URBAN POVERTY: Unpacking Yangon

Globally, urbanization is one of the most significant trends of the 21st century, with the United Nations projecting that nearly 68% of the world’s population will reside in urban areas by 2050.¹ This rapid urban growth presents both opportunities and challenges. According to the World Bank, urban poverty is increasingly becoming a pressing issue, with an estimated 1.3 billion people living in slums and informal settlements.² The growing urban population can exacerbate rising poverty by creating environments where wealth disparities deepen, leading to “urban poverty traps” that limit access to essential services and economic opportunities for marginalized populations.³

Migration for employment opportunities is a key driver of urbanization. People from rural areas are increasingly relocating to cities in search of better livelihoods. However, the influx of migrants can strain urban infrastructure and services, leading to increased competition for jobs and resources, which in turn exacerbates urban poverty and contributes to the growth of slums.⁴

In Myanmar, the situation has been further complicated by the military takeover in February 2021, which led to widespread civil unrest, conflict, economic instability, and deteriorating living conditions.

A recent UNDP report reveals a concerning trend in the poverty levels of urban Yangon. While the poverty headcount in rural Yangon escalated from 23% in 2017 to 53% in 2023 — a 57% increase — the situation is more alarming in urban Yangon, where the poverty headcount rose from 10% in 2017 to 43% in 2023, reflecting a staggering 76% increase.⁵

The depth of poverty has also intensified significantly. In rural Yangon, the poverty depth surged from 5% in 2017 to 30% in 2023, an 85% increase. Similarly, urban poverty depth rose from 2% in 2017 to 26% in 2023, representing a 92% increase.⁶ The rise in both poverty headcount and depth is significantly higher in urban Yangon than in rural areas, highlighting the distinct challenges of urban poverty. This is particularly evident in peri-urban areas, where many migrants seek to settle—driven by the pursuit of employment opportunities, the need to escape conflict in rural areas, or both.

To analyze the distribution of the poorest households, the asset quintile approach was utilized. Findings from the UNDP survey reveal a stark disparity in poverty levels across different areas. Peri-urban (24%) and rural (22%) households are disproportionately concentrated in the lowest asset quintiles compared to their urban counterparts, where only 7% fall into this category.

The severity of poverty is especially pronounced in certain peri-urban townships. In Hlaingtharyar, an alarming 48% of households are in the poorest quintile, while Dagon Myothit (Seikkan) reports 34% of households in this category. These figures highlight the overlapping challenges of urban and peri-urban poverty, where peri-urban areas often face heightened levels of deprivation.

Yangon has become the preferred destination for migrants, receiving approximately 41% of individuals relocating from other states and regions.⁷ This influx exacerbates the existing challenges faced by urban populations, particularly in peri-urban areas.

UNDP survey in Yangon reveals that migrant households constitute a substantial portion of Yangon’s population, accounting for 26% of all households. Most of these households originate from the Ayeyarwady region (40%), followed by Bago (14%), Mandalay (14%), and Magway (10%)). The majority of migrant households are concentrated in peri-urban areas (32% versus 25% in urban and 12% in rural), where labor demand is high, and the cost of living is relatively lower compared to urban townships. Garment and apparel factories, food and beverage firms, and construction sites are predominantly located in peri-urban townships, making these areas attractive to migrants seeking employment. The Hlaingtharyar industrial zone, in particular, has become a hub for employment opportunities, drawing rural youth from nearby regions such as Ayeyarwady and Bago.

The healthcare landscape in Yangon highlights significant health-related challenges for households, which is more broadly linked to systemic healthcare gaps.

Households in the poorest quintile reported the highest incidence of medical issues, at 51%, compared to other quintiles. This trend is even more pronounced in peri-urban areas, where the poorest quintile reporting 54%. Specific peri-urban townships exhibit particularly high figures, with 62% of respondents in Hlaingtharyar and 53% in Dagon Myothit (North & East) reporting medical issues, in particular diabetes, diarrhea, and hypertension.

These health challenges are compounded by concerns about the quality of public healthcare services. Only 20% of those needing healthcare utilized public facilities, in contrast, a substantial 82% of respondents reported using private healthcare services. This trend reflects a lack of confidence in the quality of public healthcare, which not only drives individuals to seek more expensive private options but also contributes to the prevalence of self-medication. 8% of households with members experiencing medical issues that required a doctor’s attention resorted to self-medication, where the rate rises to 12% for those in the poorest quintile.

Households in Yangon allocate 16.4% of their total expenditure on healthcare costs.⁸ However, this allocation poses a significant financial strain, particularly for poor households. The financial burden of healthcare expenses is evident, with 23% of households in general borrowing money to cover medical costs. This figure increases to 27% in peri-urban areas and rises to 44% among households in the poorest quintile, with 50% of households in the poorest quintile specifically in peri-urban areas resorting to borrowing.

Additionally, 21% of households resorted to selling assets to manage healthcare costs, with this number rising to 25% in peri-urban areas, 35% among households in the poorest quintile, and 42% for households in the poorest quintile specifically in peri-urban areas. This trend underscores the significant impact of economic status on healthcare access and the financial burdens faced by these households.

Several factors pose barriers to children’s enrollment in school, particularly among the poorest households. In peri-urban areas, 10% of children are not enrolled, but this figure escalates to 17% among poor households. A major contributing factor is the necessity for children to work, as 37% of households reported that their children contribute to the family income, often at the expense of their education. Many children are seen collecting plastic bottles and waste to sell, while begging for money is also prevalent among those not attending school.

Health issue is another reason for children not attending school, with 14% of families noting that their children’s health problems hinder their ability to attend school. These interconnected factors not only restrict educational opportunities but also perpetuate cycles of poverty, particularly for those in the poorest quintile.

Among students who have completed high school, 35% do not plan to pursue university education for various reasons. A significant 49% of these cited the need to work immediately to support their families. Among those who abandon plans for university, there is a strong willingness to migrate, with language courses being the most in-demand training. Furthermore, another 17% of students simply lack interest in further education, expressing a desire to explore vocational training. This underscores the importance of supporting vocational training programs for young people, as they seek practical skills and immediate employment opportunities.

Security concerns in peri-urban areas are significantly alarming, with 44% of survey respondents feeling “not safe at all” when walking alone at night. Migrants are especially vulnerable, with 48% reporting feelings of insecurity.

Specific peri-urban townships exhibit particularly alarming safety concerns: 74% of respondents in Dagon Myothit (Seikkan), 53% in Dagon Myothit (North), and 52% in Hlaingtharyar, Mingalardon, North Okkalapa, and Dagon Myothit (East) reported feeling unsafe. These concerns prompt individuals to avoid certain areas or limit their working hours, which negatively affects their income and economic stability.

Migrants fear random checks by security forces, with some reporting being apprehended without cause. Migrants from Sagaing, Magway, and Rakhine face additional challenges, as non-functional government offices in their home regions prevent them from renewing national ID cards. This increases their risk of arrest and extortion.

Violence against women remains a significant concern, with 33% of survey respondents across Yangon witnessing such incidents in their neighborhoods. The prevalence is significantly higher in peri-urban areas (34%) compared to urban (24%) and rural (22%) settings.

Addressing urban poverty in Yangon — particularly in its rapidly expanding peri-urban areas — requires more than short-term aid; it demands a coordinated, equity-focused strategy that tackles the structural drivers of economic vulnerability. The evidence is clear: poverty in Yangon is not only rising in scale but deepening in severity, disproportionately affecting migrant families, women, and the youth. Without decisive, inclusive interventions, these communities’ risk being trapped in cycles of marginalization and deprivation.

Practical, affordable, and locally adaptable solutions are essential for driving change. From upskilling workers to reducing preventable healthcare costs, and from empowering women entrepreneurs to safeguarding migrant livelihoods, each action has the potential to yield tangible returns — economically, socially, and morally.

This is not just a moment for relief; it is a moment for resilience-building. By investing wisely and targeting the most affected, stakeholders can help transform Yangon’s urban poverty challenge into a foundation for more just, inclusive, and sustainable urban development.