Indonesia's maritime layout results in a close relation between transnational organized crimes and maritime security. Indonesia's immense maritime area not only enables the illegal smuggling and trafficking of goods and people by sea, but also allows for voracious crimes such as sea robbery and piracy and illegal fishing to go unpunished. These crimes come at great economic costs (recently estimated at $20 billion annually) but also threaten the already vulnerable livelihoods of many coastal communities. The capacity of Indonesia's law enforcement agencies is limited and their overlapping authorities hamper effective action. Next to law enforcement agencies, the project assumes an important role for Indonesia's numerous coastal communities. Until now these communities are seriously neglected in academic and policy debates on combatting transnational organized crimes at sea. Bringing coastal communities 'in' is truly new. The active participation of governmental agencies that are responsible for the enforcement of law at sea as well as coastal communities will result in a better mutual understanding and actual cooperation. The prosed research builds on the collaboration between the Centre for Trust Peace and Social Relations (CTPSR) of Coventry University (UK) and the International Organization for Migration Indonesia (IOM). This collaboration started in 2014 with a specific focus on the interrelation between maritime and human security issues in Indonesia. In 2015, the partners established a consortium focused on Indonesian maritime security. This consortium brings together key stakeholders from government, academia and the private sector and acts as an interface to conduct joint research. With the active involvement of IOM/Indonesia, support from the consortium, and with the interdisciplinary expertise of the investigators (experts in law, anthropology and political sciences), the proposed research is perfectly positioned to investigate the many challenges related to transnational maritime organized crimes. The research will investigate such issues as: who are considered to be the main actors in the maritime domain; which particular 'crimes' are being experienced and with what effect; what law enforcement tools and recourses are being used and with what success; what specific threats are articulated by coastal communities; how do the communities and law enforcers appreciate each other; and what do these stakeholders see as ways forward. The research will provide insights into these matters on the basis of focus group discussions with staff members of law enforcement agencies (such as the Maritime Security Agency, the Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, the National Search and Rescue Agency, the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, the Directorate General of Immigration and the Indonesian National Police) as well as with coastal community leaders and members. The selected coastal communities, of which a number are participants in IOM/Indonesia activities, include maritime crime prone locations in North Sumatra, South Java, Flores, Sulawesi, Maluku, and East Nusa Tenggara. The focus group sessions all include the making of collages, a visual tool through which the research participants are invited to express their experiences by using photos, newspaper headings, magazine clippings and other printed materials. These collages are intended to represent the participants' unique understanding of the maritime problems and the position of the various actors involved. These images will be used first of all to establish the direction of the research as well as to elicit discussions beyond standard interview sessions and support the interpretation of the legal and policy documents. This research design is considered best suited to understand the background of transnational organized crime, maritime security and law enforcement through the eyes of the key stakeholders involved.

Zimbabwe is a source, transit and destination country for trafficking in persons yet the prevalence of different forms of human trafficking in the country are unknown and its conviction rates and victim identification pattern remain a cause for concern. Working in partnership with NGOs in Zimbabwe to analyse the secondary data they hold on human trafficking, the project will gain the much needed insight into this global development issue using a country specific case study. At an international level, The Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons 2000 (Palermo Protocol), which is the legal framework on which governments build their own domestic policy, prescribes the three Ps' of Prevention, Protection and Prosecution as the pillars of anti-trafficking; thus providing a one-size fits all approach to combating trafficking. Yet human trafficking is more complex than often imagined and its dynamics vary according to context, which calls for the need to undertake country specific case studies. Our recent pilot study (conducted by the PI and the UK-based CI) involving secondary analysis of the human trafficking data held by three Zimbabwe-based NGOs (International Organisation for Migration [IOM], Musasa Project and AFCAST) has revealed gaps in policy and practice as well as in public understandings of human trafficking. The data analysed related to the recent case of human trafficking, involving about 200 Zimbabwean women who were rescued and repatriated from Kuwait between 2016 and 2017. The pilot revealed the misrepresentations of human trafficking as solely a case of transnational organised crime; merely a gendered issue; as well as the conflation of human trafficking with sexual exploitation. The findings further highlighted the gaps in domestic policy, showing that Zimbabwe's current Trafficking in Persons (TiP) law is inconsistent with international law as it defines trafficking in persons as a movement based crime and does not adequately define 'exploitation' which leaves many victims of trafficking without legal protection. In short, the pilot work revealed the invisibility of internal trafficking victims and increasing forms of trafficking(e.g. labour exploitation) involving children, men and women whose plight does not normally attract public, media and government attention. To address this gap, we have secured the commitment of four NGOs whose anti-trafficking work spans internal and transnational trafficking. We will undertake secondary analysis of the data that these organisations hold in order to gain deeper insight into the human trafficking activity in Zimbabwe. The four organisations are: Love Justice-Zimbabwe, Childline-Zimbabwe, Kukosha and IOM. Love Justice-Zimbabwe has worked with approximately 700 diverse internal and transnational victims of trafficking since its establishment in 2015. It monitors trafficking hot-spots across the country including border posts as well as undertaking interception work. The work of Childline-Zimbabwe centres around child vulnerability and protection and the organisation operates 34 community-based drop-in centres across Zimbabwe as well as a 24 hour freephone helpline. Kukosha works with vulnerable children and their families. We will also engage with our existing partner, Musasa Project, an organisation that works with vulnerable women. The project will explore four research questions: RQ1: What do the data that NGOs hold show to be the scale, trends and prevalent forms of human trafficking, where and why? RQ2: How are the different forms of human trafficking represented by age and gender? RQ3: What, according to the various datasets, may be the opportunities and constraints that characterise NGOs' anti-trafficking work? RQ4: How can NGO anti-trafficking activities be strengthened? Findings will be disseminated to academics, policy makers and other key stakeholders through for example, conferences, workshops and website.

Migration between the countries of the Global South, otherwise known as South-South migration (SSM), accounts for nearly half of all international migration, reaching almost 70% in some places. The potential of SSM to contribute to development and delivery of the SDGs is widely acknowledged but remains unrealised, largely due to existing inequalities at the global, national and local levels which determine who is (and is not) able to migrate, where to, and under which terms and conditions. These multidimensional inequalities are associated with a lack of rights for migrants and their families; difficult, expensive and sometimes dangerous journeys; and limited opportunities to access services and protection, which can, in turn, exacerbate inequalities. The challenge of ensuring that SSM reduces inequalities and contributes to delivery of the SDGs is intractable due to: - A lack of evidence about the ways in which horizontal and vertical inequalities can undermine major development investments and policies, and about the types of interventions which can overcome inequalities associated with SSM; - A failure of existing development approaches to take account of how SSM (and related policies) is/are influenced by broader economic, political and social processes (and relevant sectoral policies); - A focus on individual ODA-recipient countries rather than on dynamic effects along migration 'corridors' which connect origin and destination countries and the development implications of (two-way) flows of people, finance, trade and knowledge; - The politicisation of migration and a growing tendency to focus on migration management and border controls at the expense of equitable migration and development related outcomes; - The top-down, high-level orientation of much development policy planning which can dehumanise migrants by focusing on economic indicators and outcomes rather than experiences and well-being, broadly defined; and - A gap between policy and legal frameworks to limit inequalities associated with SSM (where these exist), and their equitable delivery / implementation in practice. The Hub is oriented towards addressing this challenge and ensuring that SSM is able to make a more equitable and effective contribution to poverty reduction, development and delivery of the SDGs, particularly SDGs 1, 5, 8 and 10. It does so by bringing together, for the first time, research and delivery partners from 12 ODA-recipient countries which constitute six SSM 'corridors' (Burkina Faso-Cote d'Ivoire, China-Ghana, Egypt-Jordan, Ethiopia-South Africa, Haiti-Brazil, Nepal-Malaysia) who will work in partnership with five UN agencies and the OECD. The Hub will deliver challenge-led programmes of research and evaluation to address inequalities associated with SSM, undertaking extensive new data collection and policy analysis, and testing interventions and solutions in a range of geographical contexts. The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) will lead the Hub's communication and dissemination work, working alongside our research partners in the Global South to develop a range of outputs for different local, national and global audiences to maximise the Hub's impact on policy and practice. The Hub builds on existing RCUK investments but also develops equitable new partnerships in order to generate novel and innovative perspectives on the intractable challenge which it seeks to address. In particular, by bringing together researchers from the Global South working across the countries making up the SSM corridors, and connecting these teams with leading migration scholars in the Global North, the Hub provides an opportunity for significant cross-learning within and between the corridors, and on SSM more generally. In so doing it offers considerable added value, strengthening capacity and capability for understanding - and responding to - the challenges associated with SSM and delivery of the SDGs.

Overview & Aim. This project will develop interdisciplinary research methods at the intersection of complex systems, violence, public health interventions, and data visualisation. We aim to evaluate the use of dynamic complex systems modeling to develop interventions for hard-to-reach populations affected by human trafficking and conflict-related violence. The project will address the following questions: What contributions can these novel methods make to the global response to human trafficking and conficlt-related violence? How can evidence-based, accessible and visually powerful complex systems models inform decision-makers working on interventions? Project Justification. Crises, population mobility, violence and exploitation cause deleterious health consequences for millions of individuals, particularly for refugees, low-wage migrant workers and victims of human trafficking [4, 8-10]. Currently, there is limited evidence on effective interventions for these marginalised groups. Scholars emphasise the causal complexity of violence and exploitation, however, most analytical approaches have erroneously assumed linear, average effects of exposures on single outcomes. Experimental approaches to test interventions are often unethical or unfeasible to implement among these hard-to-reach populations. Reductionist research methods, such as traditional epidemiological studies, dangerously oversimplify complex problems, which frequently results in wasted resources and potential harm to already vulnerable groups. Methods. We will invite experts in complexity science, violence research, public health and data visualisation to join the Complexity & Violence Research Network. This Network will jointly design a complex intervention case study that will serve as an evaluated 'proof of concept' for these methods. In brief, our methods will include the following steps: 1. Literature reviews on: 1) complex systems modelling for intervention development, 2) visualising complex systems, and 3) theoretical and epistemological underpinnings of complex systems methods. 2. Joint selection and design of an intervention case study using the Network's existent research on violence and other historical data, empirical data, and theory. 3. Calibrate, visualise and iterate a complex intervention model with dynamic multi-level interactions of exposures, associated harms, and simulated counterfactuals (e.g. intervention). 4. Collaboratively validate the model and evaluate the usefulness, feasibility and ethics of using complex systems methods for intervention development. Evaluation will include Network and Stakeholder reflections and critiques during small in-person meetings and a virtual two-wave Delphi Panel of funders and intervention developers to assess overall methods and usefulness. At every phase, we will critically examine and document the methodological and epistemological contributions, short-comings and risks, and best practice for adopting these methods in interdisciplinary research groups. Outputs. To contribute to our future work and advancements in the field, we will produce: -Academic papers on: 1) the case study findings; and 2) methodological recommendations -Lay guidance on the opportunities and limitations of these methods, with the aim of supporting intervention development, evaluation and policy decisions targeting populations affected by violence, conflict and human trafficking. -A web browser accessible version of the final case study model and visualisations to allow a wide user-audience to engage and play with the model inputs to understand how incorporating dynamic and complex characteristics of a system can explain causal mechanisms and potential effects of interventions. -Articulate future research priorities and identify funding opportunities to pursue longer-term sustainability of the Network and the development of future proposals.