DOCSLIB.ORG

Cross Border Intervention for Refugees Returnees and South Sudanese Host Community, Palabek Camp Lamwo District and Ikotos County)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cross Border Intervention for Refugees Returnees and South Sudanese Host Community, Palabek Camp Lamwo District and Ikotos County) Cross-border Refugees-Returnees Need Assessment (Palabek Camp Lamwo District and Ikotos County) Photo: Returnees Children footing to Ikotos Town Papa John Martin Sebastian Monitoring & Evaluation Officer, AVSI-Foundation South Sudan. Contact: Email address: [email protected] Mobile Phone: +211929840006 Skype: papajohnmartin30 Ikotos County, Torit State ICRROSS (Cross border intervention for Refugees Returnees and South Sudanese Host Community, Palabek Camp Lamwo District and Ikotos County) 1 Table of Context I. ACRONYMS: ……………………………………………………………………………….…………………. 2 II. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: ………………………………………………………………………………….. 3 III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: …………………………………………………………………………………. 3 IV. Introduction: ………………………………………………………………………………………………... 5 (a) Background: ………………………………………………………………………………………… 5 1. Methodology: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5 2. Objectives: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6 3. Key Findings: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 6 A. Household Information: …………………………………………………………………….. 6 B. Relatives in Ikotos County: …………………………………………………………………. 7 C. Experience of returning back to South Sudan: ……………………………………. 8 D. Plan for the Future: ……………………………………………………………………………. 9 4. Recommendation: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10 I. ACRONYMS List of Acronyms ICRROSS: Cross border Intervention for Returnees Refugees of South Sudan and the Host community FE: Financial Education CEVSI: Cooperazione E Sviluppo AVSI: Association of Volunteers in International Service CBI: Cash base intervention AICS: The Italian Agency for Development Cooperation M&E: Monitoring and Evaluation FSL: Food Security and Livelihood. WASH: Water Sanitation and Hygiene. S.A.N.I: Southern African Nutrition Initiatives IGA: Income generating activities II. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 2 I would like to thanks first and foremost the twenty five Refugees respondents who agreed to take the survey and contributed valuable information and Italian Agency for Development Cooperation for funding, I would also like to extend my thanks to Cesvi Uganda and AVSI Foundation for coming with the initiative of conducting Refugees-Returnees need assessment. I would like to acknowledge the support of Bruno Baroni Nazim (AVSI, M&E Quality Assurance), Federica Raggi (AVSI,FLS/WASH Project Manager), Mariam Joshi (AVSI, M&E Coordinator), and Samantha Ponte (Cesvi ProjectManager) during the exercise and not forgetting Luca Scarpa (AVSI Foundation Country Representative). III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In January 2020, Cesvi and AVSI Foundation Despite the deteriorating security conducted an assessment in Palabek Camp Lamwo environment and food security within Ikotos District, Northern Uganda. The exercise is Returnees County, the situation of Returnees demonstrated a Refugees need assessment to identify the mixed challenges and opportunities in both side challenges faced; while travelling back to Torit Uganda and South Sudan overtime. For instance, State (Ikotos County, when they first returned in high engagement of Refugees children in education their village, after few weeks/months being at compared with when they are in South Sudan and home and on their way back to the camps. Food Aid. The study of the key informants indicate The survey provide a significant perspective on currently Returnees are living in their places of current population mobility trends and actionable origin, which is a good indication that people are data regarding assistance needs, protection and returning to their areas of origin. However, they are vulnerability. facing difficult condition in their villages or towns The key informants reported to have faced they have returned to. Challenges includes; the lack challenging situation both in Uganda and South of job and livelihood opportunities, limited access Sudan; Lack of access to proper health and human to basic services, insecurity, lack of land and sickness, they raise their concerns that they are housing/shelter which limits the potential of prescribed only one kind of drug for various Returnees to re-establish families and make future sickness, rapid death of children, lack of access to investment, which is essential for the sustainability land and access to employment opportunities are of their reintegration. all critical challenges jeopardizing the sustainability Host communities have a positive views of the of Refugees. In additional economic opportunities Returnees. Although the solidarity between the and death remain a major challenge for the entire Returnees and the Host communities can show Key informants with larger number of Refugees some strains after large scale returns in the long flow back by the end of last year 2019. run. Scheme to take notes of respondents’ stories; 3 THINGS/PEOPLE/EVENTS THAT THINGS/PEOPLE/EVENTS THAT CONVINCED OR HELPED THE PERSON CONVINCED OR HELPED THE PERSON TO TO RETURN BACK HOME IN TORIT GO BACK TO THE REFUGEE CAMPS IN STATE (PULLING FACTORS) UGANDA (PUSHING FACTORS) Cultivation Free Education Funerals Food Assistance (Relief) in the Sickness, since some still camp. have that believes of Hunger situation in South Sudan. 1). IN THE witchcraft and herbalist Separate families as they left REFUGEE CAMP Celebrate Christmas some family members Inadequate land for Safety environment in the Camp Cultivation in term of security. Influence from the neighbors Better access to basic services Lack of income source in the Friends or family living in the camp Camp Separate families, they wish Lack of support from the family to visit other family member especially the widows members in South Sudan. and widower Lack of access to Delay of the formation of Unity employment Opportunities state and signing of revitalized in the Camp peace agreement Restriction and Conflict Shortage of food to sustain related to firewood and them. cutting down of trees Loss of alternative livelihood like between the Refugees and livestock due to raiding the host community Fear of conflict due to criminal act of some few village members 2). WHILE Lack of means transport TRAVELLING No accommodation especially in Tseretenya as they just sleep under the BACK TO TORIT veranda, STATE (IKOTOS Long distance footing COUNTY) Sickness of children They also encountered protection risk of crime like robbery and rape Refugee cards are taken at the border Hard to travel with children. 3) WHEN THEY FIRST Lack of safe Shelter as they have abandoned their own house longtime RETURNED IN THEIR Lack of cooking utensils and other non-food items as some of cooking VILLAGE utensils are been taken from the border. Lack of Income source 4 Sickness of children related to poor feeding 4). AFTER FEW Shortage of food WEEKS/MONTHS AT Lack of agricultural inputs like seeds and tools HOME. Inadequate labor as some of the family members are left in the Camp Lack of access to employment opportunities. No means of Communication with the rest of the family members in the Camp Engaging other alternative of livelihood like selling firewood, pole and casual labor. 5) ON THE WAY BACK Means of transport (Private and public) from Ikotos Town to Madi-Opei Centre TO THE CAMP. Photo: Returnees eating lunch in Tseretenya South Sudan Check Point Introduction AVSI South Sudan and Cesvi had a Cross-border Project for Refugees, Returnees and the host community, Palabek Camp Lamwo District and Ikotos County, implementing mainly Food security and Livelihood, education and WASH, with some components of Cash Base Intervention support(Cash for Work and Financial Education), 5 Hence need for conducting Refugees-Returnees need assessment aimed at assessing what challenges they faced: a) while travelling back to Ikotos County; b) when they first returned to their village; c) after a few weeks/ months being at home; d) on their way back to the camps. Additionally, we want to know why the returned home, and reflect with these people to identify: 1) what would have made them stay; 2) who they think should have done a better job at helping them, but also the context-specific causes of such needs. This report intends to make such knowledge available to the community and stakeholders of Lamwo District and Ikotos County. Strengthening the Resilience of Pastoral and Agro-Pastoral Communities in South-Sudan cross-border areas with Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda S.A.N.I. – Food Security, Nutrition and Hygiene for the communities in Eastern Equatoria area, South Sudan ICRROSS Cross-border intervention for Refugees Returnees and South Sudanese Host Community Methodology The assessment was conducted based on (key informant interviews (KIIs), which include twenty (20) of south Sudanese refugees interviewed from six payams; Chahari Payam, Isoke Payam, Ikotos Payam, Imotong Payam, Losite Payam and Chorokol Payam. who have knowledge, either direct (they experienced) or indirect (their relatives experienced) of the challenges faced by people who voluntarily returned to South Sudan, in particular those who returned to Torit State (Greater Ikwoto County mainly). The study did not set out to produce statistically significant findings, but focused on identifying typical patterns of challenges at both household level and the County at large. Objective of the Assessment The objectives of these activities was; 1. To improve the support provided to returnees in South Sudan. 2. NOT to gain information regarding how to encourage refugees to return to South Sudan Among the refugees, we expect to find several people who attempted to return to Torit State (Greater Ikwoto County) but who later returned
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cholera Situation Analysis and Hotspot Mapping in South Sudan
    GTFCC Meeting for the Working Groups on CHOLERA SITUATION ANALYSIS Surveillance AND HOTSPOT MAPPING IN (Epidemiology and Laboratory) (15th to 17th SOUTH SUDAN March 2019) BACKGROUN D 1. South Sudan borders Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Sudan, DR Congo, & CAR 2. Got independence in 2011 3. Protracted Grade 3 crisis since 2013 (situation improving since Sept 2018) 4. Severe food insecurity – 7.1million (63% of population) – 45,000 faced with famine 5. 1.87 million IDPs & 2.27million refugees to neighboring countries 1. Multisectoral taskforce in place chaired by MoH with the other sectors (Water & COORDINATION OF Humanitarian Affairs) and partners (Health + WASH) CHOLERA CONTROL clusters as members 2. Draft National Cholera Control Plan pending WASH assessment & stakeholder review/costing 3. Implemented preventive OCV campaigns since 2017 (2.9 million doses approved 27/Mar/2019) 4. Sub-optimal involvement of other sectors and WASH in OCV preventive campaigns CHOLERA IN SOUTH 1. South Sudan endemic for SUDANcholera 2. Since the 2013 crisis onset – cholera outbreaks – 2014 - 2017 3. Between 2014-2017 at least 28,676 cases & 644 deaths reported 4. All outbreaks started in Juba 5. Cases reported along River Nile, cattle camps, IDPs, islands, & Commercial hubs 1600 Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2014 s e s a 1200 Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2014 s c e f s a o 2014 c f r 800 o 2014 e 1000 r e b b m 400 m CHOLERA IN u u N N 0 0 1 3 5 7 9 111315171921232527293133353739414345474951 1 3 5 7 9 111315171921232527293133353739414345474951 Week of onset Week of onset 1900 Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2015 s e s SOUTH a c 1600 Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2015 f o s r 900 e e 2015 b s m a 1200 u c N f o -100 r 800 1 3 5 7 9 111315171921232527293133353739414345474951 SUDAN e 2015 Week of onset b m 400 u Cholera cases in South Sudan, 2016 s N e 1600 s a 0 c f 1200 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Magwi County
    Resettlement, Resource Conflicts, Livelihood Revival and Reintegration in South Sudan A study of the processes and institutional issues at the local level in Magwi County by N. Shanmugaratnam Noragric Department of International Environment and Development No. Report Noragric Studies 5 8 RESETTLEMENT, RESOURCE CONFLICTS, LIVELIHOOD REVIVAL AND REINTEGRATION IN SOUTH SUDAN A study of the processes and institutional issues at the local level in Magwi County By N. Shanmugaratnam Noragric Report No. 58 December 2010 Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric Norwegian University of Life Sciences, UMB Noragric is the Department of International Environment and Development Studies at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB). Noragric’s activities include research, education and assignments, focusing particularly, but not exclusively, on developing countries and countries with economies in transition. Noragric Reports present findings from various studies and assignments, including programme appraisals and evaluations. This Noragric Report was commissioned by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) under the framework agreement with UMB which is administrated by Noragric. Extracts from this publication may only be reproduced after prior consultation with the employer of the assignment (Norad) and with the consultant team leader (Noragric). The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this publication are entirely those of the authors and cannot be attributed directly to the Department of International Environment and Development Studies (UMB/Noragric). Shanmugaratnam, N. Resettlement, resource conflicts, livelihood revival and reintegration in South Sudan: A study of the processes and institutional issues at the local level in Magwi County. Noragric Report No. 58 (December 2010) Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Mining in South Sudan: Opportunities and Risks for Local Communities
    » REPORT JANUARY 2016 MINING IN SOUTH SUDAN: OPPORTUNITIES AND RISKS FOR LOCAL COMMUNITIES BASELINE ASSESSMENT OF SMALL-SCALE AND ARTISANAL GOLD MINING IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EQUATORIA STATES, SOUTH SUDAN MINING IN SOUTH SUDAN FOREWORD We are delighted to present you the findings of an assessment conducted between February and May 2015 in two states of South Sudan. With this report, based on dozens of interviews, focus group discussions and community meetings, a multi-disciplinary team of civil society and government representatives from South Sudan are for the first time shedding light on the country’s artisanal and small-scale mining sector. The picture that emerges is a remarkable one: artisanal gold mining in South Sudan ‘employs’ more than 60,000 people and might indirectly benefit almost half a million people. The vast majority of those involved in artisanal mining are poor rural families for whom alluvial gold mining provides critical income to supplement their subsistence livelihood of farming and cattle rearing. Ostensibly to boost income for the cash-strapped government, artisanal mining was formalized under the Mining Act and subsequent Mineral Regulations. However, owing to inadequate information-sharing and a lack of government mining sector staff at local level, artisanal miners and local communities are not aware of these rules. In reality there is almost no official monitoring of artisanal or even small-scale mining activities. Despite the significant positive impact on rural families’ income, the current form of artisanal mining does have negative impacts on health, the environment and social practices. With most artisanal, small-scale and exploration mining taking place in rural areas with abundant small arms and limited presence of government security forces, disputes over land access and ownership exacerbate existing conflicts.
    [Show full text]
  • Water for Eastern Equatoria (W4EE)
    Water for Eastern Equatoria (W4EE) he first integrated water resource management (IWRM) project of its kind in South Sudan, Water Water for Eastern for Eastern Equatoria (W4EE) was launched in Components 2013 as part of the broader bilateral water Tprogramme funded through the Dutch Multiannual Equatoria (W4EE) Strategic Plan for South Sudan (2012–2015). W4EE focuses on three interrelated From the very beginning, W4EE was planned as a pilot components: IWRM programme in the Torit and Kapoeta States of The role of integrated water resource manage- Eastern Equatoria focusing on holistic management of the ment in fostering resilience, delivering economic Kenneti catchment, conflict-sensitive oversight of water Component 1: Integrated water resource management of the development, improving health, and promoting for productive use such as livestock and farming, and Kenneti catchment and surrounds peace in a long-term process. improved access to safe drinking water as well as sanitati- on and hygiene. The goal has always been to replicate key Component 2: Conflict-sensitive management of water for learnings and best practice in other parts of South Sudan. productive use contributes to increased, sustained productivity, value addition in agriculture, horticulture, and livestock The Kenneti catchment is very important to the Eastern Equatoria region for economic, social, and biodiversity reasons. The river has hydropower potential, supports the Component 3: Safely managed and climate-resilient drinking livelihoods of thousands of households, and the surroun- water services and improved sanitation and hygiene are available, ding area hosts a national park with forests and wetlands operated and maintained in a sustainable manner. as well as wild animals and migratory birds.
    [Show full text]
  • South Sudan Climate Vulnerability Profile: Sector- and Location-Specific Climate Risks and Resilience Recommendations
    PHOTO CREDIT: USAID|SOUTH SUDAN SOUTH SUDAN CLIMATE VULNERABILITY PROFILE: SECTOR- AND LOCATION-SPECIFIC CLIMATE RISKS AND RESILIENCE RECOMMENDATIONS MAY 2019 This document was prepared for USAID/South Sudan by The Cadmus Group LLC under USAID’s Global Environmental Management Support Program, Contract Number GS-10F-0105J. Authors: Colin Quinn, Ashley Fox, Kye Baroang, Dan Evans, Melq Gomes, and Josh Habib The Cadmus Group, LLC The contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................................................. 2 HISTORICAL AND FUTURE CLIMATE CHANGE IN SOUTH SUDAN ...................................................................... 2 AGRICULTURE VULNERABILITY AND RESILIENCE ........................................................................................................ 3 CLIMATE CHANGE, MIGRATION AND CONFLICT ....................................................................................................... 5 THE VULNERABILITY OF THE SUDD WETLAND ............................................................................................................ 6 POTENTIAL AREAS OF INVESTMENT TO IMPROVE CLIMATE RESILIENCE ..........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Uganda's Army in Sudan
    Mareike Schomerus “They forget what they came for”: Uganda's army in Sudan Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Schomerus, Mareike (2012) “They forget what they came for”: Uganda's army in Sudan. Journal of Eastern African Studies, 6 (1). pp. 124-153. ISSN 1753-1055 DOI: 10.1080/17531055.2012.664707 © 2012 Taylor and Francis This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/43407/ Available in LSE Research Online: August 2014 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. ‘‘They forget what they came for’’: Uganda’s army in Sudan Mareike Schomerus Uganda’s army, the Uganda People’s Defence Force (UPDF), has been operating on Sudanese territory since the late 1990s. From 2002 to 2006, a bilateral agreement between the governments in Khartoum and Kampala gave the Ugandan soldiers permission to conduct military operations in Southern Sudan to eliminate the Ugandan rebel Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA).
    [Show full text]
  • Symptoms and Causes: Insecurity and Underdevelopment in Eastern
    sudanHuman Security Baseline Assessment issue brief Small Arms Survey Number 16 April 2010 Symptoms and causes Insecurity and underdevelopment in Eastern Equatoria astern Equatoria state (EES) is The survey was supplemented by qual- 24,789 (± 965) households in the one of the most volatile and itative interviews and focus group three counties contain at least one E conflict-prone states in South- discussions with key stakeholders in firearm. ern Sudan. An epicentre of the civil EES and Juba in January 2010. Respondents cited traditional lead- war (1983–2005), EES saw intense Key findings include: ers (clan elders and village chiefs) fighting between the Sudanese Armed as the primary security providers Across the entire sample, respond- Forces (SAF) and the Sudan People’s in their areas (90 per cent), followed ents ranked education and access Liberation Army (SPLA), as well by neighbours (48 per cent) and reli- to adequate health care as their numerous armed groups supported gious leaders (38 per cent). Police most pressing concerns, followed by both sides, leaving behind a legacy presence was only cited by 27 per by clean water. Food was also a top of landmines and unexploded ordnance, cent of respondents and the SPLA concern in Torit and Ikotos. Security high numbers of weapons in civilian by even fewer (6 per cent). ranked at or near the bottom of hands, and shattered social and com- Attitudes towards disarmament overall concerns in all counties. munity relations. were positive, with around 68 per When asked about their greatest EES has also experienced chronic cent of the total sample reporting a security concerns, respondents in food insecurity, a lack of basic services, willingness to give up their firearms, Torit and Ikotos cited cattle rustling, and few economic opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • Things to Consider
    150 route de Ferney, P.O. Box 2100 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland Appeal Tel: 41 22 791 6033 Fax: 41 22 791 6506 E-mail: [email protected] Coordinating Office South Sudan Assistance to Returnees & Local Communities in Ikotos and Kapoeta Counties - AFSD82 Appeal Target: US$ 1,781,269 Geneva, 7 May, 2008 Dear Colleagues, For South Sudan the Comprehensive Peace Agreement CPA means that a history of war, with societies ’ influx, has been replaced with a transition – again with societies influx. ACT member the Lutheran World Federation Sudan Country program is facing many challenges to address both humanitarian assistance and sustainable development which are the two main premises of LWF/DWS work. In 2004/2005, the LWF Uganda/Sudan implemented an emergency response and development project in Torit County in South Sudan’s Eastern Equatoria Region. Now, Torit County has been divided into three counties namely Ikotos, Torit, and Lafon. In the year 2007 under ACT appeal AFSD 71 emergency response to the Sudanese refugee and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) returnees continued in Ikotos county. This emergency response project provided food, agricultural tools and seeds, and Non-Food Items (NFIs) to the Sudanese refugee returnees, the Internally Displaced People (IDPs) and the resident communities. Also, the project supported capacity building of local government authorities and construction of boreholes and schools. The arrival of both UNHCR assisted and spontaneous returnees continues to increase and UNHCR and Southern Sudan Government projections indicate a higher number of returnees in 2008. This Appeal will be implemented in Ikotos and Kapoeta counties and is designed to fulfil the immediate needs of the Sudanese refugee and (IDPs) returnees and assist the resident communities to cope with the increasing number of people.
    [Show full text]
  • Operational Deployment Plan Template
    Country: Republic of South Sudan Index Facility Address States County Facility Name Type of HF Closest Town / City number (Payam) 1 Central Equatoria State Terekeka Nyori Moridi PHCU PHCU Moridi 2 Central Equatoria State Terekeka Reggo Makamagor PHCU PHCU Makamagor 3 Central Equatoria State Terekeka Tali Payam Mijiki PHCU PHCU Mijiki 4 Central Equatoria State Terekeka Nyori Kuda PHCU PHCU Kuda 5 Central Equatoria State Terekeka Rijiong Jonko PHCU PHCU Jonkok 6 Central Equatoria State Terekeka Terekeka Terekeka PHCC PHCC Terekeka 7 Central Equatoria State Juba Rokon Miriko PHCU PHCU Rokon 8 Central Equatoria State Juba Ganji Ganji PHCC PHCC Ganji 9 Central Equatoria State Yei Tore Tore PHCC PHCC Yei 10 Central Equatoria State Yei Tore Goli PHCU PHCU Yei 11 Central Equatoria State Yei Yei Pakula PHCU PHCU Yei 12 Central Equatoria State Yei Mugwo Jombu PHCU PHCU Yei 13 Central Equatoria State Yei Tore Bandame PHCU PHCU Yei 14 Central Equatoria State Yei Otogo Kejiko PHCU PHCU Yei 15 Central Equatoria State Yei Lasu Kirikwa PHCU PHCU Yei 16 Central Equatoria State Yei Otogo Rubeke PHCU PHCU Yei 17 Central Equatoria State Yei Yei BAKITA PHCC PHCC YEI 18 Central Equatoria State Yei Yei Marther PHCC PHCC YEI 19 Central Equatoria State Yei Yei EPC CLINIC - PHCU PHCU YEI 20 Central Equatoria State Yei Yei YEI HOSPITAL HOSPITAL YEI 21 Central Equatoria State Yei CHD Yei County Cold Chain County Cold Chain YEI 22 Central Equatoria State Yei CHD Yei County Cold Chain County Cold Chain YEI 23 Central Equatoria State Yei CHD Yei County Cold Chain County
    [Show full text]
  • South Sudan's Renewable Energy Potential
    UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org SPECIAL REPORT 2301 Constitution Ave., NW • Washington, DC 20037 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063 ABOUT THE REPORT David Mozersky and Daniel M. Kammen In the context of the civil war with no end in sight in South Sudan, this report outlines how a donor-led shift from the current total reliance on diesel to renewable energy can deliver short-term humanitarian cost savings while creating a longer- term building block for peace in the form of a clean energy infrastructure. The report is supported by the Africa South Sudan’s Renewable program at the United States Institute of Peace. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Energy Potential David Mozersky is the cofounder of Energy Peace Partners and the founding director of the Program on Conflict, Climate Change and Green Development at the University of California, A Building Block for Peace Berkeley’s Renewable and Appropriate Energy Lab. He has been involved with peacebuilding and conflict resolution efforts in South Sudan for more than fifteen years. Daniel Kammen is a professor and chair of the Energy and Resources Group Summary and a professor in the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley. He served as science envoy • Shortly after independence in 2011, South Sudan fell into civil war. A regional peace agree- for the US State Department in 2016 and 2017. ment has effectively collapsed, and the international community has no clear strategy on how to proceed. • The war has destroyed South Sudan’s limited infrastructure, triggering an economic implo- sion.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Equatoria State
    ! Eas! tern Equatoria State Map ! ! ! ! ! ! 32°E 33°E ! 34°E 35°E ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Anyidi Pe!ngko ! Marongodoa Towoth Mewun !! R. !" Upper Boma Bor Kangen ! ! ! Brong Kwal Tiu Macdit ! ! Gurgo Karita Gurbi Tukls! Pajok ! ! ! Nongwoli ! Boma Balwan !! Aluk Gw! alla! ! Katanich Titong Munini Cuei Machar Awan ! R. K ! ! ang Wowa Sudan ! Aliab ! en ! Logoda ! Malek ! ! Bor South ! Rigl Chilimun N N ° Jonglei Pibor ° ! Katchikan Kichepo Pariak! ! ! ! ! 6 ! !Pariak 6 ! Lowelli a Lochiret River Bellel l l ! Aw! erial i t Kenamuke Swamp ! ! ! Panabang o L r Ngechele . ! Neria a Kanopir ! Natibok Kabalatigo R ! ! ! w South Ethiopia ! Moru Kimod G Rongada Central ! . R African Sudan R Tombi ! . N R. Republic Gwojo-Adung a Ch ! r Kassangor alb ! Tiarki o ! o !Bori ng ! ! ! Moru Kerri Kuron Gigging ! ! ! Mun! i " ! Karn Ethi Kerkeng ! ! ! ! Nakadocwa i Gemmaiza r i Democratic t Kobowen Swamp Moru Ethi Borichadi Bokuna ! i ! ! Wani Mika ! Poko Kassengo Selemani ! Pagar S ! Nabwel ! Republic of Congo ! Chabong ! Uganda ! Tukara . ! R Kenyi ! River Nakua Kenya ! Moru Angbin Mukajo Terekeka ! ! ! ! Bulu Koli Gali ) Awakot Lotimor ! t ! ! ! i ! ! Akitukomoi ! Tumu River G! era e Nanyangachor l Napalap ! l Kalaruz ! Namoropus i ! t ! Logono Kangitabok Lomokori o Eyata Moru Kolinyagkopil ! Terekeka ! ! ! ! Wit " L Natilup Swamp ETHIOPIA ! ( Magara Umm Gura Mwanyakapin ! ! ! R n Abuilingakine Lomareng Plateau . ! ! R N ! W a R ak Juban y . u Rambo l Lokodopotok . ! h ! ! ! a ! L a N Katirima Nai A (S i Lomuleye ! ! t o a k ! c e Badigeru Swamp River Lokuja a Losagam Musha Lukwatuk Pass Doinyoro East h ! ! ! p ! ! ! o i) Buboli r N ! o L o River Lokorowa Pongo Watha Peth Hills ! t .
    [Show full text]
  • Central Equatoria Eastern Equatoria Jonglei Lakes
    For Humanitarian Purposes Only SOUTH SUDAN Production date: 10 Mar 2017 Eastern Equatoria State - WASH INDICATOR REACH calculated the areas more likely to have WASH needs basing the estimation on the data collected between January and February 2017 with the Area of Knowledge (AoK) approach, using the following methEodotloghy. iopia The indicator was created by averaging the percentages of key informants (KIs) reporting on the J o n g l e i following for specific settlements: - Accessibility to safe drinking water 0% indicates a reported impossibility to access safe drinking water by all KIs, while 100% indicates safe drinking water was reported accessible by each KI. Only assessed settlements are shown on the map. Values for different settlements have been averaged L a k e s and represented with hexagons 10km wide. Kapoeta Lopa County Kapoeta East North County County C e n t r a l E a s t e r n E q u a t o r i a Imehejek E q u a t o r i a Lohutok Kapoeta South County Narus Torit Torit County Budi County Magwi Lotukei Ikotos County Pageri Parajok Magwi County Nimule Kenya Uganda Sudan 0 25 50 km Data sources: Ethiopia Settlements assessed Boundaries WASH indicator Thematic indicators: REACH Administrative boundaries: UNOCHA; State capital International 0.81 - 1 Settlements: UNOCHA; County capital 0.61 - 0.8 Coordinate System:GCS WGS 1984 C.A.R. County Contact: [email protected] Principal town 0.41 - 0.6 Note: Data, designations and boundaries contained Juba State Village 0.21 - 0.4 on this map are not warranted to be error-free and do not imply acceptance by the REACH partners, Disputed area associates, donors or any other stakeholder D.R.C.
    [Show full text]