Dataset Information

The role of participation and community mobilisation in preventing violence against women and girls: a programme review and critique.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Violence against women and girls (VAWG) is a public health problem and one of the most prevalent human rights violations in the world. Recently practitioners and researchers have taken an interest in community participation as a strategy for preventing VAWG. Despite the recent enthusiasm however, there has been little articulation of how participation in VAWG prevention programmes mobilises communities to challenge social norms and prevent VAWG.

Objectives

In an attempt to help address this gap, this article seeks to answer two research questions: (1) How does participation theoretically mobilise communities to prevent VAWG, and (2) how do nominally participatory programmes make use of these theoretical concepts in their (explicit or implicit) theories of change?

Methods

To answer the first question, we draw on two well-recognised theories of participation and community mobilisation - Rifkin and Pridmore's continuum of participation and Freire's steps towards achieving critical consciousness - to clarify theoretical assumptions about how participation can mobilise community to reduce VAWG. To answer our second research question, we present the results from a review of primary prevention programmes that seek to reduce VAWG through community participation. Our analysis examines the explicit and implicit theories of change for these prevention programmes against the assumptions outlined from the theoretical literature.

Results

Our results help to better articulate realistic goals for community mobilisation and outline a theoretical basis for how participation as part of programming can effectively mobilise communities to reduce violence.

Conclusion

We argue that, in order to be both effective and sustainable, the role of external agents in introducing programmes needs to be secondary to the ownership and empowerment of communities in designing and delivering their own strategies for VAWG prevention.

SUBMITTER: Minckas N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7480621 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a global public health concern. While community-level gender norms and attitudes to IPV are recognised drivers of IPV risk, there is little evidence on how interventions might tackle these drivers to prevent IPV at the community-level. This secondary analysis of data from the SASA! study explores the pathways through which SASA!, a community mobilisation intervention to prevent violence against women, achieved community-wide reductions in physical IPV.From 2007 to 2012 a cluster randomised controlled trial (CRT) was conducted in eight communities in Kampala, Uganda. Cross-sectional surveys of a random sample of community members, aged 18-49, were undertaken at baseline (n?=?1583) and 4 years post intervention implementation (n?=?2532). We used cluster-level intention to treat analysis to estimate SASA!'s community-level impact on women's past year experience of physical IPV and men's past year perpetration of IPV. The mediating roles of community-, relationship- and individual-level factors in intervention effect on past year physical IPV experience (women)/perpetration (men) were explored using modified Poisson regression models.SASA! was associated with reductions in women's past year experience of physical IPV (0.48, 95 % CI 0.16-1.39), as well as men's perpetration of IPV (0.39, 95 % CI 0.20-0.73). Community-level normative attitudes were the most important mediators of intervention impact on physical IPV risk, with norms around the acceptability of IPV explaining 70 % of the intervention effect on women's experience of IPV and 95 % of the effect on men's perpetration. The strongest relationship-level mediators were men's reduced suspicion of partner infidelity (explaining 22 % of effect on men's perpetration), and improved communication around sex (explaining 16 % of effect on women's experience). Reduced acceptability of IPV among men was the most important individual-level mediator (explaining 42 % of effect on men's perpetration).These results highlight the important role of community-level norm-change in achieving community-wide reductions in IPV risk. They lend strong support for the more widespread adoption of community-level approaches to preventing violence.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00790959 . Registered 13th November 2008. The study protocol is available at: http://www.trialsjournal.com/content/13/1/96.

Project description:BackgroundAlmost one in three married Indian women have ever experienced physical, sexual, or emotional violence from husbands in their lifetime. We aimed to investigate the preliminary effects of community mobilisation through participatory learning and action groups facilitated by Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs), coupled with access to counselling, to prevent violence against women and girls in Jharkhand, eastern India.MethodsWe piloted a cycle of 16 participatory learning and action meetings with women's groups facilitated by ASHAs in rural Jharkhand. Participants identified common forms of violence against women and girls, prioritised the ones they wanted to address, developed locally feasible strategies to address them, implemented the strategies, and evaluated the process. We also trained two counsellors and two ASHA supervisors to support survivors, and gave ASHAs information about legal, health, and police services. We did a before-and-after pilot study involving baseline and endline surveys with group members to estimate preliminary effects of these activities on the acceptability of violence, prevalence of past year emotional and physical violence, and help-seeking.ResultsASHAs successfully conducted monthly participatory learning and action meetings with 39 women's groups in 22 villages of West Singhbhum district, Jharkhand, between June 2016 and September 2017. We interviewed 59% (679/1149) of women registered with groups at baseline, and 63% (861/1371) at endline. More women reported that violence was unacceptable in all seven scenarios presented to them at endline compared to baseline (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR]: 1.87, 95%: 1.39-2.52). Fewer women reported experiencing emotional violence from their husbands in the last 12 months (aOR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.43-0.71), and more sought help if it occurred (aOR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.51-3.17). In addition, fewer women reported experiencing emotional or physical violence from family members other than their husbands in the last 12 months (aOR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.32-0.53, and aOR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.26-0.50, respectively).ConclusionCombining participatory learning and action meetings facilitated by ASHAs with access to counselling was an acceptable strategy to address violence against women and girls in rural communities of Jharkhand. The approach warrants further implementation and evaluation as part of a comprehensive response to violence.

Project description:IntroductionTo make valid comparisons across groups, a measurement instrument needs to be measurement invariant across those groups. The present study evaluates measurement invariance for experience of violence among adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) in two informal settlements in Nairobi, Kenya.MethodsWe used survey data collected from 1,081 AGYW aged 15-22 years from two Nairobi's informal settlements of Korogocho (n = 617) and Viwandani (n = 464) in 2017 through DREAMS (an initiative aimed at reducing HIV incidence among AGYW with a core package of evidence-based interventions) impact evaluation project. Experience of violence was measured using the 15-item WHO's violence against women instrument, and factorial (non)invariance assessed within exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) framework. Cross-group measurement invariance was assessed using Bayesian Multiple Indicator Multiple Causes (MIMIC) model across site, age groups, self-reported invitation to participate in DREAMS, marital status, currently in school, education level, religion, ethnic groups, ever had sex, slept hungry at night past 4 weeks, and wealth index.ResultsThe mean and median ages of the AGYW were 17.9 years and 17 years, respectively. About 59% reported having had sex and 58% of AGYW were in school. The percentage reporting each act of violence varied from 1.6% ("attacked you with a weapon") to 26.5% ("insult you or make you feel bad about yourself"). About 44% (n = 474) of participants experienced ≥1 acts of violence, and 2.7% (n = 29) experienced at least half of the 15 acts. The structure underlying the 15 items was configurally similar to that proposed by WHO, with three factors reflecting either psychological, physical, or sexual violence. Noninvariance was detected for five items-spread across the three domains. Three of five items showed noninvariance only for sleeping hungry at night in the past 4 weeks. As the majority of items did not show evidence of noninvariance, differences in latent mean scores likely reflect actual differences and may not be attributable to measurement artifacts.ConclusionsUsing state-of-the-art statistical techniques on a widely used instrument for measuring exposure to violence among women, this study provides support for the subscales of psychological, physical and sexual violence in a Kenyan AGYW population. The instrument supports comparisons across groups within this population. This is crucial when comparing violence against girls/women prevalence rates and to understand challenges and exchange strategies to reduce abuse or violence experienced by AGYW, or women in general.

Project description:BackgroundAdolescent multiple risk behaviour (MRB) is a global health issue. Most interventions have focused on the proximal causes of adolescent MRB such as peer or family influence, with systematic reviews reporting mixed evidence of effectiveness. There is increasing recognition that community mobilisation approaches could be beneficial for adolescent health. There are gaps in the current literature, theory and implementation that would benefit from a realist approach. We use a theory-driven evidence synthesis to assess how and why community mobilisation interventions work/do not work to prevent adolescent MRB and in what contexts.MethodsThis realist review used a six-stage iterative process, guided by the RAMESES framework. We systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL and Sociological Abstracts, from their inception to 2021. Studies were screened for relevance to the programme theory, assessed for rigour and included based on a priori criteria. Two independent reviewers selected, screened and extracted data from included studies. A realist logic of analysis was used to develop context-mechanism-outcome configurations that contributed to our programme theory.FindingsWe reviewed 35 documents describing 22 separate community mobilisation intervention studies. Most studies (n = 17) had a quality assessment score of three or four (out of four). We analysed the studies in relation to three middle range theories. To uphold our theory that these interventions work by creating a social environment where adolescents are less likely to engage in MRB, interventions should: (1) embed a framework of guiding principles throughout the community, (2) establish community readiness with population data and (3) ensure a diverse coalition with the support of intervention champions. Mechanisms such as empowerment through coalition ownership over the delivery of the intervention, cohesion across the community and motivation to work collaboratively to improve adolescent health are triggered to achieve social environment shifts. However, certain contexts (e.g. limited funding) restrict intervention success as these mechanisms are not fired.ConclusionsFor community mobilisation interventions to reduce adolescent MRB, the coalitions within them must seek to alter the social environment in which these behaviours occur. Mechanisms including empowerment, cohesion and motivation lead to this shift, but only under certain contexts.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020205342.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Gender based violence, including violence by an intimate partner, is a major global human rights and public health problem, with important connections with HIV risk. Indeed, the elimination of sexual and gender based violence is a core pillar of HIV prevention for UNAIDS. Integrated strategies to address the gender norms, relations and inequities that underlie both violence against women and HIV/AIDS are needed. However there is limited evidence about the potential impact of different intervention models. This protocol describes the SASA! STUDY:an evaluation of a community mobilisation intervention to prevent violence against women and reduce HIV/AIDS risk in Kampala, Uganda. METHODS/DESIGN:The SASA! STUDY is a pair-matched cluster randomised controlled trial being conducted in eight communities in Kampala. It is designed to assess the community-level impact of the SASA! intervention on the following six primary outcomes: attitudes towards the acceptability of violence against women and the acceptability of a woman refusing sex (among male and female community members); past year experience of physical intimate partner violence and sexual intimate partner violence (among females); community responses to women experiencing violence (among women reporting past year physical/sexual partner violence); and past year concurrency of sexual partners (among males). 1583 women and men (aged 18-49?years) were surveyed in intervention and control communities prior to intervention implementation in 2007/8. A follow-up cross-sectional survey of community members will take place in 2012. The primary analysis will be an adjusted cluster-level intention to treat analysis, comparing outcomes in intervention and control communities at follow-up. Complementary monitoring and evaluation and qualitative research will be used to explore and describe the process of intervention implementation and the pathways through which change is achieved. DISCUSSION:This is one of few cluster randomised trials globally to assess the impact of a gender-focused community mobilisation intervention. The multi-disciplinary research approach will enable us to address questions of intervention impact and mechanisms of action, as well as its feasibility, acceptability and transferability to other contexts. The results will be of importance to researchers, policy makers and those working on the front line to prevent violence against women and HIV. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT00790959.