Date post: | 21-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | juniper-garry-doyle |
View: | 219 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Jordanian hosts and Syrian refugees: comparing perceptions of social conflict and cohesion in three host communities
Maira Seeley, Programmes Research and Development Officer
THANKS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Special thanks to: Professor Dawn Chatty, Refugee Studies Centre, University of
Oxford Jadranka Stikovac Clark, GFP Institute Director Lama Hattab, GFP Programmes Director Safiya Ibn Garba, GFP Programmes Manager and Lead Facilitator Sairah Yusuf, GFP Research, Monitoring and Evaluation Officer Hana’ Juma’h, GFP Senior Programmes Officer Amani Al-Nsairat, GFP Programmes Coordinator Ahmad Al-Jbour, GFP Programmes Coordinator Ahmad Al-Kharouf, GFP Programmes Coordinator Salwa Abdel Waheed, GFP Volunteer Laila Abu Zainedien, GFP Intern GFP Programme Volunteers in Mafraq, Amman, and Irbid Maha al-Asil, Consultant
GENERATIONS FOR PEACE
Jordan-based peace-building organisation with global reach
Dedicated to sustainable conflict transformation at the grassroots level through the use of sport, art, advocacy, dialogue and empowerment activities
Volunteer movement: empowering, mentoring, supporting volunteers to be change-makers in their communities
Values: Youth Leadership; Community Empowerment; Active Tolerance; Responsible Citizenship
Drivers of Change: Innovation; Quality; Impact; Sustainability
Since 2007: trained and mentored more than 8,880 volunteers in 50 countries in Africa, Asia, Europe
Local programmes run by volunteers engaged more than 227,900 children, youth and adults
GENERATIONS FOR PEACE
Jordan Schools Programme: Train/mentor/support teachers to run sport and art-based behaviour-change
activities with their students 12 schools (boys and girls schools, selected based on priority need in
Amman, Irbid and Zarqa) for 2 academic years 2014-2016 1,800 male and female students (12-16 y/o) directly benefitting as
participants
Social Cohesion in Host Communities Programme: Train/mentor/support community/youth centres leaders to run sport and art-
based behaviour-change activities with youth In community centres and youth centres in 12 selected host communities
most in need (in Irbid, Mafraq and Amman) over 2 years 2014-2016 5,000 male and female Jordanian and Syrian youth (12-22 y/o) directly
benefitting as participants
TWO FLAGSHIP PROGRAMMES IN JORDAN
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
What are the most important/main forms of conflict prevalent between Syrian and Jordanian children and youth in urban and village communities in northern Jordan?
How do Jordanian and Syrian perceptions of these forms of conflict differ?
What are the most pressing needs (at the community level) in addressing these different forms of conflict between Syrian and Jordanian children and youth?
What type of community-based programming could address these issues? What resources are needed to address local conflict through community-based programming?
METHODS: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Focus groups and interviews at community centres in three host
communities in Mafraq (rural), Irbid (rural), and Amman (urban) Governorates, May-August 2015
At each site, one focus group (including 6-8 participants) and one interview with members of each of the following demographics (Syrians and Jordanians separated)
Target Group members’ mothers (Beneficiary Community members) Target Group members’ fathers (Beneficiary Community members) Male Target Group members (12-22 y/o) Female Target Group members (12-22 y/o)
48 total focus groups and interviews, 154 total participants (79 SYR, 75 JOR; 80 female, 74 male)
Two additional focus groups and one interview with GFP Jordanian programme volunteers (c. 20-45 y/o) at each site (9 total: 6 male, 3 female)
Quantitative and qualitative analysis of translated interview and focus group transcriptions using NVivo
MAIN FINDINGS
A. Strong contrasts between Jordanians’ and Syrians’ perceptions of both the degree and the type of Jordanian-Syrian conflict prevalent in their community
B. Interacting social factors that influence Jordanian-Syrian social relations, some of which contribute to a “feedback loop” of conflict escalation. This leads to (1) decreased access to education for Syrian refugee children and youth and (2) Syrians’ increased social isolation, especially girls and women.
C. Implications and recommendations for programmes to build social cohesion: specific points at which intervention can interrupt this “feedback loop” and de-escalate conflict between Syrians and Jordanians in host communities
A. KEY AREAS OF DIVERGENCE BETWEEN SYR & JOR PERCEPTIONS
1. The distribution of humanitarian aid
2. The status of Syrians as “guests” or as refugees holding rights: hospitality- and rights-based discourses
3. Accessibility of education
4. Community safety and relations with local law enforcement and civil/municipal authorities
5. Perspectives on Syrian women’s and girls’ marriage to Jordanians
DIVERGENCE 1: THE DISTRIBUTION OF HUMANITARIAN AID
Mafraq Irbid Amman0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100% 94%
85%
71%
6%
15%
29%
Mentions of antipathy due to aid distribution
Jordanians Syrians
DIVERGENCE 2: STATUS OF SYR AS EITHER “GUESTS” OR AS REFUGEES HOLDING RIGHTS: HOSPITALITY- AND RIGHTS-BASED DISCOURSES
Male Female0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
56%
44%
71%
29%
Mentions of rights
Jordanians Syrians
Male Female0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
45%55%
30%
70%
Mentions of status as "guests"
Jordanians Syrians
DIVERGENCE 3: ACCESSIBILITY OF EDUCATION
Jordanian Syrian Jordanian Syrian Jordanian SyrianMafraq Irbid Amman
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
8%
91%
0%
100%
19%
81%
Mentions of dropouts or youth who never enrolled in Jordanian schools
DIVERGENCE 3: ACCESSIBILITY OF EDUCATION
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
82% 84%90%
10%6%
Issues mentioned in association with youth dropping out or not enrolling in school
DIVERGENCE 3: ACCESSIBILITY OF EDUCATION
JO
R
SY
R
JO
R
SY
R
JO
R
SY
R
JO
R
SY
R
Dropout + JOR physical vio-lence against
SYR
Dropout + JOR verbal violence
against SYR
Dropout + SYR mistrust of JOR
Dropout + physical vio-
lence in school
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
18%
82%
4%
96%
13%
87%
13%
87%
Mentions of issues associated with youth dropping out of or not enrolling in Jordanian schools, by na-
tionality
DIVERGENCE 4: COMMUNITY SAFETY AND RELATIONS WITH LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT & CIVIL/MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES
Males Females0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
18%
39%
82%
61%
Mentions of street violence
Jordanians Syrians
Males Females0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
44%
18%
56%
82%
Mentions of sexual harassment
Jordanians Syrians
DIVERGENCE 5: PERSPECTIVES ON SYR WOMEN’S AND GIRLS’ MARRIAGE TO JOR
Female Male Female Male Female MaleMafraq Irbid Amman
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
48%
8%
29%
0% 0%
11%
Jordanians’ mentions of marriages between Syrian women and Jordanian men
B. SPECIFIC INTERACTING SOCIAL FACTORS INFLUENCING SYR-JOR SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS
1. Relationships between Syrian refugees and Jordanian teachers in local schools
2. Communication patterns within families
3. The gender of individuals involved in Syrian-Jordanian interactions
4. The historical precedent of Palestinian refugees in Jordan
1. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SYR REFUGEES & JOR TEACHERS IN LOCAL SCHOOLS
Relationship between SYR students and JOR teachers influences on perceptions of JOR society among SYR youth and their families
Mixed (non-shift) schools: SYR described discrimination and verbal and physical violence from teachers and school administrators
Shift schools: sense that teachers “just don’t care about Syrians,” very poor quality of education
Result: Syrian dropouts/failure to enroll, isolation of students and their families
2. COMMUNICATION PATTERNS WITHIN FAMILIES
Self-reinforcing “feedback loop” of conflict
Type and frequency of communication varies by gender
Lack of opportunities for positive interactions between SYR and JOR families increased social isolation of Syrians
Parents experience
socio-economic
stress/local pressures
Parents’ anxieties are
communicated to children
Children’s perceptions of JOR/SYR are influenced by
parents
Conflict between
JOR/SYR children
Children’s experiences
influence parents’
perceptions of JOR/SYR
3. GENDER OF INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN SYR-JOR INTERACTIONS
Lower rates of violence, perceived discrimination, and antipathy between SYR and JOR females than between SYR and JOR males
Female interactions: more references to “guest-host” relationship, fewer references to “rights”
More positive interaction among SYR and JOR female neighbours than among SYR and JOR male neighbours
High social isolation among SYR women and girls, very few opportunities for positive interactions with JOR
3. GENDER OF INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN SYR-JOR INTERACTIONS
Using "S
yria
n" as
insu
lt
JOR e
xpre
ssin
g mis
trust
of S
YR
SYR exp
ress
ing m
istru
st o
f JOR
Perce
ived
dis
crim
inat
ion
JOR g
ener
al a
ntipat
hy to
wards
SYR
Inci
tem
ent t
o confli
ct0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
13%
38%46%
38% 33%
8%
87%
62%54%
62% 66%
92%
Gender and Type of Interaction
Females' interactions Males' interactions
4. HISTORICAL PRECEDENT OF PLE REFUGEES IN JOR
Recent history of Palestinian refugees mentioned as factor in SYR-JOR relations in 45% of all interviews and focus groups
Both SYR and JOR cited Palestinian experience as a good example of mass integration of a refugee population (in both Jordan and Syria)
JOR participants in Amman referred to selves as “Palestinians” when describing their relationships with Syrians, but referred to selves as “Jordanians” otherwise
SYR participants in Amman mostly referred to host community members as “Palestinians,” explicitly contrasting them with “Jordanians” elsewhere
FEEDBACK LOOP: ESCALATION OF SYR-JOR CONFLICT, SYR DROPOUTS & SYR SOCIAL ISOLATION
Relations between Syrian and Jordanian children and youth (school, street)
Syrian and Jordanian parents’ perceptions of the other group
Teachers’ attitudes towards Syrians
When violence occurs…
Syrians leave school
Increased isolationof Syrian children, youth, and their families
C. IMPLICATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SOCIAL COHESION PROGRAMMING IN JOR
1. Design social cohesion programming to target Jordanian teachers’ attitudes towards Syrians and violence in Jordanian schools
2. Youth-based programming provides a vital “entry point” to address conflict, but also need to find ways to involve parents as much as possible in youth-based programming
3. Provide more “safe spaces” (such as integrated recreation or sport activities) for positive Syrian-Jordanian interactions in host communities
4. Ensure that Syrians are included in programme design and implementation
5. Focus efforts on including women and girls in programming (due to greater social isolation but less violence, better SYR-JOR integration when given the opportunity to interact)
With thanks to the Refugee Studies Centre, University of Oxford