Transforming Pathways From Vulnerability to Resilience Among Internally Displaced Populations in Myanmar Using a Constructive Grounded Theory Approach

Why It Matters

By shifting focus to resilience, the study provides a roadmap for more sustainable aid that can reduce chronic dependency and improve long‑term stability in Myanmar’s protracted displacement crisis.

Key Takeaways

• Five dimensions link vulnerability to resilience.
• Multi-level framework: macro, meso, micro interventions.
• Community support and indigenous knowledge boost resilience.
• Aid dependency hampers sustainable recovery.
• Internal motivation drives agency among displaced persons.

Pulse Analysis

The protracted crisis in Myanmar, sparked by the 2021 military coup, successive armed clashes and a devastating earthquake, has forced hundreds of thousands into displacement. Traditional humanitarian responses have concentrated on immediate relief—food, shelter, medical care—treating internally displaced persons (IDPs) primarily as victims. While essential, this narrow view overlooks the capacity of displaced communities to adapt, organize, and rebuild. Recognizing resilience as a dynamic process rather than a static condition is increasingly seen as critical for long‑term stability in conflict‑affected regions.

The research team employed a constructivist grounded theory design, interviewing 13 IDPs and 10 support‑network actors across Mon, Kayin, Kayah and Eastern Bago between December 2024 and March 2025. Through iterative coding, the analysis revealed five interlocking dimensions that chart the shift from vulnerability to resilience, and a three‑tiered framework linking macro‑level policy and infrastructure, meso‑level community action, and micro‑level coping strategies. Positive enablers such as communal solidarity, indigenous knowledge and religious coping amplified agency, while barriers—including aid dependency, resource scarcity and selective assistance—undermined sustainable recovery.

Policymakers and international NGOs can leverage this grounded theory to redesign assistance programs that balance life‑saving aid with capacity‑building initiatives. Embedding resilience metrics into funding criteria, investing in infrastructure that supports livelihoods, and fostering local leadership can reduce reliance on external relief and strengthen community self‑efficacy. The study’s multi‑level model also offers a template for other conflict zones where displacement is chronic, suggesting that a shift from vulnerability‑centric to resilience‑centric strategies can improve both humanitarian outcomes and long‑term peacebuilding prospects. Adopting these insights early can also mitigate future displacement cycles.