Township Level Context Assessment and Trends

Loikaw Township

Community perceptions of governance

Weak governance, political vacuum: Good governance and accountability to the public (The rule of law) tends to be weak in Loikaw Township as there are numerous grey areas in terms of governance. The two authorities tend to play politics by deferring unpopular decisions and blocking developments from the other side. Even within government controlled areas, the lack of responsiveness or ‘ownership’ causes frustration among the community when they want to report a problem or a dispute to the proper authority, only to be passed from department to department indefinitely. For example, one village tract reported that despite having the hydropower plant in their community, approximately 50% of the households still lack electricity supply. When community leaders reported this discrepancy to the state ministry they were asked to report instead to the state office, which in turn referred them to the state ministry. No explanation or solution was ever given.

Community perceptions of peace & security

Improving, but still insecure: Communities across Loikaw township report feeling that the situation is better, but there is always a risk that it could devolve back to open conflict. In part, this is linked to the failure of earlier bilateral ceasefires. However, communities no longer see many armed troops, which contributes to improved feelings of security for them.

Demining as a political issue: Prior to 2011, the military government controlled many village tracts in Loikaw Township. Communities reportedly did not dare to move outside of their village tract as there were often random shootings. When travel was necessary, community members would have to sneak out at night. Similarly, landmines remain an issue, with many having been laid around the hydro-power plant, electrical poles, and the elsewhere around the village tract with the aim of preventing other village tracts from tapping into or cutting off the supply. At the time of the baseline there had been no demining efforts, though Danish Refugee Council (DRC) had come to look into the situation, and at least one village volunteer sought assistance from World Education, thus far no interventions have been planned. In part, the reluctance to address the issue of demining is thought to stem from the ways in which demining has been politicised by both the EAOs and the Myanmar government.

Restlessness of the young generation: Some village tracts in Loikaw report that there is a youth drug issue (‘yaba tablets’, amphetamines), which is likely exacerbated by the lack of job opportunities. Some youth become alcohol dependent and are prone to creating disruptions in the community. Other village tracts, further from urban centres, noted that the lack of beer stations and strong religious community prevented youth from causing trouble, even when they were idle. Across Loikaw township communities suggested that youth from different areas (youth leaders) or NGOs are in the best position to work on addressing youth issues. Development status

Who, What, Where: According to Myanmar Information Management Unit (MIMU) 3W dashboard dated 5 November 2015, there is a total of 34 organizations reported projects under implementation in Loikaw Township. 842 project activities were reported in 11 sectors. Health, protection and WASH were the most widespread interventions, with peace building and conflict prevention as the third least widespread.

Delaying the NCA limits development: Communities in Loikaw suggested that Kayah State is behind in terms of development due to the EAO not signing the NCA.

Participation is determined by socio-economic wellbeing, ‘sector of society’: It was reported that it is hard to be totally inclusive at village or village tract level as participation can be weak if there is no financial compensation for time spent. Often communities rely on the village leader to gather the community and ensure things are being carried through according to plan. However, the village leader cannot (and will not) force community members to participate and must work around farming and other day-to-day requirements. It also depends on what the community are being asked to participate in and when they are asked to participate. It is not necessarily the poorest who can’t participate, but the sectors of society – e.g. men who are ploughing or preparing the land, women who are weeding or preapring the food, etc. Moreover, those individuals and families within the village that are not on good terms with the village leader may at times be overlooked.

Low technical capacity among community members to sustain maintenance of infrastructure building interventions: While development is evident, there is a general sense of low technical capacity to ensure maintenance and sustainability of projects within the community level. Numerous examples linked to Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) were noted, particularly issues linked to pipeline and pump maintenance. For example, one village tract dismissed a government-funded project that would have installed a pump to improve water access over concerns that the pump would not be maintained and if (or rather, when) it broke down, the community would be left without any access to their primary water source. Without assurances that technical assistance would be provided, the community advocated against the development.

Manipulation of land laws in government-led development: There are fewer land ownership issues reported in Loikaw than in other townships, however, there are more reported incidents of land confiscation. Specifically, there are numerous reports of military confiscating community and private land for resale to private developers. The process for land registration is felt to be unclear amongst all but the most educated and connected community members. Complicated forms, such as Form LR 1051, have been used by the government to confuse individuals and communities into signing away land. For example, government representatives are reported to have promised village heads in Loikaw Township that they would give land to newly formed couples from their village if they only signed an agreement. It turned out that their offer was not sincere and the land was then sold to a private developer with no benefits directed to the community. There are also episodes of corruption and under the table bribery, which community members have witnessed occurring between officials at state and village tract levels. Similarly, government

1 UNHCR, UN Habitat and Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Guidance notes on Land Issues, Myanmar. Available at: http://www.burmalibrary.org/docs12/Guidance_Note_on_Land_Issues-Myanmar.pdf projects are not always well managed. For instance, one village tract noted that there had previously been no problems with water use because the community had a dam that they managed well. However, once the government took over control of the dam, ostensibly to distribute the water to additional villages, they failed to manage the supply and overlooked reports of water leakage.

Environmental issues are development needs: Some village tracts in Loikaw are in a protected area, which, the community claims, leads many NGOs to think they are not in need of further development. However, communities are quick to point out that this is not true, particularly, they note, in regards to the need for more knowledge and education around environmental stewardship. The environment has been badly affected by the irresponsible actions of private corporations in the area to the point that many water sources have now run dry.

Anti-corporate sentiment: One village tract in Loikaw Township reported that they resisted the setting up of cement factory in their community. Even though they are aware that it would have generated employment, they were concerned with the negative externalities produced by the factory, ranging from air, water, and waste management. They also felt a lack of transparency and communication with the factory management and heard many stories about employment exploitation. It was felt that community members would not be in a strong position to negotiate or manage the situation. Another village tract contested the construction of new Telenor towers on the basis that community leaders had not been consulted and that land had been appropriated. The community drafted a letter of complaint, which they submitted to both the government and EAO authorities, in addition to writing a formal complaint to Telenor corporate headquarters. They have yet to receive a response from any party.

Free education is not the same as universal access to education: There is only one primary school in their village tract and no monastery schools or secondary schools. Only those who can afford to will go to the next village tract to pursue further education. Although education is technically free, there is an informal demand for donation for school activities and management. Those who are poor have no choice but to drop out.

SUMMARY

Areas/Issues of Greatest Concern to Community*: Extremely Important Somewhat Important Important Community • Weak governance, perceptions of political vacuum governance

Community • Demining as a • Restlessness of perceptions of political issue the young peace & security generation (ER2.3; ER3.5) • Improving, but still insecure Development • Anti-corporate • Environmental • Free education is status sentiment issues as not the same as • Manipulation of development needs universal access to land laws in • Low technical education government-led capacity among • Participation is development community determined by members to sustain socio-economic maintenance of wellbeing, ‘sector infrastructure of society’ building interventions • Delaying the NCA limits development

Attribution impact** Contribution impact No measureable impact

*Importance as a factor of frequency. Those issues considered ‘extremely important’ were present in all village tracts, ‘important’ in some, and ‘somewhat important’ for issues that were only reported by one village tract.

** Impact of PROSPER as it is currently designed. The colour coding reflects the anticipated degree of impact PROSPER programmes will likely have on contextual factors.

Demoso Township

Community perceptions of governance

Formal communication channel on the political situation to quell speculations: The community is aware of various development processes, however, information about the political situation and updates of the ceasefire progress, were obtained from media and word of mouth. There is no official communication channel on this matter with EAOs or government and the community. Miscommunication leads to troublesome grey areas, for example, KNPP had continued to collect tax from the community even when the government had stopped two years prior. No one understood why the government had stopped collecting taxes, though they tried to inquire at the township level, and so rumours circulated that the government had relinquished control over the area.

Community perceptions of peace and security

Resource risk slows disarmament process: EAOs feel justified in refusing disarmament as part of the ceasefire negotiation and push back when the government tries to discuss infrastructure development in areas where minerals are known under the aegis of community protection from extraction and exploitation.

Gender vulnerabilities of girls… and boys: Most of young people are working on their family farm. There are limited employment opportunities. Many boys started working from the age of 15-18 – either on the farm, in other states, or overseas. As a result, they also tend to pick up drinking and drugs at a younger age. This trend is not as widespread among girls who are more likely to stay near to home, but girls do suffer disproportionately from the presence, intimidation, harassment, and assault of armed fighters – both Tatmadaw and EAO.

Development status

Who, What, Where: According to Myanmar Information Management Unit (MIMU) 3W dashboard dated 5 November 2015, there is a total of 37 organizations reported projects under implementation in Demoso Township. 1,401 project activities were reported in 12 sectors. Health, protection and agriculture were the most widespread interventions, with peace building and conflict prevention as the second least widespread. Four organizations work in this area in Demoso, i.e. The Shalom (Nyein) Foundation, The Border Consortium (Karenni Women Organization), Mercy Corps and Norwegian People’s Aid.

Land laws as double-edged sword: Most of the people engaged in upland cultivation use customary farming practices passed down from earlier generations. These communities have a relationship with the land that is spiritual, cultural, and social. When trying to mediate land dispute, community members first rely on customary land law – that is years of living and working on the plot of land. If it is still unable to resolve using customary law, they will then rely on the series of land laws designed behind closed doors and promulgated in 2012, changed the legal basis for land use rights, especially in the uplands, while establishing a legal land market in order to encourage domestic and foreign investment in land. The legalisation of a land market without strong public safeguards has opened the door to a new generation of problems: under this new law, farmers who have been growing on hereditary land for their livelihoods can only possess land by means of official registration. As the registration process is not easily accessible for rural people, the land policies put them at risk. In most cases, they are helpless.

Community-led growth: Community members reported that farming technology and access to capital for small medium enterprises would be extremely helpful for them.

Religious influence to remain strong: Prior to the current ceasefire, it was reported that all CSO were religious and proselytising. The recent opening up of the country had seen more secular CSO working in development. The influence of religious leaders and religion is likely to remain strong. They are also in better position to address societal issues, including gender inequalities and peace building, because many otherwise disparate stakeholders are members of the same church.

Civil-mindedness to be guided by strong governance system: It was noted that positions in governance structures and committees at village and village tract levels are voluntary without pay, as is the Township Development Support Committee. There are also many different committees for different development sectors within the same village tract. As such, the need for a strong structure and system is just as important as the integrity of committees. Generally, women and the poor are less likely to participate in such public platforms.

SUMMARY

Areas/Issues of Greatest Concern to Community*: Extremely Important Somewhat Important Important Community • Formal perceptions of communication governance channel about the political situation to quell speculations (ER3.3) Community • Resource risk slows • Gender perceptions of disarmament vulnerabilities of peace & security process girls… and boys:

Development • Land laws as • Community-led • Civil-mindedness status double-edged growth (ER2.1; to be guided by sword ER3.5) strong governance system • Religious influence to remain strong

Attribution impact** Contribution impact No measureable impact

Hpruso Township

Community perceptions of governance

Ambivalence as a strategy for protection: in Hpruso township many communities take a firmly ambivalent stand on the issues of governance in order to avoid entanglements with either EAOs or governments. This is a strategy devised to mitigate the risk of reprisals from either authority. Communities often couch this in terms of being disinterested in the conflict dynamics, despite acknowledging that they continue to be affected by the conflict itself.

Dissatisfaction with both authorities: According to communities in Hpruso, the KNPP should be responsible for peace promotion. However, the community feel that the KNPP are not representing their interests enough in this regard. As a result, they have a very negative view of KNPP’s taxation, which focuses heavily on the roads. Some village tracts reported being upset that the KNPP did not sign the NCA, whilst still others felt the decision was justified. Communities seemed to disagree as to the symbolic potency of the NCA itself, with some suggesting that the NCA would be meaningless if the bilateral agreement continued to be abused by the government. Others saw the NCA as a commitment to peace.

Community perceptions of peace and security

Land conflicts: As in other areas, land is vital to the community and most have no other employment opportunity except to farm or to work in another state or country. The lack of physical boundaries between communities is an issue that was raised in a number of meetings where grazing animals roamed into “another community’s” area. There have been issues relating to land disputes raised even in areas where there has not yet been any push to formally register land. Reportedly, these disputes were linked to limited understanding and knowledge of the process, lack of transparency, and poor communication. Additionally, some of the community reportedly registered their land without consultation, and in these instances, the village head was unable to resolve the resulting disputes.

“Unequal development” builds tensions: There is a strong sense of unequal development within Hpruso township that is causing tensions to build within the communities. One of the main tensions amongst the community is that they are not clear who gets what and when and from whom. For example, one villager mentioned that they did not receive the rations distributed by the Japanese government and KNPP to others in his village tract. In response, a woman stood up to clarify that these rations were provided to a select group because they had been missed in a previous distribution.

Emerging trend on domestic violence: Several communities raised reports of domestic tension between couples. Mostly, women reported these issues to religious leaders; however, KSPMN also reported receiving such reports.

Development status

Who, What, Where: According to Myanmar Information Management Unit (MIMU) 3W dashboard dated 5 November 2015, there is a total of 35 organizations reported projects under implementation in Hruso Township. 820 project activities were reported in 11 sectors. Health, non-agriculture livelihood infrastructure and protection were the most widespread interventions, with peace building and conflict prevention as the third least widespread. Four organizations work in this area in Hruso, i.e. The Shalom (Nyein) Foundation, The Border Consortium (Karenni Women Organization), Mercy Corps and Norwegian People’s Aid.

Openness to corporate investment: Unlike in other townships, community members in Hpruso expressed openness to large private sector developments, specifically a large industrial factory that would provide employment.

Community members felt that the government was not doing enough: For example, the community reported that they used to receive free rabies vaccination, but since the donor terminated the supply, the government stopped providing them for free. As the vaccines costs 10,000 kyat per vaccination, most children now go without. In another example, community members expressed frustrations with the cost sharing proposed by the government for a proposed water improvement projects. The community was not able to pay the 100,000 kyat for the installation of piped water and electricity supply the government required, despite a clear need and a well-articulated case. Despite the fact that most community members expressed a desire for democracy, the articulation seemed to edge towards a model that is closer to socialism – everyone receives the same.

Low technical capacity among community members to sustain maintenance of WASH intervention: There were several reports of support from CSO and INGOs in the area of water and sanitation. However, the low technical capacity within the community limited maintenance and sustainability of the systems that were put in place.

Committees, committees, committees: There is good participation from the community members in development. Participation is largely achieved through setting up project committees to be staffed by volunteers. The committees are often project dependent and thus disappear after the funder (NGO, CSO, government, church) finishes the project or leaves the community. It was also noted that Village Development Committees (VDCs) were not always the most influential, active, effective, or inclusive development committees in the area. Often, ‘competing’ committees, established by NGOs or CSOs for specific projects, either cannibalised VDC participation, undermined their authority where it was felt VDC members were abusing their position, or took over for the VDC where members were seen to be inactive or ineffective. In many instances there are numerous committees in various degrees of formation. This creates challenges for several PROSPER activities that are designed to work with or to strengthen VDCs; in some instances, a decision may have to be made, which ultimately weakens a more functional committee for the purpose of strengthening the VDC – if this aim remains core to the PROSPER objectives.

Struggling economy: As Myanmar opens economically, smallholder farmers have seen market prices decrease due to increased competition from out of state. Community members reported that they were unable to sell at the same price as before for most items, e.g. corn, peanuts, vegetables, rice. They do not have many choices as it seems that there is asymmetry of information between buyers and sellers.

SUMMARY

Areas/Issues of Greatest Concern to Community*: Extremely Important Somewhat Important Important Community • Ambivalence as a perceptions of strategy for governance protection

• Dissatisfaction with both ‘authorities’ Community • Land conflicts • Emerging trend perceptions of (ER2.2) on domestic peace & security violence • Perception of “unequal development” builds tensions Development • Struggling economy • Community status members felt that the government was not doing enough, they are being left behind (ER2.1)

• Low technical capacity among community members to sustain maintenance of WASH intervention

• Openness to corporate investment

• Committees, committees, committees (ER2.1; ER3.5)

Attribution impact** Contribution impact No measureable impact

Hpawasng Township

Perceptions of governance

Importance of meandering between governance system at all levels: It was emphasized in three focus groups and two key informant interviews that both government and KNPP should be engaged at all levels so that the community feels confident and trustful of PROSPER. Most INGO and CSO had only placed importance on the engagement with the government and communities are generally suspicious of their presence and activities as a result, even if they welcome the support. They also emphasize the importance of this engagement to improve the relationship between EAO and government. Additionally, given the isolation of some of the areas, community leaders came across as fiercely independent of both governance systems. For example, in one village tract, KNPP members repeatedly mentioned that they had to persuade the community committee to accede to Mercy Corp’s interview request as they were visibly upset that permission was (only) obtained directly from government and KNPP in advance and not them. In some areas, community members are not allowed to engage with outsiders unless the leaders are present. From the government side, two key informants acknowledged that their communication with KNPP is an open secret as officially they are not allowed to engage with EAOs that have not signed the NCA. There are similar restrictions placed on communication with CSOs that do not have formal agreements from Nay Pyi Taw.

Clear distinction between Tatmatdaw and government: Three EAO key informants and two focus groups had made clear distinction in their conversations between Tatmatdaw and the government. They reported “proactive”, “good”, and “regular” communication links between EAO and government, with some also expressing their familiarity with whom to approach for which matter, and the ease in doing so. However, they were not confident in government being able to “control” the tatmatdaw. Individuals in EAOs and government have kept personal relationships going despite political differences.

No recognition of ethnic diversity within Kayah State: The Kayin ethnic group in Kayah State is not recognised even though they have existed in the State for centuries and they are clearly distinct from the Kayin from Kayin State. This was apparent when they were not represented during Kayah National Day. Even though they are not discriminated or marginalized in terms of access to social services, they feel a loss of identity within Kayah State. Two additional ethnic groups were reportedly excluded: Pa’o and Shan. Officially, there are nine ethnic groups in Kayah State, however, others report twelve as a more accurate figure.

Perceptions of peace and security

Inter-religious tensions are exacerbated by government: Only one community mentioned that there is perceived discrimination between religions. For example, the Christians feel they have to stand up for themselves through raising funds for projects; they reportedly have their proposals for permission to construct churches and activities rejected occasionally. Conversely, government provide financial support and carte blanche for Buddhists to build pagodas and monasteries. The respondents also mentioned that there were tensions between Budhhist Burmese who came to the area to work with Muslim sellers. They rationalized that such tensions originated with Burmese in other regions who brought biases into the state with them. When Christians tried to mediate conflicts, they were reportedly perceived to have ill intentions.

Land Policy: As with other townships, it was perceived that the current land registration process is too complex for those who are less educated or unaware. The processes are believed to be manipulated by those in power. One community was visibly aggitated during the land rights discussion as they felt inherited lands were taken away with no or little compensation. They do not know what to do or with whom to file grievances. The interpretation of the latest land law is that “every land belongs to government”. It was felt that there should be distinction made between public land, farming land, and residential land.

Dual Governance System and public confidence: There is a general perception that funding for development tends to “disappear” and go unaccounted for. Several key informants mentioned that they were not sure of the total budget - specifically at village tract and village levels - even though some of them might be invited to implement projects. There is expressed desire for decentralised system as key informants mentioned that “central control will mean slower progress for remote areas”. However, at least one government official expressed his frustration that after 2012, EAO can do “whatever they want with no restriction” and emphasized that “there is one president in the country and everyone should follow the same regulation instead of setting up different systems”. Additionally, there were a number of grievances raised concerning the dual taxation of the government and EAO. It was mentioned that EAO and government need to harmonise the system, otherwise “people will suffer and state will not develop”.

Tatmatdaw and EAO, Violation of ceasefire: One key informant was highly positive about the improving relationship between EAO and government. However, she expressed serious concerns about the engagement between EAO and tatmatdaw. For example, it was mentioned that tatmataw does not inform EAO when they access non government controlled areas or when they have to cross EAO’s checkpoints to send food to their soldiers. This is perceived to be a transgression. Leadership had to do quick verification to prevent violation of ceasefire. Another key informant had also mentioned that he has confidence in the government led by Saya Than Shwe and Daw Aung San but felt that unless they are able to manage the tatmatdaw (which continues to hold absolute power under the Ministry of Interior) there will continue to be suffering in the country.

Resolution of community disputes are subject to leaders’ discretion: KNPP does not engage in community disputes and normally refers cases back to community leaders. Cases resolved at this level are given either verbal or written warnings or community service. Some were asked to leave the community totally. Resolution of disputes is subjective and is dependent on the leadership of the community committee. There is no written rule of law at the community level. For more serious cases like alcohol or drug trafficking, murder, and so on, they will refer to court and/or police although this is often the last resort as there is little to no trust in public institutions.

Development status

Development is not pro-poor: The following groups of people were perceived to have been left behind – (i) Those who are struggling for daily living and unable to take time away to take advantage of capacity building opportunties; (ii) Those who have to leave their family behind for working opportunities in another state or township; and (iii) Most if not all development is focused at the village level. For example, NGOs/CSO distribute good quality seeds or livestock to “vulnerable” communities. However, these seeds are not available in the market, as such those living in wards and quarters/urban poor/not labelled as “vulnerable” do not have access to these seeds or livestock.

Lack of public confidence in government decision: On occastion the community wants projects which are not technical “sound” or viable. Despite many rounds of discussion with technical experts, some communities are still insistent. This has caused a number of unpleasant episodes. It was felt that this is largely due to the lack of public confidence in the government.

SUMMARY

Areas/Issues of Greatest Concern to Community*: Extremely Important Somewhat Important Important Community • Importance of • Clear distinction • No recognition of perceptions of meandering between ethnic diversity governance between government and within Kayah governance system Tatmatdaw State at all levels

Community • Inter-religious • Dual Governance perceptions of tension are System and public peace & security exacerbated by confidence government • Resolution of • Land Policy community disputes are • Tatmatdaw and subjected to EAO, violation of leaders’ ceasefire discretion (ER3.4)

Development • Development is status neither pro-poor nor develops market (ER2.1)

• Lack of public confidence in government decision

Attribution impact** Contribution impact No measureable impact