Peer-reviewed article
The security implications of using feminist methodologies to study gender-based violence in Yemen.
Al-Refaei S ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This peer-reviewed paper examines how political and security conditions in Yemen since 2019 have affected research on gender-based violence, particularly under Houthi control in the north. The study interviewed 25 GBV researchers about how anti-feminist ideologies and security measures have constrained research quality, researcher safety, and data collection. The paper discusses methodological challenges and proposes alternative approaches to continue GBV research in conflict settings while protecting researchers and survivors. Rather than evaluating an intervention for child well-being, the work addresses research methodology and researcher safety in a conflict context.
Key points
- Houthi ideologies and radical views toward women have severely curtailed GBV research activities in northern Yemen
- Researchers face detention, harassment, device confiscation, and donor harassment when conducting GBV research
- Terms like 'gender' and 'GBV' are rejected as Western concepts inconsistent with new community values
- The paper proposes using conflict-sensitivity and Do No Harm principles to allow research continuation while protecting researchers
- Alternative methodologies are explored to enable local and national researchers to study GBV without exposing themselves to risk
Limitations
This paper examines research methodology and researcher safety rather than direct outcomes for children's well-being. It does not evaluate the effectiveness of any intervention designed to improve child protection or well-being outcomes.
Abstract
Introduction This paper examines the political and security implications of gender-based violence (GBV) research in Yemen during the period (2019-2023). As various radical groups are gaining power over Yemeni land, radical views toward women and gender equity and equality shape the experiences of GBV survivors, practitioners, and researchers in the North of Yemen. Policing Houthi ideologies in Yemen have curtailed GBV research and subjected feminist research to myriad risks. If this situation continues, experiences of women and girls in Yemen will not be captured by research. Their stories and needs will not be captured by humanitarian and peace-building actors. Methodology Findings of this study are based on primary data from key informant interviews with 25 GBV researchers actively engaged in Yemen. Sampling followed the snowballing technique. Results The findings examine political and security power dynamics after the Houthi radical group took control in the north of Yemen, and implications on GBV research design. Anti-feminist ideologies coupled with extreme security measures have impacted quality of GBV study methodologies as well as researchers' safety and mobility. Donors of previously established GBV programs and research were harassed to change research topics or lose permission to speak to local communities or collect data from aid beneficiaries. Researchers who do not follow new rules of engagement with the community are detained, harassed and their devices and databases are confiscated. Terms like "gender" and "GBV" are not deemed acceptable as these are western concepts that do not align with new community values. The findings highlight the need to use conflict-sensitivity and Do No Harm principles in settings where GBV work is scrutinized. It also challenges the orthodox definition of "GBV evidence" and explores the ethical implications of the use of alternative means to collecting data. Findings also provide insight into valuable alternative methodologies that allow local and national researchers to continue studying GBV in conflict impacted areas without exposing themselves to actual or perceived risk. The paper proposes concrete approaches that can mitigate political and security risk on both researchers and GBV survivors.