2019 - Gen - Ics - Report - Eng - 7012021

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey
The Union Report
For more information contact:
Department of Population
Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population
Office No. 48
Nay Pyi Taw
Tel: +95 67 431 062

www.dop.gov.mm
December, 2020
Map of Myanmar by State/Region and District
Foreword
The 2019 Inter-censal Survey (2019 ICS) was implemented by the Ministry of Labour,
Immigration and Population, in collaboration with its line ministries and development
partners, in four stages starting November 2019 until January 2020. It was the first in the
country and was carried out to update the information collected during the 2014 Population
and Housing Census. Moreover, it was aimed to provide baseline data for the National
Indicator Framework (NIF) of the Myanmar Sustainable Development Plan (MSDP), assess
the country’s progress on the targets set for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and
serve as a preparation for the 2024 Population and Housing Census.
The 2019 ICS was under the guidance of the Central Inter-censal Survey Committee which
was responsible for providing policy guidelines for the planning and implementation of the
project. Under the Central Committee, State/ Region/ Nay Pyi Taw, District and Township
Level Committeesa were formed to supervise the implementation of the project at the
different levels.
The data enumeration was carried out using the Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing
(CAPI). Young volunteers from respective townships were recruited as enumerators and
supervisors.
This report provides up-to-date information on demographic and socio-economic

characteristics of the population and households of Myanmar. It presents reliable estimates
of key indicators at national, state/region and district levels by urban and rural areas. This
report is the second in a series of publication of the 2019 ICS after the Provisional results was
released earlier this year. More publications on thematic areas will follow.
I sincerely hope that the information in this report will form a critical base for planning,
policy development and decision-making in various sectors including its effective use for
the implementation of sectoral development plans of the Government and socio-economic
reform processes. I also believe that the information can also be used for responding to,
mitigating, and addressing the COVID-19 pandemic.
The contribution from several organizations and professionals made possible the successful
implementation of 2019 ICS. My first gratitude goes to the Government of Myanmar for the
approval and allocation of the budget for the project and to Nay Pyi Taw Council,
State/Region government for their support. Furthermore, I wish to express my sincere
thanks to the members of the Central Inter-censal Survey Committee and of the committee
The Union Report i
at every administrative level who actively coordinated and cooperated in this endeavor.
Likewise, to the Ward/VT administrators for their support during the field activities.
My deepest appreciation for the much needed assistance in the form of funding, technical
and material support provided to the Ministry by the Development Partners, namely, the
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), World
Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB), One Map Myanmar and, VSO Myanmar.
I would also like to thank the State/Region/District/Township Immigration and Population

officials who actively participated in the implementation of 2019 ICS and to the crucial role
played by the technical team of the Department of Population in all the phases of the
survey. My heartfelt gratitude goes to the youth volunteers who worked tirelessly as
supervisors and enumerators.
My warmest gratitude is also extended to the people of Myanmar for their support and
cooperation during the enumeration, without them, the project will not succeed.
H.E U Thein Swe

Union Minister
Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population
The Republic of the Union of Myanmar

ii
The Union Report
Table of Contents
Foreword............................................................................................................................. i
List of Tables..................................................................................................................... vii
List of Figures.................................................................................................................... ix
Acronyms and Abbreviations............................................................................................. xi
Figures at a Glance............................................................................................................. 1
Chapter 1: Introduction...................................................................................................... 9
1.1 Background of the survey........................................................................................... 11
1.2 Objectives of the survey. ............................................................................................ 11
1.3 Survey organization..................................................................................................... 11
1.4 Enumeration area mapping........................................................................................ 12
1.5 Development of questionnaire and manual.............................................................. 13
1.6 Preparing the CAPI systems for data collection using mobile tablets. .................... 13
1.7 Recruitment and training of field staff....................................................................... 13
1.8 Data enumeration. ...................................................................................................... 14
1.9 Data processing. .......................................................................................................... 14
1.10 Provisional results. ...................................................................................................... 15
1.11 Quality assurance to improve data quality................................................................ 15
Chapter 2: Sampling Design, Estimation and Evaluation................................................... 17

2.1 Sampling design........................................................................................................... 19
2.2 Sampling weights......................................................................................................... 20
2.2.1 Base weights. .............................................................................................................................. 20
2.2.2 Nonresponse adjustment weights........................................................................................ 20
2.2.3 Post-stratification weights....................................................................................................... 21
2.2.4 WASH component. .................................................................................................................... 22
2.3 Estimation procedure.................................................................................................. 22

2.4 Estimation of standard errors..................................................................................... 23
Chapter 3: Population Characteristics............................................................................... 25
3.1 Population size............................................................................................................. 27
3.2 Population distribution............................................................................................... 27
3.3 Population density....................................................................................................... 28

The Union Report iii
3.4 Population by residence.............................................................................................. 28
3.5 Age-sex structure......................................................................................................... 29
3.6 Age-sex pyramid.......................................................................................................... 32
3.7 Population by broad age group.................................................................................. 32
3.8 Dependency ratios....................................................................................................... 33
3.9 Marital status............................................................................................................... 35
3.10 Household size............................................................................................................. 37
3.11 Head of household. ..................................................................................................... 38
3.12 Birth registration.......................................................................................................... 39
3.13 Having a bank account................................................................................................ 40
3.14 Reasons for not having a bank account..................................................................... 41
Chapter 4: Education........................................................................................................ 43
4.1 Literacy and Numeracy................................................................................................ 45
4.2 School attendance....................................................................................................... 46
4.3 Currently attending school by level of education. .................................................... 48
4.4 Highest level of education completed. ...................................................................... 50
4.5 Main reasons for stopping schooling......................................................................... 51
Chapter 5: Labour Force Participation............................................................................... 53
5.1 Economically active population or labour force........................................................ 55
5.2 Status in employment................................................................................................. 58
5.3 Occupation................................................................................................................... 59
5.4 Industry........................................................................................................................ 61
Chapter 6: Fertility and Mortality..................................................................................... 63
6.1 Crude birth rate (CBR)................................................................................................. 65
6.2 General fertility rate (GFR).......................................................................................... 66
6.3 Age-specific fertility rate (ASFR)................................................................................. 66
6.4 Total fertility rate (TFR). .............................................................................................. 68
6.5 Total marital fertility rate (TMFR)............................................................................... 69
6.6 Age at first marriage.................................................................................................... 69
6.7 Age at first live birth (AFLB)........................................................................................ 71

iv
The Union Report
6.8 Singulate mean age at marriage (SMAM).................................................................. 72
6.9 Adolescent fertility...................................................................................................... 73
6.10 Crude death rate (CDR). .............................................................................................. 74
6.11 Early-age mortality...................................................................................................... 75
6.12 Life expectancy at birth............................................................................................... 75
Chapter 7: Migration........................................................................................................ 77
7.1 Internal migration........................................................................................................ 79
7.1.1 Lifetime levels of internal migration.................................................................................... 79
7.1.2 Migration streams..................................................................................................................... 81
7.1.3 Main reasons for movement.................................................................................................. 82
7.2 International migration............................................................................................... 84

7.2.1 Former household members living abroad........................................................................ 85
7.2.2 Current country of residence................................................................................................. 85
7.2.3 Reasons for leaving the country............................................................................................ 85
7.2.4 Type of channels used for leaving the country................................................................. 86
7.2.5 Main channel used in sending remittance......................................................................... 86
7.2.6 Remittances................................................................................................................................. 87
7.2.7 Current activity status.............................................................................................................. 88
7.2.8 Highest education completed prior to departure............................................................ 88
7.2.9 Age-sex pyramid of emigrants............................................................................................... 89
Chapter 8: Disability......................................................................................................... 91
8.1 Disability prevalence rate. .......................................................................................... 93
8.2 Age-specific disability.................................................................................................. 94
8.3 Prevalence of disability by degree of difficulty and domain.................................... 95
8.4 Community participation/activities........................................................................... 96
8.5 Support received. ........................................................................................................ 97
Chapter 9: The Older Population..................................................................................... 101
9.1 Size of the older population. .................................................................................... 103
9.2 Measures of age dependency................................................................................... 104
9.3 Type of pension, allowance and benefit.................................................................. 105
9.4 Type of health care.................................................................................................... 105
9.5 Community participation/activities......................................................................... 108
9.6 Support received. ...................................................................................................... 109
Chapter 10: Housing Characteristics............................................................................... 111
10.1 Type of housing units................................................................................................ 113

The Union Report v
10.2 Tenure status of the households.............................................................................. 113
10.3 Construction materials of housing units.................................................................. 114

10.3.1 Outer wall materials........................................................................................................... 114
10.3.2 Roofing materials. ............................................................................................................... 114
10.3.3 Floor materials..................................................................................................................... 115
10.4 Location of cooking facility....................................................................................... 116
10.5 Number of room(s).................................................................................................... 116
10.6 Housing amenities..................................................................................................... 119

10.6.1 Sources of energy for lighting.......................................................................................... 119
10.6.2 Type of cooking fuel. .......................................................................................................... 120
10.7 Household assets....................................................................................................... 121
10.7.1 Information and communication devices. ................................................................... 121
10.7.2 Transportation amenities.................................................................................................. 121
10.8 Household income..................................................................................................... 122
Chapter 11: Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)....................................................... 125

11.1 Drinking water........................................................................................................... 127
11.1.1 Accessibility........................................................................................................................... 127
11.1.2 Availability and quality. ..................................................................................................... 128
11.2 Sanitation................................................................................................................... 131
11.2.1 Accessibility........................................................................................................................... 131
11.2.2 Treatment and Disposal..................................................................................................... 132
11.3 Hygiene....................................................................................................................... 135
11.3.1 Accessibility........................................................................................................................... 135
11.4 Solid waste management.......................................................................................... 137
11.4.1 Accessibility........................................................................................................................... 137
Glossary of terms and definitions................................................................................... 139
Annex 1: Sampling errors of selected indicators.............................................................. 149
Annex 2: Accuracy and evaluation of age and sex........................................................... 156
Annex 3: Questionnaires................................................................................................. 157
List of contributors..........................................................................................................187

vi
The Union Report
List of Tables
Table 3.1: Conventional households population, population density by State/Region................................... 28
Table 3.2: Proportion of conventional households population by State/Region, urban and rural areas.......... 29
Table 3.3: Population distribution by 5-year age group, sex , sex ratio, urban and rural areas........................ 30
Table 3.4: Proportion of population by broad age group 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS................... 33
Table 3.5: Dependency ratios, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS.......................................................... 34
Table 3.6: Proportion of population by broad age group, dependency ratio, and ageing index, State/Region,
urban and rural areas........................................................................................................................... 34
Table 3.7: Proportion of households by size of the household, urban and rural areas, 2014 Census and 2019
ICS........................................................................................................................................................ 38
Table 3.8: Number and proportion of heads of households by age group and sex......................................... 39
Table 3.9: Proportion of population aged 15 years and below by birth registration status, State/Region,
Table 3.10: Proportion of population aged 18 years and over by having a bank account, State/Region,
Table 3.11: Proportion of population aged 18 years and over by the reason for not having a bank account,
State/Region, urban and rural areas..................................................................................................... 42
Table 4.1: Literacy and Numeracy rates of population aged 15 years and over by sex and State/Region........ 45
Table 4.2: Population aged 5 years and over by school attendance, sex and State/Region............................. 47
Table 4.3: Population aged 3 years and over by school attendance and sex................................................... 48
Table 4.4: Population aged 3 - 29 by current school attendance................................................................... 49
Table 4.5: Population aged 3 years and over by current school attendance, special age groups and sex........ 50
Table 4.6: Population aged 25 years and over by highest level of education completed and sex.................... 50
Table 5.1: Labour force participation rate, unemployment rate and employment to population ratio by sex,
State/Region and urban and rural areas............................................................................................... 56
Table 5.2: Employed population aged 15 years and over by status of employment....................................... 58
Table 5.3: Main occupational category of employed persons aged 15 years and over by sex......................... 60
Table 5.4: Proportion of employed persons aged 15 years and over by major industrial category by sex....... 62
Table 6.1: Crude birth rate, age-specific and total fertility rates by age of women, urban and rural areas,
2014 Census and 2019 ICS.................................................................................................................... 68
Table 6.2: Proportion of ever married women aged 20-24 years by age at first marriage, State/Region,
Table 6.3: Median age at first live birth by current age of women................................................................. 72
Table 6.4: Singulate mean age at marriage by sex, State/Region, urban and rural areas................................ 72
Table 6.5: Age-specific fertility rates for women aged 15-19 by State/Region, urban and rural areas............. 73
Table 6.6: Early-age mortality rates and life expectancy at birth by sex, urban and rural areas...................... 75
Table 7.1: Lifetime internal migration rates for movements between State/Region by sex............................ 80
Table 7.2: Migration stream for lifetime migrants by sex............................................................................... 82
Table 7.3: Internal migrant population by main reasons of movement from prior residence and State/Region..84
Table 7.4: Reasons for leaving the country of international migrants by sex.................................................. 85
Table 7.5: Current activity status of international migrants by sex................................................................. 88
Table 8.1: Population aged 5 years and over by disability status, disability prevalence rate, type of disability,
sex, State/Region, urban and rural areas.............................................................................................. 93
Table 8.2: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability who received support in the last
12 months by sex, type and source of support...................................................................................... 98
Table 9.1: Population by broad age groups, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS.....................................103

The Union Report vii
Table 9.2: Indicators of population ageing, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS......................................104
Table 9.3: Proportion of older population who had pension, received allowance, benefits by type of pension,
allowance, benefits and sex................................................................................................................105
Table 9.4: Proportion of older population who visited a health care facility in the last 12 months by type of
health care facility and sex..................................................................................................................106
Table 9.5: Proportion of older population who visited a health care facility in the last 12 months by reason
for visiting a health care facility, sex and age group.............................................................................107
Table 9.6: Proportion of older population who received support in the last 12 months by sex, type and source
of support...........................................................................................................................................109
Table 10.1: Percentage of households by type of housing unit, urban and rural areas..................................113
Table 10.2: Percentage of households by tenure status, urban and rural areas.............................................114
Table 10.3: Percentage of households by type of construction materials of walls, roofs and floors of the
housing units, urban and rural areas...................................................................................................115
Table 10.4: Percentage of households by location of cooking facility, urban and rural areas.........................116
Table 10.5: Percentage of households by number of rooms in the dwelling units, urban and rural areas......117
Table 10.6: Average number of persons per room by State/ Region, urban and rural areas..........................117
Table 10.7: Average number of persons per room by type of housing unit and tenure status of households....119
Table 10.8: Percentage of households by energy sources for lighting, urban and rural areas........................120
Table 10.9: Percentage of households by type of cooking fuel, urban and rural areas..................................120
Table 10.10: Percentage of households by availability of information and communication devices, and
transportation amenities, urban and rural areas.................................................................................122
Table 10.11: Percent distribution of household’s annual average earnings (Kyats), State/Region, urban and
rural areas...........................................................................................................................................123
Table 11.1: Proportion of households with access to improved/unimproved sources of drinking water, by
urban and rural areas..........................................................................................................................127
Table 11.2: Proportion of households by type of toilet facilities, urban and rural areas...............................132
Table 11.3: Proportion of households with access to service providers for waste disposal, urban and rural
areas...................................................................................................................................................138

viii
The Union Report
List of Figures
Figure 3.1: Proportion of conventional household population by State/Region............................................. 27
Figure 3.2: Sex ratio by age group, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS.................................................... 31
Figure 3.3: Sex ratio by State/Region............................................................................................................ 31
Figure 3.4: Population pyramid of Myanmar, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS....................................................... 32
Figure 3.5: Trends in dependency ratios, ageing Index, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS..................... 34
Figure 3.6: Proportion of population aged 10 years and over by sex and marital status................................. 36
Figure 3.7: Proportion of population aged 10 years and over by sex, age and marital status......................... 36
Figure 3.8: Mean household size by State/Region......................................................................................... 38
Figure 4.1: Literacy and Numeracy rates by State/Region.............................................................................. 46
Figure 4.2: School attendance by urban and rural areas................................................................................ 47
Figure 4.3: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over by current school attendance, sex and age........ 49
Figure 4.4: Population aged 3 to 50 years who stopped schooling by main reasons for stopping................... 51
Figure 5.1: Labour force participation rate of the population aged 15 years and over by age group and sex.. 57
Figure 5.2: Employment to population ratio of the population aged 15 years and over by age group and sex....57
Figure 5.3: Population aged 15 years and over by status of employment and sex.......................................... 59
Figure 5.4: Sex ratios for employed persons aged 15 years and over by major occupational category............ 61
Figure 6.1: Crude birth rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS.................... 65
Figure 6.2: General fertility rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas....................................................... 66
Figure 6.3: Age-specific fertility rate by urban and rural areas....................................................................... 67
Figure 6.4: Age-specific fertility rate, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS.................................................................... 67
Figure 6.5: Total fertility rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS.................. 68
Figure 6.6: Total marital fertility rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas................................................ 69
Figure 6.7: Median age at first marriage and first live birth by State/Region, urban and rural areas.............. 70
Figure 6.8: Crude death rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas............................................................ 74
Figure 7.1: Lifetime internal net migration rates for movements between State/Region by sex..................... 81
Figure 7.2: Percentage of internal migrants by main reason of movement and sex........................................ 83
Figure 7.3: Former household members living abroad by country of residence............................................. 85
Figure 7.4: Type of channels used for leaving the country by sex................................................................... 86
Figure 7.5: Main channels used by international migrants in sending money by sex...................................... 87
Figure 7.6: Amount of money sent by international migrants by sex............................................................. 87
Figure 7.7: Highest grade completed of international migrants by sex........................................................... 89
Figure 7.8: Age-sex pyramids of former household members living abroad, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS......... 89
Figure 8.1: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability by age group and sex.................. 95
Figure 8.2: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability by domain, degree of difficulty,
and sex................................................................................................................................................. 96
Figure 8.3: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability who participated in any
community/social/religious activity in the last 12 months by sex and type of activity........................... 97
Figure 8.4: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability who received support in the last 12
months by sex...................................................................................................................................... 98
Figure 9.1: Proportion of older population who participated in any community/social/religious activities in
the last 12 months by sex and type of activity.....................................................................................108
Figure 9.2: Proportion of older population who received support in the last 12 months by sex....................109
Figure 11.1: Proportion of household by status of drinking water services, urban and rural areas................129

The Union Report ix
Figure 11.2: Proportion of households with improved, basic and safely managed drinking water................130
Figure 11.3: Proportion of households with access to at least basic drinking water services by State/Region .. 131
Figure 11.4: Proportion of households by status of sanitation services, urban and rural areas.....................133
Figure 11.5: Proportion of households by management of excreta from household sanitation facilities.......134
Figure 11.6: Proportion of households with access to at least basic sanitation services by State/Region......135
Figure 11.7: Proportion of households by status of basic hygiene services, urban and rural areas................136
Figure 11.8: Proportion of household by basic hygiene services, State/Region.............................................137
Figure 11.9: Proportion of households by type of solid waste disposal services and methods, State/Region....138

x
The Union Report
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADB Asian Development Bank
AFLB Age at Frist Live Birth
ASFR Age-specific Fertility Rate
CAPI Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing
CBR Crude Birth Rate
CDR Crude Death Rate
CV Coefficient of Variation
DOP Department of Population
EA Enumeration Area
GFR General Fertility Rate
GIS Geographic Information System
GTHS Government Technical High School
ICS Inter-censal Survey
MSDP Myanmar Sustainable Development Plan
NIF National Indicator Framework
PSR Potential Support Ratio
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SE Standard Error
SMAM Singulate Mean Age at Marriage
TFR Total Fertility Rate
TMFR Total Marital Fertility Rate
TVET Technical and Vocational Education and Training
UN United Nations
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UN DESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs
WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

The Union Report xi
Figures at a Glance
Indicators
Number of States/Regions 15
Number of districts (enumerated) 71
Number of districts (not enumerated) 5
Total population in conventional households only

Both sexes 51,144,607
Male 23,916,836 (46.8%)
Female 27,227,771 (53.2%)
Percentage of urban population 28.8%
Annual population growth rate 0.88%
Sex ratio (conventional household population only) 88 males per 100
females
Median age 28.2
Total fertility rate 2.0

Total marital fertility rate 3.9
Median age at first marriage (10-49) 21.2
Median age at first live birth (10-49) 23.2
Adolescent fertility rate (births per 1,000 women 20.3
aged 15-19)
Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births) 31.0

Under five mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births) 37.7
Life expectancy at birth
Both sexes 69.4
Male 66.5
Female 73.3
Number of private households 11,162,510

Percentage of female headed households 23.2%

The Union Report 1
Indicators
Mean household size 4.6
Percentage of population by age group
Children (0 - 14 years) 27.2%
Economically productive (15 - 59 years) 62.8%
Economically productive (15 - 64 years) 66.4%
Older population (60+ years) 10.1%
Older population (65+ years) 6.4%
Dependency ratios
Total dependency ratio 59.4
Child dependency ratio 43.3
Older age dependency ratio 16.1
Ageing index
60+ years 37.2
65+ years 23.7
Had a birth certificate (15 years and below) 81.7%

Had a bank account (18 years and over) 13.0%
Literacy rate (persons aged 15 years and over)

Both sexes 89.1%
Male 92.4%
Female 86.3%
Numeracy rate (persons aged 15 years and over)

Both sexes 89.5%
Male 92.4%
Female 87.1%
People with disability

Any form of disability 12.8%

2
The Union Report
Indicators
Seeing 6.3%
Hearing 2.4%
Walking/ Climbing steps 5.4%
Remembering/ Concentrating 4.4%
Self-care 1.9%
Communication 1.6%
Labour force participation

Age 10 and over 56.7%
Age 15 - 64 66.7%
Employment to population ratio

Age 15 - 64 64.9%
International migration
Emigration by broad aged group
0-14 0.7%
15-24 28.7%
25-34 41.8%
35-44 22.1%
45-54 5.9%
55-64 0.7%
65+ 0.1%
Main reasons for leaving country of International migrants

Employment/ in search for employment/ Business 95.9%
Education 2.0%
Marriage 0.8%
Followed family 1.2%

The Union Report 3
Indicators
Other 0.1%
Type of housing unit

Condominium/ Apartment/ Flat 5.7%
Bungalow/ Brick house 10.6%
Semi-pucca house 13.1%
Wooden house 40.0%
Bamboo house 26.6%
Hut (2-3 years) 3.0%
Hut (1 year) 0.6%
Other 0.5%
Ownership of housing unit (Tenure)

Owner 90.3%
Renter (Government) 0.7%
Renter (Private) 6.1%
Provided free (Individual) 1.6%
Provided free (Government quarter) 0.8%
Provided free (Private company quarter) 0.4%
Other 0.1%
Material for housing Wall Floor Roof

Dhani/ Theke/ Palm/ In leaf 7.6% - 12.9%
Bamboo 37.8% 13.6% 0.4%
Earth 0.1% 8.2% *
Wood 24.2% 50.8% 0.3%
Corrugated sheet 1.6% - 84.0%
Tile/ Brick/ Concrete 27.8% 27.4% 2.2%
Other 0.8% * 0.1%
Number of room(s)
One 16.5%

4
The Union Report
Indicators
Two 33.9%
Three 28.8%
Four and above 20.8%
Main source of energy for lighting

Electricity (Government grid/ border country grid/ 53.0%
community based grid)
Generator (Private) 3.5%
Solar system energy 29.1%
Wind and water mill 0.8%
Kerosene 0.5%
Candle 4.3%
Rechargeable battery 8.7%
Other 0.1%
Main source of energy for cooking

Electricity (Government grid/ border country grid/ 37.6%
community based grid)
Generator (Private) 0.2%
Solar system energy 0.4%
Wind and water mill 0.1%
Kerosene *
LPG 0.5%
Biogas 1.1%
Firewood 53.3%
Charcoal 6.4%
Coal 0.2%
Straw/ Grass *
Other 0.1%
Main sources of drinking water

Piped water (into Dwelling/ Compound/ Yard/ Plot/ 16.9%
Neighbour/ Public tap/ Standpipe)
The Union Report 5
Indicators
Borehole or tube well 27.3%
Protected well/ Spring 14.1%
Bottled/ Home water purifier 21.7%
Rainwater 2.0%
Total improved water sources 82.1%
Unprotected well/ Spring 3.2%
Tanker truck/ Small cart with drum 2.0%
Surface water (Pool, River, Stream, Dam, Lake, Pond, 12.4%
Canal, Irrigation channel)
Other 0.3%
Total unimproved water sources 17.9%
Status of drinking water services

Safely managed drinking water service 41.4%
Basic drinking water service 40.3%
Limited drinking water service 0.4%
Unimproved drinking water 5.5%
Surface water 12.4%
Type of toilet facilities

Flush (to piped sewer/ septic tank) 26.1%
Water seal (Improved pit latrine) or Flush to pit latrine 59.2%
Ventilated improved pit latrine 1.6%
Pit latrine with slab 4.5%
Total improved sanitation facilities 91.4%
Traditional pit latrine or Pit latrine without slab/ open 1.6%
pit
Bucket (Surface latrine) or Container based sanitation/ 1.9%
Hanging toilet or latrine/ Flush to don’t know where or
open drain
Other 0.2%
None or Open defecation (No facility/ Bush/ Field) 4.9%
Total unimproved sanitation 8.6%

6
The Union Report
Indicators
Status of sanitation services
Basic sanitation service (at least) 79.6%
Limited sanitation service 11.9%
Unimproved sanitation 3.6%
Open defecation 4.9%
Hygiene (Handwashing service)

Basic handwashing service 72.3%
Limited handwashing service 22.3%
No service 4.9%
No permission to see or other 0.5%
Solid waste disposal

Collected by formal service provider 17.5%
Collected by informal service provider 3.5%
Disposed of in designated area/ within household/ 56.7%
buried/ burned
Disposed of elsewhere & others 22.3%
Availability of information and communication amenities

Radio 19.1%
Television set 59.3%
Landline/ Fixed-line telephone 4.3%
Mobile phone 85.8%
Computer 5.4%
Internet access at home (through landline or mobile 56.0%
connection)
% with none of the items 9.4%
% with all of the items 0.3%
Availability of transportation amenities

Car/ Pickup/ Truck/ Van 7.8%

The Union Report 7
Indicators
Motorcycle/ Moped/ Tuk tuk 59.4%
Bicycle 36.7%
Four-wheel tractor 3.3%
Canoe/ Boat 3.5%
Motor boat 3.1%
Cart (bullock) 16.2%
Note: * Less than 0.1 percent

8
The Union Report
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter
Introduction
1
1.1 Background of the survey
The Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population has successfully conducted the 2019 Inter-censal
Survey (ICS) in November 2019. This was the first Inter-censal Survey undertaken by the government
in response to the pressing demand for up-to-date data crucial for capturing several demographic
changes happening in the country.
The 2019 ICS aims to capture the transformations happening in Myanmar and incorporate them into
the different socio-demographic and economic plans for the country’s development. Likewise, it aims
to provide baseline data for the National Indicator Framework (NIF) of the Myanmar Sustainable
Development Plan (MSDP) as well as to assess the country’s progress on the targets set for the
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The survey also served as a means to sustain the capacity built
during the 2014 Census in preparation for the next Population and Housing Census in 2024.
The ICS was designed to produce district level data to provide national and local managers, policy
makers, programme and project monitors/evaluators with updated information on population
related indicators for evidence-based plans and policies, monitoring and evaluation. Results will also
be used as inputs for generating accurate population estimates during non-census years.
1.2 Objectives of the survey
The 2019 Inter-censal Survey aims:
a. To produce updated population and socio-economic data for evidence-based policies,

plans and programmes.
b. To determine population growth and changes in population structure in terms of age and
sex distribution and other socio-demographic and economic characteristics of the
population.
c. To provide inputs for monitoring the progress of projects, implementation of policies,
programs, and plans such as the Myanmar Sustainable Development Plan, SDGs, and
others.
1.3 Survey organization
Conducting the 2019 ICS requires the development of a clear supervisory, legal, institutional and
management framework, which outlines the survey guiding and administration structure, key
activities, responsibilities and critical dates, as well as capacity enhancement and resource mobilization.

The Union Report 11
In order to ensure smooth conduct of the survey several committees were formed. At the Union level,
the Central Committee was established. Committees at each State/Region, District, Township and
relevant Ward/Village Tract Committees were likewise formed. There were three levels of Inter-censal
Survey operations management. Each level provided support to supervisors and enumerators in the
following areas:
a. Household Leaders: Ten-household leaders and hundred-household leaders, in
collaboration with the ICS Committee at the Ward/Village Tract, assisted in the completion
of enumeration. They made appointments with the sample households for interviews and
arranged security for supervisors and enumerators, whenever necessary.
b. State/Region/District/Township Committee Members: Management and service/
support programs at the District/Township level was provided by the District/Township
members of the ICS Committee. They reported the progress of enumeration to the
Officer-in-charge of State/Region ICS Committee who also monitored the distribution and
retrieval of mobile tablets and accessories.
c. DOP HQ: The Officer-in-charge and technical staff from the Department of Population
and the district-level instructor assisted the supervisors and enumerators in addressing
technical issues related to the survey implementation.
Enumeration teams were formed in every township. On average, each enumeration team consisted
of one supervisor and up to four enumerators. However, some teams had less than four enumerators
because some townships had relatively fewer number of sample enumeration areas. Each team
covered an average of eight enumeration areas.
1.4 Enumeration area mapping
The Mapping and Structure/Household Listing activity is one of the major tasks in any data collection
undertaking. This guides the enumerators on the coverage of their assigned Enumeration Areas (EAs)
(no duplication or missing households) and helps in the identification of the sample households.
Enumeration area maps for 2019 ICS, using GIS technology, were developed based on enumeration
area maps of 2014 Population and Housing Census. For the Listing of Structures/Households and
mapping , there were two levels of trainings conducted: the first level training (Training of Trainers)
which was held at DOP, Central Office in Nay Pyi Taw; and the second level training for the staff of
Immigration and Population offices which was conducted at the respective State/Region offices.
The Mapping and Structure/Household Listing started on 1st April 2019 and completed in September
2019. Seventeen teams from DOP were sent to the field to work first on the sample EAs of Nay Pyi Taw
to gain sufficient experience before they proceed to the rest of the sample EAs. A total of 4,316 EAs
were selected for the 2019 ICS of which 4,028 EAs (93%) were successfully covered.

12
The Union Report
1.5 Development of questionnaire and manual
The list of indicators for 2019 ICS was developed based on the objectives of the ICS as well as on
the results of consultative process (data user consultation workshop and bilateral consultations) with
concerned ministries/departments. It also adhered to the guidelines stipulated in the United Nations’
Principles and Recommendations for the 2020 Round of Population and Housing Censuses, and past
census experiences in Myanmar and other countries. Based on the final list of indicators, the
questionnaire was developed through the assistance of experts from UNFPA, UNICEF, ADB and VSO.
After the draft questionnaire was developed, another consultative workshop was held where
comments and suggestions from the workshop were considered as bases for the finalization of the
questionnaire. Manuals for supervisors and enumerators were then developed.
The 2019 ICS collected individual information on demographic, migration, education, labour force
participation, fertility, mortality, disability, older population, participation in community activities,
well-being and support received by older population and people with disability, as well as housing
and household information such as presence of household equipment or assets/goods in the
household, sources of drinking water, sanitation, and hygiene. In total, the questionnaire contained
110 questions (Annex 3).
1.6 Preparing the CAPI systems for data collection using mobile tablets
After finalizing the questionnaires, the data processing team from DOP worked with the expert from
the World Bank in developing the Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) system for data
collection using computer tablets, setting the equipment, installing the software, testing the data
collection system, training on how to use the tablet, preparing and setting the Head Office’s server for
networking/storage of the collected data. A series of testing was conducted in September 2019 prior
to the finalization of the census questionnaire and the CAPI system.
1.7 Recruitment and training of field staff
Young volunteers from respective townships were recruited as enumerators and supervisors through
advertisements/local immigration offices. The appointment of enumerators and supervisors was done
by the township Immigration and Population Officers. There were two levels of trainings held: the first
level was conducted for the core trainers at the Department of Population. They served as trainers for
enumerators’/supervisors’ trainings. Training of field staffs for the survey was conducted in four phases
during the period from 21st October 2019 to 13th January 2020. Trainees per phase were trained for 14
days each. The training consisted of a combination of classroom training and practical exercises. There
were altogether 2,039 enumerators and 617 supervisors recruited and trained.

The Union Report 13
1.8 Data enumeration
The 2019 ICS was implemented on staggered basis:
a. First stage: Enumeration in Kachin State and Chin State (hard-to-reach areas) and Nay Pyi
Taw (accessible) from 18th November to 1st December 2019
b. Second stage: Enumeration in Kayah State, Kayin State, Mon State, Tanintharyi Region, and
Ayeyawady Region from 11th to 24th December 2019
c. Third stage: Enumeration in Bago Region, Sagaing Region and Magway Region from 2nd to
15th January 2020
d. Fourth stage: Enumeration in Yangon Region, Mandalay Region, Rakhine State, and Shan
State from 16th to 29th January 2020
Mobile tablets were used in collecting responses from the Survey . On average, one supervisor was
assigned to 4 enumerators. The ICS covered only Conventional Households and hence, did not cover
those institutional and homeless population. Out of 4,316 sample EAs, 3,960 EAs were enumerated (92%).
Due to security concern, out of 273 sample EAs in Rakhine State, only 72 EAs were covered. Nationally
representative samples of 548,553 individuals in 132,092 selected households were interviewed.
1.9 Data processing
The mobile tablet devices used in the survey were running on Android 4.0 system and up. CSEntry
7.2.1 software was used in these devices to capture the responses from the interviews while CSPro 7.2
software was used to design the consolidation processat the Headquarter. CSWeb was installed on the
server at the Headquarter and all communication between the field and the Headquarter was done
through the CSWeb server.
Data entry application was developed with internal consistency checks and validations using CSPro
software. Data synchronization process was implemented as follows; (i) In-field supervisors assigned
the sample households to enumerators using Bluetooth. The enumerators conducted interviews after
receiving the household assignments, then, sent the collected data to the In-field supervisors via
Bluetooth. (ii) In-field supervisors received and checked the data from enumerators. To check and
rectify inconsistencies in the data file, supervisors conducted re-interviews on around ten percent of
the total number of households assigned to them. (iii) Subsequently, In-field supervisors transmitted the
completed data by Enumeration Areas to the server via mobile network. (iv) At Headquarter, In-office
supervisors were assigned to monitor the data coming from the field and produced the data collection
status based on the number of EAs completed, generated quality control tables; and regularly
backed-up the data.

14
The Union Report
At the Headquarter, staffs coded open responses such as occupation and industry then integrated
them into the main data file. Data editing programs were developed according to the editing rules
prepared by the subject matter specialists to ensure good quality of data collected. Statistical tables
were generated using CSPro software while SPSS and STATA software for analysis.
1.10 Provisional results
The 2019 ICS provisional results were launched on 31st August 2020 to fulfill the need of data to
measure progress of national development plans as well as to establish a baseline to assess the impact
of COVID-19 and plan for response. The report presented 10 sessions including, Summary, Population
Characteristics, Education, Labour Force, Migration, Fertility and Mortality, Disability, Older Population,
Housing and Household Characteristics, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene. The provisional results are
available online at https://www.dop.gov.mm/ and https://myanmar.unfpa.org/en/publications
1.11 Quality assurance to improve data quality
The planning and implementation of the 2019 ICS took into consideration a number of strategies and
activities to ensure reliable, quality and timely data. Designing of the census questionnaires through
field testing and extensive consultative processes with government ministries/departments,
development partners, universities and research institutions and other data users ensured that the
information collected from the survey were relevant to data users and conformed to international
standards and guidelines. In addition, monitoring teams comprised of high ranking officials from DOP
and UNFPA visited the fields at the beginning of the listing and enumeration phase to oversee the
operations and to ensure that the field work was conducted as planned and that rules and guidelines
were followed as prescribed.

The Union Report 15
Chapter 2: Sampling Design, Estimation and Evaluation
Sampling Design, Chapter
Estimation and Evaluation 2
2.1 Sampling design
The sample for the the 2019 Inter-censal Survey (ICS) is designed to provide reliable estimates of key
indicators for all districts of Myanmar at the mid-point between the decennial censuses. A stratified
two-stage sample design is used for selecting the sample for the ICS. The primary sampling units
(PSUs) selected at the first stage are the enumeration areas (EAs) defined for the 2014 Myanmar
Census of Population and Housing, which provided population counts for wards and village tracts as
of 29th March 2014. The EAs are small operational areas with well-defined boundaries identified
on maps that were used for the census enumeration. They have an average of about 135 households
each (140 for urban EAs and 133 for rural EAs). There are a total of about 79,240 EAs in Myanmar.
These EAs were stratified by urban and rural areas within each district.
Myanmar had a total of 74 districts in 2014 Census. The districts of Laukine, Hopan and Makman in
Shan State were excluded from the frame for the ICS because those areas were not accessible for the
enumeration. Hence, the 71 districts of the country served as primary domains of the survey and a
total of 4,316 EAs were selected at the first sampling stage for the ICS, corresponding to about 5.36%
of the EAs in the Census frame.
The sample EAs were first allocated to the districts in proportion to the square root of the number
of households in each district from the 2014 Myanmar Census. This type of allocation increases
the sample for the smaller districts and decreases the sample for the larger districts compared to a
proportional allocation. The resulting allocation was then adjusted to have a minimum of 32 sample
EAs in most of the smallest districts, and a maximum of 120 sample EAs in the largest districts. Then
within each district, the specified number of sample EAs was allocated to the urban and rural strata
proportionally to the number of households in the Census frame.
Within each stratum the sample EAs were selected systematically with probability proportional to size
(PPS) based on the number of private households in each EA from the 2014 Census frame. Within each
of these sample EAs a new listing of households is being conducted to provide an updated sampling
frame for selecting the households at the second sampling stage. A sample of 35 households were
selected from the listing for each sample EA, to be interviewed for the ICS. A CSPro program was
developed by to select a systematic sample of 35 households based on the total number of households
listed in each EA.
In 2019 ICS, a total of 4,316 EAs were selected at the first-stage of sampling. Of these, 4,028 were listed
but the actual data collection were made in only 3,960 EAs due to operational difficulties encountered

The Union Report 19
at the time of the survey. Of the 3,960 EAs actually enumerated, a response rate of 95% among sam-
pled households was achieved.
2.2 Sampling weights
The sampling weights in general were generated as a product of 3 components namely: (a) the base
weights, (b) non-response adjustment weight, and; (c) post-stratification weights. That is, the final
survey weights for household j in EA i from stratum h, is conceptually calculated as:
whij =w1 × w2.1 × w3.12 (1)
Where: w1 is the base-weights; w2.1 is the non-response adjustment; and, w3.12 is the
post-stratification adjustment weight.
2.2.1 Base weights
The base weights were calculated as the inverse of the selection probabilities. Thus, for the sampling
design utilized for the 2019 ICS the selection probabilities can be calculated as:
M hi n M hi 35
phij ah
= × hi ah
= × (2)
∑ ∑
ah ah
=i 1 =i 1
M hi N hi M hi N hi
In here, the subscript h refers to the stratum in a district, i refers to the sampled EA, and j refers to the
sample household. In addition, ah refers to the number of EAs selected from stratum h. M hi refers
to the total number of households enumerated in the 2014 Census in EA i from stratum h. N hi is the
total number of households listed in 2019. Given the selection probability, the base weights was then
calculated as 1/ phij .
2.2.2 Nonresponse adjustment weights
When all sampled EAs are enumerated, the base weights are adjusted to take into account
nonresponse. However, in the case of the 2019 ICS, there were a few districts where non-enumerated
EAs is quite significant. Hence, the strategy used to adjust for non-response is two-fold: (1) adjust
nonresponse at the first stage of sampling, and (2) adjust for nonresponse at the second stage of sampling.
At the first stage of sampling, the first-stage sampling weight adjusted for nonresponse was
calculated as
∑ M ∑ I w
ah ah
hi i 1 hi hi
*
whi × 1 / r ,
whi = =i 1 =
1h hi w =
1h , r = (3)
∑ w
ah
h hi aM
i =1 hi

20
The Union Report
In here, whi is the inverse of the probability that a particular EA is selected in stratum h; r1h is the
weighted response rate at the first stage of sampling (i.e. the survey was successfully conducted in
the selected EA in stratum h) and I hi is the indicator function assuming a value of 1 if the survey was
conducted in EA i from stratum h and assuming a value of 0 otherwise.
After calculating the first-stage weights, the sampling weight adjusted for nonresponse was then
calculated as
N hi 35
*
whij = whi* × × (4)
35 nhi*
Where nhi
*
is the actual number of sample households interviewed from sampled EA i in stratum h.
2.2.3 Post-stratification weights
Individual weights were first generated. Note that in the 2019 ICS, all members of the conventional
household were enumerated. To ensure that the estimated population distribution will conform to the
projected population by state, gender and 5-year age-group, the sampling weight as shown in (4) was
then adjusted to the projected population counts in conventional households for 2019. In particular,
the sampling weights were adjusted based on the projected population in conventional households by
state, gender, and 5-year age-groups (0-4, 5-9, 10-14, 15-19, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, 40-44, 45-49,
50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70+). Initially, the calculated sampling weight for a given household,
whij* , was assigned to all members of the interviewed household. That is, the initial sampling weight for
* *
individual k, is given by whijk = whij . The final weight for each individual was calculated as:
** *
P[G ]
w= whijk × (5)
Pˆ
hijk
[G ]
P[ G ] is the projected population for group G. In here, the group G refers to a specific age-group, gender
in each state. Pˆ[ G ] is the estimated population in group G and is calculated as Pˆ[ G ] = ∑ hijk∈G whijk
*
.
Once the final person-weights were calculated using (5), the principal person weight approach was
utilized to calculate the final household weight to ensure internal consistency with the results.
In principle, the principal person is the person that is present in all sample households. For the 2019
ICS, the final person weight attached to the designated household weight will be used as the final
** ** **
household weight. That is, the final household weight, denoted by whij , is simply whij = whij1 where
**
whij 1 was the final person weight of the principal person which in this case is the Household head.

The Union Report 21
2.2.4 WASH component
In addition to the socio-demographic characteristics collected from a sample of households, a

sub-sample of households were selected for purposes of measuring actual drinking water quality in
terms of measuring fecal coliform levels. That is, in each sampled EA, a sub-sample of household were
drawn from the original sample household with equal probability at a sampling rate of about 1 in every
7 sample households. Thus, for this component, the appropriate household sampling weight, denoted
***
by whij was generated as:
*** ** nhi*
w=
hij whij × (6)
nhi**
Where nhi** is the number of sub-sampled households in EA i from stratum h.
The sum of weights was obtained for all sub-sampled households should give us an estimate of the
total number of households. However, some small changes were observed between the estimated
total number of households from the full sample and the sub-sample. Such changes may be due to
random error. To achieve internal consistency between the full sample and the sub-sample
(second-phase sample), the weight given in (7) were further calibrated so that such consistency can be
achieved beginning at the state level. The calibrated weights would be the final household weight for
this component and is given by:
' *
D Ld adh ndhi
∑∑∑∑ w
= 1 = 1= 1 = 1
**
dhij
w [***
S=
] hij
***
wdhij × d hL ai ' nj** (7)
D d dh dhi
∑∑∑∑ w
d 1=
= h 1 =i 1 =j 1
***
dhij
Note that the calibration process is done at the state level and hence the subscript [S] is added to
denote the state while the subscript d is added to denote the district in state [S].
2.3 Estimation procedure
Most survey estimates are in the form of totals or ratios. Since one of the primary objectives of the
survey is to generate estimates at the district level, then the estimator for the population totals and
ratios at the district level is given by:
L ah' '
nhi
Yˆd = ∑∑∑ whij
**
yhij (8)
h 1 =i 1 =j 1
=

22
The Union Report
L ah' '
nhi
Yˆd
∑∑∑ w **
hij yhij
Rˆ d = h 1 =i 1 =j 1
=
= (9)
Xˆ ah' '
L nhi
d
∑∑∑ w
h 1 =i 1 =j 1
=
**
hij hij x
L refers to the total number of strata in district d, ah' is the total number of sample EAs in stratum h,
'
nhi is the total number of sample households in EA i from stratum h, and whij** is the final household
weight. The quantities yhij and xhij are the values of the variables y and x for each sample unit. Note
that (9) can be used in the case of estimating proportions by setting xhij = 1 and yhij to 1 if the sample
unit possess the attribute of interest and 0 otherwise . By setting xhij = 1 , (9) can be used in estimating
means.
2.4 Estimation of standard errors
Standard errors are measures of precision attached to the estimates which can give us indicators as
the degree of usefulness of such estimates. Technically, the standard error of an estimate is defined
as the positive square root of its variance. There are several ways of estimating the variance of an
estimator. Statistical software such as SPSS, Stata, and SAS include routines for estimating them. The
most common method of estimating the variance of the population total employs the primary cluster
method and is calculated as:
'
L
 a '  ah
s (Yˆd ) =
∑2
(1 − f h )  ' h ∑ (Yˆdhi − Yˆdh ) 2
= h 1=  ah − 1  i 1
where , (10)
ah' n' '
1 ah ˆ
yhij , Yˆdh
hi
=Yˆdhi ∑∑
= **
whij ∑ Ydhi
=i 1 =j 1 ah' =i 1
The factor (1 − f h ) is the finite population correction factor for stratum h, f h is the sampling rate for
stratum h. Since f h is small, this factor can be ignored.
In the case of a ratio, the linearized estimator is employed and is calculated as:
1
s 2 ( Rˆ d ) =  s 2 (Yˆd ) + Rˆ d2 s 2 ( Xˆ d ) − 2 Rˆ d s (Yˆd , Xˆ d ) 
Xˆ d2  
where
(11)
( )( Xˆ )
'
L
 a ' − 1  ah
s (Yˆd , Xˆ d ) =
∑ (1 − f h )  h ' ∑ Yˆdhi − Yˆdh dhi − Xˆ dh
= h 1=  ah  i 1
The Union Report 23
For the more complex statistics such as Total Fertility Rate and under five mortality rate, the
jackknife method of variance estimation was employed. In particular the delete one-psu jackknife
method was employed.
Other measures of sampling error were also computed for the selected indicators for easier
appreciation of the level of precision of the estimates. In addition to the standard error (SE) which
is simply defined as the positive square root of the variance, the Coefficient of Variation (CV) was
likewise calculated as:
SE (estimate)
CV
= (estimate) ×100 (12)
estimate
ME (estimate) = zα /2 SE (estimate)
The CV were calculated for ratios, totals and means. While there is really no hard rule that sets the
value of the CV to declare the estimate as precise, some rule of thumb can be used. Ideally, the
desired CV values can be less than 10% but a more relaxed rule of up to 20% especially for lower levels
of disaggregation such as estimates at the district levels can also be used. Estimates of standard errors
of selected indicators are shown in Annex 1.

24
The Union Report
Chapter 3: Population Characteristics
Chapter
Population Characteristics
3
This chapter focuses on some population characteristics such as population size, distribution, density,
age-sex structure, birth registration and owning a bank account.
The 2019 Inter-censal Survey (2019 ICS) covered only the conventional household population in
Myanmar and, therefore, the population count in this report refers only to conventional household
population (excluding those in institutions such as monasteries, prisons, orphanages, home for the
aged, etc.).
3.1 Population size
According to the 2019 ICS Myanmar’s total conventional household population was estimated at 51.1
million, an increase of 3.2 million compared to the census count (conventional household population)
of 47.9 million in 2014.
3.2 Population distribution
Population distribution is a term used to describe how people are spread across a specific area. In other
words, population distribution shows where people live. Population distribution of Myanmar by State/
Region, presented in Figure 3.1, shows a large regional variation. Yangon Region retained its position
of having the largest proportion of the population (15.3%), followed by Mandalay (12.1%), Ayeyawady
(12.0%) and Shan (10.5%). About half of the conventional household population of Myanmar lived in
these four states and regions. The other half of the population was distributed among the remaining
11 states and regions. The least populated states and regions were Kayah (0.6%), Chin (1.0%), Nay Pyi
Taw (2.3%) and Tanintharyi (2.8%). Less than 7 percent of the total population lived in these four states
and regions (Figure 3.1).
Figure 3.1: Proportion of conventional household population by State/Region

The Union Report 27
3.3 Population density
Population density, defined as the number of persons per unit of land area, usually quoted per square
kilometer or square mile, is one of the measures for describing the spatial distribution of a population.
The population density of Myanmar from 2019 ICS was 76 persons per square kilometer. For states and
regions it varies from a high of 762 per square kilometer for Yangon Region to a low of 14 per square
kilometer for Chin State (Table 3.1).
Table 3.1: Conventional households population, population density by State/Region
Total
Stage/Region Density (Population/sq.km)
population
UNION 51,144,607 76
Kachin 1,584,375 18
Kayah 311,448 27
Kayin 1,556,552 51
Chin 509,037 14
Sagaing 5,309,914 57
Tanintharyi 1,426,426 33
Bago 4,814,582 122
Magway 3,805,211 85
Mandalay 6,168,225 200
Mon 1,889,274 154
Rakhine 3,230,175 88
Yangon 7,831,830 762
Shan 5,384,244 35
Ayeyawady 6,140,001 175
Nay Pyi Taw 1,183,314 168
3.4 Population by residence
According to 2019 ICS, the urban population constituted 28.8 percent (14,740,228) of the total
population. Yangon Region had the highest proportion (69.1%) of people living in urban areas followed
by Mandalay Region and Kachin State (32.1% each). The largest proportion of people living in rural
areas was observed in Magway Region (86.3%) followed by Ayeyawady Region (85.7%), Rakhine State
and Sagaing Region (83.3% each) (Table 3.2).

28
The Union Report
Table 3.2: Proportion of conventional households population by State/Region, urban and rural areas
Stage/Region Total population Urban (%) Rural (%)

UNION 51,144,607 28.8 71.2
Kachin 1,584,375 32.1 67.9
Kayah 311,448 21.3 78.7
Kayin 1,556,552 18.5 81.5
Chin 509,037 20.2 79.8
Sagaing 5,309,914 16.7 83.3
Tanintharyi 1,426,426 23.7 76.3
Bago 4,814,582 18.0 82.0
Magway 3,805,211 13.7 86.3
Mandalay 6,168,225 32.1 67.9
Mon 1,889,274 25.7 74.3
Rakhine 3,230,175 16.7 83.3
Yangon 7,831,830 69.1 30.9
Shan 5,384,244 29.1 70.9
Ayeyawady 6,140,001 14.3 85.7
Nay Pyi Taw 1,183,314 26.0 74.0
3.5 Age-sex structure
The 2019 ICS indicates that, of the total population, males made up 46.8 percent and the females,
53.2 percent. The sex ratio of the population (number of males for every 100 females) at the national
level was 87.8 while for urban and rural areas, these were 86.1 and 88.5, respectively. The sex ratio at
birth was 103. In 2014 Census, based on conventional household population, the sex ratio was 88.9. By
five-year age group, sex ratio tended to be high at young ages, but gradually decreased in older ages
(Table 3.3).

The Union Report 29
Table 3.3: Population distribution by 5-year age group, sex , sex ratio, urban and rural areas
The Union Report

30
Comparison of the sex ratio in 1983, 2014 and 2019 suggests that the sex ratio of Myanmar declined
substantially during the last three and a half decades (Figure 3.2). Though there may be several
reasons for that, the most likely causes may be higher mortality and out-migration rates of males
compared to females.
Figure 3.2: Sex ratio by age group, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS
In all states and regions, the survey recorded more females than males. The highest sex ratio was
observed in Kayah State (95 males per 100 females), followed by Kachin (94), Tanintharyi (94), and
Shan (93). The lowest sex ratio was in Magway Region (82) (Figure 3.3).
Figure 3.3: Sex ratio by State/Region
UNION

The Union Report 31
3.6 Age-sex pyramid
The age-sex pyramid of the 2014 Census and 2019 ICS are shown in Figure 3.4. It shows that the
population pyramid of 2019 still retained the pot-shaped feature of 2014. However, due to fertility
decline, the population in some age groups of 2019, especially for the age groups 5-9 and 10-14,
decreased. On the other hand, the population of older age groups for 2019, i.e., aged 55 years and
over, increased. This scenario was more noticeable for the female population indicating women in
Myanmar, like everywhere else, live longer than men.
Figure 3.4: Population pyramid of Myanmar, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS
3.7 Population by broad age group
Broad age groups of Myanmar population at the national level for 1983, 2014 and 2019 are presented in
Table 3.4. It indicates that although Myanmar still showed similar age pattern of 2014, some changes
were observed between 2014 and 2019. The proportion of young people aged less than 15 decreased
a little from 28.6 percent to 27.2 percent while the working-age population aged 15 to 64 increased
from 65.6 percent to 66.4 percent. The older population (aged 65 and over) also increased from
5.8 percent to 6.4 percent during the same period.

32
The Union Report
Table 3.4: Proportion of population by broad age group, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS
1983 2014 2019

Broad age group
Union Urban Rural Union Urban Rural Union Urban Rural
Less than 15 years 38.6 35.7 39.5 28.6 24.1 30.6 27.2 22.9 28.9
15-59 55.1 58.2 54.1 62.5 66.7 60.7 62.8 66.6 61.2
15-64 57.5 60.5 56.5 65.6 69.9 63.8 66.4 70.4 64.8
60+ 6.4 6.2 6.4 8.9 9.2 8.8 10.1 10.5 9.9
65+ 3.9 3.8 4.0 5.8 6.0 5.7 6.4 6.7 6.3
3.8 Dependency ratios
In 2019, the total dependency ratio (aged 0-14 and 65 years and over per 15-64 age group) for
Myanmar was 50.6 (Table 3.5 and Figure 3.5). It declined gradually from 73.9 in 1983 to 50.6 in 2019.
A similar situation was observed for child dependency ratio during the same period. However, older
age dependency ratio and ageing index continued to increase. In 2019, there were 10 individuals aged
65 and over for every 100 persons of working-age population (15-64) in Myanmar.
Total dependency ratio for Myanmar varied between urban and rural areas and across states and
regions (Table 3.6). Total dependency ratio for urban areas was 42.0 while 54.4 for rural areas. The
lowest total dependency ratio (39.8) was observed in Yangon Region and highest (84.4) in Chin State.
The ageing index (ratio of the aged population to the child population) also increased from 20.1 in
2014 to 23.7 in 2019.
The median age of the population is defined as the age that divides the population into two groups of
equal size, one of which is younger and the other of which is older. The median age is often used as
a basis for describing a population as “young” or “old” or as “ageing” or “younging”. Populations with
medians under 20 may be described as “young,” those with medians 30 or over as “old,” and those
with medians 20 to 29 as of “intermediate” age.1 The median age in Myanmar increased from 24.1 in
1983 to 28.2 in 2019 (Table 3.5). Population of Myanmar may be categorized as “intermediate “age.
1The Methods and Materials of Demography (Second edition) Edited by Jacob S. Siegel David A. Swanson
The Union Report 33
Table 3.5: Dependency ratios, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS
Dependency ratio, 1983 2014 2019

Ageing index, and
Median age Union Urban Rural Union Urban Rural Union Urban Rural
Total dependency ratio 73.9 65.3 76.9 52.4 43.0 56.8 50.6 42.0 54.4
Child dependency ratio 67.1 59.0 69.9 43.7 34.4 47.9 40.9 32.5 44.6
Older age dependency 6.8 6.3 7.0 8.8 8.5 8.9 9.7 9.5 9.8
ratio
Ageing index 10.2 10.8 10.0 20.1 24.8 18.6 23.7 29.3 22.0
Median Age 24.1 25.1 26.1 27.1 28.5 26.4 28.2 29.8 27.5
Figure 3.5: Trends in dependency ratios, ageing Index, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS
Table 3.6: Proportion of population by broad age group, dependency ratio, and ageing index,
State/Region, urban and rural areas
Proportion of broad
Dependency ratio
State/ age group
Total Ageing
Region and Total Child Older age
population index
Area 0 - 14 15 - 64 65+ dependency dependency dependency
ratio ratio ratio
UNION 51,144,607 27.2 66.4 6.4 50.6 40.9 9.7 23.7
Urban 14,740,228 22.9 70.4 6.7 42.0 32.5 9.5 29.3
Rural 36,404,379 28.9 64.8 6.3 54.4 44.6 9.8 22.0
Kachin 1,584,375 29.2 66.5 4.3 50.3 43.8 6.5 14.8
Kayah 311,448 33.4 62.5 4.1 60.1 53.5 6.6 12.3

34
The Union Report
Proportion of broad
Dependency ratio
State/ age group
Total Ageing
Region and Total Child Older age
population index
Area 0 - 14 15 - 64 65+ dependency dependency dependency
ratio ratio ratio
Kayin 1,556,552 32.9 61.1 6.0 63.7 53.9 9.8 18.3
Chin 509,037 40.8 54.2 5.0 84.4 75.2 9.2 12.2
Sagaing 5,309,914 27.2 66.1 6.7 51.3 41.1 10.2 24.7
Tanintharyi 1,426,426 32.0 62.5 5.5 60.0 51.2 8.8 17.2
Bago 4,814,582 26.2 66.6 7.2 50.2 39.4 10.8 27.5
Magway 3,805,211 26.0 66.0 8.0 51.4 39.3 12.1 30.6
Mandalay 6,168,225 24.6 68.6 6.8 45.8 35.9 9.9 27.5
Mon 1,889,274 28.3 64.1 7.6 55.9 44.1 11.8 26.6
Rakhine 3,230,175 29.6 63.4 7.0 57.8 46.8 11.0 23.4
Yangon 7,831,830 22.4 71.5 6.1 39.8 31.2 8.6 27.4
Shan 5,384,244 30.2 64.9 4.9 54.1 46.5 7.6 16.4
Ayeyawady 6,140,001 28.4 64.8 6.8 54.3 43.8 10.5 23.9
Nay Pyi Taw 1,183,314 27.2 67.5 5.3 48.1 40.3 7.8 19.4
3.9 Marital status
In 2019 ICS, a question was asked on the marital status of people aged 10 years and over. The results
showed that 54.7 percent of males and 50.8 percent of females were married, while 41.2 percent of
males and 37.4 percent of females reported as single. Only 2.7 percent of males and 9.8 percent of
females were recorded as widowed (Figure 3.6).
The comparison of marital status of males and females is presented in Figure 3.7. The difference
between males and females was more significant in the later years, which may be due to men getting
married or remarried later in life while women tend to remain widowed. It can be seen in the graph
that the line for married men slopes up steadily until it reaches the peak at the age group of 55-59 and
then starts to decline. However, the line for married women slopes down after it reaches the peak at
the age group of 35-39 as husbands die and women become widows. This scenario is supported by the
fact that the proportion of widows started to rise visibly at the age group of 45-49.

The Union Report 35
Figure 3.6: Proportion of population aged 10 years and over by sex and marital status
Figure 3.7: Proportion of population aged 10 years and over by sex, age and marital status

36
The Union Report
3.10 Household size
Mean household size is the ratio of the total population in households to the number of households in
an area. It was 4.6 people at the national level in 2019. Figure 3.8 shows the mean size of conventional
households by state and region. The mean household size was highest in Chin State with 5.5, followed
by Kachin State with 5.2, and Tanintharyi Region and Rakhine State at 5.0 persons per household. The
lowest household size was recorded in Bago and Ayeyawady Regions with 4.2 persons per household.
The results also showed that, in 2019, 46.0 percent of households in Myanmar comprised 3 to 4
household members which was an increase of about five percentage points compared with the 2014
Census results. The lowest proportion was the "9 and more persons" category with only 2.4 percent
of the total households. It is interesting to note that the proportion of 1-person household increased
from 4.6 percent in 2014 to 5.4 percent in 2019. All this information reflects the fact that people in
Myanmar preferred smaller households.

The Union Report 37
Figure 3.8: Mean household size by State/Region
Table 3.7: Proportion of households by size of the household, urban and rural areas, 2014 Census
and 2019 ICS
2014 2019
Household size
Union Urban Rural Union Urban Rural
Number 10,877,832 3,049,433 7,828,399 11,162,510 3,120,314 8,042,196
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
1 person 4.6 4.9 4.5 5.4 5.6 5.3
2 persons 12.4 12.8 12.3 13.6 14.1 13.4
3 persons 19.9 19.1 20.2 22.1 21.2 22.4
4 persons 21.3 20.4 21.7 23.9 23.0 24.2
5 persons 16.5 15.7 16.8 16.2 15.7 16.5
6 persons 10.9 10.5 11.0 9.2 9.1 9.3
7 persons 6.5 6.6 6.4 4.8 5.1 4.6
8 persons 4.1 4.6 3.9 2.4 2.7 2.3
9 persons and more 3.7 5.3 3.1 2.4 3.5 2.0
3.11 Head of household
The head of a conventional household is the household member who makes key decisions and is
recognized as the head of the household by other household members. The head of the household
may be a male or female and not necessarily the main earner in the household.
In 2019, 76.8 percent of households were headed by a male and only 23.2 percent by a female. The
comparison of male and female shown in Table 3.8 again illustrates the fact that women in Myanmar

38
The Union Report
outlive men in the oldest age groups. The proportion of male-headed households peaks at the age
group 30-34 (90.6%) and then started to decline as older men began to migrate or die and women
take over as heads of the households. Starting at age group 75-79, almost half (about 48%) of the
households in Myanmar were headed by females.
Table 3.8: Number and proportion of heads of households by age group and sex
Proportion of households
Age group of household Number of
headed by:
head households
Male Female
Union 11,162,510 76.8 23.2
10 - 14 631 31.0 69.0
15 - 19 19,996 75.1 24.9
20 - 24 205,085 87.7 12.3
25 - 29 534,530 89.7 10.3
30 - 34 879,849 90.6 9.4
35 - 39 1,122,000 89.0 11.0
40 - 44 1,268,334 86.4 13.6
45 - 49 1,339,713 82.3 17.7
50 - 54 1,337,513 78.8 21.2
55 - 59 1,277,678 73.8 26.2
60 - 64 1,093,599 67.1 32.9
65 - 69 850,928 62.7 37.3
70 - 74 560,207 56.5 43.5
75 - 79 338,428 51.6 48.4
80 - 84 195,527 48.4 51.6
85 - 89 100,681 44.6 55.4
90+ 37,811 40.8 59.2
3.12 Birth registration
In the 2019 ICS, information on the presence of birth certificate or if birth was registered was
collected from children aged 15 years and below. Out of the 14.9 million children covered in the
survey, 81.7 percent had a birth certificate while 4.1 percent had no copy of the birth certificate but
reported that the birth was registered. On the other hand, the birth of some 13.4 percent of children
aged 15 years and below was not registered. Birth registration varied between urban and rural areas.
About 91.6 percent in urban and 78.5 percent of children in rural areas reported to have a birth
certificate.
At the regional level, Kachin had the highest proportion (92.5%) of having a birth certificate, followed
by Kayah (91.2%). The least proportion was in Rakhine State (59.4%).

The Union Report 39
Table 3.9: Proportion of population aged 15 years and below by birth registration status,
No birth
State/Region Had a birth Not Don’t
certificate but Total Number
and Area certificate registered know
registered
UNION 81.7 4.1 13.4 0.8 100.0 14,887,403
Urban 91.6 2.2 5.5 0.7 100.0 3,633,857
Rural 78.5 4.8 15.9 0.8 100.0 11,253,546
Kachin 92.5 1.6 5.3 0.6 100.0 493,162
Kayah 91.2 2.5 5.3 1.0 100.0 109,850
Kayin 80.5 4.1 14.7 0.7 100.0 552,678
Chin 75.0 6.4 16.9 1.7 100.0 219,034
Sagaing 83.6 4.4 11.4 0.6 100.0 1,543,350
Tanintharyi 89.0 2.5 8.0 0.5 100.0 486,649
Bago 76.5 7.1 15.9 0.5 100.0 1,360,183
Magway 80.5 9.6 9.4 0.5 100.0 1,061,307
Mandalay 87.5 4.0 7.9 0.6 100.0 1,628,595
Mon 88.4 2.3 8.6 0.7 100.0 578,667
Rakhine 59.4 5.4 33.3 1.9 100.0 1,026,585
Yangon 89.9 2.1 7.6 0.4 100.0 1,876,443
Shan 82.1 2.3 14.3 1.3 100.0 1,735,285
Ayeyawady 76.8 2.7 19.6 0.9 100.0 1,871,403
Nay Pyi Taw 82.4 7.4 9.6 0.6 100.0 344,214
3.13 Having a bank account
Results from 2019 ICS show that the majority of people in Myanmar did not have a bank account. Only
13 percent of total population aged 18 years and over reported having a bank account. Comparing the
urban to rural distribution, about 25 percent of urban population had reported having a bank account
while it was only about 8 percent for rural areas (Table 3.10).
Wide regional variation of having a bank account was observed with the lowest in Kayin State at 5.8
percent and the highest in Yangon Region at 27.2 percent.

40
The Union Report
Table 3.10: Proportion of population aged 18 years and over by having a bank account,
State/Region Had a bank No bank

Don’t know Total Number
and Area account account
UNION 13.0 86.5 0.5 100.0 34,355,023
Urban 25.2 74.1 0.7 100.0 10,584,929
Rural 7.6 92.0 0.4 100.0 23,770,093
Kachin 11.6 87.7 0.7 100.0 1,031,400
Kayah 12.9 86.1 1.0 100.0 188,955
Kayin 5.8 94.0 0.2 100.0 933,133
Chin 10.4 87.8 1.8 100.0 268,918
Sagaing 7.1 92.6 0.3 100.0 3,571,142
Tanintharyi 10.8 88.7 0.5 100.0 875,916
Bago 12.6 87.2 0.2 100.0 3,271,917
Magway 10.7 89.0 0.3 100.0 2,610,791
Mandalay 13.2 86.3 0.5 100.0 4,323,945
Mon 10.4 89.2 0.4 100.0 1,226,892
Rakhine 8.7 91.1 0.2 100.0 2,062,650
Yangon 27.2 72.2 0.6 100.0 5,694,758
Shan 11.4 87.7 0.9 100.0 3,449,761
Ayeyarwady 7.3 92.3 0.4 100.0 4,046,704
Nay Pyi Taw 12.1 87.6 0.3 100.0 798,142
3.14 Reasons for not having a bank account
According to the information from the 2019 ICS, the main reason for not having a bank account was
“don’t have enough money to have a bank account” 53.2 percent. About 46.6 percent reported that
they did not need or want a bank account.
The regional pattern conformed more or less to that of the national except for Rakhine and Shan States
where the main reason was “do not need/want a bank account” (Table 3.11).

The Union Report 41
Table 3.11: Proportion of population aged 18 years and over by the reason for not having a bank
account, State/Region, urban and rural areas
Don’t
Don’t The
understand
Don’t have No bank Don’t fees
the
State/ need/ enough has Don’t like and
procedure
Region and want money convenient trust dealing service Other Number
for
Area a bank to have hours or bank with charges
opening a
account a bank location bank are too
bank
account high
account
UNION 46.6 53.2 3.6 0.3 0.7 5.2 0.4 0.1 34,355,023
Urban 43.3 39.7 1.1 0.3 0.6 3.4 0.2 0.2 10,584,929
Rural 48.1 59.3 4.7 0.3 0.7 6.0 0.5 * 23,770,093
Kachin 49.8 58.1 5.3 0.3 0.3 6.8 0.1 * 1,031,400
Kayah 38.9 58.0 2.4 0.1 * 3.4 0.1 0.1 188,955
Kayin 48.6 60.5 10.9 0.6 1.2 5.5 0.1 * 933,133
Chin 21.9 74.7 4.9 * 0.1 2.8 0.2 0.1 268,918
Sagaing 51.3 53.5 3.4 0.3 0.6 5.0 0.1 * 3,571,142
Tanintharyi 47.3 52.0 3.8 0.4 0.6 3.1 0.5 * 875,916
Bago 44.1 57.7 3.4 0.4 0.7 5.1 1.1 * 3,271,917
Magway 47.9 54.6 3.0 0.2 1.1 3.9 0.8 * 2,610,791
Mandalay 47.1 53.3 2.1 0.4 0.7 3.1 0.1 0.1 4,323,945
Mon 52.2 54.8 4.1 0.2 0.2 4.6 0.1 0.1 1,226,892
Rakhine 61.2 44.2 6.1 0.1 1.3 9.8 0.7 * 2,062,650
Yangon 38.2 43.8 0.8 0.2 0.4 3.5 0.2 0.3 5,694,758
Shan 47.4 43.0 5.5 0.2 0.4 9.5 0.2 0.1 3,449,761
Ayeyawady 47.3 68.1 4.6 0.3 0.5 6.3 0.7 * 4,046,704
Nay Pyi Taw 38.4 64.4 3.2 0.1 1.9 0.6 0.2 * 798,142

42
The Union Report
Chapter 4: Education
Chapter
Education
4
In the 2019 Inter-censal Survey (ICS), education information was collected from all persons aged
3 years and over which includes literacy, numeracy, highest level of education completed, current
school attendance, and reasons for stopping schooling. These data can provide updates on some
indicators for Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4) on 2030 Agenda and Myanmar Sustainable
Development Plan (MSDP) (2018-2030).
4.1 Literacy and Numeracy
Specific information on literacy and numeracy was collected from all persons aged 5 years and over.
However, the analysis in this report focuses only on those aged 15 years and over.
Literacy is defined as the ability to read and write with understanding in any language. Numeracy is
defined as the ability to do simple addition and subtraction without using a calculator. According to the
survey, at the national level, the literacy rate was 89.1 percent while numeracy rate was 89.5 percent.
Out of 15 states and regions, literacy rates of eight regions were above the national level as shown
in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1. The regions with the highest literacy and numeracy rates were Yangon,
Mandalay and Nay Pyi Taw; all reporting more than 92 percent. Among the seven states that had
literacy rates below the national level, the lowest rates were found in Kayin (70.9%) and Shan State
(72.6%). The numeracy rate followed a similar pattern with the lowest rates observed in Kayin State
(72.6%) and Shan State (80.7%).
Table 4.1: Literacy and Numeracy rates of population aged 15 years and over by sex and State/Region
Total population Literacy rate Numeracy rate

State/Region Both Both Both
Male Female Male Female Male Female
sexes sexes sexes
UNION 37,255,566 17,041,262 20,214,304 89.1 92.4 86.3 89.5 92.4 87.1
Kachin 1,122,330 549,591 572,739 88.5 90.7 86.3 89.0 91.0 87.0
Kayah 207,400 100,327 107,073 83.1 87.8 78.8 90.6 93.5 87.9
Kayin 1,044,075 488,372 555,703 70.9 73.6 68.5 72.6 75.0 70.5
Chin 301,476 136,341 165,135 81.3 88.3 75.5 81.9 89.3 75.8
Sagaing 3,866,874 1,727,901 2,138,973 91.9 95.2 89.2 91.9 94.8 89.6
Tanintharyi 970,046 463,624 506,422 90.9 92.1 89.8 88.3 89.3 87.3
Bago 3,552,951 1,617,098 1,935,853 91.6 94.9 88.9 89.6 92.8 86.9
Magway 2,816,390 1,223,723 1,592,667 90.5 95.6 86.7 90.7 94.4 87.8
Mandalay 4,649,600 2,077,371 2,572,229 92.9 96.8 89.8 92.5 96.0 89.7

The Union Report 45
Total population Literacy rate Numeracy rate
State/Region Both Both Both
sexes sexes sexes
Mon 1,354,317 602,197 752,120 80.5 83.8 77.9 82.4 85.0 80.4
Rakhine 2,271,569 1,023,178 1,248,391 88.6 95.0 83.3 89.0 94.9 84.1
Yangon 6,081,922 2,765,085 3,316,837 95.4 97.1 94.0 95.0 96.7 93.6
Shan 3,759,869 1,791,697 1,968,172 72.6 77.5 68.1 80.7 84.2 77.6
Ayeyawady 4,395,195 2,074,153 2,321,042 91.9 94.2 89.9 90.1 92.3 88.1
Nay Pyi Taw 861,552 400,604 460,948 92.5 96.4 89.1 92.3 95.6 89.3
Figure 4.1: Literacy and Numeracy rates by State/Region
Literacy rate Numeracy rate
4.2 School attendance
Table 4.2 shows the school attendance for population aged 5 years and over by State/Region. At the
national level, 9 in 10 people aged 5 years and over reported they had attended pre-school or at least
grade school. The proportion of males (93.5%) was slightly higher than that of females (90.6%). In all
states and regions, school attendance rates for males were higher than that of females.

46
The Union Report
Table 4.2: Population aged 5 years and over by school attendance, sex and State/Region
Total population Ever attended (%) Never attended (%)

Age group Both Both
Both sexes Male Female Male Female Male Female
sexes sexes
UNION 46,463,288 21,599,086 24,864,202 91.9 93.5 90.6 8.1 6.5 9.4
Kachin 1,421,334 689,768 731,566 93.6 95.2 92.2 6.4 4.8 7.8
Kayah 274,457 133,603 140,854 90.3 93.1 87.6 9.7 6.9 12.4
Kayin 1,394,544 662,338 732,206 80.5 80.9 80.1 19.5 19.1 19.9
Chin 434,771 203,148 231,623 89.5 94.3 85.3 10.5 5.7 14.7
Sagaing 4,825,520 2,201,129 2,624,391 92.8 94.2 91.5 7.2 5.8 8.5
Tanintharyi 1,274,648 614,117 660,531 95.5 95.5 95.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Bago 4,405,382 2,041,553 2,363,829 94.4 96.1 92.9 5.6 3.9 7.1
Magway 3,482,646 1,552,684 1,929,962 91.2 93.5 89.3 8.8 6.5 10.7
Mandalay 5,651,056 2,571,124 3,079,932 94.3 96.6 92.5 5.7 3.4 7.5
Mon 1,725,612 786,566 939,046 90.6 92.0 89.4 9.4 8.0 10.6
Rakhine 2,914,274 1,344,292 1,569,982 93.4 95.6 91.6 6.6 4.4 8.4
Yangon 7,210,589 3,329,940 3,880,649 96.8 97.6 96.1 3.2 2.4 3.9
Shan 4,814,943 2,308,861 2,506,082 77.0 79.3 74.9 23.0 20.7 25.1
Ayeyawady 5,561,255 2,655,437 2,905,818 95.0 95.9 94.2 5.0 4.1 5.8
Nay Pyi Taw 1,072,257 504,526 567,731 94.1 96.8 91.7 5.9 3.2 8.3
Figure 4.2 indicates that the gap between urban and rural areas in terms of school attendance is quite
wide. Only about 5 out of 100 people aged 5 years and over in urban areas reported that they had
never attended school while it was about 9 out of 100 people in rural areas. Both males and females
had a similar pattern for this indicator.
Figure 4.2: School attendance by urban and rural areas

The Union Report 47
The absolute numbers and proportion of population aged 3 years and over by school attendance are
presented in Table 4.3. The data from the table shows that among children between age 10 and 14,
98 percent reported they had attended school. The results also revealed that school attendance has
improved over time. About 83 percent of those aged 50 years and over reported they had been to
school while younger groups (between aged 5 and 49) had higher proportions (all above 90%). The
proportion of population who had never been to school increased with age. Only 1.6 percent of the
population aged 10-14 had never been to school but it increased to 16.8 percent for population aged
50 years and over.
Table 4.3: Population aged 3 years and over by school attendance and sex
Total population Ever attended (%) Never attended (%)

Age
group Both Both
sexes sexes
3-4 1,978,072 983,874 994,198 20.3 19.4 21.1 79.7 80.6 78.9
5-9 4,479,179 2,211,422 2,267,757 92.3 91.8 92.7 7.7 8.2 7.3
10 - 14 4,728,542 2,346,403 2,382,139 98.4 98.3 98.6 1.6 1.7 1.4
15 - 19 4,722,780 2,337,488 2,385,292 97.4 97.1 97.7 2.6 2.9 2.3
20 - 24 4,322,313 2,078,068 2,244,245 96.2 96.1 96.3 3.8 3.9 3.7
25 - 29 3,998,053 1,857,872 2,140,181 94.7 94.6 94.8 5.3 5.4 5.2
30 - 34 3,849,013 1,777,178 2,071,835 93.7 94.2 93.4 6.3 5.8 6.6
35 - 39 3,643,948 1,688,816 1,955,132 92.4 93.3 91.7 7.6 6.7 8.3
40 - 44 3,341,665 1,534,783 1,806,882 91.3 92.6 90.2 8.7 7.4 9.8
45 - 49 3,079,287 1,391,862 1,687,425 90.6 92.4 89.2 9.4 7.6 10.8
50+ 10,298,507 4,375,193 5,923,314 83.2 88.6 79.2 16.8 11.4 20.8
4.3 Currently attending school by level of education
The survey result shows that, only 18 percent of children aged 3-4 years were attending nursery/
pre-school at the time of the survey. Nine out of 10 children aged 5-9 years were at primary school
and seven out of 10 children aged 10-15 years were currently attending secondary school. It clearly
shows that many children dropped out of school after they have attained the primary education.
Gender differences were small in terms of current school attendance for all age groups mentioned
above (Table 4.4).

48
The Union Report
Table 4.4: Population aged 3 - 29 by current school attendance
Total population Current school attendance (%)

Level of education/Age
Both sexes Male Female Both sexes Male Female
Children of nursery age at 1,978,073 983,875 994,198 18.1 17.9 18.4
nursery/pre-school age (3-4)
Children of primary age at 4,479,179 2,211,422 2,267,757 91.7 92.9 90.4

primary school age (5-9)
Children of secondary age at 5,726,901 2,848,734 2,878,167 72.9 72.5 73.2

secondary school age (10-15)
Post-secondary age group at 12,044,782 5,771,094 6,273,688 10.5 9.6 11.4

(16-29)
Figure 4.3 shows the proportion of males and females currently attending school by age. Generally,
there was a small gender difference in all ages. The proportions of school attendance for both boys
and girls were high between ages 6 and 11 years (more than 95%). However, starting from the age of
12, the proportions started to decline slowly with a sharp decline starting from age 14 when more and
more students dropped out of school. As a result, by the age of 18, only 3 out of 10 were attending
school. Sex disparity was noticeable between the ages of 14 and 21, with the girls having higher atten-
dance rates than boys.
Figure 4.3: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over by current school attendance,
sex and age
The population currently attending school by special age groups and sex is presented in Table 4.5.
The purpose of this table is to show some of the indicators of MSDP-NIF. For instance, indicators
for children aged 3 to 8 years are for NIF indicator 4.3.11, “access to early childhood care and
The Union Report 49
development services”. Out of 5.5 million children aged 3 to 8 years, about 65 percent were currently
attending school or pre-school. Sex difference for this indicator was minimal; 64 percent for boys and
66 percent for girls.
Table 4.5: Population aged 3 years and over by current school attendance, special age
groups and sex
Total population Current school attendance (%)

Age
group Both sexes Male Female Both sexes Male Female
3-8 5,500,468 2,733,359 2,767,109 64.8 64.1 65.5

6-9 3,610,160 1,771,157 1,839,003 96.9 96.4 97.3
10-13 3,825,246 1,892,816 1,932,430 93.4 93.0 93.9
14-15 1,901,658 955,921 945,737 76.0 72.8 79.2
15-24 9,045,093 4,415,556 4,629,537 31.6 29.2 33.9
25+ 28,210,473 12,625,704 15,584,769 0.3 0.4 0.3
4.4 Highest level of education completed
Table 4.6 shows that almost half (47%) of the population aged 25 years and over had completed only
primary level of education while 22 percent for middle school level and 13 percent for high school
level. Only 11 out of 100 persons reported they had graduated or completed some years in the
university.
Table 4.6: Population aged 25 years and over by highest level of education completed and sex
Total population Percentage

Level of education
Both sexes Male Female Both sexes Male Female
Total population 25,169,127 11,589,504 13,579,623 100.0 100.0 100.0
Not completed 961,554 448,681 512,873 3.8 3.9 3.8
Pre-primary/Primary 11,833,141 4,902,655 6,930,486 47.0 42.3 51.0
Middle school 5,468,910 2,918,100 2,550,810 21.7 25.2 18.8
High school 3,348,926 1,761,503 1,587,423 13.3 15.2 11.7
GTHS 42,678 26,708 15,970 0.2 0.2 0.1
TVET 50,947 38,157 12,790 0.2 0.3 0.1
University 2,867,290 1,119,239 1,748,051 11.4 9.7 12.9
Other 595,681 374,461 221,220 2.4 3.2 1.6

50
The Union Report
4.5 Main reasons for stopping schooling
Information on the main reasons for stopping school, presented in Figure 4.4, was based on the
question why a person stopped schooling. The figure shows that 3 out of 10 people reported that they
dropped out of school to help the family while 2 out of 10 people responded that they could not afford
schooling. About 19 percent of the population aged 3 to 50 years reported they stopped schooling
because they already completed the desired level of education.
Figure 4.4: Population aged 3 to 50 years who stopped schooling by main reasons for stopping

The Union Report 51
Chapter 5: Labour Force Participation Chapter
Labour Force Participation 5
Economic activity is crucial to all societies. A society’s fundamental characteristics are how individuals
organize themselves through economic activity and the processes of stratification that are associated
with labour division. Analysis in this chapter focuses on various aspects of the economic activity status
of the population based on information from 2019 ICS which collected the labour force information
from persons aged 5 years and over. However, the analysis in this chapter focused only on the
population aged 15 years and over.
The reference period on labour force used in the 2019 ICS was seven days preceding the survey
enumeration date. The economically active or labour force refers to people who are either working
or unemployed. A person was regarded as having worked or in employment if he/she had engaged in
any activity even for only one hour to produce goods or provide services for pay or profit during the
reference period. Persons in unemployment are defined as all those who were not in employment,
carried out activities to seek employment during the reference period and were currently available to
take up a job when it becomes available.
5.1 Economically active population or labour force
It is possible to measure the extent of a population’s participation in the labour force by activity rates.
An activity rate is defined as the number of economically active persons in a population of 15 years and
over per hundred persons in that particular population.
According to the survey, 63.2 percent of the population aged 15 years and over were economically
active or in the labour force. Gender difference in labour force participation was quite large. About 76
percent of the male population aged 15 years and over were economically active compared to only 53
percent of their counterparts.
People in rural areas were more economically active than those in urban areas; with the participation
rates of 65.1 percent and 58.9 percent, respectively. There was wide regional variation in the country
with the highest labour force participation rates in Kayah State (70.7%) and Shan State (70.0%) while
the lowest ones were in Mon State (55.4%) and Kayin State (52.8%).
The unemployment rate among persons aged 15 years and over was 2.7 percent at the national level.
The difference in the unemployment rates between urban (2.6%) and rural (2.7%) areas was minimal,
though it was quite large among states and regions. Rakhine State, with an unemployment rate close
to 20 percent, was the highest while the lowest rates were observed in Kayah State and Magway
Region with only about 1 percent each.

The Union Report 55
The employment to population ratio is defined as the proportion of a country’s working-age
population that is employed. The employment to population ratio provides information on the ability
of an economy to provide employment for those who want to work. The ratio typically falls between
50 and 75 percent with a high ratio indicating that a large proportion of the working-age population
is employed. A low ratio indicates that a large share of the population is not involved directly in
market-related activities.
According to 2019 ICS, the employment to population ratio was 61.5 percent. This means among
persons who were in the working-age group (15+), 61.5 percent were gainfully employed. The
remaining 38.5 percent were either unemployed or were out of the labour force.
Table 5.1: Labour force participation rate, unemployment rate and employment to population
ratio by sex, State/Region and urban and rural areas
Labour force participation Unemployment rate Employment to

State/Region rate (15+) (15+) Population Ratio (15+)
and Area Both Both Both
sexes sexes sexes
UNION 63.2 75.7 52.7 2.7 2.1 3.4 61.5 74.1 50.9
Urban 58.9 70.8 49.1 2.6 2.4 2.8 57.3 69.0 47.7
Rural 65.1 77.8 54.2 2.7 1.9 3.6 63.3 76.3 52.3
Kachin 60.6 72.6 49.0 1.7 1.3 2.3 59.5 71.7 47.9
Kayah 70.7 81.0 61.0 0.7 0.7 0.6 70.2 80.4 60.7
Kayin 52.8 66.7 40.5 2.7 2.2 3.4 51.3 65.2 39.2
Chin 60.1 66.2 55.2 3.1 3.1 3.1 58.3 64.1 53.5
Sagaing 65.7 75.8 57.5 1.3 1.2 1.4 64.9 74.9 56.7
Tanintharyi 58.3 76.3 41.8 1.3 1.1 1.7 57.6 75.5 41.1
Bago 59.4 75.4 46.0 1.5 1.2 1.9 58.5 74.5 45.2
Magway 66.1 76.1 58.4 1.0 1.1 1.0 65.4 75.3 57.8
Mandalay 68.9 79.6 60.3 1.3 1.0 1.7 68.0 78.8 59.3
Mon 55.4 71.8 42.3 2.1 1.5 2.9 54.3 70.7 41.1
Rakhine 56.6 68.4 47.0 19.8 12.6 28.5 45.4 59.8 33.6
Yangon 61.6 74.4 51.0 2.8 2.6 3.1 59.9 72.4 49.4
Shan 70.0 78.4 62.3 1.1 1.1 1.2 69.2 77.5 61.6
Ayeyawady 61.9 78.3 47.3 1.6 1.2 2.1 60.9 77.3 46.3
Nay Pyi Taw 65.1 77.8 54.0 2.0 1.7 2.5 63.8 76.5 52.7
The distribution of labour force participation rate by sex and age in Figure 5.1 illustrates that the
proportions of males in the labour force were much higher than that of females for all age groups. The
rates for both men and women were almost linear/flat from ages 25 to 49 years and started to decline
after age 49. The rates fell rapidly after the age of 60 years for both men and women.

56
The Union Report
Figure 5.1: Labour force participation rate of the population aged 15 years and over by age group
and sex
Figure 5.2 shows that the employment to population ratio was much higher for males (74.1%) than
that of females (50.9%). This pattern was more or less similar to that of the labour force participation
rate as shown in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.2: Employment to population ratio of the population aged 15 years and over by age group
and sex

The Union Report 57
5.2 Status in employment
Status in employment refers to the type of explicit or implicit contract of employment with other
persons or organizations that the employed person has in his or her job.2 This indicator provides
information on the distribution of the workforce according to those: (a) working for wages or salaries;
(b) running their own enterprises, with or without hired labour; or (c) working without pay within the
family/household business.3
Data presented in Table 5.2 shows that among employed persons aged 15 years and over, almost half
(45%) were own account workers, and 27.7 percent were employees who worked in the private sector.
About 4 percent reported they were employees of the Government. It is worth noting that about 13
percent were working without any pay in a household or family business.
Table 5.2: Employed population aged 15 years and over by status of employment
Employment status Percentage

Total 100.0
Employee (Government) 4.3
Employee (Private) 27.7
Paid apprentice/ intern 4.2
Worked as an employer (with regular employees) 5.6
Own account worker (without regular employees) 45.1
Helping without pay in a household/ family business 13.1
Others 0.1
Analysis by sex shows that both for male and female, own account worker forms the biggest group.
The second largest group were employees in private organization comprising 30.5 percent and 24.2
percent for male and female, respectively. A large group of people in Myanmar were economically
active but helping without pay in a household or family business (9.7% for male and 17.2% for female).
2Principles and Recommendations for Population and Housing Censuses, Revision 3, United Nations, 2018,
Para 4.339, Page 233
3Employment by status in employment, ILO
58
The Union Report
Figure 5.3: Population aged 15 years and over by status of employment and sex
5.3 Occupation
Occupation refers to the type of work done in a job by the person employed, irrespective of the
industry or the status in employment in which the person’s job should be classified. Type of work is
considered in terms of the main tasks and duties performed in the job.4
Table 5.3 illustrates that “Skilled Agricultural Forestry and Fishery Workers” is the largest occupational
category in Myanmar. Among those employed persons aged 15 years and over, about 41 percent were
employed in that category. “Service and Sales Workers” was the second-largest occupational group
(18.4%) followed by “Craft and Related Trade Workers” (13.7%) and Elementary Occupations (11.6%).
The rest of the groups were relatively small and made up only about 15 percent of all persons employed.
4Principles and Recommendation for Population and Housing Censuses, Revision 3, United Nations, 2018, Para
4.352, Page 235
The Union Report 59
Table 5.3: Main occupational category of employed persons aged 15 years and over by sex
Percentage Sex
Major occupational category Number
Both sexes Male Female Ratio
Total 22,911,215 100.0 100.0 100.0 122.8

Managers 108,197 0.5 0.5 0.4 165.0
Professionals 727,723 3.2 1.7 5.0 40.3
Technicians and Associate 504,211 2.2 2.3 2.1 133.8
Professionals
Clerical Support Workers 860,396 3.8 3.1 4.5 85.9
Services and Sales Workers 4,220,262 18.4 12.0 26.3 56.2
Skilled Agricultural Forestry and 9,448,823 41.2 43.9 38.1 141.5
Fishery Workers
Craft and Related Trades Workers 3,141,403 13.7 14.9 12.2 149.4
Plant and Machine Operators and 1,227,562 5.3 8.8 1.1 957.8
Assemblers
Elementary Occupations 2,649,800 11.6 12.6 10.3 151.0
Other 22,838 0.1 0.2 * 2596.3
Sex ratio by major occupational categories in Table 5.3 and Figure 5.4 shows that males dominated in
six occupational categories. “Plant and Machine Operators and Assemblers” is the most male-dominated
profession with 958 males per 100 females working in that field. Women dominated in three occupational
categories such as “Services and Sales Workers”, “Clerical Support Workers” and “Professional”.

60
The Union Report
Figure 5.4: Sex ratios for employed persons aged 15 years and over by major occupational category
5.4 Industry
Industry (branch of economic activity) refers to the kind of production or activity of the establishment
or similar unit in which the job(s) of the employed or unemployed person was located during the
time reference period established for data collection on economic characteristics.5 For purposes of
international comparison, information on industry was compiled according to the fourth edition of
International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC).
Among those employed persons aged 15 years and over, nearly half (45.3%) were working in the
“Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing” industry. It was followed by “Wholesale and retail trade; repair of
motor vehicles and motorcycles“ (15.7%) and “Manufacturing” (9.5%).
The main industry in which both men and women worked was “Agriculture, forestry and fishing”, with
47.9 percent and 42.0 percent, respectively. “Wholesale and retail trade: repair of motor vehicles
and motorcycle” industry was the second most popular industry for men (about 11%) followed by
“Construction” (about 9%). The second and the third most common industries for females were
“Wholesale, retail trade and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles” (20.9%) and “Manufacturing”
(13.4%) which was twice higher than that of males (6.3%).
5Principles and Recommendations for Population and Housing Censuses, Revision 3, United Nations, 2018,
Para 4.356, Page 235
The Union Report 61
Table 5.4: Proportion of employed persons aged 15 years and over by major industrial category by sex
Both
Major industrial cotegory Male Female
sexes
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
Agriculture, forestry and fishing 45.3 47.9 42.0
Mining and quarrying 0.6 1.0 0.2
Manufacturing 9.5 6.3 13.4
Electricity gas steam and air conditioning supply 0.2 0.3 *
Water supply; sewerage waste management and 0.1 0.2 0.1
remediation activities
Construction 5.3 8.9 1.0
Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and 15.7 11.4 20.9
motorcycles
Transportation and storage 4.5 7.9 0.3
Accommodation and food service activities 4.0 2.7 5.6
Information and communication 0.3 0.3 0.3
Financial and insurance activities 0.3 0.3 0.5
Real estate activities * * *
Professional scientific and technical activities 0.1 0.1 0.1
Administrative and support service activities 3.0 3.0 3.1
Public administration and defense; compulsory social security 0.3 0.5 0.1
Education 2.6 1.0 4.5
Human health and social work activities 0.8 0.5 1.1
Arts entertainment and recreation 0.4 0.4 0.3
Other service activities 5.1 5.6 4.5
Activities of households as employers; undifferentiated 1.7 1.6 1.7
goods and services
Activities of extraterritorial organizations and bodies * * *
Not stated 0.2 0.1 0.3

62
The Union Report
Chapter 6: Fertility and Mortality Chapter
Fertility and Mortality 6
In the 2019 ICS, data on births and deaths of children were collected from ever-married women aged
10 years and over. These were used to estimate fertility levels, trends, and differentials according to
selected background characteristics. This was also used to estimate crude death rate, early age
mortality and life expectancy at birth.
6.1 Crude birth rate (CBR)
Crude birth rate (CBR) indicates the number of live births per 1,000 population in a given year. It is
obtained by dividing the number of live births born to ever-married women aged 10 years and over
in the last 12 months by the total population, multiplied by 1,000. Using this definition, the CBR for
Myanmar was 16.6 births per 1,000 population. It was higher in rural areas (17.2) than in urban areas
(15.0). Regional variation exists with relatively highest CBR observed in Chin State (26.2), Kayah State
(20.6) and Kachin State (20.2), and lowest in Tanintharyi Region (14.4) and Magway Region (14.6).
Figure 6.1: Crude birth rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS
Crude birth rate
Figure 6.1 that illustrates the comparison of regional CBR between 2014 Census and 2019 ICS,
indicates that CBR has decreased in all states and regions except in Mandalay Region where it
increased by 0.9 percentage point.
The Union Report 65
6.2 General fertility rate (GFR)
General Fertility Rate (GFR), a refined measure of fertility, is defined as the number of live births per
1,000 women aged 15-49 in a given year. As shown in Figure 6.2, the GFR for Myanmar is 59.4 births
per 1,000 women of reproductive ages. The GFRs at regional level varied with a range of 50.0 for
Yangon Region and 109.5 for Chin State.
Figure 6.2: General fertility rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas
6.3 Age-specific fertility rate (ASFR)
The age-specific fertility rate measures the annual number of live births to women of a specified age or
age group per 1,000 women in that age group. An age-specific fertility rate is generally computed as a
ratio. The numerator is the number of live births to women in a particular age group during a period of
time, and the denominator is an estimate of the number of person-years lived by women in that same
age group during the same period of time. It is expressed as births per 1,000 women.6
In 2019, ASFR in Myanmar increased slowly from age group 15-19 years, reached its peak at 25-29
years, and then started to decline sharply with the lowest at 45-49 years. This pattern is true for both
urban and rural areas, although, as expected, the ASFRs were higher in rural areas compared to urban
areas. (Figure 6.3)
6Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations; accessed on 4 July 2020
https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/dataset/fertility/age-fertility.asp
66
The Union Report
Figure 6.3: Age-specific fertility rate by urban and rural areas
Age-specific fertility rate
As shown in Figure 6.4, Myanmar experienced a fertility decline between 2014 and 2019 where the
ASFRs of women of all age groups were lower in 2019. It also indicates that, for both 2014 and 2019,
fertility was highest in women aged 25-29 and 30-34. It clearly shows that Myanmar women rarely give
birth at young ages and also after age 35.
Figure 6.4: Age-specific fertility rate, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS
Age-specific fertility rate

The Union Report 67
6.4 Total fertility rate (TFR)
The total fertility rate, in simple terms, refers to the total number of children born or likely to be born
to a woman in her lifetime if she were subject to the prevailing rate of age-specific fertility in the
population.
TFR from 2019 ICS also supported the fact that fertility of Myanmar has declined during the period
2014 and 2019. As shown in Figure 6.5 and Table 6.1, TFR at the national level has decreased from
a level of 2.3 to 2.0. It can also be seen that the decline was more pronounced in rural than in urban
areas. Regional differential of TFR for 2019 followed a more or less similar pattern of 2014. Chin State
still had the highest TFR of 3.9 while the lowest (1.6) was still for Yangon Region.
Figure 6.5: Total fertility rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS
Total fertility rate
Table 6.1: Crude birth rate, age-specific and total fertility rates by age of women, urban and rural
areas, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS
2014 2019
Age of women
15-19 0.0218 0.0152 0.0246 0.0203 0.0171 0.0215
20-24 0.0946 0.0682 0.1070 0.0881 0.0693 0.0970
25-29 0.1185 0.0958 0.1286 0.1012 0.0868 0.1083
30-34 0.1059 0.0910 0.1125 0.0980 0.0799 0.1060
35-39 0.0745 0.0593 0.0812 0.0640 0.0587 0.0662
40-44 0.0346 0.0231 0.0399 0.0255 0.0189 0.0283

68
The Union Report
2014 2019
Age of women
45-49 0.0081 0.0050 0.0096 0.0044 0.0022 0.0054
TFR 2.3 1.8 2.5 2.0 1.7 2.2
CBR 18.8 15.8 20.1 16.6 15.0 17.2
6.5 Total marital fertility rate (TMFR)
Total marital fertility is defined as five times the sum of the age-specific marital fertility rates. It is
interpreted as the mean number of children that a woman would eventually have if she got married
at age 15, survived to the end of the childbearing period, and experienced the observed age-specific
marital fertility rates.
The total marital fertility rate at the national level was 3.9. The rates in urban and rural areas were,
respectively, 3.7 and 4.0 children per woman. The highest TMFR (6.4 children per woman) was
observed in Chin State while the lowest rates (3.3 children per woman) were in Bago Region, Yangon
Region and Ayeyawady Region (Figure 6.6).
Figure 6.6: Total marital fertility rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas
UNION
6.6 Age at first marriage
This indicator can provide information on current status at which age young women are entering into
marriage and consensual unions. Like other Asian countries, Myanmar has also been experiencing a
The Union Report 69
transition of the marriage pattern during the last decades. Delayed marriage of both men and women
and permanent celibacy, particularly by women, are the main characteristics of the marriage transition
in Myanmar.7
The 2019 ICS included a question for ever-married women aged 10 years and over on what age they
get married for the first time. As shown in Figure 6.7, the median age at first marriage of Myanmar
women was 21.2 years at the national level; it was higher in urban areas (22.3 years) than in rural
areas (20.9 years). At the regional level, median age at first marriage for women in Yangon Region was
the highest (22.2 years) compared to other states and regions. For example, women in Rakhine State
and Shan State marry relatively earlier with median age at first marriage of 20.3 years and 20.5 years,
respectively.
The comparison of median age at first marriage and age at first live birth is presented in Figure 6.7. The
results indicated that, on average, women in Myanmar have their first child about two years after they
get married. Surprisingly, the difference in years was higher for women in rural areas (2.0 years) than
women in urban areas (1.6 years). Slight regional variation was observed. Women in Nay Pyi Taw, on
average, delayed about 2.3 years to have their first child after they get married while women in Kachin
State and Tanintharyi delayed their first birth about 1.4 years.
Figure 6.7: Median age at first marriage and first live birth by State/Region, urban and rural areas
UNION
Child marriage refers to any formal marriage or informal union between a child under the age of 18
and an adult or another child. It is measured as the percentage of women 20–24 years old who were
first married or in union before they reached the age of 18 years. The United Nations Sustainable
Development Goal (Goal 5.3) call for global action to end this human rights violation by 2030.
⁷Detailed Analysis on Fertility and Reproductive Health Survey, Department of Population, 2001.
70
The Union Report
The prevalence of child marriage in Myanmar as presented in Table 6.2, shows that about 16 percent
of ever married women aged 20-24 were in a union before the age of 18. As expected, the proportion
was higher in rural areas (17.0%) than in urban areas (14.7%). Wide regional variation was observed in
terms of early marriage in Myanmar. The proportion of women aged 20-24 who were in a union before
the age of 18 ranges from a low of 9 percent for women in Kayah State to a high of 21 percent in
Nay Pyi Taw and 20 percent in Shan State.
Table 6.2: Proportion of ever married women aged 20-24 years by age at first marriage,
Age at first marriage

Total no. of ever married
State/Region and Area
women aged 20-24 years Under 18 18-24
UNION 1,624,902 16.4 83.6
Urban 414,401 14.7 85.3
Rural 1,210,501 17.0 83.0
Kachin 49,901 12.3 87.7
Kayah 9,600 9.1 90.9
Kayin 44,087 16.4 83.6
Chin 15,182 16.0 84.0
Sagaing 156,177 14.3 85.7
Tanintharyi 34,005 13.3 86.7
Bago 167,364 18.1 81.9
Magway 97,110 16.1 83.9
Mandalay 199,550 15.2 84.8
Mon 53,750 18.3 81.7
Rakhine 101,770 15.7 84.3
Yangon 244,135 15.7 84.3
Shan 210,875 20.0 80.0
Ayeyawady 201,017 16.0 84.0
Nay Pyi Taw 40,380 21.0 79.0
6.7 Age at first live birth (AFLB)
In this section, the age at first birth of women in Myanmar was examined. In 2019 ICS, information on
age of mother when she had her first live birth was asked for every ever married woman aged 10 years
and over. This information is useful for many family planning programs because of the negative

The Union Report 71
consequences of early birth on maternal and child health as well as women’s status and empowerment.8
The distribution of women by median age at first live birth is presented in Table 6.3. The median age
at first live birth was 23.1 years among women aged 15-49 indicating that childbearing in Myanmar is
relatively occurring at a later age. The median age at first live birth for urban women (24.0 years) was
slightly higher than that of rural women (22.9 years).
Table 6.3: Median age at first live birth by current age of women
Median age at first live birth (AFLB)

Current age group
Union Urban Rural
15-49 23.1 24.0 22.9
15-19 17.9 17.9 18.0
20-24 20.6 20.7 20.6
25-29 22.8 23.3 22.7
30-34 23.9 25.0 23.6
35-39 24.1 25.2 23.7
40-44 23.7 25.0 23.4
45-49 23.9 25.0 23.6
6.8 Singulate mean age at marriage (SMAM)
Singulate mean age at marriage is the average length of single life expressed in years among those who
marry before age 50.9
Results from the survey show that, on average, men get married about 2 to 3 years later than women.
The SMAM of urban areas (25.6) is higher than that of rural areas (24.4). It is true for both males and
females. The SMAM differential among states and regions was marginal; it varied with a range of 23.8
(Ayeyawady Region and Nay Pyi Taw) and 26.4 (Tanintharyi Region) (Table 6.4).
Table 6.4: Singulate mean age at marriage by sex, State/Region, urban and rural areas
State/Region and Area Both sexes Male Female

UNION 24.8 26.2 23.5
Urban 25.6 26.9 24.4
Rural 24.4 25.9 23.1
8Family Planning and Reproductive Health Database, Measure Evaluation, accessed on 19 August 2020
https://www.measureevaluation.org/prh/rh_indicators/family-planning/fertility/age-at-first-birth
9Methods and Materials of Demography, 2004
72
The Union Report
State/Region and Area Both sexes Male Female
Kachin 25.9 27.5 24.1
Kayah 25.2 27.0 23.4
Kayin 24.9 26.5 23.5
Chin 24.5 26.7 22.6
Sagaing 25.3 26.4 24.3
Tanintharyi 26.4 28.2 24.6
Bago 23.9 25.4 22.4
Magway 25.2 26.5 24.0
Mandalay 24.6 25.6 23.6
Mon 25.1 26.9 23.5
Rakhine 24.7 26.3 23.4
Yangon 25.5 26.7 24.5
Shan 24.3 26.0 22.6
Ayeyawady 23.8 25.2 22.4
Nay Pyi Taw 23.8 25.4 22.4
6.9 Adolescent fertility
Adolescent fertility rate is defined as the number of births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 19. Having
children this early in life exposes adolescent women to unnecessary risks. Their chance of dying is
twice as high as that of a woman who waited until her 20s to begin childbearing.10
The adolescent fertility rate for Myanmar during the year before 2019 was 20.3 births per thousand
women aged 15-19 years. The rate increased with the increase in age. The rate varied substantially
between urban and rural areas (17 and 22 per thousand, respectively). At the regional level, the rates
differed from a low of 13 births per thousand for Bago Region to a high of 43 births per thousand for
Chin State (Table 6.5).
Table 6.5: Age-specific fertility rates for women aged 15-19 by State/Region, urban and rural areas
State/Region Adolescent fertility rates

and Area 15-19 15 16 17 18 19
UNION 20.3 2.6 4.5 14.7 32.5 48.3
Urban 17.1 2.1 5.6 14.2 24.3 36.4
Rural 21.5 2.8 4.2 15.0 36.0 53.5
Kachin 20.2 3.8 7.8 16.3 19.9 50.8
Kayah 20.1 4.1 4.0 4.4 20.0 60.7
10
Trends in Adolescent Fertility- A mixed picture, Population Reference Bureau, 2013
https://www.prb.org/adolescent-fertility/#:~:text=The%20adolescent%20fertility%20rate%20is,her%2020s%20
to%20begin%20childbearing.
The Union Report 73
State/Region Adolescent fertility rates
and Area 15-19 15 16 17 18 19
Kayin 22.4 4.2 2.3 10.5 40.7 67.9
Chin 43.1 9.9 - 28.5 64.1 103.2
Sagaing 22.6 4.0 5.4 23.4 37.4 44.0
Tanintharyi 23.3 - 8.8 6.7 34.9 65.8
Bago 12.7 1.8 - 13.8 14.1 37.9
Magway 14.0 5.5 4.9 - 28.6 34.8
Mandalay 23.4 1.1 5.2 13.5 34.1 59.5
Mon 18.9 - 5.2 13.2 20.6 62.5
Rakhine 20.5 10.1 - 35.0 17.7 46.3
Yangon 13.6 1.8 - 5.5 31.7 25.3
Shan 34.6 1.9 14.3 25.1 62.9 68.6
Ayeyawady 14.3 - 5.9 10.6 26.8 33.0
Nay Pyi Taw 29.2 - - 7.6 37.5 99.8
6.10 Crude death rate (CDR)
The crude death rate is simply the number of deaths occurring during the year per 1,000 population
in a given period. In 2019, the crude death rate for Myanmar was estimated at 7.8 per thousand
population. The result from 2019 ICS shows that the CDR was higher in urban areas (9.3) than in rural
areas (7.2). The state and region CDR indicates that it was the highest in Rakhine State (10.5), followed
by Yangon Region (9.2); the lowest was in Chin State (5.8), followed by Kayah State (6.0) (Figure 6.8).
Figure 6.8: Crude death rate by State/Region, urban and rural areas

74
The Union Report
6.11 Early-age mortality
Table 6.6 shows the early-age, infant, child and under-five mortality rates based on the 2019 ICS. The
most recent estimate of under-five mortality twelve months before 2019 was 37.7 deaths per 1,000
live births; infant mortality at 30.9 and child mortality at 7.0.11
6.12 Life expectancy at birth
Life expectancy at birth shows the overall mortality level of a population. It summarizes the mortality
pattern that prevails across all age groups - children and adolescents, adults and the elderly. As shown
in Table 6.6, the life expectancy at birth was 69.4 years for both sexes. It is worth noting that life
expectancy at birth of females (73.3 years) is much higher than that of males (66.5 years). The life
expectancy at birth for people in rural areas was 68.5 years compared to 71.9 years for people in urban
areas.
Table 6.6: Early-age mortality rates and life expectancy at birth by sex, urban and rural areas
Early-age mortality rate

Life expectancy at
Area and Sex
birth
Infant Child Under five
UNION 30.9 7.0 37.7 69.4
Urban 22.3 4.1 26.3 71.9
Rural 34.1 8.2 42.1 68.5
Male 39.4 9.1 48.2 66.5
Female 21.1 4.4 25.4 73.3
11
To estimate early-age mortality indirectly, the West Model from the United Nations Life Tables
(MORTPAK Software) was used.
The Union Report 75
Chapter 7: Migration Chapter
Migration 7
Migration is one of the three factors besides fertility and mortality that determine the population
dynamic of an area or a country. This chapter aims to present information on both internal migration
and international migration.
7.1 Internal migration
Findings from some studies had shown that internal migration in Myanmar had increased during the
last few decades and the pattern of migration has changed over time.12 This section focuses on the
current level and pattern of internal migration in Myanmar using the data from the 2019 ICS.
7.1.1 Lifetime levels of internal migration
A person whose area of residence at the survey date differs from his area of birth is a lifetime
migrant. In this report, lifetime migrants are defined as those who moved from one township to
another at least once at any time in their life. According to 2019 ICS, nearly 17 percent of the
population in Myanmar were found to be lifetime migrants. Table 7.1 shows lifetime internal
migration rates (in-migration, out-migration and net migration) for movements between State/
Region, by sex.
In-migration rate is calculated as the number of in-migrants arriving at a destination per 1,000
population of that destination in a given year.13
The results show that Yangon Region, former capital and commercial hub of Myanmar, had the
highest level of in-migration rate of 265 per 1,000 population. Nay Pyi Taw, the new capital of
Myanmar, followed Yangon with in-migration rate of 145 per 1,000 population. The lowest
in-migration rate (14 per 1,000 population) was found in Ayeyawady, a delta region in the south-west
of the country.
Out-migration rate is calculated as the number of emigrants departing an area of origin per 1,000
population of that area of origin in a given year.
The findings from 2019 ICS indicate that the highest out-migration (159 per 1,000 population) was
observed in Ayeyawady Region. The second highest out-migration rate (138 per 1,000 population)
was seen in Chin State.
Net migration is defined as the difference between in-migration and out-migration. If the in-migration
exceeds out-migration, the term net in-migration is used, which takes a positive sign. Similarly, net
12
Level, Trends and Patterns of Internal Migration in Myanmar, Department of Population, 2013.
13
Population Handbook 5th Edition, Population Reference Bureau
The Union Report 79
out-migration is applied when out-migration exceeds in-migration and it takes a negative sign.14
As shown in Table 7.1 and Figure 7.1, out of 15 states and regions, only 2 regions (Yangon and Nay Pyi
Taw) and 4 states (Kayah, Kayin, Kachin and Shan) had gained population through migratiovn. Other
states and regions showed a negative net migration rate that is, lost population from migration.
Yangon Region had the highest level of positive net migration rate (234 per 1,000 population) followed
by Nay Pyi Taw with a net migration rate of 88 per 1,000 population. Ayeyawady Region had shown
the biggest negative net migration rate (-145 per 1,000 population) followed by Chin State (-120 per
1,000 population).
Table 7.1: Lifetime internal migration rates for movements between State/Region by sex
In-migration rate per Out-migration rate per Net migration rate per
State/Region 1,000 1,000 1,000
of current population population population
residence Both Both Both
sexes sexes sexes
Kachin 102.0 115.2 89.5 54.2 48.6 59.6 47.7 66.7 29.9
Kayah 116.8 113.8 119.7 65.0 66.7 63.4 51.8 47.2 56.2
Kayin 93.5 100.1 87.4 39.5 34.3 44.3 53.9 65.8 43.1
Chin 17.6 17.7 17.4 137.6 132.2 142.4 -120.0 -114.5 -125.0
Sagaing 31.3 32.4 30.4 69.0 72.9 65.8 -37.7 -40.4 -35.4
Tanintharyi 33.7 42.6 25.3 39.8 36.5 42.9 -6.1 6.0 -17.5
Bago 33.8 33.1 34.5 116.9 115.8 117.9 -83.1 -82.7 -83.4
Magway 19.2 20.0 18.5 116.2 128.3 106.4 -97.0 -108.3 -87.8
Mandalay 70.2 68.3 71.8 73.1 80.0 67.3 -2.9 -11.8 4.5
Mon 60.6 70.9 51.9 114.9 103.2 124.8 -54.2 -32.3 -72.8
Rakhine 14.4 19.3 10.2 54.8 51.5 57.7 -40.4 -32.2 -47.5
Yangon 265.1 253.1 275.5 31.2 32.0 30.6 233.8 221.1 244.9
Shan 58.2 62.9 53.8 35.3 31.2 39.2 22.8 31.6 14.7
Ayeyawady 14.4 15.0 13.8 159.4 154.2 164.2 -145.0 -139.1 -150.5
Nay Pyi Taw 145.0 144.7 145.4 57.3 62.2 52.9 87.7 82.5 92.4
14
Manual VI. Methods of Measuring Internal Migration, United Nations, 1970.
80
The Union Report
Figure 7.1: Lifetime internal net migration rates for movements between State/Region by sex
7.1.2 Migration streams
Strictly defined, a migration stream is the total number of moves made during a given migration
interval that have a common area of origin and a common area of destination. In practice, it is usually
a body of migrants having a common area of origin and a common area of destination.15
Findings from surveys and 2014 Census have consistently shown that the direction of flow of migration
in Myanmar is unusual when viewed from a regional or international perspective. For example, the
result from the 2014 Census indicated that almost half of lifetime migration (46.9%) occurred among
urban areas and less than 10 percent of movement was from rural to urban areas. Meanwhile,
migration from rural areas was directed primarily towards other rural areas.
Information from the 2019 ICS allows for updated information on the pattern of migration streams in
Myanmar. In this report, four types of migration streams (urban to urban, urban to rural, rural to urban
and rural to rural) are presented.
Information from Table 7.2 indicates that the pattern of migration streams in 2019 was consistent with
the findings from previous surveys and 2014 Census. Movement from urban to urban areas, though
decreased significantly between 2014 and 2019, was still the largest (37%) among the four types of
15
Manual VI. Methods of Measuring Internal Migration, United Nations, 1970

The Union Report 81
migration streams. Movement from rural to urban areas had increased slightly from 10 percent to 14
percent between 2014 and 2019; however, it was still the smallest.
Migration streams, when looking from the gender perspective, showed only a slight difference and
followed the national pattern.
Table 7.2: Migration stream for lifetime migrants by sex
Migration stream Total migrant

Sex
Urban-urban Urban-rural Rural-urban Rural-rural population
Both sexes 3,094,282 1,946,366 1,142,628 2,156,291 8,339,567

(Percent) 37.1 23.3 13.7 25.9 100.0
Male 1,393,094 877,650 551,083 1,015,431 3,837,258
(Percent) 36.3 22.9 14.4 26.5 100.0
Female 1,701,188 1,068,716 591,545 1,140,860 4,502,309
(Percent) 37.8 23.7 13.1 25.3 100.0
7.1.3 Main reasons for movement
People migrate for many different reasons. In 2019 ICS, reasons for movement were categorized into
eight such as employment, education, marriage, followed family, conflict, medical/health services,
natural disaster, and others.
Figure 7.2 shows that the main reason for migration, for both male and female, was to follow
family (36.6%), followed by employment (31.4%) and marriage (26.2%). However, the main reasons
for movement were different between male and female. For example, the most common reason for
male was for employment (39.7%) while it was to follow the family for female (40.1%). Marriage was
the third most common reason for male (21.6%) while second for female (30.1%).

82
The Union Report
Figure 7.2: Percentage of internal migrants by main reason of movement and sex
The main reason for movement within the country varied across states and regions. Seven
states and regions followed the national norm of having “to follow family” as the most common
reason. However, for Kachin, Kayin, Shan and Nay Pyi Taw, the main reason was for employment. It is
interesting to note that in Kachin State, situated in the far north of the country where job opportunities
in jade and gold mines attract people from all over the country, almost half of the migrants (44.6%)
reported they moved to work or to look for a job. Moreover, more than one third of the migrants in
Kayin, Nay Pyi Taw and Shan also reported that they moved for economic reasons. This may be the
perfect example of how better job opportunities can pull people to in-migrate. In Yangon Region, the
commercial hub of the country, 34 percent of migrants moved in for employment; however, about
42 percent have reported they moved in to follow their families. Another interesting finding was
that at least two in five migrants in Bago, Magway and Ayeyawady Regions indicated they moved
because of marriage (46.6%, 45.2% and 50.5%, respectively) (Table 7.3).

The Union Report 83
Table 7.3: Internal migrant population by main reasons of movement from prior residence and
State/Region
Reasons for movement (%)

State/Region
of current Employment/
Medical/
residence in search for Followed Natural
Education Marriage Conflict Health Other Total
employment/ family disaster
services
business
UNION 31.4 3.4 26.2 36.6 0.7 0.3 0.8 0.6 100.0
Kachin 44.6 5.0 20.8 26.5 2.4 0.1 0.4 0.2 100.0
Kayah 32.6 5.2 23.3 36.4 1.7 0.6 0.2 * 100.0
Kayin 38.0 2.6 18.3 37.1 3.3 0.2 0.4 0.1 100.0
Chin 21.0 10.9 27.8 38.7 0.2 1.0 0.3 0.1 100.0
Sagaing 25.4 3.7 39.6 29.5 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.4 100.0
Tanintharyi 34.4 2.8 24.6 37.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.4 100.0
Bago 18.4 2.6 46.6 31.2 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.2 100.0
Magway 21.0 4.1 45.2 28.3 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.2 100.0
Mandalay 32.7 3.3 29.4 33.5 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.2 100.0
Mon 27.1 5.1 27.4 37.9 0.9 0.3 1.1 0.2 100.0
Rakhine 21.4 6.8 30.8 40.2 0.2 0.1 * 0.5 100.0
Yangon 33.8 3.2 17.9 42.2 0.4 0.3 1.0 1.2 100.0
Shan 36.7 2.3 22.5 35.0 2.7 0.2 0.4 0.2 100.0
Ayeyawady 20.1 3.3 50.5 23.8 0.4 0.2 1.4 0.4 100.0
Nay Pyi Taw 35.8 1.1 25.8 35.0 * 0.3 0.5 1.5 100.0
7.2 International migration
The 2019 ICS identified two types of international migrants: persons who have moved to another
country and persons who have moved into Myanmar. Information of Myanmar nationals who were
currently residing in other countries was obtained by asking respondents, primarily the household
head, whether or not there were former household members who were living abroad. The information
collected about them includes their relationship to head of household, sex, date of birth, year of
departure from the country, name of the destination country, main reason for leaving the country, type
of channel used to leave the country, migrant’s education and marital status before departure, current
activity abroad, remittance during the last twelve months and main channel used for remittance.
The two populations (those living abroad and the resident population) cannot be combined because
these were defined differently. This section will focus only on the analysis of those who were living
outside Myanmar at the time of the survey.

84
The Union Report
7.2.1 Former household members living abroad
Information from the 2019 ICS shows that approximately 1.6 million former household members were
living outside of Myanmar. Of these, 61 percent were males and 39 percent were females.
7.2.2 Current country of residence
About 67 percent of those living outside of Myanmar were living in Thailand. Malaysia hosted about 14
percent of the reported total, followed by China (6.7%) and Singapore (4.5%) (Figure 7.3). This pattern
was consistent with the findings from the 2014 Census.
Figure 7.3: Former household members living abroad by country of residence
7.2.3 Reasons for leaving the country
Majority of emigrants (about 96%) migrated due to economic reasons, for both males and females.
Education was the second main reason although the proportion was extremely low (2%), with a higher
proportion of females than males (2.5% versus 1.6%) (Table 7.4).
Table 7.4: Reasons for leaving the country of international migrants by sex
Reasons for leaving the country Both sexes Male Female

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
Employment/ in search for employment/ business 95.8 97.3 93.4
Education 1.9 1.6 2.5
Followed family 1.2 0.3 1.8
Marriage 0.8 0.7 2.1
Others 0.2 0.2 0.2

The Union Report 85
7.2.4 Type of channels used for leaving the country
About 26 percent of those living outside Myanmar reported that the channel they used to leave the
country was “family connections”. The second most common channel was “labour broker” (24%)
followed by “friend connections” (18%). However, the most common channel for male emigrants was
“labour broker” while it was “family connections” for female emigrants (Figure 7.4)
Figure 7.4: Type of channels used for leaving the country by sex
7.2.5 Main channels used in sending remittance
Figure 7.5, which presents the main channels used in sending remittance, shows that 6 in 10 emigrants
sent remittances through banks. About 17 percent relied on friends or relatives to carry the money for
them. About 9 percent were still using the ‘Hundi’. Only a few migrants used money transfer operators
such as Western Union, Money Gram or Xepress Money etc. (6.8%) or Mobile financial services such
as Wave Money, True Money or M-Pitesan etc. (4.8%).
A higher proportion of men than women used banks to send remittances to the country (67% versus
54%) while higher proportions of women than men for the remaining channels.

86
The Union Report
Figure 7.5: Main channels used by international migrants in sending money by sex
7.2.6 Remittances
Remittances covered under this section refer to cash sent back to their households by the emigrants.
During the twelve months before the survey, nearly 69 percent of the emigrants had sent remittances
to their households in Myanmar. About 36 percent of emigrants sent between 500,000 and 2,000,000
kyats while another 36 percent remitted less than 500,000 kyats. About 17 percent had remitted
between 2,000,000 and 4,000,000 kyats and only 11 percent sent more than 4,000,000 kyats (Figure
7.6). There was a little gender difference in the amount sent; 29 percent of males sent more than
2,000,000 kyats while it was only 26 percent for females.
Figure 7.6: Amount of money sent by international migrants by sex

The Union Report 87
7.2.7 Current activity status
Results from the survey found that most of the emigrants (92.0%) were working as “Employee”, clearly
supporting the fact that the majority of them left the country for economic reasons. There was
relatively higher proportion for males (95.7%) than females (86.2%). Moreover, about 7 percent of
female emigrants were working in a “household work” compared to only 0.2 percent for males
(Table 7.5).
Table 7.5: Current activity status of international migrants by sex
Current activity status Both sexes Male Female
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Employee 92.0 95.7 86.2
Household work 2.9 0.2 7.1
Full-time student/ attending training 1.4 1.2 1.7
Don’t know 1.1 1.2 0.9
Own Account Worker 1.0 0.9 1.3
Contributing family worker 0.5 0.2 1.0
Idle 0.4 0.2 0.7
Employer 0.4 0.3 0.4
Seeking work 0.2 0.1 0.2
Pensioner, retired, older person 0.2 * 0.3
Illness, injury or disability 0.1 * 0.1
Other 0.1 0.1 *
7.2.8 Highest education completed prior to departure
Results from 2019 ICS revealed that the majority of emigrants were not well educated before their
departure to foreign countries. About 66 percent of the emigrants had completed only below high
school (primary: 34% and middle school: 32.3%), with 8 percent with no education at all. Although the
education level of both males and females conform to the national norm, female emigrants tend to be
lower educated than their counterparts (Figure 7.7).

88
The Union Report
Figure 7.7: Highest grade completed of international migrants by sex
7.2.9 Age-sex pyramid of emigrants
Age-sex pyramids of emigrants for the 2014 Census and 2019 ICS are presented in Figure 7.8. The
shapes of both pyramids are more or less the same suggesting the age structure of emigrants did not
change much during 2014 and 2019. As can be seen in these age-sex pyramids, the majority of
emigrants in 2014 and 2019 were adults in the economically active ages between 20 and 44 years.
Figure 7.8: Age-sex pyramids of former household members living abroad, 2014 Census and 2019 ICS

The Union Report 89
Chapter 8: Disability Chapter
Disability 8
In the 2019 Inter-censal Survey, the information on disability was collected using The Washington
Group Short Set of Questions that comprises questions on six core functional domains: seeing,
hearing, walking/climbing steps, remembering/concentrating, self-care and communication and the
degree of difficulty a respondent experienced for each domain. The questions that were asked to every
person aged 5 years and over were about difficulties the person may have had doing certain activities
due to health or other problems such as a disease or chronic condition, a missing limb or organ, mental
illness or any type of impairment including disorders not always thought of as health-related such as
senility, depression, retardation, drug dependency, accidental injuries, etc.
8.1 Disability prevalence rate
According to the 2019 ICS, a total of close to six million people aged 5 years and over out of fourty six
million of the same age group had reported having at least one type of disability (Table 8.1). This
translates to a disability prevalence rate of Myanmar at 12.8 percent. Among the six types of
disabilities, the most common type was difficulty in seeing (6.3%), followed by walking/climbing steps
(5.4%), remembering/concentrating (4.4%), hearing (2.4%), self-care (1.9%) and lastly, communication
(1.6%).
People living in rural areas had higher levels of disability, both in absolute and relative terms,
compared to their urban counterparts. Among the population who reported having a disability in at
least one of the six domains, 4.3 million lived in rural areas and 1.7 million lived in urban areas. The
disability prevalence was 13.1 percent in rural areas and 12.3 percent in urban areas. The prevalence
of disability was higher among females (13.9%) than males (11.6%).
The disability prevalence varies across states and regions where relatively higher rates were reported
in Chin (20.6%), Rakhine and Ayeyawady (17.3% each) and Magway (17.0%) while the lowest was
observed in Shan (8.6%).
Table 8.1: Population aged 5 years and over by disability status, disability prevalence rate, type of
disability, sex, State/Region, urban and rural areas
Percent of population who have disability in…

With any Disability Remem-
State/Region, Total Walking/
of the six prevalence bering/ Self- Commu-
Area and Sex population Seeing Hearing Climbing
disabilities rate (%) Concen- care nication
steps
trating
UNION 46,463,285 5,968,986 12.8 6.3 2.4 5.4 4.4 1.9 1.6
Urban 13,578,988 1,674,059 12.3 6.4 1.9 5.4 3.4 1.6 1.3
Rural 32,884,298 4,294,927 13.1 6.2 2.5 5.4 4.9 2.1 1.7

The Union Report 93
Percent of population who have disability in…
With any Disability Remem-
State/Region, Total Walking/
of the six prevalence bering/ Self- Commu-
Area and Sex population Seeing Hearing Climbing
disabilities rate (%) Concen- care nication
steps
trating
Male 21,599,083 2,510,548 11.6 5.5 2.0 4.4 3.9 1.9 1.5
Female 24,864,202 3,458,439 13.9 6.9 2.6 6.3 4.9 2.0 1.6
Kachin 1,421,335 126,467 8.9 4.9 2.3 3.0 3.4 1.3 1.7
Kayah 274,458 29,729 10.8 3.8 2.3 3.9 4.9 2.3 1.6
Kayin 1,394,545 231,931 16.6 8.6 3.0 8.1 6.4 2.1 1.7
Chin 434,771 89,692 20.6 10.5 6.2 8.7 8.5 2.6 4.3
Sagaing 4,825,519 463,913 9.6 4.8 1.8 3.9 3.3 1.6 1.3
Tanintharyi 1,274,646 147,753 11.6 5.3 2.3 5.1 4.4 1.8 1.9
Bago 4,405,382 553,243 12.6 6.2 2.2 5.5 4.4 1.6 1.4
Magway 3,482,645 593,010 17.0 7.9 2.7 6.5 7.1 2.5 1.8
Mandalay 5,651,062 574,486 10.2 5.0 2.0 4.5 2.4 1.3 1.0
Mon 1,725,611 262,771 15.2 6.9 2.3 5.8 5.6 2.7 2.0
Rakhine 2,914,271 505,503 17.3 7.1 3.8 6.8 7.8 4.3 2.6
Yangon 7,210,592 896,242 12.4 6.5 1.8 5.6 3.1 1.3 1.2
Shan 4,814,943 415,135 8.6 3.6 2.0 3.6 2.9 1.2 1.4
Ayeyawady 5,561,248 963,663 17.3 8.8 3.0 7.5 6.7 2.8 2.1
Nay Pyi Taw 1,072,257 115,449 10.8 6.6 1.9 3.8 2.7 1.2 1.0
8.2 Age-specific disability
Although people can have a disability at any point in their life, the empirical evidence has shown that
the prevalence of disability increases with age. The findings from the 2019 ICS also indicated that
disability is closely related to age as shown in Figure 8.1. Disability prevalence rates were low (less
than 5%) in the younger age groups 10 to 29 years. The rate was about 11 percent among those aged
40 and 44 years; then started to increase sharply until it reached over 80 percent for people aged 90
years and over.
At younger ages, only a small difference in the age-specific disability prevalence rates was observed
between males and females. Between the ages of 55 and 59 years, the prevalence rates for males and
females were still close; 25.8 and 28 percent, respectively. After the age of 59, the prevalence rate for
females increased at a faster pace than that of males.

94
The Union Report
Figure 8.1: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability by age group and sex
8.3 Prevalence of disability by degree of difficulty and domain
To measure the severity of the disability, interviewers asked each household member aged 5 years and
over about their disability status and the degree of difficulty. Respondents were to choose from the
following responses: “no-no difficulty”, “yes – some difficulty”, “yes – a lot of difficulty” and “cannot
do at all”. Figure 8.2 shows that among population aged 5 years and over, very few people (less than
1%) reported that they have “a lot of difficulty” and “cannot do at all”. For example, only 0.06 percent
of males and 0.10 percent of females reported severe degree of difficulty (cannot do at all) in seeing;
only 0.46 percent of males and 0.62 percent of females reported a moderate degree of difficulty (a lot
of difficulty) in seeing. Similar rates of prevalence were reported for the other five functional domains.

The Union Report 95
Figure 8.2: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability by domain, degree of
difficulty, and sex
Percent
8.4 Community participation/activities
Figure 8.3 shows the proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability and had
participated in community/social/religious activity in the last 12 months by sex and type of activity.
Among those with disability, 39.6 percent had participated in at least one of the activities listed.
Clearly, among those activities, religious activities was the most common. Almost 36 percent of people
with disability reported that they participated in such activities. The percent difference between men
and women was quite modest, 39 percent and 33 percent, respectively. Participating in humanitarian

96
The Union Report
activities was the second most common activity (8.2%). Participating in political meetings and gatherings
was quite uncommon, with only 0.5 percent. In all activities, men with disability had higher rates of
participation compared to their counterparts (Figure 8.3).
Figure 8.3: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability who participated in any
community/social/religious activity in the last 12 months by sex and type of activity
Percent
8.5 Support received
Among the population aged 5 years and over with disability, one in five reported he/she had received
at least one kind of support in the last 12 months. About 78.1 percent received no support at all and
2.6 percent reported they did not need any support in the last 12 months. There was not much
difference in the proportion of support received by men and women (Figure 8.4).

The Union Report 97
Figure 8.4: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability who received support in
Percent the last 12 months by sex
Findings from 2019 ICS show that support to people with disability mostly came from other members
of the same households (Table 8.2). About 12 percent of the people with disability reported this source
against only about 7 percent from non-household members/organization. The most common type of
support that people with disability received was financial (17%). Meal (5.5%) was the second most
common support. Medical support (2.7%) comes as the third common support. Male and female
difference in the proportion of people with disability who received support was minimal.
Table 8.2: Proportion of population aged 5 years and over with disability who received support in
the last 12 months by sex, type and source of support
Source of support
Population with disability who re-
From household From non-household
ceived support
members members/organization
Type of support
Both Both
sexes sexes
Population with any of 5,968,986 2,510,548 3,458,439

the six disabilities
With any kind of support 19.3 17.8 20.5 12.0 10.8 12.9 7.3 7.0 7.6
Financial 17.0 15.4 18.2 10.7 9.5 11.6 6.3 5.9 6.5
Assistance on daily 1.0 0.9 1.1 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
activities inside the
house
Assistance on activities 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
outside the house

98
The Union Report
Source of support
Population with disability who re-
From household From non-household
ceived support
members members/organization
Type of support
Both Both
sexes sexes
Medical support 2.7 2.5 2.8 1.9 1.7 2.0 0.8 0.8 0.9
Home care 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1
Day care 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 * * *
Transportation 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 * * *
Meal 5.5 4.9 5.9 3.8 3.3 4.1 1.7 1.7 1.8
Other 0.1 0.1 0.1 * * * 0.1 0.1 0.1

The Union Report 99
Chapter 9: The Older Population Chapter
The Older Population 9
The United Nations has consistently defined older population as those aged 60 years and over.16 In
Myanmar, the mandatory retirement age in the public sector is 60 years. Therefore, in this chapter,
those aged 60 years and over are considered as the older population.
9.1 Size of the older population
The increase in the absolute number and relative proportion of the older population are presented
in Table 9.1 where the results from two Myanmar censuses (1983 and 2014), and 2019 ICS were
compared. The 1983 census enumerated about 2.2 million people aged 60 years and over, comprising
6.4 percent of the total population. In 2014, the enumerated older population was about 4.5 million
which is equivalent to 8.9 percent of the total population. According to 2019 ICS, the older population
was about 5.2 million comprising 10.1 percent of the total conventional household population. During
the last four decades, the proportion of older population and working-age population aged 15-59 had
increased while the proportion of the children aged 0-14 had decreased significantly. During 1983
and 2019, the median age of Myanmar’s population rose from 20.2 years to 28.2 years and, thus,
Myanmar’s population in 2019 was older.
Table 9.1: Population by broad age groups, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS
Broad age group 1983 Census* 2014 Census* 2019 ICS**

Total population 34,124,908 50,279,900 51,144,607
0-14 13,159,645 14,399,569 13,889,042
15-59 18,794,731 31,405,923 32,094,397
60 and over 2,170,532 4,474,408 5,161,168
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
0-14 38.6 28.6 27.2
15-59 55.1 62.5 62.8
60 years and over 6.4 8.9 10.1
Median age 20.2 27.1 28.2
Note: * Total enumerated population
** Population in conventional households only

16
United Nations. 1983. Vienna International Plan of Action on Aging. United Nations, New York; United Nations
2002. Report of the Second World Assembly on Ageing. Madrid. 8-12 April 2002. Population A/CONF. 197/9.
United Nations, New York; United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA). 2015.
World Population Ageing 2015. ST/ESA/SER.A/390. United Nations, New York.
The Union Report 103
9.2 Measures of age dependency
The demographic indicators of ageing presented in this section are the index of ageing, older age
dependency ratio, potential support ratio and parent support ratio. Each indicator captures some
aspects of the population-wide implications of ageing by comparing the numbers of children and older
people who may be dependent on the support of working-aged adults (15-59).
Children still outnumbered the older population by a wide margin, but the index of ageing has
increased from 16.5 in 1983 to 37.2 in 2019 (Table 9.2). In 1983, there were about 17 older people per
100 children while there were 37 older people per 100 children in 2019.
Table 9.2: Indicators of population ageing, 1983 and 2014 Censuses, and 2019 ICS
Indicator of population ageing 1983 Census* 2014 Census* 2019 ICS**

Ageing index 16.5 31.1 37.2
Total dependency ratio 81.6 60.1 59.4
Child dependency ratio 70.0 45.8 43.3
Older age dependency ratio 11.5 14.2 16.1
Potential support ratio 8.7 7.0 6.2
Parent support ratio 1.7 3.7 3.4
Note: * Total enumerated population
** Population in conventional households only

The older age dependency ratio (number of persons aged 60 years and over per 100 persons aged
15-59 years) in Myanmar was 16.1 in 2019 and 11.5 in 1983. On the other hand, the total dependency
ratio (population aged under 15 plus the population aged 60 year and over per 100 people aged
15-59) was 59.4 in 2019 and 81.6 in 1983. This decrease was mainly due to significant decline in the
proportion of children. During the same period, the child dependency ratio (population under 15 per
100 persons aged 15-59 years) declined from 70.0 to 43.3.
The potential support ratio is the number of people aged 15-59 per one older person. The potential
support ratio is an alternative way of expressing the numerical relationship between those more likely
to be economically productive and those more likely to be dependents. It is the inverse of the old-age
dependency ratio, that is, the number of persons of working age (i.e., aged 15 to 59) per person aged
60 years or over.17 Between 1983 and 2019, this ratio declined from 9 to 6 potential workers per
person aged 60 years or over.
The parent support ratio, that is, the ratio of the population aged 85 years or over to that aged 50 to
64, provides an indication of the level of support families may be able to provide to their oldest
17
World Population Ageing 2007, United Nations
104
The Union Report
members.18 This ratio increased from 1.7 in 1983 to 3.4 in 2019 indicating persons well past middle
age are two times more likely than they were in 1983 to be responsible for the care of older relatives.
9.3 Type of pension, allowance and benefit
Table 9.3 shows the proportion of older people who received pension, allowance and benefits. Only 14
percent of older people reported they received at least one kind of pension, allowance or benefits. Work
pension was the most availed type of pension with 6.5 percent, followed by family pension (2.4%).
Table 9.3: Proportion of older population who had pension, received allowance, benefits by type of
pension, allowance, benefits and sex
Type of pension, allowance, benefits Both sexes Male Female

Older population 5,161,168 2,099,398 3,061,770
With any type of pension, allowance, benefits 14.2 16.0 13.0
Work pension 6.5 8.8 4.9
Veteran’s pension, war widow’s pension 2.1 2.8 1.7
Family pension 2.4 1.2 3.2
Social pension 1.6 1.6 1.6
Invalid or Disability allowance pension 0.4 0.4 0.4
Sickness allowance 0.9 0.7 1.0
Other 1.1 1.0 1.1
Don’t know 0.1 0.1 0.1
9.4 Type of health care
Out of the 5 million older people, close to 2 million persons (38%) reported they had visited a health
care facility during the last 12 months. Majority of the older people who visited a health care facility
tend to rely on government hospitals (37%) and private hospitals or clinics (38.4%) for their health care
(Table 9.4). “Got sick and needed consultations and medicines (out-patient)” was the most common
reason for visiting a health care facility with 37.6 percent, followed by “medicine for maintenance”
(26.4%) (Table 9.5).
18
World Population Ageing 2007, United Nations
Table 9.4: Proportion of older population who visited a health care facility in the last 12 months by
type of health care facility and sex
Type of health care facility Both sexes Male Female

Older population who visited any health care facility 1,971,964 744,421 1,227,543
PUBLIC SECTOR
Government Hospital 37.0 40.0 35.2
Traditional Medicine Hospital/Clinic 3.9 4.0 3.9
Urban Health Center 3.1 2.9 3.3
Disease Control Clinic 0.3 0.2 0.4
Maternal and Child Health Center 0.1 0.1 0.1
Rural Health Center (RHC) 6.6 6.6 6.5
Sub-rural Health Center (SRHC) 3.7 3.5 3.8
Mobile Clinic 0.7 0.6 0.7
Health Volunteer 0.9 0.8 1.0
Other public * * *
PRIVATE SECTOR
Private Hospital/ Clinic 38.4 36.5 39.5
Private Traditional Medicine Clinic 1.1 1.0 1.2
Private Doctor 2.8 2.5 2.9
Stand-alone VCT Center * * -
Pharmacy 0.7 0.7 0.8
Mobile Clinic 0.4 0.4 0.4
Diagnostic Laboratory * 0.1 *
NGO/INGO 0.1 0.1 0.1
Other private 0.2 0.2 0.2


106
The Union Report
Table 9.5: Proportion of older population who visited a health care facility in the last 12 months by
reason for visiting a health care facility, sex and age group
Reason for visiting a health care facility

Older
Sex and Older population Got sick and Got sick
Routine/
Age popu- who visited Emer- regular
Regular needed and
Medicine for
Group lation any health gency laboratory consultations admitted to Other
consultation maintenance
care facility Care tests and medicines the health
/follow up
(out-patient) care facility
Both 5,161,168 1,971,964 11.6 13.4 1.9 26.4 37.6 8.5 0.6
sexes
60 - 64 1,864,573 648,938 12.0 13.6 1.6 25.9 38.4 7.9 0.6
65 - 69 1,372,534 516,337 11.4 13.4 2.1 25.9 37.8 8.7 0.8
70 - 74 868,129 356,435 11.1 13.3 2.0 26.7 36.8 9.4 0.7
75 - 79 510,929 223,671 12.4 13.8 2.0 25.7 37.0 8.6 0.6
80 - 84 308,170 132,070 10.2 12.6 2.1 27.8 37.9 9.0 0.4
85 - 89 167,695 69,238 11.2 12.4 1.6 33.1 33.9 7.2 0.5
90 + 69,138 25,275 12.9 10.8 0.5 28.1 40.2 6.9 0.6
Male 2,099,398 744,421 14.0 12.2 1.8 24.8 36.8 9.7 0.8
60 - 64 800,074 257,726 14.7 11.6 1.6 23.5 38.8 8.8 0.9
65 - 69 572,627 196,615 14.2 12.3 1.8 24.2 37.0 9.1 1.3
70 - 74 344,565 131,400 12.9 12.9 2.1 24.4 35.1 12.1 0.4
75 - 79 191,346 77,396 13.6 13.6 1.7 24.5 37.1 8.9 0.7
80 - 84 110,862 47,055 13.4 11.5 2.9 27.9 33.0 10.8 0.4
85 - 89 58,914 27,080 12.8 9.6 1.8 36.7 29.7 9.2 0.2
90 + 21,010 7,148 12.0 11.5 0.5 27.9 37.1 11.1 -
Female 3,061,770 1,227,543 10.2 14.1 1.9 27.4 38.1 7.8 0.5
60 - 64 1,064,499 391,212 10.2 14.8 1.6 27.5 38.2 7.3 0.4
65 - 69 799,907 319,722 9.7 14.0 2.3 26.9 38.2 8.4 0.5
70 - 74 523,564 225,035 10.1 13.5 2.0 28.1 37.7 7.8 0.8
75 - 79 319,583 146,275 11.7 14.0 2.1 26.3 36.9 8.4 0.5
80 - 84 197,308 85,014 8.4 13.1 1.7 27.7 40.6 8.0 0.3
85 - 89 108,781 42,158 10.2 14.1 1.5 30.8 36.6 6.0 0.7
90 + 48,127 18,127 13.3 10.5 0.6 28.2 41.5 5.2 0.8

9.5 Community participation/activities
Figure 9.1 shows the proportion of older population who participated in community/social/religious
activity in the last 12 months by sex and type of activity. Some 40 percent of older people indicated
they had participated in at least one activity. Clearly among those shown, “religious activities” was the
most popular. Almost 36 percent of older people indicated they participated in such activities, with 12
percentage point difference between males’ and females’ participation (43%, and 31%, respectively).
Participating in humanitarian activities was the second most common activity. On the other hand,
participating in political meetings and gatherings was quite uncommon, with only 0.5 percent. In every
activity, older men had higher participation rates compared to their counterparts.
Figure 9.1: Proportion of older population who participated in any community/social/religious

activities in the last 12 months by sex and type of activity
Percent

108
The Union Report
9.6 Support received
Among 5 million older people, 27.8 percent received at least one kind of support in the last 12 months,
70.4 percent did not receive any, and just 1.8 percent reported they did not need at all. There was not
much difference in the proportion of support received by men and women (Figure 9.2).
Figure 9.2: Proportion of older population who received support in the last 12 months by sex
Percent
People living in same households were important sources of support to older persons particularly
in providing money, food and medical supports (Table 9.6). About 18 percent of the older persons
reported that the support they received came from people in same households while only about 10
percent from non-household members/organization.
Table 9.6: Proportion of older population who received support in the last 12 months by sex, type
and source of support
Source of support
Older population who received
support From household From non-household
Type of support members members/organization
Both Both
sexes sexes
With any kind of 27.8 26.5 28.7 18.2 17.2 18.9 9.6 9.3 9.8
support
Financial 24.7 23.4 25.5 16.2 15.3 16.9 8.4 8.1 8.7
Assistance on daily 1.7 1.4 1.9 1.5 1.2 1.8 0.2 0.2 0.2
activities inside the
house

Source of support
Older population who received
support From household From non-household
Type of support members members/organization
Both Both
sexes sexes
Assistance on 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
activities outside
the house
Medical support 3.9 3.6 4.0 2.8 2.6 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Home care 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1
Day care 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 * * *
Transportation 0.1 * 0.1 0.1 * 0.1 * * *
Meal 8.2 7.9 8.4 5.7 5.5 5.9 2.5 2.4 2.5
Other 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

110
The Union Report
Chapter 10: Housing CharacteristicsChapter
Housing Characteristics 10
Housing characteristics are important determinants of socio-economic and health status of a
household. This chapter presents information on this topic focusing on the type of housing units,
tenure status of the household, construction materials of housing units, location of cooking facility,
number of rooms, housing amenities, and household income.
10.1 Type of housing units
The types of housing units included in the survey are condominium, apartment/ flat, bungalow/ brick
house, semi-pucca house, wooden house, bamboo house, 2 to 3-year-old hut, and 1-year old hut.
Table 10.1 shows that the predominant housing unit type in Myanmar is the wooden house which
made up the highest proportion of households (40%) living in it, followed by a bamboo house (26.6%)
and semi-pucca house (13.1%). The popularity of the wooden house among the households in the
country is seen both in urban and in rural areas. However, relatively, the proportion is higher in rural
areas (42.8%) than in urban areas (32.7%). It is worth noting that 3 in 10 households in rural areas live
in houses made from bamboo which is the second most common housing unit type in rural areas.
Table 10.1: Percentage of households by type of housing unit, urban and rural areas
Type of housing unit Union Urban Rural

Number 11,162,510 3,120,314 8,042,196
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
Condominium/ Apartment/ Flat 5.7 16.8 1.4
Bungalow/ Brick house 10.5 16.4 8.3
Semi-pucca house 13.1 17.8 11.3
Wooden house 40.0 32.7 42.8
Bamboo house 26.6 13.8 31.5
Hut (2-3 years) 3.0 1.2 3.7
Hut (1 year) 0.6 0.4 0.7
Other 0.5 0.8 0.3
10.2 Tenure status of the households
The information on the tenure status of the households is presented in Table 10.2. About 90 percent
of households in Myanmar were owners of the dwellings they were living in. This proportion is 74.6
percent in urban areas and 96.5 percent in rural areas. Only about 6 percent were tenants in private
housing units with higher proportion observed in urban areas (17.4%) than in rural areas (1.7%).
Table 10.2: Percentage of households by tenure status, urban and rural areas
Tenure status Union Urban Rural

Number 11,162,510 3,120,314 8,042,196
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
Owned 90.3 74.6 96.5
Rented (Government) 0.7 2.0 0.2
Rented (Private) 6.1 17.4 1.7
Provided free (Individual) 1.6 2.7 1.2
Provided free (Government quarter) 0.8 2.5 0.2
Provided free (Private company quarter) 0.4 0.7 0.2
Other 0.1 0.1 0.1
10.3 Construction materials of housing units
The construction materials of housing units are important characteristics that indicate the
socio-economic status of the household. In this report, this was assessed based on three indicators,
namely, construction materials of walls, roofs, and floors.
10.3.1 Outer wall materials
Table 10.3 shows that, at the national level, 37.8 percent of households were living in housing units
with walls made of bamboo while 27.8 percent in housing units with walls made of tile/brick/concrete
and 24.2 percent in wooden walls. Significant urban-rural differences are found in the two types of
walls. The most popular construction material for walls in urban areas was tile, brick, or concrete
whereas it was bamboo for the rural areas. About half of the households in urban areas (49.4%) used
tile, brick, or concrete as materials for the walls while the proportion for rural areas was only about
19 percent.
10.3.2 Roofing materials
The most common roofing material used by households in Myanmar was corrugated sheet (84%). The
urban-rural difference in using this type of roofing materials was small (89.6 percent for urban versus
81.8 percent for rural). However, about 13 percent of the households were still using “Dani/Theke/
Palm/ In leaf” as their roofing materials; with higher proportion observed in rural areas (16.6%) than
in urban areas (3.4%). Only about 2 percent of the households used tile, brick, or concrete as the
materials for their roof.

114
The Union Report
10.3.3 Floor materials
Survey results show that about half of the households in Myanmar used wood as the flooring material.
“Tile/ brick/ concrete” was the second most used material. However, 8.2 percent of the households in
Myanmar were still using “Earth” as the flooring material. That proportion was two-fold higher in rural
areas (9.4%) than in urban areas (5.2%).
Table 10.3: Percentage of households by type of construction materials of walls, roofs and floors of
the housing units, urban and rural areas
Type of construction materials Union Urban Rural

Number 11,162,510 3,120,314 8,042,196
Wall
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
Dhani/ Theke/ Palm/ In leaf 7.6 2.9 9.4
Bamboo 37.8 22.1 44.0
Earth 0.1 0.2 0.1
Wood 24.2 21.2 25.4
Corrugated sheet 1.6 3.0 1.1
Tile/ Brick/ Concrete 27.8 49.4 19.4
Other 0.8 1.2 0.6
Roof
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
Dhani/ Theke/ Palm/ In leaf 12.9 3.4 16.6
Bamboo 0.4 0.2 0.5
Earth * * *
Wood 0.3 0.5 0.3
Corrugated sheet 84.0 89.6 81.8
Other 0.1 0.2 0.1
Floor
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
Bamboo 13.6 4.6 17.0
Earth 8.2 5.2 9.4
Wood 50.8 38.8 55.5
Other * * *
10.4 Location of cooking facility
The results presented in Table 10.4 show that more than two-thirds of the households (68.7%) had
their cooking facilities located inside their houses. Only 22 percent of the households cooked in
a separate building and about 10 percent, outdoors. For these two most common locations,
the urban-rural difference is large. The proportion of households that had cooking facilities inside
their houses was higher in urban areas (80.3%) by 16.2 percentage points as compared to rural areas
(64.1%). However, the proportion of households that had a separate building for cooking was higher in
rural areas (25.6%) by 14.5 percentage points as compared to their urban counterparts (11.1%).
Table 10.4: Percentage of households by location of cooking facility, urban and rural areas
Location of cooking facility Union Urban Rural

Number 11,162,510 3,120,314 8,042,196
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
In the house 68.7 80.3 64.1
Separate building 21.5 11.1 25.6
Outdoors 9.6 8.2 10.2
Other 0.2 0.4 0.1
10.5 Number of room(s)
The number of rooms household members occupy is one of the indicators used to evaluate the
condition of overcrowding in the household. Crowding is calculated as the number of persons living in
the household per number of rooms or bedrooms available in the house. Overcrowding is defined as
being above a specific threshold (1.5 persons per room and 2 persons per bedroom).19 In this report,
overcrowding is defined as above 1.5 persons per room because the information on the number of
bedrooms was not collected in the survey. The rooms included in the survey were altar room,
bedroom, dining room, and living room. Kitchen, toilet or bathroom, balcony or terrace and rooms
used for business purposes were excluded.
Households that lived in one-roomed and two-roomed dwelling units made up about half of the total
households in Myanmar. Overall, the proportion of households decreases as the number of rooms
increases (Table 10.5).
19
Measuring Overcrowding in Housing, 2007, US Department of Housing and Urban Development
116
The Union Report
Table 10.5: Percentage of households by number of rooms in the dwelling units, urban and rural
areas
Number of room(s) Union Urban Rural

Number 11,162,510 3,120,314 8,042,196
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
1 room 16.5 20.4 15.0
2 rooms 33.9 30.4 35.3
3 rooms 28.8 25.1 30.2
4 rooms 13.1 13.2 13.0
5 rooms 4.9 6.5 4.3
6 rooms 1.8 2.5 1.5
7 rooms 0.4 0.9 0.2
8 rooms 0.3 0.5 0.2
9 rooms 0.1 0.2 0.1
10 rooms and more 0.1 0.3 0.1
Table 10.6 shows that almost half of the total households in Myanmar were living in overcrowded
housing units. The same proportion (about slightly less than 50%) of households in both urban and
rural areas can be considered to be living in overcrowded homes. However, overcrowding seems to
be more severe in urban areas than in rural areas. For example, 29 percent of households in urban
areas were living with more than 2 persons per room while this proportion in rural areas was about
26 percent.
All regions and states had overcrowded issues (living more than 1.5 persons in a room) with variation
in the degree of severity. Overcrowding rates were relatively higher in Tanintharyi (69.5%), Yangon
(61.7%), Mon (60.2%), Kayin (54.1%) and Chin (53.9%). Kachin, Nay Pyi Taw, Shan and Rakhine had
relatively lower proportion of about 40 percent.
Table 10.6: Average number of persons per room by State/ Region, urban and rural areas
Number of persons per room

State/Region
and Area 1.5 and Number of
1.51 to 2 More than 2 Total
below households
UNION 53.1 20.5 26.3 100.0 11,162,510
Urban 51.6 19.8 28.6 100.0 3,120,314
Rural 53.7 20.8 25.5 100.0 8,042,196
Kachin 60.7 20.6 18.7 100.0 302,429

State/Region
and Area 1.5 and Number of
1.51 to 2 More than 2 Total
below households
Kayah 53.6 23.8 22.6 100.0 66,836
Kayin 46.0 21.4 32.7 100.0 321,985
Chin 46.1 18.9 35.0 100.0 92,286
Sagaing 57.6 21.5 20.9 100.0 1,083,014
Tanintharyi 30.5 18.3 51.2 100.0 287,034
Bago 58.1 18.9 23.0 100.0 1,157,857
Magway 57.6 18.1 24.4 100.0 877,802
Mandalay 54.1 21.8 24.1 100.0 1,369,559
Mon 39.8 20.5 39.7 100.0 399,556
Rakhine 61.8 21.8 16.4 100.0 647,767
Yangon 38.4 22.1 39.6 100.0 1,711,561
Shan 60.7 20.8 18.5 100.0 1,123,111
Ayeyawady 56.9 19.3 23.7 100.0 1,455,636
Nay Pyi Taw 61.0 19.4 19.6 100.0 266,076
Table 10.7 shows the level of overcrowding according to type of housing unit and tenure status of
households. The percentage of households that stayed in overcrowded housing units was relatively
low for households living in condominium (27.7%) when compared to households living in huts (over
60%).
Overcrowding was most common among households that were privately renting their housing units,
with 67 percent of households compared to 46 percent among those that owned their housing units.
Households living in government rented housing units or government quarters which were provided
free seem to be better off in terms of crowding (37% and 35%, respectively, were considered
“crowded” households) as compared with households in non-government owned or provided housing
units.

118
The Union Report
Table 10.7: Average number of persons per room by type of housing unit and tenure status of
households

Type of housing unit and tenure status 1.5 and 1.51 More Number of
Total
below to 2 than 2 households
Type of housing unit
Condominium 72.3 15.3 12.4 100.0 9,433
Apartment/ Flat 49.0 20.1 30.8 100.0 624,861
Bungalow/ Brick house 65.9 17.8 16.3 100.0 1,178,267
Semi-pacca house 62.7 18.6 18.8 100.0 1,465,042
Wooden house 51.7 21.0 27.3 100.0 4,465,754
Bamboo 48.4 22.0 29.6 100.0 2,966,227
Hut 2-3 years 39.6 21.2 39.2 100.0 332,159
Hut 1 year 37.6 18.7 43.7 100.0 67,568
Other 41.4 21.0 37.6 100.0 53,199
Tenure status
Owned 54.3 20.5 25.2 100.0 10,084,747
Rented (Government) 62.9 17.7 19.4 100.0 79,273
Rented (Private) 33.5 22.6 43.9 100.0 679,450
Provided free (Individual) 50.9 19.2 29.8 100.0 180,226
Provided free (Government quarter) 65.1 14.1 20.8 100.0 93,114
Provided free (Private company quarter) 51.4 16.1 32.5 100.0 39,421
Other 19.5 22.6 58.0 100.0 6,280
10.6 Housing amenities
10.6.1 Sources of energy for lighting
A large proportion of households in Myanmar used grid electricity as the main source of energy for
lighting. Table 10.8 reveals that, at the national level, slightly more than half (53%) of the households
used grid electricity, while about 29 percent used solar powered electricity. However, there were
substantial urban-rural differences; 9 out of 10 households in urban areas used grid electricity whereas
it was only about 4 out of 10 households in rural areas. That may be the reason why more households
in rural areas relied on the solar system (39.3%) than in urban areas (only 2.8%).

Table 10.8: Percentage of households by energy sources for lighting, urban and rural areas
Source of energy for lighting Union Urban Rural

Number 11,162,510 3,120,314 8,042,196
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
Grid electricity (Government grid/ border 53.0 90.9 38.4
country grid/ community based grid)
Generator (Private) 3.5 2.1 4.0
Solar system energy 29.1 2.8 39.3
Wind and water mill 0.8 0.6 0.9
Kerosene 0.5 0.1 0.6
Candle 4.3 1.6 5.3
Rechargeable battery 8.7 2.0 11.3
Other 0.1 * 0.2
10.6.2 Type of cooking fuel
Table 10.9 suggests that a sizeable proportion of households in Myanmar were still using firewood
for cooking (53.3%), while 37.6 percent used grid electricity. The urban-rural difference for these two
types was quite large. About 73 percent of households in urban areas used grid electricity for cooking,
while it was only about 24 percent in rural areas. About 70 percent of the households in rural areas
used firewood for cooking while it was only about 13 percent in urban areas. It is interesting to note
that about 6 percent of the households in Myanmar used charcoal; this proportion was higher in urban
areas (about 10%) than in rural areas (about 5%).
Table 10.9: Percentage of households by type of cooking fuel, urban and rural areas
Type of cooking fuel Union Urban Rural

Number 11,162,510 3,120,314 8,042,196
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
Grid electricity ( Government grid/ border 37.6 72.5 24.1
country grid/ community based grid)
Generator (Private) 0.2 0.2 0.2
Solar system energy 0.4 0.1 0.5
Wind and water mill 0.1 0.2 0.1
Kerosene * * *
LPG 0.5 1.4 0.2
Biogas 1.1 2.2 0.6

120
The Union Report
Type of cooking fuel Union Urban Rural
Firewood 53.3 12.5 69.1
Charcoal 6.4 10.3 4.9
Coal 0.2 0.3 0.2
Straw/ Grass * * *
Other 0.1 0.2 0.1

10.7 Household assets
2019 ICS collected information on communication and transportation-related amenities at the

household level. These items include radio, television set, mobile phone, landline telephone,
computer, internet at home, bicycles, motorcycles, cars/trucks/vans, etc.
10.7.1 Information and communication devices
About 86 percent of households in Myanmar owned at least one mobile phone, 59.3 percent
television set, and 19.1 percent radio. As expected, there were some differences between urban and
rural areas in terms of the presence of such devices in the households. Presence of mobile phones in
the urban areas was 94.9 percent while 82.2 percent in rural areas. Presence of television sets in urban
areas was 83.3 percent against 50 percent in rural areas. Regarding internet access, at the national
level, 56 percent of households reported that they had access to the internet at home. This proportion
was 74.7 percent in the urban areas and 48.8 percent in rural areas. About 9 percent of the households
in Myanmar reported that they did not have any of the devices while only 0.3 percent reported that
they had all the devices listed. The proportion of households not having any of the items was higher in
rural areas (12%) than in urban areas (2.6%) (Table 10.10).
10.7.2 Transportation amenities
Table 10.10 highlights that 59.4 percent of total households in Myanmar owned a motorcycle/moped/
tuk-tuk while 36.7 percent owned a bicycle. However, only 7.8 percent of households owned a motor
vehicle such as car/pickup/truck/van. A large proportion of households in Myanmar were still using
bullock or horse cart (16.2%). This proportion was more pronounced in rural areas (21.9%) than in
urban areas (1.6%).

Table 10.10: Percentage of households by availability of information and communication devices,
and transportation amenities, urban and rural areas
Household assets Union Urban Rural

Number 11,162,510 3,120,314 8,042,196
Availability of information and communication devices
Radio 19.1 13.9 21.2
Television set 59.3 83.3 50.0
Landline/ Fixed-line telephone 4.3 6.9 3.3
Mobile phone 85.8 94.9 82.2
Computer 5.4 15.1 1.7
Internet access at home (through landline or
56.0 74.7 48.8
mobile connection)
% with none of the devices 9.4 2.6 12.0
% with all of the devices 0.3 0.8 0.1
Availability of transportation amenities
Car/ Pickup/ Truck/ Van 7.8 16.6 4.5
Motorcycle/ Moped/ Tuk tuk 59.4 58.0 60.0
Bicycle 36.7 43.5 34.1
Four-wheel tractor 3.3 1.5 4.0
Canoe/ Boat 3.5 0.5 4.7
Motored boat 3.1 0.6 4.1
Cart (bullock/ horse) 16.2 1.6 21.9
10.8 Household income
The 2019 ICS included a question on average annual income (in Lakhs) of all household members from
all sources. Responses showed that, at the national level, about 27 percent of the households reported
that their annual average household income was between 1.5 million and 3.0 million Kyats while about
26 percent between 0.5 million and 1.5 million Kyats. On the other hand, more than one-third of the
households had an annual income of at least 3.0 million Kyats. Only a little less than 10 percent of the
households belonged to the lowest income group (500,000 Kyats and below).
As expected, households in urban areas earned more than those in rural areas. Most of the
households in urban areas (37.1%) earned between 3.0 million and 6.0 million Kyats while those in
rural areas had only between 0.5 million and 1.5 million Kyats (31.4%).
At the regional level, although the average annual income of households varies widely, there were
some noticeable similarities among some states and regions. For example, the highest proportion of

122
The Union Report
households in Yangon and Mandalay fell in the group that earned between 3.0 million and 6.0 million
Kyats. However, for some states and regions such as Kachin, Mon, Tanintharyi and Nay Pyi Taw, the
highest proportion of households was found in the group that earned between 1.5 million and 3.0
million Kyats. For the rest of the States/Regions, the highest was in the group that earned between 0.5
million and 1.5 million Kyats. It is also worth noting that about one-fourth of the households in Kayah
and Chin State earned only 500,000 kyats and below annually.
Table 10.11: Percent distribution of household’s annual average earnings (Kyats), State/Region,
urban and rural areas
State/ 500,000 Between Between Between

More than Number of
Region and and 500,000 and 1,500,000 and 3,000,000 and Total
6,000,000 households
Area below 1,500,000 3,000,000 6,000,000
UNION 9.8 26.1 27.0 24.5 12.6 100.0 11,162,510
Urban 3.4 12.4 24.2 37.1 22.9 100.0 3,120,314
Rural 12.3 31.4 28.1 19.6 8.7 100.0 8,042,196
Kachin 7.9 24.0 31.6 23.2 13.3 100.0 302,429
Kayah 25.2 29.1 23.4 15.5 6.8 100.0 66,836
Kayin 16.4 29.7 26.2 18.3 9.4 100.0 321,985
Chin 25.9 27.4 20.7 15.7 10.3 100.0 92,286
Sagaing 13.8 32.5 27.5 18.1 8.1 100.0 1,083,014
Tanintharyi 9.9 25.5 26.5 23.4 14.8 100.0 287,034
Bago 9.4 30.5 29.4 21.4 9.4 100.0 1,157,857
Magway 12.4 33.0 27.8 18.8 8.0 100.0 877,802
Mandalay 4.6 19.6 30.4 31.2 14.2 100.0 1,369,559
Mon 4.3 20.7 32.4 29.9 12.7 100.0 399,556
Rakhine 12.2 41.2 21.7 14.3 10.6 100.0 647,767
Yangon 2.0 9.9 22.5 42.1 23.6 100.0 1,711,561
Shan 10.7 28.7 28.5 21.2 10.9 100.0 1,123,111
Ayeyawady 17.6 32.5 25.8 15.6 8.6 100.0 1,455,636
Nay Pyi Taw 4.4 17.9 30.1 28.3 19.3 100.0 266,076

Chapter 11: Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)
Chapter Water, Sanitation and
Hygiene (WASH) 11
Access to safe drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) is essential for good health, welfare
and productivity and is recognized as a human right. Inadequate WASH is among the leading causes
for the transmission of diseases such as diarrhoea, cholera, dysentery, hepatitis A, typhoid and polio.
Diarrhoeal diseases contribute to undernutrition and stunting and it remains a leading global cause of
child deaths.
11.1 Drinking water
11.1.1 Accessibility
Drinking water may be contaminated with human or animal faeces containing pathogens, or with
chemical and physical contaminants with harmful effects on people’s health especially on child’s
health and development. While improving water quality is critical to prevent disease, improving the
accessibility and availability of drinking water is equally important, particularly for women and girls
who usually bear the primary responsibility for carrying water, often for long distances.
The distribution of households by main source of drinking water is shown in Table 11.1. Households
using improved sources of drinking water are those using any of the following types of supply: piped
water (into dwelling, compound, yard or plot, to neighbour, public tap/standpipe), tube well/borehole,
protected dug well, protected spring, rainwater collection, and packaged or bottled water or home
water purifier.
Table 11.1: Proportion of households with access to improved/unimproved sources of drinking

water, by urban and rural areas
Improved drinking water source (%) Unimproved drinking water source (%)
Protected well/ spring
Borehole or tube well
Public tap/ standpipe
dwelling/compound/
Bottled water/ Home
Tanker-tanker/ Cart
with tank/ drum &
Unprotected well/
Piped water Into
plot/ neighbour
Total no. of
water purifier
Surface water
Area
Rainwater
households
Others
spring
Total
Total
UNION 11,162,510 10.9 6.0 27.3 14.1 2.0 21.7 82.1 3.2 2.3 12.4 17.9
Urban 3,120,314 11.1 2.2 14.9 6.1 1.1 57.1 92.4 0.8 3.1 3.7 7.6
Rural 8,042,196 10.9 7.5 32.1 17.2 2.4 8.0 78.1 4.1 2.0 15.8 21.9
In Myanmar, 82.1 percent of households had access to an improved drinking water source. The
proportion of households in the urban areas with access to an improved drinking water source was
higher (92.4%) than in the rural areas (78.1%). Only 10.9 percent of households have access to piped
water. The most common source was borehole or tubewell (27.3%) with 32.1 percent of households
in the rural areas having this type of water source. On the other hand, the most common source in
the urban areas was packed or bottled water or home water purifier (57.1%). Among the unimproved
water sources, surface water (river, stream, dam, lake, pond, canal and irrigation) was the common
among the households (12.4%) especially in the rural areas (15.8%).
11.1.2 Availability and quality
Drinking water
Service ladder Progressive realization
services
SDG 6.1 At least basic Drinking water from an improved source
Safely managed drinking which is located inside the user’s dwelling,
water plot or yard, available when needed and free
drinking water
services of faecal & priority chemical contamination,
services refers to such as arsenic & fluoride. Only faecal
either safely coliforms test was conducted for this survey.
managed or
Improved water basic drinking Drinking water from an improved source and
water collection time is not more than 30 minutes
sources: Piped Basic service
services for a roundtrip including queuing
water into dwelling/
yard/compound, Drinking water from an improved source and
Limited
public taps or collection time is over 30 minutes for a roundtrip
service
standpipes, tube including queuing
wells/ boreholes, Drinking water from unprotected dug wells or

protected dug wells, unprotected springs or any other source where
Unimproved
protected springs, water is not protected from the outside
environment
rainwater collection
and water purifier/ Surface Drinking water from a river, dam, lake, pond,
bottled water water stream, canal or irrigation channel/ditches
The distribution of households by drinking water services is shown in Figure 11.1. It is found that 81.7
percent of households in Myanmar have access to at-least basic drinking water services20 with 41.4
percent of the households using a safely managed drinking water service; that is, one located on
premises, available when needed and free from E-Coli contamination21 and 40.3 percent using only
a basic drinking water which is accessing an improved water source only within 30 minutes of water
collection time. Some 63.8 percent and 32.7 percent of households that used safely managed
drinking water services lived in urban and rural areas, respectively. Only 0.4 percent of households in
Myanmar spent over 30 minutes per round trip to collect water from an improved source (constituting
20
At least basic drinking water services refers to either safely managed or basic drinking water service
21
Only E-Coli test was conducted for drinking water at point of use in this 2019 Inter-censal Survey.
128
The Union Report
a limited22 drinking water service). However, 5.5 percent of households use unimproved water sources
and 12.4 percent of households (3.7% in urban and 15.8% in rural) still collected drinking water directly
from surface water.
Figure 11.1: Proportion of household by status of drinking water services, urban and rural areas
UNION
Figure 11.2 shows that 71.5 percent of households in Myanmar got drinking water from improved
sources and were available when needed. About 65.3 percent of households got water from (87.0%
in urban and 56.9% in rural) improved sources located on premises, while 4.6 percent of households
in Myanmar got water from unimproved sources located on premises. In addition, 56.3 percent of
households got drinking water from improved sources which were free from E-coli contamination.
22
Drinking water from an improved source and collection time is over 30 minutes for a round trip including
queuing
Figure 11.2: Proportion of households with improved, basic and safely managed drinking water
In Myanmar, 30.1 percent of households got their drinking water outside of their premises. This
was more common among the households in the rural areas (37.9%) than in the urban areas (9.8%).
Among households without access to drinking water on premises, two in five households reported
that both the male and female member of the households collected water from the source. However,
in three out of ten households, it was the female member who collected water. About 83 percent
of households (90% in urban and 80% in rural) in Myanmar had drinking water available in sufficient
quantities.
The survey also revealed that about 65 percent of households in Myanmar were drinking water free
from E-Coli contamination. Area wise, E-coli was detected in drinking water of 39.5 percent of
households in rural areas compared to 24.7 percent of households in urban areas. By State/Region
level, Kachin State reported by far, the lowest proportion of households (42.3%) using water free from
E-Coli. Rakhine State followed with 44.0 percent, while Kayah, Magway and Sagaing reported the
highest proportion of at least 75 percent.
Nine in ten households (92.3%) in urban areas had access to basic drinking water services while only
eight in ten households (77.5%) in rural areas (Figure 11.3)
By State/Region level, Rakhine State reported by far the lowest proportion of households (44.3%)
using a basic service (71.2% in the urban areas and 39.2% in the rural areas). The second lowest State
was Ayeyawady Region with 65.3 percent (77.9% in urban and 63.4% in rural), while Nay Pyi Taw,
Mandalay, Sagaing, and Kachin reported the highest proportions with at least 90 percent. In addition,
one in two households in Rakhine State (23.8% in urban and 54.7% in rural) and three in ten
households in Ayeyawady Region (8.4% in urban and 32.4% in rural) drew water from surface water
such as river, stream, dam, lake, pond, canal and irrigation for drinking. The distribution of the households
by type of drinking water services is shown in Figure 11.3.
130
The Union Report
Figure 11.3: Proportion of households with access to at least basic drinking water services by
State/Region
UNION
11.2 Sanitation
Unsafe management of human excreta and poor personal hygiene are closely associated with
diarrhoea as well as parasitic infections, such as soil transmitted helminths (worms). Improved
sanitation and hygiene can reduce diarrhoeal disease by more than a third and can substantially
reduce the health impact of soil-transmitted helminth infection and a range of other neglected tropical
diseases which affect over 1 billion people worldwide.
An improved sanitation facility is defined as one that hygienically separates human excreta from
human contact. Improved sanitation facilities include flush or pour flush to piped sewer systems,
septic tanks or pit latrines, ventilated improved pit latrines, pit latrines with slabs and composting
toilets. Table 11.2 shows the proportion of households by type of toilet facilities and whether they are
classified as improved or unimproved.

Table 11.2: Proportion of households by type of toilet facilities, urban and rural areas
Improved toilet facilities (%) Unimproved toilet facilities (%)
No facility/ Bush/ Field

Hanging toilet/ latrine
Flush to piped sewer/
sanitation and others

Ventilated improved
Pit latrine with slab
Flush to open drain
Pit latrine without
(Open Defecation)
Flush to pit latrine
Container based
slab/ Open pit
septic tank
pit latrine
Total no. of
Area
Total
Total
households
UNION 11,162,510 26.1 59.2 1.6 4.5 91.4 1.0 1.6 0.3 0.8 4.9 8.6
Urban 3,120,314 51.9 42.0 1.1 2.8 97.9 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.6 2.1
Rural 8,042,196 16.1 65.9 1.8 5.2 88.9 1.2 2.1 0.3 1.0 6.5 11.1
In Myanmar, 91.4 percent of households have access to an improved sanitation facility (97.9% of
urban households and 88.9% of rural households). However, only 26.1 percent of households have a
flush toilet linked to a sewer system or septic tank. On the other hand, 8.6 percent of households used
an unimproved sanitation facility (2.1% of urban households and 11.1% of rural households). About
5 percent of all households still practiced open defecation (dispose of faeces in fields, forests, bushes,
open bodies of water, beaches or other open spaces), with higher proportion in the rural areas (6.5%).
11.2.2 Treatment and Disposal
Sanitation services Service ladder Progressive realization
At least Basic Use of improved sanitation facilities which

Safely managed are not shared on premises with other
sanitation services households and where excreta are safely
SDG 6.2 sanitation
refers to either disposed in situ or transported and treated
services off-site or pit latrines that are sealed when
safely managed they become full and new pits dug
or basic sanitation
Use of improved sanitation facilities which
Improved sanitation Basic service services are not shared on premises with other
households
facilities: Flush/pour
flush to: piped sewer Limited service Use of improved sanitation facilities which are shared with two or
more households
system; septic tank;
Use of pit latrines without a slab or platform and pits are not
pit latrine, ventilated
Unimproved covered properly to protect fly entering, hanging latrines and bucket
improved pit (VIP) latrines
Latrine, pit latrine

Disposal of human faeces in fields, forest, bushes, open bodies of
with slab Open defecation water, beaches or other open spaces or with solid waste

132
The Union Report
The distribution of households by different sanitation services is shown in Figure 11.4. About 79.6
percent of households in Myanmar used at least basic sanitation service (an improved sanitation
facility which is not shared on premises with other households), with higher proportion among urban
households (82.5%) than rural households (78.5%). In Myanmar, 11.9 percent of households used
limited sanitation service (improved sanitation facilities that are shared with other households). The
proportion was higher among urban households (15.4%) than rural households (10.5%).
Figure 11.4: Proportion of households by status of sanitation services, urban and rural areas
UNION
Only 2.4 percent of households (7.6% in urban and 0.3% in rural) used a service provider for emptying
and removal of excreta from septic tanks to treatment site while 16.8 percent of households never
emptied the septic tanks. Less than one percent of households used a service provider to empty and
remove excreta from other improved sanitation facilities (latrines and container based sanitation) and
about 17.8 percent buried in a covered pit. About 45 percent of households never emptied the on-site
sanitation facilities.
About 84 percent of households using improved on-site sanitation systems (including shared)
practiced safe disposal in situ of excreta and 4.1 percent of households removed excreta for treatment
off-site (Figure 11.5).

Figure 11.5: Proportion of households by management of excreta from household sanitation
facilities
The distribution of the households by at-least basic sanitation services by State/Region is shown in
Figure 11.6. By State/Region level, Rakhine State reported by far the lowest proportion of households
(54.8%) that used a basic sanitation service (87.7% among urban households and 48.6% among rural
households). The second lowest State/Region were Mandalay (76.3%) and Yangon (77.7%). In
addition, Rakhine reported the highest proportion of households (31.7%) that practiced open
defecation. Kayin State followed with 9.7 percent of households.

134
The Union Report
Figure 11.6: Proportion of households with access to at least basic sanitation services by
State/Region
UNION
11.3 Hygiene
Handwashing with water and soap is the most cost-effective health intervention to reduce both the
incidence of diarrhoea and pneumonia in children under five. It is most effective when done using
water and soap after visiting a toilet or cleaning a child, before eating or handling food and before
feeding a child. Direct observation of hand washing behaviour was not done during the ICS as it will
consume much time for interviewer to complete the interview. Instead, interviewers were asked to
see the place where people wash their hands and observe whether water and soap (or other local
cleansing materials) were available at this place.

Hygiene services Service ladder Progressive realization
A hand washing facility is available (having a specific
SDG 6.2 Basic service place for hand washing) where water and soap or other
cleansing agent are present (observed during survey).
A handwashing facility is available (having a specific place
Handwashing facility Limited service for hand washing), but lacking water and/or soap.
with soap and water
available at home: No Service No handwashing facility observed.
Figure 11.7: Proportion of households by status of basic hygiene services, urban and rural areas
UNION
In Myanmar, 72.3 percent of households use a basic handwashing service with a handwashing facility
on premises with soap and water including 75.7 percent of urban households and 71.0 percent of rural
households while 22.3 percent of households use a limited service meaning a handwashing facility
is available (having a specific place for hand washing), but lacking water and/or soap. In addition, no
handwashing was observed in 4.9 percent of households (3.1% in urban and 5.6% in rural). The
distribution of the household by basic hygiene services by State/Region is shown in Figure 11.8.

136
The Union Report
Figure 11.8: Proportion of household by basic hygiene services, State/Region
UNION
By the State/Region level, Nay Pyi Taw reported the lowest proportion of households (67.2%) with
handwashing facility with soap and water followed by Ayeyawady (67.6%) and Bago (68.9%). On the
other hand, the highest proportion was recorded in Kayin (80.6%).
11.4 Solid waste management
Only 17.5 percent of households had access to formal service provider for solid waste collection (53.1
percent in urban areas and 3.6 percent in rural areas) while 56.7 percent of households disposed their
solid waste in designated area or within household premises or buried/burned them.
Moreover, 22.3 percent of households disposed their solid waste elsewhere and other (6.9% of
urban households and 28.3% of rural households). The distribution of households by type of solid
waste disposal services and methods is shown in Table 11.3.

Table 11.3: Proportion of households with access to service providers for waste disposal, urban
and rural areas
Solid waste disposal (%)
Total no. of Collected by Collected by Disposed of in

Area Disposed of
households formal informal designated area/
elsewhere &
service service within household/
others
provider provider buried/ burned
UNION 11,162,510 17.5 3.5 56.7 22.3
Urban 3,120,314 53.1 7.7 32.3 6.9
Rural 8,042,196 3.6 1.9 66.1 28.3
By State/Region level, Ayeyawady Region reported the lowest proportion of households (7.4%) that
had access to formal service provider for solid waste disposal followed by Chin State (8.0% of
households). The highest proportion were in Yangon and Mandalay (both had 27.8%) (Figure 11.9).
Figure 11.9: Proportion of households by type of solid waste disposal services and methods,
State/Region
UNION

138
The Union Report
Glossary of terms and definitions
Adolescent fertility rate: is defined as the number of births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 19.
Age: Number of years a person has lived at their last birthday in reference to the conducting date and
time of enumeration for 2019 ICS. When the age was not known, interviewers were trained to use
other ways of establishing the age of the respondent, including calendars of events, conversion tables,
etc. The interpretation of age information is given below: a) The 0 (less than 1) year olds are those
whose age is less than one year. b) The 1 year olds are those aged 1 year or more but less than 2 years.
c) The 0-4 year age group are those aged less than 5 years. d. The 5-9 year age group are those aged
5 years and more but less than 10 years. e. The group 90+ included those aged 90 years or older.
Ageing Index: refers to the number of elders per 100 persons younger than 15 years old in a specific
population.
Age-specific fertility rate (ASFR): measures the annual number of live births to women of a specified
age or age group per 1,000 women in that age group. An age-specific fertility rate is generally
computed as a ratio. The numerator is the number of live births to women in a particular age group
during a period of time, and the denominator is an estimate of the number of person-years lived by
women in that same age group during the same period of time. It is expressed as births per 1,000
women.
Child marriage: refers to any formal marriage or informal union between a child under the age of 18
and an adult or another child. It is measured as the percentage of women 20–24 years old who were
first married or in union before they reached the age of 18 years.
Conventional household: A conventional household includes one or more persons who are either
related or unrelated and share living quarters (single quarter or compound) and meals. The household
members would be eating food prepared from the same cooking pot. In most cases, there would be
one person acknowledged by the household members as the head of the household.
Crude birth rate (CBR): indicates the number of live births per 1,000 population in a given year.
Crude death rate (CDR): is simply the number of deaths occurring during the year per 1,000
population in a given period.
Dependency ratio: The total dependency ratio is the ratio of dependents (people younger than 15
years and older than 64) to the population of working-age (age 15-64).
Disability: is a situation where a person is at a greater risk than the general population of experiencing
restrictions in performing routine activities (including activities of daily living) or participating in roles
(such as work) if no supportive measures are offered. The difficulties covered in the 2019 ICS included:
a. Seeing (vision difficulties or problems of any kind even when wearing glasses);
b. Hearing (hearing limitations or problems of any kind even when using a hearing aid);
c. Walking or climbing (limitations or problems of any kind getting around on foot or lifting
items by hand, problems of climbing steps or lifting objects or gripping);
d. Remembering or concentrating (difficulties in doing their daily activities, slow learning
development making it hard to compete with their counterparts at school or other mental
conditions);
e. Self-care (problems with taking care of themselves independently such as washing all over
or dressing);
f. Communication (problems with talking, listening or understanding speech such that it
contributes to difficulty in making themselves understood to others or understanding others).
Employee: A person who performs work for somebody else in return of payment in cash or in kind.
Included in this group are wage/salary-earners, paid apprentices, casual workers, persons who are
working on a piece rate, etc.
Employer (His/her own business with employees): Persons who run business on their own work or
with one or more partners, including a farm, etc. and who hire paid employees on regular basis while
doing so, are considered to be employers.
Employment: Persons in employment are defined as all those of working age who, during a reference
period of seven days, were engaged in any activity to produce goods or services for pay or profit at
least one hour.
General fertility rate (GFR): a refined measure of fertility, is defined as the number of live births per
1,000 women aged 15-49 in a given year.
Handwashing facilities: can consist of a sink with tap water but can also include other devices such
as buckets with taps, tippy-taps and portable basins that contain, transport or regulate the flow of
water. Water and soap such as bar soap, liquid soap, powder detergent and soapy water are available
at home.

140
The Union Report
Head of household: The head of a conventional household is the household member who makes key
decisions and is recognized as head of the household by others. The head of household may be male or
female. The person is not necessarily mainly responsible for earning the livelihood for the household.
Helping without pay in a household/family business: Persons who work without receiving a wage or a
salary in the market-oriented establishment/farm operated by a related person (usually a person living
in the same household). Such persons cannot be regarded as a business paretner.
Highest level of education completed: The highest grade/standard/diploma/degree completed within

the most advanced level attended in the education system of the country where the education was
received. It covered both public and private institutions accredited by government.
Housing unit/Dwelling unit: A housing unit is a place of abode or a residence occupied by one or more
households. A housing unit must have a private entrance. As mentioned above, there can be one or
several housing units within a structure.
Improved sources of drinking water: include piped water into dwelling, piped water into compound/
yard or plot, public taps, standpipes, tube wells, boreholes, protected dug wells and springs, rainwater,
and packaged or bottled water/home water purifier.
Improved toilet facilities: include any toilet of the following types: flush/pour flush toilets to piped
sewer systems, septic tanks, and pit latrines; ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrines and pit latrines with
slabs.
Infant mortality rate (IMR): The number of deaths to infants before they reach one year of age, per
1,000 live births in the same period.
In-migrant (or immigrant): is a migrant who has moved into a migration defining area.
In-migrantion rate: is the number of in-migrants arriving at a destination per 1,000 population of that
destination in a given year.
Internal migration: is a movement involving a change of usual residence between Townships/

Districts/States/Regions.
International migration: is a movement involving a change of country of usual residence.

Labour force: comprises all persons of working age who furnish the supply of labour for the production
of goods and services during a specified time-reference period. It refers to the sum of all persons of
working age who are employed and those who are unemployed.
Life expectancy at birth: shows the overall mortality level of a population. It summarizes the mortality
pattern that prevails across all age groups - children and adolescents, adults and the elderly.
Lifetime migrants: in this survey are defined as those persons who have moved between Townships at
any time since their birth (including those who returned to their Township of birth in the interval from
birth to the date of the Survey).
Literacy: The ability to read and write a simple sentence in any language with understanding.
Marital status: Status of the enumerated person in relation to the institution of marriage. The marital
status was described by four categories: Single/never married, married, widowed and divorced/separated.
Mean household size: Mean household size is the ratio of the total population in households to the
number of households in an area.
Median age: The age that divides a given population numerically in half. Fifty percent of the
population is younger than the median age and 50 percent of the population is older than the median age.
Net migration rate (net out-migration/In-migration rate): is for any place and time interval, the
in-migration rate minus the out-migration rate. A positive (negative) net migration rate signifies an
increase (decrease) in population as a result of migration. If a net migration rate is negative, its
absolute value (the number less the sign) is a net out-migration rate.
Numeracy: The ability to do simple addition and subtraction calculation without using calculator or phone.
Out-migrant (or emigrant): is a migrant who has moved out of a migration defining area.
Out-migrantion Rate: is the number of emigrants departing an area of origin per 1,000 population of
that area of origin in a given year.
Out of labour force: Persons outside the labour force are those of working age who were neither in
employment nor in unemployment in the short reference period.
Overcrowding: is defined as being above a specific threshold (1.5 persons per room and 2 persons
per bedroom). Crowding is calculated as the number of persons living in the household per number of
rooms or bedrooms available in the house.
142
The Union Report
Own account worker: This refers to a self-employed person who does not hire paid employees on a
regular basis. Own account worker may work on their own, or with one or more partners, and engage
unpaid family workers to run a business or farm, etc. A person working for commission should also be
categorized as an own account worker.
Parent support ratio: is the number of persons aged 85 and over per 100 persons aged 50-64.
Place of birth: is the administrative township which was the usual place of residence of the mother at
the time of the person’s birth. In the case of person born outside Myanmar, the place of birth is the
country where the person was born.
Place of previous residence: is administrative township where a person usually lived before moving
to the current residence. In cases where a person has not moved, the place of current residence and
previous residence are the same.
Place of usual residence: is the administrative township where a person has lived for more than 6
months or she/he intends to live for more than 6 months.
Population ageing: is the increasing share of older persons in the population.
Population density: is the number of persons per unit of land area, usually quoted per square
kilometer or square mile.
Potential support ratio: is the number of persons aged 15-59 per number of persons aged 60 and over.
Relationship to the head of household: Household members are defined by their relationship to the
head of household (e.g. spouse, child, sister, brother).
Rural area: Areas classified by the General Administration Department (GAD) as village tracts.
Generally these are areas with low population density and a land use which is predominantly
agricultural.
School attendance: is defined as regular attendance at any regular accredited educational institution
or programme, public or private, for organized learning at any level of education at the time of the
survey.
Sex ratio: The number of males for every 100 females in a population.
Singulate mean age at marriage (SMAM): is the average length of single life expressed in years among
those who marry before age 50.
Structure: is a building used for the purposes of residential, business, religious or any other activity.
Only structures used for residential purposes were included in the 2019 Inter-censal Survey (2019 ICS).
A structure can contain one or several housing units.
Total fertility rate (TFR): in simple terms, refers to the total number of children born or likely to be
born to a woman in her lifetime if she were subject to the prevailing rate of age-specific fertility in the
population.
Total marital fertility rate (TMFR): is defined as five times the sum of the age-specific marital fertility
rates. It is interpreted as the mean number of children that a woman would eventually have if she got
married at age 15, survived to the end of the childbearing period.
Under-five mortality rate (U5MR): The number of children who died before reaching five years of age,
per 1,000 live births in the same time period.
Unemployment: Persons in unemployment are defined as all those of working age who were not in
employment, carried out activities to seek employment during a specified recent period and were
currently available to take up employment given a job opportunity.
Urban area: Areas classified by the General Administration Department (GAD) as wards. Generally
these areas have an increased density of building structures, population and better infrastructural
development.
Whipple’s index
Whipple’s index is calculated by adding the number of all persons in the age range 23-62, who have
reported their age as ending in 0 and 5, and dividing this sum by the total population aged 23-62,
and multiplying this result by 5. The result is expressed as a percentage which ranges between 100
(indicating no preference for age reporting ending in 0 and 5) and 500 (all persons report their age
ending in 0 and 5). If the Whipple’s Index score is less than 105, the data are described as being very
accurate; between 105 and 110, fairly accurate; between 110 and 125, approximate; between 125 and
175, rough; and over 175, very rough.23
Myer’s blended method
The Myer's Blended Index is similar to the Whipple’s Index, except that it considers preference (or
avoidance) for ages ending in any number from 0 to 9. The theoretical range of the index is from 0 to
90, where 0 indicates no age heaping and 90 indicates every age reported ending in the same digit.24
United Nations (1955). Manual II: Methods of appraisal of quality of basic data for population estimates.
23 & 24
United Nations Population Studies No. 23. New York

144
The Union Report
United Nations age-sex accuracy index
The United Natons Age-Sex Accuracy Index is to evaluate the quality of reported age-sex
distribution in five-year age groups. This index is calculated as three times the average of sex-ratio
differences plus the average of the deviations from 100 of male and female ageratios. Census
age-sex data are described by the United Nations as “accurate,” “inaccurate,” or “highly inaccurate”
depending on whether the UN index is under 20, 20 to 40, or over 40.25
The Methods and Materials of Demography (Second edition) Edited by Jacob S. Siegel David A. Swanson
25

Annex 1: Sampling errors of selected indicators
Table SE1: Estimated total population in conventional households and its standard errors by District.
95% Confidence Interval

District Estimate SE CV(%)
Lower Limit Upper Limit
KACHIN
Myitkyina 608,198 29,993 4.9 549,396 667,001
Mohnyin 529,375 23,178 4.4 483,933 574,816
Bhamo 345,561 11,563 3.3 322,890 368,232
Putao 101,241 2,991 3.0 95,376 107,106
KAYAH
Loikaw 274,681 10,666 3.9 253,768 295,593
Bawlakhe 36,768 2,331 6.3 32,197 41,338
KAYIN
Hipa-an 843,083 42,761 5.1 759,247 926,918
Pharpon 38,798 4,119 10.6 30,722 46,873
Myawady 191,194 11,937 6.2 167,792 214,597
Kawkareik 483,477 27,479 5.7 429,603 537,352
CHIN
Haka 100,392 4,630 4.6 91,314 109,471
Falam 158,689 11,005 6.9 137,113 180,265
Mindat 151,611 38,378 25.3 76,367 226,854
Matupi 98,345 27,763 28.2 43,913 152,777
SAGAING
Sagaing 507,308 16,085 3.2 475,773 538,844
Shwebo 1,060,889 71,250 6.7 921,197 1,200,581
Monywa 735,164 24,715 3.4 686,708 783,620
Katha 530,093 59,203 11.2 414,020 646,166
Kalay 500,649 14,977 3.0 471,284 530,013
Tamu 121,462 6,108 5.0 109,487 133,438
Mawlaik 169,252 4,843 2.9 159,758 178,746
Hkamti 406,378 15,809 3.9 375,383 437,374
Yinmarpin 534,150 13,805 2.6 507,085 561,216
Kawlin 351,753 52,527 14.9 248,770 454,736
Kambalu 392,815 74,657 19.0 246,443 539,187
TANINTHARYI
Dawei 541,897 15,186 2.8 512,125 571,670
Myeik 681,003 24,169 3.5 633,619 728,388

Kawthoung 203,526 14,225 7.0 175,637 231,415
BAGO
Bago 1,750,285 58,002 3.3 1,636,567 1,864,003
Toungoo 1,142,369 33,235 2.9 1,077,209 1,207,529
Pyay 886,230 25,496 2.9 836,243 936,216
Thayawady 1,035,699 24,557 2.4 987,552 1,083,846
MAGWAY
Magway 1,243,064 38,261 3.1 1,168,050 1,318,079
Minbu 623,064 20,599 3.3 582,677 663,451
Thayet 715,251 24,395 3.4 667,422 763,080
Pakokku 987,186 27,190 2.8 933,877 1,040,495
Gangaw 236,646 6,566 2.8 223,773 249,518
MANDALAY
Mandalay 1,569,198 51,264 3.3 1,468,691 1,669,706
Pyin Oo Lwin 967,763 32,074 3.3 904,879 1,030,647
Kyaukse 781,672 21,448 2.7 739,621 823,722
Myingyan 856,153 62,997 7.4 732,642 979,663
Nyaung U 498,594 49,008 9.8 402,510 594,678
Yame` Thin 533,448 19,133 3.6 495,937 570,959
Meiktila 961,397 37,734 3.9 887,417 1,035,378
MON
Mawlamyine 1,150,763 35,970 3.1 1,080,241 1,221,285
Thaton 738,511 24,307 3.3 690,854 786,167
RAKHINE
Sittway 1,563,653 156,874 10.0 1,256,088 1,871,217
Kyaukpyu 917,814 68,694 7.5 783,133 1,052,496
Thandwe 748,708 23,108 3.1 703,402 794,013
YANGON
North Yangon 3,037,764 103,813 3.4 2,834,230 3,241,299
East Yangon 2,510,234 57,698 2.3 2,397,112 2,623,356
South Yangon 1,427,501 47,445 3.3 1,334,482 1,520,521
West Yangon 856,330 35,495 4.1 786,739 925,922
SHAN
Taunggyi 1,860,283 49,548 2.7 1,763,140 1,957,426
Loilin 559,554 30,685 5.5 499,392 619,715
Linkhe` 135,424 5,828 4.3 123,998 146,851

150
The Union Report
Lashio 686,509 25,443 3.7 636,626 736,392
Muse 477,088 26,174 5.5 425,772 528,403
Kyaukme 664,008 48,311 7.3 569,290 758,725
Kengtung 380,409 26,316 6.9 328,814 432,003
Minesat 206,804 13,346 6.5 180,638 232,970
Tachileik 289,567 15,139 5.2 259,886 319,248
Momeik 124,600 43,602 35.0 39,114 210,086
AYEYAWADY
Pathein 1,549,121 49,618 3.2 1,451,842 1,646,401
Phyapon 917,758 27,940 3.0 862,978 972,537
Maubin 1,042,593 41,012 3.9 962,185 1,123,002
Myaungmya 835,211 31,016 3.7 774,401 896,020
Labutta 644,750 30,347 4.7 585,253 704,247
Hinthada 1,150,568 18,962 1.6 1,113,391 1,187,744
NAY PYI TAW
Ottara 576,485 21,256 3.7 534,811 618,159
Dekkhina 606,829 17,030 2.8 573,441 640,217

Table SE2: Estimated total population in conventional households and its standard errors by
State/Region

State/Region Estimate SE CV(%)
UNION 51,144,607 298,945 0.6 50,558,675 51,730,539
Kachin 1,584,375 39,742 2.5 1,506,457 1,662,292
Kayah 311,448 10,918 3.5 290,042 332,854
Kayin 1,556,552 52,374 3.4 1,453,869 1,659,235
Chin 509,037 23,331 4.6 463,294 554,779
Sagaing 5,309,914 59,524 1.1 5,193,212 5,426,615
Tanintharyi 1,426,426 31,892 2.2 1,363,900 1,488,953
Bago 4,814,582 75,643 1.6 4,666,277 4,962,887
Magway 3,805,211 57,147 1.5 3,693,169 3,917,253
Mandalay 6,168,225 84,058 1.4 6,003,423 6,333,027
Mon 1,889,274 43,413 2.3 1,804,159 1,974,389
Rakhine 3,230,175 172,807 5.3 2,891,372 3,568,978
Yangon 7,831,830 132,730 1.7 7,571,603 8,092,058
Shan 5,384,244 80,595 1.5 5,226,231 5,542,256
Ayeyawady 6,140,001 84,658 1.4 5,974,020 6,305,981
Nay Pyi Taw 1,183,314 27,236 2.3 1,129,915 1,236,713
Table SE3: Estimated total number of life-time migrants and its standard errors by State/Region

UNION 8,392,475 146,127 1.7 8,105,980 8,678,970
Kachin 303,937 23,213 7.6 258,425 349,448
Kayah 50,253 6,769 13.5 36,982 63,524
Kayin 247,540 18,594 7.5 211,085 283,994
Chin 52,672 6,505 12.3 39,919 65,426
Sagaing 460,357 19,720 4.3 421,694 499,020
Tanintharyi 162,134 9,541 5.9 143,428 180,841
Bago 421,854 20,899 5.0 380,880 462,828
Magway 273,783 13,013 4.8 248,271 299,296
Mandalay 987,919 49,513 5.0 890,845 1,084,993
Mon 220,133 15,810 7.2 189,137 251,129
Rakhine 300,267 29,404 9.8 242,617 357,916
Yangon 3,502,268 116,995 3.3 3,272,888 3,731,647
Shan 723,958 35,832 4.9 653,706 794,210
Ayeyawady 442,829 18,668 4.2 406,229 479,429
Nay Pyi Taw 242,573 20,200 8.3 202,968 282,177

152
The Union Report
Table SE4: Estimated total number of international migrants and its standard errors by
State/Region

UNION 1,632,342 34,616 2.1 1,564,474 1,700,210
Kachin 20,006 2,469 12.3 15,166 24,847
Kayah 8,231 1,614 19.6 5,066 11,396
Kayin 211,305 12,680 6.0 186,444 236,166
Chin 36,120 3,167 8.8 29,911 42,330
Sagaing 66,297 4,953 7.5 56,586 76,008
Tanintharyi 91,409 6,298 6.9 79,062 103,757
Bago 195,038 12,159 6.2 171,200 218,875
Magway 123,938 8,148 6.6 107,963 139,912
Mandalay 107,541 6,890 6.4 94,033 121,049
Mon 293,293 15,235 5.2 263,423 323,163
Rakhine 62,829 15,991 25.5 31,477 94,181
Yangon 120,872 6,022 5.0 109,064 132,679
Shan 193,535 11,762 6.1 170,476 216,595
Ayeyawady 74,152 4,734 6.4 64,872 83,433
Nay Pyi Taw 27,775 2,831 10.2 22,224 33,326
Table SE5: Estimated total fertility rate and its standard errors by State/Region

UNION 2.044 0.026 1.3 1.994 2.095
Kachin 2.247 0.121 5.4 2.009 2.484
Kayah 2.648 0.292 11.0 2.077 3.220
Kayin 2.556 0.172 6.7 2.218 2.894
Chin 3.427 0.274 8.0 2.890 3.965
Sagaing 2.187 0.067 3.1 2.056 2.319
Tanintharyi 1.966 0.114 5.8 1.743 2.188
Bago 2.128 0.085 4.0 1.962 2.293
Magway 1.929 0.082 4.3 1.768 2.090
Mandalay 2.036 0.065 3.2 1.908 2.164
Mon 2.059 0.109 5.3 1.845 2.273
Rakhine 1.882 0.189 10.0 1.512 2.252
Yangon 1.674 0.065 3.9 1.547 1.802
Shan 2.407 0.090 3.8 2.230 2.584
Ayeyawady 1.997 0.072 3.6 1.856 2.137
Nay Pyi Taw 1.923 0.123 6.4 1.681 2.164

Table SE6: Estimated crude birth rate and its standard errors by State/Region

UNION 0.017 0.000 1.2 0.016 0.017
Kachin 0.018 0.001 4.9 0.016 0.019
Kayah 0.021 0.002 10.0 0.017 0.025
Kayin 0.017 0.001 6.4 0.015 0.019
Chin 0.024 0.002 9.2 0.020 0.028
Sagaing 0.018 0.001 3.0 0.017 0.019
Tanintharyi 0.014 0.001 5.8 0.013 0.016
Bago 0.016 0.001 3.9 0.015 0.018
Magway 0.016 0.001 4.2 0.015 0.017
Mandalay 0.018 0.001 3.2 0.017 0.019
Mon 0.015 0.001 5.3 0.013 0.016
Rakhine 0.015 0.001 6.7 0.013 0.016
Yangon 0.016 0.001 4.0 0.014 0.017
Shan 0.020 0.001 3.7 0.018 0.021
Ayeyawady 0.015 0.001 3.7 0.014 0.016
Nay Pyi Taw 0.017 0.001 6.3 0.015 0.019
Table SE7: Estimated crude death rate and its standard errors by State/Region

UNION 0.008 0.000 3.8 0.007 0.008
Kachin 0.006 0.000 8.0 0.005 0.007
Kayah 0.006 0.001 13.9 0.004 0.008
Kayin 0.007 0.001 10.0 0.006 0.008
Chin 0.006 0.001 13.7 0.004 0.007
Sagaing 0.006 0.000 4.9 0.006 0.007
Tanintharyi 0.007 0.001 10.1 0.005 0.008
Bago 0.008 0.000 5.6 0.007 0.009
Magway 0.008 0.000 6.2 0.007 0.009
Mandalay 0.008 0.000 4.8 0.007 0.009
Mon 0.007 0.001 9.4 0.005 0.008
Rakhine 0.011 0.003 25.8 0.005 0.016
Yangon 0.009 0.000 5.0 0.008 0.010
Shan 0.007 0.000 5.4 0.006 0.008
Ayeyawady 0.008 0.000 4.8 0.007 0.008
Nay Pyi Taw 0.008 0.001 10.0 0.006 0.009

154
The Union Report
Table SE8: Estimated under five mortality rate and its standard errors by State/Region

UNION 0.0491 0.0023 4.7 0.0446 0.0536
Kachin 0.0435 0.0069 15.9 0.0299 0.0571
Kayah 0.0417 0.0088 21.0 0.0246 0.0589
Kayin 0.0316 0.0077 24.4 0.0165 0.0467
Chin 0.0377 0.0091 24.2 0.0198 0.0555
Sagaing 0.0469 0.0050 10.6 0.0372 0.0566
Tanintharyi 0.0382 0.0090 23.6 0.0205 0.0558
Bago 0.0521 0.0061 11.7 0.0401 0.0640
Magway 0.0711 0.0069 9.8 0.0575 0.0847
Mandalay 0.0502 0.0051 10.1 0.0402 0.0601
Mon 0.0421 0.0070 16.6 0.0284 0.0558
Rakhine 0.0474 0.0268 56.5 -0.0051 0.0999
Yangon 0.0334 0.0053 15.8 0.0231 0.0438
Shan 0.0443 0.0046 10.4 0.0353 0.0532
Ayeyawady 0.0677 0.0058 8.5 0.0564 0.0790
Nay Pyi Taw 0.0591 0.0101 17.2 0.0392 0.0789

Annex 2: Accuracy and evaluation of age and sex
The quality of 2019 ICS age data was evaluated by using the United Nations Age-sex Accuracy Index,
Whipple’s Index, and Myer's Blended Index. Age heaping and digit preference was measured by
calculating Whipple’s Index and Myer’s Blended index.
According to the United Nations Age-Sex Accuracy Index, the accuracy of 2019 ICS age data was 11.2
which can be considered as “accurate”. The Whipple’s Index shows that 2019 ICS can be defined as
“very accurate”(102.1). Again, Myer’s index indicated that the Age-Sex accuracy of 2019 ICS was 0.87
for the Union, in which 0.88 for males and 0.94 for females. Those indices indicate that the age
heaping and accuracy of age data collected for 2019 ICS was within the standardized limit.
Table A.1: Whipple’s, Myer's, and UN age-sex accuracy indices
Myer’s UN Age-Sex Accuracy

Whipples’s Index
Index Index
Total 102.1 0.87 11.2

Male 101.9 0.88
Female 102.3 0.94

156
The Union Report
Annex 3: Questionnaires

158
The Union Report
160
The Union Report
162
The Union Report
164
The Union Report
166
The Union Report
168
The Union Report
170
The Union Report
172
The Union Report
174
The Union Report
176
The Union Report
178
The Union Report
180
The Union Report
182
The Union Report
184
The Union Report
List of Contributors
Name Institution Role
Government Coordination
U Win Zaw Aung Director General, Department Overall administration and
of Population (DOP) coordination
U Htein Win Deputy Director General, Overall administration and
Department of Population coordination
(DOP)
Dr. Khaing Khaing Soe Director, DOP Administration, coordination and
quality control
UNFPA Coordination
Mr. Ramanathan Balakrishnan Country Representative Overall administration and

coordination
Ms. Nelida Rodrigues Deputy Country Representative Overall administration and
coordination
Daw Yu Myat Mon Programme Analyst Administration and coordination
Authors
Dr. Nyi Nyi UNFPA Consultant Lead Author
Dr. Khaing Khaing Soe Director, DOP Co-author
Daw Khin Myo Khine Deputy Director, DOP Assisting Author, Population and
Housing sessions
Daw Myo Pa Pa Than Staff Officer, DOP Assisting Author, Population and
Housing sessions
Daw Tin Tin Lay Staff Officer, DOP Assisting Author, Population and
Housing sessions
U Ye` Lin Naing Assistant Immigration Officer, Assisting Author, Population and
DOP Housing sessions
U Zaw Min Latt Deputy Director, DOP Assisting Author, Migration
session
Daw Hlaing Phwe Thu Staff Officer, DOP Assisting Author, Migration
session
Daw May Thu Nyo Deputy Director, DOP Assisting Author, Education and
Labour Force sessions
Daw Aye Theingi Win Staff Officer, DOP Assisting Author, Education and

Authors
Daw Malar Htun Staff Officer, DOP Assisting Author, Education and
Daw Lin Lin Mar Assistant Director, DOP Assisting Author, Fertility and
Mortality sessions
Daw Hmwe Kyi Kyi Khin Staff Officer, DOP Assisting Author, Fertility and
Mortality sessions
Daw Thet Htar Nwe Assistant Immigration Officer, Assisting Author, Fertility and
DOP Mortality sessions
Daw Thi Thi Nwe Assistant Director, DOP Assisting Author, Disability,
Older Persons and Participating
sessions
Daw Myo Thandar Staff Officer, DOP Assisting Author, Disability,
Older Persons and Participating
sessions
Mr. Kencho Namgyal Chief - Water, Sanitation and Coordinate with UNICEF HQ and
Hygiene (WASH) Section, provide overall guidance in
UNICEF writing the report aligned with
SDG and JMP comparable
indicators and as well with global
guidelines
Daw Theingi Soe WASH Specialist, UNICEF Lead in writing the narrative and
annex tables and coordinate with
HQ to get technical support
U Than Kyaw Soe WASH Officer, UNICEF Provided support on data
a n a l ys i s a n d re- ch eck i n g
accuracy aligned with SDG
indicators and ladder
Daw Theingi Tun WASH Officer, UNICEF Provided support on data
a n a l ys i s a n d re- ch eck i n g
accuracy aligned with SDG
indicators and ladder
Mr. Robert Bain Statistics and Monitoring Provide technical expertise and
Specialist, UNICEF HQ provided adapted syntaxes for
data analysis for different
categories of WASH services of
SDG 6.1 and 6.2
Mr. Yadigar Coskun Statistics and Monitoring Provide technical expertise and
Specialist, UNICEF HQ provided adapted syntaxes for
data analysis for different
categories of WASH services of
SDG 6.1 and 6.2

188
The Union Report
Data Processsing and IT Team
Mr. Juste Nitiema Consultant, World Bank Data editing and programming
Daw Sandar Myint Deputy Director, DOP Programming and generation of

tables
Daw May Myint Bo Staff Officer, DOP Generation of tables
Daw Wai Wai Hlaing Zin Assistant Immigraion Officer Generation of tables
Sampling
Mr. David J. Megill Sampling Consultant, World Sampling design

Bank
Mr. Arturo Y. Pacificador, Jr. Sampling Consultant, UNFPA Weighting and sampling error
calculation
Daw Yin Yin Kyaing Director (Retired), DOP Assiting in sampling design
Daw Thi Thi Nwe Assistant Director, DOP Assiting in weighting and
sampling error calculation
Designer
U Zaw Min Latt Deputy Dirctor Report formatting
U Thant Zin Oo Assistant Computer Operator Graphic designer
U Khun Zin Naing Htun Junior Clerk Graphic designer


2019 - Gen - Ics - Report - Eng - 7012021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2019 - Gen - Ics - Report - Eng - 7012021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2019 - Gen - Ics - Report - Eng - 7012021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

The Union Report

For more information contact:

Tel: +95 67 431 062

This report provides up-to-date information on demographic and socio-economic

I would also like to thank the State/Region/District/Township Immigration and Population

H.E U Thein Swe

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

1.11 Quality assurance to improve data quality................................................................ 15

Chapter 2: Sampling Design, Estimation and Evaluation................................................... 17

2.3 Estimation procedure.................................................................................................. 22

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

3.11 Head of household. ..................................................................................................... 38

3.12 Birth registration.......................................................................................................... 39

3.13 Having a bank account................................................................................................ 40

3.14 Reasons for not having a bank account..................................................................... 41

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

6.11 Early-age mortality...................................................................................................... 75

6.12 Life expectancy at birth............................................................................................... 75

7.2 International migration............................................................................................... 84

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

10.3 Construction materials of housing units.................................................................. 114

10.5 Number of room(s).................................................................................................... 116

10.6 Housing amenities..................................................................................................... 119

Chapter 11: Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH)....................................................... 125

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

Total population in conventional households only

Total fertility rate 2.0

Infant mortality rate (deaths per 1,000 live births) 31.0

Number of private households 11,162,510

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

Had a birth certificate (15 years and below) 81.7%

Literacy rate (persons aged 15 years and over)

Numeracy rate (persons aged 15 years and over)

People with disability

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

Labour force participation

Employment to population ratio

Main reasons for leaving country of International migrants

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

Type of housing unit

Ownership of housing unit (Tenure)

Material for housing Wall Floor Roof

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

Main source of energy for lighting

Main source of energy for cooking

Main sources of drinking water

Status of drinking water services

Type of toilet facilities

The 2019 Inter-censal Survey

Hygiene (Handwashing service)

Solid waste disposal

Availability of information and communication amenities

Availability of transportation amenities