Archives

Prevalence of physical violence against people in insecure migration status

VISION researchers from the Systematic Review working group (Andri Innes, Sophie Carlisle, Hannah Manzur, Elizabeth Cook, Jessica Corsi and Natalia Lewis) have published a systematic review and meta-analysis in PLOS One, estimating prevalence of physical violence against people in insecure migration status. This is the first review of its type, synthesizing global data on violence against migrants in all types of insecure status.

The review finds that around 1 in 3 migrants in insecure status experience physical violence. Violence included physical interpersonal, community and state violence. Insecure status was conceptualised encompassing undocumented status, lapsed statuses, asylum seeking and other pending applications, and any status that embeds a form of insecurity by tying status to a particular relationship (such as spousal or employer-employee). Studies were only included in the review if the violence happened while the victim was in insecure status.

The VISION team reviewed academic literature published between January 2000 and May 2023, across social and health sciences. The study was global in scope, although data was limited by the English language search.

Key Findings

More than one in four migrants in insecure status disclosed intimate partner violence specifically. Spousal visas embed a particular risk of violence because the visa status is connected to an intimate partner relationship, creating an important power disparity. Nevertheless, there was no significant difference in prevalence of violence by gender across the dataset. Prevalence also did not differ meaningfully across geographic region, perpetrator, status type or time frame.

The most significant findings included that violence exposure is not meaningfully different for people in undocumented status than in other types of insecure status. Physical violence is a concern across all types of insecure migration status types.

The findings were limited because of high levels of heterogeneity in the data. It was also difficult to consider intersectional identity characteristics such as age, race or ethnicity, nationality, religion, marital status, socio-economic status, education level or motivation for migration because these were not standardised across included studies. This suggests that further and specified research is needed in this area.

The review is open access and is available to read in full here.

If you have any comments or feedback for the authors, please contact Andri at alexandria.innes@city.ac.uk

Photo from licensed Adobe Stock library

Call for Papers: Cyprus and the violence of bordering 50 years on

The island of Cyprus is known to most in Europe as a popular holiday destination; the violent history and the ongoing (if stable) conflict on the island is easily forgotten by tourists who enjoy the sunny beaches, the rich archaeological sites, and the club scene of Agia Napa. Yet for half a century Cyprus has remained divided. In August 1974 Turkish forces occupied the island and initiated a process of violent partition against the backdrop of two decades of conflict: first with the British in the fight for independence and then among Greek and Turkish ethnic groups trying to get a footing in national and municipal politics while hamstrung by an unworkable constitution

Cyprus is part of an archipelago of hybrid spaces in the eastern Mediterranean. Historically governed under Hellenic, Venetian, Byzantine and Ottoman rule, in 1878 the island was leased to Britain, and then formally annexed as a crown colony in 1914. The complex international and regional politics of decolonization laid the ground for the partition of the island. Since the 1950s the ‘Cyprus question’ has become a permanent fixture in international politics, and ever since multiple plans have been proposed for the ‘solution’ to the Cyprus question; those that have been implemented have failed to unify the communities and establish peace.

This workshop, Partitioning for Peace? Cyprus and the violence of bordering 50 years on, will bring together scholars from various disciplines and paradigms (politics, IR, history, literature, anthropology, media and communications, sociology, journalism, geography, migration studies, border studies, peace and conflict studies) to discuss new research on the past and present of the Cyprus question 50 years on from the events of 1974. We welcome applications from academics, early career scholars, policy professionals, and practitioners working in community-based initiatives.

We invite new work responding, but not limited, to the following questions:

Where does the Cypriot experience sit in the context of the global history of territorial partitions?
What is the dynamic relationship between emotion and territoriality that sustains conflict?
In what ways does the partition keep peace on the island (and beyond) and in what ways does it sustain violence?
How does population dislocation compromise prospects for a resolution?
What is the logic of the solutions proposed by the international community and why have they failed?

The workshop will take the form of an in-person event on 7th – 8th of November 2024 at City, University of London, with paper presentations and discussion over one day, and a linked panel event.

Interested applicants should submit a 500-word abstract and a short 2-page CV in one document by 15 May 2024 to alexandria.innes@city.ac.uk and georgios.giannakopoulos@city.ac.uk with the subject line Partitioning Cyprus. A small amount of travel support will be available for early career researchers, please indicate if you would like to be considered for this support.

The successful applicants will be notified by 1 July 2024. Full drafts will be due by 16 October 2024 for circulation to workshop attendees.

Illustration from licensed Adobe Stock library

Event: Zero tolerance to female genital mutilation

This event is in the past.

The International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) is 6 February every year. The United Nations Assembly designated the day with the aim to amplify and direct the efforts on the elimination of this practice.

In support to highlight the day and the horrific practice of FGM, IKWRO, a London-based human rights organisation for Middle Eastern, North African and Afghan women and girls living in the UK, is hosting Zero tolerance to female genital mutilation on 5 February 2024, 2 – 5 pm, in London at Resource for London, 356 Holloway Road, London N7 6PA.

The event brings together experts and survivors to shed light on the challenges and gaps in safeguarding women and girls globally in the context of FGM:

Payzee Mahmod, Campaign Manager at IKWRO
Naana Otoo-Oyortey, Executive Director of FORWARD, an African diaspora women’s rights organisation in the UK
Mama Sylla, an FGM survivor and chairwoman of La FRATERNITE UK, a London-based registered charity
Shamsa Araweelo, an FGM survivor and social activist
Janet Fyle, Royal College of Midwives’ (RCM) Professional Policy Advisor and a Cardiff University School of Policy Law accredited Expert Witness
Jaswant Kaur Narwal, Chief Crown Prosecutor
Aisha K. Gill, Ph.D., CBE is Professor of Criminology at University of Bristol
Detective Superintendent Alex Castle, Metropolitan Police and Lead Responsible Officer for Harmful Practices and co-chair of the London Harmful Practice Working Group

Speakers and attendees will engage in discussions about the pressing issues surrounding FGM such as the challenges and barriers to disclosure, reporting and prosecution and explore ways to bridge the existing gaps through policy changes, community involvement and institutional improvements.

For further information on the free event and to register, please see: Zero Tolerance to FGM Conference

Or please contact VISION Senior Research Fellow, Dr Ladan Hashemi at: ladan.hashemi@city.ac.uk

Photo by Joel Muniz on Unsplash

Webinar: Ontological Security Theory & Migration Studies

Dr Alexandria Innes

This event is in the past.

VISION researcher and City, University of London International Politics Senior Lecturer, Dr Alexandria Innes, will be speaking with Professor Catarina Kinnvall (Lund University) and Dr Marcus Nicolson (EURAC Research) on 23 January 2024 at 1 pm CET about ontological security.

Ontological security refers to a person’s sense of existential safety in the world. The theory was originally used by the psychiatrist R.D. Laing to explain how his patients’ experienced reality in a way that did not conform with normative experiences. Later, the theory was revisited by sociologist Anthony Giddens (1991), who emphasised the role of routines, societal trust, and biographical narratives in providing individuals with a sense of security.

The webinar explores the use of Ontological Security Theory in migration studies and political science. Prof Kinnvall will draw on her expertise in the study of minority groups to show how a strong conceptualisation of home is key for individuals to develop feelings of ontological security and highlight the role that state-level narratives play in these processes. Dr Innes will provide insights from her research on the life histories of individual migrants to argue that a strong biographical narrative and sense of trust in their surroundings are necessary to perform security.

This webinar is part of the EURAC Research online series “Diversity Matters”. Taking an interdisciplinary approach, the webinar series explores the impact of migrations, diversities and mobilities on increasingly superdiverse territorial realities. The series is a forum for experts to share their work and expertise with an audience of fellow academics, students, decision-makers and practitioners.

To register and for further information please see: Ontological Security Theory & Migration Studies webinar

For any questions or comments, please contact Andri at alexandria.innes@city.ac.uk

New Data Assessment Tool: Mitigating Risk of Bias – Ethnicity and Migration

At UK Prevention Research Partnership (UKPRP) funded consortium VISION we have dedicated a workstream to studying the data gaps, analytical biases, and systemic blind spots that arise around questions of race, ethnicity and migration. We acknowledge that all research data is socially constructed. Asking questions about that process of construction can help researchers be aware of the biases and distortions that will arise when data are used uncritically and unreflectively.

Over the first two years of the project, we have considered the gaps in our own data, drawn on expertise and insight from our research team and associates, and drawn on a diverse array of methodological and disciplinary backgrounds. This research has allowed us to develop a tool to support researchers on our project and beyond to mitigate the risk of introducing or reproducing bias regarding ethnicity and migration in data, analysis and reporting findings. The tool initially responds specifically to administrative and survey data but can be adapted for use with any dataset.

The tool was conceived following consultation with VISION colleagues regarding the construction of ethnicity and migration data across the consortium. The objective was to produce the best quality data and analysis possible that could account for diversity and diverse experiences in the population. The VISION consortium is concerned with measuring violence: ethnicity and migration status are key areas where violence is underreported, which creates gaps in data. We found that existing datasets are unable to properly reflect diversity and inequality in the population and therefore cannot fully explain different experiences. Thus, we sought ways to prevent reproducing biases and data gaps within our analyses.

A collaborative workshop held by the Ethnicity and Migration research group initiated an iterative process of tool development. A meeting with the UKPRP Community of Practice for Race and Ethnicity specified feedback to the tool design. Extensive research of existing literature took place between September 2022 and March 2023 and was summarised into a companion document, both providing citations and further information.

A draft tool and companion document was shared with specialist service IMKAAN (a by-and-for service for minoritized women and girls at risk of violence) in July 2023 for consultative feedback.

I am pleased to announce the tool is now ready for circulation and use.

The tool comprises three parts:

The first part offers guiding questions to assess the quality of a data set at the adoption stage, with regard to how well the dataset mitigates the potential biases that may be produced during data collection regarding ethnicity and migration. Researchers can apply the questions within this section to any dataset they are adopting, although it was designed particularly with survey data and administrative data in mind because these are the main datasets used in the VISION project.
The second part of the tool guides the researcher in a reflective process that is intended to allow the researcher to assess the potential for internally held biases or structural and systemic biases to which they have been exposed affecting the data analysis.
The third part asks researchers to consider the impact of reporting findings. The wording of publications might affect how the finds are interpreted or reported in the media, cited by other researchers, or circulated. Findings might also be misused. This final section of the tool offers some techniques for mitigating the misinterpretation or misuse of findings (although we acknowledge that this is often outside of researcher control).

This document will evolve over time, therefore, we are keen for your feedback. If you download the tool and guide and use them, please let us know how you get on! Is the tool easy to use? Is the guide clear? How effective were they in helping you mitigate bias when working with your data? Please let us know by contacting Andri at Alexandria.innes@city.ac.uk. We look forward to hearing from you!

Download the assessment tool

RiskOfBias_web Download

Download the companion guide

VISION-TADRoB_web Download