Viet Nam

Ending Violence against Women and Children in Viet Nam: Opportunities and challenges for collaborative and integrative approaches

Originally published
View original




While the fields working to end VAC and VAW have largely developed separately, recent reviews and analyses of large datasets have identified multiple intersections between VAC and VAW including: co-occurrence, shared risk factors, similar underlying social norms, common consequences, intergenerational effects, and the period of adolescence as unique period of heightened vulnerabilities to both types of violence. These intersections suggest that collaboration between the sectors is essential to a more effective prevention and response. Integration of certain aspects VAC and VAW prevention and response across services, programmes, and policies may also be advantageous. However, there are key areas of divergence between the traditional approaches in the VAC and VAW fields that have created challenges to collaboration and may suggest some disadvantages to fully integrative approaches. To date there are no evidence-based or widely accepted integrative models.

This multi country study, commissioned by UN Women, UNICEF and UNFPA, explored existing examples of collaboration and integration of VAC and VAW policies, services, and programmes, as well as challenges and future opportunities in the East Asia and Pacific region, with a focus on four countries – Cambodia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, and Viet Nam.

Key research questions

This research initiative sought to answer following overarching questions through dialogues and interviews with relevant stakeholders in each country:

  1. What are the existing VAW and VAC policies, action plans, programmes (prevention) or services (response/support)?

  2. What are some examples of policies, action plans, programmes, or services where there is some evidence of VAW and VAC integration (i.e.: addressing both VAW and VAC at the same time)? Include any efforts to try to develop cohesive strategies or plans or collaboration.

  3. How do VAW-focused and VAC-focused stakeholders collaborate or interact? How do donors drive the VAW-VAC agenda?

  4. What are the areas of tension between VAC and VAW work? How do various stakeholders address areas of tension between VAW and VAC?

    a. Under what circumstances are boy-children accommodated in places of safety?

    b. How are adolescents’ complex needs met and rights protected?

    c. How are mothers viewed and “processed” in VAC cases?

  5. What are some opportunities within the existing policies, action plans, programmes or services where integration and/or collaboration could be introduced or enhanced?