justice and security: intercultural settings in europe compared inge vanfraechem ku leuven institute...
TRANSCRIPT
JUSTICE AND SECURITY: INTERCULTURAL SETTINGSIN EUROPE COMPARED
Inge VanfraechemKU Leuven Institute of
CriminologyESC Porto 04.09.2015
Outline of the presentation
1.The project2.Theoretical framework3.Action research in diverse
intercultural settings4.Challenges of comparison
The project 7th Framework programme (EU):
Collaborative Project - Topic SEC-2011.6.5-1 Conflict resolution and mediation
Aim of the project: To provide alternative and deepened understandings of
‘security’ and ‘justice’, based on empirical evidence of how to handle conflicts
in intercultural contexts within democratic societies, in order to set up security solutions for citizens and
communities, which will be carried by the active participation of the citizens involved
Duration of the project: 4 years (2012-2016)
Partners
1. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KU Leuven), Belgium (Coordinator)
2. Norwegian Social Research (NOVA), Norway
3. European Forum for Restorative Justice (EFRJ), Belgium
4. Institute for the Sociology of Law and Criminology (IRKS), Austria
5. Foresee Research Group (Foresee), Hungary
6. Victimology Society of Serbia (VDS), Serbia
7. University of Ulster (UU), UK
Outline of the presentation
1.The project2.Theoretical framework3.Action research in diverse
intercultural settings4.Challenges of comparison
Theoretical framework: security (1) Tracing the security discourse:
From (inter)national security to societal security
Human security (human development): in relation to property, return and reconciliation
Securitisation/widening the security agenda, and the ‘security trap/dilemma’
Eg.: the securitisation of migration
Theoretical framework: security (2) Objective (statistical risks of violence
and abuse) and subjective dimension (subjective experience of trust, control and safety)
A view from below: from an issue of surveillance to a search for mechanisms of social integration and development
Theoretical framework: security (3) Critical security studies - Re-
conceptualising ‘security’: By bringing in and representing the
experiences of the voiceless By offering a normative basis to criticise
existing practices and to conceive emancipatory approaches
Theoretical framework: justice
Justice not as a monolithic ideal, but as a pluralistic notion with many dimensions and claims
Justice as a process - as an outcome Justice in intercultural settings: an
opportunity as instrument for social change, not for social control
… and restorative justice
RJ: a focus on justice experiences RJ in terms of its values and principles Circles as a broader approach Link to community work and
development Security and justice are not a given, but
a task
Outline of the presentation
1.The project2.Theoretical framework3.Action research in diverse
intercultural settings4.Challenges of comparison
Sites of action research (1)
at the micro-level: everyday conflicts between local residents and residents with migrant background in public/social housing (Vienna)
1. Working with community organisations
2. Action researcher as ‘intern’3. Frauen café4. Circles
Sites of action research (2)
at the meso-level: conflicts in a small town with Roma and non-Roma inhabitants (Hungary);
1. Analysis of the conflict lines2. Six cases for circles3. Local learning group4. AR: mediators and researchers in one
team
Sites of action research (3)
at the meso/macro-level: interethnic conflicts within three multiethnic and multicultural regions: conflicts between Serbs, Albanians, Muslims and Croats (Serbia);
1. Qualitative interviews2. Quantitative survey3. Workshops: circles with fictive case
Sites of action research (4)
at the meso/macro-level: civil conflicts at three sites in Northern Ireland:
conflicts between a local community and gangs of youths (knee-capping);
between long term residents and recent immigrants;
and inter-community sectarian conflict (training ex-combatants).
Outline of the presentation
1.The project2.Theoretical framework3.Action research in diverse
intercultural settings4.Challenges of comparison
Methodological phases
Step 1. Theoretical conceptualisation
Step 2. Operationalisation Step 3. Application in practice Step 4. Feedback to theoretical
concepts Step 5. Re-conceptualisation
Data collection
Local action, observation, interviews, focus groups
‘Thick description’ of local experiences Logbook and participatory film making Linking theory to practice: the use of
‘evaluation grids’ Ongoing analysis in local team and
European steering committee Nvivo online database
Comparative analysis (1)
Identifying and encoding available data (grids, context reports, deliverables) against a number of key variables related to:
The context of the conflict with its surrounding culture, values and attitudes
The mechanisms of participation, dialogue and facilitation
The outcomes at personal, societal and institutional level
Comparative analysis (2)
A total of about 70 grids produced, encoded and analysed
Sharing and collaborating with partners: database/website/iPad solution
Nvivo dataset Regular feedback to the partners
(evaluation grids) Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA)
More information
www.alternativeproject.euAlternativeproject.wordpress.com
Alternativefilms.euforumrj.org
Final conference
Leuven, 16-18 November 2015