Teams developing an EVAWG programme should conduct analysis during the design phase to identify potential risks. This analysis should identify harmful social norms and behaviours along with gender and social hierarchies that may be challenged through these efforts. Following this analysis, initiatives should work with local women’s rights organisations (WROs) and feminist organisations to develop risk minimisation and mitigation strategies. For example, to reduce the risk of individual women’s rights activists being targeted, programmes should ensure their data protection processes are robust to avoid leaks of personal data.

EVAWG efforts can generate greater support by engaging in open dialogue to hear the concerns and perspectives of those who may disagree with the programme. Listening to these perspectives is key to understanding the challenges faced, provides an opportunity to address misconceptions about ending VAWG, and helps raise awareness about the importance of doing so. Open listenings sessions and dialogues should be facilitated at all levels, including within communities, at the State level, within institutions, and among civil society actors.

These open dialogues may be most effective if facilitated by local individuals who are trained in EVAWG. This can help address risks that local people perceive EVAWG initiatives as being imposed from outside, as opposed to being community grown and endorsed. Programmes should seek to engage a range of community members including men and boys and non-traditional actors in efforts to facilitate community engagement and dialogue.

See the page on community mobilisation for more information about how to engage communities.

VAWG programmes can improve buy-in across communities by establishing local partnerships with respected institutions and opinion leaders, who are able to help reduce the risk of backlash and resistance. For example, initiatives might partner with local faith leaders, celebrities, men and boys, as well as non-traditional actors as champions of change, to encourage support for the programme. In addition, initiatives could partner with media outlets and conduct community dialogues to share positive messages around EVAWG and reduce the potential impact of false information that may be circulated.  For examples, in some contexts, the Spotlight Initiative has brokered dialogue between WROs and government to try to maintain or expand civil space. The Spotlight Initiative also recommends long inception phases to ensure programmes have the time available to establish strong and long-lasting local partnerships.

Read more on establishing effective partnerships. 

Programmes can be more effective and reduce the risk of backlash when they are designed to be culturally sensitive and appropriate. EVAWG efforts often involve challenging local norms, beliefs and customs; however, it is important that they do so respectfully. It is important for initiatives to be led and facilitated by local people, with a strong understanding of cultural norms and traditions. This can help address the risk of EVAWG initiatives being perceived as being imposed from outside as opposed to being community-supported and led.

VAWG programmes should monitor and respond to instances of backlash. It is essential that participants who experience backlash, especially backlash that is violent or threatening and including technology-facilitated GBV, are able to access support such as safe spaces, security, referral systems and access to the resources needed to recover. Programmes should work with implementing partners to establish clear and culturally appropriate reporting mechanisms and referral mechanisms for participants who experience backlash. See the page on how to strengthen referral mechanisms.