scholarly journals Deradicalization Programs: Recommendations for Policy and Practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Horgan
Keyword(s):  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Actionable Knowledge ◽  
Apparent Increase ◽  
Street People ◽  
Violent Extremism ◽  
The Future ◽  
Complex Fluid ◽  
Extremist Groups ◽  
Evaluation Work

Involvement in violent extremism is not a one-way street. People can, and do, leave violent extremist movements. Understanding how and why they leave (or want to leave) constitutes actionable knowledge that brings immense practical benefits. Such knowledge may help in designing initiatives aimed at persuading people to leave violent extremist groups as well as reducing the risk of re-engagement in violent extremism in the future. Deradicalization programs have much to offer but they are not a magic solution to a highly complex, fluid problem. Not everyone who engages in violent extremism is necessarily going to benefit from such interventions, and no program can ever expect to produce complete success. Yet, they continue to show promise. Deradicalization programs can be effective for some and, if subjected to greater evaluation efforts, may prove far more beneficial than is currently believed. Despite an abundance (and apparent increase) in programming, a continued lack of evaluation work both fuels skepticism and hinders our ability to believe that there is a strong future for these programs.

scholarly journals How do we know where there is potential to intervene and leverage impact in a changing system? The practitioners perspective

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Birney
Keyword(s):  
International Development ◽  
Systems Change ◽  
System Change ◽  
Systems Dynamics ◽  
Leverage Points ◽  
Actionable Knowledge ◽  
The Future ◽  
Sustainability Challenges ◽  
The Right ◽  
Silver Bullet

AbstractMore and more people and organisations who are addressing complex sustainability challenges are turning to systems change practices. They are looking to get to grips with complexity and to better understand how to use their resources, position and influence to address the challenges. These people are working across civil society, philanthropy, business, international development, government and beyond. Many hope that adopting this emerging practice will give them the answers to the long held questions of – How do I know where to intervene? How do I know that what I am doing is the ‘right’ thing? Am I using my resources for their greatest effect? Once we have set ambitious goals around issues like inequality and climate change, how do I know I am creating impact?. In 1999 Donella Meadows wrote a paper entitled Leverage points: places to intervene in a system to help translate the work of systems dynamics into understanding where a small amount of energy might have a greater effect. Ever since, practitioners have been chasing these elusive leverage points trying to understand how this might be made useful and practical. There is, however, no silver bullet to changing a system. At Forum for the Future and through the School of System Change, we work on a number of different projects such as the Protein Challenge and Boundless Roots Community as well as collaborate on, coach and co-inquire with others such as the Marine CoLAB, Oneless, Lankelly Chase Foundation. In this paper we seek to build on systems change ideas and theories, using Forum for the Future experience of working with these ideas in practice, and offer actionable knowledge (Coghlan 2007) to other change makers who are grappling with these questions. This paper provides four qualities that help us understand the dynamics of a changing system, and how potential in these dynamics might be identified and be translated into strategy and interventions. I explore and illustrate these through cases and examples and raise the question about how change makers might value what we measure when understanding impact in the context of a changing system.

Countering Violent Extremism in Canada and Abroad

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nora Abdelrahman Ibrahim
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Far Right ◽  
Significant Development ◽  
The Us ◽  
Violent Extremism ◽  
Recent Trends ◽  
The Uk

Terrorism and violent extremism have undoubtedly become among the top security concerns of the 21st century. Despite a robust agenda of counterterrorism since the September 11, 2001 attacks, the evolution of global terrorism has continued to outpace the policy responses that have tried to address it. Recent trends such as the foreign fighter phenomenon, the rampant spread of extremist ideologies online and within communities, and a dramatic increase in terrorist incidents worldwide, have led to a recognition that “traditional” counterterrorism efforts are insufficient and ineffective in combatting these phenomena. Consequently, the focus of policy and practice has shifted towards countering violent extremism by addressing the drivers of radicalization to curb recruitment to extremist groups. Within this context, the field of countering violent extremism (CVE) has garnered attention from both the academic and policy-making worlds. While the CVE field holds promise as a significant development in counterterrorism, its policy and practice are complicated by several challenges that undermine the success of its initiatives. Building resilience to violent extremism is continuously challenged by an overly securitized narrative and unintended consequences of previous policies and practices, including divisive social undercurrents like Islamophobia, xenophobia, and far-right sentiments. These by-products make it increasingly difficult to mobilize a whole of society response that is so critical to the success and sustainability of CVE initiatives. This research project addresses these policy challenges by drawing on the CVE strategies of Canada, the US, the UK, and Denmark to collect best practice and lessons learned in order to outline a way forward. 

scholarly journals Law, Responsibility, and the Sciences of the Brain/Mind

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Morse
Keyword(s):  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Behavioural Genetics ◽  
The Future ◽  
Legal Thinking ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Brain

This chapter considers whether the new sciences of the brain/mind, especially neuroscience and behavioural genetics, are likely to transform the law’s traditional concepts of the person, agency, and responsibility. The chapter begins with a brief speculation about why so many people think these sciences will transform the law. It reviews the law’s concepts of the person, agency and responsibility, misguided challenges to these concepts, and the achievements of the new sciences. It then confronts the claim that the brain/mind sciences prove that we are not agents who can guide our conduct by reason and thus cannot be responsible. It argues that this claim cannot be supported empirically or conceptually, and that no revolution in legal thinking is foreseeable. The chapter concludes by suggesting that the new sciences have little to offer the law at present, but in the future, they may contribute modestly to reforming doctrine, policy, and practice.

Enlichenment

AI Matters ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 10-11
Author(s):  
Carolyn P. Rosé
Keyword(s):  
Basic Research ◽  
Achievement Gaps ◽  
Learning Loss ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Face ◽  
Future Of Education

This column raises the question, as we begin to emerge from COVID 19, what is the role of the field of AI in this emerging reality? We specifically consider this in the face of tremendous learning loss and widening achievement gaps. In this wake, what specifically is the role of AI in the future of education as we move forward? This question bridges the worlds of basic research and the seemingly distant worlds of policy and practice.

The Phoenix Model of Disengagement and Deradicalisation from Terrorism and Violent Extremism

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Silke ◽  
John Morrison ◽  
Heidi Maiberg ◽  
Chloe Slay ◽  
Rebecca Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Thematic Analysis ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Violent Extremism ◽  
The Phoenix ◽  
Minimum Quality

Abstract Improving our understanding of how disengagement and deradicalisation from terrorism and violent extremism occurs has critical real-world implications. A systematic review of the recent literature in this area was conducted in order to develop a more refined and empirically-derived model of the processes involved. After screening more than 83,000 documents, we found 29 research reports which met the minimum quality thresholds. Thematic analysis identified key factors associated with disengagement and deradicalisation processes. Assessing the interactions of these factors produced the Phoenix Model of Disengagement and Deradicalisation which is described in this paper. Also examined are some of the potential policy and practice implications of the Phoenix Model, as are avenues for future research in this area.

Conclusions: The Future of Gender, Violent Extremism and CVE

2020 ◽  
pp. 311-328
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Pearson ◽  
Emily Winterbotham ◽  
Katherine E. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Violent Extremism ◽  
The Future

What Drives Women to Extremist Groups?: Internal and External Drivers to Radicalization of Women

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marija Jankuloska
Keyword(s):  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Masculinity And Femininity ◽  
Violent Extremism ◽  
Extremist Groups ◽  
Gender Specific

This article addresses the issue of the causes and drivers of radicalization and violent extremism (external and internal/contextual and psychological) from a general (irrespective of gender) and a gender-specific perspective (factors affecting women exclusively). It endeavors to explore and to understand the drivers that are conducive to, specific and inherent to women. The paper attempts to dissect the dichotomy of masculinity and femininity in relation to violent extremism and the gender components that determine, influence and amplify the process of radicalization.

Criminological responses to climate change

2018 ◽  
pp. 139-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob White
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Public Intellectuals ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
The Future ◽  
Areas Of Concern ◽  
Regional Interests

This concluding chapter summarises the main propositions and areas of concern for Climate Change Criminology. It also emphasises the role of criminologists as public intellectuals and political activists, and the necessity that there be stewards and guardians of the future. This translates into prioritising research, policy, and practice around climate change themes. For criminologists, this means that they need to go beyond parochial viewpoints and those perspectives that frame harm in terms of national or regional interests. Their loyalty has to be to the planet as a whole, rather than being bound by a narrow prescriptive patriotism based on nation. Ultimately, the endeavour of Climate Change Criminology should be to create the conditions for a future that is more forgiving and generous rather than exploitive of humans, environments, and animals.

England: attempting to learn from mistakes in an increasingly ‘risk averse’ professional context

2020 ◽  
pp. 35-54
Author(s):  
Judith Masson ◽  
Nigel Parton
Keyword(s):  
Child Abuse ◽  
Policy Response ◽  
Risk Averse ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
High Profile ◽  
The Future ◽  
System Errors ◽  
Professional Context ◽  
Policies And Practices

Concerns about professional and system errors and mistakes have dominated policy and practice debates and changes in England ever since the problem of child abuse was (re)discovered over forty years ago. The period has been punctuated by a series of high profile scandals usually where a child has died and where professionals have failed to intervene effectively. A major policy response has been the use of public enquiries and, more recently, ‘serious case reviews’ to investigate what has gone wrong with the aim of learning from the experiences to ensure that such a tragedy could be avoided in the future. The chapter considers the question of how far the changes introduced have had the effect of increasing learning and developing a system better able to identify and respond appropriately to the need for protection, or have primarily intensified the culture of blame and failure in which professionals are expected to operate. It suggests that while the changes introduced over the last 40 years have perhaps made for a safer system protecting children the system has become more ‘risk averse’ and reactive rather than being able to develop policies and practices which are able to develop longer term preventative strategies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document