Together for Girls, We Protect Global Alliance, the SVRI and the Brave Movement, are co-creating a shared set of research priorities on child sexual violence (CSV) using a collaborative and inclusive process. Our collaborative approach addresses the problem of research agendas often being determined by senior researchers, which may not always reflect the priorities of diverse stakeholders. A more collaborative, inclusive, and transparent approach to priority setting helps to ensure that the priorities identified are contextually relevant, and appropriate, and consider the diverse contexts in which CSV manifests across the world. This methodology further ensures that the views of all are treated equally without dominance of any one voice.
How is the research agenda being developed?
We are using an adaptation of the CHNRI (Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative) method in the co-creation of CSV research agenda. The co-creation methodology has been adapted based on iterative learning and feedback from previous global and regional participatory and inclusive processes that SVRI – with multiple partners – has facilitated to identify knowledge building priorities and research agendas related to various forms of violence against women and violence against children. The CSV priority setting process approach draws on existing evidence on CSV in LMICs to identify research questions under each of the following domains.
- Domain 1: Understanding CSV
- Domain 2: CSV interventions and response
- Domain 3: CSV preventions interventions
- Domain 4: CSV among vulnerable and marginalized populations
- Domain 5: CSV measures and methodologies
Stakeholders are invited to co-create the research agenda through a governance structure involving three groups: a stewardship group, advisory group, and a global expert group. Generated research questions are analysed and agreed upon by the stewardship and advisory groups, after which the global expert group is invited to rank the questions using a co-developed 3-item criteria:
- Fills key gap: some research ideas will be more likely to fill a key gap in knowledge that is required for translation and/or implementation than others.
- Applicability: the likelihood that the knowledge produced through the proposed research will be applied in policy and practice
- Effectiveness: some research ideas will be more likely to generate/improve truly effective interventions
To ensure the inclusion of multiple voices in the identification and prioritisation of research questions, we have also undertaken a series of key informant interviews and focus group discussions with children, CSV survivors, LGBTQI people, indigenous people, and people with disabilities.
