Researching  Online Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) against Teens and Young People in Nepal - Challenges and Responses

- Anil Raghuvanshi and Preeti Maharjan, ChildSafeNet

There was great excitement at ChildSafeNet, when we heard our research on online intimate partner violence against teens and young people in Nepal was selected for the SVRI Grant 2021.

The research aims to understand the patterns, prevalence, and vulnerabilities of online IPV among teenagers and young people aged 16 - 24 years in fifteen municipalities of the ten districts from all seven provinces of Nepal. We use a mixed methodology with  both quantitative and qualitative data collection tools. The study has also partnered with a tech company to develop an artificial intelligence tool, which understands Nepali language and can detect online abuse.

We faced many challenges in conducting the research, but found ways to overcome them.

1.       Ethical clearance. Obtaining an ethical approval from the Nepal Health Research Council was challenging. We were required  to obtain and submit approvals from all seven provincial governments and fifteen municipalities. Since we do not have field offices, we deployed field researchers and got assistance from local NGOs. The process  took longer  and costed much more than planned, but the study was finally approved.

2.       Taboos in Nepal: In Nepal, only married couples are legally recognised as  intimate partners. This is mainly because prevailing social and legal norms do not accept intimate partners outside marriage, and  it is a taboo to talk about sex. Therefore, we had to carefully approach the respondents and explain the topic of the research. We approached the potential participants by explaining about the various online risks for teens and young people, including online IPV and how this study might help to prevent and protect them. Also, we provided the online risks and safety training at various schools and colleges after conducting survey.

For victims/survivors, we approached them via basic phone or text messages first, built rapport with them and conducted in depth interviews with participant preferred mode of interview (online or in person), time and place. Few participants were interested to share their experience with us, however, they were hesitant to meet us in person, thus, we conducted a telephonic interview. Some participant's family did not know about their victimisation, so we had to be very careful when and how to contact them. Also, we had referral psychological support in place for the participants.

3.       Quantitative data collection and focus group discussions: We approached several schools and colleges for data collection, but very few expressed interests in the research and were  reluctant to participate. We had to increase our recruitment efforts and  approach more schools and colleges. Despite these challenges, we met 87% of our total survey target. We planned for 40 FGDs initially, however, we conducted 17 FGDs as we reached data saturation.

4.       Obtaining consents and assents: Our research required  obtaining written consent from 18–24 years old participants and assent from 16-17 years old participants. However, due to the sensitivity of the issue, this  was not easy. To assist in the process,  we produced and screened an introductory video on online IPV and  conducted awareness raising sessions. We met 88% of target in 18-24 years old participants and 98% target in 16-17 years age group.

5.       Parental consents: We had difficulty in obtaining consent from the parents of 16–17 years old participants and sought help from schools to invite parents for group information sessions. We also conducted awareness sessions with students aged 16-17 years and gave them parental consent forms  to be filled by their parents. However,  only 30%  parents consented and less than half of the children participated in the study. Furthermore, some of them did not complete the survey. Regardless of these challenges, we met 98% of our target.

6.    Use of mobile phones for data collection: We planned to collect data using the participants' mobile phones. Schools and colleges in Nepal, generally do not allow students w bring phones to  schools and colleges but, upon our specific request, some schools and colleges allowed them to bring phones. Most  schools and colleges did not have internet access, so we provided the participants with  mobile data.

7.       Online survey: We planned to conduct online surveys with 4,000 participants, aged 18–24 years. Despite the paid boosting, responses were very low. Therefore, we conducted  data on-site, which took  longer , and required more human and financial resources .

8.       Finding respondents for in-depth interviews (IDIs): Finding participants for IDIs, who experienced online IPV was a big challenge. In Nepal, online IPV is less understood, under-reported and people do not want to talk about it. Therefore, we contacted NGOs, helplines, government entities and police. However, we did not receive much information and many of the identified people were unreachable. This resulted in a lower number of  IDIs .

The research study provided us a lot of learning opportunities to overcome challenges in the context of a low/middle-income country with lesser understanding on online intimate partner violence. We also learned to meet the administrative requirements for the study. Besides, we learned the importance to include more time and budget for administrative approvals, consents, coordination, field support/operation, awareness raising as well as contingency planning.  We believe the lessons learnt and our efforts to overcome them will be helpful for other researchers as well, particularly in the countries with similar social contexts.

28 November 2022

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Anil Raghuvanshi is the founder/president of ChildSafeNet, a leading organization in Nepal working to protect children and young people online. He had worked for more than three decades as a child protection professional with Unicef and international organisations.

Preeti Maharjan is a Senior Research Officer at ChildSafeNet. Preeti has more than five years of research experience in gender-based violence, occupational health, infectious diseases, antimicrobial resistance, and neglected tropical diseases.