Social and Psychological Readiness to Take Collective Action Against Violence Against Women: A Mixed Methods Study of Informal Settlements in Mumbai, India

Abstract

Past failures to mobilize communities in collective action against violence against women (VAW) have been ascribed to contextual challenges, but researchers have not systematically mapped community capacity for collective action against VAW. We conducted a mixed methods study in Mumbai, India using quantitative data from a household survey ( n = 2,642) and qualitative data from 264 community meetings. We found attitudes supporting gender inequality and violence coexisted with significant enthusiasm and support for collective action against VAW. These findings open up avenues for policymakers to treat communities as less vulnerable and more capable of changing situations and problems that affect them.

Mechanisms for community prevention of violence against women in low- and middle-income countries: A realist approach to a comparative analysis of qualitative data

“…When communities perceived VAW as a problem that needed addressing for the good of the whole community, they took ownership and shared responsibility for addressing it. This aligns with findings from a study of community readiness to tackle VAW in urban informal settlements in Mumbai ( Gram et al, 2020 ). It also has implications for evaluating VAW prevention interventions, in which less obvious forms of collective action such as shared awareness or discussions about VAW as a problem might not be assessed as intervention outcomes, despite making important contributions towards VAW prevention.…”

Modelling collective action to change social norms around domestic violence: social dilemmas and the role of altruism

“…Domestic violence-related social norms have been documented in contexts in which community members live in close geographic and social proximity such as college campuses in the United States ( DeKeseredy and Schwartz, 2013 ), urban slums in India ( Verma et al, 2006 ) and Uganda ( Kyegombe et al, 2014 ), social clubs in Tanzania ( Mulawa et al, 2018 ), or rural communities in Kenya ( Hatcher et al, 2013 ). For example, residents of Mumbai slums generally keep their door open for ventilation and socialisation given the small amount of space available to them inside ( Gram et al, 2020 ). Under such conditions, residents generally felt they would immediately notice if anyone closed their door and perpetrated domestic violence.…”

“…A trial of a government intervention in Papua New Guinea to prevent domestic violence through increased police presence showed no impact, as men mobilised in response to the programme to maintain power over women ( Cooper, 2018 ). Trials of interventions to financially empower women through economic self-help groups without highly participatory group education components have generally failed to show impact on intimate partner violence ( Gram et al, 2020 ).…”

‘Our courage has grown’: a grounded theory study of enablers and barriers to community action to address violence against women in urban India

“…Determining the extent to which perpetrators or survivors had been ‘wrong’ in a domestic dispute involved invoking gendered expectations of male authority and women’s fulfilment of domestic roles. As reported in the past, 18 inaction in the face of domestic violence was often justified with reference to norms framing it as a private matter. Residents approved of a broader norm of ‘minding your own business’, which was contrasted favourably with noisily fighting with neighbours or snooping on others’ affairs, often seen as typical of life in the rural village.…”