Missing the (Data) Point? Analysis, Advocacy and Accountability in the Monitoring of Attacks on Healthcare in Syria

Roborgh, Sophie

doi:10.7227/jha.039

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar pressures, as well as tension between Gaziantep and field staff, became evident in the communication and advocacy practices of organisations, where staff on the ground sometimes wanted to employ a different strategy than spokespeople in Gaziantep, such as in reporting attacks on healthcare facilities. At times, this created moral dilemmas on the side of the Gaziantep staff, creating a clash between their professional standards, including the need for transparency to protect the organisation's reputation, and their desire to respect the preferences of those facing a risk to life (Roborgh, 2020).…”

Section: Part I: Factors Complicating Local Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Localisation in the balance: Syrian medical‐humanitarian NGOs' strategic engagement with the local and international

Roborgh

2023

Disasters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contributions on localisation often focus on interactions between local organisations and the international community, with limited attention paid to dynamics within the locally‐led part of the response. The humanitarian operation in non‐government‐held areas of Syria is considered a key example of localisation, in which the health sector has assumed a leading role. Drawing on fieldwork among Syrian medical‐humanitarian organisations conducted in southern Turkey in 2017, this paper offers a view from below on the localisation debate. It provides a nuanced perspective on ‘the local’, showcasing how localisation is interpreted and expressed among Syrian non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) themselves, and in their interaction with each other. The paper shows how most organisations have moved to a hybrid model that emphasises their local and international character, resisting simplistic classifications. However, despite the sometimes strategic nature of its invocation, localisation does not lose its relevance as a lived experience, especially for local field staff.

show abstract

Section: Part I: Factors Complicating Local Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Localisation in the balance: Syrian medical‐humanitarian NGOs' strategic engagement with the local and international

Roborgh

2023

Disasters

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In some cases, publicly-available data are the only regularly accessible source of data about attacks; where field-based data are available, they constitute a complementary data source. Advocacy efforts, such as the SHCC, are dependent upon public information to raise awareness and maintain attention on these issues, highlighting the relationship between advocacy and data gathering [ 5 , 21 , 39 , 40 ]. Thus, even where field-based data exist, publicly-available data will continue to be used in awareness-raising campaigns and to support policy discussions informed by specific incidents and attack patterns.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, the reason for collecting data influences the type, detail, and uses of data. Aside from the mandate bestowed on WHO by the WHA, organisations gather data for advocacy, investigation and accountability, operational security and protection, or research purposes [ 5 , 34 , 37 , 38 , 40 – 42 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Underestimating attacks: comparing two sources of publicly-available data about attacks on health care in 2017

Parada¹,

Fast

Briody

et al. 2023

Confl Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Attacks on health care represent an area of growing international concern. Publicly available data are important in documenting attacks, and are often the only easily accessible data source. Data collection processes about attacks on health and their implications have received little attention, despite the fact that datasets and their collection processes may result in differing numbers. Comparing two separate datasets compiled using publicly-available data revealed minimal overlap. This article aims to explain the reasons for the lack of overlap, to better understand the gaps and their implications. Methods We compared the data collection processes for datasets comprised of publicly-reported attacks on health care from the World Health Organization (WHO) and Insecurity Insight’s Security in Numbers Database (SiND). We compared each individual event to compile a comparable dataset and identify unique and matched events in order to determine the overlap between them. We report descriptive statistics for this comparison. Results We identified a common dataset of 287 events from 2017, of which only 33 appeared in both datasets, resulting in a mere 12.9% (n = 254) overlap. Events affecting personnel and facilities appeared most often in both, and 22 of 31 countries lacked any overlap between datasets. Conclusions We conclude that the minimal overlap suggests significant underreporting of attacks on health care, and furthermore, that dataset definitions and parameters affect data collection. Source variation appears to best explain the discrepancies and closer comparison of the collection processes reveal weaknesses of both automated and manual data collection that rely on hidden curation processes. To generate more accurate datasets compiled from public sources requires systematic work to translate definitions into effective online search mechanisms to better capture the full range of events, and to increase the diversity of languages and local sources to better capture events across geographies.

show abstract

Using Data to Create Change? Interrogating the Role of Data in Ending Attacks on Healthcare

Fast

Read

2022

International Studies Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the non-straightforward role of data about attacks on health in creating policy and normative change to safeguard access to healthcare and protect healthcare providers in conflict. Acknowledging the importance of data as a key component in the quest to reduce instances of attacks, we take this one step further, asking: what is the relationship between data, action, and change processes? While scholars have examined the efficacy of transnational advocacy, rarely has the specific role of data been the focus of analysis. Here we consider two pathways for creating change: operational change designed to prevent or mitigate the impact of attacks on health at the level of those affected by attacks, and normative change that leads to a reduction in the frequency of attacks, at the level of those perpetrating attacks. Drawing on research investigating the influence of data in humanitarian decision-making and security management and research on transnational advocacy, we discuss the lessons for responding to the problem of attacks on healthcare. We end by broadening the scope of our conclusions to highlight the non-straightforward role of data in operational and normative change processes more generally.

show abstract

Missing the (Data) Point? Analysis, Advocacy and Accountability in the Monitoring of Attacks on Healthcare in Syria

Cited by 4 publications

References 9 publications

Localisation in the balance: Syrian medical‐humanitarian NGOs' strategic engagement with the local and international

Localisation in the balance: Syrian medical‐humanitarian NGOs' strategic engagement with the local and international

Underestimating attacks: comparing two sources of publicly-available data about attacks on health care in 2017

Using Data to Create Change? Interrogating the Role of Data in Ending Attacks on Healthcare

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About