Impact case study database

Research undertaken at Middlesex University on criminal justice system responses to animal abuse and animal law enforcement has had significant impact in two principal areas, dog-fighting and dangerous dogs. The research undertaken on dog-fighting, facilitated through NGO funding, was used to inform NGO policy and had a direct impact on a review of animal welfare and dangerous dogs’ legislation and enforcement policy.

The dog-fighting research described above resulted in a formal research report authored by Harding and Nurse and an article in the Journal of Animal Welfare Law, the practitioner journal for animal lawyers [A]. The Executive Summary setting out the research’s key findings was incorporated into the League Against Cruel Sports (LACS) campaign policy document Betrayal of Trust which was developed from the Middlesex research. It states: *‘Criminologists Dr Simon Harding and Dr Angus Nurse examined the available data on this clandestine crime and provide the first comprehensive look at dog fighting in the UK including the practices, motivations and extent as well as the means to tackle it.*’ [B] . The research findings were presented as evidence in support of changes in the law and allocation of increased resources to address dog-fighting issues. Nurse and Harding both made presentations at the launch of the Betrayal of Trust report at a Parliamentary reception on 11 December 2015, alongside LACS staff and guest host Bill Oddie. Subsequently, a parliamentary debate on dog-fighting was held in Westminster Hall on Wednesday 29 June 2016. The debate specifically refers to the Middlesex research stating: ‘ Research by Middlesex University in November 2015 indicated that dog fighting has historically thrived on its ability to convince our society that it does not exist….Dog fighting may not even be identified if it is easier to address the issue under animal welfare legislation, so there is under-reporting and under-recording…Inadequacy in reporting, recording and prosecution is important, because it impacts negatively on the resources provided for dog fighting enforcement. It also impacts negatively in appropriate convictions and the severity of sentences.’ [C] . Reference to the research and its findings was incorporated into a House of Commons Research Briefing’ on dog-fighting published in advance of the debate. The briefing included recommendations based on our research to: (1) record dog fighting as a specific offence; (2) increase the penalty for dog fighting; (3) provide adequate resources for policing and other agencies to deal with dog fighting. [A].

A wider NGO campaign on improving animal welfare protection and the need to engage with legislative and policy reform in a post-Brexit environment has also drawn on the research in its materials and presentation. Nurse contributed to a collective NGO policy publication on animal welfare law post-Brexit which recommended recognition of animal sentience in law [D]; and one further consequence of campaigning and policy debate in this area has been that in November 2018 the Government announced proposals for legislative change to increase the available sentences for animal welfare abuse; later the government also introduced legislative proposals on recognising animal sentience into UK law post-Brexit. The proposals were debated by MPs in Westminster Hall on 16 March 2020.

Parliamentary scrutiny of dangerous dogs’ issues by the Efra Committee criticised Government policy on dangerous dogs. In particular, the Committee questioned whether Defra’s policy approach was effective, given that evidence submitted by NGOs and others suggested that the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 was not working. The Efra Committee has required Defra to consider a range of factors relating to current legislation, perceived inadequacies in enforcement policy and how best to promote responsible dog ownership; commissioning further research from the team (commenced October 2018, continuing through to September 2020) forms a substantial part of Defra’s response to the Committee’s concerns. A tv clip of the discussion with the minister and the EFRA panel is available at [E] below. During this exchange the minister describes our research into dangerous dogs and the basis on which it was commissioned by Defra, as well as the expectations from the EFRA panel and the Government’s acknowledgment of how the research may inform policy development.

In a written Parliamentary answer on 16 April 2019 the Government stated that “the Government is serious about tackling irresponsible ownership of dogs, which is why Defra is funding research being carried out by Middlesex University to gain a better understanding of the reasons for dog aggression”. The Government confirmed in response to a Parliamentary question on 5 March 2020 concerning publication of the Middlesex research that ‘it will be published in due course’ [F].

The analysis resulting from this research has recommended further review of policy to Defra and questioned the effectiveness of an enforcement approach which is reactive rather than preventive. Classification of dog aggression and dangerousness by breed, rather than by indicative behaviours, is identified in our research as problematic and our analysis of risk factors and responsible dog ownership issues shows a need to consider a wide range of stakeholders, not only those who are perceived as owners of ‘problem’ dogs. Defra received monthly written briefings on progress and at the conclusion of each stage of the research we supplied reports on individual aspects as well as delivery of conclusions to Defra, Welsh Government and Scottish Government officials and a formal overall report setting out our findings on the state of policy and enforcement and identifying possible areas for policy change. Key findings include (i) that there is inconsistency in the recording of dog attack data as well as in enforcement approaches between police and local authorities which impacts negatively on our knowledge of the dog problem as well as the allocation of resources; (ii) that there continues to be a lack of clear guidance on use of enforcement tools; and (iii) that efforts to achieve effective preventative enforcement are negatively impacted by a lack of resources and muddled perceptions of the dangerous dogs’ problem. Questions also raised by the research concern a perception that ‘irresponsible’ dog ownership is a significant cause of dog attacks. We proposed a more nuanced consideration of the risk factors for dog attacks. The Government has already confirmed to the Efra committee in a ministerial response to questions (see above) that its response to the Efra committee’s consideration of dangerous dogs’ issues will be informed by the Middlesex research and that Defra policy will be reviewed in light of our findings [F].

The claimed impact of this research centres on i) adoption by practitioners and professional services, ii) raised public and policy awareness and debate on responsible technology and novel possibilities in the use of artificially intelligent socially assistive humanoid robots in caring roles and iii) industry - on enabling the development, production and testing of a culturally competent socially assistive humanoid robot.

Evidence of adoption of best practice by educators across Europe

The Papadopoulos Tilki and Taylor model of cultural competence was first published in 1998 and was later enhanced by Papadopoulos in 2006 (Papadopoulos 2006). Over the last 20 years the model has been adopted by institutions educating health care students, primarily nurses, in Europe and beyond (see corroborative statement No9). The model underpins the IENE programme (Intercultural Education for Nurses in Europe) established by Papadopoulos in 2008. To date the programme has received EU funding for 10 IENE projects with a total of 16 European countries and 24 different institutions took/taking part and basing their education on this model. To date the projects have delivered 2 MOOCs (Massive Online Open access Courses) and will be delivering a third in 2021 to approximately 1,500 people. It has delivered 9 seminars to 270 people, 3 webinars (over 200 people), trained over 50 people to become MOOC facilitators, delivered a conference to over 100 people, delivered 5 face to face training courses on cultural competence to over 200 people and provided access information on the created numerous tools via Twitter, Facebook and newsletters to thousands of people. Its resources have been made open access and can be found at www.ieneproject.eu/ , http://ienerefugeehub.eu/, https://iene7.eu/ , https://iene-lgbt.com/

The Papadopoulos model of cultural competence, the numerous projects built on it and the number of nurse educators, students and practitioners involved across the 16 European countries indicates the breadth of impact and influence on them (see testimonial: Corroboration document 9).

Impact on and interaction with policy-makers

This takes the form of enabling a more concrete and focused discussion of the potential and current challenges regarding the use of smart and robotics technologies for assisting older people.

Two important milestones in the development of this policy direction which have resulted from the Middlesex work are:

(i) in October 2018 the CARESSES robot was the first robot ever to give evidence to a Parliamentary committee, in this case the Education committee, making the committee newly aware of the ability and potential of such robots. This event was featured by all major UK and international news outlets, including BBC, the Daily Mail, The Guardian, Japan Times, The Sun, abcNEWS, the Independent, Wired.

(ii) in December 2018 the UK Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST), Robotics in Social Care called on CARESSES researchers to contribute evidence to them via the POSTnote process, introducing robotic technology and the main ways it has been developed for use in social care. The POSTnote process assesses evidence of the impact of robotics, including on costs and quality of social care as well as on the present workforce, and explores related ethical, social and regulatory challenges. See Corroboration document 1.

Impact on debate in global media

Presence in the media continued in the following years with news and interviews in newspapers, TV and radio channels in UK, Italy, Japan, Sweden (Sunday Express, the Sun, the Daily mail, New Statesman, The Guardian, The Telegraph, BBC (Corroboration documents 4,5), TG5 Italian Television, Il Corriere della Sera, Mind, Sky tg24, NHK, MRO Hokuriku Broadcasting Co., STV - Sweden television). In October 2018, the project was cited in Nature (Vol 562) in an article on innovative Japanese research. By September 2020, as a result of media uptake, the CARESSES project had stimulated numerous public debates on the desirability of smart, culturally competent robots, and on the ethical issues related to them such as confidentiality, the replacement of human carers, and on technical issues such as maintenance and safety. These issues had been raised before, but as more factual and evidenced based information emerged, such as that produced by this project, the ensuing debates are becoming more balanced and informed. The think tank Doteveryone, which promotes the responsible use of technology to meet societal needs, referenced the project as intensifying public debate. See Corroboration document 2.

The CARESSES project set out to significantly improve the acceptance of elder care robots by developing and testing the first ever culturally competent robot. Our research team produced the theoretical foundation and generated the data that formed the software basis for the culturally competent abilities of the robot. (A project publication, in January 2020, of open source software details a framework for cultural knowledge representation and for culturally sensitive planning and execution in artificial intelligence: Corroboration 6). This programming enabled the robot to autonomously reconfigure its way of acting and speaking when offering a service, to match the culture, customs and etiquette of the person they are assisting, combining culture and person specific knowledge, and because of this combination of knowledges to avoid stereotyping. This included for example how conversation topics changed, as well as modes of address, social distancing, gestures and appreciation of key dates.

The robot was initially put into operation during the latter part of 2019 for extensive testing in the following settings: Advinia Healthcare care homes (UK; project partner Corroboration 3); the HISUISUI care home (Japan); the iHouse facility at JAIST (Japan; project partner), a duplex apartment that is fully equipped with sensors and smart appliances for home automation. In February 2020 Mark Easton (BBC News Home Editor) visited one of the Advinia care homes and interviewed residents who had taken part in the trial as well as staff and members of the Caresses team. The programme was broadcast on the 7^th September. Easton presented the arguments for and against the deployment of robots similar to the CARESSES robot and showed footage from his interviews. In particular, and in illustration of the impact of the elements of cultural competence programmed into the robot, an interview with a resident who had lived with the robot for 2 weeks made clear how he had benefitted from having the robot as a companion during that time. The resident reported that the robot was ‘friendly’ and knew about his cultural background; it asked relevant questions. These abilities were demonstrated when the robot was brought in to talk to the resident. The resident was shown to appear delighted to see the robot again and started a conversation demonstrating the acceptability of the robot and the impact it had on this individual. See Corroborating document 8 from Newham Magazine.

Impacts stem from extensive engagement with practitioners and other stakeholders in the drugs, health and youth justice fields: UK: national third sector service providers, government (Home Office, Ministry of Justice, Public Health England, and Youth Justice Board), Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD); EU institutions: EMCDDA, European Commission (DG Home, DG Justice and DG Sante); International institutions: UNICRI, WHO, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). Project meetings in Poland, Denmark and the UK facilitated cross-national knowledge exchange/networking between stakeholders. Research findings informed UNICRI and UNODC projects on family initiatives and on the development of training packages [F,G,J]. The main impacts, with particular focus on the Middlesex contribution, are:

1. Influence in six European countries of Quality Standards produced collaboratively with practitioners and international stakeholders for drug prevention practitioners working with young people in the criminal justice system

Practitioners have drawn on findings encapsulated in the Quality Standards Handbook [A] to improve the quality of interventions to provide safe, effective interventions and positive experiences, manage and reduce drug use, and improve well-being, and to inform the training and learning for the workforce involved in delivering services to young people [C,D,E]:

• ‘These have helped to improve the quality of interventions we offer to young people in contact with the criminal justice system and we use them to inform training and learning for our workforce. In the future, we also hope to use them in shaping service level agreements between community drug and alcohol support services and our youth justice partners to ensure that we have a common understanding and approach to working with this cohort of young people’ (National Head of Operations, Young People’s Services, CGL, UK) . [E]

The perceived usefulness of the Handbook is demonstrated by its translation into Polish, German, and Italian (Danish pending). It is available on the EMCDDA website, promoted through the Standards & Guidelines page and Best Practice Portal [H,I]. Stakeholders from a wide range of different countries and contexts were able to access the Quality Standards through: the final EPPIC conference; distribution lists in each country (over 200 relevant stakeholders in the UK); information on the EPPIC website and on international websites (WEPHREN and EMCDDA) and on partner websites. The three UK practitioner partners continue to work with the Middlesex team on the implementation and evaluation of the QS and they were joined in 2021 by practitioners from Italian prison and community services.

1. Enhancement of UK practice by creating a set of key messages for practice to improve methods of engaging young people in interventions

Interviews with young people and practitioners highlighted the need to improve effective engagement in interventions. The 4 additional workshops held with UK practitioners resulted in six key messages produced as a short, accessible report [B] and circulated widely to over 200 practitioners/stakeholder institutions. Practitioners reported a positive impact, from attendance at the workshops and from the report, on ways in which they engage young people in services [C, D, E]:

• ‘The research findings on engagement and the participation in the engagement workshop helped us as a service to prioritise the preliminary work needed around building relationships with young people, particularly those in contact with the criminal justice system’ (Team Manager, Sandwell Children’s Trust, UK). [D]

• ‘The report is excellent - really useful and informative.  I'll be working with the Team here to implement the learning in our practice. I will use it to develop trauma-informed work around substance use’ (Managing Director, HOT, Edinburgh, UK). [C]

1. Improvements made in approaches to young clients and development of ‘good practice’ as a result of sustained engagement and knowledge exchange between researchers and practitioners, policy makers and other organisations

UK practitioners reported how involvement with the EPPIC project benefitted them personally and had impacted on their practice with young people [C,E]:

• ‘The questions that you asked (in the interview schedules) facilitated a really good discussion with a young person. He felt valued and heard…we’re redesigning the way we capture evaluation off young people. I found the questions that you asked in your interviews useful to do that.’ (Substance use worker, Change, Grow, Live, UK). [C]

• ‘(It)really helped me to develop...it gave me a different insight into my work’ (Project worker, HOT, UK). [C]

The UK advisory group (representatives from Public Health England, the Home Office, Youth Justice Board, service providers) exchanged ideas and participated in presentations from external speakers (eg. talk on quality standards in September 2018 and presentations by practitioners and young people on ‘innovative’ interventions from Scotland and England). Board members commented on the practical benefits of the exchange:

• ‘The networks we built through the project were really important for getting new ideas for our service and they increased my knowledge and understanding of the wider field both in the UK and abroad’ (Team Manager, Sandwell Children’s Trust, UK). [D]

• ‘Hearing from practitioners and some of the real-life stories is always a useful exercise for more of a policy-facing person like myself, who works with a lot of data and office-based stuff’ (Government Official, Ministry of Justice, UK ). [C]

1. Creation of new networks between different stakeholders both nationally and internationally

The ‘networking’ facilitated through the research was seen by UK practitioners and policy makers as beneficial to their knowledge and understanding of the field. Practitioners found exposure to stakeholders from different services, policy contexts and countries helpful and used their own networks to create wider awareness of the research and issues among local policy makers, practitioners and other stakeholders [C, D, E]:

• ‘I had the privilege to travel to Denmark to learn more about interventions that Danish practitioners had developed…The holistic approach that they adopt is something that we emulate in our services and will further develop following this learning. It was very useful to learn from other practitioners in another country about how they approach their work with this target group’ (National Head of Operations, Young People’s Services, CGL, UK) . [E]

• ‘On the WHO WEPHREN website…we had a specific themed month around youth justice and the EPPIC team were able to contribute through blogs and reports’ (Consultant, Public Health England, UK). [C]

• ‘We were able to share the reports with local politicians…We sent them round the local networks that wanted to hear about the learning’ (Managing Director, HOT, Edinburgh, UK). [C]

• ‘I do training events and presentations...[and] talk about the different projects that are running and this is one of them. I share what findings I can with the regional teams’ (Programme Manager, Public Health England, UK). [C]

Knowledge of the project was widespread across European networks. Joint sessions were held between Project partners, the EPPIC Project Advisory Group (membership from UNICRI, EMCDDA, Chafea), with practitioners in partner countries presenting their services during project meetings in Warsaw (January 2018) and Aarhus (January 2019). Practitioners from Denmark, Italy, Poland and UK presented at the final EPPIC conference - 90 participants from UK and Europe (academics, practitioners, policy makers); live- streamed to 269 people. Over the final two years of the project, the EPPIC website ( http://eppic-project.co.uk) received: 2,742 visits, 6,519 page views and 1,119 downloads. EPPIC news, tweeted regularly (@eppic_project), was picked up by 546 followers. An Italian webinar on 8 July 2020 was attended by 90 policy makers and practitioners. Practitioners in the UK networks are continuing to collaborate on new projects related to young people and substance use.

1. Evidence to support re-conceptualisation and review of policy and service development

EPPIC findings have informed policy and practice at European and national levels through invited high-level presentations and consultations:

• Presentation by Duke at the UNODC/WHO technical expert group meeting of 25 experts from 13 countries on *Elements of Family Therapy for Adolescents with Drug Use Disorders including in Contact with the Criminal Justice System held 4-7 June 2018 in Vienna. Identified effective approaches to treat adolescents with drug use disorders and provided guidance for the development of a UN training package on family therapy (UNFT). [F]

• Presentation by Thom at “Family-oriented policies in drug prevention”, 2 March 2020 at the 63rd session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, organized by UNICRI, in collaboration with UNODC, EMCDDA, and the Council of Europe. Informed UNICRI project on the needs of families in preventing drug use among children and adolescents. [J] and by Thom and Duke at the UNICRI virtual conference “COVID-19, Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Priorities: A Spotlight on Vulnerable Groups”, 2 December 2020. [G]

• Presentation by Thom on EPPIC findings to professional development session for all Public Health England Health and Justice leads nationally, including representatives from the devolved UK administrations. 4 June 2018.

• Duke contributed as an expert member to the House of Commons Health and Social Care Committee roundtable preceding the inquiry into the public health consequences of drug policy, 18 December 2018, at which the work of EPPIC was discussed.

• Invited presentation by Thom and Duke to the UK Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) at evidence-gathering session on young people and drug use on 26 June 2020.

• In addition, European stakeholders have participated in seminars and consultations in their own languages and received information (e.g. Policy Briefing published in the newsletter of the European Centre for Social Welfare, Policy and Research, Vienna, https://www.euro.centre.org/publications/detail/3653).

Our research highlighted gaps in policing practice, and differences in risk of solicitation across adolescents. In the UK, the research has had impacts in educational settings, on police and social work actions and policy discussion {a}. Examples include:

• DeMarco produced a pre-recorded webinar in June 2016 which CEOP shared across the 43 police forces in England and Wales, social work training and safeguarding practice in the UK (and 6 other European jurisdictions) {b}

• Educational poster for schools distributed in the UK and Republic of Ireland via eSafety Ltd. Replicated in Dutch and Italian and shared with partners in Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium and Italy for dissemination. Over 5,000 in total.

• In collaboration with the Greater Manchester Police, DeMarco ran workshops for 200 police officers working across cybercrime and child sexual abuse in Malawi and Tanzania.

• Over 200 police officers working in child protection in Italy and the UK {c} and 120 medical staff from Central and North West London NHS Trust {d} were trained by Martellozzo.

• Creating an episode of ‘The Know Show’, a podcast providing digestible content for sixth form and college students. This has been viewed 332 times on YouTube as well as streaming on Spotify and ‘liked’ 376 users on Twitter.

• Findings have been used in working with senior government staff at the Home Office, structuring new policy-based research around online CSA.

• Findings informed the Home Secretary’s ‘Tackling Child Sexual Abuse Strategy’ 2021.

The typologies in [2] informed the development of a new online safeguarding strategy for the National Volunteer Police Cadet programme. DeMarco assisted with informing a Theory of Change which led to the development of their safeguarding policy, as well as a platform used to (a) collect information from the cadets and (b) ensuring that the platform allowed for safe and appropriate communication between cadets and the adult leaders. Currently, there are 7348 young people and 1863 police enrolled on the platform across England and Wales. The abovementioned work has influenced policy and practice globally, and is demonstrated by:

• DeMarco’s work with foreign police forces and governments translates findings into workshop content for frontline staff tackling online sexual abuse from a multi-disciplinary perspective. Recipients countries include: Palestine and Jordan (UNDP), Malawi (Youth Justice System), Tanzania (Ministry of Justice), and Singapore (Police force).

• In Palestine and Jordan, respective UNDP offices now create ‘online safety hubs’ allowing victims to report the experience of online CSA, grooming or solicitation anonymously.

• In Malawi

- all staff working with the charity Chisomo have incorporated online safety questions and knowledge with ‘street’ children under their care.

- Police now ask questions about the online habits of youth when investigating cases of child sexual abuse.

- Police practice has changed, and they now collect ICT devices from suspected child sex offenders under investigation.

• Martellozzo and DeMarco are delivering a series of seminars for 20 non-governmental organisations working to prevent and support victims of online child sexual abuse as part of an Erasmus+ funded project in Poland which will reach over 400 practitioners.

Our research has informed police practice in the UK and police forces internationally. This has resulted in: police officers ‘up-skilled’ in the understanding of sex offenders’ complex online behaviours; increased engagement by police with young people in raising awareness about online harms; improvement of investigations more generally (e.g. interview questions, evidence collection). Not measurable but evidenced by our testimonials {b,c}, these skills have led to more efficient investigations, signifying that offenders have been identified more quickly, and mitigated some of the harm/risk to young people.

This research provided the first incontrovertible evidence that viewing pornography affects the behaviour of young people and received extensive national and international media coverage {e}. The results provided fresh leverage for a range of statutory and non-statutory organisations, politicians, and NGOs to evidence the need for changes in sex education {f}. The NSPCC alone used our research in their:

• written and oral evidence to the House of Lords’ Children and the Internet Inquiry {g};

• Health Committee Inquiry into children and young people’s mental health;

• oral evidence to House of Common’s Public Bill Committee, Digital Economy Bill;

Contributions to policy development in the UK were widespread, including citations in a number of parliamentary debates and discussions:

• a report drafted by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2015, titled ‘ Identifying the Routes by which Children View Pornography Online: Implications for Future Policy-makers Seeking to Limit Viewing’;

• findings fed into the PSHE and SRE inquiry;

• consultation on online age verification and to the expert panel supporting it;

• Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST) established direct links with Horvath and Adler who contributed to and reviewed POST Note: Relationships and Sex Education (2018) {h};

• sessional reports from The House of Commons; Science and Technology Committee reviewing the impact of social media and screen-use on young people’s health {i}.

Legislation addressed the issues identified in the research, the Children and Social Work Act 2017 which adopted the change in priorities to Relationships and Sex Education and made it compulsory in all secondary schools in England from September 2020 {j}.

Practice has also been influenced:

• Horvath created a video which is being used to train youth workers in Scotland and Iceland initially and will be rolled out across Europe as part of an Erasmus+ funded project with the aim of bringing together a community response to gender-based violence.

• Martellozzo has created a training session focusing on the impact of pornography on young people, funded by the NHS, for sexual health doctors and clinicians.