Series1
Comilla University Journal of Social Sciences
31
Occupation of the respondents in Myanmar: From the pie chart we see that, 37%
respondents were related with agricultural farming;13% were day labor; 13%
were involved with small business and rest of them were involved with various occupations like NGO activist, Household works, Government services, Fishing, etc. during their stay in Myanmar.
Figure 6: Occupation of the respondents in Myanmar
Respondent’s family members: From the study it is found that, on an average there are 6 members in a family where the minimum number is 2 and maximum number is 16 per family. It is also found that, among total respondents; 52% have 2-5 members; 39% have 6-9 members in their family.
Figure 7: Respondent family members
Agricultural farming, 37.50%
Fishing, 2.94%
Household work, 4.41%
Day labor, 12.50%
fish farming, 0.74%
Handicraft, 0.74%
Govt. service, 3.68%
Private service, 1.47%
NGO activist, 8.09%
Business, 12.50%
Others, 15.44%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
52%
39%
7% 2%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
2 - 5 6 - 9 10 - 13 14+
Percentage
Number of Family members
Sustainable Livelihood Adaptation of Rohingya within the Camp Area
Average monthly household expenditure of the respondents: From the study it is observed that, the average monthly expenditure was approximately 2, 00,000 Kyat range between 20,000 – 9, 50,000. It is also found that, 58.09% of the respondents had average expenditure between 50,000 – 2, 00,000 Kyat.
Present occupation: From the study it is found that among the total respondents, 71% don’t have any job that means they are unemployed. It is also found that, few respondents are working as day labor, shop keeper, etc. to sustenance their family.
Figure 8: Current occupation of the respondents
Practical skill/expertise: From the study it is found that, 24.26% have experience on business and 23.53% have experience on agricultural farming. Moreover, approximately 9% have expertise on handicraft.
Figure 9: Practical skill/expertise of the respondents
Small Business
[PERCENTAGE] agricultural
farming, 2.205882353 Livestock
rearing, 0.735294118 Handicraft, 1.470588235
No job, 71.32352941
Others, 21.32352941
Vendor/
Running a small stall
agricultural farming
Livestock rearing
Handicraft No job Others 0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
3.68%
23.53%
2.21%4.41%
8.09% 8.82%
2.94%
24.26%22.06%
Response rate
Comilla University Journal of Social Sciences
33
Expected profession of the respondents: From the study it is found that, 22.06% of the Rohingyas have expectation to run a business within the camp area. On the other hand, approximately 20% respondents want to involve with agricultural activity surrounded by the camp area.
Figure 10: Expected profession of the respondents
Expected training by the respondent: To earn subsistence income the Rohingya people are eager to find a job. Among the respondents 19% want to get handicraft training; 18% want agricultural training; 9% want livestock rearing training and 7% want computer training for better earning.
Figure 11: Expected training by the respondents 5.88%
19.85%
1.47%
4.41%
7.35%
15.44%
3.68%
22.06%
19.85%
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00%
Computer related job Agriculture farming Fish farming Poultry farming Livestock rearing Handicraft Carpentry/ Masonary Business Others
Response rate
Computer training
7%
Agricultural training
18%
Fish farming training
2%
Poultry farming training
8%
livestock rearing training
9%
Handicraft training
19%
Carpentry/
Masonary training
4%
Others 33%
Sustainable Livelihood Adaptation of Rohingya within the Camp Area Conclusion and Recommendations
The study attempts to explore the current livelihood practices and strategies can be adopted to ensure sustainable livelihood keeping them within the camp area. It is found that, most of the respondents were related with agricultural activities and their average family expenditure was approximately 2,00,000 Kyat per month in their homeland. It is also found that, now about 71% of them are unemployed though they have experience in doing agricultural and business related activities.
They expect mainly handicraft and agricultural training for their betterment. It is concluded that, Government and donor agencies could take various initiatives within the Rohingya camp to make sustainable livelihood which might protect Bangladesh from upcoming security threat and environmental hazards.
It is recommended that government and donor agencies should provide Handicraft and agro-based training to sustain the livelihood of Rohingya people.
Moreover, Government or private initiatives should come forward to establish labor intensive industries like small and cottage industries within the territory of the Rohingya camp. Furthermore, the government of Bangladesh should collaborate with different national, regional and international organizations to make a sustainable solution as soon as possible.
Limitations
1. During data collection stage following limitations are faced
2. Data collection was difficult and delayed due to communication difficulties.
So, interpreter was needed to conduct the study.
3. Rohinga people were less interested in providing information as there is a misperception that, those who took part in the survey they will be enlisted and they have to go to their homeland earlier.
References
Adams, W. (1939). Extent and nature of the world refugee problem. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 203(1), 26-36.
Al Imran, H. F., &Mian, N. (2014). The Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh: A vulnerable group in law and policy. Journal of Studies in Social Sciences, 8(2).
Alam, A. M. S. Bangladesh Myanmar Interplay Prosperity: Prospects & Challenges. Foreign Policy of Myanmar, 35.
Azad, A., & Jasmin, F. (2013). Durable solutions to the protracted refugee situation: The case of Rohingyas in Bangladesh. Journal of Indian Research, 1(4), 25-35.
Bidandi, F. (2018). Understanding refugee durable solutions by international players: Does dialogue form a missing link?. Cogent Social Sciences, 4(1), 1-15.
Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. Institute of Development Studies (UK).
Comilla University Journal of Social Sciences
35
Chan, E. Y., Chiu, C. P., & Chan, G. K. (2018). Medical and health risks associated with communicable diseases of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh 2017. International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 68, 39-43.
Hakovirta, H. (1993). The global refugee problem: A model and its application. International Political Science Review, 14(1), 35-57.
Jati, I. (2017). Comparative Study of the Roles of ASEAN and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Responding to the Rohingya Crisis.
Khairi, A. (2016). The Dilemma of Rohingya Refugees “Boat People”: The Role of Malaysia, its Neighbors and ASEAN. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(12), 481-489.
Khan, M. A. S. A., Uddin, M. A., & Haque, C. E. (2015). Rural livelihoods of Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh and their impacts on forests: The case of Teknaf Wildlife Sanctuary
Kipgen, N. (2014). Addressing the Rohingya problem. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 49(2), 234-247.
Majale, M. (2001, May). Towards pro-poor regulatory guidelines for urban upgrading. In A review of papers presented at the International Workshop on Regulatory Guidelines for Urban Upgrading held at Bourton-on-Dunsmore.
Milton, A., Rahman, M., Hussain, S., Jindal, C., Choudhury, S., Akter, S., ... & Efird, J.
(2017). Trapped in statelessness: Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh. International journal of environmental research and public health, 14(8), 942.
Parnini, S. N. (2011). The Rohingya Issue In Bangladesh-Myanmar Relations. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 4(23), 65.
Parnini, S. N. (2013). The crisis of the Rohingya as a Muslim minority in Myanmar and bilateral relations with Bangladesh. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 33(2), 281- 297.
Parnini, S. N., Othman, M. R., & Ghazali, A. S. (2013). The Rohingya refugee crisis and Bangladesh-Myanmar relations. Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 22(1), 133- 146.
Rahman, U. (2010). The Rohingya refugee: A security dilemma for Bangladesh. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 8(2), 233-239.
Siddiqua, A., & Mathew, S. Refugee induced security challenges in South Asia: Context of India and Bangladesh. Vol. 9 July–December 2016 No. 2, 251.
Tajuddin, A. (2018). Statelessness and Persecution of the Rohingyas in Myanmar: Time for Serious International Intervention. Social Science Spectrum, 3(3), 128-140.
Sustainable Livelihood Adaptation of Rohingya within the Camp Area
Comilla University Journal of Social Sciences Volume II, No. 1 January-December 2019 ISSN: 2663-2659
37