Evidence for Action Blog

UNICEF Innocenti's Chief of Social and Economic Policy reflects on two years of research.When I am asked why I do research, what difference it makes, and especially in an institution, like Unicef, that does rather than thinks, my answer is 1.68.[1]This number has contributed to change the lives of many children and youngsters in Venezuela. It is the benefit-to-cost ratio of investing USD 211 million in 500,000 children annually over seven years in a social development program through music. The number resulted from an ex-ante evaluation projecting the socioeconomic (reduced school dropouts, reduced victimization, and increased tax revenue) and personal (discipline, school achievement and employability) benefits of the program against its costs.It is not important whether you are familiar with ex-ante evaluations, simulations or cost-benefit principles. This research did two things everyone can understand. First, it proved that a youth orchestra is not just a music project. It can be a pretty effective massive social development program. Second, it demonstrated that children armed with violins rather than guns have better chances in life.Let me give you another number: 16. These are the years I had been working on poverty and equity before joining UNICEF. Those years gave me ample opportunity to cover many issues: the (surprising) interconnections between poverty and inequality; the mutual links with conflict; how machismo can affect poverty; or how social transfers affect behavior among the poor; which are the most effective interventions to reduce poverty; or how best to measure this complex phenomenon.But it has been working for UNICEF that I have focused on the specific vulnerabilities of children and adolescents; that monetary poverty can be a dreadful proxy for children deprivations in some settings; that standard measures do not fare well in emergencies; and that while we invest so much time thinking whether we should equally weigh indicators in our indexes, governments are instead calculating political costs and benefiting of introducing a new poverty number that will hold them more accountable.The bottom-line is that working for UNICEF Office of Research-Innocenti has allowed me to incubate fresh ideas that I might not hatch in other places. Intellectually, this is critical for a researcher. Innocenti has incredibly inspirational vibes. Florence hosts our office in premises that 600 years ago—this is not a typo—emerged as the first dedicated caring center for abandoned and abuse children in history. A dedication that inspires many of us day after day. I was enthused to work on understanding the equity effects of fiscal policies specifically on children or how different genocides––no two are alike––can affect the long-term wellbeing of surviving adolescents. These are just two examples of the many incredibly interesting and relevant themes and challenges we work on at Innocenti.A final number: 34. This is the number of researchers I have co-authored a piece of research with in these last two years. Some 26 are researchers I did not know before when I joined UNICEF. Thanks to them and Innocenti, I have developed my own evidence-based voice against injustices to children. Please keep listening!Jose Cuesta speaks at the 2018 Public Finance for Children workshop in Florence, Italy.More UNICEF Innocenti research by Jose Cuesta: UNICEF Evidence to Action BLOG by Jose Cuesta: From a human face to human emotion: Valuing feelings in developmentUNICEF Innocenti article: Economics of inequality and conflictUNICEF Innocenti article: Adolescents may be less resilient to catastrophic events than previously thoughtUNICEF Innocenti article: Global workshop raises capacity on Public Finance for Children All research produced by Jose Cuesta at UNICEF Innocenti.Jose Cuesta’s research for the World Bank.Other blogs by Jose Cuesta. [1] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2010.517187?scroll=top&needAccess=true Presentation: UNICEF Innocenti - Fiscal Policy & Equity in Uganda + Equity in education finance for children

 It is no surprise that children who are bullied do worse in academic tests. However, after  re-analyzing children’s reading test data for 30 school systems in some of the world’s richest countries, we found that an environment of bullying drags everyone’s achievement down, not just that of the victims. We published our findings on bullying and more indicators contributing to educational inequalities in a recent UNICEF report “An Unfair Start: Inequality in Children’s Education in Rich Countries”.The share of fourth-grade students who reported they were bullied at least monthly ranged from 25% in Finland to 60% in New Zealand (see figure below).Nearly half of children in the US (45 %) reported they were bullied at least once a month.One in three (33%) of these children said they were bullied on a weekly basis, one of the highest levels in the comparison (ahead of only nine of 30 school systems in the study). Our research shows that  school-level prevalence of weekly bullying is associated with significantly lower individual reading test scores in 24 of the 30 school systems. In the United States, a one percentage point difference in school-level bullying is associated with 1.1 score points lower reading achievement, one of the strongest correlations in the study. The association is greater in only three other countries in the comparison- Chile, Ireland and Sweden, all of which had lower rates of bullying victimization than the US.Only 6% of children in the US sample were in schools where no one reported being bullied weekly and a quarter were in schools with a bullying prevalence of 20% or greater. This amounts to a difference in reading scores of 22 points. This is a large effect, especially as it remains after we have accounted for a host of other factors linked to children’s reading achievement: the child’s gender and age, the language of testing and the language the child speaks at home, the location of the school, whether the child comes to school hungry or tired, or has breakfast on school days, as well as the share of students from disadvantaged families in the school (reported by the principal).It is now understood that childhood bullying casts a “long shadow” on both the victims and perpetrators, but a more nuanced understanding of how it affects bystanders is over-due. Children who get victimized as well as those who bully others tend to suffer from ill health and poor employment outcomes as they grow into adulthood. Yet our findings suggest that even children who are not necessarily involved in bullying end up being dragged down in their academic achievement.Our research demonstrates that anti-bullying interventions need to consider the whole school context, while the evaluations of such interventions should measure the impacts on children not directly involved in peer violence.  Read more:UNICEF Innocenti’s working paper: Developing a Global Indicator on Bullying of School-Aged ChildrenFor global bullying statistics and examples of anti-bullying policies and interventions, see the 2016 United Nations report “Ending the Torment: Tackling Bullying from the Schoolyard to Cyberspace”.Yekaterina Chzhen is the lead author of the newly released UNICEF report An Unfair Start: Inequality in Children’s Education in Rich Countries. The Office of Research–Innocenti, is UNICEF’s dedicated research centre. It undertakes research on emerging or current issues to inform the strategic directions, policies and programmes of UNICEF and its partners, shape global debates on child rights and development, and inform the global research and policy agenda for all children, and particularly for the most vulnerable. Please visit us on Twitter and Facebook.  

With the launch of Generation Unlimited,  UNICEF has assumed global leadership to advance the quality of life for children in the second decade. Yet many programs designed for young people, including by UNICEF, are not framed by well-developed theories of the developmental process.Recent scientific discoveries and studies demonstrate that adolescence is a critical or sensitive period, a time in life during which adverse events and exposures can have great impact. Scientific advances can provide actionable insights into windows of opportunity during which policies and programs can have a positive impact on lifetime trajectories.The three windows of opportunity in adolescence, inspired by our 2018 Oxford Handbook of Adolescent Development Research and its Impact on Global Policy,  is a framework, firmly rooted in the evidence, and drawing from the developmental and social science literature, that can help to steer how we design programs, conduct research and advocate on behalf of adolescents and young people. Download the Handbook of Adolescent Development Research and Its Impact on Global PolicyAdolescence is a UNIQUE window, with experiences and exposures that happen only during this period of life. Think about the start of menstruation, the final growth spurt, breast development, these are all examples of unique events occurring during this time of life. Undeniably the biological expressions of puberty are a turning point at the transition into adolescence.Neuroscientific advances now clearly show the plasticity of the adolescent brain, with unique developments of the prefrontal cortex during this period of life. During adolescence, the brain undergoes a process of synaptic elimination or pruning, during which frequently used connections are strengthened while others are eliminated. This process ensures that the remaining synaptic circuits are more efficient. Adolescence is therefore a unique moment to acquire new skills. For instance, research by Janacsek and colleagues (2012) on implicit sequence learning across the lifespan (between four and 85 years of age) suggests that sensitivity to acquiring new skills is significantly more effective until early adolescence (12 years old), than later in life. Yet too many skills-building programs begin after this age.This period is also unique in that we see gender differences emerge. While this might vary across cultures, many societies codify social norms for girls and boys during this period. These lead to an emergence of behaviours and practices which can instill gender inequalities, which may interact with other forms of disadvantage and accumulate. Evidence shows that many children assume care and domestic responsibilities from an early age, with an increasingly gendered pattern as children mature into adolescents. UNICEF estimates from MICS and DHS suggest that girls aged ten to 14 years old spend around nine hours per week on these activities, more than their male peers and more than double the 5-9 years old age group. Analysis of time use data from Malawi[1] shows that while in early adolescence, differences between girls and boys are small, 19-year-old girls undertake two hours of care work a day, while boys only half an hour. This gendered difference persists until females reach 60 years old, when physical limitations for sometimes demanding care work curtail it. Based on data collected for the impact evaluation of the Malawi Social Cash Transfer program. Generated by Jacobus de Hoop. Gender-transformative interventions, and those addressing gender norms, can be particularly impactful in this window, when gender norms are being internalized and consolidated.Adolescence as a unique window of opportunity The experiences of adolescence – biological, neurological and social –  occur uniquely during this period of life.Adolescence occurs at the interface of biology and society. Puberty, secondary sexual characteristics, and brain development – interact with social and structural phenomena around adolescents’ lives, including their relations with peers, parents and siblings, and non-family adultsGender-based discrimination, norms and stereotypes can intensify with puberty and adolescence There is also what some are calling a SECOND or catch up window. This is a window that provides an opportunity to redress gaps in exposures and vulnerabilities experienced in early childhood. We know not all children born during the MDGs benefitted equally from MDG gains. Many of these children are now entering adolescence. A re-prioritized set of actions that advance progress for the most vulnerable can help redress the gaps, creating a ‘second window’ of opportunity to leave no child behind.Increasingly this evidence of a catch-up window is emerging – but more studies are needed to understand when to intervene, and which factors can be leveraged to ensure that full advantage can be taken of this potential second window of opportunity to improve child wellbeing.Evidence from a longitudinal study of childhood and poverty has recently shown that some stunting might be reversible, and catch up growth possible. In the study, around 50% of children stunted at year 1 were no longer stunted at year 8 in the absence of intervention, suggesting accelerated growth after the first 1000 days can occur. Unsurprisingly, catch-up growth depends on the degree of stunting experienced during infancy. This has significant implications for nutritional programming for adolescents. Height for age and height for weight indicators have long been recognized as being associated with outcomes across the board, and indicative of outcomes in a number of other wellbeing domains. For instance, stunting[2] is associated with long-lasting harmful consequences, including diminished mental ability and learning capacity, poor school performance in childhood.Adolescence as a second window of opportunityThe possibility of catch-up growth is an amazing finding that has the potential to revolutionize how we develop programs and policies for young people.While the optimal growth needs for a child are best received in the first 1000 days, extending attention to the first 1000 weeks would allow policymakers and practitioners to intervene to leave no child behind.More research is needed on what, beyond growth, might benefit from a second chance – such as impacts on cognition. Finally, adolescence is also a window into OUR FUTURES. Here the impacts of intervening during this period can be seen to endure, as adolescents age into their adult lives and for future cohorts of their children. Health professionals are well aware of the life time benefits of positive health behaviours (for instance, physical activity and healthy diet) instilled during adolescence. This ability to create lifetime habits is also well known to cigarette manufacturers and the Food and Beverage industry (‘Big Food’).It is also a period during which vulnerabilities and stressors can strongly hit with severe consequences for adolescent futures. Portrait and colleagues (2011) analyzed data from the Amsterdam Longitudinal Aging Study to understand the effects of early life exposure to the Dutch famine (during the winter of 1944-45) on the prevalence of heart diseases, peripheral arterial diseases and diabetes mellitus at ages 60–76. The authors found that across four age classes (0-1 years old; 2-5 years old; 6-10 years old; and 11-14 years old), the exposure to severe undernutrition at ages 11–14 was the most significantly associated with a higher probability of developing diabetes mellitus and/or peripheral arterial diseases among women aged 60–76. Evidence from Falconi and colleagues, using cohort mortality data in France (1816-1919), England and Wales (1841-1919), and Sweden (1861-1919), also demonstrates that early adolescence is a sensitive developmental period for males; with findings suggesting that stressors experienced during the ages of 10-14 are related to shorter life spans.Importantly, the impact of stressors on an individual are cumulative, making it difficult to catch up once young people fall behind. Research in Vietnam has shown a considerably high share of children in the bottom quintile in mathematics scores at age 12 had left school by age 15, further limiting their life chances. Investments in education and learning for primary- and secondary-age children is crucial to ensure long-term well-being. to have positive effects at individual and household levels on their future annual earnings, decreased lifetime fertility rate and increased labour market participation, as well as on their children’s well-being and human capital.The window into our futures includes recognizing intergenerational impacts, which are evident for the next generation of children born to this cohort. For instance, interventions to improve the nutritional status of pregnant adolescents – for example through the provision of micronutrient supplementation and of nutritional education sessions – result in a statistically significant improvement in mean birth weight, reduced low birth weight rates, and preterm birth.Adolescence as a third window of opportunity Adolescence is a critical period responsive to effective interventions (or on the contrary, to stressors and adversities) that can have impacts on lifetime trajectories, and for the next generation.“Investments in adolescent health and wellbeing are some of the best that can be made, resulting in a 10-fold economic benefit”, and vital to achieve the SDGs Our approach to programming now needs new focus. With the new Generation Unlimited partnership, this conceptual approach can help researchers and practitioners, including UNICEF and policymakers, conceptualize adolescence in its interlinkages with other generations and life-course periods, to ensure synergies and effectiveness in the design and delivery of programs and policies.The criticality of the first 1000 days remains, but to ensure the best for the future of society, science now obligates us to extend our reach to the first 1000 weeks of life. The conceptualization of adolescence through a three-window opportunity approach highlights life-course and gender perspectives on adolescence – and reminds us to consider this period of life for its unique, catch up, lifetime and intergenerational significance.  Prerna Banati, PhD, is chief of programs at UNICEF’s Office of Research — Innocenti. Her research focuses on the social and structural forces that are among the most fundamental determinants of poor well- being among children. She was a Takemi Fellow in the Department of Global Health and Population at Harvard University and has previously worked at the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria and at the World Health Organization (WHO). Before WHO, she was based in South Africa, leading research on community HIV prevention, and has published in the fields of HIV prevention, reproductive health, health systems, and financing.Elena Camilletti supports the Office of Research – Innocenti’s work on adolescence and gender. She conducts research on adolescent girls and unpaid care and domestic work, gender norms, legal and policy frameworks for adolescent well-being, mental health and sexual reproductive health, and cost analyses in low- and middle-income countries. Before joining the Office of Research – Innocenti, she worked for the ILO, the Red Cross / Red Crescent Climate Centre, Oxford Policy Management Ltd and UNRISD. Elena holds a Master of Science in Emerging Economies and Inclusive Development from King’s College London and a Bachelor’s Degree in International Relations and Diplomatic Affairs from the University of Bologna. You can follow here on twitter @elenacml.[1] Based on data collected for the impact evaluation of the Malawi Social Cash Transfer program. See more at https://transfer.cpc.unc.edu/?page_id=196[2] Number of under-fives falling below minus 2 standard deviations (moderate and severe) and minus 3 standard deviations (severe) from the median height-for-age of the reference* population, out of the total number of children under 5 years old in the surveyed population. See more at https://data.unicef.org/topic/nutrition/malnutrition/

*Nota: Esta es una traducción de la publicación original del blog en inglés: What We Know and What We Don’t Know about Youth Gangs in Latin America La violencia asociada con las pandillas en América Latina se ha convertido en una de las preocupaciones principales en algunos países de la región, sobre todo en los países del Triángulo Norte de Centroamérica, y más recientemente, en México. Los miembros de estas pandillas tienden a formar parte de estos grupos de identidad durante la adolescencia temprana, lo que contribuye a la estigmatización de este grupo de la población. La adolescencia sin duda es un periodo de desarrollo y crecimiento, de cambio, de riesgo (no necesariamente negativo en sí) – una encrucijada en el camino de la vida donde decisiones determinan futuros. Lo que se asume sobre las pandillas juveniles en la región latinoamericana suele ser erróneo. Por medio de una breve discusión sobre lo que realmente sabemos, cubriendo el grado de involucramiento de las pandillas en crímenes violentos, el trabajo desarrollado en este ámbito, las lagunas en los datos y un énfasis en la educación, podemos avanzar para responder algunas preguntas importantes. ¿Hasta qué punto son responsables las pandillas de los crímenes violentos?Todavía no queda claro. El énfasis de los medios sobre el tema de las pandillas y sobre todo la atención mediática sobre los mareros en Centroamérica y en Estados Unidos, da la impresión de que éstos son responsables de una gran parte de los crímenes violentos que ocurren en algunos países de la región. En Honduras -dónde se cree que hay el mayor numero de miembros de la mara en Centroamérica – los números no son precisos. Uno de los anteriores ministros de seguridad en el país ha culpado a la mara por una gran parte del crimen en el país; sin embargo, la policía hondureña no ha publicado datos estadísticos que den validez a estas declaraciones. Según los datos disponibles, menos del 5% de todos los crímenes en Honduras son cometidos por personas menores de 18 años de edad, y normalmente son los adolescentes en esta franja de edad los que constituyen una gran parte de la mara. En el caso de El Salvador, donde las pandillas se consideran uno de los mayores problemas del país según los ciudadanos encuestados por Americas Barometer, no hay números exactos que documenten la cifra actual de miembros de las pandillas o su contribución al crimen violento. No todas las pandillas son creadas por igual En Ciudad Juárez, México, una ubicación fronteriza que queda a escasos pasos de Estados Unidos y que fue considerada el epicentro de la ‘guerra contra las drogas’ declarada en el 2006, llevé a cabo trabajo de campo para mi tesis doctoral con adolescentes y jóvenes en riesgo y aquellos que habían participado en el narcotráfico. Encontré que el hecho de haber pasado tiempo en una pandilla durante la infancia y la adolescencia aumentaba la probabilidad de participar en el crimen organizado relacionado con el narcotráfico.[1] Sin embargo, también encontré que la participación en esta forma de criminalidad estaba condicionada por otros factores, incluyendo el tipo de pandilla en la que se ingresó, el tipo de actividades en la que ésta se involucraba y la edad en la que los participantes de mi investigación entraron a la pandilla – los que ingresaban con mayor edad tenían más probabilidades de participar en estos crímenes. En pocas palabras, asociarse con una pandilla contribuye pero no siempre conduce a participar en crímenes serios. No hay nadie que no pase por las esquinasSegún uno de los pocos estudios recientes sobre pandillas en México, históricamente éstas han evitado el uso de la violencia extrema, y es únicamente en tiempos recientes que las dinámicas sociales de las pandillas en el país han abandonado su lógica tradicional y se han asociado con crímenes de alto impacto y con actores del crimen organizado, aunque el grado de cooperación entre estos actores no está bien documentado. Como un joven juarense que entrevisté me aclaró: ser parte de una pandilla es parte de la cultura en los barrios empobrecidos de Ciudad Juárez, lo que él resumió diciéndome ‘no hay nadie que no pase por las esquinas’. Según su testimonio, nadie puede evitar juntarse en la esquina – el lugar tradicionalmente asociado al surgimiento de la pandilla. Adolescentes durante una práctica de fútbol en un Border Border Care Center en Reynosa.Lo que entendemos sobre las pandillas se basa en conceptos y trabajo académico de países desarrollados. Mientras que múltiples estudios han concluido que ser parte de una pandilla está asociado con una mayor tasa de crímenes cometidos en comparación con aquellos que no son miembros de pandillas (otro ejemplo en este enlace), las conclusiones de estos estudios están basadas en trabajos académicos con criterios anglosajones. De hecho, la mayor parte de la literatura sobre pandillas viene de Estados Unidos y recientemente, del Reino Unido. Como Densley, un experto en pandillas juveniles en Londres explica, la vida del pandillero, como la entendemos ahora “was born in America, but so too is our knowledge about it [nació en América, como asimismo nuestro conocimiento sobre ella]" (p.3). Este último punto ha capturado la atención entre académicos del sur que han enfatizado que la investigación sobre crimen e inseguridad “ha principalmente involucrado las perspectivas y preocupaciones anglosajonas que a la vez demandan sociedades cada vez más ‘securitizadas’ ”.[2] La implicación es que las dinámicas de las pandillas no han sido exploradas lo suficientemente en otras partes del mundo donde existen y son relevantes y tampoco se han visto esfuerzos por alejarse de conceptos anglosajones para mejorar nuestro entendimiento. En gran parte todavía carecemos de datos básicos sobre las pandillas en América Latina. Según los datos disponibles, sabemos que los adolescentes de la región son las principales víctimas de crímenes violentos; sin embargo, en qué medida los miembros de las pandillas son víctimas se desconoce (Figura 1). Los datos que permitirían una mejor comprensión de la contribución de las pandillas a los crímenes violentos y su grado de victimización, así como comparaciones entre los países de la región no están disponibles. Esto incluye datos sobre la prevalencia de las pandillas (cuantas pandillas hay y cuantos miembros tienen) así como la naturaleza de los crímenes de los miembros de las pandillas (el tipo de crímenes que se cometen, incluyendo su grado de involucramiento en actividades del crimen organizado como el narcotráfico). Por ejemplo, en la región centroamericana, las estimaciones sobre el número de pandilleros varían en gran medida. Según una fuente se estima que hay entre 69,000 y 200,000 pandilleros en la región, en otra se estima que son entre 200,000 y 500,000. Al mismo tiempo, la composición de la pandilla, incluyendo datos demográficos de los miembros (si son principalmente adolescentes o jóvenes), la edad en la que típicamente se ingresa en la pandilla o las motivaciones principales para formar parte de ellas son datos que se desconocen en gran medida, y cuando existe información, es fragmentaria, lo que quiere decir que es insuficiente para llegar a resultados generalizables o para hacer comparaciones significativas entre países de la región. En años recientes, se han producido trabajos etnográficos importantes en esta materia (véase por ejemplo este  enlace), lo que ha contribuido a un mejor entendimiento de estos grupos; sin embargo, los resultados de esta literatura son específicos de un contexto concreto, están basados en gran parte en el trabajo de autores anglosajones y no han abordado estas lagunas en los datos. Figura 1. Tasa promedio de homicidio y tasa de homicidio juvenil en países de América LatinaFuente: OEA, Report on Citizen Security y UNODC, Homicide Counts and Rates Nota: La tasa de homicidio juvenil es del año más reciente. El mismo año se ha utilizado para comprar con la tasa de homicidio promedio. Por ejemplo, la tasa de homicidio juvenil más reciente para Brasil fue en el año 2008; a pesar de la existencia de datos más recientes en la tasa de homicidio general, se ha utilizado la tasa de 2008 en la comparación. Retener a jóvenes en riesgo en el sistema educativo es clave para prevenir su involucramiento en las pandillas y la criminalidad. Sabemos que una gran parte de los jóvenes en riesgo y los miembros de pandillas en la región tienden a estar en peligro de abandonar la escuela o están fuera de ella totalmente, con pocas oportunidades de regresar y desarrollar las habilidades necesarias para asegurarse un trabajo digno. Sin embargo, lo que sabemos o asumimos sobre lo que aleja a estos jóvenes de la escuela es limitado, con la literatura sobre el abandono escolar enfocada casi exclusivamente en la población en edad escolar en general y no en este grupo de riesgo específico (por ejemplo, ver este enlace). Lo que sí sabemos es que las políticas actuales en la región no han sido del todo exitosas en retener a estos jóvenes en el sistema escolar, resultando en tasas de abandono escolar que son especialmente altas a nivel de secundaria. En mi trabajo de campo con 180 jóvenes y adolescentes que habían participado en crímenes graves en Ciudad Juárez, casi el 60% había abandonado la escuela en primaria o secundaria. Al contrario de lo que se asume, en mi estudio encontré que, a pesar de las altas tasas de abandono escolar, los adolescentes y jóvenes que participaron en crímenes serios tenían aspiraciones en el área de educación y querían tener carreras. En una encuesta con 180 jóvenes que estaban cumpliendo una sentencia de cárcel por haber participado en el narcotráfico, les pedí que enlistaran cinco aspiraciones que tenían antes de involucrarse en la delincuencia. La mayor parte de ellos mencionaron aspiraciones relacionadas con la educación como su primera prioridad (dieron respuestas como “quiero tener una carrera” o “quiero terminar mis estudios”). Es más, la mayor parte de los encuestados mencionaron que sus calificaciones en la escuela eran buenas mientras estudiaban y en entrevistas a profundidad, varios de ellos explicaron que fueron expulsados de sus escuelas no por malas calificaciones, sino por motivos disciplinarios. Los hallazgos que se han mencionado aquí indican que el involucramiento de los miembros de las pandillas en los crímenes violentos no es claro. Permanecen lagunas importantes en los datos que no han sido abordadas en el trabajo existente sobre pandillas en la región. Además, el trabajo producido se ha basado en gran parte en conceptos y metodologías de la literatura anglosajona, lo que ha obscurecido un entendimiento más preciso y minucioso sobre el fenómeno de las pandillas en la región. Mientras que la prevención del abandono escolar de estos jóvenes constituye un paso importante para disminuir la inseguridad – el tema principal de la región latinoamericana – las intervenciones programáticas requieren de más datos y más evidencia. Hasta que tanto los investigadores como el público en general no tengan conciencia de la urgente necesidad de canalizar mayores esfuerzos para entender a las pandillas de la región, y particularmente para entender qué respuestas programáticas basadas en evidencia se pueden implementar para disminuir la inseguridad, seguiremos aceptando discursos maniqueos que estigmatizan y utilizan la mano dura del estado para oprimir a jóvenes que lo han arriesgado todo en una legitima búsqueda de identidad. Translation of the original version in English. [1] Chávez, C. (2018). Youth and Organised Crime in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico: An exploration of contributing factors. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.[2] UNODC, & EUI Migration Policy Center. (2018). EUI Organised Crime and Gender. Florence, Italy.

*This blog post has been translated into Spanish: Lo que sabemos y lo que no sabemos sobre las pandillas juveniles en América Latina Gang violence in Latin America has become one of the central security concerns in some countries of the region, including the countries of the Northern Triangle of Central America and more recently, Mexico. Gang members tend to join these identity-shaping groups during early adolescence, which has contributed to the continued stigmatization of this population group. Indeed, adolescence is a period of growth, of change, and of risk-taking (not necessarily always negative) — a fork in the road where choices can determine futures. Assumptions about youth gangs in Latin America are flawed. By discussing what we actually know, touching on involvement of gangs in violent crime, existing work and data gaps, and education, we can move towards addressing existing issues. To what extent can gangs be blamed for violent crime?This is still unclear. Media hype over gangs, referred to as pandillas in Mexico and maras in Central America, has given the impression that gang members are responsible for a large share of violent crime in some countries of the region. In Honduras — largely believed to be the country with the highest rate of gang membership in Central America, although estimates are not accurate  — former security minister Oscar Alvarez blamed the maras for a large share of crime in the country, yet the Honduran police have failed to release statistics to back up this claim. According to available data, less than 5% of all crime in Honduras is committed by people under 18 years of age, and it is this adolescent group that generally comprises a large share of mara membership. In the case of El Salvador, where gangs are considered to be one of the main problems facing the country according to its citizens, no precise figures exist to document the actual number of gang members in the country or their contribution to violent crime. Not all gangs created equalIn fieldwork with adolescents and young men in the border city of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, once considered the epicentre of organised crime throughout the 'war on drugs' declared in Mexico in 2006, I found that having spent time with a gang throughout their childhood and adolescence increased the probability of participating in organised criminal activity related to the drug trade; but I also found that participation in serious criminality was conditional on other factors, including the type of gang that was joined, the type of activities the gang was involved in, with participants joining at an older age more at risk of engaging in serious criminality. In other words, associating in a gang was not necessarily nor forcibly conducive to participating in serious criminal activity. No hay nadie que no pase por las esquinasExtreme violence has historically been avoided in Mexican gangs, and it is only until recently that the social dynamics of gangs in Mexico have left behind their traditional logic and some have been associated to high impact and organised criminality, although the extent of their cooperation is not well understood or documented. As a local young man I interviewed made clear, being part of a pandilla, or a gang, is part of the culture amongst impoverished and disenfranchised youth in Ciudad Juarez. As he succinctly told me: 'No hay nadie que no pase por las esquinas'. In other words, no one manages to avoid the street corners - the traditional birth place of the gang.

Since adolescence is a highly vulnerable period of rapid physiological, biological, and psychological change, researchers and development partners are increasingly asking how social protection can facilitate safer transitions to adulthood, and what additional factors shape these transitions for youth.Vulnerabilities related to adverse outcomes in adolescence are often shaped by gender norms, which can constrain the opportunities available to adolescent girls and jeopardize their health. Our research looks at how social protection programs have the potential to transform the lives of participants if they address these vulnerabilities and structural barriers.Looking at genderOne type of structural barrier is systematic exclusion from services or opportunities due to social class, gender or caste. Discriminatory gender and social norms, can also act as structural drivers of vulnerability among girls, as they perpetuate harmful socio-cultural practices, such as early marriage and gender-based violence. In order to have transformative effects, as they relate to gender norms, social protection would need to have impacts, which promote more equitable gender roles and relations.Social protection definedSocial protection broadly encompasses the sets of programs and policies that aim to reduce poverty, exclusion and vulnerability. Social protection includes, but isn't limited to cash transfers (child or disability grants, pensions, etc.), in-kind transfers of food and other items, waivers for schooling or health-related fees, and insurance schemes, which typically play a protective or preventive role, by either responding to adversity or shocks experienced by poor households (protective), or aiming to prevent future harm by bolstering households’ ability to cope with future shocks such as loss of income or unexpected flooding (preventive).Transitions to adulthood“Safe” transitions can be defined as freedom from violence and hazardous labor, having access to schooling and health services, experiencing positive mental health, and delaying pregnancy and marriage, among other positive outcomes.What is the existing evidence on how social protection, and cash transfers in particular, are helping to change gender norms, as they relate to adolescents? This was among the questions asked when experts convened in London on September 10, 2018, at an event organized by the Overseas Development Institute, UCL Institute of the Americas, and Gender & Adolescence Global Evidence (GAGE) consortium, and the ALIGN project. Other questions that participants grappled with included:How can a ‘gender-norms lens’ be integrated in the existing social protection policy and programming?Can a gender norms lens help advance a gender responsive social protection agenda?Is social protection really the best mechanism to address social and gender norms?Is it cost effective to influence gender norms through social protection?What are the trade-offs of addressing (or not) gender norms through social protection programming?As researchers based at the UNICEF Office of Research - Innocenti working on the Transfer Project  — a joint collaboration between UNICEF, FAO and the University of North Carolina, focused on generating evidence on social protection and facilitating its uptake — the authors of this blog participated in this event. Here are some of our own reflections on discussions generated during this event and our thoughts for moving the agenda forward.Social protection has the potential to transform gender norms and relations through the following pathways:decreasing gender inequalities in schooling attainment;promoting positive attitudes around how girls are valued by their families and communities;promoting women’s financial inclusion (that is, registering a bank account in women’s name to enable her to accumulate savings and grow a business);expanding women’s social support, economic networks, and participation in the community;reducing violence in the home, which generates a cycle of violence as children are exposed and replicate that behavior in adulthood;promoting more equitable distribution of domestic work between women and men.How are social protection programmes targeting or inclusive of adolescence? from UNICEF Office of Research - InnocentiNevertheless, cash transfer programs are not necessarily gender transformative, and they may reproduce discriminatory gender norms and practices, aggravating inequalities between the sexes. For instance, the conditions or “co-responsibilites” that female care providers are expected to fulfill to receive benefits can reinforce gender stereotypes around women’s sole responsibility for caretaking, ignoring their economic responsibilities, and cutting into their available time, and increasing girls’ work burdens, who tend to substitute the work of their mothers.Adolescents are rarely the primary focus of government-run social protection programs, but such programs can provide opportunities to leverage impacts for adolescents. Many social protection programs are aimed at investing in early childhood development, and “breaking the inter-generational cycle of poverty.” Numerous programs target large numbers of poor households with adolescents living in them, and adolescents are key to breaking this inter-generational cycle as they transition to adulthood. This creates an opening to boost impacts of social protection programs for adolescents, by mainstreaming adolescent lens into policy and programming, and providing complementary services, targeted to adolescents, to improve their health, skills, and knowledge.Programs that focus on attitudes and empowerment of individual girls without addressing discriminatory attitudes and practices in the larger community or broader structural barriers, are unlikely to have transformative effects. Many or most of those girls will continue to live in the same communities that limit their opportunities in the first place. They may continue to face limited access to schooling, employment, or financial inclusion, and pressure to marry early.Proposed strategies need to be practical, feasible, and matched to government priorities and institutional capacities and resources. Social norm change interventions are resource intensive and time consuming. Researchers and practitioners cannot be over-ambitious in terms of what social protection (on its own) can achieve. Further, strategies need to be supported by broader socio-economic and legislative policy frameworks.Finally, strategic decisions need to be informed by policy analysis and evidence. On both the research and program sides, a combination of concrete actions can be adopted to push this agenda forward:Adopt a long-term vision and a sequenced approach to programming: This may require starting from easier issues and progressively moving towards more complex normative goals.Undertake formative research to understand how social and gender norms affect adolescent behaviors and outcomes and then re-adjust program objectives accordingly. Existing design features can be tweaked to achieve transformative objectives (for example, larger transfer size for adolescents to combat increasing opportunity cost of schooling over work, adolescent-specific messaging, among others).Consider “cash plus” programming: Link adolescents in cash transfer participating households to existing services, such as sexual and reproductive health information and services, treatment and testing for HIV, or provide complementary programming, such as vocational training, financial inclusion and e-banking, mentorship schemes and safe spaces.Build staff capacity: Paying attention to the key cadre tasked with making inter-sectoral linkages on the ground, such as social welfare and monitoring officers.Measure change: Use a combination of impact evaluations, process evaluation, and qualitative research to help understand 1) how norms affect program impacts of social protection programs and 2) the role of social protection (and complementary schemes) in changing gender norms, and how changes *actually* happen.Facilitate evidence uptake: Use the evidence to engage with policymakers and communities to build their support for transformative adolescent-focused interventions, and advocate for reaching the ‘hardest to reach’ adolescents.  Maja Gavrilovic is a Research Analyst in the Social & Economic Policy Section at UNICEF’s Office of Research – Innocenti, where she conducts research with the Transfer Project.Tia Palermo is a Social Policy Specialist in the Social & Economic Policy Section at UNICEF’s Office of Research – Innocenti, where she conducts research with the Transfer Project.The Transfer Project is working to provide rigorous evidence on programme impacts in an effort to inform future programme design and scale-up. For more information on the Transfer Project’s research on cash transfers, we invite you to read our research briefs here or follow us on Twitter @TransferProjct  

“The intergovernmental negotiations on the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration recently concluded by upholding the best interests of the child and emphasizing the importance of family unity for children on the move. UNICEF’s Executive Director hailed it saying it should help equip Member States with tools to prevent deaths of children, protect them from abuse and exploitation, avoid the trauma of family separation, detention or forced removal.One of the critical issues it will tackle is how best to support children like those stranded in Niger which has effectively become the southern frontier of Europe. With the latest agreement on the EU disembarkation platforms and processing centres, Africa’s role is set to become all the more important.”  Agadez, Niger - Nothing could be further than from the gates of paradise than this scorching, unearthly wasteland stretching out as far as the eye can see and beyond. And yet this is it. Hidden in the ghettos, scattered on the outskirts of this ancient turmeric-coloured city, milling about in centres are hundreds of migrants, stranded, with dashed hopes and unfulfilled dreams. They’re on the move to or from neighbouring nations or beyond. Some, but surprisingly perhaps not most, have an eye on the ultimate prize of making it across the burning sands of the Sahara and on to what is fast becoming the elusive Eldorado - Europe. Many children travelling alone or separated, nursing mothers, newborns, and throngs of young men angry that their quest had been cut short. Agadez was once the migration capital of Africa, a crossroads for people on the move, a bustling business hub for smugglers, roadside shops selling masks, and sunglasses for the daunting journey, traffickers awaiting their human trade. Authorities would turn a blind eye then. Now, as Europe and North Africa tighten their borders and close their ports creating drama on the high seas in a general clampdown on migration – this unlikely has become effectively Europe’s new frontier. Arrivals into Italy from January to early June this year were down by two thirds compared to the same period last year when 60,000 crossed over from North Africa. Since November last year, more than 8,000 West Africans, including 2,000 children, have been returned to Niger from Algeria, with another 900 refugees and asylum seekers from East Africa transferred from Libya awaiting cumbersome and slow resettlement or family reunification processes to determine their future. Niger is one of the poorest countries in the world yet is bearing the brunt of the ‘out-of-sight, out-of-mind’ policies by richer countries.Hastily stitched together agreements between one country to the next – EU-Turkey; EU-Libya; France-Niger; Algeria- Niger - are making migration someone else’s problem, pushing migrants from pillar to post, farther south. Children pay the highest price with little or no proper structures to keep them safe. The pushbacks have meant the stakes are higher and the routes riskier. In the flurry of a dust storm, of flesh-baking heat, we met a young Guinean furious for being dumped over the border from Algeria where he was scrapping out a living on the streets doing odd jobs. He went on a wildly gesticulating tirade but his words were as wise as they were distressing: “The desert has become a cemetery for our African brothers and nobody cares.” He was among those returned from Algeria, left in a nowhere land of the desert in temperatures of 48 degrees celsius miles from the Niger border, forced to walk until they could find transport and shelter. Many came from within Niger, the impoverished county of Kantche state in Zinder with its long-held reliance on income from begging. Ironically when the migrants are brought to Agadez onto a bone-dry open plain with a few threadbare tents, local children circle around with plastic begging bowls - begging from the returned beggars.It’s a motley bag – some could even classify as refugees. I met Liberians who fled their country during the Ebola crisis, Guineans fleeing hard times, Nigerians fleeing Boko Haram and others fleeing the torment and hardships in Libya.  Three UN agencies – UNHCR, IOM and UNICEF – have stepped up the response in Niger  yet too many fall through the cracks as they’re bundled up and off in this vast migrant heartland. One young mother nursing her 2-week-old baby was embarrassed that she had not yet managed to shave the new-born’s thick head of hair according to tradition. “The enforcing of the anti-migration law has changed the dynamics in the country. We’re seeing a huge spike in unaccompanied and separated children, and those involved are using routes where they cannot be tracked, and it’s far, far more dangerous.” Said Dan Rono, a child protection officer with UNICEF “It’s a tough journey for an adult, so you can imagine for an 11-year-old, it’s almost impossible for that child.” In April alone there was an increase of 14 per cent over the previous month in people transiting through Niger with around a third children, exhausted and traumatized. The true figure is likely to be higher as many children go undetected or hide. Omar, a 14-year-old from Sierra Leone, was one of those hidden statistics. He’s a gangly, awkward early teen in a Yankees cap, sleeveless vest, baggy shorts and flip flops, pretty much all he owns.  He is under the radar in a place they call the ‘Ghetto’ outside Agadez, waiting for the chance to cross. He left home because his father was not paying for his school fees. “I have made my decision to go to Libya, or to go to Europe to have a good life. May God save and guide me I will not go back home until I make it, to become a good boy so I can support the family behind,” said Omar. “For now, if I stay home I won’t be serious ok? I’ll become a bad boy. I will smoke, drink... So, I don’t want that life ok? I don’t want to become a bad boy. But if I go Europe I will continue my school. I will continue playing football again”. UNICEF has found in studies that although most children on the move stay within Africa and have no desire to go to Europe, of those who say they do want to, like Omar, around a third say it is for an education.A former smuggler, Dan Ader, who’s seen his lucrative business crumbled into the desert dust since the clampdown, told us: “There are so many deaths because there are thousands of routes. Now if your GPS has a little glitch you’re finished! You will not find your way again.” According to UNICEF estimates between January and May some 120 children drowned at sea between January and May. At sea there are at least coastguards. No one patrols the vast and deadly sea of sand. It doesn’t stop them trying. Desperation and dreams turn them into philosophers and poets like the scratchings on a prison cell, the graffiti on the grim ghetto walls, tells their stories scrawled in large charcoal: “Europe ou rien. Dieu est là! Europe or bust. God is there.” “Il vaut mieux mourir en mer que de mourir devant sa mère – sans rien.” (i.e. “Europe or bust, God is there! It is better to die at sea than to die in front of your mother—with nothing.”) Migration is as old as humanity itself here – a rite of passage for many boys into manhood, and simply a way of life in search of a better life – and closed ports and closed borders are not likely to stop this. Africa is the youngest and fastest growing population in the world, the north is ageing. Some say ‘Africa is sitting with its bags packed.’ The scrawling on the wall of the filthy ghetto in Agadez is a stark reminder of one of the reasons: “L’Afrique est riche mais ses enfants quittent à cause de mauvais gouvernements,”  (Africa is rich, but it’s children are leaving because of bad governments.)Yet only some 15 percent of those on the move in Africa, express any interest in going to Europe. So managing migration is truly global and now as the Global Compacts on Migration and Refugees are being finalized, the EU and other bodies really need to seize this moment to put the needs of children uprooted before national interests; commit to predictable cross-region action to keep children safe and families together and invest in countries like Niger and others in the Global South that take in far more refugees and migrants in a month than the Global North now does in an entire year. For most the true paradise lost, is being uprooted from a homes and loved ones – especially for children alone. Refugee and migrant children look now to powerful member states, to the European Union and to the African Union to put in place a proper migration system – promised in the Global Migration Compact - that doesn’t dismiss them like the wind that carried them to foreign shores.     You can find more about UNICEF Innocenti research on Children and migration: rights, advocacy and resilience   Sarah Crowe, is senior UNICEF communications specialist on migration and recently visited Niger   * Total arrivals (1 Jan - 03 Jun 2018): 13,706 Total arrivals (1 Jan - 03 Jun 2017): 60,394     

This article was originally published on UNICEF's intranet platform, ICON.  In today's 5 Questions, Kerry Albright, Chief, Research Facilitation and Knowledge Management of the UNICEF Office of Research - Innocenti, speaks to us about her work at UNICEF, her experience at the Evidence for Children roundtable event in New York, and her thoughts on the future of research at UNICEF. Saranya Misra (SM): Can you tell us a little about yourself and your work at UNICEF? Kerry Albright (KA): Well I joined UNICEF about three and a half years ago now from DFID, where I was doing a lot of work on building an organizational evidence culture, and I was recruited to do pretty much the same thing here. I'm a socio-political scientist by training, passionate about evidence and passionate about science communication, so combining those two. And I'm Chief of the Research Facilitation and Knowledge Management Unit at UNICEF's dedicated office of research, Innocenti, based in Florence, Italy. The unit really does four main things: one is around research governance, so a lot of work that people will know about, things such as quality assurance and ethics. Another one on research uptake and impact, thinking about how we can ensure that the research we commission gets better used, including looking at the influence of our advocacy activities. The third one is around evidence synthesis, so making sure that the evidence that we're using internally is set within the broader body of evidence from outside, bringing that into the organization. And the fourth one is around capacity building, so things like research management training, that many people might know the unit for, but also things around methodological briefs on things like impact evaluation, randomized control trials, etc. and helping the organization to build a better culture of evidence. SM: You've just finished hosting a big event in New York. Can you tell us a bit about the purpose of this event? KA: It was an Evidence for Children roundtable. It was a really exciting event for two purposes, really. The first was to launch a megamap on child welfare in lower-middle income countries that we've produced in collaboration with the Campbell Collaboration, which is really about looking at evidence on child wellbeing. And excitingly, it's been set against the five goals of our new Strategic Plan, so we hope to make it really easy for UNICEF staff who are time-pressed to be able to access evidence that's relevant for policy and programming. And also another part of that event was really just to bring people together, across donors, across NGOs, policy makers, people that are interested in evidence for children, to try and start a dialogue about how we could maybe form a community of practice to better coordinate in future so that we don't end up reinventing the wheel and missing out really important areas that nobody is commissioning any evidence in. SM: How does this fit into a long term vision for evidence at UNICEF? KA: Well it's just one of many things really. Within our new strategic plan, people will know that we have evidence as a driver of change for children. So what we're starting to think about is what does this mean for us as an organization, as we move more upstream in the SDG era, and we look at things such as whether or not UNICEF should be a knowledge broker for children, whether our role is changing. We need to maybe think about, you know, are we fit for purpose for that? Do we have the right skillset amongst our staff, or do we need to start thinking about that? We've been doing a lot of work on generating evidence and improving the quality of evidence, but have we really also been thinking about the demand side?We've been doing a lot of work on generating evidence and improving the quality of evidence, but have we really also been thinking about the demand side? Do people actually want to access evidence, do they have the incentives to access evidence for their decision-making. And also, do our staff have the skills, are we able to know what is good and bad evidence? Where to go to access it and appraise it. So, it's a much bigger picture and quite an exciting time to be looking at these sorts of issues within UNICEF. SM: What is the value of organizational learning in UNICEF, and what are the challenges facing leaders? KA: You know, organizational learning is so important, and it's always seen as something that just happens naturally. Every organization where I've worked, never has sufficient investment. And it's really important, we have to find systems and processes to get that knowledge out of people's heads and document it, and to learn from failures as well as successes, and to enable people not to be afraid about opening up about that sort of thing. And that's really important. That needs a very strong indication from leadership right at the very top of the organization, that it's safe to talk about failures. And I think the reason it's so important is that we ought to be working to be an organization, where we're adapting and learning and evolving as we go along, so that learning automatically feeds into our policies, our programming, etc. But without looking at what sort of incentives exist for being able to draw upon that learning, looking at whether or not we need to think more systematically about knowledge management and knowledge sharing across the organization, then we risk really reinventing the wheel and not making progress as quickly as we should be doing. We have to find systems and processes to get that knowledge out of people's heads and document it, and to learn from failures as well as successes, and to enable people not to be afraid about opening up about that sort of thing.SM: So what's next in relation to enhancing an evidence culture at UNICEF? KA: Lots of exciting things. Obviously the most immediate is follow-up from the Evidence for Children roundtable, where we're looking at maybe trying to get a community of practice, people that are interested in these sorts of issues to keep the dialogue going. We also have an evidence survey that will be coming out across UNICEF shortly. That's really trying to assess staff skills and attitudes towards evidence: are we really practicing what we preach, are we really using evidence systematically in our decision making? And then also, we're looking at, with the different evidence activities at UNICEF, the data, the research, the evaluation, a lot of us are doing things involving capacity strengthening with country offices, working with governments to help them, using data to strengthen national statistical systems, working with parliaments to strengthen evaluation, looking at strengthening research management skills, but we're quite fragmented. So we're looking at whether or not we can maybe join these up much better, whether we can work more coherently and consistently to strengthen evidence ecosystems in those countries where we're working. And by that I mean systematically helping governments to think about how they might use evidence in their own decision-making, and working with the actors who are there, like science journalists, like parliaments, like civil servants, etc. So that really, we leave behind a sustainable culture of evidence, thinking, of critical appraisal skills, which ultimately will help us reach far more children far more quickly and far more effectively. You can find out more about the Evidence for Children Roundtable in this article. Explore the new Mega-Map on Child Well-Being here.

We sat down with Gabrielle Berman, our expert on research ethics, to chat about her two new discussion papers which explore the ethics of using new technologies to generate evidence about children. The papers, written collaboratively with UNICEF’s Office of Innovation, highlight the advantages and risks of using these technologies to gather data about children. They also provide useful guidance for researchers – especially those unfamiliar with technology – on the questions they should be asking in order to protect children’s rights. What inspired you to produce these two discussion papers? During staff trainings, we kept getting requests from staff who wanted technical advice around technology and the use of technologies for data collection and evidence generation. Most didn’t know where to start or what to consider when thinking about using these technologies. This was the initial foray into an incredibly complex and important area for UNICEF around using technology for evidence generation. Why focus on social media and geospatial technology specifically? We started with social media and geospatial technology because these were the two that were the most prevalent in the organisation at the time, and there was the most demand for guidance. We should now also be considering the ethical implications of technologies like biometrics, blockchain and wearable technology. We have already started receiving requests from staff for technical advice around the ethical implications of these new technologies. From my perspective, one of the biggest misconceptions is that technology is unequivocally good, meaning these technologies could be used without appropriate reflection on the implications and potential impacts.The papers were written in collaboration with the Office of Innovation. What were the benefits of the process? Without this collaboration, the papers wouldn’t have the same status. The dialogue and relationships that were established through the collaboration of the two offices are just as important as the papers themselves. Working together also meant that we could establish an advisory group which spanned everything from ICT for Development, to communications, to data and analytics.  In this way, people with all sorts of expertise across the organization could input into the papers. What are some of the most common misconceptions about the use of these technologies for evidence generation? It depends on what side of the fence you’re on. From my perspective, one of the biggest misconceptions is that technology is unequivocally good, meaning these technologies could be used without appropriate reflection on the implications and potential impacts. However, for those on the technology side, one of the biggest issues is that technology won’t be used for fear of the complexity of the ethical implications. The benefit of collaborating with the Innovation office was that we had two different perspectives, but both are equally valid. Through dialogue, we acknowledged the benefits as much as the risks and agreed that what was required was reflective practice. It’s not an absolute yes or a no, but rather an “if” and “how can we do this?” and what strategies do we need to consider? The biggest challenge is understanding the implications of the technology when you’re not a native technocrat. It’s incredibly difficult for staff in the field to understand the type of questions they should be asking.What is the biggest challenge with regards ensuring ethical compliance when using these technologies? The biggest challenge is understanding the implications of the technology when you’re not a native technocrat. It’s incredibly difficult for staff in the field to understand the type of questions they should be asking. They also have to receive responses in simple English in order for them to start thinking through the ethical issues and the potential mitigation strategies. Part of the challenge is to change thinking and empower those who aren’t tech natives to feel comfortable enough to ask questions and interrogate the potential implications of the technology. We must avoid abdication of responsibility to tech experts and remind staff that they are in fact the experts on potential implications for children. To be a child advocate it’s incredibly important to ask the right questions, to understand and to take responsibility for the technology and its implications.Adolescent girls look at social media posts while attending a "Lifeskills" event in Union Development & Culture Community Centre in Djibouti.How can we empower people to feel like they can ask the right questions? Firstly, we need to provide them with guidance. But importantly, we need to get stakeholders around the same table - including the social media companies, the data scientists, and the communities we work with. We should bring these people with different perspectives together, acknowledging everyone’s expertise, and engaging in dialogue on what the potential ethical issues are and how they can be mitigated. This joint risk assessment is a key way to start a constructive dialogue on the issues and potential mitigation strategies. How can we mitigate the threat of data and algorithms informing policy, without appropriate engagement and dialogue? Firstly, it’s important to appreciate the implications of the data sets on which algorithms are based and to be aware that the algorithms may have built-in biases. For example, certain populations are more likely to be monitored and so data on arrests are more likely to be higher for this group. Following from this, we need to understand that certain populations may be excluded from the data sets. Algorithms are based on training data, so unless all communities are included in the data, the outcomes and predictions are not going to be representative of these communities. For example, when data is gathered via smartphones, those who don’t have a smartphone are excluded. We must not forget that there are very real risks in making decisions based on quantitative trends alone.Thirdly, we must recognize that modelling looks at trends only and does not consider individuals. Algorithms may see these trends as a whole but, like any type of quantitative data, it will miss the qualitative nuances underpinning these findings. While it may be very easy to adopt big data sets and use them to determine policies, we must not forget that there are very real risks in making decisions based on quantitative trends alone. The Convention on the Rights of the Child very clearly says that a child has the right to have a voice on matters that affect them. If we start basing policy exclusively on quantitative data, we are not giving voice to the nuances that may explain the data or the nuances of the individual who may differ from the broader findings. It’s very important that we acknowledge the value of big data, but we must also acknowledge that individuals still need to have a voice. Listening to children’s voices should never be replaced by a purely quantitative approach, so while data is a very valuable tool, it is only one tool. Are there any other ethical risks that stem from using this type of data? With social media data in particular, if you run algorithms against the data you may start using it for purposes other than those originally intended when people submitted this data. The moment you start taking data out of context, it may lose its contextual integrity in which case we have to ask whether it is still relevant. This idea of contextual integrity needs to be interrogated.Adolescent girls use cellphones and tablets in a solar kiosk providing internet connectivity in the Za’atari camp for Syrian refugees, Jordan.Does ensuring ethical compliance also provide an opportunity to educate people on technology and online privacy? I don’t see it as an opportunity but rather an obligation stemming from our use of these technologies. If you’re using third party data in a public way, it must also be announced publicly, in the spirit of full disclosure. We must recognise the importance of transparency in the work we do, particularly when it may be difficult if not impossible to secure informed consent. With social media projects, where you’re actively using the platform to engage young people, it’s incredibly important that you actually provide information around privacy. You cannot guarantee that children have child-friendly explanations, and so it’s our responsibility to educate and to be clear about the risks involved. Are there any additional potential risks specifically associated with geospatial technology? Geospatial technology has been invaluable in both development and humanitarian contexts, but we need to think about where we source the data, how useful it is, whether it’s a two-way dialogue, and if can we respond to any requests for help in humanitarian contexts. We particularly need to be concerned with the potential risks involved and the security of this data in humanitarian contexts. In these situations, we’re often dealing with vulnerable populations. Because of this, we must be very careful to ensure that this data is limited to those who absolutely need to access the data, particularly any raw and individual data, with specific consideration for the safety of the populations that may be captured by the technology. For this reason, we really need to think about the interoperability of geospatial data systems: which partners are we working with? who in these organisations has access to the data? why do they have access? do we have sufficient security measures? These types of reflections are necessary to fulfill our obligations to protect the communities that we work with.   You can download both papers on ethical considerations when using geospatial technology and social media on unicef-irc.org now.

The use of administrative data for learning and research purposes in humanitarian emergencies is a relatively unexplored field. How can we make better use of these rich pools data in humanitarian settings? And what are the potential pitfalls? It is a stylized fact that in more severe emergencies, more administrative data is available from donors, NGOs and authorities, especially when compared to the availability of standard survey data.First a brief definition: While survey data are usually collected for research or M&E purposes, administrative data are typically collected for programming purposes as part of regular activities (e.g. recording children’s weight and height in routine health checks). Administrative data are collected by any institution involved in service delivery, be they government, development agencies or service providers.The main strength of administrative data is their immediate availability, at zero additional cost for analysts: administrative data already exist and can be used for research and learning.Examples of administrative data collected in fragile, conflict or humanitarian settings include infant growth monitoring during mother-baby health clinics, family composition and employment status for safety net programs, school attendance and grade progression for education programs, or refugee status for civil registration programs.We see several strengths of using administrative data for learning and research:The main strength of administrative data is their immediate availability, at zero additional cost for analysts: administrative data already exist and can be used for research and learning. The potential of such data is even greater in humanitarian and fragile settings where collecting (research) data per se often presents a number of difficulties and there is pressure to act quickly.While surveys may ask many questions, they typically only sample a fraction of all program beneficiaries. Administrative data, in contrast, collect fewer variables but do so for all program beneficiaries and indeed perhaps also for all applicants to a program to assess eligibility.While survey data collection often requires an “extra” effort (and hence cost), administrative data collection is “built into” a program. Its collection is, of course, also costly but it is typically deemed a necessity and readily budgeted. A health worker consults with Angelina Michael and her daughters, one of whom is suffering from severe acute malnutrition, in an emergency stabilization centre in South Sudan.A few weaknesses permeate the use of administrative data in fragile contexts:In an emergency setting, development agencies at times tend to collect data in the process of implementation without a clear learning purpose in mind. This translates into a weak data collection design and finally into poor data quality. At times, such weak administrative data then gets recycled as a “baseline” months after the program has started, further weakening the learning opportunities.It can be hard in practice to link administrative data about the same person or household from different sources, even within one agency. For example, different programmes may use different unique identifiers. In addition, privacy and security concerns may well prohibit such linking of administrative data across different datasets.By design, administrative data does not typically include a control (i.e. non-beneficiary) group, as administrative data are collected as part of the program implementation to serve the beneficiaries. The lack of a control group may impede the design of an impact evaluation. Having said that, some programmes also collect data on all those applying for a specific service, thereby establishing data on the rejected applicants or on members of a waiting list. Such data can then be used for impact evaluation designs based on a dis-continuity design, which compares otherwise similar beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries.Data quality can be a concern. Understanding how administrative data is collected might help to assess whether data are accurate, reliable and valid. At the same time, realizing that administrative data matter for learning also may help elevate their role and standing and may lead to more training being provided for its correct collection.Sometimes data are not immediately available, as they are collected by pen and paper, without being collected or transcribed in an electronic format. Very often these data relate to understudied themes such as nutritional outcomes. Adopting real-time monitoring using electronic devices and software may have clear benefits both for programming and for learning. Nonetheless, we identified exciting opportunities to use administrative data for learning during a humanitarian emergency:As administrative data are often routinely collected, there are very low marginal costs to adding a few variables that may serve the purpose of specific learning questions.When precise location data are available, through (e.g.) GPS coordinates, it can be relatively easy to match administrative data with weather data or data on shocks (such as conflict event data). This can be a very powerful avenue for the analysis of natural disasters and of forced displacements.Beneficiaries’ registries may reveal a high level of heterogeneity of programme implementation (dosage, frequency, modality among others). This diversity of programme execution can be potentially quite relevant for both a process evaluation and for an impact evaluation. Even the absence of a “pure” comparison group may be compatible with the latter analysis, as it allows to measure impacts with respect to a base group.Census data are one possible source of information that has not been properly exploited for evidence generation in humanitarian emergencies. Understanding who was where before the onset of an emergency can help reveal a lot of about social structures and dynamics of relevance in the emergency and the recovery phases.Finally, we highlight some threats to the use of registries for research purposes.Setting up an information management system takes time, planning and requires a definite skill set for the organization collecting the administrative data. Many such data are routinely collected by organizations, but standards will vary and so do the quality of the data collected. Yet sub-standard administrative data is not just a threat to good learning – it is a threat to good implementation in the short term. Hence implementers have an incentive to collect good administrative data – perhaps more so than with research data.Another threat are concerns of privacy and security. These data, in their raw form, can be used to identify individuals and households. Abuses can arise and become more pronounced when various datasets are combined and more information on these subjects is retrieved. The role played by the dataset manager as well as discussions with stakeholders becomes fundamental to overcome ethical concerns. As does the need for a clear data policy by implementing agencies, our next point.Finally, we believe that the largest threat to the use of administrative data for learning and research in humanitarian settings is the absence of clear data policies by many implementing agencies on this topic. How do implementers choose to use administrative data for learning and research? There may be many “right” answers to this question but we believe it is important that agencies and governments, agencies and NGOs are able to explain how they use administrative data for improving their service delivery and our understanding of the complex environments in which we work and live. Administrative data can do much more than help deliver services or provide inputs for monitoring. We can use administrative data also for learning and research in humanitarian emergencies if agencies make available their data for analysis as part of an ethical, secure and deliberate strategy. The treasure chest is ready to be opened! Suggested Further Reading:“Can Rigorous Impact Evaluations Improve Humanitarian Assistance?”“New Developments in Measuring the Welfare Effects of Conflict Exposure at the Micro-Level” This blog was written by participants at the recent Workshop on Evidence on Social Protection in Humanitarian Situations, hosted by UNICEF Innocenti. For more information on UNICEF's research on children in humanitarian settings, visit our dedicated Research Watch page. Tilman Brück is a development economist at Leibniz Institute of Vegetable and Ornamental Crops and at the International Security and Development Center in Germany. He conducts micro-level research on how people cope with crises and emergencies. @tilmanbrueckElisabetta Aurino is a development economist at Imperial College London and research associate at Young Lives, University of Oxford, UK. Her research focuses on food insecurity, child and adolescent development and social protection in low- and middle-income countries. @elisabettaurinoSilvio Daidone is an applied economist in the Social Protection team at the Food and Agriculture Organization. His research focuses on social protection programs and rural development interventions. @DaidoneSilvioLuisa Natali is a social policy consultant at the UNICEF Office of Research —Innocenti. She specializes in social policy and social protection, and in particular dynamics of child labor, education, and gender within evaluation of cash transfer programs in Sub-Saharan Africa. @luisanataliDr Benjamin Schwab is a development and health economist in the Department of Agricultural Economics at Kansas State University. He has collaborated on several large scale impact evaluations, and currently researches a variety of topics related to food security, agriculture and rural poverty in developing countries.

Imagine you work for UNICEF in Lebanon. Your team has the challenging task of ensuring that half a million displaced Syrian children who fled the war in their home country attend primary school. These children live scattered throughout the country, as Lebanon has a “no-camps” policy. Many of them are traumatized and grow up in bitter poverty. You have collaborated with the Lebanese Ministry of Education to open a free afternoon shift in public primary schools, specifically for Syrian children. You have also helped to set up an accelerated learning program that enables Syrian children who have been out of school for many years to enter school at an age appropriate grade. Yet, despite these considerable achievements, approximately half of the Syrian children you are trying to support do not attend school. This was the situation facing the UNICEF Lebanon team at the end of 2015. Survey data suggested that poverty was a key remaining barrier to school attendance of Syrian children. Although afternoon shift schools do not charge fees, many households could not afford the residual costs of school participation including transport to school. Moreover, many households relied on child labor to supplement household income, limiting children’s time available for school. As a direct solution, UNICEF Lebanon considered compensating households for the cost of education and lost income by means of a monthly cash payment when children enroll in an afternoon shift school. In collaboration with the Ministry of Education and the World Food Programme, UNICEF Lebanon set up a pilot program – referred to as the No Lost Generation Program or locally as Min Ila - to test this approach in the 2016/2017 schoolyear. So-called cash transfer programs, such as the one considered by UNICEF Lebanon, are used on a large scale in other settings and with considerable success. They tend to increase children’s school participation (see here, here, and here) and lower children’s participation in work (see here) among a host of other beneficial impacts. However, it is not clear that these programs would have comparable effects in contexts of displacement and humanitarian emergency (see here for a discussion of the limited available rigorous evidence in these settings). In the case of Lebanon, would Syrian households really use the financial support to pay for children’s school attendance, or do they have other priorities? Would they, for instance, use the money to pay off debt or purchase food and shelter? Is money really a promising tool to support the school attendance of potentially traumatized children? Could there be other barriers to school participation not previously considered? Among children enrolled in afternoon shift schools, the study shows an increase in household expenditure on education and transport to school in particular.The UNICEF Lebanon team decided to seek a thorough answer to these questions, both to decide whether to scale up the pilot program and to inform broader debates around the right approach to ensuring school participation in settings of displacement. It is hard to overstate the significance of this decision. Generating credible evidence in a setting such as the one described in this blog is not as easy as it may sound and requires a significant investment both in terms of staff time and financial resources. Given the extensive demands to deliver services to a population in need, evidence generation (beyond direct monitoring and evaluation of program delivery) understandably ranks low on the list of priorities in settings of displacement. However, it is critical to learn from experiences in the field if we are to support displaced populations effectively and allocate resources efficiently in future refugee crises. The study findings (see here) highlight both the potential and the limitations of cash transfers as a tool in settings of massive displacement. Yamen, a displaced Syrian boy who is attending school, walks past lines of laundry at an informal settlement in the Bekaa Valley.Among children enrolled in afternoon shift schools, the study shows an increase in household expenditure on education and transport to school in particular. Because afternoon shift schools close at nightfall during at least part of the school year, safe transport is considered a critical element of regular school attendance. Accordingly, the study finds a positive impact on school attendance of children enrolled in afternoon shift schools. Weekly days of school attendance increased by about 20 percent (or 0.6 days) due to the program. This increase is comparable for younger children and older children and comparable for boys and girls. There is no evidence that the pilot program increased afternoon shift school enrollment in study areas. This could be due to a combination of factors. Most importantly, primary school enrollment rates (including but not limited to afternoon shift school enrollment rates) of Syrian children increased rapidly across the country during the period of the study. An intensive “back to school” advocacy campaign is presumed to have played an important role in this increase in primary school enrollment. The increase in primary school enrollment appears to have led to capacity constraints, limiting the opportunity for out of school children to enroll in an afternoon shift school even if they had wanted to. The UNICEF Lebanon team has used these findings to advocate for expanded capacity to absorb Syrian children in Lebanese schools. A new wave of follow-up data was recently collected. The aim is to measure broader impacts of the cash support on outcomes such as children’s mental health, their self-esteem, outlook on life and aspirations. Stay tuned and follow UNICEF Innocenti for the latest results when they come out. Jacobus De Hoop is UNICEF Innocenti's humanitarian policy research specialist. UNICEF Innocenti recently held an international workshop on "Evidence on social protection in contexts of fragility and forced displacement," and will soon publish a suite of working papers from top researchers on this increasingly important area of research. The Office of Research - Innocenti has recently begun to expand its research on children in humanitarian settings. Watch our most recent edition of Research Watch on this topic.

This week, the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) launched its 2018 Global Report on Internal Displacement (GRID 2018), which presents data and analysis on the patterns and trends of internal displacement worldwide. The main findings of this report show that despite twenty years of global and national policy effort, since the publication of the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement in 1998, the pace of displacement is still outstripping efforts to address it. The most important difference between a refugee and an internally displaced person (IDP) is that instead of crossing international boundaries IDPs are exiled within their own State of origin. Due to this unique context, not only is there limited legal protection offered to the IDPs, but also a considerable lack of evidence about them. And data is now urgently needed to provide adequate protection to this growing, highly vulnerable population. A family displaced by fighting stand outside their makeshift shelter in Benakuna village, near Mbuji Mayi, Kasaï region, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Saturday 27 January 2018.The GRID 2018 puts the spotlight on several displacement-affected countries where children are amongst the most vulnerable, including the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Yemen, some of the most acute humanitarian crises of our time. As highlighted in the report, the global number of new internal displacements – caused by conflict, violence or disasters – reached 30.6 million. The number associated with conflict and violence almost doubled over the last two years, from 6.9 million in 2016 to 11.8 million in 2017. Syria, the DRC and Iraq together accounted for more than half of the global figure. Disasters alone caused 18.8 million new displacements last year, mainly triggered by weather-related events including major storms and hurricanes in the Atlantic, South Asia and East Asia and Pacific. Children make up about 60 percent of the DRC’s internally displaced population. Towards the end of 2017, the UN declared the highest humanitarian alert in the UN system in the provinces of South Kivu, Tanganyika and the region of KasaiThe numbers presented in this year’s GRID illustrate that the problem of internal displacement is far from being solved, and that a new approach is needed to cope with the current trends, and more importantly, to reduce the risk of future displacement. It also shows that the levels of displacement severity and its impacts on people vary hugely between and within countries. This calls for renewed action, led by affected countries, to address the problem as a national priority in both humanitarian and development terms. With 2.16 million new displacements recorded in 2017, the DRC comes second only to Syria, yet remains one of the most under-funded crises. Children make up about 60 percent of the DRC’s internally displaced population. Towards the end of 2017, the UN declared the highest humanitarian alert in the UN system in the provinces of South Kivu, Tanganyika and the region of Kasai, where several schools were occupied by armed groups, putting the education of as many as 64,000 children at risk. This meant that children were not only deprived of their education, but were also left at a higher risk of joining armed groups. The province of North Kivu, also affected by conflict, was identified as having around 82 percent of the total children recruited by armed groups. In Yemen, women and children constitute 75 percent of the country’s displaced population, and their protection concerns are particularly acute. Their safety, access to services and livelihood opportunities are compromised by entrenched inequalities, which puts them at increased risk of abuse and exploitation. Displaced children are at extremely high risk of falling out of education and many become embroiled in negative coping mechanisms such as child labour, recruitment into armed groups and child marriage. A survey conducted across three governorates with large displaced populations in late 2016 found that 45 per cent of marriages involved girls under the age of 15. The list of countries affected by displacement, where children suffer from its impacts, could go on. One of the main takeaways from GRID 2018 is that despite the efforts of the international community to protect and assist those displaced, more investments must be made at the national and international levels in sustainable development, peacebuilding and addressing the impacts of climate change and disaster risk reduction. This is particularly relevant for the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals, as internal displacement is directly related to all the Goals. At the core of this discussion lies the importance of data disaggregation by age and sex. The GRID 2018 highlights that major data gaps persist, making it difficult to paint the full picture of internal displacement and its impacts, including on children. If we are to design better policies to address the issue and reduce children’s vulnerabilities, we need to get better at monitoring its progress and capture its complexity. Bridging the gap between development priorities and humanitarian concerns is what will truly turn the tide on internal displacement. Vicente Anzellini is coordinator for the GRID Project, with the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. Bina D’Costa is Senior Migration and Displacement Research Specialist at UNICEF Innocenti.