Conflict Mapping SurveyCueibet County, Lakes, South Sudan

September 2017

This survey was made possible thanks to the kind support of USDOS, Bureau of Africa

Objectives of the Conflict Mapping Survey

2

1) Inferential analysis: Investigate the historical roots of cattle-relatedconflicts (mapping of the chains of cattle raids and revenge claims)

2) Descriptive analysis: Provide an outlook of livelihood strategies,people displacement (IDPs), safety & security concerns, and GBV threats

Survey Methodology and notes on data reading

3

QuestionnaireThe questionnaire was developed by AVSI in collaboration with academics from the Departmentof Anthropology of the University of Notre Dame.

Sampling strategy The sampling strategy followed the standard two-stage cluster sampling, the first one (PPS withstratification to take into account village size and distance from main settlements) to guide theselection of villages, and the second one (Improved Random Walks) to select household to besampled. 372 households were surveyed.

Data readingData reflects the number of HHs or individuals reporting a certain answer. The sum of all answersfor a given question is limited to 100% when one response only was allowed, but may reach 200%in the case two responses were allowed, 300% when three, and so on.

4

1) Exchange, Raiding, and Revenge Claim Interactions in Cueibet County, South Sudan:

A Social Network Analysis

Based on “Exchange, Raiding, and Revenge Claim Interactions in Cueibet County, South Sudan: A Social NetworkAnalysis” Final report - Yang Yang, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University & Rahul Oka, Departmentof Anthropology, University of Notre Dame

Objective

5

JustificationAs substance pastoralism remains a primary source of livelihood in South Sudan, cattle raidingrepresent one of the most economically disruptive form of violence; revenge killings and acts ofGBV resulting from cattle raiding, conversely, represent one of the gravest security concern andone of the most common obstacle to micro-level peace building.

ObjectiveBy undertaking a social network analysis, to unpack and explain the relationships betweencultural dynamics -- especially the notion of honor/revenge claims -- cattle raiding, and theresulting violence that transpires regularly within the Dinka group in Cueibet, within a frameworkof gender analysis (differentiating the analysis for gender).

ResultTo provide an overlook of active conflicts and extant revenge-claims to offer a view of bothongoing and latent conflict to the local County Peace Committee. Additionally, the inclusion ofgender analysis aims at achieving gender equity in protection.

Methodology & Results

6

MethodologyA social network analysis was employed to provide a statistical measure of the extent to whichrevenge claim networks and livestock exchange networks correlate or overlap with the raidingnetworks, and how these correlations are altered through time, and by gender.

Main findings 1) Women are significantly more likely to give/receive livestock and indulge in these meaningfulsymbolic exchanges with people (rather than in illegal form of cattle exchanges) than men.

2) While young respondents (< 25y) are more likely to engage in exchange networks, young adults(ages 25-30y) are far more likely to engage in raids or report being raided.

3) Raiding network are highly correlated with, and structurally similar to, Revenge claim network,regardless of gender

4) Livestock exchange networks are not correlated with Raiding network, nor with Revenge claimnetwork

Policy Implications

7

1) and 2): Women and young males (< 25y) do engage in (legal) exchange of cattle and do notconsider it to be a source of shame, contrary to what is sometimes claimed in the literature

3) Outstanding revenge claims do lead to cattle raids. Monitoring them adequately could indeedprovide key information to put in place preemptive/mitigation measures

4) Livestock exchanges do not seem to lead to an increase in cattle raiding, nor to a decrease.Support to the commercialization of cattle herding sector, thus, should neither cause nordiminish cattle raiding and its violent consequences

8

2) Main findings on displacement, livelyhood, security, and GBV

General outlook

9

With little less than 20K families, a large section of the people of Cueibet county has no schooling experience. Their main source of income is related to agriculture.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Agriculture and Sale of cereals (sorghum, maize etc)

Agriculture and Sale of other crops and products

Sale of animal products (milk etc)

Livestock and Sale of livestock

Sale of alcoholic beverages

Salaried work

Skilled labour

Casual labour related to agricultural activities

Begging

Sale of firewood

Sales of grass

Other non-agricultural casual labour

Borrowing

Sales of charcoal

Casual labour related to construction

Main source of incomeNumber of people*

County 177,987

Abiriu 41,115

Citcok 25,096

Cueibet

Duony 13,705

Malou-pec 62,473

Mayath

Ngap 19,935

Pagor 15,663

Tiap-tiap

62% 12% 4%5% 9% 8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Education level of caretaker interviewed 18 to 19 years

No formal education Some lower primary

Some higher primary Completed primary

Some secondary Completed secondary

*Not sure about the repartition in the new payam system. Displayed is the population attributed to the payam using the old system, reported in “Population Projections for South Sudan by Payam - From 2015 – 2020” NBS South Sudan.

People displacement (inflow and outflow)

10

People displacement/relocation is very intense: in the county, merely 19% of HHs is composed of natives only; 67% of HHs has relocated/was displaced in the last year and another 15% of HHs hosts IDPs (11% vulnerable* IDPs). Outflows figures confirm a remarkable level of displacement (48% of brother/sister left in the last year)

67%

4%

11%

19%

15%

Composition of Cueibet - natives HHs vs. newly arrived HHs vs. natives HHs hosting IDPs

HHs arrived in the last year Local HHs hosting IDP - non vulnerables

Local HHs hosting IDP - vulnerables Rest of native HHs

*Vulnerable: above 60 years, unaccompanied minors, single mothers

48%

Outflow (% of respondent’s brothers/sisters who relocated in the last year)

% of brothers/sisters who relocated in the last yearOthers

People displacement (reasons)

11

Although security-related reasons are the most significant cause of people displacement/relocation (in red), in most cases insecurity is coupled with lack of economic means (orange) as the main driver of people dislocation

Reasons for arriving or leaving Frequencies No reasons (HHs not affected by inflow/outflow of people) 10%

Only due to lack of security/cattle raiding 15%

Lack of security & Other reasons 2%

Due to Lack of security/Cattle raiding & Lack of income 52%

Due to Lack of security/Cattle raiding & Lack of income & Other reasons 2%

Only due to Lack of income (Hunger and/or Lack of employment) 12%

Due to Lack of income & other reasons 3%

Only other reasons 4%

Grand Total 100%

Livelihood activities

12

Almost every HH cultivates large plots, Tiap-tiap being the only payam slightly less engaged in farming. Livestock raring is common, especially in Pagor, but with different aims: for selling/consumption in Duony; for marriage/saving in Tiap-tiap

ABIRIU CITCOK CUEIBET DUONYMALOU-

PECMAYATH NGAP PAGOR

TIAP-

TIAP

Cultivate land 100% 100% 100% 98% 98% 100% 100% 98% 83%

I measure the size

of the cultivation

in Acres or

Feddans (vs

Katala)

98% 98% 100% 95% 84% 91% 94% 93% 83%

ABIRIU CITCOK CUEIBET DUONYMALOU-

PECMAYATH NGAP PAGOR

TIAP-

TIAPCounty

HH with livestock 79% 83% 89% 95% 83% 74% 86% 98% 80% 85%

Of HH with livestock

% with milk79% 73% 91% 100% 91% 96% 86% 98% 56% 86%

Animal reared and

bred in groups73% 50% 86% 33% 72% 20% 69% 90% 59% 62%

Average # of cattle 17 12 17 20 19 17 10 36 13 19

# of cattle

Average # of sheep 6 5 9 7 11 8 8 9 5 8

Average # of goats 9 5 9 6 9 9 7 13 6 8

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Use of cattle

For marriage

For saving purposes

Household uses/own consumption

Commercial purpose/for selling

Draught animals/working purposes

Constraints to livelhihood activities

13

Tiap-tiap stands out for its limited access to water, which most likely constraints farming too. Pagor “demands” support

0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% 350% 400% 450% 500%

ABIRIU

CITCOK

CUEIBET

DUONY

MALOU-PEC

MAYATH

NGAP

PAGOR

TIAP-TIAP

County

Main constraints to livestock farming

Cattle raiding Insecurity-Conflict

Lack of water Lack of grazing pastures

Pest and diseases Lack of veterinary services

Inability to access communal grazing lands Lack of market for livestockABIRIU CITCOK CUEIBET DUONY

MALOU-

PECMAYATH NGAP PAGOR

TIAP-

TIAPCounty

Main source

of water

changes

according to

seasons

86% 95% 94% 82% 86% 50% 91% 68% 92% 83%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

ABIRIU

CITCOK

CUEIBET

DUONY

MALOU-PEC

MAYATH

NGAP

PAGOR

TIAP-TIAP

County

Time to go and return to the closest water source

Less than 1 hour Between 1 and 2 hours More than 2 hours

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

ABIRIUCITCOK

CUEIBETDUONY

MALOU-PECMAYATH

NGAPPAGOR

TIAP-TIAPGrand Total

Distance to water source for animals

Less than 1 hour Between 1 and 2 hours Between 2 and 4 hours More than 4 hours

Livelihood/resources-related conflicts

14

Conflict over resources is mostly registered in Pagor, Tiap-tiap and Cueibet

% of HHs who report

conflicts related to…ABIRIU CITCOK CUEIBET DUONY MALOU-PEC MAYATH NGAP PAGOR TIAP-TIAP County

-Land used for grazing 77% 92% 95% 95% 80% 97% 100% 98% 98% 91%

-Water source for

livestock85% 86% 100% 95% 80% 94% 97% 100% 98% 92%

-Competition among

livestock owners and

farmers

87% 92% 97% 97% 82% 91% 91% 100% 100% 93%

Main problems (occurred in the last 3 months)

15

Cattle raid is the most widespread problem, reported by 49% of HHs

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Fire in house

Long term health problem

Livestock/ crop disease

Insicurity/violence

Food too expensive/ hight food price

Lack of free access/movement

Flood

Drought

Cattle Raid

Sudden health problem or accident

Loss of land/ assets

Loss of work of a household member

Weed/pest

Deatch of livestock

Death of family member

Theft of land/ assets

Incidence of problems in the last three months

Crimes (scope)

16

Revenge killing is the most common criminal offence experienced by families. 66% of HHs indicates that such revenges are in direct response to cattle raiding

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Ambush

Abduction of women / forced…

Disappearence

House breaking (burglary)

Robbery

Land dispossesion

Revenge killing

Sexual assaults/raping

Disappearence of family members

Beating

Child abduction

Theft

Murder

Crime experienced in the last three years

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

AmbushBeating

Child abductionRobbery

DisappearenceAbduction of women / forced…

Revenge killingHouse breaking (burglary)

MurderSexual assaults/raping

Land dispossesionDisappearence of family members

Theft

Crimes occurring during or as a result of cattle raiding

Crimes (perpetrators and refferal pathways)

17

The bulk of crimes is perpetrated by people living in far-away communities. Crimesare often reported to judiciary and law enforcement officials

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Family members

Unknown

Member of a close by village

Members from far away

Member of the same village

Perpetrators of crimes

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Head of the family

Police

NGO

Armed group

Religious leader

Went to court

Relative, friend or neighbor

Local politician

Nobody

Local leader

To whom was the crime reported

Crimes (medical/psychological support )

18

Medical/psychological support was sought by 86% of HHs; however, many turned to family members, a sign of the limited availability of qualified support. Indeed, only ¼ of HHs qualified the support received as entirely useful

14%

86%

Share of HHs who received medical/psychological assistance after crime

No Yes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Social worker

CBO or other community groups

Other

NGO

Family member

Religious organization

Provider of medical/psycological assistance

45%

29%

25%

Usefulness of support received

Not much Only partially Yes

GBV (scope in Cuibet county)

19

GBV acts are very common: only 17% of HHs has not experienced GBV in the last 5 years. Overall, GBV acts do not seem to be increasing compared to last year.

Type of GBV% who

reported it

Number of times in

the last 5 years

Physical violence 85% 6

Mental emotional pain 85% 6

Denied resources and opportunities 86% 6

Forced sex 78% 6

17%

23%

47%

13%

Experience of GBV in the last 5 years

No, they never happened to me or my familyYes, but they happened only in limited occasionsYes, they happened in several occasionsYes, they are part of life

53%

12%

35%

Time trend of GBV

Last year occurred more frequentlyThey occur more or less with the same frequencyNow they occurr more frequently

GBV (scope among payams)

20

Where GBV acts are more frequent is in TIAP-TIAP, where the outlook is worsening, followed by NGAP, where it is improving.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

ABIRIU

CITCOK

CUEIBET

DUONY

MALOU-PEC

MAYATH

NGAP

PAGOR

TIAP-TIAP

Grand Total

Time trend of GBV – current versus previous year

Now they occurr more frequently They occur more or less with the same frequency

Last year occurred more frequently

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

ABIRIU

CITCOK

CUEIBET

DUONY

MALOU-PEC

MAYATH

NGAP

PAGOR

TIAP-TIAP

Grand Total

Experience of GBV in the last five years

Yes, they happened in several occasions Yes, they are part of life

Yes, but they happened only in limited occasions No, they never happened to me or my family

GBV (Root causes and main impact)

21

Cattle raiding, the most significant cause of murders (i.e. one of the main Protection concern) is also strongly linked to GBV. The linkages between the two seems to be related to the use of cattle as dowry. Survivals lament problems in the relation with their partners

76%

18%

5%

Is there a relationship between GBV and Catlle raiding?

Yes No Does not know

Linkage between GBV and cattle raiding

Marriage 31%

Forced marriage 9%

Education 5%

High dowries 9%

Hunger/Lack of income 4%

Wealth 1%

Disagreements/Conflicts 30%

Weapons 1%

Revenge 1%

No connection - just an habit 1%

Bad friendhips 4%

Other 3%

Grand Total 100%

62%

26%

24%

28%

Main problems for survivals of sexual violence

Problem in the relations with partner/to find a partnerTaking care of your childrenProblems limiting the possibility to have a childSum of your family

GBV (most at risk groups and places)

22

Young girls is the most-at-risk group of GBV; for them there are few safe places as GBV acts occur outside villages and in cattle camps as well as in the village. Apparently, communities have knowledge of specific individuals representing a threat

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

In the cattle camp

In the school

In the streets

Outside the villages

In other homes

In your house

In the village

Where GBV acts occur

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Orphans

Young girls, under 12

Women without babies

Women with babies

12 to 18 years old girls

Girls at school

Widows

18 to 30 years old women

Groups at risk of GBV

16%

84%

Are there specific individuals who are a threat in your village

No Yes

GBV (referral pathways to justice)

23

GBV crimes are often reported to police officials. Insecurity, distance, and the practice of applying direct revenge hamper access to the legal system

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Chiefs

Commisioner

Director

Government authorities

Local leader

Payam administrator

Police

None

GBV referral pathsObstacles limiting reporting to police

Distance 21%

Insecurity 29%

Conflict 16%

Revenge 12%

Stigmatization 3%

Government/chiefs 4%

Others 15%

Total 163

GBV (safe spaces and communities’ suggestions)

24

Schools seem to offer an ideal entry point for GBV interventions. Schools host the most-at-risk group, and are recognized as a safe place by the community. Education and the weakening of the “gun culture” is highlighted by interviewed as necessary components of a GBV intervention.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Schools

Police

Cultural centers

Hospital

Church

Home

Town

Other

Safe places wor women

What could be done to improve women’s safety Improve security 38%

Peace building 23%

Education 23%

Disarmement 8%

Community meetings 3%

Enforce law 5%

Other 17%

James Wole, a South Sudanese local NGO employee, said: “If I do not carry a gun, the men despise me as a defenseless woman.

What could be done to reduce cattle raiding

Disarmament 58%Peace building 23%

Law enforcement 9%Improve security 4%Other 6%

25

Thank you for your time!