Search results for: body types

Authors: Kristina F. Wolff

Abstract:

Background: In the Federal Republic of Germany, violence against women is deeply embedded in society. Germany is, as of March 2020, the most populous member state of the European Union with 83.2 million inhabitants and, although more than half of its inhabitants are women, gender equality was not certified in the Basic Law until 1957. Women have only been allowed to enter paid employment without their husband's consent since 1977 and have marital rape prosecuted only since 1997. While the lack of equality between men and women is named in the preamble of the Istanbul Convention as the cause of gender-specific, structural, traditional violence against women, Germany continues to sink on the latest Gender Equality Index. According to Police Crime Statistics (PCS), women are significantly more often victims of lethal violence, emanating from men than vice versa. The PCS, which, since 2015, also collects gender-specific data on violent crimes, is kept by the Federal Criminal Police Office, but without taking into account the relevant criteria for targeted prevention, such as the history of violence of the perpetrator/killer, weapon, motivation, etc.. Institutions such as EIGE or the World Health Organization have been asking Germany for years in vain for comparable data on violence against women in order to gain an overview or to develop cross-border synergies. The PCS are the only official data collection on violence against women. All players involved are depend on this data set, which is published only in November of the following year and is thus already completely outdated at the time of publication. In order to combat German femicides causally, purposefully and efficiently, evidence-based data was urgently needed. Methodology: Beginning in January 2019, a database was set up that now tracks more than 600 German femicides, broken down by more than 100 crime-related individual criteria, which in turn go far beyond the official PCS. These data are evaluated on the one hand by daily media research, and on the other hand by case-specific inquiries at the respective public prosecutor's offices and courts nationwide. This quantitative long-term study covers domestic violence as well as a variety of different types of gender-specific, lethal violence, including, for example, femicides committed by German citizens abroad. Additionallyalcohol/ narcotic and/or drug abuse, infanticides and the gender aspect in the judiciary are also considered. Results: Since November 2020, evidence-based data from a scientific survey have been available for the first time in Germany, supplementing the rudimentary picture of reality provided by PCS with a number of relevant parameters. The most important goal of the study is to identify "red flags" that enable general preventive awareness, that serve increasingly precise hazard assessment in acute hazard situations, and from which concrete instructions for action can be identified. Already at a very early stage of the study it could be proven that in more than half of all femicides with a sexual perpetrator/victim constellation there was an age difference of five years or more. Summary: Without reliable data and an understanding of the nature and extent, cause and effect, it is impossible to sustainably curb violence against girls and women, which increasingly often culminates in femicide. In Germany, valid data from a scientific survey has been available for the first time since November 2020, supplementing the rudimentary reality picture of the official and, to date, sole crime statistics with several relevant parameters. The basic research provides insights into geo-concentration, monthly peaks and the modus operandi of male violent excesses. A significant increase of child homicides in the course of femicides and/or child homicides as an instrument of violence against the mother could be proven as well as a danger of affected persons due to an age difference of five years and more. In view of the steadily increasing wave of violence against women, these study results are an eminent contribution to the preventive containment of German femicides.

Keywords: femicide, violence against women, gender specific data, rule Of law, Istanbul convention, gender equality, gender based violence

Procedia PDF Downloads 89

Authors: Murat Arıbaş, Uğur Özcan

Abstract:

Due to the increasing number of universities and academics, the fund of the universities for research activities and grants/supports given by government institutions have increased number and quality of academic research projects. Although every academic research project has a specific purpose and importance, limited resources (money, time, manpower etc.) require choosing the best ones from all (Amiri, 2010). It is a pretty hard process to compare and determine which project is better such that the projects serve different purposes. In addition, the evaluation process has become complicated since there are more than one evaluator and multiple criteria for the evaluation (Dodangeh, Mojahed and Yusuff, 2009). Mehrez and Sinuany-Stern (1983) determined project selection problem as a Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) problem. If a decision problem involves multiple criteria and objectives, it is called as a Multi Attribute Decision Making problem (Ömürbek & Kınay, 2013). There are many MCDM methods in the literature for the solution of such problems. These methods are AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), ANP (Analytic Network Process), TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution), PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation), UTADIS (Utilities Additives Discriminantes), ELECTRE (Elimination et Choix Traduisant la Realite), MAUT (Multiattribute Utility Theory), GRA (Grey Relational Analysis) etc. Teach method has some advantages compared with others (Ömürbek, Blacksmith & Akalın, 2013). Hence, to decide which MCDM method will be used for solution of the problem, factors like the nature of the problem, types of choices, measurement scales, type of uncertainty, dependency among the attributes, expectations of decision maker, and quantity and quality of the data should be considered (Tavana & Hatami-Marbini, 2011). By this study, it is aimed to develop a systematic decision process for the grant support applications that are expected to be evaluated according to their scientific adequacy by multiple evaluators under certain criteria. In this context, project evaluation process applied by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) the leading institutions in our country, was investigated. Firstly in the study, criteria that will be used on the project evaluation were decided. The main criteria were selected among TÜBİTAK evaluation criteria. These criteria were originality of project, methodology, project management/team and research opportunities and extensive impact of project. Moreover, for each main criteria, 2-4 sub criteria were defined, hence it was decided to evaluate projects over 13 sub-criterion in total. Due to superiority of determination criteria weights AHP method and provided opportunity ranking great number of alternatives TOPSIS method, they are used together. AHP method, developed by Saaty (1977), is based on selection by pairwise comparisons. Because of its simple structure and being easy to understand, AHP is the very popular method in the literature for determining criteria weights in MCDM problems. Besides, the TOPSIS method developed by Hwang and Yoon (1981) as a MCDM technique is an alternative to ELECTRE method and it is used in many areas. In the method, distance from each decision point to ideal and to negative ideal solution point was calculated by using Euclidian Distance Approach. In the study, main criteria and sub-criteria were compared on their own merits by using questionnaires that were developed based on an importance scale by four relative groups of people (i.e. TUBITAK specialists, TUBITAK managers, academics and individuals from business world ) After these pairwise comparisons, weight of the each main criteria and sub-criteria were calculated by using AHP method. Then these calculated criteria’ weights used as an input in TOPSİS method, a sample consisting 200 projects were ranked on their own merits. This new system supported to opportunity to get views of the people that take part of project process including preparation, evaluation and implementation on the evaluation of academic research projects. Moreover, instead of using four main criteria in equal weight to evaluate projects, by using weighted 13 sub-criteria and decision point’s distance from the ideal solution, systematic decision making process was developed. By this evaluation process, new approach was created to determine importance of academic research projects.

Keywords: Academic projects, Ahp method, Research projects evaluation, Topsis method.

Procedia PDF Downloads 588