ABSTRACT This study investigates how perceptions of radicalisation and co-occurring mental health issues differ between mental health care and the security domain, and how these perceptions affect intersectoral collaboration. It is generally thought that intersectoral collaboration is a useful strategy for preventing radicalisation and terrorism, especially when it concerns radicalised persons with mental health issues. It is not clear, however, what perceptions professionals have of radicalisation and collaboration with other disciplines. Data was obtained from focus groups and individual interviews with practitioners and trainers from mental health care and the security domain in the Netherlands. The results show a lack of knowledge about radicalisation in mental health care, whereas in the security domain, there is little understanding of mental health issues. This leads to a mad-bad dichotomy which has a negative effect on collaboration and risk management. Improvement of the intersectoral collaboration by cross-domain familiarization, and strengthening of trust and mutual understanding, should begin with the basic training of professionals in both domains. The Care and Safety Houses in the Netherlands offer a sound base for intersectoral collaboration. Future professionals from different domains ought to be familiarized with each other’s possibilities, limitations, tasks, and roles.
DOCUMENT
Full text via link. Human rights safeguard that individuals can develop their ideas and identity undisturbed by government or governmental agencies. With regard to radicalisation, adopting radical ideas is not a crime. Some crimes, such as hate-speech and ideological violence, are associated with radicalisation, but when individuals or groups only develop ideas without committing crimes there is no legal ground or justification for intervening.
DOCUMENT
Over the past decades, many targeted policy strategies for countering violent extremism (CVE) have shown all kinds of weaknesses and side effects, especially for already marginalised citizens. Awareness of these serious downsides led to a whole branch of more generic social strategies aimed at prevention of violent extremism (PVE). Yet, tackling or preventing radicalisation in education (PVE-E) is one of the most notable and promising fruits of this branch. However, even 20 years after the 9/11 attacks, research in this field is still scarce, available findings are limited, and assumptions are fraught with many complexities. This chapter offers an overview of current formal and non-formal educational practices for tackling radicalisation, and argues schools can only contribute to this agenda if it is organised through a pedagogical lens, and in the end suggests a reset to help make PVE-E more educative than the current goals of PVE suggest.
DOCUMENT
Project objectives Radicalisation research leads to ethical and legal questions and issues. These issues need to be addressed in way that helps the project progress in ethically and legally acceptable manner. Description of Work The legal analysis in SAFIRE addressed questions such as which behavior associated with radicalisation is criminal behaviour. The ethical issues were addressed throughout the project in close cooperation between the ethicists and the researchers using a method called ethical parallel research. Results A legal analysis was made about criminal law and radicalisation. During the project lively discussions were held in the research team about ethical issues. An ethical justification for interventions in radicalisation processes has been written. With regard to research ethics: An indirect informed consent procedure for interviews with (former) radicals has been designed. Practical guidelines to prevent obtaining information that could lead to indirect identification of respondents were developed.
DOCUMENT
Full Text via Link. Programmes to address non- or pre -violent radicalisation can be justified if the programmes focus on helping adolescents in their quest for a good life. At this moment research is necessary to evaluate what types of programmes work in this regard. Research in this sensitive topic requires that researchers are aware of the possible negative consequences for respondents and need to protect their respondents carefully.
DOCUMENT
This article explores the challenges local youth workers face at the intersection of providing social care and detecting violent extremism. Extremism and other radical ideologies are often assumed to be a harbinger of terrorism. Even though both are still a rare phenomenon among adolescents, European states have become highly concerned with being alert to early signs of radicalisation processes. As a result, youth workers as well as other local professionals have been confronted with the task of detecting these early signs. However, despite training and increased knowledge, the question remains whether youth workers are sufficiently equipped to assess potential risks in youth who show no concrete plans for criminal action. In these cases, prevention targets ideas rather than violent behaviour. This article details qualitative results of a case study among Dutch youth workers and suggests that no clear framework exists for detection of radicalisation processes into (violent) extremism. This has two main causes. Firstly, the concepts of radicalisation and (violent) extremism are in practice difficult to distinguish. Secondly, the youth worker's judgement often relies more on individual perceptions rather than evidence-based criteria to identify potential ‘risky’ persons. This situation may lead to undesired side effects such as executive arbitrariness, prejudice or stigmatisation.
LINK
Full text via link. Project objectives Radicalisation research leads to ethical and legal questions and issues. These issues need to be addressed in way that helps the project progress in ethically and legally acceptable manner. Description of Work The legal analysis in SAFIRE addressed questions such as which behaviour associated with radicalisation is criminal behaviour. The ethical issues were addressed throughout the project in close cooperation between the ethicists and the researchers using a method called ethical parallel research. Results A legal analysis was made about criminal law and radicalisation. During the project lively discussionswere held in the research team about ethical issues. An ethical justification for interventions in radicalisation processes has been written. With regard to research ethics: An indirect informed consent procedure for interviews with (former) radicals has been designed. Practical guidelines to prevent obtaining information that could lead to indirect identification of respondents were developed.
DOCUMENT
Norms in research ethics and regulation regarding the collection of personal data and requirements posed by the European Committee concerning Framework Program 7 research require researchers to carry out interviews under informed consent. This means that the interviewed person is informed about the goal of the project, knows who to contact with questions concerning the project, how to retract their data and knows that participation is voluntary. Both the interviewee and the researcher should sign an informed consent form in which this information is made explicit.
DOCUMENT
In recent years, the fight against (violent) extremism has focused more on anticipating the threats that they pose. Therefore, early detection of undemocratic ideas by local professionals has become an important part of the preventive approach in counter terrorism radicalisation. Frontline workers who operate in the arteries of society are encouraged to identify processes toward violent behaviour at an early stage. To date, however, little is known about how these professionals take on this screening task at their own discretion. The analysis of 55 interviews with youth workers, municipality civil servants, and community police officers, show that they tended to be insufficiently equipped in general to detect radicalisation towards (violent) extremism at the local level in the Netherlands. Firstly, this is due to varying contents and qualities of training courses which are not suited to building up solid expertise. Secondly, and most importantly, the recognising of deviant behaviour is presumably carried out with a one-sided focus on personal norms and values rather than structured judgements about pathways towards risky behaviour. Various value systems seem to influence the norm for early detection, which means that there is, in practice, a lack of clear indicators.
LINK
Building resilience to radicalization has become a key pillar of many policies for preventing violent extremism. However, sustained debates over the precise nature of the terms radicalisation and resilience impact the ability to implement these policies. A growing body of literature argues that the way in which key ideas are understood matters to what happens in practice. Additionally, the cross-sector collaboration called for in PVE policy can be made more challenging through divergences in understanding of central concepts. As such, the way in which resilience to radicalization is being understood by frontline workers matters. In light of this, a q-methodology study was conducted, which identified four perspectives on resilience to radicalization amongst policy-makers and practitioners in Belgium, the Netherlands, and the UK. These perspectives are examined in light of the broader debates around both resilience and radicalization, and the extent to which the divergences matter for collaboration is considered.
DOCUMENT
