Cover Image


View/Hide Left Panel

52 to 78 percent—evidence of its ubiquitous nature. His research in South Africa has indicated that minimizing the effect of trauma as part of violence prevention efforts can reduce physical illness in the country’s population, and he suggested that we need more research to understand how protective factors may promote resilience to posttraumatic stress disorder and other stress-related disorders.

In summation, Bell reiterated the need for more research to build the knowledge and evidence base and the need for public will to address violence prevention. He also advocated for the discontinuation of programs that have been shown to be ineffective. For youth violence prevention, he strongly encouraged participants to read Surgeon General Satcher’s report3 for guidance in moving forward.


A number of issues were raised during this period, but the one that prompted the most discussion was how to bring all of the perspectives that have been discussed, including public health, human rights, and developmental issues together to support violence prevention in low- and middle-income countries. The panelists’ responses addressed the importance of evidence gathering and dissemination of findings on the determinants, magnitude, and consequences of violence as critical to this synthesis; providing data on the costs and benefits of violence prevention; and building and strengthening capacity for design, implementation, and research. Other important elements identified included repetition of the message; convening and engaging key stakeholders; persistence in engagement; identifying provisional or proximal indicators that can be measured as part of a review or assessment of long-term initiatives for midcourse corrections if necessary; advocacy with the national governments in countries to get them to prioritize violence prevention in health and development investment; and greater dissemination of the success of long-term violence prevention initiatives such as that of the California Wellness Foundation, which does not treat its investment like a pilot project. Further remarks suggested examining the promising and innovative work that is already being conducted in low- and middle-income countries such as Brazil and others for strategic decision making for evaluation efforts; acknowledging and using the positive effects of advocacy for international conventions, especially for children’s issues; examining issues that affect the credibility of governments and donors to advocate with a human rights-based approach; and being inclusive when creating coalitions and multisectoral collaborations.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement