Prerequisites of return and reintegration for long term internally displaced persons in Northern Uganda

Index

Index of diagrams

Index of tables

Index of images

Acknowledgements

Abbreviations

Abstract

Map of Uganda

1. Initial situation and problem definition

2. Goal and aim of study

3. Research design and Instruments:
3.1 Questionnaires
3.1.1 The questionnaire for returnees
3.1.2 The questionnaire for IDPs
3.2 Choosing the district and the camps
3.2.1 Unyama IDP camp
3.2.2 Tetugu IDP camp

4. Demonstration of results
4.1 Data editing
4.2 Demographics
4.2.1 Gender and age
4.2.2 Family structures and marital status
4.2.3 Education

5. Internally Displaced Persons
5.1 The wish to return and possible alternatives
5.1.1 Special case: Extremely Vulnerable Individuals
5.2 Reasons for IDPs to remain in the camps
5.2.1 Lack of housing and assistance
5.2.2 The hope to receive assistance while staying in camp
5.3 Knowing the boundaries of land as a prerequisite for return
5.4 Credit facilities – a possibility for the return progress?
5.5 Direct needs of IDPs
5.6 What would IDPs spend money on?
5.7 Income activities now and after return

6. Reintegration of Returnees
6.1 Trauma and justice
6.2 Spirits
6.3 Integration and comfort

7. Challenges for successful reintegration
7.1 Crime
7.2 Modern life learnt in camp
7.2.1 Mobile phones and television
7.3 Issue of land disputes
7.4 Being forced to return and the consequences
7.4.1 Moving between camp and return site
7.4.2 Landmines
7.5 Trauma hindering integration

8. Governmental approaches
8.1 Distribution of resettlement kits

9. Comparison of IDPs and returnees
9.1 Nightmares
9.2 Income
9.3 Crime
9.4 Care of Extremely Vulnerable Individuals

10. Discussion

11. Final conclusion

12. Limitations
12.1 Supervision for data collection
12.2 Gender differences
12.3 Potential selection bias
12.4 Sensitivity of the study
12.5 Loss in translation

Literature

Annax
Survey Introduction
Questionnaire for Returnees
Questionnaire for IDPs

Index of diagrams

Diagram 1 – Gender allocation of interviewed persons

Diagram 2 – Age distribution among interviewed persons

Diagram 3 – Marital status

Diagram 4 – School attendance

Diagram 5 – Comparison of school attendance

Diagram 6 – Return influenced through push and pull factors

Diagram 7 – Place of desired resettlement

Diagram 8 – EVIs among the IDPs

Diagram 9 – Income difference between EVI and non-EVIs

Diagram 10 – IDPs Knowing the boundaries of their land

Diagram 11 – IDPs with access to credit facilities

Diagram 12 – Items lacking for return

Diagram 13 – Feeling that justice was achieved

Diagram 14 – Fear of evil spirits

Diagram 15 – Factors indicating trauma in Gulu

Diagram 16 – Combined factors indicating trauma in Gulu

Diagram 17 – eeling of integration

Diagram 18 – Loss of Acholi tradition

Diagram 19 – Traditional life influenced by modern life learnt in the IDP camps

Diagram 20 – Occurrence of land disputes

Diagram 21 – Education influencing occurrence of land disputes

Diagram 22 – Nightmares influencing integration

Diagram 23 – Returnees and IDPs suffering from nightmares

Diagram 24 – Income of IDPs and returnees

Diagram 25 – Business opportunities

Diagram 26 – IDPs and returnees fearing crime

Diagram 27 – The role to take care of EVIs

Index of tables

Table 1 – Design characteristics

Table 2 – Reasons for staying in IDP camps

Table 3 – Monthly income with respect to access of credit facilities

Table 4 – Items to be used if money would be available

Table 5 – Reasons for comfort in return area

Table 6 – Summary of the prerequisites of return and reintegration

Index of images

Image 1 – Map of Uganda VI

Image 2 – Map of Gulu town

Image 3 – Video hall in Unyama IDP camp, Gulu

Acknowledgments

This thesis was only possible with support from various people and institutions.

I would like to thank everyone who sacrificed time, energy and effort providing useful information to me.

The following people and institutions deserve to be thanked separately:

Deutscher Akademischer Austausch Dienst (DAAD) for accepting to fund my studies through their scholarship programme.

Dr. Gebrewolt Balachew from the Management Centre Innsbruck, who inspired me through his lectures, dedicated his time as my mentor to review drafts and to give feedback.

Alex Odongo Okoya from the Luo Multi-Media Company for his support of the surveying process and the recruitment of a research team in northern Uganda.

Franziska Rötzer (Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarebeit (GTZ)), Ross Smith (UNICEF Uganda), Joseph Charles Okurut (Transform Uganda) and Ntegyereize Gard Benda (World Voices Ugand) for their constructive feedback and support in Uganda.

Abbreviations

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Abstract

Relative peace since 2006, after 20 years of armed conflict in Northern Uganda, brings the possibility for the internal displaced persons (IDPs) to leave displacement camps and return to the area of their original residence. Through a standardized survey of 178 individuals from the Gulu district in Northern Uganda, this study examines the needs and prerequisites of return and reintegration.

Lasting peace is the uttermost condition for any other prerequisite of this study. IDPs need the voluntary wish to return, which 75% did indicate since they are longing for their ancestral land to engage in agriculture and want to leave behind the harsh and unfavourable conditions of the IDP camps. The population of the Gulu district has been highly traumatized by the lasting armed conflict, making counselling and psychological treatment of trauma necessary. 1/3 is suffering from nightmares and ¼ fears evil spirits from murdered members of their communities. Over 2/3 of IDPs believe that justice was not achieved. Voluntary movement has to be guaranteed, as the returnees who felt forced to return show significantly high movement between the return area and the old IDP camp and lower ability for reintegration. Although, 90% of the once 1.8 million IDPs have returned, only 50% have been able to fully reintegrate back into a life of social, economic and cultural balance.

The majority from the remaining IDPs are unable to return out of their own strength. 9% percent has lost hope to be able to return, since they cannot find assistance or do not have land to return to. 46% are extremely vulnerable, needing special assistance and tailored interventions, as they lack the financial and human capacity to return. 1/5 of the IDPs do not know the boundaries of their land, and 1/3 are having ongoing land disputes. 42% claim to have no monetary income whatsoever and 16% are unable to supply themselves sufficiently with food. Infrastructure and services need to be re-established, as the lack of shelter, schools, health centres and water sources are the main facilities the IDPs need in their return areas.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Image 1 – Map of Uganda (Conciliation Resources 2001

1. Initial situation and problem definition

With its terrible and lasting war Northern Uganda was declared “the worst forgotten humanitarian crisis on earth” in 2003 (Agence France-Presse 2003). Northern Uganda has been a unique case, because the conflict lasted for 20 years, making it one of the longest running wars in Africa. Through rebel activities and thousands of abductions of predominantly children, the victims, civilians and perpetrators in this conflict all came from the same population group. War and rebel activities of the Lords Resistance Army (LRA) in Northern Uganda ended in 2006, and relative peace was achieved through a ceasefire and peace negotiations. The more than 1.8 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) began returning to the areas of their origin, leaving behind their life in displacement camps. In mid 2007, about 50% were already in their original villages or in the return process (IDMC 2009). Still, for example in the Gulu district approximately 100,000 people are remaining in the IDP camps facing new challenges. The established infrastructures in the camps are collapsing, as people resettle (New Vision Uganda 2010). The remaining population is in most cases made out of vulnerable people requiring special care, as they are unable to return on their own power.

“Internally displaced persons are not passive “recipients” of assistance and protection, but can and should be key actors in identifying and addressing their own needs. Accordingly, programs responding to situations of internal displacement need to take into account the perspectives and capacities of internally displaced communities (…)” (Norwegian Refugee Council training modules on Internal Displacement)

The humanitarian principles state the need of impartiality. Any and all assistance has to be based upon needs (Sphere Project 2004). As there have been almost two million internally displaced persons, their needs have to be the focus of humanitarian assistance and governmental actions. Since the war ended in 2007, the prerequisites for the return for the internally displaced persons in Northern Uganda are not only essential for the coordination of development for Northern Uganda, but most importantly they are the factors for reintegration of its people. The humanitarian response with actions from the government, UN organizations and Non Governmental Organisations have mostly been focused on the closure of IDP camps and the return of the displaced people. The majority of the population did already return but after their physical movement out of the IDP camps further assistance has been almost nonexistent. After many years of displacement it is unclear how far the returned population has been able to reintegrate back into their social, economic and cultural status prior to displacement.

2. Goal and aim of study

Through quantitative and qualitative methods this study will provide answers about the needs and prerequisites internally displaced persons (IDPs) in the Gulu district in Northern Uganda face prior to return. Furthermore, the study will evaluate to what extent the already returned population has been able to reintegrate into society outside of the IDP camps. The challenges within the process of return and reintegration will be examined and conclusions for its prerequisites made. The conclusions made from evaluating the extent to which the already returned population has been able to reintegrate into their social, economic and cultural life away from the IDP camps will be used to demonstrate the needs of the IDPs prior to the return of the remaining IDPs.

Consequently, the central research question for this study is the following:

What are the prerequisites for the return of internally displaced persons in the Gulu district (Northern Uganda) considering the challenges of post-war reintegration?

Two mayor aspects are resulting and will be covered and discussed:

1. What are the needs of IDPs who are yet to return?
2. How much have returned former IDPs (returnees) been able to reintegrate back into the social, economic and cultural fabric of their original villages and what challenges do they face?

In this study the term “return” is used to describe the act of an individual living in an IDP camp to go back to one’s original place of residence. Usually this place is the area of origin. If a person leaves an IDP camp and moves to another part of Uganda, other than the former place of residence, it is generally referred to as “resettlement” (Norwegian Refugee Council). Return is the favourable solution to displacement and the majority of the IDPs prefer it to displacement. However, this research paper will make no distinction between the terms return and resettlement and will be used interchangeably throughout this study.

A component for successful return is reintegration, making a close examination of the reintegration process is as important as the examination of return.

“In the context of Northern Uganda reintegration means the entrance back into a state of comfort living in given circumstances of the place of origin and the society surrounding the individuals. Only if reintegration can be achieved the return and resettlement process can be considered successful and sustainable” (Salborn 2010: 15).

3. Research design and Instruments:

The data gathered in this survey was collected in Gulu district, Northern Uganda. A research team of eight local men and women representing the ethnic group of the IDPs and returnees was formed. Members of the team had to comply with the necessary ability to hold the survey in the local Luo language using a standardized questionnaire, a set of questions arranged to collect specific data from respondents. The Luo Multi Media Company Limited broadcasted the need for research assistance on the radio in Gulu town. From 89 Acholi applicants eight people with bachelor degrees in related fields and knowledge about research methods were chosen for this research.

The research team participated in a briefing and training session to become familiar with the questionnaire, interview techniques and the selection of respondents before heading to the field in a two day interviewing procedure.

Each member of the research team was assigned to a specific zone in the IDP camps and return areas. Their task was to randomly select households for interviews in different directions. A household was defined as a group of people generally sleeping under the same roof, eating together and being dependent on each other with a high level of trust. Therefore, a household could be only one individual as well as an entire community.

The questioning was conducted in a one on one confidential setting with the respondent remaining anonymously and their names never being recorded. Neither benefits nor compensations for taking part in the interview were given to the respondents.

As two different sample groups were examined, two separate questionnaires were also designed. The first one focused on the needs and problems of the return and resettlement process of IDPs in the camps, whereas the second one focused on the reintegration of returnees into rural life and the influence in their social, economic and traditional views when compared to life in the IDP camps.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Table 1 – Design characteristics

Due to high illiteracy rates and taking into account that few respondents were able to hold a conversation in English, the research team was translating and explaining the questions in the local Luo language and writing down the responses in English.

The research team consisted of six researchers, two supervisors and two overall managers. The monitoring of the researchers was crucial to guarantee valid information as well as meeting the necessary standards. After each interview the researchers were to write down comments and observations. After each day a general summary of their findings was also obligatory.

3.1 Questionnaires

After completing a broad literature review two sets of questionnaires were designed to capture the areas of interest and secondly, to become aware of arising problems. According to Kuhlman (1991) effective return with sustainable reintegration of internally displaced persons depends on economic, social, political and environmental variables. Therefore, the study tried to gain information in the fields mentioned. As a reference and starting point the questionnaire from the World Food Programme study “Uganda - Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Assessment 2005 was revised and taken into account for the design of this study’s questionnaire (see WFP 2005).

A draft of the questionnaires was discussed in cooperation with local NGOs and experts on resettlement in Northern Uganda. Amendments were made to comply with the cultural and social circumstances, as well as differences of the Acholi people. The questionnaire was designed in English but was to be translated into the local Luo language so that the Acholi people could understand it and feel more comfortable. A pre-test was carried out in the IDP camps, as it would assists in refining the research instrument and “it is imperative to pretest the instrument in the intended languages and in the particular fieldwork environments. Such pretests may uncover unique difficulties not ascertainable in the original language of the questionnaire” (McKay et al, 1996). Using the results from the pre-Test, the questionnaires were again altered and final changes made to maximize its reliability and validity.

The questionnaires contain quantitative and qualitative methods, as the two methods differ in their aim. Qualitative research tries to find a new approach and new ideas while quantitative research evaluates a given scientific question (Brüsemeister 2008). As new approaches and existing ideas will be examined both research methods are relevant. The stakeholder’s individual perception and interpretation of the problems need to be understood and make qualitative items necessary. In some cases the respondents have to be given the opportunity to answer in their own words. That gives the advantage of broadening the scope of data collected by providing explanatory elements useful for understanding the different dimensions of the needs of the affected population in their resettlement and reintegration process.

3.1.1 The questionnaire for returnees

The questionnaire was designed to gain information about the resettlement process that the respondents had gone through while gathering data about arising problems and evaluating their integration back into rural life.

The first part the questionnaire consists of general demographic questions starting with an opening question about their marital status. In the Acholi culture it is of high importance for the people to be married and to gain respect for it. Since the majority of the people are married, almost all interviewed started with a question to be answered with great pride.

Before displacement Acholi people in Gulu had little knowledge about football and apart from radio broadcast they had no chance to follow the scene. In the IDP camps however, people were living very close together, which enabled a very rapid verbal information exchange. Football from the English premier league has become very important for many people in Uganda. Proudly, they wear jerseys from different teams and players from English teams. Knowledge about the latest results and speculations of the coming matches mean a kind of social status, especially for Ugandan men. New structures such as video halls using Digital Satellite Television technologies came into existence in IDP camps, charging about an the equivalent of $0.25 USD for watching a full game of the English Premier League or the European Champion’s League.

The questionnaire intended to evaluate how far these new entertainment structures like video halls but also pool tables (billiards), bars and discotheques, available in the camps had been influencing the integration back into rural life, where these structures are generally not available.

Especially through a block of the questions requiring respondents to agree or disagree on a scale between one and ten to statements, it was intended to shed light on their ability to reintegrate and the challenges they face.

3.1.2 The questionnaire for IDPs

After a demographic introduction, the questionnaire tries to identify existing groups within the remaining IDP population. Examining the needs and values of these groups prior to a successful return out of the IDP camp, is the major component of this questionnaire. It evaluates the ability to return, financial situation, challenges and problems the IDPs face.

3.2 Choosing the district and the camps

The Gulu district is located in Northern Uganda and was chosen because it was one of the most affected districts of the war with 95% of the population being displaced. Furthermore, Gulu town is the biggest and most important town in Northern Uganda near the IDP camps, that offers special conditions and opportunities to the population (UN World Food Programme 2007).

Within the Gulu district the following two IDP camps were chosen for interviewing IDPs and also for interviewing the returnees who once lived in these camps.

3.2.1 Unyama IDP camp

Unyama IDP camp is located in Pakwelo parish in Paicho sub-county along the main road to the Sudanese border. High traffic to and from Sudan passes near the camp. Some houses near the main road have access to electricity. According to the District Disaster Management Committee who counted IDPs in 2006, the number of IDPs residing in the camp was 26,868. Three bore holes are still functioning in the camp. An estimated 193 households (about 853 people) still remain in the camp as of April 2010. They are mostly composed of Extremely Vulnerable Individuals (EVIs), such as people who are physically impaired, orphans, child headed households and the elderly. Furthermore, land owners, businessmen, youth and single women make up another big part of the camp population.

The camp developed structures which are unique in Northern Uganda: The camp is located only about eight kilometres outside of Gulu town and has become a cheap means of accommodation for workers and visitors for Gulu town, as the prices are significantly lower in the camp. The movement between the town and the camp is high. Many IDPs are moving back and forth to their land in the villages to carry out cultivation. Schools, health facilities, entertainment structures and business opportunities are available in camp and attract people to take advantage of them.

The camp area is owned by a national teachers college and some private individuals. Some landlords have started charging rent from the remaining IDPs. The camp is changing into an urban centre making an integration of remaining IDPs a possible alternative to the return process.

3.2.2 Tetugu IDP camp

Tetugu IDP camp is located in Lapainat parish in Koro sub-county about 17 kilometres away from Gulu town. Apart from a few solar panels and diesel generators there is no access to electricity in this camp. According to the District Disaster Management Committee in 2006, 17,225 IDPs were residing in the camp during peak time. The exact number of IDPs still remaining in the camp can only be estimated to some hundreds with at least 50 being EVIs. Private individuals who have not yet started to charge rent from the IDPs own the camp area. The camp operates one remaining functional bore hole, a health centre and a primary and secondary school. As of the Joint Camp Assessment Report of the Gulu District Camp Phase Out Committee from February and March 2010 assessed that the community in Tetugu camp agreed to the closure of the camp. Therefore, the question of how to bring remaining IDPs to return voluntarily is of high importance.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Image 2 – Map of Gulu town and location of chosen IDP camps for the study

4. Demonstration of results

4.1 Data editing

During war times all questioned individuals for this survey had been affected by displacement. After the ceasefire and peace negotiations from 2006, first IDPs started to move out of the IDP camps. All individuals belong to the same sample group but can be differentiated into IDPs, which are the individuals still residing in an IDP camp, and the returnees, which are those individuals living outside the IDP camp after returning to their original village or resettling to another village.

The two groups where analyzed together for demographics to profile the whole sample group. As the questionnaires differ for IDPs and returnees their frequencies and correlations are examined individually but are compared and analyzed in the last part of this chapter.

All answers were checked for consistency, accuracy, uniformity, comprehensiveness and completeness. Invalid data was sorted out. Only correct data was then put into the statistical analyzing software “SPSS”. Within the program the data was coded, labelled and put into meaningful categories before beginning with the analysis and the review of results. All together 173 valid questionnaires were taken for examination.

4.2 Demographics

4.2.1 Gender and age

The demographics for IDPs and returnees were equally divided. There were slightly more female respondents than male, with ages ranging from 14 to 84 years with an average of 41 years.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Diagram 1 – Gender allocation of interviewed persons

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Diagram 2 – Age distribution among interviewed persons

4.2.2 Family structures and marital status

The average household size consisted of three adults and four children although the range was between zero to 15 adults and zero to 20 children in a single household.

The majority of all respondents were married. For interviewed persons below the age of 25, partnering/cohabiting or never being married were predominantly named as their marital status. In 2005, Northern Uganda saw an average of about 615 civilian deaths and 1,200 abductions per month (Bøås, Hatløy 2006). The amount of widows (both male and female) is extremely high, and is a direct result of the armed conflict. About 20% have lost their spouse. In contrast, the Ugandan national average in 2006, where only between four to five percent were widowed (Republic of Uganda 2006: 35).

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Diagram 3 – Marital status (figures in percent)

4.2.3 Education

The general education in the Gulu district is poor. 63% were not able to finish their primary school and 29% of those never even had the chance to attend any school.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Diagram 4 – School attendance (figures in percent)

A difference in the education can be seen between the two sexes. Women were significantly less educated than men and the number of women who never attended any school was significantly higher than compared to men (Chi-Square Test p=0.016).

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Diagram 5 – Comparison of school attendance between male and female respondents

(figures in percent)

5. Internally Displaced Persons

5.1 The wish to return and possible alternatives

The desire to leave the IDP camp and to live without displacement was stated by 75% of the IDPs. The 25% who did not want to return stated that they could not find any form of assistance for the return process, or they did not own land, or did not know the exact location of their land. Still, the majority of the 25% stated that they would want to return to their village of origin or another village in order to engage in farming and agriculture if they could. The desire to return was clearly shown, but in some cases overruled by ongoing problems that hinder the return process.

Almost 9% of the IDPs left in the camps had the wish to return but already somehow lost hope since they could not find assistance or they did not have any land to return to. A durable solution has to be found for those individuals and families, as they need help from international NGOs or the Ugandan government.

Some individuals did not want to return because they were taking advantage of the schools in and around the camps. About 9% had no place else to go other than the IDP camp or they had no one to take care of them and therefore, they were afraid of being alone if they return to their villages.

IDPs that do not want to return are most commonly involved in business activities in the camps. Those people plan on moving rather to towns rather than to their villages of origin. They have built up a lifestyle that they can hardly resume in rural areas and they want to keep running their businesses. Being closer to Gulu town. IDPs from Unyama camp seem to have more attraction towards the town than being further away as in Tetugu IDP camp.

The reasons why the IDPs want to return can be split into push and pull factors. Push factors are the conditions of the current place of residence, which the individual sees as unfavourable, driving the individual out of his current place of residence. Pull factors attract an individual to leave the current place of residence for a desired place through emotional or rational causes (Salborn 2010: 20, after Lee 1966).

In the Gulu district, 63% are drawn out of the camp, believing their life will be better after leaving the IDP camp. The most frequent answer with over 50% being a pull factor, was the longing for the ancestral land that they can call home and where farming is possible. Sustaining themselves, and therefore, being independent and free is important for the IDPs. Although, they will have to work a lot harder as they did in the camps, they believe that the hard work will lead them into a better future (Chi-Squared p< 0.00). After the long period of displacement with insufficient work possibilities, especially IDPs above 25 years of age were keen to cultivate their land.

Regarding push factors, the most frequent answer with over 50%, was the harsh and unfavourable conditions in the IDP camps. Overpopulation, poor hygiene, diseases, violence and theft were named predominantly as factors generating the wish to leave the camps. Trying to split all stated factors from respondents into push and pull factors, the pull factors contributing to 63% to the desire for return, are more important than the push factors. When asked where IDPs wanted to return to, 87% stated their village of origin. The place they call home.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Diagram 6 – Return influenced through push and pull factors (out of 100%)

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Diagram 7 – Place of desired resettlement (out of 100%)

5.1.1 Special case: Extremely Vulnerable Individuals

Extremely Vulnerable Individuals (EVIs) include the elderly, sick, physically impaired, widows, orphans, female headed households and child headed families. They cannot leave the IDP camps, as they need special assistance and tailored interventions. “They lack the financial and human capacity to rebuild their shelter and livelihood in the place of origin, given that the social safety nets that would have held them are either weakened or broken” (World Bank 2008: iiii).

Almost half (46 %) of the IDPs remaining in the IDP camps can to some extent be classified as EVIs. Although, the degree of disability, age and sickness was not determined, in the eyes of the interviewer, they seemed to be extremely vulnerable. Low income contributes to the incapacity to leave the IDP camps. Furthermore EVIs stated that there was a lack of shelter in the return area almost twice as often as non EVIs. Return and resettlement for EVIs is a matter of material and monetary empowerment as they are significantly poorer than non-EVIs (Chi-Squared Test p=0.002).

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Diagram 8 – EVIs among the IDPs (figures in percent)

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Diagram 9 – Income difference between EVI and non-EVIs (figures in percent)

5.2 Reasons for IDPs to remain in the camps

Although, many factors generate the wish to return- as described below, factors exist that make IDPs wanting to stay in the IDP camps. These will be demonstrated and discussed here.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Table 2 – Reasons for staying in IDP camps

[...]