Participatory community analysis reveals distinct localized dimensions of safety and peace, indicating that global metrics miss critical community-level social and structural dynamics.
Indicators measuring the progress of safety and peace have been pursued at a macro (global) and meso level (community). While global indicators focus on the country-level indicators, it does not consider the community-level contextually relevant needs of the indicators. While the global indicators present a general framework to measure safety and peace, these constructs are dynamic and fluid, and thus understood differently within and across countries, provinces and communities. Drawing on data collected through community participatory processes, this study aims to compare existing global indicators with community-level indicators of peace and safety and to evaluate the usefulness of these global indicators for measuring peace and safety at the community level. This study forms part of a larger study the Community Safety And Peace Index (CSPI) that aimed to develop a contextually and psychometrically valid and reliable instrument to assess, monitor and promote safety and peace at the community level. Contribution: The analysis of the data revealed several dimensions of safety and peace, including physical (dis)order, social (dis)order, community cohesion, structural security, social justice, affective and interpersonal relationships, crime and violence and values.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Taliep et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: