Addressing Armed Violence in East Africa.pdf - Project Ploughshares

Addressing Armed Violence in East Africa2. Research MethodologyThe impact of the peacebuilding projects cannot be understoodwithout some explanation of the context in which the violenceis taking place. No attempt is made in this report, however, toprovide a comprehensive description of the history or currentdynamics of the violent conflicts in which these communitiesare engulfed or the type, number and economics of theweapons used. The complexities and nuances of the armedconflicts of the region require more extensive research andanalysis than was available to this study; researchers spent onlyone week in each country.In consultation with WV field-level colleagues, the researchteam chose a three-year timeframe for posing questions aboutwhether the violence was increasing or decreasing. This periodcould have been longer or shorter, but it was fixed for questionsin all three countries to assist in comparing the content ofanswers.The interview and focus group responses are the primarysource used to summarise and synthesise a description of thecontext for violence and the instruments of violence used. Anumber of secondary resources are also referenced.Figure 2.2 categorises the people interviewed according to age,gender and country.Figure 2.2: Summary of field research participantsCountryMaleadultsMaleyouthFemaleadultsFemaleyouthKenya 37 29 11Uganda 44 17 35 15Sudan 23 32 38 3Total 104 49 102 29In consultation with WV staff in East Africa, the researchersagreed that youth participants should be 18 years and older,and that all research participants, youth or adult, should befamiliar with or collaborating directly in WV programs. Byvisiting communities likely to express different points of view– for example, Pokot, Turkana and Marakwet communitiesin Kenya – researchers hoped to achieve a reasonable range ofperspectives. WV field staff selected people to participate inthe research, using a combination of convenience and snowballsampling techniques. Categories of people interviewedincluded WV staff in the host countries, local governmentofficials, security sector officials (police and military),traditional community leaders/chiefs/elders, staff of local orinternational NGOs, religious leaders, and youth and adultsfrom the communities. In communities affected by cattlerustling, the last group included some individuals identified as“warriors” or “raiders”.Data was collected by teams comprising WV staff membersfrom the host country (staff working directly at the projectlevel and/or staff from the national WV headquarters), localtranslators (where necessary), and a WV Canada or ProjectPloughshares staff person. All notes taken from focus group,informant and other interviews were compiled and analysedby Project Ploughshares. The OECD-DAC armed violence lens(AVL) was used to structure the sections on each individualcountry and the research findings are organised according tothe four AVL categories.Due to the sensitive nature of the subject matter and theongoing violence in the communities visited, participantswere informed that they would not be identified in the report,and that their names would remain confidential. They wereinformed about the purpose of the research, its potentialbenefits and what will be done with the results. They were alsoassured that they were free not to participate, and to declineto answer any question. Efforts were made to hold interviewsand focus groups in safe places where participants could feelcomfortable to speak openly. Attention was also paid to genderrelatedsensitivities in the subject matter by, for example,holding several “women only” or “women youth only” focusgroups, led by an all-female research team. The exact researchlocations have also not been indicated in this report to furtherprotect the identity of participants. In addition, the photos inthis report do not show people who participated in the researchand do not depict exact research locations. Instead, the photoswere selected from World Vision’s collection to depict widerregions under study in the research (Kenya’s North Rift Valley,Northern and Eastern Uganda, and Southern Sudan).Most of the community-level interviews were facilitated bytranslation from local languages into English. Notes were keptof the English translations, sometimes with more than one12