Search results1 – 10 of 84
Purpose – This chapter provides a roadmap for future research and evaluation on violent extremist risk analysis.Methodology/Approach – The authors synthesize the lessons…
Purpose – This chapter provides a roadmap for future research and evaluation on violent extremist risk analysis.
Methodology/Approach – The authors synthesize the lessons learned from process evaluations of general violence risk assessment, bias research, survey designs, linguistic analyses, and spatial analyses, and apply them to the problem of violent extremist risk assessment and management.
Findings – The next generation of violent extremist risk assessment research will necessitate a focus upon process, barriers to effective implementation and taking the human element of decision-making into account. Furthermore, the development of putative risk factors for violent extremist attitudes and behaviors necessitates a movement toward more survey-based research designs. Future risk assessment processes may additionally take language and spatial components into account for a more holistic understanding.
Originality/Value – Based on existing literature, there is a paucity of research conducting process evaluations, survey designs, linguistic analyses, and spatial analyses in this area. The authors provide several roadmaps, assessments of respective strengths and weaknesses, and highlight some initial promising results.
Purpose – The authors examine framing and narrativization in news coverage of health threats to assess variations in news discourse for known, emerging and novel health…
Purpose – The authors examine framing and narrativization in news coverage of health threats to assess variations in news discourse for known, emerging and novel health risks. Methodology/Approach – Using the analytical categories of known, emerging, and novel risks the authors discuss media analyses of anti-vaccination, antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and Covid-19. Findings – Known risks are framed within a biomedical discourse in which scientific evidence underpins public health guidelines, and following these directives prevent risk exposure while non-compliance is characterized as immoral and risky. News coverage of emerging risks highlights public health guidelines but fails to convey their importance as the risks seem too distant or abstract. Media coverage of novel risks is characterized by the ubiquity of uncertainty, which emerges as a “master frame” under which all incidents and events are subsumed. Stories about novel risks highlight the fluid and changing nature of scientific knowledge, which has the unintended effect of fueling uncertainty as studies and experts contradict each other. Originality/Value – This chapter introduces a new analytical framework for examining how media stories represent public health risks, along with previously unpublished analysis of media coverage about AMR and Covid-19. This chapter provides insight about the nature of risk discourses involving media, public health officials, activists, and citizens.
Purpose – Drawing on the currently available research, the authors explore the effectiveness of programs aimed at reducing re-engagement into terrorism, otherwise known as…
Purpose – Drawing on the currently available research, the authors explore the effectiveness of programs aimed at reducing re-engagement into terrorism, otherwise known as “deradicalization.”
Methodology/Approach – Our approach is descriptive. The authors support their argument with findings from a wide range of studies on these phenomena for the purposes of stimulating discussion.
Findings – Though scientific research on deradicalization remains nascent, there is sufficient promise in emerging findings to support a case for the effectiveness of deradicalization – in short, deradicalization programs can be effective, but just not for everyone.
Originality/Value – Popular accounts characterize deradicalization in a simplistic, binary fashion – they are judged to be either effective or ineffective. The current reality is consistent with some of the earliest conceptual discussion – that is, deradicalization programs do not offer a one-size fits all solution, they cannot work for everyone, and they are of immense practical benefit in some cases. The authors’ fundamental argument is that deradicalization initiatives warrant continued investment.
Purpose – This chapter highlights how counter-radicalization, as a manifestation of diffuse securitizing, impacts the work of Muslim civil society organizations (CSOs) in…
Purpose – This chapter highlights how counter-radicalization, as a manifestation of diffuse securitizing, impacts the work of Muslim civil society organizations (CSOs) in Canada.
Methodology – The author presents how Muslim communities and their civil society representatives experience and adapt to the pressures from counter-radicalization policies. Data for the analysis are drawn from 16 semi-structured, anonymized interviews with managers and board members of prominent Muslim CSOs that are based in urban centers in Canada with high density of Muslim populations.
Findings – Though counter-radicalization policies are advanced under the rubric of community-orientedness and risk governance, security discourse and practice constructs radicalization as a problem within Muslim communities treating them as suspects who are “potentially radical.” Despite this framing, Muslim CSOs are cooperating with state security agencies in counter-radicalization efforts but are doing so cognizant of the immense power the state exerts over them in such “partnerships.” CSOs are raising questions about the selective nature of security practice which views Muslims as dangerous and violent but fails to fully acknowledge their reality as victims of Islamophobic violence. CSOs are using anti-racism, anti-oppression, and rights-based frames to call out the discriminatory treatment of Muslims under national security.
Originality/Value – The author’s study contributes to a community perspective in counterterrorism and counter-radicalization research that is dominated by analyses from “above.” By sharing the experiences of Canadian Muslim CSOs under counter-radicalization, the author illustrates the practice of “diffuse securitizing” and how it limits the work of civil society in liberal democracies.