Peace walls Report.indd - Ark

33 Pages·2012·1.15 MB·English

Attitudes to Peace Walls
Research Report to
Office of First Minister and Deputy First Minister
Jonny Byrne University of Ulster
Cathy Gormley Heenan June 2012
Gillian Robinson
Attitudes to Peace Walls Research Report
Acknowledgements
The researchers would like to acknowledge and thank all those people (1451)
across Northern Ireland who took the time to respond to the surveys which form
the basis of this research report. We hope the findings will help inform policy and
will help those working across the statutory, voluntary and community sectors to
understand and consider both the general population’s opinion as well as that of
those who live near peace walls. We thank the Office of the First Minister and
Deputy First Minister who provided financial support for this research. Finally we
thank Maureen Treacy and the team at Perceptive Insight who undertook the
fieldwork and our colleagues across the University of Ulster who all worked to
ensure this project was delivered in a very tight timescale.
Jonny Byrne
Cathy Gormley Heenan
Gillian Robinson
June 2012
This report, the full datasets, technical report, questionnaires and lay friendly tables will be
available on the ARK website from September 2012
www.ark.ac.uk/peacewalls2012/
Page 1
Attitudes to Peace Walls Research Report
About the Authors
Dr Johnny Byrne is a Lecturer in the School of Criminology,
Politics and Social Policy at the University of Ulster. In 2011 he
completed his doctoral thesis ‘The Belfast Peace Walls: The
problems, politics and policies of the Troubles architecture’.
Email: [e-mail]
Dr Cathy Gormley Heenan is Director of the Institute for
Research in the Social Sciences (IRISS) and a Senior Lecturer
in the School of Criminology, Politics and Social Policy at the
University of Ulster. She was one of Dr. Byrne’s research
supervisors.
Email: [e-mail]
Professor Gillian Robinson is Director of ARK and Professor
of Social Research in INCORE (International Conflict Research
Institute) at the University of Ulster. Since 1989 she has been
involved in the annual monitoring of social attitudes in Northern
Ireland, most recently through the Life and Times surveys.
Email: [e-mail]
Page 2
Attitudes to Peace Walls Research Report
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements 1
About the Authors 2
Table of Contents 3
1. Introduction 4
2. Methodology 6
2.1 Survey content 6
2.2 Sampling design 7
2.3 Response rate 7
2.4 Datasets and weighting 8
2.5 Demographics of the sample 8
2.6 Tables in this report 8
3. Survey Findings 9
3.1 Peace Walls in the Community 10
3.2 Understanding the Past: why were the peace walls established? 11
3.3 Acknowledging the Present: the impact of peace walls 12
3.4 Addressing Impact: roles and responsibilities in relation to peace walls 14
3.5 Knowledge and Awareness of Policy Initiatives 17
3.6 Envisioning Change: what should happen to the peace walls? 18
3.7 Imagining the Future: what would happen if...? 23
3.8 Is This Important or Is It Not? 25
4. Key Findings 27
5. Concluding Remarks 30
References 31
Page 3
Attitudes to Peace Walls Research Report
1. Introduction
Since the first paramilitary ceasefires in 1994, the Northern Ireland peace and political
processes have addressed a series of sensitive and contentious issues relating to the conflict
such as policing, prisoner releases, decommissioning, and power sharing. While the peace
process has also, in part, begun to address issues of segregation and division within Northern
Ireland, it has not yet sufficiently addressed the most obvious and physical manifestation of
this division – the peace walls.
While first constructed by the British Army in 1969 as a temporary, military response to
sectarian violence and disorder, these walls still remain in 2012. In sum, over eighty barriers
(Jarman, 2012) and peace lines have been constructed in predominantly urban, working
class, loyalist and republican communities. The responsibility for the construction and
maintenance of these structures resided with the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) until the
devolution of policing and justice powers in 2010. After this point, the Northern Ireland
Executive, through the Department of Justice (DoJ) became responsible for all policy-making
decisions around peace walls. This development was important because it has been argued
that the issue of peace walls existed in a local policy vacuum for over forty years (Byrne,
2011). With the responsibility for peace walls now devolved to the local administration, the
opportunity to redress this policy vacuum currently exists. The change in responsibility for
these walls, alongside the increasing significance of these walls, suggests that there is a new
window of opportunity for policy makers and practitioners to come together to drive the issue
of peace walls further onto the policy agenda.
The growing significance of the walls can be framed in five distinct ways. From a security
perspective, the peace walls continue to focus negative attention on the devolved
administration’s response to communal violence and disorder. Financially, the peace walls
impact on the delivery of services and reduce the potential for communities that have been
severely affected by the violence and disorder to attract inward investment. From a good
relations perspective, the peace walls continue to emphasise the cultural, political, and
religious differences, which exist across our community. In the context of health and social
well-being, each of the neighbourhoods with peace walls in Belfast, are in the top 10% of
the most socially and economically deprived electoral wards in Northern Ireland. Finally, from
an international perspective, events such as the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall
(2009), along with comments from the Mayor Bloomberg of New York (2008) linking potential
economic investment to the removal of peace walls continues to keep Northern Ireland in
the international spotlight but for reasons that are at odds with the accepted narrative which
promotes the success of the Northern Ireland peace process.
The devolved administration and local government have recently recognized this significance
and have incorporated addressing physical division into some of their broader strategies
Page 4
Attitudes to Peace Walls Research Report
and action plans that are designed to deal with segregation, community safety and urban
regeneration. The Cohesion, Sharing and Integration (2011) document published through the
Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM); the Department of Justice’s
Building Safer, Shared, and Confident Communities (2011) document; and the Belfast
City Council’s Investment Programme: 2012-2015 consultation document each place an
emphasis on the issue of peace walls.
A renewed focus on the policy making process in relation to peace walls is critical not least
because of the most recent decisions that have been taken by the Northern Ireland Executive
in relation to the regeneration of the Girdwood barracks site in North Belfast (Devenport,
2012). This led to criticism that the decision was one of ‘policymaking on the hoof’ whereby
decisions were taken in reaction to a situation without adequate time given to think about the
implications of this decision carefully. While the contestation over Girdwood was ostensibly
about housing and territory in North Belfast, it immediately raised the wider problem of
housing shortages and issues of territory in proximity to peace walls across Belfast.
In order for the devolved administration and local government to begin to respond to these
wider problems, access to the public’s attitudes and opinions on peace walls is crucial.
Until now, there has been a minimal amount of quantitative research which has attempted
to understand perceptions within local communities in closest proximity to peace walls
and the wider public. Therefore, to address this knowledge gap and to inform any future
policy making process, we have conducted an attitudinal survey on this matter. The primary
research took the form of two distinct postal surveys. The first survey was administered
to residents situated on, or within a short distance from, a peace wall in Belfast and
Derry~Londonderry. The second survey was administered to people that resided across
Northern Ireland. Previous qualitative research (Byrne, 2011), which considered the views of
community representatives and policy-makers specifically, suggested a difference of opinion
in relation to their general perceptions and interpretations of how and why peace walls
existed in certain areas; a difference in levels of understanding and knowledge of various
peace wall initiatives; a divergence of opinion relating to the impact of the peace walls on day
to day life; and a wide range of attitudes relating to the possible transformation, removal and
regeneration of peace walls. These themes, therefore, guided the development and structure
of the questions to be asked in the postal surveys. The following report sets out the results of
the postal surveys under these themes and captures the public’s atttitudes and perceptions
towards peace walls in 2012.
Page 5
Attitudes to Peace Walls Research Report
2. Methodology
This research sought to explore public awareness of and attitudes towards peace walls.
The project received ethical approval from the Ethics Filter Committee in the School of
Criminology, Politics and Social Policy at the University of Ulster in March 2012. The project
was funded by the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM). Perceptive
Insight was appointed to undertake the fieldwork following a competitive tendering exercise.
DEFINITION: For the purposes of this report we use the term Peace Walls as this is the
term used in every day conversation. However in the actual surveys and cover letters
we use the term Peace Line to ensure that respondents are clear what we are asking
about and we define what we mean as follows ‘We are using the term Peace Line to
cover all kinds of interface barriers that keep communities apart including walls, gates
and security barriers’.
The methodology employed was quantitative and it was decided to conduct two surveys.
The first survey focussed on a cross section of the population in Northern Ireland and the
second survey focussed specifically on the population resident adjacent to peace walls in the
Greater Belfast and Derry~Londonderry areas. The surveys were conducted by post, with
a reminder sent to non-responders. An incentive was provided to encourage response. A
total of 840 peace wall residents and 611 residents in the rest of Northern Ireland completed
and returned questionnaires. This represents response rates of 26% and 32% respectively.
Fieldwork was conducted in March and April 2012. This section summarises the
methodology employed, fuller detail is available in the Technical Report which will be available
on the ARK website from September 2012
(www.ark.ac.uk/peacewalls2012 ).
2.1 Survey content
Two separate but similar questionnaires were designed for the project and included questions
on the following themes:
• Proximity to a Peace Line and opinions on the area as a place to live;
• Perceptions of why Peace Lines were established;
• Perceptions of the impact of Peace Lines;
• Awareness of policy initiatives;
• Roles and Responsibilities in relation to Peace Lines;
• Views on methods of transforming and/or removing Peace Lines.
Both questionnaires and accompanying cover letters will be available on the ARK website
from September 2012 (www.ark.ac.uk/peacewalls2012 )
Page 6
Attitudes to Peace Walls Research Report
2.2 Sampling design Table 1: Peace Lines location and sub areas.
There were two defined populations for the
study; those who live adjacent to peace Location Sub Area
walls in Belfast and in Derry~Londonderry,
and those who reside elsewhere in Northern
North Belfast Hazelwood
Ireland. The peace walls areas were sub-
Whitewell
divided into four specific locations: North
Ligoneill
Belfast, West Belfast, East Belfast and
Ardoyne Glenbryn
Derry~Londonderry. The sampling took
Old Park Cliftonville
place in a number of stages as summarised
Tigers Bay New Lodge
below. Full detail is available in the Technical
Report. West Belfast Upper Springfield
Falls Shankill
1. Defining peace walls areas: Reviewing Suffolk Lenadoon
ordnance survey maps to define areas, then
East Belfast Short Strand Inner East
identifying peace lines and finally to select
streets located in close proximity to each
Derry~Londonderry Fountain Bishop Street
peace line. In total 13 peace line areas were
Tullyalley Currnerian
identified as shown in Table 1.
Top of the Hill Irish Street
2. Identifying the population of addresses: This involved assigning a postcode to each
identified peace line area street. The postcodes were then matched to each residential
address within the Pointer database that had the same post code. This provided the
population of houses from which to draw the sample. A random sample of these addresses,
stratified by peace wall location, was selected to take part in the survey of peace wall
residents. A second random sample was drawn from the remaining residential addresses
within the Pointer database to take part in the survey of those who reside elsewhere in
Northern Ireland.
2.3 Response rate
Response rate varied across the peace line residents sub areas from 19% in Tullyalley
Currnerian (Derry~Londonderry) to 45% in Whitewell (North Belfast). The overall response
for the peace walls residents was 26%. Response was even higher for those resident
elsewhere in Northern Ireland at 32%. The incentive £10 voucher was taken up by 48% of
all respondents (695) and 52% (756) chose to donate their incentive to charity (13% to PIPS,
suicide awareness and support, and 39% to the Northern Ireland Cancer Fund for Children).
The generosity of the Northern Ireland public in the current economic crisis was remarkable.
The cheques were presented to the two charities by the project team on 15 May 2012.
Page 7
Attitudes to Peace Walls Research Report
2.4 Datasets and weighting
The datasets (in SPSS format) and summary tables will be available from the ARK website
from September ( www.ark.ac.uk/peacewalls2012 ). Two weights have been included in the
data to take account of sample design effects.
• Weight1 should be applied to both datasets to take account of disproportionate household
size.
• Weight2 should be applied to the Peace Lines residents dataset to take account of the
fact that that we sampled within Peace line location to try to ensure sufficient numbers to
allow analysis by location. Weight2 weights back to the Peace Lines location population.
It should be applied to all analysis involving the full Peace Line residents dataset. It is not
required for analysis by location or sub-area.
2.5 Demographics of the sample
Table 2 shows summary demographics of the two samples. Further detail is available in the
Technical Report (available on ARK website www.ark.ac.uk/peacewalls2102 from September
2012). There is a higher proportion of Catholic respondents than Protestant respondents
in the Peace Lines sample. At this time we are unable to compare response rates across
the two communities but the higher proportion of Catholic respondents may be a factor of
the higher density of Catholic population living in the areas beside peace walls. Research
conducted by Murtagh and Shirlow (2006) has highlighted the changing demographics
in Nationalist and Unionist neighbourhoods in Belfast, with the evidence suggesting that
interface areas are more heavily populated with those from a Nationalist background. All
tables are presented with a breakdown by religion so that any differences between the
communities can be determined.
Table 2: Demographic characteristics of the two samples.
2.6 Tables in this report
(Based on unweighted data).
This report provides a first
General population Peace lines descriptive analysis of the data
(n=611) % residents (n=840) %
comparing the attitudes of the
Sex Male 42 38 general population with those who
Female 58 62 are resident adjacent to peace
walls. It also provides a breakdown
Age category 18-24 5 5
by religion for both groups. All
25-34 14 16
tables presenting findings from
35-44 18 17
the general population have been
45-54 22 24
calculated with Weight1 applied.
55-64 18 18
All tables presenting findings from
65 or older 24 20
the Peace Lines residents have
Religion Protestant 51 36 been calculated with the combined
Catholic 36 56 Weight1 and Weight2 applied. Due
None/Other 13 8 to the effects of rounding column
Missing 1 1 totals do not always sum to 100%.
Page 8
Attitudes to Peace Walls Research Report
3. Survey Findings
The following section sets out the survey findings using a series of themed headings
which refer to the respondents’ community; their understanding of the context around the
establishment of the peace walls; the perceived impact of the peace walls on people’s lives;
the roles and responsibilities of those engaged in historical and current initiatives around what
could/should happen to these walls; the extent of knowledge surrounding such initiatives;
their attitudes towards any future attempts to transform and/or remove peace walls and finally
their views on what might actually happen if the peace walls were to be removed. The data
is presented using a series of tables and, where appropriate, has highlighted the similarities
and difference between the views of those from the general population with those that reside
closest to the peace walls and between respondents based upon their religion.
3.1 Peace Walls in the Community
Initially respondents were asked to provide details of where they resided in relation to the
nearest peace walls in their community. Table 3a shows that the majority of respondents from
the general population (54%) lived further than 10 miles from a peace wall. A further (24%) of
the general population indicated that they lived more than a few streets away from a peace
wall, but less than 10 miles away.
In relation to the sample of respondents drawn from peace wall areas, Table 3b shows that
23% of respondents live on a peace wall and a further 54% of respondents live within a few
streets of their nearest peace wall.
The results indicate an informed sample of respondents across both surveys as the vast
majority of both sets of respondents are aware of where the nearest peace wall is in relation
to their residence.
Table 3a: How far do you currently live from the nearest Peace Line (such as a wall, gate
or security barrier) used to segregate two communities?
General population (Q5)
Total % Protestant % Catholic %
Within a few streets of the nearest Peace Line 3 2 4
More than a few streets away but less than 10 miles 24 25 23
10 miles or more 54 55 51
Don’t know 19 18 22
Page 9