Education Authority Y Box Doc

the characteristics of those who are most at risk and the factors that drive and sustain violence is central to the public health approach. If we accept that most violence is male violence, then we surely need to ask what drives male youth violence. Male youth violence has been theorised to be driven at least in part by masculinity-the socially constructed attitudes and attributes of being male (Lourenco et al., 2019; Taliep, Lazarus and Naidoo, 2021). These are often the ideals that promote the domination of some men and the subordination of other men, girls, and women (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005). In contemporary Western societies, these ideals include things like independence, autonomy, superiority, dominance, heterosexuality and aggression (Ashe and Harland, 2014). Thus violence is highly symbolic, used to communicate messages to others, conform to expectations, and to consolidate social bonds (Lee, 2019). Of course most young men cannot attain these socially constructed expectations, and this perceived failure can produce strains (Agnew, 2002; APA, 2018). In short, young men believe that they have two options- continue to attain these ideals with the resources available to them, or dampen the effects of the strains. Both cases, young men may privately feel shame and failure. Unchallenged, these feelings can manifest as a range of risk taking behaviours (Capraro, 2000) including aggression and violence (Agnew, 1992; Taliep, Lazarus and Naidoo, 2021). In contexts such as Northern Ireland, where violence remain highly common, where urban spaces are peppered with a patchwork of murals that glorify violence (Ashe and Harland, 2014), and where community norms often endorse violence, the net result is elevated incidences. Despite being more vulnerable to community violence and the spectrum of related harms (Lansford et al., 2007; Fowler et al., 2009), many young men do not have safe spaces to reflect on the issues that affect them, or to practice and rehearse non-violent alternatives (Addis and Mahlik, 2003). PREVENTION MODELS FOR YOUNG MEN AND INSIGHTS FROM RESEARCH Traditional masculine norms mean that young men are often predisposed to a limited code of behaviour that endorses violence and neutralises the harms to victims. They are at elevated risk of perpetrating violence against their male and female peers (Hong, 2000). Central to the most effective models is an intentional focus on masculinity in what is broadly defined as gender conscious or ‘gender transformative approaches’. As Dworkin et al (2013) suggest, an important element of gender transformative actions with young men is the intentional focus on unpacking concepts of masculinity, manhood and the impact these oppressive and negative social constructions have on the lives of young men, thus engendering acceptance of power, aggression and violence. Given the centrality of masculinity to violence, prevention approaches that do not evoke young men’s ideas about their own identities and norms will often fail to connect with the codes that inform young men’s everyday lives (Casey et al., 2018). It is these ‘codes’ of behaviour that increase risk of violence under certain conditions, and therefore interventions that challenge these ‘codes’ or norms, could alleviate the strains on young men that contribute towards violence and aggression (West and Zimmerman, 1987; Baugher and Gamararian, 2015). In their meta-analysis of violence prevention models that focus specifically on young men, Taliep, Lazarus and Naidoo (2021) found that few models had been developed in the European context. However, they also found that some approaches have the potential to be applied more widely. These include: investing in positive approaches to engaging young men; clarifying contradictions in young men’s lives and; providing safe space to dispel gender myths. This concept of ‘safe spaces’ and the facilitation of critical reflection, based upon the work of Freire (1970), is almost ubiquitous in the violence prevention literature. The use of participatory approaches is particularly important for young men - something that is consistent with the research evidence from Northern Ireland (see for example, Walsh and Harland, 2019). However, most studies note that interventions rarely extend beyond the facilitation of reflective elements to also include skills development components (Keddie and Bartel, 2021). In general, group work is the most common modality in the facilitation of male youth violence prevention interventions.

However, several studies have demonstrated that one-to-one approaches could be a particularly valuable component, particularly when delivered in a planned and purposeful way, and combined with group work (Ward, 2001; Cissner, 2009). Whilst this combined approach appears to be rare, it seems to offer the most promise (Casey et al., 2016) and could help to consolidate learning that takes place within the context of the group. Based upon the following empirical observations: 1. Adherence to traditional masculinity is associated with higher endorsement of violent attitudes and; 2 Health interventions have been demonstrated to reduce violence (Jewkes et al., 2008), the WHO recommends that gender conscious or transformative approaches are designed and tested in the prevention of youth violence (Brush and Miller, 2019). Gender conscious or transformative models are those interventions that address gender norms such as masculinity and promote gender equity (Gupta, 2000). Despite the theoretical support, and the call from those such as WHO, the majority of these models have tended to be designed as primary or universal interventions, and have had an exclusive focus on gender-based violence and young men’s violence against women, thus avoiding the interconnectedness of violence and largely ignoring young men’s violence against other young men. Further, most prevention models have been tested either in school or clinical settings (Miller et al., 2019). This is an issue. Firstly, school may not be a safe space for young men to meaningfully engage in critical reflection. Secondly, they may not have the positive relationship with teachers that they have with youth workers. Thirdly, school based interventions will be more limited in their provision of mixed modalities (group work and one-to-one support). Fourthly, schools will be more limited in their capacity to extend critical reflection components to skills development and connectivity with the young men’s wider community. Lastly, “while it is important to recognise the role of school for the implementation of these [violence prevention] programmes, it cannot go unnoticed that the most vulnerable group, i.e., young people that are not in school, are not being targeted by these interventions. Also important to acknowledge that the most severe forms of violence rarely occur within schools” (Atienzo, Baxter and Kaltenthaler, 2017:25). In sum, there are significant empirical gaps around community based, youth work led approaches to violence prevention (Matijasko et al., 2012; Brush and Miller, 2019). Northern Ireland has a rich history high-quality youth work. Youth workers routinely have access to young men who are most vulnerable to violence and its harms. THE POLICY CONTEXT FOR VIOLENCE PREVENTION Violence prevention work should not happen in a policy vacuum. Indeed, there are several policy frameworks that require pro-active The agenda on Sustainable Development Goals was launched in 2015 to end poverty and set the world on a path to peace. The Agenda includes 17 Sustainable Development Goals and includes distinct targets related to violence prevention. These targets are due to be realised by 2030 (Maalla, 2020). SDG 16.1 calls for a reduction in all forms of violence and related deaths SDG 16.2 calls for an elimination of abuse, exploitation and all forms of violence against children The Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC): The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child establishes protections to which children under the age of 18 are entitled. The Convention established state obligations to ensure that all children’s rights are realised. The protection of children and young people from violence is a fundamental right enshrined in the Convention (Cappa and Perowski, 2020). Article 19 calls for young people to be protected from violence and requires government signatories to do all that they can to ensure that young people are protected from all forms of violence Article 36 calls for the prevention of all forms of exploitation and requires governments to protect young people from the various ways in which they can be exploited Article 38 calls for the protection of young people from war and armed conflict. efforts to understand and respond to youth violence. The Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs:

6

7