Afghanistan National Profile - Data.unhcr.org

Baseline Survey of Refugee High Return Areas in Afghanistan

High Return Areas National Profile

Afghanistan National Profile

Date generated dd / mm / yyyy 30/09/2012

Country Code

National Analysis

93

Completion Percentage

100%

Page 1 of 35





93

Country Code


100%

1. DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIAL PROFILE NB: Figures and values in the profile only represent the population surveyed in household survey, not the total Afghanistan population, unless stated otherwise.

Summary Of the 9,227 households surveyed in 22 high return area all over Afghanistan, 3,540 (38.4%) were local community households, 3,466 (37.6%) were returnee households and 2,221 (24.1%) were IDP households. The households encompass a combined total of 80,156 individuals with a gender ratio of 1.1 males for each female. The average household size was revealed by the survey to be 9.4 of the local community, 8.5 persons among returnees and 7.9 persons among IDPs. Children (0-17 years) account for over half the average household size across all three groups with a gender ratio of 1.1 boys for each girl. The elderly (aged 60+) were found to constitute 3%-5% of the population across all three household types. Approximately 2% of the population reported to be widowed, with six times as many widows as widowers. 1.1 Type of household (HH)

24.1% 38.4% n=9,227

Pie chart

LC (n=3,540) RET (n=3,466) IDP (n=2,221)

37.6%

Male LC RET IDP Total

1.3 Age distribution by HH type: Male Age Group 0-4 5-11 12-17 18-59 60+ 2,901 4,201 2,777 6,512 801 16.9% 24.4% 16.2% 37.9% 4.7% 2,531 3,800 2,523 5,753 686 16.6% 24.8% 16.5% 37.6% 4.5% 1,467 2,171 1,392 3,513 496 16.2% 24.0% 15.4% 38.9% 5.5% 6,899 10,172 6,692 15,778 1,983 16.6% 24.5% 16.1% 38.0% 4.8%

National Analysis

Total 17,192 100% 15,293 100% 9,039 100% 41,524 100%

1.2 Household size and composition Number of Households Number of Individuals LC RET IDP LC RET IDP 170 186 145 467 501 404 754 965 703 3,921 4,990 3,596 1,162 1,171 796 9,267 9,313 6,300 795 719 373 8,577 7,708 4,006 407 274 144 5,752 3,881 2,052 252 151 60 5,122 3,068 1,231 3,540 3,466 2,221 33106 29461 17589 Average household size 9.4 8.5 7.9 Average number of children (0-17)/HH 5.4 4.9 4.4 Average number of elderly (60+) / HH 0.4 0.3 0.4 % children (0-17) 57.2% 57.9% 56.1% % elderly (60+) 4.1% 3.9% 4.6%

Size of Household 1 - 3 persons 4 - 6 persons 7 - 9 persons 10 - 12 pers 13 - 15 pers 16+ persons Total

1.4 Age distribution by HH type: Female Age Group Female 0-4 5-11 12-17 18-59 60+ 2,785 3,710 2,576 6,297 546 LC 17.5% 23.3% 16.2% 39.6% 3.4% 2,520 3,477 2,214 5,482 475 RET 17.8% 24.5% 15.6% 38.7% 3.4% 1,437 2,098 1,308 3,397 310 IDP 16.8% 24.5% 15.3% 39.7% 3.6% 6,742 9,285 6,098 15,176 1,331 Total 17.5% 24.0% 15.8% 39.3% 3.4%

Total 15,914 100% 14,168 100% 8,550 100% 38,632 100%

Page 2 of 35



Date generated dd / mm / yyyy


30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

Married

Never married, but engaged LC (n=17,192)

Never married, not engaged RET (n=15,293)

Divorced, Separated

0.8%

0.5%

0.4%

0.0%

0.0%

64.5%

65.4%

Graph

0.0%

2.4%

3.1%

2.7%

32.2%

31.0%

31.1%

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

65.7%

1.5 Marital status of males by HH type (percentage)

Widowed

IDP (n=9,039)

Married

Never married, not engaged RET (n=14,168)

Divorced, Separated

3.9%

3.4%

3.3%

0.0%

0.0%

59.1%

61.0%

Graph

0.0%

2.4%

Never married, but engaged LC (n=15,914)

National Analysis

2.2%

2.0%

34.7%

33.4%

34.0%

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

60.6%

1.6 Marital status of females by HH type (percentage)

Widowed

IDP (n=8,550)

Page 3 of 35





93

Country Code


100%

2. MIGRATION PROFILE

Summary Among the households surveyed, the year 1388 (2009/10) witnessed the largest number of returnee arrivals in Afghanistan with 533 returnee households choosing to settle in different HRAs. Also, the year 1391 (2012/13) witnessed the largest number of IDP arrivals with 429 IDP households choosing to settle in different HRAs. Since then, on average, 292 returnee households per year have chosen to settle in the area. Prior to 1391 (2012/13), an average 184 IDP households per year have chosen to settle in 22 HRAs in previous years. Of returnee and IDP households that have settled in Afghanistan in the last two years, approximately onequarter of both returnee and IDP households stated that they did so voluntarily. Of these, 97.5% of both returnee and IDP households stated that they intend to remain in the area. All returnee households had sought asylum in either Pakistan (87.1%) or Iran (12.8%) with 89.9% stating that they did so due to safety reasons due to conflict. Three quarters also cited economic reasons and approximately two-quarters cited family reasons and harassment/discrimination. Among IDP households, approximately three-fifths cited economic reasons and safety concerns due to conflict as the main reasons for having fled their districts of origin. Over two-quarters also cited family reasons as having influenced their decision to move. A further, two-fifths stated that they have fled their districts of origin because of harassment/discrimination. Three-fifths of households stated that legal difficulties were the main reason of returning back to Afghanistan. Further, two-quarters of households stated economic and safety reasons as having influenced their decision to return. Over one-quarter also stated that they have returned back to Afghanistan due to harassment/discrimination. 2.1 Year households settled in current location

600

533

484

500

395

384

429

410

400 300

272 193

191

200 100

125

111

307

319

206

155

162

169

168

1

2

24

16

41

257 21

285 9

18

1384 (2005/06)

1385 (2006/07)

1386 (2007/08)

1387 (2008/09)

1388 (2009/10)

1389 (2010/11)

1390 (2011/12)

1391 (2012/13)

0 1382 (2003/04)

1383 (2004/05)

RET (n=3,466)

IDP (n=2,089)

2.2 Percentage of HHs that settled in last 2 years and intend to remain

98%

IDP-RET (n=132)

2.3 Countries of asylum from which HHs have returned

97%

97.5%

97.5%

0.1% 13.5%

RET (n=604) IDP (n=763)

Iran (n=485) Pakistan (n=3,109) Other country (n=4)

86.4% 96% RET (n=604)

National Analysis

IDP (n=763)

Page 4 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

2.4 Reasons for leaving Afghanistan or district of origin

44.9%

42.0%

46.7%

52.2%

20%

51.2%

52.8%

71.9%

40%

64.4%

57.7%

60%

76.7%

89.9%

80%

77.3%

100%

0% Safety / Conflict

Economic reasons

RET (n=3,465)

Family reasons

Harassment / Discrimination

IDP (n=2,220)

AVG (n=5,685)

Legal Difficulties

Economic Reason

Safety

Harassment / Discrimination IDP-RET (n=132)

RET (n=3,466)

Own Property

16.7%

15.7%

18.1%

0.0%

18.6%

29.2%

50.0%

50.0% 28.6%

50.0%

50.0%

50.0%

52.8%

50.0%

52.9%

59.7%

50.0%

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

60.0%

2.5 Reasons for returning to Afghanistan

Place of Origin

AVG (n=3,598)

2.6 Main reasons for high rates of return to Afghanistan in 1388 (2009/10)

100%

9.1%

7.3%

9.2%

20.0%

12.2%

20.6%

23.3%

31.7%

22.7%

28.4%

22.0%

28.9%

39.9%

14.6%

41.8%

75.6%

50.7%

20%

48.8%

40%

79.4%

81.2%

60%

56.1%

80%

0% Legal Difficulties Economic Reason

Safety

Family Reasons

RET (n=533)


IDP-RET (n=41)

Place of Origin

Own Property

AVG (n=574)


12.7%

6.3%

12.9%

21.6%

25.0%

21.5%

22.3%

12.5%

22.7%

23.9%

24.6%

6.3%

29.8%

12.5%

30.5%

68.8%

57.7%

20%

57.3%

40%

74.9%

60%

74.4%

80%

87.5%

100%

0% Legal Difficulties Economic Reason RET (n=410)

National Analysis

Safety

Place of Origin IDP-RET (n=16)


Family Reasons

Own Property

AVG (n=426)

Page 5 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%


100%

11.2%

11.9%

0.0%

22.4%

37.5%

21.5%

23.2%

16.7%

23.5%

28.6%

30.1%

4.2%

32.2%

16.7%

66.7%

33.2%

20%

48.2%

47.1%

79.2%

40%

75.4%

60%

75.2%

80%

0% Legal Difficulties Economic Reason

Safety

RET (n=395)

Place of Origin


Family Reasons

IDP-RET (n=24)

Own Property

AVG (n=419)


19.1%

50.0%

19.0%

21.8%

0.0%

21.9%

25.3%

0.0%

25.4%

35.0%

50.0%

34.9%

20%

46.7%

50.0%

40%

81.3%

60%

81.4%

80%

46.9%

100.0%

100%

0%

Legal Difficulties

Economic Reason

RET (n=484)

Safety

Place of Origin


IDP-RET (n=2)

Family Reasons

AVG (n=486)

Legal Difficulties

Economic Reason

Safety

Harassment / Own Property Development Place of Origin Discrimination Projects in Afg

3.1%

9.4%

9.4%

12.5%

31.3%

43.8%

56.3%

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

65.6%


Family Reasons

RET (n=32)

National Analysis

Page 6 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

3. HOUSING STATUS PROFILE

Summary Survey findings reveal that 65.2% of IDP households and 70.0% of local community and 70.2% of returnee households live in single family houses. Part of a shared house was the second most common dwelling type among all three types of households. Vast majority of dwellings were mud-brick or mud construction with wooden roof. Two-room dwellings were the most common type, with 35.3% of local community and 45.3% of returnee and 44.6% of IDP households residing in such dwellings. Three-room dwellings were the second most common dwelling type among 25.0% of local community and among 19.8% of IDP households and 19.1% of returnee households. Among both local community (41.4%) and returnee households (41.3%), cooking in the open is most common. A further 36.9% of local community households and 35.0% of returnee households have kitchen as separate room in the dwelling. Vast majority in IDP households (39.3%) have kitchen as separate room in the dwelling while cooking in the open (29.5%) is the second most common in the IDP households. 3.1 Type of dwelling occupied by HH type

3.2 Construction material of exterior walls by HH type

100%

81.0%

75.5%

Shared apartment

50%

78.4%

10.6% 7.7% 11.7% 9.8%

Separate apartment

86.8%

0.5% 1.2% 3.2% 1.4%

18.1% 18.6% 15.4% 17.6%

70.0% 70.2% 65.2% 68.9%

50%

100%

0%

RET (n=3,466)

Mud Bricks/Mud LC (n=3,540)

3.3 Construction material of roof by HH type

80%

80%

12.3%

21.8%

11.0%

7.7%

36.8%

39.3%

35.0%

36.9%

38.5%

20%

41.4%

40%

20%

0% Cooking done in the Kitchen is seeparate Kitchen is part of open room in dwelling room in the dwelling ( or part of the tent)

0% AVG (n=9,227)

LC (n=3,540)

0.3%

0.2%

1.0%

0.8%

7.4%

12.1%

13.6%

3.7%

4.5%

3.4%

2.9%

20% 10%

40%

5.7%

88.9%

30%

83.3%

80%

82.9%

40%

60%

IDP (n=2,221) AVG (n=9,227)

3.6.1 Number of rooms occupied by HH: LC

100%

16.7%

3.5 Type of separate room for kitchen by HH type

RET (n=3,466)

25.0%

Wood IDP (n=2,221)

35.3%

RET (n=3,466)

11.8%

LC (n=3,540)

20%

AVG (n=9,227)

60%

73.9%

66.9%

69.8%

82.3%

100%

40%

IDP (n=2,221)

3.4 Kitchen/cooking facilities by HH type

100%

60%

RET (n=3,466)

29.5%

LC (n=3,540)

0%

41.3%

Single family Part of a house shared house

0%

0%

Open LC (n=1,306)

National Analysis

Semi-open RET (n=1,212)

Closed IDP (n=873)

LC (n=3,540)

Page 7 of 35





30/09/2012 93


3.6.3 Number of rooms occupied by HH: IDP

0%

0.0%

0.1%

0.1%

0.6%

1.3%

19.9%

0.2%

0.3%

0.5%

10% 0%

RET (n=3,466)

National Analysis

0.5%

2.9%

20% 4.0%

12.6%

10%

30% 19.1%

20%

14.4%

30%

2.9%

40%

10.4%

50%

40%

45.3%

50%

19.8%

3.6.2 Number of rooms occupied by HH: RET

100%

44.6%

Country Code

IDP (n=3,540)

Page 8 of 35





Country Code

93


100%

4. WATER, ELECTRICITY, FUEL AND SANITATION

Summary Water: Hand pump is the main source of water for 55.3% of local community households, 46.9% of returnee households and 37.9% of IDP households and it is located on average approximately 7 minutes away from both local community and returnee households while 9 minutes away from IDP households. Open Well is the second most principal source of drinking water for 32.3% of local community households, 23.9% of returnee households and 27.7% of IDP households located on average 3 minutes away from all household types. The other important sources are piped, open body of water and bored wells. Electricity: Of the 9,227 households surveyed, a total of 6,658 (72.2%) reported to have had access to an electricity supply in the 30 days prior to being surveyed. Solar power was the most important source of electricity among 52.6% of local community households, 58.1% of returnee and 52.8% of IDP households. With 29.6% of local community households, 18.4% of returnee and 26.3% of IDP households having access to electric grid as their electric source, makes it the second most common source for electricity. Small percentages among all three household types use battery and community generator (engine) as electric source. Fuel: During the winter months, Firewood is the main source of heating for approximately two-fifths of all three household types. Bushes (ping), twigs/branches and straw heat the homes of 22.3% of local community households, 24.9% of returnee and 20.5% of IDP households. A further, 11.7% of local community households, 9.2% of returnee and 12.9% of IDP households use animal dung for heating their homes. In addition, 14.9% of local community, 18.0% of returnee households and 8.7% of IDP households have no heating in the house during winter. The main source of cooking fuel in past 30 days for local community (35.7%) and returnee households (35.8%), is Bushes (ping), twigs/branches and straw but Gas is the main source among IDP (39.1%) using gas for cooking. A further 32.9% of local community households, 29.3% returnee households and 22.7% of IDP households use firewood for cooking. A small percentages of all three household types use animal dung as their cooking fuel source. Sanitation: Approximately three-quarters of household surveyed have access to a traditional covered latrine. A further, 12.4% of local community, 11.5% of returnee and 12.9% of IDP households use open field, bushes or sahrahi as their toilet. A small number of families are using open pit and flush latrines also. Surveyors took note of whether any garbage or pools of stagnant water were observed in close proximity to the households they interviewed. 43.0% of local community households, 49.0% of returnee households and 49.1% of IDP households didn’t have any garbage near their dwellings. A further, 53.7% of local community households, 47.7% of returnee households and 44.9% of IDP households had little garbage near their dwellings. Approximately less than 6% of all three households had a lot of garbage near their dwellings. Also, 81.0% of local community households, 90.6% of returnee households and 92.8% of IDP households didn’t have any stagnant water near their dwellings. In addition, 17.9% of local community households, 8.9% of returnee households and 6.8% of IDP households had little stagnant water near their dwellings. Only in the range of 1% of all three household types had a lot of stagnant water near their dwellings.

National Analysis

Page 9 of 35





30/09/2012 93


4.2 Average walking time (mins) to water source

12.9 12.9

13.7 12.3

13.4

5

6.4

1.0% 3.0% 3.7% 2.4%

3.7% 9.2% 9.7% 7.2%

10%

10

5.8% 11.5% 15.1% 10.2%

20%

15

32.3% 23.9% 27.7% 28.0%

30%

9.0

20 Minutes

50%

55.3% 46.9% 37.9% 48.0%

60%

25

11.7 12.6 14.9

4.1 Main sources of drinking water

40%

100%

19.5 19.9

Country Code

0

0%

Hand pump Open well LC (n=3,539)

Piped

RET (n=3,465)

Open body Bored wells of water IDP (n=2,218) AVG (n=9,222)

Open body of Taker/bottled Kariz Unprotected water water spring LC (n=3,539) RET (n=3,465) IDP (n=2,218)

4.3 Percentage of HHs with access to electricity in last 30 days

66.5%

70%

72.2%

75%

72.9%

77.3%

80%

65%

60% LC (n=3,540)

RET (n=3,466)

IDP (n=2,221)

AVG (n=9,227)

4.4 Main source of electricity accessed in last 30 days

70%

4.1%

3.8%

5.2%

3.3%

9.7%

8.7%

13.2%

7.3%

24.9%

10%

26.3%

20%

18.4%

29.6%

54.6%

30%

52.8%

40%

52.6%

50%

58.1%

60%

0% Solar LC (n=2,736)

Electric grid

Battery

RET (n=2,303)

IDP (n=1,618)

Community generator (engine) AVG (n=6,657)

4.5 Main source of winter heating by HH type

11.1%

12.9%

9.2%

11.7%

14.6%

8.7%

18.0%

14.9%

22.8%

20.5%

39.0%

24.9%

10%

22.3%

20%

38.5%

30%

34.3%

40%

43.9%

50%

0% Firewood LC (n=3,537)

National Analysis

Bushes (ping), twigs/branches, straw RET (n=3,463)

No heating in house IDP (n=2,220)

Animal dung AVG (n=9,220)

Page 10 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

4.6 Main source of cooking fuel in past 30 days

50%

10.5%

10.2%

8.5%

12.6%

26.2%

39.1%

25.9%

18.6%

29.1%

29.3%

22.7%

10%

32.9%

20%

33.6%

30%

27.0%

35.7%

35.8%

40%

0%

Bushes (ping), twigs/ branches

Firewood

LC (n=3,539)

Gas

RET (n=3,465)

Animal Dung

IDP (n=2,220)

AVG (n=9,224)

4.7 Main toilet facility used by HHs

100%

3.0%

2.1%

2.2%

4.5%

5.9%

8.8%

6.0%

3.8%

12.2%

12.9%

20%

11.5%

12.4%

40%

74.9%

60%

73.3%

74.6%

76.3%

80%

0%

None (Open field, bush) or sahrahi RET (n=3,464)

None Few LC (n=3,537) RET (n=3,464) IDP (n=2,220)

National Analysis

A lot AVG (n=9,221)

0.7%

0.4%

0.5%

1.1%

11.9%

17.9%

6.8%

3.9%

6.0%

3.3%

3.3%

0%

20%

8.9%

40%

20% 10%

92.8%

60%

87.4%

49.3%

44.9%

53.7%

47.7%

49.1%

46.7%

80%

49.0%

100%

50% 43.0%

60%

30%

AVG (n=9,224)

4.9 Observable pools of stagnant water near dwelling by HH type

4.8 Observable garbage near dwelling by HH type

40%

Flush latrine

IDP (n=2,221)

90.6%

LC (n=3,539)

Open pit

81.0%

Traditional covered latrine

0%

None LC (n=3,537) IDP (n=2,221)

Few

A lot RET (n=3,464) AVG (n=9,222)

Page 11 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

5. LABOUR & LIVELIHOODS

Summary According to survey findings, 29.3% of local community members, 27.1% of returnee and 27.8% of IDP are engaged in working for the family of which 75.7% of local community, 80.0% of returnee and 77.5% of IDP members are female. A further 15.0% of local community members, 16.9% of returnee and 17.3% of IDP members are working for a salary of which over 93% in all groups are male. Services represent the main employment sector for 53.1% of local community, 62.8% of returnees and 68.0% of IDP members. With providing employment for 27.7% of local community members, 21.9% of returnee and 17.4% of IDP members, government sector is the second most common sector. More local community members (12.2%) are reported to be in begging and scavenging sector compared to returnee (9.6%) and IDP members (6.9%). Among those aged 12-17 years, 284 local community, 376 returnee members and 293 IDPs were reported to be working. A further, 13 local community members, 10 returnee members and 17 IDPs aged 5-11 years was also reported to be in work. 5.1 Percentage of household members working

35%

5%

16.2%

10%

17.3%

16.9%

15.0%

15%

28.2%

20%

27.8%

25%

27.1%

29.3%

30%

0% Working for the Family LC (n=33,106)

Working for a Salary

RET (n=29,461)

IDP (n=17,589)

AVG (n=80,156)

5.2 Main sectors of employment for salaried workers

100%

6.9%

9.6%

12.2%

17.4%

20%

21.9%

40%

27.7%

53.1%

62.8%

60%

68.0%

80%

0% Services

Government

LC (n=4,920)

Begging and Scavenging

Ret (n=4,934)

IDP (n=3,030)

5.3 Age distribution of salaried workers

88.1%

60%

85.0%

80%

88.1%

89.9%

100%

4.2%

4.7%

4.1%

4.0%

7.4%

9.7%

7.6%

5.8%

0.3%

0.6%

0.2%

20%

0.3%

40%

0% 5-11 LC (n=4,920)

National Analysis

12-17 Ret (n=4,934)

18-59 IDP (n=3,030)

60+ AVG (n=12,854)

Page 12 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

6. HOUSEHOLD INCOME, DEBT, ASSETS AND EXPENDITURES

Summary Income: Average household income in 1390 was USD 2,711 among local community households, USD 2,392 among returnee households and USD 2,391 among IDP households. Wage labour was the primary source of income for 54.0% of IDP households, 56.2% of returnee households and 45.4% of local community households. Day labour was also a significant income source for 13.4% of returnee households and 12.3% of both local community households and IDP households. Remaining households all relied upon trade, agriculture and government services in varying proportions. Average household debt was revealed to be USD 1,926 among IDP households, USD 2,033 among local community households and USD 1,766 among returnee households. Expenditure: Average household expenditure in the month prior to being surveyed was USD 205 among local community households, USD 174 among returnee households and USD 162 among IDP households. A marginally larger proportion of monthly expenditure was spent on food supplies between (65 – 70%) by all three household types. Assets: With regard to ownership of key household assets, 76.0% of local community households, 75.9% of returnee households and 73.6% of IDP households own a stove/gas balloon. A mobile telephone is owned by 92.5% of local community households, 89.0% of returnee households and 88.7% of IDP households. A radio was owned by proportionally more local community households (50.0%) than returnee (45.2%) and IDP (43.3%) households. A further, 39.6% of Local community households, 36.6% of returnee and 37% of IDP households own a bicycle and a motorcycle. Approximately 6% of IDP and returnee households reported owning a car which is less than local community households (10.9%). 6.1 Average HH income for 1390 (1,000 AFN)

6.1 Average HH income for 1390 (USD)

$2,800

AFN 140

$2,600

AFN 110 LC (n=3,526)

$2,391

$2,400 $2,392

AFN 120

AFN 120

AFN 120

$2,515

$2,500 AFN 126

AFN 130

$2,711

AFN 136

Thousands

$2,700

$2,300 $2,200

RET (n=3,448)

IDP (n=2,205) AVG (n=9,179)

LC (n=3,526)

RET (n=3,448)

IDP (n=2,205) AVG (n=9,179)

6.2 Main sources of income for 1390

8.4%

5.2%

7.8%

10.9%

9.5%

6.2%

9.0%

12.1%

10.4%

14.6%

6.2%

11.8%

12.7%

12.3%

10%

12.3%

51.6%

20%

13.4%

30%

54.0%

40%

45.4%

50%

56.2%

60%

0% Salary, wage labour LC (n=3,540)

National Analysis

Salary, day labour RET (n=3,466)

Agriculture

Government services Trade IDP (n=2,221) AVG (n=9,227)

Page 13 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Completion Percentage 6.3.2 Average household debt (USD)

AFN 100

$2,000 $1,900

AFN 85

$1,800 $1,766

AFN 88

AFN 90

AFN 95

AFN 96

AFN 95

$1,700

AFN 80

$1,898

$2,100

$1,926

AFN 105

AFN 102

Thousands

6.3.1 Average household debt (1,000 AFN)

100%

$2,033

Country Code

$1,600 LC (n=2,163)

RET (n=2,516)

LC (n=2,163)

RET (n=2,516)

6.4.1 Average expenditure on household goods and services in previous month (USD)

$162

$150

$174

$205

$200

$183

$250

$100

$50 $0

LC (n=3,539)

RET (n=3,465)

IDP (n=2,221)

6.4.2 Average expenditure on food (USD)

6.4.3 Average expenditure on household supplies (USD)

$60

$49

$109

$123

$50 $40

$20

$26

$50

$35

$30 $27

$119

$135

$150

$100

AVG (n=9,225)

$10 $0

$0 LC (n=3,538)

RET (n=3,464)

LC (n=1,427)

RET (n=1,411)

6.5 Percentage ownership of key assets

15.9% 15.2% 20.0% 16.6%

10.9% 6.4% 6.1% 8.1%

20%

23.7% 21.4% 17.0% 21.2%

40%

50.0% 45.2% 43.3% 46.6%

60%

76.0% 75.9% 73.6% 75.4%

80%

19.3% 13.8% 22.4% 18.0%

92.5% 89.0% 88.7% 90.3%

100%

TV

Bicycle

Motorcycle

Car

0% Stove/Gas Balloon

Mobile Phone

LC (n=3,535)

National Analysis

Radio, Tape Recorder RET (n=3,463)

IDP (n=2,216)

AVG (n=9,214)

Page 14 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

7. AGRICULTURE & LIVESTOCK

Summary Agriculture: Of surveyed households, 28.6% of IDP households, 39.4% of local community households and 20.1% of returnee households have access to agricultural land. In 1391, on average, 4.8 jeribs of land were cultivated by IDP households and 4.4 jeribs were cultivated by local community and 3.9 jeribs were cultivated by returnee households, respectively. Wheat was the most important crop for 74.3% of local community households, 66.9% of returnee households and 49.9% of IDP households, while potatoes and barley were more important among IDP households than returnee and local community households. Also maize, other vegetables and tomato were also important among all three household types. Proportionally more local community households (9.1%) households have access to garden plot compared to returnee (6.6%) and IDP households (6.2%). Livestock: Some form of livestock is owned by 44.7% of IDP households, 57.5% of local community households and 45.4% of returnee households. Among households that do, 74.9% of local community households, 44.4% of IDP households and 44.1% of returnee households own cows and. A further 59.4% of returnee households, 56.0% of local community and 50.5% of IDP households own chickens. Among IDP households, 39.2% own sheep, 34.8% own goats and 44.3% own donkeys are significantly more likely than other household types to own these.

Own land RET (n=3,466)

7.4%

6.1%

6.7%

8.2%

19.0%

0%

0% LC (n=3,540)

18.7%

10%

20%

19.9%

20.1%

20%

40% 18.6%

28.6%

30%

74.5%

60%

73.3%

40%

29.5%

80%

39.4%

50%

72.9%

7.2 Status of land ownership

72.9%

7.1 Percentage of HHs with access to agricultural land

IDP (n=2,221)

AVG (n=9,227)

LC (n=1,394)

7.3 Average area of land cultivated in 1391 (jeribs)

6

Shared land

RET (n=697)

Leased land

IDP (n=635)

AVG (n=2,726)

7.4 Average area of accessible irrigated land (jeribs)

3.90

3.80

3.8

3.8

4.3

4.8

3.85

3.8

3

3.9

4

4.4

5

2 3.75

3.7

1 3.70

0

LC (n=1,394)

National Analysis

RET (n=697)

IDP (n=635)

AVG (n=2,726)

LC (n=1,352)

RET (n=651)

IDP (n=606)

AVG (n=2,609)

Page 15 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

7.6 Percentage of HHs that lack sufficient irrigation

7.5 Average area of accessible rainfed land (jeribs)

100%

20

80% 14.0

44.9%

49.8%

40%

5 20%

0 LC (n=148)

RET (n=97)

IDP (n=105)

0% LC (n=1,394)

AVG (n=4,884)

54.4%

60% 61.0%

10

12.0

13.5

16.7

15

RET (n=697)

IDP (n=635)

AVG (n=2,726)

7.7 Main source of irrigation water

70%

8.2%

8.5%

11.8%

6.3%

8.4%

5.8%

9.9%

8.8%

10%

13.1%

18.8%

20%

2.4%

30%

11.5%

40%

46.9%

48.4%

50%

51.5%

63.3%

60%

0% Canal

Irrigated Deep - Well Pump

LC (n=1,394)

Irrigated River

RET (n=697)

Other

IDP (n=635)

7.8 Average area of irrigated land left fallow in most recent summer

AVG (n=2,726)

7.9 Main reasons for not cultivating irrigated land

10.0

60%

6.0

5.1

4.6

4.0

20%

10%

10.4% 8.9% 15.9% 11.2%

30%

15.8% 15.2% 2.3% 12.7%

40%

6.0

15.8% 12.5% 11.4% 13.9%

46.0% 40.2% 47.7% 44.8%

50%

9.5

8.0

0%

2.0

Lack of water 0.0 LC (n=187)

RET (n=98)

IDP (n=78)

AVG (n=363)

LC (n=202)

Land not fertile

RET (n=112)

Lack of money No budget for to provide cultivation water IDP (n=88) AVG (n=402)

7.10 Most important crop harvested in 1391

2.8%

1.7%

3.6%

3.0%

2.8%

2.3%

2.3%

3.3%

3.2%

1.8%

2.2%

4.4%

5.2%

13.3%

5.6%

1.3%

6.5%

3.4%

1.5%

20%

20.9%

66.8%

49.9%

40%

74.3%

60%

66.9%

80%

0%

Wheat LC (n=1,350)

National Analysis

Potatoes

Barley RET (n=646)

Maize / Sorghum IDP (n=603)

Other Vegetables

Tomato

AVG (n=2,599)

Page 16 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

7.11 Second most important crop harvested in 1391

5.9%

2.6%

4.8%

7.6%

5.0%

4.8%

6.4%

3.1%

5.7%

8.0%

8.5%

8.1%

6.7%

9.5%

8.6%

5.7%

5%

3.8%

8.4%

10%

6.3%

15%

11.2%

23.7%

23.6%

20%

28.0%

25%

28.0%

30%

0% Maize / Sorghum

Wheat

Other Vegetables

LC (n=1,033)

Tomato

RET (n=436)

Barley

IDP (n=418)

Okra

AVG (n=1,887)

7.12 Third most important crop harvested in 1391

6.5%

5.6%

3.0%

6.6%

2.7%

8.2%

6.3%

10.2%

8.4%

10.6%

6.9%

10.1%

2.7%

17.0%

17.6%

10.1%

11.0%

9.9%

10.2%

13.1%

11.6%

5%

9.5%

10%

9.9%

15%

15.6%

20%

0% Okra

Other Vegetables

LC (n=404)

Other

Potatoes

RET (n=142)

IDP (n=147)

AVG (n=693)

16.0%

13.3%

18.0%

10%

5%

16.1%

33.2%

33.3%

32.0%

34.2%

40.0%

36.9%

20%

35.2%

11.1%

14.0%

30%

36.1%

40% 16.5%

17.5%

50%

15% 10%

Barley

7.14 Reasons for insufficient main crop seeds

7.13 Percentage of HHs with insufficient main crop seeds

20%

Tomato

0% Not enough money

Did not produce Not enough water enough seeds as last year RET (n=122) IDP (n=105) AVG (n=382)

0% AVG (n=2,726)

LC (n=155)

12.4%

16.7%

2%

8.8%

10%

13.1%

33.5%

20%

39.9%

30%

27.5%

4%

6.2%

6.6%

6%

7.4%

40%

9.1%

8%

31.5%

7.16 Main crops grown in garden plot

50%

44.5%

7.15 Percentage of HHs with access to a garden plot

10%

42.8%

IDP (n=635)

46.4%

RET (n=697)

38.2%

LC (n=1,394)

0% Fruit / Nut Trees

Grapes

Other Fruits

0% LC (n=3,540)

National Analysis

RET (n=3,466)

LC (n=321)

RET (n=228)

IDP (n=138)

AVG (n=687)

Page 17 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


7.17 Percentage of HHs with livestock

7.18 Average major livestock owned by HH type

8 7.5

100% 80%

0% LC (n=3,540)

5.2

4.7

49.9%

44.7%

20%

4 45.4%

57.5%

40%

5.5

6

60%

2

0 RET (n=3,466)

IDP (n=2,221)

AVG (n=9,227)

LC (n=1,868)

7.19 Average poultry and other birds owned by HH type

RET (n=1,263)

IDP (n=828)

AVG (n=3,959)

7.20 Average dogs owned by HH type

1.18

1.12

5.3

4

1.2

1.14 1.1

7.8

9.2

1.16

7.8

8

1.1

10

6

100%

1.1

1.10 2

1.08

0

1.06 LC (n=1,173)

National Analysis

RET (n=956)

IDP (n=513)

AVG (n=3,959)

LC (n=828)

RET (n=513)

IDP (n=266)

AVG (n=21)

Page 18 of 35





93

Country Code


100%

8. ACCESS TO SERVICES PROFILE

Summary Over 70% householders in all three community groups stated that the Provincial Centre is too far to walk to. In the last three months, the main reasons for travelling to the Provincial Centre for all three household types were to purchase goods or services, to work or to go to hospital. Moreover, approximately two-quarters of all three household types stated that the nearest police station is 15-60 minutes away on foot. Over two-quarters (53.6%) of local community households, over two-fifths (45.4%) of returnee households and 42.0% of IDP households stated that the nearest public health centre is located 15-60 minutes away. For the vast majority in all three community groups, the nearest private health clinic is either too far to walk to or 15-60 minutes away. The nearest hospital is too far to walk to for all three household types. Over two-fifths of all three household types stated that their place of employment is less than 15 minutes away. For 62.5% of returnee households, 64.3% of local community households and 54.4% of IDP households, transport can be accessed less than 15 minutes away on foot. For the vast majority of the remainder, access to transport is 15-60 minutes away. For all three household types, the nearest primary, secondary and high schools for both boys and girls are located 15-60 minutes away on foot.

8.1 Average time taken to walk one-way to Provincial Centre

75% 70.3%

70%

78.1%

80%

82.6%

83.1%

85%

65% 60%

LC (n=3,537)

Too far to walk, must use transport RET (n=3,459) IDP (n=2,217)

AVG (n=9,213)

8.2 Average number of times a HH member has travelled to Provincial Centre in last three months

10.4

10

7.8

8.0

8

LC (n=2,274)

RET (n=2,038

6

8.5

12

Graph

4 2 0

National Analysis

IDP (n=1,508)

AVG (n=5,820)

Page 19 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

8.3 Main reasons for travelling to Provincial Centre in last three months

29.2%

17.0%

25.1%

26.6%

Graph

28.2%

30.7%

26.8%

27.9%

20%

30.1%

26.6%

31.3%

30%

33.9%

40%

10% 0% To Purchase Goods or Services LC (n=2,274) RET (n=2,038

To Work

To go to Hospital AVG (n=5,820)

IDP (n=1,508)

8.4 Average number of times a HH member has travelled outside Provincial Centre in last three months

7.6

7.1

7.3

8.9

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Graph

LC (n=2,896)

RET (n=2,643)

IDP (n=1,499)

AVG (n=7,038)

8.5 Main reasons for travelling outside Provincial Centre in last three months

50%

20.8%

20.6%

17.5%

26.8%

22.7%

10%

Graph

27.2%

27.5%

37.3%

26.0%

20%

39.8%

30%

37.6%

35.8%

40%

0% To Purchase Goods or Services LC (n=2,896) RET (n=2,643)

To Work

LC (n=3,538)

National Analysis

RET (n=3,461)

Too far to walk, must use transport IDP (n=2,220)

42.0%

21.0%

More than 1Hr

13.8%

15-60mins

11.1%

Less than 15mins

10.5%

10%

0%

10.1%

20%

15.4%

9.7%

12.8%

9.6%

15.8%

30% 8.2%

33.2%

40%

8.6%

10%

24.2%

20%

32.9%

30%

46.8%

50% 48.2%

60%

50% 47.5%

60%

45.4%

8.7 Public Health Centre

53.6%

8.6 Police Station

40%

To Visit Relatives AVG (n=7,038)

IDP (n=1,499)

0% Less than 15mins 15-60mins LC (n=3,539) RET (n=3,461)

More than 1Hr IDP (n=2,220)

Page 20 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


15-60mins

LC (n=3,539)

More than 1Hr

RET (n=3,461)

26.6%

19.2%

17.1%

7.8%

14.1%

7.1%

68.4%

Too far to walk, must use transport

21.4%

28.4%

9.4%

10%

0% Less than 15mins

30% 20%

13.7%

8.8%

15.5%

17.6%

27.5%

2.1%

2.0%

20%

3.5%

40%

22.0%

40%

41.7%

60%

71.0%

50%

60.0%

80%

44.2%

8.9 Employment Area

46.1%

8.8 Hospital

100%

0%

Less than 15mins

IDP (n=2,220)

15-60mins

LC (n=3,533)

More than 1Hr

Too far to walk, must use transport IDP (n=2,220)

RET (n=3,456)

8.10 Transport

10.3%

10%

33.6%

20%

30.3%

29.4%

30%

4.9%

40%

5.0%

50%

62.5%

64.3%

60%

54.4%

70%

0% Less than 15mins LC (n=3,535)

15-60mins RET (n=3,457)


8.11 Boys' Primary School

8.12 Girls' Primary School

80%

70%

20.6%

0% RET (n=3,466)

Less than 15mins

IDP (n=2,220)

LC (n=3,540)

8.14 Girls' Secondary School

40%

56.2%

60%

60.4%

60% 60.6%

70%

70%

50%

IDP (n=2,221)

61.0%

8.13 Boys' Secondary School

15-60mins

RET (n=3,466)

50% 40%

57.6%

LC (n=3,539)

15-60mins

60.9%

Less than 15mins

16.0%

10%

21.0%

19.5%

24.1%

30.3%

20%

28.0%

30%

30%

10%

25.3%

10%

29.2%

21.3%

25.1%

20%

0%

20%

59.3%

40%

59.7%

50%

30%

26.9%

20%

60.1%

66.6%

66.7%

40%

63.6%

60% 60%

0%

0% Less than 15mins LC (n=3,539) RET (n=3,466)

National Analysis

15-60mins IDP (n=2,220)

Less than 15mins LC (n=3,538) RET (n=3,462)

15-60mins IDP (n=2,220)

Page 21 of 35





30/09/2012 93


15.2%

11.2%

10%

0%

13.9%

19.0%

20%

14.7%

13.6%

30% 10.4%

10%

40%

11.3%

17.4%

20%

12.6%

30%

40.2%

40%

50%

13.1%

60%

50%

55.6%

60%

64.1%

70%

39.7%

8.16 Girls' High School

70% 59.8%

8.15 Boys' High School

100%

51.5%

Country Code

0% Less than 15mins 15-60mins LC (n=3,539) RET (n=3,465)


Less than 15mins 15-60mins LC (n=3,538) RET (n=3,461)


8.17 Drinking Water Source

88.2%

60%

88.6%

80%

93.3%

100%

0.0%

0.1%

0.1%

0.0%

0.0%

0.1%

0.4%

0.2%

0.5%

0.3%

0.3%

0.3%

11.1%

20%

10.8%

5.8%

40%

0% Less than 15mins

15-60mins

LC (n=3,538)

National Analysis

More than 1Hr

Too far to walk, must Don't know where use transport one is RET (n=3,462) IDP (n=2,216)

Not applicable

Page 22 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

9. EDUCATION PROFILE

Summary Among those aged five years and over, 40.4% of the local community, 37.1% of returnees and 35.6% of IDPs reported to be literate. Of these, 55.8% of local community males, 50.8% of returnee males and 47.0% of IDP males reported to be literate. Similarly, 23.6% of local community females, 22.1% of returnee females and 23.5% of IDP females reported to be literate. Among adults aged eighteen years and over, 83.3% of local community males, 88.2% of returnee males and 89.6% of IDP males did not achieve any school grade. Similarly, 97.3% of local community females, 97.9% of returnee females and 97.4% of IDP females had not achieved any school grade. Among males aged 6 to 24 years, 57.7% of local community, 51.8% of returnees and 48.7% of IDPs males reported to be currently attending school. Among females aged 6 to 24 years, 31.5% of local community females, 27.3% of returnees and 31.0% of IDP females reported to be currently attending school. The main reason for not attending school given by those aged 6 to 24 years across all three groups was because the family did not permit them to. A further 15.6% of those aged 6 to 24 years across all three groups do not attend school because they don’t like it/didn’t learn enough.

9.2 Female literacy rate within each age group by household type

9.1 Male literacy rate within each age group by household type Total

Female

13,496

7,532 55.8% 11,963

6,078 50.8%

LC

60+ 800 159 19.9% 685 98 14.3% 495 80 16.2% 1,980 337 17.0%

RET

Total Yes % Total Yes % Total Yes % Total Yes %

Age Group 12-17 18-59 2,772 6,505 2,157 2,941 77.8% 45.2% 2,517 5,738 1,841 2,331 73.1% 40.6% 1,382 3,501 933 1,324 67.5% 37.8% 6,671 15,744 4,931 6,596 73.9% 41.9%

7,096

3,337 47.0% 32,555 16,947

IDP

5-11 3,419 2,275 66.5% 3,023 1,808 59.8% 1,718 1,000 58.2% 8,160 5,083 62.3%

ALL

ALL

IDP

RET

LC

Male

52.1%

Age Group 12-17 18-59 2,568 6,270 1,057 429 41.2% 6.8% 2,203 5,463 795 401 36.1% 7.3% 1,300 3,392 537 257 41.3% 7.6% 6,071 15,125 2,389 1,087 39.4% 7.2%

5-11 2,978 1,426 47.9% 2,796 1,215 43.5% 1,667 764 45.8% 7,441 3,405 45.8%

Total Yes % Total Yes % Total Yes % Total Yes %

Total

60+ 545 8 1.5% 473 7 1.5% 309 6 1.9% 1,327 21 1.6%

12,361

2,920 23.6% 10,935

2,418 22.1% 6,668

1,564 23.5% 29,964

6,902 23.0%

9.3 Percentage of literate household members by age group

20%

0.6%

0.6%

0.5%

0.6%

12.3%

11.5%

11.9%

Graph

13.0%

11.7%

10.7%

12.4%

11.5%

5%

13.6%

12.8%

13.2%

10%

14.3%

15%

0% 5-11 LC (n=25,857)

National Analysis

12-17 RET (n=22,898)

18-59 IDP (n=13,764)

60+ AVG (n=62,519)

Page 23 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


9.4 Percentage of literate males by age group

9.5 Percentage of literate females by age group

0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

0%

0% 5-11 12-17 LC (n=13,496) IDP (n=7,096)

3.5% 3.7% 3.9% 3.6%

5%

8.6% 7.3% 8.1% 8.0%

21.8% 19.5% 18.7% 20.3%

10%

1.2% 0.8% 1.1% 1.0%

5%

16.0% 15.4% 13.1% 15.1%

10%

16.9% 15.1% 14.1% 15.6%

20%

11.5% 11.1% 11.5% 11.4%

15%

25%

15%

100%

5-11 12-17 LC (n=12,361) IDP (n=6,668)

18-59 60+ RET (n=11,963) AVG (n=32,555)

18-59 60+ RET (n=10,935) AVG (n=29,964)

9.6 Highest school grade achieved by adult males (18+)

60% 40%

0.0%

0.1%

0.1%

1.0%

0.7%

1.5%

2.2%

2.4%

2.7%

3.7%

5.3%

8.8%

1.8%

2.1%

Graph

1.6%

20%

88.2%

83.3%

80%

89.6%

100%

0% Primary

High School

Secondary

LC (n=7,313)

University

Postgraduate

RET (n=6,439)

No Grade Achieved

IDP (n=4,009)

9.7 Highest school grade achieved by adult females (18+)

97.4%

80%

97.9%

97.3%

100%

60% 40%

1.2%

0.8%

0.9%

0.4%

0.5%

0.9%

1.0%

0.6%

0.7%

20%

Graph

0% Primary

High School

LC (n=6,843)

9.8 Percentage of males aged 6 to 24 years currently attending school

No Grade Achieved IDP (n=3,707)

9.9 Percentage of females aged 6 to 24 years currently attending school

28% 27% 26%

27.3%

53.6%

48.7%

51.8%

29%

29.8%

30%

31.0%

31%

31.5%

32%

57.7%

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Secondary

RET (n=5,957)

25% LC (n=8,827)

National Analysis

RET (n=7,829)

IDP (n=4,393)

AVG (n=21,049)

LC (n=7,926) RET (n=7,035) IDP (n=4,152)

AVG (n=19,113)

Page 24 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

9.10.1 General reasons for not attending school

2.1%

2.3%

2.4%

1.7%

4.5%

4.2%

4.7%

4.4%

9.5%

10.8%

6.4%

12.0%

Graph

27.7%

10%

22.0%

20%

25.8%

32.7%

50.2%

30%

48.5%

40%

49.4%

50%

54.6%

60%

0% Family

Personal

LC (n=9,158)

School

RET (n=8,889)

Security/Safety

Other

IDP (n=5,118)

AVG (n=23,165)

9.10.2 Specific reasons for not attending school

8.3% 7.0% 6.6% 7.4%

5.5% 6.6% 6.0% 6.0%

3.3% 4.2% 6.0% 4.2%

4.0% 3.1% 2.3% 3.3%

2.8% 4.1% 1.1% 2.9%

5.0% 9.4% 8.7% 7.5%

10%

6.9% 8.9% 11.5% 8.7%

20%

18.8% 14.6% 11.5% 15.6%

30%

37.9% 32.4% 32.7% 34.6%

40%

Child too young

No Response

Marriage

Studied as far as needed

No female teacher

Graph

0% Family did not Didn’t like Child needed No school, allow to work to School too far school / did help family not learn enough LC (n=9,158) RET (n=8,889) 9.11 Age distribution of males who received education in another province

9.12 Age distribution of females who received education in another province

6%

6%

6.6%

9.0%

8%

5%

2.5%

0.9%

0.3%

0.4%

3.6% 0.3%

1%

0.1%

2%

1.7%

2.0%

0.3%

0.2%

2.4%

0.1%

0.1%

3%

0.2%

5.6%

4%

4%

0%

0% 5-11

12-17

LC (n=7,678)

5-11 LC (n=3,100)

18-59

RET (n=6,246)

IDP (n=3,424)

9.13 Age distribution of males who received education in another country

12-17 RET (n=2,578)

18-59 IDP (n=1,741)

9.14 Age distribution of females who received education in another country

14%

25%

0.8%

1.0%

0.4%

0.1%

4.5%

2%

0.0%

3.8%

5.1%

4%

1.0%

8%

6.7%

19.5%

10%

6%

0.9%

0.5%

0.2%

2.8%

0.0%

10%

11.5%

15%

11.4%

12%

20%

5%

AVG (n=23,165)

7%

10%

2%

IDP (n=5,118)

0%

0% 5-11 LC (n=7,678)

National Analysis

12-17 RET (n=6,246)

18-59 IDP (n=3,424)

5-11 LC (n=3,100)

12-17 RET (n=2,578)

18-59 IDP (n=1,741)

Page 25 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

10. HEALTH PROFILE

Summary One-third (34.2%) of local community households, 33.5% of returnee households and 35.5% of IDP households had between one and two household members admitted to a health facility as an inpatient over the course of the previous month. Over two-quarters (52.5%) of local community, over two-fifths (43.9%) of returnee and 55.8% of IDP households also had at least one member receive care from a health provider, a pharmacy or traditional healer without having to stay overnight. The private health facility was visited most by all three household groups, followed by the Regional Hospital and comprehensive health center. The most common reasons for seeking medical treatment by local community households were Infection diseases (22.3%), digestive problems (18.4%) and respiratory problems (18.3%). Similarly, for returnee households the most common reasons were Infection diseases (22.9%), digestive problems (19.3%) and treatment of respiratory problems (16.2%). Among IDP households, the main reasons for seeking medical treatment were digestive problems (19.2%), infection problems (19.0%) and respiratory problems (17.8%). Of the 18,116 females aged 13-49 years that were included in the survey, a total of 2,969 were reported to be married among local community households (n=1,202), returnee households (n=989) and IDP households (n=778). Based on this data, the average number of births stands at 4.8 for local community females, 4.8 for returnee females and 4.7 for IDP females. Correspondingly, the average number of infant/child deaths is 0.6 for local community females, 0.7 for returnee females and 0.8 for IDP females. Of the 2,806 females aged 1349 years that have given birth, 75.6% of local community females, 71.9% of returnee and 59.1% of IDP females received antenatal care during their last pregnancy with an average of 3.3 antenatal care visits per mother, and one-third (34.7%) had the assistance of a midwife during delivery. With regard to children under the age of five, 75.9% of local community children, 64.9% of returnee children and 59.0% of IDP children have been registered with the civil authorities. Over the course of the previous month, 89.3% of local community under-fives, 74.4% of returnee under-fives and 64.6% of IDP under-fives have received a Vitamin A capsule, and in the region of one quarter across all three household types have suffered from diarrhea. Furthermore, approximately one-fifth of all three groups have a persistent cough.

10.1.1 Number of HH members admitted to stay at a health facility overnight in previous month

1.18 1.2

500

1.2

1.14

1.1

928

1.16

1.2

1,332

1,417

1,500

1,000

10.1.2 Average number of HH members admitted to stay at a health facility overnight in previous month

1.12

0 LC (n=1,213)

RET (n=1,162)

IDP (n=789)

LC (n=1,213)

RET (n=1,162)

IDP (n=789)

AVG (n=3,164)

10.1.3 Percentage of HHs with at least one member who sought treatment from a health provider, a pharmacy or traditional healer without staying overnight

49.9%

30%

55.8%

40%

43.9%

50%

52.5%

60%

20%

10% 0% LC (n=3,540)

National Analysis

RET (n=3,466)

IDP (n=2,221)

AVG (n=9,227)

Page 26 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

10.1.4 Reasons for seeking treatment

4.1%

4.5%

5.1%

9.6%

11.2%

5%

10.1%

17.8%

16.2%

18.3%

10%

19.2%

19.3%

18.4%

15%

19.0%

22.3%

20%

22.9%

25%

0% Respiratory

10.2.2 Age distribution of married women who completed survey

0

203

163

11

9

100

36

46

45

200

16

200

400

0 13-17

4.0%

3.1%

4 2

13-17

18-29

4.8 4.8 4.7

6.5%

6

3.8%

0.3%

0.1%

0.2%

4.8%

5.0%

8.4%

8

7.1%

8%

7.0%

10

0%

40-49 IDP (n=778)

10.2.4 Average number of births per woman by age group

10%

4%

30-39

RET (n=989)

7.3 7.7 7.0

10.2.3 Percentage of overall number of married women aged 1849 years who completed survey

6%

18-29

LC (n=1,202)

IDP (n=814)

5.9 5.8 5.8

RET (n=1,035)

2.8 2.8 2.8

LC (n=1,247)

Widowed

1.1 1.2 0.7

Married

0

13-17 LC (n=1,202)

18-29 RET (n=989)

30-39 IDP (n=778)

40-49

30-39 RET

LC

10.2.5 Average number of infant/child deaths per woman by age group

1.5

40-49 IDP

AVG

10.2.6 Age distribution of women who received antenatal care

187 66

175

281

229

377

189

0.6 0.7 0.8

0.0

120

18-29

100 4

0.3 0.3 0.4

13-17

200

8

0.2 0.1 0.2

0.5

300

1.0

0.7 0.8

1.0

1.0

323

1.3 1.3

400

6

2%

340

300

778

600

282

989

400

264

500

377

600

1,200 1,202

1,400

800

Cardiovascular

IDP (n=2,079)

527

10.2.1 Number of married women who completed survey

1,000

Other illness

RET (n=3,391)

314

Digestive

LC (n=3,387)

463

Infection

0 LC

National Analysis

30-39 RET

40-49 IDP

AVG

13-17 LC

18-29

30-39 RET

40-49 IDP

Page 27 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


10.2.7 Average number of antenatal visits during last pregnancy by age group

7.0

10.2.8 Provider of antenatal care and delivery assistance during last birth

Doctor

Other

No one

0% RET

IDP

LC (n=1,157)

59.0%

64.9%

68.0%

10.2.9 Percentage of children under the age of five registered with civil authorities

75.9%

Midwife

40-49

LC (n=1,800) RET (n=1,517) IDP (n=1,055)

TBA RET (n=964)

IDP (n=756)

Total (n=2,877)

10.2.10 Percentage of children under the age of five who received Vitamin A capsule in the last month

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

AVG (n=4,372)

LC (n=1,800)

RET (n=1,517)

78.2%

30-39

64.6%

18-29

89.3%

13-17 LC

74.4%

0.0

80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

2.6% 7.7% 8.2% 5.8%

10%

1.0

10.5% 5.2% 8.3% 8.1%

3.4

3.1

3.3

20%

3.7

3.4

3.2

3.5

3.0

2.7

2.9

3.0

3.3

4.0

21.6% 20.9% 9.1% 18.1%

30%

18.2% 27.2% 28.7% 23.9%

6.3

5.0

36.6% 33.3% 33.6% 34.7%

40%

6.0

2.0

100%

IDP (n=1,055)

AVG (n=4,372)

10.2.11 Percentage of children under the age of five who had Diarrhoea in the last month

10.2.12 Percentage of children under the age of five who had a Cough in the last month

29%

25%

23%

24.6%

24%

24.7%

10%

17.8%

25%

15.8%

15%

17.0%

26%

25.9%

27%

20.2%

20%

28.2%

28%

5%

22%

0% LC (n=1,800) RET (n=1,517) IDP (n=1,055)

AVG (n=4,372)

LC (n=1,800) RET (n=1,517) IDP (n=1,055)

AVG (n=4,372)

10.2.13 Percentage of children under the age of five who had Rapid Breaths in the last month

5.9%

6% 5% 4.1%

4%

5.5%

7%

7.3%

8%

3% 2% 1% 0%

LC (n=1,800)

National Analysis

RET (n=1,517)

IDP (n=1,055)

AVG (n=4,372)

Page 28 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

11. HOUSEHOLD SHOCKS AND COPING STRATEGIES

Summary Four-fifths (79.1%) of local community households were affected by unusually high increases in food prices. A further, 41.9% of local community households were affected by reduced drinking water quantity, 25.2% by severe winter conditions, 35.5% by reduced drinking water quality and 19.4% by heavy rains that prevented work. Over four-fifths (85.5%) of local community households responded to these shocks by decreasing expenditures. A further, 35.6% of local community households took loans, 41.0% reduced quality of diet, 39.8% reduced quantity of diet and 23.1% of households received help from others in the community. 74.9% of returnee households were affected by unusually high increases in food prices. A further, 43.2% of returnee households were affected by reduced drinking water quantity, 36.6% by severe winter conditions, 34.5% by reduced drinking water quality and 23.7% by heavy rains that prevented work. Approximately fourfifths (78.6%) of returnee households responded to these shocks by decreasing expenditures. A further, 43.5% of returnee households took loans, 34.2% reduced quality of diet, 31.6% reduced quantity of diet and 25.3% of households received help from others in the community. 63.7% of IDP households were affected by unusually high increases in food prices. A further, 40.7% of IDP households were affected by reduced drinking water quantity, 54.8% by severe winter conditions, 34.8% by reduced drinking water quality and 30.6% by heavy rains that prevented work. Approximately four-fifths (79.6%) of IDP households responded to these shocks by decreasing expenditures. A further, 48.2% of IDP households took loans, 32.5% reduced quality of diet, 28.4% reduced quantity of diet and 28.9% of households received help from others in the community.

11.1 General household shocks in 1390

21.3%

16.4%

21.1%

29.1%

24.2%

23.1%

65.7%

49.7%

42.5%

51.1%

54.9%

20%

50.9%

40%

67.2%

60%

78.6%

80%

82.6%

100%

0% Financial

Water (quality and quantity) LC (n=3,483)

Natural disaster

Idiosyncratic shocks

RET (n=3,383)

Agricultural

IDP (n=2,151)

11.2 Specific household shocks in 1390

100%

30.6%

23.7%

19.4%

34.8%

34.5%

35.5%

54.8%

36.6%

25.2%

40.7%

43.2%

20%

41.9%

63.7%

40%

74.9%

60%

79.1%

80%

0%

Unusually high increases Reduced drinking water Severe winter conditions Reduced drinking water in food prices quantity quality LC (n=3,483)

National Analysis

RET (n=3,383)

Heavy rains preventing work

IDP (n=2,151)

Page 29 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

11.3 General coping strategies employed in response to household shocks in 1390

5.9%

10.4%

8.7%

28.9%

25.3%

23.1%

43.1%

46.5%

57.0%

57.5%

20%

54.2%

44.7%

40%

79.6%

60%

78.6%

80%

85.5%

100%

0% Reduced expenditure

Loans, credits, mortgaging

LC (n=3,357)

Food reduction (quality or quantity)

Help from community

RET (n=3,145)

Illness or drug addiction

IDP (n=2,045)

11.4 Specific coping strategies employed in response to household shocks in 1390

28.9%

25.3%

23.1%

28.4%

31.6%

39.8%

32.5%

34.2%

41.0%

20%

48.2%

35.6%

40%

43.5%

79.6%

60%

78.6%

80%

85.5%

100%

0%

Decreased expenditures LC (n=3,357)

National Analysis

Took loans

Reduced quality of diet Reduced quantity of diet RET (n=3,145)

Received help from others in the community IDP (n=2,045)

Page 30 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

12. PROTECTION PROFILE

Summary Of the 9,219 households surveyed, 80.9% had an adult male aged 18-59 years as head of household. The head of household of 26 local community households, 23 returnee households and 17 IDP households were a male aged 12-17 years, and 82.9% of all three household types were headed by females aged 18-59 years. Furthermore, one local community household was headed by a female aged 12-17 years. A total of 1,693 households had an elderly (aged 60+) head of household of whom 2.5% were female. 86 local community households, 110 returnee households and 100 IDP households were headed by a widow or widower. 28 local community males, 122 local community females, 23 returnee males, 116 returnee females, 12 IDP males and 60 IDP females aged 13-17 years were reported to be married. Among married adults, a total of 728 local community females, 564 returnee and 470 IDP females reported to have been under-18 years of age at the time of marriage. In the region of 8.0% of all three household types contained more than one wife. The survey found 2,704 people living with a disability of which 59.7% were male. The most common disabilities were reported to be either physical (40.6%) or sensory (16.5%) in nature. 54.4% of disabled local community, 55.1% of disabled returnees and 56.7% of disabled IDPs were adults aged 18-59 years. In the region of one-fifth of disabled people in all three groups were aged 60 years and over. Of the 13,909 females aged 6-17 years, 29.0% of IDP females, 29.4% of local community females and 31.1% of returnee females are currently not attending school.

12.1 Vulnerable Groups 12.1.1 Age distribution of male heads of household

18.4%

19.7%

16.4%

19.5%

80.9%

50%

79.5%

79.7%

82.9%

100%

0% 18-59

LC (n=3,451)

RET (n=3,366)

12.1.2 Age distribution of female heads of household

AVG (n=8,974)

12.1.3 Age distribution of widowed heads of household

0%

41

36

38

48

16.7%

21.3%

12.1%

18.8%

50

59

74

82.9%

78.7%

87.9%

100 80.0%

100%

50%

60+

IDP (n=2,157)

0

LC (n=85)

18-59 RET (n=99)

IDP (n=61)

60+ AVG (n=245)

18-59 LC (n=86)

RET (n=110)

60+ IDP (n=100)

12.2 Marital Status 12.2.1 Age distribution of under-age married males 12.2.2 Age distribution of under-age married females

100

13 LC (n=28)

National Analysis

14

15 RET (n=23)

16 17 IDP (n=12)

62 68 28

43 32 20

2 3 1

0 1 0

0

5

4 4

2

0

2 3 0

1 2 1

6

5

15 12 11

50

8

12

10

13

15

0 13 LC (n=122)

14

15 RET (n=116)

16 17 IDP (n=60)

Page 31 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

12.2.3 Marrying age of adult women who were under-age at time of marriage

22.5%

21.7%

18.8%

26.0%

33.6%

29.1%

23.8%

24.3%

22.5%

12.7%

13.8%

16.1%

9.3%

4.5%

6.2%

5.1%

10%

3.0%

20%

25.3%

30%

32.6%

37.2%

40%

0%

13 LC (n=728)

14 RET (n=564)

12.2.4 Households with more than one wife

16

17

IDP (n=470)

AVG (n=1,764)

12.3 Age distribution of girls currently not attending school

29.9%

31.1% 29.0%

28.3%

28.2%

26%

26.6%

7.8%

28%

7.4% LC (n=1,202)

30.2%

30%

29.4%

32% 8.2%

8.4% 8.2% 8.0% 7.8% 7.6% 7.4% 7.2% 7.0% 6.8%

15

24%

RET (n=989)

IDP (n=778)

6-11 LC (n=5,695)

12-17 RET (n=5,161)

12.4 Households with at least one member with a disability by nature of disability

0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4%

0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%

0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%

0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%

0.4% 0.6% 0.7% 0.5%

0.5%

0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%

1.0%

0.4% 0.6% 0.7% 0.6%

1.5%

1.3% 1.4% 1.6% 1.4%

2.0%

Sensory Disability

Epilepsy

Mental Disability

Intellectual Disability

Chronic Disability

Communicable infections

Other

0.0% Physical Disability

LC (n=33,106)

National Analysis

RET (n=29,461)

IDP (n=17,589)

AVG (n=80,156)

Page 32 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

13. CHILD LABOUR

Summary Among households surveyed, a total of 993 children were reported to be working and include 13 children aged 5-11 years and 284 children aged 12-17 years among local community households, 10 children aged 5-11 years and 376 children aged 12-17 years among returnee families, and 17 children aged 5-11 year and 293 children aged 12-17 years among IDP families. Child workers belonging to local community households were reported to be working on average of 8.8 hours per day with 50.5% of them were reported to be day labourers and 40.1% were self-employed. Child workers belonging to returnee households were reported to be working an average of 8.4 hours per day with 54.6% of returnee child workers reported to be day labourers and 32.2% were self-employed. Child workers of IDP families work an average of 8.5 hours per day and 45.2% were reported to be day labourers and 44.9% were self-employed. Vast majority of children of each type of household were engaged in industry sector. The second most common sector for child workers among local community and returnee households is services sector and agriculture for IDP households. 13.1 Distribution of child workers by age and gender

11.2%

17.7%

9.3%

6.7%

1.1%

1.3%

1.6%

0.3%

2.9%

4.2%

1.0%

20%

4.0%

40%

84.8%

60%

76.8%

88.9%

80%

88.1%

100%

0% Male 5-11 LC (n=297)

Male Children LC (n=297)

RET (n=386)

IDP (n=310)

Total (n=993)

Female Children LC (n=297)

RET (n=386)

IDP (n=310)

Total (n=993)

National Analysis

Age Group 5-11 12-17 Total Children 5-11 12-17 Total Children 5-11 12-17 Total Children 5-11 12-17 Total Children

Age Group 5-11 12-17 Total Children 5-11 12-17 Total Children 5-11 12-17 Total Children 5-11 12-17 Total Children

Female 5-11 RET (n=386)

Male 12-17 IDP (n=310)

Female 12-17 AVG (n=993)

13.2 Distribution of male child workers by age and sector Day Labourer Salaried Worker Self-Employed Own Business Unpaid Family Total Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % 5 38.5% 0 0.0% 7 53.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 12 92.3% 142 50.0% 23 8.1% 96 33.8% 3 1.1% 0 0.0% 264 93.0% 147 49.5% 23 7.7% 103 34.7% 3 1.0% 0 0.0% 276 92.9% 1 10.0% 0 0.0% 3 30.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4 40.0% 203 54.0% 33 8.8% 91 24.2% 11 2.9% 2 0.5% 340 90.4% 204 52.8% 33 8.5% 94 24.4% 11 2.8% 2 0.5% 344 89.1% 2 11.8% 0 0.0% 11 64.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 13 76.5% 134 45.7% 23 7.8% 80 27.3% 1 0.3% 0 0.0% 238 81.2% 136 43.9% 23 7.4% 91 29.4% 1 0.3% 0 0.0% 251 81.0% 8 20.0% 0 0.0% 21 52.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 29 72.5% 479 50.3% 79 8.3% 267 28.0% 15 1.6% 2 0.2% 842 88.4% 487 49.0% 79 8.0% 288 29.0% 15 1.5% 2 0.2% 871 87.7% 13.3 Distribution of female child workers by age and sector Day Labourer Salaried Worker Self-Employed Own Business Unpaid Family Total Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 7.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 7.7% 3 1.1% 1 0.4% 15 5.3% 1 0.4% 0 0.0% 20 7.0% 3 1.0% 1 0.3% 16 5.4% 1 0.3% 0 0.0% 21 7.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6 60.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 6 60.0% 7 1.9% 5 1.3% 24 6.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 36 9.6% 7 1.8% 5 1.3% 30 7.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 42 10.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4 23.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4 23.5% 4 1.4% 3 1.0% 44 15.0% 4 1.4% 0 0.0% 55 18.8% 4 1.3% 3 1.0% 48 15.5% 4 1.3% 0 0.0% 59 19.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 11 27.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 11 27.5% 14 1.5% 9 0.9% 83 8.7% 5 0.5% 0 0.0% 111 11.6% 14 1.4% 9 0.9% 94 9.5% 5 0.5% 0 0.0% 122 12.3%

Page 33 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

13.4 Average number of hours worked daily by male and female child workers

6.6

8.5

8.5

8.8

8.4

6

7.7

8.3

8.5

8.5

8.6

8.8

8

8.6

10

4 2 0 Males

Females

LC (n=297)

AVG

RET (n=386)

IDP (n=310)

AVG (n=993)

13.5 Average number of hours worked daily by child workers by economic sector

7.0

7.0

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.2

5.5

6

8.0

8.1

9.5

9.7

10.0

8

9.7

10

10.4

12

4

0.0

2 0 Agriculture

Government

Services RET (n=386)

LC (n=297)

Industry

Begging

IDP (n=310)

13.6 Average number of hours worked daily by child workers aged 12-17 years by economic sector

8.5

8.5

8.4

8.8

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.4

8.7

8.1

7.8

8.1

9.5

9.7

5.5

6

8.1

10.0

10.0

8

9.7

10

10.3

12

4 2 0 Agriculture 12-17 LC (n=297)

National Analysis

Government 12-17 RET (n=386)

Services

Industry 12-17 IDP (n=310)

AVG 12-17 AVG (n=993)

Page 34 of 35





30/09/2012 93

Country Code


100%

14. SAFETY AND SECURITY

Summary The security Situation in the district was described as “moderately secure”” by 80.1% of local community households, 77.7% of returnee households and 69.5% of IDP households. IDP households (22.7%) were more likely to describe the district as either “not secure, not insecure” or “moderately insecure” compared to 15.5% of local community and 16.4% of IDP households. With regard to safety, 75.3% of local community households, 72.2% of returnee and 69.6% of IDP households either “rarely” or “sometimes” fear for their personal safety and security or that of family. A further 14.9% of local community households, 21.6% of returnee and 21.5% of IDP households “never” fear for their personal safety and security or that of family. More local community households (9.8%) and IDP households (8.8%) “Mostly” or “often” fear for their personal safety and security or that of family compared to returnee households (6.2%). On the subject of policing, 78.9% of local community households, 75.5% of returnee households and 70.4% of IDP households are “moderately satisfied” with the police. Proportionally more IDP households (21.1%) are “not satisfied/not dissatisfied” or “moderately dissatisfied” compared to 14.7% of local community households and 16.6% of returnee households. Of the 9,227 households surveyed in Afghanistan, 194 local community households, 91 IDP households and 174 returnee households had experienced some form of violence in the three months prior to being surveyed. 14.1 Views on security situation in the district

100%

1.8%

1.0%

1.2%

9.1%

4.9%

5.8%

13.6%

11.5%

9.7%

69.5%

5.9%

20%

4.9%

40%

3.2%

60%

77.7%

80.1%

80%

0% Very secure

Moderately secure

LC (n=3,540)

Not secure, not insecure

Moderately insecure

RET (n=3,466)

Very insecure

IDP (n=2,221)

14.2 Frequency of fear for personal safety and security or that of family

100% 80%

2.5%

1.8%

2.3%

6.3%

4.4%

7.5%

19.9%

20.3%

25.0%

49.7%

51.9%

50.3%

21.5%

20%

21.6%

40%

14.9%

60%

0% Never

Rarely

Sometimes RET (n=3,466)

LC (n=3,540)

Mostly IDP (n=2,221)

Often

14.3 Satisfaction with police in the district

1.2%

1.2%

0.7%

6.0%

3.1%

3.8%

15.1%

13.5%

10.9%

70.4%

7.3%

6.7%

5.7%

50%

75.5%

78.9%

100%

0% Very satisfied

Moderately satisfied

LC (n=3,540)

National Analysis

Not satisfied / Not dissatisfied RET (n=3,466)

Moderately dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

IDP (n=2,221)

Page 35 of 35