PALESTINIAN SOCIETY - Fafo

categories in the fonner regions while eight out of ten HHs are found
in the two lower status categories in the latter.
Gaza City and Gaza villages, though, are basically on a par with
West Bank villages and camps. More surprisingly, perhaps, West
Bank camps show a distribution similar to that of West Bank villages.
Further analysis reveals that it is the better housing standards in Gaza
City, as indicated by housing amenities, that places it on the level of
West Bank camps, whereas it is the lower educational attainments that
bring it to the level of West Bank villages. This again may reflect
differences in infrastructural provisions (piped water, sewage and
electricity) and occupational possibilities in the three areas. The main
differences between West Bank villages and West Bank camps, thus,
are the housing and occupational standards. l?
A comparison of the socioeconomic status of respectively nonrefugees,
refugees outside camps and refugees living in camps (figure
not presented), suggests that camp residence, and not refugee status
in itself, is the vital, detennining factor. Refugees outside camps and
non-refugees are generally located in the lower and upper middle
strata, while more camp refugees are found in the lower midd le and
low categories.
So far focus has been on explaining variations between the
different localities, i.e. on general differences. Yet the actual size of
the differences should not be ignored. Retuming briefly to figure 8.4,
more than half of the HHs in the two contrasting regions of Arab
Jerusalem and Gaza camps are still all within the range of the two
middle status categories, thus indicating a significant element of
homogeneity among the areas.
Why are the regional differences not even more frequent and c\earcut?
The explanation is probably to be found at the intersection of
various social and economic factors. The twin processes of "ruralization"
of the cities and "urbanization" of the countryside stand out as
possible explanations, as they may be expected to promote homogeneous
social conditions in "rural" and "urban" areas alike.
The main factor contributing to the recent social dec\ine in rural
areas is the undennining in the value of non-irrigated land as a
designator of traditional social status (such land has, however, retained
its importance as real estate). New sources of income have
emerged outside the traditionaI viIIage structure and the agriculturaI
sector.18
This change in the role and impact of land ownership is not only
due to the upheavals of war, but to an even larger extent to long-tenn
233