Evaluations of countering violent extremism programs: Linking success to content, approach, setting, and participants

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q3 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Wesam Charkawi , Kevin Dunn , Ana-Maria Bliuc
{"title":"Evaluations of countering violent extremism programs: Linking success to content, approach, setting, and participants","authors":"Wesam Charkawi ,&nbsp;Kevin Dunn ,&nbsp;Ana-Maria Bliuc","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlcj.2024.100674","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Since the September 11 attacks, prevention and countering violent extremism (P/CVE) programs have rapidly increased worldwide, garnering significant interest among researchers. This paper is a systematic review focusing on the evaluations of primary, secondary and tertiary prevention programs from 2001 until 2020. The review identified 74 program evaluations that included satisfactory measures and metrics. Only 32% of the studies deemed the intervention successful, 55% described limited success, and 8% deemed the program had failed. Many of the programs evaluated failed to reach their objectives; some generated negative outcomes such as community disdain and an increase in the likelihood of alienation and stigma. Success was largely a self-assessed measure by the facilitators or stakeholders of the programs or the evaluators of the study. Success indicators can be operationalized as the degree of enhanced sense of belonging (connectedness to the community, social connection), trust and willingness to engage in programs, development of critical thinking skills (integrative complexity theory), and a strong sense of worth (quest for significance). Without a generally accepted set of metrics and no cohesive framework for conducting evaluations, this review offers an important addition to the field on the evidence suitable for program evaluations. An important aim of this systematic review was to identify what makes an effective and successful countering violent extremism program. The key findings indicate that enhancing belonging, identity, trust and community engagement, acknowledging perceptions of injustice, religious mentoring, and the promotion of critical thinking/self-reflection are associated with successful programs. The findings press upon policymakers, funders, and researchers the need to consider and support high-quality evaluations of programs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46026,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law Crime and Justice","volume":"77 ","pages":"Article 100674"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1756061624000260/pdfft?md5=b454abc90ef6748df2662fe854165307&pid=1-s2.0-S1756061624000260-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law Crime and Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1756061624000260","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the September 11 attacks, prevention and countering violent extremism (P/CVE) programs have rapidly increased worldwide, garnering significant interest among researchers. This paper is a systematic review focusing on the evaluations of primary, secondary and tertiary prevention programs from 2001 until 2020. The review identified 74 program evaluations that included satisfactory measures and metrics. Only 32% of the studies deemed the intervention successful, 55% described limited success, and 8% deemed the program had failed. Many of the programs evaluated failed to reach their objectives; some generated negative outcomes such as community disdain and an increase in the likelihood of alienation and stigma. Success was largely a self-assessed measure by the facilitators or stakeholders of the programs or the evaluators of the study. Success indicators can be operationalized as the degree of enhanced sense of belonging (connectedness to the community, social connection), trust and willingness to engage in programs, development of critical thinking skills (integrative complexity theory), and a strong sense of worth (quest for significance). Without a generally accepted set of metrics and no cohesive framework for conducting evaluations, this review offers an important addition to the field on the evidence suitable for program evaluations. An important aim of this systematic review was to identify what makes an effective and successful countering violent extremism program. The key findings indicate that enhancing belonging, identity, trust and community engagement, acknowledging perceptions of injustice, religious mentoring, and the promotion of critical thinking/self-reflection are associated with successful programs. The findings press upon policymakers, funders, and researchers the need to consider and support high-quality evaluations of programs.

评估打击暴力极端主义计划:将成功与内容、方法、环境和参与者联系起来
自 "9-11 "袭击事件以来,预防和打击暴力极端主义(P/CVE)项目在全球范围内迅速增加,引起了研究人员的极大兴趣。本文是一篇系统性综述,重点关注 2001 年至 2020 年期间对一级、二级和三级预防计划的评估。综述确定了 74 项计划评估,其中包括令人满意的措施和指标。只有 32% 的研究认为干预措施是成功的,55% 的研究描述了有限的成功,8% 的研究认为计划是失败的。许多被评估的计划都未能达到其目标;一些计划产生了负面结果,如社区鄙视以及疏远和污名化的可能性增加。成功在很大程度上是由计划的促进者或利益相关者或研究的评估者自我评估的。成功指标可操作化为归属感的增强程度(与社区的联系、社会联系)、参与计划的信任和意愿、批判性思维能力的发展(综合复杂性理论)以及强烈的价值感(对意义的追求)。由于没有一套普遍接受的衡量标准,也没有一个连贯的评估框架,本综述为该领域提供了关于适合项目评估的证据的重要补充。本系统性综述的一个重要目的是确定什么是有效和成功的反暴力极端主义项目。主要研究结果表明,加强归属感、身份认同、信任和社区参与、承认不公正的看法、宗教辅导以及促进批判性思维/自我反思与成功的项目有关。研究结果向政策制定者、资助者和研究人员强调了考虑并支持对项目进行高质量评估的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice is an international and fully peer reviewed journal which welcomes high quality, theoretically informed papers on a wide range of fields linked to criminological research and analysis. It invites submissions relating to: Studies of crime and interpretations of forms and dimensions of criminality; Analyses of criminological debates and contested theoretical frameworks of criminological analysis; Research and analysis of criminal justice and penal policy and practices; Research and analysis of policing policies and policing forms and practices. We particularly welcome submissions relating to more recent and emerging areas of criminological enquiry including cyber-enabled crime, fraud-related crime, terrorism and hate crime.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信