Violence Against Women and Girls - Independent Strategic Review of Funding and Commissioning of Services: report

Chapter 1 – Principles Underpinning the Review

In this chapter, we explain the principles which we worked to in the course of the Review, from gathering our evidence, to our engagement and finally to developing our recommendations.

We agreed early in the Review that we would work to a set of principles both for how we gathered our evidence and engaged with organisations and individuals, and for how we developed our recommendations. Much of the former was set out in our Terms of Reference and are set out below:

• we would be needs-led
• we would take a human rights approach based on Istanbul, UNCRC and other conventions whilst also ensuring that there is due recognition and respect for different worldviews and knowledge i.e. pluriversality
• we would consider children and young people as victims in their own right in relation to domestic abuse
• our recommendations would be based on progressive realisation of rights and non regression
• intersectionality including rurality would be a strong focus
• services should be provided to all women, children and young people who need them, without discrimination
• we would take a strengths-based approach
• we agreed that prevention would be included in our considerations and our recommendations

We were also clear that our recommendations would be aimed at ensuring women, children and young people experiencing VAWG would receive the dignity and respect from services to which they are entitled.

We wanted to embed intersectionality – the discrimination experienced through the interactive inequalities of race, class, gender and other characteristics – throughout our work and to recognise that rurality would be important to any consideration of service and funding models operating across Scotland's disparate geography and population. The following sections on those two issues have been given prominence in our report due to their significance for the Review.

Intersectionality and VAWG

Context

We were clear from the outset of the Review that intersectionality was a key principle of how we would gather our evidence and develop our recommendations.

To ensure that VAWG services meet the needs of all women across all life stages, it is essential that intersectionality is more than a tick box and is embedded throughout the system from policy making, to commissioning, funding, delivery of services and monitoring and evaluation. From the international to national, regional and local levels, it is widely acknowledged that women's experience of violence is shaped by a number of intersecting structural inequalities. These include, but are not limited to, age, disability, ethnicity, migrant/refugees status, poverty, sexual orientation, transgender identity. social class, trafficked children, girls and women and geographical location (e.g. Scottish Government 2022; CoE 2012; UN 2012).

Intersectionality is also dynamic and contextually contingent i.e. differences between and within groups of women, children and young people and the axes of power and inequalities change over time and context, which VAWG services need to be aware of and responsive to.

Our starting point was Crenshaw's (1989) widely used concept of intersectionality which emphasises the ways in which race, class, gender, and other individual characteristics "intersect" with one another and overlap (see also Ahmed, 2017; Lorde, 2007). She specifically challenged the 'erasure' of black women's experiences in feminist debates and explored the specific ways in which black women experienced abuse and violence which is not only different from white women, but also varies within and between minority ethnic groups (Crenshaw, 1991). It is important to distinguish between an approach based on 'protected characteristics' as defined in law, which lends itself to considering each category separately, and intersectionality. Furthermore, looking at inequality through the lens of protected characteristics, masks the real differences and disparities between each characteristic, and the fact that they all have different and unique histories of origin and as such require their own strategies and solutions. To fully challenge inequality in resource allocation and service provision it is imperative that power imbalances are seriously addressed.

Intersectionality emphasises the importance of being sensitive and attentive to the particular structural circumstances of women which may include protected characteristics as well as other factors which are interlocking and are experienced simultaneously, putting children, girls and women at greater risk of experiencing violence. Applying an intersectional lens means acknowledging the co-existence of privilege and power among women as well as between men and women in relation to delivering VAWG services appropriately (Crenshaw, 1991). There is no one feminist perspective, voice and approach. The starting point has to be a commitment to 'feminisms' that is grounded in intersectional and anti-oppressive practices and in particular anti-racist practices.

The commitment to these principles underpins this report because, as Sojourner Truth's speech "Ain't I a Woman" - delivered at the Ohio Women's Rights Convention in 1851 reminds us - there is no equity in various struggles for equality. It is essential that these principles are made explicit and are fully embedded in any new model of funding VAWG services.

The funding of specific organisations targeted at particular groups of women (e.g. minority ethnic including Gypsy/Traveller, disabled, LBTI, migrants, homeless, etc.) shows that some children, girls and women require provision where their specific circumstances are well understood and their needs are met appropriately. Organisations responding to the Review and people we met highlighted a wide range of complex intersecting factors that increase the risk of violence and abuse experienced by women e.g. poverty, ethnicity, sexual orientation, lack of access to housing, lack of recourse to public funds, mental health issues, immigrant status, etc. However, it is not clear how VAWG organisations understand and apply the concept of intersectionality. More importantly, it is difficult to assess the extent to which intersectionality is used as an approach and practice to provide VAWG services in ways that are 'by and for women' in all their circumstances and in particular in relation to minority ethnic women.

The intersections of ethnicity, racism, class, poverty, household structures, beliefs, etc, impact on women differently and the VAWG sector not only reflects but reinforces the inequalities (particularly in relation to racism) prevalent in society generally. Services led 'by and for' minority ethnic women are not currently a reality given the legal and policy frameworks where a recognition of racism and feminist approaches rooted in intersectionality are not embedded (Imkaan, 2021). Minority ethnic women's experiences of violence and abuse and the organisations that work with these women are shaped by institutional, structural and systemic

racism. In addition, although minority ethnic groups in Scotland have increased (approximately 4.5%) with Asians being the largest group and mainly concentrated in the four main cities (Audit Scotland 2021), overall they continue to be small in number, culturally diverse and geographically dispersed. These and other issues tend to present challenges in relation to accessing and mobilising specific groups and the delivery of services including VAWG services and support which a VAWG funding model needs to take into consideration

Using an intersectional lens can highlight the ways in which women from some minority ethnic groups experience patriarchy and its manifestations differently from majority ethnic white women. For example, in some minority ethnic households, women not only experience intimate partner violence but also abuse from members of their extended household (parents and siblings of their partner). Indeed, in some cases the violence may not be perpetrated by the partner but by other household members.

The dominance of western definitions of violence leads to the lack of recognition of abuse and violence perpetrated by household members which results in minority ethnic women not being able to access the support they need. This was a common theme which arose in our lived experience engagements. A lack of recognition of domestic abuse perpetrated by someone other than an intimate partner not only increases the risk of some women experiencing violence but in some cases can lead to their death.

FGM and forced marriages among some minority ethnic communities are indeed serious issues which need to be addressed, and these points were made to us during our engagement with women from these communities. However, the tendency to essentialise these practices as 'cultural' or traditional, rather than treating them as systematic and located in particular patriarchal structures interacting with socio-economic and other factors fails to contextualise and address these issues effectively. For example, assumptions that forced marriages only affect Asian communities marginalises girls from African and other communities who are forced into child marriages. Similarly, the fact that most of the girls subject to FGM are African from certain tribes results in FGM not being challenged in other communities. It treats women as a culturally homogenous and static mass and ignores the changing nature of communities and societies across time and place. Delivery of services in this context marginalises the experiences and expertise of minority ethnic women in addressing these issues.

Minority ethnic women's organisations also face specific challenges. A combination of perceived economies of scale, competitive tendering, insecure funding and multiple funding streams creates an unfair playing field for 'by and for' organisations providing VAWG support and services for minority ethnic groups. In general the current funding model favours larger well-established organisations, and this view is shared by VAWG minoritised service organisations. Within this context it is important to acknowledge that the VAWG sector in Scotland, despite its commitment to intersectionality, operates in a context of systemic racism reinforced by dominance and privilege of white-led organisations who are in a position to shape the priorities and focus of VAWG services and establish the parameters of partnerships. This has the effect of reinforcing 'the revolving door' of privilege that white-led organisations hold in being in a position financially and structurally to

be the lead partners on bids (Imkaan, 2021). In addition, minority ethnic VAWG organisations experience a lack of recognition and respect for their specialist expertise and a tendency for appropriation when it supports /suits white-led VAWG organisations. The level of funding for minority ethnic organisations reflects their unequal status and highlights the vicious circle they are trapped in. We heard that inadequate funding puts organisations at risk of failure to deliver services effectively, which means that they do not qualify for future grants. Furthermore, for small minority groups, meeting the criteria for funding designed for the majority is extremely difficult and many give up before trying. The preference for funding large white-led organisations and universities to carry out research and develop training materials and programmes instead of funding organisations that have real life experience, is a case in point.

There is no one feminist perspective, voice, approach. Being sensitive to differences within and between women is core to providing appropriate VAWG services. For progress to be made with regard to providing equitable services to minoritised children, girls and women, the starting point has to be a commitment to a feminism that is meaningfully grounded in intersectional and anti-racist practices in policy making, budget allocations, funding, commissioning, delivery, monitoring and evaluation of services. There is a need to explore and undertake research on how best to embed intersectional feminist approaches and anti-racist practices in relation to VAWG support and services as well as ensuring funding models are fair and socially just and recognise that specialist services require to be funded well and consistently. This is critical if there is a commitment to stop and reverse the regrettable fact that generations of minority ethnic women have internalised systemic oppression, which makes them uphold the status quo instead of demanding what they are worth.

We gave considerable thought to how to make

visible the ways in which the structures of power and privilege impact differently among women as well as between men and women in relation to service delivery, as this is critical to providing appropriate VAWG services that are inclusive of women in all circumstances. Not all minority ethnic women may wish to access a service targeted at the specific ethnic group they identify with and some rural women may not wish to access local/regional VAWG services for a variety of reasons including issues of confidentiality. It is essential that every woman, child and young person should be able to access appropriate VAWG services no matter who they are and where they live, which is not the case at present.

We also gave considerable thought in relation to the visibility of all children and young people and how easily the VAWG agenda and focus becomes adult-centred (for, example during the Covid–19 pandemic, see DAHLIA- 19). Whilst intersectional frameworks provide an alternative to one-size-fits-all approaches to policy and practice, these frameworks themselves are often adult-centric; it is important we extend this intersectional feminist approach to include children and young people (see McCabe, 2021) and child rights. We note a distinct lack of evidence on children's intersectional experiences of VAWG, and the need to include relational experiences and rights (Morrison and Houghton 2020). Children and young people are a heterogeneous group, with complex and diverse identities, needs, and experiences. Gender-based violence policy and practice should reflect this diversity, capturing how intersecting structures of oppression (such as sexism, racism, ableism, heterosexism) shape children and young people's vulnerability to violence, as well as how they make sense of, cope with and resist abuse, and the support mechanisms required (see Etherington and Baker, 2018).

We are acutely aware of the importance of being sensitive and attentive to the particular intersecting circumstances of women, children

and young people that result in increasing their risk of experiencing violence and that this requires respect based on honest and genuine collaborative working. To provide services which are inclusive of all women's, children's and young people's experiences across different geographies, it is essential that flexible service delivery models are explored and developed with VAWG organisations working collaboratively. Also critical are staff with the relevant experience, skill, understanding and reflexivity to address the specific experiences of children, girls and women from different backgrounds experiencing violence and abuse. Within this context it is also essential that staff and policy makers working in the VAWG sector are committed to addressing their own privilege and power over other women which is critical to achieving a socially just and inclusive approach to funding and delivering VAWCYP services.

Rurality

Any new model of services to address VAWG in Scotland must include a focus on rurality. Seventeen percent of the Scottish population (5.46 million) are located on 98% of the land mass which is categorised as rural (Scottish Government 2021). Rural places and communities are diverse – physically, historically, socially, politically and economically – and a one size fits all approach in relation to VAWG services does not work. Urban tends to be the spatial norm in gender research, resulting in rural being rendered invisible in relation to gender issues generally and VAWG in particular (McCarry and Williamson 2009)is an exception. This makes it difficult to obtain information which reveals the extent and the scale of VAWG across ages in rural communities.

Those responding to the Review acknowledged that rural communities, compared to urban communities, face distinct challenges which makes the provision of, and access to, services difficult, if they are provided at all. There is little systematic research or evidence gathered in

Scotland that has sought to address the gender and intersectionality specific impacts of these rural challenges which include:

• Demographic trends including an ageing population and high levels of out migration of youth/the economically active group
• Sparse population resulting in lack of economies of scale impacting on service provision. In this context, balancing provision based on 'service led' and 'service user led' was identified as a problem
• Distance from urban areas/local towns combined with limited and expensive public transport makes accessing services difficult
• People living in remote rural areas experienced the poorest internet connectivity. However, the Review also highlighted that digital technology is not the answer to everything and people may experience barriers or may not want to access VAWG services digitally for various reasons
• Reduced budgets have resulted in centralisation of services such as post offices, job centres banks and services provided by the public sector and third sector organisations
• Difficulties in staff recruitment in the VAWG third sector organisations across rural areas because of the short-term insecure nature of funding
• Lack of affordable (to rent or to buy) housing
• The labour market reflects the persistence of traditional gender roles and women experience lack of childcare. Inadequate transport facilities can also serve to isolate young people and women in particular
• Lack of children and young people's spaces and support

(Davis et al. 2022; Generation Scotland 2021; Glass 2021; HIE , 2020; ^[2018]; ^[2016]; de Lima and Copus 2013; The Young Women's Movement, 2016).

The combined impact of these trends has resulted in reduced access to services and support and a permanent loss of the only local spaces that may have been available for informal encounters and face to face conversations – reinforcing social isolation and creating additional barriers to accessing basic services in rural communities.

The size of some rural communities where everyone knows each other may result in women being reluctant to access local VAWG services as those working in these services may also be members of the same communities giving rise to concerns about lack of anonymity (see also Sandberg, 2013). Accessing support for victims in this context is rarely discussed or researched.

Despite the commitment to addressing inequalities espoused by agencies, the reality is that minority ethnic groups including international migrants and Gypsy Travellers; LGBTI and disabled people continue to have a lack of voice and are underserved both generally, and in relation to VAWG services in rural areas. Improving accessibility to VAWG services is not sufficient unless it is also accessible relative to all women across ages in all their different circumstances. 'Numbers over needs' based on economies of scale tends to be the normative position for budget allocation for services. The 'No One Left Behind' principle appears to be a symbolic gesture where in practice numbers are prioritised over needs.

If VAWG is to be inclusive of all women, children and young people across geographies, there is a need for more systematic research that ensures a sensitivity to differences within and between groups across rural and urban areas. More effort and investment are required to improve the evidence base on how and in what ways particular geographies/places shape the impact of intersections associated with gender, race, sex, class, disability, sexual orientation, faith, gender reassignment age, etc with a view to developing appropriate policies and service delivery.

A socially and spatially inclusive approach to policy and funding VAWG services requires to be based on reliable and consistent evidence which is currently lacking in rural contexts. Designing policies and allocating funding keeping in mind the most 'marginalised' in terms of their social and geographical locations may have the potential to go some way towards meeting the needs of all.