2020 Torit County Multi-Sector Household Survey Full Report

March 2020

Note: the circles reported in the cover page do not represent administrative boundaries (for which there is not an official reference), nor their size is proportional to the number of inhabitants. It is merely meant to provides a much-needed geographical location of sub county administrations. i.e. payams (the list of payams was provided by Torit RRC).

Contents I. COMMUNITY CONSOLE...... 4 II. TRENDS OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS ...... 6 III. BACKGROUND and HUMANITARIAN SUPPORT ...... 7 IV. DASHBOARD ...... 8 V. PURPOSE, METHODOLOGY and SCOPE ...... 1 SECTION 1. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT ...... 5 1. LIVELIHOOD ...... 5 2. MAIN PROBLEMS, ACCESS to SERVICES and COPING CAPACITY ...... 8 3. FOOD SECURITY, NUTRITION and POVERTY PROFILING ...... 11 4. HEALTH ...... 15 5. HYGIENE and WASH ...... 18 6. EDUCATION ...... 20 7. PROTECTION and GENDER ...... 24 SECTION 2. ECONOMY ...... 29 8. AGRICULTURE...... 29 9. LIVESTOCK FARMING ...... 43 10. ACCESS TO CONSUMER MARKETS, EXCHANGES and EXPENDITURES ...... 47 11. PRODUCTIVE ASSETS, ENERGY and NON-FOOD ITEMS ...... 50 SECTION 3. PEACE and GOVERNANCE ...... 52 12. NATURAL RESOURCES RELATED DISPUTES ...... 52 13. SAFETY and CRIMES ...... 54 14. MIGRATION and IDPs ...... 55 15. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION and LOCAL GOVERNANCE ...... 60 16. HUMANITARIAN & DEVELOPMENT AID (IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS) ...... 64

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:

This report was made possible thanks to the kind contribution of the Italian Agency for Development Cooperation and the Food Agency Organization

Author

Bruno Nazim Baroni (AVSI Foundation Head of Monitoring and Quality Assurance)

with the support of

Mariam Joshi (AVSI Foundation Coordinator of Monitoring and Evaluation)

and

Kuti Elizabeth and Papa John Martin (survey managers and lead enumerators)

AVSI Foundation, South Sudan

I. COMMUNITY CONSOLE By comparison, each community is assessed with regard to the 3 themes of the report – human development (HD), economy (E), and peace & governance (PG); the green color suggests encouraging signs, red reasons for concern.

NYONG/TORIT TOWN (approximately 25% of Torit county population) HD Best access to social services but high levels of crude death rate (CDR) for U5 children (6.3/ 10,000 people/day) E Most economically diverse and significant access to productive assets but highest prices for commodities PG Highest levels of participation and association but lowest contribution to community work; high levels of theft

HIYALLA (16%) HD Best Food Consumption Score (FCS) thanks to livestock rearing and relatively fair access to social services E Community that sells most of its livestock to other community members, significant access to productive assets PG Strong community work but significant forced marriages and conflicts (livestock grazing on crops), not well managed

IYIRE (15%) HD Lowest proximity to health services; and limited access to safe water (10% of HHs drinks surface water) E Most market-oriented farmers and most varied crop farming; Least number of HHs adopting coping strategies PG High levels of crime, especially physical attack, including harm and abduction of children; outflow driven by insecurity

IFWOTU (7%) HD Strong food insecurity (32% with poor FCS) and high crude death rate (3.7). Average access to social services E Limited crop variety; 50% of HH spend more than 75% on food; severe limitation to productive assets PG Highest incidence of crime, especially murder and GBV. Weakest support among community members

BUR (10%) HD Lowest level of schooling (lowest demand) and average access to other services; Good food security E High numbers of market-oriented herders; highest rate of livestock deaths. Good access to productive assets. PG Low incidence of crime albeit potential minor tensions between IDPs and host community; average associationism

KUDO (8%) HD Little lower than average food security; Better than average proximity to social services. High morbidity E Intense sale of livestock as coping strategy; Limited access to advanced farming tools PG Average community support and association; average number of disputes (for water control) and incidence of crime

HIMODONGE (7%) HD Highest levels of CDR for U5 children (6.9); limited access to social services, and worse access to water E Highest share of smallholder farmers, little market production, and bad food security (in spite of strong agro support) PG Highest level of disputes (particularly for water), and among herders and farmers; least performing conflict resolution

LOWOI (6%) HD Highest food insecurity; low schooling (worse school infrastructure), high forced marriage and kidnapping of children E Hunger is the second most pressing problem. Worse proximity to markets. Intense sale of livestock as coping strategy PG Lowest share of HHs reporting security improvements; average incidence of crime

IMUROK (6%) HD Very high food insecurity; High CDR (4.9) and sickness. Low schooling and school infrastructure. E Hunger the second most pressing problem; 50% of HHs spending more than 75% on food; lowest access to assets PG Highest percentage of departures due to insecurity; high incidences of theft, GBV and abuses on children

Note: the circles do not represent administrative boundaries nor their size is proportional to the share or number of inhabiting populations. The list of payams was provided by Torit RRC

II. TRENDS OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS

• Overall, 2019 was a year of significant improvements – yet not sufficient to recover meaningfully from the impact of the crises (security, food security and economic crisis) that succeeded one another during the 2016-2018 period. Amid a good rainy season, food security has improved, particularly in the payams that faced the direst food security conditions in early 2019, economic vulnerability has decreased by 50%, and the share of families declaring to have some saving has doubled; Still, in spite of these improvements, a very significant 20% of the population, right after harvest season, were in a condition of moderate hunger (HHS), or poor food consumption (FCS), and one third of families continue to spend more than 75% of their budgets on food. Similarly, the comeback of returnees over 2019 has visibly accelerated compared to 2018, yet around one-third of returnees find it hard to secure a stable living and is expected to join the increasing number of a floating population of returnees, who go back and forth from and to refugee camps; Finally, although households reported improved security conditions due to the subdue of clashes, the incidence of crimes has increased remarkably across Torit and expanded its geographical reach, and so did competition over natural resources, the combination of which now challenges the whole East Torit. • Focusing on farming, contrary to what reported one year before, the majority of farmers reported having expanded their land under cultivation during 2019. Moreover, in one year it has almost doubled the share of farmers cultivating communal land -- which is more likely to be used for sale than private/family gardens. In spite of such improvements, commercial farming remains marginal: only 10% of farmers use advanced tools (ox-ploughs, water pumps, etc.) or can access lending for an amount of US$ 200, and just 5% of farmers cultivate more than 5 Hectares. Geographically speaking, there is only one community where farming can be regarded as largely market oriented: Iyiere is the only payam in which the crop most demanded is not the sorghum, used for self-consumption, but rather maize and beans, used mostly for sale – note that the farmers of Iyiere, located in a fertile but remote area, are the least supported in Torit. • Focusing on food security, despite the recent reasonable harvest, half the population of Torit continues to have a poor diet (one of which tends to be associated with chronic malnutrition), and 20% of families face serious food scarcity, which is expected to intensify during lean season, thus to undermine the next farming season. The payams lagging behind are the largely the same that scored worst one year ago, those in the West side of the county – namely, Ifwotu, Imurok and Lowoi. On the contrary, access to a varied diet is common almost only in the East side of the county, especially in Hiyalla, where pastoralist and farmers live near each other – in many cases are members of the same family. • Hiyalla shows very well that, at least during 2019, in Torit county, mixing different source of income and food consumption, at the household and/or at the community level, although associated with self- subsistence and bartering, it payed off. On the contrary, the model based on increased productivity and improved access to markets seemed to be out of touch with the actual socio-economic context, and the financial and programming capacity on the ground. It may work for a few, but it hardly can represent the only model for decision makers, at least for now. It is a fact that, over 2019, as food security and livelihood conditions improved, the number of families reportedly working mostly for self-consumption purposes has doubled. These pieces of evidence speak about the extent of the economic disruption occurred since 2016, the very incipient nature of the current recovery, and the need to adopt a more subtle and context- specific lens when assessing the economy of the youngest nation on earth, one largely based on self- subsistence, bartering and reciprocity.

III. BACKGROUND and HUMANITARIAN SUPPORT

• Torit is a very composite county that calls for interventions tailored to the specific conditions of the different payams. The area, in fact, is at the crossroad of different lands and communities: rainy mountains with valuable natural endowments, and arid and flood-prone lowlands; farmer and pastoralist communities; urban and semi-urban settlements linked to the state apparatus and served by public services, and areas relying on self-organization where reaching schools or health centers require hours of walk, and roads are inexistent. Interestingly, such differences are well mirrored by households’ request, which are remarkably different across communities (payams) – education being the only exception, by far the most voiced concern. It is unclear how such diversity is factored in by the humanitarian system, which made of standardization its strength in the face of emergencies. In the meantime, through dynamics of connections/proximity, geographical and social differences grow, fuelling grievances and dislocation. Hopefully, the PfRR can strengthen a more demand-driven, context-specific approach. • Education, by far the most important issue that HHs would like to be addressed, shows a remarkable uneven coverage across the county. For instance, whereas in thee payams more than 70% of people reported to have a school at less than a 30-minute walk, in Lowoi payam only 40% is so fortunate; similarly, while in 4 payams only one-third of schools offer a complete primary cycle (up to P8), in Torit Town that the same figure is virtually 100%. Possibly even more significant than the geographical unbalance, is the age gap, also largely overlooked. The level of schooling for children between 4 and 9 years of age is significantly lower compared to children between 10 and 15. It is a fact that adolescents and higher primary education are encouraged much more vigorously than early child and lower primary education. • Farming shows signs of a similarly important mismatch. The community with the best agronomic conditions, where farmers sell the largest share of produce to the market, is also that one receiving less basic inputs for farming (in fact is the place where the high cost of seeds is the most reported) and simply an average support in terms of more advanced support (served only by AVSI and Caritas). The three payams with the worse food security conditions are also underserved compared to the rest of the county. What all these communities have in common is the fact that they are two-hour drive further away compared to the others – unsurprisingly, these are also the communities less covered in education and health). The selection of farmer groups reflects also this gap: in Torit Town and nearby communities NGOs tend to support well established farmer groups; in other areas younger organizations tend to be supported – if it was a deliberate strategy to support vulnerable farmer, it would make sense to involve the youngest groups in nearby communities, where it is easier to provide a more continuous support. • Supporting returnees, arguably a key “game changers” going forward, with the potential to sustain a recovery and lead to improved resilience (if well managed), is a major test for humanitarian actors to move beyond emergency. So far, the centerstage was taken by the largely misleading question “how many returnees are back?”. What AVSI has witnessed and reported since 2018 is that, at least in bordering areas, many have attempted to return, but moved back to the refugee camps. In Torit, an estimated 40% of households left following the clashed of 2016, and less than half of them has returned yet. However, a significant portion of the families still missing, has sent some family members to test water, but failed to resettle. Asked about the reason for that, 45% reported insecurity, 24% insufficient education services, 21% hunger, 10% both hunger and insecurity: the majority of returnees has not resettled due to insufficient livelihood opportunities and inadequate education services.

IV. DASHBOARD

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT LIVELIHOOD and RESILIENCE (Economic diversification) 74% of HHs derive its main source of living from agriculture related work (Economic specialization) 15% of HHs sell produce to obtain cash (Economic vulnerability) 31% of HHs spend more than 75% of its budget on food purchases (50% in Imurok and Ifwotu) (Recent economic trend) 40% of HHs reports improvement in family’s income over the last year (Key contributing factor) 54% of HHs reporting a worsening in family income explain it to be the result of a loss of crops (Coping strategies) 20% of HHs have adopted crisis livelihood coping strategies – depleting assets to meet needs. (Resilience) 8% of HHs have already exhausted crisis coping strategies (22% in Imurok)

FOOD SECURITY (Access to food among children) 2.6 meals are consumed daily by children below 5 years not breastfeeding (Access to food) 21% of HHs is in a state of moderate or severe hunger (>40% in Imurok and Lowoi) (Access to nutrient diet) 18% of HHs has a poor Food Consumption Score (FCS) (Access to nutrient diet) 30% of HHS has a poor FCS in the most food insecure community, Ifwotu, Imurok and Lowoi (Access to vegetal nutrient-rich food) 2.3 times per week legumes/nuts are consumed (Access to animal nutrient-rich food) 1.9 times per week meat/fish is consumed (Access to animal nutrient-rich food) 0.9 times per week milk is consumed (2.3 in Bur and Hiyalla)

HEALTH (Mortality) 1.8 Crude Mortality Rate (CDR); 3.9 CDR for children under 5 (Maternal care) 55% of mothers giving birth in the last 3 years had visited a health facility in the first trimester of pregnancy (Infant nutrition) 65% of 0-5.9-month-old babies are exclusively breastfed (Vaccination) 83% of under 3-year old babies got vaccinated

HYGIENE (Access to water) 25% of HHs must walk more than 30 minutes to fetch water (during rainy season) (Access to safe drinking water) 3% of HHs uses surface water (ponds) as source of drinking water (during rainy season) (Hygiene practices) 88% of HHs use soap at home (Sanitation practices) 30% of HHs uses latrines to defecate

EDUCATION (Adult literacy) 56% of HH caretakers have no experience of schooling in their lifetime; 50% are illiterate (School accessibility) 68% of HHs live less than 30-minute walk from a school; 60% of schools offer competed primary (School enrolment among children) 69% of children between 4 and 9 years of age attend/ed at any time school (School enrolment among adolescents) 79% of adolescents between 10 and 18 years of age attend/ed at any time school (School absenteeism) 29% of HHs reports that children returned home from schools in the last term due to lack of teachers (Reading skills) 49% of pupils enrolled in P4 or higher classes can read basic English sentences (Mathematical skills) 43% of pupils enrolled in P4 or higher classes can perform simple additions

PROTECTION (Disability/Vulnerability) 7% of HHs have among their members at least one disable person in need of assistance (Sexual abuses on minors) 14% of HHs report that one of their 6 to 17 years old child was sexually abused in the last year (Referral path) 90% of HHs do not report child abuse to authorities (local or judicial) (GBV) 61% of HHs reports of threats specific to women; 28% of HHs reports threat of sexual abuses (rape of sexual assault) (Mental distress) 19% of HHs reports that one of their members felt so troubled that sought help repeatedly in the last year

ECONOMY AGRICULTURE (Proxy of intensive/extensive agriculture) 34% of HHs cultivates land located less than 15 minutes away from home (Actual capacity) 74% of HHs uses all the plots of land owned (Medium/large scale farming) 52% of HHs cultivate communal land/communal gardens in addition to private land (Smallholders) 25% of HHs cultivates less than 1 Ha of private land and is not engaged in communal farming (Expansion of cultivated land) 50% of HHs reports cultivating more land compared to the previous year (Main challenges) 84% of HHs report pest and diseases affecting agricultural activities; 51% experience flooding (Water access stability) 43% of HHs uses different water source depending on season (Water access maintenance) 45% of HHs have a closer non-functioning borehole (Farming of vegetable) 38% of HHs cultivate vegetables (Crop variety) 10% of HHs cultivate only one type of crop; 19% two types of crop only (Most demanded crop/seed) 44% of HHs would like to receive greater quantity of sorghum seeds, 15% maize, 14% g-nuts (Membership in farmer groups) 18% of HHs are members of a farmer group supported by an NGO (Agronomic skills) 78% of HHs are familiar with (some) planting, farming and soil & water conservation practices (Seed selection) 47% of HHs are aware of the distinction between regular and prime seeds (Seed market) 56% of HHs purchased (some) seeds; 70% in Imurok (Agriculture tool market) 2% of HHs using only self-produced tools (Casual labour market) 24% of HHs hired casual laborers (Capital market) 12% of HHs reports being capable of borrowing a conspicuous amount of money ($200) (Market orientation of farmers) 82% of HHs used produce for consumption purposes (Market orientation of farmers) 10% of exchanged produce (sold/in-kind payments)

LIVESTOCK FARMING (Scope of livestock farming) 51% of HHs engages in animal husbandry, 21% raises cattle and 33% sheep/goats (Collective livestock farming) 86% of HHs raise livestock collectively in Kraals; almost 100% in Bur and Hiyalla (Motives of livestock farming) 80% of HHs raise livestock for marriage; 66% for consumption; 1% for draught work (Market orientation of livestock farming) 45% of HHs report raising livestock for commercial purposes (Trend in sales of livestock) 35% of HHs reports having sold more livestock compared to the previous year (Main obstacles to livestock rearing) 84% of HHs report pest and disease as main obstacle, 55% lack of veterinary services (Animal welfare) 35% of animals vaccinated, 0% in Ifwotu (Cattle raiding) 35% of HHs reports incidents of cattle raiding

ACCESS TO CONSUMER MARKETS AND EXPENDITURES (Access to consumer market) 69% of HHs go to the market at least weekly (Obstacles to access to consumer market) 57% of HHs report distance related problems impede access to market (Obstacles to buy at market) 83% of HHs have insufficient money; 39% report inflation; 13% cannot find desired item (Barter) 29% of HHs trade goods with other community member at least monthly (Household expenditure) 31% report more than 75% of expenditure on food items (50% of HH in Ifwotu and Imurok)

PRODUCTIVE ASSETS, ENERGY and NFI (Non-basic agricultural inputs) 1% of HHs employ ox-ploughs; 49% have access to engine-run grinding machine (Access to electric power) 2% of HHs have electricity at home (Energy efficiency) 84% of HHs has and uses a stove/Kanun

HUMANITARIAN AND DEVELOPMENT AID (Scope) 130% is the simple sum of the coverage rates of all the humanitarian programs (Targeting) 128% is the simple sum of the coverage of all humanitarian programs in most food insecure community, Ifwotu (Scope of skill development) 63% is the simple sum of coverage rates of all training programs, lowest in Hiyalla (44%)

PEACE and GOVERNANCE

NATURAL RESOURCES RELATED DISPUTES (Scope of disputes) 32% of HHs are aware of disputes over land and water sources occurring in their communities (Recent disputes) On average 1.6 number of disputes occurred in the last 3 months (Main source of conflict) 74% of HHs identify access to water source as the main cause of conflicts (Conflict resolution mechanism) 34% of HHs reporting disputes indicate that the problems were not addressed at all (Conflict trend perception) 24% of HHs believe that it is more likely that conflicts will increase

SAFETY AND CRIMES (Level of concern) 40% of HHs report theft among the main problems of the last year; 32% murder; 29% physical attack (Recent trend) 93% of HHs reported that overall hazard conditions were worse one year ago compared to the latest period (Hazard Scope) 310% is the simple sum of the hazard rates in the village with most crimes, Ifwotu (Safety perception) 87% of HHs claim to feel safe in their village; 81% feel safe when travelling to other areas

SOCIAL CAPITAL AND CITIZENS’ PARTICIPATION (Support among people) 17% of HHs exchange gifts quite frequently (Mutual-help Associations) 55% of HHs is associated in an organization, most of them being farmer groups (Participation to community works) 50% of HHs participated in community works over the last 12 months (Contribution to community works) 26% of HHs contributes to community activities quite frequently (Community discussion) 66% of HHs aware of public meetings that occurred over the course of the last 3 months (Most debated issues) 80% of HHs report that most debated topics during community meetings was education and water (Participation) 95% of HHs attended the community meetings (Leadership) Traditional leaders are the leading figures in the community, coordinating community works, calling for public meetings, and providing crucial advice (including to resolve disputes and provide protection to vulnerable people) (Representation) Government officials/administrative authorities are more frequently engaged in solving natural resource related disputes

MIGRATION AND IDPs (Net Inflow) Around 39,000 people have returned or moved into Torit County over the last 12 months (IDP/Returnee), the large majority in Torit Town (Share of Returnees) 17% of the recent returnees (last 12 months) have come from outside of the country (Urbanization pattern) The net impact of people displacement/relocation is an increase in the share of people living in the Torit town. (Cause of migration) 27% of HHs that are returning or relocating have done so to seek better economic opportunity; another 27% of HHs were avoiding direct conflict/clashes (Outflow) Approximately 21,500 people have left their households in the last 12 months, (Reason for leaving) 18% of people left their household due to hunger; 24% due to lack of security (Return of refugees) 36% of the population believe half of those that left Torit after the 2016 crisis, have returned

V. PURPOSE, METHODOLOGY and SCOPE

This introduction provides a description of the rationale, objective and scope of the multisector household survey conducted by AVSI Foundation between the 23th of January and the 3rd of February 2020 in Torit county, Eastern Equatoria State, South Sudan. [the same survey was continued in Magwi in the following days and the report can be accessed here: https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/south- sudan/assessment/avsi-2020-magwi-multi-sector-household-survey)

Subject/Objectives Meant to influence AVSI’s programming and project implementation, the objectives of the multi-sector household survey are multi-fold. In order to promote a holistic and change-oriented understanding of the area, a comprehensive dashboard is presented, covering sectorial key indicators (outcome) and their main determinants (contributing factors), with brief references to outlier communities and/or noticeable changes occurred in the recent past. The identification of the most tailored interventions is stimulated through a short review of the major differences among the communities, including both their comparative constraints and advantages. Better targeting and project integration, the central objectives that this study aims at fostering, are encouraged with an in-depth analysis that: i) brings together socio-economic and power/conflict features; ii) reviews the scope and characteristics of the major actors (administrative authorities, community leaders, market participants and food surplus producers); iii) presents a poverty profiling of the population based on food security; iv) reminds of cross- sectorial dynamics whenever relevant. Finally, recommendations are accompanied with a description of their logic and implications for project implementation as a means to guide AVSI field officers. The main results of the survey were validated with local authorities representing all the 9 targeted communities. The result of this meeting are the notes and comments included in the report in relation to the most significant and surprising results of the survey. Such validation meeting is evidence of the fact-based discussion with local communities that AVSI undertakes to bring about relevant and tailored interventions.

Background and rationale AVSI Foundation has had a continuous presence in Torit for ten five years, implementing mainly education and protection projects. While its action has often included some components of food security and livelihood support, AVSI has expand its intervention in such field in the last years. Part of such experience is AVSI’s expertise in conducting ad-hoc multi-sector household surveys aimed at assessing not only the size and profile of the population in need, but also the context-specific causes of such needs.1 This report intends to make such knowledge available to the community and stakeholders of Torit.

Questionnaire The questionnaire employed in this survey was developed based on the WFP/FAO-led Food Security and Nutrition Monitoring System (FSNMS) survey2 and the UNICEF MICS (Multi Indicator Cluster Survey) survey3, with additional questions borrowed from a number of renowned regional resilience-oriented surveys: the Consortium for Improving Agriculture-based Livelihoods in Central Africa (CIALCA) Baseline Survey4, the Secure Livelihood

1 AVSI (2018) Greater Ikwoto Multi-Sector Household Survey. https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/south- sudan/assessment/2018-greater-ikwoto-multi-sector-survey 2 Food Security Cluster homepage. http://fscluster.org/south-sudan-rep/documents 3 MICS homepage. http://mics.unicef.org/ 4 Questionnaire applied in Congo, Burundi and Rwanda. http://www.cialca.org

PURPOSE, METHODOLOGY and SCOPE 1

Research Consortium (SLRC) Survey5, the RGAP Smallholder Household Survey6, and a study on natural resource management compiled by the Association on Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA)7. Each one of those surveys has been applied in numerous countries in the region, was crafted by internationally renowned institutions, and reflect a different focus, respectively: intake of food and nutrition, agropastoral development, livelihood opportunities in post-conflict areas, SME development and capitalization, patterns of change toward an African green revolution, and the relation between social capital and Natural Resource Management. To gain a structural understanding of the county each one of these aspects is reviewed.

Sampling The sampling strategy followed the standard two-stage cluster sampling, the first stage guiding the selection of villages and the second one that of the households to be surveyed. The first stage was conducted reflecting the different size of villages (Probability Proportional to Population -- PPS). Additionally, stratification was introduced to ensure that random selection provides account for villages in central and peripheral areas alike (in any given boma). In absence of updated official demographic data, a list of all villages, with their respective population size and the indication of their accessibility, was obtained from the Torit’s Relief and Rehabilitation Commissioner. The survey was conducted over the course of 10 days by two teams, each one visiting two different villages per day; thus, the total number of villages surveyed (clusters) was 40 (see map at page 4). This high number of clusters was adopted to compensate for potential inaccuracies in population estimate.

The second stage, which aimed at selecting households to be surveyed, was conducted following the “improved random-walk” method. This technique consists of selecting those households living along a randomly selected direction within a given village; it is qualified as “improved” for representation of the different sections of villages is ensured by sending enumerators in opposite/ different directions, and by skipping a predefined number of households, depending on village size. The survey respondents were family caregivers. Household members were defined as the group of people sharing food from the same cooking pot. In total, 345 households were surveyed, well above the number of HH commonly surveyed by similar food security studies (the standard county sample size for the biannual WFP/FAO/UNICEF-led FSNMS study is between 90 and 120 households), and sufficient to provide statistically significant references for the 9 communities/payams which comprise Torit county.

Limitations The most patent limitation of this study originates from the selection of households through the “improved random-walk” method, which is considered a sub-optimal technique in comparison to the simple random selection based on the listing of every household (in randomly selected villages). However, without official and updated demographic data at the village level, the listing process is subjects to others, at times more severe, limitations, as the entire process is vulnerable to local authorities’ agency.

At the risk of incurring an even stronger fault, non-professional interviewers were recruited as enumerators. In particular, head teachers from primary schools located in the area under investigation were invited to participate to the survey during the school break period. This was done partly to shore up teachers’ very precarious income and improve their understanding of the local context. However, the main objective was to minimize the interviewers-interviewed language obstacles, a problem that is particularly acute when surveying a population

5 Questionnaire applied in Congo. http://catalog.ihsn.org/index.php/catalog/6039 6 Questionnaire applied in Uganda. http://www.cgap.org/publications/national-survey-and-segmentation-smallholder-households- uganda 7 ASARECA (2004) The Role of Social Capital and Local Policies in the Highlands of South-western Uganda. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/57a08cc740f0b64974001434/R7856AnnB.pdf

PURPOSE, METHODOLOGY and SCOPE 2

speaking multiple languages, with their local variations, occasionally with limited capacity to articulate clear and detailed answers. Two full days of training, including practical trials, was provided to enumerators.

Conscious of the several limitations that affect the precision of the data collected, this study focuses on a comparative reading of the estimates, supported by the triangulation of several indicators, rather than the analysis of absolute values per se; coherently, no inference analysis is presented. This is in line with the objective of this investigation, which is first and foremost aimed at typifying communities to guide project customization. Finally, it should be remembered that when studying communities whose activities are strongly influenced by seasons, the result of surveys must be interpreted cautiously, acknowledging that they describe a season-specific situation.

Note on charts and data reading In reading the data and charts presented throughout the document, few notions should be kept in mind. Firstly, data reflect the different kind of questions asked through the questionnaire. In particular, while some questions allowed the respondent to provide multiple answers, other questions asked the respondent to select only one answer. As a consequence, in reporting the percentage of HHs or individuals who provided a given answer, the addition of such responses equal 100% in the case of questions allowing only one valid repose. For questions that allowed multiple answers, on the contrary, charts report figures which surpass the 100% threshold; in particular, questions which allowed to indicate up to 2 different answers, may reach up to 200%, questions which allowed for 3 different answers 300%, and so on. Secondly, it must be highlighted that certain data regarding one community may reflect matters occurring in other areas. This is due to the fact that residents who live in one community may come from other communities, where they still have some of their properties. Finally, it should be remembered the estimations at the payam level are based on only 30 responses on average, and should therefore be treated as preliminary reference. We refrain from drawing conclusion based on such individual estimations and focus rather on the joint analysis and triangulation of several complementary estimations as a means to gain “robust” approximative descriptions; the report should be read accordingly with such spirit.

Torit county Torit county is known for its capital, Torit Town, the 5th most important urban centre in South Sudan.

Payams8 Number of HHs9 Population10 Nyong (Torit Town) 11,386 38,986 Hiyalla 4,779 23,899 Iyire 4,687 23,437 Bur 3,145 15,727 Kudo 2,365 11,826 Himodonge 2,137 10,686 Ifwotu 2,067 10,337 Lowoi 1,957 9,788 Imurok 1,690 8,453 Total Torit 34,213 153,139

8 Disclaimer: Former state, county and payam names and boundaries do not imply acceptance or recognition by the Government of South Sudan and/or its partners. They are shown on the map only for humanitarian purposes. 9 Source Gok State (former Cueibet) RRC (October 2018). This figure is 20% less than what commonly indicated by UN agencies. Given the high level of people displacement and the seemingly proactive stance of local administrative authorities it was adopted the estimation presented by the local government. 10 In line with the survey results, the number of family members per household is estimated to be higher than the national average. It was adopted the UN estimation, which puts the average number for former Cueibet at 6.75.

PURPOSE, METHODOLOGY and SCOPE 3

The city overlaps with Nyong payam, the most inhabited of the 9 payams that comprise Torit County. The other payams differ a great deal from one another, as the entire county comprises hilly areas possibly with two rainy seasons such as Iyire payam, at the corner of Tort county, bordering Magwi and Ikwoto counties, and flat lowlands with an intense and long dry period of no rain such as Bur and Hiyalla. The number of households in Tort is around 35,000 families. The population data AVSI used for this report were provided by Torit’s Relief and rehabilitation Commission (RRC), and are in line with other demographic data gathered by NGOs working in the same area.

Indicative map of Torit county’s main communities* (In yellow the bomas and in red the smaller villages surveyed)

* the size of the circles does not represent administrative boundaries but provides merely a reference of the villages included in each payam. Their size is not proportional or an indication of the inhabiting population.

PURPOSE, METHODOLOGY and SCOPE 4

SECTION 1. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

This first section of the report highlights people’s welfare, more emphatically life and death in Torit county. It will be reviewed, respectively: livelihood and resilience/coping capacity (chapter 1 and 2), food security (chapter 3), health and hygiene (chapter 4 and 5), and education and protection (Chapter 6 and 7).

1. LIVELIHOOD

Torit hosts a population reliant on the exploitation of natural resources. Livelihood activities related to agriculture are the main source of income throughout the county, especially in Hiyalla (82%), Kudo (83%) and Iyire (85%). Conversely, animal husbandry is significant only in the Northern and Eastern section of Torit, namely in Bur, Lowoi and Hiyalla payams – this latter does not stand out in the table below, and yet has a vibrant livestock production (see Chapter 9).11 In Imurok and Kudo, located west of Torit Town, the sale of firewood and production of charcoal is also an important occupation. Nyong payam (Torit Town) is marked by an appreciable level of economic diversification. In comparison to last here, Feb 201912, the share of families occupied in the production and sale of alcohol beverages has increased throughout the county – it tripled on average.

9 Main sources of living Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

Production of basic/staple 48% 68% 65% 37% 79% 67% 76% 73% 78% 63% crops (sorghum, maize, etc) 10% Sale of alcoholic beverages 12% 7% 4% 24% 9% 0% 7% 8% 0% (3%) Casual labour related to 20% 7% 8% 11% 4% 0% 7% 0% 5% 7% agricultural activities Sale of firewood or charcoal 8% 0% 8% 7% 0% 19% 10% 4% 3% 6% Casual labour related to non- agriculture activities (for 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 7% 0% 8% 13% 4% example construction) Production of cash crops or other products (vegetables, 4% 4% 8% 7% 0% 4% 0% 0% 3% 4% groundnuts, etc) Livestock and Sale of livestock 0% 7% 0% 1% 2% 0% 0% 8% 0% 2% Skilled or salaried labour 4% 0% 0% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Sales of grass 0% 0% 4% 1% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 1% Note: in brackets the same figure one year before (Feb 2019)

Production for self-consumption, i.e. subsistence farming, is the main source of living for most families. It is interesting to note that this percentage has increased from 54% to 70% over the course of 2019 – a good rainy season, improved security conditions and the partial return of refugees, all contributed to put a larger number of people at work, which led to both improved livelihood conditions and an increase of subsistence farmers. In general, this data along with those immediately following, suggest to avoid oversimplification whereby under

11 Animal husbandry tends to be underreported as many locals identify their source of livelihood with the source of food consumed, which is farming - a “misunderstanding” that reveals how foreign is the notion of income to the locals. 12 See AVSI 2019 Torit Multi-Sector Household survey. https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/south- sudan/assessment/avsi-2019-torit-multi-sector-household-survey

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 5

any circumstance an increase in subsistence farmers is seen as a step backward, people engaged in markets face great opportunities, and bartering of products is a synonymous of poverty; given the current context of recovery from major economic disruption, in Torit county what is occurring contradicts all such views.

Gain from the source of living (% Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY of HHs) 70% Self-consumption 84% 89% 65% 64% 77% 70% 53% 76% 65% (54%) Exchanges with other products 8% 11% 27% 16% 14% 7% 27% 8% 15% 15%

Cash 8% 0% 8% 20% 9% 22% 20% 16% 20% 15% Note: in brackets the same figure one year before (Feb 2019)

The sale to the market is the most important source of livelihood for a tiny percentage, around 15% of people. Reviewing how cash is used, by the few families who obtain it in exchange for their work, one sees that for 2/3 of such families can afford only basic and immediate goods. On the contrary, (as shown in Chapter 3), those who barter their products seems to be the most well off (with a better food security condition).

Use of cash (% of HHs who gain Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY cash from their source of living) To buy food and other basic items 80% 75% 86% 71% 68% 45% 78% 67% 54% 69% (for instance soap) To buy basic things as well other things for family members 20% 13% 14% 23% 32% 45% 22% 33% 46% 27% (grinding of grains, school fees) To buy things for the family as well as instruments for your 0% 13% 0% 6% 0% 9% 0% 0% 0% 4% livelihood activity

While we observe the expected gender differentiation in livelihood activities (production of alcohol is a female occupation, animal keeping is conducted by men), compared to last year (not shown here) it is noticeable a widening gender gap with regard to agriculture related occupations, especially with regard to profitable activities such as fishing or cultivation in group or in association with other farmers (the gender gap for this latter occupation, now at 15%, was 2% one year before -- data not shown).

Main Occupation for Adults 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Caring family members/Family duties Cultivation individually Hunting, Fishing or Gathering of natural products Livestock rearing or defense Production of local alcohol Casual Labour (work for different people in different days) Cultivation in group or in association with other farmers Producing or selling firewood/charcoal/bamboo Petty trading (tea seller, kiosk, sales of handicraft) or small… Gathering or selling of items for construction (stone, poles, etc) House boy/House girl

Adult Males Adult Females

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 6

The main economic occupation for adolescents is family duties, followed by production of local alcohol. It is worth noticing that compared to last year adolescents are less engaged in cultivation and hunting/gathering. Overall, this could be a positive sign as it increases the share of adolescents practicing occupations that take place at home and in the villages rather than in the fields, hence less incompatible with schooling.

Main Occupation for Adolescents Caring family members/Family duties Production of local alcohol 20% 19% Cultivation Hunting, Fishing or Gathering vegetables/fruits/etc 1 54% 34% 30% 29% 28% Gathering or selling of stone/cutting grass/poles and wood 14% House boy/House girl Producing or selling firewood/charcoal/bamboo Livestock rearing or defense 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250%

Many children between 6 and 11 years of age play an essential “productive” role in their families: (lacking pre- schooling services) most of them take care of their younger brother and sisters; crucially for many (38%) that is a full day occupation, which suggests that their support is basically essential for their families. This evidence proves that, at least in this context, primary and early child education should be promoted both and with the same efforts; focusing on primary education only, in fact, is bound to bring little results, and possibly discriminate against the most vulnerable families, who cannot afford to have one parent at home guarding younger children, and thus rely on their older sons and sisters in a bid to make ends meet. Other activities in which children are involved are housing-related tasks including fetching water (see also chapter 5).

Main Occupation for Children (6 to 11 years of age) Caring for younger children Washing dishes/cleaning the house/washing clothes 6% Getting water for the house 1 54% 52% 39% 28% 23% Cooking or preparing ingredients (grinding ingredients) They do not contribute 13% Caring for elderly/sick Control the fields against birds 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250%

Overall, almost the majority of people has seen their livelihood conditions improve over the last year. The minority who has witnessed worsening conditions, 21% of housholds, lament the loss of crops, followed by the spike in food prices (albeit notice the marked differences from payam to payam). Similar to the findings of 2019, flooding remains an issue in Bur, Hiyalla and to a lesser extent in Imurok.

Changes in livelihood level over Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY last year and causes of worsening Yes, it has IMPROVED 52% 32% 62% 48% 36% 26% 27% 23% 45% 40% it stayed THE SAME 28% 39% 27% 42% 41% 48% 43% 31% 40% 39% No, it has WORSENED 20% 29% 12% 11% 23% 26% 30% 46% 15% 21%

Loss of crops/harvest 40% 50% 100% 11% 69% 71% 44% 83% 17% 54% Due to inflation/high prices 20% 0% 0% 56% 8% 14% 33% 0% 50% 19%

Floods 0% 25% 0% 0% 23% 14% 11% 0% 0% 10% Insecurity 20% 0% 0% 11% 0% 0% 11% 0% 33% 7%

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 7

2. MAIN PROBLEMS, ACCESS to SERVICES and COPING CAPACITY

Contrary to what generally believed, that locals do not value much education, the main issue that households in Torit County would like to be addressed is the improvement of education, followed by (a considerable difference apart) the provision and improved management of water (boreholes, and irrigation). Education and access to water are also the topics most discussed during community meetings (see Chapter 15). Health and agriculture are also of concern to a significant number of families.

It is worth underlining that food/hunger and peace/reconciliation, which were the third and fourth most mentioned issues in Feb 2019, seem to be less of a concern now. Additionally, it is key to notice that each community has different priorities: the improvement of health infrastructures is requested in Himodonge; the need to foster peace is still very relevant for the inhabitants of Nyong (Torit Town), while improvement in security is much desired in Ifwotu (not surprising given the high incidence of reported crime – see chapter 14); and food is a topic of concern in Imurok and Lowoi, the payams with the lowest food consumption scores (see Chapter 3).

% of HHs by most needed Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY support Education 33% 40% 32% 19% 28% 33% 50% 33% 40% 32% Water Supply 28% 12% 16% 25% 22% 4% 8% 10% 10% 16% Health 0% 20% 26% 7% 17% 21% 19% 19% 23% 16% Agriculture 22% 0% 16% 17% 7% 13% 4% 10% 27% 13% Food/ Hunger 0% 16% 0% 2% 9% 21% 15% 19% 0% 8% Security 17% 8% 5% 7% 7% 8% 4% 5% 0% 6% Peace and reconciliation 0% 0% 0% 15% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3%

It is worth noting that the requests coming from the population are aligned with the level of coverage of services (or the lack of them). For instance, those payams (Kudo, Iyire and Bur) with the furthest distance to schools and/or those reporting high levels of teacher absenteeism (see chapter 6) are those that are most demanding to improve education. Similar patterns are found in terms of access and demand of health facilities with an obstetrician where Himodonge, Imurok and Iyire, those payams that need to travel further to reach a health facility with pre-natal care, have a higher percentage of HHs demanding greater support in healthcare.

Access to services Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY (< 30 mins away by foot - one way) School 67% 65% 77% 71% 81% 54% 71% 42% 59% 68% Health facility with 'qualified' 22% 30% 17% 27% 42% 0% 44% 25% 10% 24% obstetrician Water source 78% 81% 58% 80% 70% 80% 90% 72% 77% 75% Market 8% 0% 0% 38% 14% 4% 17% 4% 5% 15%

Among the main loss faced by families in the previous 3 months (Nov 2019 to Jan 2020), human sickness, unaffordable food and flooding are the most common. In comparison to 2019, human sickness has increased by 10% (data not shown). Expensive prices for Imurok are confirmed as a problem specific to this payam, while in Hiyalla livestock disease is reported as the second most important problem; in Bur the death of livestock is particularly significant.

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 8

Main loss faced in the last three months COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu

Human sickness0% 50% 100%Food too expensive/high150% food prices200% Floods250% 300% 350% Livestock diseases Weeds/pest Insecurity/violence Death of Livestock Other Loss of income / employment Death of household member Delay of rains/ late start / dry spell Looting / theft/ loss of assets Returnees/IDPs living with household Social Event (Ceremonies, weddings, funerals) Lack of free access/movement Cattle Raid

The indicator of livelihood coping strategy depicts a situation that it is not very coherent with other information, hence should be taken with a grain of salt. Firstly, in spite of the multiple signs of improving livelihood conditions across Torit, it appears as if the coping strategies adopted by households have not changed much compared to Feb 2019 (data not shown). Secondly, 2 of the 3 payams that stand out for having a large share of HHs engaged in crises coping strategies are all but the payams in the worse conditions. Possibly the only suggestions that is coherent with other information is that Imurok, now as in 2019, continues to show signs of a prolonged condition of vulnerability, whereby many families report having already exhausted their capacity to cope with external shocks (see Chapter 6). Finally, it is worth mentioning that the ultimate emergency coping strategy, migration, shows signs of improvements, as the outflow of people that left Torit county over the last 12 months is almost the same as last year, while the inflow of people arrived in the last 12 months has doubled compared to last year (see chapter 16).

% of HHs by livelihood coping Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY strategy adopted (and exhausted) No need to adopt coping strategy 79% 71% 81% 77% 87% 56% 67% 73% 92% 78% Adopted Stress coping strategies 4% 0% 0% 5% 2% 8% 0% 5% 0% 3% Adopted Crisis coping strategies 17% 29% 19% 18% 11% 36% 33% 23% 8% 20% Had already exhausted crisis 8% 14% 0% 5% 5% 22% 13% 12% 0% 8% coping strategies N.B. Households are grouped according to their most severe strategy.13

By looking individually at the different coping strategies, it should be emphasized that withdrawing children from school is the most commonly adopted crisis coping strategy. This piece of evidence is a key reminder of the need to integrate education and FSL projects.

13 The complete methodology for the Livelihood Coping Strategies indicator (also known as Asset Depletion indicator) and the difference compared to the more emergency-oriented Consumption Coping Strategies indicator read the following: https://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/manual_guide_proced/wfp271449.pdf?_ga=2.224986716.730002542.158 3842733-6754195.1583842733

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 9

HHs engaging in coping strategies STRESS Went to friends to eat COUNTY Iyire STRESS Sold Household assets Lowoi STRESS Borrowed money for food Kudo Imurok STRESS Spent savings or sold more animals Hiyalla CRISIS Sold productive assets Nyong Himodonge CRISIS Reduced essential non-food items Bur Ifwotu CRISIS Consumed seeds held for cultivation CRISIS Withdrew children from school 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Finally, confirming what observed in 2019, Imurok is the most asset deprived / livelihood vulnerable payam in Torit.

HHs who exasuted coping strategies STRESS ALREADY no friends to go to eat COUNTY STRESS ALREADY no more household assets to Iyire sell Lowoi STRESS ALREADY none from whom to Kudo borrowed money for food Imurok STRESS ALREADY no more savings or animals Hiyalla to sell Nyong CRISIS ALREADY no productive assets to sell Himodonge Bur CRISIS ALREADY Already reduced essential Ifwotu non-food items CRISIS ALREADY no seeds to consume 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 10

3. FOOD SECURITY, NUTRITION and POVERTY PROFILING

In February 2020, right at the end of the harvest season, the overall food security condition of Torit’s families classified as one of a mild crisis (IPC phase 3). In the county, 18% of HHs have a poor Food Consumption Score (FCS) and 28% show a borderline FCS. The same condition is described by the Household Hunger Scale (HHS) that shows 21% of HHs suffering moderate hunger. On the whole, there is improvement since 2019, albeit not as significant as one could have expected. A positive sign is the diminution from 40% to 30% in the share of families with a poor FCS in Ifwotu, Imurok and Lowoi, which were and continues to be the payams with the most alarming food security. Still, these improvements must be viewed with caution, especially in Imurok and Lowoi, where 45% of HHs are classified as borderline, symptoms of a nutrient-poor diet food for almost half of the population (see below). Equally important to keep in mind, food security in Torit town (Nyong) has worsened compared to last year (partly the result of continuing rise in imported food prices, possibly also due to the arrival of new vulnerable families, such as returnees); in town we observe also the highest level of food inequality (captured by the standard deviation of the FCS). Once again, together, these indicators describe a situation of vulnerable food security conditions: despite the recent reasonable harvest, half the population of Torit continues to have a poor diet (one of which tends to be associated with chronic malnutrition), and 1/5 of families face serious problems to access food during the key lean/cultivation season, hence to persist in a condition of severe food insecurity.

% of HHs by Food Consumption Score Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

acceptable 42% 82% 39% 55% 66% 31% 47% 31% 66% 54% borderline 26% 7% 43% 21% 26% 42% 33% 46% 26% 28%

poor 32% 11% 17% 25% 9% 27% 20% 23% 8% 18%

Mean of FCS 27.2 48.5 30.5 34.5 44.0 29.1 33.9 30.6 37.4 36.0

Standard Deviation 18.7 16.9 15.3 19.2 17.4 12.1 13.3 12.3 14.5 17.4

Since 2019, the average number of meals per adult has remained the same, albeit a slight decrease in the average of meals for children. The greatest decrease is seen in Imurok and Kudo, both payams with the highest number of reported illnesses in young children (see chapter 4).

% of HHs by Food Access Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY # of meals - Adults 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.0 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.1 number of meals – U5 Children (not 2.4 3.1 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.7 (3.4) 2.3 (3.1) 2.5 2.7 2.6 (2.7) breastfeeding)

HHS- Little to no hunger 76% 71% 85% 84% 91% 52% 70% 58% 95% 79%

HHS- Moderate hunger 24% 29% 15% 16% 9% 48% 27% 42% 5% 21%

HHS - Severe hunger 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% Note: Numbers in brackets are data from 2019

When looking at the food items generally consumed it should be noted that nutrient rich food is consumed sporadically: meat and fish – 1.9 times a week, legumes and nuts– 2.3 times a week and milk or dairy products –

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 11

0.9 times a week. Fruits and orange vegetables are consumed even less frequently. Lastly, it is very rare for any household to consume eggs or orange fruits.

Bur and Hiyalla show the best consumption of milk, both at 2.3 times a week (result of the widespread rearing of cattle in those two payams – see chapter 9). Consumption of fruits is much more frequent in Iyire than any other payam. In fact, it is the payam with the broadest diet. Nyong and Ifwotu have the highest consumption of sugars and sweet, 4 and 3.4 times per week respectively, probably due to their close proximity to markets with imported food. In Torit county, the households of Lowoi consume the least varied diet.

Consumed Food - frequency of times eaten in a week (7=eaten every day) COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Cereals, grains, roots and tubers Greens vegetables Oil / fat / butter Condiments/spices Sugar or sweet Meat and fish Legumes/nuts (beans, cowpeas, peanuts, lentils, nut) Milk and other diary product Orange vegetables Fruits Orange fruits Eggs

The sort of diet consumed in the farmer communities of Torit county (as opposed to the herder communities of Bur and Hiyalla), it is based on staple food and very poor on nutrient and vitamin rich food, which is the recipe for chronic malnutrition, with in turn cause stunting.14 Significant chronic malnutrition, around twice as frequent as among pastoralist communities, is what characterizes all the communities of the green belt, i.e. the Equatoria region of South Sudan. The lower level of EES, simply reflect the fact that EES comprises two very different areas, one of pastoralists and anther one of farmers.

14 The graph reporting the level of stunting is based on data gathered in June 2019, and reported in the FSNMS report for round 24, accessible here: https://fscluster.org/sites/default/files/documents/fsnms_r24_report_dec_2019.pdf

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 12

In particular, on one hand the farming communities of Magwi and parts of Ikwoto, Torit and Budi, which have high level of chronic malnutrition; and on the other hand the pastoralist communities of the Kapoetas, Lopa and parts of Torit, who have access to animal food and its products, and are much less affected by chronic malnutrition (although acute malnutrition during lean season and/or when crop prices rises is often registered)

Finally, it is important to notice the role played by the markets, especially in relation to the food items that are mostly traded, namely protein-rich products (oil/fat/butter, eggs, legumes, meat).

Source of food by item 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 17% Cereals 32% Green vegetables 24% Orange fruits 88% Oil / fat / butter 31% Legumes / nuts 16% Milk 32% Fruits 35% Orange vegetables 51% Meat, fish 33% Eggs

Bartering Borrowing/debts Exchange of labor for food Food assistance Gathering/Hunting/Fishing Gifts from neighbors/relatives Market/shop purchase (Cash and credit) Own production (crops and animals)

As these items are consumed less often than staple food, it could be thought that markets have a minor role in relation to food security; however, that is not the case given the nutrition content of such food commodities. Indeed, the fact that a significant share of such food is distributed through the market indicates that improving food security in Torit requires to improve both the production (farming) and commercialization (marketing) of pulses and livestock; in turn, this requires supporting market-oriented producers (without failing to help vulnerable farmers), following a value-chain approach focused on both actors and infrastructures: in the case of livestock, at the slaughter houses and its personnel as well as the providers of vaccines.

Compared to 2019 the share of families who consumed pulses, milk and eggs coming from their own production (2019 data not shown) has increased significantly. Overall, these findings confirm the idea that the most immediate result of a better harvest was the increased reliance on self-produced food, as opposed to purchased food.

Given the key role that food security plays in defining the well-being of people, it is particularly useful to review the food security conditions for specific socio-economic groups of the population. This profiling exercise helps distinguish the most well-off groups from the most vulnerable, an information that is useful not only to improve the targeting of humanitarian projects but also to shed light on crucial context-specific dynamics at play in this area and thus improve the targeting of development-oriented initiatives.

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 13

In the following table is reported the share of families with a poor level of food insecurity (based on FCS).

% of HHs with "poor" FCS by selected population groups County As expected, one can observe that the families of farmers with access to ox-ploughs or investing in Average for the total population of Torit 18% agricultural inputs are very unlikely to be in a Without cattle 25% condition of poor FCS, whereas farmers with no Cultivating only one crop 19% notion of productive farming practice, or Not applying agricultural practices (in some of the 3 domains) 30% cultivating less than 1 ha, are much more likely Smallholders (farming only private land smaller than 1 Ha) 26% to have a poor FCS. With small private land (less than 1 ha), regardless of access 18% to common land

Cultivating land in common for self-consumption 16% However, when it comes to food marketing, and Cultivating land in common 13% more in general market dynamics, one realizes Agricultural inputs bought with cash provided by livelihood 0% that Torit shows the sign of a subsistence activity economy. The group more well off is that Employing ox-plough 0% EXPECTED engaging in bartering, and not those obtaining Employing advanced tools 3% cash in return for their livelihood activity (this is Member of a seed multiplication group 4% consistent with the fact that 70% of those Employing seeds of prime quality 5% Member of a farmer group supported by an NGO 8% receiving mostly cash in return for their work can Member of informal farmer group 17% afford only basic goods as reported in Chapter 1). Not associated in any income generating group 26% Moreover, the fact that the farmers hiring casual With elderly 8% workers or cultivating land with the help of a IDP/Returnees 18% numerous number of family member do not seem to be better off confirms that market-oriented

Family members with disabilities 17%

G Widow or woman with no support 18% farming is not much spread. Overall, these Hosting orphans 19% findings are consistent with an economy that is Bartered what obtained with main livelihood activity 4% still largely a subsistence economy, and the

Consuming what obtained with main livelihood activity 20% greater dynamism registered in the last year has SURPRISIN Cash obtained with main livelihood activity 26% not changed this basic important feature of Torit’s Employing casual labour 25% economy. More than 4 family member cultivating 14% In the social field, it should be noted also that families with orphans, elderly and IDPs/Returnees do not seem to be particularly worse off. This could suggest that “informal” social safety nets, basically mutual support among the members of the enlarged families and of the community is strong, something further confirmed by the fact that farmers give for free as much as 8% of their produce (as a comparison, 10% is what they sell on average, see chapter 8). Further investigation is certainly needed to corroborate such findings.

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 14

4. HEALTH

Since 2019, the crude death rate (CDR) has decreased from 2.4 to 1.8. However, the CDR for children under the age of 5 years is disturbingly high, where almost 7 children died per day in the recall period of 90 days in Himodonge, the payam that asks the most for better healthcare (see chapter 2). It is closely followed by Nyong (Torit town), Lowoi and Imuok – these latter 3 payams have a significant share of households with a poor FCS (see chapter 3). The review of the rate of died sons/daughters per household suggests some differences among communities, which may reflect some longer-term conflict dynamics; Imurok, for instance, was one of the area most severely affected by insecurity, at least in the years of 2016 and 2017.

Mortality Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

CDR (deaths/10,000 people/day) 3.7 1.6 1.3 1.5 1.6 4.9 1.6 0.6 0.4 1.8 CDR of children < 5 0.0 2.9 6.9 6.8 0.0 5.3 0.0 6.0 2.6 3.9 (deaths/10,000 people/day) % of sons and daughters who died 15% 17% 20% 9% 12% 27% 7% 6% 10% 13% per household lifetime

Limited access to health services and risky health practices/lack of awareness undermine health outcomes. In Imurok and Iyire, more than 2/3 of the population have to walk for more than an hour to reach a health facility with a ‘qualified’ obstetrician. . It is therefore not surprising that only half of the women who had children in the last 3 years were assisted by qualified health workers during labour. .

Pre and Post Natal care (based on Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY mothers of U3 years children) % who visited any doctor before 33% 60% 92% 100% 100% 100% 100% 88% 50% 80% delivery % who was visited in a health 22% 50% 73% 88% 100% 100% 100% 88% 40% 72% facility % who was visited in a health facility in the first trimester of 22% 25% 73% 65% 58% 83% 67% 75% 36% 55% pregnancy

% assisted by qualified health 11% 30% 50% 81% 83% 83% 56% 50% 15% 52% workers during delivery % visited in the days/weeks after 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% delivery

More than 1 hour to closest health 67% 40% 42% 23% 17% 83% 56% 25% 75% 45% clinic with qualified obstetrician

When asked why antenatal care was not sought earlier, 30% of women say that no doctor was available.

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 15

Although early initiation of breastfeeding is common practice for all mothers, the fact that only 65% of women Infant and Young Child Feeding Incidence N exclusively breastfeed is particularly worrisome considering it is far below the 80% alarm threshold Early initiation of breastfeeding (0-23.9 months) 96% 71 indicated by WHO. This concern added to the statistic that Early initiation of breastfeeding (0-23.9 months) only 17% of mothers are introducing solid foods at the 100% 35 among women who delivered in health centers right age and that 58% of babies between the age of 12- 15 months are still only breastfed (sometimes exclusively, Exclusive breastfeeding (0-5.9 months) 65% 20 other times given water too) is most probably an indication of high rates of malnutrition and possibly one of Introduction of solid, semi-solid or soft foods (6-8.9 17% 12 the driving factors of the high CDR in children under the months) age of 5 as mentioned above. Continued complimentary breastfeeding between 42% 12 12-15 months 20% of children under the age of 3 in Torit County do not receive any vaccination. For Ifwotu and Iyire this figure is much higher at 50%. As little as 11% in Ifwotu are vaccinated against pneumonia.

Vaccinations (U3 babies) Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY % with birth registration 25% 67% 75% 85% 83% 80% 100% 71% 59% 73% % with any vaccination 56% 90% 92% 96% 92% 100% 100% 88% 50% 83% % with BCG vaccination for 67% 80% 92% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 45% 85% tuberculosis % with tetanus vaccination 56% 90% 75% 92% 92% 100% 89% 88% 45% 78% % vaccinated against measles 22% 50% 67% 88% 92% 100% 100% 75% 35% 68% % vaccinated against pneumonia 11% 50% 50% 46% 55% 33% 78% 75% 35% 47%

When looking at morbidity figures, it is important to keep in mind that they result from self-assessment on the part of the parents interviewed, and may largely reflect their particular perception. The figures suggest that malaria and fever are very frequent, and represent the main form of illness for young children below 3 years of age. Apparently, medical advice is sought frequently and almost always from a health clinic.

Morbidity (U3 years babies) and Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY treatment in last 2 weeks

Reported Illness 35% 17% 28% 21% 38% 50% 44% 33% 30% 28% Diarrhoea 0% 44% 14% 23% 38% 67% 43% 40% 42% 34% Fever/Malaria 50% 56% 57% 62% 88% 67% 71% 100% 83% 70%

Other 17% 22% 14% 0% 0% 0% 14% 20% 8% 10% % who sought medical advice 100% 88% 100% 100% 100% 100% 71% 80% 80% 90% % who visited PHC 100% 100% 80% 100% 86% 100% 80% 100% 100% 94%

However, even though the vast majority report having sought treatment from a clinic, 68% of the local population is not aware that children affected by diarrhea must drink more liquids indicating a need for strong sensitization on key health messages.

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 16

How much was the baby given to eat How much was the baby given to during diarrhea? drink during diarrhea? 24% 32%

12% 52% 56% 12% 12% Much less than usual Somehow less Much less than usual About the same More About the same More

In the last 6 months, around 65% of children under the age of 3 have received treatment for vitamin deficiency or worms. Great difference can be seen between payams. Worms are a particular problem in Kudo and Lowoi suggesting that more attention to hygiene habits are needed in these areas.

Treatment in the last 6 months Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY (U3 years babies) % who received a capsule of 44% 80% 58% 81% 75% 67% 100% 86% 45% 69% vitamin A % who received any de-worming 44% 70% 42% 73% 67% 67% 89% 88% 45% 63% treatment

Lastly, 94% of households use mosquito nets, although it is not clear if there is a sufficient quantity for all. Moreover, in 44% of households, cooking takes place in the same room as they sleep (especially in the rainy season) which can have numerous health implications.

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 17

5. WASH and HYGIENE

Constrained access to safe water, although hardly the only factor, may very well help to explain the bad health and mortality outcomes affecting Torit County. It is important to emphasize this linkage as it is too often the case that water interventions are framed merely in term of their contribution to livelihood conditions. On average a HH consumes 4 jerrycans of water a day. For 25% of Torit’s population, reaching a water source takes more than a 30-minute walk. In Himodonge, the proportion is even greater at 42%. 18% of HHs then spend an additional 30 minutes queueing to collect water.

Access to water has also protection implications. 25% of HHs report that children under the age of 15 years are often responsible for collecting water. These numbers confirm the concern mentioned in chapter 1, that children are reportedly spending most of the day performing house duties leaving little time to attend school. Child safety is also potentially at risk during these activities (see chapter 7).

Finally, as mentioned, there is no doubt that access to water has also very important implication for farming and other FSL activities (see Chapter 8).

Now considering water source, with a more abundant rainy season there has been a marked increase in the use of water fetched in rivers, which is far from being clean and safe. It is very marked the increased registered in Bur, Himodonge and Lowoi. Moreover, in Iyire there is a worrisome share of the population who drinks surface water.

Water access, protection and safety Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Average no. of jerrycans consumed 4 3 3 6 4 3 4 3 4 4 per day % who walks more than 30 minutes 22% 19% 42% 20% 30% 20% 10% 28% 23% 25% to access water % who spend more than 30 minutes 8% 7% 12% 22% 22% 26% 3% 31% 15% 18% in queue Young person (<15) responsible for 36% 25% 23% 30% 20% 19% 21% 19% 15% 24% collecting water % who uses surface water (pond) as 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 4% 0% 0% 10% 3% source of drinking water % who uses a river as source of 88% 54% 88% 48% 45% 30% 11% 3% 31% 68% drinking water (58%) (25%) (73%) (36%) (29%) % who faces changing water source 28% 36% 27% 37% 44% 63% 31% 54% 70% 43% depending on season Note: Numbers in brackets are data from 2019

In relation to hygiene practices, there seems to be awareness of their importance, but much less knowledge about what is to be done, or the rationale for it. This may explain the odd results that shows that children tend to wash hands before and after playing much more than in relation to eating or going to toilets.

% of HHs washing hands Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Before Playing 100% 100% 96% 98% 93% 93% 100% 100% 90% 96% After Playing 64% 46% 54% 82% 57% 52% 60% 32% 45% 59% Before eating and after eating 60% 43% 50% 65% 45% 70% 50% 72% 58% 57% After visiting latrines 0% 11% 8% 4% 2% 0% 0% 8% 3% 4% Other times 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 18

It is important to keep in mind that the effort to promote better hygiene is significant, as around 1/3 of the population report to have received hygiene training. There seems to be an impact, but possibly not as one could have expected, or wished for. The fact that people miss both the knowledge and the means to undertake certain practices may be one of the reasons for the limited results. However, the marked difference in the use of bathrooms among the people who received hygiene training compared to the rest of the population seems to show that encouraging more knowledge may lead to significant results.

Hygiene practices Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY % who was trained on Hygiene and 16% 33% 23% 57% 30% 33% 21% 38% 28% 35% Cholera prevention

% sweep their compound daily 100% 93% 92% 99% 95% 85% 100% 85% 90% 94% - among those who received 100% 89% 100% 98% 100% 78% 100% 78% 100% 95% Hygiene trainings

% who uses soap 92% 86% 84% 100% 84% 81% 87% 85% 82% 88% - among those who received 100% 78% 100% 100% 75% 100% 83% 78% 100% 92% Hygiene trainings % of people who washes their 100% 75% 81% 96% 74% 74% 97% 85% 77% 85% hands regularly - among those who received 100% 78% 100% 98% 100% 100% 100% 78% 100% 96% Hygiene trainings % who wash their hands at least 100% 93% 88% 98% 93% 96% 97% 92% 80% 93% twice - among those who received 100% 100% 100% 98% 100% 100% 83% 100% 91% 97% Hygiene trainings

% who use toilets 32% 7% 19% 65% 16% 15% 17% 12% 26% 30% - among those who received 25% 11% 50% 74% 24% 33% 33% 22% 45% 47% Hygiene trainings

Finally, it is important to mention the subject of waste

% of HHs by means of waste disposal Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Burning 72% 68% 81% 47% 53% 37% 67% 65% 33% 55% Behind the house 20% 18% 15% 31% 26% 30% 17% 27% 30% 25% Within the compound 8% 4% 4% 15% 7% 22% 10% 4% 33% 13% Other ways 0% 11% 0% 5% 12% 11% 7% 4% 5% 6% (blank) 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 19

6. EDUCATION

The educational profile of the survey respondents, where 84% are of an age between 18 and 50 years, acts as a reference to interpret the educational outcomes of Torit’s youth. It shows that around 56% of household caretakers have no experience of schooling at all in their lifetime. This figure provides both a sense of the great leap required for parents to understand the value of education – something that cannot be imposed or expected naturally – the spread of education will reveal this difference between older and younger generations. There is also an evident divide that distinguishes the population of Torit Town from the other communities of the county, particularly from Bur where 75% of the population have had no education at all and an additional 20% have no more than incomplete primary level schooling.

Education level of household caretakers COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

None Some years of lower primary school (P1 to P4) Up to some years of higher primary school (P5 to P7) Completed Primary school Primary school and some years of Secondary School Completed Secondary school More than Secondary Some years of Accelerated Learning School

Illiteracy is also widespread, where only 50% of caretakers are capable of reading Arabic or English, the former being the most common language among adults and the latter, the official language that generates most of the new knowledge brought by trainings and business opportunities. Once again great disparities can be seen at the payam level.

% of HHs Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Can read Arabic or English 68% 36% 52% 79% 46% 56% 52% 44% 35% 55%

Furthermore, the language spoken at home is very rarely English while Arabic is spoken in around 1 in 4 households. 2/3 of the county speak local dialects, which is mostly Lotuko in this region.

% of HHs main language spoken at Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY home Other 60% 79% 76% 34% 73% 80% 72% 72% 75% 64% Arabic 28% 18% 24% 51% 20% 16% 21% 20% 10% 27% Southern Luo / Acholi 8% 4% 0% 9% 2% 4% 3% 4% 13% 6% English 4% 0% 0% 6% 5% 0% 3% 4% 3% 4%

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 20

Primary education services (supply side) are not abundant in Torit, leaving 1/3 of HHss more than 30 minutes away from a school, half of HHs in underserved payams like Imurok and Lowoi. Furthermore, even if 68% of the county has a school less than a 30-minute walk from their home, one third of these schools do not offer the entire primary cycle up to P8 grade; in Imurok payam, only one third of the closest primary schools offer up to P8. In Ifwotu and Iyire, more than a third of respondents note that there are closer schools to their homes but are not functioning, mostly due to a lack of teachers. Availability of qualified teachers is a major problem in South Sudan and is one of the major reasons why children do not attend school (see below).

Primary Education supply (distance from closest school, grades offered, school Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY rehabilitation, closest school not functioning and reason) % of HHs with a school at less than 30- 67% 65% 77% 71% 81% 54% 71% 42% 59% 68% minute walk Only P1 to P3 6% 0% 5% 2% 0% 29% 20% 0% 9% 6% Up to P4 13% 6% 25% 0% 0% 7% 10% 10% 27% 8% Up to P5 0% 35% 10% 0% 9% 7% 10% 0% 9% 8% Up to P6 0% 18% 5% 8% 15% 14% 20% 0% 0% 10% Up to P7 0% 6% 20% 2% 11% 7% 20% 0% 0% 7% Up to P8 81% 35% 35% 77% 65% 36% 20% 90% 50% 58% P8 and some secondary 0% 0% 0% 12% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 4%

Recent improvement works in the school 52% 11% 23% 54% 31% 19% 23% 27% 50% 36% functioning PTA in the school 0% 4% 0% 1% 2% 11% 10% 0% 8% 3%

Closer school not operating 44% 18% 23% 9% 14% 23% 26% 12% 38% 20%

reason not open - no teachers 30% 60% 83% 14% 75% 33% 57% 67% 40% 48%

reasons not open - school damaged 50% 20% 17% 71% 25% 33% 29% 33% 40% 37%

reason not open - other reasons 20% 20% 0% 14% 0% 33% 14% 0% 20% 15%

Moving toward the demand for education, it is crucial to notice that adolescents are more likely to be in school compared to younger children, i.e. that younger children face greater barriers to education than adolescents (see below). This is a well-known and yet overlooked feature of primary education in South Sudan, proved by the old age at which children enter into the schooling system -- a terrific missed opportunity given the unique benefit that early education has on children’ development of cognitive abilities and social skills.15 These barriers are the main drivers of the poor educational outcomes in South Sudan, which have a wider and deeper impact compared to the interruption of studies at an adolescent age. Lack of financial means and distance of schools are reported as the two main reasons why families do not send their children to school. What is less known is that, as explained in Chapter 1, one of the best ways to address this lack of financial means would be to support at the same time and equally primary and early child education. An important share of children between 6 and 10 are in fact busy at home caring for younger brothers and sisters, providing a private solution to a public problem caused by the underfunding of early child education services – this plays much more a role than what is sometimes simply

15 AVSI (2017) The state of primary education in Eastern Equatoria State and a call for a context-specific, integrated intervention. https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/south-sudan/assessment/state-education-eastern-equatoria-state-and-call- context-specific. See also United Nation (2018) Global Initiative on Out-of-school Children http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/global-initiative-out-of-school-children-south-sudan-country-study.pdf

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 21

regarded as a “an African habit”, a category that should not exist or be contemplated not only for being offensive but also for being grossly shortsighted.

Primary Education enrolment Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

Children (4 to 9 years) school 87% 36% 64% 89% 66% 49% 91% 59% 53% 69% enrolment Adolescents (10 to 15years) school 86% 47% 80% 95% 80% 75% 60% 72% 83% 79% enrolment

The review of the reasons why parents do not send their children and adolescents to schools shows that relatively high expenses are by far the biggest obstacles (especially for adolescents), followed by school distance (especially for younger children), and lack of teachers (especially for adolescents); bad school conditions and lack of school meals follows but are rather equally reported as the majority of the other reasons given excluding insecurity and pregnancy. These are mentioned mentioned by a negligible share of families and although pregnancy is significant, it does not seem to be as important as is commonly believed. It is worth remembering that for families facing hardship the most common reaction (copying strategies) is to redraw children from school (see chapter 2).

Reasons for not attending schools Because there is no food in the schools Child is disabled or other impairments that prevent him or her He/she is in the age when has to help the family at home He/she is in the age when she/he needs to work Insecurity Not money to pay materials, fees, uniforms Pregnancy/Marriage School is too distant The kid refuse to go to class The school conditions are too bad There are not enough teachers To help the family in the filed/cattle/agriculture 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Adolescents between 10 and 15 Children between 4 and 9

However, it should be noticed that lack of teachers is among the top reasons why children are sent back from schools, hence is one of the main drivers of absenteeism, and possibly dropout.

% of HHs reporting children sent Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY back home in the last school term Not enough teachers 12% 39% 46% 20% 29% 30% 30% 35% 33% 29% Other reasons 24% 14% 12% 26% 21% 15% 17% 8% 25% 20% It did not happen 28% 4% 15% 33% 19% 7% 10% 8% 3% 17% As a form of punishment 0% 4% 8% 8% 3% 4% 7% 8% 10% 6% The student refused to go to 4% 4% 0% 1% 3% 4% 0% 0% 10% 3% classes

Shifting to more qualitative aspects related to the quality of education, it is important to notice the marked differences registered among communities. For example, in Bur not a single child receives help for their homework

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 22

while in Torit town 45% do. This is not surprising taking into consideration the level of schooling of caretakers as mentioned before. One can see that in Bur, students indeed register poor cognitive results. This is an impacting factor on the cycle of poverty and levels of inequality in the county.

Education out of school and parent Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY participation Pupil has homework 59% 38% 56% 83% 54% 64% 42% 63% 43% 61% Pupil receive help for homework 18% 0% 28% 45% 20% 21% 28% 13% 23% 27% Parent know any teacher 65% 62% 78% 62% 73% 57% 58% 69% 83% 67% Parent attended school meeting (last 82% 63% 71% 85% 83% 75% 73% 64% 79% 78% year) Taking into consideration only the students attending schools where English is the main language used in class, and focusing on those enrolled in P4 or higher classes, half can read basic sentences extracted from a textbook meant for P4 students, and only 64% can fully understand its meaning. Only half can do simple math (involving one or two-digit figures). There is desperate need to improve teaching practices and to promote conditions conducive to learning in all Torit county.

% of HHs by cognitive capacity* (answered all questions correctly Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY for each cognitive capacity tested) Reading basic sentence 57% 20% 56% 68% 13% 0% 57% 31% 44% 49% Basic reading comprehension 43% 60% 56% 67% 60% 100% 86% 69% 56% 64% Basic numerical comprehension 57% 40% 67% 63% 80% 0% 71% 85% 78% 68% Basic numerical skills (additions) 43% 20% 33% 64% 7% 0% 33% 38% 44% 43% *data should be viewed with caution, as in all payams but Nyong there are around 10 or less respondents – Imurok had only 1 respondent.

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 23

7. PROTECTION and GENDER

In the absence of any formal system of social assistance, the (extended) family provides basic support to the most vulnerable people, a category that in Torit encompasses a significant wide section of the population. Kudo and Bur are the communities that deserve greater attention as they have the larger share of families in those conditions of social vulnerability. It should be noted however, that families with orphans and elderly are surprisingly not particularly worse off in terms of food security (see chapter 3), suggesting that social safety nets, and mutual support among members of the community is strong. Nevertheless, supporting these fragile safety nets remains important.

% of HHs by social Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY vulnerability condition Child(ren) from other families, 64% 54% 46% 49% 41% 56% 57% 31% 43% 48% without mother or father Elderly who need assistance 12% 29% 12% 14% 26% 15% 30% 27% 3% 18% and/or cannot work Disable* person(s) who need 4% 11% 12% 13% 3% 0% 13% 0% 0% 7% assistance Widow or woman without the 4% 14% 0% 7% 10% 11% 13% 0% 13% 8% financial support of any male *defined as Physically impaired, Burned by fire, Deaf, Mental Disability, Lame

Mental distress is also considerable, with one fifth of the population seeking the repeated intervention of some healer (whose qualifications are difficult to assess but presumably inadequate), and one third of children showing signs of distress

% of HHs with family members Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY with mental condition With several children withdrawn or 32% 44% 28% 30% 33% 26% 23% 38% 20% 30% consistently sad Felt so troubled that sought help 12% 18% 4% 20% 26% 22% 23% 19% 15% 19% more than once in the last year

Moreover, around 26% of children and adolescents are reportedly subject to repeated physical abuses, a very concerning 14% were sexually abused, and 8% are involved in drugs or engage in other deviant practices. Imurok seems to be the place where children are more subject to abuses.

% of HHs who suffered abuse on children (6 to 17) over the last year Using abusive words/language COUNTY Repeated physical abuse Iyire Stigmatized/discriminated due to Lowoi gender, illness or disability Kudo Sexually abused, defiled, raped, forced Imurok into sex Hiyalla Family separation (run away, Nyong chased)/neglected Withheld a meal to punish Himodonge Bur Child involved in drugs, drinking alcohol, Ifwotu or otherwise Involved in child labor with a 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% component of exchange of money

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 24

Focusing on vulnerable children, HHs identify them first and foremost as children without or far from their parents

Reasons for child vulnerability COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% Orphans Children far from their parents None of the above, there no children in such a condition Children forcibly separated from their family members Children head of household Children victims of sexual or other severe abuses Children formerly involved in criminal/war activities Special children Working Children

When HHs were asked the reasons for child vulnerability, 44% report the death of parents, 25% conflict and a worrying 10% due to kidnapping -- the latter is particularly frequent in Lowoi and Kudo.

Reasons for child vulnerability Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Death of parents 40% 33% 29% 50% 42% 58% 48% 19% 57% 44% Conflicts 35% 13% 12% 22% 26% 13% 36% 29% 40% 25% Divorce 30% 21% 6% 15% 18% 25% 16% 19% 17% 18% Need to move of location 10% 13% 0% 19% 12% 0% 4% 10% 3% 9% Kidnapping 5% 8% 0% 2% 8% 8% 20% 24% 10% 9%

Unfortunately, the vast majority of child abuse cases go unreported. Across Torit, even in the capital, reporting to police on child abuse is very negligible. On the other hand, it is interesting to notice the partial exception of Bur, where especially community leaders are involved in the management of cases of abuses.

% of HHs by referral paths in case Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY of child abuse or violence Do nothing, talk to neighbours or 92% 73% 95% 91% 86% 87% 97% 96% 94% 90% the offender Report it to community leaders 4% 27% 0% 6% 12% 13% 3% 4% 6% 8% Report it to police 4% 0% 5% 3% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2%

Focusing on threats to women, these are very significant across the county, especially in Imurok. Domestic violence is much more significant in Imurok than in Nyong for example. However, incidence of rape is worryingly high in Nyong, whereas in Bur, no incident is reported. As with reports on child abuse, Himodonge is the payam

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 25

with less reported GBV. However, it must be taken into consideration that GBV throughout South Sudan is on the most part underreported so it is reasonable to assume that real figures may be higher than shown here16.

% of HHs reporting threats to Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY women (and types) Presence of specific threats to 64% 57% 31% 57% 68% 81% 53% 64% 72% 61% women and girls

Domestic violence 36% 50% 27% 22% 50% 67% 40% 62% 55% 42%

Physical assault / beating 8% 21% 0% 25% 38% 52% 47% 42% 50% 32%

Forced marriage 16% 21% 19% 22% 31% 22% 10% 31% 15% 22% Rape 28% 0% 4% 34% 10% 7% 7% 8% 15% 16% Denied resources /opportunities / 20% 25% 15% 15% 12% 15% 10% 15% 10% 15% services Sexual exploitation 8% 11% 8% 16% 14% 11% 13% 19% 8% 13% Sexual assault 8% 4% 0% 18% 16% 7% 17% 8% 18% 12% Psychological / emotional abuse 0% 11% 0% 6% 5% 19% 7% 12% 15% 8%

Moreover, it is evident that underreporting is an issue as the majority of HHs are unaware of a referral mechanism for cases of GBV, especially in Himodonge and Bur.

% of HHs Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Aware of referral mechanism for 16% 14% 13% 35% 22% 41% 28% 32% 21% 26% GBV

Finally, it should be noticed that protecting women requires also sensitizing women themselves. In fact, it is very common for women to condone abusive behaviors on the part of their husbands. Only 5% of respondents believe that there is no case in which a husband is not justified in physically attacking his wife.

If he is too drunk % of women reporting that a man is justified when beating his wife if she does not respect him COUNTY if she argues with him Iyire Lowoi If she neglects the children Kudo Imurok If she goes out without telling him Hiyalla If she refused to have sex with him Nyong Himodonge if she burns the food Bur Ifwotu In no cases is the husband justified in hitting or beating his wife 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300%

16 https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/south-sudan/assessment/effective-solutions-gender-based- violence-western-lakes-and-gok

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 26

Undoubtedly the gender-gap contributes to reproduce questionable habits and stereotypes. In Torit, 65% of adult females have not received any education compared to 38% of males (not shown). Conversely, the share of male adults with a level of education beyond a few years of primary, is consistently much higher compared to females. Programs for accelerated learning, which may provide a second chance of education to groups lacking behind, seem to cover more men than women, as only 4.5% of adult females report attending such programs, compared to 6.8% for adult males.

Level of shooling of adults (respondents) by gender

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

Some years of lower primary… Up to some years of higher… Completed Primary school Primary school and some years… Completed Secondary school More than Secondary Some years of Accelerated… Female Male

The gender imbalance is present in other domains too. Taking into consideration the social norm of polygamy in South Sudan, on average a man has 2.7 wives which is likely to have social repercussions

Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Average number of additional 1.4 1.7 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.5 1.6 2.0 1.7 1.7 wives per man

Finally, the condition of those 17% of women who are either the only or the main contributor to the family livelihood should be assessed (an approximation of female-headed families, who strictly speaking do not exist as female-headed families but customarily join other families).

Male vs Female contribution to familiy income COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Only wife/female partner mostly wife/female partner Both partners/husband and wife mostly husband/male partner Only husband/male partner

Female-headed families suffer slightly worse food security conditions than non-female headed HHs. They are rather less involved in decision making bodies and participate less in community meetings: Despite efforts to focus

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 27

on vulnerable HHs, they are also visibly less involved in the support provided by the humanitarian system. These results clearly indicate the need to improve programming.

Female- Non female- Food security, association and voice of female-headed families headed headed families families acceptable 46% 56% Food borderline 34% 26% consumption poor 20% 18% No particular role 55% 39% Teacher 6% 16% Member of a Nyampara or Mukungu 11% 26% decision Sector leader 2% 7% making / Landlord 9% 5% public bodies Administrative authority 4% 9% Chairman or committee member of informal farmer group 4% 9% Nyampara or Mukungu 32% 49% Sector leader 0% 8% Administrative authority 9% 13% Direct contact Landlord 6% 5% with leaders Chairman of farmer groups supported by NGO 2% 3% Chairman of informal farmer groups 2% 14% Opinion leader 17% 15% Participation Attended public meeting 88% 96% Agricultural inputs i.e. seeds and or tools 38% 38% Health /medicines 11% 16% Food in the Schools 2% 17% Nutrition (e.g. Blanket supplementary feeding, etc) 9% 15% Food distribution or food in exchange for work 2% 13% Humanitarian Veterinary service 6% 10% support Non Food Items (kitchen sets, blankets, Khanga) 9% 5% Advise from extension service 2% 4% Cash and or cash in exchange for work 2% 3% Fishing gear 2% 3% School fees /uniforms 0% 2% Informal group of farmers 13% 55% Farmer group supported by NGO 21% 16% Member of Village Saving and Loan Association (VSLA)/ Credit and Saving Group 11% 4% an income Cooperative/SME 4% 6% generation Women group; Church group; Self-help group; Community-based organization, Youth group Health 4% 8% association Others 4% 3% Common Interest group/Seed Multiplication group 4% 8% Income Generation Association group (IGA) 2% 3%

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 28

SECTION 2. ECONOMY

Returning to the original concept ascribed to the word “economy”, the management of the household, this second section of the report describes the main economic decisions taken by Torit’s families and explains their determinants and logic. It reviews agricultural and livestock farming & marketing (chapter 8 and 9), access to consumer markets and expenditures (chapter 10), and productive assets, energy and NFI (chapter 11).

8. AGRICULTURE • In general, land under cultivation increased for the majority of farmers, especially among those cultivating also communal land. Parallelly, the share of the farmers cultivating both private gardens and so called “communal lands”, has almost doubled since 2019, to 52%. Evidence shows that these farmers are more likely to: i) hire workers or community members paid in cash; ii) sell their produce and iiii) use part of the cash obtained to “reinvested” in farming or for saving purposes. All this suggests the need to pay attention to the aspect of communal farming, and distinguish it from family farming. • However, still only 10% of all farmers report cultivating more than 5 hectares of land or using ox-ploughs or other advanced tools, which in Torit represent the basic features of farmers engaged in business farming. Only in one payam out of nine, farmers demand mostly cash crop seeds – in Iyiere, incidentally the Payam that receive the least supported for farming. Considerable evidence suggests that the targeting of aid to farming, both the selection of communities (payams) and of farmer groups could be improved. • The sale and barter are both important forms of exchanges of food, and the produce that gets given away for free is as significant as that exchanged. This proves that Torit farmers continue to take their decision based on social ties as much as on market dynamics and prices. Understanding such relations and encouraging new ones through human intensive projects is certainly needed to operate in Torit’s context.

Land under cultivation and water access Agricultural farming is conducted by virtually every household in Torit county, the only partial exception being Torit Town. In Torit town, as well as in Hiyalla and Imurok, one third of people live considerably far from their fields, a condition that usually comes along with non-intensive, unproductive farming practices. The fact that some land is left idle due to shortage of manpower signals land abundance as much as little mechanized farming.

% of HHs Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Cultivating land 96% 96% 96% 75% 100% 100% 100% 96% 100% 93%

Average # of plots of land owned 2.8 3.2 4.0 2.2 3.4 3.8 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.2

Cultivating all plots owned 77% 69% 71% 72% 73% 63% 85% 79% 76% 74% Given some plots to others to use 15% 0% 12% 9% 8% 19% 5% 0% 6% 8% Not using some plots of land 8% 31% 18% 19% 19% 19% 10% 21% 18% 18% - reason for not using some plots of 0% 75% 67% 17% 57% 0% 50% 67% 33% 43% land: not enough human power Living more than 30 minutes away 17% 33% 28% 36% 36% 37% 30% 32% 23% 31% from the family cultivated fields

Number of people contributing to 3.9 4.2 2.9 3.4 4.0 3.9 3.2 3.8 3.6 3.7 cultivation

ECONOMY 29

The great majority of people, 75% of families, cultivate small private/family gardens, less than 1 hectare (Ha) of land – a quantity that is insufficient to cover a family needs when cultivated following traditional farming practices. Fortunately, a large share of the population cultivates also communal land (or cultivate in one way or another in a coordinated fashion, in some instances taking advantage of some economies of scales). Interestingly, in spite of their larger than average size, these pieces of common land seems to be located close to homes. A tiny percentage of farmers, up to 5% of them, cultivates common land larger than 5 Ha, that is a field apt for significant commercial purposes.

% of HH Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Cultivating less than 1 Ha. of 83% 74% 88% 89% 71% 74% 73% 64% 55% 75% PRIVATE land Cultivating between 1 and 2 Ha. of 16% 21% 12% 8% 22% 15% 23% 31% 28% 18% PRIVATE land Cultivating more than 2 Ha. of 0% 4% 0% 0% 7% 11% 3% 4% 18% 5% PRIVATE land

Cultivating both PRIVATE and 58% 59% 44% 52% 47% 63% 60% 48% 45% 52% COMMON land

Cultivating also COMMON LAND of 0% 4% 0% 5% 9% 4% 7% 0% 3% 4% 5 OR MORE Ha

All considered, approximately one third of farmers are smallholder farmers -- household cultivating only private land, of a size of less than 1 ha, in most cases insufficient to cover a household’s food needs under prevailing farming practices; while some of this families have other sources of income, some other do not, hence are at risk of severe food insecurity if not supported. Equally worth remembering is that land size is all but the only determinant of farming performance (market access, type of cultivation, farming practices have an equally important impact). Finally, it is important to be aware of the ample differences among communities: in Himodonge the share of smallholders reaches almost 50% of the population, while in Iyire it is only 25%.

% of HH Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Less than 1ha of private land 34% 29% 30% 48% 44% 34% 26% 30% 36% 25% without common land (39%) Less than 1ha of private land plus 41% 54% 44% 40% 45% 36% 48% 43% 28% 30% common land (12%) More than 1ha private land 14% 13% 11% 8% 5% 19% 11% 10% 16% 30% without common land (32%) More than 1ha private land with 11% 4% 15% 4% 6% 10% 15% 17% 20% 15% common land (17%) (N.B. in brackets data of 2019)

By comparing the current situation with early 2019, it is encouraging to notice a decrease in the share of smallholder farmers, mostly due to the increased farming of common land (2019 data shown in brackets). This evidence suggest that the average size of land cultivated by HHs in Torit has expanded over the course of 2019.17 This finding is consistent with the answer provided by farmers to the direct question on whether they had

17 0.65 ha is the latest estimation of FAO/WFP (2019 CFSAM http://www.fao.org/3/ca3643en/ca3643en.pdf.) Yet, key informants/authorities from the 9 payams of Torit interviewed on Ma5 2019 indicated 2 to 3 feddans (just above 1 Ha) and 500Kg per Ha (or “50 bundles”), as a realistic estimation of average fields per household, and productivity of crop production.

ECONOMY 30

increased or decreased their land under cultivation. Only a tiny minority reported a decrease; conversely, half of the farmers report an increase. This is a clear sign of improvement compared to one year ago, when the size of land cultivated was reported as basically unchanged compared to the beginning of 2018 (data not shown).

Variation in private land cultivated compared to one year before 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Less than 1ha of private land without common land Less than 1ha of private land plus common land More than 1ha private land without common land More than 1ha private land with common land County Cultivating larger size Cultivating smaller size Cultivating the same size

As usual, it is important to note some significant difference, particularly the difficult condition of Imurok.

% of HHs Bur Himodonge Hiyalla Ifwotu Imurok Iyire Kudo Lowoi Nyong COUNTY

Cultivating LARGER size of land 59% 56% 60% 46% 41% 60% 50% 52% 34% 50% Cultivating the SAME size of 33% 32% 33% 50% 44% 38% 40% 32% 58% 41% land Cultivating SMALLER size of 7% 12% 7% 4% 15% 3% 10% 16% 8% 8% land

To appreciate better the land available for agriculture it is important to review its characteristics and quality. Access to water provides a first glimpse of it, an important one if one considers that access to water is consistently reported as the second most important problem for households (Chapter 2). First of all, it shows the obstacles faced by farmers of Himodonge, who lament, more than in other payams, limited access to water.

Access to water Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Water source changes depending 28% 36% 27% 37% 44% 63% 31% 54% 70% 43% on season

Less than 30 minutes far away 78% 81% 58% 80% 70% 80% 90% 72% 77% 75% Between 30 minutes and 1 hour 19% 15% 21% 20% 15% 10% 7% 24% 18% 17% Between 1 hour and 2 hours 4% 4% 16% 0% 15% 10% 3% 4% 4% 7% Between 2 hours and 4 hours 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1%

The information on the presence of spoiled boreholes and water management committees reveals some marked differences too. Taken together with the information on access to water, it is worth noting the condition of need in term of water services that seems to affect Himodonge.

Access to water Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Presence of closer non-functioning 24% 57% 48% 49% 56% 44% 55% 48% 18% 45% boreholes Presence water management 12% 64% 35% 86% 65% 68% 83% 69% 28% 62% committees Farming through continuous access 13% 11% 8% 9% 10% 11% 3% 12% 13% 10% to water throughout the year

ECONOMY 31

It is confirmed that water is indeed a key issues for farmers, as it is cited among the most important challenge to farming (be it due to shortages, such as last year, or to flooding, as it occurs this year) -- pests and diseases are the only other major factors impacting farming.

Pests and diseases Main challanges reported by farmers Flooding COUNTY Iyire Shortage of rain Lowoi Heavy weed and infestation Kudo Shortage of seeds Imurok Hiyalla Shortage of hand tools Nyong Labor constraints Himodonge Loss of crops Bur High cost of seeds Ifwotu Lack of plough tools/equipment (ox- 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% 350% 400% plough or tractor)

Farming variety

Farmers cultivate a relatively wide variety of crops, especially in the three hilly payams of Torit: Iyire, Imurok and Himodonge. Moreover, there is a certain level of specialization among communities: while sorghum (both varieties) is cultivated everywhere by almost every farmer, maize, groundnuts, beans, cassava, and millet are widely cultivated only in some communities. Confirming the complex fabric of Torit county, the farming specialization of communities does not follow the simple mountains and low land divide: maize for instance is cultivated in rainy hilly payams such as Iyire and as much as lowland plateau areas like Bur, where there is little rain but there is nevertheless enough water brought by the main river of Torit, which in Bur forms large ponds. The widespread farming of vegetables, as per early February reporting, is also remarkable (see below), involving up to 50% of farmers. On the contrary fruit farming is virtually completely absent in Toit county.

Crop/Vegetable produced by HHs (in both private and common land) COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500% 600% Sorgum long Variety Maize Groundnuts Sorghum short variety Millet/Simsim Other Vegetables Cassava Greens Tomato Eggplants Cowpeas Beans

ECONOMY 32

10% of farmers only cultivate one crop (however, it should not be assumed that all farmers doing so are food insecure or poor: some are, other are not – evidence not shown).

Number of types of cultivation Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Only 1 (monocrop) 17% 0% 4% 22% 14% 0% 10% 12% 0% 10% Only 2 29% 33% 12% 23% 17% 11% 13% 36% 5% 19%

Any vegetable 46% 52% 64% 36% 47% 37% 37% 48% 60% 46% Fruit 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

When asked about the seeds that farmers would like to receive, sorghum is the most requested crop, closely followed by maize, groundnuts and vegetables. It is important to note that Sorghum is largely used for self- consumption, because that is a clear indication that for most farmers ensuring food on their table is still the most important concern. With this background, it is important to note that Iyire is a remarkable exception, where Maize and beans are the most sought-after seed – and they seem to represents the local cash crop.

Seeds most in need COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Sorghum short variety Sorghum long variety Maize Groundnuts Vegetables Beans Other plants Cowpeas Simsims Cassava Fruit

Overall, with the significative exception of Iyire (see above), farmers do not seem to make a distinction between cash crops (sold) and crops cultivated for self-consumption (stored). The graph below shows that the only crop that is cultivated with a deliberate specific livelihood strategy is long variety sorghum, stored mostly for self- consumption purposes, confirming the wide spread of subsistence farming.

Crop by purpose 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Sorghum long variety Groundnuts Maize Sorghum short variety Millet&Simsim Cassava Beans Irish potato Stored for later consumption Produced mostly for sale purpose

ECONOMY 33

Upgrading farming (farmer groups, communal farming, agronomic practices, inputs and capital)

To provide tailored support to farmers it is important to distinguish them according to their capacity: in particular, their ability to produce above subsistence levels, supply the market, and eventually engage in business farming. Making such a distinction is not an easy task in South Sudan, for a variety of reasons, in particular because it cannot be assumed that those selling a greatest share of their production are doing it because as a deliberate choice i.e. are market-oriented farmers. In fact, it is not uncommon for worse off families to sell larger than average share of their produce to the market out of necessity. Torit is no exception in this regard. It is therefore necessary to juxtapose the analysis of poverty (end of Chapter 3) with the analysis of the market orientation of farmers to tell apart who is choosing to sell to the market as a result of a deliberate livelihood strategy of specialization, and who is doing that as a coping strategy. To this end categories of farmers must be identified.

Beside the size of the field cultivated, the most immediate way to increase the scale of farming is to farm in groups. As revealed in Chapter 3, farmer groups supported by NGOs tend to have a better food security condition compared to informal farmer groups, in fact they half their chances to show a poor FCS. Food security is even better for seed multiplication groups. On the opposite side of the spectrum, the households who are not associated at all tend to be those with a worse food security condition.

As usual, there are marked differences among communities, whereby Kudo shows very high levels of associations among farmers, Himodonge and Imurok follow suit, while other communities show markedly low levels of association, Hiyalla and Bur in particular – possibly a reflection of the semi-nomadic habits of those two communities.

Membership in association/group COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% Farmer group supported by NGO Common Interest group/Seed Multiplication group Cooperative/SME Informal group of farmers Women group; Church group; Self-help group; Community-based organization, Youth group Health Village Saving and Loan Association (VSLA)/ Credit and Saving Group Income Generation Association group (IGA) Others No association

It is worth noting that almost everywhere farmer groups supported by NGOs tend to be “younger” compared to the informal farmer organization. This is consistent with anecdotal evidence that says that NGO supporting agriculture have a tendency to form themselves groups rather than provide support to well-established group of

ECONOMY 34

farmers. Still, there is the possibility that this outcome is the result of a deliberate choice to target most vulnerable groups. However, it is worth noting that this focus on younger groups does not occur in accessible payams (see Ifwoto and Nyong), which confirms the possibility that poor targeting due to insufficient knowledge is what occurs in remote communities.

Robustness of farmer Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY groups Average membership 3.4 5.1 4.1 2.8 5.5 5.7 3.9 4.2 4.4 4.3 Informal (years) farmer # of HHs associated 25 22 21 23 22 27 24 23 24 23 groups Recorded by county or 42% 73% 42% 54% 64% 57% 53% 31% 74% 56% payam official Average membership NGO 4.0 4.8 2.4 4.2 3.8 3.6 3.0 3.0 2.8 3.6 (years) supported # of HHs associated 25 15 20 22 26 36 23 25 19 23 farmer Recorded by county or groups 33% 50% 50% 84% 50% 100% 57% 25% 60% 64% payam official Presence of 3 or more farmer associations per 46% 46% 35% 50% 23% 33% 45% 42% 41% 40% village

Communal farming, rather than the simple work in association, is the next step in terms of cooperation among farmers aimed at reaping economy of scale. It is a fact, that in Torit communal land are larger-than-average fields of land. Interestingly, private and communal lands are not much different when it comes to their location. For sure, most farmers regard their private/family land as more important; however, it is interesting to note that the appreciation for common landing seems to be strictly related with better food security condition.

Family vs Common land Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY plots of common land above 1ha 21% 44% 27% 58% 56% 29% 44% 17% 50% 43% plots of family land above 1ha 17% 26% 12% 11% 29% 26% 27% 36% 45% 25% plots of common land closer 29% 19% 45% 24% 38% 19% 47% 17% 59% 33% than 15 minutes from home plots of family land closer than 39% 19% 44% 28% 28% 37% 40% 20% 59% 34% 15 minutes from home Private land more important 36% 56% 45% 33% 62% 65% 50% 50% 56% 50% Both private and common land 64% 38% 45% 55% 27% 35% 33% 50% 28% 41% important Common land is more important 0% 6% 9% 12% 12% 0% 17% 0% 17% 9%

Usage of harvested crop on private land vs. common land Other Exchanged for animals to breed Exchanged for animals to eat Saved in the form of seeds Sold it to get money Consumed it 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Common land Private land

ECONOMY 35

Even more important, it is key to note that communal land is, more often than private land, cultivated for commercial purposes (produce sold to the market) rather than for self-consumption. Additionally, a greater share of the cash obtained through the sale is “reinvested” in farming or saved. These are just tendencies, and further investigation is needed to reach a solid conclusion. Nevertheless, there is enough evidence to justify paying attention to the aspect of communal farming, and distinguish it from family farming.

Use of cash obtained through the sale of produce Fill personal or common saving account Other goods or services Nutrient-rich food (meat, pulses, etc.) Agricultural inputs / Payment of laborers Clothing Basic food School Fees / medication Soap / Oil

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Common Private

The adoption of basic agronomic practices should represent another aspect to consider to tell apart the most productive farmers from the subsistence farmers. In line with a previous survey conducted by AVSI, there is a segment of farmers who have no notion of soil and water conservation practices; this is particularly striking considering that it is indeed the management of water that is one of the aspects with greater consequences for farmers, as reported by farmers when citing the most significant obstacles to farming. The food security conditions of farmers not aware of farming practices as of Feb 2020 were among the worse of any group of the population (see Chapter 3). However, one should be cautions when assessing farming practices: many have some ideas but that does not mean they know how to apply them correctly. In general, moreover, there is poos appreciation for notions related to land productivity, as shown by the generalized practice of burning bushes for land clearance.

Disregard/unawareness of basic Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY agronomic practices Not familiar with any specific 0% 4% 0% 0% 7% 7% 0% 12% 3% 3% planting practice Not familiar with any specific 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% farming practice Not familiar with soil & water 32% 25% 27% 12% 19% 33% 27% 19% 20% 21% conservation practice Familiar with agricultural practices in 68% 75% 73% 88% 78% 67% 73% 81% 78% 78% each of the 3 domains Burning of bushes for clearing the 84% 86% 85% 61% 86% 81% 80% 62% 90% 77% land

Being aware of and employing seed quality is another important aspect to consider when assessing farmers’ productivity. Contrary to the evidence gathered last year, generally, farmers using improved seeds show remarkably good results in term of food security (see Chapter 3).

ECONOMY 36

Knowledge on seed variety and Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY productivity Aware of seeds variety 38% 48% 56% 56% 35% 50% 60% 28% 48% 47% Farmers employing prime quality 25% 37% 52% 41% 30% 35% 53% 20% 40% 37% seeds

The use of advanced tools is another important feature of more productive farmers, which indeed show much better food security conditions compared to other groups; unfortunately, that characterizes only 10% of farmers. On the contrary, the purchase of basic agricultural inputs such as hoes or local seeds is largely widespread – something that questions the need for intervention of mere distribution of such basic agriculture inputs, especially if not privileging certain groups or areas (for instance Lowoi).

Source of basic agricultural inputs and Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY access to advanced farming tools Shop in town 96% 93% 88% 97% 93% 93% 93% 79% 100% 93% From community members 25% 37% 40% 37% 56% 41% 31% 42% 35% 40% Sellers who pass by 4% 11% 4% 3% 4% 7% 24% 13% 10% 8% No purchase of inputs or tools/ you 4% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 3% 8% 0% 2% produce them by yourself Making use of advanced tools 4% 7% 8% 19% 10% 7% 3% 8% 10% 10%

Hiring casual workers or community members (for a price that ranges from 200 to 400 SSP in Torit Town per kattala of land worked) is not uncommon – a sign of the viability of implementing more decisively incentives-for- work schemes. However, it should be emphasized that farmers reporting the hiring of casual workers do not seems to enjoy very good food security conditions (Chapter 3), suggesting the limited support that can be expected from this mechanism.

% of HHs employing labour beside Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY family members No use of labor 16% 11% 15% 13% 19% 30% 20% 12% 15% 16%

Community members, in exchange 68% 82% 73% 48% 74% 78% 80% 69% 78% 69% for food Community members, on a 8% 4% 8% 4% 19% 19% 30% 15% 15% 12% reciprocity basis Community members, in exchange 20% 11% 27% 33% 7% 19% 20% 15% 25% 21% for money

Casual Labour (per day) 28% 18% 23% 39% 12% 15% 10% 12% 35% 24%

The most common functions of these workers are weeding and planting and to a slightly lesser extent, harvesting and plowing.

Weeding Function of additional labour Planting Harvesting Land plowing and preparation Livestock care Selling crops 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% Livestock sale

ECONOMY 37

Lending, either money or assets, is a rather common practice in Torit county. The limited share of people capable of lending an amount equal to USD 200, however, suggests that such loans are of very limited amount.

Borrowing experience and Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY capacity (% of HHs) Never borrowed money 36% 39% 42% 27% 33% 37% 27% 54% 20% 33% Never borrowed assets 36% 25% 42% 40% 33% 30% 20% 46% 28% 34% Capable of having 200 USD lent if 26% 11% 9% 18% 14% 4% 7% 8% 8% 12% needed

Such small loans are hardly used to found investments; instead they are mostly used to cover health, education and basic needs. This should be kept in mind by microcredit enthusiasts: opportunities of investments and access to relatively large loans is what is lacking; of indebted people, on the other hand, there is no scarcity.

Use of borrowed money Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Health (medicine, treatments) 73% 76% 75% 81% 93% 75% 94% 100% 92% 85% Immediate Basic Needs (food, 82% 88% 92% 67% 80% 94% 67% 92% 68% 78% clothes) Education (fees, uniforms, books) 73% 47% 75% 84% 47% 25% 44% 42% 36% 55% Productive (Set up business, buy 18% 6% 8% 12% 3% 0% 6% 8% 8% 8% fertilizer, etc.) Other 9% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 4% 2%

Market-oriented farming

Besides the difficulties related to the identification of the most productive farmers (covered in the previous chapter), there are other complications when identifying the farmers more apt to business farming.

Firstly, it should be emphasized, given the limited level of economic specialization, there is not a clear demarcation between farmers selling to the market and those producing for self-consumption: virtually every farmer does both – even the most vulnerable farmer needs to sell some produce to cover urgently needed goods (drugs for a sick person, for instance). Equally important, an high share of produce sold is not always a guarantee of business oriented farming – in fact, although the quantity sold by vulnerable farmers may be limited, as a share of their total production, the share of food sold can represent a large percentage of the total produced, even larger than the share of produce sold by more advance farmers.

Secondly, in a subsistence economy the role of markets it is qualitatively different – as opposed to simply less strong – compared to market-oriented communities. It is not just a matter of farmers being more focused on self- consumption than on sale. Possibly more important than that is the fact that sale and bartering is not regarded as much different from one another, and both of them are as much important as sharing and giving away for free to other community members. Far from being just a sign of “missed business opportunity”, giveaways are most of the time later reciprocated, hence represent a form of exchange too, possibly even a smarter form of exchange given the context, as it opens up solidarity networks that can work as insurance or line of credit schemes in case of need . Unpacking this complexity, for instance assessing the capacity of lead farmers to command over

ECONOMY 38

people and resources at the local level in a virtuous manner for his group and for the other farmers becomes a crucial component of any project willing to promote efficiently market-oriented farming.

% Use of produce Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Consumed in the household 83% 86% 84% 84% 86% 80% 81% 82% 78% 83% Given out for free 7% 8% 6% 7% 7% 7% 8% 10% 8% 8% Sold to the market or bartered 9% 7% 9% 9% 8% 11% 11% 8% 15% 10%

% of families who sell some 76% 79% 92% 61% 79% 89% 90% 77% 95% 79% farming produce

% of produce sold or bartered by groups of farmers By looking at both the share of produce sold or exchanged All farmers 9.6% by families and the share of families who sell at all in the Cultivating only one crop 7.1% markets, Iyire should be regarded as a community inclined to the sale of farming products, followed by Himodonge IDP/Returnees 7.3% Smallholder (less than 1ha of private land only) 7.6% and Kudo; on the other hand of the spectrum, Nyong seems the place where families less commonly sell their produce Not associated in any income generation group 7.7% – possibly a result of the limited production in Nyong. This Widow or woman with no support 7.8% is consistent with what highlighted previously in this Consuming what obtained with main livelihood activity 9.0% section on Agriculture, where it was found that in Iyire 9.1% Family members with disabilities farmers demand first and foremost seeds to be cultivated 9.9% Without cattle as cash crop. With elderly 9.9% Hosting orphans 10.0% Finally, it is crucial to review the propensity to exchange Member of an informal farmer group 10.1% and sell in the market of the different groups of farmers Employing causal labour 10.1% identified in this chapter. On one hand of the spectrum, Not applying agricultural practices (in some of the 3 10.3% domains) smallholder and monocrop farmers tend to sell the least With 4 or more plots of land 10.3% to the market; on the other hand of the spectrum, farmers With more than 1ha of private land 10.8% cultivating common land, hiring workers or contracting With ability to borrow $200 10.8% community members in exchange for money, as well as Cultivating land in common 11.0% those employing advanced farming tools sell the greatest Household with acceptable FCS 11.3% share of their produce.

Employing seeds of prime quality 12.1% By taking into consideration also the food security Employing community members in exchange for money 12.9% conditions of the different group of farmers, moreover, it is Bartered what obtained with main livelihood activity 13.3% confirmed the ambivalent nature that it represents dealing Member of farmer group supported by an NGO 14.2% with the market. Among the most engaged in supplying the Member of a seed multiplication group 14.4% market there are groups of farmers with a good food Employing advanced tools 14.9% security conditions (such as those employing workers) – With access to ox-plough 15.0% they are farmers who chose to sell to the market out of a specialization livelihood strategy – and there are group of farmers with a rather bad food security condition (such as those associated in informal farmer groups or not applying agricultural practices) – they are farmers who sell to the market because they need to get some cash to cover some basic expenses, following a sort of coping strategy approach. This dichotomy is somehow reflected also by the distinction that there is between farmer reporting to sell in the most profitable markets, and those reporting to have no choice to get to a more lucrative market, often due to lack of transport availability (see below).

ECONOMY 39

Finally, it should be taken into consideration that not all exchanges occur in markets, and that there are lucrative markets where market participants choose to sell, and less lucrative markets, where farmers sell as transport to elsewhere is not available. On the whole, it is also observed that while a large portion of HHs sell produce to the market, selling to community members is also very significant in most payams. This is slightly different in Nyong (Torit Town) as proximity to an established and relatively large functioning market there is more market- oriented behavior.

Market of sale of produce Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY You take it to the local market 44% 25% 54% 42% 36% 33% 43% 31% 35% 39% To community members 20% 36% 8% 15% 34% 26% 33% 35% 13% 23% I do not sell it out 24% 21% 8% 39% 21% 11% 10% 23% 5% 21% You take it to a faraway market 4% 14% 31% 4% 7% 19% 3% 4% 25% 11% Buyers from local markets come to 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 3% 4% 5% 2% my area and buy it You take it to another country for 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 0% 5% 1% selling Buyers from far away counties come 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 10% 1% to my area and buy it

Finally, although the majority of HHs are content with where they sell their produce, 40% would like to sell in other established markets but face obstacles including a lack of economic means for transport or poor road conditions.

I get the best price at this market Reason for selling in this market No economic means to transport to COUNTY other markets Iyire Lowoi Poor road conditions spoil the produce/do not allow for reaching Kudo other markets Imurok Because i sell little and it is not worth to travel Hiyalla Nyong Insecurity on roads Himodonge Bur I am not aware of prices at other markets so I do not know if it is worth Ifwotu it Other reasons 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% 180%

Support to farming Finally, for accountability and learning purposes it is important course to review the aid response in agriculture, and possibly link it to the state of agriculture. Firstly, that can be done in relation to the distributed of seeds. It is remarkable the support provided to Himodonge, which remains the payam where highest is the number of smallholder farmers, along with the little support provided to the payam with the strongest agronomic conditions and market orientation (Iyiere), and the average support provided to the payams with the lowest level of food security (Imurok and Lowoi). Finally, it is important to note that one of the payam where farmers rely less on their own or purchased seeds, is Nyong, possibly the result of an excessive supply of seeds, so intense as to undermine market dynamics. It should be remembered also that the farmer of Nyong are those who have expanded the least their cultivation over the of 2019, and among the least market oriented. Overall, across Torit, one should note

ECONOMY 40

that the coverage of seed distribution seems to have reduced in the last year, dropping from 21% of HHs to 14% report receiving seeds from NGO.

Reliance on seeds distributed Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY (source of seeds cultivated) SEEDS - Own stocks 80% 89% 85% 58% 93% 89% 83% 88% 98% 81% SEEDS - Purchase 64% 68% 65% 46% 55% 70% 57% 38% 58% 56% SEEDS - Gifts 12% 11% 12% 5% 10% 11% 10% 15% 5% 9% 14% SEEDS - NGOs 4% 21% 31% 9% 12% 19% 17% 15% 8% (21%) Note: in brackets the same figure one year before (Feb 2019)

Looking at the supply of training in productive agriculture practices, Himodonge stands out, again, as the payam enjoying the best coverage, largely with the support of Care. It is important to note that Himodonge is the payam were strongest is the support for newly established farmer groups (2.4 years on average) as opposed to the average age of non-supported farmer groups 4.1 years. [Given the scale of aid to farming and the precarious conditions of food security in the payam, it would be particularly informative to review in details how farming is being supported in Himodonge – limited access to water and some evidence of tension over natural resources make it indeed a particular place].

HHs ever received farming training Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Yes 42% 30% 67% 42% 31% 26% 43% 22% 38% 38%

Once again, the payams with the worse food security conditions, Imurok and Lowoi are those reporting having received the lest support.

Organization providing training Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Plan International 0% 29% 10% 10% 39% 40% 50% 25% 7% 22% FAO 22% 14% 20% 29% 22% 20% 25% 25% 0% 20% Care 56% 14% 40% 19% 11% 0% 17% 25% 7% 20% AVSI 0% 14% 10% 14% 0% 0% 0% 0% 36% 10% Brac 22% 0% 0% 5% 22% 20% 8% 25% 0% 10% Caritas 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 20% 0% 0% 43% 8% Global Aim 0% 14% 20% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% Government 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% Niras 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Capital torit 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 1% Cordaid 0% 14% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%

It is also observed that many HHs receive training on different types of seeds. A lot of training is provided on vegetables but very little on other highly nutritious crops such as beans and almost nothing on fruit.

ECONOMY 41

Cultivation supported by the training COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500% 600% 700% Maize Groundnuts Eggplants Tomato Greens - sukuma Sorghum short variety Other Vegetables Onion Beans Millet Cowpeas Sorghum long variety Cassava Other Irish potato Fruit

Finally, by looking at the different forms of support, once again it appears that Himodonge and Nyong attract most of the most capital-intensive support. Once again, a mismatch between inputs and outputs seems to appear, as in Himodonge farmer show a less than average access to advanced tools.

% of HHs by type of support Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY received Seeds 55% 74% 75% 81% 74% 76% 80% 57% 70% 73% Tools 45% 79% 65% 70% 69% 67% 60% 62% 63% 65% Training 25% 42% 50% 31% 38% 33% 36% 19% 37% 35% Money / loans 5% 0% 5% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% Animals 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 1%

ECONOMY 42

9. LIVESTOCK FARMING

Animal rearing is practiced by half of the population, particularly in the lowlands in the North and West of Torit county. Hiyalla and Bur are specialized in cattle keeping, whereas sheep and goat herding is an important activity in Kudo and Lowoi. It is important to notice that animal herding makes an important difference: firstly, it remarkably improves the food security conditions for the animal owners, but also for other members of the community who can afford to exchange products; secondly, it can contributes to support the dynamism of the farming sector, as pure pastoralist have the means and the need to buy crop and vegetables, hence increasing the incentives for production expansion (even in absence of a good access to markets) – this is just what seems to be underpinning the good results registered in Hiyalla. For all such reasons, it is important that agriculture and animal farming are reviewed together, for they have important implications on one another

% of HHs Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

Rearing animals 28% 82% 42% 33% 81% 48% 60% 58% 38% 51%

Cattle 4% 57% 4% 13% 57% 0% 20% 12% 0% 21% Sheep/goats 20% 61% 27% 12% 48% 37% 53% 50% 18% 33% Ducks/Turkeys/Chickens 16% 46% 27% 19% 34% 26% 13% 19% 33% 26% Pigs 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 1%

of which are vaccinated animal 0% 57% 45% 32% 41% 31% 44% 20% 7% 35%

In general, besides Hiyalla and Bur, who are specialized in cattle keeping, Kudo and Lowoi have an important activity related to sheep and goat herding. During dry season cattle are brought to pasture to Bur, where the main river of Ikwoto turns into large ponds that are used as water points for animals.

Reasons for livestock rearing and production

The rearing of animals, of cattle and goats in particular, is not an activity like others in South Sudan. The motives that underpin this occupation are, in fact, multifaceted, and making a living, important as it is, is only one among others also very important: marriage, self-consumption (often in the context of key social celebrations), and saving are as important a motivation as the commercial purpose. Indeed, in some communities, such as Lowoi, the commercial purpose per se is among the least important of motivations. Reason for breeding cattle Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY For marriage 71% 96% 73% 64% 89% 69% 83% 87% 67% 80% Household consumption 71% 74% 45% 57% 77% 46% 78% 47% 73% 66% Commercial purpose/for selling 43% 52% 45% 39% 34% 54% 61% 27% 73% 45% For saving purposes 14% 9% 0% 21% 13% 23% 22% 0% 40% 16% Draught animals/working purposes 14% 0% 0% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%

It is important to recognize that cattle keepers, as farmers, are composed by different groups. To begin with, some herders are organized so as to conduct animal husbandry in a coordinated fashion, while others, almost 15% of cattle keeps, work independently.

ECONOMY 43

% of HHs with livestock Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

Rearing animals in group (kraal) 40% 100% 86% 75% 95% 90% 87% 83% 57% 86%

As of early February, most animal farming took place near the villages.

Location of most of the animals bred Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

Within the village 100% 86% 91% 96% 67% 75% 61% 73% 86% 79% Less than 30 minutes of walk away from the 0% 14% 9% 4% 15% 25% 22% 13% 7% 13% village Several hours of walk away from the village 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 0% 17% 13% 7% 8%

With animal farming taking place not far from villages, conflict between livestock keepers and agricultural farmers becomes more frequent (see the particular situation of Himodonge), in addition to dispute over water source for animals.

% of HHs by conflict over resources for farming Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

Water sources used to make animals drink 20% 5% 13% 60% 28% 38% 33% 7% 7% 27% Conflicts between livestock and agricultural 0% 30% 75% 28% 19% 31% 22% 40% 21% 27% production Conflicts with land used for grazing animals 40% 30% 0% 4% 23% 8% 17% 20% 14% 17% None of the above problems 40% 35% 13% 8% 30% 23% 28% 33% 57% 29%

With regard to the obstacles to livestock farming, poor animal health together with a lack in veterinary services are reported as the most common obstacles, followed by a limited access to water and grazing pasture.

Obstacles to livestock farming Pest and diseases COUNTY Lack of veterinary services Iyire Lowoi Lack of water Kudo Lack of grazing pastures Imurok Cattle raiding Hiyalla Nyong Insecurity-Conflict Himodonge Others Bur Ifwotu no customers 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% Inability to access communal grazing lands

The problem of pest and diseases affecting livestock in Torit County is evident. 80% of HHs report animal death due to sickness in the past year. Sheep/goats and cattle are the most affected. The death of sheep and goats is a particular problem in Imurok where 3/4 HHs report death. In Hiyalla and Bur, disease is killing a significant amount of cattle. Overall, almost 50% of HHs are reporting many or very many deaths of their livestock confirming the reason as to why pests and diseases are the main obstacle to livestock farming as reported above.

ECONOMY 44

% of HHs reporting animal death Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Any death of animal 71% 100% 82% 85% 87% 85% 83% 80% 67% 84%

Sheep/Goats 57% 27% 50% 19% 13% 75% 67% 79% 57% 39% Cattle/Cows 0% 55% 0% 37% 64% 0% 17% 0% 0% 32% Ducks/Turkeys/Chickens 43% 18% 40% 37% 21% 25% 6% 14% 36% 25% Others 0% 0% 10% 7% 2% 0% 6% 7% 7% 4% Pigs 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 1%

Many/very many deaths 43% 64% 50% 37% 49% 50% 50% 36% 27% 46%

Marketing and sale of livestock

By looking at the sale of animals, Bur and Hiyalla are confirmed to have a privileged position in animal husbandry, representing the main providers of animal products to Torit’s market, followed by Kudo. Kudo seems the place where the sale of livestock has accelerated the most this year.

% of HHs with livestock Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Who have sold livestock 8% 57% 31% 19% 52% 26% 37% 23% 23% 30%

This year I sold more 0% 44% 13% 31% 32% 29% 64% 25% 33% 35% The same than last year 50% 13% 50% 38% 29% 14% 27% 50% 33% 30% This year I sold less 50% 44% 38% 31% 39% 57% 9% 25% 33% 36%

As with agriculture farmers, however, it is important to distinguish which livestock farmers sell to the market as a coping strategy to receive cash to cover some basic expenses from those that do so as a result of market orientation. Once again there are significant differences at county level – in Kudo and Lowoi for example, 15% of HHs are selling livestock as a coping strategy. In Himodonge and Imurok, almost 10% of HHs report having already exhausted this possibility.

% of HHs with problems to meet Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY needs Selling livestock as coping strategy 0% 0% 9% 4% 2% 8% 17% 13% 0% 5% Already sold all animals available 0% 4% 9% 0% 0% 8% 6% 0% 0% 2% (exhausted coping strategy)

Moreover, the fact that a large portion of trades of livestock is made through the aid of a middle man who comes to the communities from nearby or far away markets, rather than as a result of the livestock keepers travelling to the market with the intent of making a better profit, it suggests that commercial herding is still not practiced widely. On the other hand, the sale to community members, highest in Hiyalla, is a sign of a certain level of dynamism of the local economy.

ECONOMY 45

Market of sale (for HHs commercializing livestock) COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% To community members To buyers from local market who come to buy it in your area To buyers from far away markets who come to buy it in your areas You travel to the nearest market You travel to a far away market in South Sudan You travel to a far away market in another country

A large proportion of livestock keepers report to be satisfied with the price of sale. However, almost half do not travel to markets where they know they may get a better price due to a lack of economic means for transport. Kudo and Lowoi show signs that confirm that a number of herders are selling more due to necessity of cash than because of profitability reasons.

Reason for chosing that market (for HHs selling livestock) COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% I get the best price at this market I do not have economic means to transport to go other markets Because i sell little and it is not worth to travel I fear the insecurity transporting cattle Not a particular reason I am not aware of prices at other markets so I am not sure it it worth it Poor road conditions make the travel impossible

Focusing on the production of milk, Hiyalla’s privileged position becomes evident. It is interesting to note that a significant share of herders in Nyong fetch and sell milk too – this evidence seems to suggest that limited demand is what constraints the economic activity related to milk fetching, rather than other production related factors.

% HHs of animal herders Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Who fetch milk 25% 62% 29% 69% 83% 0% 31% 15% 14% 50% Who sells milk 25% 33% 14% 38% 56% 0% 25% 8% 0% 31%

Average milk production per day 4.0 6.9 9.0 7.1 4.7 0.0 2.4 1.5 3.0 5.3 who sell half or most of the milk 0% 14% 0% 25% 26% NA 13% 8% N/A 14% produced

ECONOMY 46

10. ACCESS TO CONSUMER MARKETS, EXCHANGES and EXPENDITURES

▪ As commented when reviewing livelihood (chapter 1) and farming (chapter 8), the role of established consumer markets should not be overemphasized, as many exchanges occurs among community members, many through direct good exchange (barter). Hiyalla is a perfect example, as its average access to market did not prevent people from engaging successfully in both agriculture and animal farming, and trade goods among community members. Conversely, it should be clear that with limited economic diversification (whereby some people produce crops while others have animal products to trade) and limited access to consumer goods, not only consumers’ welfare is undermined: production is hurt too, as no goods to buy reduces all incentives to produce above subsistence level as a means to obtain cash.

As for other aspects related to livelihood, communities across Torit have a quite uneven access to markets, and not only as a result of their level of accessibility. For instance, Hiyalla certainly enjoys a good level of accessibility, at least in comparison to other payams, and yet the families from that community do not to visits markets more often compared to other people; given the significant presence of both herders and farmers in this community one may assume that a significant amount of exchanges occur among community members trough barters, reducing the needs to visit the county’s market in Torit Town.

ACCESS TO (CONSUMER) MARKETS Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY 2 times or more per week 40% 32% 31% 70% 36% 33% 60% 31% 33% 45% Once every week 32% 29% 35% 20% 27% 15% 20% 23% 25% 24% Once every 2 weeks 16% 18% 8% 6% 9% 19% 7% 8% 15% 11% Once per moth 4% 14% 19% 2% 21% 33% 10% 35% 13% 15% Only few times per year 8% 7% 8% 1% 7% 0% 3% 4% 15% 6%

Hours to reach the market 3 5 4 1 5 4 3 5 4 3

Keeping in mind that not every community – let alone every household -- has the same need to access markets, obstacles in reaching the market are mostly due to distance and lack of transport, or the means to pay for transport. Insecurity is negligible, reported by only 1% of the population.

Main obstacles to REACH markets COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Market too far/no time to leave home for such a long time Price for transport is too high No transport to the market No problem Not sure to find items needed sold in the market Other problems Seasonal problems linked to rain/disruption of roads Insecurity/conflict

ECONOMY 47

When it comes to the obstacles impeding households from buying it is clear that the lack of financial means represents by far the main problem. Still, unavailability of goods seems to be a significant problem too, as it is reported across the county, including in the capital, Torit Town.

Main obstacles to BUY in the markets COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% Not cash to spend in the market Spike in prices and confusion about prices Items not available in the market I am postponing purchases Insecurity

Bartering is significant, and it is high both in payams with good level of food security, such as Hiyalla, that in payams with low level of food security, such as Imurok – mimicking sales to markets, that are significant as a share of the production for both successful households and worse off families.

How often are goods exchanged Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY among neighbours In the last 2 weeks 8% 21% 12% 8% 26% 23% 10% 20% 23% 16% In the last month 16% 18% 19% 5% 19% 12% 13% 16% 8% 13% It rarely happens 44% 46% 27% 30% 36% 42% 57% 28% 38% 37% It never happens 32% 14% 42% 57% 19% 23% 20% 36% 33% 34%

The following table shows the most commonly purchased items by categories. These figures on goods and services acquired in the recent past seem to suggest significant purchases.

Main items purchased (% of HHs) Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY by categories of expenses Cereals (Sorghum, maize, rice, 76% 68% 65% 80% 69% 81% 60% 81% 53% 71% wheat, bread) Oil, fat and butter 40% 57% 62% 46% 52% 59% 50% 50% 63% 52% All other food items (salt, coffee, 4% 29% 19% 9% 21% 26% 37% 35% 38% 22% tea, etc.) Sugar, honey, sweets 28% 36% 23% 32% 21% 15% 27% 8% 38% 26% Meat, fish, eggs and poultry (beef, 12% 25% 8% 22% 12% 11% 13% 15% 28% 17% goat, pork, sheep, game) Vegetables (pumpkins, okra, green 28% 32% 31% 40% 22% 33% 17% 31% 33% 31% leaves etc) Pulses (Groundnuts, legumes, 12% 11% 12% 12% 9% 15% 17% 8% 20% 12% sesame, beans etc) Milk, yoghurt, cheese 0% 7% 0% 5% 9% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3%

ECONOMY 48

Soap 80% 93% 92% 78% 90% 81% 87% 92% 90% 86% Clothing, shoes 60% 79% 77% 80% 53% 44% 60% 54% 55% 64% Milling and grinding 20% 50% 38% 35% 53% 67% 63% 65% 63% 49% Tobacco and Alcohol 4% 14% 15% 18% 24% 33% 23% 31% 33% 22%

Medical expenses, health care 60% 68% 50% 55% 69% 52% 73% 58% 48% 59%

Education, (school fees/uniforms) 28% 36% 27% 41% 31% 26% 27% 23% 28% 32%

Household assets (knives, forks, 40% 54% 31% 33% 45% 52% 33% 46% 40% 40% plates) Agricultural tools, seeds, Hiring 32% 21% 27% 27% 24% 37% 37% 38% 40% 30% labor Celebrations, social events, 12% 25% 31% 13% 29% 22% 27% 35% 38% 24% funerals, weddings Alive animals (cattle, cow, 4% 7% 8% 6% 7% 4% 0% 8% 5% 6% goat/sheep) Construction, house repair, House 32% 18% 15% 36% 17% 15% 17% 27% 10% 23% Rent

Remembering to take these estimations on expenses with caution, it is evident that expenses for food represent the bulk of what is purchased by families. In fact, it is estimated that around one third of the population spend more than 75% for food purchases, an evident indicator of economic vulnerability. It should be noted however that since 2019 there has been a decrease of almost 15% in this figure (data not shown) suggesting less economic vulnerability compared to a year ago, once again perhaps due to a better agricultural season. Yet, attention should be paid to the significant economic vulnerability of families in Imurok and Ifwotu where for half the population, more than 75% of expenses are still on food.

Monthly average expenses Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

On food 15,590 15,439 14,080 19,561 18,180 19,663 14,979 20,982 19,952 17,985 On non-food items 3,967 6,682 9,768 10,165 9,564 5,711 6,472 6,513 7,820 8,077 On Services 2,360 2,839 1,941 3,805 4,496 2,763 2,912 4,310 4,703 3,551

% of HHs spending more than 48% 18% 26% 27% 30% 50% 22% 35% 38% 31% 75% for food

When looking at the price of commodities in Torit County, it is surprising to find that on the whole, prices in Nyong (Torit Town) tend to be higher. Contrary to what would perhaps normally be seen where prices would be higher in more remote areas due to transport costs, the opposite is occurring in Torit county. This may reflect HHs higher purchasing power in Torit town and traders’ high mark-up. Soap is not consistent with this finding perhaps due to its overall ease in transportation. This finding is a reminder of the need to take with a grain of salt market surveys based merely on prices registered in the main county market.

Costs for main local and Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY imported commodities Sugar (1 mug, 0.5 Kg) 243 224 218 298 220 191 229 260 176 238 Sorghum (1 Kg) 320 339 333 320 233 227 237 446 207 290 Beans (1 mug, 0.5 Kg) 195 184 243 212 188 203 184 183 172 198 Soap (1 piece -- generally sold 198 213 258 198 252 295 217 226 203 225 at the market)

ECONOMY 49

11. PRODUCTIVE ASSETS, ENERGY and NON-FOOD ITEMS

The review of housing arrangements shows that in Torit 80% of the population lives in his own home. It is significant to note that the same figure was 91% in 2019, possibly indicating that the influx of returnees, that has increased in 2019 (see Chapter 14) is not finding means to rebuild their own place, indeed putting pressure on people. Additionally, almost half the homes require substantial improvements to become a safe and stable shelter. Almost half the population do not have a kitchen area and therefore cook in the same room where it sleeps, a practice that can have detrimental effects on the health of HH members.

Housing conditions Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY 80% Owned house 84% 82% 85% 73% 83% 78% 73% 88% 83% (91%) Hosted 4% 11% 0% 8% 10% 11% 10% 8% 8% 8% 12% Renting or working to stay 12% 7% 15% 18% 7% 11% 17% 4% 10% (5%) Safe shelter (may need small 46% 68% 50% 45% 75% 70% 62% 40% 65% 58% repairs) Unsafe no stable 54% 32% 50% 55% 25% 30% 38% 60% 35% 42%

Cooking in the sleeping/living room 32% 81% 42% 15% 47% 52% 53% 77% 48% 44%

A significant share of families, around half of the entire population, have a fairly wide set of utensils – notice the widespread possession of water containers, of particular importance given its contribution to personal hygiene, as well as the situation of needs that can be observed, once again, for a significant share of Imurok families.

% of HHs with utensils Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Beds 52% 43% 38% 82% 49% 23% 47% 27% 38% 51% Blankets 56% 46% 46% 76% 71% 56% 63% 62% 68% 64% Water containers 84% 86% 96% 95% 91% 78% 93% 96% 98% 92% Stove/Kanun 68% 82% 85% 95% 79% 70% 83% 96% 83% 84% Sponge mattress 40% 29% 32% 87% 39% 30% 53% 27% 35% 49% Tables/Chairs 48% 29% 23% 83% 36% 22% 37% 15% 20% 42%

With regard to productive goods, generally called assets, there is widespread possession of key instruments such as engine run grinding machines, but the virtually total absence of more advanced agricultural tools such as ox- ploughs and tractors is also noticeable. Interestingly, since 2019, the percentage of HHs with cash and savings has more than doubled (data not shown), another indicator of slight economic improvement within the county.

% of HHs with productive assets Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Spade/Axe 68% 64% 81% 71% 63% 52% 63% 58% 50% 64% Cell phone 25% 43% 19% 68% 38% 19% 30% 12% 38% 39% Engine-run grinding machine less 32% 44% 46% 54% 62% 33% 30% 56% 55% 49% than 30 minutes away Grain grinding tool 32% 68% 50% 30% 60% 52% 63% 58% 55% 49% Fishing kit 4% 59% 23% 14% 50% 7% 27% 38% 25% 27% Bicycle 12% 22% 8% 27% 14% 22% 20% 4% 8% 17%

ECONOMY 50

Cash/Saving 16% 21% 15% 31% 27% 31% 17% 24% 30% 25% Motorcycle/vehicle 8% 4% 4% 24% 4% 7% 7% 8% 3% 10% Wheelbarrow 4% 4% 4% 19% 2% 0% 0% 4% 3% 7% Electricity 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 2% Generator 4% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% Ox-plough 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Sewing machine 4% 0% 0% 6% 4% 0% 0% 4% 0% 3% Tractor 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Sum of access to productive assets 209% 330% 250% 357% 324% 223% 261% 266% 266% 294%

ECONOMY 51

SECTION 3. PEACE and GOVERNANCE

This section covers the subject of conflict resolution, migration, and governance. In particular, it reviews disputes over natural resources (chapter 12), hazards and safety (chapter 13), human dislocation & migration (chapter 14), community participation and local governance (chapter 15), and humanitarian & development aid (chapter 16).

12. NATURAL RESOURCES RELATED DISPUTES

The percentage of HHs reporting conflict in relation to natural resources has increased from 19% to 32% compared to last year [figures for Himodonge should be taken cautiously as only 2 people answered this section on disputes]

Conflicts over water and land Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY % of HHs aware of conflicts over 32% 24% 43% 8% 35% 31% 41% 40% 42% 25% water and land (19%) # of disputes during the last 3 1.8 1.7 2.0 1.5 1.8 1.3 1.4 1.7 1.4 1.6 months

Control over water is by far the most common source of dispute and seems to be quite a prominent issue in Lowoi. However, Hiyalla and Bur, the two payam characterized by cattle herding, show also signs of strong competition.

Source of disputes COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Use of water source Land boundary conflicts Livestock grazing on crops Stealing of crops and livestock Conflict involving women Land grabbing and selling Bush burning Cattle routes related Animal raiding crops Cutting of trees Land inheritance conflicts Eviction from farm land and wetlands Pending revenges without particular reason

In Imurok and Imurok conflicts seems to be mostly among community members, whereas in Bur and Lowoi, a significant number of disputes involves well known people residing in other communities.

Groups reportedly fighting Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY (who benefited from the dispute) Not sure who profited 50% 58% 100% 60% 72% 36% 58% 55% 40% 57% Some members of our village 50% 33% 0% 23% 28% 64% 33% 18% 50% 33% Some unknown people from other 0% 8% 0% 13% 6% 0% 8% 9% 20% 9% villages Some important well-known person 0% 25% 0% 13% 0% 0% 8% 18% 0% 9% from another village

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 52

The analysis of communities’ capacity to solve problems reveals that in comparison with other payams, Ifwotu has a more successful system of conflict management, whereas in Hiyalla 60% of households reported no conflict resolution mechanism whatsoever.

Conflict Resolution performance COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Most of the problem were addressed Some problems were addressed Not at all, none were addressed

Overall, in Torit County, there is a great mix of opinion when looking to the likelihood of future conflict. Once again, in Ifwotu people seems to share a positive view; on the other side of the spectrum, people in Himodonge seems more concerned that conflicts may continue (it is important to keep in mind that these views may be differently influenced by previous experience of conflicts – see next chapter)

% of HHs by likelihood of increase Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY of conflicts Less likely 60% 42% 0% 43% 28% 40% 33% 40% 40% 39% More or less the same likely 40% 25% 50% 27% 67% 40% 42% 30% 30% 38% More likely 0% 33% 50% 30% 6% 20% 25% 30% 30% 24%

Commonly, high level county administrator addresses disputes yet traditional leaders are also very often called upon to resolve conflict.

% of HHs by type of leader who Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY helps solving disputes High level administrative government (member of county 83% 67% 100% 73% 39% 73% 67% 82% 50% 66% administration) Nyampara 83% 58% 50% 47% 22% 64% 8% 45% 30% 42% Sub chief - Mukungu 67% 42% 100% 53% 17% 18% 67% 36% 30% 42% Boma chief 67% 17% 100% 27% 6% 9% 8% 27% 0% 20% Head Chief 17% 8% 50% 7% 0% 0% 0% 9% 0% 5% Ancestral Headman - Landlord 17% 0% 50% 13% 0% 9% 0% 0% 0% 6%

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 53

13. SAFETY and CRIMES

The communities of Torit were touched by the clashes erupted in 2016 to a different extent. It is important to keep that in mind as the reading of current events may reflect different previous experiences.

Clashes in the community among Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY armed forces in the last 3 years % of HHs aware of conflicts over 60% 32% 38% 40% 25% 48% 30% 21% 58% 39% water and land

The incidence of crimes during the last 12 months seems to be high, and were reported much more frequently compared to last year (data not shown). In particular: i) crime against property are recurrent – see theft and breaking into houses along with the stealing of cattle in the two communities of herd keepers (Hiyalla and Bur), especially during rain seasons when animal herds are closer to villages – ii) in Iyire and Lowoi the abduction of people is reported by a 35% of the population, and iii) there is a serious problem of security in Iyire and Ifwotu where in the latter a very concerning 60% of HHs report murder.

Types of hazard and crimes experienced in the last year COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% 350% Theft Murder Verbal threat Physical attack/assault House breaking Serious physical harm to child Violation of the right to freedom of movement or expression Abduction or disappearance of family member Sexual assault or rape Theft of livestock

When asked about the relationship between host community and IDPs, almost unanimously, HHs report no or very little tension with newcomers. However, the handful of HHs who do report serious tensions, mostly in Ifwotu and Himodonge, report the cause to be the limited or discriminatory access to basic goods and services (data not shown).

Cause of tension between host Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY community and returneed/IDPs Good, no tensions or very little 88% 89% 88% 96% 95% 93% 93% 96% 95% 93%

Not enough information 4% 4% 4% 1% 3% 4% 7% 0% 5% 3% Bad, there are serious tensions 8% 4% 8% 1% 0% 4% 0% 4% 0% 2% Fragile, there are some significant 0% 4% 0% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% tensions

Interestingly, however, in terms of general hazards, it is unanimously reported across Torit that the situation was worse a year ago, a suggestion of improvement over the last year.

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 54

HHs’ opinion over the overall Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY trend on hazards Before it was worse 92% 100% 100% 89% 96% 89% 96% 82% 95% 93%

It is getting worse in the last period 8% 0% 0% 11% 4% 11% 4% 18% 5% 7%

14. MIGRATION and IDPs

▪ The movement of people throughout Torit in 2019 seems to describe a situation of a timid recovery. Within the last year, the inflow of people has almost doubled compared to the year 2018, while the outflow numbers remained stable compared to before. There is great reason to believe that greater stability in security and economic conditions are incentivizing families to relocate or return to Torit, especially from refugee camps abroad. Stabilization is also apparent when reviewing the reasons for people’s departure where half of those leaving do so out of a desire. However, the extent of improvement should be viewed cautiously as 42% still report a lack of security or hunger as the reason for leaving – in Imurok and Ifwotu in particular. Furthermore, findings also suggest that some of those moving into Torit choose not to stay permanently perhaps as a result of limited economic means and difficulty in access to services such as education.

% and # of HHs by Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY migration status Natives residents 68% 82% 81% 49% 86% 85% 80% 96% 88% 75% (continuously since birth) Returnees (natives forced 8% 7% 15% 11% 7% 11% 13% 0% 10% 9% to leave temporarily) IDP/Relocated 24% 11% 4% 40% 7% 4% 7% 4% 3% 15% Returnees/IDPs/relocated 27% 14% 12% 46% 7% 15% 20% 4% 9% 21% more than 12 months ago Returnees/IDPs/relocated over the last 12 months: 5% 4% 8% 5% 7% 0% 0% 0% 3% 4% IDP/Returnee HHs # of HHs IDP/Returnee* 1,236 110 112 164 562 330 0 0 0 146 (in the last 12 months) (969) # of IDP/Returnee 7,418 people**(in the last 12 661 674 986 3,372 1,978 0 0 0 879 (5,816) months) *based on a total population of 35,000 HHs (RRC Torit). Figures are based on estimations, and should not be taken as exact or verified **Based on the assumption of 6 people per HHs, Figures are based on estimations, and should not be taken as exact or verified N.B. Numbers in brackets are data from 2019

The number of entire households of IDPs/Returnees18 (entire families who have returned to their place of origin, were displaced, or simply chose to relocate over the last 12 months) is estimated to be roughly 1,200 households (7,400 people), mostly located in Torit Town and in Hiyalla payam – the other payams are largely composed of

18 This figure is different from the total number of IDP/Returnee people, which is the combination of IDP/Returnee who settled as an entire independent household (shown here) and IDP/Returnee who joined local families (shown in the next pages).

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 55

native residents who have spent their entire life in their communities. Still, most people who moved into Torit county, including in Nyong, arrived several years ago. The returnees are a special subcategory, and it is important to note that, on the contrary, they are located mostly in rural payams.

While overall figures are very much similar to those registered one year ago, at the beginning of 2019, it is important to notice that among those who moved to Torit in the last year a significant share reported to be coming from “other countries or refugee camps”, most likely from the camps located in Uganda or Kenya.

Origins of Retornees and IDPs - historic vs recent trend returned more than 1 year ago returned less than 1 year ago IDP (relocated/displaced) more than 1 year ago IDP (relocated/displaced) less than 1 year ago

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% In the same county In a very far way place, but still from the same country In a community outside the county, 2 or 3 days of walk In another country or in a refugee camp

Moreover, confirming the overall improvement of conditions, the share of entire households of IDPs/Returnees that returned or relocated for reasons other than conflicts and hunger has increased significantly from 30% last year (data not shown) to 45% this year.

Reason for relocating (Returnees and IDPs) COUNTY

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Avoiding direct conflicts/clashes Avoiding insecurity Hunger in the previous place of living Seeking better economic opportunity Marriage Accessing better services like school, health care

It is important to emphasize that a significant share of returnees and IDPs are people who have not completed their journey or have not still decided whether to settle or return to their previous place. In particular, the share of people who have returned from the refugees camps but later went back is very large (see final section on returnees)

Intention to relocate further in the next months (Returnees/IDPs) COUNTY

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% No, I have the intention to stay here For the time being I do not know Yes I want to leave this place Yes, I think / hope to go back from where I came

The number of individual IDPs/Returnees (people who joined local families over the last 12 months as they were displaced from their former location, because they returned to their place of origin, or simply because they chose to relocate) is estimated to be approximately of 25,000, hosted by around 9,600 local families. This may very likely represent an overestimation due to a habit to report the presence of IDPs to seek support (aid fatigue). The higher is the number of members hosted by a family the more likely is the probability that such cohabitation is not chosen but rather imposed by the lack of means to settle as an autonomous households.

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 56

% of HHs Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY Hosting IDPs (people arrived in the 28% 39% 46% 35% 12% 33% 23% 12% 28% 28% last 12 months) 10,026 # of HHs hosting IDPs 579 1,236 986 4,019 577 563 552 226 1,289 (3,782) average # of IDPs per hosting HH 3 3 2 2 4 3 2 2 3 3 26,163 total # of IDPs hosted by local HH 1,902 3,707 2,152 9,913 2,019 1,440 1,025 527 3,480 (12,137)

Overall, the inflow of people has almost doubled compared to last year. From the total of 19,000 moving into Torit in 2019 (almost 6,000 individuals with their entire household and 12,000 individuals hosted in families), this number has increased to an estimated 33,000 (7,500 individuals with their HHs and 26,000 hosted in families) in 2020. These figures indicate greater stability in security and economic conditions which may be incentivizing families to relocate or return to Torit.

Moreover, a large section of these individual IDPs/Returnees is comprised of people relocating from close-by areas, conceivably within the state of Torit, many of whom may have chosen to move out of their desire. Finally, around 2/5 of these people reportedly come from another country or from a refugee camp.

Place of origin of IDPs/Returnees Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY people

A very far way place, but still from 14% 45% 17% 37% 43% 33% 29% 33% 36% 33% the same country

The same county 43% 27% 58% 23% 29% 22% 43% 67% 18% 32%

Another country or in a refugee 14% 9% 17% 13% 14% 33% 14% 0% 27% 16% camp A community outside the county, 2 29% 9% 8% 20% 14% 11% 14% 0% 18% 15% or 3 days of walk Is a person from the same village who moved away and just recently 0% 9% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% came back

Shifting the focus of the analysis to the outflow of people occurred over the last 12 months, 22,000 people left Torit . This is very similar to the number found in 2019 (see in brackets). .

% of HHs Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY whose members have migrated in 28% 39% 27% 32% 16% 22% 20% 23% 28% 26% the last 12 months Average % of members who left 31% 32% 33% 31% 26% 32% 22% 22% 30% 29%

Average # of family members who 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 left 21,590 Total members who migrated 1,302 3,257 1,069 9,684 1,820 918 999 1,032 2,900 (18,954)

There is also some indication of stabilization when reviewing the reasons for people’s departure. Half of people seem to be leaving out of their desire to do so. However, lack of security or hunger is still reported by 42% of people. Imurok deserves particular attention, for virtually all people departing seems to be doing so because

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 57

forced. Moreover, half of HHs in Ifwotu are migrating due to lack of security which confirms the increased levels of crime noted in chapter 14.

Reason for migrating (leaving) to another area COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Other reasons Family reasons Lack of employment Lack of security Hunger

With regard to the refugees, in Torit families claim that around 40% of the population has left since the crisis of 2016.

% of HHs that left for the refugee camps 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY

Few families report that the majority of refugees came back. Most of the population think that at least half of the population has come back so far.

Share of the population that Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY returned Most of the them 20% 4% 28% 16% 16% 11% 3% 16% 18% 15% Many of them, the majority 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 0% 10% 4% 0% 4% Half of them 48% 48% 28% 43% 29% 37% 24% 40% 28% 36% Less than half of them 8% 15% 16% 17% 20% 19% 31% 16% 18% 18% Even less, very few 20% 30% 24% 19% 30% 33% 31% 24% 38% 27%

Equally important, is that a large share of the population (45%) believes that half or more came back in some moment but later left again. This is consistent with the finding that the number of people returning or moving to Torit are being hosted in families i.e. come alone as individuals rather than their entire HH which suggests that they choose not to stay permanently or do not have the economic means to do so. In fact, when asked why HHs do not return permanently the main reasons given are hunger, lack of basic services (education in particular) and insecurity (data not shown).

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 58

Share of the population that Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY returned but later left again Most of the them 8% 0% 8% 7% 2% 0% 3% 0% 3% 4% Many of them, the majority 4% 11% 0% 1% 2% 0% 0% 4% 0% 2% Half of them 48% 44% 40% 43% 39% 22% 41% 28% 33% 39% Less than half of them 8% 19% 24% 18% 23% 33% 3% 24% 10% 18% Even less, very few 32% 26% 28% 30% 35% 44% 52% 44% 54% 37%

Likely, there appear to be n tension between returnees/IDPs and the host communities.

Cause of tension between host Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY community and returneed/IDPs Good, no tensions or very little 91% 92% 92% 98% 98% 96% 100% 96% 100% 97% Fragile, there are some significant 0% 4% 0% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% tensions Bad, there are serious tensions 9% 4% 8% 1% 0% 4% 0% 4% 0% 2%

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 59

15. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION and LOCAL GOVERNANCE ▪ ▪ Mutual help is a key dynamic in a context like South Sudan. In Torit, there is a noticeable level of reciprocal support and habit of community contribution. More than half the population are associated in groups, the main reason given being for mutual help. The same percentage are actively engaged in community work. Traditional leaders, as is common knowledge for South Sudan, undertake an active role in coordinating community work and (although now to a lesser extent) in resolving disputes (chapter 7). On the whole, HHs have an more intense interaction with local leaders than official government authorities.

Exchange of gifts is common practice in Torit, especially in Iyire. As mentioned in chapter 8, “gifts”, which are often reciprocated, should be seen as informal safety nets. As expected this mutualistic relationship are less common in urban settings, as in Torit Town

Exchange of gifts among community members COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes, it occurred recently Yes, some time ago occurred the last time It occurs very seldom No, it almost never occurs

More than half the population of Torit are associated in a group. When asked the important factors holding the group together besides the report of wanting to help each other, sharing of land and assets are also important factors. Interestingly, family bonds are not as an important factor in Kudo as it is Nyong. In Ifwotu, the payam with most reported crimes, HHs are mostly associated with income generating/support groups much less for generosity and more for practical issues such as sharing land.

Membership in association and Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY reason holding the group % of HHs associated in self- 52% 57% 54% 69% 62% 48% 37% 46% 38% 55% help/income generation groups

Mutual Help 19% 61% 48% 46% 86% 79% 85% 76% 85% 66% Sharing of land 75% 67% 71% 44% 76% 74% 73% 71% 55% 64% Share of inputs, tools, seeds 44% 56% 33% 48% 69% 74% 65% 48% 64% 56% Family/personal relationships 31% 33% 29% 54% 45% 32% 19% 43% 36% 38% Living close to one another 31% 39% 29% 30% 31% 37% 31% 33% 42% 33% Other reasons 19% 6% 10% 6% 7% 11% 4% 0% 3% 6%

Half of the population reports having participated to community works. Traditional leaders are the main propellers in the coordination of community works

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 60

Participation to community works during the Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY last 12 months and leadership of process % of HHs who contributed to community work 54% 61% 54% 34% 39% 65% 57% 58% 67% 50%

Nyampara 77% 59% 50% 67% 68% 53% 47% 60% 69% 62%

Sub chief - Mukungu 38% 53% 57% 63% 68% 65% 65% 47% 65% 60% Boma chief 8% 35% 43% 48% 32% 35% 35% 27% 38% 35%

Head Chief 0% 6% 0% 15% 18% 12% 6% 13% 4% 9% Ancestral Headman - Landlord 23% 0% 7% 11% 5% 6% 6% 0% 4% 7% Others 0% 6% 7% 7% 0% 12% 12% 0% 0% 5%

Teachers 0% 0% 0% 15% 14% 0% 6% 0% 0% 5% Religious leader 8% 0% 7% 7% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3%

In kind or monetary contributions to community activities is also common, though to a less extent in Lowoi. HHs in Kudo are much more likely to contribute in kind or in monetary form for community activities.

Contribution (in kind or monetary) to community activity COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Yes, it occurred recently Yes, some time ago occurred the last time It occurs very seldom No, it almost never occurs

Community meetings occur frequently and involve a considerable section of the population. Concerns related to education and access and management of water are by far the most discussed issues in all communities. Not surprising as these are the issues that communities would most like the government to address (chapter 2). In Iyire, where crime levels are high, employment is also a significant topic of discussion while in the livestock rearing communities of Bur and Hiyalla, issues regarding cattle are of great significance.

Call of public meeting and issues Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY discussed % of HHs aware of public meeting in 67% 82% 73% 57% 65% 63% 79% 65% 61% 66% the last 3 months

Education 94% 74% 84% 85% 73% 76% 82% 80% 87% 81% Water 56% 65% 84% 85% 92% 71% 82% 87% 70% 79% Agriculture / farming inputs / Seeds 44% 61% 53% 51% 62% 82% 41% 60% 70% 58% Security 31% 35% 21% 32% 27% 41% 18% 20% 39% 30% Cattle issues 0% 43% 5% 4% 51% 24% 23% 47% 9% 23% Employment 19% 22% 21% 32% 14% 29% 23% 13% 39% 24%

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 61

Others 19% 13% 11% 9% 3% 18% 5% 7% 22% 11% Land issues 13% 9% 16% 9% 11% 12% 9% 7% 0% 9%

Local leaders play an important role in leading community meetings but so do NGOs and, notably, government officials. It is worth noticing that attendance rate is similar regardless of who calls for meeting (data not shown).

Who called for the community meeting COUNTY Local clan leader Iyire Lowoi NGO Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Government official Nyong Himodonge Other person Bur Ifwotu Religious leader 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% 180%

The role of administrative authority is confirmed to be minor compared to traditional small-scale government. People interact mainly with local leaders, being Nyampara or Mukungu or sector leaders, the latter being historically responsible for the delivery of humanitarian assistance.

Interaction with local leaders over the last three months Nyampara or Mukungu COUNTY Iyire Sector leader Lowoi Landlord Kudo Imurok Opinion leader Hiyalla Nyong Chairman of farmer groups Himodonge supported by NGO Bur Chairman of informal farmer Ifwotu groups Administrative authority 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

Finally, by looking at the direct participation of community members in the different types and levels of the government, there is little involvement in public bodies, especially in administrative authorities.

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 62

Direct participation of HH's member in government or public/community bodies

COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% No particular role Teacher Nyampara or Mukungu Sector leader Landlord Administrative authority Chairman or committee member of informal farmer group Opinion leader Chairman of committee member of a formal farmer group supported by NGO

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 63

16. HUMANITARIAN & DEVELOPMENT AID (IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS)

In previous chapters, in regard to farming and livestock as well as to social services, the “structural” coverage of the humanitarian system was reviewed in detail in a sectorial fashion. It is important, nevertheless, to gain an overall reading of where efforts were focused in the last year. The data shows that support to Imurok seems to have increased, while the focus on Nyong is weakening.

Humanitarian assistance over last year COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% 180% Agricultural inputs i.e. seeds and or toold Other support Health /medicines Nutrition (e.g. Blanket supplementary feeding, etc) Food in the Schools Veterinary service Food distribution or food in exchange for work Non Food Items (kitchen sets, blankets, Khanga) Cash and or cash in exchange for work Advise from extension service Fishing gear School fees /uniforms

There is no question that, in spite of a lot of complex and unrealistic requirements on accountability to affected populations, the communication with the community is largely ineffective.

Communication and transparency Ifwotu Bur Himodonge Nyong Hiyalla Imurok Kudo Lowoi Iyire COUNTY %HHs with clear knowledge over the criteria 4% 18% 36% 15% 18% 19% 17% 20% 18% 18% applied for the selection of beneficiaries

Focusing on more resilient-oriented interventions, it is obvious the focus on Torit Town, (more puzzling that one on Himodonge, yet very visible also in agriculture) and the little attention given to vocational training programs.

Techincal and Vocational Education and Training over the last year COUNTY Iyire Lowoi Kudo Imurok Hiyalla Nyong Himodonge Bur Ifwotu 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Other practical training Other adult education Other training provided by NGO FFS (Farmer Field School) training VSLA (Village Saving and Loan Association) training Accelerated education Income-generation/entrepreneurship training One-year vocational training

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 64

AVSI Foundation P.O. Box 373 Juba Raha - Juba - South Sudan [email protected]

20158 Milano — Via Legnone, 4 — Italy Tel + 39 02 6749881 Fax +39 0267490056 [email protected]

PEACE AND GOVERNANCE 65