. As a basis for policies addressing the drivers of irregular and forced migration, comprehensive research and data initiatives are essential to gather quantitative and qualitative data on migrants' and other vulnerable mobile populations' profiles, needs, expectations, vulnerabilities and intentions. This includes the need to gather and analyze more data on irregular migration routes as well as motivations for using certain routes over others, for example, the importance of diaspora networks and family reunification along specific corridors. Investment in better understanding of and combatting migrant smuggling and human trafficking is also paramount. In addition to adapting migration management policies to contemporary realities, combatting drivers of irregular and forced migration also needs to involve both stabilization and development programmes in source communities and along migration routes that are sufficient in scale and scope. Such programmes should target communities that face particular stresses or risks related to irregular and forced migration. The proposed approach to addressing irregular maritime movements originating in Myanmar is an integrated program that employs a ‘whole of State’ approach to provide support for all populations in a comprehensive way. The proposed approach is guided by the recommendations from a variety of regional dialogues. IOM will apply a phased multi-year approach including immediate, mid- and longterm interventions. IOM is seeking to: 

Build capacity for improved migration governance by providing counter-trafficking training, material and equipment; providing technical advice in investigation and prosecution for law enforcement officials; liaising with Union and State governments to promote effective management of immigration and counter-trafficking efforts.



Collect and analyse data that focuses on the human dimension and includes primary data collection on migrants’ needs, vulnerabilities and motivations; the capacity building activities at regional and national level in data-management and evidence-based policy making; conducting a multi-sector assessment on conflict as a driver for irregular migration, including regional analysis of irregular migration flows; communication patterns, sources of information and factors influencing journeys.



Increase awareness regarding the dangers of irregular migration by conducting information campaigns, including mobile campaigns and migrant response and resource mechanisms, leaflets, posters, individual counseling, community meetings, focus group discussions, online and social media projects; providing information on legal migration channels, as well as of the rights and obligations of both States and migrants; engagement with diaspora communities.



Enhance resource and response capacities in countries of origin and transit by conducting capacity building activities for the provision of reinsertion and community based reintegration; conducting community stabilization programs, including attention to post-return monitoring to ensure sustainability and access to information on legal migration possibilities.



Direct assistance to vulnerable and stranded migrants by strengthening access to healthcare, legal support, shelters and funding for support to Victims of Trafficking and other vulnerable and stranded migrants; enhancing resilience capacities and alternative livelihoods through psychosocial support; reintegration support, vocational training and capacity building of national authorities and other key stakeholders.

3


f


Health

Health services both inside and outside of the IDP Funding required camps in Rakhine are limited, particularly in Target no. of individuals: northern Rakhine. Both IDPs and surrounding communities have only limited access to basic health care services. Most women give birth at home and access to emergency obstetric care (EmOC) is severely limited. In Rakhine, U5MR (Under 5 Mortality Rate) is 75/1,000 compared with 52/1,000 nationally and the MMR (maternal mortality ratio) is 320/100,000 compared with IOM providing health services to the migrant workers in mobile clinics. 200/100,000 nationally. The majority of the displaced population © IOM 2015 (Photo: IOM) continue to rely on essential health care services provided by humanitarian partners due to limited access to a Government run health care facilities. There are only two hospitals in Rakhine (Sittwe and Myaung Bwe) that receive referral patients from IDP camps with Muslim populations.

$ 3 million 75,000

In Northern Rakhine (Maungdaw and Buthidaung), access to health facilities, especially secondary, remains restricted for the local population. Access to health services requiring immediate treatment and medical management and barriers such as “out of pocket expenses” for transportation fees and hospital stay pose a huge challenge and burden for the population of Northern Rakhine. The majority of women do not seek general health care mainly because of a lack of money, distance, and transport which is related to cost and financial barrier. IOM will build on its existing work in Myanmar and in Rakhine State to support health systems using a “whole of township” approach with a focus on supporting Maternal and Child Health and Primary Health Care approaches. This approach will not just focus on temporary service provision, but rather look at addressing chronic health system deficiencies and work closely with State and Township Health Departments, and all communities, to address critical gaps in health service availability and accessibility. IOM is seeking to: 

Improve health service facilities by infrastructure repairs and refurbishment, equipment, medicines, supplies.



Improve health service capacity including training of Basic Health Staff, Volunteer Health Workers and Village/Camp Health Committees.



Reduce barriers to health service access by reimbursing costs for transport and treatment, improving referral mechanisms.



Increase community outreach and engagement by supporting Community Health Workers, working with Village/Camp Health Committees and conducting community health education and awareness.



Support Township and State Health Departments to deliver and improve health services for all including provision of technical, material and operational assistance as required.



Improve data collection and monitoring emphasising MNCH and communicable disease surveillance including supporting Early Warning and Response Systems (EWARS)



Monitor access to health services among and between communities including documenting outcomes and analysing discrepancies



Advocate for improved health access and service deliveries for all communities at local, state and national levels.



Link with humanitarian and development initiatives including promoting multi-sectoral coordination with CCCM, WASH, Livelihoods, DRR and others.

4



T Community Stabilisation and Development $ 5 million

The majority of the 140,000 IDPs who were moved to Funding required IDP camps following communal violence in parts Target no. of individuals: of Rakhine State which erupted in June 2012 people have now spent over 3 years in extremely difficult conditions. The majority of Muslims in Rakhine State are awaiting citizenship verification (UNHCR estimates that more than 800,000 individuals in Rakhine State lack citizenship), they also lack even the most basic Migrant youth learning sewing techniques during vocational training provided by IOM. rights including freedom of movement, which effectively denies them © IOM 2015 (Photo: IOM) adequate access to education, health services and employment opportunities - including on their own land. Additionally, recent analysis of available information on affected populations in isolated and host communities indicate that as many as 36,000 other individuals have also been adversely impacted, either directly, socially or economically, with no or very limited access to basic services including markets, education, healthcare or DRR assistance to prepare for the monsoon season. Beyond the IDP caseload, an unspecified number of people belonging to families hosting IDPs have exhausted their coping mechanisms and require targeted assistance.

40,000

One of the other key elements of the development challenges facing Rakhine State is the limited scope of livelihood prospects and opportunities for income generation. This has created a cycle of food insecurity and indebtedness where food insecure households take out loans to meet immediate needs. The situation contributes significantly to the instability that constitutes a major push factor for irregular migration. Compounding the already challenging circumstances is the impact of natural disasters on livelihoods. Farmers are affected by cyclones through damage to crops/paddy fields, livestock, seeds and key assets, with the result that they often experience difficulty restarting their farming and cultivation activities. Similarly, fishermen are at risk of losing their vital equipment and having their boats damaged in cyclones or storm surges. As a consequence of these vulnerabilities, many households have come to rely on surrounding natural resources (coastal mangroves, forestry and resource extraction) to survive, thus contributing to the depletion of these important reserves. Such subsistence-driven natural resource extraction has also contributed to intra- and inter-community conflicts as a result of disputes related to logging and practices contributing to the destruction of aquatic habitats in coastal areas. IOM is seeking to: 

Conducting livelihoods, market, training/skills, and agriculture assessments to identify long-term potential to build livelihoods capacity. Conducting an agricultural assessment to identify crops, livestock and businesses around which additional income can be generated through skills training; developing a skills training package, including TOT materials, related to the selected crops, livestock and businesses; conducting a jobs and market assessment to identify main non-agricultural employers of youth and community members. The assessments will be matched with providing quick impact grants according to the community development plan (and the newly developed or improved agricultural products) by ‘quick impact’ grants to increase community resilience for villages.



Strengthen food security by training farmers in sustainable agricultural practices, providing them with seeds, livestock and equipment, and lessons on irrigation and land rights. There will be a focus on income generation including skills training, business trainings, information and technical assistance relating to mangrove protection, and prioritisation of SME development. Farmer field schools will provide training to agricultural workers and other initiatives, such as seed banks, farmer cooperatives, equipment pooling, and resource centres, will improve the capacity and resilience of agriculture for the community. Similarly, there will be a focus on market access and identification of improved seeds.



Improve community cohesion and stability by interlinking protection, health and disaster risk reduction related intervention into sustainable community stabilisation and community development. The intervention aims to build communities who are resilient against natural disasters, climate change, social and economic stress.



Support inclusive community decision making through democratic community processes and support a lively civil society.



Support communities and the RSG in targeted infrastructure development, that supports economic growth and resilience.

5


b


Early Recovery and Disaster Risk Reduction

Rakhine State is particularly vulnerable to the impact of tropical cyclones – in Funding required particular the townships of Target no. of individuals: Sittwe and Maungdaw. Local communities interviewed on hazards and risks recently identified cyclones and associated storm surges as the primary hazards in the 13 coastal townships of Rakhine State. Lessons Learned from the response to floods triggered by cyclone Komen showed that the preparedness for such events is inadequate. IOM rebuilt houses for the flood affected families in Rakhine State. The low development indicators and the complex humanitarian © IOM 2015 (Photo: IOM) situation in Rakhine contribute significantly to the vulnerability of local communities and thus, as seen after cyclone Giri, to the prevalence of dangerous migration patterns. Among the groups most vulnerable to the risks associated with natural disasters are casual labourers, fishermen, small farmers, widows and women, and persons with a disability. Many lose their income-generating assets and are forced to borrow money at high interest rates from predatory lenders, or migrate out of Rakhine State, leaving behind women and children to cope with further risks including displacement in an unfamiliar location, human trafficking, related exploitation, and GBV more generally.

$ 8 million 625,000

IOM is seeking to: 

Improve readiness to prepare and respond to natural disasters by developing disaster management plans; improving evacuation strategies and analyses of risks; providing coordination and technical assistance for community-based DRR initiatives.



Improve construction practices for increased protection by providing technical support; increasing skills; and advising the RSG.



Increase awareness and preparedness among the public by developing and updating a DRR communications strategy; promoting positive traditional practices; and developing public education campaigns and materials. Develop early warning systems by developing training courses and early warning procedures; linking RSG agencies; and increasing use of relevant technologies



Increase mangrove protection on the coastline by supporting reforestation efforts; providing training on new eco-friendly livelihoods and for officials on mangrove rehabilitation; providing technical support for the development of state-wide mangrove reforestation plan; improving community-based warning tools; and developing strategies to increase incentives for increasing and maintaining mangroves.



Support communities affected by natural disasters to meet immediate needs by working closely together with partners to identify needed items for immediate relief after the impact of a disaster event; provide trainings and develop standard operation procedures on storage and release of relief items.



Support the RSG to develop mass evacuation strategy on State level and on micro level, recognising the diverse risk profile of Rakhine, reaching from cyclones to tsunamis. Support communities to develop community based responds mechanisms and capacity.



Provide emergency prepositioning of Shelter kits, WASH kits and family kits for 20,000 people, and support the development of 4 decentralised emergency preparedness warehouses managed by the RSG accessible by all Rakhine communities.

Total Appeal: $19,500,000 CONTACTS

Preparedness and Response Division Donor Relations Division

 [email protected]  [email protected]

 +41.22.717 9271 http://www.iom.int

IOM Myanmar  [email protected] 318(A), Ahlone Road, Dagon Township, Yangon, Myanmar.  +95 1 210 588, +95 1 230 1960~2  http://www.iom.int

6

MIGRANTS FROM MYANMAR AND RISKS FACED ABROAD A desk study

YEARS International Organization for Migration

The views, opinions, findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of IOM or its Member States. The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout the work do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IOM concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning its frontiers or boundaries. IOM is committed to the principle that humane and orderly migration benefits migrants and society. As an intergovernmental organization, IOM acts with its partners in the international community to: assist in meeting the operational challenges of migration; advance understanding of migration issues; encourage social and economic development through migration; and uphold the human dignity and well-being of migrants.

This study is part of the Migrants In Countries In Crisis (MICIC) Initiative. This publication has been made possible by the support of the American people through the US Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM). The views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any agency of the Government of the United States of America.

AUTHOR

David Ndegwa

COORDINATORS Lorenzo Guadagno Yin Mar Saw Sharon Dimanche

GRAPHIC DESIGN Pierluigi Rauco

PHOTO CREDITS

IOM/Piers Benatar IOM

Editorial: International Organization for Migration 17 Route des Morillons 1211 Geneva 19 Switzerland Tel.: +41 22 717 91 11 Fax: +41 22 798 61 50 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.iom.int

© 2016 International Organization for Migration (IOM) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary

1

Introduction

2

Methodology

2

Limitations

3

Migration from Myanmar: Main patterns and emerging trends

4

Migration trends

4

Migration drivers

14

Migrants’ main areas of origin

15

Length of stay

16

Main crises affecting migrants in countries of transit and destination

18

Migrants’ conditions of vulnerability in their areas of destination

18

Myanmar “Hotspots” migrants’ destinations

18

Thailand

19

Malaysia

23

Bangladesh

25

United States

26

Other destinations

27

Migration-related institutional structures in Myanmar

32

Conclusion

36

Annex A. Tables

38

Annex B. Questionnaire

46

References

49

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Migrants from Myanmar by major region of destination: 1990–2015

5

Table 2. Total number of Myanmar migrants abroad, 2014

6

Table 3. Total Myanmar migration to leading destinations, 1990–2015

9

Table 4. Female Myanmar migration to leading destinations, 1990–2015

10

Table 5. Proportion of migrants by country of destination, sex and age group, 2014

12

Table 6. Origin of Myanmar migrants by state and top destinations, 2014

15

Table 7. Male Myanmar migrants by state of origin and country of destination, 2014

16

Table 8. Female Myanmar migrants by state of origin and country of destination, 2014

17

Table 9. Risk factors and migrant vulnerability in major countries of destination

19

Table 10. Myanmar refugees resettled in the United States between 2005 and 2009

27

Table 11. Myanmar consular services in host countries

33

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Main destinations of migrants from Myanmar

6

Figure 2. Myanmar migration trends by gender, 1990–2015

7

Figure 3. Proportion of male to female migrants abroad by country of residence, 2014

8

Figure 4. Male migration trends from Myanmar, 1990–2013

8

Figure 5. Female migration trends from Myanmar, 1990–2013

9

Figure 6. Per cent change, Myanmar female migration, 1990–2015

10

Figure 7. Percentage change in total Myanmar migrants, 1990–2015

11

Figure 8. Percentage change in male Myanmar migrants, 1990–2015

11

Figure 9. Proportion of migrants by country of destination, total and age group, 2014

12

Figure 10. Proportion of migrants by country of destination, males by age group, 2014

13

Figure 11. Proportion of migrants by country of destination, females by age group, 2014

13

Figure 12. Length of stay by country of destination, 2014

16

Figure 13. Occupations of male migrants from Myanmar in Thailand

20

Figure 14.Occupations of female migrants from Myanmar in Thailand

20

Figure 15. Map of Thailand showing main areas with Myanmar migrants

21

Figure 16. Main locations of male migrants from Myanmar in Thailand

22

Figure 17. Main locations of female migrants from Myanmar in Thailand

22

Figure 18. Map of Malaysia showing main areas with Myanmar Migrants

23

Figure 19. Registered Myanmar workers in Malaysia, 2009

24

Figure 20. Map of Bangladesh showing main areas with Myanmar migrants

25


26

Figure 22. Map of China showing main areas with Myanmar migrants

28

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ADRC

Asian Disaster Reduction Centre

ASEAN

Association of Southeast Asian Nations

CCSFC

Central Committee of Storm and Flood Control

CFEDMHA

Center for Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance

DDPM

Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, Thailand

EAG

Ethnic Armed Group

FEMA

Federal Emergency Management Agency, United States

GDCD

General Directorate of Civil Defense, Saudi Arabia

GMS

Greater Mekong Subregion

HFA

Hyogo Framework of Action

ICRC

International Committee of the Red Cross

IDMC

The Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre

IDP

Internally Displaced Person

ILO

International Labour Organization

IOM

International Organization for Migration

MARD

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Viet Nam

MICIC

Migrants In Countries In Crisis Initiative

MOFA

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

MoU

Memorandum of understanding

NGO

Non-governmental organization

SCDF

Singapore Civil Defense Force

UN-ACT

United Nations Action for Cooperation against Trafficking in Persons

UN DESA

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs

UNESCAP

United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

UNHCR

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

UNODC

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

SUMMARY The Migrants in Countries in Crisis (MICIC) Initiative is a State-led political process, co-chaired by the United States and the Philippines, that has produced a set of guidelines and a compilation of effective practices on how to better protect and assist migrants in the event of a crisis. As a complement to this consultative process, IOM is leading the implementation of a capacity-building programme targeting four countries: Guatemala, Mexico, Myanmar and Thailand. The overall aim of the programme is to develop and disseminate tools that can help governments and non-governmental actors in countries of origin and destination to better factor in migrants in emergency preparedness and response measures. This study aims to contribute to the capacity-building programme through detailed understanding of crises potentially affecting Myanmar migrants in destination countries. The study approach is to highlight “hotspots” in which large number of Myanmar migrants abroad could face crises. It then examines what potential crises affecting migrants abroad mean to the Government of Myanmar and other actors in terms of emergency preparedness, response and recovery.

This study looks at the main population flows currently taking place from Myanmar, including their type, direction and size, the stocks of Myanmar nationals abroad, their composition (migration status, gender and age) and evolution over time (including a specific attention to emerging trends). It then highlights the main risk factors that Myanmar nationals face abroad, in areas of transit and destination. It also looks at the main crises that might potentially hit the areas through or towards which the most significant population flows tend to take place. Finally, the study examines the national institutional structures in charge of assisting migrants caught in emergencies while abroad and their mandate, structure and capacities. The study also identifies potential for capacity-building of governmental and non-governmental actors that can play a role in assisting Myanmar migrants in crisis, in the attempt to provide guidance for the subsequent implementation of the MICIC capacitybuilding programme.

1

INTRODUCTION Covering 676,578 km2 of land and sea, Myanmar is situated in South-Eastern Asia in the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS), and shares borders with Thailand (2,416 km), China (2,129 km), Bangladesh (271 km), Lao People’s Democratic Republic (238 km) and India (1,468 km) – and borders Andaman Sea and the Bay of Bengal to the west.

recently highlighted in the 2011 Bangkok floods, which resulted in hundreds of thousands of Myanmar nationals with limited access to in situ assistance and evacuation options.

Myanmar has a population of over 50.3 million inhabitants with an estimated 33 per cent residing in urban areas and 67 per cent in rural areas (Republic of the Union of Myanmar, 2014). The country experiences a variety of population movements due to economic reasons, conflict and instability, and disasters and is the largest migration source country in the GMS with an estimated 10 per cent of its population residing abroad (IOM, 2015a).

METHODOLOGY

Neighbouring Thailand hosts almost 70 per cent of Myanmar’s international migrants, according to the 2014 Myanmar Census (GMS TRIANGLE Project, 2015). The second most significant country of destination for international migrants from Myanmar is Malaysia, hosting an estimated half a million Myanmar nationals (representing 15% of Myanmar migrants abroad). Other main destination countries include China (4.6%), Singapore (3.9%), United States (2%) and India (1%). Japan, Republic of Korea and other destinations also host notable numbers of migrants from Myanmar. Decades of relative poverty in a region with prospering economies, coupled with changing demographic profiles in relatively wealthier economies, have served as powerful push factors for migrants. The limited formal channels of migration available force the majority of those who move to use informal channels and the services of brokers and smugglers. Many end up taking 3D jobs (demanding, dirty and dangerous) abroad. These combined factors make migrants especially vulnerable to crises of all kind, including disasters, instability, livelihood insecurity, violence and conflicts that threaten their lives and well-being in areas of destination. The specific conditions of vulnerability of migrants from Myanmar were 2

The overall aim of the study is to provide up-todate information on migrants from Myanmar and the risks they face abroad and propose a set of recommendations on how to assist them in the event of a crisis. The study focuses mainly on migrants’ involvement in situations that are defined as “crises” or “emergencies” for the migrants’ country of transit or destination, rather than on migrants’ day-to-day conditions of vulnerability. Such crises would include natural or man-made disasters, civil or international conflict and generalized violence. To achieve this aim, a detailed analysis of the main flows and stocks of Myanmar migrants was undertaken. This allowed for understanding migrants’ numbers and characteristics, the main routes they follow, and the main risks that they face in transit and at their destinations – with a specific attention to migration and crisis “hotspots”. In addition, the existing governmental and nongovernmental structures in place to assist them at home and abroad are also analysed. The study relies on secondary data sources (both publications and online databases), identified through a desk review of available literature on Myanmar migrants. Specific sources of data have been consulted to investigate the numbers, circumstances and assistance provided to refugees, asylum seekers and internally displaced persons (IDPs), including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and international humanitarian organizations that assist refugees, asylum seekers and other types of migrants from Myanmar. Data on Myanmar

migrants in host countries, such as the Unites States and Australia, is obtained from the host countries themselves. Additional data and analysis is derived from various academic publications, opinion pieces and media reports on the issue. In order to supplement the information gathered through the literature review, representatives from seven institutions were interviewed. The institutions were identified and contacted with the assistance of International Organization for Migration (IOM) missions in Myanmar and destination countries. Through structured questionnaires, interviewees were asked to provide insights on the main migration trends and patterns, support provided to migrants from Myanmar and specific conditions and potential crises that migrants face at their destinations. The responses offer valuable insights on the experiences of some of the agencies that work to reduce migrants’ vulnerability in crises. An analysis of the responses is provided in the section that looks at different migration management actors in Myanmar.

abroad reside, representing a reasonable estimate for the country’s migrants’ stocks and flows. This report is focused on identifying potential crises situations that may affect migrants from Myanmar abroad in order to enable informed forms of assistance in support of the larger MICIC initiative. It therefore does not delve into the underlying causal factors that lead to the decision to migrate or the circumstances of migration. IOM’s MICIC 2015 Myanmar Country Profile identifies the underlying factors behind emigration from the country – including limited livelihood opportunities, poor socioeconomic conditions, and insecurity caused by conflict and frequent disasters (IOM, 2015b). Addressing these factors will be key to longer-term reduction of migrants’ vulnerability.

LIMITATIONS The data sources used for this study, while overall fairly reliable, suffer from some inevitable flaws. Census data, for example, only account for households that reported one or more members outside the country and might not fully reflect undocumented migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and children of migrants born abroad. It is likely that the census data also include a large proportion of refugees that are hosted in Thailand, Malaysia and other countries because household respondents may not distinguish whether their household members are refugees or other categories of migrants. It serves to highlight the extent and destination of migration from Myanmar, as well as the individual migrants’ characteristics, but probably underestimates the number of migrants, largely because it undercounts undocumented migrants. In general, while there is abundant data on documented migrants from Myanmar, information on irregular migration is widely incomplete and existing estimates are likely to be inaccurate. However, existing data allows to paint a fairly reliable picture of where Myanmar nationals 3

MIGRATION FROM MYANMAR

MAIN PATTERNS AND EMERGING TRENDS MIGRATION TRENDS Migration from Myanmar is overwhelmingly directed to other Asian countries. Over 70 per cent of Myanmar nationals abroad live in countries in the GMS. Myanmar is one of the major countries of origin of migrants among the 10 Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).6 IOM (2009) estimates that 10 per cent of the country’s population resides abroad. A limited number of Myanmar migrants benefit from legal recruitment governed by bilateral agreements between sending and receiving countries, and migrate in a formal, regular manner. Due to the 6 Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Viet Nam.

Map 1. Myanmar

Myanmar

Rangoon

Source: Google, INEGI, 2015. 4

difficulties and costs entailed by these procedures, a majority of the country’s migrants, instead, use irregular and informal channels that are quicker, less expensive and require no legal documents (PIDS, 2012). Migrating through irregular channels is often accompanied by the use of smugglers and informal brokers, or takes place along dangerous jungle or sea routes, adding to millions of Myanmar migrants’ risk conditions. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC, 2012) indicates that 112,384 migrants from Myanmar attempting to enter Thailand illegally were apprehended in 2008 alone. This figure rose to 113,894 in 2009, 117,681 in 2010, and 118,100 in 2011, before declining to 75,546 and 84,543 in 2012 and 2013 respectively (UNODC, 2012:59).

Table 1. Migrants from Myanmar by major region of destination: 1990–2015 Major area, region, country or area of destination Africa

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

% Change 1990/2015

220

140

99

118

184

232

5

540,337

758,098

1,060,237

1,631,480

2,316,946

2,711,323

80

12,257

12,115

12,259

15,682

22,655

26,733

54

55

62

73

83

118

135

59

North America

22,172

28,681

36,312

53,541

71,700

112,258

80

Oceania

10,039

12,032

12,802

14,146

24,785

31,116

67

585,080

811,128

1,121,782

1,715,050

2,436,388

2,881,797

79

Asia Europe Latin America and the Caribbean

Total Source: UN DESA, 2015.

The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA)7 has a comprehensive data set on migration that provides figures for migration from Myanmar disaggregated by region and country of destination. Table 1 shows the steep increase in the number of migrants from Myanmar between 1990 and 2015, with Asia, North America and Oceania standing out as the main regions of destination both in absolute terms and for the relative change in presence. Although they are not in this list, Bangladesh and Pakistan hosted respectively 197,625 and 93,057 migrants from Myanmar in 2013 according to UN DESA common set of indicators that list the top 5 migration sending and receiving countries. Bangladesh also had the highest refugee population from Myanmar, estimated at 230,674 in 2012. However, the UN DESA data also appears to omit Myanmar migrants in China, which is reported as the third leading destination in the 2014 census, with 92,263 migrants. Singapore is also not captured as a destination country for Myanmar migrants in the UN DESA data but is among the leading destinations in the 2014 census data. According to the 2014 Myanmar Census, over 2 million Myanmar nationals live abroad (Republic of the Union of Myanmar, 2014). However, IOM (2015) estimates that the number of Myanmar migrants might be much higher, with about 2.3 million residing in Thailand alone. The International Labour Organization (ILO) concurs that estimates of Myanmar nationals abroad are much higher than reported in the census (ILO, 2015). 7 See United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (UN DESA, 2015). Trends in international migrant stock: Migrants by destination and origin (United Nations database, POP/DB/MIG/Stock/ Rev.2015).

The census results indicate that iver 70 per cent of Myanmar nationals abroad reside in neighbouring Thailand, 57 per cent of them men and 43 per cent women, as shown in Table 2. Although these figures do not account for irregular or undocumented migrants, they confirm the role Thailand plays as the main country of destination for most migrants from Myanmar. Malaysia is the second most important destination, hosting 15 per cent of the Myanmar nationals abroad – 81 per cent men and 19 per cent women. The census estimates that 3.9 per cent of migrants from Myanmar reside in Singapore, 49 per cent of them male and 51 per cent female. 4.6 reside in China, while Japan, the Republic of Korea, India, United States and others account together for 6.4 per cent. Figure 1 maps these destinations and highlights some of the emerging destinations, such as South Africa and Brazil (Republic of the Union of Myanmar, 2014). Migrants from Myanmar mostly come from rural areas and are members of the Arakanese, Bamar, Indo-Myanmar, Kachin, Karen, Kayah, Mon, Gurkha (Nepalese), Shan and Tavoyan ethnic groups. They are mostly single, aged between 12 and 55 years, with low levels of education (UNODC, 2012:26). As shown in Table 2, men account for 61 per cent and women for 39 per cent of the total migrants from Myanmar. The data, however, show a trend towards the feminization of the migration from Myanmar. The growth in female migration is due to a combination of economic, social and political factors, including aspirations for a better life, lack of employment and income disparities back home, and high labour demand in sectors where women are perceived to have an advantage in countries of destination (such as the for-export-only garment and textile factories in the Mae Sot, Thailand, 5

Table 2. Total number of Myanmar migrants abroad Major area, region, country or area of destination

Gender Male

%

Total Female

%

2010

%

Thailand

812,798

57

605,674

42

1,418,572

70

Malaysia

245,772

81

58,224

19

303,996

15

Singapore

39,078

49

40,581

51

79,659

4

China

53,126

57

39,137

42

92,263

4

Japan

4,314

57

3,283

43

7,597

0.4

Republic of Korea

14,118

97

474

3

14,592

0.7

India

10,917

61

7,058

39

17,975

0.9

United States

21,937

58

15,640

41

37,577

2

Other

31,108

62

18,671

37

49,779

2

1,233,168

61

788,742

39

2,021,910

100

Total

Source: 2014 Myanmar Population and Housing Census Main Report.

area) (Sijapati, 2015:4). High demand of domestic workers in prosperous countries in Asia such as Singapore and Gulf Cooperation Council countries also leads to higher female migration. Sijapati (2015) has also shown that a significant number of women migrate through informal channels or are in irregular status. As a consequence, male and female migration have grown in parallel over the last decades (see Figure 2). However, stark differences in male and female migration trends exist in the various countries

of destination. Figure 3 shows that Singapore is the only country to host more female than male migrants from Myanmar. On the other end of the spectrum, women only represent 3 per cent of the Myanmar migrants in the Republic of Korea and 19 per cent in Malaysia. These huge differences largely depend on the jobs available to migrants in the host countries: in the latter countries most of the demand is for male workforce and the few women either accompany their husbands or work in the service, domestic and manufacturing sectors

Figure 1. Myanmar migration trends by gender, 1990–2015 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0

1990

Total female

Fuente: UN DESA, 2015. 6

1995 Total male

2000

2005

2010

2015

7

Source: Ian Mackay, 2016. http://ian.macky.net/pat/map/world.html

Figure 2. Main destinations of migrants from Myanmar

Figure 3. Proportion of male to female migrants abroad by country of residence, 2014 120

93

100

62

58

38

39

Japan

42

61

43

57

China

3

19

20

42

43

40

49 51

57

60

58

81

80

0

Thailand

Malaysia

Singapore

Republic of Korea

India

United States

Other


(GMS TRIANGLE Project, 2015). In Singapore, instead, female migrants from countries in the Asia-Pacific region are in high demand. As local women enter the labour force and experience higher social status, they seek to employ foreign domestic workers to take care of their domestic responsibilities (Sijapati, 2015:4). Many other migrate for education or family reasons. Figure 4 shows the growth in relative importance of Thailand as a destination of male migrants from Myanmar over the last decades. Conversely, male migration to India has declined sharply since the 1990s – the result of both the increase in the

number of migrants directed to other countries and the decline in absolute terms of the number of migrants destined for India. The importance of other countries for male migrants from Myanmar remained relatively constant between 1990 and 2013, with the exception of the recent increase in importance of Malaysia as a destination. The migration of women from Myanmar shows similar trends, with the only difference being a larger share of migrant women to India and the United States (Figure 5). UN DESA data provides additional insights into migration trends from Myanmar between 1990 and

Figure 4. Male migration trends from Myanmar, 1990–2013 100 80 60 % 40 20 0

1990

Malaysia

2000

Republic of Korea

2010

Thailand

Source: 2014 Myanmar Population and Housing Census Main Report. 8

2013

India

United States

Figure 5. Female migration trends from Myanmar, 1990–2013 100 90 80 70 %

60 50 40 30 20 10 0

1990

2000

Malaysia

2010

Republic of Korea

Thailand

2013 India

United States


2015. As shown in Table 3, in 2015, 12 countries represented the destination for 99.43 per cent of the Myanmar migrants. Thailand remained the top destination, hosting 68.65 per cent and the other leading destinations were Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh and the United States. Table V in Annex A reveals some of the emerging trends in migration from Myanmar. Egypt and South Africa have become some of the new destinations for migrants from Myanmar with growing numbers from 1990 to 2015. Migration to the Republic of Korea and Viet Nam has also risen rapidly during

the same period. Most other countries are hosting an increasing number of migrants from Myanmar with the notable exceptions being Lao People’s Democratic Republic, India, Pakistan, Greece, France and Argentina. Brazil appears to be a new destination for migrants from Myanmar having recorded migrants only in the last few years.8 8 The UN DESA figures do not correspond with the Myanmar 2014 Census results. Some countries such as Pakistan are not shown as leading destination countries in the UN DESA data. Countries such as Saudi Arabia are not shown as leading destinations in the census data.

Table 3. Total Myanmar migration to leading destinations, 1990–20153 Main destination countries

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

Thailand

229,504

436,777

734,129

1,150,168

1,648,602

1,978,348

88

68

Malaysia

4,568

10,170

16,841

120,771

241,430

252,292

98

9

Saudi Arabia

89,529

101,950

104,750

129,398

167,772

202,720

56

7

Bangladesh

125,851

128,499

131,147

160,780

190,412

201,346

37

7

United States

19,835

25,686

32,588

47,838

63,676

103,291

81

3

India

85,706

73,795

61,884

57,177

52,470

50,587

-69

2

9,676

11,438

12,120

13,340

23,270

28,916

66

1

10,359

9,891

9,590

10,194

11,629

13,064

21

0.5

88

552

1,193

1,976

3,542

11,514

99

0.4

963

2,690

6,807

7,834

9,356

11,187

91

0.4

Canada

2,337

2,995

3,724

5,703

8,024

8,967

74

0.3

Norway

30

47

56

514

2,433

3,136

99

0.1

Australia United Kingdom Republic of Korea Viet Nam

% Change 1990–2005

% of 2015 total


Table 4. Female Myanmar migration to leading destinations, 1990–2015 Main destination countries

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

Thailand

91,556

193,116

Malaysia

1,391

Saudi Arabia

339,199

534,912

757,863

966,851

90

78

3,090

5,170

35,471

69,661

70,798

98

6

29,975

33,956

34,740

40,440

49,688

64,628

54

5

United States

10,094

12,963

16,321

23,844

32,285

52,524

81

4

India

41,179

35,551

29,922

27,710

25,498

24,613

-67

2

Bangladesh

15,920

16,223

16,526

19,802

23,077

24,161

34

2

Australia

4,934

5,876

6,120

6,830

11,900

14,635

66

1

United Kingdom

5,501

5,253

5,107

5,436

6,156

7,009

21

0.5

Canada

1,199

1,545

1,928

2,929

4,099

4,584

74

0.4

394

1,138

2,720

2,822

3,452

4,386

91

0.3

5

14

18

217

1,146

1,549

99

0.1

Viet Nam Norway

% Change 1990–2005

% of 2015 total


Again, some slight differences exist in the destination of female migration. As shown in Table 4, the United States rank fourth, followed by India, while the Republic of Korea is not among the top destinations. Female migrants concentrated in Thailand even more than male migrants (77.75% of the total).

except for India,10 which appears to have had negative percentage change for both males and females (Figures 6 and 8). Figures 9, 10 and 11 show a breakdown by age and sex of the Myanmar migrant group in each destination. Thailand hosts a much larger portion of young migrants (0–19 years old) than any other country, Malaysia a relatively larger portion of the migrants between 20 and 49, and the United

The number of migrants from Myanmar in all these destinations has grown between 1990 and 2015,9

9 The percentage growth is calculated as change in percentage between the single years 1990 and 2015 and does not reflect fluctuations in the intervening years in any.

10 Pakistan also shows negative trend in number of migrants from Myanmar during the same period but is not included here among leading destinations.

Figure 6. Per cent change, Myanmar female migration, 1990–2015 100

Norway

91

Viet Nam

74

Canada

22

United Kingdom

66

Australia

34

Bangladesh India

-67

81

United States

54

Saudi Arabia

98

Malaysia

91

Thailand

-150 -100 Source: UN DESA, 2016. 10

-50

0

50

100

150

Figure 7. Percentage change in total Myanmar migrants, 1990–2015 99

Norway

74

Canada Viet Nam

91

Republic of Korea

99

United Kingdom

21

Australia

67 34

India

-69 United States

81

Bangladesh

37

Saudi Arabia

56

Malaysia

98 88

Thailand

-150 -100 Source: UN DESA, 2016.

-50

0

50

100

150

States, of migrants 50 or more years old (with women being overrepresented in this age group).

international migrants aged 15 to 19 were estimated at 229,407 (GMS TRIANGLE Project, 2015).

The number of children of Myanmar origin living abroad is also significant – whether they were born abroad or moved abroad at a later stage. Although some of them may be unregistered, estimates of their number do exist. The 2014 Census results shows that there are 33,775 children aged 0–4 and 59,385 children aged 5–14 abroad. Myanmar

The formal registration of unskilled Myanmar migrants in Thailand in 2004 recorded 93,082 children (Chantavanitch, 2012). Though Thailand officially recognizes the right of all children to attend school regardless of their immigration status, many of them may not actually be able to access schooling. Against an estimated 200,000

Figure 8. Percentage change in male Myanmar migrants, 1990–2015 74

Canada

20

United Kingdom

92

Viet Nam

99

Republic of Korea

67

Australia

-71

India

81

United States

57

Saudi Arabia

38

Bangladesh

98

Malaysia

86

Thailand

-150 -100 Source: UN DESA, 2016.

-50

0

50

100

150

11

Table 5. Proportion of migrants by country of destination, sex and age group, 2014 Age

Thailand

Malaysia

Male

82

7

2

4

0.2

0.1

2

3

2

Female

82

6

2

4

0.2

0.0

2

3

2

Total

82

6

2

4.0

0.2

0.1

2

3

2

10–19 Male

77

11

1

8

0.1

0.1

1

1

1.1

Female

82

4

3

8

0.1

0.0

1

1

1

Total

79

8

2

8

0.1

0.1

1

1

1

20–49 Male

63

22

4

4

0.4

1

1

2

3

Female

76

8

6

5

1

0.1

1

2

3

Total

68

17

4

4

0.4

1

1

2

3

Male

58

12

6

4

1

1

2

7

9

Female

63

5

6

6

1

0.1

2

9

7

Total

60

9

6

5

1

1

2

8

8

70

15

4

5

0.4

1

1

2

3

0–9

50+

Gender

Total

Singapore

China

Japan

Republic of Korea

India

United States

Other


migrant children of school age in Thailand (mainly from Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic and Myanmar) in 2012, only 81,548 (41%) were enrolled in Thai schools. 49,677 (61%) of them were from Myanmar (UNESCAP, 2015). Figures 9, 10 and 11 show a breakdown by age and sex of the Myanmar migrant group in each destination. Thailand hosts a much larger portion of young migrants (0–19 years old) than any other country, Malaysia a relatively larger portion of

the migrants between 20 and 49, and the United States, of migrants 50 or more years old (with women being overrepresented in this age group). The number of children of Myanmar origin living abroad is also significant – whether they were born abroad or moved abroad at a later stage. Although some of them may be unregistered, estimates of their number do exist. The 2014 Census results shows that there are 33,775 children aged 0–4 and 59,385 children aged 5–14 abroad. Myanmar

Figure 9. Proportion of migrants by country of destination, total and age group, 2014 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Thailand 0–9 Total

Malaysia 10–19 Total

Singapore 20–49 Total

China

Japan

50+ Total


Republic of Korea

India

United States

Other

Figure 10. Proportion of migrants by country of destination, males by age group, 2014 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Thailand 0–9 Total



China

Japan

Republic of Korea

India

United States

Other

50+ Total


international migrants aged 15 to 19 were estimated at 229,407 (GMS TRIANGLE Project, 2015). The formal registration of unskilled Myanmar migrants in Thailand in 2004 recorded 93,082 children (Chantavanitch, 2012). Though Thailand officially recognizes the right of all children to attend school regardless of their immigration status, many of them may not actually be able to access schooling. Against an estimated 200,000

migrant children of school age in Thailand (mainly from Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic and Myanmar) in 2012, only 81,548 (41%) were enrolled in Thai schools. 49,677 (61%) of them were from Myanmar (UNESCAP, 2015).

Figure 11. Proportion of migrants by country of destination, females by age group, 2014 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Thailand 0–9 Total



China

Japan

Republic of Korea

India

United States

Other

50+ Total


MIGRATION DRIVERS

in the United States, Australia, Canada and other countries since 2005.

A number of factors contribute to shaping Myanmar’s emigration trends, including poverty, unemployment, discrimination and statelessness in areas of origin, and the desire to improve livelihoods by accessing better opportunities for employment in countries of destination (UNESCAP, 2015). Conflict, insecurity, political violence and natural disasters also represent major drivers of movement, contributing to producing complex flows of individuals motivated by a mix of economic, family, education, and survival reasons.

Myanmar is also highly prone to natural disasters that lead to massive displacement and contribute to shaping migration flows. In 2008, cyclone Nargis affected 2.4 million people, killing 140,000 and displacing 800,000 people, of which a significant share moved from the affected Irrawady Delta into Thailand (IDMC, 2014). Cyclones again resulted in massive displacement in 2010 (100,000 IDPs) and 2013 (120,000 IDPs, many of which were people already displaced by the 2012 episodes of intercommunal violence in Northern Myanmar).

There are 17 major ethnic armed groups (EAGs) in Myanmar that have been engaged in a decadelong conflict with the Government, leading to protracted internal displacement and outflows of refugees and asylum seekers to neighbouring countries (South and Jolliffe, 2015). Considerable stability dividends have been experienced due to a recent ceasefire. However, Tanintharyi, Mon, Kayin, Eastern Bago, Kayah and Southern Shan in the south-eastern part of Myanmar are still affected by the conflict and related issues. Northern states of Kachin and Northern Shan have also recently experienced conflict episodes.

Floods also lead to frequent displacement. An estimated 38,000 people were displaced by floods in Rakhine, Kayin and Mon states and in Tanintharyi and Ayeyarwady regions in July 2013. Another 48,000 were displaced in Kayin, Mon and Shan states and Bago, Sagaing and Yangon regions during the same year in August. In September 2013, a further 22,000 were displaced by floods in Kachin, Kayin and Shan states and Ayeyarwady, Bago, Magway, Mandalay and Sagaing regions. In October and November 2013, an estimated 50,000 people were displaced in Bago region. Recurrent disasters contribute to cross-border mobility of affected persons into Thailand, Bangladesh, Malaysia and China.

IDPs due to conflict and inter-communal violence in the south-east of the country amount to an estimated 400,000 people. 98,000 have been displaced by conflict in Kachin and northern Shan states since 2011 and an additional 140,000 by inter-communal violence in Rakhine state since 2012 (IDMC, 2014). In 2014, the largest number of refugees from Myanmar (estimated at 230,000) were in Bangladesh. Other countries that were hosting large numbers of refugees and asylum seekers from Myanmar are Malaysia with 84,671 refugees and 7,764 asylum seekers; India with 7,671 refugees and 2,824 asylum seekers; the United States with 2,739 refugees and 41 asylum seekers; and Japan with 1,732 refugees and 640 asylum seekers (UNODC, 2014:61). In addition, in 2015, Thailand hosted 120,000 refugees, according to UNHCR estimates. Most live in camps; however, a large share lives outside camps, in particular in areas such as south of Kanchanaburi, north of Mae Hong Son, northern Chiang Mai Province, near construction sites or orchards where they work (UNHCR, 2015a). An estimated 90,000 refugees from Myanmar in Thailand have been resettled 14

Displaced persons and vulnerable migrants often resort to smuggler networks in order to cross borders. Hundreds of thousands of Myanmar migrants are smuggled each year to various destinations in South-East Asia and beyond – the majority to Thailand and Malaysia. There are no consistently available estimates of number of victims of trafficking and smuggling because the identification of victims and their protection is not strongly pursued. The 2016 Trafficking in Persons Report notes that the Government of Myanmar is to be commended for its efforts in screening, repatriation and assistance with resettlement and reintegration of more than 1,000 victims of forced labour on fishing vessels who were in Indonesia. The report also notes that the population that remains vulnerable to trafficking include the estimated 100,000 displaced by conflict in Kachin and northern Shan states and about 120,000 persons displaced in Rakhine state (US Department of State, 2016:112).

Table 6. Origin of Myanmar migrants by state and top destinations, 2014 State/Region of origin

Number of migrants Total (% of population)

Destination

Men

Women

First (total)

Second (total)

Third (total)

Mon state

426,586 (21%) 245,564 181,022

Thailand (385,487)

Malaysia (32,620)

Singapore (4,324)

Kayin state

322,461 (20%) 173,430 149,331

Thailand (304,980)

Malaysia (12,864)

Singapore (1,150)

Shan state

235,869 (4%) 116,054 119,815

Thailand (179,783)

China (42,490)

Malaysia (5,749)

Tanintharyi

203,232 (14%) 112,834

90,398

Thailand (187,968)

Malaysia (12,879)

Singapore (685)

Bago region

169,691 (3%) 110,367

59,324

Thailand (129,069)

Malaysia (26,564)

Singapore (6,529)

Yangon region

166,698 (2%) 109,855

56,843

Malaysia (45,593)

Singapore (33,910)

Thailand (32,791)

Rakhine state

115,502 (4%)

94,903

20,599

Thailand (74,730)

Malaysia (28,200)

China (7,833)

Magway region

84,422 (2%)

62,023

18,399

Thailand (36,674)

Malaysia (30,020)

China (11,454)

Mandalay region

80,071 (1%)

59,578

20,493

Malaysia (30,998)

Thailand (28,334)

China (8,239)

Sagaing region

64,252 (1%)

43,686

20,566

Malaysia (27,184)

India (9,012)

Thailand (7,981)

Ayeyarwady region

59,488 (1%)

42,572

16,916

Thailand (29,382)

Malaysia (16,704)

Singapore (8,021)

51,545 (11%)

33,975

17,570

Malaysia (27,016)

United States (12,117)

India (5,880)

Kachin state

21,840 (1%)

10,163

11,317

Thailand (9,250)

China (6,137)

Malaysia (2,712)

Nay Pyi Taw Union Territory

11,928 (1%)

9,244

2,684

Thailand (6,214)

Malaysia (3,679)

-

8,385 (3%)

4,920

3,465

Thailand (5,601)

Malaysia (1,134)

Singapore (716)

Chin state

Kayah state


MIGRANTS’ MAIN AREAS OF ORIGIN According to the 2014 Myanmar Census, the majority of migrants from Myanmar originate from Mon, Kayin, Thanitharyi and Shan state, as well as from the Bago region (Table 6). Geographical proximity of sending states and destination areas plays a role in determining where most of the migrants go to. Mon and Kayin states lead in sending migrants to Thailand. Most migrants to China originate from Shan state, while Sagaing is the leading state in sending migrants to India. Chin state sends more migrants to the United States than any other state or region. Most of the Myanmar migrants in Thailand and Malaysia originate from Mon state. Migrants to Singapore almost exclusively come from the Yangon region

(33,910). Shan (51%) and Kachin (53%) send out more women than men – mostly to Thailand, China and Malaysia. They also are the only two states with China as the second most common destination. Magway, Mandalay and Rakhine however send more migrants to China. In most of the sending states, an overwhelming proportion of migrants moves to the first destination country. Of the migrants from Kayin, Tanintharyi and Mon states, for instance, respectively 95 and 90 per cent go to Thailand. Migrants from Yangon, however, were evenly distributed among the three leading destinations. Tables 7 and 8 show the distribution of male and female migrants from Myanmar by country of destination. The gender-disaggregated numbers largely mirror the general pattern of migrant distribution in the countries of destination by state 15

Table 7. Male Myanmar migrants by state of origin and country of destination, 2014 Destination

Thailand

Malaysia

Singapore

Kachin

4,501

1,580

344

2,623

102

51

127

467

368

10,163

Kayah

3,265

883

242

34

18

57

9

249

163

4,920

Kayin

160,935

9,764

553

29

34

159

39

1,193

724

173,430

436

19,751

168

183

24

56

3,502

7,636

2,219

33,975

5,230

22,043

2,070

4,280

137

662

5,119

2,794

1,351

43,686

101,351

9,986

408

52

92

143

34

301

467

112,834

Bago

80,243

21,673

2,910

1,704

189

1,403

111

415

1,719

110,367

Magway

26,511

27,147

1,906

8,118

83

997

89

267

905

66,023

Mandalay

17,802

28,157

3,376

5,487

253

1,845

215

544

1,899

59,578

214,432

25,109

3,236

196

107

838

48

573

1,025

245,564

Rakhine

60,086

24,707

858

6,634

92

355

303

565

1,303

94,903

Yangon

21,186

34,086

18,989

3,709

2,845

6,611

653

6,095

15,681

109,855

Shan

90,251

3,464

1,135

18,869

157

162

103

450

1,463

116,054

Ayeyarwady

21,962

14,136

2,485

919

138

654

518

329

1,431

42,572

Nay Pyi Taw

4,607

3,286

398

289

43

125

47

59

39

8,893

812,798

245,772

39,078

53,126

4,314

14,118

10,917

21,937

30,757

1,232,817

Chin Sagaing Thanitharyi

Mon

Total

China

Japan

Republic of Korea

India

United States

Other

Total


of origin, with a few notable exceptions. Six states account for over 70 per cent of the male migrants: migrants from Kayin, Thanintharyi, Bago, Mon and Shan mostly go to Thailand, migrants from Yangon to Malaysia. The six most significant states and regions of origin of migrant women are Kayin, Thanintharyi, Bago, Mon, Yangon and Shan – in all cases migrants are directed to Thailand. Shan

and Kachin states send more female than male migrants to China.

Figure 12. Length of stay by country of destination, 2014 70,0 60,0 50,0

%

40,0 30,0 20,0 10,0 0,0

Total

Less than 15 months Thailand

15 months to 4 years Malaysia

5 to 9 years Singapore

10 to 9 years China


Over 20 years

Not stated

Table 8. Female Myanmar migrants by state of origin and country of destination, 2014 Destination

Thailand

Malaysia

Singapore

Kachin

4,749

1,132

929

3,514

120

10

73

449

341

11,317

Kayah

2,336

251

474

21

18

4

8

165

188

3,465

Kayin

144,045

3,100

597

28

22

8

5

904

622

149,331

152

7,265

1,527

19

20

19

2,378

4,481

1,709

17,570

2,751

5,141

4,273

1,743

99

24

3,893

1,848

794

20,566

Thanitharyi

86,617

2,893

277

27

70

13

6

236

259

90,398

Bago

48,826

4,891

3,682

513

117

22

37

284

952

59,324

Magway

10,163

2,873

1,454

3,336

70

19

37

81

366

18,399

Mandalay

10,532

2,841

2,283

2,752

257

27

126

461

1,214

20,493

171,055

7,511

1,106

209

82

24

5

384

646

181,022

Rakhine

14,284

3,573

940

1,199

29

7

42

149

376

20,599

Yangon

11,605

11,507

14,921

1,680

1,982

226

342

5,484

9,096

56,843

Shan

89,532

2,285

2,289

23,621

255

36

53

466

1,278

119,815

Ayeyarwady

7,420

2,568

5,536

368

97

17

39

198

673

16,916

Nay Pyi Taw

1,607

393

293

107

45

18

14

50

157

2,684

605,674

58,224

40,581

39,137

3,283

474

7,058

15,640

18,671

788,742

Chin Sagaing

Mon

Total

China

Japan

Republic of Korea

India

United States

Other

Total


LENGTH OF STAY According to the 2014 Census data, and as shown in Figure 12, 31 per cent of the migrants from Myanmar have been residing abroad for less than 15 months, 37 per cent for 15 months to 4 years, 20 per cent for 5 to 9 years, 10 per cent for 10 to 19 years and just about 1 per cent for over 20 years. The data appears to show Myanmar migrants as being mostly recent migrants. This is particularly the case for specific destinations (such as China) in which the overwhelming majority is comprised of recent migrants (about 60%). However, there are higher percentages of migrants who have stayed longer than 5 years among migrants residing in the United States, Japan and India. The patterns are likely betraying the reality of frequent returns to Myanmar either as part of their planned visits or deportations with only those with regular documentation staying longer at their destinations.

17

MAIN CRISES AFFECTING MIGRANTS ABROAD

MIGRANTS’ VULNERABILITY IN THEIR DESTINATION The considerable risks migrants face along their migration routes in South-East Asia were brought into sharp international attention between 2014 and 2015, when thousands of migrants from various countries were stranded in the high seas of the Bay of Bengal and the Andaman Sea. Irregular maritime departures have continued over many years from impoverished or conflict-affected areas in Myanmar (e.g. Buthidaung, Maungdaw, Sittwe and Sin Tet Maw). Some of the migrants travel to St Martin Island in Bangladesh, from where they board cargo ships to Malaysia (UNHCR, 2013). In addition, migrants also face a variety of natural and man-made hazards that can result in crisis situations in their countries of destination. Their vulnerability in the face of these events is likely to be compounded by the circumstances of their migration experience, with regular, documented migrants more likely to use formal, safer migration routes and modes of travel, and have access to basic services, resources and assistance in areas of destination. However, all migrant groups can present specific conditions of vulnerability that may translate into increased impacts in the face of crises of all kinds. Linguistic barriers and the unfamiliarity of the environment in the areas of destination are also major obstacles for Myanmar migrants’ safety and security in their host countries. As a consequence, migrants’ reliance on brokers and mediator is heightened, which can increase their vulnerability to exploitation and abuse. This underlines the importance of predeparture training and orientation programmes for migrants and ethical recruitment practices. Some of the challenges that migrants face which were cited were lack of access to basic labour rights, lack of access to assistance while abroad, 18

labour exploitation and trafficking. In addition, they also face challenges finding accommodation and appropriate employment due to insufficient skills, qualifications and language proficiency, and accessing health services and education. They also face difficulties in communicating with individuals and institutions in their host communities due to language barriers, as well as communicating with Myanmar embassies or consulates and NGOs when seeking assistance. A recurrent challenge that was cited is that they also face frequent arrest and have little or no legal protection in their host countries, even in situations in which they are waiting for their work permits. Unfamiliarity with the places of their destination was also cited as a challenge. In addition, migrants’ documents are often confiscated by smugglers. In some areas, employers may also confiscate documents as a mean to control migrants they are employing.

MYANMAR MIGRANTS’ “HOTSPOT” DESTINATIONS The main destination countries for Myanmar migrants (in particular other countries in the GMS and ASEAN regions) are exposed to a variety of hazards, summarized in Table 9. The following sections take a close look at some of the leading destination countries for migrants from Myanmar, focusing on some of the crises that could affect them. Emphasis is particularly on Asian destinations that absorb an overwhelming share of the migration flows from the country – and for which an unparalleled wealth of data exists. The study also covers potential crises affecting migrants in other destinations, including Europe, North America, Oceania and the Middle East.

Table 9. Risk factors and migrant vulnerability in major countries of destination Potential crisis

Causes/effects

Natural hazard

Earthquakes, cyclones, floods, landslides, droughts, tsunamis, volcanoes and fires resulting in destruction of infrastructure, displacement, loss of livelihood and economic loss, hunger, injury and death.

Economic crisis

Global economic crisis, Asian economic crisis, poor economic conditions in host or sending country, structural economic problems, underinvestment, underdevelopment.

Industrial/Occupational accident

Poor regulation in factories, industrial standards enforcement, poor safety and environmental standards have led to industrial accidents and fires. Particularly significant for migrants working risky jobs.

Exploitation

Enslavement, forced labour, debt bondage, trafficking, restricted movement, rape, physical injury, death; relying on smugglers, brokers and traffickers or emigrating via sea and border crossing through jungle is highly risky.

Disease outbreak

Outbreak of pandemic such as influenza, lack of access to health care, dangerous and risky jobs.

Mass return/Deportation

Irregular and undocumented immigrants face arrest and deportation at all times.

Conflict and violence

Internal Myanmar conflict/long-standing conflict inside Pakistan pitting Shia and Shiite Muslims, border conflict with India over Kashmir, historical tensions with Afghanistan and Bangladesh. Thailand conflict is largely severe in the southern region fanned by separatist movements. Other parts of the country are also targeted with terrorist attacks.

Source: Own elaboration.

Thailand The first attempts to regulate migration and register migrants in Thailand are over two decades old. The first formal registration process from Myanmar, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic and Cambodia was established in 1996. It established quotas for migrants from the region and resulted in the registration of 293,652 migrant workers, 80 per cent from Myanmar (Chantavanich and Vungisiriphisal, 2012:4). In 2001, in an attempt to register an unlimited number of migrant workers, the Government of Thailand announced an amnesty policy including those who were self-employed without imposing quotas. This was followed by the signing of memorandum of understanding (MoU) between the Governments of Thailand and Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Cambodia and Myanmar between 2002 and 2003, in an effort to secure cooperation in resolving issues around the employment of migrants from these countries. The registration policy reflected in the MoUs was later revised and expanded to regularize unskilled workers in irregular situations. It therefore covered the registration of migrant workers and their families, verification of their nationalities, and formal recruitment of migrant workers. This exercise, as reported in Chantavanich and Vungisiriphisal (2012:5), has been hugely successful with a total of 1,284,920 unskilled migrant workers and 93,082 children aged 0–15 registered in 2004 well before the start of the formal verification process for Myanmar nationals.

In the case of Myanmar, the formal recruitment and nationality verification only started in 2009. By 2012, a total of 1,186,805 migrants from Myanmar had been registered in Thailand. The Bangkok metropolitan area hosts 42 per cent of the Myanmar migrants with work permits in Thailand, as shown in Table VII Annex A. The southern region hosts 25 per cent, the central region 17 per cent and the northern region 14 per cent. The north-eastern region has the lowest proportion of Myanmar migrants with work permit at 1 per cent. Bangkok, Bangkok vicinity and southern regions account for almost two thirds of documented migrants from Myanmar residing in Thailand. A study that looked at the exposure to hazards and vulnerability of migrants in Thailand (Beesey, Limsakul and McDougall, 2015) estimated documented migrants from Myanmar to be over 1 million. This suggests a very high level of undocumented migrants from Myanmar when this figure is compared with the 2.3 million Myanmar migrants in Thailand estimated by IOM (2013). Along the Myanmar border with Thailand, the Tachileik, Myawaddy and Kawthoung checkpoints process high number of migrants. Myanmar migrants are particularly concentrated in industries located along border areas, such as in Thailand’s Mae Sot, Surat Thani, Tak and Ranong provinces. As shown in Figures 13 and 14, most migrants from Myanmar work in fishing, factories, agriculture, construction, domestic services, small-scale 19

trading of food and drinks, and the tourism sector (Chantavanich and Vungisiriphisal, 2012). Thailand’s rapidly expanding export-oriented economy is increasingly reliant on migrant labour, with majority of foreign workers being from Myanmar. The ongoing economic integration of the ASEAN is expected to lead to an estimated shortage of 5.36 million workers in the Thailand economy by 2025 and widen further over subsequent years unless migrant labour is used to meet the demand (Chantavanich and Vungisiriphisal, 2012). Some sectors in Thailand’s economy, such as fisheries, agriculture and hospitality, are more reliant on migrant labour than others. These sectors tend to offer lower wages and poorer working conditions and hence attract a higher proportion of undocumented workers especially from Myanmar. Figures 15, 16 and 17 show the areas with the highest concentration of Myanmar migrants and provide details about their presence: Bangkok (101,489 people), Samutsakorn (73,225), Tak (35,635), Samutprakan (28,128), Ranong (22,988), Pathum Thani (22,591), Surat Thani (21,228), Songkhla (19,306), Phuket (19,235) and Chon Buri (18,425) stand out. Many migrants from Myanmar live in areas that are subject to natural hazards. Floods are frequent, especially in Thailand’s southern, northern and north-eastern region, as well as in the central region including the basin of the Praya River and Greater

Thailand’s disaster management system is based on the 2007 Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act as well as on Five-Year National Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Plans. The Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (DDPM), in the Interior Ministry, is tasked with prevention and mitigation,

Figure 13. Occupations of male migrants from Myanmar in Thailand, in thousands

Figure 14. Occupations of female migrants from Myanmar in Thailand, in thousands

57

53 19

36 62

49

Construction

Construction

Agriculture and husbandy

Agriculture and husbandy

Services

Services

Fishery related (seafood products)

64

62

62

Agriculture related

57

Garment production and sale Domestic work

43 36 38 38 43 47 81

51 64

38

Fishery related (seafood products) Agriculture related Garment production and sale Domestic work

Selling food and drink

Selling food and drink

Wholesale, retail trade and vendor

Wholesale, retail trade and vendor

Husbandry related

Husbandry related

Source: Chantavanich and Vungisiriphisal, 2012. 20

Bangkok. Greater Bangkok experiences flooding by the Chao Phraya River and its tributaries (Tha Chin, Mae Klong and Bang Pa Klong) (Beesey Limsakul and McDougall, 2016). The devastating effects of flooding on livelihoods were demonstrated in 2011 when, after a period of heavy rainfalls on the city area and in the northern part of the watershed, Greater Bangkok was inundated. The floods affected 13.6 million people, 65 provinces and over 20,000 km² of farmland. The World Bank estimates of the economic losses that resulted was USD 45.7 billion (ibid.:21). To the south of the Bay of Bangkok is the Gulf of Thailand, which boasts many tourist resorts due to its pristine ecosystems. Thousands of Myanmar migrants work in the resorts in Phuket and Krabi to the east and Koh Tao, Koh Phangan and Koh Samuii to the west. These resort areas were the hardest hit by the 2004 Asian tsunami, and thousands of Myanmar nationals were among those affected. Droughts occur in the north-east region while storms, landslides and forest fires occur in the southern and northern region. The country’s north and western part are seismically active, and its western coasts are prone to tsunamis triggered in the Indian Ocean.

Source: Chantavanich and Vungisiriphisal, 2012.



preparedness, response and recovery from all forms of disasters in Thailand. Thailand is part of a group of 17 countries committed to regional cooperation to build resilience to such disasters (DDPM, 2015). Thailand also participated in the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction’s campaign on “one million safe schools and hospitals”, while the Ministry of Education has developed curricula for the management of the risk of disasters associated with events, such as flash floods, landslides and tsunami (DDPM, 2015). Thailand reported progress against the Hyogo Framework of Action (HFA) through its National Progress Report, where some obstacles to risk reduction policies were highlighted, including governance, mitigation programmes, lack of resources at various administrative levels

and limited risk awareness.6 At the same time, the report states that minority groups have been included into risk reduction planning since Cabinet approved the National Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Plan in 2009. It suggests that Provincial Disaster Management Plans take vulnerable groups into account, and the community-based approaches include minorities in community-level planning. However, little detail is given on how this inclusion actually takes place (DDPM, 2015). The Thai emergency management actors set up ad hoc forms of support for migrant workers on occasion 6 This is not unlike criticism directed at the SNAP in 2011 by the United Nations Development Programme; “this strategy being very recent has not been made familiar within the government institutions”. 21

of the 2011 floods, including dedicated emergency shelters, access to relief assistance remained reportedly challenging for many of them, mainly due to the following: • Insufficient overall assistance; • Insufficient consideration of the migrants’ cultural specificities within disaster management planning on the part of the Thai authorities; • Administrative obstacles to accessing services and moving freely within the country; and • Discrimination and abuse by individual relief workers and members of various security forces (Beesey, Limsakul and McDougall, 2016). To date, Thailand’s procedures for disaster management seem to include more effectively tourists than migrant workers, in particular undocumented ones. In 2015, Thailand signed the HFA’s successor framework, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. The DDPM is setting up a task force that includes public health, finance and environment to develop and monitor progress against the Sendai Framework. Targets include substantial reductions in mortality, reducing the number of people affected by disasters, reducing damage to critical infrastructure and increasing access to early warning systems and disaster risk information (ibid.:50). Figure 16. Main locations of male migrants from Myanmar in Thailand, in thousands

59

60

49

55

36

22

59 59

Thailand’s southern provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat, on the border to Malaysia, a vicious separatist civil war has been raging and is reported to have claimed 5,000 lives since the violence broke out in 2004.7 The war is waged by Muslim separatist groups seeking greater autonomy from Thailand. The attacks are carried out by car bombs, machine gun attacks on police stations, public buildings and stores and beheadings of people thought to be sympathetic to the Government of Thailand. These provinces in the south where the attacks occur are not far from Phuket and other tourist destinations that attract Myanmar migrant workers. Rising wages, increasing regulation of labour recruitment and practices, and instability in the south create potential for higher demand for migrant workers who are willing to accept slightly lowerpaying jobs and precarious working conditions that are likely to be turned down by Thailand nationals. At the same time, they pose a degree of uncertainty in prospects for work if migrants find it difficult to acquire required permits or travel to areas where there are work opportunities.

7 www.dw.com/en/thailands-sectarian-war-rages-outsidepublic-eye/a-16526013

Figure 17. Main locations of female migrants from Myanmar in Thailand, in thousands

Bangkok

Bangkok

Samutsakorn

Samutsakorn

Tak

Tak

Samutprakan

61 61

The 1997 Asian economic crisis affected the Thailand economy, resulting in large numbers of migrant workers returning to Myanmar.

56

Ranong Pathum Thani Surat Thani

41

40

39

51

Samutprakan

45 64

39 41

44

41

Ranong Pathum Thani Surat Thani

Songkhla

Songkhla

Phuket

Phuket

Chon Buri

Chon Buri



Figure 18. Map of Malaysia showing main areas with Myanmar migrants


As discussed above, the conflict in south-east Myanmar has led to thousands of refugees fleeing to Thailand who have either moved into refugee camps or settled in host areas outside of official refugee camps. The complexity of the conflict behind this outflow of refugees means that to varying extents, most of them still rely on EAGs dominant in their areas of origin for various forms of assistance and decision-making. As such, it is difficult to ignore the role of the EAGs together with Thailand-based government agencies, NGOs and community-based organizations in assisting the Myanmar refugees in crisis. Some of the EAGs have in fact established humanitarian branches aimed at supporting persons in crisis in areas under their influence inside Myanmar and in Thailand (South and Jolliffe, 2015:31).8 Malaysia Malaysia is exposed to numerous natural hazards including floods, forest fires, tsunami, cyclonic storms, landslides, epidemics and haze. Most Myanmar migrants to Malaysia are destined to Kuala Lumpur, Selangor states and Penang in the north. 8 Such organizations – such as the Karen Refugee Committee, which is the humanitarian arm of the Karen National Union EAG in Karen state and the Karreni Refugee Committee, the humanitarian arm of the Karenni National Progressive Party (KNPP) – are already involved in consulting refugees in Thailand on potential for them to return to Myanmar following the current ceasefire.

There are estimates that suggest that about 700,000 Myanmar migrant workers are in Malaysia, with only about 330,000 of them having work permits (Kyi, 2015). These estimates suggest a steep increase in the numbers from earlier estimates of 500,000 registered and unregistered migrant workers from Myanmar in 2009, 65 per cent of which worked in the manufacturing sector, as shown in Figure 19 (IRIN, 2009). In addition, UNHCR has registered 143,048 persons of concern from Myanmar in the country (UNHCR, 2015b). Figure 18 shows the major areas where Myanmar migrants live in Malaysia. UNHCR also recorded persons of concern in Kuala Lumpur (30,000 to 40,000), Selangor (45, 339), Sabah (4), Johor (8,191), Penang (9,875), Sarawak (2), Perlis (131), Kedah (4,680), Perak (3,980), Negeri Sembilan (2,674), Melaka (937), Kelantan (1,569), Terrenganu (1,814) and Pahang (4,517) (UNHCR, 2015b:1). Many migrants from Myanmar travel by boat across the Andaman Sea, land in Thailand and proceed overland to Malaysia. Many die at sea from starvation, beatings by boat crews and dehydration (UNESCAP, 2015). Almost all rely on smugglers to make the journey, and often fall victims of violence and abuse. In early 2015, holding pens for migrants pending payment of extortion money by their relatives were discovered in Thailand and Malaysia (ibid.:28). Another common form of exploitation of migrants from Myanmar in Malaysia is debt bondage, 23

Figure 19. Registered Myanmar workers in Malaysia, 2009 2,000

9,945 127 14,350

23,134

90,175

Construction

Services

Foresty

Manufacturing

Domestic work

Agriculture


practiced by networks of informal brokers operating at village level in most of Myanmar who are linked to smugglers and traffickers at borders (Hall, 2012a:4). The exploitation of migrants sometimes results in tragedy: in 2015, the Malaysian national police discovered numerous gravesites and abandoned camps in the mountainous jungle of northern Malaysia, along the Thailand border, and exhumed the remains of 150 people who were believed to be Muslim from Rakhine state and migrants from Bangladesh (UN-ACT, 2015). The risk of detention and deportation for irregular migrants is high, especially because Malaysia has not included irregular migrants in the ASEAN agreement on assistance to migrants. Muslim migrants from Rakhine state, refugees and unregistered migrants are therefore not able to send children to school or hold jobs legally (Center for Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance (CFEDMHA), 2016). This creates a situation whereby they are forced to accept low wages and poor working conditions, thereby heightening their vulnerability to workplace exploitation and abuse, including wage denial. The status of children denied education perpetuates poverty and vulnerability across generations. Higher levels of vulnerability to everyday shocks means that in times of crises, such migrants are likely to be among the more severely affected.

24

A large number of migrants find themselves in irregular circumstances in their host countries. Some enter their host country without formal documentation, some overstay their permits or visa and lapse into illegality – including due to brokers demanding high fees to return home or confiscating documents. Migrants in these circumstances have heightened vulnerability to shocks brought by hazards as they may be unable to access help from authorities due to fear of arrest and deportation. In the case of mass return migration to Myanmar following clashes with local residents in Malaysia, the private sector in Myanmar was reported to have sponsored return flights for some of the Myanmar workers. The bitter conflict between Muslims and Buddhists in Rakhine state appears to have spilled over among migrants in Malaysia with an estimated 20 murders of mainly Buddhist factory workers reported in Malaysia by September 2014. In a country with an estimated 1.5 million Myanmar migrants, the potential for the sectarian violence to spread is real. The 2016 CFE-DMHA report on Malaysia highlights that the main vulnerable groups that are vulnerable in Malaysia include refugees, unregistered migrants, IDPs and trafficked persons (ibid.:17). The majority of refugees and unregistered migrants are Muslims from Myanmar, whose status in Malaysia prevents them from holding jobs or sending their children to schools. Because of their tenuous status, they often live in poor, congested housing conditions on the edge of Kuala Lumpur (ibid.:18). The main natural hazard affecting Malaysia and impacting vulnerable populations such as migrants is flooding. Floods during 2014 north-east (October to February) monsoon affected over half a million people and caused infrastructural damage of USD 670 million (ibid.:22). Floods mainly affect the western part of Malaysia. Other hazards affecting the country are droughts and landslides, which affect the eastern part of the country. Landslides occur in the form of slope failures along highways and roads in urban and rural areas. Landslides have caused at least 611 fatalities between 1900 and 2009 in Perak, Senah, Selanghor, Pehang, Sabah, Pahng, Kuala Lumpur, Johor and Sarawak, even though many events might have gone unrecorded (ibid.:23). Other hazards that affect Malaysia include cyclones, earthquakes and forest fires. Malaysia was also affected by the 2004 Asian tsunami that led to 72 fatalities, with most of the impact being felt in Penang (ibid.:26).

Figure 20. Map of Bangladesh showing main areas with Myanmar migrants


Malaysia’s National Security Council has the official mandate to coordinate disaster management in the country, in accordance with Directive No. 20 on “Policy and Mechanism on National Disaster Relief and Management”. The Council enables the implementation of activities by the Disaster Management and Relief Committees, multi-agency institutions working at federal, state and local levels (ibid.:12). The Council is soon going to be succeeded by a new National Disaster Management Agency to be established under the Office of the Prime Minister. Other key disaster management organizations in Malaysia include the Malaysian Red Crescent Society, the National Disaster Relief Fund (Kumpulan Wang Amanah Bantuan Bencanah Negara), the Malaysian Meteorological Society, the Department of Drainage and Irrigation, the Special Malaysia Disaster Assistance and Rescue Team, and the Malaysia Social Welfare Department. International organizations are also involved in disaster response in Malaysia, including the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), UNICEF, UNHCR, World Health Organization (WHO) and IOM. Most national and international agencies involved in disaster response benefit from funding from various bilateral and multilateral international donor organizations (ibid.).

In addition, a community-based disaster response system is in place to disseminate information and raise community awareness on disasters. It is led by district officers and senior district police officers. Other actors at district level include the District Fire and Rescue Department Officer and representatives of other government arms. Migrants also mobilize social capital and rely on civil society organizations in order to overcome challenges and hardship, including in times of crisis. Kyi (2015) found out that approximately 70 organizations operate in support of Myanmar migrants in Selangor state and Kuala Lumpur. Buddhist monasteries are the first places in which Myanmar migrants seek support and refuge. Formal organizations such as the Burma Refugee Organization often require membership fees before assisting migrants facing hardship, hence, more loosely formed social welfare organizations fill broader assistance roles for the majority of migrants, including for funeral assistance, blood donation and health care. Bangladesh Migrants from Myanmar in Bangladesh are estimated to be 290,000 (IOM, 2008). Other estimates put these figures somewhere between 200,000 and 400,000 (UNESCAP, 2015). The differing figures point to the lack of reliable estimates because of the high number of unregistered migrants. Most 25

Figure 21. Map of the United States of America showing main areas with Myanmar migrants


of the migrants from Myanmar in Bangladesh are refugees, and in particular Muslims from Rakhine state. They have crossed into Bangladesh over the past two decades and settled mainly in the areas bordering Myanmar, in the south-east of the country. Most of the refugees from Rakhine state are located in the Cox’s Bazaar district and in other refugee camps. In Cox’s Bazaar, the estimates (UN DESA, 2013) are of 230,734 refugees from Myanmar, with an estimated 200,000 unregistered migrants residing outside the camps. In Chittagong, there are an estimated 100,000 migrants from Myanmar. Other places where migrants from Myanmar reside in Bangladesh are Teknaf and Dhakar. Bangladesh is prone to frequent disasters, including floods, cyclones, tornadoes, drought and landslides. The lead government agency in disaster management in Bangladesh is the Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief, whose mandate is anchored on the National Plan for Disaster Management (NPDM, 2010–2015) and the Disaster Management Act (2012) (Ahmed et al., 2015). 26

United States of America There is a large number of Myanmar migrants who have settled in the United States, mostly through third-country resettlement programmes arranged by UNHCR and IOM. Figure 21 shows the main areas in the United States where migrants from Myanmar have settled, which include major metropolitan areas of San Francisco–Oakland–Hayward (10,000); Los Angeles–Long Beach–Anaheim (9,000); New York–Newark–New Jersey (8,000); Minneapolis–St Paul, Minnesota (5,000); Indianapolis (4,000); Fort Wayne, Indiana (3,000); Washington–Arlington– Alexandria (3,000); Atlanta–Sandy Springs–Roswell, Georgia (3,000); Chicago–Naperville–Elgin, Illinois (3,000); Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington, Texas (3,000); Buffalo–Niagara Falls (2,000); and Phoenix– Scottdale–Mesa, Arizona (2,000). Large movements of Myanmar nationals to the United States began in 2004, with the resettlement of 1,400 refugees (Olson, Stauffer and Barnett, 2016). Table 10 shows that between 2005 and 2009, a total of 26,670 Myanmar nationals were

Table 10. Myanmar refugees resettled in the United States between 2005 and 2009 Fiscal year refugee arrivals from Myanmar (Top 10 states) State

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Total

Arizona

67

63

381

542

900

1,953

California

93

36

424

519

450

1,522

Georgia

16

23

401

574

875

1,889

Illinois

20

31

434

639

596

1,720

Indiana

185

193

1,066

1,150

1,147

3,741

Minnesota

157

121

488

367

370

1,503

New York

251

217

1,100

1,321

1,696

4,585

86

57

544

837

885

2,409

163

155

1,163

1,457

3,086

6,024

15

13

181

460

655

1,324

1,053

909

6,182

7,866

10,660

26,670

North Carolina Texas Washington Total

Source: Administration of Children and Families, Office of Refugee Resettlement 2005–2009.

resettled in the country, most of them in Texas, Indiana and New York states. A variety of man-made and natural hazards affect the various areas in which Myanmar migrants live and work. Records by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) show Texas and California are the states most prone to disasters in the country. The former is regularly affected by wildfires, hurricanes, tornadoes, storms and flooding, and the latter is one of the most seismically active areas in the world (in addition to being exposed to storms and heavy rain, flooding and landslides, wildfires, coastal storms and windstorms). Georgia also experiences severe storms, flooding, hurricanes, tornadoes, windstorms and has also faced flooding from a dam collapse in 1977. Illinois is prone to storms and heavy rains, flooding, tornadoes, snow storms, flash floods and windstorms and Minnesota to storms and heavy rains, flooding and landslides, tornadoes, blizzards, ice storms, heavy rains, landslides and mudslides. New York, North Carolina, Texas and Washington have also experienced a vast array of severe hazard events – most recently due to the landfall of hurricane Sandy in 2012. Indiana experiences recurrent, severe snow storms, windstorms, tornadoes, flooding and severe storms. Arizona is exposed to storms, flooding, wildfires, tornadoes, heavy rain, flash floods and windstorms (FEMA, 2016). FEMA is mandated with the role of disaster management, response and recovery in the United States. While non-monetary disaster assistance is

provided on a non-discriminatory basis, not all kinds of relief and recovery support are accessible to foreigners, in particular those in irregular situation: this translates in reduced access to assistance and more acute vulnerability in disasters. A variety of other actors – from the civil society, the public and private sector, as well as the military – are engaged in disaster management in the United States. The role of civil society is particularly important to complement official assistance for disaster-affected foreigners.

OTHER DESTINATIONS China Figure 22 shows the concentration of Myanmar migrants in China. Yunnan is the area hosting the most migrants, with an estimated 40,000, while Ruili hosts 10,000. Other places in China with significant yet unconfirmed numbers of Myanmar migrants are the Shanghai and Beijing municipalities, Guangdong, Jiangsu, Fujian, Zhejiang, Shandong and Liaoning provinces, and Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region (Haimei, 2011). Recurrent displacement along the Kachin–China border has led a number of Myanmar nationals to move on the Chinese side of the border, in Laiza and Mai Ja Yang – most recently after the 2011 episodes of violence.

27

Figure 22. Map of China showing main areas with Myanmar migrants


Saudi Arabia The plight of Muslims from Rakhine state in Myanmar has drawn international attention over the years, and Saudi Arabia accepted the largest number of them as refugees. It is estimated that 250,000 Muslims from Myanmar currently live in Saudi Arabia. The majority of them live in Makkah Al-Mukarramah’s slums, Naqqasha and Kudai. They sell vegetables, sweep streets, work as porters, carpenters, unskilled labourers, and those fortunate enough become drivers. They face arrest and strict regulation on their movement and employment and face extortion and torture by Saudi Police (Ahmad, 2015). Some of the poor Muslims from Myanmar in Saudi Arabia resort to marrying their daughters to old and wealthy Saudis in pursuit of “favours”, but their daughters often get divorced or are forced to live in obscurity as second-class wives as they fail to be recognized by the Saudi society. The most frequent disaster affecting Saudi Arabia is flooding with major events leading to fatalities having 28

occurred seven times from 1964 to 2009 (Alamri, 2010:5). Other major hazards usually occur during the month of Ramadan when millions of Muslims congregate in Makkah for Hajj. Stampedes and fires have on numerous occasions led to hundreds of death among the pilgrims. Outbreaks of epidemics such as Rift Valley fever and meningitis also occur in the Saudi Arabia and cause fatalities. A major factor exposing migrant workers in Saudi Arabia who constitute 53.1 per cent of the labour force to higher levels of vulnerability to hazards is that most emergency warnings are communicated in Arabic, which most migrants may not understand (ibid.:6). The authority responsible for managing emergences in Saudi Arabia is now the General Directorate of Civil Defense (GDCD). Under a “civil defense” law promulgated in 1987, the GDCD is given powers to conduct all operations needed to protect civilians and public and private properties from the dangers of fires, natural disasters, wars and other accidents. The GDCD structure consists of a board that exercises oversight, executives who

carry out operational work, and volunteers who help in times of emergencies. Singapore The 20049 Myanmar Census reported 79,659 migrants from Myanmar residing in Singapore. The UNHCR’s Singapore Fact Sheet indicates that the country hosted 500,364 refugees and asylum seekers from Myanmar in 2014 (2014b). The profile of documented migrants from Myanmar in Singapore is somewhat unique, as they include a large share of highly skilled professionals (civil and electrical engineers, medical personnel, planners and architects). However, the country also hosts less skilled workers in a variety of sectors, such as manufacturing, services and the tourism industry, and domestic workers. Singapore faces a series of natural hazards including earthquakes, floods and strong winds. As a city State, Singapore has a unique emergency response planning system. The lead agency for disaster response is the Singapore Civil Defense Force (SCDF). The disaster response framework within which the SCDF operates allows it to activate the national response plan in the event of an emergency. The Plan “outlines the work of the SCDF and all the Related Agencies (RAs) in the management of an incident. Under this plan, the SCDF as the Incident Manager is in overall charge of multi-agency response. The Incident Manager directs and coordinates all the agencies’ ground response forces through the Joint Planning Staff (consisting of representatives from all agencies) who support the Incident Manager with specialist advice for planning and mitigation of the incident. The Ops CE Plan is exercised according to various scenarios, such as oil refinery fires, air crashes, fires in high-rise buildings and building collapses” (ADRC, 2005:87). India India also hosts large numbers of Myanmar migrants, despite the downward trend of recent years. In Mizoram, there is an estimated 40,000 of them. Other host cities include New Delhi, Moreh, Manipur, and Arunachal Pradesh (UNODC, 2012). India is prone to many hazards, including frequent earthquakes, floods, cyclones, droughts, tsunamis, landslides and avalanches. Under the 2005 National 9 The 2010 Census results did not provide figures of migrants from Myanmar but aggregated them under “Other Asian countries”.

Disaster Management Act, the National Disaster Management Authority has been established, under the lead of the Prime Minister. The authority provides overall oversight and coordination of disaster management policies, plans and guidelines. State Disaster Management authorities implement and operationalize the disaster management plans. Viet Nam According to census data, Viet Nam hosts 9,783 migrants from Myanmar. According to the Viet Nam National Committee for Incident, Disaster Response, and Search and Rescue of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, Viet Nam’s main hazards include typhoons, floods, droughts, cyclones, landslides, earthquakes and tsunamis, as well as man-made disasters, such as fires, biochemical incidents, and river and maritime accidents. Typhoons bring heavy rainfall to Viet Nam, causing extensive damage in densely populated coastal areas and in the areas along the Red River and the Mekong Delta (CFEDMHA, 2015:26). Under Decree No. 168-HDBT of 19 May 1990 by the Viet Nam Council of Ministers, the Central Committee of Storm and Flood Control (CCSFC), and committees and sectors at all levels (provincial, district and village) were established. General oversight and coordination at the national level is performed by an inter-ministerial national committee. The committee receives support from the Department of Dike Management and Flood Control (DDMFC) of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD). All regulations and mitigation measures and guidelines related to floods and typhoons are formulated by the CCSFC, MARD (www.adrc.asia). Republic of Korea In the Republic of Korea, about 16,000 Myanmar migrants are found in Seoul and in the Gyeonggi Province. The Republic of Korea is affected by typhoons that trigger heavy rains and flooding. It is also affected by landslides, storms, drought and sandstorms. The disaster management policies of the Republic of Korea are stipulated in the Disaster Risk Management and Reduction Act of 2008. Other laws regulating disaster management and response include the Disaster and Safety Management Basic Act enacted in 2004 and the Natural Disaster Countermeasures Act enacted in 1995, the Special Law on Reduction of Disaster Risk and Emigration Measure in 2007. All disaster management and response is carried out by the 29

National Emergency Management Agency, which falls under the Ministry of Public Administration and Security. Japan Most of the migrants from Myanmar in Japan arrived as part of a refugee resettlement pilot programme and are hosted in several cities including Suzuka, Mie Misato, Saitama Shiki, Saitama Edogawa Ward, Tokyo Higashimurayama City, Tokyo, Kasukabe, Saitama and Chiba (Treviranus and Törngren, 2015). Japan had 1,942 refugees from Myanmar in 2015 according to the UNHCR. Japan’s geographic location makes it exposed to earthquakes, storms, typhoons and tsunamis. The Disaster Countermeasures Act of 1961 established the Central Disaster Management Council with a mandate to provide comprehensive disaster management. The actual planning and management of disaster risks and response is further devolved to prefectures and local municipalities where disaster management councils implement risk management plans. The devolved disaster management councils have representation from local government organizations, police, fire department and other local public organizations. While Japan has a wellestablished disaster risk management system, which also generally caters to needs of foreigners, recent disasters, such as the 2011 triple disaster in the Tohoku area, have shown that challenges in accessing information and assistance are recurrent for foreign nationals, and in particular those who do not speak Japanese (Duncan, 2013).

30

Australia In Australia, Myanmar migrants are mostly located in Western Australia (7,456), Victoria (5,607), New South Wales (5,607) and Queensland (1,897). Australia is exposed to bush fires, floods, storms, earthquakes and landslides. The main Australian agencies involved in disaster response including disaster management are the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C), Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Department of Defense (Defense), the Attorney-General’s Department, and the Australian Federal Police (CFEDMHA, 2016:21). Australia has developed a set of guidelines for emergency management in culturally and linguistically diverse communities, which aims to cater for the needs of minorities, including migrants, in the case of disasters, and promotes a variety of local-level programmes to adapt disaster preparedness, response and recovery work to their cultural specificities and needs (Commonwealth of Australia, 2006).

31

MIGRATION-RELATED

INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES IN MYANMAR This section provides an analysis of the Myanmar national institutional structures that are in charge of assisting migrants abroad, including in emergencies, by examining their mandates, institutional capacity and past and ongoing relevant activities. It looks at governmental and non-governmental actors and structures serving Myanmar migrants in transit and places of destination, analysing the environment in which they operate and the services they offer to migrants. The Government of Myanmar recognizes the need to prepare and mitigate effects of crisis on all Myanmar nationals including those residing abroad. This is reflected in its management rules enacted in the 2015 Disaster Management Plan that set out clear authority and structures, as well as operational guidelines on appropriate approaches to disasters occurring in Myanmar and outside that may affect the country’s nationals. The management rules are comprehensive and include response to all emergencies. The National Disaster Management Rules of 2015 establish the National Committee for Disaster Management as the highest organ with the authority to appoint any ministry, department or agency as a “competent authority” for activities related to disaster response. Implicitly, this grants the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) the mandate to coordinate response to disasters affecting Myanmar nationals abroad. The 2015 rules provide broad cover for mechanisms for disaster management, including initial assessments, declaration and post-disaster activities. The rules provide for the establishment of a competent authority for international communication with an explicit mandate assigned by the National Committee, “to act as an authority in coordination and communication with international organizations, overseas regional organizations, foreign government departments and government agencies, non-government organizations for the international assistance required in disaster management activities stipulated in the Law and 32

these Rules”. The rules provide a mechanism for inter-agency cooperation and coordination by indicating in Chapter X that the Ministry assigned by the National Committee as the competent authority for international communication shall “communicate and collaborate with the assisting international actors regarding the humanitarian assistance when the disaster occurs in neighbouring countries and countries in the region”. These rules propose a coordinated approach involving multiple actors with a lead “competent” authority. The relevant ministries and agencies that may be involved include the Department of Relief and Resettlement, the Department of Metrology and Hydrology, the Myanmar Fire Services Department, the Public Works Department, the Central Statistical Organization, the Department of Education Planning and Training, the General Administration Department, the Myanmar Posts and Telecommunications, the Settlement and Land Records Department, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Health, and the Planning Department. International organizations and agencies involved include UNHCR, IOM, ICRC and UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, international donors and international maritime rescue agencies. In the case of Myanmar residents abroad, the “competent” authority is the MOFA, which would coordinate assistance in case of emergency in cooperation with host national agencies, international organizations and other relevant Myanmar agencies. The MOFA operates in emergencies through its network of embassies and consulates and in liaison with relevant host government’s departments. Myanmar embassies and consulates abroad offer consular assistance, information services, trade facilitation and issue notices and updates on emergencies and disasters affecting citizens of Myanmar. The Department of Labour also provides normal-time services that might be relevant to emergency prevention, preparedness and response through its labour attachés at the embassies. Their collective mandate includes routine support to

Table 11. Myanmar representations in host countries Country

Locations

Thailand

Bangkok, Chiang Mai

Malaysia

Kuala Lumpur

Singapore

Singapore

China

Beijing, Kunming, Hong Kong and Nanning

Japan

Tokyo

Republic of Korea

Seoul

India

New Delhi, Kolkata

United States and Permanent Mission to UN

Washington, D.C., New York and Los Angeles

Saudi Arabia

Riyadh

United Kingdom

London

Australia

Canberra

Brazil

Brasilia

Indonesia and Permanent Mission to ASEAN

Jakarta

Brunei Darussalam

Bandar Seri Begawan

Cambodia

Phnom Penh

Lao People’s Democratic Republic

Vientiane

Philippines

Manila

Viet Nam

Hanoi

Bangladesh

Dhaka

Nepal

Kathmandu

Sri Lanka

Colombo

Pakistan

Islamabad

Egypt

Cairo

Israel

Tel Aviv

Kuwait

Kuwait

South Africa

Pretoria

France

Paris

Swiss and Permanent Mission to UN and other organizations

Geneva

Germany

Berlin

Italy

Rome

Russian Federation

Moscow

Serbia

Belgrade

Belgium

Brussels

Norway

Oslo

Austria

Vienna

Canada

Ottawa

Source: www.embassy-worldwide.com/country/myanmar/

Myanmar nationals abroad in non-crisis times, including by building and maintaining relationships with migrants, registering migrants, issuing of identity cards and Certificates of Identify, social security services, work accident compensation assistance, negotiating on behalf of migrants to get labour rights in their countries of destination, and, in Thailand, providing assistance for the Nationality Verification process. In addition, these

institutions are primarily mandated to protect migrant victims of any forms of crisis abroad, including by gathering and circulating information, and providing shelter for those in need. Myanmar has missions in 36 countries, as shown in Table 11. There is an embassy in each of the countries that host the largest number of immigrants from Myanmar. In China, in addition 33

to the embassy in Beijing, there are consular representatives in Hong Kong, China, Kunming and Nanning, while in the United States, the embassy is located in Washington, D.C. and the Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York. Each of the other major destination countries has one embassy, mostly in the capital city. Other agencies responsible for assisting Myanmar nationals abroad include UN agencies and international NGOs, including IOM, ILO, MAT Thailand and Australia Asia Program to Combat Trafficking in Persons. Under the overseas employment law, a central committee comprising of various ministers and other key stakeholders under the lead of the Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population is in charge of managing all processes related to overseas employment. It assists with employment abroad, registering those seeking jobs outside the country and issuing a certificate of registration to them before their departure. The pre-departure assistance is provided by a number of agencies that include the Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of Immigration and Population, Department of Social Welfare, Department of Labour, and Myanmar Police Force. Others are the UNHCR, ILO, IOM and other NGOs, such as Myanmar Red Cross Society, Myanmar War Veteran Organization, Myanmar Maternal and Child Welfare Association, and Myanmar Women’s Affairs Association. This system is complemented by efforts to eliminate unregulated labour brokers and work closely with destination countries, civil society, employees and migrant welfare organizations. The overseas employment law attempts to do so by stipulating the terms, duties and responsibilities of licensed labour brokers referred to as “serve agents”. Other forms of support that are vested in the Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population include family tracing, medical examination and awareness- raising information dissemination. The Ministry of Social Welfare is competent for return and reintegration assistance. Migrants are also entitled to assistance to pursue compensation for unpaid dues and other forms of loss-related compensation. An All-Time Complaint Centre has also been established to take prompt action with regard to the matter relating to migrant workers working abroad. The country also has a system in place to facilitate return and reintegration of migrants having experienced hardship and crises. The Department of Relief and Resettlement and the Department of 34

Social Welfare assist the return of trafficked persons and other migrants. The migrants they usually assist have often suffered from exploitation, physical and psychological abuse, confinement and in some cases, sexual abuse. Other Myanmar entities that play a role in this are the Immigration and National Registration departments, Myanmar embassies, wards and village tracts administrators, the police force (especially when they return after being arrested in destination countries), Department of Labour, and local and international NGOs. Beginning from 2016, with the advent of new democratic civilian government, the attitude towards the Myanmar nationals abroad changed totally. The State Counsellor and the Minister for Foreign Affairs gave instructions to the Myanmar Diplomatic Missions and Consular Offices to extend every possible assistance to those Myanmar nationals, temporarily living in foreign countries, without any reservation.

35

CONCLUSION Myanmar is the source of the largest number of migrants in the GMS. Over 85 per cent of Myanmar migrants reside in Thailand and Malaysia. In their countries of destination, they are often vulnerable to a variety of natural and man-made hazards, as well as the impacts of economic crises and civil unrest. This vulnerability depends on their access to services, options for accessing assistance, support networks – all of which are influenced by their migration experience. Migrants that move in precarious, unsafe and informal conditions, often having left the country as a result of disasters or conflict, or who have been trafficked and smuggled, are most likely to be among the most vulnerable in the face of crises. Crises affecting countries in which migrants live and work are therefore likely to generate a demand for relief and recovery assistance by Myanmar nationals. In places of destination, Myanmar migrants are most likely to access assistance in times of crises through welfare organizations formed by the migrants themselves, especially in smaller crisis situations in which local capacities may not be fully overwhelmed. In large-scale crisis, local NGOs, international NGOs, UN agencies and government agencies of the host countries also play a role providing assistance. Myanmar embassies and consulates are a key element of this system, providing both normal-time services that are key to emergency management (e.g. identifying and contacting migrants, issuing documents, assisting in labour and compensation disputes) and specific relief and recovery services (e.g. emergency shelter). The interviews allowed to identify in what areas this system may need improvements, including strengthening registration capacities in order to collect migrants’ data, provide vocational training, increase awareness-raising activities around risks of migration, and protect the rights of migrants. Profiling and tracking of Myanmar migrants abroad would be essential for improved provision of assistance, including in times of emergency. Relevant information sources can be the Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population, the Ministry of Education and the MOFA, as well as NGOs, social media and religious centres. 36

The national disaster response plans and mechanism in place in most of the Myanmar migrants’ countries of destination offer sound approaches to deal with disasters within the confines of their national sovereignty. However, they subsume the needs of migrants within the national context and do not specify how to address their specific conditions of vulnerability. This exposes the migrants to the risk of receiving little or no assistance in emergencies, especially for those who may be in irregular situation. Regional organs and initiatives however offer a good collaborative platform and a chance to harmonize legalization and response plans to include migrants. The advent of a new democratic civilian government in 2016 has offered a new opportunity for Myanmar nationals inside and outside the country. As noted earlier in this report, the new government has committed itself to offer all required assistance to Myanmar nationals abroad. With the new emerging attitude of the present Government, a new policy declaration for Myanmar nationals abroad is desirable. The Law on Overseas Employment only deals with Myanmar workers going abroad for employment and does not include provisions for relief and repatriation measures in times of emergency. A separate national law for assistance, protection, relief and repatriation of Myanmar nationals who are in a country experiencing a conflict or disaster would help to have a legal basis for such kind of assistance and measures. With a view to the practical application of the provisions of the law, a high-level committee for assistance, relief, repatriation and reintegration for Myanmar national migrants should be formed and empowered with responsibilities provided in the law. It is hoped that cooperation with governments in the ASEAN region and beyond will lead to better and more inclusive assistance mechanisms. The new political climate might also lead to advancements in the resolution of internal conflicts and in the situation of Muslims from Myanmar, which could have significant migration and return implications.

37

ANNEX A. TABLES Table I. Main destinations of migrants from Myanmar by sex, 1990 to 2013 Country of destination Year 1990

Sex Male

2010

2013

%

Malaysia

%

Republic of Korea

%

India

%

United States

%

Total

137,948

70

4,485

2

94

0.0

44,527

22

11,458

6

198,512

91,556

63

2,173

2

8

0.0

41,179

28

11,369

8

146,285

Total

229,504

67

6,658

2

102

0.0

85,706

25

22,827

7

344,797

Male

394,930

86

14,529

3

1,107

0.2

31,961

7

15,869

4

458,396

Female

339,199

86

6,751

2

86

0.0

29,922

8

19,249

5

395,207

Total

734,129

86

21,280

3

1,193

0.1

61,883

7

35,118

4

853,603

Male

894,933

79

163,391

15

3,431

0.3

26,972

2

41,848

4

1,130,575

Female

753,669

83

73,181

8

275

0.0

25,498

3

53,056

6

905,679

Total

1,648,602

81

236,572

12

3,706

0.2

52,470

3

94,904

5

2,036,254

Male

981,432

80

172,737

14

4,401

0.4

26,473

2

43,365

4

1,228,408

911,048

85

75,031

7

347

0.0

25,056

2

54,979

5

1,066,461

1,892,480

83

247,768

11

4,748

0.2

51,529

2

98,344

4

2,294,869

Female 2000

Thailand

Female Total

Source: Administration of Children and Families, Office of Refugee Resettlement 2005–2009. Note: Data for China, Singapore and Japan not available.

Table II: Stock of Myanmar nationals living abroad by country of residence, age and sex, 2014 Country of destination Age 0-9

10-19

Gender

50+

Total

Malaysia Singapore

China

Japan

India

United States

Other

Total

23,435

1,936

479

1,046

63

29

494

748

491

28,721

Female

22,217

1,617

488

1,174

52

8

449

737

490

27,232

Total

45,652

3,553

967

2,220

115

37

943

1,485

981

55,953

Male

115,430

16,890

1,187

11,720

111

137

1,889

1,043

1,702

150,109

95,959

4,132

3,969

8,701

104

29

1,377

886

1,347

116,504

Total

211,389

21,022

5,156

20,421

215

166

3,266

1,929

3,049

266,613

Male

631,214

223,345

35,485

39,031

3,703

13,655

7,900 18,194 26,324

998,851

Female

474,591

51,495

34,881

28,019

2,840

416

4,777 12,201 15,423

624,643

Total

1,105,805

274,840

70,366

67,050

6,543

14,071

12,677 30,395 41,747

1,623,494

Male

17,434

3,601

1,927

1,329

437

297

634

1,952

2,591

30,202

Female

12,907

980

1,243

1,232

287

21

455

1,816

1,411

20,352

Total

30,341

4,581

3,170

2,561

724

318

1,089

3,768

4,002

50,554

1,393,187

303,996

79,659

92,252

7,597

14,592

17,975 37,577 49,779

1,996,614


Republic of Korea

Male

Female 20-49

Thailand

Table III. Main destinations of migrants from Myanmar by sex, 1990 to 2013 Major area, region, country or area of destination

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

205,303

311,832

460,970

704,613

991,063

1,243,470

83

Developed regions

22,742

26,872

30,887

41,637

59,826

85,870

74

Developing regions

182,561

284,960

430,083

662,976

931,237

1,157,600

84

16,125

16,423

16,704

19,961

23,236

24,325

34

166,436

268,537

413,379

643,015

908,001

1,133,275

85

Sub-Saharan Africa

166

95

56

68

110

139

-19

Africa

168

96

57

69

111

140

-20

Northern Africa

2

1

1

1

1

1

-100

Egypt

2

1

1

1

1

1

-100

Southern Africa

166

95

56

68

110

139

-19

South Africa

166

95

56

68

110

139

-19

182,384

284,857

430,020

662,903

931,111

1,157,444

84

Eastern Asia

6

40

86

137

252

389

98

Republic of Korea

6

40

86

137

252

389

98

93,563

197,622

347,433

573,546

831,346

1,042,412

91

8

21

34

26

18

16

50

191

172

136

123

129

135

-41

1,391

3,090

5,170

35,471

69,661

70,798

98

23

85

174

192

223

226

90

Thailand

91,556

193,116

339,199

534,912

757,863

966,851

90

Viet Nam

394

1,138

2,720

2,822

3,452

4,386

91

Southern Asia

58,830

53,222

47,736

48,748

49,779

49,968

-18

Bangladesh

15,920

16,223

16,526

19,802

23,077

24,161

34

6

7

8

10

12

13

54

41,179

35,551

29,922

27,710

25,498

24,613

-67

1,725

1,441

1,280

1,226

1,192

1,181

-46

29,985

33,973

34,765

40,472

49,734

64,675

54

8

12

16

23

37

38

79

29,975

33,956

34,740

40,440

49,688

64,628

54

Turkey

2

5

9

9

9

9

78

Europe

World

Least developed countries Less developed regions excluding least developed countries

Asia

South-Eastern Asia Cambodia Lao People's Democratic Republic Malaysia Philippines

Bhutan India Pakistan Western Asia Cyprus Saudi Arabia

% change, 1990–2015

6,318

6,170

6,168

7,620

10,761

12,991

51

Eastern Europe

213

132

46

45

44

74

-188

Czech Republic

0

0

0

12

23

54

100

Hungary

4

4

3

4

5

4

0.00

209

128

43

29

16

16

-1,206

5,580

5,370

5,261

6,395

8,954

10,869

49

30

32

34

271

508

785

96

4

13

21

235

449

760

99

Russian Federation Northern Europe Denmark Finland Ireland

6

17

36

34

31

32

81

Norway

5

14

18

217

1,146

1,549

100

Sweden

34

41

45

202

664

734

95

5,501

5,253

5,107

5,436

6,156

7,009

22

Southern Europe

38

71

151

213

305

318

88

Greece

18

13

8

7

6

6

-200

United Kingdom

39

Italy

18

54

90

180

269

274

93

Spain

2

4

53

26

30

38

95

487

597

710

967

1,458

1,730

72

Austria

22

25

27

31

34

39

44

Belgium

11

11

11

20

28

41

73

France

319

335

350

216

217

235

-36

Germany

55

125

195

501

807

835

93

Netherlands

25

37

53

106

249

446

94

Switzerland

Western Europe

55

64

74

93

123

134

59

Latin America and the Caribbean

9

7

6

4

15

16

44

Central America

7

5

6

4

9

9

22

Costa Rica

7

5

6

4

8

8

13

Panama

0

0

0

0

1

1

100

South America

2

2

0

0

6

7

71

Bolivia (Plurinational State of)

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Brazil

0

0

0

0

6

7

100

Chile

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

11,293

14,508

18,249

26,773

36,384

57,108

80

1,199

1,545

1,928

2,929

4,099

4,584

74

10,094

12,963

16,321

23,844

32,285

52,524

81

Oceania

5,131

6,194

6,470

7,244

12,681

15,771

67

Australia

4,934

5,876

6,120

6,830

11,900

14,635

66

197

318

350

414

781

1,136

83

Northern America Canada United States

New Zealand Source: UN DESA, 2015.

40

Table IV. Male migrants from Myanmar, 1990–2015 Major area, region, country or area of destination

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

379,777

499,296

660,812

1,010,437

1,445,325

1,638,327

77

Developed regions

21,726

25,956

30,486

41,732

59,314

84,237

74

Developing regions

358,051

473,340

630,326

968,705

1,386,011

1,554,090

77

Least developed countries

110,170

112,518

114,849

141,171

167,504

177,356

38

Less developed regions excluding least developed countries

247,881

360,822

515,477

827,534

1,218,507

1,376,734

82

Sub-Saharan Africa

45

36

34

39

62

79

43

Africa

52

44

42

49

73

92

43

Northern Africa

7

8

8

10

11

13

46

Egypt

7

8

8

10

11

13

46

Southern Africa

45

36

34

39

62

79

43

South Africa

45

36

34

39

62

79

43

357,953

473,241

630,217

968,577

1,385,835

1,553,879

77

Eastern Asia

82

512

1,107

1,839

3,290

11,125

99

Republic of Korea

82

512

1,107

1,839

3,290

11,125

99

141,955

252,608

411,061

705,917

1,068,753

1,200,137

88

16

42

68

54

40

36

56

213

188

146

122

109

114

-87

3,177

7,080

11,671

85,300

171,769

181,494

98

32

85

159

173

192

195

84

Thailand

137,948

243 661

394,930

615,256

890,739

1,011,497

86

Viet Nam

569

1,552

4,087

5,012

5,904

6,801

92

Southern Asia

156,341

152,091

147,979

171,787

195,614

204,459

24

Bangladesh

109,931

112,276

114,621

140,978

167,335

177,185

38

10

12

14

17

20

21

52

44,527

38 244

31 962

29,467

26,972

25,974

-71

1,873

1,559

1,382

1,325

1,287

1,279

-46

59,575

68,030

70,070

89,034

118,178

138,158

57

Cyprus

3

4

4

7

11

12

75

Jordan

2

16

29

42

55

26

92

59,554

67,994

70,010

88,958

118,084

138,092

57

World

Asia


Bhutan India Pakistan Western Asia

Saudi Arabia

% change, 1990–2005

Turkey

16

16

27

27

28

28

43

Europe

5,939

5,945

6,091

8,062

11,894

13,742

57

Eastern Europe

207

215

217

432

636

689

70

Czech Republic

1

1

1

18

34

74

99

Hungary

4

3

3

3

3

5

20

202

211

213

411

599

610

67

4,969

4,802

4,700

5,998

8,793

10,232

51

13

22

30

389

748

1,011

99

Finland

3

16

29

272

514

739

100

Iceland

0

0

0

0

0

1

100

Ireland

6

18

40

42

32

32

81

Norway

25

33

38

297

1,287

1,587

98

Sweden

64

75

80

240

739

807

92

4,858

4,638

4,483

4,758

5,473

6,055

20

Russian Federation Northern Europe Denmark

United Kingdom

41

Southern Europe

39

69

180

181

232

230

83

Greece

24

18

13

14

14

14

-71

Italy

10

43

75

123

172

167

94

Spain

5

8

92

44

46

49

90

724

859

994

1,451

2,233

2,591

72

Austria

17

19

22

24

26

32

47

Belgium

16

16

15

36

53

104

85

France

354

360

366

153

219

237

-49

Germany

Western Europe

221

306

390

892

1,393

1,441

85

Netherlands

61

89

118

255

449

658

91

Switzerland

55

69

83

91

93

119

54


46

55

67

79

103

119

61

Central America

26

35

47

64

87

101

74

3

3

3

2

4

4

25

Panama

23

32

44

62

83

97

76

South America

20

20

20

15

16

18

-11

Argentina

Costa Rica

19

19

19

14

9

9

-111

Brazil

0

0

0

0

6

7

100

Chile

1

1

1

1

1

2

50

10,879

14,173

18,063

26,768

35,316

55,150

80

Canada

1,138

1,450

1,796

2,774

3,925

4,383

74

United States of America

9,741

12 723

16,267

23,994

31,391

50,767

81

Oceania

4,908

5,838

6,332

6,902

12,104

15,345

68

Australia

4,742

5,562

6,000

6,510

11,370

14,281

67

166

276

332

392

734

1,064

84

Northern America


42

Table V. Total migrants from Myanmar, 1990–2015 Major area, region, country or area of destination

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

World

585,080

Developed regions

811,128

1,121,782

1,715,050

2,436,388

2,881,797

80

44,468

52,828

61,373

83,369

119,140

170,107

74

Developing regions

540,612

758,300

1,060,409

1,631,681

2,317,248

2,711,690

80

Least developed countries

126,295

128,941

131,553

161,132

190,740

201,681

37

Less developed regions excluding least developed countries

414,317

629,359

928,856

1,470,549

2,126,508

2,510,009

83

Sub-Saharan Africa

211

131

90

107

172

218

3

Africa

220

140

99

118

184

232

5

Northern Africa

9

9

9

11

12

14

36

Egypt

9

9

9

11

12

14

36

Southern Africa

211

131

90

107

172

218

3

South Africa

211

131

90

107

172

218

3

540,337

758,098

1,060,237

1,631,480

2,316,946

2,711,323

80

Eastern Asia

88

552

1,193

1,976

3,542

11,514

99

Republic of Korea

88

552

1,193

1,976

3,542

11,514

99

235,518

450,230

758,494

1,279,463

1,900,099

2,242,549

90

24

63

102

80

58

52

54

404

360

282

245

238

249

-62

4,568

10,170

16,841

120,771

241,430

252,292

98

55

170

333

365

415

421

87

Thailand

229,504

436,777

734,129

1,150,168

1, 648,602

1,978,348

88

Viet Nam

963

2,690

6,807

7,834

9,356

11,187

91

Southern Asia

215,171

205,313

195,715

220,535

245,393

254,427

15

Bangladesh

125,851

128,499

131,147

160,780

190,412

201,346

38

16

19

22

27

32

34

53

85,706

73,795

61,884

57,177

52,470

50,587

-69

3,598

3,000

2,662

2,551

2,479

2,460

-46

89,560

102,003

104,835

129,506

167,912

202,833

56

Cyprus

11

16

20

30

48

50

78

Jordan

2

16

29

42

55

26

92

89,529

101,950

104,750

129,398

167,772

202,720

56

Asia


Bhutan India Pakistan Western Asia

Saudi Arabia

% change 1990–2015

Turkey

18

21

36

36

37

37

51

Europe

12,257

12,115

12,259

15,682

22,655

26,733

54

Eastern Europe

420

347

263

477

680

763

45

Czech Republic

1

1

1

30

57

128

99

Hungary

8

7

6

7

8

9

11

411

339

256

440

615

626

34

10,549

10,172

9,961

12,393

17,747

21,101

50

43

54

64

660

1,256

1,796

98

Finland

7

29

50

507

963

1,499

100

Iceland

0

0

0

0

0

1

100

Ireland

12

35

76

76

63

64

81

Norway

30

47

56

514

2,433

3,136

99

Sweden

98

116

125

442

1,403

1,541

94

10,359

9,891

9,590

10,194

11,629

13,064

21

Russian Federation Northern Europe Denmark

United Kingdom

43

Southern Europe

77

140

331

394

537

548

86

Greece

42

31

21

21

20

20

-110

Italy

28

97

165

303

441

441

94

Spain

7

12

145

70

76

87

92

1,211

1,456

1,704

2,418

3,691

4,321

72

Austria

39

44

49

55

60

71

45

Belgium

27

27

26

56

81

145

81

France

673

695

716

369

436

472

-43

Germany

Western Europe

276

431

585

1,393

2,200

2,276

88

Netherlands

86

126

171

361

698

1,104

92

Switzerland

110

133

157

184

216

253

57


55

62

73

83

118

135

59

Central America

33

40

53

68

96

110

70

Costa Rica

10

8

9

6

12

12

17

Panama

23

32

44

62

84

98

77

South America

22

22

20

15

22

25

12

Argentina

19

19

19

14

9

9

-111

Bolivia (Plurinational State of)

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Brazil

0

0

0

0

12

14

100

Chile

2

2

1

1

1

2

0

22,172

28,681

36,312

53,541

71,700

112,258

80

2,337

2,995

3,724

5,703

8,024

8,967

74

United States of America

19,835

25,686

32,588

47,838

63,676

103,291

81

Oceania

10,039

12,032

12,802

14,146

24,785

31,116

68

Australia

9,676

11,438

12,120

13,340

23,270

28,916

67

363

594

682

806

1,515

2,200

84

Northern America Canada


44

Table VI: Length of stay abroad by country of destination, 2014 Length of stay Country

Total

Less than 15 months

%

15 months to 4 years

%

5 to 9 years

%

10 to 19 years

%

Over 20 % years

Not stated

%

All countries

2,021,910

624,196 31

742,097 37 396,469 20 206,186 10

27,362

1

25,600

1

Thailand

1,418,472

420,281 30

537,601 38 271,386 19 154,744 11

17,462

1

16,998

1

Malaysia

303,996

81,521 27

131,230 43

67,460 22

18,404

6

1,645

1

3,736

1

Singapore

79,659

29,173 37

23,560 30

18,170 23

6,805

9

1,001

1

950

1

China

92,263

55,444 60

20,413 22

5,221

6

1,415

2

1,412

2

Japan

7,597

2,332 31

1,627 21

1,830 24

1,080 14

595

8

133

2

Republic of Korea

14,592

7,912 54

4,969 34

1,005

3

73

1

188

1

India

17,975

5,927 33

4,547 25

3,540 20

2,698 15

893

5

370

2

United States

37,577

3,603 10

6,388 17

15,002 40

9,667 26

2,032

5

885

2

Other

49,779

18,003 36

11,762 24

9,718 20

7,122 14

2,246

5

928

2

8,358

9 7

445


Table VII: Myanmar nationals with work permit in Thailand by region of residence Region/Area

Number and per cent of Myanmar migrants with work permits Numbers

Bangkok

% 73,872

7

Bangkok vicinity

373,088

35

Central region

178,911

17

Northern region

148,461

14

11,252

1

267,855

25

1,053,439

100

North-Eastern Southern region Total Thailand Source: Beesey, Limsakul and McDougall, 2016.

45

ANNEX B. QUESTIONNAIRE Myanmar migrants’ risks assessment Migrants from Myanmar and Risks Faced Abroad

Introduction and guidance Many thanks for taking the time to fill in this questionnaire. This assessment of the risks faced by migrants from Myanmar is carried out as part of the implementation of an IOM-led project for capacity-building targeting Guatemala, Mexico, Myanmar and Thailand. The project is designed to complement the Migrants in Countries in Crisis (MICIC) Initiative which is a State-led political process, co-chaired by the United States and the Philippines, that aims to produce a set of guiding principles and a compilation of effective practices on how to better protect and assist migrants in the event of an acute crisis. The project is currently being implemented by IOM in collaboration with the Government of Myanmar. The information gathered through this assessment will assist in the development of an approach to assistance and protect migrants from Myanmar as part of the larger multi-country MICIC response to migration flows in acute crisis events. When filling in the questionnaire please take notice of the following: 1. If you do fill the questionnaire by hand please do so in a clear and organized fashion to allow us to read easily and to make the most out of the information you provide. 2. The migrants risks assessment questionnaire is being distributed both to officials who deal only with migration issues and to others who may come across vulnerable migrants from Myanmar, while the focus of their daily work is different. It is of high importance that you state clearly your function and the entity for which you work. 3. If you do not know an answer to a question, please write “I do not know”. This too provides us with useful information that can assist in the development of appropriate assistance responses. But please do your best to provide us with any information you do know. 4. If the space provided for an answer is not sufficient you are welcome to use the last page of the questionnaire and to add more pages as needed. 5. Please send the filled in questionnaire back to IOM Myanmar in Yangon at the requested time so that it can be collected and sent to the consultant in time to be included in the information analysis. 6. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact IOM Myanmar Yangon office using the contact details provided below. Again, thank you very much for your cooperation, David Ndegwa, Consultant

46

The Questionnaire Filled in by:_____________________ Function/job title: _______________ Country:_______________________

Date:______________________________ Organization:_______________________ Job location:________________________

Question 1: Through your work, have you come across migrants from Myanmar? If yes – where did you encounter them? _________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 2: How would you describe the migrants you encountered? Asylum seekers Refugees Victims of Trafficking (or suspected victims of trafficking) Unaccompanied or separated migrant children Stranded Migrants Stateless Persons Other types of migrants (specify) _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 3: If you have encountered any/several or all of the types of migrants above please explain how you got know they were the type of migrants you have described e.g. refugees, asylum seekers, etc. __________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 4: Among those migrants you encountered, have you come across some whom you consider to be vulnerable? For example ___________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 5: Where are the following groups of Myanmar migrants being accommodated where they are? 5.1 Asylum seekers/refugees ________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 5.2 Victims of trafficking____________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 5.3 Irregular migrants and rejected asylum seekers_______________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 5.4 Unaccompanied or separated children______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 5.5 Stateless migrants______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 5.6 Stranded migrants______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 5.7 Other groups of vulnerable migrants ______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 6: In your view, who are the main entities that come across the migrants first? ________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 7: In your view, what are the main challenges facing migrants from Myanmar? ________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 47

Question 8: In your view, what are the main factors that compel the migrants from Myanmar to leave? ____ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 9: In your view, what are main factors that attract migrants from Myanmar to move to their destinations? ____________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 10: Where are most of the migrants from Myanmar to be found? ___________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 11: In those areas of destination, are there places where migrants from Myanmar face risks from natural or human made disasters? If yes, please specify the areas and type of disasters they face? ________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 12: Are there other specific difficulties that migrants from Myanmar face in addition to the disaster risks? If yes, please specify the areas and type of difficulties they face? ______________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 13: What bodies inside Myanmar exist to assist migrants from Myanmar? ____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 14: What bodies outside Myanmar exist to assist migrants from Myanmar at their places of destination? _____________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 15: What form of assistance is provided to the migrants from Myanmar at their places of destination? _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 16: What form of response to the migrants is provided inside Myanmar? _____________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Question 17: To your knowledge, are there needs of the migrants that are not currently being met? If yes, please specify. ___________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ You can continue your answer to any of the questions here. Please mark question numbers clearly. Please feel free to add more pages if needed. _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 48

REFERENCES Ahmad, S.N. 2015 Burmese Muslims: Stateless at home & no refuge elsewhere! The Milli Gazette, 7 January. Available from www.milligazette.com/news/11598-burmesemuslims-stateless-at-home-no-refuge-elsewhere Ahmed, A.U. et al. 2015 Sectoral inputs towards the formulation of Seventh Five Year Plan (2016–2021): Climate Change and Disaster Management. Alamri, Y.A. 2010 Emergency Management in Saudi Arabia: Past, Present and Future. University of Christchurch report, New Zealand. Arnold, D. 2007 Capital Expansion and Migrant Workers: Flexible Labor in the Thai–Burma Border Economy. Human Rights in Asia SERIES. Office of Human Rights Studies and Social Development, Faculty of Graduate Studies, Mahidol University, Bangkok. Arnold, D. and J. Pickles 2002 Global Work, Surplus Labor, and the Precarious Economies of the Border. Antipode, 43(5):1598– 1624. Asian Disaster Reduction Centre n.d. Thailand. Available from www.adrc.asia/ nationinformation.php?NationCode=764& Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) 2005 Total Disaster Risk Management - Good Practices 2005. ADRC, Kobe, Japan. Available from www. adrc.asia/publications/TDRM2005/TDRM_Good_ Practices/GP2005_e.html Aung, W.S. 2009 Illegal Heroes and Victimless Crimes: Informal Cross-border Migration from Myanmar. Institute for Security and Development Policy, Stockholm. Beesey, A., S. Limsakul and E. McDougallù 2016 Hazard Exposure and Vulnerability of Migrants in Thailand. International Organization for Migration (IOM), Geneva. Available from https://micicinitiative. iom.int/sites/default/files/document/MICIC%20 Thailand%20desk%20study%20web.pdf

Bertelsmann Stiftung 2014 Myanmar Country Report. Bertelsmann Stiftung (BTI), Gütersloh, Germany. Bradford, W. and A. Vicary 2005 Preliminary Survey Results about Burmese Migrant Workers in Thailand: State/Division of Origin, Years of Entry, Minimum Wages and Work Permits. Burma Economic Watch, 1:3–25. Burmese Women’s Union 2007 Caught Between Two Hells: The Report Highlights the Situation of Women Migrant Workers in Thailand and China. Burmese Women’s Union. Caouette, T.M. and M. Pack 2002 Pushing Past the Definitions: Migration from Burma to Thailand. Refugees International and Open Society Institute. Center for Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance (CFE-DMHA) 2014 Burma (Myanmar) Disaster Management Reference Handbook. 2015

ASEAN Disaster Management Reference Handbook.

2016

Malaysia Disaster Management Reference Handbook.

Chantavanich, S. and P. Vungisiriphisal 2012 Myanmar Migrants to Thailand and Implications to Myanmar Development. Policy Review on Myanmar Economy, October 2012.Bangkok Research Center, Bangkok. Commonwealth of Australia 2006 Burmese Community Profile. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, ACT. Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (DDPM) 2015 National progress report on the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (2013–2015). DDPM, Thailand. Duncan, H. 2013 Immigrant integration as a factor in disaster preparedness: The case of the 2011 Tohuku earthquake in Japan. Migration Policy Practice, III(2):9–14. Available from http://publications.iom. int/system/files/pdf/migrationpolicypracticejournal 10_15may2013.pdf

49

Eberle, M.L. 2010 Precarity and social mobilization among migrant workers from Myanmar in Thailand. Master of Philosophy thesis. University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong, SAR. Emerging Markets Consulting 2015 Research into Refugees’ Employment and Income Generation Opportunities in Thailand and Myanmar; with particular attention on opportunities for the most vulnerable groups, including people with disabilities in the Burmese Border Refugee Camps. Prepared for Handicap International. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 2016 National Preparedness Report 2016. Department of Homeland Security, United States. Feeney, G. n.d. The East-West Center Years: 1972-1998. Available from www.eastwestcenter.org/ Fujita, K. et al. 2010 Myanmar Migrant Laborers in Ranong, Thailand. IDE Discussion Paper No. 257. Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization, Chiba, Japan. GMS Triangle Project 2015 Myanmar citizens abroad: What the 2014 census tells us about migration. GMS TRIANGLE Project Information Note September 2015. Haimei, S. 2011 Inflow of International Immigrants Challenges China’s Migration Policy. 8 September. Brookings Opinion Piece.

Huguet, J., A. Chamratrithirong and C. Natali 2012 Thailand at a Crossroads: Challenges and Opportunities in Leveraging Migration for Development. IOM and Migration Policy Institute (MPI) Issue in Brief no. 6. Bangkok and Washington, D.C. Available from https://publications.iom.int/ system/files/pdf/mpi_issue6_10oct2012_web.pdf Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) 2014 Myanmar: Comprehensive solutions needed for recent and long-term IDPs alike. IDMC, Geneva. International Crisis Group 2012 Myanmar: Storm Clouds on the Horizon. Asia Report no. 238 – 12 November 2012. International Labour Organization (ILO) 2015 Migration in ASEAN in figures: The International Labour Migration Statistics (ILMS) Database in ASEAN. Tripartite Action for the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers in the ASEAN Region (ASEAN TRIANGLE Project). ILO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok. International Organization for Migration (IOM) 2008 Situation Report on International Migration in East and South-East Asia. Regional Thematic Working Group on International Migration including Human Trafficking. IOM Regional Office for Southeast Asia, Bangkok. Available from http://publications.iom.int/ system/files/pdf/situation_report.pdf 2009

Nargis Response: IOM Response to Cyclone Nargis Emergency: One Year On. Available from http:// yangon.sites.unicnetwork.org/files/2013/05/IOM_ Nargis_Newsletter_-_May_2009.pdf

2013

Assessing Potential Changes in the Migration Patterns of Myanmar Migrants and their Impacts on Thailand. IOM Country Mission in Thailand and the Asian Research Center for Migration, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok. Available from http://th.iom.int/ index.php/migration-resources/migration-research/ Assessing-Potential-Changes-in-the-MigrationPatterns-of-Myanmar-Migrants-and-Their-Impactson-Thailand-(English-Language)/

Hall, A. 2012a Experiences of Myanmar Migrant Workers in Thailand with the MOU Import Process. 6 May 2012. Mahidol Migration Center. 2012b Myanmar and Migrant Workers: Briefing and Recommendations. April 2012. Mahidol Migration Center. Salaya, Thailand. Htwe, T.M. 2015 Life in the Machine House of Rural Migrants: Case Study of the Lives of Rural Migrant Industrial Workers and their Families in Haling Thayar Industrial Zone. A paper delivered at the International Conference on Burma/Myanmar Studies: Burma/Myanmar in Transition: Connectivity, Changes and Challenges. UNISERV, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, 24–26 July 2015. Huguet, J. and A. Chamratrithirong (eds.) Thailand Migration Report 2011. Migration for Development in Thailand: Overview and Tools for Policymakers. IOM, Bangkok. Available from https:// publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/tmr_2011.pdf

2011

50

2015a Myanmar: 2015 Floods IOM Response. Situation Report 21 August. Available from www.iom.int/sites/ default/files/situation_reports/file/IOM-MyanmarSitrep-No6-21Aug2015.pdf 2015b MICIC Myanmar Country Profile – Country of Origin. Unpublished IOM Document. IRIN 2009

Burmese migrants struggle in Malaysia. 14 October. Available from www.irinnews.org/ feature/2009/10/14/burmese-migrants-strugglemalaysia

Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG) 2009 Abuse, Poverty and Migration: Investigating migrants’ motivations to leave home in Burma. 2014

Truce or Transition? Trends in human rights abuse and local response in Southeast Myanmar since the 2012 ceasefire. KHRG, Myanmar.

Keereepaibool, S. 2015 Educational Development in a Changing Burma: The Future of Children of Migrant Labourers Returning from Thailand to Burma. Paper delivered at the International Conference on Burma/Myanmar Studies: Burma/Myanmar in Transition: Connectivity, Changes and Challenges. UNISERV, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, 24–26 July 2015. Khunwishit, S. and D. McEntire 2011 Emergency management in Thailand: On the way to creating a more systematic approach to disasters. In: Comparative Emergency Management: Understanding Disaster Policies, Organizations, and Initiatives from Around the World (D. McEntire, ed.). Federal Emergency Management Agency. Emmitsburg. Kundu, S. 2015 The Rohingyas: Security Implications for ASEAN and Beyond. Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses Issue Brief, 28 May. Kyi, K.S. 2015

The Social Relationship of Myanmar Migrant Workers in Malaysia: An Ethnographic Study. International Conference on Burma/Myanmar Studies. Burma/ Myanmar in Transition: Connectivity, Changes and Challenges. University Academic Service Center (UNISERV) Chiang Mai University, Thailand, 24–25 July 2015.

Mahidol Migration Center 2012 Migrants, Minorities and Refugees: Integration and Well-being. 2nd MMC Regional Consultative Meeting Newsletter, vol. 3, 1 July. Mahidol Migration Center, Institute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand. Martin, P. 2007 The Economic Contribution of Migrant Workers to Thailand: Towards Policy Development. ILO Subregional Office for East Asia, Bangkok. May, S.Y. 2015 Migration as a Challenge for Myanmar’s Socioeconomic Development: Case Studies of Hpa-an and Mrauk-U townships in Myanmar. Paper delivered at the International Conference on Burma/Myanmar Studies: Burma/Myanmar in Transition: Connectivity, Changes and Challenges. UNISERV, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, 24–26 July 2015.

Muntarbhorn, V. 2005 The Mekong Challenge – Employment and Protection of Migrant Workers in Thailand: National Laws/ Practices versus International Labour Standards? ILO, Bangkok. National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma 2009 Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008. Human Rights Documentation Unit, National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma. Newland, K. 2015 Irregular Maritime Migration in the Bay of Bengal: The Challenges of Protection, Management and Cooperation. IOM-MPI Issue in Brief no. 13. Bangkok and Washington, D.C. Olson, C., W. Stauffer and E. Barnett 2016 Newly Arrived Immigrants and Refugees. Centers for Disease Control and Protection. Available from www.nccdc.gov/travel/yellowbook/2016/advisingtravelers-with-specific-needs/newly-arrivedimmigrants-refugees. Pepper, M. 2015 Social Exclusion, Livelihoods, and Gender Violence: Burmese Muslim Refugees in Thailand. International Conference on Burma/Myanmar Studies. Burma/ Myanmar in Transition: Connectivity, Changes and Challenges. UNISERV, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, 24–25 July 2015. Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS) 2012 Enhancing the Protection and Promotion of Migrant Workers’ Rights in ASEAN. PIDS Policy Brief 5. Pocapanishwong, N. 2015 From ‘Unidentified Corpse’ to ‘Hometown Association’: The Standing of Self in the Religious Sphere among Myanmar Migrant Workers in Ranong, Thailand. Paper delivered at the International Conference on Burma/Myanmar Studies: Burma/ Myanmar in Transition: Connectivity, Changes and Challenges. UNISERV, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, 24–26 July 2015. Pripotjanart, T. 2015 Inequality and way of life among Burmese migrants in Thailand: A case study in Chiang Mai. A Paper delivered at the International Conference on Burma/ Myanmar Studies: Burma/Myanmar in Transition: Connectivity, Changes and Challenges. UNISERV, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, 24–26 July 2015. Robertson, P. From the Tiger to the Crocodile: Abuse of Migrant Workers in Thailand. Human Rights Watch, New York.

2010

Sakaew, S. and P. Tangpratchakoon 2009 Brokers and Labor Migration from Myanmar: A Case Study from Samut Sakorn. Asian Research Center for Migration and Labour Rights Promotion Network, Bangkok. 51

Sijapati, B. 2015 Women’s Labour Migration from Asia and the Pacific: Opportunities and Challenges. IOM-MPI Issue in Brief no. 12. Bangkok and Washington, D.C. Available from https://publications.iom.int/system/files/pdf/mpi_ issue12.pdf

United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP) 2015 Asia-Pacific Migration Report 2015: Migrants’ Contributions to Development. ST/ESCAP/2738. Asia-Pacific RCM Thematic Working Group on International Migration including Human Trafficking.

Soe, K. 2010 Linkages between Migration and Democratization: A Case Study on Burma. Paper presented at the 6th EuroSEAS Conference at the University of Gothenburg, 26–28 August 2010.

United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs (UN DESA) 2013 International Migration Data https://esa.un.org/ unmigration/

South, A. and K. Jolliffe 2015 Forced Migration and the Myanmar Peace Process. New Issues in Refugee Research. Research Paper No. 274. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Geneva. Thailand Burma Border Consortium (TBBC) 2011 Displacement and Poverty in South East Burma/ Myanmar. TBBC, Bangkok. 2012

Refugee and IDP Camp Populations: December 2012.

Thai Ministry of Labor 2012 Labour Migration to Thailand. Presentation given at the Department of Employment on 14 June 2012. The Border Consortium (TBC) 2012 Changing Realities, Poverty and Displacement in South East Burma/Myanmar. TBC, Bangkok. 2014

Protection and Security Concerns in South East Burma/Myanmar. TBC, Bangkok.

The Republic of the Union of Myanmar 2014 The 2014 Myanmar Population and Housing Census. The Union Report. Census Report Volume 2. Department of Population, Ministry of Immigration and Population, Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar. The 7th ASEAN Forum on Migrant Labour 2014 Recommendations: The 7th ASEAN FORUM ON MIGRANT LABOUR. 20–21 November 2014. Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar. Thiesmeyer, L. 2015 Environmental Damage and Poverty Migration Among Myanmar and its Neighbors. Paper delivered at the International Conference on Burma/Myanmar Studies. Burma/Myanmar in Transition: Connectivity, Changes and Challenges. UNISERV, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, 24–26 July 2015. Treviranus, B. and S.O. Törngren 2015 A Socio-Economic Review of Japan’s Resettlement Pilot Project. New Issues in Refugee Research, Research Paper no. 276. UNHCR, Geneva. United Nations Action for Cooperation against Trafficking in Persons (UN-ACT) 2015 May 2015 Newsletter. UN-ACT Regional Management Office, Bangkok.

52

United Nations General Assembly 2015 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, François Crépeau. A/HRC/29/36. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) 2012 Myanmar Factsheet, November 2012. 2013

Myanmar Situation External Update #4, August– September 2013.

2014a Displaced Persons in the Temporary Shelters along the Thai-Myanmar Border: Future Hopes and Aspirations. UNHCR and Mae Fah Luang Foundation. 2014b Singapore Factsheet, September 2014. 2014c South-East Myanmar. UNHCR Return Monitoring Update, September 2014. 2015a Myanmar Factsheet, August 2015. 2015b Malaysia Factsheet, August 2015. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) 2012 Migrant Smuggling in Asia: A Thematic Review of Literature. UNODC Regional Office for Southeast Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok. 2014

Southeast Asia Opium Survey 2014: Lao PDR, Myanmar. UNODC Regional Office for Southeast Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok.

US Department of State 2016 Trafficking in Persons Report. June 2016. World Bank 2012 Interim Strategy Note for the Republic of the Union of Myanmar for the Period FY13-14. Report no. 72458MM, 30 October.

micicinitiative.iom.int - [email protected]

YEARS International Organization for Migration

IOM Mission in Myanmar No. 318 (A) •Ahlone Road •Dagon Township• Yangon • Myanmar Tel: +95 1 210 588; Fax: + 95 1 210 588 (ext: 5010) E-mail: [email protected] • Website: http://www.iom.int

The opinions expressed in the report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the International Organization for Migration (IOM). The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout the report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IOM concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning its frontiers or boundaries. IOM is committed to the principle that humane and orderly migration benefits migrants and society. As an intergovernmental organization, IOM acts with its partners in the international community to: assist in meeting the operational challenges of migration; advance understanding of migration issues; encourage social and economic development through migration; and uphold the human dignity and well-being of migrants. The publication has not undergone professional editing by IOM.

Authors:

Montira Inkochasan Kyaw Myint Tun Patrick Duigan Paula Bianca Blomquist Jaime Calderon Min Yu Aung

International Organization for Migration No. 318 (A) Ahlone Road, Dagon Township Yangon Myanmar Tel: +95 1 210 588 Fax: + 95 1 210 588 (ext: 5010) E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.iom.int Publisher:

© 2015 International Organization for Migration (IOM)

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher.

87_15

Contents List of tables.................................................................................................. v List of figures................................................................................................ vi List of maps................................................................................................. vii Abbreviations............................................................................................... ix Operational definitions................................................................................. ix 1. Background...............................................................................................1 1.1 Overview................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 HIV in Myanmar....................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Mobility, migration and infrastructure development ............................................... 1 1.4 Rationale and objectives.......................................................................................... 2

2. Methodology.............................................................................................5 2.1 Method overview..................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Location .................................................................................................................. 6 2.3 Target groups and eligibility criteria......................................................................... 6 2.4 Data collection methodology................................................................................... 7 2.4.1 Mapping .............................................................................................................. 7 2.4.2 Qualitative methods............................................................................................. 7 2.4.3 Rapid assessment................................................................................................. 7 2.4.4 Quantitative survey.............................................................................................. 8 2.5 Analysis.................................................................................................................... 9 2.6 Tool development and data quality........................................................................ 10 2.7 Ethical considerations............................................................................................ 10

3. Results..................................................................................................... 11 3.1 Migration and mobility in Myawaddy and Kawkareik............................................. 11 3.1.1 Reasons for migration........................................................................................ 12 3.1.2 Qualitative results: Migration patterns in Myawaddy and Kawkareik............... 13 3.1.3 Migration and trafficking.................................................................................... 17 3.1.4 Rapid assessment: Migration and mobility patterns.......................................... 20 3.1.5 Quantitative survey: Migration patterns............................................................ 20 3.2 History of illness and health care-seeking behaviour.............................................. 23 3.3 STI and HIV/AIDS knowledge and awareness.......................................................... 26 3.3.1 HIV awareness and risk assessment among risk groups.................................... 28 3.4 Attitudes towards HIV/AIDS................................................................................... 30 3.4.1 Affiliations and perceptions of people living with HIV/AIDS among risk groups..................................................................... 31 3.4.2 Perception of groups at risk of HIV transmission............................................... 33 3.5 Health services and accessibility............................................................................ 33 3.5.1 Health services for migrants and MARP............................................................. 38 3.5.2 Health services - referral.................................................................................... 40 3.6 Quality of health-care services and difficulties accessing health-care services....... 41 3.6.1 Quality of HIV and health services in the areas.................................................. 42 3.7 HIV services and HIV testing history....................................................................... 45 3.7.1 HIV testing history among migrants................................................................... 49

HIV Vulnerability and Service Availability in Mobility Settings of Myawaddy and Kawkareik

iii

3.8 Barriers to accessing HIV services........................................................................... 49 3.9 Challenges in providing HIV services ...................................................................... 52 3.10 Sexual behaviour.................................................................................................. 54 3.10.1 Sexual behaviours and living conditions of risk groups.................................... 55 3.11 Condom use......................................................................................................... 63 3.11.1 Condom use among risk groups....................................................................... 63 3.11.2 Female condom................................................................................................ 66 3.12 Condom availability and accessibility................................................................... 67 3.12.1 Condom availability among risk groups........................................................... 69 3.12.2 Condom accessibility among risk groups......................................................... 70 3.13 Drug and alcohol consumption............................................................................. 71 3.14 Media and health communications...................................................................... 74 3.14.1 Sources for HIV prevention advocacy............................................................... 74

4. Discussion............................................................................................... 77

Contents

iv

4.1 Study findings........................................................................................................ 77 4.1.1 Migration and mobility in Myawaddy and Kawkareik........................................ 77 4.1.2 HIV knowledge and attitudes............................................................................. 78 4.1.3 HIV risk behaviours............................................................................................. 78 4.1.4 Condom availability and accessibility................................................................. 79 4.1.5 Health care availability and health referral........................................................ 80 4.1.6 Quality of health-care services and barriers in accessing health services ........ 80 4.1.7 HIV and health communications........................................................................ 81 4.1.8 Representativeness and validity......................................................................... 81

5. Key findings and gap analysis................................................................... 83 6. Recommendations................................................................................... 87 Bibliography................................................................................................ 91 Appendices................................................................................................. 95 Appendix I: Eligibility and demographic profile of respondents in the survey .............. 95 Appendix II: Descriptive Results from the Survey......................................................... 99 Appendix III: Logistic regression analysis tables......................................................... 128 Annex IV: Profile of Kawkareik and Myawaddy.......................................................... 139 Annex V: Ethical Certificate........................................................................................ 142

List of tables Table 1:

Data collection methods and their associated target groups and sampling strategies.............................................................................. 5 Table 2: Rapid assessment findings: mobility patterns among locals and inbound migrants in migrant-dense areas of Myawaddy and Kawkareik........................... 20 Table 3: Previous and next location among inbound migrants, by Township (n=179)....... 22 Table 4: History of sex with specific partners among all migrants (n=388)........................ 55 Table 5: History of sex and condom use with specific partners among all migrants (n=388).................................................................................. 63 Table 6: Reasons for condom use....................................................................................... 64 Table 7: Reasons for condom use among those with a history of condom use during sex in last 12 months, presented by partner....................................... 66 Table 8: Source of condoms in each Township and by sex................................................. 69 Table 9: Summary of condom availability vs. accessibility................................................. 71 Table 10: Summary of significant findings and gap analysis................................................. 83 Table 12: Number of participants in the survey by township and ward............................... 96 Table 13: Demographic features of migrants in Myawaddy and Kawkareik........................ 96 Table 14: Educational background of migrants in Myawaddy and Kawkareik..................... 97 Table 15: Monthly income distribution among migrants with employment history in past 12 months, by Township, sex, and migrant category............................................................................................ 99 Table 16: Mobility patterns among migrants, by Township, sex, and migrant category.......................................................................................... 100 Table 17: Knowledge of sexually transmitted infections among migrants, by township, sex, and migrant category............................................. 101 Table 18: Knowledge of HIV/AIDS among migrants, by township, sex, and migrant category.......................................................................................... 103 Table 19: Knowledge of HIV transmission among migrants, by township, sex, and migrant category............................................................. 104 Table 20: Sources of information on HIV/AIDS among migrants, by township, sex, and migrant category............................................................. 106 Table 21: Risks groups associated with HIV among migrants who have heard of HIV/AIDS , by township, sex, and migrant category.............................. 108 Table 22: Attitudes towards HIV/AIDS among migrants who have heard of HIV/AIDS , by township, sex, and migrant category........................................ 108 Table 23: History of illness and health-care seeking, by township, sex, and migrant category.......................................................................................... 109 Table 24: History of STIs and health care seeking, by township, sex, and migrant category.......................................................................................... 111 Table 25: Difficulties faced accessing health care, by township, sex, and migrant category.......................................................................................... 112 Table 26: Health-care availability in study area, by township (prompted question).......... 113 Table 27: Health-care facilities available to public in study area, by township (prompted question)...................................................................... 114 Table 28: History of HIV testing , by township, sex, and migrant category........................ 115 Table 29: General sexual behaviour among migrants, by township, sex, and migrant category.................................................................................. 117 Table 30: Sexual behaviour with spouse among married migrants, by township, sex, and migrant category............................................................. 118 Table 31: Sexual behaviour with regular partner, by township, sex, and migrant category.................................................................................. 120 Table 32: Sexual behaviour with paid partner, by township, sex, and migrant category.......................................................................................... 121


v

Contents

vi

Table 33: Access to condoms, by township, sex, and migrant category............................. 122 Table 34: History of drugs and alcohol, by township, sex, and migrant category.............. 124 Table 35: Frequency of access to media, by township, sex, and migrant category............ 125 Table 36: Frequency of access to media, by township, sex, and migrant category............ 126 Table 37: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of demographic and education differences between Townships (where Kawkareik=1 and Myawaddy=0)........................................... 128 Table 38: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of demographic and education differences between migration category (where outbound=1 and inbound=0).................................. 128 Table 39: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of demographic and socioeconomic differences between short term (cross border mobility or short visits < 1 month) and longer visits (season or >3 months)........................................... 129 Table 40: Distribution of employment types per mobility pattern (Out of those who chose a specific mobility pattern, n=244)............................. 129 Table 41: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of determinants of correctly answering all five questions in the HIV composite indicator........................................................... 130 Table 42: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of determinants of more negative attitudes towards HIV..................... 131 Table 43: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of determinants of history of illness in the past 6 months.................... 132 Table 44: Univariate logistic regression analysis of determinants of health care seeking, among those with history of illness in the past 6 months........................................................................................... 133 Table 45: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of having experienced difficulties accessing health-care services in the local area................................................................................................... 134 Table 46: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of determinants of knowing where to obtain condoms in the local area................................................................................................... 135 Table 47: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of determinants of having ever had an HIV test.................................... 136 Table 48: Univariate and adjusted multivariate logistic regression analysis of determinants of having ever had an HIV test.................................... 137 Table 49: Attitudes towards HIV/AIDS among migrants who have heard of HIV/AIDS, by township, sex, and migrant category......................................... 138 Table 50: Health Facilities in Kawkareik.............................................................................. 140 Table 51: Health Facilities in Myawaddy.............................................................................141

List of figures Figure 1: Flow chart of project methodologies and their interconnectivity.......................... 6 Figure 2: Temporal mobility patterns of migrants, by township.......................................... 22 Figure 3: Relationship of respondents to household members/accommodation sharers, by sex........................................................... 23 Figure 4: Type of health-care facility attended among those who fell ill in the past 6 months (n=105)............................................................................. 24 Figure 5: Knowledge of STIs among all respondents, and knowledge of associated symptoms among those who have heard of STIs (n=359), by sex (204 men, 155 women)................................................................ 27 Figure 6: Percentage of migrants who correctly answered HIV knowledge questions........ 28

F igure 7: Attitude towards people with HIV/AIDS, among migrants familiar with HIV........ 30 Figure 8: Composite attitude score (1=most negative, 15= most positive) with increasing ease of understanding health materials received in the past 6 months............................................................................... 31 Figure 9: Respondents who consider various groups to be at elevated risk of HIV/AIDS, among migrants familiar with HIV.................................................... 33 Figure 10: Perceived availability of health providers in study area....................................... 35 Figure 11: Perceived availability of health services in study area.......................................... 35 Figure 12: Distance travelled in search of health care when last ill in the study areas, in total and by migrant category................................................................ 36 Figure 13: Frequency facing difficulties when accessing health services or facilities in study area, among all, local, and inbound migrants....................... 41 Figure 14: Satisfaction with various dimensions of health care in study areas..................... 42 Figure 15: Migrants who received pre-test and post-test counselling, and who received their test result at their last HIV test, among migrants who had ever had an HIV test (n=67)........................................ 49 Figure 16: Distribution of number of partners in the past year among respondents who had ever had sex (n=315)......................................................... 54 Figure 17: Sexual network of FSW......................................................................................... 59 Figure 18: Sexual network of MSM........................................................................................ 61 Figure 19: Sexual network of vulnerable populations in Myawaddy and Kawkareik............. 62 Figure 20: Reasons for not using a condom among those with history of not using a condom during sex in last 12 months with their regular partner..................................................................................... 65 Figure 21: Respondents who know where they can obtain condoms, among all migrants and by township and sex....................................................... 68 Figure 22: Ease of obtaining condoms, among all migrants and by township and sex.......... 68 Figure 23: Frequency of respondents in accessing to media in the communities.................. 73 Figure 24: Actual and preferred sources of information on HIV/AIDS among respondents who had heard of HIV/AIDS.................................................. 74 Figure 25: Understandability of health information received in past six months among those who had received health information in that time (n=158), by township......................................................................... 74 Figure 26: Main employment in the past 12 months among all migrants (top chart) and by Township and sex.................................................................... 97 Figure 27: Monthly income, by Township, Sex, Migrant category, and main form of employment (where n>21)....................................................... 98

List of maps Map 1: Map 2: Map 3: Map 4: Map 5: Map 6: Map 7: Map 8: Map 9:

Study area: Myawaddy Town-Thin Gan Nyi Naung-Old Route-Kawkareik Town.... 2 Migrant cluster in study areas................................................................................ 8 Mobility pattern of study population from Myawaddy and Kawkareik, September 2014.......................................................................... 21 Distribution of health facilities in Kawkareik, September 2014............................ 34 Distribution of health facilities in Myawaddy, September 2014........................... 34 HIV and STI services along East-West Economic Corridor from Myawaddy to Kawkareik, September 2014.................................................. 45 Distribution of condom outlets in Kawkareik, September 2014........................... 66 Distribution of condom outlets in Myawaddy, September 2014.......................... 67 Geographical locations of Myawaddy and Kawkareik........................................ 140


vii

Abbreviations ADB FSW IDU MARP MMM MSM PWUD

Asian Development Bank Female Sex Worker Injecting drug user Most at risk populations Mobile men with money Men who have sex with men People who use drugs


Operational definitions • Study area: one of two townships, namely Myawaddy or Kawkareik in Kayin State. • Hotspot: an area of gathering among target populations. For instance, transactional sex hotspots are areas where sex workers solicit or work. These include entertainment and leisure venues among migrants and mobile populations and most at risk populations such as bars, restaurants, massage parlour and karaoke venues. • Men who have sex with men (MSM): men who have engaged in anal sex with a man. • People who use drugs (PWUD): individuals with a history of drug use, including injecting drugs. • Female sex workers (FSW): women who have exchanged sexual intercourse (vaginal, anal or oral) for a gift, money, or drugs. • Mobile men with money (MMM): men with recent economically-driven mobility. For the purposes of this study the term refers to truck drivers and their assistants. • Inbound migrant1: an individual who a) originates from outside of the study area and has lived in the area between 0 and 5 years and b) has stayed continuously in or made intermittent day time or overnight visits into the study area for a minimum of three months in the past two years (24 months). • Local or outbound migrant: an individual who a) originates from the study area OR who originates from outside of the study area but has lived in the study area for more than 5 years and b) has stayed continuously in or made intermittent day time or overnight visits outside of the study area for a minimum of three months in the past two years (24 months).

Note that a migrant in this study is not necessarily from a separate country, as per the UNHCR definition (1990). Originating from an area outside of the study township is sufficient to be considered a migrant.

1

ix

1. Background 1.1 Overview The relationship between HIV and mobility is widely recognized. While mobility and migration are not risk factors for HIV by themselves, the often harsh, unsafe and isolated conditions surrounding the mobility process can give rise to behaviours strongly associated with increased vulnerability to HIV, while also posing barriers to access to HIV prevention, treatment and care (Martin, 2011). The dynamics of population movement have evolved in South-East Asia over the last decade, and are in a phase of acceleration due to multiple factors including geopolitical and socio-economic changes, infrastructure development and closer cooperation among ASEAN Member Countries (UNRTF, 2008). Whether mobility is internal or cross-border, whether it is voluntary or forced, this increasing population movement generates particular conditions and circumstances that render migrants vulnerable and at risk of HIV infection (UNRTF, 2008). Article 86 of the 2011 UNGASS Political Declaration commits: “to address, according to national legislation, the vulnerabilities of HIV experienced by migrant and mobile populations and support their access to HIV prevention, treatment,care and support.” Migration, interconnectivity and economic exchange across borders is integral to the lives of the people of the Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS), and is expected to only increase, especially with the induction of the ASEAN economic community in 2015. It is essential to recognise the importance and links between HIV and Mobility and to mitigate potential risks associated with intiatives that will increase population mobility in the GMS region.

1.2 HIV in Myanmar Current estimates of HIV prevalence in the general adult population in Myanmar is 0.47 per cent with an estimated 189,000 people (37% female) currently living with HIV (National AIDS Programme (NAP), 2014). Disproportionate prevalences have been observed in populations engaging in high risk behaviours, such as female sex workers (FSW), men who have sex with men (MSM) and people who use drugs (PWUD). Prevalence rates among these high risk groups from a NAP report from 2013 were 8.1 per cent for FSW, 10.4 per cent amongst MSM, and 18.7 per cent for PWUD. This is a positive improvement compared to the 2009 Myanmar National AIDS Programme Report of the HIV Sentinel Sero-Surveillance Survey, which found the prevalence of HIV in FSW to be 11.2 per cent (range 9.2-13.6%), 22.3 per cent for MSM (range 18.2-26.4%), and 34.6 per cent (range 31.6-37.7%) for PWUD. However, further interventions to prevent HIV transmission among these populations is paramount to eliminate the spread of HIV as interaction between high and low risk populations (partners/ clients of sex workers) present a gateway for HIV into populations typically unaffected, which is reflected in increasing prevalence among these intersecting populations.

1.3 Mobility, migration and infrastructure development Improved transportation infrastructure and the emergence of transport and economic corridors in the GMS have led to improved connectivity. This has simultaneously enhanced regional economic integration, the creation of new job opportunities, and resulted in an influx of migrant and local workers to development sites, creating new and complex patterns of internal and cross-border migration.


1

Although not inherent risk factors for HIV, mobility and migration often come with conditions that make migrants vulnerable to HIV transmission as a result of engagement in risky behaviours such as unprotected sex or drug use. In a report from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and International Organization for Migration (IOM) in 2009 considering the effects of infrastructure development on HIV transmission in the GMS, it was stated that migrants and other local populations working and living along newly constructed road corridors are at a higher risk as they lack the knowledge and skills to prevent HIV infection.

1. Background

2

Road expansion of the East-West Economic Corridor is scheduled to take place between the towns of Myawaddy and Kawkareik, Kayin State in Myanmar near the border to Mae Sot, Thailand (Figure 1). In a report from the ADB on HIV among migrant workers in the GMS (2013), it was stated that male and female migrant workers working in border areas, fishing and seaports, and transportation corridors are at the highest risk of HIV infection. Road construction is very mobile in nature, bringing migrant workers through communities along the planned development route. Workers subsequently engage in the surrounding communities where services and businesses catering to their needs produce a mobile microeconomy that accompanies alongside road development. This draws on the service of commercial sex workers and other forms of entertainment, and can also lead to increased drug use - both catalysts for the spread of HIV. It is therefore necessary that situational assessments of migration and HIV vulnerabilities in the East-West Economic Corridor between Myawaddy and Kawkareik are conducted to allow a tailored response to the development occurring in the area. Map 1: Study area: Myawaddy Town-Thin Gan Nyi Naung-Old Route-Kawkareik Town

1.4 Rationale and objectives The aim of this study was to assess HIV vulnerabilities and access to HIV health-care services among key affected populations that live or work along the East-West Economic Corridor between Myawaddy and Kawkareik in Kayin State, Myanmar, as well the impact of economic development and increased interconnectivity on these factors. The findings will be used as an evidence base to develop HIV prevention and control policies, plans, and programmes within the target area. It will also serve as a baseline study for comparison with the next assessment, to be conducted after the development of new infrastructure and use of new roads.

The specific objectives are: 1. To identify current HIV risk behaviours of migrants and mobile populations, as well as the at-risk populations they are likely to have contact or overlap with, including sex workers, men who have sex with men, and people who use drugs. 2. To explore potential additional vulnerabilities to populations living near the proposed transportation corridors, including near construction sites. 3. To understand the accessibility to health services, which can reduce risks and mitigate the impact on these populations. 4. To constitute a baseline study for comparison with the next assessment to be conducted after the development of infrastructure and use of new roads in order to assess the impact of economic development and increased interconnectivity on these health factors. HIV Vulnerability and Service Availability in Mobility Settings of Myawaddy and Kawkareik

3

2. Methodology 2.1 Method overview This research targeted key affected populations in Myawaddy and Kawkareik, Myanmar, namely migrants, female sex workers (FSW), men who have sex with men (MSM), and people who use drugs (PWUD). The assessment applied a mixed methods approach collecting mapping, quantitative and qualitative data. The sampling strategy involved network recruitment and quota sampling from migrant-dense clusters to maximize the number of migrants recruited and thereby enable detailed characterization of the target group. Table 2 details the data collection methods and target groups, and Figure 1 illustrates how the study components inform successive sampling strategies. Table 1: Data collection methods and their associated target groups and sampling strategies Data collection method

Target groups

Recruitment/sampling method

Mapping Participatory hotspot mapping

Vulnerable groups and key informants

Derived from qualitative methods

Visit-based health facility and hotspot mapping

Health facilities, service providers, migrant social hotspots

Facility and venue visits

Health staff, relevant officers, NGOs, community figures, MSM network organizer(s), manager(s), gate keeper(s) People Who Use Drug (PWUD)

Purposive recruitment

Mobile Men with Money (MMM), Female Sex Worker (FSW), Men who have Sex with Men (MSM)

Network recruitment/Snowball sampling

Migrants (both inbound and outbound)

Cluster sampling Cluster quota sampling

Qualitative Key Informant Interviews (KII)

Focus Group Discussions (FGD)

Note: Due to sensitive situation, PWUD were individually interviewed instead of conducting group discussion

Quantitative Rapid assessment Quantitative survey


5

Figure 1: Flow chart of project methodologies and their interconnectivity

2. Methodology

6 2.2 Location The research targeted the townships of Myawaddy and Kawkareik near the eastern border of Kayin State, Myanmar, as well as the smaller towns located along the East-West Economic Corridor, including Thin Gan Nyi Naung just outside of Myawaddy, and Lower Botel, Middle Botel, and Kyone Doe located just outside of Kawkareik. Methodology-specific areas are defined in the relevant sections below. Due to political conflict within Myawaddy during the data collection period (September 2014), not all intended study areas were investigated. However, the required numbers of interviews was acquired.

2.3 Target groups and eligibility criteria To be generally eligible for participation in the study, respondents had to meet the following criteria: • Aged 15 to 50 years; • Provide informed consent; • Have not yet participated in any aspect of the study, aside from the rapid assessment. To be eligible for the qualitative study, respondents had to qualify for one of the target risk groups, namely MSM, PWUD, FSW, or MMM (see operational definitions).

To be eligible as migrants for the quantitative survey, respondents had to display recent (within the past two years) and consistent (a minimum of three months in total) mobility into or out of the study area. Migrants were categorized as inbound if they originated from outside of Myawaddy and Kawkareik, and had not lived in the study area for more than five years. Migrants were categorized as local (outbound) if they originated from the study area or were from elsewhere and had lived in the study area for more than five years. The technical operational definitions are described on page 9 (operational definitions). The minimum total time of three months of recent, consistent mobility was pragmatically selected to represent the time required for migrants to establish living patterns and familiarize themselves with the working/living conditions and health services available in the area. The five year cut-off between inbound and local (outbound) migrants that originate from outside the study area is based on empirical evidence that more than five years residency equates to a local experience of life in the study area. These assumptions are later discussed in Section 3.1.4 Rapid assessment. HIV Vulnerability

2.4 Data collection methodology 2.4.1 Mapping Participatory and visit-based mapping were the two methods employed to map migrant hotspots and health services in the study areas. Participatory mapping involved asking KII and FGD respondents about the location of migrant hotspots and health services with reference to a large map of the study area. Visits to the area and facilities/venues also provided information on the spatial and temporal distribution of provider types and services, including opening hours, staffing, service utilization, and referral activities. The mapping team used the health facilities mapping form to collect required data at each health facility in both study areas.

2.4.2 Qualitative methods Six (6) FGDs with at-risk populations were conducted; four in Myawaddy among FSW, MSM and MMM, and two in Kawrakeik among MSM and MMM. Each session involved six to eight participants. There were 40 participants in total participating in FGDs. Eighteen (18) key informant interviews (KII) were conducted with individuals considered to have considerable knowledge of policies, activities, and services related to migrant risk behaviour and health in either study area. Interviews were carried out both individually and in small groups of two to three people. There were 31 key informants involved in the KII. Key informants included Township Medical Officers, Maternal and Child Health (MCH) staff, STI Team Leader, Religious Leader, Community/Network Leaders, Project Manager of the Road Construction Project, Gate Keepers, non-government/CSO working on HIV/AIDS, and PWUD. Each FGD and KII was led by a moderator/interviewer, and documented by a note taker and audio recorder. Sessions consisted of participatory mapping (as detailed in section 2.4) and semi-structured discussion aided by a guideline. Participants were enlisted through network recruitment, and informed consent was obtained prior to each session. For each FGD, participants were requested to fill in a participant profile form to record demographic information and employment status.

2.4.3 Rapid assessment A rapid assessment was completed to estimate the target population size, demographic composition, mobility history and location. The study employed purposive cluster sampling of areas identified to be migrant-dense through the interviews with key informants and field visits. All households within these areas were visited, and a household representative was identified to answer questions on the number of inhabitants and their respective age, sex and basic mobility patterns. Findings were used to inform the sampling strategy for the quantitative survey.

and Service Availability in Mobility Settings of Myawaddy and Kawkareik

7

2.4.4 Quantitative survey The quantitative survey was distributed among migrants using quota sampling in migrant-dense clusters (specific study areas highlighted in yellow; Map 2). Two teams of data enumerators visited households identified by rapid assessment to contain eligible migrants. These visits were supported by community leaders (leaders of ten households or leaders of one hundred households) with good geographical knowledge of the areas. A male:female ratio of 2:3 and inbound:outbound ratio of 1:1 was applied to prevent over or under-sampling by gender or migration pattern. The pragmatic target sample size was 400 individuals. Each interview lasted for 30 to 40 minutes, and more than 95 per cent of households approached were interviewed. Map 2: Migrant cluster in study areas

2. Methodology

8

One participant was recruited from each house and screened using an initial screening questionnaire. If the individual matched the eligibility criteria as described in Section 2.3 and the intended quotas, and if informed consent was obtained, the full questionnaire was completed verbally. If these requirements were not met, the data collection team recruited a new household member or moved on to a new household. Two visits were made per household if there was no response or no household members met eligibility criteria at first visit. Questions included standardized international and national indicators for comparability on the following topics: • Socio-economic conditions and mobility patterns; • Knowledge, attitudes and practices related to HIV, including sexual practices, condom use and drug-use behaviour; • Health-seeking behaviours and health care and health communication accessibility; • Barriers to HIV and health services and interventions, including testing, treatment, and health communications.

2.5 Analysis GPS data relating location of migrant clusters and health facilities were entered into a MS Excel data spreadsheet and then transferred into Arc GIS mapper software and developed migrant cluster maps along the East-West Economic Corridor. Quantitative data from the rapid assessment and survey underwent double-entry into EpiData 3.1. Stata 13 was used for data cleaning, management, and analysis. As part of data management, every tenth observation in the quantitative survey was double-checked with the original dataset. Queries flagged during the analysis process related to missing or anomalous data were also checked with the original datasets and corrected if possible. Univariate tabulations were used for descriptive analysis to profile the migrant groups in the study sites. Migrants were categorized into age, income, employment and mobility groups to enable the analysis, and composite indicators were created based on combinations of variables. The composite indicators are described below.

HIV Vulnerability and Service Availability

Composite HIV knowledge indicator: This is a standard indicator that measures the per cent of respondents who correctly answered all of the following five binary questions (correct answer in brackets). 1. Can a person reduce the risk of HIV transmission by having sex with only one uninfected partner who has no other partners? (Yes) 2. Can a person reduce the risk of getting HIV by using a condom every time they have sex? (Yes) 3. Can a healthy-looking person have HIV? (Yes) 4. Can a person get HIV from mosquito bites? (No) 5. Can a person get HIV by sharing food with someone who is infected? (No) Composite attitude score: this indicator summed the Likert scores reflecting agreement with the three statements below (ranging 1-5, where 1=strongly disagree, 5= strongly disagree, 3= don’t know. Scores were adjusted to the same attitudinal direction, and combined to represent a total range of 1 (most negative attitude) to 15 (most positive attitude). 1. I think children living with HIV should not be able to attend school with children who are HIV negative. 2. I would buy fresh vegetables from a shopkeeper or vendor even if I knew that person to have HIV. 3. I would be willing to take care of an HIV infected relative in my home. Multivariate logistic regression was used to investigate the determinants of health and mobility indicators and to adjust for confounding. Independent variables assessed included age, sex, inbound or outbound migrant status, length of mobility, exposure to health information, and HIV knowledge and attitudes. As required for multivariate logistic regression, outcome variables were converted to binary indicators. This involved the exclusion of ‘don’t know’ and ‘missing’ answers, and applying cut-offs when converting ordinal variables to binary (please refer to multivariate tables in appendix III for details). Where multiple factors influenced an outcome, backwards stepwise logistic regression was used to select the significant determinants (where p3m) Working in area without mobility None of the above Total Myawaddy Kawkareik

Combinaon of mobility types Don’t know No response 0

10

20

%

30

40

50

Figure 3: Relationship of respondents to household members/accommodation sharers, by sex 80

Total

70

Men

60

Women

%

50 40 30 20 10 0 Live alone

Family

Spouse

Partner

Co-workers

Friends

Employer

As illustrated in Figure 3, the large majority of respondents (90 %) lived with family and/or their spouse (40% with family, 68% with spouse). Few lived with other groups of people, and only a fraction lived alone (6 individuals; 1.6% of all respondents).

HIV Vulnerability

In conclusion, the migrant population residing in and passing through Myawaddy is proportionally larger than that in Kawkareik due to its proximity to Thailand and the subsequently high amount of traffic in that area. Both Myawaddy and Kawkareik had a substantial long-stay, migrant population. The border to Thailand presents an attractive alternative for those seeking work and improved economic opportunities. There are also accounts of trafficking occurring between the borders of Myawaddy and Mae Sot for purposes of labour and sex trade.

of Myawaddy and

3.2 History of illness and health-care-seeking behaviour History of illness was explored among respondents in both the qualitative and quantitative studies. It was found from interviews with health officers that health problems of migrants were no different from that of the local community. Water and sanitation-related issues and communicable diseases, such as malaria and elephantiasis were mentioned by health staff. These problems have, however, decreased as health services in the area have improved.

“It can be malaria. They come from other areas. (They come from a malaria free area to an area where there is malaria.) Firstly, they don’t know that they can catch malaria. Secondly, they are more often immune deficient as they have no immunity (from having a previous malaria infection). They also get cerebral malaria faster. Lately, as there are many NGOs working here since 2012 and the people can get treatment at their villages, the prevalence of malaria has decreased.” DMO, Kawkareik

Survey results indicate that 30 per cent of respondents had been ill in the six months prior to the interview. This was more likely among those with lower income (p