Violence Interruption And The Epidemiological Approach: A Systematic Review Of Cure Violence

Author

Charles ElliottFollow

Date of Submission

Spring 5-4-2022

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy in International Conflict Management (Ph.D. INCM)

Department

Conflict Management

Committee Chair/First Advisor

Dr. Joseph G. Bock

Committee Member

Dr. Gita Taasoobshirazi

Committee Member

Dr. Ernest H. O'Boyle

Comments

I wish for the dissertation to be embargoed for a maximum length of time so that I may publish my results with public academic journals, which require extensive re-writing.

Abstract

Violence around the globe is a key area of conflict management that should be addressed through evidence-based research. As a response to this needed area of research, violence prevention programs have begun to measure factors leading to violence in the last two decades as a potential strategy to address violence. The number of shootings and homicides occurring within cities are the two primary indicators used to determine hot-spots and trends of crime. A key approach to violence prevention is violence interruption. This approach focuses on interrupting violence like a communicable disease and stopping the transmission of violence in dangerous communities globally.

This research explored studies that have evaluated violence interruption to measure the effect of Cure Violence Global programs on the reduction of shootings and homicides in targeted cities. This study aims to fill in the gap in research about the effectiveness of the epidemiological violence prevention approach adopted by the Cure Violence Global. This approach in particular aims to interrupt gun violence around the world by changing the norms and behaviors of violent individuals. The primary goal of this study is to rigorously analyze findings about the efficacy of Cure Violence epidemiological model by systematically examining the evaluations that have been done on it.

This study contributes to international conflict management by conducting a meta-analysis of Cure Violence evaluations and by identifying key implementation factors that can significantly contribute to the effectiveness of Cure Violence Global’s strategies in preventing violence. It examines the application of the Cure Violence epidemiological approach, considering the design of research, challenges of the approach, and interdisciplinary evidence required. I have analyzed studies that have measured implementation factors using secondary, experimental, and quantitative methodologies. Key search terms are specified from evaluations and the implementation factors that strongly relate to the approach’s effectiveness.

This study shows that through systematically examining evaluations of Cure Violence, research surrounding the epidemiological violence interruption approach can be better consolidated. Additionally, this research shows that programs that have implemented this approach are better evaluated when measured using the key implementation criteria. Of the 24 neighborhoods evaluated in the reduction of shootings, all but three reported favorable results. In the neighborhoods that implemented the Cure Violence approach, there was an average of 24.9% less risk of shootings than those without the programs. Communities implementing Cure Violence Global demonstrated 19.2% less risk of homicides than those without. On average, program evaluations lasted around 25 months and used interrupted time-series analyses. Almost all programs evaluated contained a program partner in the target area, an oversight entity, an implementing partner, and external funding. Like the epidemiological models of disease prevention, the evidence from the evaluations support the view that Cure Violence Global’s approach has much to offer in addressing violence in cities around the globe. More research should be conducted to gain additional insights into what conditions most contribute to the success of Cure Violence Global’s approach.