Research Method Note: Measuring and Evaluating P/CVE Initiatives with Respect to Human Rights and the Roles of Women
Keywords:
Measurement and Evaluation, M&E, Preventing Violent Extremism, PVE, Countering Violent Extremism, CVE, P/CVE, Human Rights, Women, GenderAbstract
The United Nations Global Counter Terrorism Strategy, adopted by the General Assembly, established respect for human rights and the rule of law as one of its four pillars: a fundamental basis for the fight against terrorism. Although large investments currently are made in a broad range of localized P/CVE programs, there has not been a commensurately large amount of empirically reliable evidence about them. This (mal)practice should change, given that this prospective body of knowledge is instrumental toward designing future prevention policies and programs: including whether/how to upscale localized projects and programs. Additionally, policies that affect women and girls, including policies ostensibly to benefit them, often lack substantial input, if not leadership, from the women and girls that said policies will affect. A gender-responsive approach to P/CVE is congruent with the UN PVE Plan of Action that promotes a wide range of actions, including: human rights and the rule of law, engaging communities, gender equality and empowering women. Social science methods, and associated evaluation research methods, have been designed to facilitate these objectives. The present work offers techniques and concrete recommendations for measurement and evaluation, to support those objectives: before, during, and after data collection.
References
Bush, K., & Duggan, C. (2013). Evaluation in conflict zones: Methodological and ethical challenges. Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, 8(2), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/15423166.2013.812891
Charkawi, W., Dunn, K., & Bliuc, A.-M. (2024). Evaluations of countering violent extremism programs: Linking success to content, approach, setting, and participants. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 77, 100674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2024.100674
Christensen, J. D., Orquin, J. L., Perkovic, S., & Lagerkvist, C. J. (2021). Preregistration is important, but not enough: Many statistical analyses can inflate the risk of false-positives. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/cj3xq
Cooley, L., & Linn, J. F. (2014). Taking innovations to scale: Methods, applications and lessons. https://www.msiworldwide.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Taking-Innovations-to-Scale.pdf
Davis, L. L., Broome, M. E., & Cox, R. P. (2002). Maximizing retention in community‐based clinical trials. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 34(1), 47–53.
Forstmeier, W., Wagenmakers, E. J., & Parker, T. H. (2017). Detecting and avoiding likely false-positive findings – a practical guide. Biological Reviews, 92(4), 1941–1968. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12315
Frank, C. (2017). How human rights and the rule of law can address terrorism. Africa in the World Report, 3. https://community-democracies.org/app/uploads/2018/06/aitwr-3-1.pdf
Global Counterterrorism Forum. (2016). Good practices on women and countering violent extremism. https://www.thegctf.org/Portals/1/Documents/Framework Documents/GCTF Good Practices on Women and CVE.pdf?ver=2016-03-29-134644-853
Greenwald, H. P., & Zukoski, A. P. (2018). Assessing collaboration: Alternative measures and issues for evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 39(3), 322–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214017743813
Hamilton, C., & Lippert, R. K. (2020). Governing through human rights in counter-terrorism: Proofing, problematization and securitization. Critical Criminology, 28(1), 127–145. https://mural.maynoothuniversity.ie/id/eprint/16389/
Hughes, J. L., Camden, A. A., & Yangchen, T. (2016). Rethinking and updating demographic questions: Guidance to improve descriptions of research samples. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, 21(3), 138–151. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.psichi.org/resource/resmgr/journal_2016/21_3Fall16JN.pdf
Jackson, J., Bradford, B., Hough, M., Myhill, A., Quinton, P., & Tyler, T. R. (2012). Why do people comply with the law? Legitimacy and the influence of legal institutions. The British Journal of Criminology, 52(6), 1051–1071. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azs032
Jansen, S., Niyonsenga, J., Nsabimana, E., Kagaba, M., Rutembesa, E., Slegh, H., Mihigo, B., & Mutabaruka, J. (2025). Real ethics has dirty feet – data collector perspectives on risk exposure during data collection in conflict-affected Eastern DRC. Conflict and Health, 19(21). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13031-025-00658-0
Kazdin, A. E. (2003). Drawing valid inferences I: Internal and external validity. In Research design in clinical psychology. Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.
Lu, S. K., Elliott, S. J., & Perlman, C. M. (2019). Perceived facilitators and barriers to evaluative thinking in a small development NGO. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 34(1), 68–83. https://utppublishing.com/doi/pdf/10.3138/cjpe.43118
Madon, N. S., Murphy, K., & Cherney, A. (2017). Promoting community collaboration in counterterrorism: Do social identities and perceptions of legitimacy mediate reactions to procedural justice policing? The British Journal of Criminology, 57(5), 1144–1164. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azw053
Milat, A. J., Bauman, A., & Redman, S. (2015). Narrative review of models and success factors for scaling up public health interventions. Implementation Science, 10(113). https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s13012-015-0301-6.pdf
Milat, A., Newson, R., King, L., Rissel, C., Wolfenden, L., Bauman, A., Redman, S., & Giffin, M. (2016). A guide to scaling up population health interventions. Public Health Research & Practice, 26(1), e2611604. https://connectsci.au/pu/article-pdf/doi/10.17061/phrp2611604/1821271/pu19056.pdf
Moayerian, N., Stephenson, M. O., Jr., & Stivachtis, Y. A. (2025). The human rights of displaced populations (pp. 15-30). In A. Otruba, M. O. Stephenson, Jr., Y. A. Stivachtis, & N. Dzotsenidze (Eds.), Violent infrastructure: Protracted displacement and housing injustice in Tskaltubo, Georgia. Virginia Tech Publishing. https://publishing.vt.edu/books/73/files/15eaf868-c1a0-4859-b9b1-10e446a56d7b.pdf
Ndung’u, I., & Shadung, M. (2017). Can a gendered approach improve responses to violent extremism? Institute for Security Studies. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/aitwr-5.pdf
Saraiva, R., & Erfe, A. (2023). Preventing violent extremism with resilience, adaptive peacebuilding, and community-embedded approaches. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 61, 101271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101271
Sawadogo-Lewis, T., Bryant, R., & Roberton, T. (2022). NGO perspectives on the challenges and opportunities for real-world evaluation: A qualitative study. Global Health Action, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2022.2088083
Shaheed, A. (2018). Elimination of all forms of religious intolerance. Interim report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, submitted in accordance with General Assembly resolution, A/73/362. https://docs.un.org/en/A/73/150
Smathers, C., & Lobb, J. (2014). Coalitions: Introduction (Community Development Fact Sheet 1 [CDFS-1], Building Coalitions Series). Ohio State University Extension. https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/CDFS-1
Thurston, W. E., & Potvin, L. (2003). Evaluability assessment: A tool for incorporating evaluation in social change programmes. Evaluation, 9(4), 453-469.
UN Women. (2021). Global digital consultation: Civil society voices on the gendered dimensions of violent extremism and counter-terrorism responses. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2020/11/gendered-dimensions-of-violent-extremism-and-counterterrorism-responses
West, S. G., Biesanz, J. C., & Kwok, O. M. (2004). Within-subject and longitudinal experiments: Design and analysis issues. In C. Sansone, C. C. Morf, & A. T. Panter (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Methods in Social Psychology (pp. 287–312). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976190.n13
White, J. (2020). Gender in countering violent extremism program design, implementation and evaluation: Beyond instrumentalism. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 46(7), 1192–1215. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2020.1818435
Williams, M. J. (2021). Attrition happens (and what to do about it). Journal for Deradicalization, 26, 217–226. https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/441/269
Williams, M. J., & Kleinman, S. M. (2013). A utilization-focused guide for conducting terrorism risk reduction program evaluations. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression, 6(2), 102–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/19434472.2013.860183
World Health Organization. (2015). The MAPS toolkit: mHealth assessment and planning for scale. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241509510
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Michael J. Williams
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The JD Journal for Deradicalization uses a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND) Licence. You are free to share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format under the following conditions:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, andindicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
