by Julia Smith-Brake
I love research. I love literature reviews and methodology and bibliographies. I love engaging is discussion about research and seeing programs change or begin based on good research. It may seem obvious that the counter-trafficking sector (like any other social justice or development sector) needs professional, scientific research, but we often forego this “step” in an attempt to address problems quickly. Not necessarily well, but quickly.
I love research. I love literature reviews and methodology and bibliographies. I love engaging is discussion about research and seeing programs change or begin based on good research. It may seem obvious that the counter-trafficking sector (like any other social justice or development sector) needs professional, scientific research, but we often forego this “step” in an attempt to address problems quickly. Not necessarily well, but quickly.
So why can’t we see
research as a response to human trafficking? Maybe because of the unfortunate
divide between academics and practitioners, a gap that often means research
does not reach the field, and practitioners feel research does not represent
the reality on the field. Maybe because it is difficult for practitioners to
know which research is good and which is irrelevant, and practitioners lack the
time and motivation to distinguish and access relevant research.
Chab Dai is in a
good position to not only do research, but also to provide some of this access
to practitioners in the field. Practitioner research is a good way to go about
exploring and providing relevant information to other organizations because it
is based in an assumption that action will stem out of the research. Research
is imperative to the counter-trafficking movement, especially at this juncture,
because we need to reflect well on what has led the movement to this point and
how we can learn from past successes and failures, what responses have worked
and which ones haven’t, and how lessons from other sectors can inform our way
forward.
If we begin to see research as a response to trafficking, in the continuum of responses including prevention, intervention and others, we may be able to integrate it more holistically into our work. If we are continually going back to research and allowing it to inform and challenge our preconceptions and frameworks, won’t our programs be more relevant and better suited to the needs of those we serve?
If we begin to see research as a response to trafficking, in the continuum of responses including prevention, intervention and others, we may be able to integrate it more holistically into our work. If we are continually going back to research and allowing it to inform and challenge our preconceptions and frameworks, won’t our programs be more relevant and better suited to the needs of those we serve?
