Thank you very much again for agreeing to help us by filling in this survey.
In Part I, we are going to ask you questions related to P/CVE (preventing/countering violent extremism) policies. We divided this part into four sections: strategy and institutions, primary prevention, intervention and rehabilitation. In Part II, we are going to ask you questions related to crime prevention policies and the use of risk assessment tools in criminal justice and social care policies.
We would like to map the presence and the scope of P/CVE policy in the country of your expertise. We are aware that P/CVE activities can take place at different government levels with a different degree of governmental involvement and can differ significantly across the country. We try to take these variations into account in this survey, but welcome your comments in the comment boxes – should you feel the need to qualify your responses. The aim is to create a reasonably accurate overview rather than capturing all the existing complexities. This will help us to make broad comparisons between regions and continents. We encourage you to make use of the space for comments under each question, should you feel the need to provide additional clarifications or noting any issues of importance.
Is there a counter-terrorism strategy with a designated part devoted to “soft” prevention, like counter-radicalization or counter-extremism? (For example, does the strategy talk about preventing extremism/radicalisation by building community cohesion, promoting democratic values, resolving social exclusion or providing mentoring interventions to radical individuals/groups?)
(Please reply to multiple options below – use all three levels if necessary)
Is there a separate counter-extremism (or counter-radicalization) strategy?
Here we ask questions about CVE measures enacted upon on the whole population (or thereabouts) to prevent risks/threats developing.
Does the government fund or directly run educational, cohesion, or resilience building programs for pupils or students, which are explicitly part of P/CVE policy?
Does the government fund or directly run educational, cohesion, or resilience building programs to protect specific communities or groups (e.g., ethnic minorities, socially excluded areas, families, or football hooligans) from extremism and/or radicalisation?
Does the government fund or directly run training programs for civil/public servants so that they can recognize, assess, and deal with radicalization concerns (for non-offenders - i.e., those not currently convicted, serving prison terms, or on probation)?
If relevant: For the groups of public sector workers you’ve noted above, to what extent are these training programs widespread?
Does the government fund or directly run counter-narrative or alternative narrative projects, aimed at a domestic audience, to protect against radicalisation and/or extremism? (e.g., online or offline strategic messaging that aims at discrediting specific groups of violent extremists)
Based on your professional judgement, please indicate the overall role prescribed by government for the following actors for primary prevention CVE (i.e., general prevention/resilience-building activities within the whole community/population).
Here we will ask questions about ‘secondary prevention’: practices directed towards communities or persons at higher risk.
Does the government fund or directly run vigilance campaigns aimed at getting the public to recognize and report concerns about radicalizing/radicalized individuals (e.g., a website or leaflets with information on how to recognize signs of radicalization and how/to whom one can report such concerns)?
Does the government fund or directly run a radicalisation referral scheme?
(A referral scheme is a program that allows the public or public/civil servants to report concerns about individuals exhibiting signs of radicalization. The organization that collects such referrals can be, for example, a social service agency, municipal department, an NGO, or the police.)
If there are referral programs (or a single program) do they feature multi-agency collaboration?
(Multi-agency collaboration includes representatives from a plurality of municipal or other government agencies, community-based organizations, and non-governmental organizations, often including education, health, social welfare, youth, sports, and sometimes police and corrections. These representatives form multiagency teams that pool resources and expertise, and share information, in order to assess referrals and provide interventions if needed.)
Does the government fund or directly run intervention programs (e.g., mentoring, social or healthcare assistance, exit programs) for non-offenders in the framework of P/CVE?
Is there a special unit which monitors and removes online extremist content from the Internet? (by requesting action from internet, web-hosting, and/or social media providers)
Based on your professional judgement, please indicate the overall role prescribed by government for the following actors in the intervention dimension of CVE (i.e., responding to signs of risk or vulnerability in specific groups or individuals).
Here we will ask questions about ‘tertiary prevention’, broadly understood as preventative activities directed at persons already engaged in extremist/radicalized behaviours or groups.
Does the government fund or directly run post-detention rehabilitation programs (i.e., disengagement/ deradicalization/social or health assistance) for offenders linked to extremism/terrorism?
Based on your professional judgement, please indicate the overall role prescribed by government for the following actors in the rehabilitation dimension of CVE (i.e., dealing with offenders/ persons already engaged in extremist/radicalized behaviours or groups).
In your professional judgement, how extensive is social crime prevention throughout the country?
(Social crime prevention, sometimes known as ‘community safety’, engages with particular age groups or communities to change behaviour, provide support, and reduce chances of offending. The interventions can be made by youth workers, social services, police or other agencies.)
The data obtained from this survey are handled according to the rules stipulated in the consent form, which was sent to you together with the link to this page. Please, make sure to fill in and send the consent form before you proceed with the survey.
The University of Warwick is the Data Controller of any information you have entered on this form and is
committed to protecting the rights of individuals in line with Data Protection Legislation. The
Data Protection webpages
provide further information on your rights and how the University
processes personal data. If you wish to submit a data subjects rights request, make a complaint or report a
suspected personal data breach, please contact the University’s Data Protection Officer by email at