| MINE
RISK EDUCATION: MONITORAGGIO IN AFGHANISTAN, KAP ANALYSIS 2004-2005
Monitoring is the systematic collection and analysis of information
as a project/program progresses. It is based on targets set and
activities planned. Monitoring activities document progress, detects
deficiencies, and tracks the timely implementation of corrective
actions. The Impact Monitoring exercise for MRE in Afghanistan is
comprised of three main steps. First is collecting data among people
about the Mine Risk Education Level (MREL) Second,
comparing the distribution of MREL with the number of men, women,
boys and girls who attended MRE sessions: the goal being
the assessment of outputs (MREL) compared with
inputs (number of people attended MRE sessions). And third
is the comparison of the distribution of MREL with the distribution
of number of casualties.
This KAP Survey exercise represents the primary method used to gather
data about Mine Risk Education Levels among the communities. The
goal of KAP Survey is based on a quantitative strategy that collects
numerical data about social phenomena. To achieve this goal, a series
of people (sample) are interviewed using a sociological questionnaire
of open and closed ended questions about mine risk.
The KAP questionnaire has two groups of questions: “informative”
and “evaluative”. Informative questions supply information
about the social, cultural and economic background of each interviewee.
Evaluative questions are based on external valuation methods used
to analyze the level of Mine Risk Education.
The KAP Survey in 2004 and the KAPB in 2005 were implemented and
the outputs (MREL) compared with inputs (number of people attended
MRE sessions) were assessed along with the social effectiveness
of MRE. The comparison between the KAP Survey 2004 and KAPB Survey
2005 show the following results:
Perception of Mine Risk
- • The problem of mines is well-known by people
surveyed in both KAP Survey 2004 and KAPB Survey 2005.
- • The majority of people are fully aware
of the dangers of mine risk and many people have had direct or
indirect experiences of mine incidents.
- • The perception of mine impact on everyday
life is different within the two surveys. The KAP Survey 2004
shows a majority of people stated that mines and
- UXO are not a problem for their own families and
themselves however the 2005 survey indicates a majority of people
stated that mines and UXO are a problem.
- • Mine risk is perceived as a greater problem
to those individuals with problematic social-economic status such
as those who are unemployed and women.
Mine Risk Education Level:
- • Respondents to both surveys know well the
locations where mines and UXO are most likely to be found and
which signs indicate the presence of mines and UXO.
- • Three indexes of behavior analyze the actions
of interviewees in three typical situations where people face
mine risk. Situation A, “what would you do if you see a
mine and you are in a safe area?” Situation B, “what
would you do if you suspect you are in a minefield?” Situation
C, “what would you do if one see a parent, relative or friend
in a minefield?”. In situation A, the majority of people
from both survey samples knew they should tell the local authorities
if they saw a mine. In situation B the MREL appears to be improved
during 2005 as the majority answered, “stop, stand still
and shout for help”. In the previous year “retrace
my steps carefully” (considered a dangerous behavior within
the MAPA) received the majority of responses. In situation C,
both surveys indicate a majority of people chose “get an
expert\deminer” in this dangerous situation.
Inputs and outputs:
- • An important similarity between the data
regarding the inputs and outputs of 2004 and 2005 compared with
MREL data point out a correlation between inputs and outputs.
Thus concluding in both years that the majority of people who
have attended MRE sessions are men and their MREL is higher than
women. Additionally, the lack of Mine Risk Education among women
(possibly due to social and culture structures) is the main reason
for their low MREL.
Social effectiveness:
- • Important similarities between the KAP
Survey 2004 and the KABP Survey 2005 indicate a majority of victims
of mine accidents are young men, a social group with the highest
MREL. This leads to the conclusion that a lack of Mine Risk Education
Level is not the only factor to explain dangerous behaviours.
In general, social, culture and economic structures influence
the way some socio-cultural groups behave when exposed to mine
risk.
Aprile 2006
CLICCA
QUI PER SCARICARE L'INTERO DOCUMENTO: KAP ANALYSIS 2004-2005
|
