Introduction

Social indicators are used to indicate the social capital of the community. Social capital refers to those qualities inherent in a community that could be harnessed for the betterment of the community. A community with good social cohesion is more likely to succeed in its own betterment than one filled with distrust and a lack of social cohesion. A community that holds positive perceptions of each other, the leadership and the youth in the community, is more likely to work towards upholding the laws of the country and participating in locally-based actions to improve the control of firearms.

Placing in context the environment of the people who live with the proliferation of firearms paints part of the picture of the small arms problem. Gaining a greater understanding of the people and the conditions in which they live helps to throw light upon why there is a demand for small arms and therefore how the problem can be addressed. In particular, such information can guide and shape the design and targeting of community-based initiatives.

Certain indicators will provide insight and guidance into the likely success or failure of specific types of firearm control initiatives. For instance, indicators such as time spent helping the aged and the sick provide a glimpse into the likelihood of the community participating in social-education programmes to improve conditions in the community. Special attention should be directed to those regions where distrust is highest and community cohesion is lowest, as these regions will require special confidence-building mechanisms both amongst the leadership and amongst community members.

Indicators of community action are also considered, helping to profile who the likely 'role players' of community actions will be. In addition this section unpacks key design elements that are used as 'building blocks' for the design of community action. These building blocks include: the frequency of using different forms of communications such as radio, television, newspapers, postal service; the level of memberships of organisations; and the existence of role players to whom people can turn for help (for instance for conflict resolution).

A number of assumptions are made when interpreting data as an indication of community action. Firstly, it is assumed that communities that have experienced positive development in previous years (as indicated by changes in levels of development) are more likely to undertake future community action. Secondly, it is assumed that the willingness to participate in community-based awareness campaigns (as seen from the community and the individual perspective) is a useful way to gauge willingness to undertake community action.

Analysis of survey findings

The social environment usually refers to the public arena in the community beyond the private realm of the household. Within the social environment, community members interact to meet a number of largely non-economic needs. These could include, amongst others, the formation of a sense of identity and belonging, strengthening the links between households and individuals within the community (referred to as social cohesion), bettering or developing the community through the provision of services and facilities, and exchanging ideas and experiences to enhance a sense of self-fulfillment and the expression of creativity.

The nature and extent of participation in the social environment by individual households is used in this study as a means of predicting the possible outcome of a community-based campaign to curb firearm proliferation. By exploring the current actions of the community in the social environment, deductions are made about what could be expected from the different regions. It should be borne in mind that this exploration is by no means taking a blanket approach. We are not assuming that the same combination of inputs will necessarily lead to the same predicted outputs. In this section, the aim was to gain a better understanding of the similarities and differences of the sample regions in Tanzania. From this information, insights to possible community-based campaigns to curb firearm proliferation could be given.

Some regions are more inclined to help other community members (such as helping the sick) and to participate in community activities (such as attending church or mosque, helping with community projects, attending community meetings) than others. The regions on the upper end of the helping and participating spectrum included Arusha, Pwani, Kagera and Zanzibar. It is likely that the initiation of a community-based project to reduce firearm proliferation in these regions would be actively engaged in.

The issue of resourcing the project however would need to be carefully considered. There was a tendency to hold back on the lending of money and giving of food across all the regions. Although it is not evident if this is linked to a lack of need, or a lack of ability, giving to other households was reserved. In the section on the economic status of the regions, it is evident that many regions are economically going into a recession. This would imply that resources and the sharing thereof may become more limited in the future.

When considering the design of community-based projects there are a number of factors that are often considered to be integral parts. Of particular importance in this regard is ensuring that the project is sustainable. This can be achieved by making sure that people identify with the project and feel that those managing the project are attentive and responsive to their ideas and concerns. A sense of ownership needs to be developed and nurtured. The project must also be effectively and efficiently managed. Further significant contributory factors to the success of a project are the establishment of effective consultation and transparency mechanisms. The leaders of the community must be regularly consulted and the traditional decision-making structures within the community identified and embraced. It should be stated that although the presence of strong leadership within a community is likely to enhance the prospects of a project, weaker leadership does not preclude the success of an initiative, but means that ensuring high levels of transparency and consultation becomes even more important. With these considerations in mind the responses regarding community leadership were generally satisfactory across all the regions. Relatively speaking, the leadership in Dar es Salaam, Mbeya and Morogoro was considered better than other regions, and the leadership in Kagera weaker.

It was found that in those communities where people worked well together there was good cohesion. This implies that people had mechanisms to deal with differences and forge together on projects. On the scale of cohesion, the regions of Mbeya, Pwani and Ruvuma were strongest, while those communities that appeared to work less well together included Kilimanjaro, Tanga, Zanzibar and Kagera.

The youth were not perceived in a particularly favourable light. However, actively canvassing their participation in a community-based project would be a mechanism to provide them with a sense of belonging in the community and a chance to apply their energy towards its betterment. Within a traditional African community, the youth —and especially females—are a voiceless group. Age is a particularly relevant label determining the extent of participation in decision-making.

There are major community health problems in Tanzania. More people (than in previous years) are suffering from serious diseases such as malaria, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. Relative to the rising rates of these diseases, firearm injury rates seem insignificant. It is probable that were a community consulted on their health priorities, firearm injuries would be one of their lesser concerns. This calls for a degree of sensitivity when initiating projects to raise awareness around firearm proliferation—especially if resources are to be made available to the community for these projects.

Development does not affect people within the community evenly. Just under three-fifths of the entire sample felt that development in their community was better than in previous years. There was no difference between the views of the female and the male respondents but there were significant regional differences in the perceived levels of development. Comparatively speaking, the regions of Arusha, Kagera, Morogoro and Pwani indicated that there were improvements in development, while the respondents in Dar es Salaam and Tanga felt development was poor.

Comparatively speaking all the regions, except for Arusha and Mwanza, felt that the people in their communities would be willing to participate in community-based awareness projects. The respondents themselves were even more willing to participate than they felt their community would be—even on the issue of encouraging people to stop owning firearms. While such a positive response should be treated with a degree of caution, the findings with regard to the social environment indicate that the high willingness to participate in community projects by the Tanzanian people is probably an accurate reflection of reality.

Information was also gathered in this section about the main forms of communication. What is evident is that the most widespread form of communication, next to word of mouth and obtaining information from community meetings, is listening to the radio. However, radio campaigns are expensive. Sending information through current organisations, clubs and societies is also a creative manner to transfer information and to obtain wide spread community support. Identifying the right organisations in the community needs to be done in close consultation with the community leadership.

Two scenarios were put to the respondents, one about who the community would turn to for help following an argument, and the other regarding whom the police should negotiate with about security. These questions aimed to obtain an understanding of what were some of the main structures that the community trusted on important issues such as security. In terms of conflict resolution and negotiations on security, the tribal authority and the existing community leaders were the most popular choices in most regions, although in some cases the respondents indicated that the community liked to solve problems on their own, or with the help of friends and family.

Although this section explores some of the options key to understanding leadership in the community, in each case independent investigations are necessary to determine the level of confidence the community have in the leadership. This section clearly indicates that different role players within the community are identified for different responsibilities. This was illustrated by the fact that different role players are responsible for locally-based conflict resolution and for larger macro security negotiations.

On the whole there is a good social environment in Tanzania. There are more positive indications than negative indications, in terms of the leadership and the level of community participation. The environment would be open to the idea of initiating community projects. On a case by case basis, some communities may have negative experiences of the execution of community projects, in which case more infrastructural support would be required to ensure that the communities do not succumb to the same developmental pitfalls. In addition, a greater level of sensitisation to the objectives and methods of a project will need to be ensured before and during the implementation of any such initiative.

Indicators of helping and participation

The indicators of helping and participation were obtained to understand in which regions there were strong and reliable social networks that assisted or worked for the good of the community. In communities where family, friends and neighbours reached out and helped other people a better sense of belonging and identification with the community would exist. Where this is the case, there is likely to be a greater willingness among individuals to participate in projects benefiting the broader community.

There are eight indicators measured in this sub-section on community helping and participation. The mean score is provided, whereby 1.0 indicates the maximum amount of time is allocated to this activity and 3.0 indicates the minimum amount of time is allocated. In this analysis, the relative rank order of the mean score in relation to other regions is used.

Two regions that stood apart from the other regions were Arusha and Pwani. In both these communities there were consistently high levels of helping in the community and of participation. The next two best-ranked regions were Kagera and Zanzibar. The worst region in terms of helping and participation was Tanga.

Amongst the range of examples for helping each other and participation, the most frequently undertaken activity for interacting with other community members was by attending religious meetings such as in mosques or churches. This was followed by the activity of assisting the community with the provision of better security. This is indicative of the fact that community members are nowadays spending more time than in previous years on improving their security and may also be indicative of an increasing awareness of the need for community initiatives to tackle insecurity.

One activity that most regions were not heavily engaged in was providing money or food to other households. The implications of this could be varied. On the one hand, it could be as a result of a lack of need, or on the other because of the scarcity of food and money, that households were either unable or unwilling to share money and food with others. In terms of lending other households money, the respondents of Pwani and Zanzibar were more readily open to this, while respondents were marginally more willing to give other households food in Arusha and Kagera.

The aged in Tanzania appear to be somewhat neglected. According to the survey, the people of Tanzania are spending relatively less time with helping the aged than in previous years.

Attending community meetings seems to be a common activity in Arusha (mean score of 1.72), Pwani (mean score of 1.74) and Zanzibar (mean score of 1.48). This would be a useful indicator of the expected willingness of the community to attend meetings to discuss issues relating in general, and specifically, to community-based strategies to reduce firearm dependency.

Perceptions of community leaders, ability to participate and ability of community to work together

This sub-section looks at the extent to which the respondents agree or disagree with a range of statements pertaining to the community leaders, the ability of the community to effectively input and the ability of the community to work together. This provides a spectrum of insights into what the community dynamics are and information to inform the design and implementation of community-based initiatives to curb firearm proliferation. By understanding the status of the community in terms of the quality of the leadership, trust in the key role players (such as the community leaders, the police and other community members), the ability of the community to work together and their openness to new ideas, information is provided to inform the likely success of a community initiative.

Table 4: Changes in time spent on community helping and participation

Activity	Arusha	Dar es Salaam	Kagera	Kigoma	Kilimanjaro	Mbeya	Morogoro	Mwanza	Pwani	Ruvuma	Tanga	Zanzibar
Going to church/mosque	1.35	2.30	1.32	2.13	1.69	2.03	2.18	1.98	1.51	1.77	2.34	1.38
Spending time with the aged	2.01	2.57	2.00	2.30	2.41	2.51	2.39	2.61	2.24	2.33	2.59	2.21
Spending time with the sick	2.00	2.48	1.65	2.08	2.11	2.42	2.29	2.41	1.53	1.99	2.28	2.05
Giving food to other households	2.11	2.45	2.15	2.32	2.43	2.49	2.63	2.40	2.22	2.44	2.90	2.48
Lending money to help each other	2.19	2.46	2.68	2.65	2.76	2.69	2.47	2.41	1.94	2.68	2.87	2.01
Helping each other with better security	1.81	2.24	2.00	2.00	1.92	1.78	2.46	2.20	1.63	2.07	2.74	1.40
Helping with community projects	1.91	2.56	2.51	2.38	2.29	2.57	2.56	2.58	1.85	2.18	2.54	1.84
Attending community meeting	1.72	2.48	2.30	2.15	2.21	2.46	2.52	2.47	1.74	2.00	2.84	1.48
n =	79	448	240	237	238	237	223	370	159	219	238	162
Key for mean score: 1 = Maximum amount of time (More time) < > 3 = Minimum amount of time (Less time)

Five regions expressed strong agreement with the statement, 'this is a peaceful community'. These were Arusha, Dar es Salaam, Kagera, Kilimanjaro and Mbeya. The three regions that did not agree with the above-mentioned statement were Kigoma, Tanga and Zanzibar.

The police are least trusted in the regions of Kigoma, Mbeya, Tanga and Zanzibar. The lack of trust in the police would need to be carefully weighed up, as this has implications for the likely success of disarmament or firearm collection programmes, in which the police may play a central role. A reluctance to co-operate with the police would be likely to undermine such projects. The regions that indicated the greatest level of trust for the police were Morogoro, Ruvuma and Arusha.

There were three statements that aimed to ascertain the perceptions of the community of their current community leadership, namely: 'community leaders work for our good', 'there is respect for the community leaders', and 'community leaders listen to my opinions'. The three regions that were most in agreement with the above-mentioned statements were Dar es Salaam, Mbeya and Morogoro. This would imply that the community leadership in these three regions was amongst the best in Tanzania, and should they be consulted on behalf of their region, they would be well able to represent the views of the people. Good leadership is characterised by regularly consulting and being accountable and transparent. There were indications that the community leadership in the region of Kagera was amongst the worst in Tanzania.

The level of community cohesion and the ability of the community to work well together are as important as the quality of the community leadership in determining the likely success of a community initiative. These are critical indicators of the possibility of implementing a community-based strategy to reduce firearm dependency.

It is apparent that those communities that worked well together were usually the same communities in which there was good community cohesion. It was found that the strongest levels of community cohesion and where the community worked best together were in Mbeya, Pwani and Ruvuma. The weakest levels of community cohesion were found in Kilimanjaro, Tanga and Zanzibar. Similarly, the members of the community do not work well together in Kagera, Kilimanjaro, Tanga and Zanzibar.

The final statement, evaluated to inform the likelihood of a community initiative being undertaken, was the extent to which the community was open to new ideas. Besides the regions of Mwanza, Tanga and Arusha, most of the other regions were open to new ideas. Overall, the level of community cohesion evident from these responses is relatively high and suggests that community-based initiatives to ameliorate security and reduce firearm dependency would be likely to meet with success.

Table 5: Indicators of community cohesion

Extent of agreement with statement:	Arusha	Dar es Salaam	Kagera	Kigoma	Kilimanjaro	Mbeya	Morogoro	Mwanza	Pwani	Ruvuma	Tanga	Zanzibar
This is a peachful community	1.94	1.71	1.98	2.52	1.79	1.78	2.17	2.31	2.34	2.09	2.67	2.57
The community trusts the police	2.30	2.37	2.48	2.63	2.46	2.72	2.14	2.42	2.42	2.20	2.61	2.86
There is community cohesion	2.23	2.33	2.32	2.40	2.67	2.09	2.47	2.52	2.21	2.21	2.65	2.78
The community works well together	2.25	2.19	2.68	2.48	2.75	2.09	2.53	2.56	2.21	2.20	2.69	3.14
The community is open to new ideas	2.33	1.88	2.19	1.99	1.72	1.91	2.00	2.43	1.99	1.80	2.38	2.04
There is respect for the community	2.28	2.16	2.85	2.50	2.76	2.17	2.06	2.50	2.25	2.12	2.65	2.78
Community leaders work for our good	2.32	2.23	2.91	2.69	2.48	2.09	2.30	2.44	2.32	2.27	2.64	2.91
Community leaders listen to my opinions	2.37	2.25	3.23	2.67	2.91	2.16	2.21	2.73	2.26	2.43	2.65	2.66
n =	79	453	235	237	234	238	227	371	159	216	240	162
Key for mean score: 1 = Maximum agreement (Strongly agree) < > 3 = Minimum agreement (Strongly disagree)

Perceptions of the youth

Usually when the idea of community-based awareness campaigns are raised, the youth are identified as the key role players both in terms of target audience and implementers of the campaign. The energy, enthusiasm and the general openness to new ideas of the youth make them a pivotal grouping for the success of a community-based initiative. Within the sphere of firearm-related crime and violence, the importance of engaging younger members of the community is especially great. Young adults, in particular males, are the primary victims of firearm-related violence. Focusing on young adults and the youth—the soon-to-be young adults—is thus of paramount importance.

The following section aimed to understand the way in which the community perceived the youth. Among other things, this would inform the extent to which they could be involved in a community-based campaign.

The most strongly-held perception was that the youth are involved in crime. Across all regions, except Mbeya and Ruvuma, there was support for this idea. The youth were also perceived by the community as being very much less respectful of their elders and the law and as being less responsible. In addition to this, the youth were seen as unwilling to work for the good of the community. It was also felt that the youth were more willing to leave rural areas in search of opportunities in urban districts. In all these statements, these are not surprising perceptions of the youth, and perhaps these are universally appreciated labels given to the category of people called the youth. What this section indicates above anything else, is that the youth of Tanzania are similar to other young people in Africa. Looking for something different to their parents, questioning the world around them and trying to find their own identity within the community.

Table 6: Perceptions of the youth

The extent of involvement	Arusha	Dar es Salaam	Kagera	Kigoma	Kilimanjaro	Mbeya	Morogoro	Mwanza	Pwani	Ruvuma	Tanga	Zanzibar
Involved in crime	1.81	1.62	1.97	1.70	1.72	2.05	1.37	1.91	1.29	2.48	1.72	2.07
Respectful to the elders	3.41	3.86	3.41	3.75	3.86	3.51	3.83	3.73	4.48	3.80	3.97	3.34
Respectful of the law	3.62	3.98	3.54	3.88	3.76	3.52	4.08	3.68	4.39	3.76	2.28	3.50
Responsible	3.42	3.78	3.49	3.46	3.89	3.53	3.71	3.79	4.14	3.62	2.90	2.96
Willing to leave rural for urban areas	2.11	1.85	1.40	1.99	1.20	1.44	1.29	1.97	1.74	2.31	2.87	1.63
Working for the good of the cummunity	3.39	3.89	3.65	3.73	3.61	3.55	4.01	3.75	4.27	3.62	2.74	3.60
n =	79	449	239	239	236	238	227	374	160	220	238	159
Key for mean score: 1 = More involvement < > 5 = Less involvement

To determine the success of community-based initiatives and the involvement of the youth, one needs to look at the youth's perception of the community as well as the community's perception of the youth. In terms of community initiatives, what these results show is that there is a need for interaction within communities, between the youth and others, and that many of the problems in the community may possibly be connected with the youth. Therefore, specific initiatives need to be targeted on the youth and promoting among them a greater sense of responsibility and respect for the law. However, knowing what the community thinks of the youth does not tell us necessarily whether the youth are likely to participate actively in community-based activities. Nonetheless, it does highlight some of the perceptions of the youth that would need to be considered in order that the youth may be allowed to participate in a meaningful manner by the community. Additionally, if the community does not respect or trust the youth, they are unlikely to support a programme run by the youth, for instance a gun collection project.