Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: While the debate on peacebuilding and development started by postulating the need for a more political role of aid in order to contribute to peacebuilding, the following years have been marked by the development of particular tools to enhance the conflict sensitivity of aid projects on the ground. The paper shows the development from a politicised debate towards a tool box approach during the last decade and identifies different challenges towards a renewed politization of the debate if aid wants to have a bigger impact on peacebuilding policies.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The paper presents an overview of reformative justice model being tried in cities like Mumbai and Delhi in India. India has the highest crime rate in the world, at least as far as the raw numbers go. The crimes against women and children have also reached an all time high, while men also struggle to get justice. The criminal justice system, that is struggling hard to break the image of bias and lethargy, faces a new challenge when it applies the restorative model of justice. The slow system also means hundreds of thousands of people remaining as under-trials as well as the group waiting for justice to deliver. This often leads to a lot more punitive approach towards offenders who seem to get away with violations because of limitations in prosecuting them after a gap of months and years. These factors combined present a challenge to reintegrate offenders back in the society, especially given the limited resources. The paper explores the implementation, limitations and success of programs aimed at restorative justice, both from the law enforcement and inmates’ perspectives.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript

Publication Type: Paper/Poster Proposal
Abstract: With the events of September 11, 2001, public perception regarding the threat of terrorism has shaped national priorities and, arguably, has altered the nation’s political course. Undoubtedly, monitoring the nation’s attitudes about terrorism and the threat of another terrorist attack will be a primary goal for opinion poll researchers for many years to come. However, although salient in the mind of the American public, the concept of terrorism is also elusive, containing multiple dimensions of meaning that shift depending upon specific events, as well as social and political contexts. As a result, asking about terrorism is difficult. Survey questions on the topic are likely to prove vague and be subject to many interpretations, thus weakening construct validity.
Based on 25 in-depth interviews conducted in 2004 by the National Center for Health Statistics, this paper will present the various definitional components of terrorism, and illustrate how this interpretive complexity lends difficulty to survey research on terrorism by increasing the potential for response error. In this discussion, the paper will also illustrate how the meaning of terrorism has not materialized as a unified, collective definition—one emerging from the 9/11 attacks against the US—but rather, as a series of interpretations dependent upon the reality of individuals’ lives and the context of their communities. For example, analyses reveal several dimensions to the concept of terrorism. One dimension relates to perpetrators of violence (organized group vs. loner), while the other focuses on the targets (random individuals vs. specific people). When survey questions failed to define either of these groups, response error occurred as respondents drew upon their own experience and decided for themselves what was meant by the term “terrorism.” Other dimensions of the concept will be discussed, as will suggestions for improving question design and construct validity

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This presentation focuses on the design and implementation of an undergraduate, pre-service program that builds upon the intersection of theory, beliefs and strategies from general education, special education and literacy education