Rapid Protection Assessments Summary Report
Danish Refugee Council Southwest Cameroon
December 2020
Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
Table of Content
1. Introduction ...... 4 1.2 Methodology ...... 4 1.3 Information on Key Informants (KIs) ...... 5
2. Communities’ General Profile ...... 6 2.1 Pre and post crisis population movements ...... 6 2.2 Vulnerability profile ...... 7 2.2.1 Displacement profile ...... 7 2.2.2 Vulnerability types ...... 7
3. Access to services ...... 8 3.1 Education ...... 8 3.2 Health ...... 9 3.3 Access to markets ...... 9 3.4 WASH ...... 10 3.4.1 Water points ...... 10 3.4.2 Latrines ...... 11 3.5 Civil documentation ...... 11 3.5.1 Birth registration ...... 11 3.5.2 Property or land ownership ...... 12 3.5.3 Barriers to accessing civil documentation ...... 13 3.6 Security ...... 14 3.6.1 Incidents reporting ...... 15 3.7 Access to humanitarian aid ...... 16
4. Housing, Land and Property (HLP) ...... 16 4.1 Types of shelters ...... 16 4.2 Incidents related to land and property ...... 17
5. Social cohesion in communities ...... 18
6. Population Movements ...... 19 6.2.1 Pressure to return to place of origin ...... 19 6.2.2 Reasons to stay ...... 19
7. Conclusions ...... 20 7.2 Main results ...... 20 7.3 Priority humanitarian needs ...... 21
2/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
Acronyms BIR Bataillon d’Intervention Rapide CDC Cameroon Development Corporation FGD Focus Group Discussion IDP Internally Displaced Person HLP Housing, Land and Property KI Key Informants NSAG Non-State Armed Group NW North West RPA Rapid Protection Assessment SSF State Security Forces SW South West UASC Unaccompanied and Separated Children
3/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
1. Introduction
The Rapid Protection Assessment (RPA) is conducted by DRC when entering a new community to quickly assess protection needs and trends at the community level to inform the appropriate programme package that DRC will implement in the community. In particular, the RPA enables to have a clear picture of the evolution of needs in a particular community since the beginning of the crisis. The RPA was accompanied by Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) for an all-encompassing overview and more complete analysis.
DRC Rapid Protection Assessment (RPA) locations in Fako and Meme divisions
1.2 Methodology Data for the RPA was collected through Key Informants (KIs) who answered to a questionnaire administered by DRC protection staff. KIs were selected based on their knowledge of the community and included individuals from different age and gender groups as well as from both the host and IDP communities. Per community, DRC interviewed on average nine individuals. DRC protection staff collected the data through Kobo. The current report covers 32 communities, in the Fako (28 communities) and Meme (4 communities) divisions. The surveys were administered between November 2018 and October 2020. Data in the current report is presented at a sub-division level.
4/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
Number of assessed communities per sub- division
Muyuka 10
Buea 9
Tiko 5
Mbonge 4
Limbe 1 2
West Coast 1
Limbe 3 1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
1.3 Information on Key Informants (KIs) In order to assess the protection situation in the SW region of Cameroon, DRC conducted interviews with 315 Key Informants (KIs) located in seven sub-divisions: Buea, Limbe 1, Limbe 3, Mbonge, Muyuka, Tiko and West Coast. The sites in the communities were predominantly always accessible (82%) with only 2% of the site that were continuously inaccessible (due to geological or human factors), most of the latter located in the Buea sub-division.
How accessible is the site?
100% 82%
50% 16% 2% 0% Always accessible Inaccessible during the rainy season Always inaccessible
Key Informant by gender Among these 315 KIs, 137 are female (43%) and 178 male (57%). A majority of KIs were farmers (37%). 7% were businessmen or businesswomen, and 6% were teachers. Female Among the 34% ‘other’ category, the 43% professions/occupations that were notably represented Male among KIs are traders, students, retired people, pastors, 57% quarter heads and housewives.
5/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
Key Informants Professions Business men or women: 7%
Other: 34%
Farmers: 37%
Trader: 3% Teacher: 6% Housewive Student: Retired: 3% Pastors: 3% s: 2% 3% Quarter heads: 2%
2. Communities’ General Profile
2.1 Pre and post crisis population movements Among the communities, a lot of population movements can be witnessed. Only 3% of KIs state that the population at their site has been stable. In contrast, 46% of the KIs report that the population in their community has increased, and 50% reports that it has decreased, evidencing the displacement of people from some communities towards other communities. Important discrepancies among sub-divisions can be observed. For instance, 100% of KIs in the West Coast sub-division (one community) have perceived a population increase. Similarly, 92% of KIs in the one community of the Limbe 3 sub-division have perceived an increase in the population. On the contrary, 89% of KIs in sites of the Mbonge sub-division have observed a decrease in the population.
How has the site population evolved? 100% 100% 92% 89%
80% 67% 61% 61% 60% 52% 46% 46% 50% 37% 40% 33% 20% 13% 20% 8% 9% 2% 2% 2% 4% 1% 3% 1% 0% Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Coast Total
Increased / Increasing Stable Decreased / Decreasing Don't know
6/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
2.2 Vulnerability profile
2.2.1 Displacement profile KIs in all communities observed a mix of population types present within their What population categories are present on communities with high levels of host community the sites? individuals (90%) as well as Internally Displaced 100% 90% Persons (IDPs) (84%). 84% 80% An average of 45% of KIs attest that IDP returnees 60% are present within their communities. This 45% evidences the many movement patterns within 40% the Southwest region with the vast majority of communities welcoming displaced households 20% 1% and seeing pendular movements from households 0% who leave and return when the security situation Host Community IDPs IDP returnees Refugees allows. In addition, 1% of KIs indicate that refugees are present in their community. These KIs came from Limbe 3 and Muyuka sub-divisions. These refugees could be Nigerian refugees who live in the NW and SW regions but are possibly also IDPs, as there is sometimes confusion communities of the difference between IDPs and refugees.
2.2.2 Vulnerability types Other factors of vulnerabilities have been measured by the KIs in the different sites. Average percentage of different vulnerable groups Displacement appears as the biggest present on site vulnerability factor in almost all the sub- divisions, with an estimated average of 32 Unaccompanied and Separated… 9 percent of the site populations being Elderly People (More than 60 years) 16 internally displaced. The percentage was Pregnant women or breastfeeding 15 highest in Muyuka sub-division (40%) and Female headed household 24 lowest in Limbe 1 (15%). People with disabilities 9 The second biggest group in the seven sub- Internally Displaced Persons 32 divisions concerned by the RPA is an 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 estimated average of 24% of female headed households, which was as high as 32% in Limbe 3. Furthermore, the KIs estimate that 16% of the population in their community is over 60 years old and 15% are pregnant or lactating women (PLW). An astonishing 9% of the population is estimated to be Unaccompanied or Separated Children (UASC). Target communities in the Limbe 3 sub-division reported the highest rates of vulnerable groups present in their community.
7/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
3. Access to services
In order to obtain a picture of the situation before the crisis compared to the present context, the RPA includes several questions on access to different types of services.
3.1 Education The evolution of operational primary schools in the communities is a concrete example of the crisis’ impact on services. Education has been used as a political instrument, which is both, at the origin and at the core of the crisis in the NW and SW regions. Hence, 87 percent of KIs reported that there were primary schools operational in their communities before the crisis, as opposed to 27 percent in the present days.
Were/are there operational primary schools here? 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 90 81 78 78 80
60 52
40 20 20 5 3 0 Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Coast
Yes Before Yes Present
The sub-divisions of Buea, Mbonge and Muyuka have particularly been affected by primary school closures during the crisis. The rural subdivisions of Mbonge and Muyuka have been particularly affected by the crisis, including the presence of many NSAGs. The military has therefore also an important presence in these sub- divisions, and many public infrastructures, including schools, have become military bases in these sub-division.
8/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
3.2 Health Health facilities closures also illustrate the repercussion of the crisis on health services. KIs have reported that 70 percent of the sites hosted a functional health facility prior to the crisis. This is now as low as 30 percent, which indicates a closure of more than half of the clinics that existed prior to the crisis. Percentage evolution of open Health Clinics per sub-division
100 100 100 100 100 80 88 80 60 73 73 66 64 66 40 58 20 2 17 0 Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Coast
Before Present
As with primary schools, Mbonge and Muyuka sub-divisions are affected the most. In Mbonge, in particular, only 2 percent of the KIs report that their community currently has a health clinic, as opposed to 64 percent before the crisis. The impact of the crisis on the Mbonge sub-division’s health clinics can also be explained by the fact that is one of the sub-divisions in the SW region most affected by the crisis, leading to lower accessibility and higher insecurity. Hospitals have also been used as military bases by parties to the conflict. Nonetheless, the number of health clinics has increased slightly in the sub-division of Limbe 1, which is one of the most stable sub-divisions notwithstanding the crisis, in particular due to a lower presence of NSAGs.
3.3 Access to markets The number of weekly markets presently open has also decreased in comparison to the number of functioning weekly markets before the crisis. All seven sub-divisions covered by this RPA had a higher rate of existing weekly markets before the crisis. On average, 68 percent of weekly markets took place on sites before the crisis against 54 percent in current times. Muyuka sub-division has seen the biggest decrease with 68% of KIs reporting weekly markets before the crisis versus 43% now.
9/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
Weekly market before and currently 100% 90% 28% 80% 40% 50% 50% 43% 70% 57% 54% 68% 66% 68% 60% 87% 87% 89% 50% 98% 100% 100% 40% 72% 30% 60% 50% 50% 56% 20% 42% 45% 32% 34% 32% 10% 13% 13% 11% 0% 2% 0% 0% Before Now Before Now Before Now Before Now Before Now Before Now Before Now Before Now Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Coast Total
No Yes
In addition, 66% of DRC’s KIs consider that there are not enough available goods in the communities’ markets. In the sub-divisions of Limbe 3 and West Coast (one community in each sub-division) however, KIs predominantly consider that there are enough available goods at the market. This can be explained by the fact that both subdivisions have quite a stable situation notwithstanding the crisis and only include two assessed communities. West Coast is the subdivision closest to the sea, which enables trade as well as favours the development of economic activities. Amongst the communities that do not have access to a market, 65 percent are served by street vendors according to KIs. This means that 35 percent of the sites are not served by weekly markets or street vendors, potentially rendering the access to basic groceries arduous.
3.4 WASH
3.4.1 Water points 42 percent of DRC’s KIs reported that their community does not have access to a functioning water point. Certain sub-divisions, such as the Mbonge sub-division, have up to 66 percent of KIs who have reported the absence of a functioning water point. The rurality of this sub-division, as well as the lack of maintenance of one of the main sources of water, explains the high number of KIs reporting the absence of a functioning water point. In the more urban communities, such as Limbe 1 or Limbe 3, the number of KIs reporting an access to a functioning water point rises up to 87 percent and 83 percent, respectively.
10/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
Does the site have access to a functioning water point? 100% 90% 80% 34% 52% 55% 70% 63% 58% 60% 78% 87% 83% 50% 40% 30% 66% 48% 45% 20% 37% 42% 10% 22% 13% 17% 0% Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Coast Total
No Yes
3.4.2 Latrines In contrast, it is reported that 81 percent of the sites have functioning latrines. It should be noted that the question did not ask whether there was more than one functioning latrine, whether the latrine met quality standards, or whether the number of functioning latrines is sufficient for the population of the community.
3.5 Civil documentation
3.5.1 Birth registration Only 40 percent of DRC’s KI have reported that birth registration documents are widespread in their communities. 53 percent says that 50 percent or less of the population have birth registration documents. 22 percent of the KIs have declared that very few people have birth registration. The absence of health facilities where women can give birth, the frequent displacement of households during armed attacks, as well as the refusal of NSAGs to allow individuals to obtain civil documentation considering it to be a legitimisation of the central government, have resulted in a lack or loss of birth certificates. Individuals without birth registration are at higher risk of abuse, violence, trafficking, and arbitrary arrest. They are also exposed to statelessness.
11/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
In this site, do most people have birth registration documents?
100% 3% 0% 10% 8% 9% 9% 7% 90% 4% 10% 27% 6% Don't know 80% 25% 36% 22% 10% 34% 70% 7% 21% 14% Very few people have them 60% 14% 7% 7% 17% 18% 50% 100% 17% 25% Only a limited number of people have 40% 17% 19% them 30% 60% 56% 53% It's about half and half 20% 18% 33% 40% 10% 25% 14% They are widespread 0% Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Total Coast
3.5.2 Property or land ownership Likewise, an average of 39 percent of DRC’s KIs underline that very few people possess property or land ownership documents. 70 percent consider that less than half of the population in their community has access to property or land ownership documents. Less than one KI out of five (17%) considers that property or land ownership documents are widespread. In Mbonge in particular, only 2 percent of KIs have reported that property or land ownership documents are widespread.
In this site, do most people have property or land ownership documents? 100% 10% 8% 9% 13% 19% 22% 14% 27% 17% 80% 26% 8% 11% 13% 50% 21% 0% 39% 60% 18% 7% 58% 13% 33% 19% 33% 40% 15% 20% 14% 19% 16% 20% 40% 14% 33% 25% 33% 26% 6% 19% 10% 17% 0% 2% Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Coast Total
They are widespread It's about half and half Only a limited number of people have them Very few people have them Don't know
12/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
3.5.3 Barriers to accessing civil documentation 66 percent of the KIs in the SW region correlate the low rate of What barriers do people face in accessing civil documentation with the high documentation? documents fees. Half of the KIs also consider that the high Don't know 13% transportation costs impede People don’t know the procedures 33% individuals to access People are scared to go to government documentation services. 38 38% services percent of the KIs mention the fear of individuals to resort to The fees for documents are too high 66% government services as well as The transportation costs are too high 50% the ignorance of procedures (33 to get to services percent). 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% KIs have identified restrictions on freedom of movement as the highest risk that undocumented individuals face (mentioned by 91 percent of the KIs). Harassment by security forces is also frequently enumerated by 81 percent of the KIs. KIs also report that lack of civil documentation is a barrier to accessing services (38%) as well as in accessing land or property (15%). In addition, 63 percent of the KIs remark that the What risks do undocumented crisis has increased the frequency of issues, and people face? hence heightened the risks, related to lack of civil 100% 91% documentation. 90% 81% 80% KIs also underline that the main barrier to freedom 70% of movements that IDPs face is the lack of civil 60% documentation, as cited by 87 percent of KIs. Other 50% 38% 40% barriers to freedom of movement mentioned by KIs 30% are predominantly related to security matters, 15% 20% including state and NSAG checkpoints (65% and 10% 3% 0% 0% 12%), curfews (46%), and armed conflict (35%). 14% also mentioned the risk of sexual harassment or sexual exploitation.
13/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
What are the main barriers to freedom of movement that IDPs face?
Do not want to say 1% Do not know 4% Natural hazards (e.g. landslides, flooding etc.) 0% Curfews 46% Risk of sexual harassment or sexual exploitation 14% Risk of forced recruitment 2% Direct armed conflict 35% NSAG checkpoints 12% State checkpoints 65% Lack of civil documentation 87%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
3.6 Security On average, 71 percent of KIs report that there are insecurity incidents in their communities. The Limbe 3 sub- division appears as the only sub-division whereby security incidents are low (25 percent). This can be explained by the fact that Limbe 3 is the sub-division (one assessed community included) that has been least affected by the crisis, in part due to the important number of state actors present in the sub-division as well as of an existing military base, which prevents trespassing of NSAGs.
Are there any incidents of insecurity here e.g. criminality, violence, threats?
100% 2%0% 7%0% 0% 0% 1%0% 0%1% 0% 1%0% 17% 30% 32% 25% 24% 28% 80% 44%
60% 58% 93% 40% 68% 68% 74% 75% 71% 56% 20% 25% 0% Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Coast Total
Yes No Don't know Don't want to say
14/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
When asked about the main Main types of hazards types of security hazards in their community, 46% Don't know 23% mentioned arbitrary arrests, Forced recruitment into armed groups 3% 38% physical violence, 36% arbitrary executions or Arbitrary executions/murder 36% murders, and 26% abductions. Abductions/disappearances 26% KIs find that incidents have Arbitrary arrests 46% generally increased since the Physical violence 38% beginning of the crisis (66 Threats 42% percent).
Discrimination against certain groups 13%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
3.6.1 Incidents reporting Victims of crime or insecurity primarily report the latter events to traditional leaders according to 53 percent of the KIs. Victims then confide in other sources to talk about crimes or insecurity (other sources are mentioned by 40 percent of the KIs). These other sources encompass NSAGs’ members. Indeed, NSAG having taken over the leadership in many communities, people talk to these new leader figures when confronted to a crime or to insecurity. Different State Security Forces including the police, the gendarmerie and the military are only brought up by approximately one tenth or less of the KIs.
Who do people here talk to if they are victims of crime or insecurity?
Don't know 6%
Other 40%
Gendarmarie 5%
Police 13%
Military 2%
State local authorities 11%
Traditional leader 53%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
15/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
3.7 Access to humanitarian aid Although discrepancies between sub-divisions are significant, 40 percent of KIs reported that their communities have received support from NGOs before. In Mbonge and West Coast, 100% of KIs confirmed that they had received support, whereas none of the KIs from the sites located in the Limbe 3 sub-division reported humanitarian assistance. Indeed, a majority of the IDPs that have moved to the Limbe 3 sub-division are well-established and less vulnerable than in other sub-divisions. Have people here received support Kind of NGO support from NGOs?
100% 4% 7% 0% 1% 4% 0% 3% Don't know 1% 17% 18% 20% 0% 22% 80% 39% 40% Other 77% 60% 100% 100% 83% School kits 3% 40% 78% 73% 73% 60% 57% 20% Dignity kits 17% 0% 0% 0% Hygiene items 33%
Shelter items 37%
No Yes Don’t know 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
KIs showcase that NGO support has included distribution of shelter items (37%), hygiene kits (33%), or dignity kits (17%). Have you had any negative consequences from receiving Nonetheless, 77 percent of NGO support was reported as “other”, NGO support? which included food distribution, protection activities, as well as medical care. 2% A vast majority of KIs (84 percent) declare their community has 14% Yes not suffered negative consequences from receiving NGO support. Nevertheless, 2 percent of the KIs consider that there have been No negative consequences from receiving NGO support. This Don't know 84% particularly concerns beneficiaries who consider that they have been left out by NGOs, and did not receive as much help as other individuals.
4. Housing, Land and Property (HLP)
4.1Types of shelters 76 percent of DRC KIs report that IDPs in their community stay with the host communities. However, 56 percent of the KIs also note that some IDPs live in rented shelter, 28 percent in tents and 24 percent in collective informal shelters.
16/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
What kind of shelter are most IDPs now occupying? 97% 100% 100% 89% 76% 77% 76% 80% 72% 73% 73% 67% 60% 60% 52% 56% 50% 50% 48% 49% 39% 40% 32% 27% 28% 24% 25% 25% 22% 24% 20% 18% 20% 14% 13% 7% 3% 0% 0% 0% 2% 3%0% 0%0% 0% Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Coast Average 1 Rented shelter 2 Collective informal shelter 3 Staying with host population 4 Tent 5 Don't know
IDPs occupying tents mainly present in more rural areas, such as in the sub-division of Mbonge (as reported by 48 percent of KIs) and of Muyuka (as revealed by 49 percent of the KIs). In West Coast, in particular, IDPs live in Cameroon Development Corporation (CDC) camps, a private company’s camps.
4.2 Incidents related to land and property 43 percent of DRC KIs from all seven sub-divisions report hazards concerning land and property are related to theft or confiscation of the latter and 40 percent to their destruction. In addition, 21 percent of the KIs mention robbery or banditry on the roads as one of the hazards affecting land and property in the SW region of Cameroon. KIs also consider that land occupied by armed groups or armed forces (15%) as well as reduced land available because of the conflict (12%) impacts land and property of communities in the seven sub- divisions covered by the RPA.
What kind of hazards exist now that affect land and property?
Don't want to say 1%
Don't know 28%
Destruction of properties 40%
Reduced land available because of conflict 12%
Land occupied by armed groups or armed forces 15%
Robbery or banditry on the roads 21%
Theft or confiscation of properties 43%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%
In general, incidents related to land and property are considered to have increased in comparison to before the crisis by 43 percent of the KIs. Nonetheless, 27 percent of the KIs report that the number of incidents related to land and property remained stable notwithstanding the protracted crisis. Land and property incidents perpetrators are reported as state authorities by 45% of KIs, 17% by armed groups and 18% by civilian criminals.
17/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
5. Social cohesion in communities
With regards the relation between IDPs and host communities, the outcome of the assessment is Are there any kind of tensions between quite positive as 82 percent of KIs report that IDPs and host communities here? 100% 1% 0% there are no tensions between IDPs and host 6% 7% 8% 2%5% 10% 4% 3% 19% 14% communities in the sites they cover for the 80% 18% 20%
purpose of the RPA. 60% 58% 100% Nonetheless, it is important to note that 14 93% 89% 40% 76% 73% 76% 82% percent of the KIs do mention tensions between 20% IDPs and host communities. In the sub-division of 33% Limbe 3 in particular, 58% of KIs observe 0% tensions between IDPs and host communities. This number is of approximately 20% in the sub- divisions of Buea, Limbe 1 and Tiko. In the West- No Yes Don’t know Coast sub-division, tensions between IDPs and host communities are inexistent according to KIs. 62 percent of the KIs Reasons for tensions between IDPs and host communities mentioned that tensions arise from conflict over Don't want to say 2% distributions of food, but Don't know 7% also from conflicts over Conflicts over access to services e.g. health payment of rent (51 9% and eduction percent), distribution of Conflicts over distribution of NFIs 18% NFIs (18 percent), from access to farm land (16 Conflict over distributions of food 62% percent) and from access Conflicts over payment of rent 51% to services such as health or education services (9 Conflicts over access to farm land 16% percent). 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
18/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
6. Population Movements
6.2.1 Pressure to return to Have IDPs here been pressured to return to place of origin their place of origin? In terms of population movements, a vast Yes, they received majority of KIs (92 percent) consider that 4%3%1% threats/pressure from IDPs have not been pressured by NSAGs, by state authorities state authorities or by traditional leaders to Yes, they received threats/pressure from return to their place of origin. non-state groups In the sub-divisions of Limbe 1, Mbonge, and No, they haven't received any pressure West Coast in particular, 100 percent of KIs 92% have reported that no IDP has been Don't know pressured to return to their place of origin.
6.2.2 Reasons to stay 26 percent of KIs on average consider that all IDPs in the site they cover for the purpose of this RPA want to return. However, 51 percent of KIs believe that some (41%) or most (10%) IDPs do not want to return to their place of origin. This percentage was highest in West Coast, where 75% reported that some (50%) or most (25%) IDPs do not want to return. Buea, Muyuka and Tiko sub-divisions reported the hightest rates of KIs indicating that all IDPs in their community want to return when the situation allows. This highlights the lasting impact the conflict will have on community dynamics in the SW region.
Are there some IDPs who would prefer not to return and want to move here permanently? 100% 28% 22% 21% 20% 24% 25% 80% 50% 11% 15% 0% 60% 30% 27% 36% 8% 50% 40% 67% 56% 36% 33% 39% 20% 33% 25% 14% 10% 0% 3% 8% 0% 8% Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Coast
Yes, most IDPs here don't want to return Yes, some IDPs here don't want to return No, all the IDPs here want to return Don't know
The predominant reason (57%) why IDPs might want to stay where they are relates to the security situation (100% in Limbe 3). 36 percent of KIs mentioned IDP want to stay because the security situation is better in the host community and 21 percent mentioned that the want to stay because of ongoing insecurity in their place of origin. Family reasons are also stated by 12 percent of KIs, as well as the greater number of economic opportunities (11%) and the better access to natural resources (10%) and basic services (6%).
19/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
What are the reasons invoked to stay?
100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 4% 0%3% 1% 14% 4% 90% 20% 12% 0% 24% 12% 28% 33% 1% Don't know 80% 14% 0% 0% 11% 4% Other 70% 20% 18% 67% 16% 21% Family reasons 60% 0% 17% 36% 16% More humanitarian aid here 50% 8% 3% 6% 8% 2% More economic opportunities here 40% 10% 10% 0% 0% 67% Insecurity in their place of origin 30% 7% 60% 20% 48% Better access to basic services here 20% 33% 34% 36% 29% Better access to natural resources here 10% 20% Better security situation here 0% Buea Limbe 1 Limbe 3 Mbonge Muyuka Tiko West Total Coast
7. Conclusions
7.2 Main results The Rapid Protection Analysis conducted by DRC enables the organisation and its partners to have a better understanding of the evolution of the protection situation and needs of the populations covered by this report. The main results can be summarised as follows: • All communities have been significantly impacted by displacements and population movements, including pendular movements of individuals coming back when the security situation changes. It is clear from the report that many IDPs might not want to return to their community of origin, having established new social and economic ties in their host communities. This showcases the long-lasting impact the conflict will have on community dynamics. • High levels of vulnerability were reported in all communities, particularly concerning female headed households, elderly individuals, pregnant and lactating women and girls, unaccompanied and separated children, and people living with disabilities. • The majority of covered communities suffer from ongoing insecurity, including high levels of arbitrary arrest, abductions, and physical violence. This negatively affects individuals’ mental health and leaves many traumatised with no access to appropriate psychosocial and mental health support. • There is a clear decline in access to basic services, in particular in terms of education, health facilities, and markets. • The severe lack of civil documentation (birth certificates, property or land registration documents) is putting undocumented individuals at higher risk of violations of their rights and protection risks. • Shelter support in rural areas such as Mbonge and Muyuka sub-divisions is urgent as a high percentage of households live in tents or informal collective shelters. • Although social cohesion is reported to be positive overall (by 82 percent of KIs), tensions are mentioned by 14 percent of the KIs and are often related to conflicts over goods and services.
20/21 Cameroon – RPA Report – December 2020
The key findings of the RPA report showcase an important discrepancy between certain rural sub-divisions (such as Mbonge or Muyuka) and more urban sub-divisions (such as Limbe 1 and Limbe 3), with the former experiencing higher protection needs and less access to social services.
7.3 Priority humanitarian needs • Learning opportunities for children and youth who have been out of school for four years and have no access to safe spaces to process trauma, heal and develop their mental and social skills. • Support of existing health infrastructures and provision of health services in communities without access to functional medical facilities. • Improve access to clean water and increase the number of functioning water points. • Provision of psychosocial and mental health support for both children and adults. • Support to Unaccompanied and Separated Children by raising awareness on the protection risks associated with and prevention of separation of children, providing appropriate care arrangements, and supporting host families. • Community-based approached to raise awareness on protection risks in the community and identify and support community-based solutions. • Advocacy for access to civil documentation, especially birth certificates, to avoid a stateless generation and mitigate protection risks associated with a lack of civil documentation. • Support to community mediation of localised conflicts to reinforce the dialogue between host communities and IDPs and avoid tensions within the communities. • Advocacy with parties to the conflict to respect protection rights of communities, including training on International Humanitarian Law principles. • Finding durable solutions for IDPs intending to stay in their host communities. • Shelter support in rural areas as a high percentage of households live in tents or informal collective shelters.
21/21