LIVELIHOODS ANALYSIS OF LANDMINE AFFECTED COMMUNITIES IN YEMEN On behalf of the Yemen Executive Mine Action Centre VOLUME 2: ANNEXES 1-11 2006 Barry Pound, Adrienne Martin, Dr Abdul Qadr and Dr Abdul Wahed Mukred Volume II: ANNEXES 1-11 Table of Contents Annex One: Terms of Reference........................................................... 1 Annex Two: Itinerary ............................................................................ 5 Annex Three: People met ...................................................................... 7 Annex Four: Training of survey teams in livelihoods analysis .......... 9 Annex Five: Arabic version of survey checklists ............................. 23 Annex Six: Findings of Reconnaissance visit in March 2006 .......... 31 Annex Seven: Gender and mine impacts ........................................... 33 Annex Eight: Evaluation of Survey Methods Used .......................... 35 Annex Nine: Tables of impact of clearance by village ....................... 39 Annex Ten: Tables of development opportunities by village ............ 51 Annex Eleven: Survey data from the 25 surveyed villages .............. 57 ANNEX ONE: TERMS OF REFERENCE Landmines and livelihoods Socio-economic study of the benefits of de-mining in Yemen Introduction The Natural Resources Institute has been invited to submit a proposal to the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD) following a request from the Yemen Executive Mine Action Centre (YEMAC) for assistance in a post-clearance socio-economic study of previously mine-affected communities. The overall goals of the study will be to: 1. Assess the overall socio-economic returns from mine clearance investments through a livelihoods analysis of the landmine impacted communities that are now cleared of mines and other explosive remnants of war (ERW); and 2. Enhance the capacity of YEMAC to conduct future assessments of socio- economic benefits from mine action Secondary benefits might include: a) An assessment of the community Landmine Impact Scores as a tool for identifying impact and determining priorities for action; b) Advice on how to design and conduct on-going socio-economic surveys relating to ERW; c) Advice on integrating social differentiation within LIS survey protocols; d) Advice on enhancements to YEMAC’s M&E system; e) A preliminary assessment of complementary development initiatives for mine affected communities. The tentative timetable for the study is from 1st March to 31 May, 2006, based on one month each for (i) pre-survey activities, (ii) survey, and (iii) analysis and reporting. This may be modified based on discussions between YEMAC, GICHD, and NRI. The number of villages to be surveyed depends on the trade-off between depth and breadth of the study, but may need to consider a lower number than the 25 suggested. YEMAC will supply or coordinate all resources from within Yemen, while GICHD will play a supporting role in terms of resource mobilization, reporting to donors, contracting and payments, and will assign a GICHD Task Manager to the project. GICHD may also assist with economic analysis if there are adequate data to support this. NRI will provide expert advice and assistance on the survey design, development and testing of data collection instruments and processes, training of local surveyors, and the analysis of data. The approach The survey will be a team effort between YEMAC, GICHD, NRI and the communities selected for study. The team will be guided by a Project Steering Committee. NRI will balance the need for reliable, practical information on which short-term decisions can be made and conclusions drawn on the programme’s cost effectiveness, with longer-term capacity development objectives. 1 The approach will draw on our experience in Yemen, and on approaches used for livelihood surveys conducted in Afghanistan, Moldova, Sudan and elsewhere for a variety of purposes. However, it will be tailored to the cultural circumstances of the country, and the specific purposes of the study. A full understanding of the context of the study will be developed through an initial visit to Yemen (and, if necessary, to Geneva) to meet with stakeholders at central, regional and local levels, including visits to a small number of affected communities. This will help to clarify how the study results will be used (and therefore the type of information needed) and who at local level are most affected, positively and negatively by the demining programme (and therefore need to be included in the survey). At this stage it is anticipated that three teams of male and female Yemeni staff will be trained to conduct the surveys. A key participant will be the assigned Yemeni socio- economist, who should be present from the first visit of NRI staff, through to the end of the assignment, and actively involved in all steps at both conceptual and implementational levels. The NRI specialists will lead two of the three teams in the field, and it is hoped that the Yemeni socio-economist will lead the other. Communication will be maintained throughout the fieldwork, in order to respond to unforeseen circumstances and opportunities. The communities to be surveyed will be carefully chosen according to a sample frame that uses criteria developed with YEMAC, and approved by the Steering Committee. The criteria to be discussed might include geographical area, livelihood and cultural variation, the different levels to which communities have been affected by landmines and ERW and the time scale of contamination and clearance. The sample should be large enough to provide viable, representative information for future action, but should also give enough time to researchers to understand the situation in the villages. The sample size will therefore be determined by the variability between villages, and the time and human resources available. It will also depend on the availability and reliability of current, quantitative secondary information about the villages. The study will include representatives from high, medium and low impact communities. Experience elsewhere suggests that a minimum of two days should be allowed for each village, to enable both qualitative and quantitative information to be gathered. Villagers might be initially suspicious of the survey team, and it will take some time to develop a good rapport, and to understand the unique circumstances and experiences of each village. Survey Methods The survey will not use a single household questionnaire as envisaged in the zero draft, but a carefully balanced set of qualitative and quantitative survey tools (e.g. village profiles, focus group discussions, time lines, wealth ranking, participatory mapping, cause and effect diagramming, livelihood kites, household level interviews etc) to build a picture of the economic, social, infrastructural, natural and human impacts of demining within the specific and dynamic local setting of the community in question. While it will be possible to quantify the costs and benefits of some impacts (e.g. improved access to grazing land), others – such as improved cohesion within the 2 village, or greater confidence in future prospects – are subjective and complex judgments that are difficult to quantify. The survey will interact with leaders of the community in the first instance, and then with groups of socially-differentiated men and women. The initial visit will help to identify the most appropriate groups. In Afghanistan this was according to wealth (predominantly ownership of irrigated land and livestock) and gender, while in Moldova we used 13 different social categories to develop a complete picture of trends, problems and potential solutions to on-farm, off-farm and non-farm assets and activities. The survey will elicit from the focus groups their ideas on the main indicators of change arising from the presence and clearance of mines in their village. Then the extent of these changes, for example, in asset access and livelihood choices, will be determined on a quantitative and qualitative basis with the groups selected. Problems with access will be explored, together with suggestions for improvement (to include who would be responsible, and what resources would be required). This participatory indicator development, taken in conjunction with the insights arising from individual responses, will contribute to the methodology for future monitoring of socio-economic benefits for mine action. Individual interviews with households identified by the community as typical of their situation, would also be conducted to provide detailed information. It is our experience that such individual interviews, conducted in an informal setting using a carefully constructed check list, lead to additional, personal insights that don’t come up in group discussion. They also provide the opportunity to triangulate information gained from focus group discussions or secondary data. In particular, the need for continued or additional support services will be explored for men, women and children. A feedback session with the community would confirm the main findings from the different tools used, and further confirm the most important positive impacts of demining for that community, and the most important outstanding problems still faced. Some of the focus group discussions and most of the household level interviews will be collected in formats that allow entry into, and analysis by, SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences). Economic data will be collected to contribute to an assessment