WE WILL STAY HERE
Libya – Mercy Corps
IDP Vulnerability Assessment - Libya December 2016
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 2
Tunis, Tunisia – 11 January 2017
Many civilians in Libya are still suffering the major consequences of six years of conflict, insecurity and political instability. The direct result of this uncertainty left hundreds of thousands of people living in unsafe environment with little or even no access to medicine, life-saving health care assistance, education, safe drinking water, food and shelter. According to the Humanitarian Needs Overview (HNO) published in November 2016, 1.3 million people, including many Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs), are currently in urgent need of humanitarian assistance.
In order to respond to their needs UNHCR, thanks also to the Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), is intervening in the country to support the most vulnerable IDPs with life-saving interventions and non-food items distributions. Since 2014, the increasing level of insecurity for international staff led many humanitarian agencies, including UNHCR, to operate inside Libya through remote management from Tunisia. This working contingency and distance from the field of humanitarian and development agencies creates an urgent need for them to have well-grounded assessments of the Libyan context.
UNHCR with the support of national and international partners is able to provide reliable data to stakeholders that are willing to operate in the country. Under this specific light, this IDP assessment is extremely useful because it provides a comprehensive updated analysis of the conditions of those in displacement in Libya. The study faced also many challenges, including a full agenda of activities to be completed rapidly due to security concerns, and the ability of the population to provide information. Yet, Mercy Corps, with the help of several Libyan civil society organizations as well as twenty municipal councils, was able, through a dedicated work, to identify major key conclusions and potential solutions.
The impact of this research, however, will be reduced or even nullified, if all stakeholders including the donor community will not promote future activities targeting Libyan IDPs. It is important therefore to consolidate all efforts and sustain humanitarian actions that are meant to provide life-saving assistance to men, women and children currently living in displacement. This will be only possible if the humanitarian community will seek further dialogue and partnership with national and international stakeholders that are today present in Libya.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 3
About UNHCR
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was established on December 14, 1950 by the United Nations General Assembly. The agency is mandated to lead and coordinate international action to protect refugees and resolve refugee problems worldwide. Its primary purpose is to safeguard the rights and well-being of refugees. It strives to ensure that everyone can exercise the right to seek asylum and find safe refuge in another State, with the option to return home voluntarily, integrate locally or to resettle in a third country. It also has a mandate to help stateless people.
UNHCR’s involvement in IDP operations dates back to engagement in Sudan in 1972, despite the fact that its original 1951 mandate makes no explicit reference to IDPs. The principal criteria governing UNHCR’s involvement with IDPs are set out in Resolution 53/125 (December 1998). This resolution effectively extended the mandate of the agency in “providing humanitarian assistance and protection to internally displaced persons … with the consent of the State concerned.” In relation to IDP situations, UNHCR has made a commitment to act as ‘cluster lead’ in the areas of protection, camp management and coordination and emergency shelter.
UNHCR was the donor for the December 2016 Libya IDP Vulnerability Assessment through funding from the European Commission's Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection department (ECHO).
45 SW Ankeny Street Portland, Oregon 97204 888.842.0842 mercycorps.org
About Mercy Corps
Mercy Corps is a leading global organization powered by the belief that a better world is possible. In disaster, in hardship, in more than 40 countries around the world, we partner to put bold solutions into action — helping people triumph over adversity and build stronger communities from within. Now, and for the future.
This document covers humanitarian aid activities implemented with the financial assistance of the European Union. The views expressed herein should not be taken, in any way, to reflect the official opinion of the European Union, and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 4 Executive Summary
This report describes the most important findings and recommendations related to a vulnerability assessment of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) across the coastal urban and rural areas of Libya. The assessment, carried out between August and November 2016, was funded by UNHCR and ECHO and conducted by Mercy Corps, in collaboration with seven Local Organizations. Valuable support was also provided by twenty municipality councils.
The assessment aimed to analyze the current humanitarian situation of IDPs in Libya through household surveys, key informant interviews and Focus Group Discussions. The enumerators interviewed heads of households of IDP families, local authorities, community leaders, youth, women and elderly groups’ representatives. Given the vacuum of information from the areas, Mercy Corps and UNHCR believe that it is important to disseminate the findings and recommendations, to support the humanitarian community in addressing needs of Libyan families who have been affected by the conflict and related crisis.
Key Findings - Despite the deteriorating safety and security situation, more than 95 percent of households reached reported their firm willing to remain in their current locations or return back to their hometowns;
- 42 percent of households reached, stated that lack of safety was the main reason for deciding to displace;
- More than 30 percent of households reached reported to be in need of psychosocial support, for at least one member of their family, and according to 79 percent of interviewed households, psychosocial support services are lacking;
- Although 87 percent of households interviewed reported to have a primary source of income, which in most cases (86 percent) comes from public sector, the majority stated that they do not have access to liquidity;
- 52 percent of households reached reported not to have access to resources required to practice their profession;
- 78 percent of households reached reported to be in need of non-food items;
- More than 30 percent among those who have been evicted mentioned financial constraints as the main cause for eviction;
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 5 Table of contents
Executive Summary ...... 4 Key Findings ...... 4 Table of contents ...... 5 Introduction ...... 6 Methodology ...... 7 Geographic Scope ...... 7 Partners ...... 8 Sampling ...... 9 Household Surveys ...... 9 Key Informants ...... 9 Focus Group Discussions ...... 9 Findings ...... 10 Demographics ...... 10 Current locations and provenance of IDPs ...... 10 Displacements ...... 11 Displacement Patterns ...... 11 Push Factors ...... 12 ...... 12 Pull Factors ...... 12 Intentions ...... 13 Protection ...... 14 Livelihood ...... 17 Shelter ...... 20 Non-Food Items ...... 23 Health ...... 25 Education ...... 30 Needs – Overview ...... 31 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 33 Summary of main findings ...... 33 Recommendations ...... 34
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 6 Introduction According to the Humanitarian Needs Overview (HNO) shared in November 2016, 1.3 million Libyans are currently in need of assistance.1 Protection has been identified as the second strategic priority and the sector (together with health) in which the majority of civilians is struggling to cope.
Significant humanitarian needs have emerged and have been reported in Libya, as a consequence of armed conflict and deterioration of the safety and security situation. The vulnerability level of populations affected by the crisis, since the outbreak of the conflict, increased due to displacements.
Approximately 241,000 people have moved out of their homes seeking safe shelters due to armed conflict. Most of the displaced are living in urban conglomerates.2
Reports of violations of international humanitarian law and abuses of human rights are regularly shared and civilians, as is the case for every armed conflict, are those paying the highest price.
Combatants are responsible for multiple civilian casualties. For instance, up to 79 percent of civilian casualties are related to the use of explosive weapons, in some areas. The safety and security situation varies from region to region, and between urban and rural areas.
Under these circumstances, it is necessary for the international humanitarian community to immediately provide a broad range of essential services in order to forestall a humanitarian crisis. In order to investigate and assess the protection risks and violations, humanitarian actors and other stakeholders must have access to practical and timely protection and humanitarian needs information. The assessment conducted and presented through this report, which adheres to the basic principles of protection including neutrality, dignity and safety, is crucial to further ascertain the gaps and needs of IDPs, returnees and host communities.
1 https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/2017_libya_humanitarian_needs_overview_november_2016_1.pdf
; accessed December 15, 2016;
2 Ibidem
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 7 Methodology Geographic Scope
Geographical Coverage of the assessment
Following figures provided through the Displacement Tracking Matrix (DTM) by IOM, Mercy Corps selected 20 locations.
The sites selected are hosting 44 percent of the overall number of IDPs in Libya, following DTM figures, and 18 percent of returnees according to the same source.
In the area surrounding Tripoli, Mercy Corps selected the following locations: Tripoli city, Tajoura, Suq al Jumah, Abu Salim, Ain Zara, Hai Alandalus, Qaser Bin Ghashir, Janzour, Sidi el Saeh, Garabulli, and Al Khums.
In Misratah and the area surrounding Misratah, the locations selected were: Misratah centre, Shuhada Alrumeila, and Shati Alamaan.
In Benghazi, assessments were conducted in the city of Benghazi, Al Abyar, Slukh, Tocra, and Al Sahel.
Additionally, Mercy Corps selected the municipalities of Bani Walid and Zliten.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 8
Partners
Site FDG KI HH Survey
Momkeen Organization Janzour 3 5 173 Qasser Bin Ghashir 3 5 137 Abu Salim 3 5 192 Souq Al Khamis 3 5 60 Ain Zara 3 5 161 Libyan Center for Development and Research Souq Al Jumah 3 5 63 Tripoli Center 3 5 101 Tajoura 3 5 116 Kafaa Development Foundation Sidi El Saeh 3 5 91 Garabulli 3 5 123 Al Khums 3 5 172 Ebda'h Organization Shahada Al Rumeila 3 5 97 Shati Alamaan Village 3 5 107 Misratah City 3 5 127 Assalam Bani Walid Charity Bani Walid 3 5 183 Zliten 3 5 175 Basmaat Khair Organization Benghazi 3 5 195 Al Abyar 3 5 98 Slukh 3 5 128 Tocra 3 5 62 Al Sahel 3 5 48
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 9
Sampling Household Surveys With the objective of reaching 95 percent level of confidence, Mercy Corps used population figures provided by DTM and Municipalities to determine the samples’ size. Moreover, for urban, rural and informal settlements, random sampling has been integrated with additional indications related to provenance of households to be interviewed. The objective was to obtain a widespread representation from every geographical area covered by the Sampling in Zliten assessment.
Key Informants Key informant interviews were conducted to gain knowledge and insights from people within the IDP communities who have contextual and relevant experience in the key subject areas. Key informants (KI) were pre-selected during the planning phase with support from stakeholders.
Focus Group Discussions Information was also obtained through focus group discussions (FGDs) in each of the IDP sites assessed. This allowed for additional information at the group/community level, which was triangulated with the assessment, key informant and secondary analysis data. The groups were representative of all segments of the IDP community, including women, community elders, and youth. These discussions gave a more aggregate picture of what whole communities are experiencing. At least one focus group discussion was conducted per IDP site assessed and included questions about protection concerns, humanitarian needs and potential solutions.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 10 Findings Demographics
Average size of households: 5.5 members
Out of the 14,401 individuals, members of the 2,609 households 60 + Age Breakdown reached, 53 percent are between 18 3% 0 - 11 and 59 years old, representing the 27% most conspicuous portion of the 18 - 59 population. 53%
44 percent of individuals in the areas 12 - 17 17% assessed are minors (0 – 17). 0 - 11 12 - 17 18 - 59 60 + 51 percent of individuals are female and 23 percent of overall population is represented by girls up to 17 years old. Proportions appear to be consistent all across the areas assessed, in terms of average size of households and age breakdown. However, the percentage of children is higher in Garabulli (Tripoli countryside), where it reaches 33 percent of the overall population. HEADS OF HOUSEHOLDS
Current locations and 90 percent of the heads of household are men, with provenance of IDPs percentages being consistent in all locations. The average age for the head of household is 46 years As shown by the charts below, Sirte old. represents the location of origin for the majority (43 percent) of IDPs reached. While Bani Walid and Tripoli are the main destinations chosen by those leaving Sirte, in Benghazi displacements occur within the surrounding areas of the city. A relevant portion of IDPs moving out of Benghazi is currently settled in Misratah and Tripoli.
IDP PROVENANCE IDPs: who is where Tawargha 10% 1200 1000 Benghazi Tawargha 800 34% Sirte 600 400 Other Ghawalesh 200 Meshishia Sirte 2% 0 Ghawalesh 43% Meshishia Benghazi Other 1% 10%
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 11 Displacements Displacement Patterns
37 percent of the households reached Is this your first displacement? reported they had moved at least two 100% times before settling in the place they are 90% currently living in. 80% 70% 60% In Bani Walid, almost 90 percent of the 50% IDP population, among those reached, 40% Yes 30% stated they had been displaced multiple 20% No times. 10% 0% In line with the nature of the battle in Sirte (multiple rapid onsets and urban clashes), the majority of those displaced from the town had moved multiple times before deciding to settle, waiting for MULTIPLE DISPLACEMENT: violence to de-escalate. PROVENANCE Tawargha Benghazi Ghawalesh 7% 18% 2%
Meshisha 1% Sirte 46% Other 26%
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 12
Push Factors
80 percent of people Was safety and security the main push factor displaced from Sirte decided for you and your household? to leave due to safety and 100% security-related threats. For 90% the same reason, more than 80% 50 percent of IDPs from 70% Benghazi left their ordinary 60% shelters. 50% 40% TRUE 30% Almost the entire population FALSE 20% (more than 90 percent) 10% displaced from Tawargha 0% has been evicted.
TOP THREE PUSH FACTORS
Lack of safety and security, eviction, and community tensions were the reported reasons determining the decision to move, for 71 percent of the households reached.
Pull factors 100% Pull Factors
50% Safety and Security is definitely the main pull factor. 0% Garabulli Al Khums Bani Walid Benghazi Misratah Tripoli People try, as well, to move Other based on possibilities of No specific reasons reunification of families inside Feeling Welcome Libya. Availability of services (including health services) Security and Safety In Bani Walid, social inclusion was mentioned by 26 percent of For work/to find work the respondents as the main Friend/family connection reason for choosing to settle in the town.
Except the abovementioned case of Bani Walid, findings display consistency across the areas assessed, both urban and rural locations in eastern and western Libya.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 13 Intentions Except for IDPs living in Bani Walid and Al Khums, the majority of those reached expressed their Are you thinking of leaving willing to move out of the place they are currently anytime soon? settled in. When asked, more than 90 percent of 100% respondents mentioned “returning back to my 80% hometown” as main priority. 60% 40% Yes Only two respondents, out of the 2,610 20% No interviewed, reported willingness to leave Libya for 0% a foreign country.
The case of Bani Walid clearly shows that social inclusion represents a milestone of real integration and a driving factor in decisions to remain and settle in a specific location.
The abovementioned answers, provided by households reached, indicate a potential significant wave of returnees to Sirte, once the area will be considered safe for civilian resettlement.
Tawergha settlement, Tripoli;
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 14 Protection While the majority of IDPs interviewed stated that they do not recognize specific security issues related to their Do you recognize any community, 51 percent of those originally from Tawargha security issue affecting expressed concerns which will be presented later in this your community? report. 100% 90% 80% 70% Security Concerns Per 60% 50% Location 40% Yes 30% 100% 20% No 80% 10% 60% 0% 40% 20% 0%
Other In Misratah, Tripoli, and Garabulli, security issues tend to People from certain locations or areas in Libya affect people with certain tribal affiliations, while in People with certain tribal affiliation Benghazi youth and men appear to be the segments of Youth population most exposed to security threats. Women
Men
Nature of Security Concerns 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Garabulli Al Khums Bani Walid Benghazi Misratah Tripoli
Fighting between different community groups Criminal acts Threat Unexploded bombs or ammunition Violence against boys and girls Forced recruitment Violence against women Kidnapping
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 15
Concerns related to potential kidnappings, together with threats deriving from clashes between different community groups were raised in Tripoli, where systems for dispute resolution are lacking. The situation is different in Benghazi, where the main safety concern is related to the presence of UXOs. Kidnapping threats remain low in Benghazi, while clashes between different community groups and criminal acts are reported, although in a minor proportion if compared to Tripoli and Misratah.
In Benghazi, UXO-related Are you aware of any UXOs related incident concerns are linked to the in the community you live in? knowledge reported by 100% respondents of incidents 90% due to the presence of 80% unexploded ordnances: 35 70% percent of the households 60% reached are aware of UXO- related incidents. 50% Yes 40% No Focus Group Discussions 30% and Key Informant 20% interviews outline additional 10% details. In Benghazi 0% Garabulli Al Khums Bani Walid Benghazi Misratah Tripoli proximity of civilians to occasional clashes represents a serious issue, while in Al Khums and Garabulli migrants’ dead bodies lying on the coasts are observed regularly.
44 percent of households reached stated that they do Do you know how to submit a resettlement not know how to submit a registration form? resettlement registration 100% form. 90% 80%
70% 60%
50% Yes 40% No
30% 20%
10% 0% Algrabolly Alkhoms Bani waled Benghazi Misratah Tripoli
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 16
Has anyone in your household lost identity documents? 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% Yes 40% No 30% 20% 10% 0% Benghazi Ghawalesh Meshishia Sirte Tawargha
Loss of identity documents remains a recurrent issue among those interviewed. Especially for the Tawergha community, loss of identity documents, including passport, was reported. 61 percent of Tawergha respondents stated they had lost their passport and identity documents at the time of displacement.
Children with behavioural changes since the crisis started
Children from Tawergha community are 37% also the most affected by the conflict, in 63% terms of behavioural changes, together with those from Benghazi (60 and 66 percent of respondents). No Yes
Children with behavioural changes since the beginning of the crisis (community of origin) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Benghazi Tawargha Meshishia Ghawalesh Sirte
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 17 Livelihood 87 percent of the households reached reported to have at least one source of income. Data shows Source of incomes consistency across the areas where the surveys 100% were conducted. As well in terms of provenance, 80% income appears to be stable and similar for the 60% IDPs families. 40% Yes 20% The survey clearly shows that the large majority of No 0% households interviewed are virtually relying on public sector related sources of income: 86 percent of those who reported to have at least one source of income, stated that this is either salary paid for governmental functions or pension, provided by State institutions.
Therefore, the Libyan State remains, as it was the Primary Source of Income case before the outbreak of the conflict, the main 100% entity financially providing income to families inside Libya. 80% Pension 60% However, this does not entail stability in the Government 40% salary purchase power of people, due mainly to two factors: 20% Employment 0% Business - Market prices have been characterized by a pronounced volatility, driven by the fluctuations of the exchange rates; - Although families are receiving monthly incomes through bank transfers, they are not able Access to income (LYD) to access their financial resources;
1000 900 As mentioned earlier, families consider that cash is 800 one of the main needs and that the limited capacity 700 Average of 600 Monthly Income to access their own financial resources represents 500 a principal factor for the increasing level of 400 300 vulnerability. 200 Average of 100 Amount of Income 0 you access each Cash remains the most used means to access month services and goods; however, people reached through Focus Groups Discussions expressed concerns over programmes based on cash distributions. The general perception is that those programmes, when targeting IDPs, can increase inter and intra-community tensions.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 18
As an alternative to cash, people are increasingly using vouchers and Do you use cheques/vouchers to cheques. This is the case, especially, purchase commodities? for families currently settled in 100% Benghazi. 80% The reasons behind the high 60% TRUE percentage of people using 40% cheques/vouchers (more than 60 FALSE 20% percent) in Benghazi, are multiple: 0% - Trust: IDPs currently settled Garabulli Al Bani Benghazi Misratah Tripoli Khums Walid in Benghazi are from Benghazi and surrounding areas. They still have relatively easy physical access to their trusted bank branches. Moreover, trust is extended all across the financial circuit: service and good providers, banks, people; - Programmes stimulating the use of cheques and vouchers: banks in Benghazi are promoting programmes stimulating the use of vouchers and cheques. Deals have been brokered by banks with vendors and suppliers who are currently accepting those methods of payment. - Willingness of vendors to accept cheques/vouchers: more than 200 shops in Benghazi are currently accepting cheques/vouchers and debit cards on a regular basis;
96 percent of households reached reported to have access to market.
No disruptions in the supply market have been reported. However, since the outbreak of the conflict, prices have increased across all the areas assessed.
ACCESS TO MARKET Increase of prices (percentage) No Yes 200 150 4% 100
50
0
96%
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 19
Those who do not have any source of income or COPING STRATEGIES are not able to access their financial resources Alternative and therefore have a limited de facto, purchase Borrow Private money power, reported to have started putting in place Business 21% worrying coping strategies. 22% Sell Mostly in urban areas, IDPs have started selling assets belongings, especially gold and silver items. The 11% market for precious metals is tightly linked to the Humanita Use parallel market for cash. rian Aid savings 33% 13% The relative majority relies on humanitarian aid, while 22 percent of respondents mentioned alternative private, occasional, business.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 20 Shelter 74 percent of respondents reported to be renting an accommodation. 35 percent of respondents from the Tawergha community reported to be living in collective settlements.
100%
90% Staying with a host family 80%
70% Renting
60% Other 50% Living in a makeshift shelter or tent 40%
30% Empty home that belongs to someone else 20% Collective center (hotel, school, etc) 10%
0% Benghazi Ghawalesh Meshishia Other Sirte Tawargha
With consistency across the different locations assessed, the majority of IDPs are renting accommodations. Monthly rental costs differ between areas, with prices being higher in Benghazi and Bani Walid and lower in Misratah and Garabulli.
During Focus Group Discussions organized by Mercy Corps’ partners in Benghazi, attendants reported a potential upcoming saturation point in real estate rental market. Moreover, renting an accommodation in Benghazi might be prevented on the basis of the profile of the displaced. Authorities might decide to prevent
Shelter type per location 100% 90% Staying with a host family 80% Renting 70%
60% Other 50% 40% Living in a makeshift shelter or tent 30% Empty home that belongs to someone 20% else 10% Collective center (hotel, school, etc) 0% Garabulli Al Khums Bani Walid Benghazi Misratah Tripoli
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 21 people from renting accommodations inside Benghazi if their profile represents an alleged threat to the security situation.
Shelter renting cost - monthly (LYD) 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Benghazi Bani Walid Tripoli Al Khums Misratah Garabulli
70 percent of households reached consider that the shelter they are currently living in is satisfactory. This is due to the high number of IDPs living in rented accommodations (being houses or apartments). However, 17 percent of respondents reported issues related to safety, mainly, and lack of household water and sanitation infrastructures.
SHELTER CONDITIONS
4% 10% 3% Damaged or not completed home (still 3% under construction) 7% Home is so damaged that we cannot live there 3% No problems to report
Other
Poor infrastructure (broken pipes/flooding, etc) Shared/over-crowed accomodation 70% Unsafe/Unhealthy shetlter
The Tawergha community, living mainly in collective settlements, reported their shelters to be unsafe or unhealthy.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 22
Despite the positive shelter conditions, key informants reported significant challenges for the population, linked to the monthly payment of rent-related costs.
8 percent of households interviewed reported to have been subject to eviction, at least once. Reasons differ, but it is possible to identify a trend, related to the abovementioned challenge of renting costs (31 percent) and to lack of safety (36 percent).
Reasons for eviction
2% 6% Armed fighters took over 25% the property Because of the war 36% Couldn't pay Rent
31% Harassment
Tribal affiliation
During Focus Group Discussions, it was mentioned by attendants that cheques and vouchers started to be used to pay for the rent, especially in Garabulli and Al Khums, when liquid cash is not available.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 23
Non-Food Items 78 percent of interviewed Does your household need Non-Food households reported to be in need Items? of Non-Food Items. Figures are consistent across all reached Tripoli areas.
Misratah Trends, in terms of specific needs, Benghazi suggest that sleeping mats and No matrasses represent the most Bani Walid Yes needed items. Al Khums
Garabulli
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 24
With winter approaching, IDPs will need to face the seasonal shock due to the sudden decrease of temperature. Together with Matrasses and sleeping mats, clothes are one of the most needed items.
The abovementioned needs are still reported despite the fact that the relative majority of respondents
Needed NFI Per Location 100% NFI Assistance Received Per Location
100%90%
80%90%
70%80%
60%70%
50%60%
40%50%
30%40%
20%30%
10%20%
10%0% Garabulli Al Khums Bani Walid Benghazi Misratah Tripoli 0% GarabulliWater containersAl Khums CookingBani Walid sets/utensilsBenghazi Plastic SheetingMisratah Tripoli
SleepingWater mats containers or mattressesSoapMosquito nets Blankets Soap/hygieneClothes materials ClothingFuel KitchenFuel items Stove StoveMoveable heater MoveableMattresses Heater PhonePhone charger. ChargerTimber TimberOther Solar Lamp Other indicated that matrasses and blankets had already been received previously within the framework of humanitarian aid distribution.
20 percent of the households reached, stated that NFIs represent the highest financial portion of their monthly expenses.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 25
Health
Is there any functioning Health Facility in this community? 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% Yes 40% No 30% 20% 10% 0% Garabulli Al Khums Bani Walid Benghazi Misratah Tripoli
In most communities a large majority of respondents reported the presence of functioning health facilities, except in Benghazi, where more than 50 percent of respondents mentioned that health facilities are not functioning in their community of residence.
In Benghazi, the lack of functioning health facilities is reported mostly in the rural areas, but also in the city 40 percent stated that no health facilities were working in the vicinity of their residence.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 26
Functioning Health Facilities - Benghazi
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% Yes 40% No
30%
20% 10% 0% Al abyar Al sahel Benghazi city Slukh Tokra
In addition, in Benghazi, 31 How often are health facilities open? percent of respondents 100% (mainly from rural areas), 90% reported that they are not 80% able to identify specific time 70% schedules for the health Twice a week facilities, while in the other 60% Once a week locations, including Benghazi 50% City, respondents mentioned 40% No set schedule that health facilities are open 30% I don't know and providing services on a Daily 20% daily basis. 10% 0% Garabulli Al Bani Benghazi Misratah Tripoli Khums Walid
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 27
Are the following available in health facilities? (Answer: YES) 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Doctors Female Doctors Medical Support Staff Medical Supplies and Medicines Equipment
According to the perception of households reached by the assessment, only doctors (male) are present in sufficient numbers in health facilities within the community of residence.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 28
Are the following services available in your community? 80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0% Inpatient Outpatient Routine Dental Care Obstetric Care Psychosocial Care Consultation Consultation Vaccination
Psychosocial care is clearly the most neglected service according to respondents. Only 21 percent of households reached know about the presence of psychosocial care related services in the community of residence.
All across the locations assessed, psychosocial Availability of Psychosocial Care care appears to be almost absent. Except for Al Services - % per location Khums, where this service is reported to be existing by 30 percent of respondents, in all other 40.0% locations psychosocial care is available according 30.0% to less than 15 percent of respondents. In Tripoli, 20.0% Misratah and Bani Walid, the service is reported 10.0% by less than 5 percent of respondents, all in urban 0.0% areas. Garabulli Al Khums Bani Benghazi Misratah Tripoli Walid From the household survey, it is unclear whether those services are not available or respondents are not informed about their presence. Key informants, including local authorities, expressed Available Obstetric Care Services - though the unavailability of psychosocial care % per location services. 80% 70% 60% 50% Also concerning is the reported lack of 40% obstetric care services. In Tripoli, only 34 30% percent of respondents are aware of obstetric care 20% 10% specialized services. Those are mainly in urban 0% locations. In Misratah, Benghazi and Bani Walid, Garabulli Al Khums Bani Benghazi Misratah Tripoli less than 15 percent of respondents are aware of Walid obstetric care services.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 29
Respondents reported, as expected, an increase in costs of health care services. The increase is consistent across the locations and is close to 83 percent.
Mercy Corps and partner's team in Misratah Rural
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 30 Education 91 percent of respondents, Children attending or enrolled to attend among those having school school classes age children, mentioned the latter are attending or are enrolled and therefore planning to attend school. 9% Child Labour is reported by the majority of respondents (54 percent) to be the cause 91% for not attending school classes.
67 percent of households No Yes reached have both boys and girls attending schools. Formal education is attended by 95 percent of students. Only 5 percent is attending non-formal courses.
Parents reported that lack of stationaries and education materials is affecting the quality of the offer proposed by public schools. 50 percent of respondents stated that this represents a significant challenge for students.
Education related challenges
12% 24% 11%
19% 26% 8%
Lack of Stationary Lack of Textbooks Lack of Teachers Lack of Recreational activities and material Need Psychosocial support School is too far
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 31 Needs – Overview Households were asked which were their first two priorities: 1803 respondents (71 percent of overall respondents) reported physical cash to be either their first or second need.
2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0
Needs - Breakdown per location 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Garabulli Al Khums Bani Walid Benghazi Misratah Tripoli
Non food items Food Income support (employment training) Access to informal or formal financial services Health Transportation to services Education Access to documents Safety and security Cash Other
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 32
765 respondents (29 percent) do not consider satisfactory their current capacity to access food items and therefore believe food to be the main priority for their households.
With the only exception of Bani Walid, access to cash is reported to be the main need all across the locations assessed.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 33 Conclusions and Recommendations
Summary of main findings
1. Lack of Safety and Security Pulling and pushing factors for displacement are related to lack of safety and security and criminal acts. People do not feel safe and decide to move out of their original locations. In both urban and rural areas, a mix of limited rule of law and regular tensions between different militias represent the main concern for IDP populations.
2. Willingness to remain in Libya Despite the lack of safety and security and the uncertainty over the future of Libya, IDPs are planning to return back to their hometowns. Leaving Libya remains an extremely remote possibility for all.
3. Social inclusion matters In specific cases “feeling welcome” represents the main reason for selecting a location where to settle and to decide not to leave that location.
4. Lack of psychosocial support The level of psychosocial support is dramatically low in Libya. Access to those services remains low, while clear needs are reported by vulnerable groups of populations. Behavioural changes in children have been observed and reported by parents, especially in specific communities.
5. Critical gap between virtual and physical financial resources All across the areas assessed, physical cash is available in very limited quantity. This has a clear impact on people’s purchase power, where alternative financial systems and circuits are not in place.
6. Community-based tensions Community and profile-based selection for renting out shelters started to be used by owners. Moreover, specific ethnic groups remain at risk. Community-based tensions are easily fueled by individual criminal acts. Escalation of violence due to inter-community tensions remains one of the major risks in Libya.
7. Financial constraints push evictions The major cause for eviction is related to the incapacity of people to pay for renting shelters. When those evicted end up in informal settlements, their health and safety conditions decrease exponentially.
We will stay here: IDP Vulnerability Assessment – Libya, December 2016 34
Recommendations
When evacuated from Libya in 2014, humanitarian agencies left behind a significant vacuum of information that is still affecting the nature of the response.
Paradigms used elsewhere may not be appropriate and applicable for the case of Libya due to the level of complexity of the crisis itself.
With Safety and Security still being the main concern, humanitarian and stabilization agencies need to closely collaborate with local authorities and rule of law institutions to ensure people feel, again, safe in the communities they live in.
The deep perception of lack of safety is also influenced by the sudden shift from an authoritarian system to a pluricephalic and polycentric power structure in which conflicts (latent and manifest) between militias create a sense of insecurity and instability that affect Libyans down to the household level.
The high level of behavioral changes in children, reported by parents, is a clear symptom of the chronical level the situation of instability is reaching, which seems currently not addressed by the humanitarian community.
The humanitarian community should, with urgency, take into serious consideration the possibility of scaling up psychosocial care related activities, mainly targeting those segments of the population (primarily children) that are most exposed to conflict-related threats and shocks.
In parallel with individual support for children and vulnerable people, humanitarian agencies should scale up community outreach activities, with the support of local authorities, to increase the feeling of social inclusion for those displaced. The case of Bani Walid, final destination for the majority of families displaced multiple times, together with the willingness of the latter to remain in the town, shows that social inclusion has a pivotal role in enhancing the sane and healthy re-insertion of displaced families into social dynamics.
The complex and atypical nature of the Libyan crisis becomes again clear when analyzing the sources of income of displaced people. 86 percent of them, currently, do have a primary source of income. What seems to be missing is not only physical cash, but also trust across the financial circuit. People do not trust traditional financial and credit institutions such as banks.
With the majority of people relying only on public inputs (salaries and pensions), despite not being actually able to perform their duties, alternative financial and payment systems need to be considered in order to re-ensure that the virtual purchase power corresponds to the real purchase power.
Cash Based Response, as conceived traditionally, needs to be tailored to the Libyan context. Given the high value of physical cash and the current inefficiency of banking systems, IDPs expressed concerns over cash distributions that may end up fueling inter-community tensions. The case of Benghazi shows that when there is trust across the financial circuit, people accept alternative systems of payments (cheques, vouchers, credit cards) to access basic items. The humanitarian community should be working together with third actors to ensure people do have access to basic items despite the challenges, for people, to access their own financial resources.