Kingston University London

It is estimated that in the UK there are approximately six million carers – families or friends who without payment look after someone, often a spouse or elderly parent. By 2037 this figure is expected to rise to nine million. Many of us will be carers at some point and every year about two million people in the UK take on the role. Carers undertake a huge number of tasks from personal care including washing and toileting, managing finances, takingto hospital appointments and emotional support. Over a million people care for more than 50 hours a week but this is often longer especially amongst older people. This vast unpaid workforce is thought to save the economy a staggering £119 billion annually (Carers UK, 2011).

Not surprisingly providing this level of support can have adverse consequences for carers who report emotional (eg. anxiety and depression) and health difficulties (e.g. exhaustion and back problems) and often suffer from social isolation. Carers frequently say that informal support from others rapidly dwindles over time. This may be because other people assume they are managing well or because the very isolation of being a carer means that they are no longer good company. It is also possible that others are embarrassed by the person being cared for, particularly if they suffer from cognitive difficulties associated with conditions such as dementia or stroke.

Typical comments from carers in our research include:

'And all of a sudden nobody wants to know you. So all the friends you’ve had disappear. So from going out and meeting people, suddenly I am indoors all the time and I don’t see anybody.’

‘.... Suddenly not only are you responsible for yourself, but for somebody else and for everything.’

‘I don’t sleep through the night. Mike can’t get out of bed and go to the toilet, so I have go to push, sit him up and then come round and take him to the loo... Sometimes it can be eight times a night and other times two or three.’

Over the last six years I have been working primarily with Professor Ann Mackenzie on a range of studies investigating the impact of caring on carers. The work initially focussed on carers of people who have had a stroke but has now broadened to look at carers in general. Recent research has investigated how general practice and schemes provided by the voluntary sector might help support carers. We have been funded by a number of organisations including the Royal College of General Practice, South Thames Crossroads, The SW London Academic Health and Social Care Network and the Modernisation Initiative.

The initial work included three published systematic reviews of the impact of caring on carers. We also undertook our own qualitative longitudinal study where carers of stroke survivors were interviewed three times. Early on in the research we aimed to identify issues and concerns for carers that had received little attention previously and to identify any changes over time. Amongst carers of people who have had a stroke, research repeatedly reports carer stress and ‘burden’, often focussing solely on the negative aspects of caring. We turned our attention to arguably more subtle issues such as the uncertainty carers face and their frequent loss of autonomy. We also highlighted the satisfactions that carers may report, especially as caring progresses. Rewards include feeling pride in their role and seeing improvements in the person they care for. Being able to identify these satisfactions in caring, may help carers cope with their situations. We have recently published a fourth systematic review looking only at these satisfactions in caring.

More recently with input from Dr Ruth Habibi we have been looking at support for carers including respite and peer support or mentoring schemes run by the voluntary sector where former carers support current carers. Such schemes are usually very positively received but it is difficult to identify why they find them so beneficial. For one service that we evaluated, the essential ingredient seemed to be that carers benefitted from the knowing that they were ‘not alone’ in their experiences and sometimes negative feelings. Former carers seemed able to provide unique support which complemented support families and statutory services. Other schemes may work more by the provision of practical suggestions, signposting to other services and the fact the mentor can offer a different perspective on the carers’ situation.

Perhaps one of the most striking findings is the benefits that the volunteers report by being a mentor or peer supporter. The gains can be two-way where the carer and mentor swap experiences with each other. For many volunteers, this role replaces the caring role and provides a new sense of identity. The social support from other mentors is often seen as hugely beneficial.

I am about to embark on a large, two year NIHR-SSCR funded project looking at satisfaction with social care among stroke carers. There is some evidence that people from minority ethnic groups tend to be less satisfied with social care but the reasons behind this not understood. It might be that they have poorer experiences but it may also be related to different expectations and understanding of what is meant by satisfaction. Most of the research in the area is quantitative and this qualitative research project will look in depth at satisfaction with social care amongst older carers of people who have had a stroke using depth interviews and focus groups with people from a number of ethnic groups. It is hoped that the findings will increase understanding of the expectations and experiences of older minority ethnic carers. Issues and questions relating to service satisfaction and dissatisfaction where minority ethnic groups respond differently to White service users will also be investigated. This exploration of expectations and identification of what participants see as important when evaluating services will provide guidelines for practitioners, facilitate the development of culturally sensitive, responsive services and improve measures of service satisfaction.

Sustainable development is a fundamental principle of international environmental law and policy, providing foundation for the evolution of our world, at the same time as seeking protection of our physical and social environment. It has been subjected to a number of definitions, however, the most commonly accepted, provided by the Brundtland Report in 1987, states that it means “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. My research, however, is premised on the appreciation that this development is as necessary at the local community level as it is at the inter-continental level.

Local communities, whether they be represented by a small district in Central London or by a picturesque village in the heart of rural England, are central to all our daily lives. They are where we live, where we work and where we spend the greater part of our lives. It is important, therefore, not only that these communities be allowed to develop in such a way that create pleasant, healthy, wealthy and desirable local environments but also that local citizens be central to that development and in shaping the places in which they want to live and work. This means local sustainable development.

My work in this area is built upon a foundation provided by consideration of local government, local democracy and environmental decision-making. It is vital, if local sustainable development is to be effective, that local citizens and those within the communities have a say in the way in which development is provided and are able to participate actively in initiatives, decisions and actions taken in pursuit of that development. This means local democracy.

Democracy, and in particular, local democracy manifests itself in a number of ways. At the most basic level, we are given the opportunity to elect representatives to lead and govern our communities, taking into consideration the views and wishes f the electorate. Recent legislation, however, has brought in measures aimed at increased participation and community involvement. Such measures include the wider prominence of petitions and referenda, greater decentralisation of decision-making powers to bodies operating on a level where local people can involve themselves and take hold of the reins of power, and, also, the creation of partnerships, between people and local organisations, to put to best possible use the resources available at this level for the good of the local area. Importantly, citizens can involve themselves in such partnerships and, again, play an active role in local decision-making and policy formulation. In short, local democracy in the UK has come to be reflected by both representative and participative mechanisms.

What this means, therefore, is that decisions pertaining to sustainable development can be made in the public forum, by local people and in line with the needs and desires of citizens and their communities. In turn, the resultant sustainable development can be said to reflect better the changes and improvements that are needed in any one community or local area. In short, citizen input and local knowledge can ensure that this “development ... meets the needs of the present ... generations” whilst providing a healthy platform for future generations to develop the communities in ways that will complement future needs and desires.

John has recently written an article which considers and analyses the work of the New Deal for Communities regeneration scheme which was set up by the Labour Government in the late 1990s to tackle urban regeneration and work towards sustainable development at the local community level. Entitled ‘Local sustainable development: Lessons learned from the New Deal for Communities’ it is currently in press at the Environmental Law Review.

As a senior and top manager for 20 years within local government social services one of my responsibilities was to seek to bridge the gaps between social care services provided by local councils and the services for people with illness and impairment provided by the National Health Service. Too often these services were in conflict and competition leaving disabled and older people to navigate complex and indeed sometimes chaotic local arrangements that varied from place-to-place.

 

One way forward was to bring health and social care services together and in Wiltshire between 1992 and 2006 that is what we did. By 2002 people with mental health difficulties, people with learning disabilities, and people with physical impairment and older people, each received help from integrated health and social care teams located within their local community and with one manager and budget holder spanning health and social care services within each team.

 

Was this a good idea? We established a partnership with a local university to track and research the impact and outcomes of our fourteen year journey of integrating services, with research funding from the Department of Health. What was found was that:

• bringing different professionals (eg nurses, social workers, occupational therapists etc) together into one team improved inter-professional understanding and communication.
• it led to easier access to services as measured by more direct self and family referrals rather than referrals passed on by other agencies.
• people got a quicker and more extensive response.

 

When in 2008 I became a research professor in social work at Kingston University there was an opportunity to continue to contribute to developments in bringing health and social care together.

 

In 2008 the twice yearly Dorich House directors dinners were initiated. The dinners bring together the directors of children's services, and the directors of adult social services, from the six south-west London boroughs of Croydon, Sutton, Merton, Wandsworth, Richmond and Kingston, and the directors for Surrey, along with senior managers from Kingston University and St George's, University of London, and from the Faculty of Health and Social Care Sciences and its School of Social Work. The dinners are now supported by the South West London Academic Health and Social Care System.

 

A part of the dinner discussion is focussed on policy and practice changes and issues within local agencies which the directors might want to have explored further through research. My role then is to shape the research, seek the research funding, recruit the research team and to ensure the research is completed and has impact.

 

The directors wanted a study undertaken about what was happening within multi-professional health and social care teams in south-west London. Four teams from four boroughs were recruited for the study, with the sixty four professionals from eight different health and social care professions participating in the study. The four teams were working with working age adults with mental health difficulties, a mental health team working with older people, a team working with people with learning disabilities, and a team working with adults including older people with physical impairments. The study was entitled 'The Definition and Deployment of Differential Professional Core Competencies and Characteristics in Multi-professional Health and Social care Teams'. A catchy title! Funding for the study was awarded by the Academic Health and Social Care Network.

 

The research team of four (Rick Hood, Robert Grant, Sadiq Bhanbhro and myself) spent six months between January and June 2011 identifying with the professionals, using a research design based on personal construct theory, how they defined their own and each others' core professional competencies and how this then matched, as measured by diary completions, how they actually spent their time. Analysis of variance and factor analysis was then used to identify differences and types between the professions.

 

Differences ranged, for example, from the amount of time spent in direct work with patients (nurses in the community scored highest), to how much autonomy different professionals were seen to have (psychiatrists, psychologists and community matrons scored well here), to how much time was spent on report writing and recording (social workers and also several health therapy professions scored high).

 

Three papers have been submitted to academic health and social care journals on the findings and on the methodologies developed, and reports have also been provided to national professional associations and colleges to consider for their profession. But the main feedback and impact has been to the local agencies and teams, allowing and encouraging reflection on how the scarce resource of different competencies across professions are being deployed and how the scarce resource of time is being used. For example, we brought the teams together to consider and firm-up on our initial tentative findings so that they had the opportunity to reflect for themselves but also to fine-tune what lessons we are now sharing more widely.

 

What was important about this study was that it addressed an issue of local contemporary interest and concern, identified in discussion with local agencies, and with feedback and impact for those agencies whilst also sharing the learning more widely. It was a combination of 'act local; think global'!

'Handmade spaces' is a collaborative project we have been working on since 2009. The aim was to explore how urban spaces, rather than just being the 'fixed' outcome of formal urban design, are the result of social and relational processes: for example, people's activities, uses of and attachment to a space.

 

Our project took us on a fascinating journey through some residents' memories and attachment to their own community, and gave us the opportunity to link with debates on human geography, planning, community studies and sociology.

We started by looking for an everyday, ordinary (rather than a designed) space. We chose Bonnington Square, a small neighbourhood in South London, located between Vauxhall station and the Oval in the Borough of Lambeth, renown among young urbanites not only for its bohemian atmosphere, its communal gardens, a friendly deli and an old vegetarian café, but also for its squatting history.

 

Over the last 30 years, residents have consolidated practices of collective actions on transforming their local environment. These offered relevant insights into the way we relate to and transform spaces: from local gardening to housing transformation, from active residents associations to community activism.

 

Bonnington Square is a small Victorian neighbourhood that experienced progressive dereliction of its housing stock throughout the 1900s, but which also experienced a slow 'handmade' regeneration process from the early 1980s when some squatters occupied and settled in the derelict properties around the square.

At that time, the properties were mainly owned by the Inner London Education Authority (ILEA), who had acquired them from the Greater London Council (GLC). ILEA planned to demolish them and create a new playground around the existing local school. And yet, although the previous council tenants had even been evicted and relocated, the new development never happened. When the first squatters arrived, these properties, abandoned for such a long time, were in poor condition and in need of lots of work to be appropriate places to live in.

With its three bombsites still from WWII and no green spaces, 'it was like driving in Belfast', as one of the residents commented (Interview 7, 13 March 2010).

 

Despite the constant risks of being evicted from the area, the new and extremely diverse community of residents not only progressively renovated the properties, but initiated street planting, created communal gardens on old bomb sites, organised theatre performances and established a number of community spaces which still exist today: a community centre, a communal kitchen (which later became the Bonnington café and which is still run by community cooks) and two gardening groups which continues to maintain the communal gardens.

When ILEA was abolished in the early 1990s, the properties were sold and the squatter community was given the opportunity to buy them through housing coops or privately.

After 30 years, no squats remain and most buildings are occupied by owners or tenants. Yet, the history of the square is still very much part of the social and cultural make-up of the square today. Memories and images of Bonnington Square, as an alternative community with a cultural and artistic flare and commune of artists, still persist. Despite inevitable gentrification processes, most of the original squatters still live in the square today and many, together with some of the newcomers, still strive to keep alive what they describe as the 'ethos' of Bonnington Square.

Methodologically, our investigation was based on visual ethnography, participant observation and, most of all, walking interviews with different groups of residents. The participants, partly former squatters and partly new residents, agreed to take us through the fascinating journey of their memories (often with a high degree of emotion) by walking with us around the square and guiding us to what they considered their meaningful places. The walks we took – all documented with photos and maps – were all very different from each other. Yet, they all reflected a unique attachment and a sense of belonging to the square's past and present history. Some participants took us through the gardens showing us specific bushes and trees, some pointed out certain houses, corners, mosaics or even just scribbles on particular walls. Others chose to sit at the table outside the Bonnington Deli and generously shared their memories with us while drinking coffee. Some recalled a house covered top to bottom by newspapers by a local artist as a form of protest against the risk of eviction and others talked to us about a wonderful mural now covered by the wall of a new house. Some shared with us the inevitable tensions and the presence of local frightening 'characters' but also of inspiring social innovators.

As a result of all the interviews, a delicate thread started to progressively emerge and form an invisible and delicate texture/fabric of images, relations, attachment, memories to the area developed and consolidated over the years through people's involvement in their 'making of places'.

Currently, we are working on academic papers based on two major themes that distinctively emerged from the relationship between people and their own built environment:

 

1. how spaces are constantly made (and also unmade) through everyday human practices and the value of their 'handmade' dimension. As some squatters recalled in relation to the regeneration of the properties and the making of the gardens,  '[when we arrived] everything was stripped. The plumbing, the floorboard...There were no pipes and the phone was off. [Council] tenants had just gone…We ended up breaking in other houses…a bath, a toilet…we got bits and pieces from other houses. We all did ourselves' (Interview 5, 18 February 2010). Having some professional gardeners involved would change what was called the 'ethos' of the garden 'I just think it is ok if we could get some gardeners that come and do the work. It would make our lives easy for us but it would change the ethos [of the garden] and I cannot say why and I haven't thought it through, but it is true…It is not about ownership. It is responsibility' (Interview 8, 13 March 2010);
   
   
2. the role of stories and memories (both personal and passed on), but also of gossips, in shaping a place. 'My son was eight. I was a homless single mother. It is a long story…I had to leave the house I was living and came to London. I moved to n… in one little room and there were quite a few of us. It was quite over crowded. Kevin, a cat, adopted us' (Interview 2, 25 August 2009). 'There was a couple that lived there and one day she walked out on the husband and left. She left the door open and that was it. It was squatted.' (Interview 1, 1 July 2009).

"For governments seized with the importance of upholding human rights, the issue of statelessness raises a number of important concerns. Denial or deprivation of nationality to certain groups of people may foster insecurity and fuel cross-border and inter-ethnic wars – for example in Eastern Congo. Further, recent research has suggested that stateless groups are generally not prioritised in social assistance programs and are further disadvantaged as a result of aid policies which do not succeed in reaching them.

 

"All states, as members of the international community, have to meet certain standards under international law. Often there is a contradiction between government policies that ban refugees from working and the international legal framework.

 

"Stateless people face innumerable barriers, and wider societal and political challenges are posed by their exclusion. Obstacles include the denial of opportunities to: establish a legal residence; travel; work in the formal economy; send children to school; access basic health services; purchase or own property; vote; hold elected office; and enjoy the protection of a country. Too often the births, marriages, and deaths of stateless people are not certified and, many stateless people lack even basic documentation.

 

"Data collection about refugees has improved but little research has been done on the livelihoods of stateless people. The lack of data on the livelihoods of stateless people is problematic because sound and effective policies require a strong evidential basis. Furthermore, vulnerability does not end with the granting of citizenship.

 

"The links between statelessness, forced migration and humanitarian emergencies are well documented. Pro-active and pre-emptive policies may prevent major emergencies. Stateless people in South East Asia and Central Africa have been the victims of persistent persecution; their exclusion from their home states (eg Burma and Democratic Republic of Congo) and lack of access to protection and other resources has fuelled major refugee crises. In order to prevent future humanitarian crises, it is essential causal factors which may give rise to sudden emergencies.

 

"Statelessness is sustained by poor governance, poverty, corruption, discrimination, and the lack of the rule of law, among other factors. In order to advance shared international development commitments, including the Millennium Development Goals, the US government, UN and development agencies need to have a better understanding of how the above factors interact and influence people's livelihoods.

 

"A small number of states have made measurable progress in helping individuals acquire or regain citizenship. From September 2010 until August 2011, I led a team of researchers on a project funded by the US Department of State (£112,000) which aimed to provide empirical insight into the livelihoods of stateless people. The outcomes of this project will provide important evidence to help the US Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM), other governments, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to protect stateless individuals and advance their social, economic, and personal well-being.

 

"The project sought to examine the gains made by a number of states (Bangladesh, Kenya, Slovenia and Sri Lanka) and gather quantitative data on the livelihoods of stateless and formerly stateless people to illustrate the benefits that citizenship brings and to identify best practices.

 

"Statelessness and its implications are politically sensitive subjects. Conducting empirical research on the topic can therefore prove to be a very challenging experience in the field. To overcome this, the project has employed a sustainable livelihoods approach (SLA) which involves participants in the research process. It is holistic and will look at many strategies that people use to secure their livelihoods and build on these opportunities. The project itself has helped to encourage links and partnerships between individuals and organisations.

 

"The quantitative survey stage of the project was completed in Spring 2011. Results have provided some interesting findings with respect to livelihoods, including lower average income/expenditure levels for individuals who have recently acquired citizenship, explained by levels of access to education. Short term citizens continue to suffer from the disadvantages of limited education.

 

"Citizenship also impacts education via parents: those with citizenship tend to educate their children better than those without. Parents' education and citizenship has a different impact on the education outcomes of daughters than sons, with sons appearing to benefit more from parents with education and citizenship than daughters in terms of education. Level of household and individual health is also important in explaining the impact of citizenship on livelihoods. Even when citizenship reforms are introduced and discriminatory nationality laws amended, formerly stateless people endure continued hardships associated with the previous deprivation of nationality rights.

 

"The main findings of this study may be summarised below:

 

"With respect to livelihood outcomes:
a) Average per capita household income/expenditure is higher for those who have had citizenship for many years (or all their lives as in the case of the citizen group in Bangladeshi and Slovenian samples) than those who have more recently acquired

citizenship. The results of this study show that statelessness lowers a household‘s per capita income by 33.7 per cent.
b) In each country the impact of citizenship on income varied in terms of its intensity. In Sri Lanka and Kenya, two poor countries, the percentage by which income was reduced for formerly stateless households (as compared against born citizens) was 11.5 per cent and 24.5 per cent respectively. In Bangladesh and Slovenia, two states where the former stateless groups have been actively excluded from mainstream society it was far greater at 74.5 per cent and 62.5 per cent respectively. (Technical note: Simple averaging of these country level ratios will not yield the previously reported overall four country ratio of 33.7 per cent. This is to do with mathematical properties of average of ratios.)
c) In terms of expenditure, stateless households spent 34 per cent less than citizen households.
d) A key explanation of the observed differences in income/expenditure is education. The data suggests that differential access to education undermines livelihoods, with short term citizens continuing to suffer from the disadvantages of limited education. This was particularly evident in the case of Bangladesh.
e) Levels of household and individual health are also extremely important in explaining the impact of citizenship on livelihoods.
f) On average, stateless and formerly stateless people are 35 per cent less happy than citizens; education and health positively impact levels of happiness as does owning a house or land.
g) Statelessness reduces opportunities for education; the educational attainment of stateless and formerly stateless people is markedly lower than for citizens, in spite of the right to universal education.

i. In Bangladesh the mean education of stateless groups (grade 3) was approximately grade three to six years lower than that of the citizens (grade 9).
ii. In Kenya the mean education of stateless group (grade 7) was approximately three years is lower than that of the citizens (grade 10).
iii. In Slovenia the mean education of the ‘erased' group (grade 10) was approximately two years lower than that of the citizens (grade 12).
iv. In Sri Lanka, for the formerly stateless group educational attainment was approximately grade 6, one year lower than that of the citizens (grade 7).

h) There is strong evidence that household/individual educational attainment strengthens livelihood outcomes.
i) Statelessness reduces health expectancy.

 

"With respect to livelihood assets:
a) The odds of having good access to land are lower for stateless and former stateless households. In Slovenia and Bangladesh, there was less than ten per cent chance of having access to land, just 8.5 per cent and 5.4 per cent respectively. In Kenya, the odds of accessing land are especially low, at just 0.65 per cent.
b) Statelessness reduces owning a house by 59.7 per cent.
c) The odds of having social capital vary according to the country of the household; the larger the household the greater the odds of having social capital. Each additional member increased the odds by 18.6 per cent.
d) Though statelessness has no direct effect on the odds of acquiring social capital, poorer households in each country had reduced access.
e) Female headship also lowers the odds of having social capital by 47.1 per cent.
f) In terms of financial capital, the number of females in the household seems to increase the odds of having financial capital – in all the countries studied. Each female increases the odds by 20.6 per cent.

 

"With respect to vulnerability:
a) Deprivation of citizenship can come as a shock or as a trend where citizens go on a better trajectory than the non-citizens.
b) Stateless groups are more likely to be affected by seasonal change, which restricts opportunities for work, access to food, and shelter.
c) The impact of this shock and inter-related ones are transmitted across generations as opportunities for education and health are reduced.

 

"With respect to livelihood strategies:
a) Citizens are able to access more paid work than formerly stateless persons.
b) In Kenya and Sri Lanka this difference extends to gender, with both citizen and formerly stateless men doing more paid work than citizen and formerly stateless women respectively. Within this context more men citizens are professionals and more formerly stateless are casual workers.
c) Men perform formal work and women perform more informal work, but this is not due to citizenship.

 

"With respect to gender parity:
a) There are notable gender differences in income/expenditure which can be quantified at both household and individual levels, though citizenship does not seem to account for these gender differences.
b) Where sufficient numbers of female headed households are available in the sample, the findings record that male headed households were better off than female headed households in terms of livelihoods.
c) Further, parents' education and citizenship has a different impact on the education outcomes of daughters than sons. Sons appear to benefit more from parents with education and citizenship than daughters in terms of education.

 

"The results of the in-depth interviews support the quantitative results and provide further insights:
a) Regarding national identification cards, the processes and barriers to obtaining one are very important and accounted for the longest and deepest responses. Reference was repeatedly made to the problem of obtaining the supporting documents required to obtain a national identity card.
b) The in-depth interviews reveal that although the impact of the acquisition of nationality has a largely positive effect on livelihoods, it may have limited or no perceived benefit in some cases.
c) Reported benefits of citizenship include being able to purchase land, get a trade license, enrol children in school, and other social and economic benefits.
d) Access to education is affected by change in legal status.
e) Responses to the gender parity question were broad in nature rather than focused on the challenges facing women‘s capacity to guarantee their livelihoods.

f) While most of the respondents did not experience problems of vulnerability in terms of interactions with police and other law enforcement bodies, some did.
g) Seasonal change is a matter of concern for stateless people in some countries.

 

"The core research team consisted of myself, Dr Maureen Lynch, Dr Rajith Lakshman and Samantha Balaton Chrimes. Field research was carried out by expert teams engaged from local NGOs and research centres in Bangladesh (AI Falah), Kenya (Centre for Minority Rights Development), Slovenia (Mirovni Tnstitut/Peace Institute), and Sri Lanka (University of Colombo).

 

"Further research is required on the long term effects of statelessness on people's lives, the realisation of their rights and capacities for economic and social development, and political participation. This research should focus on the areas identified as particularly problematic in this study, specifically, the intergenerational effects of deprivation of nationality.

 

"Overall, this was a fascinating and important study, which will hopefully serve both to inform policy and encourage greater research on this neglected subject."

"Use of the internet has grown exponentially in recent years; information technology now forms a core part of the formal education system in many countries, ensuring that each new generation of internet users is more adept than the last. Whilst there are significant economic benefits to governments and businesses from increasing the take-up of online provision, the internet also provides more opportunities for criminal activity enabling the commission of identity theft, fraud, phishing and the abuse of children. As dependence upon digital technology grows the online security of citizens and organisations becomes increasingly important.

 

"In Europe, legislation and dedicated policing units have recently been set up to counter the growing threat posed by cybercriminals. However, despite these efforts, there is increasing recognition on the part of governments that cybercrime is increasing largely unchecked at an alarming rate. In the UK, for example, the National Security Council has released its security strategy that classifies cyber crime as one of the four highest priority areas.

"In terms of personal safety, most young people manage to navigate the information highway well, but unfortunately some encounter exposure to harmful materials and abuse. My focus in this area has led to a series of key internet-related studies that have sought to explain:

• online offending behaviour (Scottish Executive, 2007; European Commission, 2009-12);
• the victim experience (European Commission, 2010-1012); and
• the online behaviours of young people, perceptions of risk and safety awareness (National Audit Office, 2010; Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, 2010).

"There are many key findings that will inform practice and policy, but the biggest revelation to me personally (and one that illustrates the digital age divide) is that young people do not seem to recognise the concept of being online; digital media are so central to their lives and so integrated with daily activities, particularly with the advent of mobile technology, that they are in effect rarely offline. The online and offline worlds seem to have converged.

"Over the past 25 years I have conducted research into serious crime. During the course of my work I have travelled to many different countries trying to understand and describe life from the perspective of victims or survivors, offenders, policy makers and practitioners working in the criminal justice area. I have spent time in high security prisons in conversation with rapists, child abusers, and contract killers; respondents whose accounts of their lives and experience have furthered our understanding of violent crime, but whose motivations are often puzzling.

"People always ask why I would chose to do this (it must seem odd particularly for a woman) and my response is that I never chose to. I never really decided to focus on this difficult area, but rather was asked throughout the early part of my career to conduct studies that shed light on abuse related issues; at some point along the way however, I became interested in the impact and consequences of violent crime for the victim, the victim's family, the offender and society.

"My journey into internet-related research also began accidently. When we first started to discuss the role of the internet in facilitating crime, it was seen as fairly peripheral and unimportant. If only we could have predicted how central it would become. In 2003 I was approached by the Metropolitan Police and asked to evaluate a new programme they had developed which sought to inform children about the dangers and risks they might encounter on the internet. This study was one of the first to recognise that children may encounter dangers on the internet and formed the basis of a body of research spanning eight years that has explored the role of digital media in offending and in the lives of young people.

"By 2009 my work in this area was becoming known internationally and I was asked to visit the Kingdom of Bahrain to provide advice on internet safety and to help the Kingdom prepare a safety framework. I realised quickly that key and recent developments in legislation, safety practice and research were European and US focused, and that although child online protection is a global responsibility it was naive to assume that such practice would be relevant or directly applicable in different geographical and cultural contexts.

"Research for my latest book, for example, which explores child victimisation in an international context, has highlighted the plight of children in developing countries living in extreme poverty and in war zones, for whom daily survival is of paramount importance. For these children internet safety would seem of little consequence; but having said that it is true that mobile phone use amongst young people has increased enormously recently in some developing countries.

"The next stage of my journey began in Spring 2011 with an email from the United Nations Internet Technology Unit (ITU) and an invitation to help them develop an internet safety toolkit based upon our research and the research of others. The toolkit will be a practical guide that will enable developing countries to establish frameworks at local level that address policy, safety practice and governance. UN workshops will be held with representatives from each of the countries to enable adaptation of the toolkit for local use.

"There are still few academics working in the internet safety area and the field is multi-disciplinary. I have been fortunate to work with police and child welfare practitioners, computer scientists, forensic psychologists, media academics and lawyers in exploring the issue. Looking at an area from a wide variety of perspectives brings innovation, fresh perspective and makes for excellent collaboration. On reflection I've noticed that at this stage of my career I am increasingly called upon not for my research expertise, but for my expert knowledge of the area. This represents the greatest personal challenge; the question is no longer how good was the research, but rather how useful are the findings and can they really make a difference?"

Julia's fourth book in the child victimisation area was published in August 2011: Davidson, J. And Hammerton, C., ‘International Perspectives on Child Victimisation' Routledge.