How do representatives from sporting organisations understand primary prevention of violence against women?

How do representatives from sporting organisations understand primary prevention of violence against women?

Abstract

Sports settings have been identified as important locations for the prevention of violence against women, with numerous prevention initiatives currently running in many sports internationally. However, little is known about how those involved in sporting organisations, who are often tasked with delivering such initiatives, conceptualise the prevention of violence against women. This research draws on a survey of people who were invited to participate if they had professional experience in the development or delivery of violence prevention programs in their sporting organisation. We found that a cohort of participants had a limited understanding of primary prevention and how it applies to the prevention of violence against women through sport. Broadly, they were not aware of the difference between primary, secondary and tertiary prevention techniques. These findings suggest that there is a need for better education of those working in sporting organisations about the nature of primary prevention of violence against women as well as deeper consideration of the complex nature of doing violence prevention work through sport.

Introduction

Violence against women is a widespread concern that has deep negative impacts across the globe, with the World Health Organization estimating that almost one in three women globally, thirty percent, have been subject to sexual and/or physical intimate partner violence or non-partner sexual violence. The United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women defines violence against women as:

any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual, or mental harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.

The term encompasses a broad range of harms that extend beyond physical and sexual violence to also include emotional, psychological, cultural, financial and technology-facilitated abuse.

Evidence-based strategies to prevent violence against women before it occurs are recognised as crucial by academics, practitioners and policy makers. The most influential approach is based on a public health framework, which allows for the development of prevention strategies at three different points of intervention: primary, secondary and tertiary. Primary prevention aims to move upstream to address the root causes or drivers of violence, whereas secondary prevention targets at risk groups and tertiary prevention attempts to reduce the risk of recurrence. Identifying both the context and drivers of violence against women allows for the identification of multiple complex and reinforcing measures required to effect positive change and their implementation in the various settings where people live, work and play.

A primary prevention approach relies on a social-ecological model which takes into consideration the multiple protective and risk factors that might put an individual at lesser or greater likelihood of committing violence against women. These factors play out across the various levels of the social ecology: from individual and relationships, to community, economy, culture and society. Examples of risk and protective factors can include personal characteristics, peer attitudes, family experiences, community norms and broader societal or structural influences.

One recognised setting where people can both learn and reproduce particular attitudes, behaviours and social norms is sport. Alongside school and work, sport is a key institution of socialisation where people engage with and learn from their peers. Furthermore, sportspeople appear frequently in mass and social media and are widely considered to be influential as role models to children and young people.

Research has found that male-dominated peer and professional networks are significantly more likely to hold attitudes supportive of violence against women and gender inequality. Conversely, men with a diverse range of social networks are less likely to hold violence supportive attitudes. Male-dominated sports may promote limited and stereotypical forms of masculinity that foster and even endorse violent behaviours. Collective norms of masculinity can impact men's resistance to change. Moreover, "cultures of impunity" can exist in sporting teams where violent supportive attitudes and behaviours can go unpunished and even celebrated. As a result, some male-dominated peer contexts and organisational cultures can be intimidating and dangerous for women who come into contact with them or their members, in relationships, socially, through family or as players.

The need to engage men and boys in the prevention of violence against women has been widely acknowledged as an important strategy and in recent decades there have been increasing attempts to do so. Interventions with men and boys at the group and community level have been noted as a key setting to implement strategies to improve collectively-reinforced norms around the acceptability of violence against women. There is increasing evidence that success in engaging men and boys lies not just in focusing on changing individual violence-supportive attitudes and propensity for violent behaviour, but rather enacting approaches that, in line with the aforementioned public health model, transform identities, relations, policies, practices and cultures in such settings. The most effective prevention work appears to address gender inequality across multiple levels of target organisations and incorporate multiple interrelated components rather than just one-off activities.