It’s been nine months since the first COVID-19 case was documented in South Sudan in April 2020 and aid agencies have had to work alongside communities across the county with varying and shifting perspectives since in responding to the pandemic. This blog, written by CSRF Project Officer Lona Morgan, explores the changing perceptions of COVID-19 amongst South Sudanese communities starting from the period when news of COVID-19 first emerged in the country (March 2020), three months into the response (June 2020), and up until six months into the response (September 2020), and seeks to provide conflict sensitivity reflections on the aid community’s response throughout.

 

News of COVID-19 first arrives in South Sudan (March 2020)

News of COVID-19 in South Sudan was initially met with fear and concern. Whilst information about the virus was shared abundantly through international, national and local-level news channels, not all South Sudanese have access to reliable sources of media. Many instead receive updates through social media that contains exaggeration and misinformation. Perhaps the biggest cause of psychological distress in the early stages of COVID-19 was information about mass death and infection rates of individuals due to the virus in well-developed countries presumed to have adequate health facilities. This distress presented a challenge to INGOs, who had to cut-through multiple messages and work alongside NNGOs to implement an effective public health response.

COVID-19’s arrival in South Sudan also sparked a number of rumours, which in some cases widened the existing divide between urban and rural communities. Whilst communities in some areas perceived that COVID-19 was a real threat to people’s lives; communities in other areas believed that COVID-19 was a political tool to lobby for funding; communities in other areas believed that COVID-19 could not reach South Sudan due to its hot weather; communities in other areas believed that COVID-19 was deliberately manufactured to reduce the African population; and some faithful Christians believed that diligent prayers would protect them from infection. In an extreme example of a rumour, a community-based organization operating in Torit told me that many within Torit did not, and still do not, accept that COVID-19 is a threat to the South Sudanese, instead believing that COVID-19 started, and will remain, in China. These varying perceptions caused tensions between different communities when they witnessed other communities responding differently to the virus. Given this disconnect, the aid community had to leverage NNGOs’ knowledge to develop a contextualized response that sought to spread accurate information, but in a way that was respectful to the existing beliefs and perspectives of different South Sudanese communities.

On 20 March, the South Sudanese government formed a high-level taskforce with the purpose of coordinating the response to COVID-19. However, the taskforce was considered by many South Sudanese to lack diversity and to be led by elites with limited experience in public health. These perceptions soon began to inform how aid actors working alongside the government were viewed. For example, there was a perception that some aid actors were not engaging with representatives from marginalised and vulnerable groups within communities, including IDPs and individuals with disabilities. This led some people to believe the challenges facing the most vulnerable groups in South Sudan, compounded by COVID-19, were being overlooked.

When news of the virus first broke in South Sudan, the first reported positive COVID-19 case was a UN expatriate staff. This placed aid actors at the forefront of the news, and caused fear and stigma of expatriate and INGO workers amongst some communities, who labelled INGO workers ‘carriers’ of the virus. Some rural communities also turned this hostility towards fellow South Sudanese who were in contact with the UN and INGOs and were seen as supporting those carrying the virus. Given many INGOs and NGOs’ increased cooperation in the initial stages of COVID-19 to develop accessible messaging campaigns in local languages, this put some NGOs at risk when their communities saw them working alongside INGOs. This anger reportedly led to some NGO staff being threatened during home-to-home awareness-raising activities on COVID-19, causing a significant conflict sensitivity concern for agencies on the ground.

Finally, the history of public health emergencies in South Sudan also presented challenges to implementation of a conflict-sensitive response. Throughout the years, South Sudan has become accustomed to dealing with health crises involving diseases such as malaria, pneumonia and typhoid. Several of these illnesses have similar symptoms to COVID-19, which initially led many South Sudanese to assume they had strong immunity and would not become infected. This meant that aid agencies had to carefully present COVID-19 preventative messaging, building on existing knowledge and experiences of disease, and mindful of misperceptions that may exist. For example, although the recommendation not to greet by handshaking was a consistent public health message from the outset, it is at odds with South Sudanese culture. Handshaking is considered the most appropriate formal greeting in South Sudan and is an important way to signal trust and peace in a context affected by decades of civil war and tension. Whilst disseminating this message, aid actors therefore risked being interpreted as undermining peace within South Sudan. Finally, some communities in South Sudan relied on local medicines and I have heard that some people have been admitted to hospital for taking excessive quantities of local herbs in the belief that they will boost their immunity.  Aid agencies therefore had, and still have, a fine line to walk between respecting local customs, winning community trust yet dispelling misinformation around the virus.

 

Three months into the response (June 2020)

Despite the fact that COVID-19 was quickly spreading through the county, in June 2020, the actions of many South Sudanese suggested that social distancing guidance was not prioritised or practical. Evening curfews and movement restrictions had negatively impacted the livelihood of poor households who earn their living each day from hand to mouth, and particularly farmers and business owners who had previously relied on social gatherings to produce and sell food. In both cases, there were increased expectations of aid agencies to plug the loss of income. Elsewhere, cases of extreme flooding and displacement in Jonglei, Unity and Lakes States in July-September 2020 meant that social distancing recommendations were discarded in communities’ fight for survival. In the congested conditions of the PoCs, social distancing recommendations were not only impractical, but posed safety threats for women forced to queue for extended periods at water points, increasing their risk to SGBV. Given COVID-19 had further exacerbated the vulnerability of the most marginalised South Sudanese, some communities became frustrated at aid agencies for imposing blanket restrictions without providing alternatives to subsidise people’s lost incomes, hunger or increased exposure to violence caused by the pandemic.

The relationship between the aid sector and faith-based organisations – particularly South Sudanese churches – also evolved over the first few months of the response. Whilst, as mentioned, some church leaders placed emphasis on the importance of prayer alone in combatting the virus, some aid workers were quick to assume that all churches were not adhering to social distancing guidelines and inadvertently spreading the virus. This meant that many aid organisations did not work closely enough with them to deliver COVID-19 messages during the early months of the response. However, in reality other church leaders, including the South Sudan Council of Churches, reinforced that the threat of COVID-19 was real and urged their congregations to comply with Ministry of Health and WHO guidance in a joint statement in May 2020. This contributed to a growing recognition by aid organisations of the importance of working alongside faith institutions to win the trust and confidence of communities.

 

Six months into the response (September 2020)

Six months into the response, some of the initial panic and fear of COVID-19 amongst South Sudanese communities had subsided. This was reflected in bars, restaurants and markets largely operating normally without observing social distancing measures, buses ferrying people at full capacity, and women resuming normal practices during funerals. Few people would choose to spend their scarce resources on hand sanitiser when their families have more pressing needs. Even those who were previously diligently observing social distancing measures had increasingly lapsed in their commitment. This has undoubtedly impacted on South Sudanese communities’ perceptions of aid agencies’ priorities and whether their COVID-19 response was appropriate and proportionate to the actual outcomes of the pandemic in South Sudan.

In September, however, the existing dire economic situation had been noticeably worsened by COVID-19. With most food having previously come from the neighbouring countries, trade opportunities were reduced when border restrictions slowed imports. The depreciation of the South Sudanese Pound (with the SSP:USD parallel exchange rate on Juba’s streets dropping from 330 SSP:USD at the start of July to nearly 450 SSP:USD by the end of September) contributed to increased food insecurity, cost of living, food prices, transport and vulnerability at household-level. In Juba, where I live, for example the market cost of food items such as sugar and meat have increased from approximately 200 SSP and 1,200 SSP per kilo in March 2020 to approximately 300 SSP and 2,400 SSP per kilo in September 2020. This has evoked anger and lack of cooperation amongst the poorest families in the country. After all, would a hungry person be expected to comply with social distancing at the expense of sourcing food and income for themselves and their families?

In spite of the challenges, aid agencies should also consider the conflict sensitivity opportunities presented by COVID-19. The virus has provided opportunities for aid workers to reinforce existing good hygiene messaging, build trust with communities and more sustainable capacity to manage health crises. Handwashing and hygiene are less contentious messaging for many South Sudanese communities than social distancing. In addition, COVID-19 has potential to promote unity amongst different communities regardless of their ethnic group, gender and geographical location in the collective fight to spread public health messages across the country and target misinformation. Finally, the pandemic has stimulated an increased focus on how technology can be used to facilitate more inclusive and equitable remote working practices.

 

Recommendations

  1. COVID-19 messages should be communicated in an inclusive way, engaging marginalised groups at community-level and seeking their feedback as much as possible. To do so, INGOs should strengthen partnerships with NNGOs in responding to COVID-19 to leverage local knowledge and existing community relationships.
  2. Aid agencies should involve community leaders and representatives in setting selection criteria for beneficiaries to ensure inclusivity and minimise the risk of excluding certain groups.
  3. Aid agencies responding to COVID-19 should proactively share learnings and seek advice from research organizations in tackling public health emergencies to avoid inadvertently fuelling community-level tensions. Rift Valley Institute Research (September 2020) ‘Community Approaches to Epidemic Management in South Sudan’ outlines some considerations for a more appropriate response in South Sudanese communities.
  4. Organizations implementing awareness-raising activities should place emphasise on facts, using short video clips if possible through mobile media platforms available to demonstrate modes of transmission and practical preventive measures from sources considered by communities to be reliable, particularly for communities with no access to media. This would minimise negative perceptions of the government, aid community and religious institutions.
  5. Donors should encourage local organizations responding to COVID-19 to pool lessons and strengthen outreach to hard-to-reach areas, and ensure they have the resources needed to effectively mainstream COVID-19 activities into existing projects. Such collaboration and information-sharing could be incentivised through greater funding for consortia of NNGOs and community-based organisations.

 

Photo credit: Thomas Martin / photo taken in Kuajok