Research Report

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/10361/16293

Browse

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Covid-19 livelihood crisis, social cohesion challenges and mitigation options: an empirical study among low-income groups and migrant workers in Bangladesh
(Brac University, 2021-06) Mostafa, Sanaul; Islam, M. Shahidul; Akter, Nahida; Ahmed, Kawsher; Social participation.; Migrant labor.
The Covid-19 pandemic has caused substantial damages to the health and wellbeing of people around the world. As of February 1, 2021, Bangladesh recorded 535,000 infections with 8,100 deaths and a 90 percent recovery rate. In addition to the outbreak of the virus itself, the mitigation strategies to curb its spread, such as lockdown and social distancing, have significantly impacted the lives and livelihood of millions of people in Bangladesh. Amongst its other economic impacts, the costs of the pandemic are visible in the decline of Bangladesh’s export earnings and the return of thousands of migrant workers from overseas. A decline in domestic demand has caused a marked rise in unemployment and thus a reduction of income. A significant number of industrial workers and micro-entrepreneurs of the formal and informal sectors, amongst others, have lost their access to economic activities. Reports suggest disproportionate sharing of the burden of the pandemic by marginalized groups, as well as increased risk and incidence of gender-based violence (GBV) in the country. In addition, there is concern that the social bondage, peace, and stability of the country, which has enabled Bangladesh to grow in the past few decades, is likely to be jeopardized. This challenges Bangladesh’s long-term development goals, including eradicating extreme poverty by 2030. Against this backdrop, the Centre for Peace and Justice, Brac University (CPJ) undertook a study to understand the impacts of Covid-19 on select vulnerable groups. The study focused on two groups: low-income, urban formal and informal workers, and migrants who returned home to Bangladesh from abroad amid the pandemic (hereunder referred to as ‘returnees’). The study had three objectives: a) Analyse the Covid-19-driven core livelihood challenges of people who belong to low-income groups and their livelihood challenges in relation to social cohesion; b) Explore their options and opportunities for coping with threats to social cohesion, and c) Identify strategies for Government of Bangladesh (hereunder referred to as ‘the Government’), NGOs, and communities to consolidate social cohesion. Here, low-income groups include garment workers, returnees and non-RMG workers (household aides, day labourers, transport workers like rickshaw pullers, drivers of motored three-wheelers and their helpers, microentrepreneurs, and low salaried persons in the private sector). The study followed a normative view of social cohesion. It used a set of indicators generated from a social cohesion framework used in Latin America and the Caribbean to undertake an inter-country comparison of social cohesion. Social cohesion is understood in this study as a cumulated complementary behaviour of public institutions, society and community, which can be applied to overcome the livelihood challenges of the listed vulnerable households during the pandemic. Accordingly, the research framework used in this study included three thematic pillars: ‘Distance/divide’, ‘Institutional inclusion/exclusion mechanisms’, and ‘Sense of belonging’. Distance/divide is understood here as a manifestation of the equality or divides faced by low-income groups and migrants as opposed to other social groups not listed as low-income. Institutional inclusion and exclusion mechanisms are ‘actions carried out by various institutional actors’ in response to the felt ‘Distance’. Sense of belonging characterizes the complementary response of the community and society. The study has applied a set of indicators involving these three pillars and used them to formulate research questions. To determine the state of social cohesion, the study used two types of proxy indicators, namely a) Impact Indicators and b) Outcome Indicators. The Impact Indicators were designed to help determine whether and how the social cohesion issues experienced by the surveyed population influenced their wellbeing during the pandemic as a result of behaviours of other stakeholders. These proxy impact indicators included: a) Perception of the survey population regarding unity and bondage in society, b) Observation of family relations (e.g., gender-based violence), c) Observation of conflicts in society attributed to the pandemic, and d) Observation of discrimination practised by service providers. The Outcome Indicators are related to the listed pillars (‘distance/divide’, ‘institutional inclusion/exclusion’, and ‘sense of belonging’). The ability of the surveyed population to cope with social cohesion issues (‘coping measures’) is also incorporated in the Outcome Indicators. The Outcome Indicators under Distance/Divide include a) Job losses without severance, compensation, or other benefits, b) Loss of income, c) Relative trend of expenditures, d) Relative loss of assets, and e) Continuity of learning for children through an online system. The pillar theme Exclusion/Inclusion is expressed through eight indicators: a) Public control over prices of necessary goods, b) Continuous access to social safety net where relevant, c) Access to emergency relief (from government, NGOs, and community), d) Access to public information and instructions on Covid-19, e) Access to medical care if needed during the pandemic, f) Existence of conflict resolution system, g) Public initiatives to substitute income loss, and h) Safeguards against discrimination. The third pillar, Sense of Belonging, is characterized through four indicators: a) Affiliation with organisations to participate in decision making and raise voices, b) Access to benefits from affiliated organisations, c) Representation through organized entities (e.g., trade unions and similar interest groups), and d) Precedence of consultations by employers. The state of Coping measures is reflected through five indicators: a) Vulnerability to lower food and nutritional intake due to income loss, b) Vulnerability to survive without practical external help, c) Use of savings and personal assets to survive, d) Opt for an alternative livelihood and e) Accumulation of debt (loans, rental payment, and utilities). The study applied mixed-method research - quantitative research complemented by qualitative tools. A survey among 1,064 respondents belonging to the three groups (RMG workers, returnees and non-RMG workers) was conducted in November and December 2020. In addition to literature review, the team also conducted qualitative research through KIIs, FGDs, and unstructured interviews to complement and validate the findings of the quantitative study.
Navigating at the margins: family, mobility and livelihoods amongst Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh
(Brac University and The Asia Foundation, 2020-08) Olney, Jessica; Mercy, Rezaun Nahid; Ahamed, Kawsher; Badiuzzaman, Muhammad
Decades of persecution of the Rohingya community in Myanmar have culminated in several large waves of forced displacement, and a total of nearly one million now live as refugees in the camps of Cox’s Bazar across the Bangladesh border. Many others have sought refuge in Malaysia and other countries across the region. Widespread irregular migration has reshaped Rohingya society, with a vast number of families splintered across multiple borders. Although international justice mechanisms are engaged, a durable political remedy for the crisis is not yet visible on the horizon. Since 2017, the humanitarian response has focused on short-term needs such as food, shelter, and basic healthcare. As the displacement crisis enters its fourth year, a shift in approach is due. This study, Navigating at the Margins, carried out by The Asia Foundation and the Centre for Peace and Justice, Brac University, utilizes qualitative and quantitative methods to document how Rohingya families in the camps of Cox’s Bazar cope with hardship, with a focus on family separation and economic challenges. Most separated family members possess no travel documents and have little prospect of reuniting. For some of those living in the camps, having relatives abroad can be a helpful way to cope with the challenges of refugee life. Remittances help fill the gap between the sustenance they receive as aid and the higher actual cost of living. But these are only available to a minority of households. Furthermore, displacement and separation tend to erode family ties that are critical to enabling repatriation in the future. Already, camp residents are more likely to have a relative living in a third country than in Myanmar, and a new generation of Rohingya are growing up in Bangladesh who do not speak the Myanmar language. The refugees’ sense of reprieve after fleeing immediate danger has given way to the realization that they will likely stay in the camps a long time. Therefore, their priorities have expanded to include longer-term necessities such as education for their children. Camp households are also pressed to find ways to come up with money for the assorted living costs not covered by aid, such as communication expenses, a more diverse diet, or healthcare for conditions not treated by camp facilities. However, access to Cash for Work programs or NGO jobs remains limited, and just under half of camp households report having no income at all to supplement aid. As a result, some families sell a portion of their rations or engage in riskier activities to make ends meet. The majority of refugee households also accrue unsustainable amounts of debt. Facing a bleak future in an environment offering no hope of upward social mobility, some opt to place their lives into the hands of traffickers and risk perilous travel to other countries. Medium-term livelihood solutions are needed to prevent harmful coping patterns and allow refugees, most of whom lost all their assets in the exodus, to rebuild their lives until they eventually leave the camps.
Social Cohesion, resilience and peace building between host population and Rohingya Refugee Community in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh
(Brac University, 2019-06) Olney, Jessica; Badiuzzaman, Muhammad; Hoque, Mohammad Azizul
In August 2017 Myanmar authorities unleashed systematic violence on the Rohingya community of Northern Rakhine State. Hundred of thousands of Rohingya were affected and an unknown number were killed, resulting in nearly a million people fleeing their homeland and taking shelter in the neighboring country of Bangladesh. Hosting such a large number of refugees has had significant impacts on the host population of Cox’s Bazar. These impacts have led to a lack of social cohesion and negatively affected the potential for inter-communal harmony between the two communities. A study was undertaken by BRAC University Centre for Peace and Justice (CPJ) between January to April 2019 to identify factors affecting social cohesion, resilience and peace building between the host and Rohingya refugee communities. The study consisted of a series of consultations conducted in order to compile the perspectives of different groups of host community stakeholders. Participant included local villagers (men, women and youth) living adjacent to the camps; local government representatives; community elders; religious and ethnic minority leaders; and representatives from NGOs, educational institutions, and civil society organizations (CSOs). The consultations included thirteen focus group discussions (FGDs), five key informant interviews (KIIs), one validation session of findings, and one dissemination workshop. The dissemination workshop was organized to share key findings with stakeholders who are potential catalysts in promoting stability in the region. The aim was to draw out their recommendations on ways to strengthen social cohesion and resilience in the region.

Browse

Recent Submissions