A Review of Economic Consequences and Costs of Male Violence Against Women

[EN] This article focuses on male violence against women. As it takes place in what is often considered to be 'the private sphere' of the home, violence is difficult to prove, to measure, to prevent and easy to ignore. A multi-country study (WHO, 2005, WHO multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence against women: Summary report of initial results on prevalence, health outcomes and women's responses, Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization) shows that there are wide variations between countries resulting in 15 per cent to 71 per cent of women aged between 15 and 49 years saying that they have been victims of physical or sexual violence in intimate relationships. This article reviews and summarises literature that analyse types of economic costs that result from domestic violence and abuse perpetrated against women.The theoretical reflections and findings are from a research project funded by the European Commission through the Leonardo da Vinci Programme named 'Giving Hope to Victims of Abuse through Vocational Guidance', promoted and coordinated by the University Miguel Hernandez of Elche. The content of this paper does not necessarily reflect the position of the European Union or the National Agency, nor does it involve any responsibility on their part (Agreement number: 2011/3500-516610-LLp-1-2011-1-ES-LEONARDO-LMP).López-Sánchez, MJ.; Belso-Martínez, JA.; Hervás Oliver, JL. (2019). A Review of Economic Consequences and Costs of Male Violence Against Women. Indian Journal of Gender Studies. 26(3):424-434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971521519861194S424434263Babcock, J. C., Waltz, J., Jacobson, N. S., & Gottman, J. M. (1993). Power and violence: The relation between communication patterns, power discrepancies, and domestic violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61(1), 40-50. doi:10.1037/0022-006x.61.1.40Bloch, F., & Rao, V. (2002). Terror as a Bargaining Instrument: A Case Study of Dowry Violence in Rural India. American Economic Review, 92(4), 1029-1043. doi:10.1257/00028280260344588Comijs, H. C., Pot, A. M., Smit, J. H., Bouter, L. M., & Jonker, C. (1998). Elder Abuse in the Community: Prevalence and Consequences. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 46(7), 885-888. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.1998.tb02724.xFord-Gilboe, M., Wuest, J., & Merritt-Gray, M. (2005). Strengthening Capacity to Limit Intrusion: Theorizing Family Health Promotion in the Aftermath of Woman Abuse. Qualitative Health Research, 15(4), 477-501. doi:10.1177/1049732305274590Garbarino, J., & Crouter, A. (1978). Defining the Community Context for Parent-Child Relations: The Correlates of Child Maltreatment. Child Development, 49(3), 604. doi:10.2307/1128227Grana, S. J. (2001). Journal of Family Violence, 16(4), 421-435. doi:10.1023/a:1012229011161HEISE, L. L. (1998). Violence Against Women. Violence Against Women, 4(3), 262-290. doi:10.1177/1077801298004003002Kim, J., & Gray, K. A. (2008). Leave or Stay? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(10), 1465-1482. doi:10.1177/0886260508314307Krug, E. G., Mercy, J. A., Dahlberg, L. L., & Zwi, A. B. (2002). The world report on violence and health. The Lancet, 360(9339), 1083-1088. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)11133-0LAMBERT, L. C., & FIRESTONE, J. M. (2000). Economic Context and Multiple Abuse Techniques. Violence Against Women, 6(1), 49-67. doi:10.1177/1077801200006001004Max, W., Rice, D. P., Finkelstein, E., Bardwell, R. A., & Leadbetter, S. (2004). The Economic Toll of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women in the United States. Violence and Victims, 19(3), 259-272. doi:10.1891/vivi.19.3.259.65767(2003). Costs of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women in the United States. PsycEXTRA Dataset. doi:10.1037/e721242007-001Reeves, C., & O’Leary-Kelly, A. M. (2007). The Effects and Costs of Intimate Partner Violence for Work Organizations. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22(3), 327-344. doi:10.1177/0886260506295382Roldós, M. I., & Corso, P. (2013). The Economic Burden of Intimate Partner Violence in Ecuador: Setting the Agenda for Future Research and Violence Prevention Policies. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 14(4), 347-353. doi:10.5811/westjem.2013.2.15697Schiamberg, L. B., & Gans, D. (1999). An Ecological Framework for Contextual Risk Factors in Elder Abuse by Adult Children. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 11(1), 79-103. doi:10.1300/j084v11n01_05(1993). World Development Report 1993. doi:10.1596/0-1952-0890-0TOLMAN, R. M., & ROSEN, D. (2001). Domestic Violence in the Lives of Women Receiving Welfare. Violence Against Women, 7(2), 141-158. doi:10.1177/1077801201007002003Wuest, J., Ford-Gilboe, M., Merritt-Gray, M., & Berman, H. (2003). Intrusion: The Central Problem for Family Health Promotion among Children and Single Mothers after Leaving an Abusive Partner. Qualitative Health Research, 13(5), 597-622. doi:10.1177/1049732303013005002Yodanis, C. L., Godenzi, A., & Stanko, E. A. (2000). The Benefits of Studying Costs: A Review and Agenda for Studies on the Economic Costs of Violence Against Women. Policy Studies, 21(3), 263-276. doi:10.1080/0144287002001953

Localized practices and globalized futures: challenges for Alaska coastal community youth

An article from Maritime Studies (2015) 14:

Prevalence of violence against dating partners by male and female university students worldwide

link_to_subscribed_fulltex

Autonomy as empowerment, or how gendered power manifests itself in contemporary Russian families

What constitutes power in the household, and how much power do contemporary Russian women have vis-à-vis their husbands? Research on intrahousehold gendered power has typically focused on three contexts: employment and relative earnings, the division of household labor, and patterns of money management in the family. Here we focus on intrahousehold power as it pertains to access to household money, asking whether wives share equal control and decision-making power over family money with their husbands.Accepted manuscript2022-11-0

Women in English fisheries: roles, contributions, barriers and prospects

This chapter draws on a major research report delivered to DEFRA in June 2010. Women play a wide range of roles in the fisheries industry making significant contributions across sectors. However, there is a significant gap in knowledge about women in English fisheries today. This study aims to help close this knowledge gap and to inform policy making with evidence-based information collected and analysed by the Women in Fisheries (WIF) Team from Greenwich Maritime Institute, The University of Greenwich and IRIS Consulting between January and April, 2010. The primary data used for the analysis here was gathered through the fieldwork in selected coastal areas in England, covering 12 fishing ports in both coasts, where the research team conducted a significant number of face-to-face and telephone interviews with women and men in several sectors of the industry. The findings were reported in 5 main groups: Women in the Catching Sector; Fishing Families and Communities; Women in Processing; Women in Business; Women Regulators, Managers and Administrators. The study confirms that women are often under-represented, unrecognised, underpaid and seem to have little say in decision making at various levels in the fishing industry in England. Recommendations for change are given in Conclusion