Dr Henrica A. F. M. Jansen UNECE Work Session on Gender Statistics Geneva, 8 October 2008

1. Dr Henrica A. F. M. Jansen UNECE Work Session on Gender Statistics Geneva, 8 October 2008 Violence against WomenIndicators on scope, prevalence and incidence...REFLECTIONS ON VAW Egm report 2007

2. Introduction • General considerations for indicators on VAW • Overview proposed indicators on VAW • Comments for reflection and discussion

3. "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." (Sign hanging in Einstein's office at Princeton)

4. Need to provide a simple summaryof a complex picture Need to present features to support informed decision making, policy and programs Need to be sensitive enough to measure change (periodicity) Need to enable international comparisons (remember “SMART”???) INDICATORS....

5. issues for selection of indicators • No indicator is perfect • It is important to be aware of potential weaknesses • The range of indicators to be used changes according to the purpose and context • If you use of a group of indicators that reflect different aspects of VAW than you get a better idea of the bigger picture • Disaggregation of indicators (sex, age, rural/urban, etc.)

6. Availability of data sources Feasibility and sustainability of data collection Not overburden States Indicators can be an incentive towards systematic and accelerated data collection (accompanied by capacity buildingand institutional development) Prioritize based on

7. Outcome indicators:To measure the extent of the phenomenon (included in EGM report) Process indicators for policy development and implementation to measure the States’ responses to the problem (indicators developed elsewhere) Two main types of indicators on VAW

8. Surveys done: VAW/IPV/DV/GBV (by type, time, perpetrators) • Reported violence, through administrative and crime statistics • Issues: comparability reliability... AVAILABLE data sources for vaw indicators

9. 2006: In region covered by Conference of European Statisticians: 25 national surveys in 17 countries Half conducted by/with NSOs National dedicated surveys Internationally comparative surveys Module added to other surveys (cheaper, limited, more under-reporting, safety issues) Available data sources: Surveys

10. Almost all surveys give indicators of prevalence. Many also on frequency Almost all on perpetrators Surveys carried out by many national statistical offices and other institutions, however as ad hoc activity Attitudes sometimes collected -- Issues around usefulness Data collected on VAW in surveys

11. This may not be the most common form of VAW, depending on context Demand driven indicators are needed with a regional dimension Many surveys focus on IPV

12. Report of Expert Group meeting on vaw indicators, 2007 Limited to scope, prevalence and incidence of VAW Give a overview of existing initiatives for the development of indicators Proposing and international framework for indicators on VAW Recommending a course of action for different stakeholders at global, regional and national level and donors.

13. One indicator on the prevalence of all forms of VAW justified in terms of possible misuse of disaggregated data to stigmatize communities.. • However: • Not simple • Not easy to interpret, different contexts • Not related to existing data sources • Not clear how to assess over time • Not comparable transnational etc etc ONE SINGLE vs separate indicators

14. Proposed indicators DIMENSIONS • Physical violence • Sexual violence • Intimate partner violence • Harmful practices • FGM • Early marriage (<18y)

15. Proposed indicators Data source • Physical violence • Sexual violence • Intimate partner violence • Harmful practices • FGM • Early marriage (<18y) • Survey • Survey • Survey • ??? • Survey/records??Contextual? Need to reconsider harmful practices

16. Proposed indicators Measurement issues • Physical violence • Sexual violence • Intimate partner violence • Acts/freq/sev • Acts/freq/else? • Phys and/or sexwho is partner??

17. Future work to expand the set of indicators • Killing of women by intimate partners • Female infanticide • Threats of violence • Economic and emotional violence as part of IPV • “Honour” crimes • Dowry related violence • Sexual exploitation • Trafficking • Femicide • Forced marriage • Sexual harassment Issues: Different data sources!! Different levels of feasibility Consider including Child Sexual Abuse

18. Operationalization of the different types of violence in terms of acts/injuries(methodological work in ongoing) Severity, threshold (including frequency, injuries, impact?) Incidents/Frequency? STRENGTH: FOCUS ON SEVERITY AND INCIDENTS OPERALIZation – HOW?

19. Prevalence POSSIBLY NOT BE the best indicator (Walby) • Advantages • Uses concept of DV as a ‘course of conduct’ • Conventional measure among DV experts • Disadvantages • Hard to translate into crime statistics, which are based on number of ‘incidents’ • Does not contain measure of severity • Specialised, not mainstream, indicator

20. Severity of gender-based violence and crime statistics (Walby) • Frequency/Incidents • Crimes are counted as incidents • If dv/gender based violence is to be mainstreamed into crime statistics there needs to be an incident count • Injuries • Violent crime categories are differentiated primarily by injury level, though also intent • To mainstream, injuries need to be known for each incident

21. Moving towards “mainstreaming” vaw Moving towards more inclusive vaw (not only DV/IPV) STRENGTHs

22. Special surveys vs. Modules Standardized/harmonised methodology – possible/desirable? Realistic expectations of indicators – provides baseline, but not likely to see dramatic changes in prevalence in the short term Outstanding issues

23. Women’s safety as priority It really counts, And it needs to be counted!!!

24. THANK YOU!! henriette.jansen@gmail.com