Ha Ngoc Do1, Milkie Vu2, Anh Tuan Nguyen3, Hoa Quynh Thi Nguyen3, Thanh Phuong Bui4, Quy Van Nguyen3, Ngan Thu Thi Tran5, Ly Bac Thi La6, Nga Thu Thi Nguyen7, Quang N Nguyen8,9,10, Hai Thanh Phan9,11, Men Thi Hoang9,11, Linh Gia Vu9,11, Thuc Minh Thi Vu12, Bach Xuan Tran8,13, Carl A Latkin13, Cyrus S H Ho14, Roger C M Ho15,16,17. 1. Youth Research Institute, Ho Chi Minh Communist Youth Union, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam. 2. Department of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, United States. 3. Department of Research on Youth Culture and Lifestyle, Youth Research Institute, Ho Chi Minh Communist Youth Union, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam. 4. Department of Research on Children's issues, Youth Research Institute, Ho Chi Minh Communist Youth Union, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam. 5. Department of Research on Youth and Legal issues, Youth Research Institute, Ho Chi Minh Communist Youth Union, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam. 6. Hanoi National University of Education, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam. 7. Hanoi Metropolitan University, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam. 8. Institute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam. 9. Institute for Global Health Innovations, Duy Tan University, Da Nang 550000, Vietnam. 10. UnivLyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, 69100, Villeurbanne, France. 11. Faculty of Medicine, Duy Tan University, Da Nang 550000, Vietnam. 12. Institute of Health Economics and Technology, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam. 13. Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. 14. Department of Psychological Medicine, National University Hospital, Singapore 119074, Singapore. 15. Department of Psychological Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119228, Singapore. 16. Institute for Health Innovation and Technology (iHealthtech), National University of Singapore, Singapore 119077, Singapore. 17. Center of Excellence in Evidence-based Medicine, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While internal migrants in Vietnam have been a key driving force in the country's rapid economic development, they also face many vulnerabilities. Our study seeks to explore possible inequalities in housing and working conditions between local and internal migrant industrial workers in Vietnam. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys were conducted with 1200 industrial workers in four regions of Vietnam. Dependent variables included housing conditions (satisfaction with convenience of accommodation, sanitation and water of accommodation, and accommodation in general) and working conditions (satisfaction with income, monthly income, number of hazardous working conditions, and work-related stress measured through the modified Effort-Reward Imbalance Questionnaire). The primary independent variable is migrant status. Covariates included region, gender, education, marital status, accommodation status, living arrangements, industry, age, monthly income, experience, and working hours. RESULTS: Of the sample, 24.7% (n=296) were migrants. Overall, no differences were found regarding housing conditions by migrant status. In adjusted regression models, migrants reported higher numbers of hazardous working conditions (β=0.07, 95%CI=0.01-0.13, p=.01) and higher monthly income (β=0.05, 95%CI=0.01-0.09, p=.02). DISCUSSION: Recent state-level changes in the Vietnamese household registration system may explain the lack of differences in housing conditions by migrant status. Future research should utilize longitudinal designs to examine impacts over time of state policy on migrants' housing conditions as well as well-being. Regarding working conditions, findings highlight the need for stronger social protection policy and better information channels on occupational health and safety for migrants. Further research, including qualitative studies, is needed to explore why migrants face more hazardous working conditions.
BACKGROUND: While internal migrants in Vietnam have been a key driving force in the country's rapid economic development, they also face many vulnerabilities. Our study seeks to explore possible inequalities in housing and working conditions between local and internal migrant industrial workers in Vietnam. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys were conducted with 1200 industrial workers in four regions of Vietnam. Dependent variables included housing conditions (satisfaction with convenience of accommodation, sanitation and water of accommodation, and accommodation in general) and working conditions (satisfaction with income, monthly income, number of hazardous working conditions, and work-related stress measured through the modified Effort-Reward Imbalance Questionnaire). The primary independent variable is migrant status. Covariates included region, gender, education, marital status, accommodation status, living arrangements, industry, age, monthly income, experience, and working hours. RESULTS: Of the sample, 24.7% (n=296) were migrants. Overall, no differences were found regarding housing conditions by migrant status. In adjusted regression models, migrants reported higher numbers of hazardous working conditions (β=0.07, 95%CI=0.01-0.13, p=.01) and higher monthly income (β=0.05, 95%CI=0.01-0.09, p=.02). DISCUSSION: Recent state-level changes in the Vietnamese household registration system may explain the lack of differences in housing conditions by migrant status. Future research should utilize longitudinal designs to examine impacts over time of state policy on migrants' housing conditions as well as well-being. Regarding working conditions, findings highlight the need for stronger social protection policy and better information channels on occupational health and safety for migrants. Further research, including qualitative studies, is needed to explore why migrants face more hazardous working conditions.
Authors: T Sterud; T Tynes; I Sivesind Mehlum; K B Veiersted; B Bergbom; A Airila; B Johansson; M Brendler-Lindqvist; K Hviid; M-A Flyvholm Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-06-20 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Kiet Tuan Huy Pham; Long Hoang Nguyen; Quan-Hoang Vuong; Manh-Tung Ho; Thu-Trang Vuong; Hong-Kong T Nguyen; Giang Thu Vu; Huong Lan Thi Nguyen; Bach Xuan Tran; Carl A Latkin; Cyrus S H Ho; Roger C M Ho Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-04-28 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Sally Hargreaves; Kieran Rustage; Laura B Nellums; Alys McAlpine; Nicola Pocock; Delan Devakumar; Robert W Aldridge; Ibrahim Abubakar; Kristina L Kristensen; Jan W Himmels; Jon S Friedland; Cathy Zimmerman Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 38.927
Authors: Kolitha Wickramage; Jo Vearey; Anthony B Zwi; Courtland Robinson; Michael Knipper Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-08-08 Impact factor: 3.295