Dear ACD,

Here is the addendum to the Preliminary RGA report. Please feel free to comment and contact should you have questions.

Thank you.

All the best,

Maria Dometita

Gender Specialist

CARE Addendum to Rapid Gender Analysis

Based on the Multi Sectoral Needs Assessment

Kirkuk, Iraq

Background

Background Information and Methodology

A Multi Sectoral Joint Needs Assessment was conducted in Kirkuk. CARE deployed a team to support the process, collect a standalone gender data as well as those that relate to the sectors particularly WASH and Protection. Survey is the main data collection tool. Follow up interviews and FGDs were also done. Data collected were processed and cleaned by consultants which generated information on (a) demographic profile of IDPs and hosts including registration, relationships, living arrangements and departure and threats; (b) sectoral data – Shelter, NFI, FSL, WASH, and health; and (c) Priority and Vulnerable Groups. Data is presented in 2 ways – as a total and disaggregated by sex. Figures that show “gender breakdown” represent women’s responses disaggregated from men’s responses to the same questions. This allows for easier cross sex comparison.

Profile of Respondents

Breakdown of Respondents

Figure 1 (below) illustrates the breakdown of MSNA participants between IDPs and host families:

36% of IDPs in Kirkuk City reported not being registered. Whilst 9% of those are planning to get registered, the remaining 27% did not express they would do so in the near future

Findings and Analysis

Gender Roles and Responsibilities

The MSNA data reveals that women are still dominantly responsible on many domestic roles and their overall concerns pertains to care and welfare of household like state of their shelter, food security and water for domestic use. Decision making still the dominant role of men. For example, female respondents reported that the decision to move the family was usually taken by the husband, but not always in consultation with his wife.

However displacement has affected traditional gender roles and responsibilities for IDPs. Given the state of their shelter (like overcrowding and shared spaces), men may no longer be on top on their role to protect. Men traditionally perform the role as providers which they are not able to do. Across all affected groups, about 80% of the respondents reported not having enough food to cover their daily nutrition needs.

Capacity and Coping Mechanisms

The MSNA validated, in follow-up interviews, that women sold their gold jewellery, which they received when they married, notably to pay for food. Women bear the burden of finding ways to cope as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Coping Mechanisms (Gender Breakdown %[1] - women orange, men blue)

Access

Access to sufficient aid is problematic for both women and men, to all the different types of IDPs and host populations. This is true in all the sectors: shelter, NFI, WASH, FSL and health. There are notable needs specific to women which may not be provided. Women reported needing sanitary pads during the follow-up FGD. Although displaced women can obtain sanitary pads from ad-hoc distributions in Kirkuk City, notably at the Mosque, interviewed women mentioned using cloths when sanitary pads are not available. They expressed concern about health risks from doing so, especially with limited bathing and washing facilities available in their housing. All the other NFIs identified are needed for personal welfare and care as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3: NFI Priorities (Gender Breakdown %4 – men blue, women orange)

There is also an alarming health situation related to pregnancy and child birth. It is further noted that psychological trauma is identified as health issue with higher prevalence among men. Oftentimes there is no interventions to this.

Gender-based Violence /Protection

IDPs and host communities were asked about their relationship with each other and provided disparate answers depending on the affected group they belonged to. Out of all types of respondents, IDPBS is the group that emphasised the most “existing tensions” with host community, as it is likely to be experiencing the hardest conditions, amongst which overcrowding and limited financial resources. The top life threatening case mentioned is IDP cannot afford living in Kirkuk or were evicted and had to go back to a conflict area.

There are no direct reports on SGBV cases. However there are indications that potentially may cause SGBV to take place. More than 90% of respondents across all affected groups mentioned there were no separate rooms for female and male IDPs in their accommodation. Overall, 70% of respondents replied that families had to share a room in their building. Follow-up interviews with female respondents revealed that families often share a room with a variety of others, including polygamous families, extended family, neighbours, and strangers.

WASH

Only 10% of respondents replied there is enough safe water available. More than 90% of IDPs living with other IDP families in buildings or settlements reported that there is some safe water available, but not in sufficient quantities. Respondents indicated that water from the public pipe network is never available for more than 12 hours per day, and the average availability is around 5 hours per day. 94% of women fear that the garbage situation may become a health hazard to them whereas 45% of men reported that the garbage situation was not a major health concern to them.

Insufficient water storage capacity is identified by women as top water problem. Women expressed reduction of water consumption (more than men). Other than the generic family hygiene kits, there is also a need for women and infant specific hygiene kits.

Priority and Vulnerable Groups

Both male and female respondents across categories singled out displaced people living in damage/unfinished accommodations and displaced people living in public buildings as the priority groups. Meanwhile, respondents outlined persons with disability, pregnant and lactating women as well as single/widowed women, as the three most vulnerable groups. Female respondents mostly reported pregnant and lactating women amongst the three most vulnerable groups, whilst men clearly outlined single/windowed women. Likewise, the vulnerable group in terms of age are considered by all respondents as those age below 5.

Priorities and Aspirations

Men selected livelihood as the top most priority while women selected shelter first and livelihood second. This is consistent with gender roles. In many sectors, women expressed preference for cash. Women are more concerned with heath evidence by identifying grbage accumulation and presence of disease carrying animals like rats, mosquitoes and flies.

Conclusions: Gaps and Opportunities

The roles and responsibilities of women, men, boys and girls in Iraq are fluid, changing with the political and security (Gender in Brief). Women, men, boys and girls have distinct gender roles and responsibilities in Iraq. As mentioned, displacement has affected traditional gender roles and responsibilities for IDPs. There is a need to be more vigilant to identify opportunities and support any gender shifts in a sustained manner.

Given the context, there is a gap in information on SGBV across all sectors, various gender and age groupings. The potential problem arising from women carrying much burden of domestic and economic roles were not captured. There are specific groups which requires specific interventions like female headed households, GBV survivors, and adolescents but not much disaggregation.

The living arrangements (breakdown of respondents and the type of shelters) give a picture of new set ups, very different most probably from their previous ways in their original locations. The daily routine which includes what decisions are made, how they are made and who makes them would reveal changes in gender dynamics. Hence need more scrutiny. The preference for cash by women need to be understood more. There is inadequate information on leadership structure per type of IDPs including spaces for participation for women and presence of women’s groups.

References page

Multi Sectoral Needs Assessment Survey
FGDs
Interviews
Gender in Brief

[1] The ratio for this chart is: how many times an issue is listed female and male respondents / total number of male and female respondents.