Enlighten Publications

In this section

Methodological challenges in developing an evidence base, and realizing rights

Ferrie, J. and Hosie, A. (2018) Methodological challenges in developing an evidence base, and realizing rights. International Journal of Human Rights, 22(1), pp. 5-21. (doi: 10.1080/13642987.2017.1390300)

Preview

Text
149436.pdf - Accepted Version
455kB

Abstract

This paper focuses on the methodological challenges for a small nation, with a view to reforming and realizing human rights. The paper begins with a review of traditional measures that seek to capture comparative data and the limitation of indicators both generally and as a tool for capturing violations in Scotland. Capturing violations, particularly those that are hidden (because they happen in private spaces or to those without power or status) are necessary to clearly understand what reform is required. This creates methodological challenges in collecting data that is perhaps not understood within a human rights framework and so is not reported adequately. The paper will focus on national action plans (NAP), using the example of Scotland’s NAP (SNAP) as vital for creating a space allowing for data collection and solution generation, shared by those who experience violations and those with the power to challenge. Diffusing responsibility for action to Rights Holders and Duty Bearers engaged in creating the space facilitates reform. Further this approach can lend legitimacy to those who are violated, because they appear in spaces where their experiences are recognized within a human rights framework. This evidence can be used to demonstrate the prevalence of rights violations in a small nation, and thus can feed into debates about the need for human rights legislation and measures that go beyond comparative indicators. It also highlights that a State must be committed to reform regardless of methodology used if it is to realize rights.

Item Type:	Articles
Keywords:	Methodology, indicators, qualitative, collaborative, participatory, human rights, Scotland.
Status:	Published
Refereed:	Yes
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:	Ferrie, Professor Jo
Authors:	Ferrie, J., and Hosie, A.
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > HM Sociology J Political Science > JX International law K Law > K Law (General)
College/School:	College of Social Sciences > School of Social and Political Sciences > Sociology Anthropology and Applied Social Sciences
Journal Name:	International Journal of Human Rights
Journal Abbr.:	IJHR
Publisher:	Taylor & Francis
ISSN:	1364-2987
ISSN (Online):	1744-053X
Published Online:	08 November 2017
Copyright Holders:	Copyright © 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor and Francis Group
First Published:	First published in International Journal of Human Rights 22(1): 5-21
Publisher Policy:	Reproduced in accordance with the publisher copyright policy

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record

References

SNAP Scottish National Action Plan http://www.snaprights.info/ See also, Hosie, A. and Hutton, E. (2015) The contribution of national action plans for human rights to the pursuit of equality and social justice: lessons from Scotland. Beyond 2015: Shaping the Future of Equality, Human Rights and Social Justice. A Collection of Essays from the Equality and Diversity Forum and EDF Research Network. FAIR: F – Facts: What are the important facts to understand? A – Analysis: What are the human rights or issues at stake? I – Identifying Shared Responsibilities: What changes are necessary? Who has responsibilities for helping to make the necessary changes? R – Recall: Over time have the necessary changes occurred? If not, who is to be held accountable? Using the FAIR methodological framework throughout this programme of work has allowed SHRC to identify the facts and provide a common framework for exploration and analysis. OHCHR human rights based indicator methodology allows for three types of human rights indicators, namely: structural, process and outcome indicators. Together they address the essential aspects of human rights implementation, namely: commitment, effort and result. See Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Human Rights Indicators: A Guide to Measurement and Implementation; OHCHR Guide, a Human Rights Measurement Framework http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Indicators/Pages/documents.aspx Merry, S. E. (2016) A World of Quantification: Measuring Human Rights, Gender Violence and Sex Trafficking Chicago: The University of Chicago Press Page 10 Maurer, B. (2005) Mutual Life, Limited: Islamic Banking, Alternative Currencies, Lateral Reason. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press Trubek, D. M. & Trubek, L. G. (2005) Hard and Soft Law in the Construction of Social Europe: the Role of the Open Method of Co-ordination. European Law Journal Vol. 11 (3) May 2005 343-364 Landman (2009) Measuring Human Rights Oxon: Routledge Page. 137 Merry A World of Quantification 2016:13 see Espeland, W. N. & Stevens, M. L. (2008) ‘A Sociology of Quanitfication’ European Journal of Sociology Vol 49(3): 4-1-36 Bowker, G. C. & Star, S. L. (1999) Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press For example the UK Census measures household data every 10 years and aims to capture the entire population. Gender has traditionally been reduced to only two categories making it synonymous to the bi-categorization of sex. see Foucault, M. (1979) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage. Power, M. (2004) ‘Counting, Control and Calculation: Reflections on Measuring and Management. Human Relations. Vol. 57 (6): 765-83 Merry World of Quantification 2016 Ibid., 33 Ibid. US Department of State(2016) Trafficking in Persons Report. Washington, DC: US Department of State Example of graph on page 19 (2016) Reports from 2001-2016 inclusive available: https://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/ Merry World of Quantification 2016 Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. McNulty, D., Watson, N., and Philo, G. (2014) Human rights and prisoners' rights: the British press and the shaping of public debate. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 53(4), pp. 360-376 Latour Science in Action 1987 Ibid., 57-58 Dean (2007) FULL REFERENCE NEEDED The Sociological Cannon of Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim and Max Weber has been criticised for over-representing dead white men. They group include a disabled man and a migrant so they may not be as privileged and mainstream as they first appear. Nevertheless, their theorising, while enormously influential to contemporary social scientists, has limited use for understanding Rights. Walby, S. (1994) Is citizenship gendered? Sociology Vol 28 (2) 379-395 Fraser, N. and Honneth, A. (2004) Redistribution or Recognition?: A political-philosophical exchange. Verso Press Nussbaum, M. (2006) Frontiers of Justice; Disability, Nationality, Species Membership The Tanner Lectures on Human Values Cambridge, MA and London: The Belknap Press Rawls wrote about ‘eligibility for citizenship’: the social contract theory throughout his career, but notable references include: J. Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1971); and J. Rawls, ‘Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory’ (Dewey Lectures), Journal of Philosophy 77 (1980): 515–71. see Ferrie, J. (2010) What has Human Rights got to say about Care and Dignity? International Journal of Human Rights - Special Issue: Sociology and Human Rights Vol. 14 (6) November 2010 Walby, S. (2009) Globalization & Inequalities: complexity and contested modernities. London: Sage Publications. Burchardt, T. and Vizard, P. (2007) Definition of equality and framework for measurement: Final Recommendations of the Equalities Review Steering Group in Measurement, CASE Paper 120, London School of Economics Walby Globalization & Inequalities 2009 Hosie, A. and Lamb, M. (2013) Human rights and social policy: Challenges and opportunities for social research and its use as evidence in the protection and promotion of human rights in Scotland. Social Policy and Society. Vol. 12 (2) pp 191-203 Walby Globalization & Inequalities 2009 Burchardt, and Vizard, P. Framework for equality and framework for measurement. 2007 Townsend, (1975) Dean, H. (2006) Social Policy, Cambridge: Polity Press. See Boyle & Hughes, this special edition. Ferrie, J. & Watson, N (2015) The psycho-social impact of impairment: the case of Motor Neurone Disease Editor: Shakespeare, T. Disability Research Reader, Routledge Simon, W. H. (2004) ‘Toyota Jurisprudence: Legal Theory and rolling Rule Regimes’ in Columbia Public Law and Legal Theory Working papers. Working paper 0479. http://lsr.nellco.org/colunbia_pllt/0479 Ibid. For a general overview of the approach, see Dick, B. (2014) Action Research In. Mills, J. and Birks, M. (Eds.) Qualitative Methodology: A Practical Guide. London: Sage. For a classic example of this approach in action, see Freire, P. (1972) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin Books. Merry World of Quantification 2016 Erturk, Y. (2008) ‘Report of the Specia Rapporteur on Violence against Women, Its Causes and Consequences, the Next Step: Developing Transnational Indicators on Violence against Women’ (addendum). In Promotion and Protection of all Human Rights, Civil, Politial, Economic, Social and Cultural, Including the Right to Development. Human Rigts Council, 7th Session February 25. A/HRC/7/6/Add.5. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Human Rights Indicators: A Guide to Measurement and Implementation; OHCHR Guide, a Human Rights Measurement Framework http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/human-rights/our-human-rights-work/human-rights-measurement-framework/ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Articles 1-5 and 16 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2006/16/pdfs/asp_20060016_en.pdf http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/Vienna.aspx http://www.scottishhumanrights.com/about/strategicplan/strategicplan20082012 FAIR framework see footnote ii Driver, S., Lamb, M. & Wislon, C. 2010. Annotated Bibliography of Published and Grey Non-Legal Literature on Human Rights in Scotland since 2006. London: The Crucible Centre and Social Research Centre, Roehampton University. Smith, R., Tait, L., Bales, K., McConnell, L. & Raban-Williams, R. 2010b. Mapping the Law of Scotland in Relation to International Human Rights Treaties: CAT & CPT. Newcastle: Northumbria Law School. Normand, A. & Webster, E. 2010. Mapping the Law of Scotland in relation to International Human Rights Treaties – Civil and Political Rights. Glasgow: University of Strathclyde. Flanigan, D. 2011. Mapping the Law of Scotland in Relation to Economic, Social & Cultural Rights. Glasgow: Scottish Human Rights Commission. SHRC 2009. Building a Strategic Plan: Consultation Report. Glasgow: Scottish Human Rights Commission. Candler, J., Holder, H., Hosali, S., Payne, A., Tsang, T. & Vizard, P. 2011. Human Rights Measurement Framework: Prototype panels, indicator set and evidence base. London: LSE, CASE, BiHR, SHRC, EHRC. The groups were developed in partnership with Article 12 and the Scottish Gypsy /Traveller Law Reform Coalition, the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights, Glasgow Disability Alliance, Inclusion Scotland and Voices of Experience, the Poverty Truth Commission and the Scottish Consortium for Learning Disability. Some of the responses from organisations drew on their own consultation and outreach experiences, for example the response from the Scottish Youth Parliament reflected the policy priorities identified in their own consultation that gathered the views of 42,804 young people. Dick, B. Action Research 2014 Twenty-four groups were selected from which 17 groups agreed to participate. Some groups contained individuals who preferred to be interviewed on a one-to-one basis than participate in a focus group. This process was facilitated by the use of the qualitative analysis software NVivo, which allows for thematic coding and the integration of focused inquiry and data analysis. As the Phase 1 data had already been coded into NVivo, the process of combining the analysis of Phase 1 and Phase 2 data was relatively simple. See http://uhri.ohchr.org/ SHRC (2012) Getting it Right? Human Rights in Scotland. See http://www.snaprights.info/how-snap-was-developed/getting-it-right Ibid. SHRC (2013) Participative Consultation Report. See http://www.snaprights.info/how-snap-was-developed/participation The initial project plans involved a further range of participative methods including a photography competition and a national diary day. Chan (2009) Hosie, A. and Lamb, M. (2012) Hosie, A. and Lamb, M. (2013) Human rights and social policy: Challenges and opportunities for social research and its use as evidence in the protection and promotion of human rights in Scotland. Social Policy and Society. Vol. 12 (2) pp192 Ibid. Dean, (2006) Ibid., 101 Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Human Rights Indicators: A Guide to Measurement and Implementation; OHCHR Guide, a Human Rights Measurement Framework http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/human-rights/our-human-rights-work/human-rights-measurement-framework/. Explain NPF Ferrie, J., Lerpiniere, J., Paterson, K., Pearson, C. Stalker, K. and Watson, N. (2008) In-Depth Examination of the Implementation of the Disability Equality Duty in England: Report to the Office for Disability Issues. London: Department for Work and Pensions. See also: Pearson, C., Watson, N., Stalker, K., Ferrie, J., Lepiniere, J. & Paterson, K. (2011) 'Mainstreaming the Disability Equality Duty and the impact on public authorities'. Social Policy and Society, 10(2). see Webster, E. and Flanigan, D. This Issue.

Deposit and Record Details

ID Code:	149436
Depositing User:	Professor Jo Ferrie
Datestamp:	10 Oct 2017 08:54
Last Modified:	08 May 2019 13:53
Date of acceptance:	6 October 2017
Date of first online publication:	8 November 2017
Date Deposited:	9 October 2017
Data Availability Statement:	No