these outcomes. Analysis by the International Rescue Committee (IRC) of encamped internally displaced Rohingya in Sittwe in Myanmar found evidence that overcrowded shelters were leading to excess morbidity from preventable diseases and increasing the risk of intimate partner violence and child marriage (IRC: 2017: 2). In Thailand, where the IRC has worked with refugees from Myanmar in camps for over 30 years, the lack of livelihoods opportunities and stress contribute to high levels of domestic violence, suicide and genderbased violence, including early marriage and intimate partner violence. Evidence of similar trends is beginning to emerge in Bangladesh. Recognising the complexities and sheer scale of the challenge of refugee hosting in Cox’s Bazar, as well as other development challenges and opportunities in Bangladesh,3 there is a need to explore better ways to host Rohingya refugees and support host communities in the medium term (Huang and Gough, 2019). Such discussions and plans must take into account the views of the Rohingya themselves. Given the scale of the refugee crisis in Bangladesh, it is not surprising that national, regional and international stakeholders, including donors, multilateral banks and humanitarian organisations, have employed a variety of funding and response mechanisms to address the situation. In July 2018, UNHCR led a Solidarity Approach to ensure that ‘support is maintained for the refugees and host communities in Bangladesh’ (UNCHR, 2018a). Global and bilateral dialogues are taking place between donors, multilateral banks, UNHCR, IOM and others with the Bangladeshi Government to discuss the Rohingya situation in Bangladesh, including both short- and longer-term solutions. While there is good understanding of the shortterm needs of Rohingya refugees and their perspectives, gathered through surveys and in humanitarian organisations’ needs assessments, refugee perspectives do not appear to be informing planning for the medium term. This is problematic for two main reasons. First, research and policy work has consistently recognised the importance of incorporating refugee perspectives in programme and policy design to uphold refugees’ dignity and rights and to ensure accountability (UN, 2018). Indeed, the Global Compact on Refugees notes that responses are most effective when they meaningfully engage those they are intended to assist and protect and includes a commitment to refugee and host community participation with a particular focus on women, youth and persons with disabilities (UN, 2018). 3 Second, recent experience has shown that failing to include refugee voices and perspectives in mediumto long-term planning leads to sub-optimal results (see Barbelet et al., 2018). Analysis of the design and implementation of the Jordan Compact has highlighted how failing to integrate refugee perspectives undermines the positive impacts of policy reform on refugee lives and livelihoods (Barbelet et al., 2018). With this in mind, this research seeks to understand what refugees see as most helpful in supporting their goals for the medium and long term, including if they had to stay in Bangladesh. The research also set out to understand how far refugees’ individual perspectives were known and reflected in community leadership structures. It is based on the belief that the perspectives of refugees on these issues are not ‘nice to know’, but critical to informing dialogue, advocacy and interaction of key international stakeholders with the Bangladeshi Government on the Rohingya refugee situation. 1.2  Methodology The study employed quantitative (random sample survey) and qualitative (semi-structured interviews, focus groups) methods, with the report based primarily on the latter. Quantitative surveys were conducted with 943 Rohingya refugees in 24 sites in Ukhia and Teknaf in the last quarter of 2018. The surveys were carried out by Ground Truth Solutions, an independent NGO that provides the humanitarian sector with data on the views of affected people. The surveys covered a range of different topics (Ground Truth Solutions, 2019). The questions for this research were: • • • • • If you were not able to return safely to Myanmar in the next 5 to 10 years, and you could decide where you lived with your family, where would you want to live? If you were to stay in Bangladesh for the next 5 to 10 years, how would you like to support yourself and your family? If you were to stay in Bangladesh for the next 5 to 10 years, what are the things that would make your life better? Which sectors would you want to work in? If you had the right to work, what would be the greatest help to you? The semi-structured interviews were carried out in Cox’s Bazar in late January–early February 2019. They were based on these questions, with additional ones on Bangladesh has made impressive gains in terms of human development. However, 63 million Bangladeshis still live below the poverty line, and the country remains vulnerable to political, economic and natural-hazard-related shocks (UNDP, 2019). Humanitarian Policy Group 5