Browsing by Author "Lundqvist, Maja"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5

Benchmarking report on GBV and SH targeting national authorities and RFOs
(GENDERACTIONplus, 2023) Bondestam, Fredrik; Lundqvist, Maja; Young Håkansson, Susanna; University of Gothenburg (UGOT)
This benchmark report presents a state-of-the-art analysis of the current policy development on Gender-Based Violence (GBV) in the European Research Area (ERA). It is developed within the ongoing GENDERACTIONplus project, which contributes to the coordination of the gender equality and inclusiveness objectives of the new European Research Area (ERA). The main objectives of the report are to: • set a baseline understanding of current state of research on GBV in Higher Education (HE) • give an overview of relevant policy developments on GBV in ERA, mainly targeting national authorities and research funding organisations (RFO) • give an overview of the overall policy framework on GBV concerning ERA stakeholders • generate recommendations for policy development targeting the European Commission (EC), EU member states (MS) and Associated Countries (AC), national authorities, RFOs, and future research The analysis in the report builds on an extensive and systematic research review, collecting all peer-reviewed research journal articles globally on GBV in HE since 2017 (> 2 000 publications). Further, benchmark survey data on policy development on GBV in ERA is analysed, collected from responses by the GENDERACTIONplus partners (comprised of 16 countries/regions and 20 RFOs). Finally, a thorough collection and analysis of the current overall policy framework on GBV in ERA establishes important knowledge on relevant gaps and promising strategies for future policy development. The results in summary from these empirical parts of the report are as follows:
Deliverable 3.2 Baseline document on current and future RFO preventive measures on GBV and SH
(GENDERACTION+, European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 101058093, 2023) Bondestam, Fredrik; Lundqvist, Maja; Young Håkansson, Susanna
The main objective of the report is to develop knowledge and recommendations, beyond the results of the GENDERACTIONplus D3.1, on Research Funding Organisations (RFO) engagement in, and possible strategies for, ending Gender Based Violence (GBV) in R&I in the European Research Area (ERA). Methods used in developing a baseline document for this objective consists of revisiting the overall ERA policy framework on GBV, analysing benchmark survey results focusing on RFOs, discussing the results of the research review from task 3.1, engaging with key RFO stakeholders, formulating a RELIEF model for RFOs mitigating GBV, and finally conducting a Mutual Learning Workshop (MLW) on GBV with RFOs. Overall results are discussed in each section and two core arguments are developed from this work as to why RFOs are instrumental in engaging in mitigating GBV in the ERA: • Meritocracy as the leading principle for quality in research, as ensured through assessing and rewarding the best researchers and applications, is undermined by the existence of GBV in research and education. • Ethical research conduct is dependent on zero-tolerance to and the non-existence of GBV in research and education. Several important conclusions follow from the work done, pinpointing concrete strategies and activities proposed for RFOs: • Develop core procedures within RFOs Work with a RELIEF model – described in detail in the report – as a baseline starting point for an institutional framework for implementing concrete measures. This work should include thinking through each key area in more depth to develop the importance and relevance of the model for a particular RFO, develop concrete measures for each part of the model, and identify and include dilemmas and risks in working with the model. Introduce and/or develop new policies on GBV targeting the actual problems defined through working with the RELIEF model in more detail. Use the UniSAFE 7P model and other ERA policy framework developments to move the agenda on ending GBV in RPOs forward. • Build strong partnerships with other stakeholders Create partnerships between RFOs within and across national contexts. Develop partnerships between RFOs, RPOs, national authorities, and other relevant stakeholders. Establish both formal and informal networks and continued mutual learning using expert knowledge and competencies on GBV. • Ensure continuous knowledge and awareness raising Compile a digital course based on up-to-date and relevant research on GBV in RPO, targeting RFOs. Compile digital material with knowledge and practice from RFOs on how to work with the issue of GBV in relation to RPOs applying for funding. Turn the RELIEF model and the UniSAFE 7P model into an online portal, hosted by, for example, Global Research Council (GRC) or Science Europe, where stakeholders can contribute with concrete examples of policy developments, strategies, activities and networks. Develop training sessions on GBV targeting potential and actual grant holders. • Establish long-term funding of research on GBV To-the-point research, with results and recommendations for policy development in RFOs, is needed to develop the existing policy framework on GBV in ERA. Both national authorities, national RFOs and the European Commission (EC) should fund research and research programmes focusing on RFOs as an important stakeholder in the work against GBV in RPOs. • Further progress necessary for policy development on GBV Include GBV as a mandatory requirement in GEPs, as one way of engaging RFOs in mitigating GBV. Propose an overarching ERA Code of Conduct as a crucial guide for RFOs as to why and how to take on the work of ending GBV. Finally, the report also envisages the need to further develop policy frameworks as part of an overarching ERA infrastructure for mitigating GBV, targeting RFO engagement. The proposed ERA infrastructure for RFOs is already described in detail in D3.1. The RELIEF model and the UniSAFE 7Ps recommendations for RFOs – as described in this deliverable – are instrumental in setting both an institutional framework and a systematic logic for relevant actions. A mandatory GEP requirement on GBV is a vital component in this holistic approach, without which it will be difficult to achieve commitment among RFOs, as well as possibilities for systematic monitoring and evaluation of progress in ending GBV in ERA.
Honour, Violence and Gender — An international research review
(Swedish Secretariat for Gender Research, 2025) Baianstovu, Rúna Í; Lundqvist, Maja; Young Håkansson, Susanna
This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of international research on honour-based violence, with a focus on understanding its various manifestations and causes, identifying exposed groups and uncovering gaps in research. As shown in the introduction, honour-based violence is described and conceptualised in different contexts. This, in combination with the consequences of honour-based violence, both as a lived reality and political concept, shows the necessity of this review. The review is guided by scoping review, which is used as a model to address open questions and allow exploration and clarification of concepts and definitions within the literature. This broad-based approach allows different disciplines, perspectives and understandings of honour-based violence to emerge, contributing to knowledge development, knowledge exchange and further exploration of honour-based violence. By focusing on important parts of the literature, this review provides a broad and unique overview for both researchers and policymakers. This research review describes scientific discourses, conducted in English, in which the study object is presented in relation to honour. This represents a significant constraint, as important non-Western perspectives may have been excluded, potentially influencing the overall findings. It describes what English-speaking researchers’ study and publish with regard to honour-based violence, how they understand honour-based violence and how they explore the consequences and underlying factors of these kinds of violence. It does not answer the question: what is honour-based violence?
Normkritisk granskning av goteborg.se
(Nationella sekretariatet för genusforskning, 2018-02-18) Lundqvist, Maja; Tillberg, Anneli
Göteborgs Stad gjorde en genomlysning av sin webbplats 2012 då kommunen lät granska 15 av de mest välbesökta sidorna på goteborg.se utifrån ett normkritiskt perspektiv. Uppdraget som Göteborgs Stad gav sekretariatet 2017 var att ge en sammanfattande bild av kommunikationen på Göteborgs Stads webbplats ur ett normkritiskt perspektiv. De 15 mest besökta sidorna, startsidan och sju enhetssidor ingår i granskningen.
Sexual harassment in higher education – a systematic review
(European Journal of Higher Education, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020-02-18) Bondestam, Fredrik; Lundqvist, Maja; Swedish Secretariat for Gender Research
Sexual harassment is an epidemic throughout global higher education systems and impact individuals, groups and entire organizations in profound ways. Precarious working conditions, hierarchical organizations, a normalization of gender-based violence, toxic academic masculinities, a culture of silence and a lack of active leadership are all key features enabling sexual harassment. The aim of this study is to review scientific knowledge on sexual harassment in higher education. A thematic focus is on (a) knowledge derived from top-ranked peer-reviewed articles in the research field, (b) the prevalence of sexual harassment among students and staff, (c) reported consequences of sexual harassment, (d) examples of primary, secondary and tertiary preventive measures, and (e) core challenges to research on sexual harassment in higher education. The published research evidence suggests several findings of importance, mainly: (a) prevalence of sexual harassment among students is reported by on average one out of four female students; (b) severe consequences of sexual harassment impacts individuals but the effects on the quality in research and education is unknown;(c) there is almost no evidence supporting the supposed effects of major preventive measures; and (d) research on sexual harassment in higher education lacks theoretical, longitudinal, qualitative and intersectional approaches and perspectives.