DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Evaluation Multi-Stakeholder Model for Ending Gender-Based Violence Project Kayah March 2010 Evaluators: Raquel Fernandez Costa, Zin Mar Tun, Sofia Raineri

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Evaluation Multi-Stakeholder Model for Ending Gender-Based Violence Project Kayah March 2010 Evaluators: Raquel Fernandez Costa, Zin Mar Tun, Sofia Raineri Final Evaluation Multi-stakeholder Model for Ending Gender-Based Violence Project Kayah March 2010 Evaluators: Raquel Fernandez Costa, Zin Mar Tun, Sofia Raineri Table of Contents 1. List of acronyms ......................................................................................................................... 2 2. Charts and tables ........................................................................................................................ 3 3. Executive summary and recommendations ............................................................................. 4 4. Introduction and background .................................................................................................... 5 4.1. Project Overview ................................................................................................................. 6 4.2. Purpose and scope of the evaluation ............................................................................... 7 5. Methodology and limitations ..................................................................................................... 7 5.1. Quantitative Methodology .................................................................................................. 7 5.2. Qualitative data ................................................................................................................... 9 5.3. Limitations to the Evaluation ............................................................................................. 9 6. Evaluation findings ................................................................................................................... 10 6.1. Relevance .......................................................................................................................... 10 6.2. Efficiency ........................................................................................................................... 12 6.3. Effectiveness ..................................................................................................................... 16 6.3.1. Project Outcome 1: KSWN, its member organizations and non-member organizations are an increasingly independent organizations who work for longer-term impact and sustainability as they have increased technical and organizational capacity to prevent and respond to GBV . 19 6.3.2. Project Outcome 2: GBV survivors have access to a full range of quality GBV services in a timely and safe manner ........................................................................................................ 31 6.3.3. Project Outcome 3: KSWN has strengthened support and enabling environment to reinforce GBV prevention and response through their advocacy efforts .................................... 35 6.3.4. Project Outcome 4: The vulnerability of GBV survivors and women in the communities have reduced through increased skills and capacities, access to financial services and economic opportunities ............................................................................................................................... 39 6.4. Impact ................................................................................................................................ 41 6.5. Sustainability ..................................................................................................................... 43 7. Key lessons learned and good practices ............................................................................... 44 8. Conclusions and Recommendations ...................................................................................... 45 9. Annexes ..................................................................................................................................... 47 Annex1 – Evaluation Matrix ......................................................................................................... 47 Annex 2 – Questionnaire .............................................................................................................. 49 Annex 3 - Quantitative data: villages surveyed ......................................................................... 58 Annex 4 – Interview guides .......................................................................................................... 59 Annex 5 – List of Informants FGDs and KIIs per township ....................................................... 64 Annex 6 – Interview schedule / agenda ...................................................................................... 65 1 1. List of acronyms CEDAW - The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women CSOs - Civil Society Organisations DSW - Department of Social Welfare FGDs - Focus Group Discussions GAD - General Administration Department GBV - Gender Based Violence HH - Household IGAs - Income Generating Activities IPV - Intimate Partner Violence KIIs - key informant interviews KNWO – Karenni National Women’s Organisation KPBA - Kayah Phu Baptist Association KSWN - Karenni State Women Network M&E – Monitoring and Evaluation MSWRR – Ministry of Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement NSPAW - The National Strategic Plan for the Advancement of Women SPARC – Supporting Partnership and Resilience of Communities in Northern Rakhine ToRs - Terms of Reference ToT - Training of trainers VDOs - Village Development Organisations VRM - Vulnerable Rural Women VSLAs - Villages Saving and Loans Associations WDC - Women Development Center 2 2. Charts and tables Figure 1 - Budget Lines ....................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 2– Number of respondents by gender. .................................................................................... 16 Figure 3 - Age and Gender of the Respondents ................................................................................. 17 Figure 4 - Educational Level by Gender ............................................................................................. 17 Figure 5– Position in the HH by Gender ............................................................................................. 18 Figure 6– Number of People Involved in CARE Groups ..................................................................... 18 Figure 7- % of people who reject IPV. Comparative baseline – endline. ............................................ 20 Figure 8– People rejecting IPV by gender. Results per each of the statements measured. Comparative baseline – endline. .............................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 9 – Understanding of IPV. Comparative baseline – endline. ................................................... 22 Figure 10– Understanding IPV by township in 2020. .......................................................................... 23 Figure 11– Understanding IPV by gender in 2020 .............................................................................. 24 Figure 12– Understanding of IPV by gender. Comparative baseline – endline. Number of cases of IPV that an individual is able to identify. .................................................................................................... 24 Figure 13 – Violence against women is normal in relationships. Comparative baseline – endline by gender. ................................................................................................................................................ 25 Figure 14 – Have you ever helped someone who suffers from GBV? Comparative baseline - endline ............................................................................................................................................................ 27 Figure 15 – Have you ever referred someone suffering from GBV to any service available in the community? Comparative baseline - endline ...................................................................................... 27 Figure 16 – Those that have referred someone towards what service are referring them. Comparative baseline -endline. ................................................................................................................................ 28 Figure 17– Cases referred by gender. Endline. .................................................................................. 28 Figure 18– If there is a case of violence, who do people report to? Endline. ..................................... 29 Figure 19- If there is a case of violence, who do people report to? Baseline. .................................... 29 Figure 20 – Respondents that have experienced GBV personally by gender. Endline. ..................... 32 Figure 21 – Number of the cases that were referred by township. Endline. ....................................... 32 Figure 22 – To what services are the declared cases addressed. Endline. ....................................... 33 Figure 23 – Respondents that heard their community leaders speak about GBV. Comparative baseline – endline. ............................................................................................................................................ 37 Figure 24 – From what community leader have you heard? Comparative baseline – endline. .......... 37 Figure 25– Rating of the level of support from community leaders to GBV survivors by gender. Endline. ...........................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Weekly Briefing Note Southeastern Myanmar 5-11 June 2021 (Limited Distribution)
    Weekly Briefing Note Southeastern Myanmar 5-11 June 2021 (Limited Distribution) This weekly briefing note, covering humanitarian developments in Southeastern Myanmar from 5 June to 11 June, is produced by the Kayin Inter-Agency Coordination of the Southeastern Myanmar Working Group. Highlights • The import of soap, detergent and toothpaste from Thailand through the Myawaddy border was suspended on 4 June, according to a letter of notification from the Trades Department.1 • In Kayin State, clashes between the Tatmadaw and Karen National Union (KNU) was observed in Kyainseikgyi, Hpapun and Myawaddy townships and Thandaung town during the week. • A letter ordering the suspension of activities and temporary closure of offices of INGOs in Tanintharyi Region was issued by the Department of Social Welfare on 2 June. The closure of INGOs offices is likely to impact access to services and assistance by vulnerable people in the region. • The Karen National Liberation Army's (KNLA) Chief, General Saw Johny released a statement on 9 June, indicating that the KNLA and its members will follow political leadership of the Karen National Union (KNU). According to the statement signed by Gen. Saw Johny, the KNLA will follow the announcement that was released by the KNU's chairman Saw Mutu Say Poe on 10 May and will follow the framework of the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) signed by the KNU. The statement also stated that KNLA members must comply with the military rules of the KNLA.2 • The security situation continues to deteriorate in Kayah State. Over 100,000 remain displaced as clashes and military reinforcements brought in by the Tatmadaw continued throughout the week.
    [Show full text]
  • The Republic of the Union of Myanmar Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation Forest Department
    Leaflet No. 24 The Republic of the Union of Myanmar Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation Forest Department Assessing different livelihood of the local people and causes of forest degradation and deforestation in the Kayah State Dr. Chaw Chaw Sein, Staff Officer Dr. Thaung Naing Oo, Director Kyi Phyu Aung, Range Officer Forest Research Institute December, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS i Abstract ii 1 Introduction 1 2 Objectives 2 3 Literature Review 2 3.1 What do we mean by sustainable livelihoods? 2 3.2 Why are sustainable livelihoods important for conservation? 3 3.3 How do we identify locally appropriate livelihoods strategies? 3 4 Material and Method 5 4.1 Study Area 5 4.2 Data collection and analysis 6 5 Results and Discussion 6 5.1 Livelihood surveys in the Kayah Region 6 5.2 Causes of forest degradation and deforestation in the study area 12 6 Conclusions and Recommendation 15 7 Acknowledgements 17 8 References 18 ၊ ၊ ၊ ၊ ၁.၄% Assessing different livelihood of the local people and causes of forest degradation and deforestation in the Kayah State Dr. Chaw ChawSein, Staff Officer Dr. Thaung Naing Oo, Director Thein Saung, Staff Officer Kyi Phyu Aung , Range Officer Abstract About annual rate of 1.4% of the forest degradation and deforestation was occurred in Myanmar. There are many causes of deforestation and forest degradation. Especially in the hilly region like Kayah state, the main causes of forest degradation and deforestation are due to shifting cultivation. The present study reports different livelihood activities to settle their daily needs in the Kayah areas and the causes of forest degradation and deforestation.
    [Show full text]
  • KAYAH STATE, LOIKAW DISTRICT Loikaw Township Report
    THE REPUBLIC OF THE UNION OF MYANMAR The 2014 Myanmar Population and Housing Census KAYAH STATE, LOIKAW DISTRICT Loikaw Township Report Department of Population Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population October 2017 The 2014 Myanmar Population and Housing Census Kayah State, Loikaw District Loikaw Township Report Department of Population Ministry of Labour, Immigration and Population Office No.48 Nay Pyi Taw Tel: +95 67 431062 www.dop.gov.mm October 2017 Figure 1 : Map of Kayah State, showing the townships Loikaw Township Figures at a Glance 1 Total Population 128,401 2 Population males 63,109 (49.1%) Population females 65,292 (50.9%) Percentage of urban population 40.0% Area (Km2) 1,549.0 3 Population density (per Km2) 82.9 persons Median age 24.5 years Number of wards 13 Number of village tracts 12 Number of private households 26,495 Percentage of female headed households 24.1% Mean household size 4.6 persons4 Percentage of population by age group Children (0 – 14 years) 31.6% Economically productive (15 – 64 years) 64.3% Elderly population (65+ years) 4.1% Dependency ratios Total dependency ratio 55.7 Child dependency ratio 49.2 Old dependency ratio 6.5 Ageing index 13.1 Sex ratio (males per 100 females) 97 Literacy rate (persons aged 15 and over) 85.9% Male 90.6% Female 81.8% People with disability Number Per cent Any form of disability 7,707 6.0 Walking 2,941 2.3 Seeing 4,457 3.5 Hearing 2,335 1.8 Remembering 3,029 2.4 Type of Identity Card (persons aged 10 and over) Number Per cent Citizenship Scrutiny 92,337 90.6 Associate
    [Show full text]
  • English 2014
    The Border Consortium November 2014 PROTECTION AND SECURITY CONCERNS IN SOUTH EAST BURMA / MYANMAR With Field Assessments by: Committee for Internally Displaced Karen People (CIDKP) Human Rights Foundation of Monland (HURFOM) Karen Environment and Social Action Network (KESAN) Karen Human Rights Group (KHRG) Karen Offi ce of Relief and Development (KORD) Karen Women Organisation (KWO) Karenni Evergreen (KEG) Karenni Social Welfare and Development Centre (KSWDC) Karenni National Women’s Organization (KNWO) Mon Relief and Development Committee (MRDC) Shan State Development Foundation (SSDF) The Border Consortium (TBC) 12/5 Convent Road, Bangrak, Suite 307, 99-B Myay Nu Street, Sanchaung, Bangkok, Thailand. Yangon, Myanmar. E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] www.theborderconsortium.org Front cover photos: Farmers charged with tresspassing on their own lands at court, Hpruso, September 2014, KSWDC Training to survey customary lands, Dawei, July 2013, KESAN Tatmadaw soldier and bulldozer for road construction, Dawei, October 2013, CIDKP Printed by Wanida Press CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 1 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 3 1.1 Context .................................................................................................................................. 4 1.2 Methodology ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Kayah State Myanmar South East Operation - UNHCR Hpa-An 31 March 2016
    Return Assessments - Kayah State Myanmar South East Operation - UNHCR Hpa-An 31 March 2016 Background information Since June 2013, UNHCR has been piloting a system to assess spontaneous returns in the Southeast of Myanmar, a process that may start in the absence of an organized Voluntary Repatriation operation. Total Assessments 128 A verified return village, therefore, is a village where UNHCR field staff have confirmed there are refugees and/or IDPs who have returned since January 2012 with the intention of remaining Verified Return Villages permanently. During the assessments, communities are also asked whether their village is a refugee 44 village of origin, by definition a village that is home to people residing in a refugee camp in Thailand. A village where UNHCR completes an assessment can be both a verified return village and a refugee Refugee Villages of Origin 94 village of origin, as the two are not mutually exclusive. Using a “do no harm” approach based around community level discussion, the return assessment collect information about the patterns and needs of returnees in the Southeast. The project does not, however, attempt to represent the total number of returnees in a state, or the region as a whole. The returnee monitoring project has been underway in Kayah State, Mon State and Tanintharyi Region since June 2013, and expanded to Kayin State in December 2013. Verified Return Villages by Township ^^ ± Demoso 8 26 ^^^ ^^^^^ Hpasawng 11 ^ ^_^ ^ 5 ^ Loikaw 6 29 ^ ^_ Shadaw 19 ^ ^_ ^ 14 Shan (South) ^ ^_ ^ Bawlakhe 5 ^_Loikaw 2 ^ ^ ^_ Hpruso 7 29 ^_ ^_ ^_^_^_ Shadaw Mese 9 ^ ^_^_ ^ 2 ^^ ^_ ^_Demoso^^ ^_ Assessments Verified Return Villages ^^^ ^_^_ ^ ^ ^_ ^ ^_ ^^_^ ^^^ ^_ No.
    [Show full text]
  • Yangon University of Economics Master of Development Studies Programme
    YANGON UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS MASTER OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES PROGRAMME A STUDY ON THE COMMUNITY-BASED TOURISM DEVELOPMENT IN KAYAH STATE THET MON SOE EMDevS – 43 (15TH BATCH) DECEMBER, 2019 YANGON UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS MASTER OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES PROGRAMME A STUDY ON THE COMMUNITY-BASED TOURISM DEVELOPMENT IN KAYAH STATE A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Development Studies (MDevS) Supervised by: Submitted by: Daw Yin Myo Oo Thet Mon Soe Associate Professor Roll No. 43 Department of Economics EMDevS (15th Batch) Yangon University of Economics 2017-2019 December, 2019 YANGON UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS MASTER OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES PROGRAMME This is to certify that the thesis entitled “A Study on the Community-Based Tourism Development in Kayah State”, submitted as a partial fulfillment towards the requirements for the degree of Master of Development Studies had been accepted by the Board of Examiners. BOARD OF EXAMINERS 1. Dr. Tin Win Rector Yangon University of Economics (Chief Examiner) 2. Dr. Ni Lar Myint Htoo Pro-Rector Yangon University of Economics (Examiner) 3. Dr. Cho Cho Thein Professor and Head Department of Economics Yangon University of Economics (Examiner) 4. Daw Nyunt Nyunt Shwe Professor and Head (Retired) Department of Applied Economics Yangon University of Economics (Examiner) 5. Dr. Tha Pye Nyo Professor Department of Economics Yangon University of Economics (Examiner) December, 2019 ABSTRACT Community-Based Tourism (CBT) is gaining prestige in developing countries as an alternative to mass tourism. The main approach of CBT is to ensure environmental, social and cultural sustainability while empowering the local community.
    [Show full text]
  • Peace Is Living with Dignity
    PEACE IS LIVING WITH DIGNITY VOICES OF COMMUNITIES FROM MYanmar’s ceasefIRE AREAS IN 2016 PEACE IS LIVING WITH DIGNITY Voices of Communities from Myanmar’s ceasefire areas in 2016 i PEACE IS LIVING WITH DIGNITY Voices of Communities from Myanmar’s ceasefire areas in 2016 Listening methodology development: Soth Plai Ngarm Listening Project Implementation (Training, Processing, Writing) Coordinator and Editor: Karen Simbulan Team members: Laurens Visser, Tengku Shahpur, Harshadeva Amarathunga Myanmar Partner Organisations Karuna Myanmar Social Services (Kachin) Ta’ang Student and Youth Union (Northern Shan) Pyi Nyein Thu Kha (Southern Shan) Karen Development Network (Kayin) Kayah State Peace Monitoring Network (Kayah) Mon Women Network (Mon) Cover photo: Karlos Manlupig Inside photographs: Zabra Yu Siwa, Shutterstock, Listener from Northern Shan Copy-editing: Husnur Esthiwahyu Lay-out: Boonruang Song-ngam Publisher: Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies Funding: Peace Support Fund ISBN- 13: 978 99963 856 4 3 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CPCS) is grateful to our Myanmar partner organisations that provided invaluable assistance throughout the project. We could not have done this without you. We are especially grateful to all the individuals who volunteered to be listeners. We appreciate the time, energy and enthusiasm that you demonstrated throughout the process, and your willingness to travel to remote areas. We would also like to express our heartfelt gratitude to the community members from Kachin, Northern Shan, Southern Shan, Kayah, Kayin, and Mon states who were willing to take the time out of their busy lives to share their opinions, experiences, knowledge, concerns and hopes for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Raising the Curtain
    Raising the Curtain Cultural Norms, Social Practices and Gender Equality in Myanmar 1 We, both women and men, hold equal opportunities and chances since we were born, as we all are, human beings. Most women think that these opportunities and favours are given by men. No, these are our own opportunities and chances to live equally and there is no need to thank men for what they are not doing. Focus Group Discussion with Muslim women, aged 18-25, Mingalartaung Nyunt Township The Gender Equality Network Yangon, Myanmar © All rights reserved Published in Yangon, Myanmar, Gender Equality November 2015 Network 2 Cultural Norms, Social Practices and Gender Equality in Myanmar 3 Contents Acronyms 6 Acknowledgements 7 Executive Summary 8 1. Introduction 10 1.1 Background and Rationale 12 1.2 Objectives and Study Questions 12 1.3 Methodology - In Brief 13 2. Setting the Scene 16 2.1 ‘The Problem is that the Problem is not Seen as a Problem’ 17 2.2 Historical Narratives: Women’s High Status and Comparisons with Other Countries 18 2.3 Gender Inequality and Gender Discrimination: Where is the Problem? 21 2.4 Gender Equality as a ‘Western’ Concept 25 3. Cultural and Religious Norms and Practices 26 3.1 Culture in Myanmar, and Myanmar Culture 27 3.2 The Inseparability of Culture and Religion 29 3.3 Women as Bearers of Culture 30 3.4 The Role of Nuns in Buddhism 32 3.5 Hpon, Respect and Male Superiority 34 3.6 Purity, Female Inferiority and Exclusion 37 3.7 Modesty, Male Sexuality and the Importance of Women’s Dress 38 3.8 The Construction of Ideal Masculinity 41 3.9 Letting the Birds Rest on the Pagoda: Controlling the Self, Enduring Hardship and Sacrificing 42 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Myanmar : Administration and UNHCR Offices (2017)
    Myanmar : Administration and UNHCR Offices (2017) Nawngmun Puta-O Machanbaw Khaunglanhpu Nanyun Sumprabum Lahe Tanai INDIA Tsawlaw Hkamti Kachin Chipwi Injangyang Hpakan Myitkyina Lay Shi Myitkyina CHINA Mogaung Waingmaw Homalin Mohnyin Banmauk Bhamo Paungbyin Bhamo Tamu Indaw Shwegu Momauk Pinlebu Katha Sagaing Mansi Muse Wuntho Konkyan Kawlin Tigyaing Namhkan Tonzang Mawlaik Laukkaing Mabein Kutkai Hopang Tedim Kyunhla Hseni Manton Kunlong Kale Kalewa Kanbalu Mongmit Namtu Taze Mogoke Namhsan Lashio Mongmao Falam Mingin Thabeikkyin Ye-U Khin-U Shan (North) ThantlangHakha Tabayin Hsipaw Namphan ShweboSingu Kyaukme Tangyan Kani Budalin Mongyai Wetlet Nawnghkio Ayadaw Gangaw Madaya Pangsang Chin Yinmabin Monywa Pyinoolwin Salingyi Matman Pale MyinmuNgazunSagaing Kyethi Monghsu Chaung-U Mongyang MYANMAR Myaung Tada-U Mongkhet Tilin Yesagyo Matupi Myaing Sintgaing Kyaukse Mongkaung VIET NAM Mongla Pauk MyingyanNatogyi Myittha Mindat Pakokku Mongping Paletwa Taungtha Shan (South) Laihka Kunhing Kengtung Kanpetlet Nyaung-U Saw Ywangan Lawksawk Mongyawng MahlaingWundwin Buthidaung Mandalay Seikphyu Pindaya Loilen Shan (East) Buthidaung Kyauktaw Chauk Kyaukpadaung MeiktilaThazi Taunggyi Hopong Nansang Monghpyak Maungdaw Kalaw Nyaungshwe Mrauk-U Salin Pyawbwe Maungdaw Mongnai Monghsat Sidoktaya Yamethin Tachileik Minbya Pwintbyu Magway Langkho Mongpan Mongton Natmauk Mawkmai Sittwe Magway Myothit Tatkon Pinlaung Hsihseng Ngape Minbu Taungdwingyi Rakhine Minhla Nay Pyi Taw Sittwe Ann Loikaw Sinbaungwe Pyinma!^na Nay Pyi Taw City Loikaw LAOS Lewe
    [Show full text]
  • Myanmar Solidarity Bulletin No
    1 Myanmar Solidarity Bulletin No. 1 When dictatorship is a fact, revolution becomes a right. 21 June 2021 The Spring Revolution Needs Solidarity The purpose of this Bulletin, which we hope is but the first of a regular issue, is to raise awareness of Myanmar’s Spring Revolution against the Tatmadaw dictatorship – not as an end in itself, but with the express purpose of building international solidarity and winning material support for the many ordinary people who are playing an heroic role. Nothing comparable to what has been happening in Myan- mar since the coup has occurred in this part of Asia since the region became the engine of the global economy. Mil- lions of civil servants and other workers have been on strike for four months; many have already lost everything. Roughly 90% of students from kindergarten on up are boy- cotting class, as parents refuse to send their children to be indoc- Deadly Day in Mandalay – An Interview trinated under dictatorship. The regime killed 150 people on March 27: Myanmar Military The rural population, which sat out during past uprisings against Day, which protestors attempted to reclaim as Anti-Fascist various Burmese coup regime since 1962, and in all surrounding Revolution Day. It was also Thit Chone’s 16th birthday. He countries are systematically abused and exploited as a cheap la- recounts his experience when plainclothes soldiers opened fire bor force, have finally stood up and rallied to the revolution’s on the protest he was in and arrested him and his older brother, slogans of democracy and social justice even more energetically who remains in prison.
    [Show full text]
  • Earth Rights Abuses in Burma Exposed
    Gaining Ground: Earth Rights Abuses in Burma Exposed Earth Rights School of Burma Class of 2008 Preface People can create a better world if they have the desire, enthusiasm and knowledge to do so. Furthermore, unity of thought and unity of action are needed in the international community to bring about positive changes and sustainable development around the globe. In a long list of important goals, eradication of poverty and protection and promotion of human rights and environmental rights are top priorities. People power is pivotal and improving the connections among individuals, organizations and governments is essential. Greater knowledge is important at every level and every actor in the international community must strive to create a better world in the future. Of course, this improvement would come from both local and global actions. In fact, to my knowledge, the students and EarthRights School (ERS) itself are trying their best to cooperate and to coordinate with the international community for the above-mentioned noble tasks. By starting from localized actions, many ethnic youths from various areas of Burma come, study and have been working together at ERS. They exchange their experiences and promote knowledge and expertise not only during their school term but also after they graduate and through practical work that improves society. In Burma, according to the international communitys highly-regarded research and field documents, human rights violations are rampant, poverty is too high, environmental issues are neglected and good governance is non-existent. This may be a normal situation under military dictatorships around the world but it is not a permanent situation and history has proved that if democratic people have enough power, things will change sooner or later.
    [Show full text]
  • Kayah State Profile Updated: June 20141
    UNHCR SOUTH-EAST MYANMAR INFORMATION MANAGEMENT UNIT KAYAH STATE PROFILE UPDATED: JUNE 20141 State Kayah Flag Previous Name Karenni State Capital Loikaw NumBer of Districts 2 NumBer of Townships 7 Ward and VillaGe 105 Tracts Total population (2012 360,379 Est.) IDPs 34,600 Refugees 11,662 Area 4,510 sq. miles / 11,670 sq. kms North: Shan State East: Mae HonG Son province, Border Thailand West and South: Kayin state o o Latitude 18 30'N and 19 55'N Longitude 94o 40'E and 97o 93'E Map: Myanmar Information Management Unit Kayah, Kayin, Kayan, Kayaw, Bamar, Ethnicities Shan, Pa-O, Background Located in eastern Myanmar, Kayah State is bounded by Shan State to the north, Kayin State to the south and west, and Thailand’s Mae Hon SonG to the East. Previously Known as Karenni State, the territory is inhaBited primarily by the Karenni ethnic Group, also Known as the Red Karen. As a sub-group of the Karen people, the Karenni have maintained a close historical relationship with Kayin State. Low intensity conflict has recurred in Kayah State since the 1947 Constitution established an independent Burma, which included then-Karenni State within the Union of Burma, despite assertions from Karenni representatives that their nation souGht self- determination as independent and sovereiGn. Much of the current displacement from Kayah State dates BacK to the mid-1990s, and the armed clashes before and after the failed 1995 ceasefire Between the Tatmadaw and the Karenni National Progressive Party (KNPP). Counter-insurGency strateGies employed to varying deGrees by both sides have historically exacerbated the forced displacement resultinG from direct armed conflict Between the Government and the non-state actors 1 Disclaimer: These state profiles were printed in June 2014, and will be updated periodically by the UNHCR South-East Myanmar Information Management Unit to reflect new developments, additions and corrections.
    [Show full text]