GMAP at Side Event on Targeted Mine Risk Education in Ukraine

On 3 December 2015, GMAP, together with the Danish Demining Group (DDG) – the specialist mine action unit of the Danish Refugee Council (DRC), organised a side event at the 14th Meeting of States Parties to the Anti-personnel Mine Ban Convention, entitled “Targeting Mine Risk Education in Ukraine”. Abigail Jones, presented the results of a […]

????

On 3 December 2015, GMAP, together with the Danish Demining Group (DDG) – the specialist mine action unit of the Danish Refugee Council (DRC), organised a side event at the 14th Meeting of States Parties to the Anti-personnel Mine Ban Convention, entitled “Targeting Mine Risk Education in Ukraine”.

Abigail Jones, presented the results of a knowledge attitudes and practices survey (KAP) designed by GMAP for DRC/DDG and carried out by DRC/DDG and UNICEF in the conflict affected areas of eastern Ukraine. The survey results, which will be used to target mine risk education in Ukraine, displayed a number of important differences in knowledge, attitudes and practices between different groups. For instance, socio-economic status, proved to be the biggest predictor of risky behaviour. Poorer parts of the population are forced to go into the woods and gather firewood, thereby exposing themselves to higher risks since the woods are known to be contaminated areas.

Ms. Jones stressed the importance of taking into consideration the needs and vulnerabilities of different groups when performing a KAP survey and to look at age, sex, socio-economic status and other characteristics that might be relevant in the context in question. She also highlighted the importance of using the survey information to establish a baseline and thereby allow for a results based management approach. A thorough survey methodology is essential if messages, materials and teaching methods are to be tailored to the audience in question, in order to maximise learning and minimise the number of mine accidents.

The presentation was followed by a lively debate. The participants (9 women, 7 men), posed questions on everything from seasonal risk factors and gender and diversity considerations to the possible inclusion of mine risk education in the school curriculum.