Epistemologies of violence against women. A proposal from the South

Reverter-Bañón, Sonia

doi:10.1080/23311886.2022.2038356

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Feminist theories and approaches widely used and accepted in HICs might not offer a useful framework for transforming the realities of women experiencing violence in LMICs. Generalising their validity without contextual tailoring to LMIC-specific political and cultural contexts might hamper the very efforts to end violence [ 36 ]. Similarly, when applying methods and advocacy tools that have been developed in HICs to different LMICs, global research groups should consider the distinct context factors and actively seek the input of those who have local expertise and knowledge, to ensure the best recruitment, experiences of research participants and data generated [ 37 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical challenges in global research on health system responses to violence against women: a qualitative study of policy and professional perspectives

Lewis,

Kalichman,

Azeredo

et al. 2024

BMC Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Studying global health problems requires international multidisciplinary teams. Such multidisciplinarity and multiculturalism create challenges in adhering to a set of ethical principles across different country contexts. Our group on health system responses to violence against women (VAW) included two universities in a European high-income country (HIC) and four universities in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to investigate professional and policy perspectives on the types, causes of, and solutions to ethical challenges specific to the ethics approval stage of the global research projects on health system responses to VAW. Methods We used the Network of Ethical Relationships model, framework method, and READ approach to analyse qualitative semi-structured interviews (n = 18) and policy documents (n = 27). In March-July 2021, we recruited a purposive sample of researchers and members of Research Ethics Committees (RECs) from the five partner countries. Interviewees signposted policies and guidelines on research ethics, including VAW. Results We developed three themes with eight subthemes summarising ethical challenges across three contextual factors. The global nature of the group contributed towards power and resource imbalance between HIC and LMICs and differing RECs’ rules. Location of the primary studies within health services highlighted differing rules between university RECs and health authorities. There were diverse conceptualisations of VAW and vulnerability of research participants between countries and limited methodological and topic expertise in some LMIC RECs. These factors threatened the timely delivery of studies and had a negative impact on researchers and their relationships with RECs and HIC funders. Most researchers felt frustrated and demotivated by the bureaucratised, uncoordinated, and lengthy approval process. Participants suggested redistributing power and resources between HICs and LMICs, involving LMIC representatives in developing funding agendas, better coordination between RECs and health authorities and capacity strengthening on ethics in VAW research. Conclusions The process of ethics approval for global research on health system responses to VAW should be more coordinated across partners, with equal power distribution between HICs and LMICs, researchers and RECs. While some of these objectives can be achieved through education for RECs and researchers, the power imbalance and differing rules should be addressed at the institutional, national, and international levels. Three of the authors were also research participants, which had potential to introduce bias into the findings. However, rigorous reflexivity practices mitigated against this. This insider perspective was also a strength, as it allowed us to access and contribute to more nuanced understandings to enhance the credibility of the findings. It also helped to mitigate against unequal power dynamics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical challenges in global research on health system responses to violence against women: a qualitative study of policy and professional perspectives

Lewis,

Kalichman,

Azeredo

et al. 2024

BMC Med Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Decolonising the field of violence against women and girls: A scoping review and recommendations for research and programming

Lokot,

Pichon,

Kalichman

et al. 2024

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research capacity strengthening methods and meanings: negotiating power in a global health programme on violence against women

Tilouche,

Kalichman,

Dheensa

et al. 2024

BMJ Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThere has been much critical reflection among global health researchers about how power imbalances between high-income countries and low- and middle-income country collaborators are perpetuated through research programmes. Research capacity strengthening (RCS) is considered both a mechanism through which to redress structural power imbalances in global health research and a vehicle for their perpetuation. This paper examines the RCS programme of a multi-county study on violence against women, focussing on how it addressed power imbalances between countries and the challenges involved in doing so. It provides specific examples and lessons learnt.Methods18 semi-structured interviews were conducted online with group members from all five countries involved in the collaboration between April and June 2020. Reflexive thematic analysis, with inductive and deductive approaches was adopted.FindingsParticipants articulated their understandings of RCS as an opportunity for (1) mutual learning, understanding and collaboration and (2) personal and team career development. Participants perceived the RCS programme activities to simultaneously reinforce and challenge power asymmetries within global health research. Power dynamics within the RCS programme operated across three levels; the global health research environment, the research group level and within individual country teams. Participants described structural barriers at all three levels, but felt there were more opportunities to challenge power imbalances at the research group level.ConclusionDespite a strong commitment to addressing power imbalances through the RCS programme, progress was often hampered by the fact that these inequalities reflected broader structural issues in global health, as seen within Healthcare Responding to Violence and Abuse. The programme faced tensions between enhancing researchers’ careers while building capacity under the current model, which sometimes conflicted with creating social value or challenging epistemic and normative structures. Participants clearly expressed concerns about power imbalances within the partnership and were keen to address them through the RCS programme. This led to a steep learning curve and significant adaptations within the RCS programme to navigate these issues within existing structural limitations.

show abstract

Epistemologies of violence against women. A proposal from the South

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

Ethical challenges in global research on health system responses to violence against women: a qualitative study of policy and professional perspectives

Ethical challenges in global research on health system responses to violence against women: a qualitative study of policy and professional perspectives

Decolonising the field of violence against women and girls: A scoping review and recommendations for research and programming

Research capacity strengthening methods and meanings: negotiating power in a global health programme on violence against women

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About