1. Impact Evaluation 4 Peace 24-27 March 2014, Lisbon, Portugal 1 Strategic Initiative on Gender Based Violence: Papua New Guinea Latin America and the Caribbean’s Citizen Security Team

2. 2  Provide context for why the intervention is taking place and what it plans to achieve ◦ Levels of SGBV in PNG are some of the highest in the world – in some studies, over 60% of women have experienced SGBV. ◦ Rapid development, compounded by ongoing mineral resources boom, has exacerbated SGBV.  Increased cash flows; changing family dynamics; land loss; frustration: communities are “warping under the pressure of the mining boom’s unfulfilled expectations.”  Traditions of violence are spreading ◦ Multi-year WB, Government and Industry ‘Women in Mining and Petroleum project’ – generating awareness, empowering women in decision-making and benefit sharing, providing capacity building for women and creating small-grants opportunities. ◦ PNG Family and Sexual Violence Action Committee (FSVAC) – developed innovative holistic model for prevention and service provision.  Coordination between members of the judiciary, police, hospital, key community stakeholders; capacity building for all stakeholders, ToT  Project will extend FSVAC model to extractives communities. ◦ Joint Mineral Resources Authority and CIMC implementation ◦ Objective is to reduce instances of SGBV; improve access to medical and social care by improving confidence of communities and skills of service providers.

3. 3

4. 4  1. Overall impact of program on particular indicators ◦ Does the intervention (training and coordinating committee) reduce incidence of SGBV, as reported to enumerators?  In incidences of SGBV, does the intervention improve the response by formal and informal authorities, as evaluated by victims?  In incidences of SGBV, do rates of reporting increase, as reported by victims? ◦ Does the intervention improve response to SGBV, by service providers?  Changes in response to SGBV  Changes in response time  Improved awareness of laws and options (and improved dissemination of the information to victims)  2. Variations in treatment to be tested ◦ None but we are testing for heterogeneous effects in mining and non-communities and formal and traditional dispute resolution systems

5. 5  What method will be used to identify causal impact ◦ RCT, Difference-in-Differences ◦ 18 mining communities, ? non-mining communities ◦ Stratify by  Mining & non-mining communities  Coastal & highlands location  Communities w/ pre-existing services, without pre- existing services

6. 6  Main outcomes of interest ◦ SGBV incidence – DHS measures (survey respondents) ◦ SGBV reporting – formal, informal authorities (survey respondents, administrative records) ◦ Response time (survey respondents) ◦ Response best practices (survey respondents, admin records?) ◦ Subjective satisfaction with response (survey respondents) ◦ Subsequent revictimization ◦ Household decisionmaking; Other kinds of empowerment? ◦ Hypotheticals ◦ Anchoring vignettes ◦ Behavioral measures? Exercises to measure interaction between different agencies..