120 likes | 223 Views
Presentation on TARI Seminar Series. Preliminary findings of the Reintegration Needs Assessment. 14 December 2005 Banda Aceh. Methodology: Research aims and questions. Aims: Socio-economic needs of returnees i.e. GAM and political prisoners Socio-economic needs of receiving communities
E N D
Presentation on TARI Seminar Series Preliminary findings of the Reintegration Needs Assessment 14 December 2005 Banda Aceh
Methodology:Research aims and questions Aims: • Socio-economic needs of returnees i.e. GAM and political prisoners • Socio-economic needs of receiving communities • Current reintegration dynamics Research themes: • Provide a socio-economic profile of returnees • Determine medium and longer term needs of returnees • Determine how these needs fit with needs of receiving communities • Identify issues and obstacles to reintegration
Methodology:Research methods • Mixed-methods: quantitative and qualitative • In-depth qualitative field research • 3 Research teams • 6 kab, 9+ kec, 36+ villages • In-depth interviews, FGDs and participatory observation • Quantitative survey • Political prisoner census (IOM) • Combatant sample survey (600+ respondents)
SPADA Locations Sabang Pulo Aceh Phase 1 Phase 2 Banda Aceh Aceh Besar Kota Lhokseumawe Kab. Bireuen Aceh Utara Kab Pidie Aceh Jaya Bener Meriah Aceh Timur Aceh Barat Langsa Aceh Tengah Tamiang Nagan Raya Gayo Lues Aceh Barat Daya A.Tenggara Aceh Selatan Singkil Kab Simeulu Pulo banyak
Methodology:Timeframe • Round One (November) • Aceh Selatan • Aceh Tengah & Bener Meriah • Aceh Timur • Round Two (December) • Aceh Jaya • Aceh Utara • Pidie • Round Three (January)
Methodology:Outputs • Interim report (end December) • Final report (end of January 2006) • Weekly updates (Governor’s office)
Preliminary findings:Socio-economic profiles • Much higher numbers of returnees • Variation amongst returnees i.e. age, education, years with GAM • Significant numbers of female combatants i.e. in Pidie 5-20% per village • Half returnees already returned to previous livelihoods • Returnee numbers and conflict damage vary within kecamatan
Preliminary findings:Reintegration dynamics • GAM and communities are confident in the peace process • High level of acceptance of returnees • GAM returnees still subject to GAM leadership • Some tension amongst returning and surrendered GAM • High community awareness but low understanding of MoU and AMM • Some post-AMM safety and security concerns
Preliminary findings:Assistance dynamics • Some tensions amongst GAM over jadup • Isolated incidents of “extortion” • GAM hierarchy still important for agreement on targeted assistance • Potential for conflict if only returnees targeted
Preliminary findings:Returnee and community needs • Needs of returnees and receiving communities are similar • Immediate and longer term needs distinguished
Conclusions:Implications for reintegration programming • Targeting • Focus on community as well as returnees • Data • More accurate data collection at village level • Mechanisms • Appropriate delivery mechanisms for GAM returnees needs clarification • Complaints handling • To catch those who slip through • Post-AMM safety and security