1. 1 Developments in Small Arms Research Since 2004 Wendy Cukier, MA, MBA, PhD, DU (HC) LLD (HC) MSC Ryerson University, Toronto Canada wcukier@ryerson.ca

2.  Perspective on small arms research  Developments since 2004  Conclusions 2

3. Research on Small Arms  Crosses disciplines Public health and epidemiology Conflict studies Policy and International Relations Development Criminology etc.  Regardless, good research Is explicit about its objectives/questions Adheres to the appropriate conventions Is clear about its limitations 3

4. 4 Competing/Complementary Paradigms CHANGE IS AN EXPLICIT GOAL OF THE RESEARCH Radical HumanistRadical Structuralist - action research- Marxism - development research- some critical theory - some critical theory- some feminist SUBJECTIVE “OBJECTIVE” InterpretiveFunctionalist/Positivist - - cultural studies- epidemiology - case studies STABILITY: THE RESEARCH IS AN END

5. Problem Identification and Analysis Analysis and Causal Factors Development of Interventions Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation

6. 6 Identify, And Then, Interrupt, The Causal Chain We aim to break the chain as early as possible

7. Since 2004  Understanding the problem Data on number/rates firearm death and injury  Better data on death/injury in conflict  Better data on death/injury in non-conflict  Better country level analysis  More regional studies 7

8. Challenges  Limited longitudinal data  Limited data on segments (eg. children, youth etc.  Limited data on forms (eg. Urban gang violence versus Domestic violence)  Still gaps in approaches, completeness (health, crime, victimization) 8

9.  What are the secondary effects/costs? Limited understanding of long term overall impacts  psychological effects,  displacement,  economic impacts  social costs (eg. Cook and Ludwig)  governance etc. 9

10. Causal Factors  What are the root causes of violence in different contexts? More research on urban youth violence and key factors Some additional research on domestic violence and risk factors More contextual analysis, case studies 10

11.  What are the factors fuelling demand? Guns and masculinity “Culture” and firearms – case studies Attitudes of youth towards guns Case studies of particular contexts 11

12. 12  What are the links between availability of small arms and deaths, conflict, crime? (where other factors are held constant) Some comparative studies (eg. Canada and the US) Few longitudinal studies (eg. Australia, South Africa, Brazil, Great Britain) More contextual and market studies of supply (eg. Pierce and Braga) Still limits on comparative data (eg. cross national rates of gun ownership)

13. 13  What are the sources of small arms? What are the mechanisms of diverting legal guns to illegal markets?  More industry/marketing studies  Some government data sources on illegal guns (eg. Canada)  Some studies based on critical incidents  Some studies on specific means (eg. gun shows)  Very limited data (eg. uneven practices for collection and tracing of small arms; small percentage of guns used are recovered)

14. Interventions Questions: what is the rationale and nature of the intervention?  Many descriptive papers Program of Action Codes of Conduct Arms Trade Treaty Brokering Weapons collection National regulation  Case studies on specific projects 14

15. Implementation Questions: what were the enablers, barriers, contextual issues?  Case studies on specific interventions  Some studies of change processes Eg. Kirsten  Probably most important and least researched 15

16. 16 Evaluations  Case studies Brazil, Australia, Canada, South Africa laws Studies of specific interventions: eg. storage Weapons collection programs  Meta-analysis US National Research Council, 2004 – inconclusive  Limited evaluation of major policy priorities such as embargos, codes of conduct  Limited evaluation of enforcement

17. 17 Integrative studies  New books  Regional Studies Eg. Brazil: the Arms and the Victims, 2005

18. The Challenge: best practices?  a "best practice" is a practice that upon rigorous evaluation, demonstrates success, has had an impact, and can be replicated.  UNESCO: Best practices have four common characteristics: they are innovative; they make a difference; they have a sustainable effect; and they have the potential to be replicated and to serve as a model for generating initiatives elsewhere

19. they are innovative-> requires documentation and comparators they make a difference-> requires outcome evaluation they have a sustainable effect-> longitudinal analysis they have the potential to be replicated and to serve as a model for generating initiatives elsewhere -> requires careful analysis of the context and processes

20. Conclusions?  Glass is half full – more access to data more collaboration more sharing more recognition of value of “applied’ research  Glass is half empty – still major gaps; variable “quality” disciplinary silos, “not invented here” limited resources – too much “competition” “political economy” of small arms research eg. research chill in the USA no easily accessible, comprehensive clearinghouse 20