Upload
waqas-raja
View
235
Download
4
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
IVAP Peshawar Valley Report
Citation preview
IDP Vulnerablity Assessment and Profiling
Report of findings from the Peshawar Valley
Dates of data collection: June 2010 to March 2011 (including a three month gap due to flood response)
INTRODUCTION AND JUSTIFICATION
The displacement crisis that started in August 2008 in Pakistan’s northwest, began when Bajuris fled fighting between the
Pakistani army and armed opposition groups (AOG) in their area of origin and took refuge in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province
(KPK). Since that time, different agencies in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) have seen intermittent fighting,
causing sometimes prolonged displacement into KPK. Fighting between AOG and the Pakistani army also led to the mass
displacement of some 3 million people from the former Malakand Division, encompassing Lower Dir, Swat, Buner and Shangla.
At present, it is estimated that around 800,000 people remain displaced from the military conflict. However, accurate numbers
of this displacement are difficult due to ongoing displacement as well as spontaneous population movement.
A joint government-humanitarian community registration process registered IDPs based on (1) their possession of a
computerized national ID card (CNIC) and (2) their area of origin’s status as conflict affected, as per government of Pakistan
(GOP) notification. The Real Time Evaluation of the response to the displacement conflict noted that “while the registration
exercise was a logistic triumph, the registration criteria were fundamentally flawed and led to inclusion and exclusion errors both
on IDP status and on the need for assistance…thus, the response was category- based (on the registration criteria) rather than
status- based (IDP) or needs-based. The major humanitarian actors accepted the flawed registration and used it as a basis for
their own distributions.”
CNICs are not held by all Pakistani citizens, and many CNICs were deemed invalid due to their condition or lack of required
information. In addition, women from conservative communities rarely have CNICs, putting women-headed households at
particular risk. Many IDPs were disallowed registration and assistance on this basis. Likewise, many people fled areas not
designated by the GOP as conflict affected, for nonetheless legitimate reasons. For example, many fled due to a fear conflict in a
neighboring area would spill over into their area, or because the military or AOG moved through or used their village as a base.
Fear of conflict is considered legitimate criteria under the IDP Guiding Principles, but the registration process did not include
these groups.
To address some of these concerns, the humanitarian community, working in coordination with the government, designed and
implemented the IDP Vulnerability Assessment and Profiling Project (IVAP).
OBJECTIVES AND METHODS
The IVAP project has two main objectives: (1) profile the level of vulnerability of every conflict displaced family in KPK to allow
for targeting of in-kind assistance based on family vulnerability; (2) provide general assessment data to the humanitarian
community for the design and implementation of programs to benefit displaced and host communities.
The IVAP aims at interviewing every conflict displaced family. This is accomplished through the following process:
1. Concentrations of IDPs are mapped by Union Council
2. IVAP teams visit every village in every Union Council found to be hosting IDPs (round 1)
3. Elders in every village are consulted, and assist the IVAP team to locate the conflict IDP families and individuals in the
village
4. A snowball sample is used, with each IDP family helping to identify the next family
5. The IVAP teams strictly adhere to the IVAP inclusion policy (Appendix 1) to determine which families will be interviewed
6. Mass communication via posters in hosting villages, newspapers, radio and TV ads advertise the IOM humanitarian call
center where IDPs who were missed in the survey call and register their names and locations
7. IVAP teams revisit and interview all families who call into the call center (round 2)
8. The IVAP teams are monitored by an independent team who travel to the field, ensuring all locations are covered, and
the interviews are consistent and accurate
KEY FINDINGS
The IVAP project has profiled 47,109 conflict IDP families residing in the Peshawar Valley. It is estimated that the IVAP has
interviewed 90% of all conflict IDPs who are willing to be surveyed, in the Peshawar valley. The distribution of these families by
current location and areas of origin are as follows.
IN ORDER TO ENSURE THE RESULTS ARE AS USEFUL AS POSSIBLE TO ASSISTANCE PROVIDERS, THE IVAP KEY FINDINGS ARE
DIVIDED INTO TWO SECTIONS: IDPS LIVING IN HOST LOCATIONS (SHOWN BELOW IN ALL RED TABLES), AND IDPS LIVING IN
JALOZAI CAMP (SHOWN BELOW IN ALL GREEN TABLES).
IDPS LIVING IN HOST LOCATIONS
The IVAP has identified 31,383 conflict IDP families living in host communities in the Peshawar Valley.
Tehsil of Displacement (31383)
Tehsil # of families % of total Tehsil # of families % of total
Charssada 2230 7% Takht Bhai 168 1%
Lahor 739 2% Tangi 1752 6%
Nowshera 2202 7% Town-1 4548 14%
Other (not in list) 3139 10% Town-2 8241 26%
Peshawar 754 2% Town-3 3235 10%
Swabi 1190 4% Town-4 3107 10%
Swat Rani Zai Sub-division 78 0%
District of Displacement (n=47,066)
District # of families
% of total
Peshawar 20086 43%
Nowshera 18199 39%
Charssada 4647 10%
Swabi 2052 4%
Mardan 1115 2%
Lower Dir 967 2%
District of Origin (n=47,109)
District # of families
% of total
District # of families
% of total
Bajur 20283 43% Shangla 314 1%
Mohmand 7949 17% Hungu 244 1%
Khyber 6868 15% Buner 231 0%
Kurrum 4952 11% FR Peshawar 202 0%
Orakzai 2490 5% Malakand 126 0%
Swat 1765 4% North Waziristan 42 0%
Upper Dir 819 2% Unknown 18 0%
Lower dir 415 1% FR Kohat 16 0%
South Waziristan 347 1% FR Lakki Marwat 2 0%
RETURN INTENTIONS- IDPS IN HOST SETTINGS
When asked if they wanted to return, 92% of families mentioned a desire to return to their areas of origin. Of those who want to
return both the timeline for return and stated needs for return vary quite significantly. However, the clear majority response to
both questions is that families do not know when they will return, because they are unsure of when it will be safe.
When discussing priority needs to return home, families tended to mention either security during travel, or at the time of arrival
as the first need. After security, both food and assistance to rebuild homes were clear priorities.
Needs to return home (30,486)
1st Need n=30,486
2nd Need n=30,273
3rd Need n=28,866
Composite n=89,625
Security on home arrival 38% 10% 7% 18%
Food 17% 29% 15% 21%
Material for rebuilding house
15% 23% 18% 19%
Security during travel 10% 2% 2% 5%
Transportation 9% 8% 5% 7%
Temporary shelter 4% 8% 9% 7%
Job opportunities 2% 7% 17% 9%
Land 1% 2% 5% 3%
Water 1% 4% 5% 3%
Educational services 1% 2% 4% 2%
Health services 0% 2% 6% 3%
Assistance with rent 0% 1% 5% 2%
Livelihood training 0% 0% 1% 1%
Shelter 0% 0% 0% 0%
Of the 8% who do not want to return, 98% would prefer to settle where they are currently located, rather than relocate to a
third location (2%). For those who would like to remain in their current location, we can see that food is the first priority,
followed by NFI/household items, job opportunities and health services.
14%
1%
1%
2%
82%
If you want to return, when (n=29,122)
Immediately
1-3 Months
3-6 Months
More than 6 months
Don't knowYes92%
No8%
Do you want to return to your area of origin (n=31,325)
Needs to settle where you live now
1st
Need n=2284
2nd
Need n=2228
3rd
Need n=2030
Composite n=6542
Security 0% 1% 3% 2%
Temporary shelter 5% 8% 4% 6%
Shelter 0% 0% 0% 0%
Food 54% 13% 8% 26%
Job opportunities 5% 10% 21% 11%
Health services 6% 15% 13% 11%
Land 4% 4% 7% 5%
Livelihood training 1% 3% 4% 3%
Water and Sanitation 3% 5% 5% 4%
Assistance with rent 8% 0% 0% 3%
Material for rebuilding house 4% 7% 7% 6%
NFI/household items 8% 31% 16% 18%
Educational services 1% 2% 4% 2%
In regards to IDP families’ knowledge of and access to assistance for return, the following was found:
While nearly 75% of families’ houses were damaged or destroyed, only 33% are beneficiaries for housing compensation. In
addition, the majority of IDP families were not aware of any return assistance packages, highlighting the need for mass
communications around return assistance available.
INCOME AND LIVELIHOODS- IDPS IN HOST SETTINGS Income for displaced families is a clear concern. Only 32% make over the threshold for poverty assistance programs in Pakistan
(5000 Rs/month). Fortunate families have more than one source of income, though only about 23% of families are in this
situation, and many of them are reliant on zakat or Benazir income support programs as their first or second source of income.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Are you a beneficiary to receive housing compensation (n=26,212)
Was your house damaged/destroyed (n=31323)
Have you received the cash grant of 25,000 rps (n=31323)
Are you aware of any return assistance packages? (n=31,322)
Yes
No
Don't Know
Sixty-six percent of families count unskilled, daily wage labor as their primary source of income. While only around 15% have
semi-stable positions as servants, shopkeepers, skilled wage laborers or sharecroppers.
Loans are very common among IDP families, with 76% of families owing a loan to one or more persons. The average amount of
indebtedness is 150,000 Rs. However, the breakdown of amount owed shows only a quarter of IDPs who have loans owe over
100,000 Rs.
7%
17%
43%
33%
Family Income (n=31,338)
Less than 1000 Rs per month
1000-2500 Rs. per month
2500-5000 Rs. per month
More than 5000 Rs. per month
77%
17%
6%
Number of Income sources per family
Families with one source of income
Families with two sources of Income
Families with three sources of income
19604
1611
1177
1176
1189
1051
1026
1016
784
754
Daily wage labour
Servant
Other
Shopkeeper / trader
Door-to-door / or wood trading
Zakat or Benazir income support
Local remittances
Skilled wage labor
Foreign remittances
Sharecropping / tenancy
Main Income source (n=29,703)
6%
14%
27%25%
28%
If you have a loan, how much is it for (n=23837)
< 10,000
10,001-25,000
25,001-50,000
50,001-100,000
> 100,000
4371
Relatives, 21907
Bank, 121
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
To whom debt is owed
Local Lenders Relatives Bank
FOOD SECURITY- IDPS IN HOST SETTINGS While the IVAP uses three indicators to identify food security (meals eaten per day, negative coping strategies and food
consumption score) it must be noted most families surveyed are regular recipients of WFP food assistance. The average, to
acceptable nature of the food security results can largely be attributed to the WFP assistance. As we have seen very low income
and a lack of diversity in livelihoods, if the food assistance were to stop, it can be assumed that the food security of IDP families
would likely plummet.
Both adult males and females are eating an average of 2.8 meals per day. Results of food consumption scores (calculated
according to WFP protocol) as well as the negative coping strategies are below.
SHELTER- IDPS IN HOST SETTINGS Almost all IDP families living in host communities are accommodated in either a mud or brick house, most of which are rented.
The average rental price per month is 2,400 Rs. On average 4.7 persons sleep in each room while more than half of all IDP
families do not own an asset of any kind. Only 32% of IDPs living in host communities in the Peshawar valley have ever received
an NFI kit.
64%
41%
25%
24%
20%
16%
9%
5%
5%
2%
1%
Purchase food on debt
Borrow food, or rely on help from friends
Sold jewelry
Decrease expenses on health care
None of these
Limit portion size at meals
Skipped entire days meals
Women ate less food then men
Took children out of school
Sent family member to work abroad
Begged
Negative Coping Strategies (n=31,328) (more than one answer possible)
2%
0%
48%49%
1%
Type of housing (n=31,338)
Tent
Grass cottage
Mud house
Cement or brick house
Other84%
7%
5%4%
Who owns the house/land where you are now living
(n=31,256)
Rented
Relatives / friends
Own
Other
Food Consumption Score (n=26,502)
Poor 7%
Borderline 46%
Acceptable 48%
The largest household concerns of IDP
families are the lack of money, the high
costs of goods and services,
overcrowding and harsh weather
conditions.
In regards to asset ownership, the most
commonly owned assets are radios and
TVs, followed by bicycles. However, the
majority of families do not own an asset
of any kind.
GENERAL HOUSEHOLD SITUATION- IDPS IN HOST SETTINGS
In order to have a general overview of the situation of IDP families, the IVAP asks two subjective questions: (1) What is the
general physical appearance of the people in the family; and (2) How are the overall living conditions of the family?
Asset Index by number of households owning each asset
No Assets Radio TV Bicycle
Sewing machine Washing machine Fridge/Freezer Heater
Cooking stove Other farm machinery Plough Computer
Moterbike Car/Truck/Taxi Grain mill Microwave oven
41%60%
57%38%
2% 1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
General Physical appearance (n=31,335) Living conditions (n=31,335)
Bad Average Excelent
Top three housing concerns right now
Concern 1st concern
n=31,179
2nd concern
n=30,999
3rd concern
n=28,196
Composite n=90,374
Lack of money 31% 23% 29% 28%
Overcrowding 30% 3% 5% 13%
Harsh weather conditions 14% 12% 12% 13%
High cost of goods / services
8% 34% 21% 21%
Lack of cooking facilities 5% 13% 17% 12%
Lack of water and sanitation
4% 7% 7% 6%
Security 4% 1% 2% 2%
Privacy 3% 5% 3% 4%
Other 0% 1% 5% 2%
IVAP teams also inquired into the current needs of IDPs
in their location of displacement. The most common
responses overall (composite) were food, assistance
with rent, job opportunities and health services.
ACCESS TO COMMUNITY SERVICES- IDPS IN HOST SETTINGS In order to prioritize hosting community needs, the IVAP also looks at some key community services such as education, water
and health facilities.
81%
15%
4%
Availalbity of Water (n=30,264)
Consistently available
Inconsistantly available
No water
49%
46%
4%1%
Distance to water (n=24,592)
Available inside home
Under 500 mtrs
500 mtrs to 800 mtrs
Over 800 mtrs
82%
84%
18%
16%
Are IDP children allowed to attend local schools (n=15,844)
Are IDP children allowed to sit exams at local schools
(n=15,435)
Access to Education
Yes No
81%
15%
3% 1%
Nearest health facility (n=30,260)
Within 5 KM
6-15 KM
Beyond 15 KM
Don't know
Need right now (31,039)
Need 1st
need n=31039
2nd
need n=30,026
3rd
need n=26,051
Composite n=87,116
Food 48% 14% 12% 26%
Assistance with rent
22% 17% 21% 20%
Job opportunities 14% 34% 19% 22%
Temporary shelter 4% 7% 6% 6%
Health services 4% 12% 20% 12%
Water 3% 6% 4% 4%
Educational services
2% 5% 5% 4%
Local transportation
2% 1% 2% 1%
Livelihood training 1% 3% 5% 3%
Other 1% 2% 7% 3%
IDPS IN JALOZAI CAMP The IVAP has identified 15,726 conflict IDP families living in Jalozai Camp.
RETURN INTENTIONS- JALOZAI
When asked if they wanted to return, 86% mentioned wanting to return, slightly less
than those living in host communities. The majority do not yet know when they will
return, many mentioning security as the primary deciding factor.
When discussing priority needs to return home, families most commonly mentioned
security, food and shelter.
Needs to return home (15,525)
Need 1st need n=15,525
2nd need n=15,349
3rd need n=14,776
Composite n=45,650
Security during travel 51% 15 6% 24%
Security on home arrival
14% 32% 18% 21%
Temporary shelter 10% 18% 28% 19%
Food 7% 14% 8% 10%
Job opportunities 14% 2% 2% 6%
Health services 2% 7% 8% 6%
Land 1% 4% 11% 5%
Livelihood training 1% 2% 6% 3%
Water 0% 1% 5% 2%
Assistance with rent 0% 2% 2% 1%
Material for rebuilding house
0% 1% 3% 1%
Transportation 0% 0% 3% 1%
Educational services 0% 0% 1% 0%
Other 0% 0% 1% 0%
District/Agency of Origin (n=15,726)
Agency # of families
% of total
Bajur 11118 71%
Kurrum 10 0%
Mohmand 1005 6%
Khyber 3554 23%
Other 14 0%
Yes86%
No14%
Do you want to return to your area of origin (n=31,325)
18% 1%
0%
1%
80%
If you want to return, when (n=29,122)
Immediately
1-3 Months
3-6 Months
More than 6 months
Don't know
Of the 14% noting various reason to not want to return, 99% would prefer to
settle where they are currently located, rather than relocate to a third location
(1%). For those who would like to remain in their current location, it is clear that
food is the first priority, followed by health services, shelter and NFIs.
Needs to remain in displaced location (Nowshera)
1st need n=2156
2nd need n=2126
3rd need n=2086
Composite n=6368
Food 63% 15% 5% 28%
Health services 7% 31% 24% 21%
Temporary shelter 14% 19% 7% 14%
NFI / household items 6% 12% 16% 11%
Material for rebuilding house
4% 9% 5% 6%
Job opportunities 1% 2% 13% 5%
Security 1% 2% 12% 5%
Livelihood training 2% 3% 6% 4%
Land 1% 3% 3% 2%
Other 1% 1% 4% 2%
Water and sanitation 1% 2% 3% 2%
Education 0% 1% 1% 1%
In regards to IDP families’ knowledge of and access to assistance for return, the following was found:
While nearly 71% of families’ houses were damaged or destroyed, only 42% are beneficiaries for housing compensation. In
addition, the majority of IDP families were not aware of any return assistance packages, again highlighting the need for mass
communications around return assistance available.
INCOME AND LIVELIHOODS- JALOZAI Income for displaced families is a clear concern, and income for families living on camps, is significantly lower overall in
comparison to those living in host communities. Only 14% make over the threshold for poverty assistance programs in Pakistan
(5000 Rs/month). Fortunate families have more than one source of income, though only about 23% of families are in this
situation, and many of them are reliant on zakat or Benazir income support programs as their first or second source of income.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Are you a beneficiary to receive housing compensation (n=12,157)
Was your house damaged/destroyed (n=15,701)
Have you received the cash grant of 25,000 rps (n=15,701)
Are you aware of any return assistance packages? (n=15,701)
Return and Assistance
Yes
No
Don't Know
58%24%
7%
11%
Reasons for not wanting to return (n=2191)
Security situation in the area of origin
Damage or lack of community infrastrastructure
There are more jobs here
There is not enough assistance for returnees
Seventy percent of families count unskilled, daily wage labor as their primary source of income. No other source of income can
compare with day labor but the next most common primary source of income is Zakat/Benazir income support with 8%. The
over dependence on day labor illustrates the extreme uncertainty within which the population of Jalozai resides on a daily basis.
Loans are very common among IDP families, with 85% of families owing a loan to one or more persons. The average amount of
indebtedness is 125,000 Rs. However, the breakdown of amount owed, shows less than a quarter of IDPs who have loans owe
over 100,000 Rs.
22%
31%
33%
14%
Family monthly income (n=15,675)
Less than 1000 Rs per month
1000-2500 Rs. per month
2500-5000 Rs. per month
More than 5000 Rs. per month
70%
16%
14%
Number of Income sources per family (n=13,952)
Families with one source of income
Families with two sources of Income
Families with three sources of income
70%
8%
4%
4%
3%
3%
3%
2%
Daily wage labour
Zakat or Benazir income support
Shopkeeper / trader
Door-to-door / or wood trading
Other
Local remittances
Skilled wage labor
Sharecropping / tenancy
Main Income source (n=13,952)
8%
10%
29%29%
24%
If you have a loan, how much is it for (n=13,319)
< 10,000
10,001-25,000
25,001-50,000
50,001-100,000
> 100,000
2482
Relatives, 12730
Bank, 59
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
To whom debt is owed (n=15,271)
Local Lenders Relatives Bank
FOOD SECURITY- JALOZAI
In Jalozai camp, the three indicators used by the IVAP to identify food security (meals eaten per day, negative coping strategies
and food consumption score) are strongly affected by the WFP distribution of food to all families in the camp. As we have seen
both in the on and off camp settings, due to very low income and a lack of diversity in livelihoods, If food assistance were to
stop, it can be assumed that the food security of IDP families would plummet.
Both adult males and females are eating an average of 2.9 meals per day. Results of food consumption scores (calculated
according to WFP protocol) as well as the negative coping strategies are below.
SHELTER- JALOZAI Almost all IDP families living in Jalozai live in a tent. The average family size is 5.3 while the average number of persons sleeping
per room in a tent is 5.2, meaning that almost all families reside together in a one-room tent. Contrary to the situation in host
populations, 95% of all families living in Jalozai have received NFIs.
The largest household concerns of IDP families are the lack of money, harsh weather conditions the high costs of goods and
services, and a lack of cooking facilities.
Top three housing concerns (n=15,653)
1st need n=15,653
2nd need n=15,614
3rd need n=15,047
Composite n=46,314
Lack of money 23% 23% 37% 28%
Harsh weather conditions 29% 18% 16% 21%
High cost of goods / services
3% 24% 20% 15%
Lack of cooking facilities 6% 22% 16% 15%
Privacy 12% 8% 4% 8%
Overcrowding 17% 1% 1% 7%
Security 9% 2% 3% 5%
Lack of water and sanitation
1% 2% 1% 1%
Other 0% 0% 2% 1%
59%
52%
29%
23%
20%
17%
7%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Purchase food on debt
Borrow food, or rely on help from friends
Sold jewelry
None of these
Decrease expenses on health care
Limit portion size at meals
Skipped entire days meals
Women ate less food then men
Took children out of school
Sent family member to work abroad
Begged
Negative Coping Strategies (n=31,328) (more than one answer possible)
Food Consumption Score (n=26,502)
Poor 5%
Borderline 50%
Acceptable 45%
In regards to asset ownership, the most commonly owned assets are radios and sewing machines. However, the vast majority
(77%) of families do not own an asset of any kind.
GENERAL HOUSEHOLD SITUATION- JALOZAI The general overview questions regarding the situation of IDP families, show a higher percentage of families in the ‘bad’
categories when compared to families living in host communities.
Asset Index by number of households owning each asset
No Assets Radio Sewing machine Cooking stove
Bicycle TV Washing machine Other farm machinery
Fridge/Freezer Heater Plough Car/Truck/Taxi
Moterbike Microwave oven Computer Grain mill
43%
68%
56%
32%
1% 1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
General Physical Appearance (n=15,701) Overall living conditions (n=15,701)
Bad Average Excelent
IVAP teams also inquired into the current needs of
IDPs in Jalozai. The most common responses overall
(composite) were food, job opportunities and
health services.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The IVAP aims to balance gathering accurate data for targeting assistance, with presenting the smallest
burden to the IDP population as possible. In order to do so, the IVAP has streamlined the questionnaire to
avoid asking questions that may not inform decision making. In addition, every survey begins with an
informed consent, explaining what the IVAP is, the time it will take to complete, and the non-guarantee of
assistance.
This data report was last updated on March 18, 2011. For more information you may write to the IVAP coordinator
at [email protected] or register for approval of a log-in to the IVAP website allowing you to assess more
detailed analyses and some of the raw IVAP data.
APPENDICES
1. Inclusion Policy
2. Questionnaire
3. Maps
4. Partners
Current family needs (15,334)
1st need n=15334
2nd need n=14,188
3rd need n=11,700
Composite n=41,222
Food 55% 13% 10% 28%
Job opportunities
20% 34% 18% 24%
Health services 8% 19% 26% 17%
Temporary shelter
6% 13% 10% 10%
Other 2% 6% 13% 7%
Livelihood training
2% 4% 12% 6%
Educational services
2% 5% 5% 4%
Local transportation
4% 2% 3% 3%
Water 1% 3% 2% 2%
Assistance with rent
0% 1% 2% 1%