"... This background paper was commissioned by USAID as part of a Strategic Agricultural Sector and Food Security Diagnostic for Myanmar, led by Michigan State University and in partnership with the Myanmar Development Resource Institute ‐ Centre for Economic and Social Development (MDRI‐CESD). The broad objectives of the Diagnostic are to improve USAID?s understanding of the major constraints to agricultural sector performance and to food security of vulnerable households in Myanmar, and to outline core strategies USAID should consider as it designs policies and programs to stimulate broadbased agricultural growth and enhance food security. In support of these aims, this background paper synthesizes the best available data and information on poverty, nutrition, and vulnerability to food insecurity in Myanmar to identify key vulnerable populations, and outlines a set of strategic options to improve the food security of the most vulnerable households. This synthesis is based on a rapid assessment conducted during a three‐week field visit (October 28 to November 17, 2012), and pre‐ and post‐field visit desk research. The research draws from three broad types of information: 1) national surveys on poverty, malnutrition, and health outcomes; 2) food security assessments conducted by UN agencies, donors, and Non‐governmental Organizations (NGOs) in select geographic areas; 3) and semi‐structured qualitative interviews with key stakeholders across seven of the 14 states/regions in Myanmar?s Delta, Dry Zone, and hilly regions that the team accessed during the field visit. Data availability and reliability are major constraints to proper assessment in Myanmar. The Government of Myanmar (GOM) has not conducted a population census since 1983 and this inaction casts doubt on all other survey work since. The world?s longest running civil war and military‐government policies have restricted surveyors? access to many parts of the country; even the two relatively reliable surveys intended to document poverty and nutrition conditions face these limitations. Very few surveys provide sex‐disaggregated data, which limits analysis of gender aspects of poverty and vulnerability. The authors fully recognize this obstacle and yet are in agreement with one long‐time observer of Myanmar; the data may not be rigorous but are ?good enough to program against.” This synthesis therefore intends to provide a broad brush picture of the landscape of poverty, malnutrition, and vulnerability across Myanmar and focuses on providing a typology of vulnerability to inform USAID?s initial dialogue about possible program and policy design to improve household food security..."