A regional perspective on poverty in Myanmar - United Nations ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Poverty in Myanmar 18 Table 9: Mean under- and overemployment according to sector Poor Non-poor Total Agriculture, hunting and forestry -0.366 2.15012 1.502122 Fishing -3.12575 -9.8655 -7.65422 Mining and quarrying -4.49438 -10.23 -8.53974 Manufacturing -18.7976 -12.7435 -14.1761 Electricity, gas and water supply -4.76923 -16.2031 -14.2727 Construction -8.46111 -10.9202 -10.2932 Wholesale and retail trade incl. repairs -12.5939 -17.1144 -16.4296 Hotels and restaurants -19.2619 -31.0923 -28.9958 Transport, storage & communications -12.5833 -13.6751 -13.5042 Financial intermediation -7.6 -9.8 -9.48571 Real estate, renting and business activities -5.71429 -19.4308 -17 Public administration -17.5417 -9.337 -10 Education 10.95 0.244444 1.206742 Health and social work -6.6087 -7.01739 -6.94928 Other community, social and personal services -10.6923 -10.0433 -10.248 Activities of private hhd as employers -8.10345 -11.5878 -10.9563 Extra-territorial org. and bodies -19 -16.6818 -16.96 Note: Main occupation of the household head only, related to underemployment gap of the whole household. Note as well, that a “-“ indicates over-employment. The underemployment gaps between the S/R do not differ much. At household member level, poor and non-poor both have an higher underemployment-gap in Kachin and Kayah states, and are “overemployed” in Bago (East) and Yangon (beyond +/- one standard deviation) (Table A36 to A42).
Poverty in Myanmar 19 Table 10: Average household underemployment gap per household member and S/R poor non-poor Total Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Kachin (+) 3.78 (+) 3.77 (+) 1.33 (+) 1.81 (+) 2.00 (+) 2.44 Kayah (+) 2.50 (+) 4.64 (+) 3.27 (++) 4.17 (+) 3.20 (+) 4.21 Kayin 0.45 -0.51 0.67 -0.09 0.67 -0.14 Chin -1.17 -0.41 -3.00 -2.41 -2.00 -1.17 Sagaing 1.63 1.67 0.93 0.23 1.00 0.43 Taninthayi -3.33 -1.80 -3.56 -2.28 -3.33 -2.15 Bago (East) (- -) -8.00 (-) -5.85 (-) -6.00 (-) -4.10 (-) -6.00 (-) -4.40 Bago (West) 1.50 1.96 (+) 1.33 0.82 (+) 1.33 0.97 Magway 1.00 1.66 1.00 1.10 1.00 1.24 Mandalay (-) -5.00 (-) -4.68 -4.00 -3.64 -4.00 (-) -3.88 Mon -4.40 -2.86 -2.00 -1.54 -2.40 -1.72 Rakhine -0.14 0.89 1.00 0.97 0.67 0.94 Yangon (-) -5.25 (-) -4.92 (-) -4.75 (-) -5.83 (-) -4.82 (-) -5.70 Shan (South) -1.33 -0.79 -2.67 -1.13 -2.62 -1.07 Shan (North) 1.33 1.29 -4.00 -3.52 -2.00 -1.92 Shan (East) -2.00 -0.50 -2.50 -1.27 -2.40 -1.00 Ayeyarwady -3.00 -1.49 -4.00 -2.60 -4.00 -2.28 Total -1.26 -0.47 -1.58 -1.14 -1.39 -0.89 Stdev 3.21 2.95 2.74 2.51 2.68 2.51 Migration Based on survey figures there were about one million migrants in 2010. 16 This does possibly exclude the emigrants – those who settled abroad or in other regions without an intention of return. This figure is highly likely on the very low side: alone in Thailand there were about 1.45 million migrant workers officially registered in 2012. As unofficial migration is likely to be significantly higher than official migration, the apparent discrepancy is large. But only 6.3% of the households have migrant workers, with poor households being about 30% more likely to have migrant workers than non-poor households. But there are strong variations between the S/R: Chin, Taninthayi and Kayin do, for example, have up to five times more migrant sending households as the national average. As well, they would send by far the most migrant workers out per household. Remittances are very important for those households who receive them: at Union level, remittances make up about 57% of overall household expenditures (or 1.1 million Kyat per year), with 75% for rural and 45% for urban households. But at Union level, the importance of remittances does not appear very high, as it is only 3.4%. Based on these figures, the whole country would have received about US$ 80 million in 2010, lower than the World Bank’s estimate of US$ 133 million, which itself was however assumed to be a very low estimate. 16 All information based on UNDP. 2013. Role of remittances in economic wellbeing and poverty. Note that these results must be treated with much care: the survey is unlikely to be really representative, and the data base for such analysis appeared to be very small.
Page 1 and 2: A regional <strong
Page 3 and 4: Poverty in Myanmar 3 Mandalay......
Page 5 and 6: Poverty in Myanmar 5 electricity an
Page 7 and 8: Count Poverty in Myanmar 7 The stat
Page 9 and 10: Poverty in Myanmar 9 Figure 4: Pove
Page 11 and 12: Poverty in Myanmar 11 Mother tongue
Page 13 and 14: Poverty in Myanmar 13 Figure 6: Pov
Page 15 and 16: Poverty in Myanmar 15 From purely f
Page 17: Poverty in Myanmar 17 Figure 14: Gr
Page 21 and 22: Poverty in Myanmar 21 Table 11: Tra
Page 23 and 24: Poverty in Myanmar 23 among male: o
Page 25 and 26: Poverty in Myanmar 25 All household
Page 27 and 28: Poverty in Myanmar 27 Table 16: Mos
Page 29 and 30: Poverty in Myanmar 29 Conclusion: p
Page 31 and 32: Poverty in Myanmar 31 Second Part D
Page 33 and 34: Poverty in Myanmar 33 The poverty i
Page 35 and 36: Poverty in Myanmar 35 One of the st
Page 37 and 38: Poverty in Myanmar 37 Bago (West) L
Page 39 and 40: Poverty in Myanmar 39 Chin Land hol
Page 41 and 42: Poverty in Myanmar 41 Magway Land h
Page 43 and 44: Poverty in Myanmar 43 Mandalay Land
Page 45 and 46: Poverty in Myanmar 45 Mon Land hold
Page 47 and 48: Poverty in Myanmar 47 Shan Shan Lan
Page 49 and 50: Poverty in Myanmar 49 utilities div
Page 51: Poverty in Myanmar 51 Final remarks

A regional perspective on poverty in Myanmar - United Nations ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?