skip to content


Dilemmas in International Strategies to Reduce Violence Against Children

In this session, I will discuss dilemmas raised by various efforts to mobilize international action around child abuse and neglect (CAN). I start by proposing a typology of international mobilization strategies, noting that initiatives to promote CAN programming in new settings have tended to emphasize one of three vectors: governments, professionals or international NGOs.  There are pros and cons to each emphasis.  I also review the debates around some of the following dilemmas: Should Low-Income countries (LICs) be a top priority for CAN mobilization? Are there cultural and institutional capacities that need to be present in a country in order for CAN programs to work or be ethical?  Are some CAN programs more likely to be internationally transferable than others and why so?  Has the field adequately considered whether non-CAN programming (like family planning) might actually be more effective at preventing maltreatment than CAN programming? Does the field give adequate acknowledgement that policies and practices emanating from high resourced and Western countries may not always be the best to disseminate?  Are we relying too much on a model of program trans-plantation over a model of local cultivation?  Should we aim for modest rather than ambitious accomplishments in international mobilization? How much emphasis should be put on the priority dissemination of evidence-based programming? I will make suggestions for more a more evidence-based approach to these questions, though the study of successes and failures in this  and other international mobilization efforts.


Download the Policy Idea Papers of the Plenary Lectures