Quantitative study investigates return migration intentions in Myanmar workers, highlighting economic and social influences.
Despite increasing academic interest in return migration, limited understanding remains of how individual resources, workplace experiences, and perceptions of the origin country interact to shape return migration intention among migrant workers in major industrial destinations. This study investigates return migration intention among Myanmar migrant workers in Samut Sakhon Province, Thailand, using a multilevel framework that links micro-level individual and household characteristics, meso-level workplace and social experiences, and macro-level assessments of conditions in Myanmar. A quantitative research design was employed, with data collected from 506 Myanmar migrant workers using proportional stratified random sampling. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, t-tests, and binary logistic regression. The results indicate that the majority of respondents did not intend to return to Myanmar within the next 10–15 years. Workplace discrimination emerged as the strongest positive predictor of return migration intention, while higher income and annual remittance behavior also increased the likelihood of intending to return. Conversely, having family in Thailand, perceived opportunities for job change or promotion, satisfaction with wages and welfare, and perceived safety in Myanmar reduced the likelihood of return migration intention. The findings suggest that future mobility plans cannot be explained solely by economic calculation. They are also shaped by family arrangements, workplace treatment, and migrants’ assessments of the feasibility and desirability of return. The study advances return migration scholarship by demonstrating the pivotal role of workplace discrimination within a multilevel explanation of return migration intention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yimsook et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: