Presentation on theme: "Improving responses for survivors of trafficking through applied research, evaluation and knowledge transfer: Bridging research and practice Claire Cody,"— Presentation transcript:
Improving responses for survivors of trafficking through applied research, evaluation and knowledge transfer: Bridging research and practice Claire Cody, UHI Centre for Rural Childhood SUII, March 2013
Research : isn’t there enough research already? Not a shortage of publications - very rarely presents programme evaluations, rigorous research or practitioner reflection Researchers at Georgetown University journal articles on human trafficking were found only 39 were empirically based (as cited in Todres, 2011) There is a lack of an evidence base The rhetoric has been on the ‘problem’, rather than on the progress towards solutions (Laczko, 2005)
What does this mean? Practitioners are unable to learn about ‘best practices’ or ‘what works’ Interventions are not based on a well researched body of knowledge Survivors do not get the services they deserve Those advocating for increased funds and better services are unable to effectively influence those in the positions of power as arguments not based on substantiated data.
Why is this happening? Research and evaluation is often carried out by service-providers Involvement in data collection may not always be appropriate, independent or ethical (Surtees and Craggs, 2010; Tyldum, 2010). Trafficking is tricky!
How can research be strengthened ? Bringing together the skills and strengths from academia Independence Objectivity Credibility With practitioner knowledge Local context What may be inappropriate/ dangerous What information is of use
Partnering: Experience from India Grant to explore strategies to support reintegration for children affected by sexual exploitation and trafficking in West Bengal and Jharkhand in India First phase - understanding current responses and establishing an evidence base University of Jadavpur, School of Women’s Studies Formation of a Practitioner Advisory Group
Learning from that phase Important to understand dynamics between academia and practice NGOs need to be more than gatekeepers or respondents Important for practitioners to be involved in developing the right questions More training/ involvement of those with other skills
Why evaluation? Identifying ‘what works’ in reintegration programmes is difficult (Asquith & Turner, 2008) Due to the lack of programmatic monitoring and evaluation data ‘Evaluation is the single most critical addition necessary to strengthen anti-trafficking work; resources for evaluation must be an integral part of all anti-trafficking projects’ (GAATW, 2010:3)
Developing an M&E toolkit on reintegration Many assumptions why not doing M&E Inception workshop in Glasgow – UNICEF, Save the Children UK, IOM, EveryChild and others Developing a toolkit - common areas, what and how? Inter-agency steering group Review, survey and children’s consultations
Knowledge Transfer Not a core strength of academia – failure to produce practice-related research/ impact Dissemination – journal articles/ conferences Changing – ‘Making Research Count Initiative’, REF etc Trafficking – knowledge is ‘scattered’ Reintegration - “centralised information resource and learning platform” (Asquith & Turner, 2008)
ww.childrecovery.info Knowledge hub to share learning from research and practice Practice-based knowledge – Q&As and the Practice Bank Research – Q&As, reports, working papers and webinars E-bulletins Visitors from 150 countries UK, USA, India, Cambodia, Australia, Canada, Philippines, Switzerland, Thailand, Albania Reaching those on the frontline?
Conclusion Partnerships between academics and NGOs critical Evaluation – so we know what works and what doesn’t! Knowledge transfer that reaches those on the frontline