Malakal Town – Intentions Survey March 2016

Central Market - Malakal Town, March 2016

Executive Summary

 Given the choice today, 92% of respondents want to stay in Malakal Town.  In case of renewed fighting, 51% of respondents would head to other parts of South Sudan, whereas 42% would prefer to remain in Malakal Town.  Overall, respondents considered Malakal Town to be safe. However, a change in the security context remains the key deciding factor in whether to stay or go.  Access to services is perceived to range between “very difficult” and “impossible”  Respondents were living in rakoobas, empty houses, or communal shelters  Only 24% of respondents felt that the UNMISS presence in Malakal Town contributed positively to their sense of safety and security.

1

Context & Objective

In the evening of the 17th February, large-scale inter-communal clashes between Shilluk, Nuer and Dinka populations erupted in several different flashpoints of the Malakal PoC site and saw the involvement of armed elements allegedly coming from outside the PoC. Fighting went on throughout the night and into the following day, causing the loss of 25 lives and over 90 injuries. Violence also entailed a high level of destruction, with large areas of the PoC site burnt to ashes and widespread looting of humanitarian facilities.

On the 18th February, while fighting was still ongoing and before UNMISS managed to clear the site of armed elements and bring the situation under control, an estimated 30,000 IDPs sheltering in the new PoC extensions – including Sectors 1 to 4, – fled into the UNMISS logistical base, re-occupying the old PoC site established in December 2013 and subsequently vacated in 2014 and 2015. An estimated 5,000 Dinka and Darfurian IDPs left the PoC for Malakal Town, as a result of the incident. In the two weeks since the incident, humanitarian actors have been responding to the crisis by re-establishing services in the PoC as well as assisting the Dinka and Darfurian population now in Malakal Town. For both responses, there was a gap in information regarding the intentions of the population to stay or go and the factors that influence this decision. Thus, DRC rapidly conducted an intentions assessment in the Old PoC1, and subsequently a two day intentions survey in Malakal Town – aiming to gather information to feed into humanitarian planning.

Methodology

For the purpose of this exercise, DRC adapted the REACH Initiative Intentions Survey questionnaire – which they developed and conducted in PoCs throughout the country. The questionnaire was coded in Open Data Kit (ODK) to allow for mobile data collection with tablets and rapid analysis. The questionnaire focused primarily on intentions, response to renewed fighting, push & pull factors and access to services.

Based on previous population estimates for the Northern blocks of Sector 2 in the PoC as well as distribution figures from the WFP & WVI food distribution conducted in town just prior to this exercise – reaching 4671, individuals – the Dinka IDP population in Malakal Town having fled the PoC after recent events, was estimated at 4500 individuals.

Given this population estimation, 72 respondents were interviewed – achieving a 90/10 confidence interval, with a 10% margin of error.

Six DRC staff members who were previously living in the PoC and were themselves displaced to Malakal Town served as the enumerators for this exercise. Over the course of two days they visited key locations of IDPs: Sobat Secondary School, the Presbyterian Church, the Mosque (inhabited by Darfurians also displaced from the PoC) and clusters spread out from there. From the data collected it is clear that there was both gender diversity and a spread across the various blocks in the blocks in which the respondents used to reside in when living in the PoC (see: Demographics).

1 The “Old PoC” here refers to sites within the UNMISS Log Base, whereas “PoC” or the Sectors” refers to Sector 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the main PoC.

2

Limitations

Given the short timeframe, it was not feasible to map out all areas where IDPs are present. Therefore, the survey relied on the enumerators’ knowledge of where their community had spread to. Although the aim was full geographical coverage, it is possible that certain clusters of IDPs were not covered by this survey.

Findings

Demographics

Of the 72 HHs surveyed, the estimated average household size was eight members. As this is significantly higher than expected, it is likely that respondents interpreted “household” as the number of individuals they were living with in Malakal Town.

59% of household heads were male, and 41% female – with an average age of 32. As expected, all respondents were previously living in Sector 2 of the PoC – which housed the Dinka, Nuer, and Darfurian populations. A breakdown of the ratio of the different blocks can be seen below:

Sector 2 Block % of respondents M 22% N 14% O 10% P 11% S 14% T 10% Y 19%

As respondents were asked 3 questions pertaining to family size and location, it became clear that family units have not remained intact. Data collected showed clear discrepancies between the following:

- Total # of individuals in household - Total # of individuals who had slept in the shelter the night before - Total # of individuals from household physically present in Malakal Town

This may indicate that households are sharing shelter, or have dispersed across nearby houses and are not necessarily sleeping under the same roof. Cultural inclinations may lead to the conclusion that some shelters house predominantly women and other men – though this could not be proven through the data, which was not gender disaggregated for this question.

With regards to family separation, only ten of the 72 respondents indicated that they considered their family to be split or separated. Of these ten, eight asked to be reunified with their family members – preferably in Malakal Town – a matter which has been an ongoing focus for the Protection Cluster.

3

Areas of Origin & Intentions

Given the dynamic nature of the situation in Upper Nile State, respondents were asked the question “Given the choice today – where would you like to live?” to which an overwhelming 92% indicated that they would remain in Malakal Town. The factors that determine this are further analyzed in the “Push & Pull Factors” section.

Given the choice today - where would you like to live?

1% 4% Malakal Town 3%

Other location in South Sudan Outside South Sudan

Malakal PoC 92%

Respondents were queried as to whether their choice to stay or leave was influenced by others. 83% of respondents felt that the decision to move from Malakal Town was purely their own. Of the 17% who felt that their decision would be influenced by another group, 11 respondents indicated that the UN and NGOs could impact their decision to go or stay. Based on community consultations in other parts of Upper Nile State this is likely in relation to either service provision or receiving a “green light” to access an area. Other influential groups that were identified were community leaders and other community members.

Interestingly, 65% of respondents were living in Jonglei State, Pigi/Canal County prior to the outbreak of violence in December 2013, with only 35% of respondents having been residing in Upper Nile State – and 19% specifically in Malakal County. This indicates that respondents may not consider their pre-crisis homes safe to return to and would prefer to remain in Malakal Town, or that there are political pressures at play to keep the Dinka Community in Malakal.

Push & Pull Factors

Although 92% of respondents indicated the desire to stay in Malakal Town, further inquiring was done into the factors and stakeholders that influence these decisions, such as service provision, security, and shelter.

Service Provision

Given that humanitarian actors were severely limited in their access to Malakal Town prior to the incident – service provision has had to kick into gear in order to respond to the newly increased population of Malakal Town – respondents were asked to rate their access to various services on the following scale:

4

- Very easy - Somewhat easy - Somewhat difficult - Very difficult - Impossible

Perceived Accessibility to Services

Food

PSS

Water

Education

Health

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% % of respondents

difficult very difficult impossible

Across the board, all respondents reported that their access to health services was “very difficult”. This came paired with 26% of respondents stating that lack of health services would be their primary reason to leave Malakal Town for another destination.

68% of respondents noted that access to education services was “very difficult”; with 31% going so far as to say that it was impossible to access such services.

94% of respondents stated that access to clean water was “very difficult” with the remaining 6% split between “difficult’ and “impossible”.

78% stated that access to psychosocial support2 was “very difficult”, with 22% finding it “impossible”.

Despite the food distribution that took place just days prior to the survey, 86% considered access to food “very difficult”. During the survey, enumerators also noted that many women had left their children in order to go to the food distribution site (at the Malakal Town stadium) even though the food distribution had ended. It is possible that some of the population missed out on the distribution, or that some had not been registered in the PoC thus did not receive, but hoped at a second chance on the following day.

2 Psychosocial support was explained as provision of case management, psychological support, and provision of child protection services.

5

Although the town market could be considered as steady, with people milling around in the main streets as well as in the Darfurian market – adjacent to the town mosque – 99% of respondents stated that humanitarian food provision was their main source of food.

With 78% of respondents stating that their income (from whichever source) was not enough to cover their household needs and 93% listing relying on NGO assistance as their main coping mechanism – with a small percentage beginning to ration their food – the Dinka population is may be en route to food insecurity. 54% of respondents noted that their occupation prior to December 2013 was in agriculture and 19% gained their income through keeping livestock. Thus, if the situation stabilizes, livelihoods interventions may be key to shifting this population away from reliance on food distributions. However, this comes with the caveat that large swathes of Malakal land are owned by the Shilluk community.

The Malakal authorities have stated that they have the desire to move the Dinka population who left the PoC to one area in a designated area of Malakal Town. This would be to facilitate humanitarian access, according to the authorities.

Security

Despite recent events and the violence that swept through Malakal Town in 2015, 71% of respondents considered it to be safe to live in. 18% did not know whether they considered it unsafe or not, with 11% considering it unsafe. Of these, eight respondents listed “communal violence’ as the main reason they consider Malakal Town to be unsafe.

When asked what factors would be a trigger to leave Malakal Town, 67% responded that a lack of security would force them to leave. Thus, although 71% of respondents consider Malakal Town safe currently, it is clear that renewed fighting/insecurity would see a new displacement of the Dinka community.

Destination in case of renewed violence

3% 4% UNMISS FOB

Other location in South Sudan 42% 51% Remain in Malakal Town Return to Malakal PoC

In the case of new fighting, 51% indicated they would flee to another part of South Sudan. However, a significant 42% stated they would stay in town. Negligible percentages of respondents indicated that theywould return to the PoC or head towards the UNMISS Forward Operating Base (FOB) in Malakal Town. Throughout the establishment of the FOB, UNMISS has clearly stated that in the case of new fighting, civilians would not be admitted in and the base would not become a new PoC – which perhaps reflects in the small number who would head there in case of violence. This low percentage may also be linked to the fact that only 24% of

6

respondents felt that an UNMISS presence in town would somehow improve their security and enhance the safety of their surroundings.

Shelter & Housing, Land and Property

Three key communal centres/sites have been identified as hosting previous residents of the northern blocks of Sector 2 in the PoC; Sobat Secondary School, the Presbyterian Church, and the central Mosque, the latter of which houses the Darfurian community.

However, as mentioned earlier, it was difficult to identify all sites hosting IDPs. Of those surveyed, the largest percentage (27%) had constructed makeshift shelters (known as rakoobas), with 24% having taken up residence in concrete houses, and 18% were noted to be sleeping outside or without shelter, followed by those living in tukuls, family tents, and communal shelters.

Shelter Type

15% 8% communal shelter concrete house 24% 27% family tent 18% no shelter/outside 8% rakooba

89% of respondents were not living in shelters that they owned. This aligns with 88% of respondents never having owned a house in Malakal Town. Of the 8 respondents who indicated ownership, three respondents had constructed a rakooba since fleeing the PoC, with five respondents stating they had previously owned the home they were in.

Over 60% of respondents stated concerns with regards to reclaiming their previous homes in the areas they were living in prior to December 2013. For most this was because they thought or knew that their homes had been destroyed or severely damaged during the conflict. However, several respondents also indicated that their homes were now occupied by either other families or by the military. Without physical proof of ownership, mediation by local chiefs or the government was considered to be necessary.

Among those living in concrete houses that they did not own, most selected the house because it was the first empty house they stumbled upon when arriving in Malakal Town. Other reasons included the house having been or currently being owned by friends, or that there were signs of the house being recently inhabited. The latter because it is considered an indicator that there are no UXOs or booby traps present. The outliers in this scenario are of course the Darfurian community who are all being hosted together in the Central Mosque – next to which they have also developed a small but thriving market.

Remnants of small concrete houses in South Malakal 7

Given that such high numbers of IDPs are now occupying homes that were not originally theirs while indicating that they wish to remain in Malakal Town; this is certainly one of the factors that would cause tensions to flare in the future should the home-owners return. As Malakal Town was originally predominantly inhabited by Shilluk, this may fuel a more tribal than political conflict upon a fully emptying out of the PoC – with members of all three tribes returning to Malakal Town.

Interesting in this regard is that only two respondents considered any form of reconciliation process at a local level (facilitated by community leaders or local authorities) as a precondition for their family to be able to remain in Malakal Town. Rather they emphasized the ability to collect their items (which UNMISS has been facilitating through the SPLA and local government) and having a strong humanitarian presence in town as the main preconditions for remaining in Town. This may indicate that the Dinka community expects to remain in Malakal Town for the moment but that the implementation of the peace at a national level would change this – allowing them to return to their pre-2013 homes.

Recommendations

 Continued advocacy for humanitarian access in Malakal Town to ensure that basic needs are being met in the identified areas (shelter, health, education, WASH, psychosocial support, and food)

 Contingency planning for potential Dinka return to the PoC as a joint effort between UNMISS and the humanitarian community

 Mapping of land ownership in Malakal Town and provision of HLP support/legal advice when/if a Shilluk return takes place

 UXO clearance of Malakal Town

 Engage actively with local authorities on service provision and advocate against the creation of a new “camp-like” setting in Malakal Town as this would isolate the community having fled the PoC and potentially place them at increased risk in case of future attacks.

Survey questionnaire & raw (anonymized) data are available upon request. Please contact: [email protected]

8